Antiracist Teaching as Prophetic Challenge: One Catholic University’s Response to Systemic Racism

• In Event: “How Do I Move Forward . . .?” Catholic Colleges and Universities' Efforts to Transform Systemic Racism

Abstract

This empirical, mixed-methods study explores an antiracist teaching initiative at Mid-Atlantic Catholic University (MCU), a private predominantly white institution. The Race, Justice, and Dialogue Course (RJDC), part of MCU’s effort addressing racial disparities and racism, employs antiracism pedagogy and structured dialogue. The research question guiding this study is: What is the impact of the RJDC on students’ understanding of and ability to discuss and engage in social justice and race topics?
At MCU, antiracism is defined as a “prophetic challenge” in pursuit of “individual and communal transformation” that “requires we challenge any action and condemn any silence in institutional policies, organizational structures, or traditions that maintain or extend violence against, or oppression of, any minoritized group” (Presidential Task Force). Guided by Catholic Social Teaching and St. Augustine, the course endeavors to “notice the world for what it is, recognizing not just the things you expect to see there, but all those things that do not fit your expectations” (Matthews, 2010, p. 11).
One goal was racial literacy, or the ability to understand, discuss, and analyze how race and racism function in society (Borsheim-Black & Sarigianides, 2019). Assessment measured comprehension of content and engagement in dialogue. Formal facilitated dialogue coupled with multimedia content develops students’ ability to question and critique (Jackson, 2022). Content, comprised of multimedia modules, focused on race concepts, patterns of racism, and racialized identities.
STUDY DESIGN: Since Fall 2021, seven pilot sections have been taught. We used mixed methods to assess 71 undergraduate participants’ knowledge of race concepts and their willingness to disrupt racism. Pre- and post-surveys collected demographic information plus measured social justice attitudes and behavior (Torres-Harding et al., 2012), bias (Bracey et al., 2020), privilege, power, and race (McLellan et al., 2019), dialogue, and interaction (Gurin et al., 2009). Artifacts included pre- and post-course reflections, journals, and final projects. Interviews were held the semester after the course ended. Together, data provide a snapshot of participants’ demographics and beliefs before, during, and after the course.
RESULTS AND IMPLICATIONS: Preliminary analysis reveals increased confidence of naming racialization and comfort talking about race. Participants reported opportunities to build empathy and community as nurturing their commitment to work across groups on issues related to racial justice, such as institutional biases. These transformative effects demonstrate participants’ raised critical cultural and sociopolitical consciousness, including awareness of self as learner and citizen (Ladson-Billings, 1994). Yet, during post-course interviews, many no longer felt capable of disrupting systems, suggesting that the course positively impacted participants’ ability to discuss social justice and racial topics but was less effective in teaching students to engage in this work beyond the individual level. Finally, participants’ race and religious identities impacted participants’ understanding of course content and perceived value of the course. Findings will be presented during the session. This project highlights an institutional effort to use antiracist pedagogy to transform how race and racism are taught at a Catholic university. Our analytic model provides insight into MCU’s antiracist initiative that researchers can apply to their own antiracist courses.

Authors

• Rachel Skrlac Lo, Villanova University

• Sherry Perlmutter Bowen, Villanova University

• Teresa Nance, Villanova University

• Edward García Fierros, Villanova University

• Ariana Ramos, Johns Hopkins University