Vol. 4, No. 2, 2013

Contents EDITORIAL Oľga Zápotočná: Pedagogy, Education and Society Today . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ARTICLES Anneli Frelin, Jan Grannäs: The Production of Present and Absent Presences in Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Metka Mencin Čeplak: Heteronormativity: School, Ideology, and Politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jana Plichtová: Scottish and Slovak University Student Discussions about Stigmatized Persons: A Challenge for Education – Moving towards Democracy and Inclusion . . . . . . . . . Ping Wang: Perspectives on English Teacher Development in Rural Primary Schools in China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gilbert S. Suzawa: The Learning Teacher: Role of Ambiguity in Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zuzana Petrová: To the Relevancy of Using Vygotsky´s theoretical Framework to Legitimize the Dialogic Teaching/Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . editorial Pedagogy, Education and Society Today The social sciences and humanities are increasingly subjected to controversial discussion and public debate within the media. The opinions expressed in this public debate are often judgemental or indeed doubt the beneits these disciplines bring society, and lurking behind them we generally ind short-sighted arguments emanating from the fetishised economisation of society and culture. The quest for the social sciences to have a direct impact, packaged as a return on investment – particularly vis-àvis the natural sciences and technological disciplines – is becoming a dangerous precedence, as evidenced in reductive political and economic decisions and restrictive practices, in the shape of radical cuts to science, which is already underfunded, to the detriment of social science research in particular. Amidst the current economic crisis, these popular, or even populist, solutions are easily defended to the public. Moreover, the dangers facing the social sciences stem from the very essence of social science research, from the objectives it pursues and the subjects it investigates. This includes critically relecting on the nature of society, revealing how the very political powers upon which the social sciences are greatly dependent are involved in constructing the conditions of societal life, of individuals, groups and institutions. Education, investigated by pedagogy and represented here in this journal, is an institution that is immediately and chiely affected by the political powers and the ideologies they wield, for it (as M. M. Čeplak states) is itself one of the main ideological instruments of the state. It is therefore interesting to see how these relationships – between the political, economic and ideological reality of society and schools – emerge, and are then deined and clariied. The visible and invisible consequences of neoliberal education reforms are revealed in the study by co-authors Anneli Frelin a Jan Grannäs. The contents of this journal provide the reader with many an opportunity to follow the devastating impact of the political and economic ideology of globalised journal of pedagogy 2/2013 131 editorial capitalism now manifesting itself in educational systems. Frelin and Jan Grannäs’ study is unique, however; in that it shows – most comprehensively – how these changes are impacting on a country with the kind of traditions and the quality of education that Sweden has. This depiction of how education’s traditional goals and values are turning into a caricature under the inluences of the new managerial and performative political discourse – all in the interests of democracy, the public good and prosperity – and the consequences that has for the school environment, is truly shocking. The authors demonstrate this in their case study of a secondary school that did not come out best in this race. What is promising though is that despite all the negatives associated with the political pressures and this weakened state, positive signals of resistance are starting to emerge. A communal spirit is being revived, loyalty among the staff is on the up, there is determination to help more dificult students at risk of failing, good informal relations are being fostered, and above all, student interests are the focus of attention. Foucault’s analysis of sexuality as an object of regulation via technologies of power and disciplinary institutions – of which schools occupy primary position – is the context within which Metka M. Čeplak investigates the issue of heteronormativity in Slovenian society today. In his analysis of public policy discourses, educational documents and practices, Čeplak identiies a conlict between the principle of equality as enshrined in the legislation, on the one hand, and deeply held prejudices against same-sex relationships, on the other, all of which results in the stigmatisation and discrimination of individuals and groups. The author focuses on investigating the mechanisms and strategies whereby these attitudes persist and ascertains that many of them are to found in school environments. Active resistance, however, is to be found in alternative educational projects and equal rights NGOs, and it is in this area that Čeplak sees potential for the successful deconstruction of heteronormativity. The social exclusion of stigmatised social groups is also discussed in Jana Plichtová’s article whose investigation is an intercultural comparison conducted through the eyes of young people in western and central Europe. Plichtová employs discourse analysis to see how her sample of Scottish and Slovak university students resolve a sensitive social issue through collaborative discussion centring on a moral conlict between the interests of the majority group and the speciic human rights of HIV positive individuals. By following and comparing the dynamics and the content of the discussion she highlights marked cultural differences in the way in which the students consider the problem, how they rationally argue their case, how they accept the opposing opinions of their peers, and also in how they inally agree on a common solution. Plichtová interprets her indings in relation to diffe132 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 pedagogy, education and Society today rences in traditions in western democracies and post-totalitarian democracies and inclusive pedagogies and education systems. The Slovak system provides students with far more limited opportunities for free debate, as a means of producing democratic thinking citizens. The way the younger generation behaves relects critically on schools and society, including current social, political and ideological tensions, and the residue left over from totalitarianism. Wang Ping’s article describes the sudden changes related to curricular innovation in foreign language teaching confronting language teachers on the other side of the world – rural China. It presents research and discusses the indings on how current centralised reforms to English language teaching do not take into consideration existing language competence nor the real needs of the over-worked and undervalued teachers. This incongruity is emphasised by the author’s own experiences of a British postgraduate teacher training course (PGCE), which since many teachers have the opportunity to do the course in the UK is becoming more popular in China. Searching for ways in which English teachers can make use of this experience in order to grow professionally is not easy since Chinese educational policy is about short-term, quick, cheap solutions, regardless of the opinions of teachers. Nonetheless, the author concludes the article by seeking and indeed offering solutions. Wang Ping’s article also illustrates that in today’s globalised world, many education systems share similar problems despite their completely different social and political conditions and education traditions. The articles by Gilbert S. Suzawa (USA) and Zuzana Petrová (SK) provide scope for more theoretical considerations, although still remaining within the context of education. They consider questions relating to the nature of knowledge and education. Gilbert S. Suzawa defends the hypothesis that, by its very principle, the search for knowledge always ends in a certain degree of ambiguity, and ambiguity is the essential property of all human knowledge, thus it is one that should be embraced by teachers when teaching students. In practice, education can be characterised rather differently. At best teachers tolerate ambiguity insofar as they do not try to eliminate it outright in their attempts to present unambiguous truths or afirmed knowledge. The aim of this article is to encourage the reader – particularly teachers – to relect on this kind of teaching and learning. Suzawa bases his arguments on an excursion into the development of the scientiic paradigm, starting with Aristotle, then moving on to current constructivist approaches to acquiring knowledge and variations on these, and inishing by contrasting a wide spectrum of different views of learning. There are always social goals at stake, though, and it is through these that we monitor learning. Successful learning is therefore subject to external criteria which relate to journal of pedagogy 2/2013 133 editorial the extent to which we are able to fulil public expectations, as has been demonstrated by ecological theories of learning. Ambiguity, he holds, has a key role in the educational process and in many theories of education, so long as it does not contradict them and can be incorporated into them. Whether the hypothesis is successfully defended, readers will have to judge for themselves. Insofar as the aim of the article was to encourage readers to relect on the processes of teaching and learning, the author’s arguments are certainly motivating and inspiring. Zuzana Petrová’s article is about one of the most inluential theories of learning – Vygotsky’s theory. She gives a brief but thorough overview of current interpretations of Vygotsky’s key concepts, which are still popular today and are a rich source of inspiration for educationalists working in research and teaching. Particular attention is paid to education practices, where the aim is to implement interactive and dialogic approaches to teaching and learning, which are becoming increasingly favoured in attempts to innovate in school education. Petrová’s article is of particular beneit in that her evaluation, which reveals many problem areas in the way that the theory is sometimes applied, is based on the work of Russian followers of Vygotsky, who continue to develop his legacy, which remains unclear and unexpanded in places. Both articles demonstrate that education theories can be a rich source of inspiration when solving the contemporary issues in schooling and society described in the other articles in this issue. What kind of image, then, do we have of “Pedagogy, Education and Society Today”? It would seem that the articles in this issue create an image that is, irst and foremost, both critical and critically relective. It is critical in its perceptions of schools and the problems they face, which originate in the outside world – the world of culture, society, its governing mechanisms, and governmental and ideological inluences. Those working in education are confronted with innovation, reform and the pressures of an education policy that opposes well-established traditions, which simpliies or devalues the nature and value of general education – in its desire, rather incongruously, to produce an “educated society”. The tension which is pinpointed in almost all the articles is not one found between pedagogic knowledge (as represented by academics) and practice (represented by experienced teachers). The obstacles encountered by both sides are, for the most part, the consequence of external policy-making, which ignores this knowledge or rejects it outright in favour of other educational goals. On the other hand, we cannot but observe that current pedagogy is both constructive and valuable. Besides bringing the required critical relection, which is of value in itself, since it identiies and deines the ills of the contemporary world, but it also indicates ways forward and offers theoretically grounded and empirically tested 134 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 pedagogy, education and Society today solutions. All that remains is to hope and trust that their voices, along with voices from all the other social science disciplines, which increasingly come together in fruitful interdisciplinary collaboration, will not be silenced but, on the contrary, will resound publically. Oľga Zápotočná journal of pedagogy 2/2013 135 articleS DOI 10.2478/jped-2013-0008 JoP 4 (2): The production of present and absent presences in education1 Anneli Frelin, Jan Grannäs Abstract: Drawing on the distinction between absent and present presences, this article contributes to our understanding of how new managerial and performative discourses are played out in a secondary school context in Sweden. The consequences of numerous educational reforms during the last 20 years include a surge of new independent schools and increased segregation between students due to individual school choice. Following international trends, a yearly national municipal school ranking is published, drawing much attention both in the media and on the policy level, intensifying pressure for results at the municipal level. A case study was conducted in one bottom-ranked Swedish secondary school over the 2012-13 school year, focusing on how relationships between students and staff were negotiated in informal spaces and places. The results illustrate how absent presences and present presences are produced in the practice of schooling. The present presences were publication of results, raising merit scores and grading pressure, and the absent presences were the role of the media in the self-image of schools, increased workload for teachers, the misuse of statistical data and demoralization and determination. The results contribute to the understanding of a) the challenges that teachers and schools are faced with as a consequence of the new managerial and performative discourses in educational settings, and b) the means they draw on to face and resist them in their everyday practices. Key words: absent presence, managerialism, performative, policy enactment, present presence 1 This work was supported by AFA Insurance, Sweden [grant number: Dnr 110145] as part of the research project Spaces in-between. Sustainable relationships as prevention against threats and violence. We would like to thank the anonymous reviewer for valuable comments and our language editor for careful editing. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 139 articleS Everyone is racing to the top! Nations, schools, politicians, policymakers, school leaders, teachers, parents and students are all participants in this race. Why are they doing this? The biggest threat, in these times of globalization, seems to be an economic one. Also, in order to combat the threat, and thereby win the race, it is suggested that the key is the best and most eficient educational system. But how do we know who the winner is? The answer to that question is by making comparisons. International comparisons are used as arguments for a surge of educational reforms across the world. On the one hand, the necessity for comparisons spurs demands to conform and measure practices and outcomes, and, on the other, requires transparency and accountability from those who work and study in schools. The demands for comparisons, articulated in part through the discourse of managerialism and performance, also require the reduction or reorganization of the complexities of everyday school life in order to produce measurable outcomes. These changes have pervasive consequences for education and for educational relationships. The purpose of this article is to contribute to the understanding of how new managerial and performative discourses are played out in a secondary school context. A case study was conducted in a secondary school over the 2012-13 school year, focusing on how relationships between students and staff were negotiated in informal spaces and places within a school setting but are not directly linked to the formal mission of the school. It illustrates how absent presences and present presences are produced in the practice of schooling and helps us to understand a) the challenges that teachers and schools are faced with as a consequence of the new managerial and performative discourses in educational settings, and b) the means they draw on to face and resist them in their everyday practices. From the Global to the National Neoliberal ideology has been very pervasive over the last 30 years. This has led to a massive reframing in society, and given greater importance to the new managerial discourse. Along with these neoliberal tendencies, neo-conservative ones are also in play, thus creating an odd combination of marketization and centralization of control (Apple, 2004, 2009; Kaščák & Pupala, 2011; Laitsch, 2013). Apple describes this as: “educational reforms that have centered around neoliberal commitments to the market and a supposedly weak state, neoconservative emphases on stronger control over curricula and values, and ‘new managerial’ proposals to install rigorous forms of accountability in schooling at all levels”(Apple, 2010, p. 175). The global language used to describe education has increasingly borrowed its rhetoric from the business world, for example the concepts of accountabi140 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the production of present and absent presences in education lity, eficiency and performance standards, as part of the economization of education (Hopmann, 2008; Lipman, 2009; Takayama, 2013; Taubman, 2009). The policy technologies upheld in order to conjure constant improvement in measurable performance are management, market and performativity, all of which are encoded in government legislation and policy documents (Ball, Maguire, & Braun, 2012). However, these do not take into account the dynamic, complex and political nature of the educational context. Today’s zeitgeist administrative displacements, such as new ideological, political or administrative ways of governing the educational system, have consequences for the educational system and for teachers’ work, and constitute challenges for professionals in educational arenas – at national and local levels, such as in school (Ball, 2004; Ball et al., 2012; Fransson & Grannäs, 2013; Furlong, Cochran-Smith, & Brennan, 2008). The dominant trend is for educational systems to be increasingly governed by “managerialism” – implying a kind of one-size-its-all, eficiency-oriented set of methods (Locke, 2009). Gewirtz and Ball (2000) describe two discourses of school headship as “new managerialism” and “welfarism”. The latter is connected to values such as social justice and compensatory practices, while the former connects to more instrumental values and a market logic. The aspiration to produce more eficient educational systems through a surge of reforms is accompanied by this managerial form of government, which serves a particular vision of education for global competition that is not always compatible with the public purposes of education, such as fostering democratic citizenship. This shift can be described as moving from an educational system serving the public good to one serving the private good (cf. Englund, 1994). Please see the section below entitled From the national to the local – the Swedish school system for further elaboration. Drawing on Apple (2010), it can be argued that the neo-liberal and neoconservative tendencies in society - operationalized by “the new managerial” and a rapidly emerging bureaucratic, technocratic managerial group – have contributed to a shift in the perception of democracy. This shift contains discourses that have opened a space within the state for that kind of expertise, including a constant need for audits, “evidence”, rationalization and standardization. A shift has taken place from a collectively driven “thick” democracy with an emphasis on the public sphere and common interests, to a more highly individualized and consumer-driven “thin” democracy (cf. Barber, 2003; Ranson, 2003). Based on the assumption that the educational arena is a market like any other, and can be organized by market logic, a commodiication of all levels in the educational system occurs (cf. Ball, 2004). In Ley’s words: “The facts suggest that marketjournal of pedagogy 2/2013 141 articleS driven politics can lead to a remarkably rapid erosion of democraticallydetermined collective values and institutions” (Leys, 2003, p. 4). This development means that the private sphere, which is based on competitive individualism, economic rationalities and economic relationships, grows at the expense of the public sphere. In turn, a society and culture prevail that do not rest on trust, solidarity and shared values to the same extent (Ball & Olmedo, 2013). Although countries differ in their responses to these developments, in many places the educational system has responded with an increased focus on national tests and other control features, where international comparisons like PISA are given signiicant attention (Bieber & Martens, 2011; Hopmann, 2008; Taubman, 2009). Hopmann argues that a one-sided “NCLBinduced”2 focus allows for the transformation of the apparent problems with equity and equality, minorities, special needs, gender, etc., into individualized liabilities whose impact on achievement has to be minimized, if not eradicated. (p. 441) The performative function of market-oriented language makes it hard for teachers to speak out and ‘make sense’ using concepts outside the managerial discourse (see, for example, Hoyle & Wallace, 2007; Mulcahy, 2010). It has also contributed to aligning education to the economy, in preference to other more social/democratic/ethical/and so forth purposes. One consequence of managerialism (including the language used, the incentives given and the allocation of economic resources) is that certain features will stand out, or “count” (see e.g. Apple, 2009; Kumashiro, 2008). Things that count include lessons, homework, testing, performance, policy documents, national tests and so forth. However, another consequence is that other things do not count, but become obscured. The core of accountability is narrowly focused on student achievement measured by “academic standards”. Other functions of schooling (such as the role school plays in local communities or in shaping society) are hardly mentioned. At the same time academic achievement is reduced to that which can be reported as “statistically valid and reliable”, leaving out any educational or social achievements which cannot be counted as required (Hopmann, 2008, pp. 429-430). 2 No Child Left Behind, NCLB, pertains to the Act passed in the US in 2002 that focused on testing and accountability, but at the same time opened up for marketization and privatization in education (Apple, 2007). 142 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the production of present and absent presences in education These are things that are impossible to address within the managerial discourse, but that can nevertheless inluence educational practices in profound ways. In this paper we aim to use concepts that highlight some of these consequences. The phenomena that are not included in the new managerial discourse and are pushed away are called absent presences (see also Apple, 1999). Consequently, the events that can and are allowed to occur become present presences (Frelin & Grannäs, 2011). As Ball et al. hold, policy is enacted rather than implemented. Policies are set within existing values, commitments and forms of experience; a process that is far from straightforward and rational and produces a number of social relations, positions, practices and performances, for example when schools are labelled as ‘outstanding’, ‘coasting’ or ‘failing’ in relation to the discourse of standards which represents a particular, and on the whole indisputable, vision of what schooling ought to be like (Ball et al., 2012). Thus, for schools it becomes imperative to solve the “policy problem of becoming a ‘good’ school” (p. 130), which in turn leads to efforts to evoke the ‘good’ teacher and ‘good’ student in a process of normalization. The opposite is also produced, however. Yates (2013) asks: what will prevent some students suffering the reputational and other consequences of being in schools measured as doing worse, when the benchmarking relativities built in to the approach (the ‘race’ to the top) entail that some schools have to be classiied as doing worse? (p. 46) The efforts and resources required to boost performance give varying results in schools. Some teachers are very diligent but only achieve modest results, mainly because socio-economic factors constitute an “active force” and not just a backdrop (Ball et al., 2012). Efforts to manage reputation, student intake and staff recruitment become increasingly important as political and emotional responses to external pressures become part of this context and as schools are characterized by precariousness. Furthermore, Ball et al. argue that the role of the material context, such as space and the condition of buildings, is an active factor in policy enactments (cf. Frelin & Grannäs, forthcoming). Even though there are ongoing negotiations, translations and transformations within policy enactment, the policy pressure is not equally distributed. The schools, or in some cases subject departments, that perform well in tests and inspections have considerably more autonomy in relation to policy initiatives, so-called “earned autonomy”. In other cases, and increasingly, policy is being enforced through practices such as lesson observations and other forms of surveillance (Ball et al., 2012; Lipman, 2010). journal of pedagogy 2/2013 143 articleS Consequences for Teachers Teachers and other professionals who work with people are responsible for other people and expected to fulil their professional duties according to laws, policy documents, guidelines and other types of directives. In many countries teachers perceive decreased respect for teachers, which relates to the neo-conservative discourse and an emerging consumer attitude to education, where teachers are blamed for student failure (Müller et al., 2011). However, policy enactments serving the managerial discourse can also be challenged by counter-discourses, some residing in the common histories of the staff, which serve to criticize the new policy (Ball et al., 2012; Ball & Olmedo, 2013). These require spaces for enunciation, though, and the consequences of, for example, work overload make time for relection and critique scarce: “there is a lack of space for ‘other’ discourses, the historic archive of ‘democratic’ or ‘inclusive’ teaching is always in danger of erasure” (Ball et al., 2012, p. 68). Resistance at the discursive level also means questioning oneself and “the obviousness of things” (Ball & Olmedo, 2013, p. 90). Spaces for negotiation and contestation of policy are for the most part occupied by responsibility and necessity as teachers strive to do the best they can in an environment of increasingly competitive performativity. Ball et al. argue that the immanent tensions between the interests of students and the interests of the school sometimes make teachers uncomfortable “as they measure and compare their students and seek to extract ‘productivity’ gains from them” (p. 73), and that the role of psychosocial and affective dynamics have not been given suficient attention (cf. Hargreaves, 2000; Zembylas, 2003). Testing and competition tend not only to produce incentives and individualism, but also stress, frustration, discouragement, depression and demoralization for teachers as well as students (Ball & Olmedo, 2013; Yates, 2013). The focus of teachers’ work is steered towards improving performance, or rather, some performances. According to Ball et al. (2012), the increased use of artefacts, such as software systems for data production and analysis, is also a key element in enactments of policy which takes up teachers’ time, attention and effort. They argue that since teachers are “working their socks off” (p. 95), they direct their energies towards coping and keeping up, which decreases the possibilities for systematically relecting on the contradictions embedded in their tasks, or on the wider consequences for their students. The teacher subjectivity that is produced through policy is colonized by institutional priorities even in the most immediate interactions with students, “deined more by responsiveness than principle, pragmatism rather than relection, action rather than judgment” (p. 96). In our case study schools, this subjectivity 144 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the production of present and absent presences in education was ubiquitous and any critical thinking or resistance in the light of other and prior discourses was rare and leeting. Another consequence is that the increased time spent monitoring and recording students’ work limits the opportunities to interact with students and colleagues. Gewirtz (1997) termed this a “decline in the sociability of teaching” (p 230). Close relationships with students tends to be a central aspect for teachers across nations, particularly for students who are not doing well academically (Davidson, 1999; Frelin, 2013; Grannäs, 2011; Oreshkina & Greenberg, 2011). As building and sustaining relationships with students takes an investment of time (cf. Oreshkina & Greenberg, 2011), the colonization of time may cause more harm to those who need it most. Moreover, as the relational basis of a school organization promotes the achievement of academic results, severing this in the name of narrow performative academic purposes can be counterproductive (cf. Bingham & Sidorkin, 2004; Lingard, Hayes & Mills, 2003). From the National to the Local – the Swedish School System Even Sweden, which has a highly developed welfare state, has increasingly been drawn into neoliberal-oriented trends in recent decades. Broadly, the Swedish development can be described as consisting of two major trends. One trend involves radical organizational reforms at various levels of Swedish society aimed at eficient education, inspired by New Public Management (see e.g. Blomqvist & Rothstein, 2008; Bottery & Barnett, 1996), decentralization and, vital to the school system, the establishment of independent schools. The other trend involves the introduction of a new system with a focus on accountability and an emphasis on evaluating student achievement (Bunar, 2008; Englund, 1994, 2010). According to Beach and Sernhede (2011): This tendency is also clearly recognizable in the educational systems in these countries, such as in Sweden, where educational consumerism and individualism have replaced comprehensiveness and inclusion as capstones of recent developments. A number of elements have been involved. They include the introduction of open enrolment, per capita funding and deregulated admission procedures that encourage schools to compete for student enrolments and parents and students to act as consumers of education with the possibilities of free choice. (p. 258) Recent studies on the effects of this “freedom of choice reform” show that middle-class Swedish families beneit most from the reforms. Other journal of pedagogy 2/2013 145 articleS community groups, such as the working class and immigrant groups, have not beneited to the same extent. In Sweden, it is now clear that the neoliberal-inspired reforms introduced in the last 20 years have contributed to the rapidly increasing segregation of society as a whole, and the school system in particular (Beach & Sernhede, 2011; Bunar, 2008; Skolverket, 2012). Or, as Beach and Sernhede put it: “Students with predicted higher test scores are now more valuable to schools while pupils with predicted lower test scores and with more complex learning needs, such as working-class and ethnically different pupils, have become less useful to the school’s place in the market” (Beach & Sernhede, 2011, p. 259; cf. Minarechová, 2012). Ball et al. (2012) depict a delivery chain from the global to the individual, where pressures to perform are passed down through the system. When adapted to the Swedish system, the delivery chain looks like this: Figure 1: The delivery chain. Source: adapted from Ball et. al, 2012 Different levels have been added by us for the purpose of clarity. Twentyive years ago almost all Swedish teachers were employed by the state, but the schools they worked in were run by the municipalities. Two reforms changed this situation. First, the municipalities assumed responsibility for 146 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the production of present and absent presences in education teachers’ employment, and second, a school choice reform paved the way for privately run but publicly inanced schools, thereby forming a ‘quasi-market’ (cf. Wilkins, 2012). The latter has resulted in an explosion of so-called independent schools over the last two decades, and now as many as 40% of upper secondary schools are independent. Recent studies have raised concerns about the increased segregation and inequality of results among students. A study undertaken by Bejerot covering over 3,000 teachers and headteachers indicates that over the last 20 years there has been a radical increase in teachers’ workload and a marked decrease in inluence and support. For example, 60% of teachers report that they often work during their lunch breaks, of an evening and at weekends (Bejerot, 2013). There are also strong indications of increasing grade inlation. The National Agency of Education states that: “Grades express the extent to which the individual pupil has attained the national knowledge requirements laid down for different subjects” (Skolverket, 2011, p. 19). Students who do not achieve pass grades in at least eight subjects are not eligible for national upper secondary school programmes. This policy exerts a strong inluence on secondary school teachers’ work, which is directed towards helping students to pass (Wedin, 2007). The National Agency of Education (2012, p. 387) draws the conclusion that “the increased competition between schools, in combination with pressure from students and parents, and expectations from local management creates stronger incitements for grade inlation” (p. 2). Method This paper presents results from a research project that set out to explore the relational interplay between school personnel and students and its functions and complexity in the secondary school context. The study is explorative and generative. Studying a complex phenomenon requires an open approach that allows for a number of different variables. The choice of method, in this case a case study, is designed to acquire a deeper understanding of the complex relational processes that develop over time (Creswell, 2009; Yin, 2003). In Sweden, students aged 13-15 years attend compulsory secondary school, after which most apply to a non-compulsory upper secondary school programme, some of which are college preparatory and some vocational. Secondary schools are thus the last stage at which students are placed in heterogeneous groups. The primary focus of the study is relationships between students and staff and the ways in which these are negotiated in informal spaces and places within a school setting but are not directly linked to the formal mission of the school. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 147 articleS A year-long case study was conducted during the 2012-13 school year at a secondary school that had recently been renovated and was working to improve its environment. Multiple data sources were used, including document analysis, mapping, contextual observations and interviews. Oficial statistics, newspaper articles and school quality reports were used to contextualize the case (Creswell, 2009). The quantitative data was retrieved from the databases of the National Agency of Education with a view to contributing to a deeper contextualization of the case school and triangulating the data. The analysis of documents, interviews and newspaper articles is based on a thematic analysis (Boyatzis, 1998; Braun & Clarke, 2006). The actual work of processing, analyzing and interpreting the material was conducted using Atlas.ti software through coding, linkages and memos. The thematic analysis involved close readings, back and forth, of transcripts and documents. Furthermore, in the analysis we looked for similarities and differences, with a particular focus on how teachers deal with the consequences of policy and new managerial languages and practices. During the analysis process notes were made in support of the ongoing analysis, together with relections on the theoretical framework. The thematic analysis was continuously performed at two levels: one to analyze that which is directly visible (explicit), and the second to analyze the underlying latent meanings (implicit) (Boyatzis, 1998; Braun & Clarke, 2006). The purpose of the case study presented in this article is to contribute to the understanding of how absent presences and present presences are produced in the secondary school context. The Production of Present and Absent Presences The case study school, Tallvik, is a secondary school located in the small industrial town of Bruksta, in Sweden, and is one of two secondary schools in the municipality. The other is an independent school. Students attend Years 6-9 (12-15 yrs of age) and each year level has two or three classes consisting of about 20-30 students, with a total of around 200 students. The school was built in the 1960s. In 2009 major renovations were carried out, which were much needed as the school had not been very well maintained. The current principal was formerly a student at the school and is therefore well connected to the local community. The staff members are experienced and the numbers have remained more or less stable over time. The school has several long-standing traditions, including putting on shows at Christmas, and having a well-respected and inluential Student Council. Around ten years ago, an independent school was established in the municipality, which attracted large numbers of high SES (Socio-Economical Status) stu148 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the production of present and absent presences in education dents, for the most part in line with national trends (Skolverket, 2012). This was one of the reasons for the drop in the number of students at Tallvik, which originally had twice as many students as it does today. In order to address the consequences of the managerial discourse, the presentation of the results is divided into events that are made visible or invisible in this discourse, that is, present presences or absent presences (see above). Publication of Results (Present Presence) The national ranking of education in municipalities3 is largely based on students’ results, but also on factors such as teacher competence and salaries. Ranking receives great media attention, and in 2012 Bruksta was among the municipalities to come at the very bottom of the list. One factor that contributed to the ranking and received the most attention at municipal level was the students’ low merit scores (based on their grade point averages). The Role of the Media in the Self-Image (Absent Presence) The interviews with the staff and the students indicate the importance of societal expectations and inluences. The image of the school in newspaper articles impacts the surrounding society’s expectations of the students and school staff, because the way the teachers at Tallvik describe themselves and their school aligns with the media image. At all levels of the local education system, i.e., from the Chief Education Ofice to the students at the school, there is awareness of a variety of problems; an image that is mirrored in the media. While the oficial categorization of schools as outstanding or failing is important within the managerial discourse (present presence), the response among the teachers and students to this image constitutes an absent presence, as it is not part of this discourse. A social studies teacher and head of subject, Lisa, says this about the media image of Tallvik: Mmm, we experienced that as something negative. It seemed harsh, we were hard pressed … but that was some time ago. The journalists had produced igures from 2008 or 2009, or something like that, irst nationally and then locally. We had poor scores then, and the journalist came down here … to the cor3 http://www.lararforbundet.se/web/ws.nsf/webbIndexsida?ReadForm&index=04978 08B2ABF6128C12572C80033F58F journal of pedagogy 2/2013 149 articleS ridor and made the mistake of interviewing the students in my class without permission from the school or parents. She asked them why the results were so bad, and referred to something that had happened three years ago. She talked to the students and almost assumed that the present-day students also had bad grades, because she then went on to ask: Why is it that your results are so bad? When I added up the results from all the schools in the area, they had the same scores. But that wasn’t news. No, the media just focused on one school and said it was below par. You can see why we don’t have a positive image of the mass media. According to several teachers, the bad press, which is a recurring topic of discussion, serves to drain them of energy, and in addition reinforces students’ negative images of themselves and their school. There are additional reasons for the perceived unfairness of the media coverage, as is indicated below. Raising Merit Scores (Present Presence) The pressure for improved results is implicitly present in for example meetings between municipal oficials and teachers’ union representatives. The renovations at the school facilities were costly, and due to expansion of the independent school there were fewer students at Tallvik than had been anticipated when the renovations were carried out. The school’s high maintenance costs were pointed out at meetings, and Lisa sensed that because the municipality had invested so much they also expected the merit scores to rise, despite the fact that the higher costs were largely out of the teachers’ control. The municipality’s Chief Education Oficer was the principal at Tallvik three years ago (2010). At the time she presented the then recently published low merit scores to the teachers in the following way: We took a real dive … I just had to bang my ist on the table: This is not good enough. So everyone realized that there was only one way forward, and that was to shape up. Everybody was aware of it. It was so obvious: This just doesn’t ly, this is not good enough. It was such a clear message. 150 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the production of present and absent presences in education The pressure to raise the merit scores resulted in several practices, including revision classes during the holidays and help with homework after school (cf. Ball et al., 2012; Minarechová, 2012). The former principal started to audit teachers’ lessons on a regular basis; a practice she lamented that her successor had not kept up. A key reason the current principal had not pursued this path was because she spent a substantial part of her time on issues pertaining to health, social conditions and student welfare. Another practice that the former principal launched was the implementation of charts to identify and visualize “target students”, i.e. those who were in the ‘risk zone’ of failing in one or more subjects. Teachers were instructed to put an X (a fail-warning) for their subject on the class lists in the staff room and to repeat this each month. This practice required teachers to analyze their documentation and to make continuous judgements as to whether to give fail-warnings to their students or not. As the science teacher, Göran, suggested, he would rather give too many warnings than too few, because he did not want to risk missing students who might fail. Increased Workload for Teachers (Absent Presence) The monthly practice of documenting fail warnings was additional to the other work tasks and was later extended. The teachers were also asked to write monthly performance statements for each target student, which took them several hours each time. As teachers’ workload is already extremely high due to the increased demands for documentation, which can be regarded as present presences (see the national studies referenced above), they had little choice but to cut down on other tasks, often against their professional judgement. For example, Göran argued that the increased documentation affected his lesson planning negatively, which meant that his lessons were not as well planned and interesting as before. This naturally disadvantaged his students’ learning. Grading Pressure (Present Presence) Bruksta, the town in which Tallvik is located, is unique in terms of the proportion of attendance at independent schools, which is one of the highest in the country. One consequence of the increasing inluence of managerialism, and the subsequent demand for performance, is that the data is increasingly quantitative. This data formed the basis for many discussions in the municipality about the reasons for the poor merit scores, for which the teachers were held accountable. Lisa and the current principal argued that one reason for the low merit scores was due to teachers being journal of pedagogy 2/2013 151 articleS careful to avoid grade inlation and making concerted efforts to give accurate grades, which was in part supported by an investigation into the schools in the region by a local newspaper.4 The data indicated that students in the region who progressed from secondary school to upper secondary school often had a signiicant drop in their grades. This was particularly true for some schools, whereas students from Tallvik were able to maintain their grades. Lisa said that: “the situation is remarkable, if I pass my students, no one questions my grading. But if I fail them, then I am questioned.” This argument was mentioned by several of the teachers. Problems With Statistical Data (Absent Presence) Statistical evidence can easily be interpreted in misleading ways, because the samples in small municipalities are limited.The scores ofonly a few students can dramatically lower or raise the municipality’s merit score averages. Lisa, the social science teacher, remarked: Competition means the results hit us hard … One or two students in the statistics for us is… it is so awful I tell you, because we have got a few new students in the ninth grade who have not attended school regularly in years, and have big problems. That is two out of our ifty, and already we know: Ouch, we’re going to be in the newspaper again, because our scores went down again. With only around 50 students per grade level, the results can vary dramatically from year to year, as the table below illustrates. Tables 1, 2 and 3 show the percentage of students attaining the goals in all subjects (Table 1, the total number, Table 2, girls, Table 3, boys). The bottom graph illustrates the results at Tallvik during the years 2008-2012, while the one above shows the results of the municipality in total. The black horizontal graph shows the national average. 4 The name of the newspaper has been omitted for reasons of conidentiality, in line with national ethical guidelines. 152 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the production of present and absent presences in education Table 1, 2, 3 Percentage (%) of students who passed in all subjects In total Girls Boys School Municipality, Tallvik Municipality, Tallvik and Independent school Category of Municipalities (similar) Nation Figure 2: Variations in results at school and municipal levels Source: SIRIS, the Swedish National Agency for Education’s online information system. [http://siris.skolverket.se/siris/f?p=SIRIS:33:0] The dramatic variance between the years, which is absent at the national level, illustrates the problem of assigning any great importance to this annual statistic at the municipal level. Demoralization and Determination (Absent Presence) In parallel to the study conducted by Ball et al (2012), the neglect of socioemotional factors, such as frustration, discouragement and demoralization in policy enactment, is evident in our results, as the pressure created on the way from the top to the bottom of the delivery chain hits staff and students. Peter, a teacher, argued: We hear all the time that we have to improve, and that can get dangerous, I have brought this up. Because at some point you have to get the sense that the work you do is good, even if the results are bad. People work and work, we really do most of us, and then you get: Yes, but you have to improve. Interviewer: Who says so? Peter: Those from above Interviewer: From above where? Peter: Well, politicians. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 153 articleS The pressure from local politicians and management is to some extent perceived as unfair. Lisa asked herself whether she had become so much worse in her 30 years of teaching, or whether there were other parameters in the equation. She reached the conclusion that there had to be. Peter said that teachers at the school were very competent and experienced, but that: Somewhere you have to look at other factors, and not just the teachers, throw dirt at us. Because we are battered, as soon as, every year when there are bad results, then we at Tallvik carry the blame. The students come from other schools too, but it is here when they get grades that we take the hit, of course you get beat up in the end. Despite the fact that you work yourself to death, because I argue that most of us do. … In ifth grade 50% passed and in ninth grade almost 80% passed, you have to look at it that way too. We raised the results by almost 30% but you don’t get anything for that, they just look at the end results and by God that is so bad. Of course you get beat up, you want to do a good job. You want to feel: Damn it Peter, you did good there! The principal said that she had tried to counteract this pressure on teachers from the municipal level by repeatedly pointing to positive trends in the school and by praising her teachers. This was also because she experienced how some, particularly ambitious and excellent teachers, tried to avoid criticism and started to look for jobs at other schools where they could more easily attain the visible reinforcement of doing a good job in the form of good student grades. However, a different but equally unintended consequence of the pressure to produce results is an increased loyalty and determination among the staff. The common “we” emerges very strongly in relation to the perceived unfair competition from the independent school and the intensiied pressure for results from above. From Absent to Present - Evoking Educational Relations into Presence The staff grapple with the new managerial discourse as they enact policy, which often involves creatively dealing with irreconcilable discourses. At Tallvik, the new managerial discourse rubs up against the longstanding welfarist tradition of Swedish education, which emphasizes fostering democratic citizenship and a communal spirit; a discourse that is very much alive among the staff. The welfarist/democratic discourse emerges in the inter154 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the production of present and absent presences in education views, but also in the relations fostered in the common areas of the school, where staff make a habit of greeting students and chatting informally with them. Developing personalized relationships is something that teachers perceive as one of their tasks. Sven, for example, argued that the relationships that he built outside the classroom helped him do his job: The kids, they are central to the school. In terms of time, the time I give them in the corridor and what they give me in return, it all comes back to me during lessons. If we share a relationship, we talk and I listen … then they’d rather not make trouble during classes either. So we save time. It’s the same in the school cafeteria, it’s fun to sit with the kids there, although there are some who … we often sit together with. Who think, well, they have found someone who can listen. This is also apparent in several of the services the school provides, such as the student welfare team and the student welfare duties that are part of staff job descriptions, such as the school host and the café host.5 However, these positions tend to come under threat in times of austerity, despite the value that the staff and students assign to them. The pressure to raise merit scores that resulted in the identiication of target students and failing warnings also produced an interesting initiative when the current principal asked for suggestions as to how to help these target students. One suggestion was to pair each student with a “coach”, someone other than the grading teacher and who had a positive relationship to the student in question. The task of the coach was to connect personally with the student and support her or him in aiming to achieve a pass grade. This practice constitutes a conlation of new managerial and welfarist/democratic discourses, in several intriguing ways. First, the main basis of the coach-relationship is the perceived quality of the teacher-student relationship, rather than subject-matter knowledge, which involves evoking relational qualities that are either perceived as taken for granted or as unimportant within new managerial practices and language (cf. Frelin, 2013). Second, the teachers volunteered to coach these students without further remuneration, which added to their already intense workload. Third, the teachers used tools from their welfarist/democratic discourse toolbox. The ultimate purpose of these coach-relationships 5 The school host has a special responsibility for students’ interaction in the common areas, and runs a café in the main hall together with the café host. They are also available for the students and offer help with practical matters. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 155 articleS was to meet the demands of the new managerial discourse. And fourth, concurrently, these relationships, which beneited the students, could constitute means for other public/democratic ends. The fact that the public/democratic discourse is evoked can be viewed as a movement from the bottom up to enact policy in a way that either conforms with, counteracts, transforms or negotiates the delivery chain of the managerial discourse. It also makes absent presences present, at least at school level, which entails negotiating personal costs and professional values, responsibility and/or well-being. Furthermore, it can be viewed as creating and/or preserving educational spaces for the public good. Discussion The results show how the policy pressure created in the delivery chain plays out at local levels, from municipal directives to teacher-student relationships and the experiences of the teacher (cf. Ball et al., 2012). The new managerial discourse steers the focus of the schooling towards “knowledge” result measures, which are present presences within the discourse. In a rapidly growing audit culture, comparisons in the form of league tables and merit scores published by the media are means through which the presence is established. The carriers of this discourse hold teachers and students individually accountable for factors that are not entirely within their control, such as marginalization and segregation due to the school choice reform, which have become absent presences within this discourse (cf. Beach & Sernhede, 2011). These factors are instead structurally inluenced; this is something that has been neglected. However, lately a number of reports pointing to the relation between poor results and increased segregation have had an impact in the media and on the public debate, which can be viewed as a move initialising the shift from absent to present presence. The teachers at Tallvik, who are subjected to such blaming and shaming, describe their feelings of demoralization. The mechanical delivery chain and the blame game may also exacerbate segregation and inequality as competent teachers move to other schools in order to preserve their professional self-image. In the cognitive framework of measurement, such feelings are largely treated as absent presences because they are not given any value or signiicance. However, several practices of resistance towards the municipal management are set in play by both the teachers and the principal. Evoking the welfarist/democratic counter-discourse, residing in the common history of the school and the town, the principal highlights values that are absent presences within the new managerial discourse, such as the work of the Student 156 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the production of present and absent presences in education Council and the experience and hard work of the teachers (cf. Apple, 2010). Several teachers in the study talked about the unfairness that the scores represented, thus questioning the “obviousness” of the new managerial and performative discourse (cf. Ball et al., 2012). The results also show how policy enactment takes place through teachers’ grappling with the consequences of the new managerial discourse and how these impose on the welfarist/democratic discourses. Even though the directives that are passed down the delivery chain may be more or less imperative, the policy enactments may still retain elements of the welfarist/ democratic discourse as absent presences. One example is the coach-relationships that were formed that built on qualities in the teacher-student relationship beyond the subject matter (Frelin & Grannäs, accepted). A shift has taken place in which schools move from compensation to competition. This entails a change of emphasis from the best of the student to the best of the school, objectives that are sometimes in tension – a tension that teachers are left to contend with. Teachers grappling with the intention to serve the best interests of the students and the best interests of the school at the same time often encounter a personal cost, such as working against one’s professional judgement and the resulting intensiication and overload of work, especially as these are absent presences within a managerial discourse aiming at standardization and eficiency. The practices of promoting student well-being and democratic inluence are viewed by teachers as ends in themselves and as preconditions for student attainment. At the management level, these practices are viewed as hindering the very same attainment. This is an example of how practices at school level become absent presences at the management level. Conclusions Absent presences are phenomena that are pushed away and exist outside the new managerial discourse, whereas those that can and are allowed to occur become present presences (Frelin & Grannäs, 2011). In this article we have shown how the notion of absent and present presences achieves several things: it irst of all acknowledges the presence and signiicance of important but neglected processes in educational settings, and secondly highlights the practices by which they are marginalized. It also shows how counter-hegemonic moves, such as strengthening the role of the Student Council, can evoke counter-discourses, such as the welfarist/democratic one. Finally, let us return to the question of the race to the top by asking who is at the top? The irony of the measures taken to overcome the ‘fact’ that ‘we (countries) are all left behind’ is that they backire when they contribute to journal of pedagogy 2/2013 157 articleS an increased regime of accountability and an audit culture. However, the phenomena that we consider to be produced as absent presences – involving the fundamentally important public democratic deliberation of the purposes of education – prevent schools from ending up with more people being left behind, rather than fewer. R e fe re n c e s Apple, M. W. (1999). The absent presence of race in educational reform. Race, Ethnicity & Education, 2(1), 9. Apple, M. W. (2004). Controlling the work of teachers. In D. J. Flinders & S. J. Thornton (Eds.), The curriculum studies reader (pp. 183-197). New York: N.Y.: Routledge Falmer. Apple, M. W. (2007). Ideological success, educational failure?: On the politics of No Child Left Behind. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(2), 108-116. Apple, M. W. (2009). Some ideas on interrupting the right: On doing critical educational work in conservative times. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(87), 87-101. Apple, M. W. (2010). The measure of success: Education, markets, and an audit culture. In T. Monahan & R. D. Torres (Eds.), Schools under surveillance - Cultures of control in public education (pp. 175-193). Rutgers University Press. Ball, S. J. (2004). Education for sale! The commodiication of everything? Annual Education Lecture, Department of Education and Professional Studies, King’s College London, University of London. Retrieved September 16, 2013 from http:// irgoa.usc.es/drupal/node/25448. Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy: Policy enactments in secondary schools. London & New York: Routledge. Ball, S. J., & Olmedo, A. (2013). Care of the self, resistance and subjectivitiy under neoliberal governmentalities. Critical Studies in Education, 54(1), 85-96. Barber, B. R. (2003). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age (Twentieth-anniversary ed.). Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press. Beach, D., & Sernhede, O. (2011). From learning to labour to learning for marginality: School segregation and marginalization in Swedish suburbs. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 32(2), 257 - 274. Bejerot, E. (2013) Professioner i fokus. Fakta om professioners arbetsvillkor: Diagram om lärare. [Professions in focus. Facts on professions’ work conditions. Diagrams on teachers.] Retreived September 16, 2013, from Stockholm University website: http:// www.pifokus.se/larare/diagram#cT1HNTEmcD1BMiZvPTAsMSwyLDMsNA Bieber, T. , & Martens, K. (2011). The OECD PISA study as a soft power in education? European Journal of Education, 46(1), 101-116. Bingham, C., & Sidorkin, A. M. (2004). The pedagogy of relation: An introduction. In C. Bingham & A. M. Sidorkin (Eds.), No education without relation. New York: P. Lang. Blomqvist, P., & Rothstein, B. (2008). Välfärdsstatens nya ansikte: demokrati och marknadsreformer inom den offentliga sektorn ([Ny utg.] ed.). Stockholm: Agora. 158 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the production of present and absent presences in education Bottery, M., & Barnett, R. (1996). The challenge to professionals from the New Public Management: Implications for the teaching. Oxford Review of Education, 22(2), 179. Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code development. London; Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. Bunar, N. (2008). The free schools “riddle”: Between traditional social democratic, neo-liberal and multicultural tenets. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 52(4), 423-438. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage. Davidson, A. Locke. (1999). Negotiating social differences: Youths’ assessments of educators’ strategies. Urban Education, 34(3), 338-369. Englund, T. (1994). Education as a citizenship right-a concept in transition: Sweden related to other Western democracies and political philosophy 1. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 26(4), 383-399. Englund, T. (2010). Questioning the parental right to educational authority – arguments for a pluralist public education system. Education Inquiry, 1(3), 235-258. Fransson, G., & Grannäs, J. (2013). Dilemmatic spaces in teachers work - Towards a conceptual framework for dilemmas in teachers work. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 19(1), 4-17. Frelin, A. (2013). Exploring Teachers’ Relational Professionalism in Schools. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Frelin, A., & Grannäs, J. (2011). Questioning the modern conception of time - The Politics of complexity reduction in education. Paper presented at the AERA, New Orleans. Frelin, A., & Grannäs, J. (forthcoming). Navigating middle ground. A spatial perspective on the borderlands of teacher-student relationships in secondary school. In D. B. Zandvliet & M. T. Mainhard (Eds.), Interpersonal relationships in education: From theory to practice Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Frelin, A., & Grannäs, J. (accepted). Direct and indirect educational relationships: The varying signiicance of content in school relationships. Paper to be presented at the 2013 AARE conference, Adelaide, Australia. Furlong, J., Cochran-Smith, M., & Brennan, M. (2008). Editorial. Teachers and teaching: Theory and practice, 14(4), 265-269. Gewirtz, S. (1997). Post-welfarism and the reconstruction of teachers’ work in the UK. Journal of Education Policy, 12(4), 217-231. Gewirtz, S., & Ball, S. (2000) From ‘welfarism’ to ‘new managerialism ’: Shifting discourses of school headship in the education marketplace. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 21(3), 253-268. Grannäs, J. (2011). Framtidens demokratiska medborgare: Om ungdomar, medborgarskap och demokratifostran i svensk skola. (Doktorsavhandling), Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala. Hargreaves, A. (2000). Mixed emotions: teachers’ perceptions of their interactions with students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(8), 811. Hopmann, S. T. (2008). No child, no school, no state left behind: schooling in the age of accountability. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40(4), 417-456. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 159 articleS Hoyle, E., & Wallace, M. (2007). Beyond metaphors of management: The case for metaphoric re-description in education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 55(4), 426-442. Kaščák, O., & Pupala, B. (2011). Governmentality – neoliberalism – education: The risk perspective. Journal of Pedagogy, 2(2), 145-160. Kumashiro, K. K. (2008). The seduction of common sense: How the right has framed the debate on America’s schools. New York Teachers College Press. Laitsch, D. (2013). Smacked by the invisible hand: The wrong debate at the wrong time with the wrong people. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(1), 16-27. Leys, C. (2003). Market-driven politics: Neoliberal democracy and the public interest. New York: Verso. Lingard, B., Hayes, D., & Mills, M. (2003). Teachers and productive pedagogies: Contextualising, conceptualising, utilising. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 11(3), 399-424. Lipman, P. (2009). Beyond accountability: Toward schools that create new people for a new way of life. In A. Darder, M. Baltodano & R. Torres (Eds.), The critical pedagogy reader (pp. 364-383). New York, London: Routledge. Lipman, P. (2010). Politics by other means - Education, accountability and the surveillance state. In T. Monahan & R. D. Torres (Eds.), Schools under surveillance - Cultures of control in public education (pp. 159-174). New Brunswick, New Jersey, and London: Rutgers University Press. Locke, R. R. (2009). Managerialism and the demise of the Big Three. Real-world Economics Review, 51(1), 28-47. Minarechová, M. (2012). Negative impacts of high-stakes testing. Journal of Pedagogy, 3(1), 82-100. Mulcahy, D. (2010). Assembling the ‘accomplished’ teacher: The performativity and politics of professional teaching standards. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43 (1), 94-113. Müller, J., Norrie, C., Hernández, F., Sancho, J. M., Creus, A., & Larraín, V. (2011). European school teachers’ work and life under restructuring: Professional experiences, knowledge and expertise in changing contexts. In I. F. Goodson & S. Lindblad (Eds.), Professional knowledge and educational restructuring in Europe (pp. 65-80). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. NAfE. (2012). Betygsinlation - betygen och den faktiska kunskapsutvecklingen. [Grade inlation – grades and the actual knowledge development.] (Dnr 2012:387). Oreshkina, M., & Greenberg, K. (2011). Teacher-student relationships: The meaning of teachers’ experience working with underachieving students. Journal of Pedagogy, 1(2), 52-66. Ranson, S. (2003). Public accountability in the age of neo-liberal governance. Journal of Education Policy, 18 (5), 459-480. Skolverket. (2011). Curriculum for the compulsory school system, the pre-school class and the leisure-time centre 2011. Stockholm: Swedish National Agency for Education. Skolverket. (2012). Likvärdig utbildning i svensk grundskola?: en kvantitativ analys av likvärdighet över tid. Stockholm: Skolverket. Takayama, K. (2013). OECD, ‘Key competencies’ and the new challenges of educational inequality. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(1), 67-80. 160 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the production of present and absent presences in education Taubman, P. M. (2009). Teaching by numbers : deconstructing the discourse of standards and accountability in education. New York: Routledge. Wedin, A-S.. (2007). Lärares arbete och kunskapsbildning. Utmaningar och inviter i den vardagliga praktiken [Teacher’s work and knowledge creation. Challenges and contextual invitations in everyday practice]. Diss. Linköping: Institutionen för beteendevetenskap och lärande Linköpings universitet. Wilkins, A. (2012). Pedagogy of the consumer: The politics of neo-liberal welfare reform. Journal of Pedagogy, 3(2), 161-173. Yates, L. (2013). Revisiting curriculum, the numbers game and the inequality problem. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(1), 39-51. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: design and methods (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Zembylas, M. (2003). Emotions and Teacher Identity: A poststructural perspective. Teachers and Teaching, 9(3), 213-238. Author: anneli frelin, ph.d. university of gävle faculty of education and Business Studies 801 76 gävle Sweden email: [email protected] jan grannäs, ph.d. university of gävle faculty of education and Business Studies 801 76 gävle Sweden email: [email protected] journal of pedagogy 2/2013 161 articleS DOI 10.2478/jped-2013-0009 JoP 4 (2): Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics Metka Mencin Čeplak Abstract: This article analyzes discomfort about sexuality expressed in formal education. It draws on Foucault’s analysis of sexuality as a privileged object of biopolitics (the object of regulation, surveillance, and discipline) and the most instrumentalized element in power relations in the Western world. Related to this is also the pedagogization of child sexuality, which even today is still characterized by ambiguities and discomfort. The author concludes that silence about non-hetero-sexualities and the biomedicalization and physicalization of (homo)sexuality are the most common and obvious symptoms of discomfort about (homo)sexuality in Slovenian schools. These manners of treating sexuality are usually interpreted as neutral, but the author interprets them as strategies of conlict avoidance which in fact support a heteronormative social order and (implicitly or explicitly) even legitimize the exclusion of all who cross the boundaries of ‘normal heterosexuality’. They strengthen prejudice, motivate ignorance, and can even be used as an excuse for violence. The article points out that education does not provide a magic formula since it cannot foresee its own effects due to the complexity of social relations and the nature of the education process (e.g. Millot, 1983). Key words: sexuality, gender / sexual norms, heteronormativity, discomfort, school, education Introduction Sexuality is placed “at the pivot of the two axes along which developed the entire political technology of life” (Foucault, 1978, p. 145): disciplining of the body and regulating of the population. As Foucault (1978) points out, disciplining of the body and regulating of the population are the primary axes along which a new form of control was exerted in western societies from the end of the 18th century on: power over life. From that time on sexua162 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics lity has been the most instrumentalized element in power relations in the Western world (1978, p. 103), the privileged object of biopolitics, therefore the object of regulation, surveillance, and discipline. Birth control, political control and economic regulation through moralization: organization of the “conventional” family and juridical and medical control of “perversions” and “perverts” are the mechanisms that have been used since then in the name of “a general protection of society and the race” (1978, p. 122), of the biological existence of a population. The technology of power that at irst was focused on alliance, i.e. on a system of marriage, kinship ties, of transmission of names and possessions, also spread to “sexuality”, i.e. desires and all other “insinuations of the lesh” (Foucault, 1978, p. 19). It is just this deployment of sexuality that “engenders a continual extension of areas and forms of control” (1978, p. 106). While the severity of the codes relating to sexual offenses diminished considerably in the 19th century, agencies of control and mechanisms of surveillance multiplied. Scientia sexualis, as Foucault calls procedures for producing the “truths” of sex(uality), characteristic of Western civilization from the end of the 18th century onward, with its diagnostic, prognostic and normative knowledge, establishes standards of “(ab)normality”, among which a special place is occupied by the distinction between “natural” (“regular”) (which are not always so) and “unnatural” (“peripheral”) sexualities. Namely, according to Foucault, before the end of the 18th century “unnatural” was only perceived as a form of “acts against the law”. The “service” of Scientia sexualis is that it multiplies “unnatural”, “peripheral” sexualities and subjects them to medical, psychiatric and psychological control and scrutiny in addition to criminal prosecution: psychiatrization of perverse pleasure, hysterization of women ‘s bodies, socialization of procreative behavior, and pedagogization of children’s sexuality are all form speciic mechanisms of knowledge and power. The medicalization and psychiatrization of pleasure under the guise of science iterate moral norms, construct sexual “perverts” and sexual “perverseness” as a matter of pathological personality, and establish a classiicatory system through which sexual behavior is controlled, stimulated, rewarded, punished. Heterosexual monogamy perhaps becomes an even stricter norm than it was before “the discursive explosion of the eighteen and nineteenth centuries,” but quieter: a privileged object of scrutiny has become “the sexuality of children, mad men and women, and criminals; the sensuality of those who did not like the opposite sex; reveries, obsessions, petty manias, or great transports of rage” (Foucault, 1978, p. 38-39), and “the body, sensation, the nature of pleasure, the more secret forms of enjoyment or acquiescence” (1978, p. 106). All this is a constant threat to the family and its heterosexual foundations and the health of the journal of pedagogy 2/2013 163 articleS entire population (according to the theory of degeneration), while the family itself is seen as a potential source of evil. The “discovery” of children’s sexuality, which is simultaneously treated as both “natural” and “contrary to nature”, precious and dangerous, for example highlights the issue of the “necessity” for the pedagogization of children’s sexuality (at irst primarily in the struggle against onanism), which includes “innumerable institutional devices and discursive strategies” (1978, p. 30) around the sexuality of children and adolescents (ways of speaking about sex were of course carefully selected, controlled, and hierarchized), normiication of sexual development, careful description of all the possible deviations, constant surveillance, expert assistance to parents; through pedagogy, as well as through medicine and economics, sex became a concern of the state (1978, p. 116) In the 20th century, the pedagogization of children’s sexuality did not go away, even though “a good many of the taboos that weighed on the sexuality of children were lifted” (Foucault 1978, p. 15). Some old ambiguities perhaps lost their signiicance, but some were preserved and new ones arose, associated with the tensions between general principles of equality on the one hand and the tendency to preserve the heteronormative order on the other; between the imperative of individual pleasure and the imperative of the welfare of the population (or nation, race); between the treatment of sex as something valuable and something dangerous; between intimacy and the imperative to talk constantly about it. Schools and educational institutions in addition to the family are a crucial place where, through the mediation of controlled knowledge about facts and worthiness, conscious and unconscious processes of reproduction and naturalization of a heteronormative symbolic order and processes of constructing individuals as gendered and sexualized subjects unfold. School, in particular compulsory primary school, according to Althusser (1980), is the number one ideological state apparatus, i.e. the institution in which due to its critical role in reproducing the social order control over the knowledge and the manners of its transfer is extremely “attentive”. “Controversial” issues, among which certainly belong sexuality and gender dichotomies (see e.g. Elia, 2000) are especially subjected to vigilant monitoring by the expert and lay public. Contested subjects on which society is divided are characterized as “controversial”; according to Richardson (1986, p. 27), controversies have to do with “different opinions, values and priorities, and, basically and essentially, with different material interests.” They are the subject of rancorous public discussion about what is right, permissible, acceptable, and healthy, and what is not. This article is based on the premise that can be derived from Foucault’s conceptualization of disciplinary institutions and power relations as well as from Althusser’s (1980) analysis of ideology and ideological state ap164 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics paratus: that school is simultaneously one of the spaces of reproduction of power relations and domination as well as of resistance against them. It is the space where contradictory “truths” and opinions about sexuality (and gender) are (implicitly or explicitly) expressed – from moral condemnations of sexual behavior which diverges from dominant sexual and gender norms to the deconstruction of self-evident norms whose short-term aim is the reduction of sexual stigma and prejudices and the creation of a safe environment for their victims. We assume that heteronormativity1 is a general, poorly relected and at the same time powerfully protected and defended ideological basis which, despite its deeply taken for granted status, is not completely resistant to alternative gender and sexual norms. We further postulate that contradictory sexual and gender norms create a more or less hidden discomfort: in addition to being indicators and symptoms of heteronormativity they are the very origins, symptoms and methods of resolving discomfort about sexuality, above all discomfort about same sex orientation in syllabuses and teaching practices in primary schooling in Slovenia, the central topic of the article. In this context we critically analyze the content of the interdisciplinary curricular area Education for Health for primary schools, prepared by the National Education Institute (2004), and we also rely on data from analyses of syllabuses and textbooks for primary school and the attitude of pupils and teachers towards the teaching of content relating to sexual and gender norms. For a better understanding of the ideological context we describe key political dilemmas and conlicts associated with the principle of equality regardless of sexual orientation, and controversies in the legal regulation of the rights of gays and lesbians. School and its Contradictions and Ambivalence According to Althusser (1980, p. 43), school is the central ideological state apparatus which “teaches ‘know-how’, but in forms which ensure subjection to the ruling ideology or the mastery of its ‘practice’”; it is a privileged place for constant examination, surveillance, and normalizing judgment, which are elements of disciplinary power (Foucault, 1984); it is an institution of 1 The concept of heteronormativity refers to gender and sexual norms arising from a binary sexual division: it assumes the division of people into two separate, complementary genders, each of which has speciic social and biological roles; heterosexuality in accordance with this is regarded as the only normal gender/sexual orientation, and a union between so-called biological gender, gender identity, and gender roles appears natural and self-evident (e.g. Plummer, 1992). In so doing it communicates the message that heteronormativity assumes two biologically deined genders on which gender identity is directly dependent, and this gender identity is prescribed unequivocal gender roles by heteronormativity. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 165 articleS power that maintains relations of domination (Foucault, 1978, p. 140); the educational system is one of the key institutions which shapes, trains “good citizens”, i.e. self-reliant, self-respectful, versatile (Lasch, 1979). Althusser’s (1980) conceptualization of school as the number one ideological apparatus of the state explains its central role in social (re)production and in subjectivization processes, as a result of which it is the subject of numerous conlicting theorizations, public and private speeches, ideological and especially political battles. With the introduction of compulsory primary education, schooling in western countries in the 19th century occupied a leading position among ideological apparatuses whose function is the reproduction of “capitalist relations of exploitation”, since these relations are presented to children very early on as self-evident. However, that does not mean that the state apparatus or the ministries in charge control absolutely and manage everything that happens in school. These institutions are themselves exposed to the constant pressure of various social groups which address conlicting demands to education authorities, and usually no single one of these has explicit dominance (Štrajn, 1994). Or as Althusser (1980) says – the ideology of the ruling class can only be realized as the ruling ideology through conlict within the ideological apparatuses, and always has to do with resistance; results are not clear in advance. Althusser thus regards resistance similarly to the way Foucault (1984) does – as a side effect of every authority, as something which escapes its intentions and control. It is this unpredictability which continually triggers new (old) arguments over the socialization function of schooling. Foucault’s attitude towards schooling also draws attention to the contradictory role of schools in the (re)production of power relations – it is true that school is treated by him as a disciplinary institution, but he never fought for its abolition, since this would mean the “unschooling” of society (Baskar, 1986). Foucault (2007a, p. 257) in reference to the pedagogical institution even explicitly maintained that he does not understand what is wrong in the actions of someone who in a given game of truth knows more than someone else and teaches that other person, imparting knowledge and techniques: what is dangerous are the dominating effects, i.e. the arbitrary and unnecessary subordination of the student to the teacher/professor. For this reason Apple (1995) emphasizes contradictoriness as a fundamental characteristic of school and the educational system, and also emphasizes its relative autonomy. Contradiction or contradictoriness is a key concept of his critique of the assumptions regarding simple causal relations between school and the macro system, and at the same time also a critique of postmodernist and poststructuralist conceptions which neglect the structural dynamic and marginalize the signiicance of class, racial, and ethnic belonging and of gender, and argue in favor of a radical relativism. 166 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics Formal and informal education do indeed bear a signiicant portion of the responsibility for the reproduction of subordinating relations which are tied to class, ethnicity, and “racial” membership as well as gender and sexual orientation. It has an inluence on the child’s value system already with the selection of facts which it mediates, and with the implicit value judgments about them, but with the discovery of conditions, mechanisms and consequences of discriminatory praxes it can deconstruct its effects and facilitate resistance against the hegemonic ideology. Therefore, school is not a “mirror image” of “macrocosmos” (it does not simply reproduce the ruling ideology and inequality); neither does it directly inluence changes in the macrocosmos. Milner (1992, p. 30) notes that high expectations of these other assumptions lead to disappointments, and one of the effects of these disappointments are efforts to reform school so that it becomes a “consolatory space”, which reformers wish to distinguish from the rough outside world and change into an egalitarian and absolutely democratic community, where the truth about a child will prevail and ensure a happy childhood. In this way analyses of school praxes and their effects—what and how we learn in school, what is rewarded and what is punished, how to cooperate in the construction of identity, how we are made into subjects—without a simultaneous analysis of educational policies and the ruling ideology (and competing ideologies) frequently turn into condemnation of (or praise for) the direct participants of educational praxes: pupils, their parents, and teachers. The crucial sources of the ambivalence that characterizes the attitude towards sexual education are ingrained heteronormativity and (fragile) belief in the existence of unequivocal binary gender differences and in stable gendered subjectivity (e.g. Butler, 1990) on the one hand and a declarative democratic principle of equality on the other. Each erotic, loving, sexual relationship between individuals of the same sex, and even nonheterosexual desire itself, threaten existing power relations based on gender and sexuality; at the same time insistence on heteronormativity, which reproduces discrimination and stigmatization based on sexual orientation, violates the democratic principle of equality. Democratic societies on the one hand strive to uphold the norm of tolerance and even equality, but on the other they are based on various forms of discrimination, which implicitly justify hate, as noted by Adorno et al. (1950). In the social regulation of sexuality the contradiction of social norms is expressed for example in the relations between the general political principle of equality and the legal provisions of the relevant laws and/or even between (liberal) legislation and (exclusionary) dominant mores. Namely, according to Foucault (2007a, p. 121), sexuality is one of the ields in which the dominant morality is a more effective instrument of control than the law. Legislation, for example, guarantees sexual rights journal of pedagogy 2/2013 167 articleS to individuals but the practices of everyday life restrict, violate, and ignore them. In his analysis of human rights in Europe, Graupner (2005, p. 125) even inds that “human rights tribunals more often follow the attitudes of the majority rather than apply the core task of human rights, which is to protect the individual and minorities against unjustiied interference by the majority”. That ambivalence is also expressed in the attitude towards individuals. Those who break basic social norms commonly serve as scapegoats in political battles and in private, personal encounters with powerlessness and uncertainty, or they are perceived as victims of compulsory heterosexuality (Rich, 1980)2. Or, as the indings of a study by Franklin (1998) on the psychosocial motivation of hate crimes show, violence against gays is perceived as legitimate—as a demonstration of masculinity and adherence to sexual stereotypes—even as it is regarded as the intolerable violation of basic civil norms. That is the reason for the vehement opposition to emancipation movements and alternative educational programs, for the discomfort which is expressed through ambivalent and contradictory beliefs, feelings, and discourses on sexuality in school (and elsewhere). As already noted, educational content relating to sexuality is the subject of ideological conlicts, opposing opinions, beliefs, values, priorities, (material) interests. For this reason teachers who provide instruction on it are especially subjected to control – all the more so if the educational system, education and school authorities allow them autonomy. A good example is Jose’s (1999) analysis of discussions on sex education in the school curriculum in South Australia in the 1970s and 1980s. He shows how the Australian Education Department gave in to the demands of an Australian organization dedicated to upholding Christian values and moral standards for the “moral integrity” of teachers. Speciically, this organization stressed that the “education program should emphasize above all else family life and the values of chastity and idelity”. This could apparently only be realized with the participation of experienced teachers who “should have ‘demonstrably stable and happy marriage’ and, ideally, should themselves have children of their own.” And the Education Department, as Jose notes, “basically agreed with the principles of maturity and marital stability.” Those who favor close supervision of teachers know (intuitively or because, for example, they are familiar with psychoanalytical theories of identiication) how important a role the teacher has in educational process; they have at 2 According to Rich, the term “compulsory heterosexuality” refers to the critique of heterosexuality as an institution; as a default, required or even obligatory sexual orientation, compulsory heterosexuality among other things is also expressed as an expectation, an assumption of the individual’s heterosexuality. It is the basis for institutionalized inequality between heterosexuals and non-heterosexuals, between men and women. 168 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics least indeinite feeling that knowledge is transmitted by the explicit and implicit or hidden curriculum. The teacher can transfer the educational content in keeping with the syllabus, but the educational effects are achieved through unconscious mechanisms of identiication (Millot, 1983). This uncertainty strengthens the tendency towards supervision and the demand for the selection of teachers based on their “moral impeccability”. It could be said that supervision and selection give illusory support to certainty in uncertain circumstances, since even intense supervision and “careful” selection can spur unpredictable effects on pupils –in fact, they can be even opposite to those desired, if they do not identify with the teacher. In order to more easily understand the dilemmas relating to sex education which arise in Slovenia, below I describe current political debates on (in) equality regardless of sexual orientation (or gender identity). I focus primarily on the gap between (liberal) general principles and (conservative) speciic legal provisions. This gap and the discomfort it arouses is also relected in Slovenian legislation and in school curricula: as Apple (2000, p. 70) points out, education is “profoundly ethical and political by its very nature”. Social/political Legitimization of Sexual Stigma and Sexual Prejudices The gap between generally accepted liberal principles and the concretization of these principles, as the dominant sexual morality constantly demonstrates its power, indicates a deep ambivalence toward sexuality and sexual norms in Slovenia. This ambivalence itself is the result of a long-term political and social battle: on one side, in the name of political and social equality, there is a demand for the equal treatment of gays and lesbians while on the other the privileges of the heterosexual community (primarily married heterosexual couples and their biological children) are preserved in the name of the traditional order. Political and social conlicts between gay rights advocates and their neo-conservative opponents in Slovenia are part of a wider, more general political and ideological conlict that became visible at the end of 1980s. Namely, at that time neo-conservative groups (they gradually transformed in political parties) disseminated a discourse of threatened Slovene nation/national identity by the “remnants of the totalitarian regime” such as social, minority and women’s rights. They pleaded (and they still do) for restoration of traditional, “genuine” family values, including strong (heterosexual) marriage and strong, uniied families, gendered social roles, restrictions on abortion legislation – i.e. restoration of “single ‘grand narrative’ of personal life” (Plummer, 2003, p.18). This traditional discourse was in sharp contrast with politics of feminist, gay and lesbian movements of journal of pedagogy 2/2013 169 articleS that time and even in with already existing “fragmentations, pluralizations, multiplicities” (ibid). of intimate lives and intimate relationships in Slovenia. The Criminal Code of the Republic of Slovenia decriminalized homosexuality in 1977 (i.e. still in the Yugoslav period), and a year later all records on homosexuals were destroyed (Kuhar, 2001, p. 86-87); the current Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia (1991) guarantees equality regardless of personal circumstance, and the 1994 Criminal Code explicitly bans discrimination based on sexual orientation. The fact that the turnout at the Gay Pride Parade in Slovenia’s capital city is bigger each year, and groups which publicly advocate for the rights of the marginalized are becoming more numerous, are indicators that attitudes towards same-sex sexuality and sexual minorities are becoming more liberal. Nevertheless, the limits of this liberalization became clear from discussions in 2001 regarding a law regulating artiicial insemination and treatment of infertility. At a referendum called for by conservative political parties, the proposition that women without a male partner should also have access to artiicial insemination was voted down, in the name of child welfare. In debates before the referendum, opponents of equality displayed their phantasms of how single women, and especially lesbians, threaten children and the Slovene nation generally with their “pathology” and lifestyles; the model of the two-parent heterosexual family was imposed as the only “natural” and “healthy” environment for children and as an essential condition for a happy childhood (from Transcript of the National Assembly session, 2001). Thus in Slovenia the current legislation gives access to artiicial insemination only to women with a steady male partner, i.e. in a stable heterosexual relationship. Conlicts between advocates and opponents of equal treatment have been further exacerbated by the treatment of the law on same-sex civil unions. In 2005, after almost two decades of effort on the part of pro-GLBT movements for the legalization of same-sex unions, the Parliament of the Republic of Slovenia adopted the Registration of a Same-Sex Civil Partnership Act. The Act regulates the conditions and procedures for registration and termination of registration, and imposes the obligation on partners to care for and support one another in times of illness, but it does not grant them the status of kin, and for this reason they cannot enjoy the same rights under social, health, pension and other types of insurance which are based on the status of kinship. Above all it does not regulate relationships with children. At the beginning of 2010, the new (“left-wing”) government coalition (2008 elections) introduced into Parliament a draft of the new Family Code based on the equal treatment of same-sex and heterosexual partnerships and families (at the symbolic as well as material levels); the irst draft also anticipa170 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics ted making adoption of a child possible for same-sex couples. The Act was passed by Parliament, but the opposition called for a referendum because of the articles that would give a legal basis for the equality of different types of families and partnerships. Their campaign against the Family Code draft legislation began with the irst debate in Parliament, in which the moral disqualiication of lesbians and gays (and of the supporters of the proposal) was a common refrain—lesbians and gays were branded as “neurotic”, “confused”, “contaminated”, and incapable of long-term relationships, and some critics of equality even went so far as to attribute a tendency towards criminal acts of sexual abuse to gays. In order to maintain the appearance of objective rationality, some also made use of (mistaken and ill-intentioned) interpretations of research results and statistics which are not even relevant to the area that would be regulated by the family code. Among the “arguments” could even be found obvious lies, such as, for example, that the European Convention on the Adoption of Children does not allow adoption by same-sex couples (transcript of the parliamentary session, 2010). Ultimately, in March 2012 the Act was rejected in a referendum (with a voter turnout of 30.31%, of which 54.55% voted against the Act). This example of the gap between liberal general principles and speciic legal provisions indicates that the general principle of equality related to sexuality is merely an expression of liberal political correctness and liberal norm, i.e. an expression of liberal tolerance. Namely, “toleration is not the same thing as positive evaluation, approbation, or approval” (Fiala, 2004). It implicates a negative judgment about the entity, in our case about homosexuality, and can thus be interpreted as an expression of prejudice toward same-sex sexual orientation.3 Sexual prejudice and sexual stigma are elements of the ideology of heteronormativity and one of the cornerstones of a social order grounded in sex/gender binaries and compulsory heterosexuality. As soon as we move from general principles of equality to proposals which implement these principles and thereby undermine myths regarding 3 I use the concepts sexual stigma and sexual prejudices (instead of the concept of homophobia) as elements of the ideology of heterosexism and one of the cornerstones of a social order grounded in sex/gender binaries and compulsory heterosexuality: sexual stigma as societal negative regard for any non-heterosexual behaviour, identity, relationship, or community; sexual prejudice as individuals’ negative attitudes toward sexual orientation, i.e. internalization of structural stigma (Herek 2004; 2007; 2009). As Haslam (2009) puts it, prejudices are “collectively shared and organized phenomena, not individual pathologies,” not an exclusively psychological category. Namely, prejudices are pre-existing categories and they have a history which goes beyond individual lives. They are implicit or explicit moral judgments and have direct support in ideology, legislation, in unquestioned assumptions of scientiic concepts and practices. They are the subject of rancorous public discussion about what is right, permissible, acceptable, and healthy, and what is not. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 171 articleS natural, moral, normal sexuality and gender dichotomy, we encounter criticisms regarding the “unacceptable promotion” of same-sex sexuality and hate speech labeling gays and lesbians as “social degenerates”, i.e. discourse that is, according to Foucault (1978, 2007b), closely connected with racism. This demonstrates that there are at least three categories of powerful agents at work in the battles for and against equality regardless of sexual orientation: those who advocate complete equality regardless of sexual orientation; those who insist on maintaining heteronormativity; and those who advocate equality regardless of sexual orientation at the declarative level but for the sake of social peace and welfare of children call for “moderation” in the demands of (pro-)gay and (pro-)lesbian movements. The last group are predominantly silent or at best appeal primarily for tolerance. Based on the voter turnout for the referendum we can conclude that they had a decisive inluence on the outcome: most of those who failed to take part likely belong to this category. It is thus not surprising that in Slovenia silence is the most widespread “educational content” about (homo) sexuality – it could be considered as a strategy of conlict avoidance. I discuss this in more detail in the following section. Heteronormativity in (Primary) School: Conflict Avoidance Strategies The basic laws regulating (primary) education in Slovenia (the Organization and Financing of Education Act and the Elementary School Act) in their opening provisions explicitly state that one of the goals of education is to teach mutual tolerance, respect for diversity and cooperation with others, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and to develop the ability to live in a democratic society. This goal as deined in this way among other things opens up possibilities for the deconstruction of heteronormativity, processes, and effects of stigmatization regarding sexual orientation and gender roles. This opportunity is further widened by an article of the Organizing and Financing in Education Act (which applies to all levels of education). Speciically, teachers are explicitly provided with partial professional autonomy and they are obligated to respect the law and “objectivity, critical thinking, and plurality.” As we will see below, in everyday school praxes these provisions of the law are revealed as one of the aspects of the responsibilization of teachers: the responsibility/burden of teaching of “ambiguous” and “controversial” content is placed on their shoulders. 172 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics Silence, Medicalization and (implicit) Heteronormativity The main indings from analyses of primary (and even secondary) school syllabuses and textbooks in Slovenia, and empirical research among youth on how much and what kind of information about sexuality, sexual orientations, and associated rights they receive in school are that primary (and even secondary) school gives no or negligible attention to human sexuality (applicable especially to non-heterosexuality): it is in large part up to the teacher as to how the possibility for autonomy in the ield relating to this topic is used (e.g. Komidar & Mandeljc, 2009; Kuhar et al., 2008, 2006; Magić, 2012; Maljevac & Magić, 2009; Pinter et al., 2006; Švab & Kuhar, 2005; Vončina, 2009;). At irst glance this is a neutral position, enabling the constitutionally guaranteed rights of parents to bring up their children. However, more detailed analysis of primary (and even secondary) school syllabuses and textbooks in Slovenia shows how deeply heteronormativity is ingrained: in verbal and pictorial learning materials representations of heterosexual couples (representations of families, loving couples) (see Komidar & Mandeljc, 2009) and representations of individuals who can be identiied unambiguously as male or female absolutely predominate. It is not just that this apparent silence is not neutral – it is even dangerous. As Lipkin (1999, p. 230) points out, “mandated silence may prevent rational adult-led conversation, but it does not stop all utterance at the schoolhouse door”. Apparent silence about sexuality conveys (or even propagates) the message that heterosexuality is the only “normal” sexuality –by perpetuating gender dichotomy, through images of “typical” families and heterosexual relationships, through speech on sexuality purely in the context of “natural” biological reproduction or in contexts which are based on heterosexual relationships. These messages, based on common sense and/or scientiic classiications that create a special map of hierarchised sex(ual) categories (e.g. Foucault, 1978, 1984), at least implicitly, support the image of same-sex relationships and the image of those who cultivate them as (morally) deviant or even pathological, thereby implicitly justifying violence against them. School is thus for many of those who impose the ideology of heteronormativity a dangerous place, as also shown by research on violence in schools (e.g. Elia, 2000; Kuhar et al., 2008; Magić, 2008; McKay & Bissell, 2010). In these circumstances silence about sexual diversity continuously subjects students to the heterosexual norms according to which they scrutinize and govern themselves – it functions as a strategy of normalization (e.g. Foucault, 1984). Another strategy of conlict avoidance is a manifestation of Scientia sexualis: biomedicalization and physicalization (e.g. Elia, 2000; Foucault, 1978) of same-sex sexual orientation and of sexuality in general. This strategy also journal of pedagogy 2/2013 173 articleS at least implicitly supports a heteronormative social order: it is a common practice that the discussion of sexuality in biology lessons is limited primarily to biological reproduction, while talk of same-sex sexual orientation takes place in the context of sexually transmitted diseases (e.g. Komidar & Mandeljc, 2009; Magić, 2012). A speciic case of implicit medicalization is a proposal for the interdisciplinary curricular area Education for Health for primary school, prepared by the Slovene National Education Institute (2004), which covers sex education as well. The placement of sex education under health care is itself symptomatic, since it implicitly medicalizes sexuality in general and presumes the danger, if not even outright harm, that sex poses for the individual and the population in general (e.g. Foucault, 1978). Sexuality is therefore (implicitly) treated as a health (and public) problem and not as a right. Even more problematic is the fact that the proposed syllabus introduces the category “diverse forms of sexual behavior” (“peripheral” in Foucault’s words), in which “homosexuality, masochism, sadism, necrophilia, exhibitionism, transvestitism, voyeurism, fetishism, rape, incest, prostitution, pedophilia, sodomy, pornography” are classiied together. What do all these “diverse forms of sexual behavior” have in common? That they are “unnatural”? “Abnormal”? “Immoral”? That they are not “normal heterosexual” practices? What, for example, does homosexuality, in contrast to heterosexuality (which this list does not explicitly mention), have in common with pedophilia and rape, i.e. with behaviors that involve the abuse of power, the use of force, bodily assault, coercion? Instead of categorizing sexual behavior and sexual practices based on criteria such as the abuse of power and use of force, the syllabus proposal assumes a norm which seems to be so self-evident and unambiguous as to not need a deinition: “normal” is whatever is not included in “diverse forms of sexual behavior”. Choices, acts, and practices in the area of sexuality are really not absolute rights, but their boundaries should not be set by preconceived notions about the naturalness of sexual behavior, lofty goals relating to the preservation of the nation, etc. The acts and practices which are excluded from these rights are acts of violence and exploitation, acts in which there is an asymmetry in “maturity, behavior, and power” (Primorac, 2002, p. 209-210). The categorization used in this syllabus proposal is all the more surprising given that one of the fundamental objectives cited in the program is respect for diversity. Thus its general premises do not reduce sexuality to biology, sexuality is not considered taboo, and sexual pleasure is afirmed. However, due to the categorization of sexual behaviors described, the liberal and alternative nature of this proposal is unconvincing: the proposal in fact endorses “self-evident” sexual norms, and in this way legitimizes stigma and 174 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics maintains the distance between “us”, the “normals”, and those whose sexual habits, pleasures, and behaviors are implicitly labeled as morally questionable and even criminal when they are placed in the same category as acts involving the abuse of power. Another possibility exists that enables teachers and school authorities in Slovenia to open up the school space to emancipatory educational projects, thereby demonstrating their openness while at the same time at least partly protecting themselves against attacks by advocates of strict heteronormativity: cooperation with external educational organizations and societies. In Slovenia these are usually educational programs carried out by nongovernmental organizations in the form of workshops, which students attend voluntarily and free of charge. However, the response of schools is low: of 100 schools which were offered free workshops by Legebitra, a gay-lesbian nongovernmental, nonproit organization, only eight accepted (Maljevac & Magić, 2009). The Association for Nonviolent Communication (2001) reports a similar experience: the administration of one of the Slovenian secondary schools for which the organization offers workshops on violence, discrimination, communication, and conlict resolution demanded that the Association cancel a two-hour workshop on homosexuality. The goal of this workshop was the deconstruction of myths about homosexuality, gender dichotomy, “natural”/”unnatural” sexuality, recognition of discrimination and exclusion, including their most hidden and invisible forms; the creation of safe places in school, the strengthening of a support network , and so on. The school administration required the Association to cancel the workshop on the grounds that parents would complain “that the school “encourages” homosexuality” (see the letter by the Association for Nonviolent Communication, 2001). In protest the Association terminated cooperation with this school. Cautions about the ideological bias of silence and the medicalization of sexuality strongly relativize the seemingly convincing arguments in favor of silence and apparent neutrality: that sexuality is a personal matter; that outside school and school curricula there is an adequate supply of information on sexuality; that opening up a discussion about the problem of sexual norms will also open up the unambiguous and explicit expression of aversion to all those who “violate” the norms of “normal”, “natural”, “healthy”; the risk of transferring political struggles to the school arena. It seems reasonable to draw attention to the rational core of this last argument: it inds strong support in the harsh responses from defenders of strict heteronormativity to the political initiatives for legislation that would consistently uphold the principle of equality regardless of sexual orientation that we wrote about at the beginning of this article. A typical example of how political journal of pedagogy 2/2013 175 articleS conlicts are transferred to the school space is the response to the mentioned workshops on human rights conducted by Amnesty International and Legebitra in secondary schools (or rather the ones that used to be conducted). At the height of the political debates on the proposed Family Code the strongest organization opposing equal treatment for gays and lesbians in the Family Code (Civil Initiative for the Family and the Rights of Children, closely linked to the Roman Catholic Church) launched a massive campaign against both organizations, claiming that they were conducting “a campaign for homosexuality among children”, that “homosexual activists are trying to encourage schoolchildren to discover their homosexual inclinations”, that “they teach them that there are no differences between women and men and they spread the intolerant belief that anyone who disagrees with them is a homophobe who should be criminally prosecuted” (Civil Initiative for the Family and the Rights of Children, 2011). It is indicative that these workshops had been taking place for some years at some schools (workshops by Amnesty International for 12 years, but a year and a half before the attacks by opponents the workshops on homosexuality and gender constructions had ceased to be carried out), and there had been no complaints. Experience in Slovenia conirms Apple’s thesis on the great effectiveness of (political) organization of (neo)conservative movements in the ield of education (Apple, 2004): proponents of the reproduction of heteronormativity in school, in defense of a heteronormative social order organize and mobilize much more quickly and effectively than their critics have been able to. In polemics about the treatment of sexuality in schools the advocates of “natural sexuality”, family values, and traditional gender roles in Slovenia have successfully adopted the (liberal) discourse of human rights. Namely, they usually appeal to the rights of parents to provide their children with the religious and moral upbringing of their choice, in keeping with their convictions (Article 41 of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia); the appropriateness of lesson content for children’s developmental level (developmental psychological and pedagogical doctrines), and even nondiscrimination (Article 14 of the Constitution). It is indicative that there has not (yet) been a case recorded of parents’ objecting to educational programs which impose heteronormativity. Emancipation Education Projects and their (controversial and limited) Effects Outside contractors (and their potential “clients”) thus also confront the question of how to justify educational content which deconstructs dominant gender and sexual norms (i.e. heteronormativity) in educational curricula. 