Implementation Strategies Project
Coordinated by the Lower Mainland Multicultural Education Consortium, in
association with Canadian Heritage, Multiculturalism B.C.,
and the Ministry of Skills Training and Labour

Session 5: Handling Racist Incidents:
• defining a racist incident

• knowledge and skills in dealing with incidents
• strategies to prevent future incidents
• skill practice and development

December 1st, 1995

Suzu Speier and Norma-Jean McLaren

HANDLING RACIST INCIDENTS
AGENDA

MORNING
Introductions: Facilitators

Introductions: Participants
Guidelines and Agenda

Small Group Exercise: Definitions: Stereotypes, Prejudice, Discrimination,
Segregation.
Break

Video: Barbekuieria
Definition of Racism through reflections from the video

Internalized Oppression
Lunch

AFTERNOON

Dealing with Racist Remarks and Behaviours
Demostration
Practice
Break
Critical Incidents: Problem Analysis and Strategies

Review and Closure
Evaluations

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

*
*
*
*
*

To define what is a racist incident
To explore subtle and blatant incidents
To develop knowledge and skills related to racist incidents
To develop strategies to prevent future incidents
To practise skills related to incidents

Definition of Oppression
Societal and
Organisational
Level

Individual
Level

Assumptions
Stereotyping
Prejudices

Direct
Indirect
Inaction

Values
Education
Media
Language
Legislation

Attitudes

People
Ideas
Environment

Discrimination

Opportunities
Resources
Services

Ideology of
Superiority

Historical
Cultural
Social/Political
Economic
Exploitation

Oppression

osda a.k. che

II

WHEN YOU ARE TRIGGERED or SOMEONE CALLS YOU
A RACIST, A SEXIST, ETC.:

Assess and clarify the implication and meaning for you/ them.

Pay attention to your feelings and thoughts.

Assess whether there’s a "grain of truth."

Examine your own attitudes.

Reflect on your behaviors that exclude/ impact - personally,
organizationally.

Identify specific issues.

Think of the effects of stereotypes.

Own the "grain of truth," if appropriate.

Have a dialogue to decide where to go from here.

Remember we need to separate feedback on our behaviour from attacks on
our person.

RESPONDING TO RACISM

BY
John Kehoe
Stephen Culhane
Lili Yee

And a grenade explodes
in the sunless afternoon
and words run down
like a frothy white spit
down her bent head
down the serene parting of her dark hair
as she stands too visible
from home to bus stop to home
raucous, hyena laughter
"Paki, Go Home!”

(Returning the Gaze: 111:1993)

3

Preface

The purpose of this training package is to teach high school students how to respond to
racist incidents. It was our expectation that high school students who participated in the program

would be more likely to recognize a racist incident and describe an appropriate response. It was
also our expectation that the students would respond appropriately when confronted with an

actual racist incident. Both of these expectations were confirmed in a systematic evaluation of
Responding to Racism.
Ten social studies classes from two high schools participated in the study. Three teachers

taught the program with grade 9 or grade 11 classes. Six classes were taught the program and
four classes served as control classes. All classes were pretested with a measure of their
willingness to accept cultural diversity (Appendix I) in order to establish experimental and control

group equivalency. A posttest written response to racist incidents (Appendix 2) found that

Experimental classes had more knowledge about how to respond to a racist incident than the

control subjects. That is the least one could expect because the experimental group had just been

taught how to respond to a racist incident. The measure of behavior was unobtrusive. Pairs of
students were asked to go to a room to discuss school rules. While sitting in the room, they were

witnesses to a racist incident staged by two actors. The trained subjects reacted significantly
more positively and appropriately to the incident than did the control subjects. Appendix 3
provides actual examples of responses and how they were scored.
A third expectation was that subjects participating in the program would become less
racist than subjects who did not participate in the program. There was no significant difference

4
between the responses of experimental and control subjects on the Evidence.of Racism Scale.

The program was presented to the students over three consecutive class periods and, as a result,
only a limited number of scenarios were presented. It may be that if more scenarios were

presented over a longer period of time there would be a positive change on the Evidence of
Racism Scale. The measure is included in Appendix 4.

The incidents used in this program were gathered from teachers, high school students and
members of the community. The informants were asked to describe incidents which were likely to

reflect racist behavior and how they were resolved. Most of the incidents are set out in the form

of a playlet. It is best to make a copy of the scenario for each actor so that they can practice their
lines. Some of the incidents are set out in narrative form and can be used for discussion when the

students tire of role playing.

