Governmentality and 'fearless speech': framing the education of asylum seeker and refugee children in Australia

This paper considers the educational provision for, and general treatment of, refugee and asylum seeker children in Australia, using a framework of governmentality. The paper describes the regimes of practices which govern refugees and asylum seekers in Australia, including mandatory detention and a complex set of visa categorisations, and considers their consequences for the educational provision for children. It addresses three questions: How is it possible that the rights of children have been rendered invisible in and by a democratic state? How are repressive and even violent practices normalised in a liberal state, so that ordinary citizens show so little concern about them? And what should our response be as educators and intellectuals? In conclusion, it explores Foucault's notions of ethics and fearless speech (parrhesia) as a basis for an ethics of engagement in education.

'Please Mr Hay, what are my poss(abilities)?': Legitimation of ability through physical education practices

This paper provides two vignettes that draw on data from projects that interrogate how a student can be positioned by practices within physical education (PE) and directed by the PE teacher in relation to their valued or legitimated ability. Through the use of Pierre Bourdieu's conceptual tools of field, habitus and capital we investigate the complex legitimation processes that shape student poss(abilities) and that are situated in the space of the PE class. The first vignette is from the perspective of a student and draws on data from interviews, a journal, questionnaires and photos of her PE experiences in upper primary and lower secondary school. The second vignette focuses on teacher practices and his constitution of the field of a PE class highlighting the significance of teacher perspectives of 'ability' in informing assessment in senior secondary PE. Using these examples we discuss the symbolic violence that works against each student by positioning them as 'less able' or 'unable' despite their participation in a learning context. We argue that by not attending to the possible abilities of students that could have been recognized, developed and legitimated, and through the misuse of capital assignment by teachers, PE may well be counterproductive to students' ongoing engagement with the subject area and the espoused potential upon which such a subject area justifies itself.