Talking Circles on Race & Racism Evaluation

Evaluation Dr. Sean Eversley Bradwell & Dr. Belisa Gonzalez

Š MRC 2015

About the Principal Investigators Sean Eversley Bradwell is an Assistant Professor in the Center for the Study of Culture, Race and Ethnicity at Ithaca College. Dr. Bradwell has research and teaching interests in race theory, educational policy, and hip hop culture. His scholarly work addresses issues of race and power in U.S. society. He and his partner Nicole have lived together in Ithaca since 1995. Since 2009, Dr. Bradwell has also served as an elected member of the Ithaca City School District Board of Education. At the time of data collection, he had not participated in Talking Circles.

Evaluation

Belisa Gonzalez is an Associate Professor in Sociology at Ithaca College. Dr. Gonzalez has lived and worked in the Ithaca community since August of 2007. She is an expert in the area of race and ethnic relations in the U.S. and social inequality more generally.

Her scholarly work is more specifically focused on intergroup relations between communities of color. She is also well versed in qualitative data collection and analysis.

Her most recent scholarly work investigates Mexican and Dominican middle class immigrants’ experiences with discrimination in Atlanta. At the time of data collection she had not participated in Talking Circles. Dr. Gonzalez is also a member of the Dorothy Cotton Institute Steering Committee.

2

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

Table of Contents Introduction 4 Background on Talking Circles on Race and Racism Design of Talking Circles on Race and Racism  Goals of Round One Talking Circles Goals of Round Two Talking Circles

5 5 6 6

Methods 7 Respondent Demographic Summary 8 10 Limitations of Talking Circle Evaluation

in Talking Circles 5. Focused Round Two Talking Circles Received More Favorably

Evaluation

Findings 12 12 1. Participation In Talking Circles Increased Participant Awareness of Race and Racism 15 2. Participation in Talking Circles Impacted Participant Behaviors 17 3. Three Essential Factors for a Successful Talking Circle 20 4. People of Color and White People Have Different Experiences 23

Structural Racism

26

Racial Healing

35

Conclusion / Summary

38

Evaluation

3

Introduction The gym was loud. It was more than just the magnifying echo of poor acoustics. There was a seething energy in the room—equal parts anger and frustration. Racial tensions and acts of racism were not new to the community. There had been many forums, panels, rallies and protests. Still, this particular forum was organized to be a dialogue. It was not. Politicians and elected officials sat on the stage. Audience members expressed necessary outrage, but it was not a dialogue. And it was certainly not a dialogue about race, racism, or community.

Evaluation

It was after this forum—probably during this forum— that Audrey Cooper, as director of the Multicultural Resource Center in Ithaca, NY, became fully committed to creating a proactive conversation on race and racism for her community. The idea had been percolating for some time but there was a new urgency to be preemptive with conversations about race rather than waiting for the next “new” incident to spark a community crisis. Ms. Cooper had previously contacted Kirby Edmonds and Laura Branca of TFC Associates to discuss the possibility of a community wide dialogue.

Together, Ms. Cooper, Ms. Branca and Mr. Edmonds decided that the goals of the Talking Circles would be to provide people “with opportunities for self-reflection, sharing experiences, and influencing each other’s perspectives and attitudes.”1 The initial goal was to create a safe place where public figures, gatekeepers, and community members could “be real” and not have to maintain their public or organizational ‘faces’. The result was a format that would bring small, multiracial groups together to engage in semi-structured dialogues around race and racism.

Can community members have an honest and frank conversation about race and racism? What are the impacts of honest and frank conversations about race and racism? Is the elimination of structural racism linked with our ability to talk about race and racism? These were some of the underlying questions that drove this evaluation.

Our goal was to assess whether Talking Circles increased awareness of race and racism among participants; influenced participants’ anti-racist behavior; and to investigate the relationship between Talking Circles and dismantling structural racism.

What follows in this report are the major findings and suggestions that arose from our analysis of various data sources. As background, we offer a short description of the Talking Circles design and a brief overview of our research methods. Three additional sections conclude the report: a section that examines Talking Circles’ relationship to dismantling structural racism; another section commenting on Talking Circles’ ability to promote racial healing; and concluding remarks.

1 Multicultural Resource Center (MRC). “Talking Circles on Race and Racism – How to Build a Program.” (2012), p. 3.

4

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

Background On Talking Circles on Race and Racism Talking Circles on Race and Racism are frank, facilitated dialogues with racially diverse participants designed to provide an opportunity for self-reflection and sharing of personal experiences with racial identity, race and racism. The first Talking Circles were held in the Spring of 2007 in the midst of what a local newspaper would later describe as “one of the worst racially charged messes in school district (and area) history.”1 As of December 2014, roughly 50 Circles have been conducted throughout the Ithaca community. This includes approximately 400 unique participants throughout Tompkins County.2

Design of Talking Circles on Race and Racism

Evaluation

The design of Talking Circles includes participating in five facilitated two-hour sessions.

Normally, these sessions occur once a week for five consecutive weeks. Facilitators (one white and one of color) guide participants through a series of discussion questions and exercises designed to encourage reflection and sharing. A description of Talking Circles taken from an early grant application contains a concise outline of the Talking Circles design.

Each Talking Circle group meets for two hours per week for five weekly sessions, and is comprised of sixteen to twenty racially diverse people. We recruit participants from the larger community via networking, outreach at events, and email. We strive to create a balance of white folks and people of color, as well as taking into consideration gender and economic class in order to ensure that the discussion involves people with many different life experiences.3 As Talking Circles developed and grew, one of the key aspects of the design was to reach a broad range of community members. Still, most of the emphasis was placed on racial diversity, which often translated into balancing Talking Circle’s white participants and people of color participants.

The original design of Talking Circles included a three-session program. Participants and facilitators quickly determined that three sessions were not enough time and a recommendation arose to add additional sessions. Additionally, Talking Circles were originally modified from pre-existing “study circles”. A key distinction between the Talking Circles and the study circles is the use of and reliance on outside readings.

As the name suggests, study circles focus on the “study” and discussion of assigned readings. While there are readings available and associated with the Talking Circles, they are optional and thus do not play a central role in the dialogue.

1 ”ICSD legal challenge”. Ithaca Journal. (25 October 2007).

2 These numbers are calculated from a review of the unique participants listed in the participant database provided by the Multicultural Resource Center. It is acknowledged that the database is incomplete and may not capture all participants.

3 Multicultural Resource Center (MRC). Talking Circles on Race and Racism. Ben and Jerry’s Grant Application. 2009, p. 1.

Evaluation

5

The creators of the Talking Circles decided that there should be a blended approach between teaching and dialogue sessions—with an emphasis towards dialogue. This is to say that the facilitators are charged with not only providing relevant information to contextualize what is being said but also encouraging increased participation and conversation. In doing so, the facilitators must create a space for dialogue that does not turn the meeting time into a training session or workshop, while still providing pertinent information in order to raise awareness during key learning moments.

Evaluation

»» Goals of Round One Talking Circles The stated goals of Round One Talking Circles are to increase the level and quality of conversation about race and racism in the Ithaca community. Round One Talking Circles are specifically designed to provide a supportive environment where participants can engage in open and honest dialogue in order to raise awareness and share experiences with race and racism. Round One Talking Circles are not designed to leave participants with specific action plans, but rather a better understanding of how conceptions of race are infused in society. As quoted from the previously mentioned grant application, Round One is about dialogue and providing “a safe space” for participants “to deepen the level of our community-wide conversations on race.”4 »» Goals of Round Two Talking Circles Round Two Talking Circles are the result of participant feedback and participant demand for “next steps”. There are several differences between Round One and Round Two Talking Circles. The most obvious difference is that Round Two Talking Circles are focused “more explicitly on healing from racism and taking direct action to combat racism.”5 Round Two participants are drawn from the pool of Round One participants who express an interest in moving beyond “the talk”. Round Two Talking Circles also include Circles organized around a specific topic or shared identity. For example, there has been a Round Two Talking Circle for white allies as well as a Round Two Circle for people of color. There have also been Round Two Talking Circles focused on intersectionality. Whether general or focused, Round Two Talking Circles are designed to encourage antiracist actions.

4 Multicultural Resource Center (MRC). Talking Circles on Race and Racism. Ben and Jerry’s Grant Application. 2009, p. 1.

5 Multicultural Resource Center (MRC). Talking Circles on Race and Racism. Ben and Jerry’s Grant Application. 2009, p. 1-2.

6

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

Methods To assess the effectiveness of Round One Talking Circles on Race and Racism, we adopted a mixed methods approach to data collection. We began with a document review that included an examination of Talking Circle grant proposals, facilitator guidebooks, year-end reports and paper evaluations from Round One and Round Two participants. These paper evaluations include numeric results as well as written comments capturing participants’ assessments immediately upon completing their Talking Circle. An example of this evaluation is found in the Appendix (see Appendix A).

