What continent do you think they are from? Drawing humans to reveal internalized bias

In the process of teaching (and learning) geography in our third grade classroom, we found that our students were very North America and Europe centric. While eight year olds are naturally egocentric, we wanted an activity to shift their perspectives and push them to realize that there are “real, important people” ALL OVER the world.

So we redesigned our beloved activity where we draw people to realize our internalized biases (that we wrote for 5th graders, but have used with adults as well) to make it more geography focused and 3rd grade appropriate. While we were focused on introducing inspiring (and unexpected) people from different continents, we also thought we might uncover some gender and racial biases along the way.

We have been learning about world geography starting with the seven continents and five oceans since the first week of school. We started with the continents and learning about the differences between a continent, country, state, and city in order to make sure that our students could be clear and accurate.

The Procedure

For this activity, we refreshed our memories by sharing some information about each continent as a whole group. Then, we had students work independently on what we called a puzzle. We gave them a handout with five descriptions of humans, a space to draw each human, and a line to write what continent they thought each human was from. We also gave them a bag of crayons to draw with. We’ve discovered that asking people to draw with crayons means they have to choose a color for their humans and often surprise themselves with the assumptions they make.

We read each description out loud and asked students to follow along on their paper. Then, we gave them two minutes to draw a person. We told them to draw “whomever you imagine in your head when you hear the description.” The descriptions lacked gender specific pronouns or any clues to age, race, or background. After they finished drawing, we told them to write an answer to the question, “What continent do you think this person is from?”

Some students happily drew whatever they imagined, including props, speech bubbles, and detailed accessories. Others were more hesitant and expressed concern about getting the answer wrong. In general, students found assigning a continent to a description of a person easier as they could copy down one of the seven continents so their choices were more concrete.

Revealing the Answers

In typical third grade fashion, some students were disappointed that they didn’t guess all of the continents correctly when we revealed the actual humans we had been describing at the end (and what continent and country they were from). But our students were also fascinated by hearing about new (and very inspiring) people, so they quickly moved on and realized that learning, thinking and understanding were far more important than getting “the right answer”. They also loved hearing what country each person was from.

We chose one person from Asia, Africa, South America, Europe, and Australia. Multiple students identified the person we described from Asia - Malala Yousafzai - from our description of her and wrote her name down next to their drawing of her. However, when we read our description of Sadiq Khan, which included the fact that he is a practicing Muslim, no one guessed that he was from Europe.

The person we described from South America was Michelle Bachelet (the current and first female president of Chile), which confused some of our students because we mentioned that she is the president of her country. One student asked how that was possible because there have only been boy presidents? We reminded her that this is true in the United States, but not in many other countries.

Students comparing responses and discussing their thinking process

Many students were surprised that the Nobel Peace Prize winning scientist who studied at three different universities (Wangari Maathai) was an African women. Many students also thought most of the people were from North America or Europe (except for the person who is actually from Europe). We had one female student who drew only women, and one male student who drew only men. Another student drew androgynous people because she said she couldn’t tell from the descriptions and she didn’t want to make assumptions.

Debrief and Reflections

After we revealed the identities of each person described and discussed our reactions, questions, and comments about each person, we asked students to complete one or more of the following prompts.

While doing this activity...

I was surprised by..

I felt..

I learned…

I used to think… , but now I’m thinking …

Students shared out at the end, and had thoughtful reflections (see quotes from students’ reflections below). We love that they are embracing studying geography in a humanizing way and challenging the assumptions or stereotypes that they may have learned from Western centric media in the past.

Student quotes:

“I thought I would be right, but all of my answers were wrong, but I realized it was okay and they didn't all have to be right.”

“I felt uncomfortable because I didn’t want to get it wrong or offend anyone, but then I realized [after our discussion] that we make assumptions about people whenever we meet someone new.”

“One thing I learned was some things that some people do different things and they are actually really important, but aren't always recognized because we learn mostly about North Americans.”

“I learned don't judge people by what they look like or by first impressions.”

