A critique of multicultural education policy in non-Western teacher education: unravelling in-service teachers’ perceptions and practices

Abstract

Purpose

This article seeks to unpack multicultural education in Moroccan teacher education by: (1) examining teachers’ conceptualization of multicultural education, (2) scrutinizing how cultural diversity is addressed within English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers’ teaching instructions and practices and (3) probing into the main philosophical underpinnings that may hinder their teaching practices in ways that do not promote social justice and equity in teacher education.

Design/methodology/approach

This study was conducted using a qualitative research methodology through email interviews with EFL teachers to examine their assumptions and practices of intercultural education. Qualitative research is particularly well-suited for exploring context-dependent phenomena, as it allows for a rich, detailed understanding of participants’ perspectives and experiences (Creswell and Creswell, 2018).

Findings

The findings of the present paper reveal that although the field is deemed to promote global justice, diversity and inclusivity in language teaching classrooms, its perspectives and practices remain widely influenced by Western educational policies and ideologies. The paper further argues for more critical engagements with multicultural education in non-Western contexts whose educational programmes and orientations might stay modelled by Western educational pedagogies. Data also point to a range of complexities and dynamics underpinning Moroccan teachers’ practices of multicultural education.

Research limitations/implications

One of the limitations is the participants' late responses to online interview prompts.

Practical implications

The paper offers practical implications for language teacher education. These include (1) encouraging language educators to adjust and adapt their teaching philosophies and practices to their contexts and conditions and (2) alerting them to the mainstream educational principles that may not account for the cultural and linguistic diversities of southern classrooms.

Social implications

The paper’s social implications reside in promoting social justice, equity and diversity within language teacher education.

Originality/value

This is the first research to address Moroccan teachers’ perceptions and practices of multicultural education.

Introduction

Postcolonial theorists have been among the most powerful critics of Euro-Western-centric biases of multicultural education (ME) (e.g. Asher, 2005; May and Sleeter, 2010; Nieto, 2017). Educational policies, including those related to managing cultural pluralism and diversity, have been largely argued to be rooted in Western modernity (Ghosh and Galczynski, 2014). Equally, discourses on promoting social justice, equity and diversity within teacher education are often motivated by ideological and political incentives that may fail to address issues related to racism, power dynamics and inequalities in education (Sleeter, 2018; Atasay, 2015). Recent research has focused on interrogating the politically informed discourses of multicultural education that often employ the lexicon of inclusion to render white supremacy, capitalism and neoliberalism invisible across various teacher education contexts (Bourassa, 2019). As a matter of fact, critical multiculturalists continue to argue for thinking beyond the liberal frameworks of ME and embracing critical approaches grounded in theories of social justice and equity (e.g. Gorski and Parekh, 2020).

The multiplicity of languages, cultures and identities implies that the current classrooms are highly multicultural. The reconstruction of particular curricula positionings that account for non-Western classrooms’ diversities takes urgency. That is, the way multicultural education is envisioned requires further refinements in terms of theory and practice (Saidi and Boustar, 2024). In this sense, the paper critically engages with multicultural education in relation to unproblematized dynamics of inequalities and hierarchies in Moroccan teacher education. The paper draws on critical postcolonial theory as a lens for questioning and challenging Western-centric approaches to multicultural education and their possible perpetuation of “depoliticized diversity” under the pretence of multiculturalism.

Theoretical frameworkMulticultural education and postcolonial critiques

Multicultural education has been envisaged in terms of managing culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms in the literature (Banks, 1993, 2004; Banks and Banks, 2001; Cochran Smith, 2001; Ladson-Billings, 2014). The theory of multicultural education is deemed to provide a roadmap for managing classrooms’ cultural diversity as well as promoting social justice and equitable learning for all students (e.g. Banks, 2009; Lawyer, 2018). Multicultural education is underpinned by the attempt to promote diversity and recognize and value students’ cultural strengths, along with their experiences in the world (Villegas and Lucas, 2007).

Multicultural education’s broad objectives revolve around creating a more inclusive and pluralistic education that adheres to principles of intercultural diversity, equity and social justice inside the classroom (Nieto, 2017). This involves primarily considering students’ cultural and linguistic repertoires in the course content and delivery and simultaneously exposing them to alternative cultures and histories. However, these objectives are only attainable when the entire teaching process is not oriented towards the cultures of the dominant mainstream groups. This is because in many contexts, English textbooks and curricula have been found to be an extension of the cultures of the Anglosphere (Spring, 2014). In the Global South, there have been many studies that have uncovered the complexities of multicultural education. For instance, Ennaji (2021) contends that multicultural education in Morocco is often encumbered by systemic monocultural approaches that may overlook the diverse cultural and linguistic realities of the Moroccan society. He therefore points out that a genuine multicultural education in Morocco requires a curriculum that is inclusive and pluralistic. On a similar premise, Saidi (2024) argues that effective management of Moroccan classrooms’ linguistic, cultural and epistemic diversities mandates further decentering of the type of discourses and frameworks used for teaching interculturalism. Drawing on the Egyptian context, Atta-Alla (2012) illustrates how multicultural education in Egypt often remains detrimental owing to discriminatory educational practices, policies, curricula, textbooks and the overall school environment that neglect and marginalize minority groups, such as Nubians, Copts and Bedouins’ cultures while emphasizing Arab-Islamic values.

