Constructions of Race Among Religiously Conservative College Students

This art icle was downloaded by: [ Marianne Modica] On: 13 February 2012, At : 08: 12 Publisher: Rout ledge I nform a Lt d Regist ered in England and Wales Regist ered Num ber: 1072954 Regist ered office: Mort im er House, 37- 41 Mort im er St reet , London W1T 3JH, UK Multicultural Perspectives Publicat ion det ails, including inst ruct ions f or aut hors and subscript ion inf ormat ion: ht t p: / / www. t andf online. com/ loi/ hmcp20 Constructions of Race Among Religiously Conservative College Students Marianne Modica a a Rut gers Universit y Available online: 13 Feb 2012 To cite this article: Marianne Modica (2012): Const ruct ions of Race Among Religiously Conservat ive College St udent s, Mult icult ural Perspect ives, 14: 1, 38-43 To link to this article: ht t p: / / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 15210960. 2012. 646850 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTI CLE Full t erm s and condit ions of use: ht t p: / / www.t andfonline.com / page/ t erm s- and- condit ions This art icle m ay be used for research, t eaching, and privat e st udy purposes. Any subst ant ial or syst em at ic reproduct ion, redist ribut ion, reselling, loan, sub- licensing, syst em at ic supply, or dist ribut ion in any form t o anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warrant y express or im plied or m ake any represent at ion t hat t he cont ent s will be com plet e or accurat e or up t o dat e. The accuracy of any inst ruct ions, form ulae, and drug doses should be independent ly verified wit h prim ary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, act ions, claim s, proceedings, dem and, or cost s or dam ages what soever or howsoever caused arising direct ly or indirect ly in connect ion wit h or arising out of t he use of t his m at erial. Multicultural Perspectives, 14(1), 38–43 C 2012 by the National Association for Multicultural Education Copyright
ISSN: 1521-0960 print / 1532-7892 DOI: 10.1080/15210960.2012.646850 Constructions of Race Among Religiously Conservative College Students Marianne Modica Downloaded by [Marianne Modica] at 08:12 13 February 2012 Rutgers University college students express these sentiments not only when course content includes affirmative action policies, but when the topic of race comes up in the classroom in any context whatsoever. It is not uncommon for White students to interject questions or comments about the unfairness of affirmative action, even though class discussion centers on a different topic, such as racial identity theory. Students’ ideas about race seem to be deeply influenced by ahistorical notions of injustice and an inverted view of racism (i.e., Whites are now the group being discriminated against). The goal of this research was to investigate my students’ ideas about race and racism, especially exploring how these ideas may have been impacted by the students’ religious beliefs and church affiliation. Is it possible, as some researchers claim, that conservative Christians’ theological beliefs form the basis of their individualistic and antistructural attitudes about race? The “Whites as victims” motif in conversations about race has been well documented in recent decades. When discussing affirmative action hiring policies, a common belief expressed by Whites is that people of color have been permitted to progress unfairly at the expense of harder working Whites. Whites using this discourse see themselves as victims of a political process that ignores individual responsibility and caters to people of color who are not willing to work toward their own success. Using students’ Blackboard discussion forum postings, the author analyzes ideas about race expressed by students in education classes at a small denominational Christian college in the northeastern United States, and compares these students’ constructions of race to those analyzed in previous research using Whites as subjects in both religious and non-religious settings. The author argues that these students do not differ in their constructions of race and racism from other Whites in non-religious settings. Further, with more complete education and intentional conversation about the history of racism in the United States, these students are able to incorporate understandings of deeper structural causes of racial inequality. Methodology Blackboard Discussion Forum Through this study, I explore college students’ ideas about race by analyzing their Blackboard discussion forum postings. The Blackboard discussion postings proved a fertile and efficient data source for several reasons. First, students seem comfortable with this form of communication, perhaps because they spend so many hours a day online. Even the most introverted students seem to find their voices when sitting at the keyboard. Second, as Groth (2008) points out, “online discussion boards make it possible for teachers to monitor multiple simultaneous conversations among students” (p. 422). Third, on a practical level, discussion postings are a written record of students’ ideas that do not require transcription. Last, the asynchronous nature of discussion forum postings gives students a chance to think before commenting, allowing for deeper and more careful reflection. In this study I compare my students’ responses to research that examines the racial views of other White Introduction When discussing affirmative action policies, a common belief expressed by Whites is that people of color have been permitted to progress unfairly, at the expense of harder working Whites. Through this discourse, Whites portray themselves as victims to a political process that ignores individual responsibility and caters to people of color. As a teacher educator in a mostly White, religiously conservative, Christian college, I have heard Correspondence should be sent to Marianne