On May 18, 1896, Justice Henry Billings Brown delivered the majority opinion in favor of the State of Louisiana. In part, the opinion read, “The object of the Fourteenth Amendment was undoubtedly to enforce the absolute equality of the two races before the law, but in the nature of things it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based on color, or to enforce social, as distinguished from political equality, or a commingling of the two races upon terms unsatisfactory to the either. … If the two races are to meet upon terms of social equality, it must be the result of voluntary consent of the individuals.”== http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homer_Plessy

• Does the involvement of white scholars hinder the purpose of Critical Race Theory or further it?
• Having thought about this…What is the role of white scholars in Critical Race Theory (if any)?
• It has been 3 years since you wrote the article — how has CRT progressed?
• What singular element would provide CRT with a louder voice in academia?

How did you learn about CRT?
Access to college was more than a knowledge. I was in honor classes — but when Yale, and other colleges were there — I did not have access to it. One of two African Americans — the cultural definitions didn’t make sense — going to undergraduate — lack of access — did not sit well with me. I came across some work with a sociologist — and from there that seemed to resonate more — there were layers of access that had a lot to do with race. Class explanations did not quite make sense… like me… being that of class – it was not necessarily a resource issue – it was an access issue — access to the resources and made accessible at school. That was the beginning of interest in core theory.

Whiteness as property — Property of life, liberty, and property is left silent — in documents — do you think that is part of ahistoricism?
I think it is definitely a part of it. Property — males in particular. To a certain extent we give power to people who have property – and they have the most right to speak. How the notion of voice, and right to speak was related to property ownership — Notions of whiteness… we tend to think of racial issues outside of historical context. In typical ways, a lot of what happens does not happen in isolation. It is very much a part of a larger or historical context. One understanding, how things happen within a larger socio-historical/political context. When we argue for affirmative action or the Brown decision — people argue that it was not the right decision. Brown did not solve everything. We have to look for additional remedies… Lack of access, and rights — and it is inherent in the US.

Do white scholars – hinder it?
Delgado — caution of privileging and re-centering whiteness. there are very thoughtful white scholars who have engaged in Critical Race Theory. It doesn’t become — focused on whiteness. How are the ways that whiteness complicating things. Conscious of positionality.

One of the things that you had not found scholars who have not implemented the strategies that were identified —
It is a much bigger problem. There are larger issues. They have to be taken up by a colaition. We cannot even talk about it. We do not want to agree that race is an issue. Having a dialogue. Where people can have a critical discussion about it — about the problematic with the problems in race — these spaces are few and far between — look at Obama’s campaign — he had to step back several paces — he had to aquiece to the general public — we do not know how to talk about race… The talk could be more powerful — he had to speak generically… this is not what Critical Race Theory

Is classism an outer theme in Critical Race Theory?
Interdisciplinary. Crenshaw talks about intersectionality — it is hard to say when Race is operating over gender or class… It is intersected in complicated ways… bringing up Obama – he grew up in a single parent family. He has access to white — because he has white grandparents – he went to private schools — they see a black man — there are things that advantage him — there are many things that do not advantage him — we can not pull out phenomena — for people of colour they are compounded — if you are a person of color, poor, sexual identity, single parenthood — you cannot pull them out.

How is it improving?
At University of Chicago — there is a conference after AERA — when you get into your work it is very small. Many of us do work together. A lot of work in communities — community work. Have another colleague in San Francisco — and so — Gloria and Danny they have been both been expert witnesses… people have been quite active — and also the law schools — one that happens every two years… it is more of a PanCRT group and it moves around — it is more than just academic talk — it looks at where we go next — and how do we organize around those things.

I read the apartheid of knowledge — and you wrote a bit about it… How do you see CRT responding to — not just using the theory — the action side around CRT — the legitimizing of scholarship for scholars of color… this was sparked specifically — comes from people of colour — how is it legitimized?
The pioneers are all well respected scholars. At least in the field of education it is legitimate. Those who are not — do not know. The article was published in the top tiered journals. the second generation has had a privilege of coming after the first group of scholars. They were the working with the legitimacy of the group.

