Disciplinary Struggles in Education

DISCIPLINARY STRUGGLES IN EDUCATION Edited by Anja Heikkinen Jenni Pätäri Gabriele Molzberger DISCIPLINARY STRUGGLES IN EDUCATION DISCIPLINARY STRUGGLES IN EDUCATION Edited by Anja Heikkinen Jenni Pätäri Gabriele Molzberger Layout Sirpa Randell ISBN 978-952-359-003-8 (nid.) ISBN 978-952-359-002-1 (pdf) PunaMusta Oy – Yliopistopaino Tampere 2019 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercialNoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Copyright ©2019 Tampere University Press and authors Contents Preface 9 Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri, Gabriele Molzberger Introduction. The many meanings of disciplinary struggles in education 11 Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Gabriele Molzberger Section 1 Discipline in Education Control justified. Discipline as moral regulation in adult education 25 Leena Koski ‘How to cultivate freedom through coercion’. Defining discipline in anarchist education 41 Ivan Zamotkin Struggles for identity. A Finnish university’s identity transition in its own policies after reform 61 Henry Yuan Wang Section 2 Justification of Educational Knowledge Disciplinary struggles in and between adult, vocational and general education in the Academy. Lessons from Finland 83 Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Sini Teräsahde (Re)thinking the disciplinary relationship between the researcher and object of study in educational practices in the Brazilian context 117 Lais Oliveira Leite Thinking outside the box. De-structuring continuing and higher education 135 Markus Weil & Balthasar Eugster Multiculturalism in education and political philosophy 155 Tarna Kannisto Changing vocational special needs education. From teacher to developer 173 Maija Hirvonen & Raija Pirttimaa Section 3 Meanings and Functions of Education Ecological wisdom as a challenge for the philosophy of education 195 Kari Väyrynen How does phenomenological psychology contribute to current concepts of sustainability in Germany’s vocational education system? A brief historical outline and remarks on current problems 215 Burkhard Vollmers, Werner Kuhlmeier & Sören Schütt-Sayed Financing and institutions as key elements of the future of adult education. Disciplinary struggles about empirical observations 239 Lorenz Lassnigg & Stefan Vogtenhuber List of contributors 261 15 Introduction In the 21st century, the shift to governance in education show no decrease in disciplinary impacts of education either in pedagogical practice, in science or in institutional and professional settings. Around the world, universities may be the most striking exemples for the disciplinary character of societal institutions and their loss of autonomy. While anti-academist discourse has for long accompanied the success story of the expansion of universities (Engelmeier & Felsch, 2017), it also enforces tendencies to de-institutionalize higher education. These contradictions and ambivalences by speaking about und doing research on discipline are to be investigated. The categorization of the disciplinary struggles in education into practices, science and institutions and professions, can all be problematized from the perspective of cultural evolution, and its current phase, contributing to a geographical era of the Anthropocene. When the different meanings of education are placed in the wider context of societal and environmental change, the powercritical framework of Foucault’s genealogy might provide new horizons. (Foucault 1980a, b, 1995.) The major shifts in the ‘planetary order’, such as climate change and destruction of the biosphere, challenge the humanand society-centred foundation of all areas of educational practice and science. It can be questioned, whether the human-centered fixation of education to certain disciplines – such as psychology, sociology, philosophy, and economics – has also contributed to the current environmental, economic and social crisis, which endangers the continuity of human life itself. The revisioning of education from a planetary perspective, which embeds humans and human realities in the wider existential framework of human and nonhuman entities, might lead into sublation of the dualistic meanings of discipline in education. Instead of turning to brain sciences and digital technology as solutions to the human-created crises, cross-disciplinary questioning of the human-centred heritage of education might promote sublation of the previous dichotomies and oppositions of discipline and autonomy. The chapters The book is divided into three sections. The disciplinary character of education is discussed in the chapters of the first section of the book. The chapters in the Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Gabriele Molzberger 16 second section exemplify the justification of educational knowledge in processes of mutual transmission between theory and practice. The contributions of the third section problematize the aims and functions of educational practice and theory, which are critical for understanding the implications of disciplinary struggles in education for the future. Although the chapters focus on certain historical periods, forms and contexts of education, they provide insights, which are useful and relevant for a wider discussion in the eclectic and diverse theories and practices of education. The first section Discipline in Education discusses education as a disciplinary activity and practice, targeting expectations to and applying findings from educational theories and research. It begins with a chapter by Leena Koski, who provides a critique of the history of (popular) adult education in Finland in the context of programmes of nation-building. She considers adult education as a disciplinary constituent in adapting “common people” to the changing capitalist economy, utilizing moral regulation based on Lutheran religion. According to the author, moral regulation has been shaped to control social groups to adjust into the transforming ethos of capitalist economy. The next chapter by Ivan Zamotkin poses questions to the reader about alternatives to the selection function of modern educational systems in meritocratic societies. He discusses typical definitions of discipline in education, characterized by submission to authorities. He asks about the possibility of anarchist concept of discipline, which would enable education as a transformative activity. The chapter of Henry-Yuan Wang analyses the shift in the self-definition of universities as educational institutions, using as an example the branding strategies of Finnish universities since the reform of 2010. Through a changing imaginary, the university is steered from a collaborative, locally responsible and societally transformative community towards a competitive, high standard and business-economic player in the global higher education markets. In the section Justification of Educational Knowledge, discipline is considered as a mediator in struggles about powerful knowledge, extending also to development of institutions and professions. The first chapter by Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri and Sini Teräsahde analyses the history of disciplinarisation of adult and vocational education in Finland, in relation to general education. They question the conventional interpretations about the emergence of disciplines and show how justification of knowledge concerning adult and vocational education 17 Introduction happens through negotiations and struggles among networks of academic, political and economic actors. In the next chapter, Lais Oliveira Leite discusses the methodological justification of educational knowledge in the context of educational practices in Brazil. She provides a Foucauldian critique about the separation of researcher and the object of study in educational research, arguing that it hides the power relations between them and their knowledge production. In their chapter, Markus Weil and Balthasar Eugster analyze the struggle and discipline in the discourses of de-structuring of continuing and higher education. They ask, whether the blurring of boundaries between academic research and education and professional practices might offer options for thinking out of the box for both. The chapter of Tarna Kannisto problematises the popular generalizing notions of ‘multicultural’ in educational theory and practice. Rather implicitly she asks whether culture is always a disciplining concept, based on the hegemony of certain cultural groups. She suggests that individualist conceptions of culture, building on liberal political philosophy would provide more sound approach for culturally diverse educational encounters. In the last chapter of this section, Maija Hirvonen and Raija Pirttimaa show, based on a case study of experienced special education teachers, how the changing competence requirements implied by vocational education reforms have challenged their professional expertise and identity. Besides challenging the disciplinary basis of their professionalism, they seem to undermine the meaning of the experiential expertise of teachers themselves. The third section problematises the previous disciplinary struggles in relation to Meanings and Functions of Education. Education as a science has developed in close connection to, if not founded on the basis of certain other disciplines. It can be asked, how these connections relate to the ethical, practical and theoretical potential of education to address the most vital challenges of its era. In the first chapter, Kari Väyrynen considers dialectical philosophy and ecological knowledge vital in developing appropriate foundations for the practice and theory of education, instead of such fashionable candidates as neuro-scientific, businesseconomic and digital technological theories and methodologies. Liberation from their disciplining techniques would require an alternative concept of discipline, as responsibility to reconciliation between the freedoms of “spirit” and “nature”. The core of education should be historical understanding of human history and its Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Gabriele Molzberger 18 interaction with the natural environment. In the next chapter, Burkhard Vollmers with his colleagues discusses the history and potential of phenomenological psychology in developing vocational education for sustainability. They emphasise the need for concrete didactic solutions, which recognize the experiential, experimental, emotional and ethical aspects of occupational growth. The final chapter by Lorenz Lassnigg and Stefan Vogtenhüber critizes the use of universalizing welfare regimeor varieties of capitalismapproaches in comparative research on education. Building on a concrete study on differences in financing adult education, they show the importance of contextual analysis of the powermechanisms in participation and financing, for comprehension of the underlying factors of the observed differences. The chapter cautions against the hegemony of economist approaches also when studying economic aspects of education cross countries and cultures. Concluding remarks Education and discipline have a variety of meanings in and between linguistic and educational traditions and fields, of which this book focuses especially on adult, higher and vocational education. The uses of educational concepts and the meanings attributed to them vary with time, place and actors and the concepts consist of various temporal and semantic layers according to their various historical trajectories, contestation between related concepts and connection with socio-economic, institutional, ideological, theoretical and ecological change. The conceptual, practical and ideological changes in education carry their history with them. Despite educational goals like democracy, social equality and emancipation, modern societies have not progressed towards these goals in linear but struggling with emerging constraints. For instance, in the pursuit of national integrity or high national culture through education, minorities tend to get excluded from the project of the nation-state (see Kananen, 2014). Following Reinhart Koselleck (2011, 16), we believe that historical or historicizing clarifications including understanding the contingency of historical change can lead to political clarity and transformation. 19 Introduction Despite the wicked problems that go beyond the departmentalized and sectionalist organization of disciplines, it continues to govern academic education. Besides educational research and expertise, it reflects to policies and the ways in which states organize their political-economic, social and educational systems: like the academic disciplines, the nation-states are organized around ideas of territories and national boundaries, while markets, production and consumption are disconnected from the nature’s capacity to recover. If policy-makers’ major interest in the interdisciplinarity and the reconfiguration of academic disciplines and their autonomy relates primarily to academic capitalism and a paradigm of “innovations through ranking”, it rather creates more hierarchies than broader, more comprehensive and complex understanding of reality. Decisions based on measurements rather than conceptualisations and understanding arrive at conflicting results on the nature of educational disciplines (cf. Sugimoto & Weingart, 2014) as well as on a human being. While education is traditionally rooted in deep dualisms like nature-society (see Haila, 2000; Rudy & White, 2014), it is high time to overcome the binary opposition between the humankind and nature, and to address the power structures and imbalances among global economic order, countries, communities and nature. (Moore, 2017.) Planetary crises dissolve the constrained order of knowledge and require a holistic worldview in education instead of the dichotomies and divisions of modernity. However, the challenging of institutionalized education does not have to mean the end of educational disciplines. It rather requires to critically resolve the ways in which knowledge is produced, disseminated and taught, to practice socially and environmentally just education and research to contest the dominant human-centric structures, global behaviours and academic capitalism where economic growth parallels with development. The strive to overcome the binary relationships and make way for the diversity in thought, worldviews and values entangles with fostering the future of the distinctive educational disciplines and restoring their sense of autonomy. The search for more inclusive and collective ways of thinking can draw from their history and connection with local and indigenous knowledge. The local and contextualized histories of education might provide holistic examples of education, embedded in the local, relate them to community and moral values, and show the connection between culture, livelihood and environment. (See Heikkinen, 2017.) Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Gabriele Molzberger 20 References Baker, D. P. 2014. The Schooled Society: The Educational Transformation of Global Culture. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Beaton, G. 2010. Why professionalism is still relevant. SSRN Electronic Journal. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.154550. Biesta, G. 2007. Why ”what works” won’t work: evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57 (1), 1–22. Bourdieu, P. & Passeron, J. C. 1974. Abhängigkeit in der Unabhängigkeit: Die relative gesellschaftliche Autonomie des Bildungssystems. In Klaus Hurrelmann (ed.), Soziologie der Erziehung. Weinheim, Basel: Beltz Verlag, 124–158. Engelmeier, H. & Felsch, P. 2017. Antiakademismus. Mittelweg, 36 (4–5), 4–13. Foucault, M. 1980a. Truth and power. In C. Gordon (ed.), Power/Knowledge. Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972–1977 by Michel Foucault. Suffolk: The Harvester Press, 109–131. Foucault, M. 1980b. Powers and strategies. In Colin Gordon (ed.), Power/Knowledge. Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972–1977 by Michel Foucault. Suffolk: The Harvester Press, 134–145. Foucault, M. 1995. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of a Prison. Transl. Alan Sheridan (Surveiller et punir. Naissance de la prison, 1975). New York: Vintage (2nd Vintage Books ed.). Freire, P. 1973. Pädagogik der Unterdrückten. Stuttgart: Kreuz-Verlag. Habermas, J. 1981. Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns, Band 1: Handlungsrationalität und gesellschaftliche Rationalisierung; Band 2: Zur Kritik der funktionalistischen Vernunft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Habermas, J. 1998. Die postnationale Konstellation. Politische Essays. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Haila, Y. 2000. Beyond the nature-culture dualism. Biology and Philosophy, 15 (2), 155– 175. Harney, K. & Krüger, H.-H. (eds) 1997. Einführung in die Geschichte der Erziehungswissenschaft und der Erziehungswirklichkeit. Opladen: Leske+Budrich. Heikkinen, A. 2017. “Land and people of our own”. Rivalries in Finnish adult education, 1870–1960. Spurensuche 25/26, 196–208. Illich, I. 1972. Entschulung der Gesellschaft. München: Rowohlt. Kananen, J. 2014. The Nordic Welfare State in Three Eras: From Emancipation to Discipline. Farnham: Ashgate. Kant, I. 1870. Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten. Berlin: Verlag von L. Heimann. Koselleck, R. 2011. Introduction and Prefaces to the Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Contributions to the History of Concepts, 6 (1), 1–37. 21 Introduction Moore, J. 2017. The Capitalocene, Part I: on the nature and origins of our ecological crisis. The Journal of Peasant Studies. DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2016.1235036. Narotzky, S. 2007. The project in the model: reciprocity, social capital, and the politics of ethnographic realism. Current Anthropology, 48 (3), 403–424. Osborne, P. 2015. Problematizing disciplinarity, transdisciplinary problematics. Theory, Culture & Society, 32 (5–6), 3–35. Post, R. 2009. Debating disciplinarity. Critical Inquiry, 35 (4), 749–770. Rinne, R., Kivirauma, J. & Lehtinen, J. (eds) (2000). Johdatus kasvatustieteisiin. Helsinki: WSOY. Rudy, A. P. & White, D. 2014. Hybridity. In C. Death (ed.), Critical Environmental Politics. London & New York: Routledge. Sugimoto, C. R. & Weingart, S. 2014. The caleidoscope of disciplinarity. Journal of Documentation, 71 (4), 775–794. Stichweh, R. 1994. Wissenschaft, Universität, Professionen. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Weber, M. 1991. Schriften zur Wissenschaftslehre. Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam jun. SECTION 1 DISCIPLINE IN EDUCATION 31 Control justified velvet and gold. These desires did not accord with the ideal of the educational edification process. The idea that the peasantry’s economic prosperity would lead to the worship of material goods, and consequently, selfishness and greed completely contradicted moral ideals. The inner being had higher purposes than ostentation: living to benefit the nation and to exalt God’s praise was seen as important, as well as practical knowledge and skills. Concentrating solely on economic wellbeing was seen as a danger to the new political order. Texts stressed that the aim of education was to refine the spirit for higher purposes than pure pageantry. Such refinement was an especially urgent task as national romantic philosophies constructed the peasantry as a symbol of the nation-to-come: it was pictured as noble, humble before the face of God, resilient, tenacious and proud of their work – the embodiment of the ‘Spirit of the Land’ (Koski, 2006, 2011). The civilisation project initiated was comprehensive. It promoted the ideology of the nation in the service of sublime and edifying purposes, producing individuals who had awoken from the darkness of ignorance, ‘showing off’ and old-fashioned habits. The final aim linked the educational process to the familiar, traditional religious discourse of the salvation of the souls: The human heart will be best edified by rooting out everything that is low, selfish and unclean, and instead, everything that is noble, sublime, ideal and heavenly. The spirit of the people’s institution is good if all the activities are inspired by the warm, burning love for the heavenly and mundane Fatherland and if all the questions are judged in light of the eternal truth. (Yearbook of the Folk Institute of East Karelia, 1907) All these dimensions were introduced into practice by several educational institutions and organisations founded around the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries: Martta associations for peasant women (see Ollila, 1993), folk institutions for young boys and girls and Pellervo associations for farmers. These institutions wove together the practical, aesthetic and moral into two main purposes: the salvation of souls and financial management (Koski, 2011). The salvation of souls was an aim for both genders, but in many other ways, educational practices were gendered. Men were taught financial management, mechanised agriculture, woodwork and basic mathematics and biology. Their Leena Koski 32 education concerned founding co-operatives, dairies, sawmills and such. Women’s education, in contrast, was focused on housekeeping and proper habits, learning to do fine embroidery, plant flower gardens for the aesthetic refinement of the soul, grow new vegetables, cook nutritious food for healthy bodies and keep the home clean and tidy. It was believed that the tidiness of the home led to purity of heart and honest, kind, patient, vigorous women with strong character. From the perspective of moral regulation, the inner being and the external world were intertwined in the causal logics of the definition of progress. A tidy home, well-kept machinery and land, exact book-keeping and meticulously made ornaments, clothes and food led to and were signs of inner refinement of the human being. In these processes, the economic and social relations of capitalism were tied to both traditional and novel religious and spiritual orders: the Lutheran religion, highlighting the idea that everyday chores are acts of service to God, and nationalism or national romanticism, sanctifying the Fatherland as a gift from God (see Koski, 1998, 1999). All these ideals intermingled as justifications and practices of moral regulation and resulted in the construction of disciplinary power. Moral regulation and control thus surrounded individuals from every direction as a productive form of power (Foucault, 1983), persuading them to change their whole lives. The causal logics (see Koski & Filander, 2013) were indisputable: from proper management of finances and housekeeping followed refinement of the soul and vice versa. Simultaneously, all these deeds constituted acts praising God and advancing the common good of the Fatherland. However, the idea of the hidden inside of the human being was profoundly religious, given the notion that God only knows the truth of one’s soul and that humans will become their true selves only in the hereafter. Consequently, the inner being was, to a degree, sheltered from social and economic constraints. In Basil Bernstein’s (1990, pp. 82–83) words, the pedagogical control was external, focused on teaching to act according to the rules. The practical and the spiritual were two sides of the coin, yet at that historic moment, they were balanced to prioritise the practical to enhance the 33 Control justified construction of the capitalist economy. The ‘spiritual’ as such was then still left to the teaching of the Lutheran Church. Turn of the 20th and 21st centuries The decades after the Second World War was a time of profound political, economic and cultural changes in Finland, including democratisation, urbanisation, secularisation, expansion