Kids! on Race: How Teaching the Evolutionary Story of Human Skin Color Can Challenge Children

Home , Human skin color, Nina Jablonski

Kids! On Race: How teaching the evolutionary story of human skin color can challenge children

to question arbitrary categories of “race” and the myth of white supremacy in grade school

A thesis submitted

to Kent State University in partial

fulfillment of the requirements for the

degree of Master of Arts

Crystal A. Reedy

May 2019

A thesis written by

Crystal A. Reedy

B.A. Ohio University, 2013

M.A. Kent State University, 2019

Approved by

Dr. Linda Spurlock , Advisor

Dr. Mary Ann Raghanti , Chair, Department of Anthropology

Dr. James L. Blank , Dean, College of Arts and Sciences

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... iii

LIST OF FIGURES ...... v

LIST OF TABLES ...... vi

DEDICATION ...... vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... viii

CHAPTERS

I. Introduction ...... 1

Purpose of Kids! On Race ...... 1

How Americans categorize human variation ...... 2

Disrupting the formation of racial bias in the classroom ...... 8

The vision of Kids! On Race ...... 13

II. Background ...... 14

Human skin color variation ...... 14

Strong and weak sunlight ...... 16

Pale skin evolution and vitamin D ...... 18

III. Methods...... 20

Preparation and planning ...... 20

Quantitative data collection ...... 22

Working with existing curriculum ...... 22

iii

Implementing the Program ...... 24

IV. Results ...... 31

Quantitative results ...... 31

Qualitative results ...... 33

V. The importance of the skin color narrative ...... 37

“Race,” in-groups and out-groups (unavoidably) on the brain ...... 37

Helping children learn about evolution through skin color ...... 43

VI. Discussion of results ...... 46

Teaching genetics before evolution ...... 46

Avoidance of teleological language ...... 47

Combatting a resistance to learning about evolution ...... 48

Alternative educational programming ...... 50

VII. Conclusion ...... 53

REFERENCES ...... 56

APPENDIX A: K!OR Survey ...... 64

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: A eumelanin umbrella protects Captain Folate from harsh UVR…………...…….…..26

Figure 2: Captain Folate helps create and mend DNA inside a cell………………………….….26

Figure 3: In weak sunlight, pheomelanin helps power the skin’s vitamin D factory………...….27

Figure 4: Calcium in the intestines is unable enter the bloodstream…………………….………27

Figure 5: Vitamin D allows calcium to enter the bloodstream…………………………………..28

Figure 6: The Calcium Phosphate Queen lying in a collagen hammock………………..…….…28

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Question 1, “How easy is it to tell apart difference "races" of people?” ...... 31

Table 2: Questions 2-8 results by percentage...... 32

DEDICATION

For Don Wallis and the teachers of the Antioch Elementary School in Yellow Springs who gave me the strength and encouragement to always be myself, even when it seemed like fitting in and

taking the path of least resistance would be easier. And, for my grandparents, Joe and Janice,

whose particular brand of unwavering strength and love is the kind that has made the world a

blessed place for so many, and one that is safer for human differences.

vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It is easy to stick to the things that you are good at and avoid the things that are most hard to do. Sometimes the educational system can get in the way of your learning, leading you to believe that you are incapable of learning certain things. We put ourselves in boxes and become comfortably numb to the things that are required for true growth. Academia can be a scary place, a place where you can lose yourself in trying to fit into a mold or compete with your peers and other academics.

This thesis committee was chosen for a very specific reason. They are some of the most inspirational, hard-working people on this earth. They are teachers that teach beyond the classroom; they taught me the things I thought I was incapable of learning. They encouraged me when I was right, and totally wrong as well, gave me advice when I needed it most, and conspired when no one was looking to set me back on the right track.

This paper happened because I was supported and cheered on in ways that I didn’t think possible. A “thank you” to the members of my thesis committee and especially my advisor, Dr.

Spurlock, Rev. Leah Lewis, library and school officials, and people who opened their homes for countless meetings and discussions does not do their efforts and the inspiring nature of those meetings justice. A special thanks is due to Chris Sharron as well whose incredible artwork was instrumental in the success of this program. I am proud to have met such courageous, intellectual, and driven people in the course of completing this thesis. Onward and upward.

viii

CHAPTER 1: Introduction

Purpose of Kids! On Race

The purpose of the Kids! On Race (K!OR) educational program is to enhance existing

Ohio curriculum by encouraging students to question the arbitrary nature of socially constructed

“racial” categories and engage in a captivating narrative of the evolutionary story of human skin color earlier in their academic career than what is commonly thought appropriate. This study targeted students in 5th, 6th, and 7th grades rather than those in high school or higher education courses. The evolutionary story of human skin color naturally challenges the myths foundational to the ideology of white supremacists while the vocabulary the children learn during the program empowers them to be able to talk with a broader perspective about the nature of “race,” their ancestral story, and experiences.

Simply talking about the evolutionary story of human skin color is not the answer to

America’s deeply-engrained problem with racism; racism cannot be reduced to skin color difference nor can it be solved by educational classes alone. Encouraging children to question unscientific explanations for human skin color variation by giving them the language to explain why “race” is not biological is a small yet important step, and one that has been neglected, in actively resisting racist interpretations of the biological nature of human beings. This program has the potential to make students less likely to develop stronger stereotypes and biases relating to skin color: if children are aware of why we have different skin colors, they may be less

inclined to propagate existing stereotypes and invent their own generalizations as an explanation for this variation in the future.

How Americans categorize human variation

Although variations of skin color and other visible traits that are commonly associated with “race” are due to less than 0.1% of our genetic code, (Guest, 2014) skin color has become relatively synonymous with “race” in American society. Native African populations have the highest genetic diversity in the world, evidence that humans originated in Africa and only later expanded into Eurasia and the Americas (Race, Ethnicity, and Genetics Working Group, 2005;

Tishkoff and Verrelli, 2003). In fact, Sub-Saharan African populations have the highest level of human skin color diversity (Relethford, 2000). Despite this diversity in African populations, this diversity is underrepresented in genetic research; studies relating to skin pigmentation are largely derived from data on Eurasians and African/European admixed populations (Lasisi and Shriver,

2018).

Equating the value of an individual to the color of their skin has been one of the most perilous myths ever invented. For biologists, “race” is a rather useless variable of study other than in reference to arbitrary social categorization, but that does not mean that science is free from the bonds of enculturation and biased ideology. The segregation of humans into “racial” groups was the result of “white” people inventing a system of oppression to maintain and manipulate their power. “Racial” language matters because it affects the way the public interprets human diversity and how studies are conducted within the scientific community.

As a classificatory term for humans, the term “race” did not appear in the English language until the 17th century. One may have referred to “the dispositions and temperaments, or

to a class of persons, as the race of womankind,” (Mukhopadhyay, p. 165, 2014; Smedley and

Smedley, 2012). The roots of the rather recent construction of “race” in America lie in the concept of the Great Chain of Being originally put forth by Plato, Aristotle, Proclus and Plotinus, and the belief in biological determinism. Later Christian interpretation in the Middle Ages placed God at the top of a natural and divinely orchestrated hierarchy, with all other entities and beings below him.

Biological determinism is the idea that there is a very close association between genetics and behavioral attributes. This belief system would be used in the 18th Century to rationalize

European treatment and attitudes towards conquered peoples, or lower “races,” and then in 19th

Century America to rationalize slavery. This idea is associated with eugenics, scientific racism, and misguided ideas of biologically-based gender roles, and the alleged heritability of IQ

(Mukhopadhyay, 2014). Franz Boas, often called the "Father of American Anthropology," fought against scientific racism and argued that human behavioral differences were a matter of cultural rather than biological differences, placing culture at the forefront of anthropological analysis. Boas rejected the notion of evolutionary hierarchical progress in the study of culture, which placed Western European culture above all others. At the beginning of the 20th century,

W. E. B. Du Bois synthesized research from the social and natural sciences in order to prove the invalidity of "race" as a scientific category (Yudell, et al., 2016).

From 1990 to 2003 scientists embarked on the world's most massive collaborative undertaking in the history of biological science in order to sequence 3 billion DNA base pairs that make up the human genome (Tripp and Grueber, 2011). From 1988 to 2010 the Human

Genome Project generated $796 billion for the U.S. economy and $244 billion in personal

income directly and indirectly. During this time, scientists ardently called for an end to the use of “race” as a variable in genetic research. However, some argue that the use of “race” as a variable in genetic research has been increasing in the postgenomic years in some respects (see

Chow-White, 2013).

The U.S. is unique in its treatment of “race” and is dominated by the rule of hypodescent, which occurs in some cultures that consider certain “races” to be superior. By this rule, a child born of interracial parents will be automatically classified into the “subordinate” group. One’s racial identity is an ascribed status designated at birth and is based on one’s parents; “mixed” children born of an African American mother and European-derived father, for example, will be classified as “black.” Despite the simultaneous acknowledgement that the child received half of its genes from the mother and half from the father, the fact that it would be just as logical to classify the child as “white” is largely not discussed (Kottak, 2013).

The rule of hypodescent affects people of racial groups like African Americans, Asian

Americans, and Native Americans, and people of ethnic Hispanic identity differently; each group negotiates identity at birth in different ways. For example, having either one Native American ancestor out of eight (great-grandparents) or out of four (grandparents) can classify an individual as Native American, but also depends on who is assigning the racial status (i.e. by federal or state law or by a Native American tribal council). A “mixed-race” child of an African American and

European-derived parent cannot choose to be “white” or deny that they are “black” in most cases, whereas the child of at least one Hispanic parent may or may not claim Hispanic ethnic identity. In fact, many Americans with Native American or Hispanic grandparents may consider themselves “white,” laying no claim to a minority group status. On the other hand, in some cases

an individual with any “black” ancestry may be considered “black.” For people of Asian ancestry, studies have suggested that the more acculturated the individual is to American culture, the more likely they are to identify as "black" or "white” rather than Asian American

(Mukhopadhyay, 2014).

The history of the U.S. Census serves as an illuminating storyboard for the continually evolving concept of “race” in America and hints at how skin color came to be such a signifying marker for one’s “race.” The Census is also a reflection of the government’s societal authority in that the categories it establishes can be used to allocate or withhold resources from certain groups. It also helps shapes the way citizens view the state of diversity in America and affects how we define “race” and “ethnicity,” (Guest, 2014). It logically seems like the Census could be a primary source of clarification of the definition of “race” and the definition of “ethnicity,” but this is not necessarily true.

In the original 1790 census directed by Thomas Jefferson, included free “white” men and women, other free peoples, and slaves. In 1850 the census included just three categories, White,

Black, and Mulatto (referring to people of “mixed race”). By 1870 it had expanded to include

Chinese and Indian, referring to Native Americans (Bennett, 2000). Rather than being able to self-identify, respondents were assigned to a category by the census worker based on their physical appearance and skin color was an obviously large part of that assessment (Guest, 2013, p. 213).

By 1940 the census reached eight categories, having eliminated the option for mixed

“race” and added more Asian categories and the Hindu religion, and we have continued with this expanding trend (Bennett, 2000). Most of these intermixed categories are not racial categories,

and terms such as “ethnicity” and “race” are often mistakenly used interchangeably. In the 2000

Census, an entirely new category, Spanish/Hispanic/Latino became its own ethnicity question, even though other ethnicities, like Greek or Italian, were not offered such an option to be of whichever “race” of their choosing (Rodriquez, 2000). “Whiteness” is largely not questioned.

By 2010 the Census included fourteen different “race” boxes of which respondents could choose any or all of them. President Barack Obama signed a law in 2016 to update racial terminology, which included replacing the words "Negro" with "African American" and "Oriental" with

"Asian Americans." Today, we also see the category “some other race” and by 2020 will have more options to write in information about our origins.

Racial classification is a political issue that relates to access to jobs, education, voting districts, and federal funding for minorities. The rule of hypodescent leads to most all population growth being attributed to minority categories, which theoretically could pose a problem for minorities that depend on access to those resources due to their minority status (Kottak, 2013).

To the majority population, it may appear that their majority privileges and status are being threatened by an imposing, enigmatic group of outsiders, who may be labeled as “dangerous.”

An extreme example of this can be seen in the rhetoric of British politician Nick Griffin who has repeatedly expressed his view that British “whiteness,” or the group of people he believes to be the original native peoples, is being intentionally obliterated in one indistinguishable mass of mixed “races.” Although, this may not be such an extremist view but rather a shockingly common one, especially when certain role models like the current President of the United States validate these concerns (see Eddo-Lodge, 2018).

The gap between U.S. educators and students in terms of language, culture, and identity is growing as our country diversifies. In the U.S., public school teachers are overwhelmingly

"white," even in schools where "non-whites" are the majority (see Mukhopadhyay, 2014).

Talking about “race” and racism may be especially intimidating for teachers who may not have the experience nor courage to introduce conversations about “race” and skin color into the classroom. Productive conversations are not always happy ones and some people can fall into the trap of idealizing social issues rather than confronting harsher realities (Bell and Hartmann,

2007). During the organizing phases of the K!OR program, a few adults expressed that they did not know how to start conversation about skin color or “race” and that they were concerned about how parents would react to having such discussion in the classroom, and they are not alone.

A study from the University of Pittsburgh's Center for Urban Education surveyed 500 teachers about their feelings on discussing "race" and racial violence in the classroom. Of the teachers surveyed, 80% were "white," which is consistent with the national teaching population demographic. While 85% said that "race" and racial discrimination were important topics to tackle in school, only 30% said that they felt that the families of the students would support such education. Most teachers, or 60%, were unsure how parents would react while 10% felt that discussion of "race" in school would be opposed. The most common reasoning for these views centered on the context of the community. Those who felt that parents would support conversation about “race” and racial discrimination in the classroom cited a diverse or urban community while those who were less confident in parental approval cited a majority "white" and conservative community. Other teachers simply felt that they were unsure because they were in new communities that were unfamiliar to them and some pointed to the current political climate for their cautious approach. Many “white” teachers also said that they did not feel like they should be the ones to introduce children of color to “race” and racism. While parents may

have more complex views, this study hints that teachers that are not deeply connected to those they teach or their families run the risk of stereotyping the communities, which plays a role in what is and is not talked about (Kohli et al., 2017).

Today, dialogue in social media, and among American citizens, including teachers, promotes the misguided belief that our nation has gone entirely “color blind,” referring to the sociological term by which racial characteristics are utterly disregarded. Proponents of “color blindness” envision a society in which “race” does not factor into opportunities afforded to a given individual and idealizes a government that is immune to discrimination, or at least one that rejects the notion of discrimination, which is reflected in its “racially neutral” policies. They believe that this way of thinking promotes racial equality because America is a meritocracy where anyone can succeed. Adopting a color blind perspective “removes from personal thought and public discussion any taint or suggestion of white supremacy or white guilt while legitimating the existing social, political and economic arrangements which privilege whites,"

(Gallagher, 2003, abstract). Meanwhile, a more important and real narrative is unfolding: our nation is experiencing an increasing disparity between upper and lower social strata that is apparent in the treatment of its minority peoples and cultures.

Disrupting the formation of racial bias in the classroom

Many studies clearly show that America has a serious problem pertaining to “race” and racism. Other studies have shown that measures can be taken to help disrupt the formation of stereotypes and implicit bias. Swedish sociologist and economist Gunnar Myrdal’s five-year study published in his book An American Dilemma in 1944 exposed a relentless cycle of oppression where “white” people oppressed African American people and then attributed their

oppression to their poor performance in society. While being American boasts an adherence to the belief that “all men are created equal,” Myrdal showed that the disadvantaged situation that ensnared “black” people, which some dubbed the “Negro problem,” was in fact the result of oppression by “white” people collectively (Myrdal, 1944).

During the Kenneth and Mamie Clark Dolls Experiment in the 1940s, children associated dolls that had darker skin color with more negative words and attributes. The study exposed an acute self-hatred, pertaining to “race” among African-American children, who attended segregated schools. Many other studies, like the Clarks’, have repeatedly shown that segregation and racism harm children and society as a whole (see Myrdal 1944; Pascoe & Smart Richman,

2009; Hardin & Banji, 2010; Priest et al., 2013). Generally, stereotypes function on three main levels: (a) stereotypes seemingly help people make sense of a situation or explain something that they do not understand, (b) stereotypes are “energy-saving devices” for the perceiver, and (c) stereotypes are shared group beliefs (McGarty, Yzerbyt, Spears, 2002). Rather than exposing race-based perceptions of self, K!OR took a different approach than the Clarks’ study in order to disrupt the cognitive process involved in forming racial stereotypes.

In order to form a particular impression of a group, the human mind looks to differentiate it from other groups by comparing and contrasting them, and perhaps exaggerating these perceived differences. This is where generalizations, like racial stereotypes, are referenced, almost instantaneously. In the presence of ‘too much information,’ the perceiver attempts to filter out or even ignore some of it. This means that without any meaningful experiences, say, with people of other skin color variations, generalizations can manifest as negative racial stereotypes (Tajfel & Wilkes, 1963). In other words, positive, meaningful experiences give children, a sort of go-to road map in times of “information overload.”

Meaningful experiences with peoples of diverse skin colors at an early age can disrupt the cognitive process of forming racial biases, according to Paul Quinn at the University of

Delaware, for example. One study indicates that the simple act of associating first names, like

Samantha or Jonathan, with images of individuals of varying skin colors can work to counter racial bias in young children. The positive effect of this exercise is apparent in an Implicit Racial

Bias Test (IRBT) given to children both before and after. The results of Quinn’s study suggest that perceptual and social biases are linked. Therefore, social bias may be reduced by perceptual means (Xiao et al, 2014). This is partly why the K!OR program was designed as a highly visual experience and utilized pictures of faces of diverse phenotypes from all over the world, although real life, genuine experiences with diverse groups of people are, of course, ideal.

Schools have historically (and ideally) been seen as places where students learn everything they need to know about how to be a functioning adult in society. While it is unfair to place such a burden on teachers without providing them with basic resources they need, it is equally unfair to deny a child’s education. Teachers are under fire and have been for many years in terms of what the public expects from them, and like any definition, the criteria for expectations are constantly evolving from multiple perspectives. Several writers challenge prevailing technical ideas about teachers’ work and urge for reform in the way teachers themselves are taught.

Whereas Giroux (1985) references teachers as transformative intellectuals, Freire (1998) focusses on teachers more as cultural workers. Cochran-Smith (2010) places the highest importance on social justice in teachers’ work and promotes the commitment to social justice in which the teacher may diverge from standard teaching curriculum or may employ teaching methods that are discordant with the normal teaching procedures. Whereas Zeichner (1993)

highlights the connection between striving for social justice to the development of the teacher,

Nieto (2000) argues that “equity” must be the guiding light of teacher education. It is not too unreasonable then, to expect educators to answer children accurately when they ask questions about human skin color differences.

Anthropology is the only discipline that approaches human variation from a biocultural perspective. Anthropological data, its perspectives and theory, can be used to determine, evaluate, and solve present-day social problems. Anthropologists provide a unique perspective on human beings and the students they teach in that they view them as comprehensive cultural beings whose enculturation and views about education are part of a larger context that includes their family, peers, and community (Mukhopadhyay, 2014). The link between culture and classroom instruction is derived from evidence that cultural practices shape thinking processes, which serve as tools for learning within and outside of school (Hollins, l996). The idea of

“culturally responsive” education is premised on the idea that culture is central to student learning. It is an approach “that empowers students intellectually, socially, emotionally, and politically by using cultural referents to impart knowledge, skills and attitudes," (Ladson-

Billings, 1994, p. 382). Applying anthropological perspectives in educational settings where there is conflict can allow students and teachers alike to view conflict in a comparative way. As

K!OR participants learned, it is apparent that not all racially diverse societies have racial conflict and in fact, the particular brand of racism in the U.S. is a result of our history and is unnaturally, socially constructed (Mukhopadhyay, 2014).

Many U.S. students enter classes in a wide range of fields with the underlying assumption that “race” is biological (Coleman, 2011). The human skin color story can be used in schools and libraries to help rectify a major problem in the American school system in which students are

entering high school and college with a dismal understanding of biological processes and misguided beliefs about “race.” Dr. Nina Jablonski has pointed out that the human skin color story is one of the best narratives that can be used to convey evolution by natural selection (Penn

State, 2011). In 2002, Dr. Jablonski began making plans to write the first book to investigate the social history of skin color and how skin color deeply influences social interactions in complex ways. First published in 2012, Living Color: the Biological and Social Meaning of Skin Color discussed the relationship between sunlight, skin pigmentation, human migration patterns, and ways of life that can lead to incongruities between our skin color and environment in a way that had never been done before. The book provides the reader with vivid illustrations and an important message: knowing the evolutionary story of human skin color and the social significance of it can help prevent discrimination and racism based on skin color.

Camilla Smith, President of The Leakey Foundation, commented on the impact of Dr.

Nina Jablonski’s powerful presentations about the origins of human skin color in an interview conducted by Communications Director of the Leakey Foundation, Meredith Johnson:

“A few years ago, we did a presentation for teachers at the American Museum of Natural

History with Nina Jablonski, which was very powerful. It gave teachers a way of

understanding themselves and the way their different skin colors evolved, and that gave

them a new way to talk about skin color with their students. The teachers sitting next to

me said ‘I’ve never felt so empowered about my skin color.’ Once you understand the

mechanisms and why skin evolved the way it did, it changes the way you see skin color

in a deep way. Knowledge is power, and if you learn the basic biological steps of

evolution, that frees you, and it changes the way you see the world,” (Johnson, 2016).

The vision of Kids! On Race

The Kids! On Race program was created with the hope that those who participate in learning about the human skin color story are intrigued and motivated to learn about scientific processes, and use the knowledge gained to ask questions about “race” and human variation.

