ED 387 574

AUTHORTITLE

INSTITUTION

SPONS AGENCY

PUB DATECONTRACTNOTE

DOCUMENT RESUME

LD 030 640

Lee, Carol D.

Multicultural Education: Challenges to Administratorsand School Leadership. Urban Education Program. UrbanMonograph Series.North Central Regional Educational Lab., Oak Brook,IL.

Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED),Washington, DC.94

RP9100200719p.; Papers presentedEducation Laboratory'sMini-Conference (Lisle

AVAILABLE FROM North Central Regional

PUB TYPE

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

ABSTRACT

at the North Central Regional1993 Urban School LeadershipIL 1993).

Educational Laboratory, OrderDepartment, 1900 Spring Road, Suite 300, Oak Brook,IL 60521-1480 (order Number UMS-ME-94: $4.95).Reports Evaluative/Feasibility (142)Speeches/Conference Papers (150)

MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.*Academic Achievement; *Administrator Role;Administrators; Citizenship Education; Communication(Thought Transfer); Cultural Awareness; *Culture;Democracy; Educational Change; EducationalEnvironment; *Instructional Leadership; *Literacy;*Multicultural Education

"Academic Achievement, Culture, and Literacy: AnIntroduction" by John Attinasi provides a framework for the titlepaper. Multiculturalism requires not only a change in curriculum, buta change ;11 school climate and pedagogy. Communication is critical,given the centrality of language and the variety of linguisticexpression in homes and schools. "Multicultural

Education: Challengesto Administrators and School Leadership" by Carol D. Lee reviews thedifficulties in implementingmulticultural education and itsimplications. Whether multicultural education is cast as promotinghuman relations, finding ways to teach effectively, or reconstructingsociety, administrators must take a critical look at their goals andconsider alternative approaches. The debate about multiculturaleducation should be framed by the tenets that there are demands onschooling dictated by the fundamental principles of democracy andthat the fundamental demand of schooling is to prepare students toparticipate actively in civic debate. Changes are required incurriculum and instructional practice and in assessment practices inorder to implement multicultural education of real meaning. (Containseight references.) (SLD)

*Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

from the original document.*

*

Urban Monograph Series

Multicultural Education:Challenges to Administrators

and School Leadership

URBAN EDUCATION PROGRAM

U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIOtCENTER ERIC,

This Cf0Cument Nis Teen reproCluced asrece,veo from the oe,t1on of ornanrafonoriginating 1

0 Minor changes have ')een maoe toapprove reproduction guahty

Points of view Of opinions stated n hisdocument do not MICessatir, representofficial OERI position or pooch

k.=08111-0 'VT*11.7-e.-'21 lin III141.1.Imp:11.1141=1:41

OINIUNSION

02,A1144 ..1011%1"1"4or: a. /in, PLAI IRAA01000945.am ," nri

seem MIL k rill, mr -Irud.....~1iir-4Fr.fair s Tr.IMe Ma WPI114,.,41."

by Carol D. Lee, Ph.D.Northwestern University

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

NcREL

NCRELNorth Central Regional Educational Laboratory1900 Spring Road, Suite 300Oak Brook, Illinois 60521

Jeri Nowakowski: Executive Director

Lynn J. Stinnette: Director, Urban Education

Robin LaSota: Program Coordinator, Urban Education

Robin Fleming: Program Assistant, Urban Education

Lenaya Raack: Editor

John Blaser: Editor

Stephanie L. Merrick: Production Coordinator

Melissa Chapko: Graphic Designer

Mary Ann Larson: Desktop Publisher

Holly Jovanovich: Assistant, Urban Education

NCREL is one of ten federally supported educational laboratories in the country. It works with educationprofessionals in a seven-state region to support restructuring to promote learning for all studentsespecially those most at risk of academic failure in rural and urban schools.

The Urban Education Program's mission is to improve education for urban children and youth, especiallythose who are underachieving and historically underserved. We provide products and services that con-nect superintendents, principals, and teachers from nearly 5,000 urban schools to research and best practice.We work in partnership with schools and districts to build capacity for (1) teaching advanced skills to allstudents, (2) implementing multicultural education, (3) leading school change and innovation, and (4)supporting professional development that promotes whole school change.

