Features
Diversity, Group Identity, and
in a Global Age
JamesA. Banks
Worldwide immigrationand quests for rights by minority groups
havecaused social scientists and educatorsto raiseserious questions
about liberalassimilationistconceptions of citizenshipthat historically
have dominatedcitizenshipeducation in nation-states.The author of
this articlechallengesliberalassimilationistconceptions of citizenship
and citizenship education. He argues that citizenship education
should be reformed so that it reflects the home cultures and lan-
guages of students from diverse groups, and he contends that group
rightscan help individualsto attainstructuralequality.Inthe finalpart
of the article, he discusses the implicationsof his analysisfor trans-
formingcitizenshipeducation.
Keywords: citizenship;citizenshipeducation;diversity;
globalization;multiculturaleducation
onceptions of citizenship and citizenship education
around the world face challengesfrom a number of
onceptions
historical,political,social, and culturaldevelopments.
Worldwide immigration, globalization, and the tenacity of
nationalismhavestimulatedcontroversyand new thinkingabout
citizenshipandcitizenshipeducation(Gutmann,2004; Koopmans,
Statham,Giugni, & Passy,2005; Torres,1998).
In this article,I describeassirnilatianist,
liberal,and universal
conceptionsof citizenshipeducation;1statewhy these concepts
shouldbe interrogated; andarguethatcitizenshipandcitizenship
educationshouldbe expandedto includeculturalrightsfor citi-
zens from diverseracial,cultural,ethnic, and languagegroups.I
also statewhy citizenshipeducationshouldincorporaterecogni-
tion of group-differentiated rights(Fraser,2000; Young, 1989).
Liberalassimilationistnotions of citizenshipassumethat indi-
viduals from differentgroupshave to give up their home and
communityculturesandlanguagesto attaininclusionandto par-
ticipate effectivelyin the national civic culture (Greenbaum,
1974; Wong Fillmore,2005). Accordingto these conceptions
of citizenship,the rightsof groupsaredetrimentalto the rightsof
the individual.In contrast,using the Civil RightsMovementof
the 1960s and 1970s as an example,I arguethat groupscan help
individualsto actualizetheirrightsand opportunities.
I contendthatan effectiveandtransformative citizenshipedu-
cationhelpsstudentsto acquirethe knowledge,skills,andvalues
Educational Vol.37, No. 3, pp. 129-139
Researcher,
DOi: 10.3102/0013189X083 17501
c 2008AERA.http://er.aera.net
This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:48:49 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Citizenship Education
neededto functioneffectivelywithin theirculturalcommunity,
nation-state,and regionand in the globalcommunity.Such an
educationalso helps studentsto acquirethe cosmopolitanper-
spectivesandvaluesneededto workforequalityandsocialjustice
aroundthe world (Appiah,2006; Nussbaum,2002). In the final
partof thisarticle,I arguethatschoolsshouldimplementa trans-
formativeand criticalconceptionof citizenshipeducationthat
will increaseeducationalequalityfor all students.A transforma-
tive citizenshipeducation also helps students to interact and
deliberatewith theirpeersfromdiverseracialand ethnic groups.
I describeresearchthat illuminateswaysin which just, delibera-
tive, and democraticclassroomsand schoolscan be created.
Conceptions of Citizenship and Citizenship
Education
A citizenis an individualwho livesin a nation-stateand has cer-
tainrightsandprivileges,aswell asdutiesto the state,suchas alle-
giance to the government(LagassC, 2000). Citizenshipis "the
positionor statusof beinga citizen"(Simpson& Weiner, 1989,
p. 250). Koopmanset al. (2005) definecitizenshipas "theset of
rights,duties,and identitieslinkingcitizensto the nation-state"
(p. 7). These basicdefinitionsareaccuratebut do not revealthe
complexityof citizenshipas the concepthas developedin mod-
ernizednation-states.
Marshall's (1964) explicationof threeelementsof citizenship-
civil,political,andsocial-have beeninfluentialandwidelycitedin
thefieldof citizenshipstudies(Bulmer& Rees,1996).Marshall con-
ceptualizes citizenshipasdevelopmental anddescribeshowthecivil,
political,andsocialelementsemergedin subsequentcenturies.
The civil aspectsof citizenship,which emergedin Englandin
the 18th century,providecitizenswith individualrights,such as
freedomof speech,the rightto own property,andequalitybefore
the law.The politicalaspectof citizenshipdevelopedin the 19th
century. It gives citizens the franchiseand the opportunityto
exercisepoliticalpowerby participatingin the politicalprocess.
The socialaspectarosein the 20th century.It providescitizens
with the health,education,andwelfareneededto participatefully
in their culturalcommunitiesand in the nationalcivic culture.
Marshallviewedthe threeelementsof citizenshipas interrelated
andoverlappingandcitizenshipasan idealtowardwhich nation-
statesstrivebut which they nevercompletelyattain.
Cultural Rights and Multicultural Citizenship
Assimilationist,liberal,and universalconceptionsof citizenship
requirecitizensto give up their first languagesand culturesto
APRIL2008 129
become full participantsin the civic communityof the nation-
state(M. M. Gordon,1964;Young,1989, 2000). Most cultural,
social, and educationalpolicies in nation-statesthroughoutthe
world,includingthe United States(Graham,2005), wereguided
by an assimilationistpolicy prior to the ethnic revitalization
movements of the 1960s and 1970s. Beginningin the 1600s,
missionariesin the United Statesestablishedboardingschoolsto
assimilateand ChristianizeIndianyouth (Deyhle & Swisher,in
press).During the 1940s and 1950s, MexicanAmericanswere
punishedin school for speakingSpanish(Crawford,1999). The
histories and cultures of groups such as African Americans,
MexicanAmericans,andAmericanIndianswererarelydiscussed
in textbooks.When they appearedin textbooks,theyweremost
frequentlystereotyped(Banks, 1969). Policy and practicein
schools,as in otherinstitutions,wereguidedby Anglo-conformity
(M. M. Gordon, 1964).
Since the ethnic revitalizationmovementsof the 1960s and
1970s, marginalizedracial,ethnic, and languagegroups have
arguedthat they should have the right to maintainimportant
aspectsof theirculturesandlanguageswhileparticipatingfullyin
the national civic culture and community (Carmichael &
Hamilton, 1967; B. M. Gordon,2001; Sizemore,1973). These
groupshavedemandedthatinstitutionssuchas schools,colleges,
and universitiesrespondto the groups'culturalidentities and
experiencesby reforming curriculato reflect their struggles,
hopes, dreams,and possibilities(B. M. Gordon, 2001; Nieto,
1999). They have also demandedthat schoolsmodify teaching
strategiesto make them more culturallyresponsiveto students
from differentracial,ethnic, cultural,and languagegroups(Au,
2006; Gay,2000; Gonzalez,Moll, & Amanti,2005).
During the 1960s and 1970s, leadersand scholarsin ethnic
minoritycommunitiesin the United Statesborrowedsomeof the
concepts and languagethat had been used by advocatesand
scholarsof White ethniccommunitiesduringfirstdecadesof the
1900s, when largenumbersof immigrantsenteredthe United
Statesfrom Southern,Central,and EasternEurope.Drachsler
(1920) and Kallen(1924)-who wereadvocatesfor the cultural
freedomsand rights of these immigrantgroupsand who were
immigrantsthemselves-argued that culturaldemocracyis an
importantcharacteristicof a democraticsociety.Drachslerand
Kallenmaintainedthat culturaldemocracyshould coexistwith
politicaland economic democracyand that citizensin a demo-
cratic society should participatefreely in the civic life of the
nation-stateand experienceeconomic equality.According to
Drachslerand Kallen,citizensshouldalsohavethe rightto main-
tain importantaspects of their community culturesand lan-
guages,aslong asthesedo not conflictwith the shareddemocratic
idealsof the nation-state.Culturaldemocracy,arguedDrachsler,
is an essentialcomponentof a politicaldemocracy.
In theearlydecadesof the20th century,Woodson(1933/1977)
madea caseforculturaldemocracywhenhe arguedthata curricu-
lum forAfricanAmericanstudentsshouldreflecttheirhistoryand
culture.Woodsonharshlycriticizedthe absenceof Blackhistoryin
the curriculumandarguedthatBlackstudentswerebeing"mised-
ucated"becausethey were learningonly about European,not
African,culturesand civilizations.In the 1970s, Ramirezand
Castafieda(1974) maintainedthat culturaldemocracyrequires
1301 EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER
This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:48:49 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
teaching methods that reflect the learning characteristics of
Mexican American students as well as help them become bicogni-
tivein theirlearningstylesandcharacteristics.
Kymlicka(1995), the Canadianpoliticaltheorist,andRosaldo
(1997), the U.S. anthropologist,makeargumentstodaythat are
similarin manywaysto those made by Drachslerand Kallenin
the early1900s andin laterdecadesbyWoodsonandby Ramirez
and Castafieda.Both KymlickaandRosaldomaintainthatimmi-
grantand ethnicgroupsshouldbe ableto participatefullyin the
nationalcivic culturewhile retainingelementsof theirown cul-
tures.The dominantcultureof the nation-stateshouldincorpo-
rateaspectsof theirexperiences,cultures,and languages,which
will enrichthe mainstreamcultureas well as help marginalized
groupsto experiencecivic equalityand recognition(Gutmann,
2004).
Expanding Marshall's Citizenship Typology
The paperin which Marshall(1964) presentedhis citizenship
typologywas presentedas the Alfred MarshallLecturesat the
University of Cambridgein February1949. The significant
post-WorldWar II migrationsto the United Kingdomfromits
formercolonies such as Jamaica,India, and Pakistanwere just
beginning. Marshallwas consequentlyunable to foreseethese
migrationsandtheirconsequences-such asthe racialization that
occurredin responseor the immigrants'questsfor equalityand
inclusion(Solomos,2008)-and did not incorporatethem into
his citizenshiptypology.
Marshall(1964) conceptualizescitizenshipas an evolutionary
concept that increasesequalitywhen it expands.Lipset (1964)
statesthatthe "assumption of equality"is perhapsthe mostimpor-
tantaspectof Marshall'sideaof citizenship(p. ix). Marshallviewed
citizenshipandclassasopposingprinciplesandstatedthatcitizen-
shipandthecapitalistclasssystemwereatwarduringthe 20th cen-
turybecausecitizenshipandequalityexpandsimultaneously.
ExpandingMarshall'sconceptionof citizenshipto includecul-
turaldemocracy and culturalcitizenshipis consistentwith his view
that citizenship evolves to reflect the historical development of
the times and expandsto increaseequality and social justice.
Ethnicandlanguageminoritygroupsin societiesthroughoutthe
worldaredeniedfull citizenshiprightsbecauseof theirlanguages
and cultural characteristics,because they regardmaintaining
attachmentsto theirculturalcommunitiesas importantto their
identities, and because of historic group discriminationand
exclusion(Castles& Davidson, 2000; Koopmanset al., 2005;
Kymlicka,1995;Young,1989). Consequently,the conceptionof
citizenship in a modern democratic nation-state should be
expandedto include culturalrights and group rightswithin a
democraticframework.
Multicultural Citizenship
Globalimmigrationand the increasingdiversityin nation-states
throughoutthe world challengeliberalassimilationistconcep-
tions of citizenship.They raisecomplex and divisivequestions
abouthow nation-statescan dealeffectivelywith the problemof
constructingcivic communitiesthat reflectand incorporatethe
diversityof citizensandyet havean overarchingset of sharedval-
ues, ideals,and goalsto which all of the citizensof a nation-state
are committed (Banks,2007). In the past, the liberalassimila-
tionistideologyguidedpolicyrelatedto immigrantsanddiversity
in most nation-states.
In the liberalassimilationistview, the rightsof the individual
are paramount,and group identitiesand rightsareinconsistent
with and inimical to the rights of the individual (Patterson,
1977). This conceptionmaintainsthat identitygroupspromote
group rightsover the rightsof the individualand that the indi-
vidual must be freed of primordialand ethnic attachmentsto
havefreechoiceand optionsin a modernizeddemocraticsociety
(Patterson,1977; Schlesinger,1991). Strongattachmentsto eth-
nic, racial,religious,and other identitygroupslead to conflicts
and harmfuldivisionswithin society. Liberalscholarssuch as
Pattersonand Schlesingeralso assumethat group attachments
will die of their own weight within a modernized,pluralistic
democraticsocietyif marginalizedandexcludedgroupsaregiven
the opportunityto attainstructuralinclusionin the mainstream
society.In this view, the survivalof primordialattachmentsin a
modernizeddemocraticsociety reflectsa "pathologicalcondi-
tion"in which marginalizedgroupshavenot beenprovidedwith
opportunitiesthat would enable them to experiencecultural
assimilationand structuralinclusion (Apter,1977). If Mexican
Americans are structurallyintegrated into mainstreamU.S.
society-argues the liberalassimilationist-theywill haveneither
the desirenor the need to speakSpanish.
A numberof factorshavecausedsocialscientistsand political
philosophers to raiseseriousquestionsabouttheliberalanalysisand
for
expectations identitygroupsin modernizeddemocraticnation-
states.Thesefactorsincludetheriseof theethnicrevitalization move-
ments sincethe 1960s and 1970s, which demandrecognitionof
grouprightsas well as individualrightsby the nation-stateand by
institutionssuchasschools,colleges,anduniversities (Banks,2006);
the structural exclusionof manyracial,ethnic,andlanguagegroups
intotheUnitedStatesandotherWesternnations(Benhabib,2004;
Castles& Davidson,2000; M. M. Gordon,1964);andincreasing
immigration throughouttheworldthathasmademostnation-states
multinationaland polyethnic(Kymlicka,1995). Recentestimates
indicatethat"theworld's184 independentstatescontainover600
livinglanguagegroupsand 5,000 ethnicgroups.In veryfew coun-
triescanthecitizensbe saidto sharethesamelanguage,or belongto
the sameethnonational group"(Kymlicka,1995,p. 1).
Identity Groups in a Muiticultural Democratic
Society
Identitygroupscan both obstructthe realizationof democratic
valuesand facilitatetheirrealization(Gutmann,2003). Nonmain-
streamgroups,suchasCanadianSikhsandMexicanAmericans, and
mainstream groups,suchasAngloCanadiansandtheBoyScoutsof
America,all areidentitygroups.Democraciesshouldtreatindi-
vidualsas civil equalsand give them equalfreedoms(Gutmann,
2003). Identitygroupsmay try to impose theirvalueson indi-
viduals.However,they mayalsoenhanceindividualfreedomby
helping individuals to attain goals that are consistent with
democraticvaluesand that can be achievedonly throughgroup
action.
Identity groupsprovideopportunitiesfor their membersto
freelyassociateand expressthemselvesculturallyand politically
This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:48:49 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
(Gutmann, 2003). Individualsmore successfullyattain goals
throughthe politicalsystemwhen workingin groupsthanwhen
workingalone.Importantexamplesarethe political,cultural,and
educationalgainsthatAfricanAmericanswon throughtheirpar-
ticipationin the Civil RightsMovementduringthe 1960s and
1970s, aswell as the momentouschangesthatthe movementini-
tiated in U.S. society as a whole, with significantbenefitsfor
other racial,ethnic, and languagegroups,women, and people
with disabilities.
The ImmigrationReformAct of 1965 (whichbecameeffective
in 1968)wasa consequenceof theCivilRightsMovement.Theact
abolishedthe quotasystembasedon immigrants'nationalorigins
and liberalizedAmericanimmigrationpolicy (Bennett, 1988).
Immigrationto the UnitedStatesfromAsianandLatinAmerican
nationsincreasedsubstantially as a result.Primarilybecauseof the
ImmigrationReformAct, the nation'sracialandethnictexturehas
changedsignificantly. Before1968,mostimmigrantsto theUnited
StatescamefromEurope.Today,most comefromAsiaandLatin
America.A significantnumberalsocomefromtheWestIndiesand
Africa.The United Statesis now experiencingits largestinfluxof
immigrantssincethe late 19th andearly20th centuries.The U.S.
CensusBureau(2000)projectsthatethnicgroupsofcolor-or eth-
nic minorities-will increasefrom28%of the nation'spopulation
todayto 50%in 2050.
Marginalizedgroups have organizedand worked for their
group rightsthroughoutU.S. history,bringinggreaterequality
and socialjustice for all Americans.This was the casewith the
movementsfor civil rights,women'srights,and languagerights
(thelastpromotingthe rightof allcitizensto speakandlearntheir
own languagesin the public schools).Groupsin the marginsof
U.S. societyhavebeen the conscienceof Americaand the main
sitesfor strugglesto close the gap betweenAmericandemocratic
idealsand institutionalizedracismand discrimination(Okihiro,
1994). Throughtheirmovementsto advancejusticeand equal-
ity in America,marginalizedgroupshavehelpedthe nationcome
closerto actualizingthe democraticidealsstatedin its founding
documents-the Declarationof Independence,the Constitution,
and the Bill of Rights(Okihiro,1994).
Universal and Differentiated Citizenship
Groupdifferencesarenot includedin a universalconceptionof
citizenship.Consequently,the differencesof groups that have
experiencedstructuralexclusion and discrimination-such as
womenandpeopleof color-are suppressed. A differentiated
con-
ception of citizenship,ratherthan a universalone, is neededto
help marginalizedgroupsattaincivicequalityand recognitionin
multiculturaldemocraticnations(Young,1989). Manyproblems
resultfroma universalnotion of citizenshipaccordingto which
"citizenshipstatustranscendsparticularityand difference"and
"lawsand rules..,. areblindto individualandgroupdifferences"
(Young, 1989, p. 250). A universalconception of citizenship
within a stratifiedsocietyresultsin the treatmentof some groups
as second-classcitizensbecausegrouprightsare not recognized
and the principleof equaltreatmentis strictlyapplied.
When universalcitizenshipis determined,defined,and imple-
mented by groupswith power and when the interestsof mar-
ginalized groups are not expressedor incorporatedinto civic
APRIL2008 131
discussions,the interestsof groupswith powerandinfluencewill
determinethe definitionsof universalcitizenshipand the public
interest.Groupswith powerandinfluenceoftenequatetheirown
interestswith the publicinterest.This phenomenonoccursin the
debateover multiculturaleducationin the nation'sschools,col-
leges,and universities.Criticsof multiculturaleducationsuch as
D'Souza (1991) and Schlesinger(1991) define the interestsof
dominantgroupsas the "public"interestand those of people of
colorsuchasAfricanAmericansand Latinosas "special"interests
that endangerthe polity.
The Challenges of Global Citizenship
Culturalandgroupidentitiesareimportantin multicultural demo-
craticsocieties.However,they are not sufficientfor citizenship
participationbecauseof worldwidemigrationand the effectsof
globalizationon local,regional,andnationalcommunities(Banks,
2004a). Studentsneed to developthe knowledge,attitudes,and
skills that will enable them to function in a global society.
Globalizationaffects every aspect of communities,including
beliefs,norms,values,andbehaviors,aswell asbusinessandtrade.
Worldwidemigrationhasincreaseddiversityin mostnation-states
andis forcingnationsto rethinkcitizenshipandcitizenshipeduca-
tion. Nationalboundariesareerodingbecausemillionsof people
live in severalnationsand have multiplecitizenships(Castles&
Davidson,2000). Millionshavecitizenshipin one nationandlive
in another.Others are stateless,includingmillions of refugees
aroundthe world.The numberof individualslivingoutsidetheir
originalhomelandsincreasedfrom approximately33 million in
1910 to 175 millionin 2000 (Benhabib,2004).
Nationalboundariesarealso becomingmoreporousbecause
of internationalhuman rightsthat arecodifiedin the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and by the European
Union. These rights are specified for individualsregardlessof
the nation-statein which they live and whetherthey arecitizens
of a nation or not. Explicatedin the declarationare the rights
to freedomof expressionand religiousbelief, the right to pri-
vacy, and the rightfor an individualchargedwith a crimeto be
presumed innocent until proven guilty (Banks et al., 2005;
Osler & Starkey,2005). Serioustensionsexistbetweenthe con-
ceptions of international human rights and national sover-
eignty.Despite the codificationof internationalrightsby bodies
such as the United Nations, nationalism is as strong as ever
(Benhabib,2004).
Global Migration: A Challenge to Nations and
Schools
Migrationwithin and acrossnation-statesis a worldwidephe-
nomenon.The movementof peoplesacrossboundariesis as old
as the nation-stateitself (Luchtenberg,2004b). However,never
beforein historyhasthe movementof diverseracial,cultural,eth-
nic, religious,and linguistic groupswithin and acrossnation-
states been so extensive,so rapid, or raisedsuch complex and
difficultquestionsabout citizenship,human rights,democracy,
and education. Many worldwide developmentschallengethe
notion of educatingstudents to function in one nation-state.
These developmentsinclude the ways that people move back
and forth acrossnationalbordersand the rightsof movement
132 EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER
This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:48:49 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
permittedby bodiesexternalto nation-statessuch as the United
Nations and the EuropeanUnion.
Beforethe ethnicrevitalizationmovementsof the 1960s and
1970s, the aim of schoolsin most nation-stateswas to develop
citizenswho internalizedtheir nationalvalues,veneratedtheir
nationalheroes,and acceptedglorifiedversionsof theirnational
histories.These goals of citizenshipeducationare inconsistent
with the citizen'srolein a globalworldtodaybecausemanypeo-
ple have multiple national commitmentsand live in multiple
nation-states.However,the developmentof citizenswith global
and cosmopolitanidentitiesand commitmentsis contestedin
nation-statesthroughoutthe worldbecausenationalismremains
strong.Nationalismand globalizationcoexistin tensionworld-
wide (Benhabib,2004; Castles& Davidson,2000).
When respondingto the problemswroughtby international
migration,schoolsin multiculturalnation-statesmustdealwith
complexeducationalissuesin waysconsistentwith theirdemo-
craticideologiesand declarations.There is a wide gap between
the democraticideals in Westernnations and the daily experi-
ences of students in schools (Banks,2004a). Ethnic minority
students in the United States, Canada,the United Kingdom,
Germany, and France-as in other nations throughout the
world-often experiencediscriminationbecause of their cul-
tural, linguistic, religious, and value differences.Often, both
students and teachersperceivethese students as the "Other."
When ethnic minority students-such as Turkish students in
Germanyand Muslim students in the United Kingdom-are
marginalizedin school and treatedas the "Other,"they tend to
emphasizetheir ethnic identities and to develop weak attach-
ments to the nation-state.
Multiculturaldemocraticnation-statesmust grapplewith a
numberof salientissues,paradigms,andideologiesastheirschool
populationsbecomemoreculturally,racially,ethnically,and lin-
guisticallydiverse.The extentto which nation-statesmakemul-
ticultural citizenship possible, the achievementgap between
minorityand majoritygroups,and the languagerightsof immi-
grantand minoritygroupsare among the unresolvedand con-
tentiousissueswith which thesenationsmust grapple.
Nation-statesthroughoutthe world are tryingto determine
whethertheywill perceivethemselvesas multiculturaland allow
immigrantsto experiencemulticulturalcitizenshipor continueto
embracean assimilationistliberalideology(Kymlicka,1995). In
nation-statesthat embracemulticulturalcitizenship,immigrant
and minoritygroupscan retainimportantaspectsof their lan-
guages and cultures while exercising full citizenship rights.
Nation-statesin variouspartsof the worldhaverespondedto the
citizenshipand culturalrightsof immigrantand minoritygroups
in significantlydifferentways. Since the ethnic revitalization
movementsof the 1960s and 1970s, many nationalleadersand
citizensin the United States,Canada,andAustraliahaveviewed
these nations as multiculturaldemocracies(Banks, 1986). An
ideal exists in these nations that minoritygroupscan maintain
importantelementsof theircommunityculturesandbecomefull
citizensof the nation-state.However,thereis a wide gapbetween
the idealsof thesenationsand the experiencesof ethnicminority
groups.Most ethnicminoritygroupsin nationsthatview them-
selvesas multicultural---such as the United States,Canada,and
Australia-experiencediscriminationin both the schoolsandthe
widersociety.
Othernations,suchasJapan(Murphy-Shigematsu, 2004) and
Germany(Luchtenberg, 2004a,2004b;Mannitz,2004), havebeen
reluctantto view themselvesas multiculturalsocieties.Citizenship
has beencloselylinkedto biologicalheritageand characteristicsin
thesenations.Althoughthe biologicalconceptionof citizenshipin
bothJapanandGermanyhaserodedwithinthe pastdecade,it has
left a tenaciouslegacyin both countries.Castles(2004) refersto
Germany'sresponseto immigrantsas "differentialexclusion,"
whichis "partialand temporaryintegrationof immigrantworkers
into society-that is, theyareincludedin thosesubsystemsof soci-
etynecessary fortheireconomicrole:thelabormarket,basicaccom-
modation,work-related healthcare,andwelfare"(p. 32).
Sincethe 1960s and 1970s, the Frenchhavedealtwith immi-
grantgroupsin waysdistinctfromthoseof the immigrantnations
of the UnitedStates,Canada,andAustralia.In Francethe explicit
goal is assimilation-called integration-and inclusion(Bowen,
2004, in press;Castles,2004; Hargreaves,1995; Scott, 2007).
Immigrantscan become full citizensin Francebut are required
to surrendertheir languagesand cultures.Integrationassumes
that culturaland ethnic differencesshould and will disappear
(Hargreaves,1995; Scott, 2007).
Education for National and Global Citizenship
Multiculturalsocietiesarefacedwith the problemof construct-
ing nation-statesthatreflectandincorporatethe diversityof their
citizensand yet havean overarchingset of sharedvalues,ideals,
and goalsto whichall of theircitizensarecommitted.In a demo-
craticsociety,civicequalityand recognitionareimportantvalues
(Gutmann, 2004). These values give ethnic and immigrant
groupsthe rightto maintainimportantelementsof theirethnic
culturesand languagesas well as to participatein the national
civic culture.
Nationalistsand assimilationists
aroundthe worldworrythatif
citizensareallowedto retainidentifications
withtheirculturalcom-
munitiesthey will not acquiresufficientlystrongattachmentsto
theirnation-states.
Suchconcernsreflecta "zero-sum conceptionof
identity"(Kymlicka,2004, p. xiv). The theoreticaland empirical
work of multiculturalscholarsindicatesthat identityis multiple,
changing,overlapping,andcontextual, ratherthanfixedandstatic-
andthatthoughtfulandclarifiedculturalidentificationswillenable
people to be bettercitizensof the nation-state.Writes Ladson-
Billings(2004):
The dynamicof the modern (or postmodern)nation-statemakes
identitiesaseitheran individualor a memberof a groupuntenable.
