Clima Organizacional y Convivencia Escolar

The fore-going clearly shows that ideology is theoretically central to CDA principles and techniques. Hence, it is necessary to briefly conceptualise it. There is no single adequate definition of ideology. It is so, because ideology as a concept has variously been defined by many scholars. So one can only give current scholarly definitions of ideology. As cited in Eagleton (1991:1-2), such definitions include that ideology refers to:

a The process of production of meanings, signs and values in social life.

b A body of ideas characteristic of a particular social group or class.

c Ideas which help to legitimate a dominant political power.

d False ideas which help to legitimate a dominant political power.

e Systematically distorted communication.

f Forms of thought motivated by social interests.

g Identity thinking.

h Socially necessary illusions.

i The conjucture of discourse and power.

j The medium in which conscious social actors make sense of their world.

k Action-oriented sets of belief.

l The confusion of linguistic and phenomenal reality.

m Semiotic closure.

n The indispensable medium in which individuals live out their relations to a social structure.

o The process whereby social life is converted to a natural reality.

It is clear that some of the fore-going definitions are incompatible with one another. Hence, the need arises to identify those of them that substantially incorporate Van Djik‘s notion of ideology

which captures the operational definitions of the concept for this study. They include definitions b, c, d, f, g, j and k.

Ideology may be socio-political, socio-economic or socio-cultural. It, therefore, basically refers to a system of ideas and principles that forms the basis of an economic or political theory applicable in a polity. It also refers to a set of beliefs held by an ethno-linguistic group of people or a particular social class that determines their attitude, behaviour or character.

Given the above definitions, totalitarianism (despotism), democracy and individualism are socio-political ideologies just as capitalism, socialism, Marxism and communism are socio-economic ideologies. In the same vein, patriarchy, matriarchy, communalism, chauvinism and feminism are socio-cultural ideologies. Socio-politically, ideologies are classified into left-wing and right-wing types. Generally, left-right-wing ideologies are acceptable, while their right-right-wing equivalents are considered obnoxious, and therefore, unacceptable. Hence, every shed of democratic ideology and individualism belongs to the left, while all despotic ideologies belong to the right. Despotic ideologies include but not necessarily limited to imperialism, fascism, Nazism, Stalinism, Spanish nationalism and even Islamic fundamentalism.

Again, there are dominant and oppositional ideologies, especially with reference to the socio-political category. A dominant ideology is the pre-eminent one among several others in a polity, an ethno-linguistic community or any other form of human society. For instance, in Nigeria as a nation the dominant socio-political ideology is democracy just as the dominant socio-economic ideology is capitalism. Hence, a dominant ideology is normally the ideology of the ruling class. It can also be the ideology of the majority, and so, the popular ideology. In Nigeria as largely across the globe democracy is a popular ideology, while capitalism is the ideology of the ruling class. An oppositional ideology, on the other hand, is one among several others that is sharply at variance with the dominant ideology. An oppositional ideology

constantly seeks to transform to a dominant ideology. It can, therefore, be viewed as an emancipatory ideology, albeit from the perspective of its proponents. Socio-politically in Nigeria diarchy, Islamic fundamentalism and theocracy are oppositional ideologies. In the same vein, socialism and ‗socio-capitalism‘ (mixed economy) represent oppositional socio-economic ideologies. Furthermore, in Nigeria, while patriarchy is a socio-culturally dominant ideology, feminism is an oppositional one.

Ideologies can also broadly be classified into sociological and epistemological categories. This classification reflects in the operational definitions of ideology in this study as already identified. As evident in definitions b, c, d, k and l above, sociological ideologies objectify societal transformation which could be socio-political, socio-economic or socio-cultural in nature. Hence, all socio-political/economic/cultural ideologies identified before now collectively typify sociological ideologies. Inversely as reflected in definitions f and g, epistemological ideologies epitomise patterned individualised or group intellectual development for the purpose of obtaining temporal (physical/natural) and extra-temporal (metaphysical/supernatural) insights about life in general. In addition, epistemological ideologies enhance both individualised and collective assertion of a people‘s ancestral root and native cultural heritage. The fore-going indicates that epistemological ideologies are largely cognitive in nature as opposed to the sociological category which is substantially affective with much political propensity. Among others, pragmatism and utilitarianism are examples of epistemological ideologies. Both ideologies variously drive educational systems across the world to decide whether teaching and learning motives should be strictly extrinsic or both extrinsic and intrinsic. In other words, accepting or rejecting either of both raises the question: Should education go with or without character? While utilitarianism advances education without character (moral disposition), pragmatism advocates education with character.

The classification of ideologies in the fore-going is not absolute, meaning that the identified categories can overlap. For example, racism is a socio-cultural ideology that quickly dovetails into a socio-political one as evident in the crumbled apartheid political system of South Africa and in the politics of most third-world polities, where it manifests as tribalism.