On a similar account, studies in Sub-Saharan Africa have highlighted the socio-political and ideological complexities of multicultural education in deeply pluralistic societies. For example, Nyoni (2023) questions the prevailing decolonial efforts of multicultural education, emphasizing the need for the educational policies and curricula to reflect the diverse cultural and epistemic complexities of post-apartheid South Africa. Likewise, Jansen (2020) critiques the post-apartheid curriculum reforms, arguing that while they aimed to promote inclusivity and equality, they often failed to disrupt entrenched power dynamics, leaving marginalized communities at a disadvantage. Jansen highlights how the rhetoric of diversity sometimes overshadows the need for critical engagements with historical injustices and the systemic inequalities that persist in education.

In Southeast Asia, research studies have provided nuanced insights into the complex dynamics of multicultural education. For example, Arphattanon (2021) examines the challenges alongside strategies related to implementing multicultural education in Southeast Asian countries, which are marked by rich ethnic and cultural diversity. Similarly, Patras et al. (2022) explore the implementation of multicultural education across Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand, noting that effective application of multicultural education is largely reliant on policy consistency, practical application, shared values, cultural expression and inclusive curricula.

Postcolonial theorists have critiqued multicultural education policy for its Eurocentric norms and neoliberal ideologies (e.g.Asher, 2005; Ahmed, 2012, Mclaren, 2014; Sleeter, 2024). For instance, Taylor and Hoechsmann (2011) criticizes hegemonic liberal multicultural education for its depoliticized and reductive celebration of cultural differences that overlooks structures of inequality, power and privilege in language classrooms. On a similar vein, Mclaren (2014) questions conservative multiculturalism for its embeddedness in colonial legacies that situate White cultures as superior to all others. Nieto (2017) illustrates further that through the ideology of cultural superiority, there is a tendency to assimilate nondominant cultures into the dominant Western-centric values and practices. In the same line of argument, Ahmed (2012) interrogates the language of diversity that is often used in multicultural discourses to obscure issued related cultural and racial inequalities. Moreover, Kubota (2004) points out further how the liberal form of multiculturalism reinforces colour-blind or difference-blind ideologies, exoticize and essentialize non-Western cultures and obscure underlying power dynamics and privilege.

Within the same premise, postcolonial critiques of multicultural education also paid attention to the epistemic injustices that often remain adamant in multicultural education under the banner of epistemological pluralism. Asher (2005) argues for decolonizing multicultural education pedagogy, as those who critically engage in multicultural education often reproduce the very systemic power structures they try to avert. Also, multicultural education in its current form often operates within a framework that still centres Western epistemologies. For instance, while curricula may include “diverse” perspectives, these are frequently tokenized or framed through a Western lens, thereby diluting their transformative potential (DasGupta 2019).

Materialization of multicultural education in language classrooms

Multicultural education is arguably committed to cultural pluralism, and the goal of intercultural language teaching is to unsettle inherent hierarchies and injustices that underpin multicultural classes (Ghosh and Galczynski, 2014; Gorski, 2006). Multicultural endeavours to promote cultural relativism, empathy, respect and acceptance of cultural difference while concurrently seeking to disrupt any kind of cultural dominance. More importantly, English teachers are required to design inclusive-based teaching materials that consider the intercultural diversities underlying today’s classrooms. This particularly informs the agenda of multicultural policy, which is normally transformative. In particular, multiculturalism-oriented pedagogies challenge any kind of educational policies that centralize the dominant culture and simultaneously seek to disrupt all forms of racial practices that may sustain racism and discrimination.

The materialization of multicultural teaching has to be resilient to the political conditions that govern the selection and incorporation of the cultural capital in language teacher education. These dynamics may aggravate students’ imagination of intercultural representations and relations as well, rendered in unequal power hierarchies between the Self and Other. Students should therefore be helped to ascertain and question the normativities that underpin intercultural communication. On an equal footing, teachers have to be critical about what type of cultural aspects to include in their teaching praxis in order to avoid any kind of cultural or linguistic discrimination. Here, teachers are tasked to align their teaching materials and design with both local and global cultural particularities and nuances when highlighting the cultural input and are encouraged to pay heed to the unequal treatment of different cultures. The rationale is to enable them to deconstruct the educational rituals that may not consider how power differentials can impact the learning process (Gundara and Sharma, 2013).

As a whole, to reinforce multiculturalism, teachers ought to design multiculturally oriented lessons that display equal appreciation of cultural differences and destabilize hierarchies across cultures. Henceforth, the component of culture can be genuinely used in not only enhancing multicultural teaching practices but also in informing about intercultural awareness or communication. However, intercultural awareness should go hand in hand with critical intercultural teaching so as to disrupt all type of inequalities between cultures and instead support equality, intercultural understanding and social justice.

MethodologyAims of the study

A significant aspect of the paper’s rationale is that Moroccan in-service English teachers’ understandings and practices of multicultural education may remain rather shaped by existing theories of multicultural education that may lack relevance to non-Western contexts. Thus, this study seeks to develop a well-rounded analysis of how Moroccan English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers are processing and implementing ME within their classes. The objective here is to ascertain their interpretations and conceptualizations of multicultural education within contexts that are still grappling with cultural and linguistic imperialism. Based on these ideas, this study addresses the following questions.

(1)How do EFL educators define and conceptualize multicultural education?

(2)What existing philosophical underpinnings do Moroccan EFL teachers draw upon to inform their multicultural teaching practices?

