Privilege and resistance in the utah bubble: The Combination of Race and Religion

“And then they called me a … racist.” The statement hung over the class as every student’s face turned to meet mine waiting for a response. This situation plays out each semester in my undergraduate schools, society, and diversity class as we discuss White privilege and race as part of the required course for preservice teachers. While many preservice teachers (PSTs) view racism as bad or undesirable, believing themselves to be free of it, they do not understand the larger structures and institutions rooted in White supremacy (Cochran-Smith et al., 2009; Flynn, 2015; Okun, 2011). Despite this being a common situation in many social foundations of education (SFE) courses in teacher preparation programs, there is a unique culture present in Utah that deepens resistance to discussion of certain aspects of oppression and increases White Fatigue (Evans-Winters & Hines, 2015; Flynn, 2015; Goodman, 2011; Okun, 2011). The predominant religion—The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS)—and a predominantly White population have created the ‘Utah Bubble’ which has worked to deepen divides between those inside and outside of the bubble. These constructed hierarchies are important for teachers to identify and work to change (Bell, 2016; Ladson-Billings, 2016; Yosso, 2005). Since White is seen as the ‘norm,’ PSTs may not understand that these structures are problematic nor see who is negatively affected by them (Ladson-Billings, 2016), resulting in alienation of students in their classrooms who do not share the same religious or racial background as the teacher. Students deserve to feel a sense of belonging in the classroom, and it is necessary for teachers to develop spaces where all students are supported.

The purpose of this study was to learn how the culture developed in the ‘Utah Bubble’ may create specific understandings of identity and privilege in preservice undergraduate teacher education students and how students who did not grow up in the ‘Bubble’ may have different understandings based on their experiences elsewhere. The research questions that guided this study were: How have aspects of the students’ socialization influenced their previous ideas?; How have students’ perspectives regarding diversity changed after instruction in the course?; and Are students’ beliefs at the beginning and end of the course consistent with the description of the ’Utah Bubble’?

The term ‘Utah Bubble’ is one used by many in the state who are familiar with the unique culture created within the confines of the dominant race and religion. The largest concentration of members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, more colloquially known as Mormons or LDS, is in Utah, despite the worldwide presence of the religion (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, n.d.). Like many religions, there are specific rules that LDS members follow in their everyday lives like church attendance, service and volunteering, daily prayer and scripture study, tithing 10% of household income, and following the Word of Wisdom, which further expounds on religious daily living standards such as which foods to eat and substances to avoid such as coffee, tobacco, and alcohol (Huerta & Flemmer, 2005). Many members are fastidious in these beliefs and strive to uphold them daily.

Because Utah has such a high population of LDS members, the congregations are established very differently than other places that lack higher membership numbers. Here, smaller congregations with specific boundaries, referred to as wards, contain a bishop and two counselors (Basquiat, 2001). Larger congregations, referred to as stakes, are created when several wards are put together and presided over by a stake president and two counselors. In every community in Utah, one can see how these wards and stakes have been created based on the number of religious buildings that populate different areas of the town. While the population and design of congregations is similarly seen in some communities in Idaho, Arizona, and Wyoming, wards and stakes may cover a much larger geographic area than typically seen in Utah. Additionally, the U.S. Census estimates the population of White, non-Hispanic individuals in Utah at 77.8% (U.S. Census Bureau, 2019). As a further example of White dominance in the religion, the church did not lift its ban on Black men holding the priesthood, one of the highest honors in the church, until 1978.

