Search

In recent decades, many Latin American governments have implemented policies to expand opportunities in higher education, aiming at reducing discrimination and social inequalities. These policies have taken different forms, according to the peculiarities of the respective higher education systems. The purpose of this paper is to explore the scope and limitations of these policies. We develop our analysis of theoretical literature on the subject, and review empirical information available from secondary sources of recent experience in five countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico and Venezuela. Argentina has increased opportunities for disadvantaged social sectors by expanding the public sector. Brazil has attempted to improve access for ethnic and social minorities in both public and private institutions. Chile is a unique case because of the continuing commitment to allow market forces to shape higher education. In Mexico, increased opportunities for access have resulted from the creation of intercultural universities and technical institutions in the public sector, as well as through growth in the private sector. Finally, in Venezuela, expansion occurred through the creation of a new system of universities that operates in parallel to traditional public institutions. We note that, in all cases, the policies reflect an underlying belief that there are only benefits to unlimited expansion, without regard to possible consequences, such as an excess of university graduates in economies with limited job opportunities for them. Moreover, these policies do not take into consideration the deficit of cultural and educational capital of young people who come from the most marginalised social sectors, deficits that may hinder their success. Concepts such as 'overeducation' or 'credencialism' call into question that optimistic belief and explain the limitations of the coverage expansion in terms of real democratisation.

The aim of this paper is to describe Dewey's reception in the Spanish-speaking countries that constitute the Hispanic world. Without any doubt, it can be said that in the past century Spain and the countries of South America have been a world apart, lagging far behind the mainstream Western world. It includes a number of names and facts about the early translation of Dewey's works in Spain, Chile, Cuba, Mexico and Argentina in the first half of the century and a brief explanation of the decline of Dewey in the second half. To a great extent, Dewey's conception of education was immersed in the international movement of reform that started at the turn of the century and would eventually slowly but surely, renovate the structure of the educational system throughout the entire century, including that of South America. But it is equally clear that the Spanish-speaking countries have displayed a general ignorance of Dewey and, by extension, of American pragmatism during most of the century. In spite of mutual incomprehension, a deep affinity between Dewey's pragmatism and Hispanic philosophy is suggested in this paper, anticipating that the gradual process of democratization of Spain and the Hispanic countries of South America may be in some sense related to the rediscovery of Dewey and to the application of his key ideas in education. After decades of neglect of Dewey and of his contribution, there is a strong feeling not only that his conception of things is important to understand the last century but that Dewey--along with Peirce and other American classical pragmatists--may very well prove to be a key thinker for the XXIst century also in the Hispanic world. Along this vein, the recent resurgence of pragmatism can be understood not as the latest academic fashion but the occasion to start to close the gap between the two worlds.

In a time of advancing neoliberal educational practice globally (e.g. Roxborough, 1997, McCafferty, 2010), in the provision of public sector education as well as in assumptions regarding public educational purposes and curriculum development; this paper looks to a broader definition of education (e.g. Biesta, 2009). The authors argue that pedagogical proposal of the Community of Philosophical Inquiry as in the work of Matthew Lipman (e.g. 2002) and Ann Sharp, a model of educational praxis existent in over 60 countries world wide, can enable the advancement of a vision for deliberative democracy (Lipman, 1998) and social justice and contribute to educational theory and practice in ways which develop communicative rather than individualistic notions of autonomy (Code, 2006, p.170.). Philosophical inquiry, especially as discussed in this paper with adolescents, equips students with the tools to become more critical, to develop a more social and global awareness and consequently enable them to make more reflected moral judgments (Hannam & Echeverria, 2009, p.114). Drawing on practical examples from the direct experience of the authors in the UK and Mexico, as well as building on 40 years of research world wide, an argument is developed for embedding philosophical thinking into all educational environments as a means of forming transformative intellectuals (Giroux, 1988) and enabling a raising of awareness with regard to the consequences of the tacit acceptance of neoliberal educational policies. Furthermore, drawing on the writing of Hannah Arendt (1998) a view is advanced which suggests that deliberative and participatory democratic structures can be developed in our societies where the opportunity for careful thinking as well as conscious action taking can take place.

This paper presents the main goals and themes, as well as a critical analysis, of an ambitious new reform of Mexico's secondary-level program for civic education. It begins with a brief historical review of the modern Mexican secondary school, as well as a thematic analysis of the new published curriculum and study program, which puts heavy emphasis on the development of democratic citizenship skills and habits. The paper then draws on interview research to highlight some of the challenges that national and local actors have identified for the program?s successful implementation. Because the new program espouses a progressive democratic pedagogy in the absence of a supportive democratic political culture, an appropriate structure of school governance, or adequate training for in-service teachers, many actors expressed skepticism about whether the reform could meaningfully take hold.

Anchored in insights from my evolving research in Mexico and the United States, this article engages the literature on democratic citizenship education and proposes a potentially unifying research program for the anthropology of education. I urge anthropologists of education to address questions of political order and to bring democracy and citizenship toward the center of our concerns. Just as anthropology has much to contribute to the challenges of citizenship education around the world, a reinvigorated cross-cultural comparison can enrich our working theories of democracy and enliven our contributions to the democratization of education in the United States.

Contemplating the root of the word "idiocy" leads the author to explore the challenge that democratic societies face of developing public-minded citizens. The schools, he argues, are the most likely institutions to succeed in that task. Schools in societies that are trying in various ways to be democracies, such as the United States, Mexico, and Canada, are obliged to develop public citizens. The author argues here that schools are well positioned for the task, and in this article he suggest how they can improve their efforts and achieve greater success. (Contains 23 notes.)