Multiculturalism and Censorship

Definition: Advocacy of diversity of ethnic representation in education

Significance:Multiculturalism, a challenge to some traditional educational ideas, has drawn criticism from several fronts

The United States and Canada are essentially nations of immigrants. Multiculturalism has its origins in a problem faced by North American teachers since immigration began: what to do with classrooms filled with pupils coming from different countries, speaking different languages, and possessing different cultural assumptions. Responses have varied, although the push toward assimilation has been largely constant. Educators introduced the idea of ethnic awareness in school curricula during the 1920s. By the 1930s the Service Bureau for Intercultural Education provided in-service programs for teaching minority children.

Goals of Multiculturalism in Education

In general, multiculturalism in education has emphasized diverse ethnic and racial representation, although much misunderstanding and controversy result from a lack of consensus concerning multiculturalism’s goals. The source of much of the controversy surrounding multiculturalism in education may be summarized as the challenge that multiculturalism mounts to the melting pot theory for North American education. The melting pot metaphor recalls the making of alloys of metal, in which various metals are melted into a new alloy, losing their individual characteristics in the process. This view of how assimilation is to take place dominated educational goals in the United States in the early twentieth century. In practical terms, students were to learn only English, to let their native languages lapse, to renounce their old cultures, and to adapt to North American culture, changing it somewhat as they did so. Many have criticized the melting pot theory as a means of enforcing cultural hegemony and of excluding minority views.

Judging such education as too Eurocentric in its focus and lacking in diversity, pluralist educators recommend opening up the curriculum to embrace many cultures, many of which were represented in the American population. Arguing that the canon defines and sets the boundaries of a community’s outlooks, progressive educators advocate for equality in representation and exposure via the inclusion of literature written both by and for minorities and women. A Curriculum of Inclusion, written by the New York State Commissioner of Education’s Task Force on Minorities (1989) offers a curriculum for allowing marginalized groups to voice their perspectives. Statements of equal respect in curriculum include California’s “History-Social Science Framework,” which lists acceptable textbooks. These textbooks provide different cultural perspectives that accurately reflect the ethnic diversity of contemporary American communities.

Similarly, in the mid-1990s, many educators in culturally diverse communities, such as New York City and Los Angeles, struggled to offer ethnically inclusive curricula that address the needs of diverse populations by showcasing the cultural identities of various communities. For example, the New York State Social Studies Review and Development Committee declared in 1991 that a group’s ethnic status and presence is acknowledged by its inclusion in the curriculum.

Lack of ethnic representation in the curriculum can affect students’ self-esteem, so educators argue that teaching students’ ethnic heritage will encourage ethnic pride, thereby augmenting their social involvement and academic achievement. Examples of recognizing minority participation in well-known events include the contributions of Native American and Nisei soldiers in World War II or African American cowboys and Japanese railroad builders contributing to the taming of the Old West.

Not only does a multicultural curriculum increase an excluded groups’ self-esteem, it sensitizes nonminority students to cultural differences as well as the wrongdoing of ancestors, a way of teaching tolerance for difference as well as not repeating the colonizing behaviors of the past. During the late 1980s and mid-1990s, educators focused, for example, on minority perspectives in history, including the Trail of Tears traveled by the Cherokee in the nineteenth century, the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, and the perspectives of Mexicans on the annexation of Texas.

Another educational reform related to reducing racial and social inequality is bilingual education, for example as described in the federal Bilingual Education Act of 1968. In the act, minority language rights are not only recognized but also their preservation is emphasized, a departure from melting pot methods of education.

Criticism of Goals of Multiculturalism in Education

Criticized as nourishing separatism, minority representation in education was interpreted by some during the 1980s and 1990s as intellectual tyranny. Critics of multicultural education have argued that instead of opening up discussions of curriculum change and evaluating the proposed changes by generally accepted institutional principles, pluralists have undermined the foundations of professionalism and objectivity in making changes. One may argue, however, that multiculturalism has merely entered, not created, the volatile political environment surrounding what to teach students.

For example, Stanford University, a highly regarded California institution, implemented a core curriculum called “Cultures, Ideas and Values” (CIV) in 1989 that required study of at least one non-Western culture. Critics have argued that such a focus teaches provincialism and ethnocentrism. The selection of textbooks and course materials based solely on ethnic and gender categories are, critics argue, neither rational nor adequate because this approach prevents the nonbiased examination of precepts underlying Western civilization. In the late 1980s colleges including Mount Holyoke College, the University of Wisconsin, and Dartmouth College required students to take ethnic studies courses, but not to take courses on Western civilization. The continued focus on diversity prevents the possibility of discussing the classics without looking through the lenses of gender and race. Pluralists argue that people always are wearing glasses of gender and race; the point is to learn to recognize how the glasses shape what one sees.

Critics of multiculturalism have been derided for overlooking the curriculum that preceded it. Few today would argue in favor of segregation in schools, of punishing students for speaking their native language, of deliberately discounting the contributions of women and minorities, of describing Western imperialism as a grand adventure, or of promoting racism. Debate has not centered on whether the curriculum should return to that of the early twentieth century but whether multiculturalism has gone too far.

In addition, critics have argued that an educational agenda that emphasizes diversity imprisons students within their ethnic or ancestral heritage, defining them merely as representatives of a group, thereby impeding them from full participation within the broader culture. By defining students solely as ethnic beings, there is a social censorship that bolsters ethnic separatism. Issues of race and gender, in such a setting, cannot be examined in a nonpartisan, nonconfrontational manner. While such social limitations on college campuses are neither legislative nor preventive censorship, students are aware of a common expectation that they will be punished if they verbalize unaccepted views on race and gender. For example, in the late 1980s students at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor who did not toe the multicultural line were required to take sensitivity training workshops.

Although a goal of multiculturalism in education is to promote ethnic tolerance, its censoring effects via institutionalized public intimidation may cause racial segregation. Furthermore, a curriculum that focuses on atonement for past wrongs also encourages a victim mentality and collective guilt; this assignment of blame contributes to the idolizing of non-Western cultures and a demonizing of Western cultures. Thus, current discussions of multiculturalism in the classroom take an either-or structure, forcing students to choose between Eurocentrism or ethnicity.

Critics maintain that the multicultural movement minimizes any form of critique in which uncommendable qualities of minority cultures are highlighted. Acts of hostility, racism, sexism, and elitism within minority cultures are ignored or disregarded. In addition, the definition of Western civilization as a static and monolithic entity, beginning with Homer and ending with Ernest Hemingway, is erroneous. Critics of multiculturalism in education argue that when students are encouraged to make judgments based on ethnicity alone, they are discouraged from bona fide evaluation and critique, skills necessary for thoughtful and responsible citizenship.

Bibliography

D'Souza, Dinesh. Illiberal Education: The Politics of Race and Sex on Campus. New York: Free, 1991. Print.

Kassimeris, Christos, and Marios Vryōnidēs. The Politics of Education: Challenging Multiculturalism. New York: Routledge, 2014. Print.

May, Stephen, and Christine E. Sleeter. Critical Multiculturalism: Theory and Praxis. New York: Routledge, 2010. Print.

Race, Richard. Multiculturalism and Education. 2nd ed. London: Bloomsbury, 2015. Print.

Resiz, Matthew. "'Self-Censorship' in Discussion of Multiculturalism, Says London's Deputy Mayor." Times Higher Education. TES Global, 20 Mar. 2014. Web. 25 Nov. 2015.

Williams, Mary E. Education: Opposing Viewpoints. Detroit: Greenhaven, 2005. Print.