MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION A CR ITICAL ANALYSIS OF POLICY AND CURRICULUM

51.John's

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATIO N ACR IT ICAL ANALYSISOF

POLICY ANDCURRICULUM

Margo Connors-Stack,B.A. ,B.Ed. ,M.A.

A thesis submittedtothe School of Graduate Studies in partial fulfillmentoftherequirements for the

degree of Master of Education

Faculty of Education MemorialUniversityof Newfoundland

1995

Newfoundland

. +.

"H:"",,'.

~~Btanch

"'- -

~C'ri'_

~~~naliona~

Oitectiondesacquisilionsel desseMcesbibliographiQues :D5." ..WllIngIon

~~

TIlEAtJIHORHASGRANI'ED AN IRREVOCABLENON· EXCLUSlVE LICENCE ALLOWING THE NATIONAL LIBRARYOF CANADATO REPRODUCE, LOAN, DISTRIBUTEOR SELLCOPIES OFmSIHERTIlESISBY ANYMEANSANDIN ANYFORMOR FORMAT,MAKINGTInsTHESIS AVAll-ABLETO rNTERESTED PERSONS.

TIlEAunIOR RETAINS OWNERSHIP OFTIlE COPYRIGlITIN IIISIIIER 11IES1S.NEITHERTIlE THESIS NOR SUESTANnALEXTRACTS FROMIT MAYBE PRlNTIIDOR OTHERWISE REPRODUCEDwrrnotrrlUSIHER PERMISSION.

L'AUTEUR A ACCQRDEUNELICENCE IRREVOCABLE ETNONEXCLUSIVE PERMETTANTALA BffiLlOnmQUE NATIONALE

eu

au

L'AUfEURCONSERVELA PROPRIETE DU DROITD'AUTEURQUIPROTEGE SA THESE.NI LAmESE NI DES EX1llAITSSUBSTANTIELS DECELLE- CINEDOIVENT ETREIMPRIMES OU At.rmEMENT REPRODUITSSANSSON AUfORISATlQN ,

ISBN 0-612-01845- 8

Canada

ABSTRACT

This study is a criticalanalysisof theGovernmentof Newfoundlandand Labrador MulticulturalBducanonPolicy:RespondingtoSocietalNeeds(1992).Itisalsoacritical examinat ionof the materialsprescribedforthe currentGradeNine Englishliterature curriculumin the Province of Newfoundlandand Labradorin relationto thcMII/tiCl/fmraf EducationPolicyand multiculturaleducationin general.

The MulticulturalEducationPolicyis analyzed to determine whetheritpresents a clearunderstandingof multiculturalism;aclearvisionofmulticulturaleducation;a frameworkand philosophyforcurriculumrevision;aswenasa recognitionof the challengegeographi cisolation and ethnichomogeneit ypresentto multiculturaleducation.

The literaturematerialsare examined to determine the extentof multicultural spirit orrepresentationcontained therein. Tilepotentialfor theliterature materialsto foster an understanding of multiculturalism,to be used in amulticultural education curriculum,and to bridge geographicisolationand ethnichomogeneityispresented.

TheMulticulturalEducationPolicyisfoundtopresent a superficialunderstanding of both multiculturalism and multiculturaleducation.Thesampled literaturematerials are foundto begenerally inadequate foruse in a schoolcurric ulum dedicatedto multiculturaleducation.

The analysisof the MulticulturalEducationPolicy and the sample literature materials provideimplications for the futureimplementation andeffectivenessof

11

multiculturaleducation inNewfoundlandand Labrador. Recommendations forthe implementationofmulticulturaleducation in the Province are provided,as wellas specificrecommendationsconcerningtheGrade Nine literature curricul ummaterialsin relation tomulticultural education. Finally ,criticalquestions areraisedas possibilities for futureresearch inthearea of multiculturaleducation inNewfoundland andLabrador.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Throughout the processoffinding my wayIhrough thisthesisthere werea numberofpeoplewho provided direction,supportand inspiration.

I thankfirstmythesis advisor,Dr.ClarDoyle,for hisadvice anddirection. I amespeciallygratefulto my committee member,Dr.Andrea Rose, for hercareful considerationand readingofthisworkinprogress.

A heartfeltthank you isalsoextended tomy family.[thankmyspouse, Robert Stack, forhis patience andencouragementandhisreadingofthefinal drafts. Ithank him most of allfor listening. Ialsowishto acknowledge the interest,suppor tand encouragementprovided by my children,Sean,DavidandConor.Ithankthemfor their patienceand forcedindependence.Theywere frequentlyheard10inquire,His your thesis done yet?"

I wouldlike tothank PauletteHattery for her wordprocessing skillswhich were taxedin turning this studyintoapresentableproduct.

Finally,Iwouldliketo thank my EnglishasaSecond Language students>my studentswho comefrom different countries,culturesand language backgrounds; they haveinspiredmetobegin the processof becoming amulticultural person.Theyarethe inspirationforthisstudy.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CIIAPfER ONE 1

IImllllUlcrIll!! I

ORIGI NS OF THIS STUDY. .. ... .. . . ... . .•.. ...•• . . I

~fETHODOLOGY..., .•.. . . .. . . . .•....•...••.. 4 MULTICULTURALISM AND THEPROVINCIALCONTEXT..10

CIIAI'TERTWO 15

.B.EYIEWOF rUE LITERATURE •••••••••••• ••••••••••• 15 OVERVIEW •••.. ... . ... ... . .. . . ....15 CULTURE ....•... . . ... .. .... .. .. . . . .. .. . IS

EDUCATION,SCHOOL AND CULTURE 19

MULTICULTURALISM 2.:-

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION. . .•... ...•• . 31 MULTICULTURALEDUCATIONAND ITSCRITICS. . ..•. .35 MULTICULTURALEDUCATlONAND CURRICULUM..•..38

MULTlCULTUR AL ED UC ATIO N AND LITERATURE

CURRICULUMCONTENT..• •..• . .•...41 TexIsand Choices•... .•• ..•...•.••••• • •.• 45

ThePhilosophicalFramework 45 TheTeacher. . .. .. • .. .. ..

Guidelines forChoosingMaterial SUMMARY•.

47 49 53

CHAPfER TlDillE 56

PRESENTAT IONANnANAl"SIS Of nATA •••••• .• •• • • •••56

OVERVIEW . .•.. • . . .. . . 56

PRES ENTATION AND ANALYSISOF THEDATA: PART ONE•••58 BACKGROUND TOTHEMULTICULT URALEDUCATIONPOLICY

.. . . . .. . .. . . . . ..

OUTLINEOF ANALYSIS. .•..59

ANALYSIS OF THEPOLICY . 60

OTHER DOCUMENTS . 76

SUMMARY.. . . 78

PRESENTATION AND ANALYSISOF THE DATA:PARTTWO ,81

OVERVIEW . ... .•.. . .. •. .••.81

THE NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR LITERATURE

CURRICULUM:GRADENINE... . . .. . •..83 The Philosophy, Goals,and Objectives...

The Materials

vi

.... . 83 .. . . ..86

... ... .. ...86 .•98 100 112 Drama

Novels ... . .

Summaryof Analysisofthe Novels.. ..

Antholog ies .•... ..

Summary ofAnthologiesandDrama.... 116 BeforeandAfterGradeNine .•... •. 116

GradesSevenand Eight... 116

Literary Heritage 2201 .... 121

SUMM ARy .• • .•••. .••.. • ••.•.•• •.• 125

CHAPTER FO UR •• • ••• • •.•• •.•••.•• ••• • •• ••• • • •• 136 CONClIlSIO NS IMPUCA TIONS ANDRECOMMEND AIf(lliS•• 136 SUMMARy OF FIN DINGS.... .. .. .. . .. ... .. •.... 136 IMPLI CATIONSFOB CHANGE INMULTICULTUBAL EpUCATlON

RECOMM END ATI O NS . . . ••..•.... .... . .. . Implementationof thePolicy

140 146 146

Curricu lum Materials. .... 148

TeacherPreparatio n.... . .• ...• .. .. . . . .•• 151 Interrelationshipof Recommendations..• •.. . . ..• 152

vii

CRITICAl OIJESTIONS AND S!lGGESIIQNS FOR FHRTHER

STUDY .

