CCBC-Net Archives
Multiculturalism and the unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Charles Bayless <charles.bayless_at_ttmd.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 18:34:06 -0500
Elsa's comment sparked a train of thought that is likely pertinent to this conversation. Elsa referenced the Middle East and Islam. Someone early on mentioned the near total absence of religion in children's books, a fundamental source of personal identity that get's virtually no air time in discussions. Gallup reports that 56% of Americans identify religion as being very important to them. There could be an interesting discussion (as if we needed more) about why religion is not deemed a critical attribute of identity and why religion is so dramatically unrepresented in children's books. Rather than start that rabbit running though, it got me to thinking about how our discussions are influenced by our own community attributes and how those might differ from the American population at large. In particular, to what degree do we maintain situational awareness (context, scale, perspective)? From there I went to the possibility that this community might in fact in important ways be materially less diverse than the nation at large and how that might shape what we perceive to be important versus what the vox populi says.
So how might we differ and in what ways might we be less diverse? What follows is speculative but I would be surprised if I am directionally wrong. Absolute numbers are ball park estimates. The figures for the US are easily googled and I have included some source urls at the bottom. The first column of numbers is my guess for the CCBC community and the second column of numbers in bold is the population at large. I fully recognize that my CCBC numbers are entirely made up based solely on a sense from the conversations over the past few years. But do they look unreasonable for this community? For example, are there really a lot of CCBCers out there hunting?
CCBC Guess USA
Gender: 85% 50%
Read more than 2 books a month:
>90% 10%
Read primarily literary fiction: 80% 4%
Minutes reading to children 0-6 yrs/day (when a parent): 30 minutes 4 minutes
Daily reading to young children (when a parent): 90% 55%
High school or less attainment:
<1% 42%
Completed college: 95% 29%
Completed Masters or above: 40% 10%
Ideological orientation Conservative/Moderate/Liberal: 80% Liberal 20% Liberal
Party affiliation (Rep/Independent/Dem.): 70% Democrat 29% Democrat
How important is religion:
? 56%
Evangelical Christian:
<5% 25%
Have ever served in the military:
<1% 9%
Primary career outside Gov't., Education, Media or NGO: <10% 85%
Collaborative or self-managed work environment: 80-90% 40%
Hunt/fish:
<5% 40%
Support Second Amendment: 10% 75%
Smoker:
<5% 20%
Believe global warming is an important issue: 60% 30%
Believe immigration is an important issue: 80% 50%
Intolerance and lack of respect is an issue: 80% 2%
Believe poverty and homelessness are priority issues: 40% 2%
Believe race relations are a top priority: 80% 40%
Believe GLBT policies are a top priority: 80% 30%
I am not trying to make a point about what is important, nor establish that one set of priorities is more important than another. Surveys are notoriously slippery and easy to take out of context. My point is that I suspect that this community is A) Unrepresentative, and B) In some important ways much more homogenous in its opinions than the at-large population. If the above estimates are directionally correct, then both propositions are true. If they are both true then how does that affect our own interpretations of community and identity?
Is racial underrepresentation in literary fiction a material issue that needs to be addressed? I think it would be safe to say that a strong majority, let's say 60-80%, of the CCBC population would answer Yes! The general population has a different answer. Taking daily reading as a proxy for belief that reading is important, only 55% believe reading to children is important. Of that only 4% are concerned with literary fiction, i.e. 2.2%. And of those, only 40% are concerned with interracial issues, i.e. 0.8% of the population. It calls to mind Kissinger's quip that the fights are so bitter because the stakes are so small.
Where does that leave us? 80% of population C (CCBC) says that racial underrepresentation in books is important and something needs to be done. Only 0.8% of population A (all) says that there is an issue that needs to be addressed. Population C can produce some solid research indicating that volume of childhood reading is important to life outcomes but can produce no evidence that content of reading has any effect on life outcomes.
That's a big hill of persuasion to climb.
I think what this highlights is that there is within the US a greater degree of diversity than that which is captured simply by looking at Census definitions of race and that that diversity is a great source of strength but also a challenge. In an environment of epistemological diversity and uncertainty, it represents a challenge in terms of creating a shared perspective and a challenge in terms of reaching consensus to act. It is also a call for humility in the face of what we do not yet know. There was a great column in the NYT the other day which made me think of this conversation. The Dangers of Certainty
<http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/02/the-dangers-of-certainty/> by Simon Critchley.
Our relations with others also require a principle of tolerance. We encounter other people across a gray area of negotiation and approximation. Such is the business of listening and the back and forth of conversation and social interaction.
