♪ [Opening music] ♪
♪  ♪
♪  ♪
>> Meg Moss:
Hello. Can you hear me?
Hi I'd like to welcome you
to UNC Asheville
and to this fabulous
talk tonight.
My name's Meg Moss.
I'm the chair
of the Education Department
here at UNC Asheville.
And I was, I'm just here
to welcome you
and to introduce to you
Dr. Tiece Ruffin,
who is the one largely in charge
of organizing today's events.
We, this is the third
of three talks
that Dr. Ladson-Billings
has given here today.
And I really, very much
thank you for being here.
And Dr. Tiece Ruffin,
thank to her.
>> Tiece Ruffin:
Thank you Dr. Moss.
Good evening everyone.
My name is Tiece Ruffin. And I'm
a visiting assistant professor
in the Department of Education
here at UNC Asheville.
It is a great pleasure
to welcome Dr. Ladson-Billings
to UNCA, Asheville, as well as
to introduce her to you.
Dr. Ladson-Billings is
the Kellner Family professor
of Urban Education
at the University of Wisconsin
in Madison.
And she is a national leader
in the field of education,
particularly in the area
of culturally relevant teaching
and an understanding
and addressing
the achievement gap in schools.
Her work blends empirical work,
seeking to understand what makes
teachers effective in leading
all students to learn,
with a theoretical work
on critical race theory
and its application
to the classroom.
I wish to acknowledge the work
and the support of others that
have been involved with bringing
Dr. Ladson-Billings here.
Her time with us today is made
possible by so many entities,
including the Department
of Education,
the Department of Sociology
and Anthropology,
the Africana Studies Program,
Student Activities
and Integrative Learning,
the Intercultural Center,
and the Office of Multicultural
Student Programs,
and the Belk Professor
in the Humanities.
At UNC Asheville we believe in
the same spirit of collaboration
and cooperation in creating
educational opportunities
like this that is
necessary to address
the achievement gap
in education.
Please welcome
Dr. Gloria Ladson-Billings
to UNC Asheville.
[applause]
>> Dr. Ladson-Billings:
Thank you very much Dr. Ruffin
and good evening.
Now I need to probably preface
my remarks by telling you
that this is not going to be
a warm fuzzy talk.
I think the other two were
warmer and fuzzier.
But we're going to be talking
about hard stuff.
And there's just no way
to make some things
in our society warm and fuzzy.
Some things are hard.
And we are better
for having the conversation
about hard things.
So it probably somewhere
on fliers or programs you,
it said "Critical Race Theory
and Education."
That's kind of right.
The real title of the talk is
"From Colorblind to Post-Racial,
De-coding Race Discourse
in Democratic America."
So I'm going to try to put
the whole notion of Critical
Race Theory in a larger
socio-political context.
What it means to be in this
society as a raced person.
So like many scholars whose work
sits at the nexus of race,
inequity, justice, and democracy
I was profoundly interested in
and active in the 2008
U.S. presidential campaign.
Certainly the historic nature
of the campaign
coupled with the massive
economic crisis, two wars,
escalating health-care costs,
and a failing education system,
made this election important
to people throughout
the U.S. and beyond.
So tonight I want to address
the way that discourse on both
the liberal and conservative
ends of our political spectrum,
have appropriated notions
that suggest that race
is no longer salient.
And that it is no longer
a salient construct
in understanding inequality
and injustice
in the United States
because that's part of what
the discourse is saying.
Now in the spirit
of transparency,
and I think you already know
this, I need to point out
that I use critical race theory
as an analytic lens
through which to understand
racial inequality.
So if I start with
this first slide,
this was actually something
that I heard on a campus,
that with Obama as President
we are now post-racial.
You know, and I remember
having a really interesting
conversation with someone
on another campus who said
"Oh I know you'll be
happy if he wins."
And I said "Why? How is my life
going to be different?
"I'm going to wake up
on Wednesday after the election,
"I'm still going to be
a black woman in America.
"That ain't going to change.
I actually see this as
an opportunity for you."
So, I mean we've had
this sort of notion
that oh well everything
is taken care of.
And I want to kind of de-bunk
that notion in tonight's talk.
So critical race theory is
a legal perspective that argues
that racism is normal
not aberrant in U.S. society.
Now people hate that I say that.
They hate it, hate it, hate it.
But that's what critical race
theorists believe.
So that when racial incidents
happen we go "duh" because
they happen all the time.
Now while it is true that we
will rally around
major incidents,
like what is now happening
in Sanford, Florida
around Trayvon Martin.
It's really not that
that people deal with.
What they deal with
are what I call
the thousand daily cuts.
The everydayness of it,
the going into a store looking
at a purse in a display case,
then being told
"That's very expensive,"
as if to say
"You can't afford this."
I tell my students all the time,
if you knew how much expensive
crap black women have,
they don't really
want to buy it,
but someone said
"Oh that's expensive."
And so in some ways you know
we get goaded into buying it
because it's like you know
"Well I can afford this."
It's those things,
day in and day out,
someone's inability
to look you in the face,
someone not trusting you
over something,
you know clutching their purse.
I mean I have three sons who
are three of the most lovely,
young men you ever
wanted to meet.
But if they get into an elevator
it's not unusual for somebody
to clutch their purse
and assume the worst.
So that's really about
the daily-ness
and that is quote normal.
It's not aberrant, it's not like
"Oh we had a racial incident."
We have them all the time.
It further argues
that narratives,
or more specifically counter-
narratives, are useful ways
of understanding how racism
operates and functions.
So in other words people tell
stories to tell what happened
and to try to set a context
for how racism impacts them.
Critical race theory also
employs critical social science
as a knowledge base,
rather than just case law.
Because remember this is
scholarship that comes out
of legal scholarship.
But these are legal scholars who
are also using social sciences.
They're using political science
and sociology, and anthropology
and psychology.
And it contends that civil
rights legislation only survives
if it can advantage whites.
And that for people of color
to benefit from legislative
and policy decisions they have
to find an interest convergence,
a way to make the interest
of people of color
intersect with those of whites.
So you have a picture there
of Derrick Bell who is
the person who developed
the notion of interest
convergence.
Actually professor Bell
just died this past year,
last fall, last October.
Interesting, three people
who I greatly admired
died on like the same day,
or within a day of each other.
Fred Shuttlesworth, who was one
of the major soldiers
in the civil rights movement.
Steve Jobs, and I am like
everything Apple.
They make it, I just go
and get it.
And Derrick Bell,
all died on the same day.
But he talked about his notion
of interest convergence,
of which I'm going to talk
a little bit more about
further in the talk.
So what I want to explore
this evening
is an interesting phenomenon
that I think is appearing
on both the right and left sides
of the political spectrum.
And the phenomenon
goes by different names
but I believe it has
the same impact.
On the left we are told
we are post-racial.
On the right there is
an insistence
that we are now
a quote colorblind society.
I think both perspectives
are dangerously naive.
And they can have a pernicious
effect on that part
of the democratic project
that is aimed at insuring equity
for racial, racially
subordinated groups.
News magazines and papers
ran stories with headlines...
Trying to pick up
some of the stuff we saw.
So here was you know,
President Obama's being lifted
up into history.
They got him sitting between
Martin Luther King
and Abraham Lincoln.
It's like how much pressure
[laughs] can be on one person?
Here of course is this picture
of President Bush telling him
"Well now it's all yours."
You know and President Obama
looking quite bewildered.
And of course we remember
the excitement of that day.
But there were all kinds of news
magazines and papers that ran
stories with headlines like
quote "Does race still matter?"
Or "Is Obama the end
of black politics?"
And another one entitled
"The end of white America?"
What we seem to forget is
that more than 59 million people
voted for John McCain
and Sarah Palin.
And I don't know if I've got
the right slide here
for that one. I'll go back.
That was about nine
and a half million less than
Barrack Obama and Joe Biden.
Now think about what does
nine million represent.
There are 8.3 million people
in New York City.
If you take the New York
Metro area
there's 18.9 million people.
So if you just took half
of those people
that's the margin of difference
in that election.
So it's not like we all
decided for one candidate.
There were instances you know
and of course the Electoral
College system,
I don't want to go into that.
But the fact that if you
actually look at the raw numbers
there's a $9 million, let's see
nine million vote difference,
this in a nation
of 300 million people.
Now of course all 300 million
people are not eligible to vote,
the kids can't vote.
But we have a lot of people
in the electorate,
and nine million is really not
an overwhelming majority.
The Obama/Biden strategy
of campaigning in every state,
in every part of a state,
that is rural, suburban,
and urban, actually ended up
putting more states in play
than previous elections.
But Southern states beyond
North Carolina and mountain
west states
actually remained solidly
in the Republican column.
They didn't change.
Urban densely populated areas
continued to vote
for the Democratic candidates.
And rural less dense populated
areas continued to vote
for the Republican candidates.
Let's see if I can get one.
I'll skip that.
The ethnic breakdown
of the election
I think was even more telling.
67% of Latinos voted for Obama.
62% of Asians voted for him.
66% of those designated
as "other" voted for him.
95% of blacks voted for him.
And 55% of whites voted
for John McCain.
The majority of whites voted
for McCain.
So rather than colorblind
or post-racial,
I think the election
seemed to indicate
just how racially specific
politics in the U.S. are.
Now on the day after
the historic presidential
victory, I went to school
to teach my graduate course
on multicultural perspectives
in education.
And the buzz among the students
was palpable.
After a grueling almost
two year campaign
we were finally emerging
out of eight years
of an administration that
in some ways seemed antagonistic
toward a lot of social programs
that were designed to provide
a window of opportunity
for the poor and dispossessed.
It was also an administration
who's foreign policy stance
had placed the U.S. at odds with
most of its western allies,
save the U.K. and Australia.
We were mired in two wars
that were draining
the national treasury,
and economic policies that were
serving the wealthy were
starting to put unreasonable
strain on everyone else.
Laissez-faire economic policies
coupled with unbridled
defense spending
proved to be a recipe
for disaster.
And the global recession
that we are experiencing
is a result of this.
It is no wonder that Barrack
Obama simultaneously provoked
spontaneous celebration
and a worldwide sigh of relief.
You know, I'm a movie buff,
and when I could see all
of these shots around the world
after the election was called
I felt like that moment
in "The Wizard of Oz"
where the Munchkins
start singing
"Ding Dong the Wicked Witch
is Dead." [laughter]
So when I arrived at my class
there were students who felt
that I was somewhat subdued.
They wondered had I celebrated
too much the night before.
[laughter]
Was I in a state of disbelief?
Where was my joy?
Where was my excitement?
And I'll have to confess
that the moment
that California's 55 electoral
votes registered for Obama,
I was shouting for joy.
But shortly after,
I began thinking about
what this presidency would mean
in the larger scheme of things.
So when I met my students
I reminded them that I was
a critical race theorist
before the election
and I remain a critical race
theorist after it.
I could easily explain
through using CRT, or critical
race theory, what happened.
The election of Barrack Obama
was a classic instance
of interest convergence.
Now briefly, interest
convergence asserts
that decisions regarding
equity and civil rights
are more likely to occur
when the subordinate group
can align its interests with
those of the dominant group.
So let me give you an example.
Many years ago when Evan Mecham
was the governor of Arizona,
he said that the state
of Arizona was not going
to celebrate the Martin
Luther King holiday.
It would not be a state holiday.
In other words, state workers
would still be required to come
to work because they could not
afford another paid holiday.
And immediately after
he made that announcement,
various civil rights groups
and other groups began saying
"Well we just won't go
to Arizona for anything.
We'll stop booking conventions."
The NFL which was supposed to be
considering them
for a Super Bowl, said
"No we're not coming."
And once the NFL said
"We're not coming,"
Governor Mecham had
a change of heart.
Now I don't believe
for a minute that he thought
differently about Dr. King.
But his interests aligned with
those who wanted the holiday.
So that's an example
of an interest convergence.
He didn't have a change
of heart. He's not,
"Oh yeah Dr. King's a great
American hero. Let's do this."
It's "We can't afford
to lose the money."
You know in the larger
scheme of things.
And that interest then aligns
with the interest of the various
civil rights groups that say
"We want the holiday."
That's an interest convergence.
Another example that is
particularly related
to education is the landmark
and iconic Brown versus
Board of Education.
That decision marked the end
of legal segregation
in public accommodations,
especially schools.
And it's seen as a triumph
of American democracy
and an indication that
America is indeed
a really good altruistic nation.
Critical race theorists
see Brown differently.
To us Brown was a foreign
policy strategy,
designed to help
the U.S. win the Cold War.
And for those of you who
don't know much about
Cold War history,
soon after World War II
the U.S. and the Soviet Union
divided up the world.
Most of Europe
and the western nations
were under the U.S. influence.
And eastern Europe and other
eastern nations and China
were a part of the Soviet Block.
However throughout the world
there were non-aligned nations.
They weren't with either group.
But both of these super powers
were attempting to entice them
to join with them.
The U.S. used
the Voice of America
that was established in 1942
to reach both allies and what
might seem like enemies.
The Soviet Union used the images
of segregation and racial unrest
to underscore the U.S.'s failure
to live up to its promises.
The Eisenhower administration
saw the Brown decision
as a vehicle for sending
a clear signal
to the international community
that the U.S. and its democracy
was all that it professed.
In this case the foreign policy
interests of the U.S.
converged with the civil rights
interests of the African
American community.
Brown is painted as
a magnanimous, benevolent
decision that is a quote natural
outcome of a democratic nation
dedicated to the principles
of liberty and justice for all.
Critical race theorists see
Brown as an opportunity
that African Americans were able
to take advantage of.
And so is you want to talk
a little bit about
the failure of Brown, you know,
some years ago we had our
50th anniversary of Brown.
And we looked at the data,
most black and brown children
are not in desegregated schools.
So if it really was
an education strategy
then it's a failed strategy.
But it worked as a foreign
policy strategy,
because there were a different
set of images that got beamed
to the rest of the world
about who we were.
And really to support this
position you have to
kind of look at some
of the archival data.
There's a letter written
to President Eisenhower
by a friend of his,
named Swede Hazlett.
He was a retired Navy admiral.
And he was very upset
about the decision.
He was like "We don't need to be
desegregating these schools.
This is a mistake.
This is wrong."
In October of 1954 President
Eisenhower wrote him back,
and in that letter he says
"Look, don't worry about
the decision because next year,
"or sometime next year
in the spring,
they're going to come out with
a consent decree, Brown 2,"
which was rendered in May 1955.
We never talk about Brown 2.
We always talk about Brown 1,
because we're so excited.
Oh you know, "Separate but
equals," unequalled. Alright.
But Brown 2 was the consent
decree and Eisenhower says
in his letter,
and it's in his archives...
It's one of the great things
about democracy you know
you can go back and read
everybody's papers
and see what they said and what
they thought and you know.
And he says in there
"I think the court will be
very, very slow to implement.
So don't worry about this."
And sure enough what that
consent decree said
is that schools' districts
were required to desegregate
quote with all deliberate speed.
Which is, you know,
the only thing missing
from that statement
is "wink wink." [laughter]
Because what's
all deliberate speed?
So districts would say
"Well it's going
to take us 15 years,
that's as fast we can go,
you know it's going
to take us 10 years..."
I mean literally that line
that did not require immediate
school desegregation
created a huge loop hole
for the implementation of Brown.
