Policies and practices for teaching sociocultural diversity Concepts, principles and challenges in teacher education
Council of Europe Publishing
The opinions expressed in this work are the responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Council of Europe. All rights reserved . N o part of this publication m ay be translated , reprod uced or transm itted , in any form or by any means, electronic (CD-Rom , Internet, etc.) or m echanical, includ ing photocopying, record ing or any inform ation storage or retrieval system , w ithout prior perm ission in w riting from the Public Inform ation and Publications Division, Directorate of Com m unication (F-67075 Strasbourg Ced ex or pu [email protected]
Cover d esign and layout: Docum ent and Publication Prod uction Departm ent (SPDP), Council of Europe
Council of Europe Publishing F-67075 Strasbourg Ced ex http:/ / book.coe.int ISBN 978-92-871- 6582-4 © Council of Europe, April 2009 Printed at the Council of Europe
EDITORS Anne-Lise Arnesen Julie Allan Eva Simonsen AUTHORS Anne-Lise Arnesen Pavlina Hadzhitheodoulou-Loizidou Cézar Bîrzéa Miquel Àngel Essomba Julie Allan COLLABORATIVE AUTHORS Karmen Trasberg Siyka Chavdarova-Kostova Elisabeth Furch Angelos Vallianatos Bernard Dumont Villano Qiriazi Cristina Rossi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The group of authors would like to thank all the members of the project group who were designated to develop the second phase of the Council of Europe project on “Policies and practices for teaching socio-cultural diversity” and in particular the Steering Committee for Education of the Council of Europe (CDED), the Ministries of Education of Norway, Austria, Cyprus, Bulgaria and Estonia as well as the following higher education institutions: Oslo University College, Faculty of Education (Norway), Pädagogische Akademie des Bundes (Austria), Sofia University "St Klement Ohridski", Faculty of Pedagogy (Bulgaria), Cyprus pedagocial Institute (Cyprus), University of Tartu, Faculty of Education (Estonia), for the advice and support provided to the members of the project group.
Contents Contents ................................................................................................................................................ 4 Chapter 1 ............................................................................................................................................... 6 The Council of Europe project on “Policies and practices for teaching sociocultural diversity” ............................................................................................................................................... 6 1.0. The political context ................................................................................................................. 6 1.1. Introd uction .............................................................................................................................. 6 1.2. Teacher training: a priority for Council of Europe intergovernm ental co operation in the field of ed ucation ................................................................................................ 6 1.2.1. The project and its objectives (2006-2009) ................................................................... 7 1.2.2. Sociocultural d iversity: content and context ............................................................... 7 1.3. The legal fram ew ork – fund am ental Council of Europe reference texts .......................... 9 1.3.1. Treaties, conventions and agreem ents ............................................................................ 9 1.3.2. Declarations and action plans ........................................................................................ 12 1.3.3. Recom m endations of the Com m ittee of Ministers, Parliam entary Assem bly and the Congress ....................................................................................................................... 13 Chapter 2 ............................................................................................................................................. 18 Understanding diversity .................................................................................................................. 18 2.0. Introd uction ............................................................................................................................ 18 2.1. Sociocultural diversity ........................................................................................................... 18 2.2. Dim ensions of structural d iversity ...................................................................................... 20 2.2.1. Cultural d iversity ............................................................................................................. 21 2.2.2. Lingual d iversity .............................................................................................................. 21 2.2.3. Religion ............................................................................................................................. 22 2.2.4. Gend er ............................................................................................................................... 23 2.2.5. Disability ........................................................................................................................... 23 2.2.6. Sexual orientation ............................................................................................................ 23 2.3. Principles ................................................................................................................................. 24 2.3.1. Respect for hum an rights ................................................................................................ 24 2.3.2. Recognition and respect for cultural rights .................................................................. 24 2.3.3. Inclusion ............................................................................................................................ 25 2.4. Sociocultural diversity in ed ucation – key concepts ......................................................... 29 2.4.1. Diversity-sensitive and inclusive classroom practices ............................................... 29 2.4.2. Multiculturality and intercultural ed ucation ............................................................... 30 2.4.3. Ed ucation for d emocratic citizenship and hum an rights ........................................... 31 2.4.4. Social cohesion ................................................................................................................. 31 2.4.5. Intercultural d ialogue...................................................................................................... 31 2.4.6. Language learning and m ultilingual ed ucation .......................................................... 32 2.4.7. Ed ucational (d is)advantage ............................................................................................ 32 2.4.8. Enrichm ent approach in ed ucation ............................................................................... 33 2.4.9. Empow erm ent .................................................................................................................. 33 2.5. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 33 Chapter 3 ............................................................................................................................................. 34 N ew challenges in teacher education ............................................................................................ 34
5 3.1. Teacher ed ucation and pre-service teachers ....................................................................... 34 3.2. A teacher ed ucation m od el ................................................................................................... 34 3.2.1. Meaningful know led ge of self and the other ............................................................... 37 3.2.2. Ped agogical content know led ge for enhancing d iversity .......................................... 38 3.2.3. Enactm ent and critical reflection ................................................................................... 39 3.3. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 40 Chapter 4 ............................................................................................................................................. 42 Teacher education for diversity: responding to the challenge ................................................. 42 4.1. Introd uction ............................................................................................................................ 42 4.2. Strategies and actions by teacher ed ucators and trainers ................................................. 43 4.2.1. Working w ith students ................................................................................................... 44 4.2.2. Curriculum d esign and planning .................................................................................. 45 4.2.3. Research and d evelopm ent w ork w ith a focus on d iversity ..................................... 46 4.3. Open questions for teacher ed ucators ................................................................................. 47 4.4. Institutional managem ent and support .............................................................................. 48 4.4.1. Designing .......................................................................................................................... 48 4.4.2. Im plem enting ................................................................................................................... 48 4.4.3. Evaluating/ Monitoring .................................................................................................. 49 4.5. Open questions for m anagers ............................................................................................... 49 4.6. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 50 References ........................................................................................................................................... 52 Appendix ............................................................................................................................................. 58 Selection of Conventions, d eclarations, recomm end ations and other Council of Europe reference texts d ealing w ith cultural d iversity, ed ucation and teacher training ............................................................................................................................................ 58 Conventions ................................................................................................................................ 58 Declarations issued by Sum m its, Ministerial Conferences or the Comm ittee of Ministers...................................................................................................................................... 58
Chapter 1 The Council of Europe project on “Policies and practices for teaching sociocultural diversity” 1.0. The political context 1.1. Introduction Work on the conceptual fram ew ork of the new project on “Policies and practices for teaching sociocultural d iversity” w ent on throughout 2005 in the Secretariat and in the Bureau of the Steering Com m ittee for Ed ucation (CDED), and it w as ad opted at the comm ittee‟s plenary session of October 2005. Several events w hich occurred that year influenced the w ork as it progressed , som e of these at the highest political level w ithin the Council of Europe, and others in the con text of intergovernm ental co-operation in the ed ucation sector. The objectives pursued d uring this project have been tailored to m eet the w ish expressed by the H ead s of State and Governm ent, m eeting at the 3rd Sum m it (Warsaw , May 2005), for recognition of the need to prom ote a d em ocratic culture and to encourage intercultural d ialogue, both am ongst Europeans and betw een Europe and its neighbouring regions. Previously, the European Ministers of Ed ucation, m eeting at the 21st session of their Stand ing Conference, held in Athens in N ovem ber 2003, had red efined the objectives of co operation in the ed ucation field in Europe, and acknow led ged the role of intercultural ed ucation in, and the major contribution m ad e by the Council of Europe to, the m aintenance and d evelopm ent of the unity and d iversity of European societies. Then cam e the Faro Declaration on the Council of Europe‟s Strategy for Developing Intercultural Dialogue, ad opted in October 2005, at the end of the celebrations m arking the 50th anniversary of the European Cultural Convention; this d efined several lines of action pointing to future priorities for intergovernm ental co -operation in the ed ucation sector, tallying w ith the concerns expressed by the Ministers of Ed ucation at their Athens conference, such as: – respect for cultural rights and the right to ed ucation; – the introd uction of inter-sectoral policies prom oting cultural diversity and d ialogue; – d evelopm ent of know ledge of history, cultures, arts and religions; – support for cultural activities and exchanges as a m eans of engaging in d ialogue; – the strengthening of all the opportunities for teachers to obtain training in the field s of ed ucation for d em ocratic citizenship, hum an rights, history and intercultural ed ucation.
1.2. Teacher training: a priority for Council of Europe intergovernmental co-operation in the field of education It is in this context, and in ord er to take action on the political priorities set by the Ministers, that the Council of Europe‟s Steering Com m ittee for Ed ucation (CDED), a s early as 2006, stepped up its activity on teacher training through the grad ual introd uction of training m od ules for teacher trainers in several field s of activity, such as ed ucation for d em ocratic
7 citizenship, the European d im ension of ed ucation, the ed u cation of Rom a child ren, and the teaching of history and languages. While the em phasis w as placed m ainly on the prod uction of teaching tools based on m ethod ological concepts, principles and approaches and on exam ples of learning activities in these different fields, the d evelopm ent of new skills rem ains a constant concern, especially because the question of how teachers acquire skills has to be consid ered , and because, in m ost cases, the skills acquired rem ain closely linked , and lim ited , to the specific field s of each subject taught. It is therefore a w orthw hile step for the Council of Europe to consid er the creation of a reference fram ew ork to serve as a com m on d enom inator, encom passing “core” fund amental skills. Were this com m on d enom inator to be “ed uca tion for d iversity”, the skills that appeared in the reference fram ew ork w ould , once they had been acquired and applied , provid e teachers and education professionals in general w ith m eans of successfully coping w ith our societies‟ grow ing d iversity.
The project and its objectives (2006-2009)
In this process, the crucial role clearly d evolves to initial training establishm ents and training program m es w hich have not yet been the focal point of a Council of Europe project. The “Policies and practices for teaching sociocultural d iversity” project is intend ed precisely as a response to certain key questions connected w ith initial teacher training and the introd uction of com m on principles to the m anagem ent of school d iversity. It is therefore ad d ressed m ainly to ed ucation policy m akers, and m ore specifically to teacher trainers. The Steering Com m ittee for Ed ucation w ished to d evelop this project through three separate phases: 1. Phase 1, 2006-2007: analysis of the teacher training program m es available in a num ber of states to provid e teachers w ith the skills they need to m anage culturally d iverse classes; 2. Phase 2, 2007-2008: preparation of a skills fram ew ork for young teachers relating to ed ucation for d iversity; 3. Phase 3, 2008-2009: preparation of reform guid elines through training sessions and the raising of aw areness am ong the m ain parties. This project has tw o m ain features: 1. It relates to teaching and the training of teachers w hose job it is to prepare new generations for a future of variety and d ifferences; 2.
It regard s sociocultural difference not as a neutral concept, but as one accom panied by d iscrim ination and inequalities w hich need to be com bated through d ynam ic national policies, w hich are one of the Council of Europe‟s m ajor concerns.
Sociocultural diversity: content and context
If d iversity is regard ed as a value, it has to be assum ed that ours is a society w hich not only acknow led ges diversity, but is also able to m anage and enhance it. Enhancem ent, in particular, is an im portant concept, quite distinct from the tend ency to categorise w hich gave rise to the m arginalisation and hierarchisation of certain groups.
8 In the teaching-related activities and initiatives of the Council of Europe, the fund am ental issues relating to diversity are access for all to ed ucation and ed ucational activities, plurilingualism , respect for m inorities, the integration of m igrants, ed ucation for citizenship, schooling for Rom a children, equality of opportunities and equity at school, intercultural training and ed ucation, and the preservation of specific ind ivid ual characteristics, giving us a fairly full picture of the kind s of d iversity ad d ressed by this project. Although som e m ay have only recently realised it, m ost of the Council of Europe‟s m em be r states are m ulti-ethnic and m ultilingual, and thus are faced w ith the challenges of protecting m inorities and recognising cultural and linguistic rights, and an im migration problem , as the grow ing num bers of m igrants and refugees w ho have arrived in Euro pe over the past 40 years have generated new situations and challenges for ed ucation systems. Ed ucation system s d o not operate in a historical and social vacuum , but w ithin a d om inant culture, w ith its ow n specific objectives, behaviours, values and polit ical rules. Yet this fram ew ork is by no m eans static and changes constantly. While som e countries have a long trad ition of m ulticulturalism , others have been shaped in a m onocultural, m onolingual context, based on the concept of a hom ogeneous population often influenced by a d om inant elite, lead ing to greater national unity and stand ard isation. Minority populations are assim ilated as a result. But the view taken of m igrants or m em bers of m inorities is altering over tim e: once required to com e into line w ith national stand ard s in term s of culture, language, m entality and general attitud e, they are now increasingly accorded the right to be d ifferent, w ith the em phasis being placed on the im portance of integration into a society and into schools w hich are pluralist. Languages, regard ed as a cultural tool, a bad ge of id entity and belonging, and an instrum ent of com m unication, are also given attention in policies on d iversity, starting from the premise that som e child ren w ith a poor know ledge of the pred om inant n ational language – usually the one in w hich teaching takes place – are failing at school or being less successful than those w hose first language is the one used by their teachers. On the other hand, if som e teaching tim e is reserved for the language of pu pils representing small linguistic com m unities, or of migrant origin, their linguistic id entity and self-confidence w ill be boosted . Teaching in the m other tongue is therefore regard ed as a basis for the build ing of id entity and for the acquisition of a second language. The teaching of foreign languages has also acquired a new status. In the current context of globalisation, it is regard ed as vital to better com m unication am ong European countries and w orld w id e. In the classroom s of virtually every country of the w orld therefore, m ultilingualism is now the rule, rather than the exception, causing real d ifficulties for teachers. Religious d iversity is fam iliar to Council of Europe m em ber states. A few years ago, it took on crucial im portance, being increasingly regarded as one of the com ponent parts of the cultural id entity of European citizens. It is also associated – at both European and global level – w ith tension and conflict. At the sam e time, both the num ber of religions and the num ber of their active mem bers are rising in Europe. An aw areness of the im portance of the religious aspect thus seem s to be one of the building blocks for learning to live in a com m unity. Gend er equality is a priority them e in the d ocum ents that guid e policy in various countries . International organisations have set themselves the task of fostering access to ed ucation for all (a universal concern), and especially for girls. The availability of ed ucation varies w id ely from one country and one region to another, to the d isad vantage of girls as a result of sociocultural, structural and econom ic obstacles. Gend er is a d im ension of sociocultural
9 d iversity w hich is closely linked to all the other dim ensions of d iversity, such as ethnicity, religion and special needs. The ed ucation provid ed for child ren w ith special need s has also d eveloped further, and pupils w ith d isabilities are no longer id entified accord ing to their personal d isability, but accord ing to their need s. The international com mitm ent to hum an rights now offers a m eans of changing people‟s view of d isability, the terminology used and teaching m ethod s. The m ajority of teacher training establishm ents now cover the teaching of child ren w ith special need s, not only as a specialist subject, but also, in a grad ual process of chan ge, as part of the general initial training course. The greater access currently enjoyed by pupils w ho w ould once have been placed in institutions, and the d ifferent w ay in w hich w e now view the categories of d isabilities and persons “w ith special needs” h ave brought far-reaching change, red ucing the em phasis placed on d isabilities and lead ing to their classification as “sociocultural”. The approaches taken in relation to d iversity, w hether from the social or any other angle, vary from one country to anoth er, w ith w hat seem to be system atic variations in the w ay in w hich this d iversity is regard ed and d ealt w ith in schools and in society in general. Cultural d iversity is protected by hum an rights agreem ents. It is of fundam ental importance that cultural d iversity should be presented through education system s, but this is also a w ay of increasing know led ge of plural cultural id entities and m aking them m ore d ynam ic. Diversity in social contexts also im plies trust, respect and recognition. This is w hy teachers need to be trained to understand d iversity and must acquire the skills that w ill help them to cope w ith classes containing d ifferent sociocultural groups. Schools are regard ed as the id eal public places for dissem inating d em ocratic ideas, d raw ing on our r espective cultures to accentuate or play d ow n d ifferences in social origin. In Europe, the em phasis is therefore placed on how to m ake ed ucation the d riving force behind change in social practices, both at school and elsew here.
1.3. The legal framework – fundamental Council of Europe reference texts The legal instrum ents dealing w ith ed ucation, cultural d iversity and teacher training clearly reveal the relationship betw een the three. International organisations all feel the need to ensure, d irectly or indirectly, that pupils are provid ed w ith a high stand ard of ed ucation, paying particular attention to groups that are exposed to the risk of exclusion (such as child ren from ethnic m inorities), and highlighting the value of cultural d iversity in the context of globalisation, as w ell as recognising the role in this respect of teachers and the im portant need for high -quality teacher training to achieve these aim s. Our aim in this section is to give read ers the gist of the Council of Europe‟s instrum ents of recent years on ed ucation, cultural diversity and teacher training. A full list of these conventions, d eclarations, recom m end ations and other instrum ents is append ed .
1.3.1. Treaties, conventions and agreements Treaties, conventions and agreem ents play a key role in the international legal fram ew ork because they are binding on the states that ratify them . Before acceding to a treaty or a convention, a state m ust be sure that it has the political w ill and the capability to d o w hat is required of it. N ational law s, policies and practices m ust be in keeping w ith both the letter and the spirit of the instrum ents agreed to. At international level, and at the Council of
10 Europe in particular, there are m onitoring m echanism s through w hich shortcom ings can be reported and recom m end ations mad e to m em ber states. The Council of Europe has alw ays been heavily involved in prom oting hum an rights ed ucation and intercultural ed ucation. It has ad opted various conventions and treaties intend ed to foster ed ucation for all and m utual und erstand ing betw een the peoples of Europe, w ith d ue regard for d iversity. Article 2 of the Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of H um an Rights and Fund am ental Freed om s (1952) (ETS N o. 9) grants the right to ed ucation, w hile em phasising that, w hen im plem enting this right, states m ust show d ue regard for parents‟ religious and philosophical convictions. Discrim ination is prohibited und er Article 14 of the Convention, and Protocol N o. 12 (2000) ETS N o. 177) goes even further, extend ing the scope of the protection afford ed , provid ing for a general ban on all form s of d iscrim ination and guaranteeing that no one m ay be d iscrim inated against by any public authority on any ground . The aim of the European Cultural Convention (1954) (ETS N o. 18) is to foster m utual und erstanding betw een the peoples of Europe and a shared appreciation of their cultural d iversity, protect European culture and prom ote national contributions to Europe‟s com m on cultural heritage, w ith due regard for shared fund am ental values, by encouraging, in particular, the stud y of the languages, history and civilisation of the parties to the Convention. All of this entails specific policies in the spheres of ed ucation and teacher training. 1
The European Social Charter (1961) (ETS N o. 35) com plem ents the Convention in the field of econom ic and social rights and contains several references to cultural diversity, ed ucation and teacher training. In particular, the Social Charter grants everyone the right to appropriate m eans of vocational guid ance and training, covering both schoolchildren and ad ults, the m ain goal being to ensure that everyone‟s diversity is respected so that people can choose the occupation that suits them best. In the field of ed ucation, the Social Charter: – in Article 17, guarantees the right to free primary and secondary education for all children, and requires states to take measures to encourage regular school attendance; – in Article 7, prohibits the employment of children subject to compulsory education which would deprive them of the full benefit of that education; – in Article 10, guarantees fair access to higher education.