(3)How is cultural diversity addressed within their teaching context?

Design of the study

This study was conducted employing triangulation methods combining qualitative data collection techniques to ensure an in-depth understanding of the research topic (Fusch et al., 2018). Email interviews were employed as a primary source to explore EFL in-service teachers’ assumptions and practices of multicultural education and were supplemented by an analysis of the assigned teaching materials, which provided additional depth to the findings. Triangulation is particularly well-suited for examining complex research phenomena, as it enhances the credibility and validity of the findings by drawing on multiple perspectives and data types, e.g. classroom observations, focus groups and document analysis (Creswell and Creswell, 2018).

The rationale for using email interviews resides primarily in their practicality and accessibility, especially given the geographical dispersion of the participants. That is, given time constraints and the participants’ varying schedules, email interviews allowed for asynchronous communication, providing the participants with ample time to reflect deeply on their assumptions and practices regarding multicultural education. Unlike face-to-face or classroom observation, email interviews helped teachers to carefully consider their responses and provided a level of anonymity and comfort that might not be achievable through other qualitative methods, such as classroom observation or focus groups.

Research participants

About 25 EFL teachers (18 males and seven females) from five public high schools across Morocco were recruited for email interviews. All these schools were public and adopted the same pedagogical guidelines of the Ministry of Education. The number of participants was selected, as there is no stipulated number of the population in qualitative research. Creswell and Creswell (2018) argued that between 10 and 50 participants can be adequate depending on the nature of the study. This study employed purposive sampling as the population was selected in a non-random manner. All participants had their teaching trainings at different Regional Academies of Education and Training across Morocco and had some inputs on inter/multicultural education throughout their BA, MA and doctoral studies. The participants were selected based on (a) their teaching training as pre-service teachers at the regional centres for education and training professions and (b) the extent of their teaching experience. Throughout all sections, the acronym HT1, HT2, etc. is consistently used to stand for high school teachers.

Data collection procedures

Data collection procedures were unfolded in compliance with the research design regulating the implementation of email interviews. Research ethics and integrity were ensured through informing the participants in advance about the aims of the study. All participants took part in the study voluntarily upon invitation and were informed of the aims and purpose of the interviews in advance. Participants were reassured that their identities and discourses would be used anonymously, and numbers were assigned to identify participants throughout all research stages.

Data analysis

The study employed thematic analysis (Clarke and Braun, 2014) to organize interview data into key themes. Thematic analysis is commonly used in qualitative research. The coding process of interview data unfolded through three steps: (1) the participants’ narratives were initially re-read to familiarize ourselves with the content and eventually generate initial codes that captured key ideas of the participants, (2) the initial codes were then grouped into broader themes based on their relevance to the research questions. These themes were reviewed and refined to ensure they accurately represented the data and (3) the validation of themes was carried out through verification by the researchers.

Findings

Having situated the paper’s rationale within the main theoretical underpinnings of multicultural education, the study identified four themes which are the most relevant to the main rationale of the paper. The gathered data are systematically analysed and displayed in terms of themes drawn from the interviews and the assigned teaching materials. The themes are discussed in light of the theoretical underpinnings as well as the researchers’ insider experiences as practitioners.

Teachers’ understandings of multicultural education

The notion of “multiculturalism” has been used in the interview prompts as a lens of analysis for probing into the main philosophical underpinnings that shape teachers’ understandings and engagement with multicultural education. A number of participants (HT1, HT2, HT4 and HT10) delivered diverse rhetorical narratives about the terms mutlculturalism and multicultural education, indicating that they are fluid and slippery concepts, often shaped by an interplay of political, ideological, linguistic and cultural dynamics. For instance, HT2 commented that:

I think that it is both simple and complex to understand multiculturalism since it doesn’t have a clear-cut and a stagnant definition. I believe the idea of multiculturalism is simple in its broad sense and complex in its educational appeal. Its interpretation as well as implementation at the educational level may vary from a teacher to another. For me, it implies the existence of multiple cultures and languages inside the classroom.

On the other hand, some participants perceived multicultural education in terms of celebrating cultural diversity and inclusivity inside the classrooms; these participants emphasized the importance of recognizing and respecting students’ different cultural backgrounds. HT3 noted that: “for me, multicultural education is about acknowledging that students come from different cultural backgrounds”. It is about making everyone feel included and respected in the classroom’. On a similar vein, HT5 highlighted linguistic diversity as a central aspect of multicultural education, maintaining that:

In my classroom, multicultural education means recognizing the linguistic diversity of my students and helping them feel confident in expressing themselves in their native languages. But it’s also a challenge because the system still prioritizes one dominant language.

Furthermore, several participants illustrated how multicultural education can be constrained by educational policies and pedagogical guidelines that may not fully address the complex realities of their classrooms, which are marked by linguistic and cultural diversities. HT13 expressed that: “the way we approach multiculturalism in schools is often dictated by national policies. Sometimes it feels like it’s more about ticking boxes than truly engaging with what it means to teach in a diverse classroom”.

