Multicultural Education: Challenges and Responses

  Abstract
  Contents
  Introduction
  1. Multicultural Education
  2. How to deal with global and local diversity in multicultural education
  3. How to improve the results of migrant students
  4. How to meet the challenges of transmigration in education
  5. Hybrid cultures as a challenge for multicultural education
  6. Conclusions
  Notes
  References (1)

Sigrid Luchtenberg

Introduction

In this paper we will deal with challenges facing multicultural education at the beginning of the 21st century. First however, we will briefly examine the development of multicultural education and its present status. Here, as in the following sections, we refer mainly to the situation in Germany, though other societies are also considered. In some sections we refer to the situation in multicultural Australia in order to highlight possibilities in a country that takes it multiculturalism very seriously.

Secondly, we discuss the fact that multicultural education is now sometimes regarded as a concept of international education dealing with the cultures of the world. Although this is a necessary approach in our world of global relationships, it tends to neglect local diversity. Future challenges to multicultural education concern the combination of local and global aspects within this concept. There is a further problem to be considered with regard to a multicultural education that deals mainly with global relationships: The needs of children from migrant families. The recent PISA study (OECD 2001) has clearly pointed out that the German school system has failed so far to give them access to a good school career that is, moreover, a precondition for economic and social participation. It is a great challenge to improve this situation without falling back into concepts of migrant education. We deal with these challenges in our third section. In the fourth section we will focus on another challenge: While education - though not on all levels of educational policy in all European countries - has acknowledged the fact of a permanent immigration, which demands measures of integration and the preparation of all inhabitants - majority as well as immigrants - for a multilingual and multicultural society, there are also new developments in forms of migration to be taken into consideration. A main point is the question whether the model of integration in the concept of multiculturalism is compatible with transmigration, where migrants live in more than one social and spatial context, either at the same time, in following periods or in a way where social and geographical spaces are split or overlap. In the fifth section, the question will be posed as to how far the concept of multicultural education is able to respond to the demands of new hybrid cultures that develop in most immigration countries. A conclusion is given in the last section of the paper.

1. Multicultural Education

Post-war immigration into Germany did not challenge education for a long time since work migration was regarded as temporary in the 1950s and 60s. When workers began to settle - mainly as a result of the stop to workforce recruitment in 1973 - education had to deal with the situation of migrant children attending German schools in large numbers. The first answer to this new challenge was the concept of migrant education (Ausländerpädagogik(2)).

It took the German educational system a long time to react to the increasing numbers of students from a non-German background in the late sixties and seventies. This holds true for educational institutions like kindergartens and schools, for the administering bodies like the ministries and the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs as also for research (cf. Luchtenberg 1997 for details). All proposals and measures in that period can be described as migrant-oriented approaches. These early migrant-oriented approaches aimed at the improvement of learning conditions for migrant children, the development of the new subject of German as a second language and teacher training in order to make teachers familiar with the culture of origin, i.e. educational conceptions, religion, female education, family life, etc. especially of Turkey, but also of other countries of origin. These approaches corresponded to the educational policies of the late sixties and beginning seventies. The description is less positive when it becomes clear that the pedagogy was deficit-oriented, since the deficits of migrant students - the lack of German and knowledge of German culture and history - were the central elements. The development of a migrant culture in Germany was neglected in favor of dealing with the situation in the countries of origin which was based on a rather static concept of culture. Remigration was also regarded as a fact to be considered in developing programs. In many teacher training institutions and universities, courses were developed and first professorships were awarded to scholars for "Ausländerpädagogik", i.e. pedagogy for migrants. This isolated view on the question soon led to critical approaches that denied the necessity of such a "special" pedagogical approach, but demanded a changed approach to all in a society that was changed by migration.

Thus, one of the sources for the development of multicultural education was the criticism of this "education for foreigners" ("Ausländerpädagogik"). Other catalysts were the international discussion, e.g. within the Council of Europe and in neighboring countries, but also practical approaches of private initiatives where social work in mixed groups of migrant and German children led to the development of multicultural concepts.

From the beginning, multicultural education laid great emphasis on culture and mutual cultural exchange. In the beginnings of multicultural education, relativism of cultures was taken for granted whereas the current view is that the reflection on cultures is more complex. The role of culture implies several difficulties:

  1. Mutual learning about cultures requires an awareness of cultural differences in all questions, which supports a division into the own and the other - an important, but not indisputable point in the multicultural education discourse. Furthermore, the focus on differences deepens the feeling of being "foreign" (cf. Hu 1998)
  2. Mutual learning about cultures easily creates the perception of ethnic and cultural belongings as group belongings so that the individual is taken as an example of a group
  3. Mutual learning about cultures denies limits in the acceptance of culture
  4. Mutual learning about cultures detracts from aspects of participation and equal opportunities as well as from racism and ethnocentrism
  5. The focus on culture also makes it easier to include global aspects, e.g. cultures of different nations and people (cf. section 2).

On account of the strong focus on culture in its present name, there have been attempts to re-name the concept known as intercultural education in Germany(3) with expressions like education of diversity, transnational education and others (cf. Gundara 2000), but these have not been successful and intercultural education remains the established term. The dilemma of this expression becomes obvious, when for example, university students in teacher training courses commonly define multicultural education as "dealing with foreign cultures", which includes the cultures of migrant students, since their cultures are regarded as foreign as well Due to the strong focus on culture, multicultural education is in danger of neglecting other aspects such as equal opportunities for all. Furthermore, a strong focus on culture increases the danger of cultural attribution but obstructs while distracting from individual diversity (cf. section 5).

In 1996, the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs launched a recommendation on multicultural education, which can be taken as a sign of its formal acknowledgment (Standing Conference 1996).

In Germany, integration has become a key word in political, media and societal discourses when the focus is on migration. This holds especially true with regard to new migrants and those work migrants and their families who have lived here for a long time. In recent discussions the fear has often been expressed that the development of parallel societies endangers integration. The topic of "integration" is also a major point in the new immigration law.

True integration - as opposed to assimilation which is often meant when the word integration is used - has always played an important role in multicultural education. This focus on integration has demanded the support of mixed classes of German and non-German students from the very beginning and the rejection of all kinds of separate classes. Therefore, bilingual education has not been developed to a great extent, though language has always played an important role in the concepts of multicultural education (cf. Luchtenberg 2002). The importance of learning German becomes an increasingly central point with new implications like testing the linguistic competence of preschool children or the implementation of lessons in German in kindergartens. A demand dating from the seventies and eighties is also repeated when parents from a non-German background are asked to speak German at home. These requests stem from the political arena, but not from multiculturalists. These aspects became central issues again after the results of the OECD-study PISA (OECD 2001) were published since these results demand new measures from the schools and new efforts from the migrants. The acquisition of good German in order to master school and professional training in Germany is also called for but also school structures: One of the big issues discussed at present in multicultural education in administration, school reality and research is the organization of Islamic lessons in German schools. Islamic lessons supervised by German authorities would serve several purposes: Islam - and Muslim students - would experience integration into the German school system but German authorities would gain control on what is taught.

