Images, power, and education: the CPAF path toward the decolonization of the gazeAbstract
This article addresses the critical analysis of images in the educational context, focusing on the Sankofa symbol and utilizing the Critical Pedagogy Analysis Framework (CPAF) developed by Amorim and Kress (2020). Anchored in the principles of Critical Pedagogy and interculturality, the study explores how image analysis can promote inclusive, reflective, and transformative education, challenging power structures and hegemonic narratives. The choice of Sankofa, an African symbol that refers to learning from the past to transform the future, proves particularly significant in the context of valuing ancestral knowledge and marginalized cultures. In light of this, the article aims to analyze, through the methodological framework of the Critical Pedagogy Analysis Framework (CPAF) by Amorim and Kress (2020), the perception of a Sankofa image in the educational context, focusing on how it can be used to challenge traditional perceptions and promote critical and reflective education. The methodology adopted is qualitative, centered on the interpretative and critical analysis of the Sankofa image. Through the steps proposed by the CPAF, the study seeks to explore the sociocultural, historical, and ideological meanings underlying the symbol, contextualizing it within educational practice. It is concluded that the use of CPAF enables the integration of critical thinking into teaching, equipping educators to reflect on visual representations and value subaltern voices. The analysis of Sankofa highlights its potential to foster transformative pedagogy, reinforcing the role of education in building a more inclusive and dialogical society.
Keywords:
Critical pedagogy - Interculturality - Image analysis.
Resumo
Este artigo aborda a análise crítica de imagens no contexto educacional, com foco no símbolo Sankofa, utilizando o quadro metodológico Critical Pedagogy Analysis Framework (CPAF), desenvolvido por Amorim e Kress (2020). Ancorado nos princípios da Pedagogia Crítica e da interculturalidade, o estudo explora como a análise de imagens pode promover uma educação inclusiva, reflexiva e transformadora, ao desafiar estruturas de poder e narrativas hegemônicas. A escolha do Sankofa, símbolo africano que remete ao aprendizado com o passado para transformar o futuro, revela-se particularmente significativa no contexto da valorização de saberes ancestrais e de culturas marginalizadas. Frente ao exposto, o objetivo deste artigo é analisar, a partir do quadro metodológico Critical Pedagogy Analysis Framework (CPAF), proposto por Amorim e Kress (2020), a percepção de uma imagem do Sankofa no contexto educacional, com foco em como ela pode ser utilizada para desafiar percepções tradicionais e promover uma educação crítica e reflexiva. A metodologia adotada é qualitativa, centrada na análise interpretativa e crítica da imagem do Sankofa. Por meio das etapas propostas pelo CPAF, busca-se explorar os significados socioculturais, históricos e ideológicos subjacentes ao símbolo, contextualizando-o na prática educativa. Conclui-se que o uso do CPAF permite integrar o pensamento crítico ao ensino, capacitando professores a refletirem sobre representações visuais e a valorizar vozes subalternizadas. A análise do Sankofa evidencia o potencial de promover uma pedagogia transformadora, reforçando o papel da educação na construção de uma sociedade mais inclusiva e dialógica.
Palavras-chave:
Pedagogia crítica - Interculturalidade - Análise de imagens.
Introduction
Critical Pedagogy, inspired by Paulo Freire and other contemporary thinkers, proposes an education that goes beyond content transmission, encouraging students to develop critical awareness about the world around them. In a multicultural and globalized educational scenario, where different cultural and social perspectives intersect, Critical Pedagogy becomes an essential tool for promoting inclusive and transformative education. Critical interculturality, in turn, constitutes an approach that recognizes and values the diverse cultures present in the educational context, while seeking to question the power structures and inequalities that permeate them (Apple, 2011).
Within this context, the critical analysis of images becomes a powerful tool for educators, as images play a central role in the production of meanings and the construction of identities. When analyzed critically, images have the potential to reveal underlying ideologies, power relations, and forms of resistance. The use of an instrument such as the Critical Pedagogy Analysis Framework (CPAF) allows educators and students not only to interpret images but also to position themselves actively and critically concerning what they represent (Amorim; Kress, 2020).
The image of Sankofa will be used in this article as the object of analysis. Sankofa is a traditional African symbol that means “to go back and fetch,” often associated with the importance of learning from the past to transform the future. This symbol, in an educational context, can be a powerful metaphor for reflecting on the need to rescue ancestral knowledge and critiques of colonialism, valuing marginalized cultures and providing a new understanding of knowledge.
Given the above, this article aims to analyze, based on the methodological framework Critical Pedagogy Analysis Framework (CPAF), proposed by Amorim and Kress (2020), the perception of an image of Sankofa in the educational context, focusing on how it can be used to challenge traditional perceptions and promote critical and reflective education.
By applying the stages of the CPAF, namely: first impressions, describing, analyzing, developing critical awareness, grounding, connecting, and expressing, we seek to provide an in-depth understanding of the image and its potential in the educational field (Amorim; Kress, 2020).
