Vladimir Nikolayevich Aniskin¹, Vladimir Igorevich Bogoslovskiy², Tatiana Valeryanovna Dobudko¹, Tatiana Anatolyevna Zhukova¹, Svetlana Anatolyevna Pisareva²

¹Samara State Academy of Social Sciences and Humanities, Russia, 443090, Samara, M. Gorkogo st., 65/67 ²Herzen State Pedagogical University Russia, 191186, Saint Petersburg, Moika River Emb, 48

DOI : https://dx.doi.org/10.13005/bpj/856

Abstract

As the importance of internationalization and globalization has risen, education has changed as well. The process of developing multicultural educational philosophies is a long process that emphasizes the synthesis of various movements throughout a variety of educational systems. The majority of countries examine new pedagogical movements through the perspective of historical frames of reference in the study of pedagogy. Pedagogy is rarely allotted adequately substantial consideration within the framework of pursuing international integration of educational systems. This article presents the overview of the specificity of multicultural education, some of its important early researches, and suggests how the field might develop. Much attention is paid to the views on multicultural education research in Germany and Russia, the importance of comparative studies, the factors of the development of multicultural education and the modules as useful in developing multicultural education. Comparative studies are taking the important role in incorporating multicultural education more systematically. Nowadays, the lack of systemic or unified research in the field of multicultural education in both countries has reduced pedagogy as well as multicultural pedagogy (in Germany) within education to the simple implementation of individual training courses. As a result, multicultural education is more oriented only towards the needs of a single country, rather than towards a system of multicultural interests that consider the interests of Germany and Russia. Specifically, the authors address the further suggestions for future research directions concerning multicultural education development in Germany and Russia.

Keywords

Multicultural education; comparative study; factors and modules of the development of multicultural education

Download this article as: 

Copy the following to cite this article: Aniskin V. N, Bogoslovskiy V. I, Dobudko T. V, Zhukova T. A, Pisareva S. A. The Prospects of Multicultural Education in Germany and Russia. Biomed Pharmacol J 2015;8(2)

Copy the following to cite this URL: Aniskin V. N, Bogoslovskiy V. I, Dobudko T. V, Zhukova T. A, Pisareva S. A. The Prospects of Multicultural Education in Germany and Russia. Biomed Pharmacol J 2015;8(2). Available from: http://biomedpharmajournal.org/?p=3701

Introduction

A number of publications are dedicated to the problem of the importance of multicultural education. It includes theories and practices that have the aim to promote the further achievement for students from the varieties of sociocultural groups. (Bogoslovskiy, V.I. and Zhukova T.A., 2014; Banks, J. A., 2004; Duzhakova, M.V., 2008). Multicultural education encompasses lots of theories in education that are developed to assist teachers to work with students of different nationalities. As well as it provides students with knowledge about cultures of diverse groups, and it shows that the future of the world society is unique and pluralistic. (Rothlauf, J., 2006; Sleeter, C., 2001; Kotler, P. and Mindak, W., 1978).

Multicultural education is developed on many levels: state, regional and local. It is important to review the specifics of each level and identify opportunities for the development of scientific research at each level. As the importance of internationalization and globalization has risen, education has changed as well. The following factors should be considered: the views of every country on multicultural education, the competence that students show in multicultural contexts, the need to preserve and support local cultural practices already existent in the national educational system; the role of comparative studies in multicultural education development.

Method

Many distinct methods are used to study the process of multicultural education development. Much of the potential of this education comes from relatively recent improvements in technology for measuring of the level of multicultural education in every each country. The advantages of physiological measurement have been noted by lot of researches all over the world. Especially, the self-assessment measures are widely used in multicultural education research. They help to understand the ability and willingness of the teachers and students to show their attitudes to the process of the development of multicultural education. In spite of its potential, it is clear that prior applications of multicultural education within the literature and comparative studies as well as the factors which influence the students and teachers’ views and positions.

Results

Current View in Multicultural Education Research

Three major definitions of multicultural educations are considered as the most interesting and widely used in the theory and practice of Germany and Russia.