Some participants framed multicultural education as a pedagogical approach that should address the unique cultural specificities within Morocco, emphasizing its role in managing and navigating the country’s cultural diversity (HT1, HT5, HT7, HT4 and HT25). HT12 argued that “multicultural education entails respecting and appreciating cultural differences”. Furthermore, other participants (HT2, HT4, HT7, HT13 and H14) emphasized that multicultural education should go beyond celebrating merely cultural diversity without addressing deeper structural inequalities that plague language classrooms. They argued that while recognizing and appreciating diverse cultural backgrounds is essential, it is insufficient if the systemic power dynamics that perpetuate marginalization and inequity are ignored. HT14, for instance, highlighted that: “acknowledging students” cultural differences is important, but if we don’t also change the way we assess and interact with students, we risk reinforcing the same inequalities we’re trying to overcome”. Similarly, HT4 pointed out that:

Multiculturalism isn’t just about appreciating different cultures, identities and languages; it’s about questioning why certain groups are marginalized and how we, as educators, can work toward creating a more equitable system.

Overall, the participants’ rhetorics often skirted critical discussions around issues like cultural dominance, stereotyping and the privileging of Western cultural norms. HT5 noted, “We try to show the beauty of all cultures, but I feel sometimes the West is seen as the measurement of development”. This suggests that even with good intentions, the multicultural education being delivered remains entangled in historical and contemporary systems of cultural hierarchy.

Teachers’ teaching practices of multicultural education

It was inferred from the participants’ discourses that they employ several teaching activities and materials to integrate the multicultural dimension within their classes. Participants referenced two main techniques: content/material adaptation and prejudice mitigation. The former targets different cultures and ethnicities to illustrate key issues and generalizations within the theme of the lesson; the latter serves to mitigate the negative stereotypical images and misconceptions students uphold about a given culture. The objective may be to help students develop a sense of tolerance and openness towards the various ethnicities, races and nationalities. HT20 asserted:

As an EFL teacher, I try to assign activities that integrate a mishmash of target and local culture and I ask for example Amazigh students to work with their non-Amazigh classmates in groups about a given cultural aspect related to their ethnic culture and to that of the target language culture and I also design my own lessons that cover information about different societies and nations to fight negative attitudes they generate. By this way, they feel motivated, engaged and, importantly, tolerant in the classroom.

Substantially, teachers also appealed to an equity-based pedagogy through which an amendment of teaching styles is considered to promote students’ academic achievement. This technique conveys a particular perspective of multiculturalism that centralizes equal status and multiracial interaction patterns among various racial and ethnic minorities for the common good. It was manifested by one of the teachers that:

For me, the first goal that all teachers should strive to achieve is to make students feel they are all equal in status and involved in learning. Instead of bringing materials that address the culture of English people or that of upper-class citizens, I tend to target and support more frequently the lifestyle, heritage and traditions of middle-class students. I implement this through displaying texts that talk about these things. Also, we should not deny that public school students are coming from low status and inferior backgrounds.Multicultural dimensions from teaching materials: instances from “Gateway to English 2” textbook

In addition to examining teachers’ practices and instructional techniques aimed at fostering a multicultural EFL classroom, it is crucial to further explore how multiculturalism is presented within EFL textbooks. Specifically, assessing the cultural content delivered in students’ textbooks and analysing how these materials are integrated into classroom instruction is of paramount importance. This analysis not only provides insights into the extent to which multicultural perspectives are incorporated into the curriculum but also sheds light on how such content influences students’ intercultural competence. In so doing, in Moroccan EFL textbooks, the official guidelines of English language teaching allegedly stress the role of cultural instruction, which is centred around the notion of “Comparison” as one of the main five Cs and premises of the standards-based approaches endorsed in Moroccan EFL teacher education. The latter perspective underlines that comparing and contrasting our own languages and culture(s) with other languages and culture(s) leads to better understanding of cultures. Hence, the following excerpts portray instances of the cultural contents included in “Gateway to English 2”.

As shown in Figure 1, the cultural input presents ten distinct behavioural situations where learners should assess their level of strangeness. The material is included in unit 2, which is about “Cultural Issues and Values”. The activity takes into account students’ attitudes towards appropriateness and each student’s evaluation is compared to that of his/her partner. The overall excerpt addresses the social know-how and the cultural norms of learners’ native culture. Hence, the practicum provides students with the scope to suggest some conduct in which they think to be culturally inappropriate and those which are tolerable in Morocco. The main focus here is on the native culture rather than the target culture.

The following instance in Figure 2 considers some cultural issues and values of American society. Cultural integration is portrayed through a situational dialogue which serves to address Americans’ perceptions and principles of their eating manners. In this regard, besides boosting students’ communicative competence, culture is being explicitly presented as a means of raising students’ awareness about food habits akin to the cultural aspect of “burping”. To achieve this, an authentic exchange is created between a Moroccan student and a counsellor of foreign students that takes place in the American society. The cultural material describes a cultural misunderstanding that occurred when the Moroccan student burped while having a meal with an American family. Through reading the conversation, students would cultivate a socio-racial consciousness concerning the fact that, for American citizens, it is culturally improper to burp in front of people while eating.

Figure 3 below is about introducing Chaibia Talal, a Moroccan artist. The cultural input is designed as a form of a biographical passage which provides students with information about Chaibia Talal’s biography and her life story in Chtouka as a young painter. The material is associated with an authentic image of the main figure to make the learning appealing to students’ textual and visual cognition. The cultural cluster in the present instance is used as a means of attaining the primary objective of the lesson, which is teaching relative clauses included in the text. Therefore, the content serves the aim of reinforcing learners’ grammatical competence through a cultural input which adheres to the local culture.

