The main purpose of this paper is to problematize the concepts of learning, learning outcomes and student-centeredness. The background is that the concept of learning in recent decades has become a matter of course, or you might even say established as a dogma of the talking, writing and thinking about society, citizen, education and employment. Another way to put it is that virtually all aspects of life, from cradle to grave, nowadays can be identified as problems in terms of learning. Thus, learning is not a state or period of life to be passed but a task to be carried out endlessly and in all contexts of life. Hence, it is possible to speak of a learning turn not only in education but in society at large. Ultimately, the turn is not only about what should be the main focus in different educational contexts, as schools and teacher education. Rather it is an expression of a profound political change in how we should perceive society, work, and education and of which we as individuals should be and become to be included in society. This approach means that we are not interested in the learning turn from a traditional educational policy perspective, where issues such as educational objectives, results, resources and organization are in focus.  We are instead interested in the politics of education, how the concept of learning operates as a technology in the formation of narratives about societies and of citizens. Our main focus is thus, the politics of learning. Theoretically, we connect to Foucault’s concepts of discourse analysis, governmentality and genealogy, as this kind of analysis has the advantage that it does not require prior definition of concepts as student-centeredness and learning. Instead, it enables us to study how these concepts and other floating signifiers acquire meaning within particular regimes of discourse and practice.    

Carlgren, I. & Marton, F. (2002). Lärare av i morgon. (Teachers of Tomorrow) Stockholm: Lärarförbundets förlag. COM (2006) Towards the Learning Society. White Paper on Education and Training, Teaching and Learning. Brussels: European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/languages/documents/doc409_en.pdf [Access 24 april, 2012] Dumont, H., Istance, D. & Benavides, F (2010). Analysing and designing learning environments for the 21st century. In H. Dumont, D. Instance & F Benavides (Eds.). The Nature of Learning. Using research to inspire practice. Paris: OECDpublishing. Foucault, M. (1994) Governmentality, in D. Faubion (Eds) Michel Foucault. Essential Works of Foucault 1954-1984 (vol 3), Power. London: Penguin Books. Law, M. & Grek, S. (2012). Europeanizing Education: governing a new policy space. Oxford: Symposium Books. Moon, Jenny 2006. Linking Levels, Learning Outcomes and Assessment Criteria – EHEA version. University of Boumemouth, UK. Olsson, U., Petersson, K. & John B. Krejsler (2012) On community as a governmental technology. In Barry M. Franklin & Miguel A. Pereyra (eds.) System of Reason and the Politics of Schooling. Alternative Studies on School Reform and Science of Education. London: Routledge. (forthcoming) Popkewitz, S. T (2008). Cosmopolitanism and the Age of School Reform. Science, Education, and Making Society by Making the Child. New York, London: Routledge. Rancière, J. (1991). The Ignorant Schoolmaster. Five Lessons in Intellectual Emancipation. Standford University Press.