Rev Relig Res DOI 10.1007/s13644-017-0313-6 ORIGINAL PAPER
Whose Authority? Perceptions of Science Education in Black and Latino Churches Daniel Bolger1
•
Elaine Howard Ecklund1
Received: 6 February 2017 / Accepted: 11 September 2017 Religious Research Association, Inc. 2017
Abstract Recent scholarship argues that beliefs in biblical literalism might keep conservative Protestants out of STEM. Two of the groups that are most underrepresented in STEM, black Americans and Latinos, are also two of the most religious populations in the United States, and specifically overrepresented in theologically conservative Christian traditions. Yet, prior work also suggests that churches help promote positive educational outcomes. To interrogate the potential relationship between STEM educational aspirations and religious faith, we explore how black and Latino Christians perceive the potential impact of science education on religious faith. Analysis of 40 interviews reveals that both black Americans and Latinos have concerns about science teachers being biased. Yet, the groups differ in their assessment of the danger of anti-religious bias. Black Americans put confidence in the Christian community to incubate children from harm to their faith; therefore, they believe the effect of science education on religious faith is either neutral or positive. Latinos, however, raise concerns about the authority of science educators, rather than science curriculum. Overall, the results shift the conversation on conservative religion and science education from solely discussing content to exploring issues of bias and authority. Keywords Science Education Race Churches African Americans Latinos
& Daniel Bolger
[email protected] 1
Department of Sociology, Rice University MS-28, 6100 Main St, Houston, TX 77005, USA
123
Rev Relig Res
Introduction Despite notable gains over the past half-century, blacks and Latinos remain highly underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) professions. Recent estimates from the National Science Foundation (2017) suggest that these two groups collectively comprise just 11% of the science and engineering workforce in the US, despite making up 29% (and growing) of the total population (US Census Bureau 2011). Research interrogating minority representation in science identifies several factors affecting the likelihood underrepresented minorities will enter science, including financial constraints (Aschbacher et al. 2009; Mervis 2013), racial bias (McGee 2016), and underfunded primary and secondary schools (Smith et al. 2016). While scholars argue that current disparities result from a confluence of social factors (Else-Quest et al. 2013), scholarship on educational attainment in science has identified another factor that might shape STEM access: religion. For example, scholars have argued that conservative Protestant Christian beliefs might limit the STEM aspirations of black Americans, who are overrepresented in the kind of Protestant traditions that seem to have conflict with science (Granger and Price 2007). Such claims extend prior scholarship arguing that conservative Christian communities—and the doctrines they affirm—can limit the general educational aspirations of their members (Darnell and Sherkat 1997; Lehrer 1999; Sherkat 2011). Indeed, numerous studies document the importance of religion, specifically Protestant Christianity, in black communities (Lincoln and Mamiya 1990; PattilloMcCoy 1998; Shelton and Emerson 2012). A recent Pew survey estimates that 18% of US Protestant Christians are black (Pew Research Center 2015). Conversely, 2015 estimates from the National Science Foundation suggest only about 5% of STEM professionals are black (National Science Foundation 2017). While at first glance these two statistics seem unrelated, recent studies suggest that Americans favor either religious or scientific epistemologies (O’Brien and Noy 2015), a potential result of the perceived conflict between science and religion in US society (Ecklund 2010). Science education has often served as the battleground for such a conflict; the Scopes Monkey trial of 1925 provides a well-known example of the potential tensions between Christian teachings and science education curriculum (Gieryn et al. 1985). While the broader literature on science education and religion focuses largely on white evangelicals, it is worth noting that black Protestants and white evangelicals share many theological commitments (Shelton and Emerson 2012). One common doctrinal commitment for theologically conservative Protestants is literal interpretation of the Bible, a belief that researchers suggest might lead to tension for black students considering STEM degrees (Granger and Price 2007). Therefore, while numerous studies document the role of the ‘‘Black Church’’ in promoting positive educational outcomes (Barnes 2015), others argue that the Protestant Christian tenets espoused by black churches might limit educational attainment, particularly in STEM. Though a small recent literature at the nexus of religion and science education (Korver-Glenn et al. 2015; Chan and Ecklund 2016), focuses specifically on black
123
Rev Relig Res
Americans, Latinos are a group that is also both highly Christian and largely underrepresented in STEM (Espinosa et al. 2003; Abdul-Alim 2011). Recent estimates suggest that Latinos make up 16% of all American Christians but only 6% of the science and engineering workforce (Pew Research Center 2015; National Science Foundation 2017). Latinos are rarely discussed when considering issues of race and educational inequality due to a common black–white schema of US racial politics and controversy over whether Latinos comprise a racial or ethnic group (Fox 2004). Yet, this group is important to consider; population growth estimates suggest that by 2060 Latinos will make up approximately one-third of the US population (US Census Bureau 2012). This compares to moderate projected growth among black Americans and expected decreases in the non-Latino white population. A growing Latino population could also have repercussions for the public perception of science, as Latinos display a higher propensity than white or black Americans to support teaching creationism in public schools (Lac et al. 2010). Overall, the broader conversation on religion and science education in the US has focused largely on how conservative Protestants view science education curriculum, particularly the teaching of evolution. Such an emphasis has left notable gaps in the literature. First, scholars interrogating how conservative Protestants view science (Ellison and Musick 1995; Sherkat 2011) and education (Darnell and Sherkat 1997) have largely ignored the potential confluence of religion with race and ethnicity in shaping views of science and science education. The views of blacks and Latinos seem especially relevant to the broader conversation on religion and science due to their growing representation in US society, their overrepresentation in Christian faith communities that are theologically conservative, as well as their historic and present underrepresentation in STEM fields. Second, restricting the conversation on religion and science to focus primarily on human origins and curriculum has limited our understanding of how conservative Protestants view education and educators more broadly. Indeed, recent research (Ecklund and Scheitle 2017) argues that while many conservative Protestants view science education favorably, they are often distrustful of scientists themselves. Therefore, the present paper explores how black and Latino Christians perceive the relationship among science, race, and religious faith at the level of K-12 education. Science education has historically drawn attention from religious groups given the highly visible rhetoric surrounding the teaching of evolution (Long 2011). Similarly, research suggests that school norms can significantly influence a child’s religious practices, a potential concern for religious parents (Barrett et al. 2007). Although there are numerous studies which argue that conservative Christian beliefs have an effect, whether positive or negative, on educational aspirations (Darnell and Sherkat 1997; Beyerlein 2004), little has been done to help us understand how religious beliefs might shape views on education and educators, particularly in science. In examining the content of 40 interviews from four different Christian congregations, we find that black and Latino Americans share similar concerns about the potential bias of science educators, but few concerns about the actual content of science curriculum. Yet, black and Latino Americans differ in their evaluation of the perceived threat of science education based on contrasting beliefs in the authority of the local Christian community to preserve the faith of children.
123
Rev Relig Res
Our findings not only expand scholarly literature but also shift the conversation on religion and science education from examining beliefs about scientific theories to interrogating how black and Latino Christians perceive science as a source of moral authority.
