john a. powell

1
Equity and Access Thinking Transformatively
about Race and Opportunity

• john a. powell
• Director, Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race
  and Ethnicity
• Williams Chair in Civil Rights Civil Liberties,
  Moritz College of Law
• Presentation at the National Underground Railroad
  Freedom Center
• February 7, 2008

2
Presentation Overview

• Race
• Thinking about race transformatively
• Talking about race
• 4 common frames
• Affirmative Action
• Current bans and their impact
• Framing affirmative action
• Implementation gap
• Implicit bias / unconscious networks
• Race, Class, and Affirmative Action in Higher Ed
• Aligning missions and admissions
• A new way to measure merit

3
Thinking Talking About Race Transformatively
4
Defining Race

• As affirmative action becomes increasingly under
  attack, it is important to realize that how we
  conceptualize race is being contested.
• Race is a scientific fiction it is a social
  construction.
• Race-based interventions are seen as unfair
  because race is thought of as phenotype alone.

5
The Role of Class

• Class is thought to be a good proxy.
• Correlation between race and class
• Less controversial
• Class is complex and multidimensional.
• Difficult to define yet must be understood to be
  utilized most effectively
• The polarity is false. A class analysis cannot do
  the work of a race alone. We need to understand
  the relationship between race and class to
  understand either one.

6
Hesitancy to Talk about Race

• Most people do not know how to talk about race in
  constructive and transformative ways
• Reasons for the hesitancy include
• Fear of stigmatizing groups and creating
  self-fulfilling prophecies
• Concern about reinforcing negative stereotypes
• Avoidance of eliciting frames that create
  resistance to social-justice policy and encourage
  inter-group conflict
• Ignoring similar stresses of whites

7
Why We Need to Talk about Race

• To not talk about race is to talk about race.
• Race played a critical role in the creation and
  perpetuation of many social, political, and
  organizational structures that control the
  distribution of opportunities.
• Race affects all aspects of our lives
• Where we live, who our childrens friends are,
  what social programs we support, how we vote,
  etc.
• We must address race to understand the history of
  our nations democracy and the future well-being
  of its people.

8
Consequences of Not Talking about Race

• Masks racial disparities
• Reinforces (mis)perceptions of equality
• Decreases support for equitable interventions
• Diversity becomes less valued
• Continuation of color-blindness
• Forces us to rely on inadequate proxies, such as
  class
• Ignores symptoms that arrangements are
  functioning poorly for all- linked fate

9
Framing

• How messages are framed affects how they are
  perceived.
• Conversations about race and diversity must be
  honed to ensure that messages are effective.
• We need to start from the assumption that an
  awareness of racial disparities is fundamental to
  fostering race-conscious approaches to social
  justice policy.
• This is the first step in proactively achieving
  and maintaining diversity in our public
  institutions.

10
4 Frames Commonly Used When Discussing Race

• 1) Minimize the existence of disparities
• Examples
• Things may not be entirely equal, but its not
  nearly as bad as it used to be.
• The racial playing field is level.

Source Bonilla-Silva (2003) Racism Without
Racists Mazzocco (May 2006) The Dangers of Not
Talking About Race.
11
4 Frames Commonly Used When Discussing Race

• 2) Blame culture rather than societal structures
  or white privilege
• Examples
• Blacks are lazy and lack motivation.
• We get what we deserve in life. If some racial
  groups arent doing as well as others, people
  just need to work harder.

12
4 Frames Commonly Used When Discussing Race

• 3) Racial phenomena is natural
• Examples
• Racial segregation in housing is natural. After
  all, they prefer to live by themselves instead of
  interact with us.
• Theyd rather be with their own kind anyways.

13
4 Frames Commonly Used When Discussing Race

• 4) Focusing on individuals and their traits
  assumes that all are starting from the same
  position in society
• Examples
• We should all be judged as individuals based on
  our personal merits. No one should receive
  special privileges. Its not fair.
• People like Tiger Woods, George Lopez, and Oprah
  Winfrey are proof that anyone can be successful
  in America.

14
Challenging These Frames

• These frames are not easy to challenge,
  especially those that draw upon our national
  values of meritocracy and individuality.
• It is important to confront all four of these
  frames at the same time. Otherwise, people tend
  to just switch to a different frame rather than
  change their understanding of race.

15
Other Semantic Moves

• I am not racist, but.

