This study seeks to change ways of knowing urban education in the broader context of education, politics, society, and in research.  It would not be enough to seek to change just one aspect of urban education knowledge because each of these components is connected.  With this goal, Critical Race Theory is the theoretical framework that guides the research and how the information gathered is analyzed.  Paolo Freire states, “Praxis is reflection and action upon the world in order to transform it” (Freire, 1970). I am interested in positive change in my research topic and generating, “a new understanding of what constitutes legitimate knowledge” (Davis and Harrison, 2013). Ultimately, I will utilize CRT as a theoretical framework because it seeks to, “include a vision of society in which the distribution of resources is equitable, and all members are physically and psychologically safe and secure...and should be democratic participatory, inclusive, and affirming of human agency and human capacities for working collaboratively to create change" (Bell, 2007).   

The primary theory that will guide my research is Critical Race Theory.  In this section I will focus on a critique of CRT including a discussion of my positionality and intersectionality, defining the purpose of CRT in my research, a discussion of the pros and cons of the theory, and finally how my research will contribute to furthering the academic discussion of CRT in the field of education.    

To begin my discussion of CRT and how it forms the basis for my research, it would be appropriate to discuss my positionality and intersectionality not just on how it pertains to my career, but also my place in society.  Kimberlé Crenshaw explains what intersectionality is by saying that it is a metaphor for how multiple forms of inequality will compound and create obstacles that are not understood even by those within a marginalized group.  Therefore, understanding a person’s intersectionality helps to understand their problems in society and move toward a socially just society (NAIS, 2018). My positionality or my world view and my intersectionality help to explain why I chose CRT as the theory that guides my research  

.  I am forty-six years old, Caucasian, lesbian, mother, wife, and Christian.  I have lived in the city of St. Louis for half of my life with my wife.  The first half of my life I lived with my parents who are still together in the suburbs of St. Louis.  Although the people around me were upper middle class growing up, my family was on the edge of lower middle class.  Growing up I remember my parents struggling to keep the heat turned on, needing to use food stamps, and buying clothes from Goodwill.  I think this impacted me in ways that I am still unpacking today.  My parents never sat down and explained things to me, but I could tell that we were different from the other families in the neighborhood.  I think I gained a perspective of feeling less than those around me.  When I was very young, I wanted to have what my peers had; however, as I got older, I met other people who were like me and started to rebel against the idea of consumerism and gained a mistrust of wealth.  My parents raised me to treat all people with love and respect and to believe that God created all of us with equity.  Even if the world did not treat people with equity, we should.   The relationships that I cultivated were with people who were like me and many of those relationships were with African Americans and kids who lived in the city.  I felt accepted and understood by these friends.    

When I went to college I did the same thing, I met people who were like me and wanted to change the world.  I also met other lesbians for the first time.  This was something I had known about myself for a long time but had never expressed to anyone.  Eventually, I met my wife through some of the friends I had made at college.  She and I clicked right away and have been together now for twenty-five years.  She is my perfect life partner.  After all this time we are practically the same person.  Our relationship has always been wonderful, but the stress of being in a gay relationship from outside entities has not been wonderful.  When I told my parents I was in a gay relationship, they called me foul names and kicked me out of the house.  After years of me trying to rebuild our relationship, my parents refused to support my marriage, and my family turned their back on us.  I had to work so hard to rebuild those relationships over the years and I do not think that things will ever be like they would if I were married to a man.  When I told my family that I was pregnant with our son, everything changed.  They started to support us and wanted to be involved in our lives.  They had a baby shower for us where my eldest uncle made a speech about how excited he was for our son Oskar to come into the family. 

All these experiences with my family have shaped who I am and propel me to make the world more equitable.  I fully believe that these experiences in my childhood and young adulthood made me well suited to teaching in an urban setting.  I have not had the same life experiences as my students, but the life experiences I have had allow me to empathize and understand the need for social justice in our world.  I would also say that the intersectionality of growing up lower middle-class in an upper middle-class community and the combination of homophobia in my family and in society created a person that fights for the rights of those that are disenfranchised.    

