Content uploaded by Tara J. Yosso
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Tara J. Yosso on Oct 06, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by William A Smith
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by William A Smith on Oct 03, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cree20
Race Ethnicity and Education
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cree20
A critical race theory test of W.E.B. DuBois’
hypothesis: Do Black students need separate
schools?
Tara J. Yosso, William A. Smith, Daniel G. Solórzano & Man Hung
To cite this article: Tara J. Yosso, William A. Smith, Daniel G. Solórzano & Man Hung (2021): A
critical race theory test of W.E.B. DuBois’ hypothesis: Do Black students need separate schools?,
Race Ethnicity and Education, DOI: 10.1080/13613324.2021.1984099
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2021.1984099
Published online: 01 Oct 2021.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
A critical race theory test of W.E.B. DuBois’ hypothesis: Do
Black students need separate schools?
Tara J. Yosso
a
, William A. Smith
b
, Daniel G. Solórzano
c
and Man Hung
d
a
School of Education, University of California, Riverside, Inaugural Distinguished Scholar In Residence,
Institute for Emancipatory Education, Connie L. Lurie College of Education San José State University, United
States;
b
College of Education, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, United States;
c
School of Education and
Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles, United States;
d
Roseman University of Health
Sciences and Medicine, School of Medicine and College of Education, University of Utah, Salt Lake City,
United States
ABSTRACT
Guided by a critical race theory framework, this study tested W.E.B.
DuBois’ hypothesis that Black students need not attend integrated
schools to succeed academically. DuBois oered this controversial
hypothesis nineteen years before Brown v Board of Education, in his
1935 essay, “Does the Negro Need Separate Schools?” His concern
focused on the hostility and aversion toward Blacks evident in
integrated school settings. In the landmark Brown case, the integra-
tion rationale successfully convinced the Court to rule for deseg-
regating schools. However, it also positioned Black students as the
source of the problem instead of the racially unequal distribution of
educational resources. Unfortunately, instead of nding a remedy
for inferior schooling conditions, U.S. Supreme Court decisions on
school desegregation, such as Seattle/Louisville (2007), continue to
perpetuate this troubling message. We analyzed African American
students’ math achievement scores from the Early Childhood
Longitudinal Study to test DuBois’ hypothesis and challenge the
underlying inferences of the integration rationale. In our discussion
of the study ndings, we also considered the need to redene the
racial ‘‘tipping point’’ in schools.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 27 July 2021
Accepted 14 September 2021
KEYWORDS
Black student achievement;
School segregation; W.E.B.
DuBois; Tipping point
phenomenon; Integration
rationale
Introduction
A mixed school with poor and unsympathetic teachers with hostile public opinion, and no
teaching of truth concerning black folk, is bad. A segregated school with ignorant place-
holders, inadequate equipment, poor salaries, and wretched housing, is equally bad (DuBois
1935, 335).
In his 1935 essay, ‘‘Does the Negro Need Separate Schools?’’ W.E.B. DuBois expressed
deep concern that prioritizing Black students attending school with White students
would sideline the goal of equalizing education. DuBois and others in the Black com-
munity believed the integration rationale positioned Black students as the source of the
problem instead of the racially unequal distribution of educational resources (e.g. Bell
CONTACT Tara J. Yosso t.yosso@ucr.edu
RACE ETHNICITY AND EDUCATION
https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2021.1984099
© 2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2004; Siddle Walker 2018). Researchers have extensively documented many elements of
desegregation since the landmark Brown v. Board of Education (1954) decision and the
directive to move with “all deliberate speed” (Brown v. Board, 1955), from vociferous
protests against Black enrollments (e.g. Bell 1980a, 1980b, 2004; Belmont 2016), to efforts
to relegate Black children to remedial and vocational classes, to struggles to omit and
distort Black history and culture in the curriculum (e.g. Feagin and Van Ausdale 2001;
Banks, 20192019). Most of this literature considers segregation the most significant
barrier to equal education and a pluralistic society (Allport 1979; Chapman 2005).
Much less attention has been paid, especially in the early grades, to studies of Black
children that complicate and even contradict the integration rationale (Asante 1991;
Lewis 2003). DuBois (1935) prioritized the elimination of structures impeding Black
students’ intellectual growth and emphasized that this also meant structures hindering
their psychological, emotional, and physical well-being. He asserted that schools must be
places where Black students feel safe and have their racial identity protected (e.g. Jones
2014). For DuBois, integration remained a subsidiary goal in the struggle to realize equal
educational opportunities for Black children.
Our study aims to contribute to these lines of inquiry. We analyzed Black students’
math achievement scores from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study to test DuBois’
hypothesis and challenge the underlying inferences of the integration rationale against
low Black enrollment. In our discussion of the findings, we also consider the need to
redefine the racial ‘‘tipping point’’ in schools. We begin this with a brief introduction to
the framework that guides our work – critical race theory.
Critical race theory
In order to get beyond racism, we must first take account of race (Bakke v. Regents of the
University of California, 1978, 438 U.S. 265, 407).
We agree with Justice Blackmun’s argument in the Bakke case that to challenge racism,
we must have a full accounting of the ways race shapes the lives of People of Color. We
must discuss race because racism continues to have very real consequences on
U.S. society at both the institutional (macro) and individual (micro) levels. In this article,
we discuss how the social construct of race has been used to deny equal educational
access to Black schoolchildren. We also agree with John Calmore (1997), who often finds
that discussions of race fail to address racism substantively. To this end, we look to
critical race theory (CRT) as a dynamic analytical framework that evolved from
a movement by law scholars in the 1970s to explicitly examine race and challenge the
persistence of racism in U.S. society (e.g. Delgado 1995a; Delgado and Stefancic, 2012).
Daniel G. Solórzano (1997) identified at least five tenets shared by CRT scholarship:
(a) The intercentricity of race and racism: CRT in education starts from the premise that race
and racism are endemic and permanent in U.S. society (Bell 1992; Harris, C., 1993; Russell
1992) and asserts that racism intersects with forms of subordination based on gender, class,
sexuality, language, culture, immigrant status, phenotype, accent, and surname (see Collins
1986; Crenshaw 1989, 1991; Espinoza 1998; Valdes, McCristal-Culp, and Harris 2002; Wing
1997, 2000).
2T. YOSSO ET AL.
(b) The challenge to dominant ideology: CRT challenges claims of objectivity, meritocracy,
color blindness, and race neutrality, especially in access to education, recognizing such
claims act as a camouflage for the self-interest, power, and privilege of dominant groups (see
Bell 1987; Calmore 1992; Delgado 2003; Ladson-Billings 1998; Solórzano 1998; Zamudio
et al. 2011). In addition, CRT exposes White supremacist “logic” embedded in research
approaches that treat race as just a variable or that allege numbers speak for themselves (see
Gillborn, Warmington, and Demack 2018; Lynn and Dixson 2013).
(c) The commitment to social justice: CRT builds on multiple academic and community
traditions to conduct research as part of a larger commitment to social and racial justice
(e.g., Bell 1987; Taylor 2000). This means exposing the “interest convergence” of civil rights
gains (e.g., Bell 1980a, 1980b) and naming the elimination of racism, sexism, and poverty, as
well as the empowerment of People of Color and other subordinated groups as an essential
element of research for the public good (Freire 1970, 1973; Ladson-Billings 2013; Lawson
1995; Parker and Stovall 2004).
(d) The centrality of experiential knowledge: CRT recognizes that the experiential knowledge
of People of Color as legitimate, appropriate, and critical to understanding, analyzing, and
teaching about racial subordination (e.g., Anderson, M., 1988; Caldwell, 1995; Delgado
Bernal 2002). Accounting for the perspectives of Communities of Color means analyzing
statistical data about race as inextricably linked to the structures of colonization and racism
(see Gillborn, Warmington, and Demack 2018). It also casts a critical historical lens of
analysis on oral storytelling traditions, art, music, and other creative means of passing on
narratives, making sure to not decontextualize or essentialize these voices and insights (see
Bell 1987, 1992, 1996; Carrasco 1996; Delgado 1989, 1993, 1995a, 1995b, 1996; Delgado
Bernal and Villalpando 2002; Espinoza 1990; Montoya 1994; Olivas 1990; Solórzano and
Delgado Bernal 2001; Solórzano and Yosso 2000, 2001a; Villalpando 2003; Yosso 2006).
