figure a

Black joy at the forefront

This paper is a part of the special issue by the research interest group The Continental and Diasporic Africa in Science Education of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, we (the authors) believed a nontraditional opening would be welcomed in such a platform. We have opened with an image of Monica (first author) and Braxton (pseudonym) a 7th grade middle school Black boy who participated in the summer STEM camp where Monica was the STEM camp teacher and coordinator. It is common for papers to begin with the statistics about the poor academic performance outcomes of Black students in science classrooms (Walls 2012). To the contrary, we ask the readers to focus on the joy on Monica and Braxton’s faces evidenced by the huge smiles. At the time the picture was taken, Monica was preparing for the next science activity when Braxton decided to surprise her with a Minion picture on his face. He caught her off guard. Monica could have gotten upset with Braxton for not following the rules; instead, she embraced the moment and enjoyed it. It is with this same spirit of joy and love of Black students that we want our readers to engage in imagining the possibilities of liberatory science education teaching and learning for Black people. In a society that has dehumanized and demonized Black people (Ridgeway and McGee 2018), we question how has this positioning impacted the experiences of Black students? We believe change is possible, or at least it is that hope that fuels our dedication to be critical STEM education researchers. Being a Black critical

STEM researcher is not a choice but rather is needed for our survival in and outside of the academy (Martin and Gholson 2012). We believe Black people are brilliant (Jett 2016).

Braxton is one of those students that Monica often talks about as he has stuck with her as a reminder why she considers herself a race warrior. This paper utilizes critical race theory (CRT) to explore science education and the experiences of Black youth who participated in a summer science camp with Monica. We bring to the forefront that Black people in the USA have not experienced liberatory education practices where they are able to be free of demonizing and deficit depiction put forth by the mainstream dominant ideology (McGee 2020). We hone in on the youth’s behaviors and unpack their meaning in an anti-deficit manor. To highlight when Black youth have expressed “I didn’t do nothin’” how this in actuality can be true, yet the racialized stereotypes of Black youth over power the youth and they are presumed guilty (Gholson and Wilkes 2017). The ideology that Black youth need to be controlled is damaging in a science education context. This is used to limit their opportunities, e.g., withholding materials as a means of control until the teacher believes the Black students are ready for science (Roby and Calabrese 2019). We put forth the notion of a Black liberatory science education practice where Black students and teachers are embraced and free to be Black.

Leveraging critical race theory to centralize the experiences and voices of black people

Critical race theory has been utilized by many scholars to legitimize the use of oral storytelling (Jett 2016). Critical race theory (CRT) originated in the legal studies field with legal scholars of color who were seeking to describe and reveal the ways in which racism manifested itself within the legal system, a legal system that professed to be colorblind (Freeman 1977).

While it has expanded to many other disciplines (e.g., education, geographic information system, psychology, and dietetics) and continues to get used in legal fields (e.g., Nelson 2017). Vanessa

Dodo Seriki (2018) described how CRT has been undertheorized in science education, which provides many opportunities for scholars to consider the racialized experiences of minoritized students when advancing research. While various disciplines have taken up CRT in unique ways, there are commonalities in the salience of racial realism (Bell 1992).

Gloria Ladson-Billings and William Tate (1995) are credited for being the scholars who pioneered CRT in educational research, claiming this framework provided explanation and understanding to racial nuances that play out in society and especially in classrooms in the USA. Prior to that, the field of education had “been left with a somewhat limited to means conceptualizing, discussing, and explaining aspects of race productively” (Walls 2016, p.1550). Even among critical race scholars in education there are various interpretations based on context; however, the commitment to a critical race praxis is ever present (Mensah and Jackson 2018). There are off-shoots of CRT that take up nuanced understandings of identity, e.g., Critical Race Feminism, Tribal CRT, LatCRT, DisCRT. This allows for CRT to be sensitive to the reification of racism.

We utilize the following CRT tenants as summarized by Jennifer DeCuir and Adrienne Dixson (2004): the permanence of racism, Whiteness as property, interest convergence, the critique of liberalism, and counter-storytelling.

The permanence of racism

CRT begins with the notion that racism is not divergent from the US society, instead it is endemic “because it is so enmeshed in the fabric of our social order, it appears both normal and natural to people in this culture” (Ladson-Billings and Tate 1995, p. 53).

Recognizing racism is the “first step in unveiling” constructions that sustain the oppression of

Black people (Wallace and Bland 2012, p. 346). Moreover, to avoid racial disparities or render race neutral by colorblind ideologies is counter-productive to dismantling racism. Race matters (Howard and Navarro 2016), and racial disparities can be found in life expectancies, access to health care, mass incarceration, educational opportunities, unemployment rates, housing opportunities, and so on. Racism is real and is embedded within the structure of the USA. Racism is pervasive in how it manifests and operates within the political, economic, and social contexts (Delgado and Stefancic 2017). The permanence of racism within educational contexts, means that Black students experience racism, knowingly and unknowingly, through structural practices and the implementation of policy (school choice, science class placement, discipline, etc.). Scholars in education research have utilized CRT to unpack and make sense of schooling contexts for Black students and the ways racism manifests itself (Stovall 2013). Howard and Navarro (2016) claimed, “that many students of color are expected to learn in schools where content, instruction, school culture, and assessment are often racially hostile, exclusive, and serve as impediments for school success” (p. 255).

