EDPP 5045: Race, Ethnicity, and U.S. Educational Policy
Final Syllabus February 5, 2013
Spring 2013
Tuesdays 3-4:40
461 Grace Dodge Hall
Professor: Amy Stuart Wells
Office: 600 Grace Dodge Hall
Phone: (212) 678-4042
Office Hours: Tuesdays: 4:45-5:15; Wednesdays 3-4:45 and by appointment
E-mail: asw86@columbia.edu
Teaching Assistant: Terrenda White
Office Hours: Wednesdays 5-6:30
Email: tcw2108@columbia.edu
Course Assistant: Alana Miles
Email: am3679@tc.columbia.edu
Course Description and Learning Objectives:
In the last 30 years, policy makers and judges have questioned the veracity of race-conscious
public policies and moved to systematically dismantle them, calling the U.S. a “colorblind” and
“post-racial” society that no longer needs such corrective actions. Many of these race-conscious
policies were created in the 1960s and 70s to remedying the long-lasting and inter-generational
vestiges of a history of slavery, Jim Crow, and racial inequality. At the time, “racism” and “racial
discrimination” was defined in fairly simplistic terms that focused on prejudice and racial
attitudes that led to the exclusion of Blacks, Latinos, Asians, and Native Americans in particular
through public policies and private practices. Such forms of “racism” were addressed via
legislation and law suits during the Civil Rights era.
Looking back on this history and the evidence brought to bear on issues of race and ethnicity in
the field of education, scholars can see that the social science research strongly suggests that
these so-called Civil Rights policies were far more effective than the political rhetoric that came
to define them would suggest. Furthermore, some of the more recent research suggests that
these programs, including school desegregation, affirmative action and de-tracking efforts,
were necessary but insufficient efforts to address our nation’s racialized structure and culture.
The implications of this research are that more awareness of more forms of structural and
institutional racism – including its socio-cultural dimensions – is needed to construct
meaningful race-conscious educational policies and practices. Such a proposal seems so distant
from the “colorblind” racial politics of the late 20th and early 21st Century, which argues that
racial inequality is a thing of the past, not something we should address in a more
comprehensive manner. This Politics and Education course will explore the strong disconnect
1
between the research and the politics of race in the U.S. today as well as the implications of this
disconnect for education policy and practice.
Course Requirements:
Mid-Term Paper: Your Racial/Ethnic Biography and Class Readings/Discussions (30% of Grade):
Students will write a 6-8 page (double spaced) paper on the relationship between your
understanding of your racial/ethnic identity and how it relates to American politics, policies and
opportunities, drawing on at least three readings from the first half of the class. Write about
how and when you came to understand your racial/ethnic identity and how your experience
living in the U.S. (or other country) relates to the issues/main argument in three class readings.
You can either agree or disagree with the main argument of the authors you cite, but connect
the central issues they are discussing with your own life story – for better or worse.
Consider how your racial/ethnic background intersects with American policies and policies.
Organize the paper (using subheadings) around central themes/issues that are most relevant to
your experience and the topics covered in the readings. Conclude by considering how your life
thus far would be different if your racial/ethnic background were different and note, based on
what you have written, what changes you would like to see in American politics and policies
moving forward, as we become an increasingly diverse nation.
For each reading you cite, make sure you note the central argument of the author(s) of the
readings you cite. Include a reference list (APA) style for each reading cited.
Final Project: Education Policy Biography (55% of Grade)
Write a 12-15 page (double-spaced) paper about a major public policy in the field of education
that you think has most shaped your own educational experience and trajectory (in a privileged
and/or dis-privileging way). Trace the history and political origins of this policy, the racial
politics that shaped it and the racial dimensions/implications of it historically and/or today in
terms of creating or denying meaningful racial equality, diversity, practice, and/or engagement
and attachment to schooling.
Apply at least five of the readings (their theories, findings and/or frameworks) from class as
well as other documents you will uncover in your research to analyze this educational policy.
Your paper should address as many of the following questions as you can answer through your
research and personal experience:
-
How do you think a colorblind ideology (explicitly or implicitly) shaped the development
and/or implementation of this policy?
-
To the extent that there are any race-conscious dimensions to this policy, do they address
structural inequalities (e.g. resources/access/outcomes) and/or socio-cultural dimensions
of race and diversity (e.g. issue of culture, history and knowledge across racial/ethnic
groups)?
