RUNNING HEADER: INTERSECTIONALITY

Sarah Wilson

Texas Christian University, College of Education

Professor Crocker, EDUC 4113

12 November 2020
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 1

Intersectionality Analysis

What is Intersectionality?

Intersectionality was a term that I had never come in contact with prior to Chapter 1

reading ​Intersectionality, Race-Gender Subordination, and Education.​ This article defined

intersectionality as a ‘theoretical framework’ for understanding how multiple social identities

such as race, gender, and socioeconomic status interact at the micro-level of individual

experience (Harris & Leonardo, 2018, p. 1). The video assigned by Teaching Tolerance (2016),

gave me a more clear understanding through the use of intersectionality as a metaphor. The video

described how we all have pieces of or social identity that intersect with each other to create who

we are (Teaching Tolerance, 2016). This is our intersectionality. The chapter did disagree with

this framework, expressing the two-dimensional representation as limiting and unrepresentative

of the complexity of intersectionality. The reading brought up the discussion of intersectionality

as an example of a “Koosh ball” as well as through Combahee River Collective’s “A Black

Feminist Statement” in 1977. This portrayed the role of ‘heterosexism and homophobia in Black

women’s lives along with capitalism, racism, and patriarchy” through understanding that “black

women would never gain their freedom without attending to the oppressions of race ​and ​class

and ​gender” (Collins & Bilge, 2016, p. 66 via Harries & Leonardo, 2018). This connected me to

the second part of intersectionality I would grasp which is moving past just intersecting social

identities, but recognizing the oppressions or privileges of these identities in our lives.
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 2
Understanding this basis allowed me to then continue reading and analyzing intersectionality and

its role in society and education.

As an educator, understanding intersectionality is crucial. We are human beings teaching

other human beings. This means that every person involved in the classroom has their own

specific intersectionality, whether it be the teacher or student. First, however, I will focus on the

student’s intersectionality and its presence in education. The article stated that “intersectionality

emerges as a key concept that unlocks the education house that race made, not only from the

obvious racialized achievement gap, but also down the educational enterprise, from the

disciplinary policies to the overdiagnosis and over the referral of Black students to special

education, to teacher education in general” (Artiles, Dorn, & Bal, 2016 via Harris & Leonardo,

2018). I want to dive deeper into this quote. These are all visible acts of institutional disparity

that can be unlocked through intersectionality. As educators, we must be aware of how

intersectionality is affecting the educational system with these institutional disparities.

Overrepresentation of children of color in special education classrooms while an

underrepresentation in higher-level courses is not only a ‘race problem’ when viewed through

the lens of intersectionality. Language and socioeconomic status are also social identities within

these children that are being overrepresented as well. We often focus on the power of whiteness

in education, for example in the implementation of multiculturalism in school. The reading

discusses the institutionalization of multiculturalism in schools, to racially uplift non-white

students. This ultimately led to a normalization of multiculturalism and little impact or change

visible in education with regards to any multiculturalism at all.

INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 3

Intersectionality in Education

The next point I want to discuss is the powerful interventions in education that

intersectionality can evoke. The reading discussed the example of the “Black male experience in

education and the microaggressions they suffer, which warrants focused attention (Hothkins,

2016” (Harris & Leonardo, 2018, p.15). This observation requires the action of changing the

representation and uplifting the prospects of African American and Latino males in education.

This study requires the integration of race and gender to be studied as they intersect within the

population of Black males in education. I enjoyed this point as I could tie it back to the

institutional disparity within the training of teachers as well as the demographic of elementary

teachers.

There is a disparity between race and gender within the education system through

teachers. According to a study done by National Center for Education Statistics (2017), “in

2017–18, about 79 percent of public school teachers were White, 9 percent were Hispanic, 7

percent were Black, 2 percent were Asian, 2 percent were of Two or more races, and 1 percent

were American Indian/Alaska Native; additionally, those who were Pacific Islander made up less

than 1 percent of public school teachers” (p.2). Within the same student, the National Center for

Education Statistics found that “about 76 percent of public school teachers were female and 24

percent were male in 2017–18, with a lower percentage of male teachers at the elementary school

level (11 percent)” (p.2). When the population being studied involves black male students, and

the demographic with the most direct interaction with these students are white, lots of
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 4
unintentional bias and lack of possible empathy can be present. Through looking at these

statistics, I noticed that I was doing a critical analysis while recognizing two parts of teacher

intersectionality. This two-axis study allowed me to see how both race and gender can affect

education on a deeper level. That in itself is the basis of intersectionality.

