Less-standard claims to justice through the lens of media debates on minority education

IF 1.3 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Theory and Research in Education Pub Date : 2021-07-01 DOI:10.1177/14778785211028400
D. Lepianka
{"title":"Less-standard claims to justice through the lens of media debates on minority education","authors":"D. Lepianka","doi":"10.1177/14778785211028400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The coexistence, not always peaceful, of multiple and often rival, conceptions of justice in education policy and practice is well recognized and problematized in the academic literature. Relatively little is known, however, about what kind of justice-related considerations occupy the ‘public mind’ and/or inform what Nancy Fraser calls ‘folk paradigms of justice’. The current article seeks to shed light on the public construction of the ‘what’ of justice in the realm of education by analysing selected debates on minority education politics that occur in news and social media in five European countries. Fraser’s tripartite model of justice as redistribution, recognition and representation constituted the starting point of the investigation. The results of a qualitative analysis of selected media content show that while Fraser’s framework resonates well with the popular understandings of justice, the tripartite typology is not exhaustive in accounting for all justice claims evoked in the public domain. In the light of the debates analysed, three types of ‘alternative’ claims seem particularly relevant for theorizing justice in education and/or seeking legitimacy for education policy: claims that appeal to civil rights and liberties, claims that appeal to procedural justice and claims that appeal to epistemic justice.","PeriodicalId":46679,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Research in Education","volume":"19 1","pages":"127 - 147"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14778785211028400","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Research in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14778785211028400","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The coexistence, not always peaceful, of multiple and often rival, conceptions of justice in education policy and practice is well recognized and problematized in the academic literature. Relatively little is known, however, about what kind of justice-related considerations occupy the ‘public mind’ and/or inform what Nancy Fraser calls ‘folk paradigms of justice’. The current article seeks to shed light on the public construction of the ‘what’ of justice in the realm of education by analysing selected debates on minority education politics that occur in news and social media in five European countries. Fraser’s tripartite model of justice as redistribution, recognition and representation constituted the starting point of the investigation. The results of a qualitative analysis of selected media content show that while Fraser’s framework resonates well with the popular understandings of justice, the tripartite typology is not exhaustive in accounting for all justice claims evoked in the public domain. In the light of the debates analysed, three types of ‘alternative’ claims seem particularly relevant for theorizing justice in education and/or seeking legitimacy for education policy: claims that appeal to civil rights and liberties, claims that appeal to procedural justice and claims that appeal to epistemic justice.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从媒体对少数民族教育的辩论看不太标准的正义诉求
在教育政策和实践中,多种且往往相互竞争的正义概念并不总是和平共存,这在学术文献中得到了充分的承认,并提出了问题。然而,对于什么样的与正义相关的考虑占据了“公众的思想”和/或南希·弗雷泽所说的“民间正义范式”,人们所知相对较少。本文试图通过分析五个欧洲国家的新闻和社交媒体上关于少数民族教育政治的辩论,揭示教育领域正义的“什么”的公共建构。弗雷泽的“再分配”、“承认”和“代表”的正义三重模式构成了研究的起点。对选定的媒体内容进行定性分析的结果表明,尽管弗雷泽的框架与大众对正义的理解很好地共鸣,但这三种类型在解释公共领域引发的所有正义主张时并不详尽。根据所分析的辩论,三种类型的“替代”主张似乎与教育正义的理论化和/或寻求教育政策的合法性特别相关:呼吁公民权利和自由的主张,呼吁程序正义的主张和呼吁认识论正义的主张。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Theory and Research in Education
Theory and Research in Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Theory and Research in Education, formerly known as The School Field, is an international peer reviewed journal that publishes theoretical, empirical and conjectural papers contributing to the development of educational theory, policy and practice.
期刊最新文献
Book Review: Julian Culp, Johannes Drerup and Douglas Yacek (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Democratic Education Education for deliberative democracy through the long-term view Education for flourishing: A social contract for foundational competencies Book review: Barbara S Stengel, Responsibility: Philosophy of Education in Practice How much is too much? Refining normative evaluations of prescriptive curriculum
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1