Hollering Theology: Teaching for Liberation

CHAPTER FOUR: TEACHING FOR LIBERATION

A real beauty and gift of Appalachian culture is the expressed hospitality and genuine appreciation of others. Hospitality is felt through warm smiles, invitations into people’s homes, and hugs at church. Hillbilly hospitality is also felt in the classroom as students are willing to hear many different ideas yet in the hearing of ideas, hospitality can cover over honest conversations about difficult topics. For the hollering theologian, one must be aware that education is not a neutral endeavor, and all education is political by nature. Critical education in Appalachia must be done with sincere appreciation of hillbilly sensitivities. When stepping in the classroom, choosing a textbook, promoting an educational institution, one is engaging in pedagogy, yet pedagogy is not neutral. Hollering theologians embrace critical pedagogy as a way to graciously invite dialogue in the classroom. Critical pedagogy is an educational philosophy that critiques both culture and society as it affirms that knowledge is foundationally mediated through language. Language creates a reality, but the reality is ultimately shaped by systems of power often fueled by capitalistic desires of production, profit, consumption, and ownership. These systems of power make a clear distinction between those who are benefited and those who are oppressed. Oppression is usually systematic, historical, and fueled by seeking to get the oppressed to internalize the false narrative created by dominant education.

Students must understand the systems of oppression and be awakened before they can become free agents who know their personal and communal power to work toward liberation, freedom, and life.[1] Hollering theology partners with critical pedagogy because it advocates for people as subjects rather than objects.[2] It is imperative for the hollering theologian to never lose sight of compassion and the valuing of one’s heart in the process. So often in critical pedagogy one can lose oneself in the midst of doing the work of justice. Throughout this project, I have faced seasons of spiritual exhaustion from the work of critical education. It is imperative that critical educators remain centered in a deep spirituality as fighting systems and calling out crushing dominate narratives can in the end exhaust and embitter the liberator. Hollering theology must have a heart of compassion or else it is not liberative.[3] To grapple with hard truths through education is to invite oneself and others into a transformational journey.[4]

Critical pedagogy is a work of education that seeks to be honest regarding the formation of one’s self and one’s framework for reality. Dr. Peter Trifonas, professor of education and curriculum design, argues that oneself is created through a variation of discourses and narratives formed by normative communities and expectations.[5] All reality shapes how a person thinks and acts. Geography and land can also impact a person’s thinking and thus the hollering theologian must pay special attention to how the mountains and rural living impacts a student’s actions. Space and land deeply matter for social location and pedagogy. [6] As a student begins to pay attention to one’s surroundings and how their identity is formed, the student has the capacity to grow in awareness regarding how imperialism can negatively impact the formation of a hillbilly. Critical education can awaken hillbilly consciousness to the forces of economics, politics, community, and religion and how they can oppress. As an educator, I must be aware of how my own biases and stereotypes impact my teaching and pedagogy. In this project I had to stare intently into the mirror asking how deeply does the negative hillbilly stereotype impact my teaching and do I model hillbilly student’s cultural acceptance?[7] Through this work, I learned that much of my presuppositions of the research were rooted in negative hillbilly stereotypes, especially the belief that hillbillies need “saving” and that they needed help to be “successful.”

When mountain students have a dominant narrative pushed on them of what success looks like, it can devalue a way of life, thus becoming culturally imperialistic in the form of education provided. For example, some teachers think they are helping students who are poor by promoting a middle-class dream which is at its heart, anti-working class.[8] Students need to be given permission to question and resist narratives to avoid patterned ways of life that ultimately lead to despair in some hillbilly homes. The hollering theologian must ultimately be aware of power dynamics at play in each educational encounter, in the educational system, and the narratives that the educators unconsciously push on Appalachian students. I am guilty of this type of imperialistic expectation. When students graduate, intentionally live close to home, and work safe and good paying jobs, as an educator this must not “upset me” but rather encourage me that students are connecting with their desires. A recent example makes this educational tension more obvious. I had an Appalachian student in my course who was gifted in the area of hard sciences. This student was at the top of each science course. Due to some physical differences, the student was not able to pursue medical school yet they had outstanding research skills, and were awarded summer fellowship grants. Through hard work, mentoring by professors, and determination, the student was awarded a prestigious scholarship and placement in a masters to PhD program at a leading research university. The faculty rejoiced at the student’s acceptance, as subconsciously the faculty had “saved” a hillbilly student from the demise of going back to their holler as now the student was set for the path of “true success.” To the surprise of all at the university, the student ultimately declined the scholarship opportunity, returned back home to their holler and got married. Now the student is a stay at home spouse and some of the faculty become tearful when talking about her. At least on one occasion one faculty member has said, “what a waste.” This experience is an example of how bias education demands conformity whereas critical education empowers students to make their own path toward their defined success.

When students can begin to name and resist, there is power in this transference as students are learning how to call out systems of oppression.[9] Power is expressed in resistance education which leads toward dialogue and the dialogue helps to equally distribute the power.[10] This dialogue of resistance must be felt not only in the classroom but especially in the structure of the entire educational institution. The witness of Father Ellacuria helps the hollering theologian connect critical pedagogy in its contemporary expressions to show how the university can serve as the creative conscience of society. Ellacuria sought to learn with the poor and suffering of El Salvador. Learning that is done with people rather than for people can deeply shift the power of education.

