than an Antidote Against Amnesia... Some historiographical, theoretical, and methodological ...

22 Pages·2017·0.14 MB·English

Pedagogika, 2017, 67(4), 329–350 Theoretical Paper
http://pages.pedf.cuni.cz/pedagogika/
More than an Antidote Against Amnesia...
Some historiographical, theoretical,
and methodological refl ections
on the history of education
Marc Depaepe
Abstract: As the title suggests, this article is a theoretical and methodological one, which looks
mainly at the conceptualization of the history of education as a fi eld of research. In doing so, it
is also partly historiographical, as it deals with the history of pedagogical historiography, concen-
trating on the way in which the history of education was written and conceptualized in former
times. Th e general idea is that the discipline has shifted over the years from an “over-educationali-
zed” point of view towards a more historical one – a paradigm shift that has been labelled, more-
over, as a “new cultural history of education”. On the basis of earlier studies, some implications of
this evolution are discussed further in this paper: the relevance of the discipline, the development
of appropriate conceptual tools, and the use of sources for the history of education.
Keywords: pedagogical historiography, theory and methodology of history of education, relevance,
conceptual tools, sources.
INTRODUCTION evance. Th ere is indeed a danger that edu-
cational historians, who traditionally work
Traditionally, the history of education in pedagogical institutions – general, social,
has been conceived mainly as a history and cultural historians seem to pass up on
of pedagogical thought, as an adjunct to the opportunity of contributing to the his-
“pedagogy”, delivering possible guidelines tory of education except when it comes to
and solutions for educational practices as writing histories of universities – are consid-
well as for the formation of an educational ered an unnecessary luxury as a result of the
theory. During my career as a historian of gradual historicization and the related mar-
education, however, I have become more ginalization of educational history. All the
and more convinced that pedagogical his- more so because their “discourse” is often
toriography will either be historical or not. diametrically opposed to what educators,
Which immediately raises the issue of rel- teachers, educationalists, psychologists, and
329
DOI: 10.14712/23362189.2017.1020
Depaepe, M.
other pedagogical opinion-makers wish to But what kind of history of education was
hear. But I am not that concerned about the that?
position of the history of education in the From the last quarter of the nineteenth
long term. It is my opinion that a critical century the success of the history of edu-
understanding of history is still indispens- cation in teacher training in most western
able for catching the nature, identity, and countries depended on the theoretical rel-
intellectual foundations of all pedagogical evance of the educational thought of the
activities. “great masters” (such as Montaigne, Co-
After this, I want to demonstrate this menius, Rousseau, and Pestalozzi), and,
claim by looking back historically at the probably, even more on the prospect of in-
quest for a “relevant” history of education. culcating a pedagogically correct attitude
I am convinced that this enduring pursuit into future teachers. Gabriel Compayré,
of relevance has led, ironically, to irrelevant the standard-bearer of the French history
educational research, including research of pedagogy, stated in 1884 that the vari-
into the history of education. In my opin- ous pedagogical systems of the great think-
ion it is only when we, as historians, enter ers elevated the level of moral exhortation.
the domain of the history of science that We cannot imagine that Herbst simply
we will be able to say something meaning- wants to restore the moralizing of that old-
ful, based on our own competence, about fashioned, French republican history of
possible aberrations of historical research education. Along with other leading schol-
in education. After all, the proof of the ars in the fi eld, he believes that the golden
pudding is still in the eating. era of American educational history is not
to be situated in the nineteenth century
1. THE QUEST but in the age of cultural revisionism of
FOR RELEVANCE the 1960s and 1970s, during which the
research agenda in the United States was
More than a decade ago, Jurgen Herbst, strongly determined by the methodologi-
one of the former presidents of ISCHE, cally organized historiography of Bailyn,
wanted to portray the State of the Art of Cremin, and others. Indeed, we may well
the History of Education at the end of the assume that a paradigm shift took place
Twentieth Century in North America, as under the inspiration of cultural revision-
well as in Europe. In his fi nal consider- ism: the history of ideas was replaced by
ations he said that historians of education the postulate of the social history of educa-
have to “consider anew their presence as tion.
