Chap e 7
CREATING NEW KNOWLEDGE
112
CREATING NEW KNOWLEDGE
Anne Ryan and Tony Walsh
Anne Ryan is a lec u e and ac ing head a he Depa men o Adul and Communi y
Educa ion, NUI Maynoo h. As an educa o she is conce ned o ensu e jus ice and
equi y in ega d o he p o ision o educa ional se ices and o suppo he
democ a isa ion o he knowledge c ea ion p ocesses.
Tony Walsh is also a lec u e a he depa men and a psycho he apis . His in e es s
include sys emic cons uc i is psycho he apy, sus ainable human/communi y
de elopmen , heo ies o suicide, loss and change.
In oduc ion
Those in ol ed in any lea ning si ua ion whe he as educa o s o as s uden s, come o hei
asks enmeshed in he con ex s which o m pa o hei wide en i onmen . Hence hey
a e bo h knowingly and unknowingly in luenced by he web o con lic s, dilemmas and
powe di e en ials which a e pa o hei sys em o o igin. In his chap e we, he au ho s,
ecall an expe ience o a cou se whe e he ou key playe s – he s uden s, hei lec u e s
and hei espec i e o ganisa ions – did no sha e he same lea ning goals. The chap e
examines om ou pe spec i e, he impac hese di e ences had on class oom dynamics
and highligh s he need o ake accoun o he p e ailing alues and ci cums ances in he
b oade en i onmen s ha impinge on adul s uden s and on hei educa o s.
Ou explo a ion o he expe ience inco po a ed h ee dis inc bu in e connec ed p ocesses.
We sough (i) o cons uc a na a i e o e en s; (ii) o e eal he non-conscious p ocesses
h ough which we il e ed ou expe iences; and (iii) o a end o he sys emic dynamics ha
o med he amewo k o in e ac ion among he di e en playe s in ol ed. We ecognise
ha ou eali y is no mo e p i ileged han ha o any o he o he pa ies (Ushe and
Edwa ds, 1994) and he e o e we ecoun ed he e en s mo e as wi nesses han as holde s
o he ul ima e u h o wha happened. Ou goal was o eco d only ou ‘ u h’ a a
pa icula ime, ecognising ha his has p obably changed and e ol ed o e he yea s since
he cou se was deli e ed, and ha i is bu one o a ange o possible pe spec i es (Kenny
and Ga dne , 1989). We ha e a o ded ou sel es his posi ion o ‘knowing subjec s’ in o de
113
o u he ou own lea ning and in so doing o c ea e use ul knowledge o use in he u u e.
We a e also awa e ha he meanings and unde s andings gene a ed by ou enqui y, canno
be di o ced om ou subjec i i y. Ou app oach o he opic is no ha o impa ial
in es iga o s. On he con a y we we e ac i e pa icipan s in he e en s and unde ook his
e lec i e p ocess wi h he exp ess pu pose o lea ning how o do ou job be e .
The con ex
The depa men espouses a adical adul educa ion pedagogy ha alues c i ical hinking,
he ac i e in ol emen o s uden s in in e oga ing all aspec s o a cou se including he
con en and deli e y me hods, and lea ning ha has a p ima y pu pose o p omo ing a
mo e equi able and jus socie y. This is a pedagogy ha :
… poin s o he u u e a he han he pas . I is abou new meanings and knowledge
and i s emphasis is on he condi ions and means h ough which hese can be
de eloped – a he han on simply inc easing access o exis ing knowledge (Ba , 1999: 71).
The ocus on de eloping new meanings and knowledge pe mea es all o he depa men ’s
cou ses including he one s udied he e. I also uelled ou desi e o e lec on ou
expe ience o designing and deli e ing his cou se. Al hough many yea s ha e passed since
he cou se was un, i has s ayed wi h us and assumed a somewha legenda y s a us,
la gely due o he high le el o disco d ha domina ed he class oom a mosphe e. S uden s
we e o en discon en ed and exp essed hei eelings o ce ully. I could be said ha his is
no unusual o a class o adul s uden s, howe e , wha was no ewo hy was he deg ee
and in ensi y o he s uden s’ disg un lemen . A he ime s a we e unse led by he
expe ience. In e ospec i became clea ha e lec ing on an expe ience o such in ensi y
migh e eal he hidden dynamics ha lay a he oo o he disco d. We also hoped ha
h ough such an explo a ion we would become be e able o espond o such si ua ions
by app oaching hem as an educa ional oppo uni y a he han a p oblem o be con ained.