CRT acknowledges structural racism as a mechanism that allows racial inequities to occur at a macro and micro level (Walls 2016). Nelson (2016) challenges structural racism and asserts it is created and maintained by an individual(s) which makes these systems acts of overt racism. An example of macro-level or structural racism is the use of standardized assessment performance in schools (Davis & Martin 2008). Students are either given or not given opportunities based on an assessment, and students with higher assessment scores can be placed in honors classes or advanced placement in high school where they are able to complete college credit prior to entering higher education (Oakes 1990).

Whiteness as property

Legal Scholar Cheryl Harris (1993) theorized the concept of Whiteness as property which described that legally White people own property and has been extended to anything people find to have value. Whiteness is not just a social identity but it is structuring property of a social system (Annamma 2015). Whiteness, similar to racism, is enmeshed systematically in our society. In this case, it maintains structure to reproduce a racial hierarchy that privileges White people and their cultural ways of knowing (Le and Matias 2018). Scholars have argued that science education is deeply rooted in Whiteness (Mensah and Jackson 2018). Erica Bullock (2017) used Whiteness as property to explain how in a predominantly Black school district Black students were denied access to quality STEM instruction that was provided to White students. In this case, segregation techniques were used to funnel this limited resource and preserve it for White students, in a place where White students were a numerical minority. Bullock leveraged Ladson-Billings and Tate’s (1995), application of Whiteness as property in education:

…by likening curriculum to “intellectual property” that “must be undergirded by ‘real’ property, that is, science labs, computers and other state-of-the-art technologies, appropriately certified and prepared teachers” (Ladson-Billings and Tate 1995, p. 54). In this framing, public education, and education broadly, is a property-based game in which those who benefit from whiteness hoard real property to gain intellectual property. The danger is that, as with physical property, real property is a limited resource. Those who claim an entitlement to quality education as intellectual property also necessarily claim the same entitlement to the real property that supports it (Bullock 2017, p. 632-633).

Interest convergence

Derrick Bell (1980) introduced the concept of interest convergence in CRT, asserting that White people will support racial equality only when they will directly benefit. As such, interest convergence is seen as a way that White elites tolerate or encourage racial advancement for Blacks (or people of color) only when also promoting White self-interests. CRT scholars have critiqued many affirmative action implementations describing while these efforts claim to create opportunities for people of color, White women by far have primarily benefited from these efforts (Nelson 2016).

Lorenzo Baber (2015) described, “Interest-convergence stresses that social change benefitting traditionally marginalized populations occurs only when it also serves the best interests of the dominant population” (p.253). At all levels of science education—K-12 and postsecondary education—Black students have lower levels of participation, persistence, and completion rates than their White counter-parts. The underrepresentation of Black students in STEM has gained national attention to focus on equity efforts to increase their participation (Pitts Bannister, Davis, Mutegi, Thompson, and Lewis 2017). However, scholars have questioned the motives behind fostering equity concerns (Rodriguez and Morrison 2019). Barder is one of those scholars (2015). He leveraged Bell’s interest convergence with STEM equity efforts for underrepresented and marginalized populations of Black, Latinx, and Native American students, claiming these equity efforts are rooted in the USA remaining a global competitor in STEM, which ultimate benefit White people and Whiteness (Baber 2015).

Erica Bullock (2017) argued that over-fetishizing that STEM education will “save us” (p.628) to remain a global competitor in education is smoke and mirrors, because access to quality STEM education is often denied to marginalized students, which impacts their participation in higher education and industry. These fields have historical roots of being preserved to maintain elitism and Whiteness while intentionally being exclusive of people of color and women (McGee 2016). Access to quality STEM education is typically preserved for “high achieving” marginalized students and White students especially in urban spaces (Bullock 2017).

Critique of liberalism

CRT constantly interrogates liberalism within the context of teaching and learning.

Liberalism further substantiates theories or notions of meritocracy, based upon the sole accomplishments of an individual. CRT’s critique of liberalism takes this practice to task by reinforcing a need to assess structural and systemic histories or factors (Zamudio, Russell, Rios, and Bridgman 2011). An example of the critique of liberalism is unpacking colorblindness, the belief that race does not influence people’s experiences and outcomes.

Which, colorblindness has been found in the science standards. The issue lies in Whiteness and/or Eurocentric worldviews since this cultural perspective has been historically valued over others. Dominant perspectives in education project the image of students of color, their families and communities as a tool to enhance the experience of White students (George 2003) and deserving of “help” so long as White students remain perpetual winners in the educational system (Nelson 2016). In turn, these dominant perspectives, promoted by the Supreme Court, reinforce deficit thinking (Howard and Navarro 2016). Deficit approaches to understanding the performance of students of color are prevalent today, and if they go unmonitored or unaddressed, will continue to project a negative falsified perception of Black youth (Solorzano 1997).

Counter-Storytelling and critical race narrative

Critical Race Narrative serves as both a methodology and counter-storytelling—a key tenant within CRT. Critical Race Narrative serves as a form of critical narrative inquiry which calls attention to the untold or unheard study, while calling out systems of power and oppression (Parker et al., 1999). A method utilized within CRT and other outgrowths of CRT, Critical Race Narrative is used to disrupt dominant narratives or majoritarian stories regarding people of color and the permanence of White supremacy as racism within society (Delgado and Stefancic 2017). While narrative is intentional in drawing out the experiences and then restorying, Critical Race Narrative does the same, while offering another perspective or witness testimony, usually that of the unheard (Evans-Winters and Esposito 2010). Critical Race Narrative then addresses issues of power within society by acknowledging and validating voice and creating sense of awareness (Solórzano and Yosso 2002). The use of Critical Race Narrative within research not only serves as a form of testimony or testimonios, but also teaches lessons regarding history, cultures, and people—a tradition central to the roots of CRT in Critical Legal Studies. The use of Critical Race Narrative also supports the ways in which voice is used to empower (Mensah 2019). What comes as a result of the sharing in these stories is generations of knowledge as well as cultural ways of knowing that cannot be assessed or tapped into by way of quantitative measures.

