Buchardt Pedagogized Muslimness

Religion and Culture as Identity Politics in the Classroom
1. Auflage 2014
ISBN: 978-3-8309-8143-5
Verlag: Waxmann Verlag GmbH
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: Adobe DRM (»Systemvoraussetzungen)

E-Book, Englisch, 200 Seiten

Becoming Danish/Christian and becoming Muslim are skills that may be acquired in the secularized school system. This study explores how social structure and the politics of identity and knowledge in relation to religion intertwine when recontextualized in the classroom of the Danish comprehensive school post 9-11. Through close readings of what takes place at a classroom level in two Copenhagen schools, Pedagogized Muslimness provides insights into how the Nordic model of comprehensive schooling - in the (post-)welfare state - plays out in daily school life and with what effects. The book provides a deeper understanding of how knowledge is produced in school, and how school operates as an arena for the production and distribution of social difference. The good pupil is the pupil that speaks of her/himself, acting as a subject, or who, by confirming the teacher's organizing of her/himself, accepts being made into an object upon which knowledge can be generated. Particularly overexposed are the pupils, whom the teachers identify as 'Muslim', something which draws on decades of casting this group of children as special objects of - as well as obstacles to - schooling. By the late 1970s and the early 1980s, the children of migrants came to be defined by their parents' relation to the labor market: as 'foreign workers' in often unskilled jobs, associated with rural life and 'traditional family patterns', and characterized by what was seen as their (lack of) language skills. In the course of several moral panics around 'Muslims' and 'Muslim children', this focus has translated into a knowledge formation of culture/religion. The book shows how school-produced Muslimness, in the pedagogized social economy of the classroom, becomes a parameter of social class, higher as well as lower.

Mette Buchardt (1969) is Associate Professor at the Department of Learning and Philosophy, Aalborg University, Denmark. Her research centers on the disciplinary field of history and sociology of education and curriculum.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Buchardt, Mette

