1.

Critically analyse how intersections of race, ethnicity and class might impact upon a student’s
educational aspirations and life chances. Reflect on how your own intercultural understandings
might influence your teaching practice.

Schools are filled with students and teachers with different social and cultural backgrounds. This

intercultural environment is especially prominent in Australian schools because of Australia’s

multicultural society. These diverse institutes are filled with students that have diverse needs,

different backgrounds and different social statuses. In this essay I will argue that teachers bring

to classrooms their own habitus, including societies definitions of ‘race’, ‘Ethnicity’ and ‘class’

which can have an impact on the approaches to teaching and learning available to the students,

these constructs may also result in an inequity between the students. However, I will also discuss

how teachers can create a positive learning environment through their use of reflexivity and

praxis. Using Critical race theory, Functionalism and Marxism, I will focus on how intersections

between race, ethnicity and class may impact a student’s educational aspirations and life

chances. I will also apply my own intercultural understandings and experiences regarding these

intersections to explore how they may have an impact on or how I will be able to apply them to

my future teaching practice.

In order to understand how race, ethnicity and class affect education we must first

understand the construct of each of these and what they really mean within society. Race is a

social construct that segregates people based of “meanings that people attach to colour or

physical characteristics as they go about their everyday lives” (Richard Race,2014 page 2)

mostly in a biological nature. The definition of race differs from that of ethnicity, ethnicity is

social groupings of people based upon differences, or commonalities, this includes shared

background, language, type of clothing and religious beliefs (Richard Race, 2014). Class on the

other-hand defines people based of their social and financial achievements, this can include

Trevor Rothery 17877419

household income, location and background. These three concepts have intersectionality’s and as

such all tie in together to create different forms of prejudice such as racism and classism, in turn

these prejudices create a system of the oppressed. Intersectionality links in to be a defining

feature of ‘otherness’, referring to the different social concepts that we use to define people such

as class, gender, race and ethnicity. Richard Race (2014) presents us with the idea of

intersectionality being needed in creating a wider picture on how to define and analyse the ways

in which race and ethnicity are researched and presented. By understanding the bigger picture of

the intersections of race, ethnicity and class we can start to understand how these social concepts

can have a negative impact within the classroom as they create a ‘system of oppressed’.

Within education the system of the oppressed created through the intersections between

race, ethnicity and class can create a classroom without equity. An aim within education is to

provide equity for all, though this may not always occur. In order to understand what we mean

by equity we should first explore the differences between equality and equity. Equality is the

provision of the same resources to everyone, where equity is the provision of resources

depending on needs, which results the being at an equal level. An example of this is seen with

school funding, schools in lower socio-economic areas require more funding than those in higher

socio-economic areas, if we took an equality approach both these schools would receive the

same amount of funding resulting in the same difference between them, though an equity

approach would provide more funding to the schools in the lower socio-economic area to bring

them to the same level as the other (John Smyth, 2014). This is only one example of how equity

works within education but it is present in many different areas of education, including but not

limited to, opportunities given to students and extra support offered. The process of providing

equity within the classroom can be influenced but outside factors such as government policies,

Trevor Rothery 17877419

institutional policies and procedures, but also by inside factors such as racism, classism and the

dominant discourse (Margaret Zamudio, 2011). Many difference theories have been applied to

the study of intercultural education with some of these addressing the issue of equity and others

emphasizing the problem.

An approach to educational equity that can be seen as problematic in Marxism, Marxism

explores the concept of class creating a distinct line between the Bourgeoisie (upper class) and

the Proletariat (middle class). This distinction emphasizes the dominant discourse of those in

power to create a ‘false class consciousness’, which is used by the dominant group to “justif[y]

its power with stores that ‘construct reality in ways to maintain their privilege’” (Mike Cole,

2012 page 169). Within education this implies that based on a child’s background they can only

achieve so much, so that is all we will have them aim for. This intersects with race and ethnicity

because the class struggle has an emphasizes on certain criteria, which is determined by the

dominant ‘white’ power and used to create an institutional and structured racism (Mike Cole,

2012). The Marxism approach focuses on the economic capital and places value on education, as

the world has progressed this economic capital is beginning to change to an emphasis on

knowledge capital. This is due to machinery taking over the jobs of the proletariat, so in order to

maintain the distinction between the dominant power there has been an emphasis on controlling

knowledge capital. This distribution of knowledge based of class background can create an

inequitable environment for students to learn, causing some students to be limited in the

acquisition of knowledge capital (Michael Peters, 2003). Though this approach is not seen as

much in school’s today, it can still become an issue within the classroom and must be

acknowledged alongside other theories. Marxism is important for me to recognize and accept as

Trevor Rothery 17877419

having some impact within the classroom in order for me to maintain a neutral status when

addressing students that come from different classes.

Functionalism can cause inequity and unequal opportunities for students based on their

race, class and ethnicity. Functionalism is a basis in which acknowledges that all people have

skills which should be developed in order to contribute to society but that not everyone has the

same skills so should be developed accordingly. In education there is an emphasis around

teachers having control over what resources students ought to have to be a contributing member

of society, they control what resources the students actually have and get to determine their

needs by a comparison of what they ought to have and what they actually do have (Edward

Potthoff, 1943). It is not only the teachers who influence what she students need to learn but also

the institutions and policies such as the Board of Studies, schools, pedagogy and the curriculum

(Edward Potthoff, 1943). The teachers being able to actively decide which skills the student

should learn can be very problematic, this is due to the fact that all students can learn anything.

