SPRING/SUMMER 201539

Promising Practices

Eleni Oikonomidoy is an associate professorof multicultural education

in the College of Educationat the University of Nevada, Reno,

Reno, Nevada.

cesses in which highly digitalized spaces impact identity construction of youth.

u Display mini-specialization in one aspect of globalization and education through the completion of a research project.

u Demonstrate critical and analytical skills in transferring theory into prac-tice in the development of critical edu-cational responses to globalization.

Asitbecomesevidenttothereader,orforthatmattertoastudentwhoenrollsintheclass,multiplelevelsofanalysisarein-tegratedinthecourse.Whiletheentrancepointisatthemacro-level,itishopedthatthe transfer of theory into practice willtakeplaceatthemeso-andmicro-levelsofteacherpractice.

Theoretical Lens:Multidimensional Analysis

The transition from the macro-levelof globalization’s social forces into theworldofschoolstakesplacegraduallyinthecourse.Inthefirstthematicunit,thestudents are introduced to the multipledimensions of globalization and theirrelationship to education (Bottery, 2006;Spring,2009).Atthesametime,theyareprovidedwithliteraturethatinterrogatesthe perceived sweeping one-dimensionalglobal forces and critically analyzes un-derlyingprocesses(Popkewitz,2000). Thegoalisforthestudentstobegintoidentifyactorsthateitherpromoteorresisttheglobal‘agenda,’whilesometimesdoingboth.Attention is devoted to the strongrelationship between the global and thelocalandtofoundationalworkonculturalformations/tranformations in the era ofglobalization(Appadurai,1996). Inthesecondthematicunit,attention

Introduction

AlongwithwhatIsuspectmanyofmycolleagueswho teach college-levelmulti-culturaleducationclassesexperience,myinitialapproach to teaching introductorycoursestograduatestudentshascenteredonthehistoryofthenationaleducationalsystemintheU.S.andincludedpracticesandpoliciesinschools.Forthosewhowishtogainfurtherspecializationinthefield,Ihavetriedtoexpandthescopeofmyclassesinseveraldifferentways,including:(a)iden-tifyingcontentsub-areas(i.e.,immigrationandeducation);(b)proposingaspecifictheo-reticaldimension(i.e.,criticalmulticulturaleducation);and(c)enlargingthescope(i.e.,fromthenationaltotheglobal). Todate,Ihaveattemptedtoadvancethe global framework in two particularways. One way is through the compara-tiveanalysisofdifferentnationaleduca-tionalsystems.Inoneofmygraduate-levelclasses,throughtheguidanceofaneditedbook,webeginbyexaminingissuesofdi-versityandequityinvarioussocietiesandconclude our conceptual journey aroundtheworldwithidentifyingtheimplicationsofouranalysisasitimpactstheU.S.andmorespecificallyourownpractice. Analternativeapproach,whichIwillpresentinthisarticle,aimstoaugmentthe scope by focusing on global issuesthroughexplicitattentiontoglobalization,culture, and education. Insights abouttheoriesandpracticesindifferentpartsoftheworldaresituatedwithintheframe-workofglobalizationandglobal,national,andlocalconnectionsaresoughtatthesevariouslevels.

Thegoalisforthestudentstoengageinacriticalanalysisoftheissuespresentedandidentifyconceptualconvergencesanddivergences.Theprocessesandtheaimsofthisadvanced-levelcoursearepresentedbelow.Theprimaryaimistoengageinadiscussionof onepossibleapproach thatcouldbeused to complimentalternativeones(Starks,2013).

Course Overview

The course description provides aninitial point of departure into a globaljourneywithlocalconsequences.

Course Description

This graduate-level course will help students learn about ways in which globalization impacts educational policies and practices around the world. Utilizing culture as an en-trance point, we will examine how students’ identities and teachers’ positions are shaped in the changing global social and educational terrain. Finally, we will work to create critical educational responses to globaliza-tion, which are complimentary to multicultural education.

Stemming from the general coursedescription,therelevantcourseobjectivesfollow:

Course Objectives

u Illustrate knowledge of historical macro-level theories that have been used to understand the multifaceted expressions of globalization.

u Engage in a critical analysis of cur-rent frameworks that attend to the relationship between globalization and education.