Ratherthanseeingthe choiceas either/or,the citizenof the nation-
stateoperatesin the realismof both/and.She is both an individual
whoisentitledto citizenrightsthatpermitoneto legallychallenge
infringementof those rights[andone who is] actingas a member
of a group.... Peoplemovebackandforthacrossmanyidentities,
andthe waysocietyrespondsto theseidentitieseitherbindspeople
to oralienates
themfromthecivicculture.(p. 112)
The Challenge of Unity and Diversity
Balancingunityanddiversityis a continuingchallengeformulticul-
Unitywithoutdiversityresultsin hegemonyand
turalnation-states.
This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:48:49 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
oppression;diversitywithoutunityleadsto Balkanization and the
fracturingof the nation-state(Banks,2004b).A majorproblemfac-
ingnation-states throughouttheworldis howto recognizeandlegit-
imizedifferenceandyet constructan overarching nationalidentity
that incorporates the voices,experiences,and hopesof the diverse
groupsthatcomposeit. Manyethnic,language,andreligiousgroups
haveweakidentifications with theirnation-statesbecauseof their
marginalized statusandbecausetheydo not seetheirhopes,dreams,
visions,andpossibilities
reflectedin thenation-state
orin theschools,
colleges,and universities(Ladson-Billings,2004; Osler& Vincent,
2002).
The diversitybroughtto Europeannationssuchas the United
Kingdom,the Netherlands,andFranceby immigrantsfromtheir
formercolonieshasincreasedracial,ethnic,and religioustension
and conflict(Koopmanset al., 2005). A bittercontroversyarose
in Franceregardingthewearingof the hijab(veil)by Muslimgirls
in state-supported schools.In March2004 the Frenchparliament
passeda lawthatprohibitsthe wearingof anyostensiblereligious
symbolin stateschools.Althoughthis law prohibitsthe wearing
of the Jewishyarmulkeas well as largeChristiancrosses,its tar-
get wasthe hijab.The Frenchpolicyis a contentiousanddivisive
attemptby a nationwith a strongassimilationistideologyto deal
with religiousexpressionin the publicspherein a waythatis con-
sistent with its ideals of equality, liberty, and republicanism
(Bowen,in press).Bowen (2004) describesincisivelythe differ-
ent meaningsof the headscarfcontroversyto the mainstream
Frenchand to FrenchMuslims:
Formanynon-Muslim French,[theheadscarves]representmulti-
pledangers to theRepublic; theoppressionof women,urbanvio-
lence,internationalterrorism,andthe generalrefusalof Muslim
immigrants to integrateintothebroadersociety.Formanyof the
fivemillionor so Muslimslivingin France,thescarvesrepresent
thefreedomof religious expression
guaranteed byFrenchlaw,the
of cultural
toleration thevalueof modesty,andthegen-
pluralism,
eralimportance of developingwaysto be bothgoodMuslimsand
goodcitizens.(p.31)
As worldwideimmigrationincreasesdiversityon everyconti-
nent and as globalterrorismintensifiesnegativeattitudestoward
Muslims,schoolsin nation-statesaroundthe worldarefindingit
difficultto implementpoliciesand practicesthat respondto the
diversityof students and also foster national cohesion (Banks
et al., 2005). The fouryoung Muslimmen who aresuspectedof
being responsiblefor the bombingsof the Londonunderground
on July7, 2005, had immigrantparentsbut wereBritishcitizens
who grew up in Leeds.They apparentlywere not structurally
integratedinto Britishmainstreamsocietyand had weakidenti-
ficationswith the nation-stateand with other Britishcitizens.
The immigrantbackgroundof most of the suspectsand perpe-
tratorsof worldwideviolence (Suairez-Orozco, 2006) has con-
tributedto the riseof Islamophobiaandracialtensionsin Europe.
The Complicated Characteristics of Student
Identifications
Historically,schoolsin Westerndemocraticnations,such as the
UnitedStates,Canada,andAustralia,havefocusedon helpingstu-
dentsto developcommitmentsand allegianceto the nation-state
APRIL2008 133
and havegivenlittleattentionto theirneed to maintaincommit-
mentsto theirlocalcommunitiesand culturesor to theiroriginal
homelands.Schoolsassumedthatassimilation into themainstream
culturewasrequiredforcitizenshipandnationalbelongingandthat
studentscouldand shouldsurrendercommitmentsto othercom-
munities,cultures,andnations.Greenbaum(1974)statesthatU.S.
schoolstaughtimmigrantstudentshopeandshame.Thesestudents
weremadeto feelashamedof theirhome andcommunitycultures
butweregivenhopethatoncetheyculturallyassimilated theycould
join the U.S. mainstream culture.
Culturalassimilationworkedwell
for most White ethnic groups(Alba& Nee, 2003) but not for
groupsof color,whichcontinueto experiencestructural exclusion
aftertheybecomeculturallyassimilated.
Recentethnographicresearchindicatesthat the narrowcon-
ceptionof citizenshipeducationthathas been embracedhistori-
cally by schools is not consistentwith the racial,ethnic, and
culturalrealitiesof U.S. societybecauseof the complicated,con-
textual, and overlapping identities of immigrant students.
Researchby scholarsstudyingimmigranthigh school students
indicates that these students have complex and contradictory
transnationalidentifications.This finding is consistent across
studies of PalestinianAmericanyouth by El-Haj (2007), of
VietnameseAmericanhigh schoolyouth by Nguyen (2008), and
of working-classIndian American, PakistaniAmerican, and
BangladeshiAmericanyouth by Maira(2004). Theseresearchers
describethe nuancedand intricateidentificationsthatimmigrant
youth havewith the United States,theircountriesof origin,and
theirlocalcommunities.This researchalsoindicatesthatthe cul-
turaland nationalidentitiesof immigrantyouth arecontextual,
evolving,and continuallyreconstructed.
El-Haj(2007), Nguyen (2008), and Maira(2004) found that
the immigrant youths in their studies did not define their
nationalidentitiesin termsof their placesof residencebut felt
thattheybelongedto nationalcommunitiesthattranscendedthe
boundariesof the United States. They defined their national
identities as Palestinian,Vietnamese, Indian, Pakistani,and
Bangladeshi.They believedthat an individualcan be Palestinian
or Vietnamese and live in many different nation-states.The
youth in thesestudiesdistinguishedbetweennationalidentityand
citizenship.They viewed themselvesas Palestinian,Vietnamese,
or Pakistanibut alsorecognizedandacknowledgedtheirU.S. cit-
izenship,which they valued for the privilegedlegal status and
otheropportunitiesit gavethem. Some of the Vietnameseyouth
in Nguyen's study said, "I am Vietnameseand a citizen of the
United States."
Although the immigrantyouth in Nguyen's (2008) study
viewedthemselvesas citizensof the United States,they did not
view themselvesas Americans.They felt that they were not
Americansbecauseto be Americanrequiredan individualto be
White and mainstream.Their constructionof the criterionfor
becomingAmericanwas a consequenceof the racism,discrimi-
nation,and exclusionthat they experiencedin theirschoolsand
communities.Both El-Haj(2007) and Nguyen describehow the
marginalizationthat immigrantstudentsexperiencein schools
and in the largerU.S. societyreinforcestheirnationalidentifica-
tion with distantnations,in which they imaginethattheywould
experienceequalityand structuralinclusion.
134 EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER
This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:48:49 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Maira(2004) usedculturalcitizenshipto describethe transna-
tionalaspectsof the citizenshipidentityheld by the SouthAsian
studentsin herstudy.Theseyouthsmaintainedcontactsandcon-
nectionswith their homelandculturesthroughpopularculture
venues,such as websites,films,music,TV serials,cableTV, and
DVDs madein theirhomelands.
Schools and Citizenship Education in Multicultural
Nations
The nuanced, complex, and evolving identities of the youth
describedin the studiesby El-Haj (2007), Nguyen (2008), and
Maira(2004) indicatethat the liberalassimilationistnotions of
citizenshipareineffectivetodaybecauseof the deepeningdiver-
sity throughoutthe worldand the questsby marginalizedimmi-
grant, ethnic, and racial groups for cultural recognition and
rights.Schoolsneed to workto implementmulticulturalcitizen-
ship (Kymlicka,1995), which recognizesthe rightand need for
studentsto maintaincommitmentsto their culturalcommuni-
ties, to a transnationalcommunity, and to the nation-statein
which they arelegalcitizens.
Citizenshipeducationshouldalsohelp studentsto developan
identityand attachmentto the globalcommunityand a human
connectionto peoplearoundthe world.Globalidentities,attach-
ments,and commitmentsconstitutecosmopolitanism (Nussbaum,
2002). Cosmopolitans viewthemselvesascitizensof theworldwho
will makedecisionsandtakeactionsin the globalintereststhatwill
benefithumankind.Nussbaumstatesthattheir"allegiance is to the
worldwidecommunityof humanbeings"(p. 4).
