“So you’re calling us racists,” students accused.
I was starting to feel a little exasperated. “No, I’m not. I’m saying that you have created an image which suggests a racist stereotype.”
Earlier that afternoon, students were in the cafeteria busy finishing their decorations for our school’s Spirit Week in support of the winter athletes. The sophomores had decided to create an “urban street art” experience, dominated by a gigantic drawing of school pride. However, they began to add details—depictions of broken windows, chicken wire basketball hoops, shoes thrown over the rafters, police tape—that pushed the street art idea into what I felt was an uncomfortable depiction of racist and classist assumptions.
Calling over the students working on the project, I shared my concerns that though it had not been their intent, some of their choices contributed to a racist and classist stereotype.
“So we’re all racists?” became their refrain.
After much discussion, the student leaders agreed to remove or alter a few of the elements of their decorations.
The timing (the afternoon before decorations were due), the number of students, the cafeteria space, the on-going work all contributed to a muddled discussion. It ultimately left some students feeling that I had labeled them as “racists.” This had not been a pristine classroom seminar, but a messy encounter. It was not my intent. In hindsight, I understand that using the word racist shut down the conversation with students. I might have said “negative stereotype” and gotten better results. My goal was to diffuse the situation and create understanding. I missed it and instead created a barrier to conversation.
I wanted to examine the influences that led students to choose these images and explore other possible images. That’s the ideal when someone uses biased language or stereotypical images.
One of the greatest hindrances to our dialogue was that the students focused on their intent and not the impact of their image. They had worked diligently over many days to create a “cool” street art experience, far different than our suburban independent school.
I had to then focus on my intent and what impact my words had.
Maura Cullen, diversity trainer and author of 35 Dumb Things Well-Intended People Say, includes “Intent vs. Impact” as the first of ten core concepts necessary for people to have meaningful and respectful discussions of social justice and anti-bias work. She writes, “The first step in being willing to accept responsibility is to understand that even well-intended people can cause harm.”
My intent had been to make the best of the educational moment presented, to discuss the media influences that led my students to make these choices. Knowing these students, I didn’t want them to accidentally create something that would offend others. I wanted to prevent them from being called the very label that they thought I had given them,
Considering the impact of my words, there would have been a healthier discussion about the impact of the messages of the project.
Accepting responsibility devoid of one’s intent is a difficult cognitive leap, but, from this encounter, I realize it is a critical step necessary to engage in meaningful dialogue and make meaningful change in school culture.
Elliott is a high school English teacher in Texas.



Comments
Hi Elliott, I definitely
Hi Elliott, I definitely respect your ownership, commitment, and the consideration you have for your students. I don't think you should entirely blame yourself in this situation, though. Your use of the word racism in this instance was accurate, and perhaps the only way to diffuse the inflammatory nature of the word over time in order to get people to start taking systemic racism, racial blindness, and complicity seriously is to (continue to) use it when appropriate. Another possible approach in regards to your students would be to challenge them on the issue: "Why did you think I was calling you racist yesterday?" "Do you still think I was calling you racist today?" "Why?" "Why not?" "Can only racist people commit racist actions?" "Is it possible for racism to occur without the presence of an actor?" It's a tricky approach, I realize, and depends on what kind of students you have; but, from what you described, I feel they need to work a bit to consider the situation better. The risk, if you don't, is conditioning them that you will present such issues they find 'unsavory' in palatable, if potentially watered-down, forms; that they have the right to reject discourses on racism they may be implicated in if the approach is not suitably 'nice.'
Perhaps someone can explain
Perhaps someone can explain what is racist about what the students were doing? If the scene depicted some reasonably accurate scene, then it is not racist.
People: I find it very
People:
I find it very interesting that the important context of this little narrative left out extremely important. Don't even START talking about "negative stereotypes" unless the objects of those "negative stereotypes" and equally involved in the narrative. So, if you can convince me that there were equal numbers of blacks and whites in this class, then we can continue to consider the impact or lack thereof of the narrative. This classroom student backgrounds should be subburbanites and inner city dwellers. Further, if the class was full of white people, and we KNOW we are in Texas, then you must rule out a surfeit of "negative sterotypes" thrown around at the homes of these students. One can assume that this "racist" kind of phraseology would not be occurring overly often in inner city black family homes.
In other words, for any of this narrative on "racism" is going absolutely nowhere unless the above contextual makeup is not some in subburbs, some in inner city areas, some are white kids and some are black kids. What the the makeup of Elliotts class? Let's get this first laid out. Thank you.
Hugh Woodstock Buckingham, Jr.