Introduction/Rationale.
This blog is constructed around the concept of Community Cultural Wealth for EDUC 515: Multicultural Perspectives in Education, Spring Quarter 2014 at Seattle University. This introduction serves to provide a brief overview and literature review of the topic. Please see the blog section "What is Being Done?" for specific examples of research, organizations, and multimedia content.
The concept of Community Cultural Wealth is grounded in the work of Tara Yosso (2005) as a response to other research that takes a "cultural deficit" approach to the question of why do students from underprivileged backgrounds consistently underperform in our institutions? Deficit model thinking gives rise to the racist and classist assumption that students from these backgrounds lack the proper "cultural capital" required to succeed in school, work, etc (Dumais, 2002). This broad set of assumptions affect underprivileged groups across the board (non-white racial/ethnic groups, women, persons of low socioeconomic status) and can be compounded by the intersection of multiple targeted identities.
Community Cultural Wealth turns traditional deficit model thinking on its head. Instead of the problem lying with students and other underprivileged individuals, the model posits that instead, the problem lies with our institutions. As the name implies, this model states that all groups have cultural wealth that has value, but that our institutions are not set up to value the cultural wealth of those outside of privileged groups (white, male, middle/high socioeconomic status, etc.). Instead of viewing one set of norms and/or knowledge as legitimate or superior, this model calls for systems and institutions to treat all cultural wealth as legitimate (Delgado Bernal & Villalpando, 2002).
Yosso (2005) identifies six types of cultural wealth that are consistently devalued by institutions in favor of dominant culture:
The concept of Community Cultural Wealth is grounded in the work of Tara Yosso (2005) as a response to other research that takes a "cultural deficit" approach to the question of why do students from underprivileged backgrounds consistently underperform in our institutions? Deficit model thinking gives rise to the racist and classist assumption that students from these backgrounds lack the proper "cultural capital" required to succeed in school, work, etc (Dumais, 2002). This broad set of assumptions affect underprivileged groups across the board (non-white racial/ethnic groups, women, persons of low socioeconomic status) and can be compounded by the intersection of multiple targeted identities.
Community Cultural Wealth turns traditional deficit model thinking on its head. Instead of the problem lying with students and other underprivileged individuals, the model posits that instead, the problem lies with our institutions. As the name implies, this model states that all groups have cultural wealth that has value, but that our institutions are not set up to value the cultural wealth of those outside of privileged groups (white, male, middle/high socioeconomic status, etc.). Instead of viewing one set of norms and/or knowledge as legitimate or superior, this model calls for systems and institutions to treat all cultural wealth as legitimate (Delgado Bernal & Villalpando, 2002).
Yosso (2005) identifies six types of cultural wealth that are consistently devalued by institutions in favor of dominant culture:
- "Resistant capital - challenge inequity and/or subordination.
- Linguistic capital - communicate though different languages and/or styles.
- Navigational capital - maneuver social institutions.
- Social capital - social networks and/or community resources.
- Familial capital - cultural and/or family knowledge and histories.
- Aspirational capital - aspiration and/or hope despite challenges."