“Learning with” seeks to empty hegemony of its brutal force. Hegemony plays out in Appalachian education in subtle ways yet it is especially known by saying that hillbillies must be dependent on college or formal education as the only acceptable way to learn. Universities can fall prey to proclaiming that only former education is legitimate and education outside of it is less than adequate.[11] Critical pedagogy seeks to fully awaken human agency so that the hillbilly can challenge the forces of oppression that seek to make students simply a commodity. Sadly, however, students are often silenced rather than awakened. In the mountains, silencing often happens through an insidious form of fatalism which has disempowered generations of hillbillies. Fatalism is the religiously fueled resignation to a dependent and meaningless life. Critical pedagogy when applied in Appalachia, empowers students to see an open future and helps students own their own personal and communal power.[12]

When a person thinks of critical pedagogy, one must become familiar with Brazilian educator Paulo Freire. Although other great liberation educators like bell hooks, Henry Giroux, Peter McLaren, Howard Zinn, and Parker Palmer, are worthy of in-depth research, Freire is chosen because he is known as the founder of this pedological revolution. Through his book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire lit a fire in education circles, challenging known ideas of the “sage on the stage” and sought to topple the banking model of education. Through listening, mutual engagement, and critical education, Freire was able to empower a new way of learning. The key concept of his educational philosophy is “conscientization”, “conscientização,” a Portuguese word that is both hard to pronounce and harder to define. The idea is that a student, through a critical platform of mutual education, grows in connection of seeing their own sources of suffering as tied to larger oppressive systems of domination. This process is fundamental to hillbillly education.

Freire is unashamed in his belief that teaching and learning must aim to liberate the oppressed by developing a critical awareness of oppression's causes.[13] Critical pedagogy in Freire’s thought center on three principals: there is in every human being an innate drive to freedom; people are capable of changing their given reality; education is a political activity. In addition, he believes that before a student can overcome their oppression, they must first critically and honestly become aware of its causes. So then, Freirian critical pedagogy aims to have interconnectivity as a powerful tool to be awakened.[14] This awakening transforms the oppressed from “beings for others” into “beings for themselves.” [15] The oppressed grow in the awareness that they can exist outside the vision and definition of the oppressor.

For the hillbilly student, they can realize that there are mountains of suffering around them which are caused by systematic factors and forces yet these “mountains” can be moved, and dreams can be realized.[16] The liberating educator does not teach a method or a set of skills or provide a bank of knowledge; the educator teaches rebellion. This type of educator teaches struggle rather than conquest and discovery. [17]

Through this educational strategy, the learner discovers oneself through the lens of another.[18] These transformational relationships are all encompassing and must include the teacher. If the teacher stays isolated from the critical questioning and the engagement with inner transformation, then all liberation will be limited. Relationships are priceless in critical pedagogy. For the teacher, relationships with the learners are paramount because one must know the student and their cultural context/lived experiences.[19] To know the hillbilly, the educator must know the holler. This liberation education is deeply rooted in the context of the lives of the students and their lived experiences. Education without eyes opened for social analysis strays from education and becomes state sponsored indoctrination.[20] When working with oppressed Appalachian students it is important to know the framework and assumptions of the creators of course materials. One must be careful to avoid being an agent of the colonizer.[21]

Few books have challenged my basic understanding of teaching and learning like Paulo Freire's book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed. After having read the text, I was called to repent of the ways in which my teaching style perpetuates a culture of repression. Throughout his text, Freire challenges conventional educational methods and argues that education is a key source of liberation for the oppressed, especially those who are illiterate. Through the image of a culture of silence, he states that tragically education typically expands the culture of silence rather than giving voice to those who are being silenced.

The basic argument of Freire is that all persons are subjects who are transformational agents in the world rather than ones who are silent recipients of all things. Persons need awakened to their innate value and humanness so that they can act as subjects and change the world around them. Every person, no matter their ethnicity, education, or experience can think critically upon their world and become an agent of change. In doing so, they can lead lives which are productive and emotionally abundant. The key to a person’s awakening is the role of a teacher who is also a learner. The teacher facilitates an environment in which persons develop conscientizacao. This is the process of creating a discerning awareness of one’s surroundings/standing within society. This awareness only occurs through reflection and action. Action is primary because it is the vehicle of transforming one’s surroundings. This awakening creates within a person the growing sense that the injustice/oppression swirling around them is not right and can be changed. Action and then reflection within a repressive system can then breed a liberating discontent.

In this process, the educator is not a fount of all knowledge. Instead, they are a co-laborer unafraid to struggle with the masses by way of listening, valuing, and dialoguing. This co-laborer expects discernment from all students. By way of dialogue and presenting problems, students are made aware of their humanness which is the goal of all humanity. When a student realizes their humanness they also discover the reality of those around them who are dehumanized. Dehumanization is a historic struggle in Appalachia. Fatalism is poison to conscientizacao because persons who affirm this do not believe that they can be a change agent and thus all things will remain the same. Their dehumanization is seen as acceptable or God’s will.

Appalachian persons have at times fought against those who seek to dehumanize them through unions, coal mine strikes, and battles against outside controlling agencies. Sadly, these battles have frequently been violent. Freire’s critical pedagogy, challenges the oppressed to love when there is no love and to liberate not only themselves but also the oppressor. Freire believes that when dehumanization occurs it not only holds captive the oppressed, but it also leads to the dehumanization of the oppressor. When the oppressed realize their humanness then the door of discontent is opened. As discontent gives way to transformational praxis, the student then is released to be fully creative and alive in life. Free creativity is that which angers the oppressor and is considered a threat to standard society thus making all awakened persons radicals.