Each institution in the state of Utah is controlled by people who represent the dominant race and religion, creating a unique culture not replicated elsewhere in the United States. Even LDS members from outside the state are particularly struck by the culture that has been created by this dominance. Dodwell (2003) stated this is primarily due to the lack of understanding of the differences LDS members experience living outside the religious dominance of Utah, while those raised outside of the state do not understand the influences of living inside a state dominated by the faith. This dominance of race and religion works to create and uphold the phenomenon of the ‘Utah Bubble.’ In many cases, members of LDS communities interact mostly with people who hold the same racial and religious identities as themselves. Some of these interactions may be protected due to possible fears associated with individuals outside of the race and LDS religion, setting up the potential for explicit and implicit biases (Sinor, 2011). Huerta and Flemmer (2005) found LDS preservice teachers shared negative stereotypes about individuals and groups whose identities were different from their own, contributing to the development of negative stereotypes of minoritized populations. The lack of understanding of Christian hegemony and privilege—which could be referred to as LDS or Mormon privilege and hegemony in Utah—could create and sustain ideas of education that may be tied to many religious beliefs as well (Huerta & Flemmer, 2005; Schlosser, 2005). Additionally, members have been dissuaded from having debates about their religion in the classroom, making it more difficult for students to understand the privilege they hold (Dodwell, 2003). The White, Mormon culture is what everyone in the state is compared to and judged by, even individuals who hold both of these identities.

Preservice teachers have a variety of misconceptions regarding privilege in general, but hold many beliefs surrounding race in particular. Because the majority of teachers are White, many believe their experiences to be the norm, continuing to uphold Whiteness in the classroom (Applebaum, 2003; Marx, 2004; Reyes & Bishop 2005). Additionally, these students come from largely homogenous communities and they lack experience with individuals who may be racially or, in Utah, religiously different (Dodwell, 2003; Huerta & Flemmer, 2005). This dysconscious racism is then replicated through teachers perpetuating these systems in their own classrooms with students while maintaining the invisibility of it (Anderson, Narum, & Wolf, 2019; Applebaum, 2003; King, 1991). This is how systems of Whiteness have continued to be replicated and maintained in schools.

It is imperative that teacher education programs work to not simply name and illustrate privilege, but also ensure that students intentionally examine their place in these systems and how it upholds oppression. When students feel uncomfortable having conversations about privilege, they tend to avoid discussions regarding oppression and inequity, limiting their opportunities to understand their culpability (Cochran-Smith et al., 2009). Critical analysis of the structures and institutions rooted in Whiteness that afford privilege is essential to understanding complicity and focusing on ways that work towards systemic change in their classrooms (Cohen et al., 2013; Okun, 2011). These dangerous misconceptions about privilege lead to student resistance to Social Foundations course material, which prevents effective analysis and understanding of systems of oppression and the need for social justice education.

In the classroom, preservice teachers exhibit resistance to course material in a variety of ways. Verbal opposition during class discussions is often thought of as the ultimate form of resistance, but there are more insidious forms. Students may blame the oppressed for their situations, focus on more individualized and overt types of racism, question the credibility of sources used, center upon another identity— typically socioeconomic class—and deny complicity in existing systems (Dodwell, 2003; Marx, 2004; Okun, 2011). Students also exhibit rationalized entitlement (Okun, 2011) and may view colorblindness as something to work towards, rather than something to avoid, further cementing this notion in their future classrooms (Sleeter, 2017). There are other contributing factors to resistance seen in classrooms. Some student resistance seen could be the result of White Fatigue, when students acknowledge the individual racism that occurs and view it as solely individual, unaware of the systems and institutions that uphold oppression and White supremacy (Flynn, 2015).

Critical race theory (CRT) and critical Whiteness studies (CWS) can be utilized in Teacher Education programs to generate students who not only understand privilege, but also see themselves as complicit in the systems and institutions rooted in White supremacy. These constructed hierarchies are important for teachers to identify and work to change (Bell, 2016; Ladson-Billings, 2016; Yosso, 2005). Since White is seen as the ‘norm,’ students may not understand that these structures are problematic and see who is affected negatively by them (Ladson-Billings, 2016). Further, CRT refutes White privilege and dominant ideology, working to center voices and experiences of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) (Yosso, 2005). Courses rooted in these theories need to analyze how Whiteness creates and maintains systems of oppression (Applebaum, 2003; Leonardo, 2016). CRT and CWS need to be built into Teacher Education courses in order for students to begin to lose the misconceptions they come into the program with, further understanding their complicity in the systems.