Cosmopolitansidentify with peoples from diversecultures
throughout the world. Nussbaum contrasts cosmopolitan
universalismand internationalism with parochialethnocentrism
and inward-lookingpatriotism.Cosmopolitans"areready to
broadenthe definitionof public,extendtheirloyaltybeyondeth-
nic and nationalboundaries,and engagewith differencefarand
near"(W. C. Parker,personalcommunication,July 18, 2005).
Cosmopolitansview socialjustice and equalitygloballyand are
concernedwith threatsto the world communitysuch as global
warming, the HIV/AIDS epidemic, and war. Students can
become cosmopolitancitizens while maintainingattachments
and roots to their family and community cultures. Both
Nussbaum (2002) and Appiah (2006) view local identities as
importantfor cosmopolitans.
Schools should help students to understandhow cultural,
national, regional, and global identificationsare interrelated,
complex,and evolving(Banks,2004b). These identificationsare
interactivein a dynamicway. Eachshouldbe recognized,valued,
publiclyaffirmed,and thoughtfullyexaminedin schools.Students
shouldbe encouraged to criticallyexaminetheiridentificationsand
commitmentsandto understandthe complexwaysin whichthey
areinterrelatedand constructed.
Citizenshipeducationshouldhelpstudentsto realizethat "no
localloyaltycaneverjustifyforgettingthateachhumanbeinghas
responsibilitiesto everyother"(Appiah,2006, p. xvi).As citizens
of the global community, students also must develop a deep
understandingof the need to takeaction and makedecisionsto
help solve the world'sdifficultproblems.They need to partici-
pate in waysthatwill enhancedemocracyand promoteequality
and social justice in their culturalcommunities,nations, and
regions,and in the world.
Increasingdiversitythroughoutthe world todayand increas-
ing recognitionof diversity-as well as the intractableproblems
that the world faces-require a reexaminationof the ends and
meansof citizenshipeducationif it is to promoteinclusion,civic
equality,and recognition (Gutmann, 2004). Liberalassimila-
tionist conceptionsof citizenshipeducation that eradicatethe
culturesand languagesof diversegroupswill be ineffectivein a
transformed"flat"world of the 21st century(Friedman,2005).
Citizenshipeducationin the United States-as well as in other
Westernnations-should be reinventedso thatit will enablestu-
dents to see their fates as intimately tied to those of people
throughoutthe world. Citizenshipeducationshould help stu-
dentsto understandwhy "athreatto justiceanywhereis a threat
to justiceeverywhere" (King, 1963/1994, pp. 2-3).
Mainstream and Transformative Citizenship
Education
Citizenshipeducationmust be reimaginedand transformedto
effectivelyeducatestudentsto functionin the 21st century.For
reformto succeed,the knowledgethat underliesits construction
must shift frommainstreamacademicknowledgeto transforma-
tive academicknowledge.Mainstreamknowledgereinforcestra-
ditionaland establishedknowledgein the socialand behavioral
sciencesas well as the knowledgethat is institutionalizedin the
popularcultureand in the nation'sschools,colleges,and univer-
sities (Banks,1993). Transformativeacademicknowledgecon-
sistsof paradigmsandexplanationsthatchallengesomeof the key
epistemologicalassumptionsof mainstreamknowledge(Collins,
2000; Harding,1991;Homans, 1967).An importantpurposeof
transformativeknowledgeis to improvethe human condition.
Feministscholarsandscholarsof colorhavebeenamongthe lead-
ing constructorsof transformative academicknowledge(Collins,
2000; Harding,1991; Takaki,1993, 1998).
Mainstreamcitizenshipeducationis groundedin mainstream
knowledgeandassumptionsandreinforcesthe statusquo andthe
dominantpowerrelationshipsin society.It is practicedin most
socialstudiesclassroomsin the United States(Parker,2002) and
does not challengeor disruptthe class,racial,or genderdiscrim-
ination in the schoolsand society.Mainstreamcitizenshipedu-
cation either does not include each of the four elements of
citizenshipidentifiedin the firstpartof this article-civil, politi-
cal,social,and cultural-or includesthem at superficialand lim-
ited levels.It does not help studentsto understandtheirmultiple
and complex identities, the ways their lives are influenced by
globalization,or what their roles should be in a global world.
Instead,the emphasisis on memorizingfactsaboutconstitutions
and other legal documents,learningabout variousbranchesof
government, and developing patriotism to the nation-state
(Westheimer,2007). Criticalthinking skills, decision making,
and action are not importantcomponentsof mainstreamciti-
zenshipeducation.
Transformative citizenshipeducationneedsto be implemented
in schoolsif studentsareto attainclarifiedand reflectivecultural,
national,regional,andglobalidentificationsandunderstandhow
theseidentitiesareinterrelatedand constructed.Transformative
This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:48:49 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
citizenship education also recognizes and validates the cultural
identities of students. It is rooted in transformative academic
knowledge and enables students to acquire the information,
skills, and values needed to challenge inequality within their com-
munities, their nations, and the world; to develop cosmopolitan
values and perspectives; and to take actions to create just and
democratic multicultural communities and societies. Transforma-
tive citizenship education helps students to develop the decision-
making and social action skills that are needed to identify
problems in society, acquire knowledge related to their homes
and community cultures and languages, identify and clarify their
values, and take thoughtful individual or collective civic action
(Banks & Banks, 1999). It also fosters critical thinking skills and
is inclusive of what DeJaeghere (2007) calls critical citizenship
education.
Intergroup Relations Research and Transformative
Citizenship Education
In democratic and transformativeclassroomsand schools, students
from diverse groups interact and deliberate in equal-status situa-
tions. They also develop positive racialand ethnic attitudes as well
as the knowledge, skills,and perspectivesto deliberatewith students
from diverse groups. Deliberation among citizens from diverse
groups is essentialfor a democraticsociety (Gutmann, 1987; Parker,
2002). Researchindicatesthat equal statusamong diversegroups in
contact situations is an essential condition for effective intergroup
interactionsand deliberations.Cohen and Roper (1972) found that
White middle-classstudents dominated classroominteractionswith
AfricanAmerican students unless interventionsincreasedthe status
of AfricanAmericans.Transformativeclassroomscreateconditions
in which students from different groups can interact in ways that
enable them to view events from diverseperspectivesand to delib-
erate in equal-statussituations.
Allport (1954/1979) theorized that contact between groupswill
improve intergroup relationsif the contact has the following char-
acteristics:(a) The individualsexperienceequal status;(b) they share
common goals; (c) intergroup cooperation exists;and (d) the con-
tact is sanctioned by authorities, such as teachers and administra-
tors, or by law or custom (Pettigrew,2004). Multiculturaltextbooks
and other materials (Banks, 2007; Takaki, 1993) help to create
equal status in classroomsby giving voice to the historiesand expe-
riences of all students in the class and by enabling all to experience
equality and recognition (Cohen, 1994; Gutmann, 2004).
Students have positive attitudes toward different racial and
ethnic groups in transformative classrooms and have equal status
in classroom discussions and deliberations. Teachers in transfor-
mative classrooms use strategies and materials that help students
to acquire democratic racial attitudes and behaviors. Since the
1940s, a number of curriculum intervention studies have been
conducted to determine the effects of teaching units and lessons,
multicultural textbooks and materials, role playing, and other
kinds of simulated experiences related to the racial attitudes and
perceptions of students. These studies indicate that the use of
multicultural textbooks, other related teaching materials, and
cooperative teaching strategiescan enable students from different
racial and ethnic groups to develop democratic racial attitudes
and to interact in equal-status situations. Such materials and
APRIL2008 135
teaching strategiescan also result in students' choosing more
friendsfromoutsidetheirown racial,ethnic,and culturalgroups
(Slavin,2001).
These studies provide guidelinesthat can help teachersto
improveintergrouprelations,interactions,and deliberationsin
transformativeclassroomsand schools. One of the earliestcur-
riculum studies was conducted by Tragerand Yarrow(1952),
who examinedthe effectsof a democraticmulticulturalcurricu-
lum on the racialattitudesof childrenin the first and second
grades.The curriculumhad a positiveeffect on the attitudesof
both studentsand teachers.The authorsgavetheirstudythe title
TheyLearnWhatTheyLiveto highlightits majorfinding:Ifstu-
dents experiencedemocracytheywill internalizeit.
Researchindicatesthatcurriculuminterventionssuchas mul-
tiethnicreaders(Litcher& Johnson, 1969); multiculturaltelevi-
sion programs(Bogatz& Ball, 1971); simulations(Weiner &
Wright, 1973); multiculturalsocialstudiesmaterials(Yawkey&
Blackwell,1974);folkdances,music,crafts,androle-playing(Ijaz
& Ijaz, 1981); plays (Gimmestad& DeChiara, 1982); discus-
sions about race(Aboud& Doyle, 1996); and discussionscom-
bined with antiracist teaching (McGregor, 1993) can have
positiveeffectson the racialattitudesandinteractionsof students.
