“The Politics of Educational Exclusion”

• 

Wilson, M. A. F., Yull, D. G., & Massey, S. G. (2020). Race and the politics of educational exclusion: explaining the persistence of disproportionate disciplinary practices in an urban school district. Race, Ethnicity & Education, 23(1), 134–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2018.1511535

Summary: This article combines case study analysis with application of critical race theory and critical pedagogy with the goal of identifying barriers to equitable access to education on the basis of race and socioeconomic status (abstract).

Wilson gives a brief history of the disparate affects which zero tolerance policies and subsequently the school-to-prison pipeline has had on students and communities of color. While Ladson-Billings’ addresses the deficit language present in the discourse surrounding the idea of the “Achievement Gap,” Wilson cites the “discipline gap” as being one of the factors in creating unequal access to education. She cites studies that prove that students of color are disproportionately sent to the office, suspended, and expelled for the same behavior as white students. This is due to racism and deficit ideologies and contribute to the gap in achievement between white and minority students (introduction).

Wilson gives an account of her team’s experience conducting an ethnographic analysis of the discipline gap in Rivertown, NY, by comparing the stories from parents and students of color with those of administrators in the Riverstown school district to show resistance for school officials to admit the racial disparity in discipline. Wilson has been working with a different education stakeholders in this town to improve school and district accountability for their discipline practices and implement restorative justice reform (introduction).

Wilson describes how her use of Critical Race Theory in the study helped her and her team to understand why disciplinary measures are still racially disparate despite preventative litigation. She explains that CRT focuses on the permeation of racism into all systems and institutions and thus “challenges racial liberalism and colorblind ideology” by exposing the still existing racist attitudes and traditions of the people in power. The teams’s initial question they posed using CRT was, “Given the stark racial disproportionality in discipline that persists in Rivertown, why is the school district so resistant to discussing the implications of the data, let alone beginning to implement systemic change?” Along with CRT, Wilson describes interest conversion and how it was used in the study. Interest conversion is a principal which explains that there must be some selfish incentive in order for white people to give up -at least some of- their privilege, resulting in equitable outcomes for minorities. Wilson believes that using interest conversion to seek equitable outcomes rarely works or lasts, as was attempted and failed in Rivertown (section one).

One challenge on the team’s road to achieving equitable disciplinary solutions was that the school administration and district officials chalked up the racially disparate suspension and discipline rates to there being higher levels of behavioral issues from students in poverty, and that race had nothing to do with it. However, the team gathered data of all of the suspension rates in the district and organized them by both black vs. white and economically advantaged vs. disadvantaged to show that even within the data on just economically disadvantaged students, black students were suspended at a much higher rate than white students, thus disproving the notion that racism doesn’t influence the racial disparity in discipline (section seven).

Wilson argues that Critical Race Theory is more of a lens to see the underlying causes of disparities and inequities rather than a framework for taking action. She proposes that the best way to affect change is with the “stick and carrot approach” where the White stakeholders in power are challenged into an interest conversion position where they have little choice but to make policy change in favor of racial justice due monetary and political pressure (section eight).

Response: This article taught me so many valuable terms and concepts surrounding racial activism both within schools and in broader society. I found it incredibly interesting to hear the way the new Rivertown superintendent- who worked to implement restorative justice reforms and equitable access to education- was so aggressively shunned and protested by the teachers within the school district. It is already sparking many questions for me, such as; how, as a future educator, do you apply these critical social justice approaches to affect positive change within the context of the classroom, school, and community you serve. To more bluntly phrase that, how can I be an educational activist and also not fear getting fired? Are the two mutually exclusive in some cases? I also am curious to find instances in other school districts that were more successful in creating change surrounding disciplinary measures. It is crazy to me that teachers in this district actually protested against a leader who was merely advocating for the rights of minority students.