اختلافات سیاسی در آموزش و افول همبستگی داخلی در ایالات‌متحده

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناسی ارشد مطالعات منطقه‌ای- آمریکای شمالی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران.

2 دانشیار، گروه روابط بین الملل، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

آموزش عمومی از مهم‌ترین ابزارهای شکل‌دهی و تقویت همبستگی اجتماعی در حکمرانی مدرن به شمار می‌آید. دولت‌ها از قرن نوزدهم با درک ظرفیت عظیم این نهاد، از آن برای ایجاد جوامعی هم‌سو با ارزش‌ها و اهداف طبقه حاکم بهره برده و مفاهیم مورد نظر خود را در بستر آموزش بازتولید کرده‌اند. در ایالات‌متحده نیز آموزش عمومی نقشی کلیدی در تحقق نظریه «دیگ ذوب» و ایجاد همسانی فرهنگی میان مهاجران ایفا کرده است. با این حال، در دهه‌های اخیر خود این ابزار همگرایی به یکی از منابع اصلی واگرایی و مناقشه سیاسی بدل شده است. این پژوهش با رویکرد توصیفی- تحلیلی و روش مطالعه اسنادی و تطبیقی، در چارچوب نظری «آموزش به‌مثابه کالای عمومی»، در جستجوی پاسخ به این پرسش است که چگونه اختلافات سیاسی در آموزش به ابزاری برای افول همبستگی داخلی در ایالات متحده می انجامد؟ یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد دو گفتمان غالب در این عرصه عبارت‌اند از: گفتمان فردگرایانه و بازارمحور که بر کاهش نقش دولت فدرال، تقویت مدارس چارتر و آزادی انتخاب خانواده‌ها تأکید دارد؛ و دیگری، گفتمان برابری‌محور که خواهان گسترش عدالت آموزشی، آموزش رایگان و حمایت از اقلیت‌ها و اقشار کم‌درآمد است. در نتیجه، آموزش در جامعه آمریکا به کانونی برای بازتاب تعارضات ایدئولوژیک و فرهنگی عمیق داخلی تبدیل شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Political Divisions in Education and the Decline of Internal Cohesion in the United States

