Young Children's Perceptions Of

Home , Kenneth and Mamie Clark, The Clarks, The Doll (novel)

SHADES OF KNOWLEDGE: YOUNG CHILDREN’S PERCEPTIONS OF RACIAL

ATTITUDES AND PREFERENCES

DISSERTATION

SUBMITTED TO

College of Education

ASHLAND UNIVERSITY

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

The Degree

Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership

Tanzeah S. R. Sharpe, B.A. M.Ed.

ASHLAND UNIVERSITY

ASHLAND, OHIO

2014

©Copyright by

Tanzeah S. Robinson Sharpe

2014

A Dissertation

Entitled

SHADES OF KNOWLEDGE: YOUNG CHILDREN’S PERCEPTIONS OF RACIAL

ATTITUDES AND PREFERENCES

Tanzeah S. Robinson Sharpe

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

The Degree

Doctor of Education in Leadership Studies

______Dr. Judy Alston, Ph.D., Committee Chair Date

______Dr. Rosaire Ifedi, Ed.D., Committee Member Date

______Dr. Sunny Munn, Ph.D., Committee Member Date

______Dr. Judy Alston, Ph.D., Chair, Department of Leadership Studies Date

______Dr. Linda Billman, Ph.D., Dean, College of Education Date

______Dr. W. Gregory Gerrick, Ph.D., Dean, Graduate School Date

Ashland University December 2014

iii

SHADES OF KNOWLEDGE: YOUNG CHILDREN’S PERCEPTIONS OF RACIAL

ATTITUDES AND PREFERENCES

Tanzeah S. Robinson Sharpe

ASHLAND UNIVERSITY, 2014

Dr. Judy Alston, Ph.D.

This study explores the racial attitudes and preferences among 164 children between three and seven years of age. The study is a partial replication of the Clark and Clark (1958) Doll Test which concluded that segregation, along with prejudice and discrimination, caused feelings of inferiority and self-hatred in African-American children. Significant changes to the original doll test are introduced in the current study. This study is based on an embedded mixed method design which utilizes Chi-square, cross-tabulations, and free-choice interviewing. The data were analyzed in response to research questions designed to test the racial attitudes and racial preferences of the participants. The findings of this study concluded that the participants can identify and have an awareness of racial differences, show doll preference, and display positive self-image. Qualitative themes that emerged from the research concluded that the participants liked the doll that looked most like them (or a family member), had a skin tone they liked, or was pretty. Themes associated with why participants did not like the doll that looked like them included skin tone and miscellaneous responses such as facial features and because the doll did not resemble the child’s doll at home. The findings of this study are compared to the results from the Clark and Clark (1958) Doll Test.

DEDICATION

This dissertation is dedicated to my children; Imari, Armani, Alexa, LaMar, Desmond, and Nasir, for their support, patience, and most of all their many sacrifices throughout my educational pursuits. To my starting line-up, words cannot express how proud I am of the young women and men you are becoming. Watching the five of you undertake this journey with me has taught me the true meaning of selfless, unconditional love. There were times when you allowed me to put my writing before games and cheer competitions, brought me tall glasses of ice water during late night typing sessions, and purchased paper and pens with your own money in anticipation of this day. Every text message and phone call, every love note, and every gesture

(no matter how big or small) pushed me closer to my goal. Thank you for cheering me to the end.

Although you are too young to understand this achievement Nasir, mommy wants you to know that you have also played an essential part in my drive towards completion. Your smiles and kisses kept me encouraged while your brief cat naps taught me to utilize my time wisely. My prayer for you and your sisters and brothers is that you will possess the same ambition and enthusiasm in your pursuit towards happiness. You all are my inspiration and the reason behind my determination. With this accomplishment I hope you learn that there is nothing in life you cannot achieve. My love for you reaches to the moon and back!

I also dedicate this dissertation to my parents, Isaiah Robinson and Saundra Robinson

Turpin, who have supported me in everything I do. You have sacrificed many of your own goals so that I could achieve mine and for that I am eternally grateful. Dad, your constant hard work, dedication and commitment to spiritual growth set a solid foundation for me as a little girl upon which I stand today. Mom, you are my best friend, my confidant, and my number one fan. You

saw something in me that I didn’t know existed. Thank you for believing that the dress was in the bag! I am blessed beyond measure to have you as parents and can only hope that one day I will be as great of a parent to my own children as you are and have been to me.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to the children who participated in the study for sharing their knowledge and for their contributions to my research. I would also like to thank the families for allowing me to interview their children and the school administration and staff for providing access into buildings and interview space. In addition, I would like to show appreciation to American Girls Brand, LLC for granting permission to use images of the Bitty Babies dolls.

My deepest appreciation goes to my family, friends, and colleagues for it was your encouragement, inspiration, and trust that kept me pressing on. Special thanks to my committee who without their guidance and support, this study would not have been possible. Whether it was simple words of encouragement, a critique, or a deadline request, your actions steered me through this process. Your constructive criticism, knowledge, and expertise played a vital part in my growth as a researcher and writer. Dr. Alston, your direction and guidance came at a point when I was being stretched academically, mentally, and emotionally. Your bold confidence and outstanding leadership gave me the reassurance I needed to make it to the finish line. For that, I am forever grateful. It is an honor to be mentored by strong leaders in the field of education. I have been passed the torch and I will hold it high with integrity.

vii

Table of Contents

CHAPTER

Introduction…………………………………………………………………...... 1

Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………………1

Research Paradigm………………………………………………………………..4

Ontology…………………………………………………………………..5

Epistemology…………………………………………………………...... 5

Methodology…………………………………………………………...... 5

Definition of Terms………………………………………………………………..6

Overview…………………………………………………………………………..8

II.

Literature Review………………………………………………………………...10

Introduction………………………………………………………………………10

Racism in America: An Historical Record of the Civil Rights Movement……...10

Racial Identification & Preference in Young Children; The Doll Test Revisited.16

Identification Theories and Stages of Racial Development in Children…………25

Implications for New Research…………………………………………………..29

III.

Methodology……………………………………………………………………..31

The Clark and Clark Study………………………………………………………32

viii

Preliminary Study………………………………………………………………..33

Results of racial identification…………………………………………...35

Results of racial preferences……………………………………………..36

Results of racial identification and preference by participant skin color.37

Current Research Study………………………………………………………….39

Research paradigm……………………………………………………….41

Methods…………………………………………………………………..42

Recruitment of subjects…………………………………………………..43

Data collection and analysis procedure…………………………………..46

Limitations of the study………………………………………………….49

IV.

Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………….55

Overview of Results……………………………………………………………...55

Demographic Data from Participants…………………………………………….57

Research Settings………………………………………………………………...59

Rural school 1…………………………………………………………....59

Rural school 2………………………………………………………...... 60

Urban school 1…………………………………………………………...60

Urban school 2…………………………………………………………...61

Presentation of Results…………………………………………………………...63

Data Analysis Tools……………………………………………………...63

Research question one…………………………………………………....64

Research question two…………………………………………………...65

Research question three………………………………………………….67

Research question four…………………………………………………...69

Research question five…………………………………………………...71

Research question six…………………………………………………….73

Research question seven…………………………………………………76

Research question eight………………………………………………….78

Qualitative themes……………………………………………………….79

Summary…………………………………………………………………………82

Discussion………………………………………………………………………..84

Introduction………………………………………………………………………84

Review of Methodology…………………………………………………………85

Overview of the Findings………………………………………………………...86

Implications of the Study for Professional Practice or Applied Settings……….95

Recommendations for Further Research………………………………………...97

Conclusion…….………………………………………………………………..100

REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………103

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Interview Questions from Clark and Clark Study………………………..108

Appendix B. School Consent Form and Letter…………………………………………110

Appendix C. Parent Informed Consent Materials………………………………………113

Appendix D. Data Collection Forms…………………………………………………...116

Appendix E. Interview Materials……………………………………………………….118

Appendix F. Interview Questions………………………………………………………120

Appendix G. Child-to-Doll Identification Sheet………………………………………..122

Appendix H. Codebook for Variable Analysis..………………………………..………124

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Subjects’ Knowledge of Racial Differences…………………………………………36

Table 3.2: Subjects’ Response to Racial Preferences……………………………………...……36

Table 3.3: Awareness of Racial Differences by Participant Skin Color………………………..38

Table 3.4: Identification of Racial Preference by Participant Skin Color………………………39

Table 4.1: Participant Demographic Information by Age, Gender, and Race……………..……58

Table 4.2: Student Profile by School……………………………………………………………62

Table 4.3: Student Racial Categories by School………………………………………………...62

Table 4.4: Elementary School Performance Rating by School……………………………….…63

Table 4.5: Participant to Researcher Agreement on Child’s Skin Tone…..………………….…65

Table 4.6: Free Choice Selections……………………………………………………………….67

Table 4.7: Participants’ Doll Choice Preferences to the First Five Interview Questions by Skin

Tone.…………………………………………………………………………………..69

Table 4.8: Percentage of Participants Who Answered Questions 1, 2, 4, and 9 the Same Way by

Skin Tone……………………………………………………………………………..70

Table 4.9: Crosstabulation of Participant’s Doll Choice to Questions Three and Five…….……72

Table 4.10: Children’s “Bad and Ugly” Doll Choices………………………………………..…73

Table 4.11: Participant’s Responses According to School Demographics……..………………75

Table 4.12: African-American Participant’s Knowledge of Racial Identification Compared to

Children in Clark Study………………………………………………………………….78

Table 4.13: Determination of the Participants’ Skin Tone……………………….……………..79

Table 4.14: Qualitative Data Themes for Why Children Liked the Skin Color of the Doll That

Looks Like Them…………………………………………………………..……………79

xii

Table 4.15: Qualitative Data Themes for Why Children Did Not Like the Skin Color of the Doll

That Looks Like Them…………………………………………………………………..81

xiii

CHAPTER I

Introduction

Purpose of the Study

During the time period of the desegregation movement, many cases were brought before the Supreme Court in hopes to put an end to the inequalities Black children faced in relation to their schooling. Brown vs. Board of Education Topeka, Kansas was one of the fundamental court decisions which established that separate was not equal. This decision was made from a combination of testimonies and research. One of the research studies, known as The Doll Test

(Clark & Clark, 1958), showed how segregated schools negatively affected Black children by damaging their ego development. This study, along with additional supporting research, was used in the Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas court case to show that segregation damaged Black children’s personality development.

The original Doll Test was conducted to study the psychological effects of segregation on

African-American children. To do so, the Clarks asked African-American children between the ages of three and seven to respond to a series of questions by choosing between a White baby doll and a Black baby doll. From their study, Clark and Clark (1958) concluded that segregation, along with discrimination and prejudice, caused feelings of inferiority and self-hatred in African-

American children. In addition to determining the racial attitudes and preferences of the subjects, the Clarks also observed developmental patterns associated with this relationship. To date, there have been several replications of this very famous study. According to Gopaul-McNicol (1995), the racial attitudes of pre-school aged children in the West Indies mirrored the racial identification and preferences of the children in the Clarks’ study. Gopaul-McNicol’s study

2 found that approximately 72% of West Indian children preferred to play with the White doll over the Black doll. According to Gopaul-McNicol, this study was significant because it revealed the impact colonialism had left on the West Indians (Gopaul-McNicol, 1995).

