Forging Bonds and Crossing Borders with Youth Participatory
Action Research
Cherese D.
Childers-McKee
University of North
Carolina at Greensboro
Author Note
Cherese Childers-McKee, PhD Student in the Department of Educational Leadership and Cultural Foundations, University of North Carolina at Greensboro,
Correspondence concerning this manuscript should be addressed to Cherese Childers-McKee, Department of Educational Leadership and Cultural Foundations, UNC-Greensboro, School of Education Building, Greensboro, NC 27412. E-mail: cdchilde@uncg.edu/cherese.childersmckee@gmail.com
Abstract
How might youth participatory action research (YPAR) foster more
positive intercultural relations between Black and Latino/a students in urban
schools? Drawing upon critical, social
justice-oriented research in education, several YPAR studies are presented to
explore to what degree they address issues of intercultural relations, increase
critical consciousness, confront deficit ideology, and foster empowerment among
youth participants. Implications are
discussed for future research in this area.
Forging Bonds and Crossing Borders with
Youth Participatory Action Research
Introduction
Youth participatory
action research (YPAR) has been used in various school and community contexts
for empowerment (Goessling & Doyle, 2009), literacy (Morrell, 2006), and to
increase youth activism (Fine,
2008; Torre & Fine, 2008; Tuck, 2008; Tuck et al., 2008b) amongst
students of color. However, in the
process of raising students’ critical consciousness of social justice issues
that confront their school and community, fostering positive interethnic
relations could represent a critical nexus to achieving research goals. Studies of interethnic relationships have
been prevalent in political science and community development literature (Gay,
2004, 2006; Quiñones, Ares, Padela, Hopper, & Webster, 2011; Sanchez, 2008)
and in sociology literature (Dixon & Rosenbaum, 2004; Ellison, Shin, &
Leal, 2011; McClain et al., 2006; Quillian & Campbell, 2003). While
traditional studies of intercultural relations primarily reflect a Black[1]/White
binary, more recently scholarship has focused on an increasingly multicultural
populace (Dixon & Rosenbaum, 2004; Quillian & Campbell, 2003). In 2005, the majority of Black and Latino/a
students attended schools that had 75 percent or higher minority enrollment
(NCES, 2007). Despite increases in
contact between these particular groups, and evidence of potential interethnic
conflict in school settings, there is limited research that speaks directly to
relationships between Black and Latino/a students in educational settings
(Quillian & Campbell, 2003). This research
review will explore the potential of YPAR to address intercultural relations in
urban classrooms and school communities amongst urban Black and Latina/o
students.
Literature and Purpose
Youth
Participatory Action Research
In framing a discussion of YPAR and
interethnic relations between students in urban schools, it is necessary to
first explore the larger body of literature related to engaging youth as
co-researchers, as well as data concerning general contact between races and
the importance of relationships and attitudes in educational settings.
YPAR’s focus on
engaging students to “investigate their own realities” (Rahman, 2008, p. 49) in
ways that are nonhierarchical, enlightening, and empowering (Berg, 2004) while
conducting critical analysis of the specific contexts of their schools and
communities (Cammarota & Romero, 2009; Freire, 1970) for the purpose of
social justice makes it an appropriate vehicle through which to theorize building
stronger relationships and communities in urban schools. The ideology behind YPAR borrows from
critical theory, critical race theory, and critical pedagogical traditions in
challenging dominant narratives and engaging in praxis (Kincheloe & McLaren,
2010). McIntyre (2000) outlines three
major components of participatory action research (PAR): “(1) the collective
investigation of a problem, (2) the reliance on indigenous knowledge to better
understand that problem, and (3) the desire to take individual and/or
collective action to deal with the stated problem” (p. 128). Although YPAR may not represent a panacea for
the complex issues faced by urban schools, it holds potential for empowerment
and transformation (Stovall, 2005). YPAR
provides a framework through which youth as researchers may raise their
critical consciousness (Freire, 1970) of issues confronting their schools and
communities, and work for change in ways that are critical and collaborative.
Interethnic
Relations in Urban Schools
Evidence of tension
and strained relations between Blacks and Latino/os has been documented in both
community settings (McClain et al., 2006; Sanchez, 2008) as well as schools
(Quillian & Campbell, 2003).
Multiple contributing factors have been posed including economic strain
and competition for limited resources (Gay, 2004, 2006; Ellison, Shin, &
Leal, 2011) and difficulty in transitioning to a collective other
mentality or feeling a sense of commonality and linked fate (Quiñones, Ares,
Padela, Hopper, & Webster, 2011; Sanchez, 2008). Echoed in Quiñones et al. (2011) description
of Latinas/os hesitancy at being thrown into the same category of Blacks as collective
other, Ladson-Billings and Tate (1995) critique aspects of a colorblind
multiculturalism that operates under the false assumption that “all difference
is both analogous and equivalent” (p. 61) in which “students are taught
erroneously that ‘we are all immigrants’ and, as a result, African American,
Indigenous, and Chicano students are left with the guilt of failing to rise
above their immigrant status ‘like every other group’” (Ladson-Billings, 1998, p. 18). I concur with Quiñones et al. (2011) in
asserting that relations between Blacks and Latinas/os represent an
"under-theorized subject," that requires additional study (p.
105).
Proponents of the
contact theory assert that “close and sustained contact, with members of other
cultural groups provides direct information about the values, lifestyles, and
experiences of members of those groups” which in turn provides “a more
favorable perception of the group(s) in general, countering or displacing
unflattering images or other inaccurate perceptions” (Ellison, Shin, &
Leal, 2011, p. 938-939). However, other
theorists have countered that the assumptions that prejudice is remedied by
superficial contact oversimplifies the entrenched nature of prejudice and that
effects of contact vary depending on the quality, quantity, perceived status of
group members, degree of competitiveness in the environment (Allport,
1954/1979; Dixon & Rosenbaum,
2004). In keeping with this theme of
exploring the complexities of contact, Ellison, Shin, and Leal (2011) discusses
factors that contribute to friendships and contact by exploring attitudes
towards Latina/os in the United States. Ellison,
Shin, and Leal (2011) could only establish a firm, consistent link between, not
simply contact, but close friendships with Latina/o(s) and “attitudinal
outcomes, including stereotyping, respect for the contributions of Latina/os, social
and cultural distance, and views of immigration policy” (p. 951-952). Therefore, despite Blacks and Latina/o students’
regular contact in neighborhoods and schools, research suggests that simply
sharing the same spaces in schools and neighborhood does not constitute the
type of contact that necessarily builds friendships, changes stereotypes and
misperceptions, and promotes community building between the two groups. Additionally, viewing interaction between
blacks and Latinas/os through the same lenses used to discuss Black/White
relationships or as simply an issue of propinquity fails to consider the
effects that language, immigration, and class/economic issues may have on
people of color.
Method
Research
Questions
The potential of YPAR to address youth
empowerment, literacy, and advocacy has been well documented (Cammarota &
Fine, 2008; Morrell, 2006; Stovall, 2005). However,
in order to frame a discussion of the potential of YPAR to address interethnic
relations amongst Blacks and Latino’s in urban school, I began by selecting two
research questions to guide the analysis.
1) Has YPAR been utilized to
address interethnic relations between students in urban schools? 2) How has YPAR been used to raise students’
critical consciousness about issues that may influence interethnic
relations?
Identification
of YPAR studies
In keeping with
Jackson’s (1980) description of appropriate procedures for conducting research
reviews, I outline the rationale for the particular methods and analysis used
in this review. Researchers that assume
more of a community engaged research approach to YPAR often view students as
co-researchers in the investigative process in which, depending on the initial
goal, may take the form of formal articles, interactive websites, policy
documents, oral presentations, conference presentations, or formal reports to
be presented to a particular audience.
