Introduction
Policies are outcomes of political power and influence. Therefore, adult educators must be aware of their significance and influence in professional practice. This article will attempt to provide a scholarly supported argument as to why adult educators should be aware of the way that policies (power) influence the professional practice, and how they should prepare for this influence.
Politics in Education
According to Ginsburg (2000), politics in education can be conceptualized into two distinct but interconnect ways: “the politics of education and the political work accomplished through education” (p.ix). Sissel (2001), suggest adult education history illustrates the number of accomplishments and literature regarding how political work has been accomplished through education. Sissel also has suggested that scholars have sought to understand how the political landscape has affect adult educators work and lives, as well as ways that the adult educator can facilitate change in environments congested with polices driven by political power.
As cited in Sissel (2001), West and Blumberg (1990) would suggest that politics and concepts of political power are not restricted to activities of governments or partisan electoral politics. They are rather influenced by power and in all aspects of the human condition. Understanding this reality is critical for adult education practitioners. An adult educator’s realm of influence is ultimately driven by a political agenda outside of their control. Sissel would suggest that because political analysis can be applied in any human context, it is all political.
Cevero and Wilson (p. 1, 2001) would support this ideology by arguing this concept from another approach, “the education of adults has played an active part in the ongoing constitution of social, economic, political, and cultural alike since the beginning of human history.” Furthermore, Cevero and Wilson (2001) suggest that over the years, “many of the institutions of society, from trade unions to higher education, from local community-based organization to multinational corporations have increasingly turned to adult education to fashion a society in terms of their own interest and values” (p.1).
As cited in Cevero and Wilson (2001), Knowles (1980) explains that adult education “brings together into a discrete social system all the individual, institutions, and associations concerned with the education of adults and perceives them as working towards common goals of improving the methods and materials of adult learning, extending the opportunities for adults to learn, and advancing the general level of our culture” (p.25). According to Cevero and Wilson (2001), this optimism stems from the belief that by helping adults learn, adults educators improve the lives of individuals, increase the effectiveness of organizations, and meet the needs of society. However political influences often create barriers for adult learners. “Adult education is not practice on a neutral stage. It happens in a social location that is defined by particular social vision in relation to the wider systems of social economic and cultural relations of power” (p.6)
Implications
So what, why does this matter to adult education. Why should adult educators be aware of how power influences practice. According to Sissel (2001), one aspect of the politics of adult education addressed frequently in the literature has been the notion of power and privilege and its corollary construct: powerlessness and marginality.” From my perspective, I have personally seen how power has been used in organizations to marginalized groups of adult learners. Power influences relationships particularly in relation to gender, class, and race (Hart, 1992, Tisdell, 1993; Flannery, 1994; Sheared, 1994; Cunningham, 1996; Johnson-Bailey and Cervero, 1996, 2000; Sissel, Birdsong, and Silaski, 1997; Rocco and West, 1998; Sissel, 2000; Sheared and Sissel, 2001).
To illustrate the practical ramifications of policies of power, within an HRD context, as Cevero and Wilson (2001) so accurately articulated, “the trade unions and the HRD department offer design programs that define workers differently in terms of economic relationships with management and owners of capital. For example, there are a number of program within my own organization that are defined by different levels of work relationships, and have access elements based on policy driven criteria, which are design to marginalize groups.
Adult education in HRD is not neutral. The adult educators who embrace a humanistic foundation, and who believes that the highest professional and moral principle for adult educators is to involve learners in identifying their needs, often are disappointed by the practical realities of HRD. Therefore, it is critical for adult educator to be aware of how policies of power influence learning within this micro environment. According to Ball (1987) and Blasé (1991a) as cited n Sissel (2001) have pointed out that macrolevel social, political and cultural factors all influence the micropolitics of educational settings. Therefore, the micropolitics of education organizations and the teaching and learning that take place within them cannot be understood without some comprehension of the external environment in which then function.
Continuing professional education CPE programs, graduate education, grassroots/community development and international education are not exempt. Each micoenvornment is shaped by internal and external influences of power. As Hall (1978) has summarized, all serious educational movements are political. For example , a CPE program not only shapes a learners purpose and place, but influence learner’s power relationships. From my perspective, graduate education program maintain power structures in society by creating policies that marginalize groups. Graduate programs have been historically accused by the powerless for establishing policies, such as enrollment deadlines and tuition fees that have marginalize groups of people and helped to maintain existing power structures. On the other hand, grassroots/community development program are design to challenge the power structure and shift the power from the haves to the have nots. These program’s policies are typically design to remove power from one group and give it to another. However, beware adult educators, for sometimes the have nots are not always the have nots. At times they can be the power structure wanting to stay in power. Finally, I believe that International education program supports the power structures associated with globalization and at the same time seeks to reduce marginalization of the vary poor.
According to Sissel (2001), as adult educators begin to think about the power structures existing in various miroenvironment, then they begin to think politically about the expectations they have about learners, themselves, and others. Sissel (2001) suggest, “while the politics of diversity affects our collective way of being, diversity issues ale influence our interactions with learners.
Policies in all forms of education programming are design based on the power agenda of a selected few. From my perspective, understanding the political agenda will enable adult educators to find ways to operate with the environment. However, according to Cevero and Wilson (p. 7, 2001), “although it is true that practicing adult educators, regardless of their ideological stance, must attend to the practical issues of how to operate with exciting political relations, this stand has come under criticism on two counts: (1) its definition of power is narrowly focused along individual lines, and (2) its largely unprincipled attention to the “how to” of politics leaves aside issues of “what for”.” Forester’s (1998) literature on organizational politics may help adult educators recognize how to negotiate organizational politic. The literature defines those politics largely in terms of which individuals have power in the organizational setting. “Thus it fails to conceptualize power in socialstructural terms, in which the hierarchical relationships of race, class, and gender are manifested in adult education” Cevero and Wilson (p. 7, 2001)
Conclusion
In conclusion, adult educators should understand that everything is political. Politics influence adult learning in every facet. It is critical for adult educators to understand the macro and micro environments that they work. No environment is void of political influence. Additionally, they must understand how to navigate through policies of power.
They must be aware of who various policies are design to benefit and who they will marginalize. Finally, the adult educator must be aware that their ideological stances may conflict with the internal and external environment. However, understanding the possible conflicts will allow them to engage with a larger critical lens and look for opportunities to influence.
References
Ball. S. The micropliticas of the School: Towards a Theory of School Organization. London: Methuen, 1987
Cervero, R., and Wilson, A.(2001) Power in practice: Adult education and the struggle for knowledge and power in society. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ginsburg, M. (2000) Given a head start, should one cooperate or compete? In P. A. Sissel, (2001) Thinking politically: a framework for adult and continuing education. No 91. 5-15
Sissel, P.A (2001) Thinking politically: a framework for adult and continuing education. No 91. 5-15
West, G. and Blumberg, R.L. “reconstructing Social Protest from a feminist perspective. In P. A. Sissel, (2001) Thinking politically: a framework for adult and continuing education. No 91. 5-15
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