However, in a similar replication conducted by Farrell and Olson (1983), very different results were found. This study was designed to look at the differences in racial identification and preference between the Clarks’ subjects and contemporary dark and light-skinned Black children. According to their findings, it appeared that there had been a social transformation within society with regards to prejudice and feelings of inferiority that ultimately led to closing the gap of racial identification and preference in modern Black society (Farrell & Olson, 1983).

The above mentioned studies observed the effects that variables such as society, culture, and the school environment (segregated or desegregated) had on the identity development of young children. More recent studies have continued to add to the body of research (“CNN Pilot

Demonstration,” 2010; Jordan & Hernandez-Reif, 2009) into the new millennium.

The world in which we live is constantly changing and advancements have been made towards a more culturally sensitive society. From the start of the Civil Rights and desegregation movements in the 1950s to the inauguration of the first African-American president of the United

States and all that has fallen in between, it is important to re-evaluate the issue of racial identification and preference in young children in an effort to examine whether a change has occurred in the racial attitudes of young children. The original Doll Test was conducted to study the psychological effects of segregation on African-American children. From their study, the

Clark and Clark (1958) concluded that segregation, along with discrimination and prejudice, caused feelings of inferiority and self-hatred in African-American children.

Consequently, the current research study seeks to examine the differences in racial identification and preference between the original Clarks’ subjects and young children today.

Multiple benefits to society and the field of education were anticipated by carefully re-examining child identity development patterns associated with self-esteem and racial preference. The development of self-worth and pride in one’s culture and ethnicity are cornerstones to a child’s social and academic achievement. Children who have a healthy sense of self have a greater chance at school success (Heward, 2009). Therefore, promoting a positive self-image is an essential element to the overall development and well-being of a child. The current research study explored the racial attitudes and preferences among young children today. Thus, the results of the study provided insight into the participants’ attitudes related to self-esteem and individual preferences related to race. From this information, implications were made for educators and parents alike with regards to promoting healthy social competence and esteem in young children.

The development of a healthy sense of one’s self is a critical factor in the overall social and emotional well-being of a child. Children excel when they are placed in an environment that encourages and nurtures the development of a positive self-image. There are many factors that contribute to the development of a child’s self-image. Such variables include the environments in which the child spends most of his or her time, peer and parental influences, religion, media, and culture (Heward, 2009). As educators, it is important that we are dedicated to developing the

“whole” child; academically, socially, and emotionally.

The ultimate purpose of this research study was to enlighten and empower leaders that will want to, in turn, enrich the field of education with new knowledge and expertise. Educators are leaders because they have the ability to be a positive constant in the lives of children by providing physical, social, emotional and intellectual support. Through this research, I sought to

4 influence current and future educators that passed through my class each semester, as they are the leaders of tomorrow. Effective leadership is a journey. A journey that should be focused on commitment to making a difference; a journey filled with uncertainties and guided by passion; a journey dedicated to enriching the lives of children. The implication of the current research study is meant to serve as one rest-stop along this journey. I challenge law and policymakers, school boards, and university departments of education to read the results of the current study and implications for further growth as a change agent. Creating a climate for change is important in any program’s development (Brown & Harvey, 2006). Although the sheer thought of change alone can create an overwhelming sense of uncertainty for many, the need for change is there.

Therefore, I dare you be that change. I dare you to deeply touch the lives of the families and students you come in contact with…enrich the knowledge of the professionals and your local communities in which you are involved…and leave an everlasting footprint on the field of education; one child, one culture at a time.

Research Paradigm

As a novice researcher, understanding my view of what research is and how it works was the first step in developing a framework for the current study. In doing so, I addressed the following questions: “ (a) the ontological question (What is the nature of reality?); (b) the epistemological question(s) (What can be known, and what is the relationship of the knower to what is to be known?); and (c) the methodological question (How is knowledge gained?)”

(Rescher, 2006, p. 11). The ability to answer these questions from a postpositivist paradigm empowered me to cultivate my own worldview of how knowledge and information is ordered and furthermore to develop an understanding of how I came to construct what I know about the research topic.

Ontology. On the nature of reality, the postpositivist agrees with the positivist paradigm that reality does exist (Hatch, 2002). The difference however is that the postpositivist does not believe in absolute reality but rather a collection of approximations. The nature of the reality for many young children is shaped by environmental influences (Cook, Tessier, & Klien, 2007). A child’s home environment, cultural and religious practices, school setting, and community interlink and deeply impact the child’s view of the world around him (Heward, 2009). Additional influences include socioeconomic status, peer relationships, and the social media. Piagetian theory states that there is an inborn tendency for an individual to want to adapt to his environment (Cook, Tessier, & Klien, 2007). Therefore, in order to comprehend the ontology of the current research study, I had to first understand the authenticity of the participant’s experiences and guestimate how those experiences predisposed their views on racial identification and racial preferences.

Epistemology. According to Hatch (2002), postpositivist researchers come to know something is knowledge by capturing close “approximations of reality” (p. 14). To ensure that the data and not my own assumptions drove the research, I maintained an objective view of how the children would respond to the questions on racial identification and preference. To do this I implemented specific strategies such as soliciting peer reviews of my videotaped interviews and self-monitoring my own behaviors during interviews. These procedures will be later discussed in the Limitations of the study section of chapter three.

Methodology. Kant’s Principle of Cognitive Systematization states that “knowledge, in the qualitative and honorific sense of the term, is a matter of the extent to which information is coherently systematized” (Rescher, 2006, p. 105). The quality of the information I gathered played a crucial role in my understanding of the data that were collected. According to Rescher

(2006), distinguishing between actual knowledge and information is a fundamental task. All of the data I gathered throughout my research were not of equal importance. I discovered bits of information that were minute and furthermore unimportant to my research as well as pieces of information that were ominous to the study. Information can only be regarded as knowledge once it has been carefully examined, validated, and arranged into taxonomies (Rescher, 2006).

According to Creswell (2003), it was through this process that I was able to study and produce knowledge. My method of organizing the information into knowledge applicable to the current research study was accomplished by capturing the perspectives of my participants in a controlled approach. This tactic along with the statistical analysis is further explained in chapter four.

Definition of Terms

The American Heritage Dictionary (2006) was used in order to define key terminology used throughout the research study. As the researcher, I first found it necessary to define the terms associated with the participants’ ethnicity. The way in which a particular group identifies themselves within society is meaningful and relevant for that time period. According to the

American Heritage Dictionary, the “preferred term for a person today is Black rather than

Negro” (American Heritage Dictionary, 2006, p. 183). In addition, the term African-American is just as acceptable and widely used throughout society these days. Therefore, it was crucial that I updated the terms used to identify the Black dolls in the original interview questions as I believed that children today would not understand the terms “Negro” and “colored.” With that in mind, the following is a list of terms and definitions associated with the current research study:

African-American – black American of African descent.

Bi-Racial – consisting of, representing, or combining members of two separate races.

Black – noun (sometimes initial capital letter)

a. A member of any of various dark-skinned peoples, especially those of African, Oceania,

and Australia.

b. African-American

Caucasian – (noun) a member of the peoples traditionally classified as the Caucasian race, especially those peoples having light to fair skin: no longer in technical use.

It was necessary to define the above mentioned terms to account for changes that have occurred in society since the original Clarks’ study (Clark & Clark, 1958). During the 1940s and

50s, the suitable terms used to define someone of African-American decent were “Negro” and

“colored.” Today those terms are considered inappropriate and have been replaced with

“African-American” and “Black.” In addition, the current research study was expanded to include children of all racial and ethnic backgrounds. Each parent or guardian self-identified his or her child’s racial identity.

In addition, the following terms were defined; ethnic, ethnicity, race, and racial.

Throughout the dissertation, I used the terms ethnic and/or ethnicity and race and/or racial interchangeably. Although the term racial is contained in the definition of ethnic and vice versa, the two terms are often used to mean the same thing. Moreover, there were a total of six distinct definitions for the word race. Definitions one and three of the American Heritage Dictionary were included in the dissertation because they are most similar in descriptions and most relevant to the research study.

Ethnic - Of or pertaining to a religious, racial, national, or cultural group.

Ethnicity - The condition of belonging to a particular ethnic group.

Race – 1. A logical geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group of genetically transmitted physical characteristics. 3. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographical distribution.

Racial - Of, pertaining to, or typical of an ethnic group.

In the methodology section I classify the schools into two types: rural and urban. The rural and urban categories were further categorized into the following subcategories; integrated,

Predominately Black Schools (PBS) and Predominately White Schools (PWS). Following is a description of how I defined each type:

Integrated – Schools whose student enrollment was mixed (61% Caucasian, 24% African-

American, 12% Mixed-racial, and 3% Hispanic).

Predominately Black Schools (PBS) – Schools whose student enrollment was 90% African-

American.

Predominately White Schools (PWS) – Schools whose student enrollment was at least 95%

Caucasian.

Rural – Schools that were situated in a farmland/country environment.

Urban – Schools that were situated in a city/industrial environment.

Overview

The report that follows includes the following: a review of the literature related to the research study, the methodology employed to carry out the study, and an analysis and discussion of the data. To provide a context for the discussion, the literature review begins with an historical overview of the laws and legislation surrounding the desegregation and Civil Rights movements.

The Jim Crow laws and other important federal and Supreme Court decisions such as Brown vs.

Board of Education Topeka, Kansas and the Fourteenth Amendment are revisited and discussed

9 in detail. This is followed by a comprehensive overview of the literature to focus exclusively on the issue of racial identification and preference. In doing so, I reviewed the original Clark and

Clark (1958) research study, which ultimately helped to lead to the Supreme Court decision that

“Separate but Equal” was unconstitutional, along with other research-based studies that have been conducted on this topic (“CNN Pilot Demonstration,” 2010; Crain, 1996; Gopaul-McNicol,

1988, 1995; Jordan & Hernandez-Reif, 2009; Klein, 1979; Mahan, 1976; Morland, 1966;

Powell-Hopson, 1985; Stevenson, 1958).

After the historical overview of the desegregation movement and review of the Clarks’ study along with similar research, I discussed several studies related to racial identity theory

(Casas & Pytluk, 1995; Jacobs, 1992; Kerwin, 1995; Nesdale, 2008; Porter, 1971; Poston, 1990;

Scanlan, 1973; Sodowsky, 1995). The chapter concludes with a narrowed discussion of several child-identity models (Barrett & Davis, 2008; Brown, 2008; Casas & Pytluk, 1995; Hirschfeld,

2008; Jacobs, 2008; Kerwin, 1995; Nesdale, 2008; Poston, 1990; Sodowsky, Kwan, & Pannu,

1995) which provided a focal point for the current research study.

