“Àêòóàëüíûå äîñòèæåíèÿ
åâðîïåéñêîé íàóêè – 2017”
“Ôèëîëîãè÷åñêèå íàóêè” 3.Òåîðåòè÷åñêèå è
ìåòîäîëîãè÷åñêèå ïðîáëåìû èññëåäîâàíèÿ ÿçûêà.
Oleksandr Rak
Department of
the Foreign Languages, Higher State Educational Establishment
“Bukovinian
State Medical University”, Ukraine
Vision on intercultural education in France
Intercultural education was introduced to the French
school in 1970, almost a century after the creation of the free, compulsory and
secular school by Jules Ferry which had happened in 1880. Today, this current
seems to be running out of steam. The difficulties which led to its outbreak
have not disappeared yet. The school visited children of immigrant origin for a
few years but the number of newcomers is currently increasing. The difficulties
of integration and the failure of schooling are still relevant and concern more
and more pupils.
First of all, it seems necessary to define the terms
used in the expression of intercultural education, since these two words can receive
multiple meanings. According to C. Clanet (1993), we will define education as
"an action by an adult who is in charge for the physical, intellectual and
moral development of a young person and his or her integration into the
environment in which he or she is destined to live". This definition
emphasizes the need to adapt teaching process to the environment. According to
C. Clanet (1993), the term intercultural introduces the notions of different
exchanges and difficulties in relations between cultures. Interculturality
would be the "whole of the processes – psychic, relational, group,
institutional ... generated by the interactions of cultures, in a relationship
of reciprocal exchanges and with a view to safeguarding a relative cultural
identity of the partners in relation". Thus, the term intercultural refers
to a particular mode of interactions and interrelations, occurring when
different cultures come into contact, as well as all the changes and
transformations in the resultof repeated or prolonged contacts.
Therefore, interculturalism implies a relationship and
a dialogue between different cultures, through the subjects carrying these
cultures (Giraud, 1995). An intercultural situation is a situation in which
individuals, groups and even institutions from different cultural backgrounds
meet and interact.
In reference toClanet, we consider that the term
intercultural implies that culture is an ethno-psychological perspective. It shows
culture as a particular relation to the world of a given group – with its
norms, its values, possibly ways of life, its language, its rites, etc. – which
the group transmits and which constitutes its cultural identity. Therefore, the
most importantlies in that what is not visible (norms and values) while the
external and visible aspects of culture are less important. In other words,
interculturalism is concerned with culture as a "world view", a
universe of meanings peculiar to a given group, which encompasses the meaning
it gives to things, the beliefs to which it adheres and which situates it and
makes others place in a particular cultural community.
We are interested in the different meanings that have
been given by researchers in the human and social sciences to the notion of
intercultural education. For N. de Smet and N. Rasson (1993), the central
question of intercultural education must be: to know lifestyles, to understand
the reasons for these choices and the values which underpin them. In such a perspective,
intercultural education must transmit "respect for others, the possibility
of living one's own identity, non-discrimination, etc." It is the values which are imbricated in the Judeo-Christian and humanistic
tradition. Intercultural education obviously refers to pluralism cultural,
which implies the coexistence of different cultures on the moral, artistic or
philosophical level and the possibility to live in oppositions without falling
into insurmountable conflicts. This duty of transmitting values would explain the fact that in Switzerland,
intercultural education is mostly present in courses in religion, morals,
literature, history or the visual arts.
According to N. de Smet and N. Rasson, intercultural
education must enable every child, as a bearer of diverse cultural references,
to appropriate the cultural knowledge and codes of the society in which he
lives. Indeed, "autonomy requires thorough knowledge of the implicit and
explicit norms of a society, and the role of a democratic school is precisely
that: to provide all children with the knowledge and know-how that will enable
them to define and consciously exercise their role as citizens". This
aspect, which echoes the definition of the term education of C.Clanet, is one of
the most important. It has often been forgotten in the setting up of
intercultural projects. For De Smet and Rasson, intercultural education must
also strive to "open the eyes of young people to the environment, make
them curious and tolerant of difference", "teach them how to
communicate", "manage conflict and negotiation". Thus, the notion
of openness to diversity is introduced, a concept that has become, over the
years, the privileged objective of actions with an intercultural aim.To
summarize this idea, society can be composed of several cultures and the
advantage of this opportunity is to give each other its rightful place. The
school must take this diversity into account.