1994 North Central Regional Educational Laboratory

This publication is based on work sponsored wholly or in part by the Office of Educational Research andImprovement (OERI), Department of Education, under Contract Number RP91002007. The content ofthis publication does not necessarily reflect the views of OERI, the Department of Education, or any otheragency of the U.S. Government.

UMS-ME-94, $4.95

Dear Colleague:

We are pleased to introduce the Urban Education Monograph Series, a new initiative of the North CentralRegional Educational Laboratory (NCREL) that works to connect practitionersand policymakers to importantresearch and promising practices.

Throughout the region's urban centers, children and youth continue to achieve at levels significantlybelow national norms. While many urban students complete school and make a successful transition tohigher education, increasing numberE of poor and minority youth in the region's urban centers either dropout of school or finish school lacking the skills and knowledge needed to continue their education success-fully and to participate fully in today's high-tech, information-service economy.

NCREL believes that connecting practitioners and policymakers to knowledge about what works inurban schools is an importantstep in crafting effective solutions to the achievement gap between the region'surban children and others. Traditionally, solutions to problems of urban schools have focused on isolatedprograms or single subjects, such as reading, and have relied heavily on knowledge from one fieldeduca-tion. The achievement gap between urban children and others is the result of many factors (e.g., social,cultural, and economic). Solutions that draw on a broad knowledge base are more likely to be effective inattacking the problems that impede urban children's success in school than solutions that rely solely onlatowledge about schooling.

The Urban Education Monograph Series connects practitioners and policymakers to important informationabout what works in urban schools bydrawing on knowledge from the fields of education, sociology, culturalanthropology, and others. This series, which is being published during 1994 and 1995, addresses suchissues as the following:

Building a Collaborative School Culture (Kent Peterson, University of Wisconsin at Madison,with Richard Brietzke, Purdy Elementary School, Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin)Raising Expectations to Improve Student Learning (Jerry Banthurg, University of Washington at Seattle)

II Synthesis of Scholarship on Multicultural Education (GenevaGay, University of Washington at Seattle)Cultural Diversity and Academic Achievement (Barbara Bowman, Erikson Institute, with anintroduction by John Attinasi, California State University)

Multicultural Education: Challenges to Administrators and School Leadership (Carol Lee, NorthwesternUniversity, with an introduction by John Attinasi, California State University)Developing Resilience in Urban Youth (Linda Winfield, University of Southern California)Organizational Structures to Promote Teacher Engagement in Urban Schools (Karen Seashore Louis,University of Minnesota at Minneapolis)

Getting Ready to Provide School-Linked, Integrated Services (Jeanne Jehl, San Diego Public Schools)We welcome your comments on the Urban Educatioh Monograph Series and your suggestions aboutother issues that you would like addressed in the future.

Sincerely.

nn J . u et te

Director. Urban Education

Preface

rrhis paper, "Academic Achievement, Culture, and Literacy: An Introducticn," byJohn Attinasi, provides a framework for a series of four papers presented at the

North Central Regional Educational Laboratory's 1993 Urban School Leadership Mini-Conference in Lisle, Illinois. The authors of these papers, John Attinasi of CaliforniaState University, Rosalinda Barrera of New Mexico State.University,.Barbara Bowman ,

of the Erikson Institute in Chicago, and Carol Lee of Northwestern University, served ona panel discussing the topic, "Language, Literacy, and Culture in Urban Schools.""Academic Achievement, Culture, and Literacy: An Introduction," adapted from theauthor's speech at the mini-conference, introduces the concept of multiculturalism andmulticultural education. In Multicultural Education: Challenges to Administrators andSchool Leadership, Carol Lee identifies key issues in implementing multicultural educa-tion and discusses implications for cunicula and instnictional practice. Barbara Bowman, inCultural Diversity and Academic Achievement, guides our understanding of how students'differences in culture and language affect student performance and achievement inschool. She offers rocommendations for changing programs and practices starting inearly childhood. In her forthcoming paper, Rosalinda Barrera discusses how school-com-munity partnerships promote literacy developmentamong culturally and linguisticallydiverse students.

