EDUCATIONAL STUDIES 263

Freire, Paulo. 1972. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder.
Harris, Ian. 1982a. “An Undergraduate Community Education Curriculum for Community
Development.” Journal of the Community Development Society 13:69–82.
———. 1982b. “Credits for Previous Learning: An Appeal to Non-Traditional Students.”
The Urban Review 14:25–33.
The Holmes Group. 1986. Tomorrow’s Teachers. East Lansing, Mich: Author.
Horton, Aimee. 1989. The Highlander Folk School: A History of its Major Programs,
1932–1961. Brooklyn, New York: Carlson.
Horton, Myles, and Paulo Freire. 1990. We Make the Road by Walking. Philadelphia: Tem-
ple University Press.
Mayo, Peter. 1999. Gramsci, Freire and Adult Education: Possibilities for Transformative
Learning. London, United Kingdom: Zed Books.
Pugach, Marlene, Linda Post, and Alfonzo Thurman. in press. “Engaging the University in
the System-to-System Reform of Urban Education through a Community-wide Partner-
ship.” In A New Kind of University, edited by Stephen Percy, Nancy Zimpher, and Mary
Jane Brukardt. Boston: Anker.
Stark, Jack. 1995. “The Wisconsin Idea: The University’s Service to the State.” In State of
Wisconsin 1995–1996 Blue Book, 101–179. Madison, Wisc.: Legislative Reference
Bureau.

Correspondence should be addressed to Ian M. Harris, Department of Educational

Policy and Community Studies, Enderis 553, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee,
P.O. Box 413, Milwaukee, WI 53201. E-mail: imh@uwm.edu

New Racism, Reformed Teacher Education,

and the Same Ole’ Oppression
BEVERLY E. CROSS
University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee

This article builds on a case study about how teacher education students may
actually learn racism through their program. It employs an analysis of how
new racism is operationalized in today’s sociopolitical contexts. Field place-
ments and knowledge taught about various groups are critiqued as major
teacher education reform efforts that particularly facilitate teaching racism. It
seeks to examine and theorize about this occurrence through an analysis of
new invisible forms of racism, power, and whiteness. It finally explores how
this racism can be unlearned through reanalyzing teacher reform efforts and
choosing to purposefully center programs on a systematic analysis of how
these invisible operations shape programs and unintended program outcomes.
264 ARTICLES

As I sit down to write this, I hear the voices of white teacher educators who say,
what would you have us do; we are struggling to prepare future teachers who are
well-prepared to teach in racially diverse classrooms. I hear the voices of teacher ed-
ucators of color saying, we know from statistics that white teachers are going to pre-
dominate in the profession; so we need to figure out how to help them be prepared to
teach students of color. I hear the voices of some who claim that multiculturalism as
practiced in schools has focused on limited views of culture (e.g., food, dress, and
celebrations) and has been, as a result, unsuccessful in placing racism, power, and
whiteness on the table as central to the preparation of teachers. I hear voices from my
education foundation colleagues saying the United States is becoming more racially
divided and segregated and this is occurring in schools and elsewhere invisibly with-
out much dialogue about what it means for what teachers need. I hear the voices of
African Americans and Latinos who are certain and articulate about the numerous
ways in which the new racism and whiteness act in direct and indirect ways to op-
press them, their families, and communities. I hear the voices of my white friends
and colleagues who believe that race relations are so much better because they can all
name a friend who is a person of color and because they have carefully incorporated
diversity into their teacher education programs.
These voices are contradictory, clear, and loud. They are not, however, a ca-
cophony. They, instead, ring in my ear with loud contradictions that haunt me and
make me ponder if we ever see racism, power and whiteness in similar terms across
racial lines. And will we always think about it in simple ways as it relates to how
we prepare teachers?
For some time now, university professors have actively worked to reform their
teacher education programs to respond to today’s classrooms where the student
population is becoming more racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse while si-
multaneously they and the future teachers they produce remain overwhelmingly
white. Many efforts in redesigning teacher education programs to meet this chang-
ing classroom context have led to content integration of various knowledge bases
on diversity, multiculturalism, and urban education. Additionally, early and con-
tinued field experiences in diverse school settings have been added to further ex-
pose students to teaching in racially diverse classrooms. These efforts appear im-
portant and salient elements of bridging the racial mismatch between a largely
white teaching force and a diverse student population because, as Gomez (1996)
suggested, the typical teacher

