Essay: Progression of Education Policies in the UK Towards LGBTQ+: a Reflection of Durkheim’s Social Transformations.



Durkheim stated that “Educational transformations are always the result and the symptom of social transformations”- The progression of education policies in the UK towards LGBTQ+

Introduction

This essay will discuss the progression of education policies in the UK towards LGBTQ+ in relation to the social theories by Durkheim, MacNaughton and Foucault. Primarily, there wil be an outline of the historical events, regarding social actions and changes towards LGBTQ+ rights, both in the UK and globally, which have resulted in the progression of the education policies in the UK. Following the reference of the events, there will be a critical analysis of Durkheim’s theories in the Sociology of Education and a critical comparative analysis of the historical events under the light of the theories of MacNaughton and Foucault.

Durkheim stated that “Educational transformations are always the result and the symptom of social transformations” (1977, p.166). The transformation of societies due to historical circumstances has as a result the transformation of the educational systems across the world (Moore, 2004). Therefore, all the changes in people’s perceptions towards the LGBTQ+ community due to historical events, have resulted in the development of the educational policies towards LGBTQ+ people across the UK over the years.

Timeline of Events

Gay sex was decriminalised in the UK in 1967 following debates in the 1950s when homosexuality was still considered illegal. The 1980s was when the HIV was first reported and the first recorded patients of the disease were a group of gay men. This resulted to the stigmatisation of gay and bisexual men, and their association with the disease generated higher levels of homophobic perceptions (Wikipedia, 2016).

In 1988 the Local Government Act (The National Archives, 1988), and more specifically Section 28 of the Act stated that a local authority:

“shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality" or "promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship".

The enactment of this legislation in 1988 initiated the reaction of many organisations and gay activists who led the campaign for the repeal of Section 28. The law was repealed in Scotland in 2000 and in the rest of the UK in 2003 (LGBT History Month, 2014).

In 2010 The Equality Act was enacted, which illegalised the discrimination of LGBTQ+ in the workplace and education. (LGBT Foundation, 2011)

In 2014, OFSTED published the document “Preventing and tackling bullying, Advice for headteachers, staff and governing bodies” (Department for Education, 2014) to support schools with preventing homophobic bullying in their provision. To ensure that all schools are taking the right actions to prevent homophobic bullying, the OFSTED inspectors explore the schools’ actions to support LGBT pupils in their provision (HM Government, 2013).

Durkheim and Education

Durkheim’s readers can recognise the correlation that he makes in his work between education and society and the profound connection between them. As Durkheim has stated “Educational transformations are always the result and the symptom of social transformations” (1977, p.166). This means that if  a society decides to undergo an educational transformation there has been a shift in the needs and ideas of the society where the educational system is no longer adequate to fulfil them (Durkheim, E., 1977).

In Durkheim’s theory about the sociology of education his idea that people who live in societies are constantly developing on a social and historical level is distinct. The youth that belong in a society go through education in order to become social beings, that will be able to function under the norms that have been molded by specific historical incidents. All the historical events within a society generate categories of thought which are then transmitted through education. While in education the young grasp the principles of awareness that have been created based on the categories of thought of that specific society. Therefore, education varies as societies vary and there can be no universal pedagogical approaches. They are tailored to a specific society’s needs and ideas (Moore, 2004).

Each educational system aims to influence the younger generation in order to create in them certain physical, moral and intellectual states that are accepted not only by the general society but also the micro-environment of which they are part of and destined for. The influence inflicted upon the younger generations is decided by adult generations that belong in that society and their decisions are based upon its function. At the same time, there is an effort to maintain homogeneity up to a degree in order to maintain the survival of the society, but at the same diversity is supported so as to ensure that co-operation is viable within the society (Durkheim et al., 1956).