James A. Banks’ Conception

James A. Banks, a leading researcher in the field of multicultural education, formulated the five specific dimensions. They are: content integration (this shows the importance for teachers  to use examples and content from a variety of cultures and diverse groups to illustrate the specific features of the pluralistic world as well as the  key principles of  generalization and globalization, and theories and practices in their discipline or subject area); knowledge construction process (deals with teaching activities that help students to understand the varieties of  cultural assumptions, preferences and stereotypes); prejudice reduction (describes the methods how to help students to  develop tolerant attitudes to the people of different nationalities and cultures); equity pedagogy (includes a variety of teaching styles of work, methods and approaches which are widely used in every cultural and ethnic group) and empowering university culture and social structure.

All dimensions are interrelated, but each needs attention to detail and focus. Introducing different cultures in a social studies class does not satisfy a multicultural education. Including content from different ethnic and cultural groups, developing positive attitudes, providing equal educational opportunities and creating an environment with equal status for all requires implementing multicultural education within the context of multicultural integration.

There are both positive and negative aspects of cultural integration. On one hand, the development of new ideas in education is important and necessary for today’s multiculturally-sensitive educational institution. It provides a new view on a variety of methodological and technological aspects. On the other hand, multiculturally-informed education can lead to a change in the way local cultural systems and values are developed within an individual as she or he learns to relate these local traditions and preferences within the context of more broadly-accepted universal norms. This view on multicultural education can even affect the way an individual perceives people outside of his or her native culture who developed a different understanding of cultural traditions, ideas and beliefs central to their own national culture. All of these factors contribute to the development of a person’s mentality (Lanfranchi, A., 2008 and Thomas A., 2006).

Neto’s View on Multicultural Education

Nieto’s definition of multicultural education is closely connected with the view of the American leading scholar in this field J. Banks. She focuses on the further characteristics of multicultural education which are necessary, basic and important for all students and teachers: education for social justice, critical pedagogy, tolerance, special learning environment. She mentions that this education is a process which shows the development of individuals and universities which are involved in the process of internationalization and multiculturalism. As well as the researcher points the importance to include in the specific curriculum content the information about students and teachers’ expectations about different cultures, their preferences, stereotypes and level of tolerance.

Christine Sleeter and Carl Grant’s views on multicultural education

The authors describe this education in the context of five approaches. The goal of the first approach is to equip students with the skills, knowledge, and values to function in another culture. The second approach influences on the development of tolerant relationships among diverse cultural groups. The goal of the third approach is to organize classes that move specific groups by providing information about the group’s culture. The fourth approach is self-reflexively organized multicultural education. The fifth approach is considered regarding the new type of educational programs.

The above mentioned definitions of multicultural education by Banks, Nieto, and Sleeter and Grant helped to research the field and continue the discussion that is widely used in Germany and Russia. Moreover, it is important to understand if this education should be focused on differences between different cultures. The leading objective should be, firstly, the consideration of every nation as a subject of culture in multicultural society and, secondly, the development of the model of multicultural education. This model should be oriented towards the needs and interests of every country. However, the need to preserve, support and understand the role of the varieties of different cultural practices already exists in modern education. Comparative studies are essential in the creation of this education (Goedegebuure, L. and van Vught, F, 1996; Luijten-Lub A. and Huisman, J., 2005; Wulfson B.L., 2003).

