Sunday, February 3, 2019

White Male Educators

I have nothing against white male educators in general.

I am simply noticing a trend as I look for "recognizable authorities in the industry." I'm supposed to find leaders, speakers, or experts in education. I'm supposed to find a title that people will instantly recognize. I will be asking a few of them for endorsements for my next book about word choice in schools. (In fact, if you look here, you'll see the awesome white educators that endorsed Shift This.)

The first names that came to me were ALL white men.

Don't get me wrong - I have many of these on my "first" list on Twitter, meaning I don't want to miss their tweets (Paul B., Scott H., Kelly G....).

I'm simply - once again - noticing the whiteness that surrounds me.

Looking through my Twitter follows, I see white men as being the ones with the largest voices online. They're they ones that have blogs, podcasts, YouTube channels, get involved in chats, share their ideas, books, other resources and thoughts voraciously.

Where is my diversity in who I follow online? I have very few connections with humans that look different from me. How can I learn more when I'm always paying attention to white voices (male and female)?

So now I'm reaching out to you.

Who do YOU recommend I follow to hear different voices from our field? Please do not simply respond in a tweet - please share those educators you respect (that are not white) in the comments below so other white educators can also learn from them. Thank you in advance!

Friday, December 28, 2018

White Fragility

I just finished White Fragility: Why it's so hard for white people to talk about racism, by Robin DiAngelo.

I need this book. I need it to help me talk about race. To help me verbalize what I'm learning about racism. I wanted to share my notes publicly, even if it's hard for white people to read. If you find it difficult, I suggest you pick up this book and read it yourself - I will miss a TON.

We are socialized into different groups - whether we acknowledge this or not. (17)
Race is a social construction - never more prevalent than in the United States.
If we "look white," we are treated as white in society at large. Although our internal identities may be different, if we "pass" as white, we will still have the white experience externally. (18)
All humans have prejudice. Prejudice is pre-judgment about another person based on thoughts and feelings, including stereotypes, attitudes, and generalizations that are based on little or no experience and then are projected onto everyone from that group. (19)
Discrimination is action based on prejudice (ignoring, exclusion, threats, ridicule, slander, violence). Everyone has prejudice, and everyone discriminates. (20)
Racism occurs when a racial group's prejudice is backed by legal authority and institutional control. This authority and control transforms individual prejudices into a far-reaching system that no longer depends on the good intentions of individual actors; it becomes the default of the society and is reproduced automatically. Racism is a system.  (White men granted suffrage to women, but only granted full access to white women.) (21)
The racial ideology that circulates in the U.S. rationalizes racial hierarchies as the outcome of a natural order resulting from either genetics or individual effort or talent. (21)
The direction of power between white people and people of color is historic, traditional, and normalized in ideology.  Whites hold the social and institutional positions in society to infuse their racial prejudice into the laws, policies, practices, and norms of society in a way that people of color do not. ... In the U.S. only whites have the collective social institutional power and privilege over people of color. THIS is racism. (22)
White supremacy = promotes the idea of whiteness as the ideal for humanity.
Who controls our institutions?
White supremacy is more than the idea that whites are superior to people of color; it is the deeper premise that supports this idea - the definition of whites as the norm or standard for human, and people of color as a deviation from that norm. (33)
White people are defensive, because we have a lack of understanding of implicit bias. (43)
Here I am, today, reading this book in a "good" and "sheltered" community = white community. I am so very privileged. All I see is whites. I belong here. I can go into highly affluent communities and not worry that I don't belong - after all, I'm white. Wherever I go, I am not looked at as a threat or as a criminal. I can teach without worrying about losing my job by saying something "wrong." I am not troubled by racism on a daily (or even weekly or monthly or YEARLY basis). I am free from many burdens - because the color of my skin is white, and society accepts this. (ch 4)

