Building on Resilience

Models and Frameworks of Black Male Success Across the P-20 Pipeline

Fred A. Bonner II

• Publisher: Stylus Publishing
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781579229641
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Multicultural Education

How do we fix the leaky educational pipeline into a conduit of success for Black males? That the issue is critical is demonstrated by the statistics that only 10% of Black males in the United States are proficient in 8th grade reading, only 52% graduate from high school within four years, and only 35 percent graduate from college.This book uniquely examines the trajectory of Black males through the educational pipeline from pre-school through college. In doing so it not only contributes significantly to the scholarship on the experiences of this population, but bridges the gap between theory and practice to provide frameworks and models that will improve these young men's educational outcomes throughout their educational journeys.A compelling feature of the book is that that it does not treat Black males as homogeneous, but recognizes the diversity that exists among Black males in various educational settings. It demonstrates the need to recognize students' intersectionalities and individual characteristics as an essential preliminary to developing practices to improve outcomes at every educational stage.Throughout, the contributing authors also focus on the strategies and experiences of Black males who achieve academic excellence, examining growth-producing and asset-based practices that can be sustained, and that build upon the recognition that these males have agency and possess qualities such as resilience that are essential to their learning and development. The frameworks and models that conclude each chapter are equally commendable to K–12 educators and administrators; higher education faculty, student affairs practitioners, and administrators; and policymakers, for whom templates are provided for rectifying the continuing inequities of our educational system.

PART ONE

P–12 FRAMEWORKS AND MODELS

1

A FRAMEWORK FOR BLACK MALES IN P–12 URBAN SCHOOL DISTRICTS

Sharon Michael- Chadwell

In more than 16,000 school districts in the United States and since the 1980s, Black males in P–12 educational systems have been identified as being underachievers as well as linked to experiencing “higher rates of suspensions, expulsions, non-promotions, dropouts, special education placements, and the lowest rates of secondary school graduation” (Garibaldi, 2007, p. 324). Researchers (e.g., Hargrove & Seay, 2011; Michael-Chadwell, 2010; Michael-Chadwell, Bonner, & Lewis, 2009) have concluded that many Black males start schools as excited learners; by fourth or fifth grade, their excitement wanes because of an awareness of being treated unfairly by White teachers or being treated differently by other students as a result of negative imaging in the media. The social and economic implications related to the miseducation of Black males should be considered a significant phenomenon in the educational pipeline, which has become a foundation that threatens their abilities to achieve academically (Whiting, 2009).

Given the social significance and the milestones achieved in gifted and talented education, there is an imbalance in the history of the program and in the identification of Black and other historically underserved students for placement in these programs. Since the 50th anniversary of the 1954 Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education, gifted programs throughout the U.S. public school system may be facilitating a hidden segregation agenda, given the overrepresentation of White students in these programs at the expense of the underrepresentation of African American and other underserved gifted students (Staiger, 2004). While being classified as gifted is not guaranteed to equate with academic success, Whiting (2009) and I (Michael-Chadwell, 2008) concluded that Black males are at a greater risk of not achieving academic success in comparison with other student groups.

Meier, Kohn, Darling-Hammond, Sizer, and Wood (2004) stated, “Children of color and children of the poor still do not fare as well in school as their wealthier, White counterparts” (p. viii). Documented research indicated that the traditional means of identifying giftedness inadvertently negated the intellectual capacities of Black students and especially males, thereby minimizing opportunities for selection into gifted programs (Bonner, 2005; Ford & Moore, 2005; Michael-Chadwell, 2008; Villarreal, 2004). When examining the nature of gifted programs as well as the identification and selection of students, consideration of this phenomenon in the context of a theoretical framework is necessary to understand its manifestation in the public education system, especially for Black males in P–12 urban school districts. While much of the discussion in this chapter does lend itself to issues of underrepresentation of students of color in gifted and talented programs, there appears to be a parallel to the plight and education of Black males in school settings. Given this perspective, the following theories serve as an interwoven framework to understand this phenomenon as well as its implications on the interactions of Black males in the classroom and external environments: the social dominance theory (SDT), critical race theory (CRT), and social cognitive theory.

Social Dominance Theory

Understanding the premise of the SDT could explain the continued acceptance of the underrepresentation of minority students in relation to the nomination process used to identify potentially gifted students (Cross & Cross, 2005). The hypothesis associated with the SDT was that social stability maintenance occurs when subordinate groups believe that dominant groups are deserving of a large proportion of “positive social value” (p. 22). In postmodern American society, the male classified as high socioeconomic status (SES) represents the dominant group according to these researchers. Given the environmental challenges Black males face in urban settings, the application of the SDT signals an immediate imbalance in society’s perceptions of race, readiness, and ability when compared with those of White males in higher SES income brackets.

When applying the context of the SDT to the public education system, certain dynamics affecting the relationship between the teacher and Black students cannot be ignored. Harmon (2002) implemented a qualitative study and interviewed gifted African American students regarding their perceptions of effective versus ineffective teachers. Harmon noted that “these students were bused from their predominantly African American neighborhood to desegregate a predominantly White school and then returned to their predominantly African American neighborhood after busing was dismantled” (p. 68). The development of interview questions for Harmon’s study focused on teacher efficacy in the following categories: teacher attitude, cultural competence, and student interactions. The implications of the study are that teachers will need to become more culturally competent as they work to meet the needs of African American students as well as diverse groups of students.

Obiakor (2004) contended that for the No Child Left Behind legislation to become successful, a “comprehensive support model [is required] that taps into the energies of students, families, schools, communities, and governments in the educational process” (p. 402). When considering the continuation of research on the disproportionate placement of Blacks in special and gifted programs in P–12 urban settings, Obiakor did not believe these children would become benefactors of this particular piece of legislation. Black males are overrepresented in special education programs, lose their motivation, and have a tendency to become disengaged from the educational process (Hargrove & Seay, 2011; Michael-Chadwell, 2008; Whiting, 2009). Although the rhetoric regarding the disproportionate placement of minorities in special and gifted programs continues, the deliberateness of enacting public policy to address these issues appears to go against the premise of the No Child Left Behind legislation (Obiakor, 2004). Similar to Obiakor’s contentions, Robinson (2005) and Strange (2005) determined that perceptions of resegregation within the public school system would continue to persist with the overrepresentation and underrepresentation of minorities in special programs.

When examining the SDT in the context of the dynamics of race-ethnic identity, research has determined a relationship between the shortage of Black teachers and the academic success of Black students in public schools (Berry, 2005; Mabokela & Madsen, 2003; White, 2002). As schools desegregated, White (2002) argued that Black students were no longer being “challenged academically” (p. 272). Berry noted when prospective White teachers enter U.S. schools, colleges, and departments of education, their personal experiences and views of themselves as well as the world around them affect how they teach. Yet, Black educators contended that they understood their “own kind better and that there were certain kinds of knowledge that were more easily transmitted by Black teachers to Black children” (White, 2002, p. 272).

Lintner (2004) professed, “Teachers are a conduit for the interpretation and perpetuation of racial stereotyping in schools” (p. 29). For that reason, a manifestation of biases or stereotypes in the classroom might be a result of social, economic, and political privileges inherently given to Whites (Bond, 2004; Lawrence, 1997; Lintner, 2004). A relationship between teachers endorsing the values and beliefs of mainstream society and the dilemma of the misidentification of Black students is likely (Obiakor, 2004). In an earlier study on teacher perceptions of students in a culturally diverse class, Obiakor (1999) noted researchers’ findings on the tendency of the teachers to respond more favorably to White students than to their culturally diverse counterparts. Obiakor, therefore, asserted that a continued misdiagnosis of the abilities and talents of Black students would have a diminishing effect on their self-esteem and self-efficacy. For Black males, there is a greater chance of this misdiagnosis, misidentification, and miseducation because of factors such as negative imaging and a lack of cultural understanding.

