The third and final part of my interview with Stuart Buck, author of “Acting White: The Ironic Legacy of Desegregation” (Yale University Press). Part One is here, and Part Two is here.
In Dallas, where you and I both once lived, Woodrow Wilson High School is a big urban high school that has a large minority population, but also a significant middle-class white population. I once wrote a column focusing on how achievement at Woodrow is a highly segregated affair, with whites doing vastly better on state achievement tests than minorities. I was told by some Hispanic sources that whites heavily populate the advanced placement classes, and that they perceive an official effort to keep minority kids out of these classes. I don’t know whether that’s true or not, but that’s the perception. So it’s formally an integrated school, but segregation within the school is real, and seen by some as problematic. How, if at all, does your study of the “acting white” phenomenon bear on what the state tests results tell us about Woodrow?
As I mentioned earlier, I would expect to see an “acting white” effect in any school that has most students of a minority race in classes perceived as slower and most white students in classes perceived as more advanced. That’s the perfect environment if your goal is to encourage minority students to think that academic achievement is for the other race, not for them.
That said, instituting some sort of quota for minority students in advanced classes isn’t likely to help. Students tend to be smart enough to figure out if they’ve been artificially placed into a class with peers who are more advanced than they are.
What can be done going forward?
I have no magic bullet or panacea to offer here. Changing cultural attitudes is hard work, and one of the main points of my book is that the best-intentioned governmental efforts may affect cultural attitudes in ways that no one anticipated.
Still, I do suggest one idea that I think has some promise: eliminate individual grades, and let students compete against other schools in academic competitions.
This idea is far from original. Rather, it comes from the eminent sociologist James Coleman. Coleman observed the striking fact that while students regularly cheer for their school’s football or basketball team, they will poke fun or jeer at other students who study too hard or who are too eager in class: “the boy who goes all-out scholastically is scorned and rebuked for working too hard; the athlete who fails to go all-out is scorned and rebuked for not giving his all.”
But this is odd, is it not? Why are attitudes toward academics and athletics so different? Sports are more fun than classwork, of course, but that does not explain why success would actually be discouraged in class.
Coleman’s explanation was disarmingly simple: The students on the athletic teams are not competing against other students from their own school. Instead, they are competing against another school. And when they win a game, they bring glory to their fellow students, who get to feel like they too are victors, if only vicariously.
But the students in the same class are competing against each other for grades and for the teacher’s attention. Naturally, that competition gives rise to resentment against other children who are too successful (just as students will hate the football team from a cross-town rival). In Coleman’s words, the scholar’s “victories are purely personal ones, often at the expense of his classmates, who are forced to work harder to keep up with him. Small wonder that his accomplishments gain little reward, and are often met by such ridicule as ‘curve raiser’ or ‘grind,’ terms of disapprobation having no analogues in athletics.”
Indeed, going back to the first study that found the “acting white” criticism, sociologists pointed out that “athletes are exempt from the ‘Uncle Tom’ label because athletic achievement brings credit to the whole group while intellectual achievement does not.”
Coleman’s suggestion, therefore, was that if you want the students’ attitudes towards their studies to resemble their attitudes toward sports, you should minimize the role of grades — which involve competition against one’s classmates. In his words, we need to get rid of the “notion that each student’s achievement must be continually evaluated or ‘graded’ in every subject.” Instead, such grades should be “infrequent or absent,” and should be replaced by “contests and games” between schools, such as “debate teams, music contests, drama contests, science fairs, . . . math tournaments, speaking contests,” etc. Then, the students in any one class or school would have a greater incentive to encourage their fellow students to study hard, and to take pride in their fellow students’ success. In Coleman’s words, “I suspect that the impact upon student motivation would be remarkably great — an impact due to the fact that the informal social rewards from community and fellow-students would reinforce rather than conflict with achievement.”
As I pointed out in my first question, you are very careful to say, over and over again, that segregation was evil and had to end. Knowing what we now know about what happened in desegregation’s aftermath, what would have been a wiser approach to ending segregation?
This is a tough one. My number one suggestion would be that more black schools should have remained open and more white students assigned to those schools. That said, I realize that in the 1950s and 1960s, trying to send white students to black schools would have meant even more social upheaval and white flight. There’s only so much you can do to force people to be good.
Finally, as the adoptive father of two black children, how has your research for this book affected the way you and your wife will raise your children, particularly with respect to their schooling?
I want all my children to feel in the bottom of their hearts that they are intellectually curious and that they love learning and reading, no matter what other children may do or say. I want them to be immune (as far as possible) to peer pressure, which can drag kids down not just in school but in everything else about life.
Buy Stuart Buck’s book “Acting White” here — and visit Stuart’s blog too.
posted May 19, 2010 at 2:29 pm
I found this to be a very sad read. Like the author of course I think segregation was a great evil – so please don’t interpret any of this as an apologia for segregation. The point which seems important is that desegregation was done without regard for the ways in which culture 1) maintains constructive behavior in a group and 2)how desegregation along with urban policies of the time would alter the culture of African Americans. People just didn’t think the whole thing thru and ended up destroying something very valuable. The author concludes it was the destruction of the black schools that was the problem – but I think it goes further to the destruction of black neighborhoods which was part and parcel of the whole white flight/suburbanization phenomena. Those neighborhoods supported the black schools – the schools succeeded within the context of the neighborhood.
Of course the real tragedy is that you can’t go back. The suggestions about Coleman and promoting academic competition are interesting although one cannot escape the need to evaluate a students progress – how do you tailor instruction if you do not know where the student is?
The interview really reinforces to me at least the importance of cultural establishment and enforcement of norms and the linkage between “place” and maintaining culture. A very thought provoking read.
posted May 19, 2010 at 2:38 pm
Stuart Buck’s insight definitely goes beyond the phenomenon of “Acting White”. Being dragged down is a potent metaphor. Bullying, peer pressure, and so much more.
Sociologist James Coleman has the trait of changing his position when new data is presented. Notice this is also a trait of Diane Ravitch with respect to “No Child Left Behind”.
Wouldn’t it be refreshing if we could implement some sweeping, creative changes in education. If you could go back to the comments on the Diane Ravitch post- notice M.Z.’s comment-I paraphrase- never underestimate the ability of school bureaucrats to destroy schools.
posted May 19, 2010 at 2:51 pm
Cecelia, I hear you. This does raise similar questions as I raised in the American Jews thread. Being forced by nasty circumstance to live in a ghetto is cruel. But at the same time, it can have its benefits, such as prompting a stronger communal identity, and the creation of institutions and ways of life to ensure the community’s survival over time. There’s a great book called “Once Upon a Time … When We Were Colored” written by a black man whose name I can’t recall at the moment, in which he discusses his memories of the wonderful things that went on in the black community despite their oppression. It was by no means an apologia for segregation, but it was a challenge to the narrative that life for African-Americans was nothing but misery under segregation. In that sense, it’s a testimony to the complexity of life. I doubt that any black man or woman would trade their hard-won rights and liberties for the good things their communities had during segregation, and have lost since then. But as Stuart’s book, and “Once Upon a Time … When We Were Colored” acknowledge, there really was loss, and important loss, amid the civil rights gains. Life is difficult and complex.
posted May 19, 2010 at 3:07 pm
But as Stuart’s book, and “Once Upon a Time … When We Were Colored” acknowledge, there really was loss, and important loss, amid the civil rights gains.
I am left, after your interview, wondering “so what?” Is the goal for people to think, “Gosh, we should have done things differently” or it the goal “Maybe there’s a lesson for the future.” I can quite figure out what your friends’ ultimate goal is in waxing nostalgic for what was and might have been.
It’s like he’s identified a (perceived) problem, did a nice “historical” analysis, but doesn’t really offer any solutions. Is he suggesting “black schools” again? Is he suggesting change the “acting white” culture? Is he just trying to be contrarian?
posted May 19, 2010 at 3:18 pm
The point of the book is to figure out where the “acting white” phenomenon came from. In examining the social science research, the historical record, and in personal interviews, Stuart found that it had to do with desegregation. He is up front in the book saying that this is a very complex problem, and admitting that he doesn’t really have any solutions. But since when is it disallowed to observe and define a problem if one doesn’t have a ready-made solution? I can imagine that one result from Stuart’s book would be to be more thoughtful in the future about how humans actually behave, individually and communally, before rushing in to impose solutions on problems.
Having read the book, I wondered if the better solution to the problem of segregation would have been to have struck down laws that established schools by race, and that treated public schools differently by racial composition. Make them absolutely equal in terms of quality of facilities and materials — but let people of all races be free to attend their neighborhood school, regardless of race. Would that have permitted de facto segregation? Yes. But that’s what exists now in many urban school districts! Besides, doing that would have allowed black communities to have kept their institutions, and any changes in racial composition in either black or white schools would have been gradual and organic, therefore more durable.
It would not have been a perfect solution, but what happened was bad too. I did not know what a catastrophe it was for black schools and black communities until reading Stuart’s book. The main lesson I took away from having read it was “beware of unintended consequences.” Anybody who reads that book, or this interview, and thinks “Acting White” is some sort of apologia for segregation is being willfully stupid.
posted May 19, 2010 at 5:06 pm
Mr. Dreher, @ 1:19 PM, quotes one S. Buck, author, as follows:
“But the students in the same class are competing against each other for grades and for the teacher’s attention. Naturally, that competition gives rise to resentment against other children who are too successful (just as students will hate the football team from a cross-town rival). ”
Garbage. An “A” can be earned by more than one person in a given class for a given assignment/test/quiz/project, unless the teacher grades on a strict curve.
“In Coleman’s words, the scholar’s “victories are purely personal ones, often at the expense of his classmates, who are forced to work harder to keep up with him. Small wonder that his accomplishments gain little reward, and are often met by such ridicule as ‘curve raiser’ or ‘grind,’ terms of disapprobation having no analogues in athletics.”
More garbage. The key words in that quote are “forced to work harder”. Whatever other effects segregation had, it demanded social solidarity and community cohesion among blacks as the price of group survival. The leaders of black communities, preachers, teachers and the like, were able to enforce rigorous standards of behavior (church attendance, shirt-and-tie to school, hard work/discipline in studies, etc.) under such a regime. The peer-pressure element that has ALWAYS existed among youth of all ethnicities was held in check by counterpressures from black leaders who did not wish to give segregationists ANY excuse for imposing new restrictions on the group as a whole.
Desegregation, by allowing for the skimming off the black leadership cadre, removed those counterpressures. The preacher, teacher and factory worker, in effect, were removed as serious influences in the lives of black youth and supplanted by the drug dealer, the rap “singer” and the mercenary athlete—the people that the urban child sees as part of his immediate daily environment, whether in person or in the media.
Also, one needs to remember that most children, of ANY race, only spend 9-10 percent of their time in school. The rest of the time they are subject to the media, peers and all the rest of the unhealthy influences that are present in the life of the “modern” child.
In addition, the situation of the black child (particularly the male black child) is worsened by the absence of the father as a significant influence in his/her life. (Black rates of ba$tardy are much higher than for other ethnicities, although the others are catching up.) Male children tend to be much less controllable by mothers than by other males, particularly older, mature males who can literally pound the stuffing out of a miscreant should the situation so warrant.
Correcting this situation may well be impossible, at least in the short term. Absent a new series of social restrictions that urban children are required to take seriously, I do not see any change of the sort necessary taking place for less than two generations, as the current generation of single-parent-raised youth ages and dies off and (hopefully) is replaced by a new cohort whose members internalize an ethic of self-restraint and hard work.
Your servant,
Lord Karth
posted May 19, 2010 at 5:16 pm
There are some policy implications that come to mind. This does for example seem to confirm what advocates of affirmative action – as opposed to mere nondiscrimination – have claimed: a black middle class needed to be formed in order to be perpetuated, and it really didn’t matter if that forming was artificial. For example, when the desegregation happened and a lot of black administrators (and teachers) lost their positions, I’m not unconvinced that such wouldn’t have happened on a strict meritocratic basis.
Admittedly a lot of these things we can’t know. For example desegregation was coincident with a movement toward centralizing schools, so education was in flux at that time. We also saw the professionalization of teaching at that time. In Catholic schools, this was the time when religious sisters and brothers were slowly pushed out of the classroom. Graduating high school became unexceptional in this period.
posted May 19, 2010 at 5:30 pm
Coleman’s suggestion (as reported by Mr Buck) regarding minimising the role of grades in school’s is an interesting one, but I do not think that his analysis can be correct. In England teachers do not usually issue any grades that have long term meaning since what goes forward with a pupil in life is his or her results on centrally administered examinations. This means that at 16 and 18, when pupils take their examinations they do not compete directly with the pupils in their own school but with all pupils in the whole of England. This has the effect of competing against a national standard rather than against the class ‘swot’. So there should be no zero-sum effect, ie that the hard-working pupil will lower the chances of other pupils doing well. And yet, I do not see much evidence that English schools have anything like the culture of academic pride paralleling sporting pride. Even with nationally published league tables there is little incentive among the pupils to best their cross-town rival. (Although there is some incentive for the staff to do so since schools with poor results that do not reinvent themselves could end up being closed down—something that nearly happened to my former school’s cross-town rival a number of years ago.)
