Ground-Truthing as Critical Race Feminista Methodology: Toward an Embodied and Community-Centered GIS in Educational Inquiry

• In Event: Critical Race Feminista Methodologies in Educational Research

Abstract

Purpose and Theoretical Framework
This paper extends the methodological proposal of “ground-truthing” in Critical Race Spatial Analysis (CRSA) (Vélez & Solórzano, 2017) to consider GIS as Critical Race Feminista Methodology (CRFM) (Delgado Bernal et al., 2018). CRFM braids Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Chicana Feminisms to capture both the systemic and embodied realities of living and navigating U.S. society as People and Women of Color. In this paper, the authors employ CRFM to capture both the structural and embodied experiences in socio-spatial relationships by redefining technical GIS approaches key to ground-truthing — projection, layers, scale, and visualization.

Methods and Findings
Traditionally, GIS technicians are sent into the field to verify remote-sensing data via “ground truthing.” This process was repurposed in CRSA to “ground” mapmaking in the spatial wisdom of Communities of Color as necessary to developing counter-cartographic narratives. Through ground-truthing, CRSA provides an important lens to examine “color-lines” (Du Bois, 1903) and its impact on the everyday lives of People of Color. Missing in this initial (re)conceptualization was the theoretical sensitivity to examine spatiality in these experiences — the more intimate aspects of space that center on identity and knowledge of place. The authors engage CRFM to extend ground-truthing by redefining GIS projection, layers, scale, and visualization. They begin by centering GIS projection in the Brown body (Cruz, 2001), honoring the knowledges produced from occupying multiple systems of oppression and starting GIS projects from “inner acts” geared toward addressing injustices inscribed onto the body. Next, they build on the concept of cultural intuition (Delgado Bernal, 1998) to define GIS layers as a process that incorporates the knowledge of Latinx families, communities, ancestors, and collaborators. From here, they consider the concept of nos/otras (Anzaldúa, 2002) to foreground the limitations of only centering the “nos” — our own families and communities — and how we might reconstruct the use of scale in GIS to make visible how individual experiences with systems of oppression are also collectively experienced and felt by others. Lastly, the authors wrestle with GIS visualization practices through a decolonial imaginary (Pérez, 1999) to envision spaces and worlds that have yet to be conceived. Across each of these techniques, the authors share examples from their work to demonstrate how CRFM expands new possibilities to innovate GIS in educational inquiry.

Scholarly Significance and Implications
Aligning GIS techniques to CRFM 1) made visible how CRFM shapes specific practices, providing a more intimate look at how critical theoretical frameworks inform methodological strategies in GIS and 2) expanded the possibilities of “ground-truthing” for educational research that links structural and embodied phenomena in pursuit of spatial transformation. While geo-spatial technologies have experienced a surge in educational scholarship, the pizzazz of GIS leans on high-spectacle displays of data at the expense of theoretical rigor. Thus, it was imperative to make explicit critical alignments and applications for its use in education. Further, by extending GIS as an embodied and community-centered practice through CRFM, the authors endeavor to map new cartographies that center subaltern social imaginations to create more humanizing and liberatory educational spaces.

Authors

• Mayra Puente, University of California - Santa Barbara

• Verónica Nelly Vélez, Western Washington University