Latinos, Education, and the Church: Toward a Culturally Democratic Future

Abstract

The article provides a comprehensive critical analysis of key issues that are deeply salient to an examination of the relationship of Latinos, education, and the Church. The status of Latinos and their educational participation in the US is systematically presented through a critical theoretical lens that brings questions of historical, political, and economic inequalities and their consequences to the center of this interpretive interrogation. With this foundational piece in place, the article moves to the concept of cultural democracy as an important philosophical principle in our work to transform the education of Latino children within Catholic schools and beyond. The role and responsibility of the Church is linked here to proclamations offered by Pope Francis toward revolutionizing the labor of the Catholic Church and Catholic education in an effort to more effectively engage with the pedagogical needs of Latino communities. Moreover, the discussion employs a much needed critical philosophical lens that defies the presentation of recipes or prescriptions for how emancipatory education will look when achieved, but rather invites Catholic educators, scholars, and the leadership of the Church into deeper reflection and consideration of the culturally democratic dimension that must be integrated into Catholic social teaching, if we are to genuinely achieve the necessary structural changes required to ensure educational justice for all Latino students.

Democratic Education: A Theoretical Review (2006–2017)

“…Endorsing Marxist and identity politics' critiques, critical educators question the possibility of political equality in a context in which economic redistribution and cultural recognition are not guaranteed (Apple, 2011;Sung, 2010). Power, they argue, is not equally distributed within liberal democratic society and thus equal opportunities is a liberal myth (Darder, 2016). More radically, for transfigurationist multiculturalist and agonistic scholars, if democracy is valuable, it is precisely because the normative aim is not fixed, but rather is open to multiple interpretations (Friedrich et al, 2010).…”

“…Multicultural democratic educators argue for students having opportunities to engage with their own and other cultures (Alexander, 2007). Critical democratic educators aim to examine social problems so that students can gain knowledge to uncover structures of domination (Darder, 2016), and cooperate with communities to reduce inequality (Schutz, 2011). Agonistic democratic educators recommend to educate political emotions (Backer, 2017), and to help students understand the differences between political and moral claims (Ruitenberg, 2009).…”

“…McDonough, 2008). Taking account of postcolonialist and new materialist debates, transfigurative multiculturalists challenge the primacy of any ontological and epistemological framework and argue for a multiplicity of epistemologies that challenge dominant conceptions of being and knowing (Cooks, 2007;Darder, 2016;Sibbett, 2016).…”

“…Multiculturalists advocate for students to have opportunities to better understand their own culture (Alexander, 2007), where they might be able to learn in their native language(s) (Mutekwe & Sedibe, 2015) and engage with indigenous knowledge systems (Mutekwe & Sedibe, 2015;Okoth & Anyango, 2014). Darder (2016), for instance, defends the banned Mexican American Studies within Arizona secondary schools. Students should be given opportunities to reflect to better understand themselves and to comprehend the nature of the stereotypes they hold (Alexander, 2007;Camicia & Dobson, 2010).…”

Social Justice Teaching Through the Sympathetic Touch of Caring and High Expectations for Students of Color

“…Freire (2000) also elucidated the importance and power of understanding the history and experiences of students so that educators can work toward a revolutionary praxis. Darder (2016) expanded on Freire’s work to emphasize the importance that teachers “establish collective relationships of struggle” with marginalized students and communities (p. 13).…”