The Social Charter also m akes provision for the m ost vulnerable categories of society, includ ing in particular: – people with disabilities: Article 15 guarantees them guidance, education and vocational training irrespective of their age and the nature and origin of their disabilities; 1. Both in the 1961 version and in the revised version of 1996, although all references here w ill be to the latter.
– children of migrant workers: Article 19 requires states to promote and facilitate the teaching of the national language, or one of the national languages, of the receiving state, or the children’s mother tongue; – persons and their families living, or at risk of living, in situations of social exclusion or poverty: Article 30 requires states to strive to obtain for them, among other things, effective access to education.
These rights are extend ed to refugees und er the Geneva Convention. The Social Charter also includ es a specific article prohibiting d iscrimination on grounds of race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national extraction, social origin, health or m em bership of a national m inority. In guaranteeing all these rights, includ ing the right to ed ucation and training, for the various parties it covers, the Social Charter e ffectively obliges states to take every possible step to ensure that they are actually guaranteed , im plying ind irectly that they m ust provid e appropriate training for teachers. The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (1992) (ETS N o. 148) r elates to languages spoken by a m inority group or used in particular areas of a country, and requires states to take every necessary step to prom ote ed ucation, teaching and research in and on these languages and their respective cultures. Article 8 is specifically devoted to ed ucation, requiring states to provid e the basic and further training of teachers needed to im plem ent the m easures laid d ow n in the sam e article, nam ely those provid ing for pre-school, primary, second ary, higher, vocational and ad ult ed ucation in the m inority language or languages in so far as is possible. Und er Article 14, states are required to foster cross-bord er contacts betw een users of the sam e language in various spheres, includ ing ed ucation and vocational training, as w ell as cross-bord er co-operation betw een authorities using the sam e language. The Fram ew ork Convention for the Protection of N ational Minorities (1995) (ETS N o. 157) includ es a requirem ent both to protect national minorities – one of the fund am ental aim s of pluralist d em ocracy and a key to stability, d em ocratic security and peace – and to foster intercultural com m unication as a basis for true co-operation betw een individ uals, regard less of their d ifferences. The latter point is d ealt w ith in particular in Article 6, and the hope is expressed that a grow ing sense of id entity w ill not result in increasing compartm entalisation of society, but in m utual recognition. Article 12, w hich d eals w ith ed ucation and training, m ust be interpreted from this intercultural view point w hen ad d ressing the follow ing issues: the prom otion of the culture, history, language and religion of both national minorities and the m ajority, the opportunities provid ed d uring teacher training for exchanges betw een com m unities, and equal opportunities for access to ed ucation. It is im portant also to refer to the recent Council of Europe Fram ew ork Convention on the Value of Cultural H eritage for Society (2005) (CETS N o. 199) (w hich is not yet in force), since this is the only instrum ent presenting cu ltural heritage as a resource w hich can be used , am ong other things, to em phasise the value of cultural d iversity and prom ote intercultural d ialogue.
12 Article 13, on cultural heritage and know led ge, is particularly im portant, as it calls for the inclusion of the cultural heritage dim ension at all levels of ed ucation, a m easure w hich w ould strengthen the links betw een heritage, training and research. During the consultation m eetings held in 2008 as part of the second phase of the project, it becam e clear tha t som e interesting experim ental w ork had been d one linking heritage prom otion w ith ed ucation for d iversity.
1.3.2. Declarations and action plans The Council of Europe has d ealt w ith cultural diversity, ed ucation and teacher training in m any d eclarations issued by its various subord inate bod ies. This section w ill provid e an overview of these, focusing on the concepts of d iversity and pluralism w hich und erlie Council of Europe policies. Our tw o m ain points of reference w ill be the Declaration on m ulticultural society and European cultural identity, ad opted by the European Ministers responsible for cultural affairs in 1990, and the m ore recent Declaration on cultural diversity, adopted by the Comm ittee of Ministers in 2000. Both d ocum ents em phasise the fact that European culture stem s not only from the diversity and vitality of its d ifferent national, regional and local cultures, but also from its openness to spiritual, intellectual and artistic influences from other parts of the w orld . The peoples of Europe therefore have a d uty to preserve and prom ote this d iversity, as it is one of the keys to the harm onious functioning of their societies. The challenge presented by the relationship betw een cultural d iversity and social cohesion (in the form of the broad est possible social integration) has become increasingly crucial over the years, not only because of the globalisation process and the use of new inform ation technologies, but also in the w ake of the events w hich changed the course of European history from the late 1980s onw ard s. Consequently, d uring the 1990s the Council of Europe began a process of red efining its structure and policies, much of this shaped by its three sum m it m eetings of heads of state and governm ent. At the Vienna Sum m it in 1993, the Council of Europe placed the protection of national m inorities at the heart of its policy on cultural d iversity and ed ucation, and m ore specifically (see the d escription of the fram ew ork convention below ) on history teaching and the d evelopm ent of ed ucation in the fields of human rights and respect for cultural d iversity. The last-nam ed aspect in particular w as taken up again at the second summ it, in Strasbourg in 1997, w hich saw the launch of a cam paign on ed ucation for d em ocratic citizenship. The last sum m it, in Warsaw in 2005, focused on hum an rights and the rule of law , but also d ealt w ith ed ucation, expressing an intention to im prove teacher training in areas of particular interest to the Council of Europe, such as ed ucation for d em ocratic citizenship and hum an rights ed ucation, w hile placing particular em phasis on the need to facilitate access to and use of new inform ation technologies w ithout d iscrimination. The principles contained in these d eclarations appeared again in various d ocum ents d raw n up by the Stand ing Conference of European Ministers of Ed ucation at its sessions in Kristiansand in 1997, Cracow in 2000, Athens in 2003 and Istanbul in 2007. In the resolutions issued in N orw ay in 1997, the Stand ing Conference stressed the im portance of initial and in-service training that incorporated , on the one hand, a European d im ension show ing d ue regard for the d iversity of national id entities, and on the other, an em phasis on interpersonal and com m unication skills, an interd isciplinary approach and team w ork, based on the notion that the school is an “ed ucational com m unity”. With this in m ind , it launched a specific program m e of in -service training for teachers.
13 At the Cracow conference (2000), the Ministers of Ed ucation looked at training again, in the light of three aims: use of the European Language Portfolio, prevention of a recurrence or d enial of crim es against hum anity (through the institution of a Day of Rem em brance of the H olocaust and for the Prevention of Crim es against H um anity) and, m ore generally , appropriate history teaching and ed ucation for dem ocratic citizenship. The Athens conference of 2003 w as extrem ely important because it brought together all the issues ad d ressed previously into an intercultural ed ucation strategy, closely tied up w ith im proving the quality of ed ucation as a response to the challenges posed by European society‟s d iversity. Accord ingly, it set itself the goal of strengthening intercultural ed ucation and d iversity m anagem ent through its program me of in -service training for ed ucation staff, a goal w hich w as again taken up in Istanbul.2 At the Istanbul conference, the Ministers of Ed ucation highlighted the key role that access to quality ed ucation for all played in building a fairer and m ore hum ane society. They reiterated tha t, as stated in the Revised Strategy for Social Cohesion (2004), it w as all too often those w ho w ere m ost in need of them w ho had m ost d ifficulty in benefiting from their fund am ental social rights, particularly access to social protection, em ploym ent, housing, health and ed ucation. This approach to the question is in keeping both w ith the Council of Europe‟s w ork on intercultural d ialogue, w hich resulted in the publication in May 2008 of the White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue, and w ith the cultural co-operation policy based on the European Cultural Convention.
1.3.3. Recommendations of the Committee of Ministers, Parliamentary Assembly and the Congress The Council of Europe frequently d rafts and ad opts recom m end ations. These are not binding, but represen t an expression of international agreem ent, calling on m em ber states to take action in the specific field concerned , on the basis of the principles and criteria set out in the recom m end ation itself. Recom m end ations are prepared and d rafted by representativ es of m em ber states, w ith the assistance of the Secretariat, and they are effectively agreed on the d ate of their ad option by the Com m ittee of Ministers or Parliam entary Assem bly of the Council of Europe. Consequently, states cannot ignore a recom m end ation if they are to honour their com mitm ent to the Organisation. Quite the contrary, they m ust stud y w ays of putting recom m end ations into practice at national level, and m ust report on any failings or inad equacies. While recom m end ations ad opted by the Parliamentary Assem bly are ad d ressed to national parliam ents, those ad opted by the Com mittee of Ministers are sent d irectly to governm ents. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe and the European Com m ission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) a re other Council of Europe bod ies that issue recomm end ations.
2. The recom m end ations of the Athens conference w ith regard to teacher training w ere as follow s: strengt hen intercultural ed ucation and m anagem ent of d iversity through its program m e of in -service training for ed ucation staff and encourage m em ber states to contribu te to that program m e by organising sem inars on topics d irectly linked to the aim s of the d eclaration issued by the conference; d evise and prom ote w orking m ethod s, m aking it possible to incorporate the principles of non -d iscrim ination, pluralism and equity into states‟ ow n initial and in service training program m es; d evelop ed ucational strategies and w orking m ethod s to prepare teachers to m anage the new situations arising in our schools as a result of d iscrim ination, racism , xenophobia, sexism and m arginalisation and to resolve conflicts in a non -violent w ay; encourage the d evelopm ent of professional com petences for the teaching profession, taking account of skills existing w ithin a team linked to the roles of learning facilitator, m ed iator, counsellor, partner and hum an resources m anager.
14 There are num erous recom m end ations on the relationship betw een sociocultural d iversity, ed ucation and teacher training, in the context of various subjects: the teaching of languages, history and hum an rights, the ed ucation of m igrants and m inorities, and intercultural ed ucation. The last-nam ed subject cam e up in the early 1980s, w hen the Parliam entary Assembly issued Resolution 807 (1983), expressing the hope that ed ucation w ould strive to d eve lop in young people a spirit of tolerance and intercultural understand ing, and tracing the m ain lines of a policy of European co-operation on ed ucation. This w as follow ed by Com m ittee of Ministers Recom m end ation (84) 18 on the training of teachers in ed ucation for intercultural und erstanding, w hich acknow led ges that m ulticulturalism is an irreversible, long-term and generally positive feature of European societies, particularly because it enables closer links to be forged betw een Europe and the rest of the w orld . Cultural d iversity, particularly w here it em erges from a context of m igration, is thus regarded as a rich asset, provided that ed ucation policies are pursued w hich encourage open -m ind edness and m utual und erstanding. Acknow led ging that teachers play a vital role in fulfilling this task, the recom m end ation suggests that the intercultural d im ension and und erstand ing betw een d ifferent com m unities should be includ ed in initial and in -service teacher training. Such training should enable teachers to acquire various skills, and , in particular, to: – – – – – –
becom e aw are of the various form s of cultural expression; recognise ethnocentric attitud es and stereotypes in the course of their w ork; foster cultural exchanges betw een pupils; find out about the social exchanges that exist betw een m igrant pupils‟ country of origin and host country; becom e aw are of the econom ic, social, political and historical causes and effects of m igration; becom e aw are of the relationship betw een m igrant child ren‟s participation in school life and the cond itions in w hich they live, w ork and stud y in the host country.
N ot only d oes this d ocum ent acknow led ge the link betw een the intercultural approach to ed ucation and the challenge of social cohesion, it also goes m uch further in its d efinition of training strategies, em phasising, for instance, the im portance of d irect contact betw een teachers and parents, particularly those of m igrant origin; it also encourages the hold ing of courses for teachers from pupils‟ host country and country of origin, w ith a view to a better und erstanding of the d ifferent ed ucation system s; it suggests that teachers “acquire a basic know led ge of one of the languages of [pupils‟] countries of origin and […] reflect upon this learning process, in ord er to open their m ind s to another culture and give them a better und erstanding of the d ifficulties experienced by m igrant child ren”; finally, it encourages m igrants to m ake use of the ed ucation system . So this recom mend ation pointed the w ay for others, especially Parliam entary Assem bly Recom m end ation 1093 (1989) on the ed ucation of m igrants‟ child ren, w hich w as intended to facilitate the intercultural ed ucation outlined in the previous d ocum ent, recom m end ing the various steps that m em ber states should take to achieve the goal of preparing all child ren, ind igenous and m igrant alike, in every part of the ed ucation system , for life in a m ulticultural society.
ECRI Recom m end ation N o. 1 on com bating racism , xenophobia, antisem itism and intolerance em phasises the im portance, alongsid e its legal instrum ents, of the Council of Europe‟s ed ucation policies, again referring to recom m end ations of the Com m ittee of Ministers, Recom m end ation (84) 18, as w ell as Recom m end ation (85) 7 on teaching and learning about hum an rights in schools. Both these texts express the Comm ittee of Ministers‟ belief that “schools are com m unities w hich can, and should, be an exam ple of respect for the d ignity of the ind ivid ual and for d ifference, for tolerance, and for equality of opportunity”. Recom m end ation (85) 7 refers at consid erable length to teacher training, listing precond itions and skills essential for hum an rights and d iversity ed ucation: teachers should show an interest in national and w orld affairs; they should have a chance to stud y or w ork in a foreign country or a d ifferent environm ent; they should be taught to id entify and combat all form s of d iscrimination in schools and society and be encouraged to confront and overcom e their ow n prejud ices; they should familiarise them selves w ith the m ain international declarations and conventions on hum an rights; they should familiarise them selves w ith the w orkings and achievem ents of the international organisations w hich d eal w ith the protection and prom otion of hum an rights, for exam ple, through stud y visits and tours; they should upd ate their ow n know led ge and learn new teaching m ethods through in service training. Several of the aforem entioned skills, w hich are also referred to in other d ocum ents that w e have stud ied , are am ong the com peten ces on w hich the present project focuses (see Chapter 4, especially 4.3). Com m ittee of Ministers Recom m end ation (2008) 4 on strengthening the integration of child ren of m igrants and of im m igrant background , w hich is the m ost recent relevant recom m end ation , takes a fresh look at im proving the integration of the child ren of m igrants and those of im m igrant origin. It also refers to som e m ajor challenges, particularly w ith regard to the m anagem ent of diversity, a crucially im portant skill not only for teachers , but also for everyone w ith a professional responsibility for child ren‟s w ell-being. This recom m end ation em phasises the vital need to incorporate as a com pulsory feature of all training program m es intercultural learning skills, both in pre-em ploym ent and / or in initial training, as w ell as the need to provid e, for those professionals w hose initial training d id not cover intercultural skills, the m anagem ent of cultural d ifferences and plurilingualism , in service training that provid es a post-qualification an d / or advanced course; it also points to the need to introd uce internal or external supervisory and ad visory services for those professionals active in the intercultural field , provid ing them w ith assistance and support in d eveloping general strategies and / or d ealing w ith ind ivid ual cases. This recom m end ation, like the others, also highlights the im portance of appropriate language training. The Council of Europe has som e 50 years of experience in the field of language policies, to w hich num erous recom m end ations bear w itness. Parliam entary Assem bly Recom m end ation 1383 (1998) on linguistic d iversification serves as a reference text, ad vocating a new approach to m od ern languages in Europe‟s ed ucation system s. One aim of this policy should be linguistic d iversification in line w ith the principle of the protection of the rich cultural heritage of Europe‟s w id e range of national, regional and m inority languages. Com m ittee of Ministers Recom m end ation (98) 6 concerning m od ern languages sets the objective of the prom otion of plurilingualism , not only as a m eans of 3. Eu ropean Com m ission against Racism and Intolerance.