In his chap e we desc ibe how we explo ed ou expe iences by con ex ualising hem
wi hin a b oade amewo k ha illumina ed hi he o obscu ed ac o s and ga e meaning
o e en s ha we e p e iously mys e ious o con using. The p ima y pu poses o his
e lec i e explo a ion a e (i) o u he ou unde s anding o he ex e nal ac o s ha
impinge on he class oom (ii) o enable us o c ea e lea ning en i onmen s conduci e o
ou espoused pedagogical p inciples and (iii) o in o m any u u e collabo a i e endea ou s
ha may necessi a e wo king wi h and wi hin sys ems ha consciously o o he wise may
no sha e ou iew o educa ion.
114
C ea ing pu pose ul knowledge om ou expe ience
In o de o explo e he dynamics in ol ed in he exe cise o knowledge c ea ion we decided
o case s udy ou expe ience o his cou se, a pa - ime unde g adua e diploma, aken by
a g oup o wen y s uden s, all o whom wo ked wi h a la ge s a u o y agency. S uden s
we e eleased om wo k o a end he cou se. All he academic s a in he depa men
we e in ol ed in he cou se. Fo mos his in ol ed eaching cou se modules. Th ee s a
membe s designed he cou se in collabo a ion wi h wo ep esen a i es o he employing
agency and oge he hey o med a cou se managemen eam.
Al hough conside able ime has elapsed since he cou se was comple ed, i is s ill
men ioned, due la gely o he le el o dis u bance which i engende ed o s a . As we
discussed he expe ience wi h colleagues i was appa en ha simila di icul ies o hose
encoun e ed in deli e ing his diploma had su aced in o he cou ses, albei o a much
lesse ex en . Issues and p oblems a he hea o his speci ic case s udy a e widely
accep ed as oo ed in he depa men ’s espousal o a adical adul educa ion agenda and
i s commi men o p o ide bo h a use ul and academically igo ous se ice o ex e nal
con ac ing agencies. The e was widesp ead ag eemen among ou colleagues ha he
depa men ’s agenda and commi men a e immu able and he e o e he measu es aken
o esol e such di icul ies should no comp omise bu a he s eng hen hem.
Telling one’s own s o y in i es he na a o s in o he o en di icul and u bulen wa e s o
pe sonal e lec ion (Chu ch, 1995). We el i necessa y o engage a his le el in o de o
e eal he many laye s in ou esponse o he expe ience. In his p ocess i was c ucial o
ake accoun o he emo ions and he non-cogni i e, o acknowledge hei p ima y
impo ance bo h as a s a ing poin o he in es iga ion and as meaning-laden esou ces
ha would di ec us o he ho spo s ha needed o be p obed. Emo ion is cen al o
subjec i i y and o li ed expe ience. I a o ds ecogni ion o he powe and in luence o he
non-conscious in he posi ioning o bo h he indi iduals and o ganisa ions in ol ed. We
sensed ha unde s anding he unconscious d i es ha we e p esen in ou eac ions would
disin e he easons o ou esponses o class oom si ua ions and ha hese easons we e
ul ima ely o mo e signi icance ha he esponses hemsel es. The unconscious, by i ue
o being unconscious, is no eadily o immedia ely a ailable o conscious p ocesses.
Recogni ion, howe e , o i s p esence and he c ea ion o ways ha in i e a c i ical e lec ion
allow some o i s in luences o be e ealed.
While explo ing ou own s o ies and allowing he implica ions o ou pe sonal expe iences
o su ace, i was also essen ial o a end o he o ganisa ional and sys emic dynamics ha
115
o m he backd op o ou ecollec ions. To do his we d ew on a sys emic heo e ical model
ha di ec ed ou a en ion o he o ganisa ional con ex in which ou na a i es we e
embedded. This c ea ed a syne gy ha impac ed on how we in e p e ed he e en s and
on ou unde s anding o he sys ems ha shaped ou pe spec i e (Whi e, 1996).
Philosophical di e ences among he main playe s
The sys emic pe spec i e which we adop ed acili a ed ou awa eness o signi ican
di e ences be ween he ou main playe s, while simul aneously allowing us o conside
he in e - ela ionships and in e dependencies which we e cen al o each o he playe ’s
ways o being in he wide en i onmen . The e was ample e idence ha al hough he
disco d was mos e iden wi hin he class oom, he causes we e equen ly no loca ed
he e. We suspec ed ha he assemblage o alues and belie s ha de e mined he
posi ioning and expe ience o each o he playe s wi h ega d o he na u e o knowledge
and lea ning was likely o be impo an in his ega d.
Wi h his in mind we conside ed he opposing and la gely con lic ing pe cep ions o he
na u e o knowledge among he playe s. Fo he pu poses o his in es iga ion we el i was
use ul o ocus on he di e ences be ween hese pe cep ions a he han he simila i ies.