Research on Cooperative Learning and
Interracial Contact
tualizewaysto helpstudentsacquireincreasingly deepercitizenship
Transformativeand democraticclassroomsfoster cooperation
that containsfourlevels(seeFigure1). Likethe categoriesin any
ratherthancompetitionamongstudentsfromdiverseracial,eth-
typology,these levelsof citizenshipoverlapand are interrelated.
nic, and culturalgroups.Cooperationpromotespositiveinterra-
Nevertheless,differentiating
cial interactions and deliberations.Since 1970, a group of
investigators,guidedby Allport's(1954/1979) theory,havepro-
duceda richbody of cumulativeresearchon the effectsof coop-
erativelearninggroupsandactivitieson students'racialattitudes,
friendshipchoices,and achievement.Much of this researchhas
been conducted as well as reviewedby investigatorssuch as
Aronson (2002) and his colleagues (Aronson & Bridgeman,
1979; Aronson & Gonzalez, 1988), Cohen and her colleagues
(Cohen, 1972, 1984; Cohen & Lotan, 1995), Johnson and
Johnson (1981, 1991), Slavin (1979, 1983, 1985), and Slavin
and Madden(1979). Schofield(2004) haswrittenan informative
reviewof this research.Most of it has been conductedusingele-
mentaryand high school students(Slavin,1983, 1985).
This researchstronglysupportsthe notion that cooperative
interracialcontact situations in schools-if the conditions
describedby Allport (1954/1979) are present in the contact
situations-have positiveeffectson bothstudentinterracial behav-
ior and studentinteractions(Aronson& Gonzalez,1988; Slavin,
1979, 1983). In his reviewof 19 studiesof the effectsof coopera-
tive learningmethods,Slavin(1985) found that 16 showedposi-
tive effectson interracialfriendships.In anotherreview,Slavin
(2001) alsodescribedthe positiveeffectsof cooperativegroupson
racialattitudesand cross-racialfriendships.Other investigators
havefound that cooperativelearningactivitiesincreasedstudent
motivationand self-esteem(Slavin,1985) and helpedstudentsto
developempathy(Aronson,2002;Aronson& Bridgeman,1979).
Equalstatusbetweengroupsin interracialsituationshas to
be deliberatelystructuredby teachersor it will not exist (Cohen
& Roper, 1972). If studentsfrom differentracial,ethnic, and
136 EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER
This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:48:49 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
linguisticgroupsaremixed in contactsituationswithout struc-
turedinterventionsthatcreateequal-statusconditions,thenracial
and ethnic conflict and stereotyping are likely to increase.
Studentsfromboth privilegedandmarginalizedgroupsarelikely
to respondin waysthatwill reinforcethe advantageof the higher
statusgroup.In a seriesof perceptiveandcarefullydesignedstud-
ies, Cohen and her colleaguesconsistentlyfound that contact
among different groups without deliberateinterventions to
increaseequal-statusand positiveinteractionsamong them will
increaseratherthan reduceintergrouptensions (Cohen, 1984;
Cohen & Lotan,1995; Cohen & Roper,1972).
Transformative Classrooms and Levels of
Citizenship
Transformativeclassroomsand schoolshelp studentsto acquire
the knowledge,values,and skillsneededto becomedeepcitizens.
Clarke(1996) statesthat a deep citizen,
bothin theoperation of [hisorher]ownlifeandin someof itspara-
meters...[is]consciousofactinginandintoaworldshared withoth-
ers... [andis]conscious thattheidentityof selfandtheidentityof
othersis co-related whilealsoopeningupthepossi-
andco-creative,
inandenchantment withtheworld.(p.6)
bilityofbothengagement
I havedevelopeda typologydesignedto helpeducatorsconcep-
levelsof citizenshipis useful.
* Legalcitizenship, themostsuperficial levelof citizenshipin the
typology, applies to citizens who are legal membersof
thenation-state andhavecertainrightsandobligationsto the
state but do not participatein the politicalsystemin any
meaningfulways.
* Minimalcitizenship appliesto thosewho arelegalcitizensand
vote in local and nationalelectionsfor conventionaland
mainstream candidatesandissues.
* Activecitizenship involvesactionbeyondvotingto actualize
existinglaws and conventions. Activecitizensmayparticipate
in protestdemonstrations or makepublicspeechesregarding
conventional issuesandreforms.The actionsof activecitizens
aredesignedto supportandmaintain-but notto challenge-
existingsocialandpoliticalstructures.
* Transformative citizenshipinvolvescivicactionsdesignedto
actualizevalues and moral principlesandidealsbeyondthose
of existinglawsandconventions.2 Transformative citizenstake
actionto promotesocialjusticeevenwhen theiractionsvio-
late, challenge,or dismantleexistinglaws,conventions,or
structures.
RosaParksrefusedto giveup herseatto a Whitemanon a bus
in Montgomery,Alabama,on December1, 1955. Heractionwas
a pivotalevent in the Montgomerybus boycott that ended seg-
regationin transportationin the South and thrustRev. Martin
Luther King Jr. into national leadership.A group of African
Americancollegestudentssat down at a lunch counterreserved
 identifications
andto acquiretheknowledgeandskillsneededto pro-
motesocialjusticein communities,nations,andtheworld.
NOTES

A citizenwho has rights

I presentedversionsof this articlein a seminarat the Center for
and obligationsto the Advanced Study in the BehavioralSciences (CASBS), in Stanford,
Legal nation-state but does not
Citizen California,April26, 2006, andasthe TischLectureat TeachersCollege,
participate in the political ColumbiaUniversity,September24, 2007. I amgratefulto the CASBS's
system.
stafffor theirhelp andsupportduringmy residencyat the centerand to
the fellowsat the centerfor theirthoughtfulreactionsand comments.I
A citizen who votes in am indebtedto my colleaguesand studentsat TeachersCollegefor the
Minimal local and national elections
Citizen on conventional candidates stimulatingintellectualcommunitythat I experiencedwhen I was the
and conventional issues. Tisch DistinguishedVisitingProfessorfor the fallsemesterin 2007.
'I am usingthe termsassimilationist,
liberal,liberalassimilationist,
and
universalas synonymsin describingconceptionsof citizenshipeducation.
A citizen who takes action
Active 2My ideas regardingconvention and action beyond conventional
beyond voting to actualize
Citizen existing laws and conventions;
levels are adaptedfrom LawrenceKohlberg's(1971) stages of moral
a conventional citizen. development.

REFERENCES
A citizen who takes action
Transformative Aboud,F. E., & Doyle,A. B. (1996).Does talkfosterprejudiceortolerance
to actualize values and moral
principles beyond those of
in children?Canadian 28(3), 161-171.
Science,
Citizen JournalofBehavioural
conventional authority;
Alba, R., & Nee, V. (2003). Remakingthe Americanmainstream:
a postconventional citizen.
Assimilationandcontemporary immigration. Cambridge,MA:Harvard
UniversityPress.
FIGURE 1. Typesofcitizens,definedbyfour levelsofparticipation. Allport,G. W. (1979). Thenatureofprejudice(25th anniversaryed.).
Reading,MA:Addison-Wesley.(Originalworkpublished1954)
Transformative,or deep,citizenshipis exemplfied by RosaParksand
the studentswho startedthe sit-in movementin Greensboro,North Appiah,K. A. (2006). Cosmopolitanism: Ethnicsin a worldofstrangers.
New York:Norton.
Carolina,in 1960.
Apter, D. E. (1977). Political life and culturalpluralism.In M. M.
Tumin & W. Plotch (Eds.), Pluralism in a democraticsociety
(pp. 58-91). New York:Praeger.
forWhitesin a Woolworth'sstorein Greensboro, NorthCarolina,
Aronson,E. (2002). Buildingempathy,compassion,and achievement
on February 1, 1960.Thestudentsinitiatedthesit-inmovementthat in the jigsaw classroom.In J. Aronson (Ed.), Improvingacademic
endedsegregationin lunch countersthroughoutthe South.Both achievement:Impactofpsychologicalfactorsoneducation(pp.209-225).
Parksandthestudentsviolatedexistingsegregation laws.Theywere San Diego, CA:AcademicPress.
engagingin transformative citizenshipbecausetheytook actionto Aronson,E., & Bridgeman,D. (1979). Jigsawgroupsand the desegre-
actualizesocialjustice,eventhoughwhat they did was illegaland gatedclassroom:In pursuitof common goals.Personality and Social
challengedexistinglaws,customs,andconventions. PsychologyBulletin,5(4), 438-446.
The importantdifferencebetweenactiveand transformative Aronson, E., & Gonzalez,A. (1988). Desegregation,jigsaw, and the
citizensis thatthe actionstakenby activecitizensfallwithinexist- Mexican-American experience.In P. A. Katz& D. A. Taylor(Eds.),
Eliminatingracism:Profilesin controversy (pp. 301-314). New York:
ing laws,customs,and conventions,whereasthe actionstakenby Plenum.
transformative citizensaredesignedto promotevaluesand moral
Au, K. (2006). Multicultural issues and literacy achievement. Mahwah,
principles--suchas socialjusticeand equality--andmayviolate NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
existingconventionsand laws.Althoughtransformativeeduca- Banks,J. A. (1969). A content analysisof the BlackAmericanin text-
torsrecognizeandrespectstudentsat alllevelsof citizenship,their books.SocialEducation, 33(8), 954-957, 963.
aim is to help studentsbecometransformative and deep citizens. Banks,J. A. (1986). Multiculturaleducation:Development,paradigms,
and goals.In J. A. Banks& J. Lynch(Eds.),Multiculturaleducation
Conclusion
in Western societies(pp. 1-29). London:Holt.
