Nana Supriatna **)

AUSTRALIA has currently been trying to rebuild the national culture and identity of its people, to relinquish its British-oriented past and establish a national identity to be a multicultural nation. However, Australian shools and the teachers basically transmit the mainstream culture, i.e. Anglo-Saxon culture. This article is concerned with my experiences taken from my thesis about mainstream teachers’ attitudes towards and understandings of the students’ cultural backgrounds in Victorian multicultural primary schools. I found that teachers’ attitudes towards students’ cultural backgrounds are based on the values of equality and individuality which are embedded Indonesia the mainstream society. Therefore, even though the teachers believe that cultural differences in schools should be preserved, encouraging their culturally diverse students into the mainstream way of live is very important.[1]

Aspects discussed in this article are: (1) demographic development in Australia influences cultural diversities in the schools; (2) how the mainstream teachers express and articulate their attitudes towards their culturally diverse students; (3) how mainstream teachears compliment their culturally diverse students; and (4) how Indonesian teachers who have a great challengge in Indonesian multicultural society learn from Australian experiences in implementing multiculturalism in schools.

 

Demographic Development

Australia has been a multicultural country since the first Europeans arrived on this continent. On the first fleet in 1788, there were 12 different nationalities which made up the star of having a multicultural society even though Australians of British origin denied this reality until the Federal Government adopted the concept of multiculturalism in the 1970’s.[2] According to the Buereu of Immigration Research (1991), immigration from Britain and Ireland have always been important. They comprised arround half of the migrant intake in the 1950’s and 1960’s but accounted for less than on third in the 1980’s.[3] Approximately 60 per cent of all post war arrivals have been immigrants from non-English speaking countries, among them are refugees who seek asylum and settlement. This demoghrapic development made this country a descriptively pluralistic society which consisted of many diverse ethnic groups including the indigenous Aborigines as well as those of the Anglo-Celtic majority. The concepts of the multiculturalism and multicultural education adopted by the Federal Government in the 1970’s were based on the reality of this country.

Since the Federal Government adopted the concept of the multiculturalism as the Federal Government’s policy in 1972, there have been public debates and diverse interpretations about the concept of multiculturalism that exists in Australia.[4] Even though Australians of British origin are still dominant, it has been realised by successive Federal Governments that the face of Australia is being transformed.[5] Since 1988 the debate between supporters and the opponents of multiculturalism has subsided.[6] In 1989, the Federal Government developed the policy of multiculturalism namely “National Agenda for a Multicultural Austrlia”.[7] The attitudes of mainstream Australian people towards the concept of multiculturalism, especially in term of increasing number of immigrants, is one of the main themes which have concerned many people. Mackay maintains that the concept of multiculturalism is relatively new and an uncomfortable concept for the Australian community,[8] even though the concept has been developed from the process of social change and cultural transformation since 1947.[9] Mackay argues that Australian (Anglo-Australian) attitudes towards immigrants are positive, however, their positives attitudes are still based on some requirements. The following are examples of the requirements:

 

Migrants are welcome, as long as they are prepared to embrace the Australian way of life and its values;

Migrants are welcome as long as they make the learning of the English language  a top priority;

Migrants are welcome as long as they are not robbing Australians of job and other opportunities (including educational opportunities);

Migrants are welcome as long as they leave their own racial and cultural tensions behind, and do not import prejudice and conflict into the Australian culture;

Migrants are welcome as long as they are largerly assimilated (with some tolerance for preservation of ‘quiant’ ethnic customs and behaviour);

Migrants are welcome as long as the culture they import (especially their food) enriches our culture and is accescible to us;

Migrants are welcome as long as they do not lower the Australian standard of living (by imposing too much strain on our urban infrastructure, or our welfare system).[10]

 

According to Mackay, Australians’ attitudes towards immigrants, even when benign, have generally been egocentric and one-sided: they have been conscious of their own difficulties in accommodating people who are racially and culturally different from themselves, but they have rarely spent much time contemplating the diffuculties face by immigrants in trying to comprehend and adapt to the Australian mainstream culture.[11]

Referring to the Mackay argument, it can be assumed that the Australian attitudes towards migrants represent the majority of the mainstream Anglo-Australians. Related to this notion, the majority of teachers in Australia schools are a part of the mainstream society whose backgrounds are generally Anglo-Celtic,[12] and they are also a product of their culture embodied in their society.[13] Therefore, it is reasonable that the Australian attitudes towards multiculturalism in relation to immigrants can be found in schools, especially in term of teachers’ attitudes towards diversity in classrooms. Partington argues that the majority of teachers are members of mainstream society, and so have a natural affinity for the values, beliefs, knowledge, and skills of the mainstream culture.[14]

Australian mainstream culture is Anglo-Celtic brought from Britain with the first period of European migration in 1788–1820 and followed by the second wave of migrants in 1850’s when gold was found in this continent.[15] Even though there have been so many different migrants from other parts of the world since the “gold rush”, the migrants from Britain have dominated and made this continent a Western country in the East. The migrants from Britain have brought their own culture from their country of origin and developed it in new country to be the mainstream way of life. They have preserved, maintained and developed their own customs, habits, traditions, beliefs, and values similar to those of their country of origin. Among the many cultures brought by many different migrant groups, the Anglo-Celtic culture is the dominant one.