The use of social justice pedagogy in teacher education programs works to embed the frameworks of CWS and CRT. Instructors should share their own understandings of social justice and positionality, use multiple perspectives and narratives of historically excluded groups when developing curriculum, and consider common student misconceptions and biases that may be present in the classroom (Beck, 2020; Boyd & Noblit, 2015; Harbin et al., 2019). While a classroom can never be a completely safe space for all students simultaneously, instructors must create classrooms where all students are held accountable and work to eliminate microaggressions and uncivil behavior during class sessions (Harbin, Thurber, & Bandy, 2019). Constructing SFE courses in this manner models specific pedagogical practices that PSTs can replicate in their future classrooms.

Social justice education (SJE) creates changes in PSTs which initiates favorable learning environments for their future students. Most PSTs frame their understandings of the classroom environment in the ways they were taught when they were a student, which can lead to dissonance as they experience communities vastly different from those in which they grew up (Baldwin, Buchanan, & Rudisill, 2007; Lynch & Curtner-Smith, 2019). This also feeds into PSTs socialized biases. SJE requires PSTs to analyze their experiences and understandings and confront biases and stereotypes they hold (Baldwin, Buchanan, & Rudisill, 2007; Boyd & Noblit, 2015; Gorski & Dalton, 2020; Riley & Solic, 2017). PSTs find this process continuous, needing to reflect on their own understandings and experiences, their own positionality, and acknowledge teaching consistently changes (Borrero, Ziauddin, & Ahn, 2018). As teachers use curriculum that represent students’ backgrounds and provide counternarratives to dominant perspectives, it allows students to feel included and integral in the classroom (Borrero, Ziauddin, & Ahn, 2018; Butler, Coffey, & Young, 2021). If PSTs create and refine their teaching practices based in social justice, they bring these ideas into their own classrooms, teaching their students in a similar way, increasing the likelihood of transformative outcomes within the classroom, school, and community.

I am a White, middle-class, cisgender woman who grew up in a smaller town situated in the farmlands of Northwest Ohio. Like many of my current students, I had little daily interactions with people who differed from my racial identity. Religion wasn’t explicitly discussed in my town, but it was assumed that the majority of people belonged to one of the many Protestant denominations whose churches dotted the town landscape. To be White and presumed Christian was the norm. However, this changed when I began college as a first-generation student and was required to take a course similar to the course I currently teach. My undergraduate SFE course was taught by a professor whose racial identity was different than mine. I grew my understandings about identity and privilege and was able to see that some of the things I was socialized in were incorrect, discriminatory, and rooted in deficit ideas. My understanding and adherence to social justice ideas and teachings continued to grow as I began teaching high school English and continued my study in a Master’s of Education program. My growth in these understandings further grew as I completed a Ph.D. in Social Foundations of Education and began teaching full time in higher education.

I recount this as an illustration to show that my background and understandings were not that different from the students I teach at my current institution. While there was not one dominant religion in my hometown, Christian privilege was present in all aspects of life. The interesting situation I now find myself in is acceptance by others in regards to race, but not religion. Our family currently would religiously identify as agnostic or perhaps nonreligious. This is an interesting experience when religion is connected to every institution and used to develop many different business and personal relationships. I have had some students state that many might assume that I am LDS, and therefore be ‘LDS passing’, but other students who are more devout refute this idea mightily. My family may appear to fit into the Utah Bubble, but we do not. These understandings drove my desire to see the study’s outcomes, but worked to separate me from my students.

Before collecting and analyzing the data, I journaled about my own understandings of race and religion in the Utah Bubble to ensure I had directly identified my specific beliefs in order to keep them from unconsciously influencing the study. I kept these notes open as I interviewed students so that I was asking follow up questions from the students’ experiences shared in their answers to the planned interview questions and not falling back on my own understandings.

The participants consisted of students enrolled in two undergraduate sections of a required Social Foundations of Education course at a regional public university in Utah during the Spring 2020 semester. All participants were Elementary Education or Secondary Education majors. The course utilized face-to-face classroom delivery until midMarch due to the COVID-19 pandemic when instruction moved to synchronous remote using Zoom. There were 29 participants from a total of 62 students (Table 1). Twenty-one participants completed both the surveys and interview, while eight participants only participated in the interview. Student assignments from all 29 participants were used in the document analysis. Participants were asked to self-identify their sex, race, religion, and home state. Four men and 25 women participated in the study. All participants identified as White, except for one woman who identified as Hispanic. Religiously, participants primarily identified as LDS and from Utah; however, several students came from outside the state and participated in different religions or identified as nonreligious.

