Running head:  INSTITUTIONAL RACISM

Institutional Racism as a Framework for Evaluation

of Attitudes, Expectations, Curriculum and Instruction

Rebecca L. Reed

Western Michigan University

Institutional Racism as a Framework for Evaluation of Attitudes,

Expectations and Curriculum and Instruction

50 years have passed since the landmark Supreme Court decision in the case of Brown v. Board of Education.  This decision determined that a separate education for minority students was not equal to the education received by Caucasian students.  The desegregation actions resulting from Brown v. Board of Education has shaped the public education system we see in American today. The education system verbalizes a firm commitment to recognizing diversity and providing equal educational opportunities to all students. 

The reality, however, is much different.  Regardless of attempts at

Strong Disruption!

legislating equality and our verbal commitment to celebrating diversity, minority students as a whole continue to experience significant difficulty achieving equal levels of success throughout their schooling.   This reality serves as evidence of institutional racism

What does this phrase mean?        

 in our education system on a national and local level.  If we as educators allow ourselves to ignore this reality we perpetuate a vicious cycle of inequality.  The result of this ignorance is that we fail our profession, our community, and to a much greater extent, our society.

Very strong cost statement!

There is no doubt that institutional racism is an extremely intricate problem with significant aspects that are outside the influence of a single teacher or school district.  However, if we use the concept of institutional racism as a framework for evaluatingour educational system and our local community district, in this case

Kalamazoo Public Schools, we begin to unravel the complexities of the issue.  We must continually evaluate the ways in which we as educators contribute to an educational system that is failing our minority students.  It is our responsibility then to use our awareness to affect change in those apects over which we have control,

You mean ‘effect’ here.

specifically our attitudes, expectations for students, and the curriculum which guides our instruction. 

Since the section below begins the discussion part of the paper, The reader will probably take the previous sentences as your main point.  How do they do on the criteria that the LRS argues we need to use?  Are they precise enough? disputable?   As clear as possible? Do they directly address the main Question in this problem?  I find them very strong on all counts!

Institutional Racism as a Framework

Institutional racism in education is bias or ignorance exhibited by the school system through primarily unconscious inattention to the distinct culture of minority students (Texeira & Christian, 2002).  VanDonselaar (RR 2) pointed out that this is evident in the standard operating procedures that unintentionally hurt members 

                                    This what?

of minority races.  While Valentine (RR 4) notes that factors perpetuating institutional racism are often

Excellent use of colleagues’ reading records.  Very legitimate and useful!

 difficult to identify because the problem is generated by commonly held assumptions.   Hanssen (1998) reflects on her experiences as a white teacher in a racially diverse school stating that despite her academic background “it took a while before I was able to recognize the various and unintentional forms of racism that were hiding behind the standard practices of my hard-working, well-meaning colleagues and that undoubtedly lurked in my own” (694).  Tettegah (1996) expands this by reminding us that the basis of racism in the education system is unconscious prejudice, which by definition is an attitude or belief, and therefore not always an observable behavior. 

Evidence of Institutional Racism

The concept of Institutional racism can best be understood by first looking at the contrast between Caucasian and minority achievement in our local school system, Kalamazoo Public Schools (KPS).   Among the achievement indicators important in understanding institutional racism are standardized tests results, grade point averages, drop-out rates, and identification for special education services.  This is obviously not an exhaustive or even comprehensive list of indicators for student achievement or success, but it does serve as an excellent starting point for evaluation of the phenomenon within KPS.  For more information on the importance of other factors including access to advanced courses, enrollment in secondary education and expulsion/suspension rates, please see Gordon, Piana. & Keleher, (2000), Keleher & Johnson (2001) and Texeira & Christian (2002). 

A necessary starting point when evaluating data regarding Kalamazoo Public Schools specifically is to look at the racial composition of the student body. 

Table 1, which displays data regarding KPS enrollment during the 1999-2000 school year, certainly indicates a racially integrated school district (Office 1, 1999).  Only a slightly higher percentage of white students attended all KPS district schools when compared to African American students, while the total of all minority students combined is actually greater than the percentage of white students. 

Given the focus of the federal government on high stakes standardized testing as the primary measure of accountability for schools and KPS specifically, it is only natural to begin by considering the results of those tests. 