of educational organisations and gradual transformation of the ideals of moral regulation. The redefinition of moral ideals took place soon after the end of the war. The emphasis was laid on a new basis, attached to traditional foundations: Popular adult education and democracy are parallel phenomena. They create opportunities for each other; they need and support each other. … It is selfevident that we adopt democracy as the basis for popular adult education because only this will guarantee the unity of our nation, guarantee its high quality, guarantee its future. (Wuorenrinne, 1945, pp. 51–54) The authoritarian, class-based social and moral orders, along with nationalist educational ideals, had become restraints on the foreseen progress even though the ideals of the nation and its high quality still persisted. The middle class was emerging as the social strata holding key positions related to political and economic stability and progress. Middle-class women gradually replaced working-class men as the major group utilising all sectors of adult education (Koski, 2005b), which also changed the curricula in popular adult education. In the 1960s, the view of adult educationists was that the educational modernisation project, as well as the project of the edification of the people, had been completed successfully. The ‘people’ had learned to read and write, eat properly, utilise washing machines and vacuum cleaners and tidy their homes, surroundings and themselves. The overall educational level had risen due to reforms in compulsory education, vocational training and universities. However, at the turn of the 20th century, the education of the adult population was at a new turning point as neoliberal economics and digital technologies Leena Koski 34 changed the structures of both the labour market and the educational market. Former educational forms and ideals of disciplinary moral regulation had to be re-interpreted amid changing social conditions. As early as the 1970s, the concepts of ‘continuing education’ and ‘lifelong education’ were introduced to adult education, primarily by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), as answers to the demands of the re-structuring labour market and rapidly changing qualifications. By the turn of the 20th century, the concept of lifelong education had become the prevailing discourse setting the ideals and practices of adult learning. On the social level, the ideals were attached to democracy and equality and, on the individual level, to personal growth. These ideals became the foundation for the social and moral justification and disciplinary regulation of adult education. The ideals were written in most important texts, such as the Law on Finnish Popular Education: [The purpose of] the principles of lifelong learning [is] to arrange education that supports cohesion, equality and active citizenship in society. The aim of popular adult education is to promote diversity of individual growth, wellbeing, democracy, pluralism, sustainable development, multiculturalism and internationality. In popular adult education, the principles of selfdirected learning, communal orientation and increasing belonging to society are emphasised. (Law on Popular Education, 2009) The democratic values connected to the ‘diversity of individual growth’ and the ‘principles of self-directed learning’, defined as self-reflectivity, self-realisation, self-esteem and self-directivity as references to the inner being, have a twofold justification. First, they accord with the economics of late capitalism, for instance, in the Federation of Business Life in Finland’s educational policy documents in the early 2000s (see EK:n linjaukset, 2015). A declaration by the European Parliament directly connects the awakening of the inner being to economic principles: The aim of lifelong education is for example to increase creativity, competitiveness, employability, and entrepreneurial ethos. 35 Control justified Second, the ethos of individual growth in the law is aimed at empowering individual students as citizens by using traditional humanistic values. The educational emphasis on the self includes the idea that the self, the me, the inner being is somehow hidden, lost or imprisoned and thus in need of being unveiled, found or liberated (Koski, 2005a, 2014). In both adult educational institutes and commercial institutes offering learning opportunities for adults, courses on finding or freeing the inner being multiplied over the previous decade. These courses are based on multiple self-techniques, as can be seen in the following examples, one a curricular description of a course offered in many institutes of popular adult education in Finland and the other a parallel curriculum offered by a commercial institute: Start to live instead of just surviving. … This course is aimed at awakening creativity, the use of feelings and intellect in order to become what we already are. Based on their own experiences, students will work to free both their feelings and psychic energy. As a tool for the study of the self is the Gestalt method, in which it is essential to learn to recognise what I want and need just now and to act in order to accomplish these goals. In our coaching method, the approach is based on solving problems in an appreciative manner. Every human being will be met as their own person who has the potential to create their own success story – the seed for success must only be dug up from within. From the perspective of moral regulation, connecting democracy and the search for the self is a continuation of the traditional (religious) ideas of observing one’s conscience in order to lead a sinless life and make the right decisions (see Hunt, 1999). In popular and commercial adult education, the self is predominantly defined as hidden, lost, imprisoned or in state of becoming. The vocabulary consists of symbols such as a seed that, once found and watered, will both empower and liberate the desired qualities from within: creativity, innovativeness, competitiveness, success, spirituality or some other social invention for the labour market at a given moment. Ozga and Lingard (2007, p. 70) summarised the ideals attached to lifelong learning and success in the competitive labour market: Leena Koski 36 the individual must be creative, productive, sociable, flexible, stress tolerant, cooperative, emotionally controlled and committed to hard work. Beverly Skeggs (1997) noted that the focus on the self is a female middle-class project. In her analysis, self-projects are a means of distinguishing oneself from the lower classes in a project highlighting the value of spirit over matter. With the expansion of interest in focusing on the self, new trades and businesses of life coaching have emerged. Mäkinen (2012, pp. 110–113) labelled them ‘individualised feminism’, emphasising individual empowerment for individual success while neglecting structural injustices. Thus, each individual should, and can when properly coached, achieve any social position. It seems that highlighting the self as a symbol of the inner being, perhaps unintentionally, serves as a disciplinary discourse aimed at educated middle-class women. Conclusions With the birth of both capitalism and popular adult education in the 19th century, the connection of the inner being to the economic market was transmitted through the idea of the progress of the nation. For the peasants, this idea was justified by Lutheran spirituality aimed at refining the human being, the immediate surroundings and, ultimately, the Fatherland. In the neoliberal formation of capitalism, the inner being is directly connected to the economic market. Other justifying discourses connected to transcendental, spiritual and social aims are weak and scattered. At the same time, the disciplinary and regulative practices considering the inner being have been strengthened as individuals have been persuaded to find the hidden self and transform it as their resource. The task is narrated as normative but stripped of institutional or transcendent connections; the individual encounters moral regulation without protective structures, as if naked. Individualised morality, along with ‘self-ethic’ as Heelas (1996) noted, is aimed at ‘exorcising those voices of authority which have become internalized as the ego. ... The individual serves as his or her own source of guidance’ (Heelas, 1996, p. 23). However, the ‘voice of the authority’ and its use as a ‘source of guidance’ must be taught and learned; only then does the inner being of the individual, the self, serve as a precondition of social progress. Following Basil Bernstein’s (1990, 37 Control justified p. 67) analysis of pedagogic control, external control has become internal and implicit with formerly open hierarchies masking their communication, blurring the boundaries of the inner being and the social demands. The quest for democracy remains, however, a social justification in adult education. Participation in activities offered by communal institutes of adult education is understood to increase democratic practices. Democracy then seems to equal participation in adult education. The most popular courses in adult education, though, focus on various handicrafts, physical exercise, foreign languages, information technology, painting and other practical skills. Even though courses are offered to the entire adult population, participation is clearly both gendered and class-based, dominated by educated, middle-class women. Moral regulation aimed at population control has been multiplied, extended and at least partly disengaged from traditional institutional organisations of adult education and found its agents in commercial businesses and therapeutic practices. The deficiencies perceived in the lives of individuals and the demands and ways of improving them have also multiplied. Moral regulation no longer aims to go onwards and upwards through spirituality and the common good; instead, it aims to compete and survive in the precarious labour market and life. In all these changes, adult educationists have reformulated their definitions to justify the moral regulation of the prevailing social and economic structures. The disciplinary practices of fostering citizenship in adult education, with their historical emergence and variations, have consistently been attached to an economic ethos, disguised as the balanced moral discourses of individual growth and social progress and prosperity. Leena Koski 38 References Alapuro, R. 1998. Sivistyneistön ambivalentti suomalaisuus. In P. Alasuutari & P. Ruuska (eds), Elävänä Euroopassa. Muuttuva suomalainen identiteetti. Tampere: Vastapaino, 175–190. Bernstein, B. 1971. Class, Code and Control. Vol. 1. London: Routledge and Kegan. Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Durkheim, E. 1979. Durkheim: Essays on Morals and Education. Edited and with Introductions by W. S. F. Pickering. London, Boston and Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Foucault, M. 1983. The subject and power. Afterword. In H. L. Dreyfus & P. Rabinow. Michel Foucault. Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 208–226. Harva, U. 1942. Kansansivistystyön käsite. Vapaa kansansivistystyö. Kansan sivistys opillisen yhdistyksen vuosikirja 1942. Helsinki: Kansansivistysopillinen yhdistys, 3–17. Heelas, P. 1996. On things not being worse, and the ethic of humanity. In P. Heelas, S. Lash & P. Morris (eds), Detraditionalization: Critical Reflections on Authority and Identity. Cambridge: Blackwell. Hunt, A. 1999. Governing Moral: A Social History of Moral Regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hunter, I. 1994. Rethinking the School: Subjectivity, Bureaucracy, Criticism. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Itä-Karjalan kansanopiston vuosikirja 1907. Joensuu: Pohjois-Karjalan KirjapainoOsake yhtiö. Jackson, P.W. 1968. Life in Classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Jutikkala, E. 1958. Suomen talonpojan historia. Helsinki: WSOY. Koski, L. 1998. From God to Friendship: The changing moral orders of educational stories in Finnish ABC books. In D. Kalekin-Fishman (ed.), Designs for Alienation: Exploring Diverse Realities. SoPhi: Jyväskylä, 227–245. Koski L. 1999. Moral education and the Finnish ABC books. In J. Mikk (ed.), Väärtuskasvatus oppekirjanduses. Tartu Ulikooli pedagoogika osakonna väljaanne nr. 8. Tartu, 38–57. Koski L. 2005a. The sacred, the social, and the ‘Inner Me’ in Finnish education. In J. Nyman (ed.), Studies in the Sociology of Education and Culture. Joensuu University Press. Publications of the Dapartment of Sociology. Yliopistopaino, 72–96. Koski L. 2005b. Koulutusyhteiskunnan kynnyksellä. Osallistuminen vapaan kansansivistystyön opintoihin 1950-luvulla. In M. Sabour & L. Koski (eds), Kasvatuksen ja kulttuurin merkitystä etsimässä. Joensuu: Joensuu University Press, 27–243. 39 Control justified Koski, L. 2009. Vocational curriculum – Morality for the working class? In M. Weil, L. Koski & L. Mjelde (eds), Knowing Work. The Social Relations of Working and Knowing. Bern: Peter Lang, 27–50. Koski L. 2014. Minä ja maailma aikuiskasvatuksen keskuksessa. In K. Brunila & U. Iso-Pahka-Bouret (eds), Marginaalin voima! Aikuiskasvatuksen 51. vuosikirja. Vantaa: Kansanvalistusseura, 38–53. Koski, L. 2006. Kansansivistyksen kansaa etsimässä. In J. Tuomisto & P. Salo P. (eds), Edistävä ja viihdyttävä aikuiskasvatus. Aulis Alanen aikuisopetuksen laatua etsimässä. Tampere: Tampere University Press, 59–83. Koski, L. 2011. Sivistystyön ihmiskäsitys: villi-ihmisestä aikuiseksi yksilöksi. In A. Heikkinen & P. Leino-Kaukiainen (eds), Valistus ja koulunpenkki. Kasvatus ja koulutus Suomessa 1860-luvulta 1960-luvulle. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjal lisuuden Seura, 159–183. Koski, L. & Filander, K. 2013. Transforming causal logics in Finnish adult education: historical and moral transitions rewritten. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 32 (5), 583–599. Koski, L. & Moore, E. 2001. Näkökulmia aikuisuuteen ja aikuiskasvatukseen. Aikuiskasvatus, 21 (1), 4–13. Liakka, N. 1909. Kansanopisto-opetuksen rajoittamisesta ”kipeimmin kaivattuun”. Pyrkijä, 8. Mäkinen, K. 2012. Becoming Valuable Selves. Self-Promotion, Gender and Individuality in Late Capitalism. Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 1732. Tampere: Tampere University Press. Ollila, A. 1993. Suomen kotien päivä valkenee… Marttajärjestö suomalaisessa yhteis kunnas sa vuoteen 1939. Helsinki: SHS. Ozga, J. & Lingard, B. 2007. Globalization, education policy and politics. In B. Lingard & J. Ozga (eds), Education Policy and Politics. London and New York: Routledge, 65–82. Skeggs, B. 1997. Formation of Class and Gender: Becoming Respectable. London: Sage Publications. Snellman, J.V. 1929. Kootut teokset V. Tutkielmia ja kirjoituksia. Porvoo: WSOY. Yrjö-Koskinen, Y.-S. 1868. Yhteiskunnallisia mietteitä. Virkavalta ja kansanopistot. Kirjallinen Kuukausilehti 4. Wuorenrinne, T.I. 1945. Demokratia ja vapaa kansansivistystyö. Vapaa kansansivistystyö IV. Kansansivistysopillisen yhdistyksen vuosikirja 1945. Helsinki: Kansansivistys opillinen yhdistys, 46–54. 47 Defining discipline in anarchist education Having admitted and practised the co-education of boys and girls, of rich and poor – having that is to say started from the principle of solidarity and inequality – we are not prepared to create a new inequality. Hence in the Modern School there will be no rewards and no punishments; there will be no examinations to puff up some children with the flattering title of excellent, to give others the vulgar title of ‘good’, and make others unhappy with a consciousness of incapacity and failure. (Ferrer, 1913) At the same time, according to Ferrer, pedagogical technology as such was not rejected; rather he noted the excessive role that it was assigned in traditional school education, turning it into a set of rituals and useless conventions, the purpose of which is to control students. Regarding the content of education, Ferrer consistently implemented the conception of ‘integral education’ that has been central for anarchism and was firstly formulated by Kropotkin in his work Fields, Factories and Workshops: ‘to the division of society into brain workers and manual workers we oppose the combination of both kinds of activities; and instead of “technical education”, which means the maintenance of the present division between brain work and manual work, we advocate the education integrale, or complete education, which means the disappearance of that pernicious distinction’ (Kropotkin, 1913). According to Kropotkin the specialisation of labour must be preceded by general education, which combines both the study of sciences and the teaching of crafts (such kinds of education were at the Modern School). M.A. Bakunin went further on this issue; he believed that the division between brain and manual work itself is artificial, thus formulating the principle of integral education in a very broad way, stating ‘everyone must work, and everyone must receive education’: The science of the sage will become more fruitful, more useful and more expansive when the sage is no longer a stranger to manual labour, and the labours of the workmen, when he is educated, will be more intelligent and thus more productive than those of an ignorant workman. From which it follows that, for work’s sake as much as for the sake of science, there must no longer be this division into workers and scholars and henceforth there must be only men. (Bakunin, 1869) Ivan Zamotkin 48 For Bakunin, fixing science and science education with a certain social group is one of the main reasons for the exploitation of the ‘uneducated majority’, so he strongly rejected liberal projects of state education as he claimed that the people did not need such science and such education. Moreover, Bakunin believed that it was very cynical to talk about the purpose of science in the education of the people, ignoring the social unfairness and inequality that exists in society, which in many respects was maintained by this science. Ferrer thought that it is very important to draw the attention of his students to it when they were on a factory tour. For example, some boys and girls did not want to go into one of the workshops because of the heat and smell of toxic materials, which gave Ferrer the opportunity to discuss with them the history of the workers’ factories, how they learned this craft as children, how they also did not like the heat and unpleasant smell, but that they had no other life options, and how science and industry, having reached such heights together, can coexist with such glaring facts of social unfairness. Both for Kropotkin and Bakunin this component of political education imbued with the ideal of a society based on mutual help and solidarity was significant in the process of integral education. As mentioned earlier, the history of libertarian pedagogy is marked by many other extremely interesting educational projects; however, not all of them should be attributed to anarchism. For J. Suissa, a clear counter-example here is the famous school created by A. Neill in 1921, ‘Summerhill’. Based only on external features (lack of a strict timetable, informal learning, children’s free behaviour), this school looked like Ferrer’s and other anarchist schools, but for Suissa it is important to show what the fundamental differences are. According to Suissa, one of the fairly clear differences is how in the Summerhill school democratic decision-making procedures regarding all issues had been narrowly understood as being reduced to simple voting. Anarchist thinkers have rejected such an ‘electoral’ understanding of democracy and have had fair doubts about the validity of the majority principle as the basis of the political system. She notes that ‘more significant, though, are the subtle differences that derive from the philosophical and ideological commitments behind each of these educational approaches’. She continues: Crucially, Neill conceived of freedom in an individual, psychological sense. His chief intellectual influences were those of the psychoanalytical tradition 49 Defining discipline in anarchist education especially the work of Wilhelm Reich. So, although critical of existing society, he believed that the way forward to a better world lay in reform at the individual level a sort of mass therapy by which we would gradually achieve a society of self-aware, uninhibited, emotionally stable individuals. In contrast, the notion of freedom behind the anarchist position is one that carries “concrete political connotations”. (Suissa, 2001) This individualistic and psychological understanding of freedom, which is based on Rousseau’s claim about originally good human nature, should not be assigned to anarchism. On the contrary, a human being in anarchism is presented as a creature with a dual nature, in which not only altruistic but also egoistic characteristics are inherent. In this regard, neither Kropotkin nor even Bakunin were naïve, as they are often presented; anarchism implies that human nature is contextual. Outside the context of society, in addition to other individuals, the question of human nature, according to Bakunin, does not make any sense at all – in this regard, he criticises the theory of the social contract and the natural state of men: ‘primitive men enjoying absolute liberty only in isolation are antisocial by nature and when forced to associate they destroy each other’s freedom’ (Bakunin in Dolgoff, 1973, p. 128). Contrary to this, Bakunin sees it the following way: after concluding the contract, unfree man, who is in the slavery of his animal state, becomes a slave of the state, thus, denial of the state and animality for people is possible only in the gradual self-awareness in society, and not outside it, with other people. This remark makes clear why Kropotkin saw education as one of the main means for achieving the necessary moral level for establishing and maintaining anarchist ideal in human society (see Kropotkin, 1970). It seems that education might become a space in which the ability to share anarchist values arises among people even before the establishment of anarchy, thus becoming the prerequisites for an anarchist revolution. This view was also in the programme of integral education implemented in the ‘Modern School’: Ferrer saw his school as a microcosm of the future anarchist society. Education in the Modern School was far from the political neutrality that Neill talked about: ‘politics, life, religion is a matter for personal choice to be made later on in life as the child grows up’ (Neill, 1962, p. 354). Children, according to Neill, being originally good by nature, should themselves determine their own values in their individual development. Moral relativism in relation to education here comes Ivan Zamotkin 50 into clear contradiction with Neill’s aforementioned understanding of freedom. We see no such contradiction in Ferrer’s school: ‘rational education, among other things, preserves in humans the ability to love, to think, to strive for ideals and hope’ (Ferrer, 1913), portraying an education imbued with this hope for a society of truly free and equal people without violence, hierarchies or any privilege. Pedagogical paradox and the role of discipline in education Immanuel Kant was one of the strongest advocates for the necessity of discipline in education. His views on education were based on the assumption that there is a fundamental difference between immature and mature human beings, related, according to Kant, with the idea of autonomy as the possibility of using of one’s reason. It is education that provides this transition from immaturity to maturity, and, according to Kant, the first step of this process requires discipline. He saw discipline as a negative but obligatory part of education which prevents