Gender and Race within Schools and Society

Intersections of Identity

After identifying what intersectionality is as a whole, there are specific intersections that

are important to analyze to better understand the way schools function within society. I have

chosen as important the intersection of gender and race. Specifically, I will be analyzing the way

that gender and race interact to test or confirm a racialized and/or gendered person through their

dress.

Intersection of Gender and Schools & Society Through Dress

Over time, students have been gendered in schools most evidently through the

incorporation of a gendered dress code. With these gender-specific dress-codes, “children are

learning how to abide by gender rules, made explicit through school policies centered around a

student’s appearance and clothing” (Arns, 2017, p.41). This touches on the topic of why we are

making progress with other discrimination in schools, but little progress concerning gender

norms. With the history of the education system being founded on these norms, it becomes

difficult to change. We also know that these foundations that were once based on social and

cultural norms, are now more government and constitutionally supported. With this

understanding, Arns found in a thesis study ​Undressing the Dress Code: An Analysis of Gender
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 5
in High School Dress Code,​ that “the adoption of an inclusive dress code policy, which moves

away from proscriptive dress code policies to prescriptive dress code policies, would leave

behind inequitable rules and enforcement that relies on shame and students’ missed class time”

(Arns, 2017, p. 82-83). In order to make reform while taking the eyes off of female student’s

bodies, we must turn our focus and policy-neutral to hold expectations equally for all. When this

is reformed to completion, hopefully, females in school will not worry about who their clothing

will affect, and likewise, male students will be more comfortable and relaxed from sexual

desires.

Continuing with the intersection of gender and society, we can focus on the effect of

dress code on both men and women through community and societal values shown in the ​Harper

v Edgewood Case. ​In this case “the court upheld a school’s refusal to allow a female student and

a male student to attend their prom dressed in clothes traditionally of the opposite sex...

Concluding that the school board’s dress regulations were reasonably related to valid educational

purposes of teaching community values” (Smith, 2011, p.256). This discrimination on the basis

of sex was seen similarly in ​Doe v Yunits​ when a male student was diagnosed with ‘gender

identity disorder’ for wearing clothes traditionally worn by the opposite sex to school. The court,

in comparison to ​Harper, invalidated​ gender-based restrictions, but only on the basis of a mental

disorder stating that ‘prohibiting a student ​suffering from gender identity disorder​ f​ rom wearing

traditional female clothes violated the First Amendment. The Smith (2011) article discussed how

these decisions based on gender typically have more lasting effects on male students, due to

social biases. Men wearing traditionally female clothing is more likely to cause disapproval than
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 6
a female student wearing traditionally male clothing. These biases have lasting effects on male

student’s identities and self-efficacy.

Intersection of Race and Schools & Society Through Dress

Looking at how cultures are racialized can give us a better view of this intersection. Berry

& Candis (2013), stated that “school and its primary components/activities- curriculum, teaching,

and learning- is a major socio-cultural venue from which our experiences and identities are

(re)invented, racialized, and remembered” (p.45 &46). In the US, a person's race and ethnicity

continue to be primary indicators of social standing and access to resources. Because of this,

many Americans- African Americans discussed specifically in this article- face the need to

‘forge’ their identities in order to get ahead in mainstream society. The education system is no

exception to this. A lack of access to resources, in this instance schooling resources, provides the

inability to ‘define and perpetuate the ideals and maintain the social order’ thus reinforcing the

social racialization put on cultures (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 199 via Berry & Candis, 2013,

p.48). Taking a windows and mirrors point of view, the majority of educators in the United

