中国加拿大研究网

Chen Xiaoying
Sichuan International Studies University
Abstract: This paper tries to introduce a fresh viewpoint in the studies of Canadian multicultural education presented by Manju Varma-Joshi et al in the University of New Brunswick. They set their filed work in New Brunswick where the Whites predominates the demographic composition. As the result of their studies Manju Varma-Joshi et al have recommended a hermeneutical dichotomy of Episodic versus Historic Perceptions to identify the different perceptions upon racist names-calling and other racist harassments. They have also suggested a trio-phase category of a) splintered universe; b) spiraling resistance; and c) disengagement to help recognize the evolving responses to racism on part of the victims, in this case the students of the visible minorities and the First Nations. Their commitment to Canadian multicultural education has made genuine input into the studies and stretched the academic horizon. At the same time, it has offered original perspectives to Chinese scholars in the similar studies.
The historical processes from the time when Senator Lester Bowles Pearson and his committee in 1963 put forward the recommendation and promotion of bilingualism, to the time when the Multiculturalism Act was officially introduced by the Canadian federal government in 1988 as a federal policy establishing a multicultural society in which all citizens of Canada enjoy full and equal rights in social activities, had inserted great impetus in the development of multicultural education in Canada. The progresses considering the social awareness and participation of the ethnocultural communities particularly in such areas as Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta, and British Columbia have been universally seen and appreciated, and yet alternatively the academia in North American or in an even broader sense the uncertainty and discrepancy upon the perceptions of multiculturalism and multicultural education have never come to any conclusion, an ideal and all-agreeable clarification has never been drawn[1]. This is because the focus is always the reflection of social or political shift of the time, demanding the correspondence of a proper banner. When now the multicultural education seems to have assumably benefited the visible minorities and the First Nations, the recent article entitled “Names Will Never Hurt Me?” in Harvard Educational Review by Manju Varma-Joshi, Cynthia J. Baker and Connie Tanaka at the University of New Brunswick has offered us a lens to examine the reality of multicultural education, and invited sophisticated contemplation upon the issue. Their study drew a focus on Province of New Brunswick where the Whites predominate the demographic majority, and its qualitative design was based on a constructivist research paradigm recommended by Lincoln & Guba, in which realities are considered to be "apprehensible in the form of multiple intangible mental constructions"[2]. The inquiry was to understand a phenomenon by reconstructing specific constructions of the reality, in this case, the specific realities include the minority students' interpretations of their experiences of racism and the initial understanding of the phenomenon by the investigators, Varma-Joshi et al. Then the reconstructed realities in the form of texts were treated within the framework of hermeneutical methodology, meaning was derived from the hermeneutic circle of interpretation that was repeatedly shared with participants until both the investigator and the students were in agreement. Such a thorough treatment of the texts enabled the students’ voices to be heard, perspectives to be expressed, both of which took center phase as they were, so that their racial experience were appreciated accordingly with the time, the place and the event as when it had happened. The result of their study and examination has contributed to the accumulation of multiculturalism studies in Canada. It also serves as good materials for other researchers in the similar circle, and is worthwhile as a fresh viewpoint for further studies in future.
Discrepancies in perspectives and responses on racism
Canada as a whole is viewed as a successful country for multiculturalism promotion and implementation, nevertheless, in place like New Brunswick where the visible minorities and the First Nations are found in the predominating white settings, their racist experiences in school and in society are not yet known as they deserve. Little concern has yet been designated to their need.
Discrepancies in perspectives on racism：Tracing back the studies done in Canada since mid 90s, few cases have been dealt with the problems and situations of education of the visible minorities and the First Nations. The completed studies and research so far mainly include Kakembo’s(1994) work on Nova Scotian Blacks' success in public education, Spalding's (1999) study of Black unemployment in New Brunswick, Calliste's (1994) review of antiracist educational initiatives, and Darisme's (1996) investigation of the formation of racial gangs in predominantly White locations[3], some of which are Unpublished manuscripts yet. Therefore, the investigation of Varma-Joshi et al, on the account of their praise-winning methodologically sound study with first-hand field work texts and the well-sampled participants, works as pointer towards where the racial problems are seen in existence and in severe situation in schools, and in multiculturalism implementation on part of school white authority figures. The vehicle they selected to reveal the discrepancy in perspectives on racial issue is the most commonly known name-calling at school. They found out discrepancies in judging, a) if the name-calling pertains racial bias and discrimination; b) justification of the consequent reactions upon such a name-calling or similar racial bias and discrimination, or rather when is addressed as “nigger”, or ”wagon burner” all of a sudden, what would be considered a justifiable reaction on part of the victims, in this case, the minority students. Actually, a deeply buried meta-philosophical perception goes before this judgment, which asks if racialism actually exists in New Brunswick schools. The authority figures resisted the perception of name-calling with an indication of racial bias or discrimination, as they believed that even if racial inclination could be found within school environment, it is not in any form of severity. But the minority students and their parents held that racialism is an enduring element that perpetuates in life and in society, as they argued racialized name-calling was the root for a serious form of harassment and violence. They also held that of all the social institutes where racial harassments and violence occurred, school is the most commonly identified as the site where the first and most frequent racial slurs are encountered, and the most devastating consequences of racial incidents are experienced.
