RECONSIDERING THE QUALITY MEASUREMENT OF EDUCATION

RECONSIDERING THE QUALITY MEASUREMENT OF EDUCATION

IN THE LIGHT OF MULTICULTURALISM:

TOWARDS MEASURING STUDENTS’ CULTURE ACQUISITON

Introduction

Running an education system that broadly aims to prepare future human resources for further development of a society is a costly business.  Statistically speaking, a yearly expenditure of education sectors cross countries averages out to approximately 20 percents of the whole budget for public sector.  In turn, its costliness leads stakeholders, namely, parent and employer communities to question whether the quality of education matches to their expected outcomes and outputs. In practice, it often follows controversial critiques and contestable questionings towards schooling effectiveness and efficiency whereby advancing educational measurement both theoretically and practically. The advancement appeared in educational measurement has not, however, matched yet with such new demands advocated  by multiculturalism that students’ culture differences ought to be taken into consideration when the quality of education is measured. More specifically speaking, it can be reasonably evidenced that students have not been assessed with the same test with the same difficulties.  In fact, tests are often standardized so that they neglect students’ culture differences even though it is aware that cultural differences affect their performances.  In this term, educational measurement bears a bias against students’ cultures when measuring their development.  As a consequence, educators and scholars are often challenged to eliminate the degree of bias in educational measurement as well as to increase the extent of the culture sensitiveness of the quality judgment of education.

In response to aforementioned challenges, it is evidently claimed here that the degree of the bias in educational measurement might be eliminated in case that students’ culture differences are taken into account when measuring the quality of education. In seeking the premise for this  thesis expressed above,  the vitality of such questions asked that whether there is any  possibility to measure students’ culture acquisition and  to set up some cultural measurements into the quality measurement whereby increasing the degree of the culture sensitiveness of the quality measurement of education is recognized. Accordingly, it is also sensitized to ensure whether the nature of the quality of education characterizes cultural aspects and how educational measurement is biased against students’ culture differences.  

As a result of the examination of aforementioned questions with respect to the insight of multiculturalism, it is suggested that there is a potential possibility to measure students’ culture acquisition due to setting up cultural measurements into the quality standards of education that can sensitize students’ cultural differences. More importantly, it can be argued that students’ language acquisition and some norms governing their social and moral behaviors are highly likely to be identified as cultural measurements of the quality measurement which can function to make sense out of students’ culture differences and to measure their culture acquisition.   

The argumentation and suggestion towards modifying the nature of educational measurement of in terms of increasing its culture sensitiveness in the quality judgment of schooling might bear some contributions to eliminating the degree of the existing bias in student assessment and more importantly, increasing the extent to which students’ cultural differences are sensitized and, remarkably, their culture acquisition is measured in the light of multiculturalism.

Multiculturalism and Its Insight on Educational Measurement

Multiculturalism is, seemingly, identified a doctrine that favors to explore and explain any social phenomenon in the intervention of culture and its power. The essence of the insight of multiculturalism is that we owe equal respect to all cultures … true judgments of value of different works would place all cultures more or less on the same footing (Bennett 1998). An underpinning behind a multiculturalistic insight is that humans are cultural being in spite of their biological commonness (Wadham et al, 2007, p. 3). In fact, cultures shape how we see and feel about world how we behave within it and range of choices we have to operate.  In addition, it is logical to argue that there are no two cultures that are equal or same if their existences are identified. Hence, respecting different cultures equally is meant that we need more to focus on differences rather than sameness. Thus, multiculturalism empowers differences more than the sameness.  Therefore, the approach based on such insight that takes into account culture and its power and emphases the idea “difference rather than sameness” might be labeled as multicultural approach whereby likely tackling humane-related issues.  