In Durkheim’s book ‘Education and Sociology’ (Durkheim et al., 1956) he argues that education has always differed in time and place. He attempts to justify his idea of that by giving examples of the educational systems of Greece and Rome, where the former focused on cultivating the soul and the latter aimed at creating men that were dedicated to a military training. He then discusses about the Middle Ages and the Renaissance where the focus was on Christianity and literary consecutively. Having mentioned the educational focuses at those different times he hypothesises that the world as we know it today would have been different if the focus was different at those times. Our modern societies wouldn’t have developed if the Latin civilisation hadn’t prevailed, given the military education that the Roman men went through. Durkheim attempted to prove that education formulates the societies as much as the societies influence the educational systems within them.

In the same book, Durkheim states how education as we know it today is formed by our entire human past: “The entire human past has contributed to the formation of this totality of maxims that guide education today” (1956, p. 66). He then mentions that educational systems are developed based on the influence of religion, science, the state of the political affairs etc. Education can not be understood if it is decontextualised, because it is the context for which it is made for, the context in which it is meant to create the social being for the society. The purpose of education is the training of the children, but in order to understand what that training should consist of one must see the context in which the education functions (Durkheim et al., 1956).

Durkheim compares human beings and animals by saying that each human generation transmits all their learnings to the new generations through various ways rather than scatter them and start again. Human beings work alongside one another and in comparison to animals they enjoy the achievement of others as well. The gathering of all the wisdom that has been cultivated over the years since the creation of humanity would not have been possible without society. People in societies that are willing to support the people within them, will create individuals that will want to support the society in return. Consequently, the society through education tries to support the individual in order for them to grow and become social beings accepting the norms of the society they live in without pushing aside the traits of their individual beings. However, that wouldn’t happen if the individuals within societies were not willing to persevere and maintain all the effort that has been put into the societies by the previous generations (Durkheim et al., 1956).

In the Middle Ages, little was the focus of education in classics. There were a few scholars that had created schools based on classical education but they were isolated cases that weren’t sufficient enough in order to introduce classical literature into education during those times. It wasn’t until the sixteenth century that the Greek and Roman art and literature were considered of invaluable educational interest. But that wasn’t a sudden change, there was a series of changes in the society that resulted in the shift of the minds and the interest in these areas of study. When the markets revived and the cities became more populated people gained more confidence and the general welfare had been increased. People became more wealthy and desired an elegant and luxury life. But that wasn’t prominent in just the aristocracy but also the middle class and that is the reason why it had such obvious social results. Inevitably, these tremendous changes in the perception of living resulted in a shift of the understanding of what education should be like. Education had to change in order for the new social classes to able to present themselves in their new social circles. (Durkheim, E., 1977). The above is an evidence of how transformations in society can cause shifts in the educational systems and the perceptions of people within the society they belong to.

Based on Durkheim’s quote that “Educational transformations are always the result and the symptom of social transformations” (1977, p.166) one can clearly see that all the changes that current educational systems make in their policies are related to changes in society. They are based on people’s reactions to social events which trigger those in power to act in order to make changes for the best of society. Therefore, Durkheim’s theory is still relevant and present in modern societies.

Accordingly, all the events that happened towards the LGBTQ+ community from the 1960s onwards in the UK triggered for educational changes to happen. From the passing of the Section 28 all the way to its repeal (LGBT History Month, 2014).

MacNaughton’s curriculum models and the educational policies towards LGBTQ+ pupils

In MacNaughton’s book “Shaping early childhood: Learners, curriculum and contexts” (MacNaughton and Naughton, 2003) there is a discussion about three different types of curriculum. A curriculum that conforms to society, therefore abides to society’s rules and norms. A curriculum that reforms society, which means that through an early childhood curriculum subtle changes are aimed to be achieved in the society. Lastly, she analyses the theory of a curriculum that transforms society. A curriculum in early childhood education whose role is to transform society, desires to make drastic changes in the society in order to fundementally change the understandings and ideas of the society so social fairness can be achieved. But where do the policies towards LGBTQ+ pupils, that have come into place in the UK education system since the 1960s, stand against MacNaughton’s three models of early childhood curricula?

