The pedagogies of the precariat and symbolic violence in the neoliberal education system: A case study

Purpose: The primary aim of this study is to examine how teachers employed in public and private schools with different employment statuses experience processes of precaritization, with a particular focus on the phenomenon of "pedagogies of the precariat," which has emerged as a consequence of neoliberal principles shaping the field of education. The study further investigates how these experiences are connected to mechanisms of symbolic violence, the ways in which they are internalized and legitimized, as well as the resistance strategies developed by teachers. In addition, the research offers recommendations for the enhancement of teacher employment policies. Method: This study employed a qualitative case study design. The research group comprised 18 teachers working in public schools (tenured, contracted, and hourly-paid) and private schools located in the Gaziemir district of İzmir. Participants were selected through maximum variation sampling, a purposive sampling strategy. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, each lasting approximately 50 minutes, which were audio-recorded, transcribed, and supplemented with detailed field notes. For data analysis, an inductive content analysis approach was adopted in combination with the coding procedures of Grounded Theory (open, axial, and selective coding). Themes were generated directly from the data and subsequently interpreted in relation to the theoretical framework. Results: The findings of the study organized teachers' experiences into three overarching dimensions: neoliberalism, precarity, and symbolic violence. Within the neoliberalism dimension, six themes emerged: (1) inequalities of opportunity in education, (2) the impact of competition on school-community relations, (3) the expansionist tendencies and structural challenges of privatization, (4) the shaping of the curriculum through market-oriented (neoliberal) codes, (5) structured deprivations and inequalities in resource distribution, and (6) teacher performance and evaluation systems. In the precarity dimension, four themes became outstanding: (1) lack of job security and uncertainty, (2) deteriorating working conditions and increased professional workload, (3) economic hardships and the erosion of social rights, and (4) teachers' career ladders and perceptions of professional development. Finally, in the dimension of symbolic violence, five themes were identified: (1) political and administrative pressures, (2) the symbolic nature of supervision, (3) exclusion from decision-making processes, (4) inequities in recognition and professional development opportunities, and (5) the redistribution of authority and symbolic domination within the field. Conclusion and Suggestions: The findings of the study indicate a mutually reinforcing structure across three dimensions. Within the neoliberalism dimension; education has been transformed from a public right into a purchasable "service/ commodity", income- and space-based stratification has deepened opportunity inequalities, and donation/fee-dependent financing has created fractures in access. Public resource allocation has been shaped more by political influence than by objective need, incentives and reforms have pushed schools into market logic, reducing parents to "customers" and schools to "providers," thereby weakening community solidarity. Privatization has intensified commercialization and reproduced inequalities through "spectacle-based" competition, while the transfer of public responsibilities to the market has been regarded by participants as unacceptable. The curriculum has narrowed along the axis of exam-market alignment, reinforcing representational problems and stereotypes. Resource allocation has generated regional-structural "resource scarcity" through material inadequacies and the transfer of operating expenses to school communities. The output-centered performance and evaluation regime has reduced teaching to a "technical" occupation, redefined professional capital in terms of efficiency and customer satisfaction, and has often been perceived in practice as "market-oriented" and unreliable. In the precarity dimension; the stratification among contracted, hourly-paid, and tenured teachers has eroded professional status and belonging, created uncertainty in career and life planning, and institutionalized insecurity through flexible employment and performance regimes. Competition and accountability have intensified invisible labor and surveillance, accelerating the technicization of teaching. Financial discrimination has widened wage and rights disparities and fueled pressure for additional employment. Career steps, when combined with performance-based hierarchies, have accelerated de-professionalization and tied professional development to competitive "races," thereby restricting autonomy. In the symbolic violence dimension; the political-administrative field has limited teacher autonomy through field/habitus mechanisms, with legitimacy imposed "from above." The culture of surveillance and performance has generated an invisible yet constant pressure of conformity, while evaluations have been widely perceived as "arbitrary" and "unreliable." Teachers have reported exclusion from decision-making processes, which has further weakened professional authority. Perceived injustices in recognition and development opportunities have persisted, with performance regimes reinforcing status hierarchies. Moreover, family habitus and market logics have undermined the social legitimacy of teacher authority, subordinating knowledge flow and pedagogical decisions to market indicators. The recommendations of the study are structured on three levels. At the policy level, public funding for education should be legally secured, with at least 6% of GDP allocated to education, teachers' rights in private schools should be strengthened, and contracted/hourly-paid employment in the public sector should be replaced with secure, tenured positions. At the school level, all teachers, regardless of employment status, should be included as equal stakeholders in decision-making and task allocation. At the teacher-union level, inclusive organizational language and solidarity mechanisms that transcend employment categories should be fostered. Keywords: Neoliberal education policies, Precariat, Precarity, Symbolic violence, Teachers' Professional Law, Teaching profession, Teacher