Looking at education through lens of the multicultural insight and approach, it might be pictured that education systems as social institutions that supply educational services such as teaching, learning as well as vocational training, are challenged to reconsider structure and mechanism in the light of multiculturalism. In fact, this reconsideration raises diverse issues ranged from how to teach two pupils equally, how to provide schooling environment equally, how design curriculum content that respects students’ culture differences equally, how to assess two individuals with the same test with the same difficulty and how measure the quality of education that takes into students’ culture differences and so forth.  As a case in point, it is referred that the introduction of equality to education (namely, gender equality) through legislation, educational policy implementation and equal opportunity   policies is in practice problematic” (Erskine &Wilson 1999,p. xviii). In response to the challenges, scholars brought up some key terms working in school education such as cultural content (Meyer 1994), cultural knowledge (King1994), cultural competence (Watts et al 2008) and curriculum culture (Hargreves 1982). Now, multiculturalism is here employed again to reconsider the nature of educational measurement, the quality measurement of education.  Specifically speaking, the question pushed forward education measurement from multicultural perspectives is asked as such: How to measure the quality of education so that students’ cultural differences are taken into consideration.   In turn, this question leads us to ensure how much the nature of the quality of education is cultural.

 Does the Quality of Education Hold Cultural Aspects?

The quality of education is an underlying concept that embodies comprehensive characters of educational services. Its comprehensiveness is manifested itself in diverse definitions and understandings proposed by different scholars and agencies which attempt to recognize the constituencies and dimensions of education quality. However, the interests to determine the relationship between culture and the quality of education are stably and commonly kept among the various ideas and perspectives addressing education quality. Thus, it is suggested that the quality of education holds cultural aspects

Referring to main international education bodies engaging in education sector, it is known that UNESCO always highlights the cultural aspects of the quality of education even though they change constantly their conceptions of the quality of education with respect to time temper.  In 1972,  UNESCO recommended that  the fundamental goal of social change was to eradicate inequality and to establish the equitable democracy whereby prioritizing the notions such as lifelong learning and relevance as well as respecting the social and cultural context of learners (Faure et al, cited in EFA Global Monitoring Report, 2005).  Then, after two decades, this organization again reconsidered the nature of the quality of education in the light of four pillars of learning, known as learning to know, learning to do, learning to live and learning to be (Delors, cited in EFA Global Monitoring Report, 2005). In 2003, UNESCO also highlighted that accessibility to quality education was identified as a human right and support a human right-approach to all educational activities whereby acknowledging prior knowledge at learner’s level and recommending the best possible impacts for learning for all at system’s level (Pigozzi, cited in EFA Global Monitoring Report, 2005). At the same time, UNICEF emphasizes equity and relevance to school education whereby underpinning the equity as an essential part in the embodiment of the quality of education (Wilson, cited in EFA Global Monitoring Report, 2005)

As a whole, the quality of education centers round such culturally-contextually-understood–notions such as lifelong learning, relevance, accessibility and respectfulness of child rights and equity in terms of the sights of the international education bodies. Therefore, the nature of the quality of education might embrace cultural aspects. In turn, it brings to us a challenging question: To what extent does educational measurement take into account cultural aspects of the quality of education.  The question will be examined in the next part of this piece of writing.

Is Educational measurement biased against students’ cultures?

The functionality of education has been debatable from time to time. However, no matter how it functions, its quality measurement is importantly considered in terms of ensuring its relevancy and validity.  Having focused on the attributes of the nature of the quality of education that was to some extent discussed in the previous part, we can confidently bring in challenging questions to the field of educational measurement that might be formulated as such:  To what extent does educational measurement take into cultural aspects of the quality of education.  More specifically, are students tested with the same test with the same difficulties or do educational measurement has bias against students’ culture differences?  Since such sort of the questions often bears complexity and complicatedness, they are not easily answered.  Nevertheless, the point to advocate that educational measurement has a bias against students’ culture differences tends to be strongly arguable. The thesis bearing such point will be detailed in the rest of this piece of writing. 

Speaking about educational measurement, it is theoretically noted that the quality of education ought to be culturally and contextually determined and measured (Tsogdov 2008). However, practically, it is not done in such expected way. In other words, the quality measurement of education tends to neglect students’ culture differences whereby causing a bias against students’ culture differences. Such an educational bias is often appeared in most standardized tests in practice. Take, for example, the Second International Mathematics Study (SIMS) conducted by The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Assessment that has a bias against French students.