The role of Comparative Studies

Today, comparative research is an important tool to educational theory and practice in many countries. Many Russian and German researchers believe that comparative studies are a foundational component of multicultural education (Palatkina G.V., 2007; Schrenk M., 2013). The first concern in relation to multicultural education is the organization of scientific research. Further research oriented towards the development of multicultural pedagogy is still necessary, particularly research that builds on findings in past studies. Overall international cooperation between countries should be the basis for the development of multicultural education. Unfortunately, despite the significant number of emerging comparative studies and the considerable range of emerging trends in the development of multicultural education, the direction of its future development remains unclear (Aniskin, V.N. and Bogoslovskiy V.I., 2014). The reasons include: a) there are not a significant number of similarities between Germany and Russia in how education is managed and knowledge is measured (Bebell K., 2014; Bondarenko, E.N., 2013; Ziegele, F., 2006). This lack of similarities is partially due to the differences between how comparative studies are conducted in each country: a) a result of the differences between each country’s desired outcomes of the educational system (Hofstede, G., 2006; Holzinger, K., Knill, C., 2005), b) differences in the regional focus of comparative studies: countries will compare their educational systems to whichever other countries seem to be the best prospect for comparison (Buchwald, P. Ringeisen, T.,  Trautner, H.M., Schwarzer, C., 2006); c) lack of a shared view of multicultural education between the two countries (Chiu, C.-Y., Schaller, M., Lehman, D. R., 2004).

This ongoing comparison provides an outline for understanding the premises necessary to develop models oriented towards the improvement of multicultural education while also bearing in mind a country’s cultural characteristics. Recently, many talks have been held concerning how to improve and further the development of multicultural education (Shogenov А.А., 2008; Bogoslovskiy V.I. and Zhukova T.A., 2014; Bosse, E., 2010).

It is worthwhile to consider the specifics of how to best organize scientific research. Researchers (Goedegebuure, L., van Vught, F., 1996; Bogoslovskiy V.I., 2014) have been studying various aspects of educational change in Germany and Russia since 1990. The main topics are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Scientific Research in Germany / Russia

Areas of Research
Late 20th Century	Early 21st Century
– Problems facing educational policies worldwide and overall changes in higher education	– Effects of systematic changes in internationalism and multiculturalism around the world
– Adjustments to the structure of higher education	– Adjustment of structures of higher education bearing in mind cultural differences, varying socioeconomic statuses, and the overall cultural climate
– Curriculum reform (based on the dominant model of 1991), textbook reform
– Teachers and students’ adjustment to the West German educational system	– Variance within The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards – Teachers’ perceptions, reactions and preparation for new roles in an increasingly multicultural society (both in Russia and Germany)

 

As can be seen from Table 2 below, during the 21^st century, in contrast to the end of the 20^th century, research has been primarily focused only on the development of multicultural education. This in turn has prompted an interest in implementing comparative studies in both countries. In addition, German researchers have encountered significant difficulties in analyzing the few Russian research studies that have been conducted, due primarily to the structure of Russian research (Shrenk M., 2013). Research conducted by Russian scholars differs greatly from standards widely accepted in Europe, which has a distinct effect on the quality of comparative studies. Table 2 charts the main differences between Russian and German research methods.

Table 2: Comparative Research in Germany and Russia

	Presence of the following factors in research	Germany	Russia
1.	Institutional background		not always
2.	Historical theories and hypotheses in education
3.	Data analysis and empirical methods		not always
4.	Qualitative research		Rare
5.	Quantitative research		Rare
6.	Conclusion and results

 

Despite these historical differences, it is worth mentioning that overall, the comparison of educational systems between the two countries has grown steadily deeper and more substantial over the past couple of decades.

Factors of the Development of Multicultural Education

We propose the following group of factors (Bogoslovskiy, V.I. and Zhukova T.A., 2014):

The first group of factors below is related to the development of a multicultural curriculum for teachers with different academic specializations. Organizations responsible for teacher education should be prepared to aid in the review and development of a multicultural educational curriculum for student and teachers.

The factors of the second group are connected with assessing multicultural education and assisting in its creation. Students need to understand the kind of assistance that will be provided, to set expectations for the process, and also to conduct evaluations in order to understand students’ experience. Support as well as supervision for this process should focus on concrete situations that proved to be difficult in a multicultural context. This concept is closely associated with the concepts of “coaching”, “mediation” and “evaluation” (see Table 3.). (Kotler, P. and Mindak, W., 1978)

