Narrative on a doctoral narrative : reflections on postgraduate study and pedagogy

This paper explores the stages of one student’s intellectual journey through a Doctor of Philosophy program of study in an Australian university. It outlines the theoretical and methodological insights made as she came to understand that data was discourse, entailing a politics and position of power that ran contrary to the aims of the study that the student was undertaking in and on her own community. The article is a reflective narrative produced from the experience of having to come to terms with some of the personal and professional tensions and contradictions that postgraduate study can, and maybe should, engender if it is to be any of real value.

Queering Paradigms II : Interrogating Agendas

This book offers a fundamental challenge to a variety of theoretical, social, and political paradigms, ranging from law and justice studies to popular culture, linguistics to political activism. Developing the intellectual project initiated in Queering Paradigms, this volume extends queer theorizing in challenging new directions and uses queer insights to explore, trouble, and interrogate the social, political, and intellectual agendas that pervade (and are often taken for granted within) public discourses and academic disciplines. The contributing authors include queer theorists, socio-linguists, sociologists, political activists, educators, social workers and criminologists. Together, they contribute not only to the ongoing process of theorizing queerly, but also to the critique and reformulation of their respective disciplines.

An illusory interiority : interrogating the discourse/s of inclusion

It is generally accepted that the notion of inclusion derived or evolved from the practices of mainstreaming or integrating students with disabilities into regular schools. Halting the practice of segregating children with disabilities was a progressive social movement. The value of this achievement is not in dispute. However, our charter as scholars and cultural vigilantes (Slee & Allan, 2001) is to always look for how we can improve things; to avoid stasis and complacency we must continue to ask, how can we do it better? Thus, we must ask ourselves uncomfortable questions and develop a critical perspective that Foucault characterised as an ‘ethic of discomfort’ (Rabinow & Rose, 2003, p. xxvi) by following the Nietzscheian principle where one acts “counter to our time and thereby on our time… for the benefit of a time to come” (Nietzsche, 1874, p. 60 in Rabinow & Rose, 2003, p. xxvi). This paper begins with a fundamental question for those participating in inclusive education research and scholarship – when we talk of including, into what do we seek to include?

From ABCs to ADHD : the role of schooling the construction of behaviour disorder and the production of disorderly objects

Discussion of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in the media, and thus much popular discourse, typically revolves around the possible causes of disruptive behaviour and the “behaviourally disordered” child. The usual suspects - too much television and video games, food additives, bad parenting, lack of discipline and single mothers – feature prominently as potential contributors to the spiralling rate of ADHD diagnosis in Western industrialised nations, especially the United States and Australia. Conspicuously absent from the field of investigation, however, is the scene of schooling and the influence that the discourses and practices of schooling might bring to bear upon the constitution of “disorderly behaviour” and subsequent recognition of particular children as a particular kind of “disorderly”. This paper reviews a sample of the literature surrounding ADHD, in order to question the function of this absence and, ultimately, make an argument for an interrogation of the school as a site for the production of disorderly objects.

Drugs, labels and (p)ill-fitting boxes : ADHD and children who are hard to teach

In offering a critical review of the problem we call “ADHD” this paper progresses in three stages. The first two parts juxtapose the dominant voices emanating from the literature in medicine and psychology, highlighting some interdependency between these otherwise competing interest groups. In part three, the nature of the relationship between these groups and the institution of the school is considered, as is the role that the school may play in the psycho-pathologisation of fidgety, distractible, active children who prove hard to teach. In so doing, the author provides an insight as to why the problem we call “ADHD” has achieved celebrity status in Australia and what the effects of that may be for children who come to be described in these ways.

Out of sight, out of mind/out of mind, out of site : Schooling and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder is a diagnostic term now indelibly scored on the public psyche. In some quarters, a diagnosis of “ADHD” is regarded with derision. In others it is welcomed with relief. Despite intense multi-disciplinary research, the jury is still out with regards to the “truth” of ADHD. Not surprisingly, the rapid increase in diagnosis over the past fifteen years, coupled with an exponential rise in the prescription of restricted class psychopharmaceuticals has stirred virulent debate. Provoking the most interest, it seems, are questions regarding causality. Typically, these revolve around possible antecedents for “disorderly” behaviour – bad food, bad tv and bad parents. Very seldom is the institution of schooling ever in the line of sight. To investigate this gap, I draw on Foucault to question what might be happening in schools and how this may be contributing to the definition, recognition and classification of particular children as a particular kind of “disorderly”.

