Introduction

This proposal is in answer to the Special Call ‘Education and psychoanalysis’ of NW 13. In this paper we want to present a pedagogical ‘trend’ which developed in France in the 1950s and 1960s and which we consider to be a rather rare example of Psychoanalytic Pedagogy in Europe. This originality came to us gradually as a result of the meetings and exchanges we have had for about 10 years with researchers from different countries. These exchanges have taken place, in particular, in the NW13 of the EERA since this network nested our group of researchers working on the links between Education and Psychoanalysis.

In the first section we will present this pedagogical trend, insisting on the use of the term ‘trend’ to designate it and on some elements why it could be described as a ‘Psychoanalytic Pedagogy’. In a second section, we will present a monograph: it is a story of an educational situation in higher education. Writing monographs is a common practice and a characteristic of this pedagogical trend (Dubois, 2019). In the last section, the comments on this monograph will be an opportunity to show how pedagogy and psychoanalysis are linked in this specific field. 

1. Institutional pedagogy: an example of psychoanalytical pedagogy in France 

1.1. A trend issued from the Freinet pedagogy

• Movement

In France, the term ‘institutional pedagogy’ is used to designate a pedagogical trend that emerged from the Freinet pedagogy in the 1960s. The term ‘trend’ is used to distinguish it from the pedagogical movements.

A pedagogical movement is generally made up of several elements: 

—an established structure which most often takes the form of an association. In this way, it is possible to join a movement. This is the case of the Freinet movement with the Cooperative Institute of the Modern School (ICEM). In an association, there are instances where decisions concerning the pedagogical movement are made. This was also the case, for example, with the International League for New Education founded in 1921.

—Tools for the diffusion of pedagogical ideas: most often a journal or a collection of books, sometimes a publishing house to distribute pedagogical material.

—Events that allow the militants to meet and exchange ideas. For example, in the Freinet movement in the 1950s and 1960s, there was an annual congress that brought together several hundred militants.

A pedagogical movement is therefore structured and can pronounce some exclusions: this was the case of the Freinet movement in the 60’s.

• Current or ‘trend’

In French we use the term ‘courant’, which means literally ‘current’ in English.

English word ‘current’ is a noun and means ‘a continuous flow’, for example of water in a river, or of air through an area. Thus when we speak of ‘courant pédagogique’ in French, we mean a ‘continuous flow’ of pedagogical ideas and practices.

In the pedagogical field, this term differs from the notion of movement; the latter in its nominal form means the act of moving or a group of people sharing a cause or ideas. 

With the term ‘current’, the focus is more on ideas than on the people or structures that embody them. But in English, we don’t use the term ‘pedagogical current’ but more ‘pedagogical stream’ or ‘trend’. This distinction between ‘pedagogical movement’ and ‘pedagogical current’ is important for presenting institutional pedagogy because it has never been a movement and is still a ‘stream’.

There is no structure grouping together the professionals practising this pedagogy. These professionals, who are teachers, social workers and trainers, come together in small working groups. These are groups of peers (Geffard, 2018) who work together on their practices by writing monographs, which are accounts of real-life professional situations that are the subject of an elaboration process. Institutional pedagogy consists of setting up institutions in classrooms. Institutions are devices for organizing work in groups and promoting subjective speaking. The recognition of subjectivity is at the heart of this pedagogy. The expression ‘institutional pedagogy’ dates from 1958: Jean Oury is said to have brought the terms pedagogy and institutional together for the first time at the Freinet Movement Congress in Paris. This pedagogical trend was formed after the expulsion from the Freinet movement of some of its Parisian militants in 1961. Among these activists, Fernand Oury and Aïda Vasquez are considered as founders. Fernand Oury (1920–1998) was a teacher and Aïda Vasquez (1937–2015) a psychologist and psychoanalyst. Then, in 1964, the actors of this new pedagogical current were divided into two distinct currents: the first could be described as ‘psychoanalytic’, because it explicitly referred to psychoanalysis, and the second as ‘self-managerial’. We will now focus on the psychoanalytic trend. 1.2. Institutional pedagogy and psychoanalysis: a psychoanalytic pedagogy This long paper is a working step for a project to publish a longer paper describing institutional pedagogy today. After focusing on the notion of a ‘trend’ to define this pedagogical trend, we will highlight the links between this pedagogy and psychoanalysis. The aim is to explain why we can speak of a psychoanalytic pedagogy. To do this, we propose to take a brief historical overview of this pedagogical current to show the way it was formed in relation with psychoanalysis from its birth in the 1960s (Dubois, 2012). There is no structure grouping together the professionals practising this pedagogy. These professionals, who are teachers, social workers and trainers, come together in small working groups. These are groups of peers (Geffard, 2018) who work together on their practices by writing monographs, which are accounts of real-life professional situations that are the subject of an elaboration process. Institutional pedagogy consists of setting up institutions in classrooms. Institutions are devices for organizing work in groups and promoting subjective speaking. The recognition of subjectivity is at the heart of this pedagogy.