TOWARpS AMULTIClJIT[JRAL SPIRIT . 153 156

REFERENCES ••••••••••• •••••••• ••• ••••• •••••• •160

APPENDICES•••.•• •.•• •••.• • •••• • •.•.•• ....••.. 171 171 177 178 179 180

vi ii

CHAPTE R ONE

INTRO DUCT ION ORIGINSOF THIS STUPY

Iam anEnglishliterature teacherwhotooka detourintothe fieldofEnglish SecondLanguage(ESL)teaching. Myinterest inissuespenaining to multicultural educationarose from interactio n withmy students.Work ingwith students fromall over theworld,fromdiffe rent religions.cultures ,and languagebackgrounds, hasmade me questionmy own valuesand assumptions. From mystudents Ihavelearned that there arc many perspecti vesthroughwhich ourworldcanbeobserved. In thecourse of getting10knowmystudents.I havecome to appreciateandvaluethose perspectives.

At thesametimeIobserved thatIwasundergoinga transformation;mydetourintoESL hadsetmeontheroadto becominga multiculturalperson .

As Ihave worked with my students throug h the regular curriculum ,I have become awareof aworld view whichigno resthem. Ihave alsobecome awareofa reticence onthepartof Newf oundlan dstudents to interac t withthesestudents. 1have encountered teacherswho have exhibitedanaltitudeofintolerance,settingupa -we/ they- divisionwhen discussingrefugee,immigrant andvisastudents. The ESL studentsarcnot alwaysviewedas individualsbutas"the foreign - students or as"tbe Chinese"or"the Russians". In the eyes of somepeopleI have met,theyare allthe same.There areNe wfoundland bomstudent swhohaveneverspokento an ESL student and are nervousaboutdoingso.Ca1Jsto participateincross-culturaJexperiences,peer

tutoring and host activities havein somecases eliciteddisappointingresponses. Yet.

despitethese realities,multiculturaleducationis not anissuediscussed in staffroomsI have frequented.

In1992,1attendedthe officiallaunch ofthe ProvincialMultic ulturalBducanon Policy. Silently,I wondered if the policy would have anyreal effect. Withouthaving giventhe subiecr anyserious thought orstudy atthis point,Isaw a needfor a change of attitudesamong teachers andstudents in regard to students fromothercountries. I alsoperceivedaneed for teachersand students to look criticallyatthemselvesin tenus of theirattitudesand presumptions. Prior to this. Ihad notexaminedthe curriculum to determine,forexample.if it could broadenaltitudes. In the past' accepted the selections in the literature programs Ihad taught, notquestioning thegeneralview ofthe world contained therein; but themore I worked withstudentsfrom diversecultures,the greatermy sense ofunease withthecurrentcurriculum materials.Ibegan to wonderif the curriculummaterialsdid anything to bridge me gulfbetween thenewcomersand the Canadianstudents. I even started to wonderwhether they might actually widen it.

This studybcgan as a personalanalysis of the seeds of my discomfortwiththe schoolcultureand thecurriculum,andgrew into athesis, into a critical analysisof the ProvincialMulticultural Education Policy and its implications for theliterature curriculummater ials. Itis informedand influenced bymy personalandongoing experienceusing prescribedcurriculummaterials in the Newfoundlandschoolsystem.

Itis also influenced by my interactionsand dlscusstons withstudents,colleagues,and

othereducators.

The releaseoftheGovernmentof NewfoundlandandLabradordocument, Mu/riculruralEducotion:Respondingto Societal Needs(1992) (Policy),placesthe province in the context ofan internationaldebate on multiculturaleducationand provides aframeworkfor curriculumreview and change. ThePolicy stales that"the spiritof multiculturalism shouldpermeate the wholeeducational system-education policies, curriculum, teaching methods, resource materials and evaluation procedures"

(ImplementationGuidelines). To be effective,it will be necessary toanalyzewhatitis we donow, as wellas what we needto doinme futureto ensure a multicultural curriculum. Newfoundlandand Labradorfaces the additionalchallenge of fosteringa multicultural philosophy andfocusin a curriculum that servesa largely ethnically homogenous, and geographically isolated, province.Thispolicycanbethe wellspring of much futureresearch andthought,exploringmany areas of society,curriculumand practice.Thepurpose ofthisthesis, however,is to focusononeareaofstudy inrelation to thePolicy,thatof thecurrentliterature curriculum materialsprescribed for Grade Nine inthe Provinceof Newfoundlandand Labrador.

The Policy sets a challengefor education in Newfoundlandand Labrador.It calls for"thespirit ofmulticulturalism"topervadethe wholeeducationalsystem.Developing and compilingcurriculummaterialsthataremulticultural inspiritis a challengeforall curriculum areas,butit offersa specialchallenge10 the areaofliterature, On till surface,infusing amulticultural spirit throughoutthe literature curriculumappears

simple; merelyinclude moreselectionsfromculturesotherthanthe dominant while Angloculture.Yel,aswillbeexploredinChapterTwo of thisthesis, the issue becomes complicatedas educators considerwhose voicesareincluded,and what these voices aloe allowed to say. Some criticsargue that it isnot enough10 simplygive representation10 ethnic minoritywriters.These voices must not be marginalized withinthecurriculum.

Conversely,thereare criticswho donot want to see theplace of anytraditional western literature disturbed.These issuesareraised wheneducatorsattemptto open uporrevise the traditionalcanonsof literature. Adebateensuesin academiccircles andamong parents, teachersandother interested parties. Thesequestionsindicatethatrevising curric ulummaterialsinafield such as literatureis not asimple process.Theinterests, attitudes,valuesandbeliefs ofpeople are at stake.

MErAODD! DOY

Thisstudy provides a criticalanalysisnotonlyoftheMuflicuJr/lral Education Policy inNewfoundlandand Labradorbut alsoof materials prescribed for the current Grade Nine Englishliteraturecurriculum. Inparticular itexamines theextentto which thesematerials conformto thePolicy.ChapterTwo containsareview ofthe pertinent literatureon culture.multiculturalism,multicultural education andselectedliterature curriculumissuespertainingto theseareas. Atthe end ofChapter Two a visionof multiculturaleducationis articulatedas areference andfoundation (orthestudy. In

ChapterThree,theMulticultural EducationPolicyof Newfoundlandand Labradoris examined to determinewhereit fallsphilosophicallyand practically intermsof the larger debateon multiculturaleducation.Following rhls exarmnation,the Grade Nine literature curric ulum materials and guidelinesof Newfoundland and Labradorwill be critically examined to determinewhetherthey arecompatible with the goals and objectives of the Policy. Thesematerials will also be examined in the contextof the critical writingon multicultural educationandliterature curriculummaterials.

ChapterFourofthis criticalanalysis identifies implicationsformulticultural educationand literature programsin the context of Newfoundlandand Labrador.

Recommendationsare made withrepect totheMulticultural EducationPolicy, to multiculturaleducation ingeneral,and to the Grade Nineliterature. curriculum. Critical questions andsuggestions forfurther study are alsooutlined.

The data for the studyinclude the Newfoundlandand LabradorGovernment documentMulliculturalBducanon Policy:Responding to SocietalNeeds(see Appendix A), and the curriculum guidelines andmaterials for the Grade Nineliterature curriculum which include novels,plays,and anthologies ofpoems, essays andshortstories (see AppendixB).Two other policy documents,OurChildren OllrFuture:RoyalCommission o/Inquiryintothe Deliveryof ProgramsandServicesin Primary, Elementary, Secondary Education (1992) and Adjustillgthe Course,PartTwo(1994), as well asliterature course materialsfor Grades Seven,Eight, and Literary Heritage 2201will also be considered (see Appendices C and D).

Lee Harvey(1990) categorizesanalysisof data suchas policies,textsand art formsas criticalsocialresearch.He states:

Critical socialresearch req uires thatempirical materialis collected. Itdoes not matter whetherit is statistical material, anecdotes,directlyobserved behaviour,media content,interview responses, art works, oranythingelse.

Whatever provia es insightsis suitable.BUI whateveritis, itmust not be takenat face value. Thatdoes not mean that all data used mustbe subject to conventional"reliability"

or·validity· checks.Data are meaningfulonlyin termsof

their theoretical context, reliabilityand validity are functions of the context and the epistemological presuppositions thattheresearcher brings to theenquiry.