176 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics Their projects are usually subjected to a rigorous substantiation and proof of legitimacy, and a common strategy for defending the victims of prejudices is to focus on the psychological effects of rejection. This strategy may be just a pragmatic move which opens up the space of educational institutions for the problematization / deconstruction of the dichotomy of natural “normal” (hetero) sexuality vs. “deviant” (homo) sexuality; it can be a compassionate, paternalistic reaction to the distress of victims; it can be part of the image of the enlightened cosmopolitan. The problem with this strategy is that it unintentionally additionally victimizes individuals who are in a vulnerable position due to dominant gender and sexual norms. Above all, the effects of appealing to the conscience of the “normal” majority usually does not extend beyond compassion and tolerance. In fact, compassion and tolerance do have short-term mitigating effects on the stigmatized; they can be powerful motivators for the responsible use of the power and inluence of individuals and institutions. Nevertheless, the problem is that they preserve the domination of those who have the possibility to choose to tolerate (or not). Drawing attention to the mental distress of those who are excluded and discriminated against often sounds like an apology for the appeal to political correctness, i.e. to that pleasant but hardly binding substitute for equality. This strategy implicitly gives assent to the psychologization and even medicalization of phenomena which are in fact ideological or political at their origin (and in their effects), and also to the individualization of responsibility for stigmatization. We should certainly not underestimate the psychological effects of exclusion or the responsibility of individuals who spread hate or at least assent to it. However, limiting the treatment of the issue to the psychological conditions and effects of stigmatization obscures the social and political origins and functions of hatred, and implicitly supports the hierarchy of relations between “natural”/ “moral”/ “normal” and “unnatural”/ “immoral”/ “abnormal”. Another set of dilemmas faced by these programs that break a safe silence is how to direct a complex educational process in such a way that school becomes a safe space, and education plays a visible role in establishing political equality. Educational emancipation projects in Slovenia (as elsewhere) usually stem from an “enlightened” position. Their goal is the deconstruction of heteronormativity (including gender dichotomy), of the myth of “normal” and “natural” gendered roles and sexualities; the elimination of discrimination and consistent application of the principle of equality regardless of sexual orientation. The irst step in the process of deconstruction of heteronormativity is an analysis of the representation of gays and lesbians in school textbooks and readers, the articulation of demands for recognition and positive representation, the construction and enforcement of positive journal of pedagogy 2/2013 177 articleS representations of individuals who diverge from the dominant gender and sexual norms. Prevailing among the speciic strategies is the identiication of homophobia and prejudices, the transmission of information and dissemination of knowledge, and practical advice to teachers (and students) on how to introduce a topic relating to the exclusion of gays and lesbians, bisexuals, transsexuals, transvestites; how to recognize subtle forms of heterosexism and how to respond to them. However, these programs mainly problematize the marginalization of gays, lesbians, and less frequently bisexuals and transgendered, and even less frequently same sex/gender/sexuality binaries and the social order which is based on these binaries. There are some exceptions, of which we have already noted two, i.e. the projects of the Association for Nonviolent Communication and Amnesty International (for more see Pan, 2011). Critical theoreticians caution about the limited effects of these emancipation projects (and these are the most numerous), which are restricted to expanding the deinition of normality to include gays and lesbians. This goal is too narrow, all the more so when they are satisied with the recognition and legitimization of difference and when this “expanded normality” includes, as Lipkin (1999, p. 232) emphasizes, only gays “who are just like every morally superior one else” and for the sake of a propaganda campaign, “homosexual people would be held to a higher standard”. As Kirsch (2006, p. 33) states, the “process of legitimization does not create equality: dominance still exists; ideals still rule the day”. The proliferation of alternative, non-stereotypical representations does not automatically lead to a change in sexual prejudices and identiication with alternative, positive norms. As Luhmann (1998, p. 143) notes, it is an illusion that “with representation comes knowledge, with learning about lesbian and gays comes the realization of the latter’s normalcy, and inally a happy end to discrimination”. Prejudices as implicit or explicit moral judgments (in)directly supported by ideology, legislation, and even by unquestioned assumptions of scientiic concepts and practices, unfortunately operate as performatives; they construct subject positions that we must face even if we keep a rational distance towards them. Due to the function of prejudices in the political economy (and in maintaining power relations), the dissolving of prejudices and elimination of discrimination cannot be accomplished merely through the production and reinforcement of positive images of the stigmatized (e.g. Adorno et al., 1950; Oakes, Hasalm & Turner, 1994; Aboud & Levy, 2000). Hatred, exclusion, and rejection are not feelings and practices which can be eliminated merely through the dissemination of positive images and information which confronts prejudice with the power of argument. The distress and low self-esteem caused by open or tacit exclusion, stigmatization, and discrimination, “felt and internalized stigma” (He178 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics rek, 2007, p. 909-911) cannot be solved only through positive images of gays and lesbians who are intended to serve as a positive point of identiication. A rational deconstruction of stigma and prejudice does not guarantee any changes in negative viewpoints and even less in the negative feelings that are characteristic for deep-seated prejudices about sexual minorities. We are not claiming that the dissemination of information which tries to deconstruct myths about gays and lesbians is a mistaken strategy. Together with “popular support for striking down policies that perpetuate sexual stigma” (Herek, 2007, p. 915) and liberal legislation it can have an impact at least on enacted stigma, which according to Herek (2007, p. 908) “refers to the overt behavioral expression of sexual stigma”. In the short term, it can even contribute to the deconstruction and reduction of prejudices. However, these positive effects are limited primarily to cases when people oppose discrimination and exclusion but lack arguments for effectively combating prejudice, and in cases where they do not have a lot invested in prejudices (e.g. Aboud & Levy, 2000); positive effects are strongly limited especially in cases of hidden or open hatred, hostility, and prejudices in which, due to their speciic roles in our mental economy, we invest a lot: rationalization, negation, and avoidance (e.g. Adorno et al., 1950; Oakes, Hasalm & Turner, 1994). Hatred can even be deepened in the face of counterarguments, since a person who has allowed hatred entry into manifest thought constantly justiies their hatred due to the norms of tolerance, which succeeds temporarily only by even more radically indicting the victim of their hatred (Adorno et al., 1950). In such circumstances individuals avoid information which threatens to upset the temporary equilibrium and apparent order and security. “A lack of information” in this case is not the result of objective circumstances, for example the inaccessibility of information, but rather a consequence of motivation: we prefer to avoid information which threatens the (apparent) congruence of attitudes, emotions, behavior, and/or which wounds our narcissism, or interpret it in such a way that we prevent dissonances and discontent and preserve the fragile equilibrium in the construction of reality and self/ identity-construction (e.g. Luhman, 1998). Motivated ignorance is thus one of the reasons why information regarding the baselessness and irrationality of prejudice still cannot solve the problem of prejudice, and the practices which prejudice justiies: discrimination, stigmatization, violence, and so on. Conclusion Present analysis of syllabuses and textbooks for primary and secondary schools in social and political context in Slovenia conirms Foucault’s thesis (1978) about the importance of sexuality and sex for power relations. It exjournal of pedagogy 2/2013 179 articleS poses three key indicators of that importance: social and political conlicts over sexual norms; pedagogization of (children’s) sexuality, irst of all through regulation of students’ (children’s) access to knowledge about sex and sexuality; prevailing heteronormativity; discomforts that accompany discourses on sex and sexuality in school. Teachers very quickly say “too much” or say something that could pose a threat to a belief in the naturalness and stability of gender dichotomy and the self-evidence of sexual norms; educational materials also show “too much”, or show something that “should remain hidden from young eyes”. Which kind of information are we to convey to children, how and at what age, in which subject or in the frameworks of what kind of learning content, which moral and social values and norms should such a lesson strengthen? Educators, educational authorities, and philosophers of education in the area of sexuality confront the question of how to avoid imposing normative standards on the one hand and a radical relativism on the other (e.g. McKay, 1998; Seidman, 1992; Smith, 1994; Weeks, 1995) – this is a question which as McKay (1998) for example concludes is avoided even by academic philosophers. The analysis presented here focuses on some (mutually interconnected) origins of dificulties and limitations which attempts at the deconstruction of heteronormativity in school must confront. Crucial problems arise from deeply entrenched beliefs about the naturalness and normalcy of heterosexuality and gender dichotomy, or in other words, from ideological, normative, value-laden treatment of sexuality supported by scientiic discourses on sex and sexuality. Heteronormativity is transmitted to the school space through explicit as well as implicit, frequently unconscious and unrelected valuation of gender and sexual behaviors, desires, etc. This also includes prejudices, with their complex role in the mental economy and the reproduction of relations of domination, due to which rational argumentation and deconstruction are frequently dificult to access. It seems that in such circumstances (apparent) silence about sexuality is the most that the legal norm of sexual orientation equality can achieve. Although, in common sense, this silence could be considered as neutral, it is actually a form of (at least implicit) normalizing judgement (e.g. Foucault, 1984). Another problem, which is simultaneously also a condition for schools to become a place of emancipatory struggles, is connected with their role in enculturation processes. As a result of this role schools are the object of constant monitoring by political authorities, professional and the lay public, as well as a site of resistance and battles for control among competing interpretations of human existence. In these battles precisely because school is so important to ideological state apparatuses, it is frequently forgotten that school is not the only space where “truths” about gender, sex and sexuali180 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics ties are produced and stated, and where norms are deined and divergences from these norms evaluated. This leads to an oversimpliication and a tendency to treat schools and relationships among the participants (pupils, their parents and teachers, school administration) as the source and the solution of all individual, political, and social problems. In this article we also draw attention to the more effective organization of proponents of strict heteronormativity, who of course also have a more advantageous starting position thanks to the still deeply ingrained heteronormativity in the social environment. However, the impact on education and schools of those who are creating a moral panic due to the “destruction of family values” and concern for the “future of the Slovene nation” is not simply a consequence of (neo)conservative “public opinion” or even a (neo) conservative cultural consensus. It is more likely due to the fact that the “conservative alliance” is much more uniform, persistent, responsive, even aggressive, vocal, organized and less self-critical than the left and liberal one (e.g. Apple, 2004). Or, as Plummer (2003, p.18) points out, its strong positions are, ironically, a consequence of the “very fragility of these traditions”. In such a sensitive sphere of everyday life as school, the proponents of “postmodern” values prefer to withdraw rather than get involved in conlicts. For this reason as well, teachers who advocate for equality, freedom, and inclusion and who feel a sense of responsibility for the marginalization of pupils would have dificulty relying on the support of colleagues and pupils’ parents if they were to become the target of conservative attacks due to their ethical and political stance. This has proved for the time being to be a suficiently effective safeguard of traditional values. In Slovenia teachers “assert” their autonomy in the area of sex education primarily through a strategy of “avoiding potential conlicts”: silence about sex and sexualities seems to be the safest educational strategy. They thereby continue a strategy used by educational authorities who shift the responsibility for teaching controversial content on to teachers. Autonomy which educational authorities grant to teachers thus appears more a relection of pseudo-neutrality or a symptom of ambivalence and fear of conlicts with parents of differing ideological and political convictions on the part of school authorities than an expression of conidence in teachers. Even worse; in a mixture of neoliberal employment policy (e.g. temporary employment), great power of local education authorities, aggressiveness of neo-conservative common sense alliance, this autonomy could be the source of increased risk for teachers, mostly for those who are employed temporarily. For this reason expanding the deinition of normality to include gays and lesbians to at least mitigate the damage caused by structural stigma is a relatively ambitious pedagogical goal in Slovenian circumstances: regardless of journal of pedagogy 2/2013 181 articleS the relevance of cautions about its assimilation effect (e.g. Luhman, 1998)4 and regardless of the fact that educational programs which are limited merely to positive representation and legitimization of differences are above all an expression of political correctness. Despite their limitations and reductions, educational strategies of confronting sexual stigma and prejudices nevertheless represent an alternative to the hegemonic discourse. They help shift the boundaries of “normality” and establish safe spaces by means of which at least over the long run they contribute to the deconstruction of criteria of normality in the area of sex/gender and sexuality. Often even in the pursuit of minimalistic goals we encounter resistance and dificulties, which is a sign that our endeavors confront the sore points of the social order. The basic questions remain open: how to subvert the valuation of subjective positions and criteria of “ab/normality”, the idea of stable (gender and sexual) identities, how to liberate desiers, how to come to terms with the complex problem of domination and subordination which includes all axes at once: “race”, ethnicity, sex/gender and sexuality, class, etc. (e.g. Foucault, 2007b; Butler, 1990; Crenshaw, 1991; Collins, 2000; Luhman, 1998). As Elia (2000) points out, it is important that sexuality education relect the complexity and that - as a broad topic - it should be taught across the curriculum. Sexuality education is irst of all a matter of political education, philosophy of human rights, and citizenship, freedom. As Primorac (2002, p. 209) points out, “choices, actions, and praxes in the ield of sexuality” should be regarded as a right. And discourse about rights belongs in political (and not health!) education, as deined by Hahn: “a process in which individuals acquire knowledge about their rights and the volition and capability/ability to use them” (in Zgaga, 1991, p. 37). As Echeverria and Hannam (2013, p. 123-124) point out, education “must have a destabilizing action if it is to be pedagogy of praxis and be responsive to the needs of education in plural democracy”. Thus to the question of sexuality and construction of genders are also added concrete alternative educational programs based on the principle of equality regardless of gender and sexual orientation. Those programs in particular which manage to trigger ambiguities in connection with self-evident “truths” and norms can count on success in the process of deconstructing heteronormativity. They are a form of active resistance resistance as, according to Foucault (1978), an inevitable and essential element within power relations. And they cause discomfort which has several faces: it is felt by those who would like to preserve traditional sex and gen4 Luhman notes that the “demand for equal cultural and political representation” is actually a form of “assimilation politics”, since we “expand the deinition of normal to include lesbians and gays, rather than attacking and undermining the very processes by which (some) subjects become normalized and others marginalized” (1998, p. 143-144). 182 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics der morality, but at the same time they are clearly aware that silence about the ambiguities of sexualities and genders and the attack on alternative moralities are short-term strategies; it is felt by those who would otherwise like to participate actively in deconstruction processes for professional or ideological reasons; it is felt by those for whom the educational programs are intended. Perhaps it is not even that important whether the alternative practices and educational projects take place within the school or outside it. Their effects enter the school in a way that cannot be controlled: through beliefs (conscious or unconscious) of teachers, pupils, and their parents which are formed in a complex interaction of numerous agents of enculturation. And, irst of all, through practices of freedom, as Foucault points out (2007a) and explains that freedom is more than getting rid of prohibitions. Namely, Foucault (ibid., p. 243) points out the ethical dimension of freedom: with regard to sexuality, liberating sexual desires is a condition to “learn to conduct ourselves ethically in pleasure relationships with others”. R e fe re n c e s Aboud, F. E., & Levy S. R. (2000). Interventions to reduce prejudice and discrimination in children and adolescents. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 269-293). Mahwah: Lawrence Elrbaum Associates. Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper Brothers. Althusser, L. (1980). Ideologija in ideološki aparati države [Idéologie et appareils idéologiques d’êtat]. In Z. Skušek Močnik (Ed.), Ideologija in estetski učinek [Ideology and aesthetic effect] (pp. 38-99). Ljubljana: Cankarjeva založba. Apple, M. W. (1995). Education and power. New York, London: Routledge. Apple, M. W. (2000). Oficial knowledge: democratic education in a conservative age. London: Routledge. Apple, M. W. (2004). Creating difference: Neo-liberalism, neo-conservatism and the politics of educational reform. Educational Policy, 18 (1), 12-44. Baskar, B. (1986). Predgovor [Introduction]. In M. Milharčič-Hladnik, & J. Šušteršič (Eds.), Šolska reforma je papirnati tiger [School reform is a paper tiger] (pp. 9-30). Ljubljana: Krt, RK ZSMS, UK ZSMS. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, London: Routledge. Civilna iniciativa za družino in pravice otrok [Civil Initiative for the Family and the Rights of Children]. (2010). Odprto pismo ministru Lukšiču [Open letter to minister Lulšič]. Retrieved November 15, 2012, from Časnik website: http://www.casnik.si/ index.php/2010/11/25/ales-primc-pisal-ministru-luksicu/ Collins, P.H. (2000). Feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge. Crensahw, K. W. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241-1299. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 183 articleS Društvo za nenasilno komunikacijo [Association for Nonviolent Communication]. (2001). Pismo proti homofobiji [Letter against homophobia]. Lesbo, (11, 12). Retrieved December 18, 2012, from ljudmila. org website: http://www.ljudmila.org/lesbo/lesbo_ 1112sola.htm Echeverria, E., & Hannam, P. (2013). Philosophical inquiry and the advancement of democratic praxis. Journal of Pedagogy , 4(1), 111- 125. Elia, P. (2000). Democratic sexuality education: a departure from sexual ideology and traditional schooling. Journal of Sex Education & Therapy, 25(2/3), 122-129. Fiala, A. (2004). Toleration. In: The internet encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved January 9, 2010, from IEP website: http://www.iep.utm.edu/tolerati/ Foucault, M. (1978). History of sexuality, Vol. I: The will to knowledge. New York: Pantheon Books. Foucault, M. (1984). Nadzorovanje in kaznovanje: Rojstvo zapora [Surveiller et punir. Naissance de la prison]. Ljubljana: DZS. Foucault, M. (2007a). Etika skrbi zase kot prakticiranje svobode [L’éthiquec du souci de soi comme pratique de la liberté]. (Interview by H. Becker, R. Forner-Netancourt, & A. Gomez-Müller) In J. Šumić Riha (Ed.), Življenje in prakse svobode [Life and Praxis of Freedom) (pp. 240-259). Ljubljana: Založba ZRC. Foucault, M. (2007b). Seks, oblast in politika identitete [Sex, power and the politics of identity]. In J. Šumić Riha (Ed.), Življenje in prakse svobode [Life and Praxis of Freedom) (pp. 203-213). Ljubljana: Založba ZRC. Franklin, K. (1998). Inside the mind of people who hate gays. Retrieved January 12, 2013, from Frontline website: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ assault/roots/franklin.html Graupner, H. (2005). Sexuality and human rights in Europe. Journal of Homosexuality, 48(3, 4), 107-139. Haslam, N. (2009). Prejudice is not phobia. Retrieved January 9, 2010, from Psychology Today website: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/human-natures/200903/prejudice-is-not-phobia Herek, G.M. (2004). Beyond “homophobia”: Thinking about sexual stigma and prejudice in the twenty-irst century. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 1(2), 6-24. Herek, G.M. (2007). Confronting sexual stigma and prejudice: Theory and practice. Journal of Social Issues, (63), 905-925. Jose, J. (1999). Drawing the line: Sex education and homosexuality in South Australia, 1985. The Australian Journal of Politics and History, 45(2), 197 – 212. Kazenski zakonik Republike Slovenije [Penal Code of the Republic of Slovenia]. (1994). Retrieved December 18, 2009, from Uradni list website: http://zakonodaja.gov.si/ rpsi/r05/predpis_ZAKO905.html Kirsch, M. (2006). Queer theory, late capitalism, and internalized homophobia. Homosexuality, 52 (1, 2), 19-45. Komidar, K., & Mandeljc, S. (2009). Homoseksualnost skozi analizo učnih načrtov, šolskih učbenikov in šolske prakse [Homosexuality through the analysis of curricula, textbooks, and school practice]. Sodobna pedagogika [Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies], 60 (4), 164-181. Kuhar, R. (2001). Mi, drugi: oblikovanje in razkritje homoseksualne identitete [We, 184 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics the others: construction and uncovering the homosexual identity]. Ljubljana: ŠKUC. Kuhar, R., Maljevac, S., Koletnik, A., & Magić, J. (2008). Vsakdanje življenje istospolno usmerjenih mladih v Sloveniji: Raziskovalno poročilo [Everyday life of same-sex sexual oriented youth in Slovenia]. Ljubljana: Legebitra. Retrieved October, 23, 2009, from Društvo Legebitra website: http://www.drustvo-legebitra.si/legebitra/ Istospolno_usmerjeni_mladi.pdf Lasch, Ch. (1979). Culture of narcissism: American life in an age of diminishing expectation. New York: W. W. Norton. Lipkin, A. (1999). Understanding homosexuality, changing schools: A text for teachers, counselors, and administrators. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Luhmann, S. (1998). Queering/querying Pedagogy? Or, pedagogy is a pretty queer thing. In W. F. Pinar (Ed.), Queer theory in education edited (pp. 141-155). Mahwah, New Jersey London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Magić, J. (2012). Homofobija na naši šoli: raziskovalno poročilo [Homophobia in our school: Research report]. Ljubljana: društvo Legebitra. Retrieved January 23, 2013, from Društvo Legebitra website: http://www.drustvo-legebitra.si Magnetogram seje državnega zbora [Transcript of the National Assembly session]. (2010). Retrieved April 23, 2010, from Državni zbor website: http://www.dz-rs.si/index.php?id=97&cs=1&st=m&fts=Predlog+družinskega+zakonika&showdoc=1&unid=MDZ|D76129EBCBD177D8C12576DA0032162B Maljevac, S., & Magić, J. (2009). Pedri raus!: homofobično nasilje v šolah [No place for faggots! Homophobic violence in schools]. Sodobna pedagogika [Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies], 60 (4), 90-104. McKay, A. (1998). Sexual ideology and schooling: Towards democratic sexuality education. London: The Althouse Press. McKay, A. & Bissell, M. (2010). Sexual health education in the schools: 4 Questions & Answers (3rd ed.). Sex Information and Education Council of Canada: SIECCAN. Mencin Čeplak, M. (2005). Začaran krog diskriminacije: od moralne diskreditacije homoseksualnosti do neenakosti gejev in lezbikj pred zakonom – in nazaj [Vicious circle of discrimination: from moral discreditation of homosexuality to the inequality of gays and lesbians under the law – and back again]. Družboslovne razprave [Social Discussions], 21(49-50), 175-186. Millot, C. (1983). Anti-pedagog Freud [Anti-pedagogue Freud]. In S. Žižek (Ed.), Gospostvo, vzgoja, analiza [Domination, education, analysis] (pp. 184—217). Ljubljana: DDU Univerzum. Milner, J.C. (1992). Dekompozicija naravnih pogledov na šolo [La pensée naturelle de l’école – une décomposition ]. In E. D. Bahovec (Ed.), Vzgoja med gospostvom in analizo [Education between domination and analysis] (pp. 27-61). Ljubljana: Krt. Oakes, P. J., Haslam, A., & Turner, J. C. (1994). Stereotyping and social reality. Oxford, Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers. Pan, M. (2011). “Rečeno – storjeno”: performativnost spola v jeziku in pričevanje v šoli [“Said and done”: Performativity of gender in language and witnessing in school]. Šolsko polje [Scool Field], 22(3-4), 105 – 130. Pinter, B. et al. (2006). Spolno vedenje slovenskih srednješolcev v letu 2004 [Sexual behavior of Slovene secondary school students in 2004]. Zdravniški vestnik [Medical journal of pedagogy 2/2013 185 articleS Journal], 75 (19), 615–619. Retrieved August 10, 2013, from Zdravniški vestnik website: http://szd.si/user_iles/vsebina/Zdravniski_Vestnik/vestnik/st6-10/st6-10.htm Plummer, K. (1992). Speaking its name: Inventing a lesbian and gay studies. In K. Plummer (Ed.), Modern homosexualities: Fragments of lesbian and gay experience (pp. 3 – 25). London, New York: Routledge. Plummer, K. (2003). Intimate citizenship: Private decisions and public dialogues. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Predlog Družinskega zakonika [Draft of the family code of the republic of Slovenia]. (2010). Ljubljana: Vlada Republike Slovenije. Primorac, I. (2002). Etika in seks [Ethics and sex]. Ljubljana: Krtina. Rich, A. (1994). Blood, bread, and poetry. New York: Norton Paperback. Richardson, R. (1986). The hidden messages of school books. Journal of Moral Education, 15 (1), 26-42. Seidman, S. (1992). Embattled eros: sexual politics and ethics in contemporary America. London, New York: Routledge. Smith, T. W. (1994). Attitudes toward sexual permissiveness: Trends, correlates, and behavioral connections. In A. S. Rossi (Ed), Sexuality across the life course (pp. 6397). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Štrajn, D. (1998). Družbene spremembe in izobraževanje [Social changes and education]. In D. Štrajn, J. Kolenc, & M. Šimenc (Eds.), Družbene spremembe in izobraževanje [Social changes and education] (pp. 27-46). Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut. Švab, A., & Kuhar, R. (2005). Neznosno udobje zasebnosti: vsakdanje življenje gejev in lezbijk [The unbearable comfort of privacy: The everyday life of gays and lesbians]. Ljubljana: Mirovni inštitut. Ustava Republike Slovenije [Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia]. (1991). Ljubljana: Uradni list. Vončina, V. (2009). Nelagodje in različne spolne usmerjenosti v šoli [Discomfort and sexual orientation diversity in school]. Sodobna pedagogika [Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies], 60 (4), 148 -163. Weeks, J. (1995). Invented moralities: Sexual values in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press. Zakon o registraciji istospolnih partnerstev [Registration of a same-sex civil partnership act]. (2005). Retrieved December 18, 2011, from Ministry of labour, family, social affairs and equal opportunities website: http://zakonodaja.gov.si/rpsi/r05/ predpis_ZAKO4335.html Zakon o organizaciji in inanciranju vzgoje in izobraževanja [Organization and inancing of education act and the elementary school act]. Retrieved June, 18, 2013, from Ministry of education, science and sport website: http://www.uradni-list.si/1/objava.jsp?urlid=199612&stevilka=567 Zakon o osnovni šoli [Elementary School Act]. Retrieved June, 18, 2013, from Ministry of education, science and sport website: http://www.uradni-list.si/1/objava. jsp?urlid=200681&stevilka=3535 Zavod RS za šolstvo [The National Education Institute]. (2003). Učni načrti: Vzgoja za zdravje [Curricula: education for health]. Retrieved December 18, 2009, from Zavod za šolstvo website: http://www.zrss.si/default.asp?link=predmet&tip=6&pID=33&rID=608 186 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Heteronormativity: School, ideology, and politics Zgaga, P. (1991). Težave z vzgojo: med državo in civilno družbo [Troubles with education: between the state and civil society]. In Z. Medveš (Ed.), Vzgoja v javni šoli [Education in Public School] (pp. 24-39). Ljubljana: Znanstveno in publicistično središče. Authors: Metka Mencin Čeplak, ph.d. university of ljubljana faculty of Social Sciences Kardeljeva pl. 5 ljubljana 1000 Slovenia email: [email protected] journal of pedagogy 2/2013 187 articleS DOI 10.2478/jped-2013-0010 JoP 4 (2): Scottish and Slovak university student discussions about stigmatized persons: A challenge for education – moving towards democracy and inclusion Jana Plichtová Abstract: The paper compares discussions in 12 groups of university students (6 Slovak and 6 Scottish) equal in sex and age. The participants discussed the same problem - how to control the spread of HIV/AIDS and respect medical conidentiality (MC). Systematic comparisons revealed striking differences between the two national groups. The Scottish discussants were more cooperative than the Slovaks; they devoted more attention to analysing the problem and to creating a shared understanding of it. Although there was a temptation to contravene MC and the individual rights of those infected with HIV in both the Slovak and Scottish groups, only the Scottish discussants came to the conclusion, collaboratively and through argumentative exchange, that such proposals would be counterproductive in controlling the spread of HIV or in protecting public health. In the Slovak groups even participants who were opposed to discriminative proposals were not able to convince their fellow discussants that MC should not be contravened. Links are drawn between the indings and critical pedagogy and inclusion. Key words: critical pedagogy and pedagogy of inclusion, small discussion groups, argumentational thinking, stigmatization, HIV/AIDS, medical conidentiality 188 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Scottish and Slovak university student discussions about stigmatized persons: a challenge... Morality, without justice, produces injustice, hence immorality. R. A. Cohen (1998, p.xvi) Introduction As Hume (1777) pointed out we are capable of feeling sympathy for those who are close to us. If the essence of any morality and justice is empathy and mutual respect and care, how can we overcome our limits of empathy toward the OTHER? Is rationality in the form of argumentative discussion an appropriate and suficient means of agreeing on morals? Critical sociology holds that social orders are not natural but are a consequence of classifying individuals, and that involves including and excluding people. Any such “operation of inclusion/exclusion is an act of violence perpetrated upon the world, and requires the support of a certain amount of coercion” (Baumann, 1993). Modernity itself is an open and contradictory project that tends to reduce all “Otherness” to “Sameness” by violence if necessary (Levinas, 1961/1995). Numerous empirical studies indicate that in spite of deliberate initiatives and policies in liberal societies, individuals who are different, for instance, mentally or physically ill are deprived of being recognized as full human beings (see, for instance, Jodelet, 1984; Marková & Farr, 1995; Joffe, 1998). For example, individuals with HIV are stigmatized, seen as being irresponsible, immoral and dirty individuals who do not deserve our sympathy and help. They are systematically disadvantaged in a variety of ways, including income, education, housing status, medical treatment and health (Link & Phelan, 2001). As empirical research suggests, HIV stigma is considered to be a major barrier to accessing prevention, care and treatment (Chesney & Smith, 1999) and prevents uptake of HIV testing. Nonetheless, one of the pillars of modernity is the political project of democracy and human rights. Thus Dewey (1916/1961) argues that otherness and difference enrich the life of a pluralistic democracy and must be recognized. Without joint efforts and appropriate policies, individual freedom, a participatory way of living together and social growth are under threat. His assessment of the democratic quality of a given group, or community, is derived from two kind of observations: 1. How numerous and varied are the interests which are consciously shared? 2. How full and free is interplay with other forms of associations? Such questions must be asked in relation to the education system as well. Does a particular educational system secure the plural and wide participation of learners and educators? What measures have been introduced against uniformity and the dangers of anti-humanism and the isolationism of the privileged class? Does the educational system journal of pedagogy 2/2013 189 articleS merely serve as a social medium, transmitting basic cultural skills, techniques, knowledge and moral virtues or does it cultivate values, capabilities and social skills for a participatory way of living together? Does it struggle to achieve as much equity as possible between advantaged and disadvantaged groups? Does every human being, independent of the quantity or range of his personal endowment, have the right to equal opportunity to develop whatever gifts he has? Are the educators willing to recognize the different experiences and background of learners and deal with them in a creative, responsive and constructive way? What should be done to make education truly democratic and humanistic? The exclusion, separation and even segregation of various types of OTHER, namely economically and culturally disadvantaged groups, can be observed in all European countries, including those in Central Europe, where in spite of the relatively homogeneous populations in terms of culture and ethnicity, the disparity in education is more salient. Numerous EU programmes and projects have been developed and funded to deal with disparities in education. Several professional networks developing a pedagogy of inclusive education have been established. Hidden to varying degrees in the extensive and comprehensive work they do is the problem of how to deter a majority group away from the tendency to protect its own privileges (exclusivity) at the expense of the OTHER. How can the tendency towards a uniformity of thinking be reduced? How can we foster empathy toward the OTHER? How can we diminish the tendency towards a totalitarian pattern of thinking. A pedagogy of inclusion has to ind methods of revealing and unmasking habitual ways of thinking that lead to exclusion and a lack of empathy towards categories of people who are perceived to be different from the norm. These methods should involve active learning through the various experiences of students from different backgrounds, through cultivating the genuine constructive capacity of the students as well as deconstructive ideas and thoughts. It requires educators to adopt a different approach and they may require skills to facilitate deliberative communication among students, amongst other things. This paper relects on my experiences as a researcher and educator in my attempts to cultivate deconstructive (critical) thinking in university students through the method of inquiry in how to solve current social problems. Method The data was collected as part of an international research project entitled Responsibilities and entitlements: a study in language and social repre- 190 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Scottish and Slovak university student discussions about stigmatized persons: a challenge... sentations in Central and Western Europe and subsequent local projects1. Six different topics were discussed in small groups (4-5 participants) and one of the most interesting topics, which produced quite different results between the two sets of language users, was medical conidentiality and HIV patient responsibilities. Discussions were held in small groups of 4-5 people (N=16) at the university during seminars or free periods. The participants (18-23 years old) were university students living in the Slovak capital of Bratislava or near Stirling in Scotland. The groups were homogeneous in terms of age and education. The groups were single-sex with equal numbers of male and female groups. The discussions were between 45 and 90 minutes long. The participants were welcomed and familiarised with the basic rules of discussion and the goals of the research project. Once it was explained why the researcher would need to video the whole discussion and obtained the students’ permission, the following problem was presented them: “You are Chief Medical Advisors at the Ministry of Health. Your primary task at present is to contain the spread of HIV/AIDS. People with HIV and AIDS are protected by medical conidentiality. This means that the doctor must not tell either his/her professional colleagues or the patient’s spouse or anybody else that the patient has HIV. However, if the patient does not behave responsibly he or she can infect other people. As a group of advisors, you are responsible for the health of the public. What advice would you give to the Minister in resolving this dilemma?” This kind of inquiry provides students with an opportunity to do something: to search for the facts that constitute the terms of the problem, listen to each other and deal with various points of view and the different experiences their peers have had. Such indeterminate problem with no a priori determined solution has important consequences for teaching – it produces genuine communication, relective thinking and unleashes the creative potentialities of students. The Analysis The analysis was grounded in the pragmatic-dialogical theory of argumentation (van Eemeren & Grootendorst, 1983) and in critical discourse 1 The leader of the research group was Professor I. Marková, 1997–1999. Later research on the rights and responsibilities of the individual was led by J. Plichtová. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 191 articleS analysis (Reisigl &Wodak, 2001; Wodak et al., 2009). It focused predominantly on exploring the use of referential and nominated strategies – (the way in which they are constructed linguistically and are representative of the identities of the social actors, the ways in which individual social actors are referred to, the ways in which they are “labelled”), predicative strategies – characteristics attributed to those with HIV, judgements on their intentions and responsibility, argumentation strategies (how they justify the solutions proposed), expressed and unexpressed perspectives, premises and jointly accepted propositions. Grootendorst and van Eemeren (2004), who consider discussion to be a means of resolving differences in opinion, suggest that the roles of the protagonist and antagonist are distinct – the protagonist presents his/her proposition and the antagonist criticises that proposition. If the proposition does not stand up to criticism, then the protagonist should recognise that the standpoint is not reasonable. If the proposition does stand up to criticism, then the antagonist should recognise that the protagonist’s standpoint is reasonable. The assumption is that the participants come to a mutual agreement on the basis of argumentative discussion; however, this is the case only when the participants respect the rules of rational discussion (Van Eemeren, 1993). This means that all the discussants adhere to the agreed rules and do not seek to impose their opinions despite there being differences in opinion. If the discussants do not respect each other and if they are not willing to be attentive to one another and coordinate what they say, then they cannot reach an agreement that is acceptable to all. However, the pragma-dialectical model for discussion does not explicitly refer to the societal, moral, subjective and intersubjective dimension of each social and societal problem. If we wish to resolve any kind of social issue, then we need to understand the various interdependencies between the material and the rational side (the objective dimension) and the subjective side (“seeing” the problem from the perspective of different actors), and the societal side (morals, political values, ideological beliefs, institutional settings, legal system). In analysing how the discussion develops I shall therefore pay attention how the discussants relect on and consider the subjectivity of the various actors, the connections between the material, social, ideological, moral and subjective dimension of the societal problems that are revealed. By subjectivity we mean the ability to relect on the positions of others and to understand the subjectivity of the other person. Intersubjectivity means the outcome of a (critical, open) dialogue which leads to a change in the original subjectivity, expanding it. The discussion therefore does not simply involve rationality, but also the processes by which we understand others through empathy. 192 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Scottish and Slovak university student discussions about stigmatized persons: a challenge... The Scottish Discussion F- facilitator, A, B, C, D – participants (abbreviated) Clarifying the problem and confrontation stage B: Clariies the problem: “It may not be how we control the spread of HIV is basically our main concern. Ideally we want to keep the conidentiality as well... How are we going to control the spread of HIV while keeping the conidentiality of the patient?” D: Continues clarifying and asks all the participants the following question: “You’re assuming that people with HIV aren’t going to act responsibly and avoid blood contact with other people or whatever? Maybe they are.” The question includes knowledge of the fact that HIV is transmittable only via blood and that it is not simply about sexual contact. Thus, so long as no injury occurs, there is no blood contamination (objective dimension of spread of HIV). The discussant relects upon the fact that those who are HIV positive do not necessarily behave irresponsibly. C: Suggests a different interpretation of the task: “The question we are really discussing is should we change the rules of conidentiality in the case of people who have got HIV.” B: Objects and repeats that it is not about controlling the spread of HIV but about maintaining medical conidentiality (MC). C: Insists on a particular interpretation of the problem: (the role of antagonist and protagonist are mixed). “I do agree, it seems to be the question of is there some sort of precedent for relaxing conidentiality laws in the case of HIV because of people with HIV behaving irresponsibly.” B: Disagrees and argues on the basis of the oaths and binding laws to which the medical profession have agreed: journal of pedagogy 2/2013 193 articleS “This is the issue, isn’t it, do you then change the oaths and the binding laws to which they have signed themselves” A: Refers to C’s idea and asks whether exceptions to MC where HIV is concerned would give doctors a free hand in dealing with irresponsible HIV sufferers and 2.whether the spread of HIV could be reduced through monitoring those who are HIV. B: Disagrees with A and argues on the basis of the law that guarantees MC. A: Rejects this arguing that it is simply a law and that it can be changed at any time. D: Argues on the basis of analogy with the law on child abuse, where the law on conidentiality does not apply. A: Rejects the idea that an appropriate analogy can be drawn with child abuse – where child abuse is concerned there is no doubt as to who the victim is and who the perpetrator is, whereas in those who are HIV infected the victim is also the perpetrator. Dividing HIV positive people up into victims and perpetrators is unacceptable and impossible in practice since by deinition a person who has just been infected is a victim and at the same time is a potential perpetrator. The participant casts doubt on there being any reason why one patient should retain anonymity and another not. ‘A’ argues that using terms such as guilt, innocence, perpetrator and victim is not constructive. Abolishing MC where HIV is concerned would not prevent it from spreading. (Here are the links between the medical and ethical aspects of problem and the moral obligation to protect all patients equally clariied). D and B: Develop their argumentation further: abolishing medical conidentiality where HIV is concerned would be counterproductive, since people would worry about becoming stigmatised and would not go for tests. These arguments relate to the subjective dimension of the problem (fear, worries people have about HIV) and the social dimension of the problem (stigma), since society sees those infected with HIV as socially deviant. 194 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Scottish and Slovak university student discussions about stigmatized persons: a challenge... C: Points out that the rules are binding for all and highlights the dificulties that might arise should exceptions be made (slippery slope argument): “You’ve obviously got a wider issue here haven’t you, because if you relax it for one category of disease then you could say should it be relaxed for other diseases which are also contagious?” A: Agrees and justiies this by rejecting solutions that are based on searching for a culprit. “Blaming is not helpful. If we accuse someone of spreading an infectious disease, then we are not solving the problem. If the rights of one group of people with a particular disease were curtailed in relation to the rights of others, then that would indeed mean deciding who the culprit is. Curtailing the rights of those infected with HIV would lead to unacceptable inequalities in the way they are treated.” Participant A’s argument is based on the principle that unequal treatment is unacceptable. The conclusion from all this is that the only acceptable solution is to focus on educating the public. The participants come to mutually recognise that MC offers protection to those who are infected with HIV. It protects their identity and protects them against stigmatisation. The participants then clarify the pragmatic dimension of subjectivity in the sense of knowledge and knowing: if those who are HIV positive discover in time that they are infected with HIV, then they will know that they should behave responsibly and protect their partners from infection. Revealed Interdependencies 1. MC protects those who are infected with HIV from potential stigmatisation, thereby reducing their fears and encouraging them to willingly undergo voluntary testing. 2. The risk of HIV spreading is reduced by the fact that those infected will ind out in time that they have HIV in their blood. A: Begins a new topic – protecting the private sphere. B: Gives an example of a pregnant woman who smokes. It is not possible in this case either to take the cigarette out of journal of pedagogy 2/2013 195 articleS her mouth and justify the act by saying that it endangers the health of her child. Equally it is not possible to ban an HIV positive person from having sex or sharing needles (the argumentation is based on analogy). B further argues in normative terms (using a general principle) – “…it’s the private sphere and no one has the right to regulate it through orders and bans.” Recommendations to Ministry of Health 1. Educate the public: a. reduce the stigma of HIV/AIDS, b. encourage people to undergo testing, c. oppose the belief that if you catch it then you are to blame (changing public opinion), d. explain what safe sex is. 2. Keep in place tools that encourage mutual trust and openness amongst people (for example, MC). 3. Motivate people with HIV to behave responsibly, provide them with detailed information on how to prevent others from becoming infected. This was also justiied: “The fact that they became infected probably means that they didn’t take suficient protective measures, perhaps because they weren’t aware of them, so reminding them of them would help protect their potential partners.” 4. Foster HOPE in those with HIV, encourage them to believe that sensible behaviour leads to positive results and increases their life expectancy. “If someone who is infected with HIV feels that they been sentenced to death, with no opportunity to live their life, if they feel excluded from society, then it produces pathological changes in them – reckless behaviour and a desire for revenge.” (subjective negativity could be turned around for the beneit of all of us). The Slovak Discussion Slovak discussants did not clarify the problem itself and went straight on recommendations. 196 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Scottish and Slovak university student discussions about stigmatized persons: a challenge... D: Suggests that a distinction should be made between “innocent” and “guilty” HIV sufferers, i.e. between those who became infected through their own actions and those who were “innocent”, that is, infected through blood transfusions etc. By categorising individuals in this way, it is possible to predict that 1. the guilty will wish to hide the fact that they are infected, 2. that those who are innocent will voluntarily and publicly admit that they have the disease. E: Accepts the proposed categorisation, but predicts different behaviour patterns. 1. Those who are guilty, who became infected as a consequence of their lifestyle, will not care whether anybody inds out or not, 2. those who are innocent will tend to hide their status. No justiication is given for the categorisation and the predictions on behaviour. A: Rejects the notion of categorising people as innocent and guilty. What is important is establishing whether the infected will spread HIV further or not. D: Supports the idea of categorising those who are infected with HIV as innocent or guilty using an argumentation strategy: “… those who are guilty are irresponsible people who will spread the disease further and so it is essential to intervene” (a negative predictive framework and circular reasoning). B: Suggests that doctors should be obliged to inform others about the patient’s disease. D: Agrees with B and backs up the idea using an argumentative scheme: “Informing others about those who are HIV positive is the only effective form of prevention. Otherwise, more people will become infected.” The argumentative scheme presupposes dividing people up into “us” and “them”, which is an antagonism between healthy and infected people, based on fear of the risks. F: Asks whether maintaining MC in fact runs counter to protecting the public interest. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 197 articleS B: Suggests that MC should be abolished where HIV infected people are concerned and justiies this using the following predictive strategy: “Those infected with HIV are simply pursuing their own selish goals (having fun and infecting others at the same time), and they have to be prevented from doing this.” Abolishing MC is therefore justiied by attributing negative character traits (irresponsibility and immorality) to HIV sufferers. Hedonism and sexual promiscuity are seen as being the causes of the spread of infection (a lack of knowledge about the substance of the issue). D: Agrees with the predictive strategy that those infected with HIV are immoral and so do not deserve to be protected by MC. D asks a rhetorical question: “How can we distinguish between responsible and irresponsible HIV sufferers?”, and then supplies an answer. “Since it is impossible to distinguish between those who are responsible and those who are not, MC should be abolished for all those infected with HIV.” This type of totalitarian fallacy2 – the need to sacriice those who are not members of our group is rather frequent. The question of JUSTICE is neglected by Slovak participants because OUR interests should take priority (because WE are on the right track). F: asks: “Is a doctor “entitled” to inform a third person about a patient’s disease?” D: Expresses the opinion that a doctor is indeed “entitled” to do so. B: Disagrees with the idea of abolishing MC and then justiies his position since: 1. there is a danger that the information 2 We should bear in mind that Dewey’s irst criterion for assessing the democratic quality of a given group (community and society) is an internal one. It concerns the plurality of “interests which are consciously shared” (1916, p. 89). A pluralistic and participatory way of life, where people with different interests live together stands in opposition to uniformity and the dangers of totalitarianism. However, a plural and participatory way of life requires an open-mindedness towards different interests and the “recognition of mutual interests” (ibid, p. 92). 198 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Scottish and Slovak university student discussions about stigmatized persons: a challenge... could be misused and 2. there is a danger of stigmatisation (the societal dimension of the problem). A: Agrees and gives the example of the ilm Philadelphia. D: Refuses to acknowledge the argumentation that has gone before. D objects saying that if an HIV sufferer does not inform his/her partner then the partner’s life is in danger. This argumentation strategy exaggerates the risks of infection and prematurely shuts down the issue without any further exploration of the substance of the matter – that is, what are the dangers of sexual intercourse, what conditions are required for HIV to be transmitted and is it possible to protect oneself against HIV infection. E: Repeats the argument that those with AIDS are stigmatised in society. D: Uses E’s argumentation in favour of D’s argument and argues that stigmatising those infected with HIV is beneicial, since it warns the OTHERS off. D adds that “Those who are infected only have themselves to blame, since they chose that kind of lifestyle” F: Wonders about those who have been infected through transfusion and are therefore “innocent” (objection against inconsistent arguments). D: Accepts that this might have a negative impact on those who are “innocent” and that “a few people might have their lives destroyed”. D insists, however, that it is an acceptable solution which will protect many human lives. Non-consensual suggestions and common beliefs Public interest is narrowed down to the healthy section of the population, which takes precedence where justice and equality are concerned in relation to the right to equal treatment. There is a false assumption that there are no other ways of protecting against HIV. The subjectivity of those with HIV is negativised at irst. Their responsibility in regard to others is doubted and so the road to retaliation opens up: to exclusion and discrimination. This scheme creates the false appearance of JUSTICE. Its convincing force is journal of pedagogy 2/2013 199 articleS grounded in the false predication about the essentially negative subjectivity of the OTHER and is associated with the devaluation/dehumanization of the personal and social identity of the OTHER – people with HIV). F: Asks everyone whether they would agree with MC being abolished. They state that they have not reached agreement. B is not sure whether this is the real problem, D is for abolishing MC, since HIV infected people will continue to spread HIV further and go unpunished, A suggests that they should hold a referendum on the issue, C doubts that punishment would deter those who knew they were dying. D: Once more adopts the role of protagonist and suggests that those who are infected should be monitored. D does note that this would be an infringement of personal liberty, but that it could be defended on the grounds that those infected present a danger to others (pathetic fallacy). If people are aware that they are HIV positive and behave irresponsibly to others, by not admitting to being infected, then D suggests that strict sanctions should be imposed – isolation and imprisonment. A: Suggests that a list of those infected should be published in the newspapers (to control, to ostracise). This indicates a shared assumption of distrust in relation to the responsibilities those infected with HIV have towards US. D: Adds the following “pragmatic” justiication for publicising the identities of those infected with HIV: “... the infected could use the list as a way of meeting new people.” The argumentative strategy – “well it’s for their own beneit, we’re not doing anything unethical” negates the subjectivity of those infected with HIV and thus justiies the chosen course of action. The common understanding is that immorality (a promiscuous lifestyle) is the cause of HIV infection. WE have the “right” to act against the HIV infected, because there is no other way of protecting OURSELVES. 200 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Scottish and Slovak university student discussions about stigmatized persons: a challenge... Comparison of Stages in the Scottish and Slovak Discussion In the opening stages the Scottish discussants mapped out the ideas they had in common and deined equality as equality of treatment. Shared notions of the principals of equality and protecting privacy were deined explicitly through repeated questions and mutual assurances as to whether the principles had been understood in the same way. The discussants collaboratively agreed on a respect the privacy, medical conidentiality, equality of treatment and acknowledged an individual responsibility and rationality. The discussants agreed that 1. classiication of people as guilty or innocent, as victims or perpetrators and treating them differently are all clear examples of stigmatisation, so these solutions are unacceptable, 2. MC cannot be abolished in the case of HIV sufferers, since that would lead to discrimination of this group of patients with all the negative social and psychological consequences which that would entail. The concluding stage of the discussion led to the discussants agreeing on what the participants thought were the duties and responsibilities of the government in creating conditions for equality for all, ensuring that the public has access to the relevant information, motivating people to behave responsibly in terms of their health, reducing fear of the disease through education and enlightenment, and openly relecting upon all the important social implications of HIV/AIDS and thereby reducing the stigma attached to HIV/AIDS. The confrontational stage in the Slovak discussion was based on the premise that those who are HIV positive should be categorised as innocent or guilty. The antagonist disagreed with this, but did not use a single principled argument (equal treatment, for instance). The protagonist dominated the group defending classiication according to supposed immorality of HIV positive persons and not taking the differing opinions of the discussants into consideration. The protagonist was enough rhetorically skilled to defend his convictions by arguing that 1. public interest has to take precedence over the good of an individual who is a “threat” to society. 2. HIV is spread through the immoral lifestyle those infected lead. The discussants did not clarify the issue of whether protection of public health required that MC be maintained or not. No one successfully questioned the argumentative strategies used to defend stigmatisation of persons with HIV. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 201 articleS Table 1 Contrasting set of common beliefs in the Scottish and Slovak discussions Slovak moral discourse Their autonomous reThe individuals sponsibility is not recogwith HIV nized. They must be controlled by the authorities. The government The state has to control and punish the individuals with HIV. Scottish moral discourse Their autonomous responsibility is recognized (explicitly in relation to oneself and one’s partners = taking precautions + having the information and knowledge). The state has to protect the autonomy of any individual. MC and equal medical treatment should be guaranteed. Comparison of the Nominal and Predicative Strategies in the Slovak and Scottish Discussions There was a contrast between the Slovak groups, which labelled people with HIV as “ill, infected, HIV positive, AIDS-carrier, gay, homosexual, junkie and emphasised their “unclean” and “immoral lifestyles”, and the Scottish group which used more neutral labels, such as “someone who is HIV positive” and “a person who has AIDS”. The Scottish discussants did not judge people with HIV in terms of the personality traits that the Slovak discussants frequently referred to: immorality, frivolousness, mental instability, promiscuity, asocial, vindictiveness and so on. If any of the discussants described those infected with HIV in negative terms, a dissenter would always emerge and mitigate the generalisation, doubting or refuting the statement. This never occurred in the Slovak group. When one of the Scottish discussants used a polarising argumentative scheme (“we healthy people” versus “the sick”), there was always an antagonist to explicitly cast doubt on the statement. Summary Since the discussants in both the language groups displayed a tendency to separate those with HIV (the Other) from OURSELVES, to attribute negative characteristics to them and discriminate against them (Link & Phelan, 2001), it would seem that the stigma associated with people with HIV exists in both societies (Scottish and Slovak) due to perceived antagonistic interests. Nevertheless in the later phase of discussions, great differences were found between the two groups of language users as described above. In the inal stage of discussion, Scottish students considered the interdependence between the societal, interpersonal and personal dimensions of 202 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Scottish and Slovak university student discussions about stigmatized persons: a challenge... the problem and suggested a solution that would improve public health without sacriicing the rights of persons with HIV and destroying trust in the medical profession. The fact that the Scottish solution was much more inclusive than the Slovak one is an important inding because it indicates that the nature of education and public discourse matter. In British society the tendency to exclude and to discriminate against the OTHER (in this case the HIV infected) has been challenged by an opposing discourse grounded in a belief in individual rationality and autonomous responsibility. By contrast in Slovak society the stigma of HIV is bolstered by a widespread and generalized distrust of individual moral autonomy and doubts about the individual’s capacity to control his/her own emotions and desires. It should be explained that the authorities in the Catholic Church in Slovakia perceive HIV as being a punishment for an immoral lifestyle and use fear of HIV as a means of disciplining the sexual behaviour of their congregation. While the Scottish discussants reproduce convincing arguments for not discriminating against people with HIV, the Slovak discussants utilize various argumentative strategies to “justify” the punishment of and discrimination against persons with HIV. This difference was validated across all 24 groups and later on through the use of social dilemmas in my own teaching. The Scottish discussants explored and understood appropriately the interdependency between the societal dimension of the problem (stigmatisation), legal and institutional settings and the responsibility of persons with HIV. They comprehended that having medical knowledge about HIV transmission is an important factor in increasing the number of people taking protective measures against HIV and that the threat of discrimination reduces the willingness of persons with HIV to reveal their status to their partners. Willingness to undergo HIV testing is dependent on medical conidentiality being maintained and having trust in the medical profession. By contrast none of these interdependencies between the subjective and societal dimensions of the problem were revealed by the Slovak discussants, apart from the link between the stigma of HIV and willingness to undergo HIV testing. In addition, the comparison of the pattern of communication within the Scottish and Slovak groups of students revealed that the Slovaks were ill prepared to participate in argumentational discussion. They had not had enough experience of how to analyse the problem nor how to distinguish the various aspects of the problem. They were not ready to intellectualize the problem nor use the appropriate concepts and knowledge. They were made captive by fear and were constrained by the narrow meaning of morals. It indicates that the Slovak educational system is much less capable than the Scottish one of stimulating critical, constructive and deconstructive thinking. The Slovak university students have rarely, if ever, had the opportunity journal of pedagogy 2/2013 203 articleS to practice argumentative discussion or to participate in collaborative dialogue. Similarly, Zápotočná and Lukšík (2010) found that in (Slovak) schools there are very few opportunities for pupils to take part in discussions where freedom of speech and the required skills, such as expressing and formulating opinions, arguing and understanding different opinions, could be developed. This deicit in the skills, virtues, rules and practices of democratic communication has been documented by previous research as well (see, for instance, Plichtová & Moodie, 1998; Moodie et al., 1995; Plichtová &Berecká, 1998, 1999; Berecká, 1998). Interpretation From a critical psychology perspective, the discussions could be considered as texts and societal background, as textuality (education system, public discourse, power structure, shared symbols, meanings, and so on). The Slovak textuality is permeated with symbols of punishment and violence against the OTHER, by acts of dehumanisation, punishment and exclusion. By contrast, the Scottish textuality is more inclusive. Its shared meanings are anchored in the concepts of human rights, individual freedom, autonomous responsibility and mutual interdependency. In other words, the reasoning that the students are actually capable of producing depends not only on the knowledge stock and experience they have already obtained, but also on the culture and state of intellectual inquiry within that culture, especially the degree to which what is already known is public and communicable. Dewey’s distinction (1891/1967) between habits and routines provides us with another means by which to conceptualize the relationship between the discussions and the societal and social contexts, but this time from a dynamic and communication perspective. According to Dewey, habits are powers the individual has acquired through social communication (exchange and transaction), while customs are collective habits that always precede individual acquisition. Customs are part of culture – they create the comprehensive context through which our experiences take place. This means that our students’ discussions habitually reproduced things that had been transmitted to them via the family, school, Church, and so on. This suggests that our educational system fails to use the transformative and emancipatory potential of education and inclusive pedagogy. Instead of nurturing intellectual quality, connectedness, recognition of difference, and emotional responsibility (Gabel, 2002), our educational institutions transmit a narrow conception of morality, negative emotions towards the OTHER, close-minded thinking and feelings. 204 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Scottish and Slovak university student discussions about stigmatized persons: a challenge... What is to be done? Our system of education should be radically changed so that teaching becomes democratic, socially responsible, inclusive, communicative and critical. Reforms should go hand in hand with the dialogical engagement of educators with learners. They should engage all their students in constructive activity and facilitate development of relective, constructive and critical and open-minded thinking. They should explore the appropriate cultural tools and resources to deconstruct old habits and meanings and to reconstruct them in the interests of freedom, dignity and the equality of human beings. The subjectivity and diversity of students’ standpoints and their original perspectives should be considered essential conditions for growth. If learners were just copies of their environment, nothing new could ever emerge. One of the methods in which learners’ reasoning capacities can be developed is through argumentative discussion among themselves and another is open dialogue between educators and learners. Both methods may lead them to tentative deconstruction of the habitual and customary perspectives that have held them captive in the morality of the nineteenth century. Critical social psychology can provide a means of facilitating various types of social communication in order to reveal and unmask habitual ways of thinking and nurture empathy towards categories of people who are perceived as different. Performing drama, conducting role plays, simulating trials, conducting interviews, writing and reading autobiographies, deconstructing myths and symbols are all suitable methods of restoring recognition of all human beings. University students should have more opportunities to exercise the skills necessary for participating in open discussions. Their capacities to reason should be challenged by constructive and creative tasks, such as comparing normative and scientiic theories and making judgements about the viabilities of these theories in a societal context, and discovering the validity and consistency of their arguments. It is the social intelligence of the learners that will in the end decide whether we succeed in living together in freedom without violence and coercion. References Berecká, O. (1998). Diskurzívne charakteristiky demokracie v malých skupinách [Discursive characteristics of democracy in small groups], unpublished dissertation. Bratislava: Department of Social and Biological Communication, Slovak Academy of Sciences. Bauman, Z. (1993). Postmodern ethics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Chesny, M., & Smith, A. (1999). Critical delays in testing and care: The potential role of stigma. American Behavior Scientist, 42, 1162-1174. Cohen, R. A. (1998). Foreword to E. Levinas: Otherwise than being or beyond essence. Pittsburg: Duquesne University Press. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 205 articleS Dewey, J. (1916/1961). Democracy and education. New York : The Macmillan Company. Dewey, J. (1891/1967). Psychology. In: The early works of John Dewey, vol. 2. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press. Gabel, S. (2002). Some conceptual problems with critical pedagogy. Curriculum Inquiry, 32 (2), 177-201. Grootendorst, R., & Van Eemeren, F. H. (2004). A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge Press. Jodelet, D. (1989/1991). Madness and social representation [Original title: Folies et Représentations Sociales T. Pownall). New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Levinas, E. (1961/1995). Totality and ininity. Pittsburg, PA: Duquesne University Press. Link, B.G., & Phelan, J. C. (2001). Conceptualizing stigma. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 363-385. Link, B.G., & Phelan, J. C. (2006). Stigma and it public health implication. Lancet, 667-529. Mahajana, A.P., Saylesc, J. N., Patela, V. A., Remiend, R. H., Sawiresa, S. R., Daniel J. Ortize, D. J., Szekeresa G., & Coatesa, T. J. (2008). Stigma in the HIV/AIDS epidemic: a review of the literature and recommendations for the way forward. AIDS, 22 (suppl 2): 67–S79 Marková, I., & Farr, R. (Eds.) (1995). Representations of health, illness and handicap. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic. Moodie, E., Marková, I., & Plichtová, J.(1995). Lay Representations of Democracy: A Study in Two Cultures. Culture and Psychology, 1, 423-453. Plichtová J., & Berecká, O. (1998). Diskusná skupina - “miniatúra mysliacej spoločnosti” [Discussion groups – “a thinking society in miniature”]. Človek a spoločnosť (Internet journal for theory and research in social sciences), 1, 3. Plichtová, J., & Berecká, O. (1999). Postoje v argumentatívnom kontexte [Attitudes in arguments]. In: V. Bačová (Ed.), Súčasnosť a perspektívy psychológie. Košice: FF PU, Katedra psychológie. Plichtová, J., & Moodie, E. (1998). Proposals, justiications and beliefs in discussion groups: Slovak - Scottish comparison. Paris, 18 - 21 May, European Laboratory of Social Psychology: Maison des Sciences de l’Homme. Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (2001). Discourse and discrimination: Rhetorics of racism and antisemitism. London: Routledge Van Eemeren, F. H. (1993). Reconstructing argumentative discourse. Tuscaloosa, Alabama: The University of Alabama Press. Van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, communication and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Wodak, R., Cillia, R., Reisigl, M., & Liebhart, K. (2009). The discoursive construction of national identity. 