Even though my school district has never had a policy discriminating against gay people, I have always been wary of telling people about myself.  I had been teaching for over ten years before I told the people I worked with.  I did not tell my students until after I had been teaching for thirteen years.  I finally decided that it was not fair to myself or my students that I continue to hide who I am.  Just as CRT would argue, it is important to have visibility.  I came out to my students on the first day of school and was surprised that most did not react at all.  Some had questions, but mostly they accepted me and wanted to know what kind of teacher I was going to be.  I believe that being part of a marginalized group and part of the majority group gave me a unique intersectionality and perspective on society and specifically education.  Ultimately, this perspective has helped me to become a self-reflective person and a patient person.  I will continue to fight for change in my world and society.    

CRT was born during the 1960s and 1970s from the minds of many legal scholars such as Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Alan Freeman, Richard Degado, Cheryl Harris, Charles R. Lawrence III, Mari Matsuda, and Patricia J Williams (Ansell, 2008). Their collective interest in eroding racism in American society started in the field of law, but has transcended to help all fields, including education, to use critical theory to identify the impact of racism on systems in our society. Within the context of education and for my research, I will utilize the definitions from Delgado (2023) and Ladson-Billings (1998).  Delgado (2023) states:  

The critical race theory (CRT) movement is a collection of activists and scholars engaged

in studying and transforming the relationship among race, racism, and power.  The

movement considers many of the same issues that conventional civil rights and ethnic

studies discourses take up but places them in a broader perspective that includes

economics, history, setting, group and self-interest, and emotions and the  

unconscious. (3)  

In my research I will demonstrate that past research on the topic of high school graduation and entry into post-secondary programs has a negative deficit-based approach ultimately impacting the ability of urban education to provide equitable opportunities to its students.  The impact of many different entities across society has also contributed to the racist policies created around support of urban schools which are primarily students in minority groups such as African Americans and immigrants.  Racism is so embedded in our society that only a CRT perspective will help to uncover the pathway to equity and social justice.    

Gloria Ladson-Billings (1998) states in her paper on CRT in education:  

Beyond equal treatment was the need to redress past inequities. Thus, there was a move

toward affirmative action and the creation of African Americans and other marginalized

groups as “protected classes” to ensure that they were not systematically screened out of

opportunities in employment, college admission, and housing.  If we look at the way that

public education is currently configured, it is possible to see the ways that CRT can be a

powerful explanatory tool for the sustained inequity that people of color 

experience. (18)  

This quote defines the reason why CRT is integral in the discussion of equity in urban education.  The entrenched racism within the education system has created such an inequitable situation that the only way to pull us out of this racist perspective is with a CRT lens otherwise the argument will always be that there are laws in place that prohibit the need for further discussion of inequity in the system.  In our current political climate, there are even more threats to equity in education and the need to continue to critically examine the ways that the field of education needs CRT to understand how we as an American society are still failing to support our most vulnerable students in urban education.    

Pros  

There are so many ways that CRT is pro for the field of education.  For this paper I will focus on three, the focus on social justice at its core, the positive impact on feelings about yourself as a marginalized student, and the connection to uplifting the “voice” of marginalized people.  These are just three of the countless opportunities that CRT offers to the academic discussion of equity in education.    

In the quote from Gladson-Billings discussed earlier we see the focus in CRT on equity for students in their pursuit of employment, admission into college, and equal access to housing.  This speaks to the heart of the movement which is social justice through education.  The theory supports the rationale that through equitable access to high quality education a student can move on to their preferred post-secondary options.  With more African American and Latinx students entering their preferred careers there could be a shift in the overall social justice of American society.  Very often we see the graphic below, created by Restoring Racial Justice, used to explain equity and social justice which stems from the academic discussion of CRT.  This picture demonstrates the concepts of CRT in that we see there are barriers (the fence) in the way for people being able to see the game.  I would argue that our current systems within education are the fence.  The inequities start at the earliest stages of education and continue through till post-secondary.  CRT offers a perspective for those in education to first acknowledge and then examine all the ways that education acts as a barrier to social justice.  In the last panel of the picture, we see all three people watching the game without a fence in the way.  I would suggest that education, although it has been the fence in the past, could now be the green grass the people stand on to view the game.  As educators we need to support our students in the most natural/authentic way that meets their needs and encourages them to find the path that enriches their lives and those in their communities.