Discussion

This study explored how in-service EFL teachers perceive and implement multicultural education in non-Western classroom contexts, highlighting their praxes, challenges, and engagement with multicultural dimensions in teaching materials. Multicultural education has been discussed within the increasing scholarly critical interventions that mandate further decentering of multicultural education in terms of theory and practice. Our rationale for highlighting the multicultural input resides not only in fostering cultural/linguistic plurality in EFL classes but also in promoting social justice, given that classrooms are vulnerable contexts that may reproduce and reinforce unequal power relations, unjust treatment of cultures and identities. Our critiques of multiculturalism in Moroccan teacher education point out the opaque instantiation of multicultural education that is spawned from three triad criteria: (1) educators’ ontological understandings of multicultural education that may lack immunity to essentialism, (2) lack of pre-service teacher education and professional training, (3) the existence of multiple students’ sociocultural and ethnic realities that require resilient approaches and (4) the EFL textbook which withstands and perpetuates essentialist discourses on cultural understanding.

The present findings deliver an understanding that multicultural education in Moroccan teacher education remains blurred in terms of theory and praxis. The interviewed EFL teachers do not seem to have a nuanced understanding of multiculturalism that reflects its recent critical theorizations; their conceptualization of the term is rather simplistic and superficial. This aligns with prior research indicating that teachers often lack a deep theoretical grounding in multicultural education, leading to fragmented or incomplete interpretations of the concept (Sleeter and Grant, 2009). Their attempt to come up with their own definitions implies that they are not well-informed with current scholarly literature on multicultural education. Likewise, the endeavour to focalize the multicultural knowledge may be shaped by the traditional frameworks used for capitalizing on intercultural literacies, which are often imbued with unequal power representations; the Anglophone cultures may be granted more visibility and priority than local ones (Saidi, 2024). Even if the participants shed light on certain aspects that multiculturalists emphasize in the literature, it seems that they have overlooked some salient principles, including social justice and equity that underpin the praxis of multiculturalism. The point here is that it is more about having EFL teachers exposed to and trained on what it means to teach multiculturalism vis-à-vis their contexts and situations. This is because the main precepts and categories of multicultural education remain under the scope of Western contexts, which may not account for non-Western contexts.

A further premise emerging from the findings is that the participants’ perspectives on multicultural education reinforce rather than challenge existing power, inequality and privilege. This is evident in their teaching praxis, which remains largely susceptible to Western-centric frameworks and fails to critically engage with the systemic inequalities embedded in their contexts. This particularly aligns with Kubota’s (2004) critique of Western/liberal approaches to multiculturalism, which often promote colour-blind or difference-blind ideologies, exoticize and essentialize non-Western cultures and obscure underlying power dynamics and privilege. Also, while teachers expressed a commitment to celebrating cultural diversity, their approaches tended to be superficial. For example, when multicultural education is reduced to a depoliticized celebration of diversity, it fails to equip students with the critical tools needed to challenge systemic oppression and advocate for social justice (Banks, 2009). Moreover, it risks reproducing the very inequalities it seeks to address by reinforcing stereotypes and maintaining the status quo (Gay, 2010). For this reason, the absence of critical discussions about race, power and privilege in the classroom may contribute to the marginalization of minority students and the normalization of dominant cultural narratives (Ladson-Billings, 2014).

The findings indicate further that EFL teachers relied heavily on the teaching of culture(s) as a lens through which they foster and crystalize multiculturalism. Their use of a variety of instructional activities and materials was imbued with the need to develop students’ intercultural awareness. The way they instructed about cultural differences seems to be inspired by the traditional intercultural communication education in which the learner is put at the nexus of the cultural Self–Other dichotomy (Holliday, 2016). This approach tends to frame cultural differences as distinct and oppositional categories, a perspective that has been critiqued for oversimplifying complex intercultural dynamics (Saidi, 2024).

Given that the overall goal of multicultural education is to foster the appreciation of cultural differences, the participants’ narratives sideline the importance of equipping students with criticality and enabling them to pinpoint the range of cultural profiling and stereotypes that may go unscathed in the materials they are exposed to. This reflects findings from recent research indicating that educators often focus on surface-level cultural diversity without addressing deeper issues of power, prejudice and inequality (May, 1999). The premise here is that there is a need for rethinking the way multicultural learning is practised and taught in EFL classes; teachers should be aware of the unequal treatment and perception of cultures, especially that some students may come up with some taken-for granted assumptions about cultures (i.e. Western cultures are more superior than non-Western one). Our point here is that if the teaching of multicultural knowledge in Moroccan teacher education is not scaffolded with criticality at the level of theory and praxis, EFL teachers would recycle the same essentialist discourses and practices that have long shaped their understandings of multi/intercultural teaching/learning. It could also be inferred from teachers’ reports that the primary pedagogic challenges that impede the implementation of multicultural teaching in their classes relate to the insufficient professional training programmes on instructing multiculturalism (Education Week, 2022). Implementing multicultural education requires further comprehensive teacher training programmes that equip educators with the necessary skills and knowledge to address the diverse needs of their students (American University School of Education, 2018).