Multicultural education can be regarded as an umbrella term:

This twofold task is the biggest change in comparison with migrant education because now it is acknowledged that there is the need for a general change to make all students aware of their multilingual and multicultural surroundings. Further differences are:

If equal opportunities for migrant students are now a requirement, language skills will also be in the center of the present discussion because they are regarded as basics for school and professional careers. Furthermore, the consideration of special needs - like mother tongue tuition or religious instructions - also belongs here, as well as the consideration of special knowledge - like a further language or language awareness.

Local diversity was the main reason for the development of multicultural education in Germany. "Encountering" soon became a keyword in the sense that students with different backgrounds should meet each other, learn from each other and enrich one another.

In contrast to migrant education, multicultural education thus deals also or, to be more precise, deals mainly with changes in school life and in all subjects, which affect all students.

The development of "multicultural schools" is in the heart of multicultural education. Several studies prove that an understanding of diversity is developing even if many tasks are still unfulfilled (cf., e.g. Auernheimer 2001; Auernheimer, Blumenthal, Stübig, Willmann 1996; Auernheimer, Petzel, Wagner 2001; Gogolin, Neumann 1997).

There are new issues to be dealt with in a multicultural education, which has widened in scope since its beginnings. Among these we find the following questions in research:

Although children and juveniles are the main target group of multicultural education, elderly migrants have also become a target group of increasing importance in recent years since, contrary to expectations, many older migrants stay in Germany because their children and grandchildren live here. Migration has also become a topic in Politics courses in all forms of further training (cf. Behrens, Paufler 2002).

Multicultural education has gained influence in recent years and some recognition. Yet, we have to ask what is the present status of multicultural education in Germany. If we look at recent curricula and textbooks, we find that a multicultural awareness is increasing. The presence of migrant students is taken into consideration in many recent curricula, which, in turn, is connected with an acceptance of diversity. We often find a mixture of external and internal approaches, thus mixing an interest for indigenous cultures in America, European history and diversity due to migration. This is not necessarily a negative approach though the different branches should also be looked at in their own right (cf. section 2). Many newer textbooks have pictures of multiethnic classrooms, use names from different languages, give examples from different cultures, include texts by migrant authors(4) , and include phrases, words or even texts in a language other than German. Yet, many formulations - especially in giving tasks to students - reveal the old dichotomy between "them" and "us", when, e.g. students are addressed in the following way: "Ask your foreign classmates about their holiday traditions!" (cf. Kunz 2003).

Multicultural education still has to combat a lot of stereotypes and established opinions, which applies particularly to language use. Many teachers do not accept the use of the mother tongue among a group of migrant students and these languages are not given much space in schools, classrooms or subjects. Of course, it has to be clarified when languages other than German can play a role in the classroom and what this role could be. Studies (cf. e.g. Luchtenberg 1999; Oomen-Welke 2000) found varying opportunities and reasons to integrate the languages of students with a migrant background:

Schools in Australia offer further examples of how and for what purpose regarding how and why linguistic diversity can be integrated into school life: We often find signs on doors to the staff room or the library in many languages to make students as well as their parents feel at home. A generous system of interpreters available in schools (as well as in other state institutions) proves acceptance of linguistic diversity and the difficulties of coping with English -even if a time limit is set on this help. (cf. Clyne 1997; Inglis 2004; Luchtenberg 2000). This positive attitude no longer applies to language classes - a topic we are going to discuss with regard to the German context later on (cf. section 3).

Teachers with a qualification in multicultural education, German as a second language or Turkish are welcomed in schools since their presence is often regarded as an alibi for other teachers not to be involved in those tasks. It has also to be taken into consideration that it is still possible to qualify as a teacher in Germany without having dealt with a multicultural society and school and / or the needs of migrant students. This applies to both phases of teacher training(5).

Thus, the acceptance of multicultural education has increased since the eighties but not always in a way multicultural researchers would have hoped. The recent discussion about integration and language learning indicates that there is a danger of a backlash causing a relapse into a migrant-oriented attitude.

While in the early days of migrant education most educational programs for migrant students either aimed at a later return of those students into their countries of origin or were directed towards a full assimilation into the German society - with the exception of a short period where the educational bureaucracy demanded from schools that they work for both aims simultaneously - concepts of multicultural education take it for granted (if often only implicitly) that the migration is a permanent one. Therefore, some measures or programs now have got new interpretations:

In the light of this fact, it is astonishing that there is such little reflection on a citizenship education that addresses migrant students and refers to the diverse society (cf. Luchtenberg 2004a). This is all the more astonishing since such a necessity has been reflected worldwide, as well as in Europe, for many years (cf. Banks 1997, 2004; Bell 1995; Friebel 1996; Hahn 1998; Ichilov 1998; Lynch 1992). There is an astonishing disparity between a multicultural education that emanates from the assumption of a multicultural society with permanent migration and the lack of enabling students - migrants as well as Germans - to understand the political conditions of this multicultural society and -beyond that- its place in Europe and in the world.

Furthermore, media education is not yet meeting the challenges of a multicultural society though media competence has become one of the main issues in education in recent years, mainly initiated by the new media and the assumed danger of children and juveniles being attracted and misled by violence in the new media on the one side, but also in television and video on the other side. It has to be considered in media education that the media display another challenge within multicultural education. It is with the help of the media that most persons in a state get political information, which also holds true with regard to migration and migrants. Much research has been done in Germany that demonstrates the possibilities and responsibilities of the media within the process of migration, integration and acceptance of multiculturalism though these studies were not carried out on the basis of an educational interest. Migration and its consequences are an important part of the media discourse in a multicultural society, but German media are in general reluctant and do not always support diversity, which is - to my findings from a German viewpoint - different in the immigration country Australia with its explicit politics of multiculturalism, at least in the serious press (cf. Luchtenberg, McLelland 1998).

