文化与教育

On Culture and Education

Kimball, Solon T.

1974                Culture and the Education Process: An Anthropological Perspective. New York: Teachers College,Columbia University

Contents:

Introduction: Anthropology and Education Anthropology is traditionally defined as the study of man. Theoretically, every aspect of human behavior or of the environmental conditions that affect the physical of cultural development of man is a proper subject of study. More explicitly, the central concern has been with man’s exploitation of his environment through technology, his adjustment to other men through customs and social groupings, and his relationship to the supernatural . from the study of man’s technical equipment , customs, activities, institutions, values, and symbols, the anthropologist records the culture of people. Cultural descriptions, however, are always within the context of a larger purpose. This is the search for generalizations that express the universalities of human behavior in time and space. In order to achieve this latter goal, the anthropologist works cross culturally and , through the comparative examination of cultures, seeks for the dynamics that explain the origin, diffusion, persistence, and change of social and cultural behavior. Inevitably, the anthropologist comes to appreciate the orderliness of the cultural universe as it is expressed in pattern and system.

The understandings drawn from various cultures oftentimes have direct applicability to formalized educational systems. For example, the informal or clique systems of grouping, prevalent among both students and teachers, meet basic needs that are provided for in no other way. These groups represent a powerful untapped social resource for advancing the goals of an educational enterprise. These natural groups are found in other institutional arrangements and have their parallels in simpler societies. As another example, the place and function of ritual in educational endeavor are seldom understood, a fact undoubtedly related to the overwhelming emphasis upon the individual in American education. Anthropology teaches us that critical periods in the life of the individual or group are  eased through ceremonial observances, called rites de passage, and that values are re-inforced and new learning accompanies such events. One may ask how do schools utilize, if they even recognize, these group building devices?

The productive use of cross-cultural materials must be within the framework of understanding basic aspects of human life. As an example, the family is an institutional arrangement present among all peoples. Its basic functions of regulating the sexual behavior of adults, providing protection fro the immature, transmitting a large share of the cultural heritage to oncoming generations, and allocating tasks to old and young , male and female, for the welfare of the corporate whole, is a universal phenomenon. These are universal basic functions, although the details of family activities may vary enormously. Other cultural or social features provide comparable parallels. These may be seen in the division of labor between males and females; in age-graded systems sometimes accompanied by rituals that mark the transition from one status to another; in the relations between concepts of space and time and the rhythm of human activities; and in the connections between culture and personality.

The research methods utilized by anthropologists offer another tool for understanding problems of education. Up to the present, most educational research has been dominated by the tradition of experimental psychology. Anthropological method is quite different. The anthropologist uses the real-life setting  as his laboratory. He seeks to avoid influencing the activities he records but rather to determine the characteristics of on-going systems as they operate within a set of conditions. Thus, he observes educative processes through the activities of individuals. He can then describe the characteristic patterns and offer certain conclusions about their functions. From such knowledge it is then possible to make predictions about the probable results of a given course of action.

The concern with the whole, in which each culture item is viewed in the context of its meaning and relation to the other parts, provides an essential perspective to an understanding of the educational process. The non-judgmental, comparative method of anthropology provides an intellectual device through which the educationalist can escape from the superficial irrelevancies of the moment.

The inclusion of anthropological materials in classroom subject matter, particularly those describing the customs of primitive peoples, has made some headway in recent years. Such borrowings, however, can lead to negative results if they accentuate the ethnocentric tendency to establish the superiority of one’s own way of life in contrast to the benighted peoples of other cultures. This result would contradict the very spirit of anthropological method, which avoids invidious comparisons but instead  accords to most peoples respect for their ways.  This does not mean that one needs to approve or attempt to adopt new behavior. On the contrary, the objective should be to derive a greater awareness of the meaning of one’s own culture through the examination of others.

But there are other problems that fall within the interest and competence of the anthropologist. In this century America has been transformed from a pattern of multiple small towns and rural neighborhoods to a pattern of urban population concentrated in a few regional metropolitan cities and their adjunct suburbs. Accompanying this change have been modifications in the style of family life and in the relations and values within the family and between it and the other institutional arrangements within the community. These changes have their impact upon the educational enterprise.

The increase in organizational complexity is reflected in the ways by which we solve problems affecting education. For example, communities can no longer hold school boards directly accountable for their actions. These days, Big Brother, in the guise of federal and state courts and agencies, teacher unions, and professional associations, is now monitoring, regulating, and enforcing, with little apparent concern for the quality of education. School boards must either knuckle under to edicts imposed form without or face the consequences. The example illustrates how the use of external power affects the internal ordering. Under conditions of colonial administration, subjected peoples have experienced similar external supervision.

Other, more personal areas of life involving acceptable behavior for age and sex groups intrude themselves as problems with all the nagging uncertainties about the appropriate response to defined deviancies. Has the ability of the generations to communicate so deteriorated that they are now separated by a pathological void? The answer to such a question is related to the basic anthropological concern with transmission of culture. An answer may be found in determining the relative dominance of directional influence from either elders or peers. If youth no longer derives its images of maturity from the adult world, as those who espouse the emergence of a counter –culture claim, the shift represents a truly radical modification of the traditional educational process.

The areas mentioned thus far include only a few of the collaborative possibilities that fall within the broad spectrum of anthropological concern. They are suggestive rather than definitive. A much deeper understanding of the perspective and method of anthropology must be acquired, however, before the full measure of their relevance to formal education is understood.