Diagnóstico escolar: 1 Aceptación de escuela.

This  research  adopts  the  methodology  of  Engaged  Theory,  which  is  a  relatively   recent   approach   to   social-­‐theoretical   study.   Although   the   analytical   methodology  adopted  in  the  current  study  bears  some  similarity  to  Grounded   Theory  and  Discourse  Analysis,  there  are  several  reasons  why  Engaged  Theory   has  been  preferred  for  the  purposes  of  this  enquiry.    

Discourse  Analysis  is  primarily  linked  to  the  reading  of  statements,  acts  and  the   wider  discourse  to  try  and  uncover  what  is  hidden,  or  left  aside  to  maintain  the                                                                                                                  

52  _{A  discussion  on  these  facets  constitutes  the  subject  matter  for  Chapter  3  on  page  96.}   53  _{These  perspectives  will  be  elaborated  in  Chapters  4-­‐7,  starting  from  page  144.}  

consistency   and   unity   of   discourses.54   _{The   approach   of   the   present   study   to}  

identify,  question  and  critique  the  narratives  employed  to  comprehend  law  in   the   context   of   Pakistan,   shares   this   perspective   to   some   extent.   However,   it   is   the   emphasis   on   linguistics   and   semiotics   in   Discourse   Analysis   that   differentiates  it  from  the  methodology  adopted  in  this  study.55  _{While  the  thesis}  

employs   statements   from   the   judiciary,   activists,   government   officials   and   researchers   to   construct   and   analyse   the   identified   narratives   of   law,   it   recognises   that   their   implications   and   assertions   are   not   always   hidden   that   could   only   be   brought   to   the   fore   through   a   linguistic   analysis.   The   meanings   that   the   statements   used   in   this   thesis   carry   are   quite   evident   in   most   cases,   although   there   is   a   need   to   schematise   them   and   to   frame   them   within   the   larger   narrative   to   understand   their   implications.   In   this   sense,  narrative   as   a   category   is   related   to  discourse   as   an   organisational   schema,   and   these   terms   have  been  used  interchangeably  throughout  the  discussion.  But  the  purpose  of   the   thesis   is   to   identify   and   categorise   these   schema,   rather   than   trace   any   obscure  meaning  behind  them.56  

The  approach  of  the  thesis  also  overlaps  with  some  facets  of  Grounded  Theory,   while   differing   in   some   key   respects.   Grounded   Theory   is   acknowledged   as   ‘a   major  –  or  perhaps  the  major  –  contributor  to  the  acceptance  of  the  legitimacy                                                                                                                  

54  _{See,  the  Unity  of  Discourses  and  Discursive  Formations  in  Michel  Foucault,  The  Archaeology  of}  

Knowledge  (Routledge,  London  2002)  23-­‐43.  

55  _{This  linguistic  turn  is  a  critique  levelled  against  Critical  Discourse  Analysis  as  well.  See,  Sean}  

Phelan  and  Lincoln  Dahlberg,  'Discourse  Theory  and  Critial  Media  Politics:  An  Introduction'  in   Lincoln  Dahlberg  and  Sean  Phelan  (eds),  Discourse  Theory  and  Critial  Media  Politics  (Palgrave   Macmillan,  New  York  2011)  9.  

56  _{For  an  overview  on  Discourse  Analysis,  see  Norman  Fairclough,  Critical  Discourse  Analysis:}  

of   qualitative   methods   in   applied   social   research’.57   _{Strauss   and   Corbin   argue}  

that  Grounded  Theory  is  the  most  influential  method  of  ‘carrying  out  qualitative   research   when   generating   theory   is   the   researchers’   principal   aim’.58   _{It   is}  

conceived  of  as  ‘a  set  of  flexible  analytic  guidelines  that  enable  researchers  to   focus  their  data  collection  and  to  build  inductive  middle-­‐range  theories  through   successive   levels   of   data   analysis   and   conceptual   development’.59   _{Despite   the}  

