Comparing Coalitions’ Narrative Strategy Around Anti–Critical Race Theory State Legislation: A Narrative Policy Framework Study

• In Event: AERA Roundtable Session Thursday 5:25 pm Four Seasons Ballroom 1
  In Roundtable Session: Discursive Politics and Controversy-Making in Curricular Reform Movements (Table 9)

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to identify how narrative strategy differed, if at all, between opposing coalitions who testified on anti-Critical Race Theory legislation in Arizona. Using Narrative Policy Framework, I quantitatively assess the use of narrative elements in two years of legislative data (2022 and 2023) to determine how debating coalitions used narrative elements in their legislative testimony. While recent researchers have investigated anti-Critical Race narratives, this work seeks to explore how local opposition movements are building their own counter narratives to these bills. I find that both sides use different narrative strategy, and I begin to build a case for how local advocacy coalitions may strengthen their case against future anti-Critical Race Theory legislation.

Author

• Breanne Bushu, Self-Employed