• Calendar | News | People | A to Z | Home

Multicultural Studies(MCD, MCG) (Core Studies)

Description:

Multicultural Studies: Two courses, each from a different department or program, one with a domestic focus and one with a global focus.

A. Multicultural Studies-Domestic Course (MCD)

Guidelines:

1. The course must focus explicitly on the beliefs, history, social experiences, artistic or literary expressions, and/or traditions of one or more groups in the United States considered to have experiences and/or a culture substantially different from those of its dominant groups.

2. The course must engage students in the use of tools of inquiry considered appropriate within the disciplinary or interdisciplinary focus of the course.

3. The course must engage students in reflection on their place in a complex and diverse United States.

Comments:

1. The MCD course is intended to promote understanding of diverse experiences and cultural traditions in the United States, with an emphasis on the experiences and traditions of non-dominant groups. (Cultural traditions are defined as patterned, generationally transmissable systems of belief, behavior, and expression.) The course is compatible with a variety of approaches to the study of cultural diversity, including literature (in translation or in the original language), fine arts, history, philosophy, religion, and social sciences, as well as area studies (e.g., Asian Studies, Hispanic Studies, Linguistic Studies, Media Studies, Women’s Studies). An understanding of diverse experiences and cultural traditions in the US necessarily includes attention to power, influence, status, and/or resources.

MCD courses may treat any of a variety of human differences, including ethnicity, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, or social class. Courses that examine only non-cultural aspects of a group (such as the biology of sickle cell anemia among African-Americans, without reference to broader cultural and social implications) would usually not be appropriate to the requirement

• Cultural diversity need not be the exclusive focus of MCD courses; material about cultural diversity should be an integrated and natural part of the course. To fulfill the MCD requirement, a literature course, for example, might focus on the literature of a particular culture, noting, as appropriate, the influence of the culture on the literature, and vice versa

2. Both disciplinary and interdisciplinary methods and tools of inquiry are appropriate. In making proposals for the MCD course, faculty are encouraged to describe the most appropriate way, in their own discipline, to engage students in inquiry, observation, and analysis. MCD courses offer more than simply the opportunity to “appreciate” differences within the United States; rather, they promote a critical understanding of such differences, including the ways in which differences are conceptualized, defined, and structured.

3. The MCD requirement is also intended to engage students in reflection on their own and others’ experience of cultural diversity within the United States. Students apply knowledge and tools of inquiry to issues of cultural diversity that are of historical, contemporary, or personal significance. This reflective element is intended to promote students’ awareness of their own cultural experience to date and to encourage them to contemplate the implications of living in a country that is culturally complex and diverse.

Intended Learning Outcomes for MCD:

Students will demonstrate:

1. deep, contextualized knowledge about at least one non-dominant culture within the United States.

2. the ability to use concepts and tools of inquiry from at least one discipline to analyze issues related to the diversity of cultural experience in the United States.

3. the ability to reflect critically on their own cultural experience and the diverse cultural experience of others as well as on their understanding of themselves in relation to others.

B. Multicultural Studies-Global Course (MCG)

Guidelines:

1. The course must focus explicitly on the beliefs, history, social experiences, artistic or literary expressions, and/or traditions of one or more cultures located primarily outside the United States, considered to have experiences and/or a culture substantially different from those of the dominant groups in the United States, Canada, and Western Europe.

2. The course must engage students in the use of tools of inquiry considered appropriate within the disciplinary or interdisciplinary focus of the course.

3. The course must engage students in reflection on their place in an interdependent but divided global community.

Comments:

1. The MCG course is intended to promote understanding of diverse experiences and cultural traditions of groups located primarily outside the United States considered to have experiences and/or a culture substantially different from those of the dominant groups in the United States, Canada, and Western Europe. The course is compatible with a variety of approaches to the study of diversity, including literature (in translation or in the original language), fine arts, history, philosophy, religion, and social sciences, as well as area studies (e.g., Asian Studies, Hispanic Studies, Linguistic Studies, Media Studies, Women’s Studies). An understanding of diverse experiences and cultural traditions outside the US typically includes attention to issues of power, influence, status, and/or resources.

MCG courses may treat any of a variety of human differences, including ethnicity, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, or social class. Courses that examine only non-cultural aspects of a group, without reference to broader cultural and social implications, usually would not be appropriate to the requirement.

Cultural diversity need not be the exclusive focus of an MCG course; however, material about cultural diversity should be an integrated and natural part of the course. In making proposals for the MCG course, faculty must show how their choice of geographical region or cultural group is appropriate for the requirement. For example, a course about contemporary France might satisfy the MCG criteria by focusing on the North African immigrant experience since the end of the Algerian War.

2. Both disciplinary and interdisciplinary methods and tools of inquiry are appropriate. In making proposals for the MCG course, faculty are encouraged to describe the most appropriate way, in their own discipline, to engage students in inquiry, observation, and analysis. MCG courses offer more than simply the opportunity to “appreciate” global differences; rather, they promote a critical understanding of such differences, including the ways in which differences are conceptualized, defined, and structured.

3. The MCG requirement is also intended to engage students in reflection on their own and others’ experience of cultural diversity outside the United States, Canada, and Western Europe. Students apply knowledge and tools of inquiry to issues of cultural diversity that are of historical, contemporary, or personal significance. This reflective element is intended to promote students’ awareness of their own cultural experience to date and to encourage them to contemplate the implications of living in an interdependent but divided global community.

Intended Learning Outcomes for MCG:

Students will demonstrate:

1. deep, contextualized knowledge about at least one culture located primarily outside the United States and considered to have experiences and/or a culture substantially different from those of the dominant groups in the United States, Canada, and Western Europe.

