Countering ‘Social Curriculum’ and ‘Alternative Truths’

Guest Blogger: Abbes Maazaoui

In this era of rising xenophobia, ethnocentrism and “alternative truths”, the question that may be raised, particularly during and after the US elections, is whether schools and universities are doing enough to educate students and prepare them for what might be called “ le vivre ensemble” (= living together) or global citizenship. For it is academia where students are expected to learn how to think critically, make ethical choices and develop an inclusive global mindset.

One quick way to appraise what higher education institutions teach students and what types of curriculum, courses and experiences they offer is to examine actual course schedules.

For instance, a quick glance at Lincoln University‘s fall and spring courses, as listed on the Registrar’s website for 2016-17 academic year, reveal a glaring lack of diversity in course offerings. Major regions of the world and notably those marginalized and/or demonized in today’s polarized world are inexistent. Our students, like most Americans, are left with what Carlos Cortés calls “social curriculum.” Their education about other cultures, countries and religions is mainly fed through media of all kinds (TV, film, Facebook, Tweeter, etc.).

The question is to consider what can be done to strengthen student learning with regard to multicultural/international education and help confront the illiberal forces of political, social and religious extremism. Here are a few areas where these forces can be resisted:

1.     A globally-rooted curriculum. In most cases, this implies revising the curriculum and developing strategies for incorporating multicultural education in all academic majors, not just foreign language programs. Courses targeting marginalized cultures, religions and regions should be developed with specific assessable outcomes in all majors.

2.     The liberal arts component of the curriculum. Students should be provided with ample opportunities to explore multiple perspectives, the clash of truths instead of the “clash of civilizations,” to make judgments based on facts and not opinions, and counter the effects of ethnocentrism. Truly multidisciplinary (team-taught) courses should be implemented. For instance, developing team-taught courses has been a Lincoln’s dream for a long time, but as far as I know, was never really carried out with any coherence or consistency.

3.     Faculty development grants should include money for developing international/multicultural courses.

4.     Study abroad activities and exchange programs. Cross-cultural contacts have the potential of increasing student tolerance, broadening their horizons, and lessening the harmful effects of “social curriculum.” “Currently, less than 10% of U.S. students graduating with associates or baccalaureate degrees each year study abroad” (Institute of International Education).  But we should do more, and aim at reaching 25%, 50% of students going abroad. This is true of Lincoln University too. Around 3-4% of students study abroad annually at Lincoln. As the chair of the Committee on International/Global Initiatives, I must acknowledge here the efforts of the current Lincoln’s president who made study abroad a cornerstone of his educational leadership, as well as the growing number of colleagues who have been accompanying (or are planning to accompany) students abroad.

 These four areas, in my view, must be strengthened in all U.S. institutions, particularly liberal arts colleges, if we are concerned about true diversity, tolerance and democracy in this country.  I hope these random thoughts will trigger serious reflection and discussion, and better yet, be followed by action.