4.2 Article

Theorizing racial microaffirmations: a Critical Race/LatCrit approach

期刊

RACE ETHNICITY AND EDUCATION
卷 24, 期 2, 页码 245-261

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13613324.2020.1798381

关键词

Critical race theory; LatCrit; microaffirmations; Latinx identity; African American identity; higher education; campus climate

资金

  1. Center for the Study of Diversity, University of Delaware

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study collected stories from racially minoritized students at a predominantly white university, identifying four types of racial microaffirmations: microrecognitions, microvalidations, microtransformations, and microprotections. Rooted in the Critical Race/LatCrit theoretical framework, this typology offers concrete examples for practitioners seeking to understand and promote racial microaffirmations.
This article theorizes the concept of racial microaffirmations and illustrates different microaffirmation types. We report findings from a study that employed narrative interviews to solicit stories from racially minoritized students at a predominantly white university. Participants included 16 graduate students and 18 undergraduate students who identified as African-American, Latinx or mixed race. Students shared microaffirmations that they experienced related to their racial identities. We developed a typology of four microaffirmation types from the students' stories: microrecognitions, microvalidations, microtransformations and microprotections. Drawing on the students' stories, we further define each microaffirmation type and root the typology in the foundational elements of Critical Race/LatCrit theoretical framework. This study offers concrete examples of experiences university students found affirming that are helpful to practitioners seeking to better understand what racial microaffirmations are and ways they may be promoted. This work also expands the literature on microaffirmations and points to areas that need further research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据