CC BY
33PEDAGOGICAL SCIENCES
THE IMPACT OF MULTICULTURALISM ON EDUCATION
Quliyeva C.
Baku State University Baku, Azerbaijan DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.6809744
ABSTRACT
In the modern world, as demographics, social conditions, and political circumstances change, the question of creating conditions for the development of a multicultural personality with the aim of fostering social cohesion and tolerance towards other nationalities is acute. A multicultural education, which is based on the equality of social justice, is called upon to achieve this goal. The main research methods are: theoretical analysis of foreign and domestic literature on the research problem, analysis of the relationship of concepts such as multiculturalism and polyculturalism. The components necessary for the formation of multiculturalism in pedagogy are the reduction of prejudice, the expansion of educational and social culture. The pedagogical problems of multiculturalism mainly deal with the issues of sociocultural, linguistic and psychological adaptation of foreign ethnic children the support of migrant children in a multicultural educational environment, in connection with which the principles of multicultural education are determined, and the features of multicultural teacher training for working with foreign ethnic children are studied. Scientific, theoretical and practical aspects of the organization of educational work with students are being developed in the modern school. It becomes important to understand what a multicultural person is and how he differs from "ordinary" people, at what stage the definition and tracking of the conditions under which a cultural identity turns into a multicultural one is taking place. These aspects require special attention, as they relate to efforts to resolve conflicts in the existing society. Potentially, a multicultural style can be formed and manifest itself in any society or culture that faces new views, a different way of life. In early 2020, the changes associated with the coronavirus pandemic, have revived the need to preserve our own and collective cultural identity. Along with disorientation, new opportunities appear in order to realize our individuality and the identity of the human race as a whole. Perhaps, right now, a new type of individual is emerging, which is part of a community of citizens who want to see the world as one and feel like something whole with all its parts.
Keywords: inculturation, multicultural identity, multicultural education, multicultural competence, corona-virus, subcultural identity, ethno-cultural identity.
In recent decades, the process of preparing people for life in a multinational society, in the context of increasing multiculturalism, has been at the forefront of pedagogical research, which is reflected in the theory and practice of multicultural education, which is designed to create conditions for the education of a multicultural personality [4; 7], multicultural competence, which is understood as the ability for self-identification with simultaneous tolerance for other cultures [2]. Mul-ticulturalism is continuously associated with the preservation and development of cultural differences, the recognition of the corresponding rights of individual and collective subjects (including minorities), and is very common both as a concept and as a corresponding phenomenon that largely determines the picture of the modern world. Attitude towards him initially and still very ambiguous [9]. According to some, multicultural-ism requires more and more recognition, as it is an important direction that can change political life today. The requirements and conditions of a policy that takes into account the cultural diversity are not just declared, but in many cases are accepted and implemented, which is why we are witnessing the birth of new, multicultural models of society and the state [2]. According to others, it is a source of constant clashes of interests between the "local" and the "come in large numbers", a deep crisis and inevitably fails, since the main problem lies in the contradiction with the objective historical reality, where everyone is sincerely sure that it is his laws that are "true", because which is accepted in his culture [1].