2 nd ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Zápotočná, O., & Lukšík, I. (2010). Modely občianskeho vzdelávania a ich podiel na formovaní aktívneho demokratického občianstva [Models of civic education and how they contribute to the formation of an active, democratic citizenship]. In J. Plichtová (Ed.), Občianstvo, participácia a deliberácia na Slovensku: teória a realita (pp. 313-332). Bratislava: Veda. 206 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 Scottish and Slovak university student discussions about stigmatized persons: a challenge... Author: jana plichtová, cSc., professor institute for research in Social communication, Slovak academy of Sciences dúbravská cesta 9 841 04 Bratislava 4 Slovakia email: [email protected] journal of pedagogy 2/2013 207 articleS DOI 10.2478/jped-2013-0011 JoP 4 (2): Perspectives on English teacher development in rural primary schools in China Wang Ping Abstract: Questionnaires are used to examine Chinese rural primary school English teachers’ needs and challenges and perceptions in the implementation of Standards for Teachers of English in Primary Schools as professional development in rural school contexts in China. A total of 300 teachers participated in the research. Their feedback illustrates that there are serious problems with the current training model and that teachers have a very high expectation of being involved in the Professional Graduate Certiicate in Education. Key words: rural school teachers of English; PGCE; curriculum innovation; professional development Background In 2001, as a result of the global expansion of programmes in English Teaching to Young Learners and China’s rapid social and economic change, the Ministry of Education of China (MOE) initiated a curriculum innovation: the promotion of teaching English as a foreign language in primary schools beginning in Year 3 (ages 9-10). In 2005, the MOE formulated Standards for Teachers of English in Primary Schools (STEPS). These require all primary teachers to transform their views on teaching, to develop students’ comprehensive language competence by making learning a process during which students develop language proiciency, form positive attitudes, improve thinking skills, increase cross-cultural awareness and learn to use learning strategies so as to gradually become independent learners. The major change is the shift from traditional grammar-translation to the development of over208 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 perspectives on english teacher development in rural primary Schools in china all language competence. The emphasis lies on activating students’ interest in learning, relating the course content to the students’ life experiences, promoting cooperation among students and advocating learning by doing. The rural primary school teachers of English adopting STEPS have found it quite a challenge. They need a reasonable degree of target language proiciency. They also have to acquire a fair degree of autonomy in classroom decision-making and cope with local constraints. There is also tension between the proposed apprenticeship model designed to help them learn their “new trade” and the traditional model of teacher education, which is based on studying academic, education theory in addition to teaching practice. Also, rural teachers often experience lower levels of job satisfaction than those in urban areas. They are not only overloaded with teaching hours but are also underpaid. Thus they are not always able to meet the needs of their students as they would wish. In essence, their sense of professional self is now under threat (Hayes, 2006, p. 160). In addition, they have to travel half a day or more to attend the STEPS training programme. The cascade model employed as the sole training mode for implementing STEPS nationwide, has been criticized for offering diluted training the further one progresses down the cascade. Where this has happened, the lack of take-up at grass-roots level may, as I discuss below, be as much a consequence of the lack of consultation with the teachers by policy makers in the initial stages of STEPS (re)design as a fault within the cascade model itself. The rural primary school teachers of English have seen a disparity between the training they receive and the innovative practice they are asked to implement in their classrooms in the rural school context. Why, the teachers may feel, should they have faith in STEPS training in the irst place? Yet, without adequate training, these teachers are not able to maximize the English learning potential of rural school pupils. It was this need for English teacher professional development created by STEPS training that motivated me to conduct research. This article is thus about a study into the professional development of a large group of rural primary school English teachers in China. The aim is to explore whether the UK model of the Professional Graduate Certiicate in Education (PGCE) could be introduced into the rural primary school context in China. The Chinese Teacher Training Model vs. The UK PGCE Training Approach The Chinese teacher training model In pre-service teacher education programmes in China, the predominant teaching method is teacher-centered, with university staff lecturing to stujournal of pedagogy 2/2013 209 articleS dents who listen silently while making notes. There are not many classroom activities involving the students. They do not give oral presentations and there is no micro-teaching or individual tutorial system. There are no handouts, but for each course there are textbooks. Teaching content is mainly based on the textbook (Sharp & Ning, 1998, p. 69). The pedagogy in many Chinese schools is similar. Great emphasis is put upon the memorisation of basic facts and principles, with teachers using whole-class approaches, ixed syllabuses and textbooks. Yat-ming (1991, p. 76) states “China inherits a dogmatic Confucian pedagogical tradition which has fused effectively with the Soviet mode of instruction. The resulting hybrid pattern of teaching and learning is text-based and teacher-centred. It is geared to implement the syllabus which is usually content-overloaded”. The teaching method in Chinese rural primary schools is very commonly teacher-centred and text-based too. Children are rarely actively involved in the lesson. Teachers tend to believe that a ‘good’ English lesson is one where the teacher clearly explains the materials and accomplishes what he/she sets out to do according to the curriculum, rather than how well students learn or how actively the learners are involved in the learning process. Willis (1981, p. 42) states that inishing course books becomes the predominate aim in both the teacher’s and the students’ minds. This inevitably involves a signiicant amount of tightly controlled practice and subsequent testing; often emphasizing the form to the exclusion of meaning and use, and any communicative purpose in learning English is forgotten. As indicated above, the cascade model has been adopted. This model (Hayes, 2000; Bax, 2002) is widely employed to try to provide training in a cost effective manner, especially where the numbers ultimately needing training are very large and funds limited. Direct training, in the knowledge and skills thought necessary to enable the desired changes in classrooms, is given to a relatively small number of specialists or trainers. Recipients of such “irst level” training are then expected to train other groups, who may then, in turn, be expected to pass on the essence of their training to their colleagues. If the hoped for ‘cascade’ down from irst to subsequent levels can be seen to have occurred, albeit with the training content probably diluted as it trickles down (Hayes, 2000), educational planners may consider that they have introduced the means of implementing desired changes to classroom teachers cost effectively. During the cascade training for STEPS and within a local education commission, the irst teacher trainers expressed the view, that teachers would need regular courses if there was to be any signiicant improvement in classroom practice. 210 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 perspectives on english teacher development in rural primary Schools in china The UK PGCE training approach In the UK, the PGCE is a ten-month pre-service teacher training course for undergraduate degree holders. Those passing the PGCE are acknowledged by Ofsted (2011) and granted “eligibility to teach” in the UK schools. The PGCE is also widely recognised in the rest of the world, allowing holders to easily register as teachers after additional local training and certiication. PGCE student teachers attend intensive and focused lectures, seminars and workshops for a number of weeks. These provide them with basic knowledge. The students read, research, relect and deliberate with each other and with the lecturers. A number of assignments are planned, researched and written. In this period, they are encouraged to develop their own philosophy of teaching and learning. Then the students start their, approximately, 24week school and observation placement. On each school placement there are joint observations of student teachers’ lessons. The students have to undertake at least two substantial placements in different schools, providing them with a wealth of experience from different practitioners in different contexts. Their school partnership tutor will provide them with an alternate outlook to help them to further develop their own philosophy. Finally when the students return from each school placement they share their positive and negative times, relecting on their experiences. Rixon (2000) and Papp (2011) emphasize the necessity of such adequate training for teachers. From 2005 to 2006, I attended a PGCE course at a university in London. During that period I worked with my academic tutor and school-based mentor collaboratively. The tutor and the mentor helped me to face up to issues or experiences and assess and evaluate my own learning to identify priorities for further action. We trainees also learned from each other in pair and group work. I got a sense of what some of my peers had experienced in class. My skills of working with others also developed. My concept of the role of a teacher changed from one of being a didactic presenter to one of a collaborative facilitator enabling learning. At the end of the PGCE, I was a qualiied teacher of mandarin Chinese. In the following year I started to teach in a school in the centre of London, I found the skill and techniques I learned in the PGCE of great value. As a result the BBC interviewed me and reported my classroom teaching on the BBC website on November 24th, 2006. A comparison Compared with the PGCE training approach, the cascade training programme in China is short, quick, fast and cheap. It potentially reaches more teachers and focuses on the prime importance of the subject knowledge of teachers. It attempts to detail very precisely what teachers should cover, journal of pedagogy 2/2013 211 articleS and how this is to be assessed. There is a lack of ethos for career-long professional development. In light of the above, I wanted to ask the following research questions: 1. What problems have the teachers encountered in the implementation of STEPS training? 2. Has the current cascade training been effective in dealing with the problems? 3. Would the trainee teachers like a new teacher training model? The Study Participants and instruments The study involves 300 primary school English teachers (157 female/143 male; average age: 31). The participants are 150 teachers from 10 primary schools in Zhejiang Province, 25 primary schools in Jiangsu Province, while 150 are from primary schools in Gansu Province and the Xinjiang Uryur and Ningxia Hui Autonomous Regions. The participants, “leading English teachers” in their schools, all attend the cascade training locally, still ongoing at the time of research. And they had also had experience of the ideas behind the PGCE from previous sessions. I have adopted mixed methods in this study, involving the use of two questionnaires. The study will last four years. Below are the sorts of statements that I put to the teachers after their local cascade training combined with their direct experience of the teaching approaches covered in the PGCE. I asked them if they agreed with the statements or not. Sample statements A. Concerning the local cascade training – The school authorities require all teachers to attend the training section of STEPS. Teachers have no say in this. – Teachers’ critical problem in the implementation of STEPS training model lies in English language competence. – Teachers have little opportunity to discuss STEPS or to share ideas about it. – Teachers have access to publications so that they can learn and understand more about STEPS. – Teachers are largely given support to attend the teacher training section within the frame of STEPS. – Time for professional development is built into teachers’ workloads. – Being a rural primary school teacher seems to be a challenging profession. 212 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 perspectives on english teacher development in rural primary Schools in china Responses showed that all the participants were required to attend the training at the behest of the school management teams. ‘Lack of English competence’ was seen as the most crucial problem by 98.9% of the teachers; while 95.9% had no say in the implementation of STEPS. The participants said teachers had access to professional development resources. Over 90% had opportunities to develop their English proiciency and methodological skills. The vast majority believed that professional development had become an important part of teachers’ professional lives. B. From experiencing ideas behind the PGCE training model – The PGCE training approach meets the requirement of STEPS. – I am motivated to take a PGCE to be a qualiied teacher. – I need the PGCE training approach in order to feel conident in the teaching role. – Teachers are willing to relect on their practice from the perspective of English teaching methodology as the PGCE training approach suggests. – Practical training within the PGCE training approach is much better than the theoretical training dominating the current cascade training programme. – Teachers consider that professional development based on the PGCE training approach is of importance and of help to their career development. – The UK PGCE could be adopted as a new training model. Responses show that over 94% of the participants were very positive about the PGCE training approach and very few held negative attitudes towards it. The ambivalent ones were less enthusiastic. For them, STEPS based on imported pedagogy was opposed to local cultural values in various ways, particularly the role experiences of “teacher” and there may be corresponding resistance to STEPS, which is perceived as western (Davis, 2012). After the initial experience of elements of the PGCE training approach, 98% of the participants agreed with were “a new training training approach; 98% of them stated that the PGCE training approach met the requirement of STEPS; 98% said that the PGCE would help them become a better teacher to be qualiied teachers; 96.7% thought the PGCE was of importance and of help to their career development; 93.7% were willing to relect on their teaching from the perspective of English teaching methodology; 94.5% held the view that the PGCE made them feel conident in the teaching. From the answers to the above statements, I conclude that the majority of the participants believed that professional development had become an important part of teachers’ professional lives. The high rate of the statistics journal of pedagogy 2/2013 213 articleS also informed us that the current implementation system of teacher training in rural Chinese primary schools has been put in a challenging situation. Some of the criticism in opposition to the current ways of implementing STEPS was related to its lack of relevance to the “real teaching in real school” and lack of connection between theory and praxis (Wang, 2010). In response to tensions and constraints and pressure, primary school English teachers were turning to ideas within the relective practice of the PGCE training approach to attempt to integrate theory with practice. They were doing so to reassert a professional view of teachers’ theory produced under the power of the school authority. Plans to Improve English Teacher Language Competence Some of the primary school teachers of English were unable to understand the statements I had written in English and emailed me, saying, for example, “I can’t answer your questionnaire because I don’t understand some of your questions. I don’t know how to answer them.” “My English is very limited….” One teacher later told me that she had a BSc degree in Agricultural Engineering. Since there was a shortage of English teachers in her school, she was employed as a long-term English teacher. Though she has taught English for more than 10 years, she still inds her English “far too limited”. She is always afraid of making mistakes and she has no conidence in her English. A shortage of qualiied teachers of English is a major constraint on the implementation of STEPS. It is common in rural areas in China for primary English teachers not to be English majors (Ministry of Education, 2012). A. Providing English refresher courses Teachers need to develop English language expertise in order to understand their roles as teachers of English language learners (Wright, 2002). Lack of English competence is a constraint. In the refresher course the trainers encourage the trainees to learn some techniques on how to avoid dificulties when teaching a particular unfamiliar language. The issue of differentiation has therefore to be addressed and approaches have to be found to make the course relevant to the trainees with very different experiences. As a matter of fact, the overall purpose of the refresher course is to raise the conidence of the trainees. 214 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 perspectives on english teacher development in rural primary Schools in china B. Reinforcing the vocabulary the teachers will teach The statement in STEP that primary school English teachers should “demonstrate proiciency in English and serve as a good language model for students” may be too vague to be useful in the Chinese rural school context. A study of the literature shows that none of the taxonomies has given a clear deinition of what level of English language proiciency is adequate. Given STEPS trainers take materials and ideas from the English course books used in rural primary schools, materials aimed at the adult teachers, such as magazines articles, can be used as a springboard to recap basic vocabulary items on the special themes required in STEPS. Thus it is hoped that materials organized in this way are valuable to the primary school English teachers. C. Reinforcing the classroom language teachers will use This included social language such as greetings and language about the conduct of a lesson, for instance on starting the lesson, interactions during the lesson, words for everyday classroom objects, vocabulary for pupils’ games, talking about language, ICT terminology, ending the lesson and false cognates. In addition, classroom instructions and the names of classroom facilities and some basic grammatical terms should be included as well. Interestingly, a PGCE trainer told me that a former trainee commented that he was not able to tell a child to spit his chewing gum into the bin. Utterances such as “May I come in?” or “Can I leave now?” should be taught to the pupils. D. Increasing intercultural awareness Rural primary school teachers of English have little chance to visit English-speaking countries. Thus, it is of some concern that they are not aware of basic aspects of daily life there such as the school systems, some rituals, housing and transportation and political systems. All this knowledge is required by STEPS and is interesting for the children. Discussion A. Presenting the PGCE training approach in the current context The desire to teach English in rural primary Chinese schools is the main motivator in becoming involved in experiencing the PGCE training approach. Leading teachers of English in rural primary schools involved in the survey journal of pedagogy 2/2013 215 articleS have the same motives for choosing the teaching profession, which forms a solid foundation of the study. The PGCE can be used to encourage in-service teachers to be analytical about why they are teaching in the way they are to help them develop the rationale of their practice. What we don’t want is a teacher who simply opens the book and says ‘OK, I’ll give the pupils that to learn, that to do’ without really thinking about the quality of the learning and whether that is the best way….’ Learning might be about understanding rather than simply knowing the facts. We help teachers to develop an awareness of assessing their teaching in a critical way and continuing thinking about the different ways of doing things so that their teaching stays dynamic…(From a PGCE tutor). The UK PGCE programme has wider content for trainees’ English language improvement. It has courses of differing lengths and content. It seems that the courses are more lexible at least in two respects. One is that there are different lengths and contents available for different training needs of teachers. The other is that the programme is well planned and well organized before it takes place. Copies of a variety of booklets are distributed to all schools in January of each year showing the whole year course programme by subject with an evaluation form. There are a variety of lyers including the clearly-stated training objectives and contents and all the lyers are supposed to be sent to schools at least one term in advance so that teachers get enough time to choose the appropriate courses according to their real needs. The teachers involved in the PGCE are always encouraged to think critically or relect critically about their teaching. The trainees’ pedagogical competence is developed through critical relection and continual experimentation with different ways. All too often, trainees attempt an approach or technique which has been reduced to a formula, and have no understanding of the rationale of the method or technique being employed or its application in the particular context. Adapting this idea might mean that primary school English teacher education can be integrated so as to develop the teachers’ awareness to relect and appraise their teaching in a critical way. We might be able to adapt the ideas contained within the PGCE for the STEPS training programme. First, different training lengths and course content might mean that different training needs can be better met. Second, training objectives and content should be clearly stated and publicized in 216 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 perspectives on english teacher development in rural primary Schools in china schools in advance, so as to allow the teachers to choose suitable training courses. However we must consider whether the ideas or elements of the PGCE are really right for the rural school Chinese situation. Mechanically or blindly copying the PGCE presents dangerous risks for thousands of rural primary school teachers of English in China. B. The power-coercive have suffered resistance “It is a cultural and political problem in China that head teachers and teachers, who have no say in the decision making process, are the ones required to implement the changes in curriculum design and materials” Wang (2010, p. 68-70) . The current centralizing trends result in teachers’ feeling “that they have little autonomy in their work, that they are constantly overloaded, and that they are not always able to meet the needs of their students as they would wish: in essence, which their sense of a professional self under threats” (Hayes, 2006, p. 160). This is also emphasized by Hilton (2006), saying “what is signiicant is the inluence agendas surrounding curriculum development.” Fullan (2007, p. 25) describes “reculturing” as the process by which “teachers come to change their beliefs and habits.” Simply put there must be wide consultation among participants, who will then feel that they have had more of a say in the change. Teachers are often the target of a change initiative, but they are also frontline change agents. They need to be involved in the development of STEPS as early as possible and be inspired to take ownership of the change. Conclusion The results from the current study among the 300 participants seem to suggest two things. First, in rural primary schools in China, primary school English teacher training is still at the early stage of the reform compared with those working in urban primary schools. Second, the current programmes designed and implemented by the top-level authorities, who rarely conducted needs identiication, cannot fully meet these training needs. My experience of attending the PGCE shows that it can provide the trainee with critical information which can be looped back into his/her own teaching and learning practices. Rural primary school English teachers should establish an understanding of the PGCE which satisies the requirements of STEPS. So what we need is an approach which takes account of the teacher’s own knowledge, skills and attitudes, which will then guide the teacher towards taking responsibility for his/her own professional developjournal of pedagogy 2/2013 217 articleS ment-encouraging him/her to develop the same kind of independence and commitment to future growth. How can we help primary school English teachers to take personal responsibility for their professional development? This question and the search for the answer will greatly challenge school authorities and teacher educators in the future. Further research has to focus more on establishing what ideas of the PGCE training approach could be adopted to help teachers fulill the requirements of STEPS. There should be an exploration of how the PGCE ideas affect teachers’ professional development since qualiied rural primary school teachers of English are crucial not only in raising educational standards, leading to greater satisfaction for both teachers and pupils, but also for the development of the nation, given the importance that a command of English has in the global economy. R e fe re n c e s Bax, S. (2002). The Social and cultural dimensions of trainer training. Journal of Education for Teaching, 28(2), 165-178. Davis, H. (2012). Planning for success: Culture, engagement and power in English language education innovation. Issues in ELT change management. UK: British Council. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th edition). NewYork: Teachers College Press. Hayes, D. (2000). Cascade training and teachers’ professional development. English Language Teaching Journal, 54(2), 135-145. Hays, D. (2006). An exploration of the lives and careers of teachers of English in state education systems in Sri Lanka and Thailand. Unpublished PhD thesis, Centre for English Language Studies, University of Birmingham, UK. Hilton, M. (2006). Damaging confusions in England’s KS2 reading tests: A response to Anne Kispal. Literacy, 40(1), 36-41. Ministry of Education. (2012). Education yearbook in China (2009-2011). Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press. Ofsted (2011). The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills. Norwich: TSO. Papp, S. (2011). Impact of assessment on the teaching and learning of young learners of English: result of a large scale survey on YL assessment. Cambridge: CUP ESOL examination. Rixon, S. (2000). Worldwide survey of primary ELT. Centre for English language teacher education, University of Warwick, British Council. Sharp, D., & Ning, Q. (1998). The training of secondary modem language teachers in England and China: A comparative analysis. Compare, 28 (1). Wang, P. (2010). A language teacher vs a driving instructor. Modern English Teaching, Last Edition, 68-70. Willis, J. (1981).The Training of non-native speaker teachers of english: A new approach. In focus on the teacher, ELT Document, 110, The British Council. 218 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 perspectives on english teacher development in rural primary Schools in china Wright, T. (2002). Doing language awareness: Issues for language study in language teacher education. In H. Trappes-Lomax, & G. Ferguson (eds.), Language in language teacher education. 667-668. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Yat-ming, J.L. (1991). Curriculum development in the people’s Republic of China. In D. Marsh, & Morris (eds.), Curriculum Development in East Asia, (pp. 61-81). London: Faimer Press. A uthor: Wang ping, associate professor jiaxing university college of foreign languages 56 yuexiu road (South) jiaxing, Zhejiang province 314001 china email: [email protected] journal of pedagogy 2/2013 219 articleS DOI 10.2478/jped-2013-0012 JoP 4 (2): The learning teacher: role of ambiguity in education1 Gilbert S. Suzawa Abstract: Life is full of ambiguities, but as teachers we generally try to teach our students in a manner that sanitizes knowledge of all of its ambiguities. In doing so, we create an educational environment which forces students to learn in a rather meaningless fashion and this in turn leads to a lack of vitality and relevance within the academy. This need not be the case. As teachers, we should relect on the epistemological foundations of our theories of learning and teaching and to closely examine how our teaching devices and techniques adhere to our theories. Furthermore, we need to be receptive to making any changes in our theories and teaching practice that may be warranted by the critical and creative thinking process that we apply to our professional activities. This paper attempts to guide readers through such a relexive thinking process by trying to loosely establish a relationship between the deep concept of ambiguity (uncertainty) and some of our theories of learning via the acceptance of the view that the ultimate foundation of all human knowledge is ambiguity. We create and establish the meaning of all of our knowledge via a process of self-referencing logos. An implication of the application of self-referencing logic is the notion that a teacher can simultaneously learn and teach (“the learning teacher”). Thus, this can serve as the basis for developing the model of the “relexive practitioner” in the teaching profession. Keywords: ambiguity, self-referencing logic, relexive practitioner 1 This paper was originally entitled, “The Role of Ambiguity in Learning,” (Dec. 2001) and written as a discussion paper for the Learning Development Institute (LDI). The author would like to acknowledge the kind invitation and encouragement of Jan Visser, Executive Director of LDI, to participate in an Internet dialogue on the meaning of learning. In addition, the author would like to acknowledge helpful comments made by the following individuals: John Burkett, George Willis, Wilbert McKeachie, Basarab Nicolescu, David Solomon, and Yustra Visser. The author also would like to thank the two reviewers of this journal who kindly pointed out that there were just too many American idioms in the original manuscript. 220 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the learning teacher: role of ambiguity in education Introduction “What a ridiculous topic! Everyone knows that there should be no ambiguity in education. What students learn should be clear and unequivocal and not vague and ambiguous.” How many of you readers agree with these statements? Disagree? Quite interesting, some of you agree and some of you disagree. Also, it seems that some of you are unsure as to whether you agree or disagree. I suspect you seek additional information before you are willing to make a judgement on this issue---a very appropriate strategy. Clearly the results of this informal polling indicate that we are not dealing with simple ideas here. If we were, we would probably have more of a consensus in responses rather than diversity. This lack of unanimity in the polling responses provides the underlying motivation for this paper. We will focus on two concepts, learning and ambiguity, and attempt to provide a comprehensive examination of the possible relationships between the two ideas. The paper will introduce the hypothesis that ambiguity deals essentially with the characteristics of human intellectual perspectives of nature and the self and therefore ultimately does have some kind of role, or inluence, on the conceptualization and shaping of the theory of learning. This implies that we are adopting a very wide scope in our inquiry. For example, changing scientiic paradigms in the domains of physics and psychology are not outside of our consideration. Nor is learning that takes place outside of the educational structure beyond our consideration in this paper. The possible relationships operate through a multiplicity of intellectual domains. Moreover, much of this role is presently implicit rather than explicit in the minds of many teachers and educational designers due to their preference for a narrow framework for educational theories. The primary goal of this paper is to try to make it more explicit, that is, to get educators to relect upon the theoretical basis of their current teaching practices. How shall we go about achieving our stated goal? Well irst of all, as an individual reader, it should be quite obvious to you that my irst paragraph is a literary contrivance and not really a factual statement. Unless I can get into the minds of the readers, there is no empirical basis to my claim that there is diversity in the responses. So what’s the purpose of this ictional polling result? Is it for deceit? The answer is no. The literary device is for the purpose of setting the theme of this paper. We will be dealing with a wide range of concepts and theories of tangibles and of intangibles. The concepts may have different meaning to different individuals; and different individuals may side with conlicting theories. In principle, this would be suficient for the diversity in responses that could occur in our polling. The meaning of learning is shaped by a diversity of conceptual and theoretical perspectives journal of pedagogy 2/2013 221 articleS contained in people’s minds. It is not the purpose of this paper to side with one model (school of thought) underlying learning over any other model. Instead, the primary aim is to try to shed some insights regarding the manner in which an ambient concept like ambiguity could get incorporated into some meaningful theories of learning and teaching Secondly, in order to accomplish our stated goal, we need to be careful of the fact that our scope of inquiry is wide but that our focus for gaining insight (or understanding) is quite narrow. Or, another way of putting it is that we would like to express the insights in a local setting rather than a global setting. As an analogy, consider a detailed railway map of Central Europe. You will notice that any particular city, or location, is interconnected with another city, or location, by a network of railways. Thus, to fully understand the implications of a city being an integrated entity you will have to examine the network of railway tracks as well as the nodes (cities). Nevertheless, we could introduce an analytical contrivance for focusing on the nodes (local setting) even though we have some understanding that they are part of a network (global setting). The analytical contrivance that is employed is the distinction among variables that are considered to be endogenous (internally determined) in the analysis being undertaken verses those that are considered to be exogenous (or assumed to be givens) in the analysis at hand. Loose Framework of Analysis For the most part, the question of learning has been examined in a local setting rather than a global setting theoretical framework. Learning is associated with education. Although education is just one of many different kinds of human endeavors, such as arts, sciences, engineering, religion, etc., there is a propensity to answer the above question within the context of education itself (local setting) and not the wider framework of life (global setting). While it is understood that learning can take place outside of the educational structure, theories of learning tend to focus on learning that takes place within the academy rather than outside of the academy. This bias towards formal education rather than informal education is quite understandable if you know something about the history of production specialization in many societies. Consistent with the economic theory of division of labor, teachers are said to belong to the profession of education (a specialized channel of production) while other individuals belong to other professions such as: business, engineering, social work, theater, etc. Education is a part (a node) of the social network called a society or a community. Although education is an integral part of a whole, education is studied primarily in a local setting and not a global setting framework. 