Academic Achievement, Culture, and Literacy

An Introductionby John AttinasiProfessor, Department of Teacher Education, and Director,Bilingual Credentialing California State University, Long Beach

"Respect for Diversity is theHallmark of Democracy"

nroviding universal public educationhas always been considered a func-

tion of U.S. democracy and a leaven ofthe society. For urban school educators,schooling has many new roles withinthe broad democratic concepts of in-struction and equity. We are committedto educating all children and believingthat all can learn and achieve. As thenoted scholar Asa G. Hilliard III hassaid, "Respect for diversity is the hall-mark of democracy," (Hilliaxd

1991/1992). Students of diverse back-pounds and social conditions, languagesand dialects now populate our schools, asituation that we would have thoughtunusual a few decades ago. The gradu-ating class of the year 2010 is alreadyborn and two years old. Demographicstell us that most of these children are cul-turally and linguistically unlike themajority of teacher candidates, teachers,and administrators.

As educators, we have to balanceoverwhelming new information, newdemands, and new technology with theways we know how to teach young people.

We cannot do it all. But being unaware

of innovations in child development andin educating culturally and linguisticallydiverse students is like ignoring the poliovaccine. It is time to take the most cru-cial aspect of our professional mission,

leadership in educating the children inurban schools and communitieswhoare more culturally diverse than everand to renew and advance our attentionto their achievement in the stressfulurban setting. This challenge may bediscomforting.

Opening the Debate aboutMulticulturalism

I used to love the word "closure." I

liked the end of a course, finishing datagathering, closing the debate before avote, completing an article, picking thelast tomato, and washing the last dish.Because I relate to products more thanprocess, it has taken me many years toappreciate the process of things. A con-versation with a sociolinguist colleague,Ngure wa Mwachofi of the Universityof Wisconsin-Parkside, changed mymind about having "closure." He toldme about post-modern philosopherMichel Foucault's analysis of the term.Foucault said that closure illuminates a

practice that has always exhibited adangerous tendency: the need that

many people have to label and dismiss,

to feel good and stop thinking. Thismeaning of closure has bothered me. It

relates to how we think of politics and

multiculturalism.

In politics, we are so confused by the

end of the Cold War that we want closure

on whether or no'. the Russians are our

friends. How we. use language is alsopolitical. In language, closure meansthat we can change a word to create a"politically correct" phrase. Should we

say Hispanic or Latino? Asian, not

Oriental? Closure enables us to havecomfort. It puts a label on a boxalabel that inhibits us from opening the

box to see what is really inside.

Many people have sought closure inthe process of defining multicultuialismand multicultural education. Once we

get past the disuniting debates about

what books or knowledge should berequired (and those debates are necessary

for every person to go thmugh in onier toestablish a foundation of common knowl-edge about issues of cultural diversity incurriculum), we then need to engage inmulticultural awareness, learn to appreci-

ate diversity, and take action. Havingclosure often ends in "doing multicultu-ralism" this year, like we "do dinosaurs"in second grade. What is discomforting

is that the definition of multiculturalism isunsatisfying, because it does not provide

the closure that most people seek. Theywould be disappointed to hear James

Banks, key scholar in the field of mul-

ticultural education, say that multicultu-

ralism is a concept, a movement, and aprocess, and, as such, there can be no

closure.

The Evo;ution ofMulticulturalism

The concept of multiculturalism itselfhas evolved. There was first the notionthat only culturally and linguisticallydiverse people need multicultural educa-tion. Then came the human relationsidea that everyone's uniqueness and feel-

ings should be acknowledged. Next, theethnic studies movement advocated thestudy of excluded minority groups andworld literatures. There are now propo-nents who attempt to conil)ine all threeof these perspectives to help el;hanceself-esteem, enable positive interaction,and raise global awareness. Amongscholars in the field, the goals behindeducation that is multicultural and sociallyreconstructionist are to improve academic

outcomes; promote equity among gender,ethnicity, and exceptionality; and effectchange in the society beyond the school.

This is merely the concept or group of

concepts about multiculturalism. As amovement, multiculturalism affectsschool leaders, parents, communitymembers, and society as a whole. Mul-ticulturalism challenges the verticalview of cultural development as therefined production of an elite (mostlywhite men of leisure and power) andrecognizes, from an anthropological

perspective, that all cultures have re-sources and value. Paulo Freireworked to develop literacy in marginal-ized people by initiating dialogue withthem to help them recognize that theideas, actions, values, and objects of eve-ryday existence are cultural and worthreading about.

As a process, multiculturalism obvi-

ously does not provide closure. Changeis the only constant. This concept iswhat philosophers say and how calculusstudents solve problems. Viewing mul-ticulturalism as a process should returnus to a larger sphere of schooling as afunction of U.S. democracy and aleaven of our society. The process ofmulticulturalism should connect ourschool learning to the elements ofauthentic learningincluding criticalinquiry and other higher-order thinkingrich multidirectional conversation andother linguistic modes, social engage-ment and support for learning, and, mostof all, real world applications in class-room instruction, all of which are essen-tial to principles of democracy. In thisregard, multicultural educational processes

serve to open opportunity for learning toall students by stimulating students toengage in different forms of inquiry.For instance, students can pursue differ-ent forms of inquiry when addressing

societal issues (e.g., the environment,politics, and social reform) across thecurriculumin mathematics, science,language arts, social studies, and so on.

Multiculturalism: Implicationsfor School Climate and Pedagogy

Multiculturalism requires not only achange in curriculum, but a change inschool climate and pedagogy. In additionto implementing a higher-order, mul-ticultural curriculum, schools need toaddzess affective issues. Schools andthe people in them need to invite diver-sity, eradicate stereotypes, enhance self-esteem, encourage all members of thecommunity to have a voice, and demandeducational achievement. The centralpractice in schools is communication,where there is equal emphasis on spoken,

written, and nonverbal forms. The focuson communication in urban classroomsis critical, given the centrality oflanguage and the variety of linguisticexpression in homes and schools.

Without looking deeply into multicul-turalism, the need for closure becomes athin veil for a tendency toward exclusion of

underrepresented cultural groups. All ofour practices and conceptualizationrequire critical examination and change.We must tegin where each child andeach adult is at the moment. We cannotask for action from a person coming tofirst awareness. We need to communicate

so that awareness matures into makingchanges and taking action appropriatefor our work, our place in the culture,and our place in the social system.

Bibliography

Banks, J.A., & Banks, C.A. McGee (1992). Multicultural education: Issues andperspectives (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Foucoult, M. (1973). The order.of things. New York: Vintage Press.

Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. Boston:

Virgin and Garvey.

Hilliard, Asa G. (Dec. 1991/Jan. 1992). Why we must pluralize the curriculum.Educational Leadership, 4(49), 12-16.

wa Mwachofi, N. (in press). "On language as human intervention: Apprehending thediscursive power of post-colonial literature as counter-discourse." Manuscript to be

published in Discourse and Society, Department of Communication, University of

Wisconsin-Parkside.

John Attinasi is professor in the Department of Teacher Education and directorof bilingual credentialing at California State University at Long Beach. From

1990 to 1993, he was associate professor and director of the Urban Teacher Edu-cation Program (UTEP) at Indiana University Northwest in Gary. UTEP is a mul-

tischool district and university consortium for school-based professionalpreparation and development serving Northwest Indiana. It is one of the few pro-grams that prepares teachers for the urban context. Classroom teachers and uni-

versity faculty work in instructional teams as co-instructors and co-researchers,and parents and community members are involved in program decision-making.Attinasi's extensive written work includes articles on teacher preparation for lan-guage and cultural diversity and language attitudes, discourse, and developmentin the Latino community (and particularly the Puerto Rican community). He re-ceived his doctorate in anthropology from the University of Chicago and is a flu-ent speaker of Spanish, French, and Chol Maya.

