White Male Professor Research Articles

Censoring and punishing free speech is unethical: Reply to Jackson (2022) and Smith (2022).

The ethically proper response to problematic speech is more speech and not censorship. To the extent that Jackson (2022) and Smith (2022) advocate for all to be able to criticize all, for example, for unempowered undergraduates to criticize privileged White male professors or for anyone to criticize racist or hate speech, we are in agreement. The speech involved in criticism can be risky and hence ought to be protected by the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (American Psychological Association, 2017). However, except in very circumscribed circumstances, to the extent that Jackson or Smith advocate for acts such as the suppression, censorship, or punishment of speech, we are in disagreement. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Epistemologically Privileging Anger: Living with Cracked Containers in Feminist Scholarship

Epistemologically Privileging AngerLiving with Cracked Containers in Feminist Scholarship Sarojini Nadar (bio) I started writing this response to the question of systemic racism within the Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion (JFSR) around the same time that I made a decision to lay a formal complaint of academic harassment and bullying against a senior white male professor who has consistently directed several microaggressions toward my scholarly authority since I joined the institution in 2016. These microaggressions range from asking me to just be the “face of a conference” to harassing me to such an extent that I eventually withdrew my keynote lecture from the conference. The straw that broke the camel’s back was his unilateral decision that another colleague (presumably he himself or the junior male colleague he was copying in) should offer me their expertise in guiding a doctoral candidate who made an application to register for a PhD in the area of queer ecclesiology. Apparently, I needed academic hand-holding, despite the fact that I hold a prestigious research chair in religion and social justice, and my résumé contains ample evidence of two decades of transdisciplinary expertise including publications, teaching, and graduate supervision directly in this area. When I objected, he flexed his hegemonic disciplinary muscle through repeated email correspondence, and when I candidly called upon him to own up to his prejudice, he resorted to gaslighting and pretended that he did not understand where my questions were coming from. He cloaked his prejudice in terms of acting “in the best interests of the student.” After a few exasperating exchanges, I eventually notified him that I would be laying a formal complaint against him and copied in the dean. He quite quickly changed his mind and approved me as a supervisor of the project, while also inserting into the email how “deeply saddened” my allegations made him. I still insisted on the intervention because I believe that in calling out the white and male supremacy that hides behind the “best interests” claim, I will make visible the ways in which regulatory disciplinary [End Page 59] power is exercised in the everyday lived experiences of women of color in the academy. Calling attention to the material effects of multiple unhealthy operations of power on Black women’s bodies is important Black feminist work, as my colleague Megan Robertson and I noted in a recent special issue of essays honoring the late Katie Geneva Cannon.1 And so, I come to this piece still reeling from the effects of this epistemic and emotional violence, while preparing for a mediation meeting in the next week. The insomnia-generating, ulcer-inducing effects of my interactions were viscerally present in my body as I read Judith Plaskow’s many reflective questions posed in this roundtable. The confines of a response paper do not permit an expanded discussion, so I want to offer just one key reflection on the subject of Black women’s anger, with the hope that the reflections will galvanize larger conversations. Referring to an incident where she publicly called out a Black colleague whom she “perceived as guilty of Christian hegemony,” and to the subsequent collective anger of Black women in that space, Plaskow raises a question: “[How is it] possible to be a Black person in this country and not be in a continual rage[?]” (7). Transfer this question to South Africa, with our history of institutionalized and sustained systemic racism, and the answer is simple: it is virtually impossible. Despite acknowledging the validity of rage as a response, Plaskow still makes the following disclaimer: “I do not think it is an abdication of my own responsibility, however, to say that the anger directed at me was larger than my transgression” (6). Reading from my body in this moment, I do actually think it is an abdication of responsibility to make such a disclaimer. There is a well-documented concern expressed repeatedly by women of color about how they are driven to moments of rage which kill their spirits and sometimes even their bodies. When Black women find their voices in academia, only for them to be silenced or killed by a white and patriarchal academy...

The Field Experience as a Potential Barrier to Underrepresented Minority Student Participation in Ecological Sciences

The Field Experience as a Potential Barrier to Underrepresented Minority Student Participation in Ecological Sciences

Two decades of little change: An analysis of U.S. medical school basic science faculty by sex, race/ethnicity, andacademic rank.