• I kind of support and oppose. (views on
  affirmative action, interracial marriage, and
  other topics)

16
Thinking Transformatively about Race

• Transactional vs. Transformative
• Affirmative action is predicated on a
  transactional approach. It assists individuals
  but does not alter the larger system of
  structures.
• A transformative perspective changes the
  arrangement of societal structures and
  consequently alters relations to opportunity.

17
The Web of Opportunity

• Opportunities in our society are geographically
  distributed and often clustered throughout
  metropolitan areas.
• This creates winner and loser communities, or
  high and low opportunity communities
• Fair access to these opportunity structures is
  limited by various spatial arrangements and
  policies, such as sprawl, exclusionary zoning,
  and fragmentation

18
Connection Between Housing and Schools
High Opportunity
Low Opportunity
19
The Web of Opportunity

• Where you are situated within this web of
  opportunity plays a tremendous role in your life
  chances and outcomes.
• Where you live affects where you go to school
• Where you attend school affects the quality of
  the education you receive
• The quality of your education influences your
  ability to attain higher education
• The amount of education you receive affects what
  job you will work
• Your job determines that amount of income you
  earn
• Your income affects where you live

20
Color-blind/ Color-conscious Racism
Understanding of Disparities
Absent Minimal Declining
Present Extreme Persisting
Explanations for Disparities
OPPOSE AA
SUPPORT AA
Structural Historical Abnormal
Individual Cultural Normal
Solutions to Disparities
Color-Conscious
Color-Blind
21
Affirmative Action
22
Background

• Current affirmative action bans
• California Proposition 209 (1996)
• Washington Proposition I-200 (1998)
• Michigan Proposition 2 (2006)
• States with proposed affirmative action bans
  anticipated for the November 2008 ballot
• Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, Nebraska, and
  Oklahoma

23
The Role of Affirmative Action

• Affirmative action
• Addresses racial disparities
• Interrupts the cycle of poverty
• Responds to inequalities that stem from
  historical injustices and present-day structural
  impediments
• Ensures national security
• Provides a diverse and culturally competent
  workforce
• Creates more democratic institutions
• Works toward a legitimate democracy

24
The Benefits of Racial Diversity in Education

• Helps students avoid or overcome stereotypes by
  providing a range of experiences and viewpoints
  within a particular racial or ethnic group
• Promotes cross-cultural understanding and helps
  students develop interpersonal skills for a
  multiracial world
• Prepares students for a racially diverse
  workplace
• Trains and educates a diverse group of leaders
• Contributes to better decision making on issues
  affecting our multicultural society
• Fosters diversity among civic and business
  leaders.

Source Preserving Diversity in Higher
Education A Manual on Admissions Policies and
Procedures After the University of Michigan
Decisions. Compiled by the firms of Bingham
McCutcheon, Morrison Foerster, and Heller
Ehrman White McAuliffe. Equal Justice Society,
2004. ltwww.equaljusticesociety.org/compliancemanu
algt
25
The Impact of the Bans

• Need to move fast to preclude the devastating
  consequences of similar initiatives in
  California, Washington, and Michigan
• Following the passage 209 in California, African
  Americans at UCLA and Berkeley Law programs
  plummeted 80. Latinos dropped by 50 at
  Berkeley, and 25 at UCLA.
• UCLA saw the lowest levels of incoming African
  American freshman since 1973.

Source Killing Affirmative Action Would it
Really Result in a a better, more perfect union.
Available online at http//www.justicejournalism.
org/images/cose/Affirm_Final_PDF.pdf
26
The Impact of the Bans
27
Framing Affirmative Action

• Affirmative action is complex how it is framed
  impacts support
• Affirmative action has gained support over past
  10 years. In 1995, 58 supported it. In 2003, 63
  did.
• However, 42 felt it was unfair, and when the
  words preferential treatment were used, 72
  felt we should not make every effort to improve
  the position of blacks.

Source Pew Research Center. Conflicted Views of
Affirmative Action. Online http//people-press.or
g/reports/display.php3?ReportID184
28
Dissonance between ideas and practices

• The idea of affirmative action is gaining
  support, but it is losing in the electoral
  contests. Why?
• Implementation gap supporting an idea, but not
  the actual implementation thereof

Support of affirmative action programs
Support for the idea of affirmative action
GAP
29
The Implementation Gap

• A 1999 survey explored the racial attitudes of
  young Americans (ages of 18 - 29)
• A majority (54.5 percent) said that it was
  unlikely that the United States would elect a
  black president in the near future. In contrast,
  in the 1996 General Social Survey, 93.5 percent
  of those under the age of 30 said that they would
  vote for a black presidential candidate nominated
  by their party. This might suggest that while
  young Americans express rhetorical support for a
  black president, they know that their own
  attitudes and those of other Americans make such
  an eventuality unlikely.