Table 3: Organization of assessment and assistance

Areas of support	Content
Coaching	Aims to smooth the transition and provide an opportunity for feedback regarding further instruction and training within the educational process. To do so, it is important to develop new psychological mechanisms that analyze unconscious or subconscious emotional responses to multicultural situations and stimuli.
Mediation	Provides opportunities for students to specialize in multicultural disciplines in addition to their traditional subject area. Organizes comparative research in universities to understand the role of international students in transformation of national education systems. Many of them insist on the use of comparative researches as well as interviews. This helps to give deeper understanding of students and teachers’ interaction as well as highlight the importance of special studies to give the right understanding of the concept of university readiness.
Evaluation	Allows for the selection of measures that can be sensitive to various characteristics amongst different educational systems Assesses the dimensions of changes in different educational systems

 

The goal in integrating various educational systems is to find collaborative ways to improve coaching, mediation and evaluation in both countries. This goal can be achieved by creating a single tool based on criteria established in advance through comparative and traditional benchmarks.

Discussion

We propose a modular approach as a useful model for educational systems. As cited in German and Russian research, modular approaches have shown to be effective in encouraging implemental change where wholesale reimaginations of the educational system are not possible (Enders, J., 2002; Miethe, I., 2007). By using German and Russian research, we have identified the following modules as useful in developing multicultural education: the “reflexive module”, the “conceptual module”, the “technology module”, and the “language module” in three stages.

Stage 1: Theoretical

The framework of the “reflexive module” will demonstrate the importance of the formation of tolerance, of awareness of and responsibility for the values of multiculturalism, social and cultural identification, and readiness to create professional development opportunities in a multicultural educational system. Citing a number of the researchers who have shown the role of tolerance in intercultural communication we confirm the importance of this module. Psychological testing and training for student teachers should be available to aid in improving their socialization skills and the development of a cultural worldview and patriotism towards one’s own country as a foundation of the student’s multicultural competency.

The “conceptual model” involves expanding knowledge about multicultural crises, multicultural education, the specifics of implementing multicultural education at its current stage of development, integrative processes in global educational practice, the specifics behind the formation of multicultural personality traits, multicultural competence, and the specifics of implementing professional work in a multicultural educational environment.

The next module is the “technology module”. During the technology module, student teachers will learn about the role of information-communication technology in modern education. Students teachers’ work should lead to a familiarity with scientific databases from different countries, focusing on analysis and comprehension of the specifics of foreign databases, among other aspects. In order to cement an understanding of foreign databases, students should use these databases for tasks such as drafting joint presentations with students of other countries or writing essays analyzing projects from other countries’ databases. These task examples can then be used in students’ further education.

The “language module” involves improving the communicative components of multicultural competence, as well as using foreign language competencies to assist student teachers in solving problems that affect their future professional lives. This could include working with publications in foreign languages, including informative and communicative technologies, using translation programs for both educational and extracurricular activities, and fostering familiarity with on-line dictionaries, encyclopedias and business-related documents. The inclusion of communicative assignments, such as problem-solving situations, is encouraged so that students have the opportunity to familiarize themselves with opportunities for professional development and preparation. Assignments should include questions about types of educational institutions in different countries, the kinds of modern technology used in different countries, different educational disciplines, demographic characteristics of students abroad, common features of other countries’ educational process, etc.

Stage 2: Practical

The goal of Stage 2 involves working towards optimizing student teachers’ instructional skills.

The first module of this stage is the “conceptual model”, and proposes examining the current state of multicultural education (for example, multicultural education in different countries), determining the relevance of its modernization, and the development of professional skills related to the organization of a multicultural educational environment and the creation of multicultural competencies in students.

It is important to assess educational programs for students of different ages that focus on multicultural competence development. One should consider characteristics of technology-based approaches that underlie the development of such programs, the degree of student involvement in the multicultural education process, students’ emotional states and perceptions of new social and cultural environments, and the leading assessment and diagnostic methods to assess acquired knowledge, etc.

Additionally, the conceptual model should analyze proposed methods for working with educational programs, the organization of educational practice in comparable countries, the development of specific assessment materials, recommendations regarding how to organize interaction with representatives of other cultures throughout the learning process, the establishment of multicultural interaction, the development of recommendations for parents on the multicultural educational process, guidance on ways to resolve cultural conflicts, the characteristics of a multicultural learning environment, various ways of organizing multicultural support, among others.