(e) The interdisciplinary perspective: CRT extends beyond disciplinary boundaries to under-
stand the ways racism has shaped educational opportunities, utilizing multiple methodologi-
cal tools, and analyzing race/racism within both historical and contemporary contexts (e.g.,
Calmore 1997; Corbin, Smith, and Garcia 2018; Delgado & Stefancic, 2012; García and Yosso
2020; Gotanda 1991; Gutiérrez-Jones 2001; Harris 1994; Solórzano and Yosso 2001b).
As a unique collective of guiding principles, these tenets inform our interdisciplinary
examination of the ways race and racism shape schooling structures, practices, and
discourses (e.g. Dixson and Rousseau 2005, 2018; Lynn and Adams 2002; Lynn and
Dixson 2013; Ladson-Billings and Tate 1995; Tate 1994, 1997). Turning our CRT lens to
focus on schooling experiences, we find continuities in 21st Century systematic discri-
mination and unequal educational opportunities reverberating with the racial conditions
present in tumultuous 1960s (Carroll 1998; Smith, Altbach, and Lomotey 2002; Smith,
Yosso, and Solórzano, 2011).
White discomfort and Black shame: A legacy of integration
Much as I would like this, and hard as I have striven and shall strive to help realize it, I am no
fool; and I know that race prejudice in the United States today is such that most Negroes
cannot receive proper education in white institutions (DuBois 1935, pp. 328-329).
Nineteen years before the Brown v. Board of Education (1954) case, DuBois expressed
sincere doubt in an integrationist strategy for schools. Certainly, he did not deny the
structural inequalities that hindered Black students in segregated schools. In addition to
RACE ETHNICITY AND EDUCATION 3
run-down, inadequate facilities, Black teachers rarely received the salary, resources, or
training their White counterparts. Instead, they had to make do with the lack of text-
books, desks, and other essential classroom materials. In addition, Blacks suffered what
James D. Anderson (1988) calls ‘‘double taxation’’. During this period, states and districts
redirected Black tax dollars away from school-building program funds for Black schools
and instead used the monies to build and maintain exclusive White schools. As a result,
Blacks received little in return for their tax dollars and relied on their community
resources to build, maintain, repair, and equip their schools.
DuBois’ concern focused on the hostility and aversion toward Blacks evident in
integrated school settings. Suppose educators truly believed Black students were incap-
able of performing at the level of Whites or were ‘‘more suited’’ for manual labor
vocations. How could they foster an optimal learning environment for Black students?
In DuBois’ estimation, Black students would fare better in schools where they did not
have to battle White hostility and lowered daily expectations. 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’’ (DuBois
1935, 331).
Almost two decades later, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled separate schooling
facilities inherently unequal and unconstitutional. The plaintiffs presented social science
evidence in Brown that emphasized the ‘‘tremendous burden and feelings of inadequacy
and inferiority’’ Black students experience in racially isolated settings (see Clark and
Clark 1950, 350). This legal strategy successfully convinced the Court to rule for inte-
grated schools. However, the integration rationale suggested that Black students receive
an inferior education because they sit next to inferior Black students (see Yosso et al.
2004). Despite the sustained efforts by organizations of Black educators to realize
educational equality through integration, as DuBois forewarned, Black students bore
the burden of desegregating White schools (Siddle Walker 2018). While some White
students participated in mandatory or voluntary busing, very few participated in integra-
tion programs that required school attendance outside the White community (Solórzano
and Yosso 2002). Thousands of Black principals and teachers were fired, demoted, or
reassigned to White schools in the first decade after Brown (see Tillman 2004). In the
meantime, Black students boarded busses to cross-town schools and districts, often
enduring the shouts and death threats of hostile anti-Black, anti-integration crowds
before making their way onto historically White campuses (Bell 2004; Delmont 2016).
Monica White’s (2002) review of the literature demonstrates a continuity of scholar-
ship questioning the match between the intention of integrationist approaches and the
realities for Black communities (e.g. Irvine and Irvine 1983; Siddle Walker 1996, 2000).
Her research of New Orleans, Louisiana, transitioning from de jure to de facto segrega-
tion draws on this scholarship. She suggested that in segregated schools, ‘‘Cultural capital
in the form of the material and spiritual resources provided by members of the African
American community allowed Black teachers and principals to create positive educa-
tional environments for their students’’ (p. 272). She noted, ‘‘in spite of the horrific
conditions of Jim Crow or legal segregation, the African American community and
family pulled together to supplement the meager educational resources and materials
provided by the state’’ (White 2002, 280). Vanessa Siddle Walker’s (2018) ‘‘historical
4T. YOSSO ET AL.
ethnography’’ about Horace Tate and the Georgia Teachers & Educators Association
recovers an organizational network of Black educators crafting “a purposeful education
that infused black schools with a civic and literary curriculum, and with a power of
purpose to fight for their full freedom absent in white schools” (pp. 3–4). Given the
additional injustice of ‘‘double taxation’’, with their tax dollars bolstering the same
schooling system that denied them access, African Americans contributed ‘their time,
energies, and financial and material resources to support these [all-Black] educational
institutions because they knew they were important for the advancement of African
Americans as a group’ (Franklin 2002, pp. 177–178). The Brown decision destabilized
such community-stabilizing, self-reliant mobilizations, and as Jerome Morris (1999)
notes, fractured the communal bonds that all-Black schools nurtured with African
American families and communities. He observes,
the implementation of Brown—resulting in the disproportionate busing of Black students
into predominantly White schools and the closure of many predominantly African
American schools—may have perpetuated the stigma that all-Black educational institutions
were not “good” institutions, which some were despite their fiscal, social, and political
neglect by racist school boards and state officials (Morris 1999, 600).
One of the lead architects of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People (NAACP) legal strategy in the Brown case, Robert L. Carter (1968), further
explains this unintended byproduct of the integration rationale, conceding that, ‘‘Few
in the country, black or white, understood in 1954 that racial segregation was merely
a symptom, not the disease; that the real sickness is that our society in all its manifesta-
tions is geared to the maintenance of white superiority’’ (p. 247) (emphasis ours). Harvard
Professor of Psychiatry and Education, Chester M. Pierce (1969) also wrote about this
contagious, lethal disease plaguing the U.S. society, ‘‘Racism is, first of all, a mental health
disease. That is, it is an attitude, ideation, and behavior based on the assumption of the
superiority of white skin color . . . Secondly, racism is a public health disease because by
definition it affects masses of people’’ (p. 302). This delusional belief that dark skin
correlates with low academic outcomes remains embedded in the ways we describe
‘‘good’’ schools versus ‘‘bad’’ schools.
While some progressive Whites eagerly participated in desegregation programs, many
protested integration loudly, refusing to comply with even voluntary busing plans, and
abandoning the public school system altogether. White flight also drained school districts of
financial support and perceived prestige. Social scientists attempted to assess a numerically
specific racial tipping point in schools and neighborhoods in the late 1960s and early 1970s as
White flight became an evident response to desegregation (Bell 1986). Rather than an exact
percentage, the social phenomenon of the tipping point in schools referred to the level at which
the number of Black and/or Latina/o students caused Whites to perceive a shift in their racial
majority status. This perceived shift, they believed, would soon jeopardize the academic
standing, prestige, and ‘‘goodness’’ of the institution, and in anticipation, they left. Whites
who did not leave outright, often attempted to negotiate with the school district, threatening
that if the school did not create programs tailored to their academic enrichment needs and did
not maintain a certain level of ‘‘prestige’’, they would leave (e.g. Wells and Serna 1996). Many
districts developed magnet programs and differentiated curricula to appease these demands
and curtail White flight. Whites were subsequently placed into college preparatory programs,
RACE ETHNICITY AND EDUCATION 5
while Students of Color were tracked into vocational and remedial programs (e.g. Oakes and
Lipton 2004). By restricting access to academic enrichment courses, schools maintained an
‘‘apartheid of knowledge’’ (Delgado Bernal and Villalpando 2002) and effectively perpetuated
segregated conditions within ostensibly integrated settings (i.e. see Mickelson 2005; Orfield and
Eaton, 1996).
