The Luddite Revolt continues

The bicentenary in 2011 of the Luddite Revolt prompts us to ask ‘what would Ned Ludd think of today’s automated styles of distance education?’ He would no doubt echo the common criticism that educational technologies create an impersonal style of teaching and learning, and devalue the teacher. He would probably agree that online methods have major potential for millions of distance‐based students who cannot attend classroom‐based education and training; but he would emphasise the need for quality assurance and cost‐effectiveness studies in distance education implementation. He might also ask why anyone would encourage the development of e‐learning in countries where the Internet is largely inaccessible. This article uses the Luddites’ views of workplace automation to explore how global distance education practices might be improved. It suggests that the intentions of the original Luddites were laudable and worthy of application in distance education today.     

Resistance and enrolment in the enterprise university: an ethno‐drama in three acts,with appended reading

We are now at a point in higher education policy studies where we know that neoliberal discursive rationalities and practices are prevalent in the contemporary enterprise university, and we are beginning to get a sense of their impact on academic work and subjectivities. The article asserts that a more pressing question is how to powerfully and effectively resist neoliberalisation. The article investigates the conditions of possibility for resistance by exploring how resistance is struggled over in everyday academic work practices. The article presents an ethno‐drama, based on materials collected through participant observation in several Australian universities, and offers a reading of the drama which focuses on what in Actor–Network Theory is called ‘enrolment’. It is argued that a better understanding of how academics, collectively and as individuals, are vulnerable to the enrolment practices in the enterprise university is necessary for the enactment of effective resistance.     

Problematising the use of education to address social inequity: Could participatory action research be a step forwards?

This paper critiques international trends towards certain school practices aimed at promoting equity and social justice by closing gaps in specific learning outcomes among students. It argues that even though some of these practices (e.g. individualised student support, data‐driven leadership) improve learning outcomes for certain groups considered ‘disadvantaged’, they fail to have a genuine impact on the issue. They remain ‘locked’ in the logic of social mobility, reaffirming the legitimacy of a hierarchical system underpinned by competitive individualism, which unfairly distributes social opportunities under the guise of ‘merit’ and ‘justice’. The paper argues that unless students develop awareness of the subtle injustices legitimised by the current system, no specialised interventions will ever tackle inequity, but will, instead, reinforce it. Yet, attempts to explicitly challenge mainstream school practices are likely to face harsh resistance from system agents due to being so ingrained in school cultures. An alternative strategy is suggested which, without being too subversive, could raise students’ awareness—what Freire called ‘conscientização’. This would entail the application of participatory action research (PAR), under the cloak of traditional (system‐aligned) action research. Such PAR, despite its political character, would initially appear to fulfil the performative role of more technical interventions (e.g. raising test scores), but in such a way that ‘conscientização’ also happens in the process. This may set the ground for social reform, encouraging the transition to a more sustainable and equitable society based on collectivity and solidarity.     

Child Rearing: Passivity and being able to go on. Wittgenstein on shared practices and seeing aspects

It is not uncommon to hear parents say in discussions they have with their children ‘Look at it this way’. And called upon for their advice, counsellors too say something to adults with the significance of ‘Try to see it like this’. The change of someone's perspective in the context of child rearing is the focus of this paper. Our interest in this lies not so much in giving an answer to the practical problems that are at stake, but at disentangling the issues on a conceptual level. Within the so‐called second part of his Philosophical Investigations, Wittgenstein deals with shared practices and with concepts such as ‘seeing’ and ‘seeing as’. What he says there is in terms of content linked with his earlier Tractatus position concerning ethics, a matter which will first be dealt with. After that, the relevant sections of his later work are discussed. Following Cavell, it is concluded that to try to get someone to see what one sees, necessarily presupposes giving it out of one's hands. The passivity this points at highlights what Erziehung in the end comes down to.     