Another pro for CRT in education is the impact it can have on how marginalized students conceptualize their ideas of self.  I have many students that do go on and pursue their post-secondary dreams, but I also have students that believe these dreams are not attainable for them.  One of my students discussed “stepping off the porch,” and what that means for him.  He stated that there is constant pressure to join a gang in his neighborhood.  He has tried to keep away from these influences, but as a result he does not feel safe and decides to not associate with those in the neighborhood.  In our talks about this feeling he has, I asked if he sees himself going on to college.  He said that he wants to be a lawyer in the future so that he can support his community.  His response demonstrates that with the support of educators that admire him, and understand his perspective on the world, he can conceptualize a life outside of his neighborhood.  In the quote from Delgado (2023) he emphasizes the focus on changing emotions and the unconscious in society.  I would add that the change needs to happen for all people in America.  For my students they need to know that they are valued and their contributions to society are important.  They do not need to fit into the stereotypes that American society has portrayed for so many years.  CRT starts the conversation about how pervasive racism is and then continues by stating we need to find ways to hold up a metaphorical mirror to all people.  Caucasian people need to recognize the historical trauma of slavery and that we still benefit from white supremacy and white privilege. All marginalized groups like African Americans, Asian Americans, Latinx, LGBTQ+, and those who are differently abled need to see that they are beautiful and worthy of inclusion into American society and guaranteed the same rights and privileges as Caucasians.    

The Black Panther movies do such an excellent job of portraying this concept of CRT.  The concept of positive self-image and all that idea contains can be seen in the movies.  Due to racism and bias in the film making world there had never been a stand-alone movie depicting Black superheroes before Black Panter. The movies do such a wonderful job demonstrating the power of Black culture and community. (Jiaxi & Changsong, 2023)    In addition, the movies demonstrate the power of storytelling.  In my school we took our students to see the second Black Panther movie.  It was amazing to sit in the audience with students that had grown up with this image and could also internalize the message of positive self-image. CRT seeks to change the message that has been historically given to marginalized groups and create a positive self-image for students to use as they decide who they will be in American society.  

A final pro of CRT is the focus on “voice.”  Ladson-Billings (1998) states, “the ‘voice’ component of CRT provides a way to communicate the experience and realities of the oppressed.”  In my research I will give “voice” to the educators in urban education that are passionate about the success of their students.  CRT asserts that through this uplifting of “voice” through academic research the realities of urban students will be understood and acknowledged.  I hope to highlight the ways that adding the “voice” of urban educators adds to the overall understanding of education in America.  CRT also provides a structure for academic discussions about equity in education.  From my research on equity in urban education there is a negative bias when discussing urban students, who are primarily from marginalized/oppressed groups. When you apply CRT and critically analyze how racism impacts education it becomes clear that the overall system of education is racist and biased. What is seen in research is that there are problems with the teachers, problems with the students and problems with the schools.  This is not where the problems lie.  The problems lie in the system itself.  I believe that the only way to change the system is to add more voices to the discussion that understand the inequity in our society. By using a CRT lens, the reality of the education system in America can be changed.    

Cons  

It is difficult in the context of equity in education to determine cons to using CRT to guide the discussion.  Therefore, when determining the possible cons to using CRT they all come back to pervasiveness of racism in American society.  The cons that I will focus on are the controversy attributed to CRT, educators threatened if they discuss CRT with students, and lack of other marginalized groups being included.  

The first con comes from the controversy associated with CRT.  A few years ago, some colleagues and I went to a conference on equity in education.  Before we left, we were told by our network superintendent to not discuss CRT due to the controversy surrounding it.  At the time I did not understand the weight of what he said. I understood that he did not want any headlines like, “Teachers thrown out of conference for discussing CRT,” however in retrospect a person who was influential in our district did not want to discuss something that is at the heart of academic discourse in our field because it could be considered too controversial.  I recognize that there are others in the field of education that are scared to discuss racism and the tenets of CRT, but that fear cannot stop the discussion.    

