Although feminist perspectives are at times in conflict with each
other, all focus on the lives of women and, to some extent, social
justice for women.
Historically, we know that particular racial and ethnic groups,
the poor, and women have been both withheld from educational opportunities
and placed in schools for purposes of regulation, labeled as inferior
and intellectually unsuited for "advanced" forms of "reasoning",
tracked, placed disproportionately in special education, and on
and on. The rationale for these educational decisions has been "scientific
truth regarding the nature of human beings". What is this scientific
truth? ---- Truth is reason; those who do not reason about the world
in the appropriate way must be inferior and are not suited for education.
Truth is universality; those who do not fit the norm that we have
created for human beings must have something wrong, so must be remediated.
Truth is progress; those who do not advance through material possessions,
increase their monetary resources, or through education must be
lazy or they would "progress". In the context of our presentations
today, truth for teacher education is monocultural and technoscientific;
those who would move beyond traditional knowledge bases are considered
radical or attempting to cause trouble, and labeled as "those minorities".
Truth is speaking English; those who do not are categorized as inferior,
as not belonging "here". Truth is gendered; women were born for
particular roles and those who do not follow those roles are mentally
incompetent, too masculine, or even perverts. And finally, Truth
is White!! ----
Recently, some theorists have proposed that the Truths that are
constructed and accepted as legitimate for society are dependent
on the negotiation of power relationships between various groups
of people (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Kincheloe, 1991). These "Truths"
are actually complicated, decentralized discourses constructed in
multiple ways to mask the acquisition and maintenance of power.
Jean-Francois Lyotard (1984) labeled this interpretation of the
concept of Truth as "postmodernism". The objectivity of knowledge
or language and the appropriateness of applying (and imposing) generalized
world views to(on) all human beings are questioned. This postmodern
perspective is the foundation for a critical, and perhaps feminist,
multiculturalism and can be one site from which research can construct
action toward progress in the attainment of social justice in education.
The purpose of this paper is, therefore, to examine postmodern research
perspectives and methodologies that can be tied to multicultural
education in the pursuit of social justice.
Before postmodern research is discussed as an avenue for the examination
of race, ethnicity, class, language, and gender in education, multicultural
education must be recognized as the field in which these issues
have been predominantly addressed related to teaching and learning.
In her historical analysis of the development of multicultural education,
Geneva Gay (1983) reminds us of the origins of the field within
the 1960's and 1970's sociopolitical context. Connected to the civil
rights movement through which racial minority groups sought to overthrow
racism and claim their own histories and identities, multicultural
education emerged as "a form of resistance to dominant modes of
schooling" (Sleeter, 1996). Christine Sleeter addresses the complexity
of multicultural education and explains the diversity within the
field through discussions of antiracists teaching (Banks, 1992;
Darder, 1991; Nieto, 1992), techniques for teaching the culturally
different and human relations training (Hollins, et al., 1994; Tiedt
& Tiedt, 1986), single group studies that include Ethnic, Women's,
Gay and Lesbian, and Black Studies (Asante, 1990; Harding, 1991),
multicultural studies that focus on redesigning schooling toward
an ideal, equitable society, (Baker, 1983; Gay, 1983) and multicultural
and social reconstructionist education, addressing political and
economic oppression (Sleeter, 1996).
While multicultural education has come under attack by some critical
and feminist educators as not radical enough, educators of color
have reminded us that much of schooling is controlled by Whites.
Lifetimes of racism have taught multicultural educators that the
dominant group must be addressed with school reform language that
they will listen to (Banks, 1992; Delpit, 1988). The development
of strategies that would more likely appeal to Whites has resulted
in language that does not appear radical (for example, using the
term human relations as opposed to racial conflict) and practices
that are direct and fit dominant constructions of teaching content
and methodology. Further, most criticisms have been without recognition
of the diverse and complex beliefs and practices represented by
the field (Sleeter, 1996).
Multicultural education has been defined as a form of resistance
to oppression, particularly opposition to White supremacy and recently,
for some, resistance to patriarchy. The goal is an education (and
a society) that does not demand monocultural conformity or adherence
to one dominant norm, but challenges oppression, celebrates diversity,
and strives for social justice, equity, and opportunity. The field
of multicultural education is challenging dominant forms of knowledge,
universalist perspectives applied to human beings, and constructions
of truth that are created and controlled by particular groups as
power over other groups. Multicultural education as a field, at
least partially represents a postmodern view of the world.
