Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education

Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education

Mary Clancy

Kutztown University
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
2

Abstract

This paper investigates three key practices in critical multicultural art education; Art Teacher

Identity Formation, Representing Cultures in Authentic and Meaningful Ways, and Enacting

Critical Multicultural Education Curriculum. Starting with a brief history on multicultural

education, and critiques of past and present practices this paper goes on to explore art education

practices that critique systematic power structures, combats cultural subjugation, and provides

representations of cultures that break away from exoticizing or “othering.” Throughout the

exploration of these practices I share some of my experiences and beliefs about why critical

multicultural art education is necessary now more than ever.

INTRODUCTION
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
3

I received my Bachelor in Fine Arts from Tyler School of Art. I remember initially

feeling excited--yet nervous-- to be attending a school with such a talented student body. I

majored in sculpture, and in one of my first studio classes in my major I experienced a heated

critique. The assignment was open ended, but from the beginning of my learning my professors

stressed the importance of concept. One of my peers, a white female, made an installation that

included a painting that appeared to reference black face. The older students in the class

immediately claimed the installation was offensive, and that it was problematic. The maker of

the installation became defensive and the discussion got more intense. I remember feeling

resentful towards the artist’s reaction and her lack of understanding, but at the time I did not

question why she reacted out of such defense, or why she didn’t see the reference in her painting

to begin with. I just remember being angry at her personally.

Reflecting on this event today I’m left thinking, how common is it that students who are

accepted into some of the most “elite” art schools are taught how imagery can carry deep

meaning from a cultural and political perspective during their K-12 education. Today I believe

that she did not intentionally create a painting to reference black face, but that she was never

exposed to authentic and meaningful conversations about race, and how imagery has deep

meanings that viewers make associations with and interpret. I will never personally understand

the gravity of being a Black person in America, but I have experienced being “othered” as an

adopted Asian American woman. As an art educator I’m passionately committed to exposing my

future students to authentic and meaningful representations of cultures, providing a safe space for

students to have difficult conversations about race, and fostering a sense of community within

my classroom. I’m researching art education discourses that would enable me to achieve this

goal, and I have found that the discourses I am most interested in fall under critical multicultural
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
4

education. Questions that led my research were: why aren’t students taught about race, current

tensions in the world, and the importance of discomfort in those conversations. Where else do we

as a society expect them to learn this and engage in conversation in a safe space; And why does

authentic representation matter in art.

While I cannot tackle and address all of these questions in this paper, I have identified

three main components that make up critical multicultural art education: art teacher identity

formation, representing cultures in authentic and meaningful ways, and enacting critical

multicultural art education curriculum. I will detail a brief history of multicultural education,

speak about the misappropriation of the multicultural framework (Acuff 2015), present

discourses I found most applicable to apply critical multicultural education in art, and advocate

for critical dialogue throughout each practice. I will discuss how questioning one's identity and

position in society is at the foundation of being a culturally responsive teacher, how authentic

and meaningful representations really matter, and how practicing educators infuse critical

multiculturalism into their pedagogy. I believe critical dialogue needs to be at the center of all of

these practices to be most effective.

BRIEF HISTORY OF MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION & SUBSEQUENT

PROBLEMS

Multicultural education (MCE) theory was created during the 1960’s United States civil

rights movement (Chapman & Grant, 2010). The driving force behind this theory was to provide

an equal opportunity for all students to learn despite race, gender, and socioeconomic class

(Acuff, 2016). MCE can be traced back to the social action of Black Americans and other

people of color who challenged institutionalized racism during the civil rights movement. Over
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
5

time other marginalized groups like women's rights advocates, and the LGBTQ community

joined the fight for accurate and equal representation (Chapman & Grant, 2010). Advocates of

MCE called for accurate histories, representations, and contributions of people of color and

women that were not stereotyped and marginalized. Scholars of MCE have since identified

including groups like the LGBTQ community, and people with disabilities, but most MCE

scholarship primarily focuses on race, class, or gender (Chapman & Grant, 2010).