It is necessary to deal with the migration and multiculturalism discourse in the media in education in order to develop media competence that will enable students to cope with the media in the sense of a critical literacy (cf. Cope, Kalantzis 2000). Media education is mentioned in curricula in Political Education in the German states (cf. Luchtenberg 2004a). Here we find a common subject between Citizenship and Multicultural Education. Traditionally, German is the subject where media are discussed. The migration discourse is not in the center in media education in these subjects, if mentioned at all. Thus, a way has to be found to integrate these topics into multicultural education within different subjects since the development of media competence in a diverse society - which we could refer to as multicultural media competence - is absolutely necessary. However, this also poses the question of how multicultural media competence can be described?// Thus, a way has to be found to integrate these topics into multicultural education within different subjects since the development of media competence in a diverse society is absolutely necessary. This competence could also be referred to as multicultural media competence, which however also poses the question of definition. It would include examining the way in which the media deal with multiculturalism and especially the way in which they use language and pictures. Multicultural media competence can be understood as an extension of a general critical media competence because it is now applied in a diverse society. This includes:

Multicultural media competence also has roots in the concept of multicultural competence which can be described as the competence to cope with diversity one's own society.

Summing up, we can state that multicultural education was developed in Germany rather reluctantly in the eighties as a second answer to the challenge of the presence of migrant students in the classes, when migrant education was no longer regarded as an adequate one by many educationalists in practice and research (cf. Luchtenberg 1997). Multicultural education is to be understood as a concept with the two main tasks of improving the school careers of students with a migrant background and preparing all students for the life in a multicultural society. Furthermore, research within multicultural education deals with all aspects of a diverse society and its education. It should be mentioned that antiracist education could be understood as an integral part of the task depicted in the right-hand side of the diagram above.

2. How to deal with global and local diversity in multicultural education

Multicultural education with a focus on local diversity has helped to open schools, curricula and schoolbooks for diversity due to migration (cf. Hoff 1995). Yet the term multicultural education was only very reluctantly taken up by the educational administration. The word only really became quickly accepted when it was transferred to international aspects, especially European ones (cf. Luchtenberg 1996).

In 1988, the EC launched a directive, which requires that a European dimension be realized in the schools of the member states (cf. The Council 1988). In Germany, the realization of a European dimension is supported by the Departments of Education in the various states of Germany; it was first affirmed by the Standing Conference of the ministers of Education in Germany, which in its resolution of 1990 referred to an earlier resolution on "Europe in Education" of 1978, a fact which stresses the interest in Europe within German policies (Kultusministerkonferenz 1990). While the German directive refers to most proposals in the EC-directive, there are two important differences, for the German document a) demands "a Europe of regions" and b) mentions "foreign students as an example of the richness of European culture", although this point is not elaborated upon.

The challenges of the European Union in 1993 and the implementation of the European dimension into the educational system in Germany, due to the European directive of 1988 (The Council 1988), gave main impulses to broaden the concept of multicultural education to European and global perspectives. European education and multicultural education were used nearly as synonyms in the late eighties and early nineties, and this had the side effect of making multicultural education an acceptable concept. The importance of dealing with Europe was broadly accepted in the educational system and all states in Germany tried to find a special approach to Europe in the late eighties and early nineties. Yet, in many cases the realization looks more like an enhancement of topics that were already part of the curriculum e.g. in geography or history of Europe, a focus on European languages or an intensification of student exchange. The challenge of the development of a European identity is only seldom tackled. Besides the European dimension, global learning is also gaining in importance and has mainly replaced the former "Learning about the Third World".

Certainly, there is a necessity for global openness, even more so in the light of a coming United Europe for European education, but the danger is that the more multicultural education is regarded as global or European education, the less interest there will be in local diversity and the challenges it includes.

This can be best shown with regard to language education:

Thus, the international view increases the interest in European languages but denies the necessity of promoting mother tongue instruction (cf. Luchtenberg 2004a, b). The situation in schools has an interesting parallel in the media, where broadcasting in the mother tongues of the immigrants has been dramatically reduced in recent months.

This attitude holds true with regard to research on intercommunication within Germany as well as in international intercultural communication.

Language is a good example for the switch from local diversity in multicultural education towards more international aspects but, of course, not the only one. Many proposals for multicultural contents refer to international aspects such as African literature, the history of the Aboriginal people or Tibetan religion. All these aspects are of relevance in a global society but to call them multicultural learning makes it difficult to understand the diversity in one's own surroundings. It is probably even easier to deal with the problem of Aboriginal people than to reflect on racism in one's own community. It seems to be necessary to separate international or external contents of multicultural education from those with an internal character. This makes it clearer that one's own community is diverse and this is important for migrants as well as for non-migrants. When the problems, challenges and positive outcomes of such a diverse society are understood as a main part of multicultural education, students will gain more responsibility for their diverse society. This does not mean that European or global aspects are of no relevance - indeed, quite the opposite in a world that is growing together. However, dealing with Europe should not be confused with, nor can it replace dealing with diversity that is part of everyday life. Teachers might otherwise claim to be working in a multicultural way when they deal with Aboriginal arts. What we need is a multicultural education that is aware of the threefold character of multicultural education and serves internal as well as external issues without mixing them in a way that allows external contents to be misunderstood as the only form of multicultural education. Of course, there are topics where internal and external aspects may coincide but this situation is not yet the rule.

We find a comparable approach in the media where, e.g., Muslim holidays like the beginning of Ramadan is mentioned with an example from Egypt or Saudi-Arabia but not from a neighborhood mosque. Thus, they give international global information but neglect that Islam plays an important role in Germany.

This media approach can easily amplify the school attitude of confusing internal and external aspects of multicultural education. It contributes to neglecting the necessity of exploring the diversity in Germany. To sum up, we can confirm the necessity of a multicultural education which combines dealing with local, European and global diversity, but which at the same time must give all three aspects a place to assert themselves in their own right. There is a challenge to balance global and European perspectives and local diversity (cf. Vermeulen 1997 for the situation in other European countries).

3. How to improve the results of migrant students

Multicultural education has emphasized the necessity of preparing all students to cope with the conditions in a multilingual and multicultural society and furthermore in a European and global context. There is also a strong effort to combat racism. All these tasks can be related to the right-hand side of the diagram, which we have already examined in section 1: Now this diagram is related to a further challenge since not only the PISA-study (OECD 2001) but also the annual school statistics show that the requirements for the component on the left are far from being fulfilled in Germany.

