Uncharted territory: mapping students' conceptions of ethnic diversity.

Peck, Carla ; Sears, Alan

ABSTRACT/RESUME

This paper presents findings from a research project that focuses on grade seven students' understandings of ethnic diversity. It describes the ways in which students understand the concept of ethnic diversity and the related concept, tolerance. It represents a significant shift from past research that has focused solely on attitudes toward ethnic diversity without investigating the knowledge structures that inform an individual's mind-set. Data for this study were collected using semi-structured, stimuli centered interviews. Phenomenographic analysis techniques were used to develop descriptions of the students' understandings of the concept. We argue that students understand the concept of ethnic diversity in a limited number of qualitatively different ways, and that, in general, these understandings are far less sophisticated than those outlined in curricular expectations.

Cet article presente des resultats d'une etude qui vise a explorer comment les eleves de la septieme annee comprennent le concept de la diversite ethnique. Ce travail decrit les manieres dont les etudiants comprennent le concept de la diversite ethnique et le concept associe, la tolerance. Il represente un decalage significatif de la recherche passee qui s'est concentree seulement sur des attitudes envers la diversite ethnique sans etudier les connaissances qui informent ses memes attitudes. Des donnees pour cette etude ont ete rassemblees en utilisant des entrevues individuelles et en discutant des situations quotidiennes dont la diversite ethnique pourrait jouer un role central. Des techniques d'analyse de la phenomenographie ont ete employees afin de developper des descriptions des conceptions que les eleves ont demontrees. Nous estimons que les eleves comprennent le concept de la diversite ethnique d'une maniere variee mais aussi limitee et que, en general, ces connaissances sont moins sophistiquees que celles qui sont decrites dans les programmes d'etudes.

Questions regarding how nations will deal with ethnic diversity are central to public policy debates around the world. As Kymlicka points out, there is "a striking worldwide trend regarding the diffusion and adoption of the principles and policies of multicultural citizenship" which has reached way beyond the West, to "even the most remote regions of Peru, the highlands of Nepal, and the peripheries of Communist China" (2004, xiii). A central concern wherever cultural policy is discussed is "how can we ensure that the recognition of diversity does not undermine efforts to construct or sustain common political values, mutual trust and understanding, and solidarity across group lines?" (ibid.).

Most Western (and many non-Western) nations have adopted some form of multiculturalism in response to this question. Kymlicka writes that, despite controversy about multiculturalism, "the overall trends are fairly consistent throughout the West toward greater recognition of diversity" (2003, 374). Joshee argues that Canadians take particular pride in this, contending, "acceptance of diversity is one of Canada's foundational myths" (2004, 129). While "Canada's approach to internal diversity is not so different from that of other Western democracies" (Kymlicka 2003, 369), it is "distinctive in the extent to which it has not only legislated but also constitutionalized practices of accommodation" (Kymlicka 2003, 374).

From the beginning in Canada, education has been a central institution for the implementation of policy in the area of diversity. Joshee (2004) and others (for example, Bruno-Jofre and Aponiuk 2001; Hebert 2002; Sears et al. 1999) have documented the shift in educational policy and practice over the years, from an emphasis on assimilation, to more contemporary efforts to promote understanding of, and respect for, diversity. While there is evidence of a retreat from the activist social justice curricula which appeared in some jurisdictions in the 1980s and 1990s, developing understanding of cultural difference is a key goal of education generally and social studies education in particular across the country (Joshee 2004; Sears and Wright 2004).

If one takes a look at curricula and standards in multicultural education in Canada, there is a clear assumed progression from knowledge, through acceptance and respect, to justice. For most scholars and educators in the field, knowledge of difference is not enough; "justice demands the public recognition and accommodation of diversity" (Kymlicka and Opalski 2001, 1). The desired end then, is not only knowing, but also willingness to adapt, to accommodate and, to advocate for accommodation (see also Joshee 2004; Varma-Joshi 2004).

In light of the apparent belief that knowledge is the beginning point for both respect and justice, it seems strange to us that there is almost no research on how young people understand diversity. Constructivist research in science and mathematics has produced a growing body of knowledge about the way young people understand important concepts and ideas in those fields (Driver and Easley 1978; Posner et al. 1982). In social education, history educators have made a significant start at building the same kind of knowledge base for how students understand historical ideas and processes (Barton and Levstik 2004; Seixas 2004; Wineburg 2001).

Outside of that work, very little has been done to map how children and young people understand the social world in general and ethnic diversity in particular. Despite the fact that advocates of multicultural education argue, "educators ... have to have an understanding of how their students understand difference and adjust delivery of the material accordingly" (Varma-Joshi 2004, 152) in order to be effective, little has been done to provide them with that understanding. This article seeks to address that gap in the literature by reporting on a phenomenographic study carried out with nineteen grade seven students in rural New Brunswick. Here we begin to map the terrain of student understanding in this area.

THE STUDY

The main question guiding this study was: What are children's conceptions of ethnic diversity? For the purposes of this work we defined ethnic diversity as difference based on religion, language and/or identification with a particular cultural group. This definition is consistent with others in the literature (see, for example, Mansfield and Kehoe 1994). While we realize there are many forms of diversity, and definitions of ethnic diversity are fluid and often controversial, it was important to establish a definition to use in analyzing the qualitatively different ways in which the participants understood the concept.

Site and Participants

The study took place in a small, rural community in central New Brunswick. Ninety-eight percent of the people living in this area were born in Canada, with only 0.5 percent of the population identifying themselves as "visible minorities" on the 2001 Census. The majority of the inhabitants are English-speaking Christians. The community depends on a local lumber mill, trucking businesses, and various tourist operations for employment, although many people travel beyond the community for work.

Interviews were conducted with nineteen students (seven boys, twelve girls) who were nearing the end of grade seven at the time of the study. The average age of the students was twelve years, seven months. All of the students had lived in the area for most, if not all, of their lives. The participants' school, which has approximately 250 students and caters to grades six through twelve, provided the location for the interviews. The entire school population, including the teachers and staff, is Euro-Canadian, and the language of instruction is English.

