by Bree Picower
Given all the knowledge and skills that teacher education already must impart while preparing new teachers, this presents a challenging dilemma. How can teacher education advance racial justice while also preparing teachers for all the other technical aspects of the craft? To answer this question, the next chapters explore the practices and structures of five teacher education programs in institutes of higher education with explicit racial justice missions. These programs provide insights for other institutes of higher education on how to prepare teachers who will not perpetuate #CurriculumSoWhite and instead will advance racial justice.
CHAPTER 4
DISRUPTING WHITENESS IN TEACHER EDUCATION
HOW CAN TEACHER EDUCATION DISRUPT WHITENESS?
As examples of racist curriculum continue to be exposed on social media, it is evident that schools of education cannot continue graduating teachers who are at best ill-equipped and at worst damaging for children of Color. Leaders of teacher education programs must take seriously the negative impact that Whiteness can have on all teachers’ understanding of what and how they teach. As an institution, teacher education is one of the few places where pre- and in-service educators are required to be for substantive amounts of time. While there are many responsibilities that teacher educators must attend to, such as teaching disciplinary-specific content and methods courses, the pervasiveness of racism requires us to prioritize racial justice in preparing the next generation of teachers.
In the last chapter, it became clear that with focused energy, preservice teachers can, and do, make the racial reframes that are the prerequisites for moving toward anti-racist action. However, creating the space for preservice teachers to accomplish these racial reframes requires a massive overhaul of business as usual, which focuses mainly on the technical aspects of teaching. This chapter and the next one explore what it looks like to transform the institution of teacher education into a space that takes up this responsibility to racial justice. This chapter focuses on how teacher education can structurally arrange itself to respond to and disrupt Whiteness. The next chapter moves beyond just responding and instead shows how to shift to more humanizing relationships based on love and care.
Throughout these chapters, I discuss the variety of ways that Whiteness can show up in teacher education. By Whiteness, I am not referring to White people per se—I am talking about ways of wielding power and privilege that maintain White supremacy. Whiteness can be enacted by both White people and people of Color and can show up in many forms. For example, in teacher education, it can come from faculty who are opposed to addressing race, mentor teachers in the field who actively enact racism, or administrators who create institutional barriers to advancing racial justice. When Whiteness arises from students in class, it might be in the form of discrediting the existence of racism or asking why they have to keep talking about race. It might be a defensive denial of White people’s culpability in a system of racism, or it might be a direct challenge to experiences of racism named by students of Color in class. Sometimes Whiteness shows up through people of Color’s own internalized racism or through respectability politics in which students of Color express deficit stereotypes about the behavior of other people of Color—for example, middle-class Black students who characterize urban schools as “ghetto” or Latinx students who exhibit anti-Black beliefs.1
Disrupting Whiteness in teacher education requires an explicit, shared commitment among all stakeholders to center race and address racism. The established structure of higher education can make this challenging for various reasons. Teacher education programs are housed in colleges of education that offer a range of degrees and certifications. Teacher credential programs are often considered the cash cows of colleges of education because they bring in large numbers of tuition-paying students seeking a variety of credentials required by states in order to pursue teaching careers. Colleges of education are made up of faculty and administrators with a wide range of expertise and disciplines, as well as a wide range of racial ideologies. This context makes it difficult to achieve the kind of shared anti-racist agenda needed to advance racial justice. In fact, such programs and departments often, directly or indirectly, perpetuate racism and create hostile learning environments for students and faculty who are BIPOC.2
When they do attempt to implement change, justice-oriented administrators and faculty often struggle to transform these monoliths toward spaces of racial justice because of the lack of a shared racial ideology, pressures of external accreditation, and the need to recruit justice-minded faculty and students, among a host of other challenges. As a way to advance racial justice in teacher education, justice-oriented administrators and faculty at some universities have instead found ways to create smaller, mission-driven programs that I refer to as racial justice programs (RJPs). Through external grants, pilot programs, smaller initiatives, or changes in leadership, RJPs tend to operate slightly autonomously from their more traditional teacher education programs. Instead of ignoring race, relegating it to one course, treating it as an afterthought, or giving it one week on a syllabus, these RJPs are spaces that advance racial justice by centering race, disrupting Whiteness, reframing preservice teachers’ understandings of race, and preparing and sustaining candidates for anti-racist action.
To learn more about the structure and pedagogies of such programs, I interviewed eight teacher educators/administrators who work in five different RJPs. Because I codirect an RJP myself, I am including my own insights where relevant. The interviewees gave permission to use their real names. All of the interviewees, except Bill Kennedy and myself, are people of Color. While much of the actual work of these programs is based on supporting individual teacher transformation, these programs demonstrate the kind of institutional and programmatic design required to accomplish those transformations.