Therefore, in identifying YPAR studies that addressed student
relationships, I attempted to make my initial search as broad as possible which
included academic search databases (ERIC /EBSCO), a search of the campus
library special collections which contains reports of research and reports
conducted locally, book collection searches, the CES4Health database that
provides abstracts of community and school-based research, and a general
internet search. A variety of search
terms were used including urban education, urban schools, action research,
participatory research, youth (generated 212 results in EBSCO/ERIC) and
the search was narrowed considerable (68) by adding the term relationships. The web search was conducted with the
terms youth participatory action research, Black, Latino, and relationships.
Then, articles/websites were chosen
for further analysis that specifically engaged in school or community YPAR with
multiethnic groups of urban middle and high school students. Therefore, in keeping with the research goals
of the review, articles were excluded when all participants were identified as
being of the same race or ethnicity or when articles identified as simply
action research without the youth as co-research component that YPAR
advocates.
Analysis
of Studies
Articles, websites,
and reports generated from the search were read and initial coding was
conducted to identify ethnicity of participants, stated goals of the YPAR
project, and stated outcomes of the YPAR process. Next, more detailed coding was conducted for
YPAR projects that specifically engaged in research with urban Blacks and Latina/o
students. Initially open coding was
conducted to ascertain what categories and ideas emerged from the
findings. Then, after preliminary
categories, informed by initial codes as well as existing literature, were
identified, initial findings were revisited for additional ideas and
themes. Then, findings were grouped
according to the following broad themes:
interethnic relationships, confronting deficit ideology, and
empowerment. In speaking to the data
quality of YPAR findings, it was important to consider the diversity and wide
variety of YPAR projects. While in most
findings, researchers described the product (report, website, etc) produced by
students, data involving the level of consciousness raising and empowerment
experienced by participants may have been relayed through rich, anecdotal and
narrative formats that detailed how students engaged in the YPAR process. In the sections below, I highlight four YPAR
research projects and describe their contribution to a discussion of improving
interethnic relations in urban schools.
Findings and Discussion
In determining the extent to which findings
from YPAR studies addressed the research question, Has YPAR been utilized to
address interethnic relations between students in urban schools, it is
important to note that practically all studies analyzed were conducted with
Black and Latina/o participants. Initial
results indicated that none of the data identified improving interethnic
relations as an explicit research goal; however, two projects highlighted
interethnic relations as crucial components of the YPAR process: 1) Torre and Fine
(2008)/Torre (2009) 2) Cahill, Rios-More, and Threatts (2008). In response to the second research question, How
has YPAR been used to raise students’ critical consciousness about issues that
may influence interethnic relations, I highlight three studies that focused
specifically on producing counternarratives to deficit impressions of urban
students and emphasizing student empowerment: 1) Ozer & Wright (2012) 2) Tuck
(2008)/Tuck et al. (2008b) 3) Goessling and Doyle (2009). Listed in the sections below is a more
detailed discussion of how these components may inform a discussion of
improving interethnic relations between students through the YPAR process.
YPAR
as a Tool to Promote Intercultural Relationships
A common thread
amongst the three studies that spoke directly about intercultural relations
within the research team was the idea of promoting critical understandings of
systems of power, oppression, and stereotype.
Through the process of engaging in critical investigations of their
communities and schools, youth researchers simultaneously explored their own
racial and cultural positionality within the research space. In the YPAR
project, Echoes of Brown (Torre & Fine, 2008; Torre, 2009), Torre
and Fine intentionally create a contact zone (Pratt, 1991) of diverse youth to
investigate the legacy of the historic Brown v Board of Education
decision on contemporary urban schools.
They define a contact zone as a “messy social space where differently
situated people meet, clash, and grapple with each other across their varying
relationships to power” (p. 25).
Therefore, while creating a performance-based research project that
explored social injustice, students crossed cultural boundaries and explored
privilege and oppression in their personal lives. During the 3-year YPAR project, students
studied segregation, desegregation, oral history, urban school tracking, and
achievement scores, and presented findings in various formats to community
members, school boards, educators, and policy makers across the nation. The authors conclude that, “PAR in the
contact zone affects the consciousness and political work of very distinct
kinds of youth by educating critically, writing personal troubles into
political struggles, and performing for social justice” (p. 33).
Cahill, Rios-More, and Threatts (2008)
describe a multiethnic (Puerto Rican, Dominican, African American, Chinese) YPAR
group of women ages 16-22 who explore the workings of stereotypes, poor
resources, and failing institutions on the identities of women of color in
their neighborhood. Through an investigation of their own community, they
engage one another in a process of consciousness raising (Freire &
Macedo, 1987)
as they come to perceive themselves and their communities in different ways. They describe the three major phases of their
YPAR process as researching their community, personal transformation, and using
their newfound knowledge as a catalyst for change. As a culminating project, researchers
disseminate findings about confronting and resisting racial and cultural
stereotypes in the form of youth-friendly reports and presentations in local
schools. In describing the process by
which they engaged in the YPAR project, they state,
Whereas at the
beginning of our research process what was most remarkable to all of us were
our differences, through the process of doing the research project we
identified a collective identification as “young urban women of color”—a
shared standpoint based on an identification of intersections of race, gender,
and place. (Cahill, Rios-More, & Threatts, 2008, p. 112)
This
represents a notable example of the power of critical community building in highlighting
the interplay of power, structure, and agency (Bettez, 2011). YPAR studies like those conducted by Torre and
Fine (2008) and Cahill, Rios-More, and Threatts (2008) suggest that in order to
work towards the ultimate goal of a pedagogy that speaks to issues of
intercultural interaction between students, we must analyze and expose systems
of oppression that operate powerfully and silently in the background of urban
educational and community contexts. Through
the YPAR process, researchers created critical communities of youth by linking
a greater awareness of social issues to an empowering praxis.
YPAR
as a Tool to Confront Deficit Ideology
While many
descriptions of YPAR findings focused on the development, processes, and
outcome of the research project, some focused specifically on countering
deficit perceptions of students. Deficit
ideology glosses over a discussion of systemic inequalities and suggests that “intellectual,
moral, and spiritual deficiencies in certain groups of people” (Gorski, 2008,
p. 5) lead to lack of success in education. In response
to the second research question, How has YPAR been used to raise students’
critical consciousness about issues that may influence interethnic relations,
I highlight Ozer & Wright (2012) who describe the ways in which teachers’
impressions of students changed as students engaged in school-wide YPAR
projects. Ozer and Wright (2012) conduct a qualitative study of two urban high
schools that implemented YPAR as an elective course to determine whether
student-teacher relationships and student voice were enhanced as a result of
YPAR. “Woodson,” the smaller of the two high schools, struggled with test
scores in the lowest quartile in the district and high percentages of students
in poverty. As a YPAR project, students
researched teaching best practices through trainings and interviews, conducted
professional development for their school faculty to present their findings,
and then collaborated with teachers and consultants to create a “Best Practices
Club” in which students were trained to observe teachers and give positive
feedback about effective teaching strategies.
The authors conclude that the YPAR process influenced school climate by
fostering “data driven dialogue” (p. 278), changing the ways in which teachers
“perceived student competencies and potential for contributing” (p. 277),
and allowing students from marginalized communities to “be heard despite
disadvantage and racism” (p. 278).The authors assert that the YPAR process changed
the ways in which teachers “perceived student competencies and potential for
contributing” (p. 277), and allowed students from marginalized communities to
“be heard despite disadvantage and racism” (p. 278). While Ozer and Wright do not directly address
student beliefs about each other, their study illustrates the potential of
youth engaged in PAR projects to begin to create counternarratives (Delgado and
Stefancic, 2001) and to envision their potential in transformative ways. They identify shifts in student-teacher
interaction as students who were previously marginalized in their school, began
to view themselves as professionals and experts on certain topics they were
researching. Pervasive deficit
thinking based on harmful stereotype could serve as a barrier to positive interethnic
relations between Blacks and Latino/as (McClain et al., 2006; Gay, 2004, 2006).
