Pub Date : 2021-08-19DOI: 10.1080/17508487.2021.1955718
Ashley N. Robinson
ABSTRACT In this essay, I draw on the socio-historical context of free speech and hate speech in U.S. public higher education and the concepts of color-evasiveness and free speech ideology to conceptualize a color-evasive free speech ideology. The ideology I conceptualize is characterized by a prevailing belief that protecting and defending free speech rights is the only way to ensure democracy and equality, regardless of the racial harm and violence enacted by speech, and to the degree that those who challenge racist hate speech should be punished as a threat to free speech. I then explore three recent events to contextualize color-evasive free speech ideology: higher education professional organizations’ responses to the release of Executive Order 13864 (Improving Free Inquiry, Transparency, and Accountability at Colleges and Universities) in March 2019 and two institutional-level examples of controlling student behavior through selective and racialized protection of free speech. I discuss the examples to illustrate how color-evasive free speech ideology upholds white supremacy and conclude with implications for scholars and practitioners, urging a critical troubling of color-evasive free speech ideology in future research and practice.
{"title":"Color-evasive free speech ideology: a conceptual analysis of free speech as racial oppression in U.S. higher education","authors":"Ashley N. Robinson","doi":"10.1080/17508487.2021.1955718","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2021.1955718","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this essay, I draw on the socio-historical context of free speech and hate speech in U.S. public higher education and the concepts of color-evasiveness and free speech ideology to conceptualize a color-evasive free speech ideology. The ideology I conceptualize is characterized by a prevailing belief that protecting and defending free speech rights is the only way to ensure democracy and equality, regardless of the racial harm and violence enacted by speech, and to the degree that those who challenge racist hate speech should be punished as a threat to free speech. I then explore three recent events to contextualize color-evasive free speech ideology: higher education professional organizations’ responses to the release of Executive Order 13864 (Improving Free Inquiry, Transparency, and Accountability at Colleges and Universities) in March 2019 and two institutional-level examples of controlling student behavior through selective and racialized protection of free speech. I discuss the examples to illustrate how color-evasive free speech ideology upholds white supremacy and conclude with implications for scholars and practitioners, urging a critical troubling of color-evasive free speech ideology in future research and practice.","PeriodicalId":47434,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies in Education","volume":"64 1","pages":"51 - 66"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2021-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48695247","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-09DOI: 10.1080/17508487.2021.1957964
Katarzyna Gawlicz
ABSTRACT This paper aims to explore transformative learning processes of parents involved in informal, parent-established democratic schools, which are novel educational initiatives in Poland. The author argues that the distinctive educational ideology and the practice of such schools expose parents to new understandings of education, the child and the parent, which prompts their transformative learning. Drawing on the conceptual framework of transformative learning and practice-based learning theories, the author analyses interviews with parents to identify the trajectory of parental learning, the scope of their transformation and the factors that enhance or hinder it. Primarily concerning the respondents’ personal identities and part-identities as parents, the transformation entails changes in their value systems, definitions of a good life, perceptions of the child and parenting practices. While its potential to instigate broader social change currently appears limited, parental transformative learning exemplifies significant emancipatory biographical praxis.
{"title":"School as a site of transformative adult learning: parents’ experiences of Polish democratic schools","authors":"Katarzyna Gawlicz","doi":"10.1080/17508487.2021.1957964","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2021.1957964","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper aims to explore transformative learning processes of parents involved in informal, parent-established democratic schools, which are novel educational initiatives in Poland. The author argues that the distinctive educational ideology and the practice of such schools expose parents to new understandings of education, the child and the parent, which prompts their transformative learning. Drawing on the conceptual framework of transformative learning and practice-based learning theories, the author analyses interviews with parents to identify the trajectory of parental learning, the scope of their transformation and the factors that enhance or hinder it. Primarily concerning the respondents’ personal identities and part-identities as parents, the transformation entails changes in their value systems, definitions of a good life, perceptions of the child and parenting practices. While its potential to instigate broader social change currently appears limited, parental transformative learning exemplifies significant emancipatory biographical praxis.","PeriodicalId":47434,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies in Education","volume":"64 1","pages":"35 - 50"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2021-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43609045","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-08DOI: 10.1080/17508487.2021.1966065
J. Holloway
ABSTRACT The collection of papers presented in this issue of Critical Studies in Education adds to the expansive body of work on teachers and teaching. Collectively, the papers draw our attention to new ways the field is problematising the emerging and evolving conditions that shape the work, lives and identities of teachers. With this editorial introduction to the issue, I not only summarise the various themes of the collection, but also offer a provocation that I hope will inspire new questions moving forward. As critical researchers, we have an obligation to challenge taken-for-granted assumptions – not only by looking outwards at the policymakers, edu-businesses, and intergovernmental agencies (e.g., the Organisation for Economic and Co-operation Development [OECD]), but also by looking inwards and challenging our own assumptions about power, discourse and subjectivity. The authors in the special issue take up both challenges in their geographically diverse accounts of ‘the teacher’ and ‘teaching’, demonstrating what it means to do critical research well.
