Reference no: EM132194942

“Colorblindness” is problematic because it could lead a teacher to believe or portray that they are being fair, impartial, by seeing no differences between students. When in reality they could be just refusing to accept the diversity in their classroom. When a teacher does not accept the diversity in the classroom, she creates a learning barrier for students who do not meet the dominant culture in the classroom.

I really don’t see a benefit to “colorblindness” unless it is absolutely used for nondiscriminatory purposes. Then, all students would benefit. I believe a teacher who uses “colorblindness” as a way of refusing to accept diversity, is giving all students a disadvantage in learning. So much rich culture and backgrounds would be omitted and rob students of the opportunity to learn about each other’s beliefs, culture, and backgrounds.

The three educational implication of “equal is not the same” are:

Acknowledging the difference that children bring to school. This would include all differences such as race, gender, ethnicity, social class, religion, sexual orientation, language, and others. To refuse this acknowledgment may result in teachers and schools labeling children’s behaviors.

Admitting the possibility that students’ identities may influence how they experience school. This may influence how they learn but does not mean that teachers should lower the bar or “water down” curriculum.

Accepting differences also means making provisions for them. The teacher should view students’ diversity as an asset, not a burden and meet students where they are.

When culture is treated like a process students experience that culture. They learn from being engaged with one another and from their own capabilities. When culture is treated as a product it becomes a more of a cookie-cutter type of learning. Students are given the same instruction, the same material, and the same amount of support. Thus, leaving some students unsuccessful.