Synott (1922:190) found that migrants and the demographic development in Australian history influences the educational institutions, structures, contents, practice and the culture of teaching. The features and characteristic of educational institutions and the culture of teaching are undeniably British origin.[16]

The culture of teaching in schools in Australia is likely to be part of the mainstream culture. Australian teachers are product of the mainstream culture. Therefore, to understand the culture of schooling and teaching in Australian schools, one should refer to the values, beliefs and customs held by this mainstream society. A question that can be raised here is, “What kind of values, beliefs and customs are embodied in this society which make up the characteristics of the culture of teaching in schools?” Donald Horne maintains that Australian society (mainstream Anglo-Celtic) acknowledges the values of egalitarianism, equality, liberty, fraternity and individuality.[17] Perhaps these values was brought by the Anglo-Celtic migrants from the French Revolution to be developed in this society. Bulbeck defines “equality” as follow:

 

Equality means that everyone is equally placed, receive the same rewards from society, or at least the same reward as anyone in similar situation. A watered-down version of equality is the notion of equality of opportunity, that everyone has the same chance to succeed.[18]

 

This notion can be placed in the context of education in Australian schools. Teachers akcnowledge that every student should be equally placed and receive the same reward from teachers. It means that all students, whatever their cultural backgrounds, have the same opportunities to succeed. Teachers in Australian mainstream culture acknowledge that the values of equality implemented in the cultural life in their school are part of the culture of teaching or teachers’ cultures.

To understand teachers’ attitudes toward their students, I will refer “content” and “form”, as the two important dimensions, of the culture of teachers. Hargreaves defines the content of teachers’ cultures as follows:

 

The content of teachers’ culture consists of the substanstive attitudes, values, beliefs, habits, assumptions, and ways of doing things that are shared within particular teacher groups, or among the wider teacher community. The content of teacher culture can be seen in what teachers think, say, and do. It is ‘the way we do things around here’.[19]

 

Hargreaves argues that the form of teachers’ cultures consist of the characteristic patterns of relationships and the form of association between members of those culture. The form of teachers’ cultures can be found in how the relations between teachers and their colleagues and their students are articulated and expressed in the ways they think, say, and do things.[20] Related to this notion, then, teachers’ attitudes towards their students should be seen in the cultural context held by society, i.e. the mainstream society.

However, the form ot teacher culture may change from time to time.[21] This means that the teachers’ attitudes towards their students may also change over time. The change is influenced by internal and external factors. To some extent, the external factors, such as economic, technological, political, demographic development and other phenomena happening in their society, are very important. Teachers in many countries are expected to help rebuild national culture and identities and to carry much of the burden of national reconstruction.[22] As a country, Australia has currently been trying to rebuild the national culture and identity of its people, to relinquish its British-oriented past and establish a national identity based on its global and regional character.[23] In the age of redefinition of the national identity, this great effort has been partly the responsibility of the educational institutions including the teachers.[24] This phenomena can also influence a change of the teachers’ attitudes towards their students.

Another factor which can influence a change of teachers’ attitudes towards their students is the demographic development. To understand this, such change should also be seen in the context of the characteristics of the demographic development (migration) and the ethnic characteristics of the teachers in Australian schools including the multicultural schools. Two factors are relevant to this notion. On the one hand, the majority of immigrants coming to Australia since the 1970’s are from non-English speaking backgrounds, mostly from Asia.[25] On the other hand, the majority of teachers who are teaching in Australian schools are from Anglo-Celtic backgrounds,[26] and consequently the schools basically transmit mainstream culture.[27]

The great diversity in Australia’s population brings not only different ways of thinking and behaving but also diverse way of communicating. Therefore, it is understandable that not all mainstream teachers can communicate effectively with all culturally diverse students. I assumme that teachers’ attitudes towards students coming from the same background as the teachers are likely to be different from their attitudes towards immigrants coming from different  cultural backgrounds.

For me, the two phenomena in Australian society, i.e. the demographic development which is characterised by the increasing of number of immigrants from a variety of different cultures, and the nature of the teaching profession where the majority of teachers have Anglo-Celtic backgrounds are very interesting.[28] The phenomena are very visible from a foreigner’s point of view. Some general questions can be raised here: (1) Do mainstream teachers have positive attitudes towards diversity and multiculturalism in schools?; (2) Do mainstream teachers have positive attitudes toward students’ cultural backgrounds in multicultural classrooms?; and (3) How do they reflect and articulate their attitudes towards culturally diverse students?

 

Empirical Evidence in

Multiculturalism Schools

 

The empirical data about mainstream teachers’ attitudes towards their culturally diverse students were found in my study of 22 mainstream teachers in three Victorian primary schools. The data were gathered by using different techniques namely attitudes surveys, questionnaires, ethnographic interviews, and observations. These four techniques were used for collecting data from the cultural inferences i.e. from what teachers think, from what teachers say, from the way teachers act, and from the cultural symbols teachers use in teaching.[29] Teachers’ attitudes towards their culturally diverse students were interpreted from these cultural inferences.

The result of my study appear to indicate that mainstream teachers in these schools have positive attitudes towards multiculturalism. Their attitudes were expressed and articulated in the attitudes towards diversity in their students’ language backgrounds, different learning style, using approaches to teaching culturally diverse students, and cultural diversity in schools.

The mainstream teachers acknowledge that language diversities in their schools should be preserved, however English should be used to ensure their students educational progress. They believe that English is very important and it can be used for everything in their schools, including developing the instructional program. These attitudes are perhaps influenced by the fact that English is not only a mainstream language in Australia but also as an international language used for communication by many people from different nationalities. Therefore, if the students want to take part in this mainstream society, including in the mainstream schools, they have to speak English both in schools and in their daily life.

Different reasons as to why their students should speak English were stated by teachers in the etnographic interviews and these are interpreted by me as follows: (1) English is the mainstream language in Australia, therefore people who are going to live in this country should speak the mainstream language of English; (2) English can be used by students as a tool for everything in order that they can get along with and can be accepted by mainstream Anglo-Australian society; and (3) English is part of mainstream Anglo-Australian culture, and therefore students from culturally diverse backgrounds who want to follow the culture should learn and speak the language.