In her position of a curriculum that conforms to society, MacNaughton refers to it as a medium to create “normal adults who can conform to existing social mores and expectations” (2003, p.123). In the 1960s in the UK homosexuality was decriminalised but was not always approved. When in the 1980s the HIV outburst within the gay community, society’s attitude towards the community remained negative if not deteriorated (LGBT History Month, 2014). In one of the scenes in the movie “Pride” (Warchus, 2014), AIDS is referred to as “anally injected death syndrome”, which implies that society was still viewing the homosexuals in a negative way. The enactment of Section 28 in the Local Government Act in 1988 was the current government’s effort to ensure that the future generations would conform to the negative perception towards the LGBTQ+ community. Section 28 prohibited education institutions to use any material that promoted homosexuality or teach the normality of families where the parents are homosexuals (LGBT History Month, 2014).

In an early childhood curriculum that conforms to society where people adhere to current understandings, practices and rules, early childhood educators with that perspective believe that social differences should be disregarded or disguised. They also consider that prejudice derives from discussing about social differences and that if educators consider all children to be the same then there will be fairness between them (MacNaughton and Naughton, 2003). Under that perception the UK government considered that the abolition of any form of discussion about homosexuality in education would eradicate any negative association with the word homosexual or homosexual pupils. Therefore, no prejudice would remain against LGBTQ+ people and their relationships if no one ever discussed about them.

In the 1980s as part of the criminal justice bill in Scotland, there was a publication which supported that schools should not teach homosexuality during sex education lessons. Following the above action, two years later the government recommended that in English and Welsh schools only heterosexual intercourse should be taught during the same classes in schools (Wikipedia, 2016). Based on MacNaughton’s model of a curriculum that conforms to society, early years educators and educators in general who follow a technical curriculum that conforms to society take the risk of repeating outdated social and cultural stereotypes. A curriculum of such approach is shaped by the society’s most influential groups and is dependent on the philosophy of those groups, however, the individuality and personality of the children are pushed aside (MacNaughton and Naughton, 2003). Is a school that follows this approach supportive of children’s differences or does it make them feel guilty about who they are?

Between 1981 and 1984 there were efforts by the Greater London Council to support gay groups by funding their action. In addition to that, in 1983 a copy of the book ‘Jenny lives with Eric and Martin’ which depicts a family with two gay dads was found in a school library. Increasing were the efforts by the Local Authorities to follow anti-discrimination policies. The boroughs of Ealing, Islington, Camden and the city of Manchester employed people to tackle homophobia. In 1985 the Labour Party during their annual conference promised to try and make discrimination against lesbian, gay and bisexual illegal (Wikipedia, 2016).  

All the above actions were implemented to gradually change people’s perception towards the LGBTQ+ community and therefore society’s understanding of homosexuality . That follows MacNaughton’s model of a curriculum that aims to reform society. If all the schools in the country decided to incorporate books in their libraries that supported positive attitudes  towards homosexuality, then children from a young age would have a positive image of homosexuals. Based on Singer, if children learn something from a young age then they take it for granted and there is no room for resistance. It is hard to change older people’s minds but if the educational system focused on shaping a positive attitude in the children’s minds towards homosexuality then society would later on be reformed and a positive attitude would remain within it. The goal of a curriculum with a reforming approach is the development of every individual child where their self-expression and inner capacities are promoted (MacNaughton and Naughton, 2003). How can a school be supportive of children that show non-heterosexual behaviours or come from families with homosexual parents, when the educational system itself condemns homosexual behaviours?

In the same book (MacNaughton and Naughton, 2003), there is a reference to the origin of theories that support the fundamental changing of society through education. There was a variety of groups of social activists and social theorists that supplied a plethora of ideas that supported to form what is today known as critical educational theory. This theory supports that through education society can be transformed. Teachers and educators can have an active part in creating a society that is free of discrimination, a society of justice that provides a wide range of opportunities for the learners. Teachers following the critical education theory have a choice to transform injustice in their work and challenge the socio-political and economic constructions that prohibit the formation of a society where no discrimination against gender, race, class or sexuality exist.