16 preserving the situation as it stand s, but also as an active com mitm ent in all environm ents, includ ing the ed ucation system (from the intercultural angle as w ell), as the learning of languages provid es the m eans of grasping d iversity, show ing respect for it and com m unicating, regard less of other people‟s linguistic and cultural limitations. The Council of Europe has also given a great d eal of attention to history teaching, particularly because, w hile history can foster understand ing, tolerance and trust am ong the citizens and peoples of Europe, it is also a potential source of d ivision, violence and intolerance, as confirm ed by Parliam entary Assembly Recom m end ation 1283 (1996) on history and the learning of history in Europe. It is not therefore a foregone conclusion that history teaching w ill result in diversity being acknow led ged : teacher training is necessary, as em phasised by Com m ittee of Ministers Recom m end ation Rec (2001) 15 on history teaching in tw enty-first-century Europe. This em phasises the central role of m ethodologies requiring critical thinking and the sensitive use of teaching m ethod s w hich encourage pupils to interpret and analyse the facts of history and their influence on the present d ay, in va rious social, geographical, econom ic and other contexts. The open, but at the sam e tim e vigilant, teaching of history, avoid ing d istortion, id eological m anipulation, propagand a and the prom otion of ultra-nationalist, xenophobic, racist or anti-Sem itic, intolerant values, requires sim ilar skills to the teaching of d iversity. Another aim of history teaching is to id entify points of convergence over the course of European history, so as to build a com mon id entity w hich transcend s national differences, thus con tributing to intercultural d ialogue in a manner consistent w ith Parliam entary Assem bly Recom mend ation 1111 (1989) on the European d im ension of ed ucation. Religious d iversity, as w ell, is covered in tw o Parliam entary Assem bly recom m end ations, Recom m end ation 1720 (2005) on ed ucation and religion and Recom m endation 1804 (2007) on State, religion, secularity and hum an rights. Emphasising the principle that any m anifestation of religion m ust be in accord ance w ith fund am ental hum an rights, the Council of Europe points to the fact that religion is a basic com ponent of diversity, and that ed ucation on the subject is vital to com bating ignorance, stereotyping and m isund erstand ing of religions, all of w hich stem prim arily from an ignorance of the history and philosop hy of the m ain religions. Schools can provid e their pupils w ith a know led ge of faiths w hich lays the found ations for d ialogue w ith and betw een religions. Other recom m end ations em phasise the protection of the various m inorities. Com m ittee of Ministers Recom m end ation N o. R (2000) 4 on the ed ucation of Rom a/ Gypsy child ren in Europe refers to the possibility that sociocultural d iversity m ay result in Rom a child ren being “socially and culturally hand icapped ”, w ith attem pts at assim ilation som etim es ensuing. In ord er to cope w ith the problem of the ed ucation of Rom a children, account therefore need s to be taken of several factors, particularly the safeguard ing of all the econom ic, social and cultural rights of Rom a comm unities, in the context of the indivisibilit y and interd epend ence of all hum an rights, as em phasised in Com m ittee of Ministers Recom m end ation CM/ Rec(2008)5 on policies for Rom a and / or Travellers in Europe. The training of teachers w ith a view to managing sociocultural diversity is taken into consid eration in certain specific recom m end ations (see Append ix) relating to d eaf and hearing-im paired child ren, refugees and d isplaced persons, and persons w ith d isabilities, w ith ed ucation being regard ed as a m eans of integrating them fully into society as cit izens. Particular attention has also been given to gend er equality in the ed ucation sphere, as in Parliamentary Assembly Recom m end ation 1281 (1995), in the face of end uring d iscrim ination and stereotyping w ith sexist connotations, as w ell as acts of viole nce against
17 w om en. This recom m end ation affirm s the fund am ental principle of equality betw een girls and boys, w om en and men, w hatever their d ifferences, and how ever d ifferent their points of view and experience, in the context of a pluralist and pluricultur al d em ocracy. To sum up, w e w ould like to em phasise that the objectives of ed ucation for d iversity are firm ly established in the Council of Europe‟s treaties and recom m endations. These d ocum ents call for political representatives, as w ell as all w ho have an active role in the ed ucation system and in society, to play a part in recognising, managing and enhancing d iversity, and these same d ocum ents highlight the strategic role that teachers play in putting these policies into practice in d ay-to-day school life.
Chapter 2 Understanding diversity 2.0. Introduction In this chapter w e start by expand ing the notion of d iversity, its dim ensions and the issues specific to these. We then go on to outline som e principles und erpinning w ork in this area. These are: respect for hum an rights, recognition and respect for cultural rights and inclusion. The latter principle is seen in the context of the follow ing aspects: (1) access and quality, (2) equity and social justice, (3) d em ocratic values and participation, and (4) the balance betw een (com )unity and d iversity. Finally, w e introd uce som e key concepts related to sociocultural d iversity in ed ucation.
2.1. Sociocultural diversity Diversity is a concept w ith m ultiple connotations and interpretations that are culturally, socially and historically em bed d ed . Just like d emocracy, citizenship, civil society, equity or interculturality, d iversity is a term that becom es explicit through the activities involved rather than by m eans of an all-embracing d efinition. Its etym ology com es from the Latin w ord “d ivers” (m eaning “opposite”) and from its d erivative “d iversitas” w hich has tw o m eanings: som ething w hich is heterogeneous, assorted , varied or d ispersed ; and som ething w hich is variegated or pluralist. These im plicit m eanings of d iversity are, how ever, broad enough to be applied in relation to a large com m unity of practitioners and researchers, acad em ics and policy m akers w ith varied social and cultural background s. Diversity is the fund am ental principle that fosters creativity and progress, an essential attribute of hum an d evelopm ent (d e Cuéllar , 1996). It is the universal im perative of pluralism , encountered both in cultural and social diversity as w ell as in the d iversity of the biosphere. H ence, d iversity seems to be the very substance of both nature and culture, the inherent attribute of life. Without recognising diversity and pluralism , social life and hum an d evelopm ent w ould be blocked or perturbed . In this sense, the concept of sustainable society, introd uced by the 22nd session of the Council of Europe Conference of Ministers of Ed ucation (Istanbul, 4-5 May 2007) ad d ressed diversity as an attribute of “a m ore hum ane and inclusive society”. H aving said this, it is possible, rather than d efining d iversity, to pinpoint som e b asic assum ptions about human beings and sociocultural d iversity d raw n from a variety of sources (international policy d ocum ents and research; see Append ix) that are of particular relevance to ed ucation and teacher training in this area: (i) All hum an bein gs are unique; (ii) Individ uals and groups of ind ivid uals have the capacity to d iffer from other ind ivid uals or groups w ith w hom they live. It is the result of the ind ivid ual‟s inherent characteristic of being unique in term s of culture, experience, skills, physical and m ental features, m orals, interests, attitud es tow ard s and concepts of the w orld . Som e types of d iversity are regard ed as „natural‟ or genetic rather than „cultural‟, for exam ple, skin colour, gender, and certain
19 form s of d isability. H ow ever, such characteristics m ay becom e differentiated in a hierarchical m anner and subject to d iscrim ination varying over tim e, location and circum stances. But apparently „natural‟ diversities m ay also be „cultural‟ as diversities are embed d ed in particular political, cultural and relational contexts. Being and/ or feeling disabled d epend s on how society and environm ents are d esigned : for exam ple, the extent to w hich the physical and social environm ent is constructed for facilitating or hind ering participation fo r ind ivid uals and groups; (iii) H um an beings are culturally shaped in the sense that they grow up and live w ithin a culturally structured w orld . But people are not determ ined by the culture they have inherited . They m ay accept it uncritically, but also revise it or, in other w ays, if need ed , overcom e som e of its influences and view s (Gutmann, 1999). The hum an heritage and historical experience is actually the result of the interd epend encies and equilibrium forged betw een ind ivid uals, com m unities and types of civilisations; (iv) Diversity in a particular society or cultural context is structured in particular w ays that m ay im ply hierarchies, based on, for exam ple, gend er, skin colour, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, ability. Such structures are not stable but are over tim e subject to changes; (v) There is an internal plurality of each culture, w hich m ay be taken for granted , be contested, or represent continuous d iscussions, and som etimes even im ply violence and seclusion; (vi) Although d iverse, people have alw ays had to interact and co-operate, to find sustainable social form s of living together. The m ore d iversity, the m ore necessary to gain a com m on ground or unity acknow led ging the inescapable and d esirability of cultural d iversity and intercultural d ialogue (Parekh, 2006); (vii) H um an beings are not solely characterized by their d ifferences, but also by their sim ilarities or w hat they have in com m on as human beings, a basic assum ption on w hich hum an rights are erected, exem plified by the follow ing stat em ent: We are all born into the human family and share humanity’s basic wants and needs. Yet the process of history has also created a world of diversity as well as commonalities. Such diversities occur at the level of individuals, groups within a nation state, nation-states, and cultural regions. (Banks et al., 2005)
These assum ptions w ill be used in a systematic w ay in the follow ing text, and they w ill serve a specific purpose by form ing a background for discussions on basic principles for enhancing d iversity in teacher training program m es. Globalisation, societal changes and restructuring of w orking life are, alongsid e a grow ing aw areness of hum an rights issues and claim s for social justice by m arginalised groups, the d riving forces behind increasing recognition of d ifferences (Banks, 2004). N ew conceptions of d iversity have em erged , and grad ually, there has been an increasing recognition of the value of d iversity. In term s of ed ucation policies, valuing d iversity is a principle introd uced in the late 1990s by the Council of Europe. The principle, d efined as such by the 21st session of the Council of Europe Conference of Ministers of Ed ucation (Athens, N ovem ber 2003), is based on the assum ption that diversity represents an add ed value to both local com m unities and society. There are tw o main strand s of argum ents for enhancing d iversity in ed ucation:
The first type of argum ent em phasises that social and cultural diversity is a feature that m ay enhance the quality of education. Alread y on 31 May 1990, th e Council and the Ministers for Ed ucation of the European Com m unity, agreed to a set of conclusions on equality perspectives in teacher training, in w hich this type of argum ent is put forth: We acknowledge that the nature and quality of the training of teachers is a major factor influencing the extent to which the objective of enhancing diversity can be achieved. And we may advance the argument by suggesting that education systems that deal effectively with equality issues and diversity, is an important indicator of the quality of the system itself. (EC Ministers for Education, 1990)
The second type of argum ent is based on the assum ption that each culture or cultural group is inherently lim ited . N o political d octrine or id eology can represent the full rang e of hum an life. Each is embed d ed in a particular culture, represents a particular vision of the good life, and is necessarily limited and partial. H ence, a dialogue betw een people w ith d ifferent background s is m utually beneficial. It both alerts them to their biases, and enables them to red uce them and to expand their horizon of thought and practice (Parekh, 2006). Sociocultural aspects of d iversity and problems of inequality betw een groups and ind ivid uals are d ealt w ith in several w ays: by national legislation and regulations of institutional practices, political strategies and social practices that are intend ed to enhance participation and access to social good s for all, for exam ple, ed ucation, and counteract m arginalisation and exclusion. H ow ever, policies and institutional practices m ay still have unintend ed consequences. Through legislation and institutions populations are structured both in society at large and in school. System s of d ivisions and services intend ed to help and assist ind ivid uals and groups m ay have the opposite effect. Special provisions are based on d efinitions of id entity by m eans of a term inology, im plying practices of institutional categorisation and classification that m ay differentiate betw een pupils in w ays that create or m ainta in inequalities (Arnesen, 2002; Arnesen, Mietola & Lahelm a, 2007). Term inology is und erpinned by a particular und erstanding or notion of ind ivid uals and groups, w hich in turn tend to give d irection to policies and practices and influence outcom es for indiv id ual child ren. Term s such as “im m igrant girl” and “special need s boy” are exam ples of term inology w hich has a significant (and negative) im pact on outcom es. Diversity in social settings im plies the build ing up of trust, respect and recognition. This requ ires that teachers get know led ge that m ay form a basis for und erstanding d iversity and skills that prepare them to d eal w ith and m anage socioculturally d iverse classroom s. Schools are an id eal public arena for d issem ination of d emocratic id eas. They represent a com m on ground for sharing experiences in d ealing w ith d iversity, enhancing the situation of groups that are discrim inated against and dim inishing socially created d ifferences. Furtherm ore, ed ucation is in m ost countries taken to be the single m ost im portant tool to fight inequalities and im prove people‟s future and stand ard of living.
2.2. Dimensions of structural diversity The follow ing dim ensions of sociocultural d iversity can be id entified across all m em ber countries: ethnicity, religion, gend er, d isability, linguistic and sexual orientation. H ow ever, the survey of initial teacher training on social d iversity, cond ucted as part of the project on
21 Policies and practices for teaching social diversity (Arnesen et al., 2008) highlighted d ifferences betw een the countries in relation to their view s on problem s and w hat is em phasised and regard ed to be significant enough to call for political strategies and provisions in teacher training program m es. These d im ensions are consid ered below .
2.2.1. Cultural diversity Most countries are m ulti-ethnic and m ultilingual, although an appreciation of this fact m ay have evolved quite recently in som e countries. N ational m inorities have in m ost m em ber states grad ually becom e recognised as having cultural and linguistic r ights. Im m igration to Europe represents a new challenge. Global m igration is of course not a new phenom enon. People have travelled and crossed national bord ers throughout history for a variety of reasons; either by force, necessity or w ill because of natur al d isasters, poverty, d esire for a better life, new future, d esire for ad venture, colonialism and refuge from w ars. The colonisation of third w orld countries in the south and east and on the Am erican continent by European countries has had a great im pact on Europe as w ell as the colonised countries, both w hen it took place and at present (Brah, 1996). The increasing num ber of im m igrants and refugees to Europe d uring the last 40 years still represents som ething new in an age of globalisation, recognition o f hum an rights and state responsibility. First and forem ost, the present situation represents a new reality for the ed ucational systems, particularly d ue to increased d em and s to take d iversity into consid eration in teaching program m es. Som e countries have a long history of m ulticulturalism as a m ultitud e of cultures and religions have co-existed for centuries, w ith period s characterised by peaceful relations and others by antagonism and conflicts, even civil w ar. Som e countries, although com prising a num ber of minority populations, have, in the w ake of nation building, had a m onocultural and m onolingual orientation based on a notion of a hom ogeneous population often influenced by a d ominant elite. In these cases national unity and com m onality m ay be em phasised w ith assim ilation of m inority populations as a result. The view of im m igration and “the im migrant” is changing over tim e, from a requirem ent of adapting to national norm s in term s of culture, language, outlooks and general behaviour, to an increasing recognition of rights to be d ifferent w ith an em phasis on integration or inclusion in a pluralist society and school. The approaches to ethnic d ifference vary across national bord ers. Seem ingly there are d ifferent w ays of d ealing w ith d ifferent kind s of socially relevant d ifferences. There are system atic d ifferences betw een countries both in term s of how ethnic d ifferences are looked upon and how they are d ealt w ith, in society at large and in school.
2.2.2. Lingual diversity Language is closely related to culture and id entity. Most classroom s tod ay, in nearly every country of the w orld , are m ultilingual. It is the rule rather than the exception. This fact represents a m ajor challenge to teachers and schools. Insufficient know ledge of the official language is a problem for m any linguistic minority stud ents and represents a challenge for schools and teachers. In m ost countries and schools, proficiency in the official language on w hich the teaching is based is a prerequisite for being able to benefit from teach ing at all levels. Languages differ w ith respect to legitim acy, higher or low er status, larger or sm aller num bers of users, and other aspects of d ifference (Gogolin, 2002). Colonial conquest, im perialism and globalisation have established a hierarchy of st andard languages, w hich m irrors the pow er relations on the planet (Alexand er, 2007). Accord ing to Bourd ieu (1991)
22 legitim ate languages are those, w hich are recognised in term s of receiving unquestioned respect by everybod y and are connected to the highest am ount of “sym bolic pow er”. Accord ing to Gogolin (2002) the national languages in their standard form pass for legitim ate, but also other languages and variations w hich receive public recognition, for exam ple, by being taught as “foreign languages” in the official school system . The language policy of Council of Europe is an am bitious one, d irected not just to facilitate learning the countries‟ official language(s) or “foreign languages”, but also to enhance the value of proficiency in any languages (see 2.4.) To learn the national language(s) in a particular country is seen as essential in ord er to access ed ucation, be able to succeed in school, and as a key to get access to the d em ocratic and social institutions, necessary for successful inclusion. In social relations a com m on language is an instrum ent for social interaction and sharing of experiences and a vehicle for build ing up social bond s and trust. H ow ever, language learning goes beyond acquiring proficiency of the teaching language. Language has com e to be seen as a m ark of id entity and belonging, and a cultural tool in com m unication.
2.2.3. Religion Religious d iversity is another im portant d im ension of d iversity am ong countries, and is one of the factors that d efines the cultural id entity. Religiou s d iversity is an issue that has been associated w ith tensions and conflicts in Europe as w ell as globally, and recent w ars have been precipitated by econom ic, ethnic and religious d ifferences. Som e countries have a constitutional bond betw een church and state, but m ost European countries d efine them selves as secular in term s of consid ering religion to be a personal m atter and an elem ent not necessarily connected to the state or public life. H um an rights agreements as w ell as m em ber states‟ constitutions have incorporated universal rights to religious beliefs, banning d iscrim ination based on religion. Religious societies and com m unities m ay interfere in peoples‟ lives and claim a right to regulate social existence and behaviour. A d om inant religion in a cou ntry m ay allege preced ence, and m em bers of other religions, no matter how num erous, are d efined as inferior and insignificant. It seem s that hum an rights and m inority protection legislation, is the m ost favourable w ay of co-existence. Religion as a factor in behaviour and participation in society has becom e one of the puzzles that European countries are faced w ith. Recent historical events illustrate that matters that w ere previously approached as sim ply cultural aspects have broad er significance and have becom e m ore crucial. Und erstand ing of religious factors seem s to be one im portant basis for learning to live together. Know led ge about religions as a matter of dem ocratic citizenship based on religious ground s has becom e a priority in the field of education . At a constitutional level in each of the countries, freed om of religious choice is inviolable. Every religion is protected and equally treated by the states, even if the relationship betw een states and religions differ. In recent years, the Council of Europe has been actively involved in d ealing w ith religions and religious issues by organising expert conferences and m inisterial meetings on the subject. As a result of these w orks, recom m endations on ed ucation and religion and a reference book for schools have been created (Council of Europe, 2007).
2.2.4. Gender Gend er is one of the sociocultural d iversity d im ensions that is part of and intertw ined in all other d iversity d im ensions, for exam ple, cultural background and ethnicity, religion and special need s. Its sociocultural basis is d ocum ented by the different situations of girls and boys and men and w om en in d ifferent countries, localities and cultures, and in historical tim es. Gend er equality is a high priority in policy d ocum ents in m any countries. Globally the problem of provid ing access to ed ucation for all is a m ajor concern, and UN ESCO has targeted the task of im proving access for all, w ith a special em phasis on girls‟ access. H ow ever, the distribution of ed ucational provisions is highly uneven fro m one region to another and betw een different countries throughout the w orld. From a gend er perspective the d istribution is unfavourable tow ard s girls. In the Council of Europe, equality betw een m en and w om en is a core issue (the 5th European Ministerial Conference in 2003 focused on equality betw een w om en and m en). Gend er equality is seen as a crucial elem ent of d em ocracy. Sex-based d iscrim ination is taken as an im ped iment to the enjoym ent of hum an rights and freed oms.
2.2.5. Disability During the past 30 years m ajor international political w ork has been invested in ord er to provid e ed ucation for all (UN ESCO). In m ost European countries legislation has been put in place w ith the aim of integrating form erly segregated and institutionalised child ren and young people into ord inary schools or schools close to the child ren‟s homes. The field of special ed ucation has changed and provision for d isabled pupils has shifted from integration (placem ent w ithin m ainstream schools) to inclusion (w hich puts som e expectatio n on the schools to alter their practices to accom m od ate disabled pupils). This expectation is strengthened further by d isability d iscrim ination legislation. The Salam anca Statem ent (UN ESCO, 1994), signed by the majority of European countries, form alises t he com mitm ent to inclusion for all child ren. Som e countries, how ever, have been slow to m ake the shift from integration to inclusion. Movem ent tow ard s d esegregation and active policies of inclusion have had im plications for ed ucation and teacher training. Special ed ucation and inclusion has to becom e part of m ost teacher training, not only as a specialisation, but also grad ually as part of the general curriculum of pre-service teacher training. The very m ovem ent entailed in increasing access for previously institutionalised pupils and the w ays in w hich “special” categories and outlooks on d isabled people are changing is und erscoring the sociocultural nature of im pairm ents and categorisation.