Courts, school districts, and researchers often interpreted and implemented Brown based on
the assumption that Black students need to attend schools with White students to avoid
academic failure. These presumptions shifted attention away from structures and practices of
discrimination leading to lower academic outcomes for Blacks in comparison to Whites and
made erroneous, baseless claims about the array of cultural knowledge skills, abilities, and
networks Black students and parents do possess and pass on (e.g. Farmer-Hinton et al. 2013).
Such deficit framing of Communities of Color was also applied to scholarship, including the
work of Pierre Bourdieu and Jean-Claude Passeron (1977). Bourdieu and Passeron examined
the ways elite groups wield their knowledge and networks, their social and cultural capital, to
maintain power and restrict the social mobility of others. Unfortunately, as scholars have
pointed out, many school integration efforts misinterpreted their observations about how
hierarchy is reproduced and converted their critique into a how-to model and a goal of
integration (e.g. Yosso and García 2007, 2008). These unoriginal claims, resurrecting racial
myths that Black communities lack the appropriate knowledge for school success, persist even
in some of the more recent U.S. District and Supreme Court decisions on school desegregation,
such as in People Who Care v. Rockford Board of Education, School District 205 (2001) and in
Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007; also referred to as
Seattle/Louisville) (see Chapman 2005; Donnor 2013; Rousseau Anderson 2011).
This intensive battle over school integration ironically has meant less attention paid to
those efforts seeking to remedy inferior schooling conditions or to fostering forms of
cultural capital (e.g. Carter, P., 2003; Franklin 2002) and community cultural wealth
(Yosso 2005), which facilitated African American resilience and resistance in segregated
schools (Anderson 1988; DuBois 1935; Patton Davis et al. in press; Woodson 1933). ‘‘If
I had to prepare for Brown today’’, Carter (1988) argues, ‘‘instead of looking principally
to the social scientists to demonstrate the adverse consequences of segregation, I would
seek to recruit educators to formulate a concrete definition of the meaning of equality in
education’’ (p. 27). We, too, are interested in shifting the dialogue to examine the
resilience and resistance of Black students, who increasingly attend de facto segregated
schools. We recognize the historical continuity of communal bonds fostered in all-Black
schools (e.g. Morris 1999; White 2002) as a qualitative affirmation of DuBois’ 1935
hypothesis that Blacks need not attend integrated schools to succeed academically.
Below, we submitted DuBois’ assertion to an empirical evidence-based test, focusing
on a national, longitudinal study of math achievement.
Methodology
Data
The Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998–00 (ECLS-K)
marked the first national study focused on education that followed a cohort of children
from kindergarten entry (at approximately age 5) to middle school (about age 13). It
6T. YOSSO ET AL.
aimed to provide comprehensive and reliable data for researchers to better understand
children’s development and experiences in the elementary and middle school grades, as
well as how children’s early experiences relate to their later development, learning, and
experiences in school. The wide range of data collected from children, parents, teachers,
and administrators across the years facilitates the study of how various child, home,
classroom, school, and community factors at various points in children’s lives relate to
cognitive, social, emotional, and physical development (see https://nces.ed.gov/ecls/kin
dergarten.asp).
We used this particular dataset to test DuBois’ theory because it contains the
achievement records of a nationally representative sample of children and follows
those same students from kindergarten (approximately age 5) through fifth grade
(about age 11). Furthermore, this initial ECLS-K study captures a time period when
the percentage of Black students in relation to Whites were generally lower in many
U.S. schools, offering us a unique tool for examining schools with a small number of
Black students. Detailed information on the sampling, instrumentation and assessment
can be found online in the ECLS-K User’s Guide to the longitudinal kindergarten-base
year public-use data file (NCES 2001–029) (see https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.
asp?pubid=2001029rev).
With assistance from the Educational Testing Service and the National Center of
Educational Statistics sponsorship, Westat researchers began data collection in Fall
1998 with a national representative sample of 21,260 kindergarteners. Researchers then
followed a total of 17,565 children from the Spring of 1998 through the Spring of 2004
in six data collection cycles from kindergarten to fifth grade: Fall 1998 (kindergarten),
Spring 1999 (kindergarten), Fall 1999 (first grade), Spring 2000 (first grade), Spring
2002 (third grade), and Spring 2004 (fifth grade). Over the course of the study,
researchers used four data gathering methods: (1) Direct cognitive assessments to
measure each child’s math, reading, science, and general knowledge skills, (2)
Computer-assisted personal interviews to assess each child’s physical and social devel-
opment; (3) Telephone and in-person computer-assisted interviews with each child’s
parents; and (4) Self-administered questionnaires to survey teachers, school adminis-
trators and document each child’s records. We examined the Direct Cognitive
Assessments and focused on the Item Response Theory scores measuring mathematics
knowledge from kindergarten through fifth grade. The direct cognitive assessments
consisted of math, reading, and general knowledge items from kindergarten to first
grade. Science items were added in fifth grade. Researchers conducted field tests of
these direct cognitive assessment instruments to verify the reliability and validity
before administering the instruments to the children. Of the many direct cognitive
assessment scores available, we chose to examine the Item Response Theory scores
because they are criterion-referenced and can significantly reduce ceiling and floor
effects.
Statistical analyses
This study included all the children whose records contained information on the percen-
tage of the Black student population in their schools (N = 14,182). We used relevant
variables (math scores from each cycle, percent of Black student population versus White
RACE ETHNICITY AND EDUCATION 7
student population, child’s home language, parents’ socio-economic status, and household
income) from ECLS-K5 to test the hypothesized theory. We examined math performance
scores as our outcome variables at each measurement cycle. We assessed the children in
four subgroup categories by the percentage of the Black student population in their school
each year: (a) 1 to 5%; (b) 5 to 10%; (c) 10 to 25%; and (d) 25% or over.
We then fitted a multiple group longitudinal structural equation model representing
a latent growth model (LGM) for each interval to evaluate the associations of race and the
math scores. A LGM is a statistical technique that can measure change over time of an
underlying, latent, unobserved process. Terry E. Duncan and Susan C. Duncan (2009)
explain, ‘‘The LGM describes a single individual’s developmental trajectory and captures
individual differences in these trajectories over time. It is able to study predictors of
individual differences to answer questions about which variables exert important effects
on the rate of development’’ (p. 9). ‘‘At the same time’’, they note, the LGM can ‘‘capture
important group statistics’’, and enable examination of ‘‘development at the group level’’
(Duncan and Duncan 2009, 9).
We used this statistical approach to test our hypothesis about the trajectory of the math
scores within and across groups. Our LGM accounted for the longitudinal outcome
measurements at Fall Kindergarten, Spring Kindergarten, Fall 1
st
grade, Spring 1
st
grade,
Spring 3
rd
grade, and Spring 5
th
grade. Changes in outcomes computed for the group were
adjusted for individual student’s prior test scores so that we started with comparable
baseline measures at each period. We used a binary group variable, Black students versus
White students, as our predictor variable. In addition, we included potentially confounding
variables such as the child’s home language, parents’ socio-economic status, and household
income as covariates. On average, we identified approximately 9% of missing data at each
measurement cycle. We employed full maximum information likelihood to impute all of
the missing data. All statistical analyses were conducted in MPlus 8 and SPSS 26.
Results
Our results support the DuBoisian argument that integrating schools can sideline the
goal of equalizing schooling conditions and outcomes for Black and White students. In
fact, our findings show that improvement of Black students’ math scores was associated
with an increase in the Black student population (BSP). These findings reveal a tipping
point where Black student math performance improves across three distinct Black
student population sizes until it reaches no significant difference with their White
counterparts. Table 1 displays two major patterns emerging that challenge previous
assumptions about Blacks’ ability to achieve academically, especially when their same-
race peers are a significant majority of the student population. We discuss these two
patterns by revealing unstandardized and standardized regression coefficients: 1) within
each four distinct Black student population sizes and 2) across each of the six-time
periods in kindergarten through 5th-grade levels.
