Abstract
Advances in our understanding of human cognition highlight the utility of the arts to create an inter-subjective feeling of unity, which arises when our minds attune plastically to each other and jointly attend a single event (Brandt PA, Form and meaning in art. In: Turner M (ed) The artful mind: cognitive science and the riddle of human creativity. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 172, 2006), making the arts highly appropriate for empirical studies of the social impact of education. Although guidelines for empirical social science research published by the American Educational Research Association (AERA, Educ Res 35(6):33–40, 2006; AERA, Educ Res, 38(6):481–486, 2009) and the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF, Research excellence framework: workshops on the impacts of research in the practice-based creative and performing arts, the humanities and social sciences. Retrieved 8 Oct 2012. http://www.ref.ac.uk/media/ref/content/background/impact/workshops_impact_research.pdf, 2010) make room for diverse methodological forms, they encourage educational researchers to follow the ‘logic of enquiry’ (AERA, Educ Res 35(6):33, 2006). Thus, in contrast to the artist’s intentional orientation of an audience towards a shared unique instant (Brandt, ibid), AERA (ibid, p. 35) suggests that evidence should be ‘described’, rather than experienced. These standards for reporting on empirical social science are modelled on forms of representation of other sciences, and are ostensibly motivated by the benign aim to provide guidance about essential information. This chapter argues that the proponents of scientific standards are in fact serving a socio-political agenda that seeks to atomise society by denying the possibility of collective human experience, e.g. the privileging of description over experience is bound up with the isolation of the learner as an autonomous economic unit in an education marketplace. It argues that efforts to identify standards in the reporting of educational research should be resisted as a manifestation of the ‘new totalitarianism’ in which oppositional discourses are silenced through the regulation of academic communication. Using the example of UK filmmaking, this chapter demonstrates how the development of the ‘new totalitarianism’ in academic research is part of wider social changes, and identifies the value of arts-based educational research as a means of resistance to the imposition of market values in education and society.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
AERA. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 33–40.
AERA. (2009). Standards for reporting on humanities-oriented research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 38(6), 481–486.
Ball, S. J. (2001). Labour, learning and the economy: A ‘policy sociology’ perspective. In M. Fielding (Ed.), Taking education really seriously: Four years Hard Labour (pp. 45–56). London: Routledge.
Barber, M. (1997). The learning game. London: Indigo.
Blair, T. (1997). New labour because Britain deserves better. Retrieved June 18, 2010, from http://www.labourparty.org.uk/manifestos/1997/1997-labour-manifesto.shtml
Bourdieu, P. (2010). Culture is in danger. In G. Sapiro (Ed.), Sociology is a martial art: Political writings by Pierre Bourdieu. New York: The New Press.
Brandt, P. A. (2006). Form and meaning in art. In M. Turner (Ed.), The artful mind: Cognitive science and the riddle of human creativity (pp. 171–188). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cameron, D. (2012). ‘Make money not art-house films’: British PM. Retrieved August 24, 2012, from http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/movies/make-money-not-arthouse-films-british-pm-tells-industry/story-e6frfmvr-1226243062914#ixzz24Sc4vuEo
Collini, S. (2012). What are universities for? London: Penguin Books Ltd.
Connolly, R. (2013). Have you ever considered a career in total revolution?: Drama and the corporate reform of UK higher education. Studies in Theatre and Performance, 33(2), 225–243.
DCMS. (2001). Culture and creativity: The next ten years. Retrieved February 27, 2008, from www.culture.gov.uk
Dewey, J. (1952). Democracy and education. New York: The Macmillan Company.
Dutton, D. (2009). The art instinct. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Elliott, J., & Doherty, P. (2001). Restructuring educational research for the ‘Third Way’? In M. Fielding (Ed.), Taking education really seriously: Four years Hard Labour (pp. 209–221). London: Routledge.
ESRC. (2000). Annual report (1999–2000) ESRC. Retrieved July 4, 2010, from http://www.esrcsocietytoday.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/Images/Annual%20Report%2099-00_tcm6-6040.pdf
Fielding, M. (2001). Target setting, policy pathology and student perspectives: Learning to labour in new times. In M. Fielding (Ed.), Taking education really seriously: Four years Hard Labour (pp. 143–154). London: Routledge.
