Search

This paper assesses the dangers of the use of the concept ‘culture’ in present political and educational rhetoric. The first section offers a critique of the use of the term ‘culture’ in the so-called intercultural educational efforts. It asserts that ‘culture’ in its present use is a proxy for ‘race’ and supports views, which ignore diversity and suggest, purposely or not, an homogeneity which can easily spread into the sphere of biological resemblances and differences. The paper, then, identifies possible alternative understandings of culture through the examination of the contribution of anthropology to cultural research. In the last section of the paper suggestions are made to overcome current approaches to intercultural education through a call to diversify the understanding of diversity to include not only ethnic/cultural differences but also, physical, and cognitive ones. To achieve this goal a turn to the ontological and the training of teachers as ‘critical experts of design’ is suggested.

This paper presents a multi-case study in the field of intercultural education and it refers to a project named “Voice of children and young people in the development of intercultural education”. The cases are critical action-research projects developed with three groups of middle and high school students. They participated in dialogic processes and shared leadership with their teachers. They co-designed projects, debated and became aware of critical issues related to cultural diversity in their educational communities. The purpose of the research is to analyze participatory processes and associated changes in relation to intercultural education and students’ voice frameworks. Personal changes of the students, such as self-awareness and attention to others and to relationships, and group changes such as cohesion, were underlined, as well as changes extended to other actors —teachers, other students, staff, tutors, and other members of the community— creating collaborative relationships, solidarity, and mutual recognition. There were visible changes during the most active period in which projects were held, but sometimes impacts still endured and deepened afterwards. This stresses the relevance of youngsters’ participatory projects engaged in intercultural processes and change.

CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) —endorsed by the European Commission since 1996— constitutes the official approach to bilingual education in Spain. Intercultural learning (IL) is one of the four defining Cs in CLIL, though the literature has consistently described it as the weakest implementation area. This paper analyses the opinions of 76 Spanish secondary education students about IL through their bilingual curriculum. Their viewpoints clearly suggest that IL comes from two main sources: native assistants; and exchange programmes. These data were contrasted with the views of school principals and bilingual coordinators, who declared that both of these valuable ‘resources’ for IL are scarce due to administrative difficulties and lack of budget. Our conclusions reveal how improving these areas can lead not only to improved scores but also to a better implementation of the intercultural axis in CLIL, if the goal consists in educating 21st century citizens.