Discrepancies in responses on racism：As for the proper reaction and responsive strategies upon racial slurs, school authority figures’ views contradicted with that of the minority students and their parents. The authority figures and teachers are said to adopted a “color-blind” approach, firmly argued that racism, of any kind, was not a severe problem in New Brunswick, trying to deracialized innate structure of the racial discrimination. They signified a need to explore racialism from the point of view of the victims, reexamine definitions of racialism, and enhance school policies aimed at addressing hate-motivated behavior. But the visible minority students perceived White authority figures as resistant to recognizing the presence of racism. They were said to have been shocked by the first unexpected racial slur encounters and retreated to self-denials for protection, or relied on their peers of the same race for support and coping strategies. Unfortunately, in many cases, their protective strategies often resulted in a pattern of destructive violence, self-denial and self-loathing.
The school authority’s resistance to the racialized name-calling and their minimization of it into a common adolescent behavior is indeed a reluctant attitude towards the existence of racialism, posing the dismissive responses on racial discrimination. Nevertheless, one of the consequences of such attitude and posture would be encouragement to the possibilities of accustomed practices of undetectable racialism. As P. Essed argues that the deracialization of racial slurs downplays the action as a simple conflict in which both sides participate equally. When victims refuse to turn the other cheek, their reaction is framed as the actual problem, rather than the discipline of the perpetrator [4]. A. Lewis also points out elsewhere that the inaction/or reframe racial slurs are actually frustrations that make the insulted student a victim twice over. Observations of New Brunswick schools abiding by a zero-tolerance to violence policy also revealed a tendency to discount and deracialize derogatory taunts on a policy level. As the zero-tolerance to violence policies did not recognize or include name-calling as a violent act, when minority students were called a racist name, the perpetrator was only told to "behave." If the zero-tolerance to violence policies intended only for those ultimate blood-shedding violence while dismissed or waived off racist taunts like name-calling, the effect would unintentionally hurt the minority students, the origination of such an unconsciousness is due to the diverse recognition of racialism.
Episodic versus historic perceptions
Varma-Joshi et al at University of New Brunswick concluded, from the investigation texts of the sample minority students’ experiences, a hermeneutical dichotomy of verification to identify the conflicting positions toward name-calling which were actually symptomatic of a second, more complex dichotomy of understanding between the victims and White authority figures. They termed this clash the episodic versus the historic response to racism. In the confrontation of a racist taunt or harassment, the victim is designated to an individual, yet it is not to be regarded as an isolated case but one with historical association, first, to the Indigenous Black and First Nations individuals, they would have to deal with their own group's history with racism though long buried and unforgotten events like colonization, slavery, and segregation; second, to the younger generations of the same race when faced with a racist incident such as name-calling, they would not see it as a particular episode but would respond in a manner that confronts a history of racism and of their personal racial experiences. What requires a particular attention is that those minority students do not step into a historical perception immediately after first racial experience. They may initially take it as an isolated episode of common conflict with peers, but an accumulation of similar episodes under similar circumstances would lead them to an unavoidable realization of non-particular episode any more. They are brought up to a realization of racial diversity and racially different experience, while their teachers or school authority figures would rather see the conflict as single incident unburdened by previous experiences and accordingly deemed a victim's response (usually violent) to racist taunts inappropriate or overacting. This is especially true in the circumstance of name-calling, the victim minority student was told by the principle that name-calling did not constitute the result of hitting the tormentor because being called a nigger was no difference than being called a geek or a nerd. As to the understanding of the principle, either nigger or geek or nerd is no more than a sort of mischief of teenagers that indicates nothing of hate-motivated intention, then far from severity of racialism. The contradictory dichotomous verification between the episodic and the historic understanding of racism among different racial groups inadvertently led to perceived unfair treatment on the part of the minority students receiving little if any sympathetic sensitivity of those who have no previous experience. Therefore, the decision by authority often evolved further into a situation where the minority student had to endure a dual suffering in the end. As a matter of fact, the thinking that motivated the racist slur or racist insulting words creates a more destructive and more dangerous stance than the racist slur itself. The dispositional clash of racial scenario between perpetrator and victim would find the cause in the diversity of racial experience from each side that lead to different perceptions upon the same racial scenario. The introduction and application of the concepts of historical and episodic perceptions would then help to clarify and adjust the notion and verification of racial slurs and harassment.