The use o an opposi ional analysis o his kind helps o e eal undamen al di e ences ha
ha e se ious and a eaching implica ions o how educa o s and s uden s ela e o
knowledge. San os (1999: 36) iden i ied wo speci ic o ms o knowledge:
…knowledge-as- egula ion, whose poin o igno ance is called chaos and whose poin
o knowledge is called o de , and knowledge-as-emancipa ion, whose poin o
igno ance is called colonialism and whose poin o knowledge is called solida i y.
Knowledge-as-emancipa ion sees di e ence as a i ue a he han a p oblem. I is abou
c ea ing new knowledge om di e si y a he han hegemonic o de om chaos. San os
(1999: 36) wen on o s a e ha “…all c i ical knowledge mus begin by a c i ique o
knowledge i sel ”. In insic o San os’ emphasis on he impo ance o an epis emological
c i ique o knowledge is a conce n o b oaden he knowledge base by including hose who
ha e been elega ed o a no -knowing posi ion wi hin he knowledge-as- egula ion
app oach. The ask hen o c ea ing knowledge calls o inding new ways o engage wi h
hose who ha e been silenced so ha hei oices can be hea d. Wi hou hei oices he
ichness o di e si y is diminished. Essen ially San os’ knowledge-as-emancipa ion ex ends
he meaning o inclusion beyond me ely enabling wide access o exis ing cou ses and
i mly loca es i in he ealm o b oadening pa icipa ion in he p ocess o knowledge c ea ion.
These undamen al p inciples a e ully consis en wi h ou adical adul educa ion philosophy.

116
Such a c i ique o knowledge is a ely e iden in con en ional educa ional p og ammes.
Wi hin such p og ammes, deli e y modali ies end o ocus on eaching inpu s a he han
on lea ning ou comes while he con en emphasises he dissemina ion as opposed o he
in e oga ion o in o ma ion. Assessmen p ocedu es p ima ily measu e he in ellec ual
capaci y o he candida e o a icula e and eph ase a speci ic body o in o ma ion a he
han c i ically app aise i in a b oade con ex ha includes li ed expe ience. The
ansmission o knowledge-as- egula ion elies on he logical sequencing o da a, building
on p e ious knowledge acqui ed in a simila inc emen al ashion. E en a pos g adua e
le el, when s uden s a e equi ed o ‘add o he exis ing body o knowledge’, i could be
a gued ha he ‘new knowledge’ me ely ex ends wha is al eady known a he han
challenges he undamen al cons uc s ha unde pin ha knowledge.
By con as , cou ses ha espouse knowledge-as-emancipa ion call o a e y di e en le el
o engagemen on he pa o he s uden and he educa o . Wi hin hese p og ammes all
p e ious lea ning is open o in e oga ion, as a e he assump ions and belie s undamen al
o he cons uc s ha de e mine he lea ne ’s and educa o ’s pe cep ion and in e p e a ion
o eali y. Lea ning o his so can ha e a eaching impac s on he pe sonal and wo k li e
o he indi idual and on he pe cei ed unc ion o and ela ionship wi h he educa ional
p o ide . Consequen ly, suppo s ha enable he lea ne o engage in his kind o lea ning
mus anscend he immedia e s udy en i onmen and ake accoun o he b oade a ena
in which he lea ne ope a es. De e mining he adequacy o he suppo p o ided o he
lea ne s in his case s udy necessi a ed a conside a ion o how hei lea ning was acili a ed
no only wi hin he class oom bu also wi hin hei wo k en i onmen .
A c i ique o he philosophical di e ences be ween he main playe s, namely he uni e si y,
he depa men o e ing he cou se, he s uden s and hei employing agency p o ided
insigh s in o how he di e en posi ionings o each en i y impac ed on he cou se. The
dominan e idical discou ses among he di e en playe s, pa icula ly as hese pe ain o
wha was deemed o be ‘wo hwhile lea ning’ we e o pa icula signi icance. Foucaul
(1971) de ined e idical discou ses as hose discou ses ha de ine good om bad and
u h om e o (Go dan, 1980). These discou ses p o ide amewo ks, echniques and
s uc u es h ough which beha iou , hough s and expe iences can be in e p e ed. We
wonde ed i he e we e signi ican di e ences in he dominan e idical discou ses o each
playe and i so, how hese di e ences mani es ed hemsel es in he class oom. Bea ing
in mind Foucaul ’s conce n wi h he dynamics o powe , we conside ed he s a us o he
playe s in ela ion o each o he , and wi hin hei o ganisa ion.