Case study method was utilized in order to inform how student identities and socialization influenced their understandings of identity and privilege prior to entering the course and investigate how these ideas many have evolved over the course of the semester. This method also provided for investigations of real world context and the complexities that arose (Yin, 2014). The research became an interaction between the researcher and the case (Stake, 1997). In this mixed-methods design I utilized two surveys, document analysis, and student interviews to collect participants’ understandings about identity and privilege and the potential influence of the Utah Bubble on this knowledge. The survey was administered using Qualtrics, and the questions required students to rate understandings, opinions, and comfort with various topics of identity and privilege on a Likert scale of 1-5: 1-strongly agree, 2-agree, 3-neutral or I don’t know, 4-disagree, 5-strongly disagree. The surveys contained the exact same questions with the first survey given the second week of the course and the final survey given after the course was finished (Table 2). The first survey was used to identify the understandings and beliefs students entered the course with, while the final survey was used to indicate changes in student beliefs about diversity, identity, and privilege. Four course assignments were utilized in the document analysis. Six assignments (student reflection papers) were collected for the study; however, only reflections on White Privilege, Race and Ethnicity, and Religion were used in the analysis for this part of the study. The Cultural Archeology of Self paper was also collected as part of the document data. The assignments provided details regarding what students took out of each unit of study and their understandings of identity and privilege at that point in time. These assignments provided students’ thoughts on course material in “real time,” as opposed to the interviews that were conducted after the semester was over when students may have forgotten some of the material presented in the course. The final data point came from interviews focusing on new understandings students developed, specifically surrounding privilege, which were conducted after the course was complete. I also worked to prevent participants’ positionality from negatively impacting the interviews, so the same set of questions was utilized for each interview, with deviations from the original questions occurring only when something needed further clarification. The interviews took place over Zoom using the recording feature and were uploaded to Otter.ai for transcription.

Survey data were compared by item, as the beginning-of-the-semester survey was analyzed against the end-of-semester survey. Table 2 provides an illustration of students’ responses on each survey. The documents were analyzed with a researcher-created a priori list and coded with the Dedoose software. The a priori codes used were: Utah Bubble, defensiveness of privilege, minimization of racism, new understandings, privilege, race, religion, rejection, resistance, and White privilege. Additional codes were added during the coding process when gaps were found, such as privileged resistance, individual racism, and culture and doctrine as subcodes under the a priori code Utah Bubble. The interviews were coded using the same list.

The survey asked for participants’ perceptions on 30 questions pertaining to different types of identity. For the purposes of this study, only items that pertained to race, religion, and values and beliefs were analyzed, which left 15 survey items. There were several survey questions where participants’ understandings or ideas changed after the semester’s instruction. An increase emerged regarding participants’ strongly agreeing that diversity should be taught in the classroom. After learning about different types of diversity that exist within schools, participants’ beliefs about sharing the same identity backgrounds of their students shifted to show they believed they would not know their student populations until they had been hired in a district. Prior to the end-of-semester survey, many participants reported they did not feel it was important to understand their students’ identity backgrounds. There was also an increase of participants who strongly agreed with this statement in the end-of-semester survey. Participants’ ideas and understandings about racism also changed throughout the semester. In the first survey, 17 participants indicated racism was a real thing currently existing in society (strongly agree/agree), but by the second survey showed a greater understanding of how racism is embedded in the systems and institutions of the U.S, as 20 participants agreed or strongly agreed with the statement. Participants also indicated changed beliefs in understanding the barriers or lack of ‘equal chances’ in life, along with the understanding that people who receive public assistance are not taking advantage of the system.

