| Resum: |
One consequence of the hype around globalization and education and debates on global political actors such as the World Bank, IMF and WTO-is that there has not been sufficient attention paid by education theorists to the development of a rigorous set of analytic categories that might enable us to make sense of the profound changes which now characterize education in the new millennium. 1 This is not a problema confined to education. Writing in the New Left Review, Fredric Jameson observes that debates on globalization have tended to be shaped by "…ideological appropriations- discussions not of the process itself, but of its effects, good or bad: judgements, in other words, totalizing in nature; while functional descriptions tend to isolate particular elements without relating them to each other. " In this paper we start from the position that little or nothing can be explained in terms of the causal powers of globalization; rather we shall be suggesting that globalization is the outcome of processes that involve real actors-economic and political-with real interests. Following Martin Shaw, we also take the view that globalization does not undermine the state but includes the transformation of state forms; "…it is both predicated on and produces such transformations. "3 Examining how these processes of transformation work, however, requires systematic investigation into the organization and strategies of particular actors whose horizons or effects might be described as global. |
visitant ::
identificació
