Convergences and Divergences in Intercultural Higher Education in Mexico
The purpose of this paper is to explore the ethos of interculturality at the Intercultural Universities (IU) in Mexico. Based on the documents and interviews carried out at five universities between 2006 and 2009, it has been observed that the institutionalization of intercultural education within t...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2015 |
| País: | México |
| Institución: | UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO |
| Repositorio: | Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales |
| Idioma: | español |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/45382 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://www.revistas.unam.mx/index.php/rmcpys/article/view/45382 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | interculturalidad educación superior indigenismo México interculturality higher education indigenism Mexico |
| Sumario: | The purpose of this paper is to explore the ethos of interculturality at the Intercultural Universities (IU) in Mexico. Based on the documents and interviews carried out at five universities between 2006 and 2009, it has been observed that the institutionalization of intercultural education within the state sector has created a space of encountering and debate between the politics of recognition and the radical ideas of educators in the tradition of Latin American constructivism and popular schooling. The paper concludes by highlighting the great gap between the academic debates on multiculturalism and the sometimes anguished debates of IU professors facing entirely new challenges in education, such as teaching indigenous origin people their own language with teaching methods suitable for a second language, or students using scientific research methods in their hometowns where the division of the role as relative or family member and that of researcher is not always acknowledged. This interweaving of ideas and identities, intended and recovered, intermingled with the language and birthplace, in a context clearly marked by socioeconomic class inequalities and social mobility aspirations, constitute the tapestry of the debate at the IU. |
|---|