This article offers an assessment of the state of multicultural pre-service teacher education programs in the United States. Especially given projections of a growing minority population in the United States, the literature indicates that many teacher educators acknowledge multicultural education as important. Training in teacher education programs in this area, however, is at a substandard level across this country. Not surprisingly, many public school teachers who enter urban districts with more students of color, tell stories about their negative experiences with such students and also express sincere frustration about their teaching ineffectiveness. This article addresses, 1) teaching to cultural knowledge, 2) diffusing problematic beliefs and attitudes about other cultural groups, and 3) developing relevant pedagogical skills for teaching diverse groups.
Multicultural education in the United States had started in the 1960s. It was born to an era of considerable political and racial unrest. The basic premise of multicultural education was that minorities should adapt mainstream values, and behaviors of the dominant culture in vocational skills, civic duties, and democratic ideals (Banks, 2001).
At the time, this approach to multicultural education did not mean that minorities should surrender their distinct cultural traits to a homogenous ‘melting pot’ of America. Rather, minorities were to retain their cultural identities and still be a part of American culture much like a tossed salad (Banks, 2001).
To accomplish this objective, the idea was that various cultures in the U.S. needed to accommodate one another to the benefit of all. For pre-service multicultural teacher educators this meant preparing future teachers ‘to be reflective, critical thinkers’ (Gay & Fox, 1995, p. 241) who would promote social equity in their classrooms toward the greater goal of a ‘collective empowerment’ (Lipman, 1996, p. 52) of minorities in their communities.
The present state of affairs
Minorities constitute a growing percentage of the United States population. It has been predicted that 46% of the school population by 2020 would be non-White (Banks, 2001; Neito, 2000). Therefore, it is vital that the growing minority workforce be educated. This is, however, not happening. For example, while social distance between teachers and students continues to grow and teachers receive more education, and students receive less, with 25 states out of the 50 states requiring multicultural pre-service education (Evans, Carol & Sherry, 1997), serious questions need to be raised.
The lack of meaningful multicultural preparation and the fact that most teachers come from isolated ethnic groups, and possess professional preparation that usually excludes direct meaningful interaction with different cultures create problems for proper multicultural understanding (Cannella & Reiff, 1994; Fereshteh, 1995; Gay, 1993; Russo & Talbert-Johnson, 1997). Meaningful interaction entails sufficient exposure to other type s of students, so that teacher trainees gain an understanding that there are cultural differences and commonalties between themselves and other students in terms of general worldviews, how lives are lived and families are disciplined and organized. Having this knowledge of others can surely facilitate communication between teachers and students of other cultures, which might lead to healthy relationships, student satisfaction, and positive learning climates for both teachers and students.
The problem of lack of meaningful multicultural training of teachers may also stem from the parochialism of education and/or the fact that most professors in education share comparable characteristics of their pre-service students’ non-cultural experiences (Parker & Hood, 1995). For instance, some pre-service teachers demand conformity in students who look or behave differently (Payne, 1980), instead of accepting and respecting the students as they are. It is possible to see this problem as psychological, social and academic disconnect between pre-service teachers and minority students.
Although, it remains true that many who want to be teachers believe that teaching is their calling (Grant, 1989; Ooka Pang, 1994), pre-service teachers often have grave expectations about dealing with students who are of different cultural backgrounds and experiences (Aaronsohn, Carter & Howell, 1995; Haberman & Rickards, 1990). Could this situation explain why less than a third of pre-service teachers are minorities? Currently, most pre-service teachers are monolingual (i.e., White females) (Ukpokodu, 2002) who prefer to teach in rather rural and suburban settings. This situation does not connect varying groups into forming a more integrated cultural society.
For those teachers who enter into urban schools, they are soon to leave their positions for the same reasons the diverse students drop out of school – and this is a failure in terms of poor student-teacher interactions and ineffective teaching strategies (Weiner, 1993). A recent study (Gibson, 2002) of student-teacher interactions in a Bronx, New York high school, for example, revealed that predominantly White teachers often spoke of their Black and Hispanic students as aliens, most of whom caused problems, and with whom they often felt ineffective.
This problem may seem to be a manifestation of what Michelle Fine (1991) called ‘silencing” (p.8-9). This term means that many non-minority teachers feel uncomfortable sharing their personal and cultural lives with their students for fear of offending the students in some way or that they do not care enough to want to share.
