Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Ideological Interaction Theory in Critical Discourse Analysis

Written By

Yadu Prasad Gyawali

Submitted: 01 April 2020 Reviewed: 13 July 2020 Published: 18 August 2020

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.93366

From the Edited Volume


Edited by Daniela Turcanu-Carutiu

Chapter metrics overview

1,262 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics


Cultural and ideological references in critical discourse analysis aim at reframing decisions with exploring the cultural as well as ideological perspectives of the familiar and idiosyncratic styles. The chapter focuses on the development of the ideological interaction theory for connecting the discourse with language and personal thought. The concern criteria are ideology and the other social components like people, status, economy, media, and politics with their connectivity to the global situational trends. Therefore, the chapter surveys the personal traits as psychology, sociological surrounding, and cognitive efforts for the development of social as well as cultural interaction with the perspectives of individual influences.


  • ideology
  • interdisciplinary
  • social action
  • social interaction
  • influencing roles

1. Introduction

Discourse, a construct with the personal thought which reflects personal behavior and attitude, is known as the ideology. The socially conditioned and socially constructed ideas are considered as ideology. Ideology connects peoples’ perspectives from the different fields, such as, in the context of Nepal, political leaders may develop one kind of thought; on the other hand, educationists may develop educational thoughts differently. The perspectives educationist and the political leaders create the interactive situation in which they could discuss their thoughts and generate new thoughts. Fairclough [1] identifies transforming goals with the perspectives of textual and contextual variations; discursive practices may have significant ideological effects, which they can help to produce and reproduce unequal power relations among the different bodies of the community and how they represent the things and position of people. Van Dijk [2] states that ideologies are the ideas and belief system of a particular group of people defined from the multidisciplinary ways involving social, cognitive, and discursive aspects. He further argues that ideologies are acquired, expressed, changed, and reproduced in the society, mainly in different forms of discourses such as texts and talks.

According to Fairclough and Wodak [3], “CDA as discourse analysis which aims to systematically explore the often opaque relationship of causality and determination between discursive practices, events, texts and wider social and cultural structures, relations and processes; to investigate how such practices, events, and texts arise out of and are ideologically shaped by the relation of power and struggles overpower, and to explore how the opacity of this relationship between discourse and society is itself a factor securing power and hegemony.”

Regarding the above definition, ideology refers to social forms of processes within which and employing which, symbolic forms circulate in the social world. Ideology is the study of “how meaning is constructed and conveyed by symbolic forms of various kinds” [4]. Another perspective suggested by Luke [5] in a different context claims that language gets power when influential people use it. There is a close relationship between language and power in several ways; societal and cultural frameworks shape the ideological interaction which is based on the language associated with power relationship.

In Refs. [6, 7], it is stated that ideology is perceived as a multidisciplinary approach which is the fundamental framework for organizing multiple ideological concepts and consumptions. Similarly, Van Dijk [6] focuses that ideologies usually control the thoughts of a social group which then represent the essential social characteristics of a group based on their identities, goals, norms, values, positions, and responses to other negative stances. However, Van Dijk [2] emphasizes the ideological consumption in both cognitive and social levels and proclaims that social cognition is a system with shared sociocultural knowledge by members of a specific group, society, or culture. On the other hand, cognitive functions are considered as the basic form of ideological properties that organize, monitor, and control attitudes of a social group and are accompanied by the experiences of a person [6].

Ideology represents the discursiveness by which it allows interaction in the correspondence of the social thoughts and responsibilities. As suggested by Van Dijk [8], ideologies are particular ways of representing and constructing a society that reproduces distributed power relations.

Ideology is not only associated with representing social reality. It reflects the social identity and construction of thought. Therefore, ideology imparts the presence of thoughts coordinated by social and cultural influences.


