Prendre part à l'institution scolaire - L'enquête conceptuelle et factuelle en philosophie sociale de l'éducation Manuel Perrenoud Printemps 2022 ...
←
→
Transcription du contenu de la page
Si votre navigateur ne rend pas la page correctement, lisez s'il vous plaît le contenu de la page ci-dessous
Perrenoud - Master AISE - Printemps 2022 – « Prendre part à l’institution scolaire »
Prendre part à l’institution scolaire
L’enquête conceptuelle et factuelle
en philosophie sociale de l’éducation
Manuel Perrenoud
Printemps 2022
Cours Master AISE
#S02 – 2 Mars 2022
Perrenoud - Master AISE - Printemps 2022 – « Prendre part à l’institution scolaire »
xxx
xxx
https://www.unige.ch/fapse/life/enseignements/prendre-part-linstitution/
Voies écrites de communication
Perrenoud - Master AISE - Printemps 2022 – « Prendre part à l’institution scolaire »
Site UNIGE/LIFE Log-book (anonyme ou non)
pour les diaporamas (.pdf)
Moodle
pour le dépôt des documents mis à
disposition
(dias provisoires, textes, enregistrements
des séances, etc.)
Messagerie@unige.ch
pour vos remarques, questions etc. entre
les séances ➜ manuel.perrenoud@unige.ch
«Je vous encourage…»
Perrenoud - Master AISE - Printemps 2022 – « Prendre part à l’institution scolaire »
«Avant d’entrer dans mon analyse, je voudrais dire qu’un espace social tel que celui-ci [la salle de cours du
Collège de France] n’est pas très favorable, vous l’imaginer bien, à la discussion et à la question. Aussi, pour
favoriser une forme d’échange qui serait pour moi extraordinairement utile, je vous suggère, comme je l’ai
toujours fait par le passé, de déposer sur ma table, par exemple pendant l’entracte, des petits papiers signés
ou anonmyes sur lesquels vous me poseriez des questions ou me feriez des objections. J’essaierai de répondre
sur-le-champ si cela est facile et me paraît possible, ou alors la fois suivante. Pour moi, en tous cas, se serait
psychologiquement important de procéder ainsi parce que toute parole pose la question de sa propre
légitimité et une manière de se sentir un tant soit peu justifié dans le monopole de la parole, c’est d’avoir le
sentiment qu’on répond à des questions. Vous verrez que l’un des textes que je vais commenter aujourd’hui
recourt à cette forme de légitimation, et même si l’on peut douter de sa validité scientifique, cette légitimation a
une validité psychologique. Je vous encorage donc très fortement, si vous avec des objections ou des questions,
à les écrire et à déposer un petit papier sur ma table pour que j’essaie d’y répondre. Je précise que cette
manière de procéder est importante parce que, pour des raisons de temps ou par une sorte de pudeur
professionnelle, je vais constamment supposer connues des choses qui ne les sont peut-être pas. J’insiste pour
que vous n’hésitiez pas à me poser des question que vous jugeriez triviales ou naïves: les questions naïves sont
souvent les plus fondamentales et elles pourraient m’obliger à apporter des précisions ou à compler des
lacune que je peux laisser dans mon discours, ou comme cela m’est arrivé par le passé, à avouer simplement
que je ne sais pas répondre. »
Plan du cours en trois moments « On ne peut pas avoir de concepts du tout
à moins d'avoir beaucoup de concepts. »
(Brandom, 2009)
Perrenoud - Master AISE - Printemps 2022 – « Prendre part à l’institution scolaire »
PROBLÈMES Mise en place d’un espace problématique et d’outils conceptuels
(3 séances) (théories de l’éducation démocratique, approche du « social », théorie de l’action,
théorie de l’expérience, approches de l’institution)
[Transition]
TERRAINS Rencontres d’acteurs et actrices pour entendre et interroger leurs expériences
(3 séances) (terrain scolaire, politique, professionnel/syndical)
[Transition]
ENQUÊTES Introduction à une logique de l’enquête et théorie de l’intervention
(3 séances) (la philosophie sociale comme méthode ; applications et perspectives)
[Récapitulation]
Modalités d’évaluation
Perrenoud - Master AISE - Printemps 2022 – « Prendre part à l’institution scolaire »
Prendre part à l’institution scolaire : Prendre part à l’institution scolaire :
l’enquête conceptuelle et factuelle en philosophie sociale de l’éducation l’enquête conceptuelle et factuelle en philosophie sociale de l’éducation
Analyse et intervention dans les systèmes éducatifs (AISE) Analyse et intervention dans les systèmes éducatifs (AISE)
Maîtrise universitaire en sciences de l'éducation - Université de Genève- FPSE Maîtrise universitaire en sciences de l'éducation - Université de Genève- FPSE
Manuel Perrenoud - Semestre de printemps 2022 Manuel Perrenoud - Semestre de printemps 2022
Format du travail écrit et critères d’évaluation et (juin 2022)
Rédiger un projet d’enquête en philosophie sociale
Date de reddition : Au plus tard le 18 juin (fin de la session d’examens de juin 20221).
Document de présentation des Quantité /longueur : Entre 15'000 et 30'000 signes-espaces
modalités d’évaluation (juin 2022) (p. ex. entre 5 et 10 pages en Times New Roman 12)
Format & adresse : Document en format électronique (.docx ; .odt ; .pdf)
À : manuel.perrenoud@unige.ch
Attribution des points Insuffisant = 0 pt ; suffisant = 1 pt ; bon ou très bon = 2 pts. Valable pour les 6 critères
Le travail écrit individuel demandé en fin de semestre de printemps 2022 validera l’acquisition des 3
(par critère) : de I.1 à III.3.
crédits du cours. Le délai, le format attendu et les critères d’évaluation plus précis sont présentés Seuil de suffisance Pour que l'épreuve soit réussie, la moitié des points (3) est requise dans chaque
dans les tableaux de la page suivante. Les remarques ci-dessous visent à guider la conception et la (par catégorie) : catégorie I, II et III.
rédaction du travail de projet d’enquête en philosophie sociale. Barème en cas d’acquis : 12 pts/18 = 4.0 ; 13/18 = 4.5 ; 14/18 = 5.0 ; 15-16/18 = 5.5 ; 17/18 = 6.0
Il s’agira de rédiger un texte qui présentera et soutiendra un projet d’enquête utilisant les outils de la
philosophie sociale et orienté par une logique d’intervention. I. Qualité de l’argumentation pour exposer le projet /6
Un lecteur ou une lectrice externe devrait pouvoir, en vous lisant : comprendre ce qui vous intéresse,
quels sont les enjeux que vous voulez mettre en évidence, quel sont le ou les problèmes qui se I.1 Présentation et justification du terrain d’enquête. /2
posent selon vous, quels sont les acteurs et actrices concernés, dans quelle dynamique
institutionnelle votre projet s’inscrit, et ce qu’il s’agirait, par votre enquête, de mieux connaître et I.2 Problématisation de l’enjeu. /2
conceptualiser pour envisager au mieux une éventuelle intervention.