The expression ‘institutional pedagogy’ dates from 1958: Jean Oury is said to have brought the terms pedagogy and institutional together for the first time at the Freinet Movement Congress in Paris. This pedagogical trend was formed after the expulsion from the Freinet movement of some of its Parisian militants in 1961. Among these activists, Fernand Oury and Aïda Vasquez are considered as founders. Fernand Oury (1920–1998) was a teacher and Aïda Vasquez (1937–2015) a psychologist and psychoanalyst. Then, in 1964, the actors of this new pedagogical current were divided into two distinct currents: the first could be described as ‘psychoanalytic’, because it explicitly referred to psychoanalysis, and the second as ‘self-managerial’. We will now focus on the psychoanalytic trend. 1.2. Institutional pedagogy and psychoanalysis: a psychoanalytic pedagogy This long paper is a working step for a project to publish a longer paper describing institutional pedagogy today. After focusing on the notion of a ‘trend’ to define this pedagogical trend, we will highlight the links between this pedagogy and psychoanalysis. The aim is to explain why we can speak of a psychoanalytic pedagogy. To do this, we propose to take a brief historical overview of this pedagogical current to show the way it was formed in relation with psychoanalysis from its birth in the 1960s (Dubois, 2012). The analysis of the biographical trajectories of the first militants of this pedagogical trend will highlight the working links they had with the ‘shrinks’ world’, and how these working links formed the basis of this pedagogy which refers very explicitly to psychoanalysis. In this paper we call the ‘shrink’s world’, the circle gathering psychologists, psychiatrists and psychoanalysts of the time. We have to keep in mind that this world was very diverse.

Aristote (1990). Éthique à Nicomaque. Paris: Vrin. Aulagnier, P. (1984). L’apprenti-historien et le maître-sorcier. Paris : PUF. Bion, W. R. (2014). The Complete Works of W.R. Bion. Volume I. London : Karnac Books. Castoriadis, C. (1975/1999). L’institution imaginaire de la société. Paris : Le Seuil. Drogoul, F. (1992). Des « petits groupes » de Bion au travail institutionnel. Institutions, 10/3, 33-47 Dubois, A. (2019). Histoires de la pédagogie institutionnelle : Les monographies. Nîmes : Champ social. Dubois, A. (2012). La pédagogie institutionnelle et ses liens avec l’éducation nouvelle (1958-1968). Dans L. Gutierrez, L. Besse et A. Prost (Dir.) Réformer l’école, l’apport de l’éducation nouvelle(p. 89-100). Grenoble : Presses Universitaires de Grenoble. Geffard, P. (2018). Expériences de groupe en pédagogie institutionnelle.Paris : L’Harmattan. Geffard, P. et Dubois, A. (2016). Écriture des pratiques et remaniements subjectifs de la position professionnelle. Phronesis,5/3-4, 42-54. Green, A. (1986). Le travail du négatif. Revue française de psychanalyse, 1/L, 489-493. Guattari, F. (1972). Psychanalyse et transversalité. Paris : Maspero. Henckes, N. (2011). Reforming psychiatric institutions in the mid-twentieth century: a framework for analysis. History of Psychiatry, vol. 22-2, 164–181. Keats, J. (1899). The Complete Poetical Works and Letters of John Keats, Cambridge Edition. Boston & New York: Houghton, Mifflin Company. Levinas, E. (1974). Autrement qu’être ou au-delà de l’essence. La Haye: Martinus Nijhoff. Marx, K. (1845/1982). Thèses sur Feuerbach(p. 1029-1033).In Œuvres III Philosophie, Paris : Gallimard. Nicholas Beattie, N. (2002). The Freinet movements of France, Italy, and Germany, 1920–2000: versions of educational progressivism. Lewiston, N.Y.; Lampeter, E. Mellen Press. Oury, J. (2007). Psychanalyse, psychiatrie et psychothérapie institutionnelles. VST - Vie sociale et traitements, 95, 110-125. Pontalis, J.-B. (1995). Sur le négatif. In A. Green, B. Favarel-Garrigues, J. Guillaumin, P. Fedida et coll., Le négatif. (p. 107-120). Bordeaux-Le Bouscat : L’Esprit du Temps. Rabazas Romero, T., Ramos Zamora, S. & Sanz Simón, C. (2019). Freinet pedagogy in the university: an innovative project in the History of Education. Paedagogica Historica, Volume 55, Issue 4. Sartre, J.-P. (1985) Critique de la Raison dialectique, Théorie des ensembles pratiques [vol. 1] – Questions de méthode (précédé de). Paris : Gallimard. Schlemminger, G. (1996). History of Freinet pedagogy. In Plaisir d’apprendre et travail coopératif. Actes du séminaire international à l’Alliance française de Londres, juin 1997. Online: http://ecolesdifferentes.free.fr/FREINETLONDRES.htm Vasquez, A. et Oury, F. (1967). Vers une pédagogie institutionnelle. Paris : Maspero. Zaltzman, N. (1998). De la guérison psychanalytique. Paris : PUF.