This hopefully will encourage the normalization of conversations about the real-world implications of the social construct of “race” and the importance of human diversity. The program yielded quantitative data on the ability of the children to understand the roles of melanin, sunlight, and nutrients in the evolutionary skin color story and qualitative data on their preconceived notions about “race” and how knowledge of the story changed the way they think about human diversity and the social constructs that surround it.

Chapter 2 begins with basic background on the evolution of human skin color variation, including the natural selective forces that lead to such variation. The next chapters cover the process of creating and implementing the K!OR program and describe quantitative and qualitative results. Chapter 5 discusses a variety of studies that show why avoiding productive conversation about skin color and difference can harm rather than protect children and will not solve issues relating to racism and implicit bias. A few studies that demonstrate how the formation of strong biases and stereotypes can be inhibited are also discussed. Chapter 6 discusses the results of the program and remarks on the benefits of such an accessible yet challenging scientific narrative that encourages discussion about human variation.

CHAPTER 2: Background

Human skin color variation

Two types of melanin were discussed in the K!OR program: eumelanin, which particularly benefitted our most ancient ancestors, and pheomelanin that became more of a benefit to ancestors who migrated away from the tropics. Generally, those who produce more eumelanin have brown or black hair and dark skin that tans easily whereas those that produce mostly pheomelanin typically have reddish or blond hair, freckles, and pale skin that tans poorly

(Healy, 2004). Melanin responsible for skin color is produced in melanocytes in the basal layer of the skin's epidermis. Melanosomes contain the melanin and transport it to keratinocytes, which results in the pigmentation we see (Thong et al., 2003). Melanin protects us from harmful

UVR and plays an important role in the immune system (Gasque and Jaffar-Bandjee, 2015).

Humans evolved on the continent of Africa under the stress of intense ultraviolet radiation (UVR). The genetic variation we see outside of Africa is “generally a subset of the variation within Africa, a pattern that would be produced if the migrants from Africa were limited in number and carried just part of African genetic variability with them,” (Race,

Ethnicity, and Genetics Working Group, 2005, p. 520). As our ancient ancestors lost their hair, melanin production in the skin itself would have became more beneficial rather than being located only in the hair follicles. This melanin helped protect valuable nutrients in the skin from strong ultraviolet radiation. Evidence of this evolution can be seen in the linear body build of

Turkana Boy at 1.6 million years ago who shows adaptation to being active during the hottest

parts of the day; sweating would have allowed him to get rid of excess body heat (Jablonski,

2018, personal communication).

Whereas eumelanin provides great protection from harsh sunlight, pheomelanin does not and thus, people with more pheomelanin have a higher risk of getting skin damage.

Pheomelanin is grouped in clusters and is a yellow-red color, making the skin look pale. In response to UVR, more pheomelanin is produced. The problem is that unlike eumelanin that neutralizes free radicals, pheomelanin produces them and these free radicals are what can lead to melanoma (Jablonski, 2012). When human populations migrated out of the tropics, they were exposed to less UVR. Whereas black-brown pigment had protected them and their crucial folate levels, an important water-soluble B vitamin that we obtain from our diet, under the stress of strong UVR, our ancestors faced the new challenge of being able to get enough sunlight into their skin to induce vitamin D synthesis (Jablonski, 2012).

Differing hypotheses for the variation of human skin color in the past fell short of providing enough rationale for the natural selection of the skin color variation we see today. In

1959, Raymond Cowles proposed that darker skin would have benefitted our ancient ancestors because it gave them camouflage to hide from their predators in dark forests. However, we now know that humans did not evolve in dark forests, but rather in woodland and grassland environments. Until Harold Blum’s opposition in 1961, the idea that skin cancer in pale-skinned individuals compromised reproductive success was largely unchallenged. Blum pointed out that generally individuals with skin cancer did not die in their reproductive years. In making this point, he emphasized that dark skin could not have been an adaptive trait and for years his findings stunted research on the evolutionary function of human skin pigmentation (Jablonski,

2012).

In 1965, Wasserman suggested that the antimicrobial properties of melanin helped prevent infectious diseases and combat harmful parasites. This idea was revived again in 2001

(see Mackintosh, 2001). Nina Jablonski cites evidence that does not support this hypothesis: humans living at or near the equator in humid and cloudy environments typically have lighter skin color, and secondly, protection against the constant threat of sun damage would have been far more beneficial to our ancient ancestors than the occasional benefit of resistance to disease- causing microbes in the humid tropics. She notes that these microbes, while more common at the equator, are generally found in wetter, more humid environments and although darkly pigmented individuals may benefit from their melanin in these environments, the prevalence of these harmful microbes depends upon rainfall (Jablonski, 2012).

Strong and weak sunlight

The distribution of skin color pigmentation and UVR intensity are highly correlated

(Jablonski, 2012). While strong UVR served as a selective pressure for darker skin pigmentation and eumelanin, weak UVR, particularly UVB radiation, drove selection for pale skin pigmentation and pheomelanin. Two key players in the selection for human skin color variation, folate and vitamin D, have disparate relationships with UVR; whereas vitamin D synthesis is activated in the skin by UVR, folate can be destroyed by it (Jones, et al., 2018). Sunlight provides the full spectrum of UVR, which includes UVA, UVB, and UVC radiation. UVR is most prevalent at the equator. Those living at the equator can expect a near constant threat of harsh UVR penetrating the skin. As distance from the equator increases, the sun hits the earth at a more oblique angle, resulting in less UVB radiation that reaches the earth’s surface, especially during the winter. The amount of sun that will reach the earth is also dependent on the atmospheric content of the ozone and its transparency (Chaplin and Jablonski, 2009).

UVB plays a key role in skin cancer and is generally responsible for burning of the superficial layers of skin. UVB rays cause sunburn and are associated with an increased risk of cellular and DNA damage. Despite its damaging risks, this UVB radiation is important for vitamin D synthesis in the human body (Holick, 2016).

Dark skin evolution and folate

In 1978, Branda and Eaton published a paper in which folate was used as a model to test the hypothesis that darker pigmentation could protect against photolysis of essential vitamins and metabolites, suggesting a link between folate levels and the evolution of human skin color

(Branda and Eaton, 1978). Green leafy vegetables are the best sources of folate but other sources include citrus fruits, dried beans, and whole grains (Jablonski, 2012). We now know that our most ancient ancestors benefitted from darker skin in sunny climates because it protected crucial folate levels.

Folate is important in the creation of red and white blood cells in bone marrow, helps our body create energy from carbohydrates and plays a key role in producing and repairing DNA and

RNA. Folate-deficiency anemia is caused by a lack of folate that decreases the amount of red blood cells. It is prescribed as an essential nutrient for pregnant women to help ensure proper development during gestation and continues to play important roles into adolescence. Folate deficiency is linked to birth defects such as spina bifida and neural tube defects (Bower and

Stanley, 1989; Jablonski, 2012). Folate is required for females to produce and maintain healthy ova, for the implantation of the fertilized ovum, and is crucial “for all aspects of fetal growth and organ development, not just that of the neural tube,” (Jablonski, p. 30, 2012). A lack of folate has also been associated with decreased male fertility and damage of the sperm's DNA (Boxmeer

et al., 2009). UVR, and especially the deeper-penetrating UVA radiation, is damaging to folate, causing the body to require more folate in the wake of such stress.

Pale skin evolution and vitamin D

Our pale-skinned ancestors benefitted from having lighter pigmentation mutations because it allowed them to produce vitamin D in gloomy climates. Vitamin D is a group of fat- soluble secosteroids that aid in the absorption of calcium, phosphate, and magnesium in the intestines, helps ensure that calcium can be retained, and is important in maintaining a healthy immune system (Holick, 2003). During growth and development, we need vitamin D so that our bodies can absorb calcium to form strong bones through the process of mineralization (Holick,

2003; Jablonski, 2004; Chaplin and Jablonski, 2009) and without enough vitamin D, diseases like rickets in children and osteomalacia in adults can occur (Brahler, 2018).

The amount of melanin an individual has in their skin helps dictate how much vitamin D they can produce from exposure to the sun. People with lighter skin color have less protection from UVB but can synthesize vitamin D more effectively via sunlight than those with darker skin color whose higher melanin content prevents more UVB from penetrating the skin

(Clemens, 1982). The most at-risk populations for Vitamin D deficiency, people living above 50 degrees latitude with gloomier climates, befitted from having lighter skin for better absorption of sunlight. Today, nutritional rickets and osteomalacia are common among those with darker skin and migrant populations (Uday and Högler, 2017) and this could have been a deadly problem for our ancient ancestors. The amount of vitamin D you synthesize in natural sunlight depends on your melanin content, the length of exposure, how much skin you expose to the sun, the time of day that you are in the sun, and the geographic region. You do not need to get a sunburn or even tan to synthesize vitamin D, contrary to myths that many artificial tanning salons perpetrate.

Vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) and vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol) are the most important compounds to humans and can be obtained in our diet or via engineered supplements. Only a few foods contain vitamin D and in most cases they do not provide the body with all of the vitamin D it needs. In fact, vitamin D can be considered a hormone rather than a vitamin as most mammals do not solely rely on obtaining it through diet and synthesize it like this (Brahler,

2018). Some examples of sources of dietary vitamin D are milk and some kinds of formula for infants, cereals, and orange juice that have added vitamin D, fatty fish, and egg yolks. Exposing your skin to sunlight and taking supplements are the most efficient ways to obtain vitamin D.

Importantly, 7-dehydrocholesterol in the skin absorbs UVB radiation with wavelengths of

290-315 nm and creates cis,cis-previtamin D3, which rapidly isomerizes and is converted into vitamin D3 within a few hours of sun exposure (Holick, p. 1349, 2016). The optimal wavelength to manufacture pre-vitamin D3 in the skin is 297nm, or up to 310-315nm (Chaplin and Jablonski,

2009). Once vitamin D3 is formed, it is converted to 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 in the liver. This is the substance that is measured by doctors to asses an individual’s vitamin D levels. 25- hydroxyvitamin D3 then becomes active when it reaches the kidneys and is converted to 1,25- dihydroxyvitamin D. This active form then travels to the small intestine where it increases the uptake of calcium into the intestines and skeleton when serum levels are low (Holick, 2016).

CHAPTER 3: Methods

The K!OR program presents the evolution of human skin color in such an easy way that even a fifth-grader can understand it. Students learned about a few key players in the natural selection process for human skin color variation: two types of sunlight (harsh and weak), two types of melanin (pheomelanin and eumelanin), two types of nutrients we eat (folate and calcium), and vitamin D. The program enhances rather than disrupts existing Ohio public education curriculum standards and was introduced to children in their normal classroom or library settings. Rather than discussing things in painstaking detail, like the synthesis of vitamin

D, for example, an artist was contacted to draw six images that clearly conveyed basic principles of the vitamin D-folate theory. The program was carried out in hopes that other educators will be encouraged to teach the enlivening evolutionary story of human skin color in their own classrooms and libraries too.