In this way of education, the educator must firstly understand that solidarity with the oppressed is essential. A teacher cannot be above the students and he/she cannot also be the resource for truth. Rather, the teacher must be one of the learners who is seeking mutual insight. This plays out in the heart of Appalachia through the passionate zeal for coal mining and the recent political actions of the group, Friends of Coal. Oftentimes, organizations and persons protesting the mines do so from outside, yet when persons seek to make lasting change to the culture of the miners, they must do so from the perspective of standing with the coal miners. So, then a change of conversation is necessary. Rather than being a Friend of Coal one must become a Friend of Coal Miners.

A key roadblock to this transformation is the mindset of both the oppressed and the oppressor. Violence is the tool of the oppressor and must never be the tool of the oppressed. If the oppressed retort to violence then they are simply repeating the pedagogy of the oppressor. Therefore, the oppressed must first realize their oppression. For Freire, oppression is any act that limits a person from being fully human and maximizing their human potential. The oppressors see people as things, tools for mastery and control. Rather than being change agents, the oppressed are pawns and can become emotionally dependent upon the oppressor. This leads to a death-loving behavior and internalized oppression.

A huge challenge of this pedagogy is the reality that the oppressed, once awakened to their oppression, are responsible for their liberation. Freedom will not come from the outside but solely will come from those on the inside of the movement. The teacher is to be intentional and in solidarity with the oppressed. Not all educational pedagogy is the same and some forms are oppressive by nature. Freire discusses the banking method of education and in his view, it leads to silence and death. Banking is contingent on having students receive the information, the world, and their realities in a passive manner. Banking makes the teacher the sole authority and interpreter of knowledge and reality. Students are then objectified and cannot think for themselves. Freire contrasts this with the vehicle of dialogue, humility, and communication. Teachers pose problems which arise from felt needs and the students then are engaged in conversation. The teacher participates in the conversation and classroom as a mutual learner rather than the authority. As the students and teachers are in dialogue, reality is discovered, and students are awakened to the power of seeing/naming their reality. For Freire, dehumanization is the cardinal sin and summation of oppression.

Finally, Freire uses the motif of anti-dialogical oppression and dialogical method for liberation. Dialogue is necessary for genuine revolution and leads to humanization. Dialogue is fueled by trust for one another, co-commitment to one another, and an awakened conscious. Anti-dialogical, however, is fueled by the worldview of possession and conquest. The oppressors seek to divide and rule, manipulate, and invade the culture of the learner by imposing one’s own view of the world upon the students and silence the potential for creativity or the ability to name one's own reality. The only solution to oppression is revolution and revolution comes through dialogue. In this project of hollering theology, the dialogue occurs between UPIKE students, liberation theology materials, and their Appalachian context. The aim of this project is to see if this critical dialogue in the classroom leads to active engagement in the community.

Myles Horton is an Appalachian pioneer of critical pedagogy. By a stroke of amazing brilliance both he and Paulo Freire were brought together to share their thoughts about lived out journeys of pedagogy for social conversion in the book, We Make the Road By Walking. Myles Horton started the Highlander Folk School in Tennessee in 1932. Horton sought to “provide an education center in the South for the training of rural and industrial leaders, and for the conservation and enrichment of the indigenous cultural values of the mountains.”[22] The Highlander School was focused on the empowerment and needs of mountain people and in the course of its living among the people it also tackled racial justice as a way to accompany economic justice. Both Horton and Freire saw their education as grounded in the needs and sufferings of their own story which helped them see and hear those who suffered around them.[23] Both believe in the ideal that everyone wants to be free and has been designed for freedom. Secondly, both affirmed that all people have the ability and inherent right to pursue and express this freedom.

Expressing one’s freedom comes firstly through the process of unlearning.[24] One of the first pathways of unlearning is the constant looking to the expert or to a source outside oneself.[25] Learning and teaching are foundational acts of humility. The teacher is as open and yearning as the student, as both are becoming in the process. [26] A liberating teacher according to Horton is one who learns about how the students know and secondly has to know something more than the student knows. He says that critical education must start where the students are, but this must be coupled with a vision of what can become and what is possible.[27] This vision must be a communal vision and not just for the individual because liberation and salvation are social events.[28] Horton argues that teachers must never disempower by being the expert.[29] Horton does make space however if a person wants to be an expert then the “expertise” is knowing that one is not an expert.[30] The student and the teacher must never be afraid of becoming different because freedom to evolve makes the world better.

Horton argues that students will be engaged when they can participate.[31] Students thrive on questions and the classroom must seek to provoke and make space for questions. The best education empowers students to question; in questioning a student has the space to think critically about their world. Questioning is essential to community organizing, which is at the heart of much liberation. Allowing the students to speak freely, to envision, to use and consult outer resources, is a way of empowering people.[32] The work of critical education is a hard and stretching process. Both Freire and Horton believe that students should be stretched beyond their limits as it is the job of the educator to help people take over their own lives.[33] Horton champions the teacher as the one who exposes students to a variety of experiences/ways to thinking so that the student will ask critically examining questions toward their formation of beliefs.[34]

In critical pedagogy, Paulo Freire and Myles Horton help the hollering theologian know that the expert in the room is the community that has gathered, and not the sage on the stage. In critical pedagogy one experiences the collective wisdom of the people, which gives power. Critical pedagogy uses the insights of liberation theology to help students become awakened through questioning regarding the suffering and oppression that is felt. Also, the hollering theologian is made to confront one’s own hillbilly bias while also having to ask hard questions about oneself and one’s holler. Through cultural engagement, the hollering theologian is careful to make sure that the praxis is Appalachian thus providing space to explore, question, and name the needed tools and skills that must be learned for hollering liberation to actualize.

