Sele Nadel-Hayes

Re-envisioning Education and Democracy

Public Intellectual Essay

April 26, 2002

Who Are Those People Who Don’t Look Like Me?

…and other questions of cultural studies in public education

 

Historically, education has been used as a method of allowing people of all ages to develop an understanding of why things exist the way they do. From math class discussions of fractions to history courses on labor unions, people in education systems are able to gather tools necessary to live productively in our society. The ultimate goal of education has always varied in terms of focusing on preparation for entry into the workforce at different levels, but an element of creating a base of knowledge from which most people can draw has generally been an underlying presence. The academic discussion of what the purposes of education should be includes people with differing beliefs from all over the world, a signal that new and different perspectives have an affect on the educational lives of everyone, not just those who recognize the wide range of inputs that are present. Academics are not the only ones contributing ideas to the community of people interested in reforming schools and education in the United States. As many more groups begin to make up the general population of the United States, the life goals and objectives of the population begin to require that some of the “tried and true” elements of education be deemed insufficient and subject to innovation.

 

The process of developing systematic changes in an environment with vastly different interests is difficult at best. One might assume that in a time in which people are having new experiences with and being exposed to new cultures that adoption of principles of inclusion would be resistant to some of the difficulties of school reform as people began to develop personal connections to other cultural groups through increased interaction. Because schools should be changed and developed to reflect the needs of the communities they serve, it is crucial that all processes of school change recognize that those needs can range greatly from place to place. It is with this belief in the forefront of our school reform priorities that we find an appropriate avenue within which to identify some important methods that may be employed to create a positive setting for increased recognition of different cultural perspectives in curriculum and clearly outline the goals that motivate our doing so.

 

Goals

There cannot be one prescribed method for implementing these important changes into every school in the United States as the cultural differences vary greatly even across different schools in the same school district. Despite this, the need for common understanding within a reform community of the factors that go into making decisions to change curriculum is a central element of the process. Every school reform movement is responsible for explicitly defining its purposes for bringing reform to a school community and similarly, proponents of any changes in school systems must be prepared to present the benefits and challenges to the reform before any decisions can be made. This essay will elaborate upon a new goal of creating an educational system that represents the histories, futures, and overall cultural distinctions of the new general population and seeks to incorporate them equally into public school curriculum. This theoretical idea, that differences between diversity, multiculturalism, and pluralism should be understood and permeate curriculum reform, will provide a framework for discussions on the appropriateness of each on an individual school level.

 

Meeting Goals

It is primarily important that diversity, multiculturalism, and pluralism are identified as different ideas beyond a factor of scale. To assert that pluralism is a stronger acceptance of multiculturalism and that multiculturalism is a deeper embrace of diversity is irresponsible and misleading. Where diversity can be used to identify differences between individuals in a community and appreciated as a form of allowing individuals to freely develop and express his or her personal identity, it is not an effective way of describing connections between groups of individuals with established commonalities. Multiculturalism begins to address the need for group identification coupled with a strong understanding of one’s individual background and experiences. However, multiculturalism is limited in its ability to de-emphasize the role of a dominant group over “other cultures” in that it requires one common set of beliefs from which to draw parallels. A pluralistic approach to curriculum development extends beyond the important foundations built by multiculturalism and requires everyone in an educational system to become experts on all groups with influence on the chosen subject-matter.

 

The most visible demand for changes in curricular emphasis exists in terms of race and racial relationships in education. While this visibility lends itself to the conclusion that it is the most important area of focus, it would be inappropriate to ignore desperately needed development of curriculum that addresses questions around gender, socio-economic status, religion, sexual orientation, or any fracturing element in any community. In deciding how to approach the many areas in need of reform, communities must challenge themselves to identify the histories of different groups involved as well as their current behaviors and beliefs, to promote awareness and intercultural competency, and to reduce prejudice in every aspect of the educational system. Finally, school communities should discuss and deliberate the role of power relationships in the entire reform process and seek to utilize all available resources to employ education as a means of eliminating domination of any group or individual over another in any situation.

 

Although this essay overtly advocates the adoption of curriculum reform that embraces the most extreme of these principles, a pluralist approach to teaching and learning, it would be irresponsible to assume that this will come as an accessible reform solution for every school. Given this, the following methods of meeting the prescribed eventual goals of curriculum development are developed by different kinds of reformers and designed to provide access to the desired curriculum changes in different stages. This will hopefully allow school communities to recognize the importance of even minute changes in attitude and approach in creating positive change of this kind.

 

One method of bringing change to classrooms demands changes in how teachers present material to students. Maxine Greene from the Teachers College at Columbia University in New York says that no one should be able to look at all of the different kinds of communities in the world and be able to justify the teaching of one over another as all we strive to be attentive to difference and be open to the idea of plurality. Greene says that plurality in the classroom gives students the power to reaffirm the values of justice, equality, freedom, and commitment to human rights that provide a foreground for fostering increased interaction between people and groups and leads to decreased violence and increased appreciation for and pride in one’s own culture.