Evaluation

Our primary sources of data included interviews with the creators of Talking Circles (7 executive interviews); a group interview with Talking Circle Facilitators (14 facilitators); and interviews with Round One and Round Two Talking Circle participants (29 participant interviews). Our first interviews were conducted with the creators and designers of the Talking Circles. These “executive interviews� lasted, on average, 90 minutes to 120 minutes. We also conducted a group interview with Talking Circle facilitators. Of the 34 invitations, 14 facilitators were able to participate in the 3-hour group interview. Lastly, we used snowball sampling to identify 29 Talking Circle alumni to interview. Participant interviews lasted between 60 minutes to 120 minutes. All interview were recorded and transcribed.

In order to make the data manageable, we limited our interviews to participants who took part in Round One Talking Circles from their start in 2007 to December of 2012.

Because there were fewer Round Two Circles, we did not limit our sample to a particular timeframe. We initially attempted to separate Round One and Round Two data collection, but quickly realized that participants who had been through Round Two, also wanted to discuss Round One. All interviews were conducted according to an interview protocol developed by the coprincipal investigators (see Appendix B). In preparation for data collection and analysis, we researched relevant literature on dialogue-based approaches, structural racism, anti-racism and racial healing. The interview questions were specifically designed to address the evaluation questions outlined in the Kellogg grant (see Appendix C) as well as to triangulate information gathered in the paper evaluations. Additional questions for the interview protocol were developed in consultation and collaboration with the creators of the Talking Circles and facilitators who participated in the group interview.

Our last data source comes from an online survey sent to all Talking Circle alumni who provided an email at the time of their participation. Duplicates from the participant database were deleted and efforts were made to edit obvious errors in email addresses.

In total, 306 emails were sent directly to participants. The response rate to the survey was 34% with a completion rate of 67%. In total, 103 alumni responded to the survey.

The results in this report include those who completed the survey (71) plus those who partially completed the survey (32).

Evaluation

7

The interview transcripts, the transcribed paper evaluations and the qualitative survey comments were entered into the qualitative software management program, MaxQDA. Codes were generated from the grant evaluation questions, literature review, and from the data. After all the documents were coded, we used tools in MaxQDA to review transcript segments assigned to the same codes (e.g. awareness or behavior). Through this process we were able to identify patterns in the data. Once a pattern or findings was identified, we chose representative quotes to best illustrate each finding. In order to protect the identity of our respondents, we refer to each by a pseudonym and we purposefully withhold demographic information whenever such information could compromise respondent anonymity.

Evaluation

 Respondent Demographic Summary: Our typical Talking Circle respondent is a white woman between the ages of 4569 with a Masters degree and an annual household income above the national and Tompkins County median of $51,017 and $51,393 respectively.1 She was likely recruited to participate in Talking Circles by a friend or through email. Our interview sample is similar to that of the survey sample (see demographic information below). Given reports from Talking Circle interviews and comments from the online survey noting both the disproportionately high number of women as well as white participants in the Talking Circles, we can reasonably assume that the sample population for the online survey is generally representative of the larger Talking Circle participant population. In order to get a broader range of experiences while maintaining a representative sample, we purposely oversampled people of color and men for our participant interviews. The charts and graphs below offer additional insight into interview respondent, survey respondent and Tompkins County resident demographics.

Figure 1: Race Demographics for Survey Respondents, Interview Respondents, and Tompkins County (NY) Residents

1 U.S.Census Bureau. 2013 QuickFacts. <http://quickfacts.census.gov> (12 May 2015).

8

Multicultural Resource Center â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Talking Circles on Race and Racism

Figure 2: Gender Demographics for Survey Respondents, Interview Respondents, and Tompkins County (NY) Residents

Evaluation

Figure 3: Percentage of Population by Level of Education for Survey Respondents, Interview Respondents, and Tompkins County (NY) Residents

Figure 4: Annual Median Household Income for Survey Respondents, Interview Respondents, and Tompkins County (NY) Residents

Evaluation

9

Figure 5: Age Range for Survey Respondents, Interview Respondents, and Tompkins County (NY) Residents

Evaluation

»» Limitations of Talking Circle Evaluation: Like all studies, the evaluation of Talking Circles on Race and Racism has its limitations.

For example, we were unable to measure and/or collect data on the impact of Talking Circles on community attitudes and behaviors. To do so adequately would have been a much larger undertaking than current resources and time allowed. Therefore, we make only limited claims about the impact of Talking Circles at the community level.

Additionally, sufficient investigation into the impact of Talking Cirlces on structural racism requires a longitudinal study and a team of researchers. An effective evaluation would map employment and organizational affiliations; track policy decisions from conception through implementation; analyze public minutes and voting records; collect institutional and community data; analyze city and county judge rulings; and the numerous additional steps needed to appropriately examine the dismantling of structural racism on a community level. Without these steps, making definitive claims is not prudent.

Another limitation of the evaluation is the result of our sampling method and the population demographics of Talking Circle participants. Our sample has an overrepresentation of people with high socio-economic status and educational attainment. While our sample is representative of the Talking Circle alumni population, the almost complete exclusion of respondents without at least a college degree or who make less than $25,000 is problematic (See Figures 3 and 4). Reasons for this undersampling include the demographics of the Talking Circle participant population and the reliance on email to recruit and schedule interviews.

Unsuccessful efforts were made to contact participants who started Round One Circles but who left early. Comments from executive interviews, participant interviews and the survey reveal that some participants did not complete the 5-week program because of the “middle-class” or “academic” environment of the Talking Circles. This undersampling has an obvious effect on our data­—the most likely being that issues related to class and socio-economic status will go unexamined. While we were able to identify

10

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

some class and socio-economic issues, the more subtle normalization of middle-class culture in the Talking Circlesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; process remains under-investigated.

Evaluation

Finally, the limitations of our research can be found in arguments about self-reporting surveys, qualitative research and generalizability. Our total interview sample size of 50, roughly 12% of the Talking Circlesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; population, allows us to make generalization about the effectiveness of Talking Circles. While there are debates about the appropriate sample size necessary for generalizability, the relatively small Talking Circle population (approximately 400 unique participants) and our use of mixed methods data collection strategy, make us confident in the findings outlined in this report.

Evaluation

11

Findings This section contains a discussion of the major findings from our analyses of multiple data sources (see Methodology). Each of the findings represents patterns in the data.

In addition to the analysis of qualitative data, we also provide patterns that emerged from quantitative data gathered through evaluations and an online survey. We include visual representations of these data and, whenever possible, use direct quotes from participants to illustrate our findings. All interview participants are referred to by pseudonyms and we purposefully withhold demographic information about respondents whenever such information could compromise respondent anonymity.

1. PARTICIPATION IN TALKING CIRCLES INCREASED PARTICIPANT AWARENESS OF RACE AND RACISM

Evaluation

One of the key findings from the evaluation of Round One and Round Two Talking Circles on Race and Racism is that participation in Talking Circles increased individual’s awareness about race and racism.

Figure 6: Question: “Talking Circles Helped Me to Understand Race and Racism”

12

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

Figure 7: Question: “Talking Circles Challenged My Assumptions about Race and Racism”

Evaluation

Figure 6 and Figure 7 illustrate survey responses regarding the impact of Talking Circles on participants’ understanding of race and racism. Participants were asked to indicate their attitudes toward a statement on a scale of strongly disagree to strongly agree. The majority of respondents “agreed” or “strongly agreed” that Talking Circles have “helped me understand race and racism” (77%, Figure 6) and that participation in Talking Circles “challenged my assumptions about race and racism” (63%, Figure 7). During participant interviews and in short answers to the online survey, numerous respondents commented that the “increased awareness,” was the most effective part of Talking Circles. Given the patterns across our data sources, including paper evaluations, we conclude that Talking Circles have had a strong impact on participants’ understanding of race and racism.

Just as important as the overall increase in awareness about race and racism, are the various types of awareness participants reported. One survey participant noted, “[Talking Circles] brought me [an] awareness that racism exists everywhere and affects everyone and I am responsible for doing something to help eliminate it.” Steve, a white respondent, gave the following response to the question, “How have the Talking Circles impacted your life?”: It changed a certain level of awareness … We [white people] live in very separated groups and while I have many acquaintances of other races … the circles I’m in are mostly white and so it was an opportunity to meet some people of color that I wouldn’t have otherwise met and a couple of those relationships have continued.

Another white respondent, Michael, stated the following in response to the question, “Can you tell me about one of your ‘takeaways’ from the Talking Circles?”