By using critical pedagogy as a methodological framework for class instruction, this project explores the student voices within two specific religion courses at UPIKE. Critical pedagogy is used in the formation of the class syllabus and design. The first course used for this hollering liberation project is REL 214: Introduction to the New Testament, which encourages students to think deeply about the New Testament texts and issues of justice. The desired learning outcomes for the course include:

· The student will demonstrate an understanding of the historical, social, religious and literary contexts of the New Testament (NT).

· The student will develop a personal approach to understanding the NT.

· The student will demonstrate an ability to think critically about selected issues in the study of the NT especially related to the formation of the New Testament Canon.

· The student will develop the ability to articulate the importance of the NT and its personal impact in living out compassion and justice in society.

Students are required to use a modern translation of the Bible and the liberation theological text, Reading the Bible from the Margins by Dr. Miguel De La Torre. The course consists of a mixed pedological approach consisting of Socratic styled discussions, occasional lectures, discussions, student lead forums, and student presentations. This course meets three times per week at 50 minutes each for a 16-week period. Each class period students are required to produce a daily written reflection based on each assigned reading. Students are assigned at the beginning of the semester a capstone project that operates as a final. This capstone project includes a PowerPoint, which answers reflective questions, and requires students to provide critical reflection on self-selected sections of the New Testament. These reflections stem from a self-directed volunteer community project in which students can work individually or as a group. Students are asked to live out the love, compassion, and justice of the New Testament in their community. Students were given three assigned multiple-choice check-ins that explored historical and critical questions regarding New Testament context. Finally, students were given a choice on providing written or audio reflections on the liberation text written by Dr. De La Torre. In the Fall of 2018, students were required to attend two extra sessions with Dr. Miguel De La Torre, who was a guest lecturer on campus.

Students were assigned critical chapter reviews from Dr. De La Torre’s book. This book creates a stir in the students and in three of the four semesters the text was used, I was taken to the dean over the “concerning” material of the text. Each time these concerns were expressed to the administration, I met the concerned students to hear their concerns and genuinely listen to their issues. The text is edgy and I see it as important to help students have critical language/framework on how to engage their context.[35] Though provocative, the author provides helpful introductory explanations on how issues of race, class, and gender influence hermeneutics. The author pushes the students to hear the thoughts and views of those from the margins, especially regarding how they read and experience the Bible. This is the most user friendly and cheapest text that students could engage with liberation hermeneutics as the text costs students eleven dollars. The most concerning chapter deals with views of Christ that include the Black Christ, the Feminine Christ, and the Gay Christ. Students respond most positively to chapter three, which seeks to unmask sexism in the Bible. Multiple students have shared how they took learned insights and used them in conversation with parents, church leaders, or friends.[36]

Students also had daily sections of the New Testament to read and write personal reflections based on preassigned writing prompts. Throughout the course, students were engaged with liberation topics in discussion and in group activities. Students also encountered Andre Trocme’s work on Jubilee and were asked to read the bible through the servant/slave perspective in Luke 7:1-10. Students were also asked to think about their community and to bring their families, communities, and hollers into the class. Frequently they were asked to relate the reading of texts to their lived context and then they discussed it in a small group.

Beyond writing assignments, students were given a summation project called the Compassion Project. For the Compassion Project, students were given a directory of “Matthew 25:40” community nonprofits. This list offered some introductory ideas but was in no way exhaustive or determinative. Students were encouraged and rewarded for being creative and contextualizing their projects to their own community. The invitation to contextualization was important especially if students decided to do their volunteering over a break in their hometown. Compassion project details are in appendix ten. The class syllabus is available in appendix eleven. Students were voluntarily asked to participate in this research study which included a pre-course survey, an identical post-course survey, end of the term focus questions, reflective writing assignments and the invitation for an end of the course follow up interview.

The second course used was a special topics religion course created for this doctoral project: REL 390: Special Topics in Religious Studies: Appalachian Liberation Theology. This course provided students with an introduction to liberation theology especially in the Appalachian context. The course intentionally emphasized the rural experience of Appalachian Christians and how the Christian community seeks to alleviate regional suffering. The course sought to immerse students in Appalachian culture while challenging people to rethink preconceived theological and cultural notions. The course was designed so that the members of the course need one another especially in the area of reading through the required text, as the course was seminar styled. This seminar model required each member to lead discussions of the texts and to bring thoughtfully engaged questions for the other members. Students were voluntarily asked to participate in this research study which included a pre-course survey, an identical post-course survey, end of the term focus questions, reflective writing assignments and the invitation for an end of the course follow up interview.

The desired outcomes for the course were:

· The student will demonstrate an understanding of the general concepts and ideas of liberation theology

· The student will demonstrate an understanding of the culture of Appalachia and how liberation theology as impacted the Appalachian Protestant Church

· The student will develop a personal approach to understanding liberation theology and expressing the realities of global economic injustice and how Christian theology deals with it

· The student will demonstrate an ability to think critically about selected issues in the study of liberation theology

· The student will fully engage people while in Appalachia and through this interaction be challenged to have a greater level of compassion and empathy in relationship to global poverty and national inequalities

The class presented an unseen challenge due to the member composition. When designing the course, I had expected deeply interested students who would be engaged by the topic. I did not anticipate that half of the course would be filled with members seeking to earn three credits of upper division hours to graduate. These members did not start with interest in the topic. The design of the course quickly was changed as material was adjusted. After I discussed with the students about their motivations and desired learning outcomes, significant course modifications were made. The student composition of the course was small as there were seven students total with four being primary caregivers for children or grandparents, thus at times occupying their mental space. Two students were education majors on the verge of fulltime student teaching. One student was a social work major, one was a chemistry major with a religion minor, one was a nursing student, and the final student was in a business program but stated clearly, “I have no idea what I am going to do with my life.”[37] All but one student was Appalachian, which allowed the conversations to include insider visions of the empowerment of Appalachia. Required texts included:

· Boff, Leonardo. Introducing Liberation Theology. Orbis. 1987.