An interesting finding in the survey appeared contradictory. In the end of semester survey, many participants indicated they believed themselves to be capable of understanding and knowing their biases; therefore, 18 participants felt they would be able to teach students without those biases getting in the way. However, in the same survey, 16 participants indicated that they would be uncomfortable being around individuals who have different beliefs than they do compared to 11 participants responding in this manner earlier in the semester, which could point to the influence of the Utah Bubble. This contradiction may show that participants only feel confident in the abilities they developed over the semester in certain situations, like their classrooms and not in other spaces.

Several specific themes were analyzed in the documents including culture and religion in the Utah Bubble, privilege, and resistance.

Culture and Religion in the Utah Bubble. Participants had different emotions and understandings tied to the greater culture that creates the Utah Bubble. Several mentioned their family being ostracized when they did not attend church regularly or when they left the church altogether. The participants indicated confusion at this because the LDS doctrine proclaims members should love everyone, but the actions of some in their communities countered this belief. Other participants described the harshness and toxicity that the Bubble perpetuates throughout the state, but still maintained they felt safer and more protected operating within the confines of this culture. Participant 18 stated: “I do travel a lot and I do notice the Utah Bubble and the culture we grow up in. It is a different culture but sometimes I think it is a better culture for me because I don’t know where I would be if I didn’t have this in my life.” Several others commented on how different the LDS religion was in Utah when compared to other states they lived in. In particular, Participant 4 described these differences and what it may do to members of the faith.

Several participants described members not living up to the basic tenets of their faith and being more concerned with appearance. Participant 2 stated the expectations and beauty standards were especially problematic in the singles ward, a ward specifically designated for younger unmarried adults associated with a college community. She also saw these ideals of Whiteness upheld in her own family when her stepfather refused to move to a town in Arizona close to the Navajo Nation reservation. Instead, the family lived in a small, predominantly White border town in Utah, and her stepfather commuted 1.5 hours each way in order to keep the family in a “safe” town.

Privilege. For the purposes of this analysis, White and Christian privilege were specifically coded in the documents, despite the course covering several other types of privilege. Christian privilege was a larger code that encompassed all denominations, including LDS. Many participants indicated they had not known about Christian privilege prior to entering the class. Furthermore, students were now understanding that if they were Christian, it held privilege, with several participants who self-identified as LDS stating they had heightened privilege throughout the state. Many participants described their religious identity as most important. “I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, or abbreviated LDS. This is who I am and what I stand for. When people ask me who I am, I don’t think ‘White’ or ‘female,’ I think of my religion and who I truly am on the inside” (Participant 27). Because this identity was so prominent in the participants’ daily lives, they had not thought about people outside of the LDS religion and the effects that lack of privilege had on them. Participant 13 stated:

Several participants mentioned feeling sheltered because the communities they were raised in were predominately or all-White, and most people in the community shared the same religion. This created an environment for many participants where interacting with anyone who did not share their same race and religion was uncomfortable or avoided altogether. They also indicated not knowing the racial privileges they held. Participant 29 wrote about how her biracial sister, who identifies as Mexican, had people stare at her suspiciously when she went to different stores or restaurants. The participant stated in a reflection assignment, “she did not fit the blonde hair, blue-eye perfect Mormon stereotype.” Many of the participants who went on a mission for the LDS church revealed during this time they were able to gain many new understandings about their racial and religious privilege, especially those who grew up in Utah.

Resistance. Despite many participants’ understandings about race and religion evolving throughout the semester, there was quite a bit of resistance stated in their assignments. All students were encouraged to write their responses freely, and they would not be graded on the ideas or opinions expressed. Much of this seemed to stem from the focus on the individual level of racism. A few participants conceded that racism was still present, but it was the actions of a few individuals, not the whole of society. Others were resistant because they deemed White privilege as erasing their hard work or the hard work of their families. Participant 6 detailed an upbringing steeped in poverty, which led him to believe that privilege, particularly White privilege, was something he did not have.

This was the strongest form of resistance the instructor experienced by a participant in the study, but several other students indicated their initial discomfort with discussing Whiteness and White Privilege. Several others indicated people are discriminated against because of the choices made in their lives.

