Education in the Era of Globalization PDF
Preview Education in the Era of Globalization
EDUCATION IN THE ERA OF GLOBALIZATION Philosophy and Education VOLUME 16 Series Editors: Robert E. Floden, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, U.S.A. Kenneth R. Howe, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, U.S.A. Editorial Board: David Bridges, Centre for Applied Research in Education, University of East Anglia, Norwich, U.K. Jim Garrison, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, U.S.A. Nel Noddings, Stanford University, CA, U.S.A. Shirley A. Pendlebury, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa Denis C. Phillips, Stanford University, CA, U.S.A. Kenneth A. Strike, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, U.S.A. SCOPE OF THE SERIES There are many issues in education that are highly philosophical in character. Among these issues are the nature of human cognition; the types of warrant for human beliefs; the moral and epistemological foundations of educational research; the role of education in developing effective citizens; and the nature of a just society in relation to the educational practices and policies required to foster it. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine any issue in education that lacks a philosophical dimension. The sine qua non of the volumes in the series is the identification of the expressly philosophical dimensions of problems in education coupled with an expressly philosophical approach to them. Within this boundary, the topics—as well as the audiences for which they are intended—vary over a broad range, from volumes of primary interest to philosophers to others of interest to a more general audience of scholars and students of education. The titles published in this series are listed at the end of this volume. Education in the Era of Globalization KLAS ROTH AND ILAN GUR-ZE’EV (EDS.) A C.I.P. Catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress. ISBN-13 978-1-4020-5944-5 (HB) ISBN-13 978-1-4020-5945-2 (e-book) Published by Springer, P.O. Box 17, 3300 AA Dordrecht, The Netherlands. www.springer.com Printed on acid-free paper All Rights Reserved ©2007 Springer No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. CONTENTS Introduction: Education in the Era of Globalizing Capitalism 1 Ilan Gur-Ze’ev and Klas Roth 1. Dialogue, Difference and Globalization: An Interview with Nicholas C. Burbules 13 Klas Roth 2. Moral Education, Liberal Education and the Voice of the Individual 33 Paul Standish 3. A Kantian Conception of Human Rights Education 51 Pradeep A. Dhillon 4. Ambiguities of Cosmopolitanism: Difference, Gender and the Right to Education 65 Sharon Todd 5. (Dis)locating Imaginative and Ethical Aims of Global Education 83 Elizabeth E. Heilman 6. Education for Responsibility: Knowledge, Ethics and Deliberation 105 Klas Roth 7. Education for Deliberative Democracy 123 Lars Løvlie 8. Multicultural Metaphors 147 J. Mark Halstead 9. Racism: The Birth of a Concept 161 Walter Feinberg 10. Education as Subjectivity: Three Perspectives on the Construction of Subjectivity and the Position of Knowledge 169 Birgit Nordtug 11. Sports Education Facing Globalizing Capitalism 185 Ilan Gur-Ze’ev v vi CONTENTS 12. Toward a Critique of Paideia and Humanitas: (Mis)Education and the Global Ecological Crisis 209 Richard Kahn 13. Hope and Education in the Era of Globalization 231 Olli-Pekka Moisio and Juha Suoranta Index 247 LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS Name Address Klas Roth Stockholm Institute of Education Department of Social and Cultural Studies in Education [email protected] Ilan Gur-Ze’ev University of Haifa Faculty of Education [email protected] Nicholas Burbules University of Illinois Department of Educational Policy Studies [email protected] Pradeep Dhillon University of Illinois Department of Educational Policy Studies [email protected] Walter Feinberg University of Illinois Department of Educational Policy Studies [email protected] Elizabeth Heilman Michigan State University College of Education [email protected] Mark Halstead University of Huddersfield Department of Community and International Education [email protected] Richard Kahn University of North Dakota Educational Foundation & Research [email protected] Lars Løvlie University of Oslo Faculty of Education [email protected] vii viii LISTOFCONTRIBUTORS Olli-Pekka Moisio University of Jyväskylä Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy [email protected] Birgit Nordtug Sogn og Fjordane University College Faculty of Social Sciences [email protected] Paul Standish University of London Institute of Education Educational Foundation and Policy Studies Philosophy Section [email protected] Juha Suoranta University of Tampere Department of Education [email protected] Sharon Todd Stockholm Institute of Education Department of Social and Cultural Studies in Education [email protected] INTRODUCTION: EDUCATION IN THE ERA OF GLOBALIZING CAPITALISM Ilan Gur-Ze’ev and Klas Roth The new, dramatic imposition, so it seems, is no longer stoppable. It is an embarrassing growth that shatters, deconstructs and transforms modern and pre-modern dimensions and levels of our lives; challenging dreams, concepts, practices and the fruits of the Enlightenment and humanist education, in all its forms and dimensions. As such, it should be a starting point for a worthy effort to clarify and deepen our understanding of and responsibility for education in the era of globalization – not to retreat to sentimental, naive or nihilist alternatives. Or, in the words of Bauman: ‘Retreat from the globalization of the human dependency, from the global reach of human technology and economic activities is, in all probability, no longer on the cards. Answers like “stand the wagons in a circle” or “back to the