academics in programs of professional ed- A closer look at this evolution, how-
ucation”. “Anew” implies, in this context, ever, reveals a number of diff erentiations
that there once existed a truly relevant his- that can serve as an antidote to a mono-
tory of education that was, indeed, inte- lithic and ahistorical conceptualization of
grated into teacher training programmes. the “history of the history of education”,
330
More than an Antidote Against Amnesia... Some historiographical, theoretical,
and methodological refl ections on the history of education
as Sol Cohen put it. Heinz-Elmar Tenorth Standing Conference for the History of
and other German researchers observed Education, but this certainly did not hin-
as early as in the mid-1970s that the new der the fl ourishing of old-fashioned and,
paradigm of the “social” history of educa- in my view, even dilettantish aspirations
tion could boast only a relative consensus within the same organization concerning
and that was with regard to the method- the “relevance” of the history of education
ological problem in a narrower sense: the to the solution of practical problems. One
general acceptance of social historical tools of the editors of a book that presented it-
and research techniques, including quanti- self as the outcome of the meetings of the
tative methods. But this did not eliminate International Standing Working Group
the fundamental diversity with regard to for the History of Education as a Field of
the methodological problem in a broader Research and as a Teaching Subject within
sense, namely the relationship between ISCHE simply echoed the assumptions
theory and history, not only in the fi eld of the old-fashioned nineteenth-century
of education but also in that of the social “historical pedagogy”. According to Kadri-
sciences in general. Th ere was a fairly high ya Salimova, for example, the history of
degree of dissension in the theoretical posi- education is the science dealing with the
tioning of the discipline in West Germany. regularities (laws) of theoretical and practi-
For the historian of education, of course, it cal development. Th erefore, it must make
made a big diff erence whether the role of further contributions to the solution of
his research was limited, as the godfather new tasks, set by our time and dictated by
of empirical research, Wolfgang Brezinka, the demands of modernization and educa-
argued, to that of a pre-scientifi c “reser- tional reforms oriented to the twenty-fi rst
voir of hypotheses”, or whether it was at century.
the heart of the formation of educational Without wanting to be exposed to
theory, as in the historical socialization re- the charge of methodological imperial-
search of Ulrich Herrmann or the ideolog- ism, I saw it as my duty in 1992, when
ical-critical and neo-Marxist approaches in president of ISCHE, to warn against such
both West and East Germany. a purely utilitarian treatment of the edu-
Th ese theoretical diff erences also had cational heritage of the past. In my judge-
practical consequences in the international ment, the explicit striving for ideological,
organization of the scientifi c community theoretical, or practical advantage will
of historians of education. It may be true inevitably lead to the mystifi cation of his-
that, as a consequence of the impetus of tory, to hagiographic, pedagogical hero
presidents of ISCHE such as Brian Si- worship and a partisan and presentistic
mon, Maurice De Vroede, and Jurgen reading of history – an opinion of which
Herbst himself, the “new” social history of I became more and more convinced after
education was inspirational in the found- the invitation, in October 1994, to par-
ing and development of the International ticipate in a Sino-Swiss Pestalozzi Project,
331
Depaepe, M .
as well as after a mission, in September Africa, where “historical pedagogy” is still
1995, to evaluate the existing research and used to legitimate traditional values (even
teaching in the history of education at the unoffi cially under the fl ag of ISCHE!). On
universities of the province of Gauteng the basis of the so-called paedagogica peren-
(the former Transvaal) in South Africa. In nis – a phenomenological construct about
both cases my critical comments encoun- the essences of education derived from his-
tered simplistic reasoning about “lessons” tory – one can hear the plea for a “cultur-
of the past, for a large part hiding specifi c ally-based” [that is: unicultural] education
pedagogical and political interests in edu- for the diverse ethnic and religious groups
cational reform. in the country. For Johannes Jordaan, for
Th e nationally orchestrated attempts example, “education through the ages was
to popularize Pestalozzi’s thought in China always culturally interrelated. Culture,
coincided with large-scale literacy cam- religion, vernacular and historicity were
paigns in which the integration of manual always inherently part of authentic educa-
labour and formal education was central. tion. Remember this when re-evaluating
What makes Pestalozzi attractive in China the integration of schools in South Africa
is not so much his “profound historical sig- [….] Cramming children from all these di-
nifi cance” but his “great immediate signifi - vergent cultural groups into the same class-
cance”, which is refl ected in conclusions rooms negates the paedagogica perennis.”
