Cultural Artifact Assignment: Identifying Cultural Tensions
The students take turns presenting their cultural artifacts and asking questions to better understand the cultures that they represent. A couple of Arabic students give a lively demonstration of two men kissing each other on the cheek as a greeting, and then explain this cultural gesture, smiling and animatedly telling their stories of adjusting to American culture and its own standards for greetings.
“It can be a greeting between two men who are just very close,” one student explains. As he finishes, he asks his classmates if they have any questions. His peer raises her hand and when she is called on, she poses her question in a friendly and curious manner.
“What about between gay people? Do they also greet each other this way?”
“In our country, we do not have gay people,” the student explains.
“You have no gay people at all?” The question, again, is purely out of curiosity, and in line with the nature of the assignment.
“No. It is not allowed. So we do not have any.” The student bears no aggressive tone, but merely seeks to inform his classmate.
The teacher calmly thanks the students for their participation and comments on how interesting it has been, smoothly ending the potentially controversial conversation and shifting class attention to new topics. Whether it has been intentional or not, she has ended the discomforting conversation abruptly and without conclusion. Some may feel that she has made the wrong move, and that she should have opened up class discussion to the debate of whether or not homosexuality exists based on its legality or social acceptability. Still, others might feel she should have just ended the discussion by explaining the validity of each individual’s personal right to identify with any sexual orientation. Ultimately, this teacher’s decision has its own logical support, and should be considered in context with the opposing viewpoints in order to better understand the complexity of this situation.
Jodi Reiss’s 120 Content Area Strategies for Teaching English Language Learners explains the most basic consideration in addressing this potentially uncomfortable cultural issue: “Teachers, not realizing the cultural context of these responses, often mistakenly perceive these behaviors on an individual level as rudeness […] Awareness of culture as a potential source of student behavior will help teachers depersonalize this behavior, moving it from the personal to the cultural level” (Reiss 17). This realization of the statement’s cultural sources can immediately provide relief to an otherwise tense moment for instructors. In stepping back from the personal level, they can better assess the situation and decide how it should be handled. In fact, viewing the classroom from a cultural perspective can open up a whole separate aspect the English Language Learner’s (ELL) environment. Reiss explains that ELLs face myriad problems in integrating to American culture, and some are so specific that teachers may not acknowledge them. For instance, the writing of dates, the notation of numbers and mathematical algorithms for problem solving all vary across cultures. Students adjusting to American standards can feel excluded and disenfranchised in so many subtle ways, and culturally inclusive teachers need to address this feeling and correct it by welcoming cultural differences.
Ferlazzo and Sypnieski address the complex issue of classroom diversity and an inclusive environment in The ESL/ELL Teacher’s Survival Guide. They emphasize the importance of building relationships with students: “Numerous studies have shown the importance of supportive relationships for students, especially immigrants” (Ferlazzo & Sypniekski 14). Furthermore, they discuss the supporting research for teacher-student relationships, and explain that “when students feel that they matter, their levels of motivation and achievement are more likely to increase” (Ferlazzo & Sypnieski 15). If an instructor chooses to correct his or her student after his statement based on his own culture, that instructor sends the message of unimportance to that student. While the intention could be to open up that culturally welcoming space for the inclusion of individuals identifying as homosexual, the result can be the opposite if it closes off culturally welcoming space for students who simply follow their culturally appropriate beliefs.
K.D. Moore and J. Hansen explain the importance of culturally diverse students and their participation in high interest activities in Effective Strategies for Teaching in K-8 Classrooms: “Teachers must plan very carefully to ensure that all students participate in high interest educational activities that are personally relevant” (Moore & Hansen 29). This highlights the most part of the classroom setting depicted above: the students’ participation. Again, the two students who presented an aspect of their culture cannot be reprimanded or shamed for their participation. By doing this to students, teachers risk “a large portion of the future adult population of this country who cannot participate successfully as global citizens. Academic experiences and parental perceptions impact students’ attitudes toward education” (Moore & Hansen 29).