2. the ability to use concepts and tools of inquiry from at least one discipline to analyze issues related to cultural experience different from that of the dominant groups in the United States, Canada, and Western Europe.

3. the ability to reflect critically on their own cultural experience and the diverse cultural experience of others as well as on their understanding of their place in a world that is culturally complex and diverse, interdependent but divided.

******************************************************************************

Rationale for the motion:

Conceptualization of the original Multicultural Studies requirement in 1994 was not without challenge, and approval of the MCS requirement by the faculty was not unanimous. Review and revision of the requirement have proved to be similarly challenging. The Final Report from the General Education Task Force (August 23, 2004) asked that review and revision of the MCS requirement address four questions: (1) Would use of a term like "intercultural" be more useful than use of "Western" and "non-Western," since the requirement focuses on interrelationships between cultures? (2) Should the requirement be broadened to include other kinds of categories such as "urban/suburban/rural" or "class"? (3) What about some of the categories included in the original requirement, e.g., gender? (4) Should MCS courses challenge students' beliefs about their own and others' cultures and their understanding of themselves in relation to other cultures? (p. 3).

In responding to the first question, the working group drafting these statements decided to retain the name Multicultural Studies. This decision was informed by dialogue with colleagues in various parts of the campus and through study of recent publications such as Shared Futures: Global Learning and Liberal Education (Hovland, 2006). The working group recognizes that use of terms like "Western" and "non-Western" is clearly problematic and thus sought to avoid such terminology wherever possible. Use of the term "intercultural" was not considered in a serious way, in part because of the conviction that the extent of comparison between and among cultures depends on the individual course and the individual instructor. There currently exist courses that satisfy the MCS requirement that focus on a single culture; the working group believes that such courses fulfill an important role and should continue to satisfy the MCS guidelines.

In response to the second and third questions, the working group decided not to limit the breadth of diversity that might be considered in MCS courses. In addition to the categories previously included (race, ethnicity, and gender), sexual orientation and social class are specifically named in the comments on the guidelines. It is conceivable that other categories, including urban/suburban/rural, might be the focus in some MCS courses; the working group decided to leave it to instructors making proposals for MCS credit to describe how other categories might be appropriate for this attribute.

In responding to the fourth question from the GE Task Force, the working group revised the requirement using a tripartite framework: knowledge, skills of observation and analysis, and critical reflective thinking. The decision to adopt this framework was motivated by a proposal submitted to CEPC by Professors Carolyn Anderson and Tom Williamson and by Kevin Hovland's Shared Futures: Global Learning and Liberal Education (AAC&U, 2006). The addition of a reflective component to the guidelines is also in keeping with the objectives of several other GE requirements (e.g., BTS-T).

The working group also considered four additional questions that emerged from formal reports submitted to CEPC and both formal and informal conversations with colleagues: (5) Should the geographical distinction of the current MCS requirement be maintained? (6) If the current geographical distinction is maintained, should the requirement remain as it is currently (i.e., a global course and a domestic component), or should it be changed to two courses (one domestic and one global)? (7) To what extent should explicit skill development be an important focus of MCS courses? (8) Should the two MCS courses come from different departments or programs?

In response to the fifth question, the working group decided to maintain the current distinction between domestic and global. The dichotomy between domestic and global MCS courses is admittedly and inherently artificial, but it is a dichotomy that is being retained for several reasons. First, although individual MCS courses may address both domestic and global cultural diversity, it is likely that instructors will be able to identify which context predominates and whether the domestic or the global attribute is the more appropriate one for their course. Second, although the tools of disciplinary inquiry may be largely the same regardless of the geographical setting, St. Olaf students may perceive the task of multicultural study differently when it involves the United States as compared with a culture outside the United States. That is, whereas most St. Olaf students tend to have some familiarity with and knowledge of cultural frameworks existing in the United States — frameworks that shape perceptions and understanding of difference — most students do not have comparable knowledge and familiarity with cultures that are more “distant” both in geographic location and in patterns of social practices, beliefs, and values.

In response to the sixth question, the working group recommends a two-course requirement, with one domestic course and one global course. This recommendation reflects the conviction that not to do this would be to marginalize the domestic component. Information from the Registrar’s Office in March 2007 indicates that there are 61 active courses carrying MCD and 86 active courses carrying MCG. The working group assumes that the majority of courses currently incorporating an MCD component will continue to satisfy the proposed MCD course requirement, as long as they engage students in the use of skills of inquiry and critical reflection.

As already indicated, explicit skill development, the seventh question, is part of the revised guidelines. While the tools of inquiry used in a particular course will depend to a large extent on the disciplinary or interdisciplinary focus of the course, explicit focus on the skills of cultural and intercultural inquiry are expected to be part of all MCS courses.

In considering the eighth question, CEPC noted that some parts of the GE curriculum require students to take courses from two different departments or programs (e.g., SED/IST, HBS, ALS-A/ALS-L), whereas other GE requirements may be satisfied within a single department or program (e.g., HWC, SPM, the current MCS). The decision to require two different departments or programs for the revised MCS requirement was ultimately based on the desire to highlight the relevance of cultural diversity across disciplines and to increase the likelihood that students will be introduced to more than one discipline’s tools of inquiry. In this way, the revised MCS requirement is intended to support a broad education in the study of cultural diversity, an outcome that is less probable if both MCS courses are taken in the same department or program.

It is possible that some courses will carry both the MCD and MCG attributes. In such cases, a student will need a second MCS course from a different department or program to graduate, but it can carry either MCD or MCG.

CEPC defines departments and programs as curricular entities, corresponding to and reflected in the prefix for course listings in the catalog and class and lab schedule.