Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
com/
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for European Journal of Social Theory can be found at: Email Alerts: http://est.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://est.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://est.sagepub.com/content/6/1/133.refs.html
REVIEW
E S S AY
Niklas Luhmann and Karl Eberhard Schorr, Problems of Reection in the System of Education, trans. Rebecca A. Neuwirth. Mnster: Waxmann, 2000, 412pp., 25.50, ISBN 3893258906 (pbk) Niklas Luhmann, Das Erziehungssystem der Gesellschaft, ed. Dieter Lenzen. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2002, 236pp. inc. index, 25, ISBN 3518583204 (hbk); 11, ISBN 3518291939 (pbk) With the publication of Soziale Systeme in 1984, Niklas Luhmann (192798) provided us with what he himself later called the introductory chapter of a general theory of modern society. This book which consists of 675 pages became available in English in 1995 under the title Social Systems. It is presented as an attempt to reformulate the theory of social systems via the current state of the art in general systems theory (p. 11). Its central aim is the application of the idea of autopoiesis (= self-production) to social systems. Soziale Systeme wants to indicate the autonomy of social systems with regard to the production and reproduction of their elemental units. Luhmann argues that social reality continually organizes its own self-renewal by means of communicative acts. In his following books, which appeared at a remarkably great pace, this general theory of social systems has been specied and applied to particular kinds of social systems. Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft, which is the grand nale of his work, appeared in 1997, at a moment when Luhmann was already terminally ill as a consequence of a viral infection. This 1164-page book, bound in a black cover, focuses on society understood as the comprehensive social system. The other chapters of his theory are devoted to analyses of the major function systems which have differentiated in modern society. During Luhmanns lifetime, voluminous monographs by him appeared on the economy, science, law and art. In 2000, this series was complemented by the posthumously published monographs on politics and religion. As the last volume in this series, there has now appeared the relatively short, uncompleted manuscript of Das Erziehungssystem der Gesellschaft which has been edited by Dieter Lenzen. A number of Luhmanns recent chapters on societys function systems draw
1368-4310[200302]6:1;133143;033420
Downloaded from est.sagepub.com at Univ of Education, Winneba on August 10, 2013
134
Abstraction and complexity indeed characterize Luhmanns work; they are the counterpart of its wide-ranging scope. Moreover, Luhmann used to introduce concepts and conceptual determinations that are fairly uncommon in the eld of social theory (let alone ordinary language). These characteristics probably explain the still rather marginal position of Luhmanns writings in the eld of social theory especially outside Germany and outside the circle of the Luhmaniacs. In my view, Luhmanns and Schorrs systems-theoretical observations and analyses nevertheless deserve close attention from researchers in the eld of social theory. With regard to education, Luhmanns analyses offer a clearly articulated theoretical approach that might stimulate further developments. After the demise of the so-called new sociology of education, theoretical investigations have in fact virtually disappeared from this elds research agenda (see Shain and Ozga, 2001; Vanderstraeten, 2002). Against this background, this review essay seeks to illuminate some of the central intuitions of Luhmanns observations of the educational system of modern society. In line with Luhmanns general theory of social systems, I will rst focus on communication as the basic social unit and on education as a social system or communication system. In a second step, I will
Raf Vanderstraeten
Review Essay
135
briey deal with Luhmanns theory of social differentiation and with the analyses of education as a function system of modern society. Given the rather enigmatic style of Luhmanns (and Schorrs) writings, this review rst of all intends to clarify their main arguments. Communication as the Basic Element of Social Systems In the eld of the social sciences, theorists have opted for different concepts to represent the basic unit of social reality such as action, exchange, power or force. Niklas Luhmann, however, was the rst major writer to consider communication as the constitutive element of social reality. As Stichweh (2000) argues, Luhmanns writings seem to draw the consequences from a number of post-war developments, which were, most of all, initiated by the new technologies of information processing. These developments seem to make founding a contemporary social theory upon the concept of communication nearly unavoidable. It was Luhmann, in choosing communication theory over action theory, who took on the role of the rst major sociological communication theorist, a role which had to be taken by someone anyway (p. 9). From this perspective, communication is the constitutive element of social systems. This element can be described as an occurrence or event, which emerges from the processing of selections. According to Luhmann (1984/1995), the unit of communication consists of the co-ordination or synthesis of three different selections. These selections are: information, utterance (Mitteilung) and understanding (Verstehen). Communication, thus, is an emergent, three-part unity. For Luhmann, information is a selection from a repertoire of possibilities. It is the selection that is actualized in the communication. Without this selectivity of information, no communication would emerge, however minimal the news value of the exchanges (e.g., if communication is only engaged in to pass the time and avoid periods of silence). A communicative act, however, does not make a selection in the same way in which one grabs one thing rather than another off the rack. Pieces of information do not just exist out there, waiting to be picked up by the system. Communication is not just a two-part matter of sending and receiving messages; the selection of information is one of its crucial components. The second selection concerns the choice of behaviour, an utterance, that expresses the information. Information should be provided in a form which the sender and the addressee are able to understand. Communication requires an adequate standardization of the utterance (e.g. linguistic forms). Certainly, this utterance can occur intentionally or unintentionally. It is also possible without language, e.g. through revealing looks, through dress or outt, through absence, etc. But the utterance must always be interpretable as selection, and not just appear as a sign of something else. In this sense, rushing about can be observed as a sign of urgency, just like dark clouds as a sign of rain. But it can also be interpreted as a demonstration of urgency (Luhmann, 1995: 151). The difference between both interpretations underlines at the same time the importance of the
