Cosmopolitanism, Notes for Paper
Following is notes on the articles I have collected thus far, along witha statement of purupose for this paper that I will soon draft. Next, I will look over my notes and see if I need to search for more literature. I will also add the definition/introdutory information found during my first day of research.
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to introduce the notion of cosmopolitanism and its practice within the institution of education. Suggestions will also be offered on how schools and teachers can foster cosmopolitan ideologies in students.
¶ This symbol means “paragraph number” when making direct quotations from a website
COSMO - my appreviation for cosmopolitanism
NATIONAL - my appreviation for nationalism, the paradigm that runs counter to that of COSMO
Luke, A. (2004). Teaching after the market: From commodity to cosmopolitanism. Teachers College Record, 106 (7), 1422-1443.
– Shift in educational paradigm from commodification (COMM) to cosmopolitanism (COSMO)
– Limitations of COMM:
– Reasserts definitions of teaching as craft and profession – both limiting in reactions/responses to modern changes in economic conditions, policies, persons having and expressing divergent ethnicity and cultures, formulations of youth, multiple and divergent identities, and forms of work
– Targets teachers and teaching profession
– Attempts to deal with modern diversities through further standardizing and strengthening existing programs
– Traditional/neoclassical – teachers and teaching embrace commodity fetishism
– Leads to deskilling and deprofessionalization of generation upon generation of teachers
– Teaching becomes more about following tradition/structure/mandate/standard rather than focusing on individual student and classroom needs – results in students being 3rd party rather than recipents of education
– Strengths of COSMO
– Attempts to deal with modern diversities through programs, funding, and lobbying (e.g: school psychology, behavior management, ESL, speech and language pathology)
– Needs of COSMO
– [see paper for needs – if needed]
Hirsch, E. (1992). Toward a centrist curriculum: Two kinds of multiculturalism in elementary school. Retrieved, November 17, 2006, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/22/d7/ba.pdf
2 kinds of multiculturalism taught in school curriculums:
1) universalistic/cosmopolitanism (COSMO)
– follows the philosophy of harmony and respect across divergent cultures
2) pluralistic/ethnic loyalism (EL)
– teaches the benefits of nationalism and individual ethnic identity
– article argues against EL and for COSMO
– article describes similarities and differences of EL and COSMO
– article includes definition of COSMO and Greek translation
Kriegman, O. (2003). Dawn of the cosmopolitan: The hope of a global citizens movement. Great Transition Initiative Paper Series. Retrieved, November 21, 2006, from http://www.gtinitiative.org/default.asp?action=43
– benefits that a global citizens movement (GCM) would bring for individuals, communities, and the world at large
– promotes this movement and the practice of cosmopolitanism
– cosmopolitanism is the establishment of one with the human family in one’s family, culture, community, world
– cosmopolitanism requires global citizenship and human agency
– human agency is important factor in GCM
Mulkey, L., Dougan, W., Steelman, L. (2005). Electronic governance: Locals and cosmopolitans “in” and “as” a virtual academic community. International Journal of Public, 28, 703, 721.
– experiment on the difference between two professional role orientations within the faculty of a university via an online discussion board - distinguished by their respective forms of discourse:
– COSMO and LOCALS – both 45.5% frequency, mixed – 9.1%
– COSMO:
– communicated with formal discourse
– less concerned with administration
– more concerned with external and interpersonal tasks (report writing, publishing)
– organization mobility
– autonomy
– strive for advancement
– LOCALS:
– communicated with informal discourse
– conformity to administration
– loyalty to local community
– organizational immobility
– believe in friendly community and employee unity
– less likely to question agency directives
– conform to well established norms
Gunesch, K. (2004). Education for cosmopolitanism: Cosmopolitanism as a personal cultural identity model for and within international education. Journal of Research in International Education, 3 (3), 251-275.
– role of cosmopolitanism as an emerging social force within the establishment of individual identity and as international educational curriculum
– COSMO is defined as personal cultural identity within international education (an institution)
Reimers, F. (2006). Citizenship, identity and education: Examining the public purposes of schools in an age of globalization. Boston: Harvard Graduate School of Education.
