Uppeldi og menntun - 01.07.2015, Blaðsíða 72

UPPELDI OG MENNTUN/ICELANDIC JOURNAL OF EDUCATION 24(2) 201572
ÞVERSTÆÐAN UM LÝÐRÆÐISLEGT SKÓLASTARF
UM HÖFUNDINN
Ólafur Páll Jónsson (opj@hi.is) er prófessor í heimspeki við Menntavísindasvið Háskóla
Íslands. Hann er með MA-próf í heimspeki frá University of Calgary og doktorspróf í
heimspeki frá Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Á síðustu árum hafa rannsóknir
hans einkum verið á sviði heimspeki menntunar, lýðræðis og félagslegs réttlætis, en
þessi svið eru m.a. viðfangsefni hans í bókinni Lýðræði, réttlæti og menntun frá árinu
2011. Hann hefur einnig birt greinar um málspeki og réttarheimspeki og um heim-
speki náttúrunnar en árið 2007 sendi hann frá sér bókina Náttúra, vald og verðmæti.
Greinin barst tímaritinu 18. apríl 2014 og var samþykkt til birtingar 8. júlí 2015
The paradox of democratic schooling
ABSTRACT
Since the Compulsory School Act of 1974 democracy has been an official objective of
elementary schools in Iceland. The schools are both required to prepare students for
democracy and to work democratically. However, responding to the question “what
can schools do to promote democracy?” one is faced with a peculiar dilemma. On the
one hand, ordinary teaching of conventional subjects seems to be part of democratic
schooling for such teaching certainly has a positive impact on the future prospects of
students in a democratic society. But, at the same time, the organization of schools is
so far from any democratic ideal that it may seem impossible that a school could at all
be democratic; a school is not a community of equals, the directors are not selected by
the “public” but appointed by external authority, the student are obliged to participate
and the objectives are predetermined by a national curriculum. I argue that neither
horn of this dilemma holds. First, ordinary teaching of conventional subjects is neither
democratic in itself nor adequate preparation for life in a democratic society. On the
contrary, it may actually instil habits and attitudes that go against democratic citizen-
ship. Second, schools can be democratic in the sense that they foster and cultivate
democratic qualities – and work according to various democratic principles – despite
their non-democratic organization.
A central feature of democratic schooling is students’ participation in the daily
practices of the school as individuals with active moral and rational capacities. It is
not enough that students be regarded as moral patients – passive receivers of moral
concern – they must be included in the educational process as moral agents. This re-
quires schools to cultivate students’ judgement; that is, students must be considered
capable of passing judgement on which knowledge is relevant, what is of interest, and
what is good or beautiful. Martha Nussbaum, in her book Cultivating Humanity, calls
for Socratic education in which the only intellectual authority one should obey is the
authority of reason. One may ask three kinds of questions about intellectual authority: