ENGAGING THE PINK ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM:
INVESTIGATING RACE & RACISM THROUGH ART EDUCATION
by
NAJUANA P. LEE
(Under the Direction of Carole Henry and Tracie Costantino)
ABSTRACT
Understanding art educators’ dispositions towards racially diverse populations and how those dispositions shape expectations and the treatment of students is a critical component in ensuring equality (equal treatment) and equity (fair and just treatment) in education. In this mixed-methods study, art education students participated in a semester- long social justice art education studio course, which focused on the critical examination of race and racism. Participants recontextualized their family histories and visually expressed themselves as racial and cultural beings while developing deeper insight into the ways in which race, culture and identity shape the perspective through which they view the world. The findings indicate that the course was effective in improving most of the participants’ implicit and explicit racial attitudes. Additionally, many participants expressed that their comfort level with the topic of race had improved. However, the findings also suggested that more time and prolonged exposure was needed to explore the subject matter in further detail. Hence, one course alone may not unseat deeply held beliefs.
INDEX WORDS: art education, multicultural education, critical race theory, race, racism, teacher preparation, diversity education, studio art, implicit attitudes
ENGAGING THE PINK ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM:
INVESTIGATING RACE & RACISM THROUGH ART EDUCATION
by
NAJUANA P. LEE
B.F. A., The University of Tennessee, 2001
M. Ed., The University of Tennessee, 2007
A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
ATHENS, GEORGIA
2011
© 2011
NaJuana P. Lee
All Rights Reserved
ENGAGING THE PINK ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM:
INVESTIGATING RACE & RACISM THROUGH ART EDUCATION
by
NAJUANA P. LEE
Major Professors: Carole Henry Tracie Costantino
Committee: Richard Siegesmund Nadia Kellam
Electronic Version Approved:
Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia May 2011
iv
DEDICATION
I dedicate this dissertation to my mom and sister who stood by me when I needed them most. Their words of encouragement and support, along with a million hugs and kisses have made achieving this goal possible.
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to those who have so generously given of their time and expertise to better my work. The faculty of the art education program have guided me through challenging coursework and provided exemplar teaching on how to think critically and how to teach others to do the same.
They have encouraged me through every step of my educational journey. Several individuals, however, deserve special mention for their contributions to this work.
Carole Henry, Co-Major Professor of my Advisory Committee, has been a nurturing, supportive and guiding force in my educational growth and my personal growth. She has constantly shared her enthusiasm for my academic work, provided me with economic support opportunities through assistantships, awards, and professional positions, and has kept me focused on the important issues.
Tracie Costantino, Co-Major Professor of my Advisory Committee, has been a gracious mentor who has demonstrated the importance of rigorous scholarship and has had a lasting impact on the way I think about scholarly research. She taught me how to think critically about problems in art education and provided constant, concrete, good- natured, and patient support. Her many critiques and reviews of this paper brought focus and clarity to my writing and her keen editorial eye saved me from embarrassing errors.
Richard Siegesmund and Nadia Kellam, my committee members, have given me encouraging words, thoughtful criticism and their time and attention throughout these years.
vi
I would also like to thank my mother, Nancy Rose, my sister Dr. Xiomara
Romine, my sister Dr. Patrice Reid, and my dear friend Gloria Wilson, who each read this manuscript (in its many forms) with devotion, honesty and love and gave their
"outsider" perspectives on this work and the ideas it aimed to convey.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... v
LIST OF TABLES...... xi
LIST OF FIGURES ...... xiii
CHAPTER
1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1
Problem Statement...... 5
Research Questions...... 6
Significance of the Study...... 6
Paradigm and Methodology...... 9
Subjectivity Statement ...... 11
Definition of Terms...... 15
Sensitivity to Racial and Ethnic Labels ...... 18
2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ...... 22
Elaboration of Terms/Concepts ...... 23
Theoretical Framework...... 32
The Malleability of Implicit (Automatic/Unconscious) Racial Bias ...... 45
Historical Context of Multiculturalism and Prejudice Reduction Studies49
Teacher Beliefs, Expectations, and Attitudes ...... 59
Art Education’s Role in Unlearning Implicit Bias...... 75
viii
Strategies for Preparing Teachers for the Diverse Classroom...... 78
Conclusion of the Literature Review ...... 87
3 METHODOLOGY ...... 90
Research Questions, Outcome, and Population ...... 91
Mixed-Method Paradigmatic Stance, Purpose, and Design...... 96
The Quantitative Instrumentation and Data Collection ...... 101
The Practitioner Inquiry and Qualitative Data Collection ...... 109
Data Analysis Methods...... 112
Protection of Human Subjects (IRB) ...... 113
Validity, Credibility and Trustworthiness...... 115
Limitations, Delimitations, and Assumptions...... 121
4 ARED 5130/7130 COURSE DESIGN ...... 124
Teaching Dispositions and Strategies ...... 125
Overall Format and Design of the Course ...... 129
Epistemological Stance...... 151
Conclusion of the Course Design ...... 153
5 RESEARCH QUESTION 1...... 155
Implicit Attitude Test (IAT)...... 155
Data Analysis...... 158
IAT Score Decline Post-Course...... 159
Explicit Attitude Test...... 163
Conclusion ...... 182
6 RESEARCH QUESTION 2...... 185
ix
Developing A Framework For Analyzing The Qualitative Data...... 185
Naïve Traits...... 187
Informed Traits ...... 204
Ally Traits ...... 217
Overall Changes In Racial Attitudes...... 229
Conclusion ...... 231
7 RESEARCH QUESTION 3...... 234
Student 1 – Lower/Naïve Attitude Changes ...... 235
Student 2 – Medium/Informed Attitude Changes...... 238
Student 3 – Higher/Ally Attitude Changes ...... 242
Conclusion ...... 245
8 RESEARCH QUESTION 4...... 248
Interview Questions ...... 248
Final Written Reflections...... 267
Conclusion ...... 273
9 IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CONCLUSIONS...... 275
Implications...... 276
Recommendations...... 282
Conclusions...... 284
REFERENCES ...... 288
APPENDICES
A INFORMATIONAL LETTER ...... 319
B VERBAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR PAPER IAT & IAT MEASURE...... 321
x
C VERBAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR EXPLICIT ATTITUDE TEST...... 329
D INTERVIEW QUESTIONS ...... 335
E VERBAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR TESTING SESSION...... 336
F WRITTEN REFLECTION PROMPTS...... 338
G STUDIO ASSIGNMENTS...... 340
H READING/VIDEO/MUSIC/WEBSITE COURSE LIST...... 344
I MICHAEL RAY CHARLES’ ARTWORK ...... 349
J LEZLEY SAAR’S ARTWORK...... 351
K LORNA SIMPSON’S ARTWORK...... 352
L ALISON SAAR’S ARTWORK ...... 352
M WHITE PRIVILEGE AND ITS IMPACT IN PARTICIPANTS’ LIVES ..355
N EXAMPLES OF ADDITIONAL EXHIBITION ARTWORKS...... 359
xi
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1: Racial Identity Development Stages...... 44
Table 2: Gender of Participants ...... 94
Table 3: Self-Identified Racial/Ethnic Categories of Participants...... 94
Table 4: Age of Participants ...... 95
Table 5: Academic Level of Participants...... 96
Table 6: Elaborated Visualization of the Sequential Transformative Mixed Method
Design ...... 100
Table 7: IAT Participant Scores...... 157
Table 8: Paired Samples Test...... 158
Table 9: Paired Samples Correlations...... 159
Table 10: Equal Treatment...... 165
Table 11: Social Distance ...... 167
Table 12: Social Distance ...... 168
Table 13: Social Distance ...... 169
Table 14: Social Distance ...... 171
Table 15: Origins of Inequality...... 172
Table 16: Origins of Inequality...... 174
Table 17: Affirmative Action...... 175
Table 18: Affirmative Action...... 177
xii
Table 19: Stereotypes...... 179
Table 20: Stereotypes...... 180
Table 21: Stereotypes...... 181
Table 22: Stereotypes...... 182
Table 23: Overall Changes in Racial Attitudes...... 230
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1: Visualization of the Sequential Transformative Procedures ...... 99
Figure 2: Paper IAT Example...... 104
Figure 3: A student’s mixed media piece critically explores her family’s past...... 137
Figure 4: This copper sculpture investigates what it means to be Multiracial in America
(image on left)...... 138
Figure 5: Details of the copper sculpture (image on right)...... 138
Figure 6: This mixed media piece visually explores the multidimensionality of being
White and depicts both a history of anti-racist efforts and White privilege ...139
Figure 7: Student’s artwork explores her genealogy but stops short of critically examining
the role of race in her family history...... 141
Figure 8: This clay piece explores how Whiteness can dominate ideals of beauty,
affecting the perceptions of children of color...... 145
Figure 9: Digital photos examine the idea of hair as racial identity ...... 146
Figure 10: This clay piece questions beauty standards in America...... 147
Figure 11: Charcoal drawing on wood examines the pervasiveness of passive racism and
questions its innocence ...... 149
Figure 12: DiCaprio’s Table of Factors and Traits (DiCaprio, 2008, p. 2) ...... 186
Figure 13: “Naïve” Racial Attitude Trait Development adapted from DiCaprio (2008)
pp. 2-4 and Pope-Davis, Vandiver and Stone (2002) ...... 189
xiv
Figure 14: Student’s artwork visually expresses her discomfort with the topic of race 201
Figure 15: This student’s artwork explores notions of racial awareness and
unawareness...... 203
Figure 16: “Informed” Racial Attitude Trait Development adapted from DiCaprio (2008)
pp. 2-4 and Pope-Davis, Vandiver and Stone (2002)………………..…….206
Figure 17: Titled, America’s Job Market, this clay chess pieces symbolize the
opportunities afforded many Whites and the limitations imposed on many
Blacks caused by institutional racism and discrimination….………….….213
Figure 18: This student’s artwork explores White ideals of beauty and the role these
standards play in African American women’s self images...... 215
Figure 19: “Ally” Racial Attitude Trait Development adapted from DiCaprio (2008) pp.
2-4 and Pope-Davis, Vandiver and Stone (2002) ...... 218
Figure 20: Final art project examining Asian stereotypes...... 227
Figure 21: Final art project expressing a student’s understanding of viewing the world
through different racial lens...... 233
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Because racism changes and develops, because it is simultaneously a vast phenomenon framed by
epochal historical developments, and a moment-to-moment experiential reality, we can never
expect fully to capture it theoretically. Nor can we expect that it will ever be fully overcome. That
doesn't mean, however, that we are free to desist from trying.
—Howard Winant, 2004, p. 49
Understanding art educators’ dispositions towards racially diverse populations and how those dispositions shape expectations and the treatment of students is a critical component in ensuring equality and equity in education. However, this begs the question:
What is the difference between equality and equity? David (2008), a teacher in
California, writes about teaching her students the difference between these concepts in this vignette from her blog site:
There's this activity I do in my class. All the students sit in a circle, and I ask
everyone to take off his or her left shoe and throw it into a pile in the center. Once
the shoes are all piled up, I begin re-distributing them, one to each student,
completely at random. Then I tell everyone to put on the new shoes. And
inevitably, there begin the complaints.
"This isn't my shoe!"
"It's too big!"
"It's too small!"
"This doesn't fit me!
2
Whatever the specific complaints are, very few students are actually happy with
their newly mismatched pair of shoes. "What's wrong?" I ask. "I did everything
fairly. You all have two shoes - one for your right foot and one for your left."
"But Miss David," they say, "they aren't the correct shoes!"
"Oh," I say. "You want the shoes that are best for each of you individually? Not
just any shoe I find?
" "Yes!" they all say.
"But," I say, with furrowed brow, "that doesn't seem fair. I wanted to treat you all
EQUALLY." I point to a boy with somewhat large feet, and a nearby girl with
smallish feet. "He'll have more shoe than you will," I note. And without a doubt,
someone unknowingly gets right to the heart of the issue:
"It doesn't matter who has more shoe, Miss David. It matters that we all have the
right shoes for us."
And THAT, my friends, is the difference between equity and equality. Equality
means everyone gets exactly the same outcome - two shoes - without regard to
individual differences - large or small feet, for example. Equity means everyone
gets the same quality of outcome - shoes that fit their individual needs.
David’s (2008) classroom activity highlights how being treated equally or equitably can make a difference. Applying this vignette to education further emphasizes why it is important to understand the difference between equal treatment and fair treatment.
The student population in the United States has rapidly become more diverse over the past two decades. According to the U.S. Census Bureau News (2008), “minorities,
[are] now roughly one-third of the U.S. population, [and] are expected to become the 3
majority in 2042…. By 2023, minorities will comprise more than half of all children”
(¶2). Additionally, the Multiracial population is projected to be the fastest growing
population in the U.S., and their numbers are expected to more than triple by 2050.
According to the most recent release by the U.S. Census Bureau (2005-2009), The
American Community Survey estimates confirm this trend indicating that currently
approximately 26 percent of the U.S. population self-identified as a person of color.
However, this increase in diversity has not been reflected in the teaching workforce where only 8.4 percent of the 4.7 million teachers in public schools were Black (U.S.
Census Bureau, 2004). Latino/Hispanic teachers made up 5.5 percent, and 2.9 percent were Asian. Likewise, only .5 percent of teachers were American Indian and Native
Alaskans. No data were provided for Multiracial educators. Further emphasizing the lack of diversity in the teaching workforce, the National Collaborative on Diversity in the
Teaching Force stated in their Assessment of Diversity in America’s Teaching Force: A
Call to Action report that 90 percent of all public school teachers were White, and 40 percent of schools did not have a single teacher of color on their staff (NEA, 2004). In
2008, the U.S. Census Bureau released an updated count of all elementary and secondary schoolteachers. The report indicated that of the 3.8 million elementary and secondary school teachers, 83.5 percent were White (U.S. Census Bureau, 2009). Black teachers made up 6.7 percent and 6.9 percent were Latino/Hispanic teachers. Asian teachers were
1.3 percent of the total, with American Indian and Native Alaskan teachers making up .5 percent. Multiracial teachers were included on this report and made up .9 percent of the elementary and secondary teacher workforce. No new data has yet been released for post- secondary teachers. While this latest report does not include all teachers in the United 4
States, the demographics continue to support the notion that the U.S. teacher workforce
continues to be predominately White.
Racial differences between educators and students do not solely determine the
quality or effectiveness of a student’s educational experience. However, educators with
limited exposure to diverse cultures, as well as those who lack an understanding of
linguistic differences and racial identity development, may hold naïve and negative racial
beliefs about students of color, resulting in biased behaviors towards these students in the
classroom. A teacher’s racially biased disposition can impact the ability of a student to
become a successful learner. Sleeter and Thao (2007) write, “Race does not determine
teacher quality. However, race, ethnicity, and language shape the nature of experiences
teachers bring to the classroom, as well as insights they bring to the teaching profession
at large” (p. 4). Compounding this issue, a myriad of research supports the notion that
many preservice and practicing teachers continue to be inadequately prepared to serve
diverse populations. This unpreparedness adversely affects the ability of teachers to effectively meet the needs of the growing number of students of color in schools
(Ahlquist, 1992; Burriss & Burriss, 2004; Cho & DeCastro-Ambrosetti, 2006; Heard,
1990; 1999; Hinojosa & Moras, 2009; Hollins & Guzman, 2005; Lawrence & Tatum,
1997; Lesko & Bloom, 1998; Sleeter, 1992; 2001; Sleeter & Thao, 2007; Van Hook,
2002; Weiner, 1990). Furthermore, an educator's conscious and unconscious racial beliefs can shape his or her expectations of a student, ultimately influencing that student’s academic performance. Teachers play a key role in a student’s academic success by determining a student’s grade, evaluating a student’s behavior, and recommending a student for higher-level academic programs. 5
Racial disparity between educator and student, combined with research that
indicates that many educators may hold stereotypical beliefs about their students of color,
should concern all stakeholders in education (Hinojosa & Moras, 2009; Jackson, 2009).
These teachers often lack authentic experiences with diverse populations, feel
inadequately prepared to teach students of color and feel unsure of their ability to
effectively relate to students of color (Van Hook, 2002). Understanding current and
future teachers’ dispositions towards racially diverse populations and how those
dispositions shape their expectations and treatment of students is a critical component in
ensuring equality and equity for all students. Hence, the ways in which future and
practicing teachers are prepared for a diverse society is key in the development of their
ability to be effective teachers in diverse classrooms.
Problem Statement
The focus of this research is to investigate what influence participating in a social justice art education studio course may have on preservice and practicing art educators’ implicit (unconscious) and explicit (conscious) racial attitudes and understandings toward self and others. This study aims to understand the transformative processes of racial attitudes through the critical examination of issues surrounding race and racism. Viewing these issues through art and artmaking may facilitate future art educators emotionally connecting to these issues, thus potentially promoting an unlearning of racial bias.
Additionally, a goal of this study is to understand how this experience might improve future and practicing teachers’ cultural competencies and comfort levels when working with racially diverse populations. This study therefore aims to bridge the gap in empirical literature on multicultural art education, facilitate a change in art educators’ 6
attitudes/practices, and inform future curricular development of teacher preparation programs aimed at preparing educators for working in racially diverse schools.
Research Questions
My research questions are:
1. What are the implicit and explicit racial attitudes of the preservice and
practicing art educators who participated in this study?
2. How do these art educators express, through oral, written and visual
responses, their racial/cultural attitudes and understandings of self and others
in relation to their experiences in a social justice multicultural art education
studio course?
3. In what ways and to what extent do the qualitative data (oral, written, and
visual responses) help to explain the quantitative data (implicit and explicit
racial attitude responses) and vice versa?
4. What influence does participating, engaging and learning in an art education
studio course focused on social justice issues of race and racism have on
preservice and practicing art educators’ racial attitudes?
Significance of the Study
Visual thinking and expression through artmaking can often facilitate the exploration of emotional associations, provoke emotional responses, and influence the way individuals feel and think about an issue (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Dewey, 1934;
GoldBlatt, 2006; Noddings, 2002). The findings from this study suggest that participation in an art education course focused on the issues of race and racism can aid preservice and practicing art teachers in making an emotional connection to race-related issues, thus 7
leading to a more personally meaningful experience and a positive change in racial
attitude.
Meaning making, which refers to the process of developing a personally
meaningful learning experience, is critical to unlearning racial bias because negative
racial attitudes are deeply rooted in the emotional hub of the brain known as the
amygdala (Amodio & Lieberman, 2009). This recent discovery is supported by a wide array of research in social neuroscience, an interdisciplinary field focused on the biological mechanisms of social interaction (Amodio, Devine, & Harmon-Jones, 2007;
Amodio & Lieberman, 2009; Blair, Ma, & Lenton, 2001; Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001;
Lowery, Hardin, & Sinclair, 2001; Rudman, Ashmore, & Gary, 2001; Sinclair, Lowery,
Hardin, & Colangelo, 2005). The findings from these studies suggest that if individuals make an emotional and personally meaningful connection to issues of race, these individuals may potentially be able to unlearn racial bias.
Other supporting studies include research on the role of emotions in reducing implicit bias (Damasio, 1994; 1998; Goleman, 1994; LeDoux, 1996; 2000; O’Connor,
2004) and the intrinsically emotive nature of thinking and learning in art, as well as its effect on one’s attitudes and beliefs (Ellis, 1999; Ramachandran & Hirstein, 1999;
Stafford, 2009; Watt, 1999; Williams & Newton, 2007; Zeki, 1999). This connection between implicit bias reduction and affective and cognitive processes may uniquely position art education as a discipline in which educators may effectively facilitate implicit racial attitude change.
Visual thinking and expression in art education may play a unique role in unlearning automatic bias because the thinking skills developed in the art classroom are 8
uniquely grounded in both affective and cognitive processes (Hetland, Winner, Veenema,
& Sheridan, 2007). Eisner (2002) expands on this idea, writing:
… all [art] forms possess qualities that express or evoke feeling or emotion. In the
arts the expressive character of forms is brought under the intelligent control of
experience and technique. Artists, by virtue of their experience and technical
skills, are able to compose form in the service of feeling. Thus, artistry requires,
in part, the ability to conceive of the emotional quality desired and the technical
ability to compose form capable of evoking the feeling or emotion desired. (p. 18)
In this study, participation in an art education studio course focused on the social
justice issues of race and racism facilitated preservice and practicing art educators
making an emotional connection to their learning. This connection developed into personally meaningful learning (i.e., meaning making), which was critical to their ability
to unlearn their own biases. Antiracist thoughts and behaviors must hold personal
meaning for an individual in order for him or her to be internally motivated towards
antiracist views and behaviors (Sinclair, Lowery, Hardin & Colangelo, 2005).
Exploring complex issues, such as race and racism, through artmaking, provided
participants in this study the chance of “capturing the ineffable, the hard-to-put-into- words” (Weber, 2008, p. 225). The nature of the studio work in this study allowed participants to express their emotional reactions, changing attitudes, and thought processes regarding the topics of race and racism through their artworks. The collection of artworks as data is valuable in research because it allows for “teachers [and researchers] to learn from students’ perspectives” (Haney, Russell, & Bebell, 2004, p.
237). Additionally, Weber (2008) points out that artworks are viable artifacts for use in 9
the assessment of academic learning. She writes, “it is the ability of images to convey
multiple messages, to pose questions, and to point to both abstract and concrete thoughts
in so economical a fashion that make image-based media highly appropriate for the communication of academic knowledge” (p. 43). Because visual expression allows one to expand his or her understandings beyond the limitation of words, artmaking provides an often overlooked and underused means of understanding for exploring a phenomenon.
Lastly, although there are a plethora of articles on multicultural and anti-racist art education, both debating and advocating for its use, the nature and effectiveness of this curricular intervention in preparing educators to teach in diverse classrooms is rarely empirically studied (Ballengee-Morris & Stuhr, 2001; Chalmers, 2002; Taylor,
Carpenter, Ballengee-Morris & Sessions, 2006). This study, therefore, aims to address this shortfall in the current literature by empirically engaging the complex issues of race and racial injustices through art learning and argues for the establishment of antiracist pedagogy in teacher preparation programs.
Paradigm and Methodology
When trying to research a problem that is present in a complex educational context, a mixed-methods approach may be able to answer a broader range of questions and provide a different way of exploring a problem, as compared to using either a quantitative or qualitative approach alone (Mertens, 2005). In consideration of the research questions for this current study, a mixed methods approach was justified as offering both the benefits of quantitative and qualitative approaches for research. This study aims to collect a more comprehensive set of data by bringing together both quantitative and qualitative approaches in tandem, thereby strengthening the overall 10
study. Furthermore, the study aims to be transformational by addressing issues of racial
inequality and racial injustice with the goal of facilitating a change in preservice and practicing art educators’ existing racial attitudes, consequently changing the way in which teachers are prepared for working in culturally diverse schools.
This research is guided by three critical theories: racial formation theory (Omi &
Winant, 1996), critical social theory (Giroux, 2005) and critical race theory (Ladson-
Billings, 1995). Racial identity development theory (Helms, 1990; Tatum, 1992) informs the framework developed for analyzing and understanding the participants’ responses to race-related content. Additionally, the social cognition theory of shared reality (Sinclair,
Hardin, Lowery & Colangelo, 2005) and the neuroscience theory of race-based emotional responses (Amodio, Devine, & Harmon-Jones, 2007) guides this study's stance on the malleability of automatic and unconscious racial prejudice, as well as the role of affectivity in reducing racial bias. An in-depth discussion of these theories is included in the theoretical framework section of Chapter Two.
This mixed-method practitioner study examines two components of the same phenomenon. The first is a quantitative component aimed at exploring preservice and practicing art education teachers’ implicit and explicit racial attitudes. These evaluations of attitude were conducted pre- and post-course as a measure of whether participation in a social justice art education course facilitated an attitude change. This component was followed by a second qualitative component, a case study of students who volunteered to participate in the study and who enrolled in a studio art course, Studio Techniques for Art
Education, which was taught by the current author in the spring of 2010. This qualitative 11
portion of the mixed-methods study involved practitioner inquiry methodologies, which are discussed in more detail in the methodology portion of this paper.
Subjectivity Statement
I have been mistaken for Polynesian, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Hawaiian, Samoan,
Indian, Chinese, Brazilian, Venezuelan and Greek. I’ve passed for Black, White and
Latina all in the same day. I have also been told that I am not White, not Black, and not
Latina enough. I have been referred to as a nigger, zebra, half-breed, mulatto, White girl, high-yellow, Oreo cookie, and coffee and cream. I am a Multiracial individual.
Growing up in the Southeast with a mother who is White and a father who is half
Jamaican and half Cuban has had its challenges and its rewards. The challenges have served as the foundation for my commitment to the values of diversity and inclusion. The rewards have helped me to develop pride in my Multiracial heritage. Consequently, this also deepened my understanding of the importance of racial and cultural identity in shaping who each of us ultimately becomes, and the perspective through which we view and understand the world.
My perspective on the importance of teachers fostering children’s positive racial identity development and practicing culturally responsive teaching is informed by my own personal experiences as a Multiracial child growing up in the Southeast during the early 70s. While the post-civil rights climate was still ripe with the fruits of anti-racist and anti-discrimination ideologies, interracial marriages were still regarded by most
Americans with disdain.
The term miscegenation refers to the mixing of two different races, and it was introduced into the U.S. as early as 1863 (Lemire, 2002). Anti-miscegenation laws in 12
America aimed to criminalize not only marriages between Blacks and Whites, but also
marriages between Whites and other racial groups, such as Asians, Native Americans,
and Latinos/Hispanics (Lemire, 2002). In 1967, the U.S. Supreme court made the
landmark decision in the case of Loving vs. the State of Virginia that anti-miscegenation laws were unconstitutional. This was also the year that my parents were married. Their marriage was the first interracial marriage on the campus of Andrews University in
Michigan. Several crosses were lit and burned across campus in protest of their marriage.
The end of race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States resulted
in a rapid rise of interracial unions. As a result, there was a 50 percent increase in Biracial and Multiracial births between 1970 and 1990 (H. Harris, 2002). Born in 1970, I am a product of what is commonly referred to as the “biracial baby boom” (Rockquemore &
Brunsma, 2008, p. 35). During this time period, Biracial and Multiracial identity formation theories began to surface. Most theories were based on the work of Everett
Stonequist (1937). His theory is now known as the Marginal Man theory (Rockquemore
& Brunsma, 2008). This theory asserts that due to the fact that mixed race children are positioned outside of two different racial categories, they are never fully accepted into either racial group. This was believed to result in a permanent crisis of identity and a liminal state of being for those with mixed race heritage. Offspring from interracial unions were, and sometimes still are, thought to be biologically and socioculturally prone to mental and behavioral problems (Levitt, 2008; Nakashima, 1992; Nitardy, 2004). This is due in part to the belief that Biracial and Multiracial children will eventually suffer an unavoidable racial identity crisis. H. Harris (2002) explains further: 13
Historically, biracial [and Multiracial] individuals have been analyzed and judged
from biological and sociocultural perspectives (Nakashima, 1992). Originally, the
biological perspective characterized individuals from interracial unions as
mentally, physically, and morally weak beings and because of their perceived
genetic inferiority, they faced insurmountable social, emotional, and
psychological problems (Krause, 1941; Provine, 1973). The sociocultural
perspective supported the belief that biracial [and Multiracial] people were social
and cultural misfits, incapable of fitting in or gaining acceptance in any racial
group, destined to lead a life of loneliness and confusion. The ultimate goal
behind both perspectives was racial division, which socially and legally
discourages Caucasians from marrying and/or having children with people of
color (Nakashima). (p. 120)
These assumptions led to many stereotypes about children of mixed heritage
filtering into schools. These stereotypes included: assumptions that these students would
automatically develop a racial identity crisis; they would be unable to fit into any racial
or ethnically defined categories; they should racially identify with the racially
subordinate parent of color to help them overcome or avoid a racial identity crisis; they
would become social misfits, with loose morals, behavioral problems and academic
disabilities; and any academic or behavioral problems in school were considered a direct
result of their racial heritage (DaCosta, 2007; H. Harris, 2002; 2003; Korgen, 1999;
Morrison, 2001; Root, 1996; Schwartz, 1998; Wallace, 2004; Wardle & Cruz-Janzen,
2004). 14
Fortunately, my mother and father raised me to be proud of my multi-racial heritage, which fostered my racial identity development. Because of this, I feel like I have always known who I am racially. Many of my teachers, schoolmates and others, however, often seemed confused and frightened by my racial ambiguity. These people, throughout the course of my life, have tried to decide my race for me, and have often made biased assumptions about my abilities. Fortunately, I was lucky to grow up in a household where both my father and my mother made me feel comfortable, loved and accepted as a mixed-race individual. This helped me to develop a holistic, positive self- identity, even in the face of racial stereotyping, racism and ignorance. As a result, my personal belief is that it is important for Biracial and Multiracial children to develop
“equal pride in all the components of their heritage” (Schwartz, 1998, ¶ 8). I also believe it is equally important that all children—White children included—develop an understanding of themselves as racial and cultural beings. Recent research has shown that talking to children about race and addressing racial issues in the classroom, especially at a young age, helps children demystify race and racial constructs. This also facilitates the formation of positive conclusions that children make about race and disrupts the pattern of children developing racial biases and forming stereotypes about other races as well as their own (Bronson & Merryman, 2009; CNN, 2010; Cooper, 2010, Copenhaver-
Johnson, 2006; Helling, 2006; Perkins, 2009). However, in order to accomplish this, I believe teachers need to first feel comfortable with the topic of race.
Jones (2002) points out in her article on researcher subjectivity that the researcher needs to discern his or her “own positionality and the influence of this positionality on who and what can be known…” (p. 466). Through this disclosure of my current 15
subjectivities, which at times expanded and changed as I began to work through this
study, I am aiming to be “meaningfully attentive” (Peshkin, 1988, p. 17) to how my
personal experiences, beliefs and perspectives may have affected this research.
Definition of Terms
Concepts such as race, identity, and multiculturalism easily lend themselves to a variety of broad and sometimes vague definitions. Key vocabulary used in this research has been provided as a means of clarification, although the aim is not to imply that these definitions are the only available definitions for the following terms. The definitions that are provided herein reflect a critical antiracist-multicultural education stance, which is focused on social justice. For this reason, certain concepts within this section warrant further elaboration and are addressed in the literature review section of this paper. The definitions are:
1. Multiculturalism: “A philosophical concept built on the ideals of freedom, justice,
equality, equity, and human dignity.... It recognizes the role schools can play in
developing the attitudes and values necessary for a democratic society. It values
cultural differences and affirms the pluralism that students, their communities,
and teachers reflect. It challenges all forms of discrimination in schools and
society through the promotion of democratic principles of social justice”
(National Association for Multicultural Education, 2003, ¶2).
2. Racial Identity: A person’s positive or negative psychological response towards
his or her racial group (Carter & Goodwin, 1994). 16
3. Cultural Identity: The aspect of personal identity that is shaped by real or
imagined associations with a specific national, cultural, ethnic or racial group
(Mason, Geareon & Valkanova, 2006).
4. Race: A controversial concept based on the idea that a group within the human
population is considered distinct based on physical characteristics; A social
construct in which a group sees itself; The color of one’s skin, for example,
Black, White, etc. (University of British Columbia, n.d.).
5. Ethnicity: Social groups with a shared history, sense of identity, geography and
cultural roots, which may occur despite racial difference; Ancestral background,
for example: African American, Jamaican American, Cuban American, Brazilian,
Irish, Italian (University of British Columbia, n.d.).
6. Racism: Prejudice, discrimination, oppression and/or privilege given based on the
belief that genetic or inherited differences produce the inherent superiority or
inferiority of one race over another. Racism may be present in organizational and
institutional policies, programs and practices, as well as in the attitudes and
behaviors of individuals (University of British Columbia, n.d.).
7. Stereotype: A shared idea about the generalized attributes of others with respect
to perceived physical or cultural characteristics. These are generalizations about
all members of a group. Stereotypes may even seem to be positive, but they are
always negative because individuals are judged according to the exaggerated
norms of their group instead of personal merit (University of British Columbia,
n.d.). 17
8. Racial Attitude: Racial attitudes are one’s core beliefs and associations about race
or particular racial groups. These belief systems, or attitudes, affect one’s
behavior positively or negatively (Project Implicit –Harvard, n.d.).
9. Implicit Attitude: Attitudes are positive and negative associations of a person,
place or thing. Implicit attitudes refer to “mental associations that are so well-
established as to operate without awareness, or without intention, or without
control” (Project Implicit –Harvard, n.d., ¶ 22). Implicit attitudes may not be
shared publicly. Implicit attitudes are assessed using an Implicit Attitude Test
(Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001), which aims to collect data on one’s unconscious
associations.
10. Explicit Attitudes: These are attitudes that are commonly expressed publicly.
Typically, these attitudes are assessed through self-reports, such as opinion
surveys or interviews (Project Implicit – Harvard, n.d.).
11. Racial Essentialism: A philosophical view that there are a set of fixed
attributes/properties that any one particular racial group possesses (Adeleke,
2009). These non-biological characteristics are believed to be biologically
transferred from one generation to the next. This ideology supports the notion that
there is a “monolithic ‘Black Experience,’ or ‘Chicano Experience’ (Delgado &
Stefancic, 2000, p. 263). For example, following this logic, all individuals who
have white skin, regardless of their historical, social, or cultural contexts, will
have the same universal White Experience. Race is seen as an unchanging essence
of who we are. 18
12. Racial Hierarchy: A racial hierarchy places groups of people in an ordered system
of stratification based on the belief that some racial groups are superior/dominant
while others are inferior/subordinate. In the U.S., the hierarchy of race has
historically been described through the bipolar model. This approach positions
Whites on top and Blacks on the bottom with all other racial groups falling
somewhere in between (Gold, 2004).
Sensitivity to Racial and Ethnic Labels
The 5th edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological
Association states in reference to conducting and reporting research:
Respect people’s preferences; call people what they prefer to be called (Maggio,
1991). Accept that preferences will change with time and that individuals within
groups often disagree about the designations they prefer (see Raspberry, 1989).
Make an effort to determine what is appropriate for your situation; you may need
to ask your participants which designations they prefer, particularly when
preferred designations are being debated within groups. (2010, p. 63)
The 6th edition of this manual further elaborates, stating:
Preference for terms referring to racial and ethnic groups change often…. Authors
are reminded of the two basic guidelines of specificity and sensitivity…. Use
commonly accepted designations (e.g., Census categories) while being sensitive
to participants’ preferred designation. For example, some North American people
of African ancestry prefer Black and others prefer African American; both terms
currently are acceptable. On the other hand, Negro and Afro-American have 19
become dated; therefore, usage of these terms generally is inappropriate. (2010,
p.75)
The manual also warns against the use of essentialist or pejorative usage such as the
terms, minority as an indicator of non-White individuals or using the White race, which the manual states, “portray[s] human groups monolithically, and often serve[s] to perpetuate stereotypes” (p. 75).
The terms used in this study aim to respect individuals’ preferred racial designations. Hence, terms that are widely accepted and commonly used when referring
to racial groups are employed herein. Nonetheless, the usage of these terms does not
suggest that they are the only terms that should be used, nor does the author seek to impose a preferred word usage on others. Instead, the author has chosen terms based on the study by Tucker, Kojetin and Harrison (1995) for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. This study surveyed almost 60,000 households to determine what racial and ethnic terminology individuals who self-identified as White, Black, Latino and American Indian preferred. The findings indicated that 61.66 % of individuals surveyed preferred the term
White as opposed to Caucasian, European American and Anglo; 44.15% of individuals surveyed preferred the term Black as opposed to African American, Afro-American,
Negro and Colored; 49.76% of individuals surveyed preferred the term American Indian as opposed to Native American, or Alaska Native; and 57.88% of individuals surveyed preferred the term Hispanic as opposed to Of Spanish Origin or Latino. However, in a
2008 survey conducted by Passel and Taylor (2009) for the Pew Hispanic Center, these researchers asked individuals about their preference for the term Hispanic or Latino.
Results showed that the preference was almost split equally, with 36% preferring the term 20
Hispanic, 21% preferring the term Latino, and the remaining respondents indicating no preference. Correspondingly, an individual’s country of origin plays a large part in whether they prefer the term Hispanic or Latino. Passel and Taylor (2009) state:
How do Hispanics themselves feel about the labels ‘Hispanic’ and ‘Latino’? The
labels are not universally embraced by the community that has been labeled. A
2006 survey by the Pew Hispanic Center found that 48% of Latino adults
generally describe themselves by their country of origin first. (p. 4)
Though the terms Hispanic, Latino and Chicano are all commonly used, this study uses Latino/Hispanic in an effort to respect individuals who may identify with either term.
The terms Black and White, are used to represent the preferred terms indicated by the responses of those who self-identified with those groups on the Bureau of Labor
Statistics’ survey. These terms are also commonly used today and are widely accepted when referring to groups of individuals from African and European descent, respectively.
While both American Indian and Native American are common terms, the choice to use the term American Indian, was made given that survey respondents indicated it as the preferred term by individuals self-identifying with this group. Likewise, Hawaiians,
Native Alaskans and Samoans were chosen as the preferred terms, rather than Native
American. Finally, the term Asian is used in lieu of Oriental as the term Asian is more reflective of today’s common usage.
Reflective of the social justice orientation, equal importance is given to racial designations signified by the capitalization of racial terms, such as Black, White,
Multiracial, and so forth, rather than black, white, multiracial as designated with 21
lowercase lettering. Additionally, the 6th edition of the Publication Manual of the
American Psychological Association states, “Racial and ethnic groups are designated by
proper nouns and are capitalized” (p. 75).
When referring to individuals of mixed heritage, the terms Multiracial, Biracial,
Multiethnic and mixed race are used interchangeably. When referring to specific
individuals in this study, their preferred racial designation is used. This is done in an
effort to bring to light much of the Multiracial experience that is often ignored, denied, or
made invisible in the current limited mono-racial categories commonly used. Therefore,
when referring to popular or well-known individuals of mixed ancestry, both their
ancestral racial designation and their socially constructed racial designation are used. For
example, President Obama is Biracial, yet he is considered and referred to as an African
American.
How future art educators define concepts like race, racism, and culture are
ultimately reflected in their teaching choices. Their understandings of these concepts
impact what they choose to include/exclude from an art curriculum. Their racial
attitudes, beliefs and behaviors towards diverse populations impact whether they support
deficit thinking or high expectations for all of their students. These constructs are all
paramount in determining the success or failure of curriculum interventions aimed at
prejudice reduction. As the findings from this current study indicate, successful multicultural interventions can lead to positively altered racial views. As indicated in the literature review, this change in attitude occurs when individuals engage in the multifaceted process of self-assessment, unlearning bias and knowledge obtainment.
22
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This literature review aims to provide support for assessing the effectiveness of a multicultural intervention by collecting data on both implicit and explicit racial attitudes.
Because this topic is complex and multifaceted, this literature review is broken down into six broad sections that will address the following: (1) an elaboration of specific terms/concepts used throughout this study, (2) the theoretical framework of the study, (3) the historical context of multiculturalism and prejudice reduction studies, (4) influence of teacher beliefs, expectations and attitudes on student learning, (5) art education’s role in unlearning implicit bias, (6) and strategies for preparing teachers for the diverse classroom. These sections, when synthesized, suggest an antiracist constructivist framework for preparing preservice educators to be racially/culturally responsive educators.
This literature review will focus on both theoretical and empirical research that addresses each of the above aspects of this study. This review is also limited to current theoretical and empirical research, conducted within the last twenty years, as these methods and approaches would still be prevalent in teacher education programs today.
However, there are a few historically relevant exceptions to this limitation.
23
Elaboration of Terms/Concepts
The definitions that guide this particular study may be defined differently by others, but were chosen because they most closely align to the theories which frame this study and the antiracist social justice orientation taken within this study.
A transformative-antiracist multicultural orientation. The Web site for the
National Association for Multicultural Education (2003) defines multicultural education as:
Multicultural education advocates the belief that students and their life histories
and experiences should be placed at the center of the teaching and learning
process and that pedagogy should occur in a context that is familiar to students
and that addresses multiple ways of thinking. In addition, teachers and students
must critically analyze oppression and power relations in their communities,
society and the world... [and recognize] that equality and equity are not the same
thing. Multicultural education attempts to offer all students an equitable
educational opportunity, while at the same time, encouraging students to critique
society in the interest of social justice. (¶ 3)
A transformative-antiracist multicultural lens takes these tenets one-step further thereby encouraging one also to examine “the role of race and culture in our schools today” (Au, 2009, p. 3). Syed (2007) provides this definition of antiracist multicultural education, which, in part, guides this study:
… the main thrust of multicultural and anti-racist education is to change
institutional and organizational policies and practices that are discriminatory and 24
impact and transform individual attitudes and behaviours that reinforce racial bias
and inequality. (p. 3)
The current study therefore aims to investigate preservice and practicing teachers’
racial attitudes and the role of race in education and in the process, transform teacher education policy and practice. As such, a transformative position of multiculturalism is employed, which aims “to make difference visible” (Kincheloe, 2008, p. xxii). The power of difference is investigated in this approach to multicultural education by placing emphasis on the interaction between one's own perspective and the perspective of others.
This allows for unexamined assumptions about ourselves and others to be brought to the
surface. Kincheloe (2008) explains that the “heart and soul of transformative
multiculturalism is directly related to this dynamic” (p. xxiii). He writes:
This heart and soul involves the power of difference to expand each student’s
interpretive horizon, social understanding, and intellectual ability. As such a
powerful force, difference must not simply be tolerated but cultivated as a spark
to the development of a ‘transformative ontology’—a new way of being human.
(p. xxiii)
Kincheloe (2008) goes on to explain that empathy lies at the root of this
transformational experience. He writes that by nurturing empathy one can make an
emotional connection that allows him or her to appreciate “the anxieties and frustrations
of others” (p. xxiii). He also argues that this experience benefits an individual ethically
and cognitively because confrontations with diversity open one up to “different vantage
points…for viewing the lived world” (p. xxiii) and allows one to access the “deep
patterns of racism” (p. xxiii) that “structure oppression in everyday life” (p. xxiii). 25
This transformative position is complemented by a critical antiracist position of
multiculturalism. Nieto and Bode (2008) identified six important attributes that define
critical antiracist multiculturalism. These attributes are also used to frame this study.
Critical multicultural education:
• Affirms a student’s culture without trivializing the concept of culture.
• Challenges hegemonic knowledge.
• Complicates pedagogy.
• Problematizes a simplistic focus on self-esteem.
• Encourages ‘dangerous discourse’.
• Admits that multicultural education cannot do it all. (p. 44)
Nieto and Bode (2008) further defines critical antiracist multiculturalism as an approach in which students play a central role in their own education. She writes,
“student voices [are] a central tenet of critical pedagogy” (p. 191).
Understanding race. In her book, Can We Talk About Race? And Other
Conversations in an Era of School Resegregation, Beverly Tatum (2007) asks educators and administrators several provocative questions. Her questions highlight the tension surrounding conversations about race and racial issues:
Can we talk about race? Do we know how? Does the childhood segregation of our
schools and neighborhoods and the silence about race in our culture inhibit our
capacity to have meaningful dialogue with others, particularly in the context of
cross-racial relationships? Can we get beyond our fear, our sweaty palms, our
anxiety about saying the wrong thing, or using the wrong words, and have an 26
honest conversation about racial issues? What does it mean in our personal and
professional lives when we can’t? (p. xiii).
Race is often defined as a controversial concept grounded in the idea that a group within the human population is considered distinct based on physical characteristics, like the color of one’s skin. Although historically race was thought to be a biological difference, today it is generally agreed that race is socially constructed; a phenomenon invented by our society (Omi & Winant, 2007). Sadker, Sadker, and Zittleman (2008) distinguish between race, ethnicity and culture. These authors define race as a “group of individuals sharing common genetic attributes, physical appearance, and ancestry” (p.
68). Race is considered a physical attribute that cannot be altered, such as the color of one’s skin. They distinguish race from ethnicity by defining ethnicity as “shared common cultural traits, such as language, religion, and dress” (p. 68). Ethnicity does not describe one’s skin color, but rather a particular group’s common belief systems and customs.
This is closely linked to culture, which is defined as “a set of learned beliefs, values, and behaviors, a way of life shaped by members of a society” (p. 68). Although these terms are often used interchangeably and have commonalities, their meanings subtly differ.
Nieto and Bode (2008) warn that race is important to consider and distinguish from culture. They remind us “the problem with using terms that emphasize only culture is that the very real issue of racism in our society is then obscured” (p. 33).
This study directly engages with the concept of race, bringing it to the surface, while simultaneously supporting the notion that race alone does not define individuals.
For this reason, the term racially/culturally responsive teaching is used as a means of underscoring the importance of race as a separate construct though still acknowledging its 27
connection to culture. Nieto and Bode (2008) take an anti-essentialist stance on the connection between race and culture. They point out that while a Haitian and an African
American are both Black and “share some basic cultural values and are both subjected to racist attitudes and behaviors in the United States” (p. 34), their racial experiences may
be very different and unique because of “their particular life experiences, native language
usage, and ethnicity of each group” (p. 34). If we simply group them together under one
racial or cultural term, we overlook and refute their unique attributes and experiences.
Hence, whenever possible, this study will use terms specific to an individual’s ethnic
group in addition to their racial descriptor in order to highlight the complexity of culture
and the fluidity of race.
Scholars such as Omi and Winant (1996) assert that race is a social construct that
is actually fluid and its definition and meaning changes over time despite the notion that
many definitions of race suggest that it is static. Omi and Winant (1996) contend:
There is a continuous temptation to think of race as an essence, as something
fixed, concrete, and objective. And there is also an opposite temptation to imagine
race as a mere illusion, a purely ideological construct…. The effort must be made
to understand race as unstable and ‘decentered’ complex of social meanings
constantly being transformed by political struggle. (p. 55)
Winant (2004) defines race as “a concept that signifies and symbolizes sociopolitical conflicts and interests in reference to different types of human bodies” (p. x). Omi and Winant (1996) also advise that an understanding of the social and historical context of race is essential to an antiracist orientation writing, “Nor is it possible to acknowledge or oppose racism without comprehending the sociohistorical context in 28
which concepts of race are invoked” (p. vii). Understanding the sociohistorical context of
race is directly linked to understanding racism.
Defining racism. Definitions of racism, like race, are complex and have changed
over time. Tatum (1997), a critical race theorist, points out that often times prejudice is considered the same as racism. However, she argues that prejudice is just one dimension of racism. She defines prejudice as “a preconceived judgment or opinion, usually based on limited information” (p. 5). Racism, on the other hand, is a form of oppression not solely based on prejudice. Tatum defines racism “as a system of advantages based on race” (p. 7). This orientation takes the stance that racism is “a system involving cultural messages and institutional policies and practices as well as beliefs and actions of individuals” (Tatum, 1997, p. 7). Tatum also distinguishes between two types of racism: active and passive. She explains:
For many White people, the image of a racist is a hood-wearing Klan member or a
name-calling Archie Bunker figure. These images represent what might be called
active racism, blatant, intentional acts of racial bigotry and discrimination.
Passive racism is more subtle and can be seen in the collusion of laughing when a
racist joke is told, of letting exclusionary hiring practices go unchallenged, or
accepting as appropriate the omissions of people of color from the curriculum,
and of avoiding difficult race-related issues.
(p. 11)
Another racial theorist, Winant (2004), describes racism as a “racial project” (p.
44), a social, political, and historical occurrence, that “creates or reproduces hierarchical social structures based on essentialized racial categories” (p. 45). Winant’s definition of 29
racism supports the notion that the concept of race does exist and cannot go away and as
such it should be acknowledged and studied. The Racial Formation Theory developed by
Omi and Winant (1996) posits that racial social meanings are constantly being
transformed by political struggle.
A note on conflicting views of race theorists. Racial theorists do not always
agree on who can or cannot be considered a racist. In general, many critical race theorists
take the stance that prejudice and racism do not have the same meaning. This ideology is foundational to the belief that while anyone may be prejudiced, only White people can be racist. Tatum (1997) expands on this idea, explaining:
Of course, people of any racial group can hold hateful attitudes and behave in
racially discriminatory and bigoted ways…. But when I am asked, ‘Can people of
color be racist?’ I reply, ‘The answer depends on your definition of racism.’ If one
defines racism as racial prejudice, the answer is yes. People of color can and do
have racial prejudices. However, if one defines racism as a system of advantages
based on race, the answer is no. People of color are not racist because they do not
systematically benefit from racism. And equally important, there is no systematic
cultural and institutional support or sanction for the racial bigotry of people of
color. In my view, reserving the term racist only for behaviors committed by
Whites in the context of a White-dominated society is a way of acknowledging
the ever-present power differential afforded Whites by the culture and institutions
that make up the system of advantage and continue to reinforce notions of White
superiority. (p. 10) 30
On the other hand, racial theorists, such as Winant (2004), disagree with this view. They argue instead that the dynamics of race are ever changing and reflective of certain time periods and places. As such, theories of race, and therefore racism, are also unstable and change to reflect the sociopolitical climate of the time. Winant (2004) writes:
…like race, racism has changed over time. It is obvious that the attitudes,
practices, and institutions of the epochs of slavery, say, or of Jim Crow, no longer
exist today. Employing a similar logic, it is reasonable to question whether
concepts of racism that were developed in the early days of the post-civil rights
era… could possibly remain adequate to explain circumstances and conflicts a
quarter century later. (p. 45)
Winant calls for a new understanding of race and racism that builds on our understandings from the past. Using the racial formation theoretical lens to define racism, he repositions racism as any racist action enacted by any racial group or individual that meets two conditions: racial essentialism and the creation/reproduction of racial hierarchies.
This definition of racism clearly delineates that a racist action must “create or reproduce structures of domination based on essentialist categories of race” (Omi &
Winant, 1996, p. 12). This position also does not support the idea “that only whites have power and thus only they can be racists” (Winant, 2004, p. 44). Winant (2004) warns that this perspective is “dangerously naïve” (p. 44) because it is “highly problematic to assert that racially defined minorities are powerless in the contemporary United States” (p. 44).
He uses the example of the power wielded during the radical political racial movements 31
near the end of the civil rights era. This view of racism holds that any race may act in a
racist manner, and racism may be perpetrated on and by individuals within the same racial group. For example, lighter skin Black individuals may at times be the victim of racism by darker skin Black individuals and vice versa.
Although this orientation supports that anyone can be a racist, Winant (2004) also makes it clear that racist actions continue to be predominately perpetrated by those who are White. He writes “racism is not necessarily white, though in the nature of things, it is more often so…. We must also recognize that today, as in the past, there is a hegemonic racial project… which in general defends white racial privilege” (p. 48). Thus, while
Winant points out that the era of “monolithic white supremacy” (p. 167) no longer exists, he also acknowledges, “white power and privilege live on” (p. 167).
While there is some disagreement in racial pedagogy over the meaning of racism, both critical race theory and racial formation theory are well-suited frameworks for examining racial bias in education. Racial formation theory positions this study as one that supports the notion that race and racism are fluid, ever changing and politically charged. This study is oriented towards an understanding that a racist action is contextual and can be perpetrated by any individual regardless of race. Additionally, this study supports the idea that in order to challenge color-blind ideology, the discourse of educators needs to be critically examined. Critical race theory orients this study as one that positions race centrally in the examination of education and utilizes storytelling as a means of discovering multiple viewpoints and developing a racially/culturally appropriate approach to teaching diverse learners.
32
Theoretical Framework
This research is guided by three critical theories: racial formation theory (Omi &
Winant, 1996), critical social theory (Giroux, 2005) and critical race theory (Ladson-
Billing, 1995). Racial identity development theory (Helms, 1990; Tatum, 1992) informs the framework developed for analyzing and understanding the participants’ responses to race-related content. Additionally, the social cognition theory of shared reality (Sinclair,
Hardin, Lowery & Colangelo, 2005) and the social neuroscience theory of activation and control of affective race bias (Amodio, Devine, & Harmon-Jones, 2007) inform this study's stance on the malleability of implicit racial bias and the role of the affective in reducing this bias.
Racial formation theory. Omi and Winant (1996) explain that their theoretical framework aims to move beyond “both the Utopian framework which sees race as an illusion we can somehow ‘get beyond’, and also the essentialist formulation which sees race as something objective and fixed, a biological datum” (p. 55). Instead, they consider race to be a “part of the social structure” (p. 55) and “a dimension of human representation” (p. 55). Racial formation is considered a process that occurs within politically and historically situated racist actions, called “race projects” (p. 56). These actions continually perpetuate themselves resulting in continued racial inequalities. The authors define “race projects” as:
…an interpretation, representation, or explanation of racial dynamics, and an
effort to recognize and redistribute resources along particular racial lines. Racial
projects connect what race means in a particular discursive practice and the ways 33
in which both social structures and everyday experiences are racially organized,
based upon that meaning (Omi & Winant, 1996, p. 56).