– importance of educational institutions, international organizations, groups, and individuals to support the education of tolerance, human rights and global civility in students and future citizens
– “effective citizenship includes the knowledge, ability and disposition to engage peacefully and constructively across cultural differences for purposes of addressing personal and collective needs and of achieving sustainable human-environmental interactions, this requires internalizing Global Values” (¶ 1)
– challenge with this preferred paradigm of education: “many education systems and reforms are insufficiently focused on quality, or focus instead on a very narrow and self-referenced definition of quality”
– focus: “educate people to understand and appreciate cultural differences and to understand and accept human rights in a framework of global values that includes compassion and caring, concern for others, respect and reciprocity”
– problem with traditional paradigm: “graduates that are, in fundamental ways, ill equipped to meet the contemporary demands of citizenship”
– consequences: student disengagement/disconnection, dropout
– how teach tolerance, citizenship, and human rights:
– cross-cultural and conflict resolution
– teach Universal Declaration of Human Rights (US), Charter of Rights and Freedoms (CAN): teach what they are, history of them, how to live them, to appreciate that all people have same rights
– teach history of rights, government, and social institutions: important in education of tolerance
– effective teaching of rights/ethics – requires not enforcing (i.e., thou shalt not . . .), but engaging students in discussions, debates about relevant topics appropriate to their age levels
– not just about fact knowing, but understanding the implications of that knowledge for the capacity and disposition for personal responsibility and action
– What makes preffered paradigm difficult: “dominant competing purposes at present are: educating for economic competitiveness, educating for the formation of national identity and educating for local relevance”
– Why not followed currently?
– lack of political will from national governments
– insufficient development of a knowledge base to support effective citizenship and human rights education
– failure of implementation of educational change from international institutions.
– Lacking strong institutions of global governance committed to this purpose
– approaches to citizenship education are contested and work in progress
– lack of clarity/insight on what citizenship education is:
– some believe it is about instilling patriotism, love for country and internalization of the institutions of the nation State
– others believe it is about recognizing basic rights of all persons, irrespective of their membership in particular States, it is an education for cosmopolitanism, for egalitarian cosmopolitanism
– Conclusion: (grim present)
“on a global scale schools are not adequately preparing children to be tolerant, to understand and accept to live with a commitment to the human rights of all people and to be global citizens, and that it is unlikely that they will do anything very different in the future. We still see intolerance, hatred, and global instability in rich and poor nations alike and the cultural conflicts that some have predicted will extend and escalate.”
Spinner-Halev, J. (2005). Teaching identity and autonomy. Retrieved November 17, 2006, from
http://0-web.ebscohost.com.darius.uleth.ca/ehost/pdf?vid=4&hid=119&sid=495c40af-6d28-4f6b-92ff-8ed654fa3f39%40sessionmgr106
– review of the book, Education and Citizenship in Liberal-Democratic Societies: Teaching for Cosmopolitan Values and Collective Identities by Kevin McDonough and Walter Feinberg (2003)
– book presents essays in support of the two opposing approaches to multiculturalism in educational curriculums:
– cosmopolitanism (COSMO)
– nationalism (NATIONAL)
– paper highlights how schools teach identity and autonomy – influencing both approaches to multiculturalism.