The results in the 1–5% BSP column of Table 1 shows that when Black students
represented a very small percentage of the total student population, their achievement in
mathematics was low. Black students were already −4.718 points behind their White peers in
the fall kindergarten term on the direct cognitive assessments in math. By the spring term of
8T. YOSSO ET AL.
kindergarten, the difference increased by almost 1.5 fold (−6.105). At each term where math
performance was measured, the scores of Black students in the 1–5% BSP schools worsened.
By fifth grade, there was a 20.004-point difference between Black and White students.
Black student performance showed a marked improvement from the 1–5% BSP to the
5–10% BSP. For example, in the fall kindergarten year for the 5–10% BSP, the gap was
almost a six-point difference between the Black and White students. However, unlike in
the 1–5% BSP, the gap never widened by more than two points (−5.861 to −7.687) from
kindergarten (fall) and third grade (spring). More importantly, by fifth grade, the gap
disappeared between these two student groups.
A similar pattern is displayed in the next population (10–25% BSP), where the
kindergarten (fall) achievement gap between Black and White students was large
(−6.974). This gap widened by almost four points (−4.109) by third grade (spring).
Overall, the 10–25% BSP reached an eleven-point (−11.083) achievement gap by the
third grade. The most promising and consistent finding between the 5–10% and 10–25%
was that the achievement gap disappeared by fifth grade.
The previous two patterns were not exhibited in the final group (over 25% BSP). When
Black students attended schools with more than 25% Black students, their math achieve-
ment scores were no different from their White peers. This finding problematizes
previous arguments about Blacks’ being somehow unable to academically achieve in
large Black populations or predominantly Black schools. Additionally, these findings
affirm DuBois’ critique of integration for integration’s sake and echo his concern about
the ways hostile integrated climates can injure and hinder Black students.
To directly compare the grade levels across BSPs, we used the standardized regression
coefficients. To standardize, we subtracted the mean of a variable and divided it by its
standard deviation. Standardization allows the comparison of regression coefficients across
BSP’s. The standardized regression coefficients represent the change in response for a change
of one standard deviation in a predictor. For example, the standardized regression coefficients
across the 1–5% BSP to 10–25% BSPs during the Fall term of kindergarten ranged from
−0.188 to −0.117. These standardized regression coefficients show that the difference between
Black and White students’ math performance decreased as the Black student population grew
from 1–5% to 10–25%. In fact, we can identify the beginning of a tipping point at the fall term
of kindergarten in the 5–10% BSP. Here, the standardized regression coefficient (−0.184) in
Table 1. Mathematics performance for Black and White students across elementary grade levels and
schools with different Black Student Population (BSP).
Race (comparing Black students to White students)
1–5% BSP 5 − 10% BSP 10 − 25% BSP over 25% BSP
(n = 9,172) (n = 2,501) (n = 1,456) (n = 1,053)
Math performance at
Kindergarten (Fall) −4.718 (−0.188) * −5.861 (−0.184) * −6.974 (−0.117) * ns
Kindergarten (Spring) −6.105 (−0.220) * −6.126 (−0.181) * −7.576 (−0.120) * ns
1
st
grade (Fall) −7.493 (−0.244) * −6.385 (−0.177) * −8.169 (−0.122) * ns
1
st
grade (Spring) −8.880 (−0.262) * −6.643 (−0.174) * −8.756 (−0.123) * ns
3
rd
grade (Spring) −14.442 (−0.299) * −7.687 (−0.163) * −11.083 (−0.123) * ns
5
th
grade (Spring) −20.004 (−0.314) * ns ns ns
Note: *p < 0.05.
ns = non-significant at p > 0.05. All relationships are unstandardized regression coefficients. Numbers in parentheses
represent standardized regression coefficients.
RACE ETHNICITY AND EDUCATION 9
the 5–10% BSP was less than the same term for the 1–5% BSP (−0.188). This pattern
continued at each term, with a smaller achievement gap at the 5%-10% BSP compared
with the 1%-5% BSP. For example, the standardized coefficients were −0.299 in the 1–5% BSP
and only −0.163 in the 5–10% BSP by the third grade. Thus, the benefits of a larger Black
student population became evident at every grade level, even at just twice the smallest
population size.
The continuity of this promising pattern also appears as we approach the 10–25% BSP.
Again, the standardized coefficients at each term were smaller than in the previous two
BSPs, 1%-5%, and 5%-10%, respectively. Again, this bolsters the premise that improved
academic outcomes for Black students are associated with an increase in the overall
population of Black students. Moreover, by the fifth-grade year in 10–25% BSP, the findings
indicated no significant difference between Black and White math achievement scores.
A clear tipping point has been reached in the over 25% BSP column, where we found
no significant difference between the math test scores of White and Black students from
kindergarten through the fifth grade. Table 1 shows that the math achievement gap
disappeared in the schools with the largest populations of Black students.
Limitations
This ECLS-K5 offered us a unique opportunity to consider test scores for Black students
during a particular time period when they attended in small numbers at predominately
White schools. While some people may view this as a limitation, we see this as a strength
of the study. An educational historian, for example, might add to our analysis by
examining the sociopolitical dynamics shaping these enrollment patterns. Since the
ELCS-K does not give insight into the mathematics classrooms themselves, a critical
historical lens might also shed light on the pedagogical practices enacted in some of the
schools during this time period. Population demographics do change over time, so the
proportion of Blacks students in relation to Whites will be higher or lower from time to
time. Our results reflect the outcomes in the schools with low Black enrollments. Since
the time this longitudinal study was conducted, Black student enrollments have increased
in many schools across the U.S., as have the numbers of Latina/o, Pacific Islander, Native
American, and Asian American students. Future research might compare the results of
our study with the ECLS-K data about mathematics being collected through 2024. It can
also be beneficial to replicate this study with science and other available assessment data.
Discussion: Reconsidering the tipping point phenomenon
The African-American community and the dominant white community cannot become one
through forced integration because that process reflects no choice and has the effect of
locking African-Americans into inferior positions in society . . . integration is not a cultural
one-way street in which African-Americans must absorb white norms in order to be
assimilated into American society (Johnson 1995, pp. 368-369).
In his above critique of the United States v. Fordice (1992) Supreme Court decision, Alex
M. Johnson (1995) challenges integrationist assumptions (mis)informing the Court. The
Fordice plaintiffs sought funding for Mississippi’s historically Black colleges equal to the
10 T. YOSSO ET AL.
financial resources granted to historically White universities. Johnson argues that the
Court rejected their request because the Justices conflated ‘‘the process of integration
with the ideal of integration’’ (p. 362). His concern about the way integration continues
to fail African Americans echoes DuBois’ (1935) warnings about integrating Black
students into historically White institutions and thereby subjecting them to an unwel-
coming and often hostile environment. As DuBois predicted, the idealism of the integra-
tion rationale could not overcome the realities of racism confronting Black communities.
Since the 1954 Brown decision, integration has failed to bring about equal education. The
integration rationale fails because it casts African American communities as inferior to
Whites, diminishes their agency, and ignores their demonstrated resilience and resistance
in all-Black de jure and de facto segregated schools (see Anderson 1988; Irvine and Irvine
1983; Morris 1999, 2004; Siddle Walker 1996, 2000, 2018; White 2002).
Guided by CRT, in this study, we tested and confirmed DuBois’ 1935 hypothesis that
Blacks need not attend integrated schools to succeed academically. We found that the
increase in the Black student population was associated with the disappearance of the
mathematics performance gap between Black and White students. These findings suggest
a need to reconsider the tipping point phenomenon. Instead of Black students’ presence
reaching a threshold that threatens the outstanding academic standing of a school, Table
1 shows that higher percentages of White students represented a potential threat to the
academic performance of Black students. The tipping point in this study is the point at
which the percentage of Black students at a school reaches a threshold (in our test, over
25%) that fosters outstanding academic achievement for Black students. Thus, our
examination of DuBois’ hypothesis affirms that Black students do benefit from attending
schools with higher percentages of Black students.
