The constitution of the Italian Republic sets forth equal rights and dignity of the person, “without distinction as to sex, race, language, religion, political opinions, personal and social conditions” (art.2), and obligates the Republic to remove the causes and obstacles that can limit the freedom and equality of the citizens (art. 3). In order to guarantee the right to education, the equality of opportunities and the respect of cultural identity of every person, the school, today, is committed to establishing synergetic relationships with other extra-curricula actors which carry out various educational functions. (Indicazioni Nazionali 2012). In some way it is necessary to reconsider the role of the school as an inter-dependant institution and space, and not as a self-referential one, opened to the territory and families, which strengthens its function as an educational community by abandoning the “concept of knowledge depository” (exclusively referred to in its technical and factual form) so that it can develop outside its boundaries through shared educational planning with and within the territory where it is situated. “In fact, schools – which are not only places of learning and active citizenship, but also of legality, development and social cohesion – cannot be left alone in taking its own educational responsibility, which today involves more general commitments towards children and adolescents (especially those in disadvantaged territories) rather than just spreading literacy.” (Save the Children, 2017). In this context, two sub-systems - school and territory- must share and re-elaborate the function of the educating community reciprocally, “in order to allow everyone to express, establish and develop their own human potentials, which are unique, productive, creative and responsible. At the same time, every person should feel part of the community, be able to dialogue, face and cooperate with others” (The Chart of Educational Cities, Barcelona 1991). In this way, the “Freirerian” prospective on the concept of education seems to be realized in a creative transformation way of consistent effort which engages the individual in the critical, analytic, problematic, liberating the elaboration and re-elaboration processes. (Freire, 1977. In the project of educational Cities, the weak and passive adaptation to the historically and predetermined circumstances is avoided and the action is not seen as relegated indoors, delimited and exclusive, but rather widespread over the territory. In other words, in those domains where all citizens, children and adults, starting from school, have the power to act and experience democratic participation and respect of the common good. This is the prelude to a new idea of an educational community, which fosters resilient and proactive dynamics and promotes human, social and territorial development, because as Freire states: “No one educates anyone else nor do we educate ourselves, we educate one another in the context of living together in this world”. In a lifewide learning perspective, the “Siracusa, Educational City” project embodies a valuable example.
all’istruzione, all’uguaglianza delle opportunità e al rispetto delle identità culturali di ciascuno, la scuola è, oggi, impegnata a costruire rapporti di collaborazione sinergica con gli attori extrascolastici che svolgono funzioni, a vario titolo, educative. (Indicazioni Nazionali 2012). In qualche modo si richiede ripensare l’istituzione scuola come luogo e spazio interdipendente non autoreferenziale, aperto al territorio e alle famiglie, che problematizza la sua funzione di comunità scolastica abbandonando la “concezione depositaria” del sapere (considerato nella sua esclusiva forma tecnico-nozionistica) per uscire dalle sue mura attraverso una progettazione educativa partecipata con e nel territorio, entro cui si colloca. “Infatti, le scuole - che sono presidi di legalità, sviluppo e coesione sociale oltre che di apprendimento e cittadinanza attiva - non possono essere lasciate sole nella assunzione di una responsabilità educativa, che oggi assume caratteri generali e non solo di alfabetizzazione, nei confronti dei bambini e degli adolescenti e questo vale a maggior ragione nei territori più deprivati” (Save the Children, 2017). In questa cornice, ai due sub-sistemi – quello della scuola e quello del territorio, si impone di condividere e rielaborare riflessivamente la funzione di comunità educante “affinché ogni persona sia sempre più in grado di esprimere, affermare e sviluppare il proprio potenziale umano fatto di unicità, di costruttività, di creatività e di responsabilità e possa nel contempo sentirsi parte di una comunità, capace quindi di dialogare, di confrontarsi e di cooperare” (Carta delle città educative di Barcellona, 1991). In tal modo, sembra realizzarsi il concetto di