PROGRAM POSITION NAME
Center X at University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Executive Director Annamarie Francois
Center X at University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Professor Tyrone Howard
Newark Teacher Project (NTP) at Montclair State University Codirector and Assistant Professor Tanya Maloney
Newark Teacher Program (NTP) at Montclair State University Codirector and Associate Professor Bree Picower
Teacher Education Program (TEP) at Harvard Graduate School of Education Director Christina “V” Villarreal
Urban Education and Social Justice Program (UESJ) at University of San Francisco Department Chair and Associate Professor Patrick “Cam” Camangian
Urban Education and Social Justice Program (UESJ) at University of San Francisco Assistant Professor Farima Pour-Khorshid
Urban Teacher Education Program (UTEP) at the University of Chicago Instructor Kay Fujiyoshi
Urban Teacher Education Program (UTEP) at the University of Chicago Former Codirector Bill Kennedy
MOVE RACE FROM THE MARGIN TO THE CENTER
Unlike traditional programs, RJPs have moved race from the margins to the center in every conceivable way. Bill Kennedy delineated the evolution of the UTEP program he formerly directed at the University of Chicago as it transitioned to become an RJP over the course of five years. “The program evolved from just a course. In its earliest inception, there was recognition that this work [racial justice] was necessary, but it was treated very lightly so as not to offend.” Kennedy explained that addressing race “was done outside of the core coursework and kind of seen as an addition.”
As Kennedy and the program’s other leader, Kay Fujiyoshi, took on more responsibility of the program, they transitioned this racial justice work into the core of their program. They expanded the course in terms of meeting time and frequency and included a community engagement field component, ultimately meeting for a full day each week. This also allowed them to shift the content of the original program. “We took an existing core sequence that was called ‘academic strand’ where a lot of educational theory readings were taught and said, ‘Why is the race stuff sitti
ng outside of this? Actually, race needs to be what we’re reading centrally in the program.’ So we took those two courses and put them together and expanded the time each week that it could be meeting.” Because of their central focus on racial justice, they shifted the structure of their program: “I think a program has to see that work [racial justice] as the center and then go out, as opposed to an add-on.” By moving racial justice to the center of the newly expanded course, UTEP was able to prioritize this content, making it clear that it was a hallmark of the program and not an add-on that happened outside of dedicated meeting time.
BE EXPLICIT ABOUT RACE FROM THE BEGINNING
One way that RJPs address Tools of Whiteness is by being explicit from the beginning, from marketing to admissions, that race will be centered. Students need to be aware that racial justice is a mission of the program and that they should expect to discuss it in all spaces, because racism lives everywhere. In fact, as this section will show, the RJPs are explicit about naming that racial justice is a priority from the beginning, during admissions, in their courses, with their faculty—everywhere. For example, when I first attempted to start my own RJP, an administrator told me that I should not put a small line at the bottom of the marketing flier that read “Students of Color are encouraged to apply” because I might lose potential White students.
As the program, and my authority over it, has expanded, our NTP flyer now has a photo of five alumni of Color and states: “NTP seminars support all areas of teacher development with a special focus on social and racial justice. The small cohort provides support and community and has access to many special events and high-quality anti-racist professional development.” This explicitness is one way that RJPs disrupt Whiteness, as Whiteness relies on being masked, invisible, and unspoken.
BE EXPLICIT ABOUT RACE IN ADMISSIONS
All the RJPs in this study fronted racial justice as a core value of their mission. In the program I codirect with Tanya Maloney, we have added questions to our program admissions interview protocol specifically for White candidates so that they have all the information they need to choose to join us. For example, in interviewing a White woman for the Newark Teacher Project, I explained: “This program is made up of predominately students of Color. If accepted, you may be one of the only White people in the program. We will spend a lot of time talking about race, and we will not center your feelings in this process. Describe how this makes you feel and how you will handle it.” I also described scenarios that have actually happened that require a certain amount of comfort with racially explicit, cross-racial interactions: “You are eating lunch with your mentor and her colleagues who are all Black. They start talking about how White people are ruining Harlem. How will you engage in this conversation?”
By being explicit about race from the onset, the interview becomes a two-way street. For the candidate, it simulates the nature of the program clearly enough that they can make an informed decision on whether they want such an experience, mitigating the surprise and resistance from students who aren’t expecting, and don’t want, to address race. In terms of admissions data, it allows us to see if the candidate has a self-reflective disposition or if they respond defensively. As chapters 2 and 3 demonstrate, White candidates don’t need to come in knowing everything there is to know about race; rather, they must have the capacity for self-examination to make racial reframes.
BE EXPLICIT ABOUT RACE BY FORESHADOWING THE EXPERIENCE OF CENTERING RACE
Knowing the terrain of race-centered discussions, RJP faculty foreshadow what the experience will be like for their students, surfacing common tensions and feelings that are likely to come up. Annamarie Francois, the executive director of UCLA’s Center X, tells her candidates:
No matter what your racial background is, no matter what your economic background, [addressing racism] is going to be difficult. What we want to do is make sure that we give you the knowledge and the tools and the opportunities to engage in civil discourse around these really challenging issues. And as my colleague Dr. Howard reminds us, we are asking that when you get uncomfortable that you sit in that discomfort. That you engage, rather than resist.
