Aasian toinen todellisuus - Suomen suurlähetystöjen monikulttuurisen johtamisen haasteet

Monikulttuurinen johtaminen on globalisaation ja nopean kansainvälistymisen takia erittäin ajankohtainen aihe. Suomessa sitä on kuitenkin tutkittu vasta vähän. Tämän tutkimuksen tarkoituksena on tutkia Suomen suurlähetystöjenmonikulttuurista johtamista Aasian eri kohdemaissa ja kulttuureissa sekä ottaa osaa tieteelliseen keskusteluun monikulttuurisesta johtamisesta. Tutkimuksen kohdemaiksi on valittu neljä Aasian maata, jotka ovat tällä hetkellä hyvin ajankohtaisia nopean talouskasvunsa takia. Itä-Aasiasta mukana ovat Etelä-Korea (Korean tasavalta), Japani ja Kiinan kansantasavalta sekä Kaakkois-Aasiasta tutkimuksessa mukana on Malesia. Tämä tutkimus on laadullinen tutkimus, jonka aineisto koostuu kahdesta laadulliselle tutkimukselle poikkeuksellisesta avoimesta kyselystä, jotka on lähetetty edellä mainittujen maiden suurlähettiläille eri kohdemaihin. Analyysissä menetelmänä on käytetty teemoittelua, jonka avulla on voitu jäsentää saatua aineistoa. Näin teemojen vertailu on myös ollut helpompaa. Tutkimuksen tuloksista kävi ilmi, että monikulttuurinen johtaminen on erittäin haasteellista kansallisten kulttuurien eroista johtuen. Arvot ovat hyvin keskeisessä osassa kulttuuria tutkittaessa ja niiden erot voivat vaikeuttaa kanssakäymistä eri kulttuureista tulevien ihmisten kesken, koska asioiden merkitykset jäävät usein arvoituksiksi vieraasta kulttuurista tuleville henkilöille. Kansallisen kulttuurin tekijöistä kieli, arvot ja uskonto ovat merkittäviä monikulttuurisen johtamisen kannalta. Tutkimuksesta kävi myös ilmi, että Itä- Aasian maissa konfutselaisuudella on suuri merkitys yhteiskuntafilosofiana. Se on muokannut yhteiskunnan arvoja, tapoja ja rakenteita. Vanhempien ja ylempiarvoisten ihmisten arvostus ja vahvasti hierarkkinen yhteiskuntarakenne ovat tyypillisiä konfutselaisuuden piirteitä. Kulttuurin ulottuvuuksista merkityksellisempiä tämän tutkimuksen kannalta ovat yksilöllisyys vs. kollektiivisuus, valtaetäisyys ja konfutselaisuuden dynamiikka (lyhyen vs. pitkän aikavälin suuntautuminen). Kaikki tämän tutkimuksen maat ovat kollektiivisia sekä niissä valtaetäisyys on myös korkea. Tämä tuo haasteita monikulttuuriseen johtamiseen Suomen suurlähetystöissä, koska suomalainen kulttuuri on useimpien länsimaiden tapaan yksilöllinen ja valtaetäisyys on suhteellisen matala. Konfutselaisuuden dynamiikka vaikuttaa lähinnä vain Itä-Aasian maissa tuoden mukanaan erittäin vahvan hierarkian, jota ei voi sivuuttaa. Tutkimuksen aineistoa käsitellään näytenäkökulmasta, eikä sitä ei voisuoraan verrata muihin organisaatioihin tai kulttuureihin. Toisaalta jokaisen kansallisen kulttuurin ihmiset toimivat tietyllä tavalla tietyssä kontekstissa, riippumatta siitä, missä organisaatiossa he työskentelevät. Kulttuuri ohjaa ihmisen toimintaa ja kansallinen kulttuuri on yrityskulttuuria voimakkaampi tekijä.

Saako historiasta selvää? Monikulttuuriset yläkoululaiset historian lähteillä historian taidot motiivien, seurauksien, historian tulkintojen ja lähteiden luotettavuuden arvioinneissa

The research assesses the skills of upper comprehensive school pupils in history. The focus is on locating personal motives, assessing wider reasons hidden in historical sources and evaluating source reliability. The research also questions how a wide use of multiple sources affects pupils’ holistic understanding of historical phenomena. The participants were a multicultural group of pupils. The origins of their cultures can be traced to the Balkan, the Middle East, Asia and Europe. The number of native Finnish speakers and pupils speaking Finnish as their second language was almost equal. The multicultural composition provides opportunities to assess how culturally responsive learning history from sources is. The intercultural approach to learning in a multicultural setting emphasizes equality as a precondition for learning. In order to set assignments at least to some extent match with all participants only those answers were taken into account which were produced by pupils who had studied history for a similar period of time in the Finnish comprehensive school system. Due to the small number of participants (41), the study avoids wide generalizations. Nevertheless, possible cultural blueprints in pupils’ way of thinking are noted. The first test examined the skills of pupils to find motives for emigration. The results showed that for 7th graders finding reasons is not a problematic task. However, the number of reasons noticed and justifications varied. In addition, the way the pupils explained their choices was a distinguishing factor. Some pupils interpreted source material making use of previous knowledge on the issue, while other pupils based their analysis solely on the text handed and did not try to add their own knowledge. Answers were divided into three categories: historical, explanatory and stating. Historical answers combined smoothly previously learned historical knowledge to one’s own source analysis; explanatory answers often ignored a wider frame, although they were effective when explaining e.g. historical concepts. The stating answers only noticed motives from the sources and made no attempts to explain them historically. Was the first test culturally responsive? All pupils representing different cultures tackled the first source exam successfully, but there were some signs of how historical concepts are understood in a slightly different way if the pupil’s personal history has no linkage to the concepts under scrutiny. The second test focused on the history of Native Americans. The test first required pupils to recognize whether short source extracts (5) were written by Indians or Caucasians. Based on what they had already learned from North American history, the pupils did not find it hard to distinguish between the sources. The analysis of multiphase causes and consequences of the disputes between Native Americans and white Americans caused dispersion among pupils. Using two historical sources and combining historical knowledge from both of them simultaneously was cumbersome for many. The explanations of consequences can be divided into two groups: the ones emphasizing short term consequences and those placing emphasis on long term consequences. The short term approach was mainly followed by boys in every group. The girls mainly paid attention to long term consequences. The result suggests that historical knowledge in sources is at least to some extent read through role and gender lenses. The third test required pupils to explain in their own words how the three sources given differed in their account of living conditions in Nazi Germany, which turned out to be demanding for many pupils. The pupils’ stronghold was rather the assessment of source reliability and accounts why the sources approached the same events differently. All participants wrote critical and justified comments on reliability and aspects that might have affected the content of the sources. The pupils felt that the main reasons that affected source reliability were the authors’ ethnic background, nationality and profession. The assessment showed that pupils were well aware that position in a historical situation has an impact on historical accounts, but in certain cases the victim’s account was seen as a historical truth. The account of events by a historian was chosen most often as the most reliable source, but it was often justified leniently with an indication to professionalism rather than with clear ideas of how historians conduct accounts based on sources. In brief, the last source test demonstrates that pupils have a strong idea that the ethnicity or nationalism determines how people explained events of the past. It is also an implication that pupils understand how historical knowledge is interpretative. The results also imply that history can be analyzed from a neutral perspective. One’s own membership in an ethnical or religious group does not automatically mean that a person’s cultural identity excludes historical explanations if something in them contradicts with his or her identity. The second method of extracting knowledge of pupils’ historical thinking was an essay analysis. The analysis shows that an analytical account of complicated political issues, which often include a great number of complicated political concepts, leads more likely to an inconsistent structure in the written work of pupils. The material also demonstrates that pupils have a strong tendency to take a critical stance when assessing history. Historical empathy in particular is shown if history somehow has a linkage to young people, children or minorities. Some topics can also awake strong feelings, especially among pupils with emigrant background, if there is a linkage between one’s own personal history and that of the school; and occasionally a student’s historical experience or thoughts replaced school history. Using sources during history lessons at school seems to have many advantages. It enhances the reasoning skills of pupils and their skills to assess the nature of historical knowledge. Thus one of the main aims and a great benefit of source work is to encourage pupils to express their own ideas and opinions. To conclude, when assessing the skills of adolescents in history - their work with sources, comments on history, historical knowledge and finally their historical thinking - one should be cautious and avoid cut off score evaluations. One purpose of pursuing history with sources is to encourage pupils to think independently, which is a useful tool for further identity construction. The idea that pupils have the right to conduct their own interpretations of history can be partially understood as part of a wider learning process, justification to study history comes from extrinsic reasons. The intrinsic reason is history itself; in order to understand history one should have a basic understanding of history as a specific domain of knowledge. Using sources does not mean that knowing history is of secondary importance. Only a balance between knowing the contextual history, understanding basic key concepts and working with sources is a solid base to improve pupils’ historical understanding.

Globaalin kuluttajan ristiriidat

Kirjallisuusarvostelu

Remembering the War and Aggression: A Discourse Analysis of Japan’s State Apologies and Commemoration Speeches on August 15th 1995-2015

Memories of historical injustices affect contemporary politics from local to global level. In East Asia, questions of commemoration and historical responsibility have turned into international and domestic controversies. The main focus has been and still is in apologies conducted by Japanese prime ministers in regards to the war, aggression and colonialism during the era of Imperial Japan. Although it is granted that state apologies are not a crucial part of reconciliation, they can be analysed as a linked but separate process within the context of memory and international relations. The purpose of this study is to examine the discourses of history in Japanese prime ministers’ commemoration speeches on Memorial Ceremony for the War Dead from 1995 to 2015 in order to analyse how the Japanese government is reflecting on its past. In particular, attention is paid on what is being commemorated and how, whether it is the war and its victims or Japan’s post-war era of peace. As an apology is a reciprocal activity, responses from Japan’s most vocal former victims, South Korea and China, were also examined. Discourse analysis was used to identify and examine the different representations of the past. In addition, the apology statements of Japanese prime ministers were analysed in the Many to Many apology framework developed by Tavuchis (1991). Primary material consisted of 21 prime ministers’ speeches from the annual Memorial Ceremony for the War Dead on August 15th and from three apology statements made in 1995, 2005 and 2015. Further international context was primarily collected from newspaper articles of The New York Times and The Times throughout the examined period. It can be concluded from the findings that in the official Japanese remembrance of the past war from 1985’s annexation of Taiwan to the atomic bombings in 1945, both discourses that reinforce apology and remorse over Japan’s past aggressions and discourses that consciously avoid doing so are used. The commemoration speeches and apology statements consistently assert that Japan has acknowledged its past and expresses regret over the acts of aggression. At the same time, the speeches and statements strengthen the narrative that Japan was a victim of circumstances as well as turn the focus on post-war peace-making or on Japan’s own victimhood.

A map of Marco Polo's voyages & travels in the 13th century through a great part of Asia, all Tartary, the East India islands & part of Africa

Nimeketiedot nimiönkehyksissä