Part 2 of Prof. McDaniel’s conversation with Prof. Irizarry.<\/p>\n
Any discussion of race is a discussion about experiences. While there are some experiences that tie racial groups together, their experiences are not monolithic. The failure to understand the complexity of the racial experience has led to false conclusions and contributed to bad policy. In this episode I speak with Prof. Yasmiyn Irizarry about how the social sciences have overlooked the complexity of the racial experience and what can be done.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Part 2 of Prof. McDaniel’s conversation with Prof. Irizarry. Any discussion of race is a discussion about experiences. While there are some experiences that tie racial groups together, their experiences are not monolithic. The failure to understand the complexity of the racial experience has led to false conclusions and contributed to bad policy. In this […]","protected":false},"author":13,"featured_media":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","episode_type":"audio","audio_file":"http:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/american-ingredient\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/9\/2018\/09\/American-ingredient-Irizarry-Part-2-Final.mp3","podmotor_file_id":"","podmotor_episode_id":"","cover_image":"","cover_image_id":"","duration":"","filesize":"31.39M","filesize_raw":"32917088","date_recorded":"","explicit":"","block":"","itunes_episode_number":"","itunes_title":"","itunes_season_number":"","itunes_episode_type":""},"tags":[8,55,52,10,54,57,51,24,50,56,53],"categories":[],"series":[2],"class_list":{"0":"post-58","1":"podcast","2":"type-podcast","3":"status-publish","5":"tag-american","6":"tag-census","7":"tag-experience","8":"tag-ingredient","9":"tag-irizarry","10":"tag-mcdaniel","11":"tag-policy","12":"tag-race","13":"tag-racial-experience","14":"tag-social-construction","15":"tag-yasmiyn","16":"series-american-ingredient","17":"entry"},"acf":{"related_episodes":"","hosts":[{"ID":650,"post_author":"38","post_date":"2021-02-08 16:24:20","post_date_gmt":"2021-02-08 16:24:20","post_content":"\n
Professor McDaniel specializes in American politics. His research areas include religion and politics, Black politics, and organizational behavior. His work targets how and why Black religious institutions choose to become involved in political matters. In addition, his work targets the role of religious institutions in shaping Black political behavior.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Eric McDaniel","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"eric-mcdaniel","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2021-02-08 16:24:21","post_modified_gmt":"2021-02-08 16:24:21","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/american-ingredient\/?post_type=speaker&p=650","menu_order":0,"post_type":"speaker","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"guests":[{"ID":596,"post_author":"38","post_date":"2020-06-23 17:52:25","post_date_gmt":"2020-06-23 17:52:25","post_content":"\n
Dr. Yasmiyn Irizarry is quantitative sociologist by training with research interests in (1) sociology of education, (2) race and ethnicity, (3) sexuality and queer studies, (4) social inequality, and (5) intersectionality. Her research, which examines issues related to inequality in elementary and high school contexts, racial identity, the quantitative measurement of race, social attitudes, and prejudice and discrimination, has been supported by funding from the Ford Foundation and the American Educational Research Association. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
She is currently working on research supported by a Research Grant from the American Educational Research Association that focuses on disparities in 9th grade math course placements at the intersection of race and gender using nationally representative data from the High School Longitudinal Study of 2009. She is also engaged in a number of collborative studies examining various aspects of racial identity, racial attitudes, and prejudice\/discrimination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Dr. Irizarry is a 2011 graduate of Indiana University, Bloomington, where she completed her PhD in Sociology with a Minor in Quantitative Methodology and a Certificate in College Pedagogy. Prior to joining the Department of African and African Diaspora Studies, she worked three years as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Sociology and a Research Fellow in the Social Science Research Center at Mississippi State University, where she taught a number of courses including sociology of education, research methods, and the PhD social statistics sequence.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Yasmiyn Irizarry","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"yasmiyn-irizarry","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2021-01-13 15:58:35","post_modified_gmt":"2021-01-13 15:58:35","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/american-ingredient\/?post_type=speaker&p=596","menu_order":0,"post_type":"speaker","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"transcript":"
Welcome to The American Ingredient, a podcast that examines grace in American society from
\nan academic perspective, focusing on the work from social scientists and legal scholars. The
\nAmerican regent demonstrates that race is not the only ingredient in making America. But in order
\nto make America, you need to heaping spoonfuls. This episode is a set apart of our interview with
\nProfessor Gasman Irizarry. Professor Irizarry, who is a professor at the University of Texas,
\nfocuses on the complexity of race. And she highlights the social construction of race.