Data was gathered from 126 students in the fifth, sixth and seventh grades, although most participants were fifth-graders. Data collection was mainly performed with students whose education showed a focus on STEM subjects, a commitment to global citizenship, and inquiry- based learning and teaching style. Students came from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds and attended schools that were driven to putting urban students on a path to higher education attainment.

Preparation and planning

Crystal Reedy and Dr. Spurlock completed Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative

(CITI) certificates in 2016 before beginning the study, which is required for all research involving human participants at Kent State University. Approval from the Institutional Review

Board (IRB) of Kent State was obtained on December 21st, 2016 and was renewed on December

20th, 2017. Letters of support were obtained from officials in the Cleveland Public Library system and participating schools prior to the recruitment of participants. No risks were found to be associated with the study and all data collection was void of identifiable information in order to protect the identities of participants. The study was completed and closed in the spring of

2018.

Researchers met with the top library and school officials to discuss the implementation of the program and to address any questions and possible concerns. Meetings were held and research was conducted to determine which grades would benefit most from the program in terms of the curriculum already in place at the research sites. Planning was conducted months in advance and involved further meetings with the teachers whose classrooms would be targeted due to interest and relevance (i.e. health, social studies, language arts and science teachers).

Signed permission slips were required from parents or guardians of participants, as well as verbal assent from students. Recruitment materials and consent forms were given to participating schools and libraries in order to obtain parental permission. Classes were scheduled and taught once the permission forms, signed by both students and parents were received and securely stored. To further protect the identity of students, no audio nor video recordings were taken. Instead, note-takers and observers affiliated with the thesis committee documented comments and reactions from students and noted any errors or omission of information on the part of the presenter.

Quantitative data collection

In order to quantitatively measure how poorly or well students learned basic principles of the material presented to them, a test was designed that could be given to students at the beginning and end of the program (see Appendix A). The test questions were brief and contained only words that were either already in the students’ vocabulary based on curriculum standards or explicitly taught in the K!OR program. K!OR vocabulary terms conveyed to the students included: adaptation, ancestry/ancestors, anthropology, calcium, climate, the idea of

“color blindness,” discrimination, DNA, ethnicity, implicit bias/bias, the concept of fitness, folate, genes and the concept of natural selection, genetic variation, heritable/heredity, melanin, minerals/vitamins, privilege/white privilege, trait, “race”/racism, stereotype, and ultraviolet radiation.

The 8-question test was reviewed by an evaluation specialist at Kent State University to ensure the clarity and validity of the questions (see Appendix A). While questions 1 and 8 were intended to reflect the student’s personal opinions relating to categories of “race,” ethnicity, and identity, questions 2-6 pertained directly to images that were drawn by an artist to help convey the skin color story. The eighth question in particular dealt with whether students believed that an individual could take on multiple categories of “race” and ethnicity as their identity. If children chose “false,” this pointed to a tendency to draw hard lines between different categories of “race” and ethnicity.

Working with existing curriculum

Science curriculum. According to the Ohio Department of Education’s science standards, curriculum for fifth through seventh grade is intended to focus on challenging scientific text, resources and investigations that will lead students to have challenging conversations that will

promote independent and critical thinking, increasingly so as the school years unfold. K!OR lessons present opportunities to think critically and synthesize new information with previous lessons in many different yet interrelated subjects.

While fifth graders are learning about the natural cycles of earth, ecosystems, the solar system, the movement of light and sound, speed, force, mass and energy, by sixth grade students are learning about matter, atoms and molecules. However, it is not until eighth grade that Ohio curriculum standards include heritable traits and DNA transmission from parent to offspring in class subject matter. For this reason, it was of particular importance that we did not cognitively lose the younger students during the K!OR presentations.

Social studies curriculum. The Ohio social studies curriculum standard aims to prepare students to be participating citizens that will make rational and informed decisions in a diverse, democratic society. Ideally, the social studies curriculum enables students to "learn about significant people, places, events and issues in the past in order to understand the present; and fosters students’ ability to act responsibly and become successful problem solvers in an interdependent world of limited resources."

“Race” related issues in social studies generally appears in fourth grade. These lessons focus primarily on the early formation of the USA and Ohio. In fifth grade students are introduced to North and South America in relation to cultural development, economic change, native populations and the impact of European exploration and colonization. In sixth grade students begin studying the Eastern Hemisphere, or Africa, Asia, Australia and Europe. Seventh and eighth grade classes consist of integrated studies of world history that aim to synthesize previously learned coursework. K!OR gave students an opportunity to talk about ideas that

contributed to misconceptions and myths about different “races” of people and how a biological element was introduced into beliefs surrounding these different categories through time.

Health curriculum. Under Ohio law, the State Board of Education is not permitted to adopt Health Education Standards in Ohio, however Ohio’s learning standards do provide a vague framework with a few key subject areas. For K-6 grades, health curriculum includes nutrition and benefits of nutritious foods and physical activity for overall health. Students in

K!OR learn about healthy food that were good sources of folate and calcium and why obtaining such nutrients was important.

Implementing the Program

The first classes were conducted in the Spring of 2016 at libraries in the Cleveland area in order to ensure a satisfactory length of the program and to get feedback from participants, parents and library officials. The library experience showed that students benefited from the program when classes were kept small so that individual questions could be answered. On average, the program contained about 15 students per class.

Classes for fifth grade students lasted approximately an hour and twenty minutes to account for a more extensive explanation of the vocabulary and to allow for more questions to be asked and answered fully. All other students received a fifty-minute class. Data from a total of 8 classes were used, the great majority of which consisted of fifth graders.

Hands-on activities and a PowerPoint presentation were utilized for this program. First, students learned about the historical context dealing with the origin of categories of “race” associated with skin color, discussed basic genetic terminology and participated in hands-on activities. The first activity students participated in was a “traits” activity. Students were asked

if they thought that certain traits corresponded to certain “races” of people and gradually discovered the complexity of categorizing humans based on any given characteristic. Students divided themselves into groups with specific traits, such as the ability to roll one’s tongue, taste

PTC, or the presence of a widow’s peak, and then compared the presence and/or absence of their other traits to their classmates to show the high degree of within-group variation. Students were taught about the high genetic diversity among peoples in the continent of Africa, assumptions about “racial” homogeneity, and learned how and why within-group variation among so-called

“racial” groups is greater than between them.

Dialogue about the wide spectrum of skin color was encouraged at this stage using 30 pictures of people from around the world mounted on poster board with varying skin tones and types. Students were asked about the people in the photos in terms of their assumptions about them, including what “races” they thought people did or did not belong to and why. Students learned vocabulary relating to the social construct of “race,” shared their own experiences, and then learned terms relating to genetics.

After discussion about genetic variation and basic principles of evolution, students were then presented with the evolutionary human skin color story in lecture format within the same

PowerPoint presentation. It was explained that our most ancient human ancestors benefitted from their darker skin colors in the tropics and later, as humans migrated out of the tropics, gene mutations that caused pale skin became beneficial. Six pieces of artwork were designed to help tell the evolutionary story of human skin color during the presentation.

First, folate was introduced to students as an essential B vitamin that helps the human body grow and develop properly. The first image shows “Captain Folate” protecting himself

with a “melanin umbrella” covered in dark, closely clustered dots to represent black-brown eumelanin that protects him from the sun’s ultraviolet radiation, which could destroy him (see Figure 1).

The second image (see Figure 2) depicts “Captain Folate” repairing and Figure 1: A eumelanin umbrella protects Captain Folate from harsh ultraviolet radiation. overseeing the creation of DNA within a cell to highlight the importance of folate’s role in the human body; students learned that without him, and without protection from melanin, things could go terribly wrong. Props, two transparent umbrellas, one with dark dense dots, and one with sparse, reddish-brown dots, were used to tell this story to illustrate how melanin works as an umbrella to block out Figure 2: Captain Folate helps create and mend DNA inside a cell. sunlight, and how this can be a good thing. A food display that represented sources of folate was placed on a table.

After explaining the definition of vitamin D and from where students may get their sources of vitamin D in their own environment, the third image was shown, which depicts a

“vitamin D factory” to demonstrate how ultraviolet radiation stimulates vitamin D production in a metaphorical solar-powered “factory” in our skin (see Figure 3). This image demonstrates how lighter reddish-brown melanin, or pheomelanin, allows for the penetration of more sunlight than

darker, black-brown melanin. It was then explained why this was a good thing for humans in the absence of bright sunlight evolutionarily and why it can also be a bad thing if too much sunlight gets through and causes damage. Thus, it was explained, diversity was a key to success for our early ancestors.

Calcium was then introduced as an important mineral that plays a key role in bone growth. Foods were displayed on a table at the front of the classroom Figure 3: In weak sunlight, pheomelanin helps power the skin’s that were good sources of calcium. The fourth image vitamin D factory. (see Figure 4) depicts calcium being introduced into the intestines by the food we eat and students were directed to take note of the intestinal walls, which absorb calcium into the bloodstream. A locked door that leads to the blood stream is shown. Without a key to open this door, it was explained that calcium could not enter the bloodstream and would instead be excreted. This image is used to emphasize the importance of having vitamin D, or in this case a

Figure 4: Calcium in the intestines is unable enter the bloodstream.

“vitamin D key” so that calcium can leave the guts and enter the blood stream. In Figure 5, a

“vitamin D key” is shown to be unlocking the door, and the connection is made that this is possible because the “factory” was able to get enough sunlight to power its production.

Figure 5: Vitamin D allows calcium to enter the bloodstream.

Students were then asked what would happen if calcium could not enter the blood stream? Students were then given a hands-on activity to demonstrate the importance of calcium in the human body. Calcium is important for the formation of strong bones and without it, bones could become softer and then bend. A strong avian long bone and an identical de-calcified long bone were used in class to show what would happen if calcium were removed from a bone. Children were quite fascinated by the de-calcified bone, which they could bend, twist, and handle. This generated discussion about problems with calcium deficiency and diseases, such as rickets, that could lead to poor growth and development and Figure 6: The Calcium Phosphate Queen lying in a deformation of the pelvis. The last collagen hammock.

image is used to further discuss the importance of nutrition and the process of forming strong bones. It depicts the epitome of strong bones: a “Calcium Phosphate queen” lying in a collagen hammock. While college provides a soft matrix that gives bones their flexibility, calcium phosphate is the mineral that hardens this matrix and gives bones their strength (see Figure 6).

At the end of the PowerPoint presentation, students took their post-test and were then invited to ask questions and talk about how they felt about what they had learned. Did they disagree or agree with the information presented? How did it relate to their real-world experience dealing with categories of “race,” if at all? Did any part of the program surprise them or make them feel uncomfortable? Had they already known some of the material?

After the post-test, students completed a short writing activity called “I Am” poems, which many teachers use today to encourage students to share personal attributes of themselves.

