Written Analysis (3-5 pages, double spaced, 12pt font)Required Essay Questions? Using your three county level maps(1940,1980,2010) We must refer to both chapter 11 textbook & PDF reading Spatial p

Written Analysis (3-5 pages, double spaced, 12pt font)Required Essay Questions?

Using your three county level maps(1940,1980,2010)

We must refer to both chapter 11 textbook & PDF reading

Spatial patterns

Describe the overall geographic distribution of your chosen ethnic group. And focus on spatial structure, not lists of states or counties.

Where are concentrations highest and lowest?

Are patterns primarily regional, urban-rural,or both?

Change over time

Compare the three maps (1940,1980,2010)

Which regions show strong continuity?

Which regions show noticeable change?

Identity VS Ancestry (article based)

Perez and Hirschman emphasize that census data measure identity rather than ancestry, and that identity is subjective and context-dependent. (pages 3-4)

How does this distinction help explain at least one spatial pattern or change you observe in your maps?

Identify one region where interpreting the map as “identity” rather than “ancestry” is especially important.

Census classification and institutional effects (article based)

The article argues that racial and ethnic categories are shaped by institutional and political forces, including census definitions and classification practices (pp. 6-7, 11-12).

Give one example from your maps where census classification, not migration alone, may influence the spatial pattern you see.

Briefly explain how classification practices might shape this pattern

Required Essay Questions?

Using your three county level maps(1940,1980,2010)

We must refer to both chapter 11 textbook & PDF reading

Spatial patterns

Describe the overall geographic distribution of your chosen ethnic group. And focus on spatial structure, not lists of states or counties.

Where are concentrations highest and lowest?

Are patterns primarily regional, urban-rural,or both?

Change over time

Compare the three maps (1940,1980,2010)

Which regions show strong continuity?

Which regions show noticeable change?

Identity VS Ancestry (article based)

Perez and Hirschman emphasize that census data measure identity rather than ancestry, and that identity is subjective and context-dependent. (pages 3-4)

How does this distinction help explain at least one spatial pattern or change you observe in your maps?

Identify one region where interpreting the map as “identity” rather than “ancestry” is especially important.

Census classification and institutional effects (article based)

The article argues that racial and ethnic categories are shaped by institutional and political forces, including census definitions and classification practices (pp. 6-7, 11-12).

Give one example from your maps where census classification, not migration alone, may influence the spatial pattern you see.

Briefly explain how classification practices might shape this pattern.

Formatting & scale

Maps must show the contiguous 48 states, and be inserted into your essay as Figures with short clear captions.Extra regional zoom-ins are allowed for discussion.

Cite the book chapter or article page by page number when relevant

Possible Thesis statement

The 1940-2010 maps of the Black population show that racial landscapes in the United States are not simply demographic facts but products of historical memory, institutional classification, and cultural narratives. The persistence of the Black Belt, the rise of urban concentrations, and the changing visibility of Black identity reflect the processes described in chapter 11 and by Perez & Hirschman, who argue that landscapes and identities are actively constructed rather than naturally occurring.

1.Spatial Patterns (using maps)

Across all three years 1940, 1980,2010 the spatial distribution of the Black population shows a highly regional structure rather than a random or evenly dispersed pattern. The most striking feature is the persistent concentration in the southeast,forming a broad, continuous band of high-percentage counties often referred to as the Black Belt. This region stands out  because the pattern is not just a cluster of isolated counties but a coherent spatial corridor, indicating a deep historical relationship between Black communities and the  agricultural landscapes of the Deep South. Outside the southeast, the maps show very low percentages across most of the West, Midwest, and Northeast in 1940. By 1980 and 2010, however, new concentrations appeared in major metropolitan areas ( Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, Los Angeles, and population growth outside the South is primarily urban rather than rural.)  

Overall, the spatial structure is both regional and urban-rural:

Regional in the Southwest, where high-percentage counties form a continuous landscape.

Urban elsewhere, where Black populations cluster in large cities surrounded by low-percentage rural counties.

2.Change Over Time (1940,1980,2010)

Strong Continuity: The most stable region across all three maps is the Southeastern Black Belt. From 1940 to 2010, this region remained the largest and most consistent concentration of Black population. Even though percentages shift slightly, the overall pattern, dense, continuous, and regionally cohesive, remains intact.

Noticeable Change ( two things stand out):

The Great Migration (visible by 1980)

By 1980, large urban concentrations appeared in the Midwest and Northeast, reflecting the movement of millions of Black Americans out of the rural South into industrial cities. These new concentrations are sharply urban, not regional.

Urbanization and Reverse Migration (visible by 2010)

By 2010, the Southeast still dominated, but new growth appeared in Southern metropolitan areas (Atlanta, Charlotte, Houston, Dallas).Meanwhile, some rural southern counties show slight declines. This reflects the late 20th century reverse migration back to the South, but now into cities rather than plantations.

The maps show a shift from rural concentration (1940)--> urban dispersion (1980)--> urban Southern growth (2010).

3.Identity VS. Ancestry (Perez & Hirschman , P 3-4)

Perez and Hirschman argue that the census measures identity, not ancestry, and that identity is context-dependent. This distinction helps explain why the Black Belt remains so visible even after decades of migration. Many Black Americans who left the South for Northern cities still identify as Black regardless of mixed ancestry, generational distance, or geographic relocation. Identity remains stable even when ancestry becomes more complex.

Region where identity matters most

A strong example is the urban Midwest, especially cities like Chicago and Detroit. The Black populations in these cities are largely descendants of southern migrants. Their ancestry is tied to the rural South, but their identity is shaped by urban northern environments. If the census measured ancestry instead of identity, these cities might appear less “ Black” on the map, because many residents have multigenerational mixed backgrounds. But because the census records self-identified race, these cities show up as major black population centers. But because the census records self-identified race, these cities show up as major Black population centers.

This demonstrates perez & Hirschman’s point: identity is socially constructed and shaped by context, and the map reflects identity, not lineage.

4.Census Classification & Institutional Effects (pp.6-7,11-12)

Perez and Hirschman emphasize that census categories are shaped by institutional decisions, not just population behavior. My maps show a clear examples of this:

Examples of my of map:

Between 1980 and 2010, the census shifted from older terms like “ Negro” to “Black”, and later to “ Black alone” vs. “ Black in combination,” These changes affect how people are counted. In some countries, especially in the west and parts of the Northeast, the percentage of Black population appears to decline slightly between 1980 and 2010 even though migration patterns do not fully explain this.

How classification shapes the pattern

When the census introduced the option to identify with more than one race, some individuals who previously identified as “Black” began identifying as multiracial. This institutional change can make the Black population appear smaller in certain counties even without actual out‑migration. In other words, the map changes because the category changed, not because the people moved.

This directly supports the article’s argument that census categories produce the patterns we see, rather than simply recording them.