Research: Science and Education edited by
Chemical Education Research
Diane M. Bunce The Catholic University of America Washington, D.C. 20064
The Representation of People of Color in Undergraduate General Chemistry Textbooks Denise King and Daniel S. Domin* Department of Chemistry, Tennessee State University, Nashville, TN 37209-1561; *
[email protected] The presence of visuals in science textbooks serves to communicate important information to students trying to understand complicated ideas. These visuals can be dichotomized into schematic or iconic representations depending on the purpose they serve. Schematic visuals summarize information deemed essential for the reader in a concise format. Iconic visuals (e.g., line drawings, diagrams, and photographs) depict within a two-dimensional plane the spatial information associated with concrete three-dimensional objects. Visuals can also be dichotomized with respect to the psychological domain they influence: cognitive or affective. Cognitive-oriented visuals facilitate comprehension of essential concepts, whereas affective-oriented visuals influence the development of attitudes. Visuals containing images of people are not restricted to either side of the dichotomy; they may help students better understand course material and also help students relate to those who work within a specific discipline. Inclusion of visuals in science textbooks are predominantly directed towards influencing the cognitive domain of the learner. In his discussion of science textbook visuals, Holliday (1) lists 18 characteristics of effective visuals. All but one refers to some aspect of the cognitive domain. This is not to say that these same visuals cannot possess an affective component as well. Holliday mentions that effective visuals can also spark interest and curiosity in a specific discipline of science. Ignoring the affective domain by utilizing visuals in which only the cognitive domain has been considered can lead to the serious consequence of instructional bias. Instructional bias occurs when the interests of one group are overwhelmingly favored at the expense of the interests of other groups (2). Seven forms of instructional bias are associated with instructional materials: invisibility, stereotyping, imbalance兾sensitivity, un-reality, fragmentation兾isolation, linguistic, and cosmetic (3). With respect to visuals, instructional bias typically manifests itself in the form of invisibility, stereotyping, fragmentation兾isolation, or cosmetic. The context of instructional bias is often considered in relation to gender or culture. Many studies have been performed that assess gender bias in science textbooks and the reader is referred to the following references for a more in-depth analysis (4–6). This study focuses solely on cultural bias. When visuals contain images of people, the people within the image can usually be associated with some cultural group. The group most often represented is an indicator of the cultural group that has established hegemony over the society. As an example of hegemony, consider restaurants
342
Journal of Chemical Education
•
in American society. Many restaurants are categorized as to either the ethnicity of the food they specialize in or the clientele they serve. It is not uncommon in American society to find restaurants labeled according to ethnicity: Chinese, Mexican, Indian, and so forth. It is not typical to find restaurants advertising that they specialize in white-people food. They exist; however, the term American is substituted for white people. The white culture is so dominant in American society, that the two terms often are used interchangeably. Any situation involving hegemony will present some type of cultural bias. Bias occurs because other cultural groups are represented in a manner different from that of the mainstream culture. The most common form of cultural bias is invisibility. It occurs when particular groups are not represented in the textbook photographs or when they are only represented in areas that do not really matter (7). In the context of chemistry education this can include utilizing them in photographs that have no relevance to the practice of science or chemistry in particular. Invisibility is a powerful form of bias because it conveys the message to people from non-dominant cultures that they are less important and less significant in society than people from within the dominant culture (8). Stereotyping is another form of instructional bias that occurs when an untruth or over simplification is conveyed that may be generalized to an entire group of people. The characteristics portrayed of a group can have either positive or negative connotations—usually they are negative (3). A common form of stereotyping is the portrayal of people of color in subordinate professional roles. Fragmentation兾isolation occurs when information about people from non-dominant groups is presented either separate from the mainstream content or people of color are shown interacting only with people from within their cultural group. For example, the contributions of prominent African-American scientists may be presented in a box outside of the main text. Even if the content is positive and free of gross generalizations, it is still considered instructional bias because, as with the other forms of bias, it fosters the image of “other” when dealing with people from outside of the dominant culture (7) or, at best, peripheral members of society. A relatively new form of bias associated with textbooks is cosmetic bias. Sadker (3) describes it as a marketing strategy that gives an “illusion of equity” by placing photographs of people from non-dominant groups in strategic locations: on the cover, in pullouts, or in large photographs within the textbooks. Cosmetic bias attempts to portray a textbook as bias free to give a favorable impres-