Finally, regarding the relevance of this proposal, this article stands out for its contribution to the field of critical education, especially in the analysis and understanding of images in teaching. Although critical pedagogy has been widely discussed in theoretical and practical terms, there is still a significant gap in research exploring the use of specific methodological frameworks, such as the Critical Pedagogy Analysis Framework (CPAF), for the analysis of visual representations in educational contexts. This gap becomes particularly relevant when observing the growing presence of images in contemporary forms of communication and learning. The critical analysis of these images, therefore, emerges as an urgent necessity, as they shape perceptions, reinforce ideologies, and perpetuate power relations. By integrating the CPAF, this study seeks not only to fill this gap but also to offer a practical model that allows educators to analyze and deconstruct images in a reflective, transformative, and inclusive manner.
Furthermore, the implementation of the CPAF within the teacher training process configures itself as an essential instrument for pedagogical updating and capacitation. In a society increasingly marked by cultural diversity and interculturality, teachers face complex challenges when dealing with different realities and visual representations in teaching. The critical approach, centered on reflection on visual content, allows educators to develop a deeper understanding of the symbols and messages circulating in the educational environment. This, in turn, contributes to the construction of more inclusive teaching practices that value and question dominant narratives, while simultaneously promoting a space for intercultural dialogue and the valorization of marginalized cultures, especially those of African descent.
Therefore, by using the image of Sankofa as the object of analysis within the CPAF methodology, this article proposes to contribute to fostering discussions on critical education, providing a model that can be applied in teaching practice. Reflection on images in the educational context not only allows for a more critical reading of the present but also favors the construction of a pedagogy that values subalternized voices and histories. The training of teachers to use these methodologies, focusing on critical and intercultural thinking, not only updates their pedagogical practices but also reinforces education’s commitment to social and cultural transformation.
A critical perspective on pedagogy: brief theoretical framework
The theoretical framework of this article is based on a combination of concepts from Critical Pedagogy, Multiculturalism, Critical Interculturality, and critical image analysis methodology, with a focus on the application of the Critical Pedagogy Analysis Framework (CPAF). In the following subsections, these themes will be addressed, contextualizing the main authors and their contributions to the analysis proposed in this study.
Paulo Freire and critical pedagogy
Paulo Freire is recognized as one of the greatest thinkers of education in the 20th century, and his contributions to Critical Pedagogy continue to profoundly influence educational practices worldwide. His work represented a milestone in the struggle for the democratization of education and the formulation of a pedagogy that broke with the authoritarian and oppressive models that dominated educational institutions. Critical Pedagogy, defended by Freire, emphasizes the need for teaching that not only transmits content but also constitutes a space for awareness and social transformation (Apple, 2011). Freire’s pedagogy is built on the idea that education should be a process of liberation,
in which educator and student meet as partners in the teaching-learning process. In the context of traditional pedagogy, the student is seen as a passive receiver of knowledge, while the educator assumes the position of knowledge holder. In contrast, Freire proposes a dialogical education, in which knowledge is shared, the educator’s authority is questioned, and the student is seen as an active subject in the learning process. This central idea of dialogical pedagogy is fundamental to critical pedagogy, as it is not limited to content but questions the forms of power and authority that shape the relationship between educator and student (Apple, 2011).
Freire defines education as a political act. This means that every educational process, being carried out in a social context, is directly linked to the power relations present in society. Education, therefore, is not neutral: it can either reproduce structures of oppression or contribute to liberation and social transformation. In his work Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire argues that the oppressed need to become aware of the oppression they suffer, and education is the means for this awareness. Thus, the educator’s role is to help the student develop a critical awareness of their reality so that they can act to transform the living conditions that oppress them. Freire calls this process “conscientization,” a central concept of his pedagogy (Borges, 2018; Freire, 2018).
Conscientization, according to Freire, is a continuous process of discovering the causes and consequences of oppression. It is not just about understanding social and political conditions theoretically but about experiencing and living this reality (Freire, 2018). In this sense, Freirean education is deeply linked to action, work, and practice. Knowledge is not something acquired passively but rather through critical reflection and transformative action. The relationship between knowing and practicing, for Freire, is inseparable. Therefore, education must constitute a space where the student becomes capable of understanding and transforming their reality.
However, Freire’s critical pedagogy is not limited to a teaching model aimed at transforming isolated individuals. For Freire, education must also constitute a process of social transformation. Critical pedagogy proposes an engagement with social and political issues, and students should be encouraged to develop a critical analysis of the power structures governing their lives (Freire, 2018). For Freire, education must therefore be a practice of freedom and emancipation, empowering individuals to challenge injustices and inequalities in their communities and societies (Borges, 2018).
One of Paulo Freire’s contributions was his critique of what he called “banking education,” an educational model in which the educator deposits knowledge into the student. For Freire, this is a way of perpetuating power and domination relations in society. Banking education denies students’ autonomy and places them in a subordinate position, where they have no voice or say. In contrast to banking education, Freire’s critical pedagogy proposes what he calls problem-posing education (Borges, 2018). In problem-posing education, the student is challenged to reflect critically on their reality, question social, political, and cultural norms, and think independently. This educational model places the student at the center of the learning process, recognizing them as a subject capable of constructing their own knowledge, collaboratively with the educator. The educator, in turn, assumes the position of mediator, promoting dialogue, questioning, and reflection. The relationship between educator and student, therefore, is horizontal and dialogical, in which both learn together and share knowledge (Borges, 2018).