educazione in prospettiva freireriana, come senso di trasformazione creativa, di costante lavoro che impegna la persona nel processo di elaborazione e rielaborazione critica, analitica, problematizzante, liberatrice. (Freire, 1977). Nel progetto delle Città educative, l’adattamento fiacco e passivo a circostanze storicamente predeterminate vengono scongiurate e l’azione formativa non è immaginata come relegata in La Costituzione della Repubblica italiana sancisce l’uguaglianza dei diritti e la pari dignità delle persone, «senza distinzione di sesso, di razza, di lingua, di religione, di opinioni politiche, di condizioni personali e sociali” (art. 2), e impegna la stessa Repubblica a rimuovere le cause e gli ostacoli che possono ledere la libertà e l’eguaglianza dei cittadini (art. 3). A garanzia del dirittoluoghi chiusi, circoscritti ed esclusivi ma piuttosto è diffusa nel territorio, vale a dire negli ambiti in cui tutti i cittadini, bambini e adulti, a partire dalla scuola, hanno potere di azione e possono sperimentare la partecipazione democratica ed il rispetto del bene comune. E’ il preludio di una nuova idea di comunità educante e partecipata, che alimenta dinamiche resilienti e propositive, che promuove sviluppo umano, sociale e territoriale, perché come Freire (1968) afferma “nessuno educa nessuno, nessuno si educa da solo, gli uomini si educano insieme, con la mediazione del mondo”. Nell’ottica lifewide learning, il progetto di “Siracusa Città educativa” ne è un proficuo esempio.
Scuola e territorio: le città educative per la promozione della cittadinanza attiva e la coesione sociale
Muscarà M.
;Zapparrata M. V.
2017-01-01
Abstract
The constitution of the Italian Republic sets forth equal rights and dignity of the person, “without distinction as to sex, race, language, religion, political opinions, personal and social conditions” (art.2), and obligates the Republic to remove the causes and obstacles that can limit the freedom and equality of the citizens (art. 3). In order to guarantee the right to education, the equality of opportunities and the respect of cultural identity of every person, the school, today, is committed to establishing synergetic relationships with other extra-curricula actors which carry out various educational functions. (Indicazioni Nazionali 2012). In some way it is necessary to reconsider the role of the school as an inter-dependant institution and space, and not as a self-referential one, opened to the territory and families, which strengthens its function as an educational community by abandoning the “concept of knowledge depository” (exclusively referred to in its technical and factual form) so that it can develop outside its boundaries through shared educational planning with and within the territory where it is situated. “In fact, schools – which are not only places of learning and active citizenship, but also of legality, development and social cohesion – cannot be left alone in taking its own educational responsibility, which today involves more general commitments towards children and adolescents (especially those in disadvantaged territories) rather than just spreading literacy.” (Save the Children, 2017). In this context, two sub-systems - school and territory- must share and re-elaborate the function of the educating community reciprocally, “in order to allow everyone to express, establish and develop their own human potentials, which are unique, productive, creative and responsible. At the same time, every person should feel part of the community, be able to dialogue, face and cooperate with others” (The Chart of Educational Cities, Barcelona 1991). In this way, the “Freirerian” prospective on the concept of education seems to be realized in a creative transformation way of consistent effort which engages the individual in the critical, analytic, problematic, liberating the elaboration and re-elaboration processes. (Freire, 1977. In the project of educational Cities, the weak and passive adaptation to the historically and predetermined circumstances is avoided and the action is not seen as relegated indoors, delimited and exclusive, but rather widespread over the territory. In other words, in those domains where all citizens, children and adults, starting from school, have the power to act and experience democratic participation and respect of the common good. This is the prelude to a new idea of an educational community, which fosters resilient and proactive dynamics and promotes human, social and territorial development, because as Freire states: “No one educates anyone else nor do we educate ourselves, we educate one another in the context of living together in this world”. In a lifewide learning perspective, the “Siracusa, Educational City” project embodies a valuable example.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.