The astonishing range of writings about the social causes and consequences of the Icelandic 2008 financial crisis proffers a unique opportunity to analyse comparative-ly how scholars from different disciplines in the humanities and social sciences deal with one and the same subject. How does the scholarly approach differ regarding the employment of theories, hypotheses, empirical data and concepts? Is the methodology of the humanities noticeably different from that of the social sciences? Did the boundaries of philosophy and related sciences change in times of crisis, momentarily or permanently?
Í þeirri lýðræðisvakningu sem varð á Íslandi eftir hrun mátti sjá hvernig ólíkir hópar byggðu lýðræðiskröfur og ákall um meira eða dýpra lýðræði á ólíkum hugmyndum um lýðræði. Kjarni þessara krafna var þó hinn sami: meira lýðræði þýddi aukin áhrif almennings á ákvarðanir og stefnumótun. Þannig undirstrikaði hin almenna umræða um lýðræði þann skilning að virkt samráð við almenning sé nauðsynlegur hluti lýðræðislegra stjórnarhátta. Í þessari grein er gerð tilraun til að varpa ljósi á ólíkt inntak lýðræðiskröfunnar eftir málefnum hverju sinni og athyglinni einkkum beint að þekkingarmiðuðu lýðræði. Því er haldið fram að þótt enn sé ekki hægt að segja að þekkingarmiðað lýðræði byggi á veigamiklum empíriskum rökum, þá bjóði það upp á áhugaverðustu leið samtímans til að hugsa um lýðræðisnýjungar. ; During the democratic awakening in Iceland during and after the financial crisis of 2008 it was evident that different groups based their demands for more or deeper democracy on different conceptions of democracy. Yet their demands had a common core: more democracy meant greater public influence on policy- and decision-making. Thus public discussion insisted on a conception of democracy according to which public consultation is a necessary part of democratic governance. This paper discusses different kinds of consultation depending on the particular demands in each case with particular emphasis on epistemic democracy. I argue that even though it can hardly be said that epistemic democracy is based on much empirical evidence yet, its approach is the most promising way to think about future democratic. ; Peer Reviewed ; Ritrýnt tímarit
Eitt af meginmarkmiðum núgildandi aðalnámskrár (Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytið, 2011/2013) er að búa nemendur undir þátttöku í lýðræðislegu samfélagi. Samkvæmt þessu á grunnskólinn að vera sá staður sem veitir nemendum svigrúm til að öðlast reynslu af lýðræðislegu starfi og vera þátttakendur í því. Markmið þessarar rannsóknar var að kanna mögulegar breytingar á viðhorfum nemenda í þessum efnum yfir fimm ára tímabil, 2010 til 2015. Tveir hópar nemenda í 6.–10. bekk (Nalls = 627) voru spurðir um afstöðu sína til lýðræðis og lýðræðisþátttöku með fimm ára millibili. Rannsóknin var gerð í samvinnu við tíu skóla sem söfnuðu gögnum við reglubundið sjálfsmat. Niðurstöður sýna að viðhorf nemenda til lýðræðis í grunnskólum á Íslandi og lýðræðisþátttaka virðist hafa tekið mjög litlum breytingum á framangreindu tímabili. Engar breytingar var að finna á því sem kallað hefur verið frjálslynd lýðræðissjónarmið, svo sem tjáningarfrelsi og samkeppni í skólastofunni. Aftur á móti mátti greina smávægilega jákvæða breytingu á viðhorfum til þess sem kallað hefur verið samstarfslýðræði, þ.e. til þátttöku og samvinnu. Mikilvægi lýðræðisþátttöku að mati nemendanna virtist dala lítillega yfir þetta fimm ára tímabil. Niðurstöðurnar voru bornar saman við danska rannsókn frá árinu 2001 sem þessi rannsókn tók mið af. Enginn afgerandi munur fannst á viðhorfum dönsku og íslensku ungmennanna. Þó virtust frjálslynd lýðræðissjónarmið vera traustari hjá dönsku ungmennunum. ; The Icelandic national curriculum guide for compulsory schools published in 2011 specially emphasized the importance of preparing students for active participation in a democratic society: "It is expected that children and youth learn democracy by learning about democracy in a democracy" (Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytið, p. 19). Democracy was furthermore emphasized as one of six fundamental pillars of the Icelandic education system together with literacy, sustainability, health and welfare, human rights, equality, and creativity. Accordingly, knowledge about changes in attitudes towards democracy and democratic participation since the introduction of this new conception in 2011 is of importance. The increased emphasis on issues related to democracy introduced in the Icelandic national curriculum guide for compulsory schools were to be fully implemented in 2013. Studies on how Icelandic students are prepared for an active participation in the constantly changing democratic society are few and far between. Therefore, the results of this study can be considered of importance for education stakeholders such as teachers, parents, students, and scholars. The theoretical model used in the study is based on the works of Danish researchers (Jacobsen, Jensen, Madsen, Sylvestersen, & Vincent, 2004), where democratic perspectives in a Western tradition are conceived as liberal democracy (e.g., emphasizing the rights of the individual) and republican democracy (e.g., emphasizing solidarity). According to the model, both perspectives need to be in place for a democracy to function, and it is in the tension between these two perspectives a democratic process becomes active. The goal of this study is to contribute to an increased theoretical and empirical knowledge about democratic processes and democratic participation in public schools. The research was intended to detect possible changes in the responses of children to questions related to liberal and republican democracy after the full implementation of the Icelandic national curriculum guide from 2011. The goals of the study were approached by asking two groups of children in Grades 6 through 10 (Ntotal = 627) about their attitudes towards democracy and democratic participation in the classroom. The first data collection was conducted in 2010 and the second data collection was conducted in 2015. The study was conducted in collaboration with 10 schools that carried out the data collection as a part of their own internal evaluation. The results show that attitudes towards democracy and democratic participation over the above depicted period had changed remotely during the five-year period. No changes were found in attitudes related to a liberal democracy. A slight positive change was detected regarding opportunities for participation and collaboration in a republican democracy. However, the importance of democratic participation showed a slight decline during this five-year period. According to the model of Jacobsen et. al. (2004) one of the prerequisites for liberal democracy is individuality. A comparison with Danish result from 2001 showed that about 61% of the Danish adolescents indicated that it was very important to "be the way they are" but only 47% of the Icelandic adolescents responded the same way in 2015. These results were in accordance with other manifestations of liberal democracy in the survey, which seemed stronger among the Danish adolescents. The limited change in the attitudes of adolescents towards democracy and democratic participation raises questions about whether compulsory schools had the resources to implement the changes in policy recommended by the 2011 national curriculum guide. More research is needed to explore what was done in schools to increase democracy in the classroom during the 2011-2013 implementation period. Furthermore, it is important to conduct further research to identify efficient ways for teachers and school administrators to meet the policy recommendation for an increased emphasis of democracy in Icelandic classrooms. Finally, comparison with results from other countries give reason to conduct more research on manifestations of liberal democracy (e.g., opportunities for an open and democratic discussion; respect for individuality) among Icelandic adolescents. ; Peer Reviewed