So,for criticalsocial resear ch,data areimportant inorder 10ground the enquirybutdata mustnot be treatedas independent oftheirsccio-historiccontext.(pp.7,8)

The principaldatain thisstudy,comprising theMIIlticlllm ral EducationPolicy andtheGrade Nineliterature materialsand teacher'sguides,canbe analyzed inter ms oftheir relation10eachother and the socio-hlstortceducationalcor ucxtfromwhich they derive. Harv ey(1990) statesthatat the heart of criticalsocial research istheidea that existing setsofsocialrelationsstructure knowledge. Itfollows fromthis that the knowledgeweofferstudentsinthe curriculummaterials is structuredby socialrelations outsideof the materials.However,Harvey arguesthat knowledge isalso critique. A critiqueoftheMulti cul tural EducationPoli cyandthe Grade Nineliterature curriculum materi alswillprovide insight intoandknowledge of theforcesand structuresat play in curric ulum developmentandcultural hegemonyorreconstruction.

The criticalanalysisof the data examinedin this studyis compatible with the

"discourse of textual forms"described and advocatedby Giroux(1988).This mode of

criticaltextual analysisexposes the ideology behindthetext, thusuncovering"layersof meanings,contradictionsanddifferencesinscribedin theform andcontent of classroom materials" (p.97). Suchanalysisdoes not regard thetextas neutralconveyorof ideas.

Popkewitz(1990) similarlyargues that"a critical scienceis concerned withways in which social,culturaland economicconditionsproduce a certainselectivityin the processes ofteachingand the organizationof curriculum"(p. 49). A criticalanalysis ofthePolicy and literaturematerialsmay indicatea selectivityinthe materialsinfluenced by socialand culturalconditionspresent in the provincegenerallyand the subjectarea specifically.

Harvey' s viewthatknowledgeis structuredby socialrelationshipsis not unique.

Cherryholmes(1988),aftere-amining Habermas,Foucaultand others ,summarizes that meanings "are located in ongoingdiscourses"(p.66). What i<; included andexcluded are determinedby rules which maybeexplicitorimplicit. These rulesare based on ideas, values, beliefs, concepts and power arrangemcnts.The rules bothtranscendand groundwhatis doneandsaid as wellas changcwith shifts in eventsandpower. The critical analysisofthedata inthis study will examine whatisincluded andexcludedin theliterature materialsfromthe pointof viewofthePolicywhich advocates that a multicultural spiritpermeate allaspectsof curriculum.

Guba(1990) suggests that if the aimof inquiryis to transform the worldby raisingconsciousnessand thusmotivatingchange,then it is the process ofcritical analysiswhichmay facilitatethistransformation. Inthe processofcritical analysis

'featuresof thereal worldare apprehendedand judgementsare made about which of them can be altered.The resultof effective,concertedactionistransformation"(p. 24).

Thisanalysisparticipatesin the discourse of textual formsin examiningthePolicyand text materials only.It doesnotexamine theapplication of thesetexts (i.e.•thePolicy and the literaturematerials) in the actual classroom s. The processofanalyzingthe PolicyandtheIiterature currieulurn materialsinvolves makingjudgementswhich.if aetcd upon, couldlead to transformationin the materialsand/oraltitudesandpracticesof educators.

Inpartoneof the data analysis,the Policywillbeexaminedinthe context of thefollowing questions:

1. Does the Policy present a clear understanding of multiculturalism?

2. Does thePolicypresent a clear vision ofmulticultural education?

3. DoesthePolicyprovidea framework and philosophy for curriculumreview?

4. Does thePolicyrecognizeand addressthe challengein bringingmulticultural educationto geographically isolated andethnically homogenous communities?

Inparttwo of thedataanalysis. specificselectionsfrom the literaturecurriculum of GradeNinewill beexamined to determinewhethera multicultural spiri tpermeatesthe materials. Are the desiredoutcomes of multicult uraleducation,as articulatedinthe ProvincialPolicy,compatible with the GradeNine literature materials? Iftheyarcnot, howcan theoutcomesbereconciledwith the materials? How dothe GradeNine literaturecurriculummaterials farewhenviewedin thecontextof thecritical thinking on multicultural educationand the literatureeurriculum'?Followingthisexamination, the four question swhichframetheexamination ofLePolicywillbe revisited, albe itina modifiedform, andconsidered in relationto thesampleliterature materi als:

1. Dothe current literaturematerialsfosteran understanding ofmulticulturalism'1

2. Arethe current literaturematerial s in keeping withvisions ofmulticulturaleducation?

3. Are the geographicisolation and limitedexposure to diverse ethnicgroupsexperienced bymany studentsand teachersin theProvince ofNewfoundland and Labrador addressedin and balancedbytheliteraturematerials?

4. Isthereaneedforcurric ulum reviewandchange?

Acritical analysisof'he GradeNine literature curriculumwill revealaview of

theworld whic hmayor maynoibeconsistentwith the ProvincialM,,Jticultural EducarionPolicyand/or!he criticalliteraturein thearea. Thisperspective whichwill emerge from th..eexam inationofthedatawillprovidethebasisforfuture:development of multiculturaleducation and specifICimplication s forliteraturecu rriculumntalcriills . ThesewillbeoullinedillChapterPeer.

MULTIClJLTtIRALISMANnTHEpROVINCIA!CONTEXT

Canadaisa multiculturalcountry .Thisrea lityisrec ognizedinitsnat ionalpublic policy.TheCanadian Mulricultural Act(1988) states:

ttlC'Government of Canada recognizesthe diversityof Canadiansasregardsrace,national orethnicorigin,colour orrelig ionasa fundamenulcheracieristicof Canadian Societyandiscommittedto a policy of multeelt u ratism designedtopreserveandenhancethemultic ultural heritage of Canadians,whilework~ll~toachievetheequalityof all Canadiansintheeconom ic,socia l,culturalandpolitical

lifeofCanada.

Newfoundlandand Labrador is inthedichotomous positionof beingpart..,fa multicul turalcountry from whichitisphysicall yisolated ; its populatio n is largely ethnicallyhomogenousAnglo-Irish, withsmallbutstrongFrancoph one andaboriginal cultures . Of 568,474people in theprovince,442,805claim ances trysolely from the Britis hIsles.Theprovincehasa tolal im migrantpopulationof8,460. Only3,705of these immigrantswere bornincountries otherthantheUnitedKin gdom or theUnited

10

Statesof America(Statistics Canada, 1994). Manyresidents,particularlythose onthe island,would not describe theirprovinceas multiculturaleven though thereismuch culturaldiversityeven withinthethreeprincipal ethnic groupsin the province.Labrador has a mixed populationof French,Englishand_Abori~!nalpeoples,but to many island Newfoundlanders Ihave encountered, the cross-culturalormulticultural issuesraised there are asremo te as theissuesinTorontoand Vancouver. Theyare something to watch onthe news.

NewfoundlandisisolatedfromCanada,and manyof itscommunitieswere, and stillare, isolatedfromeachother. There isa historyof religiousdivisionmanifesting itselfeven today inthedebateover the restructuringofthedenominationalschoolsystem.

Historically Newfoundlandguarded its ethnichomogeneity as wasevident in the official exclusionary attitudetowardadmittingJewish and Chineseimmigrants(Bassler,1978;

Yu,1986).These policiesmadeit verydifficultformembersof these groups toenter Newfoundland to live.Chinesemen werenot allowed to bringtheirwivesprior to1949 (Yu,19 86), and manyapplications byJewish people for immigrationwere rejected prior to and duringWorldWar II(Bassler,1978).These exclusionary immigration policies werecharacteristicofmany countries of the time,including Canada.

Newfoundland and Labrador wasthelast provinceto enterthe Canadian Confederation. Itexistsgeographtcatly apart from the remainderofthe country,and boastsits own uniqueculture. Althoughpeoplespeak of Newfoundlandculture,it is perhapsmoreaccurateto speak of many culturesin thisprovince;culturesshaped by

11

ethnic roots,by isolation,by thesea, andby the land . Emerging from these culturesare the literary tradition s, bothoral andwritten, ofNewfoundland and labrador. The literarytraditionhasbeen foundinthetellingofsto riesamongfamilyand friends,in print, insong andon stage. In thelatter panof this century a few appreciativelisteners have beentranscribingthe waning oraltradition so tha t no morewillbelost as television continuestoemer ge asthe storytellerof evenrem ote communities. Thisact of transcribingthe oral litera ry traditionwillpotentiallyenablepeople to share andenjoy the literaryheri tage of Newfoundland andLabradorat its fullest. Suchtranscribed material alsofacili tatesbringing this heritage10 students in the province' sschools, to studentswho may nototherwise haveheard these voices fromthe past.

The NewfoundlandandLabrador literature curriculummaterialsarcnot very different from tho se in other provinces.They arevariationsupon a standardcurriculum.

