Tisham Mohammed

Saskatoon Open Door Society · Employment Services Unit

Multicultural Education, Diversity, and Citizenship in Canada

Reva Joshee, Oise, University of Toronto

Carla Peck, University of Alberta

Laura A. Thompson, Acadia University

Ottilia Chareka, St. Francis Xavier University

Ala Sears, University of New Brunswick

Working Paper for the IALEI Workshop on Multicultural Education

Seoul, Korea

February 17-20, 2010

Within this working paper, Joshee, Peck, Thompson, Chareka and Sears outline the changes over time of how Canadians have defined cultural diversity. Issues of immigrant integration, cultural identity, racism, religious diversity and linguistic diversity are addressed. Discussions of Canadian identity have been occurring since Canada officially became a country in 1867. Joshee et al. states education has been the vehicle through which diversity could be managed properly. Throughout the paper Joshee et al., outline the history of Multiculturalism, the contemporary meaning of multiculturalism as expressed in educational policies and gives examples of multicultural educational practices in schools and classrooms within the Canadian context.

CANADIAN CONTEXT

With the presentation occurring in Seoul, Korea (2010), it was important for Joshee et al. and her colleagues to set the stage, withthe following Canadian context, as represented in the graphic below. Canadian Geographic (Statistics Canada- 2006)

Population Area British French Origin First Nations Non white

Self-identified Religion

-31 million

-36th largest in the world -10 million sq.km

-2nd largest in the world -33%

-English& French are the 2 official languages -3.8% -16.2%

-25-48% of population in major urban areas -77% Christian

-2% Muslim

-1% Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh

-1% other

-remainder no religious affiliations

Responsibility of Education in Canada

Provincial Responsibility Federal Responsiility

-10 provinces and 3 territories each have their own ministry or department of education

-they establish provincial and territorial policies

-oversee operations

-implement and develop local policy with the local and regional school districts

-relationship between provincial and territorial ministries and school divisions characterized by tension as it is by harmony of purpose (Joshee et.al)

-policies and programs vary across the country -significant involvement in education

-responsible for children of armed forces personnel living on bases

-responsible for First Nations children living on reserve

-responsible for areas seen to be of national interest of which multiculturalism and citizenship fall

CANADIAN POLICY CONTEXT

Joshee et al. (2010) identify several important points in the history of Canada’s diversity. In 1987 the British colonies of Upper and Lower Canada were torn by rebellions. Lord Durham (1839) was dispatched by the new Queen Victoria to clean up the mess….. “I found a struggle, not of principles, but of races…” (Joshee et al.2010) There were evident hostile divisions between the French and the English. Upon seeing this Lord Durham was seeking to stamp out diversity in favour of a single, shared (English) Canadian identity. Since WWII there was a strong shift toward celebrating diversity, recognizing minority “nations” within a Canadian State. (Joshee et al. 2010)

Joshee et al. share an observation by Kymlicka (2003:374) that diversity has been common across virtually all western democracies, and there is a move toward integration of minority groups rather than assimilation and greater recognition of the rights of Indigenous people. Canada is distinct in constitutionalizing practices of accommodation.

Joshee et al. state that central to Canada’s history is accommodating to its’ diversity. Four factors exemplify why Canada is suited to pluralism.

1. English and French dualism

2. More diverse British rather than English

3. Separation of church and state always existed in Canada

4. Control over education was provincial rather than federal responsibility

This diversity was recognized early on in legal constitutional structures. The following dates of important events are noted;

1763 – The Royal Proclamation recognized Aboriginal right to self-government

1774 – The Quebec Act provided for maintaining the French language and culture even though Quebec had come under British control

1867 – The Canadian State “implicitly recognized the value of retaining a connection with one’s ancestral culture” (Joshee et. al. 2010)

1982 – Aboriginal rights, treaty rights are affirmed in the Constitution Act. The Act recognizes English and French as official languages of New Brunswick to protect the Acadian people.

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; Joshee et al. restate “This Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians”. This Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects languages in schooling.

2001 – The Alberta government specified the importance of Francophone education which focuses on “community belonging and pride”. (Joshee et al. 2010)

2005 – The Ontario government implemented policy for French language schools and Francophone

Communities. A new admission policy is to take effect in 2010 to make French language schools more welcoming to newcomers and to newcomers who don’t speak French or English

Throughout this history lesson of Canada’s role in attempts to maintain diversity, it is evident as

Joshee et al.state, the Canadian government is committed to language diversity and the future of official

languages in minority communities.

DIVERSITY IN THE CURRICULUM

Joshee et al. articulate throughout this working paper that Canada’s shift in educational policy began with an emphasis on assimilation to a more contemporary attempt in “promoting understanding of, and respect for, diversity”. The following are some examples from respective curriculum documents of how diversity is being addressed in curricular development across Canada.

Canada’s commitment to “the pluralist ideal” is natural for Canadians. (Joshee et al.) Joshee et al. note, in examining Social Studies curriculum there is a clear direction of knowledge of diversity, to acceptance and respect, ending in justice. Many scholars argue, as Joshee et al. share, knowledge is not enough. Not only do our children need the understanding of difference but they must be able to express the “willingness to adapt, to accommodate and, to advocate for accommodation”.

DIVERSITY AND CITIZENSHIP IN EDUCATION

Diversity has played an important role in shaping the history of Canada. It also has contributed to shaping policies in citizenship and citizenship education. (Joshee et al. 2010) Citizenship refers to a “sense of national identity”. Joshee et al. continue to say, our country has attempted to create a national education system to address a “crisis of citizenship’ and “lack of Canadian identity”. There is a fear that Canada exists as a state, however we are not a nation who share “group affinity and shared values”. (Joshee et al. 2010)

In English Canada’s historical beginnings we were built on a common English language, common culture, and a common identification with the British Empire. This excluded many, especially Canada’s Aboriginal people. After WWII the British identity began to diminish because it was unsuccessful in unifying the population. (Joshee et al. 2010) Newcomers did not identify with Canada and the empire, so they clung to the identity of their homeland. French Canadians struggled with identifying with the British Empire and relied on the Catholic Church for governance between 1867 and the 1960s.

Joshee et al. explain the Quebec educational system saw religion as more important as a social educational institution rather than, “Social Studies” curriculum. Currently in Quebec, Joshee et al. state, history and citizenship education don’t focus on nation building but on inclusive and pluralistic approaches.

CURRENT CHALLENGES

Joshee et al. reveal many challenges with respect to diversity in Canada throughout history. In the 1970s and 1980s there was a great focus on respecting, celebrating and accommodating diversity. From the 1970s onward marginalized or excluded groups were given voices to feel included in civic life of our country. This led to an educational policy framework that promoted the “pluralistic ideal”. (Joshee et al. 2010) Groups of citizens had the knowledge, skills and inclination needed to participate in the civic life of the country and feel welcome in doing so. Joshee et al. argue that what citizens were included in was not citizenship in the ethnic or sociological sense of belonging to a community but, instead, they were included in the community of those who participate and those who join the process.

Within schools differences were avoided. Teachers avoided challenging issues that would elicit clashes involving ethnicity and identity. Instead of dealing with possible struggles teachers and schools would focus on “harmony building” and “individual skill building”. (Joshee et al. 2010) An example of this would be focusing on appreciation of diverse cultural heritages rather than exploring the differences and understanding of cultural groups.

Joshee et al. explore how within the neoliberal policy web multiculturalism is understood in 2 ways; 1. Economic asset- a way of increasing ties to international markets and, 2. A potential source of division in society. Joshee et al. relate to a Government of Canada policy document and shares; Equity is thus seen as a way to achieve sameness and social justice as equity in accessing economic opportunities. “It is the ongoing process of developing a community of shared values, shared challenges and equal opportunities within Canada, based on a sense of trust, hope, and reciprocity of all Canadians.” (Joshee et al. 2010)

As stated by Joshee et al., Multiculturalism has 2 goals:

1. Social cohesion – which is a positive force that challenges social exclusion and,

2. Equity of outcomes- inequality is addressed in the framework of charity rather than social justice.

Joshee et al. share with us the Multiculturalism policy: 30 years and looking forward as a week

version of multiculturalism. Joshee et al. also state the approach is more focused on assimilation rather than integration and social justice is not even mentioned. She notes that in 2009 the federal Minister for Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism has indicated that social cohesion is important as young people from new immigrant communities avoid getting into trouble. So, the Minister is not concerned with engagement of Canadians about diversity but rather ethnic pockets that turn to criminal activity which threaten our security and safety. Joshee et al. share, the Minister thus feels diversity should be avoided at all costs.

A specific policy on safe schools and character development has said safe schools’ prerequisite is that of safety. Addressing bullying issues and delinquent behaviours before they happen is what needs to occur, not being reactive as Joshee et al. explain, is happening in Ontario schools. How this is lined to multiculturalism Joshee et al explain, the groups most affected are Frist Nations, those with disabilities and racialized groups. By being reactive to negative events the diversity of marginalized groups is being overlooked with focus on the event.

Revisions to the Safe School Act are making it more inclusive of all groups and attempts in teaching to be proactive rather than reactive to culturally sensitive groups.

The character development strategy places a focus on teaching student behaviours and attitudes that contribute to “safe, healthy, and orderly school environments. (Joshee et al. 2010) Joshee et al. state it helps students develop sub discipline and personal management skills so they will help their communities, workplaces and lives be the best they can be. With Ontario being quite diverse the message is clear as Joshee et al. contend, the mission must be to find common ground and build consensus. Focusing on social cohesion Joshee et al. explains, allows movement beyond divisiveness and helps create a safe environment where all can concentrate on academic success.

The second goal of multiculturalism; equity of outcomes takes us back to first generation human rights. Joshee et al. state it recognizes basic inequalities and the need to interject on behalf of disadvantaged members of our society. This approach addresses inequality on the individual level rather than systematic change. (Joshee et al. 2010)

The logic that comes from equity of outcomes is that all existing structures are fair and all members of society want the same thing, specifically to participate in the economy. (Joshee et al. 2010)

Many programs are designed to prepare for “youth at risk” outcomes. (Joshee et al. 2010) Joshee et al. share that with this comes a narrow understanding of academic achievement (mainly test scores).

Joshee et al. define inclusive schools as “all students making successful transitions to post-secondary destinations of their choice”. Teachers have hopes and aspirations for their students to become contributing members of society in terms of economic value. (Joshee et al. 2010) Joshee et al. concludes by stating “students are valued not for the people they are but for the workers they’ll become”.

OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUDING COMMENTS as stated by Joshee et al 2010;

1. Multiculturalism has gone from valuing diversity as a strength to decrying diversity as a threat to the safety and security of the country.

2. Consequence of the combination of neoliberal and neoconservative discourses in multicultural education is showing diversity as a problem and placing minority students as having deficits which need to be addressed.

3. Multiculturalism is an easy target for failings and challenges resulting from other policies. It is universally argued that backlash to multiculturalism is due to anxiety and fear of the unknown.

4. There is very little support that religious diversity is “radicalizing” youth.

5. The Indian understanding of “active respect” as an alternative to social cohesion as a means of creating a socially just and inclusive society. Our country must recognize and support a given communities’ aspirations.

6. Inclusion is based on respect for people’s identities and values- Joshee argues it’s the basis of the Canadian idea of multiculturalism but we’re not very good at articulating this.

Joshee, Reva., Peck, Carla., Thompson, Laura A., Chareka, Ottilia., Sears, Ala.February 17-20, 2010.

Multicultural Education, Diversity, and Citizenship in Canada. Working paper for the IALEAI

Workshop on Multicultural Education, Seoul, Korea.

Please the paper related to the issue, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268576703_Influence_and_Controversy_of_Religion_in_the_Evolution_of_Canadian_Education

It could be anything that you think is significant for the research.