Freire’s Critical Pedagogy also emphasizes the importance of the cultural and historical context in the educational process. For Freire, knowledge is neither universal nor timeless; it is produced and transmitted within a specific cultural and historical context. This means that education cannot be neutral regarding the social and historical conditions of students. Instead, it must be constructed in a way that recognizes and values students’ experiences and knowledge, especially those from marginalized groups. Thus, critical education must be sensitive to issues of class, gender, ethnicity, race, and other dimensions of identity, recognizing the inequalities that exist in our society (Borges, 2018; Freire, 2018).
Freire also offers a profound critique of the colonizing education model imposed on Indigenous and Afro-descendant populations throughout history. In his analysis of colonialism and the domination process, he argues that education was used as an instrument for subordinating colonized populations, imposing the values, norms, and knowledge of the colonizing culture. This critique aligns with the proposal for an education that values marginalized cultures, such as African and Indigenous cultures, which have been historically silenced and subjugated. Critical education, according to Freire, must work to deconstruct this colonial legacy, promoting a pedagogical approach that rescues and values the knowledge and traditions of these cultures (Freire, 2018).
Finally, Freire’s critical pedagogy is deeply linked to the practice of solidarity and social commitment. Freire argued that education is not an isolated process but must always be immersed in the students’ social reality. Thus, education should be seen as a means to build a fairer and more democratic society, where everyone has the opportunity to express themselves, participate, and become empowered (Freire, 2018).
Multiculturalism and critical interculturality
Multiculturalism and critical interculturality are fundamental concepts when it comes to education that promotes inclusion, diversity, and social justice. Both emerge from distinct historical and social contexts but converge towards a deeper understanding of the relationships between cultures and power systems (Anjos; Guedes, 2024). Multiculturalism, as a movement and theory, emerged in response to demographic and social changes occurring in many societies, particularly in the West, with the increase in cultural diversity associated with processes of migration, globalization, and social mobility. However, classical multiculturalism often failed to question the power structures that maintain inequalities between cultures (Calçada; Heringer Junior, 2018). Critical interculturality, which develops from these discussions, goes beyond mere peaceful coexistence between different cultures, concerning itself with the power relations, exclusion, and resistance present in cultural interactions.
Multiculturalism, as a political and social philosophy, seeks to promote the recognition and valorization of different cultures within a plural society (Candau, 2008). In many Western countries, especially in the last decades of the 20th century, multiculturalism became an important principle of public policies and educational systems. According to Charles Taylor (2009), multiculturalism emerges as a reaction to ethnocentrism, which historically marginalized non-Western cultures and ethnic minorities. The author defends the right of cultural minorities to live according to their traditions and practices without being forced to assimilate into the dominant culture. The central idea of multiculturalism is that coexistence between distinct cultures should be promoted, and that diverse cultural identities should be respected and preserved within a society.
However, multiculturalism, in its more conventional form, has been subject to criticism by several thinkers, such as Will Kymlicka (1995), who points out that although multiculturalism celebrates diversity, it does not sufficiently consider the structural inequalities between cultures. Frequently, multiculturalism seeks “tolerance” between cultures without questioning the power dynamics that continue to marginalize certain communities. The idea of a “pluralistic community” where all cultures coexist harmoniously often ignores historical oppression and unequal power relations between majority and minority groups. For example, multiculturalism may accept cultural diversity but often does not challenge the social and political structures that continue to marginalize minorities, such as Indigenous and Black populations.
Critical interculturality emerges as a response to the limitations of multiculturalism. Influenced by post-colonial theories and critical pedagogy, critical interculturality goes beyond the simple acceptance of cultural differences and seeks to question the power relations, hierarchies, and marginalization processes that structure these differences. Critical interculturality, unlike multiculturalism, does not treat diversity as something that should merely be “accepted” or “respected,” but as a phenomenon that demands a deep analysis of the dynamics of exclusion and oppression faced by certain cultures. It concerns itself not only with peaceful coexistence between different cultures but also with the social, political, and economic conditions that allow certain cultures to be marginalized while others dominate.
Henry Giroux (1997), one of the main theorists of critical interculturality, argues that education should be a space for resistance and transformation, allowing critical reflection on structural inequalities and forms of cultural domination present in society. For Giroux, critical interculturality involves not only the recognition of subalternized cultures but also the questioning of the power structures that sustain unequal relations between these cultures and the dominant culture. Critical interculturality is thus configured as a dynamic process of learning, reflection, and action, aiming to build a space where different cultures can express themselves freely and equally, without the constraints imposed by cultural domination.
bell hooks (2017), in her work “Teaching to Transgress,” also addresses critical interculturality, focusing on education as a space of resistance. For hooks, education should be a space where cultural and racial inequalities are confronted explicitly, and where students can develop a critical awareness that challenges dominant narratives. She argues that for marginalized cultures to be truly valued, a commitment to social justice is necessary, one that goes beyond simple recognition of differences. In this sense, critical interculturality is not limited to a process of inclusion but is a movement aimed at the decolonization of the curriculum, thought, and educational practices.
In the educational context, critical interculturality proposes that pedagogical practices not only integrate content from diverse cultures but also challenge dominant ways of knowing, promoting critical reflection on power dynamics. Critical intercultural education seeks to create a relationship of mutual respect and understanding between cultures, but more importantly, it proposes the destabilization of cultural and social hierarchies. The educator’s role, therefore, is to facilitate this process of deconstruction and reconstruction of meanings, promoting the recognition of marginalized cultures while simultaneously questioning the narratives and power systems that perpetuate these marginalizations (Kunrath; Cecchetti, 2021; Cusati et al., 2024).