Instruments and Procedures

As we were interested in uncovering students' conceptions of a particular phenomenon we employed a phenomenographic approach to the research (Marton 1981). Phenomenography is "an empirically based approach that aims to identify the qualitatively different ways in which different people experience, conceptualize, perceive and understand various kinds of phenomena" (Marton, as cited in Richardson 1999, 53).

Since phenomenographic interviews are often focused on a semi-projective stimulus meant to provoke the interviewee into speaking about the concept under study (Webb 1997), considerable time was spent in the construction of the stimuli that were used in this research. In order for stimuli to work they have to be authentic, and present something students would care enough about to want to talk about. Situations dealing with diversity were culled from Canadian popular media and more than thirty stimuli were developed on specific aspects of ethnic diversity, such as language, material expression of ethnic diversity, traditions, religious dress and the like (see Peck 2003). From these, thirteen were selected for use in the interviews based on their relevance to the students' lives and their "discussion quotient."

Several stimuli were used during the course of each interview in an effort to (a) probe the participant's understanding of the critical differences between minority groups in Canada (Kymlicka 1998, 2001b; Kymlicka and Norman 2000), (b) determine if their understandings of ethnic diversity include conceptions of accommodation, and by extension, different levels of accommodation and (c) triangulate the data.

Data Analysis

In phenomenographic research, each student's thinking is not categorized on an individual basis. Rather, all the transcripts are analyzed as one document and, following Beatty's lead, are coded by "picking out all of the differences of meaning in relation to the concept expressed in the transcripts" and "grouping the differences to form the smallest number that reflect the main differences in the transcripts, and describing their essence, forming categories" (1987, 344). Excerpts used to illustrate the qualitatively different ways in which children understand ethnic diversity are drawn from "verbatim transcripts of the interviews, edited to eliminate extraneous material (mostly final probes that failed to elicit any additional response)" (Brophy et al. 2003, 17).

FINDINGS

In total, five "categories of description" emerged from the data to form the "outcome space," or range of understandings, for the concept of ethnic diversity. Each category represents a qualitatively different way the students in this study understood the concept (see Table 1). The students were pushed to think about their own thinking during the interviews, and the majority of them offered statements from a range of categories. The information that follows focuses on the entire group's understandings of ethnic diversity, not the understandings of individual students. While we may make reference to two, some, or many students in the text that follows, we do so in an effort to illustrate the range of conceptions held by the entire group.

Variations of Understanding Ethnic Diversity

Category One

The first category of understanding is characterized by a complete lack of knowledge about anything related to ethnic diversity. The children whose thinking characterizes this category were uniformly unable to identify objects or articles of clothing that are commonly known components of religious practice amongst various ethnic groups. They were incapable of articulating why some people express their diversity through clothing or the wearing of certain objects. For children exhibiting this understanding of ethnic diversity, clothing or objects have no connection to ethnicity.

Interviewer: What kind of hats do they [Sikh boys wearig turbans] look like to you?

Student: Ah ... like a hat ... toque. [...]

Interviewer: Can you think of any other reasons why somebody might wear something on their head? [...]

Student: Maybe it's cold out?

In this category, students did not demonstrate any understanding of the role of traditional medicines in Native spirituality. One said that a medicine pouch containing tobacco "is practically the same thing as someone going to school with a pack of cigarettes in their hand." This student came to this conclusion even after being pressed to consider the spiritual nature of such an object. The notion that identity might be connected to one's spiritual expression of ethnicity is absent from this category of understanding.

When asked why some ethnic groups would want the school calendar changed to include special days such as Hanukkah, Ramadan, or Chinese New Year, two students suggested that the only reason someone would request a change in the Calendar is so that government and bank employees could have extra time off work. Students whose thinking falls into the first category of understanding were largely unaware of religious or special days outside of the Christian realm, as is illustrated by the following comment: "I never even heard of Ramadan or Kwanzaa or those ..."

This category is also characterized by a lack of recognition of the link between ethnicity and language. Students whose thinking corresponds to this category were unable to articulate a relationship between ethnicity and French or Maliseet languages, as is evident in a response to the question, "Who speaks French in this province? Which people speak French, mostly?"--"French teachers."

In sum, the first category of description for our participants' understanding of ethnic diversity is characterized by a complete lack of knowledge about any aspect of the concept. Neither religion, customs (outside of the Christian realm), nor language form any part of the schemata, or prior knowledge, of the thinking that falls into this category.

Category Two

This category is characterized by an obscure notion that religion or culture might be at the root of most of the stimuli presented and a component of ethnicity. Many students did not know the names of the various religions represented, even though some were actually printed on the stimulus material itself. Some saw articles of clothing or objects as religious symbols but were unable to be more specific. In other words, they could not explain what the symbols represent or what purpose they serve. The majority of those who understood clothing or objects as religious symbols were more apt to do so when presented with a stimulus of two girls wearing the hijab. However, several remained uncertain that religion was, in fact, the reason for the ways in which ethnic diversity was expressed in the stimuli.

In this category of description, some students' understanding of ethnicity and ethnic groups was revealed during the discussions about ethnic holidays. Students could correctly name some ethnic holidays, though they did not seem to know very much about them. In general, they appeared unsure of any of the deeper characteristics of ethnic groups and were unable to differentiate between them beyond the almost conspicuous examples that were included in the stimuli themselves.

Interviewer: What about these holidays here ... Ramadan, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, or Chinese New Year ... those are just some examples that were given [in the stimulus] for other holidays. Do you know anything about those holidays?

Student: Hanukkah, like, they light candles and stuff near Christmas time ... And I don't know about Kwanzaa. The Chinese New Year, I think that's when the Chinese get a new year, like, go into a different year.

Beyond these obvious prompts, students could not name any of the ethnic groups presented in the stimuli and did not differentiate between poly-ethnic minority groups, First Nations peoples, or Acadians. Their knowledge and understanding about ethnic groups was largely at the level of word or name recognition only. Students saw ethnic groups and diversity as something that exists elsewhere in the world.