‘Yes,but if we have students think all day when will we get anything done?’: two conceptual resources to engage students in democratically dangerous teaching

While the politics of curriculum reform occupy adults, high stakes get played out in crowded classrooms. As a component of democratic inquiry, how might teachers engage students in a study of those agendas shaping their education? What sorts of conceptual resources could help? To begin to answer these questions, I briefly review scholars who address the emergence in several countries of what Kliebard names as a ‘social efficiency’ agenda in education. I then examine two strong examples of literature in ‘authentic’ practices as a curriculum conversation contesting this agenda. While supportive of the intent of scholars concerned with authentic practices, I assert that they insufficiently address ways in which students might engage with issues shaping their experience of formal education and offer two conceptual resources with which to do so.     

What do families of the ‘professional and managerial’ class educate their children for? The links between happiness and autonomy

Based on a qualitative study involving 124 professional and managerial class families in Catalonia (Spain), this paper describes the aims and objectives these families have for the education of their children. During the fieldwork, when asked what they were aiming for in the education of their children, almost all of the parents replied ‘for them to be happy’. But what kind of happiness are they talking about? What kind of education might lead to happiness? Drawing principally on the work of Kellerhals and Montandon and their ‘contractual model of education’ and Bauman’s concepts of ‘secondary security’ and ‘homo eligens’, although also taking into account the related contributions of Lareau, Vincent and Ball, Stefansen and Aarseth, and Kusserow, the paper aims to demonstrate the strong connection these families make between happiness and ‘absolute’ autonomy, understood as two sides of the same coin and seen, by the participants, as the guiding principle that should shape the way they bring their children up.     

Knowledge Navigators and Lifelong Learners: Producing graduates for the information society

In recent years, there has been considerable attention, at least at the policy level, to the need for graduates to be ‘lifelong learners’. Although this concept means different things in different cultural contexts, there is more or less general agreement that graduation really only marks the beginning of the graduate's need for continuing personal and professional learning, and, moreover, that it is the responsibility of universities and other institutions of higher education to equip their graduates with the skills and attitudes to help them to continue learning throughout their lives. The emergence of an information-rich ‘knowledge society’ has made this even more of an imperative. The rapid and pervasive spread of information and communication technologies, coupled with increasing globalisation, the democratisation of knowledge production—once assumed to be largely the preserve of universities—and what has been dubbed the ‘information explosion’ collectively mean that most citizens of advanced industrialised countries are, or will soon become, ‘knowledge workers’. Accordingly, many graduates, whether they work in educational or other contexts, are likely to be involved in ‘knowledge-intensive’ activities, for which they need to be prepared. But what does this mean in practice, and what are we to do about it? In 1990, the late Dr Ernest Boyer, in his book Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate, proposed a fourfold division of academic work into what he labelled the scholarship of discovery; the scholarship of application ; the scholarship of integration ; and, finally, the scholarship of teaching . The paper suggests that each of these four aspects of scholarship has a direct counterpart outside the university, and that, accordingly, they might be taken as a way of considering the attributes of graduates as well as of academics. The paper suggests a necessary symmetry between the teaching and other scholarly work carried out within the university and the development of such abilities and predispositions in graduates from a variety of fields who might not otherwise consider themselves to be destined for ‘scholarly’ work.     

The relation between reported awareness of non‐verbal communication and rated effectiveness in probationer and student teachers

Forty probationer teachers were interviewed and questionnaires given to ninety‐two student teachers. They were asked how they could tell if a lesson was going well; what they would do if it was not; what they did to get attention at the start of a lesson; and whether their training had helped them in these respects. The responses were scored for mentions of non‐verbal communication. The teachers were also rated for effectiveness. Probationer teachers mentioned non‐verbal communication more often than student teachers. ‘Effective’ probationers mentioned non‐verbal communication more often than ‘ineffective’ ones, especially the more subtle cues of gaze and posture. There were no corresponding differences among the student teachers.     

