Advertisement

The Future of Intercultural Studies In Multicultural Societies

  • Jagdish S. Gundara
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE, volume 22)

Most of the diverse or multicultural societies have not succeeded in eliminating discrimination and inequalities within their national boundaries. Many of the educational initiatives have floundered and failed to make any significant difference to the educational outcomes of the poorer groups from diverse groups in society. The capacity of many national systems to resolve internal socio-economic differences and reduce disparities has been increasingly diminished as the powers of national governments to provide constitutional protection to their citizens has decreased. In external terms economic globalisation has in many cases eroded the powers of national public institutions and there are diminishing levels of trust in communities and increasing levels of ethnic nationalism in white Anglo-Saxon Protestant America or in an India marked by Hindu religious fundamentalism. Intercultural initiatives and citizenship and civic education in most countries draw on the received wisdom of the past. The chapter recognises these current dilemmas but will argue that it is not necessary to go forward into the future on the basis of the received wisdom of the past. For instance, in the United States it is not possible to go forward using the purely ‘formal’ institutional conception of democracy, as an expression of filial piety to America's Founding Fathers based on individualistically conceived liberty. The French Republic also needs to ensure that the public culture and institutions are inclusive of the minority and ‘other’ cultures. This is necessary to ensure that the corrosive aspects of racism and xenophobia do not undermine trust in democratic institutions and processes remain vibrant and do not stultify. This is because a purely formal democracy is culturally unsustainable, ideologically hollow and can be operationally subverted. To make democratic institutions more viable in the United States and other countries around the world a deeper conception of democracy that expresses the experience-based deeper conception of democracy is needed. Such culturally based democratic values would be inclusive of best values drawn from diverse groups at the local level and strengthen mutualities of community life which give validity to de Tocqueville's analytic concept ‘habits of the heart’ (Green, 1999, p. vi).

This chapter will examine the ways in which the national might be able to act differently within the regional, continental and international legal and institutional frameworks. It will refer to policies, especially as they pertain to educational rights and entitlements of citizens. Institutions like the European Commission, the Council of Europe and UNESCO have a major stake in these fast-changing times. The continental and regional organisations like the Organisation of African Unity and Meracuer may have similar obligations within those regions. Within the Commonwealth, the Heads of Government meeting in Kampala have addressed the issue of the transformation of societies to achieve greater political, economic and human development which can use the stronger Commonwealth networks in education to contribute to these agendas (Commonwealth Secretariat, 2007).

