Comparativa con aproximaciones basadas en Recuperación de Información 66

Young’s theory of communicative democracy is based on the inclusion of others. She contends that Habermas’s theory of communicative action and Benhabib’s discursive theory constitute the libratory notion of communication and consensus as emancipatory actions for the inclusion or agreement of voices. However, Young argues that these two theories do not address the issue of inclusiveness as true libratory ideas. What Young means is that all voices are included in deliberative engagement but the voices of others who are different such as marginalised women of diverse cultures, gays and lesbians are often excluded in political (educational) communication. Hence Young’s theory of inclusion extends the critical discourse in favour of including the voices of others who are “different” and not to give preference.

Young (2000: 52) states:

Democratic norms mandate inclusion as a criterion of the political legitimacy of outcomes. Democracy entails political equality, that all members of the polity are included equally in the decision-making process and have an equal opportunity to influence the outcome.

In other words, Young contends that the mandate of democracy is that of inclusion, because all citizens have a political (educational) right to be equally included in the decision-making process in the school. She further purports that it is not only the right to equality in the decision-making process, but an equal opportunity to influence the dialogical outcome. Young (in Macedo 1999: 155) argues for the inclusion of marginalised voices. I argue that at present schools still reflect a thin response to transformative education because we are not, as Young contends we should, including the voices of difference in our schools sufficiently. In other words, such scenarios have not responded to the inclusion of others through participatory

engagement in the decision-making process. For example, only one of the six school principals I visited included the voice of another staff member into the discussion concerning the staff establishment and learner statistics, mentioned earlier in this dissertation. Hence I argue that a critical leader and manager as a deliberative democrat would consciously engage the voices and reasoning of difference in staff rooms, parents meetings, and classrooms and in other educational contexts.

Young (1989, 1996, and 2000) argues that those who have the command of the language of power often articulate persuasive arguments eloquently. In other words, the language of power is the language that dominates all forms of academic communication. Those who lack this level of articulacy are excluded, even though they may have excellent ideas. Young proposes that deliberation ought to take people’s narratives (their stories) into account, irrespective of how communicatively inarticulate these narratives are. The point Young makes is that all voices should be included in deliberation and not excluded on the basis of poor linguistic expression. I refer to my narrative, where I engage the reader by telling how conversant I was with the previous regimes curriculum for education, and hence had the power of knowledge to communicate and persuade the less articulate to adopt oppressive forms of curriculum domination.

Young purports that educational leadership and management practice has a better chance of being realised through deliberative engagement that includes the voice of others. Hence, inclusion becomes more participatory when empowering, liberating and freeing people (teachers, learners, parents and the broader school community) by participating in the deliberations for the good of the school. Such inclusive deliberation constitutes a critical conception of educational leadership and management practice.

According to Young (2000: 53), greeting or public acknowledgement constitutes a form of communication by directly recognising the presence of others. Communication, plurality and publicity are experienced through communicative democratic virtues such as caring, hugs and handshakes. Through greeting, eye contact is made with others and the acknowledgement of greeting becomes more personal. A form of courtesy and acknowledgement of the other takes the form of recognition. However, I argue that if greeting is not sincerely manifested, then communicative exclusion takes place, such as greeting someone in a monotone voice,

unfriendly facial expression and lack of eye contact or coldness in approach. A critical leader and manager would consciously recognise the presence of others through greeting teachers, learners and parents in a way that recognition and mutual respect are acknowledged.

Young (2000: 53) contends that rhetoric is a mode of articulation or way of expression in which political and educational assertions and arguments are expressed where the idea of persuasion is central to rhetoric. Rhetoric has many functions that contribute to inclusive and persuasive political and educational communication. I argue that rhetoric as a communicative process ought to filter into the life-world of the school where teachers, learners and parents not only listen intently to the voice of the speaker, but that they respond accordingly.

Storytelling (narrative), according to Young (2000), is the understanding whereby recognising individuals’ general interest through storytelling is shared. Storytelling (narrative) fosters conceptualisation across difference and social locations in different situations or similar situations. Narrative communication reveals social knowledge from a social position; this point was conceptualised in Chapter 1. The narrative opportunity to express my view as an emancipated, liberated and free spirited white woman in society has had a transformative impact on my thinking and acting, hence evoking a renewed understanding of leading and managing a school. In other words, a deliberative democratic discourse provides a critical conception for educational leadership and management practice because of its emancipatory interest embedded in a critical theoretical framework. Young (2000: 53) states that narrative can also be exclusionary, as it could possibly disengage people from sharing their stories or engaging in productive debate and thus inhibit the ability to reach dialogical understanding.

Therefore Young argues that through communicative democracy people are included in the political (educational) engagements and decision-making process, provided that the voices of people who are different to us are heard. For educational leadership and management practice, Young states that the voices of all citizens constitute a democratic right to be active participants in deliberative engagements. This means that educational leaders and managers ought to respect, include and engage others as free and equal citizens of society in deliberations concerning the welfare and the educational aim of the school.

3.6 SUMMARY

I have explored how critical educational leadership and management engender deliberative democracy. Therefore it should be the intention of the principal to create functional spaces for deliberation to take place in the school. Earlier on, I stated that in order for transformation to manifest itself in schools, the school should be an open and transparent organisation embracing the cultural and social conditions that give rise to deliberation and collaboration.

This would constitute a critical conception of deliberative action for educational leadership and management practice to manifest change in a school.

The ability of a school leader and manager to listen, debate, argue and arrive at a consensual agreement would create democratic space for deepening a deliberative democratic discourse.

A deliberative democratic discourse can engender critical educational leadership and management practice in the following ways:

a) providing increased access to schooling irrespective of race, gender, age, creed, class or ability;

b) promoting equity of access and redressing past inequalities reflective of the demographic realities and needs of the school community;

c) ensuring diversity in the organisational form and school landscape through addressing the teaching and learning needs of the learners; and

d) providing quality education for all learners.

(Based on the policy framework of the South African Schools Act 1996 and the National Education Policy Act 1996).

To conclude this chapter: I have shown how a critical theoretical approach to educational leadership and management practice moves away from positivism as a construct for leadership and management practice in current schools. I have explored how democratic citizenship education as an instance of critical educational leadership and management can bring about deliberation and citizenship education in schools. Moreover, I have shown how critical educational leadership and management engender deliberative democracy. I have

also explored constitutive features of a deliberative democratic (critical) educational leadership and management practice according to three theoretical understandings of a deliberative democratic discourse, namely the seminal thoughts of Habermas, Benhabib and Young. Finally, I have explored Young’s (2000) notion of communicative democracy and showed how greeting, rhetoric and storytelling (narrative) can cultivate a critical or deliberative democratic account of educational leadership and management practice in schools.