Saturday, March 16, 2013

Call for papers Annual Conference 2013 of the Ohio Valley Philosophy of Education Society (OVPES)

 Annual Conference 2013 of the Ohio Valley Philosophy of Education
Society (OVPES)

Call for Proposals

The Ohio Valley Philosophy of Education Society (OVPES) invites
proposals for the 2013 annual meeting to be held at the Bergamo
Conference Center in Dayton, Ohio, Thursday through Saturday,
September 19-21, 2013

Conference Theme:
The Significance of Subjectivity and Identity in Community:
Framing the Political Dilemmas of Schools and Education Today for the
Creation of a Public Space

Maxine Greene (1978) wrote the words below over three decades ago,
It seems to me that any discussion of educational policy today must .
. . begin with a determination to do what can be done to reconstitute
a public space—or perhaps, a political realm. A political realm is a
realm of action that can only be called into being by human beings,
who feel themselves to be versatile enough, limber enough and free
enough to bring about differences in the world. Such a realm cannot
exist, however, unless the individuals involved are able to make the
kinds of judgments that transcend personal subjectivity.  It cannot
exist unless the participants see things as persons located in a
concrete social reality—persons with the capacity to look through the
perspectives of those around them and of those likely to be affected
by what they say or do. (p. 89)

These words called us to merge the impartial and the local perspective
in order to craft an authentic public space of understanding and of
activism. It is one in which diverse human beings respect one
another’s differences but also comfortably inhabit their own identity.
    How do these words resonate today? While it may be said that the
creation of a public space is an enduring moral imperative of
democracy, how do social and political conditions discursively
influence its formation? What is the calling of philosophers of
education in constituting this kind of political realm vis-à-vis
education? To which educational theorists and philosophers can we look
in the present milieu to address this task of so preparing students?
One key consideration for this political realm creation is that recent
education discourse typically assumes fixed forms of social
oppositions (e.g. majority versus minority; oppressor versus
oppressed; religious versus secular; neoliberals versus progressive
liberals; and individual autonomy versus group identity). This
politics of identity has been invoked as a means of interrogating
structural barriers to fairness and equality. By highlighting
differences, identity dichotomies frame forms of subjectivity as
giving voice to social positionality. Yet the moral efficacy of
subjectivity is an open question. in the discursive ascendency of the
wholly differentiated subject, there has been a movement away from
viewing the unified self as an object of a priori and universal moral
norms (Young, 2007).  Also, the idea of individuals as constituted
subjects has complicated the conceptualization of individual and
collective agency (Schutz, 1998).
Another factor in constituting a political realm is impending national
and global developments that indicate the dismantling of established
social structures and, positively, have the potential to politically
empower the economic underclass. They include demographic changes that
are predictive of a coming population advantage to nonwhites in
America; educational reform for a common core standards; and economic
and technological progress that reflect geopolitical shifts of power.
In a Deweyan interpretation, large scale societal economic and social
transformations are examples of a democratic society becoming “more
complex in structure and resources” and thereby pragmatically imposing
upon its schools the responsibility of “formal and intentional
teaching” to advance its aims (Dewey, 1916).
Do the above considerations expose moral or political tensions in
teaching students solely as situated subjects while seeking a common
ground? Relatedly, what conceptions of community, philosophy or
philosophies of education should guide the proposed convergence of the
transcendent and the local? Can notions of cosmopolitanism, critical
literacy, and autonomous agency singularly encompass the intellectual
skills or ethical stances that support an authentic political space in
our democracy? How does a broad project of linking learning to
meaning-making align with larger democratic aims of social
reproduction?
In addressing the significance of sociocultural and socio-historical
factors for the development of a democratic public culture, this call
for proposals concerns both the methodology and substance of our
discourse. As such it aims to identify the particular dilemmas of
democratic education in a digital, post-positivist and
post-constructivist age.