Trio-phase category of evolving consequences on racism
With the concepts helping to reach clarification in appreciation of name-calling and the perception of racism, Varma-Joshi et al continued to categorize the distinct responses aftermath into three phases: splintered universe, spiraling resistance, and disengagement. Such a category works to expose the devastating consequences of psychological and emotional agonies bore on part of the victim minority students. They are as follows [7]:
Splintered universe：The minimizing and indifferent attitude on part of the school teachers and authority figures towards an initial racial scenario and the immediate decision made by the authority figures created a type of moral disorientation from which minority students found difficult to bring in complication with the hitherto norms and policies that school advocated and promoted. School that is supposed to be a place for departing judgment of right from wrong turned out to be a place ganging up with wrong doings in conspiracy of overlooking or minimizing the obvious racial insulting behaviors. Messages regarding schooling became deformed, and the dichotomous fact of school's role as a moral instructor as well as a traitor and violator of the advocated doctrines contradicts the perceptions minority students were taught to believe. Shockwaves of a splintering world not only reverberated through school, but within each participant's sense of self. The moral order that the minority students now experienced left them rather hard information that White people were superior and visible minorities were inferior. Some students used the term "second-class citizens" well illustrated their reluctance that in turn revealed their emotional helplessness and newly twisted moral judgment. School that rather than provides an opportunity for all children and youngsters to experience the joys of childhood friendships, harvesting knowledge of human wisdom, provided an ominous designation to allow minority students to catapult themselves into a shell of isolation for protection and survival by letting go those racial harassments. Not less minority students, on the account of intense feeling of loneliness and sense of self-preservation, remained aloof from most of school's learning environment, regarding schooling as hell tormenting. This is believed to be one of the reasons for dropouts among the minority students.
Spiraling resistance：The lack of redress regarding racial incidents left many of the minority students feeling matters had to be taken into their own hands as what is termed “retaliation”. Once the success of the specific retaliation advanced to an outcome of satisfaction of self-image or self-dignity, the preventative retaliation strategy would likely upgrade to a kind of organized self-salvaging towards any possible perpetrators of racial attack. This was said to be a critical moment at which minority students reckoned that the splintered world was such that racism was a societal genetic element innately imbedded, and nothing but eye-for-eye tact would open an opportunity for them to find a surviving space in the society This tactic involvement continued as their historical mindset to be reinforced by forthcoming racial encounters and finally hit the bottom of spiraling resistance. The sequential phase shift after racial encounter proved the transformation of single episodic perception upon racism to incident association of historical perceptions, and further involvement of suspicion of equality of human society. They would then filter any incidents around and label them with a racialized term to echo their historical mindset patterns. Unfortunately, their grouped retaliation would often be viewed as violent action by the appearance of such actions in general, rather than drawing any concern to bring them back to the participation of schooling. What they meant for self-protection and self-dignity degenerated into what was regarded as violent behaviors; while their status as victims consequently degenerated into that of perpetrators wanting for punishment. “Beating up anyone who looked at us funny” or “purposely seeking out venues” well exposed what the minority students felt at the stage. They chose to err on the side of reason - reason formed by a historical construction of racism, even when the possibility of prejudice was minimal, with an accusation that authority figures were not only indifferent but unfair as well in ignoring racist environments that provoked the violence. Logic of such an argument actually resulted in on one hand a further solidification of racial stereotypes that branded all the minorities as violent, unproductive citizens, and on the other, disadvantageous position of individual students who would face either low academic achievement or repeated school suspensions or even criminal records.