Within thisstandardcurriculum,however,is a recognition thatthe peopleof NewfoundlandandLabradorhave theirownlite ra ry traditions. These shouldbe recognized, valuedandperpetuated .Hence , ineachof theinter mediategradesthereis ananthologyoflocallitera ture to supplement thestandard text. Such alocal anthology is a recognition thatthereis aliterarytradition inthevoicesof thepeople, aliterary tradition which mustbevalued if a cultureis 10 surviveandgrow.

Finally , Newfoundland was,and is, economica llydepressed.Newfoundlanders have always left to find work elsewhereinCanada,IheUnited States and abroad . Today, inadditio n to histo rically persistenteconomicproblems,its mainindustry,the

12

fishery, is in crisis,threatening thesurvival of communities,of a people,of a culture.

Itis in this milieu that the Provincial Government has issued the document,Multicultural EducationPolicy: Respondingto SocietiesNeeds (1992). Itis in this milieu that the challenge is presented to create a literature curriculum that is multiculturalinspirit.It mustbe relevant to people who have never met people from another ethnic culture, yet whose own cultural survival istenuous,Itmust alsobe a bridge to)lifein a multicultural country and a global community.

The very existenceof a multiculturaleducation policy should prompt educators to examine whosevoices are heard and what they are sayingin theprescribed literature materials.ThePolicyurges educators to ensure that the materials,as well as the whole curriculum and educationalsystem, are multicultural in spiritin an ethnically homogeneous, but culturally diverse,province.This study examinesthe challenge set forth in thePolicyin Ih..c context of the internationaldebateon multicultural education, and the local reality. Itexamines the currentGrade Nine literature curriculum materials as a sample todeterminewhether theyare compatible with thePolicy and whether curriculum revision is necessary.

In 1971,Pierre Elliot Trudeau stated that"cultural pluralismis thevery essence of Canadian ir1entity·and that"multiculturalism mustbe a policy for all Canadians"

(House of Commons in McCleod,1984,p.31).The ProvincialMulticultural Education Policymay be a channel by which the people of Newfoundland and Labrador can better understand and sharein the Canadian identityof pluralism,an identitywhichincludes

13

NewfoundlandersandLabradoriansregardless ofethnic origin.

14

CIIAPfERTWO

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE OVERVIEW

Areviewof the criticalliteratureonmulticulturaleducation andrelated curric ulumcon tentissues in sch oollitera tureprogra msmust beginat root level. One

OlUStexploretheconcepts of"culture" and"education"witha view toconsideringtheir interconnectedness. Attitudes towardsmulticulturaleduca tion andrelated curriculum conte nt issues ste mfromparticular notions of culture andeducation.From these broader contextsonemovestoa considerationof selectedspecificcomponents -multiculturalism, multiculturaleducation,andmorespecifically,curr iculumcontent issuesinliterature.

Thisreviewof thecritical literaturewillfollow such apath of considerationfrom the generalto the mostspecificof theissues beingconsidered:culture;cultureand education;multiculturalism;multicultural education;and finally, related curriculum conte nt issuesin thestudyofliteratureby studentsin schoo ls.

Anunderstanding of multicultural educationmustbeginwith anunderstanding of culture. Diffe ring vie ws of culture,therelative valueof culturalattributes and knowledgewithin the schoolsystem,as wellasthe relationshipof powerto cultural groups, are allissuesat the centre of the multiculturaleducationdebate.At thecentre

oftheseissues isanunde rs tandingof culture.

Cultureinvolves the tangib leandtheintangible.Iteludesanddefiesdefinition.

Manyeducatorstendto organizecultureinto ideas, behavioursand products (Robinson, 1985). However,organizingculture intocategories andlist s demonstrates the breadth of cult ure,butstilldoes notencapsulate the concept.Theselistsserve to stare the obvious andeasily articulated manifestations of culture.

For anthropologis tscultureis the "wayoflife of a people"(Hall, 1959.p.43).

Itis morethan "merecustom".Itis the differentways of"or ganizing life,of thinking, and ofconceivingthe underlying assumptionsaboutthefamil y andthestate,andofthe econo micsystem and ofmanhimself"(Hall,1959,p. 51). Culture is communication ata level beyond language andmuch ofitbeyondourlevel ofaware ness.Hall claims:

"Culture hidesmorethanitreveals, andstrangelyenough whatithidesit hidesmost effectivelyfmm its participants"(p.53). David Trend (l992) describes cultureas something that we all"fashioninourdailylives as we comm unicate,consume,and buill' theworldaroundus.Wemakeitas itmakes us"(p.9).

A definitionofcultureis always spiralling outward read y to takein something it hasleft out.Culturepermeatesevery aspect of life. Welearn our culture, andwithit we adoptconsciousandunconscious rules for living. As we areshapedby ourculture sodoe s cultureshape howweviewtheworld(Damen, 1987) .

Brian Bullivant(l9 89) cautionsthat peoplearenot members of cultures.They are members ofsocialgroupswhichshare a culture .This sharedculture consistsof

16

knowledge,values,andconceptions that are publicandare embod ied inbehaviours, artifactsand organization.Thesegroups,however,overlap.We aremembersof more thanoneculturalgroup. Sharing aculture entailsa sharing of meaning,valuesand assu mptions. ThisissimilartoMc Laren's (1994) viewthat peopledo notinhabit cultu resor classesbutliveoutclass orcultural relations.

Bissoonda lh(1994),ina recently releasedpopularbookcriticizingtheCanadian multiculturalpolicy anditsapplication ,anemptstodefineculture: "Cultureislife.Itis aliving,breathing,multi-faceted entity inconstantevolution. Italterseveryday,is neverthe same thingfromone daytothe next"(p.81).Cultureis not static ;itchanges through interactio nwiththeforcesaroundit. Bissoondathstressestheco mplexity of culture, emphasizingthat everything,eventhe mostinsignificant behaviou r or preference mustbecounted.Heisopposedtoviews ofculturewhichtriviallzeit, reducing it to stereot ype .Hecautionsagainst"culture as a commodity:a thing that canbedisplayed, performed. admired,bought,sold or forrnlten"(p.83).

Apple also resists the treatmentofcultureasco mmodity,preferringinsteadto treatitasaprocess thatis varied,complexandconstantlychanging(1991). Itis-the coosianraodcomplexprocessbywhichmeaningsaremadeandshared"(1993, p.45).

Hestatesthatculture growsoutofsociety' sdivisions, working at any unityit construc ts.

Mclaren(l994)usesthe termculture"tosignifythepart ic ularwaysin whicha socia l grouplivesoutandmakessense of its'given'circ umstances and condition s of

17

practices that express culturethroughmusic.dress.dance.food. religionand educat ion are described byMclarenas cultural forms. These have developed as groupshave shaped their lives out ofthesurround ingphysical and politicalenvironments.

McLar en (1994)is concernedwiththe link betweencultureandpower. He consolidatesthree insights from the critical literatureon culture and power:

First,eultureillintimatel y connectedwith thestructure of socialrelationswithinclass. gender,andage formations that produce formsof oppressionanddependency.Second.

cultureis analyzed notsimplyas a way of life,but asa formofproductionthrough whichdifferent groupsineither dominant orsubordinatesocial relationsdefineandrealize their aspirations through unequalrelationsof power.

Third,cultureisviewed as a field of struggleinwhichthe production,legitimation ,and circulationof particularforms of knowledgeandexperienceare centralareasof conflict.

(p.180)

Thisconsiderationof cultureinrelationto powerhighlightscultureas processand production. Each of the three insightsarticulated byMcLarcn(1994) involvesculture as part of a structure or forcewhich is engagedin theproductionofculture itself.The degreeof culturalinvolvementin thecultural processofproductionescalatesfromthe first view ofanintimate COnnection tothethird of afield of struggle. Thatconflict exis ts,however,impliesthatculture changes as a resultof the struggleinherentinthe culturalprocess. Cultureas processisnot clean, simple and predictable. Whatis produced, however, is the continuatio nof the cultural process,socialrelations and their products. Mclaren 'sarticulationofthe thirdlevel of culturalproductionas a struggle involvingthe legitimationof formsofknowledgeis ofparticular interest10thisstudy

re

whichconsidersanaspect of the legitimationof knowledge in curriculumcontent materials.

Ifcultureisunderstood as something which can be defined simplyin terms ofits outwardformsandloras somethingwhich canbeproduced,reproduced or allered in a controlled environment,thisaffects one'sview of the relationship between culture and education.People who understandcultureprimarilyin termsof productwill view the function of educationdiff erently fromthose whounderstand culture as process.