Modica, 1025 Edwin Drive, Phoenixville, PA 19460, USA. E-mail: m modica@vfcc.edu The Official Journal of the National Association for Multicultural Education 38 evangelicals, and to studies that explore Whites’ ideas about race in non-religious environments. regarding race that is derived from the following three theological beliefs: accountable freewill individualism, relationalism, and antistructuralism. The authors note that the first of these tools, accountable freewill individualism, is foundational within the Christian doctrines of sin and salvation. This belief purports that people are free actors, independent of structures, and that individual choice alone decides a person’s spiritual destiny. Therefore, individuals are accountable to God and other people for these choices. A logical extension of this thinking is that people of all racial backgrounds control their destiny through the choices they make. The second component of Emerson and Smith’s toolkit, relationalism, stresses that a personal relationship with Christ is a foundational and nonnegotiable creed for evangelicals (p. 77). In the evangelical worldview, all have sinned (Rom. 3:23), and relationship with Christ is the only way to salvation. Hence, evangelicals explain racism as the result of poor relationships. The first two components of the evangelical toolkit—accountable freewill individualism and relationalism—then form the basis of the third cultural tool of evangelicals, antistructuralism. Since the evangelicals in Emerson and Smith’s study believe that individual choice determines destiny and explain racism as the result of a break in relationships, they fail to recognize the larger, structural systems or governmental actions that continue to contribute to racial inequity in our country. Therefore, in the minds of these respondents, past victims of racism now control their own destinies, and can rise above poor circumstances by making good choices. Hence, they believe that there is no need for government interference with policies like affirmative action. Setting My study took place at a denominational Christian college with an enrollment of 861 students. At the time of the study 67% of the student body was Caucasian, 10% African American, 10% Hispanic, 2% Asian, 1% Native American, and 10% unknown (not reported). Study participants were students in education classes that I taught during the spring and fall 2010 semesters. Downloaded by [Marianne Modica] at 08:12 13 February 2012 Conceptual Framework Of special importance to my study is the work of sociologists Emerson and Smith (2000), who chronicled conservative Christian evangelicals’ views of race in a book titled, Divided by Faith, which I have used as a frame for this study. The authors define evangelicals as Christians who, “true to their name . . . believe in the importance of sharing their faith, or evangelizing” (p. 3). Using data from 2,000 randomly selected telephone survey respondents and 200 face-to-face interviews from 23 different states, the researchers asked White evangelicals to explain the Black–White socioeconomic gap, and for their opinions of proposed solutions to the problem of racism. They found that a significantly higher percentage of evangelical Whites believed that individual motivation explains the socioeconomic gap between Blacks and Whites than Whites in general and White theologically liberal Protestants (p. 173, 175). Further, 89% of evangelical Whites found getting to know people of other races “very important” as a solution to end racism, but only 38% of that group believed that racially integrated neighborhoods are a very important solution. The authors conclude that “White conservative Protestants . . . are more individualistic and less structural in their explanations of Black–White inequality than other Whites” (p. 96). Results and Discussion Question One: First Knowledge of Race Wondering if my students experienced the same isolation from racial pluralism as the respondents of Emerson and Smith’s study, my first discussion board forum question asked students how they had first learned about race. Did they talk about race as they were growing up at home, in school, and at church? Of the 48 student respondents to this question, 37 were White, 7 were African American, and 4 were Hispanic. Evangelical Toolkit Emerson and Smith report that many respondents were “sheltered, unexposed to racial diversity, insulated, in their own small world” (p. 81). These White evangelicals admitted that they had thought little about the topic of race in general. Emerson and Smith argue that racial isolation caused their White respondents to believe that racism is “a problem in the past” and that, “a residue [of racism] may remain today because original sin remains, but the race problem is not severe” (p. 81). They believe that isolation from racial pluralism allows White conservative evangelicals to develop a “cultural toolkit” Responses of White and Hispanic Students The White and Hispanic students’ responses were similar and fell into three basic categories. Multicultural Perspectives 39 Vol. 14, No. 1 Category one: “We didn’t talk about race.” The majority of responses fell into the first category, wherein students said they had not talked much about race at home or at church, offering explanations such as: “There is only one race, the human race.” Category three: Learning by observing racist behavior. In the third category of responses, several of the White students said they had learned about race through observing the racist behavior around them. Although these students had not talked about race, they had witnessed racism as silent observers. They reported: Downloaded by [Marianne Modica] at 08:12 13 February 2012 “Race was a taboo subject;” “We mostly talked about our schedules, since race wasn’t a problem;” “We never had a moment to talk about race;” “I lived in Texas, so for me race was