Democracy as a Floating Signifier: Clarifying a Theory of Democracy and Democratization in Teacher Education

• In Event: Democracy and Democratization: Ideals of Change in Education

Abstract

Purpose
Philosophers, political theorists, and historians of education have long considered the ways principles of democracy and projects of democratization undergird the purpose and practices of education in the US. For some, democratizing implies an increase in access, redistribution of decision-making (Gutmann & Thompson, 2004), equalizing of resources (Jencks, 1988), or parity in outcomes (Ladd & Loeb, 2013). At times, the frame of “democratization” is slippery, and appears to serve as a strategic tool or shield that adds political legitimacy, regardless of whether the projects are legitimately connected to theories of democracy.

This paper first asks how democracy and democratization are theorized within education, demonstrating the breadth of meaning contained in these understandings. Next, we ask how “democratizing” and “democratization” are invoked in the context of teacher education (TE), revealing what is connoted by and implicated in this particular usage.

Framework
We draw on the linguistic concept of a “floating signifier” to understand the ways “democratization” is circulated in educational discourse to take on multiple meanings (Levi-Strauss, 1950). We argue certain terms in education—like ‘democratization’—are floating signifiers, losing their inherent meaning when describing processes and practices that are altogether separate from formal political theories. We survey conceptions of “deliberative democracy” (Gutmann, 1987); “democratic equality” (Labaree, 1997), among others, drawing on frame analysis to examine how practitioners strategically describe and assign schematic meaning to their democratization projects (Goffman, 1974).

Analytical Approach
Our conceptual piece draws on critical discourse analysis techniques (Fairclough, 1995) in order to “decipher the underlying meaning, deep assumptions, and relations of power that are supported by and constructed through a discourse” (Crawford, 2004, p. 23). We consider the case of how TE research has framed issues of “democracy” and “democratization” by drawing on scholarship on democratization in TE.

Findings
Our emergent findings surface three primary frames of democratization efforts within TE:
Democratizing expertise
Building the political knowledge of teachers
Preparing teachers to teach democratically

These frames are predicated on divergent underlying theories of democracy and have different implications for how programs should undertake democratization efforts. However, these underlying theories are not always explicit. For example, the democratization of expertise frame calls for epistemologically re-grounding TE programs to draw upon both “academic” knowledge and community-based knowledge (Zeichner et al, 2015; Apple, 2008). Though this frame is rhetorically grounded in a theory of deliberative democracy, it presupposes that the democratization of expertise will only selectively bring in the expertise of those who have been historically marginalized by existing TE programs. Rather, a theory of deliberative democracy calls for bringing in all community members, which runs the risk of perpetuating the very power dynamics TE programs are attempting to dismantle.

Significance
By situating the ways democracy has been framed in TE within political theories of democracy and democratization, this paper provides greater theoretical clarity to what educational practitioners may mean when they call for “democratization.” We argue that this conceptual clarity is necessary if practitioners hope to meaningfully shift educational organizations and systems to better further the aims of democracy.

Authors

• Maya Kaul, University of Pennsylvania

• Nora Reikosky, University of Houston