such as: “People of the contemporary era Although the political and ideologi-
can absorb the quintessence [of Pestalozzi’s cal power implications of such reasoning
educational thoughts] so as to direct and still have to be brought to the surface by
promote educational reform today”; “At studying the concrete social and cultural-
present the kernel [of activity teaching] historical context to which they relate,
… is still the basic ideas of Pestalozzi”; they nevertheless instinctively make me
“With life-long devotion to education and think back to how the Catholics fl eshed
indomitable willpower, Pestalozzi will al- out the subject of “the history of educa-
ways be a shining example for educators tion” in pre-conciliar Flanders. After the
all over the world”; “Pestalozzi’s thought First World War, the priest-educationalists
on [labour and technical] education still De Hovre and Decoene made an attempt
has far-reaching signifi cance for guiding to underpin education from a Catholic
educational practices nowadays”; “If one point of view through the publication of
has Pestalozzi’s universal love and readi- the Vlaamsch Opvoedkundig Tijdschrift
ness to save the world, he will be fi lled with [Flemish Pedagogical Journal]. What they
“saint’s zeal” and become ever successful”, were ultimately aiming for was a conserva-
and so on. Ironically enough, analogous at- tive revolution, “a rebirth through rebap-
tempts to make good use of the heritage tisation in the eternal rejuvenating source
of the educational past can be found in of Catholic educational philosophy”. For
some conservative (White) circles in South De Hovre, the Catholic philosophy of life
332
More than an Antidote Against Amnesia... Some historiographical, theoretical,
and methodological refl ections on the history of education
was the “cornerstone” of all modern life methodological foundations. Th ere too,
theories, “the prototype, the Platonic idea, the (dialectical) unity of the “logical” (the-
the essence of all real pedagogical thinking, oretical) and “historical” formed the core
the “paedagogia perennis”, the foundation of (historical) educational theory. Within
of real educational tradition, the mother the bounds of the Marxist-Leninist episte-
tongue of educational wisdom, the herald mology, the past appeared as the inevitable
of educational truth,” against which all and necessary developmental process to-
“idols” or “false sources” of modern educa- wards a socialist society. Th e history of hu-
tional theory would be judged. Th is com- man society was regarded as a succession of
bative position meant that historiography class confl icts. Th e diff erent episodes of the
could not be neutral, and nor could edu- class struggle were demarcated by a revolu-
cational theory. “All the theory from the tion, which in itself constituted the climax
modern understanding of historical data, of the confl ict. Once the class society had
has shown,” again according to De Hovre, been transformed into a communist soci-
“that personal sympathy constitutes a pri- ety as a result of the great revolution, the
mary condition for understanding a man, ordered nature of their blind determinism
a work, or event,” thereby indicating that was disposed of. In this socialist form of
the past had to be seen through Catholic society, people would get to know the forc-
eyes, in which the extent of admiration es that determine society. As a result they
for the great educational heroes depended became the masters of history and they
on the building blocks that they supplied could apply this knowledge to the realiza-
to Catholic educational practice. Hence tion of the socialist message of salvation.
innovators (in this case “reform educa- Th is principle applied mutatis mutandis
tionalists who wanted to start with the to Marxist-Leninist educational theory.
child”) such as Ellen Key were labelled by Without a systematic exploration of the
Decoene and De Hovre as “big children” past, the progressive construction and
who surfaced in the century of the child planning of the future was impossible. Just
“in order to put their great childishness in like the past, present, and future, theory
the place of age-old values”. and practice in Marxism-Leninism were
Th at these assumptions have contin- “dialectically” connected and thus insepa-
ued to resound in Catholic Flanders for rable from one another.
a long time requires little debate. What A number of functional consequences
is much more remarkable is perhaps their arose from these theoretical-methodolog-
theoretical scientifi c analogy with the ical fundamentals for education in the
Marxist-Leninist principles of educational history of education that were not only
history and educational theory in the for- conceived as the centre of educational
mer Eastern Bloc, and more particularly theory, but also as an essential component
in the so-called GDR, where a lot of con- of general cultural history. First of all, the
sideration was given to the theoretical- “pedagogic heritage” of the past had to be
333
Depaepe, M .
