The world has been taken aback by the outrageous statements made by Donald Trump about immigration, people of Color, and Muslims. As a teacher, I see Donald Trump as the non-example of one possessing cross-cultural and critical thinking skills with a deep understanding of different cultures and perspectives, and social-historical-economic patterns of discrimination and oppression. Fortunately, like me, teachers and school leaders around the world want their students to become knowledgeable about different cultures, skilled in cross-cultural understanding, and able to work toward social change for a better world. But how is this accomplished? A common approach taken by schools is to hold a “Multicultural Day” during which classrooms of students create displays of maps and artifacts, and sometimes present a performance, that reflects what the students have learned from their study of a particular “diverse” group or country. But, does this approach to multicultural education meet the goals that teachers and school leaders have for their students? To answer this question, it is important to look at what multicultural education is and the goals it hopes to accomplish.
Multicultural education scholars define multicultural education as education that promotes the affirmation of differences while also addressing issues of inequity and oppression. Knowledge of other people’s lives and customs is only a part of multicultural education and does not provide students with deep understanding of the complex patterns of human interaction that have led to the polarization and marginalization we are seeing played out in our world today.
James Banks, a leader in the field of multicultural education, developed a model for the different approaches to multicultural education that describes the least effective (only scratches the surface) for reaching the goals of multicultural education to the most effective (provides deep understanding and critical thinking and cross cultural skills). Level one of Banks’ approaches is called the Contributions approach, or the Heroes and Holidays approach. This approach requires no alterations to the existing curriculum because one-time events “take care of” teaching children about other cultures. Level two, the Additive approach, is similar to the Contributions approach in that teachers “add” information about a cultural group to units of study but the group is still represented from the dominant group perspective. An example would be indigenous groups being presented as peacefully welcoming “explorers” but leaving out the negative consequences that resulted from this encounter. The final two levels, the Transformative, and the Decision Making and Social Action approaches, differ significantly from the other two levels. In these approaches, teachers research and gather materials to include perspectives and voices not traditionally presented in the curriculum and examine historical roots of racism and oppression. At the Decision Making and Social Action approach, teachers go even further by working with students to take action to make positive changes to address an issue or problem they have studied. These approaches become the curriculum throughout the year and across content areas.
A “multicultural day” can be a fun experience for all involved but research has shown that it is a short walk in a shallow pond that often perpetuates stereotypes instead of developing cross cultural and critical thinking skills in our students. Now, more than ever, we need our current and future generations of citizens and leaders to work to create a world that is inclusive, equitable, and just for all its inhabitants. To achieve this, multicultural education needs to extend throughout the school year and infused into all content areas.