· Catholic Bishops of Appalachia This Land is Home to Me: A Pastoral Letter on the Poverty and Powerlessness in Appalachia” (1975)

· Catholic Bishops of Appalachia. At Home in the Web of Life: A Pastoral Message on Sustainable Communities in Appalachia. (1995)

· Catholic Committee on Appalachia. The Telling Takes Us Home: Taking Our Place in the Stories that Shape Us. A People’s Pastoral from the Catholic Committee on Appalachia (2015)

· Fisher, Stephen Fighting Back in Appalachia: Traditions of Resistance and Change. Temple Press. 1993.

· Vance, J. D. Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis. Harper: 2016.

· Wheatley, Margaret. Deborah Frieze eds. Walk Out Walk On: A Learning Journey into Communities Daring to Live the Future Now. Berrett-Koehler Publishers; 1st edition (April 4, 2011)

The textbooks provided a wide variety of engagement of issues within theology, culture, and practical ways of Appalachian resistance. The first text, Introducing Liberation Theology, was highly valued by the students as it helped them understand more about the class and one student said, “I never knew what this was called, but this sounds like what Christianity is supposed to be all about.”[38] The series of three Catholic letters from the Bishops and the Catholic Committee of Appalachia (CCA), I had deemed essential for Appalachian liberation, yet had little impact on the students. Although students did not report any issues with reading or understanding them, they did feel that the works were unfairly critical of the coal industry. They believed that the works did not highlight enough good of coal mining. Another text deemed essential was Steven Fisher’s Fighting Back in Appalachia. In reviewing the book, it appeared to be powerful because it was the best-case study compilation on the historical waves and realities of resistance in Appalachia. Students hated the book. As is seen in the course outline, appendix twelve, halfway through the assigned dates for reading of the book, it was apparent that students were not reading it, nor cared for the discussions. The next time the course is taught, a text such as Matthew Fox’s work Creation Spirituality will be selected to generate discussion of the theology of environmental justice without overtly addressing coal mining.

The most controversial book on the course list is J.D. Vance’s, Hillbilly Elegy. Without a doubt this book was the most discussed, passionately addressed, and referred to in class. One student said of the text, “Rob, I was highlighting so much of this book, I finally turned to my husband and said, you are going to read this book…this guy is talking about your family!”[39] Vance gave the students a practical and personal story to contextualize their thinking. Students reported his story as very relatable. Frequently while reading the book. Students connected members of Vance’s family to their own.. The final text was Walk on Walk Out by author and global leadership strategist, Dr. Margaret Wheatly. This book was used to spark out of the box thinking. The text helped students think of ways to work justice and liberation in their region. Students did not report overall love of the book, but each student did speak highly of one or two of the community stories, and the book was helpful for the course. This book helped empower students to start their thinking from a resource rich starting place rather than a deficit model. One student reported, “I have never thought of my hometown in ways that say, hey wait a minute…we can do something here…we have a lot we can do.”[40]

Beyond readings and seminar style discussions, the class was engaged by six guest experts from the Appalachian region. The speakers were strategically chosen for their breath of experience and knowledge in practical Appalachian leadership. Also, the speakers represented organizations that are working in, for, and with Eastern Kentucky. The first speaker was former Kentucky Governor Paul E. Patton who is also the former president of UPIKE and its current chancellor. Gov. Patton provided an in-depth discussion on his legislative work, in addition to his work for education in the state. He was a leader in the creation of the Kentucky community college system. In his talk, he provided a personal vision on how education can transform the region. He offered a historical look at education in Appalachia by comparing North Carolina, Tennessee, and Kentucky. He argued that today Eastern Kentucky is under performing in education. A significant takeaway from the time with Gov. Patton was his focus on how the coal industry was a dying industry and if Appalachia did not pivot quickly, the region would simply become a relic of the past. Gov. Patton also outlined the natural and geographic barriers to development in the Central Appalachian Mountains.

The next speaker was Jared Arnett, who was then executive director of SOAR, Serving Our Appalachian Region. Jared shared about his work as a young Appalachian leader who seeks to empower job creation through regionally innovative ideas, partnerships, and collaboration with the aim of improving the lives of people in Eastern Kentucky. His vision includes Appalachian groups working toward the common good. Students were inspired to hear Jared discuss a hopeful job market and hear of fresh new ideas happening in surprisingly small areas of Eastern Kentucky. Students were also touched to know that Jared was only 12 years older than them and that he was once a UPIKE student who struggled to know the direction of his life. Students were most impressed by Jared’s discussion of how Christian faith inspires his work of job creation in the community. His talk lead to a lively conversation about God’s activity of providing meaningful employment as a work of the Kingdom of God.