– Liberal perspective – purpose of education is to connect identity and autonomy; teach students to be open to a variety of identities along with their own
– COSMO (diversity)
– Share liberal perspective
– encourages students to contemplate their own identity and perhaps how to change it
– goal – transmission of common culture in schools
– helps citizens understand each another and understand important historical events of one’s and other’s nations
– especially important in democratic societies
– NATIONAL (inspired by traditional religions)
– Oppose liberal perspective
– Favor patriotism
– Impress a particular, partially shared identity on students
– partially - allows for differences among students, differences that ought to be
understood, at least to some extent
– teach a sincere history and political principles of one’s country
How COSMO and NATIONAL is transmitted in schools:
– NATIONAL
– teaching in a particular language(s)
– days of the week that school takes place
– role that parents are (or are not) expected to play
– dress codes
– lunch habits and food choices
– teach society’s political institutions
– teach history and literature of dominant country
– nation-wide testing - enforce uniformity of curriculum - insisting that all students understand same things - encourage common culture
– nationally monitored and certified textbooks, curriculum, and instruction
– advantages:
– centralizes curriculum and instruction
– provides structure and standardization for instruction, monitoring quality, and evaluation
– limitations:
– deprives students of ability to consent freely to nation and dominant culture
– undermines students of ability to examine nation and dominant culture critically
– distorts processes of cultural formation and reformation
– damages loyalties and attachments relevant to social justice, such as social class
– present idealized, nearly perfect and flawless accounts of nation and dominant culture – does not present true account of history and social/political practices
– national minority might lead people to believe that majority nation is oppressive and that any federal intervention into the minority is malevolent, reducing the probability of persons within minorities to exit their groups, even if they have good reason to do so
so, and reduce their ability to seek outside assistance in case of need.
– COSMO
– Teach local variations of national curriculm (i.e., various cultures and sub-cultures)
– Advantage – welcomes variety to individuals’ ideologies
– globalized citizenship – term refers to enlarging students’ horizons through exploring diversity
– teach history and culture of various local communities, including immigrant and refugees communities
– focus: educate on wide scope of different cultures and ethnic groups and allow individuals to choose their own identity and their own perception of their identity – rather than teaching and impressing upon students the dominant cultural identity
– schools should not concentrate on teaching a particular identity
– schools should teach honest history of one’s country, particularly history of politics
– teach true/accurate/unbiased account of all cultures (e.g: teach about Canada’s history of oppressing aboriginal populations and the more recent improvements in indigenous rights
McEvoy, T. (1968). Cosmopolitanism: An opportunity for higher education in a shrinking world. Journal of Higher Education, 39, (2), 84-91.
– The adolescent developmental stage of cosmopolitanism
– a profound inner development and disposition to view people, oneself, events, ideas, and things in a cosmopolitan perspective
– human growth potential (not everyone succeeds this stage)
– similar to Abraham Maslow’s peak developmental stage of self-actualization
McDonough, K. (1997). Cultural recognition, cosmopolitanism andmulticultural education. Retrieved, November 22, 2006, fromhttp://www.ed.uiuc.edu/EPS/PES-yearbook/97_docs/mcdonough.html
Examples of nationally funded education programs aimed at improving sudent’s sense of multiculturalism:
– bilingual and heritage language education programs
o reinforce and encourage flourishing of local languages
o not merely an attempt to help minority language children to assimilate into the larger English speaking public culture
– reconfigure curricula to represent cultural values, experiences and traditions of minority cultural groups
Purpose of this paper:
– challenge the commonly-held notion that multicultural education programs should foster cultural survival for particular groups by developing and criticizing an influential and philosophically sophisticated conception of cultural identity that is used to justify them
o present an alternative notion of cultural identity (COSMO)
o suggests alternative and morally attractive role for multicultural education
Notion of multicultural respect:
– respecting others requires recognition of their cultural identity
– speaking in recognition of others’ unique identities
– speaking authentically with others
– recognizing the unique way in which one individual’s identity is constituted by a specific group cultural identity
– acquired through education focused on teaching individuals unbiased, non-judgemental, genuine accounts of different cultures and ethnic groups, and group shared identities
– not reinforced through impressing the dominant culture on students Danger of imposing dominant culture in education of students from diverse cultures:
– Cross-cultural students may have negative experiences:
· Ambivalence – feeling belonging to infereior culture, but hate it at same time
· Failure – for being member of “failed” group
· Resentment – feeling that need to conform to dominant culture, when might not want to do it
· Cultural misrecognition – feel left out and pressure to conform
– Ignorant teachers may not realize that many students come from variety of different cultural backgrounds and fragments (both inherited and learned) (example – from globalization – many non-American cultures across the world subscribe to American values and beliefs)
Support for COSMO:
– “individuals typically make meaningful choices in a cultural context that is much more heterogeneous, open-ended and fragmented than something we can call "our own" cultural structure” (¶ 13).