CRT recognizes the experiential knowledge of people of color as legitimate, appropriate, and critical to understanding, analyzing, and teaching about racial disparities. CRT researchers value the voice of marginalized groups, since often their perspective is lacking or dismissed (Duncan 2005). According to Wallace and Brand (2012), “Narratives are a key source of information for CRT in that they make the social realities for people of color, as influenced by racism, visible to the rest of the world” (p.348). Counter-storytelling is “countering” the mainstream, dominant, White narration of a topic that the story is covering (Love 2004). Counter-storytelling is not limited to oral narration, it values experiential knowledge of historically marginalized people and legitimatizes forms of text and participation that have historically been excluded, ignored, or misappropriated (Collins 2002). CRT refutes claims to researcher objectivity and exposes racist research practices and how research has been historically and contemporarily been used to reinforce racist ideologies (Solórzano and Yosso 2002), which can typically go unchallenged because White people can be in the majority in positions that would provide access. It is imperative to center the perspectives of minoritized people when evaluating equity within a given context (Ridgeway and Yerrick 2016).

Historicizing Black excellence in science education

Documenting and recording the history of Black people and their engagement with science, specifically science education, presents a new set of epistemological tools when considering the roles of Black students in science. Watkins (1993) presents a historical discussion that traces the development of curriculum orientations in the educational experience of African Americans.

These curriculum orientations present the ways in which learning for Black people is inextricably tied to a socio-political and socio-historical experience that required nuanced learning and navigation of their experience. Murrell (2012) work suggested the integration of the historical, cultural, political, and developmental considerations of the African American experience into a unified system of instruction, bringing to light those practices that already exist and linking them to contemporary ideas and innovations that concern effective practice in Black communities. Considering the histories and motivations of science education, for Black people is not only a learning experience, but also one of survival and liberation, linked to Afrofuturistic possibilities of living (Mutegi 2011).

Demonization Black presence and participation

To be clear, regardless of the teaching approach, culturally relevant pedagogy, culturally responsive teaching, social justice teaching… whatever teaching strategy is preferred, oppressive education policies and practices will remain intact if the deficit racist views about marginalized students are upheld. Robert Berry (2008), a mathematics education scholar, has proven repeatedly that Black youth have their behavior called into question over their intellect (Kinloch, Burkhard and Penn 2017). Black youth are the most likely to be recommended for special education and least likely to be recommended for gifted placement. Black students do not have more learning challenges and less intelligence over White and Asian students. Berry (Berry) has even described that in the rare occasion when Black youth are selected for gifted placement, it contingent on the Black youth maintaining “good behavior.” Berry described how Black youth are not granted the same consideration for their behavior. For example, in his study he observed White children that misbehaved in gifted placement had their misbehavior attributed to not being challenged enough where Black students can have their placement threatened and be seen as not a being a “good fit.” The language of “good fit” is often used to maintain racist structures. Erika Walker (2006) explained that lower performing students in her study felt that if they just modeled the behavior of the high achieving students and teachers thought they were “good” this would allow them to perform better academically. The problem with this line of thinking is that Black students receive the message that their behavior and compliance is privileged over actual learning (Roby and Berry 2015). It has been well documented in research that Black students can have their behavior and participation criminalized (Morris 2018). This causes our students to focus on the rules and following them and not on actual STEM content. This study focuses on unpacking the behaviors and interactions of Black students when engaging in science learning.

Ethnographic case study: a tool to explore culture in science education

Revisiting Braxton

Reflect back to the opening vignette with Monica and Braxton. Braxton is by no means a menace or a threat. However, this same young boy has been identified as a troublemaker at his school. He was even kicked out of a core class for fifteen weeks for a single incident during which he laughed at a joke his classmate told about the teacher. When Braxton’s discipline was shared in the past, people unaware of this form of disciplinary oppression were shocked that the teacher was able to take such harsh action, and how there was little his parents could do to fight back. Zero tolerance approaches toward Black youth behavior is one way the school-to-prison pipeline is nourished (Winn and Behizadeh 2011). Duncan (2005) described harsh punishment measures as an attempt to discipline the Blackness out of youth, for fear of what they could potentially do in the future, not the behavior at hand.

Aside from the punishment, Braxton had also been labeled as disruptive and disrespectful by teachers and administrators within his school. Monica was not able to grasp how such a sweet young boy was given such a demonizing label and harshly disciplined by his school. During the science summer camp where Monica was the science teacher, Braxton’s engagement in science learning and experiments was counter to that reflected in his school log. Braxton was fun, inquisitive, and silly all at the time same time.

Unfortunately, Braxton is not an anomaly; he is not the only Black child to be misunderstood and marginalized. There are many Black children who have experienced similar situations and scenarios. In the words of W.E.B. Du Bois (reprint 2008), “being a problem is an experience, -- peculiar even for one who has never been anything else...” (P.8). To be viewed as a problem in need of fixing or saving, based on the color of one's skin, is both a historical issue, and one that we are still contending with (Ridgeway and McGee 2018).

