Research: What Do Teachers Know?

• In Event: "When You Know Better, DO Better": Racial Literacies and Teacher (Un)Learning

Abstract

Teachers’ knowledge of racial literacies remains limited within history education (Author 1, 2015; Author 2, 2016). In particular, teachers often learn—or fail to learn—about the history of racism through their own experiences as students in preK-12 systems, in post-secondary history coursework, and in teacher education coursework. Much of the content of these courses come from textbooks, which include minimal opportunities for meaningful learning about race (Author 3, 2014; Author 3, 2015). Given that most students view them as factual and unquestionable (Wineburg, 2001) and given their continued popularity with teachers, textbooks may be the greatest obstacles to advancing racial literacies within history education.

The purpose of this paper is to address Guinier’s (2004) call to confront racism as systemic, institutional, and structural by interrogating how textbooks normalize and standardize whiteness within history education. First, I offer examples from research of the ways that textbooks (mis)represent peoples of color and perpetuate structural racism. Second, I synthesize results from several studies to demonstrate the pervasive influence of textbooks on pedagogy and teacher thinking.

History textbooks have been studied extensively in terms of their (mis)representations of the experiences of peoples of color (Author, 2014; Hickman & Porfilio, 2012; Loewen, 1995, 2010; Padgett, 2015; Sanchez, 2007). For example, most U.S. history textbooks prioritize the “American Progress” narrative, suggesting that obstacles to the expansion of capitalism are anti-American (Apple & Christian-Smith, 1991; Author, 2014; Loewen, 2010; Scott, 2008). Such positioning privileges individuality over collectivism and neglects the ongoing role of historical trauma on perpetuating poverty (Mann, 2006).

Many teachers continue to rely heavily on teachers’ editions (Brenner & Hiebert, 2010; Whitney, Golez, Nagel, & Nieto, 2012). While there is limited research on the pedagogical effectiveness of these resources (Lavere, 2008; Levstik, 2008), it is clear that they fall short in terms of development of racial literacies. Teachers’ editions often include “wraparound” features (i.e., guidance for discussions, activities, etc. in the margins), which most frequently support only basic understandings of racialized experiences (Author, 2015). This paper focuses on results of a critical discourse analysis, including an example that encourages teachers to ask the question, “How did Native American resistance to white settlement end?” with suggested responses arguing that Indigenous peoples “were moved to reservations, captured, or defeated.” This example illustrates the tendency of curriculum to limit racial literacies in terms of all three of Guinier’s (2004) tenets: It does not ask teachers and students to “read” racism as structural (e.g., by explaining the intent of the reservation system), balance critical thinking and action (e.g., by having students investigate continued resistance), or recognize how race intersects with other social constructs (e.g., by interrogating the origins and impacts of poverty on reservations).

To advance racial literacies, teachers should move away from the textbooks in order to conduct and facilitate inquiries that (re)center counter-narratives within the history curriculum. This paper concludes with examples of audiovisual oral history research as a tool for counter-narrative development and (un)learning.

Author

• Christine Rogers Stanton, Montana State University