a man from being turned away from humanity by his animal impulses, his appointed end. Kant’s position represents some fundamental pedagogical ideas which have become predominant in modern educational thought and which have exercised a great influence on modern educational practice. But this set of ideas is not unproblematic, and even in Kant’s own work on education we can find what is known in the literature as ‘pedagogical paradox’. Kant describes it this way: One of the biggest problems of education is how one can unite submission under lawful constraint with the capacity to use one’s freedom. For constraint is necessary. How do I cultivate freedom under constraint? I shall accustom my pupil to tolerate a constraint of his freedom, and I shall at the same time lead him to make good use of his freedom. Without this everything is a mere mechanism, and the pupil who is released from education does not know how to use his freedom. He must feel early the inevitable resistance of society, in order to get to know the difficulty of supporting himself, of being deprived and of acquiring – in a word: of being independent. (Kant, 2007, p. 447) This paradox arises due to the fact that the relationship between the student and the teacher ceases to be only pedagogical and becomes political since 51 Defining discipline in anarchist education the acquisition of freedom by the student leads to the political problem of emancipation. If emancipation is understood as something that is done for someone through a certain external intervention, then it turns out to be based on a fundamental difference between the one who emancipates and the one who should be emancipated. Due to this logic of emancipation, pedagogy is based on a fundamental distinction between the ‘educated’ and ‘uneducated’ states of mind based on the power of the emancipator, which puts those who will be liberated in the originally unfree position. One of the ways to look at this problem is to rethink the idea of disciplinary practices and to try to provide a positive notion of the term discipline. For instance, this was the task for Emile Durkheim in his influential works on education, especially in Moral Education, where he considers discipline as an essential element of morality. For Durkheim it is particularly important to analyse the notion of discipline in education not from an individualistic, psychological level but from a sociological one, i.e. to put it in the social context where social norms constitute and help to maintain a certain social order. He claims that since moral requirements are not merely another name for personal habits, since they determine conduct imperatively from courses outside ourselves, in order to fulfil one’s obligations and to act morally one must have some appreciation of the authority sui generis that informs morality … We have seen, furthermore, that if this sense of authority constitutes a part of that force with which all rules of conduct, whatever they may be, impose themselves upon us, then authority has an extremely significant function; for here it acts independently. No other feeling or consideration is involved in the moral act. (Durkheim, 1961, p. 34) In this sense the discipline is necessary for both school and society because through it we become part of the particular social order, and, hence, it always requires some changes in personal attitude and behaviour that somehow make one ‘disciplined’. The principle of authority has its own limits. For instance, Durkheim strongly opposed the idea of physical punishments in schools. However, he also rejected the notion that education had the task of changing society. Instead, Durkheim saw education as part of the process of socialisation in which discipline is the way to unite the child with the larger society. The functionalist view of education Ivan Zamotkin 52 and discipline given by Durkheim seems to be quite reasonable for describing how social mechanisms work, but it still leaves unanswered the question of how it is possible for students to become autonomous at the end of education, where discipline takes on such a crucial role. Durkheim himself argued that the result of education, or, in his words, moral discipline, should not be mere socialisation, such as engaging students into the moral values and rules of a community, but also the achievement of students’ autonomy and self-determination within society. In many ways his position reproduced the disciplinary struggles formulated by Kant in his pedagogical paradox. A very different perspective on this topic can be found in the works of Michel Foucault. His critique in Discipline and Punish helps to reveal the disadvantages of the disciplinary mechanisms not only in educational institutions but within the whole society. Foucault in his book described the birth of prison in order to demonstrate how disciplinary power works: How could the prison not be immediately accepted when, by locking up, retraining and rendering docile, it merely reproduces, with a little more emphasis, the mechanisms that are to be found in the social body. The prison is like a rather disciplined barracks, a strict school, a dark workshop, but not qualitatively different. (Foucault, 1991, p. 223) The technique of the disciplinary power does not include just limits and prohibitions but rather serves to produce some kind of relations that somehow ‘make’ individuals, regarding these both as objects and as instruments of evaluation based on the idea of the effectiveness. The main instruments of the discipline, according to Foucault, are hierarchical observation, normalising judgement and the procedure of the examination. It should be emphasised that these tools have a common task: to eliminate deviations and to correct behaviour. For instance, in schools we see that it is the teacher’s task to hold disciplinary power over students through examination and punishment. Foucault puts it this way: The art of punishing in the regime of disciplinary power is aimed neither at expiation, nor even precisely at repression. The perpetual penalty that traverses all points and supervises every instant in the disciplinary institutions 53 Defining discipline in anarchist education compares, differentiates, hierarchize, homogenizes, excludes. In short, it normalizes. (Foucault, 1991, p. 183) So, in Foucault’s critique we see the very negative notion of discipline: it ‘normalizes’ students; it turns them into conformists; it attempts to control all regimes of space and time. Even the school buildings, according to Foucault, as a tool of ‘correct training’, express disciplinary power. The problem with this view lies in the fact that it does not offer any positive programme of how it is possible (if possible) to organise the system of education avoiding disciplinary mechanisms. The situation is further aggravated by Foucault’s understanding of power which implies that disciplinary power does not have any single and stable source (such as the teacher in school); rather, it seems to be spread through the whole society, and that is why it is hard (or even impossible) to resist this power. Nevertheless, Foucault’s critique has some additional insights that are extremely helpful for understanding how disciplinary power works. He pays attention to the polysemy of the word ‘discipline’, which before had remained unaddressed. In fact, the word ‘discipline’ as an instrument of social control and as a branch of knowledge seems to be the best way to illustrate his concept of ‘power-knowledge’. Given the fact that the content of education in many ways is determined by the sociocultural conditions and can be transformed under their changes, this definition is closely connected with the first: looking at knowledge as a social construct gives reason to consider it an essential part of disciplinary mechanisms in education. Contemporary scholar Thomas Popkewitz gave a very persuasive explanation of this problem, which he called the ‘alchemy’ of pedagogy as a process that turns scientific and social disciplines into modes of ordering and regulating people: School subjects require transportation and translation tools that bring disciplinary fields concerned with knowledge production into the social and cultural spaces of schooling. Children are not physicists or historians, so something needs to be done with the disciplines so children can work with the ideas, narratives, and approaches to understanding. Like the 16th and 17th century alchemists and occult practitioners who sought to turn base metals into pure gold, the school subjects magically translate disciplinary fields through the languages of classroom management and theories of learning and communication. (Popkewitz, 2014, p. 10) Ivan Zamotkin 54 In other words, school subjects are never simply mathematics, science, literature and so on but rather elements of those disciplines placed at the service of certain larger functions of schooling. This idea in fact has much in common with what Foucault concluded in his work: disciplinary mechanisms in order to ‘normalize’ students produce the Norm and establish its power, which, in turn, appears through the disciplines. The Normal is established as a principle of coercion in teaching with the introduction of a standardized education and the establishment of the ecoles normales (teachers’ training colleges). (Foucault, 1991, p. 184) Later in the text, Foucault describes how the discipline in both meanings (as a technique of power and as a set of knowledge) organises not only the school’s system but education itself. In fact, education can be regarded as a subject of certain distinct disciplines (such as the philosophy of education, history of education, sociology of education, etc.) or even as an interdisciplinary area of studies which is usually named ‘educational studies’. Mostly, it is applied in the sphere of teacher education and in educational research. Foucault wrote about the establishment of pedagogy as an example of the connection between discipline as power and as knowledge: The school became the place of elaboration for pedagogy. And just as the procedure of the hospital examination made possible the epistemological ‘thaw’ of medicine, the age of the ‘examining’ school marked the beginnings of a pedagogy that functions as a science. (Foucault, 1991, p. 187) The formation of pedagogy as a science was closely connected with the establishment of compulsory schooling as an institution of industrial society, designed within the framework of a national capitalist state to serve its purposes. The most obvious example of this process was the emergence of the Prussian school, which became a model of the public education system for many countries (for example, for the USA). Inspired by the ideas of state education as ‘saving the nation’, Prussian pedagogues developed a ‘model for schooling, built around centrally controlled curriculums, constant fragmentation of days into changing classes at the sound 55 Defining discipline in anarchist education of a bell, obedience and teacher-directed classroom groupings. At the heart of the system though was the primacy of the State, and that children both belonged to and were the responsibility of the State’ (Hern, 2003). In addition to general philosophical and specifically cultural circumstances, many historians have noted a number of, say, objective reasons for the emergence of a state school. It is in the interpretation of these reasons, their ‘objectivity’, that the essence of the question lies. In this case, J. Suissa emphasises the importance of separating questions about the causes of the phenomenon from questions about the reasons for it: ‘while it may be true that the spread of industrialisation and the mass migration of people towards urban centres created a need to provide trained workers for the economy and thus placed a causal role in the establishment of universal state schooling one can still ask questions about where the state’s need for a skilled workforce constitutes a good argument for supporting state education’ (Suissa, 2010, p. 100). Conclusion: Towards the ‘good’ notion of discipline from an anarchist perspective To claim that anarchism offers some ‘good’ notion of the discipline is quite a strong thesis to advocate in this chapter as it requires further investigation. However, in this section we will try to present what makes one believe in the possibility of such statement, given some of the points of the discussions mentioned above. It is believed to be very challenging to see education without discipline as even the position of a researcher in education requires some kind of commitment to the discipline. It is not always realised how educational research reflects and reproduces the disciplinary mechanisms embodied in education. The mainstream philosophy of education often fails in its attempts to criticise neoliberal discourse in education as it shares with it some basic assumptions. To reduce the disciplinary mechanisms in education, it is necessary to transform the perspective from which we see education. Based on anarchist values education could be regarded not only as a part of social control in a given society but also as a place where it is possible to undermine the very foundations of society through the movements of local communities. Allowing educational spaces to become sites for prefigurative practice, according Ivan Zamotkin 56 to Suissa, is an alternative way to study education, which, in turn, requires a new notion of the discipline. As John Dewey put it: Even the theoretical anarchist, whose philosophy commits him to the idea that state or government control is an evil, believes that with abolition of the political state other forms of social control would operate. (Dewey, 1938, p. 32) As was demonstrated above, anarchist pedagogy does not reject the idea of a direct intervention in the moral and intellectual development of a child, and therefore the idea of discipline as such. At the same time, the concept of discipline in anarchist education cannot be defined precisely for three reasons. Firstly, as anarchism is strongly opposed to any forms of dogmatism or predefined pictures of society, education is considered there as a space where alternative relationships take shape in a special way. Both Kropotkin and Bakunin highly appreciate human freedom and therefore renounce the right to ‘break human nature for the sake of a moral ideal’, realising that under capitalism the altruistic aspirations of people are suppressed by the social environment itself, therefore some intermediate stages are assumed. For instance, in the Ferrer school, despite the fact that its anarchist curriculum explicitly expressed such values as anti-capitalism and anti-statism, the process of education itself did not follow a plan prepared in advance or some kind of a blueprint but was a form of experimentation. According to the anarchists, this form of constant experimentation is transferred from the school to the whole future anarchist society, becoming the way to both form and maintain it. Secondly, anarchist education recognises the danger of authority and power relations, but they are not rejected outright. The same idea was developed by Foucault (for which he could be considered an anarchist). The line between an acceptable and an unacceptable form of discipline is not easy to draw because it is recognised that people are free and unpredictable in their actions. Nevertheless, at least two features of ‘good’ discipline for anarchism can be noted: disciplinary mechanisms must be explicit so that participants are aware of the power relations they give rise to, and discipline should not be understood as a preparatory step for a mature free state of a person but must assume equality from the very beginning. According to MacAllister, for discipline to be considered an educational concept, it is necessary to claim that ‘discipline is not something that happens to pupils 63 Struggles for identity The context – Where are we going after the reform? The immediate context of the transformation is the Finnish higher education reform started by the new University Act (558/2009) in June 2009. The reform brings a massive and multiple-level transition to Finnish higher education, from a restructuring of the whole system, the funding model and the strategy direction to internationalisation, etc. Public funding is radically reduced, but unprecedented autonomy is granted to universities by endowing universities to use the identity change of becoming independent legal personalities to collect external funding (University Act, 2009) and generate revenue from commercial means. Due to the stress over the need for resources to survive, many universities have to change their strategies and prepare themselves to compete in the global market. Such transition is reflected in the policies discussed later. Under the reform, three groups of universities merged into three bigger universities during 2007–2010 (European Commission, 2016). The University of Eastern Finland (UEF) is chosen as the case study because UEF went through both the merger and the overall reform, which provides a representative case. The new branding renamed the two merged universities (the University of Joensuu and the University of Kuopio) as the University of Eastern Finland (UEF). However, this study considers UEF as a whole for the matter of clarity. Under this transition, UEF published a series of strategy policies about how to take the university into a new era of development, trying to make UEF stronger and more competitive. These policy documents are used as the data to inspect the transition. The discursive construct of identity The theoretical ground of this study’s research on the identity transition of a university through discourse lies in the postmodernist view of institutional identity as a discursive construct and identity as the totality of the narratives of who we think we are (e.g. Humphreys & Brown, 2002). Identity is a complex concept, and the identity of a university, as a collective identity, is multi-vocal from multiple voices inside the organisation (Boje, 2001; Mayr, 2015). Thus, to Henry Yuan Wang 64 maintain the clarity of the study, this paper investigates only one important aspect constituting the collective identity – how the university portrays itself in its own policy discourse. The postmodern theoretical ground of studying an institution’s identity through its discourse is how the connection of discourse and intuitions is conceptualised – the ‘linguistic turn’, with emphasis on the role of language use in social constitution, essentially views discourse as constitutive of institutions (Fairclough & Wodak, 1997; Mumby & Mease, 2011; Mayr, 2015). Mumby and Clair (1997) explain this point as follows: Organizations exist only in so far as their members create them through discourse. This is not to claim that organizations are ‘nothing but’ discourse, but rather that discourse is the principle means by which organization members create a coherent social reality that frames their sense of who they are. (1997, p. 181) That is to say, discourse plays a constituting role in shaping the institution’s identity. Institutional identity is a socially constructed meaning by its own institutional members who share the idea of what it is, and it is not fixed but rather a dynamic construction (van der Walt 2007, p. 183). This study’s investigation of the particular crafted changes imposed upon the university’s identity exposes the deeper meaning of the direction the policymakers are leading the university towards and what kind of social reality they are trying to construct. Research question and policy documents as data The objective of the study is to make sense of the recent University of Eastern Finland (UEF) transition in policies and to analyse the identity changes of a Finnish university. The transition can be seen from the comparison of the identity presented in the university policies before and after the reform. It reveals the development and evolution of a Finnish higher education institute. The research question is: how is the identity transition of UEF reflected and justified in its policy discourse after the higher education reform? 65 Struggles for identity Norman Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis (CDA) framework is adopted to examine the policy discourse transition. Fairclough’s account of discourse analysis is three-dimensional, consisting of textual analysis, discursive analysis and social analysis. Within the CDA framework, a set of specific university strategic policy documents during 2000–2015 are the data for this study, as shown in the following table. Table 1. The documents (coded as the year they were published) Policy document Code name by publish year To a new millennium: The strategy of the University of Joensuu for the years 2000–2006 Document 2000 Strategy for the internationalisation of the University of Joensuu for the years 2007–2015 Document 2007 A university of the future – Strategy of the University of Eastern Finland (2010) Document 2010 Internationalisation policy of the University of Eastern Finland 2012–2015 Document 2012 Interdisciplinary solutions – Strategy of the University of Eastern Finland for 2015–2020 Document 2014a (Auxiliary document) Implementation programme for the strategy for 2015–2020 Document 2014b The new policies after the reform (Documents 2010, 2012, 2014a and 2014b) form the data that present the new strategic priorities of UEF, which also provide the resource for the fragmented narratives of UEF’s identity. In addition, the transition is seen through comparison to the old policies (Documents 2000 and 2007). I treat the new policies as a whole for the evidence after the reform, whereas the old policies as a whole provide the resources before the reform. The study only chose English documents as the data – the discourse in English is a medium that reflects how the university constructs its identity on a global scale. The university provides the English documents publicly to the global audience. Henry Yuan Wang 66 Findings The analysis distils the distinctive discursive practices that help to shape the new reality, which provides the ground for the identity transformation. The new identity construction is justified and fulfilled by three predominant discursive practices: 1. justified by different layers of re-contextualisation; 2. legitimised by dominant ante-narratives; 3. intermediated by discursive practice normalisation. Re-contextualisation Re-contextualisation is a process in which one discourse or its meaning transfers into another context. Linell (1998) simply put it as ‘the dynamic transfer-andtransformation of something from one discourse/text-in-context ... to another’ (p. 154). One prominent analysis finding is that the new University of Eastern Finland (UEF) strategy policies justify themselves by noticeably re-contextualising elements from European Union (EU) policies and Finnish national policies. This forms the top-down level consistency (EU level–Finnish national level–UEF institutional level) in policy direction, which I denote as EU–FI–UEF consistency in this study. The most remarkable transferred discourses include establishing an increasingly concrete quality assurance system, the transit to a ‘student-centred university’, the same justification to exit the economic crisis, the encouragement to export following the European Commission’s country-specific recommendations, etc., which all indicate that UEF’s current development is in line with EU’s planning direction. For example, the discourse of marketising higher education, with the same presumption of treating higher education as a product/service that can be exported, is transferred from EU policies and Finnish policies, as shown below: 67 Struggles for identity Table 2. Example of how education export discourse is re-contextualised from EU