Journal website: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/ Manuscript received: 8/18/2017 Facebook: /EPAAA Revisions received: 10/4/2018 Twitter: @epaa_aape Accepted: 10/26/2018 SPECIAL ISSUE Rethinking Education Policy and Methodology in a Post-truth Era education policy analysis archives A peer-reviewed, independent, open access, multilingual journal Arizona State University Volume 26 Number 146 November 19, 2018 ISSN 1068-2341 When They Go Low, We Go High: Scholars of Color, Activism, and Educational Research in a Post-Truth Era Joshua Childs University of Texas at Austin & Sarah J. Johnson University of Chicago United States Citation: Childs, J., & Johnson, S. J. (2018). When they go low, we go high: Scholars of color, activism, and educational research in a post-truth era. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 26(146). http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.26.3342 This article is part of the Special Issue, Rethinking Education Policy and Methodology in a Post-truth Era guest edited by Jennifer R. Wolgemuth, Mirka Koro- Ljungberg, Travis M. Marn, Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie, and Shaun M. Dougherty. Abstract: In the post-truth era, research from scholars of color will serve greater utility due to their propensity to speak truth to power, counter inaccurate narratives about marginalized populations, and challenge the politics that emerge during the post-truth era. This paper will highlight how scholars of color have centered race and social justice within their research, and provide examples of how the educational research community should counter the current post-truth era. We propose that scholars of color should be more prominent in our research agendas. This includes citing more of their work, supporting research agendas that positions ‘race’ at the center, and promoting critical http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/ http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.26.3342 Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 26 No. 146 SPECIAL ISSUE 2 scholarship that moves away from deficit language. If we are going to speak truth to power in today’s post-truth climate, then educational researchers must produce critical scholarship that challenges the lies and myths that permeate in a post-truth era. Keywords: race; social justice; post-truth When they go low, we go high: Estudiantes de color, activismo e investigación educativa en una era posverdad Resumen: En la era posverdad, investigaciones de estudiosos del color servirán a una mayor utilidad debido a su propensión de hablar la verdad al poder, contra narraciones imprecisas sobre poblaciones marginadas y desafiar las políticas que emergen durante la era posverdad. Este artículo destacará cómo los estudiosos del color centraron la raza y la justicia social en sus investigaciones y proporcionan ejemplos de cómo la comunidad de investigación educativa debe combatir la actual era posverdad. Proponemos que los estudiosos del color sean más prominentes en nuestras agendas de investigación. Esto incluye citar más de su trabajo, apoyar agendas de investigación que posicionen la “raza” en el centro y promover la erudición crítica que se aparte del lenguaje del défic it. Si vamos a hablar de verdad al poder en el clima actual de la pos-verdad, entonces los investigadores educacionales deben producir un conocimiento crítico que desafíe las mentiras y los mitos que permean una era posverdad. Palabras-clave: raza; justicia social; era posverdad When they go low, we go high: Estudiosos de cor, ativismo e pesquisa educacional em uma era pós-verdad Resumo: Na era pós-verdad, pesquisas de estudiosos da cor servirão a uma maior utilidade devido à sua propensão de falar a verdade ao poder, contra narrativas imprecisas sobre populações marginalizadas e desafiar as políticas que emergem durante a era pós - verdade. Este artigo destacará como os estudiosos da cor centraram a raça e a justiça social em suas pesquisas e fornecem exemplos de como a comunidade de pesquisa educacional deve combater a atual era pós-verdade. Propomos que os estudiosos da cor sejam mais proeminentes em nossas agendas de pesquisa. Isso inclui citar mais de seu trabalho, apoiar agendas de pesquisa que posicionem a “raça” no centro e promover a erudição crítica que se afaste da linguagem do déficit. Se vamos falar de verdade ao poder no clima atual da pós-verdade, então os pesquisadores educacionais devem produzir um conhecimento crítico que desafie as mentiras e os mitos que permeiam uma era pós-verdad. Palavras-chave: raça; justiça social; pós-verdad When they go low, we go high 3 When They Go Low, We Go High: Scholars of Color, Activism, and Educational Research in a Post-Truth Era In 2016, the Oxford Dictionaries selected ‘post-truth’ as its word of the year. Defined as an adjective relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief (“post truth, n.d., para 1), post-truth has captured the everyday lexicon of American politics and society. Googling ‘post-truth’ will reveal a litany of news stories, think pieces, longform articles, and blog posts that explain how we are currently within a post-truth era. The fact that 2016 was the year that Oxford Dictionaries would select post-truth as its word of the year should not go unnoticed. There was significant change in global politics in 2016, for example the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union through a process called Brexit. In sports, the Chicago Cubs won their first World Series title since 1908, and the music industry lost legendary icons such as Prince and David Bowie. These events were just a few of what many considered to be an unbelievable year of newsworthy topics that could not be imagined happening anytime soon, if ever. However, for many people the election of Donald Trump was the event of 2016 that captured that we were entering into different times. In fact, the post-truth era has been personified by the election and ascent of Donald Trump as president of the United States. While numerous news articles and books have proclaimed that the election of Donald Trump ushered in a new post-truth era (Sismondo, 2017), and a new political reality through his selection of appointees for cabinet positions or judicial appointments such as Betsy Devos and Bret Kavanaugh, for people of color, there is an argument to be made that this is not a new post-truth era. Instead, we argue that what is happening in the United States is what has always been happening since the founding of this country, especially for people of color. Concerns about who occupies the presidency, cabinet and judicial appointments, changes in policies and laws that negatively impact communities of color, and dog-whistle politics that signal political agendas that desire to “Make America Great Again”, are in fact realities that have concerned people of color for decades (López, 2015). The national divide as it relates to race, class, and gender is also not new. Policies that are hyper-focused on disenfranchising communities of color, remaining silent on issues affecting marginalized people, and the absence of a national conversation on race and systemic injustices have existed long before Donald Trump. Issues of oppression, marginalization, unjust policies, unfair practices, and a variety of societal ills have always been a part of everyday life for people of color. In fact, people of color have not only had navigate these issues but have sought to raise attention about these societal ills and racism that have plagued American society for decades (Harris, 1993; Kendi, 2016). Now, the election of Donald Trump has only emboldened his base to follow a president who is willing to call Mexicans rapists, attack Black athletes protesting police violence by kneeling during the national anthem, and assign equal blame to white nationalists and counter-protesters after clashes in Charlottesville, Virginia, and would-be white allies have been willing to listen and take action. Today’s post-truth era has emboldened “white supremacy, capitalism, racism, neoliberalism, patriarchy, xenophobia, Islamophobia, and more” (Castrellón, Reyna Rivarola, & Lopez, 2017, p. 936). The post-truth era allows for not only an amalgam of misinformation (Castro Samayoa & Nicolazzo, 2017), but also provides space for the misinformation of facts to millions of people, especially around important political and societal issues. Academic scholarship has not been immune from this, especially educational research, as academic research and scholars are increasingly questioned in the news, trolled online through social media, and academic publications have seen a decline in readership due to their inaccessibility (Ratna, 2017). For scholars of color, this has been an Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 26 No. 146 SPECIAL ISSUE 4 added burden, as