Where do we go from here? What should people be looking at in education involving CRT? What holes are there?
One of the things — Derrick Bell wrote — it is a constant agitator — holding up the mirror — always skeptical — given the history of race in the US. Even policies and practices that you think are helpful — how is it going to undermine the opportunities for people of colour. How does this policy re-privilege white students. Brown claimed to deliver everything — and we are more segregated post-Brown. CRT always challenges us to be vigilent — you are always looking at policy – and how they may undo it all. How the discourse around cultural relevent pedagogy — it becomes racialized pedagogy — that does not really help students… how do we talk about working with children of colour and misrepresent it — and because it continues to limit access to literature — this is where I am looking at CRT — looking at the micro level. Always looking at the bigger picture — the visualist and the skepticism.

Discussion of the Brown case… I remember when i was taking Constitutional Law… the professor panned it — I was wondering what your thoughts are on the Brown case… because it does not fit the law way of thinking — and then the global view that it does not go far enough.
Well, um… yeah — there was Brown one and Brown two. Brown one — was the good one — Brown two — undid Brown two… what the families were really interested in in silent covenent — families wanted their fair share — they were getting taxed the same way — but they were not getting the same access to the resources… it seemed to disenfranchised their kids — hoped that it would re-distribute them in a way — the disillusionment of it was all real funding was not tied to it – how things would be distributed no formula attached to it — hundreds of Black educators lost their jobs… People of colour were considered subhuman. Desegregation did not help it — there was no way to address the pervasiveness.. it didn’t change anything. The implementation did not help anything.

Race and Pedagogy Project

Handout from Critical Race Theory on July 9, 2008

1. Race is socially constructed product of social thought and relations.
2. Racism is normal, ordinary and ingrained into society, making it difficult to recognize.
3. Traditional claims of neutrality, objectivity, and color-blindness must be contested in order to reveal the self-interests of dominant groups.
4. Social justice platforms and practices are the only way to eliminate racism and other forms of oppression and injustice.
5. The experiential knowledge of communities of colors or their “unique voice” is valid, legitimate, and critical toward understanding the persistence of racial inequality.
6. Communities of color are differentially racialized depending on the interests of the dominant group.
7. History and historical contexts must be taken into consideration in order to challenge policies and practices that affect people in color.
8. The ideological contestation, deconstruction, and reconstruction of race is often demonstrated through storytelling and counter-narratives.

one critique is that it uncovers what exists but not how we put it into action

The question — what is my race:

what the students said:

• multicultural —
• EuroAmerican White Mutt
• African American or Black — the more I read and the workd I do in my writing — am I Black or am I African American. Because I was born here — I am Black. There is no understandings of being African. I am Black.
• Latina, but if you ask me more — Mexican American
• I identify as White… I think I am more regional based – New England
• I am White — it doesn’t mean anything to me where my family came from in Europe. Until my grandfather left Boston, MA — my family had lived there for 100’s of years.
• White — German
• White/Caucasian — Norwegian — never ventured out

How did you know you were your race?

Questions to Consider:

• What role does race play in your life? (i.e., friendships, community, places you go, activities/hobbies)
• Are your daily experiences filtered through a racial lens? (i.e., is race a conscious aspect in what you do? How so?
• For general discussion: Students will be asked to provide specific examples.
• What is race? How would you define it?

Definitions of Race

• Winant (2000): An unstable and “decentered” complex of social meanings constantly being transformed by political struggle; A concept that siginifies and symbolizes sociopolitical conflicts and interests in reference to different types of human bodies.
• Shuford (2001): A construct (or set of normalized practices) for defining and identifying people by socially imposed racial categories, and allocating social, economic, and cultural position.
• Kornblum (as cited in Muir 1993): An inbreeding of populations that develops distinctive physical characteristics that are hereditary.

What is Critical Race Theory?

“Racism has been a normal daily fact of life in society and the ideology and assumptions of racism are ingrained in the political and legal structures as to be almost unrecognizable. Legal racial designations have complex, historical and socially constructed meanings that insure the political superiority of racially marginalized groups;

(2) As a form of oppositional scholarship, CRT challenges the experience of White European Americans as the normative standard; CRT grounds its conceptual framework in the distinctive contextual experiences of people of color and develop through the use of literary narrative knowledge and story-telling to challenge the existing social construction of race; and

(3) CRT attacks liberalism and the inherent belief in the law to create an equitable just society. CRT advocates have pointed out the irony and the frustrating legal pace of meaningful reform that has eliminated blatant hateful expressions of racism, yet, kept intact exclusionary relations of power as exemplified by the legal conservative backlash of the courts, legislative bodies, voters, etc., against special rights for racially marginalized groups (Bell, 1988; Crenshaw et al.,

1995; Delgado, 1987; Matsuda, 1987).” (p. 261).