The second module in the practical phase is the “technology module”. Major tasks of the technology module are the development of exercises and guidelines for students regarding informative and communicative technologies. This is particularly effective if developed with students at universities in multiple countries. This module also involves the development of personalized educational plans in order to further international cooperation in the development of a database for storing information about multicultural education programs, and associated materials, such as multiculturally-oriented lesson plans, etc.

The next module is the “language module”, where focus shifts to exercises oriented towards creating other-language and other-cultural materials that can be used for psychological and educational diagnostics for an individual development of a multicultural personality.

Because of this, the important result could include the creation of systems that allow one to map the individual characteristics that individuals of different cultures must possess in order to demonstrate multicultural competence in that culture.

Additionally, it is necessary to compile tests that determine the level of language proficiency among students. The construction of a multicultural educational process will be facilitated by learning a foreign language through linguistic materials related to the interests of students in a particular country. It is also important at this point to develop games and communication-oriented tasks to use in the educational process, and to develop a list of such tasks.

The use of materials containing information about forms of technological interaction as used in the professional work in various countries will aid in successful collaboration with parents and education administrators. During this module, those involved in multicultural education development should work with representatives of other cultures on developing curricula for week-long thematic studies if cultures of comparable countries, questionnaires for interviews with those from comparable cultures, and communication tasks focused on multiculturalism. (Education professionals should also draft notes for conversations with parents of students in the multicultural education system, based on analyses of similar conversations in other countries, or in conjunction with students from universities in other countries. The organization of the educational environment should include texts whose subject matter addresses socio-cultural concepts in comparable countries.

Stage 3: Reflective-methodological

The goal of stage 3 is to assist student teachers in the formation of methodological and reflective skills.

At this stage, pedagogical students should undergo practice teaching during which they are encouraged to examine the following: the positive and negative experiences student teachers encountered in their earlier work with multicultural education; problems similar to professional issues they will encounter in the framework of a university’s educational process; professional challenges currently affecting schools and devise solutions or improvements for school-based practices using work from the student’s own experiences; the development of self-esteem and the creation of a module allowing for peer assessment of a student’s work with multicultural education.

Comparative educational studies should incorporate the analysis of multicultural education in different countries according to similar criteria, as well as considering the content areas of multicultural pedagogy that are common to many countries.

Conclusion

Given the information presented above, the authors have shown that many countries around the world are discussing the development of multicultural education within the educational systems. There is increasing focus on transforming multicultural education, which leads the need for a new model of educational development. This paper shows conclusions from Russian and German scientific inquiries in addressing multicultural education. The authors have constructed the modules focused improving the process of multicultural education development in Russia and Germany. By analyzing how the presented modules would work in both countries it is possible to determine stages that should become the basis of the model of multicultural education, to enlarge the number of comparative studies which are taking the lead in addressing the goal and recommending specific steps to improve multicultural education.

In conclusion, the authors say that the research has shown that multicultural education is a matrix of several dimensions, stages, factors and modules that show new views on the theories and practices of this education. It promotes an access and rigorous academic achievement for all students so that they can work toward social cultural changes. The future of the field of multicultural education development will depend on the insight of different countries. We believe it will be crucial that researchers within the field of study will adopt comparative reviews to influence the process of multicultural education development.

