Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Managing diversity in the classroom
"According to Rachels, the cultural differences argument for ethical relativism
Multiculturalism in education
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Managing diversity in the classroom
Racial reconciliation should be a top priority for every Christian of any race or cultural background. But will this demand for a "multicultural center of learning" produce a less prejudiced society? Multiculturalists insist on greater sensitivity towards, and increased inclusion of, racial minorities and women in society. Christians should endorse both of these goals. But many advocating multiculturalism go beyond these demands for sensitivity and inclusion; here is where Christians must be careful.
One of the difficulties of accepting multiculturalists is that defining a multicultural society, or institution seems to be determined by one's perspective. A commonly held view suggests that being multicultural involves tolerance towards racial and ethnic minorities, mainly in the areas of dress, language, food, religious beliefs, and other cultural manifestations. An influential group calling itself NAME, or the National Association for Multicultural Education, includes in its philosophy statement the following: "Xenophobia, discrimination, racism, classism, sexism, and homophobia are societal phenomena that are inconsistent with the principles of a democracy and lead to the counterproductive reasoning that differences are deficiencies."(name). NAME is a powerful organization composed of educators from around the country, and it has considerable influence on how schools approach the issue of diversity on campus. The fundamental question that the folks at NAME need to answer is, "Is it always counterproductive to reason that some differences might be deficiencies?"(name). In other words, isn't it possible that some of the characteristics of specific culture groups are dangerous or morally unsound?
It is not uncommon for advocates of multiculturalism like NAME to begin with the assumption that truth is culturally based. It is argued that a group's language dictates what ideas about God, human nature, and morality are permissible. While Americans may define reality using ideas from its Greek, Roman, Asian or African cultures see the world differently based on their traditions. Multiculturalists conclude that since multiple descriptions of reality exist, no one view can be true in any ultimate sense. Furthermore, since truth is a function of language, and all language is created by humans, all truth is created by humans. This view of truth and language ha...
... middle of paper ...
...elieve that every human being was created in God's image and reflects God's glory and majesty. We were created to have dominion over God's creation as His stewards. Thus, we are to care for others because they are ultimately worthy of our care and concern. We are not to be cruel to others because the Creator of the universe made individuals to have fellowship with Him and He cares for them. This does not discount that people are fallen and in rebellion against God. In fact, if we really care about people we will take 2 Corinthians 5:19-20 seriously. First, that God has made reconciliation with Himself possible through His Son Jesus Christ, and as verse 20 says, "..he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us."
True sensitivity and inclusion will not be achieved by making tolerance an absolute. They occur when we take what people believe, and the consequences of those beliefs, seriously. When you think about it, what could be crueler than failing to inform people of the Gospel of redemption through Christ, leaving them to spend eternity separated from the Creator God who loves them?
Drawing a distinction between being for someone and being with someone, Father Boyle writes: “Jesus was not a man for others. He was one with others. Jesus didn’t seek the rights of lepers. He touched the leper even before he got around to curing him. He didn’t champion the cause of the outcast. He was the outcast.” Such a distinction has significant implications for understanding ourselves in relation to others. While being for someone implies a separateness, a distinction between “them” and “us”, being with someone requires the recognition of a oneness with another, a unity that eradicates differences and binds people together. “’Be compassionate as God is compassionate’, means the dismantling of barriers that exclude,” writes Father Boyle. Accordingly, true compassion is not only recognizing the pain and suffering of others – it is not just advocating for those in need. It is being with others in their pain and suffering – and “bringing them in toward yourself.” Indeed, scripture scholars connect the word compassion to the “deepest part of the person,” showing that when Jesus was “moved with pity”, he was moved “from the entirety of his
America is full and rich with diverse people, religions and values; they make America great. Just look at Riverside, California, there are over fifty churches of different denominations of Christianity, three synagogues, two temples, and one mosque; all coinciding peacefully in the city (Yellow Pages). Because Riverside is so diverse, religious pluralism and religious tolerance are two steps in making Riverside more connected. The first step is tolerance, a reflex that acknowledges a person will come across people of a different faith. The second step is pluralism, which is a better understanding of a person’s religion as well as the other religions around them. Many believe pluralism is the better of the two, because of the interaction involved and the creation of harmony, but pluralism’s faults are greater than the benefits. Currently religious pluralism is quality America should strive for, but America is not ready for pluralism yet, so religious tolerance is best for the diverse population of America today.
...Multiculturalism: Essential Primary Sources. Ed. K. Lee Lerner, Brenda Wilmoth Lerner, and Adrienne Wilmoth Lerner. Detroit: Gale, 2006. 353-355. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 11 Apr. 2014
Integration of culture within the United States has become a difficult task for government officials who follows the Multiculturalist approach. Culture is the diversification of one’s being as regards to their immutable traits being learnt from the time of their births. Linda Chaves’s essay “Demystifying Multiculturalism” points out that the accommodation of equal rights between whites and non-whites is not a problem it is education. However, multiculturalist believes that non-whites are becoming a threat to their population and will eventually change the American culture. The demographic tidal wave illusion from the business sectors is merely an exaggeration as they believe that non-white’s will eventually whip out United States white’s population. Chavez gives attention to the fact that ‘judgment should not be based on skin color but by content of one’s character’ (6). Furthermore, she doesn’t only criticize the Multiculturalist techniques but emphasizes through reasoning why the Multiculturalist approach would imposed negative attitude towards the non-whites in the United States. This will not only create negativity but a racial chaos between whites and non-whites living in the United States.
In Charles Colson and Nancy Pearcy's essay, "Worldviews in Conflict," the authors evaluate the shifting culture context of today's society and how Christianity fits into this situation. The essay compares the differing views between Christianity and today's worldview, and informs the reader on how to engage today's culture. "Worldviews in Conflict" is a reliable source because its authors, audience, publication, and purpose make it
These questions, and many more, have long been a part of the agenda for multicultural education but are recently coming more clearly into focus. Most of the work and studies in race relations and teaching in a multicultural environment in the U.S. have put an emphasis on the unique cultural experiences and perspectives of Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Native American groups. These are the groups that have historically been marginalized in various ways by the repeated asserted dominance by American people of European backgrounds. As the populations of the U.S. changes to take in even larger numbers of those groups...
White evangelicalism has been working to help increase racial diversity amongst religion. However, their efforts seem to be failing. It is becoming more and more apparent through history, social life, and politics, that white evangelicalism is not doing the right things to help desegregate the black evangelicals. "Despite devoting consid¬erable time and energy to solving the problem of racial division, white evangelicalism likely does more to perpetuate the racialized society than to reduce it" (170). Much more needs to be done in the coming decades to ensure that we can reduce racial inequalities in the church, and hopefully one day close the gap to nothing, creating an all inclusive Christian church.
United by Faith main objective is to convince the reader to embrace a multiracial formation within their congregation, but it does provide a good balance on why some favor segregated congregations. Five main categories are presented in favor of this. The five are pragmatic reasons, theological reasons, cultural reasons, activist reasons, and sociological
The United States has a history of being viewed as a superior culture in which weaker cultures must adapt. However, this attitude has been cause of repression and conflict among the different cultures. As a result, activists have worked for years pushing to empower cultures; thus, encouraging unity rather than cultural divide for the strength of our nation as a whole. According to John Ogbu (1978), every "minority" group has a unique history in the United States that needs to be studied, understood, and validated to more authentically understand, support, and educate them. Education experts have responded to the overall push for this unification by developing an interdisciplinary approach in the development of multicultural education.
Students attending American schools are taught clearly about the United States’ image as a melting pot; however, there is evidence to support that, while there is not an official federal stance on the matter (Sengupta), the amount of assimilation required to be legitimately considered a “melting pot” is not being reached. Although similar, there is often confusion about the differences between “multicultural” and “assimilated” communities. By definition, assimilation is the complete “merging of cultural traits from previously distinct culture groups” (Dictionary), while multiculturalism is delineated as the “preservation of different cultures or cultural identities within a unified society, as a state or nation” (Dictionary). Early to mid-1900’s America entertained the idea of a melting pot, where people from all parts of the world would join together and assimilate. It seems, however, that the growing trend has been to treat America as more of a “salad bowl” (Porter), in that people are joining together but instead of merging as one unit, are maintaining a majority, if not all, of their primary culture with little attempt to adapt. This underachievement has left America to unintentionally become a multicultural society. The clear differentiation between expectation and reality brings vast amounts of controversy among the nation’s people.
In Christianity, the emphasis is placed on love of God rather than on obeying his will. People must believe that God is merciful and loves them as well. As a reflection of God’s love, people must also love other people (and the whole humanity in general) and forgive their enemies.
... love your neighbor as yourself,” (www.biblegateway.com/NIV, 2011). The only command higher than this is that you love the Lord with all your heart, soul, and mind. God values the feelings and emotions of all humanity, likewise, we should as well.
To gain a better understanding and develop a positive attitude and acceptance of the varying ethnic and cultural differences we have in society today in the modern world, we need to step back and examine and study the philosophical views of ancient philosophers and attempt to modify the traditional mind set of today’s population in regards to racism. We are in fact all human, all cultures, all ethnic groups, all races, all skin color and cannot be compared to other living creatures, we can make judgments, we know right from wrong, we all have the opportunity to succeed. We as the human race must re-evaluate our morals which define our personal character and strive to make healthier and better decision in our lives on issues that affect our fellow man, as well as being ethical in our social lives and activities.
As in anything in life, there are positive and negative terms that can be detrimental in how a person does and says something and may be offensive to another person. In Diversity a positive term that we should strive to do to contain order would be, Equity, which means to treat everyone equally no matter their culture or race. Equity is very important since it’s the bases of Diversity and should be acknowledged a little more often. Without Equity, there would be no structure in Diversity for anything else, and no admiration between one another. A Negative term for diversity would be Discrimination. Discrimination is the unequal treatment of someone based on their culture or ethnicity. Discriminating someone who might be different than you is very wrong. A person has no need to put down someone just because they might not be the same religion or believe in the same thing as you. We should try to totally eradicate negative terms in order to maintain a culture of diversity and inclusion.
The issue at hand must be addressed, and the programs that attempt to correct the current state of religious tolerance aren’t working well enough. These programs attempt to promote religious tolerance through diversification and education. University programs attempt to subject people to more belief systems than ever before, and public schools teach students the beliefs and practices of religions new, old, and unfamiliar. This sort of constructive action definitely helps to reduce the insecurities that religious diversity creates, but it still only magnifies the differences between those who practice separate religions. It may improve relations for some, but for others it may have a negative effect. The true solution to the problem is to promote a philosophy that allows people to maintain their faith and simul...