Publishing Web for Students' Final Papers
Publishing Web for Students' Final Papers |
|
From: Nancy Ullrich
Email: ullrich@cats.ucsc.edu
Course: Psych 100G: Diversity in Development
College: UCSC--Crown College, Education
Instructor: Eugene Matusov
ClassWeb: http://www.ematusov.com/psych100G
ChildrenObservations: No
Date: 12 Dec 1996
Time: 13:00:04
Remote Name: ss1mac-21.ucsc.edu
As we reach the twenty-first century, teachers are faced with an increasing population of minority students who come from diverse sociocultural backgrounds. Our current educational system is designed to serve primarily the white, upper-middle class majority. Consequently, schools are not meeting the needs of the majority of its population. In order to provide for minority students, teachers must rise to the challenges of addressing diversity in their classrooms. This paper highlights some of the challenges which diversity creates in the classroom and the implications of diversity on teaching and learning. In addition, the paper argues for the implementation of a culturally responsive pedagogy as a method for teachers to address diversity in their classrooms and include it in their curriculums as a tool for teaching and learning.*
* I wish to acknowledge the contributions of my peers Kathy, Pamela, Alison, Blanca, and Melanie in the development of this paper. Their ideas and research are included in the introduction as well as in the topic of the challenges of diversity which are faced by teachers today.
The classrooms of today are comprised of students from a variety of ethnic, linguistic, and sociocultural backgrounds. A look inside of a typical American classroom reveals a significant population of minority students from backgrounds which are culturally distinct from that of the white majority. As the 21st century draws near, we face the challenge of increasing diversity of students within our educational system. It is estimated that by the year 2056 minority students will outnumber the white majority in the overall student population (Henry, 1990: 30). As a result, the classroom has become a nucleus of convergence for children of different cultures and abilities.
However, schools and teachers are not traditionally prepared to deal with the diversity of their classrooms. Teachers are prepared, while classrooms and curriculum are constructed to serve, the specific interests of the white, middle class students, prohibiting those students from non-white, non-middle class backgrounds from receiving a quality education (Osborne, 1996). Schools, teachers, students, and communities must work together to adapt to and embrace the diversity found in classrooms in order to ensure the success of all students. However, minority students bring cultural values and beliefs to the classroom which are in conflict with the beliefs and values of the school. For instance, the culture of the traditional classroom is based on the “achievement ideology” which states that if an individual works hard enough he/she will be able to succeed. This ideology assumes that an equal opportunity to succeed exists for all students. Yet, this ideology contradicts the beliefs and realities of many minority students. For instance, minority students who are new arrivals to this country are often placed in lower level classes because of an unfamiliarity with the English language. Their placement in these lower level classes is based on the assumption that these classes are the least difficult linguistically ( Harklau, 1994). Furthermore, once students are placed in low-track classes, they are likely to stay in these tracks throughout their schooling (Goodlad, 1984). Thus, the concept of the achievement ideology does not match the realities of these minority students. Once they are tracked into low-track classes, they are given little opportunity for upward mobility regardless of how hard they work.
In addition to the false assumption of the “achievement ideology”, Ogbu (1978) suggests that a “job ceiling” exists for minorities which “denies them the opportunity to use their education meaningfully and (be) rewarded with jobs and wages that commensurate with their training and ability.” He further states that as a society America has “discouraged the minorities from investing time and effort into the pursuit of education and into maximizing their educational accomplishment.” As a consequence of such societal messages as well as tracking into low academic classes, many minority students drop out of school. Research by Spencer Kagan (1994) found that half of all Hispanic students drop out of formal education before finishing high school and that less than ten percent finish college. If students see little opportunity to move up the ladder socially, academically, or economically, they are not likely to invest much time and effort in their educations. If education is not going to serve any beneficial purposes, then there is little reason to pursue it.
Hence, it is crucial that teachers and schools find ways to reach and teach to minority students. One way to reach and teach to minority students is through the incorporation of their backgrounds and cultures into the classroom curriculum and through the utilization of instruction which is based on the realities of the students, thereby making learning meaningful. Students must not only be taught school knowledge, they must also see the benefits of this knowledge in their daily lives. If students are not able to connect the skills and knowledge they learn in school to their lives outside of school, they see little relevance of those skills and knowledge to their lives. Furthermore, if we hope to convince minority students to stay in school, we must value their backgrounds and cultures in the classroom. If students see their cultures and backgrounds represented and truly valued in the curriculum, they are more likely to perceive school as a safe, enjoyable place to be.