Remembering Peter Medway

Peter Medway was an exceptionally able teacher, researcher and thinker, and his work throws light on governments, inspectors and educators. In the early 1960s, Peter met a theory which ‘established language as a major means of constructing our realities’. Later, after teaching English in secondary schools for two decades, he reflected on why this theory had failed to make English more serious and more central. In his research, he looked into the history of English, its assumptions, practices and motivations. He also wrote about the significance of the students’ experiences, looking carefully (and critically) at what they produced in talk and writing. Persuaded that English needs to be about using language rather than studying it, he helped students find the right words. Starting with their own words, Peter focused on the business of making interventions without compromising students’ own agency. When he returned from Canada to take up a lectureship at King’s College, London, he was dismayed by the state of English in schools. His dissatisfaction with current English teaching led to a fully funded research project as well as a major publication that tells a story of the way teacher-led change transformed English in post-war London, English Teachers in a Postwar Democracy. Here we remember what was special about his contribution, his legacy and why we will miss him.     

The Labouring Sleepwalker: Evocation and expression as modes of qualitative educational research

This paper deals with the highly personal way an individual makes sense of the world in a way that avoids the pitfalls of the so‐called private language. For Wittgenstein following a rule can never mean just following another rule, though we do follow rules blindly. His idea of the ‘form of life’ elicits that ‘what we do’ refers to what we have learnt, to the way in which we have learnt it and to how we have grown to find it self‐evident. But the reference to the ‘bedrock’, to what was originally learnt, is the only kind of situation for which it makes sense to ask whether the meaning of a concept is correctly stated. Dialogue, conversation, and exchange of ideas are the right ways to characterize all the other situations. The challenge of Wittgensteinian philosophy is therefore that of a balance of the individual and the community, of language and the world. His insistence on the third person (or the intersubjective level) is countered by the importance he gives to each individual's personal stance: persons must speak for themselves and do what they can do. Given the growing interest for the kind of educational research where the ‘personal’ is focused on, I will try to take up the challenge to see how here as elsewhere ‘language’ works. By making clear what it does for us, it will gradually become clear how this kind of research may itself have to be reinterpreted.     

Why Cultural Studies is the End of Thinking

Abstract

This article begins from a consideration of this issue’s contention that ‘central to politicized academic projects … is a critique of the cultural power of institutions’ and in particular pedagogical institutions. It argues that is clear enough what the Editor is thinking of here: he names ‘cultural studies’ as his prime suspect and from here it is not too far a leap to imagine that the pedagogical institution at which his ‘politicized academic projects’ take aim is the university. The article concedes that this might all appear to be superficially true, and that much of what is argued in it will up hold this hypothesis. However, the article does not wish to rush too quickly towards an unproblematic equation of cultural studies, or the ‘politicized academic project’ of a critical study of culture with something like a pedagogy of the popular. Equally, it proposes, we must distinguish rigorously between ‘a pedagogy of the popular’, pedagogy able to treat the popular, popular pedagogy, and popular culture as such. In this respect it argues that we would not wish to foreclose the impertinent question of ‘what is cultural studies?’ too early in an understanding of what it might mean to offer an institutional critique that takes the form of pedagogy. Much will depend upon what we mean by these vaguest of terms ‘culture’, ‘education’, ‘power’ and ‘pedagogy’ itself, none of which is at all straightforward even though a certain normative discourse renders such terms the cornerstone of national policy debates through which billions of human and financial capital are routed. The stakes in fact could not be higher in a ‘critique of the cultural power of [pedagogical] institutions’. Therefore, it is crucial that we make the effort to understand, or at least begin to unpack, a conjunction such as the one Bowman offers here that amalgamates ‘politicized academic projects such as cultural studies and politicized work in cultural theory and philosophy’. It argues that we will not be able to progress to a wider schema until we have some leverage on this relation. And this is what this article seeks to provide.     

Reading the Other: Ethics of Encounter

Most scholarly fields, at least in the humanities, have been asking the same questions about the politics of encounter for hundreds of years: Should we try to find a way to encounter an other without appropriating it, without imposing ourselves on it? Is encountering‐without‐appropriating even possible? These questions are profuse and taken up with intense interest in scholarship about the personal essay, specifically, which has often been credited as a philosophical form.

Within debates about the ethics of the personal essay, the most significant concern is about the traditionally accepted relationship of the writer‐represented‐on‐the‐page. For example, the notable rhetoric and composition scholar, David Bartholomae, argues that students of what he calls ‘“creative nonfiction” or “literary nonfiction”’ (1995, p. 68) write ‘... as though they [are] not the products of their time, politics and culture, as though they could be free, elegant, smart, independent, the owners of all that they saw’ (p. 70).