fact   that   the   principal   aim   of   this   thesis   is   to   argue   for   and  generate   a   theory,   there  are  two  reasons  why  Grounded  Theory  has  not  been  employed  here.  First,   the   subject   matter   of   my   research   covers   a   number   of   diverse   facets   of   Pakistan’s   legal   and   normative   structure.   Because   of   this,   it   would   not   be   possible   to   discern   and   encompass   all   these   multiple   structures   through   fieldwork   and   qualitative   data   in   a   short   period   of   time.   Second,   the   critics   of   Grounded  Theory  argue  that  the  theory  reached  through  this  method  is  mainly   an  interpretation  of  qualitative  information,  and  does  not  deliver  on  the  ideas  of   ‘theory   as   discovery’   and   ‘theory   as   part   of   an   explanatory   exercise’.60   _{As   the}  

main   purpose   of   the   research   is   to   conduct   a   dialogue   between   socio-­‐legal   context   of   Pakistan   and   the   legal   theories   that   attempt   to   explain   it,   a   methodology   was   required   that   would   allow   us   to   move   towards   theorisation   rather  than  interpretation  of  data.  

57  _{Gary  Thomas  and  David  James,  'Re-­‐inventing  grounded  theory:  some  questions  about  theory,}  

ground  and  discovery'  (2006)  32  (6)  British  Educational  Research  Journal  767,  768.  

58  _{Quoted  in  ibid.}  

59  _{Kathy  Charmaz,  'Grounded  Theory    in  the  21st  Century:  Applications  for  Advancing  Social}  

Justice  Studies'  in  Norman  K  Denzin  and  Yvonna  S.  Lincoln  (eds),  The  Sage  Handbook  of   Qualitative  Research  (3rd  Edition  edn,  Sage  Publications,  California  2005)  507.  

But  it  is  important  to  mention  that  theory  is  not  taken  here  as  an  unproblematic   exercise.   I   would   argue   that   theory   as   an   abstraction   does   not   possess   an   inherent  value;  rather  it  serves  as  a  means  to  achieve  certain  aims,  and  as  a  tool   to  engage  with  the  phenomena  at  hand  and  understand  it  in  the  larger  context.     Clifford  borrows  from  Foucault  to  build  on  this  idea  of  theory  as  an  instrument   and  makes  his  case  for  Engaged  Theory.  In  Power/Knowledge,  Foucault  argues:  

The  notion  of  theory  as  a  toolkit  means:  (i)  The  theory  to  be  constructed   is   not   a   system   but   an   instrument,   a   logic   of   the   specificity   of   power   relations  and  the  struggles  around  them;  (ii)  That  this  investigation  can   only   be   carried   out   step   by   step   on   the   basis   of   reflection   (which   will   necessarily  be  historical  in  some  of  its  aspects)  on  given  situations.61  

Clifford  calls  these  two  facets  –  the  instrumentality  of  theory,  and  the  reflection   and  dialogue  between  context  and  theory  –  a  ‘Toolkit  of  engaged  theory’.62_{.  And}  

it  is  this  methodology  that  has  steered  the  present  study.  The  approach  to  legal   theory  adopted  here  is  a  reflexive  dialogue  with  practise  or  the  context  of  socio-­‐ legal   architecture   of   Pakistan,   the   aim   of   which   has   been   to   enrich   our   understanding   of   both   of   them,   and   draw   out   themes   to   improve   on   their   mutual   shortcomings.   As   Deleuze   argues,   ‘Practise   is   a   set   of   relays   from   one   theoretical  point  to  another,  and  theory  is  a  relay  from  one  practise  to  another.   No  theory  can  develop  without  eventually  encountering  a  wall,  and  practise  is  

61  _{Michel  Foucault,  'On  Popular  Justice:  A  Discussion  with  Maoists'  in  Colin  Gordon  (ed)}  

Power/knowledge:  Selected  Interviews  and  Other  Writings,  1972-­‐1977  (Harvester  Press,  Brighton   1980)  145.  