Multicultural Education: Challenges toAdministrators and School Leadeishi

By Carol D. Lee, Ph.D.Northwestern University

Beliefs that DriveImplementation ofMulticultural Education

One of the fundamental difficulties

in implementing multicultural edu-cation in a school is its challenge to themany basic beliefs and assumptions heldby teachers and administrators in schoolsand by parents and other members of the

larger community being served. Whatmulticultural education will look like inany individual school will be a functionof the beliefs of key figures around anumber of important issues. Amongthese issues are the following:

1. Beliefs about the demands of demo-cratic citizenship

2. What it takes to succeed in America

3. Traditional motifs about key periodsin the history of this country (such asthe settling of this country by variouswaves of European immigrants, thewestward expansion, the Africanenslavement)

4. Beliefs about what knowledge base iscritical for learning in preparation forthe twenty-first century

5. How children and adolescents learn

6. The role of language in learning andvalue judgements about differentvarieties of English and the languagesof linguistically diverse immigrantgroups

School communities must ask them-selves difficult questions:

1. Whether implementing a curriculumthat challenges the assumptions thatthey believe unify this country willresult in further alienation amonggroups

2. Whether it is actually best for schoolsto attempt to unify groups by imple-menting a curriculum that emphasizeswhat different groups have in commonas opposed to what makes each groupdistinct

Implications ofMulticultural Education

There is also often much uncertaintyamong educators and parents about howto integrate multicultural considerationsinto the academic demands of a curricu-lum and whether such integration willresult in increased achievement for

students, especially students who are not

succeeding in our schools. All of these

questions are heightened for schools that

have ethnically, economically, and/orlinguistically homogeneous studentpopulations. Pressures from parents andcommunity residents are often morevirulent under such circumstances, with

more conservative political interests in

communities asking whether or not they

.have a right to have their interests and

perspectives represented in the curriculum

of schools they directly fmancially sup-port, especially when those interests are

in conflict with commonly accepted tenets

of multicultural educational philosophies.

Conceptions ofMulticultural Education

This network of conflicts and questions

is complicated even further when oneconsiders that we do not all share the

same meanings about what multiculturaleducation means and looks like. Sleeterand Grant (1987) point out three basicconceptions of multicultural educationreflected in the literature up to 1987.

One view is multicultural educationas experiments in promoting humanrelations. Under this framework, activi-ties that provide opportunities for students

of different ethnic and racial back-grounds to interact are sufficient. Thebasic curriculum of schools can remainrelatively untouched under this umbrella.

A second view is multicultural educa-tion as finding ways to teach effectively

2

the culturally different. Teachingstrategies aimed at using culturally sensi-

tive instructional strategies for African-

American, Native American, and Latino

students may be sufficient to fulfill the

expectations of this view of mulicultural

education. The curriculum in schoolsthat teach white students, particularlythose from middle-class and affluentdistricts, is in no way challenged tochange. Sleeter and Grant (1987) notedthat most studies under both of theseframeworks look at diversity primarilyin terms of race and ethnicity and ignoredifferences in terms of gender, socialclass, and handicap.

The civic debate over which of theseviews of multicultural education will bethe goal of a district's aUempts at trans-formation is neither simple nor straight-forward.

The third view is multicultural educa-

tion as social reconstructionism. Underthis framework; students ere taught tochallenge the assumptions and world-views that inform the traditional contentof schools' curricula, and in particular,history curriculum. Students are alsoencouraged to become social activists intheir communities, to confront conflictsaround issues of race, class, gender, andhandicap. This view of multiculturaleducation challenges schools to changethe content and delivery of instruction,regardless of the racial, ethnic, linguistic,

or economic class makeup of the studentpopulation. It is this view of multicultur, 1

education that is most radical and most

Multicultural Education:Challenges to Administrators and School Leadership

I. I

problematic to implement, especially inschool districts where the student popu-lation is predominantly white, regardlessof class. The civic debate over which ofthese views of multicultural educationwill be the goal of a district's attempts attransformation is neither simple norstraightforward. What set of criteria areappropriate for framing such debate andwhat role school administrators andother school leaders play in such debateand transformation are crucial issues toconsider.

School administrators must first holdan internal debate with themselvesferreting through the maze of difficultquestions inherent in implementingmulticultural education.

