Transcript An Analysis of the Incorporation of Culture into Classroom

An Analysis of the
Incorporation of Culture into
Classroom Instruction
Prof. Wang Lirong
Changchun University of Science and Technology in China
Prof.Cui Min Jilin University in China
Prof.Duan Cuixia
Changchun University of Science and Technology in
China
• Abstract: For years, many educators have arduously
attempted to define the term “culture.” Definitions have
viewed “culture” abstractly, which can be summed up as “an
aggregation of beliefs, attitudes, habits, values, and practices
that form a view of reality” (Shade & New, 1993, p. 317).
Other definitions lean toward more concrete ideas which
classify individuals as representative of culture such as race,
religion, ethnicity, age, gender, home language, sexual
orientation, social class, and disability. To form a
comprehensive definition of culture, these researchers view
culture in light of both of these perspectives. Culture involves
the behaviors, attitudes and beliefs of these individual groups
that inform a modal personality, govern rules and behaviors,
and are experienced by individual groups as normal ways of
acting, feeling and being.
•
The United States is comprised of a conglomerate of racial,
ethnic, religious, and other cultural groups and the classroom,
in many ways, represents this diversity. Each semester,
students of various cultures sit in classes to receive daily
instruction. In textbooks and curricula, students have the
opportunity to see their own culture and other cultures
represented so that they can participate and feel included in the
classroom experience and, at the same time, learn about other
cultures. This culturally responsive pedagogy and more is
needed to educate the many “culturally different” students in
society.
When schools produce a curriculum that represents cultural diversity,
students become more motivated to learn and they can make better
transitions between their home and school cultures. In other words,
school no longer becomes an “alien” place where students’ home
knowledge and behavior are not recognized or valued; rather, school
can become a place where students can feel included and build upon
the knowledge they have acquired at home to become more educated
in schools. According to Greene (2000), the incorporation of culture
in classroom activities and curriculum is a way to promote a type of
freedom among diverse groups and individuals. Freedom involves
human beings learning about other cultures. Freedom is obtained by
providing authentic representation of culture in the social contexts
with which individuals grapple in every day life. According to
Yagelski (2000), cultural instruction and activities must engage and
involve learners by reflecting the real world in which individuals live.
In the classroom, this engagement involves a variety of subjects
from reading, writing, and mathematics to study skills and other
courses in which students are involved. For this paper, however, the
focus is on reading and writing activities. Further studies could
include other subjects.
Since the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, educators have
tried various methods to better integrate the school curriculum
with diverse cultural content. These methods were based on
various models. One such model is the Feminist Phase Theory
(Tetreault, 1993) which defines women in the curriculum in
terms of the following hierarchal structure: the Male-Defined
Curriculum which rests on the assumption that the male
experience is representative of humanity. In other words, in a
curriculum, men represent both males and females with the
idea of “mankind.” This idea, considered “inaccurate” among
educators today, because it privileges a male-dominated
society. The Contribution Curriculum acknowledges the
contributions of a few outstanding women. However, when
this approach is presented in the curriculum, women are
represented in a token capacity. Students are left with the idea
that many women have not made significant accomplishments.
The Bifocal Curriculum views the accomplishments of women
and men equally.
It acknowledges that women and men are significant but fails
to point out the unique contributions of both. The Women’s
Curriculum solely focuses on the significance of women. This
approach, similar to the Male-Defined Curriculum, rests on the
assumption that women are representative of humanity. The
Gender-Balanced Curriculum views men and women as both
unique individual groups and a part of an intertwined network
called humanity. This approach is an ideal way to incorporate
gender into the curriculum by viewing the similarities and
differences and the accomplishments of men and women
equally. The Feminist Phase Theory, although useful in
determining the amount of incorporation of gender in the
curriculum, is only based on gender and, thus, fails to include
other cultural groups in order to gain a comprehensive
approach to incorporation.
Another hierarchal model focuses on a broader concept of
incorporating culture into the curriculum. This model is an attempt
to view education, globally so it focuses on the approaches to a
multicultural education, not just by defining gender but by defining
the experiences of students in terms of race, social class, gender,
and ability (Grant & Sleeter, 1993). This more comprehensive
approach to incorporating multicultural content into the curriculum
centers on the following components: Teaching the Exceptional and
Culturally Different which highlights the traditional mainstream
curriculum and views achievements of students based on their
abilities compared to mainstream notions of education.
