Page 140 - Šolsko polje, XXIX, 2018, no. 1-2: The Language of Neoliberal Education, ed. Mitja Sardoč
P. 140
šolsko polje, letnik xxix, številka 1–2
The Iron and Velvet Cages of Policy Discourse
in Postdigital Society
Fawns (2018) argues for a postdigital perspective to draw in all of edu-
cation and not just that which is considered to lie outside of digital ed-
ucation. As such, ‘the digital and non-digital, material and social, both
in terms of the design of educational activities and in the practices that
unfold in the doing of those activities’ all need to be taken into account
(Fawns, 2018). We suggest that HE policy discourse does not sit outside of
these arguments either because discourse can frame human understand-
ing within both iron and velvet cages. In times when quality is measured
via excellence frameworks for teaching and research, policy must also be
subject to scrutiny (Hayes, forthcoming 2019). This is even more impor-
tant when policy discourse concerning ‘the student experience’ appears to
encapsulate the very senses and experiences of human beings in HE.
These days many of us assume the role of a ‘prosumer’ (Toffler, 1980,
Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2010) undertaking both production and consump-
tion in digital and material spaces, rather than focusing on either one (pro-
duction) or the other (consumption). This is apparent in user-generated
content online, where control and exploitation take on a different charac-
ter than in other historic forms of capitalism (Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2010).
The concept of the ‘postdigital’ helps to provide insights into our aug-
mented realities as prosumers, who provide our unpaid labour to wealthy
organisations. This takes the form of many voluntary activities people
now undertake, such as generating our own customer orders, providing
feedback on what we purchase, sharing opinions and ‘likes’ that consti-
tute valuable information within algorithmic frameworks. Facebook,
Amazon and Starbucks are examples amongst many, where people pro-
duce valuable demographic details for no salary, but in HE staff and stu-
dents are also engaging with these forms of algorithms and analytics.
Yet, whilst these observations may sound negative, we understand
the postdigital as a space of learning, struggle, and hope. In recognizing
that ‘old’ and ‘new’ media are now ‘cohabiting artefacts’ that enmesh with
our economy, politics and culture, we can gain valuable insights into the
direction concepts such as ‘the student experience’ may be taking us in
HE. Policy discourse and educational practice are deeply intertwined:
In entering this postdigital age, there really is no turning back from
a convergence of the traditional and the digital. However, this is not
simply a debate about technological and non-technological media. The
postdigital throws up new challenges and possibilities across all aspects
of social life. We believe this opens up new avenues too, for considering
138
The Iron and Velvet Cages of Policy Discourse
in Postdigital Society
Fawns (2018) argues for a postdigital perspective to draw in all of edu-
cation and not just that which is considered to lie outside of digital ed-
ucation. As such, ‘the digital and non-digital, material and social, both
in terms of the design of educational activities and in the practices that
unfold in the doing of those activities’ all need to be taken into account
(Fawns, 2018). We suggest that HE policy discourse does not sit outside of
these arguments either because discourse can frame human understand-
ing within both iron and velvet cages. In times when quality is measured
via excellence frameworks for teaching and research, policy must also be
subject to scrutiny (Hayes, forthcoming 2019). This is even more impor-
tant when policy discourse concerning ‘the student experience’ appears to
encapsulate the very senses and experiences of human beings in HE.
These days many of us assume the role of a ‘prosumer’ (Toffler, 1980,
Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2010) undertaking both production and consump-
tion in digital and material spaces, rather than focusing on either one (pro-
duction) or the other (consumption). This is apparent in user-generated
content online, where control and exploitation take on a different charac-
ter than in other historic forms of capitalism (Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2010).
The concept of the ‘postdigital’ helps to provide insights into our aug-
mented realities as prosumers, who provide our unpaid labour to wealthy
organisations. This takes the form of many voluntary activities people
now undertake, such as generating our own customer orders, providing
feedback on what we purchase, sharing opinions and ‘likes’ that consti-
tute valuable information within algorithmic frameworks. Facebook,
Amazon and Starbucks are examples amongst many, where people pro-
duce valuable demographic details for no salary, but in HE staff and stu-
dents are also engaging with these forms of algorithms and analytics.
Yet, whilst these observations may sound negative, we understand
the postdigital as a space of learning, struggle, and hope. In recognizing
that ‘old’ and ‘new’ media are now ‘cohabiting artefacts’ that enmesh with
our economy, politics and culture, we can gain valuable insights into the
direction concepts such as ‘the student experience’ may be taking us in
HE. Policy discourse and educational practice are deeply intertwined:
In entering this postdigital age, there really is no turning back from
a convergence of the traditional and the digital. However, this is not
simply a debate about technological and non-technological media. The
postdigital throws up new challenges and possibilities across all aspects
of social life. We believe this opens up new avenues too, for considering
138