– Equal respect involves:
o Teachers to recognize specific cultural identities (as in NATIONAL)
o COSMO requires more specific attention paid towards multicultural nature of each person’s identity and not to group identities
COSMO belief:
– Cannot understand and respect people from divergent cultures simply by learning about shared identities, norms, beliefs held by group (as NATIONAL believes)
o Instead, need to understand each individual
– Must remain skeptical and critical of one's cultural commitments, beliefs, practices
– Must find value and develop sense of pride in one's cultural commitments, beliefs, practices
– individual identity is a hodgepodge [*thesaurus **] of cultural fragments (rather than NATIONAL’s notion of cultural identity)
o individuals have chance to develop a unique and evolving cultural identity through their plethora of different fragments
– NATIONAL’s conception of identity based on group can be disrespectful in a variety of ways
Nussbaum, M. (1994). Patriotism and cosmopolitanism. Retrieved, November 22, 2006, fromhttp://www.soci.niu.edu/~phildept/Kapitan/nussbaum1.html
NATIONAL
– Reinforces universal values of justice and right
– Influeces to people to identify themselves in hierarchal fashion
o I am [“the dominant culture”] first and [“ancestral, inferior culture”] second (e.g: I am Canadian first and Indian second.)
– Make general use/reference of COSMO
o E.g: education should teach shared national values but also maintain each individual’s basic human rights
COSMO
– Go further than teaching about histories, traditions, customs, beliefs held from people of divergent backgrounds – teach about human condition – things shared by all people/human beings
– Motivate students to continually learn about themselves, be self-critical and skeptical – examine self from perspectives of others – thus, limiting existence of ignorance
– Teach value of international cooperation – working with people from around the world
– Clear, respectful, and honest interpersonal communication
o Learning other languages (bilingualism)
o Respect other’s traditions, commitments, and ways of living
o Respect human dignity (general) and opportunity for every person to pursue happiness
o Believe that all human beings are created equal and have rights to equal and fair treatment from others
o Self-awareness in one’s values, beliefs, biases, judgments, and the confidence in defending them when required – also, awareness of one’s personal boundaries
o Love for humanity
o Relinquish needs to defend one’s position and needs to be right
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to introduce the notion of cosmopolitanism and its practice within the institution of education. Suggestions will also be offered on how schools and teachers can foster cosmopolitan ideologies in students.
¶ This symbol means “paragraph number” when making direct quotations from a website
COSMO - my appreviation for cosmopolitanism
NATIONAL - my appreviation for nationalism, the paradigm that runs counter to that of COSMO
Luke, A. (2004). Teaching after the market: From commodity to cosmopolitanism. Teachers College Record, 106 (7), 1422-1443.
– Shift in educational paradigm from commodification (COMM) to cosmopolitanism (COSMO)
– Limitations of COMM:
– Reasserts definitions of teaching as craft and profession – both limiting in reactions/responses to modern changes in economic conditions, policies, persons having and expressing divergent ethnicity and cultures, formulations of youth, multiple and divergent identities, and forms of work
– Targets teachers and teaching profession
– Attempts to deal with modern diversities through further standardizing and strengthening existing programs
– Traditional/neoclassical – teachers and teaching embrace commodity fetishism
– Leads to deskilling and deprofessionalization of generation upon generation of teachers
– Teaching becomes more about following tradition/structure/mandate/standard rather than focusing on individual student and classroom needs – results in students being 3rd party rather than recipents of education
– Strengths of COSMO
– Attempts to deal with modern diversities through programs, funding, and lobbying (e.g: school psychology, behavior management, ESL, speech and language pathology)
– Needs of COSMO
– [see paper for needs – if needed]
Hirsch, E. (1992). Toward a centrist curriculum: Two kinds of multiculturalism in elementary school. Retrieved, November 17, 2006, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/22/d7/ba.pdf
2 kinds of multiculturalism taught in school curriculums:
1) universalistic/cosmopolitanism (COSMO)
– follows the philosophy of harmony and respect across divergent cultures
2) pluralistic/ethnic loyalism (EL)
– teaches the benefits of nationalism and individual ethnic identity
– article argues against EL and for COSMO
– article describes similarities and differences of EL and COSMO
– article includes definition of COSMO and Greek translation
Kriegman, O. (2003). Dawn of the cosmopolitan: The hope of a global citizens movement. Great Transition Initiative Paper Series. Retrieved, November 21, 2006, from http://www.gtinitiative.org/default.asp?action=43
– benefits that a global citizens movement (GCM) would bring for individuals, communities, and the world at large
– promotes this movement and the practice of cosmopolitanism
– cosmopolitanism is the establishment of one with the human family in one’s family, culture, community, world
– cosmopolitanism requires global citizenship and human agency
– human agency is important factor in GCM
Mulkey, L., Dougan, W., Steelman, L. (2005). Electronic governance: Locals and cosmopolitans “in” and “as” a virtual academic community. International Journal of Public, 28, 703, 721.