In addition to the questions posted above, related thematic directions
would be:
In general:
•       Are methodological tensions emerging in education research and
theory as a result of the dismantling of established discourse frames
that are premised on social oppositions?
•       Are there conceptions of reasons-giving and evidence gathering that
are consistent with making meaning of one’s experiences that can
support the creation of a public space?
•       What theoretical frameworks inform the role of multimedia/digital
technologies in subject formation for communal activism? Or what
pathologies related to emerging technology have the potential to
obstruct the creation of a robust political commons?
•       How do recent innovations of multimedia technology in education
support and/or diminish a public space?

Regarding specific issues of identity:
•       Should multicultural education theorizing respond to racial and
ethnic demographics shifts? If so, how? Does Dubois’s (1903) analysis
of the persistent problem of American life being the relation of the
darker to the lighter races still hold?
•       To what extent can the present “dis-ease” in education reform be
attributed to group identity conflicts? Who then are the antagonists
in the demographic shifts?
•       Are there robust accounts of intersectionality that can integrate
multiple forms of subjectivity?
•       Are there changing perceptions about the role of religion in public
life in which schools are the vanguard? If so how or why does
religious and spiritual education hold value for education in a
democracy today?
•       Are there evolving discourses around religious and spiritual
identity that bear on public space creation? Should public spaces be
more inclusive of religion?


PRESENTATION FORMAT, DEADLINE AND NOTIFICATION:

Proposals for individual papers, panels, or symposia involving two or
three speakers on a single topic are welcome. All proposals will be
blind and peer reviewed. (See Proposal guidelines at end of this
document.) As always, topics not related to the conference theme will
certainly be considered for acceptance.

DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION:

Submit your proposal via email with an attachment as a Word document.
All proposals should be received on or before Friday, May 3, 2013.
Submit to: Dr. Kevin Gary, Program Chair at kgary@goshen.edu.
Proposals accepted for presentation at the conference will be notified
by June 25, 2013. Full-¬‐length conference papers should be no longer
than 15 double-¬‐spaced pages, following the Chicago Manual of Style.
Papers meeting all the editorial requirements will be considered for
publication in Philosophical Studies in Education, the refereed
journal of OVPES. (See manuscript requirements at www.ovpes.org)

CONFERENCE PROPSAL GUIDELINES:

Part 1 (submit in the body of your email message)
1. Title of your proposal. 2. Format of your presentation (i.e, paper
session, panel or symposium) 3. Your name, title, institutional
affiliation (should be the contact person) 4. Your address, phone,
email, fax number. 5. The name(s) of other panel or symposium members,
if applicable. 6. An abstract of up to 100 words.

PART 2 (in a Word document with all identifying information removed
for “blind” review)
1. Title of your paper or panel or symposium 2. Provide a brief
summary of your topic in two pages, up to 500 words. Provide a brief
descriptive summary of how your topic will be developed and/or its
line of argument. Explain the significance of your topic. List several
major references upon which you will draw in developing the topic in
order to “place” the scholarly conversation. 3. Provide two or three
terms of reference for your papers. This will guide the program
committee in grouping presentations. SUBMISSION GUIDELINES: 1. The
proposal should be sent as an attachment in Microsoft WORD document
format. 2. The subject of your message should read “OVPES-¬‐2011
Proposal.” 3. If any special formatting, presentation, or special
characters are essential to the proposal, please submit a paper copy.
4. The Program Committee reserves the right to request you to resubmit
electronic proposals, to submit them in the body of an email message
or to submit a paper copy within a reasonable time frame in case of
any technical problems with the electronic submission. 5. Receipt of
email submissions will be notified via email.

OUTSTANDING STUDENT PAPER AWARD

OVPES is pleased to announce a $100 award for the most outstanding
graduate student paper submitted for the 2013 conference. The
recipient of the award will be determined by the program committee and
will be based on the quality of the proposal. Please indicate your
desire to be considered for the award in the subject of your
submission email. All submissions and inquiries should be directed to
Dr. Kevin Gary.

No comments:

Post a Comment