historically we have always experienced questions or doubts about our scholarship, have had our research dismissed or not published because challenged traditional institutions or norms, or our scholarship seen as too edgy because it called out the societal ills and injustices that marginalized people experience in the United States (Bernal & Villalpando, 2002). If, education researchers are going disrupt the current societal and political climate, then the field needs to be as Dubois (1926) articulated, “...one who tells the truth and exposes evil and seeks beauty for Beauty to set the world right” (p. 293). In this article we argue that in this current post- truth era, education research should illuminate and cite more scholars of color. As mentioned earlier, for scholars of color the post-truth era is not new, as we have been writing about many of the issues and problems that are now being highlighted prominently within media and academia. Scholars of color serve as strong examples for what it will entail to critique and dismantle systems of misinformation, oppression, and discrimination in a post-truth era. The current post-truth era will require scholars, regardless of race, to use their pens and voice that will highlight truth within a vacuum of lies, falsehoods, racism, bigotry, classism, sexism, patriarchy, and white supremacy. This type of action, in conjunction with promoting and citing scholars of color, should not be seen as a hindrance to rigorous and reputable research, but instead offers a way for the research community to become politically engaged, advance scholarship that focuses on critiquing systems and structures of inequality, promote research that addresses current societal issues, and moves the educational research field to be more reflective regarding its biases absorbed from a world still practicing racism and human exportation (Morris, 2017). Scholars of color should serve as an example to others in the education research community on how to advance, critique, and research in today’s post-truth era. Our attempt with this article is not to outline a new approach to educational research, but instead propose that the work of scholars of color, and the ways they center race and social justice within the educational literature, should be more prominent and citied in our research agendas and publications; especially if dismantling the current post-truth era is the goal. We begin the article by outlining why using an exclusive citation practice that focuses on scholars of color is relevant and needed in today’s academic research. We then present two overarching themes: a) centering race in educational research, and b) educational leadership. These themes serve as examples for the type of scholarship that is necessary during a post-truth era— scholarship that is able to reveal the facts when it comes to the real issues that impact education. Also, we offer a discussion on recent research that offers additional insights and perspectives that could assist in critiquing the post-truth era, while offering innovative approaches to understanding and addressing the educational inequities that affect students of color. We end with an academic call for action, one that promotes the research of scholars of color and advances critical scholarship that will be necessary to push back against the post-truth era. Exclusive Citation Practice For many scholars of color, like the authors of this article, thinking about the responsibility to speak out against racial and social injustice, aligning research agendas that promote and advance marginalized communities, and navigating the dichotomy of scholar and activist can be a taxing endeavor. In a way, being a scholar of color represents a form of activism. In 2015, out of the 1.6 million faculty1 at degree-granting postsecondary institutions, 6% of faculty were Black, 9% were Asian/Pacific Islander, and 4% were Hispanic. Blacks and Hispanics are underrepresented relative 1 Faculty include professors, associate professors, assistant professors, instructors, lecturers, assisting professors, adjunct professors, and interim professors. When they go low, we go high 5 to their U.S. population shares, and many academic departments are filled with all white faculty (Li & Koedel, 2017). When scholars of color do hold faculty positions, they face, structural barriers when it comes to promotion and tenure, attacks on alternative research methods and action-oriented scholarship that go against traditional notions of valued research, derailment of careers, limited social networks, and public scrutiny that can hinder their upward mobility in the profession. In private conversations and public forums, faculty of color have shared countless stories of how their white contemporaries have either helped in building or remaining silent about those barriers that have slowed down their professional trajectory in the academy. There has been a significant increase in the number of scholarly articles focused on the citation rankings of academics (Delgado López‐Cózar, 2014), and how an increasing number of tenure and promotion committees are considering citation numbers (Urrieta Jr., Méndez, & Rodríguez, 2015). Recognizing this phenomenon, we offer that researchers should implement in their writing an exclusive citation practice (Ahmed, 2017). Ahmed (2017) argues that an exclusive citation practice involves recognizing those scholars that have contributed to the intellectual genealogy of feminism and antiracism. Furthermore, it should include work that is often dismissed, forgotten about, cast aside, or left behind by the traditional research community. We yoke our citational practice for the purpose of this article to the research of scholars of color to underscore the need to highlight these scholars’ prescient and longstanding research when it comes to race and inequity from within the so-called ivory tower. Ahmed (2017) suggests that citation is a kind of memory-work, or “how we acknowledge our debt to those who came before” (p. 15). It can be an “energizing” kind of memory-work that, when modeled to undergraduate or graduate students, simultaneously introduces them to research that has likely fallen off their other syllabi while showing them that scholars who look like them exist and record insights and instincts that have been long proven accurate (Ahmed, 2017). This practice offers a type of counter-narrative to the faceless, decontextualized research paradigms of many scholars of color who are situated within traditionally white higher education institutions (Reddick & Saenz, 2012). Research agendas, such as those that touch on issues of race, class, students and educators of color, opportunity gaps, teaching and learning, graduation rates, and school improvement, that fail to cite scholars of color contribute to the further development of antisocial cultures that ignore intersectional identities and research, and their impact on scholarly argument. Exclusive citation practice is a type of endeavor that pays “debts” while paving a path for future scholars. Citations are foundational to academic writing; exclusive citation practices may be one way to emphasize this truth while highlighting the limited citations (read: debts) that scholars of color receive from their general colleagues. In the remaining sections, we use an exclusive citation practice to illuminate scholars of color who have provided important contributions to educational research. While a selective sample, our goal is to highlight these scholars as a way to present their research that positions race at the foci, promotes critical approaches to collecting and analyzing data, provides spaces for voices of color such as students and teachers, and negates deficit language that positions people of color as less than their white counterparts. This does not mean that scholars who are not of color have not done such research, but scholars of color who do this work often pay a higher price as outlined earlier. Furthermore, while having allies in this endeavor is important, scholars of color and their research should be at the forefront of our efforts to speak truth in this post-truth era. Centering Race in Educational Research A recurring question in the aftermath of the 2016 election was, what role does race have in America during this current post-truth era? As many commentators have observed, the election of Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 26 No. 146 SPECIAL ISSUE 6 Donald Trump did not initiate a new kind of vitriol directed towards people of color, but has amplified the divisive rhetoric and political apparatus towards advancing racist, classist, and sexist ideologies and policies. In his position as president, Trump’s words have served as a megaphone for espousing longstanding prejudices and bigotry. Trump’s divisive, dismissive, and disingenuous rhetoric is creating a ripple