Work-Related Learning

Post-structuralism

When looking at post-structuralism it probably makes sense to say something about first about how structuralism, used mainly in a literary context, drew attention to how much of our imaginative world is structured in a binary way. A focus upon current binary views can be challenged in two ways. First, the binary oppositions can be overturned and replaced by new structures that are themselves binary. Second, the limitations of binary views can be exposed by saying there are a much wider range of ways to look at things. Foucault (1972a) outlined the idea of how one system of thought, with dominant ways of thinking, replaced another in periods of revolutionary cultural change. He also analysed the range of ways knowledge and power operated in modern society. Sarup (1998) points to the similarities between Foucault's ideas, applied to culture as a whole, and Thomas Kuhn's concept of paradigm shifts where stable established scientific ways of thinking are interrupted by periods of scientific revolution. Within social science, structuralist views emphasised how certain ways of thinking were dominant and constrained how people viewed the world, with culture offering a degree of agency and choice but also circumscribing the range of possibilities.

In contrast, post-structuralism sees a much wider range of possibilities, and questions the extent to which people can be represented as sharing one of a relatively small number of ways of thinking about society and culture. The much wider range of options is coupled with a view that cultural 'scripts' are much more open to individual influence. Post-structuralism is concerned with breaking down over-arching narratives, concerned with the 'big picture', into a series of smaller narratives that deconstruct the 'structure' as a whole and thereby release more ways of making sense of particular parts of the bigger picture.

In some senses therefore post-structuralism is a tool to sensitise the researcher to the possibility of multiple meanings and narratives associated with discourse and action in the particular contexts under investigation: it also has the potential to throw light upon aspects of society that could be overlooked. In this sense, depending on the nature of the topic and the intention of the researcher this perspective may be useful as a frame for investigation. Ironically, the more often this approach is used the less useful it may become: whether the focus upon discourse and meaning is illuminative partly depends upon how many previous studies there have been adopting this approach and the extent to which does indeed generate new insight.

The interesting thing for me is that you can, of course, use other frameworks to achieve similar effects. So personally, while occasionally drawing on insights from theorists associated with post-structuralism I have never used the framework to underpin my research. I also often find the work rather dense and so tend to prefer other ways of achieving the same ends. Indeed I wonder whether you can use Foucault's (1972b) own one idea of discourse existing within a complex web of meanings affected by shared, but changing, understandings of the 'rules of exclusion' to apply to much of this work: many of us are excluded from discussions on this because the ideas are not clearly expressed. However, it may be good to hear from those with more familiarity with some of these ideas, especially if they can communicate in a less exclusive way.

For other introductory ideas about post-structuralism see the following social bookmarking contribution: http://del.icio.us/NGRF/post-structuralism%2C

References - see also the post-structuralism tag in our NGRF connotea shared bookmarks (RSS is available)

• Foucault, M. (1972a) The Archaeology of Knowledge (New York, Pantheon).
• Foucault, M. (1972b) The discourse on language. Appendix to Foucault, M. The Archaeology of Knowledge , pp. 215-238 (New York, Pantheon).
• Kuhn, T. (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Sarup, M. (1988) An Introductory Guide to Post-Structuralism and Postmodernism. Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead .