NCLB and Multicultural Education

What does the current standards-based reform infusing state schools mean for multicultural education? The answer to this question lies, of course, in how one defines the concept of "multicultural education." According to Sonia Nieto, author of Affirming Diversity, multicultural education is basic and pervasive--it is not in conjunction to any "standard" education, but is critical daily pedagogy. Taking this for granted, can multicultural education exist in the new culture of No Child Left Behind? This article argues that "the increasing reliance on textbooks and standards undermines multicultural education." Nieto would agree, using a chapter of her book to highlight the NCLB's "particularly negative effects on students living in poverty, those whom the law was purportedly intended to help." So what exactly is it about an emphasis on standards that prohibits meaningful multicultural education?

To me, holding the entire nation of children to one set of standards is like a doctor prescribing one treatment plan to all of his or her patients. I understand how standards may be perceived as great equalizers--high expectations should be had for all! However, it is ignorant to expect that all can (and should) produce the same outcome by the same method(s). This type of thinking does not account for different historicities, cultures, or experiences.

In the article, Christine Sleeter suggests that there is a difference between a standards-DRIVEN and standards-CONSCIOUS curriculum. This implies that the NCLB's emphasis on standards should not be discarded altogether. I agree, primarily because I love how standards have highlighted the importance of accountability. However, if we are truly going to accept Nieto's demand that the lack of a pervasive multicultural education is socially unjust, we must necessarily reform the emphasis of NCLB.