{"title":"Teachers and teaching: (re)thinking professionalism, subjectivity and critical inquiry","authors":"J. Holloway","doi":"10.1080/17508487.2021.1966065","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2021.1966065","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The collection of papers presented in this issue of Critical Studies in Education adds to the expansive body of work on teachers and teaching. Collectively, the papers draw our attention to new ways the field is problematising the emerging and evolving conditions that shape the work, lives and identities of teachers. With this editorial introduction to the issue, I not only summarise the various themes of the collection, but also offer a provocation that I hope will inspire new questions moving forward. As critical researchers, we have an obligation to challenge taken-for-granted assumptions – not only by looking outwards at the policymakers, edu-businesses, and intergovernmental agencies (e.g., the Organisation for Economic and Co-operation Development [OECD]), but also by looking inwards and challenging our own assumptions about power, discourse and subjectivity. The authors in the special issue take up both challenges in their geographically diverse accounts of ‘the teacher’ and ‘teaching’, demonstrating what it means to do critical research well.","PeriodicalId":47434,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies in Education","volume":"62 1","pages":"411 - 421"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2021-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43773415","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-02DOI: 10.1080/17508487.2021.1948880
A. Bates
ABSTRACT Growing societal concern about a crisis in the wellbeing of young people has prompted a range of responses from governments and corporations, predicated on an ideal of the resilient, self-reliant individual. Behavioural economists, data scientists and educational technology companies now offer a variety of psychological interventions based on psychometric data, aimed at ‘equipping’ individual students with the necessary skills and character to enable them to withstand the pressures of contemporary life. As a consequence, the critical importance of mutually supportive interpersonal relationships continues to be neglected in mainstream approaches to Social and Emotional Learning (SEL). This article draws on Fromm’s theory of social character and Zuboff’s analysis of ‘life in the hive’ to challenge the assumptions about human behaviour underpinning data science and its application in digital tools for social and emotional learning and self-managed wellbeing. To improve students’ wellbeing, we need to begin with an understanding of why they are more likely to thrive within a network of mutually supportive social relationships than a digital ‘hive’.
{"title":"Learning ‘in the hive’: social character and student wellbeing in the age of psychometric data","authors":"A. Bates","doi":"10.1080/17508487.2021.1948880","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2021.1948880","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Growing societal concern about a crisis in the wellbeing of young people has prompted a range of responses from governments and corporations, predicated on an ideal of the resilient, self-reliant individual. Behavioural economists, data scientists and educational technology companies now offer a variety of psychological interventions based on psychometric data, aimed at ‘equipping’ individual students with the necessary skills and character to enable them to withstand the pressures of contemporary life. As a consequence, the critical importance of mutually supportive interpersonal relationships continues to be neglected in mainstream approaches to Social and Emotional Learning (SEL). This article draws on Fromm’s theory of social character and Zuboff’s analysis of ‘life in the hive’ to challenge the assumptions about human behaviour underpinning data science and its application in digital tools for social and emotional learning and self-managed wellbeing. To improve students’ wellbeing, we need to begin with an understanding of why they are more likely to thrive within a network of mutually supportive social relationships than a digital ‘hive’.","PeriodicalId":47434,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies in Education","volume":"64 1","pages":"19 - 34"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2021-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508487.2021.1948880","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47932107","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-25DOI: 10.1080/17508487.2021.1943476
Samantha McMahon, M. Stacey, V. Harwood, N. Labib, Alexandra Wong, Sheelagh Daniels-Mayes
ABSTRACT In both academic and policy spaces, learning is often cast as lifelong, dynamic, constructive and in particular, agentic. Despite this focus students’ voices are rarely privileged in these spaces – especially in policy. We respond to this oversight by deploying Foucault’s theories of knowledge to explore how students understand themselves as learners, considering this alongside dominant political and academic discursive constructions of learning. Using a metaphor card approach, we explored metaphors for learning articulated by students in longitudinal focus group interviews. Conducted over a two-year period with 47 students from four Western Sydney schools, student metaphors for learning were diverse and wide-ranging, frequently reflecting strategic approaches to learning that aligned with requirements of high stakes exit exams. Significantly, student descriptions of themselves as exhausted, passive containers of impermanent learning were at odds with national and international policy and higher education constructions of learning as ‘lifelong and agentic’. This contradiction raises critical questions about students’ experiences of learning in schools, the role of teacher education, and re-direction of university equity programmes aimed at increasing access and participation for educationally marginalised students.
