 Scientists have only studied the world in various ways; the point is to change it. ....Marx |
RADICAL PEDAGOGY:
Sponsored by the Red Feather Institute for Advanced Studies in Sociology |
030 CRITICAL MULTICULTURALISM: |
DEMOCRACY AND CRITICAL THINKING IN the CROSS-CULTURAL CLASSROOM |
by
Denise M. Dalaimo Department of Sociology University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Abstract
Since the 1960s, multicultural educators have demanded that our educational institutions and their representatives take seriously the implications and consequences of living in a multiracial and multicultural democracy. Historically, multicultural studies have encouraged us to address traditionally under-represented and excluded cultures, and to consider them on their own terms rather than seeing them through the lens of any single culture. Critical multicultural educators encourage students to see in a variety of ways so that they may begin to understand the com- plex web of intersectional and intercultural relationships in the U.S. today. Contemporary scholars have called for a modification of traditional multicultural education toward a critical multiculturalism which seeks to promote democratic initiatives in curriculum, pedagogy, and social relations in the schools. Critical multiculturalism promotes understanding of -- and participation in -- our diverse society and supports efforts directed toward attaining social, cultural and emotional harmony. After a discussion of the debate surrounding the value of multiculturalism, I analyze qualitative data collected from student papers, exercises and pro- jects; student evaluations of the class, instructor and pedagogical approach; open-ended inter view questions; comments dropped in a suggestion box; field-notes, and; audio tapes of class discussions. Students own words are put to liberal use in order to evoke their many different voices and experiences. Students' comments, questions, concerns and observations are ana- lyzed in relation to: (a) altering the traditional student-teacher power relation, (b) giving voice to previously silenced students, and (c) celebrating diversity. I go beyond the theoretical programmatics of critical multiculturalism to hands-on empirical applications in the undergrad- uate classroom. Practices used include: a democratic and student-centered classroom environ- ment; an emphasis on critical multicultural thinking; regular student evaluations; a suggestion box; voting on class structure, content, and issues; examination options; open class discussion; an exercise which highlights privileges of dominant group members, and; a focus on positive social change.
THE DEBATE OVER MULTICULTURALISM
Since the 1960s, multicultural educators have demanded that our educational institutions and their representatives take seriously the implications and consequences of living in a multiracial and multicultural democracy. However, almost four decades later we continue to be bombarded with calls from the Right for standardized testing, the rejection of multiculturalism, and the development of curricula around a "common culture."
Our country is a branch of European civilization. ... "Euro-centricity" is right, in American curricula and consciousness, because it accords with the facts of our history, and we -- and Europe -- are fortunate for that. The political and moral legacy of Europe has made the most happy and admirable of nations. Saying that may be indelicate, but it has the merit of being true and the truth should be the core of the curriculum (Will 1989, 3).
This comment represents those who believe -- despite our increasingly multicultural and global nature -- that America and the rest of the world can still be unified around the original Western ideas that have been described in Schlesinger's The Disuniting of America as "still a good answer -- still the best hope" (Lemert 1993, 10). A white, male, Harvard, liberal, intellectual, historian, Schlesinger argues "We used to say e pluribus unum. Now we glorify pluribus and belittle unum" (quoted in Feagin and Feagin 1999, 464). Criticisms of diversity are not confined to Will and Schlesinger.
They are only two of many conservative educators whose notion of a common Western culture serves as a yardstick with which to measure and denounce "any attempt by subordinate groups to challenge the narrow ideological and political parameters by which such a culture both defines and expresses itself" (Jackson and Solis 1995, xi). Himself a recent immigrant from India, D'Souza (1991) labels multiculturalism an "illiberal education" which represents a serious threat to education in the U.S. (13).
Critical educators disagree and suggest that to claim unambiguous "Westernness" as the basis of school curricula is to "repress to the dimmest parts of the unconscious a fundamental anxiety concerning the question of African American and other minority identities ... " (McCarthy and Willis 1995, 75). These scholars argue that teachers must increase their understanding on the issues affecting education such as cultural diversity and social justice by developing knowledge and skills that can help them increase their intercultural competence. Cultural diversity programs have done just this, providing a necessary corrective to the dominance of Eurocentric culture. Multicultural studies "have encouraged us to look at traditionally excluded cultures and study them on their own terms rather than seeing them through the eyes of the dominant class" and motivate people "to see in plural ways, so that they are not seeing through the lens of any single culture, but understanding the relationships of cultures to each other" (Andersen in Feagin and Feagin 1999, 465). Empirical research also reveals solid support for a multicultural perspective on U.S. college campuses. According to a 1995 survey of 34,000 professors by the Higher Education Research Institute at the University of California at Los Angeles, fewer and fewer professors believe the classics of Western culture should serve as the foundation for the college curriculum and they are instead supporting diversity and multiculturalism. Only 28% believed teaching Western civilization is essential, down from 35% in 1989. Additionally, more professors have attended workshops on cultural awareness and believe they are sensitive to minority needs (Magner 1996, A12).
One goal of the liberatory classroom is that members learn to respect each other's differences rather than fear them. Such a perspective is ecological and holistic. The classroom becomes an important place to connect to our roots, our past, and to envision the future (Shrewsbury 1993, 8).
Despite the continuing barrage of conservative arguments, many contemporary educators continue to chip away at the stone of Eurocentric hegemony in the classroom. Banks (1988), Giroux (1992), Kanpol and McLaren (1995), McCarthy and Willis (1995) and others have called for a modification of traditional multicultural education toward a critical multiculturalism which seeks to promote democratic initiatives in curriculum, pedagogy, and social relations in the schools. Critical multiculturalism not only promotes understanding of our diverse society, but also supports efforts directed toward attaining social, cultural and emotional harmony. Despite calls for objectivity in the classroom, Giroux (1995) maintains public school curricula cannot be seen as either objective or neutral.
As institutions actively involved in constructing political subjects and presupposing a vision of the future, they must be dealt with in terms that are simultaneously historical, critical, and transformative. The knowledge we attain in school is socially produced, imbued with human interests, and deeply implicated in the unequal relations off-campus (xii).
In addition to an emphasis on social change, a critical multicultural approach to education requires a far more nuanced discussion of the racial identities of minority and majority groups than currently exists in the multicultural literature (McCarthy and Willis 1995, 77). A nonessentialist approach and a consistent focus on the intersectionality of group memberships is another key ingredient in critical multiculturalism. For example, contemporary feminist and multicultural scholars have argued against the use of the essential Woman in feminist theory and scholarship because that Woman does not represent the majority of women in the world. bell hooks (1984) argues that the contemporary feminist movement is largely by, for, and about "a select group of college-educated, middle and upper class, married white women -- housewives bored with leisure, with the home, with children, with buying products, who wanted more out of life" (1). hooks maintains:
... white women who dominate feminist discourse today rarely question whether or not their perspective on women's reality is true to the lived experiences of women as a collective group. Nor are they aware of the extent to which their perspectives reflect race and class biases, although there has been a greater awareness of biases in recent years. Racism abounds in the writings of white feminists, reinforcing white supremacy and negating the possibility that women will bond politically across ethnic and racial boundaries (1984, 3).
The intersections of race, ethnicity, class, gender and national identities together create
different and varying life experiences for individuals. Our quality of life, social status, and
lifestyle -- our values, behaviors, and expectations -- all reproduce and reflect our simultaneous
and intertwining group memberships. An upper class white woman cannot expect to speak for
a working class Latina, nor can a middle class Asian American man expect to understand the
plight of a poor black mother and her children. Evidence of different social relationships due
to various intersections of race, class, and sexuality can also be seen in the long history of
tension and hostility between the black and white working classes in the United States, while
relationships between black and white members of the middle classes are much less strained,
as well as in the internal conflicts within and among various gay, lesbian, and bisexual
communities.
Controversy over a range of diversity issues -- from the dismantling of affirmative action to movements to make English the only official language -- is likely to increase. However, while the debate over the value of multiculturalism rages on, the demographic reality remains that by 2025 in the states of California, Texas, New Mexico, and Hawaii Americans of color will constitute the majority of the population. Furthermore, New York, New Jersey, and Florida, along with five other states, are projected to be more than 40 percent people of color. What does this mean for American students and teachers? No later than 2040, the U.S. educational system will be predominantly composed of students of color (Feagin and Feagin 1999, 472). Such population changes will provide major challenges to the traditional structure, process, and curriculum of public schools. Critical scholars Feagin and Feagin (1999) argue "As voting constituencies change, the composition of juries and justice systems, educational systems, and other government agencies are likely to change as well" (473). When students and teachers of color gain more and more organizational and political power, discrimination against previously marginalized groups is not likely to be tolerated.
However, we cannot rely on legislation to yield morality. All too often anti-discrimination decisions and laws have gone unenforced, and civil rights laws do not incorporate -- and therefore cannot eliminate -- many forms of subtle discrimination that persist today. Critical multiculturalism is imperative to contemporary education because it emphasizes the importance of respecting and understanding the many racial and ethnic groups and subcultures -- especially non-Europeans -- that have contributed to U.S. development. Despite protests from conservative educators, it is inevitable that schools become more concerned with issues surrounding diversity. Even former critic Nathan Glazer (1997) concedes in the title of his new book that We are All Multiculturalists Now. Though he continues to argue against new government action to end persisting discrimination, even Glazer nebulously accepts the end of white European dominance in the U.S.
As educators, we need to begin to see social, economic, and political issues in global and relational terms, i.e. in the context of what Wallerstein (1990) calls "World System's Theory." A world systems approach to social movements, for example, calls attention to the interrelatedness of Americans with the rest of the world. McCarthy and Willis (1995) maintain "the civil rights movement in the United States has had profound multiplier effects on the expansion of democratic practices to excluded groups in Australia, the Caribbean, Africa, and England, as well as in the United States itself" (75-76). The increasingly multicultural and global nature of our society and the complex interrelations of social systems demand that we address how the university classroom can become a site for cultural democracy. Critical multicultural educators need a language that emphasizes how social identities and categories are constructed within unequal power relations in societal institutions. For example, "Westernness" is a powerful ideological construct which is difficult to fully understand without being familiar with the concepts of "hegemony" and "privilege". McCarthy and Willis (1995) assert, "a new approach must begin with a more systematic critique of the construction of school knowledge and privileging of Eurocentrism and Westernness [italics added] in the American school curriculum" (74).
Theoretical Influences
Since Paulo Freire's (1970) revolutionary work Pedagogy of the Oppressed, "radical" (critical/feminist/multicultural) educators have endeavored to change the face of education by altering the student-teacher power relation toward a more democratic, emancipatory form and by including the work and experiences of previously under- or un-represented groups. Critical pedagogues tend to take a theoretical and political approach to education, focusing on the needs and autonomy of individual students, and emphasizing the importance of critical thinking (Freire 1970, 1985, 1994; Giroux 1983, 1988; McLaren 1989; Shor 1980, 1992). While feminist and multicultural educators share these theoretical and political concerns, they concentrate their focus on linking macro-social. elements of gender, racial/ethnic, and sexual discrimination and oppression with the micro-social elements of the classroom (Aptheker 1993; hooks 1984; Kanpol 1995; Lewis 1990; Luke 1994; Maher and Tetrault 1994; Rich 1979; Scanlon 1993; Schieder 1993; Spelman 1985).
Despite differences within and among discourses of radical pedagogy, a look at their central claims reveals many commonalties. Both critical and feminist pedagogy emphasize student voice and experience (Berry and Black 1987; Freire 1970; Giroux 1988; Lewis 1990; Maher 1985, 1987; McLaren 1989; hooks 1981, 1984, 1994) assert the objectives of self and social empowerment toward broader social transformation (Culley and Portuges 1985; Freire 1970; Giroux 1988; Shor 1992; Shor and Freire 1987); address teachers' authority and struggle with the contradictions inherent in the notion of authority for emancipation (Bright 1987, 1993; Friedman 1985; Giroux 1988; Maher 1985, 1987; Morgan 1987; Shor and Freire 1987; Spelman 1985); are linked to political and social movements that seek to erase multiple forms of oppression (Freire 1970; Giroux 1988; Luke and Gore 1995; McLaren 1989); and suggest similar classroom practices (Bell 1987; Freire 1970; Maher 1985; Mumford 1985; Schniedewind 1987).
Recent research in critical multicultural education addresses historically marginalized groups, including Jewish women, women of color, white lesbians, and lesbians of color (Aptheker 1993; Baxandall, Gordon and Dusan 1976; Beck 1982; hooks 1984; Omolade 1993; Schieder 1993; Sedgwick 1990). In addressing people's differences research has become highly specialized, and addresses the often asked questions regarding specific pedagogical practices. For example, research topics have included: teaching about African-American women writers to mainly white students; teaching women's studies in Third World countries; teaching math and sciences (also to children with special needs); bilingual education; teaching the Native American student, and; research in multicultural pedagogy (Kanpol 1995; Shrewsbury 1993). Briefly, common practices among radical pedagogues include: journal-keeping; action research (i.e. getting the students actively involved in producing new knowledge by working on original research with other students or the instructor and/or getting involved in local political struggles); discourse centered around empowerment/authority; an emphasis on a democratic process; shared leadership (students may help prepare, lecture in, and/or "run" the class); periodic small-group sessions; the use of first names for instructors as well as students; 'reflection papers' in which students can analyze issues -- or the class itself -- in a self- reflective manner; cooperative projects, and; collective modes of teaching with student participation. All of these practices are meant to alter the student-teacher power relation by engaging in a democratic classroom while assisting students in finding their social and political voices.
Critical Multicultural Pedagogies
One goal of the liberatory classroom is that members learn to respect each
other's differences rather than fear them. Such a perspective is ecological
and holistic. The classroom becomes an important place to connect to our
roots, our past, and to envision the future (Shrewsbury 1993, 8).
Critical multiculturalism is a culmination of years of hard work of critical, feminist, multicultural and postmodern thinkers and educators (Ellsworth 1989; hooks 1994; Kanpol and McLaren 1995; Lather 1991; Lewis 1990; Luke and Gore 1995). This pedagogical approach parallels a broader shift in political movements from focusing on the commonalties among specific groups to a perspective which addresses the differences between them. Using the women's movement as an example, its focus which had so long been on the "essential" Woman, ignored differences within and among all women, thereby excluding women of color and ethnic minorities, lesbians, women in Third World countries, and women in the lower economic strata. Critics argue that liberatory movements have traditionally reflected a white, middle-class value system, have excluded minorities, the oppressed, the marginalized, and the poor, and are therefore unlikely to have either a lasting influence on attitudes and behaviors, or to have radical implications beyond the school. Some critical educators maintain that there is little engagement, discussion, critique or analysis of the totalizing discourses of feminist and critical pedagogies themselves, and argue against the idea of a grand theory of education emphasizing the contextual, the local, and the particular. Jennifer Gore (1993) declares, "The extent to which these 'pedagogies' are 'non-traditional,' let alone specifically 'feminist,' is questionable" (79). She emphasizes instead, an "authority-with" rather than "authority-over" approach. In other words, traditional teacher/student power relations are still retained in the approaches traditionally taken by many critical and feminist pedagogues. Gore writes:
the potential for relations of power operating within feminist pedagogy to have dominating effects becomes clearer; for example, when feminist perspectives or "readings" become the only valid course content, we can see how the power relations of men and women, teacher and student, feminist and non-feminist become actualized (1993, 80).
It is in the spirit of having "authority-with" my students that I continue to research and write on the topic of critical multiculturalism. Democracy can be problematic for educators working within the traditional structure of public education, especially when it comes to issues of authority. The philosophy that has worked for me over the years has been the advice given me by mentor and radical pedagogue T.R. Young (1998): Authority of knowledge is acceptable, authority of position is not. In addition to a democratic, student-centered classroom, recent research in critical multiculturalism reveals three other fundamental foci including the celebration of diversity, the emphasis on voice, and the questioning of textual authority.
The concept of difference
Contemporary humanity speaks in many voices and we know now that it will do so for a very long time to come. The central issue of our times is how to re-forge that polyphony into harmony and prevent if from degenerating into cacophony. harmony is not uniformity; it is always an interplay of a number of different motifs, each retaining its separate identity and sustaining the resulting melody through, and thanks to, that identity (Young 1993, 284).
In contrast to traditional education which ignores context and reasserts science and religion as universal forms of knowledge (Toulmin 1990), critical multiculturalism affirms diversity of all kinds: religious; ethnic; political; economic; familial; cultural; and even relational. Aronowitz and Giroux (1991) point out that from the postmodernist perspective, modernism's claim to authority "partly serves to privilege Western patriarchal culture, on the one hand, while simultaneously repressing and marginalizing the voices of those who have been deemed subordinate or subjected to relations of oppression because of their color, class, ethnicity, race, or cultural and social capital" (115). In postmodernity, everything is subjective and unique to particular contexts, circumstances and life experiences.
