Corporate multiculturalism, diversity management, and positive interculturalism in Irish schools and society

Abstract

This article offers an empirical critique of recent social and educational policy responses to cultural diversity in an Irish context, with a particular focus on antiracism, integration and intercultural education policies developed during the socalled 'Celtic Tiger' era. Combining ethnographic and discourse analytic techniques, I highlight the centrality of the Celtic Tiger economy and corporate interests in influencing the particular version of interculturalism promulgated by the Irish state. I argue that broader macro processes and discourses operating at the level of Irish state policy can impact the local school level, resulting in negative consequences for ethnic minority students, particularly those who are least endowed with the cultural and linguistic capital valued by the school and wider society.

Irish post-primary students' attitudes towards ethnic minorities

“…At the same time, there is a value in large-scale quantitative studies in that they provide us with a picture of attitudes across representative groups, that may have been indicated in qualitative research (Keogh 1998;Devine and Kelly 2006;Devine 2009;Bryan 2010). It is also notable that, despite being over seventy-years old the Bogardus scale model continues to be regarded as sound once reliability and validity data is reported upon (Brown 2004).…”

“…Both Kitching (2010) and Bryan (2008; have focussed on the role of the state in generating or perpetuating a particular discourse of identity, variously referred to as "pop-institutional racism" (Kitching, 2010) and "corporate multiculturalism" (Bryan, 2010). Such a discourse is, they argue, drawn upon in interaction at school level as identity is negotiated and constructed.…”

“…Previous qualitative based analyses has suggested a continuum of responses to minority ethnic groups -ranging from high levels of social distance (Bryan 2009(Bryan /2010) to more mixed responses (MacGréil, 1996;Curry, 2000;Leavy, (2000) and MacGréil (1996). Mac an Ghaill (1999) has noted that the dominance of North American concepts within discussions of ethnicity have tended to lead to a prioritising of skin colour as being the primary basis of discrimination.…”

“…For Tovey et al (1989, 9), ethnicity is a "symbolic meaning system, a way for a 'people' to organise social reality"; what O'Connell (1994, 113) describes as a meaning system in which the criteria for belonging to a particular group can be changed and adapted over time as new meanings become associated with particular cultural markers or tokens in particular contexts and times. This process of identity and group formation is intrinsically linked to power (Devine, 2005;Bryan, 2010). Through the symbolic construction of "in" and "out" groups, access to resources and to social power is restricted to those who are deemed to be "insiders".…”

“…[sic] as well as the role of school, academic systems, broader cultural systems, as well as legislative and economic structures (Devine, 2005;Devine and Kelly, 2006;Devine, 2009, Bryan, 2010Kitching, 2010) in providing resources or capital which are used in the identity construction process. Resulting attitudes are both the product of local processes of identity construction and of resources that is used by young people in such processes.…”