You are here > about re-mapping > re-mapping’s main argument

Re-mapping’s main argument

The Re-mapping project argues that the theorization of the context by the current state of the art, focusing either on students’ demographics or on institutional characteristics, is too narrow in a global era of multiple migrations, and thus it is conceptually challenged. The project builds on the constructivist ontologies of space, and argues that the notion of the context, should also theorize the notion of space, as the organic social relation that students have with the “world” (Heidegger, 1992). The social construct of space is chosen as analytical tool to explore students’ representational spaces, spatial practices and imagined geographies.

In order to problematize students’ perceived relation to space, the Re-mapping project takes: a)Lefebvre’s (1991) concept of “representational space”, the way students experience, perceive and relate to the world as inhabitants and users in combination with b) Bernstein’s (1971) code theory and c) the notion of “imagined geographies” (Simondon, 2008, Anderson, 2005, Soja, 1996)  to argue that: students’ representational spaces (restricted or elaborated) affect their a) modes of motivation & self-regulation towards school, b) their long-term orientation & c) their career choices.