Minority Representation in STEM Recent scholarship highlights racial disparities in US educational attainment, as both blacks and Latinos fall well behind whites in many measures of educational achievement (Ryan and Bauman 2016). This reality, coupled with projected racial demographic shifts, has led some to suggest that the future success of US society will hinge upon its ability to narrow these gaps (Brownstein 2016). Science achievement provides a particularly stark case of educational inequality. While recent estimates speculate that only 20% of all high school seniors show proficiency in science, numbers are even lower for racial minority students, with only 8% of Latino students and 4% of black students demonstrating the same level of proficiency (Abdul-Alim 2011). Both Latino and black Americans are also largely underrepresented in STEM PhD programs, as the National Science Foundation reports that only 7% of the PhDs awarded in STEM from 1991–2010 went to (pooling available data from all groups) blacks, Latinos, or American Indians (National Science Foundation 2017). Scholars point to several factors that may be responsible for the lack of racial diversity in STEM. Prior work suggests that student self-image, negative stereotypes, and a lack of role models might limit interest in STEM for many minority students (Lewis 2003; Brand et al. 2006; Hunt 2007). For example, studies suggest that black students are less likely than white students to have STEM aspirations (Archer et al. 2015). Yet, research also suggests that blacks and Latinos see science education as a path to social mobility, albeit one that is distant from their everyday experiences (Korver-Glenn et al. 2015; Hernandez et al. 2016). Leaks in the STEM pipeline appear early in the educational process (Hanson 2013); therefore, many researchers have focused their energies on documenting science and medicine mistrust in black and Latino communities to better understand the hurdles facing minority students interested in science (Corbie-Smith et al. 2002; Sewell 2015). Another line of research suggests that religious institutions and beliefs might play a role in promoting or limiting educational attainment. For instance, Darnell and Sherkat (1997) notably assert that educational attainment can be limited by conservative Protestant religious beliefs. These authors argue that conservative Protestant ‘‘cultural orientations,’’ which define the value of worldly pursuits like education, ‘‘significantly retard educational attainment above and beyond the level predicted by social background factors alone’’ (313). Economists expanded this argument, as Lehrer (1999) suggests that religious factors help explain the high educational attainment of Jews, while Granger and Price (2007) argue that belief in literal interpretations of the Bible may limit the number of black Americans in science. These arguments echo prior work (Ellison and Musick 1995) suggesting
123
Rev Relig Res
that conservative Protestant doctrinal beliefs beget a negative view of science. Other scholars view such findings with skepticism. Beyerlein (2004), engaging directly with the work of Darnell and Sherkat (1997), contends that such studies treat conservative Protestants as a monolithic group, when in fact there is considerable heterogeneity within conservative Protestantism in terms of educational attainment. And other work (Evans 2011) argues that such studies also treat science as monolithic, when in reality conservative Protestants place a great value on scientific discovery as a whole, but have conflict with only particular pieces of science. Sherkat (2011), however, recently extended his analysis to include Catholics in arguing that religion plays a greater role in limiting scientific literacy than socioeconomic status, race, or gender. It is notable, however, with few exceptions (Brown and Gary 1991; Granger and Price 2007), that such work has largely ignored the potential role of race in discussions of religion and educational attainment.
Religion and Science Indeed, the conversation on religion and education has broadly focused on conservative, white Protestants, in part because of the perceived conflict between particular teachings of evangelicalism and science, a conflict that has existed as much in the public consciousness as it has in the scholarly literature. Literature on the conflict centers largely on the opposition of conservative Protestants to the theory of evolution. Indeed, surveys suggest that many conservative Christians, particularly those that espouse a literal reading of the Bible, are evolution skeptics (Berkman and Plutzer 2010). And recent research (Ecklund et al. 2016), argues that (when compared to views on climate change) views on evolution are more likely to be driven by religious beliefs than political ideology. While some argue that the religion and science conflict results from competing epistemologies (see Evans and Evans 2008) others suggest the conflict relates more to issues of who has authority over truth. Scholars argue, for example, that conservative Protestants are not skeptical of science but rather of scientists (Evans 2013), and especially of those scientists who speak about topics beyond their perceived competence, in particular when scientists appear to be making claims about the nature of who God is and who humans are (Ecklund and Scheitle 2017). Discussions of human origins and science have been especially contentious at the level of K-12 education (Long 2011). Such disputes have been highlighted in several high-profile court cases over the past century, including the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover case, which established the unconstitutionality of teaching Intelligent Design as an alternative to evolution in public high schools (Moore and Miksch 2003; Superfine 2009). Policy discussions about teaching human origins often have religious overtones, as recent research (Johnson et al. 2016) highlights the influence of conservative Protestantism on ‘‘anti-evolution’’ legislative efforts. It is notable that legal discussions have focused largely on curriculum; what can be taught and who gets to make decisions about what to teach. Berkman and Plutzer (2010) argue that classroom teachers hold considerable power in decisions about science curriculum, a reality that is often ignored in larger policy discussions. This
123
Rev Relig Res
is not to say that parents do not want more influence on how science is taught to children. For example, the work of Haider-Markel and Joslyn (2008) suggests that parents who are both highly religious and evolution deniers demonstrate a preference for parents (rather than school administrators or teachers) determining how evolution is taught in school classrooms. Therefore, science education remains an important topic for parents.
The Role of Religion in Racial Minority Communities Churches and Education That black and Latino Americans are highly religious has been firmly established: recent estimates from the Pew Research Center (2009, 2014) suggest that 83% of black Americans and 80% of Latinos identify as Christian. And prior literature also highlights the centrality of churches in black and Latino communities. Existing work focuses primarily on the ‘‘Black Church,’’ which has historically served as an important cultural institution in the black community (Lincoln and Mamiya 1990; Shelton and Emerson 2012). Indeed, numerous studies illustrate how black churches promote health initiatives (Rowland and Isaac-Savage 2014), political mobilization (Pattillo-McCoy 1998), and educational achievement (Barnes 2015). Educational achievement remains the most relevant here, as scholars (Gaines 2010; McCray et al. 2010) argue that religious institutions influence how black students view education and educational achievement, an influence that has traditionally been ignored by many educators as they try to establish authority with black students (Ford and Sassi 2014). Although Latino Christianity lacks an institution as central as the Black Church, churches remain integral to the US Latino experience (Matovina 2011). Several scholars (Menjı´var 2003; Hirschman 2004) note the importance of churches within Latino immigrant communities, serving as a connection to ‘‘home’’ culture as well as a social capital site, and allowing formation of social networks that have a payoff in non-religious contexts (Enriquez 2011). Yet, religious congregations are not only important in Latino immigrant communities; studies demonstrate that US churches with a higher percentage of Latino members are more likely to report non-religious civic activities (like after-school programs) taking place in congregations (Sikkink and Hernandez 2003; Ecklund et al. 2013). For example, scholarship reveals that 62% of Latinos report the desire to see their church more involved in ‘‘social, educational, and political issues’’ (Espinosa et al. 2003: 17). Aspirations for religious mobilization perhaps stem from factors within Latino culture, as some argue that Latinos tend to be more deferent to educators (Loi and McDermott 2010) and, more than other racial minority groups, to value teacher–parent consonance (Calzada et al. 2015). The multifaceted ministry of churches in black and Latino communities highlights their important civic role, a role that often includes promoting positive educational outcomes. In fact, numerous studies demonstrate a positive association between religious participation and educational attainment (Barrett 2010; Sanchez
123
Rev Relig Res
et al. 2016). While some scholars explore how churches provide a form of social capital linked to positive educational outcomes (Glanville et al. 2008), ecclesial contributions are often much more concrete. One recent study of US black churches suggests that 62% offer some type of educational program (Barnes 2015). Furthermore, service attendance has been linked not only to attainment but also to academic expectations, regardless of whether the pastor emphasizes educational achievement (Sanchez et al. 2016). In immigrant communities churches can help provide educational resources to further language acquisition, which is a key factor in educational attainment (Hirschman 2004; Stamps and Bohon 2006). Churches, therefore, serve not only as religious institutions, but also as sources of ‘‘extracurricular learning’’ (Sikkink and Hernandez 2003: 13). Moreover, religious institutions, especially the Catholic Church, have had a tremendous influence on US education (Urban and Wagoner Jr. 2009).
