Foucault's Subjectivity and Confucian Cultivation Wei Guan Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected]
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 10-27-2017 Education as a Moral Responsibility: Foucault's Subjectivity and Confucian Cultivation Wei Guan Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the Curriculum and Instruction Commons Recommended Citation Guan, Wei, "Education as a Moral Responsibility: Foucault's Subjectivity and Confucian Cultivation" (2017). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 4121. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/4121 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. EDUCATION AS A MORAL RESPONSIBILITY: FOUCAULT’S SUBJECTIVITY AND CONFUCIAN CULTIVATION A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Educational Theory, Policy & Practice by Wei Guan B.S., Northwestern Architecture Engineering Institution, Xi’an, China, 1996 M.A., The University of Iowa, 2005 December 2017 To Awen !ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The first person I want to thank is my advisor, Dr. Petra Munro Hendry. She supported me from the beginning, when I started my Ph.D. in the Curriculum Theory program at Louisiana State University. Recognized for her significant lifetime achievements in Washington DC at the AERA Conference in 2016, Dr. Hendry is revered as an impactful leader in curriculum studies. As a Ph.D candidate, I know that, academically, I will continue to learn from Dr. Henry for years to come. Personally, given my experience of being a mom at the age of 38, I would not have had the courage to write my dissertation without her support. She said to me one day that I should do it, even for my daughter. Dr. Hendry understands me as a woman like no one else does, not only because she is a woman herself, but also because of her philosophy as a teacher—she is there to support whoever wants to do something with their life. She trusts that everyone has the potential to grow and make changes. In a society where information overflows and a sense of responsibility diminishes, her trust toward other people in general is the most precious in bringing social changes. In the process of writing, Dr. Hendry taught me to break down the reading and writing, and to build up a habit of writing everyday. She engaged with me on a regular basis to keep me going on writing new chapters and revisions. Her openness in sharing her personal and professional expertise is beyond my appreciation. I also want to thank my husband for his support. He made time to be there with my daughter so that I could focus on my work. I thank Ms. Lois Stewart for her professional support. She made sure that I was on track for meeting graduate school deadlines. I also must thank Dr. !iii Roland Mitchell and Dr. Eugene Kennedy. As accomplished scholars themselves, they connect with students and trust that they can bring changes to education and make the future better. I thank Dr. Leonard Richardson for his support. Lastly, I thank Ms. Katherine H. Nesbit for her professional editing. Without any of you, I would not have gone so far. Thank you. !iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS …………………………………………………………………….. iii ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………………………….vii INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………………………..1 Research Questions ………………………………………………………………………6 Chapters Overview ……………………………………………………………………….9 LITERATURE REVIEW: STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENTS— THE MAKING OF THE DOCILE SUBJECT …………………………………………………12 Overview ………………………………………………………………………………..12 The Self as a Docile Subject ……………………………………………………………16 The Self as Hurried/Stressed ……………………………………………………………18 The Self as Undifferentiated/Assimilated ………………………………………………22 The Self as an Entrepreneur …………………………………………………………….26 The Self as Digitized ……………………………………………………………………27 Conclusion—The Self as a Lifetime Achiever …………………………………………29 FOUCAULT’S SUBJECTIVITY: POWER, CONTROL, AND LIMITATIONS …………………………………………………..32 Technologies of the Self: Opposition …………………………………………………. 34 A Transgressing Subject Through Power and Domination…………………………….. 37 Subjectivity…………………………………………………………………………….. 39 The Disciplined and Punished Subject in Education……………………………………42 Writing as Autobiography ………………………………………………………………48 The Care of the Self ………………………………………………………..………….. 55 Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………….. 61 CONFUCIAN CULTIVATION OF REN (仁) AS A MORAL RESPONSIBILITY ……………………………………………………………. 