To examine changes in U.S. medical school basic science faculty over the last 20 years (1998–2018), we undertook an observational study utilizing data from the American Association of Medical Colleges Faculty Roster. Rank (Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor), sex (Female), and race/ethnicity (Asian, Black or African American, Hispanic, Latino, Spanish Origin, or Multiple Race-Hispanic, and White) were analyzed; this reflected a population of 14,047 (1998) to 18,601 (2018) faculty. Summary percent of faculty in various gender, race/ethnicity origin categories were analyzed across years of the study using regression models. We found that females (24.47% to 35.32%) were underrepresented at all timepoints and a minority of faculty identified as Black or African American (1.57% to 1.99%), Hispanic, Latino, Spanish Origin, or Multiple Race-Hispanic (3.03% to 4.44%), or Asian (10.90% to 20.41%). The largest population at all time points was White Male Professors (30.53% to 20.85%), followed by White Male Associate Professors (15.67% to 9.34%), and White Male Assistant Professors (13.22% to 9.75%). Small statistically significant increases were observed among female faculty and faculty at multiple ranks who identified as Black or African American or Hispanic, Latino, Spanish Origin, or Multiple Race-Hispanic. We then completed secondary analyses looking at the interaction of race/ethnicity and Gender. We found: (1) a significant increase (p<0.0001) in both genders who identify as Asian although males had a higher rate of increase (6 point difference, p<0.0001); (2) a significant increase for Black or African American females (P<0.01) not found among males; (3) significant increases (p<0.0001) among both genders of faculty who identify as Hispanic, Latino, Spanish Origin, or Multiple Race-Hispanic although females had an approximately 1% higher rate of increase; and (4) among faculty who identify as White, males had a significant decrease (p<0.0001) while females demonstrated an increase (p<0.0001).

The Chair's Role in Leveraging Multigenerational Workforce Strategies in Times of Crisis

The Chair's Role in Leveraging Multigenerational Workforce Strategies in Times of Crisis

Branching out as a mentor.

Two years ago, the vice president for student life at my university asked me to serve as a faculty adviser of a student group. I enjoy mentoring and have worked with a number of student groups over the years, but this offer was different. The group—called Brother 2 Brother (B2B)—is largely composed of African American and Latino students. It has a good reputation for fostering a supportive environment for male students who find themselves in the minority in virtually every other situation they encounter across campus. But I was reluctant to get involved because I didn't see myself as the right person for the job. What would a 52-year-old white male professor raised in largely white northern Appalachia have to offer? > “The students have taught me to see the world through a different lens.” It wasn't the first time the administrator, who founded B2B, asked me to get involved. Previously, I had always declined, thinking that the job would be better left to someone whose background was more similar to that of the group members. Plus, I wasn't sure I could fit it in my schedule. This time, though, with the administrator heading off to a different university and the current faculty adviser in poor health, I felt I couldn't say no. I knew from the beginning that I needed to earn the right to be listened to—that my age, rank, and background would discourage openness. I spent roughly 1 year paying dues—simply being present, listening, and trying to be helpful—before the students began to see me as worthy of trust. The first few meetings were especially awkward. I was clearly the outsider—that out-of-place white dude sitting in the corner. The students shot me looks indicating they were wondering why I was there. During the first year, I only managed to develop a few connections. It was a little disheartening, but I stuck with it because I had made a commitment and no one stepped up to take my place. I'm glad I continued to work with the group, because in year two the students started to open up to me with questions and problems. There was little overlap between my rural upbringing and my students' largely urban backgrounds, but we bonded by discussing shared elements of our college experience: crummy jobs, financial aid issues, classroom experiences, music, sports, and the horrors of cafeteria food. I did my best to help when they came to me with problems, even when I couldn't solve them myself. For example, one undergraduate student explained that he was having difficulty getting assistance from his academic adviser. I knew the faculty member, and I also knew he wasn't considered to be the best mentor. So I connected the student with another adviser, someone who always has time for students and is willing to problem-solve. I've also given group members tips about how to study and where to go on campus to troubleshoot administrative and academic issues. I didn't do anything most faculty couldn't do; the difference was that I was in the room to listen and provide advice. My interactions with the B2B students have, honestly, been a highlight of my career—not only because I feel like I'm doing something worthwhile, but also because of what I've learned. The students have taught me to see the world through a different lens. They have given me a better understanding of the experiences of people of color—which, I believe, has strengthened my cultural competence and my ability to interact with others on a more meaningful level. And in the process, I've made new friends. I encourage my fellow faculty members to get involved in programs such as B2B, even if you're not a member of an underrepresented group. It requires patience and time; it can be challenging, but it's also rewarding and fun. What's more, you'll help ease the service burden carried by our minority colleagues, work that is often invisible to white faculty and staff.

Do Law Schools Oppress Minority Faculty Women? A Critique of Meera E. Deo, 'Unequal Profession: Race and Gender in Legal Academia' (Stanford 2019)

In our highly polarized political environment, race and gender issues have come to pervade and then agitate our formerly staid academic world. Some of the literature is angry, much of it is self-righteous; a public letter already signed by 153 scholars, artists and social critics of all colors and soon to be published in Harper’s, underscores the latter point. Query: Is the race and gender talk genuine? More specifically, are white male professors responsible for the professed unhappiness of their minority women colleagues? If so, can such men be trusted to help defuse tensions? This essay specifically tests Professor Meera Deo's assertion that “implicit bias” in law schools is holding minority female (and to a lesser extent male) faculty back. It then considers her second and more provocative claim, that minority faculty can generally offer better training in “solving complex problems.” (“Unequal Profession: Race and Gender in Legal Academia.” (Stanford UP (2019)). Regarding the former claim, Deo’s explains that minority women are not hired according to fair standards, not welcomed when they are hired, and not fairly evaluated for promotion. In addition, she argues, minority women professors are abused by their students. Because Deo barely tries to substantiate the second claim, it is dealt with only briefly in this essay. The finding here is that the principal claim is not proven. Close analysis of its components, along with Deo’s own statistics, bears out that for all of society’s failures to establish full equality, our overwhelmingly liberal law faculties offer far more equitable treatment than Deo acknowledges. Deo is to be commended for dealing with an issue close to the heart of academic life today. In pitting race and gender groups against one another, however, Deo does unnecessary damage to our self-understanding and sense of well-being.

One flew over the duck pond: Autoethnography, academic identity, and language

Autoethnography is about studying a community through the author’s personal experience. I offer my autoethnography of moving from a Finnish-speaking business school to a Swedish-speaking one in Helsinki, Finland. This is my story as a Finnish speaker who works in English, develops a sense of lack and guilt for not contributing in Swedish, and enacts an identity of an outsider in his community. My ambivalent identity work as a privileged yet increasingly anxious white male professor elucidates connections between identity, language, and power, and it may enable me to see glimpses of what those who are truly marginalized and excluded experience. I argue that academic identity is based on language, and once that foundation is shaken, it can trigger self-reflection that helps to show how language is inevitably tied in with complex power relations in organizations. I offer my story as an invitation to discuss how we learn to deal with the complexity of identity work and language. My story lays bare how autoethnographies by the privileged, too, can be useful if they show the vulnerability we all experience in contemporary universities.

Framing and source effects on White college students' reactions to racial inequity information.

This study addressed: (a) Do professors' race/ethnicity and the race-related inequity information they present influence students' evaluations of the professors, acknowledgment of racial inequity, or motivation to respond without prejudice (MRWP)? (b) Do collective guilt and students' evaluations of professors mediate these relationships? White American undergraduate students (N = 614, 66.3% females, 64.7% first year, mean age of 19.3 years [age SD = 1.5]) completed an anonymous online survey. Students imagined they were taking a racial diversity course with either a Black or a White male professor who presented either White privilege or Black disadvantage statements. Participants then completed surveys that assessed their evaluations of the professor, collective guilt, beliefs regarding racial inequity, and MRWP. Students evaluated White professors as having lower expertise, learning conduciveness, and warmth/intelligence but rated Black professors as more biased. Consistent with the inequality-framing model, intergroup sensitivity effect (ISE), and findings from prejudice confrontation research, White professors induced greater acknowledgment of racial inequity when they discussed White privilege rather than Black disadvantage. But, Black professors induced more external MRWP when they presented White privilege rather than Black disadvantage. Students' perceptions of the professors' warmth/intelligence determined the effectiveness of the inequity message while perceptions of the professors' expertise, judgmental, and conduciveness to learning determined students' concerns about appearing prejudiced. The presenters' race/ethnicity and how they frame racial inequity information affect students' evaluation of the presenters, the message effectiveness, and students' external MRWP. (PsycINFO Database Record