The writing of the poems allowed children to focus on what made them unique and highlighted the diversity of personalities and lives within the classroom. Students closed the program by reading their poems aloud to the class, if they chose to do so. Students also experienced a video fade of human faces to draw attention to the diversity of individual physical appearances but also to many similarities. During the video fade one face appeared and another slowly began to fade over top of the original image. Watching this video allowed students to observe the continuum of human skin tones and variously shaped facial features and how they gradually and subtly grade from darkest to lightest, and from wide to narrow shapes. This video fade provided students with a visual representation of the continuum of human diversity discussed during the program that contradicts socially constructed racial categories. After the program, schools and libraries directed children to resources that were available on site for further discussion about

“race” and racism and were given the information of the researchers in case any questions or concerns arose.

CHAPTER 4: Results

Quantitative results

See Appendix A for a copy of the survey given to students. Utilizing IBM SPSS computer software, a non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test was performed on question 1 results to assess paired differences. Related-samples McNemar tests were performed on all other questions. All test questions show a statistically significant difference between pre and post-test scores, which reflects positively on the impact of the K!OR program in terms of students learning the key scientific concepts. The results of the McNemar tests all show a high statistical significance of less than .001, apart from question 4 (sig= .039) and question 8 (sig.= .015).

Table 1: Question 1, “How easy is it to tell apart difference "races" of people?”

Results of question 1 (see Table 1) show an increase in uncertainty in being able to place someone in a “racial” category based on their appearance. In the pre-test results for this question, the median answer was “kind of easy” vs. “kind of hard” in the post-test results. A total of 106 students increased their scores toward “very hard” end of the Likert scale in terms of being able to determine the “race” of a given individual and 20 students had no change in opinion between their pre and post-test. On average, students shifted their Likert scale answers

towards the more difficult end of the spectrum by about 1.3 points. See Table 2 for results for the rest of the survey questions.

Table 2: Questions 2-8 results by percentage.

While only 40% of students answered question 2 correctly in the pre-test, 95% answered correctly in the post-test, identifying vitamin D deficiency with “bendy” bones. In questions 3 and 4, children made a connection between a sunny climate and having darker skin more easily than they did between a gloomy climates and having pale skin. In the pre-tests, about 81% of students correctly identified the pale-skinned figure as having ancestors from a gloomy climate vs. about 93% of students that identified the dark-skinned figure as having ancestors from a climate with bright sunlight. About 96% of students correctly identified the pale-skinned figure with the gloomy climate in their post-test vs. just over 98% of students that identified the dark- skinned figure with a sunnier climate. Question 3 required that students identify the pale- skinned figure with a gloomy climate while question 4 required association of the darker-skinned figure with a bright and sunny climate. Students generally made the connection between bright sunlight and dark skin color relatively easily on both tests.

Question 5 pertaining to the destruction of folate garnered a highly significant score as well. Whereas about 12% of students answered correctly in the pre-test, 92% scored correctly in the post-test. The second most popular answer in the post-test was vitamin D. The extreme quantity of correct answers in the post-test for question 6 may in part be due to the way the

question was written. The correct answer is nestled amongst other possible answers (i.e. vitamins E, K, and E) that were not discussed during the program, students may have been led to choose the correct answer, vitamin D, more easily. The second most popular answer, vitamin E, was mentioned by a few students that had been familiarized with it in their daily lives, whether through topical creams or supplements.

For question 7, a large portion of students (83%) did not think that pale skin resulted from a genetic mutation in the pre-test. In the post-test, 19% of students still did not associate pale skin with a genetic mutation. Before intervention, student opinions of the word “mutation” in general seemed to have a negative connotation, or a more magical one, such as a mutation associated with superheroes like Spiderman. It is unclear if students maintained this view after the program. Post-test results of question 8 showed that most students again felt that it could be possible for someone to identify as Arab, African American, and Caucasian. Discussion about how a person could be judged as a different “race” depending on which culture or individual they were being judged by, about the difference between ethnicity and “race,” and discussion about the rule of hypodescent in the U.S. all could have played roles in this decision in the post-test.

The students generally felt that an individual had the right to define themselves in both tests.

Qualitative results

While the quantitative results proved that students, at least initially, understood the roles of folate, calcium, vitamin D and sunlight in the human skin color story, the qualitative results highlighted an even greater yet more abstract benefit. Towards the beginning of the program, students were asked to say anything they would like about “race,” what these categories meant to them, what their experience had been with “race” or racism, and where they thought skin color variation “came from.” They were also encouraged to comment on the vocabulary they learned

and relate them to their own experiences. The following events are told from the perspective of the presenter, Crystal Reedy.

Generally, children that participated in the program felt that the information they learned in the program was more fulfilling and less confusing than their previous knowledge about skin color. Students were also eager to share their personal knowledge in relation to specific vocabulary words, particularly “stereotypes” and “biases.” In one explanation of the definition of a “stereotype,” one boy stood up confidently and flexed his muscles and declared, “I’m a jock!” He then relaxed and put on his rather large glasses and said, “Now I’m not.” In one scenario students were asked to picture a farmer. What did that farmer look like? “He’s got a big straw hat and is chewing on a piece of… straw!” “He’s got a pitchfork!” “Overalls! Wait… those are the things farmers wear, right?” “No! Those are suspenders!” A wild cacophony of impersonations of “farmers” ensued. When asked if I could be a farmer, the students looked at me for a moment, a 26-year-old pale-skinned woman with a patterned scarf, curly hair pulled back in a bun, wearing jewelry. The general consensus was that I was definitely not a farmer. I expressed that I grew up on a farm and that I like to grow my own food and have done farm work. One girl remarked, “She could be a farmer I guess, she just doesn’t look like one.” I then asked the class why they assumed that farmers were all old men with ragged clothes and why, when asked, some of them said that they did not see “black” farmers. As one student put it,

“People are just trying to trick us into thinking we can’t be certain things, but we can do anything.” I asked if this trickery was working on them. A few uneasy “no…” responses filled the much quieter room amongst a few more emphatic “no way!” responses.

At the beginning of another class, a male student with pale skin enthusiastically revealed

[in a more private interaction while I was collecting surveys] that his dad “says that we come

from monkeys… but not all of us!” This comment was acknowledged but not prodded extensively. The boy seemed excited to be able to share his knowledge of the topic but also seemed a bit unsure. I responded, “What a very strange and interesting idea. What do you think that means?” The student acknowledged that it was a “funny” idea and that he did not make much sense of it. This response was good because it showed that the student was already questioning this ridiculous, and likely highly racist, notion. Again I responded, “We are going to learn an even better and real story about where we all came from!” He replied, “I’m excited!”

There was much to learn, and he was excited to finally be learning it.

Upon the start of the presentation in this same class, a hand confidently raised from the other side of the room in response to the prompt of stereotypes: “People don’t believe that I can play cello.” I urged her to continue, “…and why do you think people think that? Who thinks this?” She responds, slightly shaking her head, “I don’t know… my friends… adults… I don’t think they know black girls play in orchestras… and I’m really good!” Another voice whispers from somewhere in the class “Yeah, we play in orchestra together,” as if to affirm her truth.

Later in class one of her friends told the girl that she was sorry that people thought those things about her as if she had only just realized that her friend had to deal with feelings relating to that particular discrimination, and that very well may have been the case.

The most spectacular part of this interaction with these two students was what transpired at the close of the program when students were scrambling to clean up the room and go home.

The boy mentioned above had made his way to the other side of the room where the girl was putting on her backpack and collecting her things. Looking at his arm, and then at hers, and then back at his own, he said, “You have pretty skin.” While educators cannot control what students absorb from their environment, when students are presented with logical information and

evidence, they are empowered to question the messages they are given and to lead the way in their own education. While this story does not mean that these children will grow up free from the consequences of racist ideology, it is a respectable and important step towards fruitful conversations and healthy attitudes pertaining to skin color.

CHAPTER 5: The importance of the skin color narrative

“Race,” in-groups and out-groups (unavoidably) on the brain

Overall, Americans are not good at talking about “race” and skin color. As mentioned in the introduction, citizens have pushed it so far as to promote “color blindness” in order to avoid the important issues and struggles affecting the lives of our children. However, simply not discussing “race” and racism will not make any human immune from the reality that our brains continue to at least note skin color and categorize based on our enculturated experiences. This chapter discusses evidence that shows that for the average person, being exposed to bias or developing bias pertaining to skin color and “race” is largely unavoidable, and this starts at a very young age.

Anti-racism rather than race-blindness is a realistic key to true change. Most of those who claim to be “color blind” assert that they are immune from racially discriminating because they do not “see” skin color. The “color blind” ideology was important to the vision of the Civil

Rights Movement, exemplified in the hopes of Dr. Martin Luther King that one day people would be judged “by the content of their character” rather than their skin color. This did not mean, however, that the history of the United States would simply allow for all its citizens to become immune to the consequences of hundreds of years of slavery and racist ideology at once.

While the idea of being able to simply treat everyone equally is a nice one to think about, and maybe even in some respects a well-intentioned goal for our society, our current reality is much more nuanced.

Color blindness has deprived us of a framework and language to create an equality-based society that informed Americans idealize. Conversations about melanin, ancestry, the cultural construct of “race” and racism should be normalized with our children “rather than undermining their possibilities,” (Berry, 2017). Instead of ignoring skin color, Americans need to be promoting the importance of its diversity and demonstrating its power both in terms of its evolutionary and biological significance and its sociopolitical context. We also need to be teaching children that these conversations call for courage:

“As early as kindergarten, without the time to explore social justice and courage, children will find it more difficult to grasp big ideas relating to ‘race’ and racism… healthy discussion about skin color and race leads students to engage with these themes and facilitates conversations about who has actual, legitimate power, who is right and wrong, fair and unfair, and allows students to identify ‘changemakers’ in a contextualized, historical story… We must give teaching about race and racism the same attention and time that we give other core subjects. Building community, especially a global community as our responsibility as global citizens, doesn’t begin with ignoring conversations about the differences that surround our young students,” (Rogin, 2013).

We cannot control what children are exposed to, even when we would like to think that we can provide some filters. Children will learn one way or another about skin color, “race,” and racism, and they will pick up on cues from their experience and environment. It is therefore especially disconcerting to note that white supremacist propaganda is on the rise. The way white supremacists spread misinformation online and via more implicit propaganda placed in public areas today maximizes online and media attention while protecting individuals and allowing ideology to slip into communities relatively unchallenged (Schwartz, 2019). In her book,

Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism, Safiya Umoja Noble refers to the Internet as a sort of unregulated social experiment that creates and normalizes systematic and

structural isolation. Noble cites examples of digital redlining that reinforces oppression.

Recently, Google’s auto-tagging and facial recognition technology designed to improve search results began recognizing African American faces as apes and monkeys and searching the “N- word” led to a map of the White House and a photoshopped picture of Michelle Obama with an ape’s face covering hers. Google responded that they were working to fix the issue (Noble,

2018).