Is white and from a suburban or rural home town; monolingual in English;

she selected her college for its proximity to home, its affordability and its
accessibility. She has traveled little beyond her college’s 100-mile radius.
She prefers to teach in a community like the one she grew up in. She hopes
to teach middle-income, average (not handicapped or gifted) children in tra-
ditional classroom settings.
 EDUCATIONAL STUDIES 265

Adding content and field experiences are reform efforts that take a step forward
in bridging the mismatch between the teachers described in this quote and the chil-
dren she will actually face in the classroom. Although viewed as progressive, the
reforms as employed by teacher educators often fail to address issues of racism,
power, and whiteness (Carlson 1995; Nieto 1995; Pardini 2000). Each of these is-
sues is important because each is tremendously influential, but in reality they com-
bine into a powerful force they works invisibly through systems of relations that
privilege white skin. The union of the three is important to examine not as singular
individual actions or behaviors or as an organized social group. Rather, it is impor-
tant to analyze the larger systems in place that maintain the privileges of whiteness,
power, and racism. Because teacher education reform efforts are too silent on these
issues along with the inequities and injustices manifested by them, then those pre-
pared to teach through these programs are taught to blindly, silently, and paradoxi-
cally reproduce the same inequities and injustices under the rhetoric of diversity
and multiculturalism. As this complicity becomes evident, teacher educators will
likely take their place alongside their own graduates who are already viewed as
well-intentioned educators who miss the mark in teaching well a racially diverse
student body attempting to “learn while black” or brown (Morse 2002).
Grounding teacher education reform in multiculturalism, diversity, and urban
education—frequently accepted as soft, safe code words (contrasted to racism,
white privilege, and power) that assure only small to moderate program revisions
in preparing teachers—has led subsequently to only moderate advances in prepar-
ing teachers for racially diverse classrooms. For example, the program rhetoric
about diversity and multiculturalism is often couched in how we are alike or how
white teacher educators and students can explore others as cultural exotics, the ra-
cial other, or the object of study for their academic and professional benefit. Such a
focus assures little to no meaningful discussions of racism, power, and whiteness
and how the privileges and benefits that accrue from these systems thwart the very
efforts underway to truly produce a teaching force equipped for diverse class-
rooms. In fact, it may produce just the opposite—a teaching force unaware of how
they can use their work to help dismantle power, whiteness, and racism. Akintunde
(1999) further explicated that

…the vast majority of multicultural literature is based on modernist assump-

tions. Thus strategies emanating from and based on such literature are inher-
ently (though not intentionally) white supremacist and often employ a “feel
good” individual approach toward multicultural education rather than ap-
proaching oppression as a systemic manifestation. (5)

This conclusion is not intended as a sweeping indictment of the miscues in

teacher education reform but is instead important in recognizing that many years of
work may have been undertaken within an unintended whiteness ideology. It is im-
266 ARTICLES