Lynn, M., & Parker, L. (2006). Critical race studies in education: Examining a decade of research on U.S. schools. The Urban Review, 38(4), 257-290.

How did the readings define critical race theory?

What were the core tenets of Critical Race Theory?

According to Matsuda, Lawrence, Delgado and Crenshaw (1993), there are six unifying themes that define the movement.

1. CRT recognizes that racism is endemic to American life.

2. CRT expresses skepticism toward dominant legal claims of neutrality, objectivity, colorblindness, and meritocracy.

3. CRT challenges ahistoricism and insists on a contextual/historical analysis of the law … Critical race theorists … adopt a stance that presumes that racism has contributed to all contemporary manifestations of group advantage and disadvantage.

4. CRT insists on recognition of the experiential knowledge of people of color and our communities of origin in analyzing law and society.

5. CRT is interdisciplinary.

6. CRT works toward the end of eliminating racial oppression as part of the broader goal of ending all forms of oppression (p. 6).

(p. 261)

Lynn, M., & Parker, L. (2006). Critical race studies in education: Examining a decade of research on U.S. schools. The Urban Review, 38(4), 257-290.

=========================================

From handout:

What Is Critical Race Theory?

• A collection of activists and scholars interested in studying and transforming the relationship among race, racism, and power (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001, p. 2)
• Embraces a movement of eft scholars, most of them scholars of color, situated in law schools, whose work challenges the ways in which race and racial power are constructed and represented in American legal culture and, more generally, in American society as a whole (Crenshaw, Gotanda, Peller & Thomas, 1995).
• A body of legal scholarship, a majority whose authors are both existentially people of color and ideologically committed to the struggle against racism, particularly as institutionalized in and by the law (Bell, 1995).
• A major goal of CRT is the elimination of racial oppression as part of the larger goal of eradicating all forms of oppression (Tate, 1997, p. 234).

• Bell, D. (2005). Who’s afraid of critical race theory. In J. Stefancic & R. Delgado, The Derrick Bell Reader (pp. 79-84). New York: New York University Press.
• Crenshaw, K., Gotanda, N., Peller, G., & Thomas, K. (Eds.), Critical Race Theory: Key Writings Formed the Movement (pp. 20-29). New York: The New York Press.
• Delgado, R. & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical Race Theory: An Introduction. New York: New York University Press.
• Tate IV, W. F. (1997). Critical race theory and education: History, theory, and implications. Review of Research in Education, 22, pp. 195-247.

Allow Ryan — opening remarks or clarifications — with anything that could have been misunderstood. Maybe start with the one you had a reaction to —

Opening
I think the group did a great job representing the work — I wish there was a bit more critique. Hopefully this conversation can lead to critique. I applaud the group’s work so far — especially when she/he is the instructor of record — I appreciate the energy to engage in the work.

It is important that literacy is coming from new iteracy studies. :literacy == a sense making process. this is the simplicist way to put it. inherantly we can not make it a social practice — we cannot make it alone — we can only make sense of things in the cultural world. I do not come to know this bottle of water knowing what it is via osmosis — there is nothing i know about the bottle of water – i need to come to know the water and the water itself — born of water — having consumed water before — there is a whole history of the water bottle — if i had come from a family that came ffrom the dump — i woul dhave a different relationship of the bottle of water — I love the smart water — Tracy brought this to work one day — i was totally parched and a bit hung over — this is how I come to know it — the point is I have come to know it — it is not as if all of a sudden the bottle of water and I become friends… I hope this helps clarify the way in which literacy is thought of… that is all I wanted to preface it.