\nAnd that race has different meanings in different context, using the context of Latin America
\nand specifically the experiences of Latin American immigrants into the U.S. She demonstrates
\nhow race can take on different meanings in different spaces, but also highlights
\nhow Latin American immigrants come to develop a new understanding of race.
\nIn this episode, Professor Irizarry highlights the problems we’ve had in
\nterms of our quantitative analysis and making assumptions about a lack of bias.
\nShe start this interview with her discussing teacher evaluations of students, and she highlights
\nthat the arguments that there is a lack of bias because of variety of studies which
\nfound a lack of bias is problematic because these arguments but a lack of bias is
\nbiased based on averages, and that if you look a little bit closer, you can see that there is
\nbias. Specifically, those at the bottom end of the top wrongs and at this bias may be more
\ndamaging than we realized. What about to go back to now? Is your discussion
\nas a methodology methodologies and you talked about that many of times we get these coefficients, there are their averages.
\nAnd you pointed out that this average could mean that, okay, this is an experience across
\nthe entire group. It could be bimodal. And since you have one group at one in another group
\nat the other end, or you could have one group that is driving it. And
\nso where where are you seeing some? So can you just tell us the more some of the research where you’ve been
\nable to highlight that BS coefficients are aren’t telling
\nare telling a overly simplified story. I’ve seen it everywhere I look
\npretty much almost every study I do, I find evidence that these coefficients
\nare oversimplistic. And that’s because the real world is never that simple.
\nRight. We don’t all have these experiences. We come from different regions. We
\nhave to complexions, we have different ancestries. We have different levels of wealth,
\ndifferent genders. Yeah, right. And sexual identities and all of that.
\nIntersects with race to shape all kinds of experiences. And so
\nall the time I’m finding ways that these average effects
\nrate are really just representative of some kind of
\nother thing going on that we’re not really sure about that it’s not a universal experience that we can understand through a coefficient.
\nSo to give you an example, I have an article in social science research
\nand this was some work that came out of my dissertation research. I my dissertation
\nlooked at two main ideas. One was this idea
\nof multidimensional measures of race. The idea of interest thinking about the way people are racialized
\nthrough race, ethnicity, immigration status, and how all those come together to create a particular
\nsubgroup experience. So thinking about how would we measure that, what would that look like? But the other
\npart of my work, since I’m an associate of education scholar was looking at the experiences really young children.
\nSo I was interested in what happens when children entering school.
\nWhat happens in first grade? And one of my chapters explored teachers perceptions of students,
\ntheir behaviors, their perceptions of their academic ability. And I
\nthis was even I had other chapters as ended up being the one that I really.
\nFound to be so important. And ends up exploring in a lot of detail. And one of the papers
\nthat came out of that chapter looked at teachers.
\nPerceptions of a student reading ability in first grade
\nand and really just looking at that because what students that what teachers think about students will shape
\nthings like gifted placement, access to opportunities and resources. Right. So thinking of that as a starting point
\nfor me and my main finding of this paper was when you look at the average effect,
\nit looked like there were no racial gaps in teachers perceptions of reading ability.
\nZero. There were no significant coefficients in this case. There was no average effect, but there was
\na reason for that. And the reason was that teachers
\nand how race works and how teachers racialized students varied based
\non the student’s academic performance, because part of the stereotypes
\nthat drive maybe differential attitudes are entrenched in this idea of who can and who
\ncan’t write about students abilities, supposed abilities, their
\nintellects. Right. And so what I found was when you look at students across the spectrum of performance,
\nI won’t say ability per say, because I won’t say that this test could ever capture their true ability or potential.
\nWhen you look across the spectrum of performance, I found that at the
\nbottom of the achievement distribution, teachers rated
\nblack students nonwhite Latin. Next, students and
\nAsian students. More positively than white students
\nwho perform similarly on tests. So they raided the the white students more negatively,
\nthe white students were punished for being yes. At the bottom of the chief industriales, right? Yes.
\nAt the top of the achievement distribution, the black students nonwhite let
\nnext students, Asian students were rated more poorly. Then the white students.