Social scientists began researching the behavioral and neurological development of bias and “category activation” in the 1950s. The goal was to find out how racial prejudice and stereotypes developed in the mind and how these biases endured well into adulthood (Macrae &

Bodenhausen, 2000). Categorization activation, or one’s ability to put people and things into categories on a repeatable basis (Aarts and Dijksterhuis, 2002), is normal in the human brain but the results of an intellectual void of information can be grim, as it will be filled. One study states, that drive children have to understand the world they live in “is manifested in their tendency to classify natural and non-natural stimuli into categories, and to search the environment for cues about which of the great number of potential bases for categorization are important,” (Bigler & Liben, 2006, abstract).

Children can develop ideas about STEM and science professions as early as first or second grade, such as what gender of person can or cannot do a certain STEM job. This occurs particularly with computer sciences and robotics. Because of this propensity to develop STEM biases, which can result in female students not having the confidence to be involved in such subjects, some schools are taking action by introducing children of all backgrounds to robotics and computer sciences through hands-on computer and robotics activities that are kid-friendly.

If schools are combatting gender biases as such, why can’t notions of white supremacy be

combatted by debunking them with the K!OR narrative of human skin color? bias can be reduced by meaningful experiences with a diverse group of people, why can’t we talk about the importance of human variation in school and encourage a heightened appreciation for diversity?

In 2013 Madeleine Rogin, a diversity/inclusion consultant, freelance writer and kindergarten teacher at The Prospect Sierra School in California wrote an article entitled “What if we taught kids about skin color and racism like we teach math?” She highlights the confusion that can result from kids suddenly being confronted with the history of “race” and the complex issues caused by racism without having had the opportunity to engage in discussion, and how this lack of opportunity can lead to students being disinterested or intimidated by this subject matter later in life. Meanwhile, richly pigmented students may experience “race”-related stress that can cause real and severe psychological distress that is even more significant than other stressful life events, and this can affect one’s optimism, ego, and resilience (Utsey, et al., 2008).

Being able to recognize an individual for more than just their appearance is important even for babies, as Paul Quinn’s studies (previously mentioned) suggest. Beginning at about 6 months old, babies start to perceive differences in skin color and hair. Research suggests that when children see people as individuals instead of homogenous “races,” their bias may decrease.

Quinn’s research team concluded that personal, meaningful interactions at a young age with diverse people help counteract the process of forming stereotypes (Xiao et al, 2014). In fact, research has shown that exposure to former president Barack Obama through the media, particularly directly after his election, positively impacted the academic performance of young

“black” Americans (Marx, 2009) and reduces implicit bias (Columb and Plant, 2010). If bias can be reduced by perceptual means, introducing children to the skin color narrative that allows them to visualize the “sepia rainbow” of human skin color, as Dr. Jablonski refers to it, in which

diverse role models lie on and which they can see themselves within may be a very healthy decision.

When children begin talking, they may begin experiencing something called a “loyal member effect” where children as young as three express preference for their own in-group members. More specifically, they prefer those who exclusively engage with their in-group and they begin to show disfavor for other groups (Castelli, 2007). By the ages of 4 to 6 years old, children may take it a bit further by associating positive attributes with people that look like themselves and negative ones with people that do not. Some parents panic when a child enquires or notes a skin color difference and respond with misleading explanations for the cause of skin color. Lucretia Berry reports hearing parents explain how exposure to chocolate milk or how

God left some people in the oven too long resulted in skin color diversity in her TEDx talk

(Berry, 2017). This can lead children to think that some people were mistakes, or can lead them to come up with their own explanation for differences (and there is no shortage of information, whether right, wrong, or just downright racist) based on information that is fed to them throughout their daily experiences and in the media. When a child asks an important question, we must respond with an equally important answer and that answer should not come in the form of falsehoods.

Research conducted at New York University by Elizabeth Phelps used functional magnetic resonance imaging to uncover an interconnected network of brain regions in pale- skinned individuals that show more activity when perceiving a picture of someone with dark skin, or someone considered to be “black.” Specifically, this network includes the fusiform gyrus (linked to processing color and facial recognition), amygdala (governs emotions), and the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), which are a bit

more complex in terms of their processing abilities. The ACC has been associated with conflict management and resolution while the DLPFC has been linked to sophisticated social judgment and more complex mental processes (Sapolsky, 2017).

A study from a team of researchers led by Mahzarin Banaji from Yale and Harvard

Universities noted that the response to “out-group” faces depended upon how long the perceiver had to view the pictures. When pictures of people perceived to be of an “out-group” or other

“race” were shown for a time of 30 milliseconds, activity in the fusiform gyrus and the amygdala was significant but not in the ACC or the DLPFC. In contrast, when shown these pictures for

525 milliseconds, such activity in the amygdala was not present whereas the ACC and DLPFC experienced heightened activity, which may be the brain’s way of coming to more rational conclusions about the faces it is perceiving after being given more time to process it. It is significant that “out-group” faces seem to trigger more complex brain activity than with “ingroup” faces, (Cunningham et al., 2004). The shorter flash of these images may be too quick for you to even feel like you know what you just saw, but your brain processes it anyway. This lowered brain activity in the ACC and DLPFC could reflect the perceiver’s momentary inability to see out-group members as individuals. In other words, their brain is promoting the homogeneity of the out-group, which can contribute to poor memory relating to “racial” out- group members and harmful implicit evaluations (Sapolsky, 2017).

Robert Sapolsky explains how the brain works in a more deadly scenario where someone must make a decision whether or not to shoot a possibly unarmed individual: “There’s a shortcut from the thalamus directly to the amygdala, such that while the first few layers of, say, the visual cortex are futzing around with unpacking a complex image, the amygdala is already thinking,

“That’s a gun!” and reacting; information reaches the amygdala fast but is often inaccurate. It

thinks it knows what it’s seeing before the frontal cortex slams on the brakes; an innocent man reaches for his wallet and dies,” (Sapolsky, p. 114, 2017).

There is however one group of people that has been found to be seemingly incapable of racial stereotyping. In 2010 a study was published that investigated children with Williams syndrome. Williams syndrome (WS) occurs when various genes on one copy of a particular chromosome are deleted. People with WS can have a host of health issues, experience mental delay, have feeding issues as children, problems understanding numbers and spatial reasoning, and struggle with abstract thought among other issues. People with WS are remarkable in many ways. People that have WS are markedly friendly; they do not show social fear towards strangers. Children with WS were shown to lack the ability to racially discriminate but retained the ability to stereotype based on gender in one study conducted in 2010. The findings indicate that gender bias is disassociated from racial bias and point to processing social fear as having an important role in racial stereotyping, specifically (Santos et al., 2010).

Helping children learn about evolution through skin color

In some areas, teaching about evolution and about skin color with young children have similar challenges in that opinions can be veiled in insecurity of teaching about these topics.

The Butler Act, passed in Tennessee in 1925, prohibited public school teachers from teaching the theory of evolution in place of the biblical Christian account of human creation. Seeking public attention on the matter, the American Civil Liberties Union sought out teachers that claimed that they had taught evolution regardless of the act, including substitute biology teacher John T. Scopes. In 1925, Scopes agreed to be tried and was charged after an 8-day trial for violating the act. The trial had an on-site reporter that broadcasted updates of the case on the radio and drew national attention. It was dubbed the “monkey trial” after public uproar that

resulted from the idea that scientists were trying to teach that humans came from monkeys, and that humans were no better than other animals. Throughout the 1920s and 1930s, references to evolution were removed from biology textbooks. Into the 1960s, Christian lobbyists were able to control major publishing companies in terms of the science material they presented in textbooks (Shapiro, 2013). After the trial, challenges to the teaching of evolution began to rise, suggesting that supporters of evolution failed to connect with students at the classroom level, and today we still face backlash against teaching evolution (Lord and Marino, 1993).

Evolutionary theory is important for children to learn early on in their academic career in that it serves as a contextualized, cohesive narrative that ties together other concepts of life sciences. It is important that educators provide the information students need to recognize and critically analyze both evolutionary and anti-evolutionary conversations when they encounter them. But many doubts surround the importance of teaching it and some studies show that even when students are provided with the evolution education they need, they show resistance to learning it (PLOS, 2017).

One researcher commented on the scarcity of studies relating to how kids learn, or rather do not learn, evolutionary subject matter: “The lack of secondary evolution education studies may be due to difficulties receiving approval by Institutional Review Boards at universities or within school systems, or may be due to the preference of university researchers to use a convenient sample of students on campus,” (Hermann, 2011). Therefore, it seems that many researchers avoid the extra work it takes to work with younger students, which is more likely where the problem begins rather than in high school or college where many studies currently focus.

In an article for the journal, Evolution: Education and Outreach, Ronald Hermann comments,

“An argument could be made that the combined effect of societal factors, including the

media, has led to a general portrayal of science and religion in conflict with one

another… Often, the perceived contentious nature of evolution education is evident in

the science classroom as students and parents express concern with the teaching of

evolutionary concepts. As a result, evolution educators are given the difficult task of

educating all students, when some students are reluctant learners of evolution,”

(Hermann 2011).

Increasing difficulty in separating biology from the social construct of “race” may result from a general lack of understanding of evolution. In fact, by the time students reach college, their views are generally Lamarkian in nature and they may fail to distinguish between terms such as adaptation, mutation or fitness (Lord and Marino, 1993; Stover and Mabry 2007).

Lamarkism refers to the idea that within a single lifetime, an organism can pass on characteristics that they have acquired through use or disuse to their offspring. This issue may be managed with a meaningful, more informed narrative to put evolution into context. The human skin color story is a perfect narrative in this regard.

CHAPTER 6: Discussion of results

Teaching genetics before evolution

One study published in May of 2017 in the open access journal PLOS Biology found a method of teaching that significantly increased student understanding of evolution. The study boasts a simple, cost-free technique to improve students' understanding of evolution at the secondary level: teach genetics before you teach them evolution,” (Mead et al., 2017). The researchers conducted a large controlled trial of almost 2000 students aged 14-16 in 78 classes from 23 schools across the south and south west of the UK. Teachers were asked to teach genetics before evolution or evolution before genetics.

In general, teaching genetics and evolution increased understanding of the subject, regardless of what order they were taught in. But because core concepts of genetics such as

DNA and mutation are so interlinked with core concepts of evolution, by teaching genetics to students before evolution, student understanding increased 7% beyond the increase seen if a teacher taught evolution before genetics. For students of “lower ability,” an increase in understanding of evolution was seen only when genetics was taught first. The study notes that teaching genetics before teaching evolution “does not, however, result in a significantly increased acceptance of evolution, which reflects a weak correlation between knowledge and acceptance of evolution. Qualitative focus group data highlights the role of authority figures in determination of acceptance,” (PLOS, 2017).

Following the success of the aforementioned study, K!OR primed students with genetics vocabulary before presenting the evolutionary story of human evolution. This may have contributed to such significant test results. K!OR participants were first given an outline of basic genetics and vocabulary words, like DNA and mutation, and then used them to discuss the evolutionary skin color narrative. Students were able to have meaningful discussions about genetic variation in their own families and among classmates and how that variation visibly occurred at greater frequency within groups than between groups. Then, they were able to recognize different courses of evolution in lighter skin vs. darker skinned individuals and discuss how the skin color diversity we see today was a good thing for all humans using the vocabulary provided to them. Students of many demographic and educational backgrounds did not reject learning about evolution and were instead excited to learn about their own skin color story.