YPAR holds potential for engaging youth in developing strategies to challenge
racially and culturally deficit representations of themselves and forge new
relationships with their peers and teachers.
YPAR
as a Tool for Empowerment
I highlight two
distinct studies that utilize YPAR as a tool for empowerment, the Youth
Researchers for a New Education System (YRNES) school report and the Thru
the Lenz project. The YRNES project
(Tuck, 2008; Tuck et al., 2008b) is approached from a critical,
activist-oriented lens in which a multiethnic group of former and current NYC
student researchers utilize a mixed methods design for the purposes of hearing
the perspectives of New York City youth and changing the current conditions of
NYC schools. The YRNES project
report represents a useful exemplar of YPAR research and reporting by utilizing
easily accessible language; inserting colorful charts and figures; arranging
blocks of information under subheadings; incorporating the actual words of
participants; collecting both quantitative and qualitative data; and putting
forth specific implications and recommendations for increasing student
perspectives in school decision making. Identifying
themselves as those who have been discounted and pushed aside by NYC schools, researchers
view research and activism as a way to speak back to dominant misperceptions of
NYC student and commit to remain
“conscious of how society’s power structures play out in our
interactions, so that we can challenge them and thus allow each other more room
to grow” (Tuck et al., 2008b, p. 80-81). Although the actual YRNES report
describes the results of their study, in a different publication (Tuck, 2008) researchers
collectively articulate the process by which they formed a group devoted to
YPAR. They discuss how they negotiate
power differences within the group.
We are not an academic or government space…We fill different
roles based on our interests and talents, where in other research spaces, power
is usually only held by those with the most research experience. Finally, we
engage in our own process of decision making, whereas other participatory
spaces may rely on a one-person, one-vote decision making model that will
always muffle the voices of those in numeric minority. (Tuck, 2008, p. 50)
Youth researchers
go on to describe the ways in which they navigate tension and conflict when it
arose during the research process.
In the Thru the Lenz project (Goessling & Doyle, 2009) a
diverse group of high school students utilize photography and creative arts to
gain a deeper social awareness of their identities, schools, and
communities. Through photovoice, or
community photography methodology, participant journals, researcher
reflections, and a post-project group interview, youth researchers create spaces
for candid dialogue about their school and community. The authors emphasize that, “When PAR is
conducted well, empowerment naturally follows” (p. 362). These YPAR projects illuminate the ways in
which negative characterizations are preserved in historical memories; analyze
pervasive media images that normalize whiteness and vilify people of color; and
engage in critical dialogue about how their social context may influence the
potential for positive intercultural relationships. In describing the relationship
between identity and agency, Murrell (2009) emphasizes that: “School success
among African American students depends on this agency and the subsequent
ability to maintain identity integrity despite a variety of racially and
culturally disaffirming discursive practices they experience in school” (p.
97). I would assert that cultivating
agency and empowerment is particularly critical for both Black and Latina/o
students in urban settings that may experience a bombardment of disempowering
and negative messages about themselves from both peers and adults.
Limitations
Despite the powerful
potential of the YPAR data described, there are obvious limitations to this
research review that should be noted.