One of the mainstream teachers in the etnographic intertview might refresent the opinion of mainstream teachers as follows:

 

We have to accept that whatever other languages they know and many languages they speak are all good. However, they still must master English for the purposes of their study, interaction, communication, cross-cultural communication, and being part of Australian society.

 

Teachers’ attitudes towards using English with their students mentioned above still reflect the mainstream attitudes as stated by Partington that the school culture in Australia basically transmits the mainstream culture.[30] Such attitudes are also still relevant to Mackay assumption that Australian attitudes towards diversity are positive even though they are based on the requirements mentioned above.[31]

The mainstream teachers in my study believe that the first thing to be done by teachers in improving the quality of learning of culturally diverse students is their English. These teachers were aware that English is the mainstream language in Australia and therefore the quality of learning of their students would be enhanced by the acquisition of English. In other words, involving the culturally diverse students in the mainstream culture to be a part of mainstream society is one way to improve the quality of learning of culturally diverse students. In this context, the criteria of quality of learning is determined by the criteria of mainstream. This finding is relevant to Partington’s argument that schools basically transmit the mainstream culture.[32]

Teachers in this study accept the concept of diversity in their classrooms as a positive reality in their schools which can enrich the cultural diversity of Australia. The concept of multiculturalism is working well in these schools even though the culture of these schools and the teachers’ culture are basically mainstream. It can be concluded that the mainstream culture fully accept the diversity. These mainstream teachers’ attitudes towards this aspect which were revealed and expressed in the etnographic interview probably reflect the culture of teaching of the mainstream teachers and are interpreted by the researcher as follows: (1) Teachers stated that students from culturally diverse backgrounds in these multicultural schools (which hold mainstream culture) should retain their cultural link with their cultural background because it can enrich the diversity in the schools, meaning it can also enrich diversity in the Australian mainstream society; (2) The cultural diversity brought by children to school can enrich mainstream culture both in the school and in the society, therefore the cultural diversity in school is preserved by the teachers; and (3) Teachers stated that as well as preserving their students’ cultural backgrounds, bringing them into mainstream culture is also important. The combination of both is encouraged by teachers.

Schools have to provide a window of opportunities for all students within manstream society so that they can be a good citizens, i.e. Australian citizens who live in a contemporary society. These attitudes are also reflected in the instructional programs such as in the subject “Studies of Society and Environments”, in that this subject provides the students with topics about the different cultures of different people.

Mainstream teachers in this study also have positive attitudes towards the learning styles of culturally diverse students. Their attitudes are found in their answers in the attitude surveys and their opinons express in the etnographic interviews. The majority of them state that student with different cultural backgrounds respond to classroom instruction differently. In relation to their students’ achievement in learning as stated in the settlement: “Student from ethnic minority groups have lower achievement rate than mainstream student”, the majority of them selected the responses disagree. Perhaps their experience in teaching in these multicultural schools lead them to disagree with that statement, because in their experience, the students from culturally diverse backgrounds have the same rate of achievement as or even better rate than the mainstream students. The majority of teachers also stated that students from culturally diverse backgrounds do not need more attention than those from mainstream students.

In the observations, I found that teachers gave attention to all their students. Teachers did not differentiate one student from another on the basis of ethnic backgrounds. For example, teachers when teaching gave compliments saying “good boys”, “good girls”, “terrific”, “well done”, and “wonderful” to all students who did their work well. In the teachers’ opinions, expressed in the interviews, all their students are actually seen as the same and should be equally rewarded, therefore, they gave attention, rewards, and compliments to all their students both from ethnic minority and mainstream culture. The style of leraning of culturally diverse students might be different, however, it does not mean that their culturally diverse students should be given more or less attention due to the differences of learning styles.

In their approach to teaching culturally diverse students, the majority of the teachers in the sample schools state that teachers should be concerned with both the culture of ethnic minorities and the culture of mainstream students. Both aspects should be emphasised by teachers in order to preserve multiculturalism in their schools. Therefore, there is no best method which can be used by teachers in their schools. However, as mentioned above, using English is the first thing to be considered by teachers in order to preserve educational progress. Teachers realise that English as the mainstream language, therefore “mainstream method” is probably the “best method”. In this respect, using different approaches introduced by English is the best way. In introducing their subject to different students, one important thing should be considered by teachers, i.e. understanding their students’ cultural backgrounds. Almost all teachers in this study agree that it is important to understand their students’ cultural backgrounds.

In summary, it is evident from the attitude surveys, questionnaires, and ethnographic interviews that mainstream teachers who are teaching in these sample schools have positive attitudes towards the approach to teaching mentioned above. Their attitudes towards these aspects reflect the attitudes of the mainstream teachers.

 

 

 

 How Mainstream Teachers View Their Culturally Diverse Students

 

In my opinion, the teachers’ attitudes in viewing their students reflect the mainstream attitudes towards individualism embedded in Anglo-Australian society, i.e. all people who live in this country have their individual rights, in which everyone should respect his or her own individual rights as well as respect the rights of others. Teacherwho are teaching in multicultural schools acknowledge and respect the rights of their students who have individual needs. From the perspective of me, teachers’ attitudes in viewing their children are excellent because they can combine the two different concepts, i.e. individualism and equality. In teaching, teachers treat their students as individuals, because, they said, every student has different characteristics whatever their cultural backgrounds. In this respect, students from different ethnic groups can not be generalised about. One of the teachers said:

 

A kid is a kid. It hard for us to generalise for all of them. Look at the Vietnamese students in our school, some of them are very shy, some of them are very confident, and some of them are misbehave. They are group of kids, we can’t generalise them.

 

In conclusion, teachers have a view that not all students from the same ethnic groups have similarities in all aspects, and therefore the teachers in teaching consider their students as individuals.