2
-
How had this framing affected the impact of this policy and how policy makers and the
public make sense of what it is and what it is supposed to “fix” or accomplish?
-
How is the problem this policy is designed to address related to structural inequalities in
the society?
-
What are the socio-cultural dimensions of this policy?
-
What race-conscious elements would make it more effective if any?
Class Participation (15% of Grade):
Students are expected to attend class sessions and to come to class having read assigned
materials and prepared to engage in a dialogue about the class readings.
Required Books:
1. Alexander, M. (2010). The New Jim Crow. NY, NY: The New Press
2. Carter, P. (2012). Stubborn Roots. NY, NY: Oxford University Press
Support Our Local Independent Bookstore; Buy your books at Book Culture
www.bookculture.com
536 West 112th Street (between Amsterdam and B’way)
(212) 865-1588
Course Outline and Overview:
Unit #1 January 29-February 12 Colorblindness:
Meaning, Origins and Implications
January 29: Introductions, Discussion of “Colorblindness” and American Politics
February 5: Colorblindness: A Legal and Political History
Required Readings:
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2010 edition) Chapters 1 and 2. Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism
and Racial Inequality in Contemporary America. Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield (pp. 1-52).
Guinier, L. and Torres, G. (2002). Chapter 2 “A Critique of Colorblindness” in The Miner’s
Canary. (pp. 32-66).
powell, j. and Watt, C. (March 30, 2011). “Corporate prerogative, race and identity under the
14th Amendment.” Cordoza Law Review, 32 (885).
3
Reyonlds, W.B. (1984). “Individualism and Group Rights: The Legacy of Brown.” The Yale Law
Journal 93 (6) (pp. 995-1005).
Required Activity:
Go to Harvard University’s “Project Implicit” website https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/
and take the Four-Category Race Implicit Association Test. Description from the Website:
“It is well known that people don't always ‘speak their minds’, and it is suspected that people
don’t always ‘know their minds’. Understanding such divergences is important to scientific
psychology. This web site presents a method that demonstrates the conscious-unconscious
divergences much more convincingly than has been possible with previous methods. This new
method is called the Implicit Association Test, or IAT for short.”
February 12: Colorblindness: Implications for Education Policy and Practice
Anderson, J. (2007) “Race-Conscious Educational Policies Versus a “Color-Blind Constitution”: A
Historical Perspective” Educational Researcher. 36 (5) (pp. 249–257).
Boger, J.C. (1999-2000) “Willful Colorblindness: The New Racial Piety and the Resegregation of
Public Schools.” North Carolina Law Review. 78 (pp. 1719-1796).
Excerpts from the following cases to be posted on Moodle:
Parents Involved v. Louisville
Comfort v. Lynn Board of Education
Grutter v. Bollinger
Fischer v. U of Texas
Unit #2 February 19-March 5: Racial Theories that Speak to Colorblindness
February 19: Origins and Early Readings on Race in Social Theory
DuBois, W.E.B. 2003. “Of the Dawn of Freedom” Chapter II. The Souls of Black Folk. New York:
Modern Library.
Fanon, F. (2008 edition). “The Black Man and Language.” Black Skins, White Masks. (pp 1-23).
Malcomson, S. L. (2000). “The Freest of All Human Beings” Westward Expansion and the Price
of Liberty. (pp. 292-319). One Drop of Blood: The American Misadventure of Race. NY,
NY: Farrar Straus Giroux.
Omi, M and Winant, H. (1994 edition) Introduction and Chapters 2 and 3 (pp 1-76) Racial
Formation in the United States. NY, NY: Routledge Press.
February 26: The Social Construction of Race
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2010 edition) Chapter 3. Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and Racial
Inequality in Contemporary America. Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield. (pp. 53-74).
4
Jolls, C. and Sunstein, C. R. (2006). “The Law of Implicit Bias.” California Law Review. 94 (pp.
969-996)
March 5: Critical Race Theory and Whiteness
Anderson, M. 2003. “Whitewashing Race: A Critical Perspective on Whiteness.” In White Out:
The Continuing Significance of Racism edited by Ashley Doane and Eduardo Bonila-Silva.
Routledge: New York, NY.
Delgado, R. and Stefancic, J. (2012 edition) “Introduction,” “Hallmark Critical Race Theory
Themes,” and “Critical Race Theory Today” (pp. 1-42 and 113-142). Critical Race Theory:
An Introduction. NY, NY: New York University Press.