to UEF From the EU level: Europe 2020: A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth Unleash Europe’s innovative capabilities, improving educational outcomes and the quality and outputs of education institutions, and exploiting the economic and societal benefits of a digital society. Europe 2020 Strategy (2010, p. 12) From the Finnish national level: Finnish education export strategy Educational know-how will be a Finnish export cluster in the future. Educational knowhow will be an increasingly important part of industrial and service products and in this way, it will bolster other export sectors. Education export strategy (2010, p. 7) From the UEF institutional level: Interdisciplinary solutions – Strategy of the University of Eastern Finland for 2015–2020 We promote the transfer of the university’s research findings to support knowledgebased growth … Document 2014a, p. 6 We are known as a partner …, and as a producer of research data and education … Document 2014a, p. 3 As the analysis of other core discourses shows, the EU crisis rhetoric is transferred into the Finnish higher education context, and the same justification to escape the economy crisis, to be ‘competitive’ and ‘succeed’, is adopted to justify the transition of the Finnish university. It suggests that the Finnish university’s priority is aligned to the economic priorities of the EU and the state in a synchronised way. The compliance to EU policies’ economic initiative to take a share of global market and occupy a competitive position therein has spread to Finnish higher education. Dominant competition ante-narratives The ante-narrative, namely ‘before narrative’, is a concept defined by Boje (2001) to study those fragmented pieces of narratives in an organisational context because, Henry Yuan Wang 68 in organisational settings, narratives are often articulated only in fragments. Antenarratives, simply put, are pieces of discourses before they become a complete story. The reoccurring rhetoric patterns that formulate the constituent antenarratives of the new identity after the reform are the ‘global competition’ ante-narratives. The competition-focused storytelling constantly serves as the background to justify the transition. The new policies set out the tension for competition at the very beginning. For instance, Document 2012 sets up the backdrop that ‘Europe is failing’ before any story is being told: … according to analyses by the European Commission in 2005 and 2006, only a few European universities are recognised as global leaders. Indeed, European higher education institutions are failing to attract enough students, researchers and investments from outside the EU. Currently, the United States is the leader in attracting the best students, while China and India are also emerging as rivals to European higher education institutions. (Document 2012, p. 3) At the very beginning, the discourse states ‘the fact’ that European universities are ‘failing’, which gives a sense of imperativeness – it is an unavoidable obligation to deal with the ‘failure’. The competition ante-narratives also harbour the presupposition that it is the European higher education institutes’ primary duty to compete in the global market, such as Document 2012, with some specific major competitors given, e.g. ‘the United States, China and India’ (p. 3). The discourse ‘only a few European universities are recognized as global leaders’ (p. 3) implies that European universities not only must compete in the global market but also should dominate the market. Higher education institutions used to be expected to cradle the civic development and intellectual competence of the society, but now ‘a high level of expertise and international networking’ is expected (Document 2010, p. 4). They have to ‘meet the demands of operational efficiency’ (Document 2010, p. 4), they are expected ‘to succeed’ (Document 2010, p. 4), to ‘attract the best students’ (Document 2012, p. 3) and to ‘attract researchers and investments’ (Document 2014a, p. 3, p. 4, p. 6) and to be ‘global leaders’ (Document 2012, p. 3). 69 Struggles for identity The university henceforward is also expected to increase the attractiveness of the country and serve to help the country to ‘become one of the world’s leading education-based economies’ (Document 2012, p. 4) and ‘increase the export’ (Document 2012, p. 4), e.g. Document 2012: The attractiveness of Finland as a business, work and living environment must be increased … The strategy … strives towards Finland becoming one of the world’s leading education-based economies, which relies on the high quality of its education system, as well as towards significantly increasing the proportion of education and knowledge exports in relation to overall exports by 2015. (Document 2012, pp. 3–4) ‘Competition’ is accelerated on an unprecedented level in the new UEF policies compared to those before the reform. Competition as the motif of the new documents is set as the background to justify the policy direction – to justify the transition of the university’s identity. Discursive practice normalisation There are prominent discursive features in the new policies that bring out a striking contrast to the old documents before the reforms. These discursive practices facilitate the transition for the social changes with fine subtlety. Without comparison, they are almost undetectable because they appear very natural. Just as Fairclough (2007) suggests, it is through this naturalising and normalising of certain discourses and their backgrounded ideologies that the engineering of a certain legitimacy is achieved. The most pervasive discursive practice change is that the new policy discourses largely incorporate commercialand business-style discourses, resulting in hybrid quasi-advertising and quasi-corporate discourses. A new discourse feature from the new documents with the integrated business and advertising style can be found from the individual word-choice level, to the discursive-style level, to the overall visual-layout level. From the choice of vocabulary, there is a notable increase in self-promotional words such as ‘efficient’ and ‘top-level’, which clearly indicate the significance of the university; see the table below. Henry Yuan Wang 70 Table 3. Promotional words from the top 30 most frequently reoccurring words list Before reforms After reforms Document 2000 Document 2010 Document 2014a Word Count Density Word Count Density Word Count Density high better 5 5 0.16% 0.16% international high strong significant competitive attractive versatile 35 15 8 8 8 6 5 0.98% 0.42% 0.22% 0.22% 0.22% 0.17% 0.14% international strong efficient active top-level global scientific tomorrows high achievement modern strengthened actively efficiency 23 10 7 6 6 6 6 5 4 3 3 3 3 3 1.26% 0.55% 0.38% 0.33% 0.33% 0.33% 0.33% 0.27% 0.22% 0.16% 0.16% 0.16% 0.16% 0.16% Another example from the quasi-advertising choice of words is the pervasive use of ‘we’, for example: • We are an international, multidisciplinary and student-centred university whose high standard of research and appealing academic offering build the competence base of the future. • We make use of the expertise of the entire academic community in our activities. • We are an internationally attractive university, which seeks to find interdisciplinary solutions to global challenges. • We are home to Finland’s best academic learning environments and most efficient study processes. (Document 2014a, p. 3) The following Table 4 shows the frequency of the use of ‘we’ in the strategy documents. 71 Struggles for identity Table 4. Use of ‘we’ in strategy documents Before reforms After reforms Document 2000 Document 2014a Word Count Density Word Count Density we 60.18% we 30 1.57% As shown in the above table, the pervasive use of ‘we’ is one of the many discursive features contributing to a discourse style shift after the reforms. The pronoun ‘we’ is used as a personalisation of the institution and is used 30 times in the latest strategy paper, Document 2014a. This personalisation style of addressing readers directly is commonly used in advertising practice, which is an example of the hybrid quasi-advertising genre (Fairclough, 1993). Using ‘we’ as a reference to self resembles a style of conversation, as if the text is directly talking to the audience. This kind of conversationalising policy discourse is regarded by Fairclough (1994) as a type of commodification of public discourse, which is also an indicator of the marketisation of higher education (Fairclough, 1993, 1994). Increased visual content is also another feature. Visual content, as non-verbal messages, in CDA is also considered a part of discourse (Fairclough, 1992). A comparison of the data shows that from 2000 to 2015 the documents become increasingly more concise. Especially the new documents after the reform display a clearer emphasis on the major features of UEF. In addition, these major features can be considered as the selling points of UEF from the perspective of branding and marketing. The style and layout of the new documents, especially Document 2014a, is more than that of just an ordinary policy document. The format is getting closer to a commercial brochure that provides more promotional information and visual content. For instance, the following table compares the same content but in obviously different forms: Henry Yuan Wang 72 Table 5. Visual contents Before reforms After reforms Document 2010 Document 2014a In this table, the left (Document 2010, p. 8) and right (Document 2014a, p. 2) columns show pages that express the same discourse on UEF’s emphasised research areas. Clearly, Document 2014a is more concise, with an artistic design making it easier and attractive to read and highlighting certain important information. Not just the content but also the style has drastically changed compared to the old documents; the following table shows an example of the difference: 79 Struggles for identity References Boje, D. M. 2001. Narrative Methods for Organizational & Communication Research. London: Sage. Boje, D. M. 2008. Storytelling Organizations. Los Angeles: Sage. Brown, A.D. 2006. A narrative approach to collective identities. Journal of Management Studies, 43 (4), 731–753. Ek, A.-C., Ideland, M., Jönsson, S. & Malmberg, C. 2013. Studies in Higher Education, 38 (9), 1305–1318. Enders, J. & De Boer, H. 2009. The mission impossible of the European university: Institutional confusion and institutional diversity. In A. Amaral, G. Neave, C. Musselin & P. Maassen (eds), European Integration and the Governance of Higher Education and Research. Higher Education Dynamics, vol 26. Dordrecht: Springer, 159–178. Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press. Fairclough, N. 1993. Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: The universities. Discourse & Society, 4 (2), 133–168. Fairclough, N. 1994. Conversationalization of public discourse and the authority of the consumer. In R. Keat, N. Whiteley & N. Abercombie, The Authority of the Consumer. London: Routledge, 253–268. Fairclough, N. 2007. Global capitalism and change in higher education: Dialectics of language and practice, technology, ideology. BAAL conference, Edinburgh. Fairclough, N. & Wodak, R. 1997. Critical discourse analysis. In T. A. van Dijk (ed.), Introduction to Discourse Analysis. Newbury Park: Sage. Huber, B. 2016. The role of universities in society. In N.C Liu, Y. Cheng & Q. Wang (eds), Matching Visibility and Performance. Global Perspectives on Higher Education. Rotterdam: SensePublishers, 91–99. Humphreys, M. & Brown, A. D. 2002. Narratives of organizational identity and identification: A case study of hegemony and resistance. Organization Studies, 23 (3), 421–447. Linell, P. 1998. Approaching Dialogue: Talk, Interaction and Contexts in Dialogical Perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Mayr, A. 2015. Institutional discourse. In D. Tannen, H.E. Hamilton & D. Schiffrin (eds), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis (2nd edition). Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, 755–774 . Mumby, D. K. & Clair, R. P. 1997. Organizational discourse. In T. A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as Social Interaction. London: Sage, 181–205. Mumby, D. K. & Mease, J. 2011. Organisational discourse. In T. A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage, 283–302. Henry Yuan Wang 80 van der Walt, J. L. 2007. Formalizing institutional identity: A workable idea? In D. N. Aspin & J. D. Chapman (eds), Values Education and Lifelong Learning. Lifelong Learning Book Series, vol 10. Dordrecht: Springer, 180–198. SECTION 2 JUSTIFICATION OF EDUCATIONAL KNOWLEDGE Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Gabriele Molzberger (eds), Disciplinary Struggles in Education Tampere University Press 2019, 83–115 http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-359-002-1 Disciplinary struggles in and between adult, vocational and general education in the Academy Lessons from Finland Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Sini Teräsahde Abstract The chapter discusses the concept of discipline in relation to struggles over knowledge production and power. It uses as an example the pathways of studies on adult and vocational education between the academy, politics and practice, especially beside the study of general education, which much earlier gained an institutionalised and recognised position in the academy and in educational knowledge production. Applying a genealogical and actor network-theoretical approach, the chapter argues that the disciplinarisation or scientification of educational knowledge is not primarily an issue of conceptual and theoretical progress. Rather it indicates relations and power struggles between actors in the academy, politics, economy and practice. Keywords: Disciplinarisation; adult, vocational and general education; genealogical and actor network-theoretical approach. Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Sini Teräsahde 84 Introduction The dominating interpretation among Finnish adult educators emphasises the formation of adult education as a field of study that followed a logical progress from practice to the conceptualisation of practice to theory and metatheory (Durkheim, 1956; Lehtonen, 1979; Alanen, 1977; Tuomisto, 1985, 2005, forthcoming; Finger, 2001). We argue that the academisation and scientification of neither adult education nor vocational education follow the conventional story. Instead, understanding the process demands a critical sociohistorical analysis, a study of the dynamics between different fields (of educational science) and questioning the antagonistic division between practice, research and politics as well as edification and economic development in education. Based on our studies, we argue that, at least in Finland, the sciences of (general) education, adult education and vocational education had diverse roots before becoming educational sub-disciplines in the faculties of education, established in the 1970s. While the differentiation in general education may be attributed to increasing specialisation and professionalization, the making of the fields of adult and vocational education was due to their close connections to political and economic change. Their disciplinarisation happened quite separately from that of general education. While it is possible to map differences in their underlying theoretical and conceptual frameworks, we argue that the actual solutions have rather been outcomes of intertwined power struggles in politics, economy, academy and practice. Although increasingly taking place in transnational settings, such struggles are still worth noticing when considering the disciplinary status of adult and vocational education in different contexts. Instead of providing a comprehensive overview of the histories of the adult education and vocational education disciplines in Finland,1 we focus on the early years and vital turning points of their disciplinarisation to highlight the entanglement of their transformation with social, political and economic 1 Although we are aware of the controversial notions of ‘science’ and ‘discipline’, in this article we focus on their function as tools in struggles about hegemony in knowledge creation. We are also aware about the many other demarcations in/between adult and vocational education, such as youth education/work, social pedagogy, management and HRD studies, work science etc., but assume that our approach could be widened to them as well. 85 Disciplinary struggles in and between adult, vocational and general education in the Academy programmes. In the next section we briefly discuss the main theoretical and methodological starting points of our approach. The following three sections provide examples of the concrete implementation of those programmes in analysing the disciplinarisation of adult and vocational education. In the final section we introduce preliminary conclusions and discuss the potential of our approach for future research. Figures visualise the actors initiating the disciplinarisation of adult and vocational education and the shifting positions of the disciplines in the changing actor networks.2 A list of abbreviations of the main actors can be found at the end of the chapter. Theoretical and methodological starting points Among the starting points of our research is the assumption that research fields, with their distinctive conceptualisation, emerge as part of political programmes (Latour, 1993; Narotzky, 2007). Therefore, we consider that historicising and contextualising – genealogical, actor-based, relational – analysis is required to make sense of the societal, political and economic functions of adult and vocational education disciplines. Our attempt is motivated by concerns about understanding and influencing the present, where adult and vocational education are confronted by current challenges of the globalisation of the economy, the supranationalisation of politics and ecological, economic and social crises. This, we believe, requires a critical revision of their basic concepts (Pätäri et al., 2016). The crafting of our ‘reflexive historical materialist’ (Narotzky, 2007) approach has been influenced by Michel Foucault’s genealogy and Bruno Latour’s actornetwork theory (ANT), which both consider the emergence and transformation of events as contingent processes. Instead of telling the story from the standpoint of ideas, ‘founding fathers’, progress or regress, we aim to show it as a complex of relations between events and actions. 2 To remind about the struggle between adult, vocational and general education, we use colors for tentative part in the struggle: yellow for general, blue for vocational and green for adult education. Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Sini Teräsahde 86 The genealogical approach implies that disciplinarisation is understood as a struggle over knowledge production among different actors and institutions, embedded in transformation and power relations of society, politics and economy. Instead of debating about the truth of disciplinarisation or the scientific quality of general, adult or vocational education, we ask how certain bodies of knowledge became constituted and started to condition themselves and their targets. Following Foucault, we turn Kant’s question of what in the apparently contingent is actually necessary to the question what in the apparently necessary seems contingent (Foucault, 1971, 1980; Dean, 1994; Gutting, 2013.) The standard narratives tend to take the contemporary professionalised and scientific practice as a starting point and to view the past as a teleological process towards the present, which determines the selection of objects in interpretations. As historians such as Michael Welton (1994, 2010) state about historical studies on adult education, their challenge is the problematisation and theorisation of their objects. In genealogical analysis, we ask what was theorised and conceptualised in the production of scientific knowledge about adult and vocational education, and what was left out. Accordingly, the responsibility of historical research towards the future is to affirm the present as a progressive movement (Dean, 1994, pp. 23–29). Our interest is specially to search for struggles which are marginalised or silenced in the disciplinary narratives even though they may be most vital for the transformation of educational sciences (Foucault, 1980, p. 81). The standard story’s institutional point of view and its segregation of practice from theory can be problematised by broadening its empirical approach and use of primary sources. This can be done by confronting previous research with examples of ignored sites and actors of knowledge production. Bruno Latour’s ANT provides a ‘travel guide’ for our study about disciplinarisation through the relations of actors and the formation of collectives (Latour, 2005; Lehtonen, 2015). ANT traces the history of enrolments of actors into assemblages, their appearances and disappearances, and the spokespersons of assemblages. Instead of debating with prevailing discourses about disciplinarisation, we follow actors in the midst of the tortuous history of disciplinarisation (Latour, 2005, p. 103). Using ANT concepts, we ask whether the disciplinarisation of adult and vocational education has been an attempt to 87 Disciplinary struggles in and between adult, vocational and general education in the Academy turn to a ‘black box’ – hiding what happens inside from outsiders – in order to be recognised as independent units that have autonomy to decide who is eligible to act in their name and what concepts are used to describe their action. In Latour’s flat ontology in which all human and non-human actors follow the same metaphysical principles, black boxes can mean facts that are taken for granted, groups that are established and well-organised or machines (Latour, 1987; Harman, 2009). Accordingly, the constitution of disciplines can be seen as a simultaneous process of fact construction and group formation, where concepts, theories, methodologies and paradigms are negotiated. Through opening black boxes, we can study how facts are constructed and what is taken for granted in disciplinary transformation and how groups of people negotiate over the place of a discipline inside academic faculties and departments. We ask who were negotiating and which actors and facts were enrolled into the discipline. Following Latour, we ask how strong the disciplinary black boxes are, by which kind of people they were accompanied and what kinds of connections they had to other collective actors in other disciplines, in educational practice, in policymaking or in working life. (Latour, 1987; Callon et al., 1981.) As stated by Olli Pyyhtinen and Sakari Tamminen (2011), Foucault’s and Latour’s approaches can be considered complementary since they both emphasise intentionality as distributed over relational field of networks that change and move, associate and differentiate, though Foucault refers to these assemblages as dispositifs and Latour as actor-networks. We also build on their notion about compensating Foucault’s search for assemblages preceding current ones by Latour’s travel guide to study the concrete folding of actors in their present. (Pyyhtinen & Tamminen, pp. 136–143.) Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Sini Teräsahde 88 In the midst of economic and societal movements: The self-conception of emerging adult and vocational education ‘disciplines’ (1920s–1940s) The standard story locates the start of educational science in Finland to 1852, when the first professorship was established in the University of Helsinki, qualifying teachers for gymnasia. Folk school teachers were trained in a separate seminar from 1863, in close collaboration with the School Board (KH) in the ministry of education. Initiatives on including folk edification in educational science were put forth in 1920, but the predecessor of the discipline of adult education, the study of folk edification, started in the Civic College (School of Social Sciences) in 1928 as part of social sciences. A chair followed in 1946, and the faculty of social science was established in 1949. Vocational education, alternatively, was promoted in sector ministries and departments as a component in the promotion of national industries. The following simplified figure (Figure 1) shows how influential actors were positioned soon after Finnish independence (1917) and the Civil War (1918), Figure 1. Engines in the disciplinarisation of adult and vocational education in the 1920s. 95 Disciplinary struggles in and between adult, vocational and general education in the Academy livelihood and social life, combining families, households and communities (Heikkinen 2004; see Koski in this book). Paradoxically, the disciplinarisation of vocational (adult) education proceeded more holistically but was increasingly dominated by the power struggles between the national industries. Studies on the efficiency and control of work3 The scientification4 of vocational education is seemingly separate from the development of general and adult education, being directly embedded in the contemporary economic and political controversies and dominated by the bigexport, especially wood-processing, industry. While the diverse conceptions and practices of vocational education emerged as part of different industrial and occupational fields, there was no joint concept or system for educating vocational educators nor joint theories on vocational education. The conceptions and practices transformed through networks and personal alliances between industrial actors, educational institutions and state administration. Initiatives to start academic studies on vocational education, not to mention as part of general education, were not relevant before the 1940s. (Heikkinen, 2004, 2012; Heikkinen et al., 1999.) However, it can be claimed that the disciplinarisation of vocational education was after all linked to general and adult education. On one hand, the concept of rural edification, which included occupation and industry, was marginalised by the social-liberalist workers’ edification, which became hegemonic in the study of folk edification (Heikkinen, 2011, 2017). This implied a rejection of issues related to industrial relations, which posed a political threat in the aftermath of the Civil War: in the eyes of the winners, both the urban proletariat and the newly established small farmers remained unreliable (Kettunen, 2013). During the 1910s–20s, Jalmari Kekkonen, the inspector of vocational education in the Board of Industry, and Hannes Gebhard, professor of agriculture, national economy and 3 In order to reduce the reference list, most of the sources accessible in previous researches, have been left out. 4 In the context of vocational education, disciplinarization can also be described as scientification, since compared to folk edification/adult education, it didn’t have explicit space in the academy, and even afterwards, never gained similar disciplinary independence. Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Sini Teräsahde 96 statistics and the Fennoman leader of the cooperative Pellervo-society, put forth initiatives about integrating vocational education and cooperative folk edification. Both hoped to edify the collective spirit of the craft and rural industries, but their agendas remained marginal in the disciplinarisation of both adult and vocational education5 (Heikkinen, 2014a). On the other hand, general education provided space for the emergence of applied psychology (sielutiede – ‘soul science’), which turned out to be vital in the scientification of vocational education.6 The export industry held a hegemonic position both in the building of national industries and in protecting the economic independence of the country. With representatives of strategic public sectors – such as the railways and the military – their leaders keenly followed the rationalisation strategies and methods of management and performance in advanced industrial countries. Their interests matched with the ambitions of researchers, who were eagerly looking for opportunities to promote applied psychology in the academy, society and industry. The principles of scientific management and psychotechnique were adopted to the recruitment and development of staff, to the education of supervisors and managers and to technical education. (Heikkinen, 2012, 2013.) Jalmari Kekkonen put forth the first initiative to establish an institute for continuing vocational education, which would promote occupation-based knowledge creation and the education of supervisors and vocational teachers. Although it wasn’t put into practice, an Institute for the Advancement of Occupations (AEL) was started in 1922, sponsored by the Board of Industry, the Employers Union and the Union for Rural Industries. Another proponent of disciplinarisation was Bernhard Wuolle, the director of the State Railways, a teacher and principal of the Technical University and an active municipal policymaker. While he failed to start a scientific institute for work research in the University, he founded a psychotechnical laboratory at the State Railways in 1922, staffed by junior researchers of experimental psychology from the Universities of Turku, Helsinki and Åbo Akademi. It served as an example for the laboratories of 5 Nevertheless, by developing studies for advisors and teachers in university, Gebhard was quite influential for education in rural industries and cooperative movement. 6 In fact, academic psychology was established because of its usefulness for occupational guidance and job placements. (Eteläpelto 1979.) 97 Disciplinary struggles in and between adult, vocational and general education in the Academy the Finnish army, the Aviation Institute and the State Institute for Occupational Health as well as for recruitment to vocational Factory Schools7. (Michelsen, 2000; Kirjonen, 2008.) Together with the AEL, they supported productivity through rationalisation, scientific management and work efficiency, which set the pace for the scientification of vocational education in the future. The alternative by educationalist Väinö Niininen, who worked in the psychotechnical laboratory and taught in the AEL and at employers’ and trade unions’ management courses, remained marginal. Beside psychology, he emphasised educational aspects in vocational and staff training and suggested that occupation should be part of a humane, sensitive and fair economic, political and ethical life. (Heikkinen, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015.) It was decisive for the disciplinarisation of Finnish vocational education that teacher and supervisor education was initiated jointly by state departments and industries instead of occupational organisations and trade unions, which for political reasons did not even have negotiation rights before the Winter War in 1940. The AEL, the University of Technology and technical institutes educated most teachers and supervisors for the technical sector, which was starting to dominate the development of vocational education (Heikkinen, 2004, 2012). Meanwhile, the discipline of general education became increasingly independent from philosophy and psychology. It expanded to the University of Turku and to the Pedagogical University of Jyväskylä, which was an upgraded folk school teacher seminar and a forerunner in didactic and special needs research. In search of disciplinary homes (1950s–1960s) After the Second World War, where Finland with its ally Germany were defeated, industry, industrial relations and national planning were reorganising. Socialist parties and associations were accepted, trade unions were recognised as labour market partners and the Agreement of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance between Finland and the Soviet Union was established. The settlement 7 Established by big export industry, but subsidised by and following the guidelines of the Ministry of Trade and Industry. Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Sini Teräsahde 98 of refugees from Karelia, war payments and reconstruction dominated economy and politics. The growing demand for subject teachers for gymnasia (academic secondary) and the increase of empirical educational research, which proved useful in the emerging national planning, encouraged the expansion of general education and teacher training to all parts of the country. Although teacher seminars remained separate, calls for comprehensive school reform and the academisation of folk school teacher training became louder (Pennanen, 1997; Ahonen, 2011). The disciplinarisation of adult and vocational education started to take new routes. The School of Social Sciences was establishing itself as an academic university and transformed into the University of Tampere, supplying civil servants and professionals especially to public sector and civil society organisations. The Department of Vocational Education (AKO) in the ministry of trade and industry took a leading role in the integration of national industries through the integration of different sectors of vocational education. Figure 2. Transition period from post-WWII to welfare state reforms 1950s–60s. 99 Disciplinary struggles in and between adult, vocational and general education in the Academy Although the disciplinarisation of adult, vocational and general education continued in distinctive actor networks, these became increasingly institutionalised, as indicated in the following Figure 2. According to the standard story, the third stage of the disciplinarisation of adult education – the theorisation of educational practice – took place by the end of the 1960s. It is also argued that the expansion of vocational adult education effected to the concept change from the study of folk edification to adult education science (aikuiskasvatustiede) in 1966. However, during the 1950s and 1960s, the academic interest in and research on practice was marginal, although the study of folk edification was still considered to belong to the social sciences. The change was steered by the theoretical orientation of Urpo Harva, the first professor of the study of folk edification (since 1946). He held a central position in the heart of folk edification, including the KVS, central organs of workers’ institutes, folk high schools, study centres, inspectors in the School Board (KH) and the Society for the Study of Folk Edification (est. 1940). However, with a background and interest in philosophy and pedagogy, influenced by the Anglo-Saxon concept of liberal education, he remained distant to their tradition. Alternatively, workers’ edification expanded and gained an official status after World War II, especially through social democrat trade-unions and municipal Workers’ and People’s institutes, whose leaders – such as Wuorenrinne – were defending the distinctiveness of folk edification. As they anticipated, conceptual change would also lead to changes in policy and practice and threaten its independence and status. Although the concurrent scientification of the study of general education presumably encouraged Harva to move from concepts of folk and edification to adults and education, no connections were built with education science, which was established in the 1960s in the Faculty of Humanities of the University of Tampere (Aaltonen et al., 1991; Rasila, 1973). When looking at the developments in vocational education, it cannot be claimed that there were interests to extend to, and by no means to occupy, the study of folk edification. The rare offerings from Aarno Niini (director of the AKO – Department of Vocational Education) and Oiva Kyöstiö (first doctoral thesis on the history of vocational education) about ‘occupational edification’ as parallel to ‘general edification’ were silenced. On the contrary, inspectors in Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Sini Teräsahde 100 the AKO began to develop a model institute for fostering vocational teacher education and research. (Heikkinen, 2012.) Together with the leaders of big industry and the AEL, it established the Institute of Vocational Teacher Training in Hämeenlinna (AHO) in 1958. The institute focused on the technical sectors, which were most strategic in improving work efficiency in the big export industry, while the rest of the vocational teacher training units remained annexed to other industrial branches. Teachers were inspectors and trainers from the Institute for the Advancement of Occupations (AEL), from factory schools and from the psychotechnical laboratory of Finnish Railways but also a few professors of education gave lecturers in pedagogy and didactics. (Heikkinen, 2012, 2013.) The establishment of the AHO compensated for the frustration of Aarno Niini because the AKO had not achieved the status of a leading agency in controlling the national workforce, despite its central role during World War II and the reconstruction period. In the AHO, conceptions of vocational education were based on psychotechnique and experimental psychology, with elements from humanistic education and management training in the armed forces. Besides the AKO, AEL and AHO, the Institute for Leadership (est. 1946) was part of the collaborating network, which directed the disciplinarisation of vocational education, especially through its first director, previous army officer Antero Rautavaara. In his influential presentations and publications, he propagated vocational education as the liberator of the will to work among the human machinery – workers, employees – of production by developing their positive dispositions and by integrating their interests and values into the work community. It cannot be claimed that the proponents of vocational education were developing concepts or theories based on vocational education practice. Rather they created recipes for activity, which would merge the roles of industrial supervisor and vocational teacher and support effective and encouraging management of the company. (Heikkinen, 2012.) During the 1950s–60s, there was a shift towards adaptation to the export industry-dominated Finland in both adult and vocational education. Adult education in the academy was promoting the self-understanding of the social democrat workers’ movement in representing the principles of democracy and the wellbeing of the populace. This implied, however, accepting the position of 101 Disciplinary struggles in and between adult, vocational and general education in the Academy ‘labour market partner’, where the other partner, the employers in the big export industry, allied with their collaborators in administration. They authorised the main providers of vocational education, also for adults. Into the lap of educational science (1970s–) During the 1960s–1970s, the projects of Agrarian and Small Farmers’ Finland collapsed. Despite efforts in regional politics and sub-contracted small enterprises, backed by bilateral trade agreements with the Soviet Union, the collapse of small farming was followed by a massive migration to Sweden and south-western sub-urbanising areas in Finland. The political victory of the Social Democrats, combined with the breakthrough of the radical youth, student and cultural movements, paved the way for the Finnish version of a ‘Nordic welfare state’, providing equality of access and opportunity to health and social care and education, implemented quickly during the turn of the 1970s (Heikkinen et al., 2011). In 1974, the faculties of education were established in seven universities, when primary school teacher training was academised. The departments of teacher training and general education represented the majority in the new faculties of education. Despite resistance, the Department of Adult Education at the University of Tampere (UTA) was moved from the Faculty of Social Sciences to the Faculty of Education. The positions of the key actors in the struggle over positions of adult, vocational and general education at UTA are shown in Figure 3. Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Sini Teräsahde 102 According to the standard story, researchers started to study the scientific nature and theories of adult education in its mature, metascientific stage of the 1970s. One of the main spokespersons was Aulis Alanen, lecturer and professor of the only Finnish Department of Adult Education at the University of Tampere (1973–1991). Alanen had a background in workers’ movements and trade unions and committed his career to promoting workers’ associational and institutional (trade-union folk high schools) edification. He started to construct the grand narrative of adult education/folk edification, building on the definitions and interpretations of Castrén and Wuorenrinne. While accepting the inclusion of adult education in educational sciences, he strictly demarcated it from schoolish and externally directed education. (Alanen, 1977; Tuomisto, 2014.) However, in practice, he and other staff in the department were deeply involved in policymaking. Alanen was a friend and collaborator of key figures in workers’ movements, such as Veli Lehtonen (director of educational affairs in the central organ of Finnish trade unions, SAK), and in adult education administration (KH), such as Kosti Huuhka (the author of the first doctoral thesis on adult education, Figure 3. Struggle over adult and vocational education in the 1970s–80s. 103 Disciplinary struggles in and between adult, vocational and general education in the Academy 1955) (Tuomisto, 2014). In the committee for adult education/training, together they were spokespersons of future reforms, setting the criteria for what could and should be defined as adult education and be entitled to state support.8 Although Alanen and his colleagues also participated widely in established forums of folk edification – the KVS, the Society for Research in Adult Education (ATS, until 1971 the Society for Study of Folk Edification), etc. – theoretical and empirical research in adult education remained narrow and advocative, though this was understandable because of scarce resources. The metascientific phase was actually characterised by the battle over the identity of adult education as a science, where ‘international’ explanatory models were popular, both among the defenders of the tradition and the critical opponents from the Marxist student movement (Kalli, 1979; Lehtonen, 1979). In the technocratic education politics, adult education was considered as a part of the education system, and vocational education could no longer be ignored. Especially the University of Tampere and the Centre for Development of State Administration (Valtionhallinnon kehittämiskeskus, VHKK) were following the trends in Nordic and Central-European research on work and occupations, the democratisation of work and the imperatives from internationalisation and computerisation regarding the competences, social organisation and management of workers and work processes. Many studies and initiatives were put forth to establish research on work-related adult education (Tuomisto, 1982, 1986). The establishment of sectoral research institutes in ministries liquidated plans about developing a multidisciplinary research-centre on work-life, where adult education and comparative research could play a crucial role. At the same time cognitive psychology became fashionable in the education of social and health care professionals. Instead of adult education, however, the psychology-led initiatives were first channelled to the social sciences (Work-life Research in Tampere) and to work-psychology (University of Technology in Helsinki, the VHKK and the State Institute for Occupational Health) (Heikkinen, 2012). 8 Other key figures of the committee came from the Finnish Employers’ Union (STK), thus the committee was one arena for settling the ‘division of labour’ between social democrat-led adult education and conservative vocational education/adult training, discussed a bit later in this section. Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Sini Teräsahde 104 The principal of the AHO, Seppo Oinonen, set the goal to establish a research centre there for vocational education during the 1960s. Also, a committee led by professor Väinö Heikkinen (UTA), who was collaborating in staff training with the United Paper Mills (UPM), suggested in 1971 that vocational teacher education should be moved into university, following the plans about the academisation of primary school teacher education. During the 1970s vocational orientation started in general and adult education at UTA: the initiators had a common background in conducting attitude surveys with teacher trainees, in teaching and staff training in the factory schools of big industry and in the Foundation for Free Education.9 In the era of left radicalism in universities, both the leaders of the big industry and the National Board of Vocational Education (AKH) were sceptical towards the new faculties of education. Adult education and work research were also rejected, while their collaborators in state administration might have interpreted vocational education as welfare-service and a tool for democratising work-life.10 (Heikkinen 2012; 2007.) One may question why the first professorship in vocational education started in the Department of Primary School Teacher Training (HOKL) at UTA in Hämeenlinna in the 1980s instead of in the departments of adult education or (general) education. The Institute of Vocational Teacher Training in Hämeenlinna (AHO) and the UPM made up the knot where the threads were pulled together – the STK and its co-operators in AKH in the departments of adult education and (general) education at UTA. The crucial spokesperson was Matti Peltonen, the professor of adult education during 1978–84, who worked in the vocational and staff training of UPM and in AHO as well as in AKH and in STK, where he moved in 1982 as the chair of its Council for Educational Affairs. Both Peltonen and the future professor of vocational education Pekka Ruohotie had completed their doctorates in the Department of (general) Education under 9 The Foundation for Free Education acted during 1973–1991, resisting leftist education policy, for example by intervening in recruitment of staffs in faculties of education, especially in teacher education. (E.g. Suutarinen 2008.) 10 In University of Jyväskylä an assistant professorship in vocational didactics was established in 1975 in Department of Teacher Education, with expectation to collaborate with the Institute for Vocational Teacher Training in Jyväskylä (AJO) and the national Institute for Educational Research. 111 Disciplinary struggles in and between adult, vocational and general education in the Academy References Aaltonen, R. & Tuomisto, J. (eds) 1991. Valistus, sivistys, kasvatus: kansanvalistuksesta aikuiskasvatukseen. Tampere & Helsinki: ATS & KVS. Aaltonen, R. 1981. Lähtökohtia aikuiskasvatuksen historiantutkimukselle. In J. Taskinen & J. Tuomisto (eds), Aikuiskasvatus 80-luvulla. Tutkimusja kehittämistyön lähtökohtia. Tampereen yliopisto: Aikuisja nuorisokasvatuksen julkaisuja 16, 73–88. Ahonen, S. 2011. Millä opeilla opettajia koulutettiin? In A. Heikkinen & P. LeinoKaukiainen (eds), Valistus ja koulun penkki. Helsinki: SKS, 239–252. Alanen, A. 1977. Aikuiskasvatus tieteenä. Kasvatus, 8 (3), 168–172. Aukimaa, H. 1945. Yhteiskunnallisten aineiden opetus kansanopistoissa. Master’s thesis, School for Social Sciences, Helsinki. Biesta, G. 2007. Towards the knowledge democracy? Knowledge production and the civic role of the university. Studies in Philosophy of Education, 26 (5), 467–479. Braudel, F. 2002 (1981). The Structures of Everyday Life. Civilization and Capitalism, 15th–18th Century, Vol. 1, The Limits of the Possible. London: Phoenix Press. Callon, M. & Latour, B. 1981. Unscrewing the big Leviathan: How actors macrostructure reality and how sociologists help them to do so. In K. Knorr-Cetina & A. V. Cicourel (eds), Advances in Social Theory and Methodology. Towards an Integration of Microand Macro-Sociologies. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 277–304. Castrén, Z. 1924. Yliopisto ja vapaa kansansivistystyö. Kansanvalistus ja kirjastolehti, no 5, 217–228. Castrén, Z. 1929. Valtio ja vapaa kansanvalistustyö. Valtioneuvostolle jätetty mietintö. Kansanvalistus ja kirjastolehti, no 5–6, 121–165. Dean, M. 1994. Critical and Effective Histories. Foucault’s Methods and Historical Sociology. London: Routledge. Durkheim, E. 1956. Education and Sociology. Transl. S.D. Fox. Glencoe: Free Press. Eteläpelto, A. 1979. Työelämään sovelletun psykologian alkuvaiheet Suomessa. Psykologia, 3 (2), 4–14. Fenwick, T. & Edwards, R. 2014. Networks of knowledge, matters of learning, and criticality in higher education. Journal of Higher Education January, 35–30. Finger, M. & Asun, J. M. 2001. Adult Education at the Cross-roads: Learning Our Way Out. London & New York: Zed Books. Foucault, M. 1980. Power/Knowledge. Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972–77. Ed. C. Gordon. Brighton: Harvester. Foucault, M. 1998 (1971). Nietzsche, genealogia, historia. Transl. J. Vähämäki. In Foucault/Nietzsche. Helsinki: Tutkijaliitto, 63–107. Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Sini Teräsahde 112 Gutting, G. 2013. Michel Foucault. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. In E. N. Zalta (ed.), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/foucault/. Harman, G. 2009. Prince of Networks: Bruno Latour and Metaphysics. Melbourne: re.press. Heikkinen, A. 2004. Models, paradigms or cultures of vocational education. Journal of Vocational Training 2, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ734144.pdf. Heikkinen, A. 2007. Manufacturing the ‘European’ in education and training. In M. Kuhn & R. Sultana (eds), Homo Sapiens Europaeus. NY: Peter Lang. Heikkinen, A. 2011. Elatus, oppi ja kumppanuus. In A. Heikkinen & P. Leino-Kaukiainen (eds), Valistus ja koulunpenkki. Kasvatus ja koulutus Suomessa 1860-luvulta 1960-luvulle. Suomen kasvatuksen ja koulutuksen historia II. Helsinki: SKS, 37–73. Heikkinen, A. 2012. Manufacturing a discipline – the case of vocational education in Finland. In J. Kivirauma, A. Jauhiainen, P. Seppänen & T. Kaunisto (eds), Koulutuksen yhteiskunnallinen ymmärrys. Jyväskylä: FERA, 329–350. Heikkinen, A. 2013. Psychotechnique – The power in disguise. Presentation in ISCHEconference, Riga 23.–25.8.2013. Heikkinen, A. 2014a. Ammattikasvatuksen veliverkostot valistuksen ja vaurastumisen tiellä. In K. Kantasalmi & M. Nest (eds), Valistajia, sivistäjiä, poliitikkoja ja asiantuntijoita: näkökulmia aikuiskasvatuksen kentän vaikuttajiin. Tampere: University Press, 208–232. Heikkinen, A. 2014b. Aktivismista realismiin – ihmisja yhteiskuntakeskeisen aikuiskasvatuksen/aikuiskasvatustieteen kritiikki. Aikuiskasvatus, 34 (3), 215–223. Heikkinen, A. 2015. Vocational education: for livelihood, knowledge or companionship? In E. Berner & P. Gonon (eds), History of Vocational Education and Training in Europe. Bern: Peter Lang. Heikkinen, A. 2017. Land and people of our own. Rivalries in Finnish adult education, 1870–1960. Spurensuche, 25/26, 196–208. Heikkinen, A., Korkiakangas, M., Kuusisto, L., Nuotio, P. & Tiilikkala, L. 1999. Elinkeinon edistämisestä koulutuspalvelujen laaduntarkkailuun. Tampere: Tampereen yliopisto. Heikkinen, A., Pätäri, J. & Teräsahde, S. 2015. Sivistys tutkimuksen ja käytännön missiona. In J. Pätäri, A. Turunen & A. Sivenius (eds), Vapaa, vallaton & vangittu sivistystyö: Sivistystyön Vapaus ja Vastuu -pamfletti. Helsinki: VST, 75–83. Heikkinen, A. & Teräsahde, S. 2011. Aikuiskasvatus on tutkimisen ja asiantuntemuksen arvoinen. AITURI-hankkeen loppuraportti. Tampere University Press, http:// urn.fi/urn:isbn:978-951-44-8528-2. Hosia, H. 1933. Kansanopiston historianopetuksesta. Master’s thesis, School for Social Sciences, Helsinki. 113 Disciplinary struggles in and between adult, vocational and general education in the Academy Jarvis, P. 2010. Adult Education and Lifelong Learning: Theory and Practice (4th ed.). London: Routledge. Kalli, P. 1979. Aikuiskasvatus tieteenalana – tietoteoreettista tarkastelua. In H. Lehto nen & P. Kämäräinen (eds), Aikuiskasvatus erityistieteenä – Johdatusta tiede analyysin prob leemoihin. Tampereen yliopisto, Yhteiskuntatieteiden tutkimuslaitos. Katsauk sia ja keskustelua No. E8/1979, 35–51. Kalli, P. & Kämäräinen, P. 1979. Lähtökohtia aikuiskasvatuksen tiedeluonteen arvioinnille. In H. Lehtonen & P. Kämäräinen (eds), Aikuiskasvatus erityis tie teenä – Johdatusta tiedeanalyysin probleemoihin. Tampereen yliopisto, Yhteis kunta tietei den tutkimuslaitos. Katsauksia ja keskustelua No. E8/1979, 52–70. Kantasalmi, K. & Hake, B. J. 1997. Popular adult education in Finland 1890–1939: a critical reinterpretation of the ‘people’s enlightenment project’. History of Education, 26 (4), 353–374. Kemmis, S. & Wilkinson M. 1998. Participatory action research and the study of practice. In B. Atweh, S. Kemmis & P. Weeks (eds), Action Research in Practice: Partnerships for Social Justice in Education. London: Routledge. Kettunen, P. 2013. Vocational education and the tension of modernity in a Nordic periphery. In M. Buckhardt, P. Markkola & H. Valtonen (eds), Education, State and Citizenship. Helsinki: Nordic Centre of Excellence, 206–228. Kirjonen, J. 2008. Työelämän tutkimus – tulenarkaa yliopistoissa. Työelämän tutkimus, 1/2008. Koulutuksen tutkimuslaitos, Jyväskylän yliopisto. Latour, B. 1987. Science in Action. How to Follow Scientist and Engineers through Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Latour, B. 1993. We Have Never Been Modern. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lehtonen, H. 1979. Aikuiskasvatuksen tiedeluonteesta – taustakonstruktioiden tar kastelua. In H. Lehtonen & P. Kämäräinen (eds), Aikuiskasvatus erityis tie tee nä – Johdatusta tiedeanalyysin probleemoihin. Tampereen yliopisto, Yhteis kunta tietei den tutkimuslaitos. Katsauksia ja keskustelua No. E8/1979, 8–34. Malkki, V. 1941. Kirjeellinen opetus Suomessa. Master’s thesis, School for Social Sciences, Helsinki. Michelsen, K.-E. 2000. Teknilliset tieteet. In P. Tommila (ed.), Suomen tieteen historia, osa 3. Helsinki: WSOY. Männikkö, I. 2001. Making the people fit for democracy – Kansanvalistusseura and popular adult education in Finland after the general strike of 1905. In S. Ahonen & J. Rantala (eds), Nordic Lights. Education for Nation and Civic Society in the Nordic Countries, 1850–2000. Studia Fennica. Historica 1. Helsinki: SKS, 51–79. Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Sini Teräsahde 114 Narotzky, S. 2007. The project in the model: Reciprocity, social capital, and the politics of ethnographic realism. Current Anthropology, 48 (3), 403–424. Okkeri, A. 1941. Aikuiskasvatus ja kansanvalta. Master’s thesis, School for Social Sciences, Helsinki. Pennanen, M. 1997. Kasvatustiede yliopistollisena oppiaineena suomessa vuosina 1852– 1995. Master’s thesis, University of Turku. Pyyhtinen, O. & Tamminen, S. 2011. We have never been only human: Foucault and Latour on the question of the anthropos. Anthropological Theory, 11 (2), 135–152. Pätäri, J. (forthcoming). Kansa, sivistys ja kansansivistysopin tiedontahto. Doctoral dissertation, Tampere University. Pätäri, J., Heikkinen, A. & Teräsahde, S. 2016. The responsibility of Nordic adult education research and the planetary condition. In A. Harju & A. Heikkinen (eds), Adult Education and the Planetary Condition. Helsinki: VST & SVV, https://issuu.com/svv-ohjelma/docs/adult_educ_planetary_cond_2016. Rasila, V. 1973. Yhteiskunnallinen korkeakoulu 1925–1966. Porvoo: WSOY. Suoranta, J., Kauppila, J. & Salo, P. 2012. Aikuiskasvatuksen tieteellistyminen. In J. Suoranta, J. Kauppila, H. Rekola, P. Salo & M. Vanhalakka-Ruoho (eds), Aikuiskasvatuksen risteysasemalla. Johdatus aikuiskasvatukseen. Itä-Suomen yliopiston Koulutusja kehittämispalvelu Aducate. (2. korjattu ja uudistettu painos.) Suutarinen, S. 2008. Vapaan koulutuksen tukisäätiö – koulukasvatuksen, opettajankoulu tuksen ja tutkimuksen näkymätön vaikuttaja 1973–1991. Kasvatus & Aika, 2, http://www.kasvatus-ja-aika.fi/site/?lan=1&page_id=114. Tuomisto, J. 1985. Aikuiskasvatuksen kehittymisestä käytäntönä, oppiaineena ja tieteenä. In E. Manni & J. Tuomisto (eds), Humanistin teemojen tuntumassa. Urpo Harvan juhlakirja hänen täyttäessään 75 vuotta. Acta Universitatis Tamperensis Ser. A, vol. 196. Tampere: ATS & Tampereen yliopiston aikuisja nuorisokasvatuksen laitos, 170–197. Tuomisto, J. 1991. Aikuiskasvatuksen peruskäsitteen historiallinen kehitys. In R. Aaltonen et al. (eds), Valistus, sivistys, kasvatus: kansanvalistuksesta aikuiskasvatukseen. Vapaan sivistystyön 32. vuosikirja. Tampere & Helsinki: ATS & KVS. Tuomisto, J. 2005. Searching for a new paradigm of adult education. In A. Heikkinen (ed.), Aikuiskasvatuksen tutkimuspolut. Tampere & Helsinki: ATS & KVS, 35–44. Tuomisto, J. 2014. Suunnittelukeskeisen aikuiskoulutuspolitiikan arkkitehdit: Aulis Alanen ja Veli Lehtinen. In K. Kantasalmi & M. Nest (eds), Valistajia, sivistäjiä, vaikuttajia ja poliitikkoja. näkökulmia aikuiskasvatuksen kentän vaikuttajiin. Suomalaisen aikuiskasvatuksen kentät ja kerrostumat. Tampere: Tampere University Press, 305–340. 115 Disciplinary struggles in and between adult, vocational and general education in the Academy Tuomisto, J. (forthcoming). Kansansivistysopista aikuiskasvatustieteeseen: oppiaineen ja tieteenalan synty ja vakiintuminen Suomessa. In A. Heikkinen & J. Tuomisto (eds), Aikuiskasvatuksen muuttuvat paradigmat. Suomalaisen aikuiskasvatuksen kentät ja kerrostumat. Tampere University Press. Virtanen, E. 1938. A.A. Granfeltin vaikutus kansankirjastoihimme. Master’s thesis, School for Social Sciences, Helsinki. Welton, M. R. 1994. What’s new in the history of adult education? Historical Studies in Education / Revue d’histoire de l’éducation, 3 (2) (1991), 285–297. Welton, M. R. 2010. Histories of adult education. Constructing the past. In C.E. Kasworm, A.D. Rose & J.M. Ross-Gordon (eds), Handbook of Adult and Continuing Education. 2010 Edition. California: Sage, 83–91. Wuorenrinne, T.I. 1942. Kansansivistystyön olemus. In Vapaa kansansivistystyö. Kansansivistysopillisen yhdistyksen vuosikirja. Helsinki: Kansansivistysopillinen yhdistys, 18–34. Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Gabriele Molzberger (eds), Disciplinary Struggles in Education Tampere University Press 2019, 117–133 http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-359-002-1 (Re)thinking the disciplinary relationship between the researcher and object of study in educational practices in the Brazilian context Lais Oliveira Leite Abstract This work investigates the disciplinary relationship between the researcher and object of study in educational practices in the Brazilian context. I apply Foucauldian analysis, intersectional paradigm, and politics of citation to understand historical and personal events in Brazil, as well as their epistemological background: the Brazilian positivism. I discuss how Brazilian positivism has been impacting political decisions and educational practices in Brazil, disciplining the type of relationship researchers have with their object of study. I finish this paper arguing that such positivistic relationship is not possible anymore due to political and educational transformations in our society. Keywords: Brazilian positivism, Foulcauldian analysis, intersectional paradigm, politics of citation. Lais Oliveira Leite 118 Introduction In this chapter, I explore the disciplinary relationship between the researcher and object of study in educational practices in the Brazilian context. I situate research and similar activities as educational practices, considering its inherent educational process for the researcher and its educational outcomes related to sharing results and progressing science. I begin my discussion with a brief description of events that marked my academic life in Brazil, which culminated in a ‘last straw’ that initiated a series of reflections and research. Then, I present the analytical tools of this investigation: Foucault’s analysis, the intersectional paradigm and the politics of citation. I will apply them to understand historical and personal events in Brazil as well as their epistemological background – Brazilian positivism. I continue the discussion presenting how this perspective has been impacting political decisions and educational practices in Brazil, disciplining the type of relationship researchers have with their object of study. I finish this paper arguing that such positivistic relationship is no longer possible due to political and educational transformations in our society. The reflection process that the philosophy of education brings for educational sciences is important because it opens questions about hidden premises of research and examines the values affecting academic practices (Ruitenberg, 2010; Tillapaugh & Nicolazzo, 2014). It claims from the educator-researcher to contemplate one’s own process of reflexivity while inquiring and raising hypotheses. It requests investigations not only about social and historical backgrounds but also personal psychological, cognitive and emotional mechanisms that affect research. Vokey (2009) contributes to this discussion stating that there is no context-free epistemological perspective, ‘Rather, we engage in philosophical inquiry equipped (and sometimes saddled) with assumptions and interests shaped by particulars of our personal biographies, social locations, political contexts, and more’ (p. 340). Based on these considerations, I developed this chapter inspired by the ‘mesearch’ approach influenced by the scholar personal narrative (Jones, 2015). This approach gives voice to the author’s experiences to test hypotheses and accomplish personal inquiry. Moreover, I integrated my-self, my academic background and the social milieu where I come from – North-eastern Brazil – one of the poorest and ‘blackest’ regions of the country (IBGE, 2007) – in the process of this (Re)thinking the disciplinary relationship between the researcher and object of study in educational practices in the Brazilian context 119 investigation. My final goal was to express the relationships between my writing process, the personal dimensions of this investigation and its outcomes (Coffey, 2001). The ‘last straw’ In 2016 the master’s thesis defence of a colleague constituted for me the ‘last straw’ from a series of events during my academic life in Brazil. Her thesis was highly praised by her supervisor and opponents, but still there was a criticism about her involvement, as a researcher, with her field of research – what the specialists pointed to as a bias mistake. Her research approached how the human values of an educational programme in poor rural communities from North-eastern Brazil influenced the students’ human values who engaged in this educational programme (Barbosa, 2016). This kind of criticism that caught my attention can be referred to as what theorists recognise as positivism’s ideal of what science should be: neutral, naturalist and empiricist. According to Trigg (2001), this philosophical approach accused personal emotions and values of making the researcher blind in the face of reality, damaging the rational scientific method. Following the author, positivism’s influences on human sciences determined how researchers should deal with the object of study: they should investigate only facts and not involve emotions in the inquiry process because the latter are not logically deduced and were considered a threat that could hurt the legitimacy of human sciences. What was so intriguing to me was the fact that the professors who brought up this kind of accusation against the involvement of the researcher with her object of study are well-known in that Brazilian University for being critical of positivism. By ‘well-known’ I mean that in lectures, meetings and publications, the teachers commonly accused positivism of an obsolete comprehension of science. These kinds of statements fit how Lacerda (2017) described the common reaction of Brazilian academic circles against positivism, marked by a strong negative criticism but without any further contextualised reflections and discussions. However, positioning myself as a researcher, I investigated what was behind the contradiction between discourse-practices: on one side, positivism is considered Lais Oliveira Leite 120 outdated and detrimental to human sciences; on the other side, a master’s candidate’s research is criticised from the powerful position of its evaluators because the researcher was emotionally involved with the field of study. I needed to delve into the history of such a powerful argument, that is, the researcher cannot be involved with its object of study. For that purpose, I equipped myself first (hopefully I didn’t get too saddled) with my inquiry tools: Foucault’s analysis, the intersectional paradigm and the politics of citation. Analysing human sciences as a social phenomenon to understand the power struggles that constitute them According to Trigg (2001), ‘instead of trying to find out timeless, abstract principles, we look at the strategies that are actually adopted in different times and places’ (p. 25). This practical principle of some trends in the philosophy of science developed many ways of studying the conditions, the devices and tools and the values and motives of scientists throughout centuries. Foucault is one philosopher who studied science as a social phenomenon, precisely, as a discursive and powerful practice. His studies about the Archaeology of Knowledge and Genealogy of Power helped me to understand my inquiry – without the pretension of exhausting it. The methodology of Archaeology of Knowledge (Foucault, 2007a) tries to understand the conditions of possibility, i.e. the historical, political and social breaks of a social phenomenon, which in turn allow the production of different types of knowledge, discursive practices and effective power relationships. At the same time, the archaeological analysis proposes to find the regularity of speech, here understood as the necessary conditions for the appearance of a type of discourse-practice and, consequently, the exclusion of others. Complementarily, the Genealogy of Power (Foucault, 1979, 2007b) presents a study in which individuals are not full owners of their own subjectivity. Foucault highlights that institutions, such as prisons, industries and schools, are constituted by power divisions and unbalances ‘immanent’ to capillary social relationships. Being part of social institutions and occupying a social position means that individuals exercise power by a set of devices that sometimes are beyond the (Re)thinking the disciplinary relationship between the researcher and object of study in educational practices in the Brazilian context 127 economic problems without the interference of personal and external influences (Bhering & Maio, 2010). Such impact can also still be seen in different educational practices in Brazil nowadays. For instance, according to Pastana (2007), law teaching in many faculties follows a positivistic model of ‘legal doctrines’ that carries the perspective of law as a field of rational and infallible practices. Sometimes they are thought of as if they had no internal contradictions, ignoring historical comprehensions of the conditions of possibilities of how these theories developed. Such doctrines permeate law students, who start to believe that by strictly applying legal laws, without any critical inquiry, one can achieve social justice (Pastana, 2007). Related to this field, I cannot avoid raising a rhetorical problematisation: what social actors have the conditions of applying such legal norms, and upon whom do these norms fall in Brazil? Bringing the discussion to higher education, Brazilian universities have strong European roots. It was only when the royal Portuguese family came to the colony at the beginning of the 19th century that we had our first higher education schools (Fávero, 2006). However, the character of the university was only structured in the middle of the 20th century – and still the access to them was restricted to the minority elite, mainly constituted by men, white and of European descent (Martins, 2002). Similar profile was already pointed out in the positivist elite of intellectuals described previously. In contrast, subjects who belonged to axial categories such as women, enslaved black people and their descendants, indigenous groups, poor people, etc. had for the most part of Brazilian history strict (if not null) conditions to contribute with the discourses and practices of higher education institutions (for more details about the participation of minorities in Brazilian university life, see Leta, 2003; Tragtenberg et al., 2006; Santos & Queiroz, 2007; Bayma, 2012; Terra & David, 2016). This happened due to a lack of government policies towards them, such as affirmative actions. Hence, these axial categories were mostly considered the ‘study object’ rather than the ‘study agent’ in general scientific and educational practices in academia – which does not mean they did not have their own (marginalised) production of knowledge-power. Finally, after decades of debates, the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court decided on the constitutionality of quotas to university on April 26, 2012. Law 12.711 / Lais Oliveira Leite 128 2012 determined the provision of 50% of the places of federal higher education institutions for students coming from public education and with low family income. Also, it assigned the vacancies to the candidates self-denominated as blacks and brown and indigenous peoples (Bayma, 2012; Terra & David, 2016; Tragtenberg et al., 2006; Santos & Queiroz, 2007). For the first time in our society, starting from the second decade of the 21st century, we had a larger number of those minorities at the best universities of the country. Nowadays, these social groups have interests in studying and educating themselves, their own cultures, habits, rituals and social institutions in the academy. Today, we do not have solely one kind of axial group studying others but a plurality of groups willing to study themselves. In this social context, it is necessary to confront the historical standard of the actors positioned as the ones who were doing human sciences until now and claimed neutrality and little involvement with their ‘object of study’. Today, there is a new group of researchers who come from the social institutions and groups that used to be studied, but until now did not act as a research agent. Final words Currently, human sciences no longer deal with the classical and simplistic dichotomy of ‘man studying man’. Beyond the hidden general set up of white heteronormative patriarchal cis-man studying the Other (Yuval-Davis et al., 2006) – which was a historical condition that allowed a ‘safe distance’ between the researcher and field of study – now there are more complex and specific settings. The previously unprivileged axial groups are studying themselves academically, realising a radical dichotomy of ‘subject studying subject’, because the same (or at least very similar) discursive and power devices are embedded in both sides. These social groups bring to the academic field different (before marginalised) theories and values, semantics, vocabularies, etc. that can no longer be ignored nor underestimated. As an illustration, I mention how Cisneros (2018) vocalised indigenous mothering experiences integrated with scholarship and activism