http//www.hamilton.edu/news/polls/racesurvey/defa
ult.html
30
Bogardus Social Distance Scale

• Measures how willing people are to be in social
  contact with people of various groups/affiliations
  (such as different racial/ethnic groups, sexual
  orientations, religions, etc.)
• As close relatives by marriage
• As my close personal friends
• As neighbors on the same street
• As co-workers in the same occupation
• As citizens in my country
• As only visitors in my country
• Would exclude from my country

Supporting an idea - as long as its at a
comfortable distance
http//srmdc.net/chapter7/7.htm
31
Implicit Bias

• Data is complex, but so are people.
• We unconsciously think about race even when we do
  not explicitly discuss it.
• Implicit thoughts can overpower our explicit
  positions
• People have multiple networks that may be
  activated without our awareness.
• Depending on the situation, one network becomes
  dominant over the others

32
Implicit Bias

• Even though we may fight them, implicit biases
  reside within us.
• Often these biases are socially unacceptable or
  embarrassing, so we try to hide them.
  Nevertheless, our unconscious networks are still
  operating

33
Our Unconscious Networks

• What colors are the following lines of text?
• Vqeb peow ytro
• Cvur zxyq brrm
• Vhrn wwte zytn
• Xoc jbni oew mne
• Zre ytu vee mkp

34
Our Unconscious Networks

• What colors are the following lines of text?
• Red
• Blue
• Yellow
• Green
• Brown

35
Our Unconscious Networks

• What colors are the following lines of text?
• Sky
• Grass
• Dirt
• Sunshine
• Stop sign

36
Our Unconscious Networks

• What colors are the following lines of text?
• Dirt
• Sunshine
• Sky
• Grass
• Stop sign

37
Our Unconscious Networks

• What colors are the following lines of text?
• Green
• Blue
• Brown
• Red
• Yellow

38
Priming

• Our environment affects our unconscious networks.
• Priming activates mental associations.
• Telling someone a scary story activates a frame
  of fear
• Claude Steeles stereotype threat
• For example, tell students about to take a test
  that Asian students tend to do better than
  whites, the whites will perform significantly
  worse than if they had not been primed to think
  of themselves as less capable than Asians.

http//www.eaop.ucla.edu/0405/Ed18520-Spring05/We
ek_6_May9_2005.pdf
39
Race and Class in Higher Ed
40
Admissions

• Higher education currently relies on meritocracy,
  using indicators such as GPA and SAT scores to
  quantify individual ability and predict potential
• This is predominantly accepted as being
• Objective
• Valid
• Legitimate
• Natural

41
Racialization of Standardized Measurements

• This is problematic because these measurements
  are racialized.
• GPA depends on school
• AP/5.0 classes are predominantly in middle-class,
  white schools
• SAT results racially disparate - stronger
  predictor of family income
• There is also a hidden assumption that these
  measurements are aligned with a schools greater
  goals and objectives.

42
Aligning Missions and Admissions

• Instead schools should start with their goals and
  work backwards to achieve them.
• What constitutes a good student?
• Grades?
• Career success?
• Degree to which their career is financially or
  emotionally rewarding?
• Whether they give back to their alma mater and/or
  the greater community?
• If merit is based on what we value, what does the
  way we measure merit say about our values?
• Do we value standardized test performance, or
  democracy?
• What is given the most weight in admissions?
  Curriculum?
• Is individual success more important than group?
  Can both be achieved?

43
Transitioning from Individualistic Merit

• The way merit is currently used is
  individualistic.
• This is problematic because cumulative
  disadvantage is based upon group identity- race.
• Limitations of individualistic merit
• Reinforces myth of the American dream (hard
  work ? success) stigmatizes those who do not
  succeed
• Marginalized groups do not benefit from a few
  members being given preference- need
  interventions that lift up group collectively

44

Democratic Merit

• Rather than awarding past achievements,
  democratic merit invests in the democratic
  potential of individuals.
• Admissions practices must confer rewards to those
  who will create a more just, more democratic
  society
• Multi-dimensional It involves the alignment of
  the doing of democracy with the creation of
  democratic citizens.
• Inclusive and diverse schools create bonds
  between individuals and the larger community that
  encourage democratic participation.

