What Are the Goals of Multicultural Education?

Kent Koppelman

Although the debate about how to respond to racial and ethnic diversity in American public schools has a long history, in recent years the debate has changed. According to Reich (2002), the focus is no longer on whether schools should recognize the diverse racial and ethnic identities of students, but on the extent to which this diversity should be recognized and affirmed in school curricula. His argument is not that schools no longer marginalize students based on race, ethnicity, or other factors, but that schools are no longer overtly oppressive. Reich (2002) insists that oppressive behavior in schools today would violate stated policies in most public and private schools. What has stayed the same in the debate about diversity is the concern about fostering an American identity, and how to promote citizenship in a diverse, democratic society.

Pai and Adler (1997) noted that advocates for pluralism believe that multicultural education is appropriate for a democratic society because: "participatory democracy is fundamentally pluralistic . . . it entails the acceptance of the intrinsic worth of all human beings and their unique individuality" (p. 104). Yet opponents of multicultural education often characterize it as another manifestation of the demand for group rights, and that an emphasis on groups may foster separatist attitudes and behaviors. In response, Darling-Hammond (2002) asserted: "Far from encouraging separatism, acknowledgment of diverse experiences creates new associations that helps us ultimately to build the common ground in which a more inclusive and powerful learning community can rest" (p. 3).

Yet critics of multicultural education say this approach fosters group conflicts by being anti-white and anti-male, and that multicultural education also encourages negative attitudes toward the United States (Gorski, 2006). Some advocates have responded by insisting that teaching about diverse groups and diverse perspectives in American society attempts to provide students with a more inclusive and more accurate portrayal of an American society that has always been diverse. The purpose of teaching multiple perspectives is to develop an understanding of diverse perspectives that can lead to an understanding of what motivates the behavior of others. It should also encourage students to examine their own beliefs and attitudes. Multicultural educators insist that when schools only provide the perspective of a dominant group, they are not promoting patriotism but are engaging in propaganda—"If mine is the only way of life I know, how can I judge that it is in fact a worthy and valuable way of life?" (Reich, 2002, p. 133)

Six Assumptions Fuel Resistance to Multicultural Education

In describing the ideological thinking behind the resistance to multicultural education, Vavrus (2010) identified six ideological assumptions:

• Racism is a historical artifact that is only manifested through aberrant individual behaviors, rather than a regular experience for many children and youth of color.
• Schools and classrooms are sites of fairness, not of institutional racism.
• Eurocentric curricula offer superior academic experiences.
• Academic achievement is independent of lived histories, even for those who experience forms of subordination through racism, classism, and sexism.
• Students of color and poor whites come to schools with knowledge deficits and lack the competence to succeed academically.
• The source of student academic failure rests with the family and community, not the learning environment of the school and a teacher's disposition toward social justice. (p. 26)

These ideological assumptions are held by some teachers and by individuals outside of schools who want to maintain the status quo of educational practice. Villegas and Lucas (2002) have explained why maintaining the status quo in schools is unacceptable: "Built into the fabric of schools are curricular, pedagogical, and evaluative practices that intentionally or unintentionally privilege the affluent, white, and male segment of society" (p. 30). Pluralists have called traditional education undemocratic because of this unequal opportunity it has provided to students based on socioeconomic status, ethnicity, and other factors.

Intended Student Outcomes

Many scholars have addressed the aims, goals and purposes of multicultural education, and an analysis of their work suggests five major student outcomes:

1. All students should be encouraged to affirm themselves as unique individuals and they should accept and respect the differences shaping individual identities of other students. Banks (1999) has written: "The claim that multicultural education is only for ethnic groups of color and the disenfranchised is one of the most pernicious and damaging misconceptions with which the movement has had to cope" (p. 5).
2. Students should learn about their group from the school curriculum and about the diverse groups in American society to have a basis of appreciation and respect for cultural diversity. Pai and Adler (1997) have described the value of this outcome for students and adults: "Appreciating different cultures, which should be viewed as pools of collective experiences, knowledge, wisdom, and the vision of other people, can make our own lives richer" (p. 122).
3. Students should engage in intergroup dialogues that promote cross-cultural communication skills and reduce biases and prejudices. Gorski (2006) has written that multicultural education must: "institutionalize inclusivity, to engage a broader set of worldviews that, woven together, provide all of us with a deeper understanding of the world and ourselves" (p. 69).
4. Students should learn to be critical thinkers able to analyze historical and contemporary issues in order to make intelligent decisions about problems and conflicts. Appleton (1983) addressed the need for historical analysis: "Multicultural education must deal with the social and historical realities of American society and help students gain a better understanding of the causes of oppression and inequality and the ways in which these social problems might be eliminated" (p. 216).
5. Students should engage in activities that address social justice issues and be encouraged to develop and implement strategies to respond to such issues in their school and their community. Banks (2006) described the relationship between diversity and social justice: "Diversity . . . provides schools, colleges and universities with an opportunity to educate students in an environment that reflects the reality of the nation and the world and to teach students from diverse groups how to get along and how to make decisions and take actions in the public interest" (p. 144).