According to statistics published by the Kultusministerkonferenz (2003), nearly 20% of migrant students left school in the year 2000 without gaining a certificate - which is about double the amount of German students without a certificate. This had not changed at the end of the school year 2002/03 (Statistisches Bundesamt 2005). Furthermore, statistics show a clear overrepresentation of students with a migrant background in Hauptschulen(6) , Sonderschulen(7) and Gesamtschulen(8) . This is in sharp contrast to the fact that German students mainly attend grammar schools or secondary modern schools. Statistics have to be read with care, since there are only two categories "German students" and `foreign students', which in turn give only a very rough picture because of the focus on the passport(9) . Many migrant students or students with migrant parents are not in the statistics because they have got German nationality. This is particularly relevant in the case of the group of the re-settlers ("Aussiedler"). These are the descendents of Germans who have settled in the former Russian empire since the 17th century. Since most of them suffered during World War II due to their German origin they are entitled to "return" to Germany and, in most cases, to gain German nationality. It has to be feared that the negative numbers would increase even further if we could get statistics about students with a migrant background regardless of their citizenship.

Most juveniles with a migrant background attend a "Hauptschule", which is the academically lowest secondary school within the German selective school system (cf. Jonen, Boele 2001 on the German school system). In 2002/03, about 40% of migrant students left school with a secondary school leaving certificate of the "Hauptschule" while merely about 24% of the German students left school with only this qualification. The most important difference between both groups can be found in the results for a certificate that qualifies students to begin a study at a university, at a polytechnic or at a college. While nearly 25% of the German students reached this level, only about 9% of the non-German students did so (Statistisches Bundesamt 2005). Even if these results can be read as an improvement compared with 15 or 20 years ago, they show a failure of the German school system in bringing forward the school careers of students with a migrant background.

These results are rather severe if one reflects the fact that the secondary school leaving certificate of the "Hauptschule" has lost its status in the last decade since many professions that could be learnt with this certificate nowadays demand a higher qualification. These structural problems with the German school (system) have been labeled as institutional discrimination (cf. Gomolla, Radtke 2002).

Further facts undermine the poor situation of migrant children in the German school system: PISA has given some hints on how to answer the question why this is so, though it has by far not explained all the facts (OECD 2001; cf. Auernheimer 2002). Admittedly, a lot of special programs have been established in the last years but most of them are only locally applied in some schools. Examples of these are

While such bilingual programs are being developed in some institutions, the mainstream discourse in politics and media has turned in a different direction. The general discussion about a new immigration law ("Zuwanderungsgesetz") has deepened the call for integration, which is increasingly regarded as an obligation that migrants have with a strong focus on learning or improving German. While the immigration law focuses mainly on adults when integration is discussed, this discussion - together with the PISA-results - has brought the integration discussion back to schools as well. Different measures are asked for:

In this new political and media debate on the integration of migrant students, integration has to be understood as the demand that migrant students have to learn enough German before school so that they do not trouble the school. Logically therefore, the focus is mostly on German, but certainly not on bilingualism or intercultural communication. Citizenship education is also not discussed, although it would help migrant students to cope with their special situation and probably also help them to understand the political situation in Europe. This would form a connection to the European dimension (cf. Luchtenberg 2004a).

(Intercultural) educationalists do not deny that the problem of school failure is strongly connected with insufficient knowledge of German. But they see the proximity of the programs and measures so far discussed to a deficit-oriented migrant education while the structure, programs, curricula of the institution school are not or only very little questioned, as might be necessary and appropriate in a multicultural society. Simple measures - as taken in the Australian state of New South Wales (cf. Board of Education 1998a, 1998b, 1998c) -- could be for example

Such measures would especially help with the fact that many students with a migrant background are easily able to communicate in German but fail when it comes to special or technical language.

Nearly no coordinated bilingual education exists. This task of coordinating their two languages is left to the bilingual students themselves who attend German speaking classes, get additional support in German as a second language and can be taught in their mother tongue for up to 5 hours per week depending on the conditions in their school or school district. Mother tongue tuition has improved in Germany since the seventies when it was mainly regarded as a support for remigration (cf. Reich, Reid 1992). There are two models of responsibility: In some states mother tongue tuition is organized by the countries of origin who send the teachers while the German school system only offers the rooms. In most states, however, mother tongue tuition is organized by the German school administration that recruits the teachers and supervises them. To attend a mother tongue class is not compulsory for the students. Some states now offer a variety of languages including Kurdish or Farsi, at least in big cities or places with a large community speaking these languages. There are some schools where students can choose their mother tongue as a regular second language - this applies mainly to Turkish.

Summing up, we can state that the failure of many migrant students in the German school system has led to a disparity between politics and research in education as regards both the assessment of the causes and the search for an appropriate solution.

Schools and teachers themselves feel overburdened by the tasks they have to face and unable to solve the problem without help (cf. Extra, Yagmur 2002 for the situation in Europe with a focus on migrant languages).

4. How to meet the challenges of transmigration in education

Educational research within multicultural education now has also to meet the fact that not all immigration is permanent, because there is an increasing trend towards transmigration processes (cf. Pries 2001). Permanent migration has been understood as a more or less unidirectional movement from one nation-state to another, including the possibility of remigration as a second step that can be regarded as a unidirectional movement as well since it is also a permanent process. Now we face different forms of migration in the late 20th and beginning 21st century where globalization plays a key role, though the pattern of transnational migration in the sense of migrating either between two or more countries several times or of migrating into different countries successively are not completely new as, e.g. the prospectors in the gold rushes of the 19th century prove. To a certain extent, the earlier "guest worker"-model could also be understood as a form of transnational, time-limited migration - at least the way in which these migrations were intended (cf. Pries 2004 for a model of varieties of internationalization).

Transmigration is understood as a specific type of migration in transnational social spaces (Glick Schiller, Basch, Szanton Blanc 1997; Pries 2001). It is shown that migrants develop multidirectional patterns of migration with different social and spatial relations. These patterns may differ between groups as well as between individuals. These shifts in social reality challenge the framework for analysis in social science as well as in educational theory and practice, though asylum seekers and refugees have always been regarded as non-permanent migrants, so that multicultural education could not completely focus on multiculturalism as a permanency. These transnational patterns have been very much facilitated by the European Union where the workforce can work for an unlimited time in any of the member states, but also move to one or more other states during their working life. This has changed for e.g. the migration possibilities for migrants within Europe from Italy, Greece, Spain and Portugal, since these states are now member states of the EU and thus their workers can come to and leave Germany without restrictions (besides the necessity of finding work). In contrast, migrant workers from Turkey, who might want to resettle in Turkey for a while, would lose their work permit in Germany. Yet a special phenomenon of transmigration can be observed within the Turkish community where members of the second generation tend to choose a partner from Turkey. This influences language acquisition and language behavior and has to be taken into consideration in teaching.

Pries (2004, 30) defines transmigration as a "new ideal type of migration that describes a modern variant of the nomadic way of life", a type of migration which will gain even more relevance in the future. It is therefore necessary that education - especially multicultural education - deals with this phenomenon and tries to find educational solutions for the offspring of transmigrating families.

