Simboliai kaip mokyklos kultūros dalis

LTStraipsnyje pristatomi tyrimo „Oficialioji ir demotinė mokyklos kultūra: įtampos laukų analizė“1 (2014–2015 m.) rezultatai. Šio etnografiniu jautrumu pasižyminčio tyrimo metu, taikant kokybinius tyrimo metodus (interviu, pokalbius, stebėjimą ir kt.), pagrindinis dėmesys buvo sutelktas į mokyklos diskurso, erdvių, laiko, ritualų, artefaktų, simbolių analizę ir interpretaciją. Straipsnyje išsamiau aptariami simboliai. Antropologinė prieiga ir eminis požiūris leido atskleisti šio mokyklos kultūros dėmens funkcijas, išskirti pagrindinius su simbolių naudojimu susijusius įtampos laukus. Pristatant empirinio tyrimo rezultatus, išskiriami simboliai mokykloje (pvz., įspėjamieji, nurodomieji ženklai, valstybinė simbolika ir t. t.) ir mokyklos simboliai (pvz., oficialus mokyklos logotipas, mokyklos pavadinimas, uniforma ir kt.). [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Eminis požiūris; Esminis požiūris; Mokyklos kultūra; Simboliai; Ugdymo antropologija; Anthropology of education; Essential approach; School culture; Symbols.

ENThe results of the research Dominant and Demotic School Culture: Analysis of Tension Fields (2014-2015) are presented in the paper. Qualitative data analysis using interviews, observation, etc. was chosen for this ethnographically sensitive study. Discourses on the space, time, symbols, rituals, artefacts were analysed and interpreted. An anthropological approach viewing the topic from an emic perspective allowed the author to reveal the function of symbols, the concept of school culture, to identify the main tension fields among dominat and demotic school culture. The empirical research revealed that warnings, instructions, prohibition signs, national symbols, logos, school names, uniforms, etc. are used to represent the school. The administrative, teaching staff and students were asked not only to indicate their school symbols but also what they mean for the school community and whether they are recognised outside the school. C. Geertz’s idea that the majority of symbols are used spontaneously, without thinking was confirmed. A number of the informants, students in particular, were unable indicate the meaning of their school symbols. The analysed symbols were mostly used to represent the school and little to create its image. The national symbols were not part of school image, some students would not even notice them probably because they were presented as modern artefacts in the majority of school classrooms. The administrative and teaching staff emphasised that, on the one hand, the abundance of school symbols, encourages one to find his “own” symbol, to identify himself with it, on the other hand, if a symbol is not acknowledged by others it loses its function to unite and bind the community. [From the publication]