Although teachers were unable to act in order to transform the current climate against homophobia after the enactment of Section 28, because they were scared of losing their jobs, there were a lot of organisations that reacted against the new Act and supported the teachers in school. Stonewall alongside the Family Planning Association, the Terrence Higgins Trust and Schools out (which was previous known as the Gay Teachers Association) all campaigned against the Act and supported teachers on how to tackle homophobia in schools. If it wasn’t for the opposition of all these organisations then education wouldn’t have been transformed into a just and fair place towards LGBTQ+ people, where discrimination against them is considered illegal and they are not considered to be second class citizens (LGBT History Month, 2014).

Foucault- discourse and power and the gay movements in the UK and the US in the 1980s and 1990s

Michel Foucault describes discourse as verbal signs that are used to understand the world and that there is a style of discourse for every strand of society. Different discourse is used within a family and different discourse is used within the workplace. People can switch between one type of discourse to another during their conversations based on what they are discussing about. The modes of discourse vary based on the context, the topic of the conversation and the sector of the society that it is taking part in (Oliver, 2010).

Skilful individuals that can switch from one type of discourse to another with ease can function in various social situations. People that can apply a discourse that is not understandable by the majority of the population have the power to persuade others using the authority of their discourse. This is true in the professions of education, medicine, law and politics. Politicians and law makers use their power and knowledge in order to control society through the way they discuss matters and through being vague about the implications their decisions can have on the society. The Individuals that have knowledge, acquire power and can influence the systems of ideas, knowledge and understanding within the society and therefore control those that are part of that specific society or social group. (Oliver, 2010).

In May 1968 in France, there were student protests in France which had an enormous impact on the education system and the way that students in higher education were taught. There was a shift from memorising traditional theories to being able to deploy and exploit them in order to compare them with other ideas and theories and later on create their own view of the world. This gave education the power to function as a medium to bring social changes and transform the social structures (Oliver, 2010).

Foucault has mentioned that those who can make observations on specific people within the society have tremendous power. By making observations they can identify individuals that do not conform to the norm and then decide on actions that need to be taken so that they can comply with the norm. This is evident in the education system where children’s progress is tracked as soon as they enter education from a young age. They are observed and then interventions are planned based on the observations in order for them to be able to come to the level that is expected of their age (Oliver, 2010).

In the same sense when actions were taken in the 1980s so that society’s perception towards homosexuals would change, those in power decided to cease that change and maintain the current attitude by enacting a legislation that would prohibit the mention of any homosexual activity in the educational institutions in the country (LGBT History Month, 2014). The current government tried through the education system to apply their power and control the perceptions of the population towards the LGBTQ+ community.

The power of the state is also evident in the health department where those in power have to decide whether they are going to provide expensive medication to a small group of people or if they are going to offer less expensive medication and care to a larger number of people. The state needs to ensure that the provisions made care both for specific needs of individuals but also the broader needs of the population. Failure to do so can cause public reaction and opposition to governments’ decisions (Oliver, 2010).

An example of such a dilemma that a government had to undergo was in the 1980s and 1990s when the HIV outburst and increasing numbers of gay men were dying from the disease. The Raegan government failed to take appropriate action, the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) delayed their research and thus the production of medication that would help the HIV+ patients was insufficient. This resulted in the reaction and protest of the gay community in order for the FDA to proceed with the process of creating a drug that would cease the increasing death rate of gay men. The gay movement instigated the reaction of the FDA and despite the lack of leadership by the current president the organisation stuck to their regulations and managed to generate movement in the drug industry against AIDS (Richert, 2009).