The methodology chapter provides an overview of how data were collected in the original research study as well as during a pilot study I conducted. In addition, a discussion of the subjects for the present research study and how they were recruited is included in the methodology chapter. Within this chapter, you will also find a discussion of the variables which were considered for inclusion in the research study along with the benefits to the subjects and society at large. Lastly, the process by which I collected and analyzed the data was discussed. In the last two chapters, the data collected from the research study were analyzed and the results of the research were presented in detail. Chapter IV concludes with a discussion of the implications the present study has on future research.

CHAPTER II

Literature Review

Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of literature significant to the current research study. To begin, an historical journey of the Civil Rights Movement is revisited.

Monumental court cases such as Plessy v. Ferguson, Briggs v. Elliott, and Brown v. Board of

Education Topeka, Kansas are discussed. Discussion of the aforementioned court cases, along with historical events such as the Civil War and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States

Constitution provided a foundation for why the original Doll Test was consequently significant in the desegregation cases. The original Doll Test, conducted by husband and wife team Kenneth and Mamie Clark was explored along with literature that both supported and negated their findings that desegregation, along with racism, caused feelings of inferiority and self-hatred among African-American children.

Because the current research also dealt with the racial attitudes and preferences of young children, several child identity theories related to racial development were explored. The various theories discussed throughout the chapter were germane to the present study as they provided knowledge of the developmental patterns or commonalities related to age, gender, and ethnicity which exist in the process of racial identity development in young children. To conclude, the latter part of the chapter’s focus is narrowed to center on the implications for new research. In doing so, the hypotheses set forth for the current research study are identified.

Racism in America: An Historical Record of the Civil Rights Movement

After the abolishment of slavery in 1865, the efforts to educate former slaves intensified immensely (Lusane, 1992). Prior to President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation and the

Thirteenth Amendment, an educated slave was considered dangerous; thus the education of slaves was deemed unlawful. Despite the consequences, many organizations, abolitionists, and free slaves worked diligently in an attempt to teach slaves how to read and write. In an effort to help former slaves assimilate into society, schools and universities for African-Americans were established. This new found freedom however came at a high cost. White terrorist groups such as the Klu Klux Klan were formed and laws prohibiting interracial marriages were passed. In addition, the first Jim Crow laws restoring segregation began to appear. By 1885, most of the states in the south had established laws requiring separate schools for Blacks and Whites.

The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was passed after the Civil War in order to reconcile the status of emancipated slaves (Stevenson, 1973). However, racial segregation became commonplace with the famous 1896 Supreme Court decision Plessy v.

Ferguson (Lusane, 1992; Stevenson, 1973). This doctrine, which revolved around the rights of a

Black passenger to be served on a railroad dining car, made segregation legal. Plessy, who was one-eighth Black, refused to sit in the Black-only section of the train. Facing legal conviction,

Plessy appealed his case before the U. S. Supreme Court. According to the Supreme Court, separating the races was both legal and beneficial as long as the opportunities and facilities offered to both Black and White citizens were equitable. For more than fifty years, seventeen states throughout America operated on a system of “separate but equal” with regards to public schooling (Stevenson, 1973). Despite the decision that segregated schools did not imply inferiority of either racial group, civil rights leaders continued to fight in order to level the playing field between Black and White schools. By 1950, the focal point of the civil rights movement shifted away from demanding equal facilities and materials for Black schools.

Instead, civil rights leaders and activists transferred their energies towards the injustice of a

12 segregated school system in America. A separate yet equal school system for Black and White students was no longer going to be tolerated by advocates who opposed segregation.

Prior to the desegregation cases, several complaints were brought before both the lower courts and the Supreme Court of the United States in an effort to end inequality between Black and White schools (Stevenson, 1973). Students attending Moton High School, an all-Black school in Prince Edward County, Virginia, began a protest against the hazardous conditions of their school. Moton was originally built for 180 students but housed 450 pupils. To make matters worse, the roofs leaked and the only heating available during the winter months came by way of wood burning stoves. In addition, the buses used to transport students to and from school were oftentimes broken-down.

Similarly in South Carolina, Clarendon County parents began to object to the unequal, degrading schools which their children were forced to attend (Lusane, 1992; Stevenson, 1973).

The conditions in Clarendon County were far worse than those seen in Prince Edward County.

First, the schools were understaffed and poorly equipped (Stevenson, 1973). Two teachers taught seven grades at one school while four teachers taught eight grades at another. In addition, many of the students had to write on their laps due to lack of desks and tables. None of the Black schools had drinking fountains nor did they have indoor flush toilets. Instead, 694 students had to share two wooden-seated privies that were situated over a hole dug in the ground and carry in buckets of water for drinking. On average, White students went to school 133 days a year while

Black students attended only 67 days (Lusane, 1992). Perhaps the greatest inequality within the

South Carolina public school system was prominent in the state’s expenditures per pupil; $16.22 for White children and $1.13 for Black children (Lusane, 1992).

In a meeting with the students and parents of Prince Edward County, The National

Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) expressed its willingness to help parents and pupils in the Black schools on one condition; the NAACP was only interested in school desegregation cases (Stevenson, 1973). According to NAACP state secretary Lester

Banks, no Black school would ever offer an equal educational opportunity. Prior to that time, most of the demands brought about in previous court cases had focused on the conditions of the schools in which Black children were being educated. Such demands included a new school building or a remodeling job at best. The idea of an integrated school system was far off.

The Supreme Court rulings in cases such as Moton, Clarendon, and Prince Edward

Counties were pivotal to the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka Supreme Court case as these victories brought public awareness to the inequalities between White and Black schools

(Lusane, 1992; Stevenson, 1973). On June 28, 1950, Thurgood Marshall, special counsel for the

NAACP, announced in a press conference that the organization was going to “insist on non- segregation in American public education…from law school to kindergarten” (Stevenson, p. 25).

Three reasons were given as the NAACP’s rationale for integrated schools: (a) equality in education was unattainable as long as segregation existed; (b) segregation in and of itself prevented Black children from learning as it caused feelings of inferiority; and (c) sooner or later, the decisions handed down by the Supreme Court ruling Plessy v. Ferguson would have to be addressed if Blacks were ever to attain first-class citizenship within society.

The first school de-segregation suit appeared in Charleston, South Carolina in 1951

(Stevenson, 1973). Briggs v. Elliott originated from the Clarendon County inequality case. Many of the Clarendon County plaintiffs changed their original complaint and in its place requested that their rights under the Fourteenth Amendment be granted immediately with regards to

14 segregation in education. Unfortunately for the NAACP and the citizens of Clarendon County, the judges ruled two to one, in favor of the defendants. In other words, they did not find that segregation in the schools violated any of the citizen’s rights. Judge Waring, however, disagreed.

Quite the opposite of Judges Parker and Timmerman, Judge Waring believed that segregation was wicked and therefore should be done away with. He stated:

And if the courts of this land are to render justice…for all men and all kinds of men, the

time to do it is now, and the place is in the elementary schools where our future citizens

learn their first lesson to respect the individual in a democracy. (Stevenson, 2003, p. 32)

The day after the Briggs v. Elliott decision, a Kansas court began proceedings to hear a school segregation case of their own (Stevenson, 1973). This one, however, was unlike the above mentioned protests. First, Topeka was the capital of the state. This differed vastly from the previous court cases which were filed in small, country towns. In addition, Kansas had not been a part of the Confederacy; therefore segregation had not been required. Some cities throughout the state enacted laws to segregate the races and others did not. Specifically, in Topeka, the elementary schools were still segregated despite the fact that the high schools had been integrated by the mid 1940’s.

Another distinctive characteristic of the Topeka case was that there was little difference between the Black-only and White-only schools (Stevenson, 1973). Most parents of Black children were pleased with the public school system. The core of their complaint was not the quality of education their children received, but rather the horrible conditions and wait-time of the busing system. There were only four all-Black elementary schools throughout the city of

Topeka. Many times, Black children had to wait an hour for a school bus or be driven by a parent even though an all-White school was in walking distance of their home. Although annoying,

15 such practices were tolerated by Black families until Herman Caldwell, director of Black schools, set a plan into action that many parents believed would segregate students and activities within the school. Caldwell implemented a system of having two different bells for high school assemblies. The first bell rang so that White students could go to the auditorium. The second, called the “nigger bell,” rang to direct the Black students to a classroom where they would either listen to Caldwell speak or watch slides. In addition, Caldwell arranged a separate schedule for

Black athletes to play Black-only teams and set up a separate “party” for Black students in lieu of their senior prom. In order to rid themselves of such inequalities, the parents of Topeka realized that segregation had to be eradicated.

The Topeka lawsuit, historically known as Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, focused on one basic facet of segregation; the damage that it did to the children who were subjected to it and the rights that were violated by enforcing it (Stevenson, 1973). In the lower courts, the verdict was in favor of the Topeka Board of Education simply because the Kansas judges felt that responsibility for overturning Plessy v. Ferguson lay in the hands of the United

States Supreme Court. As a result, this case and four others soon made their way to Washington.

Proceedings for the combined cases, also known as Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, began in late 1952. However, it was not until May 14, 1954 that the long awaited judgment would be announced. The judges unanimously agreed that separate educational facilities were essentially unequal and that such segregation was a denial of the equal protection provided for all citizens according to the law.

Over forty experts from various disciplines were called to testify regarding the effects of segregated schools on both Black and White children in the Brown v. Board of Education of

Topeka lawsuit (Stevenson, 1973). Kenneth B. Clark, a psychologist from New York, was

16 among the leading experts for the plaintiffs. During testimony, Clark presented research from a series of doll tests he and his wife, Mamie Clark had conducted several years earlier. Information from his research, along with others, helped to support the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education of

Topeka ruling that “separate but equal” was indeed unconstitutional.

Racial Identification and Preference in Young Children; The Doll Test Revisited

For many years researchers have studied identity development in young children and the relationship between personal identity and self-esteem (Clark & Clark, 1958; Farrell & Olson,

1983; Farrell, Olson, & Larson, 1982). Over time, there has been a change in the overall transformation of how children view themselves. Several studies related to self-esteem and identity development are explored in this section. A description of the Clarks’ research study and the profound impact it had on the Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka court case is looked at first.

The original Doll Test was conducted to study the psychological effects of segregation on

African-American children. From their study, the Clarks (1958) concluded that segregation, along with discrimination and prejudice, caused feelings of inferiority and self-hatred in African-

American children. As previously mentioned, the Clarks’ findings were used in the Brown vs.

Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas court case to demonstrate that segregation damaged

Black children’s personality development. In addition to determining the racial attitudes and preferences of the subjects, the Clarks also observed developmental patterns associated with this relationship.