This is not to say that teachers should disregard one specific culture’s respect for another culture’s inclusion; rather, it emphasizes the importance of healthy and respectful relationships: “Establishing quality teacher-student-parent communication doesn’t just happen; it requires special skills and dispositions such as good listening techniques, tact, kindness, consideration, empathy, enthusiasm, an understanding of parent-child relationships, and an awareness and knowledge of cultural factors that affect communication” (Moore & Hansen 35). In order to create truly valuable and successful intercultural relationships with students, a teacher should first hold back his or her initial reactions and judgments and instead place him or herself in the position of a cultural outsider. While this can feel difficult and unnatural, it keeps instructors from acting too quickly and ultimately alienating a student who is still is adjusting to a new culture. Moore and Hansen underscore the importance of this personal awareness: “You must try to be aware of your own automatic responses and nonverbal behaviors so that you don’t send an unintentional message. Remember to always give your students and parents the benefit of the doubt and assume that their intentions are not unkind” (Moore & Hansen 38). In doing this, the teacher opens up his or her classroom to a more open and productive environment.
Going beyond the initial reaction to a culturally sensitive incident, teachers should be ready to adjust their curricula to accommodate topics that naturally arise in their classrooms. While classrooms throughout history have asked students to adjust to the set curricula, this traditional classroom is shifting to focus less on teachers so that students lie at the center of focus. Moore and Hansen point out “the traditional, teacher-centered instructional approach no longer meets today’s students’ needs” (40) because “today’s classrooms are becoming increasingly diversified through the assimilation of immigrant populations” (40).
Jessica Singer Early’s work Stirring up Social Justice investigates the ways through which teachers can explore social justice in the classroom. While one might assume her writing would refer to an immediate correction of a culturally insensitive comment about homosexuality, she takes a step back from her own agenda and considers the personal growth of each student. In explaining her goals for young activists in the classroom, she says, “True leaders and activists have skills carefully honed over time, and do not instantly become sincere and effective activists as the result of one classroom assignment. They have passions that stem from their own particular life experience” (Early x). Moreover, she makes a very important statement regarding her course objectives: “I wanted this curriculum to create opportunities for students’ individual interests and multiple perspectives to enter the classroom discourse, rather than forcing my own agenda” (Early x). This directly links to Moore and Hansen’s emphasis on stepping back as a cultural insider and considering the response she may send to students. Even if she believes in a cause, she sees no value in simply telling students to support it. Thus, she designs her curriculum in a way that asks students to find their own passions and beliefs.
“It can be a greeting between two men who are just very close,” one student explains. As he finishes, he asks his classmates if they have any questions. His peer raises her hand and when she is called on, she poses her question in a friendly and curious manner.
“What about between gay people? Do they also greet each other this way?”
“In our country, we do not have gay people,” the student explains.
“You have no gay people at all?” The question, again, is purely out of curiosity, and in line with the nature of the assignment.
“No. It is not allowed. So we do not have any.” The student bears no aggressive tone, but merely seeks to inform his classmate.
The teacher calmly thanks the students for their participation and comments on how interesting it has been, smoothly ending the potentially controversial conversation and shifting class attention to new topics. Whether it has been intentional or not, she has ended the discomforting conversation abruptly and without conclusion. Some may feel that she has made the wrong move, and that she should have opened up class discussion to the debate of whether or not homosexuality exists based on its legality or social acceptability. Still, others might feel she should have just ended the discussion by explaining the validity of each individual’s personal right to identify with any sexual orientation. Ultimately, this teacher’s decision has its own logical support, and should be considered in context with the opposing viewpoints in order to better understand the complexity of this situation.
Jodi Reiss’s 120 Content Area Strategies for Teaching English Language Learners explains the most basic consideration in addressing this potentially uncomfortable cultural issue: “Teachers, not realizing the cultural context of these responses, often mistakenly perceive these behaviors on an individual level as rudeness […] Awareness of culture as a potential source of student behavior will help teachers depersonalize this behavior, moving it from the personal to the cultural level” (Reiss 17). This realization of the statement’s cultural sources can immediately provide relief to an otherwise tense moment for instructors. In stepping back from the personal level, they can better assess the situation and decide how it should be handled. In fact, viewing the classroom from a cultural perspective can open up a whole separate aspect the English Language Learner’s (ELL) environment. Reiss explains that ELLs face myriad problems in integrating to American culture, and some are so specific that teachers may not acknowledge them. For instance, the writing of dates, the notation of numbers and mathematical algorithms for problem solving all vary across cultures. Students adjusting to American standards can feel excluded and disenfranchised in so many subtle ways, and culturally inclusive teachers need to address this feeling and correct it by welcoming cultural differences.
Ferlazzo and Sypnieski address the complex issue of classroom diversity and an inclusive environment in The ESL/ELL Teacher’s Survival Guide. They emphasize the importance of building relationships with students: “Numerous studies have shown the importance of supportive relationships for students, especially immigrants” (Ferlazzo & Sypniekski 14). Furthermore, they discuss the supporting research for teacher-student relationships, and explain that “when students feel that they matter, their levels of motivation and achievement are more likely to increase” (Ferlazzo & Sypnieski 15). If an instructor chooses to correct his or her student after his statement based on his own culture, that instructor sends the message of unimportance to that student. While the intention could be to open up that culturally welcoming space for the inclusion of individuals identifying as homosexual, the result can be the opposite if it closes off culturally welcoming space for students who simply follow their culturally appropriate beliefs.
K.D. Moore and J. Hansen explain the importance of culturally diverse students and their participation in high interest activities in Effective Strategies for Teaching in K-8 Classrooms: “Teachers must plan very carefully to ensure that all students participate in high interest educational activities that are personally relevant” (Moore & Hansen 29). This highlights the most part of the classroom setting depicted above: the students’ participation. Again, the two students who presented an aspect of their culture cannot be reprimanded or shamed for their participation. By doing this to students, teachers risk “a large portion of the future adult population of this country who cannot participate successfully as global citizens. Academic experiences and parental perceptions impact students’ attitudes toward education” (Moore & Hansen 29).
This is not to say that teachers should disregard one specific culture’s respect for another culture’s inclusion; rather, it emphasizes the importance of healthy and respectful relationships: “Establishing quality teacher-student-parent communication doesn’t just happen; it requires special skills and dispositions such as good listening techniques, tact, kindness, consideration, empathy, enthusiasm, an understanding of parent-child relationships, and an awareness and knowledge of cultural factors that affect communication” (Moore & Hansen 35). In order to create truly valuable and successful intercultural relationships with students, a teacher should first hold back his or her initial reactions and judgments and instead place him or herself in the position of a cultural outsider. While this can feel difficult and unnatural, it keeps instructors from acting too quickly and ultimately alienating a student who is still is adjusting to a new culture. Moore and Hansen underscore the importance of this personal awareness: “You must try to be aware of your own automatic responses and nonverbal behaviors so that you don’t send an unintentional message. Remember to always give your students and parents the benefit of the doubt and assume that their intentions are not unkind” (Moore & Hansen 38). In doing this, the teacher opens up his or her classroom to a more open and productive environment.
Going beyond the initial reaction to a culturally sensitive incident, teachers should be ready to adjust their curricula to accommodate topics that naturally arise in their classrooms. While classrooms throughout history have asked students to adjust to the set curricula, this traditional classroom is shifting to focus less on teachers so that students lie at the center of focus. Moore and Hansen point out “the traditional, teacher-centered instructional approach no longer meets today’s students’ needs” (40) because “today’s classrooms are becoming increasingly diversified through the assimilation of immigrant populations” (40).
Jessica Singer Early’s work Stirring up Social Justice investigates the ways through which teachers can explore social justice in the classroom. While one might assume her writing would refer to an immediate correction of a culturally insensitive comment about homosexuality, she takes a step back from her own agenda and considers the personal growth of each student. In explaining her goals for young activists in the classroom, she says, “True leaders and activists have skills carefully honed over time, and do not instantly become sincere and effective activists as the result of one classroom assignment. They have passions that stem from their own particular life experience” (Early x). Moreover, she makes a very important statement regarding her course objectives: “I wanted this curriculum to create opportunities for students’ individual interests and multiple perspectives to enter the classroom discourse, rather than forcing my own agenda” (Early x). This directly links to Moore and Hansen’s emphasis on stepping back as a cultural insider and considering the response she may send to students. Even if she believes in a cause, she sees no value in simply telling students to support it. Thus, she designs her curriculum in a way that asks students to find their own passions and beliefs.