However, it is precisely in such contradictions, in our opinion, that the key to the dialectical solution of the problem can be found. Thus, multicultural education becomes the most important vector of practical work. The pedagogical problems of multiculturalism are based mainly on the issues of linguistic, psychological and socio-cultural adaptation of foreign-ethnic and foreign-speaking children, accompanying migrant children in a multicultural educational environment, in connection with which the principles of multiculturalism in education are determined, the features of professional training of a multicultural teacher for working with foreign-ethnic children are studied. children, scientific, theoretical and practical aspects of organizing educational work with migrant students in a modern school are being developed [5]. Differences between the concepts of "polyculturalism" (the creation of a single society by representatives of different cultures, ethnic groups, nationalities, religions) and "multiculturalism" (a situation in which all members of society must adhere to the principles of multiculturalism) are found [7]. A strategy for the transformation of education in the context of rapidly developing multicultural processes has been proposed, which includes changes in the content of education, improvement of educational practices and optimization of ways of interaction between educational institutions [4]. It should be noted that the philosophical foundations for educating a multicultural personality have been worked out to a lesser extent in terms of not only social adaptation, adaptation to the
prevailing conditions, but anticipatory pre-adaptation as a catalyst, conductor of intercultural integration. One of the tasks of any culture is to organize, integrate and maintain psychosocial personality patterns, which are known to be actively formed during childhood and adolescence. Any culture projects unique and necessary conditions and relationships for each person, which are an important component of the process of socialization and inculturation, in which impulses and motives acquire meaning, structuring of higher forms of individual consciousness takes place. All cultures, one way or another, relate to the philosophical issues of life: the cosmological ordering of the Universe, the origin, existence and fate of man and mankind, the nature of knowledge and practical experience. The way in which a person asks these questions and seeks answers to them, the social connections and relationships that are nurtured, expresses the pattern of cultural identity. Thus, the conceptualization of identity should contain three interrelated levels of integration and analysis - biological, social and philosophical, interconnected by culture, which operates through sanctions and rewards, totems and taboos, prohibitions and myths. The unity and integration of society, nature and the cosmos is reflected in the general image of oneself, the consciousness of the individual. These images, in turn, are based on universal human drives. In any analysis of cultural identity, a certain configuration of motivational needs is implied. As A. Maslow suggested, human motives form a certain hierarchy, in which the most powerful motives will monopolize consciousness and tend to form various abilities on their own. The needs of infancy and childhood focus mainly around food, water and warmth, that is, they are biological and physiological in nature. Social needs are deeper in adolescence and youth, during the period of self-assertion [9]. The individual moves from identity to identity through the process of cultural education. A person always recreates his individuality, moving from one experience of himself to another, sometimes combining them, sometimes discarding them, reacting situationally and dynamically. An individual style can be characterized by an endless series of experiments and explorations, some of which may be minor, some of which may be fundamental. A multicultural person is always in a certain activity in which a basic self-image is formed, constantly changing through experience and contact with the outside world. At the same time, he respects the indefinite boundaries of the self. Identity parameters cannot be clearly fixed and predictable, they are rather a temporary form and readiness for change. Multicultural people are capable of major changes in their belief system, they can reconsider their socio-psychological style, assuming greater flexibility. Such an individual aspires to ideas and feelings that can give a match to his own inner world and, in turn, set the vector to the eternal search for something universal and perfect. a person, like great philosophers in any phase of his development, on the one hand, cannot fully accept the rules of any particular culture, on the other hand, he is limited by his conditioning. For this reason, needs, urges, motives and expectations are constantly adjusted according to the con-
text in which it is located. This style, which has a relative, relational character, makes it possible to look at their original culture from a different point of view. Such poignancy evokes a dynamic and critical stance in the face of totalitarian ideologies, systems and movements. The flexibility of a multicultural personality makes it possible to modify adaptability to a large extent. However, the success of social adaptation at the same time allow the existence of certain constants, something stable and unchanging in life. A multicultural person can be classified as three main positions in thinking and behavior. 1. Each culture, as a system, has its own internal coherence, integrity and logic of values and attitudes, beliefs and norms that give meaning and meaning to both individual and collective identity.
2. No culture is better or worse than another in its properties. All cultural systems are equally valid and valid as varieties of human experience.
3. All people are culturally interconnected to some extent. Each culture endows a person with some sense of identity, some regulation of behavior and some sense of one's own place in the surrounding reality.
A multicultural person embodies these positions and lives by them daily, and not only in intercultural positions. They are the place of his inner image of the world and himself. Therefore, multiculturalism is not just a sensitivity to many other cultures. Rather, this is a constant process of nurturing and simultaneously budding from such a cultural context. One cannot be free from the influence of culture, but there is no permanent cultural character either. In shifts in the identity process, the multicultural personality constantly recreates the symbol of the self. Indefinite boundaries and ever-changing relationships brought about by biological, social, and philosophical patterns allow the release of the individual's complex responses to cultural systems. Such cultural plasticity implies changes in personality. On purpose or by chance, multicultural people experience changes in their condition; their religion, personality, behavior, occupation, nationality, worldview, political beliefs and values may be partially or completely reformatted under the influence of new experience. The relationship of multicultural people to cultural orders is weak and fragile. The cultural and social sphere of the individual is the basis of his personality, values and certain actions. However, this same person may, within certain limits, prefer the environment and conditions that will affect him. Who then is a multicultural person? Representatives of multicultural-ism note that such individuals most likely have undergone changes in identity and, in some cases, quite radically broke with their former selves. In them, one can notice points of change in which the significance of the values, attitudes and worldview that we characterize with identity has undergone changes. Such individuals should not be studied from the position of "ordinary" people, since each of them also express some attributes of another person, deliberately or mistakenly moving from one coordinate system to another, from one environment to another. Incomprehensible activity allows such people to live many different lives, sequentially or simultaneously. But, on the other hand, such psy-chocultural flexibility leads to tension and stress. First,
it's a vulnerability. Not following clear boundaries and forms, such an individual is prone to confusion in concepts and meanings - what is fundamental and what is insignificant.