Many challenges in education result from new forms of migration. A main question is language education. So far, it focuses far more on fluency in German than on bilingualism. We have to ask whether children from families with a high mobility are sufficiently trained in this way and what the alternatives could be. Certainly, the optimal approach would be to offer them bilingual education in their home language and in German, especially when it is uncertain how long the family will stay in Germany. Other solutions could follow the pattern of national schools in Germany, like in the Japanese communities, although most multicultural educationalists would bewail the lost chance of mutual learning. European schools as offered for the children of members of European institutions like the Central Reserve Bank or the European Patent Office show a different solution by focusing on German, mother tongue and English. These schools are regarded as elite schools and therefore probably only available for children of some transnational migrants. Besides this, there are only very few of them in Germany. In general, schools will not be flexible enough to offer different language packages for a multitude of children of transnational families so that there is no real linguistic solution for them. They do need German in order to cope in the German school system as long as their parents work here. There could be an approach for those children whose parents know definitely how long they will stay in Germany, which may well be the case with regard to representatives of foreign firms. If these children are registered in a school in their home city, this school could provide them with a kind of portfolio or register with which they could be educated in different schools. This model is adapted from the way in which education is offered for children whose parents work in a circus. In any case, a high amount of flexibility and extra work is demanded from schools and teachers.

This also applies to a rather pragmatic problem: so far, schools have nearly no concepts for students who enter school in the course of a school year, but this can easily happen in families with high mobility.

Multicultural education has a strong focus on social education - this can be explained by the fact that work and refugee migrants were so far mainly underprivileged and marginalized. Transnational migrants are often highly qualified persons of good social standing (though this not necessarily the case cf. Pries (2004). It has to be asked whether the social education approaches have to be modified with regard to this latter group, but naturally without neglecting migrants with a low social standing. It could also be argued that the presence of migrant students with a high-class background could help to overcome the marginalisation of migrant students in many contexts and could lead to a different view of migration. This was, for e.g., the case in Sweden where mother tongue tuition was offered from the very beginning to all students who had one none-Swedish speaking parent regardless of the social status. In Germany, the danger of this argument is that it could lead to two classes of migrants as already to be found in the political discourse on migration.

So far, integration is the keyword in political as well as in educational discussions on migration. It has to be questioned whether the model of integration in the concept of multiculturalism is compatible with transmigration where migrants live in more than one social and spatial context, either at the same time, in consecutive periods or in a way where social and geographical spaces are split or overlap. In the educational discourse, integration is understood in contrast to the concept of assimilation and the political use of the word integration is often more in the sense of assimilation than integration. In the educational discourse, assimilation is defined as the (enforced) abandonment of the culture and language a migrant was used to. Integration is, in contrast to this, the possibility to continue to cultivate the family language and traditions as long as they do not contradict German law. At the same time, integration includes the possibility to fully participate, e.g., in education as well as to build up relations to German society.

There can be no doubt that migration always demands a lot of assimilation with regard to many aspects even if we only look at school life: There are rules which have to be followed like punctuality, cleanliness, parent-teacher-communication, participation in activities, etc. The recent conflict with regard to the headscarf, the arguments about the participation of female Muslim students in sports or sex education show that migrants are beginning to question the demands for assimilation. This may finally lead to further discussions about the cohesion in society - a question that is important in all immigration countries. Here the main question is how much a society or, better said, their members have to have in common to be cohesive.

With regard to students with a transnational background, the assimilative approach in the described educational understanding is even less acceptable than it is for permanent or quasi-permanent migrants. The integrative approach allows them to maintain the first language and cultural bounds, but there is also an expectation of belonging and participation, which in some cases may be more than transnational migrants will be able to contribute. This problem is similar to the case of Diasporas where the exclusion from the host society is even stronger. On the other hand, if the topic is reflected in the light of hybrid cultural belongings, we may come to different assessments (see the next section).

The ways in which assimilation and integration are discussed in the multi-educational discourse are different from those in the social sciences where a controversial discussion about transnational migrations versus assimilation has occurred (cf. Bommes 2003). While exponents of the latter opinion argue that assimilation still matters because no successful participation in a society is supposed to be possible without assimilation, those of the transnational fraction refer to the fact that many modern migrants live neither in the old nor in the new society but in "plurilocal social spaces" where they built up new relations and belongings of a new quality in and between the local and social spaces. A third opinion is related to the fact that even a life in two or more countries demands forms of assimilation like acceptance of working conditions in the one and social behavior within a family in the other. Thus, assimilation in the context of transnational migrations is defined as a competence of participation - in different social, economic and cultural systems (Bommes 2003). Transnational migrants have to become bi- or multilingual to cope in different places, an argument that brings us back to the question of the best language education for their children. Such linguistic competences are an unquestioned goal in all forms of elite education and would easily be adopted for children of high-class transmigrant parents, but it has to be kept in mind that not all of them belong to these classes. Transnational migrants also have to be rather flexible in order to cope with different systems without being opportunistic. If we assume that transnational migrations will increase due to the European and global involvement of economies, multilingualism as well as flexibility have to be part of the curricula for all students as is partly already the case. Yet, children of transnational migrants in classes demand special care as mentioned above.

The European development is a further issue in the context of transnational migration because the European Union not only supports transmigration in the described sense by its legislation, but also adds further aspects by pushing the development of European identity, which means that a new social and geographical space emerges. The concept of European identity also presents a good example how it is possible to develop a sense of belonging to different linguistic and cultural entities. The European dimension in school even demands the development of such competencies without being a migrant. Thus, the European dimension in the curricula can contribute to preparing students for a possible work migration within Europe. Since the concept of the European dimension has to be implemented in all European countries and even to be reported to the EU, a successful realization would be a helpful preparation for such transnational migration movements in the later life of the students, as the chances of these taking place are quite high. Yet, transmigration is not limited to European migrants as the search for IT-workers has quite recently shown.

The challenges of transnational migration have only recently been considered and are still not in the center of multicultural education. It would certainly not be appropriate to make transnational migration central to multicultural education, but it has to be considered, especially in the sense that these different forms of migration - and thus migrant students - will all be together in classes including monolingual Germans, so that a broad range of concepts has to be combined to find a suitable education for all students. To some extent, this development leads to a new mixture of local, European and global aspects of multicultural education. This is certainly a task that can only be solved in a European, if not global approach.