Postmodernism
What is postmodernism and how does it relate to multicultural research?
>From the enlightenment perspectives generated in Europe over 500
years ago emerged a belief in universal "Truth", the naturally predetermined
reality and knowledge that was believed to apply to all human beings.
Tied to this "Truth" was the belief in human and individual progress;
"man"kind is always advancing in thought; individuals are always
progressing toward higher levels of growth, sophistication, and
intellect. Further, enlightenment beliefs fostered notions of natural
dualisms, illustrated by the dichotomy constructed in the Cartesian
separation of mind and body, and further demonstrated in contemporary
discourses of male/female, White/Black, good/evil, adult/child,
objective/subjective, reason/intuition, and on and on. As industrialization
maintained and even fostered the enlightenment belief that science
could reveal the natural "Truths" that apply to all, the modern
era emerged. Those of us who are grounded in the "so called" Western
view of the world have accepted this belief in universal truth,
progress, reason, and science without question. In education, specifically,
we have accepted such notions as the existence of particular knowledges
that all children should learn, the belief that science can determine
the universal ways in which all human beings function, and the belief
that a range of teaching methodologies are in some form universally
applicable to all. Postmodern perspectives in a variety of fields
(e.g. arts, philosophy, literature, linguistics) have called to
question these universalized "regimes of truth," labeling them as
social constructions that give power to particular groups over others
(Cannella, 1997; Derrida, 1988; Foucault, 1980; Kincheloe &
Pinar, 1991; Lather, 1991).
When Lyotard (1984) coined the term "postmodern," he referred to
critiques of enlightenment/modernist "grand narratives" or truths
that were applied to all humanity. The notion that reason/knowledge,
and therefore, education would deliver the poor from servitude and
ignorance is an example "grand narrative" that has permeated much
of our educational policy making. This regime of truth has legitimized
the control of particular groups by, for example, denying Blacks
who could not read the right to vote, categorizing those who exhibit
diverse views of the world as ignorant and without talents, constructing
experts who control the lives of others because of their "advanced"
knowledge and reasoning ability. Further, accepting this "grand
narrative" as truth has legitimized blaming the poor for their life
conditions and ignoring the larger social, political, and historical
context that has generated a classed society. Postmodern perspectives
challenge "regimes of truth" or grand narratives, calling to question
the cultural and political contexts from which they have emerged
and the power that is generated for those who construct the truth.
Again, multicultural education is at least to some extent a postmodern
view of the world.
Postmodern thought does represent a variety of different perspectives,
resulting in a definition that is elusive and problematic. However
problematic, a postmodern position is directly applicable to research
in multicultural education because it includes
(1) the examination of regimes of truth, language, and power that
have dominated thought;
(2) social criticism of institutionalized systems and the truth
assumptions underlying those systems;
(3) the recognition that those who have been identified as different
have been labeled the "Other", especially related to gender and
racial perspectives, and
(4) a discourse that both accepts and critiques diverse cultural
practices (Slattery, 1995).
Postmodernism is not a cure for the disease of "grand narratives"
or universal Truth, but the creation of new multidirectional positions
from which to view and construct the world (Lather, 1991). Further,
postmodern thought would challenge us to create an openness to the
unexplained, the ambiguous, the hidden.
Tied to multicultural education, postmodern research perspectives
lead to the construction of such questions as:
What are the regimes of truth that have been used to construct
concepts of schooling? (e.g. child development, psychologized learning,
discipline and management, universalized language acquisition, best
practices) How have these truths been constructed (historically,
politically, socially)? Who claims the truth? What are the assumptions
of these truths regarding difference?
What are the messages that underlie institutionalized educational
systems as they are applied to diversity? How do both conservative
and liberal education support the status quo? How does the construction
of educational professionalism support cultural hegemony?
What students are silenced, disqualified, and/or disregarded by
the regimes of truth that dominate schooling?
What are the "truths" that have constructed multicultural education?
What are the values and methods for analyzing those truths as they
are practiced in the field? How can we, as multicultural educators,
construct dispositions in which we appreciate but continually critique
the field?
Questions and Methods
Scholars such as Jacques Derrida (1988), Julia Kristava (1986),
and Michel Foucault (1980) have constructed theories of postmodern
analysis and research methods. The work of Foucault best illustrates
the possibilities for multicultural education. Foucault's theories
have focused on language, or discourse, as constructing knowledge
and limiting alternative forms. Language and knowledge are therefore,
inextricably tied to power. Foucault raised some of the most important
postmodern questions that apply to the goals of multicultural education.