62  _{James  Clifford,  'On  Ethnographic  Authority'  in  Yvonna  S.  Lincoln  and  Norman  K.  Denzin  (eds),}  

Turning  Points  in  Qualitative  Research:  Tying  Knots  in  the  Handkerchief  (AltaMira  Press,  Walnut   Creek,  California  2003)  123.  

necessary   for   piercing   this   wall.’63   _{Theorisation,   in   this   sense,   becomes   a}  

political  and  practical  exercise  that  questions  both  the  realities  of  the  situation   at  hand  and  the  horizon  of  possibilities  presented  by  the  abstract  expositions.   Theory,   then,   is   not   just   an   illustration   of   context,   or   it   ‘does   not   express,   translate,  or  serve  to  apply  practise;  it  is  practise.’64    

More   significantly,   as   discussed   above,   the   primary   objective   behind   the   research   is   to   understand   Pakistan’s   socio-­‐legal   architecture   in   order   to   find   ways  through  which  the  situation  could  be  improved  for  the  common  citizen  of   the   country.   The   instrumentality   of   theory   granted,   it   is   important   to   be   conscious  of  the  consequences  and  repercussions  of  the  proposed  perspectives.   This   is   the   main   reason   why   the   methodology   of   Engaged   Theory   has   been   employed  here.  The  key  aspect  behind  Engaged  Theory  is  that  it  is  ‘intended  to   support  social  change  directly  or  indirectly’.65  _{Like  Grounded  Theory,  Engaged}  

Theory  also  adopts  the  approach  that  ‘theory  evolves  dialogically’,66  _{though  this}  

dialogue   is   not   between   data   and   analysis,   but   rather   between   practise   and   theory.   A   key   difference   lies   in   the   idea   that   Engaged   Theory   does   not   see   theorisation  as  value  neutral,  but  as  a  political  exercise.  Carol  Adams  labels  her   research  on  sexuality  as  an  ‘engaged  theory  that  arises  from  anger;  theory  that  

63  _{Michel  Foucault  and  Gilles  Deleuze,  'Intellectuals  and  power:  A  conversation  between  Michel}  

Foucault  and  Gilles  Deleuze'  libcomorg,  9  September  2006  

<http://libcom.org/library/intellectuals-­‐power-­‐a-­‐conversation-­‐between-­‐michel-­‐foucault-­‐and-­‐ gilles-­‐deleuze>  last  accessed  12  February  2012.  

64  _{Michel  Foucault,  Donald  Fernand  Bouchard  and  Sherry  Simon,  Language,  counter-­‐memory,}  

practice  :  selected  essays  and  interviews  (Blackwell,  Oxford  1977)  207.  

65  _{Ann  Garry,  'Intersections,  Social  Change  and  “Engaged  Theories":  Implications  of  North}  

American  Feminism'  (2008)  8  Pacific  and  American  Studies  99,  99.  

66  _{Jacques  M.  Chevalier  and  Daniel  J.  Buckles,  Participatory  Action  Research:  Theory  and  Methods}  

envisions  what  is  possible.  Engaged  Theory  makes  change  possible’.67  _{And  this}  

kind   of   theorisation   makes   change   possible   by   exposing   problems,   offering   solutions,68  _{and  conducting  reflexive  research  that  ‘reflects  on  itself’  in  line  with}  

the  researchers’  ‘commitments  to  changing  social  history’.69  _{More  importantly,}  

Engaged   Theory   highlights   the   importance   to   ‘understand   that   everything   is   connected.’70  _{It  is  this  commitment  to  change  and  the  tendency  to  understand}  

the  connection  between  complex  and  seemingly  unconnected  phenomena  that   characterises  the  thesis  under  consideration.