The SOCIOPOLITICAL CONTEXT of MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION

DIVERSITYAffirming Seventh Edition

The SOCIOPOLITICAL CONTEXT of MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION

SONIA NIETO • PATTY BODE

www.pearson.com

Seventh Edition N

IETO • B

O D

E AFFIRM

IN G DIVERSITY

The SOCIOPOLITICAL CONTEXT of MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION

Affirming Diversity

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 1 10/11/17 4:25 PM

This page intentionally left blank

Sonia Nieto University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Patty Bode Amherst-Pelham Regional Public Schools,

Amherst, Massachusetts

Affirming Diversity The Sociopolitical Context of

Multicultural Education

7 EDITION

330 Hudson Street, NY NY 10013

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 3 10/11/17 4:25 PM

Director and Publisher: Kevin M. Davis Portfolio Manager: Rebecca Fox-Gieg Managing Content Producer: Megan Moffo Content Producer: Yagnesh Jani Media Project Manager: Lauren Carlson Portfolio Management Assistant: Anne McAlpine Executive Field Marketing Manager: Krista Clark Executive Product Marketing Manager: Christopher Barry Procurement Specialist: Carol Melville Full-Service Project Management: Katrina Ostler, Cenveo Publisher Services Composition: Cenveo Publisher Services Printer/Binder: LSC, Crawfordsville Cover Printer: Phoenix Color Text Font: 10/12pt Slimbach Book

ISBN-10: 0-13-404723-0 ISBN-13: 978-0-13-404723-2

Credits and acknowledgments borrowed from other sources and reproduced, with permission, in this textbook appear on the appropriate page within text.

The book’s front cover is made up of self-portraits from students at Springfield Conservatory of the Arts public school in Springfield, Massachusetts in 2015 with art teachers, Patty Bode and April Wesley. Student artists from top left in clockwise order: Teyonce Nunnally-Bess, Caleb Rosario, Syonah Seabrooks, Kyarah Thomas-Archie, Cristian Matos, Savione Mohown, Kaseem Walters, Joemar Burgos, Dynesty Peña

Copyright © 2018, 2012, 2008 by Pearson Education, Inc., 221 River Street, Hoboken, New Jersey 07030. All rights reserved. Manufactured in the United States of America. This publication is protected by Copyright, and permission should be obtained from the publisher prior to any pro- hibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or likewise. To obtain permission(s) to use material from this work, please submit a written request to Pearson Education, Inc., Permissions Department, 221 River Street, Hoboken, New Jersey 07030.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

On file with the Library of Congress.

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 EB 15 14 13 12 11

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 4 10/11/17 9:13 PM

This book is dedicated to all those teachers who teach, believe in, and love their students, and to the students in our schools today, with the gifts of curiosity, energy, resilience, determination, and

awe they bring to our world. They are, after all, our future.

—S. N. and P. B.

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 5 10/11/17 4:25 PM

This page intentionally left blank

vii

Sonia Nieto has dedicated her professional life to issues and social justice. With experience teaching students at all levels grades through graduate school,

currently she is Professor Emerita Literacy, and Culture, University of Massachu-

setts, Amherst. The and numerous journal articles and book chapters, she is the

awards for her research, advocacy, and activism, including the Educator of the

Year Award from the National Association for Multicultural and the Social Justice

in Education Award from the American.

Patty Bode combines nearly 20 years in PK–12 classrooms, and a decade in higher education, to inform social justice perspectives in her current work as the

principal of Amherst-Pelham Regional Middle School in Massachusetts Public

Schools. Patty’s research, teacher leadership, and community collaboration focus

on imaginative school structuring and curriculum reinvention. She has received

awards for efforts in antiracist and antibias curriculum reform and bridging theory

and practice in multicultural education—including the 2017 Art Educator of the

Year for Supervision and Administration of the Eastern Region by the National Art

Education Association; the Massachusetts 2017 Art Educator of the Year from the

Massachusetts Art Education Association; the 2016 Women’s Caucus Carrie Nord-

lund Award in PK–12 Feminist Pedagogy, also from NAEA; and 2005 Multicultural

Educator of the Year Award from the National Association for Multicultural

Education.

About the Authors

vii

Photo credit Mark Moriarty

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 7 10/11/17 9:22 PM

viii

Brief Contents Foreword xiv

Preface xvii

I Setting the Stage: Multicultural Education Within a Sociopolitical Context 1

Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 3

Defining Multicultural Education for School Reform by Sonia Nieto 30

II Developing a Conceptual Framework for Multicultural Education 47

Racism, Discrimination, and Expectations of Students’ Achievement 49

Structural and Organizational Issues in Classrooms and Schools 91

Culture, Identity, and Learning 135

Linguistic Diversity in U.S. Classrooms 184

Understanding Student Learning and School Achievement 215

III Implications of Diversity for Teaching and Learning in a Multicultural Society 247

Learning from Students 249

Adapting Curriculum for Multicultural Classrooms by Patty Bode 289

Affirming Diversity: Implications for Teachers, Schools, Families, and Communities 321

References 341

Index 355

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 8 10/11/17 4:25 PM

ix

Task 6: Examining Political Struggles— Multicultural Education, Backlash, and Legislation 21

The Back-to-Basics Argument 21 • Eroding the Tradi- tional Educational Canon 22 • Political Struggles of Legislation and Policy 23

Conclusion 28 To Think About 28

Activities for Personal, School, and Community Change 28

Chapter 1 Notes 29

Defining Multicultural Education for School Reform by Sonia Nieto 30

Why School Reform? 31

A Definition of Multicultural Education 31 Multicultural Education Is Antiracist Education 32 • Multicultural Education Is Basic Education 35

About Terminology: The Conundrum of Race 36

Multicultural Education Is Important for All Students 37 • Multicultural Education Is Pervasive 38

What You Can Do “Multiculturalize” Your Lessons 39

Multicultural Education Is Education for Social Justice 39 • Multicultural Education Is a Process 40 • Multicultural Education Is Critical Pedagogy 41

What You Can Do Learn About, and Practice, Critical Pedagogy 42

Conclusion 45 To Think About 45

Activities for Personal, School, and Community Change 45

Chapter 2 Notes 46

2

Contents Foreword xiv

Preface xvii

I Setting the Stage: Multicultural Education Within a Sociopolitical Context 1

Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 3

Assumptions Underlying this Text 3 Identity, Difference, Power, and Privilege Are All Connected 4 • Multicultural Education Is Inclusive of Many Differences: Lenses of Race, Ethnicity, and Language 4 • Teachers Are Not the Villains 5 • Quality Public Education Is a Cause Worth Fighting For 5

Defining the Sociopolitical Context of Multicultural Education 6

Task 1: Clarifying Three Goals and Four Key Terms of Multicultural Education 6

Defining Key Terms in Multicultural Education 7

Task 2: Dissolving Myths About Immigration and Difference 12

What You Can Do Your Story and the Stories of Others: Immigrant Nation 14

Task 3: Naming the Underpinnings of Educational Structures 14

School-Level Policies and Practices 15

Task 4: Studying the Demographic Mosaic of U.S. Schools and Society 16

What You Can Do Explore Your Own Heritage and the Heritage of Others 19

Task 5: Using Qualitative Research to Understand Students’ Sociopolitical Contexts 19

Choosing Methodology: What Are Case Studies? 19 • Beyond Generalizations and Stereotypes 20 • Learning from the Case Studies and Snapshots 21

1

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 9 10/11/17 4:25 PM

x CONTENTS

What You Can Do Detrack Extracurricular Activities 94

Retention 95

Standardized Testing 96 What You Can Do Be Proactive About Tests 98

The Curriculum 99 What You Can Do Use the Curriculum Critically 102

Pedagogy 103 What You Can Do Punch Up Your Pedagogy! 105

School Climate 105 School Climate: Social and Emotional Learning 106 • School Climate: Anti-Bullying Ini- tiatives 106 • School Climate: Physical Violence and Safety 107 • School Climate: School Buildings, Physical Environment, School and Class Size 109

What You Can Do Enliven Your Environment 110

Disciplinary Policies 110 What You Can Do Create Inclusive Disciplinary Practices 111

The Limited Role of Students 112

The Limited Role of Teachers 113 Multicultural Teaching Story Boston Teachers Union School: Teacher Leadership and Student Achievement 114

Limited Family and Community Involvement 118 What You Can Do Vigorously Promote Family Outreach 118

Conclusion 119 To Think About 120

Activities for Personal, School, and Community Change 120

Chapter 4 Notes 120

CASE STUDIES Avi Abramson 121

Jasper and Viena Alejandro-Quinn 128

About Terminology: American Indians, Native Americans, Indigenous People 133

Culture, Identity, and Learning 135

Countering Color-Blind Classrooms 135

Defining Culture 137

Hybridity: Another Way of Understanding Culture 138

Beyond Race and Ethnicity 139

Influence of Culture on Learning 139

Learning Styles, Preferences, Intelligences, and Power 142

5

II Developing a Conceptual Framework for Multicultural Education 47

Racism, Discrimination, and Expectations of Students’ Achievement 49

Racism and Discrimination: Definitions and Dimensions 49

Critical Race Theory and Other Frameworks 50 • Obstinacy of Conventional Norms 50 • Institutional Practices 51

What You Can Do Directly Confront Racism and Discrimination 53

The History and Persistence of Racism in U.S. Schools 53 • Manifestations of Racism and Discrimination in Schools 54

Racism, Discrimination, and Silence 56 Multicultural Teaching Story Immigration Rights and Family Stories 57

Expectations of Students’ Achievement 61

SNAPSHOT Aiden and Daniel O’Carroll 62 About Terminology: White Privilege 63

What You Can Do Start Early 64

Considerations About Research on Teacher Expectations 65

High Expectations as Antiracist Teaching 65

SNAPSHOT Kaval Sethi 66 What You Can Do Promoting Racial Literacy in Your Classroom and School 68

Conclusion 69 To Think About 69

Activities for Personal, School, and Community Change 69

Chapter 3 Notes 70

CASE STUDIES Delilah Rogers 71

Linda Howard 77

About Terminology: Whites, European Americans 85

Rashaud Kates 86

Structural and Organizational Issues in Classrooms and Schools 91

Tracking 92

3

4

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 10 10/11/17 4:25 PM

CONTENTS xi

Power Differences 143 • Multiple Intelligences and Multicultural Education 143

Communication and Pedagogy 144 What You Can Do Teach Through the Transformational Inquiry Method 145

What You Can Do Research Families’ Funds of Knowledge 147

Cultural Discontinuities and School Achievement 147

Discontinuities in Language 147 • Discontinuities in Perspectives on School Achievement 148 • Confronting Myths to Address Discontinuities 148 • Historical Causes of Discontinuities 149

Culturally Relevant, Responsive, and Sustaining Education 150

Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy 150

A Critical Appraisal of Culture-Specific Accommodations 151

Conclusion 152 To Think About 153

Activities for Personal, School, and Community Change 153

Chapter 5 Notes 153

CASE STUDIES Yahaira León 154

About Terminology: Latinos, Hispanics, and Others 162

James Karam 162

Hoang Vinh 169

Rebecca Florentina 177

Linguistic Diversity in U.S. Classrooms 184

Definitions and Demographics 184

Language Diversity in U.S. Schools: A Brief History 186

Language Diversity, the Courts, and the Law 186

Linguistic Diversity and Learning 189

Understanding Language in a Sociopolitical Context 190

SNAPSHOT Liane Chang 192

Approaches to Teaching Emergent Bilingual Students 193

About Terminology: Asians/Pacific Islanders 193

Understanding Language Development and Second- Language Acquisition 194

6

Developing an Additive Bilingual Perspective 194 What You Can Do Accept Students’ Identities 195

Consciously Fostering Native-Language Literacy 195

Program Models for Teaching Emergent Bilinguals 196

Structured English Immersion (SEI) 196 • English as a Second Language 196 • Bilingual Education 196

Problems and Challenges 198 What You Can Do Accept Students’ Language 199

Conclusion 200 To Think About 200

Activities for Personal, School, and Community Change 200

Chapter 6 Notes 201

CASE STUDIES Manuel Gomes 201

Alicia Montejo 208

Understanding Student Learning and School Achievement 215

Caring Relationships, Hope and Healing 216 Caring as Hopeful Power to Transform Trauma 217

Teacher Expectations and Asset-Based Pedagogy 218

Asset-Based Perspectives in Policy and Systemic Change 219

Out-of-School Factors 220 Economic and Social Reproduction and Out-of-School Factors 220 • Communities Respond to Out-of-School Factors 220 • Out-of-School Factors (OSFs) and Policy Proposals 221

What You Can Do Build Collegial Relationships for Solidarity Rooted in Research 222

Discipline Disparities and Restorative Justice 223 Resistance, Discipline Disparities, and the School-to- Prison Pipeline 223 • Restorative Justice Practices in Schools 224

What You Can Do Engage in Collaborative Research to Promote Teaching as Intellectual Work 225

SNAPSHOT Nini Rostland 225 About Terminology: Mixed Race/Multiracial/ Multicultural/Multiethnic 227

Student Identities Within School Structures 227 Racial Opportunity Cost and a Re-Examination of “Acting White” 228

7

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 11 10/11/17 4:25 PM

xii CONTENTS

Conclusion 230 To Think About 230

Activities for Personal, School, and Community Change 231

Chapter 7 Notes 231

CASE STUDIES Paul Chavez 232

Latrell Elton III 241

III Implications of Diversity for Teaching and Learning in a Multicultural Society 247

Learning from Students 249

Redefining Success and Achievement 249

Pride and Conflict in Culture and Language 250 Conflict and Ambivalence 251 • Self-Identification and Conflict 253

SNAPSHOT Gamini Padmaperuma 254

Creating New Cultures 255 • Identity and Learning 257

What You Can Do Become Knowledgeable About Arab and Arab American Students 258

Beyond Academics 258 Keeping on Track 259

What You Can Do Widen Horizons by Acknowledging What You Do Not Know 260

Shields Against Peer Pressure 260 • Developing Critical Thinking and Leadership Skills 260 • Belonging 261

Family, Community, and School Environments for Success 262

The Crucial Role of Family 262

Multicultural Teaching Story Dr. Renee Spanos Klein and Teacher Caring 264

Teachers, Schools, and Caring 267

Conclusion 268 To Think About 268

Activities for Personal, School, and Community Change 269

Chapter 8 Notes 269

CASE STUDIES Nadia Bara 270

Savoun Nouch 276

Christina Kamau 282

8

Adapting Curriculum for Multicultural Classrooms by Patty Bode 289

Curricular Adaptation 1: A Study of Cambodia and the Cambodian American Experience 290

What We Don’t Know 291 • Preparation 291 • Goal Setting 291 • The Work of Learning 292

What You Can Do Teach for Interreligious Understanding in Your Multicultural Curriculum 297

Curricular Adaptation 2: Expanding Definitions of Family 298

Why the Topic of Family? 298 • Who Is Included? 299 • Avoiding Pitfalls 299 • First-Grade Curriculum Based on Big Ideas in Gina Simm’s and Susie Secco’s Classrooms 300

Middle School Interdisciplinary Curriculum on the Theme of Family 304

What You Can Do Make Your School a “Welcoming School” 305

What You Can Do Use Technology to Expand Multicul- tural Curriculum 309

Curricular Adaptation 3: LGBTQ Literature: Expanding Topics for Inclusive High School Content 310

Imagining Possibilities 310 • Student Requests and Requirements 311 • Student Voices 312 • Evolution of Curriculum 312

Multicultural Teaching Story Bill Blatner: Teaching Math with Belief in Every Kid 313

SNAPSHOT Eugene Crocket 317

Conclusion 318 To Think About 318

Activities for Personal, School, and Community Change 319

Chapter 9 Notes 319

Affirming Diversity: Implications for Teachers, Schools, Families, and Communities 321

Lessons from Students: Maintaining and Affirming Identity 322

Supporting Native-Language Approaches 322 • Develop- ing Comprehensive Multicultural Programs 323

SNAPSHOT David Weiss 324 Support Beyond Academics 325

Creating Affirming Environments for Learning 325 Mutual Accommodation 326 • Teachers’ Relationships with Students 326 • Working with Families to Promote Student Learning 328

9

10

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 12 10/11/17 4:25 PM

CONTENTS xiii

Expanding Definitions: What It Means to Be American 329

Challenging “Heartbreaking Dilemmas” 329 • Toward Additive Multiculturalism 330 • A More Expansive Defi- nition of American 330 • Eliminating shame and culti- vating pride 331

Levels of Multicultural Education 331 Starting Out 332 • Becoming a Multicultural Person 332 • A Model of Multicultural Educa- tion 333 • Balancing Hope and Despair 337

Final Thoughts 338 To Think About 339

Activities for Personal, School, and Community Change 339

Chapter 10 Notes 340

References 341

Index 355

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 13 10/11/17 4:25 PM

xiv

Foreword

I t is a privilege to be associated with this seventh edition of Affirming Diversity, a book that has exerted a profound impact on American schools and teacher education programs since its first edition in 1992. This is a textbook like no

other. It refuses to “play it safe” by glossing over the historical and current realities of discrimination and exclusion in American and other societies. Over 25 years, it has drawn from the lives of teachers and students to illustrate the impact of overt racism and more subtle forms of institutional racism on the educational experi- ences of students of color. It has highlighted the challenges experienced by LGBTQ students as they negotiate their evolving identities in the face of widespread soci- etal rejection. And it has exposed the irrationality of educational policies that encourage bilingual students to abandon their home languages despite extensive research evidence that the continued development of bilingualism and biliteracy promotes academic achievement (e.g., August & Shanahan, 2006).