Education, viewed through the lens of a racial project, positions teachers as an
integral part of students’ racial formation. Glass and Wallace (1996) support this
argument, stating, “Racial formation occurs within a highly contested and contradictory
political, economic and cultural milieu, of which schools are but one part. In this context,
schools create difference—or inscribe a ‘politics of difference’…” (p. 352). Thus, the way in which teachers select, define, design and implement their curriculum can affect a student’s conception of his or her own identity. Tatum (2007) supports this notion, arguing that the right learning environment can help students to affirm their identity. She writes:
…affirming identity, refers to the fact that students need to see themselves—
important dimensions of their identity—reflected in the environment around them,
in the curriculum, among the faculty and staff, and in the faces of their
classmates, to avoid the feelings of invisibility or marginality that can undermine
student success… (p. 22)
Racial projects are also directly linked to discourse. Oral, written, and visual expression play a critical role in the construction of social relationships, identity formation, access to knowledge and power structures. Omi and Winant (1996) support this position, describing much of multicultural education as promoting color blind discourse. The authors write:
In its signifying or representation dimension, the neoliberal project avoids (as far
as possible) framing issues of identities racially. Neoliberals argue… to speak of 34
race is to enter a terrain where racism is hard to avoid. Better to address racism
by ignoring race, at least publicly. (p. 148)
Additionally, Glass and Wallace (1996) note how discourse has historically
played a key role in defining and understanding multiculturalism. They write, “… in the
1970s [multicultural] approaches became marked by an effort to replace race with
culture” (p. 350). The authors posit that this shift took the focus away from addressing
racism—a main tenet of multiculturalism. Sleeter (1996) reiterates this point and notes
that many critics of multiculturalism argue that it has failed to address the issue of race,
in part, because of this shift in language. Sleeter, however, asserts that this use of “benign
language” (p. 9) has been very effective in teacher education programs because it allows
them to refer to themselves by some other term than multicultural. This has provided multicultural advocates a “point of entrée” (p. 9) that they might otherwise not have had.
She further explains that this shift towards using more neutral terms such as culture instead of race occurred, in part, as an effort by advocates of multiculturalism to appeal to White educators who were uncomfortable with discussing racial issues. She writes that advocates of multiculturalism took the stance that it was better to use language that encouraged White educators to participate in multicultural efforts than to meet up with resistance from a predominately White teacher workforce. Sleeter (1996) gives this example:
Many advocates deliberately have chosen terms such as human relations because
nobody opposes good human relations, while the term multicultural signals a red
flag to many people, and the term race literally scares many more away. A friend
who is African American and a school principal recently commented to me that 35
she can get her white teachers to do more that is consistent with multicultural
education when she does not use the terms race or even multicultural education.
She finds this very frustrating because important issues simply go unaddressed,
yet if she tries to address them directly, her staff retreats from her. (p. 8)
On some level, replacing certain terminology with less politically or socially charged terminology becomes problematic because it shifts the focus from addressing important issues and ultimately leaves these critical issues unaddressed. For example, if one advocates for an antiracist social justice agenda aimed at addressing issues of race and racism, using language aimed at avoiding the word race serves to create ambiguity and confusion. Furthermore, using more neutral language to get educators to participate in multicultural education reinforces the idea that race and racism should not be discussed and addressed directly. This is antithetical to an antiracist pedagogy. Additionally, it perpetuates the idea that being a passive non-racist is, in some non-threatening way, actively fighting racism by simply ignoring it and thus not contributing to it. However,
Sleeter (1996) argues that fighting racism involves action, personal challenges and personal changes:
White people would like to be passive non-racists: ‘good’ whites who are not
contributing to racism, but who also are not changing our own lives to try to
dismantle it. This is a position that is impossible to take, however. Whites benefit
from white supremacy every day, and to do nothing is to accept the benefits, even
if we are not aware of them. Becoming actively involved in working to dismantle
racism will change a person’s life. It will change one’s relationships with other
people, particularly other Whites. It will change how one spends one’s time and 36
energy, where one chooses to live, who one chooses to associate with, the stands
one takes on issues, and so forth. Remaining uninvolved means conferring tacit
acceptance on the status quo. (pp. 26-27)
The racial formation theory lends support to the argument that engaging in discourse about race and racism is essential to dismantling racism. Giroux (2005) also lends credence to this argument, when he points out the failure of multicultural education to directly address issues of race and racism:
Within the discourse of modernism, dominant education approaches to race and
ethnicity imitate many of the worst dimensions of liberal ideology and radical
essentialism. Questions of Otherness are generally fashioned in the discourse of
multicultural education, which in its varied forms and approaches generally fails
to conceptualize issues of race and ethnicity as part of the wider discourse of
power and powerlessness. (p. 89)
Critical race theory. Born out of the legal profession, Critical Race Theory
(CRT) is an approach for critically analyzing race relationships in the United States. This theory supports making race the centerpiece of a conversation as a means for examining the racial components of everyday interactions and problematizing racial power structures. Ladson-Billings (2009) points out that the first step in beginning this conversation usually involves addressing the uncomfortable feelings many feel about acknowledging skin color difference. She writes:
My own experience with white teachers, both preservice and veteran, indicates
that many are uncomfortable acknowledging any student differences and
particularly racial differences. Thus some teachers make such statements as ‘I 37
don’t really see color, I just see children’ or ‘I don’t care if they’re red, green, or
polka dot, I just treat all like children.’ However, these attempts at color-blindness
mask a ‘dysconscious racism,’ an ‘uncritical habit of mind that justifies inequity
and exploitation by accepting the existing order of things as given.’ (pp. 34-35).
Use of color-blind language finds its way into the curriculum as well. Ladson-
Billings (1999) states that this is often evidenced in the “distortions, omissions, and stereotypes” (p. 22) of the African American experience. To counterbalance this erasure of experience, CRT supports a tradition of storytelling as a means for giving voice to those who have often been silenced or ignored. Ladson-Billings writes, “Stories provide the necessary context for understanding, feeling, and interpreting” (p. 15). This approach allows for multiple viewpoints to be shared and Ladson-Billings refers to this as “naming one’s reality” (p. 15). She lists three key reasons why this approach is foundational to
CRT:
1. Much of ‘reality’ is socially constructed;
2. Stories provide members of out-groups a vehicle for psychic self-preservation;
and
3. The exchange of stories from teller to listener can help overcome
ethnocentrism and the dysconscious (King, 1992) conviction of viewing the
world in one way. (p. 15)
While storytelling introduces one to a variety of different viewpoints and gives voice to the underrepresented, it is only a first step in examining racial dynamics. CRT applied to education also supports developing racially/culturally responsive teaching methods 38
through problematizing color-blind ideology, understanding the difference between equity and equality, and supporting high expectations for all students.
Critical Social Theory. Giroux’s critical social theory complements both the racial formation theory and the critical race theory. Critical social theory argues that knowledge is emancipative and promotes critique of the quality of our education system.
It is well suited to looking at schools as social sites in which the curriculum and methods of instructions and assessment are organized hierarchically thereby perpetuating the subordination of marginalized groups.
The role of critical social theory is to reveal the experiences of the oppressed.
This theory emphasizes the need to overcome dominant ideologies, which result in the
empowerment of marginalized groups. Critical social theory can bring to light important
issues surrounding the debate of multiculturalism. For example, Giroux (2005) writes,
“As a critical discourse of race and pedagogy, multiculturalism needs to break its silence
regarding its role in masking how white domination colonizes definitions of the normal”
(p. 89). Giroux also suggests “Postmodern discourse provides a theoretical foundation for
deconstructing the master narratives of white supremacist logics and for redrawing the
boundaries between the construction of experience and power” (p. 95).
Critical theory is also used to challenge the idea that the current structures of
society are inevitable and calls for a reconstruction of these structures, especially as they
pertain to social inequalities of class, race, gender, etc. Crotty (1998) further defines this
theory, writing, “The world of the critical theorist is a battleground of hegemonic
interests. In this world there are striking disparities in the distribution of power: some
people have dominant power; others have far less power; most have no power at all” (p. 39
63). Leonardo (2004) agrees with Crotty, stating, “…critical theory is a more general description of theory that is politically edgy, a form of ‘agitational theory’… concerned with institutional and conceptual transformations” (p. 11).
Giroux (2005) unpacks his social critical theory as postmodern, antiracist and utilizing postmodern discourse analysis to gain a better “understanding of how the relationship between power and knowledge works” (p. 21) in education. The objective is to challenge existing “boundaries of knowledge” (p. 21) and encourage students to cross these borders. Giroux writes:
… students should engage knowledge as border-crossers, a people moving in and
out of borders constructed around coordinates of difference and power…. The
terrain of learning becomes inextricably linked to the shifting parameters of place,
identity, history, and power. (p. 22)
Giroux writes that students’ border-crossing involves seven key concepts in an antiracist pedagogy. The first is “giving students the opportunity to speak, locate themselves in history, and become subjects in the construction of their identities and the wider society” (Giroux, 2005, p. 109). Second, Giroux also suggests that “border- crossing” (p. 109) involves antiracist pedagogy that explores students’ beliefs and emotional investments as way of problematizing racial practices and structure within their lived experiences. Third, antiracist pedagogy gives students the opportunity to voice their opinions about race using a critical lens to evaluate their views and the historical and ideological context of those views. Students should examine power relationships and evaluate how their opinions “embody interests that shape social practices in particular ways” (p.110). Giroux describes the fourth key concept as educators understanding that 40
marginalized students need to “reclaim their voices as part of the process of empowerment” (p. 111). The fifth and sixth key concepts aim to situate race socially, historically, culturally and politically. Giroux states that race and racism should be examined both at the ideological level within schools and outside of schools in the
“spheres of social life” (p. 112). Lastly, Giroux advocates that teachers critically examine their own discourse and practices. He writes:
To the degree that teachers make the construction of their own voices, histories,
and ideologies problematic, they become more attentive of Otherness as a deeply
political and pedagogical issue. In other words, by deconstructing the underlying
principles that inform their own lives and pedagogy, educators can begin to
recognize the limits underlying the partiality of their own view. (p. 113)
Critical social theory positions this study as one that critically analyzes the power relationships in education through an antiracist pedagogy aimed at problematizing race and racism. Furthermore, a direct aim of this study is to facilitate educators “locat[ing] themselves in history” (Giroux, 2005, p. 109) and exploring “the construction of their identities” (Giroux, 2005, p. 109) as a means for understanding the role of race in their lives and the lives of others.
Racial identity development theory. Racial identity development theory has informed the framework developed for analyzing the data collected in this current study.
This theory organizes participants’ verbal and written responses into typological categories that reflect the stage of one’s racial attitude development. Helms (1990) explains further, stating “one’s racial identity attitudes relate to one’s sense of self, comfort with one’s own racial group, and comfort with persons of diverse racial groups” 41
(p. 105). Helm’s theories of Black and White racial identity development posit that there
are six stages of development which reflect the racial attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors
most commonly exhibited by White individuals and five stages which reflect the same for
Black individuals. While Helm’s work focuses on the specific racial dynamics of Whites
and Blacks, other persons of color may also relate to the stages described here. As such, this current study aims to be inclusive and includes Black individuals within the more broad use of the term persons of color.
Five stages of racial identity development for persons of color. Building on the work of William Cross (1978), the five stages outlined by Helms (1990) are: Pre- encounter, Encounter, Immersion/Emersion; Internalization; Internalized Commitment.
Tatum (1992) summarizes these stages, explaining that the Pre-encounter stage of racial identity development refers to an individual disassociating oneself from one’s own racial group in an effort to assimilate and be accepted by the dominant racial group. Often times, these individuals indicate that they believe race is not a factor in their ability to achieve. Those individuals in the Encounter stage of development begin to realize that because of one’s skin color he or she will not be accepted as White, and their life will be impacted by racism. The next stage, Immersion/Emersion, involves an intense need to associate with one’s own racial group. This may involve surrounding “oneself with visible symbols of one’s racial identity and an active avoidance of symbols of Whiteness”
(p. 11). The Internalization stage builds on the previous stage and individuals in this stage often develop a sense of security with their racial identity. They also tend to begin establishing “meaningful relationships” (p. 12) with White individuals. The last stage, 42
Internalization-Commitment involves one becoming an agent for change. Often times,
these individuals work towards addressing social justice issues of people of color.
Six stages of racial identity development for White individuals. Singleton and
Linton (2006) explain that Janet Helm’s model of White racial identity development is a
continuum from color-blind actions and discourse to a non-dominant antiracist stage of
Whiteness. This model represents an “emerging consciousness surrounding Whiteness”
(p. 204). The six stages developed by Helms (1990) are: Contact, Disintegration,
Reintegration; Pseudo-Independent; Immersion/Emersion; and Autonomy. Tatum (1992) summarizes the first stage, describing individuals at this level as lacking an awareness/understanding of racism and White privilege, as well being unaware of themselves as racial/cultural beings. She writes, “This stage often include naïve curiosity about or fear of people of color, based on stereotypes learned from friends, family or the media.” (p. 13). Additionally these individuals may have very limited experiences with persons of color. The next stage, Disintegration, involves an increasing understanding of
White privilege and interactions with persons of color. This often leads the individual to experience feelings of guilt, discomfort, shame, denial and anger. Building on this stage,
Reintegration occurs when the negative feelings associated with a developing awareness and understanding of racism cause one to return to earlier racially biased belief systems that help them to avoid such intense feeling of discomfort. Additionally, Tatum warns,
“the guilt and anxiety may be redirected in the form of fear and anger directed toward people of color who are now blamed as the source of discomfort” (p. 15). The Pseudo-
Independent stage involves a desire to learn more about people of color. Tatum writes,
“looking to those targeted by racism to help him or her understand, the White person 43
often tries to disavow his or her own Whiteness through active affiliation with persons of color (p. 16)”, which may also result in alienation from their own racial group. In the
Immersion/Emersion stage, individuals begin to make antiracist allies with both people of color and other like-minded White individuals. Tatum points out the similarity between this stage for both people of color and White individuals. She writes:
Just as the Black student seeks to redefine positively what it means to be of
African ancestry in the United States through immersion in accurate information
about one’s culture and history, the White individual seeks to replace racially
related myths and stereotypes with accurate information about what it means and
has meant to be White in U.S. society (Helms, 1990). (p. 16).
The Autonomy stage is characterized by an acceptance of oneself as White while still desiring to take antiracist action in one’s daily life. This person often exhibits antiracist behaviors and attitudes.
When comparing both models, overlapping stages become apparent as indicated in Table 1 below.
44
Table 1
Racial Identity Development Stages
White Individuals Persons of Color
Contact/Pre-encounter X X
Disintegration/Encounter X X
Reintegration X
Psuedo-Independence X
Immersion/Emersion X X
Internalization X
Autonomy/Internalized X X Commitment
Tatum (1992) points out that the movement between these stages is dynamic and
not every student will go through every stage. However, she suggests that using these
models helps to frame the transitions of students’ racial attitudes in classrooms where
race-related content is being studied.
These models reflect a pre-civil rights orientation on the dynamics of Black and
White experiences, and this bipolar model is not reflective of the nuanced racial attitudes
expressed by participants in this current study. For example, there were students of color
whose responses more closely aligned with what Helm’s referred to as White racial
identity development stages, and vice versa. However, these models were useful as a guide for analyzing the data collected from this current study. 45
Racial identity development theory informed the framework developed for
analyzing both student resistance to race-related content and student transitions towards deepening awareness and understanding of racism and race-related issues.
The Malleability of Implicit (Automatic/Unconscious) Racial Bias
Petty, Wheeler, and Tormala (2003) explain that the main difference between implicit and explicit attitudes is awareness; an individual may be aware of their explicit racial attitude, but may be unaware of their implicit racial attitude. The authors also make a distinction on how these attitudes can be measured as indications that an attitude has changed. They write:
Direct attitude measures are those that simply ask the respondent to report his or
her attitude. Because these measures are transparent and make it obvious that
attitudes are being assessed, they can be considered explicit measures of
attitudes…. Indirect attitude measures on the other hand are those that do not
directly ask the individual to report his or her attitude. Instead the individual’s
attitude is inferred from his or her judgments, reactions, or behaviors. Because
these measures do not make it obvious that attitudes are being assessed, they can
be considered implicit measures of attitudes (p. 356).
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 played a key role in reducing overt racist behaviors and established explicit racism as not only illegal but also socially unacceptable.
However, research on implicit bias indicates that this more passive form of racism continues to permeate American culture, society and education. Rudman, Ashmore and
Gary (2001) support this notion writing: 46
Indeed, if researchers were to rely solely on self-report measures of attitudes
towards Blacks, they would be hard-pressed to conclude anything other than that
prejudice has become, if not outdated, at least unfashionable. In reality, however,
prejudice continues to dog Americans’ footsteps, even as we make progress
toward an egalitarian ideal… despite dramatic reductions in self-reported
prejudice, other indicators suggest that racism persists, even on the part of avowed
egalitarians. (p. 856)
Rudman, et al. (2001) also points out that self-reports, like questionnaires, are only indicative of one’s explicit racial attitudes. Implicit Attitude Tests (IAT) aimed at measuring implicit racial attitudes, on the other hand, are indicative of automatic associations, which result from “living in a culture that has favored some groups over others” (p. 856).
Implicit attitudes, which may involve some element of awareness, are predominately an automatic process that many researchers consider mostly an unconscious response (Amodio, Devine, & Harmon-Jones, 2007; Amodio, 2008; Amodio
& Lieberman, 2009; Cunningham, et al., 2004; Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001; Dovidio,
Kawakami, Smoak, & Gaertner, 2009; Eberhart, et al., 2004; Hart, et al., 2001; Phelps, et al., 2000). As a result of this scholarly consensus, Rudman, et al. contend that “only implicit measures” (p. 857) such as IATs, can be used to measure and detect implicit bias.
For example, in an educational context, an educator may explicitly state that he or she is not racially biased on a self-report questionnaire, yet knowingly or unknowingly, continue to make automatic associations in practice in the classroom that would indicate racial bias (e.g. associating a student with low academic achievement or misbehavior 47
based on the color of his or her skin). Asking educators to take an IAT in addition to an
explicit measure may help to shed light on unexplored biases that impact teaching and
learning in the classroom.
Social cognition theory of shared reality. While there is general consensus
among researchers that implicit attitudes are less under one’s control than explicit
attitudes, there is a wide array of theories regarding the malleability of these attitudes
(Albarracín, Wang, Li & Noguchi, 2008; Dijksterhuis, Albers, & Bongers, 2009).
According to Albarracín, et al. (2008) “Several recent studies have suggested that implicit
attitudes are more flexible than previously thought (Blair & Banaji, 1996; Blair, Ma, &
Lenton, 2001)” (p. 31). A sizeable number of studies on the malleability of implicit
attitudes support this argument (Blair, 2002; Blair, Ma & Lenton, 2001; Briñol, Petty, &
McCaslin, 2009; Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001; Gawronski & Bodenhausen, 2006;
Rudman, Ashmore, Gary, 2001). Sinclair, Hardin, Lowery and Colangelo’s (2005) theory
of social cognition further supports the malleability of implicit attitudes and suggests that
not only can these attitudes be changed using situational factors (Blair, Ma & Lenton,
2001; Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001) and mental strategies (Devine, Plant, Amodio,
Harmon-Jones & Vance, 2000; Lowery, Hardin & Sinclair, 2001) but they are also affected by social motivations (Blair, 2002; Sinclair, et al., 2005), such as the need to get along with others. Foundational to this theory is the idea that people learn from observing the behaviors of others. Hence, an educator who wishes to facilitate antiracist behaviors can model such behaviors for his or her students. Students who are internally/externally motivated to learn these behaviors move through stages of acquiring the learned 48
behavior. The stages include learning through observation, reproduction, and self-
efficacy.
Social neuroscience theory of activation and control of affective race bias.
Racial bias is believed to reside in the amygdala, a “small almond-shaped set of nuclei located bilaterally in the medial temporal lobes” (Amodio, 2008, p. 3) of the brain. The amygdala is described as “a critical structure for vigilance, arousal, learning, and the orchestration of the fight-or-flight response” (Amodio, 2008, p. 4). Amodio (2008) tested and supported this hypothesis by conducting a series of experiments that involved a startle-eye blink method, which measured the contraction of the orbicularis oculi, the muscle around the eye that causes one to blink. The startle-eye blink method is a commonly used method in behavioral neuroscience that is often conducted in conjunction with brain scans, in which one’s affective state is monitored during functional Magnetic
Resonance Imaging (fMRI), a specialized MRI scan used to record the part of the brain that is stimulated during an experiment.
The startle-eye blink method was also used to support Amodio’s, et al. (2007) theory regarding the activation and control of affective race bias. This theory posits that those who are highly motivated internally to be racial unbiased are much more successful than those who are externally motivated. They also suggest that those who have internalized non-prejudiced beliefs and values are “more effective in responding without prejudice” (p. 739) and “reported not being nervous when approaching intergroup
[racially diverse] interactions” (p. 739). Internal motivations to respond without prejudice are often based on individuals feeling that non-prejudicial actions are important to their self-concept. On the other hand, external motivations include the feeling that if 49
one acted in a prejudicial manner others would think poorly of them. Both types of
individuals are motivated to act in a non-biased manner, yet the former is much more successful than the latter when assessed on an IAT.
These six theories as a framework. These six theories: racial formation theory
(Omi & Winant, 1996), critical social theory (Giroux, 2005) and critical race theory
(Ladson-Billing, 1995), racial identity development theory (Helms, 1990; Tatum, 1992), the social cognition theory of shared reality (Sinclair, Hardin, Lowery & Colangelo,
2005), and the social neuroscience theory of activation and control of affective race bias
(Amodio, Devine, & Harmon-Jones, 2007), work in tandem as a framework for this study. Each theory builds on the next by providing a means for exploring racial bias, power structures and their role in education from multiple perspectives. This leads to a more comprehensive understanding of the complex dynamic of race in education, making these theories well suited to frame the design of this study.
Historical Context of Multiculturalism and Prejudice Reduction Studies
The concept of multiculturalism is complex and means different things to different people. As a result, K-12 multicultural education can take on confusing and contradictory meanings. For example, one teacher may define multiculturalism as a way to celebrate diversity, and as a result, that teacher may integrate other cultures into the curriculum only during designated times of the year, like Black History Month. This may be the only time students study about Black leaders, heroes, authors and artists. Banks
(1999) refers to this approach as the “contribution approach” (p. 24). Conversely, some teachers may define multicultural education as social activism. As a result, they may instruct students in ways that lead to understanding and questioning social justice issues 50
thereby taking action against injustices. Banks (1999) refers to this approach as the
“social action approach” (p. 25).
In Banks’ (2003) review of the historical development of multiculturalism, he
conceptualizes multicultural education as a Civil Rights and educational movement with
five main dimensions: content integration; knowledge construction; prejudice reduction;
equity pedagogy; and empowering school culture and social structure. Banks begins with
a brief overview of content integration, which he defines as “… the extent to which
teachers use examples, data and information from a variety of cultures…” (p. 5). Banks
explains that a pioneer in early content integration of African American history into the
curriculum was George Washington Williams, a scholar who wrote and published the
first volume of African American history in 1882. Williams also established one of the
first ethnic studies courses in the college curriculum in the late 1800s. This historical
dimension of multicultural education formed the roots of what would become the
multicultural education movement of the 1960s and 1970s. Additionally, the 60s and 70s
saw a shift in multiculturalism, which Banks refers to as the knowledge construction
dimension. This was a time where cultural assumptions were beginning to be questioned,
and new knowledge was being shared regarding the contributions of diverse races to the
history of the United States. Banks writes that during this dimension of multiculturalism,
“… the dominant paradigms about ethnic groups that were established by mainstream
social scientists were challenged by revisionist social scientists” (p. 6).
The prejudice reduction dimension of multiculturalism followed the knowledge construction phase, and this time period in multicultural history aimed to “develop more democratic attitudes and values” (Banks, 2003, p. 6) towards people of color. This 51
dimension, historically involved the study of children’s racial attitudes towards people of
color. These studies began in the 1920s and reached their peak by the late 80s.
Beginning in the late 50s and continuing into the 70s, equity pedagogy
concurrently developed as a dimension of multicultural education and was aimed at
increasing the low academic achievement of low-status populations through constructivist teaching strategies. As a result of these efforts, the cultural deprivation theory, which was the predominant theory regarding the achievement gap between White students and students of color, began to lose its stronghold. Peller (1997) writes,
“Cultural deprivation” was the reigning paradigm in sociology in the late fifties
and early sixties for comprehending the underachievement of black students in
integrated educational settings. As the phrase suggests, black underachievement
was explicitly understood on cultural grounds, as the inferior quality of black
culture rooted in poverty. (p. 205)
By the 1970s, the cultural deprivation theory was beginning to be replaced by cultural difference theory. Hanley (1999) describes this paradigm shift as moving toward the idea that cultural difference enriches the society as a whole and that one culture was not inferior to another culture. Though multiculturalists pushed for a shift from viewing cultural difference as a deficit to seeing it as a benefit, cultural deprivation theory continues to play a role in education today and has morphed into what is now considered the “at risk conception” (p. 6).
Banks (2003) concludes his historical overview of multicultural education with the current movement to empower school culture and social structure. Banks writes that this concept is the “process of restructuring the culture and organization of the school so 52
that students from diverse racial, ethnic, and social-class groups will experience educational equality and cultural empowerment” (p. 7).
The prejudice reduction dimension of multicultural education. Over the course of multicultural education's development, other groups who felt marginalized, like women, individuals with disabilities and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered groups (LGBT), connected with the multicultural movement, and expanded its focus beyond race to include class, gender, and disability. As a result, contemporary multicultural education often incorporates issues of race, class, gender, and disability.
However, a main tenet of this curricular intervention continues to be aimed at reducing racial stereotyping, discrimination, and prejudice.
This research study focuses specifically on the prejudice reduction dimension of multicultural education. The prejudice reduction dimension of multicultural education was built on the reform efforts of the Civil Rights movement, which was originally aimed at combating racism in the United States (Taylor, Carpenter, Ballengee-Morris &
Sessions, 2006). This prejudice reduction perspective is well suited to this research study, which is rooted in an antiracist orientation.
Furthermore, Banks (2003) calls for a resurgence in research focused on prejudice reduction. He writes that although the prejudice reduction dimension of multiculturalism was once the main foci of multicultural research, since the early 80s very little empirical research has been done on this aspect of multicultural education. Banks (2003) advises:
Studies that describe students’ racial attitudes and intervention studies designed to
modify them should be conducted. A literature search using ERIC, PsychLit and 53
Sociofile revealed that few intervention studies related to children’s racial
attitudes reviewed here were done after 1980. (p. 22)
Studies conducted on the prejudice reduction aspect of multiculturalism, though sparse,
help to reveal why these studies are important.
Review of a prejudice reduction study. One study that exemplifies the importance
of continuing research on students’ racial attitudes and interventions aimed at prejudice
reduction is Bigler and Liben’s (1993) study. This study focused on evaluating a common
multicultural approach aimed at reducing prejudice. In this approach, educators infused curriculum with what they considered to be typical stories representative of ethnic and racial groups. However, Bigler and Liben found that these stories depicted stereotypical representations of different racial groups and ultimately only re-affirmed and re- established simplistic racial stereotypes of these groups. Bigler (1999) writes:
…Children who are exposed to many types of multicultural stories (e.g. a story in
which a Chinese girl engages in cultural practices that are typical of contemporary
life in China, or one that depicts Native American Indian life in the 1800s) will
endorse simplistic stereotypes of members of these groups. (p. 696)
Bigler and Liben (1993) set out to test their theory by reading stereotypical and counter-stereotypical stories to 75 White children from Pennsylvania and Minnesota who were ages 4-9, and then assessing their recall of these stories. The findings indicated that,
“As predicted, children had poorer memory for stories that were inconsistent with cultural racial stereotypes than stories that were consistent with cultural stereotypes” (p.
1515). 54
The 36 girls and 39 boys who participated in the study were also asked to complete a classification task and a racial stereotyping measure four to five days after the story session. Each child was asked to sort sixteen photographs. Half of the photographs were of males and the other half was female. Additionally, half of the photographs were of African Americans and half were European Americans. Half of the images also included children while the rest were of adults. Eight of these photographs also depicted individuals with laughing expressions, while the other half depicted serious expressions.
Any combination of the above was used in the photographs. Children were asked to place these photographs into piles based on the prompt “[put] the people who go together into the same pile” (p. 1511). After completing this task, the participants were given the
Preschool Racial Attitudes Measure II (PRAMII) which includes 12 positive traits: clean, good, kind, nice, pretty, smart, friendly, happy, healthy, helpful, right, and wonderful and
12 negative traits: bad, dirty, mean, naughty, ugly, stupid, cruel, sad, sick, selfish, unfriendly, and wrong. Children were then given the prompt, “Who can be ______?”
(p. 1512) and the answer option included, “only Black people”, “only White people”, and
“both Black people and White people” (p. 1512). Responses were then classified as either stereotypical (if negative traits were given to Blacks only and positive traits given to
Whites only), counterstereotypical (if responses were the opposite of the above), or nonstereotyped (if both traits were assigned to both races).
As a precaution, the researchers also followed this measure with an additional sorting task and asked the children to sort the same images based on facial expression with the prompt “I think people differ according to how they feel. Do you think you could sort the people into two groups according to how they feel?” (p. 1512). The 55
purpose of this exercise was twofold. The researchers explain that this exercise was
aimed at minimizing “the extent to which children may have perceived the experimenters
to endorse the use of race as an important basis for sorting individuals” (p. 1512).
Additionally, it also served to “give children the experience of sorting people [based] on
multiple dimensions” (p. 1512).
The findings indicated that over half the children associated “only Black people”
with negative traits. Similar studies done on intergroup attitudes where children are
assigned to a color group such as red or blue also show consistent bias in children for the
group they most closely associate with (Bigler, Jones & Lobliner, 1997).
Much more recently, Vittrup-Simpson (2007) aimed to study what effect multicultural videos and parent discussions about race had on children’s racial attitudes.
These socializing agents were combined so that parents used educational multicultural videos followed by parent-child discussions about race. The objective of the study was to see if this intervention reduced White children’s racial bias towards Blacks. The participants for this study included 93 White children who ranged in age between 5 and 7 years old and their parents. There were 50 boys and 43 girls, and 69% of the families involved in the study had incomes exceeding $75,000. Both the parents’ and the childrens’ racial attitudes were measured pre- and post-intervention. Parents’ attitudes were measured using a survey, and children's attitudes were measured in interviews that used the Black/White Evaluative Trait Scale (BET). This measure is very similar to the
PRAMII described earlier in the study conducted by Bigler and Liben. The children were also interviewed using the Prediction of Parental Attitudes (PPA) measure in order to assess whether the children could predict their parents’ racial attitudes. For example, 56
children were read the prompts, “Does your Mom/Dad like Black people?” (p. 47), “Does
your Mom/Dad think Black people are nice?” (p. 47), “Does your Mom/Dad want you to
have Black friends?” (p. 47), “Do your parents have Black friends?” (p. 47).
Additionally, parents were given a survey to assess how often they discussed race
with their children and a home diary to record “the essence of the conversations” (p. 49)
with their children. Two independent coders coded the diary data and then a third coder
was also used if the first two coders did not reach an agreement.
These family participants were randomly placed into four groups. The first group
used five multicultural videos, chosen by the researcher, over a one week period and had
no discussion of the race with their children. The videos were 10 to 15 minutes in length
and contained episodes from The Puzzle Place, Sesame Street (two episodes), Little Bill,
and Zoom. The researcher specifically chose these episodes because they had “a racially
diverse cast, the portrayal of interracial friendships, and a focus on positive relationships”
(p. 48). Additionally, these episodes had also been used in prior research on children’s’
racial attitudes. The second group used the five videos and was instructed to discuss a set of racial topics, chosen by the researcher, with their children before viewing the video and after viewing the video. The third group was instructed to discuss a set of racial topics with their children without the use of the videos. The last group was a control group.
The effectiveness of these interventions was greatly impacted by the parents’ reluctance to discuss race with their children. Vittrup-Simpson (2007) describes this resistance: 57
Results revealed that parents in general were very reluctant to discuss the topic of
race with their children. Only 33% of mothers and 20% of fathers reported having
significant race related discussions. Many parents chose not to have such
discussions because they did not want to make a ‘big deal’ out of it, they did not
think it was important to talk about, or they did not know how to approach the
topic in conversation…. It appeared that parents were equally reluctant to talk
about race even when specifically instructed to do so. Close to half of parents in
the two discussion groups admitted that they only briefly mentioned some of the
topics. Only 10% of the parents reported having more in-depth discussions with
their children. This likely affected the effectiveness of the intervention, and the
children in the experimental groups did not show statistically significant
improvements of their racial attitudes following the intervention. (p. 8)
Of the 10% of the parents who reported discussing race with their children, only five parent discussions were deemed to have been in-depth rather than superficial. The discussions were deemed in-depth if parents “pointed out good and bad things, talked about character motivations, explained fiction versus reality, discussed morals and values, and/or emphasized educational aspects and learning opportunities” (p. 53).
Parents’ discussions were deemed superficial if they focused on “basic plot and characters, pointing out funny things, explaining rules of sports, commenting on clothes and hairstyles, or asking the child if he/she liked the show” (p.53). Due to the fact that only five participant discussions were deemed in-depth, the data could only be analyzed using descriptive statistics, which indicated, “that children’s racial attitudes did improve when parents discussed the content [of the videos] with them” (p. 62). 58
This study also revealed important data that highlights the importance of having
explicit discussions about race with children. The data showed that although parents
assume that children have the same racial attitudes that they do, this is not necessarily the
case. In fact, this research supports prior research, which indicates that children often do
not know what their parents’ racial attitudes are and thereby develop their own racial
attitudes based on “more indirect experiences” (Vittrup-Simpson, 2007, p. 7). These
indirect experiences may include what they see in the media, learn from their peers, or
pick up in “subtle, non-verbal responses” (Vittrup-Simpson, 2007, p. 7) that their parents indirectly model through their behavior. For example, the parents racial attitudes test showed that parents were more likely to have more Pro-Black attitudes than Anti-Black attitudes while the children’s racial attitudes test revealed that “children had significantly more positive attitudes of White people than of Black people” (p. 55). Nonetheless, those children who reported having Black playmates showed “slightly higher positive ratings of
Black people” (p. 57). Additionally, those children who were aware that their parents had
Black friends “evaluated Black people more positively” (p. 57).
The problem of child bias as evidenced in this study, lends credence to Banks’s call for more prejudice reduction research and also indicates a need for adult figures to
further educate children against racism. Additionally, this study would suggest a need for
the development of intervention curricula aimed at reducing stereotypes and prejudice in
children. However, if parents and teachers are uncomfortable talking about race with
children, children are left to formulate their views of people of color based on what the
media teaches, what their peers say, and what they pick up through the subtle behaviors of the people around them. 59
While most prejudice reduction research focuses on interventions aimed at
helping children to reduce their biases, research that aims to study teacher bias, its effect
on teacher expectations, and how to reduce these biases are equally important and yet
sparse. What research does exist indicates, “… teachers often hold cultural biases that can
spark racialized, or cultural ‘Pygmalion effects’ in the classroom” (Castro-Atwater, 2008, p. 247). The Pygmalion effect refers to the phenomenon in which teachers’ high expectations lead to students’ enhanced performance. It is believed that when teachers hold biased expectations, it affects the ways in which they teach, thereby affecting the ways in which children learn, and ultimately creating a self-fulfilling prophecy that some children learn better than others.
Teacher Beliefs, Expectations and Attitudes
A recent study indicated that art classroom curricular choices are heavily based on teacher’s personal beliefs. In a study conducted by LaPorte, Speirs and Young (2008), art educators nationwide were surveyed to determine what factors influenced their current curriculum choices. The researchers received 437 responses returned, and
overwhelmingly the findings indicated that teachers chose their curriculum focus based
on what they felt comfortable teaching, as well as their own personal beliefs.
In reviewing the empirical studies of preservice and practicing teacher beliefs and attitudes towards multiculturalism, several common themes arose that are of concern.
First, all the studies reviewed had acknowledged and expressed that the vast majority of preservice/practicing teachers felt inadequately exposed to cultural diversity and ill- prepared for working with diverse student populations (Cho & DeCastro-Ambrosetti,
2006; Heard, 1990; Heard, 1999; Lawrence & Tatum, 1997; Lesko & Bloom, 1998; 60
Sleeter, 2001; Van Hook, 2002). Second, several studies indicated that the practicing/preservice teachers who participated in multicultural courses/studies showed a high level of resistance toward developing culturally responsive curricula (Alimo, Kelly
& Clark, 2002; Cho & DeCastro-Ambrosetti, 2006; Heard, 1999; Lesko & Bloom, 1998;
Marx, 2006; Montecinos & Rios, 1999). Third, a substantial number of these studies also indicated that teachers’ racial attitudes affect their efficacy beliefs about student achievement and impact how they treat and view students of color (Bakari, 2003;
Dilworth & Brown, 2001; Downey & Pribesh, 2004; Garmon, 1998; Hanushek, Kain &
Rivkin, 2003; Hinojosa & Moras, 2009; Jackson, 2009; Marx, 2006; Masten, Plata,
Wenglar & Thedford, 1999; Pang & Sablan, 1998; Staiger, 2006; Tettegah, 1996; Wynn,
1999). Lastly, overall, each study reviewed provided very little evidence to support claims that participation in multicultural professional development courses or multicultural teacher preparation courses improved teachers’ and preservice teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about racially and culturally diverse populations or the implementation of a multicultural curriculum.
Feeling unprepared to work with diverse populations. In the pilot study by
Cho and DeCastro-Ambrosetti (2006), preservice teachers, diverse in both gender and race, were assessed to see if their attitudes changed toward implementing a multicultural curriculum in their own classroom after taking a multicultural education course. The 18 participants were given pre- and post-tests that consisted of a five point Likert-type survey and opened-ended questions. The survey consisted of 17 questions regarding the students’ “experiences and exposure to cultural and linguistic diversity” (Cho &
DeCastro-Ambrosetti, 2006, p. 26). Additionally, participants were given a 25 item 61
questionnaire that addressed issues relating to multicultural curricula. The quantitative
portion of this study was analyzed using frequencies and t-tests while the qualitative
open-ended responses were coded and categorized.
The pre- and post-test data indicated mixed results. The results of the open-ended responses suggested that the students felt that participating in the class positively influenced them to use multicultural curricula in their future classrooms. However, the quantitative data from the Likert scale survey indicated conflicting responses. On the pre- test, 56 percent of the preservice teachers responded that they believed that multicultural education could benefit all students. In contrast, the post-test responses indicated a 12 percent negative shift in attitude with only 44 percent replying that multicultural education benefits all students. Additionally, a key theme that emerged from the open- ended responses was that preservice teachers continued to feel unprepared to teach diverse populations even after completing the multicultural course.
Similarly, Van Hook (2002) found that preservice teachers perceived a wide range of barriers to implementing multicultural curricula and these beliefs influenced their attitudes towards using a multicultural approach in their classrooms. In this study, 68 sophomore level preservice early childhood educators were asked to “reflect on their individual beliefs about the obstacles to the implementation of a diversity curriculum” (p.
258) through reflective writing.
The reflective writings were coded and themes created. The findings suggested that 60 of the preservice teachers felt the greatest barrier to implementing multicultural curriculum was “the inability of others to recognize and accept diversity” (Van Hook,
2002, p. 260). Eleven of the 60 respondents felt this was due to barriers in society, and 38 62
preservice teachers believed parents caused this barrier. Six preservice teachers said that children’s biases created the barrier, and only 5 respondents felt this barrier was due to teacher bias. Van Hook concluded, “The true barriers to creating a diverse classroom are the obstacles perceived by the teachers…real or imagined…teachers’ perceived barriers are the greatest deterrent to the inclusion of diversity” (p. 263).
Resistance towards developing culturally responsive curricula. A study conducted by Heard (1999) found that preservice and practicing art educators exhibited high levels of resistance to multicultural education. In this study, 37 out of 83 students in a graduate level art education course chose to participate in a self-education multicultural inquiry project. The students were told that they could drop out of the study at any time.
All of the students who chose to participate were White except for two participants. The participants ranged in age from 23 to 45 and only four of the participants were male. The art teachers worked at schools ranging from all White middle-class suburban to highly diverse urban schools.
Heard’s (1999) study involved observing “several teachers as they conducted their own inquiries into multicultural education” (p. 462), and she explicitly states that the purpose for the teacher inquiry was to help the teachers gain a better understanding of the ways in which racism, classism, and gender discrimination are present in our lives as educators. Heard’s study also explores how an individual might “uncover” (p. 463) and
“eliminate” (p. 463) these problems in art education. In order to investigate these issues, participating art teachers interviewed teachers and the administration at their own schools and documented indications of discrimination in their reflective writings. Heard (1999) makes a sound argument for the relevance of this study, explaining that too often teachers 63
do not teach in democratic ways. She points out that several art teachers that she worked with had expressed a belief that “they only needed to teach in multicultural ways if they had children of different races in their classrooms” (p. 463). Thus, if all White or all
Black children attended their classrooms, the art teachers believed there was no need for multicultural art curricula. Additionally, art teachers had expressed to her “that their main goals were to present students with as much factual and technical information as possible” (p.464) and that they “had little time to teach [multicultural] skills” (p. 464).
Instead, students were expected to seek such information “on their own time” (p. 464).
The participants in this study were asked to read and discuss articles on racial attitudes, general multicultural literature, multicultural education texts and to participate in simulation activities, reflective writing in journals and an action research component that involved observing and interviewing at their own schools. Students were specifically asked to “collect incidents of everyday arts teaching and learning practices in formal learning settings and to identify issues, concepts or problems that they wished to know more about and to creatively explore democratic solutions and possibilities” (Heard,
1999, p. 464). Heard observed the art teachers in the classroom, collected their reflective writings and reviewed the action research components of their projects. Heard describes some of the teacher resistance she observed:
Sometimes expressed as resentment, denial and anger…insistence that arts
teaching, learning and knowledge were by their very nature objective, free and
open [and] that examination of them from a democratic multicultural pedagogical
perspective was unnecessary; and finally, accusations that the project was based
purely upon the self-interest of the course instructor (a few teachers suggested that 64
as white teachers they were being forced to discuss multicultural arts issues in a
political way because the course instructor is African American). (p. 466)
Additionally, some art teachers expressed their belief that multicultural art education should focus only on cultural heritage. Others expressed that it should be about exposing students to arts of various cultures without discussions of political contexts such as sexual orientation, race or social class.
Heard (1999) analyzes the resistance she experienced from the art teachers and draws from the reflective writings and the class discussions to formulate nine kinds of resistance using Helm’s (1990) framework of White racial identity development as a guide. She concludes that many of the teachers’ negative beliefs about multicultural curricula impeded their ability to fulfill the project. Of the initial 37 participants, 12 participants chose to discontinue participating in the project and four students completely withdrew from the class. Of the 25 students who completed the project, 15 continued to express resistance—in the form of denial, fear, and anger—to implementing a multicultural art curriculum. For example, Heard states that some of the art teachers expressed that they thought “it was unfair that the schools where they worked…required them to suffer the indignity of discussing something that made them feel so uncomfortable” (p. 461).
More recent indications that resistance to multicultural education still exists were evidenced in a study conducted by Alimo, Kelly and Clark (2002). This qualitative study, conducted at the University of Maryland, aimed to evaluate the impact that participating in a multicultural program had on students’ attitudes, beliefs and behaviors towards interacting with racially and ethnically diverse groups. This case study, referred to as the 65
Diversity Democracy Project, focused on intergroup dialogue between eight
undergraduate students who had varied diversity experiences. Half of the participants
self-identified as students of color and half of the participants self-identified as White.
They ranged from second year freshman to fifth year seniors.
Alimo, Kelly and Clark (2002) conducted phone interviews, which focused on
five key components of the students’ experiences in the multicultural course. The five
key components consisted of: “(1) interracial interactions; (2) the frequency of such
interactions before and after participation in the IDP [course]; (3) barriers to cross-racial
interactions; (4) cognitive changes perceived toward people from other races/ethnicities;
and, (5) conceptualizations of democracy and responsible citizenship” (p. 50). From these
participants’ responses, the researchers ultimately compiled three categories for analyzing
the data: residential experiences, cognitive outcomes, and affective outcomes.
The researchers’ findings indicated that most of the students’ interactions with
racially diverse groups were limited to their experiences in the residence halls on campus
both before and after participating in the course. The data collected indicated that the
participants themselves created barriers to cross-racial interactions. The participants’ responses regarding cognitive outcomes indicated that participants felt their attitudes and perspectives towards others had changed as a result of the multicultural course. However, the responses regarding affective outcomes indicated, “White students tended not to respond favorably to the anticipated experience of taking a class with diversity content or joining a diversity-focused student group” (Alimo, Kelly & Clark, 2002, p. 52).
Additionally, when asked about the frequency of social interaction between themselves and an individual who was racially or ethnically different, “a theme emerged suggesting 66
that students were not actively seeking more interactions across dimensions of
difference” (p. 52).
The researchers suggest that this resistance to cross-racial interaction and diversity courses was rooted in the students’ lack of understanding the concept of White privilege and a general desire within all racial groups to seek out like individuals, both racially and culturally. While participants in this study did not actively seek out individuals who were racially different from themselves, the researchers concluded that participation in this multicultural course helped the participants passively engage with others who were racially different.
The effects of teachers’ racial attitudes on student success. Rosenthal and
Jacobson (2003) point out that the Pygmalion effect is often directly linked to a teacher’s racial attitude. They describe a seminal study conducted by Jacobson in 1966. In the study conducted by Jacobson, two groups of educators were asked to look at a set of photographs of unknown children and assess whether these children were American or
Mexican in appearance. The term American was not defined. The teachers’ responses showed an overwhelming consensus on who was American in appearance and who was not. These same educators were then asked to assess another group of images. However, this time, the images were all photographs of Mexican children, but they were paired with
IQ scores. Again the teachers were asked to indicate which children were American and which children were Mexican based on appearance. The responses indicated that photographs that were paired with higher IQs were assessed as looking more American;
“apparently, teachers agree in their perception of ‘Mexican-looking’ until they know how a child tests, and then perception is changed” (Rosenthal & Jacobson, 2003, p. 54). 67
Rosenthal and Jacobson (2003) further explain, “Teachers’ evaluations of pupils
are determined by many variables. Sometimes the teacher recognizes disadvantages and
perhaps, sometimes, she creates them” (p. 55). Additionally, they warn, “… children
from minority ethnic groups, particularly dark-skinned groups, are especially likely to
suffer the disadvantages of unfavorable halo effects” (p. 54). This halo effect refers to the
Pygmalion phenomenon that occurs when a teacher believes that a child is bright, thus
that child’s behavior is evaluated as being of “higher intellectual quality” (p. 54) and yet
simultaneously the exact same behaviors exhibited by a child that one believes to be
“dull” (p. 54) are evaluated negatively. This seminal study resulted in what is known
today as the expectation theory (Sadker, Sadker, & Zittleman 2008).
Sadker, Sadker and Zittleman (2008) write that there are three theories that aim to
explain why some students succeed in school while others struggle. The first theory,
deficit theory, is described as “fatalistic” (p. 71) because it supports the ideology that
one’s fate is predetermined and inevitable. The deficit theory claims that “certain students
do poorly in school because of their culture, social, or linguistic background” (p. 72) and teachers who support such a theory often believe “the values, language patterns, and behaviors learned at home put [students] at an academic disadvantage” (p. 72). Economic poverty is usually considered a key issue in arguments that support this position. Second, teachers who subscribe to the expectation theory believe “that some children do poorly because their teachers do not expect much of kids from certain racial and ethnic groups.
As a result, they teach these children differently, and the students’ academic performance suffers” (p. 72). Teachers who support this theory believe that teachers’ attitudes influence students either positively or negatively. This theory is often linked with the last 68
theory, cultural difference theory, which supports the notion that culturally responsive
teaching is critical to cross-cultural understanding. The authors posit, “cultural difference
theory asserts that academic problems can be overcome if educators study and mediate
the cultural gap separating school and home” (p. 72). These theories impact how educators interact with students of color, and in turn, how those students respond to them.
A recent study exemplified this dynamic. Marx’s (2006) practitioner inquiry study exposed preservice educators’ implicit beliefs about their students of color and the deficit
theories that supported their negative thinking. This fatalistic approach to thinking about
their students of color impacted how they taught and perceived these learners.
Marx’s (2006) study involved nine of her preservice education students who were enrolled in her Second Language Acquisition course. This study served to better understand the beliefs of White female preservice students who spoke only English in regards to “race, racism, Whiteness, and the children they tutored” (p. 23). This course included a field experience at an English-language learning school tutoring predominately Mexican and low socioeconomic students. All the participants in this study were White middle-class females who spoke only English and had very limited exposure to diverse populations. They ranged in age between 20 to 28 years old. The participants varied in socioeconomic status and religious backgrounds.
In order to establish trust, Marx (2006) took a less confrontational approach to the discussions and interviews with her participants. She strived to create mutually respectful environments by having “nonthreatening, reciprocal, conversations that enabled [them] to get to know one another” (p. 26) for several weeks before she began interviewing them.
She also began building trust by sharing her life history and having students share their 69
life histories. This narrative style was also used in the interviews and collected as data.
Additionally Marx observed the tutoring sessions of the nine participants, and collected
their tutoring journals as data and kept her own personal teaching journal of the
experience. Through her interviews, discussions, and observations Marx (2006) found
that although these nine preservice educators expressed their openness to working with
diverse populations and a lack of racial prejudice, their use of color-blind language, associations of children of color with deficits, and associations of Whiteness with superiority, indicated a disconnect between the participants’ explicit attitudes and their
implicit attitudes evidenced in their behaviors.
Marx (2006) quotes Frankenberg (1993) in defining color-blindness as “… a
mode of thinking about race organized around an effort not to ‘see’, or any rate not to
acknowledge, race difference—[which] continues to be the ‘polite’ language of race” (p.
17, as cited in Marx). Marx posits that color-blindness, in part, perpetuates the feeling of unease and discomfort that many educators have regarding working with diverse populations. She contends that in order for educators to become comfortable with diverse populations and issues of race and racism, teachers must first acknowledge that issues related to race and racism still exist in education today. However, she also points out that acknowledging race and racism can be especially challenging for White educators, like herself, who have most likely been socialized not to acknowledge such social constructs as race and racism. She writes:
[A] White person talking about her or his concerns with White racism risks losing
in-group membership with other Whites…. ‘Significant White persons in one’s
environment may use the socialization pressures available to them to ensure that 70
the White person learns the rules of being a socially accepted White person.’ One
of the rules is knowing not to talk about race. (p. 17)
As part of this study, however, participants were asked to describe Whiteness and
racism. Most of the participants did not see prejudice as part of racism. In fact, all the participants expressed that they thought prejudice did not involve hate, unlike racism, and that prejudice was much more forgivable than racism. All of the participants believed that everyone is prejudiced at one time or another and “that anyone who claimed to be 100 percent without prejudice ‘is lying’ (Marx, 2006, p. 79). This understanding framed prejudice as relatively innocent. Though all of the preservice educators freely admitted to being periodically prejudiced, eight of the nine preservice educators did not connect prejudice to racism and did not acknowledge their own racist behaviors. Those eight participants, however, were keenly aware of the racist discourses of their family members, friends, and boyfriends, and had expressed their concern about this racist language more so than the racist attitudes that under-lied the language. Marx writes,
“Although [the eight] women claimed to be nonracist, they revealed racism in many different ways. Most made comments that would be considered actively racist by just about anyone” (p.90). Marx concludes:
Color-blindness and racism together create a disturbing, destructive, and yet
fragile web of partial truths and downright lies. Color-blind racism might be the
only construct that allows Whites to make derogatory comments about people of
color, to avoid people of color, to misjudge them, and to work in subtle and
explicit ways to disenfranchise them without requiring Whites to ever think of
themselves as ‘racist’. (p. 90) 71
As part of the intervention, Marx (2006) confronted the participants with copies of transcripts from their respective interviews and asked them to identify racist remarks within these transcripts. She also conducted “critical discussions of racism” (p.100) and gently called attention to the areas of the transcripts in which she had read racist remarks.
Three participants responded positively to this intervention approach, admitted their own racism and vowed to take responsibility for it. This is exemplified in one participant’s response after reading her interview transcript and critically discussing racism with the researcher. Marx documents this participant's impassioned response to being asked “if she was able to admit to being racist” (p. 102):
No. Absolutely not. Because, I don’t…when I think of someone being racist—all
my life—that means you look at someone and you think that they are not as good
as you are because of their heritage or –and I don’t consciously do that. You
know, I think racism is a bad thing. And that’s just not the way I was raised—to
look at someone and judge them like that. So I wouldn’t say—I would never want
to admit that I’m racist, but, now that I’m talking about how I—totally—Martin—
I associated him with hard times and…all that, I see that that is probably racist.
You know, and some other things are probably racist, but [sigh] I don’t know…I
guess I am, unconsciously, but I don’t mean to be. You know, I don’t not like
someone because of it. You know what I mean? But it sucks! Because it makes
you feel bad! A bad person. Like, I shouldn’t be teaching kids. You know, I am
going to judge them. (p. 103)
All the other participants, except two, also made connections between their discourse and their racist attitudes, acknowledged that these attitudes, whether implicit or 72
explicit, could affect the children they taught and therefore took differing degrees of responsibility for their attitudes.
The seven participants’ realization of their negative racial attitudes exemplifies the complexities inherent in explicit and implicit racial attitudes. It also directly links these negative racial attitudes to deficit thinking, which results in educators having low expectations of students of color.