Q: How and what use the new lireacy model — how did you come to know the literacy model?
A: the college going literacy model — as far as the new literacy studies of thought that actually pivotal piece — Harvard Ed Review – New London Group coined the phrase new literacy studies. they had talked about it since the mid 90’s it brought a group of scholars together to talk about literacy in robust ways — they wrote this watershed piece. I came to know it by happenstance — there was a course being offered — being taught by this woman…. I wanted to know her – and I wanted her to know me – and I had talked to some friends and had them take the course with me — cultural theory and mediated learning activities – CHAT — is very much — is very tied to new literacy studies — I disagree — they are just complimentary and compatible — they draw from similar theorists — new lite studies focuses in on literacies – and CHAT focuses in on more — they are both — socially and culturally framed in the existence -=- it drives how we can participate in the world. She hired me to teach with her — for the next two years — these are the frameworks for MSLI. This is sort of how I was first introduced to it — Chris makes things happen for people — you link up with her you link up with the entire network — she is good and invol;ving people and exposing people — getting people to go deep in knowledge sets and development — she provided a lot of oportunities to meet people and to talk about work together. It was never an invitation to a cocktail party — it was about workshops and be my assistant and you will meet — Barbara Rogoth — from that I was getting deep into it — something about CHAT spoke to me — I really globbed onto it quick — I had working with McDonough — and I was trying to — i was thinking in different ways — and we had a big long talk – and I had written a paper for her – and she really encouraged me to go deep and take advantage of the relationship with Chris — we do not know why we like the ideas — this is what feels good so go with it — the more I thoght abut it — the deeper i went with the literature — it helped me frame and find what was missing — or what the literature did and miss — it missed something fundamental of the activity of college access — or the praxis of college access…

Q: Why use it?
Largely it allows us to move more fluidly in the domains — domains of admissions, financial aid, college choice, access studies and across the common barriers. It allows us to shift through the domains a bit easier. It brings everything together as it bares on on the dynamic activity of college learning – as opposed to the static activity. The dynamic field with micro/macro activities — this allows us to carry it though the system and the system can be dynamic and changing and cultural contigient – and historically contingent. the inquiry is something I did not do well… I think this can be pragmatic — I just have not immersed myself in the world — I am much more of a researcher… so um… in teh pragmatic sense of the basic tenet — if it is learned it is taught… and so… i think pragmatically — the College Going literacy model — if you frame it in teaching/learning schools the administrators will learn it… does that satisfy the question?

Phil: there is much more counter-story —

Q: What was your throught process in writing the counterstories? What were the tools in this C/S development?
A: This came a month a month after I filed the disserttation — I did not think of it as a counterstory — when reworking it as a book proposal — and through um… conversations with this one group — some of you have met them through other courses — it was shown to me — it was its own version of a counter-story — it is not a critical race counter-story — it is a counter-story because it disrupts the mega narrative about college going — naming my work as counter storytelling — it comes from critical race theory — I do not necessarily know what i do until I reflect with my peers — writing is a very social process — I need to be working and sharing… along the way… Tools: I make a point to read a lot of fiction — I read at least a novel a month — um — and — um — it has been really important to me to think fresh — and to look at different forms of representing truths – I think there is truth in fiction – there is a long literary truth in fiction… I was surprise that the group did not comment on the appendix in the piece — it talks about the process of writing — I really got stuck at one point — I was struggling how to share what I learned in writing – I could not do it in any single mode — in different times in the book – it looks much more typical ethnographic vignettes — it looks research reporting — or it draws from post modern representations — it is sometimes autoethnographic — I worked hard at not representing THE TRUTH — I represent the truth on how I know it — it is queered — I am in the book tremendously — you can see my actions transparently — it was more of a moral transformation and my own political stance — what inquiry is and how it should be…

Phil: I am now thinking about the appendix and how your stories about meeting with the students and one time Ryan took them to a Macroni Grill — and introducing them to something outside of their norm — and Ryan struggled with how to share it. Dr. Rendon did the same thing — and I think it would improve it if it was within the text.