117
Rela ionships be ween he main playe s
The ela ionships be ween he ou main p o agonis s in his case s udy a ied om in ense,
in he case o he s a and s uden s who in e ac on a weekly base, o ma ginal, in he case
o he employing agency and he uni e si y. While he uni e si y was ul ima ely esponsible
o he cou se, in e ac ion be ween bo h hese bodies happened ia he depa men . The
s uden s ob iously had cons an in e ac ion wi h hei employing agency h oughou hei
wo king week. The ex en o which each g ouping ela ed o he o he , and he posi ioning
o each in ela ion o he o he eme ged as signi ican .
Engaging in a sys emic analysis o he ela ionships allowed us o explo e he ques ion o
change. Cha ing bo h he e ec and he p ocess o change calls o an analysis o he
dis ibu ion o powe , an awa eness o cul u e and alues, and an unde s anding o he play
o in e -pe sonal and in e - ole dynamics (Campbell, D ape and Hu ing on, 1991). I is
impossible o c ea e change in isola ion; any mo emen in a pa o a sys em c ea es
esonances and eac ions h oughou he whole esul ing in some dis o ion wi hin he
exis ing s a e o delica e balance cen al o e e y sys em’s on-going s abili y. E en mino
change o pe u ba ion c ea es imbalance in he o ali y, se ing in ain eac ions ha aim
ei he o es o e he o iginal balance o s a us quo, o o accommoda e he eac ion,
esul ing in he c ea ion o a new en i y. Al hough change and de elopmen a e cen al o
he long- e m su i al o any o ganisa ion as i seeks o adap o i s en i onmen s, hey can
be pe cei ed as h ea ening, especially wi hin la ge bodies wi h ai ly igid s uc u es.
In his case s udy key issues pe aining o powe and change su aced. I became appa en
ha he main playe s did no sha e a common ision o he pu pose and likely ou comes
o he cou se. In nego ia ing he cou se he agency seemed o be esponding o p essu e
emana ing om he employees o p o essional ecogni ion. The agency was willing o
acili a e his. I did no , howe e , en isage c ea ing changes in he s a us quo wi hin he
o ganisa ion no did i an icipa e o welcome he s uden s c ea ing p essu e o change
wi hin he sys em, s uc u e and hie a chy o he agency. In ac one o he pu poses o
unning he cou se om he agency’s iewpoin seemed o be o con ain he s uden s and
keep hem ‘happy’. The s uden s on he o he hand, seemed o see he cou se as a way
o inc easing hei s a us and hei ba gaining posi ion. They saw he cou se as an
oppo uni y o gain ce i ica ion, addi ional in o ma ion and knowledge. The depa men
o e ing he cou se espoused a knowledge-as-emancipa ion app oach o educa ion whe e
in e oga ion o he s a us quo is basic o he p ocess o gaining wo hwhile knowledge. The
s uden s we e no necessa ily seeking en y in o a p ocess ha would challenge hei co e
alues and expose hem o an explici encoun e wi h he inequali ies and dissonances ha
118
exis wi hin socie y and in he sys em whe e hey wo ked. I is also ques ionable as o
whe he hese undamen al di e ences we e e e acknowledged, much less spel ou in
e ms o hei implica ions, by ep esen a i es o he agency o o he depa men . Nei he
we e hese posi ions made clea o he s uden s. I is also ques ionable as o whe he
depa men s a we e e en awa e o he signi icance o hese dissonances a he ime.
The e was hus, om he ou se o he cou se a p o ound uncla i y abou he na u e o he p ojec .
To unde s and why his si ua ion a ose we explo ed he na u e o he o ganisa ional
sys ems o which he main playe s belonged. We also examined aspec s o he s uc u es
and elemen s o ideologies wi hin each sys em which se ed o inhibi he dialogue
needed o a i e a a sha ed commi men o he lea ning ou comes o he cou se. Fi s ,
we conside ed issues o do wi h he sepa a eness and iden i y o each o he playe s as
de ined by he concep o bounda y. A heal hy sys em is seen as ha ing a su icien ly loose
bounda y o enable i o c ea e an exchange o ene gy wi h i s en i onmen . This bounda y
needs also o be s ong enough o main ain he cohe ence and iden i y o he sys em. Too
igh bounda ies c ea e si ua ions in which a sys em becomes di o ced om he c ea i e
ene gies o i s en i onmen (B owne, 1980). I he bounda ies a e oo loose he sys em is
in dange o losing i s iden i y and being subsumed by i s en i onmen o by mo e powe ul
sys ems exis ing wi hin i s con ex . A second ocus ha enables an unde s anding o how
he playe s in e ac ed wi h each o he is ha o hie a chy and powe . La ge , mo e complex
supe o dina e sys ems a e seen as ha ing g ea in luence o e subo dina e sys ems exis ing
ei he in hei own speci ic en i onmen o as sub g oupings wi hin he sys em i sel . The
cen al p eoccupa ion o any sys em is i s own su i al, which is equen ly achie ed a he
expense o ei he in e nal sub sys ems o o any weake sys ems wi hin i s en i onmen
(B owne, 1980). Thus, an analysis o hie a chy, powe , con ol and in luence is impo an in any
sys emic analysis which ies o make sense o change, pe u ba ion, g ow h o disin eg a ion.