The reciprocity that exists between language and ethnicity appears only briefly in the second category. There is a semblance of understanding that language and culture are connected. Nevertheless, the inability to affirm the role that language plays in a person or group's ethnic identity coats this understanding with a residue of uncertainty.

In general, then, the second category of description is characterized by only the vaguest notion that religion and/or culture are the motivating factors in all the stimuli. The students who exhibited this understanding of ethnic diversity were largely unaware of the customs and traditions, or of the importance of language for identity-group survival, and thus were unable to call upon this knowledge when discussing the various scenarios with which they were confronted.

Category 3

In the third category of understanding, students exhibited conceptions in the middle of the total range we observed. Student responses were characterized by an ability to offer details not exhibited in the two categories described earlier. They were generally past the point of recognizing clothing or objects widely known to have religious symbolism. They were usually able to use proper nouns when describing a group of people (for example, Native or Jewish) and might associate a specific country with an ethnic group. Along with naming an ethnic group or religion, students would often try to provide reasons why customs or traditions exist. Students also made attempts to differentiate between ethnic groups and various traditions. However, the results were often inaccurate.

Interviewer: What can you tell me about that? What do you know about religion and what it has to do with wearing something on your head?

Student: Well, some religions believe that women should have a covering. And I don't know the form of religions and stuff ... really, I'm not a religious person, but there could be a religion that calls for people to wear garments over their, that cover themselves. Or, if they get in trouble or something, maybe they believe it covers their shame or something.

Statements in the third category of description revealed that some students had a hazy impression that there might be complex reasons (a "bigger picture") for what they saw happening in each stimulus, but also that they were largely unsure of their own reasoning.

Student: Well they're ... they're trying to be able to carry tobacco in their little medicine pouches, and the Department of Education says it doesn't want them to because it's a rule you're not supposed to carry it around so ... they won't be smoking it, they said. They just want to burn it in a spiritual way or something.

Interviewer: What does that mean, "in a spiritual way?"

Student: Like, what they maybe believe in or something ... that they should be allowed to carry that stuff around. That there were different people before them [that] might have carried it around and stuff and they think that they should be able to.

In terms of their knowledge of ethnic holidays, students were able to provide specific details about some of the special days, most typically about Hanukkah. The most prolific response, when asked if they knew about any of the ethnic holidays mentioned in the stimulus, referred to the "lighting of candles." Other common responses had to do with food and celebrations.

When it came to knowledge about Native peoples, students were inclined to refer to that which has been imbibed by society as a form of popular culture. For instance, a student told of a "lad that came in [to the school] with drums last year ... I don't know if he could speak it [Maliseet] or not. He was Native ... He brought in this great big drum anyway and it had a great big picture on it, and he was singing and stuff." Students' statements were also placed in the third category of description if they demonstrated some knowledge about First Nations groups but failed to acknowledge the "traditional" industries (fishing, logging, etc.) that many Aboriginal communities in the Maritimes used to sustain themselves.

In the third category of description, students' statements were more specific than those in the two previous categories. They appeared to know that the religions about which they were interviewed represent something larger than simply what is expressed by an individual person. They employed the words "culture" and "church" quite frequently, but only in a generic sense. Although they made efforts to differentiate between ethnic groups, as mentioned earlier, the results were often inaccurate. However, their thinking about ethnic diversity demonstrated that some students were able to draw on more prior knowledge than the previous two categories and thus had an easier time explaining what they saw.

Category 4

The fourth category is distinguished by an understanding of ethnic diversity that places greater emphasis on the reasons why various clothing or objects are worn for religious purposes. Understanding takes on a new depth as students give precise reasons why religious practices exist. Deeper significance is given to the religious symbolism portrayed in the stimuli. Students were able to provide explanations and examples that were well-defined, albeit prone to inaccuracies.

Interviewer: And what would that [boy taking off turban to wear a bicycle helmet] mean for him?

Student: That it would be against his religion to do it, and if he does it, he might be ... might be something happen to him or something.

Although students were not cognizant of all of the details, they did recognize that following a religion implies the existence of a belief system, and that these beliefs are important and may have a role in the decisions an individual makes on a day-to-day basis. Also acknowledged were the communal and historic aspects of religion. In short, an understanding of this nature recognizes the holistic aspect of the religions identified in the stimuli. Students also began to note similarities between the religions portrayed in the stimuli and religions with which they are more familiar. A unique aspect of this category is the inclusion of Native spirituality within the students' understanding of religion.

Interviewer: Can you tell me in your own words what this little story or news clipping is all about?

Student: Well, it's about, like, Native children, like, I've read about it in social studies ... ah, the medicine pouches that they carry with them when they become men. And, um, ah, it's with their beliefs, so yah, I think that they should be able to, but not, I don't think they should be able to burn it in the school. I think they should ... like, why don't they do it at home? But they have to carry the medicine pouch on them for so long. So really, it's a spiritual belief, and different cultures ... it's, it's ... this is like a form of racism to say that they can't.

Knowledge of First Nations peoples and Acadians takes on a new dimension in this category. For the first time, students' thinking includes these groups in their conception of the New Brunswick population.

An acknowledgement of the relationship between ethnic diversity and language emerged in the fourth category. Students began to demonstrate an understanding that language acts in a functional role, primarily as a communication tool within ethnic groups. While this demonstrates a departure from the previous categories, a monolingual speaker is assumed. That is, students did not seem to believe that a person who speaks French, Maliseet, or Mi'kmaq could also understand or speak English (or any other languages, for that matter). They did not convey any understanding of the relationship between language and transmission of culture.

In this category of description, students' statements indicate that they were drawing on more background knowledge than in the previous three categories in order to work through the issues presented in the stimuli. Understanding of ethnic diversity in this category is characterized by details and by an understanding of belief systems connected to religion and/or culture. There continues to be a marked lack of knowledge about the role of language within a multicultural society. In sum, understandings in this category are not tentative, but neither are they complete or accurate.