So more than 50 years later,
I think the election
of Barrack Obama
signaled another form
of interest convergence.
This time the converging
interests were the economic
interests of the mainstream,
with the civil rights hopes
of those outside
of that mainstream.
With the near collapse
of the financial markets
and two costly wars,
Obama was seen as the only
logical alternative
to a continuation
of failed policies.
For African Americans,
Obama was the first viable
African American presidential
candidate that they'd ever seen.
And despite comedian
and social activist
Dick Gregory's third party
anti-war candidacy in 1968,
and Representative Shirley
Chisolm's pioneering run
for the presidency in 1972,
and Jesse Jackson's 1984
and 1988 campaigns,
no African American
candidate had ever been
seriously considered
as a presidential contender.
Obama's success in the Iowa
Primary changed everything.
And this viable candidate
became the front runner.
Now the economic crisis hit hard
before the first scheduled
presidential debate
in Oxford, Mississippi.
Sort of interesting because
I was in Oxford for that.
And the Republican presidential
candidate declared that he
would not attend the debate
because he was quote calling off
his campaign to deal with
the economic crisis.
It was a bad tactical move.
The electorate saw it
as a political stunt.
And eventually McCain would,
would indeed make his way
to the debate.
And I kept telling people
in Mississippi
I said "He's going to be here."
And they're like "How are you,
how can you be sure?"
I said "Ole Miss has spent
over $1 million
"in preparation
for this debate.
"The governor of Mississippi
is Haley Barbour.
"Haley Barbour used to be
the chairman
"of the Republican
National Committee.
"He's put $1 million
on the line.
The man will be here."
And sure enough he was.
Now that first debate was
actually supposed to
focus on foreign policy.
And it was supposed to
display McCain's knowledge
and Obama's inexperience.
However, according to political
scientist Kenneth Goldstein,
Obama won the electorate
in that debate.
He came across as presidential,
while McCain seemed patronizing
and out of step with
the concerns
of everyday Americans.
By the end of the debate
it was clear that
the interests of the mainstream
and those of African Americans
were converging.
Barrack Obama would be
the choice of the majority.
He would not only win those
typical democratic states
like New York and New Jersey,
California and Washington,
and Oregon, but he made inroads
into traditional Republican
areas like Virginia,
North Carolina and Colorado.
"Surely" said
the disgruntled right,
"We are now
a colorblind society."
"Certainly" asserted
the jubilant left,
"We are now
a post-racial society."
I contend that both are wrong
and that race relations
in the U.S. remain firmly
in the same place,
despite Barrack Obama's victory.
The notion of colorblindness
seems a laudable goal
for a nation to aspire to.
It presumes that individuals
and institutions discount race
when making decisions related
to educational, employment,
housing opportunities, as well
as public policy decisions.
People holding this view
readily reference
Martin Luther King Jr.'s
statement about
having his children
one day be judged
by the content
of their character
and not the color
of their skin.
King's vision is indeed
emblematic of an ideal state.
But should not be taking, taken
out of the context of his time.
King was operating in the midst
of state-sanctioned apartheid.
There were schools, housing,
and other public accommodations
that were legally unavailable
to African Americans.
Recently a friend whose
father was a prominent
African American pastor
in Fort Wayne, Indiana
shared a story about
Dr. Ralph Bunch,
in the 1960s when he made
a visit to Fort Wayne.
When he arrived at the hotel
where he had a reservation,
Dr. Bunch was told he
could not stay in the hotel
because he was a Negro.
Ralph Bunch had a Ph.D.,
he was a special trustee
to the United Nations,
and he was a Nobel Peace Prize
winner. And he was being told
by a high school graduate
hotel desk clerk
from Fort Wayne, Indiana that he
could not stay in that hotel.
My friend's father had to get up
in the middle of the night
and pick up Dr. Bunch and have
him stay at their home.
Dr. King's declaration
makes sense
in the midst of this injustice.
Had Dr. Bunch been judged
on the content of his character
the desk clerk
would have been honored
to have him stay at the hotel.
So when white America embraces
the notion of colorblindness,
I think it is because
it absolves them
of the nation's deepest sin,
racism in the context
of white supremacy.
Because to be white is
to not think about race.
Or to worry about
other daily concerns,
things like money
or children or health
or whatever challenges
life brings.
However, being white means
not having to figure race
into one's daily calculus.
To be white is to reference
the terms man, woman, child,
and always be pre-figuring
a white subject.
Colorblindness is the way whites
have already lived their lives,
except when non-whites
have advocated for similar
opportunities or privileges.
Proponents of colorblindness
believe that blacks
and Latinos and other
people of color
have not taken advantage
of the opportunities
the government so generously
gave them.
Thus their inability to progress
represents their own
individual failure.
Colorblind advocates believe
that African Americans
and Latinos and American Indians
and other non-white groups
should quote get over the past
and relinquish group identity
and allow the meritocracy
to function.
But how does meritocracy
actually work in the U.S.?
According to sociologist
David Wellman in the 1980s
unemployment for all black men
rose relative to white men.
However it rose especially
for black college educated men.
In the late 1960s when the civil
rights movement was ending
the unemployment rate for black
and white men was equal.
This was a major improvement
from the disparities
that existed in the 1950s
and early 60s.
However, by the 1980s
educated black men
were three times more likely
to be unemployed
than their white peers.
And I think that
this is the slide.
But as typical for academics,
nobody can read it.
Okay so you have to trust me
about these rates.
This employment disparity
is greater than that
of black high school dropouts
and their white counterparts.
So in other words,
if you look at a bunch
of white high school dropouts
and black high school dropouts
it's more likely that white high
school dropouts will have jobs,
but it's not a big gap between
the black high school dropouts.
The bigger gap is between
black college educated men
and white college educated men.
That black college educated
men are much more likely
to be unemployed than
their white college.
So we tell the kids
you need to go to school,
you need to get an education,
you need to do this.
But they see people
who have education,
but they don't have jobs.
So if the system is meritocratic
how do we explain
employment disparities.
For the colorblind advocate
race is no longer the sight
of social inequality.
In this discourse,
people of color, like I said,
are using race
to get an advantage.
By ticking off minority race
on job, college,
or housing applications,
they reason that these folks
are accorded more consideration
for social benefits.
This according to the colorblind
is undemocratic.
And thus it becomes necessary
to rid all aspects
of public policy from quote
race based policies or remedies.
California Proposition 209,
and initiatives in the states
of Washington and Michigan
have passed.
And they spell the end of race
consideration in public policy.
It's interesting that
these same measures
do not speak to our
consideration of gender,
when the data show that women
actually have been
the greatest beneficiaries
of affirmative action.
Now while the colorblind
advocates see
Barrack Obama's presidential
victory as proof positive that
we are a colorblind society,
the post-racial advocates assert
that we have moved beyond race.
We still see diversity
in difference.
It just doesn't mean the same
thing, in a technologically
sophisticated global flat world.
Post-racial discourse attempts
to complicate difference
and subjectivities to suggest
that race is but one among many.
Alright, so there's race,
there's gender, sexuality and...
And so the post-racialists
suggest that talk about race
as a category is essentializing
and simplistic.
So we have to look beyond
our post-racial future
towards a more hybrid existence.
What Michael Lind refers to
as the "beige-ing" of America,
references the reality
of demographics in the U.S.
And what the post-racial
proponents do not understand
is the way that race is always
being deployed in America,
to mean what the more powerful
group wants it to mean.
Now I'm kind of, kind of off
with these slides,
so I got to,
no, no no. Okay.
In a 1923 case, United States
versus Bhagat Singh Thind,
that despite recent
anthropological studies,
expanded the definition
of Caucasian to include those
from the Indian subcontinent.