It was a little bit eye opening to realize the level on which many white people are unprepared for the discussion [about race]. And I think that

Evaluation

13

the reason why that was a surprise to me is that it’s not so true in most of the circles that I hang around in. Even though, they’re mostly white, but they’re used to challenging discussions.

Answers such as these were replicated in our interviews and suggest that Talking Circles increase awareness on multiple dimensions and in ways that participants did not always expect. For example, Michael, who is quoted above, came away with an awareness that not all white people are equally prepared to have conversations on race and racism.

While he stated his white friends are prepared to have conversations, he also seemed to have a false impression that all white people were engaged in discussions about race and racism. Another white respondent, Tom, became more aware of how much he still had to learn as a result of his participation in the Talking Circles. In response to the question “Why did you participate in the Talking Circles,” Tom states:

Evaluation

I went into the first Talking Circle thinking that I had a whole lot to offer, probably that I knew more than a lot of white folks did about race and racism, and I went in with…the understanding that…I was all that and a bag of chips, [that] I was, probably going to be somebody who could…lend something to the conversation, and I believe I did, but the seminal moment was, it may have been the very first day of the first talking circle. [Friend’s name] and I went, we spent most of that day together, we were working, we went together to the Talking Circle…[friend’s name]…let loose a barrage of feelings about white people. How they suck, they have caused him such pain, such anguish, they don’t get it, they think they’re all that, they can all…go to hell, and I remember sitting there in that circle saying holy shit.

This is one of my, for me, one of my best friends, a guy that I, that I know very well, that we see each other on the outside, we understand each other … the barrage, the feelings of, of being black in America were just stunning to me. And I felt like holy shit. I had no idea, no idea that I’d be sitting there in that circle feeling…and I felt man, I got to go back to the drawing board, cause I don’t know shit about shit.

Tom is typical of a subset of people we interviewed who entered Talking Circles believing they knew all there was to know about racism, only to realize they had a lot more to learn.

Many people we interviewed attributed their new awareness to hearing people speak honestly about their experience with racism. A final example of this type of awareness comes from another white respondent, Lynda, who was surprised to learn that not all people of color understood how racism permeates everyday life. She stated: I think, some of the biggest surprises for me were my assumptions going in that people of color doing this already understood and that it was the white people there who were gonna be doing the learning and that wasn’t the case. That people of color were on the spectrum, on the levels, you know, of understanding about their own racial identity and on how racism impacted them.

White respondents more often discussed their “takeaways” as a shift in awareness, but it was not always an awareness that racism exists. Instead, many white respondents

14

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

became aware of the multifaceted forms and effects of racism. As exemplified in the quote above, the increased awareness that white people experienced often included how much they and others, including people of color, still had to learn about racism. These different types of awareness are significant because they speak to the complex and interwoven elements of race and racism that are addressed in the Talking Circles.

2. Participation in Talking Circles Impacted Participant Behaviors Data analysis indicates that Talking Circles had a positive impact on participants’ behavior. We asked participants to respond to a series of statements and questions about the influence of Talking Circles on their relationships and behaviors. Survey data revealed that on a scale of strongly disagree to strongly agree, the typical survey participant “agreed” that “Talking Circles have increased my community involvement” and “influenced my day-to-day interactions” (See Figure 8).

Evaluation

Figure 8: Self-Reported Influence of Talking Circles on Changes in Behavior

Patterns in qualitative comments accompanying this portion of the survey suggest that “changes in behavior” generally take a couple of forms. Participants made regular comments that they no longer allow racist comments to go unchallenged. Numerous respondents discussed their increased willingness to engage in often difficult discussions about race and racism with friends and family.

The excerpt below, from Leslie, is an example of changes in day-to-day behavior that many interview respondents attributed to their participation in Talking Circles.

But one thing that I have changed is I don’t let racist comments go...when I hear somebody make at least the blatant ones, which I do. I hear black people are violent. I don’t get into a fight about it, but I never ignore it…I always at least say, I don’t agree. I think you’re wrong.

Evaluation

15

Many of the respondents reported feeling compelled to interrupt racist dialogue.

Challenging racial comments when made in the presence of participants represents the most common “action” taken after participating in Round One Talking Circles.

Other participants applied what they learned in the Talking Circles to address racialized acts. In the case of our next respondent, Avery, this meant calling into question the appropriateness of a racial image.

A really good example that just happened was there was a new building that went up…and on the sign was a face of an Indian, a Plains Indian and the person who did that, the developer that owned the building, really felt as though he was being respectful and honoring the Senecas …. and so I said this is absolutely not acceptable … he was furious. I mean so angry with me but I was like I can’t back down on this stuff…those are the kinds of things that you know I’m not now afraid. I would have been a lot more timid to or I would have tried to maybe not face it as directly but I thought this. I’m doing it.

Evaluation

The quote above represents the type of voice and action Talking Circle participants developed as a result of the Talking Circles. While we chose to highlight the story about the image because of its visibility, Avery also discussed taking several steps to create a more equitable work environment and actively encouraging colleagues to participate in the community screenings of the documentary film, Race: the Power of an Illusion (see section on Structural Racism). While the removal of a racist image is a visible influence, a number of the changes that Talking Circle participants self-report are largely invisible but no less significant.

In addition to reporting actions, some respondents reflected on the potential of the Talking Circles to affect individual behavior and by extension, institutions. Charles, an African American respondent answered a question about whether Talking Circles could eliminate racism with the following: I think the Talking Circles has the potential to have a positive impact on individual’s interactions with one another. And to the degree that those interactions allow individuals who had that shared experience to walk away with a different lens or perspective and a consciousness that they can then utilize as they interface with others. … And then for those individuals who find themselves with that knowledge base…when … they are creating policy or they are implementing certain practices, if they can use that experience and that consciousness in ways that may cause them to write that policy different or to implement practices differently with a mindset of more of understanding and appreciative then maybe the institutional structures change and racism becomes less embedded in policies and practices because the individuals have changed.

Several interview participants and survey respondents made inferences similar to Charles’ excerpt above. The general sentiment is that Talking Circles are part of a larger web of social change that individuals can experience in order to work toward eliminating racism. While participants acknowledge the structural nature of racism,

16

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

all who commented on the topic, saw the necessity and possibilities of individual shifts in behavior as part of a larger process towards the elimination of structural racism. For survey and interview respondents, these behavioral shifts start with shifts in awareness.

Many of the participants who discussed their changes in behavior did so in reference to their own work in the Ithaca community. During our interviews participants repeatedly cited four examples of actions taken after participating in Talking Circles: United Against hate Campaign, Ithaca Times Letter Writing campaign, Family Advocacy Coalition for Equity in our Systems (F.A.C.E.S.), and Understand 2 Overcome (U2O).

These examples of community organizing and anti-racist efforts as well as their impact are detailed in the section on Structural Racism. The examples of action are also illustrative of changes in participant behaviors and the role Talking Circles has played in changing the community conversation about race and racism. In short, participation in Round One and Round Two Talking Circles influenced behavioral shifts ranging from interpersonal behavior to getting involved in community wide anti-racist efforts.

THREE ESSENTIAL FACTORS FOR A SUCCESSFUL TALKING CIRCLE

Evaluation

3.

Respondents cited three contributing factors to a successful Talking Circle experience: (1) hearing other people’s stories; (2) sharing stories in a multiracial group; and (3) good facilitation. All three of these factors made repeated appearances in participant evaluations and interviews. Additionally, in anonymous written evaluations as well as the survey, Talking Circle participants repeatedly made references to “dialogue with [a] mixed raced group,” “hearing other people’s stories,” and “amazing facilitators” as factors that made their Circle successful.

Interview respondents regularly reported that hearing other people’s stories was one of the most powerful components of the Talking Circles. In response to a question about the relationship between Talking Circles and structural racism, Sarah, a white respondent, stated, I think it’s a great thing that [MRC Director] has generated…I think it’s a very, it’s a meaningful way for people to be exposed to other people’s truth, and to hear their own. Sometimes I think people are totally shocked when they…are forced to talk I mean are talking and then, and then you realize all kinds of stuff in the process of…opening your mouth, and sometimes you need help.

In response to the question “What was most effective about this Talking Circle?”, sample comments captured on anonymous evaluations distributed after a Round One Talking Circle include statements such as, “Hearing other points of view opened my eyes to things I didn’t realize were happening or underlying reasons behind events/comments, etc.;” “Getting to hear from other, stories and truths;” and “Tough thoughtful participants with different life stories.” Similarly, in response to the same question, survey respondents stated “hearing people’s personal stories, sharing pain of racism;”

Evaluation

17

“Just hearing the stories others tell is most moving for me” and “candid conversations in a safe space in a mixed race group.” As this last statement reflects, for many Talking Circle participants, it was not just hearing stories but it was important to hear stories from people with different lived experiences with race and racism.

