Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Critical management education

Research

Links

Text available via DOI:

Keywords

View graph of relations

Critical management education: from pedagogy of possibility to pedagogy of refusal

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

Critical management education: from pedagogy of possibility to pedagogy of refusal. / Perriton, Linda; Reynolds, Michael.
In: Management Learning, Vol. 35, No. 1, 03.2004, p. 61-77.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Perriton, L & Reynolds, M 2004, 'Critical management education: from pedagogy of possibility to pedagogy of refusal', Management Learning, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 61-77. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507604041165

APA

Perriton, L., & Reynolds, M. (2004). Critical management education: from pedagogy of possibility to pedagogy of refusal. Management Learning, 35(1), 61-77. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507604041165

Vancouver

Perriton L, Reynolds M. Critical management education: from pedagogy of possibility to pedagogy of refusal. Management Learning. 2004 Mar;35(1):61-77. doi: 10.1177/1350507604041165

Author

Perriton, Linda ; Reynolds, Michael. / Critical management education : from pedagogy of possibility to pedagogy of refusal. In: Management Learning. 2004 ; Vol. 35, No. 1. pp. 61-77.

Bibtex

@article{27295c06ee0a425fb8192d435b90a0fc,
title = "Critical management education: from pedagogy of possibility to pedagogy of refusal",
abstract = "In this article we use the frame of the debate between Ellsworth and the Freirean education movement over a decade ago to examine the current state of critical management education (CME). We question why an equivalent debate has not taken place within the field of critical management education, which also positions itself as a critical pedagogy. Our argument is that CME theory and practice need repositioning, much in the same way that Ellsworth{\textquoteright}s challenge to critical pedagogy attempted to do for that field. We conclude that to define CME using {\textquoteleft}traditional{\textquoteright} emancipatory aims is to misread its possibilities and position as pedagogy. Instead we use the concept of {\textquoteleft}colonizers that refuse{\textquoteright}, borrowed from Memmi to illuminate some of the dilemmas critical management educators face and to think through the implications of our {\textquoteleft}Pedagogy of Refusal{\textquoteright}.",
keywords = "criticality , debate, feminism, management education",
author = "Linda Perriton and Michael Reynolds",
year = "2004",
month = mar,
doi = "10.1177/1350507604041165",
language = "English",
volume = "35",
pages = "61--77",
journal = "Management Learning",
issn = "1350-5076",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Critical management education

T2 - from pedagogy of possibility to pedagogy of refusal

AU - Perriton, Linda

AU - Reynolds, Michael

PY - 2004/3

Y1 - 2004/3

N2 - In this article we use the frame of the debate between Ellsworth and the Freirean education movement over a decade ago to examine the current state of critical management education (CME). We question why an equivalent debate has not taken place within the field of critical management education, which also positions itself as a critical pedagogy. Our argument is that CME theory and practice need repositioning, much in the same way that Ellsworth’s challenge to critical pedagogy attempted to do for that field. We conclude that to define CME using ‘traditional’ emancipatory aims is to misread its possibilities and position as pedagogy. Instead we use the concept of ‘colonizers that refuse’, borrowed from Memmi to illuminate some of the dilemmas critical management educators face and to think through the implications of our ‘Pedagogy of Refusal’.

AB - In this article we use the frame of the debate between Ellsworth and the Freirean education movement over a decade ago to examine the current state of critical management education (CME). We question why an equivalent debate has not taken place within the field of critical management education, which also positions itself as a critical pedagogy. Our argument is that CME theory and practice need repositioning, much in the same way that Ellsworth’s challenge to critical pedagogy attempted to do for that field. We conclude that to define CME using ‘traditional’ emancipatory aims is to misread its possibilities and position as pedagogy. Instead we use the concept of ‘colonizers that refuse’, borrowed from Memmi to illuminate some of the dilemmas critical management educators face and to think through the implications of our ‘Pedagogy of Refusal’.

KW - criticality

KW - debate

KW - feminism

KW - management education

U2 - 10.1177/1350507604041165

DO - 10.1177/1350507604041165

M3 - Journal article

VL - 35

SP - 61

EP - 77

JO - Management Learning

JF - Management Learning

SN - 1350-5076

IS - 1

ER -