2.2.6. Sexual orientation Legislation and policy in relation to sexual orientation is confined to ad ults and covers em ploym ent and civil partnerships. An EC Directive in 2000 (Council Directive 2000/ 78/ EC) required m em ber states to prohibit discrimination in em ploym ent and occupation on ground s of religion, belief, d isability, age or sexual orientation. Most countries have also grad ually ad opted legislation, w hich has extend ed the rights enjoyed by heterosexual m arried people to hom osexuals, but this area of entitlem ent rem ains contentious. This d im ension of d iversity is given lim ited regard and is positively avoid ed w ithin ed ucation. Schools are discouraged , and in som e cases prohibited , from giving pupils any inform ation, w hich could be seen as actively cond oning sam e sex relationships and w here schools provid e sex ed ucation, this is confined to heterosexual sex and reprod uction. There is recognition,
24 how ever, that hom ophobia is a m ajor cause of bullying w ithin schools. A stud y of young hom osexuals across Europe (Takàks, 2006) found w id espread evid ence of bullying, social exclusion and isolation, often arising from ignorance, prejud ice and fear. The stud y found that teachers w ere frequently unresponsive and unsupportive and , in some cases, contributed to the young people‟s social exclusion through their negative attitud es. Antibullying policies have been strengthened in some countries to incorporate a “zero tolerance” approach, but this d im ension of d iversity is clearly one w hich requires a consid erably m ore effective response.
2.3. Principles 2.3.1. Respect for human rights H um an rights are basic stand ard s that set m inimum entitlem ents and freed om s that should be respected by governments. They are found ed on respect for the dignity and w orth of each ind ivid ual, regard less of race, colour, gender, language, religion, opinio ns, origins, w ealth, birth status or ability, and therefore apply to every hum an being everyw here. They can be seen as universal need s, regard less of particular cultural id entities, for ”prim ary good s” such as incom e, health care, ed ucation, religious freedom , freed om of conscience, speech, press, and association, the right to vote, and the right to hold public office. These are interests shared by alm ost all people regard less of d ifferences. H ow ever, hum an rights are id eologically based , and are neither un iversal nor even rights (Baum ann, 1999). They m ay, how ever, be seen as a general principle on w hich ed ucational policies and practices should be erected . Attention and sensitivity to the com plexity of d ifferences and id entities w ithin schools should be attended to by provid ing learning environments that m ay contribute to em pow ering the pupils, enhance participation and outcom es for all, and prom ote intercultural d ialogue and respect for d ifferences.
2.3.2. Recognition and respect for cultural rights Recognition is both a d em and from various groups and a need based on the assum ption that hum an life is fund am entally d ialogical in character. Taylor (1994) assum es the need for recognition is based on the links betw een recognition and id entity. Recognition and t he question of respect for d ifferences are being ad d ressed in m ost countries. Respect for cultural rights m eans acknow ledging rather than ignoring cultural particularities. This requirem ent of political recognition of cultural particularity extend ed to all ind ivid uals is com patible w ith a form of universalism that counts the culture and cultural context valued by individ uals as am ong their basic interests (Gutm ann, 1994). In education, language and respect for particular w ays of life are am ong cultural d im ensions that are regard ed as basic. H ow ever, there m ay be tensions betw een the acknow led gem ent of particular cultures (lingual, ethnic and religious m inorities), and ind ivid ual rights and freed om for m em bers of those cultures to choose their ow n lives, w hen consid ered from the perspective of hum an rights. It is a tend ency of m ulticultural politics to gloss over tensions betw een personal and collective id entities, embed d ed in the culture as shaped by religion, gend er, ethnicity, race and sexuality (Appiah, 1994). Recognition may be seen as a question of the need to preserve d istinct and unique cultures over tim e, w hich provid es each separate group of people w ith a secure culture and id entity for themselves and their progeny. This could m ean the co existence of separate cultural or ethnic groups, but w ithout m uch cross-cultural contact. Lack of constructive com m unication am ong and across m em bers of ethnic, religious and racial groups m ay becom e the basis for d isrespect and m utual exclusion, and ground s for conflicts and violence. If, how ever, valuing diversity is und erstood in a d em ocratic spirit, as a w ay of political and personal life, it w ould mean expanding the cultural, intellectual and spiritual horizon of all ind ivid uals, enriching our societies by exposing us to differing cultural and
25 intellectual perspectives, and thereby increasing our possibilities for grow th, exploration and enlightenm ent (Gutm ann, 1994). Gutm ann argues that recognition and mutual respect of particular cultural values should be enhanced in schools und er three conditions: that basic rights of all citizens m ust be protected by recognising the rights and d ignity of all ind ivid uals; that no one is m anipulated into accepting cultural values that are presented ; and that school should be d em ocratically accountable. Clearly, not every aspect of sociocultural d iversity is w orthy of respect, for exam ple, sexist, racist and hom ophobic view s. Although not respected , how ever, even such view s may be tolerated , on the basis of recognising every hum an being has the right to freed om of speech. In Gutm ann‟s w ord s: Mutual respect requires a widespread willingness and ability to articulate our disagreements, to defend them before people with whom we disagree, to discern the difference between respectable and disrespectable disagreement, and to be open to changing our own minds when faced with well-reasoned criticism. The moral promise of multiculturalism depends on the exercise of these deliberate virtues. (Gutmann, 1994, p. 24)
Cultural d iversity is noted and protected by human rights agreem ents. Presenting it through ed ucational systems is not only a fund amental issue but also a point of enrichm ent in know led ge and the d ynam ics of plural cultural identities. An ed ucational system d oes not exist in a historical and social vacuum . It functions w ithin the fram ew ork of a d om inant culture w ith specific political outlooks, attitud es, values and norm s. But these fram ew orks are not static; they are continuously changing. While w e have to enhance the celebration of d iversity, and tolerance and w ays of living together in a pluralist society, it d oes not m ean that all differences should be preserved and m aintained . We m ay recognise diversity and treat all kind s of people w ith respect and d ignity, includ ing the poor, those w ho live on the streets and people w ho have com m itted crim es, but sim ultaneously m ake efforts to change peoples‟ circum stances by fighting poverty, hom elessness and crim e. This is an explicit policy in m ost m ember states.
2.3.3. Inclusion Valuing d iversity im plies consid eration of the cond itions for inclusion. Council of Europe has, as m entioned above, stated that d iversity and inclusion should be d ealt w ith together, by ad d ressing d iversity as an attribute of “a m ore hum ane and inclusive society”. Th e task of build ing a m ore hum ane and inclusive society is an urgent one and ed ucation is crucial tow ard s this end . In the 1990s and 2000s the slogan „„A school for all‟‟ has highlighted the im portance of ed ucation in creating an inclusive society. Inclusion is a term w ith m ultiple m eanings, but is usually, one w ay or other, associated w ith d iversity and issues of hum an rights, equity and d em ocratic participation. These principles are shared internationally and brought into national policies in various w ays. In the context of UN ESCO inclusion is d efined as “a process of ad d ressing and respond ing to the d iversity of need s of all learners through increasing participation in learning, cultures and com m unities, and red ucing exclusion w ithin and from ed ucation” (Booth, 1996). It is a system ic approach that, rather than m erely serving to integrate m arginal ind ividuals and groups, looks into how ed ucation system s m ay be transform ed , involving changes and m od ifications in content, approaches, structures and strategies to m eet the need s of a diversity of pupils and provid e spaces for all to learn and w ork across d ifferences. Schools and teachers are to a varying extent am ong the European states m and ated to actively enhance d iversity and assist in build ing m ore inclusiv e com m unities and learning environm ents. In m ost countries ed ucational policies aim to give fair treatm ent to
26 ind ivid uals and groups, and equal access to ed ucation and a basis for personal and acad em ic grow th of all stud ents. H ow ever, an inclusive culture insists upon valuing d iversity m ore d irectly by actively m ixing stud ents of different cultures, social background s, gend er and abilities. As ind icated in the N orw egian curriculum : The school is a workplace and a meeting place for everyone. It is a place where pupils come together, learn from and live with differences, regardless of where they live, their social backgrounds, their genders, their religions, their ethnic origins, and their mental and physical abilities. (Norwegian National Curriculum for basic education, 1997, p. 56)
This im plies actively prom oting equality and counteracting discriminatory attitud es, by m eans of, for exam ple, diversity training, conflict resolution, interfaith collaboration, d em ocratic training and com m unity dialogue, and elim ination of d iscrim ination. From the 1990s inclusion has been a central concept in policies internationally, and it has been adapted to ed ucation, social policies and w elfare d evelopm ent (Arnesen & Lund ahl, 2006), and is increasingly being d efined in term s of d em ocratic values, linked to id entity and w hole life perspective, includ ing the individ uals‟ experiences of belonging and acceptance. In the context of ed ucation, inclusion policies have in particular been associated w ith the follow ing broad er values and principles: (1) access and quality, (2) equity and social justice, (3) d em ocratic values and participation, and (4) balance betw een (com )unity and d iversity.
22.214.171.124. Access and quality Access to ed ucation refers not only to ed ucation as a social good that is free for everyone, but also to the possibility of taking advantage of it, and experiencing personal benefits, that is, access to quality teaching, acquisition of know led ge and belonging to a social com m unity. In a recent international OECD sem inar (2007) on fair and inclusive ed ucation in N orw ay, inclusion w as associated w ith the acquisitions of basic literacy com petences (Paris, 2007). The International Com mission on Ed ucation for the Tw enty-First Century (Delors, 1996) states that ed ucation policies must be sufficiently d iversified and d esigned in such a w ay that they avoid future social exclusion. Schools should foster the d esire to learn and interact w ith others and prom ote the ind ivid ual d rive for social inclusion. Inclusive ed ucation recognises a broad concept of “basic ed ucation”, w ith an expand ed vision that w ill provid e access and quality in basic ed ucation for all child ren and young people. In the ed ucation system s these need s can be ad d ressed and respond ed to in m ainstream ed ucation either in form al or non -form al contexts, universalising access and prom oting equity, focusing on learning, broad ening the m eans and scope of ed ucation, enhancing the environment for learning, and strengthening partnerships (UN ESCO, 1990). Ad ult and higher ed u cation reform s have resulted in increased access to practically all stages of ed ucation. Grad ually a greater proportion of the population, d espite great d ifferences am ong the European countries, have reached higher levels of ed ucation (statistics from OECD on lifelong learning). Another aspect of access is providing a broad range of alternatives and avoid ing ed ucational “blind alleys” through prem ature and narrow specialisation. Yet another aspect concerns how to em pow er every pupil throughout their school life both by focusing on learning and preparing them for living in socioculturally d iverse com m unities and societies. Finally, inclusion in term s of access is basically about the availability of social and cultural capital for all (see below ). In ord er to be able to d eal w ith the d iversity of stud ents in m ore inclusive w ays, teachers need to und erstand the current
27 practices of social d ifferentiation in society and the social construction of id entities in school (Bourd ieu, 1993) as w ell as the pathw ays that m ay enhance and support inclusive ped agogical practices. Whether child ren of different abilities and sociocultural background s should be taught together or separately has been one of the m ajor issues in ed ucation policies throughout Europe (Lindblad et al., 2002), and still is a question und er d ebate (Allan, 2008). In m any countries ed ucation policies stress the social purposes of ed ucation, that is, of citizenship and social integration (Aasen, 2003), serving as com mon ground for child ren and young people from d ifferent background s to m eet and w ork together. This has in fact been the criterion for quality of ed ucation. Com prehensive ed ucation, for exam ple, in the N ord ic countries, has trad itionally been associated w ith uniform ity and cultural hom ogeneity (Arnesen & Lund ahl 2006). The policies have been particularly criticised for focusing on assim ilation of groups of pupils w ith d ifferent national, religious and linguistic background s rather than inclusion, w hich recognises sociocultural d ifferences (Engen , 2004). H ow ever, ed ucation and w elfare in a m ulticultural society presents a new d im ension to the id ea of the unitary school, a school for all and the notion of d iversity w ithin an inclusive society. Inclusive approaches to d eal w ith diversity go beyond m erely providing appropriate responses to the broad spectrum of learning need s in form al and non -form al ed ucational settings. Quality in ed ucation im plies active recognition and appreciation of d iversity. At the level of classroom practice, inclusion, in term s of access and quality, requires both aw areness of the com plexity of d iversity and of w hat it m eans in the context of classroom practices.
126.96.36.199. Equity and social justice Despite the fact that provid ing equal ed ucational opportunities has been a fu nd am ental id ea in ed ucation policies, inequalities on the basis of gend er, ethnicity, (d is)ability, social and cultural backgrounds, and language, persist both in term s of outcom es of schooling and lack of recognition. The notion of equity and social justice im plies activities to the benefit of all, targeting each ind ivid ual. By using the term equity, inclusion m ay be und erstood , not just as ad d ing on to existing structures, but as a process of transform ing societies, com m unities and institutions such as schools to becom e diversity-sensitive. Thus all child ren and young people m ay participate in and take ad vantage of the com m unities on equal term s. It is argued that the key question of equity and social justice is w hether every stud ent has an opportunity to achieve to their fullest, to have access to an equitably validating, supportive learning environm ent, regard less of race, ethnicity, gend er, sexual orientation, socioeconom ic status, religion, hom e language, (dis)ability, and any other ed ucationally relevant d im ensions. This requires taking differences into account, and also w hat is conceived as “engaged pluralism ”. This m eans an active attitud e tow ard s valuing diversity in general accom panied by a special concern for the d isadvantaged or m arginalised and those w ho are m ost at risk of failure, exclusion and pow erlessness in ed ucation and society .
188.8.131.52. Democratic values and participation Bringing up d em ocratic citizens w as one of the core id eas of the ed ucational reform s after the end of the Second World War, and it is still em phasised in the national curricula and ed ucational legislation of m any countries. A high ed ucational level of the population is expected to facilitate the ind ivid ual‟s active engagem ent in the d evelopm ent of society (Arnesen & Lund ahl, 2006). A broad conception of citizenship ed ucation includ es teaching about, for and through dem ocracy and active participation. The d ouble functions of fostering
28 d em ocratic citizens in the spirit of pluralism , diversity and inclusion and ensuring that pupils acquire influence over the inner w ork of schools are stressed in the steering d ocum ents in m ost European countries. H ence d em ocracy is not m erely seen as a form of governm ent, but also as a pattern of behaviour that respects ind ivid uals and their life experiences. Ideally, in a d em ocratic setting, d ecision making and ord ering of hum an relationships should be based upon open, public d ialogue that includ es all that aim s at securing freed om and equality. The construction of social arenas for d em ocratic involvem ent, particularly in schools, requires participation of pupils w ith a diversity of background s and w orld view s.
184.108.40.206. Balancing unity and diversity The ability to reach unity in diversity will be the beauty and the test of our civilization. (Gandhi)
As has been m entioned above, the m ajor shift apparent in ed ucation policies in Europe is that d iversity should no longer be consid ered a problem or burd en but rather an asset or opportunity. Valuing d iversity in ed ucation policies m eans targeting m e asures to ad d ress the variety of learning styles, heterogeneous abilities, d iverse need s and id entities, as w ell as various living conditions. These m easures are not restricted to ind ivid uals w ho m ust make up for the effects of ed ucational d isadvantage. In clusive ed ucation is structured as an open and flexible learning environm ent, a type of ed ucation capable of providing opportunities for all regard less of the num erous variations in term s of cultural background , social position, gend er, level of incom e, ph ysical or psychological characteristics. Tw o concepts of the social theory w ere highly valued in ed ucation policies in the 1990s, nam ely cultural capital and social capital. Both are very attractive m etaphors that suggest interd epend ency betw een variability and social cohesion, w hich, accord ing to Durkheim (1996), represents the essence of social life. Cultural capital is a m ajor input to or prerequisite for social cohesion and active participation of all. Social capital is the netw ork of norm s and trust that connect people and allow them to achieve m ore as a consequence. Both concepts presuppose the principle of unity in d iversity (Winch, 1996), encountered tod ay in all political d ocum ents at European or national level. The principle stipulates the need fo r unity and social cohesion to rest on w id e participation, by taking into consid eration all ind ivid ual characteristics. In fact, it has been argued that a multicultural society cannot be stable and sustainable w ithout d eveloping a com m on sense of belonging am ong its citizens (Parekh, 2006). On the one hand , the concept of cultural capital, introd uced by Bourd ieu (1979), suggests that there is a large, random d istribution of cultural characteristics in society. These characteristics em erge spontaneously as a result of learning experiences and m ay be biased by the artificial sym bolic bound aries introd uced by society (m ajority vs. minority, ind igenous vs. foreign cultures, elites vs. popular culture), w hich tend to be reprod uced from one generation to the next. The cultural d istinction thus becom es the criterion for social hierarchies provid ing legitim acy for social and econom ic fragm entation, and im plicitly for m arginalisation, exclusion, prejud ice and d isad vantage. On the other hand , social capital theory (Bourd ieu, 1993; Coleman, 1990; Putnam , 2000) em phasises the im portance of com m unity and social relations for hum an developm ent. The theory explores relationships of d ifferent kind s (bond ing, brid ging and linking) and the significance of com m unities build ing on m utual trust, reciprocity, social norm s and sanctions. Diversity is seen from this perspective not as a basis for social fragm entation, but
29 rather the very basis for generating social capital by capitalising on the multiple contributions to a com mon project (Fukuyam a, 1995). Social capital should be a form of public good , accessible to all ind ivid uals, groups and com m unities. People take part in social and cultural exchanges, bring their ow n contribution to the comm on heritage and assum e the shared values of society.
2.4. Sociocultural diversity in education – key concepts Teacher ed ucation is id eally responding to actual requirem ents and need s in society and schools and other ped agogical institutions; its m ain task is to prepare teachers and schools for the nitty-gritty pedagogical w ork w ith a m ixture of child ren and learners w ithin a culture based on principles and values such as hum an rights, equality, inclusion and recognition of d iversity as outlined above, and the com plexity of classroom practice.
