PRE-PACKAGED MULTICULTURALISM:
A Cause for Concern in the Art Classroom 

Lisa Hochtritt
The School of the Art Institute of Chicago
U. S. A.

Introduction

We are living in a time when “multiculturalism” is packaged and sold for consumption in the classroom. Art supply companies with on-line catalogs like Dick Blick and NASCO have special sections dedicated to multicultural art supplies. In fact, Crayola manufactures a “multicultural” brand of crayons, paints, colored pencils, markers, and modeling clay (Binney & Smith, n.d.). There are multicultural color construction papers made by Riverside to represent the skin tones of people from “all cultures from around the world” (Office Depot, 2005), Wonder Foam sheets in multicultural colors, and a “NASCO’s Multicultural Mini-Mask Kit” that comes complete with Crayola Model Magic clay, wooden spoons for the mask base, modeling tools, feathers, raffia, and other adornments to “create a cultural gathering in your classroom” (NASCO, 2005).  [paragraph 1]

Art supply companies focus this special segment of their product line on a superficial and narrow definition of multiculturalism based strictly on race and skin color. Most of these “kits” are cursory introductions to the originating culture and, without well-informed teachers, provide an offensive recipe for quick, inauthentic, and replications of formally culturally significant art forms. Cahan and Kocur (1996) believe that:

instead of enhancing cultural understanding, these approaches reduce cultural artifacts to empty forms devoid of historical or social significance. The superficiality of these approaches is apparent to students who rightly question why they should care about issues that appear to be fabricated simply for the purpose of classroom study. (p. xxii) [paragraph 2]

Art educator and researcher Kader (2005) found that:

References to arts of Africa as if they come from one homogenous culture have dominated mask-making activities for the last thirty years. Very few teachers and few students can name the countries the masks they purportedly replicated come from, even today. The rich variety of art forms created in Africa have inevitably been excluded, to the detriment of student learning. (p. 79) [paragraph 3]

These pre-packaged multicultural art kits or simple mask replication lesson plans offered to classroom teachers do very little to expand a child’s understanding of the complex issues of diversity. Simply put, I question, what is the motivation for a child to make, for example, a replica of an “African” mask on the end of a wooden spoon, and, more importantly, what is it that young people learn about multiculturalism from this type of lesson? [paragraph 4]

Multiculturalism in the Visual Arts Curriculum

According to Cahan and Kocur (1996), generally missing from the multicultural art classroom is the cognizant connection of the students’ lives to the curriculum. It should not be forgotten that youth bring with them a culture of their own. As Mesa-Bains (1996) suggests:

Making a place for youth culture is a form of multiculturalism and should not be ignored in school life. Our immigrant students often experience a bicultural world in which they struggle to integrate new social beliefs with the cultural values of their families. The tremendous phenomenon of youth culture – MTV, BET, hair styles, fashion, language, and social behaviors can often be more significant than the traditional idea of culture we have come to expect from multicultural curriculum. (pp. 33-34) [paragraph 5]

This argument is a rather new way to think of multiculturalism and it extends the traditional practice of multicultural art project ideas. Bastos (2002) adds that “multicultural art education practices“ seek to respect students’ heritages and traditions” (p. 75). In other words, when creating multicultural arts lessons, it is important to look not only “out” to diverse cultures, but also “in,” capitalizing on the youths’ interests and multicultural understandings they already bring with them into the classroom. [paragraph 6]

Shor (1992) looks to Dewey and Freire as he argues for critical dialogue in the classroom that includes and starts with the participants. He states, “Student speech, community life, and perceptions are foundations of the curriculum. Empowering pedagogy develops classroom discourse from the students’ cultural diversity” (p. 46). It was Deweyan progressive education that encouraged educators to start with what the students knew along with the use of experiential activities and then structuring it to include concepts and then learned knowledge. Learning by constructively making is a method art educators employ regularly. [paragraph 7]

Starting with the knowledge base of the young people involved in the educational learning process seems like a probable course of action, yet many teachers do not feel comfortable or do not know how to incorporate their students’ interests into their curriculum in a critical and meaningful way. Cahan and Kocur (1996) point this out as they state:

Generally missing from multicultural art education is an approach which connects everyday experience, social critique, and creative expression. When the focus is shifted to issues and ideas that students truly care about and that are relevant within a larger life-world context, art becomes a vital means of reflecting upon the nature of society and social existence. (p. xxii) [paragraph 8]

If we know that the general approach to multicultural art education in the classroom relies on token, race-related projects, or sometimes holiday or celebration ideas (for example, “Day of the Dead,” Kwanzaa, or Mardi Gras), how then do we expand our ideas to include a wider diversity of multicultural ideas? [paragraph 9]

In 1990, Wasson, Stuhr and Petrovich-Mwaniki (cited by Clark, 1996) offered six position statements to guide teachers and administrators (and students of the subject) in multicultural art education. These originally appeared in Studies in Art Education in the Summer 1990 issue. They advocate that in order to more fully understand the complexity of multiculturalism educators consider these six approaches:

1. We advocate a socio-anthropological basis for studying the aesthetic production and experience of cultures, which means focusing on knowledge of the makers of art, as well as the sociocultural context in which art is produced.
2. We acknowledge teaching as a cultural and social intervention and therefore, in any teaching endeavor, it is imperative that teachers not only confront, but also be consistently aware of, their own cultural and social biases.
3. We support a student/community-centered educational process in which the teacher must access and utilize the students’ sociocultural values and beliefs and those of the cultures of the community when planning art curricula.
4. We support anthropologically based methods for identifying these sociocultural groups and their accompanying values and practices which influence aesthetic production.
5. We advocate the identification and discriminating use of culturally responsive pedagogy that more democratically represents the sociocultural and ethnic diversity existing in the classroom, the community, and the nation.
6. We want to focus on the dynamic complexity of the factors that affect all human interaction: physical and mental ability, class, gender, age, politics, religion, and ethnicity. We seek a more democratic approach whereby the disenfranchised are also given a voice in the art education process, and the disenfranchised, as well as the franchised, as sensitized to the taken-for-granted assumptions implicit in the dominant ideology. (p. 51) [paragraph 10]

A contemporary example that embodies some of Wasson, Stuhr, and Petrovich-Mwaniki’s statements can be found in MacPhee’s (2004) work. An artist, educator, and activist living in Chicago, MacPhee created an on-going poster series that celebrates the histories of events, groups, and subjugated peoples who fight for social justice and freedom. He points out that many times radical activists’ history, which does not support the status quo, is oftentimes “buried or erased by dominant history” (p. 121). In this poster series, he celebrates the histories of important acts of resistance, and this is used as a tool for discussion in the classroom, and exhibited in public spaces to spur conversation and reflection (Just Seeds Radical Culture, n.d.). [paragraph 11]

MacPhee (2004) and his poster series is just one example of a contemporary artist/educator who exemplifies the struggle for meaningful and critical multicultural lesson ideas and continually questions, “what does it mean to be multicultural?,” and more importantly, “what is the dominant, dictating culture that gets talked about in the classroom?” [paragraph 12]

Kader (2005) completed an analysis of 33 years of articles from the magazine SchoolArts, specifically looking at the way multicultural art education has been represented. Overall, she noted that teachers (as reflected by articles in the magazine) consistently lack the historical and contextual information necessary in presenting lessons of meaningful multicultural value. She noted the excessive tokenism and exoticizing of culture through poorly represented activities of questionable content. Many lessons deemed “multicultural” were based on holidays or specific cultural events, and used common household items such as the paper plates and wooden spoons. [paragraph 13]

In Kader’s (2005) review of SchoolArts, she reported her findings by decade, choosing a few highlights to support her supposition. For example, in the 1980’s, she mentioned the abundance of mask projects and totem pole lessons, but the lack of content and context provided through these exercises. In her article she posed questions about these lessons and suggests other ways to approach the project with more cultural relevance. For example, in 1983, the “mummy” was the subject of inquiry. She writes:

The school mummy was the subject of one art lesson, which allegedly coincided with a unit on Egypt. Unfortunately, the author did not specify any lesson objectives. Schools have mascots, flags and even their own colors. Why should an art educator make a school mummy? What was the context for this? How could this lesson reveal to the students the complex traditions, rites and rituals associated with Egyptian mummies? Would it not be more interesting for students to examine the funeral practices in their own culture, rather than those of ancient Egypt? (p. 76). [paragraph 14]

Her research analysis is extremely illustrative of what classroom teachers currently practice in their classrooms. These not so surprising results further emphasize the need for critical and meaningful teacher education and professional development programs to help students and teachers become better diversified teachers of multicultural issues. [paragraph 15]

Pre-Service Teacher Education Programs and Multiculturalism

“…multiculturalism is not something one believes in or agrees with, it simply is” (Kincheloe & Steinberg, 1997, p. 2).

How does a pre-service teacher education program challenge the assumptions and practices that students bring in with them? Since multicultural art activities like those mentioned previously are prevalently available in many elementary classroom lesson plan guides, teacher candidates were more likely than not exposed to these questionable practices of multiculturalism in the art classroom. If they were introduced  to these types of projects, many times they replicate what they experienced themselves, unless they are encouraged at an early teacher education program or through additional professional development, to consider other ways to teach.  [paragraph 16]

Chalmers (2002) argues the desire to have robustly multicultural art lessons is present: there are many “well-meaning teachers [who] value inclusiveness…they try to avoid stereotyping, and…they strive not to present any group of people in ways that can be considered unflattering, demeaning, or limited” (p. 296). But just because someone wants to incorporate and embrace truly multicultural curriculum in the classroom does not mean they know how to effectively do so. Kader (2005) found in her study of 33 years of multicultural art lessons SchoolArts magazine and through her work with student teachers, that, “[teachers and teacher candidates] feel unprepared for and apprehensive about teaching what is unfamiliar to them” (p. 80). [paragraph 17]

Kader (2005) developed a set of guidelines to help prospective authors for SchoolArts, but, by extension, the teachers in the classrooms who utilize these lessons. Kader suggests that in order to provide a better understanding of multicultural education in the art classroom their lessons should include:

1. Geographical location of the area studied
2. Use of ‘local’ vocabulary to authenticate concepts
3. Important role of art makers, men or women, in the production process
4. History of the art, the country, and the people whose work is being studied
5. Symbols pertaining to the artwork
6. Socio-economic conditions prevailing at the time the artworks were made
7. Relationship between the past when artworks were made and what changes, if any, have occurred since and how the artwork is viewed at the present time
8. Influence of commercialism on traditional cultures (Kader, 2005, p. 80). [paragraph 18]

I would add to this, as my colleague Therese Quinn explained, that it is important to consider in every critical lesson, “who benefits from this lesson?” In the classroom discussions, take into account varying points of view and be aware of who is left out of the picture, questioning, “does the lesson perpetuate or question the hegemonic practices of the dominant culture” (and recursively, what is the dominant culture and how is this perpetuated)? [paragraph 19]

Teachers have a difficult task to make seven hours in the classroom meaningful and critical and to incorporate multiple points of view. Since time and workloads sometimes make pre-packaged curriculum enticing, it is crucial that teacher education programs provide as much support and resource material as possible to help student teachers meet their inclusive multicultural teaching goals. [paragraph 20]

Tomhave (cited in Clark, 1996) suggests that comprehensive cultural literacy is only possible when classroom teachers are given enough information so that they understand more about the culture themselves. Teachers who are creating lessons need to know the “what, when, where, who, how, and how much information they need in order to make multicultural curricular decisions” (p. 55). Given the importance and complexity of multiculturalism, and furthering the idea that it is not ancillary, but essential to today’s world, where does an effective teacher education program start in breaking down the limited and superficial ideas of multiculturalism and extend them to include more critical and more complex meanings and understandings? [paragraph 21]

The short answer is that there is no quick solution or only one way to infuse a teacher education program with the essentiality of the understandings of multiculturalism. In the Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) graduate program in Art Education at The School of The Art Institute of Chicago (SAIC), we offer two years of courses that discuss multiculturalism in every class (The School of The Art Institute of Chicago, n.d.). As Kincheloe and Steinberg (1997) so aptly describe about the necessity of multiculturalism, it just “is” our program. Through approaching multiculturalism from multiple perspectives over an extended period of time, the complexity of issues such as power, hegemony, white privilege, diversity, cultural relevance, and visual culture issues (to name a few) become infused into the general fabric of the department’s curriculum, with the intention of these understandings ending up as part of the students’ own pedagogical practices in the art classrooms where they are preparing to teach. [paragraph 22]

In an effort to move away from the formulaic multicultural “race” model of art education that material manufacturers and marketers highlight, this essay focuses on the other meanings of multiculturalism as suggested by Kincheloe and Steinberg (1997): socio-economic class, gender, language, culture, sexual orientation, and disability. As a collective class full of teachers we not only validate each others’ experiences, but also question and challenge assumptions previously held and informed by the readings, speakers, field trips, and class discussions. As Efland, Freedman and Stuhr (1996) suggest, we strive to give the students as much authorship of the courses as the instructors:

Students are encouraged to take part in the construction of curriculum by including their aesthetic experiences and by exploring diverse artists and art forms, which exist in their own homes and communities, as well as those of the state, nation, and world in which they live. (p. 83) [paragraph 23]

In this quote the authors are writing about students in an elementary or secondary art classroom, but their argument can easily be extended to the college level. Counter to the “one-shot” multicultural art lessons, building and questioning the complexity of the multiple definitions, as based on personal experience, coupled along with practice and educational readings is a slow process and often times a hard one. [paragraph 24]

What makes it hard? It can be a difficult process when a person’s belief about bias and privilege are challenged, questioned, and sometimes turned upside down. I have seen some of my graduate students at SAIC struggle with their articulation of previously held convictions about multicultural issues after reading assigned articles and texts, and after dialoging in class. It is a process that unfolds over the course of their two-year program and I am continually impressed with the honesty, insight, and clarity that my students bring into our classroom discussions and how these are translated into the research thesis papers they complete during their semester of Apprentice Teaching during the second year of their program. This growth does not come without struggle, but in each case, I have witnessed the students’ exemplary work in taking up complex issues of visual culture in our society for exploration through an action research project during their student teaching. [paragraph 25]

In an effort to point out other points of view, Chalmers (2002) cautions that:

Focusing on art that is produced now and that is about issues of identity, race, difference, and power, we need to be careful not to again privilege those types of art and artists that are exhibited and performed in galleries and museums. We need to recognize that this new art is being produced, packaged, presented, and consumed in the West by an increasingly transcultural, but nevertheless rather small elitist group of artists, curators, critics, scholars and patrons…As stated over and over again…we need to remember that everyone’s art matters. (p. 303) [paragraph 26]

Just as we want to examine the underrepresented and the voices not generally heard, we need to also be aware of our past, carefully interpreting and presenting these ideas as seen through our new understandings of issues, dominance, and critical questions – in short, seeing the past through our wider, ever-evolving definition of multiculturalism. [paragraph 27]

Conclusion

Lucy Lippard (1990) in Mixed Blessings poetically explains how multicultural issues are staunchly based on race, but are more varied and permeable:

The boundaries being tested today by dialogue are not just “racial” and national. They are also those of gender and class, of value and belief systems, of religion and politics. The borderlands are porous, restless, often incoherent territory, virtual minefields of unknowns for both practitioners and theoreticians” (p. 6). [paragraph 28]

It is vital to understand that multiculturalism in the art classroom isn’t just a “special” day or theme relegated to a discrete section of the art supply catalog (or classroom) but that it is the classroom and its participants. Diversity can be viewed as a strength, and the challenge to “integrate curriculum that will move beyond token multiculturalism” (Mesa-Bains, 1996, p. 35) is one of our essential struggles in the art classroom. [paragraph 29]

I have argued that “multicultural” art supplies currently available provide teachers with materials focused solely on race and do this only through colored markers, papers, foams, and paints. The “kits” available for multicultural art experiences through art supply catalogs lack depth and are a cursory examination into critical issues. As Kader (2005) pointed out, SchoolArts magazine commonly used in classrooms for curricular ideas also provide multicultural lessons that generally lack sufficient historical or contextual information on the cultures examined (and in most cases, superficially replicated). [paragraph 30]

It should be the goal of every responsible pre-service teaching program to seamlessly and continually integrate all issues of multiculturalism, into all courses, and to slowly help students in grasping the complex and multiple meanings of multiculturalism. Courses of study that thoughtfully confront issues related to a wider definition of diversity which includes ethnicity, socioeconomic status, gender, exceptionalities, language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographical area (NCATE, 1997-2005) as well as culture and disability will help to develop more informed teachers and critical citizens cognizant of the complexities and possibilities of our multicultural world. Helping pre-service candidates to question their previously held notions of and experiences with cursory examinations of multiculturalism is essential. This takes time and it can only be accomplished with critical programs and teachers committed to egalitarian and democratic classrooms. [paragraph 31]

References

Bastos, F. M. C. (2002). Making the familiar strange: A community-based art education framework. In Y. Gaudelius, & P. Speirs (Eds.), Contemporary issues in art education (pp. 70-83). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Binney & Smith (n.d.). The Crayolastore.com: An independent retail store. Retrieved August 8, 2005 from http://www.crayolastore.com

Cahan, S., & Kocur, Z. (Eds.). (1996). Contemporary art and multicultural education. New York: The New Museum of Contemporary Art.

Chalmers, F. G. (2002). Celebrating pluralism six years later: Visual transculture/s, education, and critical multiculturalism. Studies in Art Education, 43(4), 293-306.

Clark, R. (1996). Art education: Issues in postmodern pedagogy. Reston, VA: Canadian Society for Education Through Art and The National Art Education Association.

Efland, A., Freedman, K., & Stuhr, P. (1996). Postmodern art education: An approach to curriculum. Reston, VA: The National Art Education Association.

Just Seeds Radical Culture. (n.d.). Homepage. Retrieved August 12, 2005 from http://www.justseeds.org

Kader, T. (2005). SchoolArts: DBAE and multicultural art education in the USA, International Journal of Education through Art, 1(1), 65-84.

Kincheloe, J. L., & Steinberg, S. R. (1997). Changing multiculturalism. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

Lippard, L. R. (1990). Mixed blessings: New art in a multicultural America. New York: Pantheon Books.

MacPhee, J. (2004). Celebrate people’s history project. Democracy & Education: Teaching the Arts for Social Justice, (15)3-4, 121-122. 

Mesa-Bains, A. (1996). Teaching students the way they learn. In S. Cahan & Z. Kocur (Eds.), Contemporary art and multicultural education (pp. 31-38). New York: The New Museum of Contemporary Art.

Kocur (Eds.), Contemporary art and multicultural education. New York: The New Museum of Contemporary Art.

NASCO (2005). eNASCO on-line catalogs. Retrieved August 12, 2005 from http://www.enasco.com/prod/Static?page=ac_np1402&seqid=0

NCATE (National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education) (1997-2005). Glossary. Retrieved August 12, 2005 from http://www.ncate.org/public/glossary.asp?ch=143

Office Depot (2005). Office depot on-line catalog. Retrieved August 12, 2005 from http://www.officedepot.com/ddSKU.do?level=SK&id=338863&&An=text

Shor, I. (1992). Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

The School of The Art Institute of Chicago (n.d.). Homepage. Retrieved August 12, 2005 from http://www.artic.edu/saic

Lisa Hochtritt, Ed. D., is Assistant Professor in the Department of Art Education at The School of the Art Institute of Chicago. Her research interests focus on the interrelationships between youth and popular cultures, lived experiences, and art education. (Contact this author at lhocht@artic.edu; contact the editors of EMME at emme@eastern.edu.)

Recommended Citation in the APA Style:

Hochtritt, L. (2005). Pre-packaged multiculturalism: A cause for concern in the art classroom. Electronic Magazine of Multicultural Education, 7(2), 31 paragraphs. Retrieved your access month date, year, from http://www.eastern.edu/publications/emme/2005fall/hochtritt.html