laid bare, as familiarity with the “progres- A survey in 1917 showed that only 12.7%
sive” legacy of earlier educationalists was of the teachers surveyed were convinced
very useful for historical, or shall we say that the subject had been of any use to
socialist awareness in general, and that of them. Th e answer of academics involved in
teachers in particular. Moreover, the asso- the history of education related primarily
ciation with the “socialist” heritage could to the content. Th ey referred to the role,
be placed in the struggle against “imperial- in this case the benefi ts, of public educa-
ist” and/or even “fascist” infl uences from tion in relation to the structure of Ameri-
abroad (in this case related to West Germa- can society. Th e school was the engine of
ny). Th ird. it was hoped that a problem- democracy (read meritocracy), as Ellwood
oriented reading of the past would provide P. Cubberley called it. He set the tone with
help in resolving contemporary problems, the construction of a  linear-progressive
and fi nally, it also seemed to be an aid in account of the progress of the history of
making forecasts for future policy. education. Th is narrative, which was not
Such “strange uses of the past” were devoid of triumphalism, joined in with
not just reserved for East Germany, but the general “Whiggish” (i.e. “teleological”)
were also perceptible throughout the interpretation of the target-oriented prog-
sphere of infl uence of the Soviet Union, ress in (Western) civilization, from which
with Hungary being no exception – I re- nothing but good was expected.
call, here, as far as ISCHE is concerned, However the “functional fallacy”, as
the position of Otto Vág, the third chair- Frederic Lilge characterized the American
man of this international organization. expectations of the history of education
Th e same “uses” of the past also bring me in 1947, was far from fi nished. To begin
back to the issue of cultural revisionism in with, the “success story” according to the
the United States. But the associated ques- Cubberley style further accentuated the
tion of the functional value of the history professional discourse and ethos of the
of education is better viewed in the light educationalists. In addition, the demand
of the long-term history of the subject. for a problem-oriented approach in social
While the “history of education” from the sciences from a social-reconstructive point
end of the nineteenth century seemed to of view resounded increasingly in the
be a permanent feature on the curriculum 1930s. Only in this way could a “new” so-
of teacher training in the United States as ciety, capable of managing contemporary
well, mistrust grew after the First World problems, come into being. As a result, the
War, because this part of the training did history of education risked being reduced
not seem to keep its pragmatic promises. to a part of a “social foundations” course
In the 1920s and ’30s this led to an ex- focused on current aff airs. It was only after
tensive debate on the functional value of the Second World War that the way was
the history of education, which lost con- cleared for a wider sociocultural perspec-
fi dence as a subject in teacher training. tive, in which educational history was no
334
More than an Antidote Against Amnesia... Some historiographical, theoretical,
and methodological refl ections on the history of education
longer seen as the development of “formal an engine of democratization, the school
pedagogy but rather as the entire process lay at the basis of racism, class inequality,
by which culture transmits itself across the and unequal opportunities in the United
generations”. Th is “paradigm shift” was fa- States. As a kind of therapeutic assessment
voured by the so-called revisionism of the with an idealized past, educational history
1960s, which, on a scientifi c-organization- had to indicate the possibilities and priori-
al level, was accentuated by the foundation ties of future educational developments,
of the History of Education Society in 1960 within the critical and also generally neo-
and the publication of History of Educa- Marxist perspective adopted by the radical
tion Quarterly as of 1961. Incidentally, this revisionists. Hence post-revisionists such
(re?)development of the educational past as Ravitch blamed the radicals for open-
by historians resulted in Edgar B. Wesley ing the door again for propaganda and the
changing his thirty-six-year-old lament politicization of history with their “leftist”
“Lo, the poor history of education” to the interpretation. However, they must not
jubilant “Hail, the fl ourishing history of forget that their own research had been
education”! coloured by their assumptions about the
In practice, the revisionism of which present, even if they pleaded for a history
Bernard Bailyn and Larry Cremin were the of education in “its own right and in its
protagonists some fi fty years ago meant own terms” – an observation that other
a wider view of upbringing and education. researchers, in addition to Ravitch, also
In essence, as professional historians, the made. Today revisionism may be dead,
revisionists attacked the narrow-minded as Herbst already noted at the end of the
thesis of educationalists such as Cubberley 1970s, but that does not automatically im-
about the “victory” of public education ply that the search for lessons from the his-
in American democracy. Th ey charged it tory of education is over. On the contrary,
with being burdened with methodologi- Ravitch and others do not stop “learning
cal sins such as presentism and evangelism. from the Past”. But their stories are much
In the eyes of the revisionists, “Th e past more sophisticated and, therefore, perhaps
was simply the present writ small”. “But more veiled and dangerous than the utili-
the supreme irony of the golden era was” tarian examples discussed above.
