Šolsko Polje
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Letnik XXVIII, številka 3–4, 2017 Revija za teorijo in raziskave vzgoje in izobraževanja Šolsko polje Education and the American Dream ed. Mitja Sardoč Šolsko polje Revija za teorijo in raziskave vzgoje in izobraževanja Letnik XXVIII, številka 3–4, 2017 Šolsko polje je mednarodna revija za teorijo ter raziskave vzgoje in izobraževanja z mednarodnim uredniškim odbor om. Objavlja znanstvene in strokovne članke s širšega področja vzgoje in izobraževanja ter edukacij- skih raziskav (filozofija vzgoje, sociologija izobraževanja, uporabna epistemologija, razvojna psihologija, -pe dagogika, andragogika, pedagoška metodologija itd.), pregledne članke z omenjenih področij ter recenzije tako domačih kot tujih monografij s področja vzgoje in izobraževanja. Revija izhaja trikrat letno. Izdaja joSlo - vensko društvo raziskovalcev šolskega polja. Poglavitni namen revije je prispevati k razvoju edukacijskih ved in in- terdisciplinarnemu pristopu k teoretičnim in praktičnim vprašanjem vzgoje in izobraževanja. V tem okviru revija posebno pozornost namenja razvijanju slovenske znanstvene in strokovne terminologije ter konceptov na področju vzgoje in izobraževanja ter raziskovalnim paradigmam s področja edukacijskih raziskav v okvi- ru družboslovno-humanističnih ved. Uredništvo: Valerija Vendramin, Zdenko Kodelja, Darko Štrajn, Alenka Gril, Igor Ž. Žagar, Eva Klemenčič in Mitja Sardoč (vsi: Pedagoški inštitut, Ljubljana) Glavni urednik: Marjan Šimenc (Pedagoški inštitut, Ljubljana) Odgovorni urednik: Mitja Sardoč (Pedagoški inštitut, Ljubljana) Uredniški odbor: Michael W. Apple (University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA), Eva D. Bahovec (Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani), Andreja Barle-Lakota (Urad za šolstvo, Ministrstvo za šolstvo in šport RS), Valentin Bucik (Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani), Harry Brighouse (University of Wisconsin, Ma- dison, USA), Randall Curren (University of Rochester, USA), Slavko Gaber (Pedagoška fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani), Milena Ivanuš-Grmek (Pedagoška fakulteta, Univerza v Mariboru), Russell Jacoby (University of California, Los Angeles), Janez Justin † (Pedagoški inštitut, Ljubljana), Stane Košir (Pedagoška fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani), Janez Kolenc † (Pedagoški inštitut, Ljubljana), Ljubica Marjanovič-Umek (Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani), Rastko Močnik (Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani), Zoran Pavlo- vić (Svetovalni center za otroke, mladostnike in starše, Ljubljana), Drago B. Rotar (Fakulteta za humanistič- ne študije, Univerza na Primorskem), Harvey Siegel (University of Miami, USA), Marjan Šetinc (Sloven- sko društvo raziskovalcev šolskega polja, Ljubljana), Pavel Zgaga (Pedagoška fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani), Maja Zupančič (Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljub ljani), Robi Kroflič (Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani), Marie-Hélene Estéoule Exel (Universite Stendhal Grenoble III) Lektor (slovenski jezik), tehnični urednik, oblikovanje in prelom: Jonatan Vinkler Lektor (angleški jezik): Jason Brendon Batson Izdajatelja: Slovensko društvo raziskovalcev šolskega polja in Pedagoški inštitut © Slovensko društvo raziskovalcev šolskega polja in Pedagoški inštitut Tisk: Grafika 3000 d.o.o., Dob Naklada: 400 izvodov Revija Šolsko polje je vključena v naslednje indekse in baze podatkov: Contents Pages in Education; EBSCO; Edu- cation Research Abstracts; International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); Linguistics and Language Beha- vior Abstracts (LLBA); Multicultural Education Abstracts; Pais International; ProQuest Social Sciences Journal, Re- search into Higher Education Abstracts; Social Services Abstracts; Sociological Abstracts; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts Šolsko polje izhaja s finančno podporo Pedagoškega inštituta in Javne agencije za raziskovalno dejavnost Republike Slovenije. Tiskana izdaja: issn 1581–6036 Izdaja na zgoščenki: issn 1581–6052 Spletna izdaja: issn 1581–6044 Letnik XXVIII, številka 3–4, 2017 Revija za teorijo in raziskave vzgoje in izobraževanja Šolsko polje Education and the American Dream ed. Mitja Sardoč Contents Mitja Sardoč 5 Education and the American Dream Robert C. Hauhart 11 American Dream Studies in the 21st Century: An American Perspective Michael A. Peters 27 Conflicting Narratives of the American Dream: Obama’s Equality of Opportunity and Trump’s “Make America Great Again” Cyril Ghosh 43 Livin’ the Meritocratic Dream! Or Why it Makes Sense that Percent Plans in College and University Admissions Represent the Future of Affirmative Action Mitja Sardoč 61 From a City on the Hill to the Dungheap of History An Interview with Peter McLaren Srečo Dragoš 