Evaluation

In fact, all of our data sources point to the importance of a mixed race settings.

Participants regularly commented on the effectiveness of having a multi-racial or diverse group. In response to the question “What was most effective about this Talking Circle?” typical responses include: “That there were people from varied background;” “Having a balance of white people/people of color;” “The balance of whites and people of color seems important in filling out the dialogue/story;” and “Stories from people of color, esp [names of facilitators].” Similar responses showed up in the survey and include “Talking openly with people of different races and different backgrounds;” “The racial and economic mix of participants;” “intercultural/racial dialogue;” “Open listening to those of other color who’ve given the subject more attention than I” and “By far, listening to the experiences of the Circle members who were nonwhite.”

Interview participants most often spoke about the importance of a mixed race setting by using memorable examples and their impact on the Circle. For example, Christina recalls a moment in her Talking Circle when a black man was very honest about his experiences with racism in Ithaca. She goes on to describe the reaction of the group, It was very uncomfortable for a lot of the white people in the room…In fact, I think someone said I didn’t even realize there was so much anger, why you had so much anger in you…I think there was confusion on why is he expressing all this anger, or there [was] disbelief that there actually is all this anger around race and racism and so I think it actually was a, great moment for, I think it was almost a gift to the people in the room, because they actually got to see the effects of racism to people of color and how it really had brought this man, broke this man down to such a raw state where he was so emotional, I mean he was sobbing.

Christina’s statement is representative of many interview respondents who shared stories from their Talking Circles of the “gifts” or learning moments made possible by the mixed race dialogue.

Finally, throughout the evaluations, surveys, interviews and informal conversations, it quickly became clear that the facilitators played a key role in the success of the Talking Circles. Regardless of a participant’s personal experience in the Talking Circles, an overwhelming majority had only positive comments about the facilitators.

Representative comments from the survey and evaluations include: “The most effective part was that we had facilitators that challenged us to dig deeper and to continue to show up,” “Facilitators were amazing,” “Having group facilitators was key! Their energy and perspective kept the group going,” “Both listened actively, asked for clarification for both better understanding and to draw participants out” and “I have so much respect, and appreciation for all three of the facilitators. Having personal conversations with all of them inspired and engaged me. They give me hope and I admire their passion.

18

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

I too am passionate and am going to work towards acknowledging race/racism/ social justice (etc.).”

Comments from interviews echoed these praises. The following quotes are all taken from responses to the question, “What role did the facilitators play in the Talking Circles?”

I think, they did their jobs well. In terms of the scope of the conversations that we had, I think they were…very direct and they held people accountable to the things they were saying. So yeah, I thought that was good and…three of them were people of color, which is great to have facilitators of people of color and so, I…felt supported in that way a bit. (Loretta) So I thought that was…good…the facilitators themselves did a great job in helping people to understand the basic rules of confidentiality and safety and things like that. So I felt very comfortable in the environment. (Anthony)

Evaluation

The main facilitators…they continually conveyed standards and prompts and suggestions so people wouldn’t get left out and other people wouldn’t be talking over. So, the environment I think, was conducive to the goal of having genuine and authentic, real conversation, both life experiences and how it’s being perceived and stuff like that.

Q: And the role of the facilitators in making that happen?

Huge. I mean, setting tone, setting ground rules…Some of them may have sent emails to remind us and that kind of thing, but there was some clarity of structure. This is what we’re about. This is what we’re not about. So, that, that helped people know what they’re getting into and when there was wrinkles and bumps in the road I think, they stopped, they paused, how’s the group doing, kind of check in that way. So, it was, it was a fairly healthy, human paced...conversation as opposed to the agenda driven, wanna get to an end goal here or something like that. So, they, they used what was offered and kept, kept the learning going. (Chris) Having in this case two experienced facilitators of color I think I felt safe throughout the process and that helped with me as a person of color. And I think it is actually much harder. I might be bias because I am a person of color, but it might be harder for a person of color to participate in these types of discussion circles. (Gary) These quotes speak not only to the strength of Talking Circle facilitators but the variety of roles they play in the Circles. Among the qualities mentioned in these interviews were holding people accountable, keeping the group on track, and creating as well as maintaining a safe environment, particularly for people of color.

There were a minority of respondents who believed that facilitation was important but who took issue with some facilitation methods. For example, in response to the question “What would make the Talking Circles’ dialogue more effective?”, one person responded: “Better facilitation that is more responsive to the needs and learning styles

Evaluation

19

of participants. It sometimes felt as though the facilitators were lecturing the group rather than encouraging a conversation or drawing from the group’s own knowledge.”

In this same section, another person wrote, “sometimes the facilitators seemed to want the ‘right’ answer.” Although such comments were uncommon, these types of comments are present in the evaluations and interviews. For example, Veronica describes her preferred method of facilitation as the following: I think that depending on facilitators, some really take it down a path where they have their own agenda, their own thoughts that they’re pushing and some organically let the conversation happen without necessarily shaping it other than keeping on topic. I think that the better facilitator of course is the one who allows for that organic development but still keeping us on track, as opposed to ... in fact I think something, what you just said is wrong, kind of thing. So, I’ve been in that situation before that I’ve seen that kind of take place and, and I was surprised that that’s how the facilitator reacted.

Evaluation

From the data, we can see the power and influence of good facilitation. It bears repeating that the reviews of Talking Circles facilitation were overwhelming positive and the few critical comments point to the difficulty of facilitation.

4. PEOPLE OF COLOR AND WHITE PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES IN TALKING CIRCLES. As reported previously, several respondents stated that the most effective thing about the Talking Circles was the opportunity to have conversations in a mixed race setting.

While both white and non-white participants made these statements, further analysis revealed that the statements regarding mixed-race dialogue groups had different meaning to different racial groups. In short, there were significant differences between the ways white participants and participants of color discussed experiences and “takeaways”. This conclusion is consistent across the main findings, however, it is much more prevalent in discussion of Round One Talking Circles.

One of the most persistent differences in experience came from the expectations of what would happen during participation in the Talking Circles. White respondents revealed an expectation that they would “learn” from people of color. The following is a representative comment of a self-identified white participant to the survey question, “Why did you participate in Talking Circles?”: “I wanted to hear from those with more experience talking about racism, especially those who aren’t white like myself.”

In response to a question asking participants to identify what they remembered most about Talking Circles, additional survey statements include, “Learning directly about the experiences and lives of local people of color” and “learning from black people’s direct experience.” A number of white participants stated that their desire to participate in Talking Circles was partly motivated by the opportunity to learn from people of color, in many cases, specifically black people.

20

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

In response to the question “what was the most effective thing about the Talking Circles,” another white participant wrote, “The power of listening to POC [people of color] sharing the pervasiveness and impacts of racism in their daily lives.” Answering the same question, another survey respondent wrote the most effective part of her Talking Circle experience was, [A] woman of color sharing about a seemingly small day to day experience she has that victimizes her racially; whites trying to relate or help her feel better, caused her to cry and point out that it IS about race. Unfortunately she ended up in tears, but having a black person give an example and stick with it through our fumbling around. I REALLY appreciated that because I did learn a big lesson that I’ve seen all over the place, and caught myself thinking.

The focus of this answer is on how much the respondent learned from witnessing a black woman share her experience and not abandon the Talking Circle process even when her experience was being diminished by white participants “trying to relate and help her feel better.”

Evaluation

While the respondent acknowledges that ‘big lesson” came at a price (i.e. the process brought the black women to tears), the emphasis was what the respondent learned. This example highlights one of the inevitable realities of Round One Talking Circles – white participants regularly discussed learning from the painful experiences of people of color. This may explain why the most frequent comment among respondents of color was an assertion that their presence in the Round One Talking Circles was to “teach white people”.

Participants of color did not agree to participate with the expectation that they would teach their white counterparts. However, most came away with the feeling that their purpose in the Talking Circles was to teach white people about racism. This finding was consistent across Round One and Round Two, although, as mentioned, much less prominent in discussions of Round Two. Respondents of color also expressed a belief Talking Circles were primarily designed to educate white people. For example, the following statement was part of a longer discussion with April about why she participated in the Talking Circles.

I felt like people of color should be paid to go to Round One… I thought I was going for me, but what I realized is that I just kept listening to a lot of white people process how bad they felt about racism or feeling helpless or mystified. Like, oh my gosh, this happens to you and so…as white people get more aware of how… messed up things are then, they want to talk about it more, but I’m like can you go in a circle and talk to some white people…it’s like there’s all these traps. I just felt like we should be paid as people of color and then, they [MRC coordinators] would send out these notices like people of color, we need you people of color in the circle. I’m like, can there be a stipend? And so, I didn’t find I learned anything new.