I was actually worried about sharing my thoughts on this book, because of fear of being shunned by fellow white people. There is white solidarity everywhere - no white person wants to cause a stir. That would mean we'd have to TALK about it. Oh, how uncomfortable that would make us. (ch 4)
The "good old days" that white people talk about were only good for white men! (59)
White innocence is NOT an excuse to not talk about race. Just because I grew up segregated (for the most part) from people of color does not mean I haven't benefited from racism. Growing up in segregation (schools, work, social gatherings, places of worship, entertainment, shopping...) reinforces the message that our experiences and perspectives are the only ones that matter. We don't see people of color around us, and few if any adults acknowledge a lack of racial diversity as a problem. In fact, the classification of which neighborhoods are good and which are bad is always based on race. (65)
White people often use color-blind statements or color-celebrated statements to show they are not racist. This only takes race off the table and closes any further exploration. This protects the racial status quo. (78)
Once we understand the power of implicit bias, we know that we must deepen rather than close off further reflection. (81-82)
While it isn't comfortable for most whites to talk about racism, we must do so if we want to challenge - rather than protect - racism. (86-87)
Am I actively seeking to interrupt racism in this context? How do I know? (87)
We've been taught that people of color aren't as smart as white people. We've been taught that they're more violent. We've been taught that it's them vs. us. Yet America was (literally) founded on the backs of black people. White men raped black slaves, only to enslave more. They sold black children. This guilt that whites must have also contributes to anti-blackness.
Anti-blackness is rooted in misinformation, fables, perversions, projections, and lies. (94)
White people are surrounded by protection. We have an insulated environment of racial privilege. We expect racial comfort and become less tolerant of racial stress (she's getting into what white fragility means now). (100)

Random thoughts - Why is it that the government comes down on crack/cocaine users (mostly black) and yet tries to help herion addicts (mostly white)? Jesus is white in my world. Santa Claus is almost always white. (My ignorance shows here - is it because he lives at the North Pole?? Please let me know if this is racism on my part, and help me figure it out.)

I realized what my own response has been when it's been suggested I don't benefit from being white...
Some responses are challenges to objectivity, white taboos on talking openly about race, racial comfort, the expectation that people of color will serve us, white solidarity, white racial innocence, white authority, white centrality, and universalism. My issue? A challenge to meritocracy. I've always thought - I've worked hard to get to where I am. My family wasn't the richest. We lived in what people called "Hangover Park," for goodness sake. Dad was being laid off all the time. We reused paper plates! My white fragility comes when I must acknowledge that access is unequal between racial groups. (104)
When it comes to white solidarity, white protect their positions when challenged by characterizing themselves as victimized, slammed, blamed, and attacked - all violent actions that are not actually happening. Yet - they're playing on one of the biases we have of people of color - that they're dangerous. Whites claim they are unfairly treated if they're called out on racism!! (109)
Whites can make it so miserable to be confronted - that those "bullying" them will back off, give up, and never raise the issue again - thus supporting the status quo and maintain power and control. (112)
The author asked people of color, "What would it be like if you could simply give us feedback, have us graciously receive it, reflect, and work to change the behavior?" One reply - "It would be revolutionary." (113) Revolutionary.
When whites act fragile - they are protecting racism. (122)

When it comes to feedback, the author tries to follow these guidelines on page 125:
1. How, where, and when you give me feedback is irrelevant - it is the feedback I want and need. Understanding that it is hard to give, I will take it any way I can get it. From my position of social, cultural, and institutional white power and privilege, I am perfectly safe and I can handle it. If I cannot handle it, it's on ME to build my racial stamina.
2. Thank you.

White people raised in Western society are conditioned into a white supremacist worldview because it is the bedrock of our society and its institutions. Regardless of whether a parent told you that everyone was equal, or the poster in the hall of your white suburban school proclaimed the value of diversity, or you have traveled abroad, or you have people of color in your workplace or family, the ubiquitous socializing power of white supremacy cannot be avoided. The messages circulate 24-7 and have little or nothing to do with intentions, awareness, or agreement. Entering the conversation with this understanding is freeing because it allows us to focus on how - rather than if - our racism is manifest. (129)
The more defensive (fragile) we act, we will protect our limited worldview, and stunt our emotional and intellectual growth.  We need to receive feedback on our inevitable but unaware racist patterns, and we may feel gratitude, motivation, humility, compassion, discomfort and guilt that may lead to reflection, apology, seeking more understanding, grappling, engaging, listening, and processing. (141)

Let's try to use these assumptions from pages 142-143 (these are the ones that hit me the most)...

  • Racism is a multilayered system embedded in our culture.
  • Whites have blind spots on racism - I have many blind spots on racism.
  • Racism is complex, and I don't have to understand every nuance of the feedback to validate that feedback.
  • Bias is implicit and unconscious; I don't expect to be aware of mine without a lot of ongoing effort.
  • Giving us white people feedback on our racism is risky for people of color, so we can consider the feedback a sign of trust.
  • Authentic antiracism is rarely comfortable. Discomfort is key to my growth and thus desirable.
  • It takes courage to break with white solidarity; how can I support those who do?
  • Racism hurts (even kills) people of color 24-7. Interrupting it is more important than my feelings, ego, or self-image.