As examples:
What languages and knowledges have been included and excluded?
How have forms of discourse been used to justify particular knowledge(s)?
Whose truths have been hidden through our discourse methods? Whose
knowledge has been disqualified as not good enough, not important
enough, not sophisticated enough for consideration?
How have particular groups gained control over others through the
discourses that dominate? (Cannella, 1997)
Foucault's focus included the recognition that discourse, knowledge,
and power are rooted in historical, political, and social contexts.
Stressing the need for analyses of power from the bottom up, historical
counterquestions are asked such as: Who has written the history?
Who has been included and excluded? What has been left out? History
is approached as counter-memory (Hutton, 1993). Foucault's "genealogy"
of knowledge is an example of historical methodology that is particularly
applicable for a critical multicultural education. A particular
practice is located in the present and problematized to reveal the
ways in which the practice was historically justified. The discourses
that were used for that justification and the assumptions underlying
the forms of representation are revealed. For example, in his book
Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Foucault (1977)
begins with the practice of imprisonment, asking the question: Imprisonment
had been rejected in the past; how did it later come to be accepted?
As the genealogical analysis progresses, other questions emerge:
What knowledges are disqualified within the construction of imprisonment?
Who gained control? In another example, Thomas Skrtic (1995) recently
used a genealogical method to trace the discourse that has been
used to shape and justify the field of special education. Research
issues applicable to multicultural education would be not only the
genealogy of public education itself, but the problematization of
such discourses as child development, educational constructions
of discipline, testing practices, and English language dominance.
Genealogical analysis provides a research base from which taken-for-granted
truths in the field of education can be challenged.
As a theorist and researcher, Foucault (1978) has provided a perspective
from which to function multiculturally that addresses such issues
as identity, subjectivity, reproduction, discipline, and regulation.
Further, postmodern examples of ties with a critical multicultural
research perspective can be found. Foucault introduced the notion
of "disciplinary power", power constructed as the desire to be "normal"
is produced by dominant discourses. For example, discourses in the
media, education, and fields like medicine and psychology speak
a language in which mothers are expected to spend a lot of time
with their children, "sensitively" talk to them, constantly teach
them how to function in ways that fit the educational system, and
provide a play-oriented "childhood". Those mothers who function
based on this dominant discourse are considered and labeled normal,
good, and responsible; they even take on these labels themselves.
Those who for cultural, individual, socioeconomic, or other reasons
interact with their children in different ways are considered abnormal,
ignorant, irresponsible, and even deviate; these are the mothers
who must be taught to parent, and are labeled as uncaring, deficient
and unknowing. This disciplinary power may be so strong that these
mothers accept themselves as not normal, in some way lacking. Critical
multicultural research could explore the disciplinary powers that
have been constructed within teachers and over students as learners.
Disciplinary powers produce the desire to be normal and may counter
and even silence diverse cultural perspectives and ways of being
in the world.
Tied to postmodern perspectives are fields of thought that, although
not always labeled "postmodern", represent a challenge to dominant
discourses, view resistance to oppression as a necessary action,
and strive to foster social justice. Two of these fields are (1)
a "postmodernized" critical theory and (2) feminist theory and research
as represented by postmodern feminism and feminist scholarship from
the margins.
Postmodernized critical theory.
Grounded in the Frankfurt school and often critiqued as using a
language of privilege, critical theory has many diverse revolutionary
voices. Although avoiding association with the universal, a common
belief is that domination, subjugation and injustice play major
roles in shaping the everyday lives of human beings (Kincheloe &
McLaren, 1994; Bottomore, 1984; Giroux, 1983). Postmodern critical
theorists have challenged the more structural critical perspective
that emancipation and social justice can be achieved through some
form of rational critique. Postmodern criticalists point to the
complexity and ambiguity of human society and the idiosyncratic
ways in which individuals, communities, and even localities are
influenced (Kincheloe & Pinar, 1991). Further, Foucault's work
relating power and discourse has eliminated any utopian belief in
a rational, modernist elimination of oppression. Postmodern criticalists
do, however, address
(1) relationships as unstable and in a modernist society mediated
by capitalism;
(2) ways that oppression is perpetuated by placing those with little
power into positions in which they accept their status as natural;
(3) the interconnectedness of forms of oppressions; and
(4) the ways in which mainstream research constructions and methodologies
reproduce oppression (Kincheloe & McLaren, 1994).