Inhaltsverzeichnis

1;Buchtitel;1
2;Contents;5
3;Acknowledgements;8
4;PART 1: STUDYING THE CURRICULUMOF ‘RELIGION’ AS SOCIAL PRACTICE;9
5;1. Prologue: The desire for knowledge of ‘the Muslim pupil’: a problematization of a problematization;9
5.1;1.1 Gülsen in the mosque and the church. The knowledge desire of the researcher;11
5.2;1.2 September 12: Monoculturalism, multiculturalism, and anti-racism in education?;14
5.3;1.3 The main questions, the object, the data;16
5.4;1.4 From dissertation to book – from Danish into English: Studies of Danish schooling in an international context;17
5.5;1.5 The structure of the book;19
6;2. The approach to curriculum, knowledge, and the classroom;21
6.1;2.1 The understanding of curriculum in relation to research on education;21
6.2;2.2 Recontextualizing, pedagogizing, and the pedagogic device;23
6.3;2.3 Forms of curricular knowledge conceptualized sociologically and social-epistemologically;26
6.4;2.4 Top-down or micro-politics? Locating curriculum through the concept of recontextualizing;28
6.5;2.5 Recontextualizing knowledge about ‘religion,’ ‘culture,’ and ‘identity’ – an initial localization as a framework for asking questions in the classroom;30
6.6;2.6 The emergence of ‘the immigrant pupil’;32
6.7;2.7 Research on religion in schools and its impact on this study;34
6.8;2.8 ‘Religion’/‘culture’ as knowledge and identity politics;36
7;3. Conceptual architecture: recontextualizing and the pedagogic field of practice studied as discursive regularity and social economy;38
7.1;3.1 Operationalizing the Bernsteinian understanding of field and discourse;38
7.2;3.2 Pedagogic discourse and discursive regularity;40
7.3;3.3 The grammar of the classroom: language as social practice;42
7.4;3.4 Classroom as social space: positioning and dispositions of the agents;44
7.5;3.5 Forms of capital: The economy of the symbolic – the symbolism of economy;45
7.6;3.6 Conceptualizing the classroom: social classification and knowledge;47
8;4. Two classrooms in the socioeconomic landscape. Constructing the empirical material;48
8.1;4.1 Constructing the data – constructing the classroom;48
8.1.1;4.1.1 The dissimilarity of the school sociogeography and the socioeconomy of the school classes;49
8.1.2;4.1.2 The official self-articulation of the schools;51
8.1.3;4.1.3 Producing the material;54
8.2;4.2 The official text of the classroom;55
8.2.1;4.2.1 Fairclough-inspired reading strategies;56
8.3;4.3 The detailed focal points in analyzing classroom conversation;58
8.4;4.4 Practices of the turn-taking system;63
8.5;4.5 The socioeconomic backgrounds of the pupils: teacher, pupil, and parent descriptions and information;64
8.6;4.6 Between and across the analysis of dispositions, positions, and positioning and the analysis of knowledge- and subject production;65
9;PART 2: DIFFERENTIATED ‘MUSLIM’ CLASS STRUCTURE;68
10;5. The teacher articulation of the official classroom text;69
10.1;5.1 A differentiated ideal of respect;69
10.2;5.2 ‘The Muslim pupil’ as a structuring figure;71
10.3;5.3 Separate and stable, yet flexibly changeable;72
11;6. Muslimness as differentiated school capital;74
11.1;6.1 Culture as religion, religion as culture in the teacher’s characterizations;75
11.1.1;6.1.1 A landscape of differentiations;76
11.1.2;6.1.2 The predictable headscarf user;77
11.1.3;6.1.3 The cultivated headscarf user;80
11.1.4;6.1.4 The headscarf user who cannot be taken seriously;82
11.2;6.2 To be or not to be legitimate, to be or not to be ‘subject matter-relevant’;84
11.2.1;6.2.1 Qualifying in a subject matter sense, qualifying as religious – or not at all;85
11.3;6.3 Those in whom one can invest expectations;87
11.3.1;6.3.1 The adaptable unadapted;87
11.3.2;6.3.2 The cultivated and flexible Muslim;90
11.4;6.4 Summing up: the socioeconomic landscape;92
12;7. Production of ‘the Muslim subjects’;95
12.1;7.1 Situating the text sample: educational module and lesson;96
12.1.1;7.1.1 Comparisons, symbols, and embodiments;97
12.1.2;7.1.2 Text sample;97
12.2;7.2 Ritual as the structuring theme – Sulayman as the content;99
12.2.1;7.2.1 TRT1: ‘You’ and ‘someone’ in the mosque on Fridays;100
12.2.2;7.2.2 TRT2: What you do and what it says;101
12.3;7.3 Intimacy and distance;102
12.4;7.4 Modality at work;103
12.4.1;7.4.1 ‘Muslims’ as flexible, unpredictable, and attached to intentionality;103
12.4.2;7.4.2 They, you, and the good Muslim;104
12.4.3;7.4.3 There are some things you must do;105
12.5;7.5 Summing up: the Muslim subjects;106
12.5.1;7.5.1 Legitimate and accessible versus unacceptable spaces of Muslimness;107
