Abstract
The focus on the role of space in social sciences provides new perspectives on the possibilities for emancipatory pedagogies in higher education. The posthumanist insight into heterogeneous agency draws attention to the agential roles of spaces. The implications of spatial agency are investigated through a superimposition of a spatial typology on Rancière’s emancipatory pedagogy. A spatial typology from the social studies of science distinguishes between regional, network, fluid and fire spaces. Whereas banking education could be associated with regional spaces, progressive and critical pedagogies are closer to fluid spaces. In contrast, it is shown how the emancipatory pedagogy of R. is made possible through the interference of regional and fire spaces. The spatial analysis draws on the powerful effects of interferences (or diffractions). The significant finding of this investigation is that the possibility for emancipation is not ascribed to the spaces as such, but to the interference of regional-and fire spaces. Powerful effects are possible when regional spaces enable an awareness of the equality of intelligence and fire spaces the transformation of the world
Highlights
The calls for higher education to decolonise and to promote social and epistemic justice require a pedagogical response
While Lefebvre has been used to provide a spatial analysis of Rancière’s political philosophy (Büscher-Ulbrich, 2020), the approach to space in this study is different in two ways: Firstly, space is understood sociomaterially as a heterogeneous agency; secondly a typology of space is used where the focus is not on what happens ‘in’ the space but on the structuring of space itself
Education is for Rancière central to awakening the equality of an intelligence that participates in the aesthetics of politics
Summary
The calls for higher education to decolonise and to promote social and epistemic justice require a pedagogical response. Spatial practices mediate between the previous two spatialities in the production of social relations In their use of Lefebvre’s analysis of space in education Ford (2016) investigates the revolutionary elements of learning in conceived space, studying in lived space, and teaching in perceived space. While Lefebvre has been used to provide a spatial analysis of Rancière’s political philosophy (Büscher-Ulbrich, 2020), the approach to space in this study is different in two ways: Firstly, space is understood sociomaterially as a heterogeneous agency; secondly a typology of space is used where the focus is not on what happens ‘in’ the space but on the structuring of space itself The benefit of such a formal approach is that it does not assume that specific kinds of spaces have particular effects. While the focus in the rest of the article is on regional - and fire spaces, a brief overview is given of all four types of spaces for comparative purposes
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