Historically in the USA, Black people have been systematically oppressed. In education, this oppression often manifests itself in lower expectations, which can lead to lower performance on assessments; harsher punishments, leading to higher suspension rates and dropout rates; and culturally insensitive or absent curricula. All of this stems from harmful deficit thinking about Black students (Ortiz et al., 2019).

Study background

This paper is based on a larger ethnographic project that explored Black urban youth who participated in an intervention program that was housed inside of the students’ school. We refer to the students as Achievement Scholars throughout this study, which culminated in Monica’s doctoral dissertation research. It details how Black youth express their culture and the ways in which the school itself marginalizes them and minimizes their opportunities to reflect on the perception of self, and their identity development as growing adolescents. It closely looks at the systems in place within the school that systematically marginalized students of color, in addition to interactions with school faculty and other stakeholders.

The Achievement Scholars for All program (pseudonym) is a year-round state-funded intervention program designed to provide support for students placed at-risk in high needs school districts. Some of the criteria used to identify students as being placed at risk are: already in poor academic performance, failed at least one grade level, received disciplinary infractions, low performance on state assessments, truancy issues, and receiving free and reduced lunch. None of the indicators explicitly describe the students being Black and Brown however, this overwhelming the student population that was referred to the program by the school counselor. The students who participated in the program during the school year would receive an application for the summer STEM program.

The school was in an old industrial city in the Greater Buffalo Niagara region that had unemployment rate of 10.1%. In the school, the students attended 78% of the students received free and reduced lunch. There were a 17% math proficiency and 20% reading proficiency among all of the students in the school. The student demographics consisted of 45.7% Black, 38.2% White, and 5.8 % Hispanic at the time of the study. However, the demographics of the program did not reflect overall student demographics. The 70 students in the program consisted of 90% Black, 4% White, and 6% Hispanic; students could only enter into the program if they were referred by their school counselor. The program did not recruit students.

Data collection

The purpose of summer camp was to provide the students with an engaging science experience to prepare them over the summer for in-school science. Monica’s goal was for students to experience an educational environment where their questions could be heard and investigated, while aligning our activities to Next Generation Science Standards. During the summers of 2014 and 2015, there were two four-week science summer camps. The participants include twelve adolescents in sixth through eighth grade, ages 11 through 14 (Table 1). Each four-week summer camp included twelve science workshops that were approximately 90-minute sessions. The participants completed pre- and post-interviews which lasted 20–30 minutes. Ten focus groups were conducted, which lasted 30–45 minutes. The interviews and focus group gave students an opportunity to provide feedback and drove pedagogical decisions. Throughout the summer camp, Monica maintained a reflective journal, which included lesson reflections, her pedagogical decisions, student responses, and the critical incidents Monica wanted to explore more deeply. The students within this study are the students that participated in in summer 2014, academic school year 2014–2015, summer 2015, and fall 2016 as this allowed for deeper reflection and connection of the students’ experiences within this out of school context science program and their in-school experiences.

Table 1 Achievement Scholar participant information as of summer 2014
Full size table

Positioning sista-scholars

We begin this section by not suggesting that all Black scholars engage in critical equity research nor is critical equity research reserved for Black scholars. However, there is a special kinship among Black scholars who engage in critical equity research. It is our Blackness that binds us and at the same time we see the diversity of Blackness among us. We have different experiences as being Black women in the USA while experiences can be contextualized based on where we are (Roby and Cook 2019). There comes a point where your individual identity is not mistakenly connected to the larger African Diaspora (Graham 1999).

They cannot be easily teased apart but it is the interconnectedness of the individual and the collective that shape the diversity of Black people. During the annual convening of the Critical Race Studies in Education Association (CRSEA), we met as doctoral students navigating the utility of CRT in science, broadly. This is a testament to the importance of a community and critical spaces for interdisciplinary scholars, e.g., STEM education, Urban Education, Legal Studies, English-Language Arts scholars. For critical STEM scholars who do not have a space to engage discussions of the saliency of race and racism within their primary research conferences, CRSEA filled the void.

Meet mother scholar Monica. As a Black woman STEM education researcher, Monica believes that her research is one way that she maintains a social justice commitment (Ridgeway 2019a). She has spent most of her life in Buffalo, New York, an old industrial and segregated city. Much of her life she has experienced poverty; however, she does not deficit-orientate her thinking about this positioning (Ridgeway 2019b). She recognizes that systems were in place to construct her experiences. She feels fortunate to have been blessed to connect with people living in poverty. She finds ways to disrupt and engage to help others combat systematic oppression. She has a degrees in the geological sciences. She seeks ways to share with other minoritized students her institutional knowledge. She is also a mother to a young Black girl named Toni. It is difficult to know Monica and not hear about Toni being a mother scholar provides an additional layer to her about the intentionality behind her research, in hopes that her research will change the future experiences with education for her daughter. Her research focuses on the racialized experiences of Black people in STEM education P-20 spaces and how institutions can be shaped to be considerate of Black people and their histories. She was the teacher and camp coordinator in the STEM summer camp that is described within this study.