In conclusion, we have to state that the migration pattern in Germany, as well as in other parts of the world, has become more complex. At the same time, PISA has shown that the present educational approach in Germany is not adequate for its present migrant students who belong mostly to permanent migration families so that it will be difficult both to improve the present situation as well as to consider further challenges. Yet, there is a chance that the three levels of multicultural education discussed above will give help in the further development of a multicultural education that is able to meet new tasks (cf. Luchtenberg 2004b for a discussion of these challenges within Europe).

5. Hybrid cultures as a challenge for multicultural education

For a long time, an often-used metaphor to describe children with a migrant background was that "they fall between two stools" (cf. Kunz 2000). This metaphor indicates an understanding of cultural and social belonging which is extremely one-sided in its comprehension since it takes it for granted that individuals can only belong to one culture or one cultural group. Meanwhile, there is a growing understanding among German (multi) educationalists, that one can belong to different cultures and develop an identity of one's own, though this metaphor of being "between" is still vivid. It was used especially often to describe the situation of female Muslims in Germany, which was regarded to be hopeless since, from a single-minded German viewpoint they were forced to live in their Turkish culture though longing to become part of the German youth culture. To a certain extent, it was the discussion about young female Muslims wearing headscarves that helped to overcome this assessment at least partly, because it turned out that young female Muslims with a headscarf regard themselves as emancipated and many of them show this in their behavior as students or professionals (cf. Karakasoglu 2003).

It is also meanwhile more or less common sense that individuals in modern societies participate in different groups without "falling between two stoolsv. If a German can be a member of his or her church group and at the same time a football fan of Bavaria Munich as well as being a member of a leftist party, there is no reason why a migrant cannot be member of his or her Muslim group, the Conservative party and a supporter of Bavaria Munich as well. Thus, individuals in modern societies tend to develop multiple or hybrid identities without any damage to their personality - on the contrary, it is this form of identity that helps them to cope in a complex society and to answer global demands (cf. Castles & Miller 1993 for further discussion).

Recent studies show that young migrants have found different ways to demonstrate their manifold belongings. One example is described by Hinnenkamp (2003) as the development of an "autonomous hybrid code". He has studied Turkish juveniles who, besides speaking their two languages - Turkish and German - master a third language with elements taken out of both languages so that a new kind of language emerges. Thus they prove that they will not be tied to either German or Turkish but that they have developed an identity of their own. Such studies are still an exception, but youth music scenes also indicate this kind of hybridism, which is here transferred into music styles so that elements of modern Western music are combined with those of Turkey or Northern Africa. Hybridism is thus to be found within individuals but also within cultures or cultural items such as language or music.

In education we still generally find a strong trend to divide between cultural affiliations often related to ethnicity. A teacher might therefore assume "Turkish" chauvinistic behavior in a student with Turkish background who dislikes a female teacher or expect a Moroccan girl to contribute North African food to the school festival. These attitudes, which also occur outside of school, are criticized as cultural or ethnic attribution (cf. Çaglar 1990). Surely, individual forms of hybridism like the development of a mixed language are also protests against these attributions which allow only "either-or" but neither mixed forms nor the possibility of feeling at home in different cultures. Yet, it is certain that more and more students will demand manifold social and cultural affiliations or even present themselves as individuals with several belongings. This is also a result of a recent representative study among female juveniles with a migrant background (Boos-Nünning, Karakasoglu 2005).

What are the educational challenges that are related to this development? Educators have to abandon the postulation of cultural clearness and instead to cope with a high amount of ambiguity. Therefore, they have to be trained in ambiguity tolerance to an even higher level than the competence considered up to now: It was assumed that members of multicultural societies need ambiguity tolerance because they meet different cultures daily or, to be more precise, persons with different cultures. This concept still allows cultural and ethnic attribution. The new quality of ambiguity tolerance has to make individuals competent to meet a high amount of hybridism within cultural items and within individuals. Here, cultural and ethnic attribution will disappear to a high degree so that each individual has to be treated as unique. Of course, there are also individuals who tend to focus on a culture in building up an identity - a fact that has to be accepted and supported as well as hybridism in others. If we relate the uniqueness-approach to the tendency of schools in Germany to produce homogeneity we face a structural problem which teachers alone will not be able to overcome.

The development of hybrid cultures and hybrid identities in individuals collides with the assimilation concept as it is used in the political discourse. It also partly contradicts the integration concept as used in multicultural education. The (multi) educational concept of integration emanates from the perception of cultures and persons with cultural belongings. Flexibility is required to apply the concept of integration to the hybrid context without abandoning the concept of cultural belongings.

The perception of the hybridism of cultures and identities could also help to overcome the fear of "parallel societies" or "ghettos" as ethnic communities are often called when it can be assumed that a person can participate in the life of his or her ethnic community and still be a citizen of, e.g. Munich. If the concept of the hybridism of cultures and identities is applied to the assimilation concept as used in the social sciences, it is then the decision of that person as to which social, economic and cultural systems he or she will take part in. It remains a task of school and multicultural education to deal with these options and to prepare for a life in a very complex society, a complexity that is much larger still when the European and global aspects are taken into consideration.

To sum up, we underline the necessity of exploring and dealing with the development of hybrid cultures and identities within multicultural education in order to meet the challenges of another understanding of cultures and the chance to finally overcome the danger of ethnic and cultural attribution that is still alive in schools and beyond.

6. Conclusions

In this paper, we have assumed that Germany as a sustainable linguistically and culturally diverse society needs multicultural education as the most appropriate concept to meet the challenges this involves. While such a development is slowly being accepted in Germany, especially since the recommendations of the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs and research projects have been launched (Standing Conference 1996), new challenges can be named that have to be met in the years to come.

Among these challenges, two can be described as immanent within the concept of multicultural education, and somehow still unfulfilled tasks: the differentiation between internal and external multicultural education is the one, and the unsatisfactory school careers of students with a migrant background have to be named as the other. Here it is necessary to sharpen the senses for differences as for issues in common especially in the theoretical development of multicultural education with regard to the first challenge. The second task demands measures in school administration and schools that partly contradict the usual philosophy as that for e.g. of the homogeneous class. To develop multicultural media competence is a challenge that derives from two sources: media education on one side and the migration discourse in media on the other side. Together, they show the necessity to introduce students into the ways in which media present a migration discourse.

There are two more challenges we have dealt with in this paper: Transnational migration and hybridism in cultures and individual identities. Both belong to a development in our diverse society where migrants follow new patterns of migration insofar as they no longer intend permanent migration but plan for a restricted time of migration, while others switch between their homeland and the country of immigration several times or move to different countries. This is the most difficult situation for schools to prepare for. At the same time they have to prepare students for the possibilities of such forms of a professional life, which at least in Europe may become most common. Hybridism in cultures and in individuals has been described above as a challenge and a chance at the same time, since it really is a chance to overcome one of the negative outcomes of multicultural education: the cultural and ethnic attribution.