Différentes genres de source seront mobilisées dans votre travail de rédaction: le contenu du cours I.3 Articulation des éléments de connaissance et de conceptualisation dans une logique d’intervention. /2
(documents, présentations, concepts, discussions, etc.), vos notes personnelles au fil du semestre,
les éléments à disposition sur les plates-formes du cours, vos observations, vos réflexions issues du II. Appuis sur du matériau (concepts, textes, expériences, discussions, etc. ) /6
cours et d’ailleurs, vos lectures, etc.
II.1 Utilisation des concepts. /2
Objectifs du travail écrit II.2 Utilisation des références aux expériences relatées et aux débats vécus dans le cours. /2
• Choix et justification d’un terrain qui vous intéresse particulièrement sur lequel un enjeu de
prise de part à l’institution se pose. II.3 Utilisation d’apports pertinents extérieurs au cours. /2
• Problématisation du « prendre part » sur ce terrain en mobilisant des idées, concepts, III. Forme et lisibilité du travail /6
débats etc. (outils de philosophie sociale) exposés et discutés au fil du cours mais aussi
d’autres ressources extérieures.
III.1 Vocabulaire, syntaxe, orthographe. /2
• Formulation et articulation des aspects que votre projet d’enquête voudrait contribuer à
mieux 1. connaître (ressources du système, pouvoirs des actrices et acteurs, etc.) et 2. III.2 Clarté, structure et lisibilité de l’ensemble. /2
conceptualiser dans une logique de préparation d’une future intervention.
III.3 Référencement bibliographique. /2
Total /18
MP, février 2022
☛ Moodle
1 Du lundi 30 mai au samedi 18 juin 2022
-1- -2-
Perrenoud - Master AISE - Printemps 2022 – « Prendre part à l’institution scolaire » https://www.swissuniversities.ch/fr/themes/etudes/cadre-de-qualifications
Perrenoud - Master AISE - Printemps 2022 – « Prendre part à l’institution scolaire »
«versions de la démocratie» et «versions du social»
862493
research-article2019
RERXXX10.3102/0034654319862493SantDemocratic Education: A Theoretical Review
Review of Educational Research
October 2019, Vol. 89, No. 5, pp. 655–696
DOI: 10.3102/0034654319862493
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions
© 2019 AERA. http://rer.aera.net
Democratic Education: A Theoretical Review
Introduction
Elitist; (2006–2017)
Versions du social
Analytique;
Liberal; Edda Sant
Manchester Metropolitan University Alexis CUKIER et Olivier GAUDIN Empirique;
Neoliberal ; Institutionnelle-symbolique;
This theoretical review examines how democratic education is conceptual-
Deliberative; ized within educational scholarship. Three hundred and seventy-seven arti-
cles published in English language peer-reviewed journals between 2006 and
« Notre rapport au social est, comme notre rapport au monde, plus
Phénoménologique;
2017 are discursively analyzed. Democratic education functions as a privi-
Multicultural; leged nodal point of different political discourses. Two discourses against
(elitist and neoliberal) and six discourses pro democratic education (liberal,
deliberative, multiculturalist, participatory, critical, and agonistic) construct
profond que toute perception expresse ou que tout jugement. Il est
aussi faux de nous placer dans la société comme un objet au milieu Critique;
ISBN 978-2-7535-5261-6 — Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2017, www.pur-editions.fr
Participatory; Interactionniste;
d’autres objets, que de mettre la société en nous comme objet de
its meaning. It is argued that the different versions of democratic education
respond to various (a) ontological and epistemological assumptions, (b) nor- pensée, et des deux côtés l’erreur consiste à traiter le social comme
Les sens du social, philosophie et sociologie – Alexis Cukier et Olivier Gaudin (dir.)
mative approaches to democracy, and (c) conceptions of the relationship un objet. Il nous faut revenir au social avec lequel nous sommes en
Critical; between education and politics. For educational policy, the review provides
a critique of elitist and neoliberal policies and support for participatory deci-
sion making across discourses. Recommendations for educational practice
contact du seul fait que nous existons, et que nous portons attaché
à nous avant toute objectivation. […] Le social est déjà là quand Pragmatiste;
Agonistic Naturaliste
are made by identifying pedagogies across democratic education scholarship nous le connaissons ou le jugeons1. »
as well as specific pedagogies for each discourse.
Le projet de ce volume est d’interroger les divers sens du « social » : ses signifi-
KEYWORDS: democratic education, education, democracy, educational policy,
curriculum and pedagogy
cations et ses conditions d’intelligibilité, ses usages philosophiques et sociologiques,
et ses implications normatives2. Il existe plusieurs manières de mener à bien un tel
questionnement – notamment développé, ces dernières années, sous la rubrique de
Since Dewey wrote “Democracy and Education” in 1916 much has been writ- l’« ontologie sociale3 ». L’une d’entre elles est l’analyse conceptuelle visant à isoler les
ten about democratic education in education scholarship and theory. A work ini- propriétés des phénomènes que l’on appelle « sociaux ». Il s’agit alors d’étudier les
tially subtitled “An Introduction to Philosophy of Education” (MW.9)1 inspired
theory and research not only in philosophy of education but also in education 1. Merleau-Ponty M., Phénoménologie de la perception, Paris, Gallimard, 1945, p. 415.
scholarship more generally (Doddington, 2018). For a long time, “democratic
2. La question du « sens du social » est l’objet d’un livre récent de Franck Fischbach, l’un
education” has functioned as a nodal point (Laclau, 2007; Mannion, Biesta,
Priestley, & Ross, 2011) within educational theory and research, serving as a des contributeurs du présent ouvrage. Ses analyses portent notamment sur la dimension sociale
place of encounter for different educational disciplines, discourses of democracy et les enjeux politiques des formes contemporaines de la coopération, du travail et de la démo-
(Sant, 2019)
and education. But democratic education has been recently disputed, with some cratie. Voir Fischbach F., Le sens du social. Puissances de la coopération, Montréal, Lux, 2015.
authors warning about crisis (Okoth & Anyango, 2014) and others openly posi- 3. S’il n’existe pas de définition consensuelle ni même d’approche dominante de l’ontologie
tioning themselves against democratic education (Pennington, 2014). This review sociale, ces recherches s’organisent autour de questions telles que le degré d’autonomie des entités
aims to examine how democratic education is conceptualized within contempo- collectives par rapport aux entités individuelles ou la composition fondamentale du monde social
rary educational scholarship to support ongoing debate about its viability.
