The return of the repressed?: the gender politics of emergent forms of professionalism in education

Abstract

Three distinct discourses frame this paper: ‘new public managerialism’, new modes of governmentality, and new masculinities and femininities. This paper considers the changing forms of governance in projects of educational professionalism emerging in the nested contexts of teaching, teacher training, and academic research within departments of education. It takes the production of the subject position of the manager/wo‐manager as central to managerialist regimes theorized as provoking and potentiating modes of recruitment, refusal, and mis/recognition. It illustrates this through a heuristic relational schemata constituted by the dominance of the managerialist—audit gaze. Taking a theoretically similar but methodologically different (i.e. non‐empirical) approach (or liberty?), one understands subject positions like Prichard and Deem, as produced ‘through a series of discursive or communicative practices’ realized in different ‘conditions of possibility’. The notion of ‘communicative practice’ was also put under scrutiny, given the monovocal as opposed to the dialogic nature of audit: ‘Audit is essentially a relationship of power between scrutinizer and observed: the latter are rendered objects of information, never subjects in communication’.1 This paper was originally given as part of a symposium on gender and teacher training in higher education at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference Leeds, 13–15 September 2001. The paper has been subsequently revised as a result of conversations with other colleagues in the Professional Education Research and Reading Group, Cathy Aymer and Toyin Okitikipi. It has also been significantly reworked in the light of reviews and we thank our reviewers for their insights. One is, thus, interested in the ubiquity of the ‘managerialist subject position’ as a limit condition for the professional self and how gender gets reworked within this. One is aware that the paper slides across the domains of teaching, teacher training, and academic and professional work identities. It is not presented as an orthodox ‘labour process’ account, neither is it a conventional sociological reading of ‘professionalism’. The authors wish to deliberately keep open the possibilities provided by this lack of specificity through exercising the sociological imagination. The following is best considered an experiment in social critique deriving from a post‐structuralist methodological stance. The aim is to capture through metaphorical means the temperature and tempo of some experiential dimensions of the gendered regulation of educational subjectivities, thought as a central psychosocial feature of the ‘domaining effect’ of audit.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 54 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.