Structure, Social Control, Curriculum, & Multiculturalism #4 Blog Assignment

Thinking way back (well ok, not too far back) to my own school experiences, the history and literature curriculum taught was very traditional from what I can remember. The only true multicultural education I received was that of African-American history and maybe a little Native American history. I don’t remember every being taught anything about African, Asian, and, Hispanic, or Latino culture. Now as I mentioned in my previous post, I didn’t pay much attention in history class. But I can see that some of the curriculum, policies, and structure of my schools were used as a means of social control. Teachers and administrators had an idea of the ‘way things should be’ that they imposed on students inadvertently. For instance, take something as simple as lining up for lunch, some of my teachers would call on certain students to be the “line leader.” The teacher would then proceed to call on each student to line up one at a time, all the way to the end of the line. Most of the time, the teacher was calling on the students first who were sitting quietly with their books neatly packed away, but something as simple as this creates a hierarchy of status for young students. My 3 year old has even been taught at her daycare that the status of “line leader” is a title of significance. And even if the teacher did not intentionally call on the white child before the Latino child, the Latino child may feel as though his ‘place’ in society is just like his ‘place’ in line…last.

The Hirsch essay, Toward a Centrist Curriculum, and the Waxler reading, Multiculturalism in School Curriculum, both discuss how multiculturalism should be integrated into education, and I don’t think their ideas are completely different. While Hirsch uses more elaborate terminology to convey his view, they both seem to agree that a cosmopolitan, centrist curriculum is the best way to incorporate a variety of cultures in our curriculum. Waxler points out that, “Having separate months for different cultures is exactly the opposite of what a true multicultural education should be trying to achieve.” He goes on to give examples of ways he incorporates a variety of perspectives into his classroom. At the same time, he doesn’t think we have to move away from the traditional curriculum. In the Centrist curriculum presented by Hirsch, the third characteristic of the curriculum is that “it gives all children competence in the current system language and allusion that is dominant in the nation's economic and intellectual discourse.” Isn't this basically agreeing with Waxler that we do not have to totally move away from the traditional curriculum? Hirsch agrees that rejecting the dominant culture would harm children that are in most need of help. Hirsch ends his essay by saying, “If we Americans are to choose between the narrow ideal of ethnic loyalty and the broad ideal of social fairness, let us without hesitation choose fairness.” Well said.