Category Five

The predominant feature of the fifth way of understanding ethnic diversity is the detailed descriptions of specific components of the concept. Students were able to express precise reasons, steeped in religious understanding, about why a person would choose to wear a certain piece of clothing or object. Oftentimes, students would dismiss the contention that choice is, in fact, an option. In this category of understanding, students' conceptions are infused with the axiom of religious doctrine as law. Implicit in this understanding is that both individual and spiritual consequences will likely result if the law is broken. Inaccuracies occur, but they are far fewer in number than the previous categories and only appear in students' conceptions intermittently.

Student: I think they gotta go through, like, a hundred rituals to become Sikh. Like, when they're born. Like, I think the oldest age you can really become full Sikh is, like, three ...

Interviewer: Do you think he has any choice about wearing a turban?

Student: Ah ... probably not, cause it's with his spiritual beliefs and ... he probably could not wear it, but your never know ... that's probably their symbol of being a Sikh.

In this category, students were prone to offer supplementary and unsolicited information about ethnic groups with which they are acquainted. They attempted to name specific articles of clothing or objects worn for religious purposes. A substantial amount of their information appeared to come from school texts, television, and the internet. While much of their understanding relied on a solid foundation of knowledge, it was, at times, encumbered by imprecise ideas. Students also demonstrated that they understand Native and French ethnicities as ethnic groups indigenous to New Brunswick and Canada. For the first time in the total range of conceptions of ethnic diversity held by this group of students, immigrant groups are included in some students' conceptions of the Canadian populace.

There were a couple of variations in the ways students regarded religion and ethnicity, both of which are equally complex. On the one hand, students took the view that a person's religion and customs are determined by their membership in a particular ethnic group. On the other hand, there was an inkling of recognition that one's religious identity is not restricted by the ethnic group to which they belong. The latter appeared only briefly in students' conceptions of ethnic diversity, however. In general, they equated religion and ethnic identity on physical appearance alone.

Student: Well, the boys--this one here--90 percent sure he's probably Jewish--and these (looking at picture of girls) ... probably, I'm 90 percent sure the main reason [they want to be exempt from the "No Hats" rule] ... this one here (girl on left) don't look like it'd be her religion, but this one here (girl on right) looks like she's from Pakistan.

Interviewer: Which one did you say? She doesn't look like what?

Student: She doesn't look like she's from Pakistan, she looks White. But she still might follow that religion, I don't know. I'm assuming that, and they say not to assume, but in this case, I have to.

A palpable bond between major ethnic groups in New Brunswick and language was tentatively established in this category of understanding. Students associated French and Maliseet languages with the Acadian and Native populations of the province and asserted that it is important to be able to communicate in one's own language. When they spoke in terms of the French language, they alluded to specific locations in New Brunswick as French-speaking areas. They did not perform the same geographical exercise when speaking about Native languages. The understanding that dominates this nuance of ethnic diversity is that people who speak French only speak French, but that speakers of Maliseet speak English as well.

To conclude, the final category of description for these students' conceptions of ethnic diversity comprises the most complete understanding in the total range. Thinking that characterizes this understanding of ethnic diversity is detailed, well-thought out, and often draws on analogies to explain the circumstances presented in the stimulus material.

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

One of the foundational elements of social studies curricula in Canada and elsewhere is a commitment to enhancing students' knowledge about, and propensity to accommodate, difference. It is assumed that increased knowledge about difference will place students on a continuum that moves them from understanding, to tolerance, respect, and the willingness to accommodate, with the ideal being that students will actually act as advocates for accommodation of difference. While a considerable amount of research has been conducted regarding attitudes toward difference (Abaidoo 1997; Cumming et al. 1994; Page and Chastenay 2002), little has been done to discover and map what students actually know about the topic.

Barely Scratching the Surface

The data from this study indicate that the students had very little knowledge about the various aspects of ethnic diversity presented in the stimuli. Their knowledge tended to be scattered throughout the five categories of description reported earlier, with the majority of their utterances falling into the first three categories. This is consistent with Brophy and Alleman's findings on primary students' thinking about the economics of shelter. They described their participants' thinking as "limited and spotty, tacit rather than well articulated, and comprised of loose collections of observations rather than well-integrated knowledge networks that included awareness of connections and understanding of cause and effect relationships" (2002, 426). Similar results were reported in their study on children's thinking about the production of common foods (Brophy et al. 2003).

The five categories of description that emerged from the data represent the qualitatively different ways in which our participants understood the concept of ethnic diversity as presented in the interview stimuli. Phenomenographers have, of late, taken steps to organize the categories of description for a concept under study in a hierarchical and/or horizontal fashion according to the levels of sophistication evident therein (Beatty 1987). Other social science researchers, such as Short and Carrington (1992) and Brophy, Alleman, and O'Mahony, also follow this trend, with the latter attaching the caveat that the hierarchy represents degrees of sophistication "within the range observed" (2003, 20).

According to these criteria, then, category one is the least sophisticated, while category five is the most sophisticated within the range observed. Students' thinking in the first category of description lacked any knowledge of ethnic diversity, to the point that their explanations indicated either a reliance on that with which they were already familiar (but were not related to ethnic diversity) or, they simply invented reasons. For instance, a student thought that a principal would tell a group of girls that they could no longer wear their headscarves to school because, "they'd get hot or something 'cause they're kind of thick, and they'll get sweaty." Statements such as these demonstrate a marked lack of prior knowledge about ethnic diversity.

Other statements show some variation in students' thinking, as is evident in one student's comments. Although she started out by saying that a turban-wearing boy's head "could have been deformed at birth or something," later on in the interview, she suggested that the boy wanted to be exempt from the "No hats rule" because "there's religion that calls for it." Another student started out in a similar vein. While at first she thought that "there might be something wrong with his head," she quickly moved on to discuss some of the underlying religious reasons for wearing a turban: "Maybe if they take off their turban, the preacher at their church would say that they were traitors or something like that, and put them out of their church."