Critical interculturality, instead of reinforcing cultural differences superficially, involves a deep analysis of the forms of cultural oppression present in society. Thus, it concerns itself with problematizing colonialism, racism, xenophobia, and other forms of cultural discrimination, as well as creating pedagogical spaces where these issues can be discussed and confronted. In Brazil, for example, the struggle for the recognition of Afro-Brazilian, Indigenous, and other marginalized populations’ cultures requires a critical look at the historical legacy of colonization and enslavement that still affects these communities. Critical interculturality, by addressing these issues, seeks not only the inclusion of these cultures in the curriculum but also the promotion of a pedagogy that challenges historical and contemporary forms of exclusion (Kunrath; Cecchetti, 2021; Cusati et al., 2024).
Methodological path
The methodology adopted in this article follows a qualitative approach, focused on the critical and interpretative analysis of a specific image, Sankofa, through the Critical Pedagogy Analysis Framework (CPAF). The CPAF, proposed by Amorim and Kress (2020), is configured as an integrated and cyclical methodology, designed specifically to transform the critical analysis of multimodal texts into an effective and engaged pedagogical process. More than a simple method of analysis, the CPAF operates as a triadic system that articulates, in a structured and synergistic way, three large fields of knowledge: the theory of social semiotics, critical discourse analysis, and critical pedagogy. This integration offers a clear methodological path to investigate how meanings are multimodally constructed, which power relations sustain these constructions, and, fundamentally, how these findings can be mobilized in transformative educational practices (Santos; Amorim, 2023).
In its operationalization, the CPAF is organized into an analytical-pedagogical cycle composed of three interdependent and reflexive stages. The first stage, social semiotic analysis, provides the descriptive and technical basis. In this stage, a meticulous mapping of the sign-making resources present in the Sankofa image is carried out. Using the conceptual tools of the Grammar of Visual Design and other modalities, it is systematically described how visual (color, line, composition, salience), linguistic (tone, lexicon, structure), and spatial elements combine to create specific meanings. This phase answers the questions: “What is here?” and “How is meaning materially and multimodally constructed?” This is an objective dissection of the text’s materiality, essential for grounding subsequent interpretations in concrete evidence, avoiding merely impressionistic readings.
In the second stage, the proposal by Amorim and Kress (2020) suggests carrying out a critical discourse analysis, elevating the investigation from the descriptive level to that of contextual and ideological interpretation. At this moment, the design choices identified in the previous stage are interrogated in light of broader social, historical, and political contexts. The central question shifts to “why?” and “for whom?”. Why are certain groups represented one way and not another? What dominant discourses on race, gender, class, or nationality are being naturalized or, conversely, contested? Whose voices and perspectives are silenced? This stage requires the researcher to mobilize social and critical theories to connect micro-semiotic choices to macro-structures of power. It is where the image ceases to be an autonomous object and comes to be understood as a node in a network of discourses competing to define reality. In the case of Sankofa, for example, this stage would allow interpreting the symbol not just as a drawing but as an active counter-discourse that challenges colonial narratives about time, history, and the validity of African knowledge.
The third and final stage is that of critical pedagogy, which gives the CPAF its distinctive and transformative character. At this moment, the cycle is completed by transferring what emerged analytically to the domain of concrete educational action. The objective ceases to be merely understanding or criticizing the represented world, but rather acting upon it pedagogically. This stage answers the question: “What now? How can this analysis foster awareness (in the Freirean sense) and the agency of learners?”. Thus, the methodology projects itself into the design of activities that promote: a) students’ critical reflection on their own position as readers and consumers of media; b) the resignification of concepts and narratives based on identified gaps and contradictions; and, more powerfully, c) the production of multimodal counter-narratives, where we, empowered by the analysis, create our own artifacts (posters, videos, memes, performances) that reimagine and contest hegemonic discourses. Sankofa, in this phase, would cease to be just an object of study to become an inspiring principle of an activity in which the analysts “turn their heads” to investigate the history of an oppression and then create a campaign that resignifies it in the present.
Methodologically, the application of the CPAF is, therefore, an iterative, reflective, and explicitly situated process. The analyst constantly moves between the three stages, refining each in light of the others. Transparency regarding the theoretical frameworks that inform the interpretation and the criteria for selecting the analyzed artifact is fundamental. The framework does not offer a rigid recipe but a structured protocol that demands sensitivity to the cultural context and target audience. Ultimately, the methodological strength of the CPAF lies in its ability to operationalize critical pedagogy. It provides a clear and grounded roadmap for moving from the analytical deconstruction of a multimodal text to the pedagogical reconstruction of a classroom practice aimed not only at media literacy but at the formation of critical, creative citizens committed to social justice and interculturality.
As described, for the analysis of the image from the perspective of Critical Pedagogy, the use of the analysis framework “Systematizing the perception of the image/text through the lens of critical thinking” by Amorim and Kress (2020) was taken as a basis, see Chart 1.
For the analysis of visual representations from the perspective of Critical Pedagogy, the methodological framework proposed by Amorim and Kress (2020), presented in Chart 1, which details the stages for systematizing the critical perception of images and texts, was taken as a basis. In order to operationalize this approach in a way more directed towards the specific objectives of this study, the original stages served as a foundation for the elaboration of a synthesized analysis proposal. This proposal consolidates and brings together the methodological procedures into three central stages, which condense the analytical path without losing the required critical depth. The resulting structure, detailed in Chart 2, will be applied subsequently to investigate the Sankofa symbol, guaranteeing a systematic examination of both its constitutive elements and its layers of cultural and ideological meaning.
