Re-thinking power in student voice as games of truth: dealing/playing your hand

Untitled

“…There has been an emergence of a critical educational discourse that draws from using Foucault's notion of 'governmentality' to theorise and critically analyse student voice projects (Anderson, 2015). Governmentality discourse provides a mode of problematising power dynamics in classroom relationships and particularly student participation (Nelson, 2017). The term 'Government'' pertains to "the indirect and heterogeneous programs, strategies and techniques that have sought to regulate the conduct of conduct, including the relation of the self to the self… [P]ower works by producing practices for acting on the self by the self, stressing the dimension of self-subjectification (the ethical practices) in any process of government" (Bragg, 2007, p. 345).…”

“…Building on Bragg's work, Nelson (2017) argues that student voicework in schools develops self-technologies, thus governing by co-opting "students as knowledge workers into regulating and policing pedagogy, teachers and themselves as learners" (p. 183). Linked with governmentality but conceptualised here as a discourse in its own right, accountability and its associated audit culture has a profound influence on the field of student voice.…”

“…Learner agency "involves both compliance with and resistance to classroom norms and therefore is far more sophisticated than acting in acquiescence to expectations" (Charteris & Smardon, 2018, p. 51). Learner agency in student voice initiatives is theorised by Nelson (2017) as deployed "strategically and influentially", depending "on the perceived rules and norms" that operate within a particular schooling space (p. 184). Rather than silent witnesses, young people are positioned as active agents with something to say about their schooling and what could make learning more exciting and relevant to their lives .…”

“…Who is included and who is excluded when we have discussions about power relations and theories of power in schools? (Mayes et al, 2017, p. 35) A discourse of refusal that engages with voice to 'unsettle' and challenge particular power relations is illustrated in researcher Emily Nelson's (2017) (Nelson, 2017, p. 90) Inherent in Nelson's (2017) refusal is an acknowledgement of the positioning of the researcher/practitioner. Consideration is given, as illustrated above, to the nuances of power in voicework.…”

“…Yet problematically, the models of voicework that focus on the improvement of provision of services to children can still imply that young people are deficient and adults are best placed to make decisions on their behalf (Mannion, 2007). There has been growing critique of voicework that fails to enhance the status and positioning of students in schooling power relations (Mayes et al, 2017, Nelson, 2017, practices that locate students as data sources (Fielding, 2012) and quality control for teaching practices (Herriot, 2013;Lodge 2005). As teacher educators, who have worked with teachers in a coaching role to assist them to interpret student voice data gathered in their classrooms (Charteris & Smardon, 2015), we have seen these significant shifts in the field first hand over the last two decades and in turn have altered our perceptions around the ethics of voicework.…”