Organizational Effects on Race Relations in Schools

Abstract

This article identifies organizational structures and practices in schools that influence the frequency of interracial interactions, the likelihood of cross-race friendships, and students' attitudes and behaviors toward members of different racial and ethnic groups. These formal and informal organizational practices include curriculum tracking, assignment to classes, attendance at school level functions, and extracurricular activities. The article discusses how the quality of interracial interactions and the resulting relationships among students is influenced by the contexts of these different organizational practices, including students' status expectations, cooperative versus competitive modes of academic and extracurricular interactions, and educators' views on racial/ethnic issues and their preferences for instructional methods. By taking these effects into account, schools can make significant advances in promoting positive race relations.At the end of the 20th century, racial tension and discrimination continue to be among the characteristics of American society that evoke considerable concern. Suggestions are offered, on a regular basis, for ways to reduce racial conflict and to better integrate racial minorities into American life. Many of these suggestions place the major burden of social integration on the schools. For some, the schools are a last hope for societal integration; for others, they are a facile solution to the complex problem of reducing racism and increasing sociability among Whites and minority group members in America.

Identifying the roles of race-based choice and chance in high school friendship network formation

“…Although controlling for school size does not affect the conclusions discussed above, it is interesting to note that larger schools exhibit significantly higher biases in the rates at which students meet students of their own race. This is consistent with more opportunities to self-segregate in large schools, where academic tracking and the availability of specialized clubs, athletics, and extracurricular activities, and other mechanisms, could bias meetings (13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19). To the extent that more integrated friendship patterns are a goal for policy, the higher bias in meetings that is observed with larger schools provides some support for the opinion expressed in some of the recent sociology literature that smaller schools offer some advantages.…”

An Overview of Social Networks and Economic Applications

“…The role of biases in contact as a source of homophily is discussed by Allport (1954), Blau (1977), Feld (1981), Rytina and Morgan (1982), and the role preferences for associating with individuals with similar traits, behaviors, or backgrounds is discussed by Cohen (1977), Kandel (1978), Knoke (1990), and Currarini, Jackson and Pin (2008 and Bramoullé and Rogers (2009). There are also other reasons that homophily might arise, including competition among groups (Giles and Evans (1986)), social norms and culture (Carley 1991)), institutional and organizational pressures (Meeker an Weiler (1970), Khmelkov and Hallinan (1999), Kubitschek and Hallinan (1998), Stearns (2004)). Empirical work based on models that allow for more than one source of homophily as in Pin (2009, 2010) and van der Leij and Buhai (2008) helps identify sources of homophily and can help explain various patterns of homophily.…”

Language and Intergroup Contact: Investigating the Impact of Bilingual Instruction on Children’s Intergroup Attitudes

“…Considerable evidence shows that organizational structures and practices in school can significantly influence children's intergroup attitudes (Damico, Bell-Nathaniel, & Green, 1981;Khmelkov & Hallinan, 1999). Still, there is virtually no published research investigating how bilingual instruction affects children's intergroup attitudes.…”