136
Raf Vanderstraeten
Review Essay
137
conceded greater freedom (greater complexity) than concepts of social roles, norms and structures would allow. Luhmanns argument is based on the idea that social and personal systems are characterized by a fundamental instability. The elements, out of which they exist, have the character of occurrences or events, i.e. they vanish immediately after their appearance. They are continually replaced by other elements (different thoughts, different communications). They are radically temporalized systems. This characteristic allows for a high degree of congruence between both system types. Communications can be at the same time conscious events; thoughts can be communicated. But even if personal and social systems use the same elements, they give each of them a different selectivity and connectivity, different pasts and futures. The elements signify different things in the participating systems; they select among different possibilities and lead to different consequences. Thus, the congruence of social systems and personal systems is only temporary and vanishes time and time again. For the individual participants, the so-called turn-taking of active and passive participation in communication almost inevitably re-establishes the difference between personal and social systems. The mind might, for example, wander, think of something incommunicable, interrupt or pause, while the burden of communicating passes to somebody else. Communication can also be rejected. Human beings do not have to accept what is communicated, or how it is communicated. This theoretical approach entails important consequences for the conceptualization of socialization and education. In classical socialization research, as displayed in the writings of Emile Durkheim, Talcott Parsons, Pierre Bourdieu and others, socialization fulls a fairly unambiguous societal function. Socialization refers to the internalization or inculcation of social expectations. Luhmanns system/environment perspective, which is spelled out in the second chapter of Das Erziehungssystem der Gesellschaft, questions these assumptions. Participation in communication cannot result in the transfer of knowledge, nor in the internalization of the norms and value orientations of a social group. The meaning of norms, rules, habits, etc. which are transmitted does not remain the same. In the different participating systems, these elements have different meanings. There is always the possibility of rejecting the instruction or information which a communication contains. The interaction between a human being and its social environment might or might not provoke particular structural changes in the inner sphere of the individual; a human being might or might not adapt to particular aspects of its environment. Socialization is therefore dened as the process, steered by communication that inuences the psychological development and the bodily behaviour of human beings. It refers to changes that take place in societys environment. It is only this way, Luhmann argues (and rightly I think), that the possibilities which human beings have to travel a certain distance, to use their individual degrees of freedom, can be adequately taken into account (see Vanderstraeten, 2000). While socialization is limited by/to the stimuli of the socializing context, education strives for specic outputs. It aims to attain something that cannot be
138
Raf Vanderstraeten
Review Essay
139
initiatives automatically produce a situation within which particular patterns of behaviour are acceptable, while others are not. What occurs is compared with what is expected. Students are continually confronted with questions, remarks, tests, exams, and other kinds of communicated expectations (Luhmann and Schorr, 2000: 31825). Seen this way, it can be argued that the educational intention produces its own characteristic distinction (Luhmann, 2002: 10210). The difference between acceptable and unacceptable patterns of behaviour, between approval and disapproval, between good and wrong, etc., develops within the school system. It is worthwhile exploring this line of thought in more detail, and linking Luhmanns theoretical insights with ethnographical research in classrooms. I will briey point to some potential directions for further research, which may allow us to bring Luhmanns theory down to earth and stimulate a theoretical reection on so-called empirical facts. For example, selection forms can be specied in a number of ways in classrooms. Teachers can observe that one group of students lives up to the norm and that the other group does not, or that one student is more diligent in a particular course with a particular teacher than during another course with another teacher. Students can also observe each other and assess particular differences. Moreover, students can anticipate the evaluations. As a consequence, there thus emerges a situation within which students have to reckon with new alternatives for action, and within which the consequences of their behaviour are multiplied. In his famous Life in Classrooms, Philip Jackson makes similar comments:
In fact, he has three jobs. The rst, and most obvious, is to behave in such a way as to enhance the likelihood of praise and reduce the likelihood of punishment . . . A second job . . . consists of trying to publicize positive evaluations and conceal negative ones . . . A third job . . . consists of trying to win the approval of two audiences at the same time. The problem, for some, is how to become a good student while remaining a good guy, how to be at the head of the class while still being in the center of the group. (1990: 26)
The theoretical point which needs to be stressed is that classroom education creates these conditions itself. Educational intentions elicit a form of selection which would not emerge without these intentions. The distinctions that are introduced (such as good/wrong, positive/negative, praise/punishment, succeed/fail) are internal constructions. Educational decisions are taken in the educational setting itself. Thus, one can say that the meaning of evaluations is dened in the educational system itself following an internal scale. For example, satisfactory is better than unsatisfactory but less than excellent. A report mark indicates how much one can/could do better or worse. The autonomy of educational organizations depends upon this self-referential closure. Certainly, it does not depend upon true independency vis--vis the environment. Its autonomy does not deny that school organizations import knowledge from their environment, as well as the differences which are of importance in this context. Thus, the distinction between sine
140
Raf Vanderstraeten
Review Essay
141
It is in line with Durkheims observations, that Luhmann stresses that functional differentiation provokes wide-ranging symbolic or cultural changes. Luhmann sees reections as concepts or theories developed within a function system for that function system. These reections articulate the sub-systems main objectives. They thus lead to the appropriation of the world from a particular functional point of view, e.g. economic, political, religious, artistic, legal, educational, etc. The background of this perspective on self-descriptions can also be approached from another angle. In the eld of the history of ideas, it has been clearly outlined that the conceptual apparatus used in the Western world transformed in fundamental ways in the second half of the eighteenth century. The period 17501850 was an epoch of radical conceptual transformations. Numerous key social concepts, that are characteristic of modernity, were coined in this epoch, such as tolerance, authority, ideology, civil society, peace, culture, state and sovereignty, revolution, factory, history or progress. These new basic concepts indicate how the social and political reality is comprehended in the modern era. They record the dissolution of the old world and the emergence of a new one (Koselleck, 1972; 2000) and are not only the expression of changes within contemporary orientations, but also contribute to changing contemporary patterns of action and reection. Luhmann as a sociologist argues that structural transformations, i.e. the emergence of function systems, provoke these conceptual changes. Self-descriptions and reections are one of the most salient results of this great transformation. Their analysis allows studying the coevolution of structural and cultural changes in modern society. It is against this background in sociology and history that Luhmann and Schorr analyse at great length pedagogical modes of reection on educational realities, an analysis which forms the core of their book. English-speaking readers, however, should be aware of the fact that the discussions in the major parts of this book on the autonomy of education, on controlling prolonged processes via instruction technology, and on social selection are embedded within a predominantly German context. Luhmann and Schorr sharply criticize the idealistic articulation of the structural conditions of education in the reection theory of the educational system. In comparison, the analysis in Luhmanns Das Erziehungssystem der Gesellschaft is less critical about the reections developed in and by the educational establishment. But the bottom line of the observations remains the same. It is that educations self-descriptions focus too much on subjects (teachers/parents, pupils/children) and too little on communication and social interaction. As can be expected, the alternative suggestions of Luhmann and Schorr go in the direction of the themes which I discussed in the preceding sections. Luhmann and Schorr make a plea for a social re-conceptualization of the reection theories, for a re-conceptualization which takes its point of departure in educational communication.
142
Raf Vanderstraeten
Review Essay
143
Jackson, Philip (1990/1968) Life in Classrooms. New York and London: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Koselleck, Reinhardt (1972) Einleitung, in Otto Brunner, Werner Conze and Reinhardt Koselleck (eds) Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe: historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland, Vol. 1. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta. (2000) Zeitschichten. Studien zur Historik. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, Niklas (1981) Soziologische Aufklrung 3. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. (1982) The Differentiation of Society. New York: Columbia University Press. (1984) Soziale Systeme. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp (English translation, Social Systems, trans. John Bednarz, Jr, with Dirk Baecker, 1995, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press). (1990) Die Homogenisierung des Anfangs: zur Ausdifferenzierung der Schulerziehung, in Niklas Luhmann and Karl Eberhard Schorr (eds) Zwischen Anfang und Ende: Fragen an die Pdagogik. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. (1997) Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. (2000) Organisation und Entscheidung. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Shain, Farzana and Ozga, Jenny (2001) Identity Crisis? Problems and Issues in the Sociology of Education, British Journal of Sociology of Education 22: 10920. Stichweh, Rudolf (1997) Professions in Modern Society, International Review of Sociology 7: 95102. (2000) Systems Theory as an Alternative to Action Theory? The Rise of Communication as a Theoretical Option, Acta Sociologica 43: 513. Vanderstraeten, Raf (2000) Luhmann on Socialization and Education, Educational Theory 50: 123. (2002) Explorations in the Systems-theoretical Study of Education, in Carlos Alberto Torres and Ari Antikainen (eds) The International Handbook on the Sociology of Education. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littleeld.
Raf Vanderstraeten Faculty of Sociology, University of Bielefeld, Germany. [email: Raf.Vanderstraeten@uni-bielefeld.de]