Next the students heard from Rusty Justice, a local engineer, Appalachian historian, and proud hillbilly who is the innovating founder of BitSource. I found Rusty’s sharing to be most illuminating. His local pride and insight into the Appalachian experience proved to be useful for the framing of this project. Rusty shared of how the mountains are in the Appalachian people and how the shame regarding one’s accent has caused deep hurt and code-switching over the years. He defined for the students the differences between a redneck and a hillbilly and encouraged the students to take pride in their identity of “hillbilliness” in addition to having a strong pride of place. He strongly encouraged the students to know the depth of education that comes from experience especially with place and geography rather than limiting education to formal classroom experiences. He argued that seeing the natural surroundings empowers liberation thinking because seeing the environment as the founders saw it, can open one’s eyes. He argued that coal made many of the towns of Eastern Kentucky national gems for a season. See appendix thirteen for more images of the history of leading Appalachian coal camps. Rusty also highlighted the damaging impact on stereotypes and outlined the four most common for hillbillies: feudist, moonshiners/meth-heads; simple minded person who idly sits on the porch strumming a banjo; and the helpless “happened upon” victims, who had all of his minerals stolen by evil coal operators.

The students were mesmerized by Rusty’s handling of Appalachian history and his insight into the area. In his sharing, the students asked a critical question, “If this area is filled with incredible and rich history, why is it so poor and on the surface appear to be broken?” Rusty Justice answered by saying that the poverty of Eastern Kentucky is fueled by its geography. He further discussed issues due to the mountains, as life is just harder in the mountains. Secondly, there is a long history of flood issues. Next, the region has lagged in education as well as the people have often believed the hillbilly stereotypes. Also, the economic energy has been fueled by the dominant industry of cola which is cyclical by nature. Further, he argued that the War on Poverty had unintended consequences that hurt people. He noted that the political boundaries of the state have been wrong from the beginning. Rusty advocated for a new drawing of state lines around cultural identities of the people. He claimed that southwest Virginia, southern West Virginia, and Eastern Kentucky should all be one state and he jokingly called it “Southwestvertucky.” He claimed that through the faulty state borders, the people of the various regions/Appalachian cultural group had been left out of the decision making, thus alienating them from political power. This political disempowerment has then fueled the belief that mountain people are less than and not able to determine their own lives. When asked what he would want to change in the region, he said, “We have to change our mindset, if we are going to change and advance, we have to think differently.”[41]

The next class speaker was Dr. Brent Hutchinson, who then was the executive director of the Hindman Settlement School. Hindman Settlement School is a cultural and rural settlement school that has set the standard for folk education for more 100 years. They serve children with dyslexia and provide programs to meet the changing demands of the region. Also, they promote cultural awareness through arts programs designed to continue and build on Appalachia’s rich cultural heritage.[42] Many believe that “folk schools” have actually been a leading factor in fueling the “peculiar nature” of the Appalachian people.[43] Dr. Hutchinson however sees folk education as a key to liberation for the region. He shared regarding Hindman’s vision for contextualized education, the needs of students with dyslexia and how cultural learning is critical for the Appalachian student. His talk focused mainly on leadership and how contextualized leadership is critical for being trusted. He shared how the best ideas arise in community and that any leader seeking to help an area must be the chief listener among the group.

The final two guest speakers were Jacob Mack-Boll, Eastern Kentucky outreach director with Kentuckians for the Commonwealth, and Dr. David Snow, former professor of entrepreneurship at UPIKE. Jacob Mack-Boll shared about the work of grassroot organizing. He shared about the critical importance of committing to help local people do direct action challenges to change unfair political, economic and social systems. He also shared how Kentuckians for the Commonwealth[44] exists to empower local grassroots transformation.

Jacob’s presentation was question oriented and sought to provoke engagement from the students, yet due to the fact that the students had not done grassroots organizing, they were lost in his talk. Sadly, there was miscommunication between myself and Jacob as Jacob presented on more advanced ideas for experienced grass roots organizers whereas I was seeking to have him provide a basic introduction to grass roots organizing.

Dr. David Snow was a late addition to the course but was invited to come and offer insight into thinking strategically while offering a lesson on creating a business plan for social change. He shared with the student’s various models for birthing business ideas, forming a business plan, and how to present their business ideas. The students were least impressed with this speaker and had a hard time seeing the relevance of it, until the following class when the students were assigned a group project which required them to form and innovative a liberation project for their community.

Surprisingly, it was Dr. Snow’s talk that spurred conversations on practical social change for the Pikeville community. When coupling Dr. Snow’s talk and the assigned group project, the students collectively created a business model for a 24-hour daycare that would support working parents who were specifically working at the local hospital on third shift to earn the highest pay rate. The students identified that working parents should be rewarded for working and pushing past the dependency model, yet they were adamant that an outside funding source would be needed to support this type of daycare. One model sought to get supplemental support from the hospital and other employers who would be benefited by having employees working third shift. Students believed that this daycare option would help families have trusted care providers, create jobs, and be an extension of the successful Model City daycare already being used in Pikeville. Issues were explored including gaining the trust of the community, protocols for screening workers, and completing a community needs assessment. Through this dialogue, the students learned about the process of innovation, social good, community assessments, and seeking to use liberation theology as a force for social good.

In addition to the six guest speakers and a group project, students engaged the four-part film series by PBS on Appalachia, Appalachia: A History of Its Mountains and People. Students did self-directed learning outside the classroom with these films. This series received rave reviews as it broke through the worn-out stereotypes of the mountains and explored the beauty, the complexity, and the mystery of the region. Students loved the break from the readings and saw the third segment of this series, regarding mountain revolutions, as excellent learning material.

To alter the pace of the course, one class discussion was foregone to screen the documentary Hillbilly: The Real Story. Although produced by the History Channel, the student reviews were negative. Next time the course is taught, the Hatfield-McCoy work by the History Channel or the work by PBS, American Experience: The Mine Wars, will be used. Outside of the critical book reviews, the students were asked to do three different class presentations called Appalachia in the World. See appendix fourteen.