In another recent ethnographic study, Staiger (2006) examined one urban high school, Roosevelt High School (RHS), and the role of race and teacher expectations in this highly diverse setting. Staiger specifically looked at “how race is formed” (p. 3) and
“how it functions” (p.3) within this educational context. Although this school was viewed by the larger public to be a pinnacle of racial tolerance and an academic beacon in a city rife with racial tension and violence, this ethnographic study revealed that RHS was not the paradigm of “racial harmony” (Staiger, 2006, p. 2) that it claimed to be. In fact, racial relationships within RHS mirrored many of the same tensions and racial divides of the larger city in which the school was located. Racial segregation within the school was instigated and perpetuated by the administration and teachers, ironically, through the use of desegregation programs called academies. Students were placed within these academies based on the recommendations of the teachers at RHS. Ultimately, the gifted academy enrollment (GROW) reinforced the idea that being White equals being gifted, while the teachers tracked students of color into academies like business and technology
(Bus Tech) which were predominately made up of Black students and those unofficially termed “at-risk.” 73
Staiger began analyzing her observations using race formation theory. This
allowed her to look at how students developed their own racial identities. She also used a
critical lens to examine how the status quo of the school's administration was embedded
in color-blind discourse, which perpetuated racial tensions and segregation within the
school.
Staiger established credibility in this study through a number of ways. She
immersed herself in this environment for eighteen months, spending substantial time
volunteering in the community and at the school. She entered the classroom as a
substitute teacher and had formal and informal interviews with students, staff,
administrators and teachers. She used open-ended interviews, which were taped and later
transcribed. She also attended school sports functions and observed in a wide array of
classes and activities. This approach helped to establish the validity of this study. Staiger
gained the trust of the students, though perhaps, not the full trust of the administration.
Regardless, she established rapport with the students by being at the school before she
began the interview process. This resulted in rather candid responses to her questions.
Another strength to her approach was the use of follow-up interviews in which
she had informal conversations both on an individual level and group level. All of these exchanges and encounters were documented. Even events, like the administration’s resistance to sharing demographic information on the GROW academy were included in her findings and thoroughly described. For example, when Staiger asked for the racial breakdown of the students in the different academies, she was freely given this
information until she inquired about the racial breakdown of students in the gifted
program. Her documentation of the lack of cooperation began with the counselors and 74
worked its way up the administrative chain. This further supported her argument that
GROW or gifted was color-blind discourse, used by school staff, to denote White
students and ultimately BusTech or at-risk referred to Black students. Not only were
these observations described in detail, but information was also gleaned from school
records, newspapers, and other documents including the racial demographics of the
different academies, with the exclusion of the GROW academy. Further examination of the academies revealed that the GROW academy (gifted program) was predominately represented by White students while the BusTech academy (at risk program) had a predominately Black student attendance.
In her conclusion, Staiger found that the administration’s color-blind discourse, as well as the teachers’ implicit racial beliefs, inadvertently imposed a racial hierarchy through the creation of academies in which enrollment was determined solely by teacher recommendations. These academies reflected the implicit racial bias of the educators at
RHS. The gifted program was ultimately equated with being White and the at-risk program was ultimately equated with being Black.
The evidence that she shares in this supporting narrative makes for a strong argument, that indeed the color-blind discourse aids in segregating students by race. It also provides compelling evidence of the Pygmalion effect. In this study, teachers’ implicit racial attitudes towards students of color impacted their recommendation to enter certain academies. Though the findings of this study are not necessarily transferable to all other multi-racial urban high schools in America, it did reveal that one must also consider that administrator and teacher beliefs and attitudes play a critical role in educational equity and achievement, when considering the racial dynamics of a school. 75
Art Education’s Role in Unlearning Implicit Bias
The amygdala, affective processes, and cognitive processes, all play a critical role
in implicit bias reduction. This is due in part because the amygdala is the seat of our
emotions, as well as the hub for processing our visual input (Amodio & Lieberman,
2009). This study posits that exploring race and racism in and through visual art may
provide a unique avenue for effectively facilitating implicit bias reduction. This may be
possible because art education is a discipline that is firmly and uniquely grounded in both
the affective and the cognitive processes. Moreover, the highly visual nature of art may
also position this discipline as a trigger for stimulating the amygdala. For example, Ellis
(1999) highlights the connection between the visual processes of the amygdala and art perception. Art perception is an action in which individuals create meaningful experiences through the “self-generated movement of the eyes” (p. 161) over a work of art. This action simultaneously connects the physical experience of looking deeply at a work of art to both the intellectual and emotional processes. He explains:
“Art can do this only because perception is active rather than passive, and begins
with efferent activity in emotional brain areas (e.g. hypothalamus, amygdala,
hippocampus and anterior cingulated) which then motivates afferent processing
(parietal imaging activity which finally, after a 1/3-second motivation/selective
process is complete, resonates with occipital patterns, resulting in perceptual
consciousness). (p. 161)
These aspects of learning specifically in and through art, place art education in the forefront as a discipline that can provide a needed transition towards a more socially just 76
curriculum and for critically analyzing highly controversial and emotionally charged topics like race and racism.
Art and social justice. Anderson, Gussak, Hallmark, and Paul (2010) remind us that throughout history, cultures have used artistic representation to communicate what they think is culturally important. They explain further:
… art serves a basic, biological, survival function in that it facilitates the social
cooperation that is a primary means for our survival as a species. It does this by
aesthetically displaying (thus causing us to pay attention), thus making concrete a
group’s core values and beliefs through ritual, ceremony, and other public
presentations. (p. 3)
They go on to posit that this positions art as a viable means for framing social justice:
So if art is communication from one human being to another about things that
count, what better content than social justice? Precious few things count more
than how we treat our fellow human beings and the kinds of relationships we have
with them. The right of human beings to be treated fairly, equally, and with
dignity and respect is a core value defining what it means to be civilized. (p. 4)
Because art can so adeptly reflect one’s beliefs and values, it is also well suited as a vehicle for assessing changes in those belief systems. Additionally, because art engages both the emotions and the intellect, it is an appropriate tool for guiding human understanding. Anderson, et al. (2010) write, “Whether intentionally or not, visual artifacts present us with differing worldviews and sets of beliefs that represent human beings’ ways of being, believing and doing” (p. 5). 77
Eisner (2002) also points out that experiencing the world aesthetically opens the door for transforming consciousness. Eisner explains how learning in the arts achieves this:
So how do the arts affect consciousness? They do so in a number of ways. They
refine our senses so that our ability to experience the world is made more complex
and subtle; they promote the use of our imaginative capacities so that we can
envision what we cannot actually see, taste, touch, hear, and smell; they provide
models through which we can experience the world in new ways.... and provide
the means through which meanings that are ineffable, but feelingful, can be
expressed. (p. 19)
This may suggest that using visual aesthetic strategies may provide a way for transformational learning to occur. Anderson, et al. (2010) builds on this idea and suggests that aesthetic strategies can play a pivotal role in developing transformational learning. Anderson includes artmaking, critique and visual exploration as strategies that can be used for “exposing, deconstructing, disarming, and acting out against those aspects of culture that promote inequity…” (p. 5).
Furthermore, Daniel and Mason (1993) suggest that multicultural art education focused on social justice can facilitate students creating artworks “that takes as its subject matter their own experience of their everyday worlds” (p. 154). Clover and Stalker
(2007) reiterate this point adding that art education focused on social justice also allows for individuals to make a personal connection to problems of justice/equity and then use their critical imagination “to make sense of their world, create meaning in their lives and re-create a better world” (p. I). Naidus (2009) further explains that socially engaged 78
artmaking “is created in an expansive place that awakens peoples’ voices, minds and spirits in various ways” (p. 2).
Through the use of aesthetic strategies grounded in art criticism, art history, aesthetics and artmaking, art education may facilitate transformational learning for preservice art educators. Learning to perceive and understand the world through multiple frames of reference positions them to work more effectively with an increasingly diverse school population and better prepares them to deal with issues of race and racism in the art classroom.
Strategies for Preparing Teachers for the Diverse Classroom
Many teacher preparation programs have implemented various curricular interventions, such as multicultural education initiatives, requiring field experience in diverse settings, and increasing the number of preservice teachers of color in teacher education programs. All of these efforts are aimed at better preparing future educators to equitably serve a rapidly growing racially diverse student population.
Current art education programs also often advocate for the implementation of multicultural curricular interventions as a means of ensuring a more racially inclusive and generally diverse study of art and artists. However, even among its proponents,
Multicultural Art Education (MCAE) is vigorously debated in the field of art education
(Adejumo, 2002; Blocker, 2004; Chalmers, 2002; Desai, 2005; Stuhr, 1994). This is in large part due to conflicting concepts, aims, definitions and approaches to multiculturalism and a lack of empirical data supporting these efforts. Chalmers (1996) emphasizes this point stating, “Definitions, programs, and practices associated with multiculturalism and multicultural education have been variously described as confused, 79
contradictory, inconsistent and muddled” (p. 1). Blocker’s (2004) more recent comments
suggest that this is still a problem. He states, “…a review of the recent literature reveals
many quite different objectives under this one umbrella” (p. 189).
While the objectives, definitions and approaches to multiculturalism are still a
topic of debate, many researchers, educators, and teacher educators have begun to
delineate specific guidelines for the inclusion of multicultural art curricula in K-12
settings (Anderson, Gussak, Hallmark, & Paul, 2010; Ballengee-Morris & Stuhr, 2001;
Banks & Banks, 2004; Chalmers, 1996; Nieto & Bode, 2008; Sleeter and Grant, 2009), as well as guidelines for art teacher education programs aimed at preparing racially/culturally responsive educators (Cochran-Smith, 1995; Hollins & Guzman, 2005;
Nieto, 2000; Noel, 1995; Sleeter, 2007; Zeichner, 1999; Villegas & Davis, 2008).
Hollins and Guzman (2005) describe four general approaches, which emerged from their literature review, for preparing preservice educators to work with diverse populations: prejudice reduction, equity pedagogy, field experiences, and the preparation of candidates of color. Each of these approaches had varying degrees of success, but overall, most resulted in short-term positive outcomes. However, the preparation of candidates of color is of particular importance because rather than focusing on increasing preservice educators’ level of comfort with and understanding of diverse populations, this particular approach focuses on the retention of candidates of color within the field of education.
Hollins and Guzman (2005) additionally explored the effectiveness of college and university programs aimed at preparing preservice educators to work with diverse 80
populations. From their literature review another common theme emerged. The
researchers write:
A few university programs appeared to offer a carefully crafted program that
prepared candidates to teach students from diverse populations…. [However],
Most university programs were at various stages in developing the capacity to
address issues of cultural and linguistic diversity…. Many universities have
hardly begun to address issues of diversity in certain program areas…. [Lastly],
candidates [ability to deal] with multicultural issues in the teacher education
programs… [do] not always translate to changes in school practices once they
leave these programs. (p. 509)
An analysis of this assertion does raise some larger questions for those in higher
education who are responsible for preparing future educators to work with a rapidly
increasing, highly diverse population. Using the framework of inquiry established by
Hollins and Guzman (2005), those involved in the education of future art teachers should
reflect upon these important questions: In what ways do teacher candidates learn from
diversity preparation in art education programs? How does diversity preparation in art
education affect teacher candidate performance once they are practicing teachers in
schools and what is the impact on their students’ learning?
Addressing issues of diversity in teacher preparation programs. In the
preliminary findings of this study, it became apparent that both students of color and
White students can hold racial biases towards others as well as their own racial group,
employ color-blind language and ideology, and perpetuate stereotypes. While Sleeter
(2008b) focuses specifically on the needs of White preservice educators in her article, her 81
suggestions for preparing future educators for working with diverse populations can be
applied more broadly to all preservice educators. The finding from this current study
indicated that such strategies could benefit all preservice educators regardless of their
race.
Sleeter suggests that most preservice educators lack a comprehensive
understanding of racism, and this should be explored in teacher preparation courses.
Secondly, many preservice educators have a deficit view of students of color. Sleeter points out that a lack of understanding about racism feeds into the development of deficit views. Third, Sleeter (2008b) suggests that direct avoidance with confronting issues of race and racism through the use of colorblind discourse needs to be discouraged. Sleeter
explains that colorblind discourse is meant to provide a racially comfortable space for
individuals who are “generally ignorant of communities of color, fearing them and
fearing discussing race and racism” (p. 560). Sleeter warns:
… if fear and ignorance are not directly dealt with, White preservice teachers
become classroom teachers who are not able to examine racism in their own
workplaces, hear what students or parents of color say about teaching and
working with them more appropriately, or facilitating conversations about
differences with racially diverse students in their own classrooms. (p. 560)
Lastly, Sleeter makes a suggestion specific to facilitating White preservice
teachers to become more comfortable working with diverse populations. She writes,
“White preservice teachers commonly lack awareness of themselves as cultural beings
(Schmidt, 1999), assuming that their own beliefs and ways of behaving are ‘the norm to which others should aspire’ (Valli, 1995)” (p. 560). Sleeter explains that not 82
understanding one’s own racial/cultural background, especially as a White individual in a
predominately White society, makes it more difficult for White teachers—both practicing
and preservice—to relate and understand the role of race and culture in the lives of their
students of color. Without developing this understanding of oneself as a cultural being,
Sleeter argues that many preservice educators’ will continue to lack “cross-cultural
awareness [and] tools for viewing another community as a cultural site” (Sleeter, 2008b,
p. 561). Furthermore, Sleeter explains that this lack of cultural awareness becomes
specifically problematic in the classroom. She asserts:
As long as [White preservice educators] see themselves as normal but not
cultural, they use their own unexamined frames of reference against which to
judge students, students' families, and their communities. This practice
unfortunately reinforces deficit thinking. For example, a teacher who believes that
learning behavior involves sitting quietly will not recognize learning behavior in
students who are active and noisy, nor accurately differentiate learning behavior
from off-task or disruptive behavior. (p. 561)
Sleeter (2008b) also proposes a research-based framework for teacher education
programs aimed at addressing the problems discussed above and helping future
preservice educators to become racially/culturally responsive teachers. This framework is
comprehensive in that it aims to provide preservice educators with a coherent teacher preparation program in which all courses in the program address some aspect of racially/culturally responsive teaching. It also aims to provide teacher candidates with a support system for their first year of teaching. Sleeter states: 83
… it is not enough to prepare White teachers to teach as well as the average
White teacher does currently. Doing so would only perpetuate lower expectations,
discomfort, and a lack of appropriate pedagogical knowledge. Instead if we are
serious about preparing White teachers who are able to help close the racial
achievement gap, we need to prepare them better and more equitably than the
average White teacher. (p. 561)
Sleeter (2008b) uses empirical evidence to support her argument that “one course,
one field experience, or one student teaching experience” (p. 561) is not enough to
prepare racially/culturally responsive educators. Instead Sleeter advocates for a coherent
and comprehensive program and suggests that such a program will “have the potential to
enable White teacher candidates to confront and move beyond twenty-odd years of prior
socialization” (p. 561).
Sleeter recommends that teacher preparation programs utilize university-based coursework, school-based fieldwork and cross-cultural community-based learning experiences. Sleeter writes, “These three sites offer different kinds of knowledge and experiential resources that when intentionally connected, have the potential to interrupt racist attitudes and understandings, and help White teachers learn to teach diverse students well” (p. 563).
Both Zeichner (1999) and Sleeter (2008b) believe that the university-based coursework component of a teacher education program should present a unified and coherent curriculum aimed at preparing racially/culturally responsive educators and explicitly addressing and including some aspect of the following across all the coursework within the program: 84
… development of clearer ethnic and cultural self-identity; self-examination of
ethnocentrism; dynamics of prejudice and racism, including implications for
teachers; dynamics of privilege and economic oppression, and how schools
contribute to these inequities; multicultural curriculum development; the promise
and potential dangers of learning styles; relationships between language, culture,
and learning: and culturally appropriate teaching and assessment. (Zeichner, 1999,
p. 566)
Sleeter (2008b) suggests that these issues cannot effectively be addressed in one course and reiterates that these issues should be interwoven within all the coursework in a program so that one course might focus on two or three aspects and another course might focus on other aspects, but all of the courses focus to some degree on these important issues. She also suggests that education courses begin by taking a broad look at institutional racism so that this larger problem is defined first before shifting towards more specific techniques for creating equitable classrooms.
Sleeter (2008b) goes on to describe several active learning and reflection strategies that can be utilized in these courses. Some of the suggested strategies included journal sharing, creating personal biographies, cross-cultural mail exchange, and critical analysis of readings, such as contemporary literature written for students of color.
Inextricably linked to this coursework, Sleeter advocates for a program component that includes school-based field experiences. She warns, however, that this component can be a challenge because finding excellent teachers that reflect racially/culturally responsive teaching may be a daunting and somewhat difficult task. To help resolve this issue, she suggests that field-experiences include reflections designed to 85
help preservice educators question assumptions about students of color. She explains why
this is important:
In classrooms, preservice teachers see students’ reaction to institutions that,
depending on the specific school or classroom, may not support the students’
cultures, identities, and intellectual capabilities. Students’ behavior in such
settings often ends up reinforcing unexamined assumptions that White preservice
teachers bring. (p. 569)
Additionally, Sleeter (2008b) suggests “multiple field experiences in classrooms modeling different kinds of instruction” (p. 570) to allow preservice educators to see that children’s behaviors are impacted by the interaction between the child and the teacher.
Sleeter also posits that videotaped examples of teachers demonstrating equitable teaching of students of color can also be used to demonstrate the interplay of classroom behavior and classroom dynamics. Lastly, Sleeter (2008b) suggests that cross-cultural community- based fieldwork be linked to coursework and student teaching experiences. This component of a coherent teacher education program can have different levels of participation ranging from complete immersion in a community to simply visiting and observing a community.
Sleeter (2008b) presents a comprehensive and cohesive framework for developing teacher education programs that not only aim to facilitate many preservice educators’ understandings of race and racism, but also provide the scaffolding necessary to help all preservice educators become more comfortable working with diverse populations, and more equitable in their teaching and thinking. 86
Additionally, Villegas and Davis (2008) have suggested three strategies that
teacher education programs and teacher educators could use to prepare preservice educators of color to “be agents of change” (p. 597), “culturally responsive” (p. 597), and to feel safe discussing diversity through “critical dialogue” (p. 597). Again, while this article is specific to the needs of preservice teachers of color, the findings of this study indicated that both students of color and White students can be in a state of readiness to become agents of change, thus these recommendations could be beneficial to all preservice and practicing teachers. Villegas and Davis echo this sentiment, reminding teacher educators that all educators, regardless of race, need guidance on becoming racially/culturally responsive teachers.
The first strategy focuses on preparing future teachers to be agents of change.
Villegas and Davis contend that teacher education programs “must address thorny issues of racism and ethnocentricism openly” (p. 597). The second strategy is aimed at
facilitating teacher candidates’ development of a constructivist approach to teaching and
learning. A constructivist framework can support teacher candidates’ understanding the
“connection between culture and pedagogy” (p. 598). Using a constructivist framework
for facilitating this learning helps all future educators understand that learning is an
interpretive process (Villegas & Davis, 2008). Constructivist theory supports building on
students' prior knowledge and interests to develop engaged learning. It also supports
making instruction relevant to students' lived experience so that meaning making can
occur. Furthermore, using a constructivist lens reframes the idea that a student’s native
language is a deficit. Instead, constructivist theory supports that a student’s native
language is a "linguistic resource" (p. 598). Constructivist theory also supports 87
differentiated learning and multiple learning styles. This leads to "managing the classroom in ways that take into consideration cultural difference in interaction styles" (p.
598), as well as "using a variety of assessment strategies to maximize students’ opportunities to demonstrate what they know about the topic at hand in ways that are familiar to them" (p. 598).
Lastly, Villegas and Davis (2008) highlight the importance of teacher educators creating a safe environment conducive to critical dialogue, especially about issues of diversity. Villegas and Davis explain that teacher educators need to establish “clear rules”
(p. 599) for productive conversations. They write that these rules should set forth guidelines “for discussing difference in a manner that is respectful of all” (p. 599). For example, they suggest that teacher educators “pose critical questions to the group about who speaks or is silent in the program, in what settings, and on which topics” (p. 599).
Additionally, they suggest creating a space within the curriculum specifically for students of color. For example, Villegas and Davis suggest a seminar in which teacher candidates of color can “talk openly among themselves about issues they consider important to their own professional development as teachers (Bennett, et al., 2000)” (p. 599).
Conclusion of the Literature Review
Taken in tandem, both Sleeter’s (2008b) and Villegas’ and Davis’ (2008) suggestions for teacher education place necessary emphasis on a coherent program that explicitly addresses issues of race and racism in education. Denson’s (2009) meta- analysis supports the assertion of Sleeter, Villegas, and Davis that curricula focused on these aspects of diversity can and does indeed influence and reduce teacher candidates’
racial biases thereby helping educators to become racially/culturally responsive teachers. 88
However, Denson points out that success depends heavily on how the program is structured and the state of readiness of the teacher candidates. Programs that bring together the strategies discussed in this review have the potential to help educators bridge the current racial and cultural gap between themselves and their students.
While Sleeter’s article focused specifically on the antiracist teacher preparation needs of White preservice educators and Villegas and Davis’ article centered on the needs of future teachers of color, the findings from this current study suggest that all preservice educators, regardless of race, could benefit from both of these frameworks.
While many of the White participants in this current study did reflect the attitudes Sleeter described in her article, a few participants of color also indicated levels of deficit thinking and racist attitudes towards their own racial groups. This indicated that there is a need for all preservice teachers to participate in antiracist teacher preparation programs, regardless of their race. Furthermore, while most of the students of color did exhibit a concrete understanding of racism and indicated that they were prepared to become agents of change, several of the White participants were equally prepared to make this transition as well.
Unfortunately, in many teacher education programs, these problems continue to go unaddressed. This may be due, in part, to assumptions that there is no need to directly address racism in the program because teacher educators assume that entering preservice educators already know racism is bad. Hence, as a result of this basic understanding, it is also assumed that these future educators will not be racist in their beliefs and practices in the classroom. These assumptions, however, are naïve at best and reflect educational malpractice at worst. Most teacher candidates who enter teacher education programs trust 89
that, on some level, the program they have chosen is designed to help them acquire the tools, skills, and abilities necessary to be highly qualified and to teach all children equitably. However, teacher education programs that do not directly address racism fail to provide the needed framework for many preservice educators to bridge the cultural divide that separates them from their future students of color. Zeichner (2009) suggests that the “mission of teacher education programs [should be] to prepare teachers in ways that enable them to successfully educate everyone’s children” (p. 259).
Pretending that race and racism do not exist does not make these socially constructed issues go away or become any less relevant in students’ lives. In fact, color- blind discourse that allows for issues surrounding race and racism to fester in the shadows creates a climate ripe for misunderstandings, miscommunication, and missed opportunities to connect meaningfully to students’ lives and lived experiences. The analysis of both the qualitative and quantitative data collected in this current study provide a more thorough understanding of the potential impact of addressing racial issues in a teacher preparation course.
90
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
This mixed-method study was a sequential transformative design (Creswell, Plano
Clark, Gutmann and Hanson, 2003), which reflected a transformative paradigm (Mertens,
2009) and utilized a practitioner inquiry approach. The instruments used in the
quantitative phase included a pre and post paper-format Implicit Attitude Test adapted
from a study by Lemm, et al. (2008) and an pre and post Explicit Attitude Test adapted
from Hinojosa and Moras' (2009) study. The qualitative portion included a practitioner
research case study. The methods used included an interview with each participant, collection of participants' written reflection responses to assigned readings and their visual art responses to studio assignments. It also included classroom observations of the participants throughout the semester and the use of a researcher journal. The participants in this study were art education undergraduate and graduate students who enrolled in
ARED 5130/7130 in the spring of 2010 and volunteered to be a part of the study. No one
under the age of 18 was included in this study. Nineteen of the 22 students enrolled in the
course chose to participate in the study.
Because this study’s methodology is multifaceted and complex, this chapter is
organized as follows: (1) research questions, study outcome and study population; (2)
mixed-method paradigmatic stance, purpose, and design; (3) the quantitative
instrumentation and data collection; (4) the practitioner inquiry and qualitative data 91
collection; (5) protection of human subjects (IRB); (6) data analysis methods; (7)
validity, credibility, and trustworthiness;
(8) limitations, delimitations, and assumptions.
Research Questions, Outcome and Population
Research questions. Tashakkori and Creswell (2007) explore the nature of
mixed-methods research questions. They suggest that a mixed-methods study should have “an explicit ‘mixed-methods question’” (p. 208). In a sequential mixed-methods study, one option they suggest is to write questions specific to the quantitative and qualitative components of the study but also to include a question regarding the way in which the two components were integrated.
Question One aims to be specific to the quantitative portion of this study while
Question Two focuses on the qualitative portion of this study. Question Three is an overarching mixed-methods question. Lastly, Question Four addresses the transformative nature of this study.
My research questions are:
1. What are the implicit and explicit racial attitudes of the preservice and
practicing art educators who participated in this study?
2. How do these art educators express, through oral, written and visual
responses, their racial/cultural attitudes and understandings of self and others
in relation to their experiences in a social justice multicultural art education
studio course? 92
3. In what ways and to what extent do the qualitative data (oral, written, and
visual responses) help to explain the quantitative data (implicit and explicit
racial attitude responses) and vice versa?
4. What influence does participating, engaging and learning in an art education
studio course focused on social justice issues of race and racism have on
preservice and practicing art educators’ racial attitudes?
Study outcomes. To be demonstrated and discussed in later chapters, this study:
(a) resulted in a greater understanding of how students respond to social justice MCAE curricula focused on race and racism (b) resulted in a change in preservice art educators’ racial attitudes towards self and others, and (c) provided information for teacher preparation programs aimed at facilitating pre-service and practicing teachers becoming more comfortable working with diverse populations.
Sampling procedure and participants. As of 2008, the demographics of the art education program at the University of Georgia included 48 undergraduates, 45 of which were female and 43 of which self-identified as White. The number of graduate students in the program totaled 25, which included 16 master’s level students and nine doctorate level students. Of the 25 graduate students enrolled in art education, 21 of them were female and 22 of them self-identified as White.
These preservice teacher enrollment demographics are reflective of the larger teaching work force in America. Furthermore, Georgia’s educational workforce, much like the nation as a whole, is predominately (76.6 percent) made up of White teachers
(Georgia Professional Standards Commission, 2006). While the sample group used in this study was small (19 participants), limiting the generalizabilty of the study, the participant 93
pool was highly reflective of typical preservice teacher enrollment at many universities in
the United States as well as the educational work force in the United States. Furthermore, while this study took place in the Southeast region of the United States, prejudice and
racism is a national problem.
The population for the study included preservice and practicing art education
students who were purposively sampled. Students were recruited on the first day of class
through oral invitation, and were given an information letter (see Appendix A). All
participants enrolled in the Studio Techniques for Art Educators course during the spring
of 2010, totaling 22 students, were invited to participate in the study. The students were
given a week to decide whether they would like to participate. There were no incentives
provided. Those who decided that they would like to be involved in the study were asked
to sign consent forms at the first testing session. This study was conducted with approval
by the university’s institutional review board.
A total of 19 students participated in the study. Tables 2-4 show the demographic
characteristics of the participants. Variables include gender, self-identified racial
category, age, and academic level.
Gender. Most of the participants were female students (89.4%) in comparison to
male students (10.6%). One participant declined to specify gender (see Table 2).
94
Table 2
Gender of Participants
Frequency Percentage (+/- .01)
Female 17 89.47
Male 2 10.53
Total 19 100.00
Self-identified racial/ethnic categories. The majority of the participants were
White (74.0%), with only 26.0% of the participants identifying themselves as some other racial/ethnic background (see Table 3).
Table 3
Self-Identified Racial/Ethnic Categories of Participants
Frequency Percentage (+/- .01)
Black 2 10.53
Multiracial 1 5.26
White 14 73.68
Asian/Pacific Islander 1 5.26
Middle Eastern 1 5.26
Total 19 100.00
95
Age. The majority of the participants were under the age of 25 with 47.0%
between the ages of 19-21 years and 26.0% between 22-24 years. Seventeen percent of participants were 25-27 years. Only approximately 5% of the participants were either in the 28-30 year range or the over 30 range (see Table 4).
Table 4
Age of Participant
Frequency Percentage (+/- .01)
19-21 9 47.37
22-24 5 26.32
25-27 3 15.79
28-30 1 5.26
Over 30 1 5.26
Total 19 100.00
Academic Level. The majority of the participants were upper level undergraduates
(43.0%) or graduate students (32.0%), with only 26.0% of the participants at the
sophomore level (see Table 5).
96
Table 5
Academic Level of Participants
Frequency Percentage (+/- .01)
Sophomore 5 26.32
Junior 1 5.26
Senior 7 36.84
Graduate 6 31.58
Total 19 100.00
Mixed-Method Paradigmatic Stance, Purpose, and Design
Mertens (2005) contends that the transformative design of mixed-method research is well suited to complex studies oriented by critical theories. She suggests, “Mixed- methods have particular value when a researcher is trying to solve a problem that is present in a complex educational or social context…[and] can be used to answer questions that could not be answered in any other way” (p. 293). Tashakkori and Teddlie
(2003) write that Mertens advocates that all research, regardless of whether it utilizes a transformative framework, should ultimately be oriented towards social change and this orientation should be reflected throughout the research from beginning to end.
Additionally, Mertens (2009) points out that case studies are well suited to research that have a critical race framework.
Paradigmatic stance. This study takes a dialectic stance on mixing paradigms while mixing methods. This stance supports that “all paradigms are valuable and have 97
something to contribute to understanding; use of multiple paradigms leads to better understandings” (Greene & Caracelli, 2003, p. 96). Additionally, Mertens (2005) states:
…when the purpose of the research is complex, it is necessary to have multiple
questions, which frequently necessitates the use of mixed-methods. Mixed-
methods has the potential to contribute to addressing multiple purposes and thus
to meeting the needs of multiple audiences for the results (p. 293)
Purpose. The purposes for mixing methods in this study were development and complementarity. A development purpose means that one method is used “to inform the development of the other method” (Greene, 2007, p. 102) with the intent of gaining a better understanding of the phenomenon. Greene (2007) points out that studies in which the purpose is development are sequentially designed. This study is sequential in that the first phase of this study (preservice and practicing art educators’ implicit and explicit racial attitudes) was used to inform the ways in which data was collected in the second phase of this study (case study collecting oral, written and visual data).
A complementarity purpose means that different methods were used to investigate different aspects of the same phenomena with the goal of gaining a deeper understanding of the findings. Complementarity in this mixed-methods study was achieved by integrating the quantitative and qualitative data together to create a comprehensive overview of the findings.
Design. Creswell, Plano Clark, Gutmann and Hanson (2003) established this mixed-methods design typology as a framework for studies of an iterative nature. This typology is based on the sequence and the priority given to a method. Creswell, et al.
(2003) write that in a sequential transformative design, there are two distinct data 98
collection phases, and priority can be given to either method. Creswell, et al. (2003) write:
Sequential transformative design, in which one method precedes the other,
priority may be given to either method, and the results are integrated during
interpretation. This design is guided primarily by a theoretical perspective,
‘whether it be a conceptual framework, a specific ideology, or advocacy’. (p. 228)
In this study, the quantitative methods (IAT and explicit measure) preceded and informed the development of the qualitative methods (in-class discussions, written reflection prompts and visual art responses). However, the sequence in which the data was collected was not meant to imply that one data collection method nor one research paradigm was given priority over another. The integration of the data occurred throughout the analysis of the data. This process is illustrated in Figure 1.0.
Additionally, Table 6.0 further explains this graphical representation of the mixed-methods design, indicating the status of methods, the order of data collection, the ways in which the qualitative findings help to explain the quantitative findings and the ways in which the method relates to the research questions.
99
Figure 1. Visualization of the Sequential Transformative Procedures
100
101
The Quantitative Instrumentation and Data Collection
The quantitative methods for collecting data in this study included an implicit
attitude test and an explicit attitude measure. All statistical data analysis was reviewed
through informal peer debriefing
The Implicit Attitude Test. The IAT is a categorization task that measures the
strength of automatic associations between concepts. When two concepts are associated,
it is easy to give the same response to their exemplars, and when two concepts are not
associated the opposite is true. An increase in response latency in the computer-based version of this measure indicates bias towards a target. The algorithm used considers mean differences and the resulting score is referred to as the IAT effect. The higher the
IAT effect, the stronger the bias.
Most IATs are administered using a computer on which participants press particular keys on the keyboard in response to choices on the screen that have been designed to measure their automatic responses. The response latency is the dependent variable and is indicative of participants’ unconscious attitudes and associations. Lemm,
Lane, Sattler, Khan, and Nosek (2008) give this example and description:
The IAT measures the relative strength of associations between concepts in
different categories (e.g., flower/insect and pleasant/unpleasant) by measuring the
amount of time it takes to categorize stimuli from the four categories with just two
response options. In one condition, participants give one response (e.g., a key
press on a computer) for both flowers and pleasant and an alternate response for
both insects and unpleasant words. In a second condition, participants give one
response for both flowers and unpleasant words and the alternate response for 102
insects and pleasant words. The difference in average response latency between
the two pairings reflects the underlying relative strength of associations. (p. 2)
In general, a respondent would be able to correctly categorize the flowers listed as
pleasant faster than they could correctly categorize insects as unpleasant, indicating that
the individual has more positive associations with flowers than with insects (Lemm, et al.
2008). This response latency would be the measure indicating a positive association on
the computer version of the IAT. The computer IAT, which is available in a
downloadable format, requires computer programming in order to be installed on a
computer. The cost to have the computers within the art education department
programmed for such a test was $5000.00 and as such, was prohibitive. As a result, a
paper IAT adapted from the study conducted by Lemm, et al. (2008) was used. This
paper IAT differs from the computer-based IAT in that it can be administered to a group
of participants at one time, and it uses a different algorithm for scoring. Several studies
have established the paper-format IAT as a reliable and valid substitution for the computer-based IAT (Lemm, et al., 2008; Mast, 2004; Mori, Uchida, & Imada, 2008;
Vargas, Sekaquaptewa & von Hippel, 2007).
The paper IAT (see Appendix B) has two columns of stimuli from which the participant may choose a response. Two categories are located on the left, and two categories are located on the right above the column of choices. These represent the two conditions for which attitudes are being assessed. For example, Figure 2 illustrates how the first category (on the left) requires participants to categorize names typical among
Black people and pleasant words, and the second category (on the right) requires participants to categorize names typical among White people and unpleasant words. On 103
the next page, the category pairings are switched, creating a new second condition in which typical White names are paired with pleasant words in the first category and typical Black names are paired with unpleasant words in the second category.
Figure 2.0. Paper IAT Example
Additionally the paper IAT allows participants a fixed time period of 20 seconds to correctly categorize as many items as they can, starting from the left top category and working down the first column and then across to the next column. For example, in
Figure 2.0 the correct categorization for the left top category (Black Pleasant) would be 104
words that are pleasant and names that are typically associated with Black individuals.
When considering the first four items on the test (Deja, love, Amy, and evil), correct
responses for the left top category (Black Pleasant) would be indicated by filling in the
ovals associated with Deja and love. This response would be considered correct because
Deja is typically associated with Black names and love is typically associated with
pleasant. Lemm, et al. (2008) explains how the paper IAT is analyzed:
The number of correct categorizations in one condition compared with the other is
the key measure of relative association strength. This approach is different from
computer-based IATs, in which the number of responses is fixed and the amount
of time to complete them is the dependent variable. Even so, the procedural logic
is the same: close association between the concepts that share a response should
make the task easier, leading to better performance (i.e., more correct responses).
So, more categorizations in the second [White paired with pleasant] compared
with the fist condition [White paired with unpleasant] above would be interpreted
as an implicit preference for Whites compared with Blacks. (p. 4)
The algorithm Lemm, et al. (2008) designed for analyzing the paper IAT data is referred to as the Product: square root of difference. This algorithm accounts for the relative speed of response on each block and difference in the average latency per item between the two blocks. The IAT effect is calculated using the equation (X/Y) multiplied by the Square Root of (X-Y), where X is the greater of A (A= # Correct on Black + pleasant) or B (B= # Correct on Black + unpleasant), and Y is the smaller of A or B.
However, if B is greater than A, the resulting IAT Effect is multiplied by -1 in order to retain directionality. 105
The number of words marked correctly on the page, as indicated by the category
heading, is counted. Stronger associations result in more words being correctly
categorized in twenty seconds. The IAT effect, or strength of this association, can be
calculated by converting individual scores into z-scores, which indicate how many
standard deviations a datum is above or below the mean. If the z-score is greater than
+/-2 the individual could be said to have a strong implicit attitude.
Because the paper IAT format is designed to only measure relative strengths of pairs of associations, typically polar-opposed concepts pairs are used. For this reason, only White and Black category tasks were used. Additionally, the order of the combined tasks has been found to influence the measure. As suggested in Lemm, et al. (2008), to account for this, the IAT, which is oriented with Black on the left and White on the right in the Figure 2.0 example, was also created in a reverse version where White was on the left and Black was on the right. Half of the participants received this altered version.
Additionally to counterbalance the order of pages that participants receive, half of the participants completed the White + pleasant combination first while the remaining half completed the Black + pleasant combination first. Furthermore, though the computer- based version uses photographs, the IAT effects were found to be smaller with picture stimuli than with word stimuli on the paper IAT. The names that were chosen for the development of the IAT in this study are based on research by Fryer and Levitt (2004).
Their research investigated the most popular Black and White names given to children over several decades and the consequences of choosing such names for children. This research was featured on ABC’s program 20/20 in 2006. Their research established that names are often given based on what is popular during a particular time period and the 106
race of the child. When the data are analyzed regarding these names, patterns emerge, which indicate that some names can be recognized as being distinctively Black or distinctively White. Levitt and Dubner (2005) compiled a list of the top twenty most popular boy and girl names, based on whether the children were Black or White. This list was based on Fryer’s earlier study in which he collected data from California birth certificates for every child born since 1961. The data collected included more than sixteen million births and illustrated the dissimilarity in the most popular names White and Black children are given. For example, below are the top twenty names given to
White baby girls over the past ten years with less than 2 percent of these same names given to Black baby girls:
The Twenty ‘Whitest’ Girl Names
1. Molly 6. Madeline 11. Jenna 16. Holly
2. Amy 7. Katelyn 12. Heather 17. Allison
3. Claire 8. Emma 13. Katherine 18. Kaitlyn
4. Emily 9. Abigail 14. Caitlin 19. Hannah
5. Katie 10. Carly 15. Kaitlin 20. Kathryn (p. 187)
In contrast the twenty names most often given to Black baby girls over the last ten years:
The Twenty ‘Blackest’ Girl Names
1. Imani 6. Nia 11. Jada 16. Jasmin
2. Ebony 7. Deja 12. Tierra 17. Jazmin
3. Shanice 8. Diamond 13. Tiara 18. Jasmine
4. Aaliyah 9. Asia 14. Kiara 19. Alexus
5. Precious 10. Aliyah 15. Jazmine 20. Raven (p. 188) 107
The paper IAT for this study uses names from these lists in order to represent the most
current names typically given to either White or Black children. This is important
because the IAT test relies on polar-opposed concept pairs and the names need to be distinctly associated with names typically given to either White or Black individuals.
Additionally, the IAT and explicit attitude measure was administered by a third- party, Dr. Tracie Costantino, Associate Professor of Art Education and co-chair of my dissertation committee. This occurred for two reasons: (1) to reduce the inherent power differential between the students and the researcher, who in this case was also the teacher.
Also, to be a measure aimed at ensuring the students that the findings from their racial attitude tests would not influence or impact the teacher/student relationship and (2)
Lemm, et al. (2008) found that the race of the proctor might affect the IAT outcome writing:
Attitudes assessed with the paper-format IAT appear to be sensitive to the kinds
of situational cues as those assessed with the computerized IAT (Blair, 2002). For
example, White (but not Asian American) participants showed weaker pro-White
attitudes when the test was administered by a Black experimenter than by a White
experimenter (Lowery et al., 2001). (p. 4)
For these reasons, the IAT was administered by a third-party who was White given the fact that the researcher was Multiracial and the impact that may have had on participants’ choices was unknown. Additionally, extra precautions were taken to ensure that students’ responses did not impact the teacher/student relationship in this course. Each testing packet, containing both the implicit and explicit measures, was randomly numbered. The third-party administrator kept the number and the corresponding participant’s name 108
separate from the test results in a locked cabinet. The information was only used to
correlate the data from pre-course testing with post-course data in order to assess if any attitude change had occurred. The researcher also kept the anonymous test results in a locked cabinet separate from the racial attitude score. In this way, students' racial attitudes were not linked to them in an identifying way until after the completion of the course.
The explicit racial attitudes measure. The explicit attitude measure (see
Appendix C) was adapted from a study by Hinojosa and Moras (2009). In Hinojosa and
Moras’s study, the researchers aimed to assess White teachers’ racial attitudes and compared them to the racial attitudes of the general public. The researchers used questions from The General Social Survey (Davis, Smith, & Marsden, 2009), a national data program for the sciences sponsored by the University of Chicago. This national database holds data that has been collected on explicit racial attitudes, among other attitudes, since 1972. The survey questions used in this longitudinal database were designed to collect data on racial attitudes and attitudes towards issues surrounding race from random samples of individuals throughout the United States.
The format established by Hinojosa and Moras for categorizing and displaying the findings was also used in this current study. Hinojosa and Moras used descriptive statistics to categorize the survey questions used from the General Social Survey. The five categories they developed were: Equal Treatment; Social Distance; Origins of
Inequality; Affirmative Action; and Stereotypes. For example, survey questions that were categorized as addressing equal treatment of Black individuals included questions on laws against interracial marriage, racial segregation of neighborhoods and voting for a 109
Black presidential candidate (see Appendix C). These five categories established by
Hinojosa and Moras are the same categories used to analyze the data from the explicit
measure given to participants in this study.
The Practitioner Inquiry and Qualitative Data Collection
Practitioner inquiry. Dinkins (2009) writes, “Practitioner research is a way of
knowing, an attempt to peel back layers of knowledge and understandings in order to
stimulate growth and generate new knowledge for use” (p. 271). Cochran-Smith and
Donnell (2006) point out that there are several different variations and versions of practitioner research and at the core of each of these are “historical, cultural, and social forces” (p. 503) which guide them. Understanding these forces helps practitioners to better recognize the challenges they face when they study their own work.
Cochran-Smith and Donnell (2006) discuss five categories of practitioner inquiry, which includes action research, teacher research, self-study, scholarship of teaching, and practice as a site for research. The orientation of this practitioner inquiry focuses on action and social change. Additionally, this study was most closely aligned with the practitioner research categories of teacher research and the scholarship of teaching and learning. Cochran-Smith and Donnell (2006) describe these categories of teacher research as “…a way to study one’s own school” (p. 505) and simultaneously “work for social justice” (p. 505). Additionally, they describe the scholarship of teaching and learning as not only gaining a better understanding of teaching and learning, but also opening up this inquiry to “critique by others” (p. 506).
Additionally, Mertens (2009) points out that a transformative mixed-methods study can relate to a practitioner research methodology because elements of action 110
research are inextricably woven throughout the transformative paradigm. Mertens writes,
“key characteristics of transformative action research are action, research, and
participation” (p. 183). She also explains, “When the transformative research or
evaluation accords full power to the community, the approach resembles that described
by Reason and Bradbury (2006b) and Kemmis (2006) in participatory action research
(PAR)…” (p. 137). Additionally, Mertens explains that as with practitioner inquiry, transformative inquiry has levels of participant participation. She writes:
The type of [participant] involvement can range from consultation with
representatives from the impacted community to full involvement with the power
of decision making about all aspects of the research or evaluation resting with the
community…. The transformative paradigm, with its broad scope that
encompasses research and evaluation done for the purposes of social justice and
human rights, embraces such approaches whether or not PAR or indigenous
methodologies are used. (p. 137)
This variation in the type and level of participant involvement within the transformative paradigm allows for “opportunities for the emergence of many models of research” (Mertens, 2009, p. 137). The level of participation that participants had in this study was limited. This was due in part because of a need to ensure the internal validity of the IAT and explicit attitude measure. The study participants were given a brief description of the study, as described in the study information letter (see Appendix A).
The study participants in the current research were not provided with the findings until the completion of the course. 111
Qualitative data collection. The practitioner inquiry case study involved
collecting and analyzing participants’ oral responses to semi-structured interview questions, written reflection responses online to reading assignments and visual art expressions in response to studio assignments. Observation notes and researcher reflective journal also provided additional data.
The semi-structured interview questions (see Appendix D) used in this study were audio-taped and analyzed. The questions assessed participants’ beliefs regarding three main categories: their comfort levels with working with diverse populations, the role of teacher preparation programs in preparing teachers to work with diverse populations, and the effectiveness of the course. Member checking was also used to verify the transcripts and the interpretation of the data.
The written reflection responses to readings, observation notes and visual expressions were collected and hand coded to assess what attitude changes were occurring during the course and how the participants expressed these changes.
Participants’ artworks (see Appendix G for a list of studio assignments) were also collected and provided an underrepresented perspective on this research topic. Mertens
(2009) contends that studies that employ a critical race lens aim to investigate the role race plays in our imaginations, visual expressions, and attitudes. Madison (2005) explains further:
Critical race theory analyzes the complex machinations of racialization in the
various ways it is created, sanctioned, and employed, but it also illuminates the
various ways race is an effect of our imagination and how racial symbols and 112
representations determine our understanding and attitudes about race in the first
place. (pp.72-73)
This statement directly links one’s racial attitudes to one’s imagination and further supports the idea that art can effectively express this dynamic. Furthermore, visual art provides an avenue in which both conscious and unconscious beliefs and attitudes can be explored. Learning through visual art employs what we know based on our sensory input and what we imagine. This link to imagination, serendipitously, also links to unconscious thought and processes. Holloway and Krensky (2001) reiterate this notion, writing,
“changes in the individual imagination [are] the precursors to changes in society” (p.
357). Dewey (1934) also stated, “Only imaginative vision elicits the possibilities that are interwoven within the texture of the actual. The first stirrings of dissatisfaction and the first intimations of a better future are always found in works of art” (p. 346). More recently Eisner (2002) echoed this same sentiment:
Imagination gives us images of the possible that provide a platform for seeing the
actual, and by seeing the actual freshly, we can do something about creating what
lies beyond it. Imagination, fed by the sensory features of experience, is expressed
in the arts through the image. The image, the central term of imagination, is
qualitative in character. We do indeed see in our mind’s eye. (p. 4)
Data Analysis Methods
To analyze the quantitative data from the IAT, the algorithm established by
Lemm, et al. (2008) was used, as well as entering the data in the software program
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) for statistical analysis. A z-score was used to transform and standardize responses in an effort to measure the strength of an 113
association. A paired t-test was also calculated to determine whether participants’ scores differed from each other in significant ways. For the explicit attitude questionnaire, the categories established by Hinojosa and Moras (2009) were used to analyze the data. Field notes drawn from observations and interview responses were analyzed and emerging themes were hand-coded and member checked. The 19 participants’ written reflections were analyzed and coded using a framework informed by a synthesis of past and current racial identity development theories (Choney & Behrens, 1996; DiCaprio, 2008; Helms,
1990; LaFleur, Rowe & Leach, 2002; Pope-Davis, Vandiver & Stone, 1999; Rowe,
Bennett & Atkinson, 1994; Tatum, 1992). These theories guided the racial attitude trait typology that was developed for analyzing the participants’ racial attitudes as expressed in their written reflections. These typologies include three traits exhibited by the participants in this study: Naïve, Informed and Ally. These typologies are discussed in detail in Chapter 6. Visual artworks were paired with their respective artist’s statements and categorized according to emerging themes.
Protection of Human Subjects (IRB)
Because the teacher and the principal investigator in this study are one and the same, several steps were taken to reduce the inherent power differential between the students and the researcher. Students were explicitly made aware that participation in this study was strictly voluntary. Participants were also explicitly told that they could withdraw their participation at any time without penalty. Additionally, it was clearly stated that non-participation would not affect the student’s grades or affect the attitude of the teacher. All procedures, risks, benefits, and any other information, which may have influenced the potential participant’s decision to willingly participate, were explained. 114
Signed, informed consent was obtained from all participants who volunteered. All data
collected was confidential. Signed permission to use students’ class assignments (e.g., art
works, written reflections, etc.) was obtained.
No incentive was given to participate as an additional measure to avoid students
feeling compelled to participate. Minimal risks to the participants were anticipated,
although some students may have found their biases unsettling. Pseudonyms were chosen
by the participants and will be used in any future publication of this research. Results of
the data analysis were made available to participants upon request at the completion of
the course. Signed consent was obtained for any data that was, or will be, shared at
conferences or in publications. All data will be retained for two years. Participants were
made aware of all of these procedures.
Benefits to participants possibly included gaining a better understanding of
diverse student needs, developing a greater awareness of their attitudes towards diverse
populations and developing effective approaches for working comfortably with diverse
populations. This research also provided opportunities for preservice educators to reflect
on their attitudes and behaviors and could help them become more self-aware of the ways in which their beliefs and behaviors affect students. This awareness could also be useful in helping them to identify critical issues related to culturally responsive teaching and providing all students with an equitable education. Additionally, the data collected in this study will contribute to the field of education by providing teacher educators with needed information regarding future teacher attitudes and to better prepare them for working with diverse populations. This study also has the potential to help teacher educators identify the critical issues that surround teacher bias in the classroom and develop strategies for 115
addressing these issues in teacher education programs. Ultimately, reducing teacher bias
in the classroom is beneficial to all stakeholders in education.
Validity, Credibility and Trustworthiness
Zeichner and Noffke (2001) write that the terms internal validity and external validity are normally associated with quantitative forms of research. They write that in quantitative educational research these terms are defined as such:
Internal validity refers to the credibility of inferences that experimental treatments
cause effects under certain well-defined circumstances. External validity refers to
generalizing the effects observed under experimental conditions to other
populations and contexts. (p. 315)
The introduction of post-positivism and qualitative research initiated a reconceptualization of the notion of validity and introduced the concepts of trustworthiness, which is akin to internal validity. Conversely, transferability is akin to external validity.
Mertens (2009) warns, “Validity is a controversial concept in transformative research and evaluation because of the inherent cultural baggage it carries via concepts such as personality characteristics, intelligence, and attitudes that are measured in a social science context” (p. 236). For this reason Mertens suggests adapting “Guba and Lincoln’s
(1989) concept of credibility as the qualitative parallel to validity” (p. 236). Onwuegbuzie and Johnson (2006) support Mertens notion and take the stance “that the use of the word validity in mixed research can be counterproductive” (p. 55). However, it has also been suggested that researchers of mixed-method studies, “Report and discuss validity within 116
the context of both quantitative and qualitative research in a mixed-methods study…”
(Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007, p. 146).
The validity of the quantitative data. In the quantitative portions of this study
(IAT and explicit attitude survey) issues concerning validity were critically analyzed using Mertens’s (2005) questioning strategy as a guide. Some of the important questions she suggests asking centered on whether or not the data collection instrument is reliable and dependable, if the meaning of the scores were derived from the instrument, and determining if the instrument measured what it was intended to measure. Because both of the measures used in this study have been used previously in studies that established validity, a pilot test for construct validity of the instrument was not conducted. For a full in-depth discussion of the validity of these quantitative measures, the reader is referred to the original studies (IAT: Lemm, et al., 2008 and Explicit attitude survey: Hinojosa &
Moras, 2009). Both of these studies discuss, in detail, how validity of the instruments was established, including internal consistency of the measures, reliability coefficient, and consequential validity.
In this study, I was also sensitive to the “intended and unintended, outcomes of test interpretation and use” (Mertens, 2005, p. 357). In using an instrument to get at preservice and practicing art educators’ racial attitudes, a relationship between the score and participants’ current behavior was subsequently established. However, human behavior is complex and ever-changing. So the results of the quantitative data analysis were considered to be reflective of the range of value afforded in this type of variable.
This is in part why interviews and written reflections became important in further understanding the participants’ responses to the quantitative measures. Mertens (2005) 117
further explains this idea, writing, “the psychometric tradition can be enhanced by adding alternative methodologies (less standardized) for assessments and by conducting case studies of the context in which assessments take place” (p. 359).
There were also external validity issues related to whether the participants were
“sensitized” (Mertens, 2005, p. 141) to the posttest by taking the pretest. The scoring algorithm developed for the IAT aims to avoid this influence. Statistical analysis of the data was also reviewed in an informal peer debriefing with a statistician and professional in the field of psychology.
The credibility of the qualitative data. In the qualitative portions of this study
(interview, written reflections, observations, visual art expressions) credibility was established through peer debriefing, member checks, persistent observation, discrepant evidence analysis, and triangulation. Mertens (2005) suggests that in collecting and analyzing these different qualitative artifacts, “the use of extant materials must always be tempered with an understanding of the time, context and intended use for which the materials were created” (p. 389).
For the purposes of triangulation, care was taken that the multiple methods and data sources supported the interpretations, especially the legitimate differences in interpretation. Mertens (2005) states that when differences in interpretation occur, “Such diversity should be preserved in the report so that the ‘voices’ of the least empowered are not lost” (p. 426). Maxwell (2005) further supports this idea and warns that there is a need to “rigorously examine both the supporting and the discrepant data” (p. 112) in order to determine if the conclusion needs to be modified. Maxwell also points out the importance of rich data. Rich data occurs when the research describes the participants, 118
procedures, and outcomes in full comprehensive detail. In order to get rich data from long-term observation and interviews, verbatim transcripts were necessary. For this reason, audio equipment was used to capture the interview responses.