222 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the learning teacher: role of ambiguity in education Let us resort to a sociological concept at this juncture of our discussion. This in turn will conveniently provide us with the opportunity to establish the distinction between the two senses in which we will be utilizing the word “role” in this paper. Within the academy, there are instructors (as well as supporting staff) and students. Simplistically, it is the role of instructors “to teach” and the role of students “to learn”. Thus the roles of teaching and learning basically identify formal education. But just what do teaching and learning entail? What subject is taught (learned)? When is it taught (learned)? How is it taught (learned)? Why the subject is taught (learned) and how effectively is it taught (learned)? Obviously, besides the agents involved, local setting theories underlying educational activities would have to deal with the additional conceptual elements of content, context and assessment also. The diversity of professionally generated (academic) theories of teaching and of learning provides the foundation for educational practicum. For after all, educational practices are not conceived and implemented in a conceptual and theoretical vacuum. The role of ambiguity in learning is clearly not the same as the sociological role of a student to learn. The sociological concept of role has the connotation of social expectations. In other words, students are expected to learn and teachers are expected to teach. Not only that, these agents (teachers in particular) are expected to execute their roles in as successful manner as is feasible. [Thus, not only is there a distinct career path but also a system of professional rewards and advancement associated with education.] But by what criteria do we measure success? It is with respect to this last question that we will begin to become aware of the signiicance of ambiguity in learning (and teaching). Exogenous factors as well as endogenous factors signiicantly determine success within the framework of a profession. It is this determinant aspect of the concept of ambiguity that is being referred to in this paper as its role. In other words, we are using the term “role” here as a substitute for the more formal language that successful learning is a function of ambiguity (and other factors or variables). If the agents of education do not effectively incorporate more of the external considerations (variables) into their teaching and learning practices, then the results (or outcome) of education will not fulill social expectations satisfactorily and the profession will be held in ill repute as a consequence. The Scope and Depth of Learning Every so often one comes across a really mind-expanding kind of statement or observation. Such an experience happened to me recently as I read a section of Carl Bereiter’s (2002) volume entitled, Education and Mind in the journal of pedagogy 2/2013 223 articleS Knowledge Age. In Chapter 8, Bereiter attempts to establish what he calls “a workable distinction between learning and knowledge building.” To begin with, he states: To head off one potential misunderstanding, we must note at the start that learning accompanies all conscious activity. Therefore learning necessarily accompanies knowledge building. But this does not make them the same thing. Learning occurs while setting out garbage, too, but we do not conclude from this that learning and setting out garbage are synonymous. The learning that accompanies everything we do does not igure in the distinction I am proposing. Rather, the distinction is between activities carried out for the purpose of learning and activities carried out for this other purpose that we call knowledge building. (p. 255) It quickly occurred to me that Bereiter was attempting to make his distinction on the basis of what mathematicians would call necessary and suficient conditions, i. e. learning was a necessary but not a suficient condition for knowledge building. I did not ind myself disagreeing with this line of logical reasoning. However, when he substituted setting out garbage for knowledge building, as another example of conscious activity, I immediately found myself disagreeing with him. After some further relection, however, I realized that at some earlier stage in my life, setting out garbage might have indeed been a knowledge building kind of exercise. But now it has become a routine sort of activity and is not a challenging problem any more, with the proviso that no unexpected constraints are introduced into that activity. If that should happen, setting out the garbage may again become a problematic and not a routine activity. Nevertheless, Bereiter’s discussion made me suddenly realize that a larger share of learning in a person’s lifetime may in fact occur outside of school rather than inside the school. A person’s informal (non-academic) learning may be relatively more consequential than her formal (academic) learning. Yet, I ind that much of the existing theories of learning are academic-centered and not lifetime-centered. Consequently, there may be a signiicant misplaced emphasis in some of the existing theories of learning. To some extent, this is being corrected in the development of what are referred to as ecological theories of learning, such as that of David Solomon (2000). These ecological theories manifest more of a global setting view of learning relative to the academic-centered theories of learning. Thus, an asymmetry has arisen between the theories of teaching and the theories of learning. This asymmetry between tea224 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the learning teacher: role of ambiguity in education ching and learning allows us to make sense of the reference that someone is “self-taught.” It means that the individual has gained knowledge, or learned, about something without the direct assistance of a teacher. I did not ind the rest of Bereiter’s discussion in Chapter 8 to be very elucidating. I think that his introduction of the differentiation of conscious activities into the category of those for the purpose of learning from the residual category of activities for all other purposes (including knowledge building) to establish the distinction between learning and knowledge building is somewhat confusing. His categorization of conscious activities and the utilization of Sir Karl Popper’s (1979) “three worlds” analogy in his elucidation leads me to believe that Bereiter is attempting to make his case (workable distinctions) in terms of a scope and depth methodology. However, his manner of specifying scope does not enable me to make some sense out of a normative statement like: “We should teach students to learn how to learn.” When you ask the academician who made such a statement for a rationale or justiication, the response is somewhat as follows: “Because they will soon graduate and enter the ‘real world’ where knowledge is rapidly changing and they need to know how to successfully cope in such an environment.” My own thoughts on the scope and depth of learning are expressed in what follows. But since this discussion will be conceptually and theoretically biased, let me disclose my normative perspective up front. I agree with Bereiter on the idea that learning is associated with human cognition, i.e. consciousness. Since consciousness relates to the human mind, it follows that our theories of the mind will have an impact on our theories of learning. However, I differ with Bereirter on the conceptual relationship between learning and knowledge building. He hypothesizes that learning and knowledge building can be conceived of as separate forms of conscious activities, whereas I currently adhere to the conceptual view that learning and knowledge building is a form of complementary cognitive activity. In other words, I believe that our thinking on any content (subject matter) is a relexive process and not categorically separate cognitive activities. So where does scope come in? Knowledge is speciic to human activities; and we can categorize human activities into various sorts. By virtue of different kinds of knowledge (derived from different activities), we can categorize different kinds of learning but we cannot cognitively separate knowledge and learning. So how would this kind of classiication schema work? Consider this example; operating a machine is placed into a different activity category from designing and building the machine. Thus, knowledge associated with operating the machine is considered to be different from knowledge associated with designing and building the machine. And furthermore, the learning of one type of knowledge is distinguished from the learning of the other journal of pedagogy 2/2013 225 articleS type of knowledge. This then could become the basis for dividing education into the sub-ields of vocational education and professional education. So now we can have academies that specialize in vocational education and other academies that specialize in professional education. On top of this type of scope distinction, we can add the distinction that we made earlier regarding learning that occurs within an academy (vocational or professional) from learning that that occurs outside of any academy (on the job learning). Notice that we are beginning to “matrix” scope distinctions. However, this is not as complex as it could get. We can also make distinctions on the basis of depth, or more speciically, the degree (or level) of complexity. The scope distinction between vocational and professional education implicitly assumes a degree of complexity distinction. This is relected in the belief that the operator of the machine does not really need to know the design or architecture of the equipment in order to eficiently operate it. Manual and procedural skills are essential but the understanding of blueprints is not. However, something could come along and jolt this existing belief and induce some kind of hypothesis of the sort that knowledge of blueprint reading might signiicantly improve the operator’s productive eficiency. If this is the case, then we may begin to notice that the boundary between vocational and professional learning has become a little fuzzy as a result of this reassessment. However, the degree of complexity of the knowledge learned need not blur the distinction between formal and informal education. It may require an individual with a very high IQ, but it is quite conceivable that a person that does not have a formal education could learn enough informally to effectively deal with problems in, say, electromagnetic wave propagation in the domain of electrical engineering. Thus, when we explicitly add complexity to our classiication scheme we ind that we are now dealing with a three-dimensional array (cubic matrix) instead of the two-dimensional one. So where are we in terms of our assessment of Bereiter? In metaphorical terms, learning and knowledge can be conceived of as a cubic matrix (classiication schema) within the context of a human mind. This is an ‘artifact’ within my mind. Hopefully you will absorb it as an artifact in your mind as you read and relect on the text. This last statement points out that learning involve more than just mental, or cognitive, artifacts “downloaded” into your cranial “container.” Learning is a process as well as a generator of mental artifacts. Learning is essentially a mind-expanding process. To understand this learning process, we will have to understand how the human mind works in terms of relating our mental artifacts with our behaviors (activities). Thus, our discussion of learning would not be complete without some discussion of how the mind works (i.e. the most current theory of mind). But before we 226 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the learning teacher: role of ambiguity in education proceed in that direction, let me use the cubic matrix conception of learning and knowledge that we just described in this section to provide some kind of meaningful interpretation to the academician’s statement presented earlier. Is “To Learn How To Learn” Meaningful? Our categorical distinctions of learning (based on categories of knowledge) do not allow for meaningful phrases of the sort ‘to learn how to learn.’ In terms of our artifact and the logical way of reasoning, that phrase is tautological if it refers to a single agent. We can accept the phrase “learning about knowledge” which speciies knowledge as the content of educational theories. But this second phrase, as it stands, is ambiguous. There are different kinds of learning based on different kinds of knowledge involved. Thus for learning to be meaningful, we need to speciically state what kind(s) of knowledge is (are) being alluded to. For example, are we concerned with the knowledge associated with using basic math or are we concerned with the knowledge associated with formulating and solving differential equation models in some scientiic domain such as theoretical physics? Why do we need to make this kind of deinite speciication? Because the irst kind of learning is essential for success as construction worker, but the second kind of learning is essential for success as a theoretical physicist. Is our social objective more of the irst kind of success or of the second kind? If the weight is placed on the second, then the implications are that we should allocate more academic resources to the second kind of learning relative to the irst kind of learning in order to fulill public expectations. Do teachers learn? Yes they do. What could they learn? Well, as an example, a high school science instructor could learn more about knowledge generated in the various domains of natural sciences by taking college level courses in these disciplines in order to enhance his level of expertise in natural sciences. Also, this same instructor could learn more about the theories underlying teaching practices in secondary education by taking graduate level courses in education. Furthermore, this same instructor could learn on the job about the formal educational process, which involves instructors teaching and students learning in an academic setting. Thus, while the teacher is doing teaching in the context of the academy, the teacher could also be undertaking self-learning (classroom based research) as well. This in-class learning of how students learn about some subject-matter within the academy, however, must be construed as instructors learning about how students learn about a subject matter (content), and not as students learning about their own learning process which to my way of thinking is tautological. To put it in another way, teachers can learn about “how to teach” (or journal of pedagogy 2/2013 227 articleS about algebra, for that matter), but they cannot learn “how to learn” as the learning process is the learning process, it is a manifestation of thinking.” Thus, in our “cubic matrix” perspective of thinking, instructors could conceivably teach and learn simultaneously in their own classrooms. However, they would necessarily have to teach and to learn different kinds of knowledge. I should also point out that high school students could also simultaneously teach as well as learn within the context of the formal educational structure. This becomes quite obvious when we make note of the use of inclass student tutors. The complexity of a subject matter enables us to establish a measure of expertise regarding knowledge about this complex subject matter. While the instructor has a higher level of expertise than all the students do (by virtue of taking college level courses on the subject matter), as the students learn in response to the instructor’s teaching, some students may begin to develop a higher level of expertise relative to other students in the class. This gap in the levels of student expertise can be utilized in the form of student tutoring (teaching) in an attempt to achieve homogeneity in student learning. So we are now at the level of complexity where we can now meaningfully say that in the formal educational structure, instructors teach and learn and students learn and teach. And this depiction of the academy is not as simplistic as when we irst described its activities in terms of sociological roles in the earlier section on Loose Framework of Analysis. Note also that we have broken out of a mental “box” mindset, i.e., the “either/or” kind of reasoning. All individuals in the academy can teach and learn and not necessarily teach or learn. This “deeper” perspective of what goes on in the academy is attributable to the treatment of learning and knowledge building as a complementary cognitive concept rather than an autonomous cognitive concept. Alternative Theories of Knowledge and Ambiguity In the two prior sections we presented a conceptual and theoretical perspective that inferred learning was related to knowledge and that all forms (the scope and depth schema) of knowledge were artifacts of the human mind. However, we did not deal with the question: How does the human mind work in terms of knowledge building and relating knowledge (internal cognitive entities) with human behavior (external)? Before we do so, let us probe the most complex aspects of knowledge itself. That is to say, let us try to examine the very foundations of the knowledge that is taught and learned in the academy. It is in regards to this very deep aspect of the content that we must allow for alternative theories of knowledge and where we will en228 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the learning teacher: role of ambiguity in education counter the concept of ambiguity. But we may have opened ourselves up to an insurmountable task. This is because the object of our inquiry (knowledge in the context of mind) has such an extremely wide scope (about all kinds of human activities) as well as an exceedingly deep level of complexity associated with it. The philosopher of science, William Bartley III (1990), has used the metaphor of the ocean’s depth, “unfathomed knowledge,” in the title of one of his books. Therefore we are (or at least the author is) faced with the dilemma as to how to go about discussing the subject of knowledge: local setting or global setting? Well, I have decided that we will neither resort to local setting or to global setting but to both. And we will proceed in an eclectic fashion in terms of modes of inquiry. Note that intellectual laziness does not motivate this decision. Rather, intellectual honesty does so. Under the circumstances, maintaining only an analytical mode of inquiry is just not warranted (too restrictive) relative to the scope and depth of our object of inquiry in this section. We need to be open or receptive to any and all modes of inquiry; i.e. we need to adopt what the physicist Basarab Nicolescu (2001) calls a “transdisciplinary” mode of inquiry. Furthermore, we have left learning as a middlelevel concept in terms of complexity but the concept of ambiguity will be examined as a very deep level concept. Thus, to establish any kind of meaningful relationship between the two concepts you must be able to transcend the gap or space between the two levels of complexity. It is my hope that the readers of this paper can bridge the complexity gap by being willing to go beyond the edge of their current theories of knowledge. To use a metaphor that should be understandable to most elementary and secondary school educators: Who “certiies” the knowledge that is taught in the academy? Of course there is no formal certiication process comparable to teacher (competency) certiication programs. But there is an informal process based on the concept of authority. Then who are the authorities and by what criteria are they deemed to be in a position of authority? Without getting involved in any extended discussion, it used to be that philosophers and religious leaders were deemed to be the people in the position of authority because philosophers were the seekers of Truth and religious leaders were the receivers and gatekeepers of some kind of Divine Truth. The tug-of-war between religion and philosophy manifested itself in education in terms of the distinction between parochial and public schools. Lately, scientists have tended to displace philosophers and religious leaders as people in the position of authority by virtue of the “power” of their scientiic knowledge (Sir Francis Bacon, 1620/1878) rather than the Truth status of their knowledge. Underlying all of the historical changes in terms of authority has been a tension among alternative theories of knowledge in the global setting. And this journal of pedagogy 2/2013 229 articleS social competition among concepts, theories, doctrines and ways of knowing (modes of thought) relating to knowledge and the human mind has had an external impact on the (academic) theories of education, which are for the most part formulated in terms of a local setting. While the history of intellectual thought on knowledge is extensive, we can “cut to the chase” by focusing our attention on the Truth status of knowledge. There are two extreme conceptual perspectives on the Truth status of our knowledge. We can have knowledge about some things in our lives that is absolutely certain, but this kind of knowledge is not created by the human mind (consciousness). Rather, it is the kind of knowledge that is received by the human mind via divine intervention. In other words, we can have some forms of absolutely certain knowledge, but it is by the “grace of God” (i.e. some Supreme Being) and not by any of mankind’s doing. Any knowledge derived by human modes of inquiry (such as reasoning) is necessarily ambiguous. To return to the certiication of knowledge metaphor that was introduced earlier in this section, the only authority of Truth is God. The other extreme perspective is there is no God (or “God is dead”) and that all of mankind’s knowledge has been and will forever be created by the human mind, i.e. consciousness. Consequently, all knowledge is necessarily ambiguous (uncertain) and Truth is an illusion. Of course, these polar conceptions of Truth represent the boundaries of the path down which mankind’s intellectual development has been travelling. During the era referred to as the Enlightenment, Western philosophical thought emphasized the development of the concept of Universal Ideas. These universals were principles that could be derived and comprehended by human minds via formal analytical thought. The concept of Universal Ideas did not appear to be inconsistent with the concept of Divine Truth. However, there was no way that humans could establish the one-to-one correspondence between Universal Ideas and Divine Truth. Nevertheless, the Enlightenment Era created an intellectual environment (modernity) which fostered advances in the creation of other forms of human knowledge (derivatives of Universal Ideas). But at the same time individuals who wanted to believe that there was some unknowable God whose Divine Truth apparently supported mankind’s quest for Universal Ideas were accommodated. Thus, there was no need for a recurrence of the dreaded Inquisitions of the Middle Ages. For a hierarchy of Truth status was created (Divine knowledge, universal knowledge, and derivative knowledge) that accommodated the existence of knowledge seeking mankind and the belief in the existence of a God. Unfortunately, the intellectual environment is now radically changing. The concept of Universal Ideas is being intellectually discredited and the polar position that only the human mind creates knowledge is gaining 230 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the learning teacher: role of ambiguity in education social acceptance. Within the new intellectual environment that is evolving, for want of a better term lets call it postmodernism, ambiguity is the “preeminent characteristic” (Brown, 1995, p. 2) and there is a growing quest for new forms of social unity in the face of increasing multiplicity (relativism). How Does the Mind Work? Let us now return to the discussion of the process aspect of learning. I mentioned earlier that knowledge building results in cognitive, or mental, artifacts but that learning was more than just the product; it was also the process of creating cognitive artifacts. The product and process conceptualization of learning, as associated with knowledge building, can be formulated in terms of a problem-solving exercise. The human mind is set upon the task of identifying, deining and solving a new problem. Note that I said a new problem. Going back to “setting out garbage,” the reason I did not initially consider that particular activity as either a problem-solving or knowledge building kind of activity was because for me it was based on knowledge already learnt, i.e. a problem already solved. However, we must remember that knowledge is a stock variable as well as a low variable. Once we have learnt something anew (low), it becomes part of our mind, or consciousness (stock)2. In other words, learning is a mind-expanding kind of process. And thereafter, much of our daily routine activities is based on stored knowledge and does not involve problem-solving activities where we are learning new knowledge. Nevertheless, both categories of activities involve the operation of our minds. Consciousness is an all-encompassing property of human existence, although it may often seem like we are doing something unconsciously or subconsciously. What I have said in the previous paragraph represents nothing novel as far as the history of educational philosophy is concerned. The pragmatist and educational theorist John Dewey (1899, 1910, and 1933) has already expressed the distinction between process and product and also between unconscious and conscious behavior. Focusing on the human thought process, or “thinking.” However, Dewey’s comprehension of how the human mind worked was very limited relative to what we know today via contributions from such recently created disciplines as cognitive science and neuroscience and from changing scientiic paradigms in other disciplines, such as physics, biology and psychology, as well. To keep the focus of this 2 For additional insights on the stock nature of knowledge, refer to the investment perspective on creativity in Sternberg and Lubart (1995) and also the discussion on epistemology and economics in Barrtley III (1990). journal of pedagogy 2/2013 231 articleS paper narrowly on education, let us concentrate on the question of: What is thinking? In effect, we will be entering a third order exploration of cognition utilizing some of the insights (knowledge) gained recently in these other disciplines. We have already undertaken what the philosopher John Searle (1983, p. 156) calls a “second order” investigation of the question: What is thinking? Thinking occurs when the mind creates and utilizes knowledge and where learning is involved. Thus, instead of speaking about thinking per se, we were earlier discussing a cubic matrix schema of knowledge and relating it to learning and we were also making a distinction between artifact and cognitive process. These earlier endeavors all fall under the rubric of “thinking” in Dewey’s sense. Thinking is a cognitive activity, i.e. part of our consciousness. However, we generally think along very narrow or restricted modes of cognitive process (mindset). Thinking is usually associated with analytical modes of thought; i.e. the mind operates along the lines of logical reasoning and classiication, or in terms of a reductivist strategy of knowledge building. However, thinking need not be only associated with rational modes of thought. A cognitive revolution is taking place that is leading to a third order understanding of thinking. Our consciousness is equally capable of holistic modes of thought such as artistic creation (Langer, 1988) and/or dialogic reasoning (Wells, 1999), or in terms of a constructivist strategy of knowledge building. And it is the mind’s holistic capacity that appears to enable Western thinkers to resolve many seemingly intractable paradoxes lately. There have been signiicant paradoxes in philosophy, theology, mathematics and the sciences. Generally, the resolution of a paradox (problem solving) culminates in a signiicant advance in human knowledge along a broad front (different domains of knowledge). A long-standing paradox regarding the human brain and the human mind appears to be on the verge of such a resolution. And this is sending shock waves to all the ields of human knowledge (i.e. the subject matter taught in schools). For the past two centuries or so, scientists have adopted a reductivist strategy of knowledge building and utilized a deductive reasoning mode of thinking as their bases of determining scientiic causation. Furthermore, the underlying logic of deductive reasoning went all the way back to the Greek philosopher Aristotle. The reductive, Aristotelian way of thinking (mindset) fostered a subjectpredicate mode of mental inquiry, i.e. the mind inquires about the brain and also an either/or (duality) pattern of reasoning. With the advent of scientiic medicine, the brain could be analyzed along with the body’s other various components. But the totality of human body components could not explain the soul nor could classiication of the parts of the brain explain the mind. 232 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the learning teacher: role of ambiguity in education This allowed for the separation of religion and philosophy from the sciences. The mind was a metaphysical phenomenon and therefore should be subject to philosophical inquiry and along similar reasoning; the soul belonged to the purview of theology. How is the mind-brain paradox being resolved? Interestingly the impulses for change are coming neither so much from medicine (brain) nor philosophy (mind) but from new technological developments (computer science) and new scientiic paradigms in physics and psychology and metaphors from biology and zoology. And much of this interdisciplinary thrust regarding our understanding of the human mind is manifested in the new ield of cognitive science. Science has gained the dominance in our quest to understand how the mind works. And in so doing, science is becoming the higher authority that certiies the relevant knowledge that, socially speaking, “ought to be taught” in the academy. What are the essential features of the scientiic paradigm of mind? How do we think? The new scientiic paradigm relaxes the restrictions that Aristotelian (bivalent) logic places on modes of thought, accepts the concept of “emergent” phenomenon, and relies a great deal on the evolutionary process and biological metaphors to explain the essence of the human mind which is consciousness. The evolving scientiic paradigm of mind places more emphasis on constructivist strategies of knowledge building rather than reductivist strategies. The bias of bivalent logic was that it fostered a mode of thinking that focused on the being rather than the becoming, by virtue of not allowing the excluded middle. The logical purist would say that this leads to contradictions or impossibilities. Maybe so, but it also hinders consideration of possibilities. Consider the analogy of the opposites (duality): black or white. White is not black and black is not white. If we also allow for black and white, (the excluded middle) it appears that we have a contradiction, or at least an ambiguity. However, out of this possibility emerges shades of gray. We now have an entire spectrum of alternatives ranging from black at one end to white at the other end. In a similar fashion, the mind is now being conceived of as what the neuro-psychologist and 1981 Nobel Prize winner in medicine, Roger Sperry (1995) called an “irreducible emergent phenomenon” that complements the brain. And from the deepest ambiguities (possibilities) of our minds (i.e. consciousness) emerge reality (meaningful ideas) or at least our knowledge of reality. Therefore the prevailing epistemology is that we construct our social identities and our knowledge of nature via our individual and collective consciousness. Anthony Giddens (1990), a sociologist at the London School of Economics, had referred to this as “relexive modernisation.” Our consciousness is part of some evolutionary process that determines the biological and social growth of the human species and journal of pedagogy 2/2013 233 articleS possibly the development of the universe (nature) in terms of what physicist John Wheeler (1981) has provocatively called the “participatory anthropic principle.” Conclusion Since the primary purpose of this paper is to stimulate professional relection on the meaning of learning, I will not offer any speciic conclusion(s) to an ongoing process. In closing though, I would like to say a few words regarding the apparent attitude that many educators have regarding the concept of ambiguity (uncertainty) and what attitude I believe they ought to have. To do so I will quote a social scientist and a secular humanist. Instead of having a positive attitude towards ambiguity, many educators appear to have a negative attitude, or even an aversion, with regards to ambiguity. This is evidenced by the propensity to use the phase “tolerance for ambiguity” or to disambiguate all their pronouncements in the classroom. The hypothesis of this paper is that ambiguity is an essential property of all human knowledge and as educators who teach mankind’s knowledge to students; we should “embrace” ambiguity rather than just “tolerate” it. Embracing ambiguity means being more open to alternative ideas, never being very narrow in our thinking as we practice the art of teaching (even though we may be scientists as well as teachers). Kenneth Arrow, 1972 winner of the Nobel Memorial Prize in economics, has this to say on this matter: The sense of uncertainty is active; it actively recognizes the possibility of alternative views and seeks them out. I consider it essential to honesty to look for the best arguments against a position that one is holding. Commitments should always have a tentative quality. As may be supposed, I have always enjoyed satire and irony, as well as logical paradox; Swift and Russell are favorite authors. (1992, p. 47) Kenneth Arrow’s words are echoed by those of humanist Robert Grudin, a professor of English at the University of Oregon, who in an essay on dialogue states (1996, p. 211): “Unless they are understood in a context that includes irony, ambiguity and contingency, conclusions are always wrong and assertions always mistaken”. Unfortunately, a majority of educators are not like Arrow and Grudin. Their attitude towards ambiguity is quite negative, if not outright hostile. And this is relected in their teaching practices and students in turn do not learn course content in an appropriate or meaningful manner. 234 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 the learning teacher: role of ambiguity in education R e fe re n c e s Arrow, K. J. (1992). I know a hawk from a handsaw. In M. Szenberg (ed.), Eminent economists: Their life philosophies. (pp. 42-50). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bacon, F. (1620/1878). Novum organum. Philadelphia: Parry & MacMillan. Bartley III, W. W. (1990). Unfathomed knowledge, unmeasured wealth: On universities and the wealth of nations. La Salle, IL: Open Court. Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Brown, R. H. (1995). Postmodern representation, postmodern afirmation. In R. H. Brown (ed.), Postmodern representations. (pp. 1-19). Chicago: University of Illinois Press. Dewey, J. (1899). The school and society. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. How we think. (1910). Boston: D.C. Heath & Co. (Unabridged republication by Dover Publications, Inc. 1997) A restatement of the relation of relective thinking to the educative process. (1933). Boston: D. C. Heath. Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press. Grudin, R. (1996). On dialogue: An essay on free thought. Boston: Houghton Miflin Company. Langer, S. K. (1988). Mind: An essay on human feeling. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Nicolescu, B. (2001). Manifesto of transdisciplinary. New York: SUNY Press. Popper, K. R. (1979). Objective knowledge: An evolutionary approach. London: Oxford University Press. Searle, J. R. (1983). Intentionality: An Essay in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Solomon D. L. (2000). Philosophy and the learning ecology. Paper presented at the Presidential Session on In Search of the meaning of learning at the International Conference of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Denver, CO, October 25-28, 2000. Sperry, R. W. (1995). The impact and promise of the cognitive revolution. In R. L. Solso, & D. W. Massaro (eds.), The science of the mind: 2001 and beyond. (pp. 3549). New York: Oxford University Press. (This article is an abridgement of a Distinguished Centennial Address presented at the 99th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco, CA, August 1991.) Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying thecCrowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. New York: The Free Press. Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. New York: Cambridge University Press. Wheeler, J. A. (1981). Bohr, Einstein, and the strange lesson of the quantum. In R. Q. Elvee (ed.), Mind in nature. (pp. 1-30). New York: Harper and Row. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 235 articleS Author: gilbert S. Suzawa, ph.d., professor emeritus of economics university of rhode island department of economics Kingston ri 02881 uSa e-mail: [email protected] 236 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 on the relevancy of using Vygotsky’s theoretical framework to legitimize dialogic teaching... DOI 10.2478/jped-2013-0013 JoP 4 (2): On the relevancy of using Vygotsky’s theoretical framework to legitimize dialogic teaching/learning Zuzana Petrová Abstract: This paper is a response to the growing acceptance that dialogic teaching/learning focusing on the role of intersubjectivity in developing knowledge and reasoning, particularly when this intersubjectivity is mediated and maintained by means of language is an appropriate reaction to the weaknesses of direct instruction within the Vygotskian framework. In this paper, the theoretical background of dialogic teaching/learning inspired by Vygotsky’s cultural-historical theory is elaborated to discuss the crucial elements of the way in which the theoretical relevance of this stance in education has evolved from Vygotsky’s theory. Key words: dialogic teaching/learning, innovations of teaching/learning, language as a semiotic tool, Vygotsky’s cultural-historical theory Introduction When analysing how contemporary educational discourse approaches possible transformations of classroom settings it is hard to overlook the importance of the role of language and communication. One of the most inspiring theoretical frameworks which helps legitimise this focus on language and communication is Vygotsky’s cultural-historical theory. This is because this theory interconnects all important aspects of human bio-social and cultural development (Cole, Wertsch, 1996), while enabling us to see the source of individual cognitive development in socio-cultural practices and the speciic role of cultural tools (especially language) within that. It also journal of pedagogy 2/2013 237 articleS simultaneously provides a framework as to how education might speciically contribute to the cognitive growth of individuals focusing particularly on language as a semiotic tool enabling mediation of the individual’s cognitive processes. It is noteworthy that Vygotsky’s work has been interpreted and further theoretically and empirically elaborated to demonstrate that it is not communication per se, but learning to use language as a semiotic tool that enables us to convert the meaning and function of a speciic cultural tool into psychological tools. These tools are required in the transformation of the cognitive behaviour of individuals. Those who seek to innovate in classroom settings in accordance with Vygotskian theory are mostly attracted by the interactive nature of interpersonal communication. The social and individual dimension of learning and development is predominantly relected in the use of language as a means of maintaining activity in the classroom, in expressing and discussing ideas, and as expressed in the attitudes of all the learners. There is little discussion of the acquisition of speciic cultural tools important for developing higher psychological functions. In this reinterpreted form, Vygotsky’s theory has become highly inluential in transforming the essence of current school-based teaching/learning and essential for effective teaching/learning that develops the highest cognitive potential in students. Critics of the direct instruction disconcerted with the low level of student activity in the classroom, may ind Vygotsky’s theory useful in focusing attention on the importance of problem-solving tasks and on the role of teacher as facilitator. For those who are critical of the weak links between school-based learning and everyday life and the requirements of the labour market, this theory provides a potential means to develop the student competencies required in the information age and the service economy (Wells, 2000). Vygotsky’s theory has gradually received the status of a complex background which can be fruitfully used to stimulate student development and to help them master the means for transferring competencies, knowledge and skills from current to future activities in a generalised form instrumental to thinking, reasoning and problem solving. Impact of Vygotsky’s theory on educational theory and practice is evident in a rich discourse led to adapt Vygotsky’s concepts to innovate classroom settings, mainly to eliminate the dominance of direct instruction in the classroom. Particularly, with speciic focus on one of the most famous Vygotsky’s concepts, the zone of proximal development, to refer to the ability to solve problems that are beyond the ability of the individual through the guidance of an experienced other (adult or peer), with the potential to stimulate development (for instance, Wertsch, 1979). More recently, there has been a focus on interactively organised teaching/learning in which students can proit from and via social interactions, which are assumed to be 238 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 on the relevancy of using Vygotsky’s theoretical framework to legitimize dialogic teaching... a rich source of social plans for dealing with problems which are transferable to the repertoire of individual abilities. In focusing on problem solving the relevancy of cultural tools is questioned mainly because of the need to identify the most effective means of dealing with problem-based tasks which can be transferred to the more general context of problem resolution. The reason the use of language in communication has attracted the attention of scholars and practitioners because it is assumed that interactive problemsolving is the source of new competencies and higher forms of psychological functions, where language is used to negotiate, express points of view, and so forth. But as deeper analyses of the broader context of Vygotsky’s work show, mainstream educational