2. Basic traits

Ideologies are foundational social beliefs of people rather than general in nature because fundamental ideologies are not developed overnight, such as a person cannot be a feminist or socialist in few days but it takes time for framing the foundation of personal, social, and contextual ideologies including many experiences and discourses. Hodge [9] states that interaction is a basic requirement for discourse which is sturdy and transformative as it introduces different perspectives, ideas, structures, and ontologies. Ideologies always interact in different forms. For example, Van Dijk [6] contends that ideologies are endorsed in the forms of action and interaction, and ideological reproduction is often rooted in organizational and institutional contexts. For example, racist ideologies are expressed in racist talk, and feminists reproduce their ideologies in feminist talk. Therefore, many forms of interactional discourse play a vital role in communicating ideologies in the society. Ideologies are the principles that essentially function as the cognitive representations in the form of discourse, societal position, and interests of social groups which connect macrolevel analyses of social structure with microlevel studies of individual interaction. However, Martínez-Roldán and Malavé [10] contend that ideologies are not only the shared beliefs of a group, social interactions between individuals within a sociocultural context, and negotiation of meanings but also indicate multifaceted social phenomena including various social classes, groups, and social institutions within the broader societal contexts. It involves diverse social groups within different contradictory ideological groups.

The context of ideology reflects the personal framework [4]. Moreover, Fairclough and Wodak [3] state that context has the determining role in producing the ideology. In the context of communication, simply we get a contradiction of the ideologies. For example, media discourse may have a different ideology to educational and political discourses. The tenets of ideological interaction theory represent the guidelines to present the contextual variations or perspectives, as suggested in Refs. [1, 7, 8, 9]. The basic tenets of critical discourse analysis introduced by Fairclough and Wodak [3] are the baseline for determining the traits of ideological interaction perspectives.

  • Social dimension has the decisive capacity to determine the ideological interaction

  • Ideological creation in the perspectives

  • Culture, sex, social status, and economic status are discursive

  • Contextual discourses and communication abilities and skills are core thought of the ideology


3. The framework of ideological interaction theory

The framework of ideological interaction theory is based on sociocultural perspectives. Scott and Palincsar [11] argued that cultural and social entities suggest ideological consequences. Similarly, in Refs. [12, 13], the significance of the cultural contribution to implant ideology is stated, as an ideology has an impact on the social activities, attitudes, and shared understanding in interdisciplinary fields. The social role has tribute consideration in determining the ideology. For example, the authors in Refs. [2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 14] focus on the contextual, cognitive, and attribute relevance and variable to construct the thought, and the thought is considered to the social issue; in the way, social issues may have multidimensional and diverse perspectives might be revealed as addressing the ideology.

Ideologies are expressed by text and talks as mentioned by Padilla and Vana [15]. It helps to construct new and confirm already present ideologies persuasively. Similarly, the communication skills and strategies lead to construct ideologies and prevail interactions among groups in different circumstances.

On the other hand, there are unseen priori theoretical grounds to exclude any textual structures from expressing underlying ideological principles [3]. Undeniably, the mental model of functional categories involved in events or communicative contexts.

Some of the tenets of critical discourse analysis can already be found in the critical theory of the Frankfurt School before the Second World War [3].

The framework discusses on the interaction process where society and language interact to the individual and cultural awareness and that have the effects of critical discourse approaches from the baseline, and with this reference, an individual perceives a perspective of a discourse of any educational or political situation. Moreover, the different levels of the discourses interact to the ideologies, and by the product, there is another form of ideology. For example, the Modern Era introduces diverse thoughts and beliefs guided by ideology and conscience, and more or less, they are interacting with the other ideologies around us. In this process of interactions, we generate other modified thesis and new perspectives to see things around us. As proof, we can take an example from the situation of the COVID-19 pandemic. In Nepal, the suicidal death rate is 25 times higher than the death of those infected during this lockdown period. People have different perspectives. Some people argue that the financial crisis has caused this, whereas other people believe that it happened because of fear and psychological threat; but after the interaction between these two diverse ideologies, people have come to modify their arguments by considering each other’s factual arguments. Now, the state of their ideologies shares some common ground and they have generated ideology based on their thought and social status which is the outcome of the ideological interaction theory.