– as Donato and Lazerson put it – “that During the 1980s, another “new” his-
radical revisionists [of the 1970s] gained tory of education emerged in the United
attention by doing what previous genera- States and elsewhere, the so-called new
tions of educational historians had done: “cultural” history of education, which was
Th ey claimed an immediate connection to perhaps not so “new”, since the “old” new
the present.” Indeed, the radical revision- history of education in Germany – to use
ists, with, among others, Michael Katz as the term of Jarausch – considered the so-
the pioneer, turned the old Cubberley the- cial as well as the cultural dimensions of
sis on its head. Far from having acted as education from the outset as aspectual ex-
335
Depaepe, M .
pressions of a rich intellectual life. More- of the discourse and the context”. Accord-
over, this same qualifi cation of the often ing to Foucault, as human beings we are
infl ated “paradigm shifts” applies, in my “condemned” to write and rewrite history
view, to the American development. In- from the point of view of the present. Th is
deed, historians such as R. Freeman Butts does not imply legitimizing the systematic
may have believed, as Cubberley did, in distortion of the past as a function of an
the benefactions of American public edu- ideologically fi xed position. It does mean,
cation. Additionally, by the 1940s and ’50s however, that we, as professional histori-
they showed, at least embryonically, the ans, have to investigate how we ourselves
way to a thoroughly socio-cultural analy- rationalize and camoufl age our own re-
sis of education. Butts, for example, tried search strategies, research questions, and
to fi nd a balance between giving history interpretative themes just as much as we
a meaning for the present and upholding have to unmask the hidden agendas and
the integrity of the past. However that may rhetoric of the educational discourse of
be, this “new” cultural history of education previous generations.
– to which, among others, Sol Cohen con- To the degree to which we succeed in
tributed, although his concept of the “lin- this endless task, the history of education
guistic turn” recently came under fi re from will indeed acquire a post-modern added
a methodological point of view – clearly value: it deconstructs, demythologizes,
gives evidence for presentism being more and tarnishes the great, heroic, and often
a condition of historical research than an exaggerated stories of the past, not to ridi-
abstract methodological sin. Writing and cule our predecessors, their education, or
rewriting history ultimately belong to the their ideals but to demonstrate that they,
present. In this respect postmodernism too, were human beings, living in a con-
does not really force us to do anything crete socio-historical context that it is
new, “but it does oblige us to do it well diffi cult to abstract from. It qualifi es the
and to be seen to doing it well”, to quote great emancipatory meta-narratives about
Roy Lowe. And whether we label these ac- education and shows that, at least from the
tivities “postmodern” or “high modern”, nineteenth century onwards, education in-
as historical explanations, they will always creasingly revealed a dynamic of its own
need a kind of “hermeneutics”, which, as that seems of itself not to have guaranteed
Gadamer understood it, “is based on the the greater emancipation of the individual.
historicity and linguisticity of experience, Th e increase in educational opportuni-
seeks the identifi cation of meaning and ties did not necessarily provide increased
the sense of memory which the narrator opportunities for empowerment and au-
as mediator elaborates as a text, restoring tonomy but could also lead to subjection
and re-establishing the gaps in the story, and dependence. Herbst is absolutely right
even critically, so as to give the analysis the in picking up Tenorth’s demand to investi-
coherence it requires regarding the totality gate this paradox within the “new” cultural
336
More than an Antidote Against Amnesia... Some historiographical, theoretical,
and methodological refl ections on the history of education
history of education from the inside and to deal with generally complex, sometimes
not with conceptualizations and frame- paradoxical or ironic, and even problem-
works from the outside, i.e. mainstream atic outcomes of the past. Th e problem is
history or sociology. And he is also right in that it is diffi cult to strive intentionally for
describing with Tenorth these import the- this advance in learning, the penalty being
ories as a most critical factor in the absence making history something other than his-
of knowledge about the history of every- tory. For when history is placed in front of
day pedagogical practices in the classroom the cart of one or another ideological, po-
to the point where there is almost no place litical, or educational programme, it ceases
for “education” in the history of education, to be history.
