Tacit Racism Toward Roma Students: The Case of a Turkish Public School

Öz

This study aims to reveal hidden racist practices within a Turkish public school and explores their perpetuation through daily interactions between teachers and Roma students. As part of an applied research project dedicated to empowering Roma children in the educational setting, the study employs discourse analysis to expose tacit racist discourses circulating within the school. Using participant observation, casual conversations, in-depth interviews, and focus group discussions, the research reveals implicit discriminatory practices in classrooms. Teacher interviews expose a prevalent coping mechanism, i.e., denial, which reflects reluctance to acknowledge their role in perpetuating discrimination despite awareness of the structural inequalities faced by Roma students. While comprehending systemic challenges, the adherence of the teachers to the myth of meritocracy fosters cognitive dissonance, which results in a dismissive incomprehension of the realities of and occasional assignment of blame to Roma students. Cultural stereotypes and pseudogenetic explanations function as convenient means of rationalizing existing biases. Navigating cognitive dissonance, teachers frequently redirect their focus toward the behaviors of Roma people due to a sense of helplessness and the influence of the pervasive meritocratic narrative. This dynamic contributes to the perpetuation of institutional racism through the daily discourse of teachers, which inadvertently exacerbates this systemic issue.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• discourse analysis
• inclusive education
• institutional racism
• Roma

Kaynakça

1. Ateş, A., & Ünal, A. (2022). Roman annelerin çocuklarının okullarıyla ilgili deneyimleri. Eğitim ve Bilim, 47 (210). http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2022.11176 google scholar
2. Baysu, G., & Ağırdağ, O. (2019). Turkey: Silencing ethnic inequalities under a carpet of nationalism shifting between secular and religious poles. In P.A.J. Stevens & A.G. Dworkin (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook ofRace and Ethnic Inequalities in Education. (pp. 1073-1096). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94724-2_25 google scholar
3. Byford, J., Lennon, S., & Russell, W. B. (2009). Teaching controversial issues in the social studies: A research study of high school teachers. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 82(4), 165-170. https://doi.org/10.3200/tchs.82.4.165-170 google scholar
4. Chancer, S. L., & Watkins X. B. (2006). Gender, race and class- an overview. Blackwell. google scholar
5. Collins, J. (1988). Language and class in minority education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 19(4), 299-326. https://doi.org/10.1525/aeq.1988.19.4.05x0914d google scholar
6. Demirer, S.Ö. (2011). Anthropology as a nation-building rhetoric: The shaping of Turkish anthropology (from 1850s to 1940s). Dialectical Anthropology, 35, 111-129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10624-010-9210-x google scholar
7. Eliasoph, N. (1999). “Everyday racism” in a culture of political avoidance: Civil society, speech, and taboo. Social Problems, 46 (4), 479-502. google scholar
8. Essed, P. (2008). Everyday racism. In D. T. Goldberg & J. Solomos (Eds.), A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies. (pp. 202-216). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1111/B.9780631206163.2002.00020.X google scholar

