Convivialist multilingual education: theoretical and practical suggestions from a Norwegian perspective

The article aims at exploring the use of multilingual education to build a convivialist society. The article reflects theoretically on how to combine convivialist education and multilingual education. Today’s hyperdiversity in society faces a dual challenge in accelerating and unsettling climate change. The convivialist manifesto entails five key principles namely: common naturality where humans are interdependent with nature; common humanity which must be respected in each person beyond any identity differences; common sociality, based on long-lasting and rich relationships in various human communities; legitimate individuation where the singularity of the person contributes to the common good; and eventually, creative opposition where conflicts are dealt in a fertile, peaceful and deliberative manner. These key principles are additionally subordinated to the need to control human desire for hubris and never-ending possession which represents a political alternative to material growth ideology. The concept of intertwining convivialist education and multilingual education is illustrated through a case study [Master dissertation] in a Norwegian school context focusing on the significance of mother tongue education in the school curriculum for mitigating climate change. The data for the case study was gathered by conducting focus group discussions with three mother tongue teachers and two Norwegian language teachers working in a language school for newly arrived immigrant pupils in Norway. The findings identified the limitation of the Norwegian, section 2-8, lacunas in the bilingual learning curricula and it argued for the need to strengthen mother tongue education and the role of mother tongue teachers in promoting sustainable development in the school curriculum. Based on the study’s specific contextual findings and theoretical perspectives combining convivialist and multilingual education, the article infers that promoting multilingual education in schools can help mitigate climate change, and promote biocultural diversity and build a more convivialist society. The article thus aims to suggest some practical suggestions in a Norwegian plurilingual context and furthermore, it explores an expanded theoretical frame for convivialist multilingual education

How to challenge a culturalization of human existence? Promoting interculturalism and ethical thinking in education

What if culture appears to be a universal solution – and problem – to all human encounters in the multicultural school? When teachers explain the problems encountered by minority pupils simply by reference to their cultural (religious) backgrounds, one faces the danger of culturalization where the other’s difference is explained only by his/her ethnicity. Culturalization is highly problematic because it emphasizes stereotyped inter-group differences and by doing so erases intra-group and inter-individual differences. The article argues that culture is fundamental in human existence, but it should not be an ambiguous dimension if the school seeks to help the learner get a stronger capacity of voice and aspiration. In order to challenge culturalization of human existence, it is crucial for education to promote the paradigm of interculturalism. Such a paradigm requires educators to acknowledge multiple forms of identity belongings for the individual and to resist the interpretation of culture as common sense. Education becomes intercultural and provides liberating categorizations for the individual when it acknowledges the true value of chosen cultural affiliations and individual aspirations. Nonetheless, promoting interculturalism might not be sufficient. Facing the potential danger of culturalization, we also need to foster ethics in education, in order to deconstruct the categories of cultural identity and belonging. Drawing on the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas (1905-1995) the article argues that loving the other implies the act of loving the other person as a brother and as a stranger. Responsibility understood as an ethical responsibility opens up the community’s traditional structures and promotes a politics of ethical difference. Justice, thus, is not only about how well rights and duties are enforced, but also a matter of the other’s right to be other. Difference as a category is in other words not cultural but refers to the fundamental uniqueness of each subject, defined as both a concrete and irreplaceable human being. Although Levinasian ethics is demanding and does not provide any concrete guidance to educators, it adds a necessary dimension of definition and justification to our responsibility towards the other beyond any categorization. Consequently, a pedagogy of ethical disruption and the event of ethical subjectivity is made possible through the exploration of intercultural education

How to challenge a culturalization of human existence? Promoting interculturalism and ethical thinking in education

What if culture appears to be a universal solution – and problem – to all human encounters in the multicultural school? When teachers explain the problems encountered by minority pupils simply by reference to their cultural (religious) backgrounds, one faces the danger of culturalization where the other’s difference is explained only by his/her ethnicity. Culturalization is highly problematic because it emphasizes stereotyped inter-group differences and by doing so erases intra-group and inter-individual differences. The article argues that culture is fundamental in human existence, but it should not be an ambiguous dimension if the school seeks to help the learner get a stronger capacity of voice and aspiration. In order to challenge culturalization of human existence, it is crucial for education to promote the paradigm of interculturalism. Such a paradigm requires educators to acknowledge multiple forms of identity belongings for the individual and to resist the interpretation of culture as common sense. Education becomes intercultural and provides liberating categorizations for the individual when it acknowledges the true value of chosen cultural affiliations and individual aspirations. Nonetheless, promoting interculturalism might not be sufficient. Facing the potential danger of culturalization, we also need to foster ethics in education, in order to deconstruct the categories of cultural identity and belonging. Drawing on the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas (1905-1995) the article argues that loving the other implies the act of loving the other person as a brother and as a stranger. Responsibility understood as an ethical responsibility opens up the community’s traditional structures and promotes a politics of ethical difference. Justice, thus, is not only about how well rights and duties are enforced, but also a matter of the other’s right to be other. Difference as a category is in other words not cultural but refers to the fundamental uniqueness of each subject, defined as both a concrete and irreplaceable human being. Although Levinasian ethics is demanding and does not provide any concrete guidance to educators, it adds a necessary dimension of definition and justification to our responsibility towards the other beyond any categorization. Consequently, a pedagogy of ethical disruption and the event of ethical subjectivity is made possible through the exploration of intercultural education