Vol. 84 No. 2 February 2007
•
www.JCE.DivCHED.org
Research: Science and Education
sion to potential purchasers who only skim the book before making a purchase decision. Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the presence of cultural bias within undergraduate general chemistry textbooks by assessing the extent to and manner in which people of color are represented in textbook photographs. For this study, a person of color was defined as any person who, as perceived by the authors, could not pass for having predominantly European ancestry. That is, does not have a “white” or a Caucasian appearance. This definition was intended to include persons of African or Asian ancestry, nonwhite Hispanics, and Native Americans as people of color. Methodology A content analysis was performed on eleven general chemistry textbooks (9–19) to assess the extent to which people of color are represented and to determine the manner in which these people are portrayed. Content analysis is a useful method of analysis when the acquired data possess a structure outside the control of the researcher (20). A content analysis consists of dividing a text into units of meaning and quantifying these units according to a set of agreed upon rules. Both authors participated in the content analysis. All of the textbooks analyzed had copyrights of 2000 or later. The authors independently examined each textbook page-by-page and categorized all photographs containing images of people into one of five categories: author, historical, person of color, not a person of color, or ambiguous. Only photographs categorized as person of color were further documented to ascertain the manner in which the people were portrayed. The extent of representation was expressed as a percentage of all photographs containing people. Because chemistry has been, and continues to be, a discipline dominated by white men to the exclusion of other groups, historical photographs and photographs of authors were excluded from the analysis. Although this introduces a certain degree of bias into the analysis, it skews the results towards a greater representation of people of color than what is actually presented within the text. The results, therefore, are presented in a more favorable light than may actually exist. Operational definitions of bias were utilized for each subcategory. Invisibility was operationally defined in two distinct contexts. First, it was considered to occur if the level of representation of people of color within the textbook photographs was less than their representation in society. The most recent U.S. census figure of 36% (21) was used as the demarcation. Second, invisibility was said to occur in a specific photograph if the photograph portrayed a person or people of color in a non-science relevant context. Stereotyping was considered to be present if any photograph depicting a person of color reinforced a generalization (whether positive or negative) about that person’s ethnicity: African-Americans, for example, portrayed as athletes (22). Fragmentation兾isolation was operationally defined as photographs in
www.JCE.DivCHED.org
•
which two or more people of the same non-dominant ethnic group are the only people present or if the photograph is part of a boxed section apart from the main text. Finally, cosmetic bias was said to occur if a person of color was present on the cover of the textbook or present within full-page photographs, but the level of representation of people of color in the textbook was below 36%. Results and Discussion No textbook was free of instructional bias, the most prevalent form being invisibility. However, none of the textbooks possessed all four forms of bias. The extent of representation of people of color is presented in Table 1. The extent of inclusion ranged from 3% to 28%. Inter-rater reliability was established using two different methods: intra-class correlation coefficient and percent agreement between raters (Table 1). The intra-class correlation coefficients ranged from 0.66 to 1.00 indicating strong correlations between the judges’ categorization of the photos. This is supported by the percent agreement between the judges that ranged from 83% to 100%. All of the textbooks analyzed included persons of color well below their representation in American society, 36% (21). Only one book, Chemistry in Context (28%), approached this level of inclusion (9). Chemistry in Context, however, is not a textbook targeted towards people who plan to enter a career in the sciences or engineering. It is essentially a non-majors textbook that presents chemistry topics in personal, societal, and global contexts. All of the other textbooks are geared towards chemistry majors and all of them feature people of color not only below their representation in American society, but also at or below their representation in the sciences and engineering workforce, 16% (23). Taken as a whole, the entire content analysis identified a total of 57 photographs, out of 528 considered, featuring people of color. The types of instructional bias present are
Table 1. Percentage of Photographs Containing People of Color Mean Representation (%) (Std. Dev.)
Textbook ACS (Chem. in Context) Brown et al.
Percent Agreement
ICCa
28 (2)
094
0.87
5 (2)
097
0.66
Chang
7 (1)
083
0.88
Ebbing & Gammon
9 (2)
097
0.90
Hill & Petrucci Masterton & Hurley
10 (4)
098
0.85
3 (0)
100
1.00
McMurry & Fay
8 (1)
098
0.88
Olmstead & Williams
7 (0)
100
1.00
Silberberg Whitten et al. Zumdahl a
11 (0)
100
1.00
3 (0)
100
1.00
16 (4)
095
0.80
Intra-class correlation coefficient calculated using SPSS.
