Growing up in a small, liberal, diverse New England city in the 80’s it wasn’t good education if it wasn’t “multicultural”. We were about to get rid of Reagan. PBS’s children’s programming was still blossoming into an educational and ethnically diverse utopia. It was only 20 years since the birth of the Civil Rights movement. Everyone around me, from public school educators to my working-class neighbors, to us children had the new word on our minds. But multicultural meant different things to different people. For me, it meant sitting in a classroom with just as many Black and Brown kids as White kids. Simultaneously, multicultural education meant learning about a small group of famous people of color as part of a small section of social studies curriculum. That was it.

“While multicultural education tends to be a survey of a few historical figures at worst and a celebration of food, religion and dress at best, global citizenship is a focus on relationship.”

 The fact is that multicultural education as we know it has always fallen short, because it was never created to be a platform 1) where White Students could learn how to live in genuine community with people who were different and 2) where students of color could feel as if they were equal participants in history or current events. Multicultural education has its origins in the Civil Rights movement. More specifically, in the movement for integration. When states began passing their integration laws, many schools only admitted the bare minimum of students of color (some only admitting one) so that they could say they were abiding by the law. School boards, however, never intended to change the curricula in these schools. It wasn’t until the late 70’s and early 80’s when a very simplistic version of multicultural education began to show up in public schools across the country. This usually included a bit about slavery, a few historical figures and the occasional food and music celebration. Since that time little has changed. “Multicultural” became a form of navel gazing for White children. By providing limited and one-dimensional information about other cultures and perspectives, it continued to centralize a European perspective while placing other racial and ethnic identities as supporting characters around the central figure.

 Global Citizenship, in contrast, is a looking outward. It is the “habits of heart, mind, body and soul that have to do with working for and preserving a network of relationships and connections across lines of difference and distinctness, while keeping and deepening a sense of one’s own identity and integrity (Rappaport, 2009).” This two-fold definition is the beauty of global citizenship and the primary difference between it and multicultural education. We are continuously working towards a deepening of our connection with others while simultaneously building a love and appreciation for our own home (however we define home). While multicultural education tends to be a survey of a few historical figures at worst and a celebration of food, religion and dress at best, global citizenship is a focus on relationship. A deep movement towards understanding that the passions, fears and complex perspectives in one’s self, are also present in every one of our neighbors, despite our differences. A know thyself to know others as it were.