13;8. Intimization and flexibilization of acknowledged ‘Muslimness’;108
13.1;8.1 Social classification: recognition of dispositions and position;108
13.2;8.2 Pupils in the game of knowledge and experience;110
13.3;8.3 Categories of knowledge, production of subjects;110
14;PART 3: SUBJECTIVITY WITHIN THE PERIMETER OF ‘MUSLIM TRADITION’: MUSLIM AS ‘LOW CLASS’;112
15;9. The school and the teachers’ articulation of curriculum;113
15.1;9.1 The educational module and the teacher speech about curriculum;114
15.1.1;9.1.1 Rituals in “every culture” and “close to oneself”;115
15.2;9.2 Muslims and Christians: experience knowledge and factual knowledge;116
16;10. ‘Christianity’ as ‘universal human conditions’ versus the predictable ‘Muslim tradition’;119
16.1;10.1 The universal human funeral: organization of ‘Christianity’ and ‘funeral’;120
16.1.1;10.1.1 Selected text sample 1;120
16.1.2;10.1.2 Topics and themes and the organizational power of the speech;122
16.1.3;10.1.3 Designating persons and places;123
16.1.4;10.1.4 Modality: How ‘should’ and ‘can’ install inevitability and choice;124
16.1.5;10.1.5 Choices and limitations set by the ritual;125
16.1.6;10.1.6 Installation of pupil experience in Danish Christianness – between ‘stable’ and ‘choosing’;126
16.2;10.2 The ‘Muslim’ tradition: organizing ‘Islam’ and ‘funeral’;127
16.2.1;10.2.1 Text sample 2;127
16.2.2;10.2.2 TRTs between teacher speech and pupil speech;129
16.2.3;10.2.3 The respectful ‘Muslims’ and the busy ‘we’;130
16.2.4;10.2.4 Differentiating comparisons;131
16.2.5;10.2.5 Pupils’ speech: the relevant and valid experience;133
16.3;10.3 Producing subjects, generating pupil experience;136
16.3.1;10.3.1 Managing knowledge between .the book’ and the .self-experienced’;136
16.3.2;10.3.2 Organizing pupil experiences and contributions;138
16.3.3;10.3.3 The designated and the invisible;138
16.4;10.4 Summing up: constructing the objects Christianity and Islam;139
16.4.1;10.4.1 Formal knowledge and experience knowledge;141
17;11. The hierarchy of problematization: teachers’ interest and teachers’ concern;143
17.1;11.1 The empirical material;143
17.1.1;11.1.1 The group composition;144
17.1.2;11.1.2 Organizing the material and the analysis;145
17.2;11.2 Gülsen and Amalie: “A kind of girl that … lacks some socialfilters” and “The most social and diplomatic child”;146
17.2.1;11.2.1 Gülsen about Gülsen, and the teacher about “that kind of girl”;146
17.2.2;11.2.2 The teacher regarding “a real kind of sports girl”;149
17.3;11.3 The girl group hierarchy: the academics’ daughter, a girl who thinks she’s clever, and one who’s out of proportion;151
17.3.1;11.3.1 The wrong kind of dominance;152
17.3.2;11.3.2 Below the hierarchy;153
17.4;11.4 Those that bring bad influences from other institutions and those that bring it from home;154
17.4.1;11.4.1 The one who picked it up;154
17.4.2;11.4.2 The one who brought it from home, and the one who brought nothing;156
17.5;11.5 The categorization practices of the teachers in descriptions ofpupils;158
17.5.1;11.5.1 Pupils through parents;159
17.5.2;11.5.2 Pupils through the pupil hierarchy;160
17.5.3;11.5.3 The structure of social classification and the group;161
17.6;11.6 Summing up: pupil disposition and -positioning, teacher recognition and the opposite;162
17.6.1;11.6.1 The practices of teacher categorizations of pupils;163
18;12. Assembling knowledge production and social classification;165
18.1;12.1 Speech about types of pupils and forms of knowledge;166
18.2;12.2 Remaining an under-achiever; winning a space, but not legitimacy;167
18.3;12.3 Knowledge and speakers in an agent-, practice-, and capital perspective;168
19;PART 4: RELIGION AND CULTURE AS KNOWLEDGE AND SOCIAL CLASSIFICATION;172
20;13. Pedagogizing religion. Concluding remarks;172
20.1;13.1 Religion as race and class;172
20.2;13.2 Religion as ‘experience knowledge’;174
20.3;13.3 The differentiated Muslim class structure at the B-school: the Muslim subjects;175
20.4;13.4 Subjectivity within the perimeter of ‘Muslim tradition.’ The Muslim underclass at the C-schools highly differentiated class structure;177
20.5;13.5 Recapitulation: production of knowledge and production of social classification as interlinked;178
20.6;13.6 The school’s production and classification of knowledge and bodies. ‘Muslimness’ and ‘universal Danish Christianity’ pedagogized;179
21;Appendix A: The B-school, selected text sample. Original Danish version;193
22;Appendix B: The C-school, selected text samples, original Danish version;195