Meet scholar-activist ReAnna. As a first-generation Black woman, ReAnna had her first introduction to STEM coming of age in rural Mississippi. Spending a large amount of time with her grandparents, who utilized the land as a means of survival and activism, ReAnna’s engagement with science, as agriculture was as second nature as her faith. She used the skills and lessons learned over the years to engage in science research and teaching (physics and chemistry) in undergraduate at a land grant Historically Black institution where she earned a degree in Chemistry. Over the years, her research interests in the epistemology and culture of science materialized after noticing how few Black women and girls were physically present in science labs and reflected in science literature. As a result, her research explores the ways in which the narratives of Black girls and women in science (formally and informally) could be used to inform science curriculum as a means of reconceptualizing science and science education to be more liberating for historically minoritized people. In this study, ReAnna was not present during the summer camp implementation but she was a researcher that analyzed the data to deepen and challenge Monica’s perceptions.

Together in this study, we are reflecting on the narratives of youth and Monica’s science teaching during a summer science camp. We find this work to be both liberating and therapeutic as Black women in the academy who seek structural change for Black people while using science education as a catalyst. We believe science is constructed by people, and people need science. Science cannot advance without the contributions and perspectives of Black people.

Deprogramming deficit interpretations of black students’ participation

These following findings within this study focus on Monica’s interpretations of the Black students’ engagement with science. We believe there are two prerequisites for Black students to be liberated in science education: (1) re-framing and dismantling of deficit depictions and beliefs of Black people and their children (Martin 2010) and (2) understanding that the histories and contemporary experiences of Black people in the USA and much of the African Diaspora have not liberating for Black people (Mutegi 2011), which challenges Black scholars to not define Black liberations without using Whiteness as the measure (Ridgeway and McGee 2018). For doing so would be reifying the systems and structures we are trying to destroy. It causes us to not re-imagine this concept we have not experienced in our lifetime and many generations before ours, but from the remnants of ancient Black traditions and the essence of the brilliance Black people have always possessed to imagine and shape the possibilities for Black people. The findings sections of this paper focused on the first point of re-framing the interpretation of Black youth behavior. We conclude with pushing this ideology of Black liberatory science education with a spirit of joy and Black brilliance by asking other scholars to help us image the radical possibilities.

Traditional science lessons and experiences tend to be rigid and structured by a number of factors such as, protocol, setting, and instructor. To complicate matters, Black students also have a concurring issue of schools over disciplining and policing them and their behaviors (Morris 2018). Students regularly in the study juxtaposed their experiences in-school with the experiences within the program. All of the students within study all had at least one discipline referral which resulted in out-of-school suspension during Fall 2014–Fall 2016. Summer, a 7th grade Black girl, was suspended for truancy issues which would remove her from the learning environment which they were punishing her for. School policies are similar to the law, and leveraging the learning from CRT where historically laws have been constructed and enforced in this case school behavior policies are not enforced unilaterally (Nelson 2016).

Freedom to heal: my blackness has been punished; I will not punish yours

Reflecting back to Monica’s schooling experiences when she displayed excitement and engagement, it has been misread and unaccepted by her K-12 teachers and college professors (King 2017). In her home life, her family spends a good deal of time telling jokes and laughing. Her boisterous laugh and playful joking had always gotten her in trouble in school.

I have made White people uncomfortable. I distinctly remember when I was in fifth grade, I spent my entire year facing the wall with my desk by the teacher’s. I could only turn around when the teacher was doing direct instruction. Once I began my work, I had to turn back around. When my teacher believed I was unable to “control myself” I was put into the hallway. In the hallway, I would do things like make faces through the window or write notes then put them up for the class to see. I know what it feels like to be exiled from the learning environment for being my authentic self (journal reflection, May 2014).

Monica shared this because the act of being exiled, singled out, and/or reprimanded often happened to the Achievement Scholars in-school. We share this journal reflection as it provided insight into Monica’s perceptions about her teaching. Research has suggested that people tend to replicate the teaching they experienced (Brown 2013). Monica, like many other Black educators, attempt to disrupt the negative impacts by acknowledging her students’ agency as multifaceted learners (Mensah and Jackson 2018). The learning environment fostered excitement, joy, and laughter were often observed in this space. At the same, science learning was occurring. From Monica’s own experience as a young Black girl and being disciplined and misinterpreted, she has experiences to leverage that allows her to examine the Black youth in the program’s behavior from anti-deficit orientation.

In a focus group with the students that took place in their school before the June 2015 summer camp began students shared how Monica’s interaction with the Achievement Scholars during their in-school intervention program.

  • Monica: Is there anything that we have done here in the morning that has been helpful?

  • Nico: Turnin’ it up! (Laughs)

  • Monica: What do you mean?

  • Tyris: Like we have fun even if it is early in the morning (laughs) like we are doing our work but you guys tell us to do our work but we can do other stuff too. Like teachers just say do your work! do your work! Like they want us to do our work but they scream at us.

  • Monica: Do you have an example of that for me to help me better understand? Nico: yeah like when we work in the back corner

  • Tyris: Yeah like we be talking but doing our work and you know that. Like you don’t be riding us and being all nasty.

  • Monica: But I have raised my voice in here.

  • Arianna: Yeah but then we laugh and it is just different.. Like it is mad different. Like we know you not playing with us either. And we listen to you like for real for real. But like when you say stuff it is like my mom would say it. And you don’t be..

  • Lawrence: Yeah! but you pull people out to talk to them if it is serious. Like you say what you have to say to them.