In an attempt to examine the development of racial identification and preference in

African-American children, Clark and Clark (1958) employed several techniques, including the

Dolls Test. During this particular method, the Clark and Clark (1958) presented each participant

17 with four dolls. Each doll was alike with respect to clothing, hair and positioning, apart from skin color. Two of the four dolls were white with yellow hair and the other two were brown with black hair. During the experiment, Clark and Clark (1958) presented the dolls in the order of

White, Black, White, Black to half of the subjects. For the remaining half of the participants, the order was inverted. For the experiment, the participants were asked to respond to a series of questions (refer to Appendix A) by giving the investigator only one of the dolls. Clark & Clark

(1958) designed requests 1 through 4 to expose preferences, requests 5 through 7 to determine the participant’s knowledge of racial differences, and request 8 to reveal self-identification.

A total of two hundred fifty-three African-American children ranging in age from three to seven years were included in the Clarks’ study (Clark & Clark, 1958). Of the total population, one hundred thirty-four of the participants were recruited from segregated, public nursery schools. The southern schools were located in Hot Springs, Pine Bluff, and Little Rock,

Arkansas. The remaining one hundred nineteen participants were from racially mixed public nursery schools in the northern city of Springfield, Massachusetts. Each subject in the original study was interviewed separately in a room designated specifically for the research experiment.

The results of the Clarks’ study were analyzed according to racial identification, racial preference, age, skin color, and location (Clark & Clark, 1958). Most of the children in the study demonstrated knowledge of racial differences. Specifically, 94% of the children correctly identified the White doll and 93% of the children correctly identified the “colored” doll. Only

72% of the children correctly identified the Negro doll which may have indicated that the label

Negro was not as developed or widely used at that time. Overall, Clark and Clark (1958) were able to demonstrate that a basic knowledge of racial differences existed in children ages three to seven years. In the matter of racial differences, the dark-skinned participants were consistently

18 more accurate in their responses than the light or medium-skinned children in the Clark and

Clark (1958) study. For example, 75% of the dark-skinned children chose the Black doll when asked request 7 (Give me the doll that looks like a Negro child) in comparison to 71% of the medium-skinned children and 70% of the light-skinned children. According to the Clark and

Clark (1958) this suggested that the children in the dark-skinned group were more accurate in their knowledge of racial differences. However, when asked request 8 (the doll that “looks like you”) only 20% of the light-skinned children identified themselves with the Black doll compared to 81% of the dark-skinned children and 73% of the medium-skinned children.

Regardless of age, the majority of the children preferred the White doll in the Clarks’ study (Clark & Clark, 1958). In particular, 59% of the children indicated the Black doll for request 3 (“looks bad”) while only 17% indicated the White doll. In addition, 60% of the children believed the White doll to be a nice color in request 4 while only 38% of the children considered the Black doll as the doll with the nice color. The results of request 4 were significant in that a child’s response to request 4 supported the notion that his or her responses to request 1,

2, and 3 in some way involved skin color.

To date, numerous researchers have revisited this very famous study in one way or another by also analyzing racial preference, identification, and self-esteem in young children

(CNN Pilot Demonstration, 2010; Crain, 1996; Farrell, Olson, & Larson, 1982; Farrell & Olson,

1983; Gopaul-McNicol, 1995, 1986; Jacobs, 1992; Jordan & Hernandez-Reif, 2009; Klein,

Levine, & Charry, 1979; Porter, 1971; Scanlan & Dokecki, 1973; Williams & Morland, 1976).

Using the same Clark Doll Test procedure, Gopaul-McNicol (1988), observed racial preference in 191 African-American children from New York and Trinidad. Some forty years subsequent to the original Clark study, Gopaul-McNicol noted that much of what was observed by the Clarks

19 in 1947 was also detected during her reinvestigation. She later studied the comparison between the children in the original Clark study (1958) with pre-school aged children from four islands in the West Indies (Gopaul-McNicol, 1995). In this cross-cultural examination of approximately

300 children, Gopaul-McNicol (1995) disclosed that the racial identity and preference of preschool aged children in the West Indies closely mirrored the attitudes and beliefs of the children in the Clarks’ study. Gopaul-McNicol’s study found that approximately 72% of West Indian children preferred to play with the White doll over the Black doll. According to Gopaul-

McNicol, this study was significant because it revealed the impact colonialism had left on West

Indians (Gopaul-McNicol, 1995).

In contrast, Farrell and Olson (1983), observed somewhat different results. Their study was designed to look at the differences in racial identification and preference between the

Clarks’ subjects and contemporary dark and light-skinned African-American children. According to their findings, it appeared that there had been a social transformation within society with regards to prejudice and feelings of inferiority that ultimately led to closing the gap of racial identification and preference in modern Black society (Farrell & Olson, 1983). Of Farrell and

Olson’s 151 participants, the majority of both light-skinned and dark-skinned children were able to identify themselves correctly when asked to point to the doll that was “most like” them.

Specifically, 78.6% of the light-skinned children and 92% of the dark-skinned children identified with the Black doll (Farrell & Olson, 1983). This compares to the Clarks’ study in that only 20% of the light-skinned children and 77% of the dark-skinned children correctly identified themselves by race. This yields a 50% and 15% differential respectively.

There are several factors that may have influenced Farrell and Olson’s findings. First,

Farrell and Olson used the Larson-Olson-Farrell Picture Inventory (LOFPI) as a means for

20 collecting data (Farrell & Olson, 1983). The LOFPI consists of eight paper-doll like cutouts; one light-skinned Black girl, one dark-skinned Black girl, one light-skinned White girl, one dark- skinned White girl, and a similar set for boys. The children were dressed the same and shared similarities in weight, age, height, and facial expression. Farrell and Olson (1983) noted however that the introduction of a light-skinned Black doll allowed the fair-skinned children to make a more accurate selection. In addition it is important to note that their study (Farrell & Olson,

1983) was executed during the time following the Black is Beautiful movement when members of the Black community began to vocalize their feelings of pride associated with their heritage and culture.

In a more recent partial replication of the Clark and Clark (1958) study, Jordan and

Hernandez-Reif (2009) reexamined the attitudes and beliefs of preschool age children related to racial identification and preference. Forty Black and White children between three and five years of age attending preschool and day care programs throughout Tuscaloosa and Huntsville,

Alabama were included in the experimental study. Participants were asked to respond to questions similar to those in the original study by pointing to a character on a laptop.

Jordan and Hernandez-Reif (2009) modified their study from the original Doll Test in several ways. In contrast to the Clarks’ study, Jordan and Hernandez-Reif (2009) changed the stimuli in their study by using computer-generated figures in lieu of dolls. In addition, they added a pretest-intervention-posttest component to the design. After the interview questions were asked initially, the experimental group was told a story about a Black child who saves a baby duck. The control group, on the other hand, was told a similar story without reference to skin color and heroism. After the story, each group was asked the set of interview questions again.

This was done to determine if the participants’ answers to the preference question changed after

21 listening to the story. Two distinct differences from the Clark and Clark (1958) study that both the current research study and the Jordan and Hernandez-Reif (2009) study have in common are the introduction of a variety of skin tones and the allowance of a free-choice method when responding to the interview questions.

Interesting findings from their study indicate that (a) the participants did not show a skin tone preference, (b) Black children’s views were altered when Black children were portrayed in a positive light (this was not true of the White children’s views), and (c) both Black and White participants were aware of their own skin color (Jordan and Hernandez-Reif, 2009). The researchers caution, however, that the preference discrepancy in their findings could be attributed to providing the participants with too many skin tones during the interview process.

In 2010, CNN released a pilot demonstration that also revisited children’s racial attitudes, preferences, and skin tone biases during early (6-7 years of age) and middle (13-14 years of age) childhood (“CNN Pilot Demonstration,” 2010). The study included 145 children from either majority European-American, majority African-American, or ethnically diverse schools from

Northern and Southern regions in the United States. Picture story cue cards were used to examine what participants thought about various scenarios involving interactions between children from different racial backgrounds. The scenarios were designed to be developmentally appropriate

(recess scenario for the early childhood and hallway scenario for the middle-age participants) and to include scenes where both the White child and Black child “appeared” to be the aggressor.

The goal of the pilot demonstration was to determine if having interactions with children from different racial backgrounds had an effect on how the participants would respond to the interview questions. If a participant brought up race as an issue during the initial interview, a post

22 interview conversation was conducted. This gave the participant the opportunity to elaborate on his/her answer and discuss personal experiences.

Results from the CNN study suggest that children do not automatically view individuals who are similar to them with regards to race as always being positive, consistently right, or better than children of a different race (“Online Report for CNN,” 2012). Therefore, inter-racial friendships are acceptable by those children who have frequent contact with children of other races. In addition, younger children believe that two people from different racial backgrounds can be friends. Specifically, Black children were more optimistic about inter-racial friendships despite diversity in their school whereas White children were more likely to show optimism if they attended a culturally diverse school. In either case, by adolescence, both groups (African-

American and European-American) were less likely to view inter-racial friendships as favorable.

Another important finding that came out of the CNN study was the positive impact the school environment has on children’s acceptance of racial differences and friendships (“Online

Report for CNN,” 2012). According to the authors, school diversity matters. As the children in the study discussed their personal experiences, many of them shared stories about how teachers have played positive and powerful roles in influencing positive interactions and teaching tolerance in school.

Because much of the research surrounding the desegregation movement focuses on

African-American subjects, it is important to take a look at more contemporary research which has augmented such practices to include children from various ethnic backgrounds and their attitudes regarding racial identification and preference (Casa & Pytluk, 1995; Gopaul-McNicol,

1995; Kerwin & Ponterotto, 1995; Lerner & Schroeder, 1975; Mahan, 1976; Powell-Hopson,

1985; Sodowsky, Kwan, & Pannu, 1995 ). For example, Casas and Pytluk found that Hispanic

23 ethnic identity (the term Hispanic is generically used in this chapter to include individuals from

Spanish-speaking countries and the island of Puerto Rico) was influenced by both the enculturation and acculturation processes (1995). Enculturation is the process which involves socialization into one’s own ethnic group. Three core values are embedded within this process.

At the forefront, and perhaps most important is the significance of the immediate and extended family, or familismo (Casas & Pytluk, 1995). Through the identity process, for example, a

Hispanic child might subscribe to traditional male or female attitudes and behaviors. Next is simpatia, or “the need for social behaviors that promote smooth and pleasant social situations”

(Casas & Putluk, 1995, p. 159). And last is respeto, which includes respecting one’s self as well as others.

In contrast, acculturation, or “the product of culture learning that occurs as a result of contact between the members of two or more culturally distinct groups” (Casas & Pytluk, 1995, p. 158) occurs when a Hispanic individual socializes into an ethnic group other than his or her own. Such cultural shifts bring about behavioral and attitudinal changes which ignite new learning experiences for the individual. According to Marlin (as cited in Casas & Pytluk) the learning which takes place during the acculturation process occurs in three levels; superficial

(includes the knowledge and neglect of historical facts and figures in one’s own culture and the acceptance and learning of the history of the culture in which they exist), intermediate (includes social learning experiences and preferences such as language, friends, ethnicity of spouse, involvement in cultural activities), and significant (includes changes in beliefs and values that help to shape the individual’s worldview).