Identity Complex: Making the Case for Multiplicity by Michael Hames-García, and: Triangulations: Narrative Strategies for Navigating Latino Identity by David J. Vázquez (review)

Reviewed by: Identity Complex: Making the Case for Multiplicity by Michael Hames-García, and: Triangulations: Narrative Strategies for Navigating Latino Identity by David J. Vázquez Maria Damon Identity Complex: Making the Case for Multiplicity. By Michael Hames-García. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2011. 223 pages, $25.00 Triangulations: Narrative Strategies for Navigating Latino Identity. By David J. Vázquez. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2011. 246 pages, $25.00 Two new books from the prominent University of Minnesota Press, known for its TLH (theory/literature/history) series and its current profile in queer, new media, and other forward-edge topics, address the complexities of contemporary identity with a (non-exclusive) emphasis on Latino/a identity. They do so with different analytical tools and to different ends. Identities are proximate, there is kinship, there is complementarity, but there is crucial difference, too; a difference-within-solidarity that the authors and their respective projects celebrate implicitly. Together, the works enact a sound one-two counter-assault on the current backlash against ethnic studies and intellectual labor on the part of and behalf of the disenfranchised. Michael Hames-García’s Identity Complex: Making the Case for Multiplicity joins the growing canon of queer-of-color scholarship, which seeks to displace white male heterosexual universalism as the normative subjectivity from which all subsequent ethics and epistemology are deduced. This volume is a thoughtful, philosophically inflected investigation into a range of identity-rich scenarios. Using feminist standpoint theory and intersectionality as his guiding analytical structures, Hames-García explores a series of (as promised) complex scenarios telegraphed by his chapter titles, which are all, appropriately, posed in the form of questions: “Who Are Our Own People?” “How Real Is Race?” “Are Sexual Identities Desirable?” “Do Prisons Make Better Men?” before concluding with a descriptor, “Reflections on Identity in the Obama Era.” The interrogative mode fits this searching, conversational, deliberative book, which elegantly blends personal and journalistic anecdote, analytic acumen, and on-the-ground inquiries into what matters and how it matters when one tries to understand a densely significant social phenomenon. The first question/chapter sets out the author’s own identity(ies) within the first paragraph—professor, gay man, Latino, “activist-scholar” (1)—in the context of an anecdote about being asked to join a senior, white male professor in teaching in a prison that results in a conversation with the prisoners about gay and lesbian sexuality. Hames-García uses his conflicting feelings of anxiety, anticipation, and engagement as an opportunity to ask how he is and is not like his students that evening, how they are and are not like each other, and how they—or anyone who embodies multiple axes of identification—identify or not with a host of cross-cutting identities that interact within and among each member [End Page 424] of a group. Also taken up is Michael Nava’s 1994 novel Hidden Law. Finally, Hames-García turns to the House of Color, a 1990s video collective of queers of color, as an example of talking back to the institutional disempowerment of fragmenting these multiple identities (sexuality, gender, class, ethnicity, etc.) by developing means of communicating and making art—notably a project titled I Object that plays on resistance, subjectivity, and objectification—that challenge attempts to simplify group experience and undermine potential solidarity. Subsequent chapters likewise play out complex scenes of identification and disidentification using powerfully condensed moments of focus: one especially affective such moment is the dynamic opening of “Are Sexual Identities Desirable?” which tells of the murder of an Iraqi private by a Mexican American private in the US Army around a possible queer encounter and the fraught investigation that followed. An impressively wide range of materials—media productions such as television shows (“Do Prisons Make Better Men?” juxtaposes a close reading of an HBO fiction series on life in a men’s prison with grim and still-astonishing statistics about the growing number of incarcerated men of color in the United States), literary works, personal observation and anecdote—are considered with an equally impressive sense of genuine interlocution with contemporary philosophical conversations. Throughout, Hames-García conscientiously cites his intellectual...