Q: How would Ryan respond to Naguera’s sopcial capital…

Q: How do you interpret the missing “X”‘s to show they are not deficits.
The model shows how different actors participate in the lived drama of college access — or in performing college access. This model is less … so these tables are documenting where the different actors — which labor tasks — a set of tasks — where they provide assistance to the student. the families division of labor — where the family participates in — this is what they actually do… So, I find it important to not only document… let me back up — I think it is a very additative model — what assistance is being provided? assistance can be restraining and enabling… some of you had a teacher how you the five paragraph essay — these were restraining — unbreakable — you are suppose to have 5 — intro — 3 paragraphs and the intro and conclusion. Assistance is not always good — in discussing this… although the families – particularly parents were p
recluded from participating — the things they did participate in — the aspiration development and resources are two of the most key — you cannot do the others. Resources == time and money — parents created the time and space in the home — and provided the economic — the students are keenly aware of the families economic status. If you talk to poor folk — they never say — I feel as shitty as you think I am… both of my parents grew up very poor — but they never knew they were poor — us kids got to eat — clothes to wear — we never walked around naked — the students I was working with — they were aware of the economic equalities – and they contribute to the family income – when they were left out of the fields during spring break so they could study for the SAT — it syumbolically meant a LOT more — um… so, I also try to talk about — the X’s — they may not matter or happen in the same way — they would matter in different ways… if they are in an outreach program — they are aspiring to go — no kid is going to sacrifice their summer — they want to go — they have a conviction already to do something. But the parental asiration development was very important to aspire. If the parents didn’t give up then the children didn’t give up — if friends gave up — chances are their friend’s family had given up… something happened to the family itself — the school doesn’t teach my kid so they are not able to get into college… but then… taking each piece — taking them in context — i find it more important to look at the schooling and higher education to look at where there are not X’s and in families where there are X’s. the master narrative would argue that there are no X’s — the families are doing a TON of work… if you have never been to college — you are very limited to what you can share with your kids about going to college — the schooling and higher education — these are social institutions that society can change – readily — they have local autonomy with local context… teachers are not helping — teachers are not making any time/space for students to go work on college going. All K-12 admins do is testing. Counselors are not helping with coursework — this is an artifact with California… counselors are in charge of scheduling testing and discipline in California — they are not involved in getting students in a college prepatory path… schooling does not do anything to help make college a reality, the politics of education, it’s ideological work is about the dominant mainstream — I would theorize it is a technology of countrol — I can manage my classroom better if I tell them you are not a part of the system if you do not listen to me… In higher ed we do not do shit in higher ed — I separate outreach from higher ed… I do that intentionally… we do not do what we say we are going to do… there are some good reasons — it is structurally difficult for me to do something — there miught be X’s there for faculuty — it does not mean it is pervasive… there were 2 faculty members who helped with the MSLI — they helped. Does that address the question? Look at the context of the X’s…

Q: No where do you talk about social capital… my initial question is mute —
A: I think the idea of a college going pedagogy — is it is not a pedagogy bound to the institution — it is a social one — socially we need to be educating towards college practice… I am all about the civic engagement — i think that librarians should be helping… I do not understand as a society… I understand the social reproductionist — it is not okay with me… we need mechanics we need dishwashers — we need not make the decision for other people that this is what they will be… my dad is a mechanic — they read more than some of the faculity that are my colleagues — why can’t my dad be as smart or smarter than some of the people with Ph.D. It is a popular pedagogy — the idea of family and social capital is great if — to — to — if we are looking for families to participate in social reform… if we are looking to revolitionize how education is done — that is what it is… I would be more comfortable for parents to build social capital and to expand it… If he is arguing that parents to expand the social capital — it is putting it back on parents — and they are already doing so much — they already have the social capital and we need to help them activate it… Making Lapatas… if you want to talk in terms of capital…

Q: Why did the recommendations not speak to family?
time constraints…
working with families
== work clearly shows how families are instrumental and calls for institutions to reconceptualize the influence of families and recognize what the families are excellent at — and support those things — resource allocation and aspiration development… teachers saying I tell all of them to go to college — why does that matter? I do not like you so why would i listen? don’t tell me that is your college going pedagogy…
== a major thing is that — a major family thing — anyone working with students should understand family… Louis Mole… understand the context the family — culturally and socially organized — and shows you how to work with the family — you cannot reduce that to Latinos and Perry work at the Tyson plant — therefore they should have the parent teacher conversations in the morning… so…

Q: Why are you calling your work the fracturing opportunity
== in a way he is fracturing opportunity – we are taking the opportunity and fracturing it more
== wondering what the appropriate
== inspired by Lois Weiss and Michelle Fine — working method — fracturing current practices — different versions of the method deep work within a fracture — full fractures — different ways to disrupt hegemonic educational practices — that is where I am borrowing it from

