Anthony Giddens is a central contributor to the theory of learner agency. His theory of structuraton offers a third way through which to view the expression of human behaviour over time. His recent passing is even more solemn given the insight and certitude with which he wrote and communicated.
My interest in his theory is in using the lens of structuration as a means to afford the experience of learner agency in a micro setting – a school community. It is a significant part of answering the question ‘How do we give learners the power to shape their world?’
structuration theory, concept in sociology that offers perspectives on human behaviour based on a synthesis of structure and agency effects known as the “duality of structure.” Instead of describing the capacity of human action as being constrained by powerful stable societal structures (such as educational, religious, or political institutions) or as a function of the individual expression of will (i.e., agency), structuration theory acknowledges the interaction of meaning, standards and values, and power and posits a dynamic relationship between these different facets of society. (https://www.britannica.com/topic/structuration-theory)
In reading the introduction to his book – penned in 1990, a standout feature is the prescience of thought around modernity and it’s future. Most of this content would have been written during the 1980’s. I’m writing this in 2022. Right now, the fact of World War Three has begun, with all the terror of the threat of nuclear warfare. Alongside this is the insidious impact of climate change – the bastard product of what Giddens calls ‘the death of nature’. Both of these unprecedented threats to human kind were highlighted by Giddens three decades ago.
I’m not sure how best to reflect on my reading. So, with fingers poised at the keyboard, whatever strikes my mind will land on the page.
In what should not be a surprise at all, it was surprising to see Zygmunt Bauman listed in the acknowledgements. Any commentary on Modernity would do well to reference Bauman.
Bauman talks about a different duality – Power verses Political. He asserts that power (the ability to get stuff done) and politics (the ability to decide what stuff gets done) used to be perceived in a kind of geostatic relationship. In our post-structuralist world, the myth of this relationship has been exposed. It’s awkwardly confronting nakedness leaves us chewing apples, reaching for sheep skins, shooing snakes and terrified that no-one’s in control. Bauman gives us Liquid Modernity – a world in which nothing sticks.
The irony of Bauman’s metaphor about no-one in control is captured by Putin’s war on the people of Ukraine. This is where where, when abject fears around change and certainty are materialised, power and politics come together in a military response and (at the cost of human sacrifice) there is certainty about who is in control. People die anyway. Citizens have less agency, less ontological and physical security – yet clarity of purpose and authenticity. They do have power to shape their world – but the world they are shaping has transmogrified. As have they.
So many have slipped down Mazlow’s hierarchy of needs that the power to act is directed towards what were formally the trivial crumbs of daily activity – water, food, shelter, safety. Where hope was once trivial – the shape of hopes lost, and hopes realised are now amplified in neon flashing brightness.
In Melbourne, where I live, the role of ‘the worlds longest lockdown’ also had an impact on the people’s perception of their power to shape their world. The nascent space between power and politics was a hotly contested zone for the battle of ‘who is in control’. This is still being worked out in ever and ever more clear ‘lifestyle choices’ that are being made – like moving to Queensland.
Back to Giddens….
His notions of trust, of risk, of globalisation all feed into a narrative of self. Without mentioning Foucault, he refers to the identity of an individual being a consumer product. Something we put on. This is reminiscent of Focault’s Technologies of Self. In other words – we live in a world with a new meta narrative – ‘Don’t buy the brand, BE the brand’.
All of this is grounded in the project of colonising the future – apprehending tomorrow for today. This commodification of hope with its risks and hopes demands the reflexive repositioning of it’s agents as future proofing oneself proves to be as precarious as it was in the past.
So with these ideas in mind, I’m quite hopeful of enlightenment as I jump into the future as I read the past, in the days to come.