EIlllCAIION SCHOOl AND CULTURE

Incasual conversation itisnot unusualto use the terms"education" and"school"

interchangeably.Onreflection,however,itis apparentthat education is not necessarily synonymouswith formalschooling.People may commonlydefine formal schooling as thepractice of instructingstudentsinofficially sanctioned knowledgeby ateacher who is alsoofficiallysanctionedor certifiedto teach. Education, however,islarger than schooling. Today it is notunco mmonto hearpeoplespeak of lifelongeducationor lifelonglearning.Educationisongoing throughoutthelife of an individualinvolving family.peers,elders.and other societalforces. Thefunctionof educationhasbeen describedas"the transmission,conservation, extension.and reconstruction"of culture (Labelle,1972.p. 74). Schoolis but one educational force in the life of a student.II is,however, a powerful force said to reproducethe society andcultureas it exists

rs

(Anyon,1980;Bourdieu,19n).That schooland othereducationalforces in thelifeof a student maybein conflictbecomes apparent inthe criticalliterature. This conflict centres arounda conflictofculture.or,as McUren(1994)describesit, aconflictof leg itimationof kno wledge and experience:

According to Simon (1992), schools are not mere reflectionsof culture,butoneofthecentralsitesin which various groupshaveattemptedtoconstitutenotionsof cultural authorityand regulatetheway peopleumlersland themselves, their relationshipwithothers, andtheir shared socialand physicalenviro nments.(p. 36)

Appleclaim s that"educational institutions are usuallythemain agencies of transmission of aneffectivedominan tculture-(1979,p.6). Educationalinstitutions participate in a"selec tive tradition".Thatis,some knowledge, values, andtraditions are selected inandothers excluded .Bydoing this, Apple(1979)statesthat "schools help control meaning-(p.63). In selecting theknowledgeofcertaingroups asbeingthe knowledgethat all mustpossess,culturallegitimacy is conferred upon thesegroups.

Thisselectionprocessis relatedtothepowerof these groups inthepoliticaland economicspheres.Thus,according to Apple. cultureand powerareconnectedjust as are econo mics and power.

Connell (1989) statesthat:

the mainstream curriculum is hegemonic withinthe educationalsystem in thesensethatitmarginalizes other ways oforganizing knowledge,is integratedwith the structureoforganizationalpower, andoccupies the high cultural ground, defining most people'scommon-sense ideas aboutwhatlearn ingought tobe.(pp.124-125)

au

Accordingto Mclaren(1994),schoolknowledge isneverneutral orobject ive.

Itis"historically and sociallyrooted andinterest bound.•.Knowledgeis a social constructiondeeply rooted ina nexusof powerrelations"(p.178). Hence , it is importanttoobservewhatisemphasizedaswell asexcluded in knowledgeconstruction.

Banks (1993)definesschool knowledge asconsisting of"thefacts, concepts. and generalizationspresented intextbooks,teachers'guides,and otherforms ofmedia designed for schooluse-(p.II). He states that this knowledgeextends to the teacher's mediation and interpretationof the textbookknowledge.ReynoldsandSkilbeck (1976) claimthat teachersdo more than transmit knowledge, "Theyselectfrom and mediate culture for children;andin doing SOtheymake valuationsof culture"(p. 17).

The roleof theteacher as cult uralmediator extendsbeyond control overofficial material. School is botha product of a cultureand a producerofculture.Schools are infusedwiththevalues,rules and normsof the dominantsurroundingculture.In North Americathisnormally meanswhite,middle classculture.Most teachersbelongto this culture and participatein affirming and reinforcingtheir cultural traditions(Mclaren, 1994). Forchild ren whose educatio noutside of schoolteaches differentvaluesand behavioursfromthe dominantculture,schoolmay be a source of discontinuity with home.

Adiscontinuity between home andschool does notexist only for ethnically different children. Studiesshowthathome-school discontinuityexistswhere thereare culturaldifferences between socio-economic groups(Mclaren, 1994, p.198). Thereis

21

adiscontinuity betweenwhatis learned athomeandwhatis valuedatschool,and sometimes, between the language ofhomeandthe languageof school.This discontinuity is so greatthat Apple (1993) statesthatfor somestudentsschoolis a formof"soctat control",itscurriculaand teachingpracticesthrea tening "the moraluniverse"of some ofits students(p.46).

The seeds ofthis home-schooldiscontin uityhave beendescribedin termsof knowledge whichis culturallybased.Some students come to schoolknowing more than othersndenu.more of the knowledgeneeded forschool success. Thisknowledge extends beyondthecolours, numbers,andthe alphabet.Theyknowthe unwrillcnrules ofbehaviour .They know howtofunction successfully in the dominantmiddle class cultureof theteacher and the schoo!.They donot experiencethediscontinui ties oftheir

"less advantaged"peers. Thisculturalknowledgea childbringsto schoo lhasbeen termed"cultural capital"by P. Bourdieu (Mclaren,1994,p. 197). Schools usc pattern sand structuresfamiliar to studentsofhigher socio-economicbackgrounds.

Students from thesebackgrounds bring to schoolexperience and knowledge which ease schooladjustmentandfosteracademic success(Lareau,1987).

A student'sculturalbackground,whetherethnic orsoclo-eco nomlc, isnotthe sole determine rof schoolsuccess.Tolook onlyat a child'scultureandto see initapassport to successor failureis dangerous.Blamingschoolfailureon "cultural deprivation"or culturaldifferenceshas beencalled"the institutionalizationof failu re"(Keddi,1973, p.

10). MorerecentlyMclaren (1994)has described this as"psychclog izlng student

22

Psychologizing school failure ispart of the hidden curriculumthatrelievesteachersfromthe need to engage in pedagogical selfscrutiny or in any serious critique of their personal roleswithin theschool, and the school 's role within thewidersociety. In effectpsychologizing student failure indictsthestudent while simultaneously protecting thesocial environmentfrom sustainedcriticism.(p.216)

Keddi (1973) states that wecannotmerel y measurethe childinterms of knowledge and attributes,but wehavetolook at the interactional context oftheschools.

Wehaveto examine how we addressand typify students. We mustalsoexamine how teachersandstudentsinterpret and give meaningto educationalsituations. McLa ren (1994) urgesthatteachersbe aware of how"schoolfailure is structurally locatedand culturallymediated"(p.216).

Not onlymust teachersbe awareof how schoolstructures failurein the interactionalcontext,but McLaren(1994)and others (Apple,1993; Giroux,1991) advocatethat teachersengagein acritical pedagogyin dealing withofficialschool knowledge. This entails anunderstandingofthe relationshipbetweenknowledge and power.II entailsan understandingof how knowledge is constructed and how knowledge represents,misrepresents ormarginalizes particular views oftheworld. Accordingto Mclaren (1994):

Knowledgeacquiredin classrooms should help students participateinvital issuesthat affect their experienceall.a daily level...School knowledge should help create conditionsproductiveforstudentself-determination in the larger society. (pp. 190-191)

2J

Itis,therefore,evidentthatan understandingof culture as both a productand a processaffects one'sunderslanding of the role of school inthe cultural/educa tional process.Ifcultureis seen as static,set, definable,and enshrined,the roleof schoolis then simplytoreproducethe cultureandits attendantforms.values and structures.If cultureis viewed as dynamic,interactive,and evolving,school'srole in relationto culturemaybevieweddifferently.It maybepossiblethatif studentsandteachersare enabledto deal criticallywith theknowledge containedwithin thecurriculum materials.

as wellas withtheknowledge valuedin the interactionalcontextofthe school culture, schoolsmay become part of the cultural process of changingandrestructuringthe ever evolvingculturesaroundusand withinus.

MIUTIC1!lTURALISM

Multiculturalismis a word muchusedbut oftenill-defined.As policy,and as a featureofthe Canadianidentity,it enjoys statutoryentrenchment. Canada isa multiculturalcountry andboasts an officialpolicy of multiculturalismembodiedinthe CanadianMulticulturali.smAct(1988).Yet,thereisconfusion,debate, and sometimes rage overthemulticultural reality andits attendant officialpolicy. Two recent books (Pleras and Elliot, 1992;Bissoondath, 1994) explore the Canadianversion of multiculturalismand its surroundi ngdebate.

Themost recentof thesebooks is Bissoondath'sSellingIllusions: The Cultof

24

Multicultflralism in Canada(1994), which has received a high level of attention in the

popular media. Thisbookis a personal study of the policy of multiculturalism and its effects"o n our individualandcollective selves"(p.7).What givesthis book credibility to many people isthatit is not writtenbyaperson whocanbeclassifiedas awhite conservative wanting to return to a white dominated past, but byanimmigrant to Canada who isamember of a non-European minoritygroup.