Cochran-Smith and Donnell (2006) explain that a practitioner inquiry that aims to be transformative will address different issues of validity than a practitioner inquiry that emphasizes knowledge generation. The latter will often focus on “… notions of validity
[which] are similar to the idea of trustworthiness” (p. 510). However, because transformative practitioner inquiry is conducted for different reasons, it has been suggested that a different set of criteria be used to establish the trustworthiness of the study (Cochran-Smith & Donnell, 2006; Zeichner & Noffke, 2001).
Trustworthiness in practitioner inquiry. Anderson, Herr and Nihlen (2007) suggest five criteria for assessing validity and establishing trustworthiness in action research that is transformative in nature. They describe transformative research as “linked to some kind of action to change educational and/or institutional practices” (p. 40). The first criterion Anderson et al. describes is outcome validity. This is described as “the extent to which actions occur that lead to a resolution of the problem or a deeper understanding of the problem and how to go about resolving it in the future” (p. 40). The second criterion is process validity, and it is directly related to the first criteria for outcome validity. Process validity “asks to what extent problems are framed and solved in a manner that permits ongoing learning of the individual or system… [and] are the
‘findings’ a result of a series of reflective cycles that include the ongoing problematization of the practices or problems under study?” (p. 41). Process validity also asks, “What counts as ‘evidence’ to sustain assertions?” (p. 41). Triangulation and/or the 119
inclusion of multiple perspectives can be used to ensure that bias is addressed.
Democratic Validity is the third criteria and this refers to “the extent to which research is
done in collaboration with all parties who have a stake in the problem under
investigation. If not done collaboratively, how are multiple perspectives and material
interests taken into account in the study?” (p. 41). The fourth criteria is catalytic validity
and Anderson, et al. quotes Lather (1986), writing that this is “the degree to which the
research process reorients, focuses, and energizes participants toward knowing reality in
order to transform it” (p. 42, as cited in Anderson et al.). Anderson, et al. (2007) point out
that this transformation should occur not only for the participants, but for the researcher
as well. Anderson, et al. also note that it is important for the researcher to keep a journal
so that s/he might document their own transformation. The final criteria proposed by
Anderson, et al. (2007) is dialogic validity, which is achieved when “action researchers
participate in critical and reflective dialogue with other action researchers (Martin, 1987)
or work with a critical friend who is familiar with the setting and can serve as devil’s
advocate for alternative explanations of research data” (p. 44).
Three of the five criteria described by Anderson, et al. were used in the current study to guide the assessment of the validity/trustworthiness of the case study: democratic, catalytic and dialogic validity. Democratic validity was used in the collecting and analysis of the different artifacts in this study. Member checking was used to validate the themes that were hand coded from the written reflections and interview data.
Additionally, the multiple methods and data sources were repeatedly evaluated to ensure that they supported the interpretations. Comparing and combining the findings of the quantitative pre- and post-test IAT assessments with the findings of the qualitative data 120
analysis of the interview transcripts, written reflections, observations, and visual art
expressions, assessed catalytic validity, and provided a snapshot of participants’ racial
attitude transformation. This process is reflective of catalytic validity as the data
indicated both an implicit and explicit change in racial attitude. Dialogic validity was
accomplished through peer debriefing, member checks, discrepant evidence analysis and
reflective dialogue with this study’s dissertation committee as a form of critical peer
debriefing.
Additionally, the boundaries between practitioner and researcher “blur when the
practitioner is a researcher and when the professional context is the site for the study of
problems of practice” (Cochran-Smith & Donnell, 2006, p. 509). Several authors have
addressed the challenging issues of being both researcher and teacher (Anderson, et al.,
2007; Cochran-Smtih & Donnell, 2006; Marx, 2006; Staiger, 2006). Cochran-Smith and
Donnell (2006) warn that this dualistic role “has the potential to generate innovative research and new kinds of knowledge as well as new tensions and professional dilemmas” (p. 509). Anderson, et al. (2007) point out one of the potential tensions, writing that practitioners who already have an insider’s view must also be able to see from the outside looking into their own practice. In order to address the duality of practitioner-researcher identity, I sought to be cognizant of both the emic viewpoint as an insider of the group and the etic viewpoint as an objective outsider of the group. Equal weight was given to these perspectives through the use of a reflective teacher journal and peer reviews/member checks. This journal documented the experience of being both a teacher and a researcher. Additionally, a subjectivity statement was developed in order to address this researcher’s personal views and be reflective on how they may have affected 121
this study. Equal weight was given to these perspectives through the use of peer reviews
and member checks.
Generalizabilty and transferability. The generalizabilty of this case study is
best addressed using Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) idea of transferability. Several
researchers (Anderson, Herr, & Nihlen, 2007; Mertens, 2005; Zeichner & Nofkee, 2001)
suggest this model is appropriate for assessing not only a practitioner inquiry, but also
studies that are oriented by a transformative paradigm. Lincoln and Guba (1985) write:
… if there is to be transferability, the burden of proof lies less with the original
investigator than with the person seeking to make an application elsewhere. The
original inquirer cannot know the sites to which transferability might be sought,
but the appliers can and do. The best advice to give to anyone seeking to make a
transfer is to accumulate empirical evidence about the contextual similarity; the
responsibility of the original investigator ends in providing sufficient descriptive
data to make such similarity judgments possible. (p. 298)
One way to achieve sufficient descriptive data is to use thick description “so that
the readers can understand the contextual variables operating in that setting” (Mertens,
2005, p. 309).
Limitations, Delimitations and Assumptions
This study is delimited because it only included 19 volunteer preservice
and practicing art education students who enrolled in ARED 5130/7130 offered at the
University of Georgia during the spring semester of 2010. Hence, the number of
participants is too small of a sample for generalizations. Another limitation of this study is the assumption that responses on the implicit attitude test are reflective of the true 122
nature of a participant’s racial attitude. Furthermore, these responses may only be
reflective of one’s attitude at that particular point in time. Many factors can and do
influence one’s attitudes. There were many uncontrolled outside variables that could have
affected the outcome of this study, therefore, the findings do not aim to determine
causality. Moreover, this study makes the assumption that the explicit attitude survey
responses are truthful reflections of participants’ racial attitudes. Additionally, while The
General Social Survey (Davis, Smith, & Marsden, 2009) was administered for the 28th time in 2010, the National Opinions Research Center at the University of Chicago has not updated the language of many of the questions since 1972. As such, the questions narrowly focused on the Black/White dynamic only and utilized exclusive terms such as church, instead of including other important places of worship like temples, mosques, and synagogues. This study assumes that though these limitations existed, they did not negatively affect participants’ understanding of the questions. The assumption is also made that the IAT and explicit racial measure were appropriate instruments for determining the participants’ racial attitudes. Additionally, this study assumes that the qualitative data collected was appropriate for the use in assessing racial attitude change.
Other assumptions include the belief that without intervention, racial attitudes of the participants would have remained unchanged. While a transformative research design aims for a change to occur, it cannot be determined why participants responded a certain way or to what extent an attitude change may have occurred. The topic of race and racism is complex and highly sensitive. Because of the nature of this topic, some participants may have experienced uncomfortable periods during this study, which may have affected their racial attitudes. This begs the question of how much discomfort is productive in a 123
learning environment. Throughout this study, some participants may have remained uncomfortable with this topic resulting in a high resistance to change, as well as denial that change is necessary. Other participants may have been in the process of changing their attitudes, but needed more time and prolonged exposure to explore the subject matter in further detail. Hence, one course alone may not unseat deeply held beliefs. The course, ARED 5130/7130, was designed in an effort to provide a comfortable atmosphere in which participants could explore and discuss racial issues and facilitate a positive change in participants’ racial attitudes.
124
CHAPTER 4
ARED 5130/7130 COURSE DESIGN
Race is just one axis of a much broader debate on social justice. However, too often it is an underemphasized aspect of understanding educational equity. Consequently, this results in the under-examination of race in the dynamic of student achievement.
Several scholars have pointed out that too often teachers’ cultural expectations are not aligned with students’ cultural needs and this misalignment is believed to play a key role in the racial achievement gap in schools (Nieto & Bode, 2008; Sadker, Sadker &
Zittleman, 2008; Singleton & Linton, 2006). This would suggest that a teacher’s overt and covert racial and cultural biases send messages to students about their academic capabilities, therefore impacting student success in schools. Singleton and Linton (2006) argue that the first step in addressing this problem is to break the silence by “ushering in courageous conversations about race” (p. 1). This course was designed with this tenet in mind.
The participants in this course met twice a week on Tuesdays and Thursdays over a 16-week semester for two hours and 45 minutes per class period. The first 45 minutes of class were originally reserved for critical class discussion of the assigned readings (see
Appendix G), question and answer sessions, in-class activities and presentations. The last two hours of class were originally supposed to involve the visual art explorations of the topics discussed in the course. However, after a couple of weeks, the students felt that 45 minutes was not enough time for discussion and asked if we could use the full two hours 125
and 45 minutes for discussion on Tuesdays and then Thursday’s class would be used as studio art time. This change was beneficial because it allowed us to cover a wider range of topics during our discussions and also allowed students more time to focus, uninterrupted, on their studio art projects.
This chapter discusses the teaching disposition and strategies utilized in the course. It also describes the overall format and design of the course. Moreover, it specifically addresses the nature of the course readings, online and in-class discussions, visual art responses and the final art exhibition.
Teaching Dispositions and Strategies
Students and instructors often bring preconceived ideas, attitudes and beliefs related to race with them into the classroom. This indirectly and directly affects teaching and learning by closing off the opportunity for open inquiry and dialogue. In order to reduce such tensions and create a classroom climate that was conducive to productive discussions about race, I asked my class to approach the topic of race as if they were investigators examining a crime scene. A thorough investigation of a crime scene involves careful and detailed inquiry into unfamiliar territory. This analogy was the springboard for the class discussions, as it placed the students in a position of inquiry, redirecting them from starting their conversations with strongly held and often misguided opinions. This re-orientation allowed the evidence they collected through readings and discussions to more easily influence their understanding of racial issues in education.
The students were asked to be aware that some individuals might be more comfortable talking about racial issues than others. I wanted the students in this course to understand that often times, conversations about race are shut down because those 126
involved are afraid of offending others or being perceived as racist. In order to begin and
keep the dialogue going, it was critical that we allow each other to openly discuss a wide
variety of racial issues without fear of judgment. In an effort to create a safe environment
where all students would feel that they could participate in these conversations, I
suggested that we aim to suspend judgment of each other, remembering that comments
and questions were coming from a place of inquiry. I also asked the class to be mindful
that introducing race into a discussion changes the emotional landscape of that
conversation. As such, they should be thoughtful about how they phrased their questions
and responses.
I aimed to be highly reflective about what may or may not be working in this
course and adjusted the course accordingly to meet the unique needs of the students in
this particular class. I considered the course syllabus to be tentative. This allowed me the
flexibility to have students’ questions, interests, and suggestions also guide the
discussions and the structure of the course. For example, racial topics were sometimes introduced based on students’ questions. One question that was raised by several students was why it is socially acceptable for some Black people to call each other the “N” word in a friendly or casual manner, yet it is unacceptable for White individuals to do the same.
This question immediately raised the tension in the classroom. Although discussing this topic was not a part of the official curriculum design, the shift in dynamic in the classroom suggested a dialogue needed to take place. In an effort to foster the conversation and keep an open climate for discussion, I served as moderator for this topic. I began by reminding the students that often times, when there is a racial aspect in
a situation, it changes the way in which we understand and evaluate it. I then asked them 127
to imagine removing the racial aspect of using the “N” word and reconsider the situation.
I used, as an example, the way in which my younger sister and I used to greet each other on the phone when we were teenagers. We would call each other typically offensive names, saying the words in a sing-song-tone, which would often elicit fits of laughter from us both. While the terms we used were commonly considered degrading, our relationship was such that we knew the use of these words were not malicious. Ironically, we used these terms affectionately with each other. However, I explained, I would have never have called a close friend or a professional acquaintance on the phone and greeted them in the same manner. My sister and I understood each other’s intent and the context in which we spoke to each other was playful. I used this example to highlight that the relationship between two individuals, coupled with one’s intent, and the socio-cultural context in which one uses a word, matters. Furthermore, we discussed the assumption implied within the question; that all Black individuals use the “N” word in conversations with other Black people. I explained that many individuals, including Black individuals, find the “N” word offensive and do not use it any context. We also discussed the historical use of this word and talked about the ways in which a community might
“reclaim” a word in an effort to take back its power. We finished by looking at artists who use their artworks to accomplish a similar task by re-appropriating the power of racially charged images. One example included the artworks of Michael Ray Charles whose works often aim to problematize the image of the Sambo (see Appendix I).
By engaging these students in a conversation about a difficult racial subject in a way that acknowledged the validity of the question, I aimed to demonstrate the process of examining a question about race without passing judgment on the person(s) who 128
inquired. Listening calmly, attentively, and non-judgmentally to the students’ questions seemed to reset the mood in the classroom. Thoughtfully responding to this difficult question also had the effect of immediately reducing the tension in the room. I tried, through my actions, reactions, and dialogue, to set a tone that welcomed inquiry. This facilitated the conversation rather than shutting it down prematurely.
I aimed to help the students in this course gain a foundational understanding of the role of race in education. My goal was to help them understand that although race is a social construct, it plays a decisive role in the sociopolitical arena of our society. This results in many people being treated differently based on their race. By guiding preservice and practicing teachers’ investigations and open dialogues about race and racism, I wanted my students to begin to acknowledge that racial experiences are real and impact how each of us views and understand the world. Ultimately, I aimed to facilitate my students becoming more comfortable in conversations and situations that have a racial dimension. I hoped that this would aid in building a strong foundation upon which they could build their own culturally responsive curricula.
The objectives of this course aimed to develop preservice and practicing art educators’ studio skills and techniques, while simultaneously facilitating an understanding of themselves racially, culturally, and historically. Additionally, another goal was to help them gain a deeper understanding of cultural diversity and transform their understanding of the role of race in education while developing culturally relevant approaches to teaching art education. Furthermore, this course was also intended to better prepare art educators to serve diverse populations and assist them in becoming more comfortable with the topic of race. Throughout the course, future and practicing art 129
educators critically investigated, examined, and problematized the nature of race in education. Through arts learning, they began to better understand how race, identity and racism complicate the relationship between teachers and students. Effective teaching involves more than teaching strategies, the planning of the curriculum, and subject matter knowledge. It also includes the beliefs and attitudes of an educator and the ways in which these dispositions shape an educator’s teaching approach in the classroom.
Overall Format and Design of the Course
This course involved reading recent writings on racial issues and exploring their role in education and culturally responsive teaching. These readings helped to guide the dialogue about racial hierarchies, passive racism, Whiteness, racial identity, stereotypes, privilege and the racial gap in student achievement. Students reflected on these readings both in writing and group discussions. Students were also introduced to artworks by artists whose works address racial issues. After reading, reflecting and discussing, the students were then asked to visually express their understanding of a racial issue through artmaking. Moreover, this course met an advanced studio course requirement of the art education major. As such, core-learning processes of studio art framed the design of the studio portion of this course, while approaches to dialogue were guided by education scholars whose area of expertise is racial discourse (Berger, 2004; Davis, 2007; Gay,
2000; Marx, 2006; Nieto & Bode, 2008; Singleton & Linton, 2006; Sleeter, 2001; Tatum,
1997; 2007; Tochluk, 2008; Winant, 2004).
Course readings. The first required reading for the course was, Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education, by Nieto and Bode
(2009). This book looks at the cultural, socio-political, and personal factors that affect the 130
success of students. Emphasis was placed on making the content of the reading relevant to contemporary art education practice and culturally responsive teaching. Additionally, students read selected chapters from the second required text for the course, Rethinking
Multicultural Education: Teaching for Racial and Cultural Justice, edited by Wayne Au
(2009). The readings in this book are short interviews, vignettes and concrete examples of anti-racist teaching in the K-12 environment, including in the art classroom. The last required text was Hetland, Winner, Veenema, and Sheridan’s (2007) book, Studio
Thinking: The Real Benefits of Visual Arts Education. This book shares a case study aimed at delineating some of the habits of mind that students develop in the studio art classroom. Additional readings were assigned and posted online in an effort to compliment the topics being discussed. Three other books were highly recommended though not required for the course, and excerpts were read from each: How to Teach
Students Who Don’t Look Like You: Culturally Relevant Teaching Strategies (Davis,
2007); The Arts and Creation of Mind (Eisner, 2002); and Culturally Responsive
Teaching: Theory, Research, and Practice (Gay, 2000). Additional articles were provided
(see Appendix H for reading list), and each student chose a particular article for which they would lead the discussion by sharing their thoughts and questions regarding the reading with the class. Researcher notes were taken after the in-class discussions and compiled as a data resource.
A change was made to the reading list after the first three weeks of class to reduce the number of readings assigned. This was due in part to the request of the students, who felt that there was not enough time allotted in the course for a comprehensive discussion of each reading. While the course reading list was originally chosen based on the idea 131
that not every reading assignment would be discussed in class, students felt that the readings were often eliciting emotions and questions that they wanted to discuss further in class. In order to allow students the opportunity to respond to all the readings assigned, the amount of readings required were reduced (see Appendix H). The assigned readings informed the discussions both in class and on eLearning Commons, the online discussion forum.
In-class discussions. The sequence for class discussions were structured based on the framework provided by the authors Singleton and Linton (2006) in their book
Courageous Conversations about Race: A Field Guide for Achieving Equity in Schools.
In the first section of their book, the authors begin by exploring the topic of race and racism and its role in education. The next section discusses strategies for talking about race and racial issues. The last section provides suggestions for closing the racial achievement gap in schools. Additionally the book, Can We Talk about Race? And Other
Conversations in an Era of School Resegregation by Tatum (2007) and Tatum’s (1992) article, “Talking about Race, Learning about Racism: ‘The Application of’ Racial
Identity Development Theory in the Classroom framed the approach and guidelines established for classroom dialogue”. Tatum (1992) provides four strategies for guiding dialogue about race:
1. The creation of a safe classroom atmosphere by establishing clear guidelines
for discussion;
2. The creation of opportunities for self-generated knowledge;
3. The provision of an appropriate developmental model that students can use as
a framework for understanding their own process; 132
4. The exploration of strategies to empower students as change agents.
Both the sequencing structure and strategies for the conversations about race were
modified to meet the specific needs of the participants in this study. Both of the books
used to guide these classroom conversations tended to support the idea that students of
color may enter a course focused on race ready to become agents of social change. It is
often assumed that students of color may already have a strong understanding of racism
based on their personal experiences dealing with racist actions. Additionally, these texts also support the notion that White students may not yet be prepared for this step due to a lack of personal experiences that involve being the victim of racism and a lack of understanding the foundational concepts of racism. While these assumptions may hold a certain level of merit, in this current study, no assumptions were made as to whether a participant’s race automatically positioned him or her to be more comfortable or ready to engage in conversations about race. In fact, several students of color in this study exhibited similar racial biases in their classroom dialogue as their White counterparts, and several White students expressed a very keen understanding of racism and a readiness to move forward as change agents. The approach to dialogue in this study was built on the foundational understanding that many people, regardless of their race, would rather not talk about race or racial issues. This is partly due to the fact that discussions about race can be uncomfortable, create anxiety and sometimes result in conflict.
Additionally, many preservice and practicing teachers indicated in their written reflections that they had been taught that in polite society, it is not okay to acknowledge difference. This color-blind socialization process wrongly positions race-consciousness as equivalent to racism and further complicates teachers’ understanding of the important 133
role that race plays in the lives of their diverse students. The critical discussions about race, racism, and color-blindness in this study aimed to facilitate all students becoming more comfortable with the topics without assuming that a students’ race automatically positioned a student at a certain comfort level.
Online discussions. An online forum was used in this course to provide a space in which everyone could reflect, present their point of view, and respond to the ideas of his or her peers. Every week, an open-ended reflection question was posted online. This consisted of ten prompts (see Appendix F), aimed at guiding the participants’ written reflections and online conversations. These questions were designed to encourage examination of additional article readings that had been posted online. Students responded to these questions in the form of a reflection posting. In addition, each student responded to a posting made by another student in an effort to create a valuable exchange of dialogue. The data collected from this task reflected participants’ racial attitudes towards the topics covered in the course and subsequent changes in those attitudes throughout the course.
Studio artwork. Guiding the studio art design of this course were the works of
Elliot Eisner (2002) and Hetland, Winner, Veenema, and Sheridan (2007). The studio art component of this course encompassed a comprehensive art experience that explored aesthetics, art history, art criticism and art production. The students’ artworks were reflective visual responses to racial topics discussed in this course. Peer critiques of students' work occurred at the beginning (idea stage), middle (creating stage), and final
(completion stage) of artmaking. The critique strategy involved small groups of students talking about each other's work. Instructor critiques were one-on-one and occurred at the 134
beginning and final stages of artmaking. These critiques aimed to facilitate students
addressing the racial aspects of the art project by encouraging them to think about how
their art reflected their understanding of the racial topics being discussed in the course.
Using artwork as a data source presented unique challenges. Because this course
also functioned as an introductory studio art course, students entered the course with
varying levels of skills in printmaking, digital photography, and ceramics. It was unclear
what role technical ability within a medium played in the successfulness of a student’s
artwork to conveying their understanding of racial issues. Furthermore, because some
students were more advanced in their artmaking skills, this data was not analyzed as an
indicator of progressive levels of racial understanding for each individual participant.
Instead artworks, along with artist statements that exemplified particular racial attitude
typologies (Naïve, Informed, Ally) were analyzed and utilized in this study. These racial
attitude typologies are discussed in detail in Chapter 6.
There were three visual art responses collected from the students in this course.
The first was a mixed media response focused on reflecting the students’ understanding of themselves as racial beings. The second visual response explored the use of clay and digital media as a reflection of the students’ understanding of race viewed through multiple perspectives. The third visual response was created in a medium chosen by the student and aimed to reflect their comprehensive understanding of the role of race in education and society. Students developed their art studio skills by learning the safety precautions, tools and techniques, artistic conventions and studio practices in a wide variety of media. Some of the specific art studio areas covered included ceramics, printmaking, digital photography and graphic design. 135
Roth (2007) points out that providing opportunities for students to explore their
own lives by expressing "where they are from, who they are, and what experiences they
are bringing to the classroom can enable students to feel as if they are helping to
construct the classroom community" (p. 78). These studio experiences sought to provide these types of self-exploratory opportunities.
The first studio experience. The first studio experience involving printmaking and mixed media techniques focused on lived histories. Christine Sleeter’s Critical
Family History (Sleeter, 2008a) approach was adapted as a framework for the first studio art experience. This project was titled, Know Thyself – Critical Family History and aimed to facilitate the students’ ability to visually express themselves in racial/cultural terms, connect to their racial/cultural history and critically develop a visual representation of their critical family history research. Students began their first studio component by reading selected passages from recent writings on racial issues and then critically discussing what role these issues play in education over the first five weeks of the course
(Berger, 2004; Davis, 2007; Marx, 2006; Nieto & Bode, 2008; Singleton & Linton, 2006;
Sleeter, 2001; Tatum, 1997; 2007; Tochluk, 2008; Winant, 2004). These readings helped to guide the in-class dialogue about issues such as stereotypes, racial hierarchies, passive racism, and Whiteness. Students reflected on these readings in written reflections and in classroom discussions. Students also participated in small group discussions after watching sections of the PBS video Faces of America and NBC's Who Do You Think You
Are? They finished by reviewing Christine Sleeter's Web site on critically researching one's family. The small groups then discussed what defines a “critical” family history.
Sleeter's Critical Family History approach is informed by a critical theoretical tradition. It 136
is a teaching strategy aimed at helping preservice education students examine themselves racially and culturally. Sleeter’s process combines collecting genealogical research, family stories and documents as well as historical memories as artifacts students can use to develop their critical life histories.
Once students had gathered information and artifacts on their family histories, they began sketching ideas for their mixed media piece. The group also studied and critiqued Lezley Saar's mixed media piece, Tale of the Tragic Mulatto, 1999, as an exemplar work in which family research was organized visually (see Appendix J).
While this studio experience aimed to move students beyond uncritical examinations of their life stories, many of the students in this course found moving into this transformative space challenging. Sleeter (2008a) points out that investigating one’s life history is only the first step in this process and warns that many white preservice educators find it difficult to move beyond this stage. This was evidenced in this studio art class.
A few students were able to visually express a critical understanding of how their lives were linked to a history of oppression, power and privilege. By deconstructing their histories through art, these students moved into a space of transformational learning and developed deeper insight into the ways in which race, culture and identity shape the perspective through which they viewed the world. For example, one student shared that she had previously accepted the “history of her family as a series of mythologized
European immigrant stories that minimized the cultural loss involved in assimilation” and emphasized that anyone can come to America and “pull themselves up by their bootstraps.” Through her research, she discovered that while her family had suffered 137
from oppression as Catholics living in a Protestant Scottish town, they had also gained privileges and benefited from being White in America. In her artist’s statement, she explained that this realization helped her to understand her ancestors as real human beings, who had both been oppressed and sometimes oppressed others (see Figure 3).
This awareness repositioned her understanding of racial privilege.
Figure 3. A student’s mixed media piece critically explores her family’s past.
Another student’s mixed media piece explored her memories growing up as a
Multiracial American, and her family’s struggle to both assimilate into American culture and simultaneously retain their cultural heritage (see Figures 4 and 5). She examined how some immigrants were able to transition into becoming White Americans, while darker- 138
skinned individuals were denied such access and the privileges that often come with
being White in America.
Figure 4 and Figure 5. This copper sculpture investigates what it means to be
Multiracial in America (image on left). Details of the copper sculpture (image on right).
Another student's research also revealed a legacy of activism against racism (see Figure
6). She learned that her family had provided safe houses for the Underground Railroad
during the 1850s.
139
Figure 6. This mixed media piece visually explores the multidimensionality of
being White and depicts both a history of anti-racist efforts and White privilege.
Using Sleeter’s methodology for creating Critical Family Histories, the students in this course investigated their family roots, examined histories of oppression, problematized White privilege, and discovered legacies of anti-racist efforts. Sleeter
(2008a) notes, “Self-examination is particularly important as a part of learning to teach students who are culturally different from oneself and to address institutionalized inequities that permeate students’ lives both inside and outside of school” (p. 114).
However, this process of self-examination was challenging for about half of the students in this course. Both peer and one-on-one teacher/student art critiques aimed to encourage 140
all students to push towards critically examining and visually expressing the racial aspect
of the studio projects. For example, as part of the art critique with a student I would
specifically ask the student to talk to me about how their artwork addressed issues of
race. If the student was unable to explain how their artwork related to racial issues, I
encouraged them to push further in exploring how they might address racial issues in
their artwork. However, I did not make specific design or conceptual suggestions in an
effort not to influence how a student chose to express their understanding in their art
piece.
While these students were able to create aesthetically pleasing works of art, they
were unable to critically examine the racial aspects of their history. This was a problem
for some of the students of color as well as many of the White students in the course. For
example, one student created a visually appealing piece (see Figure 7) but only explored
her genealogy, stopping short of critically examining the role of race in her family
history. She reflects only on her ancestry, writing in her artist’s statement “throughout
my life I have proudly claimed to be a Cajun, but it was not until this year when I traced
my genealogy that I discovered that my ancestors are true descendants of the Acadians.”
Sleeter (2008a) warns that students may tend to “decontextualize their family stories [by]
adopting the ‘heroic individual’ narrative that is common in textbooks… producing in the
process uncritical celebrations” (p. 121). Such a narrative is also expressed in this
student’s artist statement when she writes, “The Acadians were a very positive group of individuals and throughout all of the trials they faced, the theme of their existence seems to be making the best out of what you have. I believe this theme has been handed down in my family.” 141
Figure 7. Student’s artwork explores her genealogy but stops short of critically examining the role of race in her family history.
The students who struggled with critically examining their family’s past may never have considered the impact of race on their lives before or thought about themselves in a racial context. Additionally, the production of artworks that merely celebrated one's ancestry, or focused on some other element of personal identity, may have reflected a certain level of discomfort with creating artworks that relate to race as a subject matter. Furthermore, neglecting to place and problematize one’s racial ancestry within the larger sociopolitical context of one's history may have reflected a level of resistance to the idea that racial difference should be acknowledged and explored. 142
The second studio experience. The second studio experience involved ceramics
hand-building techniques and focused on exploring the human figure in clay and digital
photography. Springgay and Freedman (2007) explain that "to locate the body in the
threshold of meaning making" (p. 120) situates one "to understand that to be a body is to
be continuously in relation with other bodies and the world" (p. 120). By creating works
that incorporated the human figure students problematized how society marks individuals
as different. This studio experience also aimed to highlight how the cultural self is
oriented to the other and how society conceptualizes the body as difference.
This project was titled, Beauty, Self and the Other. Students began by reading
select chapters in books that focused on artworks addressing the concept of beauty and
racial identity (M. Harris, 2003; Pinder, 2002; Willis, 2009). Students also analyzed and
critiqued the 1994 lithography titled, Wigs (portfolio), by Lorna Simpson (see Appendix
K). Her artwork aimed to question who is considered beautiful in America and who sets
those standards. Her installation piece examined the ways in which African American
women “conform to, or rebel against, prevailing White standards of beauty by braiding,
dying, weaving, and processing their hair” (Walker Art Center, 1999). Students also
looked at and talked about two sculptures created in 1997 and 1998 by Alison Saar. The
first one is titled, Blonde Dreams (see Appendix L) and the second one is Chaos in the
Kitchen (see Appendix L). Both of the pieces also explore hair as a marker of racial
identity and the role that hair plays in the lives of African American women. Students also participated in small group discussions after watching a special segment of the Tyra
Banks’s show, titled Good Hair, and a short documentary titled A Girl Like Me, on the
Understanding Race Web site (http://www.understandingrace.org/). Both videos 143
examined standards of beauty for African American women. After reviewing these artworks and videos and discussing both, students were given essential questions to guide the development of their artworks. The questions included the following:
• How has the notion and understanding of “beauty” in America been influenced by
the cultural lens through which we perceive racial bodies and difference?
• What is “beauty”? Is it tangible? Does “beauty” matter?
• How has the notion of “beauty” been idealized and exploited, today and
historically, in artworks and in the media?
• Is Black “beauty” a matter of conditioning/assimilation? What are the continuing
challenges surrounding visual images and portrayals of Black people?
• How is “Otherness” exoticized? What are the hidden messages sent to people of
color about the standard of “beauty” in America?
Some students chose to explore this topic through the use of clay while others chose to work with digital photography. All the participants in the study were able to meet this challenge in comparison to the first visual art response. The participants responded visually to a particular topic discussed in class and tied it to an essential question. For example, one student responded to the video A Girl Like Me, which we had watched in class and visually expressed her response to the question “What are the hidden messages sent to people of color about the standards of ‘beauty’ in America”? The student depicts a brain; its surface is morphed into a mass of ideal White female bodies. It rests on a cut- paper silhouette of a young Black girl’s profile (see Figure 8). The student talks about her work in her artist statement: 144
I am struck by how beauty-obsessed we are as Americans. Unrealistic ideals of what is beautiful permeate everything in our society, and it seems to always be on our minds. As women, we are expected to be all sorts of conflicting ideals: chaste yet sexual, skinny yet voluptuous in all the right places, natural yet perfectly polished…the list goes on.
In this piece, I focus on how race impacts American beauty ideals. One aspect of
White privilege is the notion that being White is the norm. Throughout the media, makeup counters, and hair salons, Whiteness dominates standards of beauty.
Society tells us that women of color need to take any measure possible to be light- skinned and straight-hair or they will risk being stereotyped and fetishized.
What bothers me the most is how these rigid, anglicized beauty standards have affected young children’s perceptions of themselves. In the 2006 video ‘A Girl
Like Me’ by Kiri Davis, 15 out of 21 Black children chose a White doll over a
Black doll when asked to pick the prettier one. I wanted to express through my art that no one can escape our racist beauty ideals until we try to actively change our social structure and open our minds about the definition of beauty and who defines it.
145
Figure 8. This clay piece explores how Whiteness can dominate ideals of beauty, affecting the perceptions of children of color.
Another student also explored the idea of hair as racial identity through digital photography (see Figure 9). This student writes in her artist’s statement:
I was inspired by a photographer named Thorsten Brinkmann, who created
portraits of people with objects enveloping their heads. In the photos I have taken, 146
I have wrapped my subjects’ hair around their faces. I chose to use hair because I
was interested in how people tend to racially identify themselves by the style,
texture, length, and color of their hair. Therefore, in light of the political and
racial definition attached to different hairstyles, I was also interested in how
people might react to having hair as a person’s only identifying trait. What does
someone’s hair say about his/her person? Or occupation? Race? Culture?
Demeanor?
Figure 9. Digital photos examine the idea of hair as racial identity.
One student titled her work, Color Me Pretty (see Figure 10) and in her artist statement
she wrote:
The clay crayons I constructed are representations of the many images we see in
media and magazines which act as painful reminders of the narrow standards of
what is considered to be beautiful and good. The result is a market flooded with
products (skin lighteners, hair straighteners, eye color enhancers, etc.), which are
geared towards helping those who are not light-skinned, blue-eyed or blonde
achieve this standard of beauty.
147
Figure 10. This clay piece questions beauty standards in America.
The third studio experience. The last studio experience provided an opportunity for the students to choose their own media for expression and to demonstrate their comprehensive understandings of the topics discussed throughout this course. Students who had been previously successful in connecting their artwork to the topic of race continued to do so. These students were also the same students who scored much higher on the Implicit Attitude Test and whose score indicated a strong association of “Black” with “good”.
Several students chose to reflect on the class discussion which focused on the
history of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) in America and artists who examine this group’s legacy, including Fred Wilson, Kara Walker, Philip Guston, Thomas Hart Benton, and
William Christenberry. As part of this portion of the course, the class watched the 148
History Channel documentary, Ku Klux Klan: A Secret History. I also brought in artifacts from a family member who had been the Grand Dragon of the KKK for many years before his passing. Students were able to see a wide variety of memorabilia, including photographs, a KKK rulebook, a hooded robe and completed membership applications.
We talked as a class about the pieces, the symbols and the meanings behind them. This presentation seemed to have one of the greatest impacts on the students. One student created a drawing suggesting that while overt racism is socially unacceptable, passive racism is much more the norm and yet equally as problematic (see Figure 11). In her artist statement she writes:
In this piece, I wanted to depict that racism is not just a problem of the past, but
ever-present today. Although outright, violent racism, like that associated with the
Ku Klux Klan, is more underground, passive racism is everywhere and its practice
is widespread. This passive, institutionalized racism may not seem as malicious,
causing less people to question it. This creates a vicious long-standing cycle that
can create unfair barriers for people of color. So, which is worse?
The professor’s photographs of her family member, who was a major figure in the
Klan, struck me. These pictures were of everyday family photos, with smiling
children in a domestic environment. Then I saw the horrible KKK memorabilia in
the background of the photo decorating the interior of the home. Immediately,
these photos became grotesque and haunting. They made me think about how
racism hides where one least expects it, whether it is active or passive. In
response, I drew these hooded figures on wood to demonstrate that racism is very 149
much engrained in our society and unless we make an active effort to inform
ourselves about racism, nothing will change.
Figure 11. Charcoal drawing on wood examines the pervasiveness of passive racism and
questions its innocence.
These studio experiences culminated in a student-led art exhibition at the end of the
course.
Final art exhibit. Terry Barrett explains in the introduction of Burton's (2006)
Exhibiting Student Art: The essential guide for teachers that art exhibitions can work to unify the art curriculum. He writes:
Exhibiting art completes the artistic cycle. When exhibition is a regular component of the art program, the entire art curriculum becomes more coherent and directed. Students are motivated and empowered by their own work. Aesthetics, art criticism, and art history flow through the exhibition. Ideas raised during the exhibition process become the basis for future studio projects and aesthetic discussions. (p. 6) 150
This portion of the course aimed to have such a unifying effect and facilitate preservice art educators becoming familiar with the processes involved in exhibiting student work.
As a guide for the student-led exhibition, students read excerpts from Burton’s (2006) book Exhibiting Student Art: The Essential Guide for Teachers. Students were divided into committees which were responsible for the following tasks: wall preparation of the exhibition space and painting pedestals, building pedestals for displaying artworks, set-up and cleanup of the reception area, food, and bar, and invitation design and distribution.
I invited a guest lecturer, Joseph Damasch, who is currently the art educator at
Dalton Elementary School in Dalton, GA, to come and talk to the students about organizing a student exhibition. Mr. Damasch had also previously worked for the
University of Tennessee’s Cress Gallery and was responsible for hanging the exhibitions in this gallery space for three years. Mr. Damasch showed the students how to calculate the hanging height for each piece of artwork in their show. He also demonstrated and assisted students with calculating the spacing distance between art pieces. He talked to the students about different methods for curating a theme for an exhibition and assisted in helping the students install their art works in a salon-style design. This allowed for every student to exhibit at least one work of art. Burton (2006) writes that this style of exhibition design “maximize[s] the number of artworks that can be shown but require[s] good planning and clear themes to avoid a cluttered look” (p. 120). In an effort to develop a cohesive theme, students were asked to email their top two theme ideas as well as title suggestions for the art show. I compiled the suggestions into a list of the top three most suggested themes and titles and the class as a whole voted on the final decisions. The 151
theme was examining race in art education and this theme was incorporated into the show title: Revealing the Invisible: Examining Race in Art Education.
The invitation committee met with me to sketch out ideas for the invitation design that reflected the chosen title and theme of the art show. The students chose to create a photomontage of all the students in the course. The artwork was designed to highlight the course’s focus on race. I worked with the students, instructing and assisting them with designing the artwork using Adobe Photoshop software. I also assisted in choosing a printing company to produce the final invitations and oversaw this process.
The exhibition lasted about two hours, and the turn out of visitors was exceptional. Each student invited ten guests, and the show was announced to the university campus via email and through the local campus paper. As a result, several professors and students from other departments attended, as well as individuals from the community. In the following in-class review of the show, students told me that their family and friends thought the show had been not only successful, but very thought provoking (See Appendix N for images of artworks included in the exhibition show).
Epistemological Stance
My role throughout this course was to act as a facilitator rather than an instructor.
The constructivist learning theory was the foundational basis for the teaching strategies and dispositions utilizes in the ARED 5130/7130 course. This theory supports the notion that learning increases and is more meaningful when students explore and build their knowledge through engaging in a variety of experiences with the course instructor serving as a guide (Brooks & Brooks, 1993). Retention of the information that participants had gained in this course was a key component in facilitating a long-term 152
transformational learning experience. Brooks and Brooks (1993) point out that lecture
and/or reading based courses tend to result in students retaining only five to ten percent
of the information they have learned long-term. In contrast, courses that utilize discussions, hands on learning (learning by doing), teaching through demonstration, and immediate application of knowledge result in students retaining between 50 to 90 percent of the information they have learned over the long-term. This current course design utilized such a constructivist approach, in an effort to facilitate students retaining the information from the course long-term.
Other constructivist learning methods utilized during the course included: written reflections; assessing the students’ needs when making decisions on studio experiences, discussion protocols, and instructional strategies; investigating students’ backgrounds and prior knowledge of the topics; and fostering communication and open inquiry among students.
Students were immersed in experiences designed to challenge their current conceptions of race. Additionally, a safe and accepting environment was created to encourage in-depth examinations and discussions of racial issues. Students were also encouraged to take the initiative to further develop their awareness with optional readings and explore their thoughts, feelings, and understandings through their visual art. Each activity was designed to provide opportunities for students to construct their own meanings in terms of race and further their understanding of its potential impact on classroom dynamics.
153
Conclusion of the Course Design
Singleton and Linton (2006) contend that critical self-examination is key in positioning educators to begin developing the skills necessary for cultural proficiency.
This means that as educators move out of color-blind discourse and become race- conscious, they begin to gain insight into how their race, ethnicity, culture and life experiences have come together to form their worldview (Castro-Atwater, 2008; Davis,
2007). By examining these underlying aspects of themselves, educators also begin to understand how and why students’ worldviews may be different from their own. This realization can be a starting point for educators to begin to develop ways in which to effectively bridge the cultural differences between themselves and their students.
Students in the ARED 5130/7130 course participated in critical self-examination within a racial context using multiple approaches including readings, reflections, videos, websites/online forums, discussions and creating artworks. Although limited in terms of length, this course was designed for long-term impact with the intent that this type of exposure would facilitate and inspire students to continue developing the skills and understanding necessary for working with diverse populations.
This coursework was a starting point for participants to think about how to interact with and engage their future students. The course provided a means for introducing avenues in which students could explore the impact of race on their own lives as well as within the larger context of society. Rejecting the “I don’t see color” ideology—the prevalent colorblind stance—is only the first step towards “courageous conversations” (Singleton & Linton, 2006, p. 1). However, by choosing to recognize and respond to racial issues, most participants became more comfortable with and open to the 154
topic of race as demonstrated in the change in participants’ IAT scores, in-class discussions, interview responses, written reflections and artworks submitted throughout the course to be discussed in subsequent chapters. The interactive teaching methods and resulting self-examinations were only one part of the many teaching strategies utilized to enable students to develop a deeper understanding of race and its role in the classroom.
The next chapter discusses how analyzing one’s implicit and explicit racial attitudes can also aid in the process of understanding and transforming one’s racial viewpoints.
155
CHAPTER 5
RESEARCH QUESTION 1
One important component of self-examining one’s racial attitude is the process of identifying what attitudes one may hold. Two specific measures, the Implicit Attitude
Test (IAT) and the explicit attitude measure, provided participants with a means for examining both apparent and underlying biases. It also helped the participants to understand their racial attitudes at the start of the course, and the transformations of those attitudes by the end of the course.
Implicit Attitude Test (IAT)
A non-experimental, one-group pre- and post-test measure was given to participants as an indicator of their implicit racial attitudes before and after participation in the social justice studio art education course at the University of Georgia described in
Chapter 4. The race preference IAT measures implicit associations of White and Black race with good and bad terms. This measure aimed to answer the first research question of this study: What are preservice and practicing art educators’ implicit and explicit racial attitudes? The following related hypothesis was generated from this research question:
Participants will show an increase in associations of Black with perceptions of "good", as indicated by an increased IAT score posttest, after participating in a studio art course focused on examining race and racism.
The computer version of the IAT assigns individuals to categories of slight, moderate or strong associations based on their IAT score strength. This gives participants a sense 156
of where their score falls in comparison to other test takers given the fact that they do not
receive their actual score. However, the paper IAT instead provides participants with
their actual test score without converting it into a category. One way to provide participants with some context as to how their individual scores compared to others is to convert them to z-scores. A z-score is a statistical measure used to tell a study participant how his or her score compares to the average score of the class. The score is computed by subtracting the sample mean and dividing by the standard deviation of the sample. A large z-score, +/- 2, could then be said to indicate a strong implicit attitude in comparison to the average participant (see Table 7).
157
Table 7
IAT Participant Scores Pre-test Scores Post-test Scores n=19 Black/ White z-score z-score Black/ White z-score z-score Good Good (B/G) (W/G) Good Good (B/G) (W/G)
1 15 29 - 0.775 1.832 18 28 - 0.438 1.832
2 19 20 0.379 - 0.033 20 21 0.011 - 0.775
3 16 20 - 0.486 - 0.033 17 23 - 0.663 - 0.775
4* 18 20 0.091 - 0.033 15 19 - 1.114 - 0.775
5 12 29 - 1.641 1.832 18 27 - 0.438 - 0.775
6 14 22 - 1.063 0.381 23 20 0.687 - 0.775
7* 19 30 0.379 2.039 14 16 - 1.339 - 0.775
8 17 16 - 0.197 - 0.862 18 23 - 0.438 - 0.775
9* 19 21 0.379 0.174 18 13 - 0.438 - 0.775
10* 24 20 1.822 - 0.033 23 25 0.687 - 0.775
11 15 14 - 0.775 - 1.276 18 21 - 0.438 - 0.775
12 19 22 0.379 0.381 28 20 1.812 - 0.775
13 23 19 1.534 - 0.240 23 18 0.687 - 0.775
14 14 17 - 1.063 - 0.654 26 24 1.362 - 0.775
15* 11 15 - 1.929 - 1.069 10 11 - 2.239 - 2.098
16 19 20 0.379 - 0.033 20 20 0.011 - 0.024
17 20 20 0.668 - 0.033 23 16 - 0.775 - 0.946
18 20 18 0.091 - 0.447 20 21 - 0.775 0.206
19 22 11 1.245 - 1.898 27 16 - 0.775 - 0.946 * Indicates five instances where students’ associations of Black with perceptions of “good” declined post-course
158
Data Analysis
The null hypothesis, that there would be no change in the associations of Black
with perceptions of “good”, was first tested using a paired samples correlation test. This
test was conducted as a means to determine if there was a significant change in the implicit racial attitudes before and after participating in the course. There is evidence that the mean score was positive, which indicates that the course was effective in improving implicit racial attitudes, t(18) = 2.28, p< .05. Furthermore, findings show that there was a statistically significant increase in the mean association of Blacks and perceptions of
“good” post-course (M=19.95; SD=4.56) when compared to pre-course scores (M=17.68;
SD 3.56). These results demonstrate that after taking the course, students’ perceptions of
Blacks being associated with ideals of “good” improved, t(18)=2.28, p< .05, 95% CI [.18,
4.35] (see Table 8).
Table 8
Paired Samples Test
95% CI
M SD SEM LL UL t df α (2-tailed)
Post & Pre-test 2.26 4.33 .993 .175 4.35 2.28 18 .035
Note. CI= confidence interval; LL= lower limit; UL= upper limit.
Table 9 indicates that the relationship between the post-test and pre-test was approaching significant. Given the closeness to significance, as well as the directionality of the results, this finding implies that the pre-test and post-test measured the same concepts, with a positive correlation of r=. 45 (see Table 9). 159
Table 9
Paired Samples Correlations
n Correlation α
Post-test & Pre-test 19 .454 .051
After examining the distribution of the difference in the association of Black with
perceptions of “good” (between pre and post-course scores) using normality and QQ- plots findings show that the distributions in differences are symmetric, and the assumptions of normality seem fairly reasonable. However, while there were five instances where students’ associations of Black race with perceptions of “good” declined post-course, 14 of the 19 students, roughly 74% of the class, showed an increase in their positive associations of Black with perceptions of "good" post-course.
IAT Score Decline Post-Course
All five students whose scores declined were female, with four self-reporting as
White and one as Black. While the sample was too small to determine if the decline in scores was statistically significant, there were commonalities amongst the participants.
The z-scores on the IAT measure indicated that each of these students had moderate to strong associations of White and Black to the “good” and “bad” terms relatively. While others in the class also exhibited similar associations, the written reflections collected from these five students suggest some commonly held beliefs and experiences among these students. For example, the first prompt given at the beginning of the course on
January 11th (see Appendix F), aimed to assess the level of comfort participants had in discussing issues of race at the onset of the course. Four of these five students indicated 160
in their responses that they were not comfortable discussing issues of race. The four
students who said they were uncomfortable all self-identified as White. These same four
students also addressed the fact that they were raised to avoid discussing issues of race
and diversity. One respondent stated:
As a person I feel uncomfortable discussing race. I have always been taught that
this is a topic similar to religion and politics, everyone has an opinion, but it
should not be discussed. As a teacher, I discovered that I was even more anxious
about this touchy issue/ topic. When the topic comes up, I tend to be silent or
avoid stating my opinions unless I feel that my side is not being argued or touched
upon. I tend to do this in most discussions, but race and diversity is specifically a
topic that renders me silent.
While the one Black student indicated she was comfortable talking about race, she also indicated that she did not feel this was a topic that should be introduced into the classroom curriculum. She also felt that art lessons should not specifically aim to address racial issues. She stated in her written reflection response, “Educators should only discuss
[race] if it is a problem in their classroom.” Each of these students acknowledged some level of discomfort with the topic of race.
Additionally, the second reflection prompt asked students to write about their racial history and racial experiences. All five of these students shared that they had limited or cursory experiences with people outside of their own racial groups.
Furthermore, their limited experiences perpetuated racial stereotypes, which were evident in their discourse. For example, one White student wrote that her early experiences with
African Americans were limited to time spent with the family nanny. She writes, “Other 161
than in classes, the only other interaction with students outside my own race, were in
sports and clubs.” Another student writes:
My life has only been lightly sprinkled with other races… my white friends have
far outnumbered my friends of a different race. I grew up in a completely white
neighborhood, in a majority white school system. The main exposure I had to
different races came through my soccer team, but even then, my team was
comprised of 70 percent white players.
Another student wrote:
I attended a private school that was mostly white, and the majority of those
students went to the same church as I did (do)…. I distinctly remember one Black
boy from elementary school, and I think I remember him because he tended to be
a little more perverted than the other boys his age. However, I’m pretty sure he
had not been brought up the same way the other boys in class (or girls, for that
matter) had been…. As athletics became more of a focus and our school moved
from the Christian High School Athletic Association to the Single A region, I
know for a fact that our coaches tried to recruit black people, because in general
they are more athletic (yes, that may be a stereotype, but this was my experience).
Said another:
Most of my life I have pretty much been surrounded by other White people. My
schools were predominately White, and my classes were even more so. It is so
evident to me now how segregated my honors and AP classes were. I ran track in
high school (I’m not sure why – I was pretty terrible at it). People constantly
made comments and jokes about how the black kids were always so much faster 162
than the White kids. This honestly didn’t [faze] me one bit at the time. In high
school most of the interactions I had with people who are a different race than I
am were through various service projects I did…. To be honest, the word
‘diversity’ was a word that bothered me for a long time. I felt like it was an attack
against me because I felt like I was the opposite of diversity.
Similarly, the last student also had limited early exposure to individuals outside of her
race. She writes in her reflection response:
I have always grown up in a predominately black neighborhood. However, with
the exception of pre-K, I have always gone to a predominately White school. I
believe my kindergarten year was the most culturally shocking. I had seen White
people before but mostly on television….I never felt so alone….I actually
remember one of the White kids coming up to me and touching my hand. He
wanted to see if the ‘dirt’ came off…. I went home later that week and was
talking to my mom and she asked if I had made any friends. I told her only on the
bus (I rode the bus with only Black children).
Each of these students had limited exposure in their early years to individuals from racial groups that were different from their own. Moreover, later experiences were often brief, casual, or cautious. In class discussions, these five students also indicated that they continued to have close friendships within the confines of their own racial groups. Two students currently belonged to Greek organizations that were exclusively attended only by members of their own respective race.
Four of these five students also shared the belief in their written reflections that while understanding one’s own racial history was important, they felt it was much less 163
important to understand the racial history of one’s students. Out of the students who shared this perspective, three self-reported as White and one self-identified as Black. One student wrote, “I don’t feel that this should be a priority in getting to know your students.”
In their final written reflection at the end of the course, all four White students indicated that while they did feel more comfortable with the topic of race, they were very hesitant to initiate a lesson or discussion in their classroom that addressed racial issues.
However, the one Black student felt that she had a new perspective on the topic. She wrote:
Now that I understand that there are teachable moments and how to go about
doing that, I truly feel that I can [discuss race]. Before this class I probably would
not have had talks about race in my classroom. If the subject had come up, I
would have just let it ease back under the rug. Now, I feel comfortable enough to
be able to have this discussion with others.
When asked by the researcher, via email, why these students felt their scores had declined, all the students were unsure. Four of the five students suggested that they were stressed at the end of the semester and felt that this may have affected their responses.
Additionally, four of the five students stated that they felt their racial attitudes had improved over the semester. One student never responded to the questions.
Explicit Attitude Test
The categories established by Hinojosa and Moras (2009) for analyzing their survey data were also used in this current study. The questions chosen from The General
Social Survey were selected specifically to address issues familiar to college-aged 164
participants, and as such differ slightly from the questions used by Hinojosa and Moras in their study. Nonetheless, all questions used in this current study align with the established categories used in Hinojosa and Moras’s study. The five categories developed by
Hinojosa and Moras were: Equal Treatment; Social Distance; Origins of Inequality;
Affirmative Action; and Stereotypes. This measure was given as part of the pre-test and post-test.
Equal treatment. The survey questions in this category were designed to elicit responses aimed at exploring an individual’s beliefs on “broad principles of equal treatment in different situations concerning race” (Hinojosa & Moras, 2009, p. 37). These questions also aim to address hypothetical situations that would not affect the survey participants’ daily lives. On the pre-test, participant responses in this current study indicated that 95% of the respondents strongly disagreed that there should be laws against marriages between Blacks and Whites. One student, however, slightly agreed. In response to the question of whether White people have the right to keep Blacks out of their neighborhoods, 17 of the participants responded that they strongly disagreed. One participant responded that they slightly disagreed and another responded that they did not know. As to whether Black and White students should go to separate schools, 95% (18) of the participants strongly disagreed. One participant slightly disagreed. The last question in this category asked participants if they would vote for a Black president.
Again, 95% of the responses indicated that the participants strongly agreed, with one participant indicating slight agreement. On the post-test, 100% of the respondents strongly disagreed in response to the first three questions. The responses did not change 165
on the last question. The results indicated that the majority of the participants believed in equal treatment (see Table 10).
Table 10
Equal Treatment
Pre-test Post-test n/percentage (+/- .01) n/percentage (+/- .01)
Responses Agree Neutral Disagree Agree Neutral Disagree
1. There should be laws 1 0 18 0 0 19 against marriages 5.26% 0.00% 94.74% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% between Blacks/African
Americans and Whites.
