The Spectrum of Discourse: A Case Study Utilizing Critical Race Theory and Critical Discourse Analysis

Abstract

This case study provides empirical evidence of the master and counternarrative described by Critical Race Theory (CRT) and seeks to understand the impact of these narratives in educational policy and practice. In 2010, Arizona passed A.R.S. §15-112, a law that was designed to eliminate the Mexican American Studies (MAS) program in the Tucson Unified School District. Utilizing the literature on culturally-relevant pedagogy and leadership, this case study uses a CRT theoretical framework and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) methodology to analyze the narratives of 26 participants. While the program was under investigation by the State for violation of A.R.S. §15-112 all of the teachers involved in MAS participated in qualitative interviews. In addition, this case study analyzes the narratives of two student focus groups, school administrators, and district governing board members well as the written findings of two former State Superintendents of Public Instruction both of whom found the program in violation of the law. By specifically focusing on the styles and genres described in a CDA methodology the findings provide evidence of both the master and counternarrative but also a spectrum of discourse in which other forms of narrative reside. Implications from this research include a more complex theory of discourse beyond the dichotomy of the master and counternarrative, the application of a new methodological tool in CRT, and recommendations for educational leaders and policy makers interested in advocating for a culturally relevant approach.