Studentsexperiencedemocracyin classroomsand schoolswhen Banks,J. A. (1993). The canon debate,knowledgeconstruction,and
transformative educationis implemented. multiculturaleducation.EducationalResearcher, 22(5), 4-14.
citizenship Consequently,
Banks,J. A. (Ed.). (2004a). Diversityand citizenshipeducation:Global
theyarebetterableto internalizedemocraticbeliefsandvaluesand
perspectives.San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
andcommitments.
to acquirethoughtfulculturalidentifications The
Banks,J.A. (2004b). Introduction:Democraticcitizenshipeducationin
totalschool,includingthe knowledgeconveyedin the curriculum, multiculturalsocieties.In J. A. Banks(Ed.), Diversityand citizenship
needsto be reformedto implementtransformative citizenshipedu- education:Globalperspectives (pp. 3-15). SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.
cation.Inequality withinthelargersocietyarechal-
andstratification Banks,J. A. (2006). Race,culture,and education:Theselectedworksof
lengedand arenot reproducedin transformative and democratic JamesA. Banks.New York:Routledge.
classrooms andschools.Transformative citizenshipeducationhelps Banks,J.A. (2007). Educatingcitizensin a multiculturalsociety
(2nd ed.).
studentsto developreflectivecultural,national,regional,andglobal New York:TeachersCollegePress.

APRIL2008 137

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:48:49 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. (with Clegg, A. A., Jr.). (1999).
Teachingstrategies for the socialstudies:Decision-making and citizen
action.New York:Longman.
Banks,J. A., Banks,C. A. M., Cortis, C. E., Hahn, C. L., Merryfield,
M. M., Moodley, K. A., et al. (2005). Democracyand diversity:
Principlesand concepts for educatingcitizensin a globalage. Seattle:
Centerfor MulticulturalEducation,Universityof Washington.
Benhabib,S. (2004). Therightsofothers:Aliens,residents,and citizens.
Cambridge,UK: CambridgeUniversityPress.
Bennett,D. H. (1988). Thepartyoffear:Fromnativistmovements to the
New Right in Americanhistory.Chapel Hill: Universityof North
CarolinaPress.
Bogatz,G. A., & Ball,S. (1971). ThesecondyearofSesameStreet:A con-
tinuingevaluation.Princeton,NJ: EducationalTestingService.
Bowen,J. R. (2004). Muslimsand citizens:France'sheadscarfcontro-
versy.BostonReview,29(1), 31-35.
Bowen, J. R. (in press).Republicanironies:Equalityand identitiesin
Frenchschools.In M. Minow, R. A. Shweder,& H. Marcus(Eds.),
just schools:Pursuingequalityin societiesof difference.New York:
RussellSageFoundation.
Bulmer,M., & Rees,A. M. (Eds.). (1996). Citizenshiptoday:Thecon-
temporary relevanceofT. H. Marshall.London:UCL Press.
Carmichael,S., & Hamilton,C. (1967). Blackpower:Thepoliticsoflib-
erationin America.New York:Vintage.
Castles,S. (2004). Migration,citizenship,and education.In J.A. Banks
(Ed.),Diversity andcitizenshipeducation:Globalperspectives(pp. 17-48).
San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
Castles, S., & Davidson, A. (2000). Citizenshipand migration:
Globalizationand thepoliticsofbelonging.New York:Routledge.
Clarke,P. B. (1996). Deepcitizenship.London:Pluto Press.
Cohen,E. G. (1972). Interracial interactiondisability.HumanRelations,
25(1), 9-24.
Cohen,E.G. (1984).Talkingandworkingtogether: Status,interaction, and
learning.In P. Peterson,L. C. Wilkinson,& M. Hallinan(Eds.), The
socialcontextofinstruction(pp. 171-186). New York:AcademicPress.
Cohen,E. G. (1994). Designinggroupwork: Strategiesfortheheterogeneous
classroom (2nd ed.). New York:TeachersCollegePress.
Cohen, E. G., & Lotan,R. A. (1995). Producingequal-statusinterac-
tion in the heterogeneousclassroom.AmericanEducationalResearch
Journal,32(1), 99-120.
Cohen, E. G., & Roper,S. S. (1972). Modificationof interracialinter-
action disability:An application of status characteristicstheory.
AmericanSociological Review,37(6), 643-657.
Collins, P. H. (2000). Blackfeministthought:Knowledge,consciousness,
and thepoliticsofempowerment. New York:Routledge.
Crawford,J. (1999). Bilingualeducation:History,politics,theory,and
practice(4th ed.). LosAngeles:BilingualEducationServices.
DeJaeghere, J. G. (2007). Intercultural
andglobalmeaningsof citizenship
educationin theAustralian secondarycurriculum: Betweencriticalcon-
testationsandminimalconstruction.In E. D. Stevick& B. A. Levinson
(Eds.),Reimagining civiceducation:Howdiversesocieties formdemocratic
citizens(pp.293-316). Lanham,MD: Rowman& Littlefield.
Deyhle, D., & Swisher, K. G. (in press). Connecting the circle in
AmericanIndianeducation.In J.A. Banks(Ed.), TheRoutledge inter-
nationalcompanionto multicultural education.New York:Routledge.
Drachsler,J. (1920). Democracy andassimilation.New York:Macmillan.
D'Souza, D. (1991). Illiberaleducation:Thepoliticsof raceand sex on
campus.New York:CollierMacmillan.
El-Haj,T. R. A. (2007). "Iwas bornhere,but my home, it's not here":
Educating for democratic citizenship in an era of transnational
migrationand global conflict. HarvardEducationalReview,77(3),
285-316.
1381
| EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER
This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:48:49 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Fraser,N. (2000). Rethinkingrecognition:Overcomingdisplacement
and reificationin culturalpolitics.New LeftReview,3, 107-120.
Friedman,T. L. (2005). Theworldisflat:A briefhistory ofthetwenty-first
century.New York:Farrar,Strausand Giroux.
Gay,G. (2000). Culturally responsiveteaching:Theory,research, andprac-
tice.New York:TeachersCollegePress.
Gimmestad,B. J., & DeChiara,E. (1982). Dramaticplays:A vehiclefor
prejudicereductionin the elementaryschool.JournalofEducational
Research, 76(1), 45-49.
Gonzalez,N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (2005). Fundsofknowledge:
Theorizingpractices in households,communities,and classrooms.
Mahwah,NJ: LawrenceErlbaum.
Gordon,B. M. (2001). Knowledgeconstruction,competingcriticalthe-
ories, and education. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.),
Handbookof researchon multiculturaleducation(pp. 184-199). San
Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
Gordon,M. M. (1964). Assimilationin Americanlife: Therolesof race,
religion,and nationalorigin.New York:OxfordUniversityPress.
Graham,P. A. (2005). Schoolingin America:How thepublicschools meet
the nation'schangingneeds.New York:OxfordUniversityPress.
Greenbaum,W. (1974). Americain searchof a new ideal:An essayon
the riseof pluralism.HarvardEducationalReview,44(3), 411-440.
Gutmann,A. (1987). Democraticeducation.Princeton,NJ: Princeton
UniversityPress.
Gutmann,A. (2003). Identityin democracy. Princeton,NJ: Princeton
UniversityPress.
Gutmann,A. (2004). Unity and diversityin democraticmulticultural
education:Creativeand destructivetensions. In J. A. Banks (Ed.),
Diversityandcitizenship education:Globalperspectives (pp. 71-96). San
Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
Harding, S. (1991). Whosescience?Whoseknowledge?Thinkingfom
women'slives.Ithaca,NY: CornellUniversityPress.
Hargreaves,A. G. (1995). Immigration,"race, "and ethnicityin France.
New York:Routledge.
Homans,G. C. (1967). Thenatureofsocialscience. New York:Harcourt.
Ijaz,M. A., & Ijaz,I. H. (1981). A culturalprogramfor changingracial
attitudes.Historyand SocialScienceTeacher,17(1), 17-20.
Johnson,D. W., & Johnson,R. T. (1981). Effectsof cooperativeand
individualisticlearningexperienceson interethnicinteraction.Journal
ofEducationalPsychology, 73(3), 444-449.
Johnson,D. W., & Johnson,R. T. (1991). Learningtogetherand alone
(3rd ed.). EnglewoodCliffs,NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kallen,H. M. (1924). Cultureand democracy in the UnitedStates.New
York:Boni and Liveright.
King, M. L., Jr. (1994). Letterfom the Birminghamjail. New York:
HarperCollins.(Originalworkpublished1963)
Kohlberg,L. (1971). Stagesofmoraldevelopment. RetrievedFebruary14,
2008, fromhttp://www.xenodochy.org/ex/lists/moraldev.html
Koopmans,R., Statham,P., Giugni, M., & Passy,F. (2005). Contested
citizenship:Immigration andculturaldiversityin Europe.Minneapolis:
Universityof MinnesotaPress.
