CST is a multidisciplinary theory that has influence from systems theory and critical social theory, and is peddled as a pluralistic tool for conducting qualitative research in education. Due to this, it tows a line between knowledge as a tool to make sense of our world and knowledge as a tool to influence our world. This dichotomy is mirrored by my observations of educational systems in practice.

Education in itself is interesting, because though it is a part of social science, it is a moving dynamic facet of life. What we are studying is not necessarily a static period in history, but a moving, changing part. My role as a researcher now requires me to decide which of that I want to tap into. Do I want to study it as a hard system, like the sciences, in the sense of dissecting it into component parts? Or do I want to study it for purposes of social justice, reforms and likewise?

Why is this an important dilemma to address at all?One of the strengths of the CST is emancipatory learning, with its core emphasis on social justice. I think this dilemma when applied to systems thinking then is part moralistic, the onus that we owe something to the body of knowledge we are studying. Also, there is just this overwhelming consensus in western literature that the current system of education is broken down and in need of change. Though on further study, the change proposed by everyone looks different. Reigeluth (in Reinventing Schools) for instance proposes this change move away from the industrial age to the needs of the information age. There are people who differ.

CST also takes the “knowledge is power” mantra quite literally. It leans towards knowledge creation and dispensation as some sort of political tool; it can be used for subordination or oppression. In the study of educational systems, I guess also depending on the perspective one takes, there is some kind of observed power dynamic at play whether deliberate or not. If the system is viewed as a top to bottom heirachy, those at the top could be viewed to have much more power or control over the educational outcomes of the system than those at the bottom.