Conference Program

Pedagogy is not a set of techniques and practices that would have the strange ability to be deployed without ideological presuppositions or political implications. This is what models such as the very classic transmissive pedagogy and the new evidence-based education, among others, show: they give concrete form to powers that make knowledge a key to the consolidation of dominations based on class, gender, race and so on. This has been understood, in different contexts, by many educational theories and practices of social emancipation, such as critical and decolonial pedagogies (Mohanty, 1990; Tuhiwai Smith, 1999), ecopedagogies (Gadotti, 2000; Shiva, 2022), feminist and anti-racist pedagogies (bell hooks, 1994; Berth, 2019) and, even earlier, materialist, workers' and socialist pedagogies in Europe (Dupeyron, 2020). They all affirm the existence of a consubstantial link between, on the one hand, the production and dissemination of knowledge and, on the other, the construction of a social, political and economic organisation in line with the project of a social and (henceforth) ecological democracy. It is in this sense that the Zapatista schools in Mexico (Baronnet, 2019) and the popular schools within the Landless Workers Movement in Brazil are unfolding, with their ups and downs.

This is why, in addition to the necessary political reflection, the educational and school commons must not neglect the pedagogical question. We therefore propose, firstly, to recall the scope of the commons model (Dardot & Laval, 2014; De Angelis, 2022), its antagonism with neoliberalism (Dardot & Laval, 2016) and its link with materialist feminisms (Federici, 2022). Secondly, we will discuss the broad outlines of an education of the commons for a democratic school revolution (Laval & Vergne, 2021; Dupeyron, 2024), in order to present in a third movement some proposals for a plural set of pedagogies of the commons. To do this, we will try to show the topicality and proximity of the pedagogy of social enquiry (Dewey, 1933, 1995) by the public into its problems, and of bachelardian pedagogy (Bachelard, 1971). Both seem to us to be able to link up effectively with critical and emancipatory pedagogies, with a view to a structural democratisation of popular access to knowledge and power. In other words, in the project to finally give democracy the educational form that corresponds to it, as a way of life without domination or discrimination.

In pluriform societies, democracy is a form of government that supports the humane and structured co-living of (groups of) individuals who differ in terms of religion, culture, ethnic background, political ideas, and so on (De Winter, 2004). For democracy to persevere, it is important that citizens have an interest and active involvement in the democratic society and underscore and have knowledge of democratic values like equality, tolerance and non-discrimination (Levinson, 1999). The importance of democratic values, such as equality, non-discrimination and respecting the rule of law, for the resilience of a pluriform democracy, is underscored by the fact that they are anchored in many national constitutions and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) (United Nations, 1948).

Despite their importance, the acceptance and underscoring of democratic values is not a given. Or, as White (1999) puts it: ‘democrats are made, not born’ (p. 59). Since teaching students the competences needed to partake in a democratic society is an important goal of education (Dewey, 1923), and education is a common socialisation context shared by all young citizens (Beane, 2013), it is important that schools carry out the task of fostering these competences in students (Council of Europe, 2018).

To better understand the quality and effectiveness of education focused on promoting democratic values among students, it is important to have insight into students’ citizenship competences. A standardised measurement instrument that provides insight into students’ attitudes towards democratic values is meaningful to educational practice because it helps schools adjust their education to what students need and supports schools in achieving learning goals regarding fostering democratic values. Hence, this study examined to what extent a valid and reliable measurement instrument can be developed to gain insight into students’ attitudes towards democratic values and what can be concluded based on this measurement.

The current study set out with a theoretical synthesis of different conceptualisations of democratic values. Most conceptualisations included (aspects of) openness towards diversity in a broad sense; human dignity and freedom; support for democratic institutions and principles, policy decisions and human rights; and communality. Based on these existing conceptualisation of democratic values, we constructed the Fundamental Democratic Values Questionnaire (FDVQ). After that, we proceeded by conducting two pilot studies (N = 302 and N = 227) and a first measurement (N = 3278) among Dutch students in grades 5 and 6 (approximately 10-12 years old), resulting in an impression of the usefulness of the instrument for empirical research and practical use by schools.

The results support the FDVQ’s validity and reliability to measure students’ attitudes towards democratic values. Support for democratic values among students was generally high. These insights are relevant for research and educational practice and contribute to improving the quality and effectiveness of citizenship education, which prepares today’s youth to make a positive contribution to a sustainable and resilient future democracy.

This contribution presents a critical examination of the social construction of children’s STEM education as a pedagogical need, understood as an expression of the neoliberal paradigm in education (Burman, 2011). The work is grounded on the results of a content and discourse analysis of a sample of 100 Italian online texts concerning the relationship between children and STEM education. As suggested by Chesky and Goldstein (2018), a lot of what is learned about STEM and its educational implications comes from media productions on the topic. The data analysis sought to answer two main research questions:

- What type of texts, and with what contents and characteristics, are disseminated online concerning the relationship between children and STEM education?

- What kinds of discourses are socially constructed through these texts and through what discursive strategies?

The content analysis aimed to answer the first research question by "mapping" the discursive territory with respect to the following variables, coded in a mixed inductive-deductive fashion (Saldaňa, 2012): typology of text; children’s age, where reported; gender perspective, where reported; generic or explicit target of the text (e.g., parents, educators, generic reader, etc.); subject of the enunciation (i.e., institutional; popular – Benveniste, 1971); epistemic authority of the text (reference or lack thereof to scientific knowledge – Kruglanski et al., 2009).

Instead, discourse analysis has been mobilized to try to illuminate some of the discourses constructed as interpretive pedagogical categories, with attention to the rhetorical and framing strategies used (Goffman, 1974), the possible construction of social identities of the subjects these discourses speak of (Fairclough, 1995), as well as their "manifest" and "implicit" meanings (Antelmi, 2006).

