Resumen En este ensayo examinamos la concepción de interculturalidad a partir de las asimetrías epistémicas entre los conocimientos indígenas y los conocimientos de la escuela. El análisis considera una perspectiva crítica del concepto de interculturalidad y un enfoque epistémico-pedagógico indígena de generación de conocimientos educativos interculturales, basado en lo social y cultural. Argumentamos que el sistema escolar niega las racionalidades epistémicas que sustentan el sistema de conocimiento indígena y dificulta la articulación intercultural cuando se enfatizan solo los aspectos culturales propios. (...) Concluimos que el desafío para una interculturalidad crítica, en contexto indígena, es epistemológico estructural.In this paper, we analyze the notion of interculturality through the epistemic asymmetries between indigenous and school knowledge. The analysis considers a critical perspective of the concept of interculturality and an indigenous epistemic-pedagogical approach for the development of intercultural educational knowledge, based on social and cultural aspects. We argue that the school system denies the epistemic rationalities supported by the indigenous knowledge system and hinders intercultural articulation when only the own cultural aspects are emphasized. Finally, we conclude that the challenge for critical interculturality, in indigenous context, is structural-epistemological. (shrink)

Social movements are using education to generate critical consciousness regarding the social and environmental unsustainability of the current food system, and advocate for agroecological production. In this article, we explore results from a cross-case analysis of six social movements that are using education as a strategy to advance food sovereignty. We conducted participatory research with diverse rural and urban social movements in the United States, Brazil, Cuba, Bolivia, and Mexico, which are each educating for food sovereignty. We synthesize insights from (...) critical food systems education and the political ecology of education in analyzing these cases. We compare the thematic similarities and difference between these movements’ education initiatives in terms of their emergence, initial goals, expansion and institutionalization, relationship to the state, theoretical inspirations, pedagogical approach, educational topics, approach to student research, and outcomes. Among these thematic areas, we find that student-centered research on competing forms of production is an integral way to advance critical consciousness about the food system and the political potential of agroecological alternatives. However, what counts, as success in these programs, is highly case-dependent. For engaged scholars committed to advancing education for food sovereignty, it is essential to reflect upon the lessons learned and challenges faced by these movements. (shrink)