Five major concepts in Education

34

CHAPTER 2:Literature Review

35

interpret, and perceive them. It is important to understand the values, symbols, interpretations, and perspectives attached to each element of someone‟s group culture. For a teacher to welcome a student from a different culture implies not only the consideration that the student is a bearer of a particular cultural characteristic (for example, language, religion, familial organization, social situation, migration status) but also to situate the student‟s unique differences and his relation within the school context. Thus, it is essential for a teacher to understand the way a student perceives and interprets his/her culture. It is important in the context of multicultural and intercultural education to guard against all essential definition of the cultural concept.

2.2.2. From ethnocentrism to cultural relativism

Ethnocentrism is an attitude shared by all cultures which consists of perceiving his/her culture of origin as the model for humanity. It means to consider the ways of living and thinking or customs and beliefs of the culture to which we belong as the most important. Ethnocentrism promotes the evaluation and interpretation of other cultures according through the lens of one‟s native culture and often implies judgmental values concerning individuals from other cultures and whose practices are incomprehensible simply because they are unknown. Regarding ethnocentrism, it is important to distinguish between defensive ethnocentrism and offensive ethnocentrism. Defensive ethnocentrism expresses the desire of a group to preserve the culture of origin, the language, or any other characteristic of the collective history. This type of ethnocentrism is observed in almost all cultural minorities or majorities. For example, a speaker from regional Europe might express a defensive ethnocentrism to safeguard their language against the dominant national or international languages. On the other hand, offensive ethnocentrism is initially linked to colonialism, which considers the values and cultural characteristics of an individual, society, or a country to be not only the most important but to be

36

adopted, either willingly or by force, by other people or cultures. School books oftenillustrate the propensity towards offensive ethnocentrism, notably by the geographical map projections or through their presentation of the national histories (Blondin, 1990; Preiswerk& Perrot,1975).

One of the objectives of multicultural and intercultural education is to counteract such ethnocentric behaviours. Therefore, an opening towards the relativistic culture is necessary to enable intercultural education to take place. Relativistic culture constitutes of analysing and evaluating the expression of different cultures towards their cultural landmark. Relativistic culture demands a certain amount of knowledge of the other culture. However, the radical relativistic culture which consisted of justifying and accepting all the behaviours linked to cultural practices is also not a favourable attitude towards the intercultural approach. In this sense, all the cultures may still be the object of criticism and opposition. For instance, female excision and other similar cultural practice cannot be justified under the pretext of cultural relativism. If scientific knowledge and democratic debate allow the contesting of such cultural practices, then it doesn‟t make sense to justify it under the name of relativistic culture.

Ultimately multicultural and intercultural education is a link between the recognition and appreciation of cultural diversity but also a necessity to enable individuals to live in dignity and liberty even at the breach with his or her culture of origin or parents.

2.2.3. The concept of assimilation, integration and the minority.

The concept of assimilation is a long history of the social sciences. Park (1939, 1950) has used the concept of assimilation to analyse the relationships between different ethnic groups.

He defined assimilation as a movement of disorganisation/re-organisation, and interpretation and fusion through which people acquire the memories, feelings, and attitudes of the other while sharing their own experiences and histories and by integrating into the collective cultural life.

37

However, recent studies have shown that majority of immigrants assimilate the norms and values of the host country, especially the second and third generations (Todd,1994; Tribalat, 1995).

However, in the French sociology, the concept of assimilation has a different meaning compared to that defined by Park and claims that “Assimilation implies the reduction of the specificities of the migrant social, cultural and religious practices” (Tribalat, 1995,p.13)

In other words, assimilation is defined as a forced adhesion of the minority immigrant to the norms of the host country (the dominant society) while their sociocultural values are restricted to their private sphere only. In the processes of assimilation, the acquisition of nationality or citizenship was conceived as high engagement in the host society. Assimilation is a process which will lead a group or an individual belonging to a minority ethnocultural group to adhere strictly to the values and norms of the dominant group. It‟s an irreversible process resulting in the loss of cultural characteristics of a minority group. In the process of assimilation, the primary condition is the renouncing of the minority‟s cultural specificities and differences.

In other words, the „other‟ can be accepted without discrimination but on the condition that he/she abandon his/her culture and to fully and quickly adapt the values and the behaviours of the host society. Assimilation has a negative connotation because assimilation seeks to eradicate the culture for the benefit of the majority. In the assimilation process, acculturation will take place. Acculturation means the norms and the values of another culture will be progressively acquired. Gordon (1964) has used the concept of assimilation to analyze the acculturation of the minority groups in the United States. The minority group has gained the culture characteristics of the dominant group (the values, the language, the behavior, etc.). A lot of ethnic groups have become entirely acculturated to the dominant American culture. Those ethnics group have lost in most of the cases their own ancestral cultures but have still not been able to achieve full social

38

participation or acceptance in the society. It is possible to become culturally assimilated but to still be socially excluded, isolated or segregated.

Integration is a concept as old as assimilation in the social sciences and refers to the social system. In a work first published in 1897, Durkheim said that a society can be considered as integrated if it is characterized by a high degree of social cohesion. In the educational sphere, the concept of integration was first used in reference to the handicapped, but was then associated with the multicultural and intercultural approach to replace the negative concept of cultural assimilation. Integration has progressively become the central notion of defining educational and social policies towards the immigrant or minority populations as well as the lens through which to analyze the situation in the host society. Integration is to enter a new element, an ethnocultural group in a society or state. The integrated individual changes along with the group which integrates him. The notion of interaction is at the center of this dynamic. The concept of integration admits the difference culture of the minorities groups and the immigrant population.

However, the discourse on integration should always be placed in the national historical context.

In France, it has been observed that the term integration is sometimes used as assimilation, while in the United States, the current term used is „mainstreaming‟ which is a term closed to the idea of integration but at the same time possessing an assimilationist connotation.

2.2.4. The system of education as a homogenous culture in the 19^thcentury

The public school was considered to be a homogenous system and a place to reinforce and consolidate nationalism and the formation of a patriotic spirit for future citizens. It was mean to assimilate the different cultures to the national culture of the country. In France, the Bretons have to put aside their language once they entered the French educational system. At the same time, the Native American in Canada or the Australian Aborigine were taken from their

39

families and placed in boarding school to be educated wholly in English. As a consequence, it can be said that the system of education from the very origin constituted of ethnocentrism towards particular social groups (women, rural populations, socially disadvantage persons, minority cultures, immigrants, etc.). School had the aim to prepare the citizens and enlighten them while emphasizing the dominant political agenda at that time, enforcing the nationalism in the future citizen of the country. The intercultural approach in education questions the role of the school. For a particular group, school is seen as a way for emancipation but also as oppressive by other groups. Since its origin, formal education had shown less respect towards the culture of the minorities and regional groups who had to face cultural alienation and much less towards the indigenous or colonized civilisation. To provide with schooling also meant to convert and to inculcate the values and beliefs that are far being universally shared by the potential learners.