discourse has taken inspiration from Vygotsky through misconception rather than through a systematic understanding of the broader context of his theory (Gredler, 2012). In this context, it is questionable whether educational projects or strategies that have been developed based on a misconception of Vygotsky’s theory can be used as vehicles for innovative classroom practice that has the potential to initiate cognitive growth which inluences the cognitive behaviour of individuals. If they cannot then focusing the attention of scholars and practitioners on minor details of Vygotsky’s work is misguided and could lead to the questionable impact on higher psychological functions of pupils as the consequence. Since one of the most promising prospects for improving the quality of education using the Vygotskian framework is based on elaborating the relationship between language and the development of higher psychological functions, this paper will analyse whether innovations of classroom discourse developed within this perspective can be seen as enrichments that correspond to other components of Vygotsky’s theory. Social Embeddedness of Higher Psychological Functions The role of language in developing higher psychological functions cannot be discussed without discussing the role of cultural tools because language is assumed to be a unique cultural tool with the special potential to restructure the cognitive behaviour of individuals. In Vygotsky’s theory, the development of higher psychological functions is triggered by the use of a speciic means – cultural tools – which increases the effectiveness of intentional human action in society. While acquiring the meaning and function of a cultural tool, the novice experiences more effective strategies for dealing with certain situations which evolve in the social-cultural community. When the novice learns how to use these strategies, the meaning and the function of the cultural tools is separated from the material action and affects individual-cognitive processes (Vygotsky, 1978). This is possible because cultural tools are journal of pedagogy 2/2013 239 articleS embodiments of certain cultural practices, crystallized templates of action, schematized representations of certain ways of doing things in human communities … [and] their acquisition by a child is an integral part of developmental processes, the pathway that deines the very essence of human development and constitutes its content. (Stetsenko, 1999, p. 246-247) Since their existence and use does not concern individual experience, the collective sharing, use and transgenerational transmission of these tools involves interpersonal communication and symbolic representation (Kozulin & Presseisen, 1995). When the meaning and function of cultural tools is mediated in interpersonal activity, new, culturally more relevant, forms of activity permeate the structure of the human mind and transform the way in which the psychological functions operate. During this process, the individual learns how to act in a culturally more appropriate way, which impacts on how his/her mind is involved in the activity. Cultural tools are useful means for deploying culturally more relevant strategies for dealing with problem situations, which exceed the effectiveness of the strategies currently available to individuals as a part of the repertoire of independent action. Since the way in which cultural tools are used in activities represents a cultural practice evolved for certain purposes and to deal with situations, the use of cultural tools in activity is not accidental but follows a certain social plan of activity interconnected with the meaning and function of the cultural tool. Through mediating the meaning and function of the cultural tool, the novice’s actions should be transformed so as to pursue an effective way of dealing with the problem. The novice takes on the perspective of a culturally more competent other (who demonstrates the meaning and function of the cultural tool in the activity) and from that the novice acquires the socially relevant plan of activity. This involves transforming psychological functions such as memory, attention, perception or thinking and so forth, as it is expressed in one of the most famous explanations of the social origins of higher psychological functions: Every function in the child’s cultural development appears twice: irst, on the social level, and later, on the individual level; irst, between people (interpsychological) and then inside the child (intrapsychological). This applies equally to voluntary attention, to logical memory, and to the formation of concepts. All the higher functions originate as actual relationships between individuals. (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 57) 240 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 on the relevancy of using Vygotsky’s theoretical framework to legitimize dialogic teaching... In interpersonal situations where emphasis is placed on promoting the ability of individuals to master and maintain intersubjectivity in social activities and to incorporate the other’s perspective into the individual plan of activity (Díaz, Neal & Amaya-Williams, 1990), the originally social act (interpsychological function) becomes separated from the context of activity and is internalised as a function of the human mind (becoming an intrapsychological function). Vygotsky (1962) identiied language as the means by which higher forms of cognitive functions are transferred from the social plane to the individual plane via a process called internalisation. Linguists, psychologists and educators have attempted to establish which qualities of language are responsible for this transformation and to analyse and explain the potential of this in seeking to elaborate the consequences for the development of higher psychological functions, particularly in classroom settings. Specific Role of Language in Development of Higher Psychological Functions Vygotsky (1962) sees language as a semiotic tool that enables the individual to retain substantial features of the activity in a generalised and abstract form which is prerequisite to representing the important aspects of the experience in the mind as mental objects (Valsiner, 2001). Since language is used in this situation, existing human knowledge can be acquired by individuals, irstly being part of shared, interpersonal activity is internalised to become the object of thinking and interpersonal communication independent from material and perceivable aspects of the world. As R. Hasan states, only language at once deies time, is capable of being relexive, classiies reality, construes communicable human experience, and articulates the many voices of a culture with equal facility (2005, p. 134). The use of language thus enables the individual to recall and relect on past events, plan future actions and consciously contribute to the ongoing activity. This enlarges the scope of activities individuals can become involved in because the individual is consequently no longer dependent on material and visual support for activity (ibid.).In joint culturally relevant activities, language is used as the medium through which the social plan of activity is shared with the novice and through which the culturally more competent other guides the activity. While engaged in such an activity, the novice experiences the way in which language is used to guide the joint activity and adopts the social plane of activity as his/her own. Later, while completing similar activities, the novice gives guidance conveying via external speech similar expressions to those the culturally competent other had used to provide guidance before. With repetitive use, these expressions become abbrejournal of pedagogy 2/2013 241 articleS viated and take on the form of internal speech (Gaľperin, 1989). In this form they can function as a tool for thinking about activities, for choosing possible strategies of activity, for thinking over possible transformative steps, without needing to be immersed in the context of material activity or dependent on perception. Language captures signiicant features of culturally relevant activities from the low of experience and they become the substance of the intrapsychological domain without losing their external manifestation. While other semiotic tools also enable communication, collaboration and problem solving, only linguistic signs mediate the transformation of mental processes to a form in which they can function under conscious realization and voluntary control (Hasan, 1995). Mediating the strategy for dealing with the culturally relevant activity by means of language thus means that the dependency of individuals on externally provided strategies of activity can be weakened and independence and full control over psychological functions can be achieved – this is the most notable feature of higher psychological functions (Vygotsky, 1978). Implications for the Field of Education The explanation that higher psychological functions have their origin in social relationships, especially in those enacted between the novice and the culturally more competent other by means of cultural tools incorporated in activity as a strategy for dealing with culturally relevant situations has been developed as a core principle in Vygotsky’s cultural-historical theory and has signiicant consequences for the ield of education. Vygotsky’s original work also included suggestions on how to rethink the essence of educational content and how to develop instructional methods that would mediate the development of higher psychological functions in students. Most contemporary initiatives focus mainly on the potential use of the zone of proximal development in developing educational strategies for going beyond the existing competencies of all students and on developing the social context of learning assumed to be the universal source of cognitive growth in students. However, Vygotsky’s Russian followers (for instance, P. Ya. Gaľperin, D. B. Eľkonin, and so on) elaborated the instructional implications, focussing on mediating highly developed cultural tools – theoretical concepts – organised around the clear structure that is peculiar to academic thinking and not adherent to everyday experience and learning (Karpov, 2003). As Tuľviste (1989) concluded from Vygotsky’s work, theoretical concepts represent a new way of using words in thinking because they are part of a conceptual system and their meaning is determined by other concepts. They are cognized separately from their denotata and form supraempiri242 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 on the relevancy of using Vygotsky’s theoretical framework to legitimize dialogic teaching... cal connections. Separated from external, material reality, the learning of theoretical concepts requires an understanding of the system of knowledge that goes far beyond the individual’s current and even potentially accessible prior experience. The mediation of theoretical concepts thus represents the most culturally developed means of instruction with the unique potential to develop higher psychological functions as described by Vygotsky. Even today, the key importance of cultural tools (with a speciic focus on language as the semiotic tool) in developing higher psychological functions has been elaborated in minor interpretations of Vygotsky’s work, such as general issues relating to semiotic mediation (Valsiner, 2001; Hasan, 1995), or the quality of cultural tools mediated via instruction (Stetsenko, 1999) or the potential of different forms of mediation in developing psychological functions of different structural qualities (Karpov & Haywood, 1998; Kozulin & Presseisen, 1995; Hasan 2002). These authors have developed aspects of Vygotsky’s theory which remained unclear or uninished in his original work, with the aim of innovating in education theory and practice. More often, Vygotsky’s theory has proved attractive to those seeking greater activity and a different context for learning in relation to classroom practices and highlighting the mediating role of the socio-cultural environment in introducing cultural rules, values and functions through social interaction. While the role of cultural tools (including semiotic systems, especially language signs) in learning effective ways of acting is recognised only formally, social interactions as such are viewed as vehicles for developing higher forms of cognition in individuals. They believe that individual cognitive development is distributed between the learner and the culturally more competent other (Hutchins, 1996). There is recognition of the social context of leaning, which is further elaborated in order to demonstrate how supportive it is in maintaining interaction during classroom activities and in developing the divergent thinking of students. There is little discussion of the potential wielded by cultural tools of various qualities and forms and by the different ways in which their function may be mediated in purposeful human activity. In particular, there is scant consideration of what kind of unique cultural tools might be present in the tradition of formal education (but not in everyday learning), which mediate and transform human cognition eficiently and in a way that other contexts are not able to mediate (Arievitch & Stetsenko, 2000). As we will demonstrate in what follows, it is the social context for learning and the modiied teacher and student roles that have mainly encouraged scholars and practitioners to apply Vygotsky’s ideas in classroom practice. Consequently, classroom social interaction involving communication, but with no signiicant connection to the scientiic concepts is seen as the cornerstone for developing a thinking community – one journal of pedagogy 2/2013 243 articleS in which learners are able to express their own ideas, ask questions, accept the ideas or viewpoints of others, discuss possible solutions, and maintain this attitude long-term. Dialogic Shortcuts in Applying Language as a Cultural Tool in Teaching/Learning If we dismiss the notion that school based teaching/learning mediates higher psychological functions through the teacher’s use of activities and selected cultural tools to develop powerful cognitive strategies and reduce student dependence on the supervision of others or on contextual support, then education tends to focus on the interactive nature of the teaching/ learning process – a standpoint familiar to social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Here, the role of language in teaching/learning is viewed in terms of the construction of meaning and as the appropriation of socially derived forms of knowledge. These are not internalised directly, but through individual transformations requiring interaction, negotiation and collaboration (for a more detailed explanation, see for instance Palincsar, 1998). The role of language is of particular interest to scholars and practitioners because it supports the interactive nature of learning. When students perform meaningful activities there must be constant interplay between student and teacher and between student and student. As a consequence, the need to reconstruct the function of the cultural tools in cooperation and interaction with someone who is aware of the meaning of these cultural tools is not discussed as a leading strategy in teaching/learning (Stetsenko, 1999). Mediation of culturally valued forms of psychological functioning in interactions between students and culturally more competent others in interactive but asymmetric relationships loses signiicance, since the construction of meaning requires more than one perspective. These interactions, as Wells (2007) states, are not found in classrooms where the teacher provides a monologue on “what is known” and what is taken to be true. On the contrary, the use of dialogue as a leading strategy for learning provides space for the negotiation of meanings, especially when students are engaged in meaningful activities requiring collaboration. The participatory perspective in educational discourse has thus come to dominate educational theory and practice as a result of the growing acceptance that all knowledge is distributed among the members of society no matter how culturally experienced and competent they are. All learning should be treated as “a sociocultural process based on negotiation of values and social co-construction” (Matusov, 1998, p. 335) so as to respect this as244 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 on the relevancy of using Vygotsky’s theoretical framework to legitimize dialogic teaching... pect of knowledge and knowing. Before this perspective can be incorporated into classroom practice, schools must relinquish the dominant position of the teacher in the classroom and his/her key role in mediating culturally valued ways of dealing with problems (as social plans of activity ready to be internalised). Learning in schools should be viewed as constant interplay between the teacher and the students, or among students as a community of learners, where everyone can contribute to the process of learning in a valuable way. Participation in sociocultural activity is thus conceived of as a source of development. The individuals constantly renegotiate responsibility for the activity, redeining the position of those participating and change the course of sociocultural activity (ibid.). Emphasis is placed on dialogic classroom activities performed using discursive practices speciic to the target knowledge area so that students are provided with the most effective platform from which they can construct meaning. Dialogic learning is thus gaining popularity in classroom practice because knowledge is most fully achieved in the dialogue between people who are together trying to solve a problem, construct an explanation, or decide on a course of action. (Wells, 2007, p. 264) Co-construction of knowledge, “knowing together”, is the guiding principle among communities of learners in classroom settings inspired by Vygotsky’s work. In contrast to what Vygotsky argued, substantial progress in learning and development is not seen as dependent on teacher-based guidance. Instead, competencies developed through participation in sociocultural activity are seen as the consequence of the co-construction of knowledge in dialogic settings, particularly if they contribute to learning speciic reasoning and argumentation strategies peculiar to particular domains of knowledge (Pontecorvo, 1993). While discussing the issues, individual perspectives can be expressed and compared and members of the collaborating group have to achieve a consensus on how to describe the problem and the steps to be taken in order to complete the task successfully (Burbules & Bruce, 2001). The participants explain their ideas and these are subjected to peer review which, it is assumed, enables the participants to differentiate between the various ideas and select those deserving further consideration from the others, and thus avoiding discussion of marginal, non-productive aspects of the problem (Michaels et al., 2007). Problem-solving discussions among communities of learners are therefore often associated with inquiries comparable with inquiries in scientiic communities (Brown & Campione, 1994). Forman and Larreamendy-Joerns (1995) state that new task goals journal of pedagogy 2/2013 245 articleS can emerge in social interactions, so the social context of learning not only facilitates or impedes the learning process but also changes what can be learned. Learning organised as dialogue thus opens up new dimensions of learning not present in classroom settings relying on the dominant position of the teacher in the classroom and his or her dominion over knowledge. To avoid reducing the role of language to a semiotic tool designed speciically to develop higher psychological functions, Wells (1999), a prominent advocate of a dialogic approach in education, introduced the concept of dialogic inquiry. This explains the development facilitating the potential of language in leaning organised as semiotic apprenticeship. Having identiied the role of cultural tools in learning as being speciically attributed to knowledge of academic disciplines, he emphasizes that school activities should introduce learning as problem-solving framed with communication genres peculiar to the academic disciplines. To achieve this, students engage in joint, inquiry-based activities in which they can co-construct signiicant attributes of the culture and “sources of the culture”, while discussing and solving problems. These problem-solving activities are organised to provide opportunities for learning how these speciic, academic, communication genres are structured and are used to contribute to solving problems raised within classroom learning more effectively, with speciic focus on written language genres (speciic problem-solving frames, such as formulating questions and hypothesizing, searching for information in books, writing notes, preparing tables of results or a protocol, writing a report about the inquiry, and so on). While students work on the problem, they discuss possible steps that may help them reach a solution, use information to support or reject the solution and use these communication genres to organize the process of thinking about the problem and to prepare a report on how this problem can be solved. As Wells (ibid.) suggests, even these communication genres are not necessarily used in a strict and formal way (formal attributes of communication genres are part of the students’ inquiry), they are to be leading frameworks for students to achieve and to present solutions of problem tasks comparable to those achieved in the academic ield. Although there is discussion in dialogic inquiry of the potential of academic disciplines developing new strategies for dealing with the problem, this is focused more on how academic disciplines are seen externally to approach the problem without acknowledging the values of the academic knowledge. Through negotiating ideas, knowledge and values, students learn to appreciate the process of knowing more than knowledge alone. Thus teachers and oficial knowledge are losing their dominant position in the classroom, while knowledge is not taken to be what is known, what is taken to be true, as a representation of the knowledge of society with inner 246 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 on the relevancy of using Vygotsky’s theoretical framework to legitimize dialogic teaching... logic and cohesive power for maintaining society as a whole (Wells, 2007). Within this theoretical standpoint, knowledge and knowing are distributed among all participants engaged in dealing with the problem, established as the constant, gradual co-constructing of frames for dealing with problems and for presenting solutions, with no aspiration to mediate clear solutions to problems even when they are accessible via the mediation of particular scientiic concepts. The question of how to provide students with systematic knowledge and enable them to justify their standpoints using empirical evidence seems to play a minor role in discussions on how to implement Vygotsky’s theory into the classroom within this perspective. The Missing Fragments of Interpretations Traditional classroom practice is often criticised for its apparently weak potential to initiate and maintain learning in the classroom (Pontecorvo, 1993). However, there is still one unanswered question concerning the dialogic teaching/learning: Is education not seriously focusing on the order and coherence in experience and information, teaching students to just take the information as it comes and take reasoning as a kind of personal response to the world, not troubling itself with information and facts the foundation for innovations in classroom practice, sustainable to represent the Vygotkian perspective in the classroom (Resnick & Hall, 1998)? These issues cannot be considered within the Vygotskian framework unless there is further consideration of how different sorts of cultural tools enable knowledge and control over individual cognition to develop in a form which maximises cultural development (Arievitch & Stetsenko, 2000). This requires critical analyses of how language operates as a semiotic tool in the human mind and how cultural tools can be selected that have the potential to change the cognitive behaviour of individuals peculiar to how higher psychological functions are developed. First of all, such analyses should focus on the role of language in development-stimulating learning. Vygotsky never raised the issue of developing problem-solving skills or competencies while working on the problem solving task. In his analyses he demonstrated how problem-solving in collaboration with an adult or peer can encourage more dynamic approaches to development and encourage the more competent other to see the potential of future development. But collaboration with an adult or peers alone should not be considered as a mean universally stimulating development because we know little about the functional features of collaboration, the elements of the problem-solving process which may stimulate development (Moll, 1990), especially the various parts of the dialogue-realised activity. Even if we were to consider collaborative problem-based teaching/learning (which must be journal of pedagogy 2/2013 247 articleS followed by dialogue) to be a form of effective learning (Mercer, 2008), we would still have to establish whether all kinds of dialogue have this potential. Secondly, even if we consider dialogic and interactive learning to be an effective strategy for increasing student activity in the classroom, the role of language requires rethinking in relation to different phases of learning. Analyses of this nature should take inspiration from Gaľperin’s work on Vygotsky’s concept of internalisation (Gaľperin, 1989) in which he demonstrated how the role of language is transformed throughout the course of dealing with the problem when the social function of language is transformed until it becomes a psychological tool (from external to internal speech). This is because if the role of language changes while being transformed from external into internal speech, educational strategies should respond to this within the parameters of the educational setting and the role of all the individuals involved in learning/teaching. Thirdly, there should also be discussion on the role of language in learning as a semiotic tool in relation to the role played by other cultural tools in learning and development. As Cole (1996) makes clear, all artefacts (cultural tools) are material and conceptual in nature because they were invented for purposeful human activity. The way in which an object is conceptualised has its roots in the way the cultural tool has evolved in goal-directed human activity and how it is used and the awareness of the existence of the cultural tool simply inluences human thinking and ways of talking about it. Since the meaning and function of cultural tools is invented and actively reconstructed in the human community, there must be cooperation and interaction with other people who already understand the meaning of the cultural tool (Stetsenko, 1999). However, the learning function and meaning of the cultural tools may not simply inluence the individuals’ experiences, knowledge or skills. Some function as semiotic tools (especially language) and play a key role in the emergence of consciousness (Wells, 2007) and in gaining control of and mastering cognitive processes. As Gredler (2009) explains, in the Vygotskian tradition symbols [semiotic tools] selected to organize and control one’s cognitive behavior change nothing in the object of the task nor are they a method to improve or perfect a cognitive operation. Rather, they redirect or reconstruct the individual’s cognitive behaviour. (p. 4) Since it is focussed on language, the dialogic nature of teaching and learning should increase unfettered discussion, reasoning or the sharing of ideas in the classroom but it redirects attention away from the challenges in248 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 on the relevancy of using Vygotsky’s theoretical framework to legitimize dialogic teaching... volved in basing teaching/learning on highly advanced cultural tools, which are selected as the subject of education transferable into intrapsychological level as psychological tools. As Gredler (ibid.) points out, there are cultural tools (e.g. words) that can function as psychological tools, but all cultural tools do not automatically become psychological tools. For that, interiorised cultural tools have to restructure one’s cognitive processes. Conclusion It seems that if a dialogic approach is adopted, then innovations powerful enough to overcome the weaknesses of direct instruction are available for classroom settings. And in fact, there is empirical evidence showing that dialogic teaching/learning enables knowledge to be restructured and cognitive processes to take place that are useful in life – emotional distribution of reasoning and thinking, openness to other children’s contributions, children’s assumption about different and complementary discursive roles within the group and the positive effects of disagreements between children (for instance, Pontecorvo, 1987). However, there is a lack of evidence proving that these classroom practices impact on the development of higher psychological functions as Vygotsky held (1962, 1978) because the process of how cultural tools can help to distinguish thinking from material activity, to develop the ability to deal with problems through independent and selfregulated mental activity and to reach the highest potential of the human psychological system developed with using the most effective – semiotic – cultural tools is barely studied. Because knowledge is seen as distributed between all participants in the classroom and every student can contribute to solving the problem as he or she decides (regardless of how much their experiences might relate to the topic of inquiry and the nature of their cultural and social backgrounds) and all contributions are seen as being equally valuable (Wells, 2000) teaching/ learning based on dialogue necessarily undermines the value of the systematic structure of knowledge peculiar to academic disciplines and to the systematic structure of the way in which they are mediated. Particularly, when the teacher’s role is to orchestrate discussion – focussing students’ attention and facilitating negotiation in the interests of consensus building (Forman, 2000), while partially relinquishing control over the low of discussion, giving up the habit of evaluating each student contribution, and allowing students to initiate when they have something that they consider relevant to contribute. (Wells, 2007, p. 264) journal of pedagogy 2/2013 249 articleS With little attention being paid to the question of educational content, dialogic teaching/learning bypasses the potential role scientiic concepts may play in the development of higher psychological functions while the individual is involved in theoretical (conceptually based) generalisations or at least has access to the system of knowledge in a generalised symbolic form allowing them ind their way around the subject in a systemic way (Arievitch & Stetsenko, 2000). If this perspective is not included, then the potential Vygotsky’s theory has to provide innovation in school-based teaching/learning cannot be fully realised. R e fe re n c e s Arievitch, I. M., & Stetsenko, A. (2000). The quality of cultural tools and cognitive development: Gaľperin’s perspective and its implications. Human Development, 43, 69-92. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly (ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 229-270). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Burbules, N. C., & Bruce, B. C. (2001). Theory and research on teaching as dialogue. In V. Richardson (ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching, (4th ed., pp. 1102-1121). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge: Bellknap Press of Harvard University Press. Cole, M., & Wertsch, J. (1996). Beyond the individual-social antinomy in discussions of Piaget and Vygotsky. Human Development, 39, 250-256. Díaz, R. M., Neal, C. J., & Amaya-Williams, M. (1990). The social origins of self-regulation. In Moll. L. C. (ed.), Vygotsky and education. instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical theory, (pp. 127-154).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Forman, A. E. (2000). Knowledge building in discourse communities. Human Development, 43 (6), 364-368. Forman, A. E., & Larreamendy-Joerns, J. (1995). Learning in the context of peer collaboration: a pluralistic perspective on goals and expertise. Cognition and Instruction, 13 (4), 549-564. Gaľperin, P. YA. (1989). Mental actions as a basis for the formation of thoughts and images. Soviet Psychology, 27 (3), 45-64. Gredler, M. E. (2009). Hiding in plain sight: the stages of mastery/self-regulation in vygotsky’s cultural-historical theory. Educational Psychologist, 44(1), 1-19. Gredler, M. E. (2012). Understanding Vygotsky for the classroom: Is it too late? Educational Psychology Review, 24, 113-131. Hasan, R. (1995). On social conditions for semiotic mediation: The genesis of mind in society. In A. R. Sadovnik (Ed.), Knowlege and pedagogy: The sociology of Basil Bernstein (pp. 171–196). Norwood, New Yersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Hasan, R. (2002). Semiotic mediation and mental development in pluralistic societies: Some implications for tomorrow’s schooling. In. G. Wells and G. Claxton (eds.), Learning for life in the 21st Century: Socio-Cultural Perspectives on the future of education (pp. 89-123). Oxford: Blackwell. 250 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 on the relevancy of using Vygotsky’s theoretical framework to legitimize dialogic teaching... Hasan, R. (2005). Semiotic mediation, language and society: Three exotripic theories – Vygotsky, Halliday and Bernstein. In J. J. Webster (ed.) Language, society and consciousness: Raqaiya Hasan (pp. 46-67) London: Equinox. Hutchins, E. (1996). Cognition in the wild. Bradford: MIT Press. Karpov, Y. V. (2003). Vygotsky’s doctrine of scientiic concepts. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. Ageyev, S. Miller (Eds.): Vygotsky’s educational theory and practice in cultural context (pp. 65 – 82). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Karpov, Y. V., & Haywood, H. C. (1998). Two ways to elaborate vygotsky’s concept of mediation. American Psychologist, 53(1), 27-36. Kozulin, A., & Presseisen, B. (1995). Mediated learning experience and psychological tools: Vygotsky’s and feuerstein’s perspectives in study of student learning. Educational Psychologist, 30(2), 67-75. Matusov, E. (1998). When solo activity is not privileged: Participation and internalization model of development. Human Development, 41, 326-349. Mercer, N. (2008). Talk and the development of reasoning and understanding. Human Development, 51, 90-100. Michaels, S., O’Connor, C., & Resnick, L. B. (2007). Deliberative discourse idealized and realized: accountable talk in the classroom and in civic life. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 27, 283-297. Moll, L. C. (1990). Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development: Rethinking its instructional implications. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 50-51, 157-168. Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 345-375. Pontecorvo, C. (1987). Discussing for reasoning: The role of argument in knowledge construction. In De Corte, E., Lodewijks, J. G. L. C., Parmentier, R. and Span, P. (eds.) Learning and Instruction. A Publication of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (pp. 71-82). Leuven University Press, Oxford/ Leuven. Pontecorvo, C. (1993). Social interactions in the acquisition of knowledge. Educational Psychology Review, 5(3), 293-310. Resnick, L. B., & Hall, M. W. (1998). Learning organisations for sustainable educational reform. Daedalus, 127(4), 89-118. Stetsenko, A. P. (1999). Social interaction, cultural tool and the zone of proximal development: In search for synthesis. In: S. Chaiklin, M. Hedegaard & U. J. Jensen: Activity theory and social practice: Cultural-historical approaches (pp. 235 – 252). Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. Tuľviste, P. (1989). Education and the development of concepts: Interpreting results of experiments with adults with and without schooling. Soviet Psychology, 27(1), 5-21. Valsiner, J. (2001). Process structure of semiotic mediation in human development. Human Development, 44, 84-97. Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The Development of higher mental functions. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a social practice and theory of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. journal of pedagogy 2/2013 251 articleS Wells, G. (2000). Improving the quality of education for life in the 21st century. Paper presented at a Conference for Teachers, Santander, Spain, June 2000 website: http://people.ucsc.edu/~gwells/Santander.html > Wells, G. (2007). Semiotic mediation, dialogue and the construction of knowledge. Human Development, 50, 244-272. Wertsch, J. V. (1979). From social interaction to higher psychological processes. Human Development, 22, 1-22. A uthor: Zuzana petrová, phd. trnava university faculty of education department of School pedagogy priemyselná 4 918 43 trnava Slovakia e-mail: [email protected] 252 journal of pedagogy 2/2013 REVIEWERS OF ARTICLES IN 2013 Andrew Wilkins, Department of Education, Roehampton University, London, UK Lessard Clouston, Cook School of Intercultural Studies, Biola University, La Mirada, CA, USA Peter Najvar, Institute for Research in School Education, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic Zuzana Petrová, Department of School Pedagogy, Trnava University, Trnava, Slovakia Branislav Malík, Department of Civic and Ethics Education, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia Adam Lefstein, Department of Education , Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel Ivan Lukšík, Department of School Pedagogy, Trnava University, Trnava, Slovakia Clare Wardman, Centre for Languages and Linguistics, York St John University, York, UK Kateřina Vlčková, Department of Education, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic Gilbert S. Suzawa, Department of Economics, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI, USA Oľga Zápotočná, Department of School Pedagogy, Trnava University, Trnava, Slovakia Ondrej Kaščák, Department of School Pedagogy, Trnava University, Trnava