Disengagement: Some of the minority students realized that their violent actions were undermining their own lives, composing self-deprive of opportunities while connoting little to alert the racial stereotypes and the set social patterns. Consequently, they retreated out of their own will from violent retaliation and learning to abide by the school norms and social norms. From a public perspective, this phase appeared positive, in that displays of violence disappeared and victims seemed to give in to authority's expectations, a boast of Canadian successful implementation of multiculturalism. However, the damage simply occurred internally and the victim start to disengage from necessary participation of school activities and social involvements, even believe avoidance of racist actions was worth living a life devoid of fulfilling opportunities. They would abandon the enthusiasm for the ideal society of equality for all citizens and defined instead the proposition of racism as permanent fixture of human world, which would never go away. There is not anything that anyone could actually do to eliminate racism from the mentality of people in the society, where the color of the skin signified a secondary citizen identity. Verbal insults and harassments would be there to stay as they always are along the path of non-Whites’ lifelong struggles. This is a terrible pre-concept to be found winning any buyers but once it does, any attempt to redress the racism would bound to end in vain. Any remaining complaints regarding the unfair treatments or decisions that authority figures did in dealing with racial confrontation disappeared. Instead, the minority students complained and cursed their own luck or rather their own race for the fraud in order to live in peace despite of the inferior status. The damaging effect of this phase lay in the assumption that the ignoring racist slurs at school would be an encouragement for extension of the same behavior mode in future society. The ultimate education products, the students, brooded in school racist environment would consolidate a racist human society in coming future where a hierarchical citizenship maintains the societal pattern that the abusers continue to abuse and the abused continue to be abused, in place where efforts should be made to realize the ideology of proper understanding of racial diversity, of eliminating historical vestiges of racism. But to everyone’s disappointment, the younger generations of minorities followed suit of their fathers’ surviving motto: self-preservation with a price of self-denial.
3R plus R school education and recommendation
Though not all the minority students experienced the above trio-category, Varma-Joshi et al pointed out that all the undesirable conducts from color-blind approach to indifference of racial diversity to inaction upon or minimizing of racial conflicts to teenager mischief would eventually hurt the minority students just as intentional racism would do, while the former would leave deeper wounds on the account that it blurs the vision for the White to see for themselves the irrationality of the undeserved hidden privileges they enjoy without their awareness. It should be realized that the severity of dismissal of racial diversity and deracialization in any form is the same as obvious intention of racism. Failure to realize this critical point is to be equated with endorsement of racism. Scholars suggest that children are aware of racial differences, can cite experiences of racism, hold racial preferences, and demonstrate discriminatory beliefs as early as four years old[8]. Therefore, school is expected to provide with its teachers systematical antiracist pedagogy training in teacher-training programs, and include education and appreciation of racial diversity in the official curriculum. School authority figures are expected to put on to the agenda the fair treatments of possible conflicts between White and non-White students, taking into account the historical association of racial experience the minority students had with the current incident rather than engaging in a single episode approach so as not to bring duel sufferings to the victims. Schooling starts not from the traditional 3R's of education, but from another R, anti-Racism of education. Attention needs to be given to prevention of the potential students from joining the communities that undergo the domino effect of low educational achievement, minimal employment opportunities, and high poverty. Let children of all races enjoy the same environment of tolerance, respect and mutual appreciation and understanding, and let them all enjoy an equitable opportunity at academic and lifelong success.


参考文献：
[1] Wang, X. (2000). Origin, Practices and Limitation of Multiculturalism. American Study, 2000 (2): 44-80
[2] http://www.colorado.edu/journalism/mcm/qmr-const-theory.htm
[3] reference cited from Manju Varma-Joshi et al. Names Will Never Hurt Me? Harvard Educational Review. Cambridge: Summer 2004. Vol.74, Iss. 2;  pg. 175, 34 pgs
[4] Essed, P. (1991). Understanding everyday racism: An interdisciplinary theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
[5] Lewis, A. (2001). There is no "race" in the schoolyard: Color-blind ideology in an (almost) all-White school. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 781-811.
[6] Manju Varma-Joshi, Cynthia J. Baker, Connie Tanaka. (2004). Names Will Never Hurt Me? Harvard Educational Review. Cambridge: Summer 2004. Vol.74, Iss. 2;  pg. 175, 34 pgs
[7] ibid.
[8] Cameron, L., & Varma-Joshi, M. (1997). Citizens for a new century. Journal of Ethnic Studies, 29, 121-135.