As systematized in Chart 2, based on the proposal by Amorim and Kress (2020), the Critical Pedagogy Analysis Framework (CPAF) constitutes a methodological framework designed to integrate Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Critical Pedagogy (CP) with the theory of social semiotic multimodality. Its main objective is to provide a systematic instrument for subjects to analyze multimodal texts (such as images, videos, infographics, social media) critically, denaturalizing their meanings and exploring how these texts construct and perpetuate (or can challenge) power relations, ideologies, and social inequalities. For this study, the image of Sankofa was chosen. The structure of the CPAF can be summarized in three main interconnected stages, which guide a pedagogical analysis.
The first stage corresponds to social semiotic analysis (descriptive stage), which is the basis for interpretations, inspired by the work of Amorim and Kress. It focuses on the systematic description of semiotic modes (image, language, color, layout, typography, sound, etc.) and how they are used to create meaning. Key questions: What is here? How is meaning made? Examples of analysis: Representation: Who or what is represented? What actions are shown? What relationships are established between elements? Regarding Interaction: How does the text/product relate to the viewer? (Direction of gaze, angle, social distance, involvement). And Composition: how are elements organized in space? What is the center of information, the margin? What value is given to each element?
The second stage corresponds to Critical Discourse Analysis (Interpretative/ Explanatory Stage). In this stage, the results of the sociosemiotic analysis are interpreted in light of broader social, historical, and political contexts. It seeks, therefore, to understand the ideologies, discourses, and power relations embedded in multimodal choices. Key questions: What discourses are at play? What worldviews are privileged or silenced? Who benefits and who is marginalized by these representations? Examples of analysis: Identify how stereotypes of gender, race, or class are reinforced or contested. Analyze how certain groups are represented as “normal” and others as “different”. Question the assumptions and values naturalized in images and texts.
Finally, the third stage corresponds to Critical Pedagogy (Transformative/Action Stage). This is the central stage of the framework, which differentiates it from a simple critical analysis. Here, what emerged in stages 1 and 2 is used as a starting point for reflective pedagogical action and social change. Key questions: What can we do with this analysis? How does it lead us to question and transform our realities?
To illustrate the pedagogical application of this approach, we can structure it into four complementary moments. Initially, Reflective Practice invites students to reflect critically on their own social positions and their habits as consumers and producers of meanings. This first moment leads to Critical Awareness, in which it is analyzed how multimodal texts (such as images, videos, or graphics) actively construct and shape our perception of reality. From this understanding, students are challenged to move towards the Production of Counter-narratives, creating their own multimodal texts (such as posters, videos, or memes) that reimagine, contest, or present alternative perspectives to the previously studied dominant discourses. Finally, the cycle completes with the perspective of Social Action, a moment when the class discusses and plans concrete interventions in their school or community, potentially resulting, for example, in a campaign against stereotypes or the development of an alternative media project.
The adoption of a qualitative approach for this study is justified by the interpretative and contextual nature that the investigation demands. As discussed throughout the chapter, this methodology is not limited to cataloging or superficial description of Sankofa, but aims to provide a dense and reflective analysis of the cultural, historical, and social relations inscribed within it. The study thus aligns with the principles of critical pedagogy, as its ambition transcends understanding the immediate content of the visual representation to investigate the layers of meaning, ideological implications, and power relations that constitute it.
The choice of the Sankofa symbol as the object of analysis is, in this sense, paradigmatic. Its symbolic richness, carrying a strong cultural and historical content for Afro-descendant communities, demands a methodological instrument capable of capturing its complexities and contradictions. The option for qualitative research proves particularly adequate for this task, as it allows exploring how such a symbol functions as a communicative artifact, conveying messages that go beyond the superficial plane and serving as a catalyst for discussions about identity, historical memory, and cultural resistance.
Therefore, the qualitative analysis undertaken here is not configured as an end in itself, but as a hermeneutic process. Its objective is to unveil how an image can simultaneously reinforce and contest dominant narratives, offering an empirical substrate for a critical and emancipatory reading. By situating the symbol in its broader sociopolitical and cultural context, this methodology operates in consonance with Freirean thought, seeking to stimulate a reflexive interpretation that contributes to the critical decoding of the world. Thus, the outlined methodological path configures itself as the fundamental basis for achieving the objectives of deep understanding and critical analysis that guide this work.
Critical analysis of sankofa based on the CPAF
Images are powerful instruments for constructing meaning and ideology. In a world where visual representations dominate public and private space, critical education needs to provide students with means to question and deconstruct the messages transmitted by images. As Mitchell (2005) points out in What Do Pictures Want?, images possess a persuasive force that can profoundly influence how people perceive the world, culture, and society. In this sense, the critical analysis of images becomes essential, as it allows students not only to passively consume visual representations but also to develop the capability to question their origins, meanings, and effects. The use of the CPAF, with its methodological stages, allows students to develop a deeper understanding of images and the ideologies they carry, reflecting on the impact of these representations on their personal and social lives.The image of Sankofa, specifically, carries a profound symbolism that can be explored in various ways within a critical curriculum. By analyzing this image, students are invited to reflect on the importance of learning from the past to transform the future, addressing issues related to memory, identity, and cultural resistance. This type of analysis also opens space for a broader discussion about the representations of African and Afro-descendant cultures, promoting a pedagogical approach that values the historical and cultural contributions of these communities. For the context of this study, the image presented in Figure 1, below, was used.