portant to acknowledge that in some contexts, to even discuss these soft interpreta-
tions of multiculturalism and diversity poses a challenge or threat. Cochran-Smith
(1991) and Tiezzi and Cross (1997) clearly explained the strong resistance of uni-
versity teacher education students to teaching for diversity and to challenging their
own beliefs and values. But acknowledging these efforts and resistance does not
excuse the lack of sharp criticism necessary to uncover the shortsighted, unexam-
ined consequences of the programs being grounded in traditional, oppressive as-
sumptions and ideology. They are oppressive according to Freire (1970), who
stated oppressions occurs in any situation in which A objectively exploits B or hin-
ders his pursuit of self-affirmation as a responsible person.
The confluence of these three realities (soft approaches to multiculturalism, di-
versity and urban education; resistance by students and even some teacher educa-
tors to such discussions; and ignoring issues of racism, power, and whiteness) re-
sults in teacher education programs remaining rooted in traditional ways of
preparing teachers peppered with some discussion of race or culture. But as
Hilliard (1999) suggested, any consideration of race (or diversity and multicultur-
alism) is useless unless it also considers racism and white privilege—and consid-
ers them as a hegemonic system. In rare instances, a few programs include a focus
on the study of whiteness and critical multiculturalism and even attempt to fore-
ground racism, for example, over cultural exoticism. But in far too many others,
rampant hypocrisy abounds. The language of the programs includes social justice
and multiculturalism and diversity while the ideology, values and practices are as-
suredly reinscribing white privilege, power, and racism. Even “multicultural edu-
cation has been partially incorporated within neoconservative and neoliberal dis-
courses in ways that currently block its fuller democratic potential” (Carlson 1995,
414). This results in what Michael Dyson (2000) referred to as unconscious racists
and racism or what bell hooks refers to as progressive, well-intentioned, aware in-
tellectuals who apply their terrorizing power on others (quoted in Fiske 1993, 282).
The result is an invisible system of unearned privilege and power that operates to
maintain institutional racism in schools and to assure its cultural agents (teacher
educators and teachers) carry out this function. But teacher educators have choices
to act against this societal and institutional expectation.
In this article, I argue that new racism undergirds recently reformed teacher
education and has assured that the “perversions and pleasure of power, privilege
and marginalization” operate through whiteness (Weis and Fine 1993, 2). The
inequities and injustices sustained through the system of whiteness are disadvan-
tageous to all of society, but in the context of this analysis has particular implica-
tions for children targeted as the benefactors of graduates of teacher education
programs. This ideology locks teacher education into maintaining the same ole’
oppression that objectifies, dehumanizes, and marginalizes others while ignoring
whiteness, power, privilege, and racism. I will first describe the traits of new rac-
ism that undergird the oppressive ideology of teacher education reform and why
 EDUCATIONAL STUDIES 267

it is important to analyze teacher education reform from this perspective. Then I

will conclude with some ideas that may hold potential in averting another group
of well-intentioned educators missing the mark and enacting the same ole’
oppression.

Old Racism, New Racism, and Reformed Teacher Education

New racism, as applied to this analysis, is defined as the struggle over the power
to promote social interests that are always racialized (Fiske 1993). Within the
United States, power, whiteness, and racism are enacted through a system of rela-
tions that privileges white skin. White privilege is maintained through invisible, in-
sidious operations of power that foster whiteness and racism. This power is no lon-
ger enacted primarily through physical violence but is mostly achieved through
more symbolic power. Young (quoted in McLaren 1998, 18) stated that the

meaning of oppression [power and racism] has shifted from the practice of colo-
nial domination and conquest. It can no longer be simply thought to be an evil
perpetuated by others as the exercise of tyranny by a ruling group. [Rather it is
the] everyday practices of a well-intentioned liberal society and a systemic and
structural phenomenon that is not necessarily the result of the intention of the
tyranist.

Fiske (1993) ascribed five attributes to new racism. I have contrasted them to old
racism to make transparent how they are distinguished in ideology and in practice.

Old Racism and New Racism Contrasted

Old Racism New Racism

System of prejudice and supremacy System of power and domination

Works when visible Works best when invisible
Works through imperialized knowledge Works through privileged knowledge
Individual racism Racism built into institutions
Power applied to physical body Power applied to social body

Old racism is based in an ideology of white supremacy and, according to Fiske

(1993), generally whites define racism in this way. Examples of old racism include
the hostile genocide of American Indians and spectator lynchings of African
Americans. Because such acts do not predominate today, this leads many whites to
be unaware of either whiteness or racism as a major factor in U.S. society. Con-
versely, new racism is viewed as a hidden system of power and domination. This
definition is generally held by people of color today (Fiske 1993). Examples of
new racism include public policies that support discrimination in housing practices
268 ARTICLES

and invisible discrimination in employment practices. Because these institutional