When pre-service teachers refuse to share vital cultural information about themselves, students of different cultural backgrounds are likely to act in kind. The result is that both non-minority pre-service teachers and non-White students run the risk of misunderstanding each other. This level of misunderstanding might partly explain why pre-service teachers leave urban schools to teach in rural settings shortly after hire.
A teacher’s willingness to discriminate can be fueled by his/her lack of cultural understanding (Rios, 1993). Discrimination on the basis of culture can be manifested in many forms, including informal tracking, disparities in discipline and the establishment of ‘caste systems’ in schools based on race and ethnicity (England et al., 1988; Ogbu, 1978). In the schools, discrimination of any type has caused irreparable harm to educating an otherwise disenfranchised group of minority students.
Although cultural diversity remains as an objective in pre-service teacher training programs, the implementation efforts have been lackadaisical (Garcia and Pugh, 1992). Not surprisingly then, many pre-service teachers have a negative reaction to affirmative action, which may be a reflection of their lack of understanding of the history of minorities and, or appreciation for cultural diversity (Gunzenhauser, Adams & Pauling, 1996).
Multicultural ignorance is responsible for the disproportionate, calculated and subjective placement of African-Americans (especially African American males) (32%) in special education programs (Russo & Talbert-Johnson, 1997). This is especially true in urban areas where 57% of all African-Americans who are below the poverty level reside (Russo & Talbert-Johnson, 1997). In other cases, such ignorance has manifested itself in the form of a child being labeled a troublemaker (Sheets, 1996). The child then internalizes this role and acts it out to invite unscrupulous attention. Other teachers who pride themselves of their non-minority privileges, and differ from their non-White students in social class and race have felt uncomfortable and even demeaned to associate with Black students (Sheets, 1996). How does one teach the other with whom socialization is problematic? And, where does one go from here?
In 1990 the literature about the direction of multicultural pre-service training indicated three directions: 1) ensuring cultural knowledge of different groups; 2) addressing the beliefs and attitudes of pre-service teachers and, 3) training in cultural- relevant pedagogical skills. I believe these three issues are pressing today than ever before:
Ensuring cultural knowledge
Lack of knowledge and understanding can lead to developing stereotypes. One of such stereotypes is the perception of cultural-different students as being intellectually inferior (James, 1980). Often the problem of stereotyping comes from the lack of sufficient information about the other (Nystrom & Perez, 1995). In many pre-service education programs, there is still minimal understanding of race and ethnicity, and yet a high incidence of ethnocentric-power struggles between pre-service teachers and their diverse students.
One’s race is important for discussion because it remains as a trait that could be pre-judged as a negative thing in terms of perceptions of one’s education, intelligence, capabilities, resources and others. For instance, to be of a White race, brings with it privileges. Whites are more likely to enjoy positive assumptions about themselves in school-settings, for example. Recognizing this fact might serve as the first of many steps for training pre-service teachers.
Addressing beliefs and attitudes
Pre-teachers need to learn how to analyze their beliefs and attitudes on cultural differences (Clark et al., 1996; Gunzenhauser et al., 1996; Scott, 1995). Through guided introspection, pre-service teachers may ‘reconcile differing versions of reality’ (Hidalgo, 1993, p. 103) – and thus go beyond surface to deep understanding of culture (Hidalgo, 1993). Surface understanding usually entails mere facts about the culture of others, whereas a deep understanding includes knowledge of perceptions of others and their realities, along with how these perceptions manifest themselves in behaviors within the school environment.
Often traditional pre-service multicultural training focuses on disseminating cultural knowledge and, at the same time, avoiding a discussion about mainstream cultural attitudes and beliefs (Lipman, 1996). For example, there are pre-service teachers who will express a desire to work with urban students ignorant of their non-minority beliefs that support their perceived cultural superiority (Grant, 1989; Montecinos, 1994). In a study of pre-service teachers, for instance, Walters (1994) found that a third of his participants considered fluency in Standard English to be an indicator of intelligence.
Most of these same individuals later responded that they were neither literate nor fluent in a language other than English. These results indicate a narrow vision that Anglo-Saxon values, broadly speaking, are to be universalized, and that different means inferior. Additionally, teachers often attribute the success of White students to internal factors such as motivation. However, they tend to attribute Black students’ performance to external factors like the family (Winfield, 1986). This has been so, in spite of research evidence to the contrary suggesting that teacher expectations influence student achievement (Lipman, 1996).
High teacher expectations often result in high student achievement, while low expectations lead to low achievement (Lipman, 1996). Also problematic is that pre-teachers often criticize students about whom they hold low expectations when they perform poorly, and do not praise them when they perform well (Winfield, 1986). This is a failure on the part of pre-service teachers to internalize appropriate principles and strategies for working with different cultural groups (Garcia & Pugh, 1992).