Affirming Diversity provides educators with a powerful set of conceptual tools to push back against these societal power relations that constrict the instructional space experienced by minoritized students. A central message throughout the book is that teachers have choices. Teacher agency is the key to implementing instruction that connects with students’ lives and affirms their identities. In their own classrooms, teachers can foster critical literacy and extend instruction to “uncomfortable” topics and issues. Many teachers, particularly in relatively afflu- ent suburban schools, may prefer to avoid discomfort for themselves and their students. As one of the young people highlighted in this book, ninth grader Delilah Rogers insightfully observes, “Talking about race is like a ticking time bomb.” However, if we avoid talking about race, power, and multiple forms of diversity, are we simply transmitting a sanitized curriculum, rather than educating our stu- dents? Are we perpetuating and complicit with societal discourses that implicitly but clearly state that black lives don’t matter, that demonize immigrants and refu- gees, and that ignore the rapidly increasing gap between affluent and impover- ished communities?

As these questions illustrate, teacher identity is central to effective instruction. Despite many constraints imposed by federal and state policies, as teachers, we always have at least some degrees of freedom in how we interact with students, how we connect with their cultural experiences and language talents, how we involve parents in their children’s learning, how we adapt content to link with students’ background knowledge and experiences, and in the levels of cognitive engagement we try to evoke through our instruction. Alternative modes of assess- ment (such as portfolio assessment) can also present a counter-discourse to the inaccurate and misleading account of student progress and effort often reflected in standardized test scores. In articulating our choices, both individually and collec- tively, we rediscover and shape our own identities as educators and we also become aware of the identity options that our instruction helps construct for our students.

Sonia Nieto and Patty Bode open up a dialogical sphere of both affirmation and resistance: affirmation of student and teacher identity and resistance to coer- cive and misguided top-down control. When we realize that we do have choices, and when we articulate these choices explicitly, we take the first steps toward empowerment, which can be defined as the collaborative creation of power. Dis- empowered teachers are not in a position to create contexts of empowerment for

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 14 10/11/17 4:25 PM

FOREWORD xv

xv

their students. We need to understand, and rediscover, the power that we bring to the classroom, not as instructional technicians who simply transmit the curricu- lum, but as educators whose instructional choices exert a dramatic impact on the lives of our students.

Affirming Diversity challenges us, as educators, to make explicit the image of our students and of our society that is implied by our interactions in the school context. What kind of people do we hope our students will grow up to be? What kinds of abilities and knowledge are accessible to them in our classrooms? What kind of society do we hope they will create? The answers to all these questions are written in the daily record of our interactions with our students. Our interactions with students and communities constitute a moral enterprise, whether we define it explicitly as such or not.

Students’ and teachers’ voices occupy a central place in this book. They com- plement and illustrate the theoretical analyses and remind us that the interactions between educators and students dramatically affect not only the acquisition of knowledge and skills but also the creation of both student and teacher identity. Unfortunately, in many classrooms, the curriculum has been sanitized such that opportunities for critical reflection on personal and collective identity and on issues of social justice are minimized. The image of our students and society implied by this pedagogical orientation is an image of compliant consumers who will gratefully accept their place within the existing power structure and who can easily be manipulated to exercise their democratic rights to preserve that power structure.

A radically different image is implied by the pedagogical orientations articu- lated in Affirming Diversity. Students are viewed as critical thinkers capable of, and responsible for, creating change through action both in their own lives and in the broader society. Their interactions in school provide opportunities to collabo- rate across cultural and linguistic boundaries in the generation, interpretation, and application of knowledge. The curriculum orients students toward critical reflec- tion on issues of social justice and how personal and collective identities are inter- twined with historical and current societal power relations.

The term “multicultural education” does not figure prominently in the educa- tional prescriptions of what historian Diane Ravitch (2013) has called the “corpo- rate reformers” whose focus is increasing test scores and privatizing as much of education as possible. Multicultural education is frequently dismissed within this perspective as, at best, an off-task frill or, at worst, a radical challenge to funda- mental values of American society. However, the alternative to multicultural edu- cation is monocultural education. The history of monocultural education is written in the certainties of the Crusades and the Inquisition, the smug brutalities of slav- ery, the casual eradication of the language, culture, and identity of generations of Native American children “educated” in boarding schools, as well as in contempo- rary claims of fundamentalist groups, from various religious persuasions, to have exclusive access to ultimate truths. Surely, 9/11 should have brought home to us the destructive power of monocultural fundamentalist belief systems and the need to figure out ways of living together in a global context where cross-cultural con- tact and population mobility are at an all-time high in human history.

Affirming Diversity not only constitutes an eloquent and forceful statement about the importance of multicultural education to our society, it also affirms the central role that individual educators play in nurturing and shaping the lives and identities of our youth. To be a teacher is to be a visionary—as we interact with our students, we envisage what contributions they will play in shaping a better society and we orchestrate our classroom interactions to enable them to realize these possibilities. The pages of this book resonate with the voices of educators whose vision of education encompasses equal opportunity for all students and whose instruction focuses on expanding minds as the primary means of attaining curriculum goals.

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 15 10/11/17 4:25 PM

xvi FOREWORD

Affirming Diversity does not supply prescriptions or formulaic solutions, but it does present extensive empirical research and invites us to think and talk about our own identities as educators and the potential and consequences of the choices we make on a daily basis. As such, it represents a powerful source of inspiration, ideas, and solidarity for all of us who see social justice and equity as important core values within our educational systems. Affirming Diversity also highlights the fact that our global society can use all of the multilingual and multicultural intelli- gence it can get. The consequences of squandering the intellectual, linguistic, and cultural resources that our students bring to school can be seen in our domestic prisons, in our battlefields abroad, and in the spiritual malaise that afflicts our society. This book does not provide a map, but it is a powerful source of inspiration—it breathes new life into those of us who believe that education is fun- damentally an ethical imperative, rather than just an economic or bureaucratic exercise.

Jim Cummins University of Toronto

References August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners. Report of

the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ravitch, D. (2013). Reign of error: The hoax of the privatization movement and the danger to America’s public schools. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 16 10/11/17 4:25 PM

xvii

Preface

M uch has changed in our society and in the world since the sixth edition of Affirming Diversity was published. The United States is still engaged in two long-running wars (in Iraq and Afghanistan), and most recently, the conflict

in Syria, while the threat of violence and terrorism still looms large on the world stage. Interethnic, interracial, and interreligious hostility around the world, a leading cause of ever more conflicts and wars, remains rampant. As a result, the number of immigrants and refugees fleeing such conflicts is at an all-time high, and although they have been welcomed in some nations, they have been roundly rejected in others. The range of cultural and social differences in our communities, schools, and class- rooms has increased tremendously over the past several decades. All of these issues have considerable consequences for our nation’s classrooms. Moreover, with the elec- tion of a president in 2016 with seemingly little knowledge, or appreciation, of public education, the federal government’s growing commitment to privatization, vouchers, and charter schools places public schools in a precarious position. These changes sig- nal a dramatic shift in our nation’s historic commitment to public education.

The changing landscape of our world, our nation, and our schools confirms the pressing need for interethnic understanding and cooperation, a need that is more evident than ever before. At the same time, while multicultural and social justice education are recognized by many as essential for living in today’s world, many teachers and other educators are woefully unprepared to deal with the tre- mendous diversity they will face in their classrooms—diversity not only of race, ethnicity, and gender, but also of religion, ability, social class, life opportunities, and more. In addition, the growing inequality in our schools and society, an inequality leading to ever more alienation and anger among segments of the popu- lation who have been overlooked and underappreciated, is leading to more con- flict in our streets, legislatures, courts, and, of course, our schools.

This leads us to the need for this book. It is not only about cultural diversity but also, and just as significantly, about why students succeed or fail in school. The subject of much research and debate, this topic has particular salience for students whose racial, ethnic, linguistic, or social identities differ from those of the dominant group. In this book, we consider these matters in relation to a comprehensive understanding of the current sociopolitical context. That is, rather than focus only on individual experiences or psychological responses to schooling, we explore how societal and educational structures, policies, and practices affect student learning, and we suggest some ways that teachers as well as other educators, individually and collectively, can provide high-quality education in spite of obstacles that may get in the way. For us, multicultural education needs to consider not just schooling but also the social, economic, and political context of the world in which we live.

In this seventh edition of Affirming Diversity, we continue to explore such matters as diversity, equity, and equality, bringing our discussion up to date by considering issues of current policy, practice, and legislation. For example, high- stakes testing, the growing standardization of the curriculum, vouchers, “choice,” charter schools, and a marketization of schooling have had a tremendous impact on public schools in the past several decades. Increasingly, education is being defined by policies far removed from daily classroom life but nevertheless having enormous consequences for teachers, students, families, and communities. The growing diversity in our nation and debates over immigration, the U.S. invasion of Iraq and subsequent wars in which the United States is engaged, the economic

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 17 10/11/17 4:25 PM

xviii PREFACE

recession and slow recovery, and its impact on many segments of the population, inter-ethnic and interracial strife here and abroad, regional wars around the world, global warming, the devastation of the environment—all of these call for a differ- ent way to interact in the world. Not coincidentally, burgeoning awareness and militancy have developed among educators who have tired of the unjustified blame they receive for many of the problems in education. Their growing mili- tancy is evident in numerous organizations focused on calls for social justice in education and teacher empowerment, sometimes through teacher unions and many times separate from them. This, too, is a significant situation that must be considered in writing a book on education in today’s world.

Given the situation briefly sketched above, we believe teachers and prospec- tive teachers need, more than ever, to understand how the larger societal context affects students, particularly those most marginalized in schools, and in society in general. Why do some students succeed academically, while others fail? What do race/ethnicity, social class, language, gender, sexual orientation, ability, and other differences have to do with learning? What is the real significance of the “achieve- ment gap”? How does the societal context influence what happens in your school? Do your school’s and your school system’s policies and practices exacerbate and perpetuate inequality? Can teachers and other educators turn this situation around? What is your role and how can you face these challenges with hope and joy? Affirming Diversity is an attempt to answer these questions—and more—that both new and veteran teachers face every day in increasingly diverse classrooms and in schools that are becoming more bureaucratic and standardized.

About This Book Affirming Diversity explores the meaning, necessity, and benefits of multicul- tural education for students from all backgrounds through an extensive review of research that explores:

• Influences on schooling and learning, such as:

• The sociopolitical context of schools and society

• Racism and other biases and expectations of students’ achievement

• School organization and educational policies and practices

• Cultural and other differences, including ethnicity, race, gender, language, sexual orientation, religion, and social class

• A conceptual framework for multicultural education based on that investigation

• Case studies and snapshots—in the words of a selected group of students from a variety of backgrounds—about home, school, and community experiences and how these have influenced their school experiences

• Teaching stories that highlight specific teachers and the inspiring work they do in their classrooms to address issues of equity and diversity in a variety of set- tings, course content, and grade levels

The book presents data on the multicultural nature of schools and society, including information about different sociocultural groups, their experiences in schools, and the issues and challenges they face.

Affirming Diversity consists of 10 chapters organized in three parts. Part I sets the stage for understanding the sociopolitical context of multicultural education. Part II develops the conceptual framework for multicultural education, emphasiz- ing institutional and cultural factors in schooling and individual and group responses to diversity. This section explores the multiple forces that may affect the school achievement of students from a variety of backgrounds.

To provide insights into the interrelated roles that discrimination, school poli- cies and practices, and culture play in the education of students in the classroom,

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 18 10/11/17 4:25 PM

PREFACE xix

we present 16 case studies and 7 snapshots. Incorporated throughout Parts II and III, the case studies and snapshots highlight salient issues discussed in particular chapters, and they provide a concrete means for addressing issues of diversity and success or failure in schools. We hope that the case studies and snapshots will help you more fully understand the lives and school experiences of a variety of young people who reflect our nation’s growing diversity. Parts II and III also con- tain a number of multicultural teaching stories that epitomize what teachers can do, individually and in collaboration with one another, to put into practice some of the theories developed throughout the text.

Part III focuses on the implications of the case studies, snapshots, and teach- ing stories for teaching and learning in a multicultural society such as ours. We use themes that emerged from interviews with students and teachers to emphasize conditions that may affect learning for different students. In Chapter 9, three spe- cific curriculum ideas for elementary, middle, and high schools are comprehen- sively described. These examples embody what the previous chapters have defined as multicultural education, that is, education that affirms diversity, encourages critical thinking, and leads to social justice and action. Chapter 10 offers sugges- tions for developing environments that foster high-quality education, concentrat- ing on multicultural education as a process. In addition, in Chapter 10, we propose a model of multicultural education that affirms all students.

Each chapter concludes with (1) a series of problems or situations for you to contemplate and (2) suggestions for classroom activities and community actions. By including these, we are not implying that there are immediate or easy answers to the dilemmas you face in schools every day. The purpose of posing particular problems and proposing activities to address them is to suggest that careful atten- tion needs to be paid to the many manifestations of inequality in our schools and that productive resolutions can be achieved when teachers, students, families, and communities reflect critically on these problems and work together to solve them.

New to This Edition Previous readers may notice a broad range of changes in this new edition.

About Terminology In the sixth edition, we took each section of the chapter that in previous editions was titled “About Terminology” and incorporated those sections throughout the book. In this seventh edition, we continue to include the same feature, one that clarifies what terms to use when referring to specific kinds of people, and how to identify respectful language that describes group affiliations. You will see these terms highlighted in boxes nearby case studies and snapshots when relevant to the identities of the students discussed in those features. One About Terminology box is new to this edition; titled “White Privilege,” it appears in Chapter 3.

Multicultural Teaching Stories In the sixth edition, we introduced a new feature, multicultural teaching stories, to highlight the important role of teachers in changing classrooms and schools. In this edition, we include two new stories and update two familiar stories. The first new story, “Immigration Rights and Family Stories” in Chapter 3, focuses on the actions of a teacher, principal, and superintendent in one school district to address the needs of immigrant families within the atmosphere of anti-immigrant vitriol that has become more prevalent since the 2016 presidential campaign and elec- tion. The second new story in Chapter 8 highlights the teaching of Renee Spanos Klein, who embodies the ethic of care through what she calls “culturally relevant writing pedagogy.” In Chapter 4, we revisit the Boston Teachers Union School, a teacher-run school, five years later. In Chapter 9, we hear updates from Bill

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 19 10/11/17 4:25 PM

xx PREFACE

Blatner and learn about the transformation of the math curriculum at his school that was built upon his introduction of more inclusive math classes with a “belief in every kid” to succeed.

A New Case Study Delilah Rogers is the focus of a new case study in Chapter 3; she reflects on how schools either silence or support student voices and talks about race in school against the backdrop of the Black Lives Matter movement.

A New Snapshot Chapter 3 also features a new snapshot of two brothers: one a seventh grader and the other a high school senior who identify as straight White males, and they both discuss White privilege.

Thoroughly Updated References We have gone to great lengths to thoroughly update the vast majority of the refer- ences and studies cited throughout the text.

Student Art The updated artwork appearing on the cover as well as in all the chapter openers and part openers are portraits and self-portraits created by school students from middle and high school.

Chapter by Chapter Chapter 1, “Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling,” has expanded its emphasis on the foundational concepts of the text. Updates include the most recent research illustrating the six significant tasks of understanding the sociopo- litical context of multicultural education: (1) clarifying the goals and key terms of multicultural education; (2) dissolving myths about immigration and difference; (3) naming the social, economic, political, and ideological underpinnings that influence educational structures; (4) studying the current demographic “mosaic” of our nation; (5) using qualitative research to understand students; and (6) exam- ining the political struggles of legislation and policy in public education.

Chapter 2, “Defining Multicultural Education for School Reform,” remains the anchor of the text, describing in detail Sonia Nieto’s definition of multicultural education, which she offered in the first edition of this book in 1992. The defini- tion remains rooted in the seven characteristics originally named while continu- ing to evolve to address current conditions. Since Sonia developed this conceptual framework in the first edition, she is listed as the sole author of this chapter.

Chapter 3, “Racism, Discrimination, and Expectations of Students’ Achieve- ment,” has been thoroughly updated with new research and insights on these topics:

• Implicit bias, discussed under the section on critical race theory

• The history of housing segregation that influences school in a contemporary context, discussed under the section on the systemic nature of discrimination

• The manifestation of racism and discrimination in statistics

• Statistics and research on teacher expectations

In addition, a new multicultural teaching story on immigration rights, a new case study, a new snapshot, and a new About Terminology box have been added to the chapter, along with a new What You Can Do: “Promoting Racial Literacy in Your Classroom and School.”

In Chapter 4, “Structural and Organizational Issues in Classrooms and Schools,” many of the topics covered have remained the same as in the sixth edi- tion, although a great deal of new research on those issues has been included.

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 20 10/11/17 4:25 PM

PREFACE xxi

• The section on discipline policies has been updated with resources about restorative justice practices in schools.

• There is a new section on school climate with four subsections to reflect the multifaceted issues that schools must address with a multicultural perspective:

• social and emotional learning;

• anti-bullying initiatives;

• physical violence and safety; and

• school buildings, physical environment, school and class size.

• The chapter also includes an updated report about the Boston Teachers Union School in its multicultural teaching story.

• There are many updated resources listed in several of the What You Can Do boxes providing the most recent research to inform practice:

• being proactive about tests;

• using the curriculum critically;

• creating inclusive disciplinary practices; and

• vigorously promoting family outreach.

Chapter 5, “Culture, Identity, and Learning,” includes further explanation of theories about culture and learning than in the previous edition. Recent research is presented on culturally sustaining practices, as well as the relationship between power, poverty, and learning.

