Advertisement

Ideology of Success and the Dilemma of Education Today

  • Luca Tateo
Chapter
Part of the Theory and History in the Human and Social Sciences book series (THHSS)

Abstract

Contemporary formal educational systems are obsessed with performance. Social devices and practices are built in order to measure students’ and teachers’ achievements as well as the performance of the system itself, as a result of the commoditization of education: putting money into school and requiring account for investments. This process of naturalization of economic relations is hiding the value-laden nature of all formal educational systems. In any culture, development is guided by systems of values, as Ichheiser adamantly showed 70 years ago. He had three main concerns: how human beings understand (or misunderstand) each other’s differences; how human beings interpret (or misinterpret) the relationship between images of the world and expectations about it in the context of culture and ideology; and, finally, how human beings are aware (or ignore) the “inner man” which lies beyond the social roles. These issues are crucial in the tendency of education to evaluate individuals according to success or failure. I will start from Ichheiser analysis of the relationship between ideology and education to draw some ideas about further potential developments in the contemporary cultural psychology of education.

Keywords

Value-laden education Epistemology of cultural psychology Imagination Cultural psychology of education 

References

  1. Bayer, B. M., & Strickland, L. H. (1990). Gustav Ichheiser on sociopsychological misperception in international relations. Political Psychology, 11, 699–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bruner, J. S. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Coe, C. (2005). Dilemmas of culture in African schools: Youth, nationalism, and the transformation of knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  4. Iannaccone, A., Marsico, G., & Tateo, L. (2012). Educational self. A fruitful idea? In M. Ligorio & M. César (Eds.), The interplays between dialogical learning and dialogical self (pp. 219–252). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  5. Ichheiser, G. (1941). Some social-psychological obstacles to an understanding between the nations. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 36, 428–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ichheiser, G. (1943a). Ideology of success and the dilemma of education. Ethics, 53, 137–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ichheiser, G. (1943b). Why psychologists tend to overlook certain “obvious” facts. Philosophy of Science, 10, 204–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lampert, K. (2012). Meritocratic education and social worthlessness. London: Palgrave-Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Cambridge, MA: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Tateo, L. (2015a). Continuity and discontinuity of the educational context: Early leavers’ in-between life stories. In G. Marsico, V. Dazzani, M. Ristum, & A. C. de Souza Bastos (Eds.), Educational contexts and borders through a cultural lens. Looking inside, viewing outside (pp. 29–52). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Tateo, L. (2015b). Let’s frankly play: Ambivalence, dilemmas and imagination. In G. Marsico (Ed.), Jerome S. Bruner beyond 100: Cultivating possibilities (pp. 55–64). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Tateo, L. (2016). Towards a co-genetic cultural psychology. Culture & Psychology, 22(3), 433–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Vygotsky, L. S. (1994). The problem of the environment. In R. van der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 338–354). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Communication and Psychology, Research Centre for Cultural PsychologyAalborg UniversityAalborgDenmark

Personalised recommendations