More practically, teacher training programmes can better prepare teachers to navigate cultural and linguistic diversity in increasingly multicultural classrooms. This may include implementing workshops that encourage teachers to critically examine their own cultural assumptions, biases and positionality. These workshops could use tools such as reflective journals, case studies and group discussions to foster self-awareness and empathy (Gay, 2018). Additionally, Curriculum design that integrates non-Western multicultural perspectives into the curriculum is important in providing hands-on strategies for implementing multicultural education. For example, literature courses could include works by authors from the Global South, and history courses could incorporate perspectives on colonialism and resistance.

Another issue that entangles the application of multiculturalism in Moroccan teacher education concerns the multiplicity of students’ identities, cultures and languages. The participants’ narratives imply that the cultural, ethnic and linguistic diversity characterizing their classes made multiculturalism incommensurable; this may be ascribed to a lack of a resilient and updated course and content delivery that is tailored to the students’ sociocultural make-up. Also, by using a variety of multiculturally informed activities, teachers would be able to help students cultivate positive attitudes about ethnically and linguistically different students and, at the same time, reduce internalized prejudices and stereotypes. This endeavour demands, in turn, a particular level of criticality and conscience on the part of both teachers and students, and likewise, the objectives set for nurturing multicultural knowledge in EFL discourse ought to be geared towards building classes of peace, equity, tolerance and pluralism. Furthermore, the participants’ insights on and strategies adopted for increasing students’ multicultural knowledge lack nuance on the current epistemological density and criticality of multiculturalism. In particular, the teaching techniques used by the participants do not seem to sensitize students to the discursive ideologies and inequalities permeating teaching materials and contexts; students may internalize certain taken-for granted assumptions about other cultures if they are not taught to be critical and reflective about the cultural content they are exposed to. Our critique here is, therefore, centred on warning against the teaching praxis that may run the risk of re-activating and re-enacting social and ethnic inequalities and hierarchies based on certain “categorizations”, especially when emphasizing the intercultural learning. This is because the classroom is a multicultural/multilingual site that is susceptible to reinforcing and sustaining social hierarchies and unequal power relations across various individual groups.

In the EFL textbook, the development of students’ multicultural knowledge has been understood through the notions of comparison and contrasting of “cultural differences”. The notion of culture was used in the material as a source for figuring out the different ways people behave, act and think. This was done through providing students with different behavioural situations as a way to emphasize the multicultural input. However, the creation of cultural differences, if not used with substantial caution, does not necessarily promote multicultural learning as much as it may generate power differentials and cultural Othering. Another problem associated with comparison and contrasting of “cultural differences” is the reinforcement of biased and stereotypical views about the “cultural other” on the basis of superior Self versus inferior Other (Holliday, 2016). In words, the real problem with cultural differences is not about the appreciation of difference per se, but it is about how the insights on that difference may lead to binary power relations (Jones, 2013). Furthermore, the use of the notion of culture per se in the material seems to be limited to essentialist and post-positivist understandings of culture as a fixed system of behavioural and cognitive traits that confine all the individuals to a homogenous cultural group. As a result, having students exposed to these fixed entries of culture-based situations may render the multicultural knowledge assimilationist and may accentuate inequalities and ideologies instead of admonishing them (Gorski, 2006). Our critique here is that the multicultural teaching in the EFL textbook themes should depoliticized and viewed from a critical stance in order to eliminate any kind of ideologically laden content that may sustain boundaries between world cultures.

With the above insights in mind, the teaching of multiculturalism in Moroccan teacher education remains laden with certain complexities and challenges, warranting further critical and nuanced insights on its instantiation. This has been accounted for in terms of three main problems: (1) teachers’ conceptualization of multiculturalism seems to be implicated in the uncontested framings of multicultural education, (2) lack of professional teacher training programmes, (3) the multiplicity of students’ identities and cultures and (4) the preoccupation with “cultural differences” in the textbook as a gateway to highlighting multicultural learning lack critical self-appraisal as to its political dynamics that may reinforce cultural prejudices and inequalities instead of eliminating them. Our main line of argument here is that multicultural education in Moroccan teacher education should reflect the current epistemological criticality that ascertains the power-laden hierarchies and inequalities reproduced and exacerbated by classroom practices and policies and that teachers should assume a transformative and agentive role that mirrors the spirit of multiculturalism.

Conclusion

The present study has been concerned with mapping multiculturalism in Moroccan teacher education with an ultimate goal of investigating the attainment of the multicultural input/knowledge in EFL discourse. The findings demonstrate that the in-service education programme/practicum does not engage substantially with multiculturalism, along with its critical and transformative frameworks. This has been accounted for mainly in terms of lack of pre-service professional training programmes, alongside the essentialist framings of teaching “cultural differences” as a pathway to students’ multicultural knowledge development. Our critiques therefore call for rethinking the way multicultural/intercultural education may sustain power inequalities and cultural domination/marginalization instead of promoting social justice and equity. This requires, on the one hand, critical and nuanced conceptualizations of multiculturalism that deconstruct the political and ideological policies of education and, on the other hand, resilient and updated textbooks and teaching methods that are sensitive to cultural diversity/plurality and cognizant of the essentialist and assimilationist discourses about the cultural Other. Also, we are proposing that to burgeon the effort of attaining a critical and transformative multicultural teaching agenda in non-Western contexts, there should be more collaborative initiatives from researchers and practitioners to support and engage in ameliorating the practice of multicultural education that is in the service of social justice and equity. In a plain term, it is more about reimagining multicultural education through new horizons, voices and contexts that reflect how to materialize multiculturalism not only from Western contexts but also from non-Western ones.

