Difference and Diversity in Ontario Schooling - Thesis Example

? Difference and Diversity in Ontario Schooling Canada prides itself as one of the very few educational hubs where students from different diverse backgrounds are able to access same and equal education opportunities. Canada spends up to 7 % of its GDP on education and this only underscores the value Canadians place on education. Higher learning institutions are ever increasing in numbers with most offering unique learning modules including the E-learning programs. Literacy levels are high in Canada in comparison with most of its American neighbors, to some extend beating event the U.S in some respect. Despite this, there are discontent voices in the overall education system of Canada. Not enough is being done in the education system to be able to provide all rounded education to people of divergent cultures. It will be naive to think that by providing a ‘standard’ form of education to everyone would yield same desired results. The truth is culture and diversity plays a key role in the education of an individual. An individual is a product his surrounding and these surrounding dictates that adjustment should be made to accommodate, assimilate or just understand that particular individual. The Canadian system has been criticized for seemingly favoring the dominant culture at the expense of immigrant cultures. The dominant white culture seems to be the propagated and ‘ideal’ way of living being fronted by the educational quotas. The concept of ‘Educating across difference’ has had its fair form of challenges that have cultural connotations. In reality it is not the cultural values themselves that bring out the difference in the education system, but it is the values that are attached to particular cultural practices that breed contention. To bury our heads in the sand and ignore issues centering on power and minority can greatly work to undue our delicate social fabric. Power related issues such as ethnocentrism, racism and sexism should form the basis of the discussion on the divergent cultural issue. To be able to understand and appreciate the urban educational system, we first have to learn a brief history of Canada. When faced with the question of diversity and difference, Canada has chosen five broad based responses, each determined by the ideology that was stronger at that specific time in the period. These five responses are; suppressing difference, insisting on the difference, denying difference, inviting difference and lastly critiquing difference. This model of response and framework have been granted by various scholars (Fleras and Elliot, 1992 and Murkerjee 1988; Sleeter and Grant 1944). 1. Suppressing Difference: Aggressive Assimilation The first framework of suppressing is an unsurprising form of human reaction when one meets diversity and divergent views. The dominant and the most widespread at the time take precedence and any new culture has to conform to the pre-existing one. The need for ‘civilize’ others saw some communities being forced to give up their language, religion and forced to embrace the superior French culture (Ashworth, 1993). This campaign of suppression was referred as aggressive assimilation and it was subjected on early immigrant families. The late 1800 brought more quests to ‘Canadize’ the huge numbers of immigrants arriving from Eastern and Southern European countries. This euphoria of the New Canada unwittingly gave rise of fascist and white supremacist movements, which had their support stemming, albeit innocently at first, from all lifestyles. Social Credit and CFF parties had endorsed such views bringing together the newly formed the United Church of Canada (Jaenen, 1977, pg. 89). Theories of Social Darwism emphasized on the superiority of Christianity, Anglo-Saxon, Western industrialization and capitalism. Therefore in this sense education was to be used to eliminate the difference in culture and propagate the ‘right’ cultures. 2. Insisting on Difference: Separation and Segregation The second form of response to differences was by insisting on difference also known as separation and segregation. The main argument here was that different was not necessarily outright ‘wrong ‘but on the contrary it was to be accommodated rather than being eliminated. This notion is perhaps credited mostly with fostering the education of women. There was a common argument that women due to their nature required distinct education that was to prepare them in their roles as mothers and homemakers (Davey1991). Sex segregation was born of this notion and perpetuated on the same ideology Education of the Black community was also viewed in this context. Of course this was not written in any laws but insisting on racially segregated schools for Black students and another system of All Whites did more than just drive the point home. These Afro centric schools (Dei, 1996) were under-funded, poorly staffed and as a result substandard education was offered to one community member, while a superior kind was offered to another purely based on ethnicity. Insisting on difference also served to bring about the issue of social classes through student streaming. There was a rapid movement from high school education as an equal opportunity provider, to high school as a basis for societal class selection (Curtis. et al 1992, pg. 42). The perceived differences in race, gender, class and ability created different historical stereotypes that are used even at this day and age. For instance that Black was better at on field activities as opposed to the classrooms and girls were better at homemaking than say, Mathematics. 