2. White people have a right to keep Blacks/African- Americans out of their 0 1 18 0 0 19 neighborhoods if they 0.00% 5.26% 94.74% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% want to and Blacks/African- Americans should respect that right.
3. White students and 0 0 19 0 0 19 Black/African-American 0.00% 0% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% students should go to separate schools.
4. If my party nominated a Black/African- 19 0 0 19 0 0 American for President, I 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% would vote for him if he were qualified for the job.
166
Social distance. Unlike the Equal Treatment category, the Social Distance
category questions “gauge how respondents would respond or act in situations where a
certain level of personal integration is involved” (Hinojosa & Moras, 2009, p. 40). When
asked if the participant grew up with Black families living close to them, the class was
divided in their responses. Eight of the 19 participants said “yes”, seven replied “no” and
the remaining four participants were unsure. Interestingly, on the post-test, some respondents changed their responses to this question. It is unclear if some of the participants changed their answers because they remembered a family they had originally forgotten about or if they had changed their answer for some other reason. Perhaps, participants changed their answers because they perceived that answering “yes” might have indicated a desire to be racially and culturally aware of those who lived around them. The majority of the participants, 84 percent, did indicate that they knew someone who had invited a Black individual over for dinner, or had done so themselves.
Additionally, 74 percent of the participants attended a church that Black individuals also attended (see Table 11).
167
Table 11
Social Distance
Pre-test Post-test n/percentage (+/- .01) n/percentage (+/- .01)
Responses Yes Unknown No Yes Unknown No
1. Where you grew up, were there any Black/African 8 4 7 12 2 5 American families living close 42.11% 21.05% 36.84% 63% 11% 26% to you?
2. During the past few years, has anyone brought a friend 16 1 2 16 1 2 who was Black/African 84.21% 5.26% 10.53% 84.21% 5.26% 10.53% American home for dinner?
3. Do Blacks/African Americans attend the church 14 4 1 14 4 1 that you yourself, attend most 73.68% 21.05% 5.26% 73.68% 21.05% 5.26% often, or not?
In response to the question of whether the participant would have objected if a member of
their family brought a Black friend home for dinner, all the respondents indicated that
they would not object (see Table 12).
168
Table 12
Social Distance
Pre-test Post-test n/percentage (+/- .01) n/percentage (+/- .01)
Strongly Mildly Not Strongly Mildly Not Responses Object Object Object Object Object Object
1. How strongly would you object if a member of your 0 0 19 0 0 19 family wanted to bring a 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% Black/African American
friend home for dinner?
When asked on the pre-test about how close they felt to both Whites and Blacks, 13 of
the participants indicated that they felt equally close to either one, and five participants
responded that they felt very close to Blacks. This number changed on the post-test with
11 participants responding that they felt close with either racial group and two participants changing their responses to very close to Blacks. It is uncertain why participants changed their answers post-test. Perhaps, participants had begun friendships with Blacks over the course of the semester. Although when asked how close they felt to
Blacks, the majority of the class indicated neither one nor the other, this number changed dramatically when asked a similar question about Whites. In that case, over half the participants (i.e., 63 percent) indicated that they felt very close to Whites. The change in response may reflect a desire to not be perceived as showing preference towards Whites when the question was geared at evaluating relationships with Blacks. On the contrary, 169
when the question was reframed to evaluate relationships with Whites, the participants may not have perceived their responses as preferential towards one race (see Table 13).
Table 13
Social Distance
Pre-test Post-test n/percentage (+/- .01) n/percentage (+/- .01)
Not Very Not Very Responses Close Neither Close Close Neither Close
1. How close do you feel 1 13 5 1 11 7 to Blacks/African 5.26% 68.42% 26.32% 5.26% 57.89% 36.84% Americans?
2. How close do you feel 1 6 12 1 6 12
to Whites? 5.26% 31.58% 63.16% 5.26% 31.58% 63.16%
Two of the last three questions in this category addressed whether participants would
favor living in neighborhoods where half or more than half of their neighbors were Black.
In response to this question on the pre-test, two students responded that they were unsure, and 12 students indicated that they neither favored nor opposed living in a neighborhood where half of their neighbors were Black. While this number stayed the same on the post- test, the two students who marked unsure on the pre-test changed their answers to a favorable response on the post-test. However, when asked on the pre-test whether they would favor living in a predominately Black neighborhood, 79 percent responded that they neither favored nor opposed it, with only three students responding that they favored 170
living in such a neighborhood. Two participants switched their answers from neutral
responses to favoring responses on the post-test.
The third question aimed to assess whether participants would favor having a
close relative marry a Black person. In response to that question, most of the participants
responded on the pre-test that they were either in favor or were neutral towards a close relative marrying someone who is Black. Only one participant opposed this occurrence.
On the post-test, one participant changed their response from favorable to neutral (see
Table 14).
171
Table 14
Social Distance
Pre-test Post-test n/percentage (+/- .01) n/percentage (+/- .01)
Responses Favor Neutral Oppose Favor Neutral Oppose
1. After graduation, how would you feel about living in a neighborhood 5 14 0 7 12 0 where half of your 26.32% 73.68% 0.00% 36.84% 63.16% 0.00% neighbors were Black/African American?
2. After graduation, how would you feel about living in a neighborhood 3 15 1 5 13 1 where most of your 15.79% 78.95% 5.26% 26.32% 68.42% 5.26% neighbors were Black/African American?
3. How would you feel about having a close 10 8 1 9 9 1 relative marry a 52.63% 42.11% 5.26% 47.37% 47.37% 5.26% Black/African American
person?
Origins of inequality. This next category of questions was designed to assess the
participants’ understanding and beliefs about the origins and reasons for “Black
disadvantage” (Hinojosa & Moras, 2009, p. 39) in contemporary American society. In
response to the first question on the pre-test, only two students responded that the
condition for Blacks had become worse in recent times. Interestingly, both of these
students self-identified as students of color. The remaining majority of participants
responded that the situation for Blacks had improved or remained the same. The post-test 172
suggests that a shift occurred with more students feeling as if the condition for Blacks
had improved (see Table 15).
Table 15
Origins of Inequality
Pre-test Post-test n/percentage (+/- .01) n/percentage (+/- .01)
Responses Improved Same Worse Improved Same Worse
1. In the past few years, do you think conditions for Blacks/African Americans 6 11 2 9 9 1 have improved, gotten 31.58% 57.89% 10.53% 47.37% 47.37% 5.26% worse, or stayed about the same?
The remaining questions in this section were designed to assess participants’ beliefs
about whether racial disadvantages are an innate quality of Blacks or are a result of
institutional or societal discrimination. The pre-test responses indicated an almost even
split between participants who believed that Blacks are afforded the same opportunities
as many ethnic groups who voluntarily immigrated to America. Post-test responses suggest a deeper understanding of the different experiences and opportunities afforded to certain racial groups, with 69 percent of the respondents indicating that some special opportunities should be afforded to Blacks. Overwhelmingly, on both the pre-test and post-test, most participants felt that racial disadvantages were not related to the in-born ability to learn, with only one respondent indicating that they were unsure. In response to the next question, 57 percent of the participants felt that a lack of educational opportunity 173
played a key role in racial disadvantages. Post-test, this number increased to 69 percent.
When asked on the pre-test whether most Blacks lacked the motivation and will power to change their situation, only nine participants responded that this was not the case. The remainder of the respondents were either unsure, or believed that a lack of motivation played a role. Post-test, however, indicated that 84 percent of the participants believed that a lack of will power and motivation were not factors in racial disadvantages. In response to the question of whether discrimination is part of the reason for racial inequity, pre-test scores indicate that the majority of participants were unsure. However, post-test responses suggest that the majority of the participants felt that discrimination was a key element in racial disadvantages (see Table 16).
174
Table 16
Origins of Inequality Pre-test Post-test n/percentage (+/- .01) n/percentage (+/- .01)
Responses Yes Don’t Know No Yes Don’t Know No
1. Irish, Italians, Jewish and many other minorities overcame 9 2 8 5 1 13 prejudice and worked their way 47.37% 10.53% 42.11% 26.32% 5.26% 68.42% up. Blacks/African Americans should do the same without special favors.
2. On average Blacks/ African Americans have worse jobs, income and housing than White 19 0 1 18 0 0 people. Do you think these 100.00 0.00% 5.26% 94.74% 0.00% 0.00% differences are because most %
Blacks/African Americans have less in-born ability to learn?
3. On average Blacks/African Americans have worse jobs, income and housing than White people. Do you think these 11 1 7 13 3 3 differences are because most 57.89% 5.26% 36.84% 68.42% 15.79% 15.79% Blacks/African Americans don’t have the chance for education that it takes to rise out of poverty?
4. On average Blacks/African Americans have worse jobs, income and housing than White people. Do you think these 4 6 9 2 1 16 differences are because most 21.05% 31.58% 47.37% 10.53% 5.26% 84.21% Blacks/African Americans just don’t have the motivation or will power to pull themselves up out of poverty?
5. On average Blacks/African Americans have worse jobs, income and housing than White 7 9 3 10 5 4 people. Do you think these 36.84% 47.37% 15.79% 52.63% 26.32% 21.05% differences are mainly due to discrimination?
175
Affirmative Action. Hinojosa and Moras (2009) explain that this category of
questions “involve the extent to which individuals agree that the government should
become involved in righting past wrongs against African Americans in society” (p. 34).
These questions build on the questions from the previous section. An attitude that
supports Affirmative Action can be linked to beliefs related to whether internal (intrinsic
motivation) or external factors (discrimination) have played a role in racial disadvantages. The theme that emerged in response to the first question in this section indicated that pre-test, the class was almost equally divided as to whether they believed a less qualified Black person would secure a position of employment over a more qualified
White candidate. Post-test, these responses changed significantly, with 64 percent of the participants responding that it would be less likely that this situation would occur (see
Table 17).
Table 17
Affirmative Action
Pre-test Post-test n/percentage (+/- .01) n/percentage (+/- .01)
Responses Don’t Not Don’t Not Likely Know Likely Likely Know Likely
1. What do you think the chances are these days that a White person won’t get a 7 4 8 5 0 14 job or promotion while a 36.84% 21.05% 42.11% 26.32% 0.00% 73.68% less qualified
Black/African American person gets one instead?
176
In response to the next question regarding preferential hiring and promotion of Blacks,
pre-test and post-test responses indicated that over half the participants opposed such
actions. However, when asked if the government has a special obligation to Blacks to
help improve their standard of living due to the long history of discrimination in the U.S.,
pre-test and post-test depicted that approximately half of the participants supported this idea (see Table 18). However, post-test, there was a decline in the number of students
who supported this idea, with two students changing their responses from “support” to
“oppose”. Interestingly, one student was a White male and the other a Black female. It is
unclear why these students changed their responses, however the shift in responses, as
well as in-class discussions about this topic, indicated that more time was needed than
was available in this course to continue the conversations about Affirmative Action.
177
Table 18
Affirmative Action
Pre-test Post-test n/percentage (+/- .01) n/percentage (+/- .01)
Responses Support Unsure Oppose Support Unsure Oppose
1. Some people say that because of past discrimination, Blacks/African Americans should be given preference in hiring and promotion. Others say that such preference in hiring and 3 2 14 5 4 10 promotions of 15.79% 10.53% 73.68% 26.32% 21.05% 52.63% Blacks/African Americans is wrong because it discriminates against Whites. What about your opinion— are you for or against preferential hiring and promotion of Blacks/African Americans?
2. Some people think that Blacks/African Americans have been discriminated against for so long that the government has a special obligation to help improve 11 4 4 9 4 6 their living standards. Others 57.89% 21.05% 21.05% 47.37% 21.05% 31.58% believe that the government should not be giving special treatment to Blacks/African Americans. Where would you place yourself on this scale?
178
Stereotypes. This category aimed to assess participants’ stereotypical beliefs about Blacks. Hinojosa and Moras (2009) explain that stereotypes can be pervasive and impact what one believes about a particular racial group. They write:
Society today is laced with images in the media of young Black men as criminals
and gangsters, young Black women as unwed teen mothers living off of welfare,
and immigrants of Color as “illegals” coming to take jobs away from Americans
(Giroux, 1997). The popular book The Bell Curve got attention and legitimacy for
its theory of racial and ethnic intellectual inferiority in the late 1990s (Herrnstein
& Murray, 1997). Conservative political talk show hosts such as Rush Limbaugh
win over audiences by implying that White men are losing their privilege in
society as a result of Affirmative Action programs that give their privileges away
to minorities who do not want to work for their jobs and promotions. (p. 35)
The questions in this category aimed to assess participants’ beliefs about how hardworking and intelligent Blacks and Whites are. The participants’ pre-test and post- test responses were very similar to each other with most respondents indicating that they believed Whites to fall somewhere in the middle of the scale between lazy and hardworking, with most scores falling between 3 and 4 on the Likert scale (see Table 19).
179
Table 19
Stereotypes
n/percentage (+/- .01)
Responses Hardworking 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Lazy
1. Where would you rate Whites in general on this scale? 0 3 8 6 2 0 0 Pre-test Scores 0.00% 15.79% 42.11% 31.58% 10.53% 0.00% 0.00%
Post-test Scores 0 2 6 9 2 0 0 0.00% 10.53% 31.58% 47.37% 10.53% 0.00% 0.00%
However, when asked the same questions about Blacks, most of the responses indicated a slight tendency to respond toward the hardworking end of the scale with most scores falling between 2 and 4 on the Likert scale. This range was consistent on both the pre and post-test (see Table 20).
180
Table 20
Stereotypes
n/percentage (+/- .01)
Responses Hardworking 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Lazy
1. Where would you rate Blacks/African Americans in general on this scale? 0 4 10 4 1 0 0 Pre-test Scores 0.00% 21.05% 52.63% 21.05% 5.26% 0.00% 0.00%
Post-test Scores 0 4 5 9 1 0 0 0.00% 21.05% 26.32% 47.37% 5.26% 0.00% 0.00%
In response to the questions regarding intelligence, most participants indicated on both the pre-test and post-test that they felt Whites fell somewhere in the middle, with most scores ranging between 4 and 5 on the Likert scale (see Table 21).
181
Table 21
Stereotypes
n/percentage (+/- .01)
Responses Unintelligent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Intelligent
1. Where would you rate Whites in general on this scale? 0 0 1 10 6 2 0 Pre-test Scores 0.00% 0.00% 5.26% 52.63% 31.58% 11% 0.00%
Post-test Scores 0 0 2 10 6 1 0 0.00% 0.00% 10.53 52.63% 31.58% 5.26% 0.00% %
Similarly, the participants’ responses, when asked the same question about Blacks,
indicated that they thought Blacks fell somewhere in the middle and the majority of the
scores fell within the 4 to 5 range on the Likert scale. However, while beliefs about
Whites’ level of intelligence stayed relatively the same from pre-test responses to post-
test, beliefs about Blacks’ level of intelligence shifted more towards intelligent on the
post-test. This was depicted in the increase from 21 percent to 37 percent of participants choosing a score of five on the Likert scale (see Table 22).
182
Table 22
Stereotypes
n/percentage (+/- .01)
Responses Unintelligent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Intelligent
1. Where would you rate Blacks/African Americans in general on this scale?
0 0 1 13 4 1 0 Pre-test Scores 0.00% 0.00% 5.26% 68.42% 21.05% 5.26% 0.00%
Post-test Scores 0 0 2 9 7 1 0 0.00% 0.00% 10.53 47.37% 36.84% 5.26% 0.00% %
Conclusion
Implicit test results. The resulting increase in IAT scores post-course among 14
students indicated a more positive association of Blacks with the term “good”. This may
be directly related to the teaching methods and multicultural curriculum implemented
during this course. Exposure to people of color, their thoughts regarding race, and
readings, discussions, and critique of relevant artworks allowed students the opportunity
to examine racial perspectives that differed from their own. More specifically, hearing a
person of color speak frankly about discriminatory practices, misperceptions and racial
experiences he or she had personally encountered may have evoked an emotional
response in the students. This may have allowed for a new level of understanding to occur regarding one’s beliefs about racial inequity. Emotionally connecting to other students’ racial experiences may have heightened these participants’ awareness and 183
empathy towards those who do not look like them. Furthermore, these participants also
connected emotionally to the topic through their artmaking, allowing for them to reflect
critically on their racial beliefs.
Explicit test results. The significant change in misconceptions regarding
intelligence of Blacks and lack of their motivation in regards to racial disadvantage may
have been a result of the conversations that occurred throughout the course. Many of the
students expressed in their reflections that they had not had previous opportunities to
engage in these types of conversations and did not feel comfortable talking about racial
issues. ARED 5130/7130 was specifically designed to encourage these types of
conversations and open up dialogues about race. Additionally, students were able to hear
other individuals’ perspectives on the topic, which may have helped them in their own
reflections on their beliefs.
By encouraging classroom conversations and providing the opportunity for
reflective writings, students further developed critical thinking skills, which may have
aided them in understanding the complex concepts involved in racial issues. Effective
classroom discussions occurred by providing students with thought-provoking questions
and clear expectations for their participation in the discussion process. By dialoging,
student to student, as well as teacher to student, participants were able to initiate and
guide the racial topics discussed, making these conversations more personally meaningful
to them. This meaning making may have also played a role in changing their racial attitudes.
These quantitative findings suggested that the participants did have preconceived
ideas about Blacks and Whites; however, such beliefs were deemed to be malleable. 184
While most participants’ responses reflected an awareness of discrimination, there were indications that many participants did not understand the nature or degree of its impact on people of color, specifically Blacks. This may be due in part to a lack of personal interactions and development of relationships outside of the participants’ respective racial groups. Lending credence to this notion, the vast majority of participants indicated that they felt much closer to Whites than they did to Blacks, describing most of their interactions with Blacks as cursory. However, most of the participants’ responses indicated a view of both Whites and Blacks as hardworking and intelligent and supported equal treatment of both.
Hinojosa and Moras (2009) remind teacher educators that it is important to understand “how teachers use cultural notions of race in their treatment of students” (p.
41). Teachers play an important role in how students come to understand what it means to respect, understand and value diverse cultures. How future and practicing art teachers define concepts like race, racism, and culture are ultimately reflected in their teaching choices. Their understandings of these concepts impact what they choose to include and exclude from an art curriculum. Hence, their racial attitudes, beliefs and behaviors towards diverse populations impact whether they support deficit thinking or high expectations for all of their students. These constructs are all paramount in determining the success or failure of teachers in bridging the cultural gap between themselves and their students. The students in ARED 5130/7130 used discussions, written reflections, interviews and visual art responses to gain insight into their racial/cultural attitudes and synthesize their experiences in the course.
185
CHAPTER 6
RESEARCH QUESTION 2
The qualitative portion of this study aimed to answer the second research question: How do art educators participating in this study express through oral, written, and visual responses, their racial/cultural attitudes and understandings of self and others in relation to their experiences in a social justice multicultural art education studio course? This part of the research involved participants in four main tasks: written reflection responses to prompts, in-class/online discussions, visual art responses, and semi-structured interviews. The first three of the four data collection methods will be discussed in this chapter. The semi-structured interviews aimed to answer the fourth research question of this study and are discussed in detail in Chapter 8 of this dissertation.
Developing a Framework for Analyzing the Qualitative Data
A synthesis of past and current racial identity development theories guided the typology that was developed for analyzing the participants’ racial attitudes as expressed in their written reflections (Choney & Behrens, 1996; DiCaprio, 2008; Helms, 1990;
LaFleur, Rowe & Leach, 2002; Pope-Davis, Vandiver & Stone, 1999; Rowe, Bennett &
Atkinson, 1994; Tatum, 1992).
Specifically, the categories developed as a result of Pope-Davis, Vandiver and
Stone’s (1999) comparative racial theory study were also used in this current study as a means of analyzing the qualitative data. The Pope-Davis et al. (1999) study compared
Helm’s (1990) racial theory with LaFleur’s et al. (2002) theory and found both theories 186
assessed three common racial attitude factors: 1) the degree of racial comfort; 2) attitudes
towards racial equality; and 3) attitudes of racial curiosity. The degree of racial comfort
category represents a continuum of racial attitudes ranging from comfort to discomfort. It
also represents the level at which an individual either accepts or rejects people of color.
The attitudes towards racial equality category reflects an individual’s attitudes towards
acts of discrimination, as well as attitudes towards “special efforts to remedy
discriminatory practices designed to benefit racial-ethnic minority groups” (Pope-Davis
et al., 1999, p. 74). The last category, attitudes of racial curiosity, is described by Pope-
Davis et al. (1999) as “a curiosity about Blacks and Blackness, a curiosity about race relations between Blacks and Whites, and a curiosity about Whiteness…” (p. 74).
Additionally, this category addresses the level of contact individuals have had with persons outside of their own respective racial groups. DiCaprio (2008) subdivided these factors into traits aimed as describing the particular stage of racial attitude development within each factor. This current study adapts this format for categorizing the emergent themes from participants’ written reflections (see Figure 12):
Factor Degree of Racial Attitudes toward Attitudes of Racial Comfort Racial Equality Curiosity Traits 1. Anti-Diversity 1. Low Equality 1. Naïve 2. Diversity 2. Equality 2. Informed Detente Detente 3. Pro-Diversity 3. High Equality
Figure 12. DiCaprio’s Table of Factors and Traits (DiCaprio, 2008, p. 2)
While DiCaprio’s framework was designed specifically for analyzing White
identity development, he delineates behaviors and cognitions directed towards both
Whites and people of color in a broad enough fashion that these traits could be adapted to 187
individuals from any racial group. Hence, this is an appropriate framework for
developing a typology for analyzing the written reflection data from this current study.
This is especially the case since many of the traits that would normally be associated with
Whites were also exhibited by some participants of color in this study and vice versa.
Thus, DiCaprio’s framework was combined with trait descriptions developed in Pope-
Davis’ et al. (1999) study and adapted to better represent the themes emergent in this
current study. This resulted in the development of three racial trait typologies used to
analyze the qualitative data collected in this study: Naïve, Informed, and Ally. These
typologies are described as they relate to participants’ exhibited behaviors and thoughts
regarding their relationships with Whites and people of color. The typologies are not
intended to represent bounded categories. Rather, participants may have exhibited only a
few traits within a specific category, more than one trait across different categories, or
may have moved in and out of different categories throughout the semester.
Naïve Traits
Tatum (1997) explains that often time at the onset of “abandoning racism” (p. 95), individuals still hold on to the stereotypes they have learned throughout their lifetime.
Some individuals also continue to support a color-blind ideology, with many White individuals lacking a clear understanding of themselves as racial and cultural beings. She writes:
At the contact stage, the first step in the process, Whites pay little attention to the
significance of their racial identity. As exemplified by the ‘I’m just normal’
comment, individuals at this point of development rarely describe themselves as
White. If they have lived, worked or gone to school in predominantly White 188
settings, they may simply think of themselves as being part of the racial norm and
take this for granted without conscious consideration of their White privilege, the
systematically conferred advantages they receive simply because they are White.
(p. 95)
Similarly, Tatum explains that the beginning stage for those who are Black can also
involve these individuals in absorbing “many of the beliefs and values of the dominant
White culture, including the idea that it is better to be White” (p. 55). At this stage Black
individuals may deny that racism has a personal impact on their lives. Tatum also points
out that while this particular racial identity model was developed specifically for Blacks,
“the basic tenets of such models can be applied to all people of color who have shared
similar patterns of racial, ethnic, or cultural oppression” (p. 132). Similar beliefs were
reflected in the responses collected in this current study, which indicated that students of
color could hold the same “Naïve” attitudes, beliefs and understandings as those students who self-identified as Black. Students’ qualitative data was categorized as “Naïve” according to whether it reflected the beliefs and actions described in the “Naïve” trait typology (see Figure 13).
189
EMERGENT TRAITS OF NAÏVE RACIAL ATTITUDE DEVELOPMENT
Relationship to Whites Relationship to People of Color Behaviors/Cognitions
• May or may not • Believes racial stereotypes. • May express views actively: consciously acknowledge overtly hostile, engaging in or be aware of Whiteness. • May feel racial issues pertain discrimination or violence against only to people of color. People of Color. • Takes an ethnocentric perspective. • May deny racism exists. • May express views passively: avoiding contact with other groups • Sees Whiteness as the • Negative experiences with outside of their own race. “norm” and the standard People of Color are seen as to which all individuals confirmation of those groups’ • May not give voice to these should assimilate. inferiority, not as stemming from feelings until he/she feels any historical or current social personally threatened. • May not see oneself as a injustice. racial and cultural being. • Guilt or anxiety sublimated - transformed into feelings of fear and anger.
• Limited or no exposure to People of Color; experiences are often negative and cursory.
• May avoid conversations about racial issues and deny these issues exist.
Figure 13. “Naïve” Racial Attitude Trait Development adapted from DiCaprio (2008) pp. 2-4 and Pope-Davis, Vandiver and Stone (2002).
Written reflections. The first written prompt aimed to assess the level of comfort participants had in discussing issues of race at the onset of the course (see Appendix F).
Thirteen students out of 19 indicated that they were somewhat comfortable discussing race, with two students stating that they were uncomfortable with the topic.
The remaining four students indicated that they were very comfortable discussing issues of race and diversity. Of the four students who stated they were very comfortable, two self-identified as Black, one as Multiracial, and one as White. However, while only two students admitted to being uncomfortable with the topic of race, many of the other students who initially indicated that they were comfortable with this topic also revealed 190
through their responses a certain level of discomfort with specific racial topics or discussing racial issues in groups that included individuals outside of their own race.
Additionally, some of these participants’ remarks also indicated a color-blind ideology that supported a belief that racial issues pertain only to people of color. For example, this quote highlights how one participant stated she felt comfortable with the topic unless it focused on the history of racism. It also indicates her struggle to come to terms with how the history of racism is relevant in her life. She writes:
I think the only difficult thing to talk about when it comes to race is the issue of
racism as it pertained to slavery. When I hear of people talking about the hostility
between Whites and Blacks and how some people believe it is still carrying on
today, I'm not sure what to say. I wasn't around before anti-discrimination laws
were put into effect. It's not really a topic I can really relate to, so I prefer not to
discuss it too much.
Another participant responded similarly, writing:
There are few topics I am uncomfortable discussing within race, and really the
only time I would be completely uncomfortable is if someone was directly
accusatory of me rather [than] White people in general - I have personally done
nothing to anyone, and can't be held responsible for what my great-great-
grandparents may have done.
Additionally, some participants stated that they didn’t understand why race was such a charged topic. Others felt that because they were White, a discussion about race did not pertain to them or made them uncomfortable. One participant stated:
So as to my comfort level, I don't mind discussing it, but I sometimes get annoyed 191
with it being such a "hot topic" because I don't see why it should be.
Another participant responded:
…because I am not a minority, I do not feel as comfortable discussing racial issues.
One replied:
Growing up, I never regularly participated in conversations that involved race or
ethnicities, and when the topic did occasionally arise I was always shocked that
these kinds of topics needed to be discussed.
Additionally, the common theme emerged that suggested that many (13) of the White participants struggled with color-blind ideology as stated by this participant:
[I] developed an attitude of “color blindness” that I believed to be the superior
attitude towards the topic. It wasn’t until I started to take educational classes in
college that I realized that this attitude was not in fact the most enlightened view
of race. In fact, this “color blindness” may have been merely my way of hiding
and dealing with the feelings of guilt and ignorance that have been ingrained into
my White suburban culture.
In response to this reflection, another student made this comment:
I can definitely see what you mean about growing up thinking "color blindness"
was the best way to look at race/ethnicity. I went to a private school, full of
mostly White kids, but there were a few Latinos and Koreans, and 5 or 6 Black
kids. But in my small school, that felt normal. I don't ever remember having
issues with any of the above people looking different, but that could also just be
because we never really addressed the issue of race in my school. Talking about it 192
now, in college, seems strange because I think that these conversations should
have happened when I was younger, to help me develop a more appropriate
attitude towards the subject of race.
Furthermore, some of the participants shared a common concern about the potential for offending others with their comments about race. Several felt that a lack of experience with people of color was a factor in their inability to feel comfortable talking about racial issues. Of the 19 participants, 13 White participants, one Black participant and one Asian participant indicated that they had very limited and cursory experiences with individuals outside of their own racial group or that most of their interactions were with White individuals. One wrote:
I grew up in small-town suburbia, where minorities were few and far between. I
don't really remember race being an issue most of the time in school. When I got
to college, it was a different story. I went to a community college for two years,
where there happened to be a huge Hispanic population. I took a part time job in
the neighboring big city, where the predominant race is black. None of this was a
problem for me, in the sense that I wasn't uncomfortable because they were a
different color, MY fear was that I would unintentionally offend someone.
Said another:
I grew up in the country in Mississippi where most of my experience of racial
issues was a divided line between races. We didn't cross that line much nor did we
talk about it.
Another added:
I was raised to be respectful in a conversation too. Not that we can't respond to a 193
heated topic without being respectful, I just feel like I don't want to step on
anyone's toes by saying something that sounds disrespectful. Saying that.... I am
not quite sure where that line is because of the small town I grew up in. In my
hometown not many Whites and blacks associated with each other, and to be quite
honest I really don't know why. I feel terrible saying all of that, but it was just the
way I was raised along with every other friend of [mine] from my hometown.
One student described her lack of interaction with people of color as the following:
I attended the same school from the time I was six weeks old until the day I
graduated. It was a bubble to say the least, and a predominantly White bubble! I
graduated in a class of 68 with one African American and one Asian American.
In contrast, students of color tended to be concerned with the burden of feeling like they were expected to be the voice for their entire respective racial groups in discussions about race. One wrote:
So when the subject of racism or race (or questions like, "does this offend you?")
comes up in class, I always feel like I'm [expected] to speak for "my people.”
Said another:
The only times I feel a little less comfortable is in academic situations where we
are discussing stereotypes of race. Most of the time, I am the only one who
identifies with my race in my classes and therefore it seems that all eyes are on
me when we discuss stereotypes of my race.
In response to the prompt regarding how important it is for an art educator to be comfortable talking about racial issues, the vast majority of the class stated that it was very important. One participant wrote: 194
As an Art teacher, it is important to discuss real issues that affect the students’
lives. To be able to discuss these aspects and intelligently articulate your opinions
is a necessity. I believe that understanding difficult topics is the first step to being
able to talk about them. Talking about sensitive topics is the first step to changing
society. As educators, it is our responsibility to better society. Being able to talk
about race is not just important in art education, but in all forms of education.
Another responded, writing:
As an educator I feel it is important to be comfortable with talking about race.
This is a topic that carries a lot of baggage, and we should be prepared to model
educated and thoughtful discussions of the topic. I believe that teachers teach
much more than their subject matter. Thus, it is important for us as educators to
show students how to question their assumptions by challenging them with their
own research. Often, especially when discussing race, students hold the views of
their family rather than creating their own personal viewpoints. The art room
specifically can function as a wonderful forum for discussions of race and the
development of individualized beliefs about race. Also, since many students
struggle daily with issues involved in the topic of race, these issues can surface in
their artwork. Therefore, as an art educator it is vital that I am comfortable with
discussing race because I am able to help students develop a knowledge base for
their own decision making about the topic, and I can help students work through
their own personal struggles with issues in their lives affected by race.
195
Another participant added:
As an educator, it has always been my goal that my students come away from
their experiences with the ability to view their world in ways that are different
than before.
Being [an] art teachers allows us THE PERFECT opportunity to have meaningful
discussions about our world and how we see it, as well as how we are “seen” in
it….If we provide students with a safe environment (free of judgment) to hold
these discussions, they will have some of the most meaningful dialogue you can
imagine- it also allows the students who are interested in creating art with
social/political messages an avenue to explore those topics. Our students feed off
of our energy, and we can have either a positive or negative affect in how
successful they are in navigating their world.
However, a few students felt that race was not a topic that should be explored by art educators unless a racial confrontation occurred in the classroom that warranted such a discussion. For example, one participant wrote:
I believe it is very important to be able to talk about race as an educator as well as
an art teacher…. In order to be able to deal with different races one must be able
to talk about race. However, I do not feel that it should be one of the lessons of
the day. For example I feel that educators should be able to discuss it if it is a
problem in their classroom.
196
Another replied to this comment, writing:
I could not agree with you more…. I think it is very important for a teacher to be
able to talk about race, but only if the subject comes up. I feel that there should be
no need to bring up the subject everyday, but there will be times when it is an
issue.
The responses to this written reflection prompt indicated that although many participants
initially stated they were comfortable with the topic of race, they also expressed varying
levels of discomfort. Those students who indicated a lack of experience with diverse
populations also indicated the highest levels of discomfort and concern with offending
others in discussions about race. Additionally, while several students had been previously
introduced to race-related topics such as color-blindness and Whiteness in prior
university courses and recognized the role it played in their understanding of race, others
indicated a lack of understanding of themselves as racial beings and questioned the
relevance of discussing racial issues at all, much less in the art classroom. Students of color tended to state that they were very comfortable discussing issues of race, until they are asked to speak for their entire racial group or when conversations only focused on the oppression or stereotypes of people of color. Overall, the participants felt it was important for educators to be prepared to discuss racial issues, however, while most felt it was important to take a proactive approach and introduce this discussion to their students, a few were reluctant to raise the issue until a racial problem occurred, indicating to them that the discussion was necessary. These written responses reflected that most participants’ degree of racial comfort was somewhat comfortable. It also suggested that attitudes of racial curiosity were impacted in large part by a lack of experience with 197
diverse populations. Moreover, these participant responses suggested that while a few
“Naïve” traits were expressed at the onset of the course, some “Informed” traits were also present.
In-class discussion. One of the readings assigned to the class the first week of the course was an excerpt from Marx’s (2006) book Revealing the Invisible, which
discussed color-blind ideology, racism and Whiteness. In the classroom discussion of the reading, several White students shared that this reading helped them to realize that they needed to question their use of colorblind language, deepen their understanding of racism
and begin to see themselves racially and culturally.
One student stated that she had always been opposed to Affirmative Action, but after reading about the history of racism [a reading assigned from Winant’s (2004) book,
The New Politics of Race: Globalism, Difference, Justice], she was beginning to question what had made her come to her decision, since she actually knew very little about
Affirmative Action. However, later in-class discussions revealed that most students had a difficult time discussing the topic of Affirmative Action and understanding its intended purpose. Readings were assigned regarding this topic and the class discussed the common misconceptions about Affirmative Action. However, discontent remained among the students with several White students voicing that they were not comfortable with the idea of racial minorities receiving “favors” based solely on their race, especially in the college admissions process. When pressed on this issue by other students in the class, these students revealed that they had been told by their high school guidance counselor not to indicate their race on the University of Georgia’s (UGA) admissions forms because they would be eliminated from being admitted based on the fact that they were White. They 198
explained that they were told that UGA has an “infamously aggressive Affirmative
Action admissions policy” and as such minority students would be given preference over
White students who had higher admission tests scores. In response, I asked the class to actually look up the enrollment rates by race of several universities online, including
UGA. What they found surprised them. At most universities less than 10 percent of the student population was Black; at UGA, only five percent. In fact, the total enrollment for students of color at UGA was only 14 percent. The class continued with a debate on this topic, framing the discussion with the essential question, “Do people of color really ‘get more’ as a result of Affirmative Action?” Students continued to evaluate the numerical facts, which indicated that most universities are still attended predominately by White students. This topic resurfaced briefly at different points in the semester and remained a point of contention with some (9) White students. It was evident that further conversations about Affirmative Action were needed, but the time constraints of the semester unfortunately limited the time available in class to discuss this topic further.
Another student noted that she felt uncomfortable with Marx’s (2006) comments that only Whites could be racist. She pointed out she had found the additional reading assignment from Howard Winant’s (2004) book to be more “in-line” with her understanding that anyone could be racist, given the right conditions. The class proceeded to discuss this topic at length and explored different contemporary thoughts regarding various definitions of racism, power and privilege. Several other White students voiced their concerns over their fear of being called a racist or saying something that would
199
make someone else think they were racist. Some students stated they were even reluctant
to refer to a Black person as Black for fear that acknowledging the skin color of a person
of color was akin to being a racist.
Another student stated that the Marx reading had helped him to realize that he was
not as comfortable with the topic of race as he had initially thought. Several other
students agreed that after doing the assigned readings, they too had begun to realize that
the topic of race was more complex than they had initially thought, and they desired to
become more comfortable with the topic.
Another discussion focused on institutional racism and the history of racism in the
United States. Several students talked about how ingrained racism is in media and
society, and some stated that as Whites, they felt they had a harder time detecting
occurrences of racism, especially passive racism. One student posed the question to the
class, “How does this racial socialization feed into our unconscious bias as art teachers”?
This led to a thoughtful discussion about the Pygmalion effect, teachers’ expectations of
students of color, the racial achievement gap in schools and the role of the media in how
we view others.
The in-class discussions reflected much of the same concerns that were shared in
the written reflections. The discussions indicated levels of both “Naïve” and “Informed” racial attitudes, especially when the conversations pertained to attitudes towards racial equality. This was evidenced in many of the participants’ comments suggesting that they were opposed to clearly discriminatory practices, but were equally opposed to societal actions aimed at offering extra assistance to people of color.
200
Visual responses. For the most part, participants’ written responses reflected a beginning understanding of racial issues. In contrast, most (10) visual responses reflected a more “Informed” racial attitude, with some (4) works expressing an attitude towards
becoming an “Ally” and a keen awareness of racial issues. Nevertheless, a few (5)
artworks did express participants’ continued anxiety over exploring racial issues. For
example one student wrote in her artist’s reflection, which accompanied her artwork (see
Figure 14):
This ceramic piece portrays my innermost feelings when I discuss race. As a
White female, I feel like I have to be careful when I am talking about race to
anyone, regardless of his or her skin color, and I symbolize those feelings visually
as walking on eggshells. However, for me, these eggshells are like glass, because
the consequences of making a wrong move can be devastating. By using glass,
cans, and sand to represent the idea of eggshells, I aim to show how painful the
discussion of racial issues can be.
When discussing controversial issues there is usually someone who gets offended
or who feels very emotional about the topic. The topic of race is definitely not an
exception.
The wounds on the foot in this piece are meant to represent situations, not only for
me, but also for others, who have been hurt in some way by racial comments and
experiences. The foot is completely white, not only as a representation of my own
skin color, but also as a representation of my open mindedness. For me, I felt 201
emotions I have never felt about race before this class, and this piece was created
to represent some of those emotions. After being in this class, I can only imagine
how painful experiencing racism can be.
Figure 14. Student’s artwork visually expresses her discomfort with the topic of race. 202
While this student felt uncomfortable with the topic of race, another student expressed in her artwork (see Figure 15) a growing understanding of racial awareness. She writes in her artist’s statement:
I aimed to explore issues of racial awareness and unawareness in my art piece.
More specifically, I was interested in the impressions that we receive from one
another when we are racially unaware. I feel that it is often naïveté that keeps
people unaware of differences and similarities that they might share across racial
lines. This naïveté hinders us from acknowledging the discrimination experiences
of others and hinders us from seeing that race impacts the view through which we
see and understand the world. If we are close-minded and refuse to understand
that there are multiple perspectives of the world, we cannot begin to understand
others or participate in educated discussions about race, which are crucial in
breaking down the racial barriers that exist in today’s society.
This deaf, dumb, and blind approach to race is no solution to the racial problems
that exist today, and I aimed to symbolize this in my piece.
I feel that every race deserves to be recognized as equal, regardless of their
differences, in order for individuals to move away from racial discomfort and to
begin honestly working towards fixing racial problems in this country.
203
Figure 15. This student’s artwork explores notions of racial awareness and unawareness.
None of the artworks created reflected a “Naïve” level of racial attitude, however some students struggled to create works that met the criteria of examining race through visual expression. Instead, these students created works that addressed some other personal issue, for example health issues, or the works they created only touched on the topic of race in a cursory and tentative manner. This re-emphasized a certain level of discomfort some participants’ had in response to the topic of race. For those students who did successfully create artworks that specifically addressed issues of race, their works demonstrated both levels of “Informed” and “Ally” racial attitudes traits. Again, there was still evidence that some degree of uncertainty and discomfort about racial issues 204
existed at the beginning of the course, even in works that were successful in addressing racial issues (Figure 15). However, many other artworks also suggested that most students were in the process of developing an “Informed” understanding of racial issues and Whiteness in relationship to themselves and others. Moreover, some artist statements explicitly advocated for supporting multiple perspectives directly reflecting the development of “Informed” traits.
Informed Traits
Tatum (1997) writes about “understanding Whiteness in a White context” (p. 94).
She explores this topic using Helm’s (1990) stages of White identity development as a framework. She explains that as some White individuals begin to develop an awareness of racism and White privilege, they also often begin to feel guilt, shame and anger. She points out, “This new awareness is characterized by discomfort” (p. 97), which can result in “denying the validity of the information that is being presented, or psychologically or physically withdrawing from it” (p. 98). In addition to these emotions, Whites may also experience for the first time “the frustration of being seen as a group member, rather than an individual” (p. 102). Tatum goes on to explain that this may cause some Whites to
“struggle with claiming Whiteness as a meaningful group category” (p. 103). Tatum explains further writing:
… When White men and women begin to understand that they are viewed as
members of a dominant racial group not only by other Whites but also by people
of color, they are sometimes troubled, even angered, to learn that simply because
of their group status they are viewed with suspicion by many people of color. 205
[Whites may respond with] ‘I’m an individual, view me as an individual!’ (p.
104)
Students of color can also struggle at this stage of racial identity development. Tatum
(1997) points out that anger towards Whites can build as the person of color “begins to grapple with what it means to be a member of a group targeted by racism” (p. 55).
Additionally, these individuals may “play down” (p. 64) their racial identity in order to fit in with the White mainstream culture.
As individuals, regardless of their respective race, begin to move into a state of race-consciousness, feelings of discomfort and sometimes anger may be expressed.
Students’ whose behaviors and thoughts reflected these traits were categorized as
“Informed” (see Figure 16).
206
EMERGENT TRAITS OF INFORMED RACIAL ATTITUDE DEVELOPMENT
Relationship to Whites Relationship to People of Color Behaviors/Cognitions
• Actively questions White • Sees that society treats People of Color • Primarily centered on intellectualization -- superiority and the inferiority of differently than Whites. emotions about race tend to be People of Color. submerged. • Has feelings of being caught between the • Still holds an ethnocentric White world and the Non-White one. • May unwittingly support a color-blind perspective. ideology. • May be looked upon with suspicion by • Holds some degree of individuals outside of their own racial group • Tends to look to People of Color to uncertainty and discomfort about who see him/her questioning racial norms. explain racism/offer solutions rather than racial identity. seeing Whites as part of the problem and • May believe that in order to understand solution. • Holds some degree of racial issues, one must be a person of color. uncertainty and discomfort about • May unwittingly act in racist ways. those individuals outside of their • Introduction to others outside of their own own racial group. racial group. • Experiences anger and/or guilt when dealing with racial issues. • Has let go of racist identity but • May have a mostly uninformed curiosity or has yet to develop a non-racist trepidation towards People of Color. • Seeks out new information regarding identity. racial issues. • May prefer People of Color who “act White.” • Has a beginning understanding • Dissonance may exist between of racism and oneself as a racial • May still assume stereotypes about People previously held ethnocentric beliefs and and cultural being. of Color are true. new information.
• May be looked upon with • Can have a positive opinion of the idea of • View of self as moral may be suspicion by individuals within People of Color yet may experience anxiety contradicted by realization that he/she is their own racial group who see when actually dealing with People of Color. benefiting from racism. him/her as violating racial norms. • May have limited exposure to People of • Measures self by White Color; experiences are often cursory with standards. few cross-race friendships/relationships.
• May believe that Normalness is • May feel uncomfortable discussing some Whiteness and Whiteness is racial issues. Normalness with no awareness of holding this belief. • May try to change his/her beliefs about others outside of their own racial group. • Opposed to clearly discriminatory practices, but, also • May question the relevance and opposed to many societal actions, importance of understanding race and which offer extra assistance to racial issues. People of Color. • Deeper, systemic, and more subtle types of racism are overlooked.
• May state that they “Don’t see race” or minimize/deny racial differences or issues.
Figure 16. “Informed” Racial Attitude Trait Development adapted from DiCaprio
(2008) pp. 2-4 and Pope-Davis, Vandiver and Stone (2002).
Written reflections. The emotions associated with White racial identity development that Tatum (1997) describes above were expressed by a few (3) of the
White participants in this study. While most written responses about Whiteness and
White privilege indicated a developing insight into this phenomenon, other responses suggested some students were struggling with this topic. As a written reflection response 207
to readings on Whiteness and White privilege, students were asked to respond to the
prompt: What does the term "White Privilege" mean to you? What about White privilege
challenges your thinking? How does this privilege/or lack of privilege function in your
life? Of the 19 participants in the study, three indicated a lack of understanding or denial of Whiteness and White privilege. All three students were White females. For example, one student expressed her denial of White privilege, writing, “I personally feel ‘White privilege’ is just a term coined by someone or some group who resents the success of certain individuals in the white race.” Another student struggled to see the role of
Whiteness in her life. She wrote:
I understand that the way the media, TV, commercials—everything—set up an
argument that can typically have a White bias (i.e. all you see is White people). I
would be a fool to deny that. BUT, I also have a hard time seeing where I,
personally, have been privileged purely because of the color of my skin…. I,
personally, cannot think of examples from my own experience where I have
benefited from White privilege, and I can't explain how it has functioned or had
an impact in my life.
Additionally, the third student expressed anxiety over being seen as part of a group rather than an individual. She states:
I also feel that, as a White person, I am discriminated against because I am White.
I know that ‘White privilege’ should mean I receive benefits because of my skin
color, but I can’t help but feel that it also is a way to stereotype me as one of the
oppressors. Being White is supposed to mean that I cannot be discriminated
against, that I am a racist, and it implies that I should be quiet about issues of race 208
because no matter what I say or think I am an oppressor. I feel that ‘White
privilege’ is a double-edged sword that implies that White people only reap
benefits from being White. I am constantly being judged for the actions of White
people generations ago and am constantly being told that I can’t begin to
understand racial issues because I am White.
While these three students struggled to come to terms with Whiteness and White privilege, five other students expressed mixed understandings of the topic. Some students expressed emotions of guilt and shame. One student wrote:
To be honest, the term ‘White privilege’ automatically makes me feel a little
guilty about something that is out of my control. I've never consciously
experienced ‘White privilege’ but unfortunately that doesn't mean that I haven't
been given various privileges throughout my life because of the color of my
skin...I'm sure I have, I just haven't always ‘witnessed my Whiteness’…
The remaining 16 students’ responses suggested a growing awareness and understanding of Whiteness. For example, one student reflected on Whiteness as a standard that other racial groups must strive to live up to:
To be very frank, I wasn't really aware of "White privilege" until late high school
and college. When I was younger and still living in Taiwan, being ‘American’
meant being White. All of the text books that I used to learn English in Taiwan
had pictures and graphics of White people…. As mentioned in the [course]
readings, having fair skin—and generally having ‘White’ features—is really
sought after in many Asian countries (and I want to say specifically Korea, Japan,
Taiwan, Vietnam, and China). I remember putting baby powder on my skin as a 209
5-year-old because I thought that would make my skin Whiter and I would be
prettier. I have many aunts who use skin-bleaching products. My mother and her
sisters had plastic surgery so that they could have the ’double eye-lid’ and
therefore have bigger more American eyes. THIS specific part of my culture
didn't appear weird to me until my non-Asian friends told me it was strange. To
me, White privilege is accepting the fact that being White is naturally superior
and ideal above all other races. Having White privilege is being able to convince
someone that his/her own race or culture is embarrassing, out-of-place, weird, less
appropriate or otherwise less adequate. White privilege is being able to say,
"Learn English, you're in America now" to someone from another country and
having others agree with you.
Other responses indicated a keen awareness of White privilege and a shifting from
“Informed” to “Ally” racial attitude traits:
I have come to understand that White privilege is an invisible system of
advantages that all White members of society take advantage of daily. I say that I
have ‘come to understand’ because one of the main aspects of White privilege is
that we are often unaware of being born into this system of ‘unsought racial
dominance’. Due to the color of our skin, we take part in events every day that
declare to other races that we are more important than they are. For instance, we
can buy band-aids the color of our skin; when watching television or celebrating
holidays we can be assured that we will be thought about and represented. Before
210
taking part in this course, I had noticed some of the privileges that I had received
based on my race, but I was not fully aware of the extent to which White privilege
plays out in my daily life.
The main question that arises for me as I study about White privilege is what can I
do to reject this form of passive racism and work toward eradicating it. This is not
an easy question to answer and by no means am I able to fully wrap my mind
around it; it is terrifying how huge of an impact the past still has on the present.
The only way that I know of, at the moment, to reject and hopefully eventually
eradicate White privilege is to make others aware of it. I believe that you can only
change what you can see, so by making others aware of it, and allowing myself to
be more aware of it, we can take society’s blinders off, one at a time, and confront
the ugliness of this system of advantages.
In-class discussions. In response to concerns raised in the students’ written
reflection responses, the scheduled topic for discussion in class was changed so that we
could spend more time discussing Whiteness and White privilege. While the students had
previously been assigned to read McIntosh’s (1988) article, White Privilege: Unpacking
the Invisible Knapsack as one of the readings on the topic, as a class I felt it would be
beneficial for us to critically examine the first chapter in the book Understanding White
Privilege by Kendall (2006). As a whole class we read this chapter, periodically stopping after a few paragraphs to engage in critical discussions about what we had read. It was very helpful to students to analyze these small segments of readings and at the end of the class, several students approached me and said that they thought that class discussion had 211
been one of the best and most beneficial to them thus far in the course.
In an effort to further assess whether this strategy had been effective in helping
students to better understand what was meant by the term White privilege, I asked the students to write down two experiences that described how White privilege impacted their lives. These experiences were then compiled into an anonymous list and passed back out to the class the next day. This facilitated students coming to understand the role
White privilege played not only in their own lives, but the lives of their classmates. Some of the ways participants felt White privilege impacted their life included the following responses:
• When I purchase foundation, I have never had a problem finding my skin
tone. If you notice, there are SO many more options for women of fair
skin as opposed to women of color.
• The teachers and administration in my son’s preschool are the same race
as I am, and I will benefit from that when I need to speak with them about
any issue that arises.
• I do not have to go out of my way to find cards and magazines that I
identify with when I am in the grocery store.
• Because I am White, I will not be accused of trying to associate myself
with another race when I wear colored contacts or lighten my hair.
• The majority of teachers in my college courses will share my race.
• I have been told that I have “fun” hair. I have been asked repeatedly “can
I touch your hair?” or “what does your hair feel like – is it soft?” or “is it
real?” 212
• If I do poorly in a class or in a job interview, I don’t worry about
whether my race contributed to this.
• I can go anywhere in America without people assuming I cannot speak
English!
• Usually when I check out at a grocery or convenience store, 8 out of 10
times the cashier will try to say hello, goodbye, or thank you to me in
some Asian language.
• I get asked, “What are you?” and “Where are you from?”
• I am constantly asked to teach dance lessons at friend’s parties.
• People outside of my race choose to speak more “hood” when I am in
their presence.
• White privilege means not having to think that someone will avoid you
on the sidewalk because of your race.
A full list of participant responses is provided in Appendix M. Overall student responses at this midpoint in the course indicated “Informed” as well as “Ally” levels of racial attitude development. While a few students still had some discomfort and uncertainty with regard to their racial identity, most students acknowledged the unequal treatment of people of color and willingly examined the role of White privilege in their own life.
Visual responses. At this point in the course, students’ artworks began to reflect a deepening understanding of the topics discussed in class. These artworks also often supported the students’ responses on their explicit racial attitudes, lending credence to the
213
validity of the findings from that measure. For example, one student’s support of equal treatment and Affirmative Action, as seen on the explicit measure, was also reflected in her artwork (see Figure 17).
Figure 17. Titled, America’s Job Market, this clay chess pieces symbolize the opportunities afforded many Whites and the limitations imposed on many Blacks caused by institutional racism and discrimination.
In her artist’s statement this student explains how her artwork reflects her understanding of Affirmative Action:
America still mostly caters to its White population. Often, the preferential
treatment White people get when applying for a job is undeniable. I want to
depict this inequality symbolically through chess, historically a “White man’s
game.”
214
The typical chessboard depicts a level playing field with alternating black and
white spaces. However, this is not the reality of the American job market. The
tall white tower-spaces, capped with a glass ceiling, symbolize this inequality.
The tall white spaces imitate city skyscrapers, the site where many jobs are won
(or lost); the color of these elevated spaces is not a coincidence.
This piece is a visual reminder that the playing field for all Americans is far from
level. The first step towards improvement is for each of us to become aware that
racial inequalities still exist today.
Another student’s artwork aimed to address racial identity issues of Black women by problematizing how they conform or rebel against the prevailing White standards of
beauty in America (see Figure 18).
215
Figure 18. This student’s artwork explores White ideals of beauty and the role these standards play in African American women’s self images.
