9. Learning Theories
9.6 Moving Past a Monolithic Approach to Learning Theory
Dr. Zachary Rowan and Michaela McGuire, M.A.
While this chapter does not represent the entirety of knowledge on learning theories, it represents the dominant approach used to situate learning theories within criminology. Some of this is a function of the fact that the scholars responsible for developing and testing the theories are white, western, and male and their ideas and methodologies are complicit in the colonial project through the silencing of Indigenous peoples (Deckert, 2014, 2016). Learning is universal, yet ironically (with some exceptions) the bulk of what we believe learning theory represents and explains is derived from frames of reference and samples of primarily white colonisers. When diversity is considered, it is largely relegated to descriptive differences as opposed to the elevation of truths or experiences of people who have lived on these lands since time immemorial. Learning theories are often operationalized within western research methodologies (such as quantitative research) that have been criticized and deemed silencing (Deckert, 2016). Indigenous knowledge has been disregarded as less esteemed/legitimate than western knowledge and of “little criminological value” (Cunneen & Tauri, 2019, p. 42). Given the over-representation of Indigenous peoples in the imposed justice system, this silencing of knowledge should be of concern. If learning theories were to incorporate the oppression of Nation-based governance into their frameworks, these theories would surely take a necessary step and arguably through such a consideration strengthen not falsify or detract from the explanatory power of the theory.
For example, learning theories do not question the role of the state or include reference to state culpability for human rights violations. Nor do these theories critically analyse how the oppression of Nation-based governance, law, and justice and the imposition of western systems impact socialisation experiences. Indeed, the primary socialising agents derived from learning theories are individuals rather than institutions that force exposure to particular associates or definitions. Still, we must be cautious about individualising the application of mainstream learning theories to Indigenous peoples and simply attributing blame to an individual’s socialisation with such institutions. This would only perpetuate harm and ignore the role of colonial policies (Cunneen & Tauri, 2017). There are virtually no direct tests of learning theory, which if done, could arguably be an advancement within Indigenous communities; however, this type of research still represents a colonial adaptation to the study of deviance among Indigenous peoples and ignores how the imposed state-defined structures fundamentally change the social environments of Indigenous peoples. This add Indigenous and stir approach is highly contested and problematic. Learning theories that consid