u Familiarize yourself with key pro-

Positioning Multicultural Educationacross the Mirror of Globalization

Eleni Oikonomidoy

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION40

Promising Practices

is given to the micro-level processes inwhich digital social spaces impact stu-dentidentities.Conceptssuchashybrididentitiesarediscussedwhiletheoreticaldiscourses that contrast youth popularculturewithschoolculturearecriticallyanalyzed(Deuse,2006;Freistat&Sadlin,2010;Kenway&Bullen,2007;Williams,2008). Theaimofthisunitisforthestudentsto move beyond traditional conceptions,whileatthesametimecriticallyanalyzingthemeaningofdigitalorphysicalspacesonidentityconstruction.Theparticipantsareaskedtoidentifythepossibilitiesandrestrainsthattechnologypresentstoedu-cation/educators. The third and final thematic unitattends more closely to the meso-levelworldofschools.Thestudentsareaskedtolocatesourcesofteacheragencywithinthe confines of existingpolicymandates(Margolis,2006;Vongalis-Macrow,2007).Theyarethenencouragedtoenvisioncur-ricularandpedagogicalpracticesthatareglobally responsive and locally relevant,whilemaintainingacriticallensthrough-out(Camicia&Franklin,2010;Horsley&Bauer,2010;Karseth&Sivesind,2010). Inalltheselevels,criticalanalysisre-mainsthegoal.Thestudentsareencour-agedtomakeconnectionsandanalyzethematerial in light of their application totheirpersonalandprofessionallives.Atthesametime,theyareaskedtocompli-ment the macro-level analysis with thedevelopmentofamini-expertisethrougharesearchproject.Amoredetailedlookonthespecificsofthethreethematicunitsfollows.

Thematic Unit 1:Setting the Stage

The introductory module in thisclass is shaped around the dimensionsof globalization. In that, the influenceof intersecting economic, geopolitical,technological, environmental, linguistic,and cultural forces on education is ex-plored (Bottery, 2006).Thepressure forstandards, management, accountability,performance,studentsasconsumers,andglobalcompetitionareoftenidentifiedasindications of the transfer of economicglobalization in education. In order tomaketheconnectionsmoretransparent,thestudentsareencouragedtocriticallyscreen national, state, or district-levelpolicydocumentsandtoidentifyevidenceofsuchtransfer.Identifyinghiddenmes-sagesiskeyinthisprocess. Atthesametime,attentionisdevoted

tosourcesofresistancethatexistinmul-tiple levels. For instance, Sassen (2008)writesthat“territory,authority,andrightsarecomplex institutionalizationsarisingfromspecificprocesses,struggles,andcom-petinginterests”(p.74).ThepresentationofcompetingeducationaldiscoursesthroughtheWorld Bank, OECD, and UNESCO,as presented by Spring (2009), framesthe discussion that is complemented byadditional insights,suchasthepro/coun-ter-globalizationdiscussionbyBurbules&Torress (2000)orthedistinctionbetween‘globalizationfromabove’and‘globalizationfrombelow’byKellner(2000). Thegoalisnottopromoteoneagenda,buttocriticallyanalyzeprosandconsinall.Aftertheinitialreview,thedirectiondivertstothelevelofculturespecifically.UsingAppadurai’s (1996) seminal workandSpring’s(2009)typologiesforculturalframeworks,thestudentsareencouragedtoidentifyconnectionsanddisconnectionsofculturalframeworksaroundtheworld.Maintaining a critical lens throughout,theyareaskedtocomparativelyanalyzethe information. Sometimes, they are tocompare and contrast antithetical viewsonsimilartopicsandidentifysimilaritiesanddifferences. For instance, they are asked tocompare and contrast Spring’s (2009)“Examplesofeducationalborrowingandlending:ThecaseofSouthAmerica”(pp.23-27)withPopkewitz’s(2000)sectionon“TheIndigenousForeigner”(pp.174-177).Other times, they are asked to ‘localize’informationthatispresentedintheread-ings.Forexample,onequestionis:

Spring (2009) writes that “…local school officials and teachers do not simply dance to the tune of global flows and networks” (p. 7). Using insights from the readings for today identify three examples that demon-strate resistance to the global flows from teachers/school officials.

Thematic Unit 2:Understanding the Audience

Thetransitiontothesecondthematicunitfortheclassisfacilitatedbytheat-tentiontoculture,whichwasintroducedas the concluding element of unit one.Buildingupontheconceptsdiscussedinthepreviousunit,thestudentsareaskedto explore the unique ways in whichstudents’identitiesareshapedindigitalspaces.Attention is provided to charac-teristics, opportunities, and restrictionsthatdigitalcultureaffordspeople(Deuse,