The image and description of Sankofa offer rich material for a critical pedagogical analysis when explored through the Critical Pedagogy Analysis Framework (CPAF) by Amorim and Kress (2020). Beginning with the sociosemiotic analysis, the careful construction of meaning through visual and linguistic modes is observed. The graphic symbol, clean and centralized, captures attention through its symmetry and paradoxical movement: the bird advances while looking back. This compositional choice is not random; the gesture of turning the head towards the tail is the primary semiotic element, the distinctive mark that carries the core message.
The text accompanying the image operates on two complementary registers: first, a peremptory identity statement: “IT IS A SANKOFA!”, which functions as an act of naming and recognition; then, a conceptual explanation linking the symbol to the “knowledge of African peoples” and translating it, through the quotation of Abdias do Nascimento, as a philosophical principle. The sequential arrangement (symbol, statement, explanation) guides the observer from a visual apprehension to an intellectual understanding, establishing Sankofa as an object of knowledge.
Moving to the stage of Critical Discourse Analysis, the discourses and power relations inscribed in this representation are interrogated. The presentation of Sankofa, with its clear attribution to an African epistemological matrix and its endorsement by a renowned Black intellectual, constitutes a potent counter-discourse. In societies where knowledge of African origin has been systematically inferiorized, silenced, or relegated to the field of the exotic, this image performs an act of claiming and legitimation. It inserts the symbol into the domain of philosophy and complex thought, challenging hegemonic narratives that historically denied the intellectual depth of non-European cultures.
The underlying discourse also proposes a rupture with the modern Western notion of linear time and inevitable progress. The idea of “returning to the past to resignify the present and build the future” values memory, ancestry, and the critical examination of history as active tools of agency in the present. This is not an invitation to nostalgia, but to a critical and selective engagement with what has been erased or distorted, positioning the individual and collective subject as an agent capable of reinterpreting the historical trajectory and, based on this new reading, forging different destinies.
It is in the stage of Critical Pedagogy, however, that the transformative potential of Sankofa, analyzed through the CPAF, is fully realized. In this phase, the analysis ceases to be merely interpretative and becomes a guide to emancipatory educational action. The symbol can be the starting point for a reflective practice that encourages learners to identify which “pasts” need to be revisited in their own lives and communities: which histories of resistance, which traditional knowledge, and which social struggles have been obscured. Sankofa becomes a living metaphor for the process of critical awareness.
The culmination of the pedagogical work, inspired by this framework, would lie in the production of counter-narratives and social action. After identifying a contemporary problem, such as epistemicide, environmental racism, or media stereotyping, we are challenged to “turn our heads” (in a Sankofian movement) to investigate its historical origins. Based on this understanding, we can then create campaigns, works of art, media content, or community projects that precisely resignify the present and point towards alternative and fairer futures. The very image of Sankofa could be reappropriated and resemanticized in these products, closing a cycle of analysis, critique, and creation.
Therefore, the reflection conducted by the CPAF reveals that Sankofa is much more than a static ornament or cultural symbol. It configures itself as a complete multimodal critical pedagogical device. Interestingly, its form and meaning perfectly mirror the three stages of the framework: the look backwards (the description and analysis of the past/the symbol), the critique and resignification (the interpretation of discursive forces and power relations), and the construction of the future (the transformative pedagogical action). Thus, Sankofa is not merely an object to be analyzed, but itself offers a methodology for an intercultural and anti-racist education; an education that values subalternized knowledge, questions established truths, and empowers subjects to learn from history to, critically, reinvent the world.
To finalize the systematization of the analysis, Chart 3 - Critical Reflection of the Sankofa Figure, below, presents the concrete application of the Amorim and Kress (2020) framework to the symbol under study. In it, the three synthesized stages of analysis, namely: denotative description, connotative and contextual interpretation, and critical reflection with a proposed action, are filled with specific observations extracted from the examination of Sankofa. This Chart consolidates the methodological path, demonstrating how the technical and historical reading of the icon unfolds into the decoding of its cultural and ideological meanings to finally achieve an evaluation of its pedagogical and political potential.
It is observed, from the critical analysis presented, the importance of pedagogical practices that value cultural diversity and promote the inclusion of ancestral knowledge in the educational context. The use of the Sankofa concept emerges as a potent resource to connect past and present, allowing educators and students to recognize their cultural roots and develop a critical and expanded understanding of the multiple perspectives that make up history and contemporary society. The intercultural approaches discussed reinforce the need for pedagogical strategies that transcend the mere transmission of information, stimulating dialogue, critical thinking, and empathy as essential pillars for a more inclusive and transformative education.
Finally, the analysis of the results suggests that the adoption of methodologies based on Sankofa can not only enrich the teaching-learning process but also contribute to facing challenges such as prejudice and cultural exclusion, strengthening the identities of students in a welcoming and respectful environment. This perspective, grounded in continuing teacher education and the application of pedagogical practices sensitive to the students’ cultural realities, reinforces the role of education in building a fairer and more plural society, aligned with the principles of multiculturalism and critical interculturality.