never a big issue;” “I grew up among all Whites, but I did watch a lot of television;” and “I went to a Christian school, so we didn’t talk about race, since it wasn’t a public setting.” “There was a big controversy at my high school over flying the confederate flag;” “My family didn’t approve when my older cousin started dating a black guy;” “My step dad would always lock the car door whenever we drove through the city;” “The only time I ever heard about a ‘colored’ person was at my racist grandfather’s house;” and “My church split because the Hispanic members wanted their own service—it’s still largely Hispanic, but things get awkward if a Spanish song is sung in service.” Several White students mentioned that they learned about race in church through singing the song, “Jesus Loves the Little Children.” When I suggested that the language in the song, “red and yellow,” (referring to Native American and Asian peoples) is racist, students were surprised. One resisted this idea, saying “maybe we are just too easily offended,” and a few others were confused, wondering why the terms “Black and White” are acceptable designations of racial category, while “red and yellow” are not. Failure to deeply discuss the history of racism in the United States had left these students unaware of the racist history behind this terminology. Only 1 of the 37 White students said that her parents specifically discussed racism with her, because, she explained, “My dad’s parents were prejudiced toward my mom’s best friend, who was African American.” In the case of this one student, the topic of racism was discussed directly and concretely. This student learned from her parents on a practical level that racism still exists and should not be tolerated. Several students reported learning about race in school, but only through very general history lessons about slavery or isolated celebrations, such as “culture week.” Hence, like Emerson and Smith’s respondents, the majority of my White and Hispanic students were inexperienced in thinking about race. For most of them, race was not discussed in a concrete, practical, or contemporary way at home, in church, or at school. Research conduced over the past several years indicates, however, that religious conservatives are far from unique in their tendency to avoid discussing race. Vittrup (as cited in Bronson and Merryman, 2009) studied the effect of multicultural storylines in children’s videos on the racial attitudes of children. She found that some White participants who had joined the study knowing it required they converse with their young children about race found themselves unable to do so and withdrew from the project. These parents “wanted their children to grow up colorblind” (p. 53). Although many of the remaining children in the study attended racially diverse schools and had parents who espoused egalitarian views regarding race, when asked if their parents “liked Black people,” a significant percentage of children answered “No,” or “I don’t know” (p. 55). The authors conclude that parents’ avoidance of conversations about race forced children to “improvise their own conclusions—many of which would be abhorrent to their parents” (p. 55). Category two: The “colorblind” approach. In the second category of responses there was an overall consensus among students that their families and the churches they attended as children taught that all people are the same. This is consistent with the “colorblind” approach explored by Bonilla–Silva (2006), wherein Whites express the desire for a “post racial” society in which skin color, and by extension racial discrimination, can be ignored. Bonilla–Silva explains that the claim toward colorblindness allows Whites to ignore present inequity and maintain their status of privilege “without fanfare, without naming those who it subjects and those who it rewards” (p. 4). By use of colorblind ideology, argues Bonilla–Silva, those in power (such as a former U.S. President) can claim to support diversity in higher education while at the same time characterizing affirmative action programs as “‘discriminatory’ against Whites” (p. 4). Responses in this category stated that students did not or should not notice race. For example, students posted: “I never really noticed a difference in people, and I still don’t;” “I grew up in a household that taught that all people were the same;” “My parents taught me that God loves us no matter what;” and The Official Journal of the National Association for Multicultural Education 40 The discussion board responses to my first question from African American students confirmed this finding, as most of them reported that a parent had discussed race with them in a practical way when they were very young. American, and 1 South Asian (Indian) student. Five of the White students agreed with Tatum’s ideas, but most still reflected elements of individualism, with comments such as, “People who view themselves as being better than others simply because of their race are racist.” The South Asian student posted that she agreed with Tatum’s ideas, but within that post she, too, defined racism in individual, and not structural terms. Since their posts agreed with Tatum’s views while stating the opposite definition of race, I wondered if these students had understood the question. Thirteen of the twenty White students participating in this discussion forum actively resisted Tatum’s ideas, with many reflecting aspects of Emerson and Smith’s evangelical toolkit in their responses. For example, students posted: Downloaded by [Marianne Modica] at 08:12 13 February 2012 Responses of African American students Bronson and Merryman (2009) explain that parents of color are much more likely than White parents to discuss race and racism with their children (p. 59). The discussion board responses to my first question from African American students confirmed this finding, as