Another way of looking at these data is that as predominantly White schools become
increasingly racially diverse, with Black students, math scores may improve for all
students (Smith, Franklin, and Hung 2020). Indeed, DuBois (1935) himself acknowl-
edged, ‘‘other things being equal, the mixed school is the broader, more natural basis for
the education of all youth. It gives wider contacts; it inspired greater self-confidence; and
suppresses the inferiority complex’’ (p. 335). Even so, he knew, “other things seldom are
equal” (p. 335). Recognizing the role of schools in the edification of the whole child, he
saw the ‘‘Color Line’’ as the central barrier to the realization of Black people’s full
humanity and the functioning of a ‘‘real democracy’’ (DuBois 1935, 328). He did not
believe integration of Blacks into White schools was the necessary remedy to this
problem.
Certainly there were many under-explored conversations among DuBois and his
colleagues about Black schooling in the 20
th
century that may offer us further insight
about this persistent problem (e.g. Alridge 2008; Shujaa 1994). As our nation’s schools
have become even more segregated than before Brown, it is urgent that practitioners and
researchers continue to explore how Black students’ sense of belonging along with
a personal connection with their teacher and authentic pedagogy matter (e.g. Ezikwelu
2020; hooks 1994; Booker and Lim 2018; Scheurich 1998). We must continue to heed
Dr. DuBois’ warning that Black students should never be thrust into hells where they are
ridiculed and hated for the sake of desegregation.
RACE ETHNICITY AND EDUCATION 11
We want to be clear that in testing this hypothesis and critiquing the integration
rationale, we are not arguing against desegregation. In fact, since our data category
stops at ‘‘over 25%’’ Black student population, a person could argue that this is the
perfect case to show Brown was a success. We are also not suggesting the scores on
any given test accurately measure a students’ mathematics capacity or actual mathe-
matics knowledge. We realize the term ‘‘achievement gap’’ is problematic and we
affirm those whose research turns our attention toward an interrogation of the
persistence of an “opportunity gap” in schools, especially for Black students (e.g.
Hung et al. 2020; Love 2004). We know standardized tests can never fully capture the
array of knowledges, skills, and abilities students possess and utilize. Indeed, this data
set leaves us with many questions as we continue to purposefully decenter the
integration rationale. What occurs within these schools to eliminate the math
‘‘achievement gap’’ for Black students so often emphasized in educational research?
How do the teachers, parents, curriculum, community members, administrators, and
staff cultivate an environment that differs from schools with a lower Black student
population (see Irvine 2002)? What is happening among Black students in these
schools that may buffer some of the racial hostility reported by more isolated students
in predominantly White classroom settings? Jerome Morris (2004) finds that histori-
cally, ‘‘African American people and African American institutions have had to adapt
to larger structural forces, such as racism and class subordination, by providing
cultural sustenance for themselves’’ (p. 100). His case studies of two urban elementary
schools in Atlanta, Georgia and St. Louis, Missouri uncover five key elements of
segregated all-Black schools consistent with the historical literature: (a) African
American school personnel actively and purposefully reach out to families and create
an encouraging ‘‘climate of trust’’ with multiple opportunities to participate in school
events (p. 102); (b) senior Black teachers and other school personnel maintained
‘‘intergenerational and culturally affirming’’ bonds with families (p. 103); (c) Black
teachers play a significant role in affirming African American students’ histories and
lived experiences with ‘‘critical race pedagogy’’ (see Lynn 1999; Lynn, Johnson, and
Hassan 1999); (d) African American principals serve as cultural and academic leaders,
utilizing their knowledge of how ‘‘race and culture ha[s] shaped African American
schooling’’ in building and sustaining bridges between the school and its surrounding
communities (pp. 103–104); and (e) successful Black schools, those with ‘‘excellent
principals, committed teachers, a love ethic for Black children, and a strong connec-
tion with the communities where the children lived’’ help stabilize African American
communities (Morris, 2004, p. 104).
Carter (1968, 1988, 2004 & Carter et al, 2004) provides additional guidance about
how we should proceed in bringing about equal educational opportunity for Black
students, reminding us that we must stop focusing on the symptom (segregated
schools) but on the disease (White supremacy). The contagious, public health
disease of racism (Pierce 1969, 1970) would have us believe Black families, commu-
nities, and students are intellectually and culturally inferior to Whites. The integra-
tion rationale inadvertently reiterates this delusion, leaving Black students locked in
battles over ‘‘racial balance’’ in order to be granted maximum exposure to White
12 T. YOSSO ET AL.
students and thereby increase their chances for academic success. The benefit of
hindsight and the challenge of CRT urges us to question such a deficit approach to
African American schooling.
But first, we have to believe that Black people have something of value. Accepting this
scholarly charge is essential, not because one should give up on the hope of an
integrated society, or a society in which racial and economic inequalities cease to
exist, but because of the need to provide the best schooling experiences (academically
and socioculturally) for those who have been consigned to society’s abyss (Morris 2004,
105).
CRT helps us reconsider what it means to genuinely center the experiences of Black
students, revealing a need to refocus our energies on recognizing and building on those
assets to draw on to foster high academic achievement (e.g. Carter, P., 2003). Siddle
Walker (2018) suggests we begin this work by looking back, ‘‘to record the role of black
educators, their organizations, and their leaders advocating for black children in
America’s changing terrain,’’ from Reconstruction to desegregation (p. 6). CRT also
encourages us to continue identifying and challenging what hinders Black students in
predominantly White schools (Smith, Hung, and Franklin 2011; Smith et al. 2016; Smith,
Yosso, and Solórzano 2007; Solórzano, Ceja, and Yosso 2000). Additionally, CRT ques-
tions the tendency of scholars to uncritically apply assumptions of the integration
rationale to their research in urban schools. We need more research that documents
the abundance of community cultural wealth African Americans bring from their homes
and neighborhoods to the classroom, whatever the numerical make-up of those class-
rooms may be (Rivers et al. 2021).
DuBois (1935) also reminds us “that there is no magic, either in mixed schools or
in segregated schools” (p. 335). Following his line of argumentation across time and
place, we might argue that the tipping point would not matter if, in the end, Black
students attended schools that truly educated Black students. In the spirit of his
work, we renew our commitment to challenging separate, unequal, and hostile
schooling conditions as we continue to prioritize the quality of the schools and
the preparation of educators who believe in and act on the intellectual ability of
Black students, families, and communities, schools (e.g. Carter 2005; McNeil 1983;
Smith 2016; Tillman 2004; White 2002). In our contemporary historical movement,
when the weight of the long struggle for justice feels particularly heavy, we reflect
with appreciation on the profound dimensions of DuBois’ 1935 question, and we
reclaim his assertion that the education Black students need begins with ‘‘Sympathy,
Knowledge, and the Truth’’ (DuBois 1935, 335).
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
ORCID
William A. Smith http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7941-2942
Man Hung http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2827-3740
RACE ETHNICITY AND EDUCATION 13
References
Allport, G. 1979. The Nature of Prejudice. 25th Anniversary Edition. Reading, MA: Addison-
Wesley.
Alridge, D. P. 2008. The Educational Thought of W.E.B. DuBois: An Intellectual History. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Anderson, J.D. 1988. The Education of Blacks in the South, 1860-1935. Chapel Hill, NC: University
of North Carolina Press.
Anderson, M. 1988. “Moving Our Minds: Studying Women of Color and Reconstructing
Sociology”. Teaching Sociology 16: 123–132. doi:10.2307/1317412.
Asante, M. K. 1991. “Afrocentric Curriculum.” Educational Leadership 49 (4): 28–31.
Bakke, v. Regents of the University of California, 438 U.S. 265. 1978.
Banks, J.A. 2019. Introduction to Multicultural Education. 6th edition. New York: Pearson.