Twentieth-century theologians: a new introduction to modern Christian thought

One needs to be a lunatic to become a Christian, the 19th century Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard once observed. Had he lived in the 20th century he might have discerned even more of an obstacle to faith. For during the last century the human condition changed more rapidly than during any previous era, taking that condition far away from the historical circumstances in which Christianity was born. In his new book, Philip Kennedy explores the ways Christian theologians of the 20th century tried to live a productive religious life in a world overtaken by massive upheaval and innovation.The book is distinctive in a number of respects. First, it differs from other surveys of theology by adopting a biographical method, examining the lives of its subjects in historical context. Second, it is more progressive than its competitors, covering many theologians other than white male professors - especially women - who have worked outside the academy or on the margins of the churches. Third, it is international, focusing on theologians in all the continents of the world rather than just Europe or North America. Fourth, it makes no assumptions that its readers are religious or that theology is uniquely credible. There is a need for a sensitive new textbook reassessing the subject in the light of modern concerns and scepticism about religion. This book meets that need.

Different Worlds and Divergent Paths: Academic Careers Defined by Race and Gender

In this article, Juanita Johnson-Bailey, a Black female professor, and Ronald M. Cervero, a White male professor, examine and contrast their academic lives by exploring how race and gender have influenced their journeys and their experiences. Using journal excerpts, personal examples, and a comparative list of privileges, the authors present a picture of their different realities at a research university. The depiction of their collective forty years in academia reveals that White men and Black women are regarded and treated differently by colleagues and students. Manifestations of this disparate treatment are evident primarily in classroom and faculty interactions. An examination of the professors' relationships with people and with their institution illustrates that, overall, the Black woman is often relegated to a second-class existence characterized by hostility, isolation, and lack of respect, while the White man lives an ideal academic life as a respected scholar who disseminates knowledge, understands complexity, and embodies objectivity.

Gaining Voice through Silence

For educators striving to create an egalitarian classroom based on open, reflexive, and honest dialogue, silence can be the ultimate obstacle. Not only does silence stifle individual expression; more importantly, silence also prevents the collective production of knowledge, understanding, compassion, and empathy. When learners and teachers feel inhibited to give voice to their experiences, when they feel uncomfortable naming their world to others, when they worry about the interpersonal repercussions of contributing to the discourse, the possibility of the classroom as a site of personal and social transformation suffers. As a teacher committed to critical and feminist pedagogy, I am continually seeking ways to break the silence of the classroom. I strive to create learning strategies that offer all students a safe space to voice their views and share their experiences. This is especially important because I teach sociology classes that center on the matrices of oppression: gender, race, class, sexuality, ability, religion, etc. Moreover, as a white male professor I recognize the need to de-center the structural authority and privilege that I bring to the classroom. Cultivating a learning environment where all students feel comfortable exploring these potentially explosive issues is a pre-condition for achieving my pedagogical goals. One strategy that I have been using for the past few years is the Silent Discussion. On days when we do this exercise I give students a handout with the following instructions:

Mentoring in black and white: the intricacies of cross‐cultural mentoring

Cross‐cultural mentoring relationships can be sites of struggle around the issues of race, class and gender. In addition, the mentor/protégé relationship offers micro‐cosmic insight into power relations within western society. The authors of this paper, a black woman associate professor and a white male professor, use the example of their mentoring relationship to illustrate six common issues facing academicians involved in these relationships: (1) trust between mentor and protégé; (2) acknowledged and unacknowledged racism; (3) visibility and risks pertinent to minority faculty; (4) power and paternalism; (5) benefits to mentor and protégé; and (6) the double‐edged sword of ‘otherness’ in the academy. Literature is used for review and critique of mentoring in the academy while offering personal examples to illustrate the complexity and success of a 13‐year mentoring relationship between a duo who began their association as teacher/student.

Teaching about Being an Oppressor

In the US womens studies programs have seriously challenged every academic disciplines conceptualizations of gender ethnicity class and sexuality. It has been one of the fastest growing academic fields and has forever changed the face of academia. In this article Steven P. Schacht explores his own attempts as a White male professor to meaningfully contribute to the womens studies programs on the various campuses he has taught and to the larger feminist movement. Schacht notes that in all his classroom discussions he offers his own experiences of doing unearned male privilege and recognize the harm it inflicted on others--both female and male. Often male and female students also offer their experiences of dominance and being oppressed. This perspective demonstrates how all too common oppression is how harmful it is for so many and why women and men should join together to bring about its end.