4. Issues and contexts

The theory of ideology is articulated within a conceptual triangle [6] that informs the discourse analytic approach and connects society, discourse, and social cognition in the framework of a critical discourse analysis. Ideologies are the straightforward outlines for establishing the social cognition communal by associates of social groups, organizations, or institutions. In this respect, ideologies are both cognitive and social [6, 7, 16]. Moreover, ideologies function and interface the interface between the cognitive representations and processes underlying discourse and action, on the one hand, and the societal position and interests of social groups, on the other hand. Similarly, according to Padilla and Vana [15], this conception of ideology also allows us to establish the crucial link between macrolevel analyses of groups, social formations, and social structure and microlevel studies of situated, individual interaction, and discourse. Ideologies, then, are the overall, abstract mental systems that organize such socially shared attitudes. In Refs. [9, 17], the authors report in the different contexts that the feminist attitudes just mentioned, for instance, which may be internally structured and mutually related by general principles or propositions that together define a feminist ideology. Similar examples may be given for racist, anti-racist, corporate, or ecological attitudes and their underlying ideological systems.

As stated by Vygotsky [18], sociocultural issues play a vital role in the formation of discourses, and scaffolding creates several opportunities to interact with the different behaviors in society. On the other hand, ideological configurations are landed by the approaches of critical discourse analysis [12]. However, Lazar [19] states that the approach, specifically, feminism shows the level of interaction among the communities and personal perspectives. The way we perceive the concept is crucial for shaping the grounded reality. Scott and Palincsar [11], on the other hand, discuss the sociocultural impacts on discourse management.

Here I am presenting some examples of interaction connected to feminism and sociocultural realities.

Feminist theory focuses on analyzing the nature of gender inequality, women’s social roles, interests, choices, and female politics in the different fields such as in philosophy, sociology, psychology, literature, and education [20]. It examines the exploitation, domination, sexual objectification, oppression, patriarchy, and stereotyping. The theory of feminism mainly talks about the role of women in society, such as being economically dependent, having low status and power, doing unpaid work, loss of choice, and division of labor in different cultural and sexist beliefs.

Feminism theory first appeared in about 1794 from the United States, and it evolved dealing with contemporary issues and women’s experiences [21]. There are different concepts associated with the theory of feminism. According to Code [20], there are different waves in feminism; the first wave was initiated in about 1928 which argued for the political equality and the rights of property and representation of women in the society, by some of the leading figures of feminism such as Wollstonecraft and Suffragettes.

Similarly, the second wave of feminism started after the Second World War period, representing the female emancipation and woman liberation movement of the 1950s and 1960s which mainly argued for the social and economic equality of the women in the society, especially equal pay and equal rights. It reacted against the uneven distribution of power, women’s racial, religious, class-related, and different forms of oppressions. The third wave appeared by pointing out some of the drawbacks of second-wave feminism in the late 1980s and 1990s by representing the experiences of woman globally—women of different races, classes, ethnicities, and sexualities are positioned differently within the countries. The most recent wave of feminism deals with the female empowerment of women in the use of digital technology or social media to encourage female achievement.

While analyzing the transcribed text of Muniba’s video speech, this research connects feminism which covers the gender-based realities in the society to its transformation to social activities. The critical discourses value the diverse perspectives in the society based on the concept of power, domination, and social equality focusing on groups, organizations, and institutions. Personal and cultural knowledge may have the crucial role in ideological interaction [19]. He further says that group knowledge is shared by the social group of society. Reality lies in the knowledge and attitude representing the ideologies of social groups such as socialists, ecologists, feminists, as well as anti-feminists and can be analyzed in terms of local and global interaction among groups and social organizations.

