How do these theoretical approaches differ from that of the classical theorists we learned about previously? And how might we use their theoretical paradigms to understand educational inequality both domestically and globally? This is a vast question, so you can pick one particular issue you'd like to focus on as an example.

Global-critique how western, capitalist models of education are exported to developing countries often ignoring local needs and cultural differences. example many developing countries focus on standardization and privatization can limit access to education for marginalized groups such as rural population or ethnic minorities.

Karl Marx and W.E.B Du Bois take on the big structures that create inequality—Marx argues that education is used to keep the working class down in a capitalist system, while Du Bois points out how schools reinforce racial injustices, especially for Black communities. On the other side, Michael Apple, bell hooks, and Paulo Freire look at how education itself can either uphold or challenge these inequalities. Apple shows how school curricula and policies tend to serve the interests of those in power, keeping cultural and ideological dominance intact. bell hooks focuses on race, gender, and class, pushing for an inclusive approach that ties marginalized students’ experiences into their learning. Freire sees education as a tool for liberation, using critical dialogue to help students question and resist oppression. So, while Marx and Du Bois provide a broader critique of inequality, Apple, hooks, and Freire dig into the everyday workings of education, aiming to transform it from the inside out.

⁤On the other hand, Apple's analysis dives into how educational practices and policies contribute to reinforcing social hierarchies. ⁤⁤Apple emphasizes how the educational system often serves the interests of the ruling class, further entrenching existing inequalities. ⁤⁤According to Apple, teachers have the potential to act as agents of change, challenging oppressive systems within education but they do the opposite and teach students in a way where they will only repeat an answer and not learn, which aligns with Marx's concept of individuals resisting and transforming societal structures as education keeping society down. They advocate for educational practices that aim to promote equity and justice, shedding light on the need for systemic changes within the educational sphere to address societal inequalities. ⁤

Apple had an interesting theory on education and how the education system does not teach people how to be equal. He states how they teach people to feel like they have power amongst others. Schools are what form us because it teaches us how to grow and what we need to know in order to succeed in life. However, Apple states that sometimes schools do not educate on inequality and how everyone should feel entitled to what they want to learn in school. Schools are part of out life and we are aware this is what forms us and what we get from education should be equal. We need to get some type of education on things that are important for us to learn.

Bell Hooks explains how many different characteristics as it pertains to identity such and class, race and gender collaborate with each other to form special experiences of inequality. Even though both DuBois and hook examined class and race, hook centers on how feminism and the aspect of community and love can decrease and stop oppression. I think that we can use their theoretical paradigms to understand education inequality both domestically and globally by focusing on power dynamics, education and culture as it pertains to education because all of these things are important to understand inequality that is present within the educational system.

Michael Apple highlights how schools reinforce inequalities by promoting some cultural stories while ignoring others, especially those of marginalized groups. W.E.B. Du Bois focuses on the personal struggle of students trying to fit in when their identities aren’t represented. For example, a Eurocentric curriculum can make students from diverse backgrounds feel left out. By applying these theories, we can see that education systems often exclude certain voices, which helps us understand the need for more inclusive practices that welcome all students’ experiences.

^{Friere, Apple, and Hooks propose education as a transformative practice, empower individuals to challenge systemic inequalities.}

^{Curriculum: Domestically and Globally}

^{With these theoretical paradigms curricula is never neutral. They are shaped by social, economic, and political forces. Domestically and globally it can often serve to reproduce inequalities as much as they can support resistance and transformation. Educators can challenge these systems and create more equitable and empowering educational experiences for all students.}