Variation in students' thoughts on these issues does indicate degrees of sophistication, but this should not be taken to mean that the most sophisticated thinking is equivalent to complete understanding of the concept. Even category five does not represent a very high degree of sophistication when compared to the definition of ethnic diversity used in this research. A more sophisticated understanding of this definition would entail detailed knowledge about various ethnic groups and their religions, customs, languages, and so on. Also encompassed would be understandings of rights and accommodations commonly associated with the concept of ethnic diversity.

Kymlikca's Framework

Kymlicka (1998; 2001a; 2001b; 2003) offers an interesting framework for thinking about ethnic diversity within the Canadian context. He identifies several types of minority groups, two of which we will discuss: national minorities and immigrant minorities. The first, national minorities are defined as "historically settled, territorially concentrated, and previously self-governing cultures whose territory has become incorporated into a larger state" (Kymlicka 1998, 30). In Canada, the Quebecois and First Nations peoples would fall into this category. These are groups who have taken steps to preserve their distinctiveness, recently settled land claims and hunting and fishing rights, petitioned the federal government for the right to self-govern, and even made attempts at separation. Historically, the Canadian government has been willing to negotiate with these two distinct national minorities in terms of the rights and privileges to which they lay claim.

According to Kymlicka, minority groups who do not meet these criteria are known as immigrant groups, despite the fact that, for many generations past, the descendents have not actually been immigrants. Those who have only arrived in Canada in the last hour, so to speak, are also included in this category. These groups are composed of people who made a conscious choice to come to Canada and "knew that they were entering a new society with its own established laws and institutions" (Kymlicka 1998, 7). In Kymlicka's words, "historically, immigrant/ethnic groups have sought and achieved social and political integration in Canada--not self-government--although they have also wanted some accommodation of their ethnocultural distinctiveness" (1998, 8). The main difference between the two, national minorities and immigrant/ethnic groups, is that the former have historically acknowledged (but still contested) inherent rights, and the latter do not.

To be sure, Kymlicka's use of the term "immigrant groups" leaves much to be desired. It is at most a way to distinguish minority ethnic groups from those he describes as national minorities. In some of his later work, Kymlicka (with Norman, 2000) delineates a far more extensive and sophisticated typology of minority groups, noting, for instance, those that have citizenship status and those that do not. This typology goes beyond the scope of this study, however. For the purpose of this work, and because the term immigrant groups is problematic due to its exclusionary overtones, we employ the term "poly-ethnic minorities" to designate those minority ethnic groups in Canada which are not national minorities. Our main interest is to discover whether or not our participants differentiated between minority ethnic groups in Canada in general, and national minorities and poly-ethnic minorities in particular.

National and Poly-Ethnic Minorities

If we contrast our participants' understanding of ethnic diversity with Kymlicka's, we see that most of the students' statements reflected little knowledge about either national or poly-ethnic minorities (not that we would expect students in grade seven to function at the level of a leading Canadian scholar). But according to curricular expectations (New Brunswick Department of Education n.d.), we do expect them to be able to differentiate between ethnic groups, and especially, to acknowledge the first groups of people who founded Canada. Our study reveals that very few students were actually able to do this.

For example, two students seemed unable to differentiate between Acadians and Natives. When asked if he knew "who the Acadians are?" one replied, "They're like a Native people, and they usually do stuff in the woods to get food and stuff. They used to hunt animals a long time ago." Another offered a similar response: "We talk about it in Social Studies ... they're sort of like Indians, I think."

On the other hand, there were a few students who demonstrated an awareness of (and difference between) First Nations and Acadian peoples. For instance, another knew that Acadians are "the French speaking people who live in ... they live here, I just forget the name. I've been there before ... you go to Fundy [National Park]--there's some French people there ... you go to Timbuctouche [Buctouche] ... and that's completely Acadian." He was also able to offer a description of the origins of First Nations peoples: "The Natives were here first, before we even discovered it [Canada] ... they were the people who were aboriginal in Canada ... They were on this land, and they've known it."

When presented with the stimuli that dealt with language issues, several students made reference to the fact that New Brunswick is a bilingual province. For instance, one noted that "in New Brunswick ... there's a lot of French people, and there's a lot of English people." Only a few students referred to Canada's officially bilingual status, and their understanding of this aspect of ethnic diversity can be captured in thoughts about language such as the following: "Canada is like a bilingual country, so there's ... in Fredericton, there's a lot of French people too."

Most of the students' statements reflected an inaccurate understanding of the national minorities that Kymlicka (1998) writes about. As mentioned earlier, we certainly did not expect them to delineate as extensive a range of definitions as he, but we would expect students to, at the very least, be able to tell us who these groups are. Only one out of the nineteen students mentioned Quebec in these discussions. Otherwise, the students seemed completely unaware of the Francophone communities that exist outside of New Brunswick. Overall, their knowledge about Acadians was extremely limited. In the least sophisticated examples, some thought that being Acadian and being Native was the same thing. The majority referred to these two groups in the past tense, a characteristic that reminds us of the history these students would most likely have encountered in their classrooms. By and large, minority groups are referred to in the past tense, and little attention is paid in the curriculum to the current status of the Acadian or First Nations communities in NB or Canada (see, for example, the history text that all of our participants used to study NB history in grade four, Spray and Spray 1984).

It is important to note that we are not alone in our expectations. In the Atlantic Provinces Educational Foundation's Foundation Document for Social Studies, the section on Citizenship, Power, and Governance calls for students in grade six to "recognize how and why individuals and groups have different perspectives on public issues" (New Brunswick Department of Education n.d., 16), and to "describe the multicultural, multiracial, and multiethnic character of Canadian society." (ibid. 18). Across Canada, the diversity-related curricular standards are very similar. For example, the new Alberta curriculum makes understanding Francophone and Aboriginal perspectives absolutely central to social studies at all levels (Alberta Learning September, 2003).