45
Aligning Missions and Admissions

• The matter of who should get into any institution
  cannot be separated from the question of what
  that institution hopes to accomplish.
• If diversity and citizenship is a goal, consider
  alternatives to achieve
• Democratic/citizenship merit
• Indiana 21st Century Scholars
• Reward those who will give back to the community

46
Recognizing the Idea of Democratic Merit

• The core purpose of the University of Texas
  Austin is to transform lives for the benefit of
  society.
• UC-Berkeley Among the admissions criteria,
  evaluators look for students who will make a
  special contribution to our society and culture.

47
Aligning Missions and Admissions

• Caution must be taken with admissions policies
  because many are thought to do the work of race,
  but fall short.
• When using class as a proxy, the number of
  students of color drops. Explanations
• Low-income threshold set too high
• Previous beneficiaries of affirmative action may
  not have been low income
• Poverty is experienced differently depending on
  race low-income white students significantly
  outperform Black and Latino/a students
• Household income may not be the best measure of
  economic disadvantage
• Already reduced applicant pool

48
Aligning Missions and Admissions

• Class fails to account for the cumulative effect
  of factors that act as gatekeepers for people of
  color
• Segregated in high-poverty, low performing
  schools
• Higher drop/push out rates
• Less willing to going into debt with school loans
  
• Inadequate/little assistance in application
  process
• Racialized admissions policies

49
Summary
50
Next Steps

• The passing of amendments and initiatives that
  ban affirmative action sets potentially dangerous
  precedents for other states.
• We need to embrace the opportunities
• Act on race in transformative ways
• Individual merit ? Democratic merit
• This is broad discussion is more challenging, but
  more fruitful.

51
Linked FatesTransformative Change

• Our fates are linked, yet our fates have been
  socially constructed as disconnected (especially
  through the categories of class, race, gender,
  etc.)
• We need socially constructed bridges to
  transform our society
• Conceive of an individual as connected toinstead
  of isolated fromthy neighbor

52
Questions or Comments? For More Information
Visit Us On-Linewww.KirwanInstitute.org
53
Appendix
54
The Miners Canary
Understanding Disparities
55
Causes and Perpetuation of Disparities

• Historical factors. Discrimination through
• Slavery
• Jim Crowe
• de jure segregation
• Redlining
• The New Deal
• Present day factors. Disparities in
• Public education
• Housing
• Healthcare
• Wealth disparities
• Crime criminal justice

56
Model for Disparate Outcomes
Historically
Today
Biased Structures
De Jure Neutral Structures
What is occurring here to replicate the outcomes
today?
Disparate Outcomes
Disparate Outcomes
Individuals/ Culture
Structures/ Opportunity
57
Attribution of disparities

• Dominant public paradigms explaining disparities
  bad apples
• Defective culture
• Individual faults
• Personal Racism
• Overlooks policies and
• arrangements diseased tree
• Structures
• Institutions
• Cumulative causation

58
Illustration of Cumulative Causation Higher
Education

• The present paradigm of bad apples leads many
  to believe that higher education is equally
  accessible to all
• External factors that affect access to higher
  education
• Availability and quality of healthcare throughout
  childhood, extending back to prenatal care
• Access to preschool
• Neighborhood effects lead, asthma, high-stress
  environments
• Family environment
• Neighborhood resources libraries, community
  centers
• Nutrition
• Resources available to the public school
• Schools concentration of high-poverty students
• These combined institutions create a web of
  oppression that is more than the sum of the
  individual parts

59
The Role of Housing

• At the core of these issues is housing
• Housing is critical in determining access to
  opportunity

60
Racialization of Poverty

• African Americans are disproportionately
  concentrated in low-opportunity neighborhoods
• The racial composition of neighborhoods
  determines the racial balance in schools, hence
  segregation
• School segregation has been steadily increasing
  in the 90s2
• Half of all African American students attend a
  central city district
• Only 1 in 6 white students does

Source 1. Determinants of Residential Location
Choice How Important Are Local Public Goods in
Attracting Homeowners to Central City Locations?
Isaac Bayoh, Elena G. Irwin, Timothy Haab 2.
David Rusk. Trends in School Segregation in
Divided we Fail Coming Together through Public
School Choice. The Report of the Century
Foundation Task Force on the Common School. 2002.
61
The Link between Racial Economic Segregation

• Strong correlation nearly all schools with a
  majority of students of color are high poverty
• The average White student attends a school with
  student poverty ranging from 23-30
• For the average African American student, school
  poverty ranges from 61-78
• The level of concentrated poverty is associated
  with the quality of the school

62
But isnt it getting better?

• Many feel that this racialization of concentrated
  poverty has improved in recent years.
• In 1960, African-American families in poverty
  were 3.8 times more likely to be concentrated in
  high-poverty neighborhoods than poor whites.
• In 2000, they were 7.3 times more likely.

