The public character of school has recently been called into question more often. I examine the question given in the title in terms of three different aspects (juridical, institutional and performative), each of which is linked with a number of disturbing transformations of public schools (privatization of that which is public, re-feudalization, and commodification of education). By virtue of such an analysis and with reference to research on the essence of what is public, I make an attempt to formulate the key meanings of the public character of school.
Confronted with a natural tendency of marginalization national/ethnic minorities and immigrant communities respond by adopting two diverse strategies of showing their presence in the public sphere of the host country. Depending on the level of their integration and the goals they want to achieve, they can either stress their links (affinity) with the majority culture or the differences that mark them out. However, some minority communities succeed in achieving a distinctive presence in the public sphere already at the stage of launching its own media.
This article concerns the conditions for the institutionalization of open academic debate. The author focuses on the changes that have occurred over time in the seminar’s place in academic practice. She describes three types of seminars, from various eras in university history. In each case, the bases for the institutionalization of academic discussion were generally-held convictions as to what knowledge is and how it should be sought. Seminars legitimized academic debate. The examples provided—of the medieval university, Humboldt’s university, and the so-called entrepreneurial university—have various sources of legitimation: religion, the authority of scholarship, or the economic ‘usefulness’ of science (devoid of other authority). The author attempts to show that the sources of legitimation are reflected in the forms of the seminar’s institutionalization: the composition of the participants, the conversational rules (its public or closed character), and the transparency of academic knowledge.