{"title":"Exploring students’ metaphors for learning in Western Sydney schools","authors":"Samantha McMahon, M. Stacey, V. Harwood, N. Labib, Alexandra Wong, Sheelagh Daniels-Mayes","doi":"10.1080/17508487.2021.1943476","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2021.1943476","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In both academic and policy spaces, learning is often cast as lifelong, dynamic, constructive and in particular, agentic. Despite this focus students’ voices are rarely privileged in these spaces – especially in policy. We respond to this oversight by deploying Foucault’s theories of knowledge to explore how students understand themselves as learners, considering this alongside dominant political and academic discursive constructions of learning. Using a metaphor card approach, we explored metaphors for learning articulated by students in longitudinal focus group interviews. Conducted over a two-year period with 47 students from four Western Sydney schools, student metaphors for learning were diverse and wide-ranging, frequently reflecting strategic approaches to learning that aligned with requirements of high stakes exit exams. Significantly, student descriptions of themselves as exhausted, passive containers of impermanent learning were at odds with national and international policy and higher education constructions of learning as ‘lifelong and agentic’. This contradiction raises critical questions about students’ experiences of learning in schools, the role of teacher education, and re-direction of university equity programmes aimed at increasing access and participation for educationally marginalised students.","PeriodicalId":47434,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies in Education","volume":"64 1","pages":"1 - 18"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2021-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508487.2021.1943476","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45755826","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-27DOI: 10.1080/17508487.2021.1942108
Glenn C. Savage
When scholars name what they do or associate their work with a particular research field, it is invariable that discussion will follow about what that name or field means. When definitions are stro...
{"title":"The evolving state of policy sociology","authors":"Glenn C. Savage","doi":"10.1080/17508487.2021.1942108","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2021.1942108","url":null,"abstract":"When scholars name what they do or associate their work with a particular research field, it is invariable that discussion will follow about what that name or field means. When definitions are stro...","PeriodicalId":47434,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies in Education","volume":"62 1","pages":"275 - 289"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2021-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508487.2021.1942108","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46456091","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-27DOI: 10.1080/17508487.2021.1924214
S. Ball
There is no way that I can address the wide range of issues raised in the exemplary collection of papers on policy sociology. These are cutting edge pieces by world-class scholars that lay out analytic possibilities for future work. Perhaps what I can do, very briefly, from the space and time of policy research in which I now stand, and as other contributors do, is to look back and look forward and think against or beyond where we have got to and where we might go next. This does not properly engage with individual papers but rather with some of the commitments and sensibilities they share and hold on to. When I began to try to engage with something that Jenny Ozga called policy sociology (which she and others discuss in this issue), there was not much in the way of extant education policy research in the sociology of education, apart from Jenny’s own work and that of the estimable Roger Dale (see references in Jenny’s paper), and the studies done by Ted Tapper and Brian Salter (e.g. Salter & Tapper, 1981) and McPherson and Raab (1988) – that drew on a more mainstream political science approach. What I was working on when I read these books and papers was an interview study of actors involved in and around England’s 1988 Education Reform Act, published as Politics and Policymaking in Education (Ball, 1990). That was a kind of hybrid between my ethnographic sensibilities (from before) and the beginnings of my engagement with Foucault, in an attempt to explore the capture of policy by neoliberal intellectuals and its re-articulation within neoliberal discourses. Further musing on the interplay of these two different orders of account (ethnographic and discursive) led later to a set of considerations of what doing policy sociology might look like: (Ball, 1993, 2015; Tamboukou & Ball, 2003). Apart from Foucault lurking in the background probably the most important influence on Politics and Policymaking in Education and my later work on the shift from government to governance (e.g. Ball & Junemann, 2012) was Bob Jessop (who gets little mention in the papers in this special issue) and his theorisation of new forms and modalities of the capitalist state. In different but closely related ways all of these early studies were trying to make sense of how policy gets done rather than what policy does. That is, initially the focus was on who does policy and with what ideas. Latterly attention shifted, for some analysts, to how policy forms the objects about which it speaks. That is, the attempt to understand how