Naming or creating a problem?

In this chapter, we are going to consider how language and practice interact in the process of supporting the learning of students with diverse abilities. You will learn that it is necessary for teachers to understand that while labels carry an administrative function in schools, when used carelessly they operate to stigmatise and exclude those whom we are working to include. This chapter will introduce the concept of equity and explain how the dilemma of difference emerges when we try to determine who should receive support and how. The chapter will also explain how an appreciation of language can help to inform and transform our pedagogy. An example of inclusion in action is provided to illustrate how inclusive language in practice can promote deep cultural changes that benefit both students and teachers. The process of determining appropriate and effective education of students with additional support requirements is troubled by what some refer to as the ‘dilemma of difference’. This dilemma derives mainly from the nature of language and our need to use certain words, terms and categories in order to share common understandings. Without these, educators cannot hope to arrive on the same page, yet such words can take on a life of their own; influencing thoughts, perspectives and attitudes in ways that far outstrip original intentions. The drive for clarity, however, through definition and diagnostic classification can ultimately obscure because of the cultural meanings that become invested within these terms through their use over time and in different professional contexts. In effect, trying to define “difference” in order to provide the right support to particular students is a process that entrenches normative boundaries that in turn create, accentuate and stigmatise whatever we have decided constitutes difference. Language is thus a powerful and dangerous weapon but, like other weapons, language can both hurt and defend. Understanding the power of language enables educators to use it both wisely and safely to the maximum benefit of their students. This chapter will discuss how teachers can recognise and support their students in ways that avoid stigma and the closure of stereotyping.

The product of text and “Other” statements : discourse analysis and the critical use of Foucault

Much has been written on Michel Foucault’s reluctance to clearly delineate a research method, particularly with respect to genealogy (Harwood 2000; Meadmore, Hatcher, & McWilliam 2000; Tamboukou 1999). Foucault (1994, p. 288) himself disliked prescription stating, “I take care not to dictate how things should be” and wrote provocatively to disrupt equilibrium and certainty, so that “all those who speak for others or to others” no longer know what to do. It is doubtful, however, that Foucault ever intended for researchers to be stricken by that malaise to the point of being unwilling to make an intellectual commitment to methodological possibilities. Taking criticism of “Foucauldian” discourse analysis as a convenient point of departure to discuss the objectives of poststructural analyses of language, this paper develops what might be called a discursive analytic; a methodological plan to approach the analysis of discourses through the location of statements that function with constitutive effects.

What's Queer About Queer Criminology?

The term ‘‘queer criminology’’ is increasingly being used in criminological discussions, though there remains little consistency with regard to how it is used and to what it refers. It has been used broadly to describe criminological research on LGBTQ people and their interactions with the justice system, more specifically to describe those analyses that identify and critique the heteronormative knowledges or binarized understandings of gender and sexuality within criminal justice research, and also to label theoretical and conceptual pieces that argue for a greater connection between queer theory and criminology. However, there are some important distinctions between ‘‘queer criminology’’ and ‘‘queer theory’’ more widely, particularly the deconstructive approaches of the latter. This chapter explores the engagements between queer theory and ‘‘queer criminology,’’ specifically focusing on whether ‘‘queer criminology’’ adopts an understanding of ‘‘queer’’ as an attitude, and as signifying a deconstructive project—a position that features in many strands of queer theoretical work. It will argue that while there are different ways of engaging with ‘‘queer’’ as a concept, and that each of these engagements produces different kinds of ‘‘queer’’ projects, ‘‘queer criminology’’ does not always engage with the deconstructive approaches drawn from queer theory. Ultimately, this can limit the ways that ‘queer criminologists’’ are able to address injustice.