2006), the fusing borders between thephysical and the digital world (Beavis,2007), and the implicit messages thatare sent through various social media(Freishtat&Sandlin,2010). Recognizing thatnotall youthhaveaccesstothedigitalculture,thestudentsareencouragedtocriticallyexaminetheabove phenomena.At a later stage, thediscussiontransitionstoexplicitexplora-tionaboutidentitiesinrelationtoschool. Theroleofthestudentsasactivepro-ducers inthedigitalspace is juxtaposedwiththeirpassiverolesasstudentsintra-ditionalschools(Kenway&Bullen,2007;Williams, 2008).At the same time, thestudentsbegintoexamineyouthculturalreproduction beyond the digital space.Hybrid, transnational, and cosmopolitanidentitiesarediscussedwithintheinter-sectingwebofsocietalboundaries(Singh&Doherty,2008). Sometimes, the students’ responsesare elicited through general reactionsto the readings. For instance, they arepromptedtoengageinanopenconversa-tionabout readings thataremost likelygoingtotriggerin-depthdiscussions.Onequestionis:

What are your reactions to Freishtat and Sandlin’s (2010) analysis of Facebook? Explain.

Othertimes,theyareaskedtorespondtotheconceptsthatarediscussedinclassbyproviding their own perspectives, as thefollowingquestiondemonstrates:

What does the term “cosmopolitan” or “citizen of the world” mean to you? Would we want all students to be cosmopolitans? Justify.

Thematic Unit 3:Crafting a Response—Teachers as Agents

Theexplicitfocusonyouthidentitiesinunittwopavesthepathwayforadirecttransfer to schools and teachers. Thefocusofthisfinalunitisforthestudentstocontinuetoconnecttheglobalandthelocalthroughacloseanalysisofhowtheirpracticeissituatedinthewebofglobal/na-tional/localpolicies. Thefirstgoalistosituateteachersasactiveagentsintheglobalizationofeduca-tion.Thisprovidesanecessaryfoundationfortheidentificationofgloballyrelevanteducational responses.At the beginningofthetransitiontothisunit,thestudentsareencouragedtoreflectupontheirrolesasteachers(currentorperceivedfuture)andthestructuralforcesthatimpacttheir

SPRING/SUMMER 201541

Promising Practices

“superficial”/touristmethods(Endacott&Bowles,2013)?Whatmaybesomeissueswiththeproposedapproach?Howcoulditbeimproved? Alloftheseareitemsforongoingdis-cussion.

References

Bottery,M.(2006).Educationandglobaliza-tion:redefiningtheroleoftheeducationalprofessional. Education Review, 58(1),95-113

Burbules,N.C.,&Torres,A.(2000).Globaliza-tionandeducation:Anintroduction.InN.C.Burbules&A.Torres(Eds.),Globaliza-tion and education: Critical perspectives(pp.1-25).London,UK:FalmerPress.

Camicia,S.P.,&Franklin,B.M.(2011).Whattypeofglobalcommunityandcitizenship?Tangled discourse of neoliberalism andcritical democracy in curriculum and itsreform.Globalisation, Societies and Educa-tion, 9(3-4),311-322

Deuse,M.(2006).Participation,remediation,bricolage: Considering principal compo-nents of a digital culture. Information Society, 22(2).

Endacott,J.L.,&Bowles,F.A.(2013).Avoid-ingthe“It’sasmallworld”effect:Alessonplan to explore diversity. Multicultural Education, 20(2),43-48

Gay,G.(2000).Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress

Horsley,M.W.,&Baurer,K.A.(2010).Prepar-ing early childhood educators for globaleducation:theimplicationsofpriorlearn-ing.European Journal of Teacher Educa-tion, 33(4),421-436

Karseth,B.,&Sivesind,K.(2010).Conceptu-alizingcurriculumknowledgewithinandbeyond the national context. European Journal of Education, 45(1),103-120

Kellner,D.(2000).Globalizationandnewso-cialmovements:Lessonsforcritical?theoryandpedagogy.InN.C.Burbules&A.Torres(Eds.),Globalization and education: Criti-cal perspectives(pp.299-321).London,UK:FalmerPress.

Kenway,J.,&Bullen,E. (2007).Globalizingtheyouthintheageofdesire:Someedu-cational policy issues. In M.W.Apple, J.Kenway, & Singh, M. (Eds), Globalizing education: policies, pedagogies and politics(pp.31-44).NewYork:PeterLang.

Noddings.N.(2005).Globalcitizenship:Prom-ises and problems. In N. Noddings (Ed.),Educating citizens for global awareness(pp. 1-21). New York: Teachers CollegePress.

Popkewitz,T.S.(2000).Reformasthesocialadministrationofthechild:Globalizationofknowledgeandpower.InN.C.Burbules&A.Torres(Eds.),Globalization and edu-cation: Critical perspectives(pp.157-186).London,UK:FalmerPress

Sassen, S. (Ed.). (2007). Deciphering theglobal:Itsscales,spaces,andsubjects.NewYork:Routledge

professionallivesandthesourcesofagencyandcreativitythattheypossess. Questions that guide the reflectionsinclude:

What are the underlying values that guide your work as a teacher?