The materials should be used in classrooms where there can be a purposeful discussion of

the incidents and appropriate responses. It is most important that students be given an
opportunity to practice responding to an incident. It is imperative that the practice be taken

seriously. It needs to be emphasized that the behavior and language of the perpetrators is used to
illustrate the critical incident. Neither the behavior nor the language is acceptable under any other
circumstances. Frequently the students have a very limited number of responses to say or suggest

when they are practicing a racist response. We have provided a set of categories in Appendix 5
which should help the students increase their range of responses. However, even with the

assistance of the categories, it is important for students to generate their own responses in their

own words. It is also important to practice the responses in first person. Students have a

5
tendency to turn to the teacher and say, “This is what I would say,” or “I would say... ”, Try to

get them to say it as a response to the situation.

Ungerleider and Douglas (1989) have suggested four possible types of responses that

students might use when confronting a racist incident. They are: no response, neutral response,
partial addressal and full addressal, A person who gives no response typically ignores a situation
and pretends they did not see or hear anything. A neutral response does not confront the issue,
but recognizes that something has happened by telling the students to stop or to get back to work.

A partial addressal takes place when the perpetrator is told the comments are unacceptable but

the victim is not reassured and no punishment is given. Another kind of partial addressal is when
the perpetrator is ignored but the victim is given assurance, support and comfort, A third partial

addressal is when the perpetrator is confronted and the victim is reassured but no punishment is
given to the perpetrator. Most high school students will not be in a position to administer

punishment. A full addressal is when the incident is discussed, the perpetrator is punished, and
the victim is reassured publicly and privately. Critical incident number one teaches the various

responses to the incidents. The students very quickly learn the meaning of the four responses.
It is important that schools not promise; more than they can deliver to improve student to
student attitudes. Ideally we want our students to hold positive attitudes toward racial and
cultural diversity. If the ideal is unattainable we would like them to exhibit non-discriminatory

behavior, even if they hold negative attitudes. If peer or other pressure persuades them to behave
in discriminatory ways, it would be desirable if they had attitudes and values which told them they
were doing something wrong. They would, therefore, not be surprised at the consequences of

6

their discriminatory behavior. We clearly do not want our students to hold negative attitudes and
exhibit discriminatory behavior with the belief that they are acceptable.

7

Critical Incident Number One
Situation;

Three Grade Ten boys are walking into an English class immediately after a

heated floor hockey game in P.E. class.
Participants: Masaki is of Japanese descent; Joey, of Ukrainian descent, and Paul of

Greek descent.
Scenario:
Masaki pushes Joey. Joey trips over a garbage can at the entrance to Mr, Stewart's

English class, and falls over. Paul is friends with both boys.
JOEY:

(Standing up, angrily) Hey! What's your problem Masaki?!

MASAKI:

What do you mean..,? Eh,., look it was an accident.

(Mr. Stewart is gathering books from a supply room at the back of the class. He can hear what is

going on, but cannot see.)
JOEY:

(Seeing other students are watching; becoming angry and embarrassed)

Ya, right. like the way you play hockey man.,, you NIPS just can't play!
MASAKI:

(Flustered and angry) I’ve told you not to cal! me that...

JOEY:

Hey, it's no big deal...

(Masaki moves directly in front of Joey, to confront him.)
MASAKI:

Don’t do it! (pushes on JOEYS shoulders).

(A third student, Paul, steps between the two.)

PAUL:

Come on you guys, just relax, eh...

8

Discussion:
1.

Here are four possible responses by Paul. After reading them, decide which one you feel

to be most appropriate to this situation.
Choice A
Separate the two boys and decide to treat them equally, with the objective of showing they

are both wrong.
Choice B

Separate the two boys, and then go and sit down.
Choice C
After separating the boys, explain to Joey that his comment was unacceptable, and simply

will not be tolerated. Make a point of speaking to Joey and Masaki in an equal way for
the physical altercation. Tell Joey he should not use the term even in fun. Provide

comfort to Masaki, by telling him that Joey should not have said what he said.
Choice D
Once the two boys have been pulled apart, take the time to tell Joey that his comment was

inappropriate. Explain to him that this type of racial slur is not acceptable.

9

2.

Each of the choices on the previous page reflect one of four basic responses that could be

given in this situation: No-Response, Neutral Response, Partial Addressal, and Full
Addressal.

The least effective response is Choice B, This is considered to be No-Response. It

ignores both the racial slur and the altercation itself

Choice A is a Neutral Response. While the physical actions are addressed, nothing is

done to address the racial slur, which might offer reassurance to the victim.