Although data analysis showed very few studies that specifically
addressed interethnic relationships as a primary goal of YPAR projects, it
would be uncritical to assume that researchers and students may not have both
confronted and found ways to navigate, address, or improve student interethnic
relations. Additionally, although
tension between Blacks and Latina/os has been documented, the assumption cannot
be made that this tendency occurs in all urban settings, nor that it occurred
in the settings in which the highlighted YPAR studies were located. Finally, although I discussed the potential
for empowerment and decreased deficit thinking in facilitating better interethnic
relations, further study needs to be conducted to establish stronger, more
definitive links between these concepts.
Additionally, future research in the area of YPAR could more fully
describe the process of navigating relationships between co-researchers,
particularly in projects that specifically address issues of privilege and
power (Torre & Fine, 2008). Also, in
educational and community settings that have experienced documented interethnic
tension, YPAR as an intervention with the specific purpose of raising
consciousness for the purpose of improving student relationships, would yield
interesting, thought-provoking findings.
Implications for Practice
Building and
sustaining positive relationships between teachers and students has been widely
explored in educational research (Klem & Connell, 2004), however, less
focus has been placed on links between students’ cross-cultural community
building and school success. Therefore,
an in-depth look at students’ perceptions of their other-race peers will be of
interest to educators and administrators who have the capacity to make
decisions that affect intercultural understanding and promote school climates
that promote harmony among student groups.
In addition, YPAR holds the potential to inform education programs
that instruct educators in promoting cultural understanding in their
classrooms, inform curriculum that addresses cultural literacy, contribute to
the literature on intercultural understanding between youth of color, and
explore the implications of race, relationships, and school culture on
achievement. YPAR may provide a vehicle by which educators might
explicitly engage students in conversations about the constructedness of their
social worlds and reductionist thinking that attributes stereotypical labels to
particular groups. Teaching youth to
deconstruct racist narratives must involve the cultivation of a more critical literacy
to give them tools to challenge representations of themselves and others and to
see both the constructedness and commodification of youth identities.
References
Allport, Gordon. (1954/1979). The Nature of Prejudice. Cambridge.
MA: Addison-Wesley.
Berg, B. L. (2004). Qualitative research methods for the social
sciences. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Bettez, S.C. (2011). Building
critical communities amid the uncertainty of social justice pedagogy in the
graduate classroom. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 33(1),
76-106.
Cahill, C.,
Rios-Moore, I., & Threatts, T. (2008). Different eyes/open eyes: Community- based participatory action
research. In J. Cammarota & M. Fine
(Eds.), Revolutionizing education: Youth participatory action research in
motion (pp. 89-124). Routledge.
Cammarota, J., & Fine, M. (2008). Revolutionizing
education: Youth participatory action research in motion. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Cammarota, J., & Romero, A. F. (2009). A social justice
epistemology and pedagogy for Latina/o students: Transforming public education
with participatory action research. New Directions for Youth Development,
123, 53-65.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical race theory: An
introduction. New York: New York University Press.
Dixon, J. & Rosenbaum, M. (2004). Nice to know you? Testing contact, cultural, and group threat theories of anti-black and anti-hispanic stereotypes. Social Science Quarterly, 85(2), 257-280.
Ellison, C., Shin, H. & Leal, D. (2011). The contact
hypothesis and attitudes toward Latinos in the United States. Social Science Quarterly, 92(4),
938-958.
Fine, M. (2008). An
Epilogue, of Sorts. In J. Cammarota & M. Fine (Eds.), Revolutionizing education: Youth
participatory action research in motion (pp. 213-234). New York, NY: Routledge.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY:
Continuum.
Freire, P. & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word & the world. South Hadley, Mass: Bergin & Garvey Publishers.
Gay, C. (2004). Putting race in context: Identifying the environmental detriments of Black racial attitudes. American Political Science Review, 98(4), 547-562.
Gay, C. (2006). Seeing difference: The effect of economic
disparity on Black attitudes toward Latinos. American Journal of Political Science, 50(4), 982-997.
Goessling, K., & Doyle, C. (2009). Thru the lenz: Participatory
action research, photography, and creative process in an urban high school. Journal
of Creativity in Mental Health, 4(4), 343-365.