The incorporation of students’ diverse cultures into the curriculum provides all students with an invitation to be valued members of the classroom community (Poplin and Weeres, 1992). Yet, many teachers are not prepared to teach in diverse classrooms. Though most teachers have their students’ best interests at heart, they are not always trained in how to incorporate diversity into their classrooms. Many teachers are never given the necessary information and tools which would make it possible for them to provide environments in which all students could succeed academically and socially. Bowman (1996) makes a call for teacher training programs which address diversity in the classrooms and provide teachers with the information and skills required to teach in diverse classrooms. He states, “...prepare teachers for a greater range of students that reflect the actual student population rather than the generic white middle-class majority.” Just as we cannot expect students to achieve without the proper tools and information, we cannot expect our teachers to perform without adequate training.
As part of this training, teachers must learn how to develop a “culturally responsive pedagogy” in which they adapt instruction in the direction of their students’ home cultures (Erickson, 1994). In such a pedagogy, teachers “teach content that is culturally relevant to students’ previous experiences that fosters their natal cultural identity, and empowers them with the knowledge and practices to operate successfully in mainstream society” (Osborne, 1996). However, if teachers are going to be able to adopt a culturally responsive pedagogy as their style of teaching, they must learn about their students as individuals. They must learn about their students’ cultures and backgrounds and become aware of their students’ lives outside of the classroom.
One strategy to learn about students’ histories, cultures, and lives outside of school is to invite parents, other family members, and members of the students’ communities to the classroom. When people from the students’ communities come to the classroom to volunteer, lead activities, or make a presentation about some aspect of their community, they are providing teachers and other students with valuable information about the minority students’ cultures. Teachers may also wish to assign homework which is based on the home knowledge of minority students (Online, Multicultural Education Web site). For instance, teachers can assign a “question of the day” which all students must ask their parents and report on their findings the next day. Students might ask their parents about their family trees, where their ancestry lies, why their families came to the United States, or who in their family speaks more than one language. Assignments such as this provide an avenue for minority students to bring to the classroom their home knowledge and skills. They also give minority students a voice in the classroom. They can report on their findings and in their own words describe their cultures and backgrounds. The incorporation of family and community members and the voices of minority students into the classroom values the knowledge and skills found in the lives of the students outside of school. Furthermore, when parents, schools, and communities work together, they enable the student to develop a positive sense of identity as a member of both the home and school cultures (Osborne, 1996). The knowledge teachers acquire about their students’ backgrounds, cultures, and lives through activities such as those suggested above assists them with the development of a culturally responsive pedagogy.
Once teachers know about their students’ cultures and backgrounds, they are able to incorporate those cultures and backgrounds into the classroom. One vital aspect of a culturally responsive pedagogy is the inclusion of students’ first languages in the classroom activities (Osborne, 1996). For instance, Moll and Diaz (1993) conducted a study on the performance of native Spanish speaking students on reading comprehension questions. The students read a passage in English and then were asked in English comprehension questions which they were required to answer in English. The students performed below grade level in this situation. Yet, when the students were allowed to answer the comprehension questions in their first language, they performed at or above grade level. They were able to understand more than they were able to express in the English language. This research suggests that teachers must provide opportunities for English language learners to complete tasks and communicate in their native languages. Furthermore, allowing the students’ first language in the classroom validates that language, the student, and the culture from which the student and language comes. In order to effectively implement a culturally responsive pedagogy, teachers must adapt their teaching strategies to the specific needs of such a pedagogy.
A culturally responsive pedagogy will not be effective if it is implemented in a traditional classroom which stresses competition, individual seatwork, and the existence of one right answer to each question. To allow for the benefits of a culturally responsive pedagogy, teachers must restructure the organization of their classrooms. Teaching practices which are consistent with a culturally responsive pedagogy are those which emphasize cooperative learning rather than competition, provide meaningful contexts for learning rather than the rote memorization of isolated skills, and hold high expectations for all students regardless of their race, socioeconomic status, and background. The cooperative learning activities designed by Spencer Kagan and outlined in his book Cooperative Learning (1992) provide many lessons teachers can implement in their classrooms which are consistent with a culturally responsive pedagogy. Kagan’s exercises provide opportunities for students to develop respect for one another through community building and team building activities. Through activities such as a “People Hunt” in which students must find classmates who meet specific requirements such as a certain number of brothers, students learn about their peers and discover many similarities among one another. They also learn that the differences among them are not insurmountable and that through these differences they have opportunities to learn about each other. In addition, the cooperative learning activities place students in random heterogeneous groups in which each member has a specific job. Each member of the group must contribute in order for the task to be completed. The placement of students in random heterogeneous groups provides them with opportunities to interact with students with whom they may not otherwise interact. These groups also place students in meaningful contexts in which to develop academic and social skills. For example, English learners can be placed in groups with English proficient speakers. The English learners have opportunities to develop their English skills in contexts in which communication, and not the development of specific English skills, is the focus. The development of English skills is contextualized in the activity. English learners increase their proficiency with the language as a by-product of an interaction in which English is used to complete a task (Diaz-Rico and Weed, 1995). Furthermore, small heterogeneous groups provide safe environments for students to take risks in their learning where they can receive the support of their peers. Besides specific examples of the advantages of cooperative learning such as those just described, Kagan (1992) states three other positive effects: academic achievement, improved ethnic relations, and the development of social skills.