In her artist’s statement, this student uses Robert Frost’s poem, The Road Not Taken as a framework for questioning whether Black beauty is a matter of conditioning or assimilation. She also explores the continuing challenges surrounding visual images and portrayals of Black people. She writes:
I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
—Robert Frost 216
The above excerpt is the last stanza of Robert Frost’s famous poem The Road Not
Taken. In this poem, Frost is at odds about which path to take when he comes to a fork in the road while walking in the woods. He chooses to take the less traveled path but contemplates taking the other path because he feels he will miss out on what so many others have experienced. In some ways, my piece is reflective of the experience Frost shares in this poem. I have incorporated this stanza of the poem into my piece, writing it in lipstick on a mirror that is partially covered by a tarnished sheet of copper, which reflects my tarnished thoughts of beauty. This stanza is meant to illustrate ideals of societal beauty and its two extremes: the natural and the fantastical.
As an African American, my sense of these beauty extremes are heightened because of the natural color of my eyes, my natural bone structure, the natural color of my skin, and the natural texture of my hair and the unnatural way that
American society often makes me feel about these things. I am not alone. It has been the trend to hide these natural Black traits in Black society. As a result, many in my generation, who are Black, wear color contact lenses and spends more money on Remy* than we do on food. Some even try to change their skin color with bleaching cream. We take extreme measures to hide our natural Black beauty because the media and society often remind us that it is something to be hidden.
Like Frost, I have also taken the road less traveled when it comes to being considered beautiful by American societal standards. My hair is not long, straight, 217
or silky. I was born with dark brown eyes and brown skin. I have chosen to take
the road that, for decades, has been looked down upon by many in the Black and
White community. I hope that like Frost, it will make all the difference.
*Remy refers to a high quality human hair product that sells for around $40 to
$100 (and beyond) per bag. It normally takes two bags of hair for a full weave.
This studio experience aimed to facilitate the students’ understanding of how the
racial/cultural self is oriented to the racial/cultural other. This student’s artwork reflects
an insightful understanding of how society conceptualizes each racial body as difference.
Again, the artworks revealed a more advanced understanding of the topics than
did the written reflections. Both of these pieces indicate well-balanced and realistic views of race as well as a sense of internalization of anti-racist actions and beliefs that are reflective of an “Ally” racial attitude.
Ally Traits
In the later stages of racial identity development for both people of color and
White individuals, racial consciousness involves unlearning stereotypes, development of a positive self-identity, involvement in anti-racist pursuits, and establishment of meaningful cross-race relationships. For people of color, this stage involves them becoming “energized by the new information he or she is learning” (Tatum, 1997, p. 76) and for Whites “ the feelings of guilt and shame start to fade” (Tatum, 1997, p. 111) as they begin to “incorporate newly defined views of Whiteness as part of a personal identity” (Tatum, 1997, p. 112). Similarly, Whites who have reached this stage become energized in “their efforts to confront racism and oppression in daily life” (Tatum, 1997, 218
p. 112). Students who exhibited these beliefs and behaviors were categorized as having
“Ally” traits (see Figure 19).
EMERGENT TRAITS OF ALLY RACIAL ATTITUDE DEVELOPMENT
Relationship to Whites Relationship to People of Color Behaviors/Cognitions
• Has a keen understanding of • Comfortable with People of Color. • Well balanced and realistic view of race, the racial issues and Whiteness in effects of racism, and has developed an relationship to self and others. • Values a pluralistic society. understanding of the actions which can be taken to be effective in fighting racism. • Advocates for multiple • Seeks opportunities to learn from other perspectives. groups. • Has a sense of internalization about his/her approach to race. • Understands oneself as a • Loses the need to see group memberships racial and cultural being. as positive or negative, idealized or • Is motivated by a moral consciousness. denigrated. • Has developed a non-racist • Does not approach identity issues out of identity. • Aware of racism’s profound impact on U.S. anger or guilt. American Culture. • Tends to believe Whites • Has the ability to identify and abandon benefit from/are responsible for • Can identify and combat oppression of racism. discrimination and racism. multiple identity groups. • Can exhibit behaviors that are active: e.g. • Actively seeks to understand • Continuously open to new ideas about race organizes events to protest racism. White racial identity and culture. • Can exhibit behaviors that are passive: e.g. contributes to organizations that fight racism.
• Continuously open to new ideas about race and culture.
• Emotions that were suppressed may resurface; may have cognitive and emotional restructuring.
• Holds a perspective that diminishes the role of personal responsibility/heightens the role of groups or society.
• May exhibit active behaviors: e.g. getting more involved in anti-racist groups and striving to be social agents for change by identifying and combating oppression of People of Color.
• May exhibit passive behaviors: e.g. intellectually and emotionally identifying with People of Color or having a great deal of awareness of racial issues.
• Increased contact with People of Color, formation of deep and lasting friendships/relationships.
Figure 19. “Ally” Racial Attitude Trait Development adapted from DiCaprio (2008) pp.
2-4 and Pope-Davis, Vandiver and Stone (2002).
Written reflections. The reflections that indicated “Ally” traits were mostly written in the later half of the semester. While not all students’ reflections indicated that they had begun to achieve this level of understanding, all 19 participants stated that as a result of their participation in this course they felt more comfortable with the topic and 219
had an interest in continuing their culturally responsive learning. Eleven of the 19
participants stated that they also felt committed to engaging in equity and antiracist work.
For example, one student responded:
After taking this course, not only do I feel informed, but also I feel inspired to be
an anti-racist educator after seeing the extent of racism in the US. It’s not a
question of whether I choose to consider the question of race in these situations,
it’s necessary.
Another stated:
This class has taught me the importance of addressing race and social inequities…
this class has equipped me with practical tools for effectively communicating
about race in the classroom, and I have now committed myself to such
communication. More specifically, I am going to strive for an “anti-colorblind”
approach in my future classroom. This means that differences will not be actively
hidden, but rather actively exposed, explored, and enjoyed. This class has most
definitely prepared me for problematic racial situations in the classroom. I think
the biggest obstacle that I have overcome is dissolving my insecurity in talking
about race. Now that I am able to address the presence and relevance of race in a
person’s life, I feel more equipped to stand up for what is right as well as educate
others to do the same.
When asked at the end of the course, where participants began in their understanding of
220
race and where they felt they were currently in their understanding, students of color, as well as White students, wrote about becoming more racially self-aware:
This course has taken me on a journey of self-awareness and growth. At the
beginning of this course, my understanding of race was only for my own race. I
had generalized expectations of other races based off of past experiences I had
faced in my life. I thought I was open-minded, but being in this course showed me
how narrow my view of others really was. I have always been comfortable talking
about race. As a Black person, I have faced challenges as a result of my race.
Race was freely talked about in my house at an early age. Now, I am more
comfortable talking about my racial experiences with others. I also have more
insight about other races and I’m not as on edge about openly discussing and
confronting specific racial issues that pertain to individuals outside of my own
racial group.
Another student talked about becoming aware of passive racism:
I began this course with a blanketed understanding that minor racial issues were
still around… as a lingering symptom of our past. I have since learned in this
course that society has restructured the way in which it demonstrates its racial
biases and discrimination (overt to covert) instead of eradicating it. I still believe
that we are making progress in the battle for equality, and that there are a growing
number of people trying to change the social constructs of race and racism.
And another described her transition from a colorblind ideology to race consciousness:
I would say I started on an almost "colorblind" note. I didn't realize that was a bad
thing (or the "easy-out" answer to racism) until I was in this class… this semester 221
we really dug into issues of racism… I had never believed White privilege
existed. But I had also never talked to a non-White person about it, so all of my
assumptions stemmed from my perspective...my WHITE perspective.
Students were also asked if they now felt more prepared to deal with racial issues in the art classroom and were they confident enough to create an art lesson that addressed issues of race.
One student wrote of her transformation:
I do feel more equipped to address issues of race in my art classroom. I think that
this class has especially taught me that I do not need to wait for issues to arise; I
can and should address race with my students just as I address any other topic.
The beauty of the art room is that it is a place of thinking, researching, and
sharing and therefore it is the perfect place to discuss race as long as you, the
teacher, make your room a safe place for your students. Not only do I feel
confident in creating art lessons about race, I also believe it is vital. As I said
early, the art classroom can be a safe place for students to engage these topics in
thoughtful and critical ways.
Another student had a similar comment:
The art room is a wonderful place for exploration, and race is a topic that needs
discovering! Being able to depict racial issues through art will build deep thinking
skills and show different perspectives. My biggest concern is not if I can create a
successful lesson plan that centers on race, or if my students will learn from the
lesson plan. My concern lies in how I can ensure administrative and parental
support. 222
Another replied:
This class has most definitely prepared me for problematic racial situations in the
classroom. I think the biggest obstacle that I have overcome is dissolving my
insecurity in talking about race. Now that I am able to address the presence and
relevance of race in a person’s life, I feel more equipped to stand up for what is
right, as well as educate others to do the same. As an art educator, I want to
design a curriculum that is relevant and powerful for all my students to participate
in. In many cases, the art classroom may be the only opportunity for my students
to explore and communicate their own feelings about race. Creating art that
focuses on racial issues will also help my students connect emotionally to this
topic, which may also spark their interest in social justice. Therefore, as an art
educator, this type of assignment would not only be beneficial for my curriculum,
but also necessary.
These comments reflect the racial attitude development of “Ally” traits. The students
talked about becoming aware of themselves as racial and cultural beings. They also
described a growing understanding of the racial experiences of others outside of their
own racial group. They were also able to take this knowledge and apply it to anti-racist teaching in the art classroom.
In-class discussions. Near the end of the semester, we had several conversations on the topic of language diversity in the classroom, specifically whether Ebonics or Black dialect has a place in the classroom. This was a very controversial topic. Several students expressed that they strongly felt that Black dialect should not be allowed and be corrected if it occurs. Prior to these discussions, students had read several articles from the book 223
Beyond Heroes and Holidays (2008) on the topic including Language Diversity and
Learning by Lisa Delpit, Say ‘ask’, Deneese by A. J. Verdelle, and Racism in the English
Language by Robert B. Moore. Because exploring this topic had elicited such strong emotions, I thought it would be beneficial to strategically place students who opposed any use of Black dialect in the classroom in small groups with others who advocated for its use. These small groups were then asked to critically analyze each article. The groups were asked to find one teaching strategy that they thought was effective but also allowed for students to use Black dialect. They were also asked to compare and contrast Black dialect with other dialects such as Cajun and Southern and evaluate if they thought it was fair to only correct Black dialect. As a whole class, we discussed creating opportunities for students to engage in their cultural dialect. We talked about developing both low stakes and high stakes assignments and teaching students how to code switch between native dialects and Standard English. We also discussed how one might teach students about using the appropriate style of language in appropriate contexts, for example the type of language that would be expected to succeed in a job interview. Most of the participants’ responses throughout these discussions indicated that they felt both cultural dialects and Standard English should play a role in the classroom. However, at the end of these discussions, tensions remained high between a few students regarding this topic.
One Black student sent me an email because she was very upset about some of the comments made by a few White students who opposed allowing Black dialect in the classroom. She also disagreed with the idea of teaching students to code switch from
Ebonics to Standard English based on their social context. She wrote: 224
Language and art go hand in hand, and a child should be able to express him or
herself visually and verbally, without compromising their cultural background… I
don’t see anything wrong with my Black students speaking in Black dialect in the
art classroom. It may be important for them to shift between two dialects in the
real world, but I feel out of place giving a grammar lesson in the art classroom….
Maybe I expect the art classroom to be the one exception—the time of day when
students can express themselves honestly and culturally, in any way, including
language expression….I am just on edge about the dialect reading. I felt nothing
was resolved.
While we spent two three-hour class sessions discussing this topic, a few students felt they needed more time to discuss this topic. Unfortunately, this discussion took place at the end of the course. As a result, there was no additional time in the course available to continue to explore this topic as a whole class. I did alter the last written reflection assignment to allow students to choose additional readings on this topic and to respond to them in their written reflections. A few students did choose to do the additional reading.
The readings were assigned from the book Rethinking Multicultural Education: Teaching for Racial and Cultural Justice, edited by Au (2009). However, even after reading additional articles on this topic, some students continued to hold some of their limited
views on the topic. For example, one student who strongly opposed the use of Black
dialect in the classroom initially, began to support the teaching strategy of code
switching, but also diminished the importance of allowing for cultural dialects in the
225
classroom. She chose to read and respond to the article, Black English/Ebonics: What it be Like? by Smitherman. She writes:
I believe it is necessary for students to learn to switch from Ebonics to formal
English in formal environments. This article states that Ebonics is not broken
English nor sloppy speech, but instead is a language that is rooted in Black
African oral tradition. My question is, how is this possible when these patterns of
language are the same as students who are learning English as a second language.
They say they are rooted in tradition, but they are too similar to improper English.
For this reason, I believe there are certain places and times to use Ebonics and
others to use a more formal language. If students speak in informal dialect in
formal settings, their writing usually is similar. Many students are failing high
school writing tests because of these issues. I do believe that there is a place and
time for Ebonics and tradition. Oral story telling and poetry are places were this is
important, but not being able to code switch from Ebonics to English hinders the
African American youth in education. This translation is being forgotten in
schools because people are afraid to deal with race or they want students to feel at
home. I feel that a safe environment is very important in school, but so is
preparing students for the future. If students only speak in Ebonics they are most
likely to only write in Ebonics as well.
Both of these students’ statements indicate that more time was needed to discuss linguistic diversity and its role in education. Continued discussion of this topic may have been helpful in facilitating their understanding. Given the time constraints of this course, continued discussion was not possible. These discussions, however, indicate that students 226
moved in and out of the different levels of racial attitude development. This iterative
process suggests that one course aimed at addressing racial issues is not enough to
eradicate strongly held beliefs. Rather continuous exposure to anti-racist ideology
throughout a program of study and increased meaningful interactions with diverse groups
are necessary.
Visual responses. Students’ final art projects allowed them to visually express
their understanding of any topic they found interesting that was covered over the
semester. The artwork that was created reflected a new level of self-awareness and a growing understanding of self in relation to other. Some students decided to address issues surrounding their own racial group. One student explored stereotypes of Asians and the misconception that all Asians take pride in the model minority stereotype (see
Figure 20). She writes in her artist’s statement:
My artwork reflects my interest in Asian stereotypes and how they have been
projected upon me as I was growing up in the United States. I was seen as the
exotic Asian, the fresh-off-the-boat (fob) tourist Asian, and the smart Asian.
These are also the stereotypes that I see in the media…. I wanted to compose
these pictures so that they highlight the material objects that I carry or wear and
my stereotypical gestures – not my face, the most recognizable part of a human
body that identifies me as an individual. In romanticizing a stereotypical image, I
provide the viewer with my image, presented in the style and manner often seen
in the media. I hope to cause the viewer to question the stereotype of model
minority.
227
Figure 20. Final art project examining Asian stereotypes.
Another student chose to create an artwork that explored how her race impacted the ways in which she perceived and understood the world (see Figure 21). In her artist’s statement, she talks about viewing the world through her own racial lens:
For my final piece I wanted to express my ideas about viewing the world through
racial lenses. My racial lens has been clouded by my White privilege and at first, I
didn’t see myself as being racist, but I’ve learned and accepted that by allowing
White privileges to exist in my life, I have been passively racist.
Every person has their own way of viewing other races, some are offensive and
some are admirable and respectable. The point is that we are all human, we were
all made the same way but we are individuals…there is something about every
single person that sets them apart from everyone else in the world.
I decided to paint a painting that represents different students from our class. The
paintings represent diversity on a small scale but the real meaning lies in the color
palette I chose. I painted the eyes using a gray scale in order to symbolize a hope 228
for future equality. The variation in skin tones is visible, but they were all
achieved using the same three colors: white, gray, & black. However, the irises of
each individual’s eye were all created using a wide range of colors, symbolizing
difference. I aimed to visually represent an idea of equality while still
acknowledging diversity and difference.
Figure 21. Final art project expressing a student’s understanding of viewing the world through different racial lens.
At the end of the course, most students’ artworks demonstrated a keen understanding of the racial issues that had been introduced, as well as a change in racial attitude.
229
Overall Changes in Racial Attitudes
The transformational process of changing participants’ racial attitudes was an iterative process. Students’ written reflections indicated that they often moved in and out of the three trait typologies (Naïve, Informed, Ally) throughout the course. However, the overall trend over the course of the semester was a movement towards “Ally” traits. This trend can be seen when comparing six key written reflection prompts, reflections one through four, seven and the final reflection (see Appendix F), aimed at assessing the participants’ racial attitudes at the beginning, middle and end of the semester, to the participants’ responses as categorized by their racial trait typology (see Table 23). The highest numbers in this table have been made bold and enlarged to highlight the emerging pattern of the participants’ positive racial attitude typology shifts over the course of the semester.
230
Table 23
Overall Changes in Racial Attitudes
n/percentage (+/- .01)
Written Reflection Prompt/ Naïve/ Informed/ Semester Date Naïve Informed Informed Ally Ally
Reflection 1 Theme: Comfort level with topic of race and 3 4 0 0 the importance of being comfortable 12 15.79% 21.05% 0.00% 0.00% with the topic. 63.16%
(January 11th)
Reflection 2 Theme: Experience and interactions with 12 3 4 0 0 individuals from a different racial 63.16% 15.79% 21.05% 0.00% 0.00% group than one’s own. (January 18th)
Reflection 3 Theme: Importance of understanding racial 0 7 1 0 histories and self-assessment of one’s 11 0.00% 36.84% 5.26% 0.00% current level of cultural proficiency. 57.89%
(January 25th)
Reflection 4 Theme: Understanding White privilege and its 3 4 6 6 0 role in one’s life. 15.79% 21.05% 31.58% 31.58% 0.00% (February 1st)
Reflection 7 Theme: Understanding how one’s race affects 0 6 2 4 the perspective through which they 7 0.00% 31.58% 10.53% 21.05% view the world. 36.84%
(March 8th)
Final Reflection Theme: Assessment of comfort levels and 0 6 2 4 7 sense of social agency. 0.00% 31.58% 10.53% 21.05% 36.84% (April 27th)
231
Conclusion
Although many difficult topics surfaced throughout the course, most class conversations flowed easily. Overall, students seemed relieved to be able to discuss these topics openly in a safe environment. While participants in this study offered very little resistance, this reaction is in stark contrast to other similar studies (e.g., Heard, 1999).
This may be due to the fact that some of the students knew in advance that this course would focus on racial issues and signed up for the course because they wanted to explore this topic. Additionally, all of the students who participated in this study were art education students. The dispositions specific to this particular group may have also played a role in their willingness to examine racial issues. In fact, several students voiced that they were excited about the opportunity to examine race, throughout the course, and stated that they felt the experience would help them to become better educators.
Furthermore, the attitudes of most of the participants indicated an informed level of development at the onset of the course. This also differs from other similar studies
(Hinojosa & Moras, 2009) in which the majority of the participants exhibited predominately “Naïve” racial attitudes. It is unclear if this difference can also be attributed to the fact that all of the participants involved in this study were art education students, many of which were interested in the course topic at the onset of the semester.
While most of the topics introduced in this course received adequate attention, the last topic regarding language use in the classroom, unfortunately did not. In the future, I would address this issue earlier in the semester, allowing for more time to explore this topic. Additionally, it is unclear if exploring this topic right before administering the racial attitude tests negatively impacted the results of the IAT. Some of the same 232
students, whose scores declined post-course, were also the same students who indicated they were struggling with this topic.
Interestingly, the artworks that the students produced revealed a more advanced understanding of the topics than did the written reflections. Dewey (1934) explains that artistic expression can be a way of processing one’s emotions and through this process one can become more self-aware. He writes, “Expression is the clarification of turbid emotions; our appetites know themselves when they are reflected in the mirror of art, and as they know themselves they are transfigured” (p. 80). Through the process of creating artworks that reflected students’ understandings of race, these students may have achieved a state of “[emotional] fulfillment” (Dewey, 1934, p. 81) that aided them in furthering their understanding of the topics. Negative emotions associated with a topic can deter further understanding of the concepts. But as Dewey suggests, processing these feelings through self-reflecting artworks may have provided an avenue that allowed understanding to occur as their emotions were “objectified” (Dewey, 1934, p. 81) through the transformation of their emotions into aesthetic expressions. Eisner (2002) also
suggests that art has the transformational ability to help one call into question what they
think they know. He writes:
Work in the arts also invites the development of a disposition to tolerate
ambiguity, to explore what is uncertain, to exercise judgment free from
prescriptive rules and procedures. In the arts, the locus of evaluation is internal,
and the so-called subjective side of ourselves has an opportunity to be utilized. In
a sense, work in the arts enables us to stop looking over our shoulder and to direct
our attention inward to what we believe or feel. (p. 10) 233
Art is a way of knowing and as such participants in this study furthered their learning through the process of art making. Eisner (2002) writes, “One cognitive function the arts perform is to help us learn to notice the world” (p. 10). Thinking through art provides one with the opportunity to connect meaningfully to the learning that is occurring. This may account for the greater understanding expressed in the participants’ artworks. Eisner also explains that art making can invite one to see the world through multiple perspectives, which is a critical component of understanding concepts like culturally responsive teaching. He writes:
Aside from promoting our awareness of aspects of the world we have not
experienced consciously before, the arts provide permission to engage the
imagination as a means for exploring new possibilities. The arts liberate us from
the literal; they enable us to step into the shoes of others and to experience
vicariously what we have not experienced directly. Cultural development depends
upon such capacities, and the arts play an extraordinarily important role in their
contribution to such an aim. (p. 10)
These artworks indicated that students were beginning to perceive and understand the world through multiple frames of reference. In conjunction with the written reflections and in-class discussions, the qualitative data collected lent further credence to the quantitative findings, which indicated a significant change in racial attitude had occurred. Comparisons of the quantitative and qualitative findings support this conclusion.
234
CHAPTER 7
RESEARCH QUESTION 3
In this chapter, the qualitative data is compared with the data collected from the implicit and explicit measures in order to address the third research question: In what ways and to what extent do the qualitative data (oral, written, and visual responses) help to explain the quantitative data (implicit and explicit racial attitude responses) and vice versa? Three students’ quantitative and qualitative data are compared in an effort to create a holistic picture of attitude changes throughout the course. All three students discussed are White females. In part this occurs because the class was predominately
White and female. Furthermore, these students showed the lowest and highest progressions in attitude change. Additionally, none of the four students of color fell within the middle range of attitude change as indicated by the attitude trait typologies
(Naïve, Informed, Ally). Two students of color were categorized as progressing to the
“Naïve/Informed” stage by the end of the course. The other two students of color were categorized as “Ally” by the end of the course. Regardless of these trait typology categories, these students of color exhibited similar behaviors and beliefs as their White counterparts who were also categorized within these typologies. Therefore a discussion of these three students is reflective of all students within a particular typology, regardless of their race. At the beginning of the course, each student chose a pseudonym for reporting their results, and these pseudonyms are used throughout this chapter. Additionally, while each student’s artwork is discussed below, images are not included in this section in an effort to protect the anonymity of the students who are being discussed. The three 235
students chosen for this comprehensive review include students whose overall attitude progression was representative of lower, medium, and higher (Naïve, Informed, Ally) attitude changes based on the data collected. Generalizations drawn from these case studies may be limited due to the small number being reviewed. However, these students’ data are highly typical of other students’ data that also fell within the same level of attitude change.
Student 1 - Lower/Naïve Attitude Changes
Jennifer is a White Female with prior teaching experience in art education.
Jennifer told me at the start of the course that she was very interested in taking this course, in part because while teaching she had encountered two instances where students had accused her of being racist. She hoped this course would help her to better understand why this had occurred.
Like many other White participants in this course, her prior experience with diverse populations was limited. Most of her experiences involved sports and early childhood experiences with a Black nanny. Her high school experiences with people of color were also limited. She talked about this in her second reflection, which asked students to write about their racial histories. She writes, “There were only three “Black
Kids” in our group of 40 students and no Hispanic students…. Other than in classes, the only other interaction with students outside my own race was in sports and clubs.” In
Jennifer’s explicit attitude test, she indicated that she was not sure if there were any Black families who lived close to her, further suggesting that her experiences with diverse groups may have been limited and/or cursory. 236
As to her comfort level discussing racial issues, she clearly stated in her first
reflection, “As a person I feel uncomfortable discussing race.” She also reiterated her
discomfort with being called a racist, writing, “I feel that this anxiety was stronger when
I, or other teachers were accused of being a racist.” Her discomfort with the topics
discussed in the course remained throughout the semester. In her interview, midpoint in
the semester, she stated that she did not feel safe sharing her opinions and thoughts in the
class for fear that the other students might think of her as a racist. This continued anxiety
associated with discussing race may have been a critical factor that impeded not only this
student’s ability to feel safe expressing herself in her classroom, but also hindered her
ability to reflect critically on the topics discussed in the course. For example, Jennifer’s explicit attitude test, pre and post-course, indicated negative attitudes towards
Affirmative Action. In the in-class discussions, she stated that she was against such governmental policies because they were designed to give “handouts” to Blacks. When we discussed the fact that Affirmative Action policies are also designed to help women, she stated she had never heard that before. She also stated that she believed that because of Affirmative Action, she had less of a chance to get into the university of her choice because as a White student, she would be discriminated against by university admissions.
When we discussed the fact that most schools are still predominately White, she expressed her skepticism stating, “I would just like to see the [admission test] scores of people who are admitted.” This underlying belief expressed in this statement, which suggests she felt that perhaps students of color did not have adequate scores for admission and yet were being given spots that White students were more qualified for, is also reflected in her explicit attitude test responses. On both pre and post-course test, 237
Jennifer indicated that she felt that a less qualified Black person was “somewhat likely”
to get a job or promotion when a White person was more qualified for the position/job.
She also indicated on the pre and post-test that she was “strongly opposed” to Affirmative
Action. Interestingly, becoming aware of her lack of knowledge about Affirmative
Action, as indicated in in-class discussions, did not seem to have a positive impact on her beliefs.
While her beginning reflections (Reflection 1-3) indicated “Naïve” attitude traits, reflections four, seven and the final reflection did indicate a slight shifting towards
“Informed”. For example, in reflection seven, she writes, “I think this class is making me more comfortable discussing race and allowing me to see that racial attitudes are a problem in how we teach. I think that I could develop the ability to consider situations from multiple perspectives in the art classroom…” However, she also states in her final reflection that while she felt like she was becoming aware of perspectives other than her own, she also felt her beliefs had not changed since the beginning of the course and had in fact gotten stronger. She writes, “I have firmer beliefs than ever before.” The IAT score lends credence to her final reflection statement. Her IAT score was one of the five declining scores post course. Additionally, the IAT z-score, which measures the strength of an association, indicated that this student’s associations of Blacks and Whites with
“Good” and “Bad” were very strong (1.9/2.2). The post-test z-score of 2.2 indicates an increased stronger association of Blacks with “Bad”.
This student struggled specifically with the topics of White privilege, Affirmative
Action and Black dialect. Jennifer also expressed defensiveness about these topics in her written reflections. For example, she writes about the topic of White privilege, “I can’t 238
help but feel that [White privilege] is a way to stereotype me as one of the oppressors”
and “I also feel that, as a White person, I am discriminated against because I am White.”
Jennifer also struggled at the beginning of the course to create artworks that addressed
issues of race. For example, for her critical family history art piece, this student focused on conflicts within her family that were unrelated to race. Her work explored the separations and divisions within her family structure and the impact this had on her own identity development. The artwork was aesthetically pleasing, and did relate to issues of her identity. However, it did not meet the criteria of visually expressing her understanding of the racial issues discussed in class, nor did it examine her own family’s racial past. This may be attributed to her initial anxiety and discomfort with the topic of race and her struggle to understand herself racially.
Student 2 - Medium/Informed Attitude Changes
Lucy had no prior teaching experience. At the beginning of the course, she stated
in her first reflection that she would “avoid a conversation [about] this topic [race].”
However, she also indicated that she thought it was important for her to become
comfortable with this topic, writing, “As an art educator, I do think it is very important to
be comfortable when talking about race… when teaching you will be faced with many
different topics that will be difficult to talk about… and this can be helpful.” Unlike
Jennifer, Lucy did not know what the theme of this course would be and was surprised
that we would be focusing on the topic of race. She writes, “When I began the class, I did
not sign up for what we were going to be talking about. I was a little confused when I
realized this was not a printmaking class… I actually thought I was in the wrong class on
the first day.” However, after realizing that we would be covering printmaking techniques 239
in the course, she decided to stay in the class. She stated, “When I realized this was the
right class and this is what we were going to be talking about, I just listened and learned.”
Lucy shared her racial history in her second reflection, which indicated that she
had limited early exposure to people of color, except for her experiences with her nanny,
who was Black. However, in high school, Lucy developed friendships with people of
color. She wrote, “I had friends of many different races, and I still have friends from
different races to this day.” However, when asked on the explicit test how close she felt
to Blacks she responded that she did not know. When asked these same questions about
Whites, she responded “Very Close”. This may indicate that her relationships with people
of color may have been more cursory.
Interestingly, in her final reflection, Lucy also stated that she felt her attitudes had
remained the same throughout the course, with the caveat, “but I can say that I now have
a better understanding of why I believe what I do.” However, her IAT score indicated a
shift towards greater associations of Blacks with “Good” when comparing the pre-test
(14) and post-test (23) scores. Additionally, she remarks in her final reflection:
I have learned about certain issues like White privilege that I really didn’t have
any idea about. I have learned about acknowledging race and dealing with [racial]
issues. I am not as afraid to talk about race with other people as I was before I
started this class. Knowing about these topics will help me in the long run to see
things more opened-mindedly as I continue to learn.
Additionally, particular explicit attitudes that this student held changed on the explicit
test responses post-course. For example, Lucy had indicated on the pre-test that she
agreed that there should be laws against marriages between Blacks and Whites. Post-test 240
however, she changed her response to this question to “disagree strongly”. During her semester midpoint interview, Lucy told me that her father had raised her to believe that interracial relationships were wrong. After we discussed this topic and the history of being Multiracial in America in-class, Lucy changed her mind. She said, “I used to think this was bad [interracial relationships] because that was how I was brought up, but no one ever explained why it was bad. Now I realize that way of thinking was just racist.”
Another change in Lucy’s attitude was reflected in her explicit test responses regarding stereotypes about Blacks. Pre-test, Lucy indicated that on an intelligence scale ranging from one (unintelligent) to seven (intelligent) Blacks were a three. When asked the same question but about Whites, she indicated they were a five. However, post-test she scored both racial groups as a five. This particular attitude change is critical, especially since educators sometimes make subjective decisions about students’ academic futures, based on their beliefs about those students’ intelligence levels.
In the in-class discussions, Lucy also struggled with the topics of White privilege and Affirmative Action. She talked about not understanding how one racial group’s disadvantages were any different from those of another racial group. These remarks supported a colorblind ideology, which suggests that race does not play a part in an individual’s experiences. This ideology also reflects the “normalness” of Whiteness. A person who is White may rarely think about his or her race and therefore assumes this is normal and that others do not or should not think about their race as well. In her written reflections, she also became defensive about this particular topic. She wrote:
I personally feel "White privilege" is a term coined by someone or some group
who resents the success of certain individuals in the White race. There are 241
obvious disadvantages associated with growing up in any particular race, religion,
or class, yet success is determined by the individual in America, at this point in
time. Unfortunately, some White people do discriminate against other races, but
this is also true of other races. If in a situation, such as a Caucasian being
discriminated against or being born into poverty, does this in turn make Whites
"underprivileged"? Nothing stops any individual from achieving what they desire
except inherent abilities or their level of tenacity to overcome the hurdles placed
before them. I am probably privileged in ways from this that no one can
accurately determine. Part of my family’s success could have come from being
White, networking, or simply luck.
Lucy’s artwork, as well as her final reflection indicated that she still felt some discomfort with the topic of race. She wrote, “I do not feel comfortable (yet) bringing up a hot racial topic with my [future] class, but I think I will encourage the students [to talk about it] if this sort of topic does come up.” Lucy also struggled at the beginning of the course to create artworks that addressed her racial past. Much like Jennifer, Lucy’s critical family history art piece also focused on the effects of divorce within her family and stopped short of critically analyzing her racial past, her artwork was also visually successful, though it did not meet the criteria of the studio art project.
By the end of the course, Lucy fit within the trait typology “Informed”, but was still struggling with feeling comfortable with diverse populations and the topic of race.
Her experience might further indicate that one course alone may not be sufficient for addressing racial issues.
242
Student 3 - Higher/Ally Attitude Changes
Piper is also a White female, who like Jennifer had prior teaching experience. She expressed to me that she had a keen interest in taking this course and had a similar experience to Jennifer because a student had also accused her of being racist. She told me that she wanted to understand her diverse students better and learn as much as she could about racial issues.
In regards to her level of comfort with the topic of race, Piper explained that it depended on what was being discussed and the nature of the discussion. She writes:
Growing up in South Louisiana, the topic of race often becomes a heated
discussion. My participation in these discussions of race depends upon the exact
topic being discussed. There are several things that I feel naive or uneducated
about and this can cause me to shy away from a discussion or at least my input on
a discussion. This is one reason I have enrolled in this course. I believe that in
order to be a contributing member of society, race is a topic I must [understand].
Currently, if a conversation is about a [racial] topic I can relate to or add to, I feel
safe to join in [the discussion]. I am a naturally nurturing person and it is my
desire to help inform others when I can, so that I can guide them as they develop
educated personal views on topics such as these.
She also stated that she thought it was important for educators to be able to talk about race, because educators are models for demonstrating how students can have educated and thoughtful discussion regarding a difficult topic. She writes, “Thus, it is important for us as educators to show students how to question their [racial] assumptions.” 243
Similar to Jennifer and Lucy, Piper’s past early experiences with people of color were cursory. Her experiences were limited as a child to interacting with Black co- workers of her family, as the school she attended was predominately White. However, in high school, she attended a much more diverse school. In her explicit test, she also indicated that no Black families lived close to her growing up.
Unlike the other two students, Piper’s written reflections indicated a shift towards
“Informed/Ally” traits, and a keen awareness and developing understanding of White privilege. She writes:
I have come to understand that White privilege is an invisible system of
advantage that all White members of society can take advantage of daily. I say
that I have “come to understand” because one of the main aspects of White
privilege is that we are often unaware of being born into this system of “unsought
racial dominance.” Due to the color of our skin we take part in events every day
that declare to other races that we are more important than they are. For instance
buying band-aids, watching television, or celebrating holidays ensures that we
will be thought about, represented, and known by others. Before taking part in this
course, I have noticed some of the privileges that my race attributes to me but I
was not fully aware of the extent to which White privilege plays out in my daily
life.
The main question that arises for me as I study about White privilege is what can I
do to reject this form of passive racism and work toward eradicating it. This is not
an easy question to answer and by no means am I able to fully wrap my mind
around it; it is terrifying how huge of an impact that the past still has on the 244
present. The only way that I know of at the moment to reject and eradicate White
privilege is to make others aware of it. I believe that you can only change
something that you can see so by making others aware of it and allowing myself
to be more aware of it we can take societies blinders off one at a time and
confront the ugliness of the system of advantage that has been created.
Piper’s attitude changes were also evident in the explicit test responses. When asked on
the Pre-test if Blacks should “work their way up” much like the Irish, Italians, and Jewish
have done in America, Piper responded that she agreed somewhat. However, post-test,
after in-class discussions about the process of who can be considered White in America
and the role this racial distinction played in our country’s immigration policies, she changed her response to “Disagree Strongly.” Her IAT scores also reflected her progression with her pre-test score (16) increasing post-test (17). In her interview, she stated that she felt her attitude was changing because she was becoming more informed.
She said, “I always thought that I shouldn’t bring up the topic of race, but now I am beginning to understand that it is important to talk about, and the art classroom is a perfect place for exploring this topic. Her final reflection also indicates her awareness of change. She wrote, “This class has enforced my conviction to open my eyes and truly observe what is going on around me and try and see what they see. I have learned that another point of view is very important to try and understand…”
Also in contrast to Jennifer and Lucy, Piper’s critical family history artwork did express her understanding of her racial genealogy. However, she also struggled to move beyond exploring her ancestry and into critically examining the role of race in her family’s history. Her piece was also visually successful, but her hesitation to push her 245
artwork further may have reflected her initial discomforts with racial issues at the start of
the semester.
Conclusion
These three students had commonalities in that they all began the course at the
“Naïve” level. However, within that naïve range, Piper’s written reflections indicated a
more rapid shift toward “Informed” than did the others. For example, Piper’s second reflection indicated she was trying to establish meaningful relationships outside of her own racial group. She writes, “ Since moving [to Athens] I have been able to develop an extremely diverse group of friends… It is too easy to stay within one circle when you are established in a community but [this move] has helped me to step out into a world where
I can reach out to different people.” Each of these students also struggled at the beginning of the course to express their racial understandings through their artworks. However, as the course progressed, they were able to relate their artwork to topics in the course. Even though Jennifer’s beliefs remained mostly steadfast throughout the course, there were indications that increased understanding was still occurring. This was evidenced in her final reflection when she writes, “I know that before this class, I did not understand that my students could have such different perspectives than I do.” Furthermore, this student’s final typology trait was assessed as being “Naïve/Informed”. Lucy, unlike the other two students reviewed in this chapter, was unprepared for the topic of the course and had very little initial interest in the course topic. Regardless, her IAT scores indicated a positive shift in her associations of Blacks. This may suggest that even students who may not be initially interested in this topic can benefit from learning about racial issues. Piper’s explicit attitude test, pre and post, reflected that she supported Affirmative Action and 246
believed in equal rights for both Blacks and Whites. This may have indicated openness
towards concepts and programs that support diversity efforts. In the in-class discussions
and outside of class, Piper often told me that she was very interested in learning more
about racial issues. This might also suggest a certain level of intrinsic motivation towards
anti-racist behaviors and beliefs that better positioned her to progress at a more rapid rate
towards an “Ally” attitude.
When considering all the data collected for these students, cohesively, certain
implications can be drawn. Limited exposure to people outside of one’s own racial group
may impact one’s comfort levels when working with these individuals. It may also
impact one’s ability to feel comfortable discussing racial topics. While missed early
experiences cannot be replaced, multiple field experiences that expose students to a wide
variety of people may be useful in order to supplement the deficiency in one’s past
experiences. Providing students with multiple field experiences in highly diverse school
settings, encouraging cross-racial relations within a university, and increasing diversity with a teacher education program, are all key components in facilitating students becoming more comfortable with racial issues. Additionally, to affect change in one’s strongly held beliefs, prolonged examination of racial issues may be necessary. A teacher preparation program where these issues are explored throughout the entire curriculum may be beneficial to students who hold strong racial associations and who may need more time to process the new information they are learning.
While the quantitative measures gathered data on the students’ racial attitudes, the qualitative data expanded on this understanding and provided a cohesive picture of attitude transformation. As an additional qualitative measure, a mid-point interview and 247
final written reflection were also utilized in this study to assess the level of change that occurred in participants’ attitudes and to explore in more depth, participants’ thoughts regarding working with diverse students and the topic of race.
248
CHAPTER 8
RESEARCH QUESTION 4
The data collected from the interview, midpoint in the semester, and the final reflection aimed to address the last research question: What influence does participating, engaging and learning in an art education studio course focused on social justice issues of race and racism have on preservice art educators’ racial attitudes? Both the interview and the final written reflection asked students to assess the effectiveness of the course, their past/current level of comfort with the idea of working with diverse student populations and the topic of race.
Interview Questions
The interviews (see Appendix D) were semi-structured and ranged from 12 minutes in length to 45 minutes. The questions assessed participants’ beliefs regarding
three main categories: their comfort levels with working with diverse populations, the
role of teacher preparation programs in preparing teachers to work with diverse
populations, and the effectiveness of the course.
Procedure. Over the course of four scheduled studio art days, five students’
names were written on the board each day, in the order that they would be interviewed.
Students were listed on the board alphabetically. The interview room was located down a
hallway, in the art education department, approximately 20 feet from the classroom. The
interviews took place in a private unoccupied office at the end of the hallway. Students
who were not being interviewed at the time continued to work on their studio art projects
while watching the video Black.White. (See Appendix H). Before the interviews began, a 249
few students voiced that they felt nervous in formal interview situations. In an effort to
put them at ease, I asked each student to bring their sketchbook with them into the
interview room so that we could discuss their work first, before beginning the interview.
Once we had reviewed their sketchbook, I explained that the interview was informal and that the interviewee should consider it a casual conversation between us. I showed them the list of questions I would be using to guide the conversation and told them their candid remarks were welcome. I also hoped that by showing the questions to the students they would feel less nervous about the interview once they realized that the questions were designed to assess the effectiveness of the course, rather than designed to specifically questioning their personal racial beliefs. My goal was for the participants to feel comfortable and open, as if in a friendly conversation, rather than on the defense in response to an interrogation of their racial attitudes and beliefs.
While the interview questions initially guided the conversation, participant responses also shaped the direction and length of the interview. For example, throughout the interview process, I would ask participants to clarify or elaborate on their responses.
Additionally, the last interview question asked respondents if they would like to talk about anything else pertaining to the course or their experience in the course. The open- ended nature of this question, as well as requests for participants to expand on their responses resulted in interviews that varied in length, depending on individual participant responses. Interviews concluded when all the interview questions on the list had been asked and a participant indicated that he or she had no further comments. When a participant finished his or her interview, I asked them to return to the classroom and ask 250
the next person on the list to bring their sketchbook to me in the interview room where
the sketchbook review and interview process would begin again.
Levels of comfort. The first four interview questions aimed to assess participants’
progression in their levels of comfort working with diverse populations from the start of
the course to the midpoint in the course. It also aimed to address what factors they
believed were contributing or detracting from their becoming more comfortable. While
most students stated that they felt more comfortable at the midpoint of the semester
(February 2nd) talking about racial issues (16 participants), many White students also indicated that they still felt less comfortable working with diverse populations (11 White participants). For example, this exchange between Interviewer (I) and Respondent (R) highlights the different levels of comfort for one participant:
I: When you first began this course, how comfortable did you feel working with
diverse populations? Let’s say on a scale from one to ten, one would be the least
comfortable and ten would be the most comfortable.
R: Last semester, I was probably a two.
I: Okay.
R: I remember when we started talking about it [diversity] and I …I was just in
the art education [foundations] class and I was expecting… well, we kept coming
back to the diversity thing and I kept thinking, why do we keep talking about this?
Why do we keep talking about this?!
I: [light laugh] Right.
R: So, but I would say after that course and at the beginning of this course, I was
probably more around a six or a seven. 251
I: Okay, good.
I: Okay, so how comfortable would you have felt at the beginning of this course if
you had been offered a job in a school that had a 70 percent or higher minority
student population?
R: I would probably be a little bit uncomfortable with it.
I: Okay, do you think you are still a little bit uncomfortable with this idea now?
R: Maybe still a little bit, but definitely not as much, because I feel a little bit
more equipped at knowing about differences. … about diversity.
I: Okay.
I: And, uh, now, as far as we have gotten in this course, how comfortable do you
feel? Since you were a six at the beginning of the course, or do you feel about the
same?
R: On talking about race or teaching in a diverse classroom?
I: Either one. Both.
R: Uh, talking about race… I feel a lot more comfortable. I’m probably …I mean
I talk about it with my friends now…so, so I would say I am probably an eight or
an eight and a half…lets say that [laugh]
I: [laugh] Okay, good.
I: What about teaching in a diverse classroom?
R: Teaching? Well I would probably be around a six.
I: okay.
R: I am just being honest.
I: That’s good, and I want you to be honest. So that’s good. 252
Another participant responded similarly, stating that his comfort levels depended on the situation:
I: When we began this course, how comfortable did you feel working with diverse
populations? And you can talk about it as a scale with one being not very
comfortable and ten being very comfortable and then just elaborate on your
feeling.
R: Um… I would say on a scale from one to ten, I would choose a five,
somewhere in the middle, because in certain instances, I feel extremely
comfortable, like with foreign or non-confident English speakers. Even when I
can’t understand them…it just doesn’t… it’s not a big deal because I feel like a
kinship to them…even though I didn’t grow up that way [As a foreigner who
doesn’t speak English] …because like with the non-English speakers a lot of these
people were in and out of our home growing up.
I: Okay.
R: But what I don’t feel very comfortable with is very American children, like
Black kids who I can’t relate to at all or Hispanic kids who come from really low
poverty areas, that I can’t really relate to, that’s actually significantly more
stressful for me, or at least it was.
I: Is it the way that they speak, specifically, or is it that you are not used to being
around people like that?
R: At first I thought it was they way they speak, but now I think its really more of
a cultural thing. I don’t consider myself wealthy by any means, but I do think the
style of upbringing I had was mildly privileged, because in my home, the 253
assumption of getting educated was definite, and I had a stay-at-home mom, so
like things like that to me are privileged.
I: Right.
R: So, I like working with them [Blacks and Hispanics], but like, I am always
nervous because I feel like I can’t relate and I feel…I feel like they maybe know
that and that’s what makes me nervous.
When asked what factors participants felt contributed or detracted from their becoming more comfortable working with diverse populations three main factors emerged from the interviews. The first factor that participants talked about was the lack of diversity amongst the students in the course. Sixteen of the 19 participants suggested that they felt since only a handful of students were students of color, their exposure to a wide range of diverse viewpoints were limited. One participant stated:
I think I would be more comfortable if we had more diversity in our
classroom….and um…so I wouldn’t feel like I was kinda speaking for my whole
race…like if I had more faces that looked like me and more like minority students
in the class, I think we would have more input and better discussions about things
and it would just help everyone in general kinda get a feel for everybody, versus
me feeling like ‘oh man, I gotta correct this comment someone made, let me say
something’.
Another had a similar response:
In our class when we talk about African American issues we can only getting
three people’s opinions and then when we talk about White issues, its like almost
the rest of the class can give their opinions… there are just so many more White 254
voices than other voices…. We need more diverse viewpoints, because without
them you are only making assumptions about what other people think.
The second factor that participants felt detracted from their becoming more comfortable with diverse populations was a lack of experience and interaction with diverse populations. Eleven of the 19 participants stated that they felt they needed additional practicum experience in highly diverse schools. The third factor was fear. Five participants stated that they were either fearful of being in diverse communities or fearful of saying something that might influence their classmates to perceive them as racist. For example, one participant stated in her interview that she desired to have a teaching practicum in a diverse school:
Um. I think lack of experience [with diverse populations]…would be the biggest
one [detraction] and…I feel like the main one…because I feel like with
experience, like a teaching practicum in a really diverse school, I would just
become more comfortable and the more experience I have the more diverse things
I can relate too….
Another participant described her fear as detracting from her becoming more comfortable:
Um. I think it is more of a fear of the community. Not so much teaching the kids
in that community, but that would probably mean I would be living in that
community and I would have a fear of being different… and then I would be
getting attention for being different. 255
A third participant went on to say that she felt like she couldn’t share her honest opinion about the topics we discussed in-class because she feared the other students in the class would label her a racist:
R: I believe that pulling yourself up by your bootstraps…well there is something
to be said about that … I mean there probably is White privilege, but there is also
a flip side of that, because there are also minorities who aren’t working, but they
blame their misfortune on their race… and it offends me sometimes that race is
used as an excuse.
I: Okay. So you are talking about pulling the ‘race card’?
R: Exactly.
I: Okay and that was something you felt uncomfortable talking about in our class?
R: Yeah.
I: Can you tell me why?
R: Because I might not articulate that well and… in my experience… I could
come off as a racist and I don’t want to be seen like that.
R: So I don’t think we need to provide a step up for minorities [Affirmative
Action] or for women, but we all need to work our way up… and I don’t feel like
I can say things like this in class because I know I will come off as a racist and I
don’t want to be seen as a racist because I don’t believe that I am one.
This conversation continued with me asking this respondent if there was another format in which she felt she could voice her opinion comfortably. She responded that she only felt she could share those kinds of thoughts with her family. I suggested that we create an anonymous box where anyone could submit their comments, and I would share them 256
anonymously with the class. I told her that we were about to begin the readings and
discussions on Affirmative Action and that this might provide a way for everyone to feel
as if their opinions could be heard. She responded that she felt the conversations in class
about Affirmative Action “would get ugly.” She stated that the anonymous comment box
might be a good idea because it would allow everyone to voice his or her opinions
without fear of being labeled a racist. However, she also stated that she felt I would be
“shocked” by the opinions that were left in the box and that if I read them to the class,
some people in class would be offended by the comments. She stated that she felt if the
class was being taught by a White teacher and all the students in the course were White,
then perhaps the conversations would be very different than our current conversations.
The implication was that because I was only part White and teaching the course, perhaps
the White students might not feel like they could share their honest opinions, even
through an anonymous format. I assured her that I would not be offended and that I
would take great care in sharing the comments placed in the box in a way that would be
mindful of not offending others. While she initially stated that the anonymous box might
be a good idea, she was becoming increasingly skeptical about the idea. We continued
this conversation, and talked about how I might create a “safe” way for students to share
their “honest” opinions. At the end of the 45-minute conversation and interview, she had
again suggested that she felt the box was the most appropriate way to handle this
dilemma. The next scheduled class, I explained the need for the anonymous box to the students, without discussing where the idea came from or my conversation with this particular student. I told the students that they could leave anonymous comments in my school mailbox as well (if they were worried about being seen putting a comment in the 257
box) or they could email a comment to me. I assured anonymity for the author. No comments were ever placed in the box, in my school mailbox, nor were they sent to me via email.
While most (16) of the students felt more comfortable with the topic of race, the idea of working with diverse populations continued to make many (11) students feel uncomfortable. I wanted to know whose responsibility these students felt it was to help them become more comfortable.
Responsible parties. The next set of questions aimed to determine what role students felt teacher preparation programs played in preparing them to become more comfortable working with diverse populations. Almost all (17) of the participants stated that they felt the responsibility lay within themselves. They stated that they believed an individual had to have a personal desire to become more comfortable with people of color. Furthermore, most (17) of the participants, agreed that professors in teacher preparation programs were responsible for designing curriculum that explored the topic of race and providing students with practicum experiences in diverse settings. Lastly, 15 participants suggested that school administrators were responsible for providing in- service training in culturally responsive teaching. One participant stated:
Well, for starters it has to begin with the educators themselves. They have to
realize that understanding diversity is something that they need to be working on.
I know that I had to realize that I was kind of narrow minded at some point and I
just had to be willing to open up and I don’t know what made me think that way.
It might have been like my environment. Or coming to this university. But I think
school administration should also push this forward. Cause I don’t think… well I 258
know… nothing gets talked about… about diversity. Um, like thinking about the
school where my mom works and stuff, they never do like diversity workshops or
programs or stuff like that and I think you need an administration that has the
power to come in and kind of counteract that and work with teachers…
Another student had a similar comment:
Well I think it becomes an individual’s responsibility. Each person themselves
have to decide to become more comfortable with [diverse populations] by
becoming more educated and having a wider variety of experiences.
One student succinctly said the responsibility lies with the “professors in a student’s
education degree program, then with administrators in their schools and lastly with the
people in charge of educational conferences.”
When asked what participants felt needed to change in teacher preparation
programs to facilitate effectively preparing them for working with diverse populations all
19 participants suggested that a course similar to the one they had just participated in
should be required by the university for all education majors. One student explained that she felt a full course devoted to this topic was needed, rather than just a section of a course devoted to examining race. She said:
I think we need more classes that focus on race, like this one does. I kinda feel
that almost everyone who is planning on being a teacher needs to go through an
entire course that is devoted to only this topic. Otherwise, it just becomes that
“section” in the course that nobody really wants to deal with and everyone hopes
will be over soon. This type of course is very important because you are 259
immersed in the subject matter, there is nowhere to run and you have to deal with
it. It [the course] should be required by the university.
A different student commented:
I think this course should be required by UGA because it teaches about White
privilege and everyone needs to understand this and how it effects them in daily
life, especially if they are going to teach in a diverse school. Too many people
don’t even believe this privilege exists, like my grandparents. They just think
everyone has equal rights and they don’t realize that equal does not mean fair.
Another suggested that a course that examines race be required for all education majors.
He said, “We need another course, like this one but even more intensive, and is geared towards all general education majors so that it is required of everyone who hopes to be a teacher one day.”
While a multicultural course focused solely on racial issues is not currently required of preservice teachers by the UGA College of Education (COE), in 2002 a
Cultural Diversity Requirement at the undergraduate level was implemented (COE
Conceptual Framework, n.d.). In 2006, the COE collaborated with the Board of Regents to require all candidates to take a mandatory pre-education diversity course. Additionally, in 2008, a second course was added, Critical and Contemporary Issues in Education, which aims to “raise candidates’ awareness of current educational issues, including diversity in all its forms” (COE Conceptual Framework, n.d., ¶ 27). Furthermore, the
Dean’s Council on Diversity (DCOD) sponsors university-wide diversity activities and seminars. On the COE Web site it states: 260
In the last decade, the college has continued to extend the commitment to
diversity through a variety of activities and initiatives, including an enhanced
curriculum to address diversity needs, expanding our research efforts in the area
of diversity and multiculturalism, increased service activities related to diversity,
and administrative commitment to diversity in policies and procedures in the
college. This level of commitment reflects the multicultural education mission
statement, which specifies that the college's instruction, research, service and
administration all share a role in fulfilling the goals of diversity in the college.
The College of Education is committed to making itself more diverse by
developing programs, practices, and policies that enable candidates, faculty, and
staff to lead productive lives in a diverse context and to effectively educate
students from various sociocultural backgrounds. (COE Conceptual Framework,
n.d., ¶ 25)
The UGA Franklin College of Arts and Sciences also requires that all students take a multicultural course “with a significant focus on African American, Asian American,
Hispanic American or Native American cultures” (Franklin College of Arts and Sciences, n.d.).