My district does not have a policy on CRT, but there are many states around the country that have banned any discussion of CRT and have also banned any books that may discuss it as well.  I started my career as a social studies teacher and part of my curriculum was early American history.  I did my best using the textbooks I had available to me to teach, with integrity, the story of the slave trade.  The material in the books was so whitewashed and completely diminished the trauma of slavery and the strength of those that endured it.  There was nothing available except articles I had found, but nothing at the level an eighth grader could understand.  If CRT had not been deemed controversial by those in power in the field of education, perhaps I would have been able to properly teach slavery to students that needed to understand this period of history and strength their ancestors possessed to not only survive but also thrive.  At a certain point we must agree that the controversy surrounding CRT comes from racism and a fear of losing white supremacy/white privilege.    

The second con is a result of the political controversy surrounding CRT and that is the threat of losing your job as an educator in certain states if you discuss CRT with your students.  As I stated earlier, I am fortunate to work in a district that does not have any policies against discussing CRT with my students, but that is not true for many other urban educators across the country.  In the state of Florida, it is now against the law to teach any tenet of CRT.  Florida’s Freedom Bill signed into law by Gov. DeSantis states, “The bill defines individual freedoms based on the fundamental truth that all individuals are equal before the law and have inalienable rights. Accordingly, required instruction, instructional materials, and professional development in public schools must be consistent with the principles of individual freedom” (Individual Freedom, 2022). For those that teach under laws like this one, I can see that CRT would be a scary topic.   

A year ago, I had a parent that wanted to meet with me to discuss some of their concerns about entering our school.  The student had just moved from Florida and her mother and grandmother were concerned about the curriculum in our school district.  They asked me if we taught CRT.  I said that honestly, we have no set curriculum, but there is also no policy in the district against teachers teaching CRT.  They asked about specific topics in our curriculum, and I stated that it would be up to the teacher on how they teach those topics.  I suggested they speak with the teacher, but that the district has no official policy stating that teachers cannot teach the tenets of CRT.  The student really struggled in school both academically and socially.  I had many interactions with her mom and grandmother.  There were so many concerns about this student that were not brought up in that first meeting that made the whole encounter an opportunity lost.    

The final con in this critique is concerned with how my topic relates to CRT.  At the heart of CRT is the concept of race and the impact of racism in education.  I would argue that race is only one of the ways urban students are marginalized that they are also discriminated against because of immigrant status.  One of the internal criticisms of CRT according to Delgado (2023) is that the CRT movement has been reluctant to include other marginalized groups like immigrants, LGBTQ+, Jews, and Muslims.  In my discussion of urban students there will be the assumption that all these marginalized groups are included.  The argument against this type of research is that it dilutes the purpose of CRT and the focus on race.  Race does need to be at the forefront of my research, but so does the discrimination against many other marginalized groups that find themselves in urban public schools.  For example, we have a large Congolese population at my school.  My students were placed, by the International Institute, in Hodiamont, which is St. Louis Housing Authority, housing that is in poor condition.  They must ride the bus to my school on the south side of St. Louis so that they can receive ESOL support.  There are two ESOL teachers with over one hundred students.  The district, the state, and the federal government still expect these students to read, write, and do math at grade level after a year of being in the country.  Even though many of these students had been living in refugee camps prior to coming to the US and more than likely did not attend a formal school.  The marginalized students of this country are more often found in urban education.  Even though CRT does not include these groups of people, I will use the theory to help those who are not in urban education better understand the reality of urban education. 

The first tenet of CRT is that “Racism is Ordinary.” (Hartlep, 2009) This means that racism is so pervasive in our society that some people do not even notice it.  Delgado (2023) discusses microaggressions and how Caucasian people treat African Americans differently without even knowing it.  For this project, I will assume the historical neglect of urban school systems is connected to this pervasive racism in our society.  When considering the needs of urban students, the bare minimum has been provided.  I used to substitute teach for a wealthy school district in the county of St. Louis and in each of the schools there was a teacher work room where there was paper of all colors, multiple copy machines, and laminators.  At my school I had to purchase my own paper.  In fact, multiple times I put a project on Donorschoose.org to get paper donated to my classroom.    

