Top Readings : Fall 2017
Banks, J., Banks, C. (2004). Handbook on research on Multicultural Education. Chapter 1. Multicultural Education: Historical Development, Dimensions, and Practice. pp. 3-25
“If multicultural education is to become better understood and implemented in ways more consistent with theory, its various dimensions must be more clearly described, conceptualized, and researched.” Banks uses five dimensions of multicultural education to review how it can be better understood: content integration, the knowledge construction process, prejudice reduction, an equity pedagogy, and an empowering school culture and social structure. In these five dimensions we see beyond the original temptation to just integrate multicultural images. Instead Banks calls us to truly integrate and critically examine the hows and whys of multicultural education. It must be implemented broadly and with intent to actuate change in our educational practices. In my curriculum, I find myself having trouble moving out of the first dimension of multicultural education, content integration. It is important for me to move into ways I can utilize my class as a place of empowerment, validation, and equity.
Lee, N. Culturally Responsive Teaching for 21st Century Art Education.
“It is important that teachers understand that students learn in different ways and effective teaching requires recognizing and responding to those differences.” In this article in Art Education, Lee discusses the importance of culturally responsive teaching. In it, Lee discusses race and its importance in creating an atmosphere of validation in art education. This article is written for practicing art teachers, preservice educators, and higher education teachers and gives practical tips for integrating discussions on race and culture. Lee also discusses some student work that responds to the topic of race in a way that was both personal and meaningful. Lee concludes, “Exploring race through artmaking facilitated these preservice art teachers' learning to perceive and understand the world through multiple frames of reference, better positioning them to work with an increasingly diverse school population and better preparing them to connect meaningfully to student's lives and lived experiences.”
Kraehe, Hood, Stewart. (2015). I’m so offended!: Critical Flashpoints and Critical Arts Education.International Journal of Education & the Arts, 1-28.
In this article, Kraehe, Hood, and Stewart write about how preservice educators gain and distribute their sociocultural knowledge. They look at how this complicates the conversation on preparing arts educators for diversity and equity. There is a lack of diversity in preservice educators and how they go about understanding themselves within this context affects the success of students. They look at the issues this creates and give potential situations that show this discrepancy. They also look at offense. They create a dialogue about giving and taking offense and how that might affect how a preservice teacher might interact in a “diverse” situation. They show that a lot of times using the words, “I’m offended,” can be a strategy to avoid a complex and/or uncomfortable issue. “Sociocultural knowledge is foundational to making arts education equitable and inclusive. In particular, the three curriculum flashpoints [identity formation, questioning knowledge, and the language of offense] highlighted in our research may serve as important organizational pillars for educator preparation.” As I think about this article, it challenges us as teachers to move beyond our comfort zone. It is important that we understand our students for who they are and how they think. Never hide behind our own discomfort.
Gaztambide-Fernández, R. A., Saifer, A., & Desai, C. (2013). “Talent” and the misrecognition of social advantage in specialized arts education. Roeper Review, 35, 124-135.
This article by Gaztembide-Fernández, Saifer, and Desai is a critical case study of the School for Creative and Performing Arts (CAPA) in the Greater Toronto Canada area. In it they look at what it means to be “gifted” or “talented” and how students are tagged and served as “gifted.” In the article, the authors draw attention to the under-representation of underserved populations in gifted education programs. They question the unconscious biases of teachers and evaluators who determine who belongs in these populations and the qualities that are associated with them. They question issues of racism and exclusion in these programs and the availability of them to certain sub-groups. I thought the article was really interesting in the way CAPA related the term talented to things such as exposure and previous knowledge. We see this over and over in our students. If a student has the ability, means, and desire to take classes over the summer or private lessons, of course they are going to appear better at something than their peers. Does this constitute talent? This idea of a perfect student just doesn’t exist. “Perfect” is a very dangerous term. Preconceived notions of a student is the easiest road to stereotyping and misrepresenting an individual.
Bonus Reading (classic literature that just has a random feel-good story) : Hans Brinker, Mary Mapes Dodge
