Well, hegemony is definitely promulgated through acculturation, so it's not like the two concepts are completely unrelated. It's moreso an issue of construing acculturation as a form of hegemony.
Gramsci is really *the* reference for hegemony. See: Hegemony in Gramsci's Original Prison Notebooks (http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/soc/courses/soc2r3/gramsci/gramheg.htm).
That aside, I grok your frustration with jargon - and enthusiasm for constructivism. Giroux advocates a socio-constructivist approach to critical pedagogy. His blend of cultural studies and critical pedagogy is woefully needed, IMO. But I'm biased because my grad research involves applying cultural studies to epistemic positionalities, a la Giroux. ;)
no subject
Gramsci is really *the* reference for hegemony. See: Hegemony in Gramsci's Original Prison Notebooks (http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/soc/courses/soc2r3/gramsci/gramheg.htm).
That aside, I grok your frustration with jargon - and enthusiasm for constructivism. Giroux advocates a socio-constructivist approach to critical pedagogy. His blend of cultural studies and critical pedagogy is woefully needed, IMO. But I'm biased because my grad research involves applying cultural studies to epistemic positionalities, a la Giroux. ;)