I gave a paper at an invitation seminar at the University of Western Sydney on Cultural Pedagogies in August 2012. The seminar aimed to to explore discussion  about what might constitute ‘cultural pedagogies’, and to open up debate across disciplines, theories and empirical focus to explore both what is pedagogical about culture, and what is cultural about pedagogy.

My paper was called:

The problem of pedagogy and everyday life or when is pedagogy not a pedagogy?

I argued that contemporary Education policy and research is dominated by interest in and studies of the penetration of learning as a life-long, life-wide project of the self. Significantly driven by speculation about ways that digital technology may (or may not) be breaking down traditional structures of educational provision there is enormous interest in the ‘pedagogization of everyday life’ and development and meaning of ‘informal learning’. For example, I am currently engaged in a year long ethnographic study of one class of 13-14 year olds in London exploring: in what ways do social networks, including digitally mediated networks, enable or impede young people’s learning and learner identity; how children’s digital media activities, embedded in daily practices and regimes of learning and leisure in and beyond the classroom, enable new forms of connected (or disconnected) learning; and how the wider opportunity structures of peers, school, family and community enable diverse learning outcomes.

In this paper I want use findings from this project – in particular the different ways that participants frame the idea of ‘learning’ in school and in everyday life -to question casual and generalised uses of pedagogy as an analytic category in studies of ‘not-school’ learning. I want to argue that principles of progression, of change over time, and expertise must be central to the term’s usefulness rather than simple (and empirically problematic) ideas about subjectivity and identity. Whilst there is no doubt that we can describe all sorts of frames and ‘opportunity structures’ that construct (and delimit) opportunities for learning, how useful is it to bracket all of these together as forms of pedagogy?

A draft version of the paper can be found  at seftongreen discussion paper2