Participants completed a one-time interview over Zoom in order to answer specific questions about their understandings learned throughout the semester, how they viewed their own privilege, and their perceptions of the Utah Bubble. The three larger themes found in the document analysis— culture and religion in the Utah Bubble, privilege, and resistance— were used when analyzing the interview data.

Culture and Religion in the Utah Bubble. There were several different perceptions of the Utah Bubble including how it is formed and maintained, how participants did or did not fit into it, and how it is viewed by participants differently. Several participants pointed to the creation of the Bubble as the culture that has developed through the dominance of the LDS population in the state. This was a common identification both by those who resided in Utah and those who were raised outside of the state. When asked which characteristics participants would identify as making up the Utah Bubble, Participant 3 stated:

Several of the participants raised outside of Utah had similar understandings of the Utah Bubble, but very different experiences, even when they fit the dominant religion and race. Participant 10 stated:

All participants discussed how the Bubble creates the culture, which many times seems to be in line with the way in which people interpret the doctrine differently. Despite the doctrine of the church being the same regardless of where one was raised, being surrounded by people who share your faith creates a different culture from those who were raised outside the state and were a minority religion in their communities. Participants who grew up in Utah and were not LDS or now consider themselves ex- LDS identified the Bubble as problematic, especially for those who do not fit into it or for those who the culture does not fit. One participant from California who identified as LDS explains:

The social norms of the Utah Bubble were described as difficult. Participants who stated they fit into the Bubble were quick to claim they hoped they actually did not fit into it because they felt they had different understandings of race, culture, and religion that may separate them from others who embraced the Utah Bubble culture. “If you didn’t follow the social norms you would get punished or shamed by institutions. Primarily, the institutions I saw do this were my family, school, friend groups, and church” (Participant 19). Others discussed being completely pushed out of the culture because they did not fit the perceived norms. Participant 25 stated:

It is clear that the Utah Bubble is perceived differently based on the participants’ experiences. Some participants did not mind being placed into this culture, while others balked at the idea. A few participants clearly never were considered part of the Bubble because of their race and religion, like Participant 1.

Privilege. During the semester, students in the course learned about different types of privilege including White privilege and Christian privilege, which could also be identified as LDS privilege in Utah. Some students did not believe they had White privilege specifically, while others came into the class with some understandings of it. Two participants stated they understood their racial privilege primarily because they served LDS missions in South American countries (Participant 10; Participant 22). While serving in these countries, they had many experiences where they were the only person of their race. Despite this, they still had situations where people believed stereotypes about them, like being wealthy because they were White Americans. It was in those moments when participants understood the connotations of privilege based on their skin color. Others described having heard the term before but not understanding all the aspects of it or how it functioned in daily life (Participant 5). Participant 1, who identified as Hispanic, had the clearest understandings about White privilege tied to religious privilege in the state:

Most participants did not have large understandings about privilege before coming into class, but developed understandings during the semester, particularly about religious privilege. Student understandings about religious privilege were also very different. While participants who identified as LDS and grew up in Utah recognized the privilege they held, those who identified as LDS and grew up outside of the state did not share the same religious privilege and were often a minority in their community. Participant 10 recalled one specific time she felt discriminated against at school:

Religious privilege or the loss of religious privilege also functioned in various ways for participants who grew up in Utah. Several other participants discussed leaving the religion or how family members left and were ostracized by their neighbors, friends, and, sometimes, family.

Many participants discussed changes in their understandings throughout the course about privilege and what types of privilege they held. Participant 23 stated: “I think I definitely became more aware of it. So I feel like I can recognize it a lot better. I feel like what I’ve learned from that is the little things that I can do to kind of help that.” Participant 26 stated she knew something like privilege existed when talking about race and social class, but didn’t know the proper terminology for it. When developing these new understandings, several participants mentioned the study of the school-to-prison pipeline and criminal justice system created eye-opening moments for them where they could not deny White privilege or Whiteness any longer.