655
et de ses entités collectives : interactions, conventions, institutions ou structures, etc. Voir notam-
ment la revue Journal of Social Ontology, De Gruyter [http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jso]. (Cukier & Gaudin, 2017)
☛ Moodle
Perrenoud - Master AISE - Printemps 2022 – « Prendre part à l’institution scolaire »
«versions de la démocratie» et «versions du social»
aujourd’hui 862493
research-article2019
RERXXX10.3102/0034654319862493SantDemocratic Education: A Theoretical Review
la semaine
prochaine…
Review of Educational Research
October 2019, Vol. 89, No. 5, pp. 655–696
DOI: 10.3102/0034654319862493
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions
© 2019 AERA. http://rer.aera.net
Democratic Education: A Theoretical Review
Introduction
Elitist; (2006–2017)
Versions du social
Analytique;
Liberal; Edda Sant
Manchester Metropolitan University Alexis CUKIER et Olivier GAUDIN Empirique;
Neoliberal ; Institutionnelle-symbolique;
This theoretical review examines how democratic education is conceptual-
Deliberative; ized within educational scholarship. Three hundred and seventy-seven arti-
cles published in English language peer-reviewed journals between 2006 and
« Notre rapport au social est, comme notre rapport au monde, plus
Phénoménologique;
2017 are discursively analyzed. Democratic education functions as a privi-
Multicultural; leged nodal point of different political discourses. Two discourses against
(elitist and neoliberal) and six discourses pro democratic education (liberal,
deliberative, multiculturalist, participatory, critical, and agonistic) construct
profond que toute perception expresse ou que tout jugement. Il est
aussi faux de nous placer dans la société comme un objet au milieu Critique;
ISBN 978-2-7535-5261-6 — Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2017, www.pur-editions.fr
Participatory; Interactionniste;
d’autres objets, que de mettre la société en nous comme objet de
its meaning. It is argued that the different versions of democratic education
respond to various (a) ontological and epistemological assumptions, (b) nor- pensée, et des deux côtés l’erreur consiste à traiter le social comme
Les sens du social, philosophie et sociologie – Alexis Cukier et Olivier Gaudin (dir.)
mative approaches to democracy, and (c) conceptions of the relationship un objet. Il nous faut revenir au social avec lequel nous sommes en
Critical; between education and politics. For educational policy, the review provides
a critique of elitist and neoliberal policies and support for participatory deci-
sion making across discourses. Recommendations for educational practice
contact du seul fait que nous existons, et que nous portons attaché
à nous avant toute objectivation. […] Le social est déjà là quand Pragmatiste;
Agonistic Naturaliste
are made by identifying pedagogies across democratic education scholarship nous le connaissons ou le jugeons1. »
as well as specific pedagogies for each discourse.
Le projet de ce volume est d’interroger les divers sens du « social » : ses signifi-
KEYWORDS: democratic education, education, democracy, educational policy,
curriculum and pedagogy
cations et ses conditions d’intelligibilité, ses usages philosophiques et sociologiques,
et ses implications normatives2. Il existe plusieurs manières de mener à bien un tel
questionnement – notamment développé, ces dernières années, sous la rubrique de
Since Dewey wrote “Democracy and Education” in 1916 much has been writ- l’« ontologie sociale3 ». L’une d’entre elles est l’analyse conceptuelle visant à isoler les
ten about democratic education in education scholarship and theory. A work ini- propriétés des phénomènes que l’on appelle « sociaux ». Il s’agit alors d’étudier les
tially subtitled “An Introduction to Philosophy of Education” (MW.9)1 inspired
theory and research not only in philosophy of education but also in education 1. Merleau-Ponty M., Phénoménologie de la perception, Paris, Gallimard, 1945, p. 415.
scholarship more generally (Doddington, 2018). For a long time, “democratic
2. La question du « sens du social » est l’objet d’un livre récent de Franck Fischbach, l’un
education” has functioned as a nodal point (Laclau, 2007; Mannion, Biesta,
Priestley, & Ross, 2011) within educational theory and research, serving as a des contributeurs du présent ouvrage. Ses analyses portent notamment sur la dimension sociale
place of encounter for different educational disciplines, discourses of democracy et les enjeux politiques des formes contemporaines de la coopération, du travail et de la démo-
and education. But democratic education has been recently disputed, with some cratie. Voir Fischbach F., Le sens du social. Puissances de la coopération, Montréal, Lux, 2015.
authors warning about crisis (Okoth & Anyango, 2014) and others openly posi- 3. S’il n’existe pas de définition consensuelle ni même d’approche dominante de l’ontologie
tioning themselves against democratic education (Pennington, 2014). This review sociale, ces recherches s’organisent autour de questions telles que le degré d’autonomie des entités
aims to examine how democratic education is conceptualized within contempo- collectives par rapport aux entités individuelles ou la composition fondamentale du monde social
rary educational scholarship to support ongoing debate about its viability. et de ses entités collectives : interactions, conventions, institutions ou structures, etc. Voir notam-
ment la revue Journal of Social Ontology, De Gruyter [http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jso].
655
(Sant, 2019) (Cukier & Gaudin, 2017)
☛ Moodle
862493
research-article2019
RERXXX10.3102/0034654319862493SantDemocratic Education: A Theoretical Review
(1) Quelles sont les versions de l'éducation démocratique qui émergent de la théorie
Perrenoud - Master AISE - Printemps 2022 – « Prendre part à l’institution scolaire »
Review of Educational Research
October 2019, Vol. 89, No. 5, pp. 655–696
et de la recherche en éducation publiées dans les revues de langue anglaise ?
DOI: 10.3102/0034654319862493
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions (2) Quels sont les discours politiques associés à ces versions ?
(3) Quelles sont les hypothèses philosophiques qui sous-tendent ces discours ?
© 2019 AERA. http://rer.aera.net
Democratic Education: A Theoretical Review (4) Quelles sont les recommandations/critiques de la politique et de la pratique
(2006–2017)
éducatives qui émergent de ces discours
Edda Sant
Manchester Metropolitan University
This theoretical review examines how democratic education is conceptual-
ized within educational scholarship. Three hundred and seventy-seven arti-
cles published in English language peer-reviewed journals between 2006 and
2017 are discursively analyzed. Democratic education functions as a privi-
leged nodal point of different political discourses. Two discourses against
(elitist and neoliberal) and six discourses pro democratic education (liberal,
deliberative, multiculturalist, participatory, critical, and agonistic) construct
its meaning. It is argued that the different versions of democratic education
respond to various (a) ontological and epistemological assumptions, (b) nor-
mative approaches to democracy, and (c) conceptions of the relationship
between education and politics. For educational policy, the review provides
a critique of elitist and neoliberal policies and support for participatory deci-
sion making across discourses. Recommendations for educational practice
are made by identifying pedagogies across democratic education scholarship
as well as specific pedagogies for each discourse.