Critical educator Joe Kinchloe (1993) argues that a "homogenous community often is unable to criticize the injustice and exclusionary practices that afflict a social system" (67). Recent research on multicultural small groups supports this claim, revealing that heterogeneous (culturally diverse) groups produce solutions of higher quality than do homogenous groups (Schaefer and Lamm 1995, 148). Instead of basing ideas, discussions, and/or decisions in the classroom on purist categories, in a heterogeneous group concepts become hybrid constructions of ideas which allow for many different voices to be heard. This, in turn, allows for coalition politics, where members of different groups can come together and work toward a particular task without abandoning their individual group identities. Addressing criticisms of essentialism in identity politics, Young (1993) advises that we remember we are not only different across groups but also within groups.
Voice
'Voice' refers to the ways in which students produce meaning through the various subject positions that are available to them in the wider society. In effect, voice is organized through the cultural resources and codes that anchor and organize experience and subjectivity. It is important to stress that students do not have a singular voice, which suggests a static notion of identity and subjectivity. On the contrary, student voices are constituted in multi-layered, complex, and often contradictory discourses (Aronowitz and Giroux 1991, 100).
Education is part of a discourse that is sensitive to power, and usually those who have the power have the "loudest" voices. The issue of 'voice' draws attention to the ideological and cultural dynamics that enable people to define themselves and to speak out as part of a broader social and cultural context. Aronowitz and Giroux (1991) argue " ... voices forged in opposition and struggle provide the crucial conditions by which subordinate individuals and groups reclaim their own memories, stories, and histories as part of an ongoing attempt to challenge those power structures that attempt to silence them" (101). They maintain students need to find their own voices so they can retell their histories in their own words, based on their own experiences and not the experiences of the dominant group. In so doing they may "check and criticize the history [they] are told against the one [they] have lived" (104).
Textual authority
A related goal of critical Multi-culturalists is to provide students with an understanding of how knowledge and power come together in the reading and writing of texts. Aronowitz and Giroux (1991) assert:
... teachers must be concerned with the interrelationship of text and language as a form of cultural politics that opens up the notion of reading and writing to the study of wider considerations of institutional power and the struggle for social and economic justice (104).
According to this view, students should take up a critical analysis of any document or material by being able to recognize the plurality of meanings in a text and to challenge the obvious interpretations. They should read the text from the position of their own experiences and should examine the ways in which the text is constructed within dominant social relations. Students may do this by identifying the cultural codes that structure an author's work; by using a variety of diverse interpretations that represent an alternative commentary on the text, and by analyzing the text in terms of its absences, thereby "explod[ing] the cultural codes of the text through assertions of the reader's own textual power" (Aronowitz and Giroux 1991, 107). Only in this way can students free themselves from the text by finding a position outside the assumptions upon which the text is based.
The notion of textual authority can be used either to silence students by denying their voices -- that is, by refusing to allow them to speak from their own histories, experiences, and social positions -- or it can enable them to speak by being attentive to how different voices can be constituted within specific pedagogical relations so as to engage their histories and experiences in both an affirmative and a critical way (Aronowitz and Giroux 1991, 101).
A student-centered classroom offers an environment in which textual authority can be challenged. Critics of textual authority argue that a language of critique must be developed in order to contextualize and problematize the ideologies and normative underpinnings of the text.
Common strategies/techniques
Despite differences within and among discourses of critical multicultural pedagogies, a look at their central claims reveals many commonalties: they emphasize student voice and experience (Berry and Black 1987); they assert the objectives of self and social empowerment toward broader social transformation (Culley and Portuges 1985; Freire 1973, 1994; Giroux 1983, 1988a; Kanpol and McLaren 1995); they address teachers' authority and struggle with the contradictions inherent in the notion of authority for emancipation (Bright 1993; Friedman 1985; Maher and Tetrault 1994; Morgan 1987; Spelman 1985); they are linked to political and social movements that seek to erase multiple forms of oppression (Freire 1970; Giroux 1988a; hooks 1994; Luke and Gore 1995); and many suggest similar classroom practices (Bell 1987; Mumford 1985; Schniedewind 1993; Shor 1988).
Briefly, postmodernist pedagogical prescriptions include: journal keeping; action research, i.e. getting the students actively involved in producing new knowledge by working on original research with the other students or the instructor, or getting involved in local political struggles; discourse centered around empowerment and/or authority; an emphasis on a democratic (rather than an authoritarian) process; shared leadership, i.e. students may help prepare, lecture in, and/or "run" the class; periodic small-group sessions; the use of first names for instructors as well as students; 'reflection papers' in which students can analyze social and political issues -- or the class itself -- in a self-reflective manner; cooperative projects, and; collective modes of teaching with student participation. All of these practices are meant to alter the student-teacher and student-text power relation by engaging in a democratic classroom, emphasizing critical thinking, and assisting students in finding their social and political voices.
While there has been much philosophizing and theorizing as to the goals and theories of contemporary critical multicultural pedagogies, we are still left with many questions. As discussed above, a literature review in this area reveals the goals of radical pedagogies and even a few techniques that may be used to facilitate a more democratic classroom. Although some recent literature does address the content and process of contemporary pedagogies, most of the empirical research (usually ethnographic) has been done in the small and intimate classroom -- usually in Women's Studies departments or at small Liberal Arts colleges. Conspicuous by its absence is any body of research applying the theories and techniques of radical pedagogy to the mainstream higher education classroom which commonly accommodates between 30 and 300 students. For instance, the average overworked educator - - who teaches three or four classes a term while trying to research, publish and serve on committees -- does not have time to grade 90 papers or journals per week, not to mention 900. In the course of my research I have implemented various radical pedagogical techniques in different classes in an attempt to ascertain which practices can be adapted to the larger, more impersonal, mainstream university classroom. The results of these efforts will be discussed in the empirical portion of this paper.
Methodology
My pedagogical approach combines practices and philosophies of critical, feminist and multicultural pedagogies. Its main thrust is to nurture critical and multicultural thinking in a student-centered classroom, while explicating the macro-micro connections of social, political and economic processes with the divers life experiences of various groups, cultures and societies. The structure and process of my classes involve democracy and critical thinking. Through a consistently inclusive curriculum students develop an awareness of the diversity of our society and the global processes that affect us. Through democracy students learn they have power and a voice in their education and consequently in their lives. Through a focus on class discussion students discover they can do more than just memorize what others have written, they can create their own knowledge in their own voices. While my research has been primarily in the sociology classroom this approach is interdisciplinary. Regardless of the content of the course being taught, this process works well in any classroom. The goal of my research has been to develop what might be referred to as a critical intercultural imagination. In the twenty-first century, one must be prepared to see the connections between the apparently private problems of the individual and important social issues through a multicultural and global lens. Preliminary data reveal that this pedagogical approach has (1) increased students' awareness of multicultural and global issues; (2) included the lives, experiences, and voices of previously marginalized group members as valid and important sources of knowledge; and (3) revealed the relationships between multicultural and global processes, structures of inequality, and individual lives.
This research was in conducted in a variety of courses, including Introduction to Sociology, Social Problems, and Social Inequalities with student enrollments ranging from 19 to 47. I have facilitated these classes in a manner that has been as consistent as possible with the theories and philosophies of critical multiculturalism. Students in these classes were informed of the goals of critical multiculturalism and that I was conducting research in class. I have tried to make the students feel a part of the research as much as possible by explaining each step of the project, from gathering demographic data at the beginning to asking for "qualitative data" throughout the term. During my research I have taken field notes and kept a research journal. In addition, I have received constant feedback from students -- both in class through discussions and anonymously by evaluations and the use of a suggestion box -- in an attempt to be as democratic as possible. It has been my hope that these techniques have helped me to be self-reflexive and responsive in my teaching style, as well as enhanced my own critical thinking skills. With this constant input I have been better prepared to meet the needs of the students by changing things that receive bad comments/reactions and fine-tuning those things that seemed not only most effective in evoking the spirit of critical multiculturalism, but that the students enjoyed and felt comfortable with.
I have attempted to allow for a broad number of coexisting discourses, voices, and realities. This has entailed trying to empathize with students' experiences through their own eyes, hearts and minds. I have done this by providing a variety of ways in which students can voice their feelings, concerns and opinions. First, in-class discussion was emphatically encouraged and student evaluations revealed discussions to be some of the most interesting, thought-provoking and controversial moments of the course. Next, a suggestion box was always kept at the back of class so those students who did not feel comfortable speaking out or asking questions in class could still have their voices heard. Finally, students had the opportunity to make two semi-formal anonymous class evaluations so they could comment on any or all aspects of the classroom, text, instructor, or material.
