ISSN 1751 - 8221

Volume 1.0 Previously published work pp 226 - 243

Why iek? Learning mathematics, training teachers, setting policies.

Tony Brown, Institute of Education, Manchester Metropolitan University.

I became interested in ie because he told !ood "o es, offered amusin! insi!hts into movies I had en"oyed and was !enerally an entertainin! read. There also seemed to be some obli#ue relevance to the issues that I confront as an academic in the field of education, and in particular mathematics education. $ith education, not much of an intuitive leap is re#uired to see the relevance of %acan and ie . There is a vibrant industry of educators reflectin! on their practices, which brin!s to mind mirrors and the whole psychoanalytical road opens up. I have discussed this e&tensively in a boo 'Brown, (t inson and En!land, )**+,. -et to reach the claim that I am a mathematics educator whose wor is increasin!ly influenced by ie too a little more wor . .evertheless, for a field that so often denies its social situatedness and reduces its concerns to refinin! al!ebraic techni#ues or assessment strate!ies, there seemed to be some scope for e&tendin! its brief. This short article offers a few insi!hts from a study I carried out 'Brown and Mc.amara, )**/, into how ie 0s wor impacted on my own understandin! of how we mi!ht en!a!e with mathematical thin in!, how be!innin! primary school teachers traumati1ed by it in their own schoolin! mi!ht now present themselves as teachers of the sub"ect, and how the !overnment mi!ht better insist that it be tau!ht in particular ways in schools. The article wor s on the assumption that everyone readin! it will have spent many hundreds of hours learnin! mathematics at school and conse#uently will not be neutral as re!ards their understandin! of what is involved. -ou will all have your own account of what was involved, of the successes achieved, of the emotions that were a!itated.

Learning mathematic There is an "o e2 what0s the difference between a member of the mafia and a post3 modernist4 The first ma es an offer you can0t refuse, the second ma es an offer you can0t understand. 5o it mi!ht seem doubly problematic to as a post3structuralist to tell you what mathematics is. 6erhaps followers of 7oucault would claim that no discursive account specifies precisely what mathematics is as such. 5uch a claim however would not assist us much with the undeniable #ualities and properties of mathematics, which do have real psychic effects in more abstract mathematical analysis, and material effects in practical enterprises such as buildin! brid!es, the effective analysis of economic models, everyday finance, etc. There are properties in mathematics itself, which !uide but do not fi& these discourses. Mathematics introduces polarities around which the discourses flow and which result in actual impact on the physical and social world. To invite another post3structuralist to intervene, followers of 8errida mi!ht su!!est that mathematics as a thin! in itself always slips away. In schools, however, it mi!ht be ar!ued that it is commodified versions of mathematics that have ta en the lead9 the institutionalised mar ers of the polarities have ta en on a life of their own. 7or e&ample, #uestions are always as ed in a particular sort of way, particular areas of mathematics are favoured, such as the bits that are more easily tested. That is, mathematical lan!ua!e as used in schools points to a style of social interpretation, social practices, ways of understandin! the teacher pupil relationship etc. .ow in the hac neyed way practitioners utilise philosophical apparatus I mi!ht su!!est that such social fronts of mathematics mi!ht be seen as fantasies. 6rior to introducin! ie we mi!ht say that %acan would a!ree with 8errida in seein! the thin! slippin! away. %acan, however, mi!ht be content to dwell on how the fantasies of what mathematics is seen as bein! mi!ht interfere with the process of mathematics :itself0 slippin! away. $e hold on to these fantasies, sometimes for a lon! time, since in the scary world of bein! educated accordin! to e&ternal prescription we hold on to whatever we can. ie has more !enerally e&plored what %acan has to offer to sociolo!ical analysis in contrast to post3structuralism and hermeneutics. 7or %acan discursive formation is characterised by the impossibility of pinnin! down social and psycholo!ical phenomena in te&t. ie ';<=<, p. ;/>, spea s of antagonisms arisin! where final resolution is