Recognizing the difficulties to compare students’ achievement level across the countries when taking into consideration cultural affects on students’ performance results, Hanna (1993) examined the cross-cultural equivalence of the original English test and its French translation administered to the Franco-Ontarian population and the affection of the difference of the language level  to the level of item difficult itself as well.  Using diverse techniques of transformed item difficulties, the author revealed that the items were more difficult for French students.  In other words, the items were biased against French students. The reasons behind this bias as author pointed out once, is due to a difference in ability or curriculum between two groups. Respecting to author’s point, it can be also argued that the causes behind the bias are more directly explained by cultural differences of French students. Likewise, most international and national tests likely administered under standardized conditions, namely PISA and TIMSS as well as the national exams whereby producing official records and results to meet specifications of test administers, are highly likely to neglect cultural aspects of students’ academic performance.  Thus, it is evident that the quality measurement of education has a bias against their culture differences.

As a whole, the advancement of the educational measurement has not reached yet the level at which students’ culture differences are taken into account when measuring the quality of education. In fact, most educational tools, namely, standardized tests have a bias against students’ culture differences. Consequently, it is reasonably noted that students who are culturally different have less chance to be tested with the same with the same difficulty.  Therefore, we, educators, are challenged to eliminate the degree of the bias in educational measurement.  This challenge compels us to seek the possibilities and ways to measure students’ culture acquisition that might be differently constructed within their cultural contexts.

 The Needs to Measure Students’ Culture Acquisition and Its Possibility

The quality of education embodies cultural aspects, yet the quality measurement of education neglects them. Instead, it is often biased against students’ cultural differences. This is a real, but controversial circumstance wherein students might be disadvantaged by the biased educational measurement against their cultural differences.  In other words, students are likely subjected to be discriminated against their culture differences by current educational measurement. In this sense, the existing bias in the quality measurement of education measurement against students’ culture differences is contradictory and incompatible to the underlying principles of social justice and the ideas of key concepts such as equality, equity, equal opportunity and multiculturalism. In order to increase the degree of the compatibility of educational measurement to the key concepts and principles that center upon social justice, it is inevitably needed to seek the ways to eliminate the bias against students’ culture difference in educational measurement.

Accordingly, it is suggested that the degree of the bias in educational measurement against students’ culture differences might be considerably eliminated as long as students’ culture acquisitions are taken into account when measuring the quality of education.  In turn, this suggestion is, of course, questioned reasonably how to take students’ culture acquisition into consideration when measuring education quality and  if there are any possible ways to measure students’ culture acquisition.  The thesis towards those issues is that students’ culture acquisition might be at the least partly measured by their knowledge, skills and even attitudes of some measurable components of culture, namely, language acquisition, school normative norms.  Thus, the culture sensitiveness of the quality measurement of education will be increased in case that it takes into consideration some possible cultural measurements which can function to measure students’ culture differences and their culture acquisition.  The detailed argumentation will be given below.

Measuring students’ culture acquisition is sounded strange because it holds the diverse characteristics or attributes of the nature of culture.  As a matter of fact, there is no single definition of what culture is. No matter how it is differently envisioned, there are, however, common understandings about what components the nature of culture consists of. Referring to Wadham et al (2007, p6), it is known that the nature of culture comprises symbols and signs, languages, values and meanings, beliefs, norms rituals as well as material objects.  Among those components of culture, which is mostly likely to be measureable in terms of measuring students’ culture acquisition?   Interestingly, it is noted that most of them holds measurable attributes in some specific sense. With regard to students’ culture acquisition, a language component of culture is prioritized to consider here.  The reason why a language is sorted out to utilize as cultural measurements is that a language is a system consisted of symbols and signs whereby externalizing our inner thoughts, feelings and experiences (Wadham et al, p.10). Thus, how to reveal students’ culture acquisition through their language acquisition? 

