MAPPING THE THEORETICAL TERRAIN AND LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1.4 Resolving uncertainties
other words, action is not transparent; it is, as Latour (2005, p. 46) describes, “dislocated”.
Latour (2005, p. 46) sees dislocation as a process in which actors are moved out of their intended path of action by some other agent. The actors respond to these agents over which they have no control. According to Latour (2005, p. 54), “agents are part of an account, they are accompanied by some explicit theory of action”. Put simply, it means that these agents dictate the actions of the actors. The actors either credit or discredit these agents in the accounts they provide about what makes them act. For us to illuminate the agents causing the dislocation, it is necessary to focus on the nature of the action.
The word ‘action’ is invariably intertwined with the word association, since action is a derivative from the associations or ties among entities (Latour, 2005). This means that action is the collective endeavour of many actors circulating in the network (Latour, 2005). Action is therefore a key term linked to associations; it brings to the fore the other actors enrolled in the network. The action among the associations results in displacements among the entities (Latour, 2005). The resultant displacement of entities changes the nature of the group. Due to the uncertainty of “what or who” makes us act, and the displacements that occur, we could never stabilise the social permanently (Latour, 2005). Once we shift our focus from certainty to uncertainty, we are able to trace what or who is acting and how group formation occurs.
This leads us to resolve the third uncertainty, namely the nature of the group.
Latour (2005, p. 31) informs us that there are four important issues that need to be resolved for groups to form. These entail identifying a spokesperson for the delineated group, mapping the social context of the actors, assembling the traces by mapping fixed and durable boundaries, and lastly seeing the formation of groups as a joint activity (Latour, 2005, p. 31).
According to Latour (2005), the controversy with regard to group formation began with a question about which group is responsible for a particular role; for example, who is responsible for preparing learners for the world of work. Therefore we resort to tracing the relationships among all our actors when groups are formed. When groups are formed there are enrolments, tensions, uncertainties and translations that, which means that actors within a group and among groups are constantly relating to one another in an ongoing manner (Latour, 2005). This leads to ever-shifting ties or associations among the actors (Latour, 2005). These ties are fragile, uncertain and controversial. The implication of the shifting ties is that there
are no fixed relations, and the enquirer cannot confine actors to them (Latour, 2005). The enquirer thus follows the trajectory of an actor in the network.
To follow this trajectory, I focus on the tensions, uncertainties and translations among the actors when they form and dismantle associations. These tensions, uncertainties and translations provide the enquirer with the resources to render the social connection traceable (Latour, 2005). Thus, these shifting ties or frames of reference allow the social to become visible - and also lead to the formation of contradictory cartographies. These ties allow me to see aspects of the social impact on the actors’ actions. Action is not transparent and has to be traced (Latour, 2005, p. 43).
Latour (2005, p. 31) maintains that to delineate a group is to define its boundary. To engage in this task we need a spokesperson for the group who will define the group and say what it should be and has been. The implication is that groups are not silent, but are the product of an uproar made by contradictory voices (Latour, 2005). It is the uncertainties among the actors that indicate which sociological theory the enquirer should use. Hence, it is unimportant to define in advance what sort of social aggregates provide the context for these maps.
The delineation of the group is the task of the actors. In other words, the actors do the sociology for the enquirer, and the enquirer learns from the actors what constitutes their sets of associations. Therefore, when associations are formed or are dismantled, their spokesperson tries to define them and the group’s boundary gets marked, delineated and rendered fixed and durable (Latour, 2005). This means that the boundaries created by the spokesperson hold up against the contradictory pressure of all competing associations that threaten to dissolve the group boundary. Demarcation of boundaries results in a stabilisation period in respect of the associations, translations and group formations and the nature of action and object.
With regard to this study, the group has been delineated by the transformative agenda attached to curriculum development. As mentioned previously, this transformative agenda focuses on human resource development and overcoming the skills shortage in South Africa.
The transformative agenda, attached to curriculum development, grants agency to structures such as the DoE, schools and industry to pursue the goal of human resource development and
defines, enrolls actors and justifies the existence of the group. In the section that follows I bring to the fore the spokespersons pertaining to the nodes of the study.
2.1.5 Spokespersons for the nodes
At the DoE node, the spokesperson is the NCS-FET Life Sciences Policy (gazetted policy and mediated policy) and subject advisors, while at the school node it is the Life Sciences teachers and policy since they are responsible for enactment of the curriculum. The NTEW are the spokespersons in the industry node since they are involved in the enactment of SKAV in these industries.
The spokesperson/s identified at each node will assist in mapping the social context by enrolling more actors into their practice. As mentioned in Chapter One, the optical density of the medium determines the degree of refraction experienced by a light beam traveling between media of different optical densities. It is important to remember that irrespective of which node the tracing begins at, the refraction that occurs at the node remains the same.
When the spokesperson of the group alerts us to the tensions within the group, what comes to the fore is the optical density (composition) of the media through which the beam of policy travels. The spokesperson will further account for what caused the policy’s construction to be refracted, and will highlight the extent to which the policy has been refracted.