پیوندهای مفید
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 25 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 563 |
| تعداد مقالات | 4,469 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 7,490,937 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 3,920,202 |
فرهنگ در قفس ویترین: از فولکلوریزاسیون تا پایداری فرهنگی در آموزش | ||
| تجارب معلمی | ||
| مقالات آماده انتشار، پذیرفته شده، انتشار آنلاین از تاریخ 18 آبان 1405 | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.48310/jte.2026.24950.1308 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| رشید احمدی فر* | ||
| دانشیار جامعه شناسی و عضو گروه علوم تربیتی دانشگاه فرهنگیان، تهران، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| آموزش چندفرهنگی، در خوانش رایج خود، بر «پذیرش و حرمت دیگری» تأکید دارد. با این حال، پرسشی که از دل مطالعات انتقادی برمی‌خیزد این است: آیا صرفِ «دیده شدن» یک فرهنگ در برنامه درسی، به معنای به رسمیت شناخته شدن آن به‌عنوان یک نظام دانش، تاریخ و عاملانگیزی است؟ فولکلوریزه کردن فرهنگ، سازوکاری گفتمانی است که در ظاهر به حضور فرهنگ‌های حاشیه‌ای در برنامه درسی می‌انجامد، اما در عمل آن‌ها را به نشانه‌های ثابت، دیدنی و غیرتاریخی فرو می‌کاهد. نوشتار حاضر با تکیه بر تحلیل انتقادی گفتمان کتاب‌های درسی و ادبیات پسااستعماری، این سازوکار را حاصل سه عملیات هم‌زمانِ گزینش، غیرتاریخی‌سازی و صحنه‌آرایی می‌داند و نشان می‌دهد که پیامد اصلی آن نه شناخت فرهنگ دیگری، بلکه تثبیت فاصله و حفظ نظم نمادین مسلط است. نوشتار حاضر می‌کوشد ماهیت این فرایند را نه به‌عنوان یک خطای ساده یا یک «اجرای ناقص» از آموزش چندفرهنگی، بلکه به‌عنوان یک سازوکار گفتمانیِ منسجم تحلیل کند که منطق خاص خود را دارد و پیامدهای مشخصی برای یادگیری، هویت و عدالت آموزشی تولید می‌کند. پرسش راهنما این است: فولکلوریزاسیون با فرهنگ چه می‌کند، و این «کار کردن» چه پیامدهایی برای آموزش دارد؟ استدلال اصلی این است که فولکلوریزاسیون فرهنگ را از قلمرو دانش و عاملانگیزی بیرون می‌کشد و در قلمرو مصرف و تماشا جای می‌دهد. در پایان، با ارجاع به آموزش فرهنگ‌پایدارساز(پاریس و آلیم، ۲۰۱۷)، بدیل ممکن ترسیم می‌شود. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| فولکلوریزاسیون فرهنگ؛ برنامه درسی چندفرهنگی؛ آموزش فرهنگ‌پایدارساز | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Culture in a Display Cage: From Folklorization to Cultural Sustainability in Education | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| rashid ahmadifar | ||
| Associate Professor of Sociology and Member of the Department of Educational Sciences, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Culture in a Display Cage: From Folklorization to Cultural Sustainability in Education Expanded Abstract Introduction This article examines the discursive mechanism of “folklorization” in multicultural education. Although multicultural education is commonly framed as promoting recognition of and respect for cultural others, the article asks whether mere visibility in curricula actually amounts to recognizing a culture as a system of knowledge, history, and agency. The central argument is that the culture of minority groups is often represented in textbooks and school calendars primarily in folkloric form-as festivals, dress, food, and rituals detached from historical context and power relations. Folklorization is therefore analyzed not as a simple pedagogical error or imperfect implementation of multicultural education, but as a coherent discursive mechanism with distinct consequences for learning, identity, and educational justice. The guiding question is: what does folklorization do to culture, and what are the educational implications of this “work”? Method The article develops its argument through critical discourse analysis of educational texts, especially recent research on the representation of minority groups in textbooks, combined with insights from postcolonial literature. It offers a conceptual and critical synthesis rather than an empirical study of a single corpus. On this basis, folklorization is theorized as the product of three distinct but interconnected operations: selection, dehistoricization, and staging. Findings First, the operation of selection reduces a group’s culture to “displayable” elements. El Boubkri’s(2023) study of English-language textbooks in Morocco shows that Amazigh identity is represented mainly through festivals, music, space, and marriage rituals-elements treated as entertaining or exotic-while the history of struggles, experiences of discrimination, and political demands of the group are omitted. The result is a partial view that prevents students from understanding oppression and symbolic struggles for power and social equality. Second, dehistoricization constructs the folklorized culture as timeless and idealized. Delrio et al.(2010) argue that popular culture in folklorization loses its historicity and becomes idealized; culture is thereby converted into an essence or quasi-biological trait, denying its complexity and dynamism. Minority culture is imagined as a static, closed heritage to be “preserved” rather than a product of history and collective action that is “made”(Cordeiro, 2023). Third, staging turns what remains after selection and dehistoricization into performance or display. Acosta-Muñoz(2026), in a study of a Mayan-Spanish bilingual university program in Yucatán, shows that students are sent as “cultural ambassadors” and their identities become folklorized objects of display. Staging moves culture from the domain of knowledge to the domain of spectacle: culture becomes something exhibited to be seen rather than something belonging to its agents and lived in everyday life. Even in non-Western contexts, folklorization can lead to commodification and turn the group into “exotic commodities for viewing”(Acosta-Muñoz, 2026). The consequences are analyzed on three interconnected levels. At the level of representation, folklorization reproduces and stabilizes stereotypes; what is presented as “celebrating diversity” reduces culture to an image or cliché, often mythical or, at worst, superstitious. At the cognitive level, folklorization blocks the possibility of deep understanding: by iconizing culture through festivals, it empties it of analytical depth and avoids issues of discrimination and struggles for power(El Boubkri, 2023). Students may “know something” about the group, but this knowledge prevents them from understanding power relations. At the identity and political level, dehistoricization and deterritorialization disconnect minority groups from land, history, and struggles (Delrio et al., 2010). This serves a homogenization project: differences are recognized only insofar as they are “safe” and “consumable.” Minorities can be celebrated without questioning the structures of inequality that act against them. Folklorization thus manages difference by permitting the other’s presence while continuing the other’s absence as a historical and political agent(Acosta-Muñoz, 2026). Conclusion The article concludes that folklorization should not be treated merely as an educational mistake or an incomplete implementation of multicultural education. It is a coherent mechanism that separates culture from history, power, and agency and reconstructs it in a visible, entertaining, and safe form. Its consequence is not expanded understanding but the stabilization of distance and the preservation of a symbolic order in which the dominant culture remains the “normal” standard while other cultures are at best “guests” or “celebrations.” The alternative is found in culturally sustaining education(Paris & Alim, 2017), which emphasizes the sustainability of dynamic linguistic and cultural plurality rather than adding the student’s culture to the classroom as a static resource. In this framework, culture is seen as a living and contested process, not a closed body of folklore. Culturally aware education, as Ahmadifar(2026) argues, begins precisely by avoiding the folklorization of culture: instead of displaying “the other’s culture,” the teacher creates conditions in which the student’s history, language, and lived experience enter educational dialogue as valid knowledge. The shift from folklorization to cultural sustainability is a shift from “seeing difference” to “recognizing agency,” and this is a necessary condition for any genuinely multicultural education(Cordeiro, 2023; Ahmadi-Far, 2026). | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| folklorization of culture, multicultural curriculum, culturally sustaining education, dehistoricization | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2 |
||