a girl, Corinne explains gently. She picks up the bunny and says, See, this one is both, like me! Sarah then loses interest, and Corinne returns to cooing over the bunnies.
This four-year-old’s explanation incorporates an interesting combination of color, race, and gender. While her causal reasoning was faulty, she constructed what for her was a sophisticated and reasonable view of the bunnies’ sexes. She displayed an understanding of the idea that an offspring’s color reflects the colors of its parents, a knowledge grounded in her experience as a biracial child. Strayer (1986) underscores how children develop appropriate attributions regarding situational determinants. Corinne’s use of parental gender to explain the unknown gender of the bunnies was an appropriate explanation of how bunnies got certain colors. Skin color was a salient part of her identity, and it was reasonable in her social world to assume that it would be salient for the identity of others, even animals….
In another setting, Corinne (4: African/White) provides an example of the complexity of young children’s racial understandings: She refines the nature of racial identity during a handpainting activity. The children have taken a field trip and are asked to make a thank-you poster for their host, a poster constructed of a large sheet of paper featuring handprints of the children. Children are asked by the teacher to choose a color that “looks just like you do.” The paints are known as “People Colors,” and are common at daycare centers concerned with diversity issues. The activity was designed to increase appreciation of differences in color among the children (Derman-Sparks 1989).
The six paints ranged from dark brown to pale pink. The handprint poster activity is familiar to the children, and the teacher asks Debi to help. Debi accepts but keeps her involvement to a minimum. Several children wait in line to participate in this desirable activity. Each chooses paint according to the teacher’s criterion, has Debi apply the paint to the palm of one hand, and then presses the painted hand onto the poster. Debi then writes the child’s name next to the handprint. Some children point out how closely the paint matches their skin color or ask Debi if she thought the choice was “right.”
Corinne approaches the table, and Debi says, OK, which color is the most like you? Which color matches your skin? Corinne looks over the bottles carefully and chooses pale brown. This one for one hand, she replies, continuing to scan the bottles, and this one for the other hand, she concludes, choosing a second, dark brown color. When Debi asks if that color matches her skin, Corinne calmly replies, I have two colors in my skin. Debi smiles and paints one of her palms pale brown and the other dark brown. Corinne places both hands on the poster, making two prints. Debi then writes Corinne’s name between the two handprints. Perfect! Corinne says.
This four-year-old chose appropriately for her understanding of the situation. That the paints she picked did not exactly match her skin color was not important to her because she was thinking in terms of her parents’ different racial identities. Corinne insisted that she be allowed to choose two colors to reflect her biracial origin. For her, choosing two colors is not an example of cognitive confusion or inconsistency (as a mainstream analysis might see it), but rather her innovative way of recognizing that her mother is dark brown (“Black”) and her father is pale brown (“White”). These examples show that children’s abilities exceed what would be predicted from the mainstream research perspective.
Using Racial and Ethnic Concepts to Define Others
We observed many examples of children exploring the complex notions of skin color, hair differences, and facial characteristics. They often explore what these things mean and make racial and/or ethnic interpretations of these perceived differences. Mindy (4: White) insists that Debi is Indian. When queried, Mindy replies that it is because Debi is wearing her long dark hair in a braid. When Debi explains that she is not Indian, the child remarks that maybe Debi’s mother is Indian.
These statements show not only awareness of the visible characteristics of race and ethnicity but also insight into how visible markers are passed from generation to generation. They demonstrate a child’s ability to grasp salient characteristics of a racial and/or ethnic category not her own and apply them to others in a collaborative and evolving way.
In another episode, Taleshia (3: Black) approaches the handpainting table. Asked if she wants to make a handprint, she nods shyly. A child with dark brown skin, Taleshia scans the paint bottles and points to pale pink. Curious about her preference, Debi asks, Taleshia, is this the color that looks like you? Taleshia nods and holds out her hand. Behind her, Cathie (3.5: White) objects to Taleshia’s decision. No, no, Cathie interjects. She’s not that color. She’s brown. Cathie moves to the table. You’re this color, Cathie says and picks out the bottle of dark brown paint. Cathie is interested in helping Taleshia correct her apparent mistake about skin color. Do you want this color? Debi asks Taleshia. No, she replies, I want this one, touching the pink bottle. Regarding Taleshia with amazement, Cathie exclaims, For goodness sake, can’t you see that you aren’t pink? Debi, Cathie continues to insist, you have to make her see that she’s brown. Cathie is exasperated and takes Taleshia by the arm. Look, she instructs, you are brown! See? Cathie holds Taleshia’s arm next to her own. I am pink, right? Cathie looks to Debi for confirmation. Sure enough, Debi answers, you are pink. Now, Cathie continues, looking relieved, Taleshia needs to be brown. Debi looks at Taleshia, who is now frowning, and asks her, Do you want to be brown? She shakes her head vigorously and points to pale pink. I want that color.
Cathie is frustrated, and trying to be supportive, Debi explains that Taleshia can choose any color she thinks is right. Cathie again objects, but Taleshia smiles, and Debi paints her palm pink. Then Taleshia makes her handprint. Cathie stares, apparently convinced that Taleshia and Debi have lost touch with reality. As Taleshia leaves, Cathie takes her place, remarking to Debi, I just don’t know what’s the matter with you. Couldn’t you see that she is brown! Cathie gives up and chooses pale pink for herself, a close match. Cathie makes her handprint and says to Debi. See, I am not brown.
Taleshia stuck to her choice despite Cathie’s insistence. Both three year-olds demonstrate a strong awareness of the importance of skin color, and their views are strongly held. This example underscores the importance of child-centered research. A traditional conceptualization of this Black child’s choice of skin color paint might suggest that the child is confused about racial identity. If she chose pink in the usual experimental setting (Clark and Clark 1940; Porter 1971), she would probably be evaluated as rejecting herself for a preferred whiteness. Debi had several other interactions with Taleshia. The three-year-old had, on other occasions, pointed out how pale Debi was and how dark her own skin was. She had explained to Debi that she was Black, that she thought she was pretty, and that pink was her favorite color. One possible explanation for her choice of pink for her skin color in the handpainting activity relies on Debi’s knowledge of Taleshia’s personality, family background, and previous interactions with others. Taleshia may have chosen pink because it is her favorite color, but this does not mean that she is unaware that most of her skin is dark. Another explanation for Taleshia’s choice of skin color representation is that, like other African Americans, Taleshia’s palms are pink while most of her skin is very dark. Perhaps she was choosing a color to match the color of her palms, a reasonable choice because the task was to paint the palms for handprints. The validity of this interpretation is reinforced by another episode at the center. One day Taleshia sat down and held Debi’s hands in hers, turning them from top to bottom. Without uttering a word, she repeated this activity with her own hands, drawing Debi’s attention to this act. The three-year-old was contrasting the pink-brown variations in her skin color with Debi’s pinkish hand color. This explanation for the child’s paint choice might not occur to a researcher who did not pay careful attention to the context and the child’s personal perspective. Taleshia’s ideas, centered in observations of herself and others, were more important to her than another child’s notions of appropriate color. Far