Chapter 6, “Linguistic Diversity in U.S. Classrooms,” has been updated with new definitions and cutting-edge research in the field.

Chapter 7, “Understanding Student Learning and School Achievement,” has been completely revised in this edition, reflecting new research on:

• caring relationships, hope and healing;

• teacher expectations and asset-based pedagogy;

• out-of-school factors;

• discipline disparities and restorative justice; and

• youth identities within school structures.

Chapter 8, “Learning from Students,” includes a new multicultural teaching story about a first-grade teacher’s efforts to affirm students funds of knowledge through culturally responsive writing.

Chapter 9, “Adapting Curriculum for Multicultural Classrooms,” includes an updated multicultural teaching story about Bill Blatner’s Interactive Mathematics Program (IMP). We revisit the teaching story of the sixth edition and see how Bill’s Math Department transformed the entire school math curriculum.

• Its language has been updated to include transgender identities more explic- itly, especially in the discussion of LGBTQ curriculum.

• The coverage of Sara Barber-Just’s LGBTQ literature course has been updated, reflecting the new literature she has added and the change in the course’s actual title so it is more inclusive of transgender identities.

• A section has been added at the end of the unit on Cambodia, suggesting how the same approach and activities might be applied to other refugee or immigrant groups, depending on school population and location.

• The What You Can Do boxes feature the updated recommendations of recently published resources under themes such as:

• Using technology to expand multicultural curriculum

• Making your school a “welcoming school”

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 21 10/11/17 4:25 PM

xxii PREFACE

This chapter was single-authored by Patty Bode, so it bears Patty’s name. Chapter 10, “Affirming Diversity: Implications for Teachers, Schools, Families,

and Communities,” continues to focus on communities. It highlights the impor- tance of working with families to promote student learning.

Supplements and Learning Aids

Instructor’s Manual The Instructor’s Manual includes a wealth of thoughtful ideas and activities designed to help instructors teach the course. The IM contains a sample syllabus and course suggestions. Each chapter includes the following elements: overview, problem posing, response journal prompts, whole class/group work assignments, student as teacher assignments, a critical pedagogy in action assignment, instruc- tions for projects to be included in student portfolios and used as assessments, handouts to accompany all assignments, and essay questions. (Available for download from the Instructor’s Resource Center at http://www.pearsonhighered .com/irc.)

PowerPoint™ Presentation Created by Patty Bode, these PowerPoint slides outline the key points of each chapter, and are customizable so that professors may add or delete material as they see fit. Instructors may also download book-specific PowerPoint slides from the Instructor Resource Center at http://www.pearsonhighered.com/irc. Your local representative can provide a password and instructions for using the IRC.

We end this preface with a personal reflection from each of us.

Sonia The first edition of Affirming Diversity, published over 25 years ago, helped define my professional career. It also had an enormous impact on my personal and pro- fessional life because it put into words the ideas and values about education, diver- sity, and social justice I had been thinking about since I was a child, and especially since I stepped into my first classroom at Junior High School 278 in Brooklyn, New York, many years ago. Just a few years ago, the Museum of Education recognized the first edition of Affirming Diversity as one of the 100 books in the twentieth cen- tury to help define the field of education, something for which I am both humbled and incredibly proud. I have been equally gratified by the enormous and generous response of readers to the text through its first four editions when I was the sole author, and since the fifth edition when Patty Bode accepted my invitation to become my co-author. She has helped to make subsequent editions of Affirming Diversity fresh, timely, and relevant to our times. Given the challenging times in which we are living—particularly with relationship to public education—it is my hope that the book will challenge you to think boldly and creatively about your role in making schools inspiring and joyful for all students. In the process, I hope that education becomes not only your profession but also a rewarding odyssey.

Patty The first four editions of Affirming Diversity played a transformative role in my research, teaching, and worldview. I was honored to become co-author on the fifth, sixth, and now seventh edition and am eternally grateful to Sonia for inviting me to participate in the continual metamorphosis of this important book. The work on the text reflects the urgent calls I have heard through 18 years as a public school teacher, a decade in higher education as a teacher educator, and now in my work as a school principal to make our schools thrive as socially just places of joy and rigor. I strive to bring those voices together with educational research that combines the most

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 22 10/11/17 4:25 PM

PREFACE xxiii

current scholarship with foundational and landmark studies in the field to point teachers toward creating meaningful, high-achieving, transformative learning com- munities. As a teacher, I recognize the struggle that arises from competing messages from academic, political, and popular culture about what counts as knowledge and what defines teaching. The vision we assert in this book hopes to activate antiracist critical pedagogy in classrooms. For all students and their families and teachers, I hope that this new edition of Affirming Diversity contributes to creating change.

Acknowledgments We are deeply appreciative of the many individuals who helped us create the sev- enth edition of Affirming Diversity. We are particularly indebted to the students who agreed to be interviewed: Delilah Rogers for the new case study, and brothers Aiden and Daniel O’Carroll for the new snapshot. We owe thanks to Vera Sten- house, who interviewed Daniel and Aiden. Also, we are most grateful to Renee Spanos Klein, Alicia Lopez, and Mike Morris for participating in our new multi- cultural teaching stories, as well as Bill Blatner, Laura Davila, and Eric Berg for their time and effort in helping us update their teaching stories. For their dedicated research assistance and overall commitment to the mission of the book, we thank Nicole Singer and Bob Moriarty. Dr. Norm Gold, bilingual educator extraordi- naire, reviewed and made suggestions for the revision of Chapter 6. We also thank those who interviewed students for the case studies and snapshots throughout all the editions: Keonilrath Bun, Paula Elliott, Kristen French, Maya Gillingham, Jason Irizarry, John Raible, Stephanie Schmidt, Vera Stenhouse, Diane Sweet, and Carlie Tartakov. We are also grateful to Kristen French, the author of the Instruc- tor’s Resource Manual, a guide characterized by both a critical edge and helpful pedagogical suggestions. We are tremendously grateful to the art teachers who submitted their students’ artwork that appears on the cover and within the part and chapter openers: Amanda Davis, Lily Friedling, Hannah Hartl, Ben Sears, Jeff Stouder, and April Wesley. We deeply appreciate the talent and generosity of the students who allowed us to reproduce their art. These art images inform each sec- tion and emphasize the role of visual culture in multicultural education.

Professional colleagues who have read and commented on the various itera- tions of this text have helped to strengthen it, and we are thankful to all of them. For this seventh edition, we thank the following reviewers: Jennifer L. Brown, Columbus State University; Michael Lee McDonald, NE Wesleyan University; Dr. Christopher Weiler, Kutztown University of Pennsylvania; Celeste Williams, Ten- nessee State University. Their detailed comments and suggestions for improving the book were enormously helpful. At Pearson Education, we are grateful for the tremendous support and encouragement we received from our editor, Julie Peters.

Once again, we owe a heartfelt thank you to Jim Cummins, a scholar of rare genius and a wonderful friend, for writing the inspiring foreword to this seventh edition. Jim has been a steadfast and enthusiastic supporter of this book since the very first edition. His continuing willingness to write the foreword means a great deal to us. And, of course, we would not be where we are without our families. Sonia particularly wants to acknowledge Angel, her partner of 50 years, for his unconditional love and support; Celso, her son-in-law; her daughters Alicia and Marisa; and her granddaughter Jazmyne, who we raised, for teaching her how to be a mother. Her other grandchildren—Corissa, Terrance, Monique, Tatiana, Celsito, Aliya, Clarita, Lucia, Mariya, Kalil, and Angela—are another source of joy and inspiration. Patty wants to thank Mark, her life partner, for his love, humor, and encouragement, and her sons, Bob, Ryan, and Keo, for revealing the adven- tures of life’s ongoing journey with special appreciation to her daughter-in-law Maya and granddaughter, Anju for adding joyful meaning to it all.

Sonia Nieto

Patty Bode

A01_NIET7232_07_SE_FM.indd 23 10/11/17 4:25 PM

This page intentionally left blank

1

Setting the Stage Multicultural Education Within a Sociopolitical Context

“At its best, multiculturalism is an ongoing process of questioning, revising, and struggling to create greater equity in every nook and cranny of school life. . . . It is a fight for economic and social justice. . . . Such a perspective is not simply about explaining society; it is about changing it.”

—Rethinking Schools 15, no. 1 (Fall 2000)

T o set the stage for understanding multicultural education within a broad

societal context and to help you think about the implications of this context

for students of diverse backgrounds, the two chapters in Part I introduce

a number of foundational concepts. In Chapter 1, we describe key assumptions

that undergird this text and define what we mean by the sociopolitical context of

education by illustratinging six significant tasks of understanding. Chapter 1 also

introduces other fundamental definitions and parameters of multicultural educa-

tion and then presents demographic data about both the general population and

the population in U.S. schools, with implications of these data for education. We

briefly describe a key approach we have employed in this text, namely, the use of

case studies and snapshots that reflect some of the tremendous diversity that cur-

rently exists in our schools.

Using the discussion in Chapter 1 as a foundation, Chapter 2 defines multicul-

tural education and describes its essential components. Because we view multi-

cultural education as far more than simply altering the curriculum to reflect more

Brown and Black faces or adding assembly programs on diversity, Chapter 2 pro-

vides examples of what we mean by a critical multicultural perspective.

Charlotte Price in Jeff Stauder’s art class, Amherst-Pelham Regional High School, Amherst Massachusetts. Charcoal drawing, 2014.

I PART

M01A_NIET7232_07_SE_P01.indd 1 09/11/17 5:14 PM

This page intentionally left blank

33

D ecisions made about education are often viewed as if they were politically neutral. Yet as we hope to make clear in this chapter and throughout the text, such deci-

sions are never politically neutral. Rather, they are tied to the social, political, and economic structures that frame and define our society. The sociopolitical context of society includes laws, regulations, policies, practices, traditions, and ideologies.

To put it another way, multicultural education, or any kind of education for that matter, cannot be understood in a vacuum. Yet in many schools, multicultural education is approached as if it were divorced from the policies and practices of schools and from the structures and ideologies of society. This kind of thinking often results in misguided practices such as a singu- lar focus on cultural artifacts like food and dress or on ethnic celebrations that exaggerate attributes of groups and exoti- cize them. It can become fictional multicultural education or a tourist curriculum, disassociated from the lives of teachers, students, and communities. This is multicultural education without a sociopolitical context. In this book, however, we are interested in how the sociopolitical context of the United States, and indeed of our global society, shapes schools and therefore also shapes the experiences of the children and adults who inhabit schools.

Assumptions Underlying This Text It is important that we begin by clarifying four major assumptions underlying the concepts described in this book. These assumptions advance our goals to (1) con- nect identity, difference, power, and privilege; (2) include many differences in multicultural education; (3) counter the argument of “teachers as villains”; and (4) defend quality public education.

Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling

1

“Desegregated schools . . . offer the single most powerful way to reach and prepare the coming genera- tion, which will be the first to live in an America that is truly multiracial and has no racial majority group. It is imperative that we take feasible steps to foster and sustain integration and to deal with the deeply rooted harms of segregation.”

Gary Orfield, Reviving the Goal of an Integrated Society: A 21st Century Challenge, 2009

Lexie Ephraim in Lily Friedling’s art class, Amherst-Pelham Regional Middle School, Amherst, Massachusetts. Graphite self portrait. 2017.

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 3 10/11/17 8:57 PM

4 PART I Setting the Stage

Identity, Difference, Power, and Privilege Are All Connected Race, ethnicity, social class, language use, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ability, and other social and human differences are major aspects of the socio- political context that we will address in this book—that is, one’s identity frames (although it does not necessarily determine) how one experiences the world. Iden- tities always carry some baggage; they are perceived in particular ways by a soci- ety and by individuals within that society. Language identity as interpreted by a spoken accent, for instance, may invoke positive or negative images, depending on one’s social class, race, country of origin, and variety of language. As a con- sequence, in the context of U.S. society, someone who is French and speaks with a Parisian accent, for example, is generally viewed more positively than someone from Senegal who also speaks French.

Yet multicultural education does not simply involve the affirmation of lan- guage, culture, and broader aspects of identity, but also assertively confronts issues of power and privilege in society. This means challenging racism and other biases as well as the inequitable structures, policies, and practices of schools and, ulti- mately, of society itself. Affirming language and culture can help students become successful and well-adjusted learners, but unless language and cultural issues are viewed critically through the lens of equity and the power structures that impede the goals of social justice, these perspectives are unlikely to have a lasting impact in promoting real change. Making explicit connections among identity, difference, power, and privilege can move education toward such transformation.

Multicultural Education Is Inclusive of Many Differences: Lenses of Race, Ethnicity, and Language Keeping the connections among identity, difference, power, and privilege in mind, this book’s framework and approach to multicultural education are broadly inclu- sive: They are based on the belief that multicultural education is for everyone regardless of ethnicity, race, language, social class, religion, gender, sexual orienta- tion, ability, or other differences. Multicultural education as a field and in practice is not directed at only one group or certain kinds of students. One book, however, cannot possibly give all of these topics the central importance they deserve. For that reason, this book uses race, ethnicity, and language as the major lenses to view and understand multicultural education. While we address other differences in one way or another, we give special emphasis to these. The inceptions of both multicultural and bilingual education were direct outgrowths of the civil rights movement, and they developed in response to racism (discrimination based on race), ethnocentrism (discrimination based on ethnicity and national origin), and linguicism (language discrimination) in education. These inequities continue to exist, especially for American Indian, Latino, African American, Asian, and mul- tiracial youngsters, and they are central to this book’s perspective and approach. Nevertheless, we believe that multicultural education includes everyone, and we have made an attempt in this text to be inclusive of many differences.

Having a broad definition of multicultural education raises another dilemma. One reason that multicultural education is such a challenging topic for some edu- cators is that they have a hard time facing and discussing the issues of race and racism. For example, whenever we bring up racism with a group of predominantly White teachers, we find that, too often, they want to move on immediately to, say, sexism or classism without spending much time on racism. Sexism and clas- sism are certainly worthy of study and attention—in fact, they must be part of a multicultural agenda, and many books are dedicated to those topics—but the discomfort of many White teachers in talking about race and racism is very evi- dent and reason enough to confront it directly. Racism is an excruciatingly dif- ficult issue for many White people. Given our nation’s history of exclusion and discrimination, this is not surprising, but it is only through a thorough exploration

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 4 26/09/17 12:02 PM

CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 5

of discrimination based on race that we can understand the genesis as well as the rationale for a broader framework for multicultural education that includes lan- guage, social class, sexual orientation, gender, ethnicity, religion, and other differ- ences. For these reasons, this book aims to include all students and all teachers in such challenging yet hopeful discussions with a deliberate focus on race, ethnicity, and language.

Teachers Are Not the Villains Another belief that informs this book’s perspective and approach is that teachers cannot be singled out as the villains responsible for students’ academic failure. Although some teachers bear responsibility for having low expectations because they are racist and elitist in their interactions with students and parents and thus provide educational environments that discourage students of some backgrounds from learning, most do not do this consciously. Most teachers are sincerely con- cerned about their students and want very much to provide them with the best education possible. Nonetheless, because of their own limited experiences and education, some teachers may know very little about the students they teach. As a result, their beliefs about students of diverse backgrounds may be based on spuri- ous assumptions and stereotypes. These things are true of all teachers, not just White teachers. In fact, being from a non-White ethnic group or background does not guarantee that a teacher will be effective with students of diverse backgrounds or even with students of his or her own background.

Teachers usually have little power in their schools. They are often at the mercy of decisions made by others far removed from the classroom; they generally have little involvement in developing the policies and practices of their schools and frequently do not even question them. Teachers also are the products of edu- cational systems that have a history of racism, exclusion, and debilitating peda- gogy. As a consequence, their practices may reflect their experiences, and they may unwittingly perpetuate policies and approaches that are harmful to many of their students. We cannot separate schools from the communities they serve or from the context of society in general. Oppressive forces that limit opportunities in the schools reflect such forces in the society at large. The purpose of this book is not to point a finger, but to provide a forum for reflection and discussion so that teachers take responsibility for their own actions. The book aims to respect and support teachers in their efforts to assert their intellectual and creative prowess in challenging the actions of schools and society that affect their students’ education in negative ways, and in helping bring about positive change.

Quality Public Education Is a Cause Worth Fighting For Another key assumption of this book is that public education that ensures all stu- dents full participation in a democratic society is worth defending and fighting for. In spite of all its shortcomings, and although it has never lived up to its potential, public education remains a noble ideal because it is one of the few institutions that at least articulates the common good, even if it does not always deliver it. Public education remains the last and best hope for many young people for a better life. Yet the public schools have often been a target of scorn and disrespect in the press and among politicians. In spite of this, the public still believes in the promise of public education.

This was evident in the 45th annual poll of the public’s attitudes toward pub- lic schools—the quantitative survey that Gallup conducted on behalf of Phi Delta Kappa International on the opinions of the American public about key issues fac- ing K–12 education in this country. The findings revealed that a majority of Ameri- cans give the public schools in their community an A or B—the highest rating ever recorded by this poll. Moreover, Americans trust public school teachers and principals.1 The National Education Association (NEA) noted that despite suffering

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 5 26/09/17 12:02 PM

6 PART I Setting the Stage

widespread repercussions of the economic downturn, voters across the country endorsed candidates who supported public education.2 Moreover, research by Christopher A. Lubienski and Sarah Theule Lubienski compared some public schools to private and charter schools, specifically on the teaching of math. Their studies reveal the advantages and success of public schools.3 Given this unam- biguous and overwhelming support for public education, it is clear that public schools can provide all children with a good education and it is within the ability of teachers, administrators, and the public at large to ensure that they do so.