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fahimeh Maghferat 1
  • Alireza Koohkan 2
1 M.A. in Regional Studies–North America, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of International Relations, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Public education is regarded as one of the most important instruments for shaping and strengthening social cohesion in modern governance. Since the nineteenth century, governments, recognizing the vast capacity of this institution, have used it to create societies aligned with the values and objectives of the ruling class, reproducing their desired concepts within the framework of education. In the United States as well, public education has played a key role in realizing the “melting pot” theory and in creating cultural homogeneity among immigrants. In recent decades, however, this very instrument of convergence has itself become one of the principal sources of divergence and political conflict. Adopting a descriptive-analytical approach and using documentary and comparative methods, this study, within the theoretical framework of “education as a public good,” seeks to answer the question of how political divisions in education become a tool for the decline of internal cohesion in the United States. The findings show that the two dominant discourses in this field are, first, an individualistic and market-oriented discourse that emphasizes reducing the role of the federal government, strengthening charter schools, and expanding families’ freedom of choice; and second, an equality-oriented discourse that calls for the expansion of educational justice, free education, and support for minorities and low-income groups. As a result, education in American society has become a focal point for reflecting deep internal ideological and cultural conflicts.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • education
  • freedom
  • social cohesion
  • United States
  • the decline of America
Arana, G. (2021, June 28). The Republican plot to ban LGBTQ history in public schools. The New Republic. https://newrepublic.com
Ball, M. (2023, August 16). Exclusive: Ron DeSantis on fatherhood, parents’ rights, and the 2024 campaign. Time Magazine. https://time.com/6305193/ron-desantis-interview-education-parents-2024/
Ball, S. J. (2007). Education plc: Understanding private sector participation in public sector education.
Banks, J. A. (2014). An introduction to multicultural education (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
Barr, N. (2012). Economics of the welfare state (5th ed). Oxford University Press.
Biden Campaign. (2020). The Biden plan for education beyond high school. https://joebiden.com
Biden–Harris Administration. (2024, April 26). Fact sheet: Biden-Harris Administration hosts first-ever White House summit for sustainable and healthy schools. The White House. https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/04/26/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-hosts-first-ever-white-house-summit-for-sustainable-and-healthy-schools/
Biden–Harris Administration. (2024, May 16). Record over $16 billion in support for Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) from FY 2021 through FY 2024. The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/05/16/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-record-over-16-billion-in-support-for-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-hbcus/
Boyle, A. (2016, August 10). Do presidential candidates love science? ScienceDebate.org quiz aims to find out. GeekWire. https://www.geekwire.com/2016/presidential-candidates-science-quiz/
Brown, T. (2024, July 3). How conservatives can promote family through policy. Institute for Family Studies. https://ifstudies.org/blog/how-conservatives-can-promote-family-through-policy
Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. (1962). The calculus of consent: Logical foundations of constitutional democracy. University of Michigan Press.
Busemeyer, M. R. (2015). Skills and inequality: Partisan politics and the political economy of education reforms in Western welfare states. Cambridge University Press.
Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. NSTA Press.
Burga, S. (2024, October 18). What a Trump or Harris win could mean for student-loan forgiveness. TIME.
Carnoy, M. (2000). Globalization and educational reform: What planners need to know. UNESCO, IIEP.
Cherlin, A. J. (2004). The deinstitutionalization of American marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(4), 848–861.
Clinton, H. (2015, October 13). Making college debt-free and taking on student debt. Hillary for America. https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/college/
Cui, L., & Ax, J. (2024, August 8). How US public schools became a new religious battleground. Sojourners. https://www.sojo.net/articles/how-us-public-schools-became-new-religious-battleground
Democratic National Committee. (2020). Democratic Party platform: LGBT rights.
Democratic National Committee. (2023, August 10). President Biden’s SAVE plan provides student debt relief for millions, despite Trump’s MAGA agenda. https://democrats.org/news/president-bidens-save-plan-provides-student-debt-relief-for-millions-despite-trumps-maga-agenda/
Democratic Party Platform. (2016). Moving America forward. Democratic National Committee.
Democratic Party Platform. (2024). 2024 Democratic Party Platform. Democratic National Committee. https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform
Dindar boudalalou, H., Jafarpour, M., Mohammadmirzaei, H., & Hadidi, H. (2025). A Study and Analysis of the Major Cultural Challenges of the United States and Its Civilizational Approaches. American Strategic Studies, 5(1), 11-58. doi: 10.47176/asr.2025.1310. [In Persian]
 Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.
GLSEN. (2016). Educational exclusion: Drop out, push out, and the school-to-prison pipeline among LGBTQ youth. GLSEN.
Hanushek, E. A. (2013). Economic growth in developing countries: The role of human capital. Economics of Education Review, 37, 204–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2013.04.005
Harvey, W. B. (1987). The three R's of the 1980's: Reagan, reform and reduction. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 14(1/2), 24–43. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23262551
Hatfield, J. (2023, June 5). Partisan divides over K-12 education in 8 charts. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/06/05/partisan-divides-over-k-12-education-in-8-charts/
Kaul, I., & Mendoza, R. U. (2003). Advancing the concept of public goods. In I. Kaul, P. Conceição, K. Le Goulven, & R. U. Mendoza (Eds.), Providing global public goods: Managing globalization (78–112). Oxford University Press.
Kluger, R. (2004). Simple justice: The history of Brown v. Board of Education and Black America's struggle for equality. Vintage.
Kosciw, J. G., Greytak, E. A., Palmer, N. A., & Boesen, M. J. (2014). The experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth in our nation’s schools: The 2013 national school climate survey (p. 91). Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network.
Lumpkin, L. (2016, July 14). GOP platform encourages teaching about the Bible in public schools. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/education/wp/2016/07/14/gop-platform-encourages-teaching-about-the-bible-in-public-schools/
Meltzer, E. (2024, July 16). Project 2025 and GOP platform target “woke” schools, would rewrite Title IX. Chalkbeat. Retrieved from https://www.chalkbeat.org/2024/07/16/project-2025-and-gop-platform-target-woke-schools-would-rewrite-title-ix
Meyer, I. H., & Choi, S. K. (2020, October). Differences between LGB Democrats and Republicans in identity and community connectedness. The Williams Institute. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/lgb-party-affiliation/
Neal, T. V. (2018). The Talk: Christian Right and Liberal Left Rhetoric about Sex Education (Master's thesis, East Tennessee State University). Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/3381
Orfield, G. (2001). Schools more separate: Consequences of a decade of resegregation. Harvard Civil Rights Project.
Oreopoulos, P., & Salvanes, K. G. (2011). Priceless: The nonpecuniary benefits of schooling. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 25(1), 159–184. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.25.1.159
Plutzer, E., McCaffrey, M., & Hannah, A. (2016). Mixed messages: How climate change is taught in America's schools. National Center for Science Education.
Ravitch, D. (2013). Reign of error: The hoax of the privatization movement and the danger to America's public schools.
Safe Schools Improvement Act, S.3105, 118th Congress, 1st session. (2023, October 24). Congress.gov. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/3105Congress.gov
Samuelson, P. A. (1954). The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure. Review of Economics and Statistics, 36(4), 387–389.
Samuelson, P. A., & Nordhaus, W. D. (2010). Economics (19th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education
San Pedro, T., Malone, H.-L., Muñoz, J., & Moore, J. (2024). Culturally relevant and sustaining pedagogies in English language arts: Research, instruction, and policy: Directions from the field. The Ohio State University; University of California, Santa Barbara; University of British Columbia; Stony Brook University.
Schwartz, N. (2024, January 31). What’s inside House Democrats’ plan for higher education reform? Higher Ed Dive. https://www.highereddive.com/news/house-democrats-higher-education-plan-blueprint/706229/
Scott-Clayton, J. (2018). The looming student loan default crisis is worse than we thought. Brookings Institution.
Shear, M. D. (2017). Trump will withdraw U.S. from Paris climate agreement. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/climate/trump-paris-climate-agreement.html
Staggenborg, S. (1991). The pro-choice movement: Organization and activism in the abortion conflict. Oxford University Press.
Stiglitz, J. E. (1988). Economics of the public sector (2nd ed.). W. W. Norton & Company.
Stiglitz, J. E., & Rosengard, J. K. (2015). Economics of the public sector (4th ed.). W. W. Norton & Company.
Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Harvard University Press.
Walters, R. (2024, November 12). Walters announces Office of Religious Liberty and Patriotism. Oklahoma State Department of Education. https://oklahoma.gov/education/newsroom/2024/november/walters-announces-office-of-religious-liberty-and-patriotism.html
World Bank. (2018). World development report 2018: Learning to realize education’s promise. World Bank.
دوره 6، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 1
شماره پیاپی 21- بهار 1405
تیر 1405
  • تاریخ دریافت: 17 خرداد 1405
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 29 خرداد 1405
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 22 تیر 1405
  • تاریخ انتشار: 01 تیر 1405