Bissoondath (1994) criticizesthe Canadian approach to multiculturalism claiming it"encourages the devaluation of that whichit claims to wishto protect andpromote.

Culture becomes an object for display rather than the heart and soul of the individual formed by it"(p.88). Bissoondathclaims multiculturalismis too muchendtoo often concerned with stereotype and"Disney-type"displays. Itdoes not open people out to their neighbours but dealsincult ural apartheid. Hecriticisesoff-shootsof the policy such as employment equity programs and special admission quotas to educational institutions for racial or ethnic groups.He stales that skin colour should notbetreated as a handicap and thatchanging the focus of discrimination through affirmativeaction programsis stilldiscrimination.These will not right the wrongs they are intended to address.

InBissoondath's judgement multiculturalismhasmade Canadians fearful of addressing the limits of diversity.There is a confusion over values. Bissoondathstares thataspublic policy multiculturalismis"ethnicity"(p.212). Itencourages an individual tobea hyphenated-Canadian instead of being a Canadian.The role and autonomy of the

25

individual havebeen diminished by the stereotype of ethnicity. He sees aresun of this heightened ethnicity in the demand for some groups to have separateschool systemsand specialcurricula. Blssoondath argues that multiculturalismhasnot servedtheinterests of societyorthenewcomer. Ithas heightenedratherthandiminisheddifferences;

preached tolerance rather than encouraged acceptance. He statesthat"itis leadingus into a divisiveness so entrenchedthat we face a future of multiplesolitudes with no centralnotionto bind us·(p. 192).

Bissoondath(1994)calls forpersonalcultureandethnicityto be removed from publicpolicy. Governmentfundsshould not be spent building halls forethnic groups but inbattling racism. Money shouldbe spent on fundingprogramsthaI"sensitize children 10each other,stressing notthe differencesthai dividethem but thesimilarities thatunite them" (p. 223). He states:

whatever may come aftermulticulturalismwill aimnot at preserving differencesbut at blending theminto a new visionof Canadianness,pursuinga Canadawhereinherent differences andinhe rent similaritiesmeldeasilyand where none is alienated with hyphenation. A nation of cultural hybrid s,where cveryindividual is unique,everyindividual distinct.And every individual is Canadian,undilutedand undivided ...The ultimate goal,then, is a cohesive, effective society enlivened by culturalvariety: reasonable diversit ywithinvigourous unity.(p. 224)

Fleras and Elliot (1992) acknowledge confusion over the meaning of multiculturalism. As an official doctrinethey say thatit is poorlyunderstoodand appreciated (p. xiii).They acknowledge thatthere is discontent with the multicultura l

26

policy ofCanada. Flerasand Elliotchronicle thediscontent apparent in recent publications; inthe voicesof thepeoplehea rdinpublic forums; inpresscoverage and editorialsinthelocaland nationalmedia;inevents suchas the controve rsyover whether Sikh RCMPofficers shouldbepermittedto wear turbans; andin politicalvoices suchas thoseheardfromthe ReformParty.

FJeras andEJliot (1992) dividethe criticism into fourcategories.Multiculturalism as policyis viewedas"dlvisive,regressive,decorative andimpractical"(p.128).It is seen as divisive,heighteningethnic differences andghettoizing ethnoracialgroups.Itis seenasregressive for itreinforces inequalityand socialstratificationwhile focusingon folkloric culturalactivity. Itis viewed as decorative inthatitencourages equalityof culturesintheprivate spherebutignores collective rights and cultural renewal atthe institutionallevel.Itis, therefore,seen as a policy of disguised assimilation.It is finally saidtobe impractical. According to Fleras and Elliot,one group ofcritics statethatit is impracticalbecause positiveattitudes withinone'sown group do notnecessarily foster receptivity to othergroups,whileothersstate thatcapitalismis incompatiblewith the egalitarian principlesunderlyingmulticulturalism.

FlerasandElliot(1992) do not dismiss thecriticisms of multicultural policyin Canada. They seeitas animperfectpolicy formanagingdiversity.They acknowledge that initsphilosophy, content andobjectivesthere are inconsistenciesandcontradictions.

They acknowledgealsothatit canbecome a tool to meetthe politicalobjectives of politicians,and that forsomeminority individualsand groupsitcanbe an instrument of

27

divisionandantagonism.However, Flerasand Elliotarguethat most ofthecriticism representsdisto rtedviewsof what multiculturalism can realistically accomplishina liberal-democrati c society.Theystatefurtherthat much ofthecriticism is based on an outdatedperceptionofmulticulturalismwhichperceives multicu lturalismas a policy whichpays peopletomaintaintheir cultureand divide Canada.Fleras andElliotsaythat inrealitythepolicyassiststhe integrationof immigrantswhile allowingthemto share theirculture withothers.Criticismofmulticulturalis mis often confusedwithcriticism of immigrationorhumanrights policy issues.

Fleras andElliot(1992)statethat anunderstanding ofmultlculturaltsminvolves an understandingof multicultura lismun fourlevels. These are summarizedas:(a) fact, a demographic reality;(b)ideology,a prescriptive ideal withrepe rcussions on national identity ;(c) policy,officialdoctrine; and (d) process,a practicalresponse to problems by affected gro ups.

Definitio ns, however, vary andmay focus on differentaspects of the term . Fleras andElliot(1992)defineCanadianmulticulturalismas

an officialdoctrineand correspondingset of policies and practices inwhich ethnoracial differencesare formally promoted andincorporated as an integralcomponentofthe political,socialand symbolic order.(p. 22)

FlerasandElliot(1992)affirmtheirfaith inmulticulturalismas apolicyfor Canada despite its problems and inadequacies. Theybelieve themandateof multiculturalism mustbeextended to apply to allCanadians, not justracial and ethnic

28

minori ties.Thiswillpreventthe marginalizingof ethnoracia lconcerns.Itshouldbe definedas a framework for social equality. Itneedsto movebeyond funding celebratory events and be equated withracere lations asapart ofananti-racist, anti-discriminatory agend..(p. 179). They state thata

truly effectivemulticulturalismmusrbe concernednotonly with cult ureand heritage,but more importantly with disadvantage, justice, equality, discrimination, and prejudice. Accomplishmentofthese goalsrequires a sustained initiativeto definethenature of these concerns, to clarifyofficial policy objectives, andto delimit the scope of government interventionin managingdiversity.(p. 136)

Flerasand Elliot (1992) attemptto critiquemulticulturalismobjectively withthe intent to affirmtheircommitmenttoit. Bissoondath (1994), ina personalanalysis, attacks multiculturalis mand calls for its.[,ulitio n as policy. Yet, Bissoondath is notas far apart from Fleras and Elliot as may appear on the surface.Like them,he is calling fora movement to a level of culturalunderstandingbeyondthat currently prac tised and understoodasmulticult uralismby somepeople developing and implementi ngpublic policies. Bissoondath wishestodispense with the policy, therhetori c and the vision of multicul tura lism.Fleras and Elliot see a needfor a new orderandunderstand ing of the roleof multicultura lism ,but they do notsec an acceptablealternative to the policy.A policyof multiculturalismis essential for"managing diversity"inCanada (Fleras and Elliot, p. xiv).NeitherBissoondath,nor Fleras and Elliot,sees cultureas static, elmer fo: thedominantgroups or the minority groups. The rewill be growth,interaction and evolutio n. Therewillbediversity and, itishoped, unity. Asmentioned . however,

29

these writers seedifferentroutes forattaining not dissimilarobjectives.

Before leaving this discussion,it is valuable to considerfive principles of multiculturalism inherent in Canadianmulticulturalismidentified byKeithMcCleod (!9S14). These are:equalityof status;the Canadianidentityof pturaflsm: sharing control of values,attributes, histories,experiences and institutionsthatmakeup society;

greaterchoice of lifestylesand culturaltraits;anda concernforand protectionof civil and human rtgbts. In analyzingthese Characteristics.McLeodstates that equalityof status extendsthemulticulturalpolicy to ail individuals,ethnic minorities aswell asthose of Anglophoneor Francophoneroots.He claims equality of statuswasnot intended10 mean thatallethnic groupswouldhave equalimpact,butthatconcerns of other groups wouldbe heard in addition to theirindividualvoices.Pluralism docsnot deny a common Canadian identity.Pluralism is simply a componentofthisidentity.InMcleod'sview, sharedcontrolmust openthe institutions of Canadato all Canadiansasparticipants,not merely asclientsor customers.Multiculturalism allows forgreaterindividualchoiceof lifestylesandit reiterates the extensionof civilandhuman rights to everyone.

