Governmentality of disability in the context of lifelong learning in European Union policy

Abstract

The possibility to participate in education and lifelong learning has been introduced in EU disability policy in recent decades as one of the key means to improve the socioeconomic position of disabled persons. Simultaneously, lifelong learning has been developed as the defining concept of EU education policy to increase social cohesion and economic competitiveness. However, the education, employment rate and socioeconomic status of disabled persons have remained far below the EU average. In this article, we theorize governmentality to explore (1) how EU lifelong learning and disability policy discourses constitute and govern disabled persons and (2) how disabled persons are positioned in the policy discourses. The data consist of the most relevant EU policy documents concerning lifelong learning and disability policy in the twenty-first century. We argue that the policies constitute and govern disabled persons as a group who do not fulfil the premises set for the lifelong learner, and that consequently, policy discourses marginalize disabled persons instead.

Educating self-governing learners and employees: studying, learning and pedagogical practices in the context of vocational education and its reform

“…Or it may be that the formal invisibility of special arrangements is clearly an attempt to strengthen the representation of the Finnish educational system as being in line with global ideals, that is, 'completely inclusive' and lacking any kind of separate support practices, even though these do exist (cf. Because the focus of neo-liberal education policy is on the ideal student who is independent, entrepreneurial and competent, using this rationale means that inclusive schooling is only considered possible for students who are 'able enough' (see Kauppila, Kinnari & Niemi 2018;Slee 2014). What is essential in the discourse on support seen as a right and a privilege is that special educational arrangements, support practices and diagnostics are seen as important and essential aspects of equalizing educational opportunities and therefore enhancing social justice (see Jahnukainen 2015), even though they may sometimes contribute to stigmatization.…”

“…(See e.g. Goodley 2014;Kauppila, Kinnari & Niemi 2018. ) In the general upper secondary school system in particular, different educational practices may disable students by hindering their participation, but also enable their participation by offering adequate support and possibilities for participation (see Mietola 2014).…”

Biopolitics and lifelong learning: the vitalistic turn in English further education discourse

“…These range from the proliferation of confessional pedagogies, data-farming and surveillance to the management of health, disability and employability in education contexts (e.g. Selwyn, 2014;Wittman, 2016;Hope, 2016;Åkerblom, 2019;Kauppila et al, 2020).…”

Zero-Achievers Non-Progressing Studies in Finnish Open University: Three Preventive Factors

“…The aim of the European education policy is to improve socio-economic positions and increase social cohesion and economic competitiveness, but the objective is not to be achieved [49]. Lowincome, first-generation, or minority students are less likely to get to university or finish a degree, compared with their more privileged peers with strong academic qualifications [50].…”