Identity politics and the pedagogy of competence

pp. 135-161

in: Christopher Wise, Chomsky and deconstruction, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, 2011

Abstract

In his book Who's Afraid of Philosophy? (2002), Derrida asserts that, "there is no neutral or natural place in teaching" (69). He also states, "The [pedagogical] question is always posed by someone who, at a given moment, in a language, in a place, etc., represents a program and a strategy" (89). Derrida's statement rearticulates Heidegger's view that every question that can be asked by the teacher implies that "the questioner as such is also there within the question" (Pathmarks 82). The pedagogical views of Derrida and Heidegger sharply contrast with those of Chomsky, who wishes to occupy the extraterrestrial vantage point of the Martian scientist. I have argued here (and elsewhere)¹ that the pedagogy of generic competencies may be linked to the denial of any forms of authority not validated by academic institutions themselves, which are unavoidably founded as political acts. The professor who is competent because he/she is authorized by the institution may reserve the exclusive right of representation. However, the competent professor often refuses to validate representation as a matter of delegation, if it threatens his/her power within the institution. In practical terms, this often means that diverse faculty members are excluded from positions of power, which would enable them to represent their own constituencies, because they are not deemed sufficiently competent.