The Role of SchoolAdministrators

School administrators are much likethe coaches of professional athletic

teams. The administrators are clearlythe motivators and strategic leaders ofthe teams. The coaches are responsiblenot only to the teams, but also to the pro-fessional associations of which theteams are a member, to the owners ofthe teams, to the general managers, andto the general public. Similarly, school

administrators are responsive not only totheir teachers and students, but also tothe local and state legislators and other

governmental policy makers, to keypolitical figures, to the general superin-tendent, to the district.superintendent, tothe general public, including parents andcommunity members with active political

Multicultural Education:Challenges to Administrators and School Leadership

and economic interests. This comparisonis intended to make clear that schooladministrators cannot legislate changealone and are often consmined byforces external to the school. At thesame time, realistically, school adminis-trators are public servants and peoplewho presumably want to keep their jobs.Still, what makes a super coach alsomakes a super principal: leadership.

This means, among other things, thatthe school administrators must first holdan internal debate with themselves ferret-ing through the maze of difficult questions

inherent in implementing multicultural

education. School administrators mustbe prepared to take a critical gaze, con-sidering points of view with which theymay be uncomfortable, asking themselveswhat it means to take the difficult posi-tion and what is both positive and nega-tive about such a position. Leadershipmeans giving serious consideration toalternatives; being willing to takechances; and, above all, personally taking

a principled position on the critical issues

involved. Undertaking this role neednot be a lonely journey, however. Seri-ous discussions with administrators insimilar positions, lead teachers in one'sschool, and with educational leaderswith whom one does not necessarilyagree can help to broaden one's thinkingand force one to think critically.

3

Framing the Debate aboutMulticultural Education

I believe there are at least two funda-mental tenets that should frame suchcivic debate about multicultural educa-tion. The first is that there are demandson schooling dictated by fundamentalprinciples of U.S. democracy that super-sede what may be distinctly local interests

and points of view. Certainly the CivilWar and the history of the civil rightsmovement in this country have laiddown such a gauntlet. Individual dis-tricts (i.e., states or municipalities) donot have the right to deny citizens theright to vote or to have equal access toeducational opportunities. Our court sys-tem and legislatures exist in order to pro-vide a forum through which we mayclarify the fuzziness of what such politi-cal rights may operationally look like.The ongoing political debate over abor-tion rights is an example. Note that Ihave not referred to the moral debateover a woman's right to abortion or anunborn child's right to life. The ongoing

political debate in courts and legislaturesis around how to balance the individualright to dissent with fundamental rightsassured and implied within the Constitu-tion. This civic debate is part of the nec-essary fabric of our democracy.

Thus, as a second tenet, it seems tome that a fundamental demand ofschooling is to prepare students regard-less of race, ethnicity, linguistic diversity,

social and economic class, gender, orhandicap to participate actively in civicdebate. Civic debate, as opposed to

4

name calling and political oratory,requires participants to respect differences,

to be able to hear the points of view ofothers without necessarily having togive up one's own, to be willing both tocompromise while at the same timeactively struggling within the bounds ofcivic debate and political organizing tocontinue to push for one's position, andto learn to live with the consequences ofone's decisions.

Confronting the hard questions both inpreparation for transformation and inthe implementation of the multiculturaleducational practices are part of ourcivic responsibility to our students,whomever they may be and whereverthey may be.

These two core tenets, I believe, sug-gest that schooling should provide edu-cational grounds for debate that includestudents, parents, teachers, communitymembers, and governmental repre-sentatives. I am suggesting that con-fronting the hard questions both in.preparation for transformation and in theimplementation of the multicultural edu-cational practices are part of our civicresponsibility to our students, whomever

they may be and wherever they may be.I recommend Amy Gutman's book,Democratic Education (1987) as anexcellent example of the kind of civicdebate that should frame our discussions.

I am also convinced that having an opendebate that includes all key parties,including students, will, in the end,approach a view of multicultural educa-tion that more closely approximates the

Multicultural Education:Challenges to Administrators and School Leadership

ii

social reconstructionist view outlined bySleeter and Grant (1987).