Wellman, D. T. (1993; 2nd edition). “Prejudice People are not the Only Racists in America.” (pp
27-62) in Portraits of White Racism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Winant, H. 2004. “Behind Blue Eyes: Whiteness and Contemporary U.S. Racial Politics.” In
Michelle Fine, Lois Weiss, Linda Powell Pruitt and April Burns eds. Off White: Readings
on Power, Privilege and Resistance, 2nd Edition. New York, NY: Routledge.
Unit #3 March 12-April 2:
Structural Inequality and Race in U.S. Past and Present
March 12: Housing, Criminal Justice, Jobs, and Social Welfare Policy
Alexander, M. (2010). Introduction and Chapters 1-3 (pp. 1-136). The New Jim Crow. NY, NY:
The New Press
Katznelson, I. (2005). Preface and Chapters 1 and 2: “DuBois’s Paradox,” “Doctors of Laws,” and
“Welfare in Black and White.” When Affirmative Action was White: An Untold History of
Racial Inequality in 20th-Century America. NY, NY: W.W. Norton & Company. (pp. ix-53).
Wilson, W.J. (1996). Chapter 1 “From Institutional to Jobless Ghettos.” When Work Disappears:
The World of the New Urban Poor. NY, NY: Random House
Mid-Term Papers Due – Class Discussion of Common Themes
March 19 – NO CLASS: Spring Break
March 26: Racial Politics and Structural Inequality
Alexander, M. (2010). Chapters 4-6 (pp. 137-248). The New Jim Crow. NY, NY: The New Press
5
Murray, C. (2012). “Prologue,” “Our Kind of People” and “One Nation, Divisible” (pp. 1-22; 2345; 269-277). Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010
Oliver, M. and Shapiro, T. M. (2006; 2nd edition). Introduction and Chapters One and Two “Race,
Wealth and Equality” and “A Sociology of Wealth and Racial Inequality” (pp. 1-54). Black
Wealth/White Wealth: A New Perspective on Racial Inequality NY, NY: Routledge.
West, C. (1991) Introduction and Chapter Four “Demystifying the New Black Conservatism” (pp.
1-9 and 47-60) Race Matters. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
April 2: Implications of Structural Inequality for Education Policy
Clotfelter, C.T.; Ladd, H.F.; & Vigdor, J.L. (2008). “School Segregation Under Color-blind
Jurisprudence: The Case of North Carolina.” The Sanford Institute of Public Policy, Duke
University, Working Paper.
Feldman, S. and Huddy, L. (January, 2005). “Racial Resentment and White Opposition to RaceConscious Programs: Principles or Prejudice?” American Journal of Political Science 49,
(1), (pp.168-183).
Reardon, S.F. & Yun, J.T. (2011). “The Widening Academic Achievement Gap Between the Rich
and the Poor: New Evidence and Possible Explanations.” In Wither Opportunity? Rising
Inequality, Schools and Children’s Life Chances. Russell Sage Foundation, 2011.
Unit #4 April 9-May 7:
Socio-Cultural Dimensions of Racial Inequality in U.S.: Educational Policies and Practices
April 9: Cultural Distinctions by Race and Class and their Implications for the Field of
Education
Baldwin, J. (1963) “Letter to my Nephew” In The Fire Next Time.
Bourdieu, P. (1984) Excerpts from Part I: “A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste” and Part II
“Class, Tastes and Life-Styles” Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Carter, P. (2012) Introduction and Chapters 1-4 (pp. 1-118). Stubborn Roots: Race, Culture and
Inequality. NY, NY: Oxford University Press.
Lewis, A. E. (2001). There Is No “Race” in the Schoolyard: Color-Blind Ideology in an (Almost)
All-White School. American Educational Research Journal, 38: 4, pp. 781-811.
April 16: Racial Politics and Socio-Cultural Biases: Implications for Educational Policy and
Student Access to Schools and Curriculum
6
Jencks, C. (1998). “Racial Bias in Testing” (pp. 55-85). in Jencks and Phillips (eds.) The BlackWhite Test Score Gap. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution
Delpit, L. (2012) Excerpts Multiplication is for White People: Raising Expectations for Other
People’s Children
Humes, E. (2003) Excerpts from School of Dreams: Making the Grade at a Top American High
School. NY, NY: Harcourt.
Staiger, A. (May, 2004). “Whiteness as Giftedness: Racial Formation at an Urban High School.”
Social Problems 51 (2) (pp.161-181).
