If you are familiar with research behind educational reform movements, then you are aware that in order for change to occur and be sustainable, it must be systemic (Tyack & Cuban, 1995). Change that happens in a vacuum will not last (Fullan, 2007). Grassroots change can only go so far. Top-down change, well…I’m sure we’re all well aware about how that goes. My point is, in order to change to occur, and I’m talking about real educational reform, then all stakeholders must be part of the process from the very beginning. True reform is not about implementing policy, but rather it “means changing the cultures of classrooms, schools, districts, [and] universities” (Fullan, 2007, p. 7). When considering educational reform issues such as technology integration (my dissertation focus) or multicultural education (focus for my summer blog series), well then it’s even more important to look at the entire system. My limited knowledge of systemic change on a broad level prevents me from being able to offer much in that area. However, because I have been a classroom teacher for 23 years and have held various leadership positions both at the school and district level, I believe I can offer some suggestions on how to go about starting the process at the school site (more to come on that in subsequent blogs).

Multicultural education (as mentioned in a previous blog) has a variety of meanings which may differ depending on the organization. However, what one cannot deny is the fact that the definition of multicultural education is quite broad (Banks, 2016). As such, when considering what multicultural education looks like (or should look like) at a school, then one must begin by examining to what extent does the total school environment reflect monoethnic or monocultural practices of the dominant group (Banks, 2016; Nieto, 2008)?

The following image displays the elements that influence the total school environment (Banks, 2016):

Thus, when considering where to begin when integrating or implementing multicultural education, the answer is…everywhere. The process involves change across the total school environment. So, take a look at the sketchnotes to determine, where can you help influence the process? What other stakeholders do you need to include? How can you get them on the same page? Without a shared meaning or understanding of multicultural education across all stakeholders, believe me, your efforts will feel more like herding cats. And that’s a whole different profession.

References

Banks, J. A. (2016). Cultural diversity and education: Foundations, curriculum, and teaching (6th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Nieto, S. (2008). Affirmation, solidarity and critique: Moving beyond tolerance in education. In E. Lee, D. Menkart, & M. Okazawa-Rey (Eds.). Beyond heroes and holidays (pp. 18–29). Washington DC: Teaching for Change.

Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Being a culturally responsive educator includes the practice of introspection. In fact, it’s important to consider to what extent does your classroom or teaching practices reflect culturally responsive teaching? The five essential components of culturally responsive teaching are as follows:

• Developing a cultural diversity knowledge base,
• Designing and incorporating culturally relevant curriculum & strategies,
• Demonstrating cultural caring & building a community of learners,
• Fostering cross-cultural communications, and
• Cultivating cultural congruity into instructional practices (Gay, 2002)

Part of the introspective process regarding the development of a cultural diversity knowledge base can include the consideration of visuals such as the diversity wheel from Johns Hopkins University & Medicine’s Diversity Leadership Council. “The center of the wheel represents internal dimensions that are usually most permanent or visible. The outside of the wheel represents dimensions that are acquired and change over the course of a lifetime. The combinations of all of these dimensions influence our values, beliefs, behaviors, experiences and expectations and make us all unique as individuals” (Johns Hopkins Diversity Leadership Council, n.d.).

Though an argument can be made as to whether some of these dimensions belong in the center or outside of the diversity wheel. Other perspectives might include the notion of how some of these dimensions are, in fact, fluid and thus, can belong at some points within the center and at others in the outside.

A quick Google search produced many examples of diversity wheels from different types of organizations (e.g., schools, churches, private companies). Consider the one from Northcentral University (2018):

This diversity wheel aligns with Bronfenbrenner’s (1977; 1994) nested model of the ecological systems approach. In this case, the individual is the focal point from which radiates the varied types of influences upon the individual organized in concentric circles (from narrow to broad).

Another example of a diversity wheel comes from the Cultural Competence Learning Institute (2018):

This diversity wheel also begins with the individual as the focal point with concentric circles representing the broader influences on one’s personality.

The point of displaying these types of diversity wheels is to show the various ways one can look at diversity. To bring the point back culturally responsive teaching practices, what this means is that we, as educators, need to take time to consider who we are and how that affects what we do in our respective classrooms. We cannot deny the fact that an increasingly diverse student population walks through our doors each and every day. Thus, it is important for us to develop explicit knowledge and understanding of cultural diversity so that we can better meet the needs of our diverse student body (Gay, 2002).

References

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32, 513–531. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.32.7.513

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1994). Ecology models of human development. In T. N. Postlewaite & Husen, T. (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (2nd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 1643-1647). Oxford, England: Elsevier.

Cultural Competence Learning Institute. (2018). Group activities. Retrieved from the Association for Science-Technology Centers website: http://community.astc.org/ccli/home

Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53, 106-116. doi:10.1177/0022487102053002003

Johns Hopkins Diversity Leadership Council. (n.d.). Diversity wheel. Retrieved from from Johns Hopkins University & Medicine Diversity Leadership Council website: http://web.jhu.edu/dlc/resources/diversity_wheel/index.html

Northcentral University. (2018). Diversity wheel. Retrieved from Northcentral University website: https://www.ncu.edu/about-ncu/who-we-are/diversity

 

If you were a product of the 70s (and now I’m dating myself), then you are well acquainted with the School House Rock series that were part of the Saturday morning cartoon line-up.

When I taught U.S. History, I used this video as an introduction to get my students to think about whether they viewed our nation as a melting pot or salad bowl. My teaching positions have afforded me the opportunity to work with a diverse group of learners based on race, ethnicity, socio-economic status, gender, disability, and giftedness*. As such, I was curious as to how my students viewed the interconnectedness (or not) of our pluralistic society.

In fact, Banks (2016) calls for educators to consider the fact that schools today exist “within a pluralistic democratic nation [and] should help students develop clarified, reflective, and positive cultural identifications” (p. 28). To begin this process, teachers need to determine the lens through which students view themselves and their role at school and within the larger community. One way to start the conversation might be to play this video and give students a graphic organizer with which to organize and justify their perspectives. In the past, I have used the Big Idea template where students would write the generalization at the top and then including supporting details/statements in the pillars below.

This type of activity may be a good way to discern students’ perspectives on the make-up of this great county we call America. To make this more relevant and personal, I think another good option is for students to take this activity home and complete it with their parent/guardian and even siblings. This way students would also begin to have conversations with their family about who they are, where they come from, and how they view their role in the family and larger community. And no, this type of conversation doesn’t only apply to the history classes. Each and every teacher has a duty to ensure that the education we provide to our students is culturally inclusive, meaningful, and engaging. But that’s a topic for a different blog post.

*The terms used here are defined in Banks, J. A. (2016). Cultural diversity and education: Foundations, curriculum, and teaching (6th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.