Bell, D.A. 1980a. “Brown V. Board of Education and the Interest Convergence Dilemma.” Harvard
Law Review 3 (93): 518–533. doi:10.2307/1340546.
Bell, D.A. 1980b. Shades of Brown: New Perspectives on School Desegregation. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Bell, D.A. 1986. “Application of the “Tipping Point” Theory to Law Faculty Hiring Practices.”
Nova Law Journal 10: 319–327.
Bell, D.A. 1987. And We are Not Saved: The Elusive Quest for Racial Justice. New York: Basic
Books.
Bell, D.A. 1992. Faces at the Bottom of the Well: The Permanence of Racism. New York: Basic
Books.
Bell, D.A. 1996. Gospel Choirs: Psalms of Survival for an Alien Land Called Home. New York: Basic
Books.
Bell, D.A. 2004. Silent Covenants: Brown V. Board of Education and the Unfulfilled Hopes for Racial
Reform. New York: Oxford University Press.
Belmont, M.F. 2016. Why Busing Failed: Race, Media, and the National Resistance to School
Desegregation. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
Booker, K. C., and J. H. Lim. 2018. “Belongingness and Pedagogy: Engaging African American
Girls in Middle School Mathematics.” Youth & Society 50 (8): 1037–1055. doi:10.1177/
0044118X16652757.
Bourdieu, P., and J. Passeron. 1977. Reproduction in Education, Society, and Culture. London: Sage.
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483. 1954.
Brown v. Board of Education, 349 U.S. 294. 1955.
Caldwell, P. 1995. “A Hair Piece: Perspectives on the Intersection of Race and Gender.” In Critical
Race Theory: The Cutting Edge, edited by R. Delgado, 267–277. Philadelphia: Temple University
Press.
Calmore, J. 1992. “Critical Race Theory, Archie Shepp, and Fire Music: Securing an Authentic
Intellectual Life in a Multicultural World.” Southern California Law Review 65: 2129–2231.
Calmore, J. 1997. “Exploring Michael Omi’s “Messy” Real World of Race: An Essay for “Naked
People Longing to Swim Free”.” Law & Inequality 15: 25–82.
Carrasco, E. 1996. “Collective Recognition as a Communitarian Device: Or, of Course We Want to
Be Role Models!.” La Raza Law Journal 9: 81–101.
Carroll, G. 1998. Environmental Stress and African Americans: The Other Side of the Moon.
Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Carter, P.L. 2003. ““Black” Cultural Capital, Status Positioning, and Schooling Conflicts for Low-
income African American Youth.” Social Problems 50(1): 136–155. doi:10.1525/
sp.2003.50.1.136
Carter, R.L. 1968. “The Warren Court and Desegregation.” Michigan Law Review 67 (2): 237–248.
doi:10.2307/1287417.
Carter, R.L. 1988. “The NAACP’s Legal Strategy against Segregated Education, 1925-1950.”
Michigan Law Review 86: 1083–1095. doi:10.2307/1289155.
Carter, R.L. 2004. “The Conception of Brown.” Fordham Urban Law Journal 32: 93–100.
14 T. YOSSO ET AL.
Carter, R.L. 2005. A Matter of Law: A Memoir of Struggle in the Cause of Equal Rights. New York:
New Press.
Carter, R.L., Egerton, J., Glasser, I., Greenberg, J., Huntley, L., Jones, N. R., McMillian, & E.W.,
Motley, C. B., (2004). On the Right Side of History: Lessons from Brown. Atlanta, GA: Southern
Education Foundation.
Chapman, T. K. 2005. “Peddling Backwards: Reflections of Plessy and Brown in the Rockford
Public Schools De Jure Desegregation Efforts.” Race Ethnicity and Education 8 (1): 29–44.
doi:10.1080/1361332052000340980.
Clark, K.B., and M.P. Clark. 1950. “Emotional Factors in Racial Identification and Preference in
Negro Children.” The Journal of Negro Education 19 (3): 341–350. doi:10.2307/2966491.
Collins, P. H. 1986. “Learning from the Outsider Within: The Sociological Significance of Black
Feminist Thought.” Social Problems 33: S14–S32. doi:10.1525/sp.1986.33.6.03a00020.
Corbin, N. J., W. A. Smith, and J. R. Garcia. 2018. “Trapped between Justified Anger and Being the
Strong Black Woman: Black College Women Coping with Racial Battle Fatigue at Historically
and Predominantly White Institutions.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in
Education 3 (7): 626–643. doi:10.1080/09518398.2018.1468045.
Crenshaw, K. 1989. “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique
of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics.” University of Chicago
Legal Forum 8: 139–167.
Crenshaw, K. 1991. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and the Violence
against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review 43: 1241–1299. doi:10.2307/1229039.
Delgado Bernal, D. 2002. “Critical Race Theory, LatCrit Theory, and Critical Raced-gendered
Epistemologies: Recognizing Students of Color as Holders and Creators of Knowledge.”
Qualitative Inquiry 8: 105–126. doi:10.1177/107780040200800107.
Delgado Bernal, D., and O. Villalpando. 2002. “An Apartheid of Knowledge in Academia: The
Struggle over the “Legitimate” Knowledge of Faculty of Color.” Equity and Excellence in
Education 35: 169–180. doi:10.1080/713845282.
Delgado, R. 1989. “Storytelling for Oppositionists and Others: A Plea for Narrative.” Michigan Law
Review 87 (8): 2411–2441. doi:10.2307/1289308.
Delgado, R. 1993. “On Telling Stories in School: A Reply to Farber and Sherry.” Vanderbilt Law
Review 46: 665–676.
Delgado, R. 1995a. The Rodrigo Chronicles: Conversations about America and Race. New York:
New York University Press.
Delgado, R., Ed. 1995b. Critical Race Theory: The Cutting Edge. Philadelphia: Temple University
Press.
Delgado, R. 1996. The Coming Race War?: And Other Apocalyptic Tales of America after
Armative Action and Welfare. New York: New York University Press.
Delgado, R. 2003. Justice at War: Civil Liberties and Civil Rights during Times of Crisis. New York:
New York University Press.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. 2012. Critical race theory: An introduction (2nd Edition). New York,
NY: New York University Press
Delmont, M.F. 2016. Why Busing Failed: Race, Media, and the National Resistance to School
Desegregation. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
Dixson, A. D., & Rousseau, C. K. 2005. And we are still not saved: critical race theory in education
ten years later. Race, Ethnicity, and Education, 8(1), 7–27.
Dixson, A. D., & Rousseau, C. K. 2018. Where are we? Critical race theory in education 20 years
later. Peabody Journal of Education, 93(1), 121–131.
Donnor, J.K. 2013. “Education as the Property of Whites: African Americans’ Continued Quest for
Good Schools.” In Handbook of Critical Race Theory in Education, edited by M. Lynn and
A. Dixon, 195–203. New York: Routledge.
DuBois, W.E.B. 1935. “Does the Negro Need Separate Schools?” The Journal of Negro Education
4 (3): 328–335. doi:10.2307/2291871.
RACE ETHNICITY AND EDUCATION 15
Duncan, T. E., and S. C. Duncan. 2009. “The ABC’s of LGM: An Introductory Guide to Latent
Variable Growth Curve Modeling.” Social and Personality Psychology Compass 3 (6): 979–991.
doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00224.x.
Espinoza, L. 1990. “Masks and Other Disguises: Exposing Legal Academia.” Harvard Law Review
103 (8): 1878–1886. doi:10.2307/1341322.
Espinoza, L. 1998. “Latino/a Identity and Multi-identity: Community and Culture.” In The Latino/
A Condition: A Critical Reader, edited by R. Delgado and J. Stefancic, 17–23. New York:
New York University Press.
Ezikwelu, E. U. 2020. “Institutional Racism and Campus Racial Climate: Struggles for Sense of
Belonging and Academic Success among Black Students in the K-12 Public Schools.” Journal of
Critical Thought and Praxis 10 (1): 1–20. doi:10.31274/jctp.11554.
