Overview
In this unit, we will build on our discussions of cultural identity and cultural competency to consider our own implicit cultural biases. While may believe deeply in the value of inclusivity and may not consider ourselves racist, a growing body of literature has identified that most of us hold some level of implicit bias. This research, which we will explore in this unit, reveals that as humans, we often experience the greatest sense of comfort when interacting with people who we consider to be “like” us, or when we are part of a group in which we feel we “belong.”
Choudhury (2015) describes bias as “prejudice without awareness” (p. 27). We may be unaware of our implicit bias; in fact, we may express beliefs that are inclusive and non-prejudiced. However, research has shown that implicit bias is part of our human experience – and furthermore, these biases influence our choices. “We all have implicit biases; it’s part of being human. Such prejudice, hidden in the realm of the unconscious, influences our behaviour,” (Choudhury, 2015 p. 29).
Further research has also shown that, with awareness, we are able to identify and overcome our own implicit bias and engage in inclusive behavior.
Topics
In this unit, we will explore the following topics:
- Implicit Cultural Bias
- Privilege
- Stereotype Threat
Unit Learning Outcomes
When you have completed this unit you should be able to:
- Define implicit bias.
- Identify implicit cultural biases.
- Discuss the influence of privilege on educational outcomes.
- Analyze how cultural bias influences the teaching/learning experience.
- Apply interventions to address stereotype threat.
Activity Checklist
Here is a checklist of learning activities you will benefit from in completing this unit. You may find it useful for planning your work.
Assessment
Unit 5 Discussion: Complete (Part A): Analysis of Privilege and Power in the Media, and (Part B): Knapsack of Privilege.
5.1 Implicit Cultural Bias
In “Deep Diversity,” Shakil Choudhury (2015) argues that the problems of racism are rooted in our unconscious selves, and that solutions must incorporate both our minds and our hearts. “Problems of diversity are not cognitive in nature. There is no shortage of good ideas about how to make people feel like they matter and belong. Our blocks exist at the feeling, unconscious level. When we encounter those who are racially different than us, our unconscious, emotional selves can take over. And yet, most of the approaches used today are very cognitive, or head-based. To undo a problem that is emotional in nature, it is not very effective to try to think our way through it. Like throwing a fire extinguisher to a drowning person, it’s the wrong tool for the task” (Choudhury, 2015, p. xv).
Choudury (2015) identifies three insights about the role implicit bias plays in how we view diversity and inclusion.
- “How we feel directly influences how we act” (p. 3)
- “As humans, we all have biases we are note aware of that play out on a daily basis” (p. 4)
- “We have greater empathy—more care and concern—for those who are most like ourselves” (p. 5)
Talking about race can be uncomfortable for many people, particularly when discussing the topic with people from another race. In fact, according to Mueller, King and Klar (2017), students discussing race in the classroom “often become quieter, angrier, or they completely withdraw from diversity education” (p. 63) particularly if they confronted with discussions that make them assess their behavior in light of discussions about privilege and power.
In this unit, we will begin to explore the concept of implicit bias and how it shapes are interactions with other people. An awareness of implicit bias will be import as we enter a teaching/learning environment and attempt to create inclusive learning spaces and experiences where all students belong.
5.1.1 Activity: Implicit Bias
5.1.2 Activity: Implicit Bias Assessment
5.2 Privilege
Scholars who explore concepts of diversity and inclusion often begin with a foundational understanding of privilege – those unearned benefits we receive or are excluded from because of our identity.
In 1989, Peggy McIntosh wrote a seminal short essay on privilege that has, in many ways, shaped the way we think about privilege today. McIntosh (1989) wrote, “I have come to see white privilege as an invisible package of unearned assets that I can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was”meant” to remain oblivious. White privilege is like an invisible weightless knapsack of special provisions, maps, passports, codebooks, visas, clothes, tools, and blank checks” (p. 10).
Like McIntosh (1989), Hilking-Hudson & Ahlquist (2003) contend that those who are privileged because of race, gender, socio-economic status, or other aspects of their identity, may be oblivious to this privilege, often finding it hard to see how this bias works in their favour. Because privilege is invisible (like implicit bias), we have to consciously work to both identify it and mitigate it, in order to create more equitable learning experiences for students.
“White blindness to the difference race makes in people’s lives has a powerful effect on schools and other institutions in white dominant societies. It keeps white people from learning about the role that their privilege plays in personal and institutional racism” (Hickling-Hudson & Ahlquist, 2003, p. 3).