Conclusion
This article sought to analyze how the image of Sankofa, in the educational context, can be used as a resource to challenge traditional pedagogical practices and promote critical and reflective education, based on the Critical Pedagogy Analysis Framework (CPAF) by Amorim and Kress (2020). Through this methodology, it was possible to highlight the transformative potential of critical image analysis, not only in developing students’ historical and cultural awareness but also as a tool for constructing a more inclusive, questioning pedagogical practice aligned with the principles of critical interculturality.
The analysis of Sankofa was structured in three interconnected movements: the semiotic description, which highlighted the material construction of the symbol; the critical interpretation, which unveiled its role as a counter-discourse challenging colonial epistemologies; and the transformative projection, which articulated these findings to concrete educational practices. This methodological path not only unveiled the layers of meaning of the symbol but also validated the CPAF itself as an operationalizable protocol of critical pedagogy, capable of transposing its theoretical foundations into structured didactic action.
Throughout the analysis, the need to overcome the traditional teaching model, centered on passive and transmissive practices, was highlighted in favor of a dialogical approach that positions the student as an active subject in the construction of knowledge. In this context, Sankofa revealed itself as a powerful symbol to connect past, present, and future, challenging learners to reflect on their own histories and the power relations that permeate visual representations and cultural narratives. The application of the CPAF, with its seven stages, proved to be a structured and accessible mechanism for educators seeking to integrate critical pedagogy into daily school life.
Based on the results obtained, it is understood that the relevance of this work lies in its dual contribution: theoretical and practical. Theoretically, the study advances by exemplifying, concretely, the integration between multimodal analysis, discursive critique, and the Freirean project of liberating education. On a practical level, it offers an executable roadmap to, from a single visual artifact, promote learning that is simultaneously about reading the world (critical analysis of representations) and writing the world (production of counter-narratives). Sankofa, in this process, revealed itself as a living metaphor for the pedagogical act that the CPAF intends to foster: a gaze that, by critically turning towards the past (history and silenced knowledge), mobilizes the present (the classroom) for the reflective construction of fairer and more plural futures.
In a world increasingly mediated by images, the critical analysis of this type of content becomes essential for forming citizens capable of questioning the implicit discourses in visual representations. The image of Sankofa, with its rich symbolism of rescuing and valuing historical memory, proved to be a strategic choice to foster reflections on identity, cultural resistance, and the reconstruction of historically marginalized narratives. Furthermore, this approach reaffirms the relevance of promoting an education that values ancestral knowledge and combats stereotypes reproduced in different spheres of society.
The study also highlighted the importance of critical interculturality as a pedagogical perspective capable of broadening the understanding of relations between cultures and deconstructing the hierarchies that often marginalize certain traditions and knowledge. The valorization of symbols like Sankofa reaffirms the role of education in resisting the coloniality of knowledge and promoting a fairer and more plural society. In this sense, the article contributes to strengthening pedagogical practices that not only recognize but also actively integrate cultural diversity into the school curriculum.
The social and cultural relevance of this research lies, above all, in its contribution to the decolonization of curricula and the formation of critical educators. By offering a practical and accessible methodology for the critical analysis of images, this study not only expands pedagogical possibilities but also fosters a vision of teaching committed to social transformation. Educators who adopt the CPAF in their pedagogical practice can help their students become critical readers of visual representations and active agents in the construction of new cultural narratives.
Finally, this article also signals the need to expand studies on the application of the CPAF in different contexts and with varied objects of analysis. It is believed that future research can explore how other images and cultural symbols can be used to promote critical reflections and encourage innovative pedagogical practices. The application of the CPAF at different educational levels and disciplines may also reveal new potentialities for critical and intercultural education.
It is concluded that the articulation between dense cultural objects, such as Sankofa, and structured critical methodologies, such as the CPAF, constitutes a fertile path for the realization of a critical intercultural education. This approach is not limited to including diverse content in the curriculum but also equips teachers and students to decode the power mechanisms present in representations and to position themselves as agents of resignification. Thus, education fulfills its essential political role: no longer reproducing hierarchies, but providing intellectual and creative instruments to question them and, learning from the past, collectively reimagine the future.
In summary, the critical analysis of the Sankofa image, guided by the CPAF, stands out as a methodological proposal that goes beyond traditional pedagogical practices, while rescuing and valuing cultural and historical diversity. This study reaffirms the importance of educational practices that not only form critical and reflective students but also contribute to building a society that recognizes and respects the multiple voices and cultures that compose it. Thus, by learning from the past, education positions itself as a transformative agent in the present and for the future.
References
-
ABEPSS. Associação Brasileira de Ensino e Pesquisa em Serviço Social. Conheça o símbolo que compõe a identidade visual da Oficina Nacional. Abepss, Brasília, DF, 2023. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://abepss-3dots.webfans.com.br/noticias/conheca-o-simbolo-que-compoe-a-identidade-visual-da-oficina-nacional-635 Acesso em: 14 out. 2024.
» https://abepss-3dots.webfans.com.br/noticias/conheca-o-simbolo-que-compoe-a-identidade-visual-da-oficina-nacional-635 - AMORIM, Simone Silveira; KRESS, Tricia. Critical pedagogy analysis framework. 1. ed. Aracaju: UNIT, 2020.