EVOCATIONS OF THE CRITICAL/DEMOCRATIC CLASSROOM
In the empirical portion of this chapter I have relied heavily upon qualitative data gathered over the course of my research from student evaluations of the class, instructor and pedagogical approach; open-ended interview questions; comments dropped in the suggestion box, and; audio tapes of class discussions, in order to evoke the voices and experiences of the students. Students' voices are represented here in italics. In this next section, I will reveal and analyze students' comments, questions, concerns and observations in relation to (1) altering the traditional student-teacher power relation; (2) giving voice to previously silenced students; and (3) celebrating diversity.
Altering the Traditional Student-Teacher Power Relation
Setting the Tone
The first day of class plays a pivotal role in setting the tone for the rest of the term. During the first class meeting I always try to provide and encourage a relaxed atmosphere. I introduce myself and tell the students they can call me by my first name if they wish -- although many still choose to address me by my surname. I discuss my research and their roles in it and I explain that the overall goals of this non-traditional teaching style are to be as democratic as possible; to include previously non- or under-represented and marginalized groups in the curriculum and discussions; to facilitate a student-centered classroom, and; to nurture and enhance critical thinking as a tool for social change. The syllabus reflects the critical/democratic theme of the course by emphasizing our focus on multiculturalism, critical thinking and social change and by giving the students options as to how they preferred to be evaluated. As I will reveal later in this chapter, the examination options proved to be an overwhelming success. Students loved having a choice and many said they wished they had this option in all of their classes.
I consistently emphasize the importance of democracy, critical thinking and social change. We discuss that we all have a lot to learn from each other and that I -- as the instructor -- was not the omniscient leader or the "keeper of knowledge." I emphasize the importance of each and every one of their personal experiences and perspectives. I explain to students that throughout the term we will discuss and analyze different social issues, and that many of us will have different opinions and distinct ways of approaching situations based on our past experiences and our own worldviews. I stress the fact that each person's opinion is valid, that there is no right or wrong answer or question and that given the discussion-based nature of the class we all had to be careful not to be cruel or insulting or to monopolize any discussion. Students like the open and critical atmosphere of the class and enjoy learning from different perspectives.
What I probably like best about the class is how open and honest we can be. I ... feel like my opinion is ... important and needed. Everything I have to say is always listened to and responded ... to. It's really nice to have the honest and appreciated feedback.[The instructor]'s example of an open mind allows us to also see the world that way.
There are two standing rules in my classes which I believe are imperative to the success of a discussion-based classroom: First, we all must be respectful of each other's lives, experiences, opinions, group memberships and feelings. Many educators are wary of a democratic classroom because discussions have the potential to get out of hand and even hurtful. Having made this rule clear on day one, I am usually able to re-direct the tone of the discussion by simply writing the word "Respect" on the board.
Some discussions were a little touchy, but that's what makes up all the different cultures and subcultures. I liked your point about, "state your fact and move on, don't keep restating" trying to convince everyone your point is correct.
The second rule of class discussion is that students make their point and supporting statements once and do not try to persuade others of your point of view. This works fairly well in keeping students from arguing with each other and from going off on tangents, but -- like the respect rule -- needs to be reiterated from time to time. Additionally, at the beginning of every class meeting I put an outline on the board so students can get a general idea of the day's lesson plan. Before I introduce any new material I always ask for and address questions, comments, concerns and suggestions from previous classes, discussions, or readings.
Democracy
Overwhelmingly, students believed the class to be more democratic than others they had taken in the past. They liked the fact that we voted on many issues, and many felt more comfortable participating in class construction and discussion due to the casual atmosphere. I have found that a casual and accessible demeanor goes a long way to make students feel more comfortable in the classroom. These students commented:
This class is very open to discussion and freedom of thought. It's nice to know we can come in and state our own opinions and attitudes towards a subject without being penalized. I've really enjoyed your style of teaching and it's refreshing to have a professor that actually shows respect for her students.The instructor gives a feeling of welcome to the class. It's a relaxing atmosphere and [she] is very open-minded.I really enjoy the way that you run the class sessions with a little more relaxed atmosphere than other classes. I think that there will be more student input.I feel the information is presented to us in a professional manner and without the need to intimidate us. We are able to interact with you and other members of the class which allows us to apply the knowledge we have learned and helps us to develop critical thinking skills.
If students are intimidated by the instructor, they will not feel as comfortable participating in class discussion or even asking questions. Granted, my status as a graduate teaching assistant was helpful in putting the students at ease because they tended to perceive me as "one of them."
I have never been in a class where a grad student teaches, but what a difference. You have a fresh approach to the subject you are teaching which makes the learning much more interesting.
Some Professors are intimidating just by the way they act, buy you seem to relate to your students.
It was clear that the democratic and student-centered approach was distinctly different from what students were familiar with.
I think the idea of teaching while working with us instead of preaching to us is a step in the right direction [towards a democratic classroom]. I've had a couple of classes where there was no student interaction and it just doesn't keep my attention or interest.It is good when the students are able to speak their mind; that helps to see the whole picture. ... Authoritative classrooms, I feel, make a student feel less of a person. You teach like you are one of us.
By giving the students more control over what and how we learned I hope to alter the teacher- student power relation in the classroom. As students become more comfortable, they participate more in class and subsequently get more out of it. I do not believe we would have such great in class discussions if the students were made to feel powerless or subordinate to me or to each other.
Voting
While I decide which texts we use in class and provide a skeleton course outline, students vote on particulars at the beginning of the term, including: which readings will be omitted; how many and what types of exams we will have (i.e. objective/multiple choice exams, in-class essays or take-home essays); whether attendance and participation will count as part of the overall grade; the length and focus of the term paper; whether or not students have to turn in definitions of key concepts and issues; what portion of the overall grade will writings, exercises and exams be worth, and; whether or not there will be extra credit, oral presentations, or student teaching. In addition, students have the opportunity to raise issues and propose a class vote at any point during the semester. One semester it became apparent we were trying to cover too much material in too little time. While I insisted on covering the chapters on Race/Ethnicity, Class, Gender, and Social Change, the class voted on which of the remaining readings we would omit (which included Population/Demography and Aging). This was one of those rare times when I felt I had to exercise my authority over them as opposed to having authority with them. However, the overall goals of the classroom could not have been met without discussion of the issues found in these chapters. Overall, voting on class issues and structure made the students feel they had a voice in their education.
I think the instructor is willing to hear options and we do have a vote.
Although students were not always happy with the way the votes went, they were still pleased
with the process.
I was disappointed that we cut out three chapters in the class, but it was democratically voted and I wouldn't want to have cut out any of the other activities.
Examination options
The option for students to choose the method by which they were evaluated was an overwhelming success. To reiterate, students were able to choose how many (two or three) and what type of examinations (objective, in-class essay or take-home essay) they would take. In each class I have taught, students voted to have an individual choice of exam type, i.e. students could take the same type of exam each time, or they could choose to blend their options among the three choices. Between 66% and 75% of students chose to take objective (multiple-choice) exams. Of those who took essay exams, roughly 20% chose to take the more lengthy and complex take-home exam. It is a lot of extra work having to write and evaluate three different exams, but the rewards are well worth it. Students are given the power to choose the method by which they will be evaluated and this makes them feel more responsible for their own learning.
The idea of choosing your own way of being graded is very interesting. Once you've chosen the testing method, I think it gives you a challenge. You made the choice, now make it work.I have never experienced [evaluation options] before and feel it is the most "fair" way to grade.The grading options are different, but it made me feel like I had more of a decision in my education.
Many students who chose to be evaluated through the take-home essay exams commented on how much more they learned during this process versus in-class exams.
The evaluation options are the best part of this class and make it more democratic. For myself, I am not a memorizer of terms or ideas. It is much easier to bring together knowledge learned in a reaction paper rather than cramming for an essay or multiple choice test.
Again, not everyone was completely happy. This student commented she was made to feel like a "slacker" by choosing the objective examination option.
The method of picking our own way of being evaluated is very interesting and exciting, however, I felt as if the people who took the objective exam were made to feel not as "smart"' or "achieving" as those that chose the other options. I've really begun to buy into the fact that I am somehow a "slacker" because I chose the "easy" route. However, I don't think that you realize that you're doing this. Other than that, I appreciate you opening my mind to new topics.
