Educational Policies and Current Practices 2015; 1(2): 87-98 ISSN : 2147-3501 (Print) 2148-9688 (Online) DOI: 10.15340/2147350112831 Research Article Globalization, Governmentality, and Education Policy in Angola: A Discourse Approach Nicolas Nkiawete Manuel1* 1 Washington State University, Pullman, USA Abstract: In the wake of globalization, there are a number of studies calling for the need to stretch educational policy field beyond the nation state (Ball, 1997; Lingard, Rawolle & Taylor, 2005). Governmentality as suggested by Foucault (1991) is a powerful tool for analysis of the link between the new forms of government and the impact of discourse of globalization and the ideology of neoliberalism on education policy. Few studies have investigated the relationship between local education policy- making and governmentality in post-colonial spaces (see Fimyar, 2008; Tikly, 2003; Rizvi, 2005; Rizvi, Lingard & Lavia, 2006). Foucault’s notion of governmentality and economic policy may be seen in sub- Saharan Africa (Clapham, 1996). This essay focuses a new Foucauldian discussion on governmentality and education policy in Angola. Previous to this essay, most Foucauldian scholars have discussed governmentality and education policy on other areas of the world (Ball, 1990; McCarthy & Dimitriadis, 2000; Pennycook, 2000, 2008; also see Besley & Peters, 2007; Larner, 2000, for governmentality and neoliberalism). While Foucault applied the concept of governmentality to a Western liberal type of government, I argue that in the context of globalization and neoliberal policy, post-colonial governments have increasingly appropriated the discourses of globalization, neoliberalism, and good governance (UNESCO, 1999). Therefore, the aim of this paper is to problematize, interrogate, and contextualize local education policy-making, donors funding of education, the discourses of globalization and neoliberalism, and how these influence educational policy-making in Angola. Keywords: Governmentality, neoliberalism, discourse, education policy, non-governmental organizations *Nicolas Nkiawete Manuel, Washington State University, PO Box 641067, Pullman, WA 99164-1067, USA Email: [email protected] 1. Introduction For some scholars, globalization is a homogenization of culture or the continuity of the Western and American imperialism (Phillipson, 1992); while for others, globalization does not necessarily imply homogenization, given that “different societies appropriate the materials of modernity differently” (Appadurai, 1991, p. 17). In respect to the link between globalization and education, Rizvi (2005), for example, argues that “to understand the relationship between globalization and education, we need to avoid the universalistic impulse at the core of many conceptions of globalization” (p. 6). In other words, Rizvi suggests that globalization is a very complex set of relations in which the outside forces exert influence to the local; such influence evolves in dialogic relationship marked by struggles, conflict and discontinuities. This essay is focused on how such complexities may affect education policy in Angola. First, the literature on education policy is discussed as it relates to conceptualizations of globalization and neoliberalism. Second, the rationale for approaching education policy through the lenses of governmentality is noted. Third, how globalization has affected the practices of government in post-colonial spaces is mapped in relation to multiple narratives and interpretations for the competing discourses that shape and influence education policy in Angola. The role discuss of grassroots movements and non- governmental organizations (NGOs) — the double role that they play as humanitarian brokers Educational Policies and Current Practices 2015; 1(2): 87–98 87 and agents of neo (il) liberal marketization of education. This essay accomplishes this by analyzing the competing discourses and practices in education policy debate, and how the neoliberal technologies of governmentality shape educational policy discursive field, and resonate with different social histories in order to create multiple narrative and interpretations (Cho, 2005). In the wake of globalization, there are a number of studies calling for the need to stretch educational policy field beyond the nation state (Ball, 1997; Lingard, Rawolle & Taylor, 2005). In a different way this paper responds to such calls. Drawing from (Fimyar, 2008; Rizvi, 2005; Rizvi, Lingard & Lavia, 2006), I argue that in post-colonial spaces few studies have investigated the relationship between local education policy-making, and governmentality. While Foucault applied the concept of governmentality to Western liberal types of government, it is argued that in the context of globalization and neoliberal policy, post-colonial governments have increasingly adopted the discourses of globalization and neoliberalism, while politically maintaining the nationalist ideologies and tactics. In this paper, I use the Foucauldian concept of governmentality to argue that educational policy-making in Angola is one of government’s technologies of power through which disciplinary power is deployed for effective control and surveillance of knowledge production and its circulation. In other words, while the influence exerted by globalization and neoliberalism is undeniable, education policymaking continues to reflect the new patterns of governmentality. Apple (1996) argues that “too often important questions surrounding the state and social formation are simply evacuated and the difficult problem of simultaneously thinking about the specificity of different practices and the forms of articulated unity they constitute is assumed out of existence as if nothing existed in structured ways” ( p. 268). While it is often argued that with the advent of globalization governments have partially lost their power of control (Green, 1997), the government of Angola (GoA) continues to exercise a powerful control not only over educational policy-making, but also over social policy in general. In Angola, an important mechanism of control of education policy has been the maintenance of centralized curriculum and policy decision making. For example, in a press release in the government’s newspaper, Feijo (2010) defends the need to maintain a centralized curriculum based on the Portuguese only ideology. National curriculum determines what counts as knowledge and who has the legitimacy of transmitting such knowledge (Apple, 1993). Lemke (2004) observes that the analytic of governmentality illuminates how the often evoked retreat of the national government on the welfare state and educational policy is in fact the prolongation of government. In other words, neoliberalism is not the end of state control of education policy; rather this change should be understood in the context of emerging network society with the transformations that structure and restructure societal power relationships, albeit in unequal power dynamics, and able and disable access to economic and cultural capital required to function in the global era. The power of discourse as Olssen et al., (2004) argue is that it: Enables us to conceptualize and comprehend the relations between the individual policy text and the wider relations of the social structure and political system. If policy is a discourse of the state, it is by its very nature political and must be understood as part and parcel of the political structure of society and as a form of political action (p. 71). This characterization of discourse implies that discourse not only produces material consequences, but also the subjectification of those involved in discursive practices (Jagger, 2004). Foucauldian discourse perspectives investigate the production of discourse formations that are linked to the different power mechanisms and institutional technologies of domination (Foucault, 1972, 1977). Education policy and cultural policy in Angola constitute and instrumentalize the technologies of the government—Governmentality. Using a discourse approach (Foucault, 1972, 1991; Sutherland, 2005), this paper interrogates the “systems of meaning reflected in policy-making, and how social problems and solutions are defined, that is, who defines them and on whose behalf” (Stein, 2004, p. 1). After more than twenty years since the independence of Angola from Portugal, the government decided to implement a language education policy in a country that has more than 10 African languages (Lewis, Simon & Fennig, 2014). The language policy is currently designed to include only six languages in the school system. This change in education policy is an indication of change in governmentality as a result not only of the global transformations and neo-liberalism, but also a change in political rationality of the government to better control, and exercise its power. Put another way, in practice, language and routines of policy-making take shape as cultural manifestations that not only shape , but also “promote ways of seeing 88 Educational Policies and Current Practices 2015; 1(2): 87–98 individuals and provide tools for organizing their lives” (Stein, 2004, p. 1). Policies are not only about power and knowledge. Ball (1993) argues that policies are a “restructuring, redistribution and disruption of power relations, so that different people can and cannot do different things” (p. 13). At the micro-level, policies provide teachers with the language and discourses to signify the perceived problems and establish limits of how