{"title":"Response: Policy? Policy research? How absurd?","authors":"S. Ball","doi":"10.1080/17508487.2021.1924214","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2021.1924214","url":null,"abstract":"There is no way that I can address the wide range of issues raised in the exemplary collection of papers on policy sociology. These are cutting edge pieces by world-class scholars that lay out analytic possibilities for future work. Perhaps what I can do, very briefly, from the space and time of policy research in which I now stand, and as other contributors do, is to look back and look forward and think against or beyond where we have got to and where we might go next. This does not properly engage with individual papers but rather with some of the commitments and sensibilities they share and hold on to. When I began to try to engage with something that Jenny Ozga called policy sociology (which she and others discuss in this issue), there was not much in the way of extant education policy research in the sociology of education, apart from Jenny’s own work and that of the estimable Roger Dale (see references in Jenny’s paper), and the studies done by Ted Tapper and Brian Salter (e.g. Salter & Tapper, 1981) and McPherson and Raab (1988) – that drew on a more mainstream political science approach. What I was working on when I read these books and papers was an interview study of actors involved in and around England’s 1988 Education Reform Act, published as Politics and Policymaking in Education (Ball, 1990). That was a kind of hybrid between my ethnographic sensibilities (from before) and the beginnings of my engagement with Foucault, in an attempt to explore the capture of policy by neoliberal intellectuals and its re-articulation within neoliberal discourses. Further musing on the interplay of these two different orders of account (ethnographic and discursive) led later to a set of considerations of what doing policy sociology might look like: (Ball, 1993, 2015; Tamboukou & Ball, 2003). Apart from Foucault lurking in the background probably the most important influence on Politics and Policymaking in Education and my later work on the shift from government to governance (e.g. Ball & Junemann, 2012) was Bob Jessop (who gets little mention in the papers in this special issue) and his theorisation of new forms and modalities of the capitalist state. In different but closely related ways all of these early studies were trying to make sense of how policy gets done rather than what policy does. That is, initially the focus was on who does policy and with what ideas. Latterly attention shifted, for some analysts, to how policy forms the objects about which it speaks. That is, the attempt to understand how","PeriodicalId":47434,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies in Education","volume":"62 1","pages":"387 - 393"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2021-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508487.2021.1924214","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42049150","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-27DOI: 10.1080/17508487.2021.1942942
M. McKenzie, S. Lewis, K. Gulson
ABSTRACT In this special issue response paper, we pick up from prior discussions to suggest areas where we think policy sociology can benefit from further conversation and research. In particular, we bring together our respective readings and work on policy mobilities, in conversation with the contributions of this special issue, to think further about what policy mobilities and related orientations can bring to the development of policy sociology. We specifically focus our attention on four areas for further conceptual and methodological extension in relation to policy mobilities and related approaches in policy sociology of education: (i) temporality, (ii) scale, (iii) land, and, finally, (iv) methodological diversity. In doing so, we advocate against ‘fast’ readings of literature from other fields, while emphasizing the value of transdisciplinary work in policy sociology and critical policy studies.
{"title":"Response: Matters of (im)mobility: beyond fast conceptual and methodological readings in policy sociology","authors":"M. McKenzie, S. Lewis, K. Gulson","doi":"10.1080/17508487.2021.1942942","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2021.1942942","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this special issue response paper, we pick up from prior discussions to suggest areas where we think policy sociology can benefit from further conversation and research. In particular, we bring together our respective readings and work on policy mobilities, in conversation with the contributions of this special issue, to think further about what policy mobilities and related orientations can bring to the development of policy sociology. We specifically focus our attention on four areas for further conceptual and methodological extension in relation to policy mobilities and related approaches in policy sociology of education: (i) temporality, (ii) scale, (iii) land, and, finally, (iv) methodological diversity. In doing so, we advocate against ‘fast’ readings of literature from other fields, while emphasizing the value of transdisciplinary work in policy sociology and critical policy studies.","PeriodicalId":47434,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies in Education","volume":"62 1","pages":"394 - 410"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2021-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508487.2021.1942942","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44465326","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-09DOI: 10.1080/17508487.2021.1923543
Liana MacDonald, Joanna Kidman
ABSTRACT In 2022, New Zealand history will shift from an optional to a compulsory subject across all levels of schooling. Teaching about New Zealand’s difficult histories has the potential to reconstitute settler-Indigenous relations to show how historical colonial injustice impacts people today, but it raises questions about whose history will be validated and taught and how settler discomfort about breaking the silences surrounding colonial violence might be addressed pedagogically. Building on scholarship in haunting, we introduce the notion of a settler colonial crypt to show how settler memory and forgetting of colonial violence can be challenged and transformed by Māori tribal memories. The introduction of difficult histories at sites of colonial violence is accompanied by the uncanny; intellectual, emotional and embodied experiences that are uncomfortable and frightening, yet stimulating and inspiring, to generate new ways of considering settler-Indigenous relations. Data from a large-scale ethnographic study exploring how different groups in New Zealand remember or forget the New Zealand Wars reveal how secondary school students were directed towards the uncanny during a field trip. The excursion demonstrates the potential for transforming understandings about how invasion and violence accompanied settlement, providing the impetus for something-to-be-done and setting the groundwork for genuine attempts at reconciliation.