Finally, I was looking for WHAT TO DO. It's simple. It will take the rest of my life. Keep learning. Do my homework. How have I managed to not know what to do about racism? I need to get educated. I need to build more relationships with people of color. I need to get out of my comfort zone and change my environment. (144)

In a vicious racial cycle, white fragility has functioned to keep people of color from challenging racism in order to avoid white wrath. In turn, not challenging white people on racism upholds the racial order and whites' position within that order. (153)

Sunday, December 2, 2018

Frivolous Expenses

I once overheard a student say his family went to Ruth's Chris over the weekend. I'd never been. I did purchase a $50 gift card for my parents to go there - they went during Happy Hour and split a sandwich. That's all the $50 covered. So when I heard that one of my students went there, I thought, "Why shouldn't I be able to go?" When it came time for my parents' wedding anniversary this year, I decided to splurge and bring them with us. All four of us could enjoy some excellent steak, right?

I underestimated the cost and the service. I have never had such a wonderful piece of meat or lobster tail (I got the surf and turf - 6 oz filet and two lobster tails). Each of us got what we wanted - and each meal was around $50 without sides or drinks.

The cost - without tip - $316.00

I didn't cry. I didn't choke. I didn't pass out. I accepted what was, added the tip, and smiled all the way. We had enjoyed every aspect of the meal - the service and food were impeccable, and the atmosphere was pleasant. I learned why they offered us black linen napkins, what "medium rare" really meant, what the top 2% of meat in the US tasted like, and my food stayed warm on the 500 degree plate. My parents even got a tiny cheesecake and bit of ice cream (with "Happy Anniversary" written in chocolate on the plate...), and we got two photos of us to take home.

As we were getting ready to leave, I took in the other patrons. There were probably 35 other people dining, and all were white except one. My gut said I didn't want to eat there again. We just spend how much money? On food and drink? In my mind, it was a once in a lifetime visit. In my mind, even though it was a special treat, it was "too frivolous."

----------

The next morning, my husband showed me an article from the May 2018 issue of Science Focus. For those with the means, you can book your 12-day 2022 trip to the space hotel on the Aurora Station. Of course you'll have to train for three months prior, but for approximately $9.5 MILLION....... Turns out space tourism has been going on since the first man went in 2001.

----------

I know that going to Ruth's Chris is not comparable to heading into space. I do think, however, that the takers they'll have for that trip will also be white. I cannot find the other seven non-astronauts that have taken a trip in space. I wonder what kind of money or status got them there.

My mind goes to all the wealth we've accumulated. My husband worked until he was 59 - and he worked hard - running service, watching so boilers don't explode, fixing machines on roofs during the hottest summer and coldest winters, and how he has his social security and retirement income. I am still working, and used to work every summer (until one lucky summer off - and I haven't turned back). I've gone for my Master's and my National Board certification, and I am constantly learning and growing as an educator. I have been able to choose my jobs and haven't slacked off. Yes, we've both earned what we make, and yes, we've both grown up white.

I have no clue how to spread the wealth to those who couldn't dream of eating at Ruth's Chris. I have no clue where to go from here. The "blessings bags" for homeless aren't enough. The volunteering at Feed My Starving Children is not enough. Donating to Donors Choose with low-income families is not enough. By no means does that mean I'll stop - I just need to know what to do better.

Saturday, October 6, 2018

Breakout by Kate Messner

I just finished Breakout by Kate Messner, and did not expect to be writing about it on this blog.

I needed to let readers know that this book is such a great start for discussions about race and hidden biases!! I'd suggest it for grades 5 and up. Although it's 433 pages, it's full of letters, reports, text messages, recorded conversations, poems, and drawings, so it doesn't take that long to read. It also includes inspiration from Nikki Giovanni, Nikki Grimes, Jacqueline Woodson and Lin Manuel Miranda.

Saturday, September 15, 2018

Blind Spot

I'm currently reading Blind Spot: Hidden Biases of Good People by Banaji and Greenwald. Here are some of my rambling notes as I read through it...

It's going slowly, as I take more time with nonfiction. I've taken the "tests" they have for us, and I'm proud to share my results:
And even better?

I can now breathe again. I wonder, however, how my results may have turned out 5 years ago. Or ten. Or fifteen. I hope they would always be the same. My mom had to be the one to tell me I "couldn't be with" certain people... I wonder how my parents would do on these?

-----------------------

The above was published on this blog on August 26th...
Here's a bit more information from September 9th that irks the heck out of me...

Weapons pictured in this test were not just guns, but weapons that have strong historical associations with European cultures.