The Holmes Scholars Network: A Study of the Holmes Group Initiative for Recruitment and Retention of Minority Faculty

Advocates for restructuring K-12 education recognize the link between effective teachers and student learning (Lewis, 1989). Effective teachers must address the needs of all children in a K-12 student population that is growing more diverse (Nieto, 1996) even as teachers are becoming less so (Ladson-Billings, 1991). Although the cultural distance between teachers and students continues to widen, few new teachers believe their preservice education experience has adequately prepared them to teach students from cultural backgrounds unlike their own (Ashton, 1996). Preservice teachers typically experience professional education programs taught by White male professors (Ducharme, 1993). Although the American professoriate encompasses numerous disciplines and reflects different backgrounds, attitudes, traditions, and values among its members (Bowen & Schuster, 1986), it is largely homogeneous in race and gender. Women and minority scholars remain underrepresented within the academy (Tierney & Rhoads, 1994), despite institutional efforts to recruit and retain them (Dunn, Rouse, & Seff, 1994). Women and people of color are similarly absent from the education professoriate (Ducharme, & Agne, 1989; Ducharme & Ducharme, 1996). The Holmes Group, a consortium of 96 research universities formed in 1987, has sought to improve both the preparation of teachers and the quality of K-12 schooling through research and development (Holmes Group, 1986). A primary goal of the consortium has been to increase the numbers of quality minority faculty in schools of education (Holmes Group, 1995). In 1991, the Holmes Group board of directors asked member institutions to create and maintain a network of minority students across levels of advanced study. The Holmes Scholar Network was designed to enhance minority graduate experience[s], and thus help to increase the pool of persons preparing to become faculty in schools of education and Professional Development Schools (Devaney, 1991, p. 2). In this study, we explored the perceptions of three Holmes Scholars regarding the Network's influence upon their career development. Our purpose was to identify conditions that facilitated and impeded successful entry of these Holmes Scholars into the professoriate. Two central questions guided the study: How did the Holmes Scholar experience influence the thinking of three individuals about professional roles? How does the Holmes experience affect their current roles and practice within academe? Two bodies of literature, faculty socialization and the education professoriate, form the conceptual framework for our investigation. To demonstrate the complexities inherent in the socialization process, we briefly examine relevant literature. This review focuses on aspiring academics preparing for faculty roles in research institutions. Faculty Socialization Within workplace settings, socialization processes serve to build commitment and loyalty to the organization (Schein, 1968, p. 7) as members gain knowledge of the organizational culture. Socialization of new faculty into the culture of higher education occurs in two phases, anticipatory and organizational (Tierney & Rhoads, (1994). Anticipatory Socialization In addition to grounding students in the specialized knowledge and skills associated with their given disciplines, graduate and professional schools offer aspiring faculty the first phase of intensive socialization into the academic culture (Dunn et al., 1994). As faculty apprentices (Merton, Reader, & Kendall, 1957), graduate students may gain familiarity with the attitudes, beliefs, and characteristics valued within their disciplines and by the faculty at large (Tierney & Rhoads, 1994). Thus, students may anticipate the types of roles and behaviors they must enact to succeed as faculty members (p. 23). Although graduate programs form a powerful socializing force, many novice faculty are inadequately prepared for their first faculty appointment (Whitt, 1991). …

Portia Unbound: The Effects of a Supportive Law School Environment on Women and Minority Students

This article reports a study of first-year students at Chapman University School of Law in the spring of 1996. A survey investigated how minority and all women students fared at a new law school with a student-supportive environment and a faculty that was more diverse than average. Student respondents reported that some women and minority students felt less competent in law school than before, but the percentage of such students was lower than the percentages in comparison studies. Some student respondents (although a lower percentage than in comparison studies) thought women and minority professors had a higher burden of proving competence than did white male professors. The students also reported a positive effect from having diverse role models on the faculty. The article concludes that minority and all women students were faring better in self-esteem and classroom involvement at Chapman than respondents in comparison studies. Two of the article's tables were misprinted and a large comparison table was erroneously omitted from the print version of the article. Please contact the author if you would like to see the correct tables.