which can indeed help to explain the ab- Certainly, policymakers will continue
sence of historical awareness among teach- to use historical perspectives, but they
ers and educators. More recently, how- do so primarily to advance their own agen-
ever, in line with the current outstanding das. Let us not be naive about this, as one
Spanish research on school culture, some of the books of the right-wing historian
studies are dealing with the silences of of education – or should I say conserva-
classroom practices, but whether they will tive politician – Diane Ravitch about the
provide answers teachers and educators are historical damage caused by progressive
willing to hear is very questionable. education (with its “hedonistic, individu-
Historical demystifi cation about, for alistic, anarchistic spirit”) proves. Th e rel-
example, the practical impact of educa- evance of the history of education for the
tional research or about the infl uence of educators of the twenty-fi rst century can,
educational innovation always seems to in my view, only be relevance of an intrin-
annoy and frustrate the believers. For this sic nature, i.e., one that is critical and inev-
reason, in contrast with Herbst, I really itably uncomfortable, even for the “time-
do not believe that much in learning from tested truths” of the educational goals of
the past or in the lessons that history will “self-restraint”, “self-discipline, and humil-
teach about school reform. Nor would ity” that Ravitch wants to learn from the
I hold with the privatizing of the educa- history of education. But such a history
tional past by the individual or collective of education is, all in all, far from being
memory in order to put into action the a superfl uous luxury for teachers. For what
lessons drawn from former experiences. To can the professional competence of practi-
my mind, such added value of the history cal educators consist of other than critical
of education is situated on another, higher, refl ection on their activities past and pres-
more abstract, and de facto more personal ent, especially since the ideological cover-
level. Th e history of education shows in its age of the traditional normative philoso-
research not only the relativity of the of- phies has fallen away? As Tom Popkewitz
ten overblown rhetoric with respect to the has pointed out, “concepts of educational
educational but also provides the impetus research, like our commonsense ideas of
337
Depaepe, M .
teaching, cannot be treated as if they were “Clientism” has not just been plucked out
natural but must be interrogated as histori- of the air. Quality controls are generally
cal monuments in social relations”. performed from the point of view of the
For sure, the history of education does satisfaction of the “user”, rather than from
not immediately yield the results that poli- being a critical refl ection of what is to be
cymakers and politicians want to hear. Nor achieved with education. Education is
does it butter up rank-and-fi le teachers said to be a “business” that delivers knowl-
and others involved in education and up- edge and skills for the purpose of securing
bringing. Because of this critical distance it a place on the job market. Without risk-
erects a barrier against the hypertrophy of ing a cultural-critical debate on the sense
one-sided, utilitarian-designed educational and nonsense of the requirements that
research, which is based solely on empiri- are currently being placed on schools, it
co-analytical and statistically-quantifying nevertheless has to be said that the domi-
thinking and generally demonstrates its nance of such a representation strongly
merits through the highest possible quote threatens to draw attention away from the
indexes and impact factors. Historical con- cultural history of education. Investing in
textualization is and will remain necessary, research into history is now diffi cult to
if for no other reason than to understand reconcile with the priorities of manage-
the eff ects triggered by these seemingly ment and effi ciency thinking. Rather than
innocent mechanisms in putting into op- willingly going along with the desiderata
eration and measuring the scientifi c out- of fi nancial market thinking, history
put of persons, institutions, and research enunciates an inconvenient discourse.
domains. In other words, the traditional, Th e historical approach cultivates, as it
more interpretational approaches to edu- were, the utility of the non-utilitarian. It
cational sciences, such as the historical, sets itself up as a dam against the terror of
although also the philosophical (and per- the immediate practical benefi t. From the
haps even social) ones, may have become critical distance of the cultural-historical
marginalized, but they are and remain view, research and education in history
indispensable in the forming of “critical” aims to go beyond the short-sightedness
intellectuals. of modern times by placing its genesis
Th e representation that is taking root into a lengthy story that will probably
in our current European society is largely not be devoid of any paradoxes. Histori-
one of economic cost-eff ectiveness and cal research, also in education, transcends
utility. Th e education sector is not es- the short-sightedness of our own time by
caping from the current washing away making it clear that this prevailing drive
of this neoliberal ideology. Educational for utility is only one element of the
institutions are considered to be playing long-term process of modernization and
“the market” and “capturing” a specifi c thereby, at the very least, holds the door
“segment” or “niche” with their off ering. open for a critical corrective that could
338