Political Education in Plural Societies: Using the Anti-Bias Approach to Challenge Oppression in Bombay and Berlin

This study addresses the effectivity of the Anti-Bias approach and training methodology as a pedagogical political strategy to challenge oppression among student groups in the cities of Bombay and Berlin. The Anti-Bias trainings conducted within the framework of this study also become the medium through which the perpetuation of oppressive structures by students within and outside the school is investigated. Empirical data from predominantly qualitative investigations in four secondary schools, two each in Bombay and Berlin, is studied and analysed on the basis of theoretical understandings of prejudice, discrimination and identity. This study builds on insights offered by previous research on prejudices and evaluations of anti-bias and diversity interventions, where the lack of sufficient research and thorough evaluations testing impact has been identified (Levy Paluck, 2006). The theoretical framework suggests that prejudices and discriminatory practices are learnt and performed by individuals over the years by way of pre-existing discourses, and that behaviour and practices can be unlearnt through a multi-step process. It proposes that the discursive practices of students contribute to the constitution of their viable selves and in the constitution of ‘others’. Drawing on this framework, the study demonstrates how student-subjects in Bombay and Berlin perpetuate oppressive discourses by performing their identities and performing identities onto ‘others’. Such performative constitution opens up the agency of the individual, disclosing the shifting and dynamic nature of identities. The Anti-Bias approach is posited as an alternative to oppressive discourses and a vehicle that encourages and assists the agency of individuals. The theoretical framework, which brings together a psychological approach to prejudice, a structural approach to discrimination and a poststructural approach to identity, facilitates the analysis of the perpetuation of dominant discourses by the students, as well as how they negotiate their way through familiar norms and discourses. Group discussions and interviews a year after the respective trainings serve to evaluate the agency of the students and the extent to which the training impacted on their perceptions, attitudes and behavioural practices. The study reveals the recurrence of the themes race, religion, gender and sexuality in the representational practices of the students groups in Berlin and Bombay. It demonstrates how students in this study not only perform, but also negotiate and resist oppressive structures. Of particular importance is the role of the school: When schools offer no spaces for discussion, debate and action on contemporary social issues, learning can neither be put into practice nor take on a positive, transformative form. In such cases, agency and resistance is limited and interventionist actions yield little. This study reports the potential of the Anti-Bias approach and training as a tool of political education and action in education. It demonstrates that a single training can initiate change but sustaining change requires long-term strategies and on-going actions. Taking a poststructural perspective, it makes concrete suggestions to adapt and alter the Anti-Bias approach and the implementation of Anti-Bias trainings.

The social dimension: a neglected policy item in the Bologna Process

Since its beginning in 1999, the Bologna Process has influenced various aspects of higher education in its member countries, e.g., degree structures, mobility, lifelong learning, social dimension and quality assurance. The social dimension creates the focus of this research. The social dimension entered the Bologna Process agenda in 2001. Despite a decade of reforms, it somehow remained as a vague element and received low scholarly attention. This research addresses to this gap. Firstly, different meanings of the social dimension according to the major European policy actors are analysed. Unfolding the understandings of the actors revealed that the social dimension is mostly understood in terms reflecting the diversity of population on the student body accessing to, progressing in and completing higher education, with a special concern on the underrepresented groups. However, it is not possible to observe a similar commonality concerning the actual policy measures to achieve this goal. Divergence occurs with respect to the addressed underrepresented groups, i.e., all underrepresented groups or people without formal qualifications and mature learners, and the values and institutional interests traditionally promoted by these actors. Secondly, the dissertation discusses the reflection of this social dimension understanding at the national level by looking at cases of Finland, Germany and Turkey. The in-depth analyses show an awareness of the social dimension among most of the national Bologna Process actors and a common understanding of the social dimension goals. However, this understanding has not triggered action in any of the countries. The countries acted on areas which they defined problematic before the Bologna Process. Finally, based on these findings the dissertation discusses the social dimension as a policy item that managed to get into the Bologna Process agenda, but neither grew into an implementable policy, nor drop out of it. To this aim, it makes use of the multiple streams framework and explains the low agenda status social dimension with: i. the lack of a pressing problem definition: the lack of clearly defined indicators and a comprehensive monitoring system, ii. the lack of a viable solution alternative: the proposal of developing national strategies and action plans closed the way to develop generic guidelines for the social dimension to be translated into national policy processes, iii. low political perceptivity: the recent trends opt for increasing efficiency, excellence and exclusiveness discourses rather than ensuring equality and inclusiveness iv. high constraints: the social dimension by definition requires more public funding which is less appreciated and strategic constraints of the actors in allocating their resources v. the type of policy entrepreneur: the social dimension is promoted by an international stakeholder, the European Students’ Union, instead of the ministers responsible for higher education The social dimension remains a policy item in the Bologna Process which is noble enough to agree but not urgent enough to act on.