Throughout analyzing this discourse, the term feminism refers not only to female-oriented characteristics but also to gender practices with constructing values. Similarly, the concept reflects gender identity, responsibility, belief, and the traditions of the social practices concerning the ground reality of women in the society. Lazar [22] reports that feminism is one of the critical perspectives of social transformation and emancipation with the values of gender-based realities that existed in society. Further, he argues that the society has the dividend role from the perspectives of gender and that focuses to the categories of cultural influences, social identity, sexuality, discrimination, power practices, social position, ideology; particularly, asymmetrical power relations and gender ideology are the major discussions of feminism. Urbain [23] discusses the feminist movement from society to pedagogy; the main concern lies in the core aspects of the feminist movement, care, diversity, and collaboration.

The video that I selected has a good connection to the disability and material feminist theory; for example, Mays [24] discusses domestic violence, social oppression as a moment of gender and disability dimensions. The psychosociological context has several emerging issues of feminism; however, the real situation that the disabled female has been coping with in the sociocultural setting demands exploring gender and disability dimensions.

In the speech, she has described about how people in the society including her relatives behave her after being physically disable in a car accident and how she dealt with socially diversified ideologies to live a successful and motivating life despite her physical inability. As we know, feminism focuses on gender identity with the aspects of society as well as cultural configurations. Van Dijk [25] discusses several approaches regarding the socio-cognitive perspectives where feminism remains as the core component. He further supports that social inequalities have been introducing several hidden realities such as attainment of knowledge of diverse groups or issues, practicing the social and cultural values associated with the ideological awareness, and social equity in the society.

For the exploration of the issue material, feminist interpretations and disability theory associated with cultural dimension have the prominent focus to experience the gendered and disabling capacities in the sociocultural environment. The women are biased due to the male dominance in the process of decision-making and power relations. Some questions such as: Are there no provision of women’s independence? Is there no value to women’s decisions? Why society marks a huge gap between male and female for education, job, and lifestyle? triggered my mind while observing the nature of society. I wanted to introduce and explore the different aspects of society where females live. I found the speech motivating to describe the hidden potentialities of the women who want to introduce their existence and prove their perfection in their physical imperfection. This empowers all the women around the world to recognize their inner capacities, to face problems created by the social system, patriarchy, and power relations. It is observed in the speech that despite many challenges, the females can raise their voices to unlock the more significant opportunities and possibilities in society.

The speech is full of positive and negative feelings of pain, sorrows, fear, and determination. She has unhappy feelings about being disabled in the accident due to her belief in misfortune and fate. She explained the situation as follows:

The next day, the doctor came to me and said, “Your spine injury is so bad you won’t be able to walk again.” I took a deep breath. And I said it’s all right. The next day doctor came and said, “Because of your spine injury and the fixation that you have in your back, you won’t be able to give birth to a child again.” That day, I was devastated [26].

The women with disabilities are depicted as weak, helpless, vulnerable, dependent, and incapable bodies [27]; the doctor had reported her as unable to give birth and walk normally. The word devastated illuminates her deep and sad feeling of disappointment, hopelessness, and unhappiness.

In another context, Mazari [26] opines, “I’m tired of looking at these white walls in the hospital and wearing these white scrubs. Bring me some colours, bring me some small canvas. I want to paint.” The word tired of is related to her unhappiness as she was convicted for full 2 years in the complete bed rest and “I want to paint” shows that she wanted to overcome all those negativities and forget the pain by painting.

According to her, “So the very first painting I made was on my deathbed where I painted for the very first time, it was not just an art piece or just my passion. It was my therapy.” To signify that she expresses her internal pain into that painting as she has a passion for portraying herself in the beautiful arts. In this way, she develops a feeling and emotion of fear, sadness, and negativity to determination. The feeling of determination has overcome her reality when she says,

After 2 years and two and a half months when I was able to sit in a wheelchair, that was the day when I had the rebirth. So, I have to accept myself the way I am, the sooner the better.

This shows her strong sense of accepting herself as the way she is. Finally, she tried to motivate the audience to summarize all her life experiences and the struggle she faced by sharing some happy and successful moments in her expressions. She says, “I became the national goodwill ambassador for UN Women, Pakistan. And now I speak for the rights of women and children. We talk about inclusion, diversity, gender equality which is a must.”