Researchers argued that biracial children go through more of a dilemma when trying to define their ethnicity than do any other group (Kerwin & Ponterotto, 1995). According to Kerwin

24 and Ponterotto (1995), there are three common myths associated with biracial children. First, biracial children are viewed by society as tragedies and are destined to have problematic lives.

Second, biracial children must choose to identify with only one ethnic group despite being born of both Black and White parentage. Finally, many individuals assume that biracial children do not want to discuss their heritage. On the contrary however, biracial children are open to queries pertaining to their racial uniqueness as long as the inquiry is genuine and nonjudgmental (Kerwin

& Ponterotto, 1995).

Nevertheless, many biracial children enter into a stage of identity development where they begin to experience pressure from outside factors to choose one identity over the other

(Poston, 1990). Once an identity is chosen, which is often that of the group of color, biracial children may experience feelings of guilt and self-hatred as well as rejection (Kerwin &

Ponterotto, 1995; Poston, 1990).

In their study of Asians living in the United States, Sodowsky, Kwan, and Pannu (1995) found that biracial children experienced more difficulty in terms of identity development in comparison to Asian children born in the United States. According to Sodowsky, et al.

“Amerasians [sic], born to G. I. fathers and Vietnamese mothers” (p. 129) underwent identity confusion when attempting to provide a concrete answer as to how they identify themselves.

Societal views, parental abandonment, lack of education, absence of cultural integrity, and the taboo related to the history of Vietnam were some of the many reasons Amerasians found it difficult to identify with either ethnic group (Sodowsky, Kwan, & Pannu, 1995). In particular, children who were born to an Asian parent and an African-American parent struggled at the personal level to prove their “Blackness” to the African-American group and experienced racism from the Asian group (Sodowsky et. al). This is consistent with Poston’s (1990) model of

25 biracial identity development. During the second stage, Choice of Group Categorization, individuals felt obligated to choose one racial group over the other in an attempt to form their own identity (Poston, 1990).

Identity Theories and Stages of Racial Development in Children

Since the exploration of Nigrescence, the psychology of becoming Black, numerous theories have emerged on adult and child identity development (Cross, 1971, 1995). Cross, for example, suggested that although earlier research related to self-esteem and identity was meaningful and relevant to the field, theorists must get at the depth of the issue if gains were to be made in society. What was more meaningful and relevant, according to Cross, was the process an individual went through to achieve cultural identity. In addition, it was equally as important to understand what phase a person was in within the stages of identity development as it ultimately affected his or her worldview.

Consequently, Cross affirmed that early research, such as the Clarks’, was significant in uncovering truths regarding the racial attitudes and feelings of Blacks (Cross, 1971). However,

Cross argued that much of Kenneth and Mamie Clark’s research was exaggerated and simply scratched the surface of the issues of self-esteem and identity. In fact, Cross rebutted the Clarks’ theory that the average Black person was self-hating and instead argued that the Clarks’ study failed to show a correlation between self-esteem and Black identity. According to Cross (1995), there was a small minority of anti-Black Blacks (self-hating African-Americans). However, unlike the Clarks’, Cross (1995) further explained that this was only a small fraction of the attitudes and beliefs characteristic of individuals during the early stages of identity development.

Although Nigrescence is not a process for mapping the socialization of children, through my research of the literature, I found that children also experience a similar transformation when

26 developing their own ethnic identities. Specifically, I examined the similarities and differences in age as well as variables such as parental influences, social groups/status, and the diversity within the community (or the lack thereof) and the relationship to identity development across models and ethnic groups. The following paragraphs summarize each child identity theory in order to provide a basis for the comparisons across models and groups.

Nesdale (2008) offered one approach to the development of children’s attitudes towards race. Social Identity Development Theory (SIDT) materialized from the impression that, in general, young children desired to be socially accepted by their peers. Because of this need to belong, children sought out social relationships and attempted to achieve social status amongst their peer group. According to SIDT, children exhibited attitudes regarding ethnic preferences and identity through four developmental stages (undifferentiated, ethnic awareness, ethnic preference, and ethnic prejudice) (Nesdale, 2008). Sequential in nature, the first phase

(undifferentiated) occurred prior to 2 to 3 years of age. At this age, race and ethnicity were irrelevant to most children. Instead, they interacted with people and stimulus in their environment based on needs and wants. During the ethnic awareness phase (roughly 3 years of age), children became more aware of racial differences and as a result were more selective with regards to social contacts and group memberships. This new sense of racial consciousness was due in part to a combination of adult influences and the diversity, or lack thereof, of the community in which the children lived (Nesdale, 2008). A major realization in this stage of development was that of the child’s own racial identification. Once children were made aware of racial categories, they came to the understanding that they belonged to a specific ethnic group.

This realization, in turn, prepared them for the third phase of the Social Identity Development

Theory.

By the time a child reached the ages of 4 or 5, he transitioned into the ethnic preference phase of development. According to SIDT,

They are aware of which ethnic and racial group they belong to, and they know which

groups are better off and more highly regarded than others…. They also prefer to be

members of high rather than low status groups. (Nesdale, 2008, p. 324)

It was significant to note, however, that this stage of development did not automatically assume prejudice towards the oppressed group. Instead, behaviors characteristic of this phase included developing a liking and concern for one’s own group as well as understanding the qualities and elements which helped to distinguish their ethnic group from others (Nesdale,

2008). This did not imply dislike or hatred; instead it suggested that children in this phase preferred their own ethnic group over others.

The final stage in the Social Identity Development Theory is ethnic prejudice.

Throughout this phase, children continued to show great interest in their own ethnic group; however, they also became increasingly concerned with other racial groups (Nesdale, 2008).

This concern shifted children from the act of preferring their own group as seen in the previous phase to hatred towards other racial groups. The existence of ethnic prejudice in children depended upon three factors according to SIDT;

the extent to which (1) children identify with their social group, and / or (2) prejudice is a

norm held by the members of the child’s social group, and / or (3) there is belief among

the in-group members that their group is threatened in some way by members of the out-

group. (Nesdale, 2008, p. 325)

Kerwin and Ponterotto (1995) also included children in their model of biracial identity development. For the purposes of the literature review, and of specific interest to the current

28 study, the first two stages, pertaining to young children, were explored. According to Kerwin and

Ponterotto (1995) biracial children became conscious of racial differences during the Preschool period which occurred any time up to the age of 5. Early awareness of racial differences may have been due to early exposure to diverse groups (Kerwin & Ponterotto, 1995). For example, biracial children living in interracial families learned about the physical differences of their parents at an early age (e.g. hair texture and skin color). On the surface, such attention to physical details may seem minimal. On the contrary, however, this marked the beginning of racial awareness and identity development. By the time children reached the second stage of development, Entry to School, classmates (and adults) begin to inquire about each other’s ethnicity. As a result, labels emerged. However, the differences noted during this stage of development for biracial children relied heavily on the presence of role models (both Black and

White) and the racial demographics of the school environment (Kerwin & Ponterotto, 1995). The aforementioned factors may also contribute to the attitudes and perceptions of individuals from different ethnic groups.

More specific to the Clarks’ (1958) research, Jacobs’ (1992) study suggested that there are three stages of biracial identity development; Pre-Color Constancy: Play and

Experimentation With Color, Post-Color Constancy: Biracial Label and Racial Ambivalence, and Biracial Identity. During the first stage, Pre-Color: Play and Experimentation With Color, skin color was viewed by children as a stable attribute (Kerwin & Ponterotto, 1995). Although most children did not assess skin color at this stage, negative occurrences and / or low self- esteem may prohibit experimentation and play with color. During the second stage, Post-Color

Constancy: Biracial Label and Racial Ambivalence, children became aware of discrimination and stereotypes based on race and began to internalize the label “biracial” or “interracial”

(Kerwin & Ponterotto, 1995). As a result, biracial children became unsure about their skin color and even refused one or both ethnic groups. According to Jacobs (1992), this was a necessary step as it prepared children for the final stage of development. During Biracial Identity, the final stage in Jacobs’ (1992) model, children comprehended that racial group association was not contingent on skin color alone. Instead, they understood that membership into an ethnic group was based on parentage. In other words, because one parent holds membership with the Black group and the other holds membership with the White group, children identified with being biracial due to skin color and social group status (Jacobs, 1992).

Implications for New Research

Time brings about change. Over fifty years have passed since the original Doll Test suggested that segregated schools led to feelings of inferiority and self-hatred in young children.

At present, our country has made historical strides towards the acceptance and celebration of diverse cultures and groups of people. Minorities are widely represented in the media, educational settings, entertainment and politics. The inauguration of our first African-American president is just one example of how minorities are beginning to acquire positions throughout society. The impact such changes may have had on young children’s self-image is just as important as it was during the desegregation era and Black Pride movement. As a result, the current study re-examined the difference in attitudes and beliefs associated with racial identification and preference in young children today in comparison to the children in the original Doll Test.

Over the past several decades, researchers have revisited the issue of racial identification and preference in children and have found both comparable and contrasting results (“CNN Pilot

Demonstration,” 2010, Farrell & Olson, 1983; Gopaul-McNicol, 1988; Jordan & Hernandez-

Reif, 2009; Powell-Hopson, 1995). The purpose of the current study is to motivate current leaders and lawmakers in the field of education into positions to create a culture of change.

During the time of the original Clark and Clark (1958) study, many children experienced feelings of self-hatred which was believed to be brought about by school segregation along with other factors. By building on Clark and Clark’s (1958) research and expanding on their original methodology, I made three significant changes into the current design; (a) adding a free-choice method of interviewing, (b) introducing dolls with various skin tones, and (c) interviewing participants from urban and rural school settings. Implementing these changes allowed me to add newness to the current body of knowledge and provide readers with strategies to working effectively in order to promote positive self-esteem and acceptance.

These changes were made for several reasons. First, I believe that if given a choice, a great percentage of children will opt not to associate a particular skin tone with negativity. The original design utilized a forced-choice methodology which may have altered the reliability of the Clarks findings. In addition, providing a variety of dolls with different skin tones allows each participant to identify with a doll that more closely resembles his or her own skin tone while also keeping with the free-choice methodology. For example, a light-skinned participant may identify with doll choice B in the current research study (See Appendix E) whereas the same participant may have been “forced” to identify with the White doll in the Clarks’ study. Lastly, by interviewing children from both rural and urban school settings a comparison can be made, if any, to the influence the school environment has on the racial attitudes and preferences of young children.

CHAPTER III

Methodology

The present research study examined the experiences of young children enrolled in integrated public primary school and pre-school settings. Specifically, the racial identification and preferences in the young children were observed in an effort to examine the effect of current racial attitudes on the ego development of young children. This chapter will briefly discuss an overview of the original Clark and Clark (1958) experiment and the research methodology used to conduct their study.

I conducted a preliminary investigation similar to the Clarks’ study to examine the racial attitudes and preferences among African-American children. Therefore, I have included a synopsis of my preliminary study as well. Information incorporated into this section includes the research methodology and a discussion of the specific modifications made to the Clarks’ research design. During my preliminary investigation I observed that one of the light-skinned participants had difficulty when I asked the question; “Give me the doll that looks like you.”