tribal (national, communal) tents” won’t do. The question is not how to reverse the river of history, but how to fight the pollution of its waters by human misery and how to channel its flow towards a more equitable distribution of the benefits it carries ... An effective response to globalization can only be global’(Bauman, 2003, p. 19). For better or for worse, modern history or our lives as we were educated to artic- ulate them, to reflect on them, to challenge or edify them – cannot necessarily con- tinue linearly in the light of binary logic, social security and dialogically reached consensus and collective action, regulated and edified in a liberal democracy; our lives cannot continue unchanged either in their present forms or in their current directions, as if nothing had happened in the past generation. Some would claim that modern life and its prospects have no future at all in the face of post-Fordist production, distribution, representation and consumption (Amin, 2000, pp. 1–40) within the framework of globalizing capitalism. They see globaliza- tion as a menace we should prepare ourselves to challenge; some would say to strug- gle against at all costs, because it can terrorize what is dear to us, even the very existence of the earth (Amin, 2004, pp. 438–448). There are also people who would argue that globalizing capitalism or, in other words, the Americanization of It should be: the planet (Sen, 2002, pp. 1–14) is the gen- uine world terror (West, 1993, p. 394) and is responsible for the reaction from, in par- ticular, Islam and the fundamentalists (Gray, 1998, p. 7) and that it is not, in fact, the fanatic killers of Al-Qaida, Hamas, Hezbollah or the Islamic Jihad.1 And so, Peter McLaren argues, it is the mission of post-colonialist education as part of the world’s progressive forces to address the colonialist nature of globalizing capitalism in theory as well as in revolutionary practice (McLaren, 1997). Others, such as Salman Rushdie, will disagree and insist, ‘Yes, this is about Islam’ (Rushdie, 2004, pp. 357–358). Still 1See also Giovanna Borradori (2003) and Michael A. Peters (2005) for elaborated discussions on the issue of terrorism in an age of globalization. 1 K. Roth and I. Gur-Ze’ev (eds.), Education in the Era of Globalization, 01–12 ©2007 Springer. 2 ILANGUR-ZE’EVANDKLASROTH others, among them moderate social democrats, committed democrats (Sacks, 2004, pp. 210–231. See also Giddens, 2002, p. XXIX) and wise critical thinkers, tell us that globalization opens for us new ways for mutual responsibility and leads us towards potential new forms of solidarity (Bauman, 2003, pp. 16–17). Less critical thinkers celebrate the disputable fact that globalization makes ‘us’ It should be: richer (Micklethwait and Wooldridge, 2000, p. 332) and could be restrained and re-educated (Behrman, 2002, p. 109), even ethically (Kuening, 1998, p. 92), and arguethat it opens the gates for economically rationalized pro-transparency and anti-dictatorial attitudes, for local autonomy and individual creativity, resistance to closure and for a new, edified, global human existence that will be richer, more democratic and moral; glob- alization will realize the vision of self-rule in oneself as an autonomous, creative, normal and free human being (Novak, 2002, p. 260). According to this vision, globalization offers us new horizons for rewording, uncensored creativity (Dunning, 2002, p. 24), liberation from territoriality and its ethnocentricity while transcending the limits, hierarchies, oppressive values, ideals and practices of modernity and anti- modernization alike. Either way, we cannot avoid addressing the new existential, philosophical, eco- nomic, cultural and political conditions, as educators, as theorists of education, as objects of subjectification and as – directly and indirectly – subjects of dynamic dis- ciplining symbolic bombardment. The changes and transformations inflicted/opened by globalization might be justifiably called ‘revolution’, ‘transformation of human conditions’ or ‘a new era’. So, how should we understand the new actuality and what should we do? Is this the first step on the way towards the world of the cyborg: a civilization beyond the dichotomies between nature and culture, humans and machines, reality and fantasy, the moment and eternity? Or is it a gateway for the new, most advanced, self-inflicted barbarization of humanity? Is it the beginning of a culture-clash that will bring the end of liberal democracies and eventually human life on this planet? Or is it a new begin- ning, a dangerous inauguration of a human rebirth, even if only for the few selected ones – an open possibility that is so complex and anarchist that we cannot yet foresee its future fortunes while we must already now position and educate ourselves for addressing its risks, possibilities and ambivalences? And if so, should we offer new ways of understanding and practising education that will prepare individuals to live in a godless, multi-oriented, kaleidoscopic, risky, free, creative, ecstatic world? Or, maybe we, as humanist educators, should react like the Roman soldier excavated in Pompeii who faced the magma of Vesuvius by remaining at his post. Should we recy- cle archaic and outmoded humanist ambitions, values, ideals and concepts to hold on to what is still left to us: heroic tragedy? Nothing prepared us for a worthy addressing of this historical shift, certainly not modern humanist education. Humanist education, as well as its various current critiques, rivals and alternatives (such as critical pedagogy, ecological education, postcolonial edu- cation and radical feminist education) are not only disoriented. They are exhausted. Beside the alternative of Jihad, all other alternatives are too weak to enforce a coherent
The list of books you might like
