Problems, Politics, and Possibilities
Chapter V: Discipline, Diversity and Agency: Pedagogic Practice and Dispositions to Learning - Megan Watkins 59
59Chapter V Chapter V What, then, makes discipline good? …is not discipline—all discipline—essentially a restraint, a limitation imposed on man’s behaviour? If life is good, how can it be good to bridle it, to constrain it, to impose limits that it cannot overcome? (Durkheim, 2002, pp. 32 & 35.) These questions posed by Durkheim in his course on moral education at the Sorbonne in 1902–3 get to the crux of the dilemma in understanding the nature and role of discipline, namely its ability to both constrain and enable.1 Foucault, likewise, explores this apparent contradiction most notably in Discipline and Punish. Unlike Durkheim, however, who places emphasis on the enabling potential of discipline in the formation of individual moral capacities, Foucault views the utility that discipline can provide as largely a mechanism of subjection. While his later work around the care of the self gives greater acknowledgment to its capacitating effects (Foucault, 1990), most application of his work appears to focus on the negative aspects of disciplinary power. This seems especially the case within education where theory and practice tend to neglect the agentic potential of discipline and the ways in which an embodied self-discipline provides the condition of possibility upon which successful academic engagement depends. Drawing on recent research into the differential achievement and dispositions to learning of Chinese-, Pasiﬁka- and Anglo-background primary school students in Sydney, Australia, this chapter examines the contradictory nature of discipline. It considers how various home and school practices in which these...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.