A review of critical pedagogies in health and social care: findings from a ‘best fit’ framework synthesis

ABSTRACT

Although recent research has highlighted the importance of understanding the structural social processes through which stigma is produced and maintained, educational approaches to stigma-reduction have not yet engaged with this concept. Recognising that critical pedagogies have been used in other contexts to help learners better understand and challenge structural social processes of marginalisation, we conducted a review of educational interventions that were informed by critical pedagogies and delivered within settings of health and social care. A systematic search was performed on academic and grey literature databases between January 1970 and 17 May 2017 to identify all literature reporting on the learning outcomes of educational interventions informed by frameworks of critical consciousness development. Articles were selected following a two-stage screening process and an assessment of methodological quality. Of the 9,674 articles identified from the systematic search, 33 were found to satisfy the inclusion criteria and were of sufficient quality to be considered within this review. Two major findings emerged from the analysis of interventional studies. Firstly, it was found that learners consistently articulated a sociostructural understanding of oppressive social relations and their position within it, based upon an understanding of their own group identity. Secondly, and despite the sociostructural content of reflection, individual actions tended to focus on the modification of interpersonal interactions. Although educational interventions informed by a critical pedagogy appear to support a structural analysis of social marginalisation or disadvantage, there is limited evidence to suggest how these structural processes might be challenged following this analysis.

KEYWORDS:

• Critical pedagogy
• marginalisation
• inequalities

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of university librarians Nikki May and Jessica Tyndall for their assistance in developing the search strategy for this review, and to the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed on the publisher's website.

Additional information

Funding

Heath Pillen was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.