Big Surprise! Teaching That White People Have Privilege Does Harm
FAIR Waterloo & David Haskell Present A Collection Of Studies To The WRDSB That Indicate Harm Is Being Done With Diversity Initiatives That Push Concepts Like White Privilege
On July 3rd I published - The Sinister Six Feel Entitled To Their Racism(substack.com) - on The Turn. In it, I discuss how the woke’s Great Illiberal Subversion has erupted at the Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB). This can been seen most recently in the highly undemocratic silencing of Carolyn Burjoski, who had been teaching for the WRDSB for 20 years before the Sinister Six moved against both her and trustee Mike Ramsey (who apparently has unpopular views). The kind of views woke idealogues won’t tolerate.
Also, in the July 3rd piece mentioned above, is a discussion concerning David Haskell, a Professor of journalism at Wilfrid Laurier, and the research-based delegation he gave on behalf of FAIR Waterloo at the most recent WRDSB meeting. David has given me permission to post a written version of his delegation that includes links to all of the relevant studies.
Below you will find it:
Studies Related to Diversity & White Privilege Instruction
An excerpt from David Millard Haskell’s delegation on behalf of FAIR Waterloo Region.
June 27, 2022
Note: click on the hyperlinks to be taken to the full study
In 2019 a study was published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General . Dr. Erin Cooley of Colgate University in the US was the lead researcher.
The aim of the study was to measure the affect that lessons on white privilege would have on attitudes of students.
Well, the study found that teaching lessons on white privilege did not make students more sympathetic to people of colour. In fact, it did nothing positive.
But it did increase hostility toward poor whites.
The researchers concluded, quote: “learning about White privilege reduces sympathy, increases blame, and decreases external attributions for White people struggling with poverty.”
In short, they found teaching about white privilege does not do good, but it does do harm.
Now, here’s a second study showing harm comes from teaching white privilege.
In May 2022, just last month, a study was published in the journal PLoS One. The lead researcher was Christopher Quarles from the University of Michigan.
The research involved an experiment to see how introducing the concept of white privilege would affect online discussions on issues related to racial equity.
The researchers found that introducing the concept of white privilege shuts down open discussion and lowers support for racial harmony.
They concluded, quote:
“mention of white privilege seems to create… discussions that are less constructive, more polarized, and less supportive of racially progressive policies.”
Furthermore they stated that the concept of white privilege made previously supportive whites less engaged in the conversation and it “led to less constructive responses from whites and non-whites.”
I’ll now turn to a third… massive study.
A 2021 study was published in the Annual Review of Psychology. The lead author was Elizabeth Paluck from Princeton University. Paluck and her colleagues didn’t do a single study, they did a meta-analysis of over 400 hundred existing studies.
Their goal was to see if mandatory instruction in diversity, equity and inclusion works to decrease prejudice and increase harmony.
Instruction about white privilege is one of the core modules in most diversity training programs, so this meta-analysis is highly applicable.
After analyzing the outcomes of the over 400 research papers, Paluck and her team concluded that despite the bold claims made by people developing and facilitating this kind of instruction, the average impact of diversity, equity, and inclusion training is zero.
And while no good is coming from it, there’s even more evidence such instruction does harm.
Let me tell you what Harvard Professor Frank Dobbin concludes.
Commenting on the 100s of studies that have measured the effects of diversity training, including instruction on white privilege, Harvard sociologist Frank Dobbin agreed it does not do good. But, writing in the July 2016 edition of the Harvard Business Review he concluded, quote: “a number of studies suggest diversity training can activate [or cause] bias or spark a backlash.” (see also Dobbin’s work: an2018.pdf (harvard.edu) )
The research shows this kind of instruction can cause more prejudice.
Therefore, should we be concerned that associate director Lila Read confirmed in the news last week that the board does do diversity-type training with our students.
She said it’s done through explicit instruction in “social justice, equity & inclusion. The subject is included in two high school courses among numerous and varied frameworks a teacher can choose to discuss.”
Given what the research has found about this kind of instruction shouldn’t parents be given the details? Why is there no discussion?
Finally, related to research, let me quickly explain why concepts like white privilege and the other curriculum ideas that now fall under the title of “anti-racism” education are likely to do the most harm to students of colour.
Hundreds of academic studies have examined the psychological phenomenon called stereotype threat. They show that when racial minorities are taught to perceive themselves as disadvantaged—as happens when instructed about white privilege—that perception can diminish their academic performance.
The research on stereotype threat is extensive, I just don’t have time to go into individual studies here.
However, from the brief list of studies that I have highlighted it should be clear that much more exploration on these issues was needed and is still needed.
__________________
To get the back story read The Sinister Six Feel Entitled To Their Racism (substack.com)
 | A guest post by
|
The race war against people of European ethnic stock has all the endearingly totalitarian qualities you would expect from Party sponsored revolutionary 'struggle' against unconscious bourgeois attitudes and tendencies that threatened the revolution and the cultural guiding spirit of its Great Leader, Mao Zedong.
The difference today is that while the Cultural Revolution only lasted for around 5 years, this one is set to be a permanent regime fixture, which means that in the event of resistance, war is almost an inevitability.
In many ways, the Woke are right. The debate IS over. Civil discourse across ideological lines is ceasing and the factions hate each so much, they just won't tolerate governance from the other side. The Supreme Court decision on abortion rights is just another blow in an escalating conflict of assault and counter assault. The next tranche will be putting Trump on trial and then I think it will be on for young and old.
"White Privilege" is a made-up term. It can mean anything you want it to, like "micro aggressions." It's an a priori belief from which adherents interpret all evidence, leading to circular logic. Any evidence against the concept is in itself condemned as rising from "white privilege," or "racism." Singling out people on the basis of skin colour would be seen as appalling by liberals and leftists back in the sixties and seventies. The fact that leftists consider this not only acceptable, but necessary now is horrendously ironic. The whole concept is absurd, here's just one example: Barack Obama and Megan Markle are of mixed race. Obama's mother and Markle's father were white. Do Markle and Obama have "white privilege?" Or does their black part cancel that out? And the homeless guy sleeping in the abandoned storefront has more privilege than them, for the sole reason that he's 100 per cent genetically Caucasian!