Paulo Freire and A New Understanding of Protest in Internationalization of Higher Education

• In Event: "How Power Works: Complementary Perspectives on Reproduction, Resistance, and Change"

Proposal

Despite as a theoretical construct over half a century ago, scholars still consider Freire and pedagogy of the oppressed a potent solution to contemporary educational complexities (Bhattacharya, 2020; Trifonas, 2018). Freire (1998) cautions that we should be dialectical about “what we inherit and what we acquire” (p.70). The world we inherit is full of myths. For instance, SDG4 is set to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all” (United Nations). “As we confront such myths, we also face the dominant power because those myths are nothing but the expression of this power, of its ideology” (Freire, 1998, p.41). Internationalization of higher education (IHE) may be one of the myths as “one of the most significant drivers facing the modern university” (Taylor, 2004, p.168). Scrutinizing IHE from the perspective of Paulo Freire would be a theoretical innovation and contribution. Researchers should be recognized “as a significant site of struggle between the interests and ways of knowing of the West and the interests and ways of knowing of the other” (Smith, 2010, p.2). The pedagogy of the oppressed can shed new light on the problematic behaviors of Global North, the power/knowledge nexus, the origins and representation of the power of protest in the context of IHE.

First and foremost, Freire expands upon the rationale behind the behavior of the oppressed. Freire (1993) perspicaciously reveals that “the behavior of the oppressed is a prescribed behavior, following as it does the guidelines of the oppressor” (p.29). When it comes to IHE, the system continues to be exploitative with the oppressing Anglophone West and the oppressed rest of the world. What concerns scholars the most is whose knowledge matters and what language counts. Western knowledge in the form of English as medium of instruction manifest the oppression of Global North over Global South. Comparatively speaking, institutions from native English countries have reaped the most benefits from internationalization (Rose & McKinley, 2018). If universities from non-Anglophone countries stick to national language in academia, their internationalization endeavor would be seen as “hollow” (Jenkins, 2011, p.927). Freire avers that the duality of the oppressed reflects the depth of oppression. “A particular problem is the duality of the oppressed: they are contradictory, divided beings, shaped by and existing in a concrete situation of oppression and violence” (Freire, 1993, p.37). One recent case would be Dutch universities and students deplore the government’s plan to reduce the use of English in Dutch education institutions for fear of diminishing their international standing and reputation (Pascoe, 2023).

In addition, Freire’s theory helps to understand the power/knowledge nexus in the context of IHE. Freire criticizes the capitalist “banking” system of education in which teachers infuse knowledge into the minds of students, in this case, Global North into Global South. Under this model, knowledge is taken as a gift bestowed by teachers who believe themselves to be knowledgeable upon students whom are deemed ignorance. “Projecting an absolute ignorance onto others, a characteristic of the ideology of oppression, negated education and knowledge as processes of inquiry” (Freire, 1993, p.72). Put into the context of IHE, Global North, specially speaking, the traditional leading destinations of international students – the US, UK, EU, Australia, and Canada are paternalistic teachers in terms of demarcating definitions (de Wit et al., 2015; Beelen & Jones, 2015; Leask, 2009), clarifying myths (Altbach, 2004; Altbach & Knight, 2007; Knight, 2011), and “enlightening” trends (de Wit & Altbach, 2020; Leask et al., 2021). Meanwhile, although as the largest two origins of international students (UNESCO, 2023), China and India from Global South in IHE are constantly biased and denigrated for lack of scientific knowledge and method about IHE (Yang, 2014; Guo et al., 2021).

For Paulo Freire, the power of protest originates from the dialogic pedagogy which requires equal communication between teachers (Global North) and students (Global South). Dialogue as social praxis warrants that “recovering the voice of the oppressed is the fundamental condition for human emancipation” (Aronowitz, 1993, p.18). Such pedagogy of the oppressed is developed not “for but with the oppressed” (Freire, 1993, p.30) by drawing on their own lived experience. The alternative pedagogy is also “problem-posing” which requires students not to be receptive but to be reflective of their communities and realities and how they are affected by structures of unjust power. Along with Gramsci (1971) who calls for organic intellectuals, Freire (1993) values the leadership of the conscientious intellectuals to adapt to the needs of the people. Scholars from Global South have been increasingly aware of the downsides of IHE and critically evaluating its practices in national contexts (Kirkpatrick, 2011; Wilkinson, 2013; Phan & Barnawi, 2015). For one thing, concepts of internationalization as well as other derivative ideas belong to western conceptualization (Li & Xue, 2021). For another, Englishization symbolizes neocolonialism in Global South (Guo & Beckett, 2007) and may encroach the space for indigenous languages in the academia (Chapman et al., 2011; Phan, 2013).

Lastly, the power of protest is from within the oppressed. Freire is a believer of the good sense of the oppressed that they are capable of seeing through the oppression and then struggling against such domination, which is substantively a revolutionary optimism. “At the heart of such a pedagogy is the dialogue not only between intellectual and oppressed but between action and reflection as well” (Burawoy, 2019, p.102). Relative autonomy of universities in IHE should be noted. For Global South who have been historically colonized by the West, it’s imperative for their higher education system transform from “a knowledge-receiving culture to a knowledge-producing one” (Sinlarat, 2005, p.268). Albeit that contemporary universities sustain a knowledge system that “reflects and reproduces social inequalities on a global scale” (Connell, 2017, p.10), certain universities from the South, for example, China, India (Niazi & Sharma, 2023) and South Africa (McKenna, 2023), have demonstrated their protest by boycotting international rankings and promoting their own national rankings based on unique education systems. Such disconnection and decoupling from international rankings can be seen as certain revolutionary opposition to oppression.

Author

• Ting Du, University of Calgary