and system practices are part of the hidden day-to-day experiences for people of
color, they may have an awareness of their personal accounts but may also lack a
full awareness of whiteness and its powerful intersection with power and racism.
While Fiske illustrated how each ideology predominates within either white or mi-
nority groups, his intent was not (nor is the intent here) to create a binary nor to
essentialize either group. In fact, he challenged the usefulness of binaries in U.S.
sociopolitical analysis, but acknowledged that race is a powerful social force that
shapes the realities of racial groups in very distinct ways. Further, “Race isn’t bio-
logical, but racism is real…race is a powerful social idea that gives people different
access to opportunities and resources” (Adelman 2003). Distinct racial realities are
produced as a result of whiteness, power, and racism with deleterious effects on ev-
eryone. To ignore these distinct realities along racial lines sets up another invisible
means to ignore (1) racism, (2) that it exists, (3) that whites benefit from whiteness
whether or not they want to and in spite of other oppressions they may experience,
and (4) that whiteness is separate and distinct from racial prejudice because it is re-
inforced at the institutional and cultural levels (Terry, quoted in Clark and
O’Donnell 1999).
Old racism and new racism are distinct in how they are practiced, similarly
powerful in effecting realities, and unique in how they must be uncovered. Lea ex-
plained that “while pseudo-scientific racism [old racism] has not been supported
by federal law since the 1960s, its legacy is one in which whiteness as symbolic,
cultural, and economic capital [new racism] continues to disproportionately privi-
lege white people over people of color” (1999, 13). New racism works through a
system of power and privilege operationalized mainly through systems and institu-
tions (including schools) because they are the key sites where people learn the atti-
tudes and behaviors they are to live by and the consciousness by which they make
sense of the world. This invisibleness leads to racism being pernicious, omnipres-
ent, natural, and frequently unchallenged. It leads to schools, teachers, and univer-
sity professors unknowingly acting as central agents to sustain new racism. It is
important to understand and to analyze new racism and its operation in reformed
teacher education, because failing to do so can result in this institution unintention-
ally maintaining itself as one of the sites where racism is not only operationalized
but also actually taught as part of the preparation of teachers.
The idea of being well-intentioned and working blindly is important because
the social and cultural agents intend to do no harm. But social institutions like
schools and universities work through their programs (e.g., teacher education) in
very complicit ways to maintain social regulation as an apparatus of the state
through multiple productive elements of power (Popkewitz 1991, 14). As sug-
gested by Macedo (1995) educators (including teacher educators) are either naïve
victims of a big lie or are cognizant of the deceptive ideological mechanisms (in-
 EDUCATIONAL STUDIES 269

cluding mechanisms of racism) inherent in education and consciously reproduce

them. Yet,

Their naïveté is never innocent but ideological to the degree that they have in-
vested in a system that rewards them for reproducing and not questioning domi-
nant mechanisms designed to produce power asymmetries along the lines of
race, gender, class, and ethnicity. (Macedo 1995, 74–75)

Many reformed teacher education programs maintain some practices that fulfill
its institutional role to sustain inequitable power relations, whiteness, and racism.
The findings of a study (Cross 2003) I recently conducted on graduates of a teacher
education program that has an explicit design to address the cultural/racial mis-
match of its largely white students to teach in racially diverse classrooms illustrate
how new racism plays out in actual practice. These recent teacher education stu-
dents who were all teaching in a racially diverse school district at the time of the
study and who taught children mostly from a racial group other than their own,
learned through their teacher education program that teaching in a racially diverse
classroom means (1) to respect the children’s language, (2) to use diverse litera-
ture, (3) to recognize cultural diversity, and (4) to acknowledge background
knowledge and experiences. These four findings are essentially innocuous plati-
tudes recited by the new teachers. In fact, they clarified that these four learnings
were passed along to them in a “stepford” manner. Their articulation of what each
meant led me to conclude that the two key elements of teacher education reform
(knowledge about the racial other and field experiences to observe them) were af-
firming new racism. I concluded that

• Field experience potentially teaches passivity toward culture and should be

modified beyond clinical observation to skill and knowledge competence to
teach racially minority students.
• Learning about race needs to go beyond a personal benefit to white teachers to
competence in teaching in racially diverse classrooms.
• Including diverse literature in classrooms is an important but limited curricu-
lar adaptation and may absolve teachers of their responsibilities in teaching in
racially diverse classrooms.

