Tough Conversations and Missed Opportunities: The Challenges of Implementing District Policies for Racial Equity

• In Event: Problems of Practice in Research on Educational Inequalities: Lessons From the Los Angeles Region

Abstract

Purpose
Racial inequity is an intractable problem in American K-12 education (Lewis & Diamond, 2015), and the diverse Los Angeles area faces particular equity challenges. To advance racial justice, numerous southern California districts are pursuing varied reforms with racial equity goals. However, limited research addresses how districts can disrupt entrenched racial inequities. To address this gap, this qualitative study of two southern California districts poses the following questions:
1. What policies do district leaders associate with racial equity goals, and how are these policies implemented?
2. What factors influence the implementation of these policies, and how so?

Theoretical Framework
This study is grounded in activity theory (Engeström & Miettinen, 1999), which offers a lens for understanding how actors working collectively towards a common object are constrained by—but can also change—their cultural contexts. I extend activity theory by drawing on literature on racial conceptions and discourses (e.g., Bonilla-Silva, 2012) to create a framework of five cultural “rules” that may maintain racial inequity in district policy implementation. These rules include normalizing Whiteness, maintaining colorblindness, individualizing racism, focusing on diversity, and attributing inequity to non-racial factors.

Activity theory suggests that change is prompted by the emergence and resolution of contradictions within the activity system (Engeström & Sannino, 2011). These contradictions provide opportunities to challenge racialized cultural norms, yet educators might also respond to contradictions by re-asserting the status quo, undermining racial equity goals.

Methods
I employ a multiple case study (Yin, 2013) of two southern California school districts, each implementing four racial equity policies during the 2018-19 school year. Data sources include interviews (n=32) with district and school-level actors; observations (44 hours) of district and school implementation efforts; and documents used in districts’ equity efforts (e.g., slide decks used in professional development). Data were analyzed through iterative cycles of coding and matrices to develop within-case themes for each policy, followed by cross-case matrices, network displays, and analytic memos to determine overall findings (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014).

Results
Policies that explicitly addressed race and racism—such as workshops on racial bias—faced defensiveness from participants, and also seemed to have minimal impact on practice. In contrast, efforts to promote equity by improving school climate and instruction were generally positively received and appeared to have prompted concrete practice changes—yet these efforts missed opportunities for challenging racism. Furthermore, all eight policies featured dynamics that undermined espoused racial equity goals, including the construction of targeted student groups in ways that reflected racial hierarchies, and the repeated articulation of deficit views of students and families of color.

Significance
Despite extensive evidence of racial inequity in education, districts’ role in furthering racial justice remains understudied. This paper identifies how district leaders seek to disrupt racial inequity, and the pitfalls that can undermine these well-intentioned efforts. Overall, this paper presents crucial insights to guide future research, policy, and practice for racial justice in the Los Angeles region and nationally.

Author

• Taylor N. Allbright, California State Polytechnic University - Pomona