affect across our political, judicial, correctional, and educational systems. This “white backlash” to the advancement of civil rights and election of President Barack Obama (Anderson, 2016), coupled with a schooling system that helps to maintain and sustain white supremacy (Horsford, 2018; Horsford & D’Amico, 2015), has created an opportunity for the educational research community to engage with scholars of color and their work, which could provide a useful lens to disrupt the post-truth era. In this section, we argue that during this post-truth era, the naming and placing of race at the center of educational research needs to be more explicit. It is through this centering that the field would do a better job at exposing and addressing the numerous inequities that affect U.S. education. For many scholars of color, centering race in their research has been common practice and an important application when it comes to advancing research that highlights the educational, social, and economic conditions of students in U.S schools. The use of Critical Race Theory (CRT), and in particular counter-storytelling, is one orientation that scholars of color have used to help shed light on the racial and social injustices that have taken place in U.S. schools. This section will provide an example of the possibilities that exist when scholars center race in their scholarship, and how it can be used to deter the effects of the current post-truth era. Critical Race Theory in a Post-Truth Era While not new, though perhaps more recently desired, race-centered research has been an ongoing effort that has sought to expose race as a historically socially-constructed concept (López, 1994). Educational research has not only critiqued the societal and educational systems that have advanced white students at disproportionate rates then students of color, but also has offered observations and solutions for how to improve systems and address educational inequities. An important tradition in educational research has been the use of Critical Race Theory (CRT) to examine a range of educational issues and the way they are informed and impacted by race and racism (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995). Defined as “a set of legal theories contending that racism is normal, not aberrant, in U.S. society” (Ladson-Billings, 2017, p.81), CRT has become a prominent tool for analyzing how race is a contributing factor to the educational inequities that exist in America (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995). Scholars such as Gloria Ladson-Billings, William F. Tate IV, Laurence Parker, Adrienne Dixson, and many others have argued that race is central to understanding the various disparities in educational outcomes that transpire in schools across the country. Furthermore, they have argued that race should be viewed not simply as an SPSS or STATA variable, but as a central tenet in understanding how schooling and educational outcomes have been determined based on one’s skin color. According to Delgado and Stefancic (2001) there are five tenets that are a staple of CRT: 1) a belief that racism is normal or ordinary, not aberrant, in U.S. society; 2) interest convergence; 3) race as a social construction; 4) intersectionality and anti-essentialism; and 5) voice or counter-narrative. These tenets build the framework for CRT and are useful in understanding how the legal underpinnings of CRT serve to understand race in education (Tate, 1997). According to Dixson and Rousseau (2005), a central tenet of CRT has been the recognition of the experiences and scholarship of people of color, primarily through the act of storytelling. Traditionally, storytelling has been used to provide entertainment, educate populations, preserve cultures and traditions, and instill moral values that have passed down through generations (Ladson-Billings, 1998). Critical Race Theorists When they go low, we go high 7 have used storytelling to illustrate how policies and laws have impacted racial and social justice through the experiences of people of color as sources of knowledge (Dixson & Rousseau, 2005; Ladson-Billings, 1998). In a post-truth era, CRT and specifically the tenet of storytelling, can serve as a useful counter to the permeance deficit perspectives of students of color. For example, in education, deficit perspectives promoted beliefs about students from lower socioeconomic statuses and non- dominant races that have viewed these students as incapable of achieving academically, unable to contribute to society, negatively plagued by their upbringing or community environment, parents and communities that do not care about education, and students themselves who present more problems than value to a classroom or school (Milner, 2010). In academic scholarship, deficit perspective research has often placed the causes of unequal educational outcomes on students of color themselves rather than on society and institutions (Solorzano, 1997). Research of this nature often lacks in interrogating the impacts of health, housing, neighborhood conditions, school environment, or a multitude of other facts that can affect educational outcomes for marginalized students (Ladson-Billings, 2017). While scholars of color have pushed back against this type of research, there still exists a perpetuation of “destructive thinking about the capabilities of learners based on race” (Ladson-Billings, 2012, p .115). Therefore, counter-storytelling plays a critical role in expressing the common experience of racism that exists in education for people of color, and present perspectives that counter the dominant white narrative that is often perpetuated in educational research (Dixson & Rousseau, 2005; Teranishi, 2002). In a post-truth era, untruthful narratives are often expressed about non-dominant populations that can cause harm long after it has been spoken, implemented as practice or policy, or settled into a society’s psyche. Counter- storytelling allows for non-dominant populations to have a say about what is expressed about their communities and lived experiences. In education, this serves as a useful endeavor as we continue to wrestle with the best educational system, schooling structure, learning inputs, and student outcomes that are necessary for equitable education for students of color. Centering race in educational research allows for a counter to post-truth era narratives about students of color. This type of scholarship refuses to see students of color, their families, and their communities as pathologically and fatally flawed. It also assists in cultivating a cadre of new teachers, leaders, and researchers “who think critically about the ways race and class delimit what students can and cannot do while they consider the intellectual work they must do.” (Ladson-Billings, 2017, p. 89). For example, Milner (2010) argues for the publication of teacher education research that is conscious of the dynamics of race, class, and the structural issues of education. This is useful, not just for teacher preparation but other facets of educational research, as a way to counter the post- truth era and for understanding how the concepts of color-blindness, cultural conflict, meritocracy, deficit conceptions, and white supremacy can perpetuate educational inequities. Without centering race in educational research, and this goes beyond just acknowledging that race is “present”, it will remain an open empirical question if a disruption of the post-truth era will occur. Lessons from Educational Leadership Educational leadership research has incorporated social justice within its scholarship as an innovative approach to addressing diversity issues in education (Santamaría, 2014). This scholarship contrasts the traditional leadership research that emphasize management and resource allocation (Rivera-McCutchen, 2014). The current post-truth era has brought to the forefront leaders and leadership styles that should raise serious concerns for society. By employing a practice of leadership that is void of culture, overtly oppressive, and non-liberating, the post-truth era has seen leaders rely Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 26 No. 146 SPECIAL ISSUE 8 on half-truths, lies, and innuendos. This type of leadership style has had a profound effect on society as people now expect leaders to relay untruths, and followers do not mind as long as the lies identify suitable scapegoats or express desired policy outcomes (Horsford, 2018). The lack of leadership in a post-truth era leads to confusion, inequitable distribution of resources, failure to acknowledge structural and economic inequality, and an unwillingness to acknowledge the abuses suffered by marginalized people by the various institutions that are oriented to serve and protect them (Green & Castro, 2017; Horsford, 2018; King, 2017; Mathias & Newlove, 2017). Educational leadership