Critics of MCE have had opposing views of its effectiveness. During the 1980’s a campaign

against MCE sprung up that had support from even some of the most powerful conservative

politicians. Conservative scholars like Arthur Schlesinger Jr., E.D. Hirsch, Denish D’Souza, and

Lyn Chaney insisted that Eurocentric curriculum be the focus taught in school districts as it

represents a sense of cohesive culture, and a less painful history. MCE was viewed as having too

radical a nature (Chapman & Grant, 2010). This year the Trump administration has taken a a

similar approach to stop institutions and schools from teaching critical race theory and anti-racist

trainings (Knutson & Rummler, 2020). Critics of MCE on the opposite spectrum have viewed

current practices as superficial and inaccurate to representations of racially and culturally

marginalized groups (Desai, 2000).

Joni Boyd Accuff has written several articles about the misappropriation of the

multicultural framework, “These practices trivialize art and perpetuate racist beliefs and

misinform people about culture and art” (Acuff, 2014, p. 68). I remember as a young student

creating artifacts like totem poles out of paper towel rolls, making African masks, and eating

ethnic foods on a foreign culture day at school. Although celebratory, these activities did nothing

to question positions of power, or create authentic learning experiences. They acted more as

activities to check off a diversity box and further dilute MCE’s originally intended purpose of
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
6

meaningful representations of disenfranchised groups (Acuff, 2014). This approach to MCE has

been named by Education criticalists as “liberal multiculturalism” (Kraehe & Acuff, 2013). I

believe the experiences I had during my K-12 education were well intentioned but ultimately

reinforced exoticizing non-white cultures furthering issues at the root of liberal multiculturalism.

Liberal multiculturalism can be used for rejecting racism and prejudice without

recognizing the power and privilege that the dominant group holds (Ladson-Billings, 2004).

Because teachers in the United States have continued to misrepresent marginalized groups of

people, and have perpetuated a sense of “otherness” scholars have called for a more critical

approach to MCE,

“one that identifies race at the crux of institutional oppression, critiques systematic

power structures, fosters critical consciousness, works to dismantle hegemonic

narratives, and combats cultural subjugation” (Acuff, 2018, p.36). This discourse is

known as critical multicultural education (Acuff, 2018).

MCE has a history rooted in social justice that called for an equal opportunity for all

students, and accurate histories and representations of marginalized groups. Ultimately it was

applied in a way that didn’t actually further that cause and Education criticisms have identified

critical multiculturalism as a better way to be a culturally responsive teacher. This paper will be

exploring practices of critical multicultural education that I will enact and apply as a future art

educator.

ART TEACHER IDENTITY FORMATION

While researching how to apply critical multicultural pedagogy in the classroom, I found

that in order to enact a curriculum that calls for a critique of power, we have to first identify our

own positions and identities within the power structures that have existed in America. We have
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
7

to do the work of asking ourselves the hard and uncomfortable questions, and then do it again

(Rao & Pfeiler-Wunder, 2018). During my first semester of graduate school as a preservice

teacher, we did a brief assignment on identity. One aspect of identity we explored was our

professional identity. Reflecting back on this exercise, I realize that I only talked about

personality characteristics I wanted to identify with and portray like acceptance, being a good

listener, being respectful, etc. This exercise was a missed opportunity for me and my class to talk

about race, which is a large part of my identity that I had not even considered at the time. Rao

and Pfeiler-Wunder talk about the importance of preservice teachers exploring, understanding,

and questioning our professional identities, especially in relation to how we see “otherness”

(Pfeilier-Wunder & Tomel, 2014). Our roles as teachers often hold a greater sense of power and

status over our students in terms of portraying reality. We are in a position of authority and we

consciously or subconsciously impose our subjective points of view on our students (Krahe,

2015).

