Individual differences found in culturally diverse areas can be easily overlooked with a systematic and typical curriculum and with a non-diverse faculty. The background of many children and the environment in which they grow up in is often something that is separated and not expanded on in the educational system. In my high school the huge population of blacks as students and as teachers created a common bond and sense of familiarity within and between both groups. However, this familiarity is something that I feel is lost in many culturally diverse educational systems. Yet, the influence from the nurture of the teacher and educational process is something that is more complex than it should be. In today's society many youth are influenced by the mainstream world and by the environment with which they surround themselves.
Nurture v. Environment.
This brings me to a very important issue, which is the nurture of a developing child versus the environment of that child. It is automatically assumed that the environment in which one grows up in is the same influence that nurtures one's growth. (Harris 2) "The use of nurture as a synonym for environment is based on the assumption that what influences children's development, apart from their genes, is the way their parents bring them up." This is an interesting argument because Judith Harris is intent on calling this definition of nurture as an assumption. Before going into an in-depth analysis of why Harris feels that this is an assumption, I think it is key to point out the most noticeable absences in the assumption. If there were anything that should be added to the nurture assumption, it would be the influence of peers that children have and the generation of friends that help, shape, and evolve a child's development. Harris feels that this assumption lacks the inclusion of "what kind of mind the child is equipped with, which requires a consideration of the evolutionary history of our species.