Critical Race Imaginations of Science Epistemology

• In Event: 64.086 - MTCC Roundtable Session 27
  In Roundtable Session: 64.086-13 - Black in (and) STEM: Narratives of Resistance and Social-Psychological Outcomes

Abstract

If science, as we come to know it in formal contexts, was developed and constructed with Black women, as opposed to the exploitation and dehumanization of Black women’s body’s, how might science epistemology be more equitable? This paper takes up Critical Race Feminism and Curriculum Theory to address the inequitable nature of mainstream science. This is done in part by unpacking the history of science and seeing how the currere (Pinar, 2012) of Black could inform science curriculum.
Critical Race Feminism (CRF) functions as a theoretical framework that combats racial and gender oppression from multiple standpoints. Critical race feminism, an outgrowth of critical race theory (Delgado & Stefancic, 2012), acknowledges and examines oppression at the intersections of race and gender. Crenshaw (1991) elaborates on how CRF differs from CRT in that it examined policies such as the 1996 Welfare Reform Act and the implications and impact of that law on women of color. Critical race feminism has emerged as an area of study that focuses on women of color and their connection to the law and public policy's impact on their lives as women, both in the U.S. and in an international context of race, gender and nationality (Wing, 1997).
My employment of Curriculum Theory as defined by Pinar (2012) is used to highlight the interdisciplinary study of educational experience and to consider the ways in which stories and experiences contribute to how we make meaning of the world. Pinar (1995), pushes scholars to not only reimagine, but to reconceptualize curriculum. This component of Curriculum Theory aligns neatly CRF, given its relationship to counter-storytelling/narrative. As a critical theory concerned with addressing issues of power, Curriculum Theory prompts the acknowledgment of not only experience, but how the experiences may be shaped as a result of sexuality, gender, race, class, and more (Carlson, 2005). In essence, the acknowledgment of curriculum as autobiographical aids in validating the real-life experiences shared by students across generations and culture (Bell, 2010). Pinar posits theory must not reinforce class differences, but it should help dissolve them; it should not be reserved for the privilege but become a mode of analysis which challenges unjust privilege; it must not hang alienated from practice in some timeless realm. As such, I employ these frameworks to force the re-imagination and reconceptualization of science with the traditionally excludes voices, of Black women and their experiences, centered. I couple CRF with Curriculum Studies to address the autobiography of science, while also calling into question practices and teachings of science that are misogynistic, white supremacist, and thereby anti-black.
Semi-Structured interviews conducted with Black women scientists and archival data were used as the primary data sources for this study. Using CRF as the data analytical tool allowed for an analysis and interpretation of the counter-stories presented across the varying narratives. In the final stage of the interpretation, I drew upon the multiple sources to construct a composite currere as a means of reconceptualizing science curricula.

Author

• Reanna S. Roby, Michigan State University