In contrast to individualism, equality is also used by teachers in the sample schools as the basis for viewing their students and practising their attitudes towards their culturally diverse students in classrooms. This is very positive approach for the teachers because they can put their attitudes into practise in their calssrooms on the basis of the different concepts. From the etnographic interviews and classroom observations their attitudes could be seen, i.e. on the one hand they view each of their students as individuals, whilst on the other  hand, when teaching they treat each student equally. They maintained that all children, whatever their ethnic group, are the same. What is the same? One of the teachers’ answers to a question in the etnographic interviews might represent the teachers’ attitudes in these sample schools:

 

All the children to me are children. They all have needs to be taught, they want to learn, they want to do things, they enjoy doing things. I always treat them in the same ways.

 

As the basis of equality, the mainstream teachers in this study view their students as the same in terms of the similarities to be taught, to be equally treated, to be given the same opportunities to learn, and to meet their individual learning needs. During the observations, it was found that teachers gave compliments to all their students, whatever their ethnic groups, saying “good boy”, “good girl”, “terrific”, “well done”, “fabulous”, “Excelleent”, etc., supports the expressed attitudes. These compliments were given by teachers to their students without considering that their students’ work are exactly true, really terrific, a little bit excellent, quite well done or so good in reality, but all are the same.

Even in these mainstream schools which hold the values of individualism, teachers never made comparisons of one student with another. Their attitudes in viewing different students as the same can actually prevent them from developing discrimination, negative stereotyping, and prejudice towards a particular ethnic group of students. In the observations, it was found that culturally diverse students were enjoying learning, liked to be rewarded by their teachers when they finished their work well or when they could answer the teachers’ questions. All students, whatever their ethnic groups, liked to be complimented that their work are good, excellent, terrific, well done, fabulous, wonderful, etc.. In this manner, negative statements were avoided by teachers. When I raised the point: “I want to learn from you how to make our culturally diverse students enjoy learning”, the following represents teachers’ responses:

 

You don’t say no. I don’t say no. I don’t use a negative statement. The students have to feel compfortable. If you start being negative at this stage, the student will leave the school. The students should have enjoyed going to school. We have to make schools enjoyable and make the learning environments as harmonious as those at their home.

 

These social studies teachers believe that such compliments are very good means of encouraging their students to learn. Using the point of view of individualism, teachers in these multicultural schools believe that all students, whatever their cultural backgrounds, are equally placed and should receive the same rewards from a teacher. It means that all culturally diverse students have the same opportunities to learn and to succeed in school. These attitudes are still relevant to the values of equality embedded in the mainstream society as stated by Bulbeck.[33] Mainstream society acknowledges that everyone who is equally placed, receives the same reward from society, and has the same opportunities to succeed. All people (and all students at schools) are actually the same terms of individual rights, the same opportunities to be equally treated and have the same opportunities to learn and to succeed in this mainstream society.

The culture of teachers or the culture of teaching which were found in this study could not be separated from the culture of the mainstream Anglo-Australian society. As Splinder mentioned, teachers are a product of their culture and live within the framework, values and symbols that are part of that culture, and this is also relevant to these findings.[34] The values embedded in the mainstream society such as egalitararianism, equality, liberty, and fraternity were implemented in their schools in the way they treat, view and teach their students.[35] The data findings show that teachers’ speech and action found in this study reflect the culture of teaching and the culture of the teachers in these schools.

The teachers in this study acknowledge that their culturally diverse students should be considered the same as the mainstream students, should be equally treated, should be equally given attention, and should be equally given the same opportunities to learn and to succeed in their schools. They stated that they never see ethnic backgrounds as the basis for teaching their students, but they see their students as students, whatever their ethnic groups. They stated that they never differentiated between their students on the basis of ethnic backgrounds. Their acknowledgments and statements (as part of the culture of teaching) are perhaps relevant to an ideal value of equality which is embedded in Anglo-Australian society as stated by Bulbeck.[36] In the other words, culturally diverse students in these multicultural schools receive the same rewards from their teachers as part of mainstream Anglo-Australian society.

Due to the values of equality, all culturally diverse students were equally rewarded and complimented. In the classroom observations, I found that the way teachers view and treat their students was very prevalent, and what they said “good” and “well done” were not necessarily exactly good or well done. The most important thing was that their students’ work, as a process of learning, was rewarded and complimented, no matter whether their students’ work is really well done, terrific, or excellent. Therefore, all students have the same opportunities to be given rewards and compliments. Consequenlty, there were no comparisons made between one student who actually did his or her work really good and those who did their work not so well. The culture of teachers in these multicultural schools is to view all culturally diverse students as the same due the values of equality held by the mainstream Anglo-Australian society.

 

Non Verbal Language for Complimenting

Their Students

 

In the culture of teaching in these multicultural schools, many ways were used by teachers for accepting and complimenting their students’ behaviours. Using categories of non-verbal communication developed by Hansford,[37] I found in the classroom observations that the majority of teachers when complimenting their students’ work saying “good”, “well done”, “terrific”, “excellent”, etc. followed up with non-verbal encouragement, such as smiling, raising thumb and nodding their head affirmatively. These expressions were the cultural symbols used by teachers which have meanings of OK, accepted, complimenting, and rewarding. These compliments were also emphasised by writing comments on the notice-boards, on the students’ books, and showing their students’ work to others in the classrooms. One of these teachers said:

 

Every thing they do they have to be rewarded and shown to other students. I always make comments on their work. For example, to a student who does his or her work well I prefer to show it to other students by saying: ‘Oh well done, look at this everyone!’, or just give them a personal feedback. They feel good about it and they love to hear: ‘Oh well, this is a wonderful thing’. That is my personal way to give my students a reward.

