BackStage

Update: Read this over at scatterplot.

Well, the ScatterEffect is at it again. I think there is also a Law and Letters Effect, or the BelleEffect, but it led to some interesting commentary on my original post on teaching Race and Ethnicity to undergraduates.

I write about the relationship between teaching discrimination and politics:

“Rather, I would hope, showing the data and evidence that does show that there still exists race discrimination should challenge the assumption that we are meritocracy and that we have equality for all. What you want to DO about it — that’s political. My job is not to answer that question, but give students the tools to answer it themselves.

Anomie, always thought provoking, responds:

Not to hijack the comments thread (maybe this would be better answered in a separate blog post), but what’s your thoughts on displaying your political beliefs in class?

I have a tendency to be upfront about them, but also give the pros and cons of every side to the best of my ability. Based on student evals, I seem to do that fine. They know what I think but they don’t feel like I’m pushing that belief on them. (I ask at the end of the semester to be sure).

But some people argue you should keep you own beliefs out of the class. Present the facts and the political attitudes toward how those facts should be dealt with (and the meaning behind them: i.e., is there inequality because of racism or because white people are just plain better/harder working/etc.?), but be agnostic regarding which answer you side with.

I take the more open approach, much like a qualitative researcher would be expected to state their biases so that the reader could situate their findings, so should the professor state their biases so the student could situate their learning.

But I’m not entirely sure yet…

Me either Anomie. But, perhaps the ScatterEffect and BelleEffect will help us out on this one.

So far, my feelings are to be as open as possible. I cannot be agnositc on statements like:

is there inequality because of racism or because white people are just plain better/harder working/etc.?

because of the evidence that points towards racism and discrimination as the underlying cause of thing such as pay equity issues. To me, that issue is not a political one. It is a social reality. Otherwise, what are you teaching? A series of statistics? Moreover, a series of statistics that does not even include the concept of statistical control?

I am open to being wrong about this. Perhaps it is a political issue. If it is, I would be harder to convince that it should be. But, perhaps even it should be. It seems to me that politics comes in when you argue about what should be done about the underlying social reality — that discrimination exists and results in negative impacts where it works. Whether that means you should have affirmative action programs, Title IX programs, if it is appropriate to work towards equity rather than equailty — I think that is politics.

I have no problems telling my students where I come down on the political issues. In fact, I agree that we should be open about them. I do stress, both verbally and in my grading, that I will not grade based on my political beliefs.

On my original post on Race and Ethnicity, Educatorblog gave the suggestion (and a link to materials) for having a debate in the classroom. I have used this approach before, and really like it. Not only does it work as a classroom activity, but as an assignment as well. I try to stress that there is a big difference between understanding the social reality and coming to conclusions about what should be done about it. I do want students to come to their own decisions on this matter, to form their own ideas about policy and approaches, but want them to do so on solid ground. Meaning, I want them to understand the social reality behind politics.

A paper assignment on say affirmative action can bring this home to students. Have them discuss the social reality, then discuss affirmative action with all its possible benefits and its problems, and then take a position on what they believe about the effectiveness of the policy. Former students of mine can tell you, no matter what position they took (on affirmative action, gender equity in sports, or other assigned issues), they were graded on their argumentation and grasp of concepts. Some of the best papers were those who took the opposite position than I would have. I think the key here is to have a solid grading ruberic — and also transparency surrounding that ruberic. I have had this assignment for three semesters of social problems. Each student does two issues (out of four, they get to pick). So, in total I’ve had over 1200 of these papers that I’ve graded (taking all sides of the issue). Never once has a student accused me of grading unfairly because of my politics. I think it is because I stay as transparent as possible throughout the assignment and grading process.