Further studies are needed to determine what knowing the evolutionary skin color story has on the learning and/or acceptance of evolution.

Introducing students to the evolutionary story of human skin color in the way that K!OR has could help give teachers the confidence they need to teach about genetics and evolution.

Educators do not need to research complex genetic studies nor do they need to understand every evolutionary research paper written about human evolution to explain to their students how

“race” is not biological. The biological lessons taught in K!OR are ones that can be learned in a relatively short amount of time.

Avoidance of teleological language

Another possible reason this program was able to communicate such complex evolutionary material may lie in the natural avoidance of using teleological language. Many studies relating to biological education have shown that students harbor teleological

misconceptions that are resistant to change (Galli and Meinardi, 2010). Galli and Meinardi

(2010) point out that children are prone to a ‘promiscuous teleology’ in which they see all living things as existing in order to fulfill a specific purpose, and that these studies were rarely cited in the domain of education. More recently the debate about the avoidance of teleology has begun to heat up again in the face of a national issue in which students are still entering college with a poor understanding of evolutionary processes and a resistance to learning about it.

A study published in the Journal of College Biology Teaching in 2007 concluded that

“[I]nstruction that incorporated historical context and avoided teleological language improved student understanding of Darwin's concept of natural selection,” (Stover and Mabry, 2007, abstract). Teleology has been a recurring problem in evolutionary biology (Ruse, 2009) and its misleading use in teaching evolution has been hotly debated:

“The teleology implicit in the metaphor of natural selection subtly permeates many of the

most basic concepts of evolutionary biology, including, most prominently, the concepts

of adaptation and fitness. I believe that this implicit teleology has led to many of the

numerous objections to the theory over the years. Moreover, and most importantly, this

teleology is entirely unnecessary, and does not contribute anything to our understanding

of the evolutionary process; instead, it often makes us think we have explained a

phenomenon when we have in fact merely restated the case in different terms,” (Reis,

2011, p. 4).

Combatting a resistance to learning about evolution

Despite efforts by some high school teachers to effectively provide their students with an understanding of evolution, American students still may maintain a dismal understanding of

evolution well into college and into their adult lives (Deniz et al. 2008; Lord and Marino 1993;

Moore and Cotner 2009; Sager 2008; see also Miller et al., 2006). Struggles to teach evolution in schools continue to this day and did not end with recent rulings like the one in 2010 during the

Association of Christian Schools International et al. v. Roman Stearns et al. where students of the Calvary Chapel Christian School (an evangelical Protestant school) sued the University of

California system after university officials found that science classes being taught at the Calvary

Chapel were not teaching evolution effectively, if at all. It was determined that the university system’s policy was not unconstitutional. In 2013 alone, about a dozen states saw challenges to teaching evolution in their school boards and legislatures (Doyle, 2019).

The seeming resistance to learning about evolution is not always simply due to religious beliefs or the views held by caretakers of students; the issue is much more complex (Berkman and Plutzer, 2012; Colburn and Henriques 2006; Moore 2004). This trend persists despite an expansive list of both religious organizations and scientific organizations who have promoted the teaching of evolution (see Sager 2008). A study in 1990 showed that whether or not students received a quality evolution education they still misused the terms “adapt” and “fitness” in the context of an everyday language sense rather than within a scientific context of evolution

(Bishop and Anderson, 1990). Results also showed that only 31% of students with two or more previous years of instruction of biology showed any scientific conception of evolution at all. This is why it is important to put vocabulary words like those that were used in K!OR presentations into a more meaningful context starting at an earlier age.

Some studies suggest there is not a relationship between acceptance of evolution and understanding of evolution (Bishop and Anderson 1990; Lord and Marino 1993; Sinatra et al. 2003), while others suggest there may be a link between acceptance and understanding

(Deniz et al. 2008; Johnston and Peeples 1987; Rutledge and Warden 2000). Whether or not there is a connection, this information points to a need for a sequential, systemic approach where the teaching of evolution starts in elementary school (Hermann, 2011).

One would think that resistance to learning about evolution in general, coupled with the tensions surrounding discussions of skin color would be potentially disastrous, but this is not the case, especially when these lessons happen early in a child’s development rather than later. The human skin color story answers meaningful questions about things for which children have always been asking and genuinely want (and need) to know. Despite differential learning and understanding of evolution, the way the human skin color story was conveyed in K!OR naturally provided an interesting and easy-to-follow narrative that encompassed the concept of natural selection, which served as a mechanism to explain the evolutionary process whether students were well-learned on the subject of evolution or not.

Alternative educational programming

More and more, teachers and parents are turning to programs outside of school to fill gaps in their child’s learning. However, programs like those during the summer can be inaccessible or unreasonable to many parents, whether monetarily or in terms of the time commitment they require. Some science camps can be important in the fight to dismantle racism in education. Many of these programs, however, could benefit from the addition of evolutionary lessons on the origin of human skin color. Further, sometimes educators and parents are not provided with the resources they need nor do they feel that they have time to reach out to more extensive programs, although the important resources these programs may provide and put online for public use is invaluable.

In 2016 an initiative at Harvard Graduate School of Education in conjunction with

Reimagining Integration: the Diverse and Equitable Schools created curriculum entitled

“Dismantling Racism.” Biweekly, block-session lessons deal with “identity, perspective, privilege, oppression, and activism,” (Anderson, 2017).

“We can't assume that children will learn this later and be okay… Kids get it, even as

little as the first grade. They are more likely to understand than most adults, especially

white adults, where the socialization has been that if you mention race, it might get you in

trouble,” says Principal Mary Anton of Bowman Elementary School in Lexington,

Massachusetts, the school which has introduced the Dismantling Racism curriculum

(Anderson, 2017).

Another program, Teaching Evolution through Human Examples (TEtHE), is a three-year exploratory research and development project headed by the Smithsonian Institution that is designed to assess how teaching human evolution in different ways will affect, not just the understanding and learning of evolution of students, but teaching itself. TEtHE, however, primarily focusses on high school AP biology teachers and students, although the project does offer some helpful activities for students in the 5th and 6th grades. Over the course of three years the TEtHE project reached over 100 AP biology teachers, or about 2000 AP Biology students. At the end of the project, the resources were made readily available online for use and were displayed at national conferences and in national publications with the ultimate goal of bettering

AP biology curriculum on a national level. The project was intended as a model of how to approach the teaching of scientific topics that intersect religious, ethical, and societal concerns.

In 1985 the DNA Learning Center (DNALC) on Long Island, NY, created summer science camps, which have since reached over twenty thousand sixth through twelfth grade students at four campuses. The DNALC is “the world’s first science center devoted entirely to genetics education,” according to their website. Each summer the DNALC offers camps for students interested in various sciences that are taught by experienced instructors. Participants have access to laboratory equipment and computer technology needed for scientific experiments that are “several grade levels ahead of their peers." Children learn about the evolution of skin color here and many more valuable lessons about genetics and human diversity.

Research shows unequal access to summer camps and after-school activities can have negative impacts on student learning and test scores. The effects are so commonly recognized that some refer to this phenomenon as “summer learning loss,” (Atteberry and McEachin, 2016).

One way to begin solving this issue relating to science education specifically, is to introduce lessons typically reserved for outside programs, such as the evolutionary story of human skin color, directly into normal classroom curriculum.

CHAPTER 7: Conclusion

The “new” racism is implicit. Supported by the idea of “color blindness” and the idea that our society is an equal-opportunity meritocracy, systematic and structural racism is avoided in discourse, defended, and allowed to persist. It is imperative that our educational system find comprehensive and systematic ways of teaching about “race” as a social construct and its very real implications that affect our children daily. Teaching the human skin color story is only a small part this journey, but it is an important piece, and one of the easiest pieces to implement.

Most teachers and parents approach talking about “race” by focusing on skin color.

Afterall, skin color has become rather synonymous with “race” in the United States. This means that whoever is doing the teaching must know enough to teach how and why “race” is not biological. Kids! On Race serves as an example of how easy it can be to equip ourselves with the intellectual toolkit we need to be able to demonstrate how “race” is not biological. Rather than an entirely new curriculum, K!OR was designed as a story consisting of a curated set of captivating facts, artistically rendered and presented, dealing with the evolution of human skin color that make things understandable to young children and people who may not even be interested in the topic initially. The story creates the desire to learn more.

While summer camps and alternative programs offer incredible advantages to participants, many teachers are not aware of these resources, do not feel comfortable introducing such material into their classroom, or cannot get access to such resources. A program such as

Kids! On Race may be an alternative for elementary school teachers who wish to enhance their lesson plans easily and independently. Clearly, programs like those designed by the DNALC and the Human Genome Project are superior in terms of their resources and time devoted to students, yet K!OR serves as a class that can be easily introduced into virtually any school and taught by any teacher that is willing to learn the material themselves.

The evolutionary story of human skin color as told in Kids! On Race avoids teleological and oversimplified, misleading explanations for human skin color differences. The story connects with individuals on a personal level and generates genuine interest in the subject and leads people to question the arbitrary nature of socially constructed “racial” categories. It also serves as an effective narrative to illustrate evolutionary processes, such as natural selection, that have historically been problematic in academia. This story can help demystify myths of white supremacy and myths about so-called biological “races” that can lead to the formation of ingrained, harmful stereotypes, and promotes a positive perception of natural human skin color variation.

Educators can use the evolutionary story of human skin color to have needed conversations about human diversity and the social constructs that surround it. While a lot of us may have been brought up with the idea that all social conflict should be eradicated or maybe just avoided, conflict is a part of life. We owe it to ourselves and to children to tell the truth when it comes to the nature of human skin color both socially and scientifically. We are wearing a beautiful and intriguing part of our ancestry, our skin, and it should be discussed and honored as such. In the book, How Real is Race?, it states, “Culture is powerful… so is society. But we are not cultural robots, blindly internalizing and reproducing culture. We are individuals, we do have agency, we can think about, challenge, reject, reform, reinvent aspects of culture,”

(Mukhopadhyay, 2014, p. 106). Kids! On Race demonstrates how easy it can be to discuss skin color differences with children; there is no reason to avoid discussing evolution nor “race” with children, no reason to spread falsehoods of “color blindness.” Cultures create our own personal versions of reality and transform us whether we are consciously aware of it or not. This is after all how our species has survived (Mukhopadhyay, p. 106, 2014). Eradicating bogus notions of white supremacy in the entire country may be a bit much to ask of this study, but changing one mind at a time, a mind that could be the future teacher that students need, surely is not. Children want to learn, and we owe them a better education.

