TaylorizationTaylorization (or Taylorism) refers to the process of "scientific management" developed by the American engineer Frederick Winslow Taylor, who in the 1880's, "appl[ied] the principles of engineering precision" to the management of labor in factories (Tozer, et. al., 2002, p. 90). His research into "where time, materials, and effort were being wasted" focused on "break[ing] down each complex, skilled task into its component parts-simple moves that could be taught in a short time" (p. 90). In much discourse, Taylorization is a negative deskilling process in which workplace design insures that few marketable skills are required by workers, resulting in "a greater number of unskilled workers, and a corresponding decrease in workers' wages and power to decide on the conditions of their labor" (p. 90). Critical educational theorists (see Critical Pedagogy) have tied Taylorization to efforts by states and others to prescribe curriculum content and enforce punitive assessment policies, such as those mandated by recent No Child Left Behind education reforms. Such policies are viewed by some as constraining teacher autonomy and professionalism. Below are some interesting quotes on Taylorization: All possible brainwork should be removed from the shop and centered in the planning or laying-out department. (p. 91) The first implication of this principle is that Taylor's "science of work" is never to be developed by the worker, always by management. The Taylorization of the work process, as it is manifested in schools, represents one of the greatest structural constraints that teachers face, i.e., it isolates teachers and reifies hierarchical forms of decision-making and authoritarian modes of control. (p. 242) Recently, a number of curricular theorists have pointed to the production of curriculum packages that promote what has been called teacher de-skilling (Apple 1981; Buswell 1980). Rather than promote conceptual understanding on the part of the classroom teacher, these curriculum 'kits' separate conception from execution. [ . . . ] Assembly-line control, in this case, parades as the newest insight in curriculumdevelopment. (p. 69-70) References: - Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and monopoly capital: The degradation of work in the Twentieth Century. New York: Monthly Review Press. - Tozer, S.E., Violas, P.C., Senese, G. (2002). School and society: Historical and contemporary perspectives. New York: McGraw Hill.
TransformationistsContributed by Mary Yeazel The true transformationists believe that our economic life, cultural practices and politics are changing, but not in a balanced way. Their belief is that globalization is a set of processes which affect every aspect of our lives. According to Peter Midmore, pg. 2, "In a state of creative chaos, new processes are fragmenting the old order whilst, in parallel, opening new spaces for innovation as a result of the heightened pace of global interconnectedness, and the intensification of its impact". References:
TransnationalismContributed by Viviana Pitton The term transnationalism has become widely used among social science scholars over the last decade. The first use of this concept can be traced in cultural studies works such as of Appadurai, Buell, Clifford, Bhabha, Hanners, among others (Smith & Guarnizo, 1998). In opposition to linear and restraining understandings of time and space, employing the rhetoric of transnationalism these authors "celebrated new anti-essentializing concepts of subjectivity that emphasize plurality, mobility, hybridity, and the margins or spaces in-between" (Mitchell, 1997: p. 107) Although initially this term has been embedded with a cultural bent, according to Portes (Portes, 1997), social anthropologists also pioneered in its identification and theorization by providing this preliminary definition: "We define 'transnationalism' as the processes by which immigrants forge and sustain multi-stranded social relations that link together their societies of origin and settlement" (Basch, et al., 1994: p.6). They used this term alluding to the social fields immigrants construct across geographic, cultural and political borders. Nonetheless, this definition of transnationalism regards it only as a migration phenomenon. Smith and Guarnizo point out that transnationalism should not only be considered as an international migration trend, since national borders are persistently criss-crossed by a variety of processes that do not include people mobility such as "multiple exchanges of monetary and non-monetary resources, material and symbolic objects, commodities and cultural values" (Smith & Guarnizo, 1998: p. 19). Moreover, they claim that other forms of bodily geographic mobility "such as tourism and expatriate consulting and entrepreneurship, do not entail migration" (Smith & Guarnizo, 1998: p.14). In this sense, Caglar agrees with the idea that transnationalism not only refers to people mobility but also to cultural, informational and economical across borders exchanges, although he attributes to migration the causality of this phenomenon. According to this author, transnationalism "represents a new analytic optic which makes visible the increasing intensity and scope of circular flows of persons, goods, information and symbols triggered by international labour migration" (Caglar, 2001: p. 607). Mitchell criticizes this approach, asserting that much of the works focused on the mounting international flows of commodities, services, money and information in the last two to three decades tend to reproduce a homogeneous vision of global processes in which "capitalism, money, information and a hegemonic narrative of modernity are assumed as standards" and self-evident (Mitchell, 1997:p. 104). In opposition to hegemonic views of international migration, some works focus on the changes on people's relations to space brought by transnationalism. Cultural studies and social scholars analyze how people's relations to space have been transformed by the fact "that large numbers of people now live in social worlds that are stretched between, or dually located in, physical places and communities in two or more nation-states. [.] Together the multiple contexts create what some have called a 'transnational social field' (Glick Schiller et al. 1992), 'transnational social space' (Pries 1999), 'transnational village' (Levitt 2001) or 'translocality' (Appadurai 1995)" (Vertovec, 2001: p. 578) Moreover, other studies regard transnationalism along with "their effects on the construction, negotiation and reproduction of individual and group identities" (Vertovec, 2001: p.573). Considering diasporas as the hallmarks of transnationalism, this perspective relies on the idea that "the condition of transnationalism is comprised of ever-changing representations that provide an 'imaginary coherence' for a set of malleable identities" (Vertovec, 1999: p. 450). As Cohen points out, "transnational bonds no longer have to be cemented by migration or by exclusive territorial claims. In the age of cyberspace, a diaspora can [.] be held together or re-created through the mind, through cultural artifacts and through a shared imagination" (Cohen, 1996: p. 516) In relation to globalization, Sklair uses the term transnational as synonym of global. From her point of view, transnational practices are those that "cross state boundaries but do not necessarily originate with state agencies or actors" (Sklair, 1998: p. 2). She asserts that transnational practices function in three spheres: 1) the economic, which its institutional form is the transnational corporation; 2) the political, with a still developing transnational capitalist class; and 3) the culture-ideology sphere, with its culture-ideology of consumerism. Opposed to this view, Kearney distinguishes transnationalism from globalization, recognizing that although they overlap, transnationalism has a more restricted scope. According to him, "whereas global processes are largely decentered from specific national territories and take place in a global space, transnational processes are anchored in and transcend one or more nation-states. [.] Transnational calls attention to the cultural and political projects of nation-states as they vie for hegemony in relations with other nation-states, with their citizens and "aliens", [.] whereas globalization implies more abstract, less institutionalized, and less intentional processes occurring without reference to nations" (Kearney, 1995: p. 548). The latter meaning assigned to transnationalism as a "situated" process concurs with those arguments that criticize the idea of transnationalism as deterritorialization, as a "boundless" process. Guarnizo and Smith resist the concepts of "deterritorialization" and "unboundedness" , since to them, "transnational practices [.] are embodied in specific social relations established between specific people, situated in unequivocal localities, at historically determined times" (Smith & Guarnizo, 1998: p.11). In addition, they disagree with the tendency to consider transnationalism as "an expression of a subversive popular resistance 'from below' [.] to escape control and domination 'from above' by capital and the state" (p. 5). They argue that although transnational practices and hybrid identities may be potentially counter-hegemonic, they are not always resistant and yet, sometimes they perpetuate hegemonic practices and discourses. Moreover, Mitchell asserts that "in the era of global capitalism, the heralding of subject positions "at the margins" too often neglects the actual marginalization of subjects" (Mitchell, 1997: p. 109). In sum, these cultural studies perspectives on transnationalism are criticized due to the scarce attention given to the restructuration of global capitalism. "Without an understanding of power relations, one that transcends purely local knowledge, the possibility of political and economic resistance is greatly diminished" (Mitchell, 1997: p. 109). Taking into account the aforementioned, one can conclude that there is a lack of consensus on what transnationalism means. The appropriation of this term in fields like anthropology, sociology, political science, geography and other social disciplines seems to have affected its analytical power by increasing its ambiguity. (Cano, 2004). However, there seems to be a tacit agreement on its consideration as a multifaceted and complex process, which is embedded in power relations that affect practices across borders. In this sense, Smith & Guarnizo's definition of transnational social formation seems to synthesize more appropriately those latter traces: 'Transnational social formation" [.] signifies the transterritorialization of a complex array of socioeconomic and political asymmetries, hegemonic discourses, and contradictory cultural practices and identities, which center around the formation and reconstitution of the nation-state." (Smith & Guarnizo, 1998: p. 27) References Basch, L.,et al. 1994. Nations unbound: transnational projects, post-colonial predicaments, and the de-territorialized nation-states , Langhorne, PA: Gordon and Breach. Caglar, A. 2001. Constraining metaphors and the transnationalisation of spaces in Berlin, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies , vol. 27, Nº4: 601-614. Cano, G. 2004. On transnationalism, Mexico North Research Network, Transnationalism Research Project Database: Statements. http://www.mexnor.org/programs/TRP/covernew.htm. Cohen, R. 1996. Diasporas and the nation-state: from victims to challengers, International Affairs , vol. 72: 507-520. Kearney, M. 1995. The local and the global: The Anthropology of Globalization and Transnationalism, Annu. Rev. Anthropol.. Vol. 24 547-565. Mitchell, K. 1997. Transnational discourse: Bringing geography back in, Antipode Vol. 29 Nº2: 101-114. Portes, A. 1997. Globalization from below: The rise of transnational communities. Working Paper on Transnational Communities Programme , Princeton University. Retrieved on 3/29/05 from http://www.transcomm.ox.ac.uk/working_papers.htm. Sklair, L. 1998. Transnational practices and the analysis of the global system, Seminar delivered for the Transnational Communities Program Seminar Series, 22. Smith, M. P. & Guarnizo, L. E. 1998. Transnationalism from below, Comparative Urban and Community Research Vol. 6, New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. Vertovec, S. 2001. Transnationalism and identity, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies Vol. 27, Nº4: 573-582. Vertovec, S. 1999. Conceiving and researching transnationalism, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies Vol. 22, Nº2.
|