 

The classroom arrangement and the classroom environments are part of the culture of teaching in these multicultural schools. It seems to me that the classrooms in these multicultural schools were very “colorful” because all students’ work were displayed on the noticeboards, on the walls, and hung on string from the ceiling. All students could easily notice that their work was shown to the classroom, and therefore the classroom and the content belong to them. I interpreted the “colorful classroom” as the way these teachers expressed and articulated their positive attitudes towards their students. Displaying students’ ideas and students’ work are part of the culture of teaching in these multicultural schools. These circumstances are totally different when compared to the classroom situation of Indonesian primary schools, where the walls of the classrooms are always “clean”.

As well as saying “good”, “well-done”, “excellent”, etc., the mainstream teachers’ attitudes towards all their students were also expressed and articulated by showing interest in their students. By establishing and maintaining eye contact with students, all teachers in the classroom observations showed interest in their students. For example, when their students were talking or answering their questions the teachers maintained eye contact with their students. In mainstream Anglo-Australian society, maintaining eye contact among people who are talking in the same situation is a kind of respect and giving attention to the speaker.[38] In the observations I found this kind of personal communication between teachers and their students occurred. When the teachers were talking they maintained eye contact with their students. In return, when the students were talking the teachers gave attention by listening and maintaining eye contact with the students. Therefore, eye contact in the communication was maintained by both the teachers and students.

Referring to Robinson who indicates that eye contact or sight, language, space, emotion and body movements are the tools for the cultural transmittions,[39] I interpreted this finding from my observations was also the cultural transmission and part of the cultural symbols as well as the reflection of the culture of teaching in the schools. The reflection of that culture might be different from other cultures. This kind of body language and this kind of personal communication were very good means for teachers to express their positive attitudes towards and transmit the culture to all their students. Such behaviours can be used as examples to be implemented in other situations.

What the teachers think and say are consistent with what they do in their classrooms. In the observations, evidence of establishing good relationships between teachers and their students was found. For example, teachers giving compliments and encouraging all their culturally diverse students by saying “good boy”, “good girl”, “terrific”, “well done”, etc. coincided with the use of non-verbal language such as warmly smiling, raising thumb, nodding head affirmatively, and writing comments about their students’ work in the students’ books and on the boards. In summary, the data about these aspects gathered from what teachers think, say, and do are relevant and complemented each other.[40]

 

Learning from Australian Experience

 

The findings of this study can be used by Indonesian teachers who are facing challenges in the contemporary Indonesian society such as the cultural diversities among ethnic groups, cross cultural understanding among Indonesian people, and the plurarity in the socio-economic status. Like Australian teachers, Indonesian teachers have a responsibility to prepare their students in facing their future. They have to provide their students with positive attitudes towards other students from different ethnic groups and nationalities.

I believe that prejudice and negative stereotyping towards and among the ethnic groups in the Indonesian contemporary society still exist. These problems are primarily not influenced by the cultural differences but by the changing of the contemporary Indonesian society such as socio-economic development, technology and communication, and social mobility. Socio-economic development in Indonesia is happening too fast compared with the readiness of the society to accept and to follow such development. Some people are capable of taking advantage of the opportunities of the socio-economic development. They have become the new middle class who possess most of the national assets and enjoy the life style as the new rich. At the same time, other groups are unable to take advantage of these development because they lack the necessary skills. They have no access to the power and still face the barrier of culture to keep up with these development. Perhaps, they are the “victims” of the socio-economic development. As the result, the disparities between the rich and the poor have become the problem in terms of plurality. When only a few of the particular ethnic groups have taken the opportunities of such advantages and rich, prejudice and negative stereotyping are addresed towards them. They are labeled as the money minded, greedy, selfish, robbers of the ”national cake”, and have no tolerance towards the poor. In this manner, prejudice and stereotyping in Indonesia are not based on the cultural diversity but by the disparities in sauce-economic status.

This is one of the great challengges to be faced by Indonesian teachers in the contemporary Indonesian society. This problems becomes even greater when the prejudice and negative stereotyping are inherited by children from their parents. Even though there is no research about prejudice and negative stereotyping from one ethnic group of students towards another, it is commonly believed that prejudice and stereotyping among athnic groups of students exists in schools. In this matter, Indonesian teachers have a responsibility to reduce and eliminate the problem. Indonesian teachers, in their pluralistic society, have a great responsibility to accommodate the differences among their students. This challenge is actually more difficult for teachers because they are in a fairly low position of the socio-economic stratification.

Another challenge that Indonesian teachers have to face, in terms of the diversity, is that of internal migration. It is caused by many factors such as the advance of communication and transportation, industrialisation, and transmigration. All regions of Indonesia are connected by all kinds of modern transportation on the land, the sea, and in the air. As a result, all Indonesian people from various ethnic groups can stay wherever they like all over Indonesia. They can travel easily from one placed to another to visit or to stay. These factors contribute to the demographic mobility. Indonesia’s vast spread-out country has seemingly become small because of the advances in transportation and communication.

Industrialisation has also contributed to the internal migration and diverse ethnic composition at schools. Since it has developed over the last 25 years, the mobility of Indonesian people has been high. Many people from Sumatra, Kalimantan, Sulawesi, Irian Jaya, and other parts of Indonesia come to Java to look for employment. Industrialisation in Java was attracted many people to come and settle in this area. They mostly settle in the urban areas like Jakarta, Bandung, Semarang, and Surabaya. The rate of urbanisation in Java is very high and it has lead to the changes in the ethnic composition. Java has not only increasingly become the most populated area in this country but also it has been settled by many people from all different ethnic groups and cultural backgrounds. It is understanable, therefore, that many primary schools in Java are not only attended by Javanese and Sundanese, but also by many ethnic groups of students. Many primary schools in Java, mostly in the cities like Jakarta, Bandung, Semarang, and Surabaya have multiethnic student populations.

