The recent Khan Report (GOV.UK, 2024) sets forth a comprehensive framework aimed at bolstering social cohesion and fortifying the resilience of democratic institutions, with a particular focus on education as a central pillar. Commissioned by the UK government and led by Dame Sara Khan, the report addresses the critical role educational systems play in fostering informed, critically thinking citizens. These individuals are viewed as essential for navigating and contributing to a diverse, pluralistic society. Highlighting the need for educational environments that impart knowledge and actively promote values of diversity, equity and inclusion, the report is intended to serve as a guide not only within the UK but also for similar initiatives globally. By drawing parallels with other international efforts, such as the EU’s integration of citizenship education and UNESCO’s global citizenship education agenda, the Khan Report attempts to lay the groundwork for a more cohesive and resilient democratic fabric across nations.

However, a rigorous examination of the strategies outlined in the Khan Review, viewed through the theoretical lens of Michel Foucault as contextualised by the scholarship of Farrell (2023), reveals a nuanced understanding of the power dynamics inherent within educational institutions. Foucault’s seminal concepts of power/knowledge, governmentality and biopolitics offer a profound critique of how educational policies and practices can inadvertently perpetuate forms of symbolic violence and exclusion. This critique gains significance when considering policies such as Fundamental British Values (FBV) and the Prevent Strategy, which, despite their professed neutrality, have been shown to embed and perpetuate specific power dynamics and divisive practices within the educational landscape.

‘… a more critical, reflective approach to educational reform is warranted – one that recognises the intricate interplay between knowledge, power and subjectivity and that strives to create an educational environment that genuinely supports the flourishing of a diverse, inclusive and resilient democracy.’

By applying Foucault’s critique to the Khan Review’s approach to enhancing social cohesion and democratic resilience, it becomes evident that the review’s strategies begin to unravel the complexities and contradictions inherent in current educational discourse. This analysis underscores the potential for educational policies not only to convey knowledge but also to serve as mechanisms of power that shape individuals’ understanding of themselves, their values and their place within society. Thus, a more critical, reflective approach to educational reform is warranted – one that recognises the intricate interplay between knowledge, power and subjectivity and that strives to create an educational environment that genuinely supports the flourishing of a diverse, inclusive and resilient democracy.

Through Foucault’s lens, education emerges not merely as a site for learning but as a pivotal arena for the exercise of power, where knowledge is constructed and disseminated in a manner that reflects and reinforces specific power relations. Policies like FBV and Prevent, when critically examined, can be perceived as mechanisms that transform educational institutions into instruments of social control. These policies operationalise the curriculum as a tool for inculcating a particular set of values and monitoring dissent, effectively shaping the subjectivities of individuals to align with a predetermined notion of citizenship. This instrumentalisation of education raises profound concerns about the autonomy of educational spaces and their role in fostering critical thinking and open dialogue.

Foucault’s discussions of surveillance and the creation of norms versus deviations are particularly pertinent to the critique of Prevent. This strategy can be seen as epitomising a form of biopower that categorises individuals and communities, thereby contributing to the fragmentation of society rather than its cohesion. Similarly, FBV and Prevent regulate public discourse, defining what is sayable and thinkable within the public sphere, thereby stifling dissent and limiting the diversity of expressions and narratives. These critical implications for democratic resilience underscore the need for educational policies that foster trust, mutual respect and genuine dialogue.

In conclusion, a Foucauldian critique invites a profound reassessment of policies like FBV and Prevent, urging policymakers to consider not only their immediate impacts but also their deeper implications for power relations, individual freedoms and the collective life of the polity. It suggests that the path to enhancing social cohesion and democratic resilience lies not in the imposition of uniform values or surveillance but in the cultivation of spaces for critical engagement, diversity and genuine dialogue.

References

Farrell, F. (2023). Fundamental British values, Michel Foucault, and religious education teacher subjectivity: A critical investigation. Palgrave Macmillan.

GOV.UK. (2024). The Khan Review: executive summary, key findings and recommendations. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-khan-review-threats-to-social-cohesion-and-democratic-resilience/the-khan-review-executive-summary-key-findings-and-recommendations