research, even with its history of omitting non-dominant perspectives and scholarship (Gooden, 2012), can serve as a useful example for how scholars of color have articulated research that has pushes back against the ills of a post-truth era. For example, Tillman (2004) found that education research journals had a long history of placing the study of Black issues and Black leaders at the margins. The research literature on educational leadership has had a troubled past of limiting the voices and perspectives of scholars of color (Dantley, 1990, 2002; Tillman, 2004). However, as the field of educational leadership has been slow to include voices of alternative perspectives within its discourse (Dantley, 2003; Dantley & Rogers, 2001), the past 30 years has seen an emergence of research from scholars of color. There are several reasons for this emergence of critical and non-dominant scholarship in educational leadership research. First, a commitment to equality, democracy, and justice has grown in prominence in educational leadership preparation programs and scholarship (Gooden & O’Doherty, 2015; Roland, 2018). Second, programs like University Council for Educational Administration’s (UCEA) Jackson Scholars Program, have focused on recruiting, developing, and supporting talented graduate students of color who have the potential to contribute to the education policy and leadership research. This emergence hasn’t happened in isolation, as the growing diversity of students in our nation’s schools calls for different perspectives on educational leadership (Dantley, 2005; Horsford, 2010; Rivera- McCutchen & Watson, 2014). In a post-truth era, it will take social justice leaders to challenge teaching and learning environments that attempt to marginalize students of color (Khalifa, Gooden, & Davis, 2016). Not only that, it will take academics to develop their own critical consciousness not only to train educational leaders (Khalifa et al., 2016), but also to engage in the necessary research that will cut through the noise and lies that a post-truth era brings. Social justice leadership research calls for a commitment to advancing for the inclusion of marginalized voices, frameworks, and orientations that have often been limited in the educational leadership canon (Gooden & Dantley, 2012; Murtadha & Watts, 2005). Next Steps for Education Scholarship in the Post-Truth Era The past several years has seen an emergence of scholarship spearheaded by scholars of color that offers new perspectives to educational research. These scholars of color have introduced either new research or have pushed traditional research to consider new populations, theories, or methodologies that are pushing the field to investigate the challenges of today’s post-truth era. Furthermore, these scholars are also investigating how students and communities of color are resisting narrow narratives that are emerging out of the post-truth era. These emerging and transcending research agendas are proposing abolitionist approaches to dismantling educational inequality (Love, 2019), understanding the ways that racialized students experience and navigate higher education (Garcia, 2017), rethinking culturally relevant pedagogy through Hip-Hop-based education (Emdin, 2010; Love, 2015; Travis, 2013, 2015), exploring the intersection of race and dis/ability (Annamma, 2017), understanding how education policies can hurt or harm students of When they go low, we go high 9 color (Grooms, 2016; Sampson, 2018; Welsh & Williams, 2018), and other approaches to addressing and improving educational outcomes for students of color. This wave of scholarship has centered race as an important determinant for understanding today’s educational system and underscores the importance for academic research that includes the voices of the community and advocates for a reframing of education policy that pushes against the noise in the current post-truth era (Dumas & Anderson, 2014). When They Go Low, We Go High In what many consider to be one of the best convention speeches of all time, former First Lady Michelle Obama offered a resounding narrative that attempted to remind the country of its true spirit. In her speech, Michelle Obama recalled all the times that she had to teach her daughters the importance of ignoring the naysayers, and that when people are cruel that they should not stoop down to their level. In the speech she offered a motto that served as a rallying cry for weeks during the 2016 presidential election, “when they go low, we go high.” The motto resonated so well, that it became a somewhat unofficial anthem for the Clinton/Democratic campaign in the closing weeks of the election. The phrase “when they go low, we go high” is a useful analogy when discussing the experiences and contribution of scholars of color. Traditionally, educational research has been dominated by the ideas and scholarship driven by white scholars. Historically, these scholars and their research have been critiqued for framing their research on communities, students, teachers, and leaders of color from a deficit perspective (Bernal, 1988; Foster, 1999; Solórzano & Yosso, 2002). However, for many scholars of color their research has focused on the assets and contributions of educators, scholars, and communities of color, while also pointing out educational inequities (Green, 2017). Combating systemic inequities and injustice, whether through research or practice, is an emotionally difficult endeavor and politically risky for scholars of color. Scholars who center race, gender, sexual orientation, and class within their research can also have political ramifications as well, especially within this new post-truth era (E. Castrellón, Reyna Rivarola, & López, 2017). If scholarship is going to serve as a form of resistance during the post-truth era, then a discussion is also necessary of citation practices. As mentioned earlier, scholars of color have been writing, presenting, and discussing the issues that are now rising to the consciousness of the general public and research community for decades. However, the practice of attributing credit to scholars of color who have provided key findings or insights around a research phenomenon has disproportionally affected scholars of color (Stanley, 2006). Scholars have critiqued how the politics of citations can influence the career trajectories of scholars of color (Johnson, 1991; Leonardo, 2004). Nevertheless, scholars of color have always and continue to contribute to educational research by ensuring that issues on systemic inequities, and the experiences and voices of marginalized students are present in the research literature. What important in the post-truth era is that scholars of color get the appropriate credit for their work, and that their research is used appropriately to counter the untrue narratives that are pushed in the post-truth era. Richard Delgado (1992) argued for his white contemporaries to cite scholars of color, and to do it often. Therefore, during a time when scholars of color are being hired and promoted at universities (Martinez, Chang, & Welton, 2017; Martinez & Welton; 2017), citing scholars of color would help to promote the critical research that is needed during this pivotal time in history. In fact, promoting the research of scholars of color should be an intentional response by those white scholars who write in areas that serve to repel the lies that are pushed during the post-truth era. To be clear, the new post-truth era is built upon a foundation of white supremacy, and if white scholars are really engaged in countering the post-truth era, and concerned with the civil rights of Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 26 No. 146 SPECIAL ISSUE 10 marginalized communities, then we should see scholarship that includes the citations of scholars of color, past and present, who have been speaking truth to power for years. In no way are we suggesting that by referencing more scholars of color by our white contemporaries would it add necessary relevance or validity to our work. Rather, to push against the noise in these current and possibly future post-truth eras, it will require a critical ally-ship, both in verbal and written form by our white colleagues. For many scholars of color, whose whole career has been about speaking truth to power, a thoughtful amplification of their research would assist in highlighting the problematic and systemic inequities that have risen to the national forefront during this post-truth era. Intentionally, we wanted to continue in the tradition of promoting scholars of color as a form of raising awareness that helps in debunking myths about our scholarship and historical notions about communities of color. Our intentionality was inspired by recent efforts on social media to cite scholars of color and scholarship exists that speaks to the many issues that have arisen