227

always defied. ?ould this approach provide the theoretical basis re#uired to deal with the impossibility of pinpointin! mathematics despite its undeniable effects4 Mathematics teachin! is a social practice, thus sub"ect to interpretation 3 but this comes up a!ainst an ob"ection that mathematics is itself more than a social practice. There is somethin! more si!nificant there that needs to be accounted for. It has a precision and produces results unli e other lan!ua!es. %acan, perhaps, offers a theoretical approach to locatin! the non3inscribable aspect of mathematics. In 5eminar < he considers the e&ample of someone sayin! @I am lyin!A as an e&ample of an impossibility. Effectively, he as s, is this is so different from someone sayin! somethin! li e2 @This is what I thin . I !uess that says somethin! about who I am. I now that this description is not #uite complete or fully accurate but it is the best I can do for nowA. This mi!ht be seen as a posture in the absence of the possibility of providin! a full statement, a report on an e&perience of truth, rather than truth itself. But it may well be that this assertion itself influences, mas s, or even creates, that which it is tryin! to locate. By actin! as if the statement were true, in a sense, it becomes true, and the actions become a reification of that truth, they stand in for that truth, and in a certain sense become that truth. If mathematics is seen as bein! learnin! multiplication tables, the emphasis on mathematical tables becomes part of the commodification of mathematics and the way it is understood more broadly. But more !enerally the statements that see to locate mathematical phenomena so often become the statements that police its boundaries. 5uch fluidity of meanin! mar s the on3!oin! historical formation of mathematics in the conte&t of social practices. Mathematics is both an assertion in the te&t but also a denial that such assertions in the te&t locate mathematics. It has no positive e&istence yet functions as thou!h it did have. The ontolo!ical basis is undecidable but nevertheless effective in !eneratin! the forms throu!h which mathematics is understood. ie !oes on to #uestion2 @if the world and lan!ua!e and sub"ect do not e&ist, what does e&ist9 more precisely what confers on e&istin! phenomena their consistency4A Be ma es clear that @%acan0s answer is ... symptomA 'ie , ;<=<, p. ;;,. 6ut crudely, the story told, the symptom, is a reflection of the spea er. It provides an account of how the spea er is connected to the world. The 'psycho, analysis of the spea er produces the truth 'p. /+,9 it retroactively names what was already there. ie ';<=<, p. </, ar!ues that the !uarantor of the identity of an ob"ect is @the retroactive effect of naming itself. It

228

is the name itself, the si!nifier, which supports the identity of the ob"ectA 'ie 0s emphasis,. The name @mathematicsA alone remains in the intersection of all the descriptive features that we may assi!n to mathematics 3 all other descriptive features of mathematics fall short of locatin! mathematics itself. But symptom of what, more precisely4 7or %acan there is nothin! other than the flow of en"oyment. By this he means the psycholo!ical drives that escape re!ulation throu!h containment in the symbolic universe, the desires that !et re3routed as a result of our unsuccessful attempts to satisfy them. The elements left out of any account come up to haunt the elements that have been included. (nd there will always be elements that do escape the !rasp of any discourse. If I understand this correctly, there is a delin#uent in all of us who does what sChe pleases, what sChe en"oys, outside of the framewor !overnin! our actions, the %acanian @DtherA. 7or someone en!a!ed in mathematics the symbols within which one is immersed activate mental dynamics, pleasure not #uite captured in the symbols themselves. Bere ie is followin! %acan in drawin! a rather curious analo!y between the notion of commodity in the wor of Mar&, and dream in the wor of 7reud. Be sees both as bein! symptoms of somethin! else. The point that ie ';<=<, p.;;, ma es is that with both commodity and dream we should @avoid the properly fetishistic fascination of the @contentA supposedly hidden behind the form2 the :secret0 to be unveiled throu!h analysis is not the content hidden by the form 'the form of commodities, the form of dreams, but, on the contrary, the secret of this form itself. The theoretical intelli!ence of the form of the dreams does not consist in penetratin! from the manifest content to its :hidden ernel0, to the latent dream thou!hts9 it consists in the answer to the #uestion9 why have the latent dream thou!hts assumed such a form, why were they transposed in to the form of a dream4A 5imilarly, in relation to commodities, ie ar!ues that capitalist economic analysis suppresses alternative understandin!s of the value of labour. Everythin! is reduced to the value of the commodity in the mar et place. $hy has the commodity form become

229

reified as the unit of analysis4 $hy, for e&ample, do my dau!hter Imo!en0s desires e&pressed in the demand for a Brat1 doll !et e&pressed as a demand for a Brat1 doll. (nd why do her parents e&press their desires to !uide their dau!hter in particular ways !et e&pressed in the form of a re!ulation forbiddin! Brat1 dolls4 In an e&tension of this analo!y2 $hat are the secrets of the form of mathematics as a commodity4 Dr rather what is embedded in the materials and practices throu!h which people encounter, what is called, @mathematicsA in the classroom4 $hy is mathematics desired by society4 $hy does this desire to have mathematics !et e&pressed as a desire to have teachin! of a certain form4 $hy do these forms result in activities comprisin! certain desi!n features4 $hat are the dominant commodity forms in primary mathematics teachin! and how do they !overn our practices and our analyses of those practices4 5imilarly, what are the secrets of the form of a teacher as a commodity4 That is, in our social construction of @primary mathematics teacherA, what do we include4 (nd how do societal desires to incorporate mathematics in life !et translated into teacher trainin! pro!rammes, curriculums etc4 Mathematics, as it is manifested in schools, is a symptom of somethin! else. That is, it is not only a symptom of a hi!her mathematics of the sort a university academic mathematician would suppose. Eather, it is more locally defined around social practices. .evertheless, the influence of a more traditional conception of mathematics remains stron!ly present in the sense that this mathematics provides the system a!ainst which the correctness of school mathematics is "ud!ed. The point in our analysis here is not to tar!et the underlyin! mathematics as the ultimate #uest but rather to #uestion why mathematical activities in the classroom have assumed the social forms that they have. That is, why have they become commodities with a !iven form4 7rom a teacher0s point of view there is a need to reduce the emphasis on the metaphorical association between mathematical activity and mathematical ideas, in favour of a metonymic association between mathematical activity and social activity more !enerally. This entails lin in! the mathematical activities 'seen as activities !overned by certain procedures, rules, performance criteria, etc, with other social discourses, includin! other social discourses specifically related to mathematics. The meanin! of the mathematical discourses thus becomes a function of their relationship with the other discourses with which they are entwined. This softens any assumption that the activities are anchored in specific mathematical concepts. Eather we need to attend to the reification of such supposed

230

concepts as they unfold in alternative discourses. This would move us away from any supposed universal conceptions of what mathematics should be about but instead alerts us to the historical and social processes that !enerated classroom mathematics in the forms it now ta es. Mathematics will always e&ceed specific manifestations of it. -et this surplus over such manifestations points to a disappointment that it is not possible to be more precise. There is a sense that there should have been more to it than has been pinpointed. The unity of any !iven @e&perience of meanin!A in the ideolo!ical field of how teachers conceptualise mathematics in the classroom is supported by some @:pure0 meanin!less si!nifierA 'mathematics,, with an always inade#uate account of the si!nifiedA 'ie , ;<=<, p. <F,. The name @mathematicsA locates somethin! that is more than the sum of descriptions of it. It has proved #uite impossible to adopt a consistent perspective on what mathematics @isA. ie 'op cit. p. <=, cites Grip e whose notion of @ri!id desi!natorA has the #uality of @a pure si!nifier that desi!nates, and at the same time constitutes the identity of a !iven ob"ect beyond the variable cluster of its descriptive properties.A In the student accounts that we have offered @mathematicsA is only bein! accessed indirectly throu!h descriptions of the activities ta in! place around it. (nd the sum of those aspects is not the whole. Dr is it4 !raining teacher $hen people as me what I do I sometimes find that the inclusion of the word mathematics in my "ob description can provo e an emotive response9 party!oers swiftly move on, hairdressers provide me with radical desi!ns. It is rather unsettlin! to learn that many primary school teachers were themselves traumati1ed by their own e&perience of mathematics in schools. Ima!es of ed!y teachers teachin! ed!y ids do not promote much optimism for future !enerations. -et despite a history of ambivalence towards the sub"ect of mathematics, trainee teachers do not continue to present themselves as mathematical failures once they become employed, where their brief includes teachin! the sub"ect. Eather, the new teachers offered an account of themselves that omitted to mention the issues that had previously troubled them 'Brown and Mc.amara, )**/,. 5uch trainees :story0 themselves so as to sideline mathematics but to present their own perceived #ualities in a positive li!ht. 7or the trainee teacher

