Multicultural Educator vs. Anti-Racism Facilitator

What is the difference between a “multicultural educator” and an “anti-racism facilitator”?

As stated in the previous section, anti-racism facilitators support the active process of unlearning racism for themselves and for others; they may do so in formal education settings, but not always. Such a process often involves discussing or teaching/learning about “race,” bias, discrimination, power relationships, oppression, history etc. Although a multicultural educator (typically in the formal education system) may teach from an anti-racism perspective, their focus tends to be on cultural diversity as opposed to dismantling racism. Multicultural educators will often teach about cultural diversity through the lens of “surface culture.” Surface culture refers to cultural holidays, celebrations, dance, food, and dress. While these special events or occasions may be enjoyable and bring us together, they usually “gloss over important concepts and issues related to the victimization and oppression of ethnic groups and their struggles against racism and for power” (Banks, 1988). This approach, wherein “ethnic” content is limited to particular days or weeks, can be referred to as the “Heroes and Holidays Approach” and on a subtle level, it teaches students to view such topics as an “addition to the curriculum, and consequently as an appendage to the main story of the development of the nation and to the core curriculum” (ibid).

Problems with this Approach:

1. Although multicultural programs and education expose students to difference, they are superficial differences.
2. The multicultural approach promotes stereotypes and isolates racialized students because their racial group is not part of the everyday curriculum, but rather portrayed in a specific, isolated way (Bolgatz, 2005).
3. Within the multicultural approach, white culture is typically not viewed as being “different,” therefore, white students are encouraged to perceive themselves as the norm.
4. The multicultural approach does not take into account the implications of race and culture on students’ lived experiences. This leaves students unable to articulate a sense of something being wrong, and/or not feeling safe to talk about their experiences on a deeper level.

↳ See our Facilitators’ Stories section for related anecdotes.

References:

• Banks, J. A. (1988). Approaches to Multicultural Curriculum Reform. Multicultural Leader . Vol. 1, No. 2. Educational Materials & Services Center.
• Bolgatz, J. (2005). Talking Race in the Classroom. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.