1-2 of 2 Results  for:

  • Keywords: Asia x
  • Curriculum and Pedagogy x
Clear all

Article

It is common practice to use theoretical frameworks developed in the West for education worldwide, but important contributions come as well from non-Western education perspectives that shed light on the emergence of ideas within given regional diasporas. Value creation serves as a valuable lens through which to examine the ideas and relevance of three thinkers from the Indian subcontinent—the Buddha (6th or 5th century bce), Rabindranath Tagore (1861–1941), and Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948). The term “value creation” encompasses a Japanese approach to curriculum (based on the work of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi, 1871–1944) that is founded on an interdependent view of life and aimed at developing learners’ capacity to enhance their own existence and contribute to the well-being of others. Using value creation as a lens to examine the contributions of the Buddha, Tagore, and Gandhi can allow for a discourse on the indigenous nature of their respective ideas that are rooted in Eastern philosophies based on similar interdependent worldviews. The emergence of alternative curricular in the Indian diaspora that are based on such interdependent worldviews, offer an integrated approach to education. A value-creating framework can be useful to examine the Indian educational scene and the many attempts that have been made for the individual learner to be the focus of education.

Article

Benjamin Chang

The communities that constitute the racialized category of Asian Americans consist of approximately 20 million people in the United States, or about 5% of the total population. About 20% or 4 million are of primary or secondary school age, and over 1.1 million are in higher education. Both in popular and academic discourse, “Asian American” generally refers to people who have ethnic backgrounds in South Asia (e.g., Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka), Southeast Asia (e.g., Cambodia, the Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam), and East Asia (e.g., China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan). As “Asian American” is an umbrella term used to categorize a very diverse, heterogeneous, and transnational set of populations, Asian Americans as a group present various challenges to education and research in and about the United States. These challenges can concern paradigms of achievement, citizenship, family involvement, access (e.g., higher education, bilingual education), language and culture, race and ethnicity, and school community. In order to address these paradigmatic challenges, a great deal of scholarship has called for a disaggregation of the data on populations that fall under the pan-ethnic “Asian America” umbrella term, to gain a more nuanced and dynamic understanding of the many diverse populations and their historical, cultural, economic, and political experiences. To further address the problematic framing of Asian Americans in education and related fields, scholars have applied critical lenses to key tensions within conceptualization, policy, curriculum, and pedagogy. More recently, the notions of intersectionality and transnationalism have been generative in the study of Asian Americans, within not only educational research but also Asian American studies, which generally falls under the field of ethnic studies in the U.S. context, but has also been categorized under American studies, cultural studies, or Asian studies. While characterizations of Asian Americans as “the Model Minority” or “the Oppressed Minority” persist, the relevance of such static binaries has increasingly been challenged as the Asian American populations and migrations continue to diversify and increase.