首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Educational Administration and History >Neo‐liberal individualism and a new essentialism: a comparison of two Australian curriculum documents
【24h】

Neo‐liberal individualism and a new essentialism: a comparison of two Australian curriculum documents

机译:新自由主义个人主义和新本质主义:两个澳大利亚课程文件的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This article explores a significant shift in the science curriculum in Victoria, Australia, in the mid‐1990s by using the idea of essentialism to compare two science curriculum documents that span the shift. The accounts given in these documents of desirable approaches to teaching science, science itself and the proper scope of curriculum, are compared to show that the document written in the mid‐1990s is open to a more essentialist reading than its predecessor. I argue that the market‐driven approach to education frames each learner as a neo‐liberal individual separated from society; consequently, it leaves ideas of community largely unexamined and unsupported. As a result, important curriculum and policy debates are short‐circuited and essentialist explanations for commonality become easier to accept. I describe this as new de facto essentialism, in that it arises from an insistence on individuality that denies the agency of society, rather than a consideration of positive evidence. Finally, I briefly examine the shaping paper for science in the first Australian National Curriculum for potential to avoid essentialist readings.View full textDownload full textKeywordsessentialism, marketisation of education, science curriculum, curriculum reformRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2010.532864
机译:本文通过使用本质主义的思想比较跨越这一转变的两个科学课程文献,探索了澳大利亚维多利亚州1990年代中期科学课程的重大转变。比较了这些文件中对科学教学的理想方法,科学本身和课程的适当范围所提供的说明,以表明1990年代中期编写的文件比以前的文件更易于阅读。我认为,市场驱动的教育方法将每个学习者构成为与社会分离的新自由主义者。因此,它使社区观念在很大程度上没有得到审查和支持。结果,重要的课程和政策辩论被缩短了,对共同性的本质主义解释变得更容易被接受。我将其描述为新的事实上的本质主义,因为它源于对个性的坚持,否认了社会的代理权,而不是出于对积极证据的考虑。最后,我简要地研究了第一本澳大利亚国家课程中的科学定型纸,以避免潜在的本质主义阅读。 ,services_compact:“ citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,美味,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,更多”,发布号:“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2010.532864

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号