Defining the Sociopolitical Context of Multicultural Education Now that we have explained some of the assumptions underlying this text, we want to define what we mean by the sociopolitical context of education. As you will see in the remainder of this chapter, understanding this terminology and the research that undergirds it is crucial to the critical view of multicultural education asserted throughout our book. In what follows, we illustrate six significant tasks of understanding the sociopolitical context: (1) clarifying three goals and four key terms of multicultural education; (2) dissolving myths about immigration and difference; (3) naming the social, economic, political, and ideological underpin- nings that influence educational structures; (4) studying the current demographic “mosaic” of our nation; (5) using qualitative research to understand students; and (6) examining the political struggles of legislation and policy in public education.

Task 1: Clarifying Three Goals and Four Key Terms of Multicultural Education Depending on one’s conceptualization of multicultural education, different goals may be emphasized. In this book, we want to make clear from the outset how we define the goals and key terms of multicultural education, the first task of under- standing the sociopolitical context. Given this text’s four major assumptions outlined above, the major premise of this book is the following: No educational philosophy or program is worthwhile unless it focuses on the following three primary goals:

1. Tackling inequality and promoting access to an equal education

2. Raising the achievement of all students through meaningful learning that pro- vides them with an equitable and high-quality education

3. Providing students with an apprenticeship in the opportunity to become criti- cal and productive members of a democratic society

Tackling Inequality and Promoting Access to an Equal Education We believe that multicultural education must confront inequality and stratification in schools and in society. Helping students get along, teaching them to feel better about themselves, and sensitizing them to one another are worthy goals of good educa- tional practice, including multicultural education. But if multicultural education does not tackle the far more thorny questions of stratification and inequity, and if viewed in isolation from the reality of students’ lives, these goals can turn into superficial strategies that only scratch the surface of educational failure. Simply wanting our students to get along with, and be respectful of, one another makes little difference in the life options they will have as a result of their schooling. Students’ lives are inexo- rably affected by economic, social, and political conditions in schools and society— that is, by the sociopolitical context in which they live and learn—and this means that we need to consider these conditions in our conceptualization and implementa- tion of multicultural education. (Further elaboration on the terms equality and equity is provided in this section under “Defining Key Terms in Multicultural Education.”)

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 6 26/09/17 12:02 PM

CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 7

Raising Achievement of All Students Learning is an equally central goal of multicultural education. Meaningful learn- ing through academically fertile and aesthetically rich engagement in which students make sense of their worlds and their place in it is at the very core of a multicul- tural perspective. Having “feel-good” assemblies or self-concept–building classroom activities will do little to create equitable school environments for students without meaningful teaching and learning. Considering the vastly unequal learning outcomes among students of different backgrounds, it is absolutely essential that achievement of all students through an equitable and high-quality education be placed at the center of multicultural education. (See the subsequent discussion of the “achieve- ment gap” under “Defining Key Terms in Multicultural Education.”) Otherwise, if they are not receiving a high-quality, rigorous education, too many young people will continue to face harrowing life choices.

Providing Apprenticeships as Critical and Productive Members of a Democratic Society Learning to take tests or getting into a good university cannot be the be-all and end-all of an excellent education. A third and equally crucial goal of multicultural education is to promote democracy by preparing students to contribute to the general well-being of society, not only to their own self-interests. Multicultural educator Will Kymlicka has asserted that not only is multiculturalism about expanding individual horizons, and increasing personal intercultural skills, but also it is essential that it be part of the larger goals of justice and equality.4 (This is further discussed in the section on “Social Justice” under “Defining Key Terms in Multicultural Education.”)

Defining Key Terms in Multicultural Education In addition to asserting these three goals, the first task of understanding the socio- political context also includes defining key terms. These definitions help explain the approach we use in this book and support the three primary goals listed above. These four key terms include: (1) equal and equitable, (2) social justice, (3) the “achievement gap,” and (4) deficit theories.

Defining Equal Education and Equitable Education: What’s the Difference? Two terms often associated with multicultural education are equality and equity, which are sometimes erroneously used interchangeably. Both equal education and educational equity are fundamental to multicultural education, yet they are quite dif- ferent. Educator Enid Lee has explained equity as the process while asserting equality as the result of multicultural education.5 That is, for many educators, equal educa- tion may mean simply providing the same resources and opportunities for all stu- dents. While this alone would afford a better education for a wider range of students than is currently the case, it is not enough. Actually achieving educational equality involves providing an equitable education. Equity goes beyond equality: It means that all students must be given the real possibility of an equality of outcomes. A high-quality education is impossible without a focus on equity. Robert Moses, who began the highly successful Algebra Project that promotes high-level math courses for urban Black and Latino middle school and high school students, has advanced the idea that quality education for all students is a civil rights issue.6 The work of Moses exemplifies what James Banks calls “equity pedagogy,” which he includes in his description of five dimensions of multicultural education. Banks explains that an equity pedagogy exists when teachers modify their teaching to include a variety of teaching styles and approaches that are consistent with the wide range of learn- ing styles and cultural groups.7 In summary, equal education implies we are giving every student the same resources and opportunities and an equitable education pro- vides students with the resources and opportunities they need to achieve equality.

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 7 26/09/17 12:02 PM

8 PART I Setting the Stage

Defining Social Justice Frequently invoked but rarely defined, social justice is another term associated with an equitable education. In this book, we define it as a philosophy, an approach, and actions that embody treating all people with fairness, respect, dignity, and generosity. On a societal scale, this means affording each person the real—not simply a stated or codified—opportunity to achieve to her or his potential and full participation in a democratic society by giving each person access to the goods, services, and social and cultural capital of a society, while also affirming the culture and talents of each individual and the group or groups with which she or he identifies.

In terms of education, in particular, social justice education is not just about being nice to students, or about giving them a pat on the back. Nor does a social justice curriculum merely ask students to make posters about their “favorite social issue.” Social justice education includes four components:

1. It challenges, confronts, and disrupts misconceptions, untruths, and ste- reotypes that lead to structural inequality and discrimination based on race, ethnicity, social class, language use, gender and gender identity, sexual orien- tation, religion, ability, and other social and human differences. This means that teachers with a social justice perspective consciously include topics that focus on inequality in the curriculum, and they encourage their students to work for equality and fairness both in and outside the classroom.

2. A social justice perspective means providing all students with the resources necessary to learn to their full potential. This includes material resources such as books, curriculum, financial support, and so on. Equally vital, but often overlooked, are emotional resources such as a belief in all students’ ability and worth, care for them as individuals and learners, high expectations of and rig- orous demands placed on them, and the necessary social and cultural capital to negotiate the world. Providing all students with resources also includes a school environment safe from discrimination. These are not just the respon- sibilities of individual teachers and schools, however. Beyond the classroom level, achieving social justice requires reforming school policies and practices so that all students are provided with an equal chance to learn. This entails critically evaluating policies such as high-stakes testing, tracking, student retention, segregation, and parent and family outreach, among others.

3. Social justice in education is not just about giving students resources, how- ever. A third component of a social justice perspective is drawing on the talents and strengths that students bring to their education. This requires embracing critical pedagogy and a rejection of the deficit perspective that has characterized much of the education of marginalized students to a shift that views all students—not just those from privileged backgrounds—as having resources that can be a foundation for their learning. These resources include their languages, cultures, and experiences.

4. A fourth essential component of social justice is creating a learning environ- ment that promotes critical thinking and supports agency for social change. Creating such environments can provide students with an apprenticeship in democracy, a vital part of preparing them for the future. Much more will be said throughout the text about how to create such a meaningful learning environment.

These four components of social justice in education are woven throughout the remaining chapters of the book.

Defining the “Achievement Gap” Another term that needs defining is achievement gap. This term has evolved over the past several decades to describe the circumstances in which some students, primarily those from racially, culturally, and linguistically marginalized and low-

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 8 26/09/17 12:02 PM

CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 9

income families, achieve less than other students. The U.S. Department of Educa- tion’s National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) states: “Achievement gaps occur when one group of students outperforms another group and the dif- ference in average scores for the two groups is statistically significant.”8 Although research has largely focused on Black and White students, the “achievement gap” is also evident among students of other ethnic and racial backgrounds, such as Latino and American Indian students.9

The problem with the term achievement gap is that it suggests that students alone are responsible for their learning, as if school and societal conditions and contexts did not exist. The result is that the problem is often defined as a “minor- ity” problem rather than as a problem of unequal schooling. For all these reasons, we use the term “achievement gap” with caution and always in quotation marks.

Yet there is no denying that the “achievement gap” is real: In 2015, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reported that White students had higher scores than Black students, on average, on all assessments. The NAEP data show that from 1971 to 2012, the White-Black and White-Hispanic score gaps in reading and mathematics narrowed as a result of Black and Hispanic students mak- ing larger gains in achievement during that period than White students. However, in reading, White students had average scores at least 21 points higher than those of Black students and 25 points higher, on average, in math, on a 0 to 500 scale.10

Reports on Hispanic student achievement are also dispiriting overall. The data from NAEP reveal that the gaps in math test scores between whites and Hispan- ics remained at 21 points in fourth grade and 26 points in eighth grade. Read- ing test gaps persisted at 25 points.11 Patricia Gándara’s research reveals that by fourth grade, 16 percent of Latino students are proficient in reading, compared to 41 percent of White students, with a notably similar pattern at the eighth-grade level, where only 15 percent of Latinos are proficient in reading compared to 39 percent of Whites.12 Clearly, the gap between African American, American Indian, Hispanic, and some Asian (particularly Laotian and Cambodian) students com- pared to White students remains very large. Specifically, the gap is the equivalent of two grade levels or more, almost what it was in 1992. For example, while 41 percent of Whites are reading at grade level, only 15 percent of Hispanics and 13 percent of African Americans are at grade level. The gap worsens through the years: Black and Hispanic twelfth graders perform at the same level in reading and math as White eighth graders.13 The gap is not only deplorable, it is also an indict- ment of our public education system.

In spite of the fact that the “achievement gap” is a reality, sometimes this term is a misnomer because it places undue responsibility on students alone. As a result, we believe that what has become known as the achievement gap can also appropriately be called the resource gap, the opportunity gap, or the expectations gap because student achievement does not come out of the blue but is influenced by many other factors—that is, student achievement is related directly to the con- ditions and contexts in which students learn. For instance, because some schools are well endowed in terms of materials and resources, the students in these schools have multiple means to help them learn. On the other hand, schools that serve students living in poverty tend to have fewer resources and frequently employ more inexperienced teachers, and thus they provide fewer opportunities for robust student learning. School-related factors include low expectations, particularly in schools that serve students who are both economically disadvantaged and from ethnic and racial minority backgrounds, as well as other practices and policies that jeopardize student learning.14 Thomas B. Timar’s research concurs. He reviewed the efforts to close both the Black–White and Hispanic–White achievement gap. The data pointed to some progress, but he found that the overall discouraging situ- ation was an indicator of larger social, economic, and political difficulties. Timar underscores that schools must be held accountable for their responsibility, but the wider social conditions must be addressed as well.15 As Gloria Ladson-Billings

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 9 26/09/17 12:02 PM

10 PART I Setting the Stage

points out: The historical, economic, political, and moral decisions that our society has made over time have created these achievement disparities.16 She has argued that the focus on school performance gaps is misplaced and that what must be considered are the historical, economic, sociopolitical, and moral components of racial stratification that have accumulated over time, amounting to what she has dubbed the “education debt.”17

Keeping these realities in mind, it is also important to note that a common response among educators and the public has been to focus on so-called sociocul- tural “problems” and “deficits” more than on school-related factors. Turning this thinking around would be a better policy because educators can do little to change the life circumstances of students but can do a great deal to change the context of schools. For example, some schools are successful with students of color, students living in poverty, and students who live in difficult circumstances. What makes the difference? Karin Chenoweth’s book How It’s Being Done: Urgent Lessons from Unexpected Schools (2009) provides examples from eight schools throughout the nation that were selected for the Education Trust’s Dispelling the Myth Award, which is given to high-achieving, high-poverty, and high-minority schools. Che- noweth’s research shines a light on successful school practices, such as teachers’ and administrators’ collaborative work to set standards and goals, as well as their notable, palpable belief in their students’ capacity to achieve. She describes how schools organize on one goal, that is, helping students learn a great deal. These schools also focus on eliminating teacher isolation by providing time for teacher learning through research-based discussions, which in turn spawns teacher col- laboration that expands successful practices to create a collective culture of high achievement for teachers and students alike.18

Chris Zurawsky also examined several school models and programs that have proven consistently successful for most students of color. These programs share two common traits: a demanding curriculum and a strong social support system that values and promotes academic achievement. Zurawsky’s research under- scores that a rigorous curriculum is not enough. Attention also must be given to the social environment. Significant people in students’ lives who communicate the value of academic success and effort made a difference in the successful programs cited in his study. For elementary students, this translates into committed paren- tal involvement. For older students, the support network expands to include peer groups and mentors.19

Clearly, addressing school-related issues alone will not completely do away with the “achievement gap” because life experiences and conditions such as pov- erty play a large part in the differential learning of students. Paul E. Barton and Richard J. Coley synthesized many research studies and reported on 16 “correlates of achievement” that fall into three categories: school factors, factors related to the homeschool connection, and factors that are present both before and beyond school.20 A similar argument has been made convincingly by several noted schol- ars, including Jean Anyon, who cites a wealth of research and other data to arrive at the chilling conclusion that the primary cause of failed urban public schools is not educational policy or urban family dynamics. Anyon’s analysis found that these problems are a logical consequence of the structural inequities in federal and regional policies and practices that support the U.S. macroeconomy.21 Despite these outside factors, researcher Paul C. Gorski advances several practices in his book Reaching and Teaching Students in Poverty: Strategies for Erasing the Oppor- tunity Gap, in which he provides what he calls the Equitable Learning framework for youth and families in poverty. He also reviews myths and examines biases faced by low-income families and furnishes research-based, effective strategies for teachers working with students and families in poverty, with a strong emphasis on the importance of collaborating with families.22

In summary, educator’s efforts cannot be underestimated, despite vast evi- dence of the detriments of poverty.

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 10 26/09/17 12:02 PM

CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 11

In spite of teachers’ best efforts, the effects of poverty can be devastating. In a comprehensively researched article on the effects of poverty on learning and achievement, David Berliner makes the argument that out-of-school factors (OSFs) caused by poverty alone place severe limits on what can be accomplished through educational reform efforts. He points out that too many OSFs are strongly cor- related with class, race, and ethnicity, and schools are segregated by those very same characteristics.23 His conclusion is that, to improve our nation’s school achievement, a reduction in family and youth poverty is essential. Berliner’s rec- ommendation to address the impact of poverty on schooling reflects the complex- ity and urgency of the problem. He includes the following 11 efforts:

1. Reduce the rate of low-birth-weight children among African Americans

2. Reduce drug and alcohol abuse

3. Reduce pollutants in our cites and move people away from toxic sites

4. Provide universal and free medical care for all citizens

5. Ensure that no one suffers from food insecurity

6. Reduce the rates of family violence in low-income households

7. Improve mental health services among the poor

8. More equitably distribute low-income housing throughout communities

9. Reduce both the mobility and absenteeism rates of children

10. Provide high-quality preschools for all children

11. Provide summer programs for the poor to reduce summer losses in their aca- demic achievement24

The suggestion that poverty and other social ills negatively affect learning is unsettling and a reminder that schools alone cannot tackle the inequality and stratification that exist in society. Richard Rothstein, an economist who has stud- ied this issue extensively, has also suggested that school reform efforts alone will not turn things around.25 He advocates three social program approaches that must be pursued if progress is to be made in narrowing the “achievement gap”: (1) promoting school improvement efforts that raise the quality of instruction; (2) giv- ing more attention to out-of-school hours by implementing early childhood, after- school, and summer programs; and (3) implementing policies that would provide appropriate health services and stable housing and narrow the growing income inequalities in our society. He contends that the harmful effects of concentrated poverty are essential to address: Only by implementing all these measures would poor children be better prepared for school.26

Perhaps the most dramatic example of the “achievement gap” can be found in high school dropout rates. Researcher Gary Orfield has cited a few hundred high schools in the nation—all overwhelmingly “minority,” low income, and located in urban centers—where the dropout rate has reached catastrophic proportions. He calls these high schools “dropout factories.”27 According to Orfield, the drop- out rate of African American and Latino students is a civil rights crisis because it affects these communities disproportionately. Less money per student is spent in these “dropout factories” than in schools in other areas, sometimes representing a difference of over $2,000 less per student.28 In other research, Orfield points to failed policies of the recent past that have dismantled civil rights policies and he calls for “reviving the goal of an integrated society.”29 The fact that these resegre- gated “dropout factories” are, for the most part, located in economically strapped communities that serve African American and Latino students, that they employ more inexperienced teachers than those in wealthier districts, and that less money is spent in them cannot be dismissed as coincidence. Furthermore, Gary Orfield’s research with Erica Frankenberg calls attention to the racial demographic changes in suburban schools, widening the lens on the conventional view of resegregation issues in schools. They assert that racial changes in these suburbs have not been

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 11 26/09/17 12:02 PM

12 PART I Setting the Stage

addressed, and that policies for in-school integration are needed. Their study high- lights possibilities for constructive actions to be taken by federal and state agen- cies.30 This is also a significant part of the sociopolitical context of education.

