A Class Divided

[Avalonian]

I just watched a Frontline special, originally made almost 20 years ago, entitled “A Class Divided.” In it, a teacher in the late 1960’s taught an object lesson to her 3rd grade students about discrimination. She separated her classroom (all white students) into brown-eyed people and blue-eyed people, and for a day each group learned what it was like to be treated as the inferior group, simply based on the color of their eyes. In this remarkably simple experiment, the results of discrimination on academics, self-esteem, and how the children view their peers come into sharp focus.

The teacher, Jane Elliot, was inspired to teach the lesson for the first time the day after Martin Luther King, Jr. was shot. She went on to teach it in later years, and even later to adults. You can read about it on the PBS website here.

What came to me when I watched it was two things. It was a remarkable experiment, but it occurred to me that in today’s school atmosphere it would probably never (or rarely) go over well. It also occurred to me that it’s as necessary today as it ever was.

In reading this interview on the PBS site, I found that Jane Elliot seems to agree.

However, I think the numbers of those who would do it are decreasing because of the very conservative stance this country is in right now. I think it has become much more risky to do creative teaching in the classroom. I also think the curriculum in the public schools is being circumscribed drastically because of the fundamentalists that are insisting that the schools teach only certain very narrow values. Several years ago the message was, “We don’t want values education.” Well, education itself is a value. There’s no way a teacher can go into a classroom without telegraphing her values to her students.

I know of at least one teacher who got fired for doing this exercise because the people in the community did not want their children to learn that it’s all right not to be white. That philosophy was very threatening to the people in that community. After all, if their whiteness didn’t make them superior, then what did they have? Had I not had an extremely wise superintendent when I did that exercise the first time, I probably would have gotten fired. He was under pressure to fire me. I didn’t know why he persevered until a researcher for “A Class Divided” asked him why he didn’t fire me, and he simply said, “Because in my heart of hearts, I knew what she was doing was right and I couldn’t fire her for doing the right thing.” However, 20 percent of the people in Riceville are still absolutely furious about what I did on April 4, 1968.

I’ve learned that discrimination and its effects are the same no matter where you find them. I get the same results with the exercise in Berlin or in the Netherlands that I do in the U.S. or Australia or Curacao. And what’s even more distressing is the fact that I’ve gotten the same results using the exercise with adults in Scotland and Australia in the year 2002 that I got using the exercise with children in Riceville, Iowa, in 1968.

To my mind, Jane Elliot is a visionary teacher, and a hero in her own way for the civil rights movement. I think her ideas are not only great, but necessary even in our age, with children and adults. I think it’s unfortunate that the current political climate seems to prohibit this sort of values education.

So… I’m sure some of you disagree already. What do you think? Is this still necessary? Is it a good thing? Could it be pulled off in a classroom today?

[december]

What an interesting OP.

*Originally posted by Avalonian *What came to me when I watched it was two things. It was a remarkable experiment

I agree. It made such an impact on me that I still remember it over 30 years later.

…but it occurred to me that in today’s school atmosphere it would probably never (or rarely) go over well. It also occurred to me that it’s as necessary today as it ever was.

Times are different from what they were 30 yeas ago. For one thing, the cult of vicimology is much stronger.

I think the problem is different today. I agree that there is pervasive prejudice against blacks in education, both in the white society and in the black society. However, I disagree with Jane Elliot as to where that prejudice is and how to fix it:

JE: I think white people aren’t aware that racism isn’t just wearing white hoods and burning crosses. It’s also fixing the system so that black votes don’t get counted. It’s refusing to open the polling places in precincts where most of the eligible voters are people of color.

Obviously blacks should be able to vote conveniently, but I have seen no evidence that lack of polling places is a pevasive problem.

JE: It’s outlawing affirmative action at the state level even though it has proven successful.

I think affirmative action is based on the very type of racism that she rightly deplores. Affirmative action assumes that blacks can’t perform as well as whites and Asians in academics.

JE: It’s building more prisons than we build schools and guaranteeing that they will be filled by targeting young men of color with things like the “three strikes” legislation in California

The racism in this statement is just staggering. She takes it for granted that blacks are more likely to be criminals.

JE: …and the DWB – “driving while black.”

I agree with Elliot about this. Stopping black drivers merely because of their race is wrong and no doubt it has a bad impact on their morale.

JE: It’s the fact that there are more children attending segregated schools in the U.S. today than there were previous to Brown vs. Board of Education.

This may or may not be true. I’ve seen the claim and I’ve also seen purported refutations.

But why is she complaining? According to Elliot’s experiment, segregated schools ought to be superior. There are no white students around to disparage the blacks. In fact, I think black universities like Howard and women’s colleges like Wellesley do provide superior education for many attendees.

JE: It’s white flight

All races “flee” from the inner city, including middle class blacks.

JE: It’s television programming that portrays people of color as villains and white people as their victims.

I’d have to check the numbers; it’s not my impression that blacks are disproportionately portrayed as villains. An area where TV does discriminate IMHO is that blacks are seldom portrayed as geniuses. It’s ballot-security systems, which are used to intimidate minority voters
[/quote]
I guess Elliot is saying that requiring a drivers licence or ID to vote intimidates blacks. Again, the level of racisim in her comment shows that she needs to think more deeply about her own experiement. and so result in the very activities which they are supposedly designed to prevent.

I don’t see a role today for Elliot’s experiment, because I don’t think that classmates’ attitudes are that high on the list of causes for lack of educational self-confidence. I think that educational interest and self-confidence come more from within. ISTM that a more promising avenue is to fundamentally change the educational establishment, which is rife with this sort of prejudice, and which has the power to disserve black students.