most of them reported that a parent had discussed race with them in a practical way when they were very young. For example, they posted: “My instinct is to believe that racism is defined as actions that are based on individual decisions;” “I think it [racism] should be a choice and not something you’re born into;” and “I think that in order to be considered a racist there is usually motivation or intent behind your actions.” “I asked my mom why I looked different and she explained it to me;” “My mother told me that when she was growing up people were racist . . . and not to be that way because it shows how ignorant a person is;” and “My parents explained it to me and how it is very important to do something with my life . . . because of what our people did so that we could do so now.” A few White students reflected a “reverse racism” argument in their posts, stating: Sadly, a few African American students in my study mentioned learning about race through being targets of racism. An African American student who had attended a mostly White school posted “I especially remember. . .Black History Month. The kids would joke around and be like, ‘Hey, is that your uncle?’ Even though they were joking, it hurt me.” Another student responded to that post, “There was a time when me and my sister were at the mall shopping . . . there were many Caucasians in the store but me and my sister were the only ones being followed . . . it was the worst feeling I have ever felt.” The one African American student in the group also saw racism as an individual choice, stating, “I live in a predominately Black town, and it seems that the majority of the Blacks in my town are racist towards other ethnic groups.” Ironically, this student seemed unaware of the historical and structural causes of the racially segregated housing he’d experienced. “I do not agree . . . with Tatum’s definition . . . as it paints an unfair stigma on the White community;” and “. . . as a White female I am at a disadvantage going into the education field because schools want more diverse teachers.” Other Research Findings Although my students’ responses tended to echo those of the respondents in Emerson and Smith’s study, it is conceivable that other factors besides theological belief influence their ideas. Tranby and Hartmann (2008), for example, extend and critique Emerson and Smith’s theory. Using data from the American Mosiac Project, Tranby and Hartmann confirm Emerson and Smith’s findings that White conservative Protestants are more likely than other Americans to explain their advantage by pointing out their “effort and hard work” (p. 351), and less likely to admit that structural causes work to Question Two: Definition of Racism In order to ascertain if my students reflected aspects of Emerson and Smith’s “cultural toolkit” in their thinking about racism, I asked a different class to reflect on Wellman’s definition of racism as “a system of advantage based on race” (as cited in Tatum, 1997, p. 7). Discussion forum postings originated from 20 White, 1 African Multicultural Perspectives 41 Vol. 14, No. 1 Downloaded by [Marianne Modica] at 08:12 13 February 2012 disadvantage African Americans. However, looking at the same interviews conducted by Emerson and Smith, Tranby and Hartmann point out examples of comments made by Whites that are based on negative stereotyping of African Americans, describing African Americans as lazy or wanting a handout (p. 345). Therefore, Tranby and Hartmann propose that evangelicals’ ideas about race are not based on theological belief alone, but are also dependent on commonly held racial stereotypes and discourse, such as blaming victims of institutional racism for their disadvantaged status and failure to acknowledge White privilege (p. 346). They argue that “conformity to American identity in the eyes of White conservative Protestants is explicitly racial” (p. 354), and that individualistic and antistructural constructions of race among religiously conservative White Christians are undergirded by a racialized view of America as a meritocracy. Failure to recognize White privilege leads Whites to believe that their success is based on merit alone, and that the same opportunity for success is available to all, regardless of color. Therefore, people in racial groups that do not achieve the same success as Whites remain outsiders, and, in the eyes of the White conservative Protestants Tranby and Hartmann studied, such people are “excluded from the American identity and ideals” (p. 347). as Emerson and Smith’s White evangelical respondents, and as my students. They assumed individual and not societal explanations for poverty (p. 177), and disagreed in far greater numbers than African American or Latino students that structural inequities exist due to race (p. 187). Likewise, Bonilla–Silva (2006) collected and analyzed data from 627 students from three large, presumably secular universities, along with a random survey of 400 metropolitan Detroit residents (p. 12, 13). Bonilla–Silva proposes that the Whites he studied interpreted race through, among other things, abstract liberalism, a frame that draws on notions of equality, choice, and individualism. Abstract liberalism purports that race no longer matters; this frame allows Whites to satisfy the requirements of liberalism while ignoring real inequity and maintaining their position of dominance. My students’ discussion forum postings show that their thinking about race is very much the same as Bonilla–Silva’s subjects. Question Three: Changing Views About Racism As a teacher educator, my role is not just to explore my students’ ideas about race, but also to help them expand their thinking. Vittrup (as cited in Bronson and Merryman, 2009) found that only six families in her study met the project requirements by following through with honest conversations about race, but after doing so all of them “dramatically