Critical Race Spatial Analysis

Mapping to Understand and Address Educational Inequity

Deb Morrison, Subini Ancy Annamma, Darrell D. Jackson

• Publisher: Stylus Publishing
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781620364260
• Topic: Pedagogía
• Subtopic: Educación superior

How does space illuminate educational inequity?Where and how can spatial analysis be used to disrupt educational inequity?Which tools are most appropriate for the spatial analysis of educational equity? This book addresses these questions and explores the use of critical spatial analysis to uncover the dimensions of entrenched and systemic racial inequities in educational settings and identify ways to redress them. The contributors to this book – some of whom are pioneering scholars of critical race spatial analysis theory and methodology – demonstrate the application of the theory and tools applied to specific locales, and in doing so illustrate how this spatial and temporal lens enriches traditional approaches to research. The opening macro-theoretical chapter lays the foundation for the book, rooting spatial analyses in critical commitments to studying injustice. Among the innovative methodological chapters included in this book is the re-conceptualization of mapping and space beyond the simple exploration of external spaces to considering internal geographies, highlighting how the privileged may differ in socio-spatial thinking from oppressed communities and what may be learned from both perspectives; data representations that allow the construction of varied narratives based on differences in positionality and historicity of perspectives; the application of redlining to the analysis of classroom interactions; the use of historical archives to uncover the process of marginalization; and the application of techniques such as the fotonovela and GIS to identify how spaces are defined and can be reimagined.The book demonstrates the analytical and communicative power of mapping and its potential for identifying and dismantling racial injustice in education. The editors conclude by drawing connections across sections, and elucidating the tensions and possibilities for future research. Contributors
Benjamin Blaisdell
Graham S. Garlick
Leigh Anna Hidalgo
Mark C. Hogrebe
Joshua Radinsky
Daniel G. Solórzano
William F. Tate
Verónica N. Vélez
Federico R. Waitoller

PART ONE

INTRODUCTION

1

SEARCHING FOR EDUCATIONAL EQUITY THROUGH CRITICAL SPATIAL ANALYSIS

Subini Ancy Annamma, Deb Morrison, and Darrell D. Jackson

The black students, every one of them, had vanished on the way to school. Children who had left home on foot never appeared. Buses that had pulled away from their last stop loaded with black children had arrived at schools empty, as had the cars driven by parents or car pools. Even parents taking young children by the hand for their first day in kindergarten, or in pre-school, had looked down and found their hands empty, the children suddenly gone.

—Derrick Bell (1989, pp. 102–103)

In Bell’s (1989) work on desegregation he had the character Geneva Gay from the story, “The Chronicle of the Sacrificed Black School Children” imagine a scenario where Black¹ children are removed from the public spaces of schools through an unknown phenomenon. Though many may cringe at the idea of little Black bodies disappearing from the world without a trace, Bell’s larger point was to reveal the ways that Black people had experienced this same kind of fate through the racialization of educational inequities. Or, as Du Bois (1935) wrote in the article “Does the Negro Need Separate Schools?” from which Bell drew his title for the story opening this chapter, “There are many public school systems in the North where Negroes are admitted and tolerated, but they are not educated; they are crucified” (1989, p. 329).

It is in the racialized spaces of schools where this book is situated. Temporally and socially, racialized educational inequities have been well documented. Our goal was to integrate a critical spatial dimension, not to replace either the historical or the social, but to enhance. Historically and socially, it has been well known that as schools were integrated, Black teachers and principals were removed from schools, so in fact the integration was only within the student body. Moreover, a race-neutral policy, one that sought to treat all kids the same, meant treating the Black and Brown children “just like” the white ones—that is, requiring Children of Color to meet the same academic and behavioral standards as white children without the assumption of competence or caring. This neoliberal focus on equality versus equity negated the complex and deep history of racial oppression in the educational and social spaces of America in favor of the reproduction of the status quo (DeCuir & Dixson, 2004).

A critical spatial analysis of any educational inequity requires the researcher to interrogate this paradox from a holistic framing, asking multiple, interconnected questions: (a) Why was the education philosophy to treat these Children of Color integrating white spaces, whose historical, social, and spatial experiences varied so much from white children, similar to their white peers? (b) How is power inscribed and reinforced in the bodies of the white children and removed from the bodies of Children of Color by using the treatment of white children as standard? and (c) How did Children of Color resist then, and continue to resist now, the mechanisms schools used to reproduce social inequities in their physical and internal spaces? Since integration, including Students of Color in physical spaces did not mean their internal spaces were ever considered. Said differently, as Black and Brown bodies of adults were erased from the spaces of public schools, simultaneously the internal spaces of the Children of Color were disregarded and punished. These unjust geographies of public schools continue to result in racialized educational inequities into the present day (Soja, 2010). In a speech given in France, “The City and Spatial Justice,” Soja (2008) discussed the term spatial justice, explicitly addressing spatiality and justice from a theoretical perspective. He built on the foundations of Michael Foucault and Edward Said to understand the intersections of space, power, and knowledge in order to expose geographies that perpetuate or disrupt inequities in both processes and outcomes. Soja recognized the possibility to (re)examine space in education as more than a simple background where education happens; instead he built theory that allowed researchers to search for ways the space of schools (at all scales) both contribute to and resist inequities. Almost every author in the present volume references Soja’s (2010) work as he provided many of us the opportunities to reconsider our work through a lens of critical spatial theory and methodology.

The purpose of this book, however, is not to provide a microanalysis of Soja’s entire body of work; it is also not an introduction to critical race theory. Soja’s work is a starting point for a wider analysis, and critical race theory is used as just one way to engage racialized inequities in education. Instead, the purpose of this book is to examine racial inequities in education through a critical spatial lens, situating the spatial temporally and socially. Therefore we did not dictate the theories or methodologies that authors should use. Instead, we encouraged authors to draw on their own contexts to use and develop theories and methodologies that work in their own spatial contexts by asking authors to examine how spatial analysis can be used to highlight educational inequities and search for solutions. This book is unique in that it adds a spatial analysis lens to the historical and social lenses, more commonly utilized in education research, to examine racial inequities in education.

This book, then, is organized to resist the racialized dimensions of these unjust geographies and to consider their intersections with other marginalized identities. To that end, the book is arranged both thematically and multiscalarly. Thematically, the book is set up similar to an empirical study wherein it moves from the purpose to an example of the theories in which we situate our spatial search for justice (Part One: Introduction), followed by potential methodologies with which to do the research (Part Two: Case Methodologies and Tools), to empirical findings of studies from across the United States (Part Three: Case Examples). Multiscalar refers to the idea that there are macro-geographical (global), meso-geographical (regional), and microgeographical (local) scales which are not “discrete layers detached from one another. . . . They are interconnected and, like spatiality itself, are . . . socially produced” (Soja, 2010, p. 213). This book is structured multiscalarly, in that it moves between the local, regional, and global scales of analysis.

In Part One, the idea of critical spatial analysis and more specifically critical race spatial analysis are introduced. In this chapter, the authors connect the expanded work of this book to the historical roots of Edward Soja.

In Chapter 2, Véronica N. Vélez and Daniel G. Solórzano extend Soja’s call for a critical spatial analysis by rooting it deeply in critical race theory, thereby developing critical race spatial analysis. This macro-theoretical chapter lays the foundation for the book, rooting spatial analyses in critical commitments to studying injustice.

In Part Two, authors provide examples of innovative ways to critically engage with spatial research. In Chapter 3, Subini Ancy Annamma shares how education journey mapping was created and utilized to explore the education trajectories of historically oppressed students, including the physical spaces of schools they encountered, the ways internal spaces of students were impacted by structural violence, and the spaces between the physical and internal.

In Chapter 4, Deb Morrison and Graham S. Garlick do not develop new methodologies; instead, the authors reclaim the tools of geospatial analysis, which have often been used in positivist and problematic ways, and reappropriate them within an explicitly critical framework.

Leigh Anna Hidalgo explores the augmented fotonovela in Chapter 5. Hidalgo researched the phenomenon of payday lending as a predatory act and used the augmented fotonovela in order “to force audiences to see and hear my community and fully recognize Latina/o immigrants in Arizona as the dignified and resilient people they are” (this volume, p. 70) All of these methodologies were built within a critical commitment to understanding racialized outcomes and resistance from a spatial perspective, highlighting the voices of People of Color in data collection and analysis. In addition, each of these methodologies and tools has the potential to link the scales together, situating the micro within the meso and macro scales.

Part Three contains case studies that vary in scalar focus. The authors of Chapter 6 zoom out to the city level of Los Angeles using historical documents. Exploring the spatial and temporal, Daniel G. Solórzano and Verónica N. Vélez dig through meso-scale archives and expose how sections of the city were formed through a critical lens. They found that white spaces contained racial covenants in order to keep People of Color out and that spaces occupied by People of Color were underresourced through redlining.

In Chapter 7, Benjamin Blaisdell explores how the concept of redlining can be applied to classroom interactions wherein teachers segregate supposedly integrated classrooms. In this micro-scaled example, the author also illustrates how redlining can be used as an analytic tool for teachers to change their practice.

Chapter 8 takes a broader perspective as Mark C. Hogrebe and William F. Tate IV explore regional scales of educational opportunity and access as a “visual political literacy project” (this volume, p. 128). The chapter examines the extent to which districts across Missouri offer access to advanced coursework in mathematics at the high school level.

In Chapter 9, Federico R. Waitoller and Joshua Radinsky explore the meso-scale of Chicago in the era of school reform. Exploring data representations and the narratives they tell from a critical perspective, the authors argue that these representations must take into account intersections of race and ability, or Children of Color in special education will be ignored within education reform. The authors find that this invisibility of the most marginalized allows educational injustice to flourish and only a critical examination of these trends will disrupt these inequities. In each of these chapters, the authors situate their own scaled research within a larger meso-scaled discussion of racialized inequities. This is purposeful as the editors believe that no individual can be understood as acting alone without context; instead, we all function within a structure of white supremacy and racism.

In Chapter 10, the concluding chapter, Deb Morrison, Subini Ancy Annamma, and Darrell D. Jackson draw connections across sections, and elucidate tensions and possibilities for future research. We recognize that spatial analysis is not a solution that will heal entrenched educational inequity on its own. Instead, we hope to address the limitations of a singular dimension analysis (e.g., only social or spatial or historical) and highlight the potential when using the spatial in conjunction with historical and social-critical analysis. This focus on spatial analysis allowed authors and editors to reimagine a right to the city (Soja, 2010), and specifically a right to education for People of Color. If we demand this right, then the first step is recognizing how this right is denied through systemic racial inequities.

We believe the thematic organization of this book reflects a symmetry of building empirical research with theory situated in literature, methods, and then cases. Moreover, the commitment to multiscalar work is essential. It reflects the commitments of this book’s editors and contributors, as well as the intellectual forerunners who laid the path long ago. Du Bois (1935) recognized the need for a critical spatial, social, and temporal analysis when it came to educational inequities. He wrote,

We shall get a finer, better balance of spirit; an infinitely more capable and rounded personality by putting children in schools where they are wanted, and where they are happy and inspired, than in thrusting them into hells where they are ridiculed and hated. (p. 331)

Du Bois’s words guide us as we think about how educational inequities are reproduced in the temporal, physical, and social spaces of schools and how those inequities are resisted by Children of Color and the communities from which they originate.

Note

1. Similar to Neil Gotanda, we purposefully choose to capitalize Black while leaving white not capitalized. We encourage readers to read Gotanda’s (1991) piece (p. 4n12) to understand why he makes these stylistic commitments, which we adhere to for analogous reasons.

References

Annamma, S. A., Connor, D., & Ferri, B. (2013). Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit): Theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 16, 1–31. doi:10.1080/13613324.2012.730511

Bell, D. (1989). Neither separate schools or mixed schools: The chronicle of the sacrificed black school children. In And we are not saved: The elusive quest for racial justice (pp. 102– 122). New York, NY: Basic Books.

DeCuir, J. T., & Dixson, A. D. (2004). “So when it comes out, they aren’t that surprised that it is there”: Using critical race theory as a tool of analysis of race and racism in education. Educational Researcher, 33(5), 26–31.

Du Bois, W. B. (1935). Does the Negro need separate schools? Journal of Negro Education, 4(Summer), 328–335.

Gotanda, N. (1991). A critique of “our constitution is color-blind.” Stanford Law Review, 44(1), 1–68.

Soja, E. W. (2008). The city and spatial justice. Paper prepared for presentation at the conference Spatial Justice, Nanterre, Paris. Retrieved from: https://www.jssj.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/JSSJ1-1en4.pdf

Soja, E. W. (2010). Seeking spatial justice. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

2

CRITICAL RACES PATIAL ANALYSIS

Conceptualizing GIS as a Tool for Critical Race Research in Education

Verónica N. Vélez and Daniel G. Solórzano

Lorena has lived in Barrio Rosas¹ her entire life. Today, like most days, her father picks her up from school in his blue truck full of gardening tools and heads toward the Westside. He will work on two more homes before they return to the Barrio for dinner. As the blue truck merges into the noisy city traffic, Lorena gazes out the mud-splattered window and smiles. From the freeway she can see the colorful houses of her neighborhood and hear echoes of her brother playing soccer in the streets. Closing her eyes, she can almost smell the cinnamon cookies from Doña Luca’s Repostería [bake shop]. If they work quickly enough, her father will buy her one on their way home—their special secret. As the truck makes its way north, her smile fades into a frown. In those still, green hills was a different world she entered only to work. It was a mostly residential area comprising expansive homes and lush gardens. Despite her frequent visits, it never ceases to feel foreign to her. It felt colder there, and no children played in the streets. In front of the huge lawns she feels small, insignificant, as if the wide streets could swallow her up so quickly and quietly that no one would even notice. As her father exits the freeway and the noise of the traffic fades away, Lorena’s hands clench into clammy fists. She feels as if the wide windows glared at her, reminding her that she just didn’t belong. Alt...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright page
• Table of Contents
• Part One: Introduction
• Part Two: Case Methodologies and Tools
• Part Three: Case Examples
• About The Contributors
• Index