Deficit Theories and Their Stubborn Durability Why schools fail to meet their mission to provide all students with an equitable and high-quality education has been the subject of educational research for some time. Deficit theories assume that some children, because of genetic, cultural, or experiential differences, are inferior to other children—that is, that they have deficits that must be overcome if they are to learn. As the “achievement gap” grows, theo- ries about cultural deprivation and genetic inferiority are once again being used to explain differences in intelligence and achievement, and the implications of these deficit theories continue to influence educational policies and practices. There are many obvious problems with such hypotheses, one being that they place complete responsibility for children’s failure on their homes and families, effectively absolv- ing schools and society from responsibility. Whether the focus is on the individual or the community, the result remains largely the same: blaming the victims of poor schooling rather than looking in a more systematic way at the role played by the schools in which they learn (or fail to learn) and by the society at large. All these factors need to be explored together.

Another problem with deficit theories is their focus on conditions that are outside the control of most teachers, schools, and students. Deficit theories foster despair in educators because they suggest that students’ problems are predeter- mined and thus there is no hope for changing the circumstances that produced them in the first place. Teachers and schools alone cannot alleviate the poverty and other oppressive conditions in which students may live. It is far more realistic and promising to tackle the problems that teachers and schools can do something about by providing educational environments that encourage all students to learn. This is why school policies and practices and teachers’ attitudes and behaviors, rather than the supposed shortcomings of students and their families, are the basis for the kinds of transformations suggested in this book. This is explored in more depth in Chapter 7 in the section called “Teacher Expectations and Asset-Based Pedagogy.”

Task 2: Dissolving Myths About Immigration and Difference The second major task of understanding the sociopolitical context of multicultural education emphasizes that immigration is not a phenomenon of the past. It remains one of today’s most contentious issues and offers a particularly vivid example of the sociopolitical context, despite its mythological influence on many assumptions about U.S. identity and its society. In the past decade, these contentions have been graphically illustrated by proposals at both the state and federal level. For exam- ple legislation such as S.B. 1070, Arizona’s law of 2010, proposed several strict measures that were widely viewed as anti-immigration.31 In the federal lawsuit that challenged its constitutional integrity, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down three provisions of the law in 2012, but it upheld the provision requiring immigration status checks during law enforcement stops. Another indicator of social percep- tions about immigration played out when tens of thousands of unaccompanied chil- dren crossed the U.S. border from Central America without parents, and without documentation in 2014 and 2015.32 The national outcry about the plight of these children ranged from calling for immediate deportation to housing, embracing, car- ing for, and educating the youngsters with the hope of reuniting them with their families. As of this writing, legislators have failed to pass protections such as the Dream Act and Senate bill S. 744.33 Debates about immigration legislation remained a contentious issue during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign and have become

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 12 26/09/17 12:02 PM

CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 13

even more pronounced since the 2017 presidential inauguration, when unfounded allegations accused immigrants of bringing crime and disease to the United States. These were propagated by candidates in speeches and debates, and continue long after the election to send chilling ripples of fear throughout some communities. These constructed myths push up against real life humanitarian dilemmas and legal struggles, which illustrate the contentious nature of differing attitudes concerning immigration sentiment across the nation, and in turn impact our schools.

Furthermore, many families entering the United States as refugees—who argu- ably deserve the greatest amount of support and most sincere welcome—may find their children in schools where they endure mockery and intimidation regarding many aspects of their lives, including clothing, food, language, religious observance, and family structure. These oppressive acts and attitudes stem from social amnesia surrounding the protected legal status of refugees, which was defined in 1951 by the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. According to the formal definition of a refugee in Article 1A of that convention, a refugee enters a country legally for protection from persecution “for reasons of race, religion, nationality, mem- bership of a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country.”34 While refugee status was initially limited to protecting European refugees after World War II, the concept of a refugee was expanded by the convention’s 1967 protocol and by regional conventions in Africa and Latin America to include persons who had fled war or other violence in their home country. It is worth noting that while European refugees after World War II were not universally welcomed on U.S. soil, the experiences of more recent groups of people of color enter- ing the United States, such as El Salvadorans, Cambodians, Somalians, Sudanese, Syrians, and many others, have been more negative, punctuated by racially moti- vated atrocities. A review of research on refugee education by Sarah Dryden-Peterson demonstrates that from World War II through the present conditions, the dilemma of refugees residing between nation-states has had perilous consequences for the educa- tion of refugee children. Gains have been made since the 1950s, but universal access has not yet been achieved. This quandary plays out amidst high numbers of refugees seeking asylum from global violence, such as the current crisis in Syria.35

Regardless of refugee status or documentation status, negative individual per- spectives and social ideologies about many immigrants, especially those from Latin America, Asia, and Africa, also often influence school policies and practices. It is critical for school curriculum and teacher education programs to underscore that the United States is not just a nation of past immigrants (who are often romanti- cally portrayed), but also a nation of new immigrants who daily disembark on our shores, cross our borders, or fly into our metropolitan areas and are deserving of full participation in a democratic society.

Yet romantic myths about U.S. immigration die hard, and these myths influ- ence some teachers’ views of students and their families. For example, the widely accepted notion that immigrants came to North America and “made it,” never to return to their countries of origin, is not entirely true. According to Irving Howe, one-third of European immigrants who came to the United States between 1908 and 1924 eventually made their way back home, thus shattering a popular myth.36 In addition, and in spite of common assumptions to the contrary, most European immigrants did not succeed academically. In his research, Richard Rothstein found that, during the immigration period from 1880 to 1915, few Americans suc- ceeded in school, least of all immigrants; in fact immigrants of all backgrounds did poorly.37 Instead, it was the children and grandchildren of European immigrants who fared well in school, but the myth that first-generation immigrants “made it,” at least in terms of academics, is firmly established in the public psyche. Because schools have traditionally perceived their role as that of an assimilating agent, the isolation, rejection, and failure that have frequently accompanied immigration have simply been left at the schoolhouse door.

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 13 26/09/17 12:02 PM

14 PART I Setting the Stage

Facing the ugly fact that U.S. history is also steeped in conquest and slav- ery, or forced immigration, is essential in developing a multicultural perspective and understanding its sociopolitical context. Millions of descendants of Africans, American Indians, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and others colonized within and beyond U.S. borders have experienced political and economic oppression and, in schools, disparagement of their native cultures and languages. But the history of racism and exploitation experienced by so many of our people is rarely taught. Instead, conventional curricula and pedagogy have been based on the myth of a painless and smooth assimilation of immigrants, thereby contributing to the stub- born infrastructure ideology that perpetuates institutionalized racism.

The research reported in our book argues that we need to make the history of all groups visible by making it part of the curriculum, instruction, and school- ing in general. By highlighting the complexities of struggle and survival, we do not aim to cast a negative pall on all of U.S. history. Rather, multiple perspec- tives about the immigrant experience highlight the frailty as well as the heroism in current and historic events. The words of the students in the case studies and snapshots included in this book provide eloquent testimony about the complexity of the immigrant experience.

These student examples provide a critical understanding of immigration and colonization experiences, which are significant points of departure for our jour- ney into multicultural education. This journey needs to begin with teachers, who themselves are frequently uninformed about or uncomfortable with their own ethnicity. By reconnecting with their own backgrounds and with the suffering as well as the triumphs of their families, teachers can lay the groundwork for their students to reclaim their histories and voices. This book invites you to cultivate a critical perspective on these issues unencumbered by mythology and romanticism.

Task 3: Naming the Underpinnings of Educational Structures The third task of defining the sociopolitical context of multicultural education is to name the ideologies underlying educational structures. These exemplify how the sociopolitical context is operational at the school level. Schools’ and the larger

Cultivating solidarity with, and empathy for, a wide range of immigration stories has the potential to shift the national and international conversation about who belongs where, and what it means to become educated in a democracy. Engaging students and teachers in documentation of their own stories, and directly connecting with the stories of others, are now possible through “Immigrant Nation” (also known as iNation), an online storytelling project created by filmmaker Theo Rigby. Immigrant Nation has three compo- nents that will prove inspiring and resourceful for teachers and students: (1) its website; (2) a series of short documen- tary films; and (3) live events at schools, museums, libraries, film festivals, and other public spaces designed to engage diverse communities in sharing their immigrant stories.

The Immigrant Nation website invites you to “watch a story. Discover how it’s connected to other stories, and share your own”38 and provides an interactive storytelling platform where teachers, students, and families can tell the story of their heritage, search for a wide range of other stories, and watch award-winning short films about immigrant experiences in the U.S. This dynamic resource holds promise for teach- ers in various content areas, especially social studies and English Language Arts, in classrooms with many grade levels, and helps students reveal the sociopolitical context of their own education. Teachers do not need expensive technology equipment or highly technical training to log on and add sto- ries to this worldwide resource, and watch the powerful short films. Visit the website of Immigrant Nation to get started in your classroom.

What You Can Do

Your Story and the Stories of Others: Immigrant Nation

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 14 26/09/17 12:02 PM

CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 15

society’s assumptions about people form a belief system that helps create and per- petuate structures that reproduce those assumptions. For example, if we believe that intelligence is primarily inherited, we will design schools that support this belief. On the other hand, if we believe that intelligence is largely created by particular social and economic conditions, our schools will look quite different. Likewise, if we believe that some cultures are inherently superior to others, our schools will replicate the cultural values that are assumed to be superior while dismissing others.

At a personal level, we take in the ideologies and beliefs in our society and we act on them—whether we actively believe them or not. In the case of the ideology of racism, for example, Beverly Daniel Tatum has aptly described racism as “smog in the air”:

Sometimes it is so thick it is visible, other times it is less apparent, but always, day in and day out, we are breathing it in. None of us would introduce ourselves as “smog-breathers” (and most of us don’t want to be described as prejudiced), but if we live in a smoggy place, how can we avoid breathing the air?39

The “smog” is part of the sociopolitical context in which we live and in which schools exist. This context includes not only racism but also other biases based on human and social differences, including social class, language, religion, sexual orientation, gender, and other factors. Pretending that the smog doesn’t exist, or that it doesn’t influence us, is to negate reality. A good example may be found in school funding: In their yearly report on the funding of public schools, the Educa- tion Trust has consistently shown that low-income students and students of color are badly shortchanged by most states, proving once again that race and social class still matter a great deal in our nation. In its 2010 report, the Education Trust argued that Congress could promote funding equity within school district budgets if the political will was demonstrated by closing loopholes in the comparability provisions of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.40 Another investigation by the Center for Reinventing Public Education reveals how school funding policies have consistently given more resources to students who already have more, and less to those who have less.41 A report to the U.S. Secretary of Education by the Equity and Excellence Commission (a federal advisory commit- tee chartered by the U.S. Congress) revealed that state funding disparities per pupil spending in 2010 ranged from $6,454 in Utah to $18,167 in New York. Funding discrepancies are also glaring across districts within states. Typically, the highest- spending districts spend about twice as much per pupil than the lowest-spending districts. In some states such as California, the ratio is closer to 3-1.42 Surely, no one can pretend that this difference does not matter.

School-Level Policies and Practices School funding is generally a state- and district-level issue. How does the socio- political context affect policies and practices at the school level? Let’s take a very concrete example: States that mandate that their schools enforce an “English- only” policy are, wittingly or not, sending students a message about the status and importance of languages other than English. In some of these schools, students are forbidden to speak their native language not only in classrooms, but even in halls, the cafeteria, and the playground. To students who speak a language other than English, the message is clear: Your language is not welcome here; it is less impor- tant than English. From a multicultural perspective, it goes without saying that if your language is not welcome, your affiliation with your family and culture is also not welcome. While the policy may have been well intentioned and created out of a sincere effort to help students learn English, the result is deprecation of students’ identities. In some instances, these kinds of policies are not innocent at all, but instead reflect a xenophobic reaction to hearing languages other than English in our midst. In either case, the result is negative and an example of how ideologies help create structures that benefit some students over others.

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 15 26/09/17 12:02 PM

16 PART I Setting the Stage

Another obvious example is the curriculum: If the content of school knowledge excludes the history, science, art, culture, and ways of knowing of entire groups of people, these groups themselves are dismissed as having little significance in creating history, science, art, culture, and so on. The sociopolitical context also undergirds other school policies and practices, including pedagogy, ability group- ing, testing, parent outreach, disciplinary policies, and the hiring of teachers and other school personnel. This issue will be discussed in greater depth in Chapter 4.

To correct the educational shortchanging of diverse student populations, the curriculum and pedagogy need to be changed in individual classrooms. But on a broader level, changes must go beyond the classroom: Schools’ policies and prac- tices and the societal ideologies that support them must also be confronted and transformed. That is, we need to create not only affirming classrooms but also an affirming society in which racism; sexism (discriminatory beliefs and behaviors based on gender); social class discrimination; religious oppression; heterosexism (discriminatory beliefs and behaviors directed against gay men, lesbians, bisexual people, transgender people, queer, and those who identify as non-gendered indi- viduals); ableism (discriminatory beliefs and behaviors directed against people with disabilities); and other biases are no longer acceptable. This is a tall order, but if multicultural education is to make a real difference, working to change soci- ety so it is more socially equitable and just must go hand in hand with changes in curricula and classroom practices.

Task 4: Studying the Demographic Mosaic of U.S. Schools and Society In the fourth task of understanding the sociopolitical context of multicultural edu- cation, we need to study the changes in the United States in the recent past and how these changes have transformed our schools. In what follows, we present a mosaic of the rich diversity of the population in the nation as well as in our public schools as a framework for understanding such a context. We focus on population statistics, immigration, language diversity, and other differences that characterize U.S. schools and society in the second decade of the twenty-first century.

We begin with an overview of the U.S. population in terms of race and eth- nicity. The U.S. total population from the U.S. Census Bureau in 2016 was 323,148,587. The 2015 data explained that the nation’s Hispanic population con- stitutes 17.6 percent of the nation’s total population, at 56.6 million, making it both the largest and fastest-growing “minority” group. The next largest “minor- ity group” is Blacks or African Americans, at 46.3 million. The current national census was held in 2010; the next census is scheduled for 2020, so some of the comparative data are from 2010, such as data illustrating growth in racial groups. Growth among different segments of the population has not been proportionate: According to the U.S. Census Bureau, from 2000 to 2008, the number of Whites increased by 6.4 percent and the African American population increased by 9.4 percent. By far, the largest increases were in the Latino population, which grew by 33 percent, and the Asian population, which grew by 28 percent.43

Even more dramatic than current population statistics are projections for the coming years: The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that from 2000 to 2050, the total population will have grown from 282.1 million to 419.9 million. Again, however, the growth will not be even: The White population is expected to grow to 210.3 million, representing an increase of 7 percent, although it is expected to decrease in the decades from 2024 to 2060. People of color, now roughly one-third of the U.S. population, are expected to become the majority in 2043, and projected to be 57 percent in 2060. By 2023, people of color will comprise more than half of all chil- dren. Whites are thus expected to comprise only 46 percent of the total U.S. popula- tion by 2050, compared with 66 percent in 2008, becoming the new minority.44

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 16 26/09/17 12:02 PM

CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 17

The African American population is expected to grow to 61.8 million, increas- ing from 13.1 percent in 2012 to 14.7 percent of the total population in 2060. In contrast, the Latino population is projected to more than double, from 53.3 million in 2012 to 128.8 million during the 2008–2060 period. Its proportion of the nation’s total population is projected to double, from 15 percent to 30 percent. If these pro- jections bear out, nearly 1 in 3 U.S. residents would be Hispanic. Asians are also expected to increase substantially by doubling in number, from 15.9 million in 2012 to 34.4 million in 2060, an increase from 5.1 percent to 8.2 percent of the total U.S. population. While American Indians and Alaska Natives are projected to climb from 3.9 million to 6.3 million (or from 1.2 to 1.5 percent of the total popu- lation), the Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander population is also expected to double: from 706,000 in 2012 to 1.4 million by 2060. While a substantial jump has already occurred in the number of people who identify themselves as being of two or more races, it is projected that this number will more than triple from 7.5 million to 26.7 million.45 (These statistics are available from the U.S. Census Bureau. A great deal of analysis is exhibited in multiple charts and tables at its website, which is a rich resource for teachers.)

Another noteworthy indication of the growing diversity in the United States is the current number of foreign-born or first-generation U.S. residents, which in the year 2000 reached the highest level in U.S. history—56 million, or triple the num- ber in 1970. And unlike previous immigrants, who were primarily from Europe, more than half of the new immigrants are from Latin America, and 25 percent are from Asia. In 2013, the following five countries accounted for 35 percent of all new legal permanent residents or LPRs (in ascending order): Mexico, China, the Philippines, India, and the Dominican Republic.46

The growth in immigration has been accompanied by an increase in linguis- tic diversity. Currently, 20 percent of the total U.S. population speaks a language other than English at home. As of 2008, 10.9 million school-age children (ages 5 to 17) spoke a language other than English (LOTE) at home; 7.8 million of these children spoke Spanish at home.47 While Spanish is clearly the language spoken by well over half of linguistically diverse students, there are also many other lan- guages spoken in U.S. homes. (More information on linguistic diversity is given in Chapter 6.)