These basicprinciples of multiculturalism are notlikely tobe faulted byr-ost people,conservativesorliberals.Ashas beenevidentin thediscussionofBissoondath (1994) and Flerasand Elliot (1992),many of the difficultieswithmulticulturalismlie in misunderstanding, mismanagement and misapplication. Multiculturalism demographicfactwillnot disappearand,therefore,cannotbeignored.

Itis not lhe intentionof thisstudy tosupport orattack thecontinuation of

30

multiculturalism asofficialpolicy in Canada, but simplyto review aspectsof thedebate inorder togain a greater understandingof theissues involved.This study acceptsthat Canada has anofficial policyofmulticulturalismandwill continuetohaveitinthe foreseeable future ,eventhough,due tocurrentcriticis m, the interpretationand applicationof theofficialpolicy maybemodified.

An understanding ofmulticulturalismisnecessaryasafoundatio nto a discussion of multiculturaleducation. Hence,forthe purposesof this study, multiculturalismis understood as apartof aculturalprocesswhichisnot static,butinteractive, evolving andgrowing.Itis understood in terms ofthe principlesarticulatedbyMcleod(1984) with referenceto the concerns ofdisadvantage, justice,equality,discrimination, and prejud icearticulatedbyFleras andElliot (1992). Itinvolves a recognitionand affirmationof the manycultureswhichcompose Canadiansociety. Multiculturalism goesbeyond tolerance, acceptanceand protection ofhumanandcivilright sin thatit allowsshared controland participationinthe institutions and publiclife of the society.

Multiculturalism should strivetoovercome disadvantage,discrimination andprej udice while fosteringequality and justice.

MULTI CULII JRAl EDt ICATIO N

Multiculturaleducationis anextension of multiculturalism asit is practisedin the educational institutionsofsociety, inits schools.lust asmulticulturalism asa policyhas

31

beensaidtobe forallCanadians, it has been saidthat allCanadianclassroomsshould be multiculturaleven if they are notmultie thnic. Due to themulticultural nature of Canadiansociety,teachers shouldensuretha t thelr classrooms are public spaces open to the participationof all people inCanada (D'Oyley and Stanley , 1990 ).

D' Oyley andStanley(1990) advocate multicultural education as appropriate education forallstudentsin a multiculturalcountry for four reasons. First, differences persistin all classrooms even whenclassrooms areethnicallyhomogenous. Secondly, innovations in multicultura leducation affectcurriculumin ethnica llyhomogenous communities. Their third reasonis that students from ethnica llyhomogenous communities may findthemselveslivingin ethnically diverse communit ies.Finally,they believe prejudiced and stereotypical attitudes can exist inclassroom s withno exposure to mino rities.The authorsclaim tha t itis inthe multiculturalclassroom "that the skills needed to shape the Futurevisions of our countrycan first belearned andexercised-(p.

33). Such a multiculturalclassroom must extend into ethnically homogenous environments.

Rooted indiffere ntunderstandingsof cultureand the role ofeducationinrelation to culture are differingviews concerningwhat multicultura leducatio n is andwhat it shoulddo. Likeits parent.multiculturalism,multiculturaleducationtakes no one definitive fo rm, view,or approach. The following is an outline ofhow some educational theorists havedefin edthe different approaches tomun.rulturaleducation thatthey have studied.

32

Sleeter (1991) recognizesfiveapproaches 10 multiculturaleducation.Thefirst approach is ahuman relations approachwhichfocusesonsensitivitytraining inorderto changeattitudes.Interpersonal well-being andacceptanceof differencesare highlighted.

Thesecond approach,concernedwithteaching theculturally different,emphasizesusing teachi ngstyles and accommodations compatible with alearner'sculture.Neitherof these focusesonsocialchangeandempowerment.

Thelatterthree approachesrecognizedby Sleeter(1991),whichall focusto some degree on empowerment, are singlegroupstudies,cultural democra cy, and multicultural, social reccn srrucuonineducation.Through singlegroupstudies the cultura ldevelopment of a target group is explored,with emphasis on historical andcurrentoppression of that group. Culturaldemocracy attempts tomodel educationalenvironmentsonthe ideal of a culturallydiversebut equal society. Thelast approach,which ismulticultural,social reconstructio nist, attempts to teachmembersofboththe dominant and minoritycultures aboutpoliticalandeconomic oppression and discrimination.Its aimis10provide young peoplewithsocialactionskills.

The integrationofethniccontentinto thecurriculumis acomponentof multiculturaleducation . Banks (1989)uses four similarlevelsofdemarcationfor discussinga frameworkforintegrating ethniccontentinto the curriculum. Level One,

"the contributionsapproach", focuses on discretecultural elementssuch asheroesand holidays.levelTwo, "the additiveapproach",adds content, themes,perspectives and conceptswithout changing thestructureofthe curriculum. Tile third level, "'he

33

transformanv e approach-,changes the structure of thecurriculumsothatstudentscan viewcontent,conceptsand issues fromdifferentculturalandethnicperspectives.Inthe foonhlevel,-thesocialactionapproacn",the studentsmake decisions onimponant socialissuesandfollow throughwith action(Hanles.pp.192-199).

Nieto (1992)categorizesapproaches to multiculturaleducationintermsofI hierarchy offouroutcomes. Theminimal outcomeofmultic ultural education is toleran ce;at a higherlevel acceptance is achieved; respect isattainedas the third outcome;and thehighestand mostdesirable outcomeinvolves a combinationof

"affirmation, solidarityandcritique" (p.276). At the highestlevel,the cultureand languageofindividualsare viewed as valid and arctherefore incorpora ted intothe learning environment. Allfourlevelsshareseven characteristicsofmulticultural education. Multicult ural education is: aetiracisuantidiscrimiaatory;basic; pervasive;

importantfor all students;educationforsocial justice;process; and critical pedagogy.

The higher the level,themorethese seven characteristics are developedand encoded, Kehoe and Mansfield (1994), in synthesilingthe componentsofdifferent multicultural programs, suggestthatthere: arethree:commongoals of multicultural educationprograms:equivalencyinachievem ent; morepositive intergro up attitudes;

and developingpridein heritage.These goalsareCOlistant despitedifferingphilosophies or practicalapplicationsof multiculturalprograms.

Fromthereviewof theliterature on culture and education,itisapparent that a

34

teacherwhouses theapproach of simplyadding ethniccontent, who focuses onthe first level of humanrelations, whois satisfied withachievingtoleranceor evenacceptance, may have a viewofculture and its relation to educationwhich isdifferent fromteachers strivingfora version ofmulticulturaleducation that involvesthe higher levels articulated bySleeter (1991),Banks(1989),andNieto (1992). These higherlevels deal with culture atthelevelof precess andpower. These approacheschallengethe natureof school knowledgeand ofsocialdecision-making. They evenchallenge the roleof formal education. Onthis level school may nolongerbesimplyreproducing culture,but perhapsrestructuring,producingandtransfor mingculture.

M1J1:nCtJI T1JRA l EDlJCATIONAND ITS CRlrrcs

Multicultural education has many critics.Itiscriticized by the lei"tandby the right,by whitesand by racialminorities.Sleeter(1991) acknowledges thatfor many people multiculturaleducation is equated withwhatshe calls the firstlevelof multiculturaleducationwhichaimsfor harmony and understanding. This teaches studentsabout culturesotherthan theirown but cultureremains atthelevel of commodity.

Recent educational theorists criticizethe humanrelations versionofmulticultural educationbecauseit doesnot look criticallyat the power relationshipsin society and aim at restructuring these relationships (Banks,1986;Giroux,1991). In Australia,the

35

multiculturaleducationpolicyhas been criticizedby advocates of educationalsocial changebecause it perpetuatesa We/theydichotomy.Itdoesnot change, look critically, or question the assumptionsofthedominantsociety (Knight,Smith,&Sachs,1990).

Kehoe andMansfield (1994),however,arguethat many of the criticisms levelled against multicultural educationareunsubstantiated. Many suchcriticismsare applied to multicultural educationin generaland do not lakelnto account there are manylevels of multiculturaleducation.

Right wingcritics see multiculturalismas athreat \0 the existingsocialorder.

They see thevalues andactionsofthe dominantsocietybeingscrutinizedandunder mined (Chavez,1994).Parekh(1986) claims thatfor conservatives"itrepresentsanattempt to politicizeeducation to pander tominority rights" (p.19).Ithasbeen saidthatleft wingcriticscriticize multicultural education fornot doingwhat theright wing critics fear itis doing,restructuring thesocialorder(Banks,t986)._

Left-wingcriticssuch " 0;<00<(1991)Crille liCUIIU"1OOUCallO>1. bUI unlikesome othereducationaltheorists of theleft,Giroux does notdismissit. Instead, in order for multicultural educationtosuccessfullyeffectchangeand make adifference.