Friedman, M. (2002). Capitalism and freedom: 40th anniversary edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Friedrich, C. J. (1955). The political thought of neo-liberalism review by Carl J. Friedrich. The American Political Science Review, 49(2), 509–525.
Griffiths, M. (2012). Is it possible to live a philosophical, educational life in education, nowadays? Journal of Philosophy of Education, 46, 397–413.
Hargreaves, D. H. (1996). Teaching as a research-based profession: Possibilities and prospects. London: Teacher Training Agency.
Hargreaves, D. H. (2001). Revitalising educational research: past lessons and future prospects. In M. Fielding (Ed.), Taking education really seriously: Four years Hard Labour (pp. 197–208). London: Routledge.
Hill, R., & Myatt, T. (2010). The economics anti-textbook: A critical thinker’s guide to microeconomics. London: Zed Books.
Jones, K., & Thomson, P. (2008). Policy rhetoric and the renovation of English schooling: The case of Creative Partnerships. Journal of Education Policy, 23(6), 715–727.
Loach, K. (2012). Ken Loach: Pouring lottery money into blockbusters is a travesty. Retrieved August 24, 2012, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9006675/Ken-Loach-pouring-lottery-money-into-blockbusters-is-a-travesty.html
Machen, A. (2010). The hill of dreams. Cardigan: Parthian Library of Wales.
Martin, B. R. (2011). The research excellence framework and the ‘impact agenda’: Are we creating a Frankenstein monster? Research Evaluation, 20(3), 247–254.
Miles, S. (2007). Feeling 10 feet tall: Creative inclusion in a community of practice. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 28(4), 505–518.
Morris, E. (2003). Creative journeys. Retrieved May 8, 2008, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2003/jun/24/artsinschools.schools
Neelands, J., & Choe, B. (2010). The English model of creativity: Cultural politics of an idea. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 16(3), 287–304.
Ramonet, I. (2008). Chapter 1: Introduction. In R. Brouillette (Director), Encirclement: Neo-liberalism ensnares democracy. Québec (Canada), HDCam (shot in 16mm), B&W, 2008, 160 minutes.
REF. (2010). Research excellence framework: Workshops on the impacts of research in the practice-based creative and performing arts, the humanities and social sciences. Retrieved October 8, 2012, from http://www.ref.ac.uk/media/ref/content/background/impact/workshops_impact_research.pdf
Reynolds, D., Sammons, P., Stoll, L., Barber, M., & Hillman, J. (1996). School effectiveness and school improvement in the United Kingdom. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7(2), 133–158.
Sandel, M. J. (2012). What money can’t buy: The moral limits of markets. London: Allen Lane.
Sennett, R. (2008). The craftsman. London: Penguin Books Ltd.
Smeyers, P., & Depaepe, M. (2012). The lure of psychology for education and educational research. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 46(3), 315–331.
Thatcher, M. (1987). Interview for woman’s own. Retrieved October 31, 2009, from http://www.margaretthatcher.org/speeches/displaydocument.asp?docid=106689
Tooley, J. (1998). Educational research: A critique. London: Office for Standards in Education.
Ward, S. C. (2010). Understanding creative partnerships: An examination of policy and practice. Retrieved February 11, 2013, from http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/525/
Ward, S. (2012). Education under the heel of Caesar: Reading UK higher education reform through Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 46(4), 619–630.
Ward, S. (2013). Creativity, freedom and the crash: How the concept of creativity was used as a bulwark against communism during the cold war, and as a means to reconcile individuals to neo-liberalism prior to the great recession. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 11(3), 110–126.
Wriston, W. B. (1992). The twilight of sovereignty. New York: Macmillan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ward, S. (2014). Education and the ‘New Totalitarianism’: How Standards for Reporting on Empirical Studies of Education Limit the Scope of Academic Research and Communication. In: Smeyers, P., Depaepe, M. (eds) Educational Research: Material Culture and Its Representation. Educational Research, vol 8. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03083-8_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03083-8_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-03082-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-03083-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)