States are White females. This is staggering next to the increasing number of non-White students

in America’s public schools. This lack of mirrors for students poses a potential cultural gap

between many educators and students. A cultural gap, as defined by Berry & Candis (2013), is

“a theoretical, conceptual and practical disconnect in the spaces between culture (values,

traditions, customs, beliefs, etc) of the learners and communities from which they come and the

educational institutions and the popoenters thereof” (p.46). This gap causes a disconnect between
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 7
both educators and their students. A societal racialization forcing those to change their cultural

identity to be economically competitive, in combination with a lack of mirrors in the early

childhood classroom, causes an identity crisis for many African American students. The current

education system is not developed to resist this identity crisis, rather it is continuing to racialize

these students through a lack of representation and connection. “Teachers whose future teaching

practices are affected by their coming to know the cultural identities and experiences of their

students, may, in turn, have students who are less likely and less often experiencing identity

crisis” (Berry & Candis, 2013, p.46). To do this, we as educators must come to understand

where we stand in the socio-cultural venue of school. We then can build and understand where

students, of many cultural identities, facing many different cultural racializations, stand in the

venue of the school, and develop complex perspectives of our students. By doing this, we can

address these racializations, acknowledge them, and make them a central part of our classroom

curriculum.

Lastly, we can dissect the intersection of race and society in schools, specifically how

cultures are racialized, and connect it to the central theme of this analysis which is dress. In a

dissertation by Nurse (2016), eloquently describe the way this intersection is present in society

by describing how women specifically, “do beauty by visually articulating and negotiating

cultural contradictions and personal ambivalence to various definitions of beauty to construct

their own bodily performance” (Hammidi & Kaiser, 1999 via Nurse, 2016, p. 37). This provides

evidence that people must negotiate between the cultural expectation of their society and the

cultural expectations of themselves to create a physical appearance that is seen as ‘socially

beautiful’. Oftentimes, this involves dress; many people of culturally and linguistically diverse
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 8
backgrounds have a traditional dress that would then be a primary definer of their social standing

and access to resources. These members of society struggle to balance the intersectionality of

their culture, society, and dress while remaining high-level respected members of society.

Intersection of Gender and Race in Schools & Society through Dress

We can take this study on gendered dress codes further by looking at how students are

not only gendered but subsequently racialized. Ahrens & Siegle touched on this topic through the

discussion of policing in schools. In the 1960s the United States joined a state of ‘law and order’

that “involved creating new crimes, imposing substantially harsher prison sentences for existing

ones, and investing staggering amount of resources into policing crimes” including the adoption

of policy officers regularly stationed inside schools (Ahrens & Siegle, 2018, p.69). Children of

color particularly were most affected by this change; there were more aggressive law

enforcement and less leniency to youth offenders. These policy changes occurred simultaneously

with the development of racist anxieties and concerns imposed on Black Americans. “These

racist narratives dubbed young Black boys as ‘super predators’, used stereotypes and slurs to

become Black crack dealers and users for an uptick in crime rates more likely attributable to

shifting age patterns and poverty rates” (Ahrens & Siegle, 2018, p.80). This narrative of ‘super

predators’ for Black boys is an intersection of race and gender in the classroom imposed by

societal and political influence. These students have both a gender identity of being a boy, which

brings the stereotype of naturally more aggression. On top of this, these students carry a racial

identity of being a student of color. With this super predator lens placed on them, comes

racialization and profiling especially with dress. Specifically, the 2012 Trayvon Martin case,
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 9
serves as a tragic yet realistic view of these intersections in society today. On February 26, 2012,

Trayvon Martin was fatally shot and killed while walking home from the convenience store. The

police officer responsible for the shooting, George Zimmerman, claimed self-defense after

reporting Trayvon as a ‘suspicious guy’ and getting into a physical altercation with him. Many

claimed that the officer reacted this way because of the way Trayvon Martin was dressed; in a

“dark hoodie, a gray hoodie”, as Officer Zimmerman described to dispatchers. This case sparked

one of the first large movements in police racial profiling with regards to dress. An article by

NPR (2012) titled “Tragedy Gives The Hoodie A Whole New Meaning”, stated that ‘the hoodie

is as much responsible for Trayvon Martin’s death as George Zimmerman was” (para. 3). Many

advised other young Black boys to not wear hoodies as they are now considered by some to be

suspicious attire. This tragic case started the discussion of how dress confirms racialized

prejudice. If Trayvon was wearing a suit, would things have been different? This intersection

tests the prejudices built into society that young Black men face daily through the way they

dress.