Furthermore, a sociological ideology could incorporate traces of an epistemological ideology or even embed it completely as illustrated by a democracy that adopts pragmatism and/or functionalism as educational system. The concise elucidation of ideology, so far, depicts it as a concept that encompasses the totality of the principles or ideas that determine human attitudinal or behavioural ideals, which could be positive or negative.This generalization apparently interprets Van Djik‘s (1996) ideological schema cited at the beginning of this sub-section as the conceptual basis of the understanding of ideology in this study. For a detailed exposition on socio-political and socio-economic ideologies, see Appadorai (1975).

To ensure a firm understanding of ideology as a concept, this paragraph and the next four dwell on ideological strategies. Ideological stretegies refer to the chain processes that lead to the initiation and/or propagation of an ideology. Every new ideology originates from the self-interests of its proponent(s) as may be decided by perceived or real societal dissatisfaction with subsisting dominant and/or oppositional ideologies. This assertion corroborates Eagleton‘s (ibid) own position that every ideology is a self-interest-seeking platform of its proponents and adherents. The emergence of Thatcherism as a political ideology in Britiain as the brain child of Marggret Thatcher is a typical illustration of how an ideology originates. The initiation of an ideology, following the insight provided in the last paragraph before this, is clearly a psycho-social action arising from the initiator‘s intellectual reaction to a dissactifactory psycho-social order put in place by a dominant ideology. It can, at this juncture, be deduced that originating an ideology is an action associated with a social crusader or a socio-political activist.

The identification of support groups is the immediate follow-up assignment carried out by such a crusader as soon as the various ideational components of the new idealogy are captured and finetuned. The natural law of attraction facilitates this assignment. Following this law, he attracts men and women of like minds to the new ideology and even youths. Youths are indispensable for the purpose of active propagation. This requisite makes imperative, the ideological strategy of incentivisation. Hence, the originator needs to utilise both material and non-material incentives to recruit a formidable army of youths as his enlightenment campaigners on the new ideology. Incentivisation is also necessary if an effective cognitive dismantling of the existing order is to be achieved.

To ensure effective cognitive dismantling of the existing order the new ideology propagators should and must take every actionable step to achieve impeccable rationalization.

Rationalisation is synonymous with achieving large-scale acceptance of the new ideology. It, therefore, provides a solid stepping stone to the next inter-related ideological strategies of naturalisation, universalisation and eternalisation. Once these inter-related strategies are successfully executed, the new ideology has come to stay. That is, the last three strategies jointly serve to ensure lasting implantation of any new ideology.

Legitimation is another ideological strategy. It is not, however, applicable to left-wing ideologies. It is rather a strategy appropriate to right-wing ideologies due to their general repulsive nature. Hence, it serves to deceptively justify an emergent right-wing or obnoxious ideology, usually a socio-political one. It, therefore, involves the legislative process of fraudulent constitutional amendment or, given that the ideology in question is conceived to enthrone military dictatorship, sacking the legislature, entirely. For more insightful exposition on the technicalities of ideological strategies than has already been provided here, refer to Eagleton (ibid: 33-61).

The focus on ideology in this study is anchored on the theoretical premise that ideologies are typically, though, not exclusively expressed in every discourse or communication, including non-verbal semiotic messages such as photographs and movies. In other words, ideologies can even be expressed, non-verbally, by means of various forms of representation or interaction. Nevertheless, among these other forms of articulating ideologies, discourse as verbal communication, whether written or oral, remains the preferential springboard for persuasive ideological propositions. This theoretical premise is mirrored in Van Djik‘s (1993) own theoretical assertion on the same subject matter, quoted below:

Obviously, ideologies are also enacted in other forms of action and interaction and their reproduction is often embedded in organisational and institutional contexts. Thus, racist ideologies may be expressed or reproduced in racist talk, comics or movies in the context of the mass media, but they may also be enacted in many forms of discrimination and institutionalised by racist parties within the context of the mass media or of western parliamentary democracies.

Theorizing further, Van Djik advances a triangular notion of ideology that connects society, discourse and social cognition within a CDA framework. Hence, ideologies are both social and cognitive and can be viewed as the basic frameworks for organising the social cognitions shared by members of specific social groups, organisations or institutions. That is, ideologies function as the interface between the cognitive representations and processes underlying discourse and action, on one hand, and on the other, societal position and the interests of social groups. From this perspective, ideologies are rightly considered to be the overall abstract mental systems that organise socially shared attitudes and given the interlinked relationship between ideology, discourse and cognition as already explicated, it is indisputable that discourse analysis goes with ideology analysis.

2.2.4 VAN DJIK’S MODEL OF CDA AND DELL HYMES’ ETHNOGRAPHY OF