Evaluation

21

In this quote, April is clear that she 1) did not learn anything new about race or racism in the Round One Talking Circles and 2) felt like there was an undue burden placed upon people of color. She goes one step further by suggesting that participants of color should be compensated for their time in the Talking Circles. Lastly, April pointed to the continual call for people of color to participate in Round One Talking Circles.

Participants and facilitators of all represented races and ethnicities made references to these recruitment notices.

Another respondent described a similar sentiment as Christina but goes on to discuss why she continues to support the Talking Circles despite the toll it takes on her and other people of color.

Evaluation

I purposely don’t schedule anything right after because I know I’m going to be angry for a little while, and it’s going to take me a while again to get back into, you know everything is copasetic, everything is fine, you know wearing the mask that most people of color have to wear so. It takes a while to get it back on.

Q: Do you warn people that that’s going to happen?

A: Yes, especially people of color that, participate in it, because I do think that there’s a certain amount of exploitation that happens of people of color within this piece, but I understand the purpose behind it, and it’s almost like an inevitable side effect that happens, and like I sit in the seat and I definitely see that a lot of the work I do though ultimately I hope affects people of color’s lives and their quality of life here.

Christina expresses a similar view that people of color bear an undue burden in the Talking Circles. Yet, like most of our respondents of color, Christina describes an understanding of the necessity of such “exploitation.” Even though she leaves Talking Circles angry and warns other people of color about what they will experience in the Circles, she continues to recruit people to the Talking Circles and participant in them in the “hope [it] affects people of color’s lives and their quality of life here.”

According to our executives interviews and interviews with white respondents, MRC has a waiting list of potential white Talking Circle participants. However, the organization has had to continually recruit people of color to participate in Talking Circles. There are two results of this “shortage” of people of color. First, some Talking Circles have been temporarily delayed in order to ensure a racial balance. Second, some people of color have been asked to participate in multiple Round One Talking Circles. This was also true of our interview sample. Of the 18 participants of color we interviewed, nearly all had been asked to participate in more than one Circle and all but a few had participated in two or more. Some of the respondents of color had participated in as many as six different Talking Circles.

When asked about their “takeaways” from participation in Talking Circles, another commonly cited response for people of color was a realization that, while white racism is the most significant impediment to the elimination of structural racism, people of

22

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

color also have “their own stuff” to deal with in relation to racism. For example, Charles responded this way to the follow-up question, “Is there anything that you took away from [Talking Circles]?”: That I have my own stuff to deal with. You know, my own anger to deal with and I just don’t deal with it. You know? And that’s part of the raw stuff that’s there, but it’s also understanding that there are many people out there that we all want to deal with this issue of race and racism.

Two self-identified people of color who participated in Round Two Talking Circles commented on their evaluations that the most effective aspect of their Talking Circle included, “The separation into racial peer groups and then coming back together to hear each other.” The second participant in this Circle wrote, “I really liked doing some of the talking in a group with other people of color only. It was much easier to speak freely.”

Paradoxically, a self-identified white participant had this to say about the same circle in response to the question, “What would make the Talking Circle more effective,”: “Meeting in the whole group – the whites only [group] wasn’t as effective or beneficial.”

This last series of comments from a Round Two evaluation exemplify the different experiences people have even when participating in the same Circle. It also speaks to what may be a common perception among white participants – i.e. white people can only learn about racism from people of color or in the presence of people of color.

Similar dynamics were also reported in the White Allies Round Two Circle. The impact or origins of these differing experiences is beyond the scope of this project. However, various data markers indicate that while all participants increase awareness and change behaviors, white participants and participants of color are impacted differently through their participation.

Evaluation

At several points in his interview Charles discussed the idea that people of color have relationships to racism that are specific to their individual and sometimes collective groups. One example is the intergroup relationships between African Americans and Latinas/os. In Charles’ interview, he indicated that inter and intra group relationships among people of color were not discussed in the Talking Circles.

5. Focused Round Two Talking Circles were received more favorably As discussed in the Background section, Round Two Talking Circles were created in order to intentionally encourage anti-racist actions. Data collected from both interviews and surveys suggest that participants of focused Round Two Talking Circles self-report more satisfaction with their Round Two experience than those who attended what we are calling “general” or non-focused Round Two sessions. Focused Round Two Talking Circles have been organized around identities or themes – for example, White Allies and

Evaluation

23

Intersectionality. General Round Two Talking Circles are not organized or focused on an identity or issue but rather extend the dialogue of race and racism.

The following quote comes from a white respondent, Rachel, who had a transformational experience in Round One but was left wanting more from her participation in a general Round Two Talking Circle.

I think I recall round two, I mean…round one was so very, very transformative for me [it] had a huge impact, by the time I came to round two it was…I was still on this huge learning curve but it was like I knew a little bit more what to expect…I don’t remember it being quite as emotionally challenging as round one...it was a little bit less compelling. I felt like maybe I might have missed one of the sessions, and I felt like well, it’s not the end of the world if like with the round one it was like every session was so completely…compelling and you had to be there.

Evaluation

Rachel recalls how transformative the Round One Talking Circles was for her, calling it “life changing” several times in her interview. Naturally, she expected to have a similar experience in Round Two, but instead, reported feeling like missing a session was “not the end of the world.” This is in contrast to Round One where she felt like she learned a substantial amount in every session.

Similar comments about general Round Two’s were present in our survey data. Some of the reasons respondents provide for their less-transformative experiences in general Round Two Circles include: “conversations were less candid,” “trust within the group did not develop,” and “[Round Two] felt like a repeat of Round One.” An African American respondent characterized Round One as “the basics” and had this to say when asked whether Round Two moved beyond the basics.

Q: Was it beyond the basics? Did you get something more out of it?

A: No…I hoped for it and I think, we tried, but you can’t… It [general Round Two] gives you like a familiar trope of kind of white guilt and discomfort and what I was more surprised by was at some point in time I wanted to feel like, when we started talking about there’s no way to talk. I don’t think you can talk about racism and not feel like other [other oppressions] are, they’re all related…So, I felt like…At least I thought at some point, you know, people were starting to talk a little bit about homophobia…and I could feel like the facilitators were like, okay, we’re only gonna talk about race. But I felt like it, sometimes shutting down the conversation to be specific about race, people miss this whole other…dimension.

This respondent’s experience reflects most but not all of our sampled participants of general Round Two Talking Circles. Additional respondent feedback on general Round Two Talking Circles included requests to talk about the intersection of race with other oppressions; desires to get white people “beyond guilt”; and appeals for the Round Two Talking Circles to be organized around an issue or identity that the group could address collectively.

24

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

With the exception of the White Allies Round Two Talking Circle, all other focused Round Two Talking Circles received near unanimous positive reviews. In response to a question about what he remembered most about his participation in a focused Round Two Circle, Gabe, an African American respondent, gave this response: How much more, how much deeper people were willing to share about their experiences. Like I said, round one, people held back and then round two people almost go to the other extreme, they want to put it all out there…They’re trying to talk about saying stupid shit at work to a black colleague that made the black colleague shoot back which made them burst into tears and they were confused because they had no idea they had said anything wrong. They go right to the core of their worst experience and then we try to work, we try to deconstruct those and help people understand the difference between guilt and shame. That comes up a lot in round two, you know.

I think the [focused round two] one…I really enjoyed it because it really delved deep into like our other identities and…there wasn’t really any action that came from it…but in terms of just like diving deeper, not just the basics of like what was the systemic racism… It definitely just brought me to this different perspective…it just made things a little bit more complex for me…it helped me really understand the different intersections of my identity and what that means for me, but also what that means in terms of my place or my belonging in… I think also it…made me more aware of other people’s kind of path and their own development of understanding about race and racism and how it’s this ongoing work.

Evaluation

The next statement comes from a respondent who participated in both general and focused Rounds Two Circles. After discussing her disappointment in the general Round Two, Serena had this to say about a focused Round Two.

Serena’s words are a perfect illustration of how many participants of Round Two Talking Circles experienced focused Circles. While there were positive comments about general Round Two Talking Circles, the noticeable difference of positive feedback from focused Round Two warrants consideration moving forward.

