Advertisement

Performative Pedagogy: Poststructural Theory as a Tool to Engage in Identity Work Within a Youth-Led HIV Prevention Program

  • Helen CahillEmail author
  • Julia Coffey
  • Sally Beadle
Reference work entry

Abstract

This chapter discusses the use of poststructural theory as a way to inform identity work within a youth-led HIV prevention program in Asia, entitled NewGen. Many HIV prevention programs which serve those “at risk” focus on changing the behaviors that are deemed to put the individual at risk; however, this places a disproportionate focus on individual rather than sociocultural explanations and can inadvertently lead to stigmatization and exclusion. Using a logic of change informed by a poststructuralist understanding of identity opens the space to create a different kind of program, one in which the emphasis is on a repositioning from victim to leader. A poststructural focus on positioning and subjectivity emphasizes the socially constructed nature of identity and highlights the importance of social factors, rather than individual behavior, in the ways identities are formed and lived. The pedagogies used within the program are designed to facilitate a (re)positioning, (re)imagining, and (re)enactment of the self. The course positions participants as leaders and advocates rather than simply as members of key populations identified to be at higher risk of HIV exposure. In this chapter the ways poststructural theory informs the design of the NewGen course are discussed. Data collected about participants’ experiences of the NewGen course illustrates their response to the methodology as a form of identity work.

Keywords

Young People Identity Work Serodiscordant Couple Youth Lead Individual Behavior Change 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Julia Coffey would like to acknowledge that the work was done while she was employed as a Research Fellow at the Youth Research Centre, University of Melbourne.

References

  1. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Butler, J. (1999). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity (1999 ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Butler, J. (2007). An account of oneself. In B. Davies (Ed.), Judith butler in conversation: Analyzing the texts and talk of everyday life. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Cahill, H. (2010a). Drama for Intergenerational Dialogue: Researching Youth Views about the Future. NJ (Drama Australia Journal). 33(2), 7–20.Google Scholar
  6. Cahill, H. (2010b). Re-thinking the fiction/reality boundary: investigating the use of drama in HIV prevention projects in Vietnam. RIDE. 15(2), 152–172.Google Scholar
  7. Cahill, H. (2012). Form and governance: considering the drama as a ‘technology of the self’ RiDE: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 1–20.Google Scholar
  8. Cahill, H. (2014a). Re-thinking role-play for health and wellbeing: Creating a pedagogy of possibility. In J. McLeod & K. Wright (Eds.), Rethinking youth wellbeing: Critical Perspectives Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Cahill, H. (2014b). Withholding the personal story: Using theory to orient practice in applied theatre about HIV and human rights. Research in Drama Education: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 19(1), 23–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cahill, H., Beadle, S., & Coffey, J. (2013). NewGen Asia: Building capacity in emerging young leaders in the HIV response. Research Report 41. Melbourne: University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
  11. Davies, B. (1989). The discursive production of the male/female dualism in school settings. Oxford Review of Education, 15(3), 229–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davies, B. (1993). Shards of Glass: Children reading and writing beyond gendered identities. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  13. Davies, B. (1994). Post-structuralist theory and classroom practice. Geelong: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Davies, B. (2006). Subjectification: The relevance of Butler’s analysis for education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 27(4), 425–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davies, B., Dormer, S., Gannon, S., Laws, C., Rocco, S., Taguchi, H., & Helen, M. C. (2001). Becoming schoolgirls: The ambivalent project of subjectification. Gender and Education, 13(2), 167–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977. Brighton, Sussex: The Harvester Press.Google Scholar
  17. France, A. (2000). Towards a sociological understanding of youth and their risk-taking. Journal of Youth Studies, 3(3), 317–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kesby, M. (2005). Retheorizing empowerment-through-participation as a performance in space: Beyond tyranny to transformation. Signs, 30(4), 2037–2065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. UNAIDS. (2011a). HIV in Asia and the pacific: Getting to zero. Bangkok: Joint United Nations Programme on HIV & AIDS.Google Scholar
  20. UNAIDS. (2011b). UNAIDS terminology guidelines. Geneva: Joint United Nations Programme on HIV & AIDS.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Youth Research CentreThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.School of Humanities and Social ScienceUniversity of NewcastleCallaghanAustralia
  3. 3.Melbourne Graduate School of EducationThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations