The Media in Intercultural Education: From Social Reproducers of Racist Prejudice to Educational...

Building Intercultural Competences

A Handbook for Professionals in Education, Social Work and Health Care

Maria Giovanna Onorati and Furio Bednarz(editors)

Acco Leuven / Den Haag

First edition: 2010

Published by Uitgeverij Acco, Blijde Inkomststraat 22, 3000 Leuven (België)E-mail: [email protected] – Website: www.uitgeverijacco.be

For the Netherlands:Delivery – : Centraal Boekhuis bv, CulemborgCorrespondence – : Acco Nederland, De Star 17, 2266 NA Leidschendam

Cover: www.frisco-ontwerpbureau.be

© 2010 by Acco (Academische Coöperatieve Vennootschap cvba), Leuven (België) No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by mimeograph, fi lm or any other means without permission in writing from the publisher.

D/2010/0543/180 NUR 740 ISBN 978-90-334-7971-7

This book has been published with funds of University of Valle d’Aosta – Université de la Vallée d’Aoste and of ECAP Foundation – Switzerland.

The ICIC learning Programme, to which this book is primarily devoted, was funded by the European Commission. The authors are solely responsible for this publication and the Commission disclaims all responsibility for any use that may be made of infor-mation contained within it.

Contents

Introduction 9

Maria Giovanna Onorati and Furio Bednarz

PART 1. A Multidisciplinary Theoretical Framework for Intercultural Competency 25

THE CONTRIBUTION OF PEDAGOGY TO INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION 27

1. Interculturality as an Educational Task in Global Societies 29

Angela Perucca

2. Building Up Intercultural Competences: Challenges andLearning Processes 39

Furio Bednarz

THE CONTRIBUTION OF ANTHROPOLOGY TO INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION 53

3. The Use of Hermeneutics in Dealing with Cultural Diversity 55

Attila Dobos

THE CONTRIBUTION OF SOCIOLOGY TO INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION 67

4. Understanding Diversity, Boundaries and Identifi cation in the Contextof Cultural Diversity 69

Éva Nagy & István Vingender

6 | Contents

5. Sociality as a Basic Dimension of Intercultural Competences. Intercultural Education in a Sociological Perspective 79

Maria Giovanna Onorati

PILLARS OF INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION 103

6. Unesco Guiding Principles for Intercultural Education 105

Elisa Palomba

7. “Expanding Roles” as a Condition for an Intercultural Approach to Education: The I-3 Model 111

Filip Dejonckheere

PART 2. Learning Pathways. Tools and Methods for Developing Intercultural Awareness 131

1. The Relevance of Conceptual Maps in Intercultural Education 133

Carmen Indirli

2. The Media in Intercultural Education: From Social Reproducers ofRacist Prejudice to Educational Tools to Contrast Xenophobia 147


3. Approving Skills for Caregivers: (Inter)cultural Awareness 161

Reyhan Görgöz & Eric Van der Meirsch

4. Confronting Interculturality Using City Exploration 181

Reyhan Görgöz, Tom Claeys & Johan Hoozee

5. Case Studies and Interdisciplinary Teams in SolvingIntercultural Challenges 195

Päivi Rimpioja & Mai Salmenkangas

6. Refl ective Strategies and Tools, Between Individual and SocialDimensions. Diaries, Debriefi ng Sessions, Tutoring 209

Furio Bednarz & Andrea Leoni

Contents | 7

7. Final Reports: Enhanced Refl ective Tools for Evaluating Intercultural Competences 237

Candan Oztürk

PART 3. Evaluating Intercultural Learning 245

1. Measuring the Effects of an Intercultural Learning Process:The Case of ICIC 247

Giorgio Comi

2. Social Background as a Clustering Factor of Students’ Evaluation ofthe Learning Pathway 269


References 287

2. The Media in Intercultural

Education: From Social Reproducers

of Racist Prejudice to Educational

Tools to Contrast Xenophobia


Media Education is, then, one of the few instruments which teachersand students possess for beginning to challenge the great inequalities in

knowledge and power which exist between those who manufactureinformation in their own interests and those who consume

it innocently as news or entertainment(Masterman, 1985: 11)

2.1 Media Education and intercultural competency

Nowadays teaching the media in the sense meant by Masterman (1985) has become a primary need in any educational planning process, as it is a highway to developing cultural awareness. As already recommended by UNESCO (1982), the role of com-munication and media should not be underestimated in the process of personal and social development, nor the function of the media as a primary tool for citizens active participation in society. Political and educational systems should acknowledge as a priority the need to promote in citizens a critical understanding of the phenomena of media communication and its influence on the public sphere.

As a matter of fact, in current societies we are immersed in such a media saturated environment, that the distinction between reality and simulacra of reality created by the media is becoming increasingly blurred (Baudrillard, 1991). By highlighting the crucial role played by media representations within the social construction of reality,

148 | Maria Giovanna Onorati

teaching (and learning) media serves a wide democratic goal that can be summarized under the concept of empowerment. Media outlines a symbolic field that is not at all neutral, but rather strongly ideological, as it is concerned with economic and political interests, which in turn mirror underlying power relations in society. This is the reason for which, in the wake of Masterman, teaching and learning media becomes part of an ambitious educational and cultural democratic planning process aimed at breaching gaps in knowledge produced by unequal access to information within society and, by revealing the communicative project underlying messages, enhances critical under-standing of the hidden dynamics at the basis of consensus and social reproduction.

As we well know, ever since the Orson Welles’ play in 1937 when a radio broadcast announced an invasion of Martians in an extremely realistic way creating panic among the audience, the media can influence the public sphere in a very drastic and extensive way, and thus deeply affect and mould people’s attitudes and behaviour. Later, from the Sixties onwards to be precise, social theory, in particular that which developed within the so-called Cultural Studies, focused on the relationship between communica-tion and culture and assumed the media to be a social definer in mass-communication societies (Hall E., 1959 and 1966). In particular, they emphasized the role played by the media on socialization and on the definition of the social space in complex societies (Silverstone, 1999), with a particular stress on its power of discrimination, especially in representing race (Ferguson, 1998), with the consequent ideological (and politi-cal) effect of conditioning common attitudes towards differences (Thompson, 1995). Thanks to Cultural Studies, media representation of “race” was definitely assumed not only as a matter of identity and belonging, but also (and primarily) as an ideological matter of power relations in society and of reproduction of such relations. As a result of its demystifying of the role played by symbolic universes within social reality, the use of the media becomes particularly important in an intercultural education pathway, especially in the part concerned with developing awareness to one’s own culture and the filters it interposes in the perception of reality.

Mapping the ideological field – especially that concerning ethnic differences – out-lined by the media through the way in which messages are constructed and organized within a communicative project, and highlighting the social characteristics of such a terrain where power relations are at work, are integral goals of any intercultural education project based on a holistic approach to knowledge and, consequently, to competency.

2.2 Neo-racism in complex societies

In our “diasporic” societies (Appadurai, 2001: 40-41), characterized by different “ethnoscapes” and “ideoscapes” created both by individual physical mobility and by the mass media, with the effect of a coexistence of different symbolic frames within the same context (ivi: 68-70), racism has become more complex than in the past. In fact, in

The Media in Intercultural Education | 149

these societies, in which ethnic and cultural differences have become part of everyday experience, the classical forms of racism that overtly reject differences by invoking the concepts of “race” and “superiority” as a “biologization” of differences, is no longer possible. Authors like Taguieff, Wieviorka help us trace back the symbolic processes underpinning current forms of racism, by pointing out the increasingly communicative and symbolic (disguised) basis underlying the discriminatory mechanism for “raciali-zation”, that is assuming cultural differences as natural unchangeable features, that mark subjects as “imperfectible” and hence, inferior (Taguieff, 1998: 67).

A new kind of racism has emerged in our multi-ethnic and multi-cultural societies: a discrimination that instead of denying differences, absolutizes them, thus giving life to a more insidious neo-racism called “differencialism” (Taguieff, 1998: 60). It is a phenomenon of social construction of racist discrimination passing through deceitful and disguised forms of stereotyping and de-individualization. This neo-racism with-out a race (Taguieff, 1998), mainly based on symbolic processes of “ethnicization of conflicts” and radicalization of differences instead of their negation, is the effect of a defective multiculturalism, that denies differences behind their apparent acceptance. Racism without race is a phenomenon owing much to the fact that racism has entered and affected our common sense by acting on the unsuspected level of implicit forms of exclusion and discrimination. This kind of racism has entered the realms of that practical shared normative knowledge that is “common sense”; what Schütz defines as “what I know that everyone knows”. It is a racism tangled up in those taken-for-granted interpretative schemes springing from routines, that suspend doubt and provides peo-ple with a sense of ontological safety (Berger – Luckmann, 1969: 42). An analysis of current forms of racism should mainly focus on the symbolic processes that work on the “normality of prejudice in common sense” (Allport, 1954), thus normalizing and legitimating racism. It is an analysis that questions common sense; that is the cogni-tive field relying upon scarcely mediated cognitive processes, such as perception. By drawing on taken-for-granted schemes of action, this analysis brings to the fore the perceptive automatisms on which the veiled and deceitful forms of reproduction of prejudice act.

It is a racism in which the classical statement of inequality between races turns into a skilful process of symbolic enclosure of the differences, thus giving life to a fatal antagonism between them. It is a neo-racism no longer relying upon open ethnocen-trism, but rather starting from a condition of apparent acceptance of difference, eas-ily confused with cultural relativism. This is what Taguieff calls the passage from an “eterophobic” to an “eterophilic” racism that springs from the acknowledgement and radicalization of differences instead of their negation (Taguieff, 1998: 107).

These new forms of prejudice and intolerance, which Wieviorka (2002) calls “infra-racism” with reference to its diffused nature, rely upon the reproduction of a “reason-able”, “sensible” prejudice, consisting in “behaviours of identitarian closure that can emerge in the contexts in which cultural difference is asserted” (Wieviorka, 2002: XIII). It is a kind of pondered prejudice (a sort of oxymoron), in which hostile contents are rarely expressed in an absolute way, but rather disguised and inserted in a context of


arguments and counter-arguments that aim at proving a certain acquaintance with the subject matter and at justifying such discriminating positions. The bedrock of this dif-fused infra-racism lies in its disguised concept of normality which is strongly worked on by the media (Ferguson, 2002). The Media, with its incessant attempts to capture and control the largest share of public opinion, plays an important role in such a “nor-malization” of racism (Ferguson, 1998; Giaccardi 2005) as it bases its world-wide reach mainly on a hypertrophic use of stereotypes and prejudices as schemes to simplify a reality which is becoming increasingly complex and unpredictable, with the effect of what Van Djik calls the “daily construction of the prejudice” (Van Dijk, 1998).

2.3 Reproduction of racist prejudice and mass media

As Silverstone points out, the media is central to our daily life insomuch as it is one of the elements that contributes to the process of conveying sense to experiences and to construction of its meanings (Silverstone, 1999: 19). In fact it provides collective emotions capable of mobilizing larger and larger audience shares, by permeating the fabric of daily experience through the filters of a surprising, and even shocking repre-sentation of reality that, by its recursivity, in the end results as “normalized”. Media representations are therefore social facts that develop shared landscapes of knowledge: mediascapes as ideoscapes and ethnoscapes (Appadurai, 2001).

As pointed out by Wieviorka, (1993 and 2000) the more differentialistic racism is, the more central the role of the mass media becomes, because its way of showing cultural differences, whether real or imagined, is spectacular and on a large scale. As a matter of fact the media is able to provide us with fake worlds and to show these as if they were true, with the effect of turning an unusual reality into something obvious and even taken for granted. The worldwide social visibility achieved by such a distorted media perception of reality inevitably clashes with increasingly differentiated contexts and pre-existing habits so that at the end the conflict among them is inevitable.

Within an educational context aimed at developing intercultural competences, it is necessary to provide socio-cognitive instruments that may adequately allow us to look into these symbolic strategies of infra-racism nurtured by the media in our society. These dynamics must be detected not only at the institutional level (official docu-ments such as laws, rules, statutes, instructions, modules, documents, reports and other official texts) but also, more importantly, in informal communicative situations that characterize our daily routines, which bring into play “typizations” (Berger–Luck-mann, 1969), “thinking-as-usual” (see infra, see Part I, Chapter 5), that is all those highly shared systems of signification through which stereotypes are reproduced and strengthened. With regard to this latter point, we cannot forget the effect of praxis’ “grammaticalization” provoked by the mass media – especially by television – that is inseparable from its appeal and involvement (Casetti 1988). As pointed out by Casetti, “grammaticalization” is a sort of “labelling of daily action” deriving from a spiral effect


between media and social action, according to which the media (especially television, because of its merging with the domestic setting) trace daily actions and, by represent-ing them, transform them into “exemplary” actions that turn into “canons of action”, which are in turn assumed to pilot daily actions (Casetti, 1988: 25).

We understand that media representations play a crucial role in creating and strengthening mainstream visions to the widespread public and this circle becomes the highway to reproduction of racist prejudice if we consider that mass-media gives us more and more access to contexts that are quite beyond our direct experience.

Intercultural education should therefore count, among its main goals, that of trac-ing the abovementioned discursive structures, that orientate common sense and that eventually strengthen the existing commonplaces, de-individualize up to ethnicize the conflicts, and finally legitimate the concept of differences’ non-integrability. Such an approach sheds a new, critical light on the communicative dynamics through which the system of relations granting control of praxis turns into “public discourse” and this latter into “common sense”, through strategies that are not indifferent to the character-istics of each medium, which continuously outline and re-adjust the boundaries of our “social visibility” (Sorlin, 1979). Such an approach to media discourse makes us aware of the mechanisms of symbolization and legitimization that take place at an informal level, thus allowing the sociological analysis of racism shift from an institutional and macro-structural level to a micro-structural one of daily experience (what we see, what we read, what we hear in our daily life).

The main strategy used by the media in regard to racism is normalization, that is the first necessary step to turn racist attitudes or behaviour from an exceptional event to a “normal” one. Normalization necessarily demands an invisibilization of the cultural, ideological matrix of racism. Invisibilization means effacing the “frames” (Goffman, 1974); that is the symbolic schemes of reference within which media images are taken and inserted, so that the emotional effects provoked by these images are provided with the inevitability and spontaneity of real experience (Giaccardi, 2005). Such a disguis-ing mechanism brings about an effect of neutralization and habituation up to the point of indifference to what at the beginning stirred and even offended us (Di Fraia, 2004: 189) and it relies upon the classical play of “dissimulation” through which mainstream ideology establishes and reproduces itself.

Normalization and grammaticalization of reality are then the first steps to infra-racism, but they are not enough. In order to nurture the conflict and thereby infuse fear, a sense of danger and need for protection (necessary to legitimate an authoritarian role by the State), the media works at the ethnicization of the conflicts, by noting the ethnic origins of those who are considered responsible for bad deeds (“them”), and de-ethnicizing and individualizing the praiseworthy ones (“we”). This effect of the media, which is the main strategy for making conflicts problematic within multi-ethnic societies, is at the basis of differentialistic racism (Taguieff), which because of its wide-spread and symbolic nature, becomes a sort of “infra-racism” (Wieviorka).

In fact the mass media contribute to formulating a total contraposition between “us” (often presented in a positive way) and “them” (presented in a negative or, in


most cases, problematic way), with the effect of legitimating the polarized vision that is also at the basis of what Sayad called “State thought” (Sayad, 2002). The result is a subtly persuasive “frame of interpretation” that is functional in the reproduction of a well-defined model of society, in which difference is assumed to fit the positive idea of ourselves and the negative one of the other, and identity is assumed as functional in the reproduction of the existing power-relations.

According to Van Dijk’s idea that prejudice is mainly built up by media-discourse (press-news, audio-visual representations, textbooks, digital information), in this edu-cational pathway we focus in particular on audio-visual mass media, that, because of its high effect of reality, mould our perception by feeding visual stereotypes. Audio-visual media work as unsuspected means for domesticating our perception because although relying upon negative assumptions they do not overtly clash with a positive attitude towards “difference”, but rather develop discriminating and labelling cognitive attitudes towards the “others” by rhetorical devices, that for instance associate images of diversity with threatening situations.

Through these simulating/dissimulating operations, the media create a racist envi-ronment made of symbolic resources and circulating meanings to which actors refer during their daily life. Such operations can be summarized as follows:

definition – : of the frames within which one can understand and interpret phenom-ena (esp. foreigner = threat)strengthening – : diffusion of commonplace arguments, such as danger, disorder, escalating violence, that is all factors that create a context that feeds anxiety and increases the need for safety and the dependence on the media and on an authori-tarian powerethnicization: – de-individualization and stereotyping of characteristics that associ-ate bad behaviour with ethnic origins, so that this behaviour becomes typical of the group he/she belongs to, thus creating prejudicelegitimization – : supporting the idea of non integrability of differences thus creat-ing a polarized grammar of we/them. This action gives life to a double opera-tion: visibilization/invisibilization of reality and domestication of visibilization (see Giaccardi, 2005: 186-190)

2.4 A workshop on media and racist prejudice

In the ICIC program we developed a model of media analysis that, by assuming that the media was an important vehicle of infra-racism, activates reflective learning processes that, in a holistic perspective, bring to the fore the hidden dynamics that feed and consolidate racist “attitudes”, “mentality” and “beliefs”. Teaching media within this educational path is a learning practice deeply rooted within sociological awareness that, in the wake of Van Dijk (1994), sheds light on the following situation:


We are immersed in a society that is entirely full of mechanisms that reflect and 1. cause racism by imposing a well-defined model of social identity.We need a model of neo-racism intelligibility that is not only descriptive of the 2. effects, but also explicit about the causes, so as to highlight social dynamics that we can recognize as “racist” and also the values underpinning them.Such an analysis can enable us to stand up to racism, by letting audiences develop 3. awareness about the symbolic dynamics of reproduction of racism in order to hinder, interfere and/or block them.

Of course, being “the most specific interface between social cognition and dis-course, passing through lived experience” (Van Dijk T., 2004: 40), the media can be used as a powerful learning tool within educational contexts focused on intercultural learning. In fact, by showing the mechanisms underlying its role in the cultivation of racist prejudice, it is possible to set the conditions for making a different use of its social effects on public opinion in order to develop a different praxis.

The workshop on media and racist prejudice which we activated during the ICIC worked on different media, in order to show how different languages may convey racist messages though the apparent neutrality or even acceptance of differences.

The analysis, organized in consecutive steps that trace Gibbs’ reflective cycle (see figure 3), focuses on the cultural frames affecting the main cognitive processes - selec-tion, categorization, interpretation – involved at the immediate level of perception (Giaccardi, 2005, 199-201). The perceived coherence of the represented discourse is detected as the result of cognitive strategies of selection and sense-conveying made according to habitual bents (habitus), working as interpretative schemes generating and organizing practices and representations acquired and consolidated through lived experience (Bourdieu, 1980). The need to investigate at the unsuspected level of per-ceptive automatisms at work in our daily routines is owing to the awareness that rac-ism no longer, or not only, exists in the explicit, programmatic plans of action of well-defined and recognisable groups, but as an effect of a wider cultural planning which permeates society as a whole and affects the system of. This is something that can only be checked through a holistic approach to knowledge and communication.

Such an analysis combines the pragmatic perspective which comes from the experi-ential dimension with the cognitive level of mental habits disposed to action (e.g. “atti-tudes”). In such a constructionist perspective of media as a social definer, this analysis cannot ignore the specific expressive devices through which the medium creates, not only mentalities, but also deeper intra-psychic mechanisms that De Kerckhove calls “brain frames” (De Kerckhove, 1991).

We started with a photo-language exercise checking the simulacrum of a discrimi-nating social order based on the power relations hidden behind the semiotic struc-ture of two advertising photos for a famous brand of male clothing. The two photos are shown below (see figures 1 and 2) and start with a descriptive exercise: What is this? What do I read? What do I see? Where is the situation set? Then we continue by checking symbolic and pragmatic levels of sense-conveying by asking questions such


as: How can we infer the location, the profession, the social role of the characters? In which position are they? What is their social role? And so on. Through deeper and deeper reflection of a circular meaning de-construction (see figure 3), students become aware of the multi-layered nature of the message conveyed by this image. The mean-ing of these two photos is indeed wholly constructed upon an apparently intercultural conception of fashion as an ideal style that, as an expression of human intelligence, may cross and join up with different cultures. In any case, the intercultural message of equality among human beings openly conveyed by the caption “Great minds think alike” is denied at the non-verbal, visual level of the message. In both images there is a hierarchical disposition of three men in which the white/western businessman is domi-nant and/or at the centre of the image. The Eastern/non-white colleague (that should embody the other “great mind”) is actually in a lower, decentralized position, playing a role that is falsely equal and cooperative. With respect to the white/western man who is the active figure who dominates the scene and looks into the camera or speaks on the podium, the non-white/eastern man is in a marginal and auxiliary position. In both pictures the man with traditional clothing, the only one who is not “alike” as he’s not wearing the fashionable clothes promoted by the advertisement, and consequently, is not “a great mind”, is also the only one openly shown to belong to a well defined cul-tural context. This charcater works as the semiotic device that at the end “ethnicizes” the represented situation, in particular the social, cultural and even cognitive disparity between the three characters in the scene.

Figure 1. and 2. Billboards of a famous fashion designer in the main street of Lugano.

It is evident to what extent these photos may represent a particularly meaningful example of infra-racism carried out in the name of the acceptance of difference and not of its denial. The two photos apparently convey an ethno-relative vision based on the misleading message that fashion – elitist and exclusive by definition – may become a trans-cultural, peaceful field where gaps are breached and differences healed in the name of human intelligence; a universal gift indifferent to race and inequality.


As a matter of fact, in a more attentive analysis, the communicative effect of these two photos relies on the visual effect of a situation cast in a setting where gaps and inequalities are reproduced and fixed in a way that is as powerful as it is veiled and undeclared. The implicit message conveyed by the non-verbal level of communication is revealed as being highly ethnocentric as it denies the explicit level of communica-tion by confirming the existence of gaps that are denoted by ethnical features, and at the end reproduce a world order where white/western people are arbiter elegantiarum and, more in general, promoters of a lifestyle that is successful, and therefore desirable on a worldwide scale.

In the second part of the workshop we used movies, once again activating a reflec-tive sequence aimed at discovering the symbolic construction of current forms of rac-ism. We started with the viewing of three short-movies where the complex nature of racism and ethnic conflict in our current societies is not conveyed through a disguising communicative strategy, but openly thematized and ironically represented. As a result of this peculiar structure, the selected films are particularly well suited for use in an educational context; their story-plot revolves around critical accidents provoked by dif-ferent kinds of racist attitudes typical in our current multi-ethnic societies. The three short-movies are:

Der Schwarzfahrer 1. (by P. Danquart, Germany, 1992, 12’)The Cookie Thief 2. (by K. Sehringer, Switzerland, 1999, 8’)Relou 3. (by F. R. Nacro, France, 2001, 6’)

Each movie concerns a racist incident which takes place in a public space typical of big cities, such as airports, buses, etc..., that are crowded with different people. They are spaces where indifference is shaken by a condition of forced proximity, that provokes different reactions of ethnic intolerance from mistrust of different others up to open discrimination which are all, to a greater or lesser extent, forms of current infra-racism.

As in the case of the analysis of the two photos, the methodology adopted in the workshop is to cast a light on the communicative project underpinning media repre-sentations by starting from the simple, lived experience of being exposed to them, and arriving at a higher level of wider (holistic) understanding of racism and, consequently, of intercultural competence, through an enhanced use of reflective practices that com-bine experiential learning with meta-cognitive skills (see figure 3). The reflective ana-lytical pathway activated in the workshop strongly relies on a pragmatic design that, by exploring the stereotyping cognitive processes activated by media representations, shows the (pre)formulated “hidden paradigms” according to which racist attitudes and behaviours may be (are) legitimized and consolidated, but may also be questioned and unhinged. In the case of the three selected movies, this passage is ironically part of the explicit message. In fact the filmic structure brings to the fore how racist prejudice may inhabit our minds at an unsuspected level, even when we think we are tolerant and respectful of differences. In the movies, the ironic effect is played on the fact that,


though thematized, the core of infra-racism is not “explained”, but ironically conveyed by a powerful combination of words and images and, especially in The Cookie Thief, the narrative construction of the racist incident is wholly committed to scenes.

Reflective analysis following the viewing of films was carried out in subgroups, each of which had to deal with a level of analysis, as shown in Figure 1.

DescriptionWhat happened?

PLOT

Action plan(What would I

have done,What shall/would I

do next time...)

Conclusion(Supposed knowledge,underpinning values)

Evaluation(Personal SWOT)

FeelingsWhich feelings...

Analysis(Focus on the critical

factorsin the situation)

Figure 3. The “Refl ective cycle” – Enhanced version of Gibbs, 1988 by Bednarz–Onorati 2010 (see also infra, see Part II, Chapter 6).

The analysis was conceived as a subsequent reflective reworking of the different cognitive steps involved in watching a movie. In any case, the pathway is not linear, but cyclic: 1) it starts from the more superficial and immediate interpretative action concerned with describing facts and espousing first impressions aroused by the view-ing; 2) it goes through a deeper understanding of the feelings involved and background values guiding the story; 3) it ends with the projection of possible future actions, so that, as in a circle, at the end it is possible to recover the first impressions concerning described actions and reframe them in a more culturally sensitive perspective, aware of the cultural, ideological and personal filters affecting our perception, that proves never to be neutral.

According to the model, the reflective cycle enhances Gibbs’ one and articulates it in the following subsequent steps:


First step of refl ection: Descriptive level

Defi ning the situation: “What did I see?”

a movie –What kind of movie? A documentary, a chronicle, a drama, fi ction, science fi ction (aware- –ness of the specifi c genre/type of text is relevant to the expectations of the product and its relationship with reality)

These simple questions highlight the position of the spectator in the communicative context he/she is part of, and the role he/she is expected to play in the interpretative pact made with the screen.

Defi ning the overall meanings (topics):“What is it about?”: explanation of the content in terms of the plot. Descriptive level of experi-ence that focuses on the general level of “global meaning” concerned with the“social”, that is the “visible” side, of the habitus

Who are the protagonists of the story? –Where are they? –What are they doing? –

Second step of refl ection: affective level (and its analysis)

Symbolic construction that provides the representation with an affective tone What feelings are involved?

What do the characters in the story feel? –How are these feelings manifested? –Do they (characters’ feelings) change during the represented situation? –What were your feelings concerning the shown situation? –Did they change throughout the viewing? –

How is the text made coherent? Pragmatic step in which structural features (codes, stylistic devices, etc.) of the text underpinning its communicative coherence are shown as elements of a communicative project

What are the passages in which tension arises in the shown situation? –Which is the moment of utmost tension (climax)? –Is it a situation of shock? –How is this shock expressed? –What codes are used to emphasize this tension up to shock (music, colours, close-ups, –camera movements, and so on....)?

Coherence is assumed to be the effect of a symbolic construction, a “representation” of a specifi c social reality, in which ideal models of subjects are involved in communication.

First step of refl ection: Descriptive level

Defi ning the situation:“What did I see?”

a movie–What kind of movie? A documentary, a chronicle, a drama, fi ction, science fi ction (aware-–ness of the specifi c genre/type of text is relevant to the expectations of the product and its relationship with reality)

These simple questions highlight the position of the spectator in the communicative context he/she is part of, and the role he/she is expected to play in the interpretative pact made with the screen.

Defi ning the overall meanings (topics):“What is it about?”: explanation of the content in terms of the plot. Descriptive level of experi-ence that focuses on the general level of “global meaning” concerned with the“social”, that is the “visible” side, of the habitus

Who are the protagonists of the story?–Where are they?–What are they doing?–

Second step of refl ection: affective level (and its analysis)

Symbolic construction that provides the representation with an affective tone What feelings are involved?

What do the characters in the story feel?–How are these feelings manifested?–Do they (characters’ feelings) change during the represented situation?–What were your feelings concerning the shown situation?–Did they change throughout the viewing?–

How is the text made coherent? Pragmatic step in which structural features (codes, stylistic devices, etc.) of the text underpinning its communicative coherence are shown as elements of a communicative project

What are the passages in which tension arises in the shown situation?–Which is the moment of utmost tension (climax)?–Is it a situation of shock?–How is this shock expressed?–What codes are used to emphasize this tension up to shock (music, colours, close-ups, –camera movements, and so on....)?

Coherence is assumed to be the effect of a symbolic construction, a “representation” of a specifi c social reality, in which ideal models of subjects are involved in communication.


Third step of refl ective practice: evaluative level

Focus on the cultural factors at the basis of the cultural shock shown/aroused by the movie What is being presupposed (as knowledge)?

Which representations of identity/diversity (we/them), stereotypes, prejudices can you –recognize in the movie? How many forms of discrimination can you see in this movie? –

Conclusions/plan of action: Breaking into the story/situation

If you were one of the characters, which would you be? –How would you react? –What would you have done to avoid the confl ict? –

In this fi nal step of the analysis, the reader/spectator becomes aware of the interpretative hab-its put into play by the text, and of the communicative strategies appealing to them. The aim of this step is to highlight the hidden paradigms made of the plans and scripts according to which the author organized the text for the imagined addressee of the representation (Hall E., 2001).

The reflective circle activates a work of encoding/decoding at different levels of the media representation, that is a hermeneutic work of “negotiation” (Hall S., 1973) of the ultimate sense of the movie. The detected meaning-structures reflect both cognitive and practical categories, habits, which can be more or less convergent or contrary to main-stream values as they result from a compromise between pre-existing views orienting personal interaction and the ones underpinning the simulacra driven by media. Thanks to such an in-depth analysis, involving feelings, perception, habits orienting routines, and finally values, it is possible to make clear the subtle but close link between com-munication and what we called infra-racism nurtured by disguised forms of daily repro-duction of prejudice. The reflective circle activated in this workshop provides students with a method of fruition, that makes them aware of the strengthening, weakening or even unhinging of pre-existing stereotypes by the media, thus revealing the forms of prejudice re-produced in discourse.

2.5 Conclusions

The need to introduce media education in this learning pathway is an integral part of the holistic approach to intercultural competence, as well as it confirms the solid sociological awareness upon which an educational pathway focused on the ideal of an inclusive education is built.

Third step of refl ective practice: evaluative level

Focus on the cultural factors at the basis of the cultural shock shown/aroused by the movie What is being presupposed (as knowledge)?

Which representations of identity/diversity (we/them), stereotypes, prejudices can you –recognize in the movie?How many forms of discrimination can you see in this movie?–

Conclusions/plan of action:Breaking into the story/situation

If you were one of the characters, which would you be?–How would you react?–What would you have done to avoid the confl ict?–

In this fi nal step of the analysis, the reader/spectator becomes aware of the interpretative hab-its put into play by the text, and of the communicative strategies appealing to them. The aim of this step is to highlight the hidden paradigms made of the plans and scripts according to which the author organized the text for the imagined addressee of the representation (Hall E., 2001).


Starting from the lessons of Taguieff, Van Dijk, Wieviorka about emerging forms of racism in current multi-ethnic societies, the use of the media within this program aims at providing an adequate method of analysis that highlights the symbolically legiti-mated nature of new forms of prejudice and racism, supported no longer in the name of universalism but rather of particularism and difference. Through reflective activa-tion, we try to investigate discursive media strategies, through which racist attitudes are cultivated and normalized so that they can live together with an anti-racist system of values and opinions.

We shed light upon the invisible mechanisms of symbolization and neutralization (that is legitimisation) through which “ideology” is turned into “mentality”, and the latter into “common sense”. Through diffused action of perceptive domestication, the mass media is revealed to be mainly responsible for the neutralization and normaliza-tion of racist dynamics, as they provide the virtual and symbolic material for everyday interaction and outline daily experience by creating a space of shared emotional invest-ment and identification for those whom they reach.

Such an analysis can highlight, in non-psychological terms, the racist attitude of privileged categories (teachers, educators, social workers....) who play a central role in mediation in the socialization process and who, in most cases, tend to show a “posi-tive” image of themselves and to distance themselves from the idea of a “closed” per-sonality, affected by prejudice. We can thereby single out the “hidden paradigms” that, like a silent language (Hall E., 2001), build up and legitimate a (image of) social reality based on social inequities. To shed light on perception, the first level of organization of our sensorial data coming from experience, a cognitive level particularly rich in stere-otypes and common sense because of its low level of rational mediation, is the high-way to instilling critical thinking and cultural awareness. In its hermeneutic circle the workshop starts from the first phases of perception such as selection, categorization, interpretation (see Giaccardi, 2005, 199-201), assumed as the first moments in which we organize our understanding of reality according to a well defined perspective and bestow “salience”, thus carrying out the first operations of inclusion/exclusion.

The reflective method applied to the fruition of mass-media messages brings to the fore those socio-cognitive structures such as definition, strengthening, ethniciza-tion, de-individualization, stereotypization, invisibilization, working as communicative devices that finally normalize in our minds the “frame” of unassimilability of the differ-ences and legitimate modern racial prejudice. In Van Dijk’s words these semiotic struc-tures “can only be accounted for in terms of personal or socially shared knowledge, and require relevant knowledge or other beliefs” to be detected (Van Dijk, 1994). That is why unmasking them means setting the hermeneutic conditions for developing a criti-cal culture able to see connections between apparently separate spheres of existence, just by starting from the connection between the inner structures of the text/messages with the understanding structures of the reader/consumer.

The strategic versatility of these new forms of “infra-racism”, once unmasked and critically re-connected with mainstream messages driven by media, becomes the best possible path to build a new culture of inclusion and solidarity.

References

Abdallah-Pretceille M. – Porcher L., Ethique de la diversité et education, PUF, Paris 1998.Abdallah-Pretceille M., L’ éducation interculturelle, PUF, Paris, 1999.Abrams. R. (ed.), The meaningful learning forum, Meaningful Learning Research Group, Santa

Cruz (CA), 1996, 1.Adda J., La mondialisation de l’économie. Genèse et problèmes, La Découverte, Paris, 1996.Aerts H. – Görgöz R., Intercultureel werken in het maatschappelijke werk, Unpublished course at

the Arteveldehogeschool, opleiding sociaal werk, 2004.Allen J.-L., Long K. M. - O’Mara J.- Judd B.B., Verbal and nonverbal orientation towards com-

munication and the development of intra-cultural and intercultural relationships, in: Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 2003, 32 (3): 129-160.

Allport W.G., The nature of prejudice, Addison Wesley, Cambridge (MA), 1954, It. trans. La natu-ra del pregiudizio, La Nuova Italia, Firenze, 1976.

Alsina M. R., Intercultural communication: context, fi eld and practice, In: Rigotti E. – Rocci A. (eds.) Studies in Communication Sciences, Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, 2003: 163-174.

Anderson B., Imagined communities, Verso, London - New York,1983.Anderson J., The architecture of cognition, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 1982.Apel K-O., Diskurs und Verantwortung. Das problem des Übergangs zur postkonventionellen Mor-

al, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1988.Appadurai A., Modernity at large: cultural dimensions of globalization, University of Minnesota

Press, Minneapolis-London, 1996, Modernità in polvere, Meltemi, Roma, 2001.Argyle M., Les competences sociales, in Moscovici S. (ed.), Psychologie sociale des relations à

altrui, Nathan, Paris, 1994: 87-118, It. trans. Le competenze sociali, in Moscovici S. (ed.), La relazione con l’altro, Raffaello Cortina, Milano, 1997: 105-142.

Argyris C. – Schön D., Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice, Addison Wesley, Reading (MA), 1996, Apprendimento organizzativo: teoria, metodo e pratiche, Guerini e As-sociati, Milano, 1998.

Argyris, C. – Schön, D., Theory in practice. Increasing professional effectiveness, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1974.

Augé M., Pour une antropologie des mondes contemporains, Aubier, Paris, 1994.Augé M., Non-lieux: introduction a une anthropologie de la surmodernite, Editions du Seuil, Paris,

1992, Engl. trans. Non-places. Introduction to an anthropology of supermodernity, Verso, Lon-don - New York, 2006.

Ausubel D.P., The Psychology of meaningful verbal learning, Grune & Stratton, New York,1963.

288 | References

Baron J.B. – Sternberg R.J., Teaching thinking skills: theory and practice, Freeman & Co., New York, 1987.

Barth F. (ed.), Ethnic groups and boundaries: the social organization of culture difference, Univ-eritetsforlaget, Oslo, 1982.

Baudrillard J., La societé de consommation: ses mythes et ses structures SGPP, Paris, 1970, It. trans., La società dei consumi. I suoi miti e la sue strutture, il Mulino, Bologna 1976.

Baudrillard J., Simulacre et simulation, Galilée, Paris, 1991.Bauman Z., Community. Seeking Safety in an Insecure World, Polity Press, Cambridge, 2001, It.

trans. Voglia di comunità, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 2001.Bauman Z., Globalization. The human consequences, Polity Press - Blackwell, Cambridge-Oxford,

1998, It. trans. Dentro la globalizzazione. Le conseguenze sulle persone, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 2001.

Baumann G., The multicultural riddle. Rethinking national, ethnic and religious identities, Rout-ledge, New York- London, 1999.

Beck U., Risikgesellschaft. Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1998, Engl. trans. The risk society: Towards a new modernity, Sage, London, 1992.

Beck U. – Grande E., Das kosmopolitische Europa. Gesellschaft und Politik in der Zweiten Mod-erne, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 2004, It. trans. L’Europa cosmopolita, Carocci, Roma, 2006.

Bednarz F. – Onorati M.G., Learning to become an intercultural practitioner, in Journal of US-China Education Review, David Publishing, Libertsville (Ill.), 2010, 7 (5).

Behrens M. – Weber Guisan S. – Mottas C.L. (eds.), La qualité dans la formation et l’enseignement, comment la défi nir, comment l’évaluer? Proceedings of the International Congress ADMEE - SSRE Suisse, Lausanne, 5-7 September 2002.

Bennett M.J., Principi di comunicazione interculturale, Franco Angeli, Milano, 2002.Bennett M.J., Towards a developmental model of intercultural sensitivity, in R. Michael Paige

(ed.), Education for the intercultural experience, Intercultural Press, Yarmouth (ME), 1993.Berger P. – Luckmann T., The social construction of reality, Anchor Books, New York, 1966, It.

trans., La realtà come costruzione sociale, il Mulino, Bologna, 1969.Bernegger G. – Comi G., Ripensare tempi, spazi e relazioni di apprendimento, In: Merlini F. (ed.),

Nuove tecnologie e nuove sensibilità. Comunicazione, identità, formazione, Franco Angeli, Milano, 2007.

Bloom B. S., Taxonomy of educational objectves; the classifi cation of educational goals, Longmans Green, New York, 1956.

Boas F., The methods of Ethnology, in: American Anthropologist, 1920, 22 (4): 311-321.Bolton G., Refl ective practice. Writing and professional development, Sage, London, 2005.Bonoli L., La conoscenza interculturale. Una reazione all’inadeguatezza delle nostre aspettative

di senso, in: Merlini F. – Boldrini E., Identità e alterità. 13 esercizi di comprensione, Franco Angeli, Milano, 2006.

Bonoli L. – Ghisla G. – Loi M. (eds), Economia della formazione professionale, De Agostini, No-vara, 2008.

Boud D. – Cohen R. – Walker D. (eds), Using experience for learning, SRHE & Open University Press, Buckingam (UK), 2000.

Boud D. – Cohen R. – Walker D. (eds.), Refl ection. Turning experience into learning, Kogan Page, London, 1985.

Bourdieu P., La distinction: critique sociale du jugement, Les Editions de Minuit, Paris, 1979.Bourdieu P., Le sense pratique, Les Editions de Minuit, Paris, 1994.Bourdieu P., Language and symbolic power, Cambridge, Polity Press, 1991.Boyle T., Design for multimedia learning, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (NJ), 1997.Bronckart J-P. – Gather Thurler M., Transformer l’école, De Boeck, Bruxelles, 2004.

References | 289

Brubaker R. – Cooper F., Beyond identity. In: Theory and society, 2000, 29: 1-47.Bruner E. M., Experience and its expressions, in: Turner V. – Bruner E. M. (eds.), The anthropology

of experience, University of Illinois Press, Chicago, 1986.Bruner J., Acts of meaning, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 1990, It. trans., La ricerca

del signifi cato, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino 1992.Bruner J., Actual minds, possible worlds, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA)-London,

1986, It. trans., La mente a più dimensioni, Laterza, Roma-Bari 2005.Bruner J., The culture of education, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 1996, It. trans.,

La cultura dell’educazione, Feltrinelli, Milano 1997.Bruner J., Going beyond the information given, Norton, New York,1973.Buchler J., What is a discussion?, in The Journal of General Education, 1954, 8 (October).Butler M. B. – Lee S. – Tippins D.J., Case-based methodology as an instructional strategy for

understanding diversity: Preservice teachers perception, in Multicultural Education, 2006, 13 (3): 20-26.

Buzan T., The history of memory techniques leading to mind maps - history of mind maps, Paper-back BBC Active, London, 2003.

Buzan T. – Buzan B., The mind map book - radiant thinking, the major evolution in human thought, BBC Books, London, 1993.

Callwood L.J., Interprofessional learning among health professionals. Learning to work collabora-tively, Lancaster University, Department of Educational Research, Lancaster (UK), 2006.

Camilleri C. – Cohen-Emerique M., Chocs de cultures. Théories et enjeux pratiques de l’interculturel, L’Harmattan, Paris, 1989.

Cardinet J., L’évaluation en classe: mesure ou dialogue?, IRDP, Neuchâtel, 1986.Carter K., Using cases to frame mentori-novice conversations about teaching. In Theory into Prac-

tise, 1988, 27: 214-222.Casetti F., Tra me e te. Strategie di coinvolgimento dello spettatore nei programmi della neotelevi-

sione, Rai Vpt, Torino, 1988.Cassano F., Pensiero meridiano, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 1996.Castiglioni I., La comunicazione interculturale: competenze e pratiche, Carocci, Roma, 2005.Cattaneo A. – Comi G. (eds.), Didattica della videoconferenza. Un manuale operativo, Carocci,

Roma, 2009.Catteeuw P. – Coutuer M., Een portfolio voor interculturele competenties. Zoektocht naar een ref-

erentiekader interculturele communicatie, in Mores, 2005, 6 (3): 15-20.Cheli E., Teorie e tecniche della comunicazione interpersonale, Franco Angeli, Milano, 2004.Chiozzi P., L’antropologia culturale, Le Monnier, Firenze, 1980.Clifford J., On ethnographic authority. In: Representations, 1983, 2: 118-146.Cohen A. P., Culture as identity: An anthropologist’s view. In: New Literary History. A Journal of

Theory and Interpretation, 1993, 24 (1): 195-209.Cohen-Emerique M., L’approche interculturelle, une prévention à l’exclusion, in Les Cahiers de

l’ACTIF, Dossier Interculturel en travail Social, 250-251, mars-avr. 1997: 19-29.Cohen-Emerique M., La négociation interculturelle, phase essentielle de l’intégration des migrants,

in Hommes et Migrations, 1208, juillet-août 1997: 9-23.Cohen-Emerique M., Le modèle individualiste de sujet. Ecran à la compréhension des personnes

issues de sociétés non-occidentales, in Cahiers de sociologie économique et culturelle, 1990, 13: 9-34.

Comi G. - Bonoli L., L’interculturalità nella formazione. Quale ruolo per un istituto di formazione dei formatori?, Cohep, Berna, Giornata di studio sulla Pedagogia dell’interculturalità, 2009: 1-2.

Comi G., (ed.) Chercher pour agir, A.I.R.H.M., Mendrisio, 1993: 106 – 121.Corrao S., Il Focus Group, Franco Angeli, Milano, 2000.

290 | References

Coulby D., Intercultural education: Theory and practice. In: Intercultural Education, 2006, 17 (3): 245-257.

d’Ovidio F. - Onorati M.G., Esplorazione dei paradigmi latenti di interculturalità in Valle d’Aosta tramite modelli con equazioni strutturali In: Annali del Dipartimento di Scienze Statistiche “Carlo Cecchi”, Università degli Studi di Bari, Vol. VII, CLEUP, Padova, 2008: 93-114.

De Angelis K., Bignami, F. (eds.) Formazione professionale modulare. Esempi di buone pratiche in Europa, Instytut Technologii Eksploatacji, Radomiu, 2007.

De Bartolomeis F., La ricerca come antipedagogia, Feltrinelli, Milano, 1969.

De Decker F. - Vyt A., Research on the impact of internationalisation on the higher education cur-ricula (in Flanders), University College Arteveldehogeschool, Ghent, 2002.

De Decker F., From I-3 education to I-3 Health Care, Celebration of 10-year International course on Health Care Issues, Bruges, 2007.

De Decker F., I-3 modules. (Internal document University College Arteveldehogeschool, Ghent), 2004.

De Greve M. – Dejonckheere F., Outcome competences International Course on Intercultural com-petences (ICIC), 2004, www.icic.be.

De Kerckhove D., Brainframes, technology, mind and business, Bosch & Keuning, Utrecht, 1991.

Dejonckheere F. – Oztürk C., Developing interprofessional and intercultural competences of allied health and nursing students. Unpublished paper presented at the 1st European Transcultural Nurses’ Association (ETNA) International Conference, Conference CD, 4-6 June 2008, Izmir, Turkey.

Dejonckheere F. – van der Hulst H., Manual international course on health care issues, University College Arteveldehogeschool, Ghent, 1998.

Dejonckheere F., Interdisciplinary course on health care issues, paper presented at the Celebration of 10-year International course on Health Care Issues, Bruges, 2007.

Dejonckheere F., Bridging the different professions within health care, social work and education. NACNAH-Annual conference, New York (US), 2005.

Dejonckheere, F., Clientgericht werken en diversiteit in theorie en praktijk, 2006, in: Kinébanian A. – Le Granse M., Grondslagen van de ergotherapie, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2006.

Dejonckheere F., International Course on Intercultural Competences (ICIC), ASAHP-Annual con-ference, Tampa, US, 2006.

Dejonckheere F., Manual international course on health care issues, University College Artevelde-hogeschool, Ghent, 2004.

Delors J. (ed.), Learning: The treasure within, Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-fi rst Century, UNESCO Publishing, 1996, available in: http://www.unesco.org/delors/.

Demorgon J. – Lipiansky M., L’interculturel en formation, Retz, Paris, 1998.

Demorgon J. – Ludemann O., Pour le développement d’une compétence interculturelle en Europe. Quelles formations? Quelles sanctions qualifi antes? Ofaj, Paris,1996.

Deraeck G., Culturen in meervoud. Aspecten van intercultureel (ped)agogisch handelen in onder-wijs, vormingswerk en hulpverlening, Kritak, Daman, 2003.

Di Nallo E. – Guidicini G. – La Rosa M. (Eds.), Identità e appartenenza nella società della globaliz-zazione, Franco Angeli, Milano, 2004.

Doise, W. - Palmonari A. L’étude des représentations sociales, Delachaux & Niestlé, Neuchâtel, 1986.

Dominelli L., Anti-racist social work. A challenge for white practitioners and educators, Mac-millan, London, 1988.

Donnan H. – Wilson M.T., Nation, state and identity at international borders, in: Donnan H. – Wilson T. (eds.), Border identities. Nation and the state at international frontiers, Cambridge University Press, 1998: 1-31.

References | 291

Erskine J.A. – Leenders M. – Michiel R. – Mauffette-Leenders L., Teaching with cases, Ivey Pub-lishing, Richard Ivey School of Business, The University of Western Ontario, London - Can-ada, 1998.

Farr R. – Moscovici S. (eds.), Social representations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1984, It. trans. Rappresentazioni sociali, il Mulino, Bologna, 1989.

Farra H., The refl ective thought process: John Dewey revisited, in The Journal of Creative Behav-iour, 1998, 22 (1): 1-8.

Feischmidt M., Multikulturalizmus: kultúra, identitás és politika új diskurzusa. In: Feischmidt M. (eds.), Multikulturalizmus, Osiris, Budapest, 1997: 7-29.

Ferguson R., Representing ‘race’, Arnold, London, 1998.Festinger L., A theory of cognitive dissonance, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1957.Foucault M., Of other spaces. In: Diacritics – a review of contemporary criticism, 1986, 16 (1):

22-27.Fry H.. – Ketteridge S. - Marshall S., A handbook for teaching and learning in Higher Education,

Kogan Page, Glasgow, 1999.Furbert C. - Hickie J. - Lee K. - McLoughli A. - Boggis C. - Sutton A. - CookeS. - Wakefi eld A.,

Interprofessional education in a midwifery curriculum:the learning through the exploration of the professional task project (LEAPT), in: Midwifery, 2004, 20: 358-366.

Gadamer H-G., Wahrheit und Methode, Gesammelte Werke, 1, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, 1990.Gans H. J., Symbolic ethnicity in America. In: Ethnic and Racial Studies, Routledge, Philadelphia,

1979, 2(1):1-20.Gardner H., Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences, Basic Books, New York 1983, It.

trans. Formae mentis. Saggio sulla pluralità della intelligenza, Feltrinelli, Milano 1987.Gather Thurles M., Innover au coeur de l’établissement scolaire, ESF, Issy-les-Moulineaux, 2000.Geertz C., The interpretation of cultures, Basic Books, New York, 2000.Giaccardi C., La comunicazione interculturale, il Mulino, Bologna, 2005.Giaccardi G. – Magatti M., L’io globale. Dinamiche della socialità contemporanea, Laterza, Roma-

Bari, 2003.Gibbs G., Learning by doing. A guide to teaching and learning methods, Further Education Unit,

London, 1988.Giddens A., Modernity and self-identity. Self and society in the late modern age, Polity Press,

Cambridge, 1991.Goffman E., Frame Analysis. An essay on the organization of experience, Harvard University

Press, Cambridge (MA), 1974.Goffman E., Behavior in public places: Notes on the social organization of gatherings, Free press of

Glencoe, New York, 1963, It. trans. Il comportamento in pubblico, Einaudi, Torino, 1971.Goleman D., Social intelligence: The new science of human relationships, Bantam Books, New

York, 2006, It. trans. L’intelligenza sociale, Rizzoli, Milano, 2006.Görgöz R., Intercutureel werken, Arteveldehogeschool, opleiding sociaal werk, Unpublished

course, 2005.Görgöz R., Gemeenschapsvorming en Diversiteit. De Dr. Jeckyll & Mr. Hyde of de Bert & Ernie van

het hedendaagse samenleven? In: Cockx F. - De Vriendt J., (eds.), ‘Ne zanger is een groep’: over gemeenschapsvorming, Socius, WisselWERK Cahier, 2006: 70-85.

Görgöz R., Culturele antropologie, Arteveldehogeschool, opleiding sociaal werk, Unpublished course, 2009.

Görgöz R. – Dierckx Ch., Diversiteitsvraagstukken, Arteveldehogeschool, opleiding sociaal werk, Unpublished course, 2008.

Granovetter M., The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited, in Sociological Theory, 1983, 1: 201-233.

Grondin J., Sources of Hermeneutics, State University of New York Press, Albany, 1995.

292 | References

Habermas J., Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns: Handlungsrationalität und gesellschaftliche Rationalisierung, Bd. 1, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1981, It. trans., Teoria dell’agire comu-nicativo: Razionalità nell’azione e razionalizzazione sociale, Vol. 1, il Mulino, Bologna 1986.

Hall E.T., The silent language, Doubleday, New York, 1959.

Hall E.T., The hidden dimension, Anchor Books, New York, 1966, it. trans. La dimensione nas-costa, Bompiani, Milano, 2001.

Hall S., Encoding and decoding in television discourse, in Hall S.- Hobson d. – Lowe a. – Willis P. (eds.), Culture, media, language: working papers in cultural studies, 1972-79, Hutchinson, London, 1980.

Hall S., Our mongrel selves. In: New Statements and Society., Suppl. 19th of June 1992: 6-8.

Hall S., The question of cultural identity. In: Hall S. – Held D. – McGrew T., Modernity and its Futures, Open University Press, Cambridge, 1992: 596-634.

Hall S., Raising intercultural awareness in preparation for periods of residence abroad. A review of current practice in UKHE, University of Central Lancaster, Lancaster, Unpublished paper, August, 1999.

Haloburdo E.P. – Thompson M.A., A comparison of international learning experiences for bacca-laureate nursing students: Developed and developing countries, in Journal of Nursing Educa-tion, 1998, 37: 13-21.

Hancock P., Refl ective practice – using a learning journal. In Nursing Standard, 1998, 13: 37-40.

Hargie O. – Saunders C. – Dickson D., Social skills in interpersonal communication, Routledge, London, 1994.

Harrison L. – Malone K., A study abroad experience in Guatemala: learning fi rst-hand about health, education, and social welfare in a low-resource country. In International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 2004, 1 (1): 1-15.

Hatton N. – Smith D., Refl ection in teacher education - towards defi nition and implementation, Teaching and Teacher Education, 11 (1), 1995: 33 – 49.

Hawley D. – Richardson B., The case study session as a control system, in: Industrial and Com-mercial Training, 1995, 27 (6): 21-24.

Heidegger M., Phänomenologische Interpretation zu Aristoteles. In: Existentia, 6-7., suppl. II., 1996: 6-73.

Held D. – Mc Grew A., Globalization/anti-globalization, Polity Press, Cambridge (UK), 2002, It. trans., Globalismo e antiglobalismo, il Mulino, Bologna 2003.

Helliwell J.F. – Putnam R. D., Education and social capital, In Eastern Economic Journal, 2007, 33: 1-191, available in: http://college.holycross.edu/eej/Volume33/V33N1P1_19.pdf.

Heron J., Feeling and personhood: Psychology in another Key, Sage, London, 1992.

Herreid C.F., What makes a good case? Some basic rule for good storytelling help teacher generate students excitement in the classroom, in: Journal of College Science Teaching, Dec.1997/Jan. 1998: 163-165, now available in: http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/projects/cases/teaching/good-case.html.

Hoffman E., Interculturele gespreksvoering, Houten/Zaventem, Bohn Stafl eu Van Loghum, 2002 (fi rst edition 1994).

Hofstede G., Cultures and organisations: Software of the mind, McGraw-Hill, London, 1991.

Hofstede G., Allemaal andersdenkenden. Omgaan met cultuurverschillen, Contact, Amsterdam, 1991.

Hofstede G., Culture’s consequences, comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organisations across nations, Sage, Thousand Oaks (CA), 2001.

Hutchinson J. – Smith A. D. (ed.), Ethnicity, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1996.

Illeris K. (ed.), International perspectives on competence development, Routledge, London and New York, 2009.

Illeris K., A comprehensive understanding of human learning, in Jarvis P. – Parker S. (eds.), Hu-man Learning: a holistic approach, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 2005: 87-100.

References | 293

Illeris K., Laering, Roskilde University Press, Roskilde, 1999, Engl. trans. How we learn. Learning and non learning in school and beyond, Routledge, London - New York, 2007.

Jamme C., Gibt es eine Wissenschaft vom Menschen? Zur aktuellen Theoriedebatte zwischen Phi-losophie und Ethnologie. In: Därmann I.- Jamme C., Fremderfahrung und Repräsentation. Velbrück Wissenschaft, Weilerswist, 2002: 183-208.

Jarvis P., Learning to be an expert: competence, development and expertise, in K. Illeris (ed.), International perspectives on competence development, Routledge, London and New York, 2009: 99-110.

Jarvis P., Adult learning in the social context, Croom Helm, New York, 1987.Jarvis P., Globalisation, lifelong learning and the learning society. Sociological perspectives, 2nd

vol. of Jarvis P., Lifelong learning and learning society, Routledge, London, 2007.Jarvis P., Learning to be a person in society, Routledge, London and New York, 2009.Jarvis P., Parodoxes of learning: on becoming and individual in society, Jossey Bass, San Fran-

cisco, 1992.Jarvis P., Towards a comprehensive Theory of human learning, Routledge, London - New York,

2006.Jedlowski P., Un giorno dopo l’altro. La vita quotidiana tra esperienza e routine, il Mulino, Bolo-

gna, 2005.Jenkins R., Rethinking ethnicity, Sage, London, 1997.Johnson J.D. – Tuttle F., Problems in intercultural research, in: Gudykunst W. - Asante M. (eds.),

Handbook of International and Intercultural Communication, Sage, Newbury Park (CA), 1989.

Jonas H., Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1984, It. trans., Il principio responsabilità, Einaudi, Torino 1993.

Jonassen D,H., Learning to solve problems. An institutional design guide, San Fransisco (CA), Wiley&Sons, 2004.

Jonassen D.H., Using cognitive tools to represent problem, in Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 2003, 35 (3): 262-380.

Jonassen D.H., Computers as mind tools for schools, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (NJ), 2000.

Jonassen D.H., – Peck K.L. - Wilson, B.G., Learning with technology, Merrill Publishing, Upper Saddle River (NJ), 1999.

Jorgensen P.S., Hvad er Kompetence? (What is competence?), in: Uddanelse, 9: 4-13.Kaern M., The bridge and the door by Georg Simmel., in: Qualitative Sociology, 1994, 4: 407-412 Karrus K., Ratkaise case, Otavan kirjapaino Oy, Keuruu, 2001.Kersten G. – Noronha S., Negotiation via the World Wide Web: A cross-cultural study of decision

making, in: Group Decision and Negotiation, 1999, 8: 251-279.Kinchin I.M., Using concept maps to reveal understanding. A two-tier analysis, in School Science

Review, 2000, 81 (296): 41-46.Koballa T.R., – Tippins D.J., Cases in middle and secondary science education: The promise and

dilemmas (2nd ed.) Upper Saddle River (NJ), Prentice Hall, 2003.Kolb D.A., Experiential learning: Experience as the source of Learning and Development, Prentice-

Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1984.Kolb D.A. – Osland J. – Rubin I., Organizational behavior: An experiential approach to human

behavior in organizations, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (NJ), 1995.Kovács É., Vakmerö tézisek az identitásról, in: Fedinec Csilla (szerk), Nemzet a társadalomban,

Teleki László Alapítvány, Budapest, 2004, 221-234, available in: http://szochalo.hu/uploads/media/kovacseva_vakmero_tezisek.pdf.

Kristeva J., Etrangers a nous-memes, Fayard, Paris, 1988, It. trans., Stranieri a se stessi, Feltrinelli, Milano 1990.

294 | References

Kuper A., Culture. The anthropologists’ account, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1999.Ladmiral J.R., La communication intercuturelle, Colin, Paris 1989.Landis D. – Bennett J.M. – Bennett M.J. (eds.), Handbook of intercultural training, Sage, London

– Thousand Oaks, 2004.Latouche S., L’occidentalisation du monde. Essai sur la signifi cation, la portée et les limites de

l’uniformisation planétaire, La Découverte, Paris, 1989, It. trans. L’occidentalizzazione del mondo. Saggio sul signifi cato, la portata e i limiti dell’uniformazione planetaria, Bollati Bor-ingheri, Torino 2002.

Lave J. – Wenger E., Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1991.

Le Boterf G., De la compétence a la navigation professionnelle, Editions de l’Organisation, Paris, 1997.

Lévinas E., Éthique et infi ni, Fayard, Paris, 1982, It. trans. Etica e infi nito. Il volto dell’altro come alterità etica e traccia dell’infi nito, Città Nuova, Roma, 1984.

Lewin K., Resolving social confl icts; selected papers on group dynamics, Harper & Row, New York, 1948, It. trans. I confl itti sociali, Franco Angeli, Milano, 1972.

Lin Ho C.M., Developing intercultural awareness and writing skills through email exchange, in The Internet TESL Journal, December 2000, 6 (12), available in: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Ho-Email.html.

Lindquist G.J., Programs that internationalize nursing curricula in baccalaureate schools of nurs-ing in the United States. In Journal of Professional Nursing, 1986, 2: 143-150.

Lindqvist S. – Duncan A. – Shepstone L. – Watts F. – Pearce S., Case-based learning in cross-pro-fessional groups-the development of a pre-registration interprofessional learningn programme, in Journal of Interprofessional Care, 2005, 19: 509-520.

Lugo A., Refl ections on border theory, culture and nation. In Michaelsen S. – Johnson D. E. (eds.), Border Theory – the limits of cultural politics, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1997: 43-68.

Malinowski B., Argonauts of the Western Pacifi c, Routledge, London, 1932.Mannheim K., Diagnose unserer Ziet, Diagnose unserer Zeit: Gedanken eines Soziologen, Europa,

Frankfurt am Main, 1952.Marcus G.E. – Clifford, J. (eds.), Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Univer-

sity of California Press, Berkeley, 1986.Marcus G.E. – Fischer M. J.(eds.), Anthropology as cultural critique: An experimental moment in

the human sciences, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1986.Masoni V., Monitoraggio & valutazione dei progetti nelle organizzazioni pubbliche e private, Fran-

co Angeli, Milano, 1997.Masterman L., Theaching the media, Commedia Publishing Group – MK Media Press, London,

1985.McClure J.R. – Sonak B. – Suen H.K., Concept map assessment of classroom learning: Reliability,

validity & logistical practicality, in Journal of Research in Science Teaching, J. Randy McGinnis and Angelo Collins (eds.), 1999, 36 (4): 475-492.

Meyrowitz J., No sense of place. The impact of electronic media on social behavior, Oxford Uni-versity Press, York - Oxford 1986, It. trans., Oltre il senso del luogo. Come i media elettronici infl uenzano il comportamento sociale, Baskerville, Bologna 1995.

Mezirow J., Learning to think like an adult: Core conceptions of transformation theory, in Mezirow J. - Associates (eds), Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress, Jossey Bass, San Francisco, 2000.

Moon J., Learning journals and logs, refl ective diaries, in Good Practice in Teaching and Learning, Centre for Teaching and Learning, Dublin, 2003.

Moore G.T., Initiating problem-based learning at Harvard Medical School, In Boud D. – Feletti G. E, The challenge of problem-based learning, Kogan Page, London, 1997: 73-80.

References | 295

Morin E., Educare gli educatori. Una riforma del pensiero per la democrazia cognitiva, EdUP, Roma, 2002.

Morin E. – Motta R.D. – Ciurana E-R. (eds.), Éduquer pour l’ère planétaire. La pensée complexe comme méthode d’apprentissage dans l’erreur et l’incertitude humaine, Balland, Paris 2003, It. trans. Educare per l’era planetaria. Il pensiero complesso come metodo di apprendimento, Armando, Roma, 2004.

Morin E., La Méthode, l’humanité de l’humanité, tome 5: L’Identité humaine, Seuil, Paris, 2001, It. trans. L’identità umana, Raffaello Cortina, Milano, 2002.

Morin E., Les sept savoirs nécessaires à l’éducation du futur, Unesco-Seul, Parigi, 1999, It. trans. I sette saperi necessari all’educazione del futuro, It. trans. Raffaello Cortina, Milano, 2001.

Mortari L., Aver cura della vita della mente, La Nuova Italia, Firenze, 2002.

Moster M.P. – Kauffman J. M., Preparing teachers for special and general education through case-based instruction: An analysis of their perceptions, learning, and written cases, in Austral-asian Journal of Special Education, 16 (2), 1993: 40-47.

Neuhardt-Pritchett S. – Payne B.D. – Reiff J.C., (Eds)., Diverse perspectives on elmentary education:A casebook for critically analyzing issues of diversity, Allyn&Bacon, Needham Heights (MA), 2004.

Nicoll G., A three-tier system for assessing concept map links: a methodological study, in Interna-tional Journal of Science Education, 2001, 23 (8): 836-875.

Novak J.D. – Cañas A.J., The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct them, Techni-cal Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01, Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition, 2006.

Novak J.D. – Gowin D.B., Learning how to learn, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1984.

Novak J.D. – Wandersee, J., Perspectives on Concept Mapping. Special issue of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1990, 27(10): 921-1075.

Novak J.D., Concept maps and vee diagrams: Two metacognitive tools for science and mathemat-ics education, in Instructional Science, 1990, 19: 29-52.

Novak J.D., Learning, creating and using knowledge: concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (NJ), 1998.

Onorati M.G., LLP- Intensive Programme Interdisciplinary Course on Intercultural Competences (ICIC). Unpublished Internal evaluation report Edition 2007-08, 2008.

Onorati M.G., LLP- Intensive Programme Interdisciplinary Course on Intercultural Competences (ICIC). Unpublished Internal evaluation report Edition 2008-09, 2009.

Oomkes F.R., Communicatieleer: een inleiding, Boom, Meppel, 1986.

Oztürk C., Educational strategies for developing intercultural competent networks and quality of services, Unpublished paper presented at the International Intercultural Conference 8-9 Octo-bre 2009, Modena, Italy, now available in the Conference CD.

Park R.E. – Burgess E. W. – Mckenzie R.D., The city. Suggestions for investigating of human be-havior in the urban environment, University of Chicago press, Chicago, 1925.

Perregaux C., Odyssea. Accoglienza e approcci interculturali, ed CDC, Bellinzona, 1996.

Perucca A., Educazione, sviluppo, intercultura, Pensa MultiMedia, Lecce 1998.

Perucca A., Il compito dell’educazione. Verso l’utopia dell’intercultura, in Quarta C. (ed.), Global-izzazione, giustizia, solidarietà, Dedalo, Bari 2004.

Perucca A., Mediazione culturale ed educazione universale in Pinto Minerva F. (ed.), La ricerca educativa tra pedagogia e didattica. Itinerari di Giacomo Cives, Progedit, Bari 2006.

Peschl M.F., Triple-loop learning as foundation for profound change, individual cultivation, and radical innovation. Construction processes beyond scientifi c and rational knowledge, in Con-structivist Foundations, Wien, 2007, 2(2-3): 136-145, available in: http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/journal/2/2-3/136.peschl.

296 | References

Pinto D., Intercultural communication. A three-step method for dealing with differences, Garant, Leuven, 2000.

Pinxten R. – Verstraete G., Cultuur en macht. Over identiteit en confl ict in een multiculturele wereld, Houtekiet, Antwerpen, 1998.

Putnam R., Bowling alone. The collapse and revival of American community, Touchstone- Simon & Schuster, New York, 2000, It. trans. Capitale sociale e individualismo, il Mulino, Bologna, 2004.

Rabinow, P. – Sullivan, W. M. (eds.), Interpretive social science. A reader, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1979.

Reggio P., Apprendimento esperienziale: fondamenti e didattiche, Università Cattolica – Diritto allo Studio, Milano, 2009.

Ricoeur P., Persona, comunità, istituzioni: dialettica tra giustizia e amore, E.C.P., San Domenico di Fiesole, 1994.

Rogers C., Freedom to learn, Charles E-Merrill, Columbus, 1969.Rogers C., On becoming a person, Houghton-Miffl in, Boston, 1961.Rogoff B., The cultural nature of human development, Oxford University Press, New York, 2003,

It. trans. La natura culturale dello sviluppo, Raffaello Cortina, Milano, 2004.Rokeach M., The open and closed mind, investigations into the nature of belief systems and per-

sonality systems, Basic Books, New York, 1960.Ryser C. - Alberti G. - Comi G. - Longhi, R., Persona, tecnica, organizzazione. La confi gurazione

dei sistemi lavorativi secondo la concezione MTO, Labor Transfer, Camorino, 2005.Sayad A., La double absence, Editions du Seuil, Paris 1999, It. trans. La doppia assenza, Raffaello

Cortina, Milano, 2002.Scanlan J.M. – Care W.D. – Udod S., Unravelling the unknowns of refl ection in classroom teach-

ing, in Journal of Advanced Nursing, 38 (2): 136-143.Scheler M., Die Wissensformen und die Gesellschaft: Probleme einer Soziologie des Wissens, Der

Neue-Geist, Leipzig, 1926.Schlick, C. – Comi G., Approaches to cultural awareness, Final report – Action Research in Parent-

ing in a multicultural european city project – Grundtvig 1 229977-CP-1-2006-1-UK-GRUNDT-VIG-G1PP, 2009.