Choudhury (2017) refers to several studies that show positive bias based on identity. Job candidates with white-sounding names are more likely to receive an interview offer. Until changes were made in the audition process, female candidates were less likely to be selected as orchestra members. Faculty were more likely to respond to emails sent from male faculty with “white names” than with those that sounded like they were from other cultures.
Mueller, King and Klar (2017) argue that “privilege” is not about wealth, but about dominance and power. “Hidden racism, when named, can further polarize the rift between groups as it identifies which racial groups have more social power and less” (Choudhury, 2015, p. 6).
5.2.1 Activity: Knapsack of Privilege
5.2.2 Activity: Resources
5.2.3 Activity: Analysis of Privilege and Power in Media
5.3 Stereotype Threat
Over the course of his research career, Steele (2010) and his colleagues engaged in an ongoing research journey to explore the role that stereotypes play in student performance. He began this journey when confronted by data from American universities that showed differences in academic achievement by racial groups. Steele and his colleagues wanted to identity the phenomena behind these results, which were replicated at universities across the U.S. By conducting a series of experiments, in which one group of students were reminded of aspects of their identity to which negative stereotypes were attached and another group of students were not reminded of this aspect of their identity, they were able to consistently demonstrate that what they termed “stereotype threat” had a statistically significant impact on student performance. Steele (2010) coined the term “stereotype threat” to describe “the idea of a situational predicament as a contingency of their group identity, a real threat of judgement or treatment in the person’s environment that went beyond the limitations within” (pp. 59-60).
In one of his early experiments, Steele (2010) and his colleagues gave a challenging verbal test to black and white students at an elite American university. In the initial version of the test, white students performed better than black students, with an average of four more items correct. They then gave the test to a second group of students, but with the instructions that this was a test not to measure intellectual ability, but to study methods of problem solving. “With this instruction we freed these black participants of the stigma threat they might otherwise have experienced on a difficult test of verbal reasoning” (p. 51). The results were markedly different than the first test: black student performance was now equivalent to white student performance – and significantly higher than black student performance on the test for which no framing was given.
Steele (2010) and his colleagues went on to explore this phenomenon in multiple studies, many of which were replicated by researchers at universities in countries around the world. The study findings demonstrated the strong influence that stereotype threat has on student performance. These studies demonstrated that when students were aware of negative stereotypes about performance (including both athletics and academics) of their group identity, their performance was likely to be depressed. Steele (2010) argues that this explains the underperformance of equally qualified students – and is exacerbated when motivation is high. In other words, the effect is greater when individuals have a high desire to perform well, or when the stakes are higher (such as at an elite university).
Steele’s (2010) studies revealed that, “an American woman in an advanced college math class knows at some level that she could be seen as limited because she is a woman; a black student knows the same thing in almost any challenging academic setting; and a white, elite sprinter knows it, too, as he reaches the last 10 meters of a 100-meter race” (p. 59). This ongoing attention to stereotype threat not only decreases performance, but also siphons valuable mental energy to thinking about negative stereotypes and concerns about performance, further diminishing intellectual attention to the tasks at hand.
Building on this body of research, Steele (2010) also presents four strategies educators can use to mitigate the impact of stereotype threat within learning environments.
- Connecting with values: In one study (led by researchers Valerie Purdie-Vaughns, Nancy Apfel, and Allison Master and described by Steele, 2010), students were asked to identify three values important to them and briefly write a summary of why they were important to them. Additionally, they completed follow-up self-affirmations of these values in exercises throughout the year. Compared to a control groups, students who affirmed there values demonstrated improved grades, with the effect highest for black students and those with poor performance early in the class. “With one’s larger sense of competence and worth brought into view by the writing exercise poorer early performance in the semester and other identity threatening cues in the classroom were less all-important than they would otherwise have been. This made students less vigilant, freeing up mental resources and improving performance” (p. 176). Furthermore, the disruption of poor performance allows students to experience success, and “interrupts an otherwise negative recursive process… Without an affirmation, early frustration and threatening environmental cues worried them more, which worsened their performance, which worried them still more, until a full-scale downward progression was underway” (p. 176).
- High expectations: In several studies, students who were most impacted by stereotype threat also mistrusted the feedback they received from faculty members on their academic work, particularly neutral feedback or feedback that included constructive criticism along with compliments. Instead, what worked was feedback that underscored the high expectations for academic work, along with a belief that the student was capable of achieving those high expectations. “The feedback giver explained that he ‘used high standards’ in evaluating the essays… Still, he said, having read the student’s essay, he believed the student could meet those standards. His criticism, this feedback implied was offered to help the student meet the publication’s high standards” (p. 163).