Discourse About Religion, Race, and Education Prior research linking religion and educational aspirations has largely ignored the role of race, despite the fact that racial minority groups, like blacks and Latinos, tend to be among the most religious groups in the US (Pew Research Center 2009, 2014). Similarly, blacks and Latinos also tend to be among the least represented groups in STEM professions (National Science Foundation 2017). Existing research on the intersections among religion, race, and education has brought up considerations of how religious beliefs and identities may shape educational attainment and scientific literacy (Sherkat 2011). Yet, comparatively little is known about the mechanisms by which religious belief might limit or, under certain conditions, even facilitate access to STEM. Moreover, research that does discuss how religious groups view science education focuses largely on how theological beliefs shape evaluations of curriculum. This paper addresses such gaps in the literature by asking how black and Latino members of Protestant and Catholic churches understand the potential impact of science education on the religious faith of children.
Methods Data for this paper come from a national study of how religious people view science.1 We draw on analysis of 40 qualitative interviews from four Christian congregations. This sample includes 26 black respondents and 14 Latino respondents. Two of the congregations we sampled were predominantly black and the 1
Data collection for this mixed-methods project consisted of 319 qualitative interviews, 248 participant observations, and a nationally representative survey of over 10,000 Americans regarding their views on the relationship between religion and science, completed between 2011–2015. Qualitative data was garnered from 23 religious congregations in two major U.S. cities and the research sites for the study included Evangelical, Mainline, and Catholic Christian congregations, Orthodox and Reform Jewish Synagogues, and Sunni Muslim Mosques. Religious communities in the study were selected based on a
123
Rev Relig Res
other two were predominantly Latino. The four congregations represent a crosssection of churches from theologically conservative traditions, as much of the literature on tensions between religion and science has focused on conservative (mainly Protestant) Christians (Ellison and Musick 1995; Sherkat 2011). All four of the congregations were located in low or mid SES geographic areas. We estimated SES ratings using a tri-partite system that considered annual median income within the congregation’s zip code, on-site observation of SES markers (dress, building quality, church budget, etc.), and post-interview evaluations. We identified interview candidates through a variety of means, including the recommendations of congregational leaders, as well as people we met through participant observation at the congregations. While not all respondents currently had children taking science classes, many were parents (or grandparents) and all reported regular involvement in their faith community. Black American Churches One predominantly black congregation was a Baptist church located in a large Southern city. The majority of black Christians in the United States are members of historically black churches, with around 40% of all black Protestants identifying as Baptist (Pew Research Center 2009). The church was located in a low SES area with a median annual income of $28,217 (US Census Bureau 2010). According to congregational leaders, the average weekly attendance for services was between 250 and 350 people. Fifteen congregation members were interviewed for the study, which included ten female respondents and five male respondents. The average age of those interviewed was 56 years old and eight had completed at least a bachelor’s degree. Only three respondents worked in a science-related occupation. The second black Baptist church was in a large, Midwestern city. The average weekly attendance of the church was between 250 and 500 congregants according to church leaders. The church was located in an area with a median income of $42,218 (US Census Bureau 2010). Eleven members of the congregation were interviewed as part of the study. The average age of respondents was 51 years of age and five out of the 11 members interviewed had completed a bachelor’s degree. Three of the respondents were men while the other eight were women. Only one respondent worked in a science-related occupation. Latino Churches Recent estimates suggest that around 55% of Latinos in the US identify as Catholic (Pew Research Center 2014). While most literature on religion and educational attainment focuses on Protestant churches, recent work documents similar trends in Catholic communities (Sherkat 2011). Therefore, the third congregation analyzed for the study was a Latino Catholic parish in a large Southern city. The congregation Footnote 1 continued number of demographic factors, including socioeconomic status, racial composition, religious tradition, theological perspectives, geographic location, and age of congregants.
123
Rev Relig Res
was located in a neighborhood with a median income of $37,664 (US Census Bureau 2010). Approximately 500–650 parishioners attended weekly mass at the Church. Of the six congregants we interviewed for the study, the average age was 54. We interviewed five women and one man for the study; only one of the six respondents had completed a bachelor’s degree. None of the congregants we interviewed worked in a science-related occupation. The final church we examined was a Latino Evangelical Church in a large Southern US city. Scholars note that many US Latinos are moving towards Evangelical or Pentecostal expressions of Christianity, rather than the Catholicism so prevalent in many Latin American countries (Calvillo and Bailey 2015; Mulder et al. 2017). Yet, Latino Protestants remain an understudied group, with some scholars arguing that much of the existing information on Latino Protestant congregations is based on conjecture (Martı´ 2015). Recent estimates suggest around 22% of US Latinos identify as Protestant (Pew Research Center 2014). The church was located in a lower SES neighborhood of the city; the median income was $27,458 as of 2010 (US Census Bureau 2010). The congregation had a weekly attendance of 150–200 people. We interviewed eight church members for the study, including three women and five men. The average age of those interviewed was 46, with half having completed a bachelor’s degree. Two respondents worked in a science-related occupation. Interviews We utilized two semi-structured guides for conducting interviews: one for congregational leaders and the other for members. The interviews typically lasted around 1 h, with times ranging from 30 min to 2.5 h. We conducted all interviews in either English or Spanish, as members of the Latino congregations were given the option of having the interview conducted in either language. Researchers audiorecorded the interviews with the respondent’s permission and then research assistants transcribed the audio files to ensure accuracy. The interview guide covered an array of topics including religious identity, personal views of science, and opinions on specific scientific issues (i.e. in vitro fertilization or evolution). Data analyzed for the present paper was taken from the question ‘‘What kind of effect, if any, do you think science education might have on a child’s developing faith? Is this effect positive or negative?’’ Interviewers were free to reword this question to ensure clarity. We analyzed transcripts using Atlas.ti. More specifically, we used a modified inductive approach which involved developing an open coding scheme that was utilized to identify prominent themes in the responses. Our analysis followed a grounded theoretical approach (Glaser and Strauss 2009) in that we did not collect data with pre-established hypotheses but came to the data with a limited number of inductive categories from the existing literature and then created revised categories as the data analysis proceeded. Based on the revised categories, we created a coding template and then coded all 40 interviews. Finally, we organized responses thematically and selected representative quotes to illustrate these themes. We
123
Rev Relig Res
focused on the reasoning that respondents provided to explain the potential influence of science education on religious faith.
Results When asked whether science education can influence a child’s faith, the black and Latino respondents articulated similar concerns but differed in their evaluations of the potential threat of science education. Although some black respondents raised concerns about bias in the education system, most were relatively unconcerned about science education causing any potential harm to children. Our black American respondents saw the family and faith community—not the school system—as responsible for a child’s faith. In addition—and related—black Americans placed confidence in the stability of a child’s Christian faith amid opposing viewpoints. Given these convictions, several of our black American respondents argued that learning new information, even if it competes with the child’s existing beliefs, is beneficial. Latino respondents also raised concerns about educators; several voiced concerns about the effect a biased, anti-religious science educator could have on a child’s developing faith. In describing a potentially biased educator, respondents suggested that such a person could aggressively subvert a child’s faith commitments. Therefore, the main concern of both communities was not science curriculum but rather the potential of science educators themselves to bias the presentation of science. Yet, few Latino respondents voiced confidence in the faith community to incubate children from opposing viewpoints. Thus, for the Latino respondents, science education was viewed as innocuous at best, and at worst, a very real threat to the faith of children. Concerns About Teacher Bias Overall, the most common response offered by both black and Latino respondents was that the effect of science education ‘‘depends’’ on numerous factors. One factor identified by both groups was bias. In drawing on language from the First Amendment, one 71-year-old black woman2 told us: Well, because the thing you had said earlier about the scientist being biased? The same thing happens with the teacher—that you are supposed to keep the state and the church separate. But if you have certain upbringings, it’s going to come out. So it goes back to how you present it. This church member asserts that teachers do not always keep church and state separate in presenting scientific theory, as preconceived notions are bound to ‘‘come out’’ in their teaching. This bias is not just in support of science but also seems to be construed as being anti-religion. In such a conception, ‘‘presentation’’ is the issue, rather than curriculum. 2
SB03, conducted 6/24/11, Female, Black, Baptist.
123
Rev Relig Res
While several black respondents discussed bias in the education system, Latinos respondents often painted more detailed pictures of what bias might look like. Surprisingly, few voiced concerns about what curriculum might be utilized. Rather, among Latino respondents, the dominant focus of potential concern was the educator. For example, when talking about her daughter, a 28-year-old Latina3 respondent upheld the value of science education while also presenting her own conception of what a science educator might look like. Well I do want [my daughter] to learn about science, but if they straight up tell her, ‘‘God isn’t real’’ (laughs), then I would have a problem with that. But I do want her to learn about science. Science is a very important subject. It doesn’t matter if you’re religious or not. But if they are very aggressive and trying to put down anyone or put down anyone’s beliefs in religion, then I would probably have a problem with that. First, the respondent provides a positive view of science and its potential role in her daughter’s life. She even goes so far as to say it is ‘‘very important’’ for both the religious and non-religious alike. Yet, she articulates a concern about how such an important topic is taught, or more accurately, the type of person who would teach the subject. This person could be ‘‘very aggressive’’ and would be mainly concerned with belittling the student’s religious beliefs. Although laughed off, the respondent’s initial comment about the teacher telling the student that God does not exist seems to further develop the idea of ‘‘science educator as anti-religious and potentially dangerous to religious beliefs.’’ This concern about educators suggests it is not science with which religious communities take issue, but rather the potential bias of the scientist. In such a view, the scientist might be anti-religious and aggressive. Rather than an aberration, this type of disposition among scientists, and by extension science educators, was seen as normative. A 28-year-old Latino Catholic man4 seems to uphold this viewpoint in stating, I think it depends on the teacher. I mean, I think there are, I mean there is a mode of scientific thinking that kind of devalues religious thought. Like they know the way, this is the truth, you’re not special, blah blah blah…. And the teacher is going to infuse the teaching with that, the teaching of science with that. So, it could have negative impacts, I think, on a kid’s religious perspective. I don’t think it necessarily has to and I think there’s lots of scientists who, teachers of science who don’t sort of try to influence students away from religion. This respondent makes the assertion that the effect of science education on faith depends directly on the teacher. First, the respondent highlights a scientific viewpoint that serves to denigrate religious belief and assert science as the arbiter of truth claims. Such a mode of thinking not only diminishes ‘‘truth’’ but also the student. Devaluing the child’s faith, according to this respondent, seems 3
EL02, conducted 7/7/13, Female, Latina, Evangelical.
4
CL06, conducted 10/6/13, Male, Latino, Catholic.
123
Rev Relig Res
synonymous with making the child herself feel less than ‘‘special.’’ Similarly, like the previous respondent, this man seems to have a specific picture of what a science instructor might look like. Embedded within his response is an implicit conflation of scientists and science educators (‘‘teachers of science’’). When asked about science education it appeared that for many the picture that came to mind was not the elementary school science teacher but rather the anti-religious scientist. Given these concerns, how might respondents approach sending their children to schools where they might encounter biased science teachers? For one 47-year-old Latina Catholic respondent5 the answer was simple, ‘‘For me, it’s a risk. The outcome depends on the education you give [kids].’’ While many described the type of education that might be detrimental to Christian faith, few speculated about what a positive educational experience might look like. One 49-year-old black woman6 attempted such a response in saying ‘‘[science] can be taught, but it really needs to be dealt with in a very sensitive manner and a curriculum that can sort of allow [children] to think out of the box and make their own final decision about it.’’ While this respondent does reference curriculum, of equal concern is presentation, as she goes on to describe the sensitivity with which science should be taught. Some Latino respondents suggested that the theistic beliefs of students should be considered by teachers. As one 47-year-old Latina respondent7 put it, ‘‘I say the teacher can be right too. But you have the other part that complements it. God, and science too.’’
Role of the Family and Faith Community Despite offering similar concerns about anti-religious bias in the classroom, our black and Latino respondents differed in their evaluation of the extent to which bias might affect children. When asked whether science education might affect the faith of a child, one 39-year-old black woman8 told us, ‘‘It can if they don’t have anyone else teaching them something different.’’ Aside from the acknowledgement that science education can shape faith, what seems notable is that such an influence can only take place in the absence of some other form of education. The idea of needing ‘‘something different’’ to combat or attenuate the potential biases in scientific education was a persistent theme among black respondents, with many arguing that the effect of education on religious faith is related to factors outside the control of the educational system. Rather than curriculum or the teaching of evolution, many black congregants pointed toward extra-curricular factors as the most prominent in the shaping of faith. For instance, as a 64-year-old black respondent9 put it: So yeah, [science education] can affect a lot of [kids]. But a lot of them— young people are affected because their parents didn’t really teach them— 5
CL03, conducted 9/7/13, Female, Latina, Catholic.
6
MB02, conducted 7/17/13, Female, Black, Baptist.
7
CL03, conducted 9/7/13, Female, Latina, Catholic.
8
MB01, conducted 7/12/13, Female, Black, Baptist.
9
SB04, conducted 6/27/11, Male, Black, Baptist.
123
Rev Relig Res
could be because the parents didn’t really learn themselves or they went to a church that the pastor didn’t really know too much. Rather than pointing to the school system or educators as potential issues, this respondent places agency within the home and church life of the child. If the child is not educated in the faith, through the guidance of a religious leader or committed parent, she can be affected by viewpoints that might fall ‘‘outside’’ the faith. Thus— in his sense of things—blame should be placed on the family or church community, rather than the educational system, should a child lose their faith. So, in this case, the prior respondent’s idea of ‘‘something different’’ comes from the family and church community, who are collectively charged with developing religious belief in the child. The effect of education is proportional to the child’s pre-existing faith, or as a 71-year-old black woman10 explained ‘‘I think it would depend on how strong of a Christian background that they have, and how strong their faith is…it could have an impact on some, and on others not necessarily.’’ A major theme for black Americans was their confidence in the perseverance of Christian faith. Many black respondents assumed that, when forced to choose between principles learned in their religious congregation and those espoused by a science teacher, the child will choose his or her Christian faith. In reflecting on her own past, one 23-year-old black woman11 shared how consistent church attendance incubated her from any potential faith crisis. I mean, for someone like me, no, ‘cause like I said, I came to church every Sunday regardless. But for someone who doesn’t go to church every Sunday, I think [science education] would raise a question or two, and maybe make them consider it, you know what I’m saying, things like that. From this woman’s perspective, the religious practice of going to church keeps the child from embracing differing beliefs. Buried in this answer is the implicit assumption of the superiority of Christianity; the respondent concedes that science education would only raise a ‘‘question or two’’ for those who do not attend church regularly. As one can see from the aforementioned quotes, many of our black respondents noted the potential for science education to impact faith, but only when the child lacks exposure to Christian teaching and community. The theme of the perseverance of faith even came up within the context of discussions of human origins. Some respondents put their disagreements with evolution bluntly, like one 51-year-old black woman12 who, when discussing science, explained, It just didn’t make—it just never made sense to me, so I think that’s why I chose my religious belief over the science of evolution. …Basically the same thing I told you from the beginning. I just could not, nobody could ever explain that to me how, as intricate as our bodies are, as intricate as the world
10
SB05, conducted 7/6/11, Female, Black, Baptist.
11
MB05, conducted 7/18/13, Female, Black, Baptist.
12
MB15, conducted 11/10/13, Female, Black, Baptist.
123
Rev Relig Res
is, how it can just be made from a big bang. It just … never made sense. Nobody could ever satisfy that answer for me. For this respondent, there was a conscious choice between two options regarding her ideological commitment; ‘‘religious belief’’ and ‘‘the science of evolution.’’ When presented with scientific evidence regarding the complexity of human bodies and the visible universe, the respondent was faced with a decision as to what (or whom) to attribute such complexity. Ultimately she chose religion and many respondents assumed that students who are sufficiently educated in the faith will make the same choice. Among the Latino respondents, there was comparatively little talk about the protective role of the faith community. Therefore, for many, science education presented a real threat to the faith of children. One 64-year-old Latino man13 articulated the potential risk of education in saying, [Science education] has an impact if the class is going to be taught that the creation is more important than the creator. Science is made from the creation. The creator is what makes science. So then, it is going to have an impact because minds, when they take up the most information is when you’re a kid. So, if from childhood it is instilled in someone that the creation is more important than the creator, logically there’s going to be conflict in the person. In this response, we again see concerns about how science is ‘‘taught,’’ particularly by science educators who do not identify the creator (God) as greater than the creation (science). When this hierarchical ordering is not preserved in the classroom, conflict arises within the child. The respondent highlights his perception that children are vulnerable to forms of authority, like teachers, who might teach in a way that subverts the divinely inspired order. Latino respondents offered several potential solutions for dealing with such concerns. Some respondents downplayed the vulnerability of children in expressing an overall lack of concern about science education. For example, one respondent14 argued that elementary aged children ‘‘would not really think twice’’ about what they are learning in science class while another15 took comfort in her belief that ‘‘kids are smart’’ so they will be able to distinguish what is true from what is false. Other Latino respondents did not hold a positive outlook. One 30-year-old father16 articulated his concerns about public schools in saying, The fact that we assume that our schools are teaching our kids the same morals and education that we instill in our kids, I think, is a false assumption. And I think that’s why a lot of Christians who want to teach their kids their view of things have taken their kids out of school, out of the public education system, and put them in home schooling or something like that.
13
EL07, conducted 11/3/13, Male, Latino, Evangelical.
14
EL05, conducted 9/13/13, Female, Latina, Evangelical.
15
EL09, conducted 11/15/13, Female, Latina, Evangelical.
16
EL06, conducted 9/20/13, Male, Latino, Evangelical.
123
Rev Relig Res
For this respondent, the potential threat of education stems from a fundamental difference between the values taught in public schools and those taught in Christian institutions. Yet, unlike many of our black respondents, this man does not mention the church or family as institutions to shepherd children through potential value conflicts. Therefore, he sees home schooling as an attractive option to help protect children from the potential anti-religious bias of educators. Other Latino respondents made similar comments about placing their children in private schools.
Positive Effects of Science Education Given concerns about the bias of educators, only two of our Latino respondents (both Catholic) suggested that science education could positively affect a child’s faith. Conversely, given their convictions about the power of the church community, more black American (when compared to Latino) respondents regarded science education as potentially positive. Such positive evaluations of science education might be unsurprising except for the fact that the question was framed specifically in terms of how it affects religious faith. Overall, most respondents saw science education as innocuous because it is part of a larger educational process. A handful of others went even farther in suggesting that students will be enriched by learning different viewpoints, even those not shared by their faith community. For instance, a 51-year-old black woman17 shared, Well, in my opinion, [science education] would more than likely be a positive thing. I think that in anything that you’re learning, people will need to be able to—you need to be able to ask questions and see if it kind of makes sense to you. Rather than suggesting that religious children should be harbored from different viewpoints, this respondent suggests that familiarity with science will help children make an informed decision regarding their own convictions. Similar sentiments about the benefits of understanding non-religious viewpoints were voiced by other respondents, like a 48-year-old black woman18 who reflected ‘‘I would want to give [children] the option of knowing that there are other things and other entities that are different than your thoughts.’’ Such a statement is consistent with the other black respondents we interviewed, who emphasized that religious faith is the responsibility of the community. Respondents suggested that a child’s faith is strengthened by learning differing viewpoints and that science may provide other benefits besides. For instance, when asked if science education can affect a child’s faith, one 42-year-old black woman19 explained: Yes. I’m gonna say yes, my gut—I’m going to say yes. And the reason I say that is science makes you think deeper than you would normally think, so if 17
MB15, conducted 11/10/13, Female, Black, Baptist.