In conclusion, we have analyzed the ​way that gender and race interact to test or confirm a

racialized and/or gendered person through their dress, as well as the combination of both race

and gender interacting in school and society to confirm or test these biases.

Gender and Race in Curriculum

Identifying Intersections

After analyzing the way gender and race interact within schools and society specifically

through dress, we can move onto the final intersection. This is the interaction of gender and race
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 10
in the curriculum. Curriculum involves the theoretical, philosophical, and/or practical concerns

of the educators and students. To analyze this interaction I will continue to analyze the way

curriculum either confirms and/or tests the way individuals are genders and/or racialized, as well

as the way dress is used in and as a school curriculum.

Intersection of Gender and Curriculum

One of the most prevalent ways gender is shown through curriculum is through the

representation of traditional gender roles. Traditionally “the male gender role is one of

dominance, while the female gender role is one of subordination” (Basow, p. 118). Due to these

traditional gender roles, many of the significant moments of history, discussed in the state given

standards, are focused around men. This notion is supported in many curriculums as they “fail to

reflect on the experiences and contribution of women in history and in contemporary society”

due to the assumption that women’s roles of subordination led them to be downplayed in

historical significance (Taylor, 1989, p. 1).

This is often seen through women being underrepresented in History textbooks. In a 2015

article on this underrepresentation, Gospe stated that “nobody notices the lack of representation

at first because we are so encultured to accept male-centric attitudes in our curricula'' (para.1). A

gender bias this heavily imprinted on the educational curriculum can be questioned when looking

back to our findings on the demographic of U.S educators, which represented a majority of

women. Women teaching this gender bias, male-centric curricula leads us to ask the question,

why is there not being more change made? Pinder (2013) argues that “gender equality requires

the willing cooperation of males” which is lacking in the education system, however “a

counter-argument can be made that the marginalization of women depends, in part, on the
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 11
cooperation of women in their own marginalization, especially in light of the concept of

hegemonic masculinity” (p. 448). Pinder continues to discuss the process in which many female

educators are socialized into these norms of masculine hegemony. Through the process of

becoming an educator, many women are taught to normalize this male-centric curriculum and in

part, not question the lack of representation. But what does this effect have on the students

experiencing these gender bias standards and content? In a study done by Chiponda &

Wasserman in 2011, there were three possible outcomes of the underrepresentation of women in

textbooks: women as exceptional or wicked, science is not for women, and the historical place of

women is in the home and if they leave, they must do double the work (p.21).

To investigate women as exceptional or wicked, Chiponda & Wassermann used the

vignette of war. There is little, if ever, a representation of women leading soldiers to victory or

farming in the heat of summer. While the representation of this is sparse this gives both positive

and negative views of gender roles. First, it is positive in the sense that it represents women as

having the ability and potential to perform these traditionally masculine roles. The

counterargument is that it gives off the impression that “for example, working in the army,

farming, and bartending are dangerous, difficult and mysterious jobs not meant for the majority

of ordinary women but are activities for a minority of a ‘special and extraordinary women”

(Chiponda & Wassermann, 2011, p. 22). This gives off the message that girls need to be ​more

than themselves to fill traditionally masculine roles.

Moving onto science is not for women. The women in STEM (Science, Technology,

Engineering, Mathematics) topic has grown monumentally in the past decade, but there is still an

overwhelming majority of men in STEM roles. In many textbooks, women are shown as
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 12
‘observers’ to scientific experiences conducted by men. The justification for this is that science is

“danger and/or frightening to women, who must meekly and cautiously stand at a distance and

merely observe their courageous men” (Chiponda & Wassermann, 2011, p.22). The simple

message sent here is that women simply do not belong in science. To young girls, this message is

not only discouraging but hurtful. The subject matter is simply not gender-specific, and to

address this issue of gender misrepresentation in STEM it must begin in the early childhood

classroom with the curriculum being taught.