She helps her students understand that one of the reasons they need to feel that discomfort is “because that’s the feeling that most of our poor Black and Brown students feel in schools, every single day.” Because of their experience in centering race, the faculty know the very specific types of resistance that are likely to emerge and work to name them upfront rather than wait for them to appear. The faculty understand that resistance is part of the process, but they know that digging into and understanding the discomfort will make their students better, more critical, and more empathetic educators.
With all of their experience centering race, the faculty know that, despite the foreshadowing, there will still be times when White students will express anger and resistance in ways that cause harm to the community. Christina “V” Villarreal, new director of the Teacher Education Program at Harvard Graduate School of Education and former director of the MAT Program in History/Social Studies at Brown University, prepares her students to navigate and move through this experience, teaching them how to work through challenging cross-racial dialogue. From the beginning, Villarreal foreshadows what might happen in such discussions. She explains that in one of the first conversations she has up front, she tells them:
You better be ready. You’re going to fuck up. You are going to make mistakes; you better accept it. You’re going to inflict harm; the question is, one, when you make those mistakes, are you going to be prepared to hear it and accept responsibility for the impact of your actions; and two, are you committed to then repairing or helping to heal the harm that you created or inflicted on the other side?
By foreshadowing the process and how to overcome challenges, RJPs support their candidates to move past the common enactments of Whiteness when learning about race, developing them into teachers with the capacity to advance racial justice.
BE EXPLICIT ABOUT RACE FROM DAY ONE IN COURSEWORK
In addition to admissions and foreshadowing, another way that race is explicit from the beginning is by fronting concepts of race in initial coursework. RJPs don’t wait to bring race into the curriculum; they start it on day one. As Farima Pour-Khorshid, an assistant professor in the UESJ Program at University of San Francisco, declared, “I think it’s problematic if we don’t make [our focus on race] clear and understood day one at orientation.” For most of the programs, initial coursework provided the opportunity to lay a foundational racial justice framework upon which all other learning would build. As Maloney, who codirects the Newark Teacher Project with me at Montclair State University, described of our family of RJP programs, “The initial summer class the students took in the program was about race, class, and identity. It was a class that essentially was intended to develop the students’ racial identity, their understanding of their internalized race and racism, and their understanding of socio-political issues.” This theme of fronting race in initial coursework was echoed throughout the other RJP faculty interviewed.
While most of the programs start with a broad framework such as the Four I’s,3 the UTEP program is unique in forefronting the realities of institutional racism in Chicago through an intensive field component. Fujiyoshi explains: “The foundation sequence begins with neoliberalism, class issues, and housing—and race is obviously central to that. There’s some introductory work that I would call intro to critical race theory. Critical pedagogy sits in the philosophy course that is in the first year.” Whether through initial orientations or embedded directly into first-semester coursework, all of these programs center race from the get-go.
DISRUPT WHITENESS IN CLASSES
More often than not, Whiteness will show up when educating White students about racism. Despite all the groundwork to prepare them that this is going to happen, and explanations of what it will feel like and how they will act, it is simply part of the process. I recognize thi
s phenomenon from my experiences teaching about race, but also from my own responses to learning about race as a White woman. Over my lifetime of examining race and my own Whiteness, my reactions have shifted and transformed from those early feelings of shame and defensiveness that my students feel to a constant questioning of myself, my role, and my reactions through the lens of privilege and superiority.
This examination itself, however, does not preclude me from still enacting Whiteness. For example, reading, studying, and teaching Robin DiAngelo’s seminal book White Fragility doesn’t mean I don’t still feel White fragility when called out/in on how my own Whiteness is manifesting itself. The benefit of doing the work of anti-racism is that I can at least recognize and name the feeling of fragility and remind myself to step back, take a breath, and reframe. Learning about and disrupting Whiteness is a lifelong process. Similarly, White students, despite their progressive nature or their good intentions, are going to enact their Whiteness when learning about race.
Unlike many traditional teacher education programs, however, RJPs anticipate that Whiteness will emerge and are prepared with strategies to address and disrupt it. As stated by Patrick “Cam” Camangian, an associate professor in the UESJ program at University of San Francisco, “It’s inevitable that you would always have a White woman, one who might be speaking for others [resisting the content]. This is a common thing that’s happened across about six different courses that I taught.” As Fujiyoshi explains, RJPs don’t avoid those conversations—they use them. “A lot of things surface during the quarter, especially in these conversations around identity, and so we don’t shy away from it, we delve into the wreckage, as Bill Ayers talks about, and we sit in it. We see what’s around, and then we plot forward.” This section examines some of that wreckage and what it looks like to plot forward toward racial justice.