Subscribe to our blog:

Covenant Usurp Simulation: constructing a glimpse of forced assimilation for our students

When we start teaching Native American studies, students often refer to Native Americans only in past tense or as peoples who “used to live here.” We correct this misconception and learn about American Indians TODAY, but we also ask our students where they got this idea from and why this so often is the dominant narrative about indigenous Americans.

This exploration requires some understanding of history (which remains limited by the literal mindedness of 5th graders) and the reality of extermination, eradication, and (forced) assimilation that native peoples experienced. Before we start learning about boarding schools in detail, we want our students to have an experience they can use as a parallel to forced assimilation.

Another student's reflection showing revised thinking!

An important disclaimer is that this simulation (or any simulation) is NOT the same or even close to the actual experience, which we would never ever want to simulate. Ours is temporary; historical experiences were real and permanent. It’s important to acknowledge that we are only getting a tiny glimpse. We tell our students this constantly and have them reflect upon it as one of their homework questions. But there can never be too many reminders.

    This simulation requires some sixth graders to come in and act out the role of the villains. This year, so many of our former students were interested in being a part of the simulation that we had to hold auditions! They were hilarious to watch and we ended confident that we had chosen strong actors and actresses who wouldn’t crack a smile or break character.

    We gave our 5th graders some work to do and had them reading quietly when the 6th graders stormed in at the agreed upon time. The 6th graders (4 in total) announced that they heard our students were having trouble paying attention, using computers responsibly, and kept fighting over who gets to sit where. They told the 5th graders that this was no way to get ready for 6th grade and since their covenant (our class agreement or rules) was clearly not working, they needed to revamp it.

At this point, we joined in and told the 5th graders that we were going to let the 6th graders take the lead and help them re-think their covenant. The 6th graders took some suggestions. All of the 5th graders’ suggestions were shut down. Next, the 6th graders took down our covenant (which we spend over a month working on at the beginning of the year) and put up a 6th grade covenant which declared:

• Respect ourselves, each other, and the environment

• Assigned seats (no couch)

• All voices heard. You are only allowed to participate once per lesson.

• Take notes on everything the teachers say, follow along

• Use computers only to write essays

• The whole class has to do something right or we start over (we are a team).

• Don’t say the words 'like, well, um'

• Don’t use kudos, high fives

• No games or breaks

Our students were upset. No kudos? No high fives? No computers (except for essays) caused a lot of grumpy faces, and even a few tears. One change would be unsettling, but this was turning everything upside down!

We ignored their complaints and told them we had to keep going and the new rules went into action immediately. We wheeled our computer cart out and away, relocated students to their assigned seats, and passed out a new assignment.

When students asked to get a drink or go to the bathroom, they were told “NO! We have new rules now!” After they finished their assignments, we moved into a discussion. Our more verbal students were very frustrated by the rule that “everyone has to speak” as they had already used up their allotted speaking time and had to wait for everyone else to share first.

The simulation lasted less than two hours, but the students were extremely frustrated and angry at the sixth graders. They also engaged in acts of disobedience like trying to give each other kudos and slyly give high fives. They tried to appeal to other teachers or administrators on behalf of their computer time.

Their homework that night was a reflection about the experience of having their covenant usurped. Many students had to be reminded that as much as they may have felt frustrated, their experience lasted less than two hours and was not permanent. They also only had their class culture critiqued and curtailed, instead of their entire way of life. Upon reflection, they were able to reflect upon this distinction.

Here are some of their thoughts:

• “I used to think that turning around and joining another community would not be hard, but now I am thinking it actually is really hard."

• “We can’t say things like ‘well,’ ‘um,’ and ‘like,’ which is like how the Natives had to speak English. And we had to sit in an assigned spot, like how the US made a reservation for the Natives to live on.”

• “I used to think that most of the discrimination is gone but now I think that we still have a long way to go before everything is fair.”

• “Today made me feel like our ‘tribal sovereignty’ had been taken away because the sixth graders came in and took away our covenant. Without asking! Then, the sixth graders replaced it with their covenant, forcing us to assimilate to their ways.”

Please let us know if you have any questions! We'd love to hear what activities you have tried to help students think critically or from other perspectives.