{"title":"Uncanny pedagogies: teaching difficult histories at sites of colonial violence","authors":"Liana MacDonald, Joanna Kidman","doi":"10.1080/17508487.2021.1923543","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2021.1923543","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In 2022, New Zealand history will shift from an optional to a compulsory subject across all levels of schooling. Teaching about New Zealand’s difficult histories has the potential to reconstitute settler-Indigenous relations to show how historical colonial injustice impacts people today, but it raises questions about whose history will be validated and taught and how settler discomfort about breaking the silences surrounding colonial violence might be addressed pedagogically. Building on scholarship in haunting, we introduce the notion of a settler colonial crypt to show how settler memory and forgetting of colonial violence can be challenged and transformed by Māori tribal memories. The introduction of difficult histories at sites of colonial violence is accompanied by the uncanny; intellectual, emotional and embodied experiences that are uncomfortable and frightening, yet stimulating and inspiring, to generate new ways of considering settler-Indigenous relations. Data from a large-scale ethnographic study exploring how different groups in New Zealand remember or forget the New Zealand Wars reveal how secondary school students were directed towards the uncanny during a field trip. The excursion demonstrates the potential for transforming understandings about how invasion and violence accompanied settlement, providing the impetus for something-to-be-done and setting the groundwork for genuine attempts at reconciliation.","PeriodicalId":47434,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies in Education","volume":"63 1","pages":"31 - 46"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2021-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508487.2021.1923543","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42633690","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-07DOI: 10.1080/17508487.2021.1919165
S. Saltmarsh, Kay Ayre, Eseta Tualaulelei
ABSTRACT This paper considers how complex family circumstances such as parental separation, custody disputes and family violence intersect with the organisational cultures and everyday practices of schools. In particular, we are concerned with the ways that coercive control – a strategy used predominantly by men to dominate, control and oppress women in the context of intimate partner relationships – can be deployed to manipulate and coerce the organisational networks of schools into furthering abusive agendas. Informed by cultural theory and research from sociology of education, legal studies, criminology and family violence, we show how what we term the ‘coercion of organisational networks’ (CON) both relies upon and exploits systemic misogyny and gendered unequal relations of power. These issues underpin institutional strategies often used by schools to keep parents – and mothers, in particular – at a distance. When affected by separation, divorce and family violence, being positioned in problematic terms can create additional risks for women and children. We argue that without adequate understandings of coercive control as practices within a broader constellation of systemic misogyny and gender inequalities, and in the absence of organisational cultures committed to addressing these, schools are considered complicit in perpetuating family violence and its effects.
{"title":"Schools, separating parents and family violence: a case study of the coercion of organisational networks","authors":"S. Saltmarsh, Kay Ayre, Eseta Tualaulelei","doi":"10.1080/17508487.2021.1919165","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2021.1919165","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper considers how complex family circumstances such as parental separation, custody disputes and family violence intersect with the organisational cultures and everyday practices of schools. In particular, we are concerned with the ways that coercive control – a strategy used predominantly by men to dominate, control and oppress women in the context of intimate partner relationships – can be deployed to manipulate and coerce the organisational networks of schools into furthering abusive agendas. Informed by cultural theory and research from sociology of education, legal studies, criminology and family violence, we show how what we term the ‘coercion of organisational networks’ (CON) both relies upon and exploits systemic misogyny and gendered unequal relations of power. These issues underpin institutional strategies often used by schools to keep parents – and mothers, in particular – at a distance. When affected by separation, divorce and family violence, being positioned in problematic terms can create additional risks for women and children. We argue that without adequate understandings of coercive control as practices within a broader constellation of systemic misogyny and gender inequalities, and in the absence of organisational cultures committed to addressing these, schools are considered complicit in perpetuating family violence and its effects.","PeriodicalId":47434,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies in Education","volume":"63 1","pages":"516 - 533"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2021-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508487.2021.1919165","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41628023","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：