Fact Sheet from the Opportunity Agenda, Housing
Neighborhoods and Opportunity. http//www.opportun
ityagenda.org/site/c.mwL5KkN0LvH/b.1433711/k.B7BA/
Housing_Fact_Sheet.htm
63
Effect of Disparities Contradict American Ideals

• REPRESENTATION Public institutions do not
  reflect their constituents
• EQUALITY A race-based social hierarchy
  predominates
• NON-DISCRIMINATION Unresolved tensions between
  the public ideal (colorblindness) and reality
  (disparities)
• CITIZENSHIP Membership in society conferred
  unequally
• OPPORTUNITY Dominant ideologies in America such
  as open opportunity and individualism are hollow
• FREEDOM People in poverty cannot fully exercise
  their freedoms
• DEMOCRACY Cumulatively these represent an
  ILLEGITIMATE DEMOCRACY
• These contradictions must be communicated to
  the public

64
Moving Forward The Impact on Higher Education
65
Moving Forward in the Social/Political Environment

• Although not an ideal social/political climate,
  this is a unique opportunity for higher
  education
• Colleges and universities have been defending
  diversity for decades, but not enough has been
  done for race or socioeconomic bases
• Attacks on affirmative action/diversity provide
  an opportunity to shift from a reactive to a
  proactive agenda
• Need short, medium and long term strategies

66
Short, Medium, Long Term Strategies

• Short Term
• Act quickly to develop policies that ensure a
  racially diverse campus.
• Continue building public support for diversity
• Meet collaborate with universities/states/stakeh
  olders
• Medium Long Term
• Develop ongoing research and data collection
  plans to understand the full effects of these
  bans
• Broaden and challenge the meaning of merit
• Revisit the universitys vision and mission, and
  ensure policies and practices are in alignment
• Bakke and societal discrimination/racial justice

67
Looking Ahead in Higher Education

• There are four primary areas for higher education
  to consider
• Outreach
• Recruitment
• Admissions
• Retention

68
Outreach

• To ensure a highly qualified and diverse
  applicant pool, higher education must increase
  outreach efforts to high-poverty schools and
  communities
• Creating or expanding mentoring/tutoring support
  and summer programs
• Providing support to and partnering with
  community organizations
• Advocating for education reform and working to
  build a more equitable P-12 system

69
Recruitment

• After Initiative 200, the percentage of African
  Americans at the University of Washington
  decreased as a result in a decline in application
  rates.
• Schools must prepare for being perceived as an
  unwelcoming, exclusive environment.
• The discouragement effect (Weirzbicki and
  Hirschman)
• Schools should be proactive about emphasizing
  their commitment to inclusion and diversity,
  particularly when doing outreach to potential
  students.
• Revised admissions policies could also counteract
  this chilling effect.

70
Retention

• The work of creating a diverse institution does
  not stop with the demographic composition of the
  student body.
• Diversity is a transformative goal, not solely a
  numerical one.
• Harnessing the genuine benefits of diversity
  within and across an institution is a challenge.
• Teachers, administrators and staff must share the
  goal and be culturally competent.
• Teachers must have the skills and knowledge to
  create a safe, supportive, and inclusive space.

71
(No Transcript)
72
(No Transcript)
73
(No Transcript)
74
(No Transcript)
75
Alternative Approaches
Source Created from Rose, S.J., Carnevale, A.P.
(2003). Socioeconomic Status, Race/Ethnicity, and
Selective College Admissions. Available online
at http//www.tcf.org/Publications/Education/carn
evale_rose.pdf
76
Alternative Admissions Policies