On the whole, the paper’s insights on multicultural education in non-dominant contexts provide further implications that can inform policy changes, curriculum development and teacher training programmes in non-Western contexts. By critically examining how multicultural education operates outside of Western-centric frameworks, the paper underscores the need for localized, culturally responsive pedagogies that address the unique social, political and historical contexts of these regions. It calls for a rethinking of educational practices that go beyond mere inclusion to foster genuine intercultural dialogue and understanding. The recommendations proposed could lead to more inclusive policies that not only reflect the diversity within non-Western societies but also challenge global educational hegemonies. Additionally, it suggests that teacher training programmes should be rooted in the realities of the students they serve, empowering educators to navigate and mediate intercultural interactions with sensitivity and relevance.

Author Affiliation

Figure 1

Adapted from Gateway to English 2

Figure 2

Adapted from Gateway to English 2

Figure 3

Adapted from Gateway to English 2

References

Ahmed, S. (2012), “On being included: racism and diversity in institutional life”, in On Being Included, Duke University Press.

American University School of Education (2018), “Culturally responsive teaching: strategies and tips”, available at: https://soeonline.american.edu/blog/culturally-responsive-teaching/

Arphattanon, T. (2021), “Multi-lingual and multicultural education in globalizing Southeast Asia”, Advances in Southeast Asian Studies, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 149-153.

Asher, N. (2005), “At the interstices: engaging postcolonial and feminist perspectives for a multicultural education pedagogy in the South”, Teachers College Record, Vol. 107 No. 5, pp. 1079-1106, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.00505.x.

Atasay, E. (2015), “Neoliberal multiculturalism embedded in social justice education: commodification of multicultural education for the 21st century”, Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 171-204.

Atta-Alla, M. (2012), “Egypt education system: a monocultural education in a multicultural society”, Journal of Sociological Research, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 476-488, doi: 10.5296/jsr.v3i2.2645.

Banks, J.A. (1993), Multicultural Education: Development, Dimensions, and Challenges, Phi Delta Kappan, Bloomington, IN, Vol. 75, pp. 22-28.

Banks, J.A. (2004), “Multicultural education: historical development, dimensions, and practice”, Handbook of Research on Multicultural Education, 2nd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 3-29.

Banks, J.A. (2009), “Diversity and citizenship education in Nation’s around the world”, in Paper Presented at the Korean Educational Association for Multicultural Education, Seoul, South Korea.

Banks, J.A. and Banks, C.A.M. (2001), Multicultural Education: Issues and Perspectives, 4th ed., John Wiley, New York.

Bourassa, G. (2019), “Neoliberal multiculturalism and productive inclusion: beyond the politics of fulfilment in education”, Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 253-278, doi: 10.1080/02680939.2019.1676472.

Clarke, V. and Braun, V. (2014), “Thematic analysis”, in Michalos, A.C. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research, Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 6626-6628.

Cochran-Smith, M. (2001), “Multicultural education: solution or problem for American schools? [Feature DER: 20010425]”, Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 91-93, doi: 10.1177/0022487101052002001.

Creswell, J.W. and Creswell, J.D. (2018), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches, 5th ed., SAGE, Thousand Oaks.

DasGupta, A.A. (2019), Navigating the Racialized Neoliberal Gaze: Asian American Women Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Professionals in US Higher Education, University of, San Francisco.

Education Week (2022), “What is culturally responsive teaching?”, available at: https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/culturally-responsive-teaching-culturally-responsive-pedagogy/2022/04

Ennaji, M. (2021), “Multiculturalism, citizenship, and education in Morocco”, in Educational Scholarship across the Mediterranean, Shine, pp. 304-325.

Fusch, P., Fusch, G.E. and Ness, L.R. (2018), “Denzin's paradigm shift: revisiting triangulation in qualitative research”, Journal of Sustainable Social Change, Vol. 10 No. 1, p. 2, doi: 10.5590/josc.2018.10.1.02.

Gay, G. (2010), Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, and Practice, Teachers College Press.

Gay, G. (2018), Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, and Practice, 3rd ed., Teachers College Press.

Ghosh, R. and Galczynski, M. (2014), Redefining Multicultural Education: Inclusion and the Right to Be Different, Canadian Scholars’ Press.

Gorski, P. (2006), “Complicity with conservatism: the do politicizing of multicultural and intercultural education”, Intercultural Education, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 163-177, doi: 10.1080/14675980600693830.

Gorski, P.C. and Parekh, G. (2020), “Supporting critical multicultural teacher educators: transformative teaching, social justice education, and perceptions of institutional support”, Intercultural Education, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 265-285, doi: 10.1080/14675986.2020.1728497.

Gundara, J.S. and Sharma, N. (2013), “Some issues for cooperative learning and intercultural education”, Intercultural Education, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 237-250, doi: 10.1080/14675986.2013.797202.

Holliday, A. (2016), “Revisiting intercultural competence: small culture formation on the go through threads of experience”, International Journal of Bias, Identity and Diversities in Education, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 1-13.

Jansen, J.D. (2020), Knowledge in the Blood: Confronting Race and the Apartheid Past, Stanford University Press.

Jones, R.H. (2013), Health and Risk Communication: an Applied Linguistic Perspective, Routledge.