Multicultural education is a rather young concept and still in the process of development. Thus, it should be capable of meeting the challenges that now occur and of offering at least first answers to the demands of the near future.

Notes

(1) There is a much larger amount of literature in German on the questions discussed here, but I have tried to focus on literature in English for this paper, when available.

(2) "Ausländerpädagogik" translated literally means pedagogy or education for foreigners. This definition is of importance as regards the approach concerned which was migrant- but also deficit-oriented. The term "interkulturelle Pädagogik" i.e. multicultural education has only been in use since the 1980s and the term "Migrant" (migrant) as opposed to "Ausländer" (foreigner) has only begun to be used in public life even more recently, though still not exclusively.

(3) Intercultural education is used synonymously with multicultural education, especially in texts written in English.

(4) A migrant literature - written by migrants or their descendents - has developed in Germany since the seventies. Some texts are of high quality, often with migration as a backdrop (cf. Amodeo 1996; Chiellino 2000; Luchtenberg 1989).

(5) To become a teacher, you have to study two subjects plus education at a university or other teacher training institution for 3 or 4 years depending on the type of school you intend to teach in later. These studies end with a state examination (1. Staatsexamen) and are followed by 1-2 years in practice combined with studies at a teacher college completely organized by school districts and "Länder" administration (the "Länder" are the 16 individual German states). This phase ends with a further state examination (2. Staatsexamen) after which the candidate can apply for a teaching position - more or less nation wide.

(6) Hauptschule is a school for the academically challenged students, which they leave after 9 or 10 years - depending on the state - with a qualifying diploma.

(7) Special schools.

(8) Comprehensive schools, which in some states exists almost on a par with the Grammar School (Gymnasium), while in others there are only very few comprehensive schools.

(9) In the statistics you find information about different national groups within the group of non-German students as well as about differences with regard to the 16 German states.

(10) There is a much larger amount of literature in German on the questions discussed here, but I have tried to focus on literature in English for this paper, when available.

 

References (10)

Amodeo, Immacolata. 1996. "Die Heimat heißt Babylon". Zur Literatur ausländischer Autoren in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag

Auernheimer, Georg. ed. 2001. Migration als Herausforderung für pädagogische Institutionen. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

Auernheimer, Georg. ed. 2002. Schieflagen im Bildungssystem. Die Benachteiligung der Migrantenkinder. Opladen: Leske und Budrich.

Auernheimer, Georg; Blumenthal, v. Viktor; Stübig, H.; Willmann, Bodo. 1996. Interkulturelle Erziehung im Schulalltag. Fallstudien zum Umgang von Schulen mit der multikulturellen Situation. Münster: Waxmann.

Auernheimer, Georg; van Dick, R.; Petzel, Th.; Wagner, U. eds. 2001. Interkulturalität im Arbeitsfeld Schule. Empirische Untersuchungen über Lehrer und Schüler. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

Banks, James A. 1997. Educating citizens in a multicultural society. New York: Teachers College.

Banks, James. A., ed. 2004. Diversity and citizenship education. Global perspectives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.

Behrens, Heidi; Paufler, Alexandra. 2002. Politische Bildung in der Einwanderungsgesellschaft". Expertise. Solingen: Landeszentrum für Zuwanderung.

Bell, G. H., ed. 1995. Educating European Citizens. Citizenship Values and the European Dimension. London: David Fulton.

Board of Studies NSW 1998a. English K-6. Syllabus. Sydney.

Board of Studies NSW 1998b. English K-6. Modules. Sydney.

Board of Studies NSW 1998c. English as a Second Language (ESL) Syllabus. Sydney.

Boos-Nünning, Ursula; Karakasoglu, Yasemin. 2005. Viele Welten leben - Lebenslagen von jungen Frauen mit griechischem, italienischem, jugoslawischem, türkischem und Aussiedlerhintergrund. Berlin: Bundesministeriums für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend.

Bommes, Michael. 2003. Der Mythos des transnationalen Raumes. Oder: Worin besteht die Herausforderung des Transnationalismus für die Migrationsforschung? In: Thränhardt, Dietrich; Hunger, Uwe, eds. Migration im Spannungsfeld von Globalisierung und Nationalstaat. In: Leviathan (Special issue 22), 90 - 116.

Çaglar, Ayse N. 1990. Das Kultur-Konzept als Zwangsjacke in Studien zur Arbeitsmigration. In: Zeitschrift für Türkeistudien, vol. 3 (1), 93-105.

Castles, Stephen; Miller, Mark J. 1993. The Age of Migration. International Population Movements in the Modern World. London: Macmillan.

Chiellino, Gino, ed. 2000. Interkulturelle Literatur in Deutschland. Ein Handbuch. Stuttgart: Metzler.

Clyne, Michael. 1997. Managing Language Diversity and Second Language Programms in Australia. In: Current Issues in Language and Society, vol. 4 (2), 94-119.

Cope, Bill; Kalantzis, Mary 2000. Multiliteracies. Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures. London, New York: Routledge.

The Council and the Ministers of Education Meeting with the Council. 1988. Resolution on the European dimension in education of 24 May 1988. In: Official Journal of the European Communities No. C 177/5.

Extra, Guus; Yagmur, Kutlay 2002. Language diversity in multicultural Europe. Paris: UNESCO (MOST Discussion paper 63).

Friebel, Wim, ed. 1996. Education for European Citizenship. Freiburg: Fillibach.

Glick Schiller, Nina; Basch, Linda; Szanton Blanc, Cristina. 1997. From Immigrant to Transmigrant. Theorizing Transnational Migration. In: Pries, Ludger, ed. 1997. Transnationale Migration. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 121-140.

Gogolin, Ingrid; Neumann, Ursula eds. 1997. Großstadt-Grundschule. Eine Fallstudie über sprachliche und kulturelle Pluralität als Bedingung der Grundschularbeit. Münster: Waxmann.

Gomolla, Mechthild; Radtke, Frank-Olaf. 2002. Institutionelle Diskriminierung. Die Herstellung ethnischer Differenz in der Schule. Leverkusen: Leske + Budrich.

Gundara, Jagdish S. 2000. Interculturalism, Education and Inclusion. London: PCP.

Hahn, Carole L. 1998. Becoming Political. Comparative Perspectives on Citizenship Education. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Hinnenkamp, Volker. 2003. Mixed Language Varieties of Migrant Adolescents and the Discourse of Hybridity. In: Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, vol. 24 (1/2), 12-41.

