The oppression of children and young people in education settings: A Foucauldian Discourse Analysis of Educational Psychologists' constructions.
Saved in:
| Title: | The oppression of children and young people in education settings: A Foucauldian Discourse Analysis of Educational Psychologists' constructions. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Hayes, Millie Frances (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Educational & Child Psychology. Sep2025, Vol. 42 Issue 3, p24-39. 16p. |
| Subjects: | Oppression, Educational psychologists, Critical discourse analysis, Discourse, Learning, Power (Social sciences), School children, Young adults |
| Abstract: | Aims To explore educational psychologist's (EPs) constructions of oppressive discourses used about children and young people (CYP) in educational settings, the goals and impact of these discourses and how EPs could work against them. Method/Rationale EPs are required to 'understand and challenge' oppressive practice, however, findings indicate barriers including the 'misuse of power' in education settings and pathologisation of CYP. The current study presents a Foucauldian Discourse Analysis (FDA) of oppressive discourses used about CYP in education settings. Transcripts from semi-structured interviews with seven EPs were analysed. Findings Constructions of 'othering', 'compliance', 'seen not heard', 'within-child', 'conformity' and 'innocence' were derived, emphasising discourses of 'deviancy' and perceived to locate difference internally. These discourses were interpreted to have genealogical links to colonialism, eugenics, and capitalism among others. Participants highlighted 'direct' and 'indirect' approaches to challenging oppressive discourses. Limitations This study explores constructions of constructions, based on EP's interpretations of the discourses employed by education staff. This layered approach could be argued to obscure the viewpoint, possibly distorting the intentions and agendas. However, interpretation is key to FDA and the analysis and discussion is understood to be a reflection of this layered approach. Conclusions Oppressive constructions of CYP seemed to be underpinned by 'within-child' discourses, often presenting medicalised narratives. Through these constructions, CYP are positioned by education staff to meet specific agendas. Possible implications include the need to: Critically reflect on the genealogy of discourses employed about CYP. Consider how these discourses 'form' CYP and explore this explicitly with others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Educational & Child Psychology is the property of British Psychological Society and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Aims To explore educational psychologist's (EPs) constructions of oppressive discourses used about children and young people (CYP) in educational settings, the goals and impact of these discourses and how EPs could work against them. Method/Rationale EPs are required to 'understand and challenge' oppressive practice, however, findings indicate barriers including the 'misuse of power' in education settings and pathologisation of CYP. The current study presents a Foucauldian Discourse Analysis (FDA) of oppressive discourses used about CYP in education settings. Transcripts from semi-structured interviews with seven EPs were analysed. Findings Constructions of 'othering', 'compliance', 'seen not heard', 'within-child', 'conformity' and 'innocence' were derived, emphasising discourses of 'deviancy' and perceived to locate difference internally. These discourses were interpreted to have genealogical links to colonialism, eugenics, and capitalism among others. Participants highlighted 'direct' and 'indirect' approaches to challenging oppressive discourses. Limitations This study explores constructions of constructions, based on EP's interpretations of the discourses employed by education staff. This layered approach could be argued to obscure the viewpoint, possibly distorting the intentions and agendas. However, interpretation is key to FDA and the analysis and discussion is understood to be a reflection of this layered approach. Conclusions Oppressive constructions of CYP seemed to be underpinned by 'within-child' discourses, often presenting medicalised narratives. Through these constructions, CYP are positioned by education staff to meet specific agendas. Possible implications include the need to: Critically reflect on the genealogy of discourses employed about CYP. Consider how these discourses 'form' CYP and explore this explicitly with others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 02671611 |
| DOI: | 10.53841/bpsecp.2025.42.3.24 |