In the planning of the course, the syllabus was designed to have each student work toward a semester long liberation project. Originally, it was planned for students to complete a similar type of community engagement experience like the Compassion Project, as is required in the New Testament course. Due to the dynamics of student motivation, demands of students outside of class, and almost all students having engaged in the Compassion Project, I changed the project in the early days of the class. Changes were made only after complete discussion with students and an anonymous class vote on the optional change was cast. The original project presented to students is in appendix fifteen. Students elected to do a community liberation project that used the models provided by speakers Jacob Mack-Boll and Dr. David Snow to collectively interview family, friends, and fellow students regarding the needs of Appalachia. Students then assigned various jobs to each class member, chose a director, and brainstormed for a community project. The community project was the previously mentioned 24-hour daycare that operated on reduced, sliding scale pay rate. The assignment was designed for students to prepare a business model, submit it to the office of innovation at UPIKE and then present as a group to the entrepreneur competition on campus. The greater campus engagement failed as the project was not completed on time. This project failed as I did not give enough initial direction nor clear guidelines, so that the student failure was my failure. The students were not punished for the missed submission date and I owned the failure with the class. The next time this course is taught, students will be required to have partners assigned or voluntarily selected in the first week and they will then be given more clear periodic assignments attached to this greater project. Also, next time, students will go through a personal interview with the professor in the first few days of the course so that I can clearly explain project and brainstorm with the student in hopes of linking fellow interested together.

Students did engage in one field trip in the course. Students took an afternoon and traveled to Martin, Kentucky which is home to Mt. Tabor Dwelling Place, the residence and monastery/spiritual home of the ecumenical sisters who do justice and lead social change in Central Appalachia. This community was created out of the Bishops appeal of the first Catholic Letter to Appalachia.[45] On this visit, students walked the grounds, explored the monastery, met four sisters and asked questions. They also heard of the foundations of the monastery and how each sister came to be a part of the work. Students found this trip meaningful as they participated in evening vespers and personally engage the sisters. Students were inspired by the activism of the elderly sisters.

The students were then engaged in a final focus group that included all seven class members, and I facilitated this discussion. The students were given the questions at the start of the semester and were reminded throughout the semester. Next time this course is taught students will be asked to do final presentations or papers rather than a focus group. The conversation was rich as students demonstrated their knowledge of liberation, Appalachia, and shared their future dreams for engagement in Appalachian liberation. See appendix sixteen for the content of the oral exam and course outline.

In addition to these courses, for the creation of hollering theology, it was deemed vital to perform field interviews with Appalachian activists who are tied to UPIKE and/or the Pikeville community. 10 interviews were conducted and those chosen to be interviewed were either directly employed by UPIKE or tied to UPIKE through regional influence. Each interviewee was given a series of questions to answer. Although no interview directly inspired project changing insights, each interview provided further insight into the hillbilly experience.

When implementing this project, the two courses were taught over the 2018-2019 academic year and the 2019 fall academic semester at UPIKE. The field interviews were conducted in 2020. Introduction to the New Testament was taught in all three semesters whereas Appalachian Liberation Theology was taught in the Fall of 2018. In the three semesters of the New Testament course, 168 students participated in the course, yet 135 students participated in the study, Fall 2018 = 42; Spring 2019 = 50; Fall 2019 = 43, whereas the Appalachian Liberation course was taught in the fall of 2018 with 7 students, and all 7 participated in the study. Each student was voluntarily enrolled in the courses, yet all the New Testament students were using the course as one of the required three hour “Systematic study of the Bible” requirements for the university’s general education curriculum. Six of the seven students in the Appalachian Liberation course were taking it to fulfill the final three hours of their needed religion requirement for the general education curriculum; only one student was not taking it to compete a requirement. Each student received 40 hours of instruction time in each class as is assigned over a 16-week term. The only students who opted out of the study were those students who did not finish the courses.

Although the two courses varied extensively in content communication, New Testament was mostly Socratic style supplemented with foundational lectures, while Appalachian Liberation was seminar and discussion format. Each class employed intentional critical pedagogy practices. Firstly, I sought to model being personally challenged to think outside of the expectations as I immersed myself in materials that were outside of my norm. Also, the seating in the class was changed from straight chairs facing the front to chairs that were sitting in a half circle and many times I sat while speaking. Critical pedagogy advocates for the truth that changing the dynamic of the classroom environment, changes the power dynamic.[46] Alternative perspectives were provided through the variety of authors, examples used in class, various small videos shown, and the guest speakers provided. In New Testament, each class students were asked about how the text of the Bible intersected with their beliefs, their traditional and cultural perspectives, and how their views impacted their actions. Students were strongly encouraged to be independent in their thinking and creativity was rewarded. Critical pedagogy was also seen in how I provided feedback to the students. The reflection model used in this course came from Dr. Melanie-Prejean Sullivan and her work with college students at Bellarmine University on developing personal theologies through Ignatian discernment. Her work, Whispers, Nudges, and a Couple of Kicks inspired the push for students to develop personal theologies through their critical writing reflections. [47]

Ultimately each course strongly encouraged activism. On the first day of the courses, I shared my teaching philosophy which is, “education is not about the accumulation of facts. Education is about compassionate transformation, which helps students have the tools needed to be agents of mercy and justice in their community. Students must be challenged and asked to be engaged with those of need.” Throughout the courses each guest speaker was an activist practitioner, so students were hearing and seeing activism lived out in front of them.