Mays [24] argued that women with disabilities experience social domination and domestic violence continuously as a result of gender and disability dimensions. It is praiseworthy and inspirational to all people that despite all these miseries, illness, injuries, hatred, ignorance, disability, and lack of acceptance, she overcame her depressing feelings and faced the world as an average and happy person. By accepting all the challenges and personal limitations, how she managed her life to return in a new transformative form shows her a motivational and robust figure in the world. Muniba wanted to convey that every bad experience teaches us the best lessons in life, when she says, in the first line of her speech “They see my disability, I see my ability,’ they call me to disable, I call me differently able.” The words delivered by her reflect her strong sense of self-determination and confidence. She takes the suffering of spinal cord injury as a challenge and becomes more determined to express her feelings through her art and paintings. She further suggests to all the audience and says,

Live your life fully, accept yourself the way you are, be kind to yourself, and only you can be kind to others, love yourself and spread the love if you accept the way are, the world will recognize you, it’s all starts from within.

Through her speech, she has proven to the world as a capable and inspiring lady despite her disability. She is spreading motivation to all the people around the world to have a positive sense of self-acceptance and kindness to the self before spreading compassion to the world.

The cultural aspects of feminism believe in gender equality, and radical feminism believes that women are dominated by the practice of patriarchy in the family [28]. Mazari expresses that she was 18 years old when she got married. She said, “if that makes you happy, I will say ‘YES.’ And of course, it was never a happy marriage.” This has characterized how social structure and patriarchy are the root cause of gender inequality leading women to domination. This exemplifies how she accepted the forceful marriage proposal led by her father though she was not happy in the marital relationship. Similarly, she said, “You know what was my biggest fear? ”Divorce. I couldn’t stand this word. I was trying to cling on to this person who didn’t want me anymore I got the news that he is getting married, I sent him a text and said, ‘I am so happy for you and I wish you all the best.’ This demonstrates how men have the freedom and choice in their life of making a decision of remarriage, ignoring the disabled wife in the pain and miseries. This depicts the real picture of male domination over females.

From the linguistic perspective, the language, and utterance, linguistic aspects such as grammar, vocabulary, cohesion, and structure used in the speech of Muniva Mazari were analyzed, which were found as per the principle of consistency and comprehensiveness.

The motivational discourse of Muniba Mazari illustrates that if people want to explore their hidden talents regardless of their physical disabilities, social inequalities, domination, and weaknesses, they can transform into a recognized person contributing to the society, nation, and the world. Human life is full of challenges, hardship, and turmoil but a strong sense of determination makes people break all those barriers. Disability is not a limitation to those who take it as an opportunity to explore their inner capacities. Ignorance and inequalities make victim suffer a lot but finally makes a person more strong-minded and goal-oriented as Muniba Mazari who has been working for many social campaigns, spreading awareness on gender discrimination, women, and child rights.

Muniba’s speech is the reflection of the societal structure including gender discrimination, violence, domination, and ignorance of the disability. Some of the important realities she exposed in her speech are how women are living in the society, how their decision-making affects their life, how they react to the unexpected incidents in life, how the disable people need familial and social acceptance, how females are standing in their career, and how they feel being discriminated and ignored by the society and dear ones. Her speech reflects personal experiences representing life before and after disability. The speaker focuses on motivating people, particularly women, to recognize self-power of potentialities, to spread love, care, and kindness to the self and the rest of the world by fighting against social and gender discriminations.

In another context, critical discourse analysis deals with multiple perspectives guided by ideology, power, social activities, action, and ethics. Kalina and Powell [12] argue that the approaches of the constructivist thoughts have been recognized as the best practices with multiple meanings around the globe. Constructivism has several branches; among them, the sociocultural theory of Vygotsky might have a good connection with the discourse. Turuk [29] opines that human understanding is the fundamental concept of sociocultural theory as it connects with different levels of connections such as zone of proximal development (ZPD). Vygotsky [30] claims that a child is a dependent phenomenon, and the sociocultural environment ensures the engagement of the task, activities, and instructions to actualize the shape of learning.