The second tenet of CRT is “Interest Convergence” (Hartlep, 2009). This tenet asserts that White people will only support racial justice if it benefits them.  Speaking as a White person, I would say that this is not always true, but for a large group of White people it is.  I also believe that most people in the world will not offer to extend their hand unless it somehow benefits them.  This is why one of the goals of my research project is to give “voice” to the urban educator.  Some urban educators are African American, but many are also Caucasian.  The thought process is that urban educators will have a louder and more passionate “voice” for ideas that will help support their students.  In addition, if the ideas come from urban educators, other urban educators might be more likely to listen.    

The third tenet of CRT is that “Race is a Social Construction” (Hartlep, 2009). The concept of race having anything to do with who a person is, is a social construction that comes from a fear of losing supremacy and privilege.  This concept is so evident when I speak with my son about his friends at school.  My son comes home and tells me about his best friend at school.  He talks about the games they like to play, the drawings he does, and the secrets they share.  He never mentions the child’s race.  I then asked if he would show his picture on the class photo and the child is African American.  I love that Oskar does not consider race at all when describing his friend.  In my research, I want to dismantle some of the preconceived notions of urban education.  One of the most pervasive I found was that urban students are drop-outs.  Using the term “drop-out” in the title of the paper automatically gives a negative bias and a deficit-based perspective on urban education.  The problem with urban education is the racism and discrimination coming in from outside.  I would like to demonstrate a strength-based insider’s perspective on urban education in my research, so that the narrative about urban education can start to change.    

The fourth tenet of CRT is “storytelling and counter-storytelling” (Hartlep, 2009). CRT academics use storytelling and counter-storytelling to best illuminate the issues of racism in our country.  When you read any CRT paper you will read stories from the author to illuminate their topic.  One of the most interesting came from Kimberlé Crenshaw in her Ted Talk about intersectionality (Russo, 2018). She speaks about a woman named Emma D. who filed a lawsuit against a car company for discrimination. She speaks about how Emma’s intersectionality is what caused the court to throw the suit out.  Crenshaw speaks about how the frame of the problem was the issue, and this is how she developed intersectionality.  This story perfectly explains the topic and makes it accessible to the audience.  I will also use storytelling in this project to help the reader better understand the state of equity in urban education.  Even before CRT I used storytelling to help get an idea across to my students.  I used to tell my students the story of how my wife, and I started dating.  I used this story to teach the parts of plot.  I also hoped that this story would be interesting to them and then help them remember the topic I was teaching.  Of course, I would really get into it and add lots of drama to help them remember.  I think that storytelling will help my readers understand that first I am authentic in my passion for equity in education and I hope that my storytelling helps my readers to sort of get a front row seat to see what is happening in urban education.    

The final tenet of CRT is, “Whites have been the ones to benefit from civil rights legislation” (Hartlep, 2009). Hartlep describes how Brown v Board of Education attempted to desegregate public schools, but what happened was White people moved away from schools that had Black students causing another form of segregation.  I saw this at my school.  Many students at my school are African American, but when you look at the racial makeup of the city, you will see there are more Caucasians that live in the city.  Many Caucasian families will put their students into religious schools or into other private schools.  Then these parents argue about wanting funding from the government for the private religious schools, causing a dilemma that many states are facing about separation of church and state, all from racism.  I will discuss this topic further by examining some of the programs listed by past researchers that were supposed to correct the problem of low graduation rates.  One example from the research and from my own experience is the program AVID.  My school district spent millions of dollars buying all the materials for middle and high schools and taking teachers on training trips.  We used AVID for two years and then the program was abandoned.  I could give many more examples of outside groups coming into urban schools and selling programs that are research-based, but when applied to the schools does not have any real impact on graduation rates.    

By aligning the goals of my project with the tenets of CRT I will help to further the discussion surrounding CRT in the field of education.  I hope to also demonstrate through my research the validity CRT has in the discussion of urban education.  Urban students have been neglected long enough because of racist systems.  It is time to face the reality of urban education and demand that change happen so that there can be equity in education.