And a quote from pgs 105-106 in Blindspot:
First, the automatic Black = weapons association is much stronger among all groups who took the test - White, Asian, Hispanic, and even African American - than is suggested by surveys that asked questions about this association. Second, the size of this automatic stereotype varies noticeably by groups - it is largest in Whites and Asians, next largest in Hispanics, and smallest in African Americans. But even African Americans show a modest Black = weapons stereotype.
Black men are well aware that those around them associate them with violence, often including other Black Americans themselves, who carry the stigmatizing belief to a lesser extent than Whites and Asians. They experience it every day, whether they are walking down a street, trying to hail a cab, entering a store, applying for a job, for housing, for a loan. Many have developed explicit strategies to signal that they are harmless. ...
And then... as I was taking the next one, I could FEEL my unconscious (subconscious?) kicking in, and knew I'd have a bias for this one, even though I'd JUST READ that 64.2 million women and 63.4 million men are non-farm payroll employees. AND... my husband stays home and I go to work! (To be fair, though, he did work and is now retired.)

From the book again:
Despite the fact that a massive cultural and economic change has resulted in 50 percent of the workforce in the United States now being female, there has been much less of a change in who occupies the role of primary caregiver at home. ... So even though the workplace is now populated by as many women as men, we suspect that stereotypes remain present because of the strong and dominating presence of women in the home sphere and the strong and dominating position of men in the highest status positions at work (112). This result [mine above, and most people's] isn't especially surprising. After all, as discussed..., men still dominate in the world of work, and women still dominate domestic life (115).
The data from the gender-career IAT show that about 75 percent of male respondents display the automatic gender stereotype of male = work and female = family. Leading them by a little, 80 percent of women show the same automatic stereotype! ...  [To help some of us feel better, the authors added this next bit of information...] Decade by decade, the younger the test takers are, the weaker is this automatic gender bias (115).
This, to me, is easier to understand than the bias I held above with Black = weapons. What still bugs me, is my bias that American = White; this I found out earlier in the book, and it's still kicking my butt.

Also, I'm thinking of my current students. Which may I have not talked with much yet because I figure they're more into athletics than reading and writing? Which may I have not paid as much attention to because I figure their parents may not be as involved? Keeping my eyes open...

-----------------------

This bit was eye-opening...
The use of language to establish identity was nicely demonstrated in a recent study led by Andy Baron at Harvard University. In his study, three- to five-year-olds were shown pictures of two groups of cartoon characters, one colored purple, the other red. One group did rotten things such as break toys and cause car crashes, while the other did nice things such as help others. If the children merely saw these differently colored and differently behaving characters, they didn't seem to assign them a group identity. But if they were given names for the two groups ("These are the Nifs," "These are the Lups") they quickly figured out who were the good guys and who were the bad guys. In other words, at that age, the differences in the appearance of the two sets of characters (purple versus red) were not automatically seen as cues to group membership. But once the groups had names, the children became aware of the differences between them and understood that they belonged in different categories. This is the beginning of stereotyping (131-132).
I. Love. This. It makes so much sense! And I hate it just the same. We are hard-wired to categorize. We are hard-wired to label. It's part of our being.

Racial identity affects our interactions with others in so many ways. We may have negative experiences with one person of a particular race, and it will affect our unconscious about that group of people - just based on their color. Reactions such as these used to be used by our minds to help us survive - certain __________ used to be categorized in our minds as "safe" or "dangerous." But in present day, this hard-wired response has lost its relevance:
In the modern world, where friendships, collaborations, businesses, and entire economies span the globe in a highly networked web of interdependence, the ability to create alliances that bypass boundaries of race, nationality, and culture can have bearing on our well-being, our prosperity, our productivity - and perhaps even our survival (135).
We NEED people. Of all colors, races, opinions. We need to learn from everyone we meet.

-----------------------

This bit was also disturbing. There's a chapter in Blind Spot about "Us & Them." The authors make a good point about how we help those that are most like us, and discriminate against those that are not - by NOT helping them as much. Here's one story shared...
Carla Kaplan was an assistant professor of American literature at Yale in the late 1980s, a serious young scholar in her late twenties who looked even younger than her actual age. Carla was also a dedicated quilter. While working with patches of cloth, she could be transported to faraway places of pattern and color, oblivious to all but the world she was creating.
One evening, Carla slit her hand from accidentally dropping a crystal bowl while she was washing it. Her boyfriend took her to the emergency room of the university affiliated Yale-New Haven Hospital.
At the ER, Carla's boyfriend made it clear to the resident physician on duty that Carla's quilting was very important to her and that he feared the injury might impair the fine motor control she needed for this activity she loved so much. The doctor seemed to understand this concern and expressed confidence that all would be well if they could just "stitch it up quickly."
As the doctor prepared Carla's hand for the stitches, a student volunteer who had been working nearby recognized Carla and exclaimed, "Professor Kaplan! What are you doing here?" and this sentence seemed to stop the doctor in his tracks. "Professor?" he asked. "You're a professor at Yale?" Within seconds Carla found herself on a gurney, being escorted to the hospital's surgery department. The best hand surgeon was called in, and a team worked for hours to restore Carla's hand to perfection (141)... 
The us / them discrimination was due, this time, to where they work. Sometimes, the discrimination rears its head by inaction - the absence of helping. I feel this relates to those I'm connected to at my work and in my Twitter PLN. I mentioned it a bit in this post about my own personal Twitter rules, and I'm going to try to explain here...