Sociocultural theory reflects the sociocultural influences as well as relationship traits in learning behaviors. The meaning and learning situation is situated in social values and cultural traditions. In the same way, the theory introduces the collaborative and interactive situation. In the context of personality development, Jaramillo [31] explains that learners’ success depend upon the collaboration. Similarly, sociocultural theory creates spaces for learner’s active participation and motives with regard to the unit of the developmental framework, and the letter written by Lincoln demands the social and cultural setting regarding child psychology.

On the other hand, Vygotsky [18] claims that sociocultural theory differs from cognitive approaches, in that, the cognitive approaches assign several internal processes to gain the knowledge gaining channels with reference to socially as well as culturally mediated prospects. Kalina and Powell [12] support the model of sociocultural learning modality and focus on the collaborative act, coordination skills, negotiation strategies, and creative as well as critical behaviors for the successful adaptation of learning behaviors.

Therefore, the theory focuses to the gap between the inter-psychological/social and intra-psychological/individual aspects and believes that collaborative and psycho-centric instruction helps learners to understand and see how interactions take place and enable learners to achieve the goals within a social instructional network; with the assumption, I used this theory, though others’ theories are also equally possible to connect with the text that I have selected for the analysis.

Lincoln’s primary concern is that the teacher should be able to instruct his child on the thought that educational scholarship should accompany the first instruction of character. He took education as a journey to gain values of faith, love, and courage and asked the teacher to teach his son moral and ethical values as his son could realize the world and his responsibility. These values square measure ones that transcend content learning and facilities to make the premise of one’s identity. Lincoln desires the teacher to reflect the truth that education is character based. Similarly, he instructs his son’s principal to show his son a way to be a decent, honorable, and ethical person.

Furthermore, he wants his son to avoid jealousy. He further needs his son to understand each learning from a book and enjoying the refinement and wonder of nature. He needs his son to follow his integrity and to find out to track what he thinks is true, though it is unpopular. He should moreover learn that it’s additionally honorable to fail than to comprehend accomplishment through dishonesty. Lincoln needs his son to feel comfortable to express unhappiness and nevertheless to find out to laugh once he is unhappy. Lincoln asks the principal to be kind to his son, however, do not spoil him and show his son patience. In the end, Lincoln needs his son to find out to be on his own.

In my observation, I found that Lincoln connected learner to social beings and focused the learners’ reality in two basics, such as the right learning and wrong learning. As discussed in the letter, right being leads to the social well-being and to developing social thoughts and responsibilities, with reference to enhancing positive as well as cooperative and collaborative learning goals. For instance, education is defined as values, love, faith, courage, ethics, responsible thoughts, and personal as well as social identity and character. On the other hand, wrong being made the learners to tackle the situation and that might lead to the development of leadership skills.

The cultural reflection is another part of the letter, as the writer wanted to see his son as one of the examples of the cultural entity in which he could sketch his introduction and independence in society. Hence, he imagined a positive, motivated, encouraged, determined, dedicated, diligent, problem-oriented, and socially responsible son and that could be shaped by the teachers only. In his letter, he discussed honesty, positivity, and sublime faith on own self as the three fundamental values. According to him, honesty develops a positive mind, leads to happiness, and develops a realistic view. Similarly, positivity encourages us to be cheerful and prepares to face the challenges. He further claims that sublime faith itself enables learners to have sublime faith in humanity.

Similarly, knowledge reveals the several facets of the common goals such as content development, social responsibility, cultural well-being, political insights, and emotional radicals. According to the letter, Lincoln highly emphasized the values that he expected from the teachers.