The impact of the growing cultural, racial, national origin, and linguistic diversity is clearly visible in our nation’s public schools in several ways. First, the enrollment of students of color will continue to increase. According to the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in 2016, about 54.5 million students were enrolled in public elementary and secondary schools in the United States. Approximately 5.2 million others will be enrolled in private schools. The data point to the continued decline in the percentage of the White student population standing at 24.6 million of the 50.4 million public school students entering prekindergarten through grade 12 in the fall of 2016. The statistics account for the remaining 25.9 million students of color as follows: approximately 7.8 million Black students, 13.3 million His- panic students, 2.7 million Asian/Pacific Islander students, 0.5 million American Indian/Alaska Native students, and 1.5 million students of two or more races. The Census Bureau’s population projections indicate that the student population will continue to diversify in the coming years. The projected decline in the per- centage of public school students who are White is expected to continue through 2025, as the enrollment of Latino students and Asian/Pacific Islander students increases.48

Second, and closely related to that increase: Our public schools’ growing diversity is clearly evidenced by the number of students who are foreign-born or have foreign-born parents. As of 2009, over 49 million students, or 31 percent of those enrolled in U.S. elementary and secondary schools, were foreign-born or had at least one parent who was foreign-born.49

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 17 26/09/17 12:02 PM

18 PART I Setting the Stage

At the same time that diversity in schools around the country is growing, racial and ethnic segregation has been on the rise. That is, students in U.S. schools are now more likely to be segregated from students of other races and backgrounds than at any time in the recent past. Indeed, according to Gary Orfield, much of the pro- gress made in integrating the nation’s schools during previous decades was eradi- cated by the end of the 1990s. For Blacks, the 1990s witnessed the largest backward movement toward segregation since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and the trend is continuing. For Latinos, the situation has been equally dramatic: Latinos are now the most segregated of all ethnic groups in terms of race, ethnicity, and poverty.50 Despite this trend, there is growing evidence that schools with diverse student populations are good for students of all backgrounds.51

Race and ethnicity have a strong link to poverty due to the history of institu- tionalized racism. The percentage of all people in the United States living below the poverty level is currently 12.5 percent. The number of children living in poverty increased by 21 percent from 2000 to 2008, which means there are at least 2.5 mil- lion more children living in poverty now than a decade ago. Research shows that compared to White families with children, Black and Latino families with children are more than twice as likely to experience economic hardships. About 11 percent of White children live in poverty, while 35 percent of African American, 31 percent of American Indian, 31 percent of Hispanic, and 15 percent of Asian children live in poverty. The poverty rate does not tell the whole story because the equations for the federal poverty level have not been adjusted for inflation since the 1960s. In terms of the school-age population, 41 percent of all U.S. children live in low-income fami- lies, and over 20 percent live in poor families, which translates into the sobering reality that more than half of all children in the United States live in some degree of poverty. It is well documented that food insecurity, lack of affordable housing, and other hardships affect millions of American children, not just those who are offi- cially poor. Even more disturbing, although the number of children living in poverty had declined from 1990 to 2000, it has been rising steadily since then.52

At the same time that the number of students of color, those who speak lan- guages other than English, and those who live in poverty has increased to almost 50 percent of all school students, the diversity among the nation’s teachers has not kept pace. For example, a 2014 report from the Center for American Progress revealed that 82 percent of public school teachers were White, with just 18 percent being people of color.53

HispanicBlackWhite 0

10

20

30

40

50

60 58 50

45

17 16 15 19

25 29

4 5 6 1 1 1 3 4

Two or more races

Asian/Pacific Islander

Race/ethnicity

P er

ce n t

Fall 2004 Fall 2014 Fall 20261

†

American Indian/ Alaska Native

70

80

90

100

FIGURE 1.1 Percentage Distribution of Students Enrolled in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, by Race/Ethnicity: Fall 2004, Fall 2014, and Fall 2026

Source: https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 18 26/09/17 12:02 PM

CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 19

One implication of the tremendous diversity previously described is that all teachers, regardless of their own identities and experiences, need to be prepared to effectively teach students of all backgrounds. One way to do so is to heighten awareness of the sociopolitical context of students’ lives by learning about the social, cultural, and political circumstances of real students in real schools. In the next section, we briefly discuss the case study approach used in this book to help readers consider how they can best translate the information into their classroom practices.

Task 5: Using Qualitative Research to Understand Students’ Sociopolitical Contexts The fifth task of understanding the sociopolitical context of multicultural educa- tion concerns students—who they are, how they identify themselves, what their families are like, how they live, the values they hold dear, what helps them learn, and their desires and hopes for the future. Because of the importance of student voices in understanding the sociopolitical context of education, our research in this book includes case studies and snapshots that provide descriptions and stories of students of diverse backgrounds.

Choosing Methodology: What Are Case Studies? The case study approach fits within the social sciences general framework of qualitative research. Sharan Merriam describes the essential characteristics of a qualitative case study as an intensive, holistic description and analysis. She further explains case studies as particularistic (focusing on one person or social unit), descriptive (because the result is a rich, thick portrait), and heuristic (because it sharpens the reader’s understanding, leading to discovering new meanings).55 A case study is also inductive because generalizations and hypotheses emerge from examination of the data. In this book, we use ethnographic case studies, which include a sociocultural analysis of each of the students, all of whom are presented contextually, that is, within their cultural and social environment.

No matter what subject matter you teach in schools, your perspectives on American history and of your own herit- age influence the ways in which you view your students’ herit- ages and cultural identities. Reading books and viewing videos that offer points of view often overlooked or covered up in tra- ditional American history books can expand your understand- ing of your ancestors’ experiences and the experiences of others. You can approach this as a personal goal for summer reading or by pacing these books throughout the school year.

Allow yourself some introspective time by keeping a jour- nal, a sketchbook, or a blog about thoughts and questions that bubble up in your journey into rethinking historical under- standings. Another approach is to create a teachers’ reading group with a cluster of colleagues. Recruit your teacher- friends to develop a book club to discuss your reflections about your own histories and the histories of your colleagues

and students. Pay particular attention to the ways in which common assumptions or previously held beliefs are chal- lenged by these well-researched texts. Suggested books and videos: A Different Mirror: A History of Multicultural America by Ronald Takaki (New York: Back Bay Books, 2008), with a video on C-SPAN’s Book TV; A People’s History of the United States: 1492 to Present by Howard Zinn (New York: Harper, 2010); Voices of a People’s History of the United States, Sec- ond Edition, edited by Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2009). For film resources, see a documentary The People Speak, produced by the History Channel from the texts edited by Howard Zinn, that weaves archival footage and re-enactments of speeches performed by many popular celebrities. Also, for inspiration, resources, and guidance for teachers using these ideas in the classroom, visit the website for the Zinn Education Project. 54

What You Can Do

Explore Your Own Heritage and the Heritage of Others

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 19 26/09/17 12:02 PM

20 PART I Setting the Stage

The case studies and snapshots differ in terms of length and treatment: Snap- shots are short and written mostly in the words of the young people, with a brief analysis, while case studies are longer and offer more in-depth analysis. Case stud- ies are placed at the end of Chapters 3 through 8, and snapshots are located within various chapters to highlight particular issues discussed in the chapters.

The young people in the case studies and snapshots are actual students who were interviewed about their experiences in school; the importance of ethnicity, race, culture, and language in their lives; what they like and dislike about school; teachers who made a difference in their lives; and what they expect to get out of their education. The students are described within a variety of settings—home, school, community, and city or town in which they live—because, by looking at each of these settings, we gain a clearer, more complete picture of their lives.

The students represent multiple communities and identities. As young men and women from a number of racial, ethnic, linguistic, social class, and cultural groups, they have had many different life experiences. They live in various geo- graphic locations, from large cities to small rural areas and native reservations. They are first-, second-, or third-generation Americans, or their ancestors may have been here for many hundreds of years or even since the first humans popu- lated this continent. Some are from families in economic difficulty, while others are from struggling working-class, middle-class, or well-to-do families. Most are heterosexual, and others are gay or lesbian. They range in age from 13 to 19. When first interviewed, some of them were almost ready to graduate from high school, a few were in middle or junior high school, and the others were at various levels of high school. They range from monolingual English-speaking youths to English-language learners, to fluent bilinguals. Their families vary from very large (11 children) to very small (one child) in both one- and two-parent households. Their parents’ educational backgrounds vary as well: from no high school educa- tion to postgraduate degrees.

In spite of the vast differences in their experiences and backgrounds, most (although not all) of the students in these case studies share one characteristic: They are successful in school. Although there may be disagreements about what it means to be successful (research by Michelle Fine, e.g., suggests that, in some ways, the most “successful” students are those who drop out of school56), most of the students have been able to develop both academic skills and positive attitudes about themselves and about the value of education. They generally have good grades, most have hopes (but not always plans) of attending college, and they have fairly positive perceptions of school.

Beyond Generalizations and Stereotypes We did not include these case studies and snapshots for the purpose of generali- zation to all students in U.S. schools. No educational research, whether qualita- tive or quantitative, can do so. The students in the case studies and snapshots in this book are not samples, as might be the case with quantitative research, but examples of a wide range of students. Case studies can help us look at specific examples so that solutions for more general situations can be hypothesized and developed. For example, James Karam, the Lebanese Christian student whose case study follows Chapter 5, does not reflect the experiences of all Lebanese students in U.S. schools. However, describing James’s experience within its sociocultural framework can help us understand many experiences of other Lebanese students. Whereas quantitative methods can yield some important data about Lebanese stu- dents in general (e.g., their numbers in the United States or their relative levels of achievement), it is only through a qualitative approach that we can explore more deeply, for example, the impact on James of “invisible minority” status.

No case study of a single individual can adequately or legitimately portray the complexity of an entire group of people. (Neither, of course, can any quantitative approach claim to do this.) Although some Mexican Americans prefer to learn

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 20 26/09/17 12:02 PM

CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 21

collaboratively, and some African American students may perceive school success as “acting White” (these issues are discussed further in Chapters 7 and 8), many do not. To reach such conclusions contradicts one of the very purposes of case studies, which is to challenge stereotypes.

The case studies and snapshots are meant to encourage you to ask questions rather than to make assumptions about what it means to be from a large family, to be raised by two dads, to be Vietnamese, middle class, lesbian, African American, Cape Verdean, or anything else. It is far easier to pigeonhole people according to our preconceptions and biases, but the deeper struggle is to try to understand people on their own terms. Some of the experiences, feelings, and statements of the young people described in the case studies and snapshots may surprise you and shake some deep-seated beliefs. So much the better if they do. On the other hand, they may reflect some of your own experiences or your knowledge of young people of diverse racial and sociocultural backgrounds. In either case, what these students say should be understood within the context of their particular school, family, and community experiences.

Learning from the Case Studies and Snapshots We hope that you will read each of these stories critically and with the goal of understanding how the experiences and thoughts of young people can influence classroom discourse and strategies as well as school policies and practices in gen- eral. These young people challenge us to believe that all students in our nation’s classrooms are capable of learning. Although their stories demonstrate the indomi- table strength of youth, they also reveal the tremendous fragility of academic suc- cess, which is so easily disrupted by a poor teacher, misguided policies, a negative comment, or an environment that denies the importance of one’s experiences. In the end, all their voices challenge us as teachers and as a society to do the very best we can to ensure that educational equity is not an illusion but an achievable goal.

Task 6: Examining Political Struggles—Multicultural Education, Backlash, and Legislation The sixth and final task of this chapter, to understand the sociopolitical context of multicultural education, requires examining historic and current political strug- gles. Since its beginnings in the 1970s, multicultural education has been criticized for many reasons. While some of the criticisms have been warranted and have, in fact, helped the field develop a more solid foundation, many of the arguments against multicultural education have been deeply ideological and have ignored both educational research and actual practice. That is, multicultural education has come under fire precisely because it has challenged the status quo, encouraged the emergence of previously silenced and marginalized voices, and championed the transformation of curriculum and the use of alternative pedagogies. The criticisms and detractions of multicultural education are also embedded in the broader socio- political context. Three common strategies for trying to destabilize multicultural education include (1) calls for going back to basics, (2) claims of erosion of the educational canon, and (3) political struggles of legislation and policy.

The Back-to-Basics Argument The backlash against multicultural education has been evident in claims that a focus on diversity is a diversion from the “basics.” This has been the case for more than three decades since the educational reform movement that began in 1983 after the publication of A Nation at Risk.57 One vivid example of the back-to-basics argument is E. D. Hirsch’s 1987 book Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know, which he initially developed to combat the “multicultural threat.” Despite its date, the premise took hold in the discourse that aims to detract from

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 21 26/09/17 12:02 PM

22 PART I Setting the Stage

multicultural education. The book includes a list of several thousand terms and concepts that the author considers essential for every educated person to know or at least to recognize and be familiar with.58 Many critics have charged that both the book and the list are provincial and Eurocentric, with little attention given to the arts, history, or culture of those from groups other than the so-called mainstream. Yet since the publication of Hirsch’s book 30 years ago, several hundred schools around the nation have been structured and organized according to what has been dubbed “core knowledge” and the “cultural literacy” model. Hirsch’s work further promulgated a notion of so-called cultural literacy that flies in the face of the rap- idly changing demographics—not to mention the rich multicultural history—of our nation. Numerous spin-off publications are targeted toward parents and guardians and focus on different grade levels, making Hirsch’s cultural literacy model and ideas a cottage industry that is hard to ignore. To challenge Hirsch’s work, Kristen Buras analyzed the neoconservative evolution and contradictory ideology of this core knowledge school reform movement. She uncovered the conservative lead- ers and their financially powerful backers, as well as the strategies and campaigns to politicize school curriculum in order to develop a permanent conservative majority—which she dubs the rise of “Rightist Multiculturalism.”59

The pitfalls of Hirsch’s assertions of what counts as literacy are multifold. While many of us might welcome a generally agreed-upon definition of the educated per- son, this is a complex issue that cannot be solved by a prescribed list, or even a prescribed curriculum. Eugene Provenzo has challenged Hirsch’s views in his book Critical Literacy: What Every American Ought to Know, a critique of both Hirsch and the simplistic ideas behind the cultural literacy model that he promotes.60

Eroding the Traditional Educational Canon The call for “back to basics” falls under the broader conservative argument against multicultural education as a liberal movement that erodes the traditional educa- tional canon. The claim is that multicultural education can slide into a separa- tist monoculturalism that pits Europeans and European Americans against people of other backgrounds, creating a divisive “us versus them” mentality. This argu- ment makes two assumptions: that no “us versus them” mentality existed previ- ous to multicultural education and that there already is unity among all people in our country—both clearly erroneous assumptions. There are tremendous divi- sions among people in the United States, many of which have been renewed and become increasingly visible in the political landscape and public parlance of the past decade. The notion that multicultural education has separatist goals could not be further from the truth. On the contrary, supporters of multicultural education assume that a more pluralistic curriculum is also more complicated and truthful and will, in the long run, help develop citizens who think critically, expansively, and creatively and therefore will be actively engaged in a democratic society.

In terms of its impact on schooling, opponents have been especially nervous about how a multicultural perspective might translate into curriculum changes. Those who fear that the traditional educational canon is being eroded have vocif- erously criticized it because, they claim, a multicultural curriculum will do away with our “common culture.” The ramifications of this stance can be seen in efforts to do away with specific courses at high schools and universities. Multicultural education opponents claim that it is now more important than ever to focus on a rigidly defined version of American history. An example of this can be found in the actions of the Texas State Board of Education, which in the spring of 2010 adopted a set of social studies and history standards that dilutes the teaching of the civil rights movement and the history of the trade of enslaved people, while directing teachers to examine America’s relationship to the United Nations as a threat to U.S. sovereignty.61 A group of educators, students, families and com- munity members responded by creating free online curriculum to teach Mexican American Studies.62

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 22 26/09/17 12:02 PM

CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 23

We need to remember that the history of all groups in the United States is not foreign; it is American history. Our history was never exclusively a European saga of immigration and assimilation, although that is, of course, an important part of the American story. But our collective consciousness began with—and continues to be influenced by—indigenous Americans as well as by those who were forcibly brought from Africa into slavery. No one in our nation has been untouched by African American, Native American, Mexican American, and Asian American his- tories and cultures (among many other groups, including women, European Amer- ican immigrants, and working-class people). The influence of these groups can be seen throughout our history in scientific discoveries, technological advances, pop- ular culture, civic engagement, and the arts. The expansive globalization of com- munication, commerce, and cultural experiences will continue to increase, and it behooves us to educate our students to participate more fully in multicultural and global social exchanges.

Political Struggles of Legislation and Policy The sociopolitical context is vividly revealed in struggles over power and privi- lege in the heart of U.S. education policy and law. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) has been the law for over 50 years; since 1965, it has been the federal government’s primary legislative vehicle for supporting and influenc- ing K–12 public education in more than 16,000 local school districts across the country. The ESEA has been reshaped and morphed through several presidential administrations, and its history is worth a brief review to understand the current sociopolitical context. In 2001 through 2015, public schools endured the ramifi- cations of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) era, noted for its pernicious expan- sion of standardized testing practices and the resulting fallout of the accountability movement.63 The most recent iteration of ESEA is the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which was signed by President Obama in December 2015.64 Before sign- ing the ESSA, the Obama administration had taken a positive step by dropping the stringent measures of NCLB called Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), which had been leveling sanctions against schools that did not meet the strict measures. But given the legacy of NCLB, many concerns remain about how the ESSA policy will develop into practice and how it may influence school life across the nation.65

The Historical Significance of NCLB When the NCLB version of ESEA was enacted in 2001, it had marked the most extreme reach of federal policy into state and local school districts in the history of U.S. public education; it was particularly damaging on several levels. While NCLB was originally enacted in response to several issues plaguing our educational system, including the deplorable history of educational inequality in our nation, its single- minded focus on standardized tests as the primary criterion for judging academic progress, as well as the dismal results this focus produced, revealed many flaws in the policy. By almost every measure, along the wide spectrum of liberal and con- servative opinion and analysis, NCLB’s approach was a failure in closing gaps and increasing test scores. However, as explained by Stan Karp in Rethinking Schools, NCLB succeeded in creating a misleading general public perspective: that school failure was the fault of students, their families, and teachers.66

As you will see in demographic data, research studies, and our own case stud- ies throughout this text, educational inequality has been a fact of life for many children in our schools, but especially for students of color and children living in poverty. Parents, educators, and other defenders of public education have long advocated for addressing this inequality through legislation. It is not surprising, then, that many advocates of equal education initially supported NCLB and were misled by its promises. While debate about its benefits or injuries to schools con- tinues, it remains popular with some.