KEYWORDS: democratic education, education, democracy, educational policy,
curriculum and pedagogy
Since Dewey wrote “Democracy and Education” in 1916 much has been writ-
ten about democratic education in education scholarship and theory. A work ini-
tially subtitled “An Introduction to Philosophy of Education” (MW.9)1 inspired
theory and research not only in philosophy of education but also in education
scholarship more generally (Doddington, 2018). For a long time, “democratic
education” has functioned as a nodal point (Laclau, 2007; Mannion, Biesta,
Priestley, & Ross, 2011) within educational theory and research, serving as a
place of encounter for different educational disciplines, discourses of democracy
and education. But democratic education has been recently disputed, with some
authors warning about crisis (Okoth & Anyango, 2014) and others openly posi-
tioning themselves against democratic education (Pennington, 2014). This review
aims to examine how democratic education is conceptualized within contempo-
rary educational scholarship to support ongoing debate about its viability.
☛ Moodle
655
(Sant, 2019)
377 articles962373
research-article2020
ESJ0010.1177/1746197920962373Education, Citizenship and Social JusticeSant et al.
Perrenoud - Master AISE - Printemps 2022 – « Prendre part à l’institution scolaire »
ecsj
CAMBRIDGE JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, 2017
https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2017.1337719
OPEN ACCESS Article
Education, Citizenship and
Promoting participation at a time of social and political
Pedagogies of agonistic democracy
Social Justice
2021, Vol. 16(3) 227–244
turmoil: what is the impact of children’s and young people’s © The Author(s) 2020
city councils? and citizenship education
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
Edda Santa and Ian Daviesb https://doi.org/10.1177/1746197920962373
DOI: 10.1177/1746197920962373
journals.sagepub.com/home/esj
Edda Sant , Jane McDonnell, Karen Pashby
a
Department of Childhood, Youth and Education Studies, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester,
UK; bDepartment of Education, University of York, York, UK
and David Menendez Alvarez-Hevia
ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY
Manchester Metropolitan University, UK
Political Education
in Times of
Downloaded by [2.217.191.116] at 01:13 14 August 2017
Youth councils are examined as spaces of citizenship education Received 3 February 2016 Abstract
where young people are educated as political subjects. At a time of Accepted 18 May 2017 Concerned about the limits of normative deliberative pedagogies, we designed and organized a workshop
political and economic instability data were collected in a Catalan
Populism
KEYWORDS to explore to possibilities of an agonistic pedagogy for global citizenship education. We brought together a
city through tests and focus groups involving 112 students, three Citizenship education; range of participants including national and international primary and university students, researchers and
teachers and two youth council managers during one academic political education;
year. Students’ political trust decreased and their cynicism towards
curriculum developers and we created pedagogical activities in which disagreement was fostered. We aimed
youth councils; political
politics increased; there were no changes in students’ anticipated participation; Spain; to normalize conflict, create channels for the expression of political emotions and generate opportunities for
future participation. The article avoids drawing simplistic causal links Catalonia the emergence of new subjectivities. Our findings suggest that the plurality of participants and the conflict-
between students’ involvement in a council and the expression of orientated pedagogies facilitated the normalization of conflict, the participants’ affective engagement with Towards a Radical Democratic
their views. The participants also discuss the councils as performance Others and the creation of new subjectivities. They also indicate that older participants had less positive Education
sites. It is speculated whether, in students’ views, this metaphor of attitudes towards conflict-orientated pedagogies and discussions on abstract topics did not foster ‘affective’
performance applies not only to the councils but to the wider political engagement. We examine potential implications for further educational research and practice considering
context in which they live. It is argued that youth councils are, in the singularities of this project.
some ways, potentially valuable for promoting participation and Edda Sant
recommendations are made in light of the findings.
Keywords
agonistic democracy, citizenship education, deliberative democracy, democratic education,
Introduction intergenerational, pedagogy and curriculum studies, Sustainable Development Goal 4
We aim to contribute to discussions concerning the education of young people as political
subjects. In our research project we asked: ‘What do students learn through their participa-
Pedagogies of agonistic democracy and citizenship education
tion in a city youth council?’ The research discussed in this article is relevant to citizenship In the autumn of 2016, a group of lecturers engaged in research and teaching,1 we had the oppor-
education and, more specifically, to political education, in Spain. We focus on evaluation of tunity to design and host a half-day exploratory workshop bringing together primary, undergradu-
an educational project – referred to in this article as EPS – in one city in Spain. As part of our ate and postgraduate students, educators, and researchers to discuss the key points of contention
research we compared students’ views on politics and their anticipated political participation relating to what it means to be a citizen in today’s global world. The workshop was funded as part
before and after their participation in a youth council. We deepened our understanding of all of seed support towards developing a programme focused on global citizenship and education for
data by considering the perceptions of teachers and project managers as well as students. Our
research was conducted in in a Catalan city in Spain in 2011–2012 in a context of economic
an undergraduate Education Studies programme. As we were designing the programme, we were
also engaging theoretically with literature on agonistic and radical approaches to democratic edu- (Sant, 2022)
and social and political crisis. A phase of intensive nationalistic-separatist mobilisation had cation. The workshop provided the opportunity to bring together practice and theory in order to
explore the pedagogical possibilities of hosting a diverse group of participants to discuss citizen-
begun in 2010 and probably reached its climax in 2014. It can probably be best understood
ship issues. We were drawn to agonistic and radical approaches due to concerns about the limits of
CONTACT Edda Sant e.sant@mmu.ac.uk Corresponding author:
© 2017 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Edda Sant, Manchester Metropolitan University, 53 Bonsall Street, Manchester, M15 6GX, UK.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License Email: e.sant@mmu.ac.uk
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
(Sant & Davies, 2018) (Sant & Davies, 2021) ☛ MoodlePerrenoud - Master AISE - Printemps 2022 – « Prendre part à l’institution scolaire »
862493
research-article2019
RERXXX10.3102/0034654319862493SantDemocratic Education: A Theoretical Review
Perrenoud - Master AISE - Printemps 2022 – « Prendre part à l’institution scolaire »
Review of Educational Research
October 2019, Vol. 89, No. 5, pp. 655–696
DOI: 10.3102/0034654319862493
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions SANT, E. (2019). Democratic Education: A Theoretical Review (2006–2017). Review of Educational Research, 89, 5, 655–696.
