Multicultural Education: A Definition
and Implications for Teacher Preparation
Masters in Education Program
Indiana Wesleyan University
The role and function of public education has changed over
the past 40 years. Just as American culture has become more
diverse, so has the need for schools to effectively teach and
prepare all students for a productive place in society. In fact,
schools are expected to solve failures and manage social, economic,
and political changes occurring in the United
States and the rest of the world (Baker,
1994).
However, the sad fact is that schools have not done well
in achieving the mission of effectively educating all students.
As student populations have become more diverse, learning success
has become predictable by race, socioeconomic background, or
culture. Educators have been slow to recognize the fact that
while students have changed, educational institutions by and
large have not -- methods and strategies that once were consistently
successful with homogenous student populations are not necessarily
successful with heterogeneous ones. Teachers teach in much the
same way as always. Curriculums have undergone little substantive
change. Classroom instruction is delivered in much the same
way as it always has been, with little thought given to the
effect on student populations.
Definition
The multicultural education movement has grown in reaction
to this situation and the need to effectively teach all students,
not just the privileged few. However, much confusion exists
about the meaning of multiculturalism and its impact on classroom
teaching and learning. The concepts of cultural diversity and
inclusionary practices are generally well accepted in contemporary
classrooms, but a clear definition of what is meant by multicultural
education is more elusive. In fact, many authors agree that
definitions of multicultural education differ depending on the
person. Some people consider only racial or cultural diversity,
whereas others only address issues of gender, social class,
and even public policy issues, such as immigration and bilingualism
as evidenced in California's Taxpayer's Protection Act (Sleeter
& Grant, 1994).
For this reason, multicultural education tends to
be too restrictive a term for use in the contemporary classroom.
Diversity education is a much more inclusive term since
it encompasses all forms of differences that students bring
to the classroom. For our purposes, Diversity Education is
better defined as:
Curricular and instructional adaptation to conditions arising
from student differences that has an effect on the teaching/l
earning process. These adaptations are focused at the individual,
not the group level.
These differences include, but are not limited to, racial or
cultural diversity, language, gender, social class or socioeconomic
status, learning style or intelligence, or physical or mental
handicapping condition. Further, since these differences cause
students to be motivated by different things, be interested
in different things, and learn in different ways, the issue
underlying the concept of classroom diversity is managing the
classroom in such a way so as to enable all students to become
successful learners. These questions should be considered:
- What knowledge, skills, and dispositions are all students
expected to acquire?
- What are the ways in which individual students can learn
what is expected of them?
- What teaching strategies are best used in specific situations
with specific students and groups of students?
- Without lowering expectations, what adaptations in process
and product must the teacher make to ensure learning success
for all students?
Sleeter & Grant (1994) imply additional questions, such
as:
- How do
teachers meet the needs of such a wide variety of student?
- What
curriculum is taught?
- How is
that curriculum taught?
- How (if
at all) are students grouped for instruction?
In spite of rhetoric to the contrary, schools tend to operate
in ways that are favorable to the "haves" rather than the "have-nots."
This could happen for several reasons:
1. We tend to teach as we were taught. The majority of teachers
come from white, Anglo-Saxon backgrounds, and were typically
were taught by white, Anglo-Saxon teachers. We have internalized
those teaching behaviors in part because they were successful
with us; we learned and thrived under those teaching methodologies.
Since the Anglo-Saxon culture is the predominant one in our
society, the teaching methodology that is most compatible with
that culture is the one that tends to shape the culture in schools,
often to the (unintentional) exclusion of many students from
diverse backgrounds. (See The Pedagogy of Poverty by
Martin Haberman for an excellent discussion of how the predominant
pedagogy in America's
schools tends to suppress learning in disadvantaged students.)
Bennett (1990) writes that teachers must make a conscious effort
not to teach only in the same way that they learn best. Bennett
believes that is essential for teachers to analyze their learning
style in order to understand their teaching style in an effort
to avoid being mismatched by both learning styles and teaching
styles.
2. We tend to teach in ways that are compatible with our own
learning styles. Each of us has a predominant learning style,
and it is natural for us to teach in ways that are compatible
with the ways we learn best. Those of us who are visual learners
tend to teach in compatible ways; those of us who are kinesthetic
or tactile or auditory learners tend to teach in similar ways.
It is reasonable to believe that such a correlation should exist.
It is also reasonable to assume that we would experience a certain
level of discomfort when we stray from those teaching methodologies
that are most compatible with our own learning style. Thinking
about this issue, A.F. Gregorc (1979) writes that when teachers
teach in ways that closely approximate their learning styles,
they report more comfortable and authentic preferences for those
styles. Mismatches, according to Gregorc, lead to feelings
of awkwardness and even mental discomfort. What is not reasonable,
then, is focusing on one or two instructional strategies, never
ranging into unfamiliar territory because of the discomfort
we experience, and thereby ignoring students who learn best
in ways that are incompatible with our preferred teaching style.
3. We tend to choose curricula that are familiar to us. Just
as we tend to teach as we were taught, so we tend to choose
curriculum content and materials that lie well within our "comfort
zone." It is not unreasonable to believe that curriculum selection
is heavily influenced by culture, tradition, and personal preference
of the teacher. These are not necessarily improper choice criteria
unless they are used to screen out or otherwise eliminate materials
that could be used effectively with diverse student populations.
