The Diversity Bargain and the Discourse Dance of Equitable and Best

IF 0.7 0 MUSIC
Lauren Kapalka Richerme
{"title":"The Diversity Bargain and the Discourse Dance of Equitable and Best","authors":"Lauren Kapalka Richerme","doi":"10.2979/philmusieducrevi.27.2.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Contemporary music education leaders suggest ambiguous definitions of \"diversity,\" often assuming it both unquestionably good and compatible with equity. The purpose of this inquiry is to explore the assumptions underlying such discourse. First, I use the legal history of diversity in education to examine the American National Association for Music Education's statements on equity, access, inclusivity, and diversity. Second, drawing on Thomas Green's educational systems framework, I analyze the political strength of arguments surrounding diversity and equity. Third, considering instances when white parents deem diversity \"best\" for their children, I investigate the advantages and limitations of what Natasha Warikoo calls the \"diversity bargain.\" While not condoning unbridled self-interest, I posit how music educators might use parents' self-interest to support more ethical practices. Designed to benefit all students, diversity initiatives conflict with efforts aimed at equity. Music education diversity and equity rhetoric rely on either a troubling misreading of a politically strong state rationale or on the weak political positions of societal interests or educational goods valuable for their own sake. Rather than focusing on diverse content, teachers and students might experiment with how artistic expressions enable the exchange of individuals' stories and insights. The music education profession might also provide attention to equity apart from diversity.","PeriodicalId":43479,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Music Education Review","volume":"164 ","pages":"154 - 170"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy of Music Education Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2979/philmusieducrevi.27.2.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MUSIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract:Contemporary music education leaders suggest ambiguous definitions of "diversity," often assuming it both unquestionably good and compatible with equity. The purpose of this inquiry is to explore the assumptions underlying such discourse. First, I use the legal history of diversity in education to examine the American National Association for Music Education's statements on equity, access, inclusivity, and diversity. Second, drawing on Thomas Green's educational systems framework, I analyze the political strength of arguments surrounding diversity and equity. Third, considering instances when white parents deem diversity "best" for their children, I investigate the advantages and limitations of what Natasha Warikoo calls the "diversity bargain." While not condoning unbridled self-interest, I posit how music educators might use parents' self-interest to support more ethical practices. Designed to benefit all students, diversity initiatives conflict with efforts aimed at equity. Music education diversity and equity rhetoric rely on either a troubling misreading of a politically strong state rationale or on the weak political positions of societal interests or educational goods valuable for their own sake. Rather than focusing on diverse content, teachers and students might experiment with how artistic expressions enable the exchange of individuals' stories and insights. The music education profession might also provide attention to equity apart from diversity.
多样性交易与公平与最佳的话语之舞
摘要:当代音乐教育领导者对“多样性”提出了模棱两可的定义,通常认为它无疑是好的,而且符合公平。本次调查的目的是探索这种话语背后的假设。首先,我利用教育多样性的法律历史来研究美国国家音乐教育协会关于公平、获取、包容性和多样性的声明。其次,借鉴托马斯·格林的教育体系框架,我分析了围绕多样性和公平性的争论的政治力量。第三,考虑到白人父母认为多样性对孩子“最有利”的情况,我调查了娜塔莎·沃里科所说的“多样性交易”的优势和局限性。虽然我不宽恕肆无忌惮的私利,但我认为音乐教育工作者可能会利用父母的私利来支持更多的道德实践。多样性倡议旨在造福所有学生,与旨在实现公平的努力相冲突。音乐教育的多样性和公平言论要么依赖于对政治上强大的国家理由的令人不安的误读,要么依赖于社会利益或教育产品的薄弱政治立场。教师和学生可以尝试艺术表达如何促进个人故事和见解的交流,而不是关注多样化的内容。音乐教育行业也可能关注多样性之外的公平性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信