Decolonising the curriculum beyond the surge: Conceptualisation, positionality and conduct

IF 1.9 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
M. Moghli, L. Kadiwal
{"title":"Decolonising the curriculum beyond the surge: Conceptualisation, positionality and conduct","authors":"M. Moghli, L. Kadiwal","doi":"10.14324/LRE.19.1.23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nIn recent years, there has been increased interest in, and work towards, decolonising the curriculum in higher education institutions in the UK. There are various initiatives to review university syllabuses and identify alternative literature. However, there is an increasing risk of turning ‘decolonisation’ into a buzz term tied to a trend. We fear that decolonisation within academia is becoming an empty term, diluted and depoliticised, allowing for superficial representations that fail to address racial, political and socio-economic intersectionalities. In this article, we examine several initiatives to decolonise the curriculum with a focus on the field of education as a discipline and medium. Based on our analysis, we engage with three main themes: conceptualisation, positionality and conduct. The article concludes that decolonisation cannot happen in a vacuum, or as an aim disconnected from the rest of the structure of the university, which leads to diluting a wider movement and turns into a box-ticking exercise. We argue that there needs to be a deconstruction of asymmetrical power relationships within academic spaces to allow for meaningful decolonisation in practice. This requires a real political will, a change in the structure, and in the hearts and minds of those in decision-making positions, and a shift in the practices of knowledge production.","PeriodicalId":45980,"journal":{"name":"London Review of Education","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"London Review of Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14324/LRE.19.1.23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

In recent years, there has been increased interest in, and work towards, decolonising the curriculum in higher education institutions in the UK. There are various initiatives to review university syllabuses and identify alternative literature. However, there is an increasing risk of turning ‘decolonisation’ into a buzz term tied to a trend. We fear that decolonisation within academia is becoming an empty term, diluted and depoliticised, allowing for superficial representations that fail to address racial, political and socio-economic intersectionalities. In this article, we examine several initiatives to decolonise the curriculum with a focus on the field of education as a discipline and medium. Based on our analysis, we engage with three main themes: conceptualisation, positionality and conduct. The article concludes that decolonisation cannot happen in a vacuum, or as an aim disconnected from the rest of the structure of the university, which leads to diluting a wider movement and turns into a box-ticking exercise. We argue that there needs to be a deconstruction of asymmetrical power relationships within academic spaces to allow for meaningful decolonisation in practice. This requires a real political will, a change in the structure, and in the hearts and minds of those in decision-making positions, and a shift in the practices of knowledge production.
课程的非殖民化:概念化、定位和行为
近年来,人们对英国高等教育机构课程的非殖民化越来越感兴趣,也越来越努力。有各种各样的举措来审查大学的教学大纲和确定替代文学。然而,将“去殖民化”变成与一种趋势相关的流行语的风险越来越大。我们担心,学术界的非殖民化正在成为一个空洞的术语,被淡化和去政治化,允许肤浅的陈述,而不能解决种族、政治和社会经济的交叉性。在这篇文章中,我们研究了几项将课程非殖民化的举措,重点关注作为一门学科和媒介的教育领域。根据我们的分析,我们涉及三个主要主题:概念化、定位和行为。这篇文章的结论是,去殖民化不可能在真空中发生,也不可能作为一个与大学结构的其他部分脱节的目标发生,这导致了更广泛的运动被稀释,变成了一个打勾的练习。我们认为,需要在学术空间内解构不对称的权力关系,以便在实践中实现有意义的非殖民化。这需要真正的政治意愿,需要改变结构,需要改变决策人员的思想和思想,需要改变知识生产的做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
London Review of Education
London Review of Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
39
审稿时长
48 weeks
期刊介绍: London Review of Education (LRE), an international peer-reviewed journal, aims to promote and disseminate high-quality analyses of important issues in contemporary education. As well as matters of public goals and policies, these issues include those of pedagogy, curriculum, organisation, resources, and institutional effectiveness. LRE wishes to report on these issues at all levels and in all types of education, and in national and transnational contexts. LRE wishes to show linkages between research and educational policy and practice, and to show how educational policy and practice are connected to other areas of social and economic policy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信