Critical multicultural research is easily tied to postmodern critical
thought. For example, critical analysis of the assumptions underlying
mainstream research methodologies is very much a multicultural issue.
What are the assumptions concerning reality and human truth in the
construction of positivist research methods? Who have these methodologies
privileged? Who have they oppressed? When social science research
methods have been applied to education, has social justice been
the result? Has this educational research been used to regulate
members of particular groups (e.g. women, Blacks, the poor, diverse
families, children in general)? Other example critical issues that
tie with multicultural education include the middle-class materialist
emphasis of dominate educational methodologies, the focus on technology
that will save the learning world, and the construction of economic,
linguistic, and racial division through such practices as honors
and gifted programs. Critical research methods most often include
historical reconstruction and critical ethnography, methods that
support the multicultural researchers attempts to examine various
forms of educational oppression (Sleeter & McLaren, 1995; Kincheloe
& McLaren, 1994).
Feminist Research.
Although feminist perspectives are at times in conflict with each
other, all focus on the lives of women and, to some extent, social
justice for women. For a critical multicultural education, postmodern
feminist research and feminist perspectives that have been constructed
from the margins provide the most insight.
Postmodern feminist researchers "regard truth as a destructive
illusion" (Olesen, 1994, p. 164). The world is viewed as complex
narratives, endless stories of people and their lives. Gender is
not privileged as in some other forms of feminist work, but women
are the focus of the research. Cultural studies that stress both
representation and text are common. One example is the work of Haraway
(1991), illustrating the cultural construction of "woman" as related
to science. With this increased focus on life narratives, postmodern
feminist research has drawn attention to two issues that directly
relate to critical research in education:
(1) The first is the issue of "voice." How are the "voices" of
others to be heard? What does voice mean? and Must voices be made
to fit the dominant discourse learned by the researcher? Based on
this concern, postmodern feminists have begun to search for diverse
(and unthought of) ways in which to provide accounts of women's
lives (Lather, 1996; Fine, 1992; Wolf, 1992; Krieger, 1983).
(2) The second is the issue of "experience." While we have accepted
"experience" as representing life and educational work reality,
postmodern feminists have demonstrated the instability of the concept.
Experience is understood as both representing life and as a vehicle
for the replication of oppressive systems (Scott, 1991). Experience
is an interpretation of life within a context and requires historical,
political, and social analysis. Critical multicultural education
could explore the experiences of teachers and students with the
historical recognition of the position from which their experiences
have been constructed. Additionally, critical multicultural research
could provide further insight into how we listen and attend to the
diverse voices of students in educational settings.
Finally, the work of feminist researchers who represent the margins
of societal power (hooks, 1984), e.g. women of color, lesbian women,
and women with disabilities, provide the most important postmodern
multicultural research perspective. These scholars strain the accepted
boundaries of social science, attacking the dualist lens from which
researchers function. Patricia Hill Collins (1986, 1990), Patricia
Zavella (1987), and bell hooks (1990) are examples of those who
have clearly critiqued the creation of the "Other" by researchers
dominated by male forms of reference, authoritarian assumptions,
and hidden cultural norms. These scholars have always represented
race, gender, and class oppression as undeniably linked. Theories
that would address only one form of oppression are understood as
actually representing forms of thought that are part of dominate
ideology and may even perpetuate that very oppression. As bell hooks
has stated: "Racism is fundamentally a feminist issue because it
is so inter-connected with sexist oppression." (1992, p. 396). This
work from the margins has begun to address the need for the construction
of bonds between us, as Black and White female researchers and educators,
as members of diverse socioeconomic groups, as human beings with
different types of education and life experiences. Again quoting
bell hooks: "As long as White and Black women are content with living
separately in a state of psychic social apartheid, racism will not
change" (1995, p. 224). Perhaps the greatest challenge for the construction
of a critical multicultural research agenda in education is that
we face the ways that we have knowingly or unknowingly oppressed
each other and construct partnerships that would attack any form
of social apartheid that places limits on human beings.
After Thoughts
Postmodernism should not become another "grand narrative", resulting
in a relativistic form of dominance. The interconnections between
the various postmodern perspectives, multicultural education, critical
theory, and feminist perspectives can, however, serve as the conditions
of stimulation and critique for each other.
Editors' Note: APA style is followed as closely
as possible under the html format. Indentions, spacing, andfootnoting
may vary.
References
Asante, M.K. (1990). Kemet, Afrocentricity and knowledge.
Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.