Instruction in the relevant pedagogical skills
No amount of cultural awareness can make up for good teaching skills (Frisby & Tucker, 1993; Marshall, 1996). Pre-service teachers are to learn proper classroom management and instruction techniques (Sheets, 1996) and as related to issues of cultural diversity. Multicultural education for pre-service teachers involves effective teaching skills with sensitivity toward cultural diversity. Instead of communicating ‘survive in the system’ (Cannella & Reiff, 1994, p. 33) pre-teacher preparatory programs should be communicating to soon-to-be teachers to ‘create a system celebratory of diversity’ (Cannella & Reiff, 1994, p. 33) - a system which empowers students to perform academically (Cummins, 1990).
It takes special skills to make the classroom a safe place to accommodate feelings and perceptions as well as language of the other (Ladson-Billings, 1994; Nieto et al., 1994). Weiner (1993) discussing Vivian Paley’s White Teacher mentioned that when a child feels different from others and this feeling is not addressed naturally - it can become cause for anxiety and an obstacle to learning. Thus, effective teachers with cultural understanding relate lesson-content better to the cultural backgrounds of their students. While relating lesson-content to students’ cultural experiences, for example, can produce student engagement, ignorance of cultural differences can provoke student resistance (Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995).
Peterson and colleagues (1991) conducted an ethnographic study of teachers who were successful working with at-risk students. The authors found out that the teachers in this study knew how to create a sense of belonging and identity, and also placed demands on their students relative to tasks correspondent to the students’ skills and knowledge levels. Teachers with this attitude to teaching tended to respond to student failures as their personal challenges (Winfield, 1986). This study also concluded that a common practice among the teachers was to require that their students re-do assignments which were below acceptance levels, rather than dismiss those students into referral programs, or remedial classes.
Lipman (1996) in a study of successful inner-city teachers had similar findings. Lipman found that successful teachers were those who saw strengths in students where others saw deficits. In this study, the teachers communicated well with both students and parents; they facilitated the students’ sense of belonging in the school environment; they took care of their classrooms like it was their own space; they showed students respect, coupled with high expectations; they demonstrated a seriousness towards academics; they engaged in ‘personal and socially meaningful learning’ (p. 50) and linked academic tasks with students’ daily experience. Gibson (2002) and Haberman (1995) also reported that effective urban teachers are also skilled at negotiating with authority in the best interest of their students rather than being passive and complaining.
In one New York City high school, for example, an effective White female teacher often managed to see the best in both minority and majority students. She took the time to understand her minority students, including African Americans and Hispanics in view of their lives and cultures. Beyond her knowledge, this teacher always communicated to her students that she cared about them. Further, this teacher was not abrasive with her students. She was assertive, persistent, and effective enough as a teacher to capture the attention of the administrators at her school. Because of her effective relationship with minority students, this teacher was liked, and so her requests for extra supplies and expanded office-space to meet the growing needs of her students were granted - much to the envy of her peers (Gibson, 2002).
Simply holding high standards for all students can produce positive results (Lipman, 1996). When teacher expectations are low, and teachers teach down to their students, this can contribute to dis-empowerment of all students, especially African Americans and Hispanics. Thus, the empowerment process must begin early. While success in the early grades does not guarantee success throughout K-12 and beyond, failure in the early grades virtually guarantees failure in later schooling (Slavin, Karweit & Wasik, 1993).
Teaching is largely a communicating profession (Asante, 1992). The point is that when teachers show lack of the relevant skills to communicate adequately with students from other cultures, they choose to ignore powerful cultural dynamics in the classroom (Jervis, 1996). On the one hand, lack of relevant communication with students who are different culturally may mean that minority students be ignored. On the other hand, cultural minority students are at a disadvantage in the classroom and at school because of conflicts between behaviors valued in the home and residential community as compared to those valued in school (Bowman, 1994).
The struggle between these two different worlds usually cause minorities to develop certain values, patterns of communication, cognitive processing, task performance, work habits, self-presentation, and problem-solving skills unique to their experiences (Gay, 1993). It is to be said that differences in cultures are not synonymous with cultural inferiority. Therefore, for teachers who hold this belief in their teaching, the literature indicates a need for a reconstructivistic teaching in which teachers are to make useful connections between students’ home and school-life (Montecinos, 1994; Russo & Talbert-Johnson, 1997).