The letter is the representation of the social guideline as to the triangularity (learners, teachers, and parents) with the diverse nature of social and cultural rhetorics. The letter is an example of the expectation of parents from the teachers, as they want their children to be accustomed to the diverse realities of the multidimensional world. It mainly focuses on the determination of individual principles concerning the sociocultural perspectives in the multidisciplinary rationale of transformational ethics. The letter covers several areas like psychology, sociology, linguistics, pedagogy, and other various disciplines and approaches. The writer only focused on the teacher’s responsibility as concerning the issue, and it would be better if he could incorporate parents’ role at home as students are at school for some limited time. Consequently, he needs to shortly talk on the home environment that he had been providing to his son. Therefore, every parent should play a vital role and be responsible for shaping the future of their children as they need to deal with different realities and the people around them.

Eventually, the letter illustrates and prioritizes that education is not only about teaching the books and using materials, but it should be practical and connected with the realities of society and the world too. This educational discourse is a mirror of the society that reflects how education should be incorporated in practical and real life.

This letter proves that education is a multidisciplinary approach that not only includes teaching and learning inside the four walls, but it is a process of habit formation, teaching students the real values and norms connecting with the social behaviors and real world outside. In Ref. [32], it is argued that Lincoln believed losing something is connected with learning because it is another way out or looking for alternatives to get another path to proceed with the task.

Regarding the sociocultural perspectives, learners’ motivation, teachers’ responsibility, parents’ expectations, and societal needs are associated with forming cultural identities. Therefore, the letter reflects the social changes and adaptation. However, the learners are expected to be found to the determining curriculum, and they might develop their insights through the hidden curriculum or natural orders of learning praxis.

In the above contexts, generally, we find the interaction of the ideology with the individual and society.


5. Conclusion

Frankfort school introduces the relationship between theory and society, social inquiry, and the interconnection of the social life with the economy, psychology, ethics, traditions, values, and focus on social and historical contexts [33]. In the same vein, Kim [16] argues that the primary consideration is the transformation of knowledge. The knowledge has radical consequences, and subjective and intersubjective practices are implied.

Social framework and cultural consciousness are in the central concern for the study of social inquiries and activities. Critical consciousness, cultural inheritance, and sociopolitical adaptation and aspirations are critical considerations in educational practices.

In Refs. [15, 34], the authors believe on multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary educational policy in the field of critical pedagogy. It has a connection to ideology, power, economics, politics, and knowledge diversity. Discursive practice, social phenomena, and cultural diversity are the key issues discussed in the articles. Weiss and Wodak [7] suggest critical pedagogy, value system, power relations, critical consciousness, and critical literacy rather than functional literacy to promote a subjective form of knowledge, culture, and understanding. Following Refs. [4, 5, 8, 35, 36], the role of education should be for developing a critical consciousness; furthermore, the educational approaches are highly context-sensitive and democratic approaches take an ethical stance on social issues to transform society into an approach or attitude rather than a step method. The socio-transformative practices’ impact is seen accompanied by sociopolitical, socio-historic contexts which contribute to the production and interpretation of the text and are crucial aspects of the analysis. However, social responsibility connected with ideological concern is crucial for critical pedagogy, and power relations determine that. The societal framework is the connecting paradigm where different social theories and approaches surround the mind, ideology, and perspectives.