Schön, D., The refl ective practitioner, Basic Books, New York, 1983, It. trans., Il professionista rifl essivo, Dedalo, Bari, 1993.

Schuringa L., Omgaan met diversiteit. Een uitdaging, H. Nelissen, Soest, 2001.Schütz A., Collected Papers. Studies in social theory, Vol. II, Martin Nijhoff, The Hague, 1976.Senge P., The fi fth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization, Doubleday, New

York, 1990.Senior B., Team performance: using repertory grid technique to gain a view from the inside, in

Journal of Managerial Psychology, 1996, 11(3): 26-32.Shadid W.A., Interculturele communicatieve competentie, in: Psychologie en Maatschappij, 24 (1),

2000: 5-14.Shaver P. (ed.), Self, situations and social behavior, Sage, Beverly Hills 1985.Silverstone R., Why study the media?, Sage, London, 1999, It. trans. Perchè studiare i media?, il

Mulino, Bologna, 2002.Simmel G., Bridge and door, in Frisby D. – Featherstone M., Simmel on Culture, Sage, London,

1997: 170-174.Singer P., One world: the ethics of globalization, Yale University Press, New Haven - London 2002,

It. trans. One World. L’etica della globalizzazione, Einaudi, Torino 2003.Soini H., Critical learning incident technique as a research method for studying student learning,

Paper presented at the Workshop Qualitative Research in Psychology, Blauberen (Germany), 20-22 October, 2000.

References | 297

Sorlin P., Sociologie du cinéma, Aubier Montaigne, Paris, 1977, Sociologia del cinema, Garzanti, Milano, 1979.

Srinivasan M. – Wilkes M. – Stevenson F. – Nguyen T. – Slavin S., Comparing problem-based learning with case-based learning: Effects of a major curricular shift at two institutions, in: Academic Medicine, January 2007, 82 (1):74-82.

Stoddart T. – Abrams R. – Gasper E. – Canaday D., Concept maps as assessment in science in-quiry learning- a report of methodology, in: International Journal of Science Education, 2000, 22(12): 1221-1246.

Stroobants H – Chambers P. – Clarke B. (eds.), Refl ective journeys. A fi eldbook for facilitating life-long learning in vocational education and training, Istituto Tagliacarne Roma – Acco Printer, Leuven, 2007.

Sulkanen L., Case-menetelmä ja sen vaikutus opettamiseen ja oppimiseen, Lahti University of Applied Sciences, Sarjat C, Artikkelikokoelmat, raportit ja muut ajankohtaiset julkaisut, Tam-pereen Yliopistopaino Oy, 2006.

Taguieff P.-A., Le racisme, Flammarion, Paris, 1997, It. trans. Il razzismo, Raffaello Cortina, Mila-no, 1998.

Taylor Ch., Philosophy and the human sciences, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985.Teraoka A. A., Is Culture to Us What Text is to Anthropology? In: The German Quarterly, 1989, 62

(2): 188-191.Thompson J.B., Critical hermeneutics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1981.Tilman F. – Ouali N., Piloter un établissement scolaire, De Boeck, Bruxelles, 2001.Timmerman C., Onderwijs maakt het verschil. Socioculturele praxis en etniciteitsbeleving bij

Turkse jonge vrouwen, Acco, Leuven, 1999.Todorov T., Michail Bakhtine: le principe dialogique suivi de Écrits du Circle de Bakhtine, Éditions

du Suil, Paris, 1981, Engl. trans. Mkhail Bakhtin: The dialogical principle, The University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1984.

Tossavainen K. – Tawse S. – Turunen H. – Voutilainen U. – Perttula J., Collaborative learning in health care teacher training:A comprative study of Finnish and British students´experiences. in: Häkkinen K. (ed.), Multicultural education.Refl ection on Theory and Practice, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, 1998: 182-192.

Tosteson D.C. – Adelstein S.J. – Carver, S.T. (eds.), New pathways to medical education:Learning to learn at Harvard Medical School, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 1994.

Trochim W.M.K., Concept mapping: soft science or hard art? In: Evaluation and program plan-ning, 1999, 12 (1): 87-110.

Turner T., Anthropology and multiculturalism: What is anthropology that multiculturalists should be mindful of it? In: Cultural Anthropology, 1993, 8 (4): 411-429.

Turner V., The ritual process: structure and anti-structure, Aldine Pub. Co., Chicago, 1969.Turner V.W., Dewey, Dilthey, and drama: An essay in the anthropology of experience. In: Turner

V. – Bruner E. M. (eds.), The anthropology of experience, University of Illinois Press, Chicago, 1986.

Ulich E., Arbeitspsychologie, vdf-ethz-Verlag, Zürich, 1998.UNESCO, Grunwald declaration on Media Education, Grunwald, Germany, 1982, available in:

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ulis/.UNESCO, International conference on education, 43rd session, The contribution of education to

cultural development, 1992, available in: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ulis/.UNESCO, Our creative diversity: Report of the World Commission on culture and development,

1995, available in: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ulis/.UNESCO, Sharing a world of difference: The Earth’s linguistic, cultural and biological diversity,

2005, available in: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ulis/.UNESCO, Universal Declaration on cultural diversity, 2001, available in: http://unesdoc.unesco.

org/ulis/.

298 | References

Universal Declaration of human rights, 1948, available in: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/.

Van Dijk T., Racism and the press, Routledge, London, 1991.Van Dijk T., Communicating racism. Ethnic prejudice in thought and talk, Sage, Newbury Park,

CA, 1987.Van Dijk T., Discourse and the reproduction of racism, Paper presented at the World Congress of

Sociology. Delhi, Summer 1986. CRES Publication Series. Working paper No 6. Center for Race and Ethnic Studies (CRES), University of Amsterdam, 1987, It. trans. Il discorso razzista. La riproduzione del pregiudizio nel discorso quotidiano. Rubbettino, Soveria Mannelli, 1994.

Van Dijk T., Elite discourse and macis, Sage, Newbury Park (CA), 1993.Van Dijk T., Ideology: A multidisciplinary introduction, Sage, London, 1998, It. trans. Ideologia.

Discorso e costruzione sociale del pregiudizio, Carocci, Roma, 2004.Van Mens – Verhulst J., Diversiteit: denkkader, principe en competentie. Sleutel tot vraagsturing in

een gevarieerde samenleving? Vakgroep vrouwenhulpverlening, Utrecht, 2003: 1-18.Vandana S., Monoculture of the mind. Perspectives on Biodiversity and Biotechnology, Natraj Pub-

lishers, Dehradum 1993, It. trans. Monoculture della mente. Biodiversità, biotecnologia e agri-coltura scientifi ca, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino 1995.

Verstraete G., Naar een interculturalisering van het welzijnswerk, Alert, Antwerpen, 1999.Vygotskij L.S., Mind in society: the development of higher psychological process, Harvard Univer-

sity Press, Cambridge (MA), 1978.Waldenfels B., Antwortregister, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1994.Waldenfels B., Phänomenologie als Xenologie. Das Paradox einer Wissenschaft des Fremden, In:

Topographie des Fremden. Studien zur Phänomenologie des Fremden 1, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1997: 85-109.

Wallman S., The Boundaries of ’race’: Processes of ethnicity in England, in Man, New Series, 1978, 13 (2): 200-217.

Wieviorka M., La différence culturelle. Une reformulation des débats, Balland, Paris, 2001, It. trans. La differenza culturale, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 2002.

Wieviorka M., Le racisme, une introduction, La Découverte, Paris, 1998, It. trans., Il razzismo Laterza, Roma-Bari, 2000.

Wieviorka M., L’espace du racisme, Seuil, Paris, 1991, It. trans., Lo spazio del razzismo, il Sag-giatore, Milano, 1993.

Wimmer A., The making an unmaking of ethnic boundaries: A multilevel process theory. In: American Journal of Sociology, 2008, 113 (4): 970-1022.

Wiske M.S., What is teaching for understanding?, In Wiske M.S. (ed.), Teaching for understand-ing: Linking research with practice, Jossey-Bass Publishing, San Francisco, 1998.

Zammuner V.L., I focus group, il Mulino, Bologna, 2003.Zoll R., Was ist Solidaritat heute?, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main 2000, It. trans., La solidarietà.

Eguaglianza e differenza, il Mulino, Bologna 2003.

Websiteshttp://college.holycross.edu/eej/Volume33/V33N1P1_19.pdfhttp://dileahs.arteveldehs.be/dokeos/index.php?arteveldehs_auth=truehttp://iteslj.org/Articles/http://stuwww.uvt.nl/~csmeets/http://szochalo.hu/http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/projects/cases/case.htmlhttp://www.dokeos.com/http://www.geert-hofstede.com/

References | 299

http://www.icic.be/http://www.interculturalrelations.com/http://www.refl ectivepractices.co.uk/cms/index.phphttp://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ http://www.unesco.org/delors/http://www.unesco.org/en/education http://www.unige.ch/fapse/life/welcome.htmlhttp://www.uni-hildesheim.de/de/index.htmhttp://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/journal/2/2-3/136.peschl http://www.usability.gov/basics/usercntrd.html

FilmographyAe fond kiss, dir. by K. Loach, UK/DE/ES/IT, 2004, 104’Bend it Like Beckham, dir. by G. Chadha, UK-Germany, 2002, 112’Crash, dir. by P. Haggis, US-Germany, 2004, 113’Der Schwarzfahrer, dir. by P. Danquart, Germany, 1992, 12’Missisippi Masala, dir. by N. Mira, US, 1991, 118’Persepolis, dir. by M. Satrapi M. – V. Paronnaud, France, 2007, 35’Relou, dir. by F. R. Nacro, France, 2001, 6’Syriana, dir. by S. Gaghan, US, 2005, 128’The Cookie Thief, dir. by K. Sehringer, Switzerland, 1999, 8’

Date post:	21-Nov-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	universitadeglistudiscienzegastronomiche
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

The Media in Intercultural Education: From Social Reproducers of Racist Prejudice to Educational...

Documents