The Relationship Between Teachers' Beliefs and Sense of Efficacy and Their Significance to Urban LSES Minority Students

INTRODUCTIONA basic prerequisite to learning in school is an openness on the part of the student to accept the teacher as a credible source. For this to occur, the student should feel that the teacher is significant to him or her in a positive way. Negative attitudes and stereotypes on the part of the teacher may act to destroy this tenuous crucial bond, or prevent it from ever developing, thereby creating student resistance to the teacher both personally and educationally. This is particularly true in the relationship between teachers and their lower socioeconomic status (LSES) minority students. Teachers who avoid or reject negative attitudes and stereotypes are able to face LSES minority students with a type of respect that allows them to expect and achieve success with these students.It would be helpful for all teachers, who in general sincerely wish to do their best, to become aware of their attitudes and beliefs and what impact these have on students. This responsibility is greater in situations in which the cultural and economic backgrounds of the teachers and students are different. We cannot now nor will we in the near future be able to match students and teachers according to their ethnic, racial, and socioeconomic backgrounds--there are simply not enough minority teachers in the labor force (Haberman, 1989). Moreover, as Grant (1989) suggests, teachers (even minority teachers) are often trained by White male professors whose knowledge of urban schools, at-risk students, and minority cultures comes from secondary sources. Teachers, even Black teachers whose life experiences are similar to those of the White middle class, tend to group and rank their Black students according to socioeconomic characteristics, teachability, and adaptability to bureaucratic school norms (Gouldner, 1978). Such preconceptions impair the psychological processes through which student motivation and achievement are shaped. Researchers such as Baron and Cooper (1985), who examined via meta-analysis 20 studies on discrimination against minority students, have long contended that dominant cultural biases against LSES minority students have had a detrimental effect on these students' motivation and achievement. The present study examines the connections between the teacher's significance to LSES minority students and such beliefs.REVIEW OF THE LITERATUREIn schools where LSES African American and Hispanic students predominate, many deleterious conditions exist that are exacerbated by negative teacher attitudes and stereotypes. These conditions have been firmly established in the research literature and include lower-track-level placement of LSES minority students (Oakes, 1987); lowered expectations and reduced opportunities (Brophy, 1983; Entwisle & Webster, 1974; Maeroff, 1988; C. Payne, 1984); and differences between school personnel and students in language, lifestyles, values, personal preferences, cognitive and social styles, and occupational aspirations (Levy, 1976; Michaels, 1982; Ogbu, 1986; Ramirez, 1982; Scribner & Cole, 1973; Spolansky, 1978). Alone or in combination, they create problematic relationships between teachers and LSES minority students. The results are often frequent discipline problems (Ford, 1985; Glidewell, 1978; Maeroff, 1988; C. Payne, 1984; Reed, 1988; Selove, 1984), which deprive these students of meaningful instruction. However, to be effective while maintaining their own sense of efficacy, teachers must gain the students' trust and become significant to them despite these conditions.Research has long confirmed that LSES minority students are frequently misperceived and that they are keenly aware of this discrimination (Davidson & Lang, 1960; Entwisle & Webster, 1974; Graham, 1986; Maehr & Rubovits, 1973; Rist, 1973). Ichheiser (1970) notes that individuals consciously or unconsciously anticipate and adjust their behavior to some degree to match the expectations and stereotypical images they hold in mind. …

Affirmative Action and Job Satisfaction: Self-Interested v. Public Spirited Perspectives on Social Equity—Some Sobering Findings from the Academic Workplace

This study utilizes a national study of university faculty, including a sizeable proportion of Afro-American and female respondents, to examine university faculty attitudes toward affir mative action. It has been argued by some that self-interested motivations underlie attitudes about affirmative action policies, while others have argued that "public spirit" (Kelman, 1987) and "other regarding" (Wilson and Banfield, 1964) motivations more properly serve to account for attitudes relating to social equity and societal welfare issues. University faculty were chosen as a particularly appropriate group to study; if any segment of society is likely to be public spirited in this way it is likely to be the best educated among us. The central question to be investigated is: how do individuals embedded in a meritocratic system such as the University perceive affirmative action and the benefits and harms it holds for both white males and protected category persons? How, in turn, does this set of attitudes about affirmative action affect the job satisfaction of white male professors? The results indicate that little "pub lic spirit" is in evidence, suggesting that future implementation of this policy will hold only continued conflict for Academe. Somewhat fortunate, however, is the finding that job satisfac tion for white males is little related to their views on affirmative action.