For Dr. Bronowski, the moral consequence of knowledge is that we must never judge others on the basis of some absolute, God-like conception of certainty. All knowledge, all information that passes between human beings, can be exchanged only within what we might call "a play of tolerance," whether in science, literature, politics or religion. As he eloquently put it, "Human knowledge is personal and responsible, an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty."
Charles
Sources
Literary fiction: http://www.bookmasters.com/blog/what-you-should-publish-statseries/
Time spent reading: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.t09.htm
Daily reading: http://www.childtrends.org/?indicators=reading-to-young-children#_edn3 http://www.rif.org/us/about/press/only-one-in-three-parents-read-bedtime-sto ries-with-their-children-every-night.htm
Education Attainment: http://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/
Military service: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080208105328AAX8gl1
Ideological identification: http://www.gallup.com/poll/152021/conservatives-remain-largest-ideological-g roup.aspx
Party affiliation http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx
Religion: http://www.gallup.com/poll/1690/religion.aspx
Evangelical Christian: http://religions.pewforum.org/affiliations
Percent government workers: http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/jobs/posts/2012/08/03-jobs-greenstone-looney
Hourly employees: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/09/american-workers-paid-hourly-59-per cent_n_1659001.html
Hunting/fishing: http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/upload/FWS-National-Preliminary-Report
-2011.pdf
Gun rights: http://www.gallup.com/poll/105721/public-believes-americans-right-own-guns.a spx
Global warming: http://www.people-press.org/2010/01/25/publics-priorities-for-2010-economy-j obs-terrorism/
Immigration: http://www.gallup.com/poll/161813/few-guns-immigration-nation-top-problems.a spx
Intolerance/respect: http://www.gallup.com/poll/161813/few-guns-immigration-nation-top-problems.a spx
Poverty: http://www.gallup.com/poll/161813/few-guns-immigration-nation-top-problems.a spx
Race: http://www.gallup.com/poll/166880/americans-rate-economy-top-priority-govern ment.aspx
GLBT: http://www.gallup.com/poll/166880/americans-rate-economy-top-priority-govern ment.aspx
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 18:34:06 -0500
Elsa's comment sparked a train of thought that is likely pertinent to this conversation. Elsa referenced the Middle East and Islam. Someone early on mentioned the near total absence of religion in children's books, a fundamental source of personal identity that get's virtually no air time in discussions. Gallup reports that 56% of Americans identify religion as being very important to them. There could be an interesting discussion (as if we needed more) about why religion is not deemed a critical attribute of identity and why religion is so dramatically unrepresented in children's books. Rather than start that rabbit running though, it got me to thinking about how our discussions are influenced by our own community attributes and how those might differ from the American population at large. In particular, to what degree do we maintain situational awareness (context, scale, perspective)? From there I went to the possibility that this community might in fact in important ways be materially less diverse than the nation at large and how that might shape what we perceive to be important versus what the vox populi says.
So how might we differ and in what ways might we be less diverse? What follows is speculative but I would be surprised if I am directionally wrong. Absolute numbers are ball park estimates. The figures for the US are easily googled and I have included some source urls at the bottom. The first column of numbers is my guess for the CCBC community and the second column of numbers in bold is the population at large. I fully recognize that my CCBC numbers are entirely made up based solely on a sense from the conversations over the past few years. But do they look unreasonable for this community? For example, are there really a lot of CCBCers out there hunting?
CCBC Guess USA
Gender: 85% 50%
Read more than 2 books a month:
>90% 10%
Read primarily literary fiction: 80% 4%
Minutes reading to children 0-6 yrs/day (when a parent): 30 minutes 4 minutes
Daily reading to young children (when a parent): 90% 55%
High school or less attainment:
<1% 42%
Completed college: 95% 29%
Completed Masters or above: 40% 10%
Ideological orientation Conservative/Moderate/Liberal: 80% Liberal 20% Liberal
Party affiliation (Rep/Independent/Dem.): 70% Democrat 29% Democrat
How important is religion:
? 56%
Evangelical Christian:
<5% 25%
Have ever served in the military:
<1% 9%
Primary career outside Gov't., Education, Media or NGO: <10% 85%
Collaborative or self-managed work environment: 80-90% 40%
Hunt/fish:
<5% 40%
Support Second Amendment: 10% 75%
Smoker:
<5% 20%
Believe global warming is an important issue: 60% 30%
Believe immigration is an important issue: 80% 50%
Intolerance and lack of respect is an issue: 80% 2%
Believe poverty and homelessness are priority issues: 40% 2%
Believe race relations are a top priority: 80% 40%
Believe GLBT policies are a top priority: 80% 30%
I am not trying to make a point about what is important, nor establish that one set of priorities is more important than another. Surveys are notoriously slippery and easy to take out of context. My point is that I suspect that this community is A) Unrepresentative, and B) In some important ways much more homogenous in its opinions than the at-large population. If the above estimates are directionally correct, then both propositions are true. If they are both true then how does that affect our own interpretations of community and identity?
Is racial underrepresentation in literary fiction a material issue that needs to be addressed? I think it would be safe to say that a strong majority, let's say 60-80%, of the CCBC population would answer Yes! The general population has a different answer. Taking daily reading as a proxy for belief that reading is important, only 55% believe reading to children is important. Of that only 4% are concerned with literary fiction, i.e. 2.2%. And of those, only 40% are concerned with interracial issues, i.e. 0.8% of the population. It calls to mind Kissinger's quip that the fights are so bitter because the stakes are so small.
Where does that leave us? 80% of population C (CCBC) says that racial underrepresentation in books is important and something needs to be done. Only 0.8% of population A (all) says that there is an issue that needs to be addressed. Population C can produce some solid research indicating that volume of childhood reading is important to life outcomes but can produce no evidence that content of reading has any effect on life outcomes.
That's a big hill of persuasion to climb.
I think what this highlights is that there is within the US a greater degree of diversity than that which is captured simply by looking at Census definitions of race and that that diversity is a great source of strength but also a challenge. In an environment of epistemological diversity and uncertainty, it represents a challenge in terms of creating a shared perspective and a challenge in terms of reaching consensus to act. It is also a call for humility in the face of what we do not yet know. There was a great column in the NYT the other day which made me think of this conversation. The Dangers of Certainty
<http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/02/the-dangers-of-certainty/> by Simon Critchley.
Our relations with others also require a principle of tolerance. We encounter other people across a gray area of negotiation and approximation. Such is the business of listening and the back and forth of conversation and social interaction.
For Dr. Bronowski, the moral consequence of knowledge is that we must never judge others on the basis of some absolute, God-like conception of certainty. All knowledge, all information that passes between human beings, can be exchanged only within what we might call "a play of tolerance," whether in science, literature, politics or religion. As he eloquently put it, "Human knowledge is personal and responsible, an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty."
Charles
Sources
Literary fiction: http://www.bookmasters.com/blog/what-you-should-publish-statseries/
Time spent reading: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.t09.htm
Daily reading: http://www.childtrends.org/?indicators=reading-to-young-children#_edn3 http://www.rif.org/us/about/press/only-one-in-three-parents-read-bedtime-sto ries-with-their-children-every-night.htm
Education Attainment: http://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/
Military service: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080208105328AAX8gl1
Ideological identification: http://www.gallup.com/poll/152021/conservatives-remain-largest-ideological-g roup.aspx
Party affiliation http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx
Religion: http://www.gallup.com/poll/1690/religion.aspx
Evangelical Christian: http://religions.pewforum.org/affiliations
Percent government workers: http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/jobs/posts/2012/08/03-jobs-greenstone-looney
Hourly employees: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/09/american-workers-paid-hourly-59-per cent_n_1659001.html
Hunting/fishing: http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/upload/FWS-National-Preliminary-Report
-2011.pdf
Gun rights: http://www.gallup.com/poll/105721/public-believes-americans-right-own-guns.a spx
Global warming: http://www.people-press.org/2010/01/25/publics-priorities-for-2010-economy-j obs-terrorism/
Immigration: http://www.gallup.com/poll/161813/few-guns-immigration-nation-top-problems.a spx
Intolerance/respect: http://www.gallup.com/poll/161813/few-guns-immigration-nation-top-problems.a spx
Poverty: http://www.gallup.com/poll/161813/few-guns-immigration-nation-top-problems.a spx
Race: http://www.gallup.com/poll/166880/americans-rate-economy-top-priority-govern ment.aspx
GLBT: http://www.gallup.com/poll/166880/americans-rate-economy-top-priority-govern ment.aspx
---
You are currently subscribed to ccbc-net as: ccbc-archive_at_post.education.wisc.edu.
To post to the list, send message to: ccbc-net_at_lists.wisc.edu
To receive messages in digest format, send a message to...
ccbc-net-request_at_lists.wisc.edu
...and include only this command in the body of the message:
set ccbc-net digest
CCBC-Net Archives
The CCBC-Net archives are available to all CCBC-Net listserv members. The archives are organized by month and year. A list of discussion topics (including month/year) is available at http://www.education.wisc.edu/ccbc/ccbcnet/archives.asp
To access the archives, go to:
http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/ccbc-net
and enter the following:
username: ccbc-net
password: Look4Posts
Received on Fri 14 Feb 2014 05:35:23 PM CST