Evaluation

25

Structural Racism A 2004 report from the Aspen Institutes Roundtable on Community Change defines structural racism as the “subtler racialized patterns in policies and practices [that] permeate the political, economic, and sociocultural structures of America in ways that generate differences in well-being between people of color and whites.”1 If Talking Circles on Race and Racism single-handedly dismantled structural racism, the results of the dialogue-based model would have eliminated “the chronic gap between Americans of color and whites when it comes to jobs, housing, health, education, and other indicators of well-being.”2

Evaluation

Clearly, the existence of structural racism continues to plague communities across the nation and Ithaca, NY is no exception. Data indicators from several sources show wide racial disparities in the City of Ithaca and Tompkins County. Data from public schools on graduation and discipline rates reveal significant racial disproportionality.3 County health indicators report that black people experience a higher mortality rate; experience significantly higher asthma hospitalizations, and ultimately have shorter life expectancies.4 U.S. Census data indicates that Asian, Latino/a and Black residents are significantly more likely to be living below the poverty line (see Figure 9).5

Figure 9: Percentage of Tompkins County Residents Living Below the Poverty Line

1 Keith Lawrence, Stacey Sutton, Anne Kubisch, Gretchen Susi, and Karen Fulbright-Anderson. (2004, June).

Structural Racism and Community Building”. Aspen Institute, p. 9.

2 Ibid, p. 44.

3 New York State Department of Education. New York State Report Cards 2013-2014. Retrieved from: http://data.nysed.gov/enrollment.php?year=2014&county=61 (15 May 2015).

4 Tompkins County Health Department. Community Health Assessment 2013–2017. Available from: http://www.tompkinscountyny.gov/files/health/pnc/cha/CHA-Tomp-2013-2017.pdf 5 U.S. Census Bureau. Table S1703; Selected Characteristics of People at Specified Levels of Poverty in the Past 12 Months 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Generated by Sean Eversley Bradwell; using American FactFinder; <http://factfinder2.census.gov> (12 June 2015).

26

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

Additionally, white residents remain under-represented in the population of incarcerated residents6 and significantly over-represented throughout law enforcement and the criminal justice system. Throughout New York State’s 6th Judicial District (including Tompkins County), all 47 or 100% of judges are identified as white.7 The Demographic Research Group’s creation of the “Racial Dot Map” displays notable racial residential segregation in the city (See Figure 10).8 And lastly, a recent report from the Martin Prosperity Institute lists Ithaca, NY as the most segregated community in the nation for service-class workers (see Figure 11).9 Given that people of color living in Tompkins County are more likely to live below the poverty line (see Figure 9), one can assume that the segregation by socio-economic status closely resembles that by race.

Evaluation

Figure 10: Racial Residential Segregation – Racial Dot Map (Ithaca, NY

SOURCE: Cable, Dustin. (2013). “Racial Dot Map.” Demographic Research Group: Charlottesville, VA: Retrieved from: http://www.coopercenter.org/demographics/Racial-Dot-Map (12 May 2015).

6 The Community Listening Project. “Fact Sheet on Proposed Tompkins County Jail Expansion.” (2014, April). Ithaca, NY. 7 New York State Bar Association. (2014). Judicial Diversity: A Work In Progress. Retrieved from http:// www.nysba.org/judicialdiversityreport/ (31 October 2014).

8 Cable, Dustin. (2013). “Racial Dot Map.” Demographic Research Group: Charlottesville, VA: Retrieved from: http://www.coopercenter.org/demographics/Racial-Dot-Map (12 May 2015).

9 Florida, Richard and Charlotta Mellander. (2015 February). Segregated City: the geography of economic segregation in American Metros. Martin Prosperity Institute: Toronto, Canada.

Evaluation

27

Figure 11: Working Class Residential Segregation Index (Martin Prosperity Institute)

Evaluation

SOURCE: Florida, Richard and Charlotta Mellander. (2015 February). Segregated City: the geography of economic segregation in American Metros. Martin Prosperity Institute: Toronto, Canada.

A list of data points and metrics could probably continue for some time. However, whether talking about education, health care, criminal justice, employment, housing, or economics, there are persistent and often significant racial disparities between people of color and white people throughout the nation. Structural racism is far too large and complex a system for any one program to address.

Thus, this report does not answer whether Talking Circles on Race and Racism dismantled structural racism. Rather, the evaluation investigated the relationship between the Talking Circles and structural racism. Stated differently, what is the relationship between Talking Circles and eliminating structural racism? Our assessment indicates that, while limited, Talking Circles can play a crucial role in dismantling the tentacles of structural racism. We argue that Talking Circles are an essential component of dismantling structural racism and are connected to a larger web of social change events designed to eliminate racism.

The complicated connection between dialogue and the end of structural racism is not always realized, in part, because there are a series of variables that must be in place in order to promote structural change. Combating structural racism requires institutions and individuals to act differently and in coordination. Intentional changes in individual action require new knowledge and awareness. Intentional changes in collective action require shared knowledge and awareness. The colloquialism, “When we know better, we do better” is a key variable and assumption in the completion of this step-logic equation.

As reported previously, we argue that Talking Circles on Race and Racism raises participants’ awareness and influences their behavior. The next step is the connection to the dismantling of structural racism. The examples below take this equation and explore the elusive space between the end of structural racism and changes in individual and institutional behaviors and actions (See Figure 12).

28

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

Figure 12: Relationship Between Dialogue and the End of Structural Racism

I think it’s a great thing that [MRC Director’s name] has generated. And… it’s [Talking Circles] not the end all and be all but…it certainly doesn’t structurally change things but I think it’s a very… meaningful way for people to be exposed to other people’s truth, and to hear their own.

Sometimes I think people are totally shocked when they… are forced to talk—I mean are talking and then you realize all kinds of stuff in the process of, …of opening your mouth, and sometimes you need help.

In this quote, Sarah stated that the Talking Circles do not make structural changes, but quickly added that they are meaningful. We argue that this meaningful dialogue, where people not only listen to other’s stories but can also tell their own, is directly connected to the “increase in awareness” our respondents report. Furthermore, that awareness is a crucial first step toward antiracist action, which we contend moves us closer to dismantling structural racism.

Evaluation

Participants had their own ideas about the connection between Talking Circles and dismantling structural racism. Below, Sarah explains how she thinks Talking Circles have impacted the Ithaca Community.

Additionally, many of the decisions that uphold and dismantle “policies and practices [that] permeate the political, economic, and sociocultural structures of America”10 are made behind closed doors outside of public scrutiny. Thus, it is difficult to gather data on the individual actions (e.g. conversations, confrontations, questions, thought processes, etc.) that both uphold and challenge current institutions. Fortunately, we were able to gather data on some aspects of these processes as respondents recalled the ways the Talking Circles affected their behavior (See Findings).

Our data indicate that increased awareness, can and in fact does change participant behavior. In examining the grey area between changes in behaviors and attempts to dismantle structural racism we discovered that the undefined space between requires a couple of factors. One of the key factors supported and expanded through participation in Talking Circles is the extension of an anti-racist network. In addition to self-reported changes in relationships (see Figure 13), the collected data indicate that participating 10 Keith Lawrence, Stacey Sutton, Anne Kubisch, Gretchen Susi, and Karen Fulbright-Anderson.

(2004, June). Structural Racism and Community Building”. Aspen Institute, p. 9.

Evaluation

29

in Talking Circles is likely to increase the amount of community involvement of its participants by (1) strengthening and extending an anti-racism network and (2) creating new opportunities to participate in anti-racist activities via Talking Circle Alumni.

Figure 13: Self-Reported Influence of Talking Circles on Changes in Relationships

Evaluation Many people commented on their surveys that becoming a part of the Talking Circle network made them aware of opportunities and/or pushed them to “get involved” in anti-racist community efforts. Additionally, Talking Circles expanded participant’s anti-racist networks through event attendance as well as the Talking Circle email listserve. Representative comments about increased community involvement include: “The listserv provides opportunities I wasn’t finding elsewhere,” “I attend community events that I would not have even known about before,” “I made friends and show up for them at events,” “I made a greater effort to go to community events,” “I became more connected with people in Ithaca,” and “[Talking Circles] heightened my participation in neighborhood events to connect with a broader cross-section of families.” Meeting people with similar interest and broadening one’s antiracist network were two additional reasons participants reported signing up for Talking Circles.

In addition to strengthening existing networks, Talking Circles also have the potential to extend the reach of antiracist networks to people who might not otherwise cross paths.

As Maria, an interview respondent said, connections made in Talking Circles can be beneficial beyond introducing an antiracist framework.

I know for a fact that…people’s networks get…widen and that’s the benefit of including both [race and], socioeconomic [diversity]…Because you start having those, for example, who might not have a job and are interested in I don’t know some profession that or career that somebody else is the

30

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

director of, and maybe… those connections then get made and so…I think that’s important.

Another respondent, Celia, stated: I guess when I think about the impacts to me it’s about relationships and stories and even now like, when I, I’m so grateful I did go through it because I’m part of a community and when I think about like acting and you know with folks at [name of an institution of higher education] I think about the community and the circle and the circle that the community’s created.

