- The structural-functionalist view: If a society is structured in such a way that students are not allowed to express critical views in the classroom, they will lack critical thinking everywhere.3
- The social action view: Not being allowed to express critical views in classrooms in one particular social system does not mean that students do not think critically in private or that they cannot express critical views when moving to other social systems.3
- The dominant neo-essentialist view: Silence derives from collectivist national cultures in which loyalty to the group inhibits individual expression, which in turn reflects a lack of self-determination. This therefore reflects different values which have to be appreciated and understood. Western teachers (from individualist cultures) need to be sensitive and to adjust their expectations.11
- The critical cosmopolitan view: Silence may well be influenced by national traditions and educational practices; but the students do not have to be confined by them. The behaviour reflects the employment of universal discoursal strategies within small culture formation on the go to deal with unfamiliar cultural practice (different structures of power and authority). Silence may be a form of resistance which involves strategic withdrawal. The particular deCentred cultural experience and criticality that students bring with them may enable them to bring new, innovative behaviour and successfully change the dynamics of the classroom. [page 48 ends here]11
Document in text mode:
Adrian Holliday 2020 Chapter 2: Culture, communication, context, and power Adrian Holliday, published (2020). Culture, communication, context and power. In Jackson, J. (Ed.), Routledge handbook of language and intercultural communication, 2nd ed., 39-52. Routledge. 1. INTRODUCTION/DEFINITIONSThis chapter reviews a struggle between two sociological paradigms which govern the way we think about and research the intercultural. Table 2.1 summarises these. On the one hand, postpositivism leads to neo-essentialism and a postpositivist research methodology. On the other, postmodernism leads to a critical cosmopolitan approach and a constructivist ethnography. I argue that the postpositivist paradigm fails because of its neo-essentialist inability to escape from Centre methodological nationalism and structural-functionalism, whereas the success of the postmodern paradigm is its engagement with a deCentred small culture formation on the go (middle left and right of the table). (See also the dis...