Session Information
05 SES 03 A, Democracy, Citizenship, Safety and Voice
Paper Session
Contribution
Today, psychoanalysis looks back on a long-lasting tradition of impacting educational theory and practice. In fact, from its very inception psychoanalytic thinking has been applied to educational settings (e.g., Freud, 1914; Freud, 1960). However, despite a long and very rich tradition, psychoanalysis in education remains a niche area in educational research and practice in Europe, North America, and beyond (Taubman, 2011). In academia, it has been almost entirely pushed out of the mainstream of educational research, with the exception of special needs education.
In this presentation, we argue that today there is an opportunity opening up for psychoanalytic thinking to (re-)emerge from the margins of educational research and practice. In the course of the past two decades, there has been a growing acknowledgment that social-emotional learning and development is a crucial part of a modern educational experience (CASEL, 2023), and an essential precondition for more effective academic/cognitive learning, and the advancement of meta-cognitive skills (Pianta, 2012). At the same time, meta-analyses of social-emotional learning/development program evaluations, based on theories and methods of the educational sciences’ mainstream, show only small effects (Corcoran et al., 2018). From a psychoanalytic perspective this is hardly surprising, because most of these programs resort to behavioral condition strategies that ignore latent/unconscious factors impacting human development. Hence, an opportunity is opening up for psychoanalysis in education to show that it can deliver better results.
However, in order to be successful, psychoanalysis in education needs to accept the methods and quality standards, which currently dominate the mainstream of educational sciences, despite their obvious limitations. Specifically, psychoanalysis in education needs to work with and show appreciation for the methods and contributions of quantitative empiricism with its focus on social ecological factors impacting development, and integrate them – which is not the same as giving up its traditional focus on qualitative and in-depth analyses of the unconscious. Initial successful and encouraging steps in this direction have been made in clinical psychoanalysis (Fonagy & Bateman, 2013).
This presentation focuses on our first attempts to bridge the gap between psychoanalysis in education and quantitative empiricism in educational research and practice. From our point of view, group analysis (Foulkes, 1983; Bion, 1991), which combines psychoanalytic and social-ecological/sociological theory and thinking, is the best-suited practice and methods framework for this endeavor. In early 2022, we began working as group analytic coaches in schools. Specifically, we have provided group analytic supervision sessions in two schools in the greater Berlin metropolitan area. In the course of this work, we have also developed a new student survey instrument, which has been theoretically derived from psychoanalytic and group analytic theory (e.g., Hirblinger, 2017; Naumann, 2014). The purpose of this instrument is to support teachers' self-reflective practices in the context of group analytic school coaching and professional development training.
Method
To evaluate the new instrument's validity and reliability, we apply hierarchical linear modeling (HLM), exploratory, and confirmatory factor analysis using Stata 17 and Mplus 8.8.
Expected Outcomes
This presentation summarizes preliminary quantiative-empirical results of the new survey instrument. We expect the variables to show significant correlations with several standardized social-emotional outcome variables: Academic and social efficacy, mentalizing, self-esteem, externalizing behavior, feelings of class belonging (e.g., Minter & Pritzker, 2015; Ha et al., 2013; Bollen & Hoyle, 1990; Veiga & Leite, 2017; Brown & Evans, 2002).
References
Bion, W. R. (1991). Experiences in groups and other papers. New York, NY: Routledge. Bollen, K. A., & Hoyle, R. H. (1990). Perceived cohesion: A conceptual and empirical examination. Social Forces, 69(2), 479-504. doi:10.2307/2579670 Brown, R., & Evans, W. P. (2002). Extracurricular activity and ethnicity: Creating greater school connection among diverse student populations. Urban Education, 37(1), 41-58. doi:10.1177/0042085902371 Corcoran, R. P., Cheung, A. C. K., Kim, E., & Xie, C. (2018). Effective universal school-based social and emotional learning programs for improving academic achievement: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 50 years of research. Educational Research Review, 25, 56-72. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2017.12.001 Fonagy, P., & Bateman, A. (2013). A brief history of mentalization-based treatment and its roots in psychoanalytic theory and practice. In M. B. Heller & S. Pollet (Eds.), The work of psychoanalysts in the public health sector (pp. 168-188). New York, NY: Routledge. Foulkes, S. H. (1983). Introduction to group-analytic psychotherapy: Studies in the social integration of individuals and groups. New York, NY: Routledge. Freud, A. (1960). Psychoanalysis for teachers and parents. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Freud, S. (1970). Zur Psychologie des Gymnasiasten (1914). In A. Mitscherlich, A. Richards, & J. Strachey (Eds.), Sigmund Freud Studienausgabe (Band IV): Psychologische Schriften. Frankfurt am Main: S. Fischer Verlag. Ha, C., Sharp, C., Ensink, K., Fonagy, P., & Cirino, P. (2013). The measurement of reflective function in adolescents with and without borderline traits. Journal of Adolescence, 36(6), 1215-1223. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2013.09.008. Hirblinger, H. (2017). Lehrerbildung aus psychoanalytisch-pädagogischer Perspektive [teacher education from a psychoanalytic-pedagogical perspective]. Gießen: Psychosozial-Verlag. Minter, A., & Pritzker, S. (2015). Measuring adolescent social and academic self-efficacy: Cross-ethnic validity of the SEQ-C. Research on Social Work Practice, 27(2), 1-9. doi:10.1177/1049731515615677 Naumann, T. M. (2014). Gruppenanalytische Pädagogik: Eine Einführung in Theorie und Praxis [group analytic pedagogy: An introduction to theory and practice]. Gießen: Psychosozialverlag. Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K., & Allen, J. P. (2012). Teacher-student relationships and engagement: Conceptualizing, measuring, and improving the capacity of classroom interactions. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement. New York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media. Taubman, P. M. (2011). Disavowed Knowledge. Psychoanalysis, Education, and Teaching. New York, NY: Routledge. Veiga, F. H., & Leite, A. (2016). Adolescents’ self-concept short scale: A version of PHCSCS. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217, 631-637. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.02.079
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.