9. Evans, R. W., Avery, P. G., & Pederson, P. V. (1999). The social studies taboo topics: cultural restraint on teaching social issues. The Social Studies, 90(5), 218-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377999909602419 google scholar
10. Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Longman. google scholar
11. Gonsalves, R. E. (2008). Hysterical blindness and the ideology of denial: Preservice teachers’ resistance to multicultural education. Counterpoints, 319, 3-27. https://about.jstor.org/terms google scholar
12. Hall, S. (1992). Race, culture, and communications: Looking backward and forward at cultural studies. Rethinking Marxism, 5(1), 10-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/08935699208657998 google scholar
13. Hand, M., & Levinson, R. (2012). Discussing controversial issues in the classroom. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(6), 614-629. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1469-5812.2010.00732.X google scholar
14. Journell, W. (2012). Teachers’ controversial issue decisions related to race, gender, and religion during the 2008 presidential election. Theory & Research in Social Education, 39(3), 348-392. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2011.10473459 google scholar
15. Kello, K. (2016). Sensitive and controversial issues in the classroom: Teaching history in a divided society. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 22(1), 35-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1023027 google scholar
16. Kelly, T. E. (1986). Discussing controversial issues: Four perspectives on the teacher’s role. Theory and Research in Social Education, 14(2), 113-138. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.1986.10505516 google scholar
17. Kesik, F., Şahin, İ. & Zoraloğlu, Y.R. (2018). Roma Children: Victims of social injustices in education. International Journal of Progressive Education, 14(6), 200-214. doi: 10.29329Zype.2018.179.15 google scholar
18. Lund, D. E. (2006). Rocking the racism boat: School-based activists speak out on denial and avoidance. Race Ethnicity and Education, 9(2), 203-221. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613320600696813 google scholar
19. Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41(9), 954-969. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.9.954 google scholar
20. Marsch, A. (2008). Ethnicity and identity: who are the Gypsies? European Roma Rights Center Country Reports Series, 17, 21-30. google scholar
21. Marsh, A, (2010). The Gypsies in Turkey: History, ethnicity and identity-an action research strategy in practice. In D.L. Bas & T.A. Acton (Eds.), All Change!: Romani Studies through Romani Eyes. (pp. 27-38). Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press. google scholar
22. McNamee, S. J., & Miller, R. K., Jr. (2004). The meritocracy myth. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. google scholar
23. Osei-Kofi, N. (2005). A review of: “Payne, R.K. (2003). A framework for understanding poverty.” Equity & Excellence in Education, 38(4), 367-375. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665680500299833 google scholar
24. Oulton, C., Dillon, J., & Grace, M. M. (2004). Reconceptualizing the teaching of controversial issues. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 411-423. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000072746 google scholar
25. Rogers, R. (2011). Critical approaches to discourse analysis in educational research. InR. Rogers (Eds.), Critical Discourse Analysis in Education: A Review of the Literature. (pp. 1-20). Routledge. google scholar
26. Rogers, R., Malancharuvil-Berkes, E., Mosley, M., Hui, D., O’, G., & Joseph, G. (2005). Critical Discourse Analysis in Education: A Review of the Literature. In Review of Educational Research, 75 (3), 365-416. google scholar
27. Rymes, B. (2016). Classroom discourse analysis: A tool for critical reflection (2nd ed.). Routledge. google scholar
28. Somer, M. (2002). Ethnic Kurds, endogenous identities, and Turkey’s democratization and integration with Europe. The Global Review of Ethnopolitics, 1(4), 74-93. google scholar
29. Souto-Manning, M. (2014). Critical narrative analysis: The interplay of critical discourse and narrative analyses. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(2), 159-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2012.737046 google scholar
30. Stradling, R. (1984). The teaching of controversial issues: An evaluation. Educational Review, 36(2), 121-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013191840360202 google scholar
31. Tunç Cox, A., & Uştuk, O. (2019). The Roma image in the mainstream Turkish audiovisual media: Sixty years of stereotyping. Romani Studies 29(2), 159-179. google scholar
32. Uştuk, O. (2021). Roman Kimliğinin Çatışmalı İnşası: “Fotokopi Romanlık” Karşısında Otantik Romanlık. Folklor/Edebiyat, 27(105), 151-165. https://doi.org/10.22559/folklor.1271 google scholar
33. Uştuk, O. (2024). Unwanted others of the city: Counter-cultural production of the Roma people of Urla-Turkey, Journal of Intercultural Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/07256868.2024.2302434 google scholar
34. Uştuk, O., & Tunç Cox, A. (2020). Roma people of Turkey re-write their cinematographic images. Ethnicities, 20(3), 501-519. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468796819890463 google scholar
35. Van Dijk, T. (1993). Analyzing racism through discourse analysis: Some methodological reflections. In J. H. Stanfield II & R. M. Dennis (Eds.), Race and Ethnicity in Research Methods (pp. 92-134). Sage. google scholar
36. Van Djk, T.A., Ting-Toomey, S., Smitherman, G., & Troutman, D. (1997). Discourse, Ethnicity, Culture and Racism. In T. A. van Djk (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction (pp. 144-180). Sage. google scholar
37. Wierzbicka, A. (1999). Emotions across languages and cultures. In Emotions across Languages and Cultures. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511521256 google scholar
38. Zürcher, E. J. (2017). Turkey: A modern history (4th ed.). I. B. Tauris. google scholar