Der Bildungsbegriff in der medienöffentlichen Debatte

Because of permanent reforms within the educational system in Germany (from 2000-2011; to which also the kindergarten or preschool is more and more numbered among), “Bildung” [education] never loses its topicality on the factual level. Especially the first decade of the new millennia was characterized by the fact that the discussion about “Bildung” [education] was particularly intensively held. The relevant key terms are as follows: “Wissensgesellschaft” [information society], early education, Bologna, G8, secondary school, “Schulstreit” [dispute over school], “Bildungsrepublik” [the German Republic of Bildung], and educationally deprived classes of society. As social relations of a term are reflected in its particular connotations (cf. Maas 1985: 78), the educational discourse – or further its medial representation – can be used especially in order to examine the term “Bildung” [education] in its respective current form. The depiction and explanation of these reforms as well as their backgrounds are part of the thesis, since these “latest” reforms form the background for the term analysis. In a similar way, it is also impossible to leave out socio-political dimensions of “Bildung” [education]. Especially in those parts, but also in the whole work, the “discourse analysis” will be understood “as an analysis of society”, as Siegfried Jäger demands it in a discussion with Rainer Diaz-Bone (“Diskursanalyse als Gesellschaftsanalyse”, my translation, 2006: par. 56). Accordingly, an “interdisclipinary opening” (“tranzdisziplinäre Öffnung”, my translation, ibid. par. 55) is pursued here.
Further, the outcomes of these interdisciplinary “excursions” will be deduced to the question of the mode of use and the change in meaning of the term “Bildung” [education]. This approach will be complemented by conducting a discourse analysis with a “governmental perspective” (“gouvernmentaler Perspektive”, my translation, cf. Maeße 2010: 102). This necessarily causes the inclusion of the political function as well as the consequences of the rhetoric (dispositives).
The term “Bildung” [education] is part of the so called “Hochwertbegriffe” [which may be translated as ‘high value terms’], which distinguish themselves by the requirement of approval within political communication. Someone who demands more or better education can be sure to have full public support on her/his side. That is why the term “Bildung” [education] is only rarely missed in any “Sonntagsrede” [which may be translated as ‘soap box oratory’]. In its long history of being updated, the term holds a large variety of connotation. This openness or uncertainty on the side of meaning is part of the properties of a “term”. This fact alone sparks the possibilities of struggles over interpretation(s) (cf. Knobloch 1990: 67). Following Knoblochs definition, this work in progress will analyze whether new connotations have clustered around to the already existing connotations. Of special interest within the analysis will be the question whether the accusation of economization (brought up within the political dispute) of Bildung [education] can be recognized as a connotation.
The work in progress assumes that there exists a classical connotation of Bildung [education] connected to the name of Humboldt and the “Bildungsbegriff” [term of education] of the “Wissensgesellschaft” [information society]. The connotations of these two “Bildungsbegriffe” [terms of education] differ widely which allows to set up these two terms as poles of the overall discourse. Both “Bildungsbegriffe” [terms of education] will be defined by means of discourse analysis. The connotations of the other discourses, i.e. Bologna (chapter 6), the “Hamburger Schulstreit” [the famous dispute over school in Hamburg], the political affair around the former German Defence Minister Guttenberg (chapter 7), the qualifications framework (chapter 8), will be filed in between those two poles.