Finally, both courses did start each class period with a time of mindfulness that lasted from one to three minutes to encourage focus and personal awareness. Mindfulness preparation was deemed a critical tool of empowering students to be more in touch with their present moment and to grow in awareness of themselves as full and free agents of change. Mindfulness seeks to support students to have clarity of their surroundings and to see more clearly/deeply. The goal was to have students become alert and, in their alertness, with the help of critical pedagogy, to see, judge, and act upon their own oppression.[48]

Each course started with an explanation of the syllabus and ended with students voluntarily completing the pre-course research survey, see appendix seventeen. On the last day, students voluntarily completed the identical post-course survey. Students in the Appalachian Liberation course had a group conversation which comprised the substance of a focus group. New Testament students were asked a series of oral follow up questions in their compassion project presentations.

For the New Testament course, the evaluation process did not include any standardized tool, as after extensive research no adequate tool was found. The primary quantitative tool used was the pre-course and post-course survey. The survey sought to learn about student understanding of Christian faith as a motivator for social change and to see their knowledge of foundational liberation theology themes before class and after class. The survey is measured using a Likert scale and did provide students space to share one open-ended question that was evaluated in a qualitative way. The bulk of this project used qualitative methods to help with student connectedness that contributes to place-making. As relationships are built, the students and I help define place in relation to experience.[49] Qualitative research is the approach I used as my students struggle with internalized oppression and qualitative methods provided them full space to voice their expert opinions while also being granted the dignity to be heard. For qualitative writing samples, each student was invited to complete 30 one-page critical reflection responses on New Testament passages, which had prescribed writing prompts.

A few students from the New Testament courses were asked to do a follow up interview based on their engagement with the material and their willingness to critically engage the presented topics. For their final experience, New Testament students were given a standard set of questions to answer in their initial Compassion Project presentation: see appendix eighteen. Students whose writings sparked further investigation were invited to a one-on-one interview. 14 students were asked for follow up interviews; 8 students participated. The questions for the follow up interview are found in appendix nineteen.

In Appalachian Liberation theology, students were given the same survey at the start and finish of the course. Students drove the theme and pace of the liberation project. Students were given four critical book reviews with the aim of critically engaging the material and asking hard questions of the authors while intersecting the concepts with hollering liberation themes. These students were actively engaged in class session especially when the six various Appalachian activists came to class. The capstone reflection was a two-hour oral reflection, discussion, and processing of the entire course and larger class themes.

The Appalachian Liberation Theology course provided a great comparison partner to the Introduction to the New Testament course as each class offered possibilities to introduce liberation themes and materials while then creating pathways for students voices to be heard/honored. Both courses were used to engage UPIKE students in this hollering theology project. Even though the development of hollering theology emanates from a much larger study, the evaluation of the student insights is the focus of the project. The engagement and understandings of the students, within these courses, is what this project is evaluating. The project uses critical pedagogy as an educational framework for course design and it also is used in the implementation of the courses. The wisdom gained from the evaluation of the student voices is discussed in the following chapter.

[1]Colin Lankshear, Peter McLaren, The Politics of Liberation: Paths from Freire, Routledge, 2002, 147.

[2] David Golding, “From Suffering to Liberation Mindfulness in Critical Pedagogy,” Accessed June 21, 2020, https://www.academia.edu/13860371/From_suffering_to_liberation_Mindfulness_meditation_in_critical_pedagogy

[3] Jurgo Torres-Santome, Teaching for Global Community: Overcoming the Divide and Conquer Strategies of the Oppressor, Cesar Augusto Rossatto, ed., Information Age Publishers, 2011, 171.

[4] Lankshear, McLaren, 137.

[5] Peters, 79.

[6] Jim Cummins, “Challenging the Construction of Difference as Deficit: What are the Identity, Intellect, Imagination, and Power in the New Regime of Truth,” Pedagogies of Difference: Rethinking Education for Social Change, Peter Pericles Trifonas, ed, Routledge, 2002, 23.

[7] Slone, 34.

[8] Julie A. Gorlewski, Power, Resistance, and Literacy: Writing for Social Justice, Information Age Publishers, 2011, 178.

[9] Ibid., 174.

[10] Ibid., 181.

[11] Debra Panizzom, “Ivan Illich: Renegade Academic, Intellectual, Pastor,” A Critical Pedagogy of Resistance: 34 Pedagogues We Need to Know, James D. Kirylo, ed., Sense Publishers, 2013, 82.

[12] Carlos Tejeda, Manuel Espinoza, Kris Gutierrez, “Toward a Decolonizing Pedagogy: Social Justice Reconsidered,” Pedagogies of Difference: Rethinking Education for Social Change, Peter Trifonas, ed., Routledge, 2002, 17.

[13] Golding.

[14] Hazel T Biana, “Extending bell hooks' Feminist Theory,” Journal of International Women's Studies, 21(1), 13-29, 2020, Accessed November 20, 2020, https://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws/vol21/iss1/3

[15] Golding.

[16] Paulo Freire and Ana Maria Araújo Freire, Walter de Oliveira, Pedagogy of Solidarity: Qualitative Inquiry & Social Justice, Routledge, 2014, 33.

[17] Freire. Pedagogy of Indignation, Taylor and Francis, 2015, 55.

[18] Freire. Teachers as Cultural Workers: Letters to Those Who Dare Teach, Avalon, 2005, 127.

[19] Ibid., 102.

[20] Freire, Pedagogy of Indignation, 20.

[21] Lankshear, McLaren, 48.

[22] Myles Horton and Paulo Freire, We Make the Road by Walking: Conversations on Education and Social Change, Temple University Press, 1990, Pg. xxiii.

[23] Ibid., xxiii.

[24] Ibid., 41.

[25] Ibid., 51.

[26] Ibid., 53.

[27] Ibid., 100.

[28] Ibid., 111.