231

buildin! a sense of self, there is inevitably a !ap between how she :is0 and how she :mi!ht be0. ( resolution between supposed and desired states is not easily achieved without compromise in which certain desires will be re3routed. There are multiple stories of what it is to be a teacher to be ne!otiated. These stories do not necessarily lend themselves to final resolution in relation to each other. ?onceptions may be both idealistic and unachievable in themselves and impossible to reconcile with other conceptions. The teacher, however, may nevertheless e&perience this apparent need for reconciliation as a re#uirement bein! made of her in a school settin!. That is, ima!es of what constitutes a :competent0 teacher may be circulated by the !overnment and influence the teacher0s understandin! of the multiple demands she needs to meet. 5he may feel obli!ed to respond to this re#uirement with some account of her success in achievin! reconciliation, or otherwise feel disappointed as a result of failure. But in which ways would this account be offered4 ?onvery ';<<<, p. ;H), su!!ests that perhaps teachers feel that they are deficient in relation to their stereotype of how teachers behave, and conceal this inade#uacyI by reconstructin! a morally presti!ious self3description that they can use for public display. Bowever, in so doin! we reinforce an unrealistic stereotype and become complicit in our own alienation. 5uch reconstructions may act as short term therapy for the individual, whilst contributin! to a collective repression, to which the only response is this ultimately disablin! palliative of further self reconstruction. 'p. ;H), That is, the failure to reconcile is understood as a personal failure to achieve a particular ima!e of teachin! and activates a perceived need to chan!e oneself yet a!ain in response to the different positions they adopted, as traineeC new teacher, and the different roles they assumed 'learner, teacher, assessor, assessed, carer, employee,. The teacher needed to reconcile these various roles in order to have some account of her achievement and satisfy her need to narrate a coherent narrative of self 'cf. Barre, ;<=<, 5o efeld, ;<<<,. .ew teachers often emphasise the s ills they thin they have 'bein! :sensitive0, :patient0, :supportive0,, and this can provide effective mas s to the continuin! an&ieties relatin! to the students0 own mathematical abilities. (n&ieties

232

related to mathematics were side stepped rather than removed. There is a need, however, to be cautious in interpretin! the teachers0 accounts. $hich truth are they tellin!4 In a conversation Eom Barre described how he often as ed a lot of neutral #uestions in the first half an hour of any interview he was conductin! since he felt the interviewees did not really rela& until later. Bowever, can we be sure that the state of bein! rela&ed would produce a better truth4 5urely %acan would thin the reverse, havin! conducted short consultations of undefined len!th to eep his clients on their toes. 6erhaps the state of bein! more rela&ed mi!ht enable the teacher to move more easily around her habitual mode of describin! themselves. That is, she mi!ht merely occupy the depictions of self with which she has learnt to live, which may, or may not, paint her in a positive li!ht ':shy0, :bad at maths0, :carin! towards children0,. (n uneasy mi& of moral and causal e&planations may be combined to produce a preferred identity that uses moral platitudes to endorse a style of operation that she has been obli!ed to choose as result of her mathematical shortcomin!s. Individuals use metaphors of stru!!le to create an impression of an essential self. The :truth0 of e&perience is processed throu!h a story frame in which the individual portrays herself as stru!!lin!. This story provided the sub"ective fantasy throu!h which reality is structured. But how mi!ht the truth beneath be accessed4 ?learly such a notion of a sin!ular truth is problematic. (nd is it concealed4 5uch concerns echo ie 0s wor , where we live the fantasy, and where the Eeal sometimes interferes. In tal in! to teachers we were clearly touchin! on some personal stuff yet the media throu!h which this was accessed precludes any sort of neutrality. The unconscious was pressin! upon the thin!s the teachers said yet there could be no definitive manifestation of this unconscious. 5uccessive stories were tried out for si1e as the teachers ne!otiated the trust they felt able to offer to others and the preparedness they had to accept a particular version themselves. -et, identity was constructed rather than revealed throu!h such narrative processes. There was not an innate truth to locate. But the #uestion remained of how interviews enabled access to versions of reality and what those versions reveal. ie ')**;, has e&plored the difficulties of identifyin! and accessin! this sort of :truth0 or :reality0. In his analysis of the 6olish film director Gr1ys1tof Gieslows i he touches upon what 8errida ';<<H, has called :fictive devices0. Gieslows i