2.4.1. Diversity-sensitive and inclusive classroom practices Classroom practices that are d iversity-sensitive and inclusive m ay operate at m any levels (d om ains), political, institutional, relational and ethical. We have id entified three m ain areas of w ork in w hich these different d om ains are intertw ined : –
Work against structural barriers that prevent active participation and access to social and societal resources and good s for individ uals and groups (political, institutional);
Work tow ard s recognition of social and cultural values and resources of minority groups for the benefit of the social com m unity and for the em pow erm ent of ind ivid uals and groups w ho belong to and are identifying w ith these groups/ cultures, prom oting recognition, positive id entity, and self-respect (institutional, relational, ethical);
Work tow ard s m aking space for ind ivid ual d iversity by focusing on the uniqueness of the ind ivid ual w ith his or her resources and w ays of learning, com m unicating and expressing them selves, and acknow led ging d ifferent notions of “the good life” (relational, ethical). (Arnesen & Sollie, 2003)
Schools have a particular responsibility to m eet every ind ivid ual stud ent and to und erstand and take into consid eration his or her individ ual skills and circum stances. Teaching and ped agogical practices m ay be inform ed by know led ge, experiences and insights about, for exam ple, “cultures”, ethnic groups, social background , d isability and gend er, and yet, in the reality of the classroom , it is the com m unity of individ u al learners w ith their d ifferent background s, abilities, aspirations, interests, identities and need s w hich has to com e into the foreground . In a society increasingly m arked by cultural, linguistic and religious d iversity, it is urgent that teachers in their classroom practices are able to see the ind ivid ual behind group labels, and to m ake constructive use of this d iversity in d eveloping new id eas and solutions w hich w ill increase the opportunities for recognition, equality, achievem ent and d evelopm ent for all. The particular configurations of the social com m unity, curriculum and the ind ivid ual, and betw een d iversity and unity are the very basis for teaching: –
A focus on the ind ivid ual learner, but w ith a view of the collective, the social com m unity and w hat characterises the learning environm ent;
A focus on the social com m unity and learning environm ent, but w ith a view of the ind ivid ual learner and their position;
A focus on curriculum , possibilities and resources for d eveloping a diversity -sensitive and inclusive environm ent and a d em ocratic school based on principles of equality and hum an rights.
In the follow ing section w e review concepts and issues as they are com monly used in ped agogical contexts. These concepts and issues und erlie all ed ucational a ctivity and cut across d iversities and those associated w ith specific know led ge areas associated w ith and targeted tow ard s particular groups, for exam ple, im m igrant child ren, children w ith d isabilities, Rom a child ren and child ren at risk of exclusion.
2.4.2. Multiculturality and intercultural education Any und erstand ing of cultural d iversity or m ulticulturality and w hat it m eans for ped agogical practice d epend s on the notion of culture em ployed . Culture is a highly contested concept. Within this report culture is seen not as a fixed entity, but as a d ynamic, com plex, and changing phenom enon (Mesic, 2008), associated w ith artefacts, m aterial objects, and other tangible aspects of hum an societies as w ell as legitim ated and institutionalised practices, w ays of life, customs, beliefs and other things that have been passed on to us for generations, form s of relations, id eas and norm s, id entities, feeling of belonging and the w ay people interpret, interact and contest their circum stances. Multiculturalism (like assim ilation) is und erstood as a specific policy approach, w hereas the term s “cultural d iversity” and “m ulticulturality” im ply that people of d ifferent “cultures” exist and may interact w ithin a given space and social organisation (Council of Europe, 2008). In ed ucational term s m ulticultural ed ucation has been und erstood in m uch the sam e w ay as intercultural ed ucation. The term “intercultural” em phasises interd ependency and interaction, and accord ing to Rey (2008) im plies tw o d im ensions that run through all intercultural thought and practice: First, the intercultural perspective requires us to recognize that reality is plural, complex and dynamic, and that interaction is an integral part of all life and culture. It seeks to understand how these interactions work, and to record them objectively. Second, it asks us to ensure that these interactions foster mutual respect and the enrichment of mutual supportive communities rather than strengthening of relationships based on domination and rejection. (pp. 2-3)
Intercultural ed ucation goes beyond “culture” and can be seen in com bination w ith intercultural d ialogue, as ped agogical approaches that can inspire schools and teacher ed ucation institutions to broad en their scope to includ e all types of diversities. Rey (2008) argues that intercultural ed ucation should be thought of in term s of a strategy: – –
for questioning our egocentric, sociocentric and ethnocentric certainties and our m onocultural norm s; for changing stereotypical im ages and representations and overcom ing prejud ices that generate jud gm ents and actions;
for transform ing and diversifying pow er relationships, giving equal place to ind ivid uals and groups that are undervalued , and their com petences, cultural references and m ethod s of expressing them selves; for breaking d ow n barriers and fostering relations betw een cultures, social classes, institutions, field s of teaching, school subjects, scientific subjects, etc., as w ell as betw een hum an beings of all ages, languages, ethnicities, cultures and religions; for teaching and enhancing negotiation and comm unication betw een individ uals, groups and com m unities, so that these are positive; for linking the responsibilities incum bent on everyone in relation to the local and national com m unity, and to the international com m unity. (p. 4)
2.4.3. Education for democratic citizenship and human rights The term citizenship m eans both a status and a role (Bîrzéa, 2000) by w hich the form er refers to civil, political and social rights guaranteed by a state to its citizens, and the latter takes account of the id entities and the m ental im ages of public and political life that every citizen conceives. Bîrzéa argues that globalisation (politics and m arkets) is accom panied by a convergence of values and a situation w here social protection by legal citizenship is no longer autom atically guaranteed . These circum stances bring about the em ergence of new m od els of citizenship. In this w ay ind ivid uals can see them selves as having m ultiple citizenship and can identify w ith an institution rather than a geographical area or vice versa (d iaspora). On this basis there is a need for new notions of social cohesion, prom oted through ed ucation for d em ocratic citizenship. The Council of Europe has developed a m ajor project relating to ed ucation for d em ocratic citizenship. Dem ocratic citizenship, in this context, m eans learning to live together in a d em ocratic society, enabling young people and ad ults to play an active part in d em ocratic life by accepting and exercising their rights and responsibility.
2.4.4. Social cohesion Social cohesion, as und erstood by the Council of Europe, d enotes: the capacity of a society to ensure the welfare of all its members, minimising disparities and avoiding polarisation. A cohesive society is a mutually supportive community of free individuals pursuing these common goals by democratic means. (Council of Europe, 13th Session, Spring Session, Strasbourg, 27-28 March 2007)
In ed ucational term s social cohesion can be seen as an aspect of intercultural ed ucation w hereby ind ivid uals, groups and com m unities are brought together around a com m on political project and shared values, and to prod uce skills required to achieve this goal (Bîrzéa, 2000).
2.4.5. Intercultural dialogue This concept has becom e ad opted by the Council of Europe (White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue, “Living together as equals in d ignity”, 2008) and is und erstood as an open and respectful exchange of view s betw een ind ivid uals, groups w ith different ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic background s and heritage on the basis of m utual und erstand ing and respect. Ed ucation is an im portant context for bringing child ren and young people together and creating spaces for d ialogue across differences.
2.4.6. Language learning and multilingual education Council of Europe language ed ucation policies aim to prom ote the follow ing w hich clearly show how language acquisition is und erstood as part of the notion of intercultural ed ucation and d em ocratic citizenship: –
Plurilingualism: all are entitled to d evelop a d egree of com m unicative ability in a num ber of languages over their lifetim e in accord ance w ith their need s.
Linguistic diversity: Europe is m ultilingual and all languages are equally valuable m od es of com m unication and expressions of id entity; the right to use and to learn one‟s language(s) is protected in Council of Europe conventions.
M utual understanding: the opportunity to learn other languages is an essential cond ition for intercultural com m unication and acceptance of cultural d ifferences.
Democratic citizenship: participation in d em ocratic and social processes in multilingual societies is facilitated by the plurilingual com petence of ind ivid uals.
Social cohesion: equality of opportunity for personal d evelopm ent, ed ucation, em ploym ent, m obility, access to inform ation and cultural enrichm ent d epend s on access to language learning throughout life.
Schools, to an increasing extent, have found that a num ber of child ren w ho have inad equate proficiency in the teaching language, fail in school or achieve less w ell than those w ho have the teaching language as their first language. Many countries have recognised the im portance of build ing upon a child‟s first language. Mother tongue ed ucation has been ad opted in som e countries, particularly because it has been recognised as a crucial basis for id entity build ing on the one hand and for second language acquisition on the other. It is also seen as a necessary tool for those w ith poor skills in the teaching language to gain access to the subjects. In som e countries lin gual (and cultural) m inorities have their ow n schools, separate from the m ainstream . Foreign language ed ucation has also attained new status as crucial for enhancing com m unication w ithin Europe and beyond .
2.4.7. Educational (dis)advantage An und erlying assum ption for w orking w ith sociocultural d iversity is that a num ber of child ren across sociocultural d iversities d o not benefit from schooling, get schooling that is inad equate or of poor quality, experience harassm ents and are d iscrim inated against, not heard , m arginalised and segregated . They d o not succeed in school and too m any leave school w ith an experience of und erachievem ent and exclusion. International and national statistics ind icate that som e key factors relate to success or failure in school: the individ ual background s of pupils such as socioeconom ic background , cultural background , language, gend er, d isabilities, family and com m unity expectations (PISA). Early school leaving is m ore com m on and enrolm ent in higher ed ucation low er am ong m igrant pu pils than their peers. There are clear signs that tend encies tow ard s segregation along socioeconom ic lines intensify as socially ad vantaged parents tend to w ithd raw their child ren from schools w ith high num bers of migrant pupils. Disparities betw een schools tend to increase over tim e (see EU Green Paper IP/ 08/ 1092, 2008).
33 H ow ever, d ata also show the im portance of ed ucation system s and that som e countries succeed better than others in red ucing the gap betw een various groups, thus d em onstrating that policies and practices m ay significantly influence school perform ance. It is argued in the EU Green Paper that segregation, for instance, is a d ow nw ard spiral that affects child ren‟s m otivation and performance, and that ability grouping and tracking m ay have sim ilar effects. Teachers‟ expectations, and their preparedness to d eal w ith d iversity, m ay have a further im pact on results. The Green Paper on m igrant child ren und ertakes a brief review of policies and approaches that m ay foster ed ucational success. It indicates that those system s that strongly prioritise equity in ed ucation are also the m ost effective in integrating particular groups such as m igrant pupils. Am ong the policy m easures w hich seem particularly useful to ad d ress the issue are pre-school ed ucation , language learning, ad d itional ed ucational support such as m entoring and tutoring, and intercultural ed ucation as w ell as partnerships w ith fam ilies and com m unities. Preventing segregation and d esegregating “ghetto” schools seem s a precond ition to guarantee real equal opportunities to m igrant pupils. To do that, ensuring high quality stand ard s in all schools, especially in relation to teaching and lead ership, is essential.
2.4.8. Enrichment approach in education The enrichment perspective is d eveloped w ith in inclusive ed ucation and is an alternative or supplem entary approach to the d iagnostic-therapeutic special ed ucation m od el (Befring, 1997). From an enrichm ent perspective, a school is seen as a social context in w hich everybod y profits ed ucationally and personally from living together in a com m unity. It im plies that form erly exclud ed and isolated child ren and young people are includ ed as necessary and vital m embers of the m ainstream ed ucational com m unity. This perspective requires that caring for and supp orting others is part of the curriculum for both child ren and the ad ults of school. It im plies helping stud ents break aw ay from a trad ition of isolation, red ucing com petition and fostering a schooling that nurtures a culture in w hich all can have som ething to bring to the group. The enrichm ent perspective is a strengths- and ability-based m od el that involves an assessm ent of w hat child ren can d o as w ell as w hat the school can d o, and uses this inform ation as the point of d eparture in creating a learning env ironm ent based on d iversity.
2.4.9. Empowerment The m ost com m on use of the term “em pow erm ent” refers to increasing the pow er and influence of ind ivid uals and groups that have been d enied the possibility to get their voices heard . It also involves afford ing them access to fora w here d ecisions are m ad e w hich concern their lives. It requires active efforts to provid e secure and open classroom s w here people can w ork, d iscuss and negotiate on equal term s and im plies altering relationships w ithin classroom s to red uce the d istance betw een teachers and pupils.
2.5. Conclusion Whilst an attem pt has been m ad e in this chapter to clarify d iversity and its m any d im ensions, meanings and interpretations are subject to change over tim e and in d ifferent cultural contexts. Th e principles outlined in this chapter are m ore em bed ded and robust and d enote the values w hich can form the basis for the response by teacher education to d iversity. In Chapter 3, w e outline in m ore d etail the nature of the new challenges facing teacher ed ucation.
Chapter 3 N ew challenges in teacher education In this chapter the notion of the “interactive m od el” in teacher ed ucation and d evelopm ent is introd uced . We focus on the em phasis of such m od els on professional d evelopm ent thinking in teacher ed ucation and on the need to und erstand the w ays in w hich learning is created and shared w ithin the teacher‟s w orld . An interrelation betw een theory and practice is presented as the cornerstone need ed in ord er to cope w ith the com plexity of current ed ucational issues related to d iversity. We then go on to outline the particular m od el, proposed by Clarke and H ollingw orth (2002), w hich focuses on an expert -led process of d eveloping know led ge, skills and attitud es in relation to the different d omains of the teacher‟s w orld (personal d om ain, practical d om ain, external d om ain and d om ain of consequences). We outline particular issues that need to be ad d ressed in teacher ed ucation program m es in ord er to m ake teachers com petent in enhancing d iversity and w hich correspond to the personal d om ain (m eaningful know led ge of self and the other), the practical d omain (ped agogical content know led ge for enhancing d iversity) and the m ed iating processes of enactm ent and reflection.
3.1. Teacher education and pre-service teachers As has alread y been m entioned , there is a general agreem ent in Europe, the ed ucational research com m unity and the Council of Europe about the im portance of teachers‟ professional ed ucation and d evelopm ent as the m ain w ay to im prove education for all and create cond itions that value d iversity and contribute to the d evelopm ent of an inclusive, participative ethos. Teachers play an im portant and crucial role in supporting the learning experience, as they are key actors in how ed ucation system s evolve and in the im plem entation of reform s (European Com m ission, 2004). They have a strong influence on society and play a vital role in ad vancing hum an potential and shaping future generations. From this perspective the teaching profession is inspired by the values of inclu sive ed ucation and the need to nurture the potential of all learners (Council of Europe, 2007; European Com m ission, 2004). The task of preparing and supporting teachers for w ork w ith d iverse stud ents has generated w id espread interest in teacher ed ucation, ind uction and m entoring program m es (Achinstein & Athanases, 2005).
3.2. A teacher education model Different m od els have been d eveloped or id entified , focusing on classroom experience, on training and ed ucation in institutions, or on active m eaningful lear ning (Clarke & H ollingw orth, 2002). The latter, characterised as an interactive m od el (Justi & van Driel, 2006; Sprinthall, Reim an & Thies-Sprinthall, 1996), focuses on the occurrence of an expert-led process of changing or developing prior know ledge, form ed , for exam ple, by apprenticeship in the profession w hile being at school as a stud ent (Lortie, 1973), or by participating in teacher ed ucation sessions d uring pre-service program m es or ind uction courses in the case of in-service program m es (Bartholom ew , 1987; N iem i, 2002). The em phasis on professional d evelopm ent thinking shifts from individ uals and courses to system ic complex und erstandings of the w ays in w hich learning is created and shared w ithin com m unities or practice, and to the interrelation betw een theory and practice (Knight, 2002).
35 Within this perspective one m od el proposed for teacher professional learning and grow th w as by Clarke and H ollingw orth (2002). Accord ing to this m od el the teacher‟s w orld is m ad e up of four d istinct d om ains that chan ge through the m ed iating processes of reflection and enactm ent in a particular context and environm ent. In the d iagram the m ultiplicity of pathw ays betw een the dom ains reflects the com plexity of teachers´ learning and d evelopm ent. Teachers experience new know led ge in their teacher ed ucation program m es and put this into practice through d ifferent activities and assignm ents. At the sam e tim e this practice interacts w ith the teachers‟ ow n personal beliefs and experiences and m ay lead to outcom es w hich m ay or m ay not be salient and w hich w ill affect the process of d evelopm ent and change. The interaction betw een the d om ains and the process of enactm ent in transform ing an id ea into action and reflection, gives the m od el a dynamic character. The m od el d oes not d ich otom ise action and know ledge or theory and practice as part of the process of teacher d evelopm ent. As part of their ed ucation program m e or as part of classroom practice, teachers m ay be asked to ad opt a particular approach. In ord er to incorporate this app roach into their professional w orld , the und erlying beliefs, know led ge and outcom es of the approach require som e reflection. The external d om ain refers to exposure to particular sets of know led ge, includ ing psychology, sociology, philosophy and ped agogy, and them es such as teaching m ethod s, professional planning, curriculum d evelopm ent, ed ucation and subject stand ard s and ad m inistrative w ork. Activities and experiences take place in a particular environm ent w hich includ es the profile and politics of the school and legislation, as w ell as certain created cond itions. The m od el im plies that this external d om ain d oes not exist per se , but it can ind eed lead to teacher d evelopm ent and change through interaction and interconnection w ith the teacher‟s professional w orld and in relation to d iversity. In the case of teacher d evelopm ent in relation to diversity issues this interactive m od el em braces all the key aspects of diversity. It starts from the teacher and explores id entity and d iversity in relation to him or herself. It em phasises interaction and prom otes a d ynam ic character of teacher id entity. It also entails accepting and enhancing the pluralistic and changing nature of the self, school and society. Through this m od el teacher learning is based on know ing, experiencing and reflecting on d iversity and thus d eveloping know led ge, skills and beliefs w hich are in a constant process of reflection, reform ation and transform ation in ord er to m eet the need s of all pupils.
