ntages higher-performing students who may not be sufficiently challenged in the courses.
While the debates about multicultural education are both numerous and nuanced, many center on differing interpretations of equity—what is fair and just—and equality—what is applied, allocated, or distributed equally (for example, a school might choose to allocate resources—funding, teachers, staff time, etc.—equally among all students). Another source of debate stems from the conception of America as a meritocracy in which anyone, if they work hard enough, can succeed and prosper. Those who believe in and prioritize meritocracy may perceive unequal educational allocations, accommodations, or compensations to be unfair (because some students are being given an unfair advantage, which may diminish opportunities for other, possibly more deserving, students). Others, who don’t perceive America to be a true meritocracy, may argue that the unequal distribution of educational resources is the only fair way to level the playing field and ensure that every student has an equal—or equitable—opportunity to succeed. For a more detailed discussion of these debates, see equity.
The following list describes a few representative examples of multicultural education giving rise to debate:
- Affirmative action: While affirmative action policies are frequently misunderstood—e.g., they are often misrepresented as quota systems for minorities, for example—the practice of giving certain minority groups preferential treatment in school admissions has been a source of ongoing debate in the United States, and it has led to charges of reverse-bias (some even refer to the practice as “positive discrimination”). While proponents of multicultural education would argue that affirmative action is motivated by the desire to counterbalance a legacy of systemic, institutionalized bias and to expand educational opportunities for all students, critics tend to argue that students should be admitted to schools based solely on academic performance and other objective measures of merit and worthiness.
- Resource allocation: As states, districts, and schools increase funding for specialized teachers, resources, and accommodations for minority, lower-income, and special-needs students, concerns and debates about fairness often follow. For example, a district and school may decide to hire more teachers with specialized expertise in English as a second language or in special education (often to comply with state or federal requirements) despite budgetary cutbacks and staffing reductions in other teaching areas. Such decisions can be particularly contentious if a school district decides to hire a private school, organization, or business, often at higher cost, to provide these specialized services.
- Assessment and testing: While there is broad agreement in the education community that all students should be held to the same high academic expectations, practices such as standardized testing and high-stakes testing are common sources of debate. Since all students—regardless of their ability, English proficiency, or cultural background—may be required to take the same test, debates about fairness can arise, particularly in those cases in which students may be at a clear disadvantage when taking the test—e.g., recently arrived immigrant students who are not yet proficient in the English language or in American customs and cultural references. Proponents of multicultural education may argue that students should be assessed using a variety of measures, while critics may contend that using a single test is the only fair and objective way to evaluate learning acquisition and academic progress.
- Curriculum and instruction: Critics of multicultural education may express concern that some texts and learning materials, for example, overemphasize culturally diverse content while giving insufficient attention to important topics or historical events. Proponents of multicultural education may argue that learning should address multiple cultural viewpoints, and that students from different cu