233

started out his career as a social documentary filmma er, e&aminin! the lives of people in 6oland in the politically turbulent nineteen ei!hties. -et in touchin! on the emotional lives of his sub"ects Gieslows i was uneasy about the portrayal of these lives on film. Insofar as !enuine emotions were revealed his wor as filmma er became intrusive. 5uch emotions need to be recast and read as fictive material and in a sense be made unreal to wor in the filmic medium. Gieslows i0s resolution was to move into fiction films rather than documentaries as the former enabled him to !et at a better truth of the emotional content of lives that he wished to e&plore. ie ')**;, p. F/, ar!ues that for an actor in Gieslows i0s documentaries, :he does not immediately display his innermost stance9 it is rather that, in a reflective attitude, he :plays himself0 by way of imitatin! what he perceives as his own ideal ima!e0. In the case of our study the emotional content of personalities was only partially accessed in interviews and that element then further needed to be fitted within a discourse 'story frame, appropriate to the research domain. The study found itself obli!ed to retain the limitations of the documentary form. (nd there is a necessary distancin! of the story told from the life it see s to capture. The reality of that life can only, ie ar!ues, be mediated throu!h a sub"ectively produced fantasy of it. (nd as ie ')**;, p. F>, further advises :the only proper thin! to do is to maintain a distance towards the intimate, idiosyncratic, fantasy domain J one can only circumscribe, hint at, these fra!ile elements that bear witness to a human personality.0 6ersonalities can only be read a!ainst certain bac drops where researchers and perhaps the personalities themselves see to understand how personalities and research perspectives and bac drops and discourses and e&ternal demands and personal aspirations, intermin!le in the accounts offered of this process. ( %acanian perspective on how a human constructs his or her self as a sub"ect rests on the inevitability of mis3reco!nitions resultin! from attempts at achievin! resolution of disparate concerns. In meetin! the impossibility of a full reconciliation between conflictin! demands faced in the early sta!es of teachin!, it would appear that the new teacher presents an unachievable fantasy of her own personal and professional identity or, at least, they remain content with a partial picture. This cover story is often e&pressed throu!h a lan!ua!e provided within the official trainin! discourse. The discourse provides a camoufla!e for issues that seem to remain comple& and irreconcilable. The teachers subscribed to various social pro!rams relatin! to the classroom. These can be seen as bein! !overned by mis3reco!nitions of effective participation that enable the

234

teachers to suppress some of the more difficult issues arisin! in their trainin!. $hilst they do identify with many of the e&ternal demands that they encounter, their articulation of their en!a!ement often seemed to build the very !ap that eeps them away from :anta!onistic0 discourses 'ie , ;<=<,, or conflictin! stories. (ny attempted resolution of the conflictin! demands cannot be achieved without some compromises. It is not possible to achieve a unifyin! structure upon which everyone will a!ree. ?ertain desires will always be left out, no matter how pluralist or attentive to diversity we may be. The only consensual framewor s that seem to claim a unifyin! a!enda in teachin! mathematics at present are !overnmental policy instruments. 5uch instruments succeed in he!emonic control, in that they appear to achieve !overnance throu!h fairly widespread common consent. 7or the teacher followin! !overnment prescriptions within their trainin!, we mi!ht be !uided by %acan in ar!uin! that there is also a perverse pleasure involved in !au!in! one0s actions a!ainst these rules and see in! to comply. Teachers are interpellated by multiple discourses '(lthusser, ;<F;,. That is, they spea the ideolo!y within which they are immersed. Butler ';<<F, pp. ;3),, however, ar!ues that the operation of power throu!h such interpellation is parado&ical2 @To be dominated by a power e&ternal to oneself is a familiar and a!onisin! form power ta es. To find, however, that what :one0 is, one0s very formation as a sub"ect, is in some sense dependent upon that very power is #uite another. $e are used to thin in! of power as what presses on the sub"ect from the outside, as what subordinates, sets underneath, and re!ulates to a lower order. This is surely a fair description of what power does. But if, followin! 7oucault, we understand power as forming the sub"ect as well, as providin! the very condition of its e&istence and the tra"ectory of its desire, then power is not simply what we oppose but also, in a stron! sense, what we depend on for our e&istence and what we harbor and preserve in the bein!s that we are.A Thus any acceptance of subordination carries with it a particular assertion of a!ency within a !iven frame. Individuals can only define themselves in relation to the constraints they see themselves as havin! accepted. Butler ';<<F, ar!ues that as an individual