For the most part, students' understanding of poly-ethnic minorities and their place in Canada was equally limited. When asked about their knowledge of these groups, student responses ranged from a tentative, "different cultures?" and another's provisional, "religious? non-religious?", to another's suggestion that "some people in Canada might be those kinds of cultures." One student's response continues along this thread, noting that "some of them [people in stimuli] are Canadian ethnics. Like, they were born in Canada, but they're that kind of person 'cause their parents were that." The same student also made reference to Toronto and Montreal as multicultural cities, denoting a common theme evident in all students' responses: that no poly-ethnic minority groups live in NB. This is not true, of course, but all of the students interviewed stated either that poly-ethnic groups live elsewhere in Canada, or they live elsewhere in the world. Our findings reinforce earlier work conducted by Varma (2000), who found that elementary students in Moncton envisioned Canada and Canadians as White-only.

In one sense, we see these kinds of understandings in a positive light. In general, students were not negative when they spoke of "others." They did not use disparaging or racist language when talking about the people presented in the stimuli, an aspect of their thinking that we find promising in terms of ethnic relations in Canada. However, their lack of knowledge about ethnic groups in Canada, whether national or poly-ethnic minorities, raises significant concerns. If we believe that "unquestioned assumptions, misconceptions, and ignorance about other cultures are likely to provide a fertile breeding ground for prejudice and ethnocentrism" (Short and Carrington 1999, 172), it seems clear that progress needs to be made in addressing both the knowledge and the position ("them" versus "us") from which students approach their learning and thinking about ethnic diversity.

Diversity and Rights

In 2001, a large scale, quantitative study conducted by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) found that fourteen-year-olds around the world actually expressed a high level of support for immigrant rights (Torney-Purta et al. 2001). But others (Froumin :2004; Joshee 2004) found that, when actually faced with a real situation in which rights are contested (as opposed to an item on a questionnaire asking if they support immigrant rights), many youths' attitudes are far less positive than the IEA's survey results indicate.

When our participants were faced with such situations, for the majority of them, "rights talk" (Ignatieff 2000) was not a part of their conception of ethnic diversity. It is only in statements from the third category of description that we began to see a vague notion of rights encompassed in some students' understanding of the concept, and only in relation to First Nations peoples. However, statements in this category lacked detail and knowledge about why these rights exist or how they came about. The fact that students lack even a rudimentary understanding of how theses rights came to be and why they are contested is distressing, especially in a province like New Brunswick, where the quest for rights by Natives has been a mainstay in the legal and public realms for quite some time.

Statements pertaining to rights that fall into the fourth category of description are slightly more defined than those described above. Rights continue to be discussed only in terms of First Nations peoples, however, and only as if issues surrounding Native rights have long been resolved and there is no need to entertain further discussion about them. No understanding of the rights of Canada's other minority populations is evident in this way of thinking about diversity.

It is not until the fifth category of description that we see a more advanced understanding of "rights talk." In these instances, students conceptualized rights and freedoms in a legal sense when confronted with situations (in the stimuli) that required a solution.

Interviewer: What difference would it make, though, if it was their religion?

Student: Well, really ... they have ... I'm pretty sure they have to do something if it's religion. I'm not really sure, but religion is something that ... there's freedom of religion and they have to ... let them because it's the law.

This advanced conceptualization of rights was quite rare amongst the students interviewed. Only two participants demonstrated any knowledge of the legality of "rights talk" and actually applied this thinking to poly-ethnic minority groups.

What does this mean in a country where "rights talk" is a fundamental part of the Canadian identity and is presented as a model for other nations to follow (Ignatieff 2000)? The majority of our participants did not think about, and could not explain anything related to, rights. According to Ignatieff, the "purpose of rights language is to facilitate peaceful adjudication (by defining precisely what is at stake between contending parties and, in so doing, to prevent the conflict from turning into violence)" (ibid. 9). It is supposed to help us understand the position from which the other person speaks. But if one lacks even the most basic knowledge (about diversity, in this case) for this understanding to take place, then one remains incapable of entering into a discussion about rights in the first place. Ignatieff goes on to write that "to believe in rights is to believe in defending difference" (53). It is very hard to believe in something if you do not know what it (difference) is in the first place. This is a difficulty most of our participants faced.

A Typology of Accommodations

Canada's record on the accommodation of diversity, while far from perfect, is nevertheless seen as an exemplar on the world stage. We are the only Western nation that has "constitutionalized practices of accommodation" (Kymlicka 2003, 374). Kymlicka argues that "accommodating diversity has a symbolic salience in Canada that is not matched in most other Western countries" (375). A basic understanding of difference is required in order to make accommodations for it, however. For a few of our participants, accommodation seemed a non-issue. Those who did not recognize any aspect of ethnic diversity did not see any need to change a school rule, law, or custom, because they were unable to think of any reasons that would merit such a change. In addition, those students who felt bound by rules tended not to want to accommodate difference. We saw this clearly in one student's comments about why Native students should not be allowed to wear medicine pouches containing tobacco to school: "It's a rule that they shouldn't be allowed to, so probably they shouldn't be allowed ... 'cause some of them might smoke it ... you never know ... But they say they're not going to, but you don't know so ... it's a rule."

For those participants whose thinking about diversity did encompass notions about accommodation, our data seem to suggest that their understandings about diversity can be described in the following ways: Accommodations that include little to no real change on the part of the majority group member (Passive); accommodations that appear to make the most sense or serve a particular purpose, particularly avoiding conflict (Pragmatic); and accommodations that are based on notions of what is right and fair (Principled). Almost all comments from participants fell into the first two categories, with only one or two approaching a principled idea of accommodation, such as is evident in the following quote regarding the provision of bilingual services:

Student: They're changing all the signs and tickets and stuff like that in bilingual ... French and English, and that could be good. 'Cause it would be weird if you were French and in a bilingual province and can't read some of the stuff that the law has.

Interviewer: Ok. Why would that be weird?

Student: Because you'd have to try to learn English, and you shouldn't really have to if you're in a bilingual province.

