How do school district leaders frame their commitments to racial equity? This question has become increasingly salient in the last few years as, on the one hand, organizations have striven to break with previous norms of race-evasive or “colorblind” approaches to issues of racial equity; on the other hand, the backlash against teaching about racism and DEI practices in schools may cause districts to retreat from their stated commitments. My dissertation focuses on how school district leaders framed their commitment to racial equity during arguably the period of most intense cultural discussion about racism in the last several decades: the Minneapolis police murder of George Floyd and the subsequent protests for racial justice in May-July 2020.

While Floyd’s horrific death was not unique but part of an unrelenting pattern of extrajudicial violence against Black Americans, this moment was unprecedented in the response from organizations. I examine the statements that leaders of a random sample of 1000 school districts publicly posted outlining their commitments to racial equity in their districts. While these statements do not necessarily indicate the actual actions districts took, they show what leaders thought, in this moment, was appropriate and legitimate for them to say to their communities, revealing a cultural shift away from the norm of race-evasive language (see also this recent study by Toraif and colleagues, examining the statements by colleges and universities).

My preliminary analysis of these statements reveals three distinct ways leaders framed their commitments to racial equity. The first two frames validate and elaborate on past qualitative research by scholars including Subini Annamma, Ellen Berrey, Erica Turner, Natasha Warikoo, and Amy Stuart Wells, while the third frame offers a novel interpretation of organizational discourse about race and racism. The diversity frame supports celebrating each students’ individual differences, including racial identities, but avoid discussion of racial violence and systemic oppression; the power analysis frame acknowledges structural racism, including the role of schools and districts in producing racialized power imbalances; finally, the responsible ignorance frame suggests that school district leaders are innocent of past racial inequity in their districts due to their ignorance about racism, which they must solve by talking and learning about racism.

I find that these frames vary by district political and demographic characteristics, showing that what is considered a legitimate and acceptable framing of racial equity varies across the US according to a community’s urbanicity, political leanings, and socioeconomic demographics. I argue that these frames matter because they present radically different visions of what policies and practices a district should enact to address racial inequity in their districts. While the diversity frame might suggest districts should celebrate heritage months, the power analysis frame might push leaders to eradicate supposedly race-neutral policies that produce racially unequal student experiences and outcomes, such as student ability tracking.

A key outstanding question that I seek to answer using my dissertation is what makes an organization issue a statement on a current event at all. What organizational and environmental features prompt leaders to take this action? Given my case is school districts, it would be tremendously helpful to know the demographic background and career history of U.S. superintendents. What kinds of statements are considered acceptable when a superintendent is new to a community, as opposed to a longtime district employee? Do superintendents with minoritized identities, especially women and people of color, face additional scrutiny when they propose district change, especially change that focuses on racial inequality in their district? These are just some of the questions I will seek to answer with the support of Dr. White and the Superintendent Lab.

Bonnie Siegler is a Ph.D. student whose research lies at the intersection of cultural sociology, sociology of race/ethnicity, and organizational sociology. She is interested in discourse, particularly in its relationship to inequality in institutional settings. Her research has centered on school choice, with projects examining parent school choice narratives and the role of race in parent school preferences. Her dissertation work focuses on discourse of race in organizations, particularly the ideology of diversity in US schools, as well as the expertise of DEI workers in schools. She uses qualitative and quantitative methods.