The intercultural education must be based on a work on
oneself and J.-M. Dufour confirms that: "as a guarantor of general and
universal truth man must exercise to distance oneself from one's own cultureto
have access to a certain type of objectivity, to seek oneself by comparison and
relativisation". Similarly, N. de Smet and N. Rasson (1993) think that
"interculturality leads to reflections on one's own culture or, better
still, one's own cultural identity and contains questions like - Who am I? What
do I do? "This issue of cultural identity is of direct interest to the
humanities and social sciences, and particularly to psychology.
Interculturality also leads one to wonder about the
differences and similarities between oneself and others and "also assumes
that I speak about myself and the (cultural) position I occupy in intercultural
dialogue". This point is essential because it places the individual at the
center of the intercultural experience. For C. Camilleri, such work on oneself
should lead young people to grasp what a culture is in the anthropological
sense, to understand the point of view of the other, whether it is shared or
not, which implies that one has access to "relativism", that one is
able to legitimize cultural identity while avoiding",to give it a sacred
representation. The same author proposes us to protect the exchanges between
carriers of distinct cultures, to help assume without guilt feelings of
distance and personalized positions that these exchanges favor. In other words,
intercultural education aims at a dialectical project that of ensuring respect
for differences within a system of attitudes which allow them to be overcome.
In this perspective intercultural content is much more
than a teaching content. It merges with an in-depth reflection, decentration
and knowledge of its own cultural identity and the role it plays in the
construction of each.
Abdallah-Pretceille gives a vague indication of what
an intercultural education action should be when she writes:
"Understanding cultures is not accumulating knowledge, but it is a movement,
a reciprocal recognition of a person by person, it is a learning to think of
the other without annihilating it without entering into a discourse of mastery
in order to emerge from the primacy of identification and marking." The
intercultural approach must be "comprehensive and multidimensional in
order to account for dynamics and complexity and avoid categorization
processes."(1999)
The definition of the concept of intercultural
education is sometimes more ideological than operational. That is sought above
all is the transformation of individuals, a phenomenon that is difficult to
evaluate. The behavior of children which have benefited from intercultural
action in their class may seem to change in the days that follow, but there is
no guarantee that the observed change will be truly deep and lasting. The main
defect in the definitions of the concept of intercultural education is the
difficulty of making them live. If some researchers have tried experiments to
put the theory into practice, they would get not much.
Dias (1985) defines interculturality as "a new
conception of education and communication, leading to positive and dynamic
interethnic and community relations so that our children are more likely to be
open to others, and to have a vision and an openness to the world, without
forgetting their own realities, their history ".
A. Flye Saint-Marie (1993) designates intercultural as
"any action, any project aimed at transforming the spontaneously difficult
relations between people and groups of different cultures into positive
situations", there is an evolution in the conception of intercultural
education: initially it is limited taking into account different cultures, but it
gradually becomes willing to make the relations easier between the bearers of
these cultures.
If one adheres to the definition of A. Flye Sainte-Marie
(1993), which states that intercultural education is "an option in the
school space for the psychological, intellectual and moral preparation of
children for the daily life of diversity, alterity, the acceptance of
differences, the relativisation of cultures, an essential contribution to the
construction of a global society that harmoniously manages the plurality of its
components". We can understand the confusion of teachers which meet such a
challenge. Moreover, the term option seems ill-suited, as most researchers
agree on the need for an intercultural project that is both transversal and
omnipresent within the school. Indeed, it is not a question of adding a new
subject to be taught, such as, for example, the study of cultures, but of
imbuing a little "intercultural philosophy" with every moment of
school life. L. Porchersays (1989): "The intercultural hypothesis,must be
global and generic to be coherent and truly concrete. It is a matter of
developing an original pedagogy, not intended specifically for the children of
migrant workers, but necessarily encompassing them among the target public. It
must address all children".
Many authors insist on the inadequacy of a contact of
different cultures to constitute an intercultural action. Indeed, whole society
of the populations of different cultures come together daily without
necessarily coming into relation. The school must therefore strive not to bring
cultures into contact but to allow them to exchange and communicate.
The keystone of intercultural education seems to be take
into account the values, codes and norms that underpin each culture, not only
on the side of children but also on the school side. School has to play a role
in education of the citizens. It must develop in a persona certain number of
values for example the respect of difference and openness to otherness.