| Summary: | 2003年5月，本地教育社會學圈出現了一場有關翻譯Critical Pedagogy的論戰：「『批判教學論』或『批判教育學』何者較為恰當？」本文將從當時各家的主張，解析出影響這個翻譯的兩大疑旨：何謂「教育學」與何謂「批判」？
從本文的分析可見，論戰一開始關心的「Pedagogy是『教學論』或『教育學』？」，實來自本地對教育做為一個學門的歧見。這個學院建制的問題固然重要，但作者主張，「Critical是什麼？」應是實踐與翻譯更關鍵的問題。對此，筆者依次從理論、方法論層面，檢視Critical Pedagogy晚近在北美的複雜發展與對「文化研究」的興趣。根據這些特質，筆者建議，或可借用此間流行的「火星文」做為翻譯／展演的途徑。筆者期待，這種翻譯策略或可讓我們把眼光從學院拉向社會日常的流行文化，為Critical Pedagogy的
在地實踐，新闢一個向度。
In May 2003, a debate of translating “critical pedagogy” into Chinese arose in the circle of educational sociology in Taiwan. By analyzing the discourse-in-practice, the author explored two major problematics behind this controversy, namely: “what is a discipline of education?” and “what is the meaning of being critical?”
As the author argued, this debate was originally focused on the
meaning of pedagogy, which, in effect, carried an acute local academic politics— institutionalizing education into a discipline. But, for critical educators, the notion of being critical deserves more attention. The author, therefore, traced, both theoretically and methodologically, the trend of critical pedagogy and “his” emerging interest of cultural studies in North America, and proposed an alternative rhetorical strategy to translate/perform
his/her critical spirit by employing a local subculture of textspeak and netspeak—so-called “Martian”. In so doing, the author intends to identify a ground of popular culture for critical educators.
|
|---|