Which are aspects of your professional life that you think are non-negotiable to ‘mandated’ change?

In order to provide an example of whatthegoalisintheactivity,thestudentsareprovidedwithdraftsofteacherevaluationdocumentsemerginginvariousstatesandareaskedtocriticallylocatebothmandatesandflexibility. The next goal of the unit concernsstudentscraftingthetheoreticalphiloso-phiesofpracticessothattheycanbegintomakeexplicitconnectionsbetweentheoryand practice. The students are askedto envisionandproposeboth curriculartransformationsandpedagogicalinnova-tionsthatarecarefullyandpurposefullyincorporatingtechnologywhenappropri-ate.There is guidance through the thereadingsaswellasflexibility.

Sample Prompts

Identify and list the essential respon-sibilities of a teacher at your grade level.

Using Vongalis-Macrow’s (2007) framework, categorize the areas of teachers’ obligations, autonomy, and authority that you consider impor-tant.

Categorize/reinvent the areas of agency that teachers at your level of schooling have in curriculum, peda-gogy, and assessment.

Discussion and Implications

This class aims to cultivate both astrong theoretical foundation and soundpractical approaches. One of the mainpremisesofthecourseistoresituatemul-ticulturaleducationfromtheperipherytothecenterofglobaleducationaldiscourses.Whilemultiplegraduate-levelclassesmayattempttomakeconnectionsbetweentheglobalandthelocal,aseminaronmulti-cultural education can compliment suchapproachesbyaclearandexplicitanalysisatthelevelofculture. Often times, the discussion aboutdistantprocessesofglobalizationappearsjust that:distantanddisconnected frompolicies and practices in schools. The

aim of the class is to counteract this byidentifyingnuancesofnewglobaltrendsandlocating/creatingspacesofresistance.By reinventing the activist foundationofmulticulturaleducation,thegoalistomovefromindividualresponsivepractice(classroom) to a collective/systemic one(schoolandbeyond). Situated within the broader frame-work of culturally responsive teaching(Gay,2000),thisclassaimstocultivatethestudents’criticalanalysisskillsandattendtocurriculum,pedagogy,andrelationshipbuildingthat isbothgloballyawareandlocally relevant.Oneof theassessmentsincludes students’ constructs on criticalgloballyresponsiveteaching. Prior to reaching this level the stu-dents’criticalthinkingskillsarecultivatedthrough examinations of “globalizationfromabove”and“globalizationfrombelow”practicesandpoliciesinschoolsandclass-rooms,investigationsof‘hidden’messagesin curricular material and informationsharedbythemedia,andexplorationsofstudents’ philosophies of globalization,culture,andeducation. Throughtheindividualprojectsthatthey complete, which are shared witha group of peers, the students focus thecontentinanareaofeducationalpracticethat is relevant to them.Their projectsenlarge and enrich the theoretical andpractical lenses of the class. One of thecentral pillars, ongoing critical analysis,isparticularlyrelevantinenvisioningandcreatingconnections.Theroleofteachersastravelersisthuscultivated.

Conclusion

Theclassdescribedhereprovidesonepossiblepathwaytomakingtheconnectionbetweentheglobalandthelocal.Thepro-posalisthatamongmanyotherthings,thejourneytothedevelopmentofcriticalap-proachesisaconceptualendeavor.Itisnotmeant to replacean introductory coursein multicultural education but rather tocomplimentit. However,someofthedangersthatex-istwhenteachingmulticulturaleducationwithin a national framework are repro-ducedatthislevelaswell(Smith,2009).For instance, the analysis could be toosimplistic and the approaches identifiedtoosuperficial.Theremayberesistancetoanin-depthexaminationofcomplexsocialstructures. What are alternative approaches toconnecting the local and global in mul-ticultural education? How do we avoid

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION42

Schuck,S.,&Aubusson,P.(2010).Educationalscenarios for digital futures. Learning, Media, and Technology.

Smith, E. B. (2009). Approaches to multi-cultural education in preservice teachereducation:Philosophicalframeworksandmodelsforteaching.Multicultural Educa-tion, 16(3),45-50.

Spring,J.(2009).Globalization of education: an introduction.NewYork:Routledge.

Starks,C.(2013).Connectingmulticulturalism,sustainability,&teachereducation:AcaseforlinkingMartinLutherKingStreets&thepowerofplace.Multicultural Education, 21(1),33-37.

Williams,P.(2008).Leadingschoolsinthedigi-

talage:Aclashofcultures.School Leader-ship and Management, 28(3),213-228.

Promising Practices