In addition to industrialisation and the advances in communication and transportation, transmigration has also contributed to the ethnic composition in Indonesia especialy outside Java. Since transmigration has been developed in Indonesia  more than one hundred years ago, the ethnic composition in some regions has changed. Many people from highly populated areas in Java, especially in the rural areas, have been transmigrated to some provinces outside Java. As a consequence, the populations of these provinces are no longer dominated by particular ethnic groups. All provinces in Indonesia, characterised by one ar two main ethnic gorups, are actually multiethnic. Javanese, Sundanese, Maduranese, Malay, Padang, Bugis, and the other ethnic groups have spread out all over Indonesia. Some cities are settled by many different ethnic groups. For example, Medan, the capital city of the province of North Sumatra, with two million people, has currently become the melting pot of Javanese, Malay, Batak, Chinese, and Sundanese. Malay and Batak people, who are naturally the main ethnic groups in the province, are not dominant in the city of Medan. As a consequence, schools in the city are attended by students who come from different ethnic groups.

In the era of economic development and industrialisation, social mobility and migration among Indonesian people has become higher than ever before. Social contact among people coming from different cultural backgrounds has increased. Indonesian people are lucky because they have the Indonesian language (Bahasa Indonesia) as the national language. Kipp maintains:

 

Although most Indonesians continue to grow up learning Javanese, Sundanese, Acehnese, or one of the literally hunderds of other different local languages as their mother tounge, instruction in primary school shifts gradually from their local language to Indonsia in the first three grades. An increasing number of children learn to speak Indonesian first.[41]

 

Most of them can communicate with each other using the Indonesian language. To some extent, the Indonesian language can be used to reduce prejudice, negative stereotyping, and cultural misunderstanding among people from different ethnic groups. The Indonesian language is used at schools as the instructional language. Teachers can use the language to increase cross-cultural understanding among students who speak their mother tounge at home.

However, in the era of globalisation, Indonesian teachers will have another great challenge. The problem is not only a cross-cultural understanding among Indonesia people from different ethnic groups within the Indonesian Archipelago but also a cross-cultural understanding of different people from different regions. Like Australia, Indonesia is not an isolated country in the world, its dependency on international links is becoming greater than ever before. In the age of global economy, many multinational corporations invest their capital in Indonesia. Businesses from many different countries are represented now in Indonesia. As well as foreign investment, tourism is becoming a big industry in Indonesia. Every year Indonesia is visited by more than 4 million tourists coming from all over the world and more than 11 million are expected to come to this country by the year 2005.[42] It is apparent that Indonesian students in today’s schools stand a great chance of making significant contact with people from different cultures from all over the world and with those who spend time in all parts of Indonesia.

As part of this great effort to attract foreign investment and international tourists to Indonesia, Indonesian teachers are given new challenge to teach young children to have positive attitudes towards foreigners. It is believed that multinational investors and international tourists will come to Indonesia if Indonesian people warmly welcome them.[43] Indonesian teachers need to have knowledge and understanding that they and their children are living in a global and interdependent world. Therefore, it is importan that multicultural education in the Indonesian context gives teachers knowledge, skills, and positive attitudes towards culturally different people that are needed to live in aglobal society.

It is believed that if the teachers succeed in passing their positive attitudes on to all students in their classrooms, their students will do the same thing in relationships with others or in friendship.[44] Therefore the emphasis is placed on teachers. All teachers have to have positive attitudes towards all their students. However, not all teachers have such positive attitudes. Two questions are raised here: (1) How do we equip Indonesian teachers with skills, knowledge, and positive attitudes towards all the different students in their calssroom?; and (2) How do we improve the quality of Indonesian teachers who are teaching in multicultural schools?

There are a number of ways to do that. One of these ways is that we can learn from other teachers, in more developed countries. Cook maintains that attitudes are learned not inherited.[45] Learning is one of the ways to improve teachers’ attitudes. Learning from experienced of other countries in implementing multiculturalism in schools is very relevant.

Increasing positive attitudes among teachers towards their students, among one ethnic group towards another, increasing tolerance among people from different socio-economic status, or decreasing negative stereotyping and prejudice among ethnic groups in Indonesia are the small things to be done by Indonesian people in supporting the national building. These are great challenges which have to be faced by Indonesian educators in the Indonesian contemporary society.

 

Conclusion

 

This article was commenced by raising some issues in multicultural Australian society which influence the characteristics of the multicultural primary schools. Firstly, the demographic development in Australia influences the characteristics of teachers and students in multicultural schools, where both the teachers and students are from different cultural backgrounds. Secondly, the teachers in multicultural schools are not “multiethnic”, because the majority of them are from mainstream Anglo-Australian culture and, as a consequence, the culture of teaching in the multicultural schools follows the mainstream culture. Relevant to the second issue, the third issue is mainly focused on questions as to whether or not the mainstream teachers understand the students’ cultural backgrouds, whether they have positive attitudes towards culturally diverse students, and whether they can communicate effectively with their students.

Empirical evidence in this study shows that mainstream teachers actually have positive attitudes towards culturally diverse students. These teachers tend to use the term “all students” rather than “culturally diverse students”. This term refers to the way they treat their students as the same without differentiating the rights of one student from another on the bais of ethnic backgrounds. They also see their students as individual in terms of the differences in their individual learning needs. They stated that every student, whatever his or her own ethnic background, has individual learning needs, and teachers have to meet these needs. However, as individuals, their students are not to be compared with one another. The way they view their culturally diverse students is based on the value of individualism and equality embedded in the mainstream Anglo-Australian society.