The Supreme Court argued
that despite the presence
of quote Arian blood
in the veins of this
World War I veteran,
and I think I'm missing
a picture because I had
a picture of him to show you.
This World War I veteran
Bhagat Singh Thind...
Mr. Thind was not white.
Now the anthropologists
at that time,
remember this is 1923,
anthropologists at this time
said if you are from India,
you are Caucasian.
So he said "I'm Caucasian"
and they said "No you're not."
So he went to court over this.
And the court determined
that Thind was not white
quote in accordance with
the understanding
of the common man.
Now I suspect that since race
is such an arbitrary concept,
powerful interests can rearrange
and coalesce around
shades and degrees of blackness.
Tiger Woods, Barrack Obama,
Halle Berry, would easily fit
into this new category
of acceptability.
Others of darker hues will not
be so easily accepted without
some other form
of exceptionality.
The other thing that is likely
to happen is the co-mingling
of race and class,
which already happens.
And in this arrangement
poor blacks will not
be able to escape
the pernicious impact of race
because of their social status.
But wealthy blacks despite
their skin color can transcend
or at least insulate themselves
against the negative effects
of race.
So celebrities like Michael
Jordan or LeBron James
do not have to worry about
how race functions.
Indeed, in an interview with
some black National Basketball
Association players,
many of them asserted
that racism was no longer
a problem in the U.S.
And I guess if you make over
$2 million a year it's not.
>> audience:
[indistinct]
You know you can live
and function and operate
in circles that race
doesn't touch you.
The claims of a post-racial
society, makes sense
if one looks from the top
of the social-economic ladder.
President Obama and celebrity
actors and athletes who are
black operate in different
circles than the rest of us.
But the view from the bottom
is quite different.
And clearly the view from
the classroom is different.
If the U.S. were
a post-racial society
then poor blacks would
be having experiences
and life chances similar
to poor whites.
However this is not the case.
On most measures of health
and well-being
poor blacks fair worse
than poor whites.
So rather than look
to colorblind
or post-racial paradigms
to explain our present moment,
I would argue that we are in
a space of racial flexibility,
not unlike Aihwa Ong's notion
of flexible citizen...
her notion of flexible
citizenship.
So race can be deployed
in a variety of ways
and has shed its seemingly
fixed position.
In the extreme position we have
the case of Michael Jackson
who physically changed himself
from black to white.
In the more subtle and crass
marketing venue
we have the case
of Mariah Carey.
So I want you to look at that,
those two magazine covers.
Do you notice how much
lighter she looks
on the Seventeen magazine cover?
Those covers came out within
a month of each other.
So on Seventeen she is becoming
more acceptable to a broader
audience, whereas
Ebony is a magazine that caters
directly to African Americans.
Or in a move to impact public
opinion, we had OJ Simpson.
Alright. So they, Time magazine
literally darkened their picture
to make him look more sinister
and less acceptable.
Because remember OJ
was everybody's hero
before all this
craziness went on.
Right the ladies in the airport
singing "Go OJ"
for the Hertz commercial.
Michael Olmy points out
that despite the attestation
of biologists and geneticists
and physical anthropologists
that race is not
a scientific concept
rooted in discernible
biological differences.
It is an extremely powerful
and contested social construct.
So in other words, if you took
the DNA of anybody in this room
and put it under a microscope
the geneticists cannot tell you
what the race of that person is.
I think I said at a,
one of our meals earlier today,
it's like calico cats deciding
they don't want to have anything
to do with tabby cats.
It doesn't make any sense,
they're cats.
And in the same way
that we are quote people.
But we have come
to make race matter.
It really isn't a scientific
construct, but we've made it
a powerful social construct.
And it has implications for how
people get to live their lives.
So Olmy further argues that
race has always been fluid
and subject to multiple
determinations.
And more important
the relationship between race
and racism is about
transformations
in the nature
of racialized power.
So since we cannot remove
power from the equation,
I think the challenge
of subordinated racial groups
is to figure out how to equalize
the power relations.
Lani Guinier and Drell Torres
began talking about something
they call political race,
as a way for marginalized
communities to take on race
as a diagnostic tool
and as a motivational tool.
Rather than attempting
to dismantle race
or become post-racial, Guinier
and Torres speak of re-deploying
race strategically to create
coalitions and social movements
that challenge injustice
and challenge inequity.
The work of a civil rights
movement is an example
of the strategic
deployment of race.
One did not have to be
phenotypically black
to be instrumental
in the civil rights struggle.
Indeed in many instances
it helped to be white.
For white lawyers could
file motions
and argue cases before
white judges.
White businessmen
and philanthropists had
enough money to finance aspects
of the civil rights movement.
White priests and white clergy
had the moral bravitas
to challenge the extent social
order on behalf of the mull,
of the movement. And white
teachers could stand up
on behalf of black children.
And I'm, most of you probably
know the story of Ruby Bridges,
the little girl who was
the first to desegregate
in New Orleans public schools.
And as a result of...
And the federal marshals had to
walk this first grader to school
every day because of the crowds
that were chanting
racial epithets at her
every single day.
But there was one white teacher
in the building
who was willing to teach Ruby.
So Ruby probably got
the best private education
public money could buy,
[laughter]
because nobody would
go to school with her.
But this teacher, taught her
five hours a day.
I'm sure by the time first grade
was over Ruby was ready to go
to middle school, [laughter]
because she had a private tutor.
But it took a white teacher,
because there were no black
teachers in this school.
It took a white teacher
who was willing to do this.
So we want to be clear
that there is a role
for each of us to play
in getting us to social justice.
Everybody who has
become associate,
who becomes associated
with the movement
in some ways are rendered black
as his or her political race.
When Guinier and Lanier
talk about political race
it's not about phenotype.
It's about where are your,
where are your sympathies,
where are your,
where's your advocacy.
This political race I think
is useful in garnering
both rights and social benefits.
And rather than separate
and individual atoms,
political race allows for
coalescence and community
so that real change can happen.
The Obama/Biden campaign
recognized this.
And rather than be
colorblind or post-racial,
they decided to be
flexibly racial.
His speeches included
code switching, sermonic riffs,
professorial analysis,
and down home folksiness.
He was being racially flexible
in ways that allowed him to be
the person each person
in his growing constituency
needed him to be.
The fact that he was not
post-racial was indeed
part of his attraction.
And I think President Obama
represented the promise
of democracy.
Even with all of its flaws
and shortcomings,
he was the emblem of what
America could be.
He was both
youth and wisdom,
present and future,
black and white.
Obama is neither colorblind
nor post-racial.
He is the embodiment of race
with both its fear and promise.
His position as the President
of the United States
is simultaneously extraordinary
and unremarkable.
It is extraordinary because
it took the nation
from 1619 to 1863 to even
acknowledge the humanity
of African descent people.
It took from 1863 to 1965
to grant African descent people
full social and civic rights.
To have a person
of African descent
occupy its highest office
is indeed extraordinary.
However even in the midst
of the extraordinary,
we have to recognize
this presidency
as kind of unremarkable
in the 21st century.
The nation itself
is more diverse.
And people of color
have engaged in
the political process
at all levels.
Even in the previous
administration
there were two African American
Secretaries of State,
an African American National
Security Advisor,
a Latino Attorney General,
and a Secretary of Commerce.
There was an African American
Secretary of Housing
and Urban Development,
and Secretary of Education,
and an Asian American
Secretary of Labor.
That was all pre-Obama.
The Bush administration
had all of those folks.
So the conventional narrative
of America, would someway see
Barrack Obama's presidency
as a natural progression.
And ultimately I think
I leave you with the question,
of whether or not race
still matters in the U.S.
I would argue that it does.
It matters in new ways that
reorganize and re-conceptualize
who and how people are raced.
