At the crossroads of sociological reflection and the militant proposal, school democratization has screened critical reflection in the last issue of the journal La Pensée. An inventory of differences on the establishment of a good distance between the educational institution and society.
The last issue of Thought is devoted to the political question of the democratization of the School in France, present since the end of XIXe century. School democratization arises in the republican ideology of meritocracy, according to which individuals should not inherit but deserve their social position. Thus, the reforms aimed from the outset both to increase the rate and duration of schooling and to promote equal opportunities for access to places. If the increase in chances of access to secondary education is proven – there is an increase in the number of graduates of 5% in 1950, 29.4% in 1985 to 64.2% in 2007 -, it remains linked to the social origin of students. According to the sources of National Education, while 51% of the children of workers entered in 6e In 1989 accessed at the baccalaureate level, 90% of teachers and executives’ children reached him. Beyond the controversy over the ideological use of the word, which therefore designates both the increase in the number of places in the educational institution and the reduction of social inequalities, the ten contributions of the file of Thought endeavor to question different positions issued to the left of the political spectrum. The interest of the various texts gathered here, in addition to the often fruitful crossing of genres and disciplines – sociological, historians and militants – is to think together theory and practice, and to take into account the contemporary social and political context.
How to explain that the school divides and produces new cleavages within so -called progressive forces ? Antoine Prost’s historical perspective analyzes the debates between pedagogues at the end of XIXe century. It makes it possible to grasp the political dimension of pedagogy and to recall the refusal of a part of the socialist and communist left to advocate the use of new methods. These apparent paradoxes are found in the results of the Jérôme Deauvieau questionnaire survey on current teaching practices. Neither political commitment nor the seniority of teachers constitute explanatory variables of their educational choices in the face of students considered in difficulty. Teacher mobilization is “ the junction between political convictions and concrete working conditions ».
If we move the focal length on students, it seems appropriate to question the effects of innovative teaching practices on their learning. Stéphane Bonnéry, based on observations carried out in class of 6eshows the perverse effects on certain students of the inductive methods recommended by the official texts. Another empirical research work highlights the internal contradictions of the design of students’ work today in secondary establishments. It constitutes a real dead angle that sociologist Anne Barrère defined by a “ normalized and organized constrained activity provided by elevation during their schooling ». The approach through school work makes it possible to show how the relationship between work and academic success is opaque for students, while it is the meritocratic logic that prevails.
The contributions of these three sociologists make it possible to clearly grasp how school democratization policies have transformed the relationships between teachers and students, and, such as Stéphane Bonnery analysis, the exercise of symbolic violence by sanctioning the latter on their relationships with learning. This modality of social sorting constitutes the consideration for school massification. Built throughout a school career, this selection thus takes shape in the orientation process. Pierre Roche’s contribution allows precisely to criticize, in the face of the feeling of injustice of the students at the time of their school orientation, the political speeches of the “ just selection », From press articles.
Under what conditions could the Single School become really democratic, in the sense that it would reduce social inequalities ? A progressive school reform will not be able to come without teachers, concludes Laurent Frajerman, in his article which relates to “ the tensions of progressive thought on the school ». Guy Coq offers “ rethink the institution and school culture “, As far as the author is attended by a” School uninstitutionalization ». Indeed, the author notes a crisis of the School due to the tension between egalitarian and elite logics, where the first takes precedence over the second. For a school that is a strong institution, it proposes to revalue the “ inherited culture ». Here we find the theme of the decline of the institution, already analyzed by Lise Demailly for example, in terms of transformation of the institution into an organization which refers to the labor market.
This is what the contribution of the author of School is not a companyChristian Laval. He shows how the education system obeys “ the reason for the market “, Via a process that is not simply reduced to the idea of a commodification of education, but is explained by a combination of” Modern management, new pedagogy and authoritarian conservatism ». He offers “ a proactive policy of concrete equalization of the conditions of study between lessons To fight against school segregation, “ promote cooperative practices and solidarity logics “, of “ strengthen the independence of the sphere of knowledge vis-à-vis immediate economic interests “, And finally” replace new forms of managerial power with more democratic forms of school conduct ».
This program of resistance to neo-liberalism nevertheless requires a rupture with a school-centered vision. This implies that the transformation of the School cannot be summed up either a transformation of practices or that of the educational institution, and cannot be thought without taking into account the social context, sometimes obscured in this file. In addition, the various political proposals put forward here are revealing differences among the contributors and contributors, differences whose analysis would be fruitful.
The publication of large extracts from a speech delivered by Paul Langevin on December 7, 1944 highlights the gap between the political program presented in this archive document, and current orientations. This issue therefore intends to participate in the political debate on the real democratization of the school, which first supposes to question the uses which are made of the word.