Banks, J.A. (1992). African American scholarship and the evolution
of multicultural education. Journal of Negro Education, 61,
273-286.
Baker, G. C. (1983). Planning and organizing for multicultural
instruction. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Bottomore, T. (1984). The Frankfurt school. London: Tavistock.
Cannella, G.S. (1997). Deconstructing early childhood education:
Social justice and revolution. New York: Peter Lang.
Collins, P.H. (1986). Learning from the outsider within: The
sociological significance of Black feminist thought. Social Problems,
33, 514-532.
Collins, P.H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness
and the politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge.
Darder, A. (1991). Culture and power in the classroom. New
York: Bergin & Garvey.
Delpit, L.D. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy
in educating other people's children. Harvard Educational Review,
58, 280-298.
Derrida, J. (1981). Dissemination. (B. Johnson, Trans.).
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Fine, M. (1992). Passions, politics and power: Feminist research
possibilities. In M. Fine (Ed.), Disruptive voices (pp. 205-232).
Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the
prison. New York: Pantheon.
Foucault, M. (1978). The history of sexuality: Vol's I-III.
New York: Pantheon.
Gay, G. (1983). Multiethnic education: Historical developments
and future prospects. Phi Delta Kappan, 64, 560-563.
Giroux, H. (1983). Theory and resistance in education: A pedagogy
for the opposition. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey.
Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking
from women's lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Haraway, D.J. (1991). Simians, cyborgs and women: The reinvention
of nature. London: Routledge.
Hollins, E.R., King, J.E., & Hayman, W.C. (Eds.). (1994). Teaching
diverse populations: Formulating a knowledge base. Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Hooks, B. (1984). Feminist theory from margin to center.
Boston: South End.
Hooks, B. (1990). The politics of radical Black subjectivity. In
b. hooks, Yearning: Race, gender, and cultural politics (pp.
15-22). Boston: South End.
Hooks, B. (1992). Sisterhood: Political solidarity between women.
In J.A. Kourany, J.P. Sterba., & R. Tong (Eds.), Feminist
philosophies (pp. 391-404). Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hooks, B. (1995). Killing rage: Ending racism. New York:
Henry Holt and Co.
Hutton, P.H. (1993). History as an art of memory. Hanover,
NH: University of New England, University of Vermont.
Kincheloe, J.L. (1991). Teachers as researchers: Qualitative
inquiry as a path to empowerment. New York: Falmer Press.
Kincheloe, J.L., & McLaren, P.L. (1994). Rethinking critical
theory and qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.),
Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 138-157). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kincheloe, J.L., & Pinar, W. (1991). Curriculum as social
psychoanalysis: Essays on the significance of place. Albany:
State University of New York Press.
Krieger, S. (1983). The mirror dance: Identity in a woman's
community. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Kristeva, J. (1986). The Kristeva reader. (T. Moi, Ed.).
New York: Columbia University Press.
Lather, P. (1991). Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogy
with/in the postmodern. New York: Routledge.
Lather, P. (1996). Methodology as subversive repetition: Practices
toward a feminist double science. Paper presented at the American
Educational Research Association, New York.
Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Lyotard, J. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge,
(G. Bennington and B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press.
Nieto, S. (1992). Affirming diversity. New York: Longman.
Olesen, V. (1994). Feminisms and models of qualitative research.
In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative
research (pp. 158-174). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Scott, J. (1991). The evidence of experience. Critical Inquiry,
17, 773-779.
Skrtic, T.M. (1995). Disability & democracy: Reconstructing
(special) education for postmodernity. NY: Teachers College
Press.
Slattery, P. (1995). Curriculum development in the postmodern
era. New York: Garland Publishing.
Sleeter, C. E. (1996). Multicultural education as social activism.
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Sleeter, C. E., & McLaren, P.L. (Eds.). (1995). Multicultural
education, critical pedagogy, and the politics of difference.
Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Tiedt, P., & Tiedt, I. (1986). Multicultural teaching: A
handbook of activities, information and resources. Boston: Allyn
& Bacon.
Zavella, P. (1987). Women's work and Chicano families: Cannery
workers of the Santa Clara Valley. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University
Press.
Gaile Cannella is Associate Professor of Early Childhood and Multicultural
Education and Assistant Head of the Department of Educational Curriculum
and Instruction at Texas A&M University at College Station,
Texas. E-mail : g-cannella@tamu.edu
AWL Journal Home Page
AWL Journal Volume
1, Number 2, Winter 1998
|