21st Century Teaching and Learning

  • Annouchka Bayley


Posthumanism poses radical critiques and challenges to some of the most fundamental assumptions that underlie what it means or doesn’t mean to ‘be human’ in and amongst the entangled web of phenomena that make up our world. As Donna Haraway might have it, we need to better learn how to “live and die well with each other in a thick present.” (Haraway D, Staying with the trouble: making kin in the Chthulucene. Duke University Press, Durham, p 1, 2016), but who or what counts as ‘each other’ in this kind of “thick present” – a present where simple divides and prosaic attempts to name and hold differences in mind are incapable of capturing the kinds of entangled complexity that characterises living (and dying) in the 21st century. In such vital and urgent times, posthumanisms can become key thinking-strategies, a complex prism via which pedagogic research and practice in and for Higher Education contexts can move towards achieving such a bold proposition. If, as Taylor states, posthumanism “calls into question the essentialising binary between human and nonhuman on which humanism relies, it throws anthropocentrism into doubt along with the categories and identities it underpins” (Taylor C, Edu-crafting a cacophonous ecology: posthumanist research practices in education. In: Taylor C, Hughes C (eds) Posthuman research practices in education, 1st edn. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp 5–24, 2016), then crafting vibrant approaches to pedagogy from out of it requires a shift in how educators and pedagogues work with some of the foundational territories upon which education rest.


  1. Ahmed, S. (1998). Differences that matter: Feminist theory and postmodernism. New York: Cambridge University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), pp. 801–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barad, K. (2007) Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning, Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barad, K. (2014). Diffracting Diffraction: Cutting Together-Apart. Parallax, 20(3), pp. 168–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M. and Rumble, M. (2012). Defining 21st Century Skills. In: P. Griffin, B. McGaw and E. Care, ed., Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills. London: Springer, pp. 17–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Braidotti, R., (2013). The Posthuman, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  8. Chandler, C. (2014). What is the meaning of impact in relation to research and why does it matter? A view from inside academia. In: P. Denicolo, ed., Achieving Impact in research. London: Sage, pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
  9. Deleuze, G., and Guattari, F. (1987). A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  10. Ellsworth, E. (2005). Places of Learning: Media, architecture, pedagogy, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. FitzGerald, E., Ferguson, R., Adams, A., Gaved, M., Mor, Y. and Thomas, R. (2013). Augmented Reality and Mobile Learning: The state of the art. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 5(4), pp. 43–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gray, D., Micheli, P., and Pavlov, A., (2015). Measurement Madness: Recognizing and avoiding the pitfalls of performance measurement. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  13. Griffin, P. and Care, E. (2015). The ATC21S Method. In: P. Griffin and E. Care, ed., Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills: Methods and Approach. London: Spinger, pp. 3–36.Google Scholar
  14. Haraway, D., (2013). SF: Science fiction, speculative fabulation, string figures, so far. Ada: A Journal of Gender, New Media, and Technology, (3).Google Scholar
  15. Haraway, D., (2016) Staying With the Trouble: Making kin in the Chthulucene, Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kirby, V. (2011). Quantum Anthropologies: Life at large, Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Murphy, T. (2016). Revising the Research Excellence Framework: ensuring quality in REF2021, or new challenges ahead?. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 21(1), pp. 34–39.Google Scholar
  18. Ní Mhurchú, A., McLeod, L., Collins, S. and Siles-Brügge, G. (2016). The Present and the Future of the Research Excellence Framework Impact Agenda in the UK Academy: A Reflection from Politics and International Studies. Political Studies Review, p. 147892991665891.Google Scholar
  19. Parr, A., ed. (2005) The Deleuze dictionary, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Susskind, R., Susskind, D. (2015) The Future of the Professions: How technology will transform the work of human experts, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Taylor, C. (2016). Edu-crafting a cacophonous ecology: posthumanist research practices in education. In: C. Taylor and C. Hughes, ed., Posthuman research practices in education, 1st ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 5–24.Google Scholar
  22. Thiele, K. (2014). Ethos of Diffraction: New Paradigms for a (Post)humanist Ethics. Parallax, 20(3), pp. 202–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Van der Tuin, I. (2014). Diffraction as a Methodology for Feminist Onto-Epistemology: On Encountering Chantal Chawaf and Posthuman Interpellation. Parallax, 20(3), pp. 231–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Annouchka Bayley
    • 1
  1. 1.University of WarwickCoventryUK

Personalised recommendations