Guidelines for ImplementingMulticultural Education

Banks (1991) discusses what he con-siders to be four fundamental pillars tothe implementation of multicultural edu-cation. These include:

Integrating examples and contentfrom a variety of cultures into one'steaching

Helping students "understand, investi-gate, and determine how the implicitcultural assumptions, frames of refer-ences, perspectives, and biases withina discipline influence the ways thatknowledge is constructed"

Transformation of a school to imple-ment multicultural education placesdemands similar to those involved inany kind of whole school change.

Teachers modifying their delivery ofinstruction "in ways that will facilitatethe academic achievement of studentsfrom diverse racial, cultural, genderand social-class groups"

Creating a school culture that"empowers students from diverseracial, ethnic, and gender groups"(Banks, 1991, p. 4)

While these dimensions are compre-hensive and laudatory, they presume a

diverse student population being served.In many rural, small town, suburban,and inner city schools, however, homo-geneity of student population is a fact oflife! Many of these communities do notquestion that homogeneity, but rathersee it as a potential positive force.There are Native American, African-American, and Latino students in manyurban districts who see homogeneousschools and communities as opportunities

to reinforce issues of cultural integrity,heritage, and tradition as a bulkheadagainst the racism that plagues American

history and culture and infiltrates com-mon curriculum at all levels.

Thus, While many may see as an ulti-mate goal schools and communities thatare diverse and integrated, what each ofthese dimensions of multicultural educa-tion outlined by Banks may look like inindividual schools and school districtswill certainly be different. The widegulf between America's goals for socialintegration and the reality of the makeupof so many communities may mean thatthe broadest challenges to the implemen-tation of multicultural education may liein the areas of content integration andknowledge construction as outlined byBanks. In addition, what effects trans-formations in each of the four dimen-sions will have on student achievementremains to be seen.

Multicultural Education:Challenges to Administrators and School Leadership 5

i

Whole School Change andMulticultural Education

In many ways, the transformation of aschool to implement multicultural educa-tion places demands similar to thoseinvolved in any kind of whole schoolchange. The differences may be relatedto the quality of change in teacher beliefs

required. Certainly, the research onteacher change has supported the common-sense idea that how a teacher teaches inhis or her classroom is influenced notonly by curricular mandates, forms ofassessment, and textbooks, but also bypersonal beliefs about how childrenlearn, the nature of the discipline beingtaught, and the capacities of groups ofchildren to learn.

The challenge to administrators tolocate financial support and time forteachers to make a full investment inmulticultural education is a crucialcornerstone of this and any wholeschool transformation.

Changes in Curriculum andInstructional Practices

As with other schoolwide curricularand instructional changes, administrators

must locate time and resources to sup-port teachers in gaining additionalknowledge and strategies to implementand develop the new curriculum theyare to teach. Few examples of whole-sale curricular packages across all disci-plines exist in multicultural education.In addition, our experiences suggest thatteachers are much more likely to imple-

6

ment effectively, and buy into, curriculum

that they themselves develop. By cur-riculum, I mean specific units of instruc-tion and the material support needed toimplement them. By instructional prac-tice, I mean teaching strategies aimed atusing culturally sensitive approaches.This process is slow and time consuming.

Thus, the challenge to administrators tolocate fmancial support and time forteachers to make a full investment inmulticultural education is a crucial cor-nerstone of this and any whole schooltransformation. Implementing multicul-tural education may well require changesin or additions to existing staffing in orderto bring on teachers whose knowledgebase can contribute to the change effort.It may be necessary to increase the diver-sity of the teaching staff along racial,ethnic, and gender lines, and includeteachers with physical handicaps.

Changes in Assessment

Another criticil cornerstone of majorwhole school transformation is assess-ment. Assessment includes more thangathering data on standardized achieve-ment measures. It also means collectingdata on a wide variety of variables thatcan influence the effectiveness of imple-mentation of multicultural educationalapproaches as defined by the school.This may include data on the makeup ofthe teaching and counseling staff, distri-butions of student achievement (grades,course enrollments, attendance, awards,leadership functions, as well as stand-ardized achievement measures) according