And this reorganization
makes it difficult to fix race
in the same ways it was fixed
a generation ago.
It makes it difficult in schools
when we look at our data
and realize that academic
performance is so predictable.
Some years ago I took
a group of my colleagues
on a campus of the University
of Wisconsin
who are not in education,
on a field trip.
I took them to a high school,
a local high school.
Because they thought, "Oh we
don't have these problems.
Those problems are in Milwaukee.
Those problems are in Chicago."
And I said "I'm inviting you
guys to a local high school."
So colleagues from medicine
and law and the college
of agriculture, and departments
like English and Classics,
they all came on the field trip.
And it was almost like
a back to school night,
you know if you've ever been
to back to school night
they give you, at the high
school they give you a schedule
so you can follow your child's
schedule. And every ten minutes
the bell rings and you go
to the next teacher
and you get to hear what
the course is about
and what the expectations are.
So we got schedules.
And as we walked down the hall
before we went into any room,
I would say something like,
I'd look at the schedule,
look at what the course was
and I'd say
"There are no black students
in this class."
Alright so we'd look
at something
and it'd be calculus.
Go in, no black students.
We'd go to another room
and it would be AP biology,
and I would say "There are no
black students in this class."
And we'd go in and there'd be
no black students.
Then we'd go to a class
called basic science, [ohs]
and I said "There'll be black
students in this class."
And when the, my colleagues,
these people have Ph.D.s,
they are experts in their field,
they went in there
and they're like "How are you
able to do this?" [laughter]
It's not hard. It's not hard
at all, because we have
continued to vulcanize
and segregate by race.
And our achievement scores look
exactly like this disparity.
Our challenge is to try to forge
a democracy [clears throat]
in the midst of what I call
a bankrupt concept,
the concept of race.
Thank you.
[applause]
[footsteps]
>> Tiece Ruffin:
Thank you very much
Dr. Ladson-Billings for your
lecture on critical race theory
and education and application
to broader areas as well.
We now have time for question
and answer.
And because this event is being
recorded we ask that when you
ask your question you please go
to the microphone in the aisle.
And please feel free to ask your
questions for the next :15.
We have a national scholar
in education. I believe,
please take advantage of this
valuable opportunity to hear
her perspective on pressing
issues facing our schools.
>> audience:
[indistinct]
>> Ladson-Billings:
Okay I can't vouch for you
this time. I can't do
the question for you
this time because
they are recording.
So you do have to go
to the microphone.
>> audience - male:
Well I was at your
earlier session,
and I'm very happy to see
many of my colleagues
in Asheville City schools here.
One of the questions
that I want to ask
is that African American men,
I was kind of trying to find...
Yeah there you go... [laughter]
Some of my colleagues
and brothers.
But how can we discuss
with our peers,
one of the things
that I'm finding out
as I'm going through
this doctorial program
and obtaining higher education,
higher knowledge,
it seems to get harder for me.
It seems I get less respect.
And I was just telling
Miss Hughes you know
whenever I go to work
I have to put on my face.
And a lot of times my white
colleagues don't understand
why we have to put on a face.
Because if we're assertive
we're confident,
we speak intelligently,
why is that so intimidating?
And can you help me
with any strategies
that I can equip myself
as a man trying
to obtain higher education
and be a trend setter
and a change agent for the kids
that I love and serve.
Do you have any advice for me?
>> Ladson-Billings:
Well it is harder because
we live in a more complex
and complicated society.
And it's harder because
people really don't want
to have these conversations.
Indeed I hear things like
we need to just stop talking
about this, as if that's
going to make it go away.
You know I almost always say
"So if you don't talk about sex,
your kids are not going to have
it right?" [laughter]
You know, this is one
of America's sticking points.
And we don't want to have
the conversation at all.
It's interesting when I engage
in my colleagues in the U.K.,
they talk about this a lot.
In fact they don't even use
the term multicultural.
They say "No, no no no, that's,
that's the government's term."
We are doing anti-racist
education.
And so they're very up front
about the way in which race
has divided their society.
And it has to do
with imperialism.
And now you've got all these
nations, people from these
various nations, repatriating
and coming back to the U.K.
So I, I don't know exactly
why we struggle so to talk
about it in this society.
But talk about it we must.
Your question about putting on
the face... The space you are
entering is a space that is
a dominant cultural space.
There's certain ways that,
in what, in many ways what you
are doing is displaying your
bi-cultural competence,
that you can move from
one place to another.
My dream for our children is
that all of our children
leave our schools at least
bi-culturally competent.
I would love for them to leave
multi-culturally competent.
In other words, that they are
confident and comfortable
in the culture that is theirs.
But they have acquired at least
one more. So for most children
of color, the one more is
quote mainstream culture.
But this also means that white
students need to be bi-cultural.
They need to be able to take on
at least one more culture,
so that they can converse
and, and move in and out
of different circumstances.
I am a mother of four kids.
My youngest son is so good
relating to people
across cultural lines that he
actually gets paid to do it.
He works in Silicon Valley.
He spends a good part of his
time in Asia and in Europe.
And when he's not there
they get mad.
They call back to California
and say "Where is Kevin?
Because Kevin can fix this."
He has that skill.
And that's a skill that we,
you know we're a global village
in some ways.
And you know my daughter's
one of these video gamers.
She's gaming with people
in China.
So we all have to begin to talk
across racial and cultural lines
if we're going to be
really global citizens
and not just local citizens.
So in some ways you have
something to teach
your colleagues about
what it means to move in and out
of different cultural spaces.
Whether they'll be receptive
to it I have no idea.
>> audience - male:
Thank you. Asheville City people
please ask questions.
[laughter]
>> Ladson-Billings:
Thanks. [laughter]
>> audience - female: Do you
ever think it's going to change?
That's my reason for being
an elementary teacher,
because I wanted to change
how African American students
were getting treated inside
of the classroom
as far as learning. So do you
ever think it's going to change?
We work so, we work so hard
to, to do it,
but is it ever going to change?
>> Ladson-Billings:
So her question is
"Is it ever going to change?"
Darling it has changed.
It has changed.
We are not in the same place
we were in 1960.
>> audience - female:
We, we not, but we not...
>> Ladson-Billings:
Now is it going to change fast?
That's a different question.
>> audience - female:
Maybe that's what
I should have said.
Is it going to change fast?
>> Ladson-Billings:
Because there has been
a tremendous amount
of change in the society.
The society has figured out
it's not going to be
economically productive to lock
people out of the society.
And so there has been change.
The question is "Is it going
to be rapid enough so that
we don't lose generations
of kids on the way?"
And that part I can't, I don't
have an answer for you for.
You know, and I've said this
probably so many times today
that if you've been with me
you're tired of hearing it,
but we are not in this
particular fight to win,
we're in it to struggle.
We don't have to worry
about the outcome.
We just have to keep struggling.
So I gave the example
of Sisyphus,
you know Greek myth and the gods
rolling this rock up a hill.
And no sooner than he gets it
all the way up the hill
it's going to roll back down.
And he has to go back
and roll it up again.
But if you've ever seen
an artist's rendering
of Sisyphus, either a painting
or a sculpture,
he has these incredible biceps,
this, these amazing quads
and calf muscles.
Why? Because he's gotten
stronger pushing that rock.
So that's what our job is,
to push the rock.
I've a wonderful friend
at Georgia State, Joyce King,
who often says "Your job is
to push the elephant,
and the elephant has no
inclination to move."
So you just push on it.
And some days you get it
to move a little bit.
And you go home and you feel
really, really good.
And you're excited, and you say
"Oh I got it to move."
But trust me, when you
come back the next day,
it's going to be right back
there again. [laughter]
And you got to push some more.
What we learn and how we grow
in the midst of that struggle
is a part of our building
of character.
And so I would not worry so much
about the outcome.
That's a kind of very American
kind of thing, can we do it,
get it done and be done with it?
But I would be much more
concerned about how do we engage
more people in the struggle
to push that rock?
>> audience - female:
Thank you.
>> Ladson-Billings:
Yes.
>> audience - female:
So earlier in your talk
you mentioned some specific
white privileges.
And I was just wondering
as a future educator, if you had
strategies for me to combat
those in the classroom.
I'm going to be a math educator
hopefully, fingers crossed.
And you know, what we hear is
you know is use problems that
speak to diverse backgrounds.
But that seems like a baby step.
So I was just wondering
if you had strategies
to get to that second step.
>> Ladson-Billings:
So you want kids to understand
mathematics as a useful tool,
for them to participate
in the struggle.
How do you, how do you analyze
the world mathematically?
Some years ago I was
engaged with
the Urban Math Collaborative.
And one of the things
we were doing is
we were testing out
mathematics problems.
Because if you, you know, you
probably got NCTM guides, right?
And you know how it is to push
that particular rock about.
Let's change the way
we think about mathematics.
So one of things we were trying
to do is see if can we engage
kids in inquiry based thinking
about mathematics.
Not just getting
the right answer.
I mean you know getting
the right answer is easy.
You could pick up your phone
and calculate and get
the right answer.
But do you understand
and, and how have you
thought about a problem?
So we had this problem,
it was a word problem.
And the problem went
something like this...
a city bus pass...
city bus fare is $1 each way.
A fast pass is $50 a month.
Which is cheaper for going
to work, paying the dollar
or getting the fast pass?
So we took the problem
to a suburban upper middle class
white community,
showed the kids the problem,
we said now before you think
about solving the problem,
what questions does the problem
provoke for you?
Absolutely no questions.
They said there's about 20
workdays in a week, in a month,
$1 each way is $2,
2 times 20 is 40,
40 is cheaper than 50
which is the fast pass,
it's cheaper to pay as you go.
We couldn't get them to find
anything problematic
about that problem.
On the second day
we went into the city,
to an urban middle school.
Same problem.
And we said look at the problem
carefully and tell us
what problems does this,
you know what questions does
this problem provoke for you?
Hands all over.
First hand, how many jobs are we
talking about? [laughter]
Because if you have two jobs
it's not $2 a day, it's $3.
Second question, is there
a car in the family at all?
Our suburban kids presumed
a car. Alright, you just going
to work back and forth
and you're going to a 9-to-5.
Our urban kids said because
if there's no car, you can use
that fast pass on the weekend.
You're not just using it
to go to work.
And you can use it to go
to beauty parlor, barber shop,
church, grocery shopping,
you know.
The third question
they asked was
"How many people
in this family?"
Because the fast pass is
transferable. When I finish
using it I can give it to you,
and then you can go somewhere.
And the final question,
which I loved, was a kid said
"If the fast pass is not cheaper
why is the bus company spending
so much money advertising to us
all the time?" [laughter]
So here is exactly the kind
of thing you want kids
to be able to do, to and in some
ways what Ralph Putnam calls
"Mathematize their world."
And I find the use of statistics
and helping kids actually see
the statistical inequalities,
and then not just
solving a problem,
but asking
"Well why is this, this way?
How can we come
to understand it?"
One of the most beautiful uses
of mathematics that I saw was
in Dallas, TX where a teacher
was in an urban middle school
and her kids were very, very
upset about the fact
that their school was surrounded
by these liquor stores.
And I don't know
if you know Dallas,
but it has wet and dry zones.
So their school was
in a wet zone.
And they were being harassed
every day. They'd come to school
and these drunks would always
be asking them for change.
And they just didn't feel safe.
Rather than dismiss
the students' concerns,
they got launched off
into this incredible project.
They, she, they got on a bus,
they went to the suburban middle
school and saw there were quote
no liquor stores around them.
They counted how many liquor
stores there were.
They ended up with
a draft of a petition
to take to city council
about closing down
some of these liquor stores,
I mean it was just,
it was such an exciting use
of their mathematics.
So I think that that's going
to be your big challenge.
How do you get the kids
to engage on a deep level
and see how mathematics
really can help them
understand their world?
>> audience - female:
Thank you.
>> Ladson-Billings:
Okay. Got one? Miss Shannon?
>> audience - male:
I have a question on behalf of
one of my colleagues, Livy will
you raise your hand? [laughs]
Fifth grade teacher. She asked,
wanted me to ask...
So given what we know about
where our African Americans are
in terms of their achievement
and where we want them to be,
what do we do?
And I think, I don't know,
maybe just if you can nutshell
three strategies for us
elementary school teachers.
And you have done a little bit
of that as well.
>> Ladson-Billings:
Okay.
So one of the things
that I find that people
have like this unsettled feeling
about what's happening.
But we don't have a discussion
about the data,
not along racial terms.
We'll say well our third graders
are not doing well,
or eighth grade
in math, you know.
But we don't really unpack
the data and look at
well what is it that our kids
aren't doing well at,
and which kids aren't,
and which kids are?
So what's been my experience is
that if you start with the data.
And that data can be suspension
and expulsion data,
it can be attendance data,
it can be achievement data.
But with a laser like focus
on the data, I think there's
a whole bunch of questions
we can and should be asking.
You know what can we do
to improve these data?
Do we really have to have
these many suspensions?
You know can we find alternative
ways to ensure that kids stay
in school, because we know
when kids are not here
they certainly can't benefit
from what we have to offer here.
How do we reach our parents?
And I don't really care
what grade level you are,
then you might be in high school
and they may be big,
they still got adults
attached to them.
And so how do we get
our parents engaged?
You know, what's the outreach
going to take?
Who is having more success
than some other people?
That's the other thing that I
think we, we just minimize
the expertise that exists
in our own buildings.
We're as bad as the kids.
You know somebody doing
a good job we like
[snarling tone] "Who she thinks
she is?" [laughter]
We should be running
over there saying
"What are you doing?
And how are you doing it?
And you want to do
a little workshop?"
One of my favorite, favorite,
favorite civil rights icons
is a white guy named Miles
Horton. I love Miles Horton.
I actually have a quote
from him on my email,
one of my emails'
signature lines.
And the quote is
something like this
"The people with
the problem
are the same people
with the solution."
You are not going
to get an answer
outside of your building,
because those people
don't know your building.
They don't know your kids.
They don't know your teachers.
They don't know your parents.
Now you can get somebody
from outside the building
to help you facilitate
the knowledge
that's in the building.
But what happens is you know
administrators get their
budgets, "Oh well let's have
this person come, and let's have
this person do this."
They don't know your building.
You need someone that, that...
First of all the people
in the building know
what the problem is.
So you've got to be
in a process in which you,
someone will, is willing to say
"Hey, this is the problem. What
are we going to do about it?"
You know so let's say,
for example the problem
is parent involvement,
can't get the parents
to do quote anything.
The first question that I have
when schools tell me
that parent involvement is
the problem, is, well what
I take them through an exercise
and I say "Well imagine tomorrow
every last one of your parents
showed up here."
And usually it's the black
and Latino parents
we're talking about.
"Let's say every black
and Latino parent
showed up tomorrow.
What would you have them do?"
And they all look at me
like you all are looking at me.
[laughter]
That's why they don't come.
Because the one thing that
working class people have,
the most valuable commodity
that working class people
have is time.
And they can't have it wasted.
Now middle class people
don't need you to tell them
what to do, because they
already have an agenda.
And we're like stupid enough
to think they're coming up there
to help us, they're not.
Those people are
on reconnaissance. [laughter]
You know they are coming
in that building,
you think they're
running off stuff.
Yeah they're running it off,
but they're also looking to see
what you doing, so that they
can go back in the community
and say "You know what you don't
want your kid in that class,
oh well she terrible." Right?