In other words, the personal essay, as a subgenre of creative or literary nonfiction, allows for the perpetuation of the fallacy that a writer can be ‘free’ of social influences, ‘independent’ of a society and of its politics, and ‘owners’ of their own perspectives and experiences—of those the writer expresses on the page, specifically. Consequently, if the writer is not conscious and critical of the social influences acting on him/her, if s/he believes the text to be the singular and uninfluenced production of his/her own self, then the topic taken up in the essay is tyrannized by the self‐centered (and dangerously un‐critically‐conscious) perspective of the writer.

However, the personal essay also has its strengths as a philosophical form: in its privileging of skepticism; in its attention to complexity and complication; and even in its existence‐as‐evidence of some quality of its writer. Too, very often essays pay homage to works of other essayists, as in the case of Gass's ‘Emerson and the Essay’, instead of mowing down other works in order to establish its own reign. Despite these ethically responsible characteristics, though, I show, using Gass's essay about Emerson's work, that the personal essay continues to be devalued because of its reliance on and celebration of its transparent relationship to its author.

In general, essayists don't complain in their work about the belief in this transparent relationship; they advocate it. Thus, my purpose is not to suggest that there is no relationship between the essayist and the essay. Rather, I will, in the latter half of the article, turn to the work of philosopher Emmanuel Levinas, which describes and enacts an approach to an other (writer/text) that does not hinge on the assumption that writer and text are in a transparent relationship to each other. I hope that in presenting this possibility for re‐thinking the essay (and its relationship to its writer), writers, scholars, and teachers of the essay—and even its opposition—will give it new attention and explore further the possibilities that it may provide for engagement, for encounter.     

Art and Creativity in the Global Economies of Education

Creativity: what might this mean for art and art educators in the creative economies of globalisation? The task of this discussion is to look at the state of creativity and its role in education, in particular art education, and to seek some understanding of the register of creativity, how it is shaped, and how legitimated in the globalised world dominated by input‐output, means‐end, economically driven thinking, expectations and demands. With the help of Heidegger some crucial questions are raised, such as: How can art maintain its creative ontological and epistemological potential in the creative economies of globalisation? Is it possible for art and the creative arts to act as a process of ‘revealing’ and ‘becoming’ and ‘throwing light’ on the world while working within the market economies of innovation and entrepreneurship where creativity has become a generalised discourse? What matters in this discussion is to find a way to argue for the sustainability of art education as a creative mode of enquiry through which self and the world may be better understood, identity might be realised as difference and being‐in‐time might be possible.     

Doing Diversity Work in Higher Education in Australia

This paper explores how diversity is used as a key term to describe the social and educational mission of universities in Australia. The paper suggests that we need to explore what diversity ‘does’ in specific contexts. Drawing on interviews with diversity and equal opportunities practitioners, the paper suggests that ‘diversity’ is used in the face of what has been called ‘equity fatigue’. Diversity is associated with what is new, and allows practitioners to align themselves and their units with the existing values of their universities. However, given this, diversity can mean potentially anything: and practitioners have to re‐attach the term ‘diversity’ to other more marked terms such as equality and justice if it is to ‘do anything’. The paper explores the appeal of diversity, the strategic nature of diversity work, and the role of commitment, leadership and training. It also offers some more general reflections on how language works within organisations by showing that words, although they do things, are not finished as forms of action: what they do depends not only on how they are used, but how they get taken up.     

