Lýðræðisleg gildi, samræða og hlutverk menntunar
| Autor: | Vilhjálmur Árnason |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: | |
| Zdroj: | Tímarit um uppeldi og menntun. 28 |
| ISSN: | 2298-8408 2298-8394 |
| DOI: | 10.24270/tuuom.2019.28.13 |
| Popis: | The Icelandic law on elementary schools states that it is the role of schools to prepare students for life and work in a continuously changing democratic society. In this paper, this interesting provision is considered and interpreted in light of the writings of Sigrun Aðalbjarnardottir in her book (2007) Virðing og umhyggja: Akall 21. aldar [Respect and Care: Call of the 21st Century]. It is argued that educational practices in the spirit of this legal provision will inevitably depend on how democracy is understood; what it implies to live and work in a democratic society. In order to discuss this, three different normative models of democracy (cf. Jurgen Habermas, 1996) are introduced: the liberal /protective model, the republican/participatory model and the discourse theoretical/ deliberative model. These three models and their main characteristics are briefly described. It is shown how they imply different understandings of the main functions of democracy, the meaning of citizenship and the role of citizens, and different roles for schools or education. In the three main sections of the paper, the educational ideas of Sigrun Aðalbjarnardottir are discussed and interpreted in light of each of these models of democracy. In relation to the liberal model, two aspects are thematized: first, the emphasis on human rights that protect the citizens from the abuse of political power and are intended to ensure them decent standards of living, and second, the liberal emphasis on value neutrality in education. It is argued that Aðalbjarnardottir’s discussion is not heavily influenced by the liberal model which places no emphasis on civic engagement which looms large in her vision of education. This shows, on the other hand, that her ideas are more akin to the republican/participatory model which emphasizes the positive rights of individuals to political participation and articulation of their values. The aim of this participation is development of skills needed for a meaningful engagement in a democratic culture. It is demonstrated how Aðalbjarnardottir describes many of these skills and argues for their importance in education for a democratic citizenship. It is also argued that Aðalbjarnardottir avoids the dangers of what Habermas called the communitarian version of republicanism where political discussion is dominated by ideas of cultural identity and values that are not subjected to critical scrutiny and can, therefore, lead to an illiberal, populistic democracy. She emphasizes the importance of balancing liberal emphasis on individual rights with communitarian features of solidarity and fraternity. The third model of democracy is introduced as a corrective to the other two, attempting to remedy their weaknesses while preserving their strengths. Instead of emphasizing civil engagement as a primary value, the main importance is moved towards the institutionalization of discursive practices in order to improve the quality of political decision- making and justification of public policy. Two main arguments for the discourse theoretical/ deliberative model of democracy are presented, the critical argument, stressing rational argumentation, and the conciliatory argument, emphasizing fair agreement. Both concern the way in which we employ language in our interaction in order to justify decisions or reach an agreement among diverse participants. It is argued that Aðalbjarnardottir’s education theory in many ways well aligns itself with the deliberative approach. The notion of dialogue or conversation as the vehicle of the capacities that need to be developed dominates her discussion. It is argued, however, that the ways in which she employs the notion of conversation position her closer to the fair agreement aspect of deliberative practices than with the emphasis on critical argumentation. Aðalbjarnardottir sees it as a major role of education in contemporary society to foster the will and cultivate the capacity to deal with disagreements that are rooted in many kinds of cultural diversity. For this, she suggests it is essential to develop a consensus on shared values crucial for upholding a democratic society like our own. It is demonstrated how her discussion of these issues is akin to what Habermas calls ethical discourse of values and distinguishes it from moral discourse on matters of justice. The former is characterized by the aim to articulate and interpret values constitutive of a person’s sense of the good life or the identity of a social group and are conducive to their wellbeing. The latter, on the other hand, aims at the justification of generalizable norms we all can agree on, regardless of our individual or collective identity. It is argued that the latter must be sustained in order to meet the main challenges facing contemporary democratic practices which have caused a crisis in democracy that has been deepening since the publication of Aðalbjarnardottir’s book in 2007. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|