You know we're so desperate
for their help you know,
the first little warm day
they come up there
with their little cooler
full of popsicles.
We're so happy to get
the popsicles, we don't
understand that those popsicles
are a Trojan horse. [laughter]
They're in there to figure out
who needs to go, you know
and where they want...
So, when people tell me
that the parents don't come,
that first issue is "Well what
do you want them to do?"
Now that's, so that's the first
thing you got to decide.
But the second question
I always say
"Is there anybody
in the building who has
been successful at getting
their parents involved?"
And low and behold there'd be
somebody over here
"Well you know most of my
parents have been."
"Really? What do you do?"
So those kinds of conversations
where we begin to trust
each other's expertise is what's
going to move us further along.
We have to stop thinking that
that solution is out there
in some package curriculum.
I think I talked about
at the earlier talk
how you know twenty years ago
everybody was buying
these assertive discipline
things, $10,000 a pop.
Now what did assertive
discipline say?
"If the kids misbehave
don't stop teaching,
"just write their name
on the board.
"If they don't stop, [laughter]
don't stop teaching,
"put a check beside them.
[laughter]
If they keep on misbehaving
put another check."
I went to a school one time
a little boy told me,
he said "I got 17 checks.
I got the most checks
of anybody in this school."
It was like a badge of honor
for him. [laughter]
Those kinds of external things
rarely work.
Every place that I have seen
big improvement in schools
has involved hard work
internally
where faculty, staff,
and administrators
get together and say
"Let's work on this thing."
You know. So I hope that helps
a little bit. Okay?
Another question?
>> audience - female:
Hi. See I have a question,
a comment slash question.
So there's some schools that are
clearly getting it done right,
90/90/90 schools with
90% free and reduced lunch
90% students of color
and 90% proficiency rate.
So, often those are charter
schools or inner city schools
or people who can change
the curriculum,
those type of things.
I would be really interested
in hearing your comments
on Asheville City school
administrators
planning with that 90/90
in mind first.
And establishing a strategic
plan for students and planning
for the entire community
with the 90/90 coming first.
Because I would say that
the reason you have
90/90/90 schools is because
those schools plan
with those students in mind
as opposed to, you know,
the other students.
So I'd be interested in what
your advice to administration
would be in terms of how
to advocate for that.
And what steps they
would need to take
in order to make that happen.
>> Ladson-Billings:
Right. Okay.
So there was a major study done
of Chicago school reform.
And Chicago is a big
unwieldy system.
There are 500 schools
in that system.
And they were all undergoing
school reform.
Anthony Bryk and Barbara
Schneider did a major study,
trying to figure out why school
reform, if everybody's doing it,
why is it working here
but not working here?
You know what, what was
the difference
in the schools
in which it worked.
And to their surprise,
the major difference
between places where school
reform actually works,
and this may speak to the point
you made about the charters,
or what have you, was not
actually the size of the school
but something that they called
relational trust.
That is, do the people
in the school trust each other?
Do the administrators
trust the teachers?
Do the kids trust
the administrators?
Do the parents trust
the teachers?
Do the, you know, teachers
trust the parents?
In schools where there was
high levels of relational trust
reform took hold, and you began
to see change and turn around.
In those schools that had
low levels of relational trust,
same reform, you know
same exact thing
because it was district-wide,
it didn't happen.
So that's one of the first
things that has to start
to happen, as I see the whole
school reform movement,
is that you have to be
in a building where people
begin to trust each other.
And you have to build
that trust in communities.
Years ago when I was looking
for teachers to participate
in the, what became
the Dream Keeper Study,
I went all around the country
looking at examples
of exemplary schools.
And I went to a school
in Newark, New Jersey.
It was 99/99 [laughs] /99.
It wasn't 99, I mean it was
an all black, a few Latino kids,
no white kids, all free
and reduced lunch.
And every single youngster
was on grade level or better.
Some things that were,
that struck me about the school
is number one it had incredible
stability of staff.
The average tenure of a teacher
at Harriet Tubman Elementary
school in Newark, New Jersey
is 14 years.
People been there.
Tell the parents all the time
"I ain't going nowhere.
"Ain't no sense
in getting mad at me.
I'm going to be right here."
You know.
The other thing was that they
had a principal
who made it his mission to go
out and meet these families.
And he said "It's taken me
three years for some of these,
"you know, I'll knock
on the door...knock.
"And I just told them, Listen,
I ain't going to stop knocking,
"I'm not, you can't
make me not come.
I'm going to keep coming."
So finally people said
alright he's serious.
These were schools,
now it's an extraordinary school
because it's a school
that opens at about
5:30 or 6:00 each morning
and it doesn't close until
10:30, 11:00 at night.
The school has what it calls
a very vibrant co-curricular
program. And what's
the co-curricular program?
So you know you got to have
reading and math and science
and language arts and PE,
social studies.
But at Harriet Tubman every
adult, not every teacher,
every adult teaches something.
So the custodian
teaches cooking,
because he used to be
a Navy cook.
The secretary teaches drumming,
because she plays the drums.
The crossing guard teaches
bowling, that's her passion.
So what you do in an environment
like that is you make it
more difficult for kids
to slip through the cracks
because you're constantly
making the relationship
with the ratio of adults
to kids much smaller.
You know people talk about
the fact that oh well
the problem is we got all these
single parents households.
Trust me, go to the suburbs
they got a bunch of single
parent households.
Divorce is rampant
in the nation.
It's not localized among
black people.
But what middle classed kids
often have that poor kids don't
is they have a lot more adults
around them.
So some of you who are
African American and are older
may remember when you had
a lot of adults around you.
Grandmama right upstairs,
she wasn't you know,
she lived right in the house.
Miss Annie May lived across
the street, would watch you.
So that you had a bunch
of adults around you.
Middle class kids have
a lot of adults because
they had soccer,
they had dance,
they had art class,
they got piano lessons.
They constantly have adults
around them.
What's happening in many
of our urban communities
is our kids are lucky
to fend for themselves.
And when you are 13 you can only
make 13 year old decisions.
You know, I happen to be
a grandmother now.
And I'm telling you it's
the best fun of anything.
I tell my kids all the time
"I put up with you to get them."
[laughter]
I love my grandchildren.
My grandchildren are perfect,
you hear me? Perfect. [laughter]
There's nothing at all wrong
with any of them. [laughter]
And they will tell me like
the craziest stuff in the world,
as their grandmother,
not their mother.
I can listen to the craziness
and get them in a place where
they don't make a bad decision.
Whereas if you go tell your
parents you thinking about that,
you about to get a licking,
right? You can't do that.
Well many of our kids
don't have that,
or the grandmother that's
in their life really is not
functioning as a grandmother,
she's functioning as a mother.
And that's totally different.
So here is Harriet Tubman,
a regular old elementary school,
it's not a charter,
it's not a small school,
it's a neighborhood school.
And the expectations are here,
you must be at grade level.
But you also have a school
community that's worked
really hard to bring
so many resources.
So all of the first graders
are playing Suzuki violin.
You know they have a vibrant
preschool program.
And you usually leave
preschool reading.
The school is open
until late at night
because some parents
work night shift.
So there's a midnight basketball
and there's a place for kids
to go to sleep.
So the school has become
the hub of the community.
And I think one of things
that we've often done
with school reform,
is make,
put the school opposite
the community.
And tell the kids "Don't bring
that in here, leave..."
You know. But the kids have
to work in both spaces.
So I think you know you begin
to see some schools
where people have really engaged
the community in serious ways,
and are willing
to put in the work.
And someone over here asked me
this question about how long.
See when you go into
this kind of reform work
you don't worry about how long.
You just start doing the work.