Q: How do you represent the cyclical stuff?
This is where my writings failed — they were seniors, juniors and sophomores — the last two are graduating next week from HS. All the rest of them have been in college for the last two years — and one is graduating from CC on Saturday. Not only via… we have reconvened multiple times – there is active myspace activity — emailing/sms — some of them live near eachother and go to the institutions together… there is a ot of dude help me… don’t forget to take these subject tests — this is the fee waiver — a lot of seeking help — some of them had not been in the same physical space — for a length of time — a lot of communicating through me — once I got here – I made 4 different 1-=14 day trips to go and visit them again — there is a lot of that — the project has grown — now, the project is based in students doing inquiry in their own communities — some of them have been featured in local newspaper, parents — invilved in different parent activities — that is sort of the next phase for a little while now…

Q: He talked about the ways in which he got to know these students — some people might call it inappropriate in traditional research sense… Ryan was going into their homes — restaurants — the hotels as a space… have you encountered any challenges to the relationships with the students — I do not know if I would be comfortable working with the respondents in this way…
A: Folks who critique field work — i am just like whatever — you clearly have not done your homework what ethnography is or does… and then, um… there have been critiques in not including me in activity — this project — keep in mind — in context of the MSLI — a broader project with a lot more history… there is a lot of context with political context — I was a small player within the MSLI — this project was a big thing — so, um… some people involved in the MSLI that do not believe he shohuld work with students like these students… a lot of people come from disbelief — they cannot believe these relationships can exist… relationships — like a queer white guy and these young Chicanos can hap
pen… disbelieve what the relationships are — people think it is a fantastical event… that is fine if yu are blimnded by your own prejudice — it is fairly well documented and presented so… yeah… at UCLA — is much conservative as it is progressive… you can always find someone to fight the battle with you… they rocked they were totally amazing —

Q: The notion of reading and writing at the same time and the interplay — creating histories — creating oral histories — did you constantly see the histories of the people you were writing and interviewing them?
A: Yes and no. History is written for them — the master narrative — that has not changed although well — parts are being exaserbated in contemporary debate — created and recreated in the debate… part of making college real — making oneself — real — making them a historical actor — they are not ahistrocal — anytime one pauses for reflection — recognizing on perpetuates — and recognize the complexity — one is rewriting they history —

Q: Was it impactful as an ethnographer? Was it constantly in your lens? was it a secondary thought?
A: It was not conscious — it was not this will be documented — the framework is emmersed in the idea — it bleeds through the entire way of seeing… actually yeah… but history is REALLY important and recognizing that… we have to acknowledge that college access is TODAY… different social/political forces acting TODAY then 20 years ago… the migrations are different… they are bounded by those particular histories — we are acting in teh historical present… we are not acting in some historical quasi momentary event.

OPENS UP:
new methods of inquiry
allows folks to do things like — linguistic discourse analysis t look at college going —
critical ethnography consequential for college access
some of the lived realities of Mexican students
favourite finding from that part of the project is the idea of immigration as a tool — which i think opens up a whole other thing — it can be a dynamic influence in students’ lives — its influence changes over time and place –

http://www.luminafoundation.org/

Knowing the field well enough to know where entry points exist — it is reading critically and in relation to each other… if you have read 10 articles — how do they relate to each other? You are not reading critically enough…

Next week:
1 – page single-spaced precis (pretty way of saying an analytical summary with an argument (problem statement)
1- working bibliography with at least 12 sources (outside of coursework reading)

When I look through these questions I am able to group some of them

Framing the Conversation
What is racial diversity?
What do we mean by diversity?
Why does racial diversity matter?
Why does it work? Why is it educationally relevant?
What is wrong with diversity?
Where do we go from here?

Limit to racial diversity — most of my work has focused on this — this is not to say that other forms are not important — I am not going to have time to address anything else — this is what I know best. We need to take into account institutional circumstances. Open access is an example like community colleges — where they pretty much do not select students — their student body is very sensitive to the local level demographic shift — their racial diversity is a result of the unintended demographic shifts — then you have other institutions where racial demographic is a choice — because it is subscribed — lets use the Ivys (Yale, Harvard, Princeton) racial diversity is a choice to them. If they do not do it – they will not get the racially diverse perspective with national representation. Institutional racism, societal classicism, that overlap in ways that make institutional access difficult – and much less competitive. Admissions to the highly selective institutions. We really have to take institutional circumstances into account. Judgmentally, it is unintended demographic shift or a choice that has to be legally justified.

Why does racial diversity matter?
When you think about racial diversity — I will really point to it — within this narrow way – we have to think about campus circumstances. the diversity you see on campus is due to demographic shifts or they have engineered it to achieve it through intentional choices the institutions make… these choices have to be legally justified.