For the dominant power, be it institution or teachers, to decide on criteria in which defines a

student as being only capable of learning one skill or another, is oppressive and creates inequity

among the students. There is a greater focus on differences being a deficit, be in differences in

race, ethnicity, class gender or others. The oppression of the ‘other’ in order for the mainstream

success creates unequal opportunities and inequity among students is the biggest concern of

functionalism.

To better understand the position of the student within these frameworks and the

constraints around the influence teachers have over the students the Critical race theory (CRT)

plays a key role. CRT emphasizes understanding of one’s own whiteness as a key feature in

understanding the dominant position. In other words, CRT is a tool that can be used to challenge

Trevor Rothery 17877419

the social construct of race and ethnicity along with how it is challenged within education

(Richard Race, 2014). To fight against the ‘white’ dominant discourse we first need to

understand how we stand within it, by understanding our own position we are able to have a

better understanding of our own interactions in an intercultural classroom. There is a focus

within CRT on race, history (e.g. process of racialization), voice matters (opposition to the

dominant discourse) and Praxis (putting the theory into practice) (Margaret Zamudio, 2011). We

can see that CRT does not only point towards race as the answer, or the issue, but that there is a

focus on understanding and engaging with ideological mechanisms of white supremacy (Maria

Ledesma, 2015). The framework of CRT offers better opportunities for students and their future

as it helps to create a positive and accepting environment. This is only able to be achieved

though through self-reflection in order to understand your own position within the dominant

structures of white supremacy. If reflexivity is used to reflect on practices and your own habitus,

you would be able to acknowledge your own white supremacy (Tania Ferfolja, 2015) and then

teach your students with more equity.

In order to improve my own future teaching I must take an approach filled with Praxis

and reflexivity, only through this approach will I be able to understand the dominant discourses

that I am involved with and provide a safe learning environment for my classroom. Praxis is

applying theory to practice, by understanding the theories that are revolving within the education

system (Margaret, Zamudio, 2011). By acknowledging theories such as Marxism, Functionalism

and Critical race theory I can apply the positive aspects and better understand how I interact with

my students. Through applying theoretical frameworks to my teaching and avoiding the potential

inequity that comes along with some ways of approaching race, ethnicity and class, I can

improve my teaching practice. Alongside Praxis I need to apply reflexivity to my teaching

Trevor Rothery 17877419

practice in the future, reflexivity is being able to turn the critical gaze upon oneself, to transcend

my own culturally situated assumptions, whilst monitoring and adjusting my behavior

accordingly (Maribel Blasco, 2012). In intercultural education, cross-racial relations including

ethnicity, social background and histories present themselves constantly either consciously or

unconsciously and must be taken into account when applying reflexivity (Jenna Shim, 2014).

Within my own practice I will need to consider shared experiences and how my own social and

cultural context challenge the power relations between socially constructed ideologies around

race, ethnicity and class (Jenna Shim, 2014). I experience a teacher applying reflexivity within

his classroom in my shadow day, he discussed with me after class how he always reflects on the

class and how power relations work within the classroom, he focused on giving opportunities to

all the students and on ways to engage without forcing ideologies onto the students. I found that

the approach using praxis and reflexivity will be the best way to provide the best experience and

life chances for my future students.

In conclusion we can see that in order to provide a beneficial environment for students to

have equitable opportunities and life choices we must explore and apply Praxis and reflexivity in

intercultural education. By exploring and understanding the difference ways race, ethnicity, and

class are defined and affected by the dominant discourse of a society we are able to see the

effects of different theories such as Marxism, functionalism and Critical Race Theory. In the

future I will need to critically approach my own teaching incorporating reflexivity and praxis

into my practice, acknowledging my own whiteness and ideologies I may be placing onto my

students and approach that in a way which is inclusive and provides an equitable opportunity for

my students. Hopefully through the exploration of concepts such as Marxism, functionalism,

Trevor Rothery 17877419

Critical Race Theory, Praxis and Reflexivity we can move towards a teaching environment

which does not socially oppress the ‘other’.

Trevor Rothery 17877419

References
Blasco, M. (2012). On reflection: is reflexivity necessarily beneficial in intercultural education?
Intercultural Education, 23(6), 475-489. doi: 10.1080/14675986.2012.736750
Cole, M. (2012). Critical race theory in education, Marxism and abstract racial domination.
British Journal of Sociology of Education, 33(2), 167-183. doi:
10.1080/01425692.2011.649830
Ferfolja, T.; Jones Diaz, C. & Ullman, J. (2015). Understanding Sociological Theory for
Educational Practices. Australia: Cambridge University Press
Ledesma, M. C., & Calderón, D. (2015). Critical Race Theory in Education: A Review of Past
Literature and a Look to the Future. Qualitative Inquiry, 21(3), 206-222. doi:
10.1177/1077800414557825
Peters, M. (2003). Post-structuralism and Marxism: education as knowledge capitalism. Journal
of Education Policy, 18(2), 115-129. doi: 10.1080/0268093022000043100
Potthoff, E. F. (1943). Functionalism in General Education. The Journal of Higher Education,
14(3), 148-152. doi: 10.2307/1975092
Race, R. (2014). Introduction. In R. Race & V. Lander (Eds.), Advancing Race and Ethnicity in
Education (pp. 1-16). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Shim, J. M. (2015). Transference, Counter-transference, and Reflexivity in Intercultural
Education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 47(7), 675-687. doi:
10.1080/00131857.2014.914875
Smyth, J. (2014). Improving schools in poor areas: It’s not about the organisation, structures and
privatisation, stupid! Improving Schools, 17(3), 231-240. doi:
10.1177/1365480214556418
Zamudio, M., Russell, C., & Rios, F. (2011). Critical Race Theory Matters: Routledge.

Trevor Rothery 17877419