Lastly, the historical place of women is in the home and if they leave they must do double

the word. This connects to the opening discussion about traditional gender roles for women and

men. Chiponda & Wassermann studied a textbook where they saw that while women in

textbooks were largely portrayed in these submissive roles, there were women represented in

other roles (p.23). However, the women presented in these roles were duly represented; they

were not only doing a different job but doing it alongside their traditional role of mother, cleaner,

cook, etc. In comparison, Chiponda & Wassermann (2011), found that “in none of the studies

reviewed did the role of men change convincingly in regard, for example, being portrayed as

supportive of women by engaging in domestic duties to support them” (p. 24). With the typical

family structure becoming varied and diverse, this underrepresentation can not only be

influential to females in the classroom. Children raised by a single father and/or stay-at-home

father, then led to believe that men are to be the breadwinner, not the domestic parent may

struggle with their familial identity. Similarly, female students without dreams of being a mother

or wife may find themselves questioning their role as women in society.

INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 13
In conclusion, the way that both men and women are represented in curriculum,

specifically through textbooks, can significantly affect children’s ideas of their role in society.

This is just the surface level of a deeper discussion in gender curriculum, as there is lots of work

to be done in shifting common curriculums from male-centric to gender-equal.

Intersection of Race and Curriculum

Similar to the intersection of gender and curriculum, we can investigate the intersection

of race and curriculum most evidently through the lack of representation of minority racial

groups. To address this lack of representation, I will be discussing the use of the Critical Race

Theory to challenge racism in contemporary curriculums.

In his article Toward a Critical Race Curriculum, Yosso (2010) shared that “critical race

theory can be a guide for educators to expose and challenge contemporary forms of racial

inequality, which are disguised as ‘neutral’ and ‘objective’ structures, processes, and discourses

of the school curriculum” (p.2) Understanding these layers of curriculum Yosso (2010) stated

the following:

Curriculum includes what ​structures​ are in place so that specific classes are designated

to present specific knowledge… as well as the ​processes​ designed to place students in

certain classes… curriculum is [lastly] supported by ​discourses​ that justify why some

students have access to certain knowledge while others are presented with different

school curriculum. (p.2)

INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 14
The first layer, structures, have a common example of specialized programs in schools

such as Gifted and Talented (GT) and Accelerated Placement (AP). These structures specialize

in finding the students who perform above their peers and offer many high-level resources. This

curriculum structure is highly beneficial to the students within the program, but when

investigating deeper the average demographic of these programs, we can see the demographics

are not equal. For example, Peters (2019) studied that “nationally, students from African

American, Latinx, and Native American families are underrepresented in gifted education by

43%, 30%, and 13% respectively” (para. 1). This is almost half of African American students

being underrepresented in GT. In counter to this, white students are being ​overrepresented​ in

these programs. What is causing this? Barlow and Dunbar (2010) consider that “white property

interest is one often-overlooked factor contributing to this opportunity gap” (p.65). Barlow and

Dunbar observed and outlined these property interests are as follows:

1. The right to exclude.

2. The right to maintain rights of disposition.

3. The right to status and reputation conferred by property

4. The right to maintain use and enjoyment.

Essentially, property right 1: the absolute right to exclude, allows those deemed as ‘not white’ to

become a function of whiteness and face exclusion. This white privilege, as shown in the

property rights above, leads to an automatic admission into many GT as they are run by the often

white school leaders. A counter-argument to this idea may be admission requirements. For most

of history, students have had to meet an admission criterion to be admitted to the district’s GT

program. However, after 1997 students began to be assessed using the group-administered test,
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 15
the NNAT. Even with these assessments, the procedure still excluded growing non-white

populations through socioeconomic status. As society naturally impacts those of minority groups

in more negative ways than white members of society, many families opt out of their child even

being assessed for GT programs to protect their children from competing against students with

far more advantages. As a concluding statement for this structure of curriculum, I began to

believe that while ​Brown V Board of Education ​desegregated schools, Gift and Talented

programs may serve as a reverse to current school communities, resegregating schools slowly,

one GT program at a time.