Subscribe to our blog:

Pom Pom Simulation

Our pom pom simulation is a personal favorite. It simulates privilege, the cyclical effects of poverty, oppression, and more. Students always make new connections and take their reflections to a level we never could have anticipated. This year was no exception!

There are 3 rounds to the pom pom simulation. Round One consists of collecting pom poms. You have one minute to get as many pom poms as you can. Pom poms, of course, simulate wealth (and power). There is a catch. Students receive slips of paper with “assignments” on them. These instructions make it harder for some people to gather pom poms than others. Some examples:

You can use both of your hands, but you may not move your feet at all.

You may not bend your knees.

You must wear an oven mitt on your non-dominant hand and use that hand to pick up pom poms.

You may only use your two pointer fingers behind your back.

Only two people are allowed to use their hands and move around as they normally would.  We also caution all students that if you touch or bump another body, you lose pom poms. This is a safety requirement more than anything else, but does make it harder for the students who are already limited by their instructions!

Once pom pom collection is over, we put students into three groups based on the number of pom poms they collected.  This year, we had:

Students were very engaged, animatedly talking about how the collection process was “not fair” and how they deserved another chance.  So we told them, ok, here you go - Round Two.

Round Two consists of making “baskets” of crumpled up balls of paper. Each group had different color paper. I told the 3rd group - little wealth and power - that they had an advantage due to their large number of members, as every time one member of the group made a “basket,” every member of the group would earn another pom pom. There were cheers when this was announced, but the celebration was short lived as we soon showed each group where they had to stand to shoot.

Group 1 was right up front, Group 2 was behind them (still too far away to easily make a basket, especially with a ball made of paper), and Group 3 was in the back of the room. Naturally, Group 1 made lots of baskets, while Group 2 and 3 only made one each. During this round, we witnessed some very creative teamwork and division of labor as well as enterprising blocking tactics and questions about whether you were allowed to take paper balls out of the baskets. After Round 2, we heard more frustration about how “unfair” the whole situation was and many requests for a new “fair” round.

So we moved on to Round 3. In Round 3, each group gets to decide what they think is a “fair” system to distribute ALL of the pom poms. We give them five minutes to discuss with their group and come up with a system they support. Each group must choose a spokesperson to present their plan to the class. They have one minute each to make a pitch for their group's plan. What students don’t know until voting happens is that voting is weighted as shown below.

Group 1 members: 5 votes each

Group 2 members: 2 votes each

Group 3 members: ½ vote each

When students saw the unequal voting power, Group 3 was livid. They had planned on winning the vote by virtue of their large number of people. Group 1 was pleased as they planned on retaining their “wealth and power” and now had the votes to do so.

Here are the plans they proposed:

Group 1: Play steal the bacon to earn pom poms. 2 people would go out from each team. Keep doing that until pompoms are gone. There are restrictions- the same as the first ones from the beginning (the slips of paper we handed out).

Group 2: Our plan is everyone gets the same amount of pompoms and if it is an odd number, we cut it up into thirds. We don't want to keep repeating what we did before. We want every group to have the same.

Group 3: Everyone would start off with 5 pompoms to meet needs and then you could work your way up by doing different challenges. No restrictions.

We voted, and Group 1’s proposal got the most votes (once we calculated in the weighting). The other students were FRUSTRATED. Group 1 was pleased - they had started out trying to think of a “fair” system, but soon realized “it doesn’t say it has to be fair.” They also were influenced by two members who repeatedly said “Stay wealthy! We should keep our power!”

At this point, we stopped the simulation and had a debrief. First we asked students to share their reactions and feelings (one sentence per person). Here are some samples:

Student from Group 3:

“When I first saw the amounts each group got, it made me feel like the people in the 3rd group were being treated like they aren't humans… ½ a vote. ½ human! Half not real. Not seen. When the people with more wealth get so many more votes, it feels like just because they have more they also should get more of everything always. We are the people working the hardest but we can’t get the things they have that we want and need.”  (lots of me too’s)

Student from Group 1:

“I do agree with [student’s name] that it wasn’t fair. But our group was trying to make it so that we would still be at the top of the ladder, so it wouldn’t be as fair  - you had to be strategic and life isn’t always fair.”

Once everyone shared, we reminded the students that this was a simulation that lasted less than two hours and therefore is NOT THE SAME as actually experiencing poverty, oppression, lack of privilege, discrimination, etc. This was just an activity about pom poms. We DO NOT suddenly understand how others who are actually in these situations feel, just have a tiny experience we can think about and hopefully learn from. Then we asked them to make connections to real life, both in discussion and then later as a homework reflection.

Here are some of their thoughts:

"I used to think that if you work hard you can get wealth but now I think there is more to it. I think this because If you are born without wealth you will have a disadvantage and you will be stuck behind someone who started with a lot of resources and wealth."

"I used to think that in life everything started out fairly and equally and you get to be a higher class based on what job you have and your choices. But now I know that some people are born with an advantage such as rich parents who can afford to send you to a good college which could result into a better life."

We will be presenting this simulation (among other activities) on Friday, March 10th at the Private Schools for Public Purpose conference and look forward to trying it out with other educators. We’d love to hear your reactions and questions!

Subscribe to our blog:

Sinking Ship Simulation: Who do we VALUE?

"Well in the real world not everyone can get everything and this kind of showed me that not all our decision making processes are fair."

Notes on our whiteboard from the students' brainstorming and decision making process.

How it Works:

Yesterday in Social Studies, we did our Sinking Ship simulation (idea credit: we first read about this here). We had the students in half groups (when half the class is with us and half the class is with a different teacher) so we only had 13 students at a time. For each group, we started by handing out “assignments” on folded slips of paper.

The different roles were:

migrant worker

senator

someone who is currently unemployed

child

firefighter

teacher

nurse

doctor

babysitter

college student

taxi driver

lawyer

scientist

We then asked our students to get in a circle and told them that they were on a sinking ship, and there were only FIVE spots in the lifeboat. They had to work together to decide as a group which five people should go in the lifeboat.

Students immediately started making arguments for why they should be on the lifeboat. The senator claimed that he should get on the boat because he is important. Another student countered, “Not on the lifeboat!” One of our favorite funny moments occurred when someone agreed with the “senator” that he should be on the boat and another student said quietly to himself, “It depends if he is a Democrat or a Republican.”

Why We Love this Simulation:

We love this simulation for so many reasons--

• It is fascinating to watch the students work it out amongst themselves!

• It’s also interesting to hear the arguments the students come up, and note which students give up immediately when they read their assignment and decide that their job isn’t “good” enough.

• It is also very telling (and part of our debrief) to note when students laugh. Some laugh out loud when they read their role to their classmates and others start play acting their preconceived idea of that role. For example, the student who received “you are currently unemployed” said, “I just graduated from college. I don’t have a job and I live in my mother’s basement!” in a goofy voice as if he was acting out a role, and put labels on himself.

The Two Group's Decisions:

In the first group, the students worked collaboratively and ensured that everyone’s voice was heard (with some raised voices, but general agreement), while in the second group, one student took charge and made decisions for the group that were later challenged as “unfair.” The two groups also came to different conclusions about who should get a spot on the lifeboat. Their final choices for which "characters" should be on the lifeboat were:

Group One:

1. Doctor

2. Child

3. Nurse

4. Scientist

5. College student

Group Two:

1. Child

2. Person who is currently unemployed

3. Doctor

4. Senator

5. College student

Student Reflections:

"I thought it was unfair because it was based on stereotypes and generalization."

"One thing that did not go well was there was a lot of stereotypes of "taxi driver" and the "currently unemployed". This is bad because just because someone does not have a job does not mean they are not smart. Also people were saying things like how can a taxi driver help. This made us choose people whose jobs make more money, not on their basic humanity!"

"I can connect this to the real world with people who say people who have bad paying jobs aren’t smart. In this I felt stereotyped and I can connect that with the real world because people were using the same stereotypes."

Who would you choose to go on the lifeboat? Do you have other ideas for collaborative problem solving simulations? How else can we push our students to think critically about who is valued in our society and how different people or roles are valued?  We’d love to hear your ideas!

Subscribe to our blog: