无声的盟约和结构性障碍:州立标准委员会与种族入侵性社会研究标准的维持

IF 3.5 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Aera Open Pub Date : 2024-08-10 DOI:10.1177/23328584241265303
Christopher C. Martell, Lauren McArthur Harris, J’Shon Lee, Jennifer P. Chalmers, Jami Carmichael
{"title":"无声的盟约和结构性障碍:州立标准委员会与种族入侵性社会研究标准的维持","authors":"Christopher C. Martell, Lauren McArthur Harris, J’Shon Lee, Jennifer P. Chalmers, Jami Carmichael","doi":"10.1177/23328584241265303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this qualitative study, researchers used critical race theory to examine the experiences of social studies standards committee members in 18 states and the District of Columbia. They found that while many participants articulated goals of increasing the teaching of race and racism in their state’s social studies standards, at least in part, numerous silent covenants and structural barriers existed to maintain the status quo through race-evasive standards. A smaller group of participants generally avoided advocating for race and racism topics altogether due to their perceived controversial or political status, while others did not mention race or racism as a priority. Recommendations are made for both the policy and practice related to state standards creation, and questions are raised about the ability of social studies standards to foster a racially just social studies curriculum.","PeriodicalId":31132,"journal":{"name":"Aera Open","volume":"72 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Silent Covenants and Structural Barriers: State Standards Committees and the Maintenance of Race-Evasive Social Studies Standards\",\"authors\":\"Christopher C. Martell, Lauren McArthur Harris, J’Shon Lee, Jennifer P. Chalmers, Jami Carmichael\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23328584241265303\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this qualitative study, researchers used critical race theory to examine the experiences of social studies standards committee members in 18 states and the District of Columbia. They found that while many participants articulated goals of increasing the teaching of race and racism in their state’s social studies standards, at least in part, numerous silent covenants and structural barriers existed to maintain the status quo through race-evasive standards. A smaller group of participants generally avoided advocating for race and racism topics altogether due to their perceived controversial or political status, while others did not mention race or racism as a priority. Recommendations are made for both the policy and practice related to state standards creation, and questions are raised about the ability of social studies standards to foster a racially just social studies curriculum.\",\"PeriodicalId\":31132,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aera Open\",\"volume\":\"72 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aera Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584241265303\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aera Open","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584241265303","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这项定性研究中,研究人员运用批判性种族理论考察了 18 个州和哥伦比亚特区的社 会研究标准委员会成员的经历。他们发现,虽然许多参与者明确提出了在本州的社会研究标准中增加种族和种族主义教学的目标,但至少在一定程度上,存在着许多无声的契约和结构性障碍,以通过具有种族侵蚀性的标准来维持现状。还有一小部分参与者由于认为种族和种族主义问题具有争议性或政治地位,一般都避 而不提,而另一些人则没有把种族或种族主义问题作为优先考虑的问题。对制定州立标准的相关政策和实践提出了建议,并对社会研究标准能否促进种族公正 的社会研究课程提出了疑问。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Silent Covenants and Structural Barriers: State Standards Committees and the Maintenance of Race-Evasive Social Studies Standards
In this qualitative study, researchers used critical race theory to examine the experiences of social studies standards committee members in 18 states and the District of Columbia. They found that while many participants articulated goals of increasing the teaching of race and racism in their state’s social studies standards, at least in part, numerous silent covenants and structural barriers existed to maintain the status quo through race-evasive standards. A smaller group of participants generally avoided advocating for race and racism topics altogether due to their perceived controversial or political status, while others did not mention race or racism as a priority. Recommendations are made for both the policy and practice related to state standards creation, and questions are raised about the ability of social studies standards to foster a racially just social studies curriculum.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Aera Open
Aera Open EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
7.10%
发文量
60
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Cross-National Comparison of the Relative Size of Lower-Tail and Upper-Tail SES Achievement Gaps Measuring the Efficacy of Zearn Math in Louisiana Undergraduate Grading Practices of International and Domestic Faculty: Evidence From Three Large U.S. Public Universities Does Knowing the Word Matter for Preschool DLLS? Individualized Vocabulary Words on Phonological Awareness Performance Silent Covenants and Structural Barriers: State Standards Committees and the Maintenance of Race-Evasive Social Studies Standards
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1