Imagining social justice

This paper examines how creativity and the arts can assist teachers who teach from a social justice perspective, and how knowledge built through meaningful experiences of difference can make a difference. Just as imagining is central to visual arts practice, so too the capacity to imagine is a necessity for social justice. The authors ask what art can do, and how art can work, to bring about greater understandings and practices around social justice and the early years. A ‘recognitive justice’ (Fraser, 1997, 2000; Cazden, 2012) requires the capacity to be sensitive to the multiple voices that need to be heard, and the ability to imagine how lives might be lived differently. The arts can provide powerful means for thinking social justice, and the experiences described in this paper can have application in addressing social justice in the professional preparation of prospective teachers. Three teacher educators who teach from a social justice perspective apply a collective biography methodology to their stories of art activity. Data were collected from three sites: transcripts, notes and digital images from a salon evening; ethnographic observations, field notes and artefacts from a school classroom; and a/r/tographic data generated in a university art classroom. Data were analysed using Foucault and the conceptual work of other post-structuralist philosophies, to explore how aesthetic and creative artistic activity could excite imaginations and open up multiple possibilities for richer forms of educational outcomes – for teacher educators, their students, and ultimately for young children.

Not as it seems : using Deleuzian concepts of the imaginary to rethink children’s drawings

Deleuze (1990) states in Negotiations that signs are realized in ideas. Although Deleuze referred to cinema, his thinking about signs and ideas can apply to drawings. Cinema is moving imagery and drawing is static, however both are informed and constructed from realized ideas that continue to shift beyond the artifact. Theories about children’s drawings have historically pertained to establishing schematic universalities rather than acknowledging the agglomerative connections they make to the multiple things occurring around a drawing as it is created. Universal schemas however persist within early childhood art discourses despite the growth of critical theory research into other aspects of childhood. Deleuze’s assertions about the signs and classifications of cinema help to contest notions of schematic development, i.e. children should progress through particular iconic drawing stages at particular ages. Deleuze’s quotes and thoughts on the imaginary and imagination are referenced to interrogate ‘scientific’ knowledges and the gathering of evidential truths about children’s intellectual growth and development. Four examples from a dataset of drawings from a pilot study, undertaken by the author that tested the methodological potential of intergenerational collaborative drawing in early childhood settings, facilitate focused discussion on the above contestations.

Inclusion?

Whilst inclusive education is a relatively recent advance in our thinking about schooling and pedagogy, it is rapidly establishing movement simultaneously reflected in and refracted by education policy, research, and scholarship. This is manifest in the proliferation of policy texts and programmes generated by education jurisdictions globally and locally, and in the burgeoning number of scholarly texts, academic conferences, and research grants dedicated to inclusive education.

“I’m Happy with Who I Am” : A Discursive Analysis of the Self-characterisation Practices of Boys in “Behaviour” Schools

In this chapter, I draw on poststructural theories of language to examine the self-characterisation practices of 33 boys attending special schools for students with disruptive behaviour. During a semi-structured interview, each boy was asked to describe his personality and then to choose from a selection of positive/negative word pairs. The objective was to determine whether these young people would characterise themselves in positive or negative ways. Participants were then asked if there was anything they would change about themselves if they could. Responses were analysed and compared against a discourse model developed from media reports and interviews with their principals. Findings suggest that while discourse may well ‘form the objects of which it speaks’ (Foucault, 1972, p. 49) in the eyes of teachers, principals, psychiatrists and paediatricians, it also offers a means through which the constituted subject can re-author itself in a more positive frame.

Reading Derrida on mathematics

This article engages with the claims of Anne Brubaker that “[n]ow that the dust has settled after the so-called ‘Science Wars’ […] it is an opportune time to reassess the ways in which poststructural theory both argues persuasively for mathematics as a culturally embedded practice – a method as opposed to a metaphysics – and, at the same time, reinscribes realist notions of mathematics as a noise-free description of a mind independent reality.” Through a close re-reading of Jacques Derrida’s work I argue, in alliance with Vicki Kirby’s critique of the work of Brian Rotman, not only that Brubaker misunderstands Derrida’s “writing” but also that her argument constitutes a typical instance of much wider misreadings of Derrida and “poststructuralism” across a range of disciplines in terms of the ways in which her text re-institutes the very stabilities it itself attributes to Derrida’s texts.