The mainstream teachers this study also indicated that their students’ native languages should be preserved. They said, however, that the acquisition of English by their students is also important in order to ensure educational progress. They also stated that, without neglecting their students’ native languages, it is important to bring their culturally diverse students into the mainstream Anglo-Australian culture. These attitudes are consistent with the attitudes of mainstream Anglo-Australian society towards migrant as stated by Mackay.[46]

The mainstream teachers’ attitudes towards all their studendts were also expressed and articulated using their body language as the cultural symbols of rewarding, complimenting, accepting, and praising students’ behaviours, displaying students’ ideas and showing interest in students’ behaviours. The expressions of “good boys”, “good girl”, “terrific”, “excellent”, “fabulous”, atc. were followed by or coincided with their smiling, raising a thumb, affirmatively nodding heads, commenting on their students’ work in their books, putting students’ work on notice boards, and establishing eye contact with their students. The expression and articulation of these attitudes are part of mainstream culture these multicultural schools.

I suggest that we can learn from Australian teachers experienced in expressing and articulating positive attitudes towards all students in schools. I realize that the culture of teaching in the multicultural primary schools in Australia is different from that operating in Indonesia. Nevertheless, the experience of the mainstream teachers of Anglo-Australian background could be referred to as a good example for Indonesian primary school teachers. The reason is that Australia and Indonesia have relatively the characteristic of the multicultural countries. As a developing countries, however, Indonesia have another plurality and diversity in which the tremendous economic development achieved by New Order Regime has not only created social mobility and frequent contacts among Indonesian people and improve understanding among them, but also created another social problem such as disparities between the rich and the poor, and prejudice and negative stereotyping among them. Indonesian educators have another great challenges to solve these problems.

 

 References

Anderson, Ray & Ken Cushner. 1994. “Multicultural and Intercultural Studies” in Colin Marsh (Ed.). Teaching Studies of Society and Environment. Sydney: Prentice Hall.

Buereu of Immigration Research. 1991. Australian’s Population: Trends and Prospects. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Sevices.

Bulbeck, Chilla. 1993. Social Science in Australia: An Introduction. Sydney: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publisher.

Cook, Trevor. 1992. “Developing a Curriculum for an Intercultural Era: A Historical Overview” in Terence J. Lovat (Ed.). Sociology for Teachers. Australia: Social Science Press.

Faichney, Gavin. 1992. “Preparing Teachers for Teaching in Democratic Multicultural Societies”. Paper presented at NCSC Annual Meeting, November.

Hansford, Brian. 1988. Teachers and Classroom Communication. Sydney: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publisher.

Hargreaves, Andy. 1994. Changing Teacher, Changing Times: Teachers’ Work and Culture in the Postmodern Age. London: Cassell.

Hawke, Bob. 1989. Foreword of the National Agenda for a Multicultural Asutralia. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

Horne, Donald. 1987. The Lucky Country Revisited. Australia: Dent, Knoxfield.

Jamrozik, Adam, Cathy Boland, and Robert Urquhart. 1995. Social Change and Cultural Transformation in Australia. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Jupp, James. 1989. The Challenge of Diversity. Canberra: Office of Multicultural Affairs.

Kipp, Rita Smith. 1993. Dissociated Identities, Ethnicity, Religion, and Class in an Indonesian Society. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.

Mackay, Hugh. 1993. Reinventing Australia: The Mind and Mood of Australia in the 90s. Sydney: Angus and Roberston.

Office of Multicultural Affair [OMA]. 1989. National Agenda for a Multicultural Australia. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

Partington, Gary and Vince McCudden. 1993. Ethnicity and Education. Australia: Social Science Press.

Robinson, Gail L. Nemetz. 1985. Crosscultural Understanding. New York: Pergamon Press.

Sealey, Richard W.. 1995. Multicultural Education: Resources Booklet 1 and 2. Melbourne: Deakin University.

Spindler, George D.. 1974. Education and Cultural Process. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc..

Spradley, James P.. 1979. The Etnographic Interview. Sydney: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publisher.

Supriatna, Nana. 1996. “A Study of the Culture of Teaching in Three Victorian Primary Schools”. Thesis Unpublish. Melbourne: Deakin University, Burwood Campus.

Synott, John. 1992. “Global Change and New Contexts of Australian Education” in Terence J. Lovat (Ed.). Sociology for Teachers. Australia: Social Science Press.

Tonkin. 1992. “World Perspective in Social Education” in Monograph Series, No.4. Australia: Social Education Association of Australia.

 

Newspaper:

 

Far-Eastern Economic Review (May 18, 1995).

Indonesian Economic & Business Review (November 1995).

 

 

Bank, James. (1987). The Social Studies, Ethnic Diversity and Social Change, Elementary School Journal, 87. (85). Pp. 531-542.

Bennet, Christine I. (1990). Comprehensive Multicultural education, Theory and Prctice,  Allyn and Bacon, Sydney.

Bullivant, Brian M. (1998). The Ethnic Success, Ethnic Challenges, Conventional wisdom about Immigrant Disadvantages in Education, Australian Journal of Education, Vol. 32, No. 2 1998, 223-243.

Cohen, Louis & Manion, Lawrence. (1991) Perspectitive on Classrooms and Schools, Holt, Rinehart and Winstonn, London.

Feiman-Nemster & Floden. (1986) The Cultures of Teaching, in Wittrock, Merlin C. (1986) Handbooks of Research on Teaching, 3 _­rd Ed. MacMillan Publishing Company, New York.

Koentjaraningrat, R.M (1975) Introduction to the People and Cultures of Indonesia  and Malaysia, Cummings Publishing Company, Sydney.

Marsh, Colin. (1994) Teaching Studies Of Society and Environment, Prentice Hall, Sydney.

Supriatna, Nana. (1996) Diversity in Indonesia , A great challenge in educational Aspect, Paper presented at Seminar of social Studies, Department of History, FPIP IKIP Bandung, 14 Ocyober 1996.

Suryadinata, Leo. (1992) Pribumi Indonesian, The Chinese Minority, and China, Heineman Asia, Singapore.