- ANJOS, Ana Paula Souza dos; QUEIROZ GUEDES, Marilde. Contribuições da interculturalidade crítica para a educação e a justiça social: repensando o currículo e a formação docente. Sul-Sul: Revista de Ciências Humanas e Sociais, Barreiras, v. 5, n. 1, p. 31-50, 2024. https://doi.org/10.53282/sul-sul.v5i1.1016.
- APPLE, Michael W.. Paulo Freire, critical pedagogy and the tasks of the critical scholar/activist. e-Curriculum, São Paulo, v. 7 n. 3, p. 1-21, 2011.
- BORGES, Gabriela Fernanda Silva. Resenha crítica à obra Conscientização, de Paulo Freire. Criar Educação, Criciúma, v. 7, n. 2, jul./dez. 2018. https://doi.org/10.18616/ce.v7i2.3742.
- BRASIL. Ministério de Educação e Cultura. LDB - Lei nº 9394/96, de 20 de dezembro de 1996. Brasília, DF: MEC, 1996.
- CALÇADA, Luís Antonio Zanotta; HERINGER JÚNIOR, Bruno. Do multiculturalismo ao interculturalismo: fracasso ou aperfeiçoamento. Revista Eletrônica Direito e Sociedade, Canoas, v. 6, n. 2, p. 159-170, 2018. https://doi.org/10.18316/redes.v6i2.3800.
- CANDAU, Vera Maria Ferrão. Direitos humanos, educação e interculturalidade: as tensões entre igualdade e diferença. Revista Brasileira de Educação, Rio de Janeiro, v. 13, n. 37, p. 45-56, jan./abr. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-24782008000100005.
- CANDAU, Vera Maria Ferrão. Multiculturalismo e educação: desafios para a prática pedagógica. In: MOREIRA, Antonio Flavio; CANDAU, Vera Maria Ferrão (org.). Multiculturalismo: diferenças culturais e práticas pedagógicas. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2008. p. 13-37.
- CANDAU, Vera Maria F.. Sociedade, cotidiano escolar e cultura(s): uma aproximação. Educação & Sociedade, Campinas, v. 23, n. 79, p. 125-161, 2002.
- CUSATI, Iracema C. et al. Pensar a interculturalidade na educação e a didática crítica intercultural na contemporaneidade. Nuances: Estudos sobre Educação, Presidente Prudente, v. 35, n. 00, p. e024011, 2024. https://doi.org/10.32930/nuances.v35i00.10623.
- FREIRE, Paulo. Conscientização: teoria e prática da libertação: uma introdução ao pensamento de Paulo Freire. São Paulo: Cortez, 2018.
- GIROUX, Henry A.. Professores como intelectuais transformadores. In: GIROUX, Henry A.. Os professores como intelectuais: rumo a uma pedagogia crítica da aprendizagem. Porto Alegre: Artes Médicas, 1997. p. 157-164.
- GOMES, Nilma Lino. Relações étnico-raciais, educação e descolonização dos currículos. Currículo Sem Fronteiras, v. 12, n. 1, p. 98-109, jan./abr. 2012.
- hooks, bell. Ensinando a transgredir: a educação como prática da liberdade. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2017.
- KUNRATH, Zenaide Borre; CECCHETTI, Elcio. Educação intercultural crítica e suas potencialidades para outra gestão escolar. ETD: Educação Temática Digital, Campinas, v. 23, n. 3, p. 658-676, jul. 2021. https://doi.org/10.20396/etd.v23i3.8664215.
- KYMLICKA, Will. Multicultural citizenship: A liberal theory of minority rights. Oxford: University of Oxford, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1093/0198290918.001.0001.
- MALDONADO-TORRES, Nelson. Analítica da colonialidade e da decolonialidade: algumas dimensões básicas. In: BERNARDINO-COSTA, Joaze; MALDONADO TORRES, Nelson; GROSFOGUEL, Ramón (org.). Decolonialidade e pensamento afrodiaspórico. 2. ed. Belo Horizonte: Autêntica, 2020. p. 31-61.
- SANTOS, Eliane Nataline; AMORIM, Simone Silveira. Docência e curadoria: divulgação étnico-racial no Facebook. e-Curriculum, v. 20, n. 3, p. 1064-1083, 2023. http://dx.doi.org/10.23925/1809-3876.2022v20i3p1064-1083.
- TAYLOR, Charles. El multiculturalismo y la politica del reconocimiento = Multiculturalism and the politics of recognition. Cidade do México: Fondo de Cultura Economica, 2009.
- WALSH, Catherine. Interculturalidade e decolonialidade do poder: um pensamento e posicionamento a partir da diferença colonial. Revista Eletrônica da Faculdade de Direito da Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Pelotas, v. 5, n. 1, p. 6-39, 2019.
- WYNTER, Sylvia. Unsettling the coloniality of being/power/truth/freedom: towards the human, after man, Its overrepresentation: an argument. The New Centennial Review, Michigan, v. 3, n. 3, p. 257-337, 2003.
-
*
English version by Allan Alves de Messias Corrêa. The authors take full responsibility for the translation of the text, including title of books/articles and the quotations originally published in Portuguese.
-
1
Data availability: The entire dataset supporting the results of this study has been published within the article itself.
Source: ABEPSS (2023)