Whatever the reason for accommodating difference, the few students who were inclined to think about accommodations were not afraid to also impose limits. For instance, while one was willing to re-draw the line in terms of the bicycle helmet law (and allow Sikhs to wear turbans instead of helmets), he refused when it came to a request to be exempt from a law requiring motorcyclists to wear a helmet. None of the students who thought about accommodation were able to justify an accommodation of this nature. The same is true of the kirpan debate; not one of the students agreed with the boy who thought he should be able to wear his kirpan to school. Safety overrode any accommodation of diversity when it was seen to be too dangerous for the individual requesting the accommodation or for society in general.

CONCLUSION

Multicultural education in Canada and abroad has gone through several transformations, particularly in terms of its approach to diversity. In its early stages, multicultural education had, as its main goal, the assimilation of all those who were not White and British (Joshee 2004; Richardson 2002). In Canada, the assimilation model was gradually dropped, largely due to the increasing diversity of the Canadian populace. Joshee (2004) tracks these shifts in educational policy and notes that, in the latter half of the twentieth century, much of the focus was on issues of identity, social justice, and more recently, social cohesion.

In light of increasingly diverse populations, citizenship education in Canada and elsewhere has also had to recalibrate its focus. Banks writes that "an important goal of citizenship education in multicultural societies is to teach toleration and recognition of cultural differences" (2004, 4). However, Castles acknowledges this as only one of two major objectives of citizenship education, and adds that it should also focus on "social equality for members of minorities" (2004, 25).

Concomitant with changing demographics and educational policies comes an escalating pressure to teach about, and incorporate, accommodating practices in Canadian schools. It is not enough to recognize diversity and teach students about accommodation, we also need to enact the rhetoric of social justice in a much broader sense, as Kymlicka notes: "the institutions of the larger society should be adapted to provide greater recognition and accommodation of these ethnic identities--for example, schools and other public institutions should accommodate their religious holidays, dress, dietary restrictions, and so on" (2001b, 33).

To a large extent, complex understandings of these ideas were not in evidence in our study. However, we think we have begun to understand why most of the students in this study either failed, or were reluctant, to entertain thoughts about accommodation and rights. They simply did not know enough (and in some cases, anything) about the many facets of ethnic diversity that would have enabled them to do so.

We are left wondering how we (educators and curriculum developers) can expect students who have little to no understanding of ethnic diversity to progress on a continuum that moves them from recognition of diversity to advocacy for accommodation and rights. Kymlicka and Opalski claim "that justice requires the public recognition and accommodation of diversity" (2001, 1). Our participants are barely on the recognition end of the scale. Is it fair and responsible of us to expect them to be able to advocate for something they know next to nothing about?

In the summer of 2004, New Brunswick and much of the rest of Canada celebrated the 400th anniversary of the landing of Samuel de Champlain on Isle Sainte Croix. Champlain is famous, not only for establishing the first French settlements in North America, but also for being an important cartographer of what is today Eastern Canada and the United States. By today's standards, Champlain's maps were primitive, rough, and not very accurate, particularly with regard to inland areas. His maps, however, provided the basis for others to come and clarify the terrain. In similar fashion, we see this preliminary study as a rough map of the terrain of students' understanding of ethnic diversity. It only touches the surface and almost certainly contains many gaps and inaccuracies, but we hope it provides a beginning for other explorer-researchers to follow.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors gratefully acknowledge funding for this research provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

REFERENCES

Abaidoo, Samuel. Cultural diversity in Canada: An assessment of the relationship between city size, size of minority population, and perceptions of and attitudes towards, cultural diversity: The case of Calgary and Saskatoon. Ottawa: Department of Canadian Heritage, Multiculturalism Program, 1997.

Alberta Learning. Social studies, Kindergarten to Grade 12. Edmonton: Alberta Learning, 2003.

Banks, James A. Introduction. In Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives, ed. J.A. Banks, 3-15. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004.

Barton, Keith C., and Linda S. Levstik. Teaching history for the common good. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2004.

Beatty, Elizabeth M. Understanding concepts in social science: Towards an effective evaluation strategy. Instructional Science 15 (1987): 341-59.

Brophy, Jere, and Janet Alleman. Primary-grade students' knowledge and thinking about the economics of meeting families' shelter needs. American Educational Research Journal 39, 2 (2002): 423-68.

Brophy, Jere, Janet Alleman, and Carolyn O'Mahony. Primary-grade students' knowledge and thinking about food production and the origins of common foods. Theory and Research in Social Education 31 (2003): 10-49.

Bruno-Jofre, Rosa, and Natalia Aponiuk, eds. Educating citizens for a pluralistic society. Calgary: Canadian Ethnic Studies/Etudes ethniques au Canada, 2001.

Castles, Stephen. Migration, citizenship and education. In Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives, ed. J.A. Banks, 17-48. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004.

Cumming, Alister, Ronald Mackay, and Alfred Sakyi. Learning processes in a Canadian exchange program for multicultural, anti-racist education. Canadian Journal of Education 19, 4 (1994): 399-417.

Driver, Rosalind, and Jack Easley. Pupils and paradigms: A review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students. Studies in Science Education 5 (1978): 61-84.

Froumin, Isak D. Citizenship education and ethnic issues in Russia. In Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives, ed. J.A. Banks, 273-98. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004.

Hebert, Yvonne, ed. Citizenship in transformation in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002.

Ignatieff, Michael. The rights revolution. Toronto: House of Anansi, 2000.

Joshee, Reva. Citizenship and multicultural education in Canada: From assimilation to social cohesion. In Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives, ed. J.A. Banks, 127-56. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004.

Kymlicka, Will. Finding our way: Rethinking ethnocultural relations in Canada. Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press, 1998.

--. Politics in the vernacular: Nationalism, multiculturalism, and citizenship. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2001a.

--. Western political theory and ethnic relations in Eastern Europe. In Can liberalism be exported? Western political theory and ethnic relations in Eastern Europe, ed. W. Kymlicka and M. Opalski, 13-105. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 200lb.