REFERENCES

Anderson, J. (2017, August 28). Confronting Racism at an Early Age. Retrieved January 5, 2019,

from https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/uk/17/08/confronting-racism-early-age

Atteberry, A., & McEachin, A. (2016). School’s out: Summer learning loss across grade levels

and school contexts in the United States today. In Alexander, K., Pitcock, S., &

Boulay, M. (Eds). Summer learning and summer learning loss, pp. 35-54. New York:

Teachers College Press.

Baron, A. S., and M. R. Banaji, 2006. The development of implicit attitudes: Evidence of race

evaluations from ages 6 and 10 and adulthood. Psychological Science, 17(1): 53-58.

Bell, J. M., & Hartmann, D. (2007). Diversity in Everyday Discourse: The Cultural Ambiguities

and Consequences of “Happy Talk”. American Sociological Review 72, 895-914.

Bennett, C. (2000). Racial categories used in the decennial censuses, 1790 to the present.

Government Information Quarterly, 17(2): 161-180.

Berkman, M., and Plutzer, E. (2012). An evolving controversy: the struggle to teach science in

science classes. American Educator. Summer 2012 edition.

Berry, L. (2017). Children will light up the world if we don’t keep them in the dark. Retrieved

from: http://tedxcharlotte.com/2017/10/13/live-lucretia-berry/

Bigler, R.S. & Liben, L.S. (2006). A developmental intergroup theory of social stereotypes and

prejudice [abstract]. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 34: 39-89.

Bower, C., and F. J. Stanley. 1989. Dietary folate as a risk factor for neural tube defects:

Evidence from a case-control study in Western Australia. Medical Journal of

Australia, 150: 613-619.

Boxmeer, J. C., et al. (2009). Low folate in seminal plasma is associated with increased sperm

DNA damage. Fertility and Sterility, 92(2): 548-556.

Brahler, E. (2018). Hypovitaminosis D and Associated Mortality Within the Hamann-Todd

Human Osteological Collection. (Electronic Thesis or Dissertation). Retrieved from

https://etd.ohiolink.edu/

Branda, R., & Eaton, J. (1978). Skin color and nutrient photolysis: An evolutionary

hypothesis. Science, 201(4356): 625-626.

Castelli, L., De Amicis, L., Sherman, S.J., (2007). The loyal member effect: on the preference for

ingroup members who engage in exclusive relations with the ingroup. Developmental

Psychology, 43: 1347-1359.

Chaplin G, Jablonski N. G. (2009). Vitamin D and the evolution of human depigmentation.

American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 139(4): 451-461.

Chow-White, P. A., Green Jr., S. E. (2013). Data Mining Difference in the Age of Big Data:

Communication and the Social Shaping of Genome Technologies from 1998 to 2007.

International Journal of Communication, 7, 556.

Clemens, T. L., et al. 1982. Increased skin pigment reduces the capacity of skin to synthesise

vitamin D3. Lancet, 1(8263): 74-76.

Cochran-Smith, M., Gleeson, A. M., & Mitchell, K. (2010). Teacher Education for Social

Justice: What’s Pupil Learning Got to Do With It? Berkeley Review of

Education, 1(1): 35-61.

Coleman S. (2011). Addressing the puzzle of race. Journal of Social Work Education, 47, 91-

108.

Columb, C., and E. A. Plant. 2010. Revisiting the Obama Effect: Exposure to Obama reduces

implicit prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(2): 499-501.

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.

Phycological Science, 15(12).

Doyle, E. (2019). The role of religion in public policy. New York: Greenhaven Publishing. pp

79-82.

Freire, P., Macedo, D. P., Koike, D. A., & Oliveira, A. (2006). Teachers as cultural workers:

Letters to those who dare teach. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Gasque, P., & Jaffar-Bandjee, M. C. (2015). The immunology and inflammatory responses of

human melanocytes in infectious diseases. Journal of Infection, 71(4), 413-421.

Giroux, H. A., (1985). Teachers as transformative intellectuals. Social Education, 49(5): 376-79.

Guest, K. J. (2017). Cultural anthropology: A toolkit for a global age. New York, NY: W.W.

Norton & Company.

Hardin, C. D, & Banji, M. R. (2010). The nature of implicit prejudice: implications for personal

and public policy. In E. Shafir (Ed.), Policy Implications of Behavioral Research.

Healy E. (2004, Dec 20). Melanocortin 1 receptor variants, pigmentation, and skin cancer

susceptibility. Photodermatology Photoimmunology and Photomedicine, 20(6): 283-

288.

Hermann, R. S. (2011). Breaking the Cycle of Continued Evolution Education Controversy: On

the Need to Strengthen Elementary Level Teaching of Evolution. Evolution:

Education and Outreach, 4(2), 267-274.

Holick, M. F. (2003). Evolution and function of vitamin D. Recent Results in Cancer Research,

164: 3-28.

Jablonski, N. G. (2012). Living color: The biological and social meaning of skin color. Berkeley:

University of California Press.

Johnson, M, (2013). Q&A with Camilla Smith, Newsletter of Leakey Foundation, no. 30

Jones, P., Lucock, M., Veysey, M., Beckett, E., (2018, May). The Vitamin D-Folate Hypothesis

as an Evolutionary Model for Skin Pigmentation: An Update and Integration of

Current Ideas. Nutrients, 10(5): 554.

Kohli, R., Pizarro, M., & Nevárez, A. (2017). The “New Racism” of K–12 Schools: Centering

Critical Research on Racism. Review of Research in Education, 41(1), 182–202.

Kottak, C. P. (2013). Cultural anthropology: Appreciating cultural diversity (15th ed.). Boston:

McGraw-Hill.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishing Co.

Galli, L. M. G., Meinardi, E. N., (2010). The Role of Teleological Thinking in Learning the

Darwinian Model of Evolution. Evolution, 4(1): 145-152.

Lasisi, T., & Shriver, M. D. (2018). Focus on African diversity confirms complexity of skin

pigmentation genetics. Genome Biology, 19(1).

Lord, T., Marino, S., (1993). How university students view the theory of evolution. Journal of

College Science Teaching, 22(6): 353-357.

Mackintosh, J. A. 2001. The antimicrobial properties of melanocytes, melanosomes and melanin

and the evolution of black skin. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 211(2): 101-113.

Marx, D. M. et al. 2009. The ‘Obama Effect’: How a salient role model reduces race-based

performance differences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4): 953-956.

McGarty, C., Yzerbyt, V., & Spears, R. (2002). Stereotypes as explanations: The formation of

meaningful beliefs about social groups. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.

Mead, R., Hejmadi, M., Hurst, L.D. (2017). Teaching genetics prior to teaching evolution

improves evolution understanding but not acceptance. PLOS Biology, 15(5):

e2002255.

Miller JD, Scott EC, Okamoto S., (2006). Public acceptance of evolution. Science, 313: 765–6.

Mukhopadhyay, C., Henze, R. & Moses, Y. (2014). How real is race? : a sourcebook on race,

culture, and biology. Lanham Md: AltaMira Press, a division of Rowman &

Littlefield.

Myrdal, G., et al. (1944). An American dilemma; the Negro problem and modern democracy. (2

Vols.). Oxford, England: Harper.

Nieto, S. (2000). Placing Equity Front and Center. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3): 180-

187.

Pascoe, E. A., & Smart Richman, L. (2009). Perceived discrimination and health: A meta-

analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135(4): 531-554.

Penn State. (2011, February 20). Skin color: Handy tool for teaching evolution? Penn State

News. Retrieved February 19, 2019 from

https://news.psu.edu/story/160633/2011/02/20/research/skin-color-handy-tool-

teaching-evolution

Priest, N., Paradies, Y., Trenerry, B., Truong, M., Karlsen, S., & Kelly, Y. (2013). A systematic

review of studies examining the relationship between reported racism and health and

wellbeing for children and young people. Social Science & Medicine, 95: 115-127.

Race, Ethnicity, and Genetics Working Group (2005, Oct). The use of racial, ethnic, and

ancestral categories in human genetics research. American Journal of Human

Genetics, 77(4): 519-32.

Relethford, J. H. 2000. Human skin color diversity is highest in sub-Saharan African

populations. Human Biology, 72(5): 771-780.

Rodriquez, Clara. 2000. Changing Race: Latinos, the Census, and the History of Ethnicity. New

York: New York University Press.

Rogin, M. (2013, June 26). What if we taught kids about skin color and racism like we teach

math? Retrieved from https://www.good.is/articles/what-if-we-taught-kids-about-skin-

color-and-racism-the-way-we-teach-math

Santos, A, Meyer-Lindenberg A, Deruelle C, (2010, April 13). Absence of racial, but not gender,

stereotyping in Williams syndrome children. Current Biology, 20(7): 307-308.

Schwartz, M. S. (2019, March 06). White Supremacist Propaganda At 'Record-Setting' Levels,

ADL Report Finds. Retrieved from

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/06/700614357/white-supremacist-propaganda-at-record-

setting-levels-adl-report-finds

Shapiro, A. R. (2013). Trying biology: The Scopes trial, textbooks, and the antievolution

movement in American schools. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Sinatra, G. M., Southerland, S. A., McConaughy, F., Demastes, J. W. (2003). Intentions and

beliefs in students' understanding and acceptance of biological evolution. Journal of

Research in Science Teaching, 40: 510–528

Smedley, A., and B. D. Smedley, (2005). Race as biology is fiction, racism as a social problem is

real: Anthropological and historical perspectives on the social construction of race.

American Psychologist, 60(1): 16-26.

Steele, C. M., and J. Aronson, 1995. Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of

African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5): 797-811.

Stover, S. and Mabry, M. (January, 2007). Influences of Teleological and Lamarckian Thinking

on Student Understanding of Natural Selection. Bioscene 33(1).

Tajfel, H., & Wilkes, A. L. (1963). Classification And Quantitative Judgement. British Journal

of Psychology, 54(2): 101-114.

Thong, H.-Y. et al, (2003). The patterns of melanosome distribution in keratinocytes of human

skin as a determining factor of skin colour. British Journal of Dermatology, 149(3):

498-505.

Tishkoff, S. A., & Verrelli, B. C. (2003). Patterns of human genetic diversity: Implications for

human evolutionary history and disease. Annual Review of Genomics and Human

Genetics,4(1), 293-340.

Uday, S., Högler, W. (2017). Nutritional rickets and osteomalacia in the twenty-first century:

revised concepts, public health, and prevention strategies. Current Osteoporosis

Reports, 15(4): 293-302.

Utsey, S. O., Giesbrecht, N., Hook, J., Standard, P. M. (2008). Cultural, sociofamilial, and

psychological resources that inhibit psychological distress in African Americans

exposed to stressful life events and race-related stress. Journal of Counseling

Psychology, 55(1), p. 49-62.

Xiao, W. S., Fu, G., Quinn, P. C., Qin, J., Tanaka, J. W., Pascalis, O., & Lee, K. (2014).

Individuation training with other-race faces reduces preschoolers’ implicit racial bias:

A link between perceptual and social representation of faces in

children. Developmental Science, 18(4), 655-663.

APPENDIX A

K!OR Survey