Group items tagged

As state-defined standards of learning and standardized tests become more and more closely identified as measures of achievement, not only for students, but also for teachers, administrators, schools and school districts, teachers are feeling less empowered to employ creative means for make their curricula more inclusive and accessible to all students. Even as the Internet and other new educational media broaden classroom access to a virtually endless stream of new resources, perspectives, and interactive capabilities, most curricula are necessarily built around textbooks and standardized tests. These and other contextual factors highlight some of the formidable challenges to any process of curriculum transformation. An additional set of challenges emerges when one attempts to develop a process for curriculum transformation within a multicultural education paradigm. One such challenge is a set of critiques regarding multicultural education, usually coming from educational conservatives. (These critiques and responses to them are listed here.) A second challenge is a lack of training or preparation on the part of teachers for developing inclusive multicultural curricula, and a lack of training or preparation on the part of administrators to support teachers in such efforts. This section of the Multicultural Pavilion will serve as a starting point for teachers who, despite these challenges, are determined to create a more inclusive, multicultural curriculum for their students.

This article provides the following guidelines for creating culturally responsive, inclusive classrooms: use a range of culturally sensitive methods and materials, create a classroom atmosphere that respects individuals and their cultures, foster an interactive classroom learning environment, employ ongoing and culturally aware assessments, and collaborate with other professionals and families.

"Multicultural education means different things to different people. However, the differences are not as great, confusing, or contradictory as some critics and analysts claim. Many of these differences are more semantic than substantive, a reflection of the developmental level in the field and the disciplinary orientation of advocates. One should expect people who have been involved in a discipline or educational movement for a long time to understand and talk about it differently from those who are new to it. Similarly, educators who look at schooling from the vantage point of sociology, psychology, or economics will have differing views of the key concerns of schooling. Yet, these disparate analysts may agree on which issues are the most critical ones. Such differences over means coupled with widespread agreement on substance are naturally found in discussions of multicultural education. But this diversity should not be a problem, especially when we consider that multicultural education is all about plurality. The field includes educational scholars, researchers, and practitioners from a wide variety of personal, professional, philosophical, political, and pedagogical backgrounds. Therefore, we should expect that they will use different points of reference in discussing ethnic diversity and cultural pluralism. Yet, when allowances are made for these differences, a consensus on the substantive components of multicultural education quickly emerges. Such agreement is evident in areas such as the key content dimensions, value priorities, the justification for multicultural education, and its expected outcomes. Only when these fundamentals are articulated do variations emerge. Some advocates talk about expected outcomes, while others consider the major determining factor to be the group being studied; the arena of school action is the primary focus for one set of advocates, and still others are most concerned with distinctions between theory and practice. Some people

Federal law prohibits sex discrimination in schools, yet inequities remain. For examples, teachers often treat boys and girls differently when it is not appropriate to do so. Other issues include limiting access or dissuading girls from participating in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) courses, over-representation of boys in disciplinary actions, and the impact of stereotyping on access and inclusion. Frances Guzmán, M.Ed., an IDRA education associate, discusses where gender inequities tend to show up in classrooms and how educators can make changes to ensure equity for girls and boys. Frances is interviewed by Aurelio M. Montemayor, M.Ed., director of the IDRA Texas Parent Information and Resource Center.

EdChange is a team of passionate, experienced, established, educators dedicated to equity, diversity, multiculturalism, and social justice. With this shared vision, we have joined to collaborate in order to develop resources, workshops, and projects that contribute to progressive change--change in ourselves, our schools, and our society.