3. Denying Difference: Equal Treatment for All This ideological view of education and its meritocracy was to be based on individual ability, energy and determination and hence there was need for fair playing ground for whosoever wished to pursue this. Access to education in its entire entirety took center stage and education reforms targeted discriminating practices to even out the playing field (Mazurek, 1987, page 146). Barriers imposed on any level of education was to be done away with and create equal opportunities for elementary schooling right up to equal job placement opportunities. This necessitated the enactment of Affirmative action in recognition to years of interest groups who had been at a disadvantage. This included women and marginalized race minorities. Human identity was seen to transcend race, gender and simple cultural differences and which was understood as a unified rational essence (Jagger, 1983). 4. Inviting Difference: Celebrating Diversity Ethnic consciousness after World War 2, formation of the United Nations, Cultural and linguistic resistance to assimilation and waning influence of Great Britain brought about the advent of multicultural programs in the Ontario education system and that of Canada as a whole. The Ontario Ministry of Education came up with policies that could support multiculturalism and celebrate diversity. 5. Critiquing Difference: Interrogating Power and Identity Thus dwelt on the antiracist education as an agent for change and clamor for self-encompassing education. In terms of identity. Anti racist education bases issues of power and powerlessness in relation to various products of the multicultural education system. This touches on how education policies affect race, gender, class and cultural based inequalities (Dei 1994,1995). In 1985, the Ontario government pledged to eliminate all discriminatory race policies and completely grew intolerant to racism of any kind or level (Ontario Advisory Educational Committee 1987.pg. 38). Having looked at the brief history of the education system of Ontario and by extending the larger Canadian borders, we now set sights on the current education system in Ontario in relation to cultural diversity. Current Education System of Ontario In big cosmopolitan cities like Ontario and Toronto, there has been a gradual paradigm shift of the way layout of Suburban lifestyles with more and more immigrant families moving into these suburbs and abandoning the accustomed downtown neighborhoods. The suburbs themselves have been zoned out and labeled ‘inner’ and ‘outer’ suburbs. The inner suburbs are predominantly occupied by immigrant families owing mostly to a combination of affordability, access to public transportation and desire to live in communities. Houses here are mostly high rise apartments and town house. The outer suburbs are more affluent and provide a blend of both white middle class families living together with other middle class immigrant families. Communities that live here take their children to outer suburban schools that are a representation of the society. These ethnoburbs have many challenges due to their composition and implementing educational policies that befits all can be a daunting task. Patterns of choice of residence for most immigrant family is purely based on economic status and related to the voluntary and involuntary processes of residential decentralization (Bauder & Sharp, 2002, p. 207). Driven for a quest for better lives or perceived better life, immigrant families move to the outer suburbs in what Anisef, Axelrod, Baichman-Anisef, James, and Turrittin (2000) refer to as the “immigrant drive.”Parents here also try to secure better educational opportunities for their children. Despite all the attempts made in standardizing the education system in the Ontarian suburbs, the outer suburbs have more desirable schools with better performance than the inner suburban schools. So why the disparity in performance across the cultural barriers? A number of reasons and contentious issues stick out. First and foremost the issue of culture can be a positive incentive to these immigrant students as the values placed on family values, bicultural activities and strong pride in one’s culture can be a strengthening factor. Most researchers (see Boyd & Grieco, 1998; Foner, 1997; Gibson, 2005; Henry, 2005; James, 2005a; Kao & Tienda, 1995; Portes & MacLeod, 1999; Waters, 1999; Zhang, Ollila, & Harvey, 1998; Zhou, 1997) agree that cultural and social capital allows one the ability to command scarce resources by the virtue of being indigenous members of these networks. This works well in areas teachers are apathetic to the daily struggles and lives of their students in their various communities. Some schools and teachers practice the Zero tolerance policy. This policy affects predominantly the Black male student where teacher and school authorities have preconceived image of the typical Black male student as terror or crime associated. This leads to stricter and unduly unfair treatment of these students when in problems. Discipline handed is in most cases much harsher and stiffer for such students. (Noguera, 2003; Ruck, Smith, & Fine, 2004). The policy of zero tolerance does not take into account the social and environments of these students that may make them more irritable and sometimes more aggressive than other students. Life in the inner suburban streets may encompass bare minimal survival and students put through such cannot be evaluated on the same scale as the others. A survey of the Ontario area showed the devastating effect the policy has no one community with almost 75% of the suspended or expelled students being black males (Solomon and Palmer 2004). In the U.S this policy is also culpable in keeping large numbers of black males from completing their education and far and large discouraging others. Statistics have rife with the number of students suspended each year in U.S. schools almost doubled from 1.7 million in 1974 to 3.1 million in 1998, with 87,000 students being expelled” (Ruck 2004. p. 206). This cannot be a mere coincidence and tangible and pragmatic solutions have to be found to address such levels of injustice. Another stigma of alienation befalls black male students is that of the balance between academic work and on field activities. Most black students are encouraged to put more emphasis on being better athletes than general concern of raising an all rounded individual. Many students are led to believe that sports are their only way out and cannot perform as well in class as the other students (James 2005). They therefore embrace sports and mostly basketball which forms their identities in school. This continued practice of sidelining Blacks in sports has a negative effect on the education of the black community in general. In Ontario area, the number of black professional visas via other ethnicities’ is severely diminished. While the intention may be noble and the fruits sweeter for a select few, a retrogressive policy needs to change. Stereotyping affects all minority groups one-way or the other. While the Black male student becomes the athlete, their female counterparts have no let up. They do not have the support of teachers and coaches and this works to ruin their chances of progression in the education system (Gaymese 2006). As a result, these female students feel neglected with the need to defend themselves and what is theirs. They focus their energies in trying to prove their toughness and by default enhance their ‘rude’ stereotypical image that in a twisted sense accords them respect from peers and teachers (Gaymes 2006). Students from Asian backgrounds also have a stereotype that they are expected to fit into. These students are seen like the ‘model minority students’ with expectations on them being set very high (Lee, 2003; phone 2000). While this stereotype may be deemed positive and not as limiting as the one for blacks, it still has two adverse effects on the students. First and foremost it does not put into context the large numbers of South Asian students who are struggling against both cultural barriers and an education system that demands too much from them (Handa, 2003; Varghese, 2006). Secondly and on a rather sad note, it has been used as a backlash weapon other ethnic communities which do not generally perform well in school. This flawed comparison of Asians as model students at the expense of other minority communities leads to lowered self-esteem for students whose community has been devalued. This creates emotional and psychological beliefs that their failure in academics is through their own inadequacies. This in essence compound the situation and drives students in their droves to early dropouts (Lee, 2003). Teachers should the responsibility of nurturing these students in the education system in lieu of the circumstances in their surroundings. It is therefore generally expected that teachers would take keen interests on their students and try to understand at the backdrop of their surroundings. Teachers, especially those who hail from affluent neighborhoods may have a preconceived mindset and assumption about their students stemming from personal experience, mass media and poverty-phobic education (James-Wilson, 1999). This teacher has little or no knowledge of the natural habitats of their students and many misconceptions are born out of such scenarios. Teachers therefore teach in the blind without understanding their students and the unique daily challenges these students go through (Kincheloe, 2004) This misconstrued perception leads to cases where teachers tend to be more authoritarian than liberal to these students of diverse backgrounds (Delpit, 1985). Most teachers say that their students exhibit too much anger and do not seem to have a clue where this anger emanates from. Interestingly enough, research carried out found that “biased curricula and lack of consistent supportive relations with teachers” (Fine and Burns, 2005.page 119). Some teachers even perceive dressing differently as a form of rebellion and lack of discipline. This was more evident with students from the Caribbean nations who have strict adherence to cultural dressing. In these milieu teachers adopt high handedness stance against such students which only leads to strengthening rebellion and create an ‘us’ vs. ‘them’ situation. The expectation of teachers to have all students submit to them using authoritative means is in itself self defeating and downright retrogressive. Genuine efforts should be made to reach out to all students to create a common understanding of what method of delivery would be more appropriate at given times to certain students. Perhaps interesting to note is that to a large extend, the race of the teacher did not really matter. In inner suburban schools for instance, black students were just as ‘lost’ in a class with a white teacher just as they were in the next class taught by a black teacher. This observation then underscores the effect of social classes and the ability to relate as one form of imparting information to these youth. Therefore understanding is paramount in the teacher-student relationship if much is expected to come from this already complex situation. Schools from outer suburbs also have their own fair share of issues in that they emphasize more of ‘sameness’ as opposed to giving attention to the diversity of the student population. The education system here seems to assume the suburban existence of their students’ represents financial stability as well as social and cultural assimilation and hence the core needs of these students are not adequately provided for (Desai & Subramanian, 2000). Conclusion As an overview, the education system of Ontario has made great strides to be all inclusiveness and the Ontario Education Ministry should be commended for its leadership and stewardship. However more needs to be done and at a faster rate to safeguard the positive gains that have been made. In light of the educational history of Ontario, schools should emphasize on multiple identities and lay emphasis on the critique that examination of the values, assumptions, and beliefs underlying the range of identities society want to produce and valorize in its schools and the means by which these identities are produced and conferred. This history of Ontario also stipulates that notions and assumptions are developed and based on what is perceived as the Canadian Identity. Therefore the relationship between the identity of the student and that of the state is of great importance to understanding how difference is created and managed. The possibility for change can only take place in Ontario schools once a response to looking into arising differences is taken to benefit all and sundry. There is no immediate fix to these problems but progressive reforms and embracing all culture sin equal measure is a step in the right direction. References Anisef, P., Axelrod, P., Baichman-Anisef, E., James, C., & Turrittin, A. (2000). Opportunity and uncertainty: Life course experiences of the class of ‘73. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Boyd, M., & Grieco, E. M. (1998). Triumphant transitions: Socioeconomic achievements of second generation in Canada. International Migration Review, 32 (4), 853–876. Curtis, B., Livingston D. W., & Smaller, H. (1992). Stacking the deck: The streaming of working class kids in Ontario schools. Toronto: Our Schools/Our Selves. Davis, J. E. (2001). Transgressing the masculine: African American boys and the failure of schools. In W. Martino, & B. Mien (Eds.), What about the boys? Issues of masculinity in schools (pp. 140–153). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Dei, G. (1994). Anti-racist education: Working across differences. Orbit, 25 (2), 1-3. Dei, G. J. S., Mazzuca, J., McIsaac, E., & Zine, J. (1997). Reconstructing ‘drop-out’: A critical ethnography of the dynamics of black students’ disengagement from school. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Delpit, L. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York: New Press. Desai, S., & Subramanian, S. (2000). Color, culture and dual consciousness: Issues identified by South Asian immigrant youth in the Toronto area. In P. Anisef, & K. Kilbride (Eds.), Managing two worlds: The experiences and concerns of immigrant youth in Ontario (pp. 118–131). Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press. Fine, M., & Burns, A. (2005). The color and class of betrayal in public education. In L. Karumanchery (Ed.), Engaging equity: New perspectives on anti-racist education (pp. 115–131). Calgary, Alberta: Detselig Enterprises Ltd. Fleras, A., & Elliott J. L. (1992). Multiculturalism in Canada: The challenge of diversity Scarborough, ON: Nelson. Gaymes, A. (2006). Making spaces that matter: Black females in the public education system. MA Thesis. Toronto: Graduate Studies in Education, York University Gibson, M. A. (2005). It’s all about relationships: Growing a community of college-oriented migrant youth. In L. Pease-Alvarez, & S. R. Schecter (Eds.), Learning, teaching, and community (pp. 47–68). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Handa, A. (2003). Of silk and miniskirts: South Asian girls walk the tightrope of culture. Toronto: Women’s Press. James, C. E. (2005a). “I feel like a Trini”: Narrative of a generation-and-a-half Canadian. In V. Agnew (Ed.), Diaspora, memory and identity: A search for home (pp. 230–253). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. James-Wilson, S. V. (1999). Stories about the inner-city: Beginning teachers struggle with images and reality. Orbit, 30 (3), 34–37 Kincheloe, J. L. (2004). Why a book on urban education? In J. L. Kincheloe (Ed.), 19 urban education questions: Teaching in the city (pp. 1–28). New York: Peter Lang Lee, S. J. (2003). The impact of stereotyping on Asian American students. In M. Sadowski (Ed.), Adolescents at school: Perspectives on youth, identity and education (pp. 41–49). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Noguera, P. A. (2003). The trouble with Black boys: The role and influence of environmental and cultural factors on the academic performance of African American males. Urban Education, 38 (4), 431–459. Ornstein, M. (2006). Ethno-racial groups in Toronto, 1971–2001: demographic and socioeconomic profile. Toronto: Institute of Social research, York University Pon, G. (2000). Beamers, cells, malls and canto pop: Thinking through the geographies of Chineseness. In C. E. James (Ed.), Experiencing the difference (pp. 222–234). Halifax, NS: Fernwood Publishing Ruck, M., Smith, K., & Fine, M. (2004). Resisting at the borders: Warnings from the US about zero tolerance. In Kidd & J. Phillips (Eds.), Research on community safety: From enforcement and prevention to civic engagements (pp. 203–214). Toronto Centre of Criminology: University of Toronto. Read More