Dear Members,
 
We are writing to invite you to apply as a reviewer for proposals for our SIG for AERA 2019 in Toronto, Canada. It is only through the involvement and dedication of our members that quality presentations continue to represent our SIG and the scholarly perspectives we find important.
 
We know many of you volunteer to review for more than one Divison or SIG, and we do hope that you choose CESJ as one that gains your valuable time and energy. Graduate students are also encouraged to sign up as reviewers. Deadline to volunteer is May 22.
 
For more information, please see the AERA website (www.aera.net) or the following call: http://www.aera.net/Events-Meetings/Annual-Meeting/2019-Annual-Meeting-Volunteer-Reviewer-System-Open
 
 Thank you!
 
Shantá Robinson (Outgoing 2018 CESJ SIG Program Co-Chair)
Nini Hayes (2018-2019 CESJ Program Co-Chair)

Just added!  Webinar transcript

As you prepare for AERA, we invite you to review the recording or transcript of our first CESJ webinar, entitled "Navigating and Thriving in the Academy as a Critical Scholar"

See below for additional details and recommended readings, or jump directly to the recording at
http://ctesiu.adobeconnect.com/pczav5nm5mwq/ .  You can also review a transcript of the session here.

​Dear CESJ SIG Members and Friends
 
CESJ's first webinar "Navigating and Thriving in the Academy as a Critical Scholar" was a huge success.  We'd also like to extend our deepest thanks and gratitude to Dean Kinloch and Dr. Patel who provided incredible wisdom, candor, and affirmation. We received an overwhelming response from participants expressing their feelings of inspiration and solidarity to continue this work together. Many also expressed a desire to continue the conversation. We'd like to suggest the hashtag #criticaleducatorsolidarity to use on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and our other social media outlets to connect and support each other.
 
In you were unable to attend the taped webinar can be viewed at the following link:
http://ctesiu.adobeconnect.com/pczav5nm5mwq/ .  You can also review a transcript of the session here.
In addition to the webinar, Dean Kinloch and Dr. Patel have provided a list of sources referred to in the webinar for further reading:

• Sylvia Wynter - everything she's written, seriously
• Robin Kelley, Freedom Dreams
• Cedric Robinson's Black Marxism
• Joyce E. King, specifically on the attenuation of humanity that happens through domination
• Ruthie Wilson Gilmore - this book contains her definition of racism 

We hope that the conversation that Dean Kinloch and Dr. Patel started will be one we can continue in our SIG's work. Please be on the look out for other upcoming CESJ events. If you have not yet joined our SIG through your AERA membership, we encourage you to do so to join our listserv to receive information about our events, such as the AERA pre-session Graduate Student Forum, the Early Career Scholars Forum, and the AERA CESJ business meeting and social. We look forward to seeing you at the business meeting at AERA (we are awaiting the program announcement from AERA for the date/time.) 
http://www.cesjsig.org/ 
In solidarity,
Kari & Sosanya
 

We are starting a new series called “Stories of Hope and Resistance” which will be featured in our newsletter and on our blog. Working to eradicate and mitigate inequality and injustice can be tiring and demoralizing. In addition to minding self-care, we also need to listen and share stories that remind us of why we fight and how we can fight future battles. We hope this series offers you a renewed sense of purpose, hope, and commitment for your work.

Note: We received so many entries for this first round that we have decided to replace this issue’s scholar-activist entry with half of the stories we received. We will feature the other half of the stories in our next issue.


The rain and gloomy weather seemed appropriate at the start,
as students first huddled together outside Campbell Hall.
But as our voices echoed,
as we made way to Storke Tower –
our unity,
our community,
caused the sun to break the clouds.
We walked out of class and work this Friday January 20th 2017,
joining hands, arms, steps and voices,
as we made way through our campus communities.
United against Trump,
against racism,
against xenophobia,
against Islamophobia,
against gender violence,
against the intolerances.
Our faculty, staff, and students together chanting,
from our hearts,
from our minds.
From our brilliance, our intelligence, and our power,
the chants were loud,
our anger, our resistance, and our hopes ever roaring.
And as I stood and listened to my community,
my brothers, my sisters,
my student family,
express fear and concern for our lives,
I heard snaps, loud claps and witnessed many raised fists to the sky.

We students, we social justice advocates,
we share our dedication and hope for equitable futures,
for dismantling the injustices,
for resisting the racisms.
Today, tomorrow and the next,
Me, we, and UCSB will not rest.


 Written by Jenny Sperling – University of California Santa Barbara

-----------
At my institution, it would be an understatement to say that many of us have been shaken this year – not just by events during the presidential election, but also by the constant stories of violence against Black and Brown faces.  While many faculty members felt as though the divides are just too much to overcome, some of us felt otherwise.