Intersection of Race and Gender in Curriculum

As we have discussed thus far, the most common way these intersections are shown in

curriculum is through their lack of representation. For the final intersection, I would like to

incorporate the idea of free speech within these curriculums, specifically citing the ​Tinker v. Des

Moines Independent Community School District​ case of 1969. This monumental case involved a

group of junior high school students who wore black armbands to school in an act of protest to

the war in Vietnam. These students were asked to remove the armbands and with refusal were

then suspended. With this, students filed a First Amendment lawsuit and were represented by the

ACLU where they took on the Supreme Court for one of the most influential cases in student

rights. The landmark Supreme Court decision ruled that “7-2 that students do not ‘shed their

constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse senate’ and their First

Amendment applied to public schools, and school officials could not censor students speech
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 16
unless it disrupted the educational process” (ACLU, 2020). This case provided a backbone for

future cases regarding dress code and student’s rights to freedom of speech through dress code.

There are sensitive areas where we can see the intersection of race and gender in

curriculum become issues through free speech in the class. One of the most evident to me is the

lack of free speech many teachers face when it comes to the curriculum they are teaching. For

example, current societal situations such as the Black Lives Matter movement, and LGBTQ+

rights are a continuous part of Free Speech in the classroom for both students and educators. In

September 2020, a Texas teacher was fired for wearing a Black Lives Matter face mask to school

(CNN, 2020). Similarly, a Texas teacher personalized her virtual classroom with many posters,

as she would in a regular classroom, however “one read ‘Black Lives Matter’, another included a

rainbow flag and a third had a phrase written in Spanish that highlights solidarity between Black

and brown people” (CNN, 2020, para 2.). This creates a balancing act for teachers, especially

when viewed through the social efficiency ideology discussed in Shiro’s book ​Curriculum

Ideology​ (2013).

This ideology is defined by Shiro (2013) as “the purpose of schooling is to efficiently

meet the needs of society by training youth to function as future mature contributing members of

society” (p.5). It is a teacher’s responsibility, within this curriculum ideology, to prepare the

students to be responsible contributing members of society. Thereby the inclusion of such social

rights and/or social issues would need to be explicitly discussed or modeled for the students.

With this curriculum ideology in mind, shouldn’t teachers be able to teach free speech by

expressing free speech, as it is a large part of human rights in society? In support, “leading young

people to practice democratic values and virtues like equality, tolerance, rational autonomy,
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 17
recognition of reasonable disagreement, and respectful political engagement, they will come to

appreciate how these things contribute to decision-making that promotes the common good”

often through these practices of free speech shown by teachers. (Maxwell, McDonough, &

Waddington, 2017, p.197 via Kunzman, 2006). With this support of free speech, there is yet still

a political stigma around these controversial issues being so-called ‘pressed’ onto children in the

classroom. Finding this balance between a social efficiency curriculum ideology and not

politically influencing students is one many educators must face daily.

To tie these issues of student and teacher free speech in the classroom through the

intersection of race and gender in curriculum, I will look at the specific issue of minority groups

underrepresented in curriculum and teachers’ freedom to inclusion. The teaching of

Thanksgiving in many curriculums addresses both the underrepresentation of race and gender

and challenges many educators' free speech. Thanksgiving is only mentioned one time in the K-5

Social Studies TEKS in the 2nd grade: “(1) History. The student understands the historical

significance of landmarks and celebrations in the community, state, and nation. The student is

expected to: (A) explain the significance of various community, state, and national celebrations

such as Veterans Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, and ​Thanksgiving”​ (Social Studies,

2.1A ). This open-ended speech of teaching the ‘significance’ of Thanksgiving should give the

teacher’s an option to teach in a culturally responsive way, yet many share the curriculum that

‘during ‘The First Thanksgiving’ the Pilgrims and Indians share a feast celebrating the Pilgrims’

survival in America” (Kerner, 1999, p. 235). To follow this, it is most common that children

make pilgrim hats and Indian construction paper feather headbands, an activity I have vivid

memories of partaking in as well. However, we are all consciously aware that it is nowhere near
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 18
how ‘The First Thanksgiving” went. The point of view of the Native people who were so heavily

impacted by the arrival of these invaders into their land is virtually ignored in many curriculums.

Not only are their viewpoints ignored, and their culture appropriated, they are often discussed as

fragments of the past, that Natives do not exist in this country anymore because they welcomed

the pilgrims and then left happily. An article by National Geographic Kids entitled ​The First

Thanksgiving d​ escribes the first thanksgiving as when “Native Americans and early settlers gave

thanks together with the historic feast” specifically describing this event as a ‘celebration’! (para.

1). This, frankly ignorant, way to teach such a historical event is rather exclusive and hurtful to

Native people in America. We as teachers strive to be mirrors for children, not windows. The

teaching that Native Americans are a fragment of the past, who loved Americans is a truly

patriotic curriculum and can be extremely harmful to Native American students and their

families. As our society and country grows and progresses, so should the curriculum. Creating a

culturally and socially responsible way challenges many teacher’s free speech.

The idea of decolonizing thanksgiving often requires a fresh start in the Social Studies

Curriculum. This is a privilege not all teachers have, as they follow a unified curriculum within

their school or district. However, Morris (2015) on ​Teaching Thanksgiving in a Socially

Responsible Way​, provides many suggestions for ways educators can attempt this:

“Thanksgiving Mourning activities for grade 6-8 that ask students to consider thanksgiving from

a Native American perspective” and “Plimoth Plantation Just for Teachers section that outlines

professional development opportunities, workshops, a virtual Thanksgiving field trip and

activities that incorporate the Wampanoag perspective” (para. 6). These ideas do not challenge

the TEKS of teaching the significance of Thanksgiving, but rather incorporate activities that
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 19
allow students the freedom to explore other perspectives in a culturally responsive way, which in

itself is allowing students to practice their social efficiency.

The social efficiency ideology is a good ideology to express the idea of free speech in

curriculum when it is viewed through a symbolic activism lens. While other ideologies such as

learner-centered, social reconstruction, and scholarly academic could be applied to this idea,

teachers can use the social efficiency ideology to prepare students to be responsible citizens in

society, by viewing their work as preparing youth for the civic future. An alternate definition of

social efficiency helps express this idea. Tahirsylaj (2017) states that in a social efficiency

curriculum “students would learn in schools only what they needed to know to perform as an

adult member of social order” (p. 624). The key idea here is social order. Many ideologists view

the social efficiency curriculum as either preparing youth for a corporate work society or a civil

society setting. For free speech, teachers are preparing students to be members of a civic society

where they practice their given rights freely and appropriately. This ideology best suits these

ideas when viewed this way; educators teach about free speech, model free speech, and prepare

their students to practice their free speech within a responsible civic society in their future. With

this in mind, educators can mold their pedagogy to support this ideology through the

incorporation and inclusion of free speech.

Overall, the identities of race and gender are commonly underrepresented in some way

through the curriculum we teach. However, it does not have to remain this way; being aware as

educators, that our students have these identities and thus representing them in our classrooms is

a step towards inclusion.

INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 20
Conclusion

Intersectionality is a complex idea, but a crucial one for educators to understand. ​The

normalization of multiculturalism and little impact or change visible in education with regards to

any multiculturalism must be addressed and can be addressed when we view these identities as

intersections within our students. These intersections influence school, society, and curriculum in

many ways. Centralizing our pedagogies around an understanding of intersectionality can make a

significant difference in a child’s experience in school.

INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 21

References

ACLU. ​Tinker v. Des Moines-landmark supreme court ruling on behalf of student support.

ACLU.​https://www.aclu.org/other/tinker-v-des-moines-landmark-supreme-court-ruling-

behalf-student-expression

Barlow, K., & Dunbar, E. (2010). Race, class, and whiteness in gifted and talented identification:

A case study. ​Berkeley Review of Education,​ ​1(​ 1). DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5070/B81110014

Basow, S. (2004). The hidden curriculum: Gender in the classroom in ​M.A. Paludi (Ed.) ​Praeger

guide to psychology of gender​ (pp.117-119). Praeger Publisher.