A more effective response would be Choice D. As a Partial Response, Paul has dealt
with the unacceptable nature of Joey's comment. However, little has been done to reassure the

victim.

Choice C is the most effective response. This is a Full Addressal. Paul directly
addresses the racial slur, and deals with the entire situation resulting from it. This response allows

for a much fuller reaffirmation of the victim’s self-worth.

3.

Role play the situation, trying each of the four different responses.

EXAMPLES OF HANDLING PUT DOWN
A.

Put Down Comment
Hey Goof Ball, Heard you blew the Math test, You’re even stupider than I
thought.

Responses

B.

1.

Limit Set
Are you calling me names because you want me to feel bad?

2.

"I' statement.
I don’t listen to people who enjoy putting other people down.

3.

(a)
(b)

question
Do you know why you are putting me down?
Whats your problem.

4. Repart back
(a) You heard right, 1 didn’t do very well on the Math test.
(b) You have such a grasp of the obvious.
5.

Identifyfeelings
(a) Well I’m glad my Math mark made somebody happy. It sure as hell
didn’t make me happy.

6,

Agree
Yeah 1 flunked so whats your point.

7.

Make a Joke
See that’s what happens when you don’t cheat.

8,

Change the Subject
It was a tough test! Why don’t you ask me how I did in English?

9.

Ask for Advice
Instead of putting me down why don’t you give me some help,

10,

Leave
Ya, Okay buddy. See ya later.

11.

Ignore
Say nothing and leave.

JK/brb
mkehoe.002^£hoc.045

File: 10100 20

Responding to Racism - John Kehoe Study

Some schools in Surrey participated in the Responding to Racism Program.
Some of Dr. Kehoe's findings were:
1.

"On post tests experimental classes had more knowledge
on how to respond to a racist incident than control subjects “

2.

"Trained subjects responded better to racial incidents."

3.

"No significant difference between the responses of
experimental and control subjects on the Evidence of
Racism Scale."

4.

"It is most important that students be given an opportunity
to practice responding to an incident. It is important that
the practice be taken seriously."

5.

"It is important that students generate their own responses
in their own words and to practice the responses in the first
person." (see Appendix 5 - helps students to increase their
range of responses.)

6.

"Ungerleider and Douglas have suggested four types of
responses that students might use when confronting a racist
incident;"
- no response
- neutral response
- partial addressal
- full addressal

7.

"Students very quickly learn the meaning of the four
responses." (see critical incident #1)

8.

"Ideally, we want our students to hold(possitive) attitudes
towards racial and cultural diversity. If the ideal is
unattainable we would like them to exhibit nondiscriminatory behaviour, even if they hold negative
attitudes."

THE RACIST INCIDENT

Think of a time when someone said something offensive to you. Define the context,
who was involved, and what specifically was said.

- At work meeting
- those people shoulder + be allowed in

in
it

How did you feel?

frustrated , tired

What did you think?

What did you do?

INTERNALIZED OPPRESSION

1.

The individual starts to believe that her presence is
not important

2.

The individual feels that her participation does not
matter

3.

The individual denies her ability -1 can't do it

4.

The individual denies her ambition -1 didn't
want it anyway

5.

The individual denies taking responsibility -I don't
have any control over my life -I have no power
to change it

6.

The individual turns to alcohol or drug abuse and/or
violence against self and own group

CROSS CULTURAL AWARENESS - VALUING DIVERSITY
DEFINITIONS

STEREOTYPES:

A typical example of pattern.
A conventional oversimplified conception.
A fixed and distorted generalization made about all members of a particular group.

PREJUDICE:
An unfavourable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge,
thought or reason.
Any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favourable or unfavourable.

RACISM:
A belief that one's own race/culture is superior and has a right to rule others.
A policy of enforcing such asserted rights.
Prejudice plus institutional power.
Racism involves attitudes of prejudice and stereotyping, discrimination, and an
ideology of superiority.

DISCRIMINATION:

An action or behaviour based on prejudiced feelings and ideas. Discriminatory
behaviour is aimed at people perceived as "different". To discriminate a group has
to have some form of power over another group in order to restrict or exclude in
some way.
Systemic discrimination involves practices that may be neutral and entrenched
within organization that have the effect of discriminating against a group of people.

SEGREGATION:

One group is isolated, excluded, ghetto-ized by another group.
intentional or unintentional.

It could be