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 23 26/09/17 12:02 PM

24 PART I Setting the Stage

Influence of Private Industry in Public Schools At the same time, conspicuous among those who had been the most ardent sup- porters of NCLB, and the 2015 version of the law now called the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), are those who support privatization of schools through tech- niques that include, among others, vouchers and charter schools (many of which are operated by profit-making companies) that frequently exclude the most vulner- able children from their classrooms. The goals of various groups promoting NCLB or ESSA may not be the same and, in some cases, may be contradictory, yet they become entangled in the discourse and desire to demarcate achievement. For some, gaining a standardized picture of so-called achievement is guided by a hopeful pur- suit of equity; for others, it appears to be the pursuit of financial profit and/or seg- regation. With the transition to ESSA, the enduring effects of NCLB will be difficult to shake; research about the NCLB is essential to inform hopeful reform in this next phase under ESSA. Researchers Heinrich Mintrop and Gail L. Sunderman of the Civil Rights Project provide an analysis of why the NCLB policy failed, and also, despite the counterintuitive indicators, why it continued to reap support from policymakers. Their evidence indicts NCLB for causing serious costs to the U.S. education system by keeping students mired in low-level intellectual work. They reveal how teachers get stuck in test-driven basic skills remediation, pointing out how this is particularly destructive for students who are in the schools NCLB identifies as failing: schools that are overwhelmingly populated by students of color and students living in pov- erty.67 They go on to explain that there are what Marshall Meyer and Lynne Zucker call powerful “secondary beneficiaries”68 of NCLB, such as private business testing agencies, segments of the school improvement industry, and others deriving eco- nomic and political benefit from the system—even when it is failing. Indeed, one of the most egregious outcomes of the overemphasis on testing is the flourishing multimillion-dollar testing industry that reaps it profits from public school funding. Challengers have aptly dubbed this monstrous carnivore of school funds the testing- industrial-complex.

What Happened and What Now, Under ESSA? The landscape under ESSA remains unchanged in many ways. It continues the mis- guided emphasis and financial investment in standardized testing practices, while punishing schools that do not meet specific requirements. However, the ESSA leg- islation did change some aspects of the previous policy. ESSA responded to activist students, parents, teachers and communities by shifting more ownership back to the states from the federal government. Also it allows states to pass laws that protect the rights of parents/guardians to support their children to “opt out” of taking standard- ized tests.69 But at the same time, the law throws support to charter schools.

Also important to bear in mind is that during the years of debate about NCLB, while waiting for ESSA to pass, the Obama administration had offered the “Race to the Top” (RTTP) initiative under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 funding. RTTP required states to adopt a common reform agenda that included the Common Core Standards to be eligible for such funding. RTTP and Common Core initiative also will hold sway in the coming years, because states had agreed to four assurances within that agenda. These four assurances were required: (1) adopting rigorous standards and assessments, (2) implement- ing statewide student data systems, (3) enhancing teacher effectiveness, and (4) improving low-performing schools.70 The requirement to comply in order to access funding created sweeping agreement in 2010–2011 with the national reform agenda, including adoption of the Common Core standards by 46 states and the District of Columbia, even though budget shortfalls and political rankling impede implementation of many reform efforts. Despite current political rancor over the Common Core, it will certainly take time to reconsider each state’s position on standards.

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 24 26/09/17 12:02 PM

CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 25

Teaching to the Test and High Standards Now that the ESSA of 2015 has been adopted in schools, it is clear that concern for the overemphasis on and misuse of standardized testing will continue. Keeping in mind that 2014 was NCLB’s target date by which all children were to be proficient in reading and math, the National Center for Fair & Open Testing (FairTest) reviewed the 2014 National Assessment of Education Progress, which showed no improve- ment for high school seniors in math or reading since 2009, and little improve- ment over the past decade. Moreover, racial gaps still persist. FairTest Director Bob Schaeffer emphasizes that test-driven schooling is not producing educational quality or closing opportunity gaps.71

Each of these legislative developments continues to promulgate immense pres- sure on teachers and administrators to “teach to the test” and to devote a lion’s share of the school day to reading and mathematics. The effects have been mixed, at best. While test scores are rising in some districts, the law’s pressure on school districts has reduced instructional time for other subjects to make more time for reading and mathematics under much more prescribed pedagogy. Subjects that are not evaluated on high-stakes tests have been reduced or eliminated in some schools. Recess and physical education have also been curtailed in many schools. The testing frenzy has had a chilling effect on schools’ and teachers’ autonomy to develop and implement curricula, and this includes multicultural curricula. A range of mandates have also funneled professional development funding away from any goals that are not test-score-driven, further eroding opportunities for teachers to learn about or expand multicultural goals.

Questioning the Common Core State Standards Though the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are being hailed by some as a means to boost quality and equality,72 they are attached to particular high-stakes tests, and steeped in social and political controversies that extend the problems of NCLB into this ESSA era. Stan Karp, editor of the journal Rethinking Schools, pro- vides a comprehensive analysis of the sociopolitical context of the CCSS. He argues that the problem with the Common Core is not only the content of the standards, or what is not included, although that’s certainly an issue. The greater issue is the over- all role that the CCSS are playing in the larger dynamics of current school reform.73

Karp explains that the CCSS were not conceived or developed by a demo- cratically representative group of educators and community members. It is worth remembering that federal law prohibits the federal government from creating national standards, so the Common Core efforts were framed within the National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers, and a private consulting firm, Achieve. Funding from private industry was poured into the effort, most notably more the $160 million from the Gates Foundation, which entered into partnership with profit-making publishers to produce full K–12 curriculum materials. These publishers also produce the broadest portion of the market of standardized tests for students in early-childhood grades all the way through col- lege teacher licensure programs. These so-called public–private partnerships raise disturbing questions about the influence of private wealth and corporate power in our public institutions that are assumed to be managed democratically.74

Advocates of the CCSS claim that these are not federally mandated standards (as that would be against the law), and that curriculum implementation will still be decided at the local level. However, a few resource-rich private industry text- book companies are leading the development and dissemination of curriculum to be aligned with the Common Core Standards. This creates a default dynamic of centralizing curriculum. The centralization of curriculum and assessment across the nation deepens the likelihood that more of our neediest children will have access to fewer educational opportunities, as documented in research by Christo- pher H. Tienken and Yong Zhao.75 As David C. Berliner and Gene V. Glass assert,

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 25 26/09/17 12:02 PM

26 PART I Setting the Stage

time will tell whether or not the CCSS will or will not promote a richer and deeper curriculum for U.S. students. But what is certain is that the CCSS will homogenize education as they replace local and state developed standards, inevitably restrict- ing what knowledge will be considered acceptable (and testable).76

Multicultural Standards Are High Standards Most state standards, including the CCSS, do not preclude the possibility of including multicultural perspectives in the curriculum. In fact, it is important to emphasize that there is no contradiction between high standards and mul- ticultural education. Quite the opposite is the case: Since its very beginning, one of the major arguments in support of multicultural education has been that some students—particularly students of color and poor students of all back- grounds—have been the victims of an inferior education, often based on their race/ethnicity, social class, first language, and other differences. Multicultural education, through a rich curriculum and rigorous demands, was an antidote to this situation. Nonetheless, the pressure that teachers and administrators are under to meet scores, as defined by high-stakes standardized tests, has resulted in little support for the visual arts, music, drama, dance, physical education, and even subjects such as social studies and science, much less for innovation and creativity in curriculum and instruction. The potential disaster on the limi- tations of knowledge for future generations is frightening. The obliteration of the arts and reduced status of science, history, and other social sciences have shaped the curriculum of many children throughout their entire kindergarten through twelfth-grade school life. Analysis by Christopher H. Tienkan and Yong Zhao emphasizes that focusing on few subjects through standardization and test- ing impoverishes the curriculum and greatly diminishes the overall educational experience.77 Neglecting access to study of the humanities and full sciences will certainly have an influence on the future of U.S. society. High standards then should include multicultural perspectives and rich, meaningful experiences in a wide range of subjects, including depth of study in the arts, humanities, and sciences rather than more high-stakes standardized testing that limit access to studying and producing robust knowledge.

The Question of International Standing Nevertheless, the national conversation about standards continues to be confus- ing. The standing of U.S. schools compared to schools internationally has become a common battle cry among politicians, amplified by popular media for more stringent standards and more frequent testing. However, Diane Ravitch’s research calls for a more critical analysis of the scores from the Programme for Interna- tional Student Assessment (PISA), which have been misused and misinterpreted to claim that the United States is lagging significantly behind. Ravitch offers two salient points through a close examination of the scores. First, in reading and mathematics, the scores of American 15-year-olds on PISA tests had not declined in 2010 compared to those recorded for 2000, 2003, and 2006. Moreover, Ameri- can students’ scores in science improved from 2006. Ravitch’s second point con- tends with school poverty rates and disaggregating data with a consideration of these comparisons internationally. She clarifies that in American schools with low poverty—where less than 10 percent of students were poor—students had scores equal to those in the high-scoring nations of Finland, the Republic of Korea, Canada, New Zealand, Japan, and Australia.78 Research by David C. Ber- liner and Gene V. Glass concurs with much of Ravitch’s discussion by uncovering the ways in which the myths about U.S. performance on international tests are propagated. They assert that these misleading claims about international tests supposedly showing the United States as having a second-rate educational sys- tem, combined with the underanalyzed, overemphasized significance of college

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 26 26/09/17 12:02 PM

CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 27

entrance exams scores such as SAT and ACT, are used by reformers who promote unproven school reforms like high-stakes testing, charter schools, teacher merit pay, and the CCSS.79

Teachers’ Responsibilities: ESSA and the Common Core In terms of teachers’ responsibilities, we must once again consider the sociopolitical context of education. Curriculum and pedagogy, along with other school policies and practices, as we shall see in Chapter 4, are as much political issues as they are educational issues. The same is true of standards, including the CCSS. We make the assumption here that all educators want to hold their students to high standards. Yet every curriculum decision also says something about the values, expectations, and dreams that teachers hold for their students. If this is the case, it becomes the responsibility of teachers to help define the curriculum and not simply to be automa- tons who implement a rigidly prescribed curriculum.

The undue attention on test scores in the United States also has devastating effects on teachers’ sense of professionalism. Many teachers are now reluctant— and in some cases forbidden—to engage in projects outside the prescribed curricu- lum with their students, or even to collaborate with peers due to possible criticisms, or job-security threats they are likely to receive from administrators who are also under tremendous pressure to keep their schools out of the headlines for failing test scores. The result in many schools around the country is that teachers are expected to follow a rigidly prescribed curriculum, particularly in reading and math, with lit- tle room for innovation or collaboration. What are teachers to do?

Un-Standardizing Curriculum Christine Sleeter and Judith Flores Carmona suggest that there is a difference between a standards-driven and a standards-conscious curriculum. A standards- driven curriculum, according to Sleeter and Camona, begins with the standards and draws the “big ideas” from them; the standards are the main source for cur- riculum design. A standards-conscious curriculum, on the other hand, uses the standards as a tool, rather than as either the starting point or the underlying ideol- ogy for the development of big ideas. In their book Un-Standardizing Curriculum: Multicultural Teaching in the Standards-Based Classroom, Sleeter and Carmona provide powerful vignettes of teachers who face the same pressures to teach to the test as do all teachers. In spite of this pressure, rather than following the stand- ards uncritically, these teachers developed standards-conscious curricula in which the teachers selected big ideas that are both creative and critical from a range of sources.80 Another example of using the standards in inventive ways is Mary Cowhey’s Black Ants and Buddhists: Thinking Critically and Teaching Differently in the Primary Grades.81 A first- and second-grade teacher, Cowhey uses the stand- ards to develop curriculum that is inspiring, demanding, and multicultural. Other examples of meaningful curriculum can be found in the book In the Service of Learning and Empowerment: Service-Learning, Critical Pedagogy, and the Problem- Solution Project by Vera Stenhouse, Olga S. Jarret, Rhina M. Fernandes Williams, and E. Namisi Chilungu.82 This text features the firsthand accounts of PK–5 teach- ers implementing service-learning curriculum that they call the “Problem-Solution Project.” Such a model builds on student-centered interests, and standards are woven throughout the student-driven curriculum that advances critical multi- cultural perspectives. This is a useful resource for teachers at all stages of their careers as well as teacher-educators.

These books, and a growing number of others, are challenging the notion that standards will necessarily lead to rigid standardization. They provide vivid exam- ples of how powerful learning, meaningful social actions, civic engagement and imagination can be promoted even within a testing and accountability context that tends to leave little room for such things.

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 27 26/09/17 12:02 PM

28 PART I Setting the Stage

Conclusion In this chapter, we have attempted to provide a definition and description of the sociopolitical context of multicultural education. As described, taking into account the sociopolitical context requires the following tasks: (1) clarifying the goals and key terms of multicultural education; (2) dissolving myths about immigration and difference; (3) naming the social, economic, political, and ideological underpinnings of educational structures; (4) studying the current demographic “mosaic” of our nation; (5) using qualitative research to under- stand students; and (6) examining the political struggles of legislation and pol- icy. This sixth effort was considered through a topic that is both current and controversial in schools and communities around the nation: the reauthoriza- tion of the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act from the No Child Left Behind Act to the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015, including the adop- tion of the Common Core State Standards and its implications for education in a multicultural society. By rooting these challenges in qualitative research, the issues can be studied through ethnographic “lenses,” specifically through case studies and snapshots of students who reflect the tremendous diversity of our school-age population. Such research can help us understand the effect of the sociopolitical context of schooling on various segments of the population as well as on the nation as a whole.

To Think About

1. Can you describe the sociopolitical context of your own education? For you to become college-educated and to pursue a career in education, what circumstances cultivated both success and challenges for your family and your ancestors?

2. Consider the academic accomplishments of two of your current students: one who earns high marks in school and one who is struggling with grades. Compare what you know about the OSFs described by David Berliner’s research. Does this influence the ways in which you and the school might support each student?

3. Consider the various iterations of the ESEA and the concerns around the CCSS. Com- pare your current standards and consider how CCSS might influence, or has influenced, the teaching and learning in your school. Does it influence your school differently than a school in a neighboring district? Does it seem to provide your students with more resources or fewer? What are the implications of federal policy on your local school?

Activities for Personal, School, and Community Change

1. Increase awareness in your school culture of the rich mosaic of diverse backgrounds and languages in U.S. society by developing a classroom activity that draws upon the wide array of resources available from the U.S. Census Bureau developed spe- cifically for teachers (http://www.census.gov/dmd/www/teachers.html). Compare the U.S. demographics to your school’s demographics. Place emphasis on diver- sity as an asset rather than as a “problem.” Make your students’ thinking visible to the entire school through bulletin board displays, presentations during morning announcements, school web spaces, multimedia projections in the lunchroom, and the like.

2. Has your school responded to test preparation and budget constraints by cutting pro- gramming that supports students’ multiple ways of knowing and expressing, such as art, music, dance, drama, clothing design, cooking, physical education, technology cur- riculum, theater, and so on? If so, help organize students, families, cultural workers, community artists, and other educators to provide after-school activities to increase students’ multiple intelligence engagement as well as to maintain their attachment to the school environment.

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 28 26/09/17 12:02 PM

CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Sociopolitical Context of Schooling 29

1. Bushaw & Lopez (2013). 2. National Education Association (2013). 3. Lubienski & Lubienski (2014). 4. Kymlicka (2007). 5. Lee (2004). 6. Moses (2002, 2010). 7. Banks (2016), p. 17. 8. Vanneman, Hamilton, Baldwin Anderson, & Rahman (2009). 9. Ibid. (2009). 10. Bohrnstedt, G., Kitmitto, S., Ogut, B., Sherman, D., and Chan, D.

(2015). Gutiérrez, R. (2014). 11. Hemphill & Vanneman (2011). 12. Gándara (2008); Gándara & Contreras (2010). 13. Kena et al. (2014). 14. Ibid, (2014). 15. Timar (2012). 16. Ladson-Billings (2013, 2014). 17. Ladson-Billings (2006) p. 3 18. Chenoweth (2009). See also Karen Chenoweth’s summary in Phi

Delta Kappan (2009, September, vol. 91). 19. Zurawsky (2004). 20. Barton & Coley (2009). 21. Anyon (2014), p. 2. 22. Gorski (2013b). 23. Berliner (2009), pp. 1–2 24. Ibid.; see also Berliner (2014). 25. Rothstein (2006). 26. Rothstein (2013). 27. Orfield (2004), p. 9. 28. Ibid. 29. Orfield (2009). 30. Frankenberg & Orfield (2012). 31. Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act, AZ.

SB 1070 (2010). 32. Camarota (2012). 33. Dream Act: Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors

(2001), Senate bill S. 744. 34. United Nations High Commission for Refugees (2000). 35. Dryden-Peterson (2016). 36. Howe (1983). See also Wyman, Greenfield, & Gill (1993). 37. Rothstein (1998). 38. Rigby (2015). 39. Tatum (2017), p. 86. 40. Hall & Ushomirsky (2010). 41. Carey & Roza (2008). 42. U.S. Department of Education, Equity and Excellence Commission

(2013). 43. All the data in this paragraph were sourced from the U.S. Census

Bureau website at http://census.gov/. The data are in the public domain. Various tables of data sets were cited, such as “Estimates of the Components of Resident Population Change by Race and Hispanic Origin for the United States: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2014” and “Population Estimates/Current estimates data.”