improved their racial attitudes in a single week” (p. 55). I, too, have found that students’ perspectives often broaden once they become more educated about the history of race in America. For example, after they’d viewed the chapter on housing discrimination in the video, Race, the Power of an Illusion (Smith, 2003), I asked the same students who had misunderstood or resisted Wellman’s structural definition of racism if their views had changed. Students overwhelmingly reported that they had, expressing shock, sadness, disgust, and anger at the aspects of their own nation’s past that they’d never learned about in school. For example, they posted: . . .Tranby and Hartmann propose that evangelicals’ ideas about race are not based on theological belief alone, but are also dependent on commonly held racial stereotypes and discourse, such as blaming victims of institutional racism for their disadvantaged status and failure to acknowledge White privilege. “After watching the video I have to say I was truly disgusted by the way our country treated people in those years;” “I feel like this DVD filled in gaps in my understanding of U.S. history;” “I had no idea about all the structural racism that was present in the past . . .” “This video was eye opening to just a taste of the truths of America’s dark history, the history that isn’t taught in your high school;” “I am blown away that a country who prides itself on freedom, liberty, and equal opportunity for all would If, as Tranby and Hartmann posit, religious or theological belief alone cannot account for conservative White evangelicals’ failure to recognize the structural causes of racial inequity, it is not surprising that college students at secular universities (who likely come from varied faith traditions and levels of religiosity) express the same sentiments regarding race as my evangelical students. For example, Bush (2004) studied Brooklyn College students’ attitudes regarding race. While certainly Brooklyn would not be considered an evangelical enclave, the White students in Bush’s study reflected similar beliefs The Official Journal of the National Association for Multicultural Education 42 act in such hateful, degrading ways towards people of color;” and “It saddens my heart that my country has this kind of a past and that I am part of this nation.” Combined, these factors create a limited, ahistorical construction of race and racism in my White students, and perhaps in other Whites, as well. Further research is needed among students of all ages to determine what educational experiences are most beneficial in broadening their ideas about race. Classroom teachers of all grade levels (the majority of whom are White) would benefit from deeper reflection on their own attitudes about race, and from training on how to engage their students in more intentional conversations on the topic. Through a more thorough education about the history of racism in America, and a focus on the present structural conditions that perpetuate racial inequity, White teachers and students alike must take up the challenge to think more critically about race and about their own privileged status in a White dominated society. Hence, through their discussion forum postings many students expressed frustration, feeling that the full truth about the history of racism in our country had been kept from them. For many, viewing this well-made documentary was the first time they’d been challenged with a broader view of racism in America, and these students’ comments reflected their ability to think more deeply about the issue than they had in the past. Downloaded by [Marianne Modica] at 08:12 13 February 2012 Conclusion While there is no doubt that my students have been deeply influenced by their religious beliefs, the previously cited research would indicate that their constructions of race do not differ greatly from their peers in secular institutions, or, for that matter, from many White adults whose religious views are unknown. Therefore, I question the extent to which specific theological beliefs have impacted my students’ individualistic, antistructural ideas about race. In fact, the same students who talk about racism in individualistic, antistructural terms also state that their faith compels them to actively resist racism. For example, one of the students who objected to Wellman’s definition of racism, saying of it, “I think that sometimes people go too far,” declared in the very same post that she felt it was her duty as a Christian to actively break down the walls of racism around her. I believe that this contradictory thinking is the result of the more general individualistic Western cultural norms, combined with limited knowledge and experience in talking and thinking about the role that race has played in American history. References Bonilla–Silva, E. (2006). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Bronson, P., & Merryman, A. (2009, Sept. 14). See baby discriminate. Newsweek, 53–60. Bush, M. (2004). Breaking the code of good intentions: Everyday forms of whiteness. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Pub., Inc. Emerson, M.O., & Smith, C. (2000). Divided by faith: Evangelical religion and the problem of race in America. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Groth, R. E. (2008). Online discourse to assess students’ thinking. Mathematics Teacher, 101, 422–427. Smith, L. M. (Producer). (2003). Episode 3: The house we live in. Race, the Power of an Illusion. [California Newsreel]. Tatum, B. (1997). “Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?” and other conversations about race. New York, NY: Basic Books. Tranby, E., & Hartmann, D. (2008). Critical whiteness theories and the evangelical “race problem”: Extending Emerson and Smith’s Divided by Faith. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 47, 341–359. Multicultural Perspectives 43 Vol. 14, No. 1