However, many studies have shown that students do indeed learn
better if they are able to relate well with whatever is being
taught. For that reason, schools must change their curricula
to better reflect other ethnic and cultural backgrounds so as
to more effectively reach a larger population of diverse students
(Baker, 1994). Selection of curriculum and materials should
be dictated by the requirements of the subject area and the
needs of students. If both of these conditions are met as an
initial condition, teachers have wide latitude to choose suitable
curricula.
Implications for the M.Ed. Program
1. Teachers need to know and use a variety of instructional
strategies. Since diverse students have diverse learning styles,
the effective teacher knows and uses different teaching methodologies
to help them understand curriculum content. It often happens
that a student will be "left in the dark" when taught in a certain
way, but will "catch on" when taught with an alternative instructional
strategy. Christine Bennett (1990) effectively illustrates this
principle as she describes three first grade teachers in a Midwestern
elementary school. Each of the teachers chose one of three
different approaches to teach reading. The results of their
experiment concluded that the same number of students progressed
at grade level, and beneath grade level regardless of the method
chosen. Had all three approaches been utilized in each classroom,
however, the results might have been dramatically different
as the students would have found a particular approach more
suitable to their respective learning style than the others.
Further, all students benefit from seeing material present
in a variety of ways. It can make the difference between "knowing"
and "understanding' as students make connections when they see
material presented through multiple teaching strategies. To
equalize opportunities for success, it is imperative to use
deliberately chosen teaching methods that respond to relevant
differences among students. According to Torrence (1962), alert
teachers have always been aware that different methods of teaching
appeal to different students. Their preferred learning style
often results in dramatic differences in classroom performance,
depending not only on the choice of instructional strategies
but also methods of assessment that draw upon all major learning
styles. In effect, teachers who are sensitive to the needs
of individuals teach in different ways so that all students
will learn effectively.
2. Curriculum must be diversified to take advantage of student
differences. Motivation for learning is enhanced when new concepts
are placed in the context of what is already known. If students
are consistently presented with curricula that are unfamiliar
to them or that present no understandable point of reference,
they will quickly decide that the material is irrelevant or
too difficult and will detach themselves from the learning process.
If, however, materials are carefully chosen that build on the
backgrounds and interests of students, they will come to see
the curriculum as relevant and meaningful and will begin to
integrate the new learning into their frameworks of understanding.
3. Teachers must become comfortable with sharing power in the
classroom. One of the characteristics of the "old pedagogy"
was the retaining of tight control by the teacher over curriculum
and instruction, and therefore of the ways in which students
were able to learn. Classrooms in which students were all doing
the same thing at the same time were easy to control, but under
that system, it was easy to confuse classroom control with student
learning (either consciously or unconsciously). Students who
were "shut out" by the old pedagogy were too often compliant
and learned to play the game to get along in the classroom.
Since compliant behavior was valued in the old system, it was
often accepted as a substitute for learning, and students were
passed through to the next grade without reaching acceptable
levels of achievement.
The "new pedagogy" requires that all students be successful
in attaining learning outcomes, yet it must be understood that
alternative ways of learning will occur simultaneously in the
same classroom, creating issues of learner equity. Inflexible
classrooms that do not allow students to learn in multiple frameworks
and through multiple styles may err significantly in their assumption
that all students are learning, when in fact only some
of the students are learning (Bennett, 1990). Teachers who
are accustomed to retaining absolute control in the classroom
might be surprised to learn that as they begin to share power
and more students become successful learners, the classroom
actually becomes easier, not harder to control.
Summary
It will not be an easy task, but with resolve and intention
teachers will become more skillful in the knowledge and application
of Diversity Education. The process will be facilitated more
effectively through the use of the following guidelines:
- Know our own teaching and learning styles.
- Determine how far we can stray from these strengths and
preferences and still be comfortable.
- Begin with a few students, those who are having difficulty
in our classes.
- Know the learning style patterns that seem to characterize
various ethnic groups.
- Build classroom flexibility slowly, adding one new strategy
at a time.
- Use all modalities (visual, auditory, tactile, and kinesthetic)
when teaching concepts and skills.
- Begin to use inclusive practices in the selection and delivery
of curriculum.
- Share power and control with students in the classroom
in appropriate ways.
The goal of Diversity Education is to help each student
become a successful learner, to make it possible for every individual
to become a motivated, eager learner who finds joy and fulfillment
in school and willingly accepts new challenges. Too optimistic,
you say? But why shouldn't the expectations we hold for some
of our children be the expectations we hold for all of our children?
Why should some of them be relegated to second-class status
simply because of the way we organize educational experiences,
often for the benefit of the adults in the system?
If it is the right thing to do, and if it will benefit
students, then it is incumbent upon all of us to make the changes
that will result in success for all individuals. We owe it to
our profession, to our students, and ultimately to ourselves.
REFERENCES
Baker, G. C. (1994). Planning and organizing for multicultural
instruction (2nd ed.). Des Moines, IA: Addison-Wesley
Publishing.
Bennett, C. I. (1990). Comprehensive multicultural education:
Theory and practice (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Gregorc, A. F. (1979). Learning/teaching styles in Student
learning styles: Diagnosing and prescribing programs. Reston,
VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals, p.
24.
Haberman, M. (1991, December).The pedagogy of poverty. Phi
Delta Kappan, p. 290-294.
Sleeter, C. E., & Grant, C. A. (1994). Making choices
for multicultural education: Five approaches
to race, class, and gender. New York: Merrill.
Torrence, P. (1962, September). Cultural discontinuities and
the development of originality of thinking. Exceptional Children
(29), p. 2, 3.
Return
to the Table of Contents