Skip to main content
Log in

General education. Homogenised education for the globalized world?

Allgemeinbildung. Homogenisierte Erziehung für die globalisierte Welt?

  • Schwerpunkt
  • Published:
Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Societies need to make sure that the next generation is ready and capable to take over in due time, be it in working life, culture, civil society, politics or families. Therefore, society at large and specifically state governments need to assist the efforts of families and local communities. Such provisions have been the basic premise for general educational theories for centuries, when education was often named Democratic and Comprehensive Bildung. At present, this premise needs re-conceptualization, because societies are moving dramatically towards opening up for interactions and relations with the widest possible area: the globe. Many societal challenges have effects across nations, calling for trans-national coordination, management and solutions,—for homogenized and standard based policy making. At the same time, inspiration from multiple sources produce conflicting visions and rival discourses about what the purposes of and the means for education should be.

In this paper we analyze and discuss two contemporary, fundamentally dissimilar discourses on education and their theoretical and societal roots. Our main method is discourse analysis. We argue for inclusion of a global world-view in national education. We shall be critical, however, to the technocratic turn and the homogenization of education per se and argue for a Democratic Bildung perspective in education for world citizenship.

Zusammenfassung

Gesellschaften haben dafür Sorge zu tragen, dass die nächste Generation darauf vorbereitet ist und sich auch dazu bereitfindet, zu angemessener Zeit Verantwortung zu übernehmen – sei es nun im Berufsleben oder in der Kultur, in Zivilgesellschaft, Politik oder Familie. Deshalb müssen die Gesellschaften insgesamt und die Regierungen im Besonderen das Bestreben von Familien und lokalen Gemeinschaften unterstützen, ihren Kindern die besten Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten zu verschaffen. Solche Fürsorgekonzepte sind für Jahrhunderte die elementare Voraussetzung für die erziehungswissenschaftliche Theoriebildung gewesen, immer dann, wenn Erziehung als demokratische oder allgemeine Bildung verstanden wurde. In der Gegenwart muss diese Voraussetzung aber neu konzeptualisiert werden, weil sich Gesellschaften dramatisch verändern, indem sie sich für gemeinschaftliche Handlungen und Beziehungen öffnen, die sich auf das denkbar größte Gebiet beziehen, auf den Globus. Viele gesellschaftliche Herausforderungen haben Effekte, die über (einzelne) Nationen hinweg wirken und deshalb transnationale Koordination, Management und Problemlösung verlangen – für eine homogenisierte und auf gemeinsamen Standards beruhende Politik. Gleichzeitig erzeugt die Inspiration aus unterschiedlichen Quellen konflikthafte Visionen und rivalisierende Diskurse über die Zielsetzung von Erziehung sowie die Wahl der dafür geeigneten Mittel.

In diesem Beitrag analysieren und diskutieren wir zwei fundamental verschiedene Diskurse über Erziehung und deren theoretische und gesellschaftliche Wurzeln. Unsere Hauptmethode ist die Diskursanalyse. Wir argumentieren dafür, eine globale Welt-Perspektive in die nationale oder regionale/lokale Erziehung einzubringen. Wir nehmen aber eine kritische Position bezüglich der technokratischen Umorientierung und der Homogenisierung per se ein und argumentieren für eine demokratische Bildungsperspektive im Rahmen einer Erziehung zum Weltbürger.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The Danish ‘Folkeskole’ covers primary and lower-secondary education, for students aged 6–16. A brief description of the Danish educational system is found below.

References

  • Ball, S. J. (2004). Education for sale! The commodification of everything? (king’s annual education lecture). London: University of London, Institute of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, S. J. (2012). Global education INC. New policy networks and the neo-liberal imaginary. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, S., & Junemann, C. (2015). Pearson and PALF: the mutating giant. Brussels: Education International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: towards an Understandung of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culturea and Society, 28(3), 801–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity. London: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beane, J. A., & Apple, M. W. (1999). The case for democratic schools. In M. W. Apple & J. A. Beane (Eds.), Democratic schools, lessons from chalk face. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: theory, research and critique. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biesta, G. (2003). Demokrati - ett problem för utbildning eller ett uttbildningsproblem? [Democracy—a problem for education or an educational problem?]. Utbildning & Democracy, 12(1), 59–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biesta, G. J. J. (2009). Good education in an age of measurement. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blossing, U., Imsen, G., & Moos, L. (Eds.) (2013). The nordic education model: ‘a school for all’ encounters neo-liberal policy. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Consolidation Act No. 730 of June 21, 2000, Ministry of Education (Act on Folkeskole 1993).

