Purpose of Education at Work: Is It Really Only About “Learning”?
In our first week of the Critical Issues in Digital Education course, we are encouraged to consider what the purpose of education is, what are some of its key functions and how it applies to our professional context.
We have been introduced to the concept of “learnification” of education (Biesta, 2004) which is the shift in discourse and practice of education towards learners. On the surface, a progressive concept from the authoritarian approach of education as an act of control, Biesta argues that it is in fact forcing students “into modes of self-management” (Biesta, 2020, p.100) by putting all the responsibility in the hands of a learner while removing the context of what the learning is supposed to be about and for.
Biesta then identifies three functions of education:
- Qualification: the function of knowledge and skill transfer. Without any doubt, this is an important task and provides a good justification for schooling, be it school, university, or workplace. This is one function that most people think of and agree on when asked about the purpose of education.
- Socialization: the function of (re)presentation of traditions and practices of the society where schooling is taking place. This can be both explicit and implicit through the act of teaching. Some examples of this include gender norms, social class norms, etc. This is equally an important function of any educational institution.
- Subjectification: the function of developing the learner’s ability to exercise their freedom in relation to the world. Thereafter, let’s focus on what this function is, and, perhaps even more importantly, it is not.
What subjectification is concerned with is the promotion of freedom as a first-person matter, which is to say learner’s existence as the subject of their own life and not an object in other people’s lives. It is worth clarifying that this is not about a theoretical or philosophical concept of freedom, but, simply put, how we respond to situations encountered in our lives. It is also not about absolute freedom as in we are free to do whatever we want about about about qualified freedom which is all about trying to maintain “the balance between the world-destruction and self-destruction” (Biesta 2020).
The relationship between the three functions of education suggested by Biesta in his earlier work is that of a Venn diagram where the three functions of education overlap. However, in his later work (Biesta 2020), it is suggested that this relationship resembles more a set of concentric circles where subjectification is either at the center as it is a core of education, or at the outer circle as it encompasses the functions of qualification and socialization.
The relationship between the three functions of education suggested by Biesta (2020)
By focusing exclusively on qualification and socialization functions, Biesta argues, we are in danger of stripping the educational practice of the context that it requires (the what about and what for of this practice) and making it “fast and furious” rather than that which requires a degree of patience to help a learner find their balance of freedom within the world.
My own experience working within a broad domain of workplace education confirms Biesta’s concerns to a certain degree. Throughout my career, I have observed the shift towards “learnification” both in terms of practice (working with an assumption that learners already know what needs to be learned and what for) and language (most of my roles had “learning” in the title, be it “e-learning” or “learning and development”, and this is a general trend I have observed in the field).
Google search suggestions ( accessed January 19, 2024 from Lausanne, Switzerland)
I also share the concern about the educational practice I am encouraged to follow within my field of education at the workplace being solely focused on qualification and (to a lesser degree) socialization, with the function of subjectification nearly always left out of scope. In my opinion, by leaving the task of helping a learner find their balance with the world of their organization solely to the learner, we are potentially reducing the role of a learner to that of an order taker failing to exercise their freedom to act or putting them in danger of not knowing the real limits of their freedom in relation to their workplace environment. Both of these possibilities are unwelcome results for both employer and employee which are in our best interest as workplace educators to avoid by putting back the function of subjectification at the center of our educational practice.
References
- Biesta, G. (2004) “Against Learning: Reclaiming a Language for Education in an Age of Learning,” Nordisk Pedagogik 23, no. 1, pp. 70–82. https://brill.com/view/journals/bire/1/2-3/article-p259_259.xml
- Biesta, G. (2020). Risking ourselves in education: Qualification, socialization, and subjectification revisited. Educational Theory, 70(1), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.12411
2 replies to “Purpose of Education at Work: Is It Really Only About “Learning”?”
Leave a reply
Hi there, Marta!
I am excited to see that you are reflecting on your experience as an instructional designer. I did a Master’s degree at the University of Virginia in Instructional Technologies. I learned about instructional design as a practice and research field – say, learning science + design principles). I loved my Master’s, but one of the gaps in the instructional design field is the lack of critical scrutiny of what education is, as the focus is to optimize learning experiences. In my opinion, the gap is more significant when instructional design is applied to public education. Corporations/enterprises are not interested in the critical aspect (subjectification) of education but in the effectivity of qualification (and maybe socialisation?). I will talk about this a bit later about your blog post.
I will begin my feedback by highlighting three elements of your text that are well executed. First, thanks for using images. Blogs are multimodal media. Thus, the invitation is to use text, images, hyperlinks, and videos (maybe you can think of more modalities?). Second, good referencing. Images are referenced, and citations are in place. Third, good reading of Biesta’s article. The concepts are clear and well-explained.
Now, I will give you feedback to improve your future blog posts.
Your first paragraph can improve by making clear the argument you want to develop in your text. When thinking about your argument, I think you might want to answer these questions: What am I trying to say? What is my main point? The aim is to search for clarity. The sentence that resembles an argument the most is in your conclusion:
“by leaving the task of helping a learner find their balance with the world of their organization solely to the learner, we are potentially reducing the role of a learner to that of an order taker failing to exercise their freedom to act or putting them in danger of not knowing the real limits of their freedom in relation to their workplace environment. Both of these possibilities are unwelcome results for both employer and employee which are in our best interest as workplace educators to avoid by putting back the function of subjectification at the center of our educational practice”
These sentences could be arranged to become an argument that can guide the development of the text. Notably, as it relates to my own experience, I would like to know how enterprises can benefit from subjectification. Or what may be the tensions of education, rather than learning, in corporate contexts?
Congratulations on your first blog post! I am eager to keep reading you.
Hi Nicolás,
Thank you for your feedback on what has been done well and what can be improved in my blog entries. It is a great advice to make my point known and clear already in the first paragraph, and I will make sure to do so going forward.
The notion of functions of education other than qualification in the corporate context have been to of mind for me since completing Biesta’s reading last week and I have also been discussing it with my colleugues. Whilst it is true that corporate organizations are not that interested in subjectification and socialisation is being discussed quite rarely as well, I do believe all three functions can be of benefit to both learner and their employer and I’ll continue exploring how this can be incorporated in my practice at work.
Best wishes,
Marta