Characteristics of Public School Teachers. (2020). Retrieved August 26, 2020, from

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/coe_clr.pdf

Chiponda, A. & Wassermann, J. (2011). Women in history textbooks: what message does this

send to the youth?. ​Yesterday and Today,​ (6), 13-25. Retrieved November 12, 2020,

from
INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 22
http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2223-03862011000100006

&lng=en&tlng=en​.

Dumas, M. J. (2014). ‘Losing an arm’: Schooling as a site of black suffering. ​Race Ethnicity and

Education​, ​17​(1), 1-29.

Elanssar, A. (2020, September 26). ​Texas teacher was fired for wearing a black lives matter face

mask.​ CNN.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/26/us/texas-teacher-fired-black-lives-matter-mask-trnd/ind

ex.html

Fernandez, S. (2020, August 26). ​A Texas teacher who posted black lives matter and lgbtq

​ he
posters in her virtual classroom was placed on leave after parents complained. T

Texas Tribune.

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/08/26/texas-teacher-black-lives-matter-LGBTQ/

Grier, P. (2012, March 12). ​Travyon Martin case: is a hoodie a symbol of menace or desire for

justice?​. The Christian Science Monitor.

https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0326/Trayvon-Martin-case-Is-hoodie-a-sy

mbol-of-menace-or-desire-for-justice

Harris, A. & Leonardo, Z. (2018). Intersectionality, Race-Gender Subordination, and Education.

Review of Research in Education​ (Vol. 42, pp. 1-27).

Kerner, K. (1999). The Thanksgiving Epidemic. ​American Indian stereotypes in the world of

children: a reader and bibliography,​ 235.

INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 23
Maxwell, B., McDonough, K., & Waddington, D. I. (2018). Broaching the subject: Developing

law-based principles for teacher free speech in the classroom. ​Teaching and Teacher

Education​, ​70​, 196-203.

Morris, A. (2015, November 10). ​Teaching Thanksgiving in a socially responsible way.

Teaching Tolerance.

https://www.tolerance.org/magazine/teaching-thanksgiving-in-a-socially-responsible-way

NPR. (2012, March 24). ​Tragedy gives the hoodie a whole new meaning.​ NPR KERA.

https://www.npr.org/2012/03/24/149245834/tragedy-gives-the-hoodie-a-whole-new-mea

ning

Peters, S.J. (2019, February 25). ​Gifted and talented: finding and calculating representation

rates​. National Association of Gifted Children.

https://www.nagc.org/blog/gifted-and-talented-finding-and-calculating-representation-rat

es

Pavlakis, A. & Rogeman, R. (2018, September 24). ​How dress codes criminalize males and

sexualizes women of color.​ Phi Delta Kappan.

https://kappanonline.org/pavlakis-roegman-dress-codes-gender-race-discrimination/

Rutledge, S. A. (2005). ​A case study of the perceptions of educators and representation of

gender in the curriculum of a rural school district (​ Order No. 3193347). Available from

ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (305406250).

INTERSECTIONALITY
Wilson 24
http://library.tcu.edu/PURL/EZproxy_link.asp?/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/doc

view/305406250?accountid=7090

Shiro, M.S. (2013). ​Curriculum theory​. SAGE Publications, Inc.

Smith, N. (2012). Eliminating gender stereotypes in public school dress codes: the necessity of

respecting personal preference. ​JL & Educ.​, ​41​, 251.

Tahirsylaj, A. (2018). ​Curriculum field in the making: Influences that led to social efficiency as

dominant curriculum ideology in progressive era in the US.​ Euro-JCS, 4(1).

Teaching Tolerance (2016, May 18). ​Intersectionality 101 ​[Video], YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6dnj2IyYjE

Yosso, T. J. (2002). Toward a critical race curriculum. ​Equity & Excellence in Education​, ​35​(2),

93-107. DOI: ​https://doi.org/10.1080/713845283