ABSTRACT

Lifelong learning has for decades been considered a ‘holy grail’ that can help resolve societal problems and boost the economy. The current hegemonic discourse surrounding lifelong learning has included economic objectives since at least the 1980s; however, this has not always been the case. At least three different conceptual generations have been distinguished throughout the history of the politics of lifelong learning: humanistic, economic and ‘soft’ economic. In this article, we examine the politics of lifelong learning in the humanistic generation. Our research comprises eight policy texts from UNESCO, the Council of Europe and the OECD. We apply Foucauldian approach with the aim of understanding the subjectivity types of lifelong learners that have been constructed within the policy texts. We apply Carol Bacchi’s ‘What is the problem represented to be?’ (WPR) method together with Foucauldian elements of ethical relations as a new modified tool for analysing educational policy texts. The study enhances our understanding of current lifelong learning discourses by analysing their ‘humanistic roots’ and subjectivities in the humanistic era. Moreover, it challenges the extent to which the politics of lifelong learning was considered humanistic at that time.

摘要

几十年来，终身学习一直被认为是有助于解决社会问题和促进经济发展的“圣杯”。至少从 20 世纪 80 年代起，当前围绕终身学习的霸权话语就包含了经济目标；然而，情况并非总是如此。纵观终身学习政治的历史，至少可以区分出三个不同的概念代：人文主义的、经济的和“软”经济的。在本文中，我们研究了人文一代的终身学习政治。我们的研究包括来自联合国教科文组织、欧洲委员会和经合组织的八份政策文本。我们应用福柯方法，旨在理解政策文本中构建的终身学习者的主体性类型。我们应用卡罗尔·巴基（Carol Bacchi）的'问题是什么？（WPR）方法与福柯伦理关系要素一起作为分析教育政策文本的新修改工具。该研究通过分析人文时代的“人文根源”和主观性，增强了我们对当前终身学习话语的理解。此外，它挑战了当时终身学习政治被认为是人文主义的程度。