Examining one’s beliefs, experiences, values, practices, and backgrounds is a key

component to being a culturally responsive teacher (Pfeiler-Wunder & Tomel, 2014). Because a

main component of critical multicultural education calls for a critique of power structures,

excluding the impacts that race and positions of power have on teacher identity formation

perpetuates the notion of liberal multiculturalism (Thomas 2020). Understanding how and why

our identities affect our teaching is critical, “their ideas about teaching create an implicit and

often unconscious lens through which newly encountered art education discourses are filtered,

playing a vital role in the ways new concepts and practices are tried out, accepted, or resisted”

(Thomas, 2020, p. 33). By not understanding our own biases we risk the ability to enact

discourses that could make our students feel seen. It is my hope that every art educator would
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
8

want their students to feel seen, accepted and included. Critical reflection of one’s beliefs,

values, and assumptions as a preservice and practicing educator are essential to critical

multicultural pedagogy (Knight 2006). I have chosen to include a chart (Figure 1) of questions

for critical reflection written by Wanda Knight that gets to the heart of challenging ourselves to

be culturally responsive art teachers.

Questions for Critical Reflection

Self
● Have I identified and confronted my biases and prejudice?
● Are my views ethno-and/or egocentric?
● Do I celebrate diversity?
● Do I demonstrate respect for cultures and backgrounds different from my own?
● Am I committed to behaviors, dispositions, and values that are multicultural?

Students
● For whom am I designing the art education curriculum?
● Have I made genuine attempts to make visual culture and art education relevant to all
my students?
● Do I provide a classroom environment in which all students’ cultures and their art
forms are recognized, shared, and respected?
● Am I knowledgeable about, and sensitive to students’ differing cultural backgrounds,
values, traditions, and learning styles?

Curriculum and teaching

● Do I afford students and community opportunities to teach me what I don’t know or
understand about the art of their cultures?
● If I teach children or adolescents from only one cultural group, do I tend to ignore
issues of diversity?
● With respect to art education curricula, do I view arts as socially constructed, and
consider which cultures have exerted dominancance, and which have been erased in
such constructions?
● Do I raise questions about art or frame questions in ways that encourage others to see
that the arts may serve similar as well as unique functions and roles in diverse cultures?
● Are gaps (i.e., ethnic minority perspectives) in multicultural learning about the arts
being addressed?
● What more can I do to insure that issues of diversity permeate the entire art education
curriculum?

Learning Environment
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
9

● What is the emotional and psychological climate in my art classroom?

● Whose work is displayed? To what student needs do I attend?
● Whose work is dominant? Why?
Figure 1. Knight’s (2006) Questions for Critical Reflection

I found myself thinking about these questions throughout my research and find them very useful

as a preservice teacher, particularly the questions under curriculum and teaching and learning

environment. I believe that educators of preservice teachers need to give their students

opportunities to ask themselves these questions.

Amelia Kraehe wrote about case studies of two Black preservice art teachers exploring

teacher identity centered around an ethnographic investigation. She recounts some of their

racialized experiences with professors and student teaching. Krahe expresses the importance of

preservice teachers having a space and a framework to have dialogue about critical reflections

(Kraehe, 2015)

“Without such opportunities, important aspects of art teachers’ identities are

suppressed. This is not only invalidating to preservice teachers of color, but it also

diminishes the capacities of all prospective art teachers to teach equitably and reflexively

in the context of social inequality” (2015, p. 209)

Kraehe’s observation really resonated with me and reiterated that in order for teachers to enact

culturally responsive pedagogy they need to first understand what their own experiences and

identities bring to the classroom (Rao & Wunder, 2018). Because examination of identity can be

done on a superficial level, it is important that we dig deeper and examine how our race, gender,

class, sexuality, and religion affect our identities, and how being positioned in these spaces

directly affects our positions of power (Rao & Wunder, 2018). While reflecting is crucial to art
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
10

teacher identity formation, dialogue needs to occur to understand how our identities intersect

within power structures.