• Cooper, K. J. (1999). Admissions models for
  inclusion. Black Issues in Higher Education,
  16(18), 3435.
• Lewin, T. (January 26, 2007). Colleges Regroup
  After Voters Ban Race Preferences. New York
  Times.
• Moses, M.S., Marin, P. (2006). Informing the
  Debate on Race Conscious Education Policy.
  Educational Researcher 35, no.1. 3-5.
• Rose, S.J., Carnevale, A.P. (2003). Socioeconomic
  Status, Race/Ethnicity, and Selective College
  Admissions. Available online at
  http//www.tcf.org/Publications/Education/carneval
  e_rose.pdf
• Schmidt, P. (November 2, 2006) Educational
  Testing Service Accused Of Suppressing Research
  On An Alternative Affirmative Action. The
  Chronicle of Higher Education.
• Sternberg, R. (2005). Accomplishing the Goals of
  Affirmative Action With or Without Affirmative
  Action. Change.
• U.S. Department of Education. Race-Neutral
  Alternatives in Postsecondary Education
  Innovative Approaches to Diversity. Available
  online http//www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/e
  dlite-raceneutralreport.html

77
Merit

• Baez, B. (2006). Merit and difference. Teachers
  College Record, 108(6), 996-1016.
• Guinier, L. (2003). Admissions rituals as
  political acts Guardians at the gates of our
  democratic ideals. Harvard Law Review, 117, 113.
• Hendrickson, R. (2001). Rethinking affirmative
  action Redefining compelling state interest and
  merit in admission. Peabody Journal of Education,
  76 (1).
• Simpson, E., Wendling, K. (2005). Equality and
  Merit A Merit-based argument for Equity Policies
  in Higher Education. Educational Theory. 55(4).
  385-398.
• St. John, E. P., Simmons, A. B., Musoba, G. D.
  (2002). Merit-aware admissions in public
  universities Increasing diversity. Thought
  Action, 17(2), 35-46.

78
Benefits of Diversity

• Astin, A. Diversity and multiculturalism on the
  campus How are students affected? Change. v25 n2
  p44-49 Mar-Apr 1993
• Chang, M.J. Astin, A.W. (1997). Who benefits
  from racial diversity in higher education?
  Diversity Digest, 1(2),13,16.
• Chang, M. J., Whitt, D., Jones, J., Hakuta, K.
  (2003). Compelling interest Examining the
  evidence on racial dynamics in colleges and
  universities. Stanford, CA Stanford University
  Press.
• Gurin, P. Y. (1998). Expert witness report of
  Patricia Y. Gurin, in Gratz et al. v. Bollinger
  et al., No. 9775321 (E.D. Mich). Ann Arbor The
  University of Michigan.
• Gurin, P., Dey, E. L., Hurtado, S., Gurin, G.
  (2002). Diversity and higher education Theory
  and impact on educational outcomes. Harvard
  Educational Review, 72(3), 330366.
• Moses, M.S. Chang, M.J. (2006), Toward a deeper
  understanding of the diversity rationale,
  Educational Researcher, 35(1), January/ February,
  American Educational Research Association (AERA),
  Washington DC.
• Preserving Diversity in Higher Education A
  Manual on Admissions Policies and Procedures
  After the University of Michigan Decisions.
  Compiled by the firms of Bingham McCutcheon,
  Morrison Foerster, and Heller Ehrman White
  McAuliffe. Equal Justice Society, 2004.
  ltwww.equaljusticesociety.org/compliancemanualgt
• Wells, A. S., Crain, R. L. (1994). Perpetuation
  theory and the long-term effects of school
  desegregation. Review of Educational Research,
  64, 531556.
• Yun, J.T. Kurlaender, M. (2004). School Racial
  Composition and Student Educational Aspirations
  A Question of Equity in a Multiracial Society.
  Journal for Students Placed at Risk. 9(2).
  143-168.

79
Talking About Race

• Center for Social Inclusion. 2005. Thinking
  Change Race, Framing and the Public Conversation
  on Diversity. What Social Science Tells Advocates
  About Winning Support for Racial Justice
  Policies. The Diversity Advancement Project.
  Available online http//www.diversityadvancementp
  roject.org/media/ThinkingChange.pdf
• Kirwan Institute UPdate. Fall 2006/Winter 2007.
  Available online http//www.kirwaninstitute.org/p
  ublications/newsletters/Kirwan_Update_au06wi07.pdf
  
• Mazzocco, P.J. (2006). The Dangers of Not
  Speaking about Race A summary of research
  affirming the merits of a color-conscious
  approach to racial communication and equity.
  Available from the Kirwan Institute.
• Mazzocco, P.J. Newhart, D.W. (2006).
  Color-blind racism and opposition to progressive
  racial policy A new scale and supportive
  findings. Unpublished manuscript (available upon
  request).
• Pew Research Center for People and the Press.
  2003. Conflicted Views of Affirmative Action.
  Online http//people-press.org/reports/display.ph
  p3?ReportID184