Racially diversity matters — taking racial diversity into account — if it is demographic it is a reality – not a choice – you have to take it into account. When the student body shifts, like in a community college or non-selective institution — in California we have certain institutions that take every student that applies. there is a huge shift in their diversity – they have to take the new demographic shift into account mainly because of interest in retention — 1) intellectual shift 2) cultural shift — even if racial diversity is not a choice — i think it is important —

intellectual shift really has a great deal with the great interest in new student population — populations that have historically been excluded from these institution — these new populations are very interested in being exposed to different truths and the way they see it — different truths that have not been a part of formal education. This new population the campuses are seeing — these are populations that have not been historically served by these institutions and have been historically excluded — African Americans were excluded in the south – they were legally banned from these institutions — now, you are seeing these students who are attending historically white institutions — they are interested in being exposed to these truths — i.e., African American in gaining education about African American — study programs. these students will call for a variety in the curriculum that will satisfy their intellectual curiosity because of their positionality. (i.e., third world study movement in the 1960s, hunger strikes to demand for intellectual expansion). This is one part of it. It comes with racial diversity and greater shift within the direction.

Cultural shift: importance of rooting out — or addressing institutional racism — this has to do with a whole “host” or stuff — greater over site to prevent discrimination. When institutions do this, it is to help them assimilate to the institution — rather than diversify the culture. At the superficial level — debates about mascots — the images and symbols. Institutional assumptions with intelligence — who are the purveyors of intellectual wealth — the protectors of the standards of intelligence and knowledge.

There has to be the simultaneous effort along with the racial diversity of the student body to address the institutional and cultural aspects. If institutions do not address these — student retention is impacted — they get tired of the wear and tear of having to confront these racism on campus. There is a lot of higher education literature that exacts a tax on them academically. Easiest example: Latino student in the sciences, being one of a handful in a class of 200, have the TA ask if they are in the right class…. a good number of students experience this — I am sure you guys can come up with examples. Institutions capacity to better serve the student body.

5-10% within a privileged place to choose their student body:
They need to address the institutional and cultural — they need to have a diverse student body — it becomes a choice as well… it is not like these institutions will not have any African American, Latino students… they would have a much smaller population – proposition 209 — Race conscious admissions — we saw a precipitous drop in admissions — they dropped and did not disappear. They need to make a case to justify the diverse student body via their admissions policy — then, this gets to the question of why is it important?

Why is the racial diversity argument/justification important?
It is most important – because it matters a great deal. There are plenty of studies that have real significant value added effect from these institutions not only academics but social networks. Screening of the highly motivated ambitious people — it has to do with better chances — all things equal or slightly unequal — with lower grades, etc. Less selective institutions you have less chance of going to law school or graduate schools — it is important. The idea is that if the most oppressed groups do not get access to these institutions you stand a higher chance of racial stratification. Even though these are a small % of institutions – they grab out attention in very significant ways — of how they function in this society.

Next Steps?
Call for a different rationale for Affirmative Action?

All of the institutions want to have the option to em brawl a racially diverse student body. they are very pro-race conscious – they are very supportive of this because they want to have the choice. The legal argument — looking at Bakke — it is highly constrained — the best argument is to address the best way to address racism. It is to understand that it is not a level playing field. At the point of college admissions, people have access to college opportunity. This is based on a remedial argument — this has a lot to do — unfortunately this has been off the table since Bakke — is diversity rationale — the educational benefits rationale. This is the argument for the lawyers at MI — this almost went to the supreme court — there was one in TX, GA — they decided strategically to use the diversity rationale argument to expand race conscious arguments. There are some people wh
o “try” to inject the remedial argument — the court rejected into it — the student interveners — that they continue to face discrimination on campus — this discrimination has a lot to do with racism – that’s why we need to have affirmative action… the courts rejected it. In part, the University does not want to admit it. In short, it was almost the only case that institutions can make race conscious practices — in 2003 the supreme court would have rejected any practice — not only the mechanical one. Sandra Day O’Connor wrote the deciding opinion — she was not going to buy the “remedial argument” — at best middle of the road. We have to think of this as a diversity rationale as a strategy that is best left in making a case for the courts. This skips to the article to take a much stronger position about the diversity rationale — the diversity discourse should not be limited — the main thing wrong with the diversity discourse is why it is so useful… the diversity rationale — it is relatively neutral — it has a great way of converging interests — are the interests in political economy and the liberal civil rights agenda. I think that the diversity rationale is appealing for the majority center because it does not critique the political economy that supports a demographic capitalism that shows the enormous gap between wealth and power — and the proportion of the concentration of wealth continues to get smaller. So, it continues to support the political economy and show that “we” are opposed to racial discrimination. It does not say anything about the discrepancies are unjust. It does not distribute power and wealth by race. By having discrepancies in stratification is a good thing — that is what the diversity rationale says…