According to Carroll (1990) and Gay (1993), pre-teachers need to be taught to become changing agents with skills for the following: (1) critical self-analysis, (2) self-reflection and (3) understanding culture. In addition, the authors believe that teachers must develop strategies for teaching both minority and mainstream students. To do this, teachers may need to be immersed in other cultures (Follo, Hoerr & Vorheis-Sargent, 2002). Immersion could be made a part of internships, practica and, or other field-based experiences (Clark et al., 1996; Cannella & Reiff, 1994 on Englert, 1997; Payne, 1980; Russo & Talbert-Johnson, 1997; Weiner, 1993).
Havas and Lucas (1994) suggested also that students volunteer 15 hours at a community agency. Barrett (1993) pointed out that field experiences needed also to include opportunities for reflection on critical incidents. Clark et al. (1996) and Payne (1980) believe that all these activities do facilitate pre-service teachers’ observational and analytical skills about the norms, values and attitudes of others.
When pre-service teachers become involved in multicultural environments, they need to dialogue with their peers, and supervisors to help them to gain an understanding of their experiences and observations (Ooka Pang, 1994). Otherwise, pre-service teachers may further cement their biases, ill-feelings and stereotypes of students who are different from themselves and others. Is Nieto et al. (1994) possibly right to say that becoming cognizant of one’s biases can be a very painful experience?
This article was designed to assist in the training of pre-service teachers for the reason that despite the evidence of increased diversity and cultural segregation of many public schools in the United States, mainstream pre-service teachers consistently show lack of needed competencies in teaching students who are different from themselves. Properly trained, pre-service teachers will be better equipped to address un/foreseen challenges of both diverse (or minority) and mainstream students in the classroom.
Aaronsohn, E., Carter, C. & Howell, M. (1995). Preparing monocultural teachers for a multicultural world attitudes toward inner-city schools. Equity and Excellence in Education, 28: 5-14.
Asante, M.K. (1992). Afrocentric curriculum. Educational Leadership, 49: 28-31.
Banks, J. A. (2001). Cultural Diversity and Education: Foundations, Curriculum, and Teaching. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Barrett, M.B. (1993). Preparation for cultural diversity: Experiential strategies for educators. Equity and Excellence in Education, 26: 19-26.
Bowman, B. (1994). The challenge of diversity. Phi Delta Kappan, 76: 218-224.
Cannella, G.S. & Reiff, J.C. (1994). Teacher preparation for diversity. Equity and Excellence in Education, 27: 28-47.
Carroll, T.G. (1990). Who owns culture? Education and Urban Society, 22: 346-355.
Clark, E.R., Nystrom, N.J. & Perez, B. (1996). Language and culture: Critical components of multicultural teacher education. The Urban Review, 28: 185-197.
Cummins, J. (1990). Empowering minority students: A frameworks for intervention. Pp. 50-68 in Facing Racism in Education. N.M. Hidalgo, C.L. McDowell, & E.V. Siddle (Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review.
England, R.E., Meier, K.J., Fraga, L.R. (1988). Barriers to equal opportunity: Educational practices and minority students. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 23: 635- 646.
Englert, R.M. (1997). The university’s role in the improvement of inner-city education. Education and Urban Review, 29: 373-402.
Evans, E., Carol, T., & Sherry, N. (1997). Multicultural education requirements in teacher certification: A national survey. Multicultural Education, 5: 16 19.
Fereshteh, M.H. (1995). Multicultural education in the United States: A historical review. Multicultural Review, 4: 38-45.
Fine, M. (1991). Framing Dropouts: Notes on the Politics of an Urban High School. New York: State University of New York.
Follo, E., Hoerr, B. & Vorheis-Sargent, A. (2002). Where will urban high school teachers for the 21st century come from? American Secondary Education, 30: 2- .
Frisby, C. L. & Tucker, C.M. (1993). Black students self-perception of self: Implications for educators. Educational Forum, 57: 146-156.
Garcia, J. & Pugh, S.L. (1992). Multicultural education in teacher preparation programs: A political or an educational concept. Phi Delta Kappan, 74: 214-219.
Gay G. (1993). Building cultural bridges: A bold proposal for teacher education. Education and Urban Society, 25: 285-299.
Gay, G. & Fox, W. (1995). The cultural ethos of the academy: Potentials and perils for multicultural education reform. Pp. 239-255 in Beyond Comfort Zones in Multiculturalism: Confronting the Politics of Privilege, Sandra Jackson & Jose Solis (Eds.). Connecticut: Bergin & Garvey.