If anyone were to look at those I follow, they'd notice I am mostly connected to white educators. Is this a fault of my conscious? I doubt it. I think it's the fault of where I reside, who has connected with me, what it says on people's Twitter bios, and what I might miss or see on any given day. I'll blame my Twitter habits, too. When a teacher from my PLN tags me in a request to either donate or share their Donors Choose project, I do not retweet their request, and I feel terrible for at least a week. I feel terrible for not retweeting it, because, really, what could it hurt? But my brain thinks this - If I retweet this, this person might get a lot of donations due to the number of teachers following me. I don't see this as fair to those who are not connected as much on Twitter. When I read this section of "us and them," I could see that my choice to retweet would be, in a sense, making the rich richer. This made me feel better about my decision to not retweet requests for funds. Donating is a very personal decision for many people, and I want to help the least fortunate, and I do my research before contributing. When I think of Carla's story above, I don't want to NOT help others who may need the same help.

I don't know if I'm making sense, or if I'm rambling. I just hate the notion that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and I believe it's happening to me. I am making more money now than ever before, and that, perhaps, has allowed me to write and publish a book, meaning I make even more money (some may see this amount as significant, and others not so much). Because I was born into a family whose parents worked, and I went through a solid school district, I was able to pay my way through college and get this good-paying job myself. I currently live ten miles away from where I grew up. Many circumstances and decisions have gotten me here. Many roads have been passed while others have been taken. I am a product of opportunity, choices, and effort. If I'm going to help others, I'd rather be helping those who are a product of not-so-much opportunity. I do not want to contribute to what the authors call "hidden discrimination," and yet I know I already have.
Discrimination is hard to perceive because it does not present itself in obvious comparisons, where we must decide in a single moment whether to help one or the other. These behaviors happen in sequence, allowing the fact that one was helped and the other not to remain in our blindspot (142).
The importance of Carla's story is that by capturing not just acts of commission but acts of omission, we expand our sense of how hidden bias operates. It also allows us to see that the people responsible for such acts of omission are, like the doctor who is the main actor in this story, by and large good people who believe that helping is admirable. So far as we can tell, the doctor was a responsible and caring professional who had no conscious intention to discriminate against Carla the quilter. Nevertheless, he did discriminate and the harm that could have been done to Carla's hand had she not been recognized as a member of the in-group is a real one. 
How to outsmart the machine known as the brain? They haven't yet found a way, but the authors are confident there will be much more research, as they've seen temporary results from minor experiments. One thing we can do - put (literal) blinders on when possible. One more - expose ourselves to as many different people as we can. Those that defy the stereotypes would be the best for starters. And while we're at it, let's expose our children to as many different children (and their parents) as we can!

I'm exhausted. In a good way. My brain took a hit while reading Blind Spot, as the stories the authors shared made me read and re-read closer many times over. I'm so glad I read this book, and I'm looking forward to trying to explain parts of it to others when the occasion arises.

Sunday, August 19, 2018

Wednesday, August 15, 2018

37 New Hires

All but one are female.
Most are white.
   -One looks to be wearing a hajib.
   -One looks to be Asian Indian.

This district has this demographic of children:

Here is a new list of questions:




  • Where is the one male going? 
  • Where is the one woman who is not white heading?
  • When students draw a "scientist," they usually draw a male. What about when they draw a teacher?
  • I know of three males on Twitter that do not have a teaching job yet this year. Do their neighboring districts need male teachers?
  • How important is it that we have male teachers at each school? At each grade level?
  • Do school districts keep track of how many male and female teachers they hire?
  • Do school districts keep track of how many ethnicities they hire?
  • I wonder how many people with any type of "disability" teach? (Do corrective lenses or hearing aids count?)
  • What other questions should I be asking?
  • What am I missing? What am I not noticing?