Teachers’ perceptions of culture-related identities are relevant to the educational successes of students (Ladson-Billings, 2006; Neal, McCray, Webb-Johnson, & Bridgest, 2003). In particular, Neal et al. contended, “African American students . . . benefit from a culturally responsive pedagogy” (p. 49). In relation to non-Black students, Neal et al. emphasized that the probability of experiencing academic achievement among Black students increases when they perceive that their teachers are culturally sensitive in their instructional delivery. Ladson-Billings (2006) asserted that Black students might experience a cultural separation in relation to the schooling process when faced with a cultural incongruency between home, community, and school. Smith, Atkins, and Connell (2003) documented similar observations regarding cultural separation between the individualistic ethos related to academic achievement in the public education system and a strong adherence to a racial-ethnic ethos adopted by certain youths.

Neal et al. (2003) noted that the misperceptions of teachers as well as their negative reactions to culturally conditioned behaviors could contribute to academic and social failure among culturally diverse students. For example, stylized movements are characteristic and central to Black males’ development, whereby these movements are an interchange of “movement, rhythm, percussion, music, and dance” (Neal et al., 2003, p. 50). Stereotypes associated with Black males’ adoption of postures symbolic of masculinity, pride, strength, and control might affect teachers’ expectations of their future behavior and academic successes; sometimes, teachers misconstrue these behaviors as related to emotional disturbance (Cullinan & Kauffman, 2005; Thomas, Townsend, & Belgrave, 2003).

Thomas et al. (2003) argued that Black males might resort to maintaining these stances either to hide feelings of rejection resulting from perceived and experienced injustices or to garner respect from teachers and peers. Similarly, Patten and Townsend (2001) reported that Black males remained vulnerable to ineffective instruction, underachievement, and being overrepresented in special programs for the learning challenged. Contingent on their use of Black English, teachers could either lower or raise their expectations of the academic abilities of these students (Neal et al., 2003), in particular regarding Black males.

Critical Race Theory

CRT addresses the historical suppression of Blacks, race and racism, and minimized self-empowerment (Gillborn, 2005; Hertzog, 2005; Saddler, 2005; Snipes & Waters, 2005); therefore, the theory postulates that the omnipresence of racism is a constant factor in the daily experiences of people of color (Hertzog, 2005). In the education environment, DeCuir and Dixson (2004) viewed CRT as a means of understanding social, assessment, power, discipline, and curriculum issues. Delpit (2003, 2006) argued issues of power become more prevalent as schools promote learning agendas based on the cultural constructs of White middle- and upper-class segments of society. Consequently, minority students might feel stereotypically threatened when challenged to demonstrate intellectual abilities that might confirm negative stereotypes, thereby hurting their academic performance (Lehrman, 2005).

Considerable discourse has occurred regarding the existence of achievement gaps between minority and White students in the U.S. public education system, with much of the attention focusing on the relationship between underrepresentation and underachievement (Snipes & Waters, 2005). If education leaders understood the premise of CRT, they could begin to develop praxis within their assigned learning communities to address issues of race and racism and the influences of such issues on how teachers view minority students’ abilities and potential (Lynn, 2006; Stovall, 2004). Saddler (2005) claimed CRT offers a powerful framework for reexamining the state of affairs in the current public education system.

In an examination of germinal theories on intelligence, Morris (2002) suggested psychological research subjectively legitimized the perception that the intelligence of Afr...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• FOREWORD
• OPEN LETTER (ABOUT BLACK MALES. . .)
• ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
• INTRODUCTION
• PART ONE: P–12 FRAMEWORKS AND MODELS
• PART TWO: POSTSECONDARY FRAMEWORKS AND MODELS
• AFTERWORD
• CONTRIBUTORS
• INDEX
• Add Page
• Back Cover