Kubota, R. (2004), “Critical multiculturalism and second language education”, in Norton, B. and Toohey, K. (Eds), Critical Pedagogies and Language Learning, Cambridge University Press, pp. 30-52.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2014), “Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: aka the remix”, Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 84 No. 1, pp. 74-84, doi: 10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj131485484751.

Lawyer, G. (2018), “The dangers of separating social justice from multicultural education: applications in higher education”, International Journal of Multicultural Education, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 86-101, doi: 10.18251/ijme.v20i1.1538.

May, S. (1999), “Towards critical multiculturalism”, in May, S. (Ed.), Critical Multiculturalism: Rethinking Multicultural and Antiracist Education, Falmer Press, London, pp. 1-9.

May, S. and Sleeter, C.E. (Eds) (2010), Critical Multiculturalism: Theory and Praxis, 1st ed., Routledge.

McLaren, P. (2014), “Multiculturalism and the postmodern critique: toward a pedagogy of resistance and transformation”, in Between Borders, Routledge, pp. 192-222.

Nieto, S. (2017), “Re-Imagining multicultural education: new visions, new possibilities”, Multicultural Education Review, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 1-10, doi: 10.1080/2005615X.2016.1276671.

Nyoni, P. (2023), “The politics of decolonizing the curriculum through adopting mother tongue instruction in a South African historically disadvantaged university setting”, Curriculum Perspectives, Vol. 43 No. Suppl 1, pp. 47-57, doi: 10.1007/s41297-023-00210-1.

Patras, Y.E., Hidayat, R., Maksum, A. and Nurhasanah, N. (2022), “Understanding multiculturalism education from Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand”, Kelola: Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 125-135, doi: 10.24246/j.jk.2022.v9.i2.p125-135.

Saidi, B. (2024), “Intercultural education in the Global South: decolonising canonical intercultural models in Moroccan University MA program courses”, Language and Intercultural Communication, pp. 1-15, doi: 10.1080/14708477.2024.2341772.

Saidi, B. and Boustar, R. (2024), “Critical intercultural education in Moroccan teacher education: practical insights for teacher candidates”, in Selvi, A.F. and Kocaman, C. (Eds), International Perspectives on Critical English Language Teacher Education: Theory and Practice, Bloomsbury Academic, London, pp. 223-228, August 10, 2024, doi: 10.5040/9781350400351.ch-29.

Sleeter, C.E. (2018), “Multicultural education past, present, and future: struggles for dialog and power-sharing”, International Journal of Multicultural Education, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 5-20, doi: 10.18251/ijme.v20i1.1663.

Sleeter, C.E. (2024), Critical Multicultural Education: Theory and Practice, Teachers College Press.

Spring, J. (2014), Globalization of Education: an Introduction, Routledge.

Taylor, L.K. and Hoechsmann, M. (2011), “Beyond intellectual insularity: multicultural literacy as a measure of respect”, Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l’éducation, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 219-238.

Villegas, A.M. and Lucas, T. (2007), “The culturally responsive teacher”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 64 No. 6, pp. 28-33.

Further reading

Banks, J.A. (1995), “Transformative challenges to the social science disciplines: implications for social studies teaching and learning”, Theory and Research in Social Education, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 2-20, doi: 10.1080/00933104.1995.10505739.

Banks, J.A. (2002), An Introduction to Multicultural Education, Allyn & Bacon.

Banks, J.A. and Banks, C.A.M. (2010), Multicultural Education: Issues and Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons.

Chen, Y.W. and Lawless, B. (2019), “Teaching critical moments within neoliberal universities: exploring critical intercultural communication pedagogy”, Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, Vol. 48 No. 5, pp. 553-573, doi: 10.1080/17475759.2019.1683056.

Cortina, R. and Earl, A.K. (2020), “Advancing professional development for teachers in intercultural education”, Education Sciences, Vol. 10 No. 12, p. 360, doi: 10.3390/educsci10120360.

Freire, P. (1973), Education for Critical Consciousness, Seabury Press, New York.

Gay, G. (2012), “Multicultural education, purposes, and goals”, in Banks, J.A. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Diversity in Education, Sage, pp. 1548-1553, doi: 10.4135/9781452218533.n495.

Hudson, A.H. (2003), “Multicultural education and the postcolonial turn”, Policy Futures in Education, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 381-401, doi: 10.2304/pfie.2003.1.2.13.

Leclercq, J.M. (2002), The Lessons of Thirty Years of European Co-operation for Intercultural Education, Steering Committee for Education.

Maguire, M. and Delahunt, B. (2017), “Doing a thematic analysis: a practical, step-by-step guide for learning and teaching scholars”, All Ireland Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 156-167.

McLaren, P. (1997), Revolutionary Multiculturalism, Westview, Boulder, CO.

Ngo, B. (2010), “Doing ‘diversity’ at dynamic high: problems and possibilities of multicultural education in practice”, Education and Urban Society, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 473-495, doi: 10.1177/0013124509356648.

Sprecher, K.M. (2011), Decolonial Multiculturalism and Local-Global Contexts: A Postcritical Feminist Bricolage for Developing New Praxes in Education, (PhD dissertation), University of Tennessee, available at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/1129

Spring, J.H. (2001), Deculturalization and the struggle for equality: a brief history of the education of dominated cultures in the United States.

Vavrus, M. (2017), A Decolonial Alternative to Critical Approaches to Multicultural and Intercultural Teacher Education, SAGE Publications, Vols 1-2, pp. 473-490, doi: 10.4135/9781529716627.