On day one when the evaluation options were explained and discussed, we talked about the options as a way of allowing different students to excel in ways best suited to them. On the syllabus it states "Recognizing the different and varied ways in which each of us excel, and in an effort to be as fair as possible, students may choose between four alternative methods by which they will be evaluated for this class". When asked, I had mentioned that I would probably pick the reaction papers because it was less studying and memorizing the text book which I personally found more difficult than discussing and analyzing concepts and issues in an essay exam. I tried to convey the idea that no type of exam was better than the other. After I received this comment I reiterated in class that each evaluation option is different but equal. The evaluation options were a very popular part of class, and I would like to continue offering them. Many students commented on feeling more involved in, and having more power over their education. However, in a class larger than 20 or 25 students, it may not be feasible to have evaluation options without teaching assistants due to the heavy workload it entails.
Giving Voice to Previously Silenced Students
Suggestion Box
The suggestion box proved to be another favorite among the students. Many commented on how much they enjoyed the opportunity to have an anonymous voice in the class given the often sensitive issues that we discussed. Others mentioned they appreciated hearing what other students had to say, and the reading and addressing of suggestions and comments became a favorite ritual at the beginning of each class. In one class we went two weeks without any comments in the box, and finally a student dropped one in.
Why haven't the contents of the comment box been read lately? This is another part of the class I like. It's good to hear what other students are thinking.
This was a good indicator of the role the suggestion box had taken in our class. It was nice to hear someone enjoyed that part so much that he or she missed it. Other students were thankful for the option to drop an anonymous question in and forego the embarrassment of bringing attention to his- or herself in class.
Being able to discuss issues and give opinions makes [the class] very student-centered. If you are too shy to speak up in class you can drop a question or comment into the box at the back of the room.
In most social science classes we are usually required to participate vocally in class for a grade. I personally am not comfortable speaking in front of class and learn more by listening. I was glad to see this wasn't required.
Critics of the suggestion box argue that it merely encourages students not to talk in class, but I have found it an essential tool to give voice to traditionally silenced students who may not participate in class discussion otherwise. I do, however, continue to encourage all students to participate vocally in class. The suggestion box is also beneficial when discussing sensitive issues such as race, ethnicity, gender, or sexuality. Students can anonymously share personal experiences, ask questions or make comments without fear of reprisals from other students or myself. After a discussion of racial and ethnic inequalities and seeing the film "Ethnic Notions: Black Images in White Minds" these comments were left in the box:
I thought it was interesting how these stereotypical images of blacks helped to perpetuate the notion that slavery was somehow "okay." Isn't it interesting how our white ancestors really pulled the wool over their own eyes -- fooling themselves. I wonder what images we laugh at today that really serve to make immoral practices, such as slavery, seem "okay" -- do we even know that it is happening?We as one race (the human race) cannot dwell on past mistakes. What we need to do now is work towards a happier and more peaceful future ... I nor anyone else can change the past, but we can make the future. Imagine the possibilities that we as a class could open up if the end of racism, towards all races and genders, started with us. A few deviants can do more than ever imagined.
This is the kind of thing I love to see. These students are actually thinking about the consequences of stereotypes and inequality. Some students come to perceive a critical multi-culturalism classroom as a springboard for social change.
This course was more sensitive to understanding differing cultural aspects and approaches to life. It did expand my ideas of other cultures and allowed me to be open to other different cultural aspects I may encounter later.The teacher ... had a talent or gift in which she would make students evaluate themselves. A lot of times I found that there were ways about myself that I did not like. ... this affected my daily life.
I received this next note in the suggestion box, from a 20ish Hispanic male who had written some great reaction papers relating sociological principles to gang culture and rap music:
... Sociology shows the harsh realities of life and society. Even though the world is life and society, the world as a whole isn't ready for what sociology has to offer, which is reality. It's funny, people in higher, more "respected" places re-word stereotypes in order to address the public in a "proper" manner. Why? What better way to address people than with reality? In my old neighborhood as well as several others, there's a slang type of saying, "keep it real." I respect that about your class. You keep things real.
After discussing inequality in education, a male student of color dropped off this comment:
Your comment about school funding was great. Sometimes I think I'm one of the only people who realize that this is a fundamental problem of education. I had to move from my house in Los Angeles to an affluent suburb because I knew I would get a better education in High School.
Despite critics' claims that the use of a suggestion box in the classroom encourages students not to speak, I have not found this to be true. Perhaps it is because of the student-centered and democratic atmosphere in our classroom. On the contrary, I have found a suggestion box facilitates dialogue on a more personal level, and it provides me with some valuable feedback.
Student Evaluations
Twice during the semester -- once four weeks into the class, and once three weeks prior to finals -- I ask students for their feedback on specific questions and issues. Student input is pivotal to the goals of the critical/democratic classroom. Prior to the evaluations I explain that in keeping with the exploratory nature of critical multiculturalism it is imperative to get feedback for their sake as students and as citizens, for my sake as an educator, and for the sake of the research. Initially, the first evaluation was held in-class and the students were given 15 minutes. They were told that the evaluation was a voluntary and anonymous event, and that those participating should be completely honest -- to give negatives as well as positives of the class -- about the text, lectures, films, the instructor, and discussions. I then made some suggestions of things they might want to address. These included: test content and form; lecture content and form; teacher performance (knowledge, clarity, attitude, accessibility); how can the class be improved?; do you feel you have input?; comparison with other classes/instructors; thoughts on teaching method (critical thinking; evaluation options; democratic classroom?), and; is knowledge neutral? I emphasized that they should only address those things they had an opinion about and not to feel as if they had to say something about each of these issues. I let them know they could add whatever they wanted to this list, that this was simply a guideline. Subsequent evaluations were taken home instead of given in class. This adaptation was in response to student input that they would have liked to have spent more time on the evaluation, as well as my own feelings that they may be more honest if they did not have to complete the evaluation while I was present. I will never know if this was the case, but I do know that the ratio of evaluations to students enrolled decreased significantly when it was a take-home project. In the following sections I reveal and analyze some class issues as they emerged through evaluations, discussions, and various comments throughout the semester.
Class Discussions
Overall, most students reacted favorably to the time we had for in-class discussions. For many, it was stimulating and enlightening to hear what their fellow students had to say on controversial social issues.
It is interesting hearing the discussions in class because I hear people that agree with me on various subjects and I hear opposing views. (I always wondered who the type of people were that had opposing views!)I think the time we have for discussion is very valuable. It gives me the chance to know what others are feeling and thinking; it helps tune me in with the world around me.
Class discussion over debatable subjects makes you more open-minded and more understanding towards what goes on in society today and how we as individuals influence it. ... I feel comfortable participating in class because the instructor encourages it. It gives me more than one perspective about any given situation.
However, there is an inherent danger in having open class discussions and in the preliminary stages of my research the line between hearty debate and outright anarchy was occasionally blurred.
Open discussions provided for the best parts of the class the student participation was intense, humorous, revealing, and at times frightening.
On the heels of the Brown-Simpson/Goldman murders classroom debate became particularly tense after an emotional discussion about race, ethnicity and the justice system.
It seems the discussions are controlled by ... white males and they tend to dominate the discussion. Minorities are under-represented in the class and sometimes excluded from the discussion because of what is said.I have participated in some class discussions, but we have some people in the class that tend to try and dominate during these discussions. You probably cannot do anything about this, but perhaps this will change ... I hope more people will speak up!It seems like whenever the class interacts it turns into everyone trying to defend their own race or gender or accuse others.
In one class there was a white male in his mid-twenties who continually made racist and sexist comments in a very vocal manner and a white female about the same age who sat next to him and always agreed with him -- sometimes making supporting comments herself. Various other students would try to explain their points of view to them, but they never seemed to hear what was being said and would only raise the volume while they reiterated their previous comments.
Students were obviously exasperated by their inability to listen to other viewpoints as evident in the rolling of eyes, shaking of heads, and throwing up of hands. I had to repeatedly write the word "respect" on the board and to reiterate that we were not here to persuade others of our opinions. These two students remained on my roster, but did not show up for the last six weeks of class. After their departure, discussions improved dramatically and we all had a lot of fun and learned a lot from each other. This type of situation is somewhat common in classes that discuss sensitive issues and remains a fear of many educators in these situations. While I felt badly that these two students felt the need to boycott our class, I am -- by necessity -- teaching to and learning with the many, not the few. I realized that whenever the situation became precarious it was always the result of one or two outspoken individuals who tended to vociferously dominate class discussions. However, by changing the focus of the subject matter and specifically asking for diverse experiences and knowledges, these few boisterous individuals found they could not be "experts" on everything. Regardless of a few "bad eggs," students seem to understand the sensitive nature of class discussions and remain supporters of a student-centered approach.