© 2019 AERA. http://rer.aera.net Elitist Political &
Multicultural
Although various disagreements have arisen within this group, all multiculturalists have in common an understanding that debates on plurality and diversity should be prioritized. multiculturalists advocate a
Political & politics should be in the hands of a small elite who would guarantee the stability of democratic societies; elites as more politically active greater understanding and commitment to democratic values; philosophical multiplicity of spaces (i.e., formal, informal) where democratic practices might take place
philosophical competing groups, elites periodically accountable to the masses who evaluate their performance through voting; elites are necessary for the functioning of any society. social as a complicated and conflicted principles Diversity, nevertheless, is the primary democratic feature; diversity and freedom are not easily reconcilable: what happens if communities do not share the liberal value of freedom? Multiculturalists argue
principles reality; Knowledge of the truth demands levels of ability, self-sacrifice and commitment only available to a minority; only elites should rule the polis and be involved in politics; elites have access to that, in a democratic context, diversity and plurality— even if they undermine freedom—must be protected. the focus here is on questions about “who” is the democratic subject and the consequences of
knowledge and consequent virtue, are more likely to know how the social space should be organized. intersectionality between race/gender and citizenship; a democratic society is a society that guarantees the plurality of ways of being.
Educational students conditioned by the social role that each student will pursue; distinctive citizenship program: one for the elite of cosmopolitan leaders, one for mid-level workers, and one for “local” followers (eg. multiculturalists position themselves as particularists; deny the universality and priority of any cultural framework (liberal institutions, communicative rationality.).key disagreement is the extent to which
implications Singapour). this particularism applies; challenge the universality of any moral and cultural framework
Democratic Education: A Theoretical Review
two different forms of democratic education: one orientated to the elites (cosmopolitan forms of knowledge and values are particularly; students learn other languages and cultures, study abroad, and Critical multiculturalists go farther and challenge the primacy of social and political institutions. The priority of the liberal state and liberal institutions are here directly questioned and other communities,
engage with the Western canon ) and another orientated to the masses (alternative curricula are proposed. In some occasions, these students are not expected to be educated to participate; “nonelite” and social and political organizations are considered to have the same democratic legitimacy; challenge the primacy of any ontological and epistemological framework; argue for a multiplicity of
students will automatically learn about democracy because schools are embedded within democratic systems); participation is reduced to the act of voting and nonelite students are expected to gain epistemologies that challenge dominant conceptions of being and knowing
knowledge on formal political structures so they can evaluate the elites’ performance. Educational state vs. communities making educational decisions is a matter of discussion. universalist–particularist spectrum: particularist: parents must be free to raise their children within their own way of life, even if
(2006–2017)
Debates Elitism is not a strong discourse framing democratic education; more often a discourse against which democratic education is constructed; elites are not perceived as virtuous but rather as potentially implications this implies excluding them from the education system; homeschooling or non-schooling become an alternative. Universalist side: heterogeneous school body allow students to interact with those different
and critiques undemocratic : Dewey “the world has suffered more from leaders and authorities than from the masses” (LW.4.365); education in democracy, as discussed by elitists, is considered to be minimally to themselves: public schools must be a meeting place for male and female students of diverse socioeconomic, racial, and cultural backgrounds; students could be exempt from attending specific classes or
democratic. activities. Between these two perspectives, others argue for the existence of religious or ethnic schools that allow parents to educate their children in their own values; democratic curricula and pedagogies:
opportunities to better understand their own culture, being able to learn in native language(s), engage with indigenous knowledge systems; opportunities to reflect to better understand themselves and
Liberal comprehend the nature of the stereotypes they hold; Religious education a key curricular subject where this process of inquiry can take place; inquiry should allow students to engage with multiple identities
Political & liberal democracy functions as a tacit social contract between individuals and the state in which representativeness and plurality are key features; division of society into those who govern and those who are and examine (disrupt) essentialist understandings of culture ; students be confronted with the Other; learn of other traditions and experiences (made visible and normalized in the curriculum); curriculum
philosophical governed; equality of citizens; primacy of the individual over the social; privilege freedom over any other democratic value; freedom is controversial: distinction between negative and positive - negative reflect cultural history, present expectations, aspirations of different cultures; understanding of oneself and the encounter with the Other should facilitate abilities to communicate with others (intercultural,
principles liberty is absence of external impediments; democracy is instrumentally valuable as it is effective in guaranteeing individual liberty. positive liberty is the freedom to be ruled by one’s own rationality: translation, or dialogue competency); a curriculum exposes the relations between power and culture; concerned about institutional racism within educational institutions (teachers’ lack of knowledge of
students’ cultural, social, and language backgrounds); challenge Eurocentric understandings, recommend students should engage with non-Cartesian epistemologies.
Edda Sant
rationality and aspiration for freedom are conceived as part of the natural human beings: all humans are expected to have the capacity to access social truth; truth as universal “moral law” ; rational citizens
will use their freedom to act for the common good Debates Multiculturalist proposals on democratic education are critiqued for their stand on particularism. First, there is a question about the coherence of particularism itself: approaches to the problem of pluralizing
democracy as a political expression of the liberal value of self-fulfillment and(political) equality by providing equal rights to participate in political and social life. and critiques education that privilege the particular over the universal fail because their demands for equality are premised on universal principles. Second, it can be argued that denying universality might privilege the
Manchester Metropolitan University Educational education is essential for political, epistemological, and moral reasons; political equality can only be guaranteed in a society of knowledgeable and rational citizens, and so democracy demands the status quo; without a demand for universality, conformity with the status quo is unavoidable. Third, particularist educational policies might foster the isolation of communities: in faith and/or ethnic-based
implications universalization of education to guarantee equal opportunities of self-realization; mass schooling policies worldwide (eg. UNESCO) have at least partially their roots on this conception; liberal educators also schools, students might be isolated from others. Intercultural dialogue might require educational spaces where students have opportunities to interact with others.