Farmer-Hinton, R.L., J.D. Lewis, L.D. Patton, and I.D. Rivers. 2013. “Dear Mr. Kozol . . . Four
African American Women Scholars and the Re-authoring of Savage Inequalities.” Teachers
College Record 115: 1–38.
Feagin, J. R., and D. Van Ausdale. 2001. The First R: How Children Learn Race and Racism.
Lanham, MA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Franklin, V.P. 2002. “Introduction: Cultural Capital and African American Education.” The
Journal of African American History, 87(2), 177–181.
Freire, P. 1970. Education for Critical Consciousness. New York: Continuum.
Freire, P. 1973. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.
García, D.G., and T.J. Yosso. 2020. “Recovering Our Past: A Methodological Reflection.” History of
Education Quarterly 60 (1): 59–72. doi:10.1017/heq.2019.50.
Gillborn, D., P. Warmington, and S. Demack. 2018. “QuantCrit: Education, Policy, ‘Big Data’ and
Principles for a Critical Race Theory of Statistics.” Race Ethnicity and Education 21 (2): 158–179.
doi:10.1080/13613324.2017.1377417.
Gotanda, N. 1991. “A Critique of ‘Our Constitution Is Color-blind’.” Stanford Law Review 44:
1–68. doi:10.2307/1228940.
Gutiérrez-Jones, C. 2001. Critical Race Narratives: A Study of Race, Rhetoric, and Injury.
New York: New York University Press.
Harris, A. 1994. “Forward: The Jurisprudence of Reconstruction.” California Law Review 82:
741–785. doi:10.2307/3480931.
Harris, C. I. 1993. “Whiteness as Property.” Harvard Law Review 106 (8): 1707–1791. doi:10.2307/
1341787.
hooks, b. 1994. Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. New York: Routledge.
Hung, M., W.A. Smith, M.W. Voss, J.D. Franklin, Y Gu, and J. Bounsanga. 2020. “Exploring
Student Achievement Gaps in School Districts across the United States.” Education and Urban
Society 52 (2): 175–193. doi:10.1177/0013124519833442.
Irvine, J.J. 2002. In Search of Wholeness: African American Teachers and Their Culturally Specific
Classroom Practices. New York: Palgrave/St. Martin’s Press.
Irvine, R., and J.J. Irvine. 1983. “The Impact of the Desegregation Process on the Education of
Black Students: Key Variables.” Journal of Negro Education 52 (4): 410–422. doi:10.2307/
2294948.
Johnson, A.M. 1995. “Bid Whist, Tonk, and the United States V Fordice: Why Integrationism Fails
African Americans Again.” In Critical Race Theory: The Cutting Edge, edited by R. Delgado,
355–361. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. (1995).
Jones, A. 2014. “Do Negro Boys Need Separate Schools? Evaluating Choice, Rhetoric, and
Practices.” The Journal of Negro Education 83 (3): 274–280. doi:10.7709/
jnegroeducation.83.3.0274.
Ladson-Billings, G. 1998. “Just What Is Critical Race Theory and What’s It Doing in a Nice Field
like Education?.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 11 (1): 7–24.
doi:10.1080/095183998236863.
Ladson-Billings, G. 2013. “Critical Race Theory: What It Is Not!” In Handbook of Critical Race
Theory in Education, edited by M. Lynn and A. Dixon, 34–47. New York: Routledge.
16 T. YOSSO ET AL.
Ladson-Billings, G., and W. Tate. 1995. “Toward a Critical Race Theory of Education.” Teachers
College Record 97: 47–68.
Lawson, R. 1995. “Critical Race Theory as Praxis: A View from outside to the Outside.” Howard
Law Journal 38: 353–370.
Lewis, A.E. 2003. Race in the Schoolyard: Negotiating the Color Line in Classrooms and
Communities. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Love, B. J. 2004. “Brown Plus 50 Counter-storytelling: A Critical Race Theory Analysis of the
“Majoritarian Achievement Gap” Story.” Equity and Excellence in Education 37: 227–246.
doi:10.1080/10665680490491597.
Lynn, M. 1999. “Toward A Critical Race Pedagogy: A Research Note.” Urban Education 33 (5):
606–626. doi:10.1177/0042085999335004.
Lynn, M., and A. Dixson. 2013. “Introduction.” In Handbook of Critical Race Theory in Education,
edited by M. Lynn and A. D. Dixson, 9–22. New York: Routledge.
Lynn, M., C. Johnson, and K. Hassan. 1999. “Raising the Critical Consciousness of African
American Students in Baldwin Hills: A Portrait of an Exemplary African American Male
Teacher.” The Journal of Negro Education 68 (1): 42–53. doi:10.2307/2668208.
Lynn, M., and M. Adams, (Eds.). 2002. Critical Race Theory in Education [Special Issue]. Equity
and Excellence in Education 35(2). doi:10.1080/713845285.
McNeil, G.R. 1983. Groundwork: Charles Hamilton Houston and the Struggle for Civil Rights.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Mickelson, R.A. 2005. “How Tracking Undermines Race Equity in Desegregated Schools.” In
Bringing Equity Back: Research for a New Era in American Educational Policy, edited by
J. Petrovich and A. S. Wells. New York: Teachers College Press.
Montoya, M. 1994. “Mascaras, Trenzas, Y Grenas: Un/masking the Self while Un/braiding Latina
Stories and Legal Discourse.” Chicano-Latino Law Review 15: 1–37.
Morris, J. 1999. “A Pillar of Strength: An African-American School’s Communal Bonds with
Families and Community since Brown.” Urban Education 33 (5): 584–605. doi:10.1177/
0042085999335003.
Morris, J. 2004. “Can Anything Good Come from Nazareth? Race, Class, and African American
Schooling and Community in the Urban South and Midwest.” American Educational Research
Journal 41 (1): 69–112. doi:10.3102/00028312041001069.
Oakes, J., and M. Lipton. 2004. ““Schools that Shock the Conscience”: Williams V. California and
the Struggle for Education on Equal Terms Fifty Years after Brown.” La Raza Law Journal 15:
25–48.
Olivas, M. 1990. “The Chronicles, My Grandfather’s Stories, and Immigration Law: The Slave
Traders Chronicle as Racial History.” Saint Louis University Law Journal 34: 425–441.
Orfield, G., and S.E. Eaton. 1996. Dismantling Desegregation: The Quiet Reversal of Brown V. Board
of Education. New York: New Press.
Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, 551 U.S. 701. 2007.
Parker, L., and D.O. Stovall. 2004. “Actions following Words: Critical Race Theory Connects to
Critical Pedagogy.” Educational Philosophy and Theory 36 (2): 167–182. doi:10.1111/j.1469-
5812.2004.00059.x.
Patton Davis, L., I.D. Rivers, R.L. Farmer-Hinton, and J.D. Lewis, eds. in press. Re-authoring
Savage Inequalities: Narratives of Community Cultural Wealth in Urban Educational
Environments. State University of New York Press.
People Who Care et al. vs. Rockford Board of Education, School District No. 205. United States
Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit, No. 00-3200. 2001.
Pierce, C. 1969. “Is Bigotry the Basis of the Medical Problems of the Ghetto?.” In Medicine in the
Ghetto, edited by J. C. Norman, 301–314. New York: Meredith Corporation.
Pierce, C.M. 1970. “Offensive Mechanisms.” In The Black ’70’s, edited by F. B. Barbour, 265–282.
Boston, MA: Porter Sargent.
Rivers, I. D., D. Patton, L. Farmer-Hinton, L. R., and J. D Lewis. 2021. “That Wasn’t My Reality:
Counter-Narratives of Educational Success as East St. Louis’ Educators “Reimagine” Savage
Inequalities.” Urban Education. doi:10.1177/0042085920987283.
RACE ETHNICITY AND EDUCATION 17
Rousseau Anderson, C. 2011. “What Do You See? the Supreme Court Decision in PICS and the
Resegregation of Two Southern School Districts.” Teachers College Record 113 (4): 755–786.
Russell, M. 1992. “Entering Great America: Reflections on Race and the Convergence of
Progressive Legal Theory and Practice.” Hastings Law Journal 43: 749–767.