Resistance. Resistance to the material taught in the course was seen in several different ways. Participant 2 discussed interactions she had with Black women at a business she managed in Las Vegas. While the participant was willing to learn and exhibited several changes in understanding throughout the course, she did not acknowledge how she may have microaggressed against her employees or had biases about them as Black women. Participant 24 dismissed race as a whole, citing social class differences between him and his roommates, who were men of color. Two participants dismissed White privilege entirely, refusing to think about the concept. Participant 25 stated: “This whole White privilege thing is so frustrating to me because I don’t see it. I don’t understand it. I don’t know why people bring it up and talk about it.” Several participants also discussed how they had playmates of all different races growing up, which never led them to thinking they were “different,” setting the participants up for colorblind thinking. Others described racism as something that was on an individual level, not an institutional or systemic level. If they were “not racist” then to them racism was not something they felt they had to act to oppose.

This research, conducted in two undergraduate Social Foundations courses, specifically centered on race and religion. Most of the participants believed they fit into the Utah Bubble based on their race and religious affiliation. Students entered the course with different understandings about privilege and oppression. During the instructional time, there were many different forms of resistance students exhibited throughout the course; however, many reported changed beliefs or new understandings as a result of the learning opportunities. There were three primary themes found in the analysis of the data: culture and religion in the Utah Bubble, privilege, and resistance.

Each of the participants had different experiences and understandings about the Utah Bubble. The Bubble was described as White, middle-class, and LDS, which mirrors the dominant groups in the United States—White, upper middle class/wealthy, and Christian. Many participants enjoyed the privilege they received by fitting into the Bubble and being part of the dominant culture of the state. They reaped benefits from their dominance, like solid social ties to the community, assistance from those in their wards and stakes, and receiving the benefit of the doubt in most situations (Basquiat, 2001). The participants who may not have had these benefits when living outside of Utah were automatically afforded them upon their arrival in the state (Dodwell, 2003). The participants who were not LDS or had left the religion were not able to maintain social ties as easily and faced scrutiny from neighbors, family members, and others.

Despite the privilege the LDS participants had, the majority of the participants described why they did not want to fit into the Utah Bubble. This could be tied to their growing understandings about culture and the oppression that occurs in the conjunction of race and religion. The expectations put upon those who fit into the Bubble may have been extreme, as the culture had been described as toxic by some. The doctrine and the Word of Wisdom specified tenets that members should follow, but the focus on more superficial aspects embedded within the culture was harmful to even the most devout participants in the study (Huerta & Flemmer, 2005). This culture also upholds the racial divide and makes it difficult for people to interact with individuals who are racially and religiously different. While small interactions at school, at work, and in the general public are experienced, there is a social segregation that exists between LDS and non- LDS individuals. Fear of losing privilege was a factor in upholding the dominant identities, even when participants were aware of their privilege (Sinor, 2011). However, participants who were now or always outside of the Utah Bubble explicitly stated how these privileges continued to uphold the dominance in the state.

Participants began the course with different understandings and beliefs about privilege, and many changed those beliefs during the semester. While the majority of the participants had limited knowledge of privilege, most reported learning about Christian privilege for the first time. Religious identity was thought to be most important by many participants, but they had not thought about people from other religious beliefs. This could be because like some other religions, the LDS religion states that it is the one true religion, casting aside acknowledgment of others’ religious beliefs. Anyone who does not fit the racial or religious majority may find themselves oppressed. While the participants who were LDS but not raised in Utah believed they had been oppressed occasionally, they still received privilege based on race and the assumption they were Christian. Religious beliefs also lent themselves to stereotypes about populations who differed from the dominant religion and race (Huerta & Flemmer, 2005; Schlosser, 2005).