the attitudes toward race, power,equalityand justice mustbecentralto its philosophy.

Giroux (1991) acknowledgesthat multiculturaleducationhas varied form s and approaches,butsaysit generallyfails to"conceptualize issues of race and ethnicityas part of thewider discourseon powerand powerlessness"(p.225). Henotes thatin multicultural educationthereis a

can

36

nor m ofwhiteness is neverquestion ed,nor isthere anyattemptto critiq uedifferent forms ofEuropeanorAmericanculture.Multicu lturalism is about"Otherness".Giro ux claimsthatvers onsofmulticultural educationthat callfor"joyful learnin g"must be criticallyengaged. Schoolingmustbeviewedas contextual, examiningquestion s of c'~ ;1ure,langu age andvoice. Giroux claimstha t multicul tural educators mustdevel op a theoryofdifference beginning withpower,doclnation andstrugglecombined witha progressive vision as partofschoolingforde mocracy andcriticalcitizenship. Giroux (1992)alsonotcsthat multicultural educationcannot simply beimposedupon a school.

This is because relat ionships between the school,teachers,students andthe comm unity atlargewillbereshaped.

Giroux 's visionof multiculturaleducation is consistent with a visionof multicultur alism articulated by Fleras andLeonard-Elliot (1992) who advoca tea vision of multiculturalism concernedwith"disadvantage, justice,equality,discri mination , and prejudice "(p.136). Kehoe andMansfield(1994)arguethatmulticultural educa tion shouldbeconcem ed with institutional barrie rs, material inequalities and power discrepancies . They statemullicultural educati onis able to retain the threemai n goals ofcelebrat ion of heritage , equalityof achieve ment,and intergroupharmonyand understandi ng,while critically examini nginequitiesof power. However,Kehoe and Mansfield cautionthatcaremustbetaken toen sure that multicult uraleducationdoes not becomesoppositional,divisive and preoccupied withan exclusionaryemphasisoncolour racism and capitalism.

37

MJIIDCI I!DIRAIEPlJCATIONANDC!!RRICJ I!J!M

Multiculturaleducationhasbeenattackedby neo-conservativecriticsregardless ofwhetheritis seen as anapproachto fostercrcss-cuuuratundustandingoras a critical pedagogy. Aronowitz (I993) states that the categoryof "culture"isnowa majo r political issue. For somepeopleopeningthe curric ulumtorepresent diverse cultures is vi-wedas a"frontal assault on the core values ofwestern civilization"(p.I).Itisthe processesof curriculumreviewand revisionwhich promptoutcriesfrom traditionalists.

IntheUnitedStates, E.D.HirschinCulturalLiteracy(1987) and Allan BloominThe Closingofthe American Mind (1987)bothcallforthereinstatement ofa curr iculum that teachesAmericanvaluesstressing Ame ricanliteratureandhistory in the tradition of westernthoug ht.These authorsdecrywhatibey sec as theerosion01 westernsociety and call forareturn to a placeofdominanceforwC$ternacademic traditions. Neo- conservativesare threatened by the movetoinclude works from other racial and ethn ic groups,aswen asthosebywomen.Theyresist scrutiny of existing works forbiasand stereotyping.

AronowitzandGiroux (1991),inanalyzingHirsch andBloo m'sarguments,note thattheseconservativ es advocate a transmissionpedagogy to transmit aversionof weste rnculturehelddeartothemselves. HirschandBloo madvocatea textualauthority whichdoesno trecogni zetheinjusticesormultiple version s of realityexistinginthe past as weltasthepresent. Accordingto Giroux and Aronowitz,'what weareleft withis

the philosophy andpedagogy ofhegemonic intell ectualscloaked in themantleof academicenlightenmentand literacy·(p. 238).

Hirsch andBloomarcpartof areaction against multicultural education in academicand popular circles.Thisreaction is oftenpartof a movement of"back-to- basics" educatio n.Someeducators inthe field ofmulticulturaleducation(Price,1992 ; Nieto, 1992) statethatitistimeto redefinewhatwe mean by"basiceducation"."Back- to-bastes"shouldnot simplymean areturnto acurriculumthat teaches academic skills usingtraditional westerncontentand teachingme thods. Itshouldmeancoming to respect and ackno wledgeotherpeoples.Itshould mean aholi sticeducationthat doesnot viewother culturesas superioror inferior(Price,1992). Itshou ldmeanteaching students tobeaware oftheir previously unque stionedassumptions,to valueother culture s,and tothinkcrit icallyabout culture,one'sownandothers (Klasen, 19 89). Fo r Nieto(1992),multicultur al educationonalllevelsis basic. Formany people, however, the"basics"movementisopposedto diversificationof curricu lumcontent.

The issueofwhat constitutesbasic education begs an understandingof curriculum.Doyleand Mulcahy (1992) notethatthere is no ccncensuson a definitio n orunderstandingofcurriculumamong educators,the generalpublic,orscholars. Conceptualizatio nsrang e from alist ofsubjectsto a child's Whole experiencein a school, However,Doy leand Mulcahy state:

Students,teachers, learning resou rces,milieu,subject matter,classsire,integration,orientation,beliefs,values, attitudes;[sic) continuity,processes,strategies,geography, organization,and structure,areall part of the meaningthat

J'

isembedded in"curriculum". (p.457)

Theseelem entsandcompo nentsarenot static,but each"is affectingand being affected byallothersinaconstantstateofchange andtension " (p.458).

Peoplewhoview abasiceducationas simplyan idcntifiablebank ofknowledge andskills that stud e ntsmustbe taught,do notnecessari lyrecognizethe interdependence, interrelationandinteraction of allofthe forces iden tifiedabove. Aswas previously discussed,teachers mediate and even change officiallysanctioned te xtmaterial and knowledge .Howe ver, according to Appleand Christian-Smit h (1991), "Students bring theirownclassed,raced, gendered,andsexualbiog raphieswiththem aswell. They, too,selectively accept, rein terpret, andrejectwhat cou ntsaslegitimateknowledgc"(p.

14), Multicultural education,when itmoves beyondthe recognitionofsuperficial differences andintothe realmofthe critical,advocatedby Giroux(1991),Banks (1989), Nieto (1992),and Sleete r(1991), recognizesthe dynamic interconnectednessofthe elementsand componentsarticulatedbyDoyle and Mulcahy (1992). Multicultural education at this levelinvolveslookingcritically atknow ledge. Itis part of an understandingofcurriculum whichis not compatiblewithanarr ow constructionof basic educationas simplyadefin able setofofficiallyappro vedknowledgeandskills. Rather, itispartofa riche r understanding of curriculumwhichseesknowledge,not as somcthing tobemerely transmittedandaccepted,but as negotiab leand even"oppositional- (Apple and Christian-Smi th, 1991 ,p,14). Th at is, the student, asreceiver , maynegotiate meaning. The stu dent may accept thegeneral premisesorinterpretationsaspresented,

40

or mayeven respond fromthepositionof theoppressed . In thislatterresponse,the framework.theideology, or philosophyunderlying the knowledge presented in a text, or by ateacher, is rejected.Multiculturaleducationemergesfrom an understanding of curriculum which does not separateknowledgefromanyof thehumanbeingswho construct,transmitand receiveknowledge.Forin doing so, each person revalues,and evenreconstructs,official knowledge.

Theforegoin goutlineofthecriticismsof multic ult ural education indicates that an understanding of multiculturaleducation,andits place within the curr iculum,is very much dependent upon one'sunderstanding ofthe whole curriculumprocess and therole of education inco nnectionwithculture.

MULTICUI TURAL EDUCA TIONANnlITERATU RECORRlq JI tiMCO NTENT

Producing aliterature curriculum that is multicult ural inspiritandpracticeisa challenge. This challenge goes beyond a simpleheadcountofracialandcultural representationin illustrations, problemsandexamples . Itinvolvesgiving voiceto the complexityof thecultureswhich make uphumanity. Itinvo lveslettingpeople speak.

from the pastas well asthe present.Itinvolveslisteningto vo ices that are both pleasing andaffirming aswellaslistening10 voices thatwemay find disturbing or challenging.

Research in the area of teachingculture hasfound that for changetooccurin an individual' s attitudes and behaviours,personal involve ment and intellectual challenge

41