THE ENVIRONMENT (e.g. legislation, educational system)
EXTERNAL DOMAIN The teacher experiences new knowledge in the teacher education programme PRACTICAL DOMAIN The teacher puts into action new knowledge
PERSONAL DOMAIN The teacher knows, believes, experiences
DOMAIN OF CONSEQUENCES The teacher makes conclusions about the new knowledge
enactment reflection Based on Clarke & Hollingworth (2002)
This m od el regard s teacher ed ucation on d iversity as a d ynam ic construction of a variety of com petences by ind ivid ual teachers in response to their participation in their ed ucation and professional d evelopm ent program m e and through participation in classroom practice. In this m od el the active participation of teachers in their d evelopm ent is based on taking into account and reflecting upon d ifferent aspects and form s of d iversity and on how these are involved in the learning process for both teachers and stud ents. In the final d eclaration from the Stand ing Conference of European Ministers of Ed ucation “Build ing a m ore hum ane and inclusive Europe: role of ed ucation policies” (Istanbul, Tur key, 4-5 May 2007) there is a call for “analysing and d eveloping key com petences for d em ocratic culture and social cohesion, such as citizenship com petence, intercultural competence, plurilingual com petence, social com m itm ent, a solid arity-based outlook an d m ulti-perspectivity” as basic requirem ents in ord er to realise “inclusive ed ucation, in particular for the socially and culturally exclud ed ”.
37 This perspective fits w ell w ith the em phasis of the Council of Europe Ad H oc Ad visory Group on teacher ed ucation in sociocultural diversity (ED-DS) that teachers should be involved in a process of com petency building in ord er to d evelop their ability to enhance d iversity. The results of the first phase of the project show ed that m anaging d iversity is in m ost countries the “starting point” for “enhancing d iversity” (Arnesen et al., 2008). This interconnected m odel of professional d evelopm ent and grow th for teachers (Clarke & H ollingw orth, 2002) is used as a fram ew ork to id entify the basic items to be taken into account w hen d esigning a teacher ed ucation program m e aim ed at enhancing d iversity through specific com petences.
3.2.1. Meaningful knowledge of self and the other An ed ucation program me w hich ad d resses a teacher‟s professional d evelopm ent in relation to enhancing d iversity should focus on the teacher‟s personal d om ain and in particular on their beliefs, know led ge and experiences. Teachers should becom e increasingly aw are of, and sensitive to, their ow n self and personal and social m ultiple id entities and to valuing, respecting and enhancing d ifferences in ord er to rem ove barriers to participation and prom ote equal opportunities for all pupils. Research has show n that und erstand ing the id entities ed ucators construct for them selves is central to effecting innovation w ithin a changing policy environm ent (Robinson & McMillan, 2006). Through their ed ucation program m es, teachers should und erstand , for exam ple, how their status and ethnicity are affected by their ow n experiences and histories and should recognise the lim its for their com petences and expertise. They should be aw are of specific features of their ow n id entity, how these affect their und erstand ing of “norm ality”, and how know led ge of oppression of any kind and stereotyping affects them personally and profes sionally (Aheyanz, Bow n & Molina, 1998). Com petences in this area w ill enable teachers to recognise and respect d ifferent perspectives and to offer opportunities for these to be voiced . As a starting point, this refers to the acceptance and m anagem ent of diversity as d iverse d iscourses w ithin the general claim of equity, and the attem pt to d econstruct socially constructed perceptions of d iversity that are used as justifications for exclusion (Speiser, 2000). Such know led ge can be gained through engagem ent w ith stories by stud ents and teachers of their ow n experiences of ed ucation (Achinstein & Athanases, 2005; Jam es, 2001). Focusing on the self and others can help teachers to und erstand the com plex characteristics of ethnic groups w ithin society and the w ays in w hich religion, language, d isability, gend er and sexual orientation interact and influence student behaviour. Research has show n that the concerns of new teachers for stud ents as learners, classroom participants and effective ind ivid uals rem ain consistent, and are com plicated and of a m ultidim ensional nature. Although they m ay be aw are of their prejud ices they m ay still be unconcerned about changing them (Am be, 2006; Watzke, 2007). Teachers can use their know led ge of them selves and others to construct know led ge of their stud ents and thus becom e m ore effective since “in teaching in m ulticultural contexts … if w e d o not have som e know led ge of child rens‟ lives outsid e the realm s of paper and pencil w ork and even outsid e their classroom s then w e cannot know their strengths” (Milner & Sm ithey, quoted in Santoro, 2007). This m eans that teachers learn about the assets stud ents bring into class and m ove beyond a stance of view ing them (culturally, linguistically, accord ing to ability, etc.) as “problem s” or t hrough d eficit lenses. This allow s them to und erstand learners from d ifferent background s w ithout im prisoning them in their background s, to interpret properly w hat they say and d o, and to support them effectively in their d evelopm ent in cognitive and socia l d im ensions. There is
38 also a need to recognise physical and psychological d im ensions: “ped agogical learner know led ge is ped agogical proced ural inform ation useful in enhancing learner focused teaching in the daily life of classroom action or the w ays teach ers interact rigorously and supportively w ith learners” (Grim m et & McKinnon, in Achinstein & Athanases, 2005, p. 858). Sim (2006) introd uced a m od el of d elivery of professional experience courses for pre -service teachers. The overall purpose of the m od el is to assist the d evelopm ent of a reflective approach in pre-service teachers as they build their professional know led ge in schools and on cam pus. She uses a fram ew ork of “com m unities of practice” in w hich teachers com bine experience of teaching practice in school and a cam pus-based tutorial component. The m od el m ay be seen as a tool that should enable teacher stud ents to attain valuable professional und erstanding. There is a need for engagem ent in com bining theory and practice and to encourage co-operative effort, coherence and d ialogue betw een the acad em ic com m unity, the school and the society. This relates closely to the second d om ain of the teacher d evelopm ent and grow th m od el w hich refers to practice in the classroom.
3.2.2. Pedagogical content knowledge for enhancing diversity An interconnected m od el of teacher d evelopm ent and grow th w hich is based on their interaction and reflection w ith their classroom practice and activities, should contribute tow ard s the d evelopm ent of teaching com petences that enha nce d iversity and prom ote learning for all child ren. Effective teachers w ho can enhance diversity possess a w ellground ed know led ge of the content area that is central to their teaching, and they can relate it to the m ultiple form s of und erstand ing that in d ivid ual stud ents bring to the classroom w ith a particular sensitivity to the d iversity of pupils. This know led ge should includ e the three broad categories: learners and learning, contexts and purposes, and curriculum and teaching (Achinstein & Athanases, 2005). It refers to the different approaches that can be used and could includ e focusing on stud ents and problem s, probing teachers‟ thinking, being direct and finding openings for prod uctive thinking and com m unication. Teacher ed ucation program m es can help teachers refram e their thinking about diversity and the ed ucational need s of pupils, and provid e them w ith a repertoire of strategies to establish a trusting classroom clim ate based on com m unity and com m unication. In ord er to serve all pupils, teachers m ust sustain high expectations for all, construct lesson plans to serve the stud ents and use m ultiple m od es of lesson presentation and m eans to d ifferentiate instruction tailored to learners‟ specific need s. To d o this they should benefit from research on the use of ICT, co-operative learning and problem solving. In other w ord s, there is a need to focus on specific strategies, m ethod s and approaches in the classroom w hich w ill enable d ifferentiation (Sfyroera, 2002; Tom linson, 1999). The focus w ill be prim arily on the learning processes and second ly on the ed ucational outcom es. The aim should be to develop com petences that w ill enable teachers to create a flexible context in w hich stud ents can follow and d evelop their ow n learning styles, w ays and strategie s to achieve ed ucational goals. This w ould m ean that teachers, apart from understand ing and id entifying their ow n and their stud ents‟ id entities and background s, abilities, know led ge and interests (Koutselini, 2002; Sfyroera, 2002), should be able to go on e step further and ad opt m ethod ology and strategies w hich could enable all stud ents to participate fully in learning, enhance d iversity and experiences, learn to w ork autonom ously, interact and transform their learning and succeed in ed ucation (Gotovos, 2003; Koutselini, 2002; Sfyroera, 2002). This calls for teachers to be flexible in m anaging com m unication, time and ed ucational goals (Sfyroera, 2002; Tom linson, 1999). To achieve this requires com bining both the personal and the practical d om ain of the teacher‟s w orld in ord er to id entify the best tools for enhancing d iversity.
3.2.3. Enactment and critical reflection Teacher ed ucation program m es m ust involve practical experience in schools and universities so that teachers can d evelop first-hand experiences and assess their professional know led ge in actual ed ucational settings. This w ill encourage the d evelopm ent of m ulticultural ped agogies (Ladson-Billings, 2001; Milner & Sm ithey, 2003) through instructional approaches that purposefully enhance the d iverse perspectives represented in classroom s and recognise differences. Teachers need to realise how school realities can be constrained , how they can w ork w ithin such constraints to enhance diversity and promote equity, how to id entify inequities in the treatm ent of stud ents and in the system , and how classroom activities and experiences m ay be em bed d ed w ithin school and com m unity life contexts that m aintain or enhance inequality. Teachers should see them selves as agents of change in close co-operation w ith school m anagem ent and the local com m unity in actively involving people w ho are facing discrimination in the process for change in schools and com m unity life. It is im portant to engage teachers in professional d evelopm ent sessions w ith skilled teacher trainers and m entors, action research and ongoing d iscussions on d iversity. The m entor sessions should includ e know led ge to be achieved as w ell as know led ge of w ays to teach, and should guid e teachers tow ard s prom oting enhancem ent of diversity (Achinstein & Athanases, 2005). Mentors can help teachers in und erstand ing how the curriculum can support learning of all stud ents through the infusion of d iverse content, and can use their know led ge of stand ard s to guid e ped agogy. Achinstein and Athanases (2005), in their research in the US on mentors and d iversity, show ed that w eekly conversations and using observational d ata to help analyse learning opportunities d uring instruction helped new teachers to m eet the need s of d iverse populations and im prove practice. Accord ing to Schon (1987) practice is articulated as “a sim plified version of reality that has as one of its prim ary purposes the prom otion of reflection” (p. XX). Teachers need to engage in self-reflection on their personal attitud es tow ard s d iversity and inequality in ed ucation. As has alread y been m entioned they should be aw are of their personal and practical d om ains, their ow n beliefs, values and practices related to diverse bod ies of stud ents and the biases they bring to the teacher–stud ent relationship. This im plies the ability to be com fortable in d iscussing such issues openly through d ifferent external d om ain activities w ithin a teacher ed ucation program m e. The essential quality of reflection is thinking about practice in ord er to improve practice (Dew ey, in Ward & McCotter, 2004). It is im portant to reflect critically on the d ifferent d im ensions of d iversity in ed ucation and the m ultiple contexts in w hich schools function, to appreciate the d iverse perspectives of ed ucational issues and be com mitted to d em ocratic form s of interaction. Teacher ed ucation programm es should help teachers reflect continuously on all aspects of their teaching experience, and in relation to the personal, practical and external d om ains. Reflection is a key concept w ithin the “inquiry-oriented ” parad igm of teacher ed ucation that w as put forw ard by Zeichner (1983; Wubbels & Korthagen, 1990). Teachers are reflecting w hen they are engaged in structuring their perceptions of a ped agogical situation, or learning, altering or ad justing these structures. A reflective attitud e in enhancing diversity suggests a tend ency to develop or alter m ental structures related to d ifferentiation, prejud ice, id entity, stereotypes, thus ind icating an orientation tow ard s one‟s ow n professional grow th. Research ind icates a connection betw een a reflective teacher ed ucation and introd uction of innovations as w ell as w ith the teacher‟s ability to foster good relationships w ith their stud ents (Wubbels & Korthagen, 1990).
Personal application and reflection can provid e opportunities for participants to think critically and consid er their ow n personal experience and know led ge. So, in a teacher ed ucation program m e there is a need , for exam ple, for d iscussions and problem -solving sessions using w ritten and vid eo-taped case stud ies. This may serve as the starting point for reflection on the connection betw een d iversity and learning to teach. If pre-service teachers reflect only on “w hether or not their stud ents scored w ell on tests stud ent learning is evaluated in a very narrow w ay. A broad er reflection about the teaching and learning process can com e through focus, inquiry and change” (Ward & McCotter, 2004, p. XX). In ord er to im prove teaching the teacher need s to engage in system atic classroom enquiry and in personal and professional reflection. Reflective processes such as asking evaluative questions on content background and m ethod , selecting proced ures to answ er these questions, evaluating the results and making appropriate d ecisions may lead to enhanced cognitive u nderstanding and m eta cognitive aw areness and control (Baird , 1993). It is having more positive attitudes to yourself and to what you do. It is caring more, being more committed and having greater self-confidence and self-assurance … it is not just learning better teaching techniques. It is undergoing fundamental change in one’s attitudes, perceptions, beliefs, abilities and behaviours. (p. 33)
A teacher ed ucation program m e can help teachers to reflect and ad apt a lesson to d ifferent stud ents and provid e differentiated instruction to various learners (Shulman, 1987; Tom linson, 1999). Teachers m ay reflect on how instruction relates to ind ivid uals and groups of learners to reconstruct a learning situation for d ifferent stud ent groups as need ed . It can thus be conclud ed that it is not enough to possess general ped agogical com petences in d ealing w ith diversity. There is also a need for reflection on larger social contexts that have shaped d iversity and education inequalities, cultural norm s for learning and lan guage d evelopm ent and how they operate outsid e schools. Such reflection w ill contribute to transform ative learning (N agata, 2006; Taylor, 2007) and prom ote a m ore inclusive, d ifferentiated and integrated perspective on d iversity. Teachers m ay experience a d eep structural shift in thoughts, feelings and actions in their relations w ith others. Such a transform ative ped agogy w ould require diversity issues to feature in all areas of the teacher preparation program m e rather than lim iting it to single courses. Th us it w ould go beyond m anaging d iversity but w ould help teachers to appreciate d iversity as a strength, and to d evelop a critical stance in relation to all beliefs and practices (Ambe, 2006; Morey & Kitano, 1997).
3.3. Conclusion Teaching is first and forem ost a social practice. Preparing teachers for the com plexities and d iversities that they w ill encounter d em and s m uch m ore than provid ing opportunities to practice technical strategies or covering a d iscipline area (Sim , 2006; Thurlow Long & Stuart, 2004). The nature of teaching is the constant requirem ent for situational jud gm ents in com plex situations w ith various d im ensions of diversity and id entities involved . Institutions that are charged w ith the preparation of teachers have the responsibility of provid ing them w ith the com petences necessary to foster the intellectual, social and personal d evelopm ental need s of all learners. The m od el introd uced by Clarke and H ollingw orth (2002) assum es that teacher d evelopm ent regard ing d iversity issues in a pluralist school should prom ote the d evelopm ent of com petences w hich cover all d om ains of a teacher‟s
41 w orld , includ ing d iversity enhancem ent. To achieve this it should w ork on teachers‟ personal d om ain aw areness of the self and others. It should be built on and a t the sam e tim e be part of a teacher‟s external d om ain (general content of teacher ed ucation curricula, interaction w ith colleagues and society). It should also focus on the practical d om ain as w ell and enable new teachers to correlate ped agogical content know led ge w ith facets of d iversity. Finally it should aim at reflection proced ures and critical thinking.
Chapter 4 Teacher education for diversity: responding to the challenge 4.1. Introduction Valuing d iversity in ed ucation involves policy measures and has im plications for policy m akers, m anagers of teacher ed ucation institutions, and teacher ed ucators and trainers. This entails: –
d ifferential treatm ent to end orse d ifferential inputs in term s of heterogeneous abilities, talents, need s and acad em ic interests; this calls for ind ivid ualised learning d elivery, com petence-oriented program m es and various institutional and curriculum settings (for exam ple, m od ular curriculum , flexible scheduling, optional tracks and flexible program m es w ith m ultiple entry and exit points);
quality ed ucation for all, for exam ple, through w id e-spread access to ICTs, form ative evaluation, school and career counselling, high level stand ard s of learning and teaching;
social m obility through ed ucation and training, for exam ple, by s upporting low incom e fam ilies, free access to any type of ed ucational institution and valuing learning in career and social prom otion;
inclusive ed ucation and active participation of all: this m eans equitable d istribution of ed ucational resources, specific provisions to ad d ress inequalities or the effect of past d iscrim ination, as w ell as d em ocratic governance of ed ucational institutions;
d ecentralisation, to allow for d evelopm ent w ithin institutions, school-based problem solving, stud ent participation an d involvem ent of com m unities in im plementing ed ucation policies at the local level;
an ed ucational policy that find s w ays of reconciling legitimate d em and s of unity and d iversity, achieving unity w ithout cultural uniform ity, being inclusive w ithout being assim ilationist, cultivating am ong citizens a comm on sense of belonging w hile respecting their legitim ate cultural d ifferences, and cherishing plural cultural id entities w ithout w eakening the shared and precious id entity of shared citizensh ip (Parekh, 2006, p. 343).
These policy m easures designed to value d iversity are not restricted to catching up or to be consid ered as com pensatory policies, nor are they lim ited to the id ea that diversity lead s to a social or cultural d isad vantage for those w ho d o not fit the m ainstream or d om inant culture. Diversity politics has a m ore am bitious concern, nam ely to create an inclusive, pluralist culture w hich gives room for everyone. The survey of initial teacher ed ucation on sociocultural d iversity, cond ucted as part of the project on “Policies and practices for teaching sociocultural d iversity” and reported in
43 Arnesen et al., 2008, recom m end ed that m ember states d evelop policies and practices that take account of international, national/ regional, teacher training instit utions‟, teacher trainers‟ and teachers‟ perspectives. This can be achieved by: –
Developing policies w hich are inform ed by UN ESCO, Council of Europe and European Union d eclarations and recom m end ations on ed ucation, teacher training and d iversity;
Ad opting a d isciplinary approach to incorporating sociocultural diversity w ithin Bachelor, Masters and Doctoral d egree program m es;
Encouraging national educational authorities to seek international partnerships, exchanges and the d evelopm ent of joint programm es;
Embed d ing equality and inclusion as core contents of teacher ed ucation program m es, based on the UN ESCO ed ucation for all approach;
Prom oting “enhancing diversity” as the priority for teacher ed ucation institutions, w ith “m anaging diversity” as a basic m inim um ;
Establishing, through collaboration betw een ed ucational policy m akers and teacher ed ucation institution representatives, a com m on fram ew ork, at national level, and a specific institutional im plem entation m od el for respond ing to specific regional contexts;
Assessing the im plem entation and im pact of teacher ed ucation for diversity;
Developing accreditation for d iversity;
Consid ering the potential role of other university d epartm ents in prom oting d iversity and of the significance of institutional cu lture, for exam ple, through recruitm ent of staff and stud ents;
Provid ing support for teacher ed ucators through staff developm ent and the establishm ent of a research netw ork;
Making use of existing expertise on d iversity w ithin institutions;
Consid ering initial and in -service training on d iversity for professionals other than teachers w ho w ork in schools and other ed ucational contexts.