Changes at this level require concrete changes in what is commonly taught in classrooms. Although this includes introducing “new” authors and theorists to standard curriculum like Toni Morrison and Bharati Mukherjee in English courses, Art Spiegelman in history, and Paulo Freire in civics, an important departure from this is the identification and use of works and interpretations of existing established sources that contribute positively to the understanding of other cultures. Walt Whitman, a foundationally necessary poet of the 1930s, writes in “Song of Myself”:

 

Through me many long dumb voices

Voices of the interminable generations of prisoners and slaves,

Voices of the diseas’d and despairing and of thieves and dwarfs,

Voices of the cycles of preparation and accretion,

And of the threads that connect the stars, and of wombs and of the father-stuff,

And of the rights of them the others are down upon…

Through me forbidden voices…

 

Whitman’s recognition of the importance of recognizing the contributions of other cultures to every individual’s current social location is an exemplary illustration of the inter-connectedness of our histories and futures and exists within a reputable body of literature. This preliminary connection can provide a link between more traditional and contemporary understandings of the relations that govern our lives and guide our actions.

 

In contrast to the adoption of curricular changes which infuse all aspects of learning with recognition of the influence of different cultures, one might find it more appropriate to one’s community to focus on a single introductory element to serve as a gateway to more inclusion. In choosing this individual experience, it might be appropriate to co-ordinate with different stakeholders within the school system to allow for the process to gain institutional recognition and meaning. As the school as a whole begins to embrace the teaching of one particular set of experiences, it becomes more reasonable to envision the repetition of the experience and re-dedicating the community to taking part in the process again with a different cultural group.

 

An example of this kind of project would be a situation in which few members of the school community have had experiences or relationships with Japanese culture. Incorporation of coursework that includes language, literature, dance, food, mathematics, and history allows all members of the school community to develop a new and valuable knowledge base and a better frame of reference for understanding his or her own background. The crucial element of this curricular possibility is the commitment of the entire institution to recognizing the equal value the different culture holds. It is the responsibility of all participants in the curriculum reform project to be dedicated to eliminating the tokenization of any aspect of another culture and instead encourage the systematic expansion of what is commonly accepted as an individual’s personal area of expertise.

 

A final possibility for bringing curricular changes that celebrate different cultures is the use of a single academic field as an introductory point of departure. This method, which would focus its emphasis to the contributions of many different groups to a single subject, is an important tool for school communities that are unable to reach consensus on the best way to approach curricular changes or if to approach them at all. It is often argued that the first step in learning about difference is to identify similarities. This approach would develop the expertise of teachers and students with meaningful breadth such that curiosity in expanding the cultural exploration beyond a single subject would progress and be cultivated.

 

The method of gradual introduction and expansion relies upon several factors. First, the “entry discipline” must be a standard field with required coursework by all students so as to maximize the possibility for translation of the lessons into other fields. Second, the delicacies of scheduling time for different groups must be considered to emphasize equality and utility so as not to yield further marginalization. Finally, practical and “real-world” experiences must be incorporated into the curriculum to ensure students are not made to think the differences and similarities they study exist only in textbooks and while sitting in rows of desks.

 

Critiques

As in many movements, new or long-established, there exists a vocal body that resists the development of curriculum beyond traditional teachings. Arthur M. Schlesinger, an Ohio author and historian, is a staunch challenger of educational practices that go beyond the primacy of Eurocentric curriculum. Schlesinger argues that development of curriculum to include generally unrecognized perspectives is a means of providing “therapies whose function is to raise minority self-esteem.” Other academics maintain that teaching equality of other cultures creates a illusory classroom climate that leads to undue shock when the student enters “the real world” and is faced with difference. Still others suggest that bringing cultural studies into classrooms introduces a political element that should not be present in public education systems as partisan activity can fracture the communities education systems seek to build.

 

These critiques are based upon many different assumptions and fears. It is the responsibility of an educational system to recognize and address all of the proposals for change that are presented and evaluate them based on criteria that works toward the goals for change that reflect the community’s needs. In this process, all community members are afforded the opportunity to question reform proposals and present counter-proposals of their own. The role of critique in a reform movement is equally as valuable as the initial development of the reform goals. While it is unfair to allow objections to over-rule the work of reformers, it is the role of education to provide a space and common language for individuals and groups with differing views to understand each other and work together. This goal should support all curriculum reform movements until communities are able to clearly see themselves and their efforts in their schools and are able to utilize all of the resources education is able to offer each individual in the community.

 

 

For more on new curriculum development…

¯    Maxine Greene, “The Passions of Pluralism: Multiculturalism and the Expanding Community.” in The Journal of Negro Education (Summer, 1992). pp250-261.

 

¯    Richard Seltzer, Michael Frazier, Irelene Ricks, “Multiculturalism, Race, and Education.” in The Journal of Negro Education (Spring, 1995). pp124-140.

 

¯    Rose Reissman, “The Evolving Multicultural Classroom.” Published by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria VA. 1994.

 

¯    Christine Sleeter & Carl A. Grant, “Making Choices for Multicultural Education.” Published by Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 1993.

 

¯    Pedro A. Noguera, “More Democracy Not Less: Confronting the Challenge of Privatization in Public Education” The Journal of Negro Education (Spring, 1994). pp237-250.