I admire [the instructor's] effort in trying to understand everyone, although the issues we discuss are touchy most of the time. I appreciate the opportunity to speak out and share the opinions of others especially on the important social issues.I love hearing everyone's views on different subjects, although I wouldn't want to be in your position having to try to keep peace.It is nice the way you direct the class into an area and let us discuss different aspects of the topic. Hopefully we well all gain knowledge from each other.
Many class discussions about sensitive issues were initiated by a question dropped anonymously in the suggestion box. I do not believe this comment would have been made were it not anonymous.
One question I have wanted to ask is why some people find it acceptable to have interracial marriages. I personally don't think it is appropriate for Blacks and Whites to marry. I don't see anything wrong with Whites marrying Asians, North American Indians or Mexicans. But when if comes to Blacks and Whites marrying it just seems wrong to me. if there is any way you could offer any opinions in class I would be very interested in hearing an objective way of looking at this.
I addressed this comment in the next class meeting, when we were discussing family. We had a great discussion about interracial marriages during which almost everyone in class participated. It was enlightening and very productive. The best part was that the emphasis was on cross-cultural norms and trends, not just what happens in the U.S. Also, we heard from two students (one male, one female, both in their early twenties) who were products of interracial marriages. We discussed how they were treated by their families, friends, society, etc., and also how ethnocentrism, socialization and the institution of marriage played a role in our beliefs on the issue. After this discussion, one student put this note in the suggestion box.
I would like to see more interaction like the question about interracial marriages. It is one of the few times when almost everyone participated in the discussion.
This comment came early in my research. That day we had heard from several students from different racial and ethnic backgrounds who did not regularly participate in class discussion. I immediately began to make a greater effort to focus discussion questions on topics more salient to multicultural issues. By specifically asking for diverse perspectives we shifted the focus from dominant group members and their experiences to the equally valid experiences of previously silenced students. The decision to focus on inclusive class discussions was significant because it changed the dynamic and made many more students feel comfortable sharing their thoughts. However, not everyone liked the discussion-based environment and would have preferred traditional "banking" teaching methods. Some students still prefer the structure of the traditional classroom setting with the instructor in control at all times.
The class is long enough without all the long drawn-out irrelevant opinions of narrow-minded individuals. I am more interested in what the teacher has to say, which I find very informative and interesting. ... the teacher does not make me feel like I'm on a lower level.
Overall, in-class discussions were a success. Many students reacted positively to the time we spent discussing social issues, and I believe it was an enlightening experience for all involved, including myself. I will definitely strive for more multicultural and discussion-based teaching experiences in the future.
Celebrating Diversity
As I have previously stated, a critical multi-culturalism approach celebrates diversity of all kinds, including religious, ethnic, political, economic, racial, familial, cultural, and relational. This type of pedagogy encourages students to consider and analyze traditionally marginalized perspectives and worldviews according to their own terms rather than interpreting them through the lens of any single culture.
The examples of other cultures viewed both ethnocentrically and in terms of cultural relativism have really helped.[This class] gives a different view. Living in the U.S. we tend to think we have all the answers and they are the right ones.... everyone participates in class -- this mixture of ideas helps to get diverse feedback from a multitude of ethnic and racial backgrounds.We've not only discussed our own culture, but compared it to others while not judging ours as better or worse. We've criticized and praised certain ways of life while trying to understand why we do the things we do .
This affirmation of difference supports the attempt to de-center knowledge and power while giving voice and validity to previously marginalized individuals and perspectives. Given the rapidly changing racial demographics in public education it is imperative that teachers and administrators address these dynamic intercultural relationships, as well as attempt to come to some understanding of them. However, bringing a critical multiculturalist perspective into the classroom can be risky. Many traditional educators denounce the inclusion of "politics" in the classroom, opting for what they believe is a more "objective" educational experience. Additionally, many students resist this approach -- especially when it is new to them -- because it openly challenges much of what they have been taught and have come to believe in.
It seems like in every lecture the issue of repressed minorities and women is brought up. Sometimes I think you're trying to make me feel guilty for being white and that white men especially are the cause of society's problems.This is more of a feminist class than anything else. There is too much white male bashing going on ... I would like to know how old some of these studies are? Because I know some of them are wrong.
This last comment was dropped in the suggestion box after the lecture on Social Inequality.
The next class meeting I brought all of the statistics and citations from the Bureaus of the Census and Labor and the FBI Crime Report -- the oldest of which was from 1992. I read the comment to the class and used it as an opportunity to discuss the sources of social science data. We also considered reasons why many of us feel uncomfortable discussing racism, sexism and heterosexism in class, including the concept of "privilege" which I discuss in the next section. I also used humor to relieve the tension, making a joke about being perceived as a "Femi-nazi." The class as a whole laughed with me and a couple of students commented that I did not come off that way. Hopefully, this exchange eased some tensions about the alleged bashing of white males. During the last round of evaluations one of these students wrote that although they thought I was "a little harsh on white males at the beginning" that he or she realized now it was an over-reaction and actually apologized for the comment. It seems to be quite a shock to some of the more conservative students when we start talking about dominant and subordinate groups and the existence of a ruling class in the United States. Many students commented they felt "guilty" about the plights of minority groups and some felt they were being "punished" for what their ancestors had done. I struggled with this for some time and wondered if I should try to teach from a more "objective" perspective. I decided to address these issues in class by introducing an exercise which reveals the privileges of dominant groups in our society. The privilege exercise I adapted from Peggy McIntosh's (1998) article "White Privilege and Male Privilege," was an overwhelming success and helped many students gain a new perspective on privilege, prejudice and discrimination.
Privilege
Many scholars have criticized traditional "problem-based" approaches to diversity because they often focus on marginalized or minority groups and their members as having a problem, e.g. experiencing discrimination. By changing our focus from discrimination to privilege, we can turn the spotlight on dominant group members and explore ways in which they can adapt to the rapidly changing multicultural world around them. McIntosh asserts "[Dominant group members] are taught to think of their lives as morally neutral, normative, and average, and also ideal, so that when we work to benefit others, this is seen as work that will allow 'them' to be more like 'us'" (1998, p. 78). Even when dominant group members are willing to acknowledge obstacles for minorities, they will seldom recognize their own privileges. For example, most of us understand that discrimination puts others at a disadvantage, but few of us truly grasp a more subtle aspect of discrimination, i.e. privilege, that gives individuals who belong to dominant groups certain advantages in our society. Some of these privileges allow dominant group members to feel comfortable where they live, work, or play. Others let us escape fear, anxiety, hostility, abuse, violence, and sometimes even death. Denial by dominant group members protects privilege from being fully recognized or accepted, and thereby perpetuates social inequalities. Many of us who will admit that privilege systems are entrenched in our society will likely deny that this privilege has opened doors for us personally. McIntosh writes:
As a white person, I realized I had been taught about racism as something that puts others at a disadvantage, but had been taught not to see one of its corollary aspects, white privilege, which puts me at an advantage. ... I have come to see white privilege as an invisible package of unearned assets that I can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was "meant" to remain oblivious. White privilege is like an invisible weightless knapsack of special provisions, assurances, tools, maps, guides, codebooks, passports, visas, clothes, compass, emergency gear, and blank checks (94-95).
Privilege is a difficult thing to face, because to do so we must give up the myth of meritocracy, a value so deeply embedded in our society that its very questioning brings accusations of "anti-Americanism." This exercise was designed to help students begin to identify some of the daily effects of privilege in their lives. It focuses not only on white privilege and male privilege, but includes all types of privilege, i.e. advantages we all enjoy based on race, ethnicity, gender, social class, culture, geographic region, physical ability, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, appearance, etc. After reading McIntosh's article, students were asked to keep a "privilege journal" for two weeks in which they were to make a list of special circumstances, situations and conditions that certain individuals enjoyed based entirely on group membership. Using these journal entries, students were then challenged to make a list of privilege statements like those used by McIntosh, e.g.:
* I can go into a book shop and count on finding the writing of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods that fit with my cultural traditions, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can deal with my hair (97).* I can choose blemish cover or bandages in "flesh" color and have them more or less match my skin (99).* Most people I meet will see my marital arrangements as an asset to my life or as a favorable comment on my likability, my competence, or my mental health (104).