in academia by accomplishing an epistolary qualitative methodology. Another example is the report by Kahnawake researcher Audra Simpson about the refusal (Re)thinking the disciplinary relationship between the researcher and object of study in educational practices in the Brazilian context 129 of indigenous communities to discuss some topics with ‘external’ researchers to avoid misrepresentation or misunderstandings (Cisneros, 2018). Thence, by strengthening such research developments, these new empowering social groups have potential to create forms of relationships between the researcher and field of study that can minimise risks of oppressive mechanisms and articulate voices, perspectives and phenomena still underrepresented. According to Trigg (2001) ‘Once the argument is seen to be not about purifying science of the taint of “values” but about which values are essential to its purposes and which bias us away from them, any distinction between fact and value becomes irrelevant’ (p. 121). However, what is still lacking in such introductory course books when it comes to discussing ‘value-free’ science is that values are immersed into gender, race, class and other social and power axes – which, if not assumed and exposed, can function as Disciplinary mechanisms of naturalised oppression (Smith, as cited in Mott & Cockaine, 2017). This chapter discussed the historical background of positivism and how it has influenced educational practices in the Brazilian context – understood through Foucault’s analytical tools, the intersectionality paradigm and the politics of citation. It helped me to realise how important the conditions of possibility and the historical disciplinary struggles between social actors are in the process of building scientific and educational power devices. This investigation made me think of the relevance for educational scientists and practitioners to consider how their research influences policymakers, media and other social apparatuses since the discursive practices of the sciences have high status in Western societies and a strong impact on our daily lives (Yuval-Davis et al., 2006). Volke (2010) brings a fundamental contribution to this argument in the following passage: […] there is no ‘neutral ground’ on which to stand, literally and metaphorically, in relation to ongoing histories of oppression and colonization. On this view, it is a mistake to do philosophy as if class, race, gender, sexual orientation […] does not matter, and engaging responsibly with those representing alternative standpoints entails being mindful of the privileges we do and we do not enjoy by reason of our social location in contexts of domination. (pp. 38–39) Lais Oliveira Leite 130 From a global to a local perspective, these reflections also helped me to understand the specific phenomenon of my colleague being criticised by her supervisor and opponents during her master’s defence. She, the researcher, came from the research field she was studying: she had previously engaged in the educational programme she was investigating, and her partner also came from the poor rural communities targeted by the programme. Even though her research was carried out through both qualitative and quantitative data analysis, accomplishing triangulation strategies to guarantee the reliability of the results, the evaluators considered that her engagement with the study field could be regarded as a promanifesto for the educational programme. I believed such discussion about the relationship between the researcher and object of study was already exhausted by philosophers of education and current methodological debates. However, comments coming from such a powerful position, such as evaluators assessing a master’s candidate’s work, unfortunately still happen in Brazilian universities – even contradicting other discursive practices in the same space. Therefore, this discussion must be carried forward, and those comments must be confronted, so that such opinions do not cause regression on educational practices after so many years of social disputes and political conquest of rights. (Re)thinking the disciplinary relationship between the researcher and object of study in educational practices in the Brazilian context 131 References Barbosa, M. S. 2016. Relações entre os valores do Programa de Educação em Células Cooperativas (PRECE) e os Valores Humanos de seus participantes (Master thesis). Universidade Federal do Ceará, Centro de Humanidades, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Psicologia, Fortaleza. Bayma, F. 2012. Reflexões sobre a constitucionalidade das cotas raciais em Universidades Públicas no Brasil: referências internacionais e os desafios pós-julgamento das cotas. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, 20 (75), 325–346. Bhering, M. J. & Maio, M.C. 2010. Entre ciência e política: O positivismo de Paulo Carneiro na Secretaria de Agricultura, Indústria e Comércio de Pernambuco (1935). Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas, 5 (2), 435–452. Cisneros, N. A. 2018. To my relations: Writing and refusal toward an indigenous epistolary methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 31 (3), 188–196. Coffey, A. 2001. Education and Social Change. Buckingham: Open University Press. Davis, A. Y. 1983. Women, Race & Class. New York: Vintage Books. Fávero, M. de L. de A. 2006. A Universidade no Brasil: das origens à Reforma Universitária de 1968. Educar, Curitiba, n. 28, 17–36. Editora UFPR. Foucault, M. 1979. Microfísica do Poder. Rio de Janeiro: Graal. Foucault, M. 2007a. Arqueologia do Saber. Rio de Janeiro: Forense Universitária. Foucault, M. 2007b. Vigiar e Punir. Rio de Janeiro: Vozes. Jones, T. B. 2015. Me-search is research: my socialization as an academic. In D. J. Davis, R. J. Brunn-Bevel & J. L. Olive (eds), Intersectionality in Educational research, 252–260, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uef-ebooks/detail. action?docID=4438630. IBGE. 2007. Aspectos Demográficos – Informações Gerais. Retrieved from https://ww2. ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/populacao/condicaodevida/indicadoresminimos/ tabela1.shtm#a13 Iskandar, J. I. & Leal, M. R. 2002. SOBRE POSITIVISMO E EDUCAÇÃO. Revista Diálogo Educacional, 3 (7), 89. Lacerda, G. 2017. A “Teoria do Brasil” dos Positivistas Ortodoxos Brasileiros: Composição étnica e independência nacional. Política & Sociedade, 16 (35), 271–298. Leta, J. 2003. As mulheres na ciência brasileira: crescimento, contrastes e um perfil de sucesso. Estudos Avançados, 17 (49), 271–284, https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S010340142003000300016. Levine-Rasky, C. 2007. School choice and the analytics of power. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 29 (5), 397–422. Lais Oliveira Leite 132 Levine-Rasky, C. 2011. Intersectionality theory applied to whiteness and middle-classness. Social Identities, 17 (2), 239–253. Martins, A. C. P. 2002. Ensino superior no Brasil: da descoberta aos dias atuais. Acta Cirurgica Brasileira, 17 (Suppl. 3), 04–06, https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S010286502002000900001. Merquior, J. G. 1982. More order than progress? The politics of Brazilian positivism. Government and Opposition, 17 (4), 454–468. Mitchell, Jr. D. & Simmons, C. Y. & Greyerbiehl, L. A. (eds) 2014. Intersectionality & Higher Education. New York: Peter Lang. Mott, C. & Cockayne, D. 2017. Citation Matters: Mobilizing the Politics of Citation toward a Practice of ‘Conscientious Engagement’. Gender, Place & Culture, DOI: 10.1080/0966369X.2017.1339022. Pastana, D. R. 2007. Ensino jurídico no Brasil: perpetuando o positivismo científico e consolodando o autoritarismo no controle penal. EDUCAÇÃO: Teoria e Prática, 17 (29), 103–120. Peake, L. & Sheppard, E. 2014. The emergence of radical/critical geography within North America. ACME, 13 (2), 305–327. Ruitenberg, C. 2010. What Do Philosophers of Education Do (And How Do They Do It)? [N.p.]. Wiley-Blackwell. Santos, J. T. & Queiroz, D. M. 2007. Sistemas de cotas: um multiculturalismo brasileiro? Ciência e Cultura, 59 (2), 41–45. Silva, C. M. da S. 1999. The influence of positivism on the teaching of mathematics in Brazil: 1870–1930. Historia Mathematica, 26 (4), 327-343. Terra, R. B. M. da R. B. & David, T. D. 2016. A função social do acesso ao Ensino Superior diante da subrepresentatividade dos povos originários: uma análise acerca da política pública de cotas (Lei nº 12.711/2012) e da resistência indígena no Brasil. Barbarói, Santa Cruz do Sul, Edição Especial n. 47, 107–124. Tillapaugh, D. & Nicolazzo, Z. 2014. Backward thinking: exploring the relationship among intersectionality, epistemology and research design. In J. D. Mitchell, C. Y. Simmons & L. A. Greyerbiehl (eds), Intersectionality & Higher Education, 111–122, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uef-ebooks/detail. action?docID=1920237. Tragtenberg, M. H. R. et al. 2006. Como aumentar a proporção de estudantes negros na Universidade? Cadernos de Pesquisa, v. 36, n. 128, 473–495. Trigg, R. 2001. Understanding Social Science: A Philosophical Introduction to the Social Sciences (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell. Vokey, D. 2009. ’Anything You Can Do I Can Do Better’: Dialectical Argument in Philosophy of Education. In C. Ruitenberg (ed.), What do Philosophers of Education Do? (and How Do They Do it). Malden: Wiley & Sons. (Re)thinking the disciplinary relationship between the researcher and object of study in educational practices in the Brazilian context 133 Westbury, I., Hansen, S-E., Kansanen, P. & Björkvist, O. 2005. Teacher education for research-based practice in expanded roles: Finland’s experience. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 49 (5), 475–485. Yuval-Davis, N. 2006. Intersectionality and Feminist Politics. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 13 (3), 193–209. Yuval-Davis, N., Kannabiran, K. & Vieten, U. (eds) 2006. The Situated Politics of Belonging. DOI: 10.4135/9781446213490. Anja Heikkinen, Jenni Pätäri & Gabriele Molzberger (eds), Disciplinary Struggles in Education Tampere University Press 2019, 135–153 http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-359-002-1 Thinking outside the box De-structuring continuing and higher education1 Markus Weil & Balthasar Eugster Abstract While universities are strongly embedded in a history of disciplinary structures, both institutionally (faculties, institutes or schools) and scientifically (“septem artes liberales”, study programmes), Continuing Education and Training (CET) within higher education (HE) can break up this disciplinary view and open new perspectives between the academic and the professional world. In this article, we explore the structural, disciplinary and historical boundaries of HE and CET and how both can come to systematic, constructive relations. Subsequently, we adopt a more pedagogical perspective and focus on CET that is provided within the institutional structures of HE. Keywords: higher education, continuing education, education system, pedagogy 1 This chapter draws on some ideas developed in the German article: Eugster/Weil (2015): “Grenzfall Weiterbildung: Forschungsorientierung in der Entstrukturierung.” In Peter Tremp (ed.), Forschungsorientierung und Berufsbezug im Studium. Hochschulen als Orte der Wissensgenerierung und der Vorstrukturierung von Berufstätigkeit. Bertelsmann Bielefeld, p. 63–82. The article is re-framed and revised regarding disciplinary struggles in the history of education. Markus Weil & Balthasar Eugster 136 Introduction Higher education (HE) is based on a history of disciplinary structures, both institutionally (e.g. with faculties, institutes or schools) and scientifically (e.g. ‘septem artes liberales’, study programmes) (de Ridder-Symoens, 2002, p. 85). In the context of Switzerland HE refers to formal learning, which leads to a qualification and to study programmes embedded in a disciplinary structure (see CRUS et al., 2011). In contrast, continuing education and training (CET) refers to non-formal and informal learning outside the formal education system but is nevertheless partly regulated, legally framed and systematically linked. The rationales of CET can break up the disciplinary view on HE and open new perspectives on the relation to the academic and the professional worlds. CET irritates HE – institutionally by drawing on the professional world besides formal academic structures as well as scientifically by challenging generated knowledge and theories with professional practices. Under the institutional umbrella of HE, some non-formal CET programmes and courses are provided without being part of the formal study programmes. The topic of this article deals with a conceptual layout for the role of CET offered within HE in Switzerland. For the analysis we draw on concept and policy papers that are framing education. Referring to the Swiss context – with a focus on the German speaking part – cannot be more than an example highlighting a general problem in the institutional and systematic relations of CET and HE. We use the term ‘outside the box’ in the sense of deconstructing a system approach towards HE to show the conceptual inconsistency within HE. ‘Outside the box’ means that the CET offered by universities belongs to the environment of the formal HE system and thereby forms its own self-referential system. The HE system and the system of CET in HE are connected in that they are each other’s environment, but they persist as autonomous systems – both conceptually and in policy documents. We aim at an analytical and conceptual view by exploring the status and position of CET in HE in Switzerland and looking at possible consequences. Switzerland has found a way of adopting structures for CET from HE – still in a very vague sense regarding the contribution of CET to HE. In the following sections, we start with the contextualisation of CET and HE in the Swiss education system. The progression rationale from a bachelor’s (BA) to Thinking outside the box 143 which is rather a closed system and a precondition for academic careers exclusively within HE. For CET at universities, it is not surprising that it follows the logic of academic levels. The rather strong hierarchy of degrees and institutions in Switzerland might be a reason for the ‘invention’ of the CAS–DAS–MAS-structure. CAS– DAS–MAS closely relate to the logic of BA–MA–PhD, while at the same time they mark a difference by using ‘advanced studies’. ‘Advanced’, with its polyvalent meanings, also refers to ‘more than higher education’, and this positions in the professional field and the relation to practice as resources for CET. In this sense, these CET degrees are outside the academic degree box. They are a bridge between the academic disciplinary order of knowledge and the practice of professional life. Two positions within the education system demonstrate why further education cannot be located definitely. Since the 1970s in the Swiss context, CET has been discussed as the ‘fourth pillar’ of the education system (quarternary education), relating to primary, secondary and tertiary education. The main reference document for this attempt to position further education is the Structural Plan for the German Education System, where further education is defined as a continuation or re-starting of organised learning after finishing a differently realised first phase of education (Deutscher Bildungsrat, 1972, p. 197). CET is positioned here as a continuation of initial degrees and as a part of the education system for the first time. Alternatively, also during the 1970s, CET was strongly related to the concepts of lifelong learning (see Kraus, 2001). By this, CET was positioned as accompanying the education system on all levels and degrees. This second approach is currently leading the rationales, e.g. by the Federal Department of Statistics, and puts CET in the position of offering non-formal or informal education only (see BFS, 2010; Weil, 2011, p. 46). Alongside, CET is assigned to the general idea of lifelong learning and does not often result in generally recognised degrees and certificates (Egger, 2012; Kraus, 2001). With this analysis, CET at universities is per se thinking outside the box because even when using a structural hierarchisation of degrees, it does not follow the functions of HE, nor is it necessarily linked to its structures. Of course, themes and staff can be similar in CET and HE, but regarding the participants, CET relates more to the experience in the professional field, and it cannot fulfil Markus Weil & Balthasar Eugster 144 the same function for research and knowledge as HE does. This brings the chance of reflecting on the HE structures and generated theories by structurally bringing in the aspects of the professional field. (2) Research orientation is a claim of CET at universities. Universities are research institutions; they are defined by research and teaching, plus, as mentioned above, further education and service. Without research no scientific knowledge could be taught and learned, neither in initial nor in further education settings or services. Without research, scientific knowledge would stagnate. One main objective of HE teaching is to enable the students to do research by themselves and to contribute to the development of knowledge. Research is a broad concept and can also be located at different institutions outside a university, but it can only claim to validate the knowledge generated by referring to the scientific community. In this sense, science requires specific organisational forms Figure 2. Positioning of further education within HE (Eugster & Weil, 2015) Thinking outside the box 145 to assure scientific knowledge and to define the specific research methods that can be classified as such (see also Tremp, 2005). In contrast, for CET at universities it is not the primary objective to produce research findings. CET might be targeted on a research-based discussion of themes that gain relevance for science-based occupational fields. In this sense, CET offered within an HE setting offers a viewpoint from outside the box of university research (see Figure 2). It can enable a discourse that takes place at the edge of organisational and disciplinary borders by bringing scientists (from inside the box) together with qualified professionals (form outside the box) in order to reflect the relevance of research results for applied fields of science. Furthermore, CET at universities can help to deepen the knowledge of scientists in specific fields outside their main domain. This can have effects on the proceedings within the system by irritations that are triggered by the discussions just outside the system. CET at universities does not have the function to produce new knowledge, but, by being offered closely to HE, it takes research results, methods and processes into account. For the created learning environments in CET this means a critical reflection about applicability, validity and relevance of research results. It can offer a look at research from the border of the box – still close enough to understand its principles and already close enough to the professional world to bring in questions of practical relevance and application. This position of CET brings in a reflective potential for HE by applying or questioning knowledge. Alternatively, the role of CET could easily be used for service only, without drawing on the reflective function for HE. A market logic of customer orientation and profit could overlap academic principles even stronger than in initial HE because, by being outside the box, CET is not necessarily committed to the scientific community or the academic standards. An additional critical point could be the imitation of formal aspects by CET programmes, which might diminish the opportunities of existing outside the box. Markus Weil & Balthasar Eugster 146 (3) The professional world and research orientation are a chance for de-structuring institutional and disciplinary boundaries Offering CET brings a benefit to HE institutions because this adds a perspective of recurrent education to initial study programmes, which provides educational perspectives beyond the academic degrees (see also Schiefner, 2011). However, the logic of CET is atypical for HE. Rather than merging both fields or treating them separately, research and teaching need links between the rationale of HE and CET. Especially the transdisciplinary generation of knowledge within a nonhierarchical organisation, as stated by Gibbons (1994), shows a need for translation support, which is close to ‘the box’ but not part of it. CET in HE could fulfil that function. CET can use new and creative forms outside the initial HE degree structures. It is less influenced by the institutional settings of universities than initial study programmes, or at least it could use that position. Additionally, the relation to the labour market can be used steadily as further education has strong links to the professional field. The range of possible learning environments widens and does not necessarily have to follow strong institutional rules (see Figure 3). Therefore, a de-structured CET offers new perspectives outside the box for HE. It enables new questions, which might not be possible within the institutional setting of initial study programmes. In addition, there is less pressure for innovative research results in CET, both for the programme and for the participants. The professional world becomes an explicit reference point for the reflection of science and academia rather than a translation from theory to practice (see Figure 3). Participants from the professional world can use their position ‘outside the box’ to look at science and academia and ask questions that are not primarily research focused. They can be integrated into research in certain structural and pedagogical conditions. Therefore, research orientation means more than the rhetoric of ‘research-based teaching and learning’. It also seems crucial that the reflection of the knowledge-construction, which is situated in the setting of HE by the means of practice, is the character of CET in HE. The participants of CET in HE enable a self-reflection about the knowledge-construction of the scientists, which is possible only within the specific discourse of CET in HE. The authority of this reflection belongs to the participants who irritate and challenge the logic of the science system. This irritation is caused by a displacement of Thinking outside the box 147 the perspective on the discourse. The main point here is not to strengthen the usability of knowledge but to use the change of perspectives for an irritation of the discourse. Scientific findings can be discussed critically within CET settings, which consist of participants socialised in the scientific field. What is interesting from the perspective of science is the reformulation of knowledge. This is the great challenge for science: it succeeds in generating knowledge but makes hardly any attempt to put it into a different perspective other than the disciplinary logic, and therefore there might be a rather low transferability to different contexts. The chance of CET within HE is to enable this transferability, but it also is a fragile balance as CET should not shift into the role of becoming increasingly more like initial HE programmes. Consequences ‘outside the box’ As a conclusion, we gather the findings from the three propositions regarding consequences for continuing higher education (CHE) and possible impacts that might relate back to the initial system of HE. We consider a circular understanding, in which CET is a resource for shaping the setting of researchbased teaching in a disciplinary-ordered institution. Therefore the term CHE Figure 3. De-structuring potential of further education within higher education (Eugster & Weil, 2015) Markus