After much hesitation, the participant verbally responded “But I’m light-skinned,” before choosing the African-American doll. It was evident that the participant had a clear understanding of her racial ethnicity. However, she struggled when she was asked to make a choice between the two dolls. This brought about an additional question with regards to racial identification of children who are fair-skinned or of mixed heritage. In response, two significant changes were made to the current research design; the inclusion of participants from various racial heritages and the introduction of a multi-cultural line of dolls.

In addition, I found in the pilot study that several of the participants responded to the interview questions arbitrarily. In particular, it seemed that the majority of the three year-old

32 participants answered the interview questions without being cognizant of their doll choice. It was unclear whether or not the participants’ choices were derived from actual knowledge of racial differences and preferences. Child identity theories (Nesdale, 2008; Kerwin & Ponterotto, 1995) suggested that children develop a sense of ethnic awareness around age three and racial preference between the ages of four and five. Therefore, although the participants in my pilot study were able to correctly identify the White and Black dolls, it was left unclear as to whether or not they consciously preferred one doll over the other. The phrase “correctly identify” refers to children whose racial identification of a doll matched my racial identification for that doll. For example, I identified the dark dolls as the Black or African-American dolls and the light dolls as the White or Caucasian dolls.

Lastly, I provide in this chapter an in-depth explanation of the current research design, divided into three sub-sections: Subjects, Instrumentation, and Data Collection and Analysis

Procedures. In order to interpret the data, a mixed methodology approach was used. The theoretical framework I used to extract and analyze my data is discussed further in the latter sub- section of the chapter.

The Clark and Clark Study

The original Doll Test conducted by Kenneth B. and Mamie P. Clark (1958) analyzed racial identification and preference among African-American children. In addition to determining the racial attitudes and preferences of the subjects, the original researchers also observed developmental patterns associated with this relationship. As a result, the Clarks’ findings were used in the Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas court case to show that segregation damaged African-American children’s personality development.

In an attempt to examine the development of racial identification and preference in

African-American children, the Clarks (1958) employed several techniques, including the Dolls

Test. They presented each participant with four dolls. Each doll was alike with respect to clothing, hair and positioning, apart from skin color. Two of the four dolls were white with yellow hair and the other two were brown with black hair. During the experiment, Clark and

Clark presented the dolls in the order of White, Black, White, Black to half of the subjects. For the remaining half of the participants, the order was inverted. For the experiment, the participants were asked to respond to a series of questions (refer to Appendix A) by giving the investigator only one of the dolls. The Clarks designed requests one through four to expose preferences, requests five through seven to specify the participant’s knowledge of racial differences, and request eight to reveal self-identification.

A total of two hundred fifty-three African-American children ranging in age from three to seven years were included in Clark and Clark’s study (Clark & Clark, 1958). Of the total population, one hundred thirty-four of the participants were recruited from segregated, public nursery schools. The southern schools were located in Hot Springs, Pine Bluff, and Little Rock,

Arkansas. The remaining one hundred nineteen participants were tested in racially mixed public nursery schools in the northern city of Springfield, Massachusetts. Each subject in the original study was interviewed separately in a room designated specifically for the research experiment.

Preliminary Study

I conducted a pilot study similar to the Clark and Clark (1958) experiment within the state of Ohio on the issue of racial identification and preference in young African-American children. Subjects for the pilot study were recruited through personal recommendations from individuals who were at least twice removed from me. The individuals recommending the

34 participants provided each prospective subject with a letter explaining the research study in detail. Once the names and phone numbers of possible participants were collected, the subjects were contacted via an initial telephone call. If the parent consented to the research study, a meeting was scheduled during which time the consent form and demographic information sheet were completed.

Seven participants ranging in age from three to seven years were included in the pilot study, five boys and two girls. Variables which met the criteria for inclusion in the research population included the following: (a) subjects were between the ages of three and seven years at the time of interviewing, (b) parents self-identified their child as being of African-American descent, (c) subjects were not visually impaired, and (d) subjects were able to physically and/or verbally respond to the research questions. At the time of their involvement in the study, all participants were enrolled in an Ohio public school district that was diverse with respect to race and ethnicity.

Data for the pilot study were collected via direct interviewing techniques. All interviews took place either in the participant’s home or in the school building in which the participant was enrolled. Four genderless baby dolls, two White and two Black, were used during the interviews.

To create the illusion of sameness, all dolls were identical except for skin color. Each doll shared the same facial structure and body type and was purposely clothed in a white diaper in an effort to control for gender preferences. In addition, the arm and leg positioning of each doll was kept the same throughout the interview. The hair coloring and texture of the dolls was not an issue as they lacked real hair which gave them a newborn appearance.

As the researcher, I manually recorded the subject’s responses to each question. In addition, each interview was audio and video taped with the exception of Participants two and

35 three, whose parent declined the video portion of the interview. In order to preserve the data accumulated from Participants two and three, I took detailed field notes throughout the interview.

The data from the research study were analyzed using a mixed methods approach. The primary source of data was interpreted using qualitative methodology; however, the results from the participant interviews were tallied and converted into percentages. There were a total of eight questions included in the interview process. The questions used for the preliminary study were extracted from the original Clark and Clark (1958) study. The content of the questions was kept the same; however I found it necessary to update some of the terminology used in the original study. In particular, the term “Black” was substituted for the word “colored” in request six.

Similarly, request seven originally asked the participant to give the investigator the “Negro” child. This was changed to “African-American” child in the pilot study. The aforesaid modifications to the original set of questions were made to better represent today’s jargon.

Results of racial identification. The subjects were asked four questions to determine their knowledge of racial differences. Table 3.1 provides a list of the participants’ responses to the following interview questions; (a) Give me the doll that looks like a White child, (b) Give me the doll that looks like a Black child, (c) Give me the doll that looks like an African-American child, and (d) Give me the doll that looks like you. When asked request five (Give me the White doll), five of seven subjects correctly responded by giving me the White doll, while two of the seven subjects chose the Black doll. With regards to request six (Give me the Black doll), all seven subjects pick the Black doll. Request seven (Give me the African-American doll) yielded a mixed response. Three of seven subjects chose the Black doll, while four of seven chose the

White doll. The results were similar with regards to request eight (Give me the doll that looks like you). Four of seven chose the Black doll and the remaining three chose the White doll.

Table 3.1. Subjects’ Knowledge of Racial Differences

Choice Request #5 Request # 6 Request # 7 Request #8 (for White) (for Black) (for African- (like you) American) Black doll…………. 2 of 7 7 of 7 3 of 7 4 of 7

White doll…………. 5 of 7 0 4 of 7 3 of 7

Don’t know or no response 0 0 0 0

Results of racial preferences. Requests one through four were designed to determine racial preference. In request one, I asked subjects to give me the doll that they like to play with.

Male subjects were asked to give me the doll they liked best. Two of seven subjects chose the

Black doll, while the remaining five chose the White doll in response to the abovementioned question. For request two (nice doll), only one child chose the Black doll while all others picked the White doll. Five of seven subjects picked the Black doll for request three (looks bad) and two of seven selected the White doll. When asked request four (nice color), four out of the seven subjects selected the Black doll while three of the seven picked the White doll. Table 3.2 lists the participants’ responses to the racial preference questions.

Table 3.2. Subjects’ Response to Racial Preferences

Choice Request #1 Request # 2 Request # 3 Request #4 (play with) (nice doll) (looks bad) (nice color)

Black 2 of 7 1 of 7 5 of 7 4 of 7 doll………………………

White 5 of 7 6 of 7 2 of 7 3 of 7 doll………………………

Don’t know or no response 0 0 0 0

Results of racial identification and preference by participant skin color. The subjects’ responses were further analyzed to determine partialities by skin color with relation to racial identification and preference. Table 3.3 separates the responses of the participants by their skin color (light-skinned, medium-skinned, and dark-skinned).

The two light-skinned subjects both correctly answered requests five (White child) and six (Black child) by choosing the White and Black dolls respectively. With regards to request seven (African-American child); however, both light-skinned subjects incorrectly selected the

White doll. When asked request eight (looks like you), one of the slight-skinned subjects chose the White doll while the other chose the Black doll.

There were three medium-skinned subjects included in the research study. All three correctly associated the Black doll with request six (Black child). With regards to request five

(White child); on the other hand, one medium-skinned subject incorrectly chose the Black doll while the other two correctly picked the White doll. Request seven (African-American child) produced similar results. Two of the three medium-skinned subjects correctly associated the

Black doll with African-American, while only one incorrectly chose the White doll. When asked request eight (looks like you), one of the medium-skinned subjects self-identified with the Black doll while the other two identified themselves with the White doll. The two dark-skinned subjects both correctly selected the Black doll for request six (Black child). However, when asked requests five (White child) and seven (African-American child), one of the dark-skinned subjects chose the Black doll and the other chose the White doll.

Table 3.3. Awareness of Racial Differences by Participant Skin Color

Interview Questions Choice by Participant Skin Color

Light-skinned Medium-skinned Dark-skinned

Request #5 (for White doll) 1 Black doll 1 Black doll 2 White doll 2 White doll 1 White doll

Request #6 (for Black doll) 2 Black doll 3 Black doll 2 Black doll

Request # 7 (for African-American 2 Black doll 1 Black doll doll) 2 White doll 1 White doll 1 White doll

Request #8 (looks like you) 1 Black doll 1 Black doll 2 Black doll 1 White doll 2 White doll

With regards to racial preference (Table 3.4), both light-skinned subjects chose the White doll for request two (nice doll). One of the subjects picked the White doll and the other chose the Black doll for requests one (play with), three (looks bad), and four (nice color). Similar to the light-skinned subjects, all three of the medium-skinned children chose the White doll for request two (nice doll). With regards to request one (play with), one of the medium-skinned subjects chose the Black doll while the other two chose the White doll. On requests three (looks bad) and four (nice color), two of the subjects chose the Black doll for both requests while only one medium-skinned subject selected the White doll. Both dark-skinned subjects chose the White doll for request one (play with). Likewise, both subjects chose the Black doll for request three

(looks bad). For requests two (nice doll) and four (nice color), one of the dark-skinned subjects selected the Black doll and one chose the White doll.

Table 3.4. Identification of Racial Preference by Participant Skin Color

Interview Questions Choice by Participant Skin Color

Light-skinned Medium-skinned Dark-skinned

Request #1 (play with) 1 Black doll 1 Black doll 1 White doll 2 White doll 2 White doll

Request #2 (nice doll) 1 Black doll 2 White doll 3 White doll 1 White doll

Request # 3 (looks bad) 1 Black doll 2 Black doll 2 Black doll 1 White doll 1 White doll

Request #4 (nice color) 1 Black doll 2 Black doll 1 Black doll 1 White doll 1 White doll 1 White doll

Current Research Study

The present research study examined the attitudes and beliefs associated with racial identification and preference in young children today as they compared to the attitudes and beliefs of the children in the original Clark and Clark Doll Test (1958). More specifically, the current study tested the following hypotheses;

Research Question 1: If presented with four doll choices representing different shades of

skin tone, will the majority of the children accurately identify themselves with the doll

that most resembles their skin color?