during this post-truth era. In recent years hashtags have been created to highlight that scholars of color are noticeably absent from research conversations, presentations, and literature. For example, during the 2018 American Educational Research Association (AERA) conference two hashtags grew to significant prominence that highlighted that even within scholarship on communities and students of color, the research of scholars of color are noticeably absent or not cited. #POCAlsoEdPolicy and #POCAlsoKnow began trending during AERA, and since then have resonated in such a way that it has been used as a way to bring attention to the research of scholars of color who are engaged in important educational research. Created as an actionary response to center Black women scholarship in the research literature, #CiteASista serves as another example of efforts to raise awareness around the lack of recognition for Back women scholars (Nicole & Williams, 2018). In the post-truth era, we should be inspired by these hashtags to do the necessary work to highlight the contributions of scholars of color, while also moving beyond the hashtag to make sure that their scholarship has utility as well in the post-truth era. Today’s post-truth scholarly climate often fails to recognize or even read the work of scholars who critically engage concepts of race. As a result, when race-based education issues finally make it into the news cycle, there is a general scramble for authorities on the subject. This scramble is a waste of energy. As this discussion has hopefully made clear, the field of education is home to many scholars who are well-versed in the impact of concepts of race on educational structures, outcomes and discourse. The stakes are too high in this new post-truth era for scholarship to not speak truth to power. What’s at Stake in the Post-Truth Era Former First Lady Michelle Obama’s convention speech, that included the line “when they go low, we go high”, should have served as an early warning that we were on the verge of entering a post-truth era based on who was elected to the presidency. Michelle Obama’s famous 2017 inauguration face, which exploded as an expression of disgust that represented the overall mood of people of color throughout the country after Donald Trump’s election, served as a visual representation the country should have listened and followed the lead of people of color, who for the entire election cycle tried to warn about the dangers of a Donald Trump presidency. Now, as we wrestle and try to understand the chaos and the issues surrounding us daily, especially as it relates to the research academy, it is important that we do not glance over years of research done by scholars of color about some of these issues that are prevalent in society now. For example, Ladson-Billings and Tate (1995) discussed the salience of race in American society yet called for more scholarship that explored the intersection of race and education. Tate (1997) highlighted the importance of When they go low, we go high 11 Critical Race Theory as a theoretical perspective that could provide insight on investigating education research that could lead to addressing societal inequalities. If we are going to emerge out of this post-truth era and advance activist and truth-finding research agendas that will help to usher in a new era of scholarship, then we should center scholars of color work and ensure that we are not ignoring issues of class, race, privilege, and white supremacy that has helped to advance the current narratives in the post-truth era. There is opportunity for collaboration between scholars who may be aligned in their outrage towards what is happening in the post-truth era, to ensure that there is an intentional foregrounding of the role of scholars of color and partnering with them to amplify their scholarship. The post-truth era raises new intellectual challenges and moral dilemmas; however, scholars of color offer a compelling and insightful way forward on how to challenge post-truth politics and narratives. If we are going to emerge successful from the post-truth era, then it is important that we re-install and re-center the research of scholars of color whose efforts will be salient for an emancipation from the-post truth era. References Ahmed, S. (2017). Living a feminist life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822373377 Annamma, S. A. (2017). Not enough: Critiques of Devos and expansive notions of justice. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(10), 1047-1052. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2017.1312608 Annamma, S. A., Connor, D., & Ferri, B. (2013). Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit): Theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability. Race Ethnicity and Education, 16(1), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2012.730511 Annamma, S. A., Jackson, D. D., & Morrison, D. (2017). Conceptualizing color-evasiveness: Using dis/ability critical race theory to expand a color-blind racial ideology in education and society. Race Ethnicity and Education, 20(2), 147-162. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2016.1248837 Bernal, D. D. (1998). Using a Chicana feminist epistemology in educational research. Harvard Educational Review, 68(4), 555-583. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.68.4.5wv1034973g22q48 Bernal, D. D., & Villalpando, O. (2002). An apartheid of knowledge in academia: The struggle over the “legitimate” knowledge of faculty of color. Equity &Excellence in Education, 35(2), 169- 180. https://doi.org/10.1080/713845282 Castro Samayoa, A., & Nicolazzo, Z. (2017). Affect and/as collective resistance in a post-truth moment. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(10), 988-993. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2017.1312595 Dantley, M. E. (1990). The ineffectiveness of effective schools leadership: An analysis of the effective schools movement from a critical perspective. Journal of Negro Education, 59, 585- 598. https://doi.org/10.2307/2295315 Dantley, M. E. (2003). Critical spirituality: Enhancing transformative leadership through critical theory and African American prophetic spirituality. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 6, 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360312022000069987 Dantley, M. E. (2005). African American spirituality and Cornel West’s notions of prophetic pragmatism: Restructuring educational leadership in American urban schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 4, 651-674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04274274 Dantley, M. E., & Rogers, J. L. (2001). Including a spiritual voice in the educational leadership and school reform discourse. International Journal of Educational Reform, 10(1), 87-101. Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 26 No. 146 SPECIAL ISSUE 12 Dantley, M. E., & Tillman, L. C. (2010). Social justice and moral transformative leadership. In C. Marshall & M. Oliva (Eds.), Leadership for social justice: Making revolutions in education (2nd ed., pp. 19-34). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Delgado, R. (1992). The imperial scholar revisited: How to marginalize outsider writing, ten years later. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 140(4), 1349-1372. https://doi.org/10.2307/3312406 Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (Eds.). (2000). Critical theory: The cutting edge (2nd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Delgado López‐Cózar, E., Robinson‐García, N., & Torres‐Salinas, D. (2014). The Google scholar experiment: How to index false papers and manipulate bibliometric indicators. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(3), 446-454. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23056 Dixson, A. D., & Rousseau, C. K. (2005). And we are still not saved: Critical race theory in education ten years later. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 7-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000340971 Dixson, A., & Dingus, J. E. (2008). In search of our mothers' gardens: Black women teachers and professional socialization. Teachers College Record, 110(4), 805-837. Du Bois, W. E. B. (1926). Criteria of Negro art. Crisis, 32(6), 290-297. Dumas, M. J., & Anderson, G. (2014). Qualitative research as policy knowledge: Framing policy problems and transforming education from the ground up. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(11). http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22n11.2014 E. Castrellón, L., Reyna Rivarola, A. R., & López, G. R. (2017). We are not alternative facts: Feeling, existing, and resisting in the era of Trump. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(10), 936-945. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2017.1312603 Emdin, C. (2010). Affiliation and alienation: Hip‐hop, rap, and urban science education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42(1), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270903161118 Foster, M. (1999). Race, class, and gender in education research: Surveying the political terrain. Educational Policy, 13(1), 77-85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904899131007 Garcia, G. A. (2017). Defined by outcomes or culture? Constructing an organizational identity for hispanic-serving institutions. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1_suppl), 111S-134S. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216669779 Garcia, G. A. (2018). What does it mean to be Latinx-serving? Testing the utility of the typology of HSI organizational identities. Association of Mexican American Educators Journal, 11(3), 109-138. https://doi.org/10.24974/amae.11.3.363 Gooden, M. A. (2012). What does racism have to do with leadership? Countering the idea of color- blind leadership: A reflection on race and the growing pressures of the urban principalship. The Journal of Educational Foundations, 26(1/2), 67. Gooden, M. A., & Dantley, M. (2012). Centering race in a framework for leadership preparation. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 7(2), 237-253. https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775112455266 Gooden, M. A., & O’Doherty, A. (2015). Do you see what I see? Fostering aspiring leaders’ racial awareness. Urban Education, 50(2), 225-255. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085914534273 Green, T. L. (2017). From positivism to critical theory: School-community relations toward community equity literacy. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(4), 370-387. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2016.1253892 When they go low, we go high 13 Grooms, A. A. (2016). Money or diversity? An implementation analysis of the Voluntary Transfer Program in St. Louis, 1999-2009. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24, 20. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.24.2131 Harris, C. I. (1993). Whiteness as property. Harvard Law Review, 1707-1791. https://doi.org/10.2307/1341787 Hill, M. L. (2009). Beats, rhymes, and classroom life: Hip-hop pedagogy and the politics of identity. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Horsford, S. D. (2010). Black superintendents on educating Black students in separate and unequal contexts. The Urban Review, 42(1), 58-79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-009-0119-0 Horsford, S. D. (2012). This bridge called my leadership: An essay on Black women as bridge leaders in education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 25(1), 11-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2011.647726 Horsford, S. D. (2018) Making America’s schools great now: reclaiming democracy and activist leadership under Trump. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 50(1), 3-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2017.1403893 Johnson Jr, A. M. (1991). The new voice of color. Yale Law Journal, 2007-2063. https://doi.org/10.2307/796814 Jones, V. A., & Reddick, R. J. (2017). The Heterogeneity of resistance: How Black students utilize engagement and activism to challenge PWI inequalities. The Journal of Negro Education, 86(3), 204-219. https://doi.org/10.7709/jnegroeducation.86.3.0204 Kaba, A. J. (2009). Demographics and profile: The most cited Black scholars in the Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities. Journal of Pan African Studies, 3(2), 153-207. Kendi, I. (2017). Stamped from the beginning: The definitive history of racist ideas in America. Random House. King, J. E. (2017). Who will make America great again? ‘Black people, of course…’. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(10), 946-956. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2017.1312605 Krupnick, M. (Oct. 1, 2018). After colleges promised to increase it, hiring of black faculty declined. Hechinger Report. Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and what's it doing in a nice field like education? International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/095183998236863 Ladson-Billings, G. (2012). Through a glass darkly: The persistence of race in education research & scholarship. Educational Researcher, 41(4), 115-120. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12440743 Ladson-Billings, G. (2017). “Makes me wanna holler”: Refuting the “culture of poverty” discourse in urban schooling. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 673(1), 80-90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716217718793 Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (1995). Toward a critical theory of education. Teachers College Record, 97, 47-68. Leonardo, Z. (2004). The color of supremacy: Beyond the discourse of ‘white privilege’. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 36(2), 137-152. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2004.00057.x Li, D., & Koedel, C. (2017). Representation and salary gaps by race-ethnicity and gender at selective public universities. Educational Researcher, 46(7), 343-354. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17726535 Lopez, I. F. H. (1994). The social construction of race: Some observations on illusion, fabrication, and choice. Harvared CR-CLL Review, 29, 1. Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 26 No. 146 SPECIAL ISSUE 14 López, I. H. (2015). Dog whistle politics: How coded racial appeals have reinvented racism and wrecked the middle class. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Love, B. L. (2015). What is hip-hop-based education doing in nice fields such as early childhood and elementary education? Urban Education, 50(1), 106-131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085914563182 Love, B. L. (2017). A ratched lens: Black queer youth, agency, Hip-Hop, and the Black ratchet imagination. Educational Researcher, 46(9), 539-547. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17736520 Love, B. (2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of educational freedom. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Martinez, M. A., Chang, A., & Welton, A. D. (2017). Assistant professors of color confront the inequitable terrain of academia: A community cultural wealth perspective. Race Ethnicity and Education, 20(5), 696-710. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2016.1150826 Martinez, M. A., & Welton, A. D. (2017). Straddling cultures, identities, and inconsistencies: Voices of pre-tenure faculty of color in educational leadership. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 12(2), 122-142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775115606177 Matias, C. E., & Newlove, P. M. (2017). Better the devil you see, than the one you don’t: bearing witness to emboldened en-whitening epistemology in the Trump era. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(10), 920-928. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2017.1312590 Milner IV, H. R. (2010). What does teacher education have to do with teaching? Implications for diversity studies. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 118-131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109347670 Morris, A. (2017). WEB Du Bois at the center: From science, civil rights movement, to Black Lives Matter. The British Journal of Sociology, 68(1), 3-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12241 Murtadha, K., & Watts, D. M. (2005). Linking the struggle for education and social justice: Historical perspectives of African American leadership in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41, 591–608. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04274271 Nicole, J. & Williams, B. M. (2018). #CiteASista. Retrieved from https://citeasista.com/about/ Ratna, A. (2017). ‘Using the pen as a weapon’: The resistance of an outsider within. In Race, Gender and Sport (pp. 109-125). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315637051 Reddick, R. J., & Sáenz, V. B. (2012). Coming home: Hermanos académicos reflect on past and present realities as professors at their alma mater. Harvard Educational Review, 82(3), 353-380. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.82.3.g311m72q432062uq Rivera-McCutchen, R. L., & Watson, T. N. (2014). Leadership for social justice: It is a matter of trust. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 17(4), 54-65. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555458914549663 Roland, E. (2018). Understanding Intersectionality to Promote Social Justice in Educational Leadership: Review of JCEL Cases. Intersections: Critical Issues in Education, 2(1), 3. Sampson, C. (2018). (Im) Possibilities of Latinx school board members’ educational leadership toward equity. Educational Administration Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X18799482 Santamaría, L. J. (2014). Critical change for the greater good: Multicultural perceptions in educational leadership toward social justice and equity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(3), 347-391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X13505287 Singleton, G. E. (2013). More courageous conversations about race. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. When they go low, we go high 15 Sismondo S (2017b) Post-truth? Social Studies of Science, 47(1), 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312717692076 Solórzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. J. (2002). Critical race methodology: Counter-storytelling as an analytical framework for education research. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 23-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780040200800103 Stanley, C. A. (2006). Coloring the academic landscape: Faculty of color breaking the silence in predominantly White colleges and universities. American Educational Research Journal, 43(4), 701-736. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312043004701 Tate IV, W. F. (1997). Chapter 4: Critical race theory and education: History, theory, and implications. Review of Research in Education, 22(1), 195-247. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X022001195 Teranishi, R. T. (2002). Asian Pacific Americans and critical race theory: An examination of school racial climate. Equity & Excellence in Education, 35(2), 144-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/713845281 Tillman, L. C. (2004). African-American principals and the legacy of Brown. Review of Research in Education, 28, 101-146. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X028001101 Tillman, L. C. (2007). Halls of anger: (Mis)representations of Africa-American school leaders in film. In D. Carlson & C. P. Gause (Eds.), Keeping the promise: Essays on leadership, democracy and education (pp. 357-372). New York: Peter Lang. Travis, R. (2013). Rap music and the empowerment of today’s youth: Evidence in everyday music listening, music therapy, and commercial rap music. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 30(2), 139-167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-012-0285-x Urrieta Jr, L., Méndez, L., & Rodríguez, E. (2015). “A moving target”: A critical race analysis of Latina/o faculty experiences, perspectives, and reflections on the tenure and promotion process. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 28(10), 1149-1168. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2014.974715 Welsh, R. O., & Williams, S. M. (2018). Incentivizing improvement or imposition? An examination of the response to gubernatorial school takeover and statewide turnaround districts. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 26, 124. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.26.3679 Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 26 No. 146 SPECIAL ISSUE 16 About the Authors Joshua Childs University of Texas at Austin joshuachilds@austin.utexas.edu Joshua Childs is an assistant professor of Educational Policy and Planning in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy at the University of Texas. Joshua’s research focuses on the role of interorganizational networks, cross-sector collaborations, and strategic alliances to address complex educational issues. Sarah Johnson University of Chicago sarahjjohnson@uchicago.edu Sarah Johnson is a Provost’s Postdoctoral Fellow in English at the University of Chicago. Her research is broadly concerned with 17th through 19th-century archives of slavery and marronage in the United States and Caribbean. Sarah researches quest ions of how certain resistance practices refuse or reject textual representation, and the resulting challenges such escapes from representation pose for historical authors and literary scholars today. About the Guest Editors Jennifer R. Wolgemuth University of South Florida jrwolgemuth@usf.edu Jennifer R. Wolgemuth is an Associate Professor in Measurement and Research at the University of South Florida. Her research focuses on the socio-politics of social science research. Her work illuminates and disrupts categorical accounts of the contexts, ethics, and outcomes of social science research, including their personal and social impacts on researchers, participants, and those who shepherd research evidence into policy and practice. Mirka Koro-Ljungberg Arizona State University Mirka.Koro-Ljungberg@asu.edu Mirka Koro-Ljungberg (Ph.D., University of Helsinki) is a Professor of qualitative research at the Arizona State University. Her scholarship operates in the intersection of methodology, philosophy, and socio-cultural critique and her work aims to contribute to methodological knowledge, experimentation, and theoretical development across various traditions associated with qualitative research. She has published in various qualitative and educational journals and she is the author of Reconceptualizing qualitative research: Methodologies without methodology (2016) published by SAGE and co- editor of Disrupting data in qualitative inquiry: Entanglements with the Post-Critical and Post-Anthropocentric (2017) by Peter Lang. Travis M. Marn Southern Connecticut State University Marnt1@southernct.edu mailto:joshuachilds@austin.utexas.edu mailto:sarahjjohnson@uchicago.edu mailto:jrwolgemuth@usf.edu mailto:Mirka.Koro-Ljungberg@asu.edu mailto:Marnt1@southernct.edu When they go low, we go high 17 Travis M. Marn (Ph.D., University of South Florida) is a Professor in the Curriculum & Learning Department at Southern Connecticut State University where he teaches child development and educational psychology. His scholarship focuses on philosophically informed empirical accounts of performative identities, employing new materialism and posthumanism in psychological research, and contributing to the development of qualitative and post -qualitative methods and methodologies. Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie Sam Houston State University tonyonwuegbuzie@aol.com Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie is Professor in the Department of Educational Leadership at Sam Houston State University, where he teaches doctoral-level courses in qualitative research, quantitative research, and mixed research. Further, he is a Distinguished Visiting Professor at the University of Johannesburg and an Honorary Professor at the University of South Africa. His research areas primarily involve social and behavioral science topics, including disadvantaged and under-served populations such as minorities, children living in war zones, students with special needs, and juvenile delinquents. Also, he has conducted numerous research studies on factors that predict educational achievement at the primary, secondary, and tertiary levels. Additionally, he writes extensively on qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methodological topics applicable to multiple disciplines within the field of the social and behavioral sciences. Shaun M. Dougherty Vanderbilt University shaun.dougherty@vanderbilt.edu Shaun M. Dougherty is an Associate Professor of Public Policy and Education, Peabody College of Education & Human Development, Vanderbilt University. His work focuses on applied quantitative analysis of education policies and programs, equity, and career and technical education. mailto:tonyonwuegbuzie@aol.com mailto:shaun.dougherty@vanderbilt.edu Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 26 No. 146 SPECIAL ISSUE 18 SPECIAL ISSUE Rethinking Education Policy and Methodology in a Post-truth Era education policy analysis archives Volume 26 Number 146 November 19, 2018 ISSN 1068-2341 Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Education Policy Analysis Archives, it is distributed for non- commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in th e work. More details of this Creative Commons license are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/. All other uses must be approved by the author(s) or EPAA. EPAA is published by the Mary Lou Fulton Institute and Graduate School of Education at Arizona State University Articles are indexed in CIRC (Clasificación Integrada de Revistas Científicas, Spain), DIALNET (Spain), Directory of Open Access Journals, EBSCO Education Research Complete, ERIC, Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson), PubMed, QUALIS A1 (Brazil), REDALyC, SCImago Journal Rank; SCOPUS, SOCOLAR (China). Please send errata notes to Audrey Amrein-Beardsley at Audrey.beardsley@asu.edu Join EPAA’s Facebook community at https://www.facebook.com/EPAAAAPE and Twitter feed @epaa_aape. http://www.doaj.org/ mailto:Audrey.beardsley@asu.edu https://www.facebook.com/EPAAAAPE When they go low, we go high 19 education policy analysis archives editorial board Lead Editor: Audrey Amrein-Beardsley (Arizona State University) Editor Consultor: Gustavo E. Fischman (Arizona State University) Associate Editors: David Carlson, Lauren Harris, Eugene Judson, Mirka Koro-Ljungberg, Scott Marley, Molly Ott, Iveta Silova (Arizona State University) Cristina Alfaro San Diego State University Amy Garrett Dikkers University of North Carolina, Wilmington Susan L. Robertson Bristol University Gary Anderson New York University Gene V Glass Arizona State University Gloria M. Rodriguez University of California, Davis Michael W. Apple University of Wisconsin, Madison Ronald Glass University of California, Santa Cruz R. Anthony Rolle University of Houston Jeff Bale OISE, University of Toronto, Canada Jacob P. K. Gross University of Louisville A. G. Rud Washington State University Aaron Bevanot SUNY Albany Eric M. Haas WestEd Patricia Sánchez University of University of Texas, San Antonio David C. Berliner Arizona State University Julian Vasquez Heilig California State University, Sacramento Janelle Scott University of California, Berkeley Henry Braun Boston College Kimberly Kappler Hewitt University of North Carolina Greensboro Jack Schneider University of Massachusetts Lowell Casey Cobb University of Connecticut Aimee Howley Ohio University Noah Sobe Loyola University Arnold Danzig San Jose State University Steve Klees University of Maryland Jaekyung Lee SUNY Buffalo Nelly P. Stromquist University of Maryland Linda Darling-Hammond Stanford University Jessica Nina Lester Indiana University Benjamin Superfine University of Illinois, Chicago Elizabeth H. DeBray University of Georgia Amanda E. Lewis University of Illinois, Chicago Adai Tefera Virginia Commonwealth University Chad d'Entremont Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy Chad R. Lochmiller Indiana University Tina Trujillo University of California, Berkeley John Diamond University of Wisconsin, Madison Christopher Lubienski Indiana University Federico R. Waitoller University of Illinois, Chicago Matthew Di Carlo Albert Shanker Institute Sarah Lubienski Indiana University Larisa Warhol University of Connecticut Sherman Dorn Arizona State University William J. Mathis University of Colorado, Boulder John Weathers University of Colorado, Colorado Springs Michael J. Dumas University of California, Berkeley Michele S. Moses University of Colorado, Boulder Kevin Welner University of Colorado, Boulder Kathy Escamilla University of Colorado, Boulder Julianne Moss Deakin University, Australia Terrence G. Wiley Center for Applied Linguistics Yariv Feniger Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Sharon Nichols University of Texas, San Antonio John Willinsky Stanford University Melissa Lynn Freeman Adams State College Eric Parsons University of Missouri-Columbia Jennifer R. Wolgemuth University of South Florida Rachael Gabriel University of Connecticut Amanda U. Potterton University of Kentucky Kyo Yamashiro Claremont Graduate University Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 26 No. 146 SPECIAL ISSUE 20 archivos analíticos de políticas educativas consejo editorial Editor Consultor: Gustavo E. Fischman (Arizona State University) Editores Asociados: Armando Alcántara Santuario (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México), Jason Beech, (Universidad de San Andrés), Angelica Buendia, (Metropolitan Autonomous University), Ezequiel Gomez Caride, (Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina), Antonio Luzon, (Universidad de Granada), José Luis Ramírez, Universidad de Sonora), Paula Razquin (Universidad de San Andrés) Claudio Almonacid Universidad Metropolitana de Ciencias de la Educación, Chile Ana María García de Fanelli Centro de Estudios de Estado y Sociedad (CEDES) CONICET, Argentina Miriam Rodríguez Vargas Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas, México Miguel Ángel Arias Ortega Universidad Autónoma de la Ciudad de México Juan Carlos González Faraco Universidad de Huelva, España José Gregorio Rodríguez Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Colombia Xavier Besalú Costa Universitat de Girona, España María Clemente Linuesa Universidad de Salamanca, España Mario Rueda Beltrán Instituto de Investigaciones sobre la Universidad y la Educación, UNAM, México Xavier Bonal Sarro Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, España Jaume Martínez Bonafé Universitat de València, España José Luis San Fabián Maroto Universidad de Oviedo, España Antonio Bolívar Boitia Universidad de Granada, España Alejandro Márquez Jiménez Instituto de Investigaciones sobre la Universidad y la Educación, UNAM, México Jurjo Torres Santomé, Universidad de la Coruña, España José Joaquín Brunner Universidad Diego Portales, Chile María Guadalupe Olivier Tellez, Universidad Pedagógica Nacional, México Yengny Marisol Silva Laya Universidad Iberoamericana, México Damián Canales Sánchez Instituto Nacional para la Evaluación de la Educación, México Miguel Pereyra Universidad de Granada, España Ernesto Treviño Ronzón Universidad Veracruzana, México Gabriela de la Cruz Flores Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Mónica Pini Universidad Nacional de San Martín, Argentina Ernesto Treviño Villarreal Universidad Diego Portales Santiago, Chile Marco Antonio Delgado Fuentes Universidad Iberoamericana, México Omar Orlando Pulido Chaves Instituto para la Investigación Educativa y el Desarrollo Pedagógico (IDEP) Antoni Verger Planells Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, España Inés Dussel, DIE-CINVESTAV, México José Ignacio Rivas Flores Universidad de Málaga, España Catalina Wainerman Universidad de San Andrés, Argentina Pedro Flores Crespo Universidad Iberoamericana, México Juan Carlos Yáñez Velazco Universidad de Colima, México javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/816') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/819') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/820') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/4276') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/1609') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/825') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/797') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/823') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/798') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/555') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/814') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/2703') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/801') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/826') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/802') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/3264') javascript:openRTWindow('http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/about/editorialTeamBio/804') When they go low, we go high 21 arquivos analíticos de políticas educativas conselho editorial Editor Consultor: Gustavo E. Fischman (Arizona State University) Editoras Associadas: Kaizo Iwakami Beltrao, (Brazilian School of Public and Private Management - EBAPE/FGV, Brazil), Geovana Mendonça Lunardi Mendes (Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina), Gilberto José Miranda, (Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, Brazil), Marcia Pletsch, Sandra Regina Sales (Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro) Almerindo Afonso Universidade do Minho Portugal Alexandre Fernandez Vaz Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Brasil José Augusto Pacheco Universidade do Minho, Portugal Rosanna Maria Barros Sá Universidade do Algarve Portugal Regina Célia Linhares Hostins Universidade do Vale do Itajaí, Brasil Jane Paiva Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Maria Helena Bonilla Universidade Federal da Bahia Brasil Alfredo Macedo Gomes Universidade Federal de Pernambuco Brasil Paulo Alberto Santos Vieira Universidade do Estado de Mato Grosso, Brasil Rosa Maria Bueno Fischer Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil Jefferson Mainardes Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Brasil Fabiany de Cássia Tavares Silva Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso do Sul, Brasil Alice Casimiro Lopes Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Jader Janer Moreira Lopes Universidade Federal Fluminense e Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Brasil António Teodoro Universidade Lusófona Portugal Suzana Feldens Schwertner Centro Universitário Univates Brasil Debora Nunes Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Brasil Lílian do Valle Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Flávia Miller Naethe Motta Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Alda Junqueira Marin Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, Brasil Alfredo Veiga-Neto Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil Dalila Andrade Oliveira Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brasil