Research by Robert Slavin (1983) suggests that although the lowest academic achieving and minority students benefit most from cooperative learning structures, high achieving students also benefit. He suggests that high achieving students tend to perform as well or better in cooperative learning classrooms than they do in traditional classrooms. In the same study, Slavin also found that as cross-ethnic friendships improved in cooperative learning so did students’ social skills. When students are allowed to work together, they increase their social skills, become better able to solve problems which require cooperation, are better able to take the perspective of another, and are more willing to help and support their peers than are students in traditional classrooms. Hence, cooperative learning strategies should be an integral part of the classroom which strives to incorporate the diversity of its students.
As teachers face classrooms filled with students from various backgrounds and cultures, they need a repertoire of skills and instructional strategies on which they can rely to meet the individual needs of their students. Strategies such as cooperative learning, listening to students’ voices, making a home/school/community connection, and utilizing a student’s first language in the classroom all contribute to the development of an effective culturally responsive pedagogy. By utilizing these strategies to implement a culturally responsive pedagogy, teachers appreciate students for their individuality and establish classroom environments where their students feel welcomed and valued. When all students feel that they are valued members of the classroom community, they are likely to want to stay in that community and pursue their educations. Moreover, through the adaption of a culturally responsive pedagogy, teachers create learning environments which accept and include the diversity found in their classrooms. They create classrooms where it is possible for all students to achieve success. Moreover, a culturally responsive pedagogy allows students and teachers to embrace diversity as a gift and to use it as learning tool. The following quote by Elaine Griffin, 1995 Teacher of the Year, illustrates the beauty that can be found when one views diversity as a gift: “The more instruments we have, the more beautiful the music...We should value the diversity we have as one of our biggest strengths” (Online). Teachers must treasure the diversity found in their classrooms and provide environments in which that diversity can flourish.
Bibliography
Bowman, B.T. (1996). Cultural Diversity and Academic Achievement. Online. Available: http://www.ncrel.org/adrs/areas/issues/content/cntareas/math/ma1bowman.htm
Diaz-Rico, Lynne and Kathryn Weed (1995). The Crosscultural, Language, and Academic Development Handbook: A Complete K-12 Reference Guide. Allyn & Bacon, A Simon & Schuster Company, Needham, Massachusetts.
Erickson, Frederick (1993). Transformation and School Success: The Politics and Culture of Educational Achievement. In Minority Education: Anthropological Perspectives. Jacob and Jordan (Eds). Ablex Publishing Company, Norwood, NJ.
Griffin, Elaine. Quote. Online. Available: http://www.ait.net/catalog/catpages/c386.htm
Harklau, Linda (1994). “Jumping Tracks”: How Language-Minority Students Negotiate Evaluations of Ability. Anthropology and Education Quarterly. Vol. 25 (p. 351).
Henry, W. (1990). Beyond the melting pot. Time (April 9): 28-31.
Kagan, Spencer (1992). Cooperative Learning. Resources for Teachers, Inc. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Moll and Diaz (1993). Change as the Goal of Educational Research. In Minority Education: Anthropological Perspective. Jacob and Jordan (Eds). Ablex Publishing Company, Norwood, NJ.
Multicultural Education Web Site. Online. Available: http://guidep.infoseek.com/Education/Teaching...and...learning/Multicultural...education?tid=5579
Ogbu, John (1993). Variability in Minority School Performance: A Problem in Search of an Explanation. In Minority Education: Anthropological Perspectives. Jacob and Jordan (Eds). Ablex Publishing Company, Norwood NJ.
Osborne, B.A. (1996). Practice into theory into practice: culturally relevant pedagogy for students we have marginalized and normalized. Anthropology & Education Quarterly 27 (3): 285-314.
Poplin and Weeres (1992). Voices From The Inside: A Report on Schooling from Inside the Classroom. The Institute for Education in Transformation at The Claremont Graduate School, Claremont, CA.
Slavin, Robert E. (1983). When Does Cooperative Learning Increase Student Achievement? Psychological Bulletin, 1983, 94, 429-445.
