Neil Wilcock

In this paper I draw apart two different contexts of Freirean pedagogical practice that I label interactional and institutional. The interactional refers to the immediate learning environment with relation to the interaction between the students and the teacher. In contrast, the institutional refers to how the institutions of education are managed, constructed, and organised and how they relate to the individuals those institutions are composed of. I begin by presenting a brief overview of Freire’s argument in favour of a revolutionary pedagogy. I then highlight how this project is represented at both interactional and institutional levels with a particular focus upon the practice of the revolutionary leaders and their role in the development of the humanisation of the oppressed. In presenting the interactional and institutional elements of Freire’s pedagogy separately the tension between the individual and the state is made plain and the limitations of his politico-educational project are drawn out. I argue that due to an inconsistent application of the relationship between means and ends in Freire’s politico-educational project an incoherence between the interactional and institutional levels of education is highlighted. In responding to this limitation of Freire’s politico-educational project with a thoroughly interconnected relationship of means and ends I show that there remains a necessary conflict between the interests of the individual and the state. As a result of this a door is opened for the development of an argument in favour of the disestablishment of education and state from a Freirean perspective.

This paper suggests that Jean‐Jacques Rousseau, John Dewey, and Paulo Freire each engage in philosophical projects that seek to employ the practice of philosophy as a means to the development of the person and as a political and educational method of philosophy that aims to discover and answer the problems of cooperative associations. The paper argues that the philosophical projects of Rousseau, Dewey, and Freire are intimately related in approach, scope, and intent. Furthermore, it argues that by reading Rousseau, Dewey, and Freire in conversation with one another, their philosophical projects can be effectively employed in an inquiry into citizenship and citizenship education and accordingly as the foundation for a fruitful philosophical methodology that is both political and educational.

This book offers a unique analysis of the tension between the individual and society in educational contexts, and the role that citizenship and democratic education can play. It approaches the question from two different perspectives - the institutional and the interactional - and argues that any solution must answer the tension from both or it will necessarily fail. The answer is found through a political methodology that places education at the centre and concludes that a balance can be found if we embrace the federated disestablishment of education and state and internally democratic schooling that aims to realise the emancipation of the political child. The book situates itself in the tradition of political philosophy that is education focused, identifying an unresolved tension between the individual and society in the works of Rousseau, Dewey, and Freire. It discusses the concept of authority as a primary issue persisting in this tension. It does so by exploring both interactional and institutional responses based on the idea of the free individual and cooperative associations. The author advocates an education system that creates the necessary space for the cultivation of the free individual and is run by the principles of internally democratic schooling. With a strong focus on citizenship and the role of education in the development of social-justice oriented citizens, this book will be of great interest to researchers, academics, and postgraduate students in the fields of philosophy of education, political philosophy, educational theory, and citizenship education.

In this thesis I develop a model of the citizen which offers a resolution to the tension between the individual and society. This is done in two interconnected parts. In the first part of the thesis I establish the form of the citizen through a comparative analysis of the manifestation of the tension between the individual and society in the politicoeducational projects of Rousseau, Dewey and Freire in conversation with contemporary debates on the citizen. I identify the impact and influence that Rousseau, Dewey and Freire have had on the contemporary debate, address their shortcomings through critical comparison and strengthen that conception within the context of the contemporary citizen. The conclusion is a citizen that is defined and discovered by the subjects that seek to embody its values. It is a bottom-up model that I call the Critical Citizen. In the second part of the thesis I investigate what model of education is suited for the development of the Critical Citizen and the political conditions necessary for its realisation. I offer an interactional and an institutional response to this investigation which addresses the relationships between members of a school as well as the relationship between the school and society. Both responses are developed through an analysis of authority as an instantiation of the tension between the individual and society, and of democratic education as a potential resolution to the problem of authority. I conclude my investigation with two radical recommendations, the first interactional and the second institutional, which is informed by the politico-educational projects of Rousseau, Dewey and Freire and the methodology which underpins their practice. I argue in favour of the large-scale incorporation of internally democratic schooling in schools in the UK and the federated disestablishment of education and state in order to protect the individuals subject to education from the coercive force of the state and of the free market.