And over time you begin to see
the fruits of that work.
>> Ruffin:
Last question please.
>> audience - female:
Hey so this doesn't really
have to do with racism
in schools,
but I was just wondering,
to help end racism
when my generation grow up
and get married and have kids,
what should we tell our kids,
that there is a difference
between the races
or that we aren't different
and we're all equally smart
and athletic and all that,
or that there is a difference
but it doesn't have
to be that way,
or it's not a big deal
kind of thing?
>> Ladson-Billings:
Wonderful question.
What do we tell our kids?
Well there's really
two storylines.
The first storyline is
that we're all human beings.
And our DNA is pretty
much the same.
You know what makes
somebody human
really doesn't have to do with
the color of their skin.
However, everybody doesn't
believe that.
And as a consequence,
some people don't get the chance
they really want because of it.
Your kids will respond
the way you do.
So let me give you an example.
My daughter, when she was
a little girl, her best friend
was a little Chinese immigrant
girl. Zeon, never forget her.
And my daughter's a big tall
girl, my daughter's now 6' tall,
my granddaughter's 6'3",
I mean I'm the shrimp
in the family.
But Zeon was a little petite
little girl.
And I remember Zeon came
to my house one day.
And she said
"Where's the white Barbie?"
I said "What?!" I said "Zeon I
don't have any white Barbie!"
She said "Why?"
I said "Well Zeon
a white Barbie
wouldn't feel comfortable
living here." [laughter]
She said "Why?"
I said "Well you know
there really aren't
"any people like her here.
"And so she would just be so
uncomfortable in this setting.
"And she probably wouldn't like
what we eat.
And she certainly wouldn't want
to go to church with us."
And while I'm going through
this list of rationalize,
Zeon said "Oh there she is.
There's the white Barbie."
Now my head is on a swivel like
that woman on "The Exorcist",
who brought this white doll in
this house right? [laughter]
It was a black Barbie doll
in a wedding dress.
For Zeon that's
the white Barbie.
Because she was
new to the country,
she didn't, you know,
she knew that Jessica
was her best friend,
I don't really care, you know,
her skin color was irrelevant.
Now fast forward a couple years,
we moved to Wisconsin.
And a year after we moved
to Wisconsin,
Zeon's family moves to
the Chicago area.
Her father takes a job
in Illinois.
And so they want to get
the girls together.
They haven't seen each other
in a couple years.
I guess they were
in kindergarten together.
This is, they're probably
in second, maybe second grade,
maybe third grade by now.
And so the Choo family comes,
they get Jessica, they take her
skiing with them.
Then we decide we're going
to keep Zeon over,
over Christmas at our house.
And I overhear these kids
having a conversation.
And Zeon says something
about being yellow.
And my daughter says
"Well Zeon
when we were in California
you said you were white."
And you hear this,
just the tone of her voice
she says "Yeah, I didn't know."
And all I could think of is
what has happened to this child,
in the intervening years,
that someone has said
"You don't get to be white."
I mean she was saying I'm white
from the standpoint of, my skin
complexion is quote a lighter
skin complexion.
But someone corrected her.
So I don't know that you
can insolate your kids
from the way in which racism
is operating outside.
What's been valuable for my kids
is that they have had the luxury
of international travel.
And we've been every color
imaginable.
I was in Brazil, somebody said
"Well why you saying you're
black?" I'm like "I am."
They're like "No you ain't."
They had a whole list, "No you
right here." I'm like "What?"
And it, what it does is
make you see how silly it is.
I had an experience in Africa.
I was in a very,
very small village.
And I went to a preschool
and I was reading a story
to a little girl. She had
to be about four years old.
She was sitting on my lap.
I'm, I'm all happy,
I'm in Africa y'all,
I'm back home.
I'm in the motherland.
And at the end of the story
the little girl looked at me
and said "You're a nice
white lady." [laughter]
Now, you know after they
peeled me up off the floor,
because I had come
all those miles
to bond with my people,
right.
What I realized is that
the little girl was thinking
of white western-ness
as whiteness,
because that's pretty much
how we advertize it.
And that it didn't have
the same connotation
that it has in the U.S.
So I mean I think
you have to tell kids
that things are complex.
I mean my granddaughter
was told she couldn't,
she asked her teacher
why she never got picked
for any of the class jobs.
And the teacher told her
she wasn't blonde.
Now when she told me that
I'm like okay,
I know my hearing is gone right.
[laughter]
And I didn't want to press it
so I asked my daughter-in-law
because I was stunned.
And my daughter-in-law said
"We didn't want to tell you
but we been dealing
with this all year."
Well my strategy in dealing
with stuff like this
is to use my bi-cultural
dominant cultural skills.
And I understand
that the dominant culture
understands paper.
See I just like to go up there
and handle it.
That's my cultural style.
[laughter]
But that doesn't work.
Because that makes me
just a crazy black mother,
in this case the grandmother.
But paper, oh my gosh,
and I can write a letter.
[laughter]
And as my kids will say
"My momma will cc God."
I'm like "He needs to know.
He's going to be on the list."
So I wrote a letter
on University of Wisconsin
stationery, [laughter]
explaining my disappointment
in what I had heard
and just knowing this
can't be true,
because no teacher in 2010
would make these kinds
of statements to a child.
And of course the letter
went to her,
it went to her principal,
it went to the superintendent,
it went to the school
board members.
Somehow my granddaughter started
having a much better experience.
[laughter]
So you know,
no matter what I told her
about how beautiful she was
and how special she was
she got zapped and I couldn't
protect her from it.
So I think we have to arm
our kids with the knowledge
that everybody doesn't think
this way.
And that we always have
to struggle against this.
This is, it's a noble struggle.
And it's worth struggling for.
And some of the most magnificent
people of our society
have been a part of this fight.
I grew up in a house
so I know a lot of times,
the mantra at school is
"no fighting."
Well I didn't grow up with that.
My father told me
"If you see a good fight,
get in it." [laughter]
The question is what's
the good fight?
So a fight around race,
that's a good fight, get in it.
You know just because somebody
calls you a name,
that ain't no good fight,
don't get in that one.
So we have to teach our kids
how to, how to be good fighters,
because some things are indeed
worth fighting for.
Thank you.
>> Ruffin
Thank you.
[applause]
Thank you so much
Dr. Ladson-Billings.
You leave us today with some
terms that we can grapple with
and some action, Aluta
the struggle continues.
We have to not think
that to be colorblind
is to be okay, that we are
in a post-racial society.
Race does matter.
And we take hold of the term
flexibly racial,
racial flexibility.
To say that race doesn't matter
is not acceptable,
to think that there are not
inequalities because of race
we know is not acceptable.
So we thank you very much
for your lecture tonight,
and actually for the whole day.
So that we can
re-conceptualize
achievement gap
to education debt,
as well as knowing
that colorblindness
is an issue that has no premise.
It should be de-bunked.
We should no longer hear
teachers say
"Oh but it doesn't matter, it's
okay, I just see the person."
Well we see that it matters
in the achievement gap.
That we're not going to look
forward to programs
that we can purchase for change.
But we're looking for change,
where everyone?
>> audience:
[indistinct]
>>  Ruffin:
Internal, with self.
And not always looking
to a program to purchase
to commercialize.
But you have shown us tonight
that we do have the answers
with ourselves, that there are
models that we can look forward
to, but the answer lies here.
And let's learn
from one another.
Thank you all for attending
tonight's lecture.
Dr. Ladson-Billings will do
a book signing now
for a few minutes.
We have about 20 books or so
that are first come first serve.
There is a line outside.
Please line up at the table
if you would like her to sign
a free book, courtesy
of Teaching Fellows
and the Department of Education.
Thank you.
[Applause]
♪ [Closing music] ♪
♪  ♪
♪  ♪