Just as language acquisition is measured often by four major skills such as listening, speaking, reading and writing, so does culture acquisition.  In other words, students’ culture acquisition are likely be revealed by four major channels, namely, listening, reading, speaking and writing culture through language. Hence, it is logically noted that the body of students’ culture acquisition comprises four major parts such as cultural listening, cultural speaking, cultural reading and cultural writing.  Taken together such points, it is said that such four major components can partially function as cultural measurement of the quality measurement of education even though succinct definitions of them are needed.  Therefore, it is sensitized that there is a potential possibility to measure students’ culture acquisition through their language acquisition

Apart from a language component of culture, it seems that norms might bear some attributes or characteristics that function together as cultural measurement to measure students’ culture acquisition.   Referring to Halliman (2005), it is known that school normative culture plays a considerable role in students’ socialization. As he pointed out, school normative culture consists of three major dimensions: academic performance, social behavior and moral behavior.  Each of them tends to be measured by norms as the author argues. Students’ academic performance might be measured the norms defined in standards, excellences as well as expectation whereas norms governing students’ social behaviors might be measured by their social participation and civil engagement such as the rules and standards governing social participation and tolerance of democracy, pluralism as well as diversity.  In addition, the norms regulating their moral behaviors are expected to be measured by moral orders of school community, namely, justice, community responsibilities and collective interests.  Thus, school normative cultural norms such their social participation, community responsibility, tolerance of diversity, democracy as well as pluralism are highly likely to be identified as cultural measurement to judge students’ culture acquisition.

As a whole, it is remarkably noted that students’ culture acquisition needs to taken into consideration when the quality of education is measured with respect to the insight of multiculturalism. Because of the complexity of the nature of culture, the task to measure students’ culture acquisition is inevitably become a challenging question so far.  Deliberating on the constituencies of the nature of culture, it can be contended that there is a potential possibility to measure students’ culture acquisition through their language acquisition along with their social and moral behaviors governed by community norms.

Conclusion

Multiculturalism that emphasizes ethnic differences and cultural diversities, is questioning us whether the quality measurement of education is sensitive to students’ culture differences and backgrounds.  In response to this question, the nature of the quality of education and the possibility to modify educational measurement in terms of increasing its culture sensitiveness were reconsidered here in the light of multiculturalism.  Accordingly, it is evidenced that the nature of the quality of education holds cultural aspects; educational measurement at current time has a bias against students’ culture differences; and what is more, there is a potential possibility to measure students’ culture acquisition through their language acquisition. As a result of analysis, it is recommended that students’ language acquisition as well as some norms governing students’ social and moral behaviors are likely to function as cultural measurements into the quality measurement or standards of education whereby measuring students’ culture acquisition. Moreover, it is reasonably suggested that setting up culture measurement into the educational measurement will increase the degree of culture sensitiveness of the quality of education.

The translation of the insight on measuring students’ culture acquisition into the practice of educational measurement will hopefully bring some benefits to educators and students in both theoretical and practical senses. However, in doing so practically, a careful justifications and clear procedures are needed to verify in further investigations.  

References

Bennett,D 1998, Multicultural states: Rethinking Differences and Identity, Claysle Ltd, Great Britain, p.32.

Erskine,S&Wilson,M (ed.)1999, Gender issues in international education: Beyond policy and practice, Falmer Press, New York.

Hargreves, D,H 1982, The challenge for the comprehensive school, Routledge (http//books.google.com.au)

King, Joyce, E 1994, The purpose of schooling for African American children: Including cultural knowledge, SUNY press,

Meyer,J,W 1999, The changing cultural content of the Nationa-State: World Society Perspective, Cornell University Press.

Halliman, T, M 2005, The normative Culture of a school and student socialization in Hedges,V& Schneider, B (ed.) The school Organization of schooling, Russell Sage Foundation, New York.

Hanna,G 1993, The validity of the international performance comparisons, in Niss, M Investigation into Assessment in Mathematics Education, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.

Tsogdov, L 2008, The dimensional aspects of the quality of the primary and secondary education in Mongolia (Literature review assignment), School of Education, Adelaide.

UNESCO 2005, EFA Global Monitoring Report, Paris, pp.27-31.  htt://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID.

Watts, R, J, Cuellar, N,G, O’Sullivan, A,L 2008, Developing a blueprint for cultural competence education, Journal of Professional Nursing, no.24, pp.136-142.

Wadham, B, Pudsey, J, Boyd, R 2007, Culture and Education, Pearson Education Australia, Malaysia.