REPRESENTING CULTURES IN AUTHENTIC AND MEANINGFUL WAYS

One of MCE’s biggest critiques today is it’s inaccurate and superficial representations of

cultures that perpetuate social and systemic inequalities (Desai, 2000; Acuff et. al 2012; Kraehe

& Acuff, 2013; Acuff, 2018). After understanding one's identity and how it is positioned in

systematic power structures, we can begin to ask ourselves why we are choosing to represent a

specific culture, keeping the identities of our students in mind (Desai, 2000). Understanding who

your students are, and considering how they might perceive representations from their own

cultural lens is equally as important as understanding your own perceptions. Also understanding

that if your student population is not one that is diverse, representation and exposure to art and

experiences of different races and cultures still matters greatly (Acuff, 2012-13). Critical

multicultural education is not just beneficial for students of color, but necessary to students of

privilege in changing the Master Narratives within education. Frances Kenndell discusses what

white people get from exploring and questioning the issue of systematic oppression and asserts

that it has the potential to create more genuine connections, change worldviews to be more

accurate from Eurocentric narratives, and foster meaningful conversations (Kenndall, 2013).

Once we understand why we are choosing to include a specific culture in our teaching, we have

the responsibility of representing that culture accurately and in a way that does not perpetuate

“othering” or cultural subjugation (Acuff 2018). Some examples of superficial representations I

have experienced during my K-12 art education are: making a sugar skull in celebration of Day

of the Dead without any real explanation of cultural significance, traditions, or a larger
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
11

connection to spiritual beliefs, and sculpting Native American spirit animals out of clay with no

dialogue or understanding of cultural significance.

Because it is difficult to speak for a culture or race unless it is your own, I understand the

evolution of marginalized groups having no representation, to representation that promotes

exoticizing or stereotyping. While I understand how MCE has been institutionalized it is

imperative that the work of authentic and meaningful representation continues. What I have

come to conclude authentic and meaningful representations to mean are ones that critique

structures of systematic oppression, question stereotypes, present accurate representations that do

not perpetuate “othering,” and allow for critical dialogue among students.

It is my experience as well as most of my peers from undergrad, to have not been

exposed to artists outside of the traditional canon of art (predominantly European males) prior to

university. It is harder to imagine yourself doing something if you do not have anyone that

represents you to model from. Acuff, Hirak, and Nangah speak about the consequences of a

Master Narrative, “The Master Narrative is an ‘ideological script that is being imposed by the

people in authority on everybody else’” (Moyers, 1990, cited in Acuff et. al, 2012, p. 7). The

Master Narrative has no room for marginalized people to enter because it threatens the idealistic

history of people in power. Culturally responsive pedagogy enables multiple points for students

to engage and see themselves within the curriculum (Acuff et. al, 2012). Acuff talks about how

literature is one of the ways she challenges the Master Narrative within her curriculum, and how

most textbooks affirm the dominant European American history. It is important to think about

the sources you use for lessons and demonstrations (Acuff et. al, 2012). Primarily or only

representing artwork from people in power reinforces hegemonic norms, and does not aim to

teach with every student in mind (Acuff, 2014).

Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
12

ENACTING CRITICAL MULTICULTURAL ART EDUCATION CURRICULUM

While researching it was hard to find scholarly articles with viewpoints from K-12

teachers enacting critical multicultural art education curriculum. The majority of my findings

were written by scholars and educators of preservice or current art teachers in a higher level

education context (Desai 2000; Knight 2006, Acuff et. al 2012; Kraehe & Acuff 2013; Pfeiler-

Wunder & Tomel, 2014, Kraehe 2015; Acuff 2012, 2014, 2016; Rao & Pfeiler-Wunder, 2018,

Thomas 2020). I believe that the majority of culturally responsive practices they utilize in

teaching their college level courses can be applicable to practices that K-12 art teachers can

implement with their students.

Acuff discusses action research she took in addressing the question, “how can an art

educator infuse multiculturalism into “general” undergraduate art education courses” (Acuff,

2012-13, p. 85). She organized her findings in four categories, Plan, Act, Observe, and Reflect.

She found planning her course with the goal of embedding critical multiculturalism into her

curriculum to be essential to enacting multiculturalism. Acuff did this through course objectives

in a syllabi and selected literature (Acuff 2012-13). I found this really helpful when thinking

about ways to intentionally and thoughtfully embed critical multiculturalism into my future

curriculum.

