Are Our Research Epistemologies Racially Biased? Author(S): James Joseph Scheurich and Michelle D
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Coloring Epistemologies: Are Our Research Epistemologies Racially Biased? Author(s): James Joseph Scheurich and Michelle D. Young Source: Educational Researcher, Vol. 26, No. 4 (May, 1997), pp. 4-16 Published by: American Educational Research Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1176879 . Accessed: 23/07/2014 14:40 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Educational Research Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Educational Researcher. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 149.31.21.88 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 14:40:03 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Coloring Epistemologies: Are Our Research EpistemologiesRacially Biased? JAMESJOSEPH SCHEURICH MICHELLED. YOUNG EducationalResearcher, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 4-16 neo-realisms, interpretivisms, constructivisms, the critical tradition, and postmodernisms/poststructuralisms3-can be understood as racially biased in a way that will (1) facilitate an scholarsof colorhave Stan- understanding of just what epistemological espected suggested (e.g., (2) the kind of debate that has even within the of this racism4is; ignite spirited field, 1985, 1993a, 1994), pages occurred around research A. & other, arguably lesser, issues; journal (J. Banks, 1993, 1995; Gordon, Miller, (3) draw some of the research that the we use in prominent epistemologists, Rollock, 1990), epistemologies typically those who author methods into this educational research be biased. have especially textbooks, may racially They and (4) additional efforts scholars that our our use of but debate; provoke among argued epistemologiesl-not them, of all races to address this We will this the themselves-are biased problem. pursue epistemologies racially ways five of racism and their of a new of purpose by discussing categories knowing, implicitly proposing, thus, category to and we will conclude with some racism that could be labeled racism.There linkages research, sug- epistemological about what needs to be done to address has a lack of or gestions initially been, however, provocative response-pro racism. con-to this race-oriented educa- epistemological argument by leading The first two of racism we shall discuss- tional in of categories methodologists journals education, including overt and covert racism-are defined as this one.2 But this lack of is in curious contrast to typically oper- response at the individual the next two are the and contentious debates on other ating level; organiza- lively epistemologi- tional and social and societal cal such as versus categories-institutional issues, quantitative qualitative (e.g., in create the social context for the versus Heshu- racism-and, effect, Cizek, 1995), objectivity subjectivity (e.g., two The final one is a civilizational cat- or prior categories. sius, 1994), validity (e.g., Lenzo, 1995;Moss, 1994), para- and we will creates or constitutes the issues in Delandshere egory, it, contend, digmatic general (e.g., Bereiter,1994; for all of the four it is & possibility prior categories.5Further, Petrosky, 1994; Gage, 1989). the latter that is the salient one for discussions If we were those this race-oriented category among raising issue, the racial bias of research we would wonder our efforts to that the regarding epistemologies. Figure why argue 1 illustrates and these it also of educational research were biased positions categories; epistemologies racially the structure of this article. The indi- no those graphically depicts provoked virtually response, particularly among vidual which includes both overt and covert who author the and research level, racism, quantitative qualitative sits within the institutional level, which sits within the methods textbooks we all typically use. We would cer- societal level. All of these four sit, in a hierarchy of smaller tainly wonder whether our argument was ignored because to larger and broader, inside the largest and broadest it raised the disquieting issue of race, because it was category, the civilizational level.6 thought to be a weak or irrelevant argument, or because the argument was simply not understood. Unfortunately, Two Categories of Individual Racism: Overt and Covert we also wonder whether this was one more might just Racial bias or racism is understood in incidence of Ellison's "invisible man" of typically popular (1972) syndrome, culture and in academia in terms of individual acts of overt Whites ignoring racial issues and people of color. As researchers whose race is White and who have written and presented on both epistemological and racial issues (Scheurich, 1993, 1994b; Young 1995a, 1995b), we want to offer a substantive response to the argument of the JAMES JOSEPHSCHEURICH is an assistant professorin the De- scholars of color who have contended that our research partmentof EducationalAdministration, University of Texas epistemologies are racially biased. It will be our claim that at Austin, GeorgeI. SanchezBuilding (SZB) 310, Austin, TX the lack of response to date to the racial bias argument is 78712-1291. He specializes in research epistemology and not primarily a function of overt or covert racism, as some methodology,school change, policy studies, race and racism,and might argue, or of institutional or societal racism, as others organizationaltheory. might suggest. Instead, we will contend that this silence is a function of a different lack-a lack of understanding MICHELLED. YOUNGis a doctoralstudent in theDepartment of among researchers as to how race is a critically significant EducationalAdministration, University of Texasat Austin, SZB epistemological problem in educational research. 310, Austin, TX 78712. Her areasof specializationare research Our purpose then is to discuss how our range of research paradigmsand methodology,educational politics and policy,pro- epistemologies-including positivism, postpositivisms, fessionaldevelopment, and home-schoolrelations. 4 EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER This content downloaded from 149.31.21.88 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 14:40:03 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Researchers, just like other members of this society, typically judge their own lack of racism based on personal evaluations that they do not, as an individual, have a negative judgment of another person just because that person is a member of a particular race. While this individ- IndividualRacism: ualized, conscious, moral or ethical commitment to anti- Overt and covert racism is a significant and meaningful individual and historical accomplishment, the fact that it restricts our of racism to an individualized ethical arena InstitutionalRacism understanding is a barrier to a broader, more comprehensive under- standing of racism-for society and for researchers. Understanding that we need to get beyond issues of Societal Racism individual racism, whether overt or covert, is critical to initiating a consideration of whether our research epistemologies are racially biased. For example, if we, as were to read an article that that our CivilizationalRacism researchers, argued research (out of which emergesepistemological racism) epistemologies were racially biased and if we disagreed with this argument because we did not consider ourselves, as individuals, to be consciously or intentionally racist, this judgment would indicate that we did not understand epistemological racism. The error here is that FIGURE 1. Levels each which is "broader"and of racism, of racial critiques of research epistemologies have virtually than aboveit. "deeper" any nothing to do with whether an individual researcher is overtly or covertly racist. A researchercould be adamantly anti-racist in thought and deed and still be using a research prejudice that are racially based, i.e., overt racism(see, for epistemology that, given our later discussion of episte- example, Kluegel & Smith, 1986; Ogbu, 1978; Reyes & mological racism, could be judged to be racially biased. Halcon, 1988; Rizvi, 1993; Scheurich, 1993; Tatum, 1992). Consequently, researchers considering the issue of epis- For example, if a college professor makes a racial slur temological racism need to get beyond the question of during a class lecture, this is seen as overt racism. Overt whether personally they are racists because this latter racism, then, is a public, conscious, and intended act by a judgment is not related to judgments about epistemolog- person or persons from one race with the intent of doing ical racism. to a or of another race damage person persons chiefly Institutional Racism because of the race of the second person or persons.7 While there are many in the U.S. who are overt racists, there is a Institutional racism exists when institutions or organi- general social consensus, at least at the public level,8 that zations, including educational ones, have standard oper- these behaviors are socially unacceptable (though verbali- ating procedures (intended or unintended) that hurt zations of overt racism are constitutionally protected in members of one or more races in relation to members of the most cases). dominant race