Educational Psychology—Limitations and Possibilities

Counter-memory and Re-memory-ing for Social Action 589
we accept educational psychology’s traditional theory of memory, the above example presents no
difficulty for teachers and learners. For critical theorists it does.
When teachers and learners accept the traditional theory of memory as produced by academic
disciplines such as educational psychology; when this dominant construction of memory enters
society and institutions as natural, normal, and universal; when memory is encoded with singular
truths; when memory is stored as homogenous, authoritative knowledge; and when memory is
retrieved as individualistic yet universal, the fundamental promises of a postmodern democratic
society are being corroded. This takes us back to the questions asked by critical pedagogues: What
counts as memory and what doesn’t? Whose memories count and whose don’t? What happens
when dominant status quo memories are challenged (counter-memory)? What happens when
one person’s, one cultural group’s, one nation’s, one civilization’s memories are in conflict with
the dominant’s? In what contexts were the memories constructed? By whom? How? How does
context influence what and whose memories count? Why those and not others? What does it mean
to have a “good” memory or a “bad” memory? These are just a few of the possible questions that
can be and should be asked when the postmodern principles of democratic societies, institutions,
and nations are at stake. Theories and practices of plurality, diversity, inclusiveness, equity, and
social justice are just a few of the principles used when examining and critiquing, excavating
and connecting, articulating memory and memories. Without these principles and freedom to ask
the questions, memories are no more than objects of totalitarianism and brainwashing made to
appear natural, neutral, and normal.
RETHINKING TEACHING AND LEARNING PRACTICES
A theoretical rethinking of what counts as memory produces a change in practices. Postmodern
memory and counter-memory do recognize the practices of modern constructions of memory and
uses their frameworks sometimes. They do so, however, with a different set of questions similar
to those listed in previous paragraphs. To rethink our teaching and learning practices, what seems
the best and, dare I say, logical place to start is with particular questions; questions that situate
memory and memories in larger contexts than those of cognition as an activity of the mind/brain
and beyond the responsibility of but not separate from individual memory. Practices that involve
supplying memories works mainly through the symbolic (oral, print, visual, audio, concrete,
abstract, etc.) ordering of thoughts. For these reasons, we also have to rethink how symbolic
ordering of memories also has to change. The following is a partial list of ways that educators
(teachers, administrators, parents, community, television and film producers) might begin to
rethink their practices for the inclusion of postmodern memories and counter-memories.
1. Examine the practices you use to teach that has students learn in particular ways. Are they what you
would consider complicit with, in conflict with, contradictory to, resistant to, negotiated with those of
traditional modern ways of teaching and learning? In what ways? Why so?
2. Examine how other teachers, parents, educational administrators, institutional policies, disciplinary textbooks
on teaching and learning think you should teach. In what ways do they support differences from or
confirmation of the dominant ways of scientific rationality and logical positivism as discussed above? Are
practices that include different teaching/learning styles, multiple intelligences, and multiple mnemonic
strategies encoded with messages of objectivity and methodological homogeneity that reproduces or
challenges scientific rationality? In what ways do you teach that prevents the reduction of individual
memories to objectification and instrumentalism?
3. Examine the materials (oral, books, film, TV, computer, etc) that store knowledge, beliefs, values, representations,
etc. that become memories. Whose memories? Are they those of the dominant, negotiated,
or marginalized? What memories are excluded? How does the knowledge and the structure of the