Minimization of racism, ‘reverse racism’ arguments, privileged resistance, and rationalized entitlement (Okun, 2011) were recorded during the study. Participants initially minimized racism, largely because many only thought of individual acts of racism, not the structures and institutions that maintain White supremacy (Flynn, 2015). Some participants exhibited privileged resistance and dysconscious racism through denial of institutional racism and defensiveness of the privileges they viewed as earned (Anderson, Narum, & Wolf, 2019; King, 1991). These ideas were deemed as rationalized entitlement as many participants also believed in a binary where White was ‘good’ and minoritized populations made ‘bad choices’ (Okun, 2011). Participants who had spent a fair amount of time in a population where they were the minority developed greater understandings of oppression and racism (Baldwin, Buchanan, & Rudisill, 2007; Riley & Solic, 2017). They also indicated their own complicity in systems they were part of, which was counter to the experiences that other participants had. Those who had little contact with people different from their racial and religious identity thought of their identities as the norm (Applebaum, 2003; Marx, 2004; Reyes & Bishop 2005). Throughout the semester, there were numerous topics studied from the perspectives of minoritized people in order for PSTs to understand how privilege functions in various institutions and continuously harms anyone who does not fit the dominant populations (Boyd & Noblit, 2015; Cochran-Smith et al., 2009; Cohen et al., 2013, Gorski & Dalton, 2020; Okun, 2011). Several participants were able to understand their own identity and how they can work to change institutions they operate within to change the overall culture found in the Utah Bubble (Borrero et al., 2018; Butler et al., 2021; Harbin et al., 2019). Many participants also indicated their desire to learn more about various privileges they held.

Resistance was seen in several ways during the study. Some participants were resistant to the idea of White privilege, citing it to be something they did not believe in or that other identities like socioeconomic class were more prominent and larger issues than race (Dod- well, 2003; Marx, 2004; Okun, 2011). Other participants indicated at the beginning of the study they believed racism to be more of an individual thing, and if people could just learn not to be racist, then racism would not be as large of a problem. Participants seemed moved to utilize that knowledge, but they may not have understood how they were complicit in the various systems, possibly showing White Fatigue (Flynn, 2015). Several participants believed if they were simply not intentionally racist, then they were inherently good people, and that was their contribution to working towards combating racism, essentially maintaining somewhat of a colorblind mentality (Sleeter, 2017).

It is important to note that even though students showed some changes in beliefs and ideas held as they interacted with the course material, the course instruction was the only intervention provided. If this study was replicated, another group of students may not show similar results. Additionally, knowledge about White privilege and Christian privilege students held prior to entering the course was not measured, which could affect the perceived growth of understandings during the semester. Those who came in with knowledge about racial and/or religious privilege may not have gained enough additional understandings to expand their knowledge considerably.

Based on the results of this study, instructors in the field of teacher education must understand how religion can influence students’ perceptions of identity and privilege. In Utah, educators need to recognize the cultural aspects present within the Utah Bubble and understand that students who hold dominant racial and religious identities can find such a culture restrictive and oppressive, similar to students who fall outside of these dominant identities. However, instruction needs to focus on how this culture works to exclude minoritized races and religions and upholds institutions and systems that benefit those who fall into the Utah Bubble. Despite the growing populations of racially and religiously diverse people throughout the state, if those who hold racial and religious privilege do not recognize the harmful nature of these systems, the hierarchy and culture established in the state will not change. Such a change needs to be spurred by those who hold the privilege in order to shift the culture within the state.

While Utah is a unique state where the White LDS culture is not replicated to such a degree in other states, there are undoubtedly other areas of the country where religion provides a deep influence over student understandings of their identity, especially when students hold their religious identity as most prominent. Many social foundations of education courses focus on racial identity and privilege, but religious identity and privilege is just as important to study. Religious beliefs have been seen as private or something that individuals should not debate with others, but it is only through sharing these identities that others will be able to learn about and understand their own beliefs and those of others. Furthermore, many religions share specific core beliefs that are similar, rendering different faiths more alike than may generally be perceived.

Educating students in ideas of diversity, privilege, and identity can be the first steps to creating awareness of the issue and educating individuals to create change within their own spheres of influence. Teacher educators, and especially those in social foundations, need to instruct students in confronting these systems of oppression, regardless of type of identity, and how preservice teachers can work to eliminate them in their classrooms. Moving students to a place where they can see oppression despite their privilege and understand their role in these systems take time. While it is not something that can be completely accomplished within the confines of a one-semester course, it defines the trajectory for students to continue learning about their own identities, those of others, and how to use this information to change institutions.