With this in mind, and feeling a bit brave, we organized an event called “Bridging the Chasm: Social and Political Dialogue that Matters”.  While we initially wanted to have an event that honored those who feel frightened by the events in our country, we instead decided to have a more inclusive event, with voices around the table that may not ever share a room normally.  This conversation included a student of Muslim decent; an advocate for those who are transgender; a pro-life advocate; a leader from the campus multi-cultural and diversity organization; a feminist; a retired US colonel; a student who represented Black Lives Matter; and voices from a variety of political affiliations.  We were hopeful that we might have civil dialogue, but worried that the event would devolve into more acts of hate speech.

At the end of the conversation, I can say that we were proud to have had two hours of civil, thoughtful, critical discourse.  While we certainly did not solve any problems during that time, we did bring together viewpoints that are often difficult to hear, depending on your own beliefs and values.  We stripped away some fear of the “other” and hopefully broke down some barriers to healthy, productive, hopeful conversation.

Written by Dr. Danielle T. Ligocki
Assistant Professor, Teacher Development and Educational Studies
Oakland University
-----------
The Morning After

The morning after –a space in which one finds themselves after a rough night.  The morning after requires a “thing” to cleanse away the remnants from the night before. But for this morning after…there’s nothing to take.  Nothing to do or say. On this morning after, as I prepare to go to work, I know the person who shares my space also knows it’s the morning after. She knows there’s nothing to say to a person like me from a person like her who said they voted for HRC – but secretly, she knows she didn’t.  She and the other women know today is that morning after when 53% of them and a percent so small of women who look like me are responsible for this morning after space…And now we’re wondering…Now we’re cautious and suspicious.
This is not that, “I thought I knew you and you knew me and even though you live in that skin that says regardless of your credentials or mine, you’ll win, and we’re okay anyway,” space. No…on this morning after, we’re not okay. An unexpected line’s been drawn. And since it’s that morning after, we’re silent because we know what morning after today is. It’s a morning after that’s brought a heaviness for which there are simply no words. We’re silent on this morning after and when we get to this day’s end, we sigh, knowing we’ve survived.

Written by Tanji Reed Marshall, PhD Candidate, Curriculum & Instruction, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University
--------------
It is nearly impossible to find silver-lining amidst the fear and uncertainty that the election of Donald Trump and his cabinet have aroused in the hearts of many educators. Yet, we know as critical educators, it is our work to persistently navigate that trying terrain that lies between hope and despair. In the days following the election, 26 members the Curriculum and Instruction Department at the University of Texas at Austin gathered together without a plan, but with a sense of urgency to address the threats that this election poses to the well-being of many of our students and community members. Within the course of the meeting we, professors and graduate students, formed what is now known as the Coalition Against Racism, Hate, and Violence. Together, and in anticipation of the dangerous and uncertain future, we drafted a statement in order to be clear about what we stand for and what we stand against. Most importantly, we collectively made the decision to stand in solidarity as concerned educators and with those who have been historically harmed and are presently targeted by emboldened violence and hateful rhetoric. Our work will continue to be amplified, to be unambiguous, and to move in a direction of hope for a more just society, as we stand alongside one another in sustained and active resistance. The community, trust, and solidarity we are working to build inspires hope – a silver-lining of sorts – that reminds me of what is possible when people choose to engage in unified resistance.

----------
Killing Their Souls

This past spring I attended a session within an academic conference on Women of Color in academia. The theme of the session was how academic institutions advertently and inadvertently, through both policies and procedures, impose racism, sexism, and other discriminatory ‘-isms’ onto their students, faculty, and staff members. The women of this session discussed how their intersectionality of identities was at odds with the dominant culture of their professional institutions and this schism caused not only personal distress but also trauma. They boldly proclaimed that many of their ‘souls were dying’.  These provocative claims have resonated within me for months. As I sat there, in that cold conference room, I asked myself what is killing their souls and were their souls really dying?

The idea of the slow death of one’s soul has haunted me for months. I have asked myself repeatedly as an educator, who colludes in the killing of one’s soul? Have I ever played a role in the killing of a student’s soul?

This school year as the presidential election has transpired; I have taken this opportunity to make not only history but also civics come alive for my students, their engagement in this year’s election process was extensive and they greatly enjoyed it. But the as the ballots were cast and president elect was named, I saw the lights in their eyes start to dim. This was not the outcome that they expected, but more importantly their new president seemed to be in direct opposition to who they are as young people of color. Some cried daily, as what were believed to be idle threats about the ‘building of a wall’ or ‘helping the blacks’ or ‘grabbing women by their genitalia’ became more real.

On the day of Donald Trump’s inauguration, I could feel the tension within my classroom boiling up. My students were on edge and their nerves had gotten the best of them. Their eyes were low and their spirits were noticeably crushed. In that moment I understood what it meant to watch one’s soul die, it was happening right in front of my eyes within their little bodies. Before I could even start their day of learning my administrator came into my classroom and asked why I wasn’t showing the children the inauguration.