235

moves into a new discursive space the individual understands who he or she is differently. 7or an individual enterin! into trainin! his or her sense of a!ency is modified, understood differently, a!ainst an emer!ent understandin! of a new environment and of how he or she will be received. This entails a tric y meetin! of a newly conceived a!ency rooted in personal aspirations and an e&pectation that he or she will be told how to teach. (!ency on the part of the teacher min!les with dependency and !ets shaped by the form of the e&ternal demands encountered. The (lthusserian account of power offered is also partial since interpellation also fails to capture the flow of emotion or conscience activated in teachers in their efforts to comply with the demands they face 'Butler, ;<<F, p ;*F,. ie pursues this sort of concern in offerin! a departure from a more fatalistic (lthusserian poststructuralist account of interpellation, insofar as within this account the teachers are seen as bein! immersed in discourses without bein! aware of it. ie ';<=<, p. )F, characterises post3 structuralism more !enerally as referrin! to a state in which @we all live in a world of si!ns referrin! to other si!nsA where there @there is no final realityA. 5uch a perspective, in ie 0s view, results in people bein! held in place by the way in which they are described in multiple and various ways within the symbolic networ . Teachers are e&ternally defined and are reco!nised only to the de!ree to which they comply with these role determinations. There is no space for them to have their own say within this. .o space to reflect on themselves as sub"ects. Thus ie ar!ues that post3 structuralism brin!s us @too closeA to the world, such that we become immersed in its structures 'interpellated without nowin! it,. This s#uee1es out any space for sub"ective intervention. ie see s to reintroduce some human a!ency into the picture throu!h distancin! the perspective assumed. This perspective is shaped around a @fantasisedA structurin! of reality. In %acanian terms, the e!o is an inauthentic a!ency wor in! to conceal any apparent lac of unity. 5elf3ima!e, he claims, is delusory and acts as a misleadin! filter throu!h which the world is understood. $hilst we have ar!ued there is no :trueA version, the possibility of investi!atin! the delusions remains open. In ie 0s scenario teachers would still find themselves immersed in socially acceptable ways of describin! their own practice. (nd teacher identity would still be predicated on a fra!mented self that is havin! difficulty in or refusin! to reconcile all the conflictin! discourses actin! throu!h that self. -et ie identifies this !ap between the cover story and the conflict as a

236

potential site for resistance where a more autonomous individual identity could be asserted. The cover story is a function of self3ima!e resultin! from the he!emonic !rip. This however is a delusory enterprise that can be substituted. But for this to be achieved it is necessary to find ways of enablin! teachers to @see outside the frameA. ie offers the e&ample of capitalism as the frame that embraces the limits of the individual0s understandin! of the world. ?apitalism0s !rip, ie contends, is such that it appears that there is no alternative scenario. $e su!!est that recent !overnment policy moves have attempted to provide a comprehensive picture such that the dominant discourses are all shaped by the policy. This ma es it difficult to see outside of this particular frame. (lternative ways of understandin! education seem peculiar a!ainst this bac drop. -et these must be !iven space in the teacher education pro!ramme if the pro!ramme is to be more than mere trainin! for a !iven re!ime.

237

Setting "olic# 7or new teachers inserted more or less successfully in a multitude of discourses, there are drives that motivate their attempted participation in these discourses. (s seen, there may be a perverse pleasure achieved throu!h performin! correctly within a !iven re!ulatory frame. ( specific tas relates to their tamin! of the beast of mathematics. They actively reduce their emotional ran!e in their dealin!s with it, confinin! it to certain lin!uistic modes that eep it in chec as a threat to their psyche. The re!ulation implicit in !overnment policy tools appeared to be positively en"oyed in what mi!ht be seen as its substitution or strai!ht3"ac etin! of the teachers0 own professional inte!rity. The subordination !ave rise to a particular form of a!ency 'Butler, ;<<F,. The policy instruments functioned as the %acanian Dther, @the symbolic order as it is e&perienced by individual sub"ectsA 'Myers, )**>, p. )>,. The instruments provided the parameters that shaped the teacher0s sense of self as a mathematics teacher. 6olicy emer!es throu!h a variety of social processes and cannot be understood simply as an individual0s intention. 6olicy implementation is far more complicated than that. .evertheless, policy is often constructed and presented as bein! a dialo!ue between the !overnment and the electorate and in this sense the presentation of !overnment policy mi!ht be seen as respondin! to its own @DtherA by shapin! and presentin! policies as thou!h it is see in! to please the electorate. Bow mi!ht we resist this state of affairs4 6olicies have a limited shelf life and it would be worryin! if all trainin! were directed at conformin! to "ust one current model, resultin! in a proliferation of civil servants of a time3specific !overnmental truth. 6olicy initiatives need to promote improved practice whilst transcendin! the conceptualisations specific to current !overnment initiatives. It seems desirable then that ways need to be found of eepin! alive the debates that ne!otiate the boundaries of mathematical activity in the classroom and how those boundaries mi!ht reshape in response to even broader evolvin! social demands such as economic and intellectual necessity. It would be unfortunate if the prevailin! conception of teacher development reached further towards the preference of providin! new rules, with the teacher understandin! their own professional development in terms of followin! those rules more effectively. Bow mi!ht we effect such a discursive re3routin!4 In observin! this debate and the official apparatus that !oes with it, what mi!ht we

