- The Need for Cultural Studies, Giroux, Shumway, Smith, Sosnoski-
What I liked:

• The vision of a possibility via Cultural Studies for academics or intellectuals to ultimately impact and improve society: "Resisting intellectuals can provide the moral, political, and pedagogical leadership for those groups which take as their starting point the transformative critique of the conditions of oppression (p.10)." And more specifically on p. 11 : "Providing students with the critical tools they need to understand and dismantle the chronic rationalization of harmful social practices, "& "Actively engage in projects which encourage them to address their own critical role in the production and legitimation of social relations."
  Under this lens, cultural studies scholars (the resisting intellectuals) become political "Activists: "Intellectuals must play the crucial role of mobilizing such resistance into a praxis that has political impact." Of course, for me it seems to split society in two classes: the intellectuals (enlightened) and the "others," thus making the emergence of classes and some hierarchy unavoidable? The the questions: How will the intellectuals know how to address the others? How will they know that they are listened to and understood?
  
• The clear contrasting between two conflicting characterizations of culture: In the present "disciplinary"context, culture has "a permanent character," and "has already been formed" (p.9); students' part is limited to accumulating as much knolwedge of this preexisting body of culture as possible (p. 8); the cultural studies approach would enable students to "investigate the culture they live in as a set of activities", and it is constantly"in the process of transformation" (p.9). This concept of culture as organic is familiar and reminds me of theories (Vygotsky) supporting t that development and learning must be viewed through socio-historical context.
  

What I liked less:

• Much of the definition of "Counter-disciplinary praxis" is explained using the notioin of "normal science (Kuhn's normal science)," yet, there is no definition or clarification, and I am not sure what Normal science is. Also, I wish the article pointed out more real life examples of Counter disciplinary praxis
• Within the discussion about specialization and departmentalization of disciplines in academia, the dichotomy between resisting and earning a living, although addressed, is not resolved. It cannot be. There is a constant pull between tearing apart a system and living from this sytem.