The actions Act and Observe were paired by Acuff. She asserted that authentic dialogue

was the most effective for her class in generating new perspectives and questioning ideas. By

guiding her students through actions centered around thoughtfully chosen literature and critical

dialogue, she was able to observe conversations they had with one another and assess how these

readings were affecting them (Acuff, 2012-13). I have learned as a preservice teacher that

observing students is an essential element of teaching. It can be effective in assessing them but is
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
13

also utilized when students are working independently. I am interested in observing my future

students not only in things that they say in class conversations, but things that they do not say.

Kraehe and Acuff both touch on people of color silencing themselves or code-switching

(adjusting one's style of speech, behavior, and appearance to make others comfortable with the

goal of receiving fair treatment) out of fear of being stereotyped (Acuff, 2012-13, Kraehe 2015).

Acuff also describes white students being hesitant in speaking on topics centered around race and

other “difficult” conversations (Acuff, 2012-13). By observing these silent communications,

teachers can learn a lot from their students’ opinions, beliefs, and fears.

Reflect is the last category Acuff uses to address how she infuses critical multicultural

education in her teaching. She reflects on what she found successful and on where she fell short

(Acuff, 2012-13). This reflection echoes similar actions I have found in my research of

questioning and understanding not just your intentions, but your impact (Dewhurst, 2010;

Pfeiler-Wunder & Tomel, 2014; Rao & Pfeiler-Wunder, 2018).

While it may be less controversial and uncomfortable for art teachers to create curriculum

that stays on the surface of diversity, it leaves no real opportunity to confront societal issues from

the past and present (Knight, 2006). In my first semester of graduate school I was creating a

lesson for 5th graders about identity using contemporary artist Nari Ward as an artist connection.

Nari Ward is a Black American artist born in Jamaica, much of his work is about issues of race,

poverty, and consumerism. I found myself trying to research how to appropriately introduce

topics of racism and poverty to elementary students and had a hard time finding suggestions I

could practically apply to my lesson. I instead chose to leave the issues that are essential to

Ward’s work out of my lesson, which resulted in a superficial representation of the artist.

Reflecting on why I chose to do this I realize it felt more comfortable and easier. After realizing
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
14

what is at stake by omitting controversial topics because they are uncomfortable, King poses the

question for art educators, “whether to use or reject contemporary art that brings to our attention

uncomfortable and even taboo issues that exist today?” (King, 2006, p. 44) I hope to be able to

follow through with making the uncomfortable yet necessary choices in my future curriculum to

enact critical multicultural education.

CONCLUSION

Three main components to applying critical multicultural education are art teacher

identity formation, representing cultures in authentic and meaningful ways, and following

through with enacting critical multicultural education pedagogy in art curriculum. These

practices need to be supported and understood through dialogue (Knight, 2006; Acuff, 2012-3,

2014, 2016; Kraehe 2015). Art teacher identity formation is essential in understanding where you

are situated in terms of power and privilege, and necessary for acknowledging your students

beliefs, values, and cultures (Desai, 2000; King, 2006; Pfeiler-Wunder & Tomel, 2014; Rao &

Pfeiler-Wunder, 2018; Thomas, 2020). Representing cultures in authentic and meaningful ways

is imperative to push back against current critiques of multiculturalism, introducing superficial or

stereotypical cultural practices perpetuates a position of dominance and supports hegemonic

norms (Knight, 2006; Acuff, 2014). Enacting critical multicultural education pedagogy is the

practice I am most interested in exploring further. I found Acuff’s four categories of Plan, Act,

Observe, and Reflect to be most practical to me currently as a preservice educator (Acuff, 2012-

13).

Reflecting on my own K-12 experience in art education, I see a disconnect in utilizing

critical multicultural education practices. I also believe that my school’s art program was better

developed than a lot of my friends in different school districts. I was not exposed to diverse
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
15

artists that made work about questioning current socio-political issues until college. I believe the

work of critically examining ourselves as teachers is more necessary now than ever. With a

population that is becoming rapidly more diverse and more young people expressing their

concerns with injustices in America, meaningful conversations and authentic representations of

artists that reflect our students' cultures are needed now more than ever (Knight, 2006). I am

cautious yet hopeful that in light of this year's uprisings centered around issues of race, police

brutality, and systematic oppression that art educators will feel responsible for enacting critical

multiculturalism practices within their curriculum.

Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
16

References

Acuff, J. (2013). “How will you do this?” Infusing multiculturalism throughout art
teacher education programs. Journal of Cultural Research in Art Education, 30, 82-102.

Acuff, J. (2014). (Re)constructing cultural conceptions and practices in art education: An

action research study. Visual Arts Research, 40(2), 67-78.
https://doi.org/10.5406/visuartsrese.40.2.0067

Acuff, J. (2018). ‘Being’ a critical multicultural pedagogue in the art education

classroom. Critical Studies in Education, 59(1), 35-53.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2016.1176063

Acuff, J., Hirak, B., & Nangah, M. (2012). Dismantling a master narrative: Using
culturally responsive pedagogy to teach the history of art education. Art Education, 65(5),
6-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2012.11519186

Adejumo, C. (2002). Considering multicultural art education. Art Education, 55(2), 33-
39. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2002.11651484

Ballengee-Morris, C., & Stuhr, P. (2001). Multicultural art and visual cultural education
in a changing world. Art Education, 54(4), 6-13. https://doi.org/10.2307/3193897

Bastos, F., & Bastos, F. (2006). Border-crossing dialogues: Engaging art education
students in cultural research. Art Education, 59(4), 20-24.
https://doi.org/10.2307/27696154

Chapman, T., & Grant, C. (2010). Thirty years of scholarship in multicultural education.
Race, Gender & Class, 17(1-2), 39-46. https://doi.org/10.2307/41674722

Desai, D. (2000). Imaging difference: The politics of representation in multicultural art

education. Studies in Art Education, 41(2), 114-129. https://doi.org/10.2307/1320658

Dewhurst, M. (2010). An inevitable question: Exploring the defining features of social

justice art education, Art Education, 63(5), 6-13.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2010.11519082

Kendall, F. E. (2013). Understanding white privilege: Creating pathways to authentic

relationships across race (pp. 18-41). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203114162

Knight, W. (2006). Using contemporary art to challenge cultural values, beliefs, and
assumptions. Art Education, 59(4), 39-45. https://doi.org/10.2307/27696157

Knutson, J. & Rummler, O. (2020, September 23). Trump pushes to expand ban against
anti-racism training to federal contractors. Retrieved December 10, 2020, from
https://www.axios.com/trump-discrimination-training-federal-contractors-63b3515d-
9720-4d53-abfd-530262f9f9b8.html
Examining Key Practices in Critical Multicultural Art Education
17

Kraehe, A. M. (2015). Sounds of silence: Race and emergent counter-narratives of art

teacher identity. Studies in Art Education, 56(3), 199-213.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00393541.2015.11518963

Kraehe, A.M. & Acuff, J. (2013). Theoretical considerations for art education research
with and about “underserved populations”, Studies in Art Education, 54(4), 294-309.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00393541.2013.11518904

Ladson-Billings, G. J. (2003). New directions in multicultural education complexities,

boundaries, and critical race theory. In Banks, J. & McGee-Banks, C. (Eds.), Handbook
of research on multicultural education, 2nd edition (pp. 50-65). Jossey-Bass.

Milbrandt, M. (2002). Addressing contemporary social issues in art education: A survey

of public school art educators in Georgia. Studies in Art Education, 43(2), 141-157.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1321001

Pfeiler-Wunder, A., & Tomel, R. (2014). Playing with the tensions of theory to practice:
Teacher, professor, and students co-constructing identity through curriculum
transformation. Art Education, 67(5), 40-46.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2014.11519289

Rao, S. S., & Pfeiler-Wunder, A. (2017). Intersections, identities, and the landscape of
preservice education. Art Education, 71(1), 32-37.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2018.1389590

Thomas, B. A. (2020). Traditional futures: Prospective art teachers' possible future

Selves. Art Education, 73(5), 32-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2020.1766923