\nSo at the bottom, the distribution whites are punished being at the white, the bottom at the bottom, the distribution at the top,
\nthe distribution. non-Whites are being punished for me at the top of this. Absolutely.
\nNow think about it. If I have on one side a negative for and on the other side a positive for, what does that
\naverage out to? Zero. Zero. So it looks like there’s no inequality,
\nthere’s no inequities, there’s no discrimination when in fact race is working differently
\nwithin these different domains for these children. And it was masked by an average
\nof zero. Right. Something really important, especially important because
\nit both speaks to the kind of maybe lower expectations teachers have students.
\nWhich is why they may it may have been a higher expectation of white students or vise versa. You know, it glorification
\nas soon as the color at the lower end of the treatment decision, that may lead to students not providing as much rigor
\nwhen, let’s say they’re in urban communities, low income communities or working with students, who are
\nthey enter school less prepared that they don’t. They they have lower expectations, maybe yoga.
\nI don’t see the same kind of potential. So don’t provide the same kind of rigor or opportunities for those students.
\nAnd at the top of achievement distribution, it speaks to the barriers for students of color in trying
\nto be seen for their potential. Right. That they are, in fact, meeting all this, given all the barriers
\nto success. They’re meeting those goals and yet they’re not being seen that way by
\nteachers. And that’s going to shape what kind of opportunities the
\nteacher is going to provide for those students. That seems to be that when the white students at the bottom, it’s OK.
\nWhat is wrong with you for being here? So that’s why it must be punished more like what’s wrong with you
\nwith nonwhite students being at the top? It’s almost seems like, well, do you
\nreally deserve this or is it just what is it? Is it something like. No, you really don’t deserve
\nthis. And so that’s why I’m not going to rate you as high as your white counterparts. Whereas
\nthe white counterparts at the bottom. What’s wrong with you? Much white. Worse than your, I guess, nonwhite counterparts
\nat the bottom. Yeah. And you know, the thing about Kwanzaa, because I can’t tell you exactly the you know, the thought
\nprocess. A teacher was having. But I can tell you the capture there. And if their significant and if they’re
\nlarge enough that they can have a pretty large impact. And this is just one moment, one experience in
\none moment. And really, race, race and racism are cumulative. Right. So all
\nkinds of moments accumulating to an experience. But in this one moments in this one measure that I
\nwas looking at a students reading, they’re kind of average ability of a student. Yes.
\nThe teachers were whether they were being whether they were
\npenalizing the license, the bottom or maybe had law citations for the sins of color. I couldn’t
\ntell you which one it was. Or maybe it’s both at the top of this mission, whether they saw greater potential, the white students
\nor whether they were more skeptical of the performance since the color. I couldn’t tell you when it could be both, too.
\nBut in the end, the result of that was
\nan inequity that was masked by an average and that,
\nwithout knowing, couldn’t be dealt with in a way that could possibly lead to both.
\nMaybe. Great expectations for students who come in
\nless prepared because they still have great potential. Where they come in is not where they could end up being,
\ndepending on what a teacher thinks and what they offer. But they have to believe that.
\nAnd at the, you know, towards the top of the distribution, really.
\nQuestioning one’s biases and thinking about how we. Think about someone’s potential
\nin an in a different way, right, in terms of offering opportunities, stopping going. Am I. Am I thinking this because
\nof the actual performance or is there something inside of me that is shaping
\nthis perception without me even realizing it? And there’s tons of social psychological research that
\nthe pride’s evidence of the way that race shapes the way we receive behavior, performance
\nand different kinds of actions. Right. So it’s hates all those kinds of interactions. And the way we read
\npeople for everyone for for for for people of every race, not just for individuals
\nwho are white. Do you see your work as making the world more complicated? Because, again, we wanted
\nwe want even amongst academics or we think of ourselves, understand the complexity of the world. We do
\nwant things a little bit simplified if we look at the articles. They’re very simple. Okay. Give me
\ngive me a simple story. So do you see your work as making the world more complicated? Or as painting
\na better picture? Really painting a better picture because.
\nWe say we want things simple, but we’re a country with so many different people and
\nwithin a particular community it may be simple, but it’s simple for a subgroup within a community, right?
\nYou can have a community that has particular subgroups there for that community. That’s all they know. For them,
\nthat’s simple. But simple in an article may not translate to simple within their community. Right. Because
\nwhat is simple in a community may be very nuance within our research. And so I don’t see myself so much as
\nlet’s say, complicating as I see it fleshing out, because
\nour articles don’t ever capture all the nuance. But they can be more specific.
