阿特金森和德帕尔马认为，教育政策和实践需要认识和理解在学校里个别恐同案例背后的制度上的异婚现象。在具有异性恋权力结构的学校里，异性恋和明确的男女性别身份和角色是唯一被接受的规范。在她关于学校权力的主观性和表演性话语的有用总结中，她总结了福柯如何看待这种来自国家的压制性权力。这种权力导致包括学校在内的机构对其人口进行管理，并使他们服从国家的“标准判断标准”(同上)。年轻的同性恋女孩很可能会受到学校偏见的“规范”的束缚，甚至为了获得身份和认可而以接受它们为面具。辱骂她遭受潜在破坏性的自己,真正的身份是她的感情,因为在这个征服,作为Youdell(2011)通过阿尔都塞继续解释我们是“叫”,当我们调用我们接受它,让自己在术语中,为了得到认可。在这种接受和认可中，我们成为了召唤的主体。
英国教育学essay代写:教育政策和实践
Atkinson and De Palma argue that educational policy and practice need to recognise and understand the Institutional heteronormativity which lies behind individual cases of homophobia in schools. In schools with a heteronormative power structure, heterosexuality and clear male / female gender identities and roles are the only accepted norms. In her useful summary of subjectivation and performative discourse in relation to power in schools,summarises how Foucault would see this kind of repressive power as originating from the state . This power leads to institutions, including schools, regulating their populations and subjecting them to the state’s ‘normative criteria for judgment’ (ibid). The young homosexual girl may well be subjected to the school’s prejudicial ‘norms’, and even end up subscribing to them as a mask in order to derive identity and recognition. The name-calling she suffers is potentially as destructive to her own, real identity as it is to her emotions, since in this subjection, as Youdell (2011) goes on to explain through Althusser We are ‘called’, and as we turn to the call we accept it, allowing ourselves to be recognized in its terms, in order to be recognized at all. In this acceptance and recognition we become a subject within the terms of the call.