Religious institutions. We see this very evident in the school systems today, where a lot of politics is involved, and a district's economic status matters for the distribution of resources and education tools. Contrary to Pablo Feire’s theory, teacher-student relationships are the root of social problems. Their authority puts teachers in the position of controlling how students learn and what they know. Schools reproduce class-based inequality ( the pedagogy). In the 1968-1972 publication of Pedagogy of the Oppress, we see it extended into a society with a hierarchical system. It promotes inequality and oppression. On the other hand, Bell Hooks believes in the “theory as liberatory practice”(1994), that although there is hurt and inequality, that theory offers an opportunity for it to be reformed and understood. Hook was a fan of Pablo Feire and based a lot of her theory on his theory and often referred to it throughout her book; although she points out the weaknesses in the theory, she believes that she can take the theory and expand it to grow. She recognized that most of her pain came from a patriarchal family and a Patriarchal society. She wanted to use the liberatory theory to stop the hurt; she didn’t only view the theory as not liberatory but transformational. But how can we understand the world if the only theories that are validated come from white people? So, as she puts it, black and brown men and women already come with family trauma and then go into a society that further oppresses them.  But not one monolithic oppression but intersectional oppression. Hooks believes that theory helps to understand the root of pain and where it comes from.

After reading and hearing about the philosophy or the thinking behind the theorist, you can see how parts of each theory relate to our school system. I agree with Hooks's views that it’s intersectional and that many components play a part. Many students come to the classroom with wounds and trauma that they bring to the school, which plays a role in their development. But I think with time, the school systems, although there are many flaws and politics involved, also have people trying to make a difference to bring healing and trust to our students. I think when we have and see people representing our own identities in schools, they may understand student struggles and that teaching practices can change. We can see that some of the teaching approaches are transforming and are taking a different approach to learning where students feel included and validated for their culture, religion, and gender. In some way, this helps to transform the views of society and how black and brown people view themselves in society.  We have a long way to go to achieve this. Still, it’s when each moving part works together with the same vision and recognizes that we are all valuable and deserve equality in our education system and society.

Connecting Apple's ideology with Du Bois they both share similarities when it comes to challenging societal norms. Du Bois highlights the inequality within race due to systematic oppression and how African Americans struggled in the education system. Du Bois's concept of "double consciousness" analyzes African Americans' struggle with identity and the misrepresentation school systems had.

There is still an inequality that goes within the school system. When it comes to funding to area one lives in influences the quality of learning. Educators are underpaid, have overcrowded classrooms, and lack resources and support. The quality of learning is different among schools, and schools use standardized testing to divide students on where they qualify to attend schools.

According to Pablo Freire, teacher narration - also referred to as the “banking method” is the issue in schools, where lecturers treat students like empty vessels because they are viewed as the authority. Lower class students experience this which also gives people the impression that they are not working hard enough. On the other hand, Du Bois discusses the use of double consciousness, the sense of unfairness to comprehend unequal distribution among schools and school base segregation. However Du Bois ignored the gender aspect. 

Marx viewed things through a capitalistic lens. He felt that the systems that were provided by schools were used to perpetuate the power dynamic that already existed.

Freire's theory centered around the banking method. He argued that in this method teachers treat students like empty vessels with no consideration of previous knowledge. There is no connection to the student, and it also strips students of their voices. There is only value for what the teacher knows.

Many ideas of past theorists are still present and serve as the bedrock for many theorists that came after.

Bell Hooks although influenced by Freire, looked at things through a different lens as well. His work left out people of color and women as it written in a different time. She was theorizing through a patriarchal lens Her theorizing began with pain, struggle, and hurt. She is looking at the lack of representation in theory. That goes into race and culture, as well as sex. She was looking for black and brown voices, she was looking for women of color as well.

Apple looks at education as one cog in a system that perpetuates injustices and inequality. He shines a light on the education system, but does not fully blame it. He instead looks at the education system as a piece of a larger system that must be scrutinized. He is looking at equity in education.

I think the theoretical approaches changed with time. They began as broad strokes to address certain things that were relevant to the time. As the challenges changed and transformed ,so did the people who began to theorize.Each of the theorists looked at things from their own perspective, but all have common ground in equity, injustice, or changing the power dynamics.