In connecting the focus group with Monica’s reflection on her earlier experiences in school, it was important for her to re-conceptualized classroom management with the students. But she relied on respecting students and developing a relationship with them. In addition, students were always able to re-enter into the learning community being fully embraced. This was counter to the youths’ experiences in their other learning spaces, where re-entry into the classroom was not granted. This is similar to the ways in which Black youth within a school–prison nexus (Varner, Mitchell, Martin, and Bennett-Haron 2014) are not granted full participation or inclusion in their school communities.

During the time that Monica was the program director, it maintained a 96% retention rate of over 400 students for the three years. This was one of the highest in the state. She operated the program based off the questions (1) do we know where the children are? and (2) how are they doing? It was from her genuine concern for the youth and building relationships with their families that she attributes the program’s success. The science program was a part of her intentional support where both she and the students could learn from one another and heal from our in-school experience. As Michael Dumas (2014) has said, schools are a place for Black suffering, but Monica did not want this to be their truth during their time with her.

Freedom to explore: re-conceptualizing science

In the next examples of Monica’s science teaching, we recognize that the science lessons which she engaged in are replicated in many K-12 classrooms. The point of reflection and investigation of this work is to focus on the interpretation of Black students’ behaviors and engagement. We operate under the guise that all Black students are brilliant, and science is omni present in their life both knowingly and unknowingly. This principle consideration allows us to not have to prove that Black students are brilliant and they are engaging in science.

In this example, the Achievement Scholars were going outside of the college where there is a natural restoration area that is a part of the great lakes water system. This is the location where many of the outdoor ecology lessons took place. Initially the Achievement Scholars, resisted the idea of going outdoors for science lessons, but quickly turned to embrace it. The area had a small creek flowing through it, a path for nature walks, and a bridge over the creek. Based on students’ initial responses, Monica was unsure how the lesson for the day would pan out. The following excerpt showed their initial reactions:

  • Monica: Grab your iPads, we are heading outside!

  • Maurice: Like outside, outside?

  • Monica: Yes, like outside of the building

  • Journey: It is hot out there!

This response somewhat surprised Monica because she felt she had informed the Achievement Scholars they were going outside the day before and they would need to dress accordingly. Summer wore a shirt that said “Flawless” and said “I betta not get dirty!” From this response, Monica felt maybe she had not communicated clearly what dress appropriate to go outside meant. Or perhaps, Summer was resisting the activity and used her clothing choice as a form of protest. Which for her, was an example of the students’ subtle acts of resistance.

Monica continued with the outdoor lesson as planned. The Achievement Scholars were provided an inquiry-style activity where they were to take pictures with their Ipads and write questions based off the pictures they had taken. Once Monica took them outside, the scholars began to complain. The scholars complained about the heat, the dirt, the location, etc. Monica was questioning why they were taking such a strong stance on resisting the activity when they go outside for outdoor recreation every day and they enjoy it. Once outside, she asked them, Maurice replied “You know they (in schoolteacher) don’t ever take us out. They hold us hostage. Fo’ real though” [Students laugh at Maurice’s perceptive]. We would like to highlight two points relative to Maurice’s reflection: he is describing the in-school experience he has had with science where he has not ventured outside and feeling trapped inside of the school.

Maurice’s describing what many Black youth experience in the school to prison nexus (Stovall 2016) where the school feels like prison, and they are conditioned to feel contained.

Monica felt tension from with the scholars resisting the science lesson and considered restructuring it. However, she recognized she was asking the scholars to participate in science in new ways. Despite there being a small river across the street from their school, they never engaged in formal outdoor science learning. These students were never allowed “outside learning time” which could have been beneficial from such application, discovery and/or other hands-on learning.

During the outdoor activity, none of the Achievement Scholars explored far into the creek and they complained about the number of bugs. Monica realized they were exploring where they felt most comfortable. Students only took pictures on the outer boundary of the regenerative area. At the end of their time outside, she collected the students’ worksheets and Ipads. Only 6 out of 13 had written anything down on the worksheet. She felt discouraged.

Trying to salvage her lesson for the next day, Monica went through each scholars’ Ipad to her surprise they all had taken beautiful pictures of the area. Their pictures ranged from close captions of organisms to students in the picture pointing to specific plants, and pictures of birds flying. She no longer felt discouraged about the incomplete worksheets. The students had captured excellent data that could be used in their science lessons. She reminded herself the worksheets served as one tool to gather information. While she still needed to alter the lesson, they had plenty to move forward with.

The next morning, Summer asked as soon as she came in the door, “Are we going outside today?” Monica replied, “Yes” She stated, “good, cause I am ready for y’all.” From Summer, I this indicated her willingness to engage in outdoor science activities and also when Monica said something she would follow through, which is important to build trust. To her delight, all the students came to camp on the second day dressed with more appropriate outdoor clothes and some had even planned ahead enough to bring a change of clothes. When we were outside, 10 out of the 13 students went into the creek. By the third day, all students were in the creek and under the bridge (Fig. 1). Some ventured so far down the creek that Monica had to yell for them to come back because she could not see them (Fig. 2). They were not happy about that because they were busy exploring, some sucked the teeth and asked Maurice stated “do we have to?” Lawrence, “Just a little farther!”