Vol. 84 No. 2 February 2007
•
Journal of Chemical Education
343
Research: Science and Education
shown in Table 2. Because of the way the different forms of instructional bias were operationally defined, a single photograph may contain more than one type of bias. As discussed above, all of the textbooks analyzed possessed some degree of invisibility. People of color are represented at a level well below their representation in society and a number of the photographs in each textbook present them in a non-science relevant context. Considering only the photographs containing at least one person of color, only two of the eleven texts had a majority of photographs depicting people of color in science relevant contexts. For four of the eleven textbooks this was the only type of cultural bias. The second most prevalent form of bias was fragmentation兾isolation. Six of the eleven texts had at least one incidence of fragmentation or isolation. The most common manifestation of this bias was having pictures of people of color in which their ethnic group was the only ethnic group presented. Placing pictures of people of color in boxed sections of the chapters, outside of the main text, was another manifestation of this bias, but to a lesser extent. Stereotyping was identified in four of the eleven texts. Three textbooks depicted an African-American man in an athletic context and another textbook included a photograph of a young girl of Asian ethnicity studying. Cosmetic bias was identified in two textbooks. In one case, an AfricanAmerican woman is included in a photograph of young people on the cover of the book and, in a different textbook, a full-page photograph depicts a group of Asian workers. Although it is impossible to judge the intentions of the publishers and authors when deciding which photographs to place on the cover or in full-page depictions, the fact that these textbooks place photographs of people of color in highly visible locations while maintaining a low frequency of overall representation (9% and 16% respectively) promotes an illusion of equity and thus, according to Sadker (3), can be construed as cosmetic bias. Textbooks were grouped together based on publisher (Table 3) to ascertain any relationship between the percent representation and textbook publisher. The limited number of textbooks analyzed and the relatively high number of publishers represented in this study prevent drawing any defi-
nite conclusions. However, there does not appear to be any relationship as to the publisher influencing the extent of inclusion of people of color in textbook photographs.
Table 2. Types of Instructional Bias
Table 3. Textbooks Grouped According to Publisher
Textbook
n
Inv.
ST
F/I
Cos.
ACS (Chem. in Context)
12
11
---
---
---
Brown et al.
02
01
1
1
---
Chang
02
01
---
---
---
Ebbing & Gammon
10
03
---
3
1
Hill & Petrucci
04
04
---
1
Ebbing & Gammon Z umdahl
Silbe rbe rg
11
01
---
---
---
1
2
---
M cGraw H ill
9 16
---
05
---
H ought on M if f lin
Re p. A v e (%) (%) (St d. De v .)
28
01
1
T e x t bo o k
07
05
03
Publis he r
A CS
Masterton & Hurley
04
The textbook is a very important type of instructional medium. Usually, it is the first thing a student sees with respect to a particular course. The textbook also bears an intimate relationship with the student in that it remains with the students outside of class and, possibly, even after the course is completed. It is not unrealistic to expect the textbook to have a significant impact on the learner. Advocates stress that textbook illustrations help students understand concepts and appeal to learners with non-verbal learning styles. The pictures illustrate many of the concepts presented in the course. The pictures can also have a less explicit function: they communicate to the learner something about the people involved in the discipline. It is proposed that the images that the students look upon in their textbooks aid in their perceptions of chemistry as a whole. Some illustrations may provoke thoughts of wanting to be a chemist, or other scientist, or simply convey to the student that this discipline is a realistic choice for a profession. When images of people in science textbooks predominantly portray only a single cultural group, the implicit message conveyed to students from other cultural groups is that this discipline is not open to them as a profession. What can be done to change this message? Simply including more photos of people of color is unlikely to be the answer. Including a greater number of photographs will not necessarily reduce instructional bias. For example, increasing the number of photographs of people of color may seem like a way to reduce invisibility, but that action will have no effect on that particular form of instructional bias if the photographs portray the people in non-scientific scenarios. Also, one must also be careful to avoid substituting one form of bias for another. Increasing the number of photographs of people of color may reduce invisibility, but if the photograph includes only people from the same ethnic group, it will increase the level of fragmentation兾isolation bias.
C hang
McMurry & Fay Olmstead & Williams
Conclusion
Pe ars on/Pre nt ice H all
B row n e t al.