Effectiveness of the course. The last set of questions assessed the effectiveness of the course. When asked what participants thought had been the most helpful part of the course, 18 participants responded that they felt it had been the readings, written reflection, and videos (see Appendix H), while 15 participants stated that the artmaking had been the most helpful. Additionally, 11 participants also felt that the in-class and on- 261
line discussions had been helpful. In regards to the artmaking process, one student said that it provided a means of expressing herself beyond using words. She said:
For me personally, it [the artmaking] gave me an opportunity to investigate race
that became more personal to me…. It gave a way for me to express my feelings
without the limitation of words. It was an avenue for visualizing and exploring
what we were talking about in class. The studio part could have been a class all by
itself.
One student suggested that art was a integral part of her ability to connect emotionally to the topic:
We especially need a course in art education that focuses on racial issues, because
creating art is such a better way of expressing emotions and feelings. Since we are
artists as well as educators it [artmaking] really changes how we understand
something. Granted I may be biased because I am an art education person (laugh),
but I think others who aren’t could really benefit from artmaking as well. It would
really help them to think deeply about a topic like this one.
This same student went on to explain that artmaking provided another way for her to express her understanding of the topic:
The art projects… the discussions have helped too, but the art projects helped me
to develop my understanding of things [racial issues] and I think I express my
understandings better in my art.
A different student discussed how creating art made her think deeply about racial issues:
I think that the artmaking projects were very thought provoking. They made me
really think about it [racial issues]. I think they also provided a wonderful model 262
for how we could do similar projects to get our students thinking about race. I will
use these projects as a way to get my students to open up and become more
comfortable with this topic.
Another student stated that she felt the in-class discussions had been helpful in preparing
her to discuss this topic in her future classroom:
I think I really get a lot from our in-class discussions because…. Well first of all
you just talk through things, and then I still, like, don’t feel like everyone always
ends up on the same page, and I just feel like that is real life, you know. I get to
hear a lot of different opinions. We can talk through it until we are blue in the
face, but we still might not see eye to eye because we all have our own respective
experiences and so we just see things differently and it is nice to hear that because
in the end we just have to get through that. I felt like these discussions prepare me
to be open to… you know… talking about things in my classroom.
One student talked about why she felt the readings and written reflections were the most helpful aspect of the course:
For me, probably the readings and the written reflections because... ideas have
been presented that I never thought of before or heard of before. Even if I didn’t
agree with what the author was saying or it didn’t sound to right to me, at least I
still had to think about it and work through understanding why I felt the way I did.
I think too that the on-line postings are good too, because the on-line postings are
a non-threatening way to open up more in a discussion and I have really
appreciated being able to dialogue this way. It is a lot of reading, but the readings
are very interesting and beneficial to me. 263
Another student commented on how she appreciated the opportunity to take a class like this one:
I really appreciate having this course as an option to take as a class because I
don’t know where else, aside from reading on my own, I would have the
opportunity to talk about race. Now I go home every night and talk to my
roommate about what we discussed in this class and it is nice to be able to talk
about it, even my roommate appreciates having that dialogue because it is
something we’ve been taught not to talk about. This is why we need more classes
like this one, because you don’t get to talk about race in political science, or other
courses I have taken at UGA. I mean most professors don’t talk about things like
interracial relationships and after our discussions in class [on interracial
relationships] my roommate and I stayed up all night talking about it.
One student reflected on her past experiences with other multicultural courses at a different university she had attended and compared her experiences with her experiences in this course, writing:
In my undergrad experience and Master’s experience, the multicultural classes I
took were less than memorable. They were definitely structured as the heroes and
holidays approach. And so coming here [to the University of Georgia], when I
read the syllabus for this course… it blew me away! I just thought ‘wow’ this
kind of reading and discussion is what is necessary to get at the root of racism.
The reading materials are awesome, the videos shown in class are awesome, the
dialogue is awesome… and it is funny because these are the conversations we
have been having in the Black community all along and now in this class we are 264
talking about Jim Crow, Sarah Baartman, and ‘good’ hair and these are the
discussions that my friends and I have been having eight, nine years ago and now
White students are critically examining these issues… and so it is great to be
having these discussions with people who have never talked about these things
before…and it is opening all of our eyes. It is a heavy, heavy topic, but I really
appreciate that we are having these discussions and that these topics have finally
found their way into a college course. Courses like these are critical in teacher
preparation programs because these programs should be aiming to prepare
teachers for the reality of the classroom and that reality involves students of
different races.
Another student commented on how the course had changed his perspective:
So until I had this class, it would never have occurred to me to bring in artworks
from different artists of different ethnicities. So now if I had three paintings that
were similar, I will probably choose the one created by the minority, if I can,
because most textbooks are so Westernized and lacking this perspective. And
those are things that would never have occurred to me before because I would
have just been like… I would just have picked the art maybe by the most famous
artist… but these artists are usually White… it was like a color-blind curriculum
in my head but now I am aware that by adding this other art by underrepresented
artists, it might make a difference to my students.
When asked what the participants felt needed to improve to make the course more effective in helping them become comfortable working with diverse populations, all 19 participants suggested that more than one course was needed that covered the topic of 265
race. Several students suggested that the course be broken up in to two companion courses: one that focused on the readings, written reflections and in-class discussions and one that was devoted to exploring the topics discussed in the art studio. Students felt that there was not adequate time in one course to fully discuss the topics, complete the readings, and respond visually in the art studio to these topics. One student also suggested that a practicum be added that would allow the students to teach at an all minority school or an inner city school. This student explained in his interview why he felt the school should be all minority:
I: What do you think could be improved in this course to make it more effective
for preservice teachers?
R: Working in diverse classrooms.
I: Like a practicum?
R: Exactly like a practicum, but a practicum where all the students are minorities.
I: All the students? Why?
R: Because, like when we were doing our teaching practicum at Gaines
Elementary, even though there were some minority students, I noticed that many
of the White [college] students only wanted to work with White children and they
tried to seek them out of the rest of the children. They avoided helping the Black
and Hispanic children. If there are children who look like them, they gravitate to
those children. Then they would try to play it off. They were like, I’m gonna sit
with this girl and get more hands on with her, and I don’t think it was a
coincidence that both the UGA student and the little girl were White. Nor was it a
coincidence that the UGA student always wanted to work with only the little 266
White children. This is why I think people need to be put in a school with a totally
different cultural background then they have, so they can’t only seek out children
who look just like them. If these people are going to work in a public school in
Georgia they are going to work in classrooms where the minority is the majority,
so they better start learning how to interact with minorities.
Another student suggested that the class be divided to allow for more time to explore the topic:
You know we just did not have enough time to do all the studio things that we
wanted to do. This class would be much better if had an art lab component
because I think that would allow us enough time to go really in-depth in our
discussions and then we could go to the next class and really concentrate on just
the studio aspects.
Similarly, another student also suggested the course become two courses:
I think this course should become two separate courses so that we would have
more time to focus on both the academic side… the readings and discussions, and
then the studio side, which helps us to explore the topic deeper. The courses
should be related to one another and students should be required to take both of
them at the same time.
One student also suggested that the course be expanded into two sections, a beginning and advanced section, which would be taught consecutively during the spring and fall semester, respectively.
267
Final Written Reflections
The final written reflection asked students to reflect on their experiences in the
course. Students self-assessed their beginning understandings of race and compared these
to their current understandings at the end of the course (April 27th). Students were also
asked if they felt they would continue learning about diversity and if they felt they were
ready to begin engaging in equity/antiracist work. Lastly, they were asked if they felt
prepared to address racial issues in the art classroom and if they felt comfortable
facilitating or participating in conversations that had a racial dimension.
Progression of understanding race. While most (13) students’ reflections
indicated a move towards “Ally” racial attitudes, with two students being categorized as
“Informed”, six as “Informed/Ally” and five as “Ally”, six remaining students continued
to reflect some level of “Naïve” racial attitudes, as well as “Informed” racial attitudes in
their final written reflections. Interestingly, four of the five students whose IAT scores
declined post-test were also the same students who continued to have “Naïve” racial
attitudes. One of the four students expressed continued fear about talking about racial
issues and addressing these issues in the art classroom. Two students continued to
express defensiveness about the discussions of Whiteness and one of the two continued to
support a colorblind ideology. One student wrote about her continued discomfort with
talking about racial issues, writing, “I am becoming more and more aware of engaging in
equity/antiracist work but also I am becoming more aware of how intimidated I am of
engaging in courageous conversation.” Another student wrote, “I still believe my conviction that being colorblind is only partly bad.” This student also wrote about her anger over experiencing being seen as a member of a group instead of as an individual: 268
I am aware of the personal struggles of others more, but this class has also taught
me about the exclusion of the majority, more than I ever would have expected. In
this class I learned about WHITENESS. Whiteness in this class became a
generalization that took away my individuality and I believe this is what racism
does. I see that I will never understand someone else’s point of view on this
subject. I am more aware of things, but I will not specifically discuss this
[Whiteness] if I am not in a safe environment…
This student’s reaction to the discussions about Whiteness exemplifies the emotions that
some White students experience, which is described by Tatum (1997) as “the frustration
of being seen as a group member, rather than an individual” (p. 102). Tatum goes on to
explain:
People of color learn early in life that they are seen by others as members of a
group. For Whites, thinking of oneself only as an individual is a legacy of White
privilege… The view of oneself as an individual is very compatible with the
dominant ideology of rugged individualism and the American myth of
meritocracy. Understanding racism as a system of advantage that structurally
benefits Whites and disadvantages people of color on the basis of group
membership threatens not only beliefs about society but also beliefs about one’s
own life accomplishments. (pp. 102-103)
Of the six students who continued to have “Naïve” racial attitudes, four stated that they felt their racial attitudes had not changed over the course of the semester. One wrote, “I still feel the same way [about racial issues] with the added addition that I think it is ridiculous to have racial classifications.” Another student wrote: 269
To be honest, ultimately, I am not sure if my opinions and feelings on racial
issues have significantly changed this semester. I can honestly say though, that
because of this class, I have been forced to think considerably and critically about
WHY I believe the way I do, and that has been a good experience for me, a tough
one, but still good.
This student’s IAT score did, however, show that her racial attitude had improved by the
end of the course. Additionally, while all six students expressed “Naïve” attitudes, portions of their written reflections also indicated “Informed”, and even “Ally” attitudes.
One of these student stated, “I think in general, I am [now] more willing to speak up when I witness discrimination, prejudice, or racism.” Another student wrote:
I feel confident enough to develop an art lesson that addresses issues of race.
After this semester, I have realized what a valuable resource art can be [for social
change]…. I now understand that I am capable of initiating and/or facilitating
conversations about race. It is ultimately in my best interest as the teacher to
initiate these conversations and control where the conversation goes, as opposed
to letting it come about on its own, and risk disaster blowing up in my face.
One student’s reflection suggested that even though they had expressed some “Naïve” traits, such as continued fear and discomfort, they also had a growing desire to eventually become a social agent for change:
I feel very passionate about social justice and the fact that all people deserve to be
treated equally… I really want to make a difference. I think a start would just be
addressing racial issues with my friends and family. I am involved in a lot of
service work with the UGA campus and Athens community and I definitely want 270
to tie in antiracist education into the advocacy portion of my service projects in
the future. I definitely feel more prepared [to address issues of race in the art
classroom] than I did before this class. Before this class, I think my reaction to
any racial problem in the classroom would have been to give the “we are all
equal” speech that we’ve all heard before. Now I feel confident that I could
address the situation in a more meaningful and impactful way, a way that would
critically address race.
The other 13 students’ final reflections indicated a deepening awareness of White privilege and its role in their lives, increased comfort with the topic of race and working with diverse student populations, a desire to teach about race in the art classroom, and a desire to begin antiracist work. One student wrote about becoming aware of White privilege:
Of course I knew some people do discriminate based on race, but because it
wasn’t blatantly obvious to me, in my life, the big idea of White privilege was a
new concept for me to grasp. It has been so beneficial for me to slow down and
pay attention to the White privilege that exists around me in so many forms. I
think I’m still learning to see it and I think that I still have a long way to go before
I lose my biases… but I do feel more comfortable discussing race, as long as I can
state upfront that I’m not claiming to know it all!
Another student described her increased comfort level, writing, “After having this course,
I feel more comfortable talking about race and learning about race. I know that I can knowledgably discuss racial issues with another individual now. I could not have done 271
that before this class.” One student stated that she felt confident enough to address racial issues in her future classroom:
I feel more equipped to address issues of race in my art classroom. I think that this
class has especially taught me that I do not need to wait for an issue to arise,
rather I can and should address race with my students, just as I would any other
topic. The beauty of the art room is that it is a place of thinking, research, and
sharing. This makes it the perfect place to discuss race…
Another student described the importance of addressing race in her future art classroom:
I most definitely feel confident enough to create an art lesson that addresses issues
of race. As an art educator, I want to design a curriculum that is relevant and
powerful for my students to participate in. In many cases, the art classroom may
be the only opportunity for my students to explore and communicate their own
feelings about race. They will emotionally connect to the topic through their
artmaking and this may lead them to have a stirring for social justice activism as
well. Therefore, as an art educator, this type of assignment would not only be
beneficial to my curriculum, but also necessary.
This same student also talked about her increased comfort level with the idea of working with a diverse student body:
I feel like before I took this class, I tried to ignore the fact that most of my
students will look different from me, and that I will still need to be able to relate
to them to teach them. In my own fantasy world of teaching, my classroom was
filled with students just like me: passionate about art, disciplined, well mannered,
bubbly, energetic… and White. This class has awakened me from these 272
daydreams and given me the tools to face reality. I will be teaching students who
are drastically different from me, but I shouldn’t be afraid just because they are
different. After learning about and understanding some of these differences, I am
no longer afraid. Instead, I am now excited to teach students who are different
from me, and I am excited for those students to teach me.
Another student also wrote about her desire to work with students who do not look like her:
After learning more in depth about the racial achievement gap and how it comes
into play in the different neighborhoods throughout America, I feel really inspired
to teach somewhere that might have originally been out of my comfort zone. This
is because motivated, informed teachers are especially needed in areas like that.
Also, teaching diverse populations will help ME grow as a person and educator.
To not be antiracist, doesn’t even seem like an option anymore.
This student also spoke about her experiences in this course and how they led her to feel motivated towards antiracist actions:
Beginning this class, I considered myself to be open-minded towards race. I had
grown up with a variety of races and engaged in some race discussions in other
classes like Women’s Studies and Current Issues. To an extent, I understood the
racial construction in America. However, looking back I was still pretty
uninformed. My view was that although racism still existed, it was progressively
on its way out of society and most Americans were trying to change it. However,
after having such in-depth discussions, readings, and studio art projects about race
in America, I feel so much more informed. I realize now that racism is a terrible, 273
growing issue, which is often passive, causing most of the country to not realize
or actively care about abolishing these racial barriers. White privilege is definitely
something I have a better grasp on now, and I understand that racism is my
problem as much as anyone else.
Another student made similar comments, writing:
I wouldn’t be doing my job as an Art Educator if I allowed my students to create
artworks that reinforce stereotypes or racist views. Having been in this class, I
feel it is up to me as the Art Educator to step in and get my students thinking
about race.
Conclusion
While most students transitioned towards feeling more comfortable working with diverse populations and talking about race by the end of the course, several students continued to experience varying levels of discomfort. This indicated that one course alone might not be effective in reducing students’ anxieties over working with people who are different from them.
Participation in this study provided preservice and practicing art educators with the opportunity to reflect on their racial attitudes and behaviors towards others. By developing a greater awareness of their attitudes towards individuals outside of their respective racial groups, these participants also became more self-aware of the ways in which their beliefs and behaviors can affect their future students. This awareness was also useful in helping them to identify critical issues related to culturally responsive teaching and developing teaching strategies aimed at not only providing equal education, but equitable education for all students. 274
The findings in this study contribute to understandings of race and the role it plays
in education. The improvements seen in the participants’ racial attitudes post-course suggested that activities and discussions regarding social justice issues of race/racism might be able to help individuals reconstruct and adapt their racial attitudes. As schools become more diverse, it is important to recognize how exploring the topic of race in
teacher preparation programs can affect teachers’ dispositions and subsequently students’ learning experiences.
275
CHAPTER 9
IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CONCLUSIONS
This research aimed to understand the transformative processes of racial attitudes that resulted from the students’ participation in this studio art course, which focused on the critical examination of racial issues. Viewing these issues through art and artmaking facilitated these future art educators emotionally connecting to these issues. The findings suggested that learning through art aided participants in the development of dispositions that potentially promoted their unlearning of racial biases. Furthermore, future and practicing teachers’ cultural competencies and comfort levels regarding working with racially diverse populations and the topic of race improved. This study also resulted in a greater understanding of how art education students respond to social justice MCAE curricula focused on race and racism, which informs teacher preparation programs aimed at facilitating pre-service and practicing teachers becoming more comfortable working with diverse populations.
This study implemented constructivist methods for examining race. These methods involved the use of expressive artmaking and dialogue, rather than a lecture format. Taken together with the written reflections and the improved scores from the racial attitude tests, the results of this study suggest that difficult and sensitive topics may be easier for students to process when they are immersed in learning that is meaningful and personal. Implementation of this learning approach was of particular importance in this study since most participants indicated that they tended to avoid issues of race rather 276
than explore and discuss this topic. The findings from research Question One suggested
that although preservice and practicing art educators have preconceived ideas about
individuals outside of their own racial groups, their attitudes towards these groups are
malleable. Question Two findings indicated that some participants’ positive racial
attitudes progressed more quickly than others. Additionally, while some participants
continued to exhibit “Naïve” racial attitudes at different times throughout the course, this
process was iterative. Furthermore, all participants progressed beyond “Naïve” racial
attitudes by the end of the course, though to various degrees. Research Question Three
findings suggested that the quantitative and qualitative data were reflective and
supportive of each other, providing a holistic view of participants’ racial attitude changes.
The findings from research Question Four indicated that while all participants believed a course focused on critically examining racial issues was beneficial, important, and necessary in teacher education programs, they also felt that one course alone was not adequate. Overall, the findings suggested that individuals must thoroughly examine their attitudes, perceptions, actions and beliefs regarding race in order to modify their biases and become more comfortable with issues of diversity.
Implications
There are several implications that can be concluded from the study results. The
first implication is drawn based on the findings of the analysis of the visual artworks
produced by the students. Participants expressed in their interviews a deeper involvement
and racial understanding in the course due to the creation of their artwork. This deeper,
more personal involvement, in conjunction with the improvement of the scores on the
racial attitude post-tests, suggest that making an emotional connection to a topic through 277
artmaking can aid in facilitating a racial attitude change. Additionally, the artworks
indicated a greater depth of understanding of racial issues than did the written reflections
and in-class discussions. This may have been due to multiple factors. One factor may
have been that the artmaking process allowed for a more introspective reflection on the
topics discussed in-class. By emotionally connecting to racial issues through artmaking,
students entered a transformational space of learning that engaged them in deeper
personal reflection, allowed them to share in the feelings and experiences of others and
question their long-standing belief systems. Another factor may have been that the
artmaking process provided a period of gestation. This period of time may have provided
students the opportunity to absorb, process, and digest the new and often unfamiliar
information they had learned, resulting in increased understanding. During the
interviews, most (15) of the participants stated creating the artworks helped them to
process the information from the course readings and discussions. Since most art
educators are visual learners, this may suggest that artmaking provides another way of
demonstrating one’s development of critical and higher order thinking skills, as well as
providing a space for transformational learning to occur.
The studio portion of this study also provided students with the opportunity to
further develop their artistic skills with various art media. Focusing on the topic of race as
inspiration for these art pieces seemed to specifically affect the participants’ studio work by increasing their engagement and persistence in the art tasks. Students often asked to stay after class and be allowed access to the classroom on weekends in order to continue working on their studio pieces. These students’ desire to work on the studio projects outside of class was markedly different from other students’ levels of engagement and 278
persistence in a similar course I have taught, which was not organized thematically around the topic of race. Perhaps, because the topic of race often elicits strong emotional responses, students’ interest levels were peaked. Additionally, each studio project (see
Appendix G) allowed for students to connect personally and meaningfully to their artmaking. Because the art pieces reflected each student’s unique perspective on the subject of race, students may have found this aspect of the art projects very engaging, which may have enticed them to persist in their artmaking.
The second implication relates to the implicit and explicit attitude measures. The findings from these measures indicated that participants’ racial attitudes were malleable and did improve over the course. The IAT scores indicated that a significant (t(18) =
2.28, p< .05 ) positive change in attitudes occurred when comparing the pre-test and post- test scores. Looking specifically at the explicit test results and the positive change regarding racial misconceptions, it can be assumed that exposure to opinions and experiences of people from different races can help individuals change negative perceptions they may hold regarding races different from their own.
Also of note were the written reflection statements and in-class discussions, and a review of these provides the third implication of this study. In their interviews, many students stated that they found that engaging in conversations about race allowed them to become more comfortable with the topic of race in general. The written reflections provided an alternative and comfortable forum for students to share their thoughts about the class discussions and readings. These reflections also indicated the level of racial attitude trait development and student progression through these traits throughout the course. 279
A fourth implication stemmed from the interview transcriptions in which students
expressed their feelings that discussing racial issues was imperative in teacher education
programs. Most (17) students stated that they felt their participation in this course had
been one of the most important in their educational journeys. All 19 students who
participated stated that a course that critically explored race should be required by the
university for every student in the education major, art education included. Additionally,
all the students made the suggestion that if the ARED 5130/7130 course were to be
taught again as a MCAE course focused on race, the course should be expanded to
become either two sequential courses or a course devoted to the readings, in-class discussions and written reflections and a separate course that would be a companion art lab course focused on the studio projects. Students felt like this would allow them more time to examine this complex topic. Moreover, discussions of three topics in particular would have greatly benefited from an extended timeframe in the course. These topics,
White privilege, Affirmative Action, and Black dialect, met with the most resistance in the course. Students’ understandings of these topics were often limited and misguided.
Comments made both in class and on the online forum indicated that students needed more time to process these topics. Furthermore, scholars such as Zeichner (1999) and
Sleeter (2008b) suggest that teacher education programs present a unified and coherent curriculum aimed at preparing racially/culturally responsive educators. They believe this involves having the students in the program specifically examine the “dynamics of prejudice and racism” (Zeichner, 1999, p. 566) as well as racial self-examination. Sleeter
(2008b) also points out that racial issues cannot effectively be addressed in one course.
Instead, these issues should be interwoven within all the coursework throughout a 280
program. The findings from this study also support this notion. Students’ racial attitudes
transitioned at different rates and to different degrees. It is important to recognize that
although post-test results in this study showed a significant increase in positive racial attitudes, more than one course may be needed to unseat deeply held beliefs.
Students’ racial histories as expressed in the written reflections and in-class discussions lead to the fifth implication; students with limited exposure to others may
hold racial misconceptions about others. Most students stated at the beginning of the
course that they had limited or cursory experiences with individuals outside of their own
racial groups. This lack of cross-racial interaction may have played a key role in students’ racial beliefs. Moreover, the five students whose IAT scores declined post-test had this aspect of their past in common. Cochran-Smith and Zeichner (2005) support this notion, writing, “Studies of prejudice reduction reveal that prior experiences, early socialization, and ways of thinking influence teacher candidates’ attitudes and beliefs” (p. 21).
A fifth implication is that how the class is taught is equally, if not more important than what is taught. Creating a safe environment for students is key, especially when discussing a highly sensitive topic such as race. In order to facilitate open and honest dialogue, students need to feel as if they will not be judged for their racial misunderstandings or labeled as a racist for their opinions. This means setting a tone for the course that nurtures inquiry, encourages vulnerability, and ensures safety for all students in the course. Multiple perspectives must be respected and valued. Teacher educators who choose to address such potentially volatile topics should take great care to remain constantly mindful of the heightened emotional state such conversations can create. As such, a good first step is to establish and discuss the ground rules for classroom 281
dialogue. Secondly, teacher educators should explain to the class that each student participating will have a different level of racial understanding and all levels of understanding are welcome. This helps to set the tone for encouraging open inquiry without judgment. Lastly, the topic of race is broad and complex. Thus, choosing specific readings, events, artworks, artist, videos, and/or subject matter to guide a conversation about race provides the teacher educator with a tangible foundation for researching multiple perspectives on a particular racial issue. While understanding differing views on a particular racial issue will not insure that a discussion will not lead down a difficult path, it can better prepare a facilitator to guide that discussion towards effective and constructive dialogue.
A final implication became apparent throughout the course. Both students of color and White students can hold racial biases towards others as well as their own racial groups, employ color-blind language and ideology, and perpetuate stereotypes. Much of the literature to date focuses specifically on strategies aimed at helping White preservice educators become more prepared for working with diverse populations. This study, however, indicates that these strategies can be applied more broadly to all preservice and practicing educators, regardless of their race. The findings also suggest that all preservice and practicing educators benefit from learning about racial issues. This is not to say that students of color and White students have the same needs when learning about race, in fact, their needs are often very different. Rather, regardless of students’ racial experiences, interactions, and understandings, learning together in an environment where students’ needs differ is a critical component in helping students to appreciate multiple perspectives and develop empathy for others. 282
Recommendations
This study was limited in that any participants’ attitude changes that occurred
during the semester may not necessarily translate to their teaching practices once they are
in the classroom. Because this study was not longitudinal, this type of data could not be
collected. As such, one recommendation is that a longitudinal study be conducted in
order to study the long-term effect, if any, that MCAE courses aimed at prejudice reduction have on participants. Additionally, the pool of participants in this study was small, limiting the generalizabilty of the study. Further studies should be conducted with a larger participant population in order to increase the validity of the study. The participant population was also predominately White and further studies on more diverse groups should be conducted. However, this may be difficult as most teacher education programs are also populated by predominately White females. This study was also limited to preservice and practicing art education students. Broadening the participant pool to include other types of educators may yield a very different result.
Recommendations for practice which have emerged from the literature and the study findings suggest that education students need a course designed to critically examine issues of race. Engaging in conversations about race can have an effect on one’s racial attitude and increase awareness. Teacher educators can also address issues of diversity by infusing and acknowledging diverse perspectives within the larger context of their course design. For example, while a course may not specifically address racial issues, acknowledging that the assigned readings in a course have a predominately White male perspective potentially opens up a conversation about who is missing from the course literature and why. Furthermore, encouraging preservice and practicing teachers to 283
be mindful that their racial perspective should not be the only, nor the dominant, perspective presented in their future/current classrooms and curriculums facilitates teacher dispositions necessary for culturally responsive teaching. This could be as simple as reminding and encouraging teacher candidates to be inclusive in the range of artists and artworks displayed in the art classroom and included in the art curriculum.
Additionally, a comprehensive teacher education program that incorporates learning about issues of race throughout the entire curriculum may reinforce students’ understandings and provide adequate time for students to reflect on their racial beliefs. A constructivist framework seems to support students connecting meaningfully to this topic.
Furthermore, students learn from each other. Recruiting a wide variety of students of color into the education program can provide an opportunity for multiple perspectives to be shared in the classroom.
Lastly, teacher education programs should provide multiple opportunities for preservice educators to increase their exposure to diverse populations. Sleeter (2008b) advocates for more extended immersion experiences and contends that these cross- cultural experiences “may well be the most powerful venue for helping White preservice teachers begin to critically examine racism, move beyond fear and see teaching with ‘a cultural eye’”(p. 564). Sleeter points out that although immersion experiences are potentially the most powerful component, ironically these experiences are also the component that is most often missing from teacher education programs. Sleeter therefore proposes a cross-cultural component that supports preservice educators through first facilitating preservice educators’ learning about a particular community by understanding its history and what is currently happening there. This can be accomplished through 284
interviews and observations, as well as research in the community and with community members.
Conclusion
The transformative nature of this study not only influenced how participants understood race but also impacted my initial perception of White teacher candidates as potentially lacking in their ability and willingness to examine racial issues. Much of the research literature focuses on the need to prepare White preservice teachers for working with students of color (Tatum, 1992; Tettegah, 1996; Sleeter, 2001, 2008b; Singleton &
Linton, 2006). Additionally, some research also suggests that preservice teachers of color already have the skills necessary for being culturally responsive towards all students
(Villegas, 2008; Villegas & Davis, 2008). I began this study from this same perspective but came to understand that all preservice teachers regardless of their race can have negative and stereotypical perspectives and beliefs. Furthermore, many White preservice teachers are interested, willing and able to critically examine race. While race may typically position one group to experience life very differently than another, potentially allowing for one group to develop better insights of racial issues, it is not the only factor that determines one’s willingness to critically examine race and readiness to engage in antiracist actions.
Lowenstein (2009) warns that conceptualizing White preservice educators as
“deficient learners” (p. 163) of diversity issues can affect these students’ engagement in multicultural education courses. Lowenstein (2009) also points out that it is critical that teacher educators remember that while White preservice teachers may be lacking in their diversity experiences and knowledge, this does not automatically mean that they are 285
lacking in their willingness or ability to become culturally responsive and racially literate
teachers. Furthermore, Lowenstein (2009) suggests that teacher educators who
conceptualize all “teacher candidates as competent learners who bring rich resources to
their learning” are, in effect, also practicing the tenets of culturally responsive teaching.
According to Pohan and Aguilar (2001), a key question in the field of education
should be, “How do we best help future and current teachers acquire the knowledge,
skills, and attitudes that would result in culturally responsive teaching?” (p. 160). Art educators’ beliefs and attitudes towards racially diverse populations play a part in their expectations and treatment of students. Understanding what these dispositions are and how they can be changed is a critical component in ensuring equality and equity in education.
As this study suggests, preservice and practicing teachers are not immune to negative racial attitudes. However, learning through art can facilitate positive attitude change and help educators to become more comfortable with the topic of race and the idea of working with diverse populations. The artmaking experiences helped students to explore the topic of race in a way that was both personal and meaningful. Art, as another way of knowing, allowed these practicing and preservice educators to move outside their comfort zones, take risks, and learn to view the world through multiple frames of reference. In making artworks as a way of exploring understanding, these art education students visually engaged with the complex issues of race. These experiences emphasize that not only does artmaking allow one to move beyond the limitations inherent in language, creative expression is inextricably linked to emotions, which fosters a 286
transformative learning process. In teacher education programs, art can play a critical role
in addressing social justice issues such as racism.
Ladson-Billings (2006) writes, “Race is the proverbial ‘elephant in the parlor.’
We know it’s right there staring us in the face—making life uncomfortable and making it
difficult for us to accomplish everything we would like to do—but we keep pretending it
isn’t” (p. X). Pretending that race and racism do not exist does not make these socially
constructed issues go away or become any less relevant in students’ lives. In fact, color-
blind discourse that allows for issues surrounding race and racism to fester in the
shadows creates a climate ripe for misunderstandings, miscommunication, and missed
opportunities to connect meaningfully to diverse students’ lives and lived experiences.
Singleton and Linton (2006) contend that critical self-examination is key in positioning educators to begin developing the skills necessary for cultural proficiency.
This means that as educators move out of color-blind discourse and become race- conscious, they begin to gain insight into how their race, ethnicity, culture and life experiences have come together to form their worldview (Castro-Atwater, 2008; Davis,
2007). By examining these underlying aspects of themselves, educators also begin to understand how and why students’ worldviews may be different from their own. This realization can be a starting point for educators to begin to develop ways in which to effectively bridge the cultural differences between themselves and their students. The participants in this study were able to begin to view the world through multiple perspectives, develop insight into their own racial identity, and understand themselves in relation to others. As a result, these participants began building a 287
foundation of cultural proficiency and racial literacy that is key in effectively responding to the needs of all students in the art classroom, equally and equitably.
288
REFERENCES
Adams, C. (2008, January/Feburary). Are you biased? The challenge of teaching across
race. Scholastic Instructor, 26–32.
Adejumo, C. O. (2002, March). Considering multicultural art education. Art Education,
55(2), 33–39.
Adeleke, T. (2009). The case against Afrocentrism. Jackson, MS: University Press of
Mississippi.
Albarrracín, D., Wang, W., Li, H., & Noguchi, K. (2008). Structure of attitudes:
Judgments, memory and implications for change. In W.D. Crano & R. Prislin
(Eds.), Attitudes and attitude change (pp. 19–40). New York, NY: Taylor &
Francis Group.
Alhquist, R. (1992). Manifestations of inequality: Overcoming resistance in a
multicultural foundations course. In C. A. Grant (Ed.), Research and multicultural
education: From the margins to the mainstream (pp. 89–105). London: Falmer.
Alimo, C., Kelly, R., & Clark, C. (2002). Diversity initiatives in higher education:
Intergroup Dialogue Program student outcomes and implications for campus
radical climate: A case study. Multicultural Education, 10(1), 49–53.
289
Amodio, D. M., Devine, P. G., & Harmon–Jones, E. (2007). Mechanisms for the
regulation of intergroup responses: Insights form a social neuroscience approach.
In E. Harmon–Jones & P. Winkilman (Eds.), Social neuroscience: Integrating
biological and psychological explanations of social behavior (pp. 353–375). New
York: Guilford.
Amodio, D. M. (2008). The social neuroscience of intergroup relations. European Review
of Social Psychology, 19, 1–54.
Amodio, D. M., & Lieberman, M. D. (2009). Pictures in our heads: Contributions of
fMRI to the study of prejudice and stereotyping. In T. Nelson (Ed.). Handbook of
prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination (pp. 347–362). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
Press.
Anderson, G. L., Herr, K., & Nihlen, A. S. (2007). Studying your own school: An
educator’s guide to qualitative practitioner research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press.
Anderson, T., Gussak, D., Hallmark, K. K., & Paul, A. (2010). Art education for social
justice. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.
Au, W. (2009). Introduction: Rethinking multicultural education. In W. Au (Ed.),
Rethinking multicultural education: Teaching for racial and cultural justice (pp.
1–6). Milwaukee, WI: A Rethinking Schools Publication.
Bakari, R. (2003). Preservice teachers’ attitudes toward teaching African American
students. Urban Education, 38(6), 640–654.
Ballengee–Morris, C., & Stuhr, P. L. (2001). Multicultural art and visual cultural
education in a changing world. Art Education, 54(4), 6–13. 290
Banks, J.A. (1999). An introduction to multicultural education (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.
Banks, J. A. (2003). Multicultural education: Historical development, dimensions and
practices. In J.A. Banks & C. A. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on
multicultural education (2nd ed.) (pp. 3–29). San Francisco, CA: Jossey–Bass.
Banks, J.A., & Banks, C.A.M (2004). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives
(5th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Banks, J. A. (2006). Improving race relations in schools: From theory and research to
practice. Journal of Social Issues, 62(3), 607–614.
Baptist, K. W., & Nassar, H. F. (2008). Social justice agency in the landscape
architecture studio: An action research approach. Art, Design & Communication
in Higher Education, 7(2), 91–103.
Barrett, T. (2004). Investigating art criticism in education: An autobiographical narrative.
In E.W. Eisner & M. D. Day (Eds.), Handbook of research and policy in art
education (pp. 579–583). Mahwah, NJ: National Art Education Association:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Battin, M. P., Fisher, J., Moore, R., & Silvers, A. (1989). Puzzles about art: An aesthetics
casebook. New York, NY: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Berger, M. (2004). White: Whiteness and race in contemporary art. Baltimore, MD:
Center for Art and Visual Culture – University of Maryland.
Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (1993, October). A cognitive–developmental approach to
racial stereotyping and reconstructive memory in Euro–American children. Child
Development, 64(5), 1507–1518. 291
Bigler, R. S., Jones, L. C., & Lobliner, D. B. (1997, June). Social categorization and the
formation of intergroup attitudes in children. Child Development, 68(3), 530–543.
Bigler, R. S. (1999). The use of multicultural curricula and materials to counter racism in
children. Journal of Social Issues, 55(4), 687–705.
Blair, I. V., & Banaji, M. (1996). Automatic and controlled processes in stereotype
priming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1142–1163.
Blair, I. V., Ma, J.E., & Lenton, A. P. (2001). Imagining stereotypes away: The
moderation of implicit stereotypes through mental imagery. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 828–841.
Blair, I. V. (2002). The malleability of automatic stereotypes and prejudice. Personality
and Social Psychology Review, 6, 242–261.
Blocker, H. G. (2004). Varieties of multicultural art education: Some policy issues. In
E.W. Eisner & M. D. Day (Eds.), Handbook of research and policy in art
education (pp. 187–199). Mahwah, NJ: National Art Education Association:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Boughton, D., & Mason, R. (1999). Beyond multicultural art education. New York, NY:
Waxmann Publishing Co.
Briñol P., Petty, R. E., & McCaslin, M. J. (2009). Changing attitudes on implicit versus
explicit measures. In R. E. Petty, R. H. Fazio, & P. Briñol (Eds.), Attitudes:
Insights from the new implicit measures (pp. 285–326). New York, NY: Taylor &
Francis Group.
Bronson, P., & Merryman, A. (2009). NutureShock: New thinking about children. New
York, NY: Twelve. 292
Brooks, J. & Brooks, M. (1993). In Search of Understanding: The Case for
Constructivist Classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Brown, K. M. (2004). Leadership for social justice and equity: Weaving a transformative
framework and pedagogy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(1), 77–108.
Burriss, K., & Burris, L. (2004). Competency and comfort: Teacher candidates’ attitudes
toward diversity. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 18(3), 199–209.
Burton, D. (2006). Exhibiting student art: The essential guide for teachers. New York,
NY: Teachers College Press.
Cahnmann-Taylor, M., & Siegesmund, R. (2008). Arts-Based research in education.
New York, NY: Rutledge.
Caroll, L. (1898). Alice’s adventures in wonderland. London: MacMillan & Co., Ltd.
Carter, R. T., & Goodwin, A. L. (1994). Racial identity and education. In L. Darling-
Hammond (Ed.), Review of research in education (pp.291-336). Washington, DC:
American Education Research Association.
Castro–Atwater, S. A. (2008). Waking up to difference: Teachers, color–blindness, and
the effects on students of color. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 35(3), 246–
253.
Chalmers, F. G. (1996). Celebrating pluralism: Art, education, and cultural diversity.
Los Angeles, CA: J. Paul Getty Trust.
Chalmers, F. G. (2002). Celebrating Pluralism six years later: Visual transculture/s,
education, and critical multiculturalism. Studies in Art Education, 43(4), 293–306. 293
Cho, G., & DeCastro–Ambrosetti, D. (2006). Is ignorance bliss? Pre-service teachers’
attitudes toward multicultural education. The High School Journal, 89(2), 24–29.
COE Conceptual Framework. (n.d.). PSC & NCATE. Retrieved on April 19, 2011 from
http://ncate.coe.uga.edu/framework/.
Choney, S. B., & Behrens, J. T. (1996). Development of the Oklahoma Racial Attitudes
Scale – Preliminary form (ORAS-P). In Sodowsky, G. R. & Impara, J. (Eds.),
Multicultural assessment in counseling and clinical psychology (pp. 247-324).
Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurement.
Clark, K. B., & Clark, M. P. (1947). Racial identification and preference in Negro
children. In
T. M. Newcomb & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Reading in social psychology. New York,
NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Clover, D. E., & Stalker, J. (2007). Introduction. In D.E. Clover & J. Stalker (Eds.), The
arts and social justice: Re–crafting adult education and community cultural
leadership (pp. 1–18). England: Niace.
CNN – Doll Test Results. (2010, April 28). CNN News. Retrieved May 17, 2010 from
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/17/ac360-series-doll-study-research/.
Cochran–Smith, M. (1995). Uncertain allies: Understanding the boundaries of race and
teaching. Harvard Educational Review, 65, 541–570.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. (Eds.). (2005). Studying teacher education: The
report of the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher Education. Mahweh, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers. 294
Cochran–Smith, M., & Donnell, K. (2006). Practitioner inquiry: Blurring the boundaries
of research and practice. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli & P. B. Elmore (Eds.),
Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp. 503–518).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cooper, A. (2010, May 17). AC360 Series: Doll study research. CNN News. Retrieved
May 17, 2010 from http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/17/ac360-series-doll-
study-research/.
Copenhaver-Johnson, J. (2006, Fall). Talking to children about race: The importance of
inviting difficult conversations. Childhood Education, 12-22.
Cross, W. E., Jr. (1978). The Cross and Thomas models of psychological nigrescence.
Journal of Black Psychology, 5(1), 13-19.
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the
research process. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J.W., Plano Clark, V.L., Gutman, M.L., and Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced
mixed-methods research design. In A, Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook
of mixed-methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 91–110). Thousands Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed-methods
research. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York:
Harper Collin. 295
Cunningham, W. A., Johnson, M. K., Raye, C. L., Gatenby, J. C., Gore, J. C., & Banaji,
M. R. (2004). Separable neural components in the processing of Black and White
faces. Psychological Science, 15, 806–813.
DaCosta, K. M. (2007). Making multiracials: State, family, and market in the redrawing
of the color line. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ Error: Emotion, reason and the human brain. New
York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
Damasio, A. R. (1998). Emotion in the perspective of an integrated nervous system.
Brain Research Reviews, 26, 83–86.
Daniel, S., & Mason, R. (1993). The visual arts. In A. S. King & M. J. Reiss (Eds.), The
multicultural dimension of the national curriculum (pp. 145–161). Abingdon,
Oxon: RoutledgeFalmer.
Dasgupta, N., & Greenwald, A. G. (2001). On the malleability of automatic attitudes:
Combating automatic prejudice with images of admired and disliked individuals.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(5), 800–814.
David, Lara (2008, July 31st). Life: The ongoing education: The difference between
‘equity’ and ‘equality’ [Web log comment]. Retrieved on January 5, 2011 from
http://laradavid.blogspot.com/2008/07/difference-between-equity-and-
equality.html.
Davis, B. (2007). How to teach students who don’t look like you: Culturally relevant
teaching strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
296
Davis, James Allan; Smith, Tom W.; and Marsden, Peter V. General social surveys,
1972-2008: cumulative codebook / Principal Investigator, James A. Davis;
Director and Co-Principal Investigator, Tom W. Smith; Co-Principal Investigator,
Peter V. Marsden—Chicago: National Opinion Research Center, 2009. 2,667 pp.,
28cm— (National Data Program for the Social Sciences Series, no. 19). Retrieved
on August 7, 2010 from http://www.norc.uchicago.edu/GSS+Website/.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2000). Critical race theory: The cutting edge (2nd ed.).
Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Denson, N. (2009). Do curricular and co-curricular diversity activities influence racial
bias? A meta–analysis. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 805–838.
Desai, D. (2005). Places to go: Challenges to multicultural art education in a global
economy. Studies in Art Education, 46(4), 293–308.
Devine, P. G., Plant, E. A., Amodio, D. M., Harmon-Jones, E., & Vance, S. L. (2002).
The regulation of explicit and implicit race bias: The role of motivations to
respond without prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(5),
835-848.
Devos, T. (2008). Implicit attitudes 101: Theoretical and empirical insights. . In W.D.
Crano & R. Prislin (Eds.), Attitudes and attitude change (pp. 61–86). New York,
NY: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York: Perigee.
DiCaprio, P. (2008). A framework for understanding White identity development.
Retrieved on January 2, 2011 from http://triadllc.com/publications.html. 297
Dijksterhuis, A., Albers, L. W., & Bongers, K. C. A. (2009). Digging for the real attitude:
Lessons from research on implicit and explicit self-esteem. In R. Petty, R. Fazio,
& p. Brinol (Eds.), Attitudes: Insights from the new wave of implicit measures
(pp. 229-250). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Dillon, S. (2007, June 1) U.S. data show rapid minority growth in school rolls. The New
York Times. Retrieved October 3, 2008, from
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/01/education/01educ.html?_r=1.
Dilworth, M.E., & Brown, C. E. (2001). Considering the difference: Teaching and
learning in culturally rich schools. In V. Richardson (Ed.) Handbook of research
on teaching (4th ed.) (pp. 643–667). Washington, DC: American Educational
Research Association.
Dinkins, D. (2009). Teachers talk about race, class, and achievement. In M. Cochran–
Smith & S. Lytle (Eds.), Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next
generation. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., Smoak, N., & Gaertner, S. L. (2009). The nature of
contemporary racial prejudice. In R. E. Petty, R. H. Fazio, & P. Briñol (Eds.),
Attitudes: Insights from the new implicit measures (pp. 165–192). New York, NY:
Taylor & Francis Group.
Downey, D. B., & Pribesh, S. (2004). When race matters: Teachers’ evaluations of
students’ classroom behavior. Sociology of Education, 77, 267–282.
Eberhardt, J. L, Goff, P. A., Purdie, V. J., & Davies, P. G. (2004). Seeing Black; Race,
crime and visual processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87,
876–893. 298
Eisner, E. (2002). The arts and the creation of mind. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Ellis, R. D. (1999). The dance form of the eyes: What cognitive science can learn from
art. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(6–7), 161–175.
Forgas, J. (2008). The role of affect in attitude and attitude change. In W.D. Crano & R.
Prislin (Eds.), Attitudes and attitude change (pp. 131–158). New York, NY:
Taylor & Francis Group.
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2005). How to design and evaluate research in
education. New York, NY: McGraw–Hill.
Franklin College of Arts and Sciences. (n.d.). Student policies and procedures –
Multicultural requirement. Retrieved on April 19, 2011 from
http://www.franklin.uga.edu/students/multicultural_requirement.php.
Freire, P. (1998). Teachers as cultural workers: Letters to those who dare teach. Boulder,
CO: Westview Press.
Fryer, R. G., & Levitt, S. D. (2004). The causes and consequences of distinctively Black
names. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, CXIX(3), 767–805.
Garmon, M. (1998, October). Preservice teachers’ learning about diversity: The
influence of their existing racial attitudes and beliefs. Paper presented at the
Annual Meeting of the Midwestern Educational Research Association, Chicago,
IL.
Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in
evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change.
Psychological Bulletin, 132, 692–731. 299
Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher
Education, 53(2), 106–116.
Georgia Professional Standards Commission. (2006). The Georgia educator workforce
2006: Status Report. Retrieved on September 1, 2009 from
http://www.gapsc.com/Research/2006_Report/Full_Report.pdf.
Giroux, H. (2005). Border crossings: Cultural workers and the politics of education (2nd
ed). New York, NY: Routledge.
Glass, R. D., & Wallace, K. R. (1996). Challenging race and racism: A framework for
educators. In M. Root (Ed.), The multiracial experience: Racial borders as the
new frontier (pp. 341–358). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Gold, S. J. (2004). From Jim Crow to racial hegemony: Evolving explanations of racial
hierarchy. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 27(6), 951-968.
Goldblatt, P. (2006). How John Dewey’s theories underpin art and art education.
Education and Culture, 22(1), 17–34.
Goleman, D. (1994). Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam.
Grace, A. P., & Wells, K. (2007). Using Freirean pedagogy of just ire to inform critical
social learning in arts–informed community education for sexual minorities. Adult
Education Quarterly, 57(2), 95–114.
Greene, J. C., & Caracelli, V. J. (2003). Making paradigmatic sense of mixed-methods
practice. In A, Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed-methods in
social & behavioral research (pp. 91–110). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed-methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey–Banks. 300
Haney, W., Russell, M., & Bebell, D. (2004). Drawing on education: Using drawings to
document schooling and support change. Harvard Educational Review, 74(3),
241–271.
Hanley, M. S. (1999). The scope of multicultural education. New Horizons for Learning
Website. Retrieved February 18, 2009, from
http://www.newhorizons.org/strategies/multicultural/Hanley.htm.
Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (2003). Why public schools lose teachers.
Journal of Human Resources, 39(2), 326–354.
Harris, H. L. (2002, December). School counselors’ perceptions of Biracial children: A
pilot study. Professional School Counseling, 6(4), 120-129.
Harris, H. L. (2003). Multiracial students: What school counselors need to know. ERIC
Digest (ERIC Counseling and Student Services Clearinghouse No. ED479354).
Retrieved from ERIC database.
Harris, M. D. (2003). Colored pictures: Race and visual representation. Chapel Hill, NC:
The University of North Carolina Press.
Hart, A. J., Whalenen, P. J., Shin, L. M., McInerney, S. C., Fischer, H., & Rausch, S. L.
(2000). Differential response in the human amygdala to racial outgroups vs.
ingroup face stimuli. Neuroreport: For Rapid Communication of Neuroscience
Research, 11, 2351–2355.
Heard, D. (1990). How do teachers identify multicultural and cross–cultural pedagogical
phenomena in and out of arts classrooms? Educational Review, 42(3), 303–318.
Heard, D. (1999). A developing model of teachers educating themselves for multicultural
pedagogy. Higher Education, 38, 461–487. 301
Helling, J. A. (2006, April). ‘Allowing’ race in the classroom: Students existing in the
fullness of their beings. New Horizons for Learning. Retrieved January 16, 2010
from http://www.newhorizons.org/strategies/multicultural/helling.htm.
Helms, J. E. (Ed.). (1990). Black and white racial identity: Theory, research and
practice. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Hetland, L., Winner, E., Veenema, S., & Sheridan, K. (2007). Studio thinking: The real
benefits of visual arts education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Hinojosa, M. S., & Moras, A. B. (2009). Challenging colorblind education: A descriptive
analysis of teacher racial attitudes. Research and Practice in Social Sciences,
4(2), 27–45.
Hollins, E. R., & Guzman, M. T. (2005). Research on preparing teachers for diverse
populations. In M. Cochran–Smith & K. M. Zeichner (Eds.) Studying teacher
education: The report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education (pp.
477–513). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Holloway, D. L., & Krensky, B. (2001). Introduction: The arts, urban education, and
social change. Education and Urban Society, 33, 354–365.
Immordino–Yang, M.H. & Damasio, A. (2007). We feel, therefore we learn: The
relevance of affective and social neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain, and
Education, 2(2), 67–73.
Irwin, R. L. & Chalmers, F. G. (2007). Experiencing the visual and visualizing
experiences. In L. Bresler (Ed.). International handbook of research in the arts
education, (pp. 179–194). Dordrecht, NL: Springer. 302
Jackson, C. K. (2009). Student demographics, teacher sorting, and teacher quality:
Evidence from the end of school desegregation. Journal of Labor Economics,
27(2), 213–256.
Jones, S. (2002). (Re)writing the word: Methodological strategies and issues in
qualitative research. Journal of College Student Development, 43(4), 461-473.
Kincheloe, J. (2008). Foreword: Exploring a transformative multiculturalism—Justice in
a Zeitgeist of despair. In C. Korn and A. Bursztyn (Eds.) Rethinking multicultural
education: Case studies in cultural transition (pp. ix–xxviii). Westport, CT:
Bergin & Garvey.
King, Jr., M. L. (1964). Acceptance Speech, on the occasion of the award of the Nobel
Peace Prize in Oslo, December 10, 1964. Retrieved on April 1, 2009, from
http://nobelprize.org/index.html.
Korgen, K. O. (1999). From Black to Biracial: Transforming racial identity among
Americans. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Ladson-Billing, G. J. & Tate W. F. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education.
Teachers College Record, 97, 47-68.
Ladson-Billing, G. J. (1999). Just what is critical race theory and what's it doing in a nice
field like education. In L. Parker, D. Deyhele, S. Villenas (Eds.) Race is—race
isn’t: Critical race theory and qualitative studies (pp. 7-30). Boulder, CO:
Westview Press.
Ladson–Billings, G. (2006). Foreword. In G. E. Singleton & C. Linton (Eds.),
Courageous conversations about race: A field guide for achieving equity in
schools (pp. ix–xii). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. 303
Ladson–Billings, G. (2009). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American
children (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey–Bass.
LaFleur, N. K., Rowe, W., & Leach, M. M. (2002). Reconceptualizing White racial
consciousness. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 30, 148–
152.
LaPorte, A. M., Speirs, P., & Young, B. (2008). Art curriculum influences: A national
survey. Studies in Art Education, 49(4), 358-370.
Lawrence, S. M., & Tatum, B. D. (1997). Teachers in transition: The impact of antiracist
professional development on classroom practice. Teachers College Record, 99(1),
162–178.
Lawrence, R. L., (2008). Powerful feelings: Exploring the affective domain of informal
and arts–based learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education,
120, 65–77.
LeDoux, J. E. (1996). The Emotional Brain. New York: Simon and Schuster.
LeDoux, J. E. (2000). Emotion circuits in the brain. Annual Reviews in Neuroscience,
23, 155–184.
Lemire, E. (2002). Miscegenation: Making race in America. Philadelphia, PA: University
of Pennsylvania Press.
Lemm, K. M., Lane, K. A., Sattler, D. N., Khan, S. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2008). Assessing
implicit cognitions with a paper–format implicit association test (pp. 1–24). In M.
A. Morrison & T. G. Morrison (Eds.), The psychology of modern prejudice.
Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. 304
Leonardo, Z. (2004). Critical Social Theory and transformative knowledge: The functions
of criticism in quality education. Educational Researcher, 33(6), 11–18.
Lesko, N., & Bloom, L. R. (1998). Close encounters: Truth experience and interpretation
in multicultural teacher education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 30(4), 375–
395.
Levitt, S. D., & Dubner, S. J. (2005). Freakonomics: A rogue economist explores the
hidden side of everything. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.
Levitt, S. D. (2008, August 12). The plight of mixed-race children. Retrieved August 22,
2008, from http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/12/the-plight-of-
mixed-race-children/.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba. E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Lowenstein, K. L. (2009). The work of multicultural teacher education:
Reconceptualizing White teacher candidates as learners. Review of Educational
Research, 79(1), 163-196.
