Blog Post #4: Control

The issue of curricular content can be a great point of contention among the stakeholders in education. Parents, teachers, administration and community leaders rarely agree on best practices in regards to selecting the content students should learn. Viewpoints diverge even more when discussing how the content should be presented. As suggested in our blog prompt, I believe most of our debates over curriculum, particularly multicultural curriculum, stem from issues of control. Although the phrase has become a cliché, it is true that knowledge is power. The most educated members of society have the most control over their futures. With knowledge comes opportunity and authority. Sadly, it is also true that human beings have a propensity toward self-preservation and protection. Once a group has attained power, they rarely relinquish it for the common good. It is from this perspective that many proponents of multicultural education argue for change in the way we present our curriculum. They ask that we encourage divergent thinking and present history and culture from multiple perspectives. Some go further and encourage students of specific backgrounds or cultures to preserve their own culture first and foremost. I truly believe that, for the most part, these proponents simply hope to protect and maintain their heritages. However, many experts argue that education from a segmented view only serves to further disenfranchise groups already at-risk for school failure. Instead, many multicultural education advocates hope to focus on commonalities rather than differences. They see multicultural education not only as the presentation of various cultural views, but moreover as equal access to a core curriculum that provides opportunities for all learners.

It is from this perspective that Hirsch argues for a curriculum based in shared cultural literacy. He shares an example from South Africa where students from various ethnic and cultural backgrounds need to be educated together. Hirsch argues that, in any nation, there is a need for a common core curriculum that prepares all students to participate as contributing members of society. This, he believes, levels the playing field for all groups in a society. I have seen firsthand the importance of cultural literacy during my time studying in Segovia, Spain. In Spain there is no official national language and regionalism and autonomy are regarded above all else. However, all students learn castellano, or what we here in the US call Spanish. Classes in Cataluña are taught in both castellano and catalán, in the Basque Country in castellano and euskera and in Galicia in gallego and castellano. This system of education stems from the idea that communication between citizens of Spain is foundational to a strong nation. This shared language makes them stronger, yet they maintain their own identities as autonomous regions. I think Hirsch’s core knowledge curriculum ideas are similar. Having a common knowledge set provides a foundation for educator’s to build on. When all students have access to this knowledge base then we are truly providing a multicultural education.

I also believe, as Adam Waxler, that providing students with varied cultural perspectives does not have to be a matter of creating independent units of study. Integrating cultural into traditional curriculum is just good teaching practice. When we separate groups and cultures we create boundaries that need not exist in the minds of our students. Yes, there are marked differences between the cultures that comprise our planet, but there are many commonalities as well. I think a balanced approach to multicultural curriculum is integral to righting the inequities in our educational system. Curriculum should be comprised of both core understandings and varied viewpoints. Students should share a foundational understanding or level of cultural literacy, but also be able to examine issues from many sides and analyze and judge for themselves.