References

1. Aniskin, V.N., Bogoslovskiy, V.I., Zhukova, T.A., Bebell, K. (2014). The role of comparative research in the development of multiculturalism within educational systems. Life science journal, 11(8s), (246-248). Acta Zhengzhou University Overseas Edition.
2. Banks, J. A. (2004). Multicultural education: Historical development, dimensions, and practices. In J. A. Banks & C. A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., pp. 3–29). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
3. Bondarenko, E.N. (2003).Teacher training in modern systems of teacher education in the world. Bulletin of Moscow University, 3, (127-136).
4. Bosse, E. (2010). Vielfalt erkunden – ein Konzept für interkulturelles Training an Hochschulen. In: H. Gwenn, & S. Vogler- Lipp (Eds.), Schlüsselqualifikation interkulturelle Kompetenz an Hochschulen. Grundlagen, Konzepte, Methoden (109-133). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
5. Duzhakova, M.V. (2008). Development of teacher education in a multicultural society: a monograph, Voronezh.
6. Enders, J. (2002). Higher education, internationalisation, and the nation-state. German Policy Studies, 2(3), (1–33).
7. Goedegebuure, L., van Vught, F. (1996). Comparative higher education studies: The perspective from the policy sciences. Higher Education, 32, (371–394).
8. Hofstede, G. (2006). Lokales Denken, globales Handeln. Interkulturelle Zusammenarbeit und globales Management. Munchen: DTV-Beck.
9. Holzinger, K., Knill, C. (2005). Causes and conditions of cross-national policy-convergence. Journal of European Public Policy, 12(5), 775–796.
10. Kotler, P. and Mindak, W, (1978). Marketing and public relations: Should they be partners or rivals? Journal of Marketing (53-57).
11. Lanfranchi, A. (2008). Interkulturelle Kompetenz als Element pädagogischer Professionalität – Schlussfolgerungen für die Lehrerausbildung. Interkulturelle Kompetenz und pädagogische Professionalität. Wiesbaden, (231–260).
12. Lehman, D. R., Chiu, C.-Y., Schaller, M. (2004). Psychology and culture. Annual Review of Psychology 55, (689-714).
13. Luijten-Lub A., van der Wende, M., Huisman, J. (2005). On cooperation and competition: A comparative analysis of national policies for internationalisation of higher education in seven Western European countries. Journal of Studies in International Education, 9(2), 147–163.
14. Miethe, I. (2007). Bildung und soziale Ungleichheit in der DDR. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen einer gegenprivilegierenden Bildungspolitik [Education and social inequality in the GDR. Opportunities and limits for educational policy against privileges]. Opladen: Budrich.
15. Nieto, S., Bode, P., Kang, E. & Raible, J. (2008). Identity, Community and Diversity: Retheorizing multicultural curriculum for the postmodern era. In F. M. Connelly, M. F. He, & J. Phillion (Eds.), The Sage handbook of curriculum and instruction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://www.education.com/reference/article/multicultural-education
16. Palatkina, G.V. (2007). Multicultural education of young people throughout Russia. Multicultural education of youth: the principle of ethnic tolerance: monograph, Astrakhan.
17. Ringeisen, T., Buchwald, P., Schwarzer, C., Trautner, H.M. (2006). Interkulturalität im Ausbildungskontext. Zum Einfluss interkultureller Faktoren auf das denken, Fühlen und Handeln von Lehrkräften und Studierenden. Dokumente zur Weiterbildung und Internationalisierung an Hochschulen 4, (4-38).
18. Rothlauf, J. (2006). Interkulturelles Management, Oldenburg Verlag, Munchen.
19. Schrenk, M., Zhukova, T.A. (2013). On the prospects of the integration of Russian and German educational systems in information technology. Information technology in the social sphere. Samara, (62-65).Shogenov, А.А. (2008). National education policy. Pedagogy, 5 (13- 20).
20. Sleeter, C. (2001). An analysis of the critiques of multicultural education. In J. A. Banks & C. A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 81–94). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
21. Thomas, A. (2006). Interkulturelle Kompetenz im Internationalen Management, in: Volkswagen Stiftung (hrsg): Wir stiften, Wissen, Tagungsband, Dresden.
22. Wulfson, B.L. (2003). Comparative education: history and contemporary issues. Moscow: URAO.
23. Ziegele, F. (2006). «Konzeption eines neuen Modells der staatlichen Mittelvergabe an die Hochschulen in Brandenburg – Ergebnisbericht», CHE Working Paper, 51, Gütersloh.

(Visited 1,322 times, 1 visits today)