\nThey can be more targeted. They can be more accurate at trying to understand
\nindividuals experiences. And it’s through that greater accuracy and that effort towards
\nthat, that we can have better understandings of how these processes work within society,
\nbetter understanding how to target. Particular policies, interventions
\nand efforts because of we believe that there’s just as black effect. What we gonna do every part of the country is a black
\nperson to a sane policy because we assume that there’s this black effect or if we don’t find something
\nfor a similar reason, then what I found are we just gonna assume that this is not discrimination?
\nAnd so it’s not it’s not so much about this idea that it’s complicated because really, honestly,
\nthink of my work is complicated. Yes. I don’t I don’t think of it that
\nway. I just think of it as more detailed. OK.
\nSo when you’re filling in many of the blank spaces, I guess on the canvas, one of things
\nalso you mentioned policy issues and I’m thinking about the various ways. And when we think
\nabout Polis, we thing about target populations and understand their complexity is a population that what might work
\nin Appalachia is not going to work in San Diego. Well, my work in Seattle is not gonna
\nwork in El Paso. And we’ve seen this also with social movements. So, for
\ninstance, King realized that once he moved outside of the south, many things they were talking
\nabout just weren’t going to work. And so he had to he had to update. So
\nwhere are the policy issues where you believe this failure to understand nuance has been
\nmost damaging?
\nI don’t think so much that there’s one policy arena, in fact, I think it probably most policy arenas.
\nWhat I think that it has done is it kind of reified this idea that
\nthat nonwhite groupings are monoliths. Right. When we have
\nsimplistic measures, simplistic effects, we
\nover and over and over again reify this idea that
\nif you are not white, that you’re simple, right, that you’re simplistic, that you’re monolith and that we can
\nunderstand the black experience, the Latin experience. But I never hear people say the
\nwhite experience. I never hear that. I never hear people talk about that on TV.
\nWhites are diverse. So are we, but in the research,
\nwe’re not painted as such. In the narratives that people create
\naround the promotional policy, around discussions of issues of inequality
\nin the news media were painted with very broad strokes and
\nthis impacts all of our experiences and how we’re seen in every arena, right. So then in essence, it impacts
\nevery policy. So, I mean, I look at specific things and sometimes
\nthose things are can be tied to specific policies or school policy, a district
\npolicy, a national policy. But sometimes they’re just a challenge.
\nThat notion to begin with, there may not be a policy to fix what it is that I’m looking
\nat. It’s not something that is easily fixable because it’s entrenched their ideas that are entrenched.
\nAnd the starting point for dealing with that is challenging those
\nideas, showing the diversity and showing it not
\njust through stories, because I think all stories are so important, but also showing it through numbers because people just
\npeople tend to believe the numbers are truths. They’re not one of the things. One of the first things I tell my students is numbers are tools,
\nnot truths. I tell them this over and over again. But we have been taught to
\nbelieve the numbers are truths is that we need to see numbers assume as truth. And if we hear stories and goals, if that story
\nreaffirms what we believe, we take it. If the story does it, then we say up.
\nIt’s just an anecdote. Regardless of what is, we believe we tend to do this right as humans,
\nbut people tend to see numbers angle. Those numbers are truth and believe them
\nwithout without any question. And so maybe I’m trying to use numbers to create a different narrative,
\none that challenges the kind of ideas that numbers have for a long time
\npromoted this idea that we that we can understand that nonwhite groups
\nand the experiences of individuals within these groups. Simplistically, given the
\namount of complexity that the that sociology political science must mean,
\nthe social sciences are willing to talk about with a wide experience and the simplification of the
\nnon nonwhite experience. What are some of the pushback you’ve received in your work?
\nOh boy. Okay. So. And it’s funny because I’m actually going to sit on a panel
\nat a pre-conference on recent racism in the sociology of education right before the American
\nSociological Association meeting in Philadelphia in August. And this is one of my topics that I’m going to speak
\nabout and the pushback. Oh,
\nboy. I could talk about this for for a while. But really the pushback is that I would say
\nthe starting point for the pushback is that many scholars believe that somehow they’re exempt from
\nthe very forces they study or sociologists are notorious for this. They
\nstudy things like race or racism, but believe that it couldn’t exist within their own
\ndepartments, associations, fields. Right. And
\nwhen we’re creating. Academic work. Right. Especially quantitative work
\nwhere you’re going through that kind of constant peer review at different journals. It’s our our peers
\nthat are reviewing our work. And so I have individuals reviewing my work
\nwho believe they know about race, not because they’re scholars of it, but because.
