Representation, Race and Empire: a Postcolonial Analysis of the New York Global History Regents exam

ABSTRACT

Postcolonial studies have long identified history curriculum as a site of empire building. High stakes exams like the Global History Regents Exam in New York (NYGHR) undoubtedly impact curriculum but have yet to be examined through a postcolonial lens. This study evaluates to what extent, if at all, the NYGHR perpetuates eurocentrism as defined by four concepts from the literature: numerical representation, replacement, tokenism and narrative erasure. Through both qualitative and quantitative analysis, the study finds the exam to be eurocentric both in its numerial underrepresentation of the global south, and in its replacement and ommission of global south achievement, its overuse of tokenism, and its flagrant narrative erasure of the violence of colonialism. The study posits implications and next steps for students, practitioners and future research on how to build inclusive, student driven global history curricula

KEYWORDS:

• Eurocentrism
• curriculum
• colonialism
• Global South
• narrative erasure
• inclusive pedagogy
• postcolonial theory
• decolonizing pedagogy

Disclosure statement

The author is an employee of the New York City Department of Education. She does not teach a regents-based course and has no personal or professional relationship with the Regents Commission.

Notes

1. The phrase ‘Global South’ refers broadly to the regions of Latin America, Asia, Africa and Oceania, and ‘references an entire history of colonialism, neo-imperialism, and differential economic and social change through which large inequalities in living standards, life expectancy, and access to resources are maintained’ (The Global South—Nour Dados, Raewyn Connell, 2012). Global North is most often defined as regions of the world that were colonizers or benefited from colonialism (the act of violent political, economic and social exploitation and imposition on a people)—broadly, the United States, Canada, Europe and Australia. Though both Global South and Global North should be understood as political and not solely geographic markers, they are connected to the power and political dynamics of colonialism and so therefore politics of land ownership, control and geography are also at stake (Bhambra, 2014; Chakrabarty, 2008; Sparke, 2007; Spivak, 2003).