238

surmise as to the !overnment0s underlyin! intentions4 $e wish to consider, albeit speculatively, how the rational premises of such policies and supportin! rhetoric mi!ht emer!e and then function. %et us be!in by as in! the #uestion2 what was in the minister0s mind when he introduced his policy framewor 4 'cf. ie , )***, pp. +;3+), Karious options seem possible2 The minister wants to improve mathematics by whatever means as part of his #uest to provide an education as a basic human ri!ht 3 any rationalisation of how he achieves this is secondary to that basic desire. The minister sees pursuit of the improvement of mathematics as a !ood ploy for re3 election 3 his only real concern. The minister sincerely believes that the implementation of his policies will brin! about improvement in mathematics in the way he su!!ests. The minister is himself aware that policy settin! is not an e&act science but instinctively believes that a simple and insistent presentation of his policies will achieve for him the best possible outcomes in some way or other. This mi!ht be throu!h, !ood participation amon! teachers, #uantifiable improvements in test scores, an ima!e of a !overnment ta in! char!e, or more ne!atively, the demotion of mathematics as a political issue in the public0s eye. $hich account best describes the minister0s perspective4 6erhaps all of them do despite apparent mutually e&clusive aspects. It seems impossible to attain a @realA version of events. The options above merely provide alternative fantasies throu!h which reality mi!ht be structured. To personify the implementation of policies with a clear association between one person0s rational action and its effect ris s oversimplifyin! the broader concern. The effects of policy implementation are probably too comple& to be encapsulated in that way. 5uch is the nature of policy settin!. %ife is a complicated affair but sometimes, in order to communicate, the path throu!h life is presented as a set of choices that can be clearly understood. If the !overnment e&plained all of the comple&ities underlyin! its chosen policies, those comple&ities mi!ht overwhelm the very 239

people who the policies are meant to convince. -et, conversely if the !overnment conceals information that appears to contradict its advice then it may be accused of deception. It is necessary to steer a course between these two poles. This however presupposes that the !overnment itself has some sort of overview with more complete information. The scope of such an overview however could well be rather limited. The !ame of e&plorin! what was !oin! on in the !overnment0s thin in! is maybe seductive but inevitably misleadin!. It panders to the beliefs of !overnments, teachers, and the public ali e, that someone is in control in a mechanical sense and that the characteristics of this control can be specified and operated on. ?omple& situations are apparently bein! interpreted as thou!h they are dominated by distin!uishable causal relationships that can be ad"usted to specific re#uirements. This does not appear to be the case. There are too many factors at play and it is rarely possible to be precise. .evertheless, it seems, professional roles and professional worth are defined in terms of activatin! such control. Dr at least bein! able to effectively implement centralised prescription. But how much is it possible to believe in such control technolo!y4 In what circumstances mi!ht it be su!!ested that such control technolo!y wor s4 The minister appeared to believe his own story or at least was prepared to offer his resi!nation if it appeared not to wor . Dr more cynically it may be that such public e&pression of belief in his own effect was the best strate!y to ensure his promotion to his ne&t "ob, which he has now secured. But mi!ht sincerity have been ac#uired as the minister started to believe his own messa!e, whether or not it delivered results interpretable as bein! consistent with success. 6olitics routinely enters the territory of re3writin! history to e&plain and "ustify current actions. %ivin! the story can become the new @realityA. The discursive patternin! that results from this can shape subse#uent life and perceptions of it. (nd in turn new mappin!s of this emer!e and so forth. The proliferation of discursive formulations itself is a symptom of the impossibility of holdin! an overview. .evertheless, the discursive formulation !overnin! professional practices and the conceptions of mathematics that they point to so often !et meshed in a lan!ua!e of control technolo!y. That is, mathematics as a notion is constructed as a phenomenon that e&tends into a conception of its own implementation. The mathematics per se is wedded, or perhaps welded, to a notion of peda!o!y. The mathematical material is specified in such a way that it points to particular styles of teachin!. Unfortunately, the control at wor here appears to be rather diffuse. The

240

discourses are many. They often conflict and do not lend themselves to easy cate!orisation within a mechanistic model. .evertheless, the account that is declared publicly in !overnment documentation, for e&ample, mops up any underlyin! conflict of intention in relation to these discourses. The statement of a definite policy stands a!ainst a lar!ely indeterminate bac drop. -et the policy statement ma es us read this comple& bac drop throu!h a specific ideolo!ical lens 'with specific @#uiltin! pointsA 'ie , ;<=<, p. =F,,. 7urther, havin! selected a specific policy choice e&pressed in clear lan!ua!e, the minister must now be !overned by the declared story rather than by the ori!inal conception that led to the creation of this story. The demands on politicians to be consistent !enerally ma e it necessary for the minister to !ive the appearance of believin! his own story. In bein! so wrapped up in its presentation and its reification in action the minister may be!in to believe it, even if it was ori!inally couched in manipulation. The story ta es on a life of its own with a widenin! !ap between the story and the reality it ori!inally purported to represent. 7urther, useful framewor s desi!ned in !ood faith as resource !uides to !ood practice can function differently when they are reinterpreted as re!ulatory framewor s.