[John_Mace]

Funny, I was thinking exactly the opposite as to why you couldn’t do this experiment today. Not because of “conservatives”, but because “liberals” would complain that it was damaging some kid’s self esteem, or PROMOTING racism.

I’ll freely admit that this country still has some problems with racism and prejudice. But to claim that we have gotten WORSE since the 1960 is ridiculous beyond imagination.

[Avalonian]

*Originally posted by december *
I think the problem is different today. I agree that there is pervasive prejudice against blacks in education, both in the white society and in the black society.

You should note that Jane Elliot has expanded the scope of this exercise to go much farther than black/white prejudice. From her interview:

JE: I’m doing the exercise and giving lectures about its effects all over the U.S. and in several locations overseas. I’ve just recently spent five weeks in Scotland and England where we did the exercise with a group of diversity trainers and others interested in the topic of diversity. We also taught a group of trainers how to most effectively use films made of the exercise, and I delivered several lectures about the anatomy of prejudice. Over the last 18 years I’ve given lectures in Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Northern Ireland, and Saudi Arabia, to name those I can remember.

<snip>

For the Germans then, as now, the problem is the rise of neo-Nazism and the issue of immigrants, most of whom are people of color. The problem is the same all over Western Europe because of the need for workers and the unwillingness of many people in those countries to accept those who are different from themselves. However, the problem is not people of color; it’s the prejudices that have always been in Western Europe and are now resurfacing. Many European people, like many people in the U.S., deny that they are racist while continuing to discriminate against people of color.

First of all, it’s not targeted at students anymore, partially because of the changed political climate. Second, it’s targeted at a wider array of cultures and prejudices. The exercise in Germany would have been very interesting to see, I think. TO my mind, this speaks as much to prejudice against Muslims in 2003 as it did against blacks in 1968. Though I didn’t mention this in the OP, it was definitely in my mind as I watched the program.

*Originally posted by december *
**The racism in this statement is just staggering. She takes it for granted that blacks are more likely to be criminals.

<snip>

I agree with Elliot about this. Stopping black drivers merely because of their race is wrong and no doubt it has a bad impact on their morale.**

These were separate statements you made, responding to parts of this sentence in her interview:

JE: It’s building more prisons than we build schools and guaranteeing that they will be filled by targeting young men of color with things like the “three strikes” legislation in California, and the DWB – “driving while black.”

You called the first half of this statement racist but agreed with the second half. Why did you parse them this way? To my mind, these examples were two elements of the same statement. The “three strikes” legislation combined with racial profiling of suspects (such as DWB) is indeed horribly biased against blacks. We’re seeing more of this sort of thinking coming out against Muslims now as well.

*Originally posted by december *
But why is she complaining? According to Elliot’s experiment, segregated schools ought to be superior. There are no white students around to disparage the blacks.

I don’t think she would agree with this. The nature of her experiment suggests that all students would do better in integrated schools with no racist behavior present. Your statement here suggests that you think racism is inherent to humans and inevitable. Do you think this?

I would say that racism is a learned behavior, and just as it can be taught, it can also be taught out.

*Originally posted by december *
**I don’t see a role today for Elliot’s experiment, because I don’t think that classmates’ attitudes are that high on the list of causes for lack of educational self-confidence. I think that educational interest and self-confidence come more from within. ISTM that a more promising avenue is to fundamentally change the educational establishment, which is rife with this sort of prejudice, and which has the power to disserve black students. **

So, if you believe what you say in your last sentence, why not use this experiment for educators and administrators, as well as students? Jane Elliot would actually support this. In the Frontline special last night, he discussed expanding the scope of the experiment to include people at all levels of the educational system. Do you think that would help? I do.

If you take into account that the exercise can be applied to more than just black/white prejudice, that it can apply to gender prejudice and religious prejudice as well, then I think it has just as much validity now as it ever did.

One more thing… just a point of curiosity. You said “It made such an impact on me that I still remember it over 30 years later.” Did you participate in an exercise like this, december? If so, what was it like firsthand? I’m genuinely curious to know what effect it had on you, short-term and long-term if possible.

[Avalonian]

*Originally posted by John Mace *
Funny, I was thinking exactly the opposite as to why you couldn’t do this experiment today. Not because of “conservatives”, but because “liberals” would complain that it was damaging some kid’s self esteem, or PROMOTING racism.

I’d actually agree with you here, in part anyway. The conservative slant towards “back to basics” education and away from values education is part of the problem, and the liberal tendency to try to whitewash tough issues like racism away both contribute. That’s why, in my own posts above, I cited the modern political climate as the problem, not one particular group. Factions on both sides of the aisle would probably have a problem with Jane Elliot’s lessons being taught in schoold today.

*Originally posted by John Mace *
**I’ll freely admit that this country still has some problems with racism and prejudice. But to claim that we have gotten WORSE since the 1960 is ridiculous beyond imagination. **

Is it really that simple? Sure, we’ve gotten better about some things, but I would say that some things have gotten worse as well. When you consider prejudices other than black/white racism, there are a whole lot more factors to consider. And when you include the attitudes of other cultures around the world it becomes even more important. It is widely held that Europeans share an anti-American sentiment, for example. Obviously, this is not true accross the continent, but many Americans think it is. Could this not be part of the same problem? And for those Europeans who do think that all Americans are trigger-happy cowboys, couldn’t they use this sort of exercise as well?

I suppose it depends on your definition of “we” in your sentence above. To me, as citizens of the world, “we” could be doing a hell of a lot better than we are now at eliminating ethnic prejudice, cultural prejudice, gender prejudice, andd many other sorts of unfair grouping and classifying.

Further, using a “better/worse” dichotomy is a bit too simplistic for my tastes. Some things have gotten better, while others have gotten worse. What you think of the overall picture really depends upon your perspective more than anything else, but the fact that some sort of change is still needed is undeniable, to me.