What has it been effective — what are the problems with that?
It can be used to support a full spectrum of ideologies — Horowitz to call out all the radical liberals — intellectual diversity for conservative agenda — to show radical thinking in colleges/universities. Diversity has become a term for powerful political views — or liberal anti-racism — we are all champions of diversity — because we are all multiculturalists — it almost becomes a term of no meaning — BUT it has GREAT meaning.

We have to separate out the terms — when we talk about diversity – it is not important to mix all the forms together — they certainly overlap — they operate in different spheres, and the histories are very different… we have to pay a great deal of attention what they might be concealing or what are the agendas might be promoted — some people would use diversity with an anti-racist agenda — others would promote a conservative agenda — most use to it to promote the status quo — maintaining the political economy with a little bit of tinkering on race.

Earlier you mentioned a political mass of students of color — is that the only goal? How is having a critical mass creating an opportunity and not the outcome of education?
It is so confusing… the courts do not even know what their goals are anymore. The whole policy has gone through.. has been revised by each Presidential Cabinet or every new office… one… affirmative action will not say it is to get a critical mass… right now… as I see it within the higher education context – it is t use the choice of race conscious practices — critical mass is important — ate the student level to feel as if they are not the kind-of soul representative of the race — less likely to be treated in stereotypical fashion… It reduces their vulnerability to racism… at the educational benefits level critical mass increases the chances of one student to have meaningful interactions with other students — my empirical studies have shown with students who have more opportunities to get to know people of other races — it has educational benefits — greater stratification in college — great appreciation of differences — cognitive and social growth — critical mass matters in different ways — educationally… at the level of policy with respect to affirmative action I do not think it plays that big of role.

Where do we go from here?
Focus on structures of oppression – the diversity discourse may or may not help us — using the framing gets you the attention of people who normally will object you straight out — you can use it to promote a more palatable agenda — in this agenda when it comes to research – we have to focus on the structures of oppression — often subtle and nuance how the structures maintain the status quo within the political economy — it is a political economy where the gap continues to grow — and it either will continue to grow across race — and then identify structures of oppression who’s interest and sensibilities are being promoted – reduce it to organizations and their practices in place — in the end if we have to reduce racism — at the institutional level it will help the individuals develop. We have the address the structures… We have to look at the constraints within the research agenda — Scholarship of confrontation — Tim Wise, Nana Osei Kofi… empirical work that is accessible that helps us anticipate. Education compared to other fields of study was really able to anticipate the debates that would come up — and help develop an empirical foundation to support the debates — you see now sociology — johnny come lately — where were they when these debates were being tested in the courts — it helps use anticipate the issues when they come up so we are prepared for them.

Lastly, I will leave you with this… we have to continue to check ourselves — we are all working within some paradigm — Thomas Kuhns work — that is how academics work — we work within the paradigms of the audience — we have to understand our limitations and be prepared of the shift — that the paradigms are totally inadequate — the diversity rationale is a paradigm we are working with and is currently inadequate — what is the alternative paradigm to understand what is going on? will help us to anticipate it and predict what will go on… I am not sure — I have been searching for an alternative paradigm — I am not going to be the one come up with it. Now as a full professor — now, those working within the paradigm do not have the vision for an alternative… according to Thomas Kuhn… they do not have a different capacity of seeing things…. my time has already passed… once you are a fully certified member — you have almost become a problem… I think people within those positions they are more likely to cling on — more than anyone else?

Do you think you will be open for the scholarship of confrontation?
yes — but we have to do it in a fair way — one that does not demonize — we do not have to be civil — I have not been treated civil — I know I was doing something right when I was getting the hate mail and phone calls — it really helps improve the understanding and progress of where we want to head.