|
|
|
Using the Family Background Project in the Sociology of Minority Groups
JOHN P. MYERS
|
I TEACH THE "Sociology of Minority Groups," a sophomore-level general education course that fulfills Rowan University's global and multicultural requirement. I have taught the course since the mid-1970s and, in addition to accomplishing the more traditional academic goals, have always sought to make it personally relevant to students' lives. In recent years I have had success in addressing both kinds of goals by requiring students to complete a Family Background Project (FBP). The FBP makes up about one-third of each student's grade. The FBP asks students to blend sociological theory, the history of one American ethnic group, and the role that part of the student's family played—going back in time to the immigrant himself or herself if possible—in American ethnic history. The FBP is explained fully in readings given to the students.1 I discuss the assumptions on which the FBP is based, review the process that students experience, and make some observations on using the FBP. |
1
|
| |
|
ASSUMPTIONS | |
|
The first assumption underlying the FBP is that, except for Native Americans, our society is made up entirely of newcomers or the descendants of immigrants. When someone asks us, "What are you?" we know what they mean. They want to know our racial and ethnic background. "Where are you from?" often means where did your family come from originally, rather than whether you are from New Jersey or California. In that sense, we are all originally from a foreign country. |
2
|
|
A second assumption is that we are all part of the process. Race and ethnicity impact all of our lives, either as members or former members of a minority group or as members of the dominant group that benefits from having minority groups, or both. We are where we are and who we are in some measure because of race and ethnicity. The intensity of this ethnic impact on our lives, particularly in everyday situations, varies greatly from group to group and from individual to individual, but the influence can be documented in a society like ours, made up almost entirely of newcomers, the sons and daughters of newcomers, and their descendants. |
3
|
|
A third underlying belief held here is that not only are we affected by race and ethnicity, but we treat each other differently based on race and ethnicity. Race and ethnicity matter. Of course, other things like gender, age, and occupation are also shortcuts we take in our assessments and treatment of individuals and groups. But—contrary to our formal creeds that focus on equality and racial and ethnic blindness—it really matters to us whether someone is black or white, and if we are unable to tell whether you are black or white, we will do our best to find out. We will be uneasy in our relationship with you until we know for sure. It is the belief here, in short, that racism and ethnocentrism are deeply ingrained in our culture. |
4
|
|
A fourth assumption is that it is possible to reenvision ourselves as part of a historical family that extends back in time in the United States. We think of ourselves as individuals or a part of a nuclear family. For the FBP, students need to think of themselves as members of families that extend back to the original immigrant or, in the case of Native Americans, to the ancestor who first had contact with the European colonizers. |
5
|
|
A fifth assumption is that by looking at one's family history using sociological theory, academic insights can be made. Does one's own family experience match up with theory? With the larger group experience? Why or why not? We can build on and strengthen generalizations by studying individual ethnic group cases. |
. . . |
There are about 1291 more words in this article.
Please log in (or, if you are not yet an
authorized user, please go to the
User Setup page) to gain full access rights. Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.
|