These two quotes are representative of interview respondents who reflected on the community and networks that were built through the Talking Circles. Celia even alludes to feeling accountable to the community that was built in her Circle. While not all respondents mentioned the Talking Circles as increasing their own community and/or networks, the majority of interview and survey respondents agreed that Talking Circles provided the potential for doing so.

Evaluation

Evaluation

While structural racism remains present in Tompkins County, Talking Circle participants and alumni have engaged in a number of antiracist actions directly confronting structural racism. On the following pages we provide a list and brief description of four collective actions. These are presented as representatives of the types of larger antiracist organizing that occurred as a direct result of participation in Talking Circles. These four are also the most commonly referenced throughout our data.

31

United Against Hate Campaign

Evaluation

After three racist messages were left on the answering machine of a local community center, the “United Against Hate” campaign was suggested and organized by a Talking Circle participant using the Talking Circles email list-serve. As stated on the Multicultural Resource Center website, “The person who suggested the idea gathered input from others on the list to come up with the phrase and designed a poster. The poster was distributed through list-serves and was hosted on the Ithaca Journal website (in its December 1, 2009 edition) along with t he statement of intent below. That weekend, over 1,000 posters were downloaded from the Journal site alone.

Before long, posters were showing up in home and car windows all over Ithaca.” The website goes on to say, “The ‘United Against Hate’ campaign is a way for people to push back against this trend and be visible in opposition to racist intimidation.”

Image 1: United Against Hate (Poster)

Ithaca Times Letter Writing Campaign

On December 8, 2010, The Ithaca Times published an editorial titled “$175,000 is Too Much.” The editorial was a reference to the salary of the newly appointed Ithaca City School District (ICSD) Superintendent, Dr. Luvelle Brown. Brown was hired in the aftermath of racial tensions throughout the district and the editorial included the line, “To the school board: Please, please, don’t tell us you bent over backward to hire this guy just because he’s black.” In response, numerous Talking Circle alumni organized a letter writing campaign. As Dr. Sofia Villenas writes, “This opinion piece drew community outrage. In the seven letters to the editor that were published on 15 December 2010, the editorial was referred to as ‘racist’, ‘race-baiting’, ‘offensive’, and ‘unacceptable’.”11 The following week, the Ithaca Times issued an apology for publishing the editorial. All seven letters were from Talking Circle alumni.

11 Villenas, Sofia A, and Sophia L. Angeles. “Race Talk and School Equity in Local Print Media: the Discursive Flexibility of Whiteness and the Promise of Race-Conscious Talk.” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education. 34.4 (2013), p. 511.

32

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

Family Advocacy Coalition for Equity in our Systems (F.A.C.E.S.)

F.A.C.E.S. began as a follow-up to the Round Two Talking Circles. The Multicultural Resource Center (MRC) originally sponsored this group in order to provide a facilitated space for parents and caregivers to have dialogue specifically focused on how racialized systems affect the lives of children. Every participant of this group is a parent or caregiver of a child of color. The group continued to meet well after the completion of their Circle.

U2O was formed by a group of Ithaca community members, all of whom had participated in Round One Talking Circles.

The group came together in the spring of 2013. U20â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s first major campaign was to organize several community-wide screenings and facilitated discussions of the three part series, Race: the Power of an Illusion. More than 1000 community residents participated in a film screening over a threeweek period during the spring of 2013. This was in addition to the screenings that took place at Ithaca High School, Cornell University, Loaves and Fishes, Ithaca College, churches, public libraries and classrooms. The group has also organized at least one followup social event for people who viewed the film and wanted to know how to get more involved.

The screenings have exposed thousands of Tompkins County residents to some conversations about race and racism.

Evaluation

Understanding 2 Overcome (U2O)

Image 2: Understand 2 Overcome (U20) Poster

Evaluation

33

United Against Hate, Ithaca Times Letter Writing Campaign, F.A.C.E.S. and U2O were all designed to make change at the community or structural level. Each serves as an example of the way Talking Circles have affected the Ithaca conversation about race and racism at the community level (Understanding 2 Overcome, United Against Hate Campaign) and specifically addressed at least two key institutions: schools (F.A.C.E.S.) and media (Ithaca Letter Writing Campaign).

While participants acknowledged the structural nature of racism, all who commented on the topic, saw the necessity and possibilities of individual shifts in behavior as a necessary component of the process to eliminate structural racism. As described by respondents, the elimination of structural racism must necessarily begin with increased awareness and shifts in individual behaviors. Here, we repeat a statement from Charles, who captured this idea particularly well while discussing the potential impact of Talking Circles.

Evaluation

I think the Talking Circles has the potential to have a positive impact on individual’s interactions with one another. And to the degree that those interactions allow individuals who had that shared experience to walk away with a different lens or perspective and a consciousness that they can then utilize as they interface with others. … And then for those individuals who find themselves with that knowledge base…when … they are creating policy or they are implementing certain practices, if they can use that experience and that consciousness in ways that may cause them to write that policy different or to implement practices differently with a mindset of more of understanding and appreciative then maybe the institutional structures change and racism becomes less embedded in policies and practices because the individuals have changed.

34

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

Racial Healing After the mass killing of nine black churchgoers inside the oldest African Methodist Episcopal church in the South, President Obama spoke passionately about racism as “a blight that we have to combat together.” Comedian Jon Stewart put his jokes aside and somberly reminded his audience of the nation’s “gaping racial wound”. As we remember the murder of Vincent Chin 30 years earlier, the sexual violence against indigenous women, and recall the events of the recent past in McKinny, TX, or Ferguson, MO or Los Angeles, CA or Baltimore, MD, it is all too clear that there is plenty of racial pain and racial injury.

Still, it remains difficult to tease out the effectiveness of Talking Circles to promote racial healing. One of the challenges for the principal investigators is that in the literature, and in our extended conversations, we continue to encounter the use of “end of racism”, “racial equity” and “racial healing” as synonyms. This interchanging of terms, as well as other phrases, presents a challenge as we have tried to operationalize our terms and analyze the interview data.

Evaluation

Further complicating this operationalization of racial healing is the lack of a consistent definition in the literature. Mauren Walker defines racial healing as the “structured sharing of information and personal experiences to help alleviate racial conditioning.”1 Sharon E. Davis states that racial healing “gets enough people ready in heart, mind, and spirit to change the structures and requires personal reflection.”2 And Harlon Dalton writes that the purpose of racial healing is “to transform the meaning of race.”3 While the definitions share basic approaches, the concept becomes hard to operationalize and “measure” particularly when racial healing is regularly substituted with “racial equity” or “ending racism.”

When interview participants were asked to describe their understanding of “racial healing”, their responses varied greatly. During executive and participant interviews, only one respondent used the term healing to describe the effect of the Talking Circle prior to the interview question on racial healing. We see this as a signal that participants may not frame their experience in Talking Circles around ideas of healing or racial healing. Below are just a few examples of the many ways Talking Circle participants defined and discussed racial healing.

My spin is the racial healing that whites go through is to work through that white privilege and work through the guilt and work through all that stuff and that would be their racial healing, where do they fit in, what can they do, what do they do that they shouldn’t do, what, precepts, concepts and misconceptions do they have that they can, they can turn around and 1 Walker, Maureen. When Racism Gets Personal: Toward Relational Healing. Wellesley, MA: Stone Center for Developmental Service and Studies, Wellesley College, 2001, p. 73.

2 Davis, Sharon E. “The Oneness of Humankind: Healing Racism Today.” Reclaiming Children and Youth.

18.4 (2010): 45.

3 Dalton, Harlon L. Racial Healing: Confronting the Fear between Blacks and Whites. New York: Doubleday, 1995, p. 101.

Evaluation

35

help work to turn around. The racial healing and again I’m not black…but I would assume that the black racial healing is a much different thing and it’s probably much more individual even from black to black than from white. I think that with the white racial healing it, it, a huge piece of it is that, to work through the guilt and the white privilege. (Ruth) I just think of Stevie Wonder. You know, and I think of Stevie Wonder after 9-11 hit, he sung his song. After Whitney Houston died, at her funeral, he sung this song and the song is ‘Love is in Need of Love Today’ and to me, that’s what racial healing has to be about. You know, it’s gotta be this love. And I’m not saying that going out and preaching love, but there’s something in that song that racial healing is a part of as well, I think. You know, it’s something that we all need, you know, in terms of level of acceptance that has to be there and a difference and appreciating that difference. (Charles)

Evaluation

While some respondents made general comments about racial healing, it was not uncommon to hear references to “love” in response to the “injury,” insult” and “disease” of racism.