Because it represents a whole new way of looking at their lives, this exercise is not easy for most students at first. However, once they begin to recognize privilege in everyday life the concepts of racism, sexism and heterosexism take on whole new meanings. By focusing on the intersections of various group memberships and the consequent privileges, we were able to further highlight the diverse experiences of a wide range of individuals. For example, white females were able to recognize their race privilege despite their disadvantaged gender, and likewise this Korean-American male acknowledged his male privilege while understanding his lack of race privilege.
Being coherent about my privileges and non-privileges was a real eyeopener. I've always focused on the [existence of racism] of my life. Thinking I was always oppressed and not valued as an individual by my non-Korean peers. I've always recognized the non-privileged aspect of my life for not being White or Black. I never realized how much privileges I had for being a man. To be honest, it shocked me. ... I strongly believe that privileges I and others have has shaped our life experiences significantly. People are valued in society by what fits the social norms and expectations ... I know I make other people feel uneasy because of my race and action, and I feel uneasy because some people don't fit into my ideology of what the norms are. ... This class is helping me to recognize my fault, but most importantly, challenging ... my view points ... .
This student also focused on the intersections of various privileges in her life:
I definitely believe that certain privileges have shaped experiences in my life. ... I feel that because I am white I have had an easier life than a Black or Latino person. At the same time I have been in situations where I have been at a disadvantage because I was not male. As I did this assignment my awareness of this grew. I learned to open my eyes ... and see what privileges are out there and how they affect my life and the lives of others.
This next comment represents a success story -- an individual who plans to modify his behavior based on what he has learned and observed about privilege in society:
This assignment makes me take more notice of the treatment of people going on around me. It also helps me not to feel or want to act on immediate prejudice. These experiences help me to treat people more equally, regardless of my own feelings at the time.
Once students learn the concept of privilege, many begin to see it as a pervasive aspect of social life -- from their personal experiences to the media to professional sports.
I am an intelligent, college educated Black man and someone ... will automatically see me as less intelligent than a White man. I think this is due to ... my race being so often portrayed in a negative light in the media ... . Tiger Woods was not seen as just a ... skilled golfer, he was seen as the Black guy who won the Master's ...
It was interesting to see how students developed their privilege statements, and the journals were an excellent medium to document this progression. A journal entry of a young African- American woman read:
After being followed around suspiciously by a salesclerk ... I confronted her [and] she told me that basically it was common knowledge that "you people steal." ... I changed my mind about buying clothes and left the store. I was not angry with her, but I pitied her ignorance.
Her resulting privilege statement was:
Being white, it would be safe to assume that the sales clerk is there to assist you rather than suspect you.
After an experience where he was "rejected" by a white girl, this racially-mixed male observed:
Whites can go to Blacks with less fear of rejection (dating-wise).
After being made to feel very uncomfortable at a Neighborhood Watch meeting, this racially- mixed male stated if he was White he could:
... join the Neighborhood Watch and not become the neighborhood watched.
For some, the privilege exercise is profoundly heartfelt.
I have no experience with privilege. I am a Black woman. Immediately I have two strikes against me. All my life I have had to prove myself. When I was young, I wished that just once I could be white so that I could be welcomed at my friends' homes without any sarcasm. To be able to walk through a store and not be followed. To know that if I dated a white man, he would not be afraid to introduce me to his family. Now that I am older and understand the society in which I live, I am proud to be Black and a woman. I no longer strive to prove myself to others. My goal is to prove only to myself that I can stand with the best of them. The insults and ignorances of others only shows the abuse of their privilege and makes me that much stronger. Being Black, I learned as a child that I would be viewed as different and therefore I would have to work twice as hard as my white friends to achieve anything. Although I have had many negative experiences with privilege, I have also had many positives. The world is filled with all kinds of people, and many of these people are truly good. They do not abuse their privilege but instead use it to help others who are less fortunate. What does it matter if I am Black and you are White? What does it matter if I am rich and you are poor? What does it matter if I am female and you are male? ... if I am straight and you are gay? What does it matter? I learned from this lesson that although we have taken one step up, we still have ninety-nine to go.
By affirming and celebrating diversity while acknowledging the existence and significance of privilege in our society, I have tried to provide an inclusive, student-centered and "safe" environment where students from all backgrounds feel like a part of the knowledge process.
Critical Thinking
As I have stated, critical thinking is a pivotal part of a critical multiculturalist pedagogy. If there could be only one goal in my classroom it would be that students learn to use their minds to critically examine all social relationships. I was glad to see that many students commented on this aspect of the class. Students felt the focus on critical thinking made them look at society differently, and in many cases they found it a more interesting approach to the material than traditional education.
I have found that I see things differently. I notice inequality in the media, workplace, and other areas. I have noticed gender differences like who controls conversations, etc.The book, lectures, and discussions are interesting enough that during the course of the week I find myself thinking about the topics and utilizing my critical thinking.Critical thinking has been a vital part of Sociology 101. It has changed my perspective of what I see and hear in the newspapers, T.V., radio, etc. My wife says I'm too critical about these things.
Even those students who were already critical thinkers found the critical multiculturalist approach useful.
My critical thinking skills have been refreshed. I thank the class for offering a variety of different opinions and outlooks on a variety of topics. I enjoyed the class interaction on questions posed by other students.I believe that I have significantly improved in the area of critical thinking. The subject matter lends itself to more critical thinking and I believe that your teaching style has emphasized the concept.
Overall I was quite pleased with the apparent increase in critical thinking over the course of the semester. In one case a student argued that we should stop using the term "American" to describe people in the United States because it was ethnocentric and ignored Canadians and South and Central Americans. This comment was a great catalyst for a debate over cultural sensitivity and "political correctness."
DISCUSSION
Though the debate over multiculturalism in education rages on, many critical educators have spent years developing a critical multiculturalist pedagogy. Objectives of a critical multiculturalist approach include
(1) altering traditional student-teacher power relations,
(2) emphasizing and nurturing an appreciation for diversity and global processes, and
(3) facilitating a democratic and inclusive classroom environment.
I have strove to meet these objectives by providing a safe, democratic and student-centered environment through: an inclusive multicultural curriculum; the use of a suggestion box; student evaluations; voting on course content and structure; examination options; frequent in-class discussions; an emphasis on critical thinking, and; an exercise highlighting the privileges of dominant group members. My teaching experiences over the course of this research were overwhelmingly positive. I received a lot of thoughtful and insightful feedback regarding my pedagogical approach, I met a lot of intelligent and inspiring people, and I discovered there is a lot more research to be done in this area.
I continue to use the critical multiculturalist approach as described in this chapter. The suggestion box allows everyone an equal opportunity to have their voice heard regardless of age, gender, or racial, ethnic, sexual, and/or religious backgrounds. Reading students' comments at the beginning of each class was a great way to "warm-up" and get discussion rolling. In addition, having the students evaluate the course and the instructor twice during the term remains a helpful tool in providing me with valuable feedback. Reading students' comments allows me to modify my approach, the class structure or content so that I can reach as many students as possible. After the first evaluation I address comments in class and we are able to come to a compromise on any issues raised. The evaluations also serve as another outlet for students to have their voices heard. I try to be as self-reflexive and responsive as possible, and hearing directly from the students helped this task immensely. As I have stated, the evaluation options were a huge success. However, the larger the class is the less practical it is to offer options due to workload and time constraints. In lieu of using evaluation options, I recommend keeping the classroom environment as student-centered and democratic as possible. Having frequent class votes, open discussions, and continuous student feedback helps students to feel more involved and in control of their education. It has always been my belief that the more involved students are, the more they learn. True to form, there are always those individuals who would rather have an authoritarian atmosphere. One student in particular did not believe they were up for the challenge of critical multiculturalism.
The class is FAR too student centered. The structure is too liberal. We are Americans and in a group will take ALL we can get. En mass it's not the learning that's important it's how much can we get away with.Though there were a few students who prefer the conventional lecture format of more traditional classrooms, the overwhelming majority enthusiastically endorse critical multiculturalism.This class does affect the way I think. It allows me to see life from the perspectives of others.I appreciate teachers who strive to progress in their respective fields. Knowledge is a lifelong goal.Radical pedagogy is new to me but absolutely fascinating and beneficial to learning!
Overall, practicing critical multiculturalism in the classroom alters the traditional student- teacher power relations, nurtures an appreciation for and an understanding of diversity, and empowers students to think critically about the world in which they live. While my research was performed in the sociology classroom, this approach is adaptable to any classroom environment. Once one understands the philosophies and basic objectives of a critical multiculturalist pedagogy, any course content can be adapted to the approach. Implications for future research include developing an evaluation tool which may accurately measure the long- term effects of critical multiculturalism on students and educators.
