teachers is to remind their students “that they can see and think for themselves and are
not dependent upon others who claim that they can see and think for them” (Bingham &
Biesta, 2010, p. 138).
The wisdom of Ranciere’s educational work, as it pertains to subjectification and
emancipation, is that it defies the constraints of a defined pedagogy. Ranciere merely
highlights the work of Joseph Jacotot and extrapolates certain directives gained from the
insight of its example. Instead of a method, Ranciere presents us something more akin to
a story. Methods need implementation. Stories wait for “another story to be told in
return” (Bingham & Biesta, 2010, p. 152). Among other things, our classrooms must
become places where our students can “become emancipated storytellers in their own
right” (Bingham & Biesta, 2010, p. 151). We need teachers who “never aim for their
students to remain dependent upon their input and effort but always have an orientation
toward their students’ independence and emancipation” (Biesta, 2010, p. 130). In effect,
teachers merely provide the conditions and space for their students to write and tell their
own story.
The realization and expression of an individual who has transitioned to a state of
subjectification and emancipation always causes an interruption and disruption into the
status quo. “Subjectification and this is the second point is therefore highly political
as it intervenes in and reconfigures the existing order of things” (Bingham & Biesta,
2010, p.33). As indicated earlier, subjectification “decomposes and recomposes the
relationship between the ways of doing, of being, and of saying that define the
perceptible organization of the community” (Bingham & Biesta, 2010, p.33). Ranciere
asserts that human beings are political beings. Bingham and Biesta (2010) underscore
Previous Page Next Page