In addition to this, the role of the school ‘swot’ is replaced by whole schools that are seen to be academic powerhouses. Both nationally and regionally there are certain schools which are simply more academically successful for whatever reason (money being an important, but not sole, factor). So the ‘acting white’ phenomenon is simply taken to a larger scale where schools with large minority populations do quite badly even when one takes into account the distorting effects of a very successful (and expensive) private education system. Schools that are at the top academically certainly do take pride in their achievements but there is no culture of weaker schools trying to knock them out of their top spots. Just as in the US it seems that being good at ‘education’ is seen as submitting to the establishment.
And all of this is true even for academic competitions: one always sees the same names in mathematics team competitions, debating competitions, general knowledge competitions and so on. Interestingly, however, lack of academic ambition is also true of non-minority schools in deprived areas. So while the ‘acting white’ phenomenon may not have a direct parallel here, I do not think that Coleman’s suggestion can be supported by the evidence. Perhaps looking at successful academic systems such as the Finnish or Hungarian in the light of Coleman’s suggestion would be an interesting study.
posted May 19, 2010 at 6:41 pm
Rod – yeah I thought of the thread on Jewish people too and have been pondering the connections before I do any response to that thread.
I think Mr. soon to be Dr. Buck has done a great job here – speaking to an important subject. That he doesn’t offer any great solutions is okay by me in that – it is a complex issue so it would almost be facile to offer some list of “things to do”. I also find it refreshing to hear a scholar say – I am not sure what we should do. It seems enough to me that he provided us with this part of our history – one hopes it will be a caution for the future.
posted May 19, 2010 at 10:00 pm
“I want all my children to feel in the bottom of their hearts that they are intellectually curious and that they love learning and reading, no matter what other children may do or say.”
Stuart, are your adopted black children intellectually curious? Do they love learning and reading, no matter what other children may do or say?
posted May 20, 2010 at 10:44 am
I second Nickolas.
Besides, even if Mr. Coleman’s academic competition ideas came to fruition, there would still be a pecking order, with varsity athletes in one group and varsity academics in another, and slackers despising them both. Guess which one would be higher? Which one would get routinely pounded on by the slackers? By the other varsity grouping?
I thought so.
posted May 20, 2010 at 10:45 am
So far, yes. But the middle school years are ahead of us.
posted May 20, 2010 at 8:53 pm
I homeschool my kids – so they have no opportunity to ‘compete’ with anyone for grades, but I wanted them to be challenged to do their best academically. So, I did what the author suggested – started academic teams in our homeschool group. We compete in quiz bowls, stock market game and Science Olympiad. And the effect has been just as the author suggested. The team members (and all our teams are racially mixed) put positive peer pressure on each other to do well – and the kids not on the teams cheer those who are on. And we have achieved amazing results. I don’t see the schools employing this idea any time soon – but I can say, it works!
posted June 7, 2010 at 7:53 pm
If you’re going to cite Coleman– and you should– then you should also point out the REAL reason why black kids were sent to white schools instead of the other way ’round: black teachers and principals were markedly less competent than their white counterparts. James Coleman later admitted suppressing this vital fact and regretted the side effects of his deception (see http://www.springerlink.com/content/1t34w314613t1328/ for details). The situation has not improved; see, e.g., http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/08/19/minority_scores_lag_on_teaching_test/
It turned out that even better teachers could not boost black kids’ achievements above the levels predicted by their IQ’s, but worse teachers could diminish the achievements of kids of all races. In today’s better public schools nearly all kids achieve their genetic potential. In the worse schools, nearly all *staffed* by minority teachers of objectively low competence, kids don’t do so well.
posted June 15, 2010 at 1:41 pm
It seems to me that athletes compete with each other to get on the team, no? And I think an even wider phenomenon is hinted at in Nickolas’ comment. Intelligence itself is resented in society at large, with results that are plain.
I don’t know why this is; apparently it’s a throwback to class resentment.
The results cited by Merle Van der Merwe are not to be discounted, but they would seem to be those of a group selected for a respect and focus on education signified by the fact that they are home-schooling families; hardly an easy undertaking that wouldn’t be chosen by lackadaisical parents.
I mean, can we picture the adulation in national media (including advertising)that is heaped upon sports being transferred to academic achievement? Much as I’d like to see that, I can’t picture it.