Gibson, C. A. (2002) Being Real: The Student-Teacher Relationship and African American Male Delinquency. New York: LFB Scholarly.
Grant, C.A. (1989). Urban teachers: their new colleagues and curriculum. Phi Delta Kappan, 70: 764-770.
Gunzenhauser, G.W., Adams, J.Q., and Paulding, W. (1996). Assuring an appreciation for student diversity: Alternatives to teacher education field experiences. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (Chicago, IL, February 21-24, 1996).
Haberman, M. (1995). Selecting “star” teachers for children and youth in urban poverty. Phi Delta Kappan, 76: 777-781.
Haberman, M & Rickards, W.H. (1990). Urban teachers who quit: why they leave and what they do. Urban Education, 25: 297-303.
Havas, E. & Lucas, C. (1994). Modeling diversity in the classroom. Equity and Excellence in Education, 27: 43-47.
Hidalgo, N. (1993). ). Multicultural Teacher Introspection. Pp. 99-106 in Freedom’s Plow: Teaching in the Multicultural Classroom. T. Perry and J.W. Fraser (Eds.).NewYork: Routledge.
James, R. (1980). The multicultural teacher education standard: Challenge and opportunity. Viewpoints in Teaching and Learning, 56: 18-25.
Jervis, K. (1996). “How come there are no brothers on that list?”: Hearing the hard questions all children ask. Harvard Educational Review, 66: 546-576.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). What we can learn from multicultural education research. Educational Leadership, 51: 22-26.
Lipman, P. (1996). The missing voice of culturally relevant teachers in school restructuring. The Urban Review, 28: 41-62.
Marshall, P. (1996). Multicultural teaching concerns: New dimensions in the area of teacher concerns’ research? Journal of Educational Research, 89: 371-379.
Montecinos, C. (1994). Teachers of color and multiculturalism. Equity and Excellence in Education, 27: 34-42.
Nieto, S. (2000) Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education, (3rd ed.). New York: AddisonWesley.
Nieto, J., Young, R.L., Tran, M. & Ooka Pang, V. (1994). Passionate commitment to a multicultural society. Equity and Excellence in Education, 27: 51-57.
Ogbu, John (1978). Minority education and caste: The American system in cross-cultural perspective. New York, New York: Academic Press.
Ooka Pang, V. (1994). Why do we need this class? Multicultural education for teachers. Phi Delta Kappan, 76: 289-292.
Parker, L. & Hood, S. (1995). Minority students vs. majority faculty and administrators in teacher education: Perspectives on the clash of cultures. The Urban Review, 27: 159-174.
Payne, C. (1980). The integration of multicultural education into the general preparation of teachers. Viewpoints in Teaching and Learning, 56: 77-87.
Peterson, K.D., Benny, B. & Sherman, D. (1991). Themes of uncommonly successful teachers of at-risk students. Urban Education, 26: 176-194.
Rios, F.A. (1993). Thinking in urban, multicultural classrooms: Four teachers’ perspectives. Urban Education, 28: 245-266.
Russo, C. J. & Talbert-Johnson, C. (1997). The overrepresentation of African-American children in special education: The re-segregation of educational programming? Education and Urban Society, 29: 136-148.
Scott, R. (1995). Helping teacher education students develop positive attitudes toward ethnic minorities. Equity and Excellence in Education, 28: 69-73.
Sheets, R.H. (1996). Urban classroom conflict: Student-teacher perception: Ethnic integrity, solidarity, and resistance. The Urban Review, 8: 165-
Slavin, R.E., Karweit, N.L. & Wasik, B.A. (1993). Preventing early school failure: What works? Educational Leadership, 50: 10-18.
Ukpokodu, N. (2002). Breaking through pre-service teachers’ defensive dispositions in a multicultural education course: A reflective practice, Multicultural Education, 9: 25-33.
Walters, T.S. (1994). Multicultural literacy: Mental scripts for elementary, secondary, and college teachers. Equity and Excellence in Education, 27: 45-52.
Weiner, L. (1993). Preparing Teachers for Urban Schools: Lessons from Thirty Years of School Reform. New York: Teachers College Press.
Winfield, L.F. (1986).Teacher beliefs toward academically at- risk students in inner urban schools. The Urban Review, 18: 253-268.
Wlodkowski, R.J. & Ginsberg, M.B. (1995). A framework for culturally responsive teaching. Educational Leadership, 53: 17-21.
© Radical Pedagogy