The Human Relations Approach which centers on similarities
and differences in cultures to help students live harmoniously
in the world; the Single Group Studies Approach that presents
one cultural group in the curriculum at a time so that students
can concentrate fully on the history and perspectives of that
culture; the Multicultural Education Approach which
extensively highlights various groups in an attempt to work
toward social justice for all students; and Education that is
Multicultural and Social Reconstructionist an extension of the
Multicultural Education Approach but one that provides
students with the opportunity to examine and analyze their
own life circumstances in authentic ways.
Similar to the Feminist Phase Theory, each phase is an
improvement over the previous phase mentioned; thus, the
ideal way to incorporate culture into the curriculum is the final
approach, Education that is Multicultural and Social
Reconstructionist in which students are empowered to become
active in their own learning by participating socially and
evaluating their own cultures based on their own cultural
standards and ways of viewing the world. Although this model
explores culture more in depth than the feminist phase model,
the approach appears to be more of an incorporation based on
sociological representation rather than a reading/writing
curriculum incorporation.
In order to more thoroughly analyze cultural content in the
reading and writing curriculum, however, Banks (1993)
devised a hierarchy of how incorporation is often
accomplished into the curriculum. In his model, Banks
classified lower-level attempts to higher-level attempts of
utilizing culture. The most commonly used lower level of
incorporation in a reading/writing curriculum, the
Contributions Approach, provides a quick and easy way to
insert culture into the curriculum but often creates a false view
and a superficial understanding among students since it
focuses on only viewing the heroes and heroines in the culture.
The Additive Approach consists of using thematic units to
study culture but the problem is that this approach views
various cultures, including individual American “subcultures,”
as separate entities, apart from the American culture as a whole.
The Transformation Approach allows students to view
concepts, issues, problems and themes from various
perspectives. This approach allows students to become more
acquainted with culture since students are required to discuss
real issues related to culture. This approach, however, fails to
promote discussions and actions beyond the classroom so that
students can participate in the culture. The final approach is
the Social Action Approach in which students discuss and get
involved with real issues within a culture and participate in
authentic cultural activities outside the classroom in order to
gain a true understanding of culture.
The first two levels of Banks’ model of incorporation are
traditional methods of incorporation in which the curriculum is
not altered. For example, the Contributions Approach may
consist of instructors providing a lesson on famous Mexican
Americans during Cinco de Mayo (May 5th) or instructors
providing a lesson on famous authors with disabilities during
National Disability Week. What happens after the cultural
festivity? During the rest of the year are these cultural groups
no longer worth celebrating or studying? A second concern of
this approach occurs when a person is considered a hero
among some within a cultural group but not among others in
the same cultural group. One example is Malcolm X.
Malcolm X is a noted hero to some African Americans but not
to other African Americans; yet, his work is popularly
represented on most reading booklists of famous African
Americans.
Instructors use the Additive Approach when they add books
onto the mainstream curriculum such as adding a novel by a
Native American author onto a pre-selected booklist in order to
fulfill the University’s requirements of providing diverse
reading materials to students. Instructors also use this level
when they provide units of study dealing with culture such as
adding to the curriculum a unit on the Japanese American
Internment or Desert Storm. The basic problem with this
approach is that, when designing the curriculum, instructors
are left to grapple with the question, “On what basis do I
decide the cultures that are to be studied?” In other words,
how can instructors justify some cultures chosen for study and
not others? Since this approach focuses on representatives of
culture and not the entire culture, itself, the Additive Approach,
along with the Contributions approach, fails to explore culture
in enough depth for students to gain a realistic sense of the
culture studied.
