Collectivist educational practice as a restorative response to social and political uncertainty

• In Event: Education, Power, and Resistance: Networks, Policy, and Practice in Divided Times

Proposal

Bourdieu (1998) identifies how political neoliberalism changes social relations towards those of competitive individualism, thereby privileging independent over interdependent activity. This hyper-individualism (Wacquant, 2010; 2012), which also underpins meritocracy, provides scant support for those facing late modern turbulence and uncertainty, although the confidence and security of academic achievement can, to some extent offset this. The need for social interaction became obvious during the coronavirus pandemic when many were isolated from each other and dependent on technology for communication. Those children, young people, and teachers who were able to maintain links with others often through online communities fared better than those who could not (Kelly et al., 2021).

Hyper-individualism also underpins meritocracy, the political wing of neoliberalism (Wacquant, 2010; 2012). Meritocracy articulates a benign economic argument promoting the flourishing of all whilst providing the means for reproducing inherited privilege, for blaming and punishing the vulnerable and marginalised and for presenting the successful and dominant as virtuous and deserving (Bourdieu, 1998; Wacquant, 2009). The collective suffering and alienation that results (Bourdieu, 1993) can bring a solidarity that feeds into authoritarian populism (Cohen, 2019). Reducing the isolation and dissent of disaffected student groups is therefore both a moral and political imperative.

This presentation reports the findings of a comparative study, funded by the European Federation of Education Employers, which set out to explore how educational institutions were responding to the social and political challenges and uncertainties of a post-Covid-19 era. Case study events involving school leaders and administrators were conducted in Belgium, Norway, Portugal and Slovenia. These were supplemented by a survey of education employers from across the European Union. Thematic analyses revealed community building to be a common focus and identified strategies for overcoming barriers to achieve this. Strong communities afford resilience amongst students, parents and practitioners, whilst community development in schools and neighbourhoods improves the mental health and wellbeing of all and allows people to thrive in challenging circumstances.

Wacquant (2010) suggests that hyper-individualism has effectively silenced collectivist worldviews and their expression in analytic or organisational frames. However, ‘to change the world, one has to change the ways of world-making, that is, the vision of the world and practical operations by which groups are produced and reproduced’ (Bourdieu, 1989: 23). In this paper I argue that a more inclusive, moderate and resilient future is possible if we rediscover collective educational analyses and focus our educational endeavours on repurposing schools as community builders, whether of interdependent learners and teachers or of supportive neighbourhoods. These should be neither authoritarian nor technocratic but democratic in nature. Whilst the context is contemporary, I also identify research on this topic that is much older, illustrating how collective frames bring not only a beneficial perspective, but also one that is long-established.

Author

• Peter Kelly, University of Plymouth