According to Standard & Poor’s School Evaluation Services (2002), 62.3 percent of white students achieved passing rates on the MEAP test in comparison to the 25.1 percent of African American students who achieved those same results.  This is especially alarming when enrollment of African American students in KPS is not significantly lower than that of white students in KPS (see table 1). 

            Additional data generated by KPS Office of Administrative Information Systems further demonstrates the nature and significance of the issue when considering measures like grade point averages, drop-out rates and special education (SPED) enrollment.  The table that follows illustrates the distribution of grade point averages by race during the 1998-1999 school years at KPS high schools (Office 2, 1999). 

As one might expect, the majority of students at KPS high schools fall in the middle range of 2.99 to 1.0 when looking at grade point average (GPA), however it is disconcerting to note that 54.52% of those students are African American.  Additional evidence for concern is apparent when considering the highest GPA range.  Only 6.94% of African American students achieved a 3.5 to 4.0 GPA, while 35.77% of white students achieved those high marks. 

The factor of drop-out rates certainly warrants attention.  Table 4 that follows shows the percentage of students who started 9^th grade in 1995 at one of the two KPS high schools and were not receiving any educational services designed for diploma or GED completion in 1999 (e.g. those who moved to another district or left to attend adult education programs were not included)(Office 3, 1999). 

While the data presented in Table 4 is not as glaringly alarming as the GPA data in Table 3, if one considers minority groups as a whole, the difference becomes more concerning.  It is clear that minority students are more likely than white students to drop-out. 

Additionally, minority students are more likely to be identified as needing special education services.  Coutinho, Oswald and Best (2002) conducted a study to evaluate the influence of demographic factors and gender on the likelihood of minority students being identified as having learning disabilities.  They determined that African American males were 2.3 times more likely to be labeled with a learning disability than Caucasian

Four instances of passive voice

females (Countinho, Oswald & Best, 2002).  Data presented by the Office of Administrative Information systems at KPS (Office, 4) illustrates the assertion of Coutinho, Oswald and Best (2002) in our own community school district (see Table 5). 

Although the specific data presented is specific to only one urban school district in the United States, Roers (RR 1) notes the prevalence of statistical evidence throughout the nation regarding the gap between white student achievement and minority student achievement on the measures discussed previously.  Coutinho, Oswald and Best (2002) indicate that while their study focused on the identification rates of minority students with learning disabilities, the disproportionate identification rate of minority students as having emotional impairments and cognitive impairments is well documented on a national level. 

Attitudes and Expectations

            It is easy to succumb to the notion that institutional racism is outside of the range of influence for a well-meaning teacher who does not condone individual racism and is likely adamantly opposed to individual acts of racism (Hanssen, 1998; Tettegah, 1996).  Texeira and Christian (2002) note that factors like socio-economic status, “under funding of urban schools, parental apathy, substance abuse…and a host of other ills” (117) must not be used as an excuse for educators to ignore the institutionally biased practices over which they do have influence.  To use these factors as an excuse is an attitude that our students cannot afford.  Coutinho, Oswald and Best (2002) note that minority students are “disproportionately exposed to toxic environmental influences and this fact represents a critical bias in U.S. society” (58).  It is the responsibility of the teacher then to be knowledgeable about community resources and additional educational services and make referrals to appropriate services in order to help the students overcome environmental factors contributing to an unsuccessful school experience (Texeira & Christian, 2002; Coutinho, Oswald & Best, 2002). 

            A second issue over which teachers have influence falls under the category of attitudes and described as racial consciousness.  According to racial identity development theory, racial consciousness develops as the perceptions, attitudes and characteristics of an individual (Tettegah, 1996).  These are based on interactions between the individual and the environment which is influenced by the particular racial group(s) to which a person belongs.  The different perspectives that influence an individual’s racial consciousness play out in the educational system as a cultural mismatch or discontinuity between the teacher and the student (Graybill, 1997). This is especially concerning when considering data regarding the racial and ethnic background of America’s teachers.  According to the National Education Association (2003) the percentage of African American teachers has decreased from 8 percent in 1971 to 6 percent in 2001. 

It is significant then, to consider how the racial consciousness of white teachers influences their attitudes of and expectations for minority students.  Tettegah (1996) conducted a study to determine the influence of the factor for white prospective teachers and its correlation with their attitudes regarding the teach-ability of minority students.  The study delineated four white racial consciousness personality types which include reactive, integrative, conflictive and dominative.  Tettegah (1996) found that white prospective teachers in the sample held differential attitudes toward white, African American, Asian American and Latino student groups depending on the dimensions being rated.  These dimensions include cognitive ability, institutionally appropriate behaviors and personal-social behaviors.  Both the reactive and dominative personality types rated African American students lower in the cognitive dimension.