Lowery, B.S., Hardin, C. D., & Sinclair, S. (2001). Social influence on automatic racial
prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 842-855.
Machaalani, M. (2005). The Pygmalion effect. Retrieved October 4, 2009 from
http://www.accomplishlife.com/blogs/8/The–Pygmalion–Effect.html.
Madison, D. S. (2005). Critical ethnography. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Malcomson, S. L. (2000). One drop of blood: The American misadventure of race. New
York, NY: Farrar, Straus, Giroux. 305
Marx, S. (2006). Revealing the invisible: Confronting passive racism in teacher
education. New York, NY: Routledge.
Mason, R., Geareon, L., & Valkanova, Y. (2006). A systematic review of the contribution
of art education to cultural learning in learners aged 5-16. Technical report. In
Research evidence in education library. London: EPPICentre, Social Science
Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.
Mast, M. S. (2004). Men are hierarchical, women are egalitarian: An implicit gender
stereotype. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 63(2), 107–111.
Masten, W., Plata, M., Wenglar, K., & Thedford, J. (1999). Acculturation and teacher
ratings of Hispanic and Anglo–American students. Roeper Review, 22(1), 64–65.
Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Mertens, D. M. (2005). Research and evaluation in education and psychology (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative research and evaluation. New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
Miners, Z. (2009, June 5). Do good teachers leave when Black students enroll? U.S. News
World Report. Retrieved June 3, 2009 from http://www.usnews.com/blogs/on-
education/2009/06/05/do-good-teachers-leave-when-black-students-enroll.html.
Montecinos, C. & Rios, F. A. (1999). Assessing preservice teachers’ zones of concern
and comfort with multicultural education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 26(3), 7–
24. 306
Mori, K., Uchida, A., & Imada, R. (2008). A paper–format group performance test for
measuring the implicit association of target concepts. Behavior Research
Methods, 40(2), 546–555.
Morrison, J. W. (2001). Supporting biracial children’s identity development. Childhood
Education, 77(3), 134-38.
MSNBC – Snapshot of the Melting Pot: Interactive Map. (2008, May 12) Retrieved
October 8, 2008, from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24543231.
Naidus, B. (2009). Arts for change: Teaching outside the frame. Oakland, CA: New
Village Press.
Nakashima, C. L. (1992). An invisible monster: The creation and denial of racially mixed
people in America. In Maria P. P. Root (Ed.), Racially mixed people in America
(pp. 162-180). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
National Association for Multicultural Education. (2003, February 1) Retrieved October
8, 2008, from http://nameorg.org/.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2003). The condition of education
2003 in brief. US Department of Education: Institute of Education Sciences.
Retrieved April 1, 2009, from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2003068.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2009, June). Characteristics of public,
private, and Bureau of Indian Education elementary and secondary school
teachers in the United States: Results from the 2007-08 Schools and Staffing
Survey. Retrieved January 25, 2011 from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009324/tables/sass0708_2009324_t12n_02.asp. 307
National Education Association (NEA). (2004). Assessment of diversity in America’s
teaching force: A call to action. Retrieved on August 12, 2010 from
http://www.ate1.org/pubs/uploads/diversityreport.pdf.
Nieto, S. (2000). Critical multicultural education and students’ perspectives. In S. May
(Ed.), Critical multiculturalism: Rethinking multicultural and anti–racist
education, (pp. 191–215). London: Falmer.
Nieto, S. & Bode, P. (2008). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of
multicultural education (5th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
Nieto, S. (2010). Language, culture, and teaching: Critical perspectives (2nd ed.). New
York, NY: Routledge.
Nitardy, C. (2004). Identity problems in Biracial youth. The Leader. Retrieved August
22, 2008, from http://cehd.umn.edu/EdPA/licensure/leader/2004Fall/identity.html.
Noddings, N. (2002). Educating moral people. New York, NY: Teacher College Press.
Noel, J. (1995). Preparing teachers for diversity through critical conversations. Journal of
Professional Studies, 3(1), 69–73.
O’Connor, A. (2004, March 16). Sex and the brain: Researchers say, ‘Vive la
Différence!” The New York Times. Retrieved June 8, 2009 from
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/16/health/16SEX.html.
Omi, M., & Winant, H. (1996). Racial formation in the United States. New York:
Rutledge & Keegan Paul.
Omi, M., & Winant, H. (2007). Racial Formation. In P. S. Rothenberg (Ed.), Race, class
and gender in the United States (7th ed.) (pp. 13–22). New York, NY: Worth
Publishers. 308
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Johnson, R. B. (2006). The validity issue in mixed research.
Research in the Schools, 13(1), 48–63.
Pang, V. O., & Sablan, V. (1998). Teacher efficacy: How do teachers feel about their
ability to teach African–American students? In M. E. Dilworth (Ed.), Being
responsive to cultural differences: How teachers learn (pp. 39–60). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Parsons, M. (2007). Art and metaphor, body and mind. In L. Bresler (Ed.). International
handbook of research in the arts education, (pp. 533–542). Dordrecht, NL:
Springer.
Passel, J., & Taylor, P. (2009). Who’s Hispanic? A Pew Research Center Project.
Retrieved from Pew Hispanic Center August 12, 2009, from
http://pewresearch.org/.
Peller, G. (1997). Cultural imperialism, White anxiety, and the ideological realignment of
Brown. In A. Sarat (Ed.), Race, law, and culture: Reflections on Brown v. Board
of Education (pp. 190–220). New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc.
Perkins, M. (2009). Straight talk on race: Challenging the stereotypes in kids’ books.
School Library Journal. Retrieved on January 16, 2010 from
http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=C
A6647713.
Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity—one’s own. Educational Researcher, 17(7),
17-21. 309
Petty, R. E., Wheeler, C., & Tormala, Z. L., (2003). Persuasion and attitude change. In I.
Weiner (Ed.). Handbook of psychology: Personality and social psychology, (pp.
353-382). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Phelps, E. A., O’Connor, K. J., Cunningham, W. A., Funayama, E. S., Gatenby, J. C.,
Gore, J. C., & Banaji, M. R. (2000). Performance on indirect measures of race
evaluation predicts amygdala activation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,
12(5), 729–738.
Pinder, K. N. (Ed.). (2002). Race-ing art history: Critical readings in race and art
history. New York, NY: Rutledge.
Pohan, C. A., & Aguilar, T. E. (2001). Measuring educators’ beliefs about diversity in
personal and professional contexts. American Educational Research Journal,
38(1), 159-182.
Pope-Davis, D. B., Vanidiver, B. J., & Stone, G. L. (1999). White racial identity models:
A critique and alternative proposal. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46, 70–79.
Project Implicit- Harvard. (n.d.). Implicit Attitude Test. Retrieved on February 2, 2010
from https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/background/faqs.html.
Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). (2001).
Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.
Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). (2010).
Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.
Ramachandran, V. S., & Hirstein, W. (1999). The science of art: A neurological theory of
aesthetic experience. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(6–7), 15–51. 310
Rhem, J. (1999, February). Pygmalion in the classroom. The National Teaching &
Learning Forum, 8(2), Retrieved on August 6, 2009 from
http://www.ntlf.com/html/pi/9902/pygm_1.htm.
Rockquemore, K. A., & Brunsma, D. L. (2008). Beyond Black: Biracial identity in
America (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Root, M. P. (Ed.). (1996). The Multiracial experience: Racial borders as the new
frontier. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (2003). Pygmalion in the classroom: Teacher expectation
and pupils’ intellectual development. Norwalk, CT: Crown House Publishing
Company, LLC.
Roth, M. A. (2007). The power of where we're from: Creating a classroom community
through various frames and perspectives. In S. Leafgren, B. Schultz, M. P.
O'Malley, L. Johnson, J. F. Brady, & A. M. Dentith (Eds.), The articulation of
curriculum and pedagogy for a just society: Advocacy, artistry, and activism
(pp.75-98). Troy, NY: Educator's International Press, Inc.
Rowe, W., Bennett, S. K., & Atkinson, D. R. (1994). White racial identity models: A
critique and alternative proposal. The Counseling Psychologist, 22, 129-146.
Rudman, L. A., Ashmore, R. D., & Gary, M. L. (2001). “Unlearning” automatic biases:
The malleability of implicit prejudice and stereotypes. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 81(5), 856–868.
Sadker, D. M., Sadker, M. P., & Zittleman, K. R. (2008). Teachers, schools, and society
(8th ed). New York, NY: McGraw Hill. 311
Savage, M. (1996, March 10). Representation in art and film: Identity and stereotype. On
the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute Web site. Retrieved January 3, 2007 from
http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1996/3/96.03.10.x.html.
Schwartz, W. (1998). The schooling of multiracial students. New York, NY: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (Retrieved July 25, 2008, from
http://www.ericdigests.org/1999-3/schooling.htm ERIC/CUE Digest, ERIC No.
ED425249).
Siegesmund, R. (2004). Somatic knowledge and qualitative reasoning: From theory to
practice. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 38(4), 80-96.
Siegesmund, R. (2007). On the persistence of memory: The legacy of visual African-
American stereotypes. Studies in Art Education, 48(3), 323-328.
Sinclair, S., Hardin, C. D., Lowery, B. S., & Colangelo, A. (2005). Social tuning of
automatic racial attitudes: The role of affiliative motivation. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 89(4), 583-592.
Singleton, G. E., & Linton, C. (2006). Courageous conversations about race: A field
guide for achieving equity in schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Sleeter, C. E. (1992). Resisting racial awareness: How teachers understand the social
order from their racial, gender and social class locations. Educational
Foundations, 7–32.
Sleeter, C. E. (1996). Multicultural education as social activism. Albany, NY: State
University of New York. 312
Sleeter, C. E. (2001). Preparing teachers for culturally diverse schools: Research and the
overwhelming presence of Whiteness. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(2), 94–
106.
Sleeter, C. E. (2007). Preparing teacher for multiracial and historically underserved
schools. In G. Orfield & E. Frankenburg (Eds.) Lessons in integration: Realizing
the promise of racial diversity in America’s schools (pp. 171–198). Virginia:
University of Virginia Press.
Sleeter, C. E., & Thao, Y. (2007). Guest editor’s introduction: Diversifying the teaching
force. Teacher Education Quarterly, 34(4), 3–8.
Sleeter, C. E. (2008a). Critical family history, identity, and historical memory.
Educational Studies, 43, 114–142.
Sleeter, C. E. (2008b). Preparing White teachers for diverse students. In M. Cochran–
Smith, S. Feiman–Nemser, & K. E. Demers (Eds.), Handbook of research on
teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (3rd ed.) (pp. 559–
582). New York, NY: Routledge.
Sleeter, C. E., & Grant, C. (2009). Making choices for multicultural education: Five
approaches to race, class, and gender (6th ed). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Spencer, M. S. (1998). Reducing racism in schools: Moving beyond rhetoric. Work in
Education, 20(1), 25–36.
Springgay, S., & Freedman, D. (2007). A bodied curriculum. In S. Leafgren, B. Schultz,
M. P. O'Malley, L. Johnson, J. F. Brady, & A. M. Dentith (Eds.), The articulation
of curriculum and pedagogy for a just society: Advocacy, artistry, and activism
(pp. 120-134). Troy, NY: Educator's International Press, Inc. 313
Stacey, K. (2009, May 27). Study: Teachers choose schools according to student race.
Chicago Journals. Retrieved June 8, 2009 from
http://www.physorg.com/news162625766.html.
Stafford, B. M. (2009). Echo Objects: The cognitive work of images. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Staiger, A. D. (2006). Learning difference: Race and schooling in the multiracial
metropolis. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Stonequist, E. V. (1937). The marginal man: A study in personality and culture and
conflict. New York: Russell & Russell.
Stuckey, M. (2008, May 28). Multiracial Americans surge in number, voice. Retrieved
July 25, 2008, from http://www.msnbc.com/id/24542138/.
Stuhr, P. L. (1994, Spring). Multicultural art education and social reconstruction. Studies
in Art Education, 35(3), 171–178.
Syed, K. T. (2007). Teacher educators’ narratives of teaching multicultural, anti–racist
education. Paper presented at WestCAST 2007 Learning to Teach, Teaching for
Learning Conference. Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of
mixed-methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In A. Tashakkori & C.
Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed-methods in social & behavioral research (pp.
3–50). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). Editorial: Exploring the nature of research
questions in mixed-methods research. Journal of Mixed-methods Research, 1,
207–211. 314
Tatum, B. D. (1992). Talking about race, learning about racism: ‘The application of’
racial identity development theory in the classroom. Harvard Educational
Review, 62(1), 1-24.
Tatum, B. D. (1997). Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the cafeteria and other
conversations about race. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Tatum, B. D. (2007). Can we talk about race? And other conversations in an era of
school resegregation. Boston, MA: beacon Press Books.
Taylor, P. G., Carpenter II, B. S., Ballengee–Morris, C., & Sessions, B. (2006).
Interdisciplinary approaches to teaching art in high school. Reston, VA: The
National Art Education Association.
Tettegah, S. (1996). The racial consciousness attitudes of White prospective teachers and
their perceptions of the teachability of students from different racial/ethnic
backgrounds: Findings from a California study. Journal of Negro Education,
65(2), 151–163.
Tochluk, S. (2008). Witnessing Whiteness: First steps toward an antiracist practice and
culture. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Torre, M. E. (2009). Participatory action research and critical race theory: Fueling spaces
for Nos–Otras to research. Urban Review, 41, 106–120.
Tovée, M. J. (2008). An Introduction to the visual system (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press.
315
Tucker, C., Kojetin, B., & Harrison, R. (1995). A statistical analysis of the CPS
Supplement on race and ethnic origins. Report for the Bureau of Labor Statistics
and Bureau of the Census. Retrieved September 10, 2009, from
http://www.census.gov/prod/2/gen/96arc/ivatuck.pdf.
Turner, R. N., Voci, A., & Hewstone, M. (2007). Reducing explicit and implicit outgroup
prejudice via direct and extended contact: The mediating role of self–disclosure
and intergroup anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(3),
369–388.
University of British Columbia – Race & Ethnicity Glossary. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1,
2009, from http://www.students.ubc.ca/access/race.cfm?page=glossary.
U.S. Census Bureau Newsroom (2004, April 22). Retrieved on August 12, 2009 from
http://www.census.gov/newsroom/minority_links/black.html.
U.S. Census Bureau (2005-2009). American Community Survey. Retrieved on January
25, 2011 from http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DTTable?_bm=y&-
geo_id=01000US&-ds_name=ACS_2009_5YR_G00_&-
mt_name=ACS_2009_5YR_G2000_B02001.
U.S. Census Bureau News (2008, November 17). Retrieved on August 12, 2009 from
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/.
U.S. Census Bureau News. (2010, June 15). Facts for features: Back to school 2010-
2011. Retrieved on January 25, 2011 from http://www.census.gov/newsroom/.
316
Van Hook, C. W. (2002). Preservice teachers’ perceived barriers to the implementation of
a multicultural curriculum. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 29, 254–264.
Vargas, P. T., Sekaquaptewa, D., & von Hippel, W. (2007). Armed only with paper and
pencil: “Low–tech” measures of implicit attitudes. In B. Wittenbrink and N.
Schwarz (Eds.), Implicit measures of attitudes (pp. 103–124). New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
Viadero, D. (2009, May 7). Study links teacher movement to influx of Black students.
Education Week. Retrieved June 3, 2009 from
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2009/05/27/33race.html.
Villegas, A. M. (2008). Diversity and teacher education. In M. Cochran–Smith, S.
Feiman–Nemser, & K. E. Demers (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher
education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (3rd ed.) (pp. 551–558). New
York, NY: Routledge.
Villegas, A. M., & Davis, D. E. (2008). Preparing teachers of color to confront
racial/ethnic disparities in educational outcomes. In M. Cochran–Smith, S.
Feiman–Nemser, & K. E. Demers (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher
education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (3rd ed.) (pp. 551–558). New
York, NY: Routledge.
Villenas, S. (1996). The colonizer/colonized Chicana ethnographer: Identity,
marginalization, and co-optation in the field. Harvard Education, 66(4), 1-18.
Vittrup–Simpson, B. (2007). Exploring the influences of educational television and
parent–child discussion on improving children’s racial attitudes. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin. 317
Walker Art Center. (1999). Interactivity art activity. Retrieved January 12, 2010 from
http://www.walkerart.org/archive/9/B7838DD567B1D4546174.htm.
Wallace, K. R. (Ed.). (2004). Working with multiracial students: Critical perspectives on
research and practice. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Wardle, F. (2000). Children of mixed race—no longer invisible. Educational Leadership,
57(4), 68-72.
Wardle, F., & Cruz-Janzen, M. I. (2004). Meeting the needs of Multiethnic and
Multiracial children in schools. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Watt, D. F. (1999). Consciousness and emotion: Review of Jaak Panksepp’s ‘Affective
Neuroscience’. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(6–7), 191–200.
Weber, S. (2008). Visual images in research. In G. Knowles & A. Cole (Eds.). Handbook
of the arts in qualitative research (pp. 41–53). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Weiner, L. (1990). Preparing the brightest for urban schools. Urban Education, 25(3),
258–273.
Williams, R., & Newton, J. H. (2007). Visual communication: Integrating media, art, and
science. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Willis, D. (Ed.). (2009). Posing beauty: African American images from the 1890s to the
present. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Winant, H. (2004). The new politics of race: Globalism, difference, justice. Minneapolis,
MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Winters, L. I., & DeBose, H. L. (2003). New faces in a changing America: Multiracial
identity in the 21st century. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 318
Wolcott, H. F. (1991). Propriospect and the acquisition of culture. Anthropology &
Education Quarterly, 22(3), 251–273.
Wynn, J. (1999, April). The elephant in the living room: Racism in school reform. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Zeichner, K. (1999). Educating teachers for cultural diversity. In K. Zeichner, S. Menick,
& M. L. Gomez (Eds.) Currents of reform in preservice teacher education (pp.
133–175). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Zeichner, K. & Noffke, S. (2001). Practitioner research. In V. Richardson (Ed.),
Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.) (pp. 298–330). Washington, DC:
American Educational Research Association.
Zeichner, K. (2009). Teacher education and the struggle for social justice. New York,
NY: Routledge.
Zeki, S. (1999). Art and the brain. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(6–7), 76–96.
319
Appendix A
Informational Letter Jan 7th, 2010
Dear ARED 5130/7130 Student(s):
I am a graduate student in the doctorate program under the direction of Dr. Tracie Costantino in the Department of Art Education at The University of Georgia. I invite you to participate in a research study entitled Engaging the Pink Elephant in the Room: Investigating Race & Racism In & Through Art Education, which is being conducted this semester in ARED 5130/7130. The purpose of this study is to assess if a change in implicit (indirect, spontaneous, unconscious) racial attitudes and explicit (direct, decisional, conscious) racial attitudes occurs after participation in an art education studio course focused on race and racism. All participants must be 18 years of age or older.
Your participation will involve taking a implicit racial attitude test and explicit racial attitude test both at the beginning of the course and at the end of the course (estimated time commitment: these tests was given during the allotted class time and should take approximately 30 minutes total for both tests); participating in a one-on-one interview with the course instructor aimed at gathering your opinions about how to better prepare future educators to work with diverse populations (estimated time commitment: this interview was given during the allotted class time and should take approximately 30 minutes total); and the analysis of your written responses to critical readings and analysis of your visual art responses to studio assignments. Observations of the whole class will occur over the course of the semester and field notes was made during class, however, no data was recorded for those who choose not to participate.
Your involvement in the study is voluntary, and you may choose not to participate for any reason or to stop at any time without giving any reason, and without penalty to your grade or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You can ask to have all of the research information returned to you, removed from the research records, or destroyed. No individually identifiable information about you, or provided by you during the research, was shared with others without your written permission. Your information collected was confidential. You are assigned an identifying number and this number was used for all the racial attitudes tests. You will also choose a pseudonym for all interview, written and visual responses. Dr. Costantino will act as a third-party administrator for the racial attitudes tests and was the only person who will have the identification sheet with your name, your number, and your chosen pseudonym. I was the only person who will have the racial attitudes test scores with randomly assigned numbers on them. After 320
grades have been posted at the completion of this course this identification sheet was used in order to correlate pre- and post testing scores as well as correlate the racial attitude test results with interview responses, written reflections and visual art responses. Once this correlation has occurred the identification sheet was destroyed. This extra measure is meant to give added protection to you if you choose to participate. The results of the research study may be published, but your name will not be used. Pseudonyms will be used in all published formats. Your identity will not be associated with your responses in any published format.
The findings from this project may benefit you by helping you gain a better understanding of diverse student needs, developing a greater awareness of your attitudes towards diverse population and developing approaches for working comfortably with diverse populations. This research will also provide opportunities for you to reflect on your attitudes and behaviors and may make you more self-aware of the ways in which your beliefs and behaviors affect students. This awareness may also be useful in helping you to identify critical issues related to culturally responsive teaching and providing all students with an equitable education. Additionally, the data collected in this study will contribute to the field of education by providing teacher educators with needed information regarding future teacher attitudes and how to better prepare them for working with diverse populations. There are no known risks or discomforts associated with this research. This study poses no minimal risk/stress similar to what would be found in a typical course in art education. Results of the analysis will be made available to you upon request.
If you have any questions about this research project, please feel free to call me or my advisor, NaJuana Lee/Dr. Tracie Costantino at (404) 272-3026/(706) 542-1640 or send an e-mail to [email protected]/[email protected]. Questions or concerns about your rights as a research participant should be directed to The Chairperson, University of Georgia Institutional Review Board, 612 Boyd GSRC, Athens, Georgia 30602-7411; telephone (706) 542-3199; email address [email protected].
Thank you for your consideration! Please keep this letter for your records.
Sincerely, NaJuana Lee
321
Appendix B
Verbal Instructions for Paper IAT & IAT Measure
For this part of the session, you are making judgments about words that you will classify into different categories. On the first page of the questionnaire, you will see flowers and insects, and pleasant and unpleasant words. If you see a word that is a flower word, OR a word that is a pleasant word, you should make a mark in the circle to the left of the word by drawing a slash through the circle. If you see a word that is an insect, OR a word that is a negative word, you should draw a slash in the circle to the right of the word. As a reminder, the location of the categories is listed at the top of the page.
You should start with the word at the top of the left column, in this case Rose, then proceed down the left column of words. If you finish with the left column, you should go up to the top of the right column and continue down the list. You should go as fast as you can, but try not to make too many mistakes. If you do make a mistake, just keep on going.
You will have 20 seconds to try to judge as many words as you can. Wait until I say “start” before you begin making judgments. When 20 seconds have passed, the timer will make a loud beep. As soon as you hear the beep, please stop marking the page. You should work on the first page only, and wait until I tell you to turn to the next page.
Do you have any questions?
Ready, Set, Go.
Now that you’ve finished the first page, do you have any questions about the procedure?
Turn to the next page. On this page, you will see the category labels for the judgments you are making in the next set. From now on, you will always have a chance to look at the category labels by themselves before you begin making judgments. You should notice that the location of the labels pleasant and unpleasant has been changed. This time, when you see a flower OR an unpleasant word, you should mark the circle on the left. If you see an insect OR a pleasant word, mark the circle on the right. Other than that, you are doing the same basic task as you did on the first page.
Do you have any questions?
OK, turn to the next page. Ready, Set, Go.
322
The judgments that you’ve just finished were for practice. Now we begin the main part of the session. For the remaining pages, you will judge the same pleasant and unpleasant words you saw already and names of Black and White people. Turn to the next page. Here you will see examples of the stimuli that you are judging for the rest of the session. As you can see, the stimuli are names that you will categorize as Black names or White names. Of course, these names are not exclusively Black or White names, but they have been previously identified by research to be more likely to be Black names or more likely to be White names. For this task you should categorize them according to the list.
Do you have any questions before we go on? Are you ready to make the next set of judgments?
OK, turn to the next page. Ready, Set, Go.
For each subsequent page, read the following:
Turn to the next page and take a moment to look at the location of the category labels for the next set of judgments. (Wait 3 seconds). Are you ready to make the next set of judgments?
OK, turn to the next page. Ready, Set, Go.
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
Appendix C
Verbal Instructions for the Explicit Attitude Test
For this part of the session, you are reading some opinions other people have expressed in connection to attitudes towards race. You was choosing which statements comes closest to how you, yourself, feel by choosing from the options: Agree Strongly, Agree Slightly, Disagree Slightly, Disagree Strongly, Don’t Know, or Not Applicable.
Additionally you are answering questions about your experiences with diverse groups and your attitudes towards race issues.
This test is not timed.
Do you have any questions?
OK, please begin. 330
1. There should be laws against marriages between Blacks/African-Americans and Whites.
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Don’t Not Strongly Slightly Slightly Strongly Know Applicable
2. White people have a right to keep Blacks/African-Americans out of their neighborhoods if they want to and Blacks/African-Americans should respect that right.
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Don’t Not Strongly Slightly Slightly Strongly Know Applicable
3. White students and Black/African-American students should go to the to separate schools.
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Don’t Not Strongly Slightly Slightly Strongly Know Applicable
4. If my party nominated a Black/African-American for President, I would vote for him if he were qualified for the job.
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Don’t Not Strongly Slightly Slightly Strongly Know Applicable
5. Where you grew up, were there any Black/African-American families living close to you?
Yes No Don’t Know Not Applicable
331
6. During the past few years, has anyone brought a friend who was Black/African-American home for dinner?
Yes No Don’t Know Not Applicable
7. How strongly would you object if a member of your family wanted to bring a Black/African-American friend home for dinner?
Strongly Mildy Not Don’t Not Object Object Object Know Applicable
8. Do Blacks/African-Americans attend the church that you, yourself, attend most often, or not?
Yes No Don’t Know Not Applicable
9. How close do you feel to Blacks/African-Americans?
Not At Neither One Very Don’t Not All Close Or The Other Close Know Applicable
10. How close do you feel to Whites?
Not At Neither One Very Don’t Not All Close Or The Other Close Know Applicable
11. After graduation, how would you feel about living in a neighborhood where half of your neighbors were Black/African-American?
Strongly Favor Neither Favor Oppose Strongly Don’t N/A Favor Nor Oppose Oppose Know
332
12. After graduation, how would you feel about living in a neighborhood where most of your neighbors were Black/African-American?
Strongly Favor Neither Favor Oppose Strongly Don’t N/A Favor Nor Oppose Oppose Know
13. How would you feel about having a close relative marry a Black/African- American person?
Strongly Favor Neither Favor Oppose Strongly Don’t N/A Favor Nor Oppose Oppose Know
14. In the past few years, do you think conditions for Blacks/African-Americans have improved, gotten worse, or stayed about the same?
Improved Gotten About Don’t Not Worse The Same Know Applicable
15. Irish, Italians, Jewish and many other minorities overcame prejudice and worked their way up. Blacks/African-Americans should do the same without special favors
Agree Agree Neither Agree Disagree Disagree Don’t N/A Strongly Somewhat Nor Disagree Somewhat Strongly Know
16. On average Blacks/African Americans have worse jobs, income, and housing than White people. Do you think these differences are because most Blacks/African-Americans have less in-born ability to learn?
Yes No Don’t Know Not Applicable
333
17. On average Blacks/African Americans have worse jobs, income, and housing than White people. Do you think these differences are because most Blacks/African-Americans don’t have the chance for education that it takes to rise out of poverty?
Yes No Don’t Know Not Applicable
18. On average Blacks/African Americans have worse jobs, income, and housing than White people. Do you think these differences are because most Blacks/African-Americans just don’t have the motivation or will power to pull themselves up out of poverty?
Yes No Don’t Know Not Applicable
19. On average Blacks/African Americans have worse jobs, income, and housing than White people. Do you think these differences are mainly due to discrimination?
Yes No Don’t Know Not Applicable
20. What do you think the chances are these days that a White person won’t get a job or promotion while a less qualified Black/African-American person gets one instead?
Very Somewhat Not Don’t Not Likely Likely Likely Know Applicable
21. Some people say that because of past discrimination, Blacks/African- Americans should be given preference in hiring and promotion. Others say that such preference in hiring and promotion of Blacks is wrong because it discriminates against Whites. What about your opinion—are you for or against preferential hiring and promotion of Blacks/African-Americans?
Strongly Support Oppose Strongly Don’t Not Support Oppose Know Applicable
334
22. Some people think that Blacks/African-Americans have been discriminated against for so long that the government has a special obligation to help improve their living standards. Other believe that the government should not be giving special treatment to Blacks/African-Americans. Where would you place yourself on this scale?
Strongly Support Oppose Strongly Don’t Not Support Oppose Know Applicable
23. Where would you rate Whites in general on this scale? Please circle your choice.
Hardworking Lazy
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
24. Where would you rate Blacks/African-Americans in general on this scale? Please circle your choice.
Hardworking Lazy
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
25. Where would you rate Whites in general on this scale? Please circle your choice.
Unintelligent Intelligent
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
26. Where would you rate Blacks/African-Americans in general on this scale? Please circle your choice.
Unintelligent Intelligent
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
This is the end of the Test. Please place your test in the manila envelope and return it to the test administrator.
Thank you for participating.
335
Appendix D
Interview Questions
1. When we began this course, how comfortable did you feel working with diverse student populations? Where would you rate yourself of a scale from 1 (not comfortable) to 10 (very comfortable)?
2. At the midpoint in this course, how comfortable do you feel now with the idea of working with diverse student populations? Has your comfort level unchanged? Where would you rate yourself of a scale from 1 (not comfortable) to 10 (very comfortable)?
3. How comfortable would you be teaching in a school that was 70% or higher minority population?
4. What factors do you see as contributing or detracting from your becoming more comfortable working with diverse populations?
5. Who do you think is responsible for helping educators become more comfortable with diverse student populations?
6. What do you believe needs to change in teacher preparation programs in order to facilitate effectively preparing you for working with racially diverse populations?
7. What do you think has been the most effective or helpful part of this course?
8. What do you think needs to be improved to make this course more effective?
9. How important do you think a course like this one, which investigates race, is to art education teacher preparation? What about all educators?
10. Is there anything else you would like to talk about that pertains to this course or your experiences in this course?
336
Appendix E
Verbal Instructions for Testing Session
Introduction of third-party administrator (Administrator introduces herself)
I am going to be passing around manila envelopes, which contain the tests you are taking today. Please do not write any identifying information on the outside of your envelope. Please only look at the pages I ask you to look at and wait until I tell you to look at the next page. Please also wait until everyone has an envelope before you open yours.
Pass out envelopes.
Okay, everyone can open his or her envelopes. Please remove all the items from the envelope and place them in front of you. Every page in your packet will have a random number written in the upper right hand corner in black marker. This number was associated with your test responses throughout this research study and was used to correlate your test responses both pre-course and post-course. You may also use this number to request copies of your results at the end of the study. Additionally, you are asked to choose a pseudonym that was used to correlate your interview, written responses, and visual art responses with the testing results after the course has ended. The first sheet you will see was used to collect this identifying information and was held in confidence until the end of this course so that your data can be correlated and analyzed. Please write your name next to your number and choose a pseudonym. When you are finished simply raise your hand and I will come around and pick these up.
The next sheet in your packet is a demographic information sheet. Please fill this sheet out and place it back in the manila folder.
(Give 5 minutes for students to complete demographic sheet)
Does anyone need more time?
Next is your first test. Please look only at the first page, and wait until I tell you to look at the next page.
(Go to Verbal Instructions for Paper IAT)
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION EXAMPLE
337
Assigned number: ______
Your Name: ______
Your Pseudonym: ______
338
Appendix F
Written Reflection Prompts
Reflection 1 How comfortable are you with discussing the topic of race? When the topic of race comes up in a conversation do you tend to engage in it, sharing your true feelings/politely change the subject/become silent in an effort to avoid the conversation or have some other reaction? Why do you think you react as you do? Are there particular topics that are more comfortable/less comfortable for you to discuss? Why do you think some topics are easier or more difficult? Do you think it is important to be comfortable talking about race as an educator? Why or Why not? Is it important as an art teacher? Why or Why not?
Reflection 2 Investigate your racial past. Write about or draw a history that includes the interactions that you have had with people of a different color from yourself. If you choose to draw a timeline rather than write a racial history, please bring your timeline into class for us to discuss.
Reflection 3 As future educators and current educators, is it important for us to reflect upon our racial histories? Why or why not. Do you think knowing your students' racial histories will improve your classroom instruction? Support your answer. How might learning about your own racial history and the racial history of others be important to cultural proficiency? At what level of cultural proficiency do you define yourself at this present time?
Reflection 4 What does the term "White Privilege" mean to you? What about White privilege challenges your thinking? How does this privilege/or lack of privilege function in your life?
Reflection 5 Think of a time when you misread a racial/cultural communication or when someone misread you. Briefly discuss. Was this situation resolved? How. If not, how do you think it could have been resolved?
339
Reflection 6 Do you think it is important for students to "see" themselves in the classroom curriculum? In what ways might you reflect the different races and cultures of your future students without trivializing their race/culture? How can you design an art curriculum that pushes beyond a "heroes and holiday" approach?
Reflection 7 In what ways does your race affect the lens through which you view the world? What are some practical and feasible steps you can take today to help you become more comfortable with people from different races? How might you develop the ability to consider situations from multiple perspectives in the art classroom?
Reflection 8 Choose ONE of the following readings from Rethinking Multicultural Education (Chpts: 26, 28, 29, 30). Reflect on your chosen reading. Tell us the title of the piece you chose to read. What did you find insightful? What was interesting or surprising? Did reading your chapter help you to think about anything differently? How might you address a similar issue in an art lesson in the art classroom?
Reflection 9 Choose ONE of the following readings from Rethinking Multicultural Education (Chpts: 31, 32, 34, 36). Reflect on your chosen reading. Tell us the title of the piece you chose to read. What did you find insightful? What was interesting or surprising? Did reading your chapter help you to think about anything differently? How might you address a similar issue in an art lesson in the art classroom?
Reflection 10 Choose ANY of the readings from Rethinking Multicultural Education. Reflect on your chosen reading. Tell us the title of the piece you chose to read. What did you find insightful? What was interesting or surprising? Did reading your chapter help you to think about anything differently? How might you address a similar issue in an art lesson in the art classroom?
Final Course Reflection Commit to paper your personal thoughts about the journey you have made throughout this course. Where did you begin in your understanding of race? Where are you now? How will developing the skills to examine race impact your personal and professional experiences? Will you continue your learning? How? Are there commitments you feel you are ready to make to engage in equity/antiracist work? If so, briefly describe what they are. Do you feel more prepared to address issues of race if they arise in your art classroom? Do you feel confident enough to create a art lesson that addresses issues of race? Would you feel comfortable initiating or facilitating a conversation that had a racial dimension or participating in a conversation about racial issues if it were to occur?
340
Appendix G
Studio Assignments
ARED 5130/7130 Spring 2010 Studio Techniques for Art Educators
Studio Assignment 1 Know Thyself -Critical Family History (Printmaking/Mixed Media) This studio experience involves printmaking and mixed media techniques and focuses on lived histories. This studio experience aims to facilitate your ability to visually express yourself in racial or cultural terms and connect to your racial/cultural history. Through decontexualizing your family stories, critically examining your family history and visually expressing your understandings of yourself as a cultural being, this studio art experience aims to provide you with a deeper insight into the ways in which race, culture and identity shape the perspectives through which you view the world. Printmaking techniques explored will include: Relief printing, monoprinting, and photo transfers. Additionally, we will discuss lithography, silkscreen, and etching printmaking processes.
Begin by interviewing family members. You should aim to gain some understanding of where your ancestors are from and how they arrived in this country. Begin to acquire photos of your family members and images that relate to your heritage (maps, cultural keepsakes, etc). Research and begin to collect iconography and important symbols of the countries that are significant in your family history (stamps, money, architecture, monuments, etc.). Critically examine the role race played in your family history (see Christine Sleeter’s Web site https://sites.google.com/a/christinesleeter.org/critical-family- history/ as model for your critical inquiry)
Some Guiding Questions for Critical Inquiry: 1. What are my family roots? 2. What is my culture? How does my culture affect the way I view the world? 3. How do I choose to racially identify? 4. What is my family’s racial history? 5. What is my ethnicity? 6. What is my nationality? 7. What is my regional heritage? 341
8. What was the experience of my ancestors as immigrants/involuntary immigrants coming to America or as people native to this land? What role did race play in my family history?
Essential Questions of this studio experience • In what ways do our racial histories impact the lens through which we view the world? • How might we come to understand ourselves as cultural beings and why is this important? • How might artworks incorporate research and visually express an understanding of our racial histories? • What is Whiteness and how does understanding it help us frame passive racism and become social agents for change?
Exemplar Artist(s)/Artwork(s) Lezley Saar, Tale of the Tragic Mulatto (Tragic Mulatto Series), 1999
Studio Assignment 2 Beauty, Self and the Other - Figures in Clay/Digital Photography (Ceramics/Photography) This studio experience involves ceramic handbuilding techniques/digital photography techniques and focuses on exploring the embodiment of self and other in art. This studio experience aims to facilitate your understanding of your racial body in continuous relation with other racial bodies in the world. By creating two and three-dimensional figures/self-portraits that problematize how society marks individuals as different, this studio experience aims to highlight how the racial/cultural self is oriented to the racial/cultural other and how society conceptualizes each racial body as difference.
Begin by expressing your understanding of one of the following in a work of art: • Racial/cultural self in relation to other racial/cultural beings • Invisible race privilege • Blackness/Whiteness/Otherness and the idea of Beauty (What is “beautiful” and by whose standards?) 342
• Racial hierarchies • Racial awareness/unawareness/blindness • Problematizing American identity (What is and who defines what it is?) • Racial identity (How is it developed and what role does the media play in positive/negative identity development?) • Racial lens (How does your race impact the ways in which you perceive and understand the world?)
Essential Questions of this studio experience • How has the notion and understanding of “beauty” in America been influenced by the cultural/racial lens through which we perceive racial bodies and difference? • What is “beauty”? Is it tangible? Does “beauty” matter? What role does race play in defining beauty? • How has the notion of “beauty” been racially idealized and exploited, today and historically, in artworks and in the media? • Is Black “beauty” a matter of conditioning/assimilation? What are the continuing challenges surrounding visual images and portrayals of Black people? • How is “Otherness” exoticized? What are the hidden messages sent to people of color about the standard of “beauty” in America?
Exemplar Artist(s)/Artwork(s) Lorna Simpson Lezley Saar, Alison Saar, Betye Saar India Arie (Musician) Selected artworks from Colored Pictures: Race & Visual Representation by Michael D. Harris Selected artworks from Posing Beauty: African-American Images from the 1890s to the Present by Deborah Willis 343
Selected artworks form Race-ing Art History: Critical Readings in Race and Art History by Kymberly N. Pinder
Studio Assignment 3 Choose Your Own Media This an opportunity for you to choose your own media for expressing and demonstrating your comprehensive understandings of the topics discussed throughout this course. This final artwork should be guided by the phrase “self in relation to other”.
Some recent topic suggestions to explore/examine in your final piece: • Self in relation to other • The legacy of the KKK • Sarah Baartman • Jim Crow • The TV series Black/White • Order of Myths video on the segregated Mardi Gras parades in Alabama • Whiteness • The Multiracial experience in America • The history of Asian immigration and experiences in America • Black dialect • Language and the Latino/Hispanic experience in America • Any racial topic you would have liked to have read about or discussed this semester • Any other topic we read about or discussed this semester
344
Appendix H
Reading/Video/Music/Website Course List
* Indicates a reading was changed to optional to reduce the number of required readings.
Required Course Texts:
Adams, C. (2008, January/Feburary). Are you biased? The challenge of teaching across race. Scholastic Instructor, 26–32.
*Armon, J., Uhrmacher, P., & Ortega, T. (2009). The significance of self-portraits: Making connections through monotype prints in “Letras y Arte”. Art Education, 62(6), 12-18.
Au, W. (2009). Introduction: Rethinking multicultural education. In W. Au (Ed.), Rethinking multicultural education: Teaching for racial and cultural justice (pp. 1–6). Milwaukee, WI: A Rethinking Schools Publication.
Chalmers, F. (1992). The origins of racism in the public school art curriculum. Studies in Art Education, 33(3), 134-143.
Hetland, L., Winner, E., Veenema, S., & Sheridan, K. (2007). Studio thinking: The real benefits of visual arts education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Nieto, S. & Bode, P. (2008). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education (5th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
Additional Course Readings of Articles, Chapters, and Specific Sections/Excerpts:
Ballengee-Morris, C., & Stuhr, P. (2001). Multicultural art and visual cultural education in a changing world. Art Education, 54(4), 6-13.
*Berger, M. (2004). White: Whiteness and race in contemporary art. Baltimore, MD: Center for Art and Visual Culture – University of Maryland.
*Bonilla-Silva, E. (2006). Racism without racists: Color-Blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
*Bronson, P., & Merryman, A. (2009, September 5). See baby discriminate. Newsweek. 345
Retrieved from http://www.newsweek.com/id/214989/output/print.
Bronson, P., & Merryman, A. (2009). NutureShock: New thinking about children. New York, NY: Twelve.
Burton, D. (2006). Exhibiting student art: The essential guide for teachers. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Copenhaver-Johnson, J. (2006, Fall). Talking to children about race: The importance of inviting difficult conversation. Childhood Education, 12-22.
Copenhaver-Johnson, J. (2000, Spring). Silence in the classroom: Learning to talk about issues of race. The Dragon Lode, 18(2), 12-22.
Davis, B. (2007). How to teach students who don’t look like you: Culturally relevant teaching strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
*Eisner, E. (2002). The arts and the creation of mind. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 106–116.
Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink: The power of thinking without thinking. New York, NY: Back Bay Books.
Gude, O. (2004). Postmodern Principles. Art Education, 57(1), 6-14.
Guillermo, E. (2002, April 19). One-Drop Rule: Tiger as Asian Pacific American. AsianWeek Magazine. Retrieved on March 13, 2005 from http://www.asianweek.com/2002_04_19/opinion_emil.html.
Harris, M. D. (2003). Colored pictures: Race and visual representation. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press.
Horyn, C. (2008, June 19). Conspicuous by their presence. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/19/style/19iht- 19black.13823039.html.
Hutton, K. & Urbanska, W. (1997). Instructional resource: Examining prejudice through art: Reynolda House Museum of American Art.
*Jacobson, M. (1999). Whiteness of a different color: European immigrants and the alchemy of race. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
*JBHE Foundation (2001, Spring). Bipartisan support for Affirmative Action at the University of Georgia. The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 31, 67-68. 346
Lee, E., Menkart, D., & Okazawa-Rey, M. (2008). Beyond heroes and holidays: A practical guide to K-12 antiracist, multicultural education and staff development. Washington, DC: Teaching for Change.
*Maillard, K. N. (2008). The Multiracial epiphany of Loving. Fordham Law Review, 76, 2709-2733.
Marsh, S. C. (2009, Summer). The lens of implicit bias. Juvenile and Family Justice Today, 16-19.
Marx, S. (2006). Revealing the invisible: Confronting passive racism in teacher education. New York, NY: Routledge.
Ouimet, T. (n.d.) Safety guide for art studios. United Educators. Retrieved on August 1, 2009 from http://www.units.muohio.edu/ehso/downloads/brochures/Art%20Safety%20Broch ure.pdf.
Pinder, K. N. (Ed.). (2002). Race-ing art history: Critical readings in race and art history. New York, NY: Rutledge.
*Roediger, D. R. (2006). Working towards Whiteness: How America’s immigrants became white: The strange journey from Ellis Island to the suburbs. New York, NY: Basic Books Publishing.
Root, M. P. (1996). 50 Experiences of racially mixed people. In The Multiracial child resource book. Seattle, WA: Mavin Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.drmariaroot.com/doc/50Experiences.pdf.
*Rothchild, T. (2003, January). ‘Talking race’ in the college classroom: The role of social structures and social factors in race pedagogy. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 31, 31-38.
Siegesmund, R. (2007). On the persistence of memory: The legacy of visual African- American stereotypes. Studies in Art Education, 48(3), 323-328.
Singleton, G. E., & Linton, C. (2006). Courageous conversations about race: A field guide for achieving equity in schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
*Simpson, J. S., Causey, A., & Williams, L. (2007). ‘I would want you to understand it:’ Students’ perspectives on addressing race in the classroom. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 36(1), 33-50.
*Sozzani, F. (Ed.)., & Meisel, S. (Photographer). (2008, July). The Black Issue. Vogue Italia, 695. 347
Tatum, B. D. (1997). Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the cafeteria and other conversations about race. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Tatum, B. D. (2007). Can we talk about race? And other conversations in an era of school resegregation. Boston, MA: beacon Press Books.
*Teaching Tolerance Website. Talk about race is too uncomfortable. Retrieved from http://www.tolerance.org/tdsi/cb_talk_about_race.
Tochluk, S. (2008). Witnessing Whiteness: First steps toward an antiracist practice and culture. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
*Uddin, F. (2008, December 17). Vogue Italia: The Black issue. Feminist Review [Weblog]. Retrieved from http://feministreview.blogspot.com/2008/12/vogue- italia-black-issue.html
Winant, H. (2004). The new politics of race: Globalism, difference, justice. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Yang, G., & Suchan, T. (2009, November). The cultural revolution and contemporary Chinese art. Art Education, 62(6), 25-32.
Websites:
- Christine Sleeter’s Critical Family History https://sites.google.com/a/christinesleeter.org/critical-family-history/
-Art for protest or persuasion (Printmaking) http://mati.eas.asu.edu:8421/ChicanArte/html_pages/Protest.L2-PrintM.html
- Straight talk on race: Challenging the stereotypes in Kids’ books http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6647713.html
- Race the power of illusion: Sorting people http://www.pbs.org/race/002_SortingPeople/002_00-home.htm
- Understanding prejudice: Ten myths about Affirmative Action http://www.understandingprejudice.org/readroom/articles/affirm.htm
-New Horizons for Learning: “Allowing” race in the classroom: Students existing in the fullness of their beings http://www.newhorizons.org/strategies/multicultural/helling.htm
Videos: 348
Brown, M. (Producer & Director). (2008). The order of myths [Documentary]. United States: Cinema Guild.
Banks, T. (Host), Warner Bros. (Producers). (2010, March 14). What is good hair? [YouTube Video]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeXUm8OOUA8.
Davis, K. (Director), Real Works Teen Filmmaking (Director). (2007). Race – A girl like me [Documentary]. Retrieved from http://www.understandingrace.org/lived/video/index.html.
MSNBC News (Producer). (2008, May). Multiracial in America [Television broadcast]. Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24765917.
Fox Entertainment Group (Producer), Ice Cube (Director), & Cutler, R. J. (Director). (2006). Black. White. [Reality television show]. United States: Fox Entertainment Group.
The History Channel (Producer). (2005, September 27). The Ku Klux Klan – A Secret History [Documentary]. United States: A&E Home Video.
Music:
Simpson, I. A., Sanders, S., & Ramsey, D. (2006). I am not my hair [Recorded by India Arie]. On Testimony: Vol. 1, Life & Relationship [MP3]. Detroit, MI: Motown.
349
Appendix I
Michael Ray Charles’ Artwork
Michael Ray Charles CUT AND PASTE 1994 350
Michael Ray Charles BEWARE 1994
351
Appendix J
Lezley Saar’s Artwork
Lezley Saar Tale of the Tragic Mulatto 1999 352
Appendix K
Lorna Simpson’s Artwork
Lorna Simpson Wigs (portfolio) 1994
353
Appendix L
Alison Saar’s Artwork
Alison Saar Blonde Dreams 1997
354
Alison Saar Chaos in the Kitchen 1998
355
Appendix M
White Privilege and Its Impact in Participants’ Lives
WHITE PRIVILEGE AND ITS IMPACT IN YOUR LIVES:
I am judged for my sexual habits when in a biracial relationship. As a White woman dating a Black man implies certain things about me...
I don't need to change my “White dialect” to be accepted by my friends, family and in school situations.
I don't feel that I am discriminated against when I apply for a job because I am White.
When I purchase foundation, I have never had a problem finding my skin tone. If you notice, there are SO many more options for women of fair skin as opposed to women of color.
The teachers and administration in my son's preschool are the same race as I am, and I will benefit from that when I need to speak with them about any issue that arises.
I do not have to go out of my way to find cards and magazines that I identify with when I am in the grocery store.
I went to eat lunch today with my boyfriend and his mom, and we were definitely the minority in the restaurant. I have never really experienced that, and quite frankly I would have not even really noticed if I was not taking your class. Being some of the only White people there, it made me see more clearly how minorities feel.
I know I can go into my church at home and be a majority. There are only two Black people that attend my church in the small town of Dublin. The church is fairly large (about 250/300 people) and they are the only people of a different race there.
A privilege that I have experienced is the fact that generally speaking a White child going into school will be part of the majority and be surrounded by their own race.
As a White female I benefit from the mass media portrayal of my race. It is a smorgasbord of White people. Our race is constantly depicted on the television, which produces a sense of comfort and normality.
I will never have to SECRETLY listen to country music or picture myself in the music videos.
I can meet others without the fear of intimidating them due to my race.
Because I am White, I will not be accused of trying to associate myself with another race when I wear colored contacts or lighten my hair. 356
Most places I go, I will not be the minority.
The majority of my teachers in my college courses will share my race.
I have been in the car with Black male friends who have gotten pulled over while driving (for no reason).
Many of my Black male friends who drove to Louisiana to support the demonstration for the "Jena six" were pulled over while in transit.
Have been asked if it is true that I (my people) only wash my (our) hair once a month.
I have been told that I have "fun" hair. I have been asked repeatedly "can I touch your hair"? or "what does it feel like- is it soft?” or "is it real?”
While shopping with friends (who happened to be White), I did not get acknowledged upon walking in the store while my friends were immediately acknowledged and asked if they needed assistance (this happens on many occasions).
If I wish, I can easily locate what countries my family members immigrated from.
I can always find a large variety of make-up and hair products that match my complexion.
Art and literature classes are chock full of figures that are my race.
If I do poorly in a class or in a job interview, I don't worry about whether my race contributed to this.
Characters in movies, TV shows, commercials, etc. are mostly unquestionably White; if they aren't, their race is often part of the plot, they are the first character to die, or they play the role of a racial stereotype.
When applying for a babysitting job with a White family, they are more comfortable because I look like them.
When asked if I need help in a department store I do not assume that the clerk thinks I don't belong there.
People don't look at me strangely if I walk into the country club.
People believe me more easily, possibly because of my skin color.
Can go through security (at an airport or at a courthouse) without feeling as if someone is looking at me as a terrorist or a punk!
I can go anywhere in America without people assuming I cannot speak English!
I know one that I notice all the time now is textbooks. I went back through some old textbooks I had, and it is true. All White kids. Before this article, I never thought about the impact that commercials/media/TV /textbooks, which depict predominantly/only White people, can have on 357
young minority students.
One of my old roommates is a Black girl. We went to a Mary Kay party once, that a friend of ours was having. The Mary Kay girl had no dark foundation for her to use. Our friend didn't even think to tell her that Black girls could be there. I mean it never even occurred to any of us to tell her, we assumed she'd have everything she was supposed to. The friend who was throwing the party was embarrassed, my roommate was embarrassed, and the sales girl was mortified. It was definitely an awkward situation, and actually a really good example of White privilege. The Mary Kay lady is ALWAYS going to have my make up to match my skin tone.
I can attend Ultimate Frisbee events and assume ~90% of the participants will share my race.
I can dress down in public with little or no effect on how I'm treated by members of the service industry.
When speaking to people of authority, I can be sure that my judgment & honesty will not be questioned based on my race.
I can go about daily activities in places such as school, the grocery store, the bank, the movies, etc. without feeling threatened by the racial majority because I am the majority.
I could not donate blood one time because I came from a third world country.
Not even knowing what I need, store employees have told me, “I believe this is a bit out of your price range.”
Usually, when I check out at grocery or convenient stores, 8 out of 10 times the cashier will try to say hello, goodbye, or thank you to me in some Asian language.
My roommate (who's also Taiwanese) and I visited a White church in Athens one Sunday. After service, a White woman, whom we've never met before, walked up to us and asked us for our names, and then asked, "Are you girls exchange students from Korea?" (No, and no.)
I get asked, "What are you?" and "Where are you from?"
There are still a lot of people who make “Chinky” eyes around me and think it’s funny.
I can go to a counter-service restaurant and use my given name and not have to spell it out or have it horribly mispronounced (actually, I can't do this, but most White folks can)
I can go to a shelter to adopt a pet without too many additional screening questions (mostly along the lines of "are you going to use this animal for fighting?”).
I am constantly asked to teach dance lessons at friend’s parties.
People other than my race choose to speak more “hood” when I am in their presence.
Shows on primetime TV typically depict White people as the main characters. While other characters may be of other races (token Black, Asian, Hispanic characters)- the main characters tend to be White- and beyond that- almost every channel on TV represents my race. There doesn't have to be a separate channel just so I can see my race on TV. 358
White privilege means not having to think that someone will avoid you on the sidewalk because of your race.
When discussing race issues I can be certain that my race will be one of two races that get discussed/ recognized.
I can be assured that my children or myself will have lower rates of bulimia or anorexia due to higher self-esteem and lower body dissatisfaction.
359
Appendix N
Examples of Additional Exhibition Artworks
360
361
362
363
364
365