Without a certain framework, life experience itself has no clear limits, and therefore no meaning: where there is no evil, there can be no good; where there are no prohibitions, nothing can be sacred. Boundaries, while indefinite, encourage separation and definition of who we are in relation to someone or something else. Secondly, a multicultural person can easily become multiphrenic, that is, using the terminology of E. Erick-son, acquire a "dispersed identity". Where the configuration of loyalty and identification is constantly changing, a person is open to any incentives. The task of each cultural group is to count the images and symbols that the individual can transform into his own existence. But where all messages and stimuli are given equal weight, the individual can easily become overwhelmed by the demands of outsiders. Thirdly, a multicultural person can easily suffer from the loss of a sense of authenticity. In the course of cultural adaptation, he can potentially take on many roles that are not related to each other. Roles, according to psychologists, are models of behavior that are expected from a person in a given situation, in certain social or cultural statuses. Behind the roles are deeper processes of cognition, experience and evaluation, which make up a single canvas. Fourth, it is the risk of amateurism. The energy and enthusiasm that arises in new situations can be transformed into some quirks and fantasies in which a multicultural person tries to avoid more fundamental responsibilities and hobbies. Visible plasticity masks the avoidance of real problems that are avoided or acquire only superficial significance. This is especially true in societies where young people are vulnerable to the challenges of modern global culture, identity can give way to dilettantism, "in which the individual flows, unaffected, unhindered and unaffected, through social, political and economic manipulation. Fifth, a multicultural person can take psychological refuge in relation to existential absurdity by ridiculing the stereotypes and lifestyles of other people, reacting at best with aloofness and aloofness, and at worst as a nihilist who sees salvation in denial. Where boundary violation creates a chasm that separates a person from meaningful relationships with others, it can hide behind unsafe cynicism and apathy. In such a state, nothing inside or outside the personality has serious consequences; the individual in such a position must ultimately despise that which cannot be understood and included in his own existence. These stresses should not be confused with the tension and anxiety that comes with intercultural adjustment. Culture shock is a more superficial combination of problems resulting from the misinterpretation of commonly accepted and understood signs of social interaction. Moreover, the distinction between these contradictions should not indicate that a multicultural person necessarily faces these difficulties. The multicultural style of identity is based on fluid, dynamic movement, the ability to move in and out of diverse contexts, and to maintain internal coherence in various situations. A multi-
cultural individual can equally be a great artist or a neurotic, each of whom is equally receptive to the cultural trends of his time. Any list of such persons belonging to different cultures may include both persons who have achieved a high degree of success (famous writers, musicians, diplomats, etc.), as well as those whose lives, for one reason or another, were broken by insurmountable circumstances. The process of formation of a multicultural identity leads to a new type of personality, not limited by the boundaries of culture. However, both women and men, regardless of age, must be able to overcome the difficulties of intercultural contact. Intercultural psychology is rich in examples of problems people face in other cultures. For example, integration and assimilation represent two different responses to the dominant culture: the first involves the maintenance of subcultural differences, the second is absorption into the larger cultural system. The relationship between assimilation, integration, and identification suggests that if people identify with their own group, they will have a favorable attitude toward integration. On the other hand, if they identify with the host society, this contributes to assimilation [8]. Various negative attitudes, psychosomatic stresses and deviant behavior are associated with this. A multicultural person is in many ways a stranger. The degree to which a given individual can change frame of reference and learn about group structures and functions while maintaining a clear understanding of personal, ethnic, and cultural characteristics may well be the extent to which he or she functions successfully across cultures. It is difficult to determine the conditions under which a cultural identity will turn into a multicultural one. Such changes are most likely in cases where the foundations of collective cultural identity have been violated in communities that have been subjected to stress for a long time due to environmental or economic difficulties, suffered from natural or man-made disasters [3]. Potentially multicultural attitudes and values can develop where there is a balanced exchange between cultures that