advocate for an education for democratic citizenship based on knowledge and reason; liberal educators worldwide recommend that students should acquire knowledge of democratic institutions and
procedures; particularly, they emphasize knowledge of local and national political and juridical systems and governments of democratic values and of individuals’ rights and duties; recommend that students Participatory
study the history of democratic institutions and practices and examine the potential strengths and weakness of democratic systems when compared with other forms of government. Cosmopolitan liberals Political & Participatory democrats understand elitism to be against democracy itself, restricting the participation of most citizens; argue for a strong democracy based on an “aristocracy of everyone”; democratic
advocate the need for a cosmopolitan democratic education that examines the ethical basis of human rights; history and social studies are identified as subjects that are particularly helpful for these philosophical practices are not limited to politics but become the general way of “associated living” (Dewey)
examinations. principles whereas deliberative democrats privilege communication and consensus, participatory democrats privilege action and praxis. The relevance of participation is justified in relation to normative and
Rational citizens, in this liberal framework, also require the ability to think critically. Since social ills are considered to arise from irrational living the content of democratic education programs should be based functionalist principles. Normatively, participation is understood to be the prime responsibility of the citizenry; participatory democrats argue that participation fulfils four main functions. First, according to
on scientific truths and should reflect scientific knowledge correctly; teachers should focus on helping students develop an ability to weigh evidence, evaluate views and potential truths, detect Dewey, action is epistemologically relevant. There is no assumed distinction between the human and the world, and knowledge itself is intralinked with experience. Through action—interacting with others
This theoretical review examines how democratic education is conceptual- contradictions, form and articulate opinions, and respond to those who disagree; educating these critical thinking abilities becomes an educational purpose across all curricular areas including mathematics
education
and the environment—we become who we are; Second, participation humanizes us. Arendt writes that (political) action is one of the three basic activities of human beings. It is what makes each human
distinct to the extent that if “people [are] leading more private lives, they are becoming less human”; Third, through our active engagement with the “outside world” we are able to modify this world; Fourth,
ized within educational scholarship. Three hundred and seventy-seven arti- Debates
and critiques
Liberal democratic education is perceived in two different ways. Some authors critically identify the potential deficits of their present or past systems when compared with the principles of liberal democracy.
South Africa/ Spain. From this perspective, liberal democracy is considered as aspirational and democratic education a vehicle toward this possible outcome. Others, writing from consolidated liberal Educational
participation is also educative. Learning is conceived as experiential and thus, only by participating in democracy can one learn about it. Participation and education are intrinsically connected.
Participatory democratic educators advocate for action-centered pedagogies: students are expected to be able to openly participate in educational activities, raising their voices and having their views taken
cles published in English language peer-reviewed journals between 2006 and democracies such as the US or the UK, often discuss the deficits of liberal democratic systems and liberal democratic education. In this respect, most versions of democratic education could be considered as
a reaction to liberal democratic education. From a deliberative perspective, discussion on how the Kantian conception of (individual) rational autonomy undermines the potential role that communication
implications into account (open class, climate, and ethos pedagogies) ; participation in class, school, and youth councils is often emphasized as a priority. Worldwide and across all educational stages, students are also
encouraged to participate in other activities such as curriculum codevelopment student unions, and student media. Opportunities also need to be created for students to engage in activities outside
institutions such as service learning, community learning and media production activities
and the public sphere can play in democratic education. From a participatory perspective, criticize the lack of participation in liberal democratic education programs.
2017 are discursively analyzed. Democratic education functions as a privi- Neoliberal
Debates
and critiques
Participatory democratic educators disagree on whether participation, in the educative context, should foster social reproduction or social reconstruction. At one extreme, progressive educators, following
the work of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Alexander Neil, Maria Montessori (among others), and certain interpretations of Dewey, endorse child-centered, student-centered, or learner-centered pedagogies.
leged nodal point of different political discourses. Two discourses against Political &
philosophical
democracy as aggregation of individual preferences regulated through procedures similar to those of the market; citizens as rational consumers through voting compete (views and private interests prevail);
political candidates compete for votes; democracy becomes political equivalent of economic market.
Students are here expected to recover knowledge from within themselves to create new worlds; examples of this often relate to particular schools such as Summerhill or Dewey’s Lab schools.
At the opposite extreme, advocates of the social reproduction approach argue for an education for (future) citizenship. In the line with as participatory citizenship education, participatory pedagogies are
(elitist and neoliberal) and six discourses pro democratic education (liberal, principles privilege the negative liberty; freedom as absence of external coercion; democracy denuded from moral aspiration; as a political system that effectively guarantees individuals’ freedom and prevents social
violence and fraud ; responsibilities between individuals vs against the state
expected to allow younger generations to engage with participatory values that have been defined by the previous generations; the curriculum for civic studies in British Columbia (Canada), for instance,
explicitly specifies its aim in relation to active citizenship; considering the main function of students’ participation is an educative one, “nonreal” participatory pedagogies such as mock elections, parliaments
deliberative, multiculturalist, participatory, critical, and agonistic) construct objective truths might exist, individuals are unlikely to have access to them; situation of permanent ignorance, toleration of individuals’ perspectives and the protection of the private sphere are needed
against uncheckable universal claims that attack individuals’ liberty.
and other simulations are recommended. In between these two approaches, those who favor Dewey’s pragmatism—neither traditionalist nor progressive— argue for an education “through” democracy.
Education is not considered child-centered or a preparation for life, but rather as social life itself. Through social action, both education and politics are conceived as a continuous reconstruction of
experiences and subjectivities; in this later line of thought, some recommends a democratic education in which students have real opportunities to take initiatives in and beyond schools and to reflect on
its meaning. It is argued that the different versions of democratic education markets are understood to exceed the economic sphere and operate as a forum where individuals’ views compete; markets perform three main social functions: create spaces where producers and
consumers bid for all kind of resources, they perform a public learning function determining which goods are in fact valued; and they increase the diversity and the quality of opportunities; markets as better
organizers of the social space; individuals pursue their self-interest; total sum of “rational choices” result in better social and economic organization
those situations in which action is (not) possible
respond to various (a) ontological and epistemological assumptions, (b) nor- Educational
implications
Neoliberals recommend the replacement of public education with free market practices; freedom of individuals to form their ideas will be inevitably conditioned in state schools and thus, neoliberals reject
any form of curriculum for education for democratic citizenship; support educational policies in the line of aggregative democracy they conceive to be less invasive for the individual. 1. discussions about Political &
Critical
critical educators pursue equality and social transformation; are concerned with the deficits of aggregative and liberal systems as they reproduce inequality and existing power relations. Most present-day
mative approaches to democracy, and (c) conceptions of the relationship school choice, parental choice, and students as consumers are embedded within this framework and can be found worldwide. The logic supporting these policies is both moral and economic; insofar as no
educational practices can be proved to be universally desirable, students or their parents should have the individual liberty to decide; it is expected that choice would generate more diverse and higher
philosophical
principles
democracies, they argue, function as “thin” versions of democracy where the society is atomized into individuals whose voice is confined within the market system, limiting the possibilities for real social
change. Against this thin democracy defined in terms of choice, individualism, and the status quo, critical democrats defend a “thick” normative democracy in which all humans have equal and real
between education and politics. For educational policy, the review provides quality educational opportunities and that the total sum of rational choices will equate with the structuration of an effective education system as a market scenario would expect. 2. Second, standards,
assessments, and accountability are emphasized. educational institutions need to be accountable to the public. Establishing common standards reflects a commitment to the idea of quality education for all,
opportunities to be agents of social transformation. Social transformation is not conceived as neutral, but rather it is committed to the value of equality that underpins critical democratic educators’ ethical
demands.