Gorski, P. (2008). Good intentions are not enough. A decolonizing intercultural education. Intercultural Education, 19(6), 515-525.
Jackson, G. B. (1980). Methods for integrative reviews. Review of
Educational Research, 50, 438-460.
Kincheloe, J. & McLaren, P. (Eds.). (2010). Critical pedagogy:
Where are we now? NY: Peter Lang
Publishers.
Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships matter: Linking
teacher support to student engagement and achievement. Journal of School
Health, 74(7), 262-273.
Ladson-Billings, G. & Tate, W. (1995). Toward a critical
race theory of education. Teachers
College Record, 97(1), 47-68.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and
what’s it doing in a nice field like education? Qualitative Studies in
Education, 2(1), 7-24.
McClain, P., Carter, N., DeFrancesco Soto, V., Lyle, M.,
Grynaviski, J., Nunnally, S., et al. (2006). Racial Distancing in a Southern
City: Latino Immigrants’ Views of Black Americans. Journal of Politics, 68(3),
571-584. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00446.x
McIntyre, A. (2000). Inner-city kids: Adolescents confront life and
violence in an urban community. New York: New York University Press.
Morrell, E. (2006). Critical participatory action research and the
literacy achievement of ethnic minority groups. In National Reading
Conference Yearbook . 55, 1-18.
Murrell Jr, P. (2009). Identity, agency, and culture: Black achievement
and educational attainment. The Sage handbook of African American education
(pp. 89-105). Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
Ozer, E. J., & Wright, D. (2012). Beyond school spirit: The effects
of youth-led participatory action research in two urban high schools.
Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22(2), 267-283.
Pratt, M. L. (1991). Arts of the contact zone. Profession, 91, 33-40.
Quillian, L. & Campbell, M. (2003). Beyond black and white: The present and future of multiracial friendship segregation. American Sociological Review, 68, 540-566.
Quiñones, S., Ares, N., Padela, M., Hopper, M., &
Webster, S. (2011). ¿Y nosotros, qué?: Moving beyond the margins in a community
change initiative. Anthropology &
Education Quarterly, 42(2), 103-120.
Rahman, M. A. (2008). Some trends in the praxis of participatory action
research. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of action
research: Participative inquiry and practice (pp. 49-62). London, United
Kingdom: SAGE.
Sanchez, G. (2008). Latino group consciousness and
perceptions of commonality with African-Americans. Social Science Quarterly, 89(2), 428-444.
Stovall, D. (2005). From hunger strike to high school: Youth
development, social justice and school formation. Retrieved from http://www.uic.edu/cuppa/gci/publications/workingpaperseries/pdfs/GCP-05-01%20From%20Hungerstrike%20to%20High%20School.pdf
Torre, M. & Fine, M. (2008).Participatory action research in the
contact zone. In J. Cammarota & M. Fine (Eds.), Revolutionizing
education: Youth participatory action research in motion (pp. 23-44). New
York, NY: Routledge.
Torre, M. E. (2009). Participatory action research and critical race theory:
Fueling spaces for ‘nos-otras’ to research. Urban Review: Issues and Ideas
in Public Education, 41(1), 106-120.
Tuck, E. (2008). The YRNES report: New York City. Retrieved from http://www.clsj.org/YRNES-REPORT.pdf
Tuck, E., Allen, J.,
Bacha, M., Morales, A., Quinter, S., Thompson, J, & Tuck, M. (2008b). PAR
praxes for now and future change: The collective of researchers on educational disappointment and desire.
In J.
Cammarota & M. Fine (Eds.), Revolutionizing education: Youth
participatory action research in motion (pp. 49-83). New York, NY: Routledge.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics. (2007). Status and Trends in the Education of Racial and Ethnic Minorities. (NCES Publication No. 2007-039). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/minoritytrends/index.asp