Steele, C. (2010). Chapters 1-3 (pp. 1-62). Whistling Vivaldi: And Other Clues to How
Stereotypes Affect Us. NY, NY: Norton.
April 23: Critical Issues of Race, Education and Socio-Cultural Pedagogy Past and Present
Carter, P. (2012) Chapters 5-7. Stubborn Roots: Race, Culture and Inequality. NY, NY: Oxford
University Press (pp. 119-181).
Howard, T. C. (2010). Chapter 4 “Culturally Responsive Pedagogy.” Why Race and Culture
Matters in Schools. NY, NY: Teachers College Press.
Walker, V. S. (2009). Introduction: “Once a Upon a Time in a Forgotten World” (pp. 1-16). Hello
Professor
April 30: Culturally Relevant Pedagogy: The Relationship Between Race, Diversity and Whose
Knowledge is Valued
Bartolome, L. (1994). “Beyond the Methods Fetish: Toward a Humanizing Pedagogy.” Harvard
Educational Review 64 (2) (pp. 173-194).
Howard, T. C. (2010). Chapters 5 and 6 “The Role of Race in Learning” and “Developing Cultural
Competence.” Why Race and Culture Matters in Schools. NY, NY: Teachers College
Press.
May 7: Embracing our Demographic Future (or Not) in Educational Politics, Policy and Practice
Hilliard III, A. G. (2003). “No Mystery: Closing the Achievement Gap between Africans and
Excellence.” (pp. 131-163) In T. Perry, C. Steele, and A. G.Hilliard III (eds). Young, Gifted
and Black. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Page, S. (2007). Prologue and Introduction. The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates
Better Groups, Firms, Schools and Societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
7
Wells, A.S.; Holme, J. J.; Revilla, A. T. and Atanda, K. A. (2009). “That was a Different Time” Both
Sides Now: The Story of School Desegregation’s Graduates. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press.
May 14: Final Project Presentations: Toward a New Agenda for Educational Politics and Policy
Additional Policies Related to this Course:
1.
The College will make reasonable accommodations for persons with documented
disabilities. Students are encouraged to contact the Office of Access and Services for Individuals
with Disabilities (OASID) for information about registering with the office. You can reach OASID
by email at oasid@tc.columbia.edu, stop by 163 Thorndike Hall or call 212-678-3689. Services
are available only to students who are registered and submit appropriate documentation. As
your instructor, I am happy to discuss specific needs with you as well.
2.
The grade of Incomplete will be assigned only when the course attendance requirement
has been met but, for reasons satisfactory to the instructor, the granting of a final grade has
been postponed because certain course assignments are outstanding. If the outstanding
assignments are completed within one calendar year from the date of the close of term in
which the grade of Incomplete was received and a final grade submitted, the final grade will be
recorded on the permanent transcript, replacing the grade of Incomplete, with a transcript
notation indicating the date that the grade of Incomplete was replaced by a final grade. If the
outstanding work is not completed within one calendar year from the date of the close of term
in which the grade of Incomplete was received, the grade will remain as a permanent
Incomplete on the transcript. In such instances, if the course is a required course or part of an
approved program of study, students will be required to re-enroll in the course including
repayment of all tuition and fee charges for the new registration and satisfactorily complete all
course requirements. If the required course is not offered in subsequent terms, the student
should speak with the faculty advisor or Program Coordinator about their options for fulfilling
the degree requirement. Doctoral students with six or more credits with grades of Incomplete
included on their program of study will not be allowed to sit for the certification exam.
3.
Teachers College students have the responsibility for activating the Columbia University
Network ID (UNI) and a free TC Gmail account. As official communications from the College –
e.g., information on graduation, announcements of closing due to severe storm, flu epidemic,
transportation disruption, etc. -- will be sent to the student’s TC Gmail account, students are
responsible for either reading email there, or, for utilizing the mail forwarding option to
forward mail from their account to an email address which they will monitor.
4.
It is the policy of Teachers College to respect its members’ observance of their major
religious holidays. Students should notify instructors at the beginning of the semester about
their wishes to observe holidays on days when class sessions are scheduled. Where academic
scheduling conflicts prove unavoidable, no student will be penalized for absence due to
religious reasons, and alternative means will be sought for satisfying the academic
8
requirements involved. If a suitable arrangement cannot be worked out between the student
and the instructor, students and instructors should consult the appropriate department chair or
director. If an additional appeal is needed, it may be taken to the Provost.
9