These graduates to some extent learned racism through their teacher education
program because it is grounded in new racism. They completed the readings pro-
duced by white scholars that represented people of color, they completed all of
their field experiences in racially diverse classrooms, and some completed a
one-on-one study of an “othered” child. All of them exercised the power handed to
270 ARTICLES

them by their white professors and instructors to place people of color under their
untrained surveillance (read observation) for their own learning. And that learning
resulted in learning racism, ignoring power, and ignoring whiteness. New racism
in its invisible form, validated by teacher education, reinscribed their white privi-
lege and power, othered those they learned about, and subjected them to their aca-
demic and employment benefit.
The following chart accentuates the explicit link between the traits of new rac-
ism and some examples of how they are manifested in some teacher education re-
form practices. The examples derive from the two key practices of teacher educa-
tion reform mentioned early: field placements in racially diverse settings and
knowledge taught about the racial other. The two are important because knowledge
produces power disguised as truth and observation is an act of power and control to
represent those observed (Fiske 1993).

New Racism and Teacher Education

New Racism Traits Teacher Education Practices

System of power and Prejudice and white supremacy is replaced by power and
domination
Works best when invisible Visible forms of racism are replaced with invisible systems. In
domination that work in subtle forms. In reformed teacher
education this plays out, for example, through subtle forms of
subordinating racial minority groups as objects of study and
critique in order to advance the educational and professional
goals of white students through such practices as field
experiences, one-time visits to urban schools, video tape
observations inside diverse classrooms, one-on-one child study
of a minority student, interview of a minority parent, and a home
visit of a minority child. Each of these teacher education
practices uses systems of power to dominate racial minority
groups who are not empowered to flip the gaze back on their
white observers. As a result the power to gaze on another and to
reach conclusions without having the gaze be multidirectional
normalizes the group that has the power to look and not be seen,
grants them the power to describe others as different or aberrant,
and allows them to dominate as they see fit for their benefit.
reformed teacher education this is enacted when neither white
teacher educators nor their students are required to explicitly
address, critique, or challenge their own unearned privilege and
advantage and how teacher education practices reproduce
transmission of stereotypes and racism. Examples of such
practices include studying minority groups while ignoring white
status and positions in society, never analyzing the
normalization of whiteness while examining others, utilizing
minority spokespersons as prototypes of an entire group while
leaving invisible the white group, and leaving white cultural
lenses invisible while making others transparent. The ability to
control one’s own visibility while simultaneously controlling the
invisibility of others is based in the inequitable distribution of
power and is enacted in subtle forms of teacher education
practice.
 EDUCATIONAL STUDIES 271

Works through privileged The privileged status of one truth is replaced by multiple truths of
knowledge various groups primarily as products of white research and
distributed by them as truth. This occurs in teacher education
through research conducted on minority groups by white scholars
and through texts produced by whites articulating their knowledge
of minority groups, the ability to control the history and realities
through research ignoring barriers that prevent whites from seeing
others authentically and in their own right, too little examination of
white bias, ignorance and assumptions that influences the truth
produced by them, the power of white researchers to validate truth
as they see it regardless of or with minimal voice of others, and
power to validate one’s own position and worldview. This results in
validating white teacher education researchers as the producers of
the truth about others and it resincribes white power to produce the
reality of others. It allows whites to know and not be known.
Racism built into Individual racism is powerfully augmented by the power of
institutions institutions (like universities) to apply racism across social
groups. In teacher education, completing the various
experiences to become a teacher carry with them the validity of
the institution. Examples occur through white professors
directing their students to put minority groups under
observations as tools of their own advantage, transmitting the
belief that whites can understand minority groups from an arms
distance through reading and observations, teaching white
students that they can actually understand another’s reality with
little direct contact with them, lack of examining power
differentials and unearned power and privilege, and lack of
examining the contradictions in the roles of institutions. The
backing of the institutions and the academics within them
exacerbates racism because of the power of the institutions
themselves. The silent endorsement of the good institution
communicates the acceptance of the practices of racism.
Power applied to social The attack on the physical body is replaced by the attack on the
body social body as the focus of racism. Teacher educators transmit
knowledge to future white teachers about the social realities and
existences of minority groups with the intent to enable them to
teach across racial lines well. This is carried out when teacher
educators teach about others from their own perspectives; when
minority groups are examined, documented, and objectified by
others; when field experiences miniaturize and essentialize the
social realities of minority groups; and when whites are granted
ownership of how the social and cultural realities of others are
represented. The control over the consciousness that white
future teachers develop about the racial groups they will face in
classrooms becomes powerful tools in how they respond to those
they will teach. That consciousness about others as social
beings will inform pedagogy, expectations and so on.