Wiriaatmadja, Rochiati. (1992) Peranan Pengajaran Sejarah Nasional Indonesia  Dalam Pembentukan Identitas Nasional (Upaya Peralihan nilai-nilai Integralistik Dalam Proses Sosialisasi dan Enkulturasi Berbangsa di Kalangan Siswa SMAK I BPK Penabur di Bandung), Rangkuman Disertasi Pascasarjana IKIP Bandung, Bandung.

 

 

 

 

*)This article was presented in the International Conference on Education “Issues in Education of Pluralistic Societies and Responses to the Global Challenges Towards the Year 2020”, Joint-Committee between IKIP Bandung, Indonesia, and La Trobe University, Australia, in Bandung, West Java, 11-13 November 1996.

**)Drs. Nana Supriatna, M.Ed. is Lecturer at Departement of Historical Education FPIPS Indonesia University of Education (UPI); and Deputhy Dean for Academic Affairs FPIPS UPI in Bandung, West Java.

[1]See Nana Supriatna, “A Study of the Culture of Teaching in Three Victorian Primary Schools”, Thesis Unpublish (Melbourne: Deakin University, Burwood Campus, 1996).

[2]Gavin Faichney, “Preparing Teachers for Teaching in Democratic Multicultural Societies”, Paper presented at NCSC Annual Meeting, November 1992, p.1.

[3]Buereu of Immigration Research, Australian’s Population: Trends and Prospects (Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Sevices, 1991).

[4]Adam Jamrozik, Cathy Boland, and Robert Urquhart, Social Change and Cultural Transformation in Australia (UK: Cambridge University Press, 1995), p.99.

[5]Bob Hawke, Foreword of the National Agenda for a Multicultural Asutralia (Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 1989).

[6]James Jupp, The Challenge of Diversity (Canberra: Office of Multicultural Affairs, 1989), p.1.

[7]Office of Multicultural Affair [OMA], National Agenda for a Multicultural Australia (Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 1989).

[8]Hugh Mackay, Reinventing Australia: The Mind and Mood of Australia in the 90s (Sydney: Angus and Roberston, 1993), p.159.

[9]See Adam Jamrozik, Cathy Boland, and Robert Urquhart, 1995, Op.Cit., p.113.

[10]Hugh Mackay, 1993, Op.Cit., p.155-56.

[11]Ibid., p.157.

[12]Trevor Cook, “Developing a Curriculum for an Intercultural Era: A Historical Overview” in Terence J. Lovat (Ed.), Sociology for Teachers (Australia: Social Science Press, 1992), p.143.

[13]George D. Spindler, Education and Cultural Process (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc., 1974), p.152.

[14]Gary Partington and Vince McCudden, Ethnicity and Education (Australia: Social Science Press, 1993), p.18.

[15]Ray Anderson & Ken Cushner, “Multicultural and Intercultural Studies” in Colin Marsh (Ed.), Teaching Studies of Society and Environment (Sydney: Prentice Hall, 1994), p.323-26.

[16]John Synott, “Global Change and New Contexts of Australian Education” in Terence J. Lovat (Ed.), Sociology for Teachers (Australia: Social Science Press, 1992), p.190.

[17]Donald Horne, The Lucky Country Revisited (Australia: Dent, Knoxfield, 1987), p.27-33.

[18]Chilla Bulbeck, Social Science in Australia: An Introduction (Sydney: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publisher, 1993), p.73.

[19]Andy Hargreaves, Changing Teacher, Changing Times: Teachers’ Work and Culture in the Postmodern Age (London: Cassell, 1994), p.165.

[20]Ibid., p.166.

[21]Ibid..

[22]Ibid., p.5.

[23]See John Synott, 1992, Op.Cit., p.190; and Tonkin, “World Perspective in Social Education” in Monograph Series, No.4 (Australia: Social Education Association of Australia, 1992), p.2.

[24]Hugh Mackay, 1993, Op.Cit., p.21.

[25]Ray Anderson & Ken Cushner, 1994, Op.Cit., p.325.

[26]Gavin Faichney, 1992, Op.Cit., p.6.

[27]Gary Partington and Vince McCudden, 1993, Op.Cit., p.11.

[28]Ibid., p.18.

[29]James P. Spradley, The Etnographic Interview (Sydney: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publisher, 1979).

[30]Gary Partington and Vince McCudden, 1993, Op.Cit., p.11 and 18.

[31]Hugh Mackay, 1993, Loc.Cit..

[32]Gary Partington and Vince McCudden, 1993, Loc.Cit..

[33]See Chilla Bulbeck, 1993, Op.Cit., p.73.

[34]George D. Splinder, 1974, Loc.Cit..

[35]Donald Horne, 1987, Loc.Cit..

[36]Chilla Bulbeck, 1993, Loc.Cit..

[37]Brian Hansford, Teachers and Classroom Communication (Sydney: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publisher, 1988).

[38]See Richard W. Sealey, Multicultural Education: Resources Booklet 1 and 2 (Melbourne: Deakin University, 1995).

[39]Gail L. Nemetz Robinson, Crosscultural Understanding (New York: Pergamon Press, 1985), p.26-34.

[40]James P. Spradley, 1979, Loc.Cit..

[41]Rita Smith Kipp, Dissociated Identities, Ethnicity, Religion, and Class in an Indonesian Society (Michigan: The University of Michigan Press, 1993), p.106-07.

[42]See Far-Eastern Economic Review (May 18, 1995).

[43]Indonesian Economic & Business Review (November 1995).

[44]See Brian Hansford, 1988, Op.Cit., Chapter 7, especially in term of “Teachers’ and Students’ Interaction”.

[45]Trevor Cook, 1992, Op.Cit., p.137.

[46]Hugh Mackay, 1993, Loc.Cit..