Fig. 1
figure 1

Monica and Achievement Scholars are in the creek

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

Achievement Scholars venturing down the creek

Full size image

When students are engaged with something new, as science educators we have to allow time to explore and navigate the new experience. Monica could have subscribed to the dominant ideology and interpreted the Achievement Scholars’ responses as “kids these days, don’t want to go outside and play.” She knew that was not true, when the Achievement Scholars all go to the park, and they’ve enjoyed several sports and outdoor activities. The real issue was connecting school science to the outdoors. Monica also learned that she cannot assume students understood what she meant by “dress appropriately to be outside.” The scholar may have thought they just needed to wear shorts, for instance, if the weather was hot. The Achievement Scholars did not consider getting wet or dirty near the creek. As Monica was asked to reflect on what she could have done differently. Monica replied she could have taken the Achievement Scholar to the outer boundary of the area the day before and said,

We are going in there tomorrow. How do you think we should dress? To enable students to think about their own clothing choices. This would have been a more thoughtful approach she could have potentially had less resistance to the science lessons being outdoors.

The original resistance stemmed from awareness of their limited agency with regard to their learning. This in turn influenced their actions and ethos when engaging in other activities outside of school. Just as scholarship has described how students’ lived experiences and home life can influence their learning in school (Mutegi 2011), the inverse is true and the over controlled learning environments impact students.

Freedom to question

The following incident demonstrated the Achievement Scholars’ excitement during a science experiment with Monica. The Achievement Scholars were weighing cans of Diet Coke and Coca-Cola. In this activity, students were calculating the density of each can, then predicting whether the cans would sink or float in water based on the density of the water. There was a series of activities that led up to the actual placing of the cans in the water. On the day of the experiment, students were seated on the edge of the chairs, leaning forward, and waiting for Monica to drop them in the water. When She let the cans go into the big tub of water, two boys jumped up yelling “Yeah! I knew it!” Journey shouted “I told you!” The boys proceeded to get up and do a celebratory dance. Every student responded in some sort of verbal cue that they were either right or wrong. The room was loud, and Monica loved it (Reflection July 2014) (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3
figure 3

Students shouting out with excitement what they have learned

Full size image

As we reflect on this in comparison with the students’ description of in-school science experiences, many students could not even remember doing experiments in school. In a focus group many reported only having conducted experiences in April after testing, despite science was a state tested area. The students learned science from a series of worksheets. The students even a year later could recall with much detail the science activities we did in the summer camp and what they learned from them. This latent impact of deep learning allowed the students to better connect to new concepts and engage in deep level science learning. Students were able to use their voice and are a part of the learning community. All the members within the learning community mattered. A lot of times the impact of the learning would be revealed when the students were reminiscing and telling stories about what happened. Danny Morales‐Doyle (2018) described students engagement and science content where students are able to make better connections to content when they believed it was relevant to them and they are a part of the learning community.

While we started our narration at the moment of excitement. The events that led up to the previous Coca-Cola versus Diet Coke experiment were challenged by the Achievement Scholars’ skepticism. As Summer, shared “My teachers weigh everything for us,” (Focus group, July 2014) meaning the Achievement Scholars had very limited access to weighing their own samples and collecting their own data. According to the Next Generation Science Standards, every student under the standard should have experience with collecting and analyzing their own data. In the Coca-Cola versus Diet Coke activity, students all had their own triple beam balance. The use of a triple beam balance is outdated and does not correlate to what actual scientists would use. Yet, this is one of the state’s performance measures where students should be able to use the apparatus appropriately and take the measurements. For students to be state-assessed on a device that they have had very little interaction with through K-12, and in addition, does not correlate to what actual professional scientists use in the field is an extreme disservice for students.

Initially, Monica placed the scales in front of the Achievement Scholars as she was trying to give them directions. At that time, students were touching the scales, paying very little attention to what she was saying. They were measuring anything they had in their possession from pencils to paper. In school their behavior would have been seen as disobeying the teacher and being off-task. However, Monica understood the Achievement Scholars did not have much experience with scales, which led her to believe that they were not trying to be defiant, but rather were very curious and excited to be able to touch the apparatus. Instead of scolding the youth, she allowed them a few minutes to continue exploring and “get it out” before they continued.

Then the scholars helped her move the scales to an alternative table until they were ready for them.

As we transitioned back into the activities with the digital scales, students for the first time experienced weights of identical products not being the same. This was a discrepant event for the Achievement Scholars. They wanted to figure out why the cans of Coca-Cola had different weights. Each student had an assigned scale to use; however, scholars did not follow this rule because they were convinced something was wrong with scale they were given and some believed Monica tampered with the products before she had given them to the Achievement Scholars.

Maurice Move! Let me use that scale!

Braxton No, wait! Let me weigh your can!

Summer Can I use your scale next? I don’t think my scale weighs it right

Lawrence I am tellin’ y’all Miss Monica don’ did something to these cans

The students were testing a reasonable hypothesis that all identical products should be the same weight. We did not interpret the Achievement Scholars’ skepticism as a behavior issue.

Rather, the Achievement Scholars were thinking critically and trying to make sense of the discrepant events they were experiencing. They were not accustomed to weighing things on their own and had not had firsthand experience with variations in results like this. From this point in the experiment the science lessons were able to discuss the use of: margins of error, averages, and accepted standard measurements for the density of water in both science and mathematics. We were able to view how close our measured density of water was compared to the standard.

It is important for educators to not shut students down when they are trying to engage with new devices, concepts, etc., the rules should not overshadow the inquiry. This can stifle their curiosity and critical thinking and potentially missed students discovering for themselves a larger and deeper connection to science content. They also could have potentially left that space feeling as Monica had been dishonest and tampered with the equipment. Allowing students to make these observations for themselves and exploring them as a class led to a deeper understanding of and engagement with the material.