Kymlicka,W. (1995). Multiculturalcitizenship: A liberaltheoryofminor-
ity rights.New York:OxfordUniversityPress.
Kymlicka,W. (2004). Foreword.In J. A. Banks(Ed.),Diversityand citi-
zenshipeducation:Globalperspectives (pp. xiii-xviii). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2004). Cultureversuscitizenship:The challengeof
racializedcitizenship in the United States. In J. A. Banks (Ed.),
Diversityand citizenshipeducation:Globalperspectives (pp. 99-126).
San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
LagassC,P. (Ed.). (2000). The Columbiaencyclopedia (6th ed.). New
York:ColumbiaUniversityPress.
Lipset,S. M. (1964). Introduction.In T. H. Marshall,Class,citizenship,
and socialdevelopment: Essaysof T. H. Marshall(pp. i-xx). Westport,
CT: Greenwood.
Litcher,J. H., & Johnson,D. W. (1969). Changesin attitudestoward
Negroesof White elementaryschoolstudentsafteruseof multiethnic
readers.JournalofEducationalPsychology, 60(2), 148-152.
Luchtenberg,S. (2004a). Ethnicdiversityand citizenshipeducationin
Germany.In J. A. Banks (Ed.), Diversityand citizenshipeducation:
Globalperspectives (pp. 245-271). San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
Luchtenberg,S. (Ed.). (2004b). Migration, educationand change.
London:Routledge.
Maira,S. (2004). Imperialfeelings:Youthculture,citizenship,andglobal-
ization.InM. Suirez-Orozco & D. B. Qin-Hilliard(Eds.),Globalization,
culture,and educationin thenewmillennium(pp. 203-234). Berkeley:
Universityof CaliforniaPress.
Mannitz,S. (2004). Collectivesolidarityand the constructionof social
identities in school: A case study of immigrantyouths in post-
unificationWest Berlin.In S. Luchtenberg(Ed.), Migration,educa-
tionand change(pp. 140-166). New York:Routledge.
Marshall,T. H. (1964). Class,citizenship,and socialdevelopment: Essays
ofT. H. Marshall.Westport,CT: Greenwood.
McGregor,J. (1993). Effectivenessof role playingand antiracistteach-
ing in reducingstudent prejudice.Journalof EducationalResearch,
86(4), 215-226.
Murphy-Shigematsu, S. (2004). Expandingthe bordersof the nation:
EthnicdiversityandcitizenshipeducationinJapan.InJ. A. Banks(Ed.),
Diversityand citizenshipeducation:Globalperspectives (pp. 303-332).
SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.
Nguyen, D. (2008). In betweenworlds:How Vietnamese immigrantyouth
construct social,cultural,andnationalidentifications.
Unpublisheddoc-
toraldissertation,UniversityofWashington,Seattle.
Nieto, S. (1999). Thelightin theireyes:Creatingmulticulturallearning
communities. New York:TeachersCollegePress.
Nussbaum,M. (2002). Patriotismand cosmopolitanism.In J. Cohen
(Ed.), Forloveofcountry(pp. 2-17). Boston:Beacon.
Okihiro,G. Y. (1994). Marginsand mainstreams: AsiansinAmericanhis-
tory.Seattle:Universityof WashingtonPress.
Osler,A., & Starkey,H. (2005). Changingcitizenship:Democracyand
inclusionin education.New York:Open UniversityPress.
Osler,A., & Vincent, K. (2002). Citizenshipand thechallengeofglobal
education.Stoke-on-Kent,UK: TrenthamBooks.
Parker,W. C. (2002). Teachingdemocracy: Unityand diversityin public
life. New York:TeachersCollegePress.
Patterson,O. (1977). Ethnicchauvinism:Thereactionary impulse.New
York:Stein and Day.
Pettigrew,T. F. (2004).Intergroup contact:Theory,research, andnewper-
spectives.InJ.A. Banks& C.A. M. Banks(Eds.),Handbook on
ofresearch
multicultural
education (2nded.,pp.770-781). SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ramirez,M., III, & Castafieda,A. (1974). Culturaldemocracy, bicogni-
tivedevelopment, and education.New York:AcademicPress.
Rosaldo,R. (1997). Culturalcitizenship,inequality,and multicultural-
ism. In W. V. Flores& R. Benmayor(Eds.),Latinoculturalcitizen-
ship:Claimingidentity,space,and rights(pp. 27-28). Boston:Beacon.
Schlesinger,A. M. (1991). ThedisunitingofAmerica:Reflectionson a
multiculturalsociety.Knoxville,TN: Whittle Direct Books.
Schofield,J.W. (2004). Fosteringpositiveintergrouprelationsin schools.
In J.A. Banks& C. A. M. Banks(Eds.),Handbookofresearch on multi-
culturaleducation(2nded., pp. 799-812). SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.
Scott, J. W. (2007). Thepoliticsof the veil. Princeton,NJ: Princeton
UniversityPress.
Simpson,J. A., & Weiner,E. S. C. (Eds.). (1989). TheOxfordEnglish
dictionary(2nd ed., Vol. 3). New York:OxfordUniversityPress.
This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:48:49 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Sizemore,B. A. (1973). Shatteringthe meltingpot myth.In J.A. Banks
(Ed.), Teachingethnicstudies:Concepts and strategies
(43rdYearbook,
pp. 72-101). Washington, DC: National Council for the Social
Studies.
Slavin,R. E. (1979). Effectsof biraciallearningteams on cross-racial
friendships.JournalofEducationalPsychology, 71(3), 381-387.
Slavin,R. E. (1983). Cooperative learning.New York:Longman.
Slavin,R. E. (1985). Cooperativelearning:Applyingcontacttheoryin
desegregatedschools.JournalofSocialIssues,41(3), 45-62.
Slavin,R. E. (2001). Cooperativelearningand intergrouprelations.In
J. A. Banks& C. A. M. Banks(Eds.),Handbookofresearchon multi-
culturaleducation(pp. 628-634). SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.
Slavin,R. E., & Madden,N. A. (1979). Schoolpracticesthatimproverace
relations.AmericanEducational ResearchJournal,16(2), 169-180.
Solomos, J. (2008). Raceand racismin Britain (4th ed.). New York:
PelgraveMacmillan.
Suirez-Orozco,M. M. (2006, March13). Commentary:A questionof
assimilation.U.S. News e&WorldReport,pp. 34, 36.
Takaki,R. (1993). A differentmirror: A historyofmulticulturalAmerica.
Boston:Little,Brown.
Takaki, R. (1998). Strangers fom a differentshore:A historyofAsian
Americans(Rev.ed.). Boston:Little,Brown.
Torres, C. A. (1998). Democracy,education, and multiculturalism:
Dilemmas of citizenshipin a global world. Comparative Education
Review,42(4), 421-447.
Trager, H. G., & Yarrow,M. R. (1952). Theylearn what theylive:
Prejudicein youngchildren.New York:Harper& Brothers.
UniversalDeclarationof Human Rights.(1948). RetrievedDecember
4, 2007, fromhttp://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html
U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Statisticalabstractof the United States
(120th ed.). Washington,DC: U.S. GovernmentPrintingOffice.
Weiner,M. J., & Wright,F. E. (1973). Effectsof undergoingarbitrary
discriminationupon subsequentattitudestowarda minoritygroup.
JournalofAppliedSocialPsychology, 3(1), 94-102.
Westheimer,J. (Ed.). (2007). Pledgingallegiance:Thepoliticsofpatrio-
tismin America' s schools.New York:TeachersCollegePress.
Wong Fillmore, L. (2005). When learninga second languagemeans
losing the first. In M. M. Suirez-Orozco,C. Suairez-Orozco,&
D. Qin (Eds.), The new immigration:An interdisciplinary reader
(pp. 289-307). New York:Routledge.
Woodson, C. G. (1977). The mis-educationof the Negro.New York:
AMS Press.(Originalworkpublished1933)
Yawkey,T. D., & Blackwell,J. (1974). Attitudesof 4-year-oldurban
Black children toward themselvesand Whites based upon multi-
ethnicsocialstudiesmaterialsand experiences.JournalofEducational
Research,67(8), 373-377.
Young, I. M. (1989). Polityand groupdifference:A critiqueof the ideal
of universalcitizenship.Ethics,99(2), 250-274.
Young, I. M. (2000). Inclusionand democracy.New York: Oxford
UniversityPress.
AUTHOR
JAMESA. BANKSis the KerryandLindaKillingerProfessorof Diversity
Studiesand Directorof the Centerfor MulticulturalEducationat the
Universityof Washington,Box 353600, 110 MillerHall, Seattle,WA
His researchfocuseson multicul-
98195-3600;jbanks@u.washington.edu.
turaleducationanddiversityandcitizenshipeducationin a globalcontext.
Manuscriptreceived December 10, 2007
Revisionreceived February21,2008
Accepted February22, 2008
APRIL2008 139