|
Description:
|
This qualitative case study of eight veteran Texas Regional Education Service
Center Multicultural /Diversity Trainers examined their perceptions of structural barriers
and teacher resistance to a voluntary program of Multicultural /Diversity Training
(MDT ) . It also explored how they made sense of their roles in light of their social
locations . Data were collected through in -depth semi -structured interviews of the
trainers , observations of MDT sessions , and examination of relevant documents . Data
were analyzed using the constant comparative method .
Three themes associated with structural barriers emerged : contextual factors , lack
of administrative support , and the Texas system of accountability , particularly high
stakes testing . The contextual factors were differences in regional cultures , the autonomy
of the Education Service Centers , and the voluntary nature of MDT . Lack of
administrative support for MDT is crucial because teachers often take administrative
response to school reform as their cue for action or inaction . In Texas , high stakes testing exerts influence at every educational level , particularly on teachers in relation to
curriculum , instruction , student placement and professional development choices .
Teacher resistance to MDT occurred in the training sessions and in the classroom
setting . During the training sessions teachers resisted MDT because it challenged deeply
held beliefs and encouraged self -examination , personal disclosure , and discussions of
race /ethnicity and culture . Resistance in the educational setting was manifested in
maintenance of a Eurocentric perspective , and in school practices such as negative
attitudes toward multicultural education and MDT , placement of students of color in
special education and lower tracks , and negative attitudes toward all people of color .
Ultimately , trainers suggest that they are enmeshed in a system that seeks to
maintain the status quo , and that too many teachers have low expectations for students
who are different from themselves and conform to a deficit model when dealing with
those students . |