--. Being Canadian. Government and Opposition Ltd. 38, 3 (2003): 357-85.

--. Forward. In Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives, ed. J.A. Banks, xiii-xviii. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004.

Kymlicka, Will, and Wayne Norman. Citizenship in diverse societies. Oxford, UK/New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Kymlicka, Will, and Magda Opalski. Introduction. In Can liberalism be exported? Western political theory and ethnic relations in Eastern Europe, ed. W. Kymlicka and M. Opalski, 1-10. Oxford, UK/New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Mansfield, Earl, and John Kehoe. A critical examination of anti-racist education. Canadian Journal of Education 19, 4 (1994): 418-30.

Marton, Ference. Phenomenography--Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science 10 (1981): 177-200.

New Brunswick Department of Education. Foundation for the Atlantic Canada social studies curriculum. Halifax: Atlantic Provinces Education Foundation, n.d.

Pagr, Michel, and Marie-Helene Chastenay. A comparison of young citizens in Quebec, New Brunswick, and Alberta. McGill University workshop, "Citizenship on trial: Interdisciplinary perspectives on political socialization of adolescents," Montreal, 2002.

Peck, Carla L. Children's understanding of ethnic diversity. Master's thesis, University of New Brunswick, 2003.

Posner, George, Kenneth Strike, Peter Hewson, and William Gertzog. Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education 66, 2 (1982): 211-27.

Richardson, George. The death of the good Canadian. New York: Peter Lang, 2002.

Richardson, John T.E. The concepts and methods of phenomenographic research. Review of Educational Research 69, 1 (1999): 53-82.

Sears, Alan, Gerald M. Clarke, and Andrew S. Hughes. Canadian citizenship education: The pluralist ideal and citizenship education for a post-modern state. In Civic education across countries: Twenty-four national case studies from the I.E.A. Civic Education Project, ed. J. Tomey-Purta, J. Schwille, and J. Amadeo, 111-35. Amsterdam: IEA, 1999.

Sears, Alan, and Ian Wright, eds. Challenges and prospects for Canadian social studies. Vancouver: Pacific Educational Press, 2004.

Seixas, Peter, ed. Theorizing historical consciousness. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004.

Short, Geoffrey, and Bruce Carrington. The development of children's understanding of Jewish identity and culture. School Psychology International 13 (1992): 73-89.

--. Children's constructions of their national identity. In Critical multiculturalism: Rethinking multicultural and antiracist education, ed. S. May, 172-90. London: Falmer, 1999.

Spray, William, and Carole Spray. New Brunswick: Its history and its people. Toronto: Gage, 1984.

Torney-Purta, Judith, Rainer Lehmann, Hans Oswald, and Wolfram Schulz. Citizenship and education in twenty-eight countries: Civic knowledge and engagement at age fourteen. Amsterdam: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, 2001.

Varma, Manju. Multicultural children's literature: Storying the Canadian identity. Ph.D. diss., Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, 2000.

Varma-Joshi, Manju. Understanding multiculturalism in the social studies classroom. In Challenges and prospects for Canadian social studies, ed. A. Sears and I. Wright, 150-63. Vancouver: Pacific Educational Press, 2004.

Webb, Graham. Deconstructing deep and surface: Towards a critique of phenomenography. Higher Education 33 (1997): 195-212.

Wineburg, Samuel S. Historical thinking and other unnatural acts: Charting the future of teaching the past. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2001.

Carla Peck is a Ph.D. student in the Centre for the Study of Historical Consciousness in the Faculty of Education at the University of British Columbia. Her research interests include children's conceptions of social studies concepts and students' uses and understandings of the past. Email: peckc@interchange.ubc.ca

Alan Sears is a professor of social studies education at the University of New Brunswick. He has written extensively about social education in general and citizenship education in particular. He is coeditor of Challenges and Prospects in Canadian Social Studies and chief regional editor for Canada for the International Journal of Citizenship and Teacher Education. Email: asears@unb.ca Table 1 Grade Seven Students' Understanding of Ethnic Diversity: Categories of Description Ethnic diversity: 5 Is likely determined by Exists in Canada & birth; expression is includes First Nations guided and bound by (FN) and Francophones religious doctrine as indigenous to NB 4 Incorporates the historic, FN and Francophones communal, and traditional live in NB, but other nature of religion and ethnic group members religious practice and come from elsewhere includes Native spirituality 3 Is somehow connected Is associated with to religion, religious specific groups of practices, and/or culture people and/or countries 2 Might involve religion Exists somewhere else and/or culture in the world 1 No understanding of ethnic diversity Ethnic diversity: 5 Is likely determined by Includes language as birth; expression is something used for more guided and bound by than communication; religious doctrine i.e., functions as one aspect of identity 4 Incorporates the historic, Language is only a communal, and traditional communication tool nature of religion and religious practice and includes Native spirituality 3 Is somehow connected to religion, religious practices, and/or culture 2 Might involve religion and/or culture 1 No understanding of ethnic diversity Ethnic diversity: 5 Is likely determined by Might require legal birth; expression is accommodations, guided and bound by however, safety religious doctrine remains a concern 4 Incorporates the historic, Accommodations are communal, and traditional acceptable as long as nature of religion and safety is not a factor, religious practice and and the dominant group includes Native is not negatively affected spirituality 3 Is somehow connected Might accommodate in to religion, religious some situations, "depending practices, and/or culture on the numbers," and only if the dominant group is not negatively affected 2 Might involve religion and/or culture 1 No understanding of ethnic diversity Ethnic diversity: 5 Is likely determined by Is protected by birth; expression is law (rights) guided and bound by religious doctrine 4 Incorporates the historic, For FN only, involves communal, and traditional certain rights because nature of religion and of their history religious practice and includes Native spirituality 3 Is somehow connected FN have rights but to religion, religious no explanation given practices, and/or culture regarding why these rights exist 2 Might involve religion and/or culture 1 No understanding of ethnic diversity