  1. 1. Fairclough NL. Critical and descriptive goals in discourse analysis. Journal of Pragmatics. 1985;9(6):739-763
  2. 2. Van Dijk TA. Ideology and discourse analysis. Journal of Political Ideologies. 2006;11(2):115-140
  3. 3. Fairclough N, Mulderrig J, Wodak R. Critical discourse analysis. In: Dijk TAV, editor. Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. Los Angeles: Sage; 1997. pp. 357-378
  4. 4. Thompson JB. Ideology and Modern Culture: Critical Social Theory in the Era of Mass Communication. Hoboken NJ, United states: John Wiley & Sons; 2013
  5. 5. Luke A. Beyond science and ideology critique: Developments in critical discourse analysis. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 2002;22(1):96-110
  6. 6. Van Dijk TA. Discourse analysis as ideology analysis. Language and Peace. 1995;10(47):142
  7. 7. Weiss G, Wodak R. Critical Discourse Analysis. Springer; 2007
  8. 8. Van Dijk TA. Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society. 1993;4(2):249-283
  9. 9. Hodge B. Ideology, identity, interaction: Contradictions and challenges for critical discourse analysis. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis Across Disciplines. 2012;5(2):1-18
  10. 10. Martínez-Roldán CM, Malavé G. Language ideologies mediating literacy and identity in bilingual contexts. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy. 2004;4(2):155-180
  11. 11. Scott S, Palincsar A. Sociocultural Theory.; 2013
  12. 12. Kalina C, Powell K. Cognitive and social constructivism: Developing tools for an effective classroom. Education. 2009;130(2):241-250
  13. 13. Peca K. Critical Theory in Education: Philosophical, Research, Sociobehavioral, and Organizational Assumptions. Mexico: Eastern New Mexico University; 2000
  14. 14. Van Dijk TA. 18 critical discourse analysis. In: The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. 2001. pp. 349-371
  15. 15. Padilla LV, Vana R. Ideologies in the foreign language curriculum: Insights from textbooks and instructor interviews. Language Awareness. 2019;28(1):15-30
  16. 16. Kim AI. (De)legitimation of monolingual ideologies in a US teachers’ online forum. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism; 2020:1-12
  17. 17. Ayers DF. Neoliberal ideology in community college mission statements: A critical discourse analysis. The Review of Higher Education. 2005;28(4):527-549
  18. 18. Vygotsky L. Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the Development of Children. 1978;23(3):34-41
  19. 19. Lazar MM. Feminist critical discourse analysis. In: Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies. 2017. pp. 372-387
  20. 20. Code L. Encyclopedia of Feminist Theories. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis e-Library; 2000
  21. 21. Wilkinson S, Kitzinger C. Heterosexuality: A Feminism & Psychology Reader. Sage; 1993
  22. 22. Lazar MM. Politicizing gender in discourse: Feminist critical discourse analysis as political perspective and praxis. In: Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis. Springer; 2005. pp. 1-28
  23. 23. Urbain M. A Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. 2018
  24. 24. Mays JM. Feminist disability theory: Domestic violence against women with a disability. Disability & Society. 2006;21(2):147-158
  25. 25. Van Dijk TA. 18 critical discourse analysis. In: The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. 2001. p. 352
  26. 26. Mazari M. Muniba Mazari the inspiring “Iron Lady of Pakistan” [YouTube Video]; 2017
  27. 27. Garland-Thomson R. Integrating disability, transforming feminist theory. NWSA Journal. 2002:1-32
  28. 28. Campbell R, Wasco SM. Feminist Approaches to Social Science: Epistemological and Methodological Tenets. 2000
  29. 29. Turuk MC. The relevance and implications of Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory in the second language classroom. Arecls. 2008;5(1):244-262
  30. 30. Vygotsky L. Socio-cultural theory. In: Mind in Society. 1978
  31. 31. Jaramillo JA. Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory and contributions to the development of constructivist curricula. Education. 1996;117(1):133-141
  32. 32. Lessons from Abraham Lincoln’s Letter to his Son’s Headmaster [Internet]. 2018. Available from:
  33. 33. Martin J, Jay ME. Splinters in Your Eye: Essays on the Frankfurt School. Verso; 2020
  34. 34. Pais A, Costa M. An ideology critique of global citizenship education. Critical Studies in Education. 2020;61(1):1-16
  35. 35. Bachmann V, Moisio S. Towards a constructive critical geopolitics–Inspirations from the Frankfurt School of critical theory. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space. 2020;38(2):251-268
  36. 36. Portschy J. Times of power, knowledge and critique in the work of Foucault. Time and Society. 2020;29(2):392-419

Written By

Yadu Prasad Gyawali

Submitted: 01 April 2020 Reviewed: 13 July 2020 Published: 18 August 2020