This paper addresses the way in which the work of Jacques Rancière can, and is being, taken up within the field of education and the arts. Interest in his work within educational philosophy has increased steadily over the past ten years. Readings of his 1991 work, The Ignorant Schoolmaster, have proved particularly popular amongst educationalists seeking to reconstruct from his work a theory of learning and teaching (see, e.g. Cornelissen, 2010). Bingham and Biesta’s (2011) contribution has been an interesting addition to the field. Their work goes beyond purely pedagogical readings of Rancière’s philosophy (both in this text and elsewhere) to emphasise the critique of a ‘society pedagogicized’ in his work. This term refers to the situation in which people’s political experience is constantly in need of explaining back to them (often by historians, sociologists and political scientists). Rancière’s writing has also been the subject of intense interest amongst art theorists. Bishop (2012) for example, has applied his philosophy to theorise the resurgence, internationally, of interest in participatory and collaborative art as the latest form of boundary crossing between ‘art’ and ‘non-art’  in contemporary practice – particularly in innovative ‘pedagogic arts projects’ in Europe. In arts education, Rancière’s thought has been variously employed to re-examine the possibility of a post-Kantian ‘aesthetic education’ (de Boever, 2011); to argue for art as a form of disruptive pedagogy (Atkinson, 2012) and to offer a reappraisal of the aesthetics of democratic and emancipatory education (Lewis 2012; 2013; McDonnell, 2014).

In this paper, I build on the above contributions to address two research questions:

1. What can Rancière’s work add to a number of key debates within education and the arts?
2. In applying Rancière’s work to these questions, what can be learnt about the way in which his work is being taken up within the field? 

The paper addresses these questions via a critical reading of some of Rancière’s most notable contributions in both political philosophy and aesthetics. This critique is combined with a discussion of research literature in three key areas of debate within arts education of relevance both in Europe and  internationally, namely; the challenge of contemporary art within schools and galleries, the role of art and aesthetics within democratic education, and art as a form of engagement within community and adult education. In each case, I illustrate the how the emphasis on equality – both aesthetic and political – in Rancière’s work offer some fresh perspectives on existing debates.

In relation to contemporary art in galleries and schools, I draw on his intervention on the visual-textual binary in discussions of contemporary art (2007; 2008) to argue against essentialist conceptions of arts education. In relation to democratic education, I draw on his discussion of the aesthetic dimensions of democracy and political subjectivity (1999; 2006) to argue for a fresh approach to the role of art in democratic education. In relation to the arts in adult and community education, I argue against Bishop’s (2012) claim that Rancière’s work offer a way of ‘rehabilitating the aesthetic’ in various national contexts, instead illustrating how his political philosophy and writing on aesthetics provide a way of valuing simultaneously the political and artistic dimensions of many arts-based community education projects. The paper concludes with some reflections on the implications of my discussion for how Rancière’s work is being taken up in relation to debates in education and the arts.

Atkinson, D. (2012) Contemporary art and art in education: the new, emancipation and truth, International Journal of Art and Design Education, 31(1), 5-18. Biesta, G. (2010) How to exist politically and learn from it: Hannah Arendt and the problem of democratic education, Teachers College Record, 112(2), 556-575. Biesta, G. (2006) Beyond Learning: democratic education for a human future, London: Routledge. Bingham, C. & Biesta, G. (2011) Jacques Rancière: education, truth, emancipation, London: Continuum. Bishop, C. (2012) Artificial Hells: participatory art and the politics of spectatorship, London: Virago. Cornelissen, G. (2010) The public role of teaching: to keep the door closed, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 42(5-6), 523-539. De Boever, A. (2011) The philosophy of (aesthetic) education, in: J. Smith & A. Weisser (eds.) Everything is in Everything. Between intellectual emancipation and aesthetic education. JPR/Ringier. Burgess, L. & Addison, N. (2004) Contemporary art in schools: why bother? In: R. Hickman (ed.) Art Education 11-18 (2nd edition), London: Continuum. Illeris, H. (2005) Young people and contemporary arts, International Journal of Art and Design Education, 24(3), 231-242. McDonnell, J. (2014) Re-imagining the role of art in the relationship between democracy and education, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 46(1), 46-58. Lewis, T. (2013) Jacques Rancière’s aesthetic regime in democratic education, Journal of Aesthetic Education, 47(2), 49-70. Lewis, T. (2012) The aesthetics of education: theatre, curiosity and politics in the work of Jacques Rancière and Paulo Freire, London: Bloomsbury. Rancière, J. (2009) The Emancipated Spectator, London: Verso. Rancière, J. (2007) The Future of the Image, London: Verso. Rancière, J. (2006) Hatred of Democracy, London: Verso. Rancière, J. (2004) The Politics of Aesthetics, London: Bloomsbury. Rancière, J. (1999) Dis-agreement: politics and philosophy, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press. Rancière, J. (1991) The Ignorant Schoolmaster: five lessons in intellectual emancipation, Stanford: Stanford University Press.