a critique of elitist and neoliberal policies and support for participatory deci-
because it fosters transparency of practices and more efficient procedures. Independent audits help prevent fraud and allow citizen-consumers to make more informed choices. Critical democrats take a universalist standpoint; education is grounded on the assumption that universal material relations structure the social fabric. To change this structure one first needs to gain
Debates Neoliberalism as a dominant discourse in educational policy worldwide; if aggregation, choice and accountability can be framed as democratic education is questionable; democratic educators rarely identify knowledge about its functioning. However, this knowledge is not easily accessible as it is hidden by dominant (hegemonic, in Gramsci’s term) ideologies (i.e., capitalism, neoliberalism) that enslave human
and critiques themselves with neoliberal principles, presents neoliberal educational practices as antagonistic to democratic education (even by proponents of neoliberalism themselves), often write neoliberalism bodies and communities. Only if humans are emancipated from these dominant ideologies can they become empowered to challenge hegemonic ideologies and the material conditions underneath.
sion making across discourses. Recommendations for educational practice represents an attack on equality as a democratic value.“choice” practices privilege middle and upper classes: parents might struggle (information, resources, and time) to conduct the so-called rational
choices required to identify “higher status” schools; might fear weaknesses in the capacity of their children to adjust to demands of these schools. Schools with low-income children more often appear to be
Do not limit their analysis to the category of social class. Their analysis expands to all potentially marginalized social groups and emancipation and solidarity among these groups is conceived as a requirement
to materialize social transformation
are made by identifying pedagogies across democratic education scholarship prone to budget cuts or in need of improvement (accountability audits). Standards and assessment procedures do in themselves contribute to inequality by “sorting” students into different groups.
Social cohesion is damaged; aggregative democracy restrict; spaces for public deliberation on common good; practices of choice undermine social cohesion and sense of education as a public good; school
Educational
implications
distinction between “humanizing” (democratic education) and “dehumanizing (antidemocratic ideological state apparatus, socializing students into dominant ideologies and perpetuating existing inequality
and power relations). positive conceptions of liberty: argue for self-empowerment, social transformation, emancipation from hegemonic ideologies; promote democratic tendencies; favor discussions about
as well as specific pedagogies for each discourse. choice policies have taken decision making from hands of communities and school boards, and increasingly concentrated the power in hands of business interests or other unelected institutions;
accountability evolved into authoritarian/technocratic models (teachers’ professionalism is questioned by expert bureaucrats).
democratic deficits of neoliberal policies(social mobility limited by cultural/class strength students bring to schools). Pedagogies aim to achieve personal and collective emancipation, transformation of social
reality. Illich: emancipation happens outside educational institutions (compromised by their role as ideological state apparatuses and); deschooling or homeschooling would be encouraged. Freire:
Individuality/ competition are fostered through choice (hegemonic discourse that limits individuals and communities’ choices); lack of diversity affects curricula; accountability limits the diversity of provision; emancipation possible in educational institutions (constant dialogue between teachers and students over particular problems); dialogue not aim consensus and reconciliation but intersubjective
focus on what is quantifiable: nonquantifiable outcomes are marginalized from curriculum; worldwide teaching become test based (students have to look for single “correct” answer); opportunities for understanding of students’ and teachers’ experiences; dialogue through problem posing and inquiry; constant ‘unveiling of reality; leads to conscientiousness , challenges and obligates all parties to respond
critical dissent are minimized and compliance with the dominant system is promoted to that reality. Teachers not expected to be neutral but facilitators (Freire) or organic intellectuals (Gramsci); required helping students “uncovering” existing structures of domination; challenge what is
KEYWORDS: democratic education, education, democracy, educational policy, Deliberative
socially valued as “legitimized” (vs. “popular”) knowledge; educators to become “bridge builders” and help students gain technical–scientific and social–humanistic knowledge (can overcome existing cultural
inequalities); argue for dialogical relationship of reflection and action leading to social transformation. Schools are sites of struggle, students becoming activists struggling for public good and betterment of
curriculum and pedagogy Political &
philosophical
Deliberative democrats propose the existence of public forums; all citizens can provide reasons that will be discussed under conditions of equality; all citizens as de facto coauthors of public decisions,
reducing the gap between the public and actual decision-making processes. Debates
and critiques
society and the common good; links between schools and communities: work together in solidarity to reduce inequality within and outside educational institutions
Critical educators see an intrinsic link between critical pedagogy and democratic education; concerns have been raised about the democratic perils underlying the assumptions and pedagogies of critical
pedagogy. Liberals have questioned the democratic legitimacy of democratic educators who enter the classroom with preformulated political objectives, whose goal is not to bring out students’ independent
principles Reason and inclusivity are key features; participants in deliberative processes can commit themselves to the values of rationality and impartiality, seeking the best collective reasons; the most compelling
reasons will operate as the moral imperative that needs to be accepted by those who are bound by it. The legitimacy of deliberative democracy relies on the inclusiveness of the deliberation processes; thoughts but to alter students’ ways of thinking to conform with a preconceived notion of what constitutes critical thought. Drawing on poststructuralist analysis, agonistic and participatory scholars have
perspectives of all who are governed by public decisions need to be considered. challenged the universalist and rationalist assumptions underneath the critical democratic education discourse; critical pedagogues claim a truth; after having defined it, they then impose it on others; in a
In deliberative democracy theory, rationality is constructed using both pragmatist (argue for a consensual rationality described as an overlapping consensus of citizens committed to diverse conceptions of democracy, truth is determined through open and thorough debate of opposing views. Critiques have also been formulated within the critical pedagogy school itself. The usual primacy of social class at the
the good) and liberal claims (that reason and morality are unavoidably connected). Rationality moves from being subject centered to being intersubjective. expense of other forms of oppression have been brought into question. In addition, critical educators have identified different pedagogical challenges of a critical democratic education. The difficulties of a
To “deliberate” is not so much a matter of finding universal solutions for universal problems, but rather a public inquiry to make decisions in relation to contextualized problematic situations. The role of Freirean equalizing dialogue between students and teachers have been highlighted; this includes the risk that White middle-class academics and educators, who aim to empower their students, might fail in a
communication is essential. Communication fulfils socializing, rhetorical, and epistemological functions; we influence and are influenced by others and we create meaning through these interactions; decontextualizing of students’ cultures and values and/or in taking patronizing attitudes toward them.