– experiment on the difference between two professional role orientations within the faculty of a university via an online discussion board - distinguished by their respective forms of discourse:
– COSMO and LOCALS – both 45.5% frequency, mixed – 9.1%
– COSMO:
– communicated with formal discourse
– less concerned with administration
– more concerned with external and interpersonal tasks (report writing, publishing)
– organization mobility
– autonomy
– strive for advancement
– LOCALS:
– communicated with informal discourse
– conformity to administration
– loyalty to local community
– organizational immobility
– believe in friendly community and employee unity
– less likely to question agency directives
– conform to well established norms
Gunesch, K. (2004). Education for cosmopolitanism: Cosmopolitanism as a personal cultural identity model for and within international education. Journal of Research in International Education, 3 (3), 251-275.
– role of cosmopolitanism as an emerging social force within the establishment of individual identity and as international educational curriculum
– COSMO is defined as personal cultural identity within international education (an institution)
Reimers, F. (2006). Citizenship, identity and education: Examining the public purposes of schools in an age of globalization. Boston: Harvard Graduate School of Education.
– importance of educational institutions, international organizations, groups, and individuals to support the education of tolerance, human rights and global civility in students and future citizens
– “effective citizenship includes the knowledge, ability and disposition to engage peacefully and constructively across cultural differences for purposes of addressing personal and collective needs and of achieving sustainable human-environmental interactions, this requires internalizing Global Values” (¶ 1)
– challenge with this preferred paradigm of education: “many education systems and reforms are insufficiently focused on quality, or focus instead on a very narrow and self-referenced definition of quality”
– focus: “educate people to understand and appreciate cultural differences and to understand and accept human rights in a framework of global values that includes compassion and caring, concern for others, respect and reciprocity”
– problem with traditional paradigm: “graduates that are, in fundamental ways, ill equipped to meet the contemporary demands of citizenship”
– consequences: student disengagement/disconnection, dropout
– how teach tolerance, citizenship, and human rights:
– cross-cultural and conflict resolution
– teach Universal Declaration of Human Rights (US), Charter of Rights and Freedoms (CAN): teach what they are, history of them, how to live them, to appreciate that all people have same rights
– teach history of rights, government, and social institutions: important in education of tolerance
– effective teaching of rights/ethics – requires not enforcing (i.e., thou shalt not . . .), but engaging students in discussions, debates about relevant topics appropriate to their age levels
– not just about fact knowing, but understanding the implications of that knowledge for the capacity and disposition for personal responsibility and action
– What makes preffered paradigm difficult: “dominant competing purposes at present are: educating for economic competitiveness, educating for the formation of national identity and educating for local relevance”
– Why not followed currently?
– lack of political will from national governments
– insufficient development of a knowledge base to support effective citizenship and human rights education
– failure of implementation of educational change from international institutions.
– Lacking strong institutions of global governance committed to this purpose
– approaches to citizenship education are contested and work in progress
– lack of clarity/insight on what citizenship education is:
– some believe it is about instilling patriotism, love for country and internalization of the institutions of the nation State
– others believe it is about recognizing basic rights of all persons, irrespective of their membership in particular States, it is an education for cosmopolitanism, for egalitarian cosmopolitanism
– Conclusion: (grim present)
“on a global scale schools are not adequately preparing children to be tolerant, to understand and accept to live with a commitment to the human rights of all people and to be global citizens, and that it is unlikely that they will do anything very different in the future. We still see intolerance, hatred, and global instability in rich and poor nations alike and the cultural conflicts that some have predicted will extend and escalate.”