97 The Slovenian Counterpart to the American Dream Igor Bijuklič 127 Manufacturing and Selling a Way of Life: Historical Analysis of Modern Communication and New Forms of Conformism Darko Štrajn 145 Perversion of the American Dream 3 šolsko polje, letnik xxviii, številka 3–4 Maja Gutman 161 The Morphological and Archetypal Traces in the American Dream: Exploring the Potential of the Narrative Structure and Symbolism BOOK REVIEW Valerija Vendramin 189 A Cautious and Cautionary Tale: Robert Putnam’s Our Kids ABSTRACTS 199 Abstracts CONTRIBUTORS 211 Contributors 4 Education and the American Dream Mitja Sardoč s a central element of American culture, the American Dream is said to represent a distilled version of basic American values and Athe single most important emancipatory ideal associated with the American ‘way of life’. As Jennifer L Hochschild emphasized in her book Facing Up to the American Dream, it represents ‘a central ideolo- gy of Americans […], a defining characteristic of American culture’ (Ho- chschild, 1995: p. xi). In fact, both in the US and abroad, the American Dream constitutes a symbol of progress and has been synonymous with hope in general. Moreover, throughout history, its progressive idealism has had a galvanizing influence on a number of emancipatory social pro- jects, e.g. the Civil Rights movement. At the same time, its promise of up- ward social mobility [firmly grounded in the merit-based idea of equal opportunity] encapsulates best the idea of non-discrimination and fair- ness that stand at the very center of social phenomena as diverse as raci- al desegregation, the ‘war for talent’, migrations, educational reforms etc. The voluminous literature on the American Dream in disciplines as diverse as sociology (Hauhart, 2016), political science (Ghosh, 2013; Hochschild, 1995; Jillson, 2016), the economy (Shaanan, 2010; Stiglitz, 2013), migration studies (Clark, 2003), history (Cullen, 2003), advertising (Samuel, 2001), cultural studies (Lasch, 1996; Lawrence, 2012), linguistics (Fischer, 1973), religious studies (D’Antonio, 2011), anthropology (Dun- can, 2015), literary studies (Churchwell, 2013), educational theory (DeVi- tis & Rich, 1996) as well as philosophy (Cannon, 2003; Peters, 2012; San- del, 1996), points out that the idea of the American Dream is far from simple or unproblematic. In fact, as Robert Hauhart emphasizes in his 5 šolsko polje, letnik xxviii, številka 3–4 book Seeking the American Dream, ‘[i]t would be foolish, and counter- productive, to ignore the contributions that derive from history, litera- ture, economics, anthropology, political science and journalism’ (Hau- hart, 2016: p. ix). Yet, its ‘standard’ interpretation as an idealized ‘metaphor of basic American values’ and the US ‘dominant national ideology’ (Hochschild and Scovronick, 2003: x), is no longer straightforward, as the American Dream has also been associated with a wide range of ideas not everyone finds appealing. As an archetype of (material) success and consumerism in general, the American Dream has also been subjected to a number of ob- jections leading to the criticism that its promise of equal opportunity and material prosperity for all has not been fulfilled. As the writers of the joint report Opportunity, Responsibility and Security: A Consensus Plan for Re- ducing Poverty and Restoring the American Dream by two of the leading US think-thanks, i.e. Brookings Institution and the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research [AEI] have emphasized, the current state of affairs ‘contradicts our country’s founding ideals’ (AEI/Brook- ings, 2015: p. 8). 1 Furthermore, backed with indicators and other data on increasing economic inequality (compared to other democratic countries), some of the leading contemporary scholars (e.g. Krugman, 2012; Putnam, 2015; Rank et al., 2016) and public intellectuals (e.g. Chomsky, 2017; Reeves, 2014) have questioned its emancipatory potential as well as its basic prom- ise of upward social mobility.2 It is precisely this gap between its emanci- patory potential and its idealized image on one side and a set of indicators suggesting that the American dream has utterly failed, that has given rise to a series of objections leading to the assertion that it represents an emp- ty or even false promise. In fact, while its advocates champion it as some sort of a ‘brilliant construction’ (Hochschild, 1995: p. xi), its [many] crit- ics depict it as nothing less than a ‘necessary illusion’ (Lasch, 1996: p. 52). Surprisingly enough, despite a number of divergent approaches aim- ing to shed light on this complex [and controversial] social ideal, some of the recent interpretations over its alleged failure(s) have been disturbing- ly simplistic. While part of the ‘problem’ in understanding the American Dream is to a large extent dependent on the complexity of the social fact 1 The report is available at Brookings’