  • Dean, M. (1999). Governmentality: power and rule in modern society. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desrosières, A. (2000). L’histoire de la statistique comme genre: style d’écriture et usasge sociaux. Genéses, 39, 121–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. New York: The free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1937). Democracy and educational administration. In J. Ratner (Ed.), Education today. New York: G.P. Putman’s sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Englund, T. (2006). Deliberative communication: a pragmatis proposal. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(5), 503–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament (2017). Fact sheet on the European Union. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/displayFtu.html?ftuId=FTU_3.1.1.html. Accessed: 10 Jan. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fedotova, O. (2014). Modern Education in the Framework of Affirmative and Non-affirmative Approaches. Procedia – Sociual and Behavioural Science, 2015(180), 55–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furman, G. C., & Starrat, R. J. (2002). Leadership for democratic community. In S. J. Murphy (Ed.), The educational leadership challenge (pp. 105–133). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunter, H. M., & Mills, C. (2017). Consultants and consultancy: the case of education. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1996a). Between facts and norms: contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1996b). Euroskepticism, market Europe or a Europe of (world) citixens? In C. Cronin & M. Pensky (Eds.), Time of transitions. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hellesnes, J. (1976). Socialisering og teknokrati [Socialization and Technocraty]. Copenhagen: Gyldendal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, M., Lindgard, B., Rizvi, F., & Raylor, S. (2001). The OECD, Globalisation and Education Policy. Amsterdam: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honneth, A. (1992). Integrity and disrespect: principles of a conception of morality based on the theory of recognition. Political Theory, 20(2), 187–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons. Public Administration, 69, 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopman, S. T. (2008). No child, no school, no state left behind: schooling in the age of accountability. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40(4), 417–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, E. (2015). EU in crisis? Blame the single market, not Schengen and the euro. Politics and strategy. The survival editors’ Blog. https://www.iiss.org/en/politics%20and%20strategy/blogsections/2015-932e/december-1bda/europe-in-crisis-blame-the-single-market-not-schengen-and-the-euro-eec7. Accessed: 10 Jan. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kavanagh, T. (2011). The problem with the EU: a Leftist critique. https://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/eu-left/. Accessed: 10 Jan. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, P. (2011). Citizen of the world. The cosmopolitan ideal for the twenty-first century. New York: Humanity Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klafki, W. (2001). Dannelsesteori og didaktik - nye studier [Neue Studien zur Bildungstheorie und Didaktik, 1996][New Studies on Bildungs-theory and Didactics]. Århus: Klim.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klafki, W. (2007). Neue Studien zur Bildungstheorie und Didaktik. [New Studies on Bildungs-theory and Didactics] (6th edition). Weinheim: Beltz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labaree, D. (2014). Let’s measure what no one teaches: PISA, NCLB, and the shrinking aims of education. Teachers college record. http://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentId=17533. Accessed: 10 Jan. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lange, B., & Alexiadou, N. (2007). New forms of European governance in the education sector? A preliminary analysis of the open method of coordination. European Educational Research Journal, 6(4), 321–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawn, M., & Grek, S. (2012). Europeanizing education—governing a new policy space. Oxford: Symposium Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lawn, M., & Lingard, B. (2002). Constructing a European policy space in educational governance: the role of transnational policy actors. European Educational Research Journal, 1(2), 290–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzer, A. (1975). Materialistisk socialisationsteori [Material theory of socialization]. København: Rhodos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louis, K. S. (2003). Democratic schools, democratic communities. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 2(2), 93–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, H.-P., & Schumann, H. (1997). Globaliseringsfælden. Angrebet på demokrati og velstand [Die Globalisieringsfalle. Der Angriff auf Demokraite und Wohlstand]. Copenhagen: Borgen.