Scheurich, J.J. 1998. “Highly Successful and Loving, Public Elementary Schools Populated Mainly
by Low-ses Children of Color: Core Beliefs and Cultural Characteristics.” Urban Education
33 (4): 451–491. doi:10.1177/0042085998033004001.
Shujaa, M.J. 1994. Too Much Schooling, Too Little Education: A Paradox of Black Life in White
Societies. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.
Siddle Walker, E.V. 1996. Their Highest Potential: An African American School Community in the
Segregated South. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Siddle Walker, E.V. 2000. “Valued Segregated Schools for African American Children in the South,
1935–1969: A Review of Common Themes and Characteristics.” Review of Educational Research
70 (3): 253–286. doi:10.3102/00346543070003253.
Siddle Walker, V. 2018. The Lost Education of Horace Tate. New York: New Press.
Smith, W. A. 2016, June. “Understanding the Corollaries of Offensive Racial Mechanisms,
Gendered Racism, and Racial Battle Fatigue”. Center for Critical Race Studies at U.C.L.A.
Research Brief 1: 1–4.
Smith, W.A., P. G. Altbach, and K. Lomotey, Eds. 2002. The Racial Crisis in American Higher
Education: Continuing Challenges to the Twenty-first Century. Albany: State University of
New York Press.
Smith, W. A., T. J. Yosso, and D. G. Solórzano. 2011. “Challenging Racial Battle Fatigue on
Historically White Campuses: A Critical Race Examination of Race-related Stress.” In Covert
Racism: Theories, Institutions, and Experiences, edited by R. D. Coates, 211–237. Bolton,
Massachusetts: Brill.
Smith, W. A., J. B. Mustaffa, C. Jones, T. J. Curry, and W. R. Allen. 2016. ““You Make Me Wanna
Holler and Throw up Both My Hands!”: Campus Culture, Black Misandric Microaggressions,
and Racial Battle Fatigue.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 29 (9):
1189–1209. doi:10.1080/09518398.2016.1214296.
Smith, W. A., M. Hung, and J. D. Franklin. 2011. “Racial Battle Fatigue and the Miseducation of
Black Men: Racial Microaggressions, Societal Problems, & Environmental Stress.” Journal of
Negro Education 80 (1): 63–82.
Smith, W. A., T. J. Yosso, and D. G. Solórzano. 2007. “Racial Primes and Black Misandry on
Historically White Campuses: Toward Critical Race Accountability in Educational
Administration.” Educational Administration Quarterly 43 (5): 559–585. doi:10.1177/
0013161X07307793.
Smith, W.A., J.D. Franklin, and M. Hung. 2020. “The Impact of Racial Microaggressions across
Educational Attainment for African Americans.” Journal of Minority Achievement, Creativity,
and Leadership 1 (1): 70–93. doi:10.5325/minoachicrealead.1.1.0070.
Solórzano, D. G., M. Ceja, and T. J. Yosso. 2000. “Critical Race Theory, Racial Microaggressions,
and Campus Racial Climate: The Experiences of African American College Students.” Journal of
Negro Education 60–73.
Solórzano, D.G. 1997. “Images and Words that Wound: Critical Race Theory, Racial Stereotyping,
and Teacher Education.” Teacher Education Quarterly 24: 5–19.
Solórzano, D.G. 1998. “Critical Race Theory, Racial and Gender Microaggressions, and the
Experiences of Chicana and Chicano Scholars.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in
Education 11: 121–136. doi:10.1080/095183998236926.
Solórzano, D.G., and T.J. Yosso. 2000. “Toward a Critical Race Theory of Chicana and Chicano
Education.” In Charting New Terrains of Chicana(o)/Latina(o) Education, edited by C. Tejeda,
C. Martinez, Z. Leonardo, and P. McLaren, 35–65. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Solórzano, D.G., and D. Delgado Bernal. 2001. “Examining Transformational Resistance through
a Critical Race and LatCrit Theory Framework: Chicana and Chicano Students in an Urban
Context.” Urban Education 36 (3): 308–342. doi:10.1177/0042085901363002.
18 T. YOSSO ET AL.
Solórzano, D.G., and T.J. Yosso. 2001a. “Critical Race and LatCrit Theory and Method:
Counterstorytelling Chicana and Chicano Graduate School Experiences.” International
Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 14: 471–495. doi:10.1080/09518390110063365.
Solórzano, D.G., and T.J. Yosso. 2001b. “From Racial Stereotyping toward a Critical Race Theory
in Teacher Education.” Multicultural Education 9: 2–8.
Solórzano, D.G., and T.J. Yosso. 2002. “A Critical Race Counterstory of Race, Racism, and
Affirmative Action.” Equity and Excellence in Education 35 (2): 155–168. doi:10.1080/713845284.
Tate, W. 1994. “From Inner City to Ivory Tower: Does My Voice Matter in the Academy?.” Urban
Education 29 (3): 245–269. doi:10.1177/0042085994029003002.
Tate, W. 1997. “Critical Race Theory and Education: History, Theory, and Implications.” Review of
Research in Education 22: 195–247. doi:10.3102/0091732X022001195.
Taylor, E. 2000. “Critical Race Theory and Interest Convergence in the Backlash against
Affirmative Action: Washington State and Initiative 200.” Teachers College Record 102 (3):
539–560. doi:10.1111/0161-4681.00067.
Tillman, L.C. 2004. “African American Principals and the Legacy of Brown.” Review of Research in
Education 28: 101–146. doi:10.3102/0091732X028001101.
United States v. Fordice, 505 U.S. 717, 1992.
Valdes, F., J. McCristal-Culp, and A. Harris, Eds. 2002. Crossroads, Directions, and a New Critical
Race Theory. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Villalpando, O. 2003. “Self-segregation or Self-preservation? A Critical Race Theory and Latina/o
Critical Theory Analysis of Findings from A Longitudinal Study of Chicana/o College
Students.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 16: 619–646. doi:10.1080/
0951839032000142922.
Wells, A. S., and I. Serna. 1996. “The Politics of Culture: Understanding Local Political Resistance
to Detracking Racially Mixed Schools.” Harvard Educational Review 66 (1): 93–118.
White, M. A. 2002. “Paradise Lost? Teachers’ Perspectives on the Use of Cultural Capital in the
Segregated Schools of New Orleans, Louisiana.” The Journal of African American History, 87(2),
269–281.
Wing, A. K., Ed. 1997. Critical Race Feminism: A Reader. New York: New York University Press.
Wing, A. K., Ed. 2000. Global Critical Race Feminism: An International Reader. New York:
New York University Press.
Woodson, C.G. 1933. The Mis-education of the Negro. Washington, D.C.: Associated Publishers.
Yosso, T.J. 2005. “Whose Culture Has Capital? A Critical Race Theory Discussion of Community
Cultural Wealth.” Race Ethnicity and Education 8 (1): 69–91. doi:10.1080/
1361332052000341006.
Yosso, T.J. 2006. Critical Race Counterstories along the Chicana/Chicano Educational Pipeline.
New York: Routledge.
Yosso, T.J., and D.G. García. 2007. “This Is No Slum!”: A Critical Race Theory Analysis of
Community Cultural Wealth in Culture Clash’s Chavez Ravine.” Aztlan: A Journal of Chicano
Studies 32 (1): 145–179.
Yosso, T.J., and D.G. García. 2008. “Cause It’s Not Just Me”: Walkout’s History Lessons Challenge
Hollywood’s Urban High School Formula.” Radical History Review 102: 171–184. doi:10.1215/
01636545-2008-022.
Yosso, T.J., L. Parker, D.G. Solórzano, and M. Lynn. 2004. “From Jim Crow to Affirmative Action
and Back Again: A Critical Race Discussion of Racialized Rationales and Access to Higher
Education.” Review of Research in Education 28: 1–25. doi:10.3102/0091732X028001001.
Zamudio, M.M., C. Russell, F.A. Rios, and J.L. Bridgeman. 2011. Critical Race Theory Matters:
Education and Ideology. New York: Routledge.
RACE ETHNICITY AND EDUCATION 19
