Hinchey, Patricia H. (2004). Becoming a critical educator: Defining a classroom identity, designing a critical pedagogy. Reviewed by Sylvie Roy, University of Calgary

Hinchey, Patricia H. (2004). Becoming a critical educator: Defining a classroom identity, designing a critical pedagogy. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc. Pp. xi + 168 ISBN 0‑8204‑6149‑0 Reviewed by Sylvie Roy University of Calgary July 13, 2006 I am a Canadian white woman who speaks two languages, French and English. I worked as a teacher for a few years before I became a faculty member at my university, where I prepare teachers to teach in French Immersion, French as a second language, and Francophone schools. Our teacher program at the Faculty of Education is inquiry based, field experiences based, and learner focused. We believe that preparing teachers should be done through inquiry, critical thinking, and praxis. In 2006, we think that teachers should be prepared for diverse classrooms where students bring with them culturally and linguistically diverse experiences. It is through this lens that I read and interpreted the content and messages of Patricia H. Hinchey’s Becoming a Critical Educator: Defining a Classroom Identity, Designing a Critical Pedagogy. The main message of Hinchey’s book is that we should prepare teachers to become critical thinkers and challenge the status quo, not only to bring about changes for a better, more democratic society in which every child has a place to grow and develop, but also to prepare students to participate in such a society by teaching them to use critical inquiry methods. The book focuses on American schooling and ideologies, but it could be applied to any social or political context. After examining old assumptions about schooling, the book discusses the role and power of corporations and government in the U.S. school system and finishes with suggestions for critical alternatives for teachers. I liked the foreword very much. A personal note written by the author’s daughter, who is a teacher, it sets the tone for the book and describes the reality of U.S. classrooms for some teachers. The first chapter begins with reflections on the assumptions of, and alternatives to, current methods of education. Hinchey suggests that all educators should ask themselves some questions about their assumptions regarding schooling. She writes that teacher education should focus more on the whys instead of the hows of teaching: Why do we do things the way we do? Why do teachers assign homework? Why do students do homework? Why not? These questions are important, because “the first step toward careful reflection and choice is recognizing that consciously or not, anyone who has ideas about what schools ‘should’ be or do is already aligned with one paradigm of education or another” (p. 7). The author then urges readers to take time to think about the various educational ideas, beliefs, assumptions, theories, and philosophies that have an impact on how we conduct ourselves in the classroom. In the first chapter, and later in the book, the author talks about the influences of government, political motives, capitalism, and the immigration system—all of which favor white Anglo‑Saxon Protestants (or immigrants who can play the part). She also describes how corporate and business mentalities are integrated into the school system. Hinchey writes that historically, the essential aspects of education in the United States have been the political, which asks schools to indoctrinate patriotic citizens; the economic, which asks schools to train compliant, productive workers and acquisitive consumers; and the social, which asks schools to nurture hardworking, self‑reliant, law‑abiding community members. In every instance, the intention is to preserve the American status quo. (pp. 12‑13) The next section of Chapter One introduces the alternative agenda, which is based on critical theories such as those of Dewey, Giroux, and Freire. Hinchey discusses the critical alternatives for teachers and schools in more detail at the end of the book, but here she mentions that in a democratic society, students and teachers should challenge and examine existing conditions by asking questions: Who made the decision? Who devised this plan, based on what criteria? Who will gain and lose from it? The goal of critical educators is to uncover societal inequalities and biases, in order to promote social responsibility for a more just society. The second chapter focuses on teachers’ work and thinking. Hinchey talks about critical consciousness, that is, the awareness that our ideas come from a particular set of life experiences, and the ability to trace our ideas from their sources and to acknowledge that others have ideas and experiences that could be different from ours. Critical consciousness also requires an understanding that ideas and values are socially constructed and that they are not universal laws. The author focuses on characteristics such as race, gender, language, and sexual orientation that sometimes influence teachers’ thoughts and actions. Experiences are also shaped by “social class, native language, religion, parenting styles and a world of other factors” (p. 43). It is important to remember that these factors are not neatly categorized. The main message is that teachers need to understand how experiences have shaped their lives and their students’ lives and to be conscious of these factors in their own practice. The fourth and fifth chapters address U.S. educational policy and the dominant educational rhetoric that influences the school system right now. These chapters demonstrate that U.S. politics and corporation leaders control discourses around schooling and the success of schooling. Hinchley maintains that the rhetoric of failure is so convincing that the public believes that the school system should be reformed. These two chapters strongly criticize the “bad” influences that the Bush presidency and large corporations have on the school system. As a Canadian reader, I was astonished to read about the extent to which the Bush government has affected the education system. I would have liked to read about the good that the Bush administration has done as well. Not that I am agreeing with the present system, but I would have appreciated a more balanced discussion, one that says, This is the way it is, here is how we can implement changes, and here is an example of how one school is making changes in the United States. The last chapter, which from my point of view is the most important, looks at how teachers should apply critical principles in the current school system. The author claims that in schools, “supporting democracy come to be defined as supporting that which best advances corporate goals for maximized profit” (Hinchey’s emphasis; p. 116). She would like to redefine the goal of democracy as an ideal in which the good of the many takes precedence over the good of the few and where a racially, linguistically, and culturally diverse population has equal access to quality education and opportunities for self‑determination. Hinchey suggests a move away from the idea of supporting profit‑based democracy and assimilation. Rather than preparing students to be tomorrow’s “human capital” in a society in which success is measured in monetary terms, critical teachers should ensure that all students (including the poor, nonnative speakers of English, and those from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds) receive a quality education that allows them to become “masters of their own economic and social careers” (p. 65). Hinchey proposes to focus on people instead of things, and on genuine rather than rhetorical democratic goals, by adopting critical inquiry as a central activity in classrooms. Through questioning, students examine matters that are important for them, ask why things are the way they are, and analyze who benefits from the status quo. Then they can explore possibilities for changing conditions. Hinchey suggests that we need a different kind of teacher, who can adopt critical alternatives. We need teachers who understand social power arrangements and who respect the other, “other people’s children.” Teachers should also see themselves as risk takers, public intellectuals who play an active role as agents for social change. In my own work in preparing future teachers in an inquiry‑based program at the University of Calgary, I often interview and talk to teachers about diversity in their classrooms (Roy, 2006). Diversity is invisible to many of these teachers. They want to treat their students all the same way. However, teachers who were trained in inquiry‑based programs do see differences, not only in terms of multiple intelligences and students learning differently, but also in terms of racial, linguistic, and socioeconomic factors. This is a very strong and powerful book. Everyone who wants to implement changes in the system, especially in the United States, should have a copy. I believe that changes often occur at the grass‑roots level, even if it takes a few years to see the effects. This book can help to facilitate that process. As Hinchey points out, “Every educator must decide whether to endorse the prevailing vision or to work for change” (p. 63). Teachers, future teachers, and students should be encouraged to be critical by asking questions and acting for change. Reference Roy. S. (2006, April). Discourses of diversity in second‑language classrooms. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. About the Reviewer Dr. Sylvie Roy University of Calgary Calgary Alberta Associate Director, Language Research Centre http://fis.ucalgary.ca/lrc/. Second Vice-President, Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics Association canadienne de linguistique appliquée http://www.aclacaal.org/ Copyright is retained by the first or sole author, who grants right of first publication to the Education Review.