Since Dewey wrote “Democracy and Education” in 1916 much has been writ- Educational
communication processes can create the necessary conditions for inclusive decision making; in a situation of free, open, and symmetrical communication, fair consensus in public decisions can be achieved .
educational policies framed through deliberative decision-making processes; examine who should have the authority to make decisions in education and what should be the limits of such authority; how the Agonistic
ten about democratic education in education scholarship and theory. A work ini- implications curriculum is determined is particularly relevant. decisions in education should be taken in a process of deliberation involving parents, citizens, and professional educators; authority of these groups,
nevertheless, should be morally bound to ensure the inclusiveness of the deliberative process . Two principles to guarantee inclusive deliberation. 1. nonrepression: citizens cannot be excluded deliberation
process because of their conceptions of the good. 2. nondiscrimination: citizens cannot be denied participation in deliberative processes on the basis of group differences.
Political &
philosophical
principles
Agonistic democracy is constructed in relation to the principles of openness, dissent, and agonism. democracy cannot be defined in relation to any predetermined account; democracy and its meaning here is
contingent, always in construction, and changes with time and space; is constructed as the only political logic open to critiques of itself; dissent is considered constitutive of any democratic enactment, rather
than provisional. endorse the principle of “democratic exceptionality” where democracy is only possible in moments of disruption of existing social forces; commitment to provisional agreements in a context
tially subtitled “An Introduction to Philosophy of Education” (MW.9)1 inspired emphasize the need of a democratic threshold. all moral conceptions are welcome but plurality of options for all children needs to be guaranteed. public education “for” democratic citizenship is essential;
understand education for democratic citizenship as the education of skills and values for public deliberation
of unavoidable dissent; argue for an ontology of plurality: Divergence and conflict are seen as manifestations of human uniqueness, not simply as failures of communication or understanding; privilege
conflict over diversity; argue that antagonism cannot be eliminated from the social fabric. all forms of knowledge and their related value criteria are considered socially constructed;, equality is understood as
theory and research not only in philosophy of education but also in education students and teachers organized in communities of inquiry to examine real problems such as the challenges that can appear in everyday school life; problem-solving activities become key feature (certain
curricular content such as mathematics or social studies as being particularly amenable areas to work within). generic deliberative pedagogical strategies working with controversial issues and structured
academic controversies ; students engage with academic evidence from multiple perspectives to interrogate a particular issue and then look for consensual solutions; social studies, geography, and history as
a presupposition rather than a goal or an empirical claim. Agonistic educators assume the “equality of intelligences”: An equal ability to think—a universal power to be struck by a truth; social knowledge,
structures, and groups are just social constructions sedimented through hegemonization processes; “we” and the “them” are considered to be continuously subject to renegotiation; exclusions are expected
but humans are also expected to be able to articulate in solidarity with others to create new social groups and meanings; challenge the liberal and deliberative primacy of reason ; emotions are a legitimate
scholarship more generally (Doddington, 2018). For a long time, “democratic key curricular subjects providing historical and current content to interrogate these controversies; communicative education, such as rhetoric (or media education are also essential; Language (arts, dance,
and drama) and philosophy education are also particularly fruitful. Educational
and necessary political response.
mainly published in philosophy of education journals; proposals for policy making are unusual; abstraction of some of their pedagogical proposals; 5 distinctive recommendations for democratic educational
education” has functioned as a nodal point (Laclau, 2007; Mannion, Biesta, Debates
and critiques
Deliberative democratic education has had a strong influence on the way contemporary democratic education is conceptualized, been one of the most highly supported versions of democratic education in
journals on educational philosophy and pedagogy, particularly in English-speaking countries.
Yet, it is not exempt from critique. Multiculturalists have argued that deliberation—in both policy and practice—might be discriminatory in itself, since language and communication is never neutral. Social
implications practice. 1. spaces where it is safe to dissent and to disagree with others; argues for supporting students to reflect on and to learn from moments of disruption. 2. opportunities to enact and practice their
equal capacity as speaking beings inside and outside educational institutions; not a question of ‘identity’, but of ‘singularisation’ (becoming a singular person searching for an individual, unique response) ;
argues that through dance, students can realize their own individuality and can discover and perform deep personal meanings. 3. help students understand others might be political adversaries over a
Priestley, & Ross, 2011) within educational theory and research, serving as a groups or students who believe that they do not have the right to speak might be easily excluded.
Deliberation, agonistic democrats argue, is also repressive. It values consensus over conflict and plurality and it generates a false rational–emotional binary that weakens the possibilities of affective political
determinate political conflict: not mean they are moral “enemies” that need to be questioned for their conceptions of reason, truth, or morality. 4. educational institutions - as other social spaces - are
spaces where the meaning of democracy and politics are constantly constructed and reconstructed; students and teachers can “articulate” themselves with others—inside and outside educational
place of encounter for different educational disciplines, discourses of democracy engagement. institutions to create new hegemonies ; radical teacher is an element—not dominant one—in the field of differences undergoing articulation. 5. education of political emotions; in contrast with deliberative
pedagogies, students can articulate their emotions; in the field of dance education, for example, emotions can be expressed through affective mapping of body movements. Others, within social studies or
civics, argue that educators might encourage agonism by helping students bring their emotional stories; rather than asking students to engage with rational or evidence-based arguments to support a
and education. But democratic education has been recently disputed, with some Debates
particular view on a debate, students to consider the wide emotions they feel as a member of a community or the feelings they experienced in particular situations
Although the proposals of agonistic educators are relatively new when compared with more consolidated frameworks, critiques have already been developed. Some have criticized the antagonistic
authors warning about crisis (Okoth & Anyango, 2014) and others openly posi- and critiques assumptions underneath agonistic democracy; overvalue conflict and underestimate solidarity; there is also a question of whether the assumption of a universal antagonism is essentially framed. The
movement from a “moral enemy” to a “political adversary” has also been challenged. Within the agonistic framework itself, some defends agonistic democratic educational projects that incorporate and
explore the notion of the enemy. Finally, others, perhaps anticipating a new emerging version of democratic education—one that could be named “posthumanist” or “post- democratic”—have challenged the
tioning themselves against democratic education (Pennington, 2014). This review anthropocentric nature of the agonistic—and all other—discourses, and have argued for a democratic education that considers potential associations with nonhuman partners.
aims to examine how democratic education is conceptualized within contempo-
rary educational scholarship to support ongoing debate about its viability.
655
(Sant, 2019)
☛ MoodleVous pouvez aussi lire