- Growth mindset: Studies of implementation of Carol Dweck’s (2006) work on “growth mindset” also result in increased performance. In one study, researchers divided students into two groups, one of which was mentored by college students who focused on how intelligence can be improved. The control group, in contrast, received mentoring on drug use prevention. The results demonstrate that the students who were mentored in the “growth mindset” performed better on sections of the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills “Both girls and boys whose mentors had focused them on the expandability of intelligence did significantly better on the reading section of this test” with even greater gains for female students in the math section.
- Teaching techniques: Another study described by Steele (2010) involved observations of classroom teachers. The study revealed that test performance was higher in classrooms where teachers demonstrated the following: “positive relationships with students; more child-centered teaching; use of their diversity as a classroom resource rather than following a strict strategy of colorblindness; teacher skill, warmth, and availability; and so on” (p. 181).
Both implicit bias and stereotype threat are subconscious experiences – and influence our behaviours and performance without our awareness. However, as with implicit bias, Steele (2010) and other researchers have shown that stereotype threat can be mitigated significantly with strategies that seek to minimize student focus on stereotypes and diminish their unconscious focus on the need to defy these negative stereotypes. These interventions are able to break through the stereotype threat to allow students to perform in a way that more closely represents their ability or knowledge in a particular subject area.
“The intervention studies bear a profound lesson: even though group underachievement problems may be routed in background factors that are difficult to change – socioeconomic disadvantage, poorer access to good schooling, less parental support, low participation in social networks that enable the timely development of critical skills and cultural capital, historically rooted patterns of sex-role socialization, and so on–remedying the immediate causes of these problems in the situations in which they occur can improve things dramatically” (p. 182.)
Although background factors may be big predictors of success – and difficult to change – it doesn’t mean we should give up. Instead, interventions have the power to lessen the impact of these predictive factors – and offer hope for students who want to succeed.
According to Steele (2010), the research results in the following strategies to improve learning outcomes for those who experience stereotype threat:
- By changing the way you give critical feedback, you can dramatically improve minority students’ motivation and receptiveness.
- By improving a group’s critical mass in a setting, you can improve its members’ trust, comfort, and performance in a setting.
- By allowing students, especially minority students, to affirm their most valued sense of self, you can improve their grades, even for a long time.
- By helping students develop a narrative about the setting that explains their frustrations while projecting positive engagement and success in the setting, you can greatly improve their sense of belonging and achievement – which if done at a critical time could redirect the course of their lives. (Steele, 2010, p. 216)
5.3.1 Activity: Key Terms Review (ungraded)
Unit Summary
In this unit, you have had the opportunity to assess your own implicit biases, and explore the influence of privilege and bias in the learning process. As we continue together in this course, we’ll dive more deeply into research focussed on diversity and racism, later integrating these concepts into the practice of developing culturally inclusive learning experiences for students.
Assessment
Unit 5 Discussion
Part A: Analysis of Privilege and Power in Media
In activity 5.3, you were asked to watch a show and consider the ways in which cultural, ethnic, and gender diversity are displayed. Answer the questions below and prepare a 500 word analysis of the show, including a description of the show, an analysis of how people are depicted, and how culture identity is portrayed.
- What is the title of the series and episode?
- Who is the creator of the show? What is their ethnicity? Gender? Occupation? Income level? Education level?
- Who is the lead for the show? What is their ethnicity? Gender? Occupation? Income level? Education level?
- Who makes up the key cast of characters listed in the opening credits? What is their ethnicity? Gender? Occupation? Income level? Education level?
- Does anyone play a character of a different ethnicity or gender than their own?
- Select three different scenes with different characters. Stop the show at that scene and, if watching on a provider that allows, capture a screen shot of that scene. Consider the characters in the scene? What are their ethnicities? Gender? Occupation? Income level? Education level?
- In each of the scenes, how are people of different ethnicities/gender/occupation/income/education depicted? Who are the villains of the story? Who are the heroes? What are their genders or ethnicities?
Part B: Knapsack of privilege
Refering to the checklist you completed from McIntosh’s White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack, post a discussion post with your score. Answer the following questions: In what ways do you consider yourself privileged? In what ways do you feel you have barriers to overcome? How have these privileges and challenges influenced your experience of schooling?
Be sure to respond to at least two of your peers’ posts.