To participate in the 2017 conference, you are asked to interrogate the discourses we live by and consider how they are present in cultural narratives and how they are relevant to the real life contexts of adult education and of people’s life histories. Question to what extent are people's accounts shaped by the understandings already held. Ask if the real life narratives that researchers collect transform understandings and shape acceptance of commonly held discourses.

Within this theme, participants will have divergent interests and will occupy different spaces on the theoretical/empirical spectrum and this diversity is welcomed. Work could be exploratory, evaluative or emancipatory, for example. For many it is the link between the local ‘micro- and meso-’ and the large ‘mega-’ level ramifications that fascinates. Writing in an educational context, Bernstein (1999) captures these strands as horizontal (everyday or common-sense knowledge) and vertical (coherent, explicit, and systematically principled) discourses.

Participants could use their own narratives to newly explore existing discourses to understand their merits and disadvantages as an explanatory tool, or choose to examine specific discourses more closely to evaluate their effectiveness in a particular context. They could seek out discourses that appear to support inclusion, diversity or change, perhaps co- or re-structuring them to make them more fit for purpose. Some papers will be introspective, taking a reflective stance; others steer towards objectivity; many will combine these two approaches. Papers meeting these, and broader aims will be welcomed, and it is envisaged that for the conference, accepted papers will be grouped sensitively to take account of themes, approaches and intentions.

Communication is key to creating understanding – and both of these are fundamental requirements for cooperation and collaboration – but can take a range of forms. In keeping with the conference tradition, papers will take a narrative approach but communication need not be confined to dialogue. Words are a powerful medium but so, too, are the visual arts, dance, drama and music and all forms of activity that draw on the emotions. Responses to the theme that draw on non-verbal media will also be welcome.

The 2017 conference theme develops ideas that arose from discussions around ‘Resources of Hope’ the previous year. These drew inspiration from the work of British cultural theorist and adult educator, Raymond Williams, who advocated a society where respect and humanity underpin all aspects of intellectual challenge. Presentations considered the nature and role of hope in building better dialogue and connectivity between diverse people at a time when opportunities for dialogue are challenged, the ‘other’ experienced as a threat rather than a source of learning and enrichment. In the broader debates, participants acknowledged the serious political situations in many of their home nations and the suffering of the millions of homeless people fleeing repression and conflict, poverty and destitution, in countries nearby.

Conference participants were aware of the rising levels of xenophobia, racism and fundamentalism in the world outside but conscious, too, of the need to embrace, to value, and to work with ‘difference’ within our own walls. At the plenaries, participants reflected on the growing need to ensure that the conference reflects society as a whole. There is an evident need to build a safe space for the sharing of views and opinions whatever an individual’s background, also to find ways to address the language barriers that beset a European network, mindful that important ideas can be ‘lost in translation’.

For 2017, the conference is planned around similar notions of integrity, but asks participants to question their own assumptions by examining the suppositions and frameworks that underpin their thinking and their practices: the discourses they live by.

For Foucault (1972/1995, The Archaeology of Knowledge) discourse is steeped in status and power: it is the frame for what it is possible even to think in a given period. To identify a discourse, analysis focuses on practices and ideas that demarcate and marginalise. As such a discourse is a culturally constituted means of representing reality that is used to determine what it is possible to talk about and do within a society. Thus, discourses establish social ‘norms’ that then go unquestioned, perpetrating existing patterns of control and behaviour. Even, in contemporary society, people often conform to ‘norms’ accepting them as ‘truths’ rather than questioning their provenance, validity or applicability to different contexts.

As we are deemed to live in a globalised world by politicians and economists (Bhagwati, 2007; Shangquan, 2000; Stiglitz, 2002) and by sociologists (Bauman, 1998; Giddens, 1999; Mann, 2013) alike, there is a danger that ‘one world thinking’ overwrites diversity, concealing how the ‘universal’ process of globalization affects us differently depending of our place in the world (Standing, 2011).  Often the discussion of difference centres on capital and inequality (see Piketty, 2014, 2015; Wilkinson & Pickett, 2009) but McCloskey (2006) challenges this view as simplistic, encouraging people to look more broadly at other aspects of society. To use the words of the Danish anthropologist, Kirsten Hastrup (2012), it is important to remember that individuals live 'differently in the world'.

Alvesson and Karreman (2000) point out that capturing discourses is a complex process. “Discourse is a popular term used in a variety of ways, easily leading to confusion”. The  concept manifests within social studies in various ways and conference members are invited to use this flexibility to their advantage, to enable a diversity of treatments.

In general terms, discourse can refer to:

·         social texts;

·         other phenomena (experiences, events, material objects and social practices), their orientations and meanings and the power they wield; or

·         larger-scale and reasoned ways of ordering the social world (the more formal discourses seen within academic disciplines and organizational spheres).

All or any of these forms could be explored and conference participants are invited to consider the broader aspects, to reflect upon the influence of specific discourses on different members of society, to focus on diversity rather than normativity.

When people aim to smooth out differences, by claiming to be inclusive, holistic, and democratic, experience shows that trying to do this is an illusion. Even acting together the ESREA Network cannot avoid this constraint nor can it reform the world, but it can provide a space in which to start the process of analysis and debate and offer a forum where each contributor’s voice is heard and respected. 

At the 2017 conference, the intention is to address differences in our world analytically in order to celebrate them, to acknowledge that they exist and challenge the pretence that it is possible to remove them just by wanting to. Difference can occupy many positions but wherever it is placed, to understand difference will help us to better understand ourselves as well as others.

ESREA's language policy reflects the network’s European scope (and its much broader global interest). Conference languages are English and French but if you submit an abstract in French please provide an English version too, to assist the peer-review process.

Papers and presentations, too, can be delivered in French as well as English but please make available a short (1000-1500 word) summary in English or consider providing bilingual slides (English and French) if this is possible.

At the parallel sessions, bi- or multi-lingual participants will be present to facilitate understanding and debate but there is no formal translation service. ESREA conferences rely on tolerance, respect, mutual support, curiosity and thoughtful preparation to overcome language barriers.

When planning your presentations please allow time for an element of translation, and provide essential information as handouts or diagrams if this seems appropriate.

The close connections between research, language and narrative lie at the heart of the Network and the dual language approach seeks to facilitate communication across national and cultural divides. However, at the 2017 conference, where Danish is the host language, organizers recognize the importance of ELF (English as a Lingua Franca) – English used as a means of communication between non-native speakers for whom it serves as a common language. According to key proponent, Barbara Seidlhofer (2004) within English language teaching ELF serves two purposes.

Linguistically, ELF is a “contact language” for those who share neither a common native tongue nor a common (national) culture, and sociolinguistically, it plays an important role in enabling continuing interaction between such individuals.

The ESREA conference experience is that English serves this sociocultural role. To do this successfully it requires native English speakers to be aware that ELF is an English that differs from their everyday usage (Ur, 2010). When writing and speaking in English please help others to understand by avoiding or explaining idioms, metaphors and colloquialisms, and by speaking clearly, perhaps more slowly. 

Price:

DKK 1750 (~€235,00) incl. 25% VAT - Doctoral Students

DKK 2160 (~€290,00) incl. 25% VAT - ESREA Member

DKK 2570 (~€345,00) incl. 25% VAT - Non ESREA member

Register here: https://auws.au.dk/ESREALBHN_2017