1H 0: The majority of the children, when presented with four doll choices representing

different shades of skin tone, would not accurately identify themselves with the doll that

most resembles their skin color.

Research Question 2: If interviewed using a free-choice method, are the children equally likely to select any one of the four dolls in the first five questions?

2H 0: When interviewed using the free-choice method, the children are equally likely to select any one of the four dolls or none of them.

Research Question 3: Is the children’s own skin tone related to their preferences to the first five questions?

3H 0: The children’s own skin color is not related to their preferences.

Research Question 4: Are children of lighter skin tones or darker skin tones more likely to answer questions one, two, four, and nine the same way?

4H 0: Children with lighter skin tones are not more likely than other children to answer questions 1, 2, 4, and 9 the same way.

5H 0: Children with darker skin tones are not more likely than other children to answer questions 1, 2, 4, and 9 the same way.

Research Question 5: Will children pick the same doll for questions three and five?

6H 0: Children will not pick the same doll for questions 3 & 5.

Research Question 6: Is there a difference in the doll choices among children attending predominately Black, predominately White, or integrated schools to the first five questions?

7H 0: When asked to select the nice, bad, pretty, or ugly doll, or the doll that they like, children attending integrated schools will not choose differently than children attending more segregated schools.

Research Question 7: Were the children in the current study equally likely to select the

African-American, Black, and White doll as did the children in the Clark and Clark

study?

8H 0: A different percentage of children will identify the Black doll as did the children in

the Clark and Clark study.

9H 0: A different percentage of children will identify the African-American doll as did

the children in the Clark and Clark study.

10H 0: A different percentage of children will identify the White doll as did the children

in the Clark and Clark study.

Research Question 8: Were the dark-skinned and light-skinned children equally likely to

select the African-American, Black, and White doll?

11H 0: A different percentage of the dark-skinned children will identify the Black doll

than did the light-skinned children in the study.

12H 0: A different percentage of the dark-skinned children will identify the African-

American doll than did the light-skinned children in the study.

13H 0: A different percentage of dark-skinned children will identify the White doll than

did the light-skinned children in the study.

Research paradigm. According to Kant’s Principle of Question Propagation, “the progress of knowledge-development in the course of resolving our questions always brings new questions to light” (Rescher, 2006, p. 105). In other words, new knowledge emerges from inquiry and the process of asking new questions. Specifically, my decision to revisit the issue of racial identification and preference in young children was provoked by the idea that the answers to the Clarks’ (1958) research questions on children’s perceptions of race may have changed

42 over time. In addition, I discovered that there were certain questions that had not been explored in the Clarks’ (1958) study and thus considered them worth asking in the current study. As I reflected on the validity of some of the old questions, I determined whether or not they were suitable for my research study. Consequently, changes and omissions were made. Specific changes will be discussed later in the chapter.

According to Rescher (2006), “further progress is always possible: in principle we can always go beyond whatever point we have so far managed to reach” (p. 96). Thus, from a postpositivist paradigm I expanded the knowledge of what was currently known about children’s perceptions on race beyond the absolutes of seeing merely Black or White. Instead, throughout my research process the knowledge and data I gathered was conjectural. This method allowed me to synthesize the nature of what was reality for the children participating in the study along with my own relationship to the research topic and what was to be known about it.

Methods. The current study utilized an embedded mixed method design. This particular research design was chosen because it allowed me to collect both quantitative and qualitative data.

According to Creswell (2008), the value of using an embedded mixed method approach is that

“one form of data play(s) a supportive role to the other form of data” (pg. 558). Therefore, the comments that the participants made during the interview process were recorded concurrent to the quantitative data collection. Using an embedded mixed method approach was beneficial as it gave me insight to understanding the outcomes of the quantitative data analysis. SenGupta

(1993) explained that this technique is often used on order to expand and enhance the range of the research. According to Greene et al. (1989) there are five purposes for which a mixed methodology is used (as cited in SenGupta, 1993). They are: 1) Triangulation, 2)

Complementarity, 3) Development, 4) Initiation, and 5) Expansion. Of the five reasons,

Complementarity is used when “the results from one method helps to enhance or clarify the results from another method” (SenGupta, 1993, pg. 3). The current research study used this approach in order to inform the reader as to why the participants in the study liked or did not like the doll that looked like them.

Creswell (2008) cautions however that there are disadvantages to utilizing this type of research design. Specific to my research, it was possible that the qualitative data collection process could have altered the outcomes of the study. In order to minimize the possible influence the qualitative data had on the quantitative data, I completed the qualitative portion of the research at the end of each interview by asking the participants to explain why they did or did not like the skin color of the doll they chose that looked like them.

Certain variables were modified in the current research study. Therefore, it is important to note that there were several novelties associated with the current research study. Unlike the

Clarks’ Doll Test, in my study I interviewed children of any racial background. Also, the terminology was slightly amended in the current study from the original set of interview questions. Specifically, the term “Negro” was changed to “African-American” to better represent today’s lingo. The inclusion of a light-skinned and medium-skinned doll was also introduced in the current study.

Recruitment of subjects. Subjects for the current research study were recruited from public elementary schools and before-and-after school programs in the state of Ohio using a nonrandom procedure. Initial telephone calls were made to public pre-schools, elementary schools, and Head Start programs explaining the scope of my research study and to elicit assistance with the recruitment of children between the ages of three to seven years. After the initial telephone call, an email was sent to potential cooperating schools. Attached to the email

44 was a letter and power point presentation further explaining the scope of my research. A Letter of Cooperation (see Appendix B) was disseminated to administrators who consented to assist with the research study by allowing me access into their respective buildings.

The method utilized for procuring possible schools was both criterion sampling and convenience sampling. Criterion sampling ensured that the participants met specific conditions for inclusion in the study (Creswell, 1998). The latter method, convenience sampling, involved the process of asking administrators for permission to interview children in their school buildings. This type of sampling provided ease during the recruitment process as it saved on the time and effort it would have taken to seek out individual participants for the research study.

Once school administrators granted their approval, the families were informed of the nature of the research study in writing (see Appendix C). Any foreseeable risks and the voluntary nature of the child’s participation were also disclosed in the correspondence. In addition to the letter, a consent form and personal data sheet (refer to Appendices D and E respectively) were sent home.

Participants were selected using a random sampling procedure. Every third child from a list of all students meeting the age requirements for inclusion in the study was given an envelope containing the abovementioned items.

Subjects. A total of 165 children were included in the research study. The age distribution of the child participants ranged between three to seven years, as this was the age range of the participants in the Clarks’ research study and, according to two theories, the age when children develop their own identity (Clark & Clark, 1958; Kerwin & Ponterotto, 1995; Nesdale, 2008).

Variables which met the criteria for inclusion in the research population included the following:

(a) participants were between the ages of three to seven years at the time of interviewing; (b)

45 participants were able to visually see each doll choice; and (c) subjects were able to physically and/or verbally respond to the research questions.

The participant’s general state of mental and physical health was not significant to the study. However it was difficult for me to understand the speech of several of the participants on occasion. In such cases, I asked the child to point to the doll of his or her choice in addition to his or her verbal attempts. To increase the accuracy of the qualitative data during these instances, I compared my anecdotal notes against the taped interview sessions.

There were no immediate or long range physical or mental risks to the participants related to the procedures used in the research study. Deception was not a part of the research design.

Participation in the research study was strictly voluntary and parents were permitted to withdraw their child at any time during the study. In addition, I made the decision to cease an interview if a child displayed discomfort or was unwilling to participate in the study. All of the information gathered as a result of the study remained confidential. The names of the individuals involved in the study were not associated with the research findings in any way. For that reason, all information was identifiable through a code number only.

In my pilot experiment, the children appeared to enjoy the interview procedure. This was due in part to the fact that the children regarded the interview to some extent as a game. Play- based assessments provide an excellent opportunity to asses and evaluate young children

(McLean, Bailey, & Wolery, 2004). This type of assessment benefits the researcher as well as the participant. Play scenarios gave me a venue in which I could interview the children in a non- threatening environment. For the children, observations carried out in a naturalistic situation helped to reduce any anxiety associated with the interviewing process and increased their willingness to participate in the research study (McLean, Bailey, & Wolery, 2004).

Data collection and analysis procedure. The participants’ involvement in the study consisted of one interview session which lasted approximately five to seven minutes. The teachers were notified the day of my arrival that I would be pulling students throughout the day for interviews. Using classroom rosters, I walked to each room and requested students two at a time for interviewing. In order to develop a rapport with the participants, I engaged in general conversations with them about school and personal areas of interest during our walk to the interview room. This helped me establish the necessary relationship with the participants, as suggested by Seidman (2006).When building relationships with participants, Seidman recommended, “the interviewer keeps enough distance to allow the participant to fashion his or her responses as independently as possible” (p. 96). In other terms, the rapport built with each participant was equally as important as his or her ability to respond in a sincere, autonomous manner. Therefore, it was important that the participants felt comfortable in the interviewing relationship, and in their responses to the questions.

Interviewing was the principal method used for data collection. It was important that each interview took place in a location that cultivated a non-threatening environment for the participants. As a result, all interviews took place in the educational setting in which the child was enrolled. Once we arrived to the room designated for interviewing, I instructed one participant to sit in a chair while the other participant completed the interview. Once the initial interview was completed, the second student interviewed while the other sat in the waiting area.

Afterwards, both students were walked back to class and two more students were picked up. This process was repeated until the end of the school day.

American Girl Bitty Baby dolls were used during the interviewing process. These dolls were chosen because they are offered in eleven different hair, eye, and skin combinations. Four

47 dolls were included in the research study. The dolls were selected because they offered a variety of skin tone options without presenting the children with too many choices. I used American

Girl’s explanation to describe dolls and assigned the following alphabetical codes to each: a) dark skin doll with textured black hair and light brown eyes, b) light skin doll with dark brown hair and light brown eyes, c) medium skin doll with dark brown hair and dark brown eyes, and d) light skin doll with blonde hair and blue-gray eyes (see Appendix F for a visual image of each doll). Each doll was dressed in a white cloth diaper. This was done in an effort to create the illusion of sameness in reference to gender and decrease biases due to novelty. All the dolls were kept identical with respect to dress and position throughout the interview process.

