Multiculturalism compels educators to recognize the nar-row boundaries that have shaped the way knowledge is shared in the classroom. It forces us all to recognize our complicity in accepting and perpetuating biases of any kind.
Multiculturalism forces educators to recognize that the way knowledge is imparted in the classroom has actually been very narrowly confined by certain boundaries.
Students taught me, too, that it is necessary to practice com-passion in these new learning settings. I bave not forgotten the day a student came to class and told me: 'We take your class. We learn to look at the world from a critica! standpoint, one that considers race, sex, and class. And we can't enjoy life anymore."
The author remembers that one day, a student said to him, "We took your class and learned to view the world with a critical perspective, considering issues related to race, gender and class. But as a result, we were no longer able to simply enjoy life."
Making the classroom a democratic setting where everyone feels a responsibility to contribute is a central goa! of trans-formative pedagogy.
Transforming the classroom into a democratic environment where everyone feels responsible for participating is the core goal of "transformative teaching".
To share in our efforts at intervention we invited professors from universities around the country to corne and talk-both formally and informally-about the kind of work they were doing aimed at transforming teaching and learning so that a multicultural education would be possible
In order to promote educational intervention and improvement, we invited professors from universities across the United States to engage in both formal and informal exchanges, sharing their ongoing work. The goal of this work is to transform teaching and learning and make multicultural education possible.
Despite the contemporary focus on multiculturalism in our society, particularly in education, there is not nearly enough practica! discussion of ways classroom settings can be trans-formed so that the learning experience is inclusive. If the effort to respect and honor the social reality and experiences of groups in this society who are nonwhite is to be reflected in a pedagogical process, then as teachers-on all levels, from ele-mentary to university settings-we must acknowledge that our styles of teaching may need to change. Let's face it: most of us were taught in classrooms where styles of teachings reflected the hotion of a single norm of thought and experience, which we were encouraged to believe was universal. This has been just as true for nonwhite teachers as for white teachers. Most of us learned to teach emulating this model.
When most of us were being educated, we grew up in a classroom environment that only recognized a single way of thinking and experience as the "universal standard". Although in today's society, especially in the field of education, there is a strong emphasis on multiculturalism, there are very few actual discussions on how to truly make the classroom more inclusive.
When I first constructed the ladder to describe how schools structure inequality, I struggled with where to begin. My training as an early childhood educator, experience as a child care provider, education in developmental psychology, and specialization in human development told me to start in the womb. What are the factors that affect poor children before they are even born? First, women and children are overrepresented in poverty (Gollnick & Chinn, 2009).
The proportion of women and children among the poor population is too high. The author has a background in early childhood education, child care, developmental psychology and human development, so he/she believes that it should start from the "fetal stage".
The surest way to build wealth-as indicated by the real in real estate-is to own a home. Both Katznelson (2005) and Wise (2005) mapped, in bril-liantly unconsidered ways, how "affirm~tive action" in the United States has always benefited Whites and most significantly in the building of White wealth. From establishing the country's earliest legislation restricting the landed gen-try to White males, to offering mortgage loans to Whites only via the Federal Housing Authority and the GI Bill, to excluding Blacks and people of color from home loans and subdivisions by way of redlining and restrictive covenants, both scholars illuminate the long-standing and state-sponsored wealth gaps (ravines) between Whites and all others.
These two scholars have revealed a fact: The institutional practices that have been supported by the government for a long time have resulted in a huge wealth gap between whites and other groups. Later, through the Federal Housing Administration and the Veterans Act, only mortgages were provided to white people. This followed the earliest legal provisions that only white men could be landowners.
hat scores of students-well-meaning educators, all-fail to realize is that public education does not serve its intended function as the great equal-izer. Quite contrarily, schools actually structure inequality (gasp!) in insidiously subtle ways. To introduce countless future teachers to this "radical" notion ' I devised a plan to combat pernicious thinking about poor students, the educa-tional "failures" of poor students, and the "self-inflicted" demise of the poor.
In order to help future teachers understand this "radical" perspective, the author has devised a plan to counter those harmful ideas - such as the belief that the educational failure of disadvantaged students is their own fault, or that their predicament is "their own doing".