            The perceptions teachers make about race correspond directly to the expectations they have for their minority students and the assumptions they make about their students’ potential.  Their assumptions then influence the teaching methods teachers implement and their reaction to student behavior (Texeira & Christian, 2002; Graybill, 1997).  These attitudes, assumptions and expectations have a tangible effect on student achievement (Graybill, 1997).  As noted by Wenzler, (RR 3) Dr. Allen Webb, a professor of English Education and Postcolonial studies at Western Michigan University, indicated that students will not learn more than they are required by their teachers to learn and teachers are not expecting enough from their students, especially students from poor families or racial minorities (personal conversation, October 18, 2004).    Both Tettegah (1996) and Texeira and Christian (2002) focused on the implications of these concerns for quality teacher education programs.  They call for a multi-cultural teacher education curriculum which involves reflective teacher evaluation of their racial consciousness and attitudes towards other racial groups.  This takes multi-cultural education to a more reflective, personal and pragmatic level. 

Curriculum and Instruction

            Please consider for a moment the situation observed below (Personal observation, 10/4/2004).

In a work experience program for students identified as needing special education services in a Kalamazoo public high school there are twelve African American students, one Hispanic student, one multi-racial student, and one Caucasian student.  The topic of the lesson is value systems and how they influence individual career decisions.  The handouts of the lesson focus on three well-known individuals throughout history who have demonstrated their value system in career decision making.  The following conversation occurred between an African American student (S) and the white teacher (T):

T – What can we learn from the people on your handout?

S – George Washington was black (laughing). 

T – George Washington wasn’t black.  What can you tell me about what you read about

      his values(laughing with student)?

S – All those guys were all black.  They just don’t tell us that (laughing and smiling at

      classmates).

T – You know these people weren’t black.  We’re talking about their values, not the

      color of their skin (becoming slightly impatient).

S – I’m tired of talking about white dudes all the time (angrily shoves handout off the

     desk).

            The minority student in this situation was obviously aware at least on some level that his history and culture is underrepresented or perhaps marginalized in the curriculum found in his public school.  The English curriculum, according to Hanssen (1998) is one area where it is easy to integrate minority influence.  However, this is not happening on a consistent or even frequent basis (Graybill, 1997; Hanssen, 2002; Texeira & Christian, 2002).  Wenzler (RR 4) indicates that this appears to be the case at KPS as well.  In a conversation with an English teacher at one KPS high school, it was determined that the assigned books for 9^th grade English include literature with all white protagonists (Wenzler, RR 4). 

Roers (RR 2) indicates that multi-cultural education is useful for integrating the culture of minority students and general cultural awareness into the curriculum.  However, Graybill (1997) asserts that multi-cultural education is just a beginning in the process of learning to respect the African American culture as distinct and separate.  In addition, scholars and professionals call for a integration of Gardner’s multiple intelligences and a broad range of teaching strategies into the curriculum and teacher pedagogy (Graybill, 1997; Keleher & Johnson, 2001Texeira & Christian, 2002). 

Conclusion

The 50 year anniversary of Brown v. the Board of education is an ideal time to consider again whether we have done enough to ensure minority students receive an education that is, in fact, equal.  For more information on the historical progression of desegregation, please see Walters (2001).  Evidence of attempts at cultural awareness are everywhere in our society and include multicultural teacher education programs at universities, affirmative action, equal employment legislation and institutional diversity policies.  However, it is clearly not enough.  It is easy to assume that there is little a single teacher or school district can do to address the prevalence of institutional racism within their sphere of influence, but we must look at those areas over which we do have control.  These include the attitudes formed through our racial consciousness, the resulting expectations we have for our students, and the curriculum which guides our instruction. 

Reference

Reading Records

Roers, K.  (10/6/2004).  Reading Record 1. 

Roers, K.  (10/10/2004). Reading Record 2.

Valentine, C.  (10/14/2004).  Reading Record 4. 

VanDonselaar, M.  (10/12/2004).  Reading Record 2. 

Wenzler, A.  (10/18/2004).  Reading Record 3.

Wenzler, A.  (10/13/2004).  Reading Record 4.