Hoff, Gerd. 1995. Multicultural Education in Germany. Historical Development and Current Status. In: Banks, J. A.; Banks, C. A. M., eds. 1995. Handbook of Research on Multicultural Education. New York: MacMillan, 821-838.

Hu, Adelheid 1998. Das Fremde und das Eigene. Leitendes Denkmodell für interkulturellen DaF-Unterricht oder ideologische Polarisierung? In: Barkoswski, H., ed. 1998. Deutsch als Fremdsprache weltweit interkulturell? Wien: Verband Wiener Volksbildung, 241-250.

Ichilov, Orit, ed. 1998. Citizenship and Citizenship Education in a Changing World. London: The Woburn Press.

Inglis, Christine. 2004. Australia. Educational changes and challenges in response to multiculturalism, globalization and transnationalism. In: Luchtenberg, Sigrid, ed. 2004. Migration, Education and Change. New York: Routledge, 186-205.

Jonen, Gerdi; Boele, Klaus, eds. 2001. The Education System in the Federal Republic of Germany 2000. Bonn: Kultusministerkonferenz.

Karakasoglu, Yasemin. 2003. Custom Tailored Islam. Second generation female students of Turko-Muslim origin in Germany and their concept of religiousness in the light of modernity and education. In: Sackmann, R.; Faist, Th.; Peters, B., eds. 2003. Identity and Integration. Migrants in Western Europe. London: Ashgate, 107-226.

Kultusministerkonferenz. 1990. Europa im Unterricht. Beschluß der Kultusministerkonferenz vom 08.06.1978 i.d.F. vom 07.12.1990. Bonn: Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland.

Kultusministerkonferenz. 2003. Ausländische Schüler und Schulabsolventen 1999- 2001. Bonn.

Kunz, Thomas. 2000. Zwischen den Stühlen. Zur Karriere einer Metapher. In: Siegfried Jäger; Schobert, Alfred eds. Weiter auf unsicherem Grund. Faschismus - Rechtsextremismus - Rassismus - Kontinuitäten und Brüche. Duisburg: DISS, 229-252.

Kunz, Thomas. 2003. Guten Appetit? Aspekte der Thematisierung und Nicht-Thematisierung "ausländischer Mitschüler" im Schulbuch. In: Kloeters, Julian; Lüddecke, Ulrike; Quehl, Thomas, eds. Schulwege in die Vielfalt. Handreichung zur interkulturellen und antirassistischen Erziehung und Bildung in der Schule. FFM: Verlag für Interkulturelle Kommunikation (IKO), 221-251.

Luchtenberg, Sigrid. 1989. Migrant literature in Intercultural Education. In: Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, vol. 10 (5), 365-381.

Luchtenberg, Sigrid. 1996. The European dimension and multicultural education. Compatible or contradictory concepts. In: Winter-Jensen, Th., ed. Challenges to European Education. Cultural Values, National Identities, and Global Responsibilities. Frankfurt a. M. et al: Peter Lang, 281-293.

Luchtenberg, Sigrid. 1997. Stages in Multicultural Theory and Practice in Germany. In: Watts, Richard J.; Smolicz, Jerzy J., eds. Cultural Democracy and Ethnic Pluralism. Multicultural and multilingual policies in education. Bern et al.: Peter Lang Verlag, 125-148.

Luchtenberg, Sigrid. 1999. On Languages in Intercultural Learning. In: Alheit, Peter et al., eds. 1999. Lifelong Learning Inside and Outside Schools. Contributions to the Second European Conference on Lifelong Learning Bremen, 25-27 February 1999. Collected Papers. Roskilde University, Universität Bremen and Leeds University 2000, Vol 2, 647-657.

Luchtenberg, Sigrid. 2000. On the Role of Australian Multicultural Education in German Universities. In: Leitner, Gerhard; Bennett, Bruce, ed. 2000. Australian Studies. A Topic for Tertiary Education? Australia Centre Series, Vol. 4. Berlin: Berliner Debatte Wissenschaftsverlag, 83-100.

Luchtenberg, Sigrid. 2002. Bilingualism and Bilingual Education and its relationship to citizenship from a comparative German-Australian viewpoint. In: Intercultural Education, vol. 13 (1), 49-61.

Luchtenberg, Sigrid. 2004. Ethnic Diversity and Citizenship Education in Germany. In: Banks, James A., ed. 2004. Diversity and citizenship education. Global perspectives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Wiley, 245-271.

Luchtenberg, Sigrid. ed. forthcoming. Migration, Education and Change. London: Routledge.

Luchtenberg, Sigrid; McLelland, Nicola. 1998. Multiculturalism, Migration and Racism: The Role of the Media. A Comparative Study of Australian and German Print Media. In: Journal of Intercultural Studies, vol. 19 (2), 187-206.

Lynch, James. 1992. Education for Citizenship in a multicultural society. London, New York: Cassell.

OECD. 2001. Knowledge and Skills for life. First Results from PISA 2000. Paris.

Oomen-Welke, Ingelore. 2000. Sprachen in der Klasse. In: Praxis Deutsch, vol. 157, 14-23.

Pries, Ludger. 2004. Transnationalism and migration. New challenges for the social sciences and education. In: Luchtenberg, Sigrid, ed. 2004. Migration, Education and Change. New York: Routledge, 15-39.

Pries, Ludger. ed. 2001. New Transnational Social Spaces. London: Routledge.

Reich, Hans H.; Reid, Euan. 1992. Education for Bilingualism. In: Reid, Euan; Reich, Hans H., eds. 1992. Breaking the Boundaries. Migrant Workers' Children in the EC. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Standing Conference. 1996. Empfehlung "Interkulturelle Bildung und Erziehung in der Schule". Bonn: Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland.

Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland. 2005. (read 22-01-05).

Vermeulen, H., ed. 1997. Immigrant Policy for a Multicultural Society. A Comparative Study of Integration. Language and Religious Policy in Five Western European Countries. Brussels: Migration Policy Group.

 

Keywords: identity, integration, assimilation, multicultural education, migration, migrant, migrant children, migrant student, transmigration, hybrid culture, difference, diversity, equality, migrant education, Ausländerpädagogik, relativism, universalism, didactics, multiculturalism, multilingualism, multicultural society, citizenship education, German, Turkish

 © 2005 sowi-online e.V., Bielefeld  Leading Editor of JSSE 1-2005: Frank-Olaf Radtke  WWW-Presentation: Norbert Jacke  Processing: Saad eddine Fidaoui  URL: http://www.jsse.org/2005-1/education_luchtenberg.htm  Publishing date: 2005/12/30