Kunskapssamhällets excellenssatsningar – Försök och tystnader i tysk och svensk utbildningsvetenskap

Susanne Dodillet
{"title":"Kunskapssamhällets excellenssatsningar – Försök och tystnader i tysk och svensk utbildningsvetenskap","authors":"Susanne Dodillet","doi":"10.24834/educare.2016.3.995","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although different forms of excellence initiatives have become a part of the Swedish educational landscape, educational research on this trend is rare in Sweden. The present article examines this silence by contrasting it against educational elite research from Germany. Departing from Michel Foucault's concept of critique I examine the knowledge and unspoken truths that these research fields are based on and identify some of their omissions. While excellence initiatives are conceptualized as forms of segregation in the Swedish example, the German example examines excellence as the result of selection processes. In both cases excellence initiatives are problematized as an effect of the so-called knowledge society, but in two different ways. The Swedish example criticizes a social climate in which knowledge has become a competitive factor, displacing the idea of A School for All. The German example questions whether knowledge really determines success in the ”knowledgebased” society and emphasizes meritocracy as a goal that remains to be fulfilled. The purpose of this article is not to highlight one of these examples as more appropriate as every presentation of a superior position would entail new categorical boundaries. The critique presented here is limited to revealing two ways of researching excellence initiatives.","PeriodicalId":34339,"journal":{"name":"Educare","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24834/educare.2016.3.995","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Although different forms of excellence initiatives have become a part of the Swedish educational landscape, educational research on this trend is rare in Sweden. The present article examines this silence by contrasting it against educational elite research from Germany. Departing from Michel Foucault's concept of critique I examine the knowledge and unspoken truths that these research fields are based on and identify some of their omissions. While excellence initiatives are conceptualized as forms of segregation in the Swedish example, the German example examines excellence as the result of selection processes. In both cases excellence initiatives are problematized as an effect of the so-called knowledge society, but in two different ways. The Swedish example criticizes a social climate in which knowledge has become a competitive factor, displacing the idea of A School for All. The German example questions whether knowledge really determines success in the ”knowledgebased” society and emphasizes meritocracy as a goal that remains to be fulfilled. The purpose of this article is not to highlight one of these examples as more appropriate as every presentation of a superior position would entail new categorical boundaries. The critique presented here is limited to revealing two ways of researching excellence initiatives.
虽然不同形式的卓越计划已经成为瑞典教育景观的一部分,但在瑞典,关于这一趋势的教育研究很少。本文通过将这种沉默与德国的教育精英研究进行对比来考察这种沉默。从米歇尔·福柯的批判概念出发,我考察了这些研究领域所基于的知识和不言而喻的真理,并确定了它们的一些遗漏。虽然在瑞典的例子中,卓越举措被概念化为隔离的形式,但德国的例子将卓越视为选择过程的结果。在这两种情况下,卓越计划都被认为是所谓知识社会的影响,但以两种不同的方式存在问题。瑞典的例子批评了一种社会氛围,在这种氛围中,知识已经成为一种竞争因素,取代了“全民学校”的理念。德国的例子质疑知识是否真的决定了“知识型”社会的成功,并强调任人唯贤是一个有待实现的目标。本文的目的并不是强调这些例子中的一个,因为每一个优越地位的呈现都会带来新的分类界限。这里提出的批评仅限于揭示研究卓越计划的两种方式。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
86
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
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