These recom m end ations specify a shared responsibility for and com m itm ent to d iversity, from m em ber states through to teacher ed ucators. The specific responsibilities – and the related strategies and actions – of teacher ed ucators and trainers and of teacher ed ucation institution m anagers are outlined below .
4.2. Strategies and actions by teacher educators and trainers Three m ain areas of innovation w ithin institutions of teacher ed ucation on w hich com petences can be built are envisaged as being und ertaken by teacher educators and trainers:
– – –
Working w ith stud ents; Curriculum d esign and planning; Research and d evelopm ent w ork w ith a focus on d iversity.
4.2.1. Working with students Enhancing diversity and inclusion in teacher ed ucation program m es requires approaches w hich ad d ress the very basis of the personal and professional d evelopm ent of stud ent teachers (experiential, practical and acad emic, critical and reflective) as have been outlined in Chapter 2. These form the basis of the com petences on d iversity ed ucation and w hat teachers m ay be expected to achieve in ord er to respond effectively. – – –
Know led ge and understand ing of diversity; Com m unication and relationships; Planning m anagem ent and teaching.
The specific com petences w ithin these d om ains are outlined in the com petences d ocum ent (in process). The follow ing strategies enable the teacher ed ucator to support the d evelopm en t of these com petences: 1. Prom oting the personal d evelopm ent of the teacher through a process of exploration and exchange of experiences and analysis in w hich each teacher stud ent is enabled to id entify the influence of his or her cultural upbringing/ socialisation and behaviour in a variety of personal social and professional contexts. 2. Introd ucing the stud ent teacher to know led ge of inequality, discrim ination, and m arginalisation of ind ivid uals and groups based on, for exam ple, race, social class, ability, gend er and ethnicity in historical and cross-cultural perspectives, and of processes of inequality in the classroom , exclusion and inclusion. 3. Provid ing opportunities for the stud ent teacher to d evelop an und erstand ing of the d iversity d imension of know led ge and its expression through the school curriculum and to d evelop skills in critically evaluating d iversity w ithin curriculum materials. 4. Enabling the stud ent teacher to d em onstrate their com m itm ent to d iversity, equity and inclusion through their relationships w ith peers and pupils through the cond uct of their profession. 5. Provid ing the stud ent teacher w ith opportunities to prom ote an inclusive and d iversity-sensitive curriculum based on equity through the application of personal insights, attitud es and know led ge acquired to the professional task of creating a positive classroom clim ate, selecting and structuring content and m aterials, using appropriate teaching and assessm ent m ethod s and classroom organisation and interaction. Stud ents should be involved in the practice of planning and teaching lessons as w ell as und ertaking classroom observation, scrutinising textbooks and teaching materials, prod ucing teaching m aterials, lectures and d ebates w ith a particular em phasis on d iversity sensitive curricula, p eer tutoring, ind ivid ual assignm ents, project w ork and sem inars. It is essential that teacher educators m od el effective engagem ent w ith d iversity in each of these activities and are reflexive about these processes. This w ill assist stud ent teachers in
45 acquiring the com petences and in d eveloping the capacity to reflect on these processes of acquisition. The introd uction of accreditation of com petences for d iversity could have an im portant role in reinforcing their im portance in the eyes of stud ents and staff.
4.2.2. Curriculum design and planning The prim ary focus of curriculum innovation is transform ation of teacher ed ucation courses throughout the curriculum to ensure it reflects the sociocultural reality of the w orld and people‟s experiences. Curriculum in novation in connection w ith design and planning com prises a broad spectrum of initiatives and efforts w hich could be exem plified by three types of initiatives and associated activities: Inclusion of knowledge and research on sociocultural diversity, marginalisation, exclusion and inclusion in education in all curricula –
Fam iliarising stud ents w ith the legal international and European instrum ents d ealing w ith d iversity from a hum an rights perspective (for exam ple, the Fram ew ork Convention for the Protection of N ational Minorities (ETS N o. 157), the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ETS N o. 148), the UN ESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (2001));
Clarifying the relationships betw een rights and responsibilities, and particularl y child ren rights (for example, through the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Council of Europe m anual on exploring child ren‟s rights in primary ed ucation).
Inclusion of methods of analysis and reflection on issues of diversity in society and schools within various contexts and courses: –
Prom oting social sensitivity and cultural relativism ; introd ucing stud ents to a non centric curriculum and differentiated ed ucational provisions;
Emphasising the im portance of enhancing diversity rather tha n the m anagem ent of d iversity;
Developing stud ents‟ com m unication skills, cultural aw areness, interpersonal und erstanding and team w ork;
H elping stud ents to recognise and value the role of hid den curricula, school ethos and inform al ed ucation in build ing a co-operative and non-d iscrim inatory organisational culture;
Provid ing stud ents w ith practical experiences of d iversity w ithin school settings and facilitating analysis of these experiences and stud ents‟ ow n engagem ent w ith d iversity.
Transformation of mainstream curricula and methods (into which diversity perspectives can be introduced) in all subjects and/or special courses: –
Introd ucing stud ents to netw orks, partnerships and corporate m anagem ent schem es and helping stud ents to recognise potential for horizontal and non -hierarchical relations am ong stakehold ers;
Facilitating co-operative learning m ethod s, for exam ple, based on the Council of Europe reference book on religious d iversity and intercultural ed ucation;
Fam iliarising stud ents w ith inclusiv e ed ucational strategies such as affirm ative action, ind ivid ualised learning, peer learning and the involvem ent of m inority parents in school activities and collective d ecision m aking;
Creating d eliberate and explicit intercultural learning situations, fo r exam ple, through encounters w ith the unknow n, the foreign, the different and the other;
Prom oting learning from d ifferences, for exam ple, through m ulti-perspective d ebates on controversial issues and com parative analysis;
Creating opportunities for m ultilingual d elivery, intercultural com m unication and exposure to other cultures;
Using experiential learning m ethod s and non -form al ed ucation projects to prom ote life skills and responsiveness to the concrete challenges of societies;
Using non-text d id actic tools and ICT to support intercultural learning and to enhance participation, netw orking and collaborative learning;
Ensuring continuity and progression betw een Bachelor, Masters and Doctoral program m es.
These activities involve preparing stud ents not just for teaching and the d id actic transm ission of know ledge, but also for new professional roles such as intercultural m ed iator, com m unity adviser, learning facilitator, coach, m entor and counsellor.
4.2.3. Research and development work with a focus on diversity One of the m ost significant challenges of und ertaking research on d iversity is that research, to a very great extent, is organised w ithin a num ber of separate research areas usually associated w ith particular d im ensions of d iversity such as gend er , race, social class, m ulti/ interculturalism , d isability, special need s, lingual and cultural m inorities, etc., w ith their ow n traditions, separate d atabases, journals and research netw orks. There has been a grow th in research on intersectionality (Knud sen, 2006; McCall, 2007) but the know led ge base is still relatively limited . Teacher ed ucators have a responsibility to fam iliarise themselves w ith research w hich ad d resses d ifferent d im ensions of diversity and on intersectionality, to und ertake this w ork them selves and to m ake stud ent teachers aw are of research know led ge. Teacher ed ucators should also m otivate and involve stud ents in classroom research and d evelopm ent w ork in schools and stim ulate cross-d isciplinary thinking and project d esigns that can gra sp the m ultiple aspects of sociocultural d iversity as d efined in this book. Action research and d evelopm ent projects, w hich involve the investigation and im plem entation of change, are potentially valuable sources of learning for stud ent teachers. Partnersh ips w ith N GOs and collaboration on specific projects w ill extend the opportunities for stud ents to learn about d iversity w hile undertaking w ork w hich has practical benefits for com m unities. Collaboration w ith staff in other institutions nationally and inte rnationally w ill provid e opportunities to und ertake research and exchange id eas about teacher education for d iversity.
4.3. Open questions for teacher educators The follow ing questions are intend ed to assist in the evaluation and m onitoring of the response to d iversity by ind ivid ual (2005), w ho em phasises the im portance of lead ership in establishing and sustaining a com mitm ent to d iversity. W ork with students: – – – – – –
H ow , and in w hat w ays, d o you assist stud ent teachers in respond ing effectively to d iversity in their classroom s? What m eanings and values d o you convey to students? What dim ensions of student d iversity present particular challenges to the stud ents? What sources of support (for exam ple, professional, m aterial) are you able to seek to enable you to p repare them m ore effectively? To w hat extent d o you mod el effective practice in relation to sociocultural d iversity and reflexivity about practice? H as consideration been given to the accred itation of com petences in relation to d iversity?
Curriculum design and planning: – – – – – – –
What know led ge and research on d iversity, m arginalisation, exclusion and inclusion in ed ucation has been includ ed w ithin program m es? What opportunities exist w ithin program m es for stud ents to analyse and reflect on issues of d iversity in schools and society? What practical opportunities are m ad e available to stud ents to experience d iversity w ithin schools and to analyse and reflect on these experiences? H ow far have you been able to transform m ainstream curricula and m ethod s in ord er to introd uce d iversity perspectives in all subjects and / or special courses? What adaptations and innovative practices are possible? What sources of support are available? What m easures are taken to ensure continuity and progression betw een Bachelor, Masters and Doctorate degree program m es?
Research and development work with a focus on diversity – – – – – –
H ow helpful is existing research in und erstand ing d iversity, the need s of ind ivid ual pupils and the challenges these present to stud ent teachers? What research or evaluation have you und ertaken in ord er to investigate diversity and / or the progression of stud ent teachers? What opportunities exist for collaborating w ith staff in other institutions on research or the exchange of id eas about teacher ed ucation for d iversity? What research or evaluation is necessary in ord er to investigate diversity and / or the progression of stud ent teachers? What sources of support are available to enable you to carry out research, evaluation and d evelopm ent w ork? What theoretical fram ew orks en able you to evaluate responses to d iversity and to convey these to the stud ents?
Teacher ed ucators may find it useful to consid er these questions, either ind ivid ually or collectively, and to d ocum ent their responses as a m eans of exem plifying the reflection on practice w hich is expected of stud ent teachers.
4.4. Institutional management and support Managers of teacher training institutions are expected to create an atm osphere that facilitates the learning of stud ent teacher com petences. In ord er to d o so t hey m ust be aw are of d iversity, not only as a key issue w ithin the curriculum but also as an essential elem ent of the institutional m anagem ent. Trad ition cannot be relied on in this m atter, and research literature on this topic, specifically ad d ressed to teacher training institutions, is scarce. Three areas of responsibilities for m anagers are id entified : – – –
Designing; Im plem enting; Monitoring/ evaluating.
4.4.1. Designing All institutions have mission statem ents, w hich outline their overall aspirations and va lues, and policies, w hich d etail institutional com m itm ents, positions and practices. The inclusion, w ithin m ission statem ents and policies, of statements about the recognition and value placed on d iversity, is im portant. Institutions m ay choose to establish a separate policy for diversity or d ecid e to em bed diversity w ithin all of its policies and there are ad vantages and d isad vantages in both approaches. The im portant aspect is to develop some clarity about the expectations and goals for the institution in respect of d iversity. As w ell as the form al messages com m unicated w ithin institutions‟ m ission statem ents and policies, institutions w ill give out inform al messages about d iversity and it w ill be im portant to try ascertain w hat these are. Institutions have found stud ent surveys are an effective m eans of id entifying w hat m essages are being picked up. Surveys of the stud ent population w ill also be an im portant w ay of analysing d iversity am ong the stud ent population. Establishing the m easures to ensure the institutional environm ent is responsive to d iversity is a com plex process and institutions m ay find it helpful to establish w orking groups w hich have representation from m inority groups. These groups could be encouraged to plan, d evelop, and im plem ent d iversity-related initiatives and w ork to ensure that the institutional environm ent is responsive to d iversity.
4.4.2. Implementing The im plem entation of m easures to respond to d iversity involves considerations of m anagem ent and lead ership, recruitm ent of stud ents and staff, curriculum , assessm ent and staff developm ent. These are im portant in ord er to ensure both that the institution can respond effectively to diversity and that the teacher ed ucation program mes are able to support stud ents m ore effectively in their d evelopm ent as teachers w ho can engage effectively w ith diversity w ithin schools. Id entifying lines of responsibility for d iversity policies and practice w ithin senior m anagem ent is im portant in ord er to end orse the im portance of d iversity, provid e lead ership and ensure a co-ord inated approach in both the institutional practices as a w hole and in the support for stud ent teachers in respond ing to diversity. Institutions m ay m ake specific resources available to prom ote and support d iversity initiatives, but w ill need to exercise careful m anagem ent to ensure effective d eploym ent of these resources. The institution‟s stud ent profile, and the extent to w hich it is d iverse, comm unicates im portant m essages about the values it places on d iversity. Specific efforts by institutions to
49 recruit a d iverse staff and stud ent population w ill reinforce its com m itment to d iversity. Recruitm ent of staff could have regard for d iversity issues and cand id ates could be invited to d em onstrate an interest in and com m itment to d iversity. Managers could co-ordinate the scrutiny of all program m es to exam ine the extent to w hich they take account of diversity. This m ight be in relation to the language used and their accessibility for a diverse stud ent population. Assessm ent proced ures could be exam ined in term s of how far they take account of d iversity. Som e guid ance m ay be required to encourage staff to evaluate the appropriateness of learning outcom es w ithin program m es and support m ay be need ed to id entify alternative m eans of achieving particular outcom es. The survey of teacher ed ucation on sociocultural d iversity revealed d ifferent levels of institutional autonom y in relation to the teacher ed ucation curriculum . This m ay d eterm ine the extent to w hich institutions are able to innovate and transform curricula, but institutions m ay be able to exert some influence upon ed ucational policy m akers at national level. An institutional overview w ill help to ensure continuity and progression betw een Bachelor, Masters and Doctoral program m es . Institutions have a responsibility to ensure staff involved in teacher training are sufficiently com petent in relation to d iversity and ind ivid uals m ay need ad d itional support and staff d evelopm ent in ord er to increase their com petence. Staff involved in other program m es w ithin the institutions w ill also benefit from support and guid ance. Staff developm ent activities m ay d raw on expertise w ithin the institution or from external sources, for exam ple, through collaboration w ith N GOs. The establishment of r esearch netw orks for teacher ed ucators w ill enable the d issem ination of good practice and encourage collaboration and the d evelopm ent of joint program m es. Id entifying staff w ho d em onstrate good practice in the area of d iversity and ensuring that they are g iven som e recognition w ill be beneficial.
4.4.3. Evaluating/Monitoring The Berlin m and ate for im plem enting the Bologna process specifies the responsibility of institutions to m onitor stud ents once they have com pleted their teacher education and entered teaching and to analyse and publish d ata regard ing stud ent teachers. This should includ e stud ent progression and success rates, and em ployability of grad uates (European Association for Quality Assurance in Ed ucation, 2005). The survey report on initial teache r ed ucation on sociocultural d iversity (Arnesen et al., 2008) highlighted m anagers‟ concerns about the im portance of m aintaining contact w ith alum ni in ord er to evaluate the success of teacher ed ucation program m es in preparing stud ents for careers in teach ing. This is an extrem ely im portant aspect of institutional practice and a crucial d im ension of quality assurance. Involving stud ents in evaluating and m onitoring institutions‟ policies and practices in relation to d iversity is also im portant.
4.5. Open questions for managers The follow ing questions m ight be posed by managers in the process of consid ering the institution as a w hole and its engagem ent w ith diversity. Developing – What d oes your institution‟s mission statem ent and policies say about d iversity? – What m essages about d iversity are conveyed inform ally? – What are the expectations and goals in the areas of d iversity w ithin your area of responsibility?
50 – – –
H ave analyses of d iversity of the stud ent population been und ertaken w ithin your institution? What m easures have been introd uced to ensure your institutional environm ent is responsive to diversity? Are m inority groups w ithin your organisation supported and encouraged to plan, d evelop, and im plem ent d iversity-related initiatives?
Implementing – What positions w ithin your institution have been established to provid e m anagem ent and leadership to staff supporting stud ent teachers in respond ing to d iversity? – What resources are available to prom ote and support d iversity initiatives? H ow effective is the d eploym ent of these resources? – To w hat extent are staff w ho d em onstrate good practice in the area of d iversity recognised and rew ard ed ? – What efforts are m ad e to recruit a d iverse staff and stud ent population? – Does the appointing process expect cand idates to d em onstr ate an interest in and com m itm ent to d iversity? – To w hat extent d o program m es reflect d im ensions of d iversity? – To w hat extent d o assessm ent proced ures take account of diversity? – In w hat w ays are staff assisted in provid ing support to stud ent teachers to ena ble them to respond effectively to d iversity? – What opportunities for staff d evelopm ent in relation to d iversity are mad e available? What opportunities exist for staff to netw ork and collaborate w ith staff in other institutions nationally and internationally? H ow effective are these in preparing staff for supporting stud ent teachers? – What m echanism s are in place to facilitate an institutional overview and ensure continuity and progression betw een Bachelor, Masters and Doctoral program m es? Evaluating/monitoring – To w hat extent is d iversity am ong the staff and stud ent population m onitored ? – Does m onitoring of d iversity w ithin teacher training program m es take place? If so, w hat d oes it reveal about the engagem ent w ith d iversity? – Is the progress of stud ent teachers m onitored once they enter teaching? If so, w hat is know n about their progress? – Is m onitoring of stud ent teachers‟ engagem ent w ith d iversity m onitored once they entered teaching? If so, w hat is know n about the ad equacy of their engagem ent? – Are stud ents involved in evaluating and m onitoring policies and practices in relation to d iversity?
4.6. Conclusion Teacher training institutions need to develop curricula that engage in educational strategies and working methods that can prepare teachers to manage the situations arising from diversity, discrimination, racism, xenophobia, sexism and marginalisation and to resolve conflicts peacefully, as well as to foster a global approach to institutional life on the basis of democracy and human rights and create a community of students, taking account of individual unspoken assumptions, school atmosphere and informal aspects of education. (Council of Europe White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue, “Living Together as Equals in Dignity” )
51 The challenges for teacher ed ucation are significant and require a broad -based response to d iversity. It has been the aim of this book to provid e som e conceptual clarity about the nature and extent of d iversity and to offer guidance and support for teacher ed ucators and institutional m anagers in d eveloping teacher ed ucation program m es. The next book in the series w ill focus specifically on the teacher com petences for d iversity and reports on the refinement of these through a process of consultation w ith four m em ber countries.
References Aasen, P. (2003). What happened to social democratic progressivism in Scandinavia? Restructuring education in Sweden and Norway in the 1990s. In M.W. Apple (Ed.), The state and the politics of knowledge (pp. 109-148). London: Routledge Falmer. Achinstein, B. & Athanases, S.Z. (2005). Focusing new teachers on diversity and equity. Toward a knowledge base for mentors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 843-862. Alexander, N. (2007). Linguistic diversity in South Africa and the challenges of the African Renaissance. Presentation. Berlin: South African Embassy. Allan, J. (2008). Rethinking Inclusive Education: the Philosophers of Difference in Practice. Dord recht: Springer. Ambe, E.B. (2006). Fostering multicultural appreciation in pre-service teachers through multicultural curricular transformation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 690-699. Appiah, K.A. (1994). Id entity, Authenticity, Surv ival: Multicultural Societies and Social Reprod uction. In A. Gutm ann (Ed .), Charles Taylor et al., M ulticulturalism. Examining the politics of recognition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Arnesen, A.L. (2002). Ulikhet og marginalisering med referanse til kjønn og sosial bakgrunn. En etnografisk studie av sosial og diskursiv praksis i skolen [Difference and marginalization with reference to gender and social background. An ethnographic study of social and discursive practice in school]. HiO Report 13/2002. Oslo: Oslo University College Press. Arnesen, A.L. & Sollie, U. (2003). Differensiering og tilpasset opplæring [Differentiation and ad apted and inclusive education]. H iO Report 11/ 2003. Oslo: Oslo University College Press. Arnesen, A.L. & Lundahl, L. (2006). Still Social and Democratic? Inclusive Education Policies in the Nordic Welfare States. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50( 3), July, 285-300. Arnesen, A.L., Mietola, R. & Lahelma, E. (2007). Language of inclusion and diversity: policy discourses and social practices in Finnish and Norwegian schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 11(1), 97-110. Arnesen, A.L., Bîrzéa, C., Dumont, B. et al. (2008). Policies and practices for teaching sociocultural diversity. A survey report. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing. Baird, J.R. (1993). Collaborative Reflection Systematic Enquiry Better Teaching. In T. Russel & H. Munby (Eds), Teachers and teaching: From classroom to reflection (pp. 71-89). Philadelphia: Falmer Press. Banks, J.A. (2006). Cultural Diversity and Education: Foundations, Curriculum and Teaching (5th Edition). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
53 Banks, J. et al. (2005). Democracy and Diversity. Principles and Concepts for Educating Citizens in a Global Age. Center for Multicultural Education, College of Education, University of Washington, Seattle. Banks, J. (2001). Diversity within Unity: Essential Principles for Teaching and Learning in a Multicultural Society. , accessed 8 November 2008. Bartholomew, J. (1976). Schooling Teachers: The myth of liberal college. In G. Whitty & M. Young (Eds), Explorations in the politics of school knowledge. Driffield: Nafferton Books. Baumann, G. (1999). The Multicultural Riddle. Rethinking National, Ethnic and Religious Identities. New York & London: Routledge. Befring, E. (1997). The Enrichment Perspective: A Special Educational Approach to an Inclusive School. Remedial and Special Education, 18(3), 182-92. Bîrzéa, C. (2000). Education for democratic citizenship: a lifelong learning perspective. Strasbourg, DGIV/EDU/CIT(2000)21. , accessed 19 November 2007. Booth, T. (1996). A Perspective on Inclusion from England. Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(1), 87-99. Bourdieu, P. (1979). La distinction. Paris: Ed. du Minuit. Bourdieu, P. (1980). Le capital social. Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales, 31, 2-3. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language & Symbolic Power. Harvard University Press. Brah, A. (1996). Cartographies of diaspora. Contesting identities. London & New York: Routledge. Clarke, D. & Hollingworth, H. (2002) Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 947-967. Coleman, J.S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 94, Supplement, 95-120. Council of Europe (1992). The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. Council of Europe (1995). The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. Council of Europe (2007). Religious diversity and intercultural education: a reference book for schools. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing. Council of Europe (2008). White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue, “Living together as equals in d ignity”. Ministers‟ Deputies CM Docum ents, CM(2008)30 final 2 May 2008.
54 d e Cuéllar, J.P. (1996). N otre diversité créatrice (p. 17). Paris : Ed . UN ESCO. Delors, J. (1996). Learning: The Treasures Within. Report to UN ESCO of the International Com m ission on Ed ucation for the Tw enty-First Century. Durkheim, E. (1996). Education et sociologie. Paris: PUF. Engen, T.O. (2004). Inkludering og tilpasset opplæring: To perspektiver [Inclusion and adapted instruction: Two perspectives]. In G. Høie & A. E. Kristoffersen (Eds), Inkluderende eller ekskluderende klasserom [Inclusive and exclusive classrooms]. Oslo, Norway: Skådalen Resource Centre (in Norwegian). European Union (EU) (2008). Green Paper IP/08/1092, “Migrant children and education: a challenge for EU education systems”. European Association for Quality Assurance in Ed ucation (2005). Stand ard s and Guid elines for Quality Assurance in the European H igher Education Area. H elsinki, Finland . European Community Ministers for Education (1990). Conclusions of the Council and the Ministers for Education meeting within the Council of 31 May 1990 on the enhanced treatment of equality of educational opportunity for girls and boys in the initial and inservice training of teachers. EC Council Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, 27 November 2000. European Commission (2004). Common European principles for teacher competences and qualifications. Freire, P. (1995). The Pedagogy of the Oppressed. NY: Seabury Press (originally published 1969). Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: the social values and the creation of prosperity. London: Hamish Hamilton, 1995. Gogolin, I. (2002). Linguistic and Cultural Diversity in Europe: a challenge for educational research and practice. European Educational Research Journal, 1(1), S. 123-138. Gotovos, A. (2002). Education and Diversity. Metaichmio (in Greek). Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the Imagination: Essays on Education, the Arts, and Social Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Gutmann, A. (1999). Introduction. In A. Gutmann (Ed.), Charles Taylor et al., Multiculturalism. Examining the politics of recognition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. James, C.E. (2001). Making Teaching Relevant: toward an understanding of students’ experiences in a culturally different Sweden. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 9(3), 407-426. Justi R. & van Driel J. (2006).The use of the Interconnected Model of teacher professional growth for understanding the development of science teachers’ knowledge on models and modelling. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 437-450.
55 Knight, P. (2002). Systemic approach to professional development: learning as practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 229-241. Knudsen, S. (2006). Intersectionality – A Theoretical Inspiration in the Analysis of Minority Cultures and Identities in Textbooks. In E. Bruillard, M. Horsley, S. Knudsen & B. Aamotsbakken (Eds), Caught in the Web or Lost in the Textbook. Paris: IUFM de Caen. Koutselini, M. (2002). Curriculum, Educational Objectives, Methodology of Teaching. University of Cyprus. Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). What we can learn from Multicultural Education Research. Educational Leadership, 51(8), 9-28. Ladson-Billings, G. (2001). Crossing over to Canaan: The journey of new teachers in diverse classrooms. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Lindblad, S., Lundahl, L., Lindgren, J. & Zackari, G. (2002). Educating for the New Sweden? Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 46(3), 283-303. Lortie, D. (1973). Observation on teaching as work. In R. Travers (Ed.), Second Handbook on Research on Teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally & Co. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: a sociological study. Chicago: Chicago University Press. McCall, L. (2007). The Complexity of Intersectionality. Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30, 1771-1800. Mesic, M. (2008). Multiculturality and Intercultural Education. The contemporary world of cultural diversities. Paper presented at Council of Europe project seminar on intercultural dialogue (South Caucasus Region/Ukraine), February 2008. Milner, H.R. & Smithey, M. (2003). How teachers educators created a course curriculum to challenge and enhance preservice teachers’ thinking and experience with diversity. Teaching Education, 14(3), 293-303. Morey, I. & Kitano, M. (1997). Multicultural course of transformation in higher education: A broader truth. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Nagata, A.L. (2006). Transformative learning in intercultural education. Rikkyo Intercultural Communication Review, 4, 39-60. Niemi, H. (2002). Active learning a cultural change needed in teacher education and schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 763-780. N orw egian Ministry of Ed ucation and Research (1997). The N ational Curriculum for basic education for the 10-Y ear Compulsory Education. OECD Statistics on lifelong learning. Parekh, B. (2006). Rethinking Multiculturalism. Cultural Diversity and Political Theory (2nd Edition). London & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Paris, B. (2007). Fair and inclusive education. Early childhood services. Lecture at OECD conference in Trondheim, Norway, June 2007. Putnam, R.D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65-78.
56 Rey, M. (2008). Discussion pointers for intercultural education policy, training and education. Draft policy paper on intercultural education, Council of Europe. Robinson, M. & McMillan, W. (2006). Who teaches the teachers? Identity, discourse and policy in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 327-336. Santoro, N. (2007). Outsiders and others: different teachers teaching in culturally diverse classrooms. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13(1), 81-97. Schon, D.A. (1987). Evaluating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Sfyroera, M. (2007). Differentiated Pedagogy. Ministry of Education/University of Athens: Kleidia kai Antikleidia. Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22. Sim, C. (2006). Preparing for professional experiences – incorporating pre-service teachers as communities of practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 22-83. Soto, J. (2005). Diversity is about change and leadership. Electronic version available at Speiser, S. (2000). Becoming an intercultural primary school teacher experiences from Bolivia. Intercultural Education, 11(3), 227-237. Sprinthall, N.A., Reiman, A.J. & Thies-Sprinthall, L. (1996). Teacher Professional Development. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of Research as teacher education (2nd edition). New York: Macmillan. Stand ing Conference of European Ministers for Ed uation (2007). Building a more humane and inclusive Europe: role of education policies, 22nd session, Istanbul, Turkey, 4-5 May 2007. Takàks, J. (2006). Social exclusion of young, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in Europe. Brussels: ILGA – Europe. Taylor, E.W. (2007). An update of transformative learning theory: a critical review of the empirical research (1999-2005). International Journal of Lifelong Education, 26(9), 173-191. Thurlow Long, D. & Stuart, C. (2004). Supporting higher levels of reflection among teacher candidates: a pedagogical framework. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and practice, 10(3), 405420. Tomlinson, C.A. (1999). The Differentiated Classroom. Alexand ria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Developm ent (ASCD). UNESCO (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. UNESCO (2001). UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. UNESCO (2003). Overcoming Exclusion through Inclusive Approaches in Education. A Challenge and a Vision. Conceptual paper (p. 5).
57 UNESCO (1966). Declaration of Principles of International Cultural Co-operation. UNESCO (1996). Our Creative Diversity. Ward, J.R. & McCotter, S.S. (2004). Reflection as a visible outcome for preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 243-257. Watzke, J.K. (2007). Longitudinal research on beginning teacher development: Complexity as a challenge to concerns-based stage theory. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 106-122. Wilson, G. & I’Anson, J. (2006). Reframing the practicum: Constructing performative space in initial teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 353-361. Winch, C. (1996). Equality, quality and diversity. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 30(1). Wubbels, T. & Korthagen, F.A.J. (1990). The effects of a pre-service teacher education program for the preparation of reflective teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 16(1), 2943. Zeichner, K.M. (1983). Alternative paradigms of teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 34(3), 3-9.
Appendix Selection of Conventions, declarations, recommendations and other Council of Europe reference texts dealing with cultural diversity, education and teacher training Conventions – – – – – –
Convention for the Protection of H um an Rights and Fund am ental Freed om s (ETS N o. 009) (1950) European Cultural Convention (ETS N o. 018) (1954) European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ETS N o. 148) (1992) Fram ew ork Convention for the Protection of N ational Minorities (ETS N o. 157) (1995) European Social Charter (ETS N o. 035) (1961) and European Social Charter (revised) (ETS N o. 163) (1996) Council of Europe Fram ew ork Convention on the Value of Cultural H eritage for Society (CETS N o. 199) (2005)4
Declarations issued by Summits, Ministerial Conferences or the Committee of Ministers. – – –
– – – – –
Declaration on “Intolerance - A threat to d em ocracy”, ad opted by the Com m ittee of Ministers on 14 May 1981 Declaration on equality of w om en and m en, ad opted by the Com m ittee of Ministers on 16 N ovem ber 1988 Declaration on the m ulticultural society and European cultural id entity, ad opted by the Conference of European Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs, Palermo, Italy, 25 and 26 April 1990 Vienna Declaration, ad opted at the First Sum m it of H eads of State and Governm ent of the Council of Europe, Vienna, October 1993 Resolution N o. 1 of the 19th Session of the Standing Conference of European Ministers of Ed ucation, Kristiansand , N orw ay, 22-24 June 1997 The Final Declaration and Action Plan of the Second Sum m it of H eads of State and Governm ent of the Council of Europe, Strasbourg, N ovem ber 1997 Bud apest Declaration (“For a Greater Europe w ithout Dividing Lines”), ad opted by the Com m ittee of Ministers on 7 May 1999 Declaration and Resolution N o. 2 on the European Language Portfolio, adopted at the 20th session of the Standing Conference of Ministers of Ed ucation, Cracow , Poland , 1517 October 2000 Declaration on cultural diversity, ad opted by the Com m ittee of Ministers on 7 Decem ber 2000 Declaration on intercultural ed ucation in the new European context, ad opted by the Stand ing Conference of European Ministers of Ed ucation, Athens, N ovem ber 2003
4. At the tim e of w riting it has not yet entered into force because it has not yet been ratified by the requisite 10 countries. To d ate it has been ratified by Croatia, Latvia and Montenegro, and signed but not yet ratified by Albania, Arm enia, Bulgaria, Lu xem bour g, Mold ova, Portugal, San Marino, Serbia, Slovenia and Ukraine.
59 – – – –
Revised Strategy for Social Cohesion, ad opted by the Com m ittee of Ministers on 31 March 2004 Wroclaw Declaration, adopted by the European Ministers responsible for Culture, Ed ucation, Youth and Sport, Wroclaw , Poland , Decem ber 2004 Warsaw Declaration and Action Plan, ad opted by the Third Sum m it of H ead s of State and Governm ent, Warsaw , May 2005 Faro Declaration on the Council of Europe's strategy for d eveloping intercultural d ialogue, ad opted by the Conference of European Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs, Faro, Portugal, October 2005 Final Declaration of the Stand ing Conference of European Ministers of Education on "Build ing a m ore hum ane and inclusive Europe: role of ed ucation policies", Istanbul, 4 and 5 May 2007
Recommendations of the Committee of Ministers – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – –
R (82) 9 on European Schools Day R (82) 18 concerning m od ern languages R (84) 7 on the m aintenance of m igrants' cultural links w ith their countries of origin and leisure facilities R (84) 13 concerning the situation of foreign stud ents R (84) 18 on the training of teachers in ed ucation for intercultural und erstand ing, notably in a context of migration R (85) 7 on teaching and learning about hum an rights in schools R (85) 21 on m obility of acad em ic staff R (92) 10 on the im plem entation of rights of persons belonging to national m inorities R (98) 3 on access to higher ed ucation R (98) 6 concerning m odern languages R (99) 2 on second ary education R (2000) 4 on the ed ucation of Rom a/ Gypsy children in Europe Rec(2001)15 on history teaching in tw enty-first-century Europe Rec(2003)6 on im proving ph ysical ed ucation and sport for child ren and young people in all European countries Rec(2004)4 on the European Convention on H uman Rights in university ed ucation and professional training Rec(2005)3 on teaching neighbouring languages in bord er regions Rec(2006)3 on the UN ESCO Convention on the protection and prom otion of the d iversity of cultural expressions Rec(2006)5 on the Council of Europe Action Plan to prom ote the rights and full participation of people w ith d isabilities in society: im proving the quality of life of people w ith d isabilities in Europe 2006-2015 Rec(2006)9 on the ad m ission, rights and obligations of migrant stud ents and co operation w ith countries of origin CM/ Rec(2007)13 on gend er m ainstreaming in education CM/ Rec(2008)4 on strengthening the integration of child ren of migrants and of im m igrant background CM/ Rec(2008)5 on policies for Rom a and/ or Travellers in Europe
Recommendations and resolutions of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe – –
Resolution 807 (1983) on European co-operation in the field of ed ucation Recom m end ation 1093 (1989) on the ed ucation of m igrants' child ren
60 – – – – – – – – – – –
Recom m end ation 1111 (1989) on the European d im ension of ed ucation Recom m end ation 1281 (1995) on gender equality in ed ucation Recom m end ation 1283 (1996) on history and the learning of history in Europe Recom m end ation 1353 (1998) on access of minorities to higher ed ucation Recom m end ation 1383 (1998) on linguistic d iversification Recom m end ation 1539 (2001) on the European Year of Languages Recom m end ation 1598 (2003) on the protection of sign languages in the m em ber states of the Council of Europe Recom m end ation 1652 (2004) on ed ucation of refugees and internally d isplaced persons Recom m end ation 1720 (2005) on ed ucation and religion Resolution 1464 (2005) on w om en and religion in Europe Recom m end ation 1804 (2007) on state, religion, secularity and hum an rights
Recommendations and a declaration of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe – – – –
Final d eclaration of the Stuttgart Conference on foreigners‟ integration and participation in European cities, Stuttgart, Germ any, 15 and 16 Septem ber 2003 Recom m end ation 194 (2006) on effective access to social rights for im m igrants: the role of local and regional authorities Recom m end ation 207 (2007) on the developm ent of social cohesion ind icators – The concerted local and regional approach Recom m end ation 222 (2007) on language ed ucation in regional or m inority languages
Recommendations of the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) – – – –
N o. 1: Com bating racism, xenophobia, antisem itism and intolerance (1996) N o. 3: Com bating racism and intolerance against Rom a/ Gypsies (1998) N o. 5: Com bating intolerance and d iscrim ination against Muslims (2000) N o. 10: Com bating racism and racial d iscrim ination in and through school ed ucation (2007)