{"id":818,"date":"2022-02-13T22:50:01","date_gmt":"2022-02-13T22:50:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.luc.edu\/edlawinstitute\/?p=818"},"modified":"2022-02-13T22:50:01","modified_gmt":"2022-02-13T22:50:01","slug":"the-fight-for-and-against-implicit-bias-training","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.luc.edu\/edlawinstitute\/the-fight-for-and-against-implicit-bias-training\/","title":{"rendered":"The Fight for (and against) Implicit Bias Training by Claire Bufalino"},"content":{"rendered":"

Racism \u2013 unconscious bias \u2013 implicit bias \u2013 critical race theory \u2013 anti-racism \u2013 anti-anti-racism<\/em>. Everyone has something to say about these terms and where they belong in our culture. Implicit bias has become the most recent idea to suffer the consequences of a polarized political environment. The battle over implicit bias\u2014what is it? who has it? what should we do about it?\u2014has now infiltrated the nation\u2019s public school system.<\/p>\n

What is Implicit Bias?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Two psychologists, Mahzarin Banaji and Anthony Greenwald, developed the theory<\/a> of implicit bias 25 years ago. They conducted a simple experiment in which Dr. Banaji quickly sorted positive and negative words and faces of Black and white people using two keys on her keyboard. She found that when Black faces were paired with the same key as negative words and white faces paired with positive words, it was easy to sort them quickly. However, when they switched the pairing, sorting Black faces together with positive words and white faces with negative words, the task was not as simple. This was how they discovered that our decisions are guided by unknown forces.<\/p>\n

This experiment became the Implicit Association Test<\/a> (IAT), which measures the strength of associations between concepts, like race or gender, and evaluations or stereotypes. The IAT debuted in 1998, and millions of people have since taken the test, inspiring a wealth of further research<\/a> on implicit bias. Now scientists understand that most of our brain processing happens unconsciously<\/a>. Therefore, the part of our brains responsible for this processing must work automatically and quickly, and it makes many implicit associations to do that. Thus, implicit bias is the result of a critical part of our brain functioning, and nobody is immune to it.<\/p>\n

Politicizing the Issue<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the past 5\u201310 years, this research has shaped public discourse about race and discrimination. Hillary Clinton<\/a> brought the issue to the forefront of the 2016 presidential race, arguing<\/a> that \u201cimplicit bias is a problem for everyone.\u201d This led to swift political backlash<\/a> where the accusation of bias was equated with an accusation of racism.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Photo by Rolande PG<\/a> on Unsplash<\/a><\/p><\/div>\n

Despite proponents\u2019 attempts<\/a> to depersonalize the issue by stressing that everyone has bias, and therefore no one is blameworthy, opponents have largely succeeded in conflating understandings of explicit racism with implicit bias, triggering the defensiveness of many white Americans.<\/p>\n

Fast forward to 2020, when, in the wake of the murders of Breonna Taylor, George Floyd, and other Black Americans by police officers, and during a global pandemic that disproportionately affected people of color and those in poverty, the United States experienced an unprecedented reckoning with centuries of systemic racism and inequality. As a result, the discussion resurged about the need for anti-discriminatory policies in workplaces and educational institutions, ones that break down systemic racism and implicit bias, not just overt discrimination. Again, the backlash was quick, decrying the liberal agenda that invents harm where it doesn\u2019t exist. The current battle over this issue is playing out in the public school system.<\/p>\n

Implicit Bias in Education<\/strong><\/p>\n

Implicit bias exists everywhere, and K\u201312 education is no exception. It is most prevalent in school discipline<\/a>, with students of color, especially Black students, and students with disabilities being disciplined more frequently and harshly than their white peers. Black students account for 15.5% of all public school students, but they represent 39% of school suspensions<\/a> and 36% of expulsions<\/a>. These disparities only worsen at the intersections of race, gender, and disability. This overrepresentation is not due to higher rates of misbehavior by Black students but is the result of structural and systemic issues, like implicit bias. A 2016 Yale study<\/a> found evidence of this bias against students as young as preschool when, by using eye-tracking technology, researchers found that preschool teachers show a tendency to more closely observe Black students, especially boys. Racial bias is also evident in the fact that students of color are more likely to be disciplined for subjective offenses<\/a> like \u201cdisrespect\u201d or \u201cexcessive noise,\u201d while white students are more likely to be disciplined for objective offenses like smoking or vandalism. The expectation that Black boys will exhibit more challenging behaviors leads teachers to monitor and stress control over their behavior far more than white students. Teachers are as susceptible to bias as anyone else.<\/p>\n