18
MB06, conducted 7/18/13, Female, Black, Baptist.
19
SB02, conducted 6/22/11, Female, Black, Baptist.
123
Rev Relig Res
let’s say we’re talking to the kids about nature. Then the questions come, ‘‘Well where does all this come from, who created this, how did it get here? Science is described here as providing a distinct benefit; it helps religious students to think in more critical ways about the world around them. Such thinking leads to questions about the nature of the world and such questions will only strengthen the student’s faith. Within this conception is the idea that science, or the study of nature, ultimately points back to God. One 58-year-old black woman20 summed up a number of responses in saying ‘‘[Children] should learn all they can about science, but still…also know that … God has a bigger place than science.’’
Discussion Overall, our black and Latino respondents shared similar concerns about science education. Both groups saw bias, particularly the anti-religious bias of the science teacher, as a greater concern than the content of science curriculum itself. Yet, despite sharing this concern, the two groups differed in their evaluation of the threat of such bias for religious faith. Black respondents articulated trust in the Christian community, including both the church and family, to incubate children from harm. This finding has potential implications for understanding how historically black congregations view science education, as the responses suggest that issues like the interaction between religious faith and science fall within the locus of control of the faith community. Similarly, the results echo prior scholarship highlighting the perceived institutional strength of the Black Church (Lincoln and Mamiya 1990). From this perspective, science can only affect a child’s faith if the religious community or family fails to properly educate the child in the foundations of Christianity. Given this conviction, the net effect of science education on religious faith for our black respondents was either neutral or positive. In fact, many of them even argued that science education benefits a child’s faith even if some of the content contradicts their religious beliefs. In contrast, for many Latino respondents, a biased science educator was perceived as a real threat to children’s faith. Such a view conflates the role of science teacher with that of scientist (or moral authority) and draws on images of anti-religious scientists. This imagery is not insignificant in understanding how many minority religious communities view science education and confirms social psychology research on societal images of scientists (Garfield 1978; Schibeci 1986). Our results suggest that Latino students and their parents may enter the educational system with suspicions of science and, in particular, science educators. Such a view echoes Evans’ (2011, 2013) assertion regarding differing views of science and scientists among religious conservatives, as many remain skeptical of scientists in ways they are not skeptical of science. The solution for several of our respondents was to remove their children from the public educational system, an option that is not always available for families with limited financial resources. 20
SB09, conducted 7/24/11, Female, Black, Baptist.
123
Rev Relig Res
Overall, especially given historic under-representation of black Americans and Latinos in STEM, the racial and religious dynamics of moral authority in science warrant further scholarly attention. Most respondents wanted what they would think of as ‘‘fairly presented information,’’ rather than teaching certain ideas about human origins. This finding is especially interesting given the high support for teaching creationism among Latinos (Lac et al. 2010) and work suggesting that conservative religious parents want to be involved in science curriculum decisions (HaiderMarkel and Joslyn 2008). Yet, our findings echo the work of Berkman and Plutzer (2010) on the importance of the teacher, an influence that has not gone unrecognized by parents. For example, our respondents rarely mentioned other educational actors (administrators, policymakers, or school boards) in their responses. If, as prior research suggests (Loi and McDermott 2010), Latinos do tend to be more deferent to educators, it would make sense that parents would be concerned about the authority of teachers challenging children’s faith commitments. With reference to the body of literature on the relationship between conservative religion and science, it is notable that evolution and topics related to human origins remain largely absent from these respondents’ answers. Prior work suggests that religious conservatives often connect science education with evolution (Hill 2014), but few of our respondents mentioned either evolution or creationism. This is especially interesting given that the answers provided by both sets of respondents largely assumed that there would be some level of conflict between a child’s faith and what they might learn in science class (even though we were careful not to introduce the idea of conflict into the interview). The differences of opinion related to how such conflicts might affect children. Overall, the responses expand the work of Evans (2011, 2013) and Ecklund and Scheitle (2017) in suggesting that conservative religious groups, even from racial minority congregations, are positively oriented toward science but resistant to scientists (or science teachers) as moral authorities. This view of education seems to push scholarly conversation in a direction that is different than other scholarship (Darnell and Sherkat 1997; Sherkat 2011), which argues that conservative religious cultural orientations limit educational aspirations and scientific literacy. Similarly, the results fill a gap in the religion and education literature by helping to parse the reasons why Christians might be skeptical of certain forms of education. Conversations regarding educational attainment in religious communities have centered largely on belief; for instance, how belief in biblical literalism and an afterlife might limit interest in certain careers (Granger and Price 2007). Yet, the present data shifts the conversation on religion and educational from belief to authority; for the respondents in our sample authority plays a larger role in the potential faith effects of education. Our black American respondents saw the church community and family as authoritative and able to incubate children from potential faith crises. Meanwhile, our Latino respondents raised concerns about the potential authority of anti-religious educators in children’s lives.
123
Rev Relig Res
Limitations One question raised by these findings relates to the differences between the black and Latino groups. Here we see one of the limitations of our study as the nature of the project limits the generalizability of our findings as well as our ability to explore the reasons for racial differences. Nonetheless, the robust literature establishing the importance of the church as a cultural institution in many black communities (Gaines 2010; McCray et al. 2010; Shelton and Emerson 2012) helps make sense of the confidence black Americans find in the faith community. Similarly, the long history of after-school or other educational support programs through black churches (Barnes 2015), suggests that many students receive considerable exposure to theological teachings in relation to education. Potential reasons for educator skepticism among Latino respondents can be postulated, although certainly this also remains an area ripe for further investigation. First, how scientists are perceived by the public might have a profound effect on science teachers, especially those educating 1st and 2nd generation immigrants. Second, half of our black respondents had completed a bachelor’s degree compared to just 36% of the Latino respondents, so it is possible that comparative educational attainment affected how education was viewed by these two groups. It is also worth noting that both groups in our sample were well-educated compared to other members of their racial group; recent estimates suggest that only 22.5% of black Americans and 15.5% of Latinos in the US have completed a bachelor’s degree (Ryan and Bauman 2016). Therefore, the comparatively high educational attainment of our sample suggests a possible confluence of race with class factors, another nuance that should be interrogated further in future research. Finally, language barriers faced by immigrant first-generation Latino families also offer a potential reason for educational skepticism (Sikkink and Hernandez 2003) as other studies have suggested that Latino students and their families tend to be deferent to educators (Loi and McDermott 2010).
Conclusion The narratives highlighted here do suggest that scholars need to move beyond discussions of curriculum when discussing religion and science education to focus more on perceptions of authority. Both blacks and Latinos, groups that are highly Christian and highly underrepresented in STEM, share similar concerns about the bias of certain authority figures (in this case, teachers). They also interpret the threat of such bias differently based on their beliefs in the authority of religious institutions and families to impart faith to children. Scholars and policymakers interested in diversifying STEM need to pay attention to these conceptions of authority, especially given research demonstrating how leaks in the STEM pipeline can be found at early stages of education (Hanson 2013). Indeed, narrowing educational disparities requires understanding how religion and race collectively pattern views of education and educators.
123
Rev Relig Res Acknowledgements Research for this article was part of the Religious Understandings of Science Study, funded by the John Templeton Foundation (Grant 38817, Elaine Howard Ecklund, principal investigator).
References Abdul-Alim, Jamaal. 2011. K-12 science proficiency bottoms out among nation’s high school seniors; Blacks, Latinos at lowest levels. Diverse issues in education. http://diverseeducation.com/article/ 14655/#. Accessed 5 April 2013. Archer, Louise, Jennifer DeWitt, and Jonathan Osborne. 2015. Is science for us? Black students’ and parents’ views of science and science careers. Science Education 99(2): 199–237. Aschbacher, Pamela, Erika Li, and Ellen J. Roth. 2009. Is science me? High school students’ identities, participation and aspirations in science, engineering, and medicine. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 47(5): 564–582. Barnes, Sandra L. 2015. To education, equip, and empower: Black church sponsorship of tutoring or literary programs. Review of Religious Research 57: 111–129. Barrett, Brian. 2010. Religion and habitus: Exploring the relationship between religious involvement and educational outcomes and orientations among urban African American students. Urban Education 45(4): 448–479. Barrett, Jennifer B., Jennifer Pearson, Chandra Muller, and Kenneth A. Frank. 2007. Adolescent religiosity and school contexts. Social Science Quarterly 88(4): 1024–1037. Berkman, Michael, and Eric Plutzer. 2010. Evolution, creationism, and the battle to control America’s classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press. Beyerlein, Kraig. 2004. Specifying the impact of conservative Protestantism on educational attainment. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 43(4): 505–518. Brand, Brenda R., George E. Glasson, and Andre M. Green. 2006. Sociocultural factors influencing students’ learning in science and mathematics: An analysis of the perspectives of African American students. School Science and Mathematics 106(5): 228–236. Brown, Diane R., and Lawrence E. Gary. 1991. Religious socialization and educational attainment among African Americans: An empirical assessment. The Journal of Negro Education 60(3): 411–426. Brownstein, Ronald. 2016. The challenge of educational inequality. The Atlantic, May 19. https://www. theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/05/education-inequality-takes-center-stage/483405/. Accessed 6 June 2017. Calvillo, Jonathan E., and Stanley R. Bailey. 2015. Latino religious affiliation and ethnic identity. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 54(1): 57–78. Calzada, Esther J., Keng-Yen Huang, Miguel Hernandez, Erika Soriano, C.Francoise Acra, Spring Dawson-McClure, Dimitra Kambousos, and Laurie Brotman. 2015. Family and teacher characteristics as predictors of parent involvement in education during early childhood among AfroCaribbean and Latino immigrant families. Urban Education 50(7): 870–896. Chan, Esther, and Elaine Howard Ecklund. 2016. Narrating and navigating authorities. Evangelical and mainline Protestant interpretations of the bible and science. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 55(1): 54–69. Corbie-Smith, Giselle, Stephen B. Thomas, and Diane Marie M. St. George. 2002. Distrust, race, and research. Archives of Internal Medicine 162(21): 2458–2463. Darnell, Alfred, and Darren Sherkat. 1997. The impact of Protestant fundamentalism on educational attainment. American Sociological Review 62(2): 306–315. Ecklund, Elaine Howard. 2010. Science vs. religion: What scientists really think. New York: Oxford. Ecklund, Elaine Howard, Michael Emerson, Celina Davila, and Samuel Kye. 2013. Motivating civic engagement: In-group versus out-group service orientations among Mexican Americans in religious and nonreligious organizations. Sociology of Religion 74(3): 370–391. Ecklund, Elaine Howard, and Christopher P. Scheitle. 2017. Religion vs. science: What religious people really think. New York: Oxford University Press. Ecklund, Elaine Howard, Christopher P. Scheitle, Jared Peifer, and Daniel Bolger. 2016. Examining links between religion, evolution views, and climate change skepticism. Environment and Behavior. doi:10.1177/0013916516674246. Ellison, Christopher G., and Marc A. Musick. 1995. Conservative Protestantism and public opinion toward science. Review of Religious Research 36(3): 245–262.
123
Rev Relig Res Else-Quest, Nicole M., Concetta C. Mineo, and Ashley Higgins. 2013. Math and science attitudes and achievement at the intersection of gender and ethnicity. Psychology of Women Quarterly 37(3): 293–309. Enriquez, Laura E. 2011. ‘Because we feel the pressure and we also feel the support:’ Examining the educational success of undocumented immigrant Latina/o students. Harvard Educational Review 81(3): 476–500. Espinosa, Gasto´n, Elizondo Virgilio, and Jesse Miranda. 2003. Latino churches in American public life: Summary of findings. South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame. Evans, John H. 2011. Epistemological and moral conflict between religion and science. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 50(4): 707–727. Evans, John. 2013. The growing social and moral conflict between science and religion. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 52(2): 368–385. Evans, John H., and Michael S. Evans. 2008. Religion and science: Beyond the epistemological conflict narrative. Annual Review of Sociology 34: 87–105. Ford, Amy Carpenter, and Kelly Sassi. 2014. Authority in cross-racial teaching and learning: (Re)considering the transferability of warm demander approaches. Urban Education 49(1): 39–74. Fox, Cybelle. 2004. The changing color of welfare? How whites’ attitudes toward Latinos influence support for welfare. American Journal of Sociology 110(3): 580–625. Gaines, Robert W. 2010. Looking back, moving forward: How the civil rights era church can guide the modern black church in improving black student achievement. Journal of Negro Education 79(3): 366–379. Garfield, E. 1978. Scientists’ image in movies and TV programs. Current Contexts 10: 5–12. Gieryn, Thomas F., George M. Bevins, and Stephen C. Zehr. 1985. Professionalization of American scientists: Public science in the creation/evolution trials. American Sociological Review 50(3): 392–409. Glanville, Jennifer L., David Sikkink, and Edwin I. Hernandez. 2008. Religious involvement and educational outcomes: The role of social capital and extracurricular participation. The Sociological Quarterly 49(1): 105–137. Glaser, Barney G., and Anselm L. Strauss. 2009. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New Brunswick: Aldine Transaction. Granger, Maury D., and Gregory N. Price. 2007. The tree of science and original sin: Do Christian religious beliefs constrain the supply of scientists? The Journal of Socio-Economics 36(1): 144–160. Haider-Markel, Donald P., and Mark R. Joslyn. 2008. Pulpits versus ivory towers: Socializing agents and evolution attitudes. Social Science Quarterly 89(3): 665–683. Hanson, Sandra L. 2013. STEM degrees and occupations among Latinos: An examination of race/ethnic and gender variation. Race, Gender & Class 20(1/2): 214–231. Hernandez, Diley, Shaheen Rana, Meltem Alemdar, Analı´a Rao, and Marion Usselman. 2016. Latino parents’ educational values and STEM beliefs. Journal for Multicultural Education 10(3): 354–367. Hill, Jonathan P. 2014. Rejecting evolution: The role of religion, education, and social networks. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 53(3): 575–594. Hirschman, Charles. 2004. The role of religion in the origins and adaptation of immigrant groups in the United States. International Migration Review 38(3): 1206–1233. Hunt, Matthew O. 2007. African American, Latino, and white beliefs about black/white inequality, 1977–2004. American Sociological Review 72(3): 390–415. Johnson, David R., Christopher P. Scheitle, and Elaine Howard Ecklund. 2016. Conservative Protestantism and anti-evolution curricular challenges across states. Social Science Quarterly 97(5): 1227–1244. Korver-Glenn, Elizabeth, Esther Chan, and Elaine Howard Ecklund. 2015. Perceptions of science education among African American and white evangelicals: A Texas case study. Review of Religious Research 57(1): 131–148. Lac, Andrew, Vanessa Hemovich, and Igor Himelfarb. 2010. Predicting position on teaching creationism (instead of evolution) in public schools. Journal of Educational Research 103(4): 253–261. Lehrer, Evelyn. 1999. Religion as a determinant of educational attainment: An economic perspective. Social Science Research 28(4): 358–379. Lewis, Bradford F. 2003. A critique of literature on the underrepresentation of African Americans in science: Directions for future research. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering 9: 361–373.
123
Rev Relig Res Lincoln, C.Eric, and Lawrence H. Mamiya. 1990. The black church in the African American experience. Durham, NC: Duke University Press Books. Loi, Claudia X.Aguado, and Robert J. McDermott. 2010. Conducting program evaluation with Hispanics in rural settings: Ethical issues and evaluation challenges. American Journal of Health Education 41(4): 252–256. Long, David E. 2011. Evolution and religion in American education: An ethnography. New York: Springer. Marti, Gerardo. 2015. Latino Protestants and their congregations: Establishing an agenda for sociological research. Sociology of Religion 76(2): 145–154. Matovina, Timothy. 2011. Latino Catholicism: Transformation in America’s largest church. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. McCray, Carlos R., Cosette M. Grant, and Floyd Beachum. 2010. Pedagogy of self-development: The role the black church can have on African American students. Journal of Negro Education 79(3): 233–248. McGee, Ebony O. 2016. Devalued black and Latino racial identities: A by-product of STEM college culture? American Educational Research Journal 53(6): 1626–1662. Menjı´var, Cecilia. 2003. Religion and immigration in comparative perspective: Catholic and evangelical Salvadorians in San Francisco, Washington, D.C., and Phoenix. Sociology of Religion 64(1): 21–45. Mervis, Jeffrey. 2013. Minorities run up significant debt in earning STEM Ph. Ds. Science 340(6140): 1510–1511. Moore, Randy, and Karen L. Miksch. 2003. Evolution, creationism, and the courts: 20 questions. Science Education Review 2(1): 1–15. Mulder, Mark T., Aida I. Ramos, and Gerardo Martı´. 2017. Latino Protestants in America: Growing and diverse. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. National Science Foundation. 2017. Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2017/nsf17310/. Accessed 5 June 2017. O’Brien, Timothy L., and Shiri Noy. 2015. Traditional, modern, and post-secular perspectives on science and religion in the United States. American Sociological Review 80(1): 92–115. Pattillo-McCoy, Mary. 1998. Church culture as a strategy of action in the black community. American Sociological Review 63(6): 767–784. Pew Research Center. 2009. A religious portrait of African-Americans. Pew Research Center. http:// www.pewforum.org/2009/01/30/a-religious-portrait-of-african-americans/. Accessed 17 July 2015. Pew Research Center. 2014. The shifting religious identity of Latinos in the United States. Pew Research Center. http://www.pewforum.org/2014/05/07/the-shifting-religious-identity-of-latinos-in-the-unitedstates/. Accessed 26 May 2017. Pew Research Center. 2015. America’s changing religious landscape. Pew Research Center. http://www. pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/. Accessed 24 June 2017. Rowland, Michael L., and E. Paulette Isaac-Savage. 2014. As I see it: A study of African American pastors’ views on health and health education in the black church. Journal of Religious Health 53: 1091–1101. Ryan, Camille L., and Kurt Bauman. 2016. Educational attainment in the United States: 2015. United States Census Bureau. http://www.dl.icdst.org/pdfs/files/321d0ec4cab3e59091bc4c3a7d2adeba.pdf. Accessed 26 May 2017. Sanchez, Esmeralda, Nicholas Vargas, Rebecca Burwell, Jessica Hamar Martinez, Milagros Pen˜a, and Edwin I. Hernandez. 2016. Latino congregations and youth educational expectations. Sociology of Religion 77(2): 171–192. Schibeci, R.A. 1986. Images of science and scientists and science education. Science Education 70(2): 139–149. Sewell, Abigail. 2015. Disaggregating ethnoracial disparities in physician trust. Social Science Research 54: 1–20. Shelton, Jason E., and Michael O. Emerson. 2012. Blacks and whites in Christian America: How racial discrimination shapes religious convictions. New York: NYU Press. Sherkat, Darren. 2011. Religion and scientific literacy in the United States. Social Science Quarterly 92(5): 1134–1150. Sikkink, David and Edwin I. Hernandez. 2003. Religion matters: Predicting schooling success among Latino youth. Interim reports. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED476003. Accessed 9 July 2015. Smith, P. Sean, Peggy J. Trygstad, and Eric R. Banilower. 2016. Widening the gap: Unequal distribution of resources for K-12 science instruction. Education Policy Analysis Archives 24(8): 1–42.
123
Rev Relig Res Stamps, Katherine, and Stephanie A. Bohon. 2006. Educational attainment in new and established Latino metropolitan destinations. Social Science Quarterly 87(5): 1225–1240. Superfine, Benjamin Michael. 2009. The evolving role of the courts in educational policy: The tension between judicial, scientific, and democratic decision making in Kitzmiller v. Dover. American Educational Research Journal 46(4): 898–923. Urban, Wayne J., and Jennings L. Wagoner Jr. 2009. American education: A history, 4th ed. New York: Routledge. US Census Bureau. 2010. Community facts. http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/community_ facts.xhtml?src=bkmk#none. Accessed 19 August 2015. US Census Bureau. 2011. 2010 census demographic profile summary file. https://www.census.gov/prod/ cen2010/doc/dpsf.pdf. Accessed 24 June 2017. US Census Bureau. 2012. US Census Bureau projections show a slower growing, older, more diverse nation a half century from now. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/population/ cb12-243.html. Accessed 16 July 2015.
123