44. The data in this paragraph were sourced from the U.S. Census Bureau website at http://census.gov/. A variety data tables were cited, such as “Annual Estimates of the Resident Population by Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2014.” Data were also sourced from National Center for Education Statistics, “Fast Facts: What Are the New Back to School Statistics for 2016?”

45. U.S. Census Bureau (2015). 46. Baker & Rytina (2013). See also Monger (2010) for U.S. Department

of Homeland Security Office of Immigration statistics. 47. U.S. Census Bureau (2009–2013, 2015). 48. Brown (2014). 49. Davis & Bauman (2013). 50. Orfield (2009). See also U.S. Census Bureau (2015). 51. Kugler (2002); Page (2007). 52. Jiang, Ekono, & Skinner (2015); DeNavas-Walt & Proctor (2015). 53. Boser (2014). 54. Takaki (1998, 2008); Zinn (2010); CSPAN2 Book TV (2001). 55. Merriam (2009), p. 43. 56. Fine (1991). 57. National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983). 58. Hirsch (1987). 59. Buras (2008). 60. Provenzo (2005). 61. Birnbaum (2010). 62. MAS Texas (2017); Arce v. Douglas (2015). 63. No Child Left Behind Act (2001). 64. Every Student Succeeds Act (2015). 65. Karp (2016). 66. Karp (2014). 67. Mintrop & Sunderman (2009). 68. Meyer & Zucker (1989). 69. Guisbond, Neill, & Schaeffer (2015). 70. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) (2009). See also

U.S. Department of Education website for Race to The Top (2010). 71. Schaeffer (2014). 72. Common Core State Standards Initiative (2017). 73. Karp (2014). 74. Ibid. 75. Tienken & Zhao (2013). 76. Berliner & Glass (2014). 77. Tienken & Zhao (2013). 78. Ravitch (2013). 79. Berliner & Glass (2014). 80. Sleeter & Carmona (2017), pp. 58–59 81. Cowhey (2006). 82. Stenhouse, Jarret, Fernandes Williams, & Chilungu (2014).

Notes

M01_NIET7232_07_SE_C01.indd 29 26/09/17 12:02 PM

30

I n discussing multicultural education with teachers and other educators over many years, I have heard comments and remarks (see examples below) that make it seem as if multicultural education is already “a done deal” or that we

do not need it. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, statements such as these reflect a profound misunderstanding of diver- sity in our nation today.

Unfortunately, when multicultural edu- cation is mentioned, many people first think of lessons in human relations and sensitiv- ity training, units about ethnic holidays, education in inner-city schools, or food fes- tivals. If multicultural education is limited to these issues, the potential for substantive change in schools is severely diminished. On the other hand, when broadly conceptual- ized, it can lead to more understanding and empathy. It can also help to address the four areas of potential conflict and inequity to be addressed in Part II—namely, racism and dis- crimination, inequitable structural conditions in schools and society, the impact of culture on learning, and language diversity.

Defining Multicultural Education for School  Reform by Sonia Nieto

2

“We don’t need multicultural education here; most of our students are White.” “I don’t see color. All my students are the same to me.” “We shouldn’t talk about racism in school because it has nothing to do with learning. Besides, it’ll

just make the kids feel bad.” “Let’s not focus on negative things. Can’t we all just get along?” “I want to include multicultural education in my curriculum, but there’s just no time for it.” “Oh, yes, we have multicultural education here: We celebrate Black History Month, and there’s an

annual Diversity Dinner.” “Multicultural education is just therapy for Black students.” “Multicultural education became irrelevant after 9/11. It’s divisive because it focuses on differences.

Now, more than ever, we need to stress our similarities.”

M02_NIET7232_07_SE_C02.indd 30 23/09/17 2:01 PM

CHAPTER 2 Defining Multicultural Education for School Reform 31

Why School Reform? This chapter proposes a definition of multicultural education as an essential element of school reform. The definition is based on the context and terminology discussed in the preceding chapter, and it analyzes seven primary characteristics included in the definition, characteristics that underscore the role multicultural education can play in reforming schools and providing an equal and excellent education for all

students. Emerging from the reality of persistent problems in our nation’s schools, this definition especially addresses the lack of achievement among students of diverse backgrounds and empha- sizes the context and process of education, rather than viewing multicultural education as simply an add-on or luxury discon- nected from the everyday lives of students.

At the same time, we need to stress that multicultural educa- tion is not a panacea for all educational ills. Because schools are part of our communities, they reflect the stratification and social inequities of the larger society. As long as this is the case, no school program alone, no matter how broadly conceptualized, can change things completely. Multicultural education will not cure underachievement, eliminate boring and irrelevant curricu- lum, or stop vandalism. It will not automatically motivate fami- lies to participate in schools, reinvigorate tired and dissatisfied teachers, or guarantee a lower dropout rate. Only by address- ing inequities in the larger society can we hope to solve these problems.

Despite these caveats, multicultural education can offer hope for real change. Viewing it in a broad sociopolitical context is both richer and more complex than simple lessons on getting along or units on ethnic festivals. By focusing on major condi- tions contributing to underachievement, multicultural educa- tion, as defined here, permits educators to explore alternatives to a system that promotes failure for too many students. Such an exploration can lead to the creation of a richer and more produc-

tive school climate and a deeper awareness of the role of culture, language, and power in learning. Seen in this comprehensive way, educational success for all students is a realistic goal rather than an impossible ideal.

A Definition of Multicultural Education In spite of some differences among major theorists, during the nearly 50 years since multicultural education first developed as a specific field, there has been remarkable consistency concerning its rationale, goals, and purpose.1 But no defi- nition of multicultural education can truly capture all its complexities. The defini- tion I present here reflects one way of conceptualizing the issues; it is based on my many years of experience with students, teachers, researchers, and teacher educators. Although the definition includes seven characteristics that I believe are essential in multicultural education, you might come up with just 3, or with 15. The point is not to develop just one way to understand multicultural education but instead to encourage you to think about the interplay of societal and school struc- tures and contexts and how they influence learning.

What I believe is essential is emphasizing the sociopolitical context of educa- tion and rejecting the notion that multicultural education is either a superficial addition of content to the curriculum or, alternatively, the magic pill that will do away with all educational problems. As you consider my definition of multicul- tural education, I hope it will serve to foster further dialogue and reflection so that you will develop your own ideas, priorities, and perspectives.

Alex Demarjian, Jorge Piccole, Elliot Thomas, Phoebe Weissblum in Dawn Southworth’s art class at Glen Urquhart School, Beverly, Massa- chusetts. Self-portraits. Linoleum prints. 2010.

M02_NIET7232_07_SE_C02.indd 31 23/09/17 2:01 PM

32 PART I Setting the Stage

I define multicultural education in a sociopolitical context as follows:

Multicultural education is a process of comprehensive school reform and basic education for all students. It challenges and rejects racism and other forms of dis- crimination in schools and society and accepts and affirms the pluralism (ethnic, racial, linguistic, religious, economic, gender, and sexual orientation, among oth- ers) that students, their communities, and teachers reflect. Multicultural education permeates the school’s curriculum and instructional strategies as well as the inter- actions among teachers, students, and families and the very way that schools con- ceptualize the nature of teaching and learning. Because it uses critical pedagogy as its underlying philosophy and focuses on knowledge, reflection, and action (praxis) as the basis for social change, multicultural education promotes demo- cratic principles of social justice.

The seven basic characteristics of multicultural education in this definition are:

Multicultural education is antiracist education.

Multicultural education is basic education.

Multicultural education is important for all students.

Multicultural education is pervasive.

Multicultural education is education for social justice.

Multicultural education is a process.

Multicultural education is critical pedagogy.

Multicultural Education Is Antiracist Education Anti-racism, indeed antidiscrimination in general, is at the very core of a multicul- tural perspective. The antiracist nature of multicultural education must be kept in mind because, in many schools, even some that espouse a multicultural philoso- phy, only superficial aspects of this philosophy are apparent. Celebrations of eth- nic festivals are the extent of multicultural education programs in some schools. In others, sincere attempts to decorate bulletin boards with what is thought to be a multicultural perspective end up perpetuating the worst kind of stereotypes. Even where there are serious attempts to develop a truly pluralistic environment, it is not unusual to find incongruencies. In some schools, for instance, the highest academic tracks are overwhelmingly White, the lowest are populated primarily by students of color, and girls are nonexistent in calculus and physics classes. Although a school’s policies may claim to be multicultural, the result is not neces- sary explicitly antiracist and antidiscriminatory.

Because many people erroneously assume that a school’s multicultural pro- gram automatically takes care of racism, multicultural education must be con- sciously antiracist. Writing about multicultural education over 30 years ago, when the field was fairly new, Meyer Weinberg asserted:

Most multicultural materials deal wholly with the cultural distinctiveness of vari- ous groups and little more. Almost never is there any sustained attention to the ugly realities of systematic discrimination against the same group that also hap- pens to utilize quaint clothing, fascinating toys, delightful fairy tales, and delicious food. Responding to racist attacks and defamation is also part of the culture of the group under study.2

Being antiracist and antidiscriminatory means being mindful of how some students are favored over others in school policies and practices, such as the curriculum, choice of materials, sorting policies, and teachers’ interactions and relationships with students and their families. Consequently, to be inclusive and balanced, multicultural curriculum must, by definition, be antiracist. Teaching does not become more honest and critical simply by becoming more inclusive, but this is a necessary first step in ensuring that students have access to a wide variety of viewpoints. Rather than viewing the world through rose-colored glasses,

M02_NIET7232_07_SE_C02.indd 32 23/09/17 2:01 PM

CHAPTER 2 Defining Multicultural Education for School Reform 33

antiracist multicultural education forces teachers and students to take a long, hard look at everything as it was and is, instead of just how we wish it were. Thus, although the beautiful and heroic aspects of our history should be taught, so must the ugly and exclusionary.

Too many schools avoid confronting, in an honest and direct way, the nega- tive aspects of history, the arts, and science. Michelle Fine has called this the “fear of naming,” and it is part of the system of silencing in public schools.3 Related to the fear of naming is the insistence of schools on “sanitizing” the cur- riculum, or what Jonathan Kozol many years ago called “tailoring” important men and women for school use. Kozol described how schools manage to take our most exciting and memorable heroes and bleed the life and spirit completely out of them because it can be dangerous, he wrote, to teach a history “studded with so many bold, and revolutionary, and subversive, and exhilarating men and women.” He described how, instead, schools drain these heroes of their passions, glaze them over with an implausible veneer, place them on lofty pedestals, and then tell “incredibly dull stories” about them.4 Although he wrote these words nearly 40 years ago, Kozol could just as well be describing education in many of today’s U.S. schools.

The process of sanitizing is nowhere more evident than in depictions of Mar- tin Luther King Jr. The only thing most children know about him is that he kept “having a dream.” School bulletin boards are full of ethereal pictures of Dr. King surrounded by clouds. If children get to read or hear any of his speeches at all, it is his “I Have a Dream” speech. As inspirational as this speech is, it is only one of his notable accomplishments. Rare indeed are allusions to his early and consist- ent opposition to the Vietnam War; his strong criticism of unbridled capitalism; and the connections he made near the end of his life among racism, capitalism, and war. This sanitization of Martin Luther King, a man full of passion and life, renders him an oversimplified, lifeless figure, in the process making him a “safe hero.”

Most of the heroes we present to our children are either those in the main- stream or those who have become safe through the process of what Kozol referred to as “tailoring.” Others who have fought for social justice are often downplayed, maligned, or ignored. For example, although John Brown’s actions in defense of the liberation of enslaved people are considered noble by many, in most history books, he is presented, if at all, as somewhat of a crazed idealist. Nat Turner is another example. The slave revolt that he led deserves a larger place in our his- tory books, if only to acknowledge that enslaved people fought against their own oppression and were not simply passive victims. However, Turner’s name and role in U.S. history are usually overlooked. On the other hand, Abraham Lincoln is presented as the Great Emancipator, as if he was single-handedly responsible for the abolition of slavery (and with little acknowledgment of his own inconsistent ideas about race and equality). Nat Turner is not considered a safe hero; Abraham Lincoln is.

A powerful example of reclaiming one’s history was recounted by Rebecca Geary, a former graduate student on whose master’s thesis committee I served. In writing about her great-great-grandfather, Moses Hunter, in her master’s thesis, she recounts that he

pounded his fist upon the table when he heard my father sharing his school lesson about how Lincoln “freed the slaves.” “Nobody freed me, sir! I earned my free- dom with a pitchfork and a knife,” he bellowed in frustrated rage at my father’s misinformation.5

To be antiracist is not a passive act; it presupposes working actively to combat racism. For example, it means making antiracism and antidiscrimination explicit parts of the curriculum and teaching young people skills in confronting racism. A school that is truly committed to a multicultural philosophy will closely examine

M02_NIET7232_07_SE_C02.indd 33 23/09/17 2:01 PM

34 PART I Setting the Stage

both its policies and the attitudes and behaviors of its staff to determine how these might discriminate against some students. The focus on school policies and prac- tices makes it evident that multicultural education is about more than the percep- tions and beliefs of individual teachers and other educators; it is about the very structure of the school.

Racism is seldom mentioned in school (it is bad, a dirty word) and therefore is rarely addressed. Unfortunately, many teachers think that simply having lessons in getting along or celebrating Human Relations Week will make students nonracist or nondiscriminatory. But it is impossible to be untouched by biases including rac- ism, sexism, linguicism, heterosexism, ageism, anti-Semitism, classism, ableism, and ethnocentrism in a society characterized by all of these. To expect schools to be an oasis of sensitivity and understanding in the midst of bigotry and strati- fication is unrealistic. Therefore, part of the mission of the school is to create an environment where these issues can be broached directly and honestly. Teaching the missing or fragmented parts of our history is crucial to achieving this mission.

Although White students may be uncomfortable with discussions about race, having these discussions can actually be a positive pedagogical approach to help them think about their position in society and their responsibilities to combat bias and bigotry. Beverly Daniel Tatum’s groundbreaking work on bringing discussions of race out of the closet proposes discussing race and racism within the framework of racial and cultural identity theory. Doing so, she contends, can help students and teachers focus on how racism negatively affects all people and can provide a sense of hope for positive changes.6

What about teachers? Because many teachers have had little experience with diversity, discussions of racism often threaten to disrupt their deeply held ideals of meritocracy, fair play, and equality. As a result, fruitful classroom discussions about discrimination may not happen because many teachers are uneasy with these topics. If this continues to be the case, neither unfair individual behaviors nor institutional policies and practices in schools will change and students of dis- empowered groups will continue to bear the brunt of educational inequities. The dilemma is how to challenge the silence about race and racism so that teachers can enter into meaningful and constructive dialogue with their students. For exam- ple, in research with teachers from around the country, Karen McLean Donaldson found that many teachers were in denial about racism and its effects in schools. On the other hand, those who became active in antiracist projects broadened their understanding and were able to use their new skills in creating affirming learning environments for all their students.7

One of the reasons schools are reluctant to tackle racism and discrimination is that these are disturbing topics for those who have traditionally benefited by their race, gender, and social class, among other advantageous differences. Because instruction in, and discussion of, such topics tend to place people in the role of either the victimizer or the victimized, an initial and logical reaction, for example, of European American teachers and students in discussing race is to feel guilty. But being antiracist does not mean flailing about in guilt and remorse. Although this reaction is understandable, remaining at this level is immobilizing. Teachers and students need to move beyond guilt to a state of invigorated awareness and informed confidence in which they take personal and collective action for positive change, rather than hide behind feelings of culpability. For White students and teachers, this means taking responsibility for being White, a point forcefully made by Robin DiAngelo in a book that asks a question seldom heard in discussions about race, What Does It Mean to Be White?8

The primary victims of racism and discrimination are those who suffer its immediate consequences, but racism and discrimination are destructive and demeaning to everyone. Although not everyone is directly guilty of discrimina- tion, we are all responsible for combating it. This means that working actively for social justice is everyone’s business. Yet it is often the victims of racism and other

M02_NIET7232_07_SE_C02.indd 34 23/09/17 2:01 PM

CHAPTER 2 Defining Multicultural Education for School Reform 35

kinds of discrimination who are left to act on their own. Everybody loses when a particular group of students is made a scapegoat. Rebecca Florentina’s case study, which follows Chapter 5, is a good example. As a lesbian, Rebecca felt the need to personally confront the heterosexual biases in her school, but this should have been viewed as everyone’s responsibility. Indeed, we will have come a long way when everybody feels this same obligation.

Multicultural Education Is Basic Education One of the major stumbling blocks to implementing a broadly conceptualized mul- ticultural education is the ossification of the “canon” in schools. When multicul- tural education is peripheral to the core curriculum, it is perceived as irrelevant to basic education. But given the recurring concern for teaching the “basics,” multi- cultural education must be understood as basic to an excellent education. That is, multicultural literacy is just as indispensable for living in today’s world as reading, writing, arithmetic, and computer literacy.

The canon, as generally understood in contemporary U.S. education, assumes that the knowledge that is most worthwhile is already in place. This notion explains the popularity of E. D. Hirsch’s series What Every [First, Second, Third . . .] Grader Needs to Know.9 Geared primarily to parents, this series builds on the fear that their children will not measure up if they do not possess the core knowl- edge (usually in the form of facts, names, and dates) that they need in order to succeed in school. According to this rather narrow view, the basics have, in effect, already been defined, and they are inevitably European, male, and upper-class. Yet the basics must be understood as broader than names, dates, and facts, and as more inclusive than the history or reality of any one group of people.