68 Limitations of Cartesian Rights-Centered Individualism ……………………………….72 Nature, Moral Goodness, and Cultivation in Confucian Thought ………………………78 Rights and Moral Responsibility in Confucian Thought……………………………….. 89 Cultivation of Ren (仁) as Responsibility: Working toward Changes………………….. 98 EDUCATION AS A MORAL RESPONSIBILITY…………………………………………….108 The Power of Ren in Ancient Chinese Rulings…………………………………………111 Iowa Redistricting—Diversity the Political Way……………………………………….117 Moral Responsibility in Higher Education……………………………………………..127 !v CONCLUSION: ENVISION AN EDUCATION AS A MORAL RESPONSIBILITY…………………………………………………………….134 REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………………………….. 142 VITA ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 150 !vi ABSTRACT The current state of education focusing on standards and assessment, according to Wu (2004), reduces education to “technical problems and individual deficiencies, subject to surveillance and quality managerial procedures” (p. 308). This work uses Foucault’s discourses of discipline and power to understand standardization as a political utility of control that makes children docile subjects through “a set of practices by which one can acquire and assimilate” (Foucault, 1988, p. 31). The process of standardization provides an ineffective grounding for achieving a worthwhile life as children are shaped as results-driven individuals (Shun & Wong, 2004). Baker (2008) believes that only through “a moral notion of reasoning” can a sense of responsibility be learnt (p. 191). The Confucian cultivation of Ren represents a moral notion of reasoning. It understands the very foundation of human existence, not as an epistemology based on a dichotomous way of thinking, but as a moral responsibility. Not relying on an extensive accumulation of knowledge, the cultivation of Ren is based on a belief that all children are born with a moral goodness that can be led to a moral responsibility. Moreover, it emphasizes the carrying out of the benefit for others through respect, propriety, and relationship, rather than the seeking of rewards for one’s own. Furthermore, I explain the Confucian notion of rights as embedded in the autonomy of the self. The more the self becomes morally responsible toward others, the more one’s rights are assured. I cite the United Sates law cases on higher education to support the claim that the political protection of rights may be necessary, but it is not the only condition to achieve autonomy and justice. In the case of Iowa Redistricting Policy, when a moral responsibility is !vii absent in the policymakers, an ideology of segregation continues to persist under the cover of diversity, which indirectly pushes the practice of discipline and assessment to its extreme. I conclude that the Confucian Ren celebrates a responsible living that cares children as lifetime achievers rather than results, rights-driven subjects. Moral responsibility can transform the existing power relations and make social, educational changes. !viii INTRODUCTION Raise our head high and drop our head low, we will find the way. — Zisi1, 中庸 (The Mean and Constancy)2 My first experience with a parent-teacher conference in Iowa was deeply disturbing. I was ready to hear about moments of my preschooler interacting with her friends at school. But I was not ready at all to talk through pages of evaluation prepared by the teacher. Assessments? Why? This is not why we send her to school, especially at the age of 4. Why is education so eager to hurry children (Hatch, 2002) to demonstrate skills like counting numbers? What is the point of assessment if children are reduced to numbers that do not reflect their capacity, especially for those who are beyond the maximum or below the minimum of the measurement scale? Throughout the conversation, the focus on curriculum objectives and dimensions, as well as meticulous behavioral instructions and expectations, was overwhelming. I worried, what would it mean that some children are “the dream kids for teachers?” What would it mean that some children are identified as low-achieving? I learned that my 4-year-old was assigned to a letter spot on a carpet, an intended get-together space for group activities. As everyone was assigned to fixed letter spots, those who were unruly were placed nearest to the teacher to guarantee obedience. The opportunity for recess would be 1 Zisi (⼦思, c. 481–402 BCE), Chinese philosopher. The only grandson of Confucius, Zisi is debatable the author of The Mean and Constancy (中庸). 2 Texts in Chinese are translated by myself, including “中庸” (The Mean and Constancy), “论 语” (Analects), “史记” (Records of the Grand Historian), “孟⼦”(Mencius), and “⼦道” (Zidao, or The Way of the Son). !1 taken away