The next quotes are in responds to the question, “What role do you think Talking Circles play in racial healing?”: I think the talking circles role is creating that safe space and having well trained and well skilled facilitators and administrators to help guide along in that process to make sure that everybody has that comfort level to grow in the process. Talking Circles I would say have been quite successful in doing that. (Gary) I think that witnessing effect is phenomenal. I mean I really think that people of color hearing from white folks confess what they normally will never confess in a general social kind of interaction or even in friendships that have been ongoing for a long time…And then conversely for the white folks I think the testimonies of people of color’s experience of violence, discrimination, undermining, minimizing, gets them to really feel that pain in a real way as opposed to in an abstract way. And that’s, for me, the beginning of the confrontation that, you know that the white folks need to, need to kind of start looking at. (Shannon) We use these quotes as representative examples of the variety of responses participants gave in reference to racial healing. In Gary’s quote, the respondent sees the role of Talking Circles as creating a safe place for people to grow. It would appear that this participant is using “growth” and “healing” as synonyms, since the answer is given in response to a question about racial healing. Similarly, Shannon focused her attention on the space that the Talking Circles create for “witnessing” each other’s stories. For this participant, it appears, that healing begins with the sharing of stories.

Another key difficulty in assessing racial healing revolves around the different experiences between white participants and participants of color (see Findings). As previously discussed, there is an unintentional and unequal expectation of labor (i.e.

36

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

white participants learning from participants of color). This also means there is an imbalance of racial healing, where some expect to be healed, while other participants are expected to serve as healers. Â

Evaluation

Due to the fact that our respondents define racial healing in such different ways and there is no consistent definition in the literature, it is unclear what role the Talking Circles play in promoting racial healing at a larger community or structural level. If we accept that racial healing and racial equity are synonyms, then we can assert that Talking Circles promote racial healing. We can also say that the work Talking Circles has inspired to dismantle structural racism helps to create healthier communities.

Evaluation

37

Conclusion / Summary

Evaluation

In short, our findings from an analysis of evaluation, survey and interview data indicate that Talking Circles on Race and Racism increase participants’ awareness of race and racism; positively impact participants’ community involvement, dayto-day interactions and relationships with their own and other racial groups. These changes in behavior ultimately strengthen and extend anti-racist and community networks. We also identified three key factors necessary for an effective Talking Circle, (1) hearing other people’s stories; (2) sharing stories in a multi-racial group; Conclusion — and (3) good facilitation. Additionally, Major Findings data suggest that people of color and 1. Participation in Talking white people have significantly different Circles increased participant experiences in the Talking Circles. Those differences seem to stem from white awareness of race and racism. participants’ expectations that they will 2. Participation in Talking Circles “learn from” people of color. Finally, impacted participant behaviors. respondents report more satisfaction 3. There are three essential after participating in a focused Round factors (good facilitation, Two Talking Circle.

stories, interracial groups) for a

In addition to investigating the successful Talking Circle effectiveness of the Talking Circles to 4. People of color and white increase awareness on race and racism, we also explored the relationship between people have different Talking Circles and eliminating structural experiences in Talking Circles. racism. Our assessment indicates 5. Focused Round Two Talking that, while limited, Talking Circles can Circles were received play a crucial role in dismantling the more favorably. tentacles of structural racism. Data indicate that Talking Circles are part of a larger web of social change events designed to eliminate racism. Talking Circles alumni have created and participated in many community level and countless private interactions specifically intended to disrupt racism.

Finally, our conclusions about the connection between racial healing and Talking Circles remain elusive (see Figure 12). One of the challenges is that in our extended conversations, we continue to encounter the use of “end of racism”, “racial equity” and “racial healing” as synonyms. Further complicating the operationalization of racial healing is the lack of a consistent definition in the literature. Regardless, respondents believe that Talking Circles promote racial healing, even if they can not agree on what that means. The general sentiment of our respondents in response to questions about racial healing and the Talking Circles more generally, is that Talking Circles are an invaluable asset to the Ithaca community.

38

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

Evaluation

Appendices

Evaluation

39

Appendix A: Copy of Participant Paper Evaluation Event/Location: Dates: We appreciated working with you and will use this information to improve our process and service in the future. Thank you for your time and attention.

Please check the box which matches your rating. Your comments are welcome.

Poor 1. The stated objectives were met (from session one).

1 2 Comments ...

3 4 5 6 7

Evaluation

2. The content level was appropriate.

Comments ...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

3. The methods and facilitation style were appropriate.

Comments ...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

4. The trainers/facilitators functioned well as a team. n/a 1 Comments ...

5. Individual trainer/facilitator evaluation.

1 Comments ...

2 3 4 5 6 7

2 3 4 5 6 7

6. The length of the session was appropriate for the content.

(If not, was it too long___?

Too short___?)

Comments ...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

7. Facilities (cleanliness, temperature, lighting, refreshments, etc.)

Comments ...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8. Materials (easy to understand, well-organized, reference value).

Comments ...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

9. Overall rating

What was most effective about this talking circle?

How could this talking circle have been more effective?

40

Excellent

Multicultural Resource Center â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Talking Circles on Race and Racism

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Appendix B: Copy of Interview Guide and Protocol Talking Circle Participant Interview Guide

SECTION I – Background 1. How did you first hear about the Talking Circles?

2. Why did you participate in a Talking Circle?

3. What were your assumptions going into the TC/What did you think they were about? a. Did your assumptions align with the reality?

4. Do you remember the stated purpose of the TC? What was it? a. Do you think the TC accomplished that stated purpose?

5. How would you describe the environment of the TC? a. Was the environment safe and open? b. How important was it to have a safe environment/ Did you feel comfortable participating/sharing in the TC? c. What about TC made you comfortable or uncomfortable?

6. What do you remember most about the dialogues of your TC sessions?

7. Do you remember the racial/gender breakdown of your TC? a. Did you think it was well balanced? b. How did the facilitators gather your information to make sure that the Circles was balanced?

8. Without using names, can you describe the most memorable moments of the TC? 9. What was most effective about the TC? 10. What would you change about TC?/What would make the TC dialogues more effective?

11. What role do you think the facilitators played in the TC? b. Were they effective? c. Was there anything they should/could have done to be more effective?

12. In retrospect, what do you wish you had known before going into the TC?

Evaluation

SECTION II – Experience Now I am going to ask you a few questions about your experience in the Talking Circle.

SECTION III – Impact 13. Can you tell me about one of your “take-aways” from talking circles?

14. What are some other ways that TC have impacted your life? d. Community involvement? e. day-to-day interactions? f. changed your relationships? g. Have you taken an action or actions as a result of your participation?

15. Was your experience in TC significant? If so, in what ways?

16. What did you “learn” by participating in the TC?

Evaluation

41

17. What new insights from TC? What influences on your attitudes? On what or how you think about racism? Or race?

18. Since participating in TC, how have your conversations / dialogues about race changed? d. Changed or challenged assumptions? e. Willingness to dialogue? f. Awareness?

19. Has TC helped you to better understand race and racism?

20. Have you recommended and/or recruited others to participate in TC? 21. Do you think that the TC benefit the Ithaca Community? How? 22. Do you think the TC help eliminate racism? How? 23. If someone asked why they should join a talking circle, how would you respond?

Evaluation

SECTION IV – Racial Healing 24. If someone were to ask you to explain “racial healing” what would you say?

25. Do you think it is achievable?

26. What role do you think the TC play in achieving RH? 27. What would be an indicator to you that others in your TC had made positive shifts in their racial healing?

WRAP UP 28. Given your involvement, and if you were trying to evaluate Talking Circles, what question would you ask alumni / participants?

29. Is there anything else you would like to tell me about your experience in the Talking Circles?

30. Do you have any questions for me?

42

Multicultural Resource Center — Talking Circles on Race and Racism

Appendix C: Kellogg Foundation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Evaluation Questions

Annual Narrative Report Guidelines

1. To what extent did project participants increase awareness and/or change their behaviors to promote racial equity in the community? Please describe the impact of the racial dialogue on community attitudes and behaviors.

2. How effective were Talking Circles as a strategy for promoting racial healing and dismantling structural racism? Please describe efficacy assessment methodology used and findings obtained.

Evaluation

Evaluation Questions:

3. Please describe any opportunities to promote racial equity in the community that arose from implementing the Talking Circles strategy. Also, describe any challenges or â&#x20AC;&#x153;lessons learnedâ&#x20AC;? about limitations to the Talking Circles strategy as a mechanism for racial healing and/or dismantling structural racism.

Evaluation

43

FOR MORE INFORMATION: M ulticultural R esource C enter Fabina Colon, Director 615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850 (607) 272-2292

Funded in part by

Talking Circle Founder & Project Editor: Audrey C ooper