One of the guiding questions within

One of the guiding questions within the field of education is a deceptively simple one: What knowledge is of most worth? Over the past four decades, an extensive tradition has grown around a restatement of that question. Rather than “What knowledge is of most worth?”, the question has been reframed. It has become “Whose knowledge is of most worth?” There are dangers associated with such a move, of course, including impulses toward reductionism and essentialism. These dangers arise when we assume, as some people have, that there is always a one-to-one correspondence between any knowledge that is seen as “legitimate” or “official” and dominant groups’ understanding of the world. This is too simplistic, since official knowledge is often the result of struggles and compromises and at times can represent crucial victories, not only defeats, by subaltern groups (Apple, 2006; Apple, 2000). However, the transformation of the question has led to immense progress in our understanding of the cultural politics of education in general, and of the relations among educational policies, curricula, teaching, evaluation, and differential power. Indeed, some of the most significant work on the intimate connections between culture and power has come out of the area of the sociology of school knowledge and critical educational studies in general.
Ideology and Curriculum was the first step on what became a long journey, for other books regularly followed as I understood more and as I was taught by the criticisms of other scholars and activists throughout the world, and certainly by my international doctoral students at Wisconsin.

Results (Indonesian) 1:

One of the guiding questions within the field of education is a deceptively simple one: What knowledge is of most worth? Over the past four decades, an extensive tradition has grown around a restatement of that question. Rather than “What knowledge is of most worth?”, the question has been reframed. It has become “Whose knowledge is of most worth?” There are dangers associated with such a move, of course, including impulses toward reductionism and essentialism. These dangers arise when we assume, as some people have, that there is always a one-to-one correspondence between any knowledge that is seen as “legitimate” or “official” and dominant groups’ understanding of the world. This is too simplistic, since official knowledge is often the result of struggles and compromises and at times can represent crucial victories, not only defeats, by subaltern groups (Apple, 2006; Apple, 2000). However, the transformation of the question has led to immense progress in our understanding of the cultural politics of education in general, and of the relations among educational policies, curricula, teaching, evaluation, and differential power. Indeed, some of the most significant work on the intimate connections between culture and power has come out of the area of the sociology of school knowledge and critical educational studies in general.Ideologi dan kurikulum adalah langkah pertama pada apa yang menjadi perjalanan panjang, untuk buku-buku lain yang diikuti secara teratur seperti yang saya mengerti lebih dan sebagaimana saya telah diajarkan oleh kritik ulama lainnya dan aktivis di seluruh dunia, dan tentu saja oleh saya mahasiswa doktoral internasional di Wisconsin.

Results (Indonesian) 2:

Salah satu pertanyaan membimbing dalam lapangan pendidikan adalah tampak sederhana satu: Pengetahuan apa yang paling berharga? Selama empat dekade terakhir, tradisi yang luas telah tumbuh sekitar penyajian kembali pertanyaan itu. Daripada "Apa pengetahuan adalah yang paling berharga?", Pertanyaan telah dibingkai kembali. Hal ini telah menjadi "siapa pengetahuan adalah yang paling berharga?" Ada bahaya yang terkait dengan langkah tersebut, tentu saja, termasuk impuls ke arah reduksionisme dan esensialisme. Bahaya ini muncul ketika kita menganggap, karena beberapa orang memiliki, bahwa selalu ada korespondensi satu-ke-satu antara pengetahuan yang dipandang sebagai pemahaman "sah" atau "dari fi resmi" dan dominan kelompok 'dunia. Ini terlalu sederhana, karena dari fi pengetahuan resmi sering hasil dari perjuangan dan kompromi dan sewaktu-waktu bisa mewakili kemenangan penting, tidak hanya mengalahkan, oleh kelompok-kelompok subaltern (Apple, 2006; Apple, 2000). Namun, transformasi pertanyaan telah menyebabkan kemajuan besar dalam pemahaman kita tentang politik budaya pendidikan pada umumnya, dan hubungan antara kebijakan pendidikan, kurikulum, pengajaran, evaluasi, dan kekuasaan diferensial. Memang, beberapa yang paling signifikan bekerja pada hubungan intim antara budaya dan kekuasaan telah keluar dari wilayah sosiologi pengetahuan sekolah dan studi pendidikan kritis pada umumnya.
Ideologi dan Kurikulum adalah langkah pertama pada apa yang menjadi perjalanan panjang, untuk buku lain secara teratur mengikuti seperti yang saya mengerti lebih banyak dan seperti yang saya diajarkan oleh kritik dari ulama dan aktivis lainnya di seluruh dunia, dan tentunya dengan mahasiswa doktoral internasional saya di Wisconsin.