Given these student outcomes, advocates for multicultural education have insisted that if a diverse society is to thrive, citizens must respect and value diversity. Reich (2002) has argued that respect for diversity depends upon learning about diversity: "I may tolerate people without the least bit of knowledge about them; I may not, however, respect them" (p. 136). Multicultural education goes beyond tolerance by teaching about the need for mutual respect between people belonging to diverse groups. In addressing this issue, Nieto (2002) asks a critical question: "If all we expect of students is tolerance, can we ever hope that they will reach the point where they understand, respect, and affirm differences?" (p. 257)

Teaching to promote mutual respect does not mean that only positive information about diverse groups should be presented. Human history is a record of persistent flaws in human thought and behavior, and no group is exempt from this reality. Nieto (2002) has rejected what she called a "sunny-side-up diversity" that celebrates diversity as an abstract concept and "attempts to paper over important differences" (p. 111). Multicultural education engages in a critical examination of power and structural inequities and explores conflicts between and within groups. By presenting human flaws and group conflicts as well as the achievements of diverse groups, Reich (2002) believes that multicultural education teaches: "why (students) should respect views that they may consider to be false" (p. 136).

Is It Working?

The theory behind multicultural education may sound persuasive, but has it been effective in practice? The main difficulty with assessing programs claiming to illustrate multicultural education is the different goals established by different schools. Nieto and Bode (2008) have described four types of programs whose goals vary widely:

1. Tolerance simply emphasizes getting along with people who are different and denies the significance of differences.
2. Acceptance acknowledges that differences are important to people but does not affirm diversity.
3. Respect views differences in a positive light and promotes learning about diversity.
4. Affirmation, solidarity, and critique entails a commitment to social justice issues beyond the classroom, rejecting a romanticized view of culture and promoting the idea that culture is dynamic, changing over time (pp. 426–427).

In his review of multicultural education programs regarded as effective in promoting intergroup relations, Stephan (2004) supported Nieto's advocacy for the fourth type of program in his description of common themes among them:

Differences are to be prized, not disparaged; people from different groups treat each other with respect, not disdain; social justice is a lived reality, not just an ideal; and co-existence means more than merely tolerating the presence of other groups. (p. 266)

Although multicultural education is a reform that can be initiated at the classroom level, Banks, et. al. (2005) emphasized that it is more effective if it is implemented as a school-wide reform for educators to be successful in addressing the problems of the traditional approach:

Without an explicit agenda . . . to look for ways to recognize and support all students, to offer all individuals and groups a rich and meaningful curriculum, and to build positive relationships across students, many schools inadvertently (and sometimes knowingly) distribute opportunities for learning and success inequitably (p. 254).

This situation exists in many schools today, but those supporting the status quo say that multicultural education will lead to social conflict and a loss of national unity. Advocates counter that intergroup conflict already exists in the United States, but their reform movement addresses the need to abide by a set of national norms and still value cultural diversity. Reich (2002) has put it this way: "The challenge of any educational theory . . . is to navigate successfully between protecting the pluribus while also promoting an unum" (p. 116).

References

Appleton, N. (1983). Cultural pluralism in education: Theoretical foundations. New York, NY: Longman.

Banks, J. A. (1999). An introduction to multicultural education. (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Banks, J. A. (2006). Democracy, diversity, and social justice: Educating citizens for the public interest in a global age. In G. Ladson-Billings & W. F. Tate (Eds.), Education research in the public interest: Social justice, action, and policy (pp. 141–157). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Banks, J., Cochran-Smith, M., Moll, L., Richert, A., Zeichner, K., LePage, P., Darling-Hammond, L., & Duffy, H. (2005). Teaching diverse learners. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 232–274). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2002). Learning to teach for social justice. In L. Darling-Hammond, J. French, & S.P. Garcia-Lopez (Eds.), Learning to teach for social justice (pp. 1–7). New York, MA: Teachers College Press.

Gorski, P. (2006). The unintentional undermining of multicultural education: Educators at the equity crossroads. In J. Landsman & C. W. Lewis (Eds.), White teachers/diverse classrooms: A guide to building inclusive schools, promoting high expectations, and eliminating racism (pp. 61–78). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

Nieto, S. (2002). Language, culture, and teaching: Critical perspectives for a new century. Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Nieto, S., & Bode, P. (2008). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. Boston, MA: Pearson.

Pai, Y., & Adler, S. (1997). Cultural foundations of education (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Reich, R. (2002). Bridging liberalism and multiculturalism in American education. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Stephan, W. G. (2004). Conclusion: Understanding intergroup relations programs. In W. G. Stephan & W. P. Vogt (Eds.), Education programs for improving intergroup relations: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 266–279). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Vavrus, M. (2010). Critical multiculturalism and higher education: Resistance and possibilities within teacher education. In S. May & C. E. Sleeter (Eds), Critical multiculturalism: theory and praxis (pp. 19–31). New York, NY: Routledge.

Villegas, A. M., & Lucas, T. (2002). Educating culturally responsive teachers: A coherent approach. New York, NY: State University of New York Press.

Source: Used with permission from the publisher. From K. Koppelman, The Great Diversity Debate: Embracing Pluralism in School and Society, New York: Teachers College Press. Copyright 2011 by Teachers College, Columbia University. All rights reserved. To order copies, visit www.tcpress.com or call 1-800-575-6566.

ASCD Express, Vol. 6, No. 15. Copyright 2011 by ASCD. All rights reserved. Visit www.ascd.org/ascdexpress.