Spinner-Halev, J. (2005). Teaching identity and autonomy. Retrieved November 17, 2006, from
http://0-web.ebscohost.com.darius.uleth.ca/ehost/pdf?vid=4&hid=119&sid=495c40af-6d28-4f6b-92ff-8ed654fa3f39%40sessionmgr106
– review of the book, Education and Citizenship in Liberal-Democratic Societies: Teaching for Cosmopolitan Values and Collective Identities by Kevin McDonough and Walter Feinberg (2003)
– book presents essays in support of the two opposing approaches to multiculturalism in educational curriculums:
– cosmopolitanism (COSMO)
– nationalism (NATIONAL)
– paper highlights how schools teach identity and autonomy – influencing both approaches to multiculturalism.
– Liberal perspective – purpose of education is to connect identity and autonomy; teach students to be open to a variety of identities along with their own
– COSMO (diversity)
– Share liberal perspective
– encourages students to contemplate their own identity and perhaps how to change it
– goal – transmission of common culture in schools
– helps citizens understand each another and understand important historical events of one’s and other’s nations
– especially important in democratic societies
– NATIONAL (inspired by traditional religions)
– Oppose liberal perspective
– Favor patriotism
– Impress a particular, partially shared identity on students
– partially - allows for differences among students, differences that ought to be
understood, at least to some extent
– teach a sincere history and political principles of one’s country
How COSMO and NATIONAL is transmitted in schools:
– NATIONAL
– teaching in a particular language(s)
– days of the week that school takes place
– role that parents are (or are not) expected to play
– dress codes
– lunch habits and food choices
– teach society’s political institutions
– teach history and literature of dominant country
– nation-wide testing - enforce uniformity of curriculum - insisting that all students understand same things - encourage common culture
– nationally monitored and certified textbooks, curriculum, and instruction
– advantages:
– centralizes curriculum and instruction
– provides structure and standardization for instruction, monitoring quality, and evaluation
– limitations:
– deprives students of ability to consent freely to nation and dominant culture
– undermines students of ability to examine nation and dominant culture critically
– distorts processes of cultural formation and reformation
– damages loyalties and attachments relevant to social justice, such as social class
– present idealized, nearly perfect and flawless accounts of nation and dominant culture – does not present true account of history and social/political practices
– national minority might lead people to believe that majority nation is oppressive and that any federal intervention into the minority is malevolent, reducing the probability of persons within minorities to exit their groups, even if they have good reason to do so
so, and reduce their ability to seek outside assistance in case of need.
– COSMO
– Teach local variations of national curriculm (i.e., various cultures and sub-cultures)
– Advantage – welcomes variety to individuals’ ideologies
– globalized citizenship – term refers to enlarging students’ horizons through exploring diversity
– teach history and culture of various local communities, including immigrant and refugees communities
– focus: educate on wide scope of different cultures and ethnic groups and allow individuals to choose their own identity and their own perception of their identity – rather than teaching and impressing upon students the dominant cultural identity
– schools should not concentrate on teaching a particular identity
– schools should teach honest history of one’s country, particularly history of politics
– teach true/accurate/unbiased account of all cultures (e.g: teach about Canada’s history of oppressing aboriginal populations and the more recent improvements in indigenous rights
McEvoy, T. (1968). Cosmopolitanism: An opportunity for higher education in a shrinking world. Journal of Higher Education, 39, (2), 84-91.