I was appalled. I did not think it was necessary to explain that for this population of students, who did not possess the skill sets need to situate this event in their lives, showing the inauguration was grossly inappropriate. It became my job to protect their souls.

How could I, not only as their teacher, but also as someone who looks and feels like them, allow them to watch someone who has said racist, demeaning, discriminatory, and obscene comments get promoted to the highest office in our country. Although this act of resistance was minute, on this day I could not play a role in the killing of their souls.

Written by Martha Ann Wilkins Ed.D
Educator

So long as White Supremacy (and people who want to fight it) exists, racial conflict will always manifest – and it is perhaps in higher education where this should be most welcomed and nurtured. It should not be feared. More specifically, racial protests should not be ignored – they are in fact the very awesome phenomenon that occurs when injustice meets knowledge.
 
Racial conflict is a product of a system that continues to fight racial hierarchies. Racial conflict also signifies discord between beliefs, values and practices within a group or between two or more constituencies.  If we consider the various groups that currently coexist within our universities, we must learn to accept racial conflict as a natural part of a diverse system. If we consider ourselves defenders of justice and as stakeholders in the education of global citizens, then we should accept racial protest as a form of racial conflict that attempts to correct injustices committed against under-represented and under-served minoritized groups in higher education.
 
White Supremacy is a system in which beliefs, values, and practices are developed, maintained and upheld to preserve social and political dominance of one racialized population over all others When non-dominant racial populations contest those beliefs, values, and practices, racial contestation – a type of organizational conflict - arises. Thus, racial conflict should be taken seriously on college campuses – whether it is a racist verbal interaction between two students or larger more structural forms of racial conflict (e.g. stating that diversity is an important value of the university while overtly or subtly resisting the hiring and promotion of People of Color in faculty and senior administration). These incidents of racial conflict suggest that there are clashes in racial beliefs, values, and practices within the institution. The outcome of these conflicts reveals the interests of the institutions of higher education.
 
My research on campus racial conflict reveal important information about racial conflict (some which are included at the end of this piece) but among them is that students do not trust administrators to do the right thing when it comes to campus racial conflict.  Some students admit that they don’t trust administrators because they believe they represent and protect the institution and not them.
 
Additionally (to my surprise!), my research also reveals that administrators felt that they had a sense of how students were feeling about the racial climate on their campus – until their students were interviewed and their thoughts recorded by the media.  They felt that students often gave a different opinion about the racial climate when the representatives from the media asked them about the same issue.
 
Drawing on over a year of qualitative research involving 35 interviews with students, faculty, and administrators, I examined the perceptions of campus racial conflict at two types of institutions of higher education: a minority-serving institution (MSI) and a historically White institution (HWI). Based on the data, I highlight several strategies below that can be employed by colleges and universities seeking to understand students’ experiences with racial conflict:
 

1. Be clear about campus racial conflict policies and consequences
2. Be honest about the kinds of incidents of racial conflict students have experienced at their particular institution. Part of my research agenda includes a typology of incidents that may occur at different institutional types.  This typology can then be modified to each institution that desire to delve deeper into this topic.
3. MSIs (Minority Serving Institutions) can suffer from incidents of racial conflict, too. MSIs should do regular investigations of the kinds of institutional and structural forms of racial conflict that may be more likely to occur at these institutions.
4. HWIs (Historically White Institutions) need to re-evaluate and study the effectiveness of their diversity mechanisms.
5. Racial conflict can’t be addressed in one training day.  In fact, some of my respondents desire a conversation that goes beyond punitive practices. If racial conflict is only addressed when something “bad” happens, we tell stakeholders that racism isn’t a part of our daily lives and it occurs only at “bad” institutions.
6. Employ people who have the skills to study the aftermath of an incident of racial conflict is important to study. According to my respondents, these incidents often spur an interest in learning about the history of the institution, an increased desire to take classes that address race and racism in society, and know who allies are.
7. Take care of those affected by racial battle fatigue. If some stakeholders are tired of “diversity talk” on their campuses, there are a whole other group that are tired from always being called upon to do the work that ends up as a study on a bookshelf. Addressing racial battle fatigue is an important part of addressing campus racial conflict. This especially should be emphasized among those who participate in racial protests.

 
Campus racial conflict is a daily occurrence at all our institutions, whether it makes a headline or not.  Campus racial protest, a form of racial conflict, is an active type of racial contestation that opposes a White Supremacist regime. Diversity politics, then, is an important tool but not sufficient in the battle against White Supremacists beliefs, values, and practices - with some study these could be identified on our campuses.  Our job as student affairs administrators is to be honest with ourselves and figure out what role we play in this kind of environment: do we want to maintain the regime as it is? Do we want to be the band-aid with the hope that these incidents of racial conflict will heal on their own? Or do we aspire to temporary peaks of progress and employ mechanisms that truly combat White Supremacy