Place and Being

Do places matter educationally? When Edward Casey remarks: ‘The world is, minimally and forever, a place‐world’, we might take this statement as presupposing without argument that places exist as a given, that we know what a place is, a point that Aristotle would have never taken for granted and in fact neither does Casey. I find Casey's remark that we live in ‘a place‐world’ an immensely rich turn of phrase, forever packed with an infinite and diverse range of landscapes reflecting our being in the world, a maze of wonders, an orchestra of different subtle sounds where places are witnessed, mimicked and created. We submerge ourselves in the gamesome labour of place and learn to perceive and quiver in its light. I will discuss through a phenomenological perspective the self‐givenness of place experience, the unfolding of a life that is an aspect of one's own space and horizon. The relationship between place and being and the aesthetic way that I discuss this is central to this paper's analysis, a position that is at odds with those who favour a more macro theoretical perspective that eclipses place. My analysis focuses on a philosophical exploration of being‐in‐place, where place becomes being. Much is made of the thought that place is primarily an aesthetically lived experience where we create ourselves. An attempt is made to show how an embodied sense of being in place transforms places of learning. The paper attempts to acknowledge the kind of governing power of being that place interconnections can enclose, personalize and create.     

The Pedagogy of the Body: Affect and collective individuation in the classroom and on the dancefloor

Abstract

Much recent work in the study of popular culture has emphasized the extent to which it is not only a site of signifying practices, myths, meanings and identifications, but also an arena of intensities, of affective flows and corporeal state-changes. From this perspective, many areas of popular culture (from calisthenics to social dance to video gaming) can be seen as sites at which rich and complex—if sometimes dangerous—processes of embodied learning/teaching take place. By comparison, the world of formal education can seem hopelessly clumsy in its inattention to such issues. From a personal perspective, I can attest that nothing surprises my students more than when I try to get them to think about the ergonomics of studying, or advise them that getting some exercise and cutting down on sugar will probably improve their work as much as further studying will, or when I advise graduate students that their mood and physical state will make as much difference to the quality of their lectures as will their level of formal preparation; and yet experience has convinced me of the accuracy of these assertions. I would aver that I have learned more about successful lecturing—in particular about the improvisational skill of ‘reading’ a room, and adjusting an affective–informational flow accordingly—from DJing in dance clubs than from any formal training in pedagogy that I have received. What conclusions could be drawn from these observations, and how do they relate to existing strands of pedagogic theory? These are the questions which this article will ultimately seek to address.     

Lifelong learning policies and discourses: critical reflections from Aotearoa,New Zealand

This article examines New Zealand experiences and understandings of lifelong education and lifelong learning over the past 30 years or so. It investigates the place of lifelong education and lifelong learning discourses in shaping public policy in Aotearoa as well as questions about the similarities and differences between the discourse in New Zealand and in Europe and the UK. The aim of the paper is to throw light on the following questions: what effects, if any, have notions of lifelong education or lifelong learning had on public policy discourses on tertiary education and the education of adults? Is there evidence to suggest that notions of either ‘lifelong education’ or ‘lifelong learning’ have provided a vision or sense of purpose or set of guidelines in developing public policies? Have they served to justify or legitimate new initiatives or funding arrangements? And, if so, what is the nature of this influence? Finally, in the light of this discussion the article also examines the question whether notions of ‘lifelong education’ and ‘lifelong learning’ as they have featured in the academic and policy literature are predominantly located in a Euro‐centred discourse and hence how they might be reconstituted to reflect more adequately discourses of learning and education in other parts of the world.     

‘Wild’ girls? An exploration of ‘ladette’ cultures in secondary schools

‘Laddish’ attitudes and behaviours are central to current discourses on boys’ ‘underachievement’, as they are seen by many people to impede the progress of some boys in school. Whilst the vast majority of concern about ‘laddishness’ has, to date, focused upon boys, according to media reports there are now good reasons to worry about girls. Anecdotes from teachers and reports in the media suggest that some schoolgirls are now acting ‘laddishly’, that they are ‘ladettes’. This paper explores ‘ladette’ cultures in secondary schools, drawing upon interview data from100 pupils and 30 teachers. It tackles and discusses the following questions: (a) What does the term ‘ladette’ mean to pupils and teachers? (b) Do school‐aged ‘ladettes’ ‘exist’—and if so, what are they like inside and outside of school? (c) In what ways are ‘ladettes’ similar to, and different from, ‘lads’? (d) Are teachers concerned about ‘ladettes’? (e) Are ‘ladette’ behaviours on the increase?