– The adolescent developmental stage of cosmopolitanism
– a profound inner development and disposition to view people, oneself, events, ideas, and things in a cosmopolitan perspective
– human growth potential (not everyone succeeds this stage)
– similar to Abraham Maslow’s peak developmental stage of self-actualization
McDonough, K. (1997). Cultural recognition, cosmopolitanism andmulticultural education. Retrieved, November 22, 2006, fromhttp://www.ed.uiuc.edu/EPS/PES-yearbook/97_docs/mcdonough.html
Examples of nationally funded education programs aimed at improving sudent’s sense of multiculturalism:
– bilingual and heritage language education programs
o reinforce and encourage flourishing of local languages
o not merely an attempt to help minority language children to assimilate into the larger English speaking public culture
– reconfigure curricula to represent cultural values, experiences and traditions of minority cultural groups
Purpose of this paper:
– challenge the commonly-held notion that multicultural education programs should foster cultural survival for particular groups by developing and criticizing an influential and philosophically sophisticated conception of cultural identity that is used to justify them
o present an alternative notion of cultural identity (COSMO)
o suggests alternative and morally attractive role for multicultural education
Notion of multicultural respect:
– respecting others requires recognition of their cultural identity
– speaking in recognition of others’ unique identities
– speaking authentically with others
– recognizing the unique way in which one individual’s identity is constituted by a specific group cultural identity
– acquired through education focused on teaching individuals unbiased, non-judgemental, genuine accounts of different cultures and ethnic groups, and group shared identities
– not reinforced through impressing the dominant culture on students Danger of imposing dominant culture in education of students from diverse cultures:
– Cross-cultural students may have negative experiences:
· Ambivalence – feeling belonging to infereior culture, but hate it at same time
· Failure – for being member of “failed” group
· Resentment – feeling that need to conform to dominant culture, when might not want to do it
· Cultural misrecognition – feel left out and pressure to conform
– Ignorant teachers may not realize that many students come from variety of different cultural backgrounds and fragments (both inherited and learned) (example – from globalization – many non-American cultures across the world subscribe to American values and beliefs)
Support for COSMO:
– “individuals typically make meaningful choices in a cultural context that is much more heterogeneous, open-ended and fragmented than something we can call "our own" cultural structure” (¶ 13).
– Equal respect involves:
o Teachers to recognize specific cultural identities (as in NATIONAL)
o COSMO requires more specific attention paid towards multicultural nature of each person’s identity and not to group identities
COSMO belief:
– Cannot understand and respect people from divergent cultures simply by learning about shared identities, norms, beliefs held by group (as NATIONAL believes)
o Instead, need to understand each individual
– Must remain skeptical and critical of one's cultural commitments, beliefs, practices
– Must find value and develop sense of pride in one's cultural commitments, beliefs, practices
– individual identity is a hodgepodge [*thesaurus **] of cultural fragments (rather than NATIONAL’s notion of cultural identity)
o individuals have chance to develop a unique and evolving cultural identity through their plethora of different fragments
– NATIONAL’s conception of identity based on group can be disrespectful in a variety of ways
Nussbaum, M. (1994). Patriotism and cosmopolitanism. Retrieved, November 22, 2006, fromhttp://www.soci.niu.edu/~phildept/Kapitan/nussbaum1.html
NATIONAL
– Reinforces universal values of justice and right
– Influeces to people to identify themselves in hierarchal fashion
o I am [“the dominant culture”] first and [“ancestral, inferior culture”] second (e.g: I am Canadian first and Indian second.)
– Make general use/reference of COSMO
o E.g: education should teach shared national values but also maintain each individual’s basic human rights
COSMO
– Go further than teaching about histories, traditions, customs, beliefs held from people of divergent backgrounds – teach about human condition – things shared by all people/human beings
– Motivate students to continually learn about themselves, be self-critical and skeptical – examine self from perspectives of others – thus, limiting existence of ignorance
– Teach value of international cooperation – working with people from around the world
– Clear, respectful, and honest interpersonal communication
o Learning other languages (bilingualism)
o Respect other’s traditions, commitments, and ways of living
o Respect human dignity (general) and opportunity for every person to pursue happiness
o Believe that all human beings are created equal and have rights to equal and fair treatment from others
o Self-awareness in one’s values, beliefs, biases, judgments, and the confidence in defending them when required – also, awareness of one’s personal boundaries
o Love for humanity
o Relinquish needs to defend one’s position and needs to be right
posted by Brad | 11:44 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home