The higher levels of incorporation of this model, however,
actually alter the traditional curriculum to become more
inclusive of culture. Instructors not only view culture by
studying famous people and holidays and reading literature
about various cultures, as with the traditional curriculum, but
with the higher levels of incorporation, instructors are required
to delve into issues, perspectives and social action relevant to
the people studied. These in-depth attempts, provide students
with a more authentic view of culture and more real world
learning experiences ( Paulo Freire, 1994). For example, the
Transformation Approach allows students to see various
perspectives of relevant issues within cultures; thus, instructors
can organize formal debates for students; have students to
conduct interviews within various cultural communities; invite
guest speakers to participate in class discussions; engage
students in research projects that lead them to discover various
cultural views and practices, or require students to write
argumentative papers and engage in projects that will allow
them to utilize their knowledge of opposing cultural views.
The Social Action Approach, an extension of the
Transformation Approach, allows students to completely
venture out of the classroom and into the community. Students
become community advocates as they address social problems
and present views to school officials and other people who can
make a difference in the community. Community service is a
requirement of this approach. For example, a group of students
could assist residents in a battered women’s shelter with
writing resumes and filling out job applications to help these
women gain employment skills. Students can also become
guest story book readers to young children in after-school
programs; students could tutor students in literacy centers such
as library extension programs and adult literacy programs such
as Operation Read. Students could participate in panel
discussions with local or national government officials and
focus on community issues. Students can also participate in
community outreach programs and celebrations to learn more
about various cultures and to become an academic resource to
the community.
Instructors must understand how to incorporate the higher
levels of these approaches to avoid stereotyping cultures. Since
students in the United States live in a multicultural society, it is
important that instructors provide students with a realistic and
accurate portrayal of the various distinct groups classified as
“Americans.” Equally important are the non-American
students studying or living among the many American cultures.
Many of these students will interact with American students as
they work together on the world scene; therefore, each culture
must have an accurate understanding of other cultures.
Instructors may agree that the higher levels of Banks’ model
produce a better understanding of culture but they may be
uncertain regarding how to implement these levels since the
lower levels are more commonly used and taught in many
traditional teacher education programs. When instructors
attempt to study culture even at the lower levels of Bank‘s
hierarchy, it is better than no attempt to provide an
understanding of diversity in the classroom. In spite of the
disadvantages, the lower levels of incorporation, when used
cautiously, often provide a starting point to the incorporation
of higher levels. As instructors begin to evaluate their own
ability to incorporate culture, they should ask themselves a few
basic questions:
•
•
•
•
•
Which approach to multicultural education do I feel
most comfortable using?
Could my portrayal of culture, in any way, be
interpreted as stereotypical or offensive to others?
Am I comfortable with my current knowledge of
diverse cultures?
Do I use activities in the classroom that are
representative of the higher levels of incorporation,
the Transformation and Social Action Approaches?
Do I understand fully how to incorporate the higher
levels into my teaching and lesson preparation?
Conclusion: More diversity preparation among educators may
be needed as educators continue to discover ways of
redesigning the curriculum to incorporate diversity into the
curriculum appropriately. Perhaps local, state and national
professional development workshops can be the beginning to
an exchange of ideas, strategies, activities, and other culturally
responsive pedagogy needed to educate students, instructors,
and the world.
References：
Banks, J. (1993). Approaches to multicultural curriculum reform.
In J. Banks & C.
Banks
(Eds.), Multicultural Education: Issues and
Perspectives, 2nd edition (pp. 195 214). Boston: Allyn
& Bacon.
Freire, P. (1994). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving pedagogy of the
oppressed. New York:
Continuum Publishing Company.
Greene, M. (2000). The ambiguities of freedom. English
Education, 33 (1), pp. 9-14.
Grant, C. & Sleeter, C. E. (1993). Race, class, gender, and
disability in the classroom.
In J. Banks & C. Banks
(Eds.), Multicultural Education: Issues and Perspectives,
2nd edition (pp. 48-67). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Shade, B. J. & New, C. A. (1993). Cultural influences
on learning: Teaching implications. In J. Banks & C.
Banks (Eds.), Multicultural Education: Issues and
Perspectives,
2nd edition (pp. 317 - 331).
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Tetreault, M.K. (1993). Classrooms for diversity:
Rethinking curriculum and pedagogy.
In J. Banks
& C. Banks (Eds.), Multicultural Education: Issues
and Perspectives,
2nd edition (pp. 129-148).
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Yagelski, R. (2000). Literacy matters: Writing and
reading the social self. Teacher’s College Press.