are not completely disparate, or where the rate of change is evolutionary rather than forced. Thus, a multicultural style can be born and initially expressed in any society or culture that is faced with new attitudes, a different way of life. The studies of psychologists and anthropologists are increasingly consistent with the idea of a multicultural personality, which is nurtured in conditions of stress and tension that arise at the macro and micro cultural levels [6]. Apparently, a multicultural style is able to form when an individual is able to discuss the conflicts and contradictions inherent in intercultural contacts. Thus, a multicultural person may well represent an affirmation of individuality at a higher level of social, psychological and cultural integration. Psychological neoplasms in new conditions often lead to the disintegration of the personality, but, in turn, are the basis for growth and development. The basis for each new identity of a multicultural person lies in the destruction of previous identities. The process of adjustment and adaptation is part of the growth of a new type of wholeness at a higher level of integration. In general, researchers do not suggest that multiculturalism is currently the predominant
style of behavior or type of character. It is also not assumed that multicultural people, by virtue of their free attitude towards other cultures, are "better" than supporters of a mono- or bicultural model. However, it can be argued that multiculturalism is an increasingly significant socio-psychological phenomenon that requires further research and conceptualization. At the same time, multiculturalism becomes a rather serious problem for study and understanding, including from a psychological and pedagogical point of view, since it embodies the characteristics that act as a mediator, a catalyst for contacts between cultures. The variation and flexibility of this style of identity allows one to be included in various contexts and environments without being completely alienated from the original ones. There is no doubt that people with a broader self-consciousness than the space of the original culture appear more and more often. However, truly multicultural people are rare, although they are uniquely positioned to mediate cultures around the world, contributing to their preservation. In the process of adaptation, such a person is in a unique position for understanding and researching the psychocultural dynamics of other systems. Today we live in a transitional period of history, which makes it necessary for the manifestation of parallel forms of the cultural process, opening up for people both positive advantages and negative sides. The events of early 2020 related to the coronavirus pandemic have caused a revival of the need to preserve their own and collective cultural identity.
The tragedy claimed tens of thousands of lives, destroyed the habitual way of life of millions of people. Before our eyes, what was considered important in previous decades has depreciated and become unsafe -globalization, a consumer society, freedom of movement, familiar services, and even handshakes. As never before, the question arose before all mankind - to unite or to be every man for himself? Experts agree on one thing: having emerged from quarantine measures, people will find themselves in a new, unusual world, along with disorientation and alienation, new opportunities
will appear in order to realize their individuality and the identity of the human race as a whole. Perhaps, before our eyes, a new type of person is being born, who is part of a community of citizens who want to see the world as one and feel as one with all its parts.
This work was supported by the Science Development Foundation under the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan - Grant № EÍF-GAT-6-2021-2(39)-13/09/5-M-09
References
1. Joppke C. The retreat of multiculturalism in the liberal state: theory and policy. British journal of sociology, 2004, vol. 55, pp. 237-257. (In Eng.). VESTNIK OF THE MARI STATE UNIVERSITY. Vol. 14, no. 3. 2020 A. A. Stenishcheva 319
2. Kymlicka W. Multiculturalism as fairness. Journal of political philosophy, 1997, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 407-427.
3. Kymlicka W. Testing the liberal multiculturalist hypothesis: normative theories and social science evidence. Canadian journal of political science, 2016, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 257-271.
4. Lynch J. Multicultural education in a global society. London, The Falmer Press, 1989, 191 p.
5. Maslow A. Motivation and personality. New York, Harper & Brothers, 1954, p. 411.
6. Rudmin F.W. Critical history of the acculturation psychology of assimilation, separation, integration, and marginalization. Review of general psychology, 2003, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 3-37.
7. Sleeter C.E., Grant C.A. Making choices for multicultural education. Hoboken, N. Y., Wiley, 2007, p. 238.
8. Sommerlad E.A., Berry J.W. The role of ethnic identification in distinguishing between attitudes towards assimilation and integration of a minority racial group. Human relations, 1970, vol. 23, pp. 23-29.
9. Therborn G. Multicultural societies. Russian sociological review, 2001, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 50-67.
