CRITERIOS DE RECUPERACIÓN DE UN CURSO PENDIENTE

Many researchers (Al-Haj, 2002; Gorski, 2009; Jenks et al., 2001; McLaren, 1994; Nylund, 2006; Webster, 1997) assert that there are three main theoretical frameworks for the study of multicultural education: the conservative; the liberal; and the critical ones. It is important to differentiate among these frameworks to have a better understanding about the essence of the theoretical foundations of multicultural education.

3.4.1 Conservative Multiculturalism

Conservative multiculturalism upholds the assimilationist notion of addressing issues of cultural diversity where schools attempt to assimilate minority students into the mainstream culture (Jenks et al., 2001; McLaren, 1994; Nylund, 2006; Rhoads, 1998). This means that conservatives deliberately ignore cultural differences to ensure homogeneity (Jenks et al., 2001) as well as to control other ethno-cultural groups in order to maintain the status quo (Al- Haj, 2002). As explained by Nylund (2006, p. 29), conservative multiculturalism purposely marginalizes and dismisses the cultural differences of students. Similarly, Rhoads (1998, p. 40) suggests that “a conservative interpretation of multiculturalism tends to stress courses on diverse cultures as support offerings to be added to an already established canon”. This means

that conservative multiculturalism encourages minority students to ‘fit in’ to (Leeman & Reid, 2006) the existing dominant culture by leaving aside their own cultural identities.

According to Jenks et al. (2001, p. 91), the ideological basis of conservative multiculturalism is a market logic which bypasses issues of cultural inclusion practices. Thus, the attainments of educational excellence and equity are judged against student participation in a free market of competition, survival of the fittest, and upward social mobility. Moreover, since conservative multiculturalists believe that students’ cultural differences have no significant roles in learning outcomes, their educational agenda underpins a commitment to the same academic standards for all students (Jenks et al., 2001).

Grant and Sleeter (2010, p. 63) propose the multicultural education approach that they call ‘teaching of the exceptional and the culturally different’ where the main responsibility of the teacher is to prepare all students to fit into and achieve within the existing school and society. They further claim that teachers who use this approach often start teaching through assessing the academic achievement levels of the learners by comparing their academic achievement status to the respective grade-level norms. The teachers work hard to assist those students who lag behind in order to help them catch up. Jenks et al. (2001, p. 91) contend that “social mobility leading to equality comes from assimilation that requires the elimination of certain differences or deficits in knowledge, skills, and values that are barriers to the acquisition of better-paying jobs”.

In general, conservative multiculturalism recognises cultural, ethnic, racial, and other differences only from the perspectives of their ‘contributions’ to the dominant culture. In other words, conservative multiculturalism does not promote the recognition and promotion of the cultures of students with diverse backgrounds on an equal footing.

3.4.2 Liberal Multiculturalism

As suggested by Al-Haj (2002, p. 171), liberal multiculturalism recognizes the existence of inequality in a country, but claims that this inequality emanates not from cultural deprivation of the minority groups but from the absence of social and educational opportunities. This means that unlike conservative multiculturalism, liberal multiculturalism emphasizes the need for diversity and cultural pluralism as well as the acceptance and celebration of differences (Jenks et al., 2001; Leeman & Reid, 2006). According to Rhoads (1998, p. 40), ‘mainstream

multiculturalism’ is a notion which is synonymous with liberal multiculturalism and this kind of multiculturalism strives to promote tolerance amongst diverse people.

According to Jenks et al. (2001, p. 92), instead of identifying the root causes of inequality and thereby transforming them, liberal multiculturalists primarily emphasize the humanistic approach where acceptance, tolerance and mutual understandings are exercised. In this regard, one could argue that liberal multiculturalism relates to Grant and Sleeter’s (2010, p. 64) ‘human relations approach’ to multicultural education whose core objective is to foster a feeling of unity, tolerance, and acceptance among people with diverse backgrounds.

