Abstract

Anonymity is an unquestioned norm in education research, yet few scholars have theorized how this methodological standard reaffirms structural racism. This practice is critical to question given the presiding mismatch between the rhetoric and practice of racial diversity across educational contexts. Using Derrick Bell’s interest convergence as a critical race framework, I contend institutional review boards (IRBs) embody a converging of interests between educational institutions and research participants (particularly People of Color). As a de facto requirement of IRBs, research site anonymity disrupts readers’ ability to imagine structural racism as a normal and endemic component of American education. As a result, the predilection to default to anonymity without question minimizes racism’s impact and perpetuates cultures of silence deeming racism socially taboo. This conceptual paper concludes with a discussion of limitations and additional methodological points for readers to consider.

摘要

匿名是教育研究中不容置疑的规范，但很少有学者对这种方法标准如何重申结构性种族主义进行理论化。鉴于跨教育背景下种族多样性的言辞和实践之间的主要不匹配，这种做法对于质疑至关重要。使用德里克贝尔的利益趋同作为一个关键的种族框架，我认为机构审查委员会 (IRB) 体现了教育机构和研究参与者（特别是有色人种）之间的利益趋同。作为 IRB 的一项事实上的要求，研究站点的匿名性破坏了读者将结构性种族主义想象为美国教育的正常和地方性组成部分的能力。其结果，毫无疑问地默认匿名的倾向使种族主义的影响最小化，并使将种族主义视为社会禁忌的沉默文化永久化。这篇概念性论文最后讨论了局限性和供读者考虑的其他方法论点。