Multicultural Educalion:Challenges to Administrators and School Leadership

to race, ethnicity, gender, and familyincome. Assessment should include aserious look at the articulated goalsaround student learning and how thosegoals may be. operationalized in terms ofstudent outcomes. If, for example, theability to articulate and evaluate compet-ing perspectives around issues in thehumanities and social sciences is anobjective, then portfolios using writingscales for evaluating persuasive writingmay be a necessary part of the wholeschool assessment process. If, for example,

the ability to articulate the contributionsof diverse cultures to knowledge inmathematics and science and the abilityto discuss the impact of those contribu-tions on U.S. and/or western civilizationand technology are objectives, then initia-tives involving implementing scientificand mathematical principles in social

contexts (either historical or contempo-rary) may be a necessary part of thewhole school assessment process. It is awell-accepted adage in school reformthat assessment (along with textbooks)drives what happens in the classroom toa significant degree.

Conclusion

Thus, while it is important to considerthe many dimensions of multiculturaleducation, we must also recognize theenormity of the challenge to integratethe content of instruction, but to createopportunities for students to understand,question, and investigate how knowl-edge is socially constructed to reflectspecific interests and points of view.

Multicultural Education:Challenges to Administrators and School Leadership 7

1 0

Bibliography

Banks, J.A. (1991). The dimensions of multicultural education. Multicultural Leader (apublication of University of Washington at Seattle, School of Educafion), 4 (1), 1-4.

Gutmann, A. (1987). Democratic Education. Princeton, NY: Princeton University Press.

Sleeter, C. & Grant, C. (1987). An analysis of multicultural education in the UnitedStates. Harvard Educational Review, 57 (4), 421 444.

DI% Carol D. Lee, is currently assistant professor in the School of Education

and Social Policy at Northwestern University and director of the MaryMcLeod Bethune Teacher Training Institute of the Institute of Positive Educa-

tion in Chicago. Her research interests include cultural contexts for acquiring,teaching, and practicing literacy. Dr. Lee also investigates the consequences ofspecific characteristics of competence in African American English for instruc-tion in reading and writing. Among her publications that address multicultural-ism and literacy are the book, Sigmfying as a Scaffold for LiteraryInterpretation: The Pedagogical Implications of an African American Dis-course Genre, published by the National Council of Teachers of English inthe Research Report Series, and the article, "Literacy, Cultural Diversity, andInstruction," published in the February 1992 issue of Education and UrbanSociety. Dr. Lee has extensive teaching experience at the high school andelementary school levels.

Multicultural Education:8 Challenges to Administrators and School Leadership

ANNOUNCINGNCREL's Urban Education Monograph Series

Available now:

Building Collaborative Cultures: Seeking Ways to Reshape Urban Schools (Kent Peterson,University of Wisconsin at Madison with Richard Brietzke, Purdy Elementary School, FortAtkinson, Wisconsin) UMS-BCC-94, $5.95

Cultural Diversity and Academic Achievement (Barbara Bowman, Erikson Institute with anintroduction by John Attinasi, California State University) UMS-CD-94, $4.95

Synthesis of Scholarship on Multicultural Education (Geneva Gay, University of Washington atSeattle) UMS-SS-94, $6.95

Available Summer 1994:

Raising Expectations to Improve Student Learning (Jerry Bamburg, University of Washington atSeattle)

Multicultural Education: Challenges to Administrators and School Leadership (Carol Lee,Northwestern University with an introduction by John Attinasi, California State University)

Developing Resilience in Urban Youth (Linda Winfield, University of California at Los Angeles)

Available late 1994:

Organizational Structures to Promote Teacher Engagement in Urban Schools (Karen SeashoreLouis, University of Minnesota at Minneapolis)

Getting Ready to Provide School-Linked, Integrated Services (Jeanne Jehl, San Diego PublicSchools and Michael Kirst, Stanford University)

For more information caII:

Lynn J. Stinnette

Director, Urban Education

800-356-2735

FAX: (708) 571-4716

To order, send check or purchase order to:

Publications Department

North Central Regional Educational Laboratory

1900 Spring Road, Suite 300

Oak Brook, IL 60521-1480

NCRELNorth Central Regional Educational Laboratory

1900 Spring Road, Suite 300

Oak Brook, IL 60521-1480(708) 571-4700Fax (708) 571-4716

BEST COPY AVAILABLE