$onclu ion ?ommodified versions of mathematics, in learnin!, teachin! and policy, create the illusion that there is somethin! more tan!ible beneath. These versions however comprise the currency used to measure and classify mathematical thin in!. The need for accountability in mathematical learnin! results in specific transformations of the mathematical teachin! and learnin! around commodified forms. It is throu!h alertin! us to the form and structure of our approaches to or!anisin! our world that ie assists us in locatin! aspects that are often missed in our focal attention. Bis pursuit of the analo!y of commodity and dream opens space so often overloo ed in the broader social sciences. 7or 7reud the dream has a @structure 'that, is always triple. This comprises the manifest dream-text, the latent dream content or thou!ht and the unconscious desire articulated in a dreamA 'ie , ;<=<, p. ;>,. In our e&ample above we could re!ard the mathematical activity, or teachin! device, as analo!ous to the manifest content. The latent content is the supposed mathematical content. -et the desire at wor is constituted throu!h a host of contributory factors. These mi!ht include, for e&ample,

241

e&citement of mathematics to those who are mathematicians, relationship with children for youn! teachers, administrative control issues for those in !overnment, etc. The fusion of these is in a sense analo!ous to dream wor , the attempt to fi!ure these contributory factors in to some sort of symbolic form. 5uch features of en"oyment so often escape the analytical re!ister. (nd as such Li1e provides apparatus that could support a broad ran!e of concerns across the social sciences. This apparatus enables us to inspect the fantasies that we are livin!. The individual teacher can stand in for the individual actor in a host of social scientific domains. In the metaphor of settin! a mathematical tas to a child there is an impact on the child, the purpose underlyin! the teacher0s overt intention it but then also the more unconscious desires bein! mediated by those forms, such as9 controllin! the class effectively, bein! li ed by the children, meetin! curriculum tar!ets, concealin! personal wea nesses etc. The unconscious desire, the would3be reconciliation of all these forces throu!h one teacher articulates itself in this @dream wor A. The elaboration is the process throu!h which specific forms of sociality !et constructed. The @dream wor A attempts to reconcile alternative forces in a unifyin! symbolic form. $e need to analyse this @dream wor A, not the supposed delivery of overt intention. $e are not loo in! for the true meanin! of the act but rather we need to analyse the conception of the social arran!ements revealed in such @dream wor A around the act. %&'&%&N$&S (lthusser, %. ';<F;, Ideolo!y and ideolo!ical state apparatuses. In Lenin and philosophy and other essays. %ondon2 .ew %eft Boo s. Brown, T. and Mc.amara, D. ')**/, New teacher identity and regulative government2 the discursive formation of primary mathematics teacher education. '.ew -or 2 5prin!er,. Butler, M. ';<<F, The psychic life of power. 5tanford, ?(2 5tanford University 6ress. ?onvery, (. ';<<<, %istenin! to teacher0 stories2 are we sittin! too comfortably4 International ournal of !ualitative "tudies in #ducation, ;)'),, ;>;3;H+. 8errida, M. ';<<H,. 8econstruction of actuality2 an interview with Mac#ues 8errida. $adical %hilosophy, &', )=3H;. Eeprinted in 8errida, M. ')**), Negotiations( interventions and interviews, )*+)-,--). 5tanford9 5tanford University 6ress. Barre, E. ';<=<, %an!ua!e !ames and te&ts of identity. In M. 5hotter and G. Ner!en 'Eds., Texts of identity 'pp. )*3>/,. %ondon2 5a!e. 242

%acan, M. ';<FF, #crits( a selection. %ondon2 Eoutled!e. Myers, T. ')**>, 5lavo" ie , %ondon2 Eoutled!e. 5o efeld, M. ';<<<, 8ebatin! self and culture in anthropolo!y. .urrent /nthropology, H* 'H,, H;F3HHF. ie , 5. ';<=<, The su0lime o01ect of ideology. %ondon2 Kerso. ie 5. ')***, 2id some0ody say totalitarianism3 %ondon2 Kerso. ie 5. ')**;, The fright of real tears( 4r5ys5tof 4ieslows6i 0etween theory and posttheory %ondon2 British 7ilm Institute.

243