Search

This research addresses the guiding autoethnographic question: "What three key institutional incidents/conditions inform my Black scholar-activism for predominantly White education in this historical moment?" Moreover, it applies autoethnography to illuminate three key incidents/conditions involving: (1) predominantly White undergraduates; (2) top-level predominately White male university administrators; and (3) White school community leaders in this historical moment (i.e. within the last 4 years). The research is organized to begin with a new poem and proceed to illuminate: (a) the current, observed historical context, (b) the application of critical race theory for illuminating my lived experiences of this context, (c) the rationale for applying autoethnography in this research, and (d) the three key incidents/conditions. It concludes by returning to the guiding question, critical race theory, related implications and rationales.

This article uses critical theoretical methods to reconsider the potential of "Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka" in urban education. It finds "Brown" as a potentially useful tool for coconstructing critical race pedagogy of hope that involves (a) Socratic questioning of the endemic nature of racism and power dynamics of public education and the political discursive innovations of "Brown"; (b) a commitment to justice in urban education for all stakeholders, including stakeholders representing injustices linking race to class and gender; and (c) tragicomic hope--locating, critiquing, and ultimately engaging the action of hope to sustain participation in the struggle for distributive justice in public education.

The purpose of this article is to revisit "Brown" as a paradigmatic understanding of social justice and its barriers, by reconsidering "Brown" in light of the three moral pillars of democracy identified by Cornel West (2004). West maintains that authentic deep democracy is grounded in three fundamental capacities and dispositions, or pillars: (a) Socratic questioning, (b) a prophetic commitment to justice, and (c) tragicomic hope. West's articulation of these pillars constitutes 20 a philosophical framework for the exploration of the basic demands of justice in a democratic society. These moral pillars can also offer useful insights into this phase of living exploration of Brown and its central place in educational studies.

Educational research suggests that the response biases of educators can negatively influence student performance and aptitude (Blanchett 2006; Bloom 2001; Darity et al. 2001; Gordon 2005; and Skiba et al. 2000). This article introduces "good enough methods" for autoethnography as an alternative approach to this problem. Luttrell (2000, 13) conceptualizes "good enough methods" researchers as those seeking to understand and appreciate difference and accept errors often made because of their blind spots and intense involvement. Evidence of this approach via autoethnography is provided here from cases of graduate student-practitioners and their Intergroup/Intercultural Education professor. Moreover, the article highlights (a) a connection of autoethnography to research in Education, (b) five key decisions of a "good enough methods" approach to autoethnography, and (c) how this approach can be applied to expose and address educator biases relating to "the matrix" (Hill-Collins 1990) of race, class, and gender. (Contains 1 note.)

This manuscript begins by distinguishing the common structural and cultural arguments that tend to guide popular urban achievement gap research. It highlights Jencks and Phillips, and Payne, as two cases of popular texts followed by critical responses to them. It concludes by imagining a compass to guide burgeoning scholars toward reading into research “more complexly” so as to enhance and proliferate critiques1 of popular cultural and structural arguments and to dissuade abrupt, myopic, and polemic responses. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]