Reflection 3: Critical Condition—Understanding Critical Race Theory


Coined by UCLA School of Law and Columbia Law School professor, Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw in the ‘80s, Critical Race Theory (CRT) has been a complex legal analysis framework in law schools for three decades. CRT is primarily designed to teach lawyers-in-training how to critically examine the roles race and racism play in our legal system—for example, how race might be a factor in America’s soaring incarceration rate. CRT, however, is not taught taught in American K-12 schools, nor is it designed to make white students feel guilty about past racist incidents in American history. Nonetheless, since 2020, Republicans have used CRT to rally their base by painting it as a tool designed to shame white people—President Trump even called CRT “un-American.” In the past two years, conservatives across the country have been banning CRT in public schools, including colleges, on the basis that it actually encourages, not discourages, racism and intolerance. But the nationwide anti-CRT fury has now expanded to include banning books from school libraries, dissolving EDI (equity, diversity, and inclusion) programs, and establishing laws which ban educators from teaching certain aspects of racism. So, how should race and racism be taught in American K-12 schools? If, in reality, CRT is relegated to law school classrooms, what and how should American students learn about these issues? Should a teacher be restricted from any topics that relate to race and racism?

Include at least two of the following in your discussion: 

Required:
  • MLA Style
  • Approximately 375 words
  • Works cited 

Submission Window: Wed 11.9-Mon 11.14 (via Canvas)