  • Meadows, D., Meadows, D., Randers, J., & Behens, W. (1972) The limits to growth. New York, Universe books

    Google Scholar 

  • Moos, L. (2003). Educational leadership: leading for/as ‘Dannelse’? International Journal of Leadership in Education, 6(1), 19–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moos, L. (2006). What Kinds of Democracy in Education are Facilitated by Supra- and Transnational Agencies? European Educational Research Journal, 5(3&4), 160–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moos, L. (2009). Hard and soft governance: the journey from transnational agencies to school leadership. European Educational Research Journal,, 8(3), 397–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moos, L. (2011a). Governance of educational systems—conteztualizing and conceptualising influence. In F. Dietrich, M. Heinrich, & N. Thieme (Eds.), Neue Steuerung - alte Ungleichheiten? (pp. 23–34). Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moos, L. (2011b). Sustaining leadership through self-renewing communication. In L. Moos, O. Johansson, & C. Day (Eds.), How school principals sustain success over time (pp. 127–150). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Moos, L. (2013a). Pædagogisk ledelse i en læringsmålstyret skole? [Pedagogical leadership in a Outcomes-governed School?]. København: Hans Reitzlers Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moos, L. (2013b). School leadership in a contradictory world. Revista de Investigacion Educativa, 31(1), 15–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moos, L. (2014). Leadership for creativity. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 18(2), 178–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moos, L. (2017). Neo-liberal governance leads education and educational leadership astray. In M. Uljens & R. Ylimaki (Eds.), Beyond leadership, curriculum and didaktik (vol. Educational governance research). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moos, L., Nihlfors, E., & Paulsen, J. M. (2015). Directions for our investigation of the chain of governancd and the agents. In L. Moos, E. Nihlfors, & J. M. Paulsen (Eds.), Nordic superintendents: agent in a broken chain (Vol. 2). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, L. (1970). Gesammelte Schriften. Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Normand, R. (2016). The changing epistemic governance of European education. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nóvoa, A. (2013). Numbers do not replace thinking. European Educational Research Journal, 12(1), 139–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • v. Oettingen, A. (2001). Det pædagogiske paradoks [The Educational Paradoxe]. Aarhus: Klim.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (1995) = Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1995). Governance in Transition. Public management Reforms in OECD Countries. https://books.google.dk/books/about/Governance_in_Transition.html?id=TACcD2r0wDYC&redir_esc=y. Accessed: 10. Jan. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (1998) = Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1998). Education Catalogue. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2011) = Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2011). Society at a glance 2011: OECD social indicators. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/soc_glance-2011-en/08/01/index.html;jsessionid=2a7fa4dh4ws3k.x-oecd-live-01?itemId=/content/chapter/soc_glance-2011-26-en&_cs. Accessed: 10 Jan. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2017a) = Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2017a). Migration. http://www.oecd.org/migration/. Accessed: 10. Jan. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2017b) = Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2017b). PISA, Programme for International Student Assessment. http://www.oecd.org/pisa/test/. Accessed: 10. Jan. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitman, A. (2008). Capacity-Building in South-East Asian Universities: International Challenges. Paper presented at the Korean Education Research Association, Seoul.

  • Pedersen, O. K. (2011). Konkurrencestaten. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, E. (2014). The Case against human Rights. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/dec/04/-sp-case-against-human-rights. Accessed: 12. Nov. 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuller, T. (2006). Reviewing OECD’s educational research reviews. European Educational Research Journal, 5(1), 57–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tillmann, K.-J., & Baumert, J. (Eds.) (2016). Empirische Bildungsforschung. Der kritische Blick and die Antwort of die Kritiker (Zeitschrift für Etziehungswissenschaft: Sonderheft 31). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uljens, M., & Ylimaki, R. (2015). Towards a discursive and non-affirmative framework for curriculum studies, Didaktik and educational leadership. NordSTEP, 1, 30–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verger, A., Lubienski, C., & Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2016). The emergende and structuring of the global education industry. In A. Verger, C. Lubienski & G. Steiner-Khamsi (Eds.), World year book of education. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkoszewski, H., & Sundby, E. (2014). Steering from the centre: new modes of governance in multi-level education systems.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Woods, P. A. (2005). Democratic leadership in education. London: Paul Chapman.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our common future—Brundtland report.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Trade Organization (2017). Education services. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/education_e/education_e.htm. Accessed: 10. Jan. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lejf Moos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moos, L., Wubbels, T. General education. Homogenised education for the globalized world?. Z Erziehungswiss 21, 241–258 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-018-0809-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-018-0809-z

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Navigation