1 have been teaching teachers for over a decade, primarily in teacher educati?n ~rograms designed to prepare urban educators and always guided by a social JUStice framework. For years I have been floored by the number of candidates who believe not only that public education is the great equalizer but also that children and families who remain poor are to blame for not exploiting such a freely available opportunity to improve their lots.
Over the years, what has shocked me is that many teacher candidates believe that public education is not only a "great equalizer", but also that those children and families who remain poor should blame themselves for not making good use of this free opportunity for improving their lives through education.
Horace Mann was on to something. When he witnessed an angry street riot in New England, his conviction that "the educated, the wealthy, the intelligent" had gone morally astray by abandoning the public was fortified {Johnson, 2002, p. 79). Mann chided the economic elite for shirking obligations to their fellow man by favoring private education over common schools. He conceptualized public education as "the great equalizer," or the most powerful mechanism for abating class-based "prejudice and hatred," and, most important, the only means by which those without economic privilege or generational wealth could experience any hope of equal footing.
Man criticized the economic elites, who chose private education instead of public schools, and he believed that this was equivalent to evading their responsibilities towards society. Horace Mann noticed a problem. When he witnessed the street riots in New England, he became even more convinced that "educated, wealthy, and intelligent people" had gone astray morally because they abandoned the public.
The gap between beliefs and actions not only leads to contention and con-fusion, it also generates policies that are irrational in the sense that they are inconsistent with evidence of what works or are not based on any evidence at all. At times policymakers have abandoned proven reforms or have promoted them only over stiff opposition. Desegregation enhanced the long-term life chances of many African American students and rarely hurt white students, but the movement to complete or maintain it has largely been over for 2 5 years. School finance reform broadens schooling opportunities for poor children with-out harming those who are better off, but equity in funding has depended mostly on the intervention of the courts. At other times policymakers have adopted reforms for which there is no empirical support or on the basis of conflicting assessments. There is at best mixed evidence of the benefits of separating stu-
Sometimes, policymakers abandon reforms that have been proven effective, or encounter strong opposition when promoting reforms. The gap between belief and actual action not only leads to disputes and chaos, but also results in some irrational policies that either contradict existing valid evidence or have no evidence to support them at all.
et this progress has met limits. Hispanics and inner city residents still drop out much more frequently than others, the gap between black and white achievement rose during the 1990s after declining in the previous decade, the achievement gap between students from lower-and higher-class families has barely budged, and poor students in poor urban schools have dramatically lower rates of literacy and arithmetic or scientific competence. Most importantly, life chances depend increasingly on attaining higher education, but class back-ground is as important as ever in determining who attends and finishes a four-year college
The dropout rate among Hispanics and those living in urban centers is still much higher than that of other groups. The gap in academic performance between blacks and whites widened again in the 1990s.
Many issues in education policy have therefore come down to an apparent choice between the individual success of comparatively privileged students and the collective good of all students or the nation as a whole.
Many issues of educational policies ultimately seem to boil down to a choice: either favor the individual success of those students who are relatively advantaged, or pursue the common interests of all students or the entire nation.
Sustained and serious disagreements over education policy can never be completely resolved because they spring from a fundamental paradox at the heart of the American dream. Most Americans believe that everyone has the right to pursue success but that only some deserve to win, based on their tal-ent, effort, or ambition.
There has always been debate over educational policies, and it is impossible to completely resolve the issue. This is because these disputes stem from a fundamental contradiction within the "American Dream". Most Americans believe that everyone has the right to pursue success, but only those who are talented, hardworking or ambitious should truly be able to win.
HE AMERICAN DREAM IS A POWERFUL CONCEPT. It encourages each person who lives in the United States to pursue success, and it cre-ates the framework within which everyone can do it. It holds each person responsible for achieving his or her own dreams, while generating shared values and behaviors needed to persuade Americans that they have a real chance to achieve them. It holds out a vision of both individual success and the col-lective good of all.
Everyone is responsible for their own dreams. It also shapes common values and behavioral habits, making everyone believe that they really have the chance to realize their dreams. It encourages everyone to pursue success, and at the same time provides a framework where everyone can achieve success. It not only emphasizes individual success, but also emphasizes the common interests of all together.