Accordingly, the enactment of Section 28 in 1988, provoked the gay rights movement to protest against the power of the government. Affluent people (Ian McKellen, Boy George etc.) from the world of Arts along with other organisations such as Stonewall and OutRage!, campaigned against the new legislation. The Department for Education is 1988 in a statement about Section 28 (LGBT History Month, 2014, p.3) they said:

"Section 28 does not affect the activities of school governors, nor of teachers… It will not prevent the objective discussion of homosexuality in the classroom, nor the counselling of pupils concerned about their sexuality."

The government representatives using their power, tried to persuade the public about the impact of the new legislation on teachers and schools. The main reason why the legislation ignited a chain of reactions was because by prohibiting the action of gay support groups teachers didn’t have the power to support students that were victims of homophobic bullying. Section 28 prevented the promotion of homosexuality but also became a licit cause to go against homosexuality in schools and other agencies (LGBT History Month, 2014).

Foucault and the History of Sexuality

In the first volume of his book the History of Sexuality (Foucault, M., 1990.) Foucault examines the relationship between power and discourse in terms of sexuality. He analyses the way in which those in power, i.e. the Catholic Church, urged the people during the Victorian times, to discuss more about sex, which at the time had become a taboo, during confessions and then use that discourse extracted from those dialogues to influence the people. An attitude towards sex, that it was only meant for reproduction and any enjoyment to meet the flesh’s needs were sinful, was dominant during that time due to the preaching form the Church.

The term ‘population’ was devised and sex was used to police the birth-rate, the marriage conditions, the sexual relations, the results of contraceptive sex. Therefore the discourse of sex was used by the current state to control the man power that was important for the development of the economy of the society.

The regularity of sex was consolidated over the eighteenth century through education and the preaching of the Church. A variety of measures were implemented in order to control sex, i.e. educational programmes in schools which taught a specific discourse and what was expected of students’ sexual behaviour. This created a hesitance when it came to discussing about sex, which is still evident these days.

Once the regularity of sex was consolidated in the society those in power were able to abolish those who presented anomalies or used sex in a perverse way, in a way that did not agree to the economy of social reproduction. With the aid of the medical profession from the nineteenth century onwards there was a proliferation of different sexualities and the notion of perversion. All the sexual acts that were against the human nature were considered unlawful. Homosexuality, which was one of them, became an area of interest for the doctors at the time and it was officially recognised in 1870 by Westphal in one of his articles. This generated a big interest in a variety of medical areas.

The social mechanisms of medicine, psychiatry, education and family had the power of denying any counterproductive sexualities such as homosexuality. But all these adjacently to one another operate through the mechanisms of power and pleasure. The pleasure which derives from controlling what comes to light and also the pleasure to leave or change the power that controls. The power that allows to be intruded by the enjoyment it seeks to resist. This contradictory relationship was evident in the area of sexuality over the nineteenth century.

Foucault proves through his theory how the mechanisms that function within society affect one another and how they support changes within that society. The state and the Church had the power to control the discourse and create new norms and perceptions around sexuality. These norms were then used to generate social structures that would transmit the notion around sexuality in all the social strands, and one of those structures was education.

Conclusion

Durkheim’s statement, that changes in education derive from social changes ignited a discussion in this essay around the educational policies in the UK towards the LGBTQ+ pupils. There was an analysis of Durkheim’s theory of Education and Society in order to prove how these two are deeply connected and affect one another. Furthermore, there was a critique of the educational policies under the lens of MacNaughton’s curriculum models. Finally, Foucault’s theory of discourse was utilised to prove how all the changes in the educational policies towards the LGBTQ+ between the  1980s and now have been influenced by the social changes. His research around the history of sexuality was also used in order to prove that point.

Education is constantly changing around the world based on the current affairs of each society. Policies are being transformed on the ground of society’s benefit. The LGBTQ+ community in the Western countries is now treated in a more positive way due to the fights that have been given by the community against the conservative governments over the past decades. The perception towards LGBTQ+ still needs to be shifted in the majority of the globe in order for it to be widely accepted and education is a medium to make this possible.