\nThey know Burris the way everybody else does. Right. And that will shape
\nthe kinds of arguments they make about the work. What they value, what they say,
\nhow they frame it. It’s like a lot of pushback, but that pushback is is often not situated
\nin my methodology as much as it is an ideology, sadly.
\nAnd so I do get that and I get I get some of that. The pushback that comes particularly from my own colleagues
\nat times doing the very same things I study in in the real world, because they’re real people.
\nThey live real lives in the real world. They send their children to schools. Many of them segregated
\nin the real world. They pick their houses based on the same kinds of criteria. Other people do
\nright in the real world. They befriend individuals. And while their friendship networks may be somewhat more diverse,
\nthey often look not too dissimilar to other individuals like them.
\nSo in the in the in the real world, they live real lives. Right? There are people. And that means
\nthat real forces impact their view. And there’s no
\nway to be entirely objective. We bring that back with us into our work.
\nI bring it back into my work. It’s what shapes how I see the work that I’m doing. It’s my own experiences and
\nI’ll admit that readily. But it also shapes how people respond. And I won’t say so. I won’t say that the pushback
\nthat I get all push back, that it’s all negative. In fact, there are many people that are supportive of what I’m doing and see
\nit as the kind of next step. Right. That that we’re not done. We have a lot more work we
\ncan do. Yes. There’s a lot more research to be done. We’re not done studying these topics. We just
\nhave to think about new ways of studying them and understanding them. There’s so much to be known still. Right.
\nAnd so there’s space for the work that I’m doing after the work of others that are trying to also, you know,
\nforge into these new areas. But there’s also a pushback
\nto that. Okay. And I noticed that one of the things,
\nat least as a public scientist, what I’ve faced and people talked about this. For instance, Melissa
\nHarris Perry has talked about the fact that in political science, that
\nwork, which treats blacks as objects so well within the race work.
\nSo that publishes mainly about white attitudes towards non-whites. And the nuance
\nof white racial attitudes. But work that treats non-whites as agents tells their story,
\nseems to be pushed away, seems to be ostracized or treated as
\nspecialized. And what I’m gonna give you is this seems to be the case as well,
\nthat when you talk about these groups as agents and talk
\nabout the complexity of these groups, people see this as well. This is too
\nthis is too specific. This is not general enough. Whereas we talk about whites, it is general.
\nAnd it seems to me that seems to be refute that to me seems to be reflected
\nin well, tell us some of the pushback. But also from the previous work that’s been done
\nis that these nonwhite groups, I guess, really
\naren’t about America. And if we see ourselves as exclusively
\nscholars of the social sciences within an American context, that these groups don’t really
\nneed to be studied, the complexities within these groups really don’t matter is.
\nAre you seeing that as well in sociology or do you believe do you
\nbelieve we are getting better at acknowledging these groups as agents and
\nand acknowledging the complexity of their lives? We so on average, I’d say we’re getting
\nbetter. But again, averages don’t always represent everyone’s experience. Right.
\nSo I would say that maybe some people done a lot better and now there’s not so much at all that
\nwe still see the kind of pushback we’ve seen for
\na long time from some some of power, the power to reject
\npapers, to challenge promotions, to
\nto really, you know, black people’s trajectories and their opportunities
\nto kind of produce this work and to see this kind work to fruition and bring out to
\nthe world. But there are also opportunities. People are hungry for
\nit. I remember presenting some of the work I do. So I do work on
\nattitudes, black attitudes towards discrimination. And in fact, my first solo
\nauthored article was a an entirely black sample looking at attitudes about
\nrace and racism and whites. And my main argument that we’ve spent a lot of time
\ntrying to understand, you know, ideas of interracial contact and it’s about whites, but those
\nwhites aren’t the only ones having contact within this space. And so what happens? For blacks within
\nthese spaces, can we say it’s as good as it is for whites? Right. It’s not. But.