Each participant was asked a series of questions (refer to Appendix A for a complete list of the interview questions). The interview questions from the Clarks’ study (1958) were slightly modified for the current research study. Questions one through five were designed to determine racial preference and were significantly different from the original interview questions. The current research study asked participants; is there a doll that is a nice doll, is there a doll that looks bad, and is there a doll that is a nice color? If the participant answered yes to any of the questions, he or she was directed to show me which doll corresponded to his or her answer. This varied from the original set of interview questions in that the Clarks used a forced-choice method to elicit responses from participants. In their study, Jordan and Hernandez-Reif (2009) found that when forced to choose between Black and White characters, the Black children in the control group showed a tendency to select the White character as the one they would want as their “best friend.” Offering a choice in the current study allowed me to better determine if the child actually preferred one of the dolls in lieu of displaying evidence of preference for the reason that it was forced upon him or her. Questions six through eight (see Appendix F) were designed to

48 determine an awareness of racial differences. Specifically, question eight asks participants to

“give me the doll that is an African-American doll. The term Negro (which was widely used throughout society during the time of the original experiment) was changed to African-American in the current study to better synchronize with terminology used today. Question nine, “Give me the doll that looks like you,” was designed to determine racial identification. Lastly, question ten,

“Do you like the color of this doll,” (doll choice given in question # 9) was designed to determine the participant’s acceptance of his or her own skin color.

In order to determine accuracy in the participant’s response to question nine, I gave each participant a rating of “A,” “B,” “C,” or “D” in correspondence to the doll that most resembled him or her (see Appendix H for tracking sheet). In order to increase the inter-rater reliability of my assessment of a participant’s skin tone an outside evaluator, which in most cases was the classroom teacher, also assessed the skin tone of each participant in relation to the dolls. The agreement between my identification of the child’s skin tone and the teacher’s identification was

87.8%. Participants were asked to respond to the entire set of interview questions by choosing one of the four dolls presented for each response. Upon completion of each interview, the participants were praised for their efforts and given a sticker as a reward.

In contrast to the Clarks’ Doll Test (1958), the dolls utilized in the current research study were different in terms of skin tone, hair color, and eye color. During the interview process, the dolls were randomly arranged on the table in a straight line directly in front of the participant. A participant’s response was recorded after he or she pointed to or picked up the doll of his or her choice. Each participant’s doll choice was recorded by alphabetical code. In my previous research, it became evident that several of the participants noticeably preferred one of the

African-American dolls over the other. The same was true with respect to the Caucasian dolls.

Conversely, a few of the participants seemed to pick dolls at random as if to give all the dolls an equal chance at being chosen. In an effort to better examine this phenomenon, I manually recorded each subject’s response to the interview questions by race and positioning.

Once the data were gathered, the Chi-square goodness of fit test was used to compare the results from the current research study with the results from the Clarks’ study. Chi-square tests were utilized because I had nominal data. In other words, the numbers are simply labels that can be counted but not ordered (Aron & Aron, 1997). Qualitative data were also analyzed and organized in terms of support or relevance provided to the hypotheses. Variables that were considered throughout the analysis of the data included age, gender, skin tone, ethnicity, and educational setting. If the parent or guardian granted permission, the interview was audio and video taped. Recording each interview allowed me to capture qualitative data such as dialogue, facial expressions, body language, and emotional responses to the interview questions.

Qualitative data were transcribed no more than three days after the interviews.

Limitations of the study. As the principal investigator, my personal biases were undeniably a factor in the execution of the research study. Having attended both a predominately

White school and a predominately African-American school as a young child, I distinctly remember my personal path towards self-identification and esteem. On one hand, I understood what it felt like to struggle with identity and acceptance in an environment that did not celebrate the diversity of my cultural background and heritage. As a child I was ashamed at times to discuss the cultural practices, beliefs, and values that made me who I was; Black in America. I vividly remember playground discussions about hair washing and feeling embarrassed that I only washed my hair once a week in lieu of the daily washings my classmates engaged in. I can also recall being called an Oreo (a Black person who acts White) by my sister during this time period.

Several years older than me and having previously attended a racially diverse school, she was set in her ways, proud of her differences, and was not influenced nor intimidated by the lack of diversity the predominately White school district failed to provide. Unlike me, she was comfortable being Black in a White space and perhaps teased me because she wanted me to do the same. Being young however, I struggled with my identity because I didn’t feel comfortable being in an environment where no one looked like me. In my elementary school I was Black and

I was alone.

In contrast, the predominately Black schools I attended often neglected to recognize the

Caucasian students or children from other ethnic backgrounds in their efforts to aggressively celebrate African-American heritage. Although this type of environment assisted me in my identity development, I would assume it did for the other students what the predominately White districts did for me. In addition, I observed similar inequalities when I enrolled my own children in primary school. The realization of this discrepancy was both disheartening and humbling at the same time. Time had changed but much had stayed the same. Unfortunately, this left a negative impression of my views regarding racial equality.

Through my experiences and those of my children I became consciously aware of the harsh reality that what was once ruled unconstitutional was now made constitutional through a very simple but powerful practice neighborhood schooling. I wasn’t ignorant of the fact that inequality within the schools still existed. The dilemma for me was how to best afford an education for my own children. This simple term, afford, brought about deeper understanding and new meaning. On the one hand, in order to “afford” my children a better education I realized

I had to send them to a school district that had adequate resources, text books, facilities, etc.; everything needed for a quality education. Most of those schools were situated in the more

51 affluent areas of town. On the other hand however, in order to afford a better education for my children I recognized that my financial stability played an important role in where they would be able to attend school. Being able to monetarily afford to reside in a well-to-do neighborhood meant my children would attend better schools. So I did; and so they were. The schools were better because they consistently preformed at a rate of excellence on the state report card and had access to resources that many of the inner-city, low-income schools lacked. Nonetheless, my earlier realization became a reality once again. I often wondered how attending a predominately

White school would affect the self-esteem and identity development of my children and if I was doing the right thing by placing a higher value on academic success over esteem.

Coming to terms with my personal biases was a critical step in the research process as I became consciously aware of my own limitations throughout the data collection and analysis process. According to Hatch (2002), the data and not my own assumptions should drive the research. Therefore, several steps were implemented in order to minimize the effects of my biases on the research study. First, I self-monitored my own behavior during the interviews. This was essential in order to remain consciously aware of my reactions to the subjects’ responses. It was important that I remained neutral throughout the interview process. I praised each participant at the conclusion of the interview as it was important for me to applaud the participant’s effort and not his or her ability to correctly answer the questions. In addition, I monitored my own actions so that I did not behave differently with the participants based on their skin tone and/or gender. In order to strengthen the inner-rater reliability, an outside observer randomly viewed the videotaped interviews for any evidence of differentiation of subjects due to skin tone and/or gender. Afterwards, feedback was provided to me in relation to interviewing techniques and behaviors towards the subjects.

Due to my existing relationship with various school personnel, I assumed access into the schools would be fairly easy to obtain. To the contrary, I found it quite difficult to gain access into several of the schools. Many of the principals I spoke with were concerned about the anatomy of the dolls, how invasive the interview questions were and whether or not my interviewing would disrupt the academic day. In addition, many of the principals I contacted seemed unsure about the district’s policy of allowing me access into their building. As a result, I had to go through a lot of red tape of trying to gain approval at various levels of administration.

In one instance, I was turned away because I was told my request came at a time when the program would be scheduling their end-of-the-year assessments. Although some attempts were successful, this process often ended in dead-end scenarios. As a result, my sample was limited in several ways, such as not having enough African-American participants included in the overall study, limited children attending racially integrated schools, and not having ample participants to provide numbers big enough to test the differences among the four skin tones. These limitations will be discussed later in the chapter.

I did not have enough participants to provide large enough data to test the differences among the four skin tones. Providing the children with various skin tones was one of the purposeful changes I made to the original methodology used in the original doll test. However, when running tests in SPSS, the numbers were not large enough to run data with. As a result, collapsed variables “Dark” (doll choices A and C) and “Light” (doll choices B and D) had to be created.

Many of the children appeared reluctant to say the Black doll was the ugly or bad doll during the interviews. On several occasions I noticed some of the children glance at doll choice

A (dark tone/textured hair), look at me, and then respond “no/none.” There are several reasons

53 why the children could have behaved in such a way. First, I had to take into consideration that many of the children may have simply been reluctant to answer during the interviewing process for one reason or another. According to McLean et al (2004), the sheer nature of young children makes it difficult to assess and interview them. Young children have short attention spans, can become anxious or uneasy during the interview, or may simply be ill or exhausted on the day of interviewing. Such reasons had to be taken into consideration as to why the children may have been cautious when answering.

Second, I had to consider myself as the interviewer. Many of the children may have been reluctant to answer the questions in such a way because of my race and the fact that they associated their preferred doll choice with the color of my skin. To eliminate this as a factor in future research studies, I would recruit both male and female interviewers of various races.

While the previously mentioned reasons seemed legitimate, I also had to consider that the children’s eye gaze and hesitation could have simply been a part of their natural thought process.

I came to this conclusion because I often find myself “staring off into space” when I am in deep thought. Therefore, as I reflected on reasons why the children might have behaved this way during the interview process, it became apparent to me that it may not be a factor of one of the previously mentioned reasons. Instead, the children might have behaved in such a way solely because that’s how they process information.

The last limitation that will be discussed involves the demographic data and the research settings. This study was limited to a selected number of rural and urban public school settings in the state of Ohio. Ohio was chosen based on convenience and accessibility. Because of this, I cannot generalize my results to other demographic areas throughout the United States nor can I make a statement regarding the attitudes and beliefs of children attending private, charter, or on-

54 line schools. In addition, the population of children I interviewed included participants from various racial backgrounds. While this brought about newness to the current body of research, the original research study only interviewed African-American children. Only twenty-three out of 164 participants in my research study were African-American. At times this made it difficult to compare my results to the Clark and Clark (1958) study.

Although segregated schools were deemed unconstitutional with the passing of Brown vs.

Board of Education (1954), including schools that were more like the school settings in the original Clark (1958) study would have made for a better comparison of my results in Chapter

IV. It is important to note that even though the schools were integrated, they severely lacked diversity. As a result, I did not have enough children in my sample who were attending racially integrated schools. The population of participants for the study came from schools that were located in either very rural areas in which mostly White students attended or urban areas in which mostly African-American students attended.

CHAPTER IV

Data Analysis

Overview of Results

Kenneth and Mamie Clark (1958) concluded that school segregation led to an inferior, self-denigrating state of mind in young children. More precisely, racial identification and racial preferences were examined. Since their original experiment, studies have been conducted on this topic that both affirm and refute their findings (Farrell & Olson, 1983; Gopaul-McNicol, 1988;

Jordan & Hernandez-Reif, 2009; Powell-Hopson, 1995). By examining the attitudes and beliefs of young children enrolled in integrated public school settings, the current research study sought to revisit the issue of racial identification and preference in children today. Included in this chapter are the results from the data analysis. Again, this study explored the following research questions;

Research Question 1: If presented with four doll choices representing different shades of

skin tone, will the majority of the children accurately identify themselves with the doll

that most resembles their skin color?

1H 0: The majority of the children, when presented with four doll choices representing

different shades of skin tone, would not accurately identify themselves with the doll that

most resembles their skin color.

Research Question 2: If interviewed using a free-choice method, are the children

equally likely to select any one of the four dolls in the first five questions?

2H 0: When interviewed using the free-choice method, the children are equally likely to

select any one of the four dolls or none of them.