Hello readers,
Though most of my posts are generalized about a given topic, today I would like to hone in on a specific piece of writing that I will, for the sake of the post, assume you have read. Dr. Claude Steele’s book Whistling Vivaldi is a wonderful read and an endless font of discussion material. In fact, while reading, I so enjoyed the sections that were assigned that I sought out the remainder of the text online. After having finished a grand majority of the work, I would like to offer up some fair criticism of the piece in hopes that a productive discussion might arise. I mean no ill will to Dr. Steele in this, but rather put it forth in the hopes that his work might inspire further change at the university level.
I would like to begin with an odd stipulation: Let us assume, for a second, that we are in complete agreement with the argument that Dr. Steele has made. We could, wasting our time, talk about how outdated his examples are, and how most of his research in Whistling Vivaldi is pulled from 40+ years ago, and that, if he were speaking about computers instead of students, he would have written a comparable book on how inefficient the Ditto machine is. But, I believe to do so would be pointless. We could spend all day nitpicking his minor arguments, and, at the end of it all, still not have hit at the heart of what troubles us with this book. So, for the time being, I would like to assume that we completely buy into everything that Dr. Steele has put forth. I do this for a multitude of reasons, foremost being that Dr. Steele is most certainly acting out of honest concern for the well-being of students, and I can fault no man for this. He has put his heart into making certain that a group of individuals, who are currently struggling, will be pushed the forefront of the educational agenda in hopes of securing them a better future. Secondly, I do not sense any ill will in the writing of Dr. Steele. He is not searching for solutions at other’s expense. He is striking at this problem with the hope of destroying it without casualties.
For these reasons, I am willing to give Dr. Steele the benefit of the doubt, and begin with complete acceptance of his argument before I begin any criticism of it. If we assume that Dr. Steele has made a correct assessment of the current state of affairs in academia, then there is really only one criticism that remains worth pursuing: a criticism of response. The fact remains that after all agreements have been furnished, Dr. Steele does not give any concrete advice towards a solution. At the end of his book, he puts forth a solution that would be considered vague at best stating:
“Still, a hope arises from this research. If we want to overcome underperformance, if we want to open the door for many stereotyped students to learn and prosper in society, we should, in addition to focusing on skill and knowledge, also focus on reducing those threats in schools, classrooms, workplaces, even basketball gyms. You should focus on making the identity less inconvenient, and this first generation of intervention studies makes a good beginning in showing you how to do it.”
But does it?
Did he really give us any practical advice towards a solution? Let’s review his advice and experiments:
He begins the book by recounting a large amount of examples and justifications for the existence of stereotype threat; here we have no issue. He then recounts his study of the women in math class and demonstrates how he helped them. However, let’s not forget that his “help” involved telling them that stereotypes did, in fact, apply and that they had created a test that accounted for the difference in the genders. I would argue that, while this proved the existence of the threat, as a teaching method, it does nothing but reinforce the assumptions. He also gives the suggestion to set high expectations and promote confidence in student achievement, but this is a tactic endorsed by the “colorblind” group that he rallies against at the beginning of the book. In the end, the only practical advice that he gives out amounts to “be aware that it happens and fix it.” This, however, is problematic as well.
In order to fix a problem ( And I think we can all agree that underperformance is a problem) one must find the source of that problem and seek to change the elements that dictate that source. According to Steele, there are two things that cause the black students of today anxiety to the point of feeling obligated to “Whistle Vivaldi”: 1) The depictions of white people in positions of wealth and power in the media and in observation, and 2) Their minority status within the campus.
Now the first of these cannot be changed by classroom professors, and I think this is where his message of awareness comes in. Professors, though powerful incubators of change hold very little sway over geopolitical economics and the media. however, this does not leave us powerless. As Steele suggests, if we provoke our students into a realization that whiteness is not a normative function, it may counterbalance some of these media portrayals. But the second issue is more of a sticking point. How does one make minority students feel safe and non-threatened, if their existence as a minority is the source of the threat? I’m not sure I have an answer, and I’m positive that Dr. Steele does not provide one. It’s a cyclical issue that cannot be resolved anytime soon, though some have tried. Diversity faculty hires exist for this very reason, as do classes in cultural studies. But the problem becomes one of separations. As Steele mentions, these programs frequently are only attended by the minority students to begin with, which only serves to separate them further on campus and strengthen the stereotype threat that they experience. If aid is given, the question quickly becomes, “how much,” and, “for how long?” with no specific answer in sight. It’s an issue that deserves a solution, but which may not have one for a long time.
In the end, I’m not faulting, Dr. Steele’s book. It’s very well written and extremely enjoyable. Quite the opposite, I’m suggesting a sequel. I need a book where he sets forth a series of guidelines to improve the quality of life for these students across a variety of campuses. We agree on the threat Dr. Steele, but now it’s time to do something about it.
As always, if my readers have any clever solutions I would love to hear them in the comments below.