Conclusion and Recommendations

I believe that in the not so distant future, teacher educators will be called
well-intentioned yet fraudulent because we reproduce racism, power, and white-
ness through new forms of racism without acknowledging it, deconstructing it, or
272 ARTICLES

analyzing practices for it. Teacher education reform should be examined to iden-
tify how new racism shields white privilege and interests under the guise of “em-
powering” people of color. While the reformed teacher education programs are en-
trusted to be grounded in liberalism and enlightenment, this analysis illustrates
how whiteness and racism permeates these efforts through invisible systems of
power.
What can teacher educators do? The unfortunate truth is that we can be
strongly antiracist in our own minds but be promulgating racism in profound
ways we do not understand (Pine and Hilliard 1990). Considering the serious-
ness of this certainty, maybe we should consider the exact opposite of what we
currently do. The primary challenge to teacher educators and to their students is
to develop the skills and knowledge to combat the root causes of racism, white-
ness, and power rather than reaffirming them through either field placements or
the knowledge taught.
The following represents an attempt to participate in the dialogue with others
about what those engaged in the preparation of teachers can do. The suggestions
are classified into the same two categories that formed the basis of the critique of
this article: field placements in racially diverse settings and knowledge taught in
teacher education programs about the other. Knowledge taught is identified first
because this understanding is a prerequisite to engaging with others. These sugges-
tions apply to both teacher educators and the students that they teach. That is, both
need to take up such suggestions as a means to work against the unearned benefits
of whiteness as a means to build authentic relationship with others.

Knowledge

1. Study antiracist whites throughout history to gain practical ideas of what it

actually means to diminish the power of whiteness.
2. Study institutional racism and how racism is operationalized in its contem-
porary form as contrasted to historically.
3. Explicitly teach about school practices that sustain racism, power and
whiteness.
4. Become students of history and how it has shaped all of us into the beings
that we are and how we wish to reshape ourselves.
5. Develop a clear sense of one’s own identities, what is required to become at
least bicultural and eventually global in identity, and how to continually ex-
amine those identities.
6. Reassign cultural and educational foundations knowledge to equal impor-
tance as methods to denote that they are symbiotic in preparing teachers for
diverse school settings.
7. Emphasize teaching as a form of social activism rather than a job based in
the love of children or content.
 EDUCATIONAL STUDIES 273

8. With all knowledge and program decisions, ask what view of others am I
teaching and do I intend to do so and am I qualified to do so.
9. Recognize that teacher education programs and teacher educators are dis-
ingenuous if not also engaged in social activism beyond the rhetorical.

Field Experience Recommendations

1. Learn to be with groups outside of the white norm rather than watching
them and taking from them.
2. Engage in long-term field experiences to avoid “drive by” placements that
disempower though assigning other to objects of surveillance.
3. Limit entering communities without learning how to do so and without
participating in voyeurism.
4. Elicit and foreground listening to how others see you while engaged with
communities rather than strictly how you see others.
5. Engage in a constant critique of the acts of power and whiteness that allow
you to observe and pimp others for your own learning.
6. Ask if the cost of the field experience is worth the privileges of whiteness
that it calls on to allow it to occur.
7. Go for broke to diversify the teaching force as a manifestation of a commit-
ment to the necessity of racial diversity and solidarity.
8. Flip the script on the ideas of service learning and field placements: Make
decisions based on whether they are first beneficial to the communities
prior to deciding if they are beneficial to white university students.
9. Ask if I am qualified to engage with others prior to any field placements:
Do I have something to offer by reviewing all items in the knowledge
section?