\nBut might might really work within thinking about that. Exactly that. Right. What are other people
\nthinking about? What are our stories and other stories and trying to find ways to bring
\nthose out? Is there pushback to that? Yes, there is pushback to that. But
\nit’s not a. It’s not a barrier, it’s more like a hurdle.
\nRight. It’s not impossible. But boy, do some people make it really hard. So it is it’s it’s harder
\nto get this workout and it’s harder to get this work published. You will have people that’ll steer you towards.
\nThey’ll say you should put this in the, you know, race and ethnicity journals. Right. They’ll
\nthey’ll try to. Shift the work into particular venues
\nas though that work is not relevant to everyone like it shouldn’t be in the mainstream or generalist
\njournals within those journals, you’ll have many, many more views. They
\nwill be more negative. They will be longer. Just send in a paper with some
\ncolleagues. In our first set of reviews was five reviewers, a 19th single-spaced pages
\nfor a six thousand word article. There were more words problem with double
\nthe words in the reviews to the article. Second review three reviewers
\nand 15 single spaced pages. It took many reviews,
\nbut our premise never changed. The paper didn’t change, most of that was proving without
\na shadow of a doubt in the minds of people who don’t believe race matters. A race is important to this kind of way that it does.
\nYes. And that’s we spent most of our time doing so. You you’re engaged in an ideological fight?
\nNot not a mythological fight. It was people were entrenched in this idea that race was
\na matter. And you had to basically. Climb that hill some
\nmethodology and then write no papers perfect going in, I won’t say that the paper was perfect. Going right.
\nThere were some changes to the models. There were some things that we added, some citations that,
\nyou know, we did improve the paper. I won’t say that it wasn’t improved in that process, but
\nwe had to find those points within. Yes, some also
\nideology where people actually just outright said, I don’t abide by your argument. I don’t abide by this
\nis a thing. And that’s not for me. It’s not
\nuncommon. It happens in a lot of the things I said, especially my sentiments isn’t generals journals that I’m used to, people actually
\njust outright saying that they don’t buy the race argument. They don’t buy that race is an issue. They
\ndon’t buy that this is. Really important or that or sometimes downplaying it.
\nAnd when I find these differences, it’s just an incremental amount of knowledge. Right.
\nSo there it is there that kind of that pushback is there that kind of work to push
\nthis work to the periphery into particular journals? Is there. It just means fight a little harder. I don’t mind.
\nI’m one of those for a fight. I’m from Newark. Professor arizonas work points to the need
\nfor social scientists to be more aware of the complexity of race. She’s highlighted that
\nbecause race is a social construction. The way in which we develop our racial identities or come to understand what race means
\ndiffers from context to context. Furthermore, she’s highlighted that many of the race
\nproblems that we thought were solved are not solved at all. But if we scratch the surface, it would look
\na little bit more. We see greater disparities than expected. Professor Irizarry
\nis trying to push the social sciences to be more aware of the bear’s intricacies
\nof the racial experience. She sees a work not as prating a more complex picture,
\nbut a more detailed picture. In many ways, she is pulling things that would beat in the shadows
\nout into the light for us to better understand the race problem and how to work
\nto solve the race problem. As earlier interviews have suggested and have discussed,
\nthe tools that we use are important and we know that we cannot use the same tool for every group.
\nAnd that minute the problems that we think may have gone away are hidden, meaning that we must update the tools
\nthat we use. So as we go forward, I hope that you as well as
\nothers will take the time to think a little bit more deeply about the complexities of race in the racial experience
\nand how we can change the way in which we study it. Also, what are the tools and activities
\nwe can engage in to help solve this problem?
\nThank you for listening to the American ingredient. I’m Eric Daniel, a professor in the Department of Government at the University
\nof Texas. I would like to think Michael heidenreich and Jacob Weiss for their assistance, along
\nwith the Department of Government, the University of Texas and the University of Texas. Ali, ISIS
\nDevelopment Studio.<\/p>\n"},"episode_featured_image":false,"episode_player_image":"https:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/american-ingredient\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/9\/2018\/02\/The-American-Ingredient-Logo-with-text.png","download_link":"https:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/american-ingredient\/podcast-download\/58\/08-the-experience-of-race-and-its-complexity-pt-2.mp3","player_link":"https:\/\/podcasts.la.utexas.edu\/american-ingredient\/podcast-player\/58\/08-the-experience-of-race-and-its-complexity-pt-2.mp3","audio_player":"