Findings show the rhetorical construction of STEM education as a social and pedagogical need, within a larger social imaginary fabricated through popular as well as institutional and scientific accounts (Carter, 2017; Chesky & Wolfmeyer, 2015) becoming part of a set of taken-for-granted "pedagogical certainties" (Caronia, 2014). At an explicit level, by calling into play the role of parents, educators, and society at large, fostering children’s STEM education is profiled as a highly relevant and rather imperative goal. Indeed, reference is made to the importance of guiding children’s education with a future and career-oriented perspective. More subtly, benefits of STEM are enunciated, but no mention is made of any sciences other than those part of the acronym, yet failing to acknowledge the premises behind such a choice. Such an approach ratifies an epistemology according to which when speaking of "sciences" we are referring to a specific and delimited area of knowledge, which focuses only on certain epistemic objects and not others, leaving behind human and social sciences and their contribution, constructed as “less useful” compared to technical-scientific disciplines, in line with a tendency already described by Nussbaum (2011).

This work, while proposing a possible lens through which reading the phenomenon, aims to interrogate the implicit assumptions that discourses on children’s STEM education come with, beyond polarized accounts, yet critically acknowledging the social, historical, cultural, and political nature of such discourses.

More than ever today, the school institution is called upon to fulfill its specific functions in contemporary society, enabling every child and adolescent to learn how to become an active citizen. This necessitates a revolutionary shift in the school paradigm, grounded in a reformation of thought that interprets complexity in response to the dynamic transformations of society in relation to knowledge. This transformative process requires the implementation of innovative educational tools and strategies, aiming to renew the educational landscape (Morin, 2001). Educational paths, situated in both formal and informal contexts such as cultural heritage sites, cultivate students' inquiry skills, empowering them in their relationship with cultural heritage, and fostering active citizenship (Alvarez Ibis et al., 2023). This perspective aligns with the research theme rooted in the democratization processes of the second half of the 20th century in Italy, where the school institution and its openness to the territory emerge as pivotal components. Central to this endeavor is the crucial relationship between the school institution and local heritage and the community, leveraging its resources "to benefit the school in the direction of an expanded educational system" (De Bartolomeis, 1983, p. 28). This contribution explores the potential of the relationship between the school and the territory and its cultural heritage from a historical and educational background, thanks to the experience of the Pathways for Transversal Skills and Orientation (PCTO), which involved a class from the International Scientific High School with a Chinese option in Cagliari, spanning two school years. The program's output was the collaborative creation of cultural itineraries in Sardinia tailored for diverse Chinese audiences. Students actively participated in co-designing inclusive touristic tours (Biddulph, Scheyvens, 2018), reflecting deeply on the varied needs and interests of their target audience in the relationship with the territory. The curriculum covered topics ranging from effective engagement with the Chinese language and culture and Sardinian heritage to experiential tourism. The outcomes surpassed conventional learning paradigms as students not only honed their focus on the target audience but also developed an acute awareness of diverse publics and their site accessibility needs. The PCTO program emerged as a significant opportunity for students to acquire cross-disciplinary skills, bridging conventional subject boundaries (a historical issue for Italian schools, as revealed already in the 1980s, Calvani, 1986), and expanding perspectives toward potential future careers (Madera et al., 2023). Moreover, the program heightened students' sensitivity to the challenges of an inclusive and common education both within and outside the classroom. Culminating the program, students developed a tourist package in Chinese, presenting it to their peers and a committee of teachers who systematically evaluated their work. Documentation, featuring photos and student feedback, was disseminated through the school's communication channels, ensuring a wider reach and recognition of their achievements.

In numerous Italian and international studies, the age at which smartphones are acquired and access to digital platforms is steadily decreasing, with the COVID-19 pandemic accelerating this trend (Rideout & Robb, 2019; Adachi et al., 2021; Picca et al., 2020). Parents appear perplexed and disoriented regarding their pre-adolescent children's autonomous access to the internet, torn between prioritizing benefits or protecting them from risks (Livingstone & Blum-Ross, 2022). This disorientation is exacerbated by the fact that experts from various disciplines provide differing, sometimes conflicting, advice on digital education (Straker et al., 2018). Pediatric societies have more clearly expressed their position on limiting screen time during developmental stages (Bozzola et al., 2019), whereas education scientists - and sometimes psychologists - seem more inclined to emphasize good digital education, regardless of arrival times and daily usage limits (Carenzio et al., 2021; Caprari, 2021). Some existing laws (such as those in Europe that prohibit independent use of online platforms under 16, in Italy under 14) appear to be disregarded by social norms and sometimes even by school system practices.

The "Digital Pacts" (“Patti Digitali”) are a grassroots response to the lack of authoritative voices from educational institutions regarding fundamental educational choices concerning online child protection. Digital Agreements are local groups of parents, sometimes including schools, local institutions, and other educational entities, who collectively agree on specific issues of digital education in childhood and pre-adolescence (e.g., the age at which smartphones should be introduced, age for social media usage, digital skills development, and the relationship with school's digital demands during homework). This involves the realization of educational alliances endorsed and formalized at the local level.

With over 70 groups across Italy, Digital Pacts have seen exponential growth in the past year, signaling a strong need for community-based management of digital education among families. This presentation reflects on this experience in three directions:

- The role of grassroots collective response to "digital anomia" (Murdaca et al., 2011; Lareki et al., 2017) linked to techno-optimistic rhetoric characterizing the field of digital education;

- Digital Pacts as an innovative form of dialogue between the scientific community and the local community, particularly as an example of universities’ “third mission”;

- the generativity of a collective management experience of educational issues beyond the field of digitalization.