These ideas are only the beginning of what the neoreformed teacher education
programs can do. Although they are exploratory, they are not easy, simple or quick
fixes. Further, each is necessary—no one of these suggestions is sufficient. Rather
they require rethinking ourselves, what we believe, our relationships with others,
and our relationships to the very systems that privilege us. As teacher educators we
can rest assured that our great efforts to date are limited if we do not thoroughly an-
alyze the manifestations of new racism, power, and whiteness and how they per-
meate our programs, and make the choice to consciously work against them.

References

Adelman, Larry. 2003. Race: The Power of an Illusion. http://www.pbs.org

Akintunde, Omowale. 1999. “White Racism, White Supremacy, White Privilege, and the
Social Construction of Race.” Multicultural Education 7:2–8.
274 ARTICLES

Carlson, Dennis. 1995. “Constructing the Margins of Multicultural Education and Curricu-
lum Settlements.” Curriculum Inquiry 25:407–431.
Clark, Christine, and James O’Donnell, eds. 1999. Becoming and Unbecoming White:
Owning and Disowning a Racial Identity. Westport, Conn.: Bergin and Garvey.
Cochran-Smith, Marilyn. 1991. “Learning to Teach Against the Grain.” Harvard Education
Review 61:279–310.
Cross, Beverly. 2003. “Learning or Unlearning Racism: How Urban Teachers Transfer
Teacher Education Curriculum into Classroom Practice.” Theory into Practice 42(3).
Dyson, Michael. 2000. I May Not Get There with You. New York: Free Press.
Fiske, John. 1993. Power Plays Power Works. New York: Verso.
Freire, Paulo. 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.
Gomez, Mary. 1996. “Telling Stories of Our Teaching, Reflecting on our Practice.” Action
in Teacher Education 18(3):1–12.
Hilliard, Asa. G., III. 1999. “Race, Identity, Hegemony and Education: What Do We Need
to Know and Why?” Race, Research and Education. Meeting conducted in Chicago.
Lea, Virginia. 1999. Re-Thinking Whiteness, Re-Thinking Self: Enabling White Teachers to
Question how Race Informs their Ideology, Identity and Practice in Classrooms. Paper pre-
sented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
Macedo, Donald. 1995. “Literacy for Stupidification: The Pedagogy of Big Lies.” In Multi-
cultural Education, Critical Pedagogy, and the Politics of Difference, edited by Christine
Sleeter and Peter McLaren, 71–104. New York: State University of New York Press.
McLaren, Peter. 1998. Life in Schools. New York: Longman.
Morse, Jodie. 2002, May 27. “Learning While Black.” Time Magazine 159:21.
Nieto, Sonia. 1995. “From Brown Heroes and Holidays to Assimilationist Agendas: Recon-
sidering the Critiques of Multicultural Education.” In Multicultural Education, Critical
Pedagogy, and the Politics of Difference, edited by Christine Sleeter and Peter McLaren,
191–220. New York: State University of New York Press.
Pardini, Priscilla. 2000. “Down but Not Out.” Rethinking Schools 15(1):4, 6–7.
Pine, Gerald, and Hilliard, Asa. 1990, April. “RX for Racism: Imperatives for American
Schools.” Phi Delta Kappan 71:593–600.
Popkewitz, Thomas. 1991. A Political Sociology of Educational Reform: Power/knowledge
in Teaching, Teacher Education and Research. New York: Teachers College, Columbia
University.
Terry, Robert. 1981. “The Negative Impact of White Values.” In Impact of Racism on White
Americans, edited by B. P. Bowser and R. G. Hunt, 35–47. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Tiezzi, Linda, and Beverly Cross. 1997. “Utilizing Research on Prospective Teachers’ Be-
liefs to Inform Urban Field Experiences.” The Urban Review 29:113–125.
Young, Iris. 1992. “Five Faces of Oppression.” In Rethinking Power, edited by Thomas J.
Eartenberg, 174–175. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Weis, Lois, and Michelle Fine, eds. 1993. Beyond Silenced Voices: Class, Race and Gender
in United States Schools. New York: State University of New York Press.

Correspondence should be addressed to Beverly E. Cross, Associate Professor,

School of Education, Department of Curriculum and Instruction, University of Wis-
consin-Milwaukee, PO Box 413, Milwaukee WI 53201. E-mail: bcross@uwm.edu