REFERENCES
Aptheker, B. 1993. "Teaching about Anti-Semitism and the legacy of Jewish Women." Women's Studies Quarterly 15(3,4): 63-68.
Banks, J. 1988. Multiethnic Education: Theory and Practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Baxandall, R., L. Gordon, and R. Dusan, eds. 1976. America's Working Women. New York: Vintage.
Beck, E.T., ed. 1982. Nice Jewish Girls. Watertown, Mass.: Persephone.
Bell, L. 1987. "Hearing All Our Voices: Applications of Feminist Pedagogy to Conferences, Speeches and Panel Presentation." Women's Studies Quarterly 15(3,4): 74-80.
Berry, E. and E. Black. 1987. "The Integrative Learning Journal." Women's Studies Quarterly, 15(3,4): 59-64.
Bright, C. 1993. "Teaching Feminist Pedagogy: an Undergraduate Course." Women's Studies Quarterly 21(3,4): 128-132.
Culley, M. and C. Portuges. 1985. Gendered Subjects: The Dynamics of Feminist Teaching. Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Denzin, N. and Y. Lincoln, eds. 1994. Handbook of Qualitative Research. California: Sage. D'Souza, D. 1991. Illiberal Education. New York: Random House.
Ellsworth, E. 1989. "Why Doesn't this Feel Empowering? Working through the Repressive Myths of Critical Pedagogy." Harvard Educational Review, 59(3): 297-324.
Feagin, J. and C. Feagin. 1999. Racial and Ethnic Relations, (6th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Freire, P. 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seabury Press. _____ 1973. Education for Critical Consciousness. New York: Seabury Press. _____ 1978. Pedagogy in Process: Letters to Guinea-Bissau. New York: Seabury Press. _____ 1985. The Politics of Education. Massachusetts: Bergin and Garvey. _____ 1989. Learning to Question: a Pedagogy of Liberation. New York: Continuum. _____ 1994. Pedagogy of Hope. New York: Continuum.
Friedman, S. 1985. "Authority in the Feminist Classroom: A Contradiction in Terms?" Pp. 203- 208 in Gendered Subjects: The Dynamics of Feminist Teaching, eds. M. Culley and C. Portuges. Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Giroux, H. 1983. Theory and Resistance in Education. Massachusetts: Bergin and Garvey. _____ 1988a. Schooling and the Struggle for Public Life: Critical Pedagogy in the Modern Age. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
_____ 1988b. Teachers as Intellectuals. Toward a Critical Pedagogy of Learning. Massachusetts: Bergin and Garvey.
_____ 1992. Resisting Difference: Cultural Studies and the Discourse of Critical Pedagogy. Pp. 199-212 in Cultural Studies, eds. Grossberg, Nelson, and Treichler, (Eds.), New York: Routledge.
Glazer, N. 1997. We are All Multiculturalists Now. Cambridge: Harvard University.
Gramsci, A. 1971. Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. Translated and edited by Q. Hoare and G. N. Smith. New York : International Publishers. (Original work written in prison 1929-1935)
hooks, bell. 1981. Ain't I a Woman? Boston: South End Press.
_____ 1984. Feminist Theory: from margin to center. Boston: South End Press.
_____ 1994. Teaching to Transgress. New York: Routledge.
Jackson and Solis. 1995. Beyond Comfort Zones in Multiculturalism: Confronting the Politics of Privilege. Connecticut: Bergin and Garvey. Kanpol, B. 1995. Multiculturalism and Empathy: A Border Pedagogy of Solidarity." Pp. 177- 195 in Critical Multiculturalism, eds. B. Kanpol and P. McLaren. Connecticut: Bergin and Garvey.
Kanpol, B. and McLaren, P., eds. 1995. Critical Multiculturalism. Connecticut: Bergin and Garvey.
Kinchloe, J. 1993. Toward a Critical Politics of Teacher Thinking: Mapping the Postmodern. Connecticut: Bergin and Garvey.
Lather, P. 1991. Getting Smart: Feminist Research and Pedagogy with/in the Postmodern. New York: Routledge.
Lemert, C., ed. 1993. Social Theory: The Multicultural and Classic Readings. Boulder: Westview.
Lewis, M. 1990. "Interrupting Patriarchy: Politics, Resistance, and Transformation in the Feminist Classroom." Harvard Educational Review 60(4): 467-488.
Luke, C. 1994. Feminist Pedagogy and Critical Media Literacy. Journal of Communication Inquiry 18(2): 30-47.
Luke, C. and J. Gore, eds. 1995. Feminisms and Critical Pedagogy. New York: Routledge.
Magner, D.K. 1996. "Fewer professors believe Western culture should be the cornerstone of the college curriculum: a survey finds a growing commitment to diversity and multiculturalism." The Chronicle of Higher Education 43(3).
Maher, F. 1985. "Classroom Pedagogy and the New Scholarship on Women." Pp. 29-48 in Gendered Subjects: The Dynamics of Feminist Teaching, eds. M. Culley and C. Portuges. Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
_____ 1987. Inquiry Teaching and Feminist Pedagogy. Social Education 5(3): 186-192. Maher, F. and M. Tetrault. 1994. The Feminist Classroom. New York: Basic.
McCarthy and Willis. 1995. "The Politics of Culture: Education after the Content Debate." In Beyond Comfort Zones in Multiculturalism: Confronting the Politics of Privilege, eds. Jackson and Solis. Connecticut: Bergin and Garvey.
McIntosh, P. 1998. "White Privilege and Male Privilege: A Personal Account of Coming to See Correspondences Through Work in Women's Studies." Pp. 94-105 in Race, Class, and Gender: An Anthology, eds. M. Anderson and P. Hill Collins. Boston: Wadsworth.
McLaren, P. 1989. Life in Schools: An Introduction to Critical Pedagogy in the Foundations of Education. New York and London: Longman.
Morgan, K.P. 1987. The Perils and Paradoxes of Feminist Pedagogy. Resources for Feminist Teaching 16: 49-52.
Mumford, L.S. 1985. "Why Do We Have to Do all this Old Stuff? Conflict in the Feminist Theory Classroom." Journal of Thought: Special Issue: Feminist Education, 20(2): 88-98.
Omolade, B. 1993. A Black Feminist Pedagogy. Women's Studies Quarterly 15(3,4): 31-39.
Reason, P. 1994. "Three Approaches to Participative Inquiry." In Handbook of Qualitative Research, eds. N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln . Thousand Oaks, California : Sage Publications.
Rich, A. 1979. On Lies, Secrets, and Silence: Selected Prose 1966-1978. New York: W.W. Norton and Co.
Scanlon, J. 1993. "Keeping our Activist Selves Alive in the Classroom: Feminist Pedagogy and Political Activism." Feminist Teacher, 7(2): 8-14.
Schaefer, R. and R. Lamm. 1995. Sociology (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Schieder, E. 1993. "Integrating Lesbian Content." Women's Studies Quarterly 15(3,4): 46-56.
Schniedewind, N. 1987. "Teaching Feminist Process." Women's Studies Quarterly 15(3,4).
Sedgwick, C. 1990. "Pedagogy in the Context of an Anti-homophobic Project." The South Atlantic Quarterly 89(1): 139-157.
Shor, I. 1980. Critical Teaching and Everyday Life. Boston: South End Press.
_____ 1988. Freire for the Classroom: a Sourcebook for Liberatory Teaching. Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook.
_____ 1992. Empowering Education: Critical Teaching for Social Change. Chicago and London: University of Chicago.
Shor, I. and P. Friere. 1987. A Pedagogy for Liberation: Dialogues on Transforming Education. Massachusetts: Bergin and Garvey.
Shrewsbury, C. 1993. "Feminist Pedagogy: An Updated Bibliography." Women's Studies Quarterly 15(3,4). Spelman, E.V. 1985. "Combating the Marginalization of Black Women in the Classroom."
Pp. 240-244 in Gendered Subjects: The Dynamics of Feminist Teaching, eds. M. Culley and C. Portuges. Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Toulmin, S. 1990. Cosmopolis: The Hidden Agenda of Modernity. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Wallerstein, H. 1990. Culture as the Ideological Battleground of the Modern World System.
Pp. 31-56 in Global Culture: Nationalism, Globalization and Modernity, ed. E. Featherstone. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Will, G. 1989. Eurocentricity and the School curriculum. Morning Advocate (December).
Young, I. 1993. "Together in Difference:Transforming the Logic of Group Political Conflict." In Principled Positions, ed. J. Squires. London: Lawrence and Wisehart.