Multicultural Education Today Has Become

Multicultural education today has become the norm in American schools, and indeed in schools across the world. With the changing economic and social climate, along with information and educational advancements, education professionals find themselves in an ever-changing climate, facing profound challenges on a daily basis. Various critics, professionals, and authors have therefore begun to address this issue to find a shared vision that could be used by educators. In working directly within the multicultural environment, educators need to address these challenges by means of not only understanding educational theory, but also by cultivating an understanding of the social dynamic within which they are required to work. In this, the authors to be examined here can be of help.

Paul C. Gorski (2010) for example calls for transformation on three different scales in order to effectively address the issue of multicultural education. Indeed, he calls for the transformation firstly of the self, secondly of schools and schooling, and finally of society as a whole. The aim of multicultural education is therefore to obtain a sufficient degree of transformation to the effect that each student will have an equal opportunity for the achievement of his or her full potential. Students must have the opportunity to do this from a platform of an increasingly intercultural society. In this, educators have the responsibility to accommodate each student and encourage learning, regardless of cultural differences, and regardless of the teacher's own cultural heritage. In this way, education should become student-centered and inclusive, overturning the traditional system of a teacher-centered, separatist paradigm.

In order to achieve this type of transformation, Gorski calls upon educators, activists, and indeed everyone in society to transform the society within which they function towards a more integrative one, where students and persons from all cultures will experience the freedom to work and function on their own terms rather than those of the economic elite.

In this way, society will create a truly integrated environment that can serve the educational system and its clients. Simultaneously, the educational system will serve society by cultivating a future basis of professionalism that will excel in all available professions.

According to Milton J. Bennett (1993), the development of cultural sensitivity occurs in six stages, the first three of which is ethnocentric, while the remaining three are ethnorelative. The ethnocentric stages include 1) the denial of difference, 2) defense against difference, and 3) minimization of difference. The three ethnorelative stages include 4) acceptance of difference, 5) adaptation to difference, and 6) integration of difference.

The stages of the model are progressively positive towards the integration of cultures. The first stage, denial, involves an individual being unable to recognize cultural difference for what it is. In the defense stage, the individual recognizes difference, but tend to evaluates difference negatively. The final ethnocentric stage, minimization, constructs a superficial acceptance of cultural difference, but focuses upon commonality in an ethnocentric manner.

The ethnorelative stages of acceptance, adaptation and integration involve progressive degrees of recognizing cultures and accepting their differences as valuable in themselves rather as relative to a specific elitist culture.

For each stage, Bennett then provides possible ways in which the specific stage can be addressed and mitigated in the classroom, all with the aim to achieve a more integrated and culturally sensitive model.

Sonia M. Nieto (2003) suggests that issues of multiculturalism in the classroom are far more complex than can be remedied by a few classroom exercises or indeed by the recognition that transformation is necessary. Indeed, it involves a close and honest look at attempts to date to remedy existing inequalities, and whether these do not perhaps exacerbate rather than remedy the inequalities in question. The author notes that multicultural education is often set up in such a way that the concomitant issues of equity and access do not receive sufficient attention to bring about a remedy for what is truly the matter. Indeed, the author goes as far as stating that multicultural education often manifests in such a way that it provides little more than a platform for promoting self-esteem. The effect of this lack of balance is then that students either end up feeling good about themselves but unskilled for their future, or those who have skills, but do not feel good about their culture.

Furthermore, many who promote multicultural curricula fail to recognize the fact that many and profound inequalities remain in schools and society today. The bottom of the matter is that cultural awareness training is not as easy as simply implementing a generic, basic reading program for the whole school. A related problem, according to the author, is that many programs that are implemented towards multicultural education do not address the root of inequality, but simply serve as generic remedies that cannot in truth be applied to the specific integration problems experienced by specific schools.

Nieto appears to be in agreement with the other authors, in that multicultural education should address issues beyond the mere fact of equal opportunities to learn science and mathematics. It should also address issues of social injustice and marginalization. This contextualizes multiculturalism while also addressing the educational needs of all children. Indeed, the author holds that all educators should understand the need not only to be culturally sensitive, but also to be sensitive to the issues behind multiculturalism. Multicultural education should therefore primarily be aimed at addressing the educational needs of children in an equitable manner.

This is however not a simple thing to achieve, as Nieto notes that many students continue to be segregated on the basis of their race and ethnicity. This is something that educators and other relevant professionals need to be aware of if the issue is to be adequately addressed. Specifically, segregation does not extend only to education, but also to society in general, where Latinos are the most segregated of ethnic groups in the country, by means of race, ethnicity, as well as poverty.

A further issues is the quality of teachers and their influence on their students. Nieto appears to suggest that the teacher's responsibility is to demonstrate a caring, mentoring, and guiding attitude towards their students, regardless of race, ethnicity or gender. Such teachers can have a profound effect upon both current and future performance. In this way, teachers can provide students with what the author refers to as "social capital" to help them succeed not only in education, but also in life.

In terms of my own capacity in education, I find myself inspired on various levels by the readings. My personal experience substantiates that of Nieto, in that I am profoundly aware of the fact that cultural segregation continues to exist in our schools. However, I do not believe that this problem is insurmountable. It is important to understand and be aware of one's own experience of segregation and one's own attitude to persons of other cultures before one can begin to change the world.

This is what I was most profoundly impressed by in Gorski's work. The author suggests three levels of change: the self, schools and society. The self is the first seat of change, because both schools and societies are made up of many "selves." It is only if the self-change that change can be effected for the many. The very specific suggestions that Gorski provides towards achieving such change has provided me with plenty of food for thought.

In my capacity as guide and councillor who serves as mediator for students, parents, and teachers of many different cultures, I have learned to reflect upon my own attitudes and cultural sensitivity in a much more profound manner. When interacting with people of various ages and cultural backgrounds, the effect of this self-reflection is that I attempt to maintain an equal attitude towards all of the persons I meet and work with. In this way, I ensure that I provide each with the opportunity to express themselves without letting culture be a deterrent.