Keywords

Teacher Education Democratic Institution Educational Inequality Educational Initiative Multicultural Society 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amin, S. (1997). Capitalism in the age of globalisation. London: Zed.Google Scholar
  2. Batelaan P., & Coomans F. (1999). The international basis for intercultural education including anti-racist and human rights education, IAIE, IBE and Council of Europe. Geneva: IBE.Google Scholar
  3. Batelaan, P., & Gundara, J. (1992). La diversité culturelle et la promotion des valeurs à travers ĺéducation. Questions de Formation, IV(8), 23–53.Google Scholar
  4. Bauman, Z. (2007). Liquid times: Living in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bourne, R., & Gundara, J. (1999). Human rights education: Learning human rights in secondary schools; curricular framework. London: Commonwealth Secretariat.Google Scholar
  6. Cantle, T. (chair) (December 2000). Community cohesion: A report of the independent review team. London: Home Office; Ritchie, D. December 2001. The Oldham One Future, Oldham Independent Review Panel Report; Ouseley, H. July, 2001. Community pride not prejudice – Making diversity work in Bradford.Google Scholar
  7. Carnegie Forum on Education (1986). A nation prepared: Teachers for the 21st century. New York: Carnegie Corporation.Google Scholar
  8. Centre for Cross Border Studies (November 2007). A note from the next door neighbours. 15. Belfast: Centre for Cross Border Studies.Google Scholar
  9. Commission for Racial Equality (2002). Images of race in 21st century Scotland. Edinburgh: CRE 2002.Google Scholar
  10. Commonwealth Secretariat, Report of the Commonwealth Commission on Respect and Understanding (2007). Civil paths to peace. London: Commonwealth Secretariat.Google Scholar
  11. Department for International Development (2007). Afghanistan: Development in action. London: DFID.Google Scholar
  12. Evens Foundation (13–14 November 2007). A vision of “Europe of the Future”.Google Scholar
  13. Fukuyama, F. (7–9–2002) ‘The transatlantic rift’, The Guardian, London.Google Scholar
  14. Gray, J. (2002). Straw dogs: Thoughts and human and other animals (p.12). London: Granta Books.Google Scholar
  15. Green, J. M. (1999). Deep democracy: Community, diversity and transformation. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlewood.Google Scholar
  16. Gundara, J. (1992). Permettre à des citoyens d'origines différentes de participer à la société démocratique et pluraliste. Questions de Formation, IV(8), 55–75.Google Scholar
  17. Gundara, J. (1993). Multiculturalism and the British nation-state. In J. Horton(Ed.), Liberalism, multicultur-alism and toleration. Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  18. Gundara, J. & Hewitt, R. (1999). Life files: Racism. London: Evans Brothers.Google Scholar
  19. Gundara, J. (2000a). Religion, human rights and intercultural education. In Intercultural education. Vol. 11, no. 2. Basingstoke: Taylor & FrancisGoogle Scholar
  20. Gundara, J. (2000b). Interculturalism, education and inclusion. London: Paul Chapman.Google Scholar
  21. Gundara, J. (2002). Social diversity, intercultural and citizenship education in European Union. Le Metais (Ed.). Enschede: CIDREE/SLO.Google Scholar
  22. Gundara, J., & Jones, C. (1990) Education in urban communities: A London case study. In C. Poster & A. Kruger (Eds.), Community education in the Western world.Google Scholar
  23. Gundara, J. (March 1999). Multiculturalism in Asian societies: Issues for intercultural education. Washington D.C.: Sasakawa Peace Foundation.Google Scholar
  24. Gundara, J. (2005). The global and the national: Inclusive knowledge and linguistic diversity. In D. Coulby & E. Zambeta (Eds.), World Yearbook of Education, Globalization and nationalism in education. Abingdon: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  25. Hans, N. (1949). Comparative Education. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Inayatullah (1998). Imagining an alternative politics of knowledge: Subverting the hegemony of international relations theory in Pakistan. Contemporary South Asia, 7(1), pp. 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Interview with Hall, S. (8–3–2006). London: New Humanist.Google Scholar
  28. Nason, S., & Redding, D. (2002). Losing reality. London: 3WE.Google Scholar
  29. Paris: Musée de l'Homme. www.evensfoundation.be.ef10.org
  30. Pike, M. (2003). CAN DO citizens: Re-building marginalised communities.Google Scholar
  31. Power, C. N. 30–3–2000. Learning to live together: Interculturalism in the 21st century (Mimeo). London: ICIS, ULIE.Google Scholar
  32. Rawls, J. (1997). Theory of justice. Cambridge: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
  33. Report of the World Commission on Culture and Development (1995). Our creative diversity (President Javier Perez de Cuellar). Paris: WCCD.Google Scholar
  34. Sassen, S. (2006). Territory, authority, rights. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom(p. 32). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. The Economist(3 November 2007). A special report on religion and public life (pp. 3–20). London.Google Scholar
  37. The Guardian(27 November 2007). Education (p. 2) London.Google Scholar
  38. The Guardian(10 March —2006) London.Google Scholar
  39. The Scarman Trust Report. London: SES.Google Scholar
  40. Tomasevski, K. (2003). Education denied: Costs and remedies. London: Zed.Google Scholar
  41. UNESCO (2003). Education position paper: Education in a multilingual world. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  42. UNESCO. (2002). Preface Sir John Daniel. Education and cultural diversity. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  43. UNESCO (2006). UNESCO guidelines on intercultural education. Paris: UNESCO, Section of Education for Peace and Human Rights, Education Sector.Google Scholar
  44. UNESCO (2003). Education global monitoring report. Gender and education for all: The leap to equality. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  45. Wilson, D. (2002). Minority rights in education: Lessons for the European Union from Estonia, Latvia, Romania and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jagdish S. Gundara

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations