| Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools. |
Difference, Diversity, and Distinctiveness in Education and LearningUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign The introduction to this issue of the Review of Research in Education was prompted by exploring reviews of research perspectives that speak to our societal need to figure out how best to interact with youth who require our care regarding their education and social needs. The chapters in this volume speak to reviews of research that emphasize diversity and academic achievement in different education settings both here in the United States and other regions of the world such as sub-Saharan Africa. Educational research and social science perspectives that call for broad public policy changes in the socioeconomic and racial equity arenas, as well as a focus on high expectations, student-centered learning, use of test scores to inform instruction critically, and culturally relevant teaching, all could work in tandem toward reinforcing a more humanistic approach to accountability (Neckerman, 2004; Scheurich, 1998; Young, 2004). In this way, meaningful interactions and relationships among students, teachers, schools, and local communities can be fostered that hold all parties personally responsible for academic success (Conchas, 2006). Educational policy and programs designed to increase the level of academic success of low-income and minority students must go beyond the rhetoric of leaving no child behind. Indeed, there must be a culture of caring created in a school that is firmly grounded in the belief that students of diverse backgrounds can learn and that educational institutions should be enhancers and enablers of this learning. The chapters in this volume call our attention to the salient research that has been undertaken regarding learning contexts within critical literacy, scientific literacy, and teacher education. This edition also contains reviews of studies related to the cumulative academic consequences of racism and homophobia for students, in both the higher education and K–12 settings. Chapter authors also address the effects of education policy decisions on equity in sub-Saharan Africa and the historical research implications of the definition of social justice in education. Some of the authors in this volume explore the concept of social justice in education. Despite the controversy surrounding this term and its usage, some of the chapters seek out research studies and informed perspectives regarding how social justice should be defined and linked to curriculum and instruction. For example, Moje’s chapter attempts to explain the term by discussing the ways social justice in subject matter instruction has been articulated in the education research literature. She examines how social justice has been described as access to expert subject matter knowledge, as the foregrounding of everyday knowledge, as access to usable disciplinary knowledge and ways of knowing, and as access to knowledge as a means for youth to produce and take ownership of knowledge. She then explores the connection between social justice subject matter instruction to disciplinary literary theory and research and the importance of language, cognition, and culture. Moje’s review of the research offers a blended perspective of an emphasis on cognitive processes in disciplinary literacy across subject matter areas and how this process can connect to socially just instruction. Her chapter serves as an important fusion of social justice pedagogy perspectives with research-based outcomes that demonstrate student acquisition of discursive skills that also build on critical literacy knowledge to enhance student learning outcomes. Southerland, Smith, Sowell, and Kittleson’s chapter provides an overview of the research related to the question of how science should be taught in the current climate of accountability. The authors walk us through the reform efforts of the mid-1980s, which called for more emphasis on second-order science learning and emphasized exposure to higher order thinking skills, scientific literacy, and the incorporation of student contextual knowledge to peak and enhance student interest in science. The authors then highlight the current debate on science education through the pressure of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) on schools to make science teaching more efficient through "drill and skill" testing and reducing the role of the science teacher as expert in order to present rudimentary science knowledge. Southerland et al. review this debate in science education pedagogy and categorize it as a "failure to communicate" between science educators, scientists, and education policymakers at the federal and state levels. The authors of this chapter review the limited reaction of the science education research community to the requirements outlined by NCLB and argue that some parts of the research community have resisted unlearning what we know to be important about science teaching and learning. Finally, they posit that it is irresponsible to engage within the current climate through the work with teachers by simply ignoring government policy. Instead, science educators must take a more active role in helping states, districts, and policy-makers understand the importance of more fundamental changes to bring about true scientific literacy. The next three chapters examine diversity in educational settings, both in the United States and abroad. To that end, Cris Mayo’s chapter explores the general trends and shifts that have taken place in lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LBGT) youth in education research. Her chapter also reviews the strengths and weaknesses of linking LBGT youth research in education to queer theory. For example, one caution Mayo notes in this review is that from a social justice perspective, the past research focused on demands for recognition, respect, and rights of LBGT youth. Now, however, there has been a shift in the research to explore issues related to discourse, psychoanalytic theory, poststructural theory, and new materialist theorization of bodies. Still, she reviews studies that stress findings related to LBGT youth as seeking normalcy in their same-sex relations and where they do not want to identify as gay. These findings illustrate some of the tension between queer theory and research on LBGT youth in which they feel the pressure to conform as the norm that creates difficulty as they attempt to live their lives. The chapter by Ng, Lee, and Pak looks at the research and perspectives related to Asian Americans in education. This chapter draws on work done in Asian American studies and other fields to center the Asian American experience in education, not as the "model minority myth" but as a racial group that has varied and unique experiences regarding their ethnic diversity. Furthermore, Ng et al.’s review of the historical and current research in this area illustrates how Asian Americans have been viewed as immigrant foreigners who were feared and discriminated against, but also at times have been seen as "honorary whites" who can be used as allies or regarded as threats in educational policy campaigns against affirmative action (Takagi, 1993). Their chapter calls for more research that examines Asian Americans as a racialized group but that also captures the intersections and conflicts with social class, sexuality, gender, and so forth. Oketch and Rolleston’s chapter looks at issues of inclusion and exclusion within the context of sub-Saharan Africa. Focusing on a review of research done on the countries of Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania, Oketch and Rolleston trace the evolution of free primary education policy and universal schooling, as well as the colonial and postcolonial periods, and explore the history behind the political and economic justification for universal primary education. This chapter highlights descriptive data on rates of education acquisition and the link between education and economic development in this region. Yet they also point out that the goal of universal education is still not a reality for the vast majority of students in the lowest socioeconomic stratum. Building on the work of Vavrus (2005) and Maclure (2006), Oketch and Rolleston conclude with a call for research-based policies that focus more on the local context and locally initiated policies in education. The themes of this chapter are useful for readers to compare and contrast the United States with other countries, as one of the fallout issues of globalization is the persistent inequity related to access and quality of schooling. Finally, Brayboy, Castagro, and Maughan’s chapter and Williamson, Rhodes, and Dunson’s chapter focus on race, education, and social justice issues in different but complementary ways. Brayboy et al. look at race as a social construction within the current context of the schooling experience for students of color in the United States. The authors find gaps in the equitable treatment of students of color based on race and social class, and they attribute part of this discrimination to the historical and current struggles between the assimilation of racial minorities to conform to a White European American standard of learning versus the fight for group self-determination. This struggle is particularly important when examining the research on American Indian students (Deyhle & Swisher, 1997). Brayboy et al.’s review of the literature speaks to the importance of social justice as an expansion of opportunity to maximize the chances of educational success for students of color in terms of both academics and cultural affirmation. Williamson et al.’s chapter concludes with an exploration of the term "social justice" and the controversies that have been debated about it in recent education policy circles. The authors then ask this question: What insights can we gain from historical struggles over social justice issues in education? By looking at how different racial groups have pushed for social justice in various ways, the authors call for both sides of the debate to explore the historical evidence to get a clearer sense of how the past struggle for social justice in education influences present-day debates about remedies and still-persistent effects of past discriminatory policies. It is also important to note that from this chapter, we can see that the call for social justice in education, particularly in the form of communities of color demanding excellence and quality schooling for their children, has a longer history than the current debate about NCLB. Thus, we as researchers may want to look at these historical calls for excellence to see how we could reexamine issues related to accountability and standards. Overall, the chapters in this volume turn the question of "what works" in education on its head and answer that it depends on the context and specifics in relation to what is taught, how, why, and who is involved and engaged in a meaningful way (E. Moje, personal communication, January 4, 2007). Social justice’s connection to discipline-based literacy, and how science is taught, is important for understanding the role of curriculum and instructional research in enhancing student learning and teacher pedagogy. The chapters in this volume also highlight the importance of utilizing current research to explore how education institutions (both K–12 and higher education) can structure positive learning environments that can connect teachers and students to each other with the common goal of fostering cooperation and academic excellence without resorting to cultural assimilation (Carter, 2005; Moses, 2001). Most of all, the themes of these chapters indicate that future reviews of research should explore the details of how diverse students learn in different and distinctive environments in order to enhance education and learning and develop more nuanced answers to the questions raised by what works in education.
Review of Research in Education, Vol. 31, No. 1,
xi-xv (2007)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
 |
|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
TOP
REFERENCES