Although liberal multiculturalism has made significant contributions in terms of honouring differences in an essentialist way, it does not attempt to ensure long term solutions to problems of racism/ethnocentrism and other social inequalities (Nylund, 2006, p. 29). Jenks et al. (2001, p. 93) state that “like the conservative approach, liberal multiculturalists assume that laws and policy decisions will bring about excellence and equity within the dominant culture”. Moreover, since liberal multiculturalists often do not strive to transform the existing inequalities in society, they remain supportive of the dominant culture and its hegemonic power (Jenks et al., 2001).

Goodstein (1994, p. 104) conceptualised diversity in two main ways, i.e. diversity as ‘variety’ and diversity as ‘critical perspective’. The first conceptualisation aligns with the notion of liberal multiculturalism as it purports to highlight the existence of different cultures contributing to the richness of the national or global community (Sleeter and Grant, 1988 as cited in Goodstein, 1994). The second definition, i.e. critical diversity, critiques traditionally accepted hierarchies in order to transform the situation (Goodstein, 1994). Therefore, critical diversity upholds the notion of critical multiculturalism.

3.4.3 Critical Multiculturalism

Unlike conservative and liberal multiculturalism, critical multiculturalism claims that issues of educational equity and excellence can be addressed through raising critical as well as transformative questions (Jenks et al., 2001; Leeman & Reid, 2006; Nylund, 2006; Rhoads, 1998). According to Rhoads (1998, p. 41), critical multiculturalism combines issues of cultural diversity and the emancipatory nature of critical educational practices which are taken from postmodernism, critical theory, and feminism. Turner (1993, p. 413) states that “critical

multiculturalism seeks to use cultural diversity as a basis for challenging, revising, and relativising basic notions and principles common to dominant and minority cultures alike, so as to construct a more vital, open, and democratic common culture”.

The essence of critical multiculturalism is therefore compatible with transformative pedagogy which intends to help students raise critical questions about the social, cultural, political, and economic conditions that significantly affect their lives and their society. Cummins (2000, p. 260) underscores that:

Transformative pedagogy uses collaborative critical inquiry to enable students to analyse and understand the social realities of their own lives and of their communities. Students discuss and frequently act on ways in which these realities might be transformed through various forms of social action.

In applying transformative pedagogy, instead of making students learn facts, attention is given to engaging the learners in deep learning through enhancing critical thinking and reflection. The classroom is considered a community of learning where knowledge is generated by the teacher and the students collaboratively (Cummins, 2000).

According to Banks (1997), the key objective of multicultural education is to help students develop decision-making and social-action skills. To this effect, it is important to encourage students to view situations and events from different perspectives through the application of critical thinking, reflection, and action (Nieto, 1997). According to Freire (1993, pp. 52-53), the “banking” concept of education signifies that the relationship between the teacher and the students is characterized by narration. Through this narration, the teacher deposits his/her knowledge in students’ minds and students are expected to passively accept the knowledge. Apart from remembering the knowledge that they receive from their teacher through lecturing, repetition and memorization, students are not allowed to engage in inquiries, such as asking critical questions and trying to find answers for themselves. This kind of teaching approach tends to make students indifferent and dependent citizens.

In contrast, in critical education, students are encouraged to be independent learners, curious, ask questions, and seek answers for themselves (Nieto, 1997). Furthermore, critical pedagogy helps students develop their analytical abilities and engage in deep learning that may help them understand the realities of a particular situation (Cummins, 2000). This may

enable students to better understand their socio-cultural realities and make informed decisions to transform their situation.

When it comes to positioning my study, while my approach is eclectic in using the three theoretical frameworks of multiculturalism, it is mainly framed based on the principles of liberal and critical multiculturalism. In other words, liberal and critical multiculturalism are the core theoretical perspectives that guide this study since their notions reflect the principles of the Ethiopian constitution, the education and training policy, and the cultural policy.