1 3 (5 )
1 5 (1 1 )
5
---
H ill & Pe t rucci
10
M cM urry & Fay
8
8 (3 )
Silberberg
05
02
1
1
---
Whitten et al.
02
02
---
---
---
Saunde rs
W hit t e n e t al.
3
---
1
B rooks C ole /Thoms on
M as t e rt on & H urle y
3
---
W ile y
Olms t e ad & W illiams
7
---
Zumdahl
10
05
---
3
NOTE: Inv. is invisibility, ST is stereotyping, F/I is fragmentation/isolation, and Cos. is cosmetic.
344
Journal of Chemical Education
•
N OTE: Re p. is t he me an re pre s e nt at ion.
Vol. 84 No. 2 February 2007
•
www.JCE.DivCHED.org
Research: Science and Education
We encourage textbook authors and publishers to include more photographs of people of color and suggest the following: • show people of color doing science, • place more photographs of people of color in earlier chapters as opposed to later chapters, • place the photographs in chapters that are more likely to be covered, • show people of differing ethnicities in the same photograph as equals, and • avoid photographs that perpetuate stereotypes of specific ethnic groups.
Instructional bias in college-level general chemistry textbooks is too common and too important an issue to ignore. Historically, people outside of the mainstream culture have been excluded from participating in science and engineering professions and their representation in these fields continues to be significantly lower than their representation in American society. Efforts to change this are on-going; each year the United States government and private organizations spend millions of dollars on programs dedicated to increasing the percentage of under-represented groups in science and engineering professions. Many of these programs prepare high school students for college. It is important that once they get there the message from their science textbook is one of inclusion. Literature Cited 1. Holliday, W. G. http://www.narst.org/publications/research/ textbook.htm (accessed Oct 2006). 2. Byrne, M. M. AORN Journal 2002, 75, 808–816. 3. Sadker, D. M. http://www.american.edu/sadker/ curricularbias.htm (accessed Sep 2006). 4. Bazler, J. A.; Simonis, D. A. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1991, 28, 353– 362.
www.JCE.DivCHED.org
•
5. Guzzetti, B. J.; Williams, W. O. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1996, 33, 5–20. 6. Walford, G. Phys. Educ. 1981, 16, 261–265. 7. Fleras, A.; Kunz, J. L. Media and Minorities: Representing Diversity in a Multicultural Canada; Thomson Educational: Toronto, 2001. 8. Byrne, M. J. Nurs. Educ. 2003, 42, 277. 9. American Chemical Society. Chemistry in Context, 3rd ed.; McGraw–Hill: Boston, 2000. 10. Brown, T. L.; LeMay, H. E.; Bursten, B. E.; Burdge, J. R. Chemistry: The Central Science, 9th ed.; Pearson: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2003. 11. Chang, R. General Chemistry: The Essential Concepts, 3rd ed.; McGraw–Hill: Boston, 2003. 12. Ebbing, D.; Gammon, S. General Chemistry, 8th ed.; Houghton Mifflin: New York, 2005. 13. Hill, J. W.; Petrucci, R. H. General Chemistry: An Integrated Approach, 3rd ed.; Prentice–Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2002. 14. Masterton, W. L.; Hurley, C. N. Chemistry: Principles and Reactions, 5th ed.; Brooks Cole/Thomson: Belmont, CA, 2004. 15. McMurry, J.; Fay, R. C. Chemistry, 4th ed.; Pearson: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2004. 16. Olmstead, J.; Williams, G. M. Chemistry, 3rd ed.; Wiley: New York, 2002. 17. Silberberg, M. S. Chemistry: The Molecular Nature of Matter and Change, 3rd ed.; McGraw–Hill: Boston, 2003. 18. Whitten, K. W.; Davis, R. E.; Peck, M. L.; Stanley, G. G. General Chemistry, 7th ed.; Brooks Cole/Thomson: Belmont, CA, 2004. 19. Zumdahl, S. S.; Zumdahl, S. A. Chemistry, 5th ed.; Houghton Mifflin: Boston, 2000. 20. Krippendorff, K. Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology; Sage: Beverly Hills, 1980. 21. United States Census 2000. http://www.census.gov (accessed Sep 2006). 22. DeCuir, J. T.; Dixon, A. D. Educ. Res. 2004, 33, 26. 23. National Science Board. Science and Engineering Indicators; National Science Foundation: Arlington, VA, 2002.
Vol. 84 No. 2 February 2007
•
Journal of Chemical Education
345