In 2016 and 2017, as the idea of implicit bias came to the forefront of public discussions, articles provided guidance<\/a> to educators on how to combat their own biases and dismantle systemic inequality. In 2020 and 2021, the calls to require implicit bias training for educators have increased and, once again, so has the conservative backlash. The counterattack began with Donald Trump\u2019s charges<\/a> that schools were spreading lies to children by teaching about slavery and racism. Capitalizing on this momentum, recent attacks by Republican-controlled state legislatures against teaching critical race theory (CRT) in schools present an additional challenge.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Photo by NeONBRAND<\/a> on Unsplash<\/a><\/p><\/div>\n

Twelve states<\/a> have enacted bans against teaching CRT and other \u201cdivisive concepts.\u201d Most recently, the Wisconsin State Assembly passed<\/a> a bill that would prohibit schools from teaching students and training employees on topics related to critical race theory, including systemic racism and implicit bias. This bill and others like it not only prevent educating students on racism, but also prevent schools from educating teachers on their own biases.<\/p>\n

Illinois has been no exception to the political conflict. In February, Illinois adopted<\/a> \u201cculturally responsive teaching and leading standards,\u201d which require teacher training programs to cover concepts like implicit bias, historical inequities, social-emotional development, and student advocacy. Prior to its adoption, conservative media outlets criticized the standards as \u201cwoke indoctrination<\/a>\u201d and \u201cmore like racism<\/a> than its opposite.\u201d These arguments rely on the idea that critical race theory and implicit bias training teach educators and students to see race where they wouldn\u2019t have before and promote reverse discrimination. This ignores the well-documented disparities between students of color and white students, in discipline but also in test scores, advanced class placement, and almost every other aspect of education. By centering the fragility of white educators, parents, and children rather than the outcomes of all students, these critics increase the risk that disparities will only get worse.<\/p>\n

Moving Past Politics<\/strong><\/p>\n

It is essential to move beyond the politicization of this topic to see how it can fundamentally change the school environment. Studies show that when students witness their classmates face serious discipline for trivial offenses, it affects academic performance and creates an atmosphere of anxiety. Exclusionary discipline also costs<\/a> districts across the country $35 bill annually. Training will not only save money, but more importantly, it works. One study<\/a> of 2,000 middle schools showed that a 45-minute workshop paired with one 25-minute online module on \u201cempathetic discipline\u201d was enough to cut suspension rates in half. Note that this training doesn\u2019t tell teachers not to discipline students when they misbehave, but it teaches them to do so with empathy, searching for the underlying cause of the behavior and addressing that instead of the child\u2019s identity. This not only alters teachers\u2019 actions but students\u2019 as well. The same study<\/a> found that intervening with just one of a student\u2019s teachers affected their interactions with every other teacher as well.<\/p>\n

As with many others before it, the term \u201cimplicit bias\u201d has transformed into a political tool, a scare tactic used to label administrators as woke leftists prepared to leave their white students behind. In reality, implicit bias training consists of programs like the one described above that train educators to make small changes in the way they approach all of their students. It consists of simple tools that offer to transform the school community. It benefits everyone<\/em>.<\/p>\n

And so it is up to every member of the school community to reshape the narrative around this issue. That may mean that the administration labels the training something else, such as \u201cempathetic discipline training\u201d. Or a group of parents shows support at a school board meeting. Or a teacher implements strategies in their own classroom and shares what they\u2019ve noticed with their colleagues. Depoliticizing and changing the narrative around implicit bias training is on all of us.<\/p>\n

Claire Bufalino is a law student at Loyola University Chicago School of Law and wrote this blog post as part of the Education Law Practicum.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Racism \u2013 unconscious bias \u2013 implicit bias \u2013 critical race theory \u2013 anti-racism \u2013 anti-anti-racism. Everyone has something to say about these terms and where they belong in our culture. Implicit bias has become the most recent idea to suffer … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2,4,10,11,16,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-818","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-anti-racism","category-critical-race-theory","category-humanities-education","category-implicit-bias-training","category-public-education","category-school-curriculum"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.luc.edu\/edlawinstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/818","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.luc.edu\/edlawinstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.luc.edu\/edlawinstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.luc.edu\/edlawinstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.luc.edu\/edlawinstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=818"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.luc.edu\/edlawinstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/818\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.luc.edu\/edlawinstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=818"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.luc.edu\/edlawinstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=818"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.luc.edu\/edlawinstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=818"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}