Loca ing he s uden s in hei con ex s
O he ou main p o agonis s in his case s udy he issues o bounda y and powe we e
mos signi ican o (i) he depa men , which is a sub sys em wi hin he la ge sys em o
he uni e si y, and (ii) o he s uden s who o med a sub sys em wi hin hei employing
agency. In he case o he depa men , i s cohe ence and iden i y is la gely de ined by i s
commi men o knowledge-as-emancipa ion. Howe e , he depa men is loca ed wi hin
he b oade uni e si y sys em ha may no be ully sympa he ic wi h his app oach. In he
con ex o his case s udy, howe e , wha is impo an is ha he academic s a us o he
cou se was secu ed wi hin he uni e si y’s alida ional sys em. This, o a la ge ex en ,
nega ed he e ec s o dissonances be ween he depa men ’s and he uni e si y’s
119
app oach o knowledge. The in luence o he la ge hi d o de sys em o e a subo dina e
sys em was mo e p onounced in he case o he s uden s.
In all cou ses ha call o ans o ma i e lea ning and c i ical posi ioning ega ding
knowledge, s uden s begin o apply he implica ions o his hinking wi hin di e en ace s
o hei li es. In hei wo k li e hey gene ally a emp o econcile any disco d be ween wha
hei employing agency alues as app op ia e wo k p ac ices and hei on-going ques ioning
o he hinking unde pinning hese p ac ices. I s uden s encoun e ba ie s ha cu ail hei
po en ial o engage in his p ocess hey end o eloca e hei ques ioning om he
wo kplace o he cou se. In doing his hey seek secu i y and assu ances ha wha hey a e
lea ning is alued wi hin he b oade uni e si y sys em. The alidi y o he lea ning in which
hey a e engaged becomes a majo conce n. This conce n is mo e p onounced in cou ses
such as he one being s udied he e, whe e all he pa icipan s come om a single agency.
In cou ses whe e he s uden s come om a a ie y o wo k en i onmen s he si es o
ension wi hin each wo kplace di e and he e o e i is easie o he s uden s o iden i y
he pa e ns ha eme ge in each pe son’s expe ience and o ecognise ha hese a e pa
o a change p ocess ins iga ed by he indi idual’s eposi ioning in ela ion o his o he
assump ions and belie s. By con as when all membe s o he lea ning g oup come om
a single agency hey end o encoun e iden ical di icul ies and blockages so ha he bigge
pa e n is obscu ed while he pa icula blockages assume a signi icance in hei own igh .
In such ins ances he ba ie s o change appea insu moun able and he challenge o
engage wi h he change p ocess is abandoned, a leas in he sho - e m, as un easible.
The s uden s on he cou se unde e iew wo ked wi h a clien g oup who a e a he
ma gins o socie y. Many ound ha he posi ioning o he people hey wo ked wi h was
e lec ed in he pe iphe al s a us hey as a g oup we e a o ded wi hin hei employing
agency. As such hey no only in e ac ed wi h a pa icula ly ma ginalised sec o o he
popula ion bu hey also saw hemsel es as ma ginalised wi hin hei wo k se ing. In
sys emic e ms hey ound hemsel es in a posi ion whe e hey e ec i ely o med a weak
sub sys em wi hin a powe ul agency. F equen ly cou se pa icipan s displayed high le els
o dissa is ac ion di ec ed ini ially a hei employe , in ime his was ex ended o include
he cou se and cou se pe sonnel. Thei an agonism appea ed o s em om a s ong sense
o powe lessness in dealing wi h bo h sys ems. They el unable o apply hei lea ning
wi hin hei speci ic wo k con ex and hey also el excluded om undamen al decisions
pe aining o he cou se. Fu he mo e, al hough all he s uden s in his case s udy chose o
ake he cou se, many expe ienced a high deg ee o compulsion o make ha choice,
belie ing ha a decision no o ake he cou se would e lec badly on hei u u e p ospec s
wi hin hei agency.