Weil & Balthasar Eugster 148 signals the informal structure within the HE system. By focusing on genuine pedagogical consequences and less on economical or societal consequences, curricular, academic content-related and didactic areas arise as three main aspects for reflection (see Lindenstein Walshok, 2012). Curricular consequences CHE is not only about the reception of research results classified in disciplinary structures: as stated above, CHE has the potential to irritate research and bring in an ‘outside the box’ perspective beyond disciplinary and institutional structures. In this respect generating questions, testing applicability, overcoming disciplinary borders or enquiring into research can be an important function of CHE. It offers possibilities to practice reflections on research results. CHE operates with a potentially privileged connection to the professional world. At the same time this could lead to a functionalist approach towards HE, with risks of functionalising or threatening HE functions of academic freedom, objectivity or the validity of teaching and research. If CHE can clearly take the role of changing perspective ‘outside the box’, we can also draw new questions for the initial study programmes because beside the genuine research there is often an important relation to the professional field. Regarding curriculum this could mean a clearer focus on the function of particular curricular elements, such as on practical studies, internships or site visits. They can gather learning and reflect on opportunities for the academic settings as learning sites. The curriculum as the set of relations between the different elements of learning units is more than the sum of these learning units. There is a need for reciprocal effects between practical studies and the teaching of the scientific basics in. Both the temporary exposure to academia and to the professional world can relate to each other in a constructive way due to clear positioning in the curricula of study programmes. Content-related consequences Research orientation as a characteristic of HE also transfers to CHE settings in terms of content-related issues. Although research results might be the content Thinking outside the box 149 of CHE, the function of generating knowledge is not on issue for these settings as they are only partly based within academia and the scientific community. Nevertheless, CHE can reflect on research content and the processes, or on how content has been generated, validated and distributed. The reflection on research processes and products related to the perspectives of the professional field can create possibilities to mirror academic research. CHE offers the research function of HE a way to gain a look at the blind spots of scientific self-reflection. For HE, CET in general and CHE in specific gives the possibility to reflect on generated content within or in relation to the complexity of meanings for the professional field. From an iterative or recurrent perspective, further education settings could already be anticipated in the content (and its generation) in HE research and teaching. Additionally, feedback functions could lead to making use of the critical reflections for research as well as for teaching and learning settings. By the practice of CHE, a special and unique sort of discourse arises that irritates the internal logic of the box in a constructive manner. Even if generating knowledge (content) in HE is bound to disciplinary traditions and discourses, CHE can overcome these boundaries by also referring to the logic of the professional field. Didactic consequences These assumptions also lead to a didactic dimension by means of creating teaching and learning settings that have a relation to the professional world and enable reflecting on and challenging research. CHE can draw on both the professional world and the world of academia as reference points regarding teaching conceptions and practices. A didactic of CHE uses the ‘outside the box’ position as a possibility for critical reflection on research processes and knowledge and uses this as a possibility for testing the applicability of knowledge. As a didactical consequence, CHE settings need to provide the necessary background knowledge and create opportunities for contrasting and reflecting on knowledge and its applications. In order to reach such didactical goals, CHE has to pick the fluidity of scientific knowledge out as a central theme. Students in CHE programmes will be exposed to the inconsistencies of knowledge transfer and knowledge production. Only by Markus Weil & Balthasar Eugster 150 debating such questions can the involved lecturers bring the professional field into an intercommunication with science that is prolific for both sides. The didactic of HE benefits from the developments in CHE as it opens a much more diverse range for teaching and learning settings. It can link to liberal, vocational and/or political further education and make use of concepts from informal and non-formal learning, e.g. the methods used for learning while working. This might give learning how to become an academic a new perspective by practicing research and using this as learning opportunities more systematically. Concluding reflections Overall, there is a potential in thinking outside the box for HE if CHE is not only used as a cash cow on the educational market. A clear positioning and quality claim for CHE could carefully draw together curricular, content-related and didactic aspects in order to critically reflect upon the content, methods and structure of HE. Nevertheless, opening the box could also bring with it the risk that the professional world also carries along unintended effects such as market orientation or utilitarianism. This might already be a reality of universities not only by the means of CHE. Academia could critically reflect on that relation and take this as a further research perspective. While the clear positioning of CET functions and the use of reference points different than those of HE, we could also question whether CHE is well positioned so close to HE or if it generally should be positioned independently outside the institutional umbrella of HE. In this regard, the three propositions allocate and substantiate the functions of CHE as preconditions for a critical and independent role for HE. All in all, CHE might be a challenge for disciplinary boundaries by the defined relations to the professional world. Naming and defining ‘the box’ of HE (endoperspective) can provide perspectives ‘outside the box’ (exo-perspective), but this dichotomy could also be challenged. Nevertheless, the disciplinary and historical boundaries of CET and HE can come to constructive relations when the primary approach is not merging all functions and blending the purposes and advantages of research and the professional world but rather using their advantages for shaping clearer perspectives and relations. Thinking outside the box 151 References Baecker, D. 2010. Forschung, Lehre und Verwaltung. In J.-Ch. Horst et al. (eds), Unbedingte Universitäten. Was passiert? Stellungnahmen zur Lage der Universität. Zürich: diaphanes, 311–322. BAK (Bundesassistentenkonferenz). 1970. Forschendes Lernen – Wissenschaftliches Prüfen. Ergebnisse der Arbeit des Ausschusses für Hochschuldidaktik (new print 2009). Bielefeld: UVW. BfS (Bundesamt für Statistik). 2010. Teilnahme an Weiterbildung in der Schweiz. Erste Ergebnisse des Moduls ”Weiterbildung” der Schweizerischen Arbeitskräfteerhebung. Neuchâtel: BfS. Biggs, J. 2003. Aligning teaching and assessing to course objectives. Conference paper University of Aveiro: Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: New Trends and Innovations, http://www.josemnazevedo.uac.pt/proreitoria/docs/biggs.pdf [2014, December 1]. CRUS (Rektorenkonferenz der Schweizer Universitäten)/KFH (Rektorenkonferenz der Fachhochschulen der Schweiz)/COHEP (Schweizerische Konferenz der Rektorinnen und Rektoren der Pädagogischen Hochschulen). 2011. Qualifikationsrahmen für den schweizerischen Hochschulbereich nqf.ch-HS, https://www.swissuniversities.ch/fileadmin/swissuniversities/Dokumente/ Lehre/NQR/nqf-ch-HS-d.pdf [2017, December 5]. Deutscher Bildungsrat 1972. Strukturplan für das Bildungswesen (4th ed). Stuttgart: Klett. De Ridder-Symoens, H. 2002. The intellectual heritage of ancient universities in Europe. In N. Sanz & S. Bergan (eds), The Heritage of European Universities. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing, 77–89. Diogo, S., Carvalho, T. & Amaral, A. 2015. Institutionalism and organizatinoal change. In J. Huisman, H. de Boer, D.D. Dill & M. Souto-Otero (eds), The Palgrave International Handbook of Higher Education Policy and Governance. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 114–131. Egger, R. 2012. Lebenslanges Lernen in der Universität. Wie funktioniert gute Hochschullehre und wie lernen Hochschullehrende ihren Beruf. Wiesbaden: Springer. Eugster, B. & Tremp, P. 2018. Lehre als Zugang zum Fach. Plädoyer für eine didaktische Wissenschaftssoziali. In M. Weil (ed.), Zukunftslabor Lehrentwicklung. Perspektiven auf Hochschuldidaktik und darüber hinaus. Münster: Waxmann, 75–94. Markus Weil & Balthasar Eugster 152 Eugster, B. & Weil, M. 2015. Grenzfall Weiterbildung: Forschungsorientierung in der Entstrukturierung. In P. Tremp (ed.), Forschungsorientierung und Berufsbezug im Studium. Hochschulen als Orte der Wissensgenerierung und der Vorstrukturierung von Berufstätigkeit. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann, 63–82. Fischer, A. 2012. Hochschulweiterbildung in einem heterogenen Feld. Bericht zu Handen der Geschäftsstelle des Schweizerischen Wissenschaftsund Innovationsrats. Bern: Schweizerischer Wissenschaftsund Innovationsrat. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. & Trow, M. 1994. The New Production of. Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research. London: Sage. HFKG (Hochschulförderungsund -koordinationsgesetz). Bundesgesetz über die Förderung der Hochschulen und die Koordination im schweizerischen Hochschulbereich. 30. September 2011. https://www.admin.ch/opc/de/officialcompilation/2014/4103.pdf [2017, December 5]. Kraus, K. 2001. Lebenslanges Lernen. Karriere einer Leitidee. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann. Kuper, H. & Kaufmann, K. 2009. Systemtheoretische Analysen der Weiterbildung. In R. Tippelt & A. v. Hippel (eds), Handbuch Erwachsenenbildung/Weiterbildung (3rd ed.) Wiesbaden: Springer, 153–168. Lindenstein Walshok, M. 2012. Reinventing continuing higher education. Continuing Higher Education Review, Vol. 76, 38–53. Luhmann, N. 1995. Social Systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Molzberger, G. 2007. Rahmungen informellen Lernen. Zur Erschließung neuer Lernund Weiterbildungsperspektiven. Wiesbaden: Springer. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2003. Reviews of national Policies for Education: Tertiary Education in Switzerland. Paris: OECD Publishing. Reinalda, B. & Kulesza, E. 2006. The Bologna Process – Harmonizing Europe’s Higher Education (2nd ed.). Opladen: Barbara Budrich. Schiefner, M. 2011. Hochschuldidaktische Szenarien für die wissenschaftliche Weiterbildung. In M. Weil, M. Schiefner, B. Eugster & K. Futter (eds), Aktionsfelder der Hochschuldidaktik. Von der Weiterbildung zum Diskurs. Münster: Waxmann, 43–50. Schweizerische Edigenossenschaft. 2002. Bundesgesetz über die Berufsbildung (Berufsbildungsgesetz, BBG) vom 13. Dezember 2002 (Stand am 1. Januar 2019). Schweizerische Eidgenossenschaft. 2011. Bundesgesetz über die Förderung der Hochschulen und die Koordination im schweizerischen Hochschulbereich (Hochschulförderungsund -koordinationsgesetz, HFKG) vom 30. September 2011 (Stand am 1. Januar 2018). Schweizerische Edigenossenschaft. 2014. Bundesgesetz über die Weiterbildung (WeBiG) vom 20. Juni 2014. Financing and institutions as key elements of the future of adult education 255 state expenditure and formal AE, to a high extent driven by the liberal countries, and without an impact on overall participation. Finally, against widespread expectations, the welfare regimes do not seem to create consistent AE politics and institutions. Discussion and conclusions The results of the estimation of the financing of adult education (AE) in a comparative perspective were highly unexpected for us as researchers and for the Austrian stakeholders also, as the Austrian expenditure turned out not to be comparatively low (as expected) but on the contrary comparatively high, in particular with respect to the contributions of individual citizens. At the same time the indicators about participation and policies confirmed a rather unfavourable pattern in comparison with the other countries. How can these results be related to the disciplinary struggles? A first point concerns the qualitative vs. quantitative struggles in comparative research. Indeed, we have to consider the explorative nature of the observation and analysis as a caveat; critiques can simply point to the necessary constructions and transformations of the data. The combination of the different sources of information has entailed much recalculation and standardisation (e.g. by transforming information about different years into 2009) and might be a source of error. Moreover, the estimation of the resources only covers one point in time (2009), which might be more or less representative for the situation in the selected countries. Thus, a deeper institutional analysis would be necessary to validate the observed patterns. Another question would be how much the Nordic regime has already been in fact liberalised. However, the attempt can also demonstrate first how much important and necessary information is lacking and second how many difficulties exist in solving the challenges in this area of comparative research. A basic question behind the project was whether the politically deliberate state financing of educational institutions according to educational purposes and the public good would be more appropriate for the development of AE than the push towards the political support of incentives and market mechanisms according to the individual preferences of the (potential) participants, leading to the Lorenz Lassnigg & Stefan Vogtenhuber 256 commercialisation of learning and education. This question is clearly related to the disciplinary struggles in the social sciences. Traditional mainstream economic views and the influential economic theory of politics would support the second alternative. According to the socio-economic approach regarding welfare regimes, the Nordic regime would represent the first alternative and the liberal regime the second, with the corporatist Austrian regime lying somehow in between the two, with some potential in either direction. The findings do not support these expectations and, if the estimations are valid, point to more complex patterns. A critical topic that further distinguishes between the two alternatives is whether adults still need education (or just learning), and if this difference exists, who should be the educators. This topic is closely related to core questions of educational research. The learning-centred market approach assumes that adults are already educated. They know what they need to learn and in principle will also be able to find ways to do this – the purposes of learning are in this approach assumed to be quite instrumental, with learning for work and professions as the main purpose. The educational approach assumes alternatively that educational purposes still exist in AE that go beyond the instrumental ones and concern learning for (the wider aspects and dimensions of) life, represented by the social, political and cultural fields, including moral and ethical deliberation and the wider fields of human knowledge production. These alternatives cannot really be explored with the rough information about welfare regimes, financing and participation. A main component related to these aspects is the contextual understanding of the AE institutions and policies and of their traditions, which is only very indirectly represented by the quantitative measurement. With respect to research and theory, a main path of reasoning over recent decades was to underpin the abstract macro-level theorising and research by analyses at the micro and meso levels, in particular by studying the barriers and motivations at the individual micro level and by including this dimension into multi-level models (Boeren, Nicaise, & Baert, 2010). Compared to the abovementioned bounded agency approach, this research has guided the attention towards the rational choice ideology and towards the strengthening of market behaviour at the ‘cost’ of moral and ethical behaviour. Moreover, this model has focused on the interaction between the individuals (micro) and the institutions (meso), and, despite to some extent being integrated, the macro level was to some Financing and institutions as key elements of the future of adult education 257 degree pushed aside. A better understanding of the interplay between the macro level and the others still seems to be an unresolved challenge. Neoliberalism is a key concept in the disciplinary struggles on comparative research and needs to be used in a clarified way (Mudge, 2008). In this vein the question might be asked to what extent the market itself is conceived as an alternative educational institution that replaces moral and ethical reasoning through a rational cost-benefit calculation among alternative preferences. The decisions about participation and also more general policy decisions are modelled according to human capitalist cost-benefit calculations, with the inclination to transform the various and multidimensional potential effects of AE into a form of ‘wider benefits’ to accommodate to the cost-benefit rationality. The human capital approach with its basic logic of discounting costs and benefits has much suggestive power, such that it has invaded most thinking about AE by imposing the basic framework of supply and demand to the roots of reasoning, and furthermore pointing to the importance of incentives (or sanctions) in order to influence the actors’ assumed rational behaviour. Rees (2013) tries to escape this logic and proposes much more detailed analyses, starting with a combination of the welfare regime approach with the varieties of capitalism approach, which has distinguished the liberal market economy from the coordinated market economy. Austria would fall together with the Nordic countries in the coordinated regime. However, this extended approach would not really help to explain the unexpected results. Lorenz Lassnigg & Stefan Vogtenhuber 258 References Boeren, E., Nicaise, I. & Baert, H. 2010. Theoretical models of participation in adult education: the need for an integrated model. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 29 (1), 45–61. Booth, A.L. & Snower, D.J. (eds) 1996. Acquiring Skills: Market Failures, Their Symptoms and Policy Responses. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Desjardins, R. & Rubenson, K. 2013. Participation patterns in adult education: the role of institutions and public policy frameworks in resolving coordination problems. European Journal of Education, 48 (2), 262–280. Heissenberger, S., Mark, V., Schramm, S., Sniesko, P. & Süss, R.S. (eds) 2010. Uni brennt. Grundsätzliches, Kritisches, Atmosphärisches. Vienna: Turia & Kant. Holzer, D. 2017. Weiterbildungswiderstand. Eine kritische Theorie der Verweigerung. Bielefeld: transcript. Hummelsheim, S. 2010. Finanzierung der Weiterbildung in Deutschland. Bielefeld: DIE. Erwachsenenbildung.at (n.d.). KEBÖ-Konferenz der Erwachsenenbildung Österreichs, http://erwachsenenbildung.at/themen/eb_in_oesterreich/organisation/keboe. php. Kilpi-Jakonen, E., Vono de Vilhena, D. & Blossfeld, H.-P. 2015. Adult learning and social inequalities: Processes of equalisation or cumulative disadvantage? International Review of Education, 61, 529–546. Lassnigg, L. 2011. Contradictions in adult education structures and policies in Austria: Their interrelation with the professional development of educators. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 2 (1), 37–55. Lassnigg, L. 2015. Modernisierung, Reflexivität, Globalisierung. Überlegungen zur Zukunft der Theorie und Praxis von Erwachsenenbildung. Magazin erwachsenenbildung.at, No. 25, Vienna, http://erwachsenenbildung.at/ magazin/15-25/03_lassnigg.pdf. Lassnigg, L., Vogtenhuber, S. & Osterhaus, I. 2012. Finanzierung von Erwachsenenund Weiterbildung in Österreich und in ausgewählten Vergleichsländern. IHSresearch report commissioned by Arbeiterkammer Wien, www.equi.at/dateien/ AK-IHS-EB-Kovgl.pdf, http://www.equi.at/dateien/AK-IHS-strat.pdf. Lenz, W. (ed.) 1994. Modernisierung der Erwachsenenbildung. Vienna: Böhlau. Mudge, S.L. 2008. What is neo-liberalism? Socio-Economic Review, 6, 703–731. doi:10.1093/ser/mwn016. Rees, G. 2013. Comparing adult learning systems: an emerging political economy. European Journal of Education, 48 (2), 200–212. Republik Österreich. 2011. LLL 2020. Strategie zum lebensbegleitenden Lernen in Österreich. Vienna, http://www.esf.at/esf/wp-content/uploads/LLLStrategiepapier_20111.pdf. Financing and institutions as key elements of the future of adult education 259 Rubenson, K. & Desjardins, R. 2009. The impact of welfare state regimes on barriers to participation in adult education. A bounded agency model. Adult Education Quarterly, 59 (3), 187–207. Wagner, P., Strohmeier, D. & Schober, B. (eds) 2016. Special Issue Bildung-Psychology: Theory and practice of use inspired basic research. European Journal for Developmental Psychology, 13 (6). Williams, J., McNair, S. & Aldridge, F. 2010. Expenditure and funding models in lifelong learning. A Context Paper. National Institute of Adult Continuing Education. Leicester, www.niace.org.uk/lifelonglearninginquiry/docs/Expenditurefunding-models.pdf. 261 List of Contributors Balthasar Eugster, Faculty of Education, University of Zurich, email: ba lthasa r. eugster@uzh .ch Anja Heikkinen, Faculty of Education and Culture, Tampere University, email: [email protected] Maija Hirvonen, JAMK University of Applied Sciences, email: maija. h ir vonen@ jam k.fi Tarna Kannisto, Social and Moral Philosophy, University of Helsinki, email: [email protected] Leena Koski, Department of Social Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, email: [email protected] Werner Kuhlmeier, Faculty of Education, University of Hamburg, email: werner. ku hl meier@u ni-hamburg.de Lorenz Lassnigg, Institute for Advanced Studies, email: [email protected] Lais Oliveira Leite, Department of Education and Psychology, University of Eastern Finland, email: [email protected] Gabriele Molzberger, Faculty of Human and Social Sciences, Institute of Education, University of Wuppertal, email: [email protected] Raija Pirttimaa, Department of Education, University of Jyväskylä, email: raija . pirttimaa@jy u.fi Jenni Pätäri, Faculty of Education and Culture, Tampere University, email: jenni. [email protected] Sören Schütt-Sayed, Faculty of Education, University of Hamburg, email: soeren. schuett@u ni-hamburg .de Sini Teräsahde, Faculty of Education and Culture, Tampere University, email: [email protected] 262 Stefan Vogtenhuber, Institute for Advanced Studies, email: [email protected] Burkhard Vollmers, Faculty of Education, University of Hamburg, email: [email protected] Kari Väyrynen, Department of Philosophy, University of Oulu, email: kari . vayr [email protected] Henry Yuan Wang, Department of Education and Psychology, University of Eastern Finland, email: y[email protected] Markus Weil, School of Education, University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Northwestern Switzerland, email: [email protected] Ivan Zamotkin, Philosophy of Education Department, Lomonosov Moscow State University, email: [email protected]