Freedom to speak

Many scholars have established that student discourse is a powerful way to foster learning communities and empower students in the classroom (Ridgeway and Yerrick 2016). As evidenced in the earlier focus group, Black students described they were not afforded with the opportunity to speak. Not allowing student discourse is not only harmful for students learning it impacts their willingness to connect to science and their perceptions about who is able to participate in a science practice.

The classroom environment that Monica encouraged was one where students had a voice and she listened to what they had to say (Boyd, Ridgeway and Nyachae 2019). This classroom environment led students to ask any question that came to mind. Monica did not label these “blurting out,” since this stance goes against valuing student discourse and the voices of students. Which pushes back against the dominant narrative that Black bodies, voices, and minds must be controlled. Monica admitted,

There have been times where students asked so many questions that I felt overwhelmed because I could not answer them all. As their teacher, I had to learn to delicately broker their voices; since, at times I needed them to engage in dialogue and at other times, I needed them to listen. I found facilitating this student behavior difficult in the beginning. But I go the hang of it and I really listened to what they were talking about sometimes they made roundabout connections to their homes and science (Reflection discussion August 2018).

The following is an example of a conversation scholars had as they worked together on their urban food webs. Students’ were completing the assignment but they made connections through their own eating habits.

  • Journey: I eat all types of meat

  • Braxton: Man, I don’t eat no pork. No pork on my fork! Pigs is nasty, they eat everything.

  • Maurice: They can’t eat e’vrything

  • Braxton: I mean ev’erything

  • Maurice: Hold up.. do pigs eat bacon?!? That is like a pig eating itself, dats nasty

  • Braxton: I told you they nasty. (Classroom observation)

In this dialog, students share knowledge and lived experiences. Journey described her love for pork and Braxton shared how he found the animal’s eating habits to be repulsive.

Neither student’s perspective on pork is right or wrong, but their home experiences have given them different understandings. Reflecting back to Maurice’s words, he did not state whether he liked or disliked pork, but instead raised a question based on the information shared. Maurice’s words revealed insight into his thinking. It was a logic statement often used in Mathematics: If pigs eat everything, then pigs would eat bacon. Therefore, a pig would eat itself. This logic connection could easily be overlooked or interpreted as a misbehavior; however, we argue it is instances like these which would indicate the classroom discourse is generating meaningful connections for Black students.

Freedom to reminisce

Science classrooms can be a place where Black students can have fond memories of engaging in learning in ways that are affirming to them. During the summer camp, students would always enter into the classroom sharing things they did at home that they either felt connected to the science lessons or observations that were made. While these were moments of enjoyment for both Monica and the scholars, these feelings would quickly disparate when in school science began. Maurice stated, “I wish school was like this, like the school needs to just let you do their job cause we don’t even learn nothin’….all day all day we are there and nothing. For real for real they don’t even like us they be front like we don’t know.” Monica replied, “what makes you think I like you?” Maurice, “Miss Monica stop playing! You know you like us...forget that you luv us!” Braxton, “Miss Monica is like everybody mama and auntie (laughs) (July 2015).” From our time together, there is a familial kinfolk connection that was experienced. As the Achievement Scholars have shared this has not been their overall experience in science classes. This tradition resonates with the oral storytelling traditions of Black people, as storytelling (Banks-Wallace 2002) and in this case teaching, is nuanced in a way that present content in a way that is nurturing and caring.

Black liberation in science education

We began this study with CRT in mind as a methodological and analytical tool to release and legitimize our final intention which is science classrooms can be and should be liberating for Black students and teachers. Black liberatory science practices cannot happen without Black people. Our support must be unique to account for the historical and contemporary trauma of Black people. We can have others join us in imaging what the possibilities are but as Patricia Hill-Collins (2002) reminds us that Black feminist thought cannot be leveraged without centering Black women. We too believe that Black Liberatory Science Education cannot happen without centering Black people.

To be liberated is a freeing feeling especially for Black people who had the opportunity to experience true liberation. Black liberation cannot and will not happen without Black students, teachers, administrators, and families. Without the freedom to question, to speak, and reminisce, Black students will always be confined by Whiteness.

The Achievement Scholars were initially reluctant to embrace the inquiry process, since it was unlike the traditional teaching methods they had experienced in school. When creating a classroom culture that embraces the voices of Black youth, there is a need for the discourse space and time to be co-constructed for the teacher and students where each feels safe to operate. Our intention is to urge educators to be comfortable with student dialogue and patient with where students’ curiosity takes them. While student conversations at times could be considered off-task or unrelated to science, they were often working at outside connections that were not immediately apparent. Some thoughts and questions could easily cause a novice teacher to feel uncomfortable as if they’ve deviated from the script or lesson, especially when topics of race and injustice surface. However, there is very little that can be done to make science interesting to students without considering their lived experiences and perceptions. To take these issues into consideration and value what students bring with them to the classroom will take work and patience, but will ultimately allow them to engage more deeply with the content at hand.

Critical imaginings and manifestations of Black joy (like that with the Achievement Scholars) within science and science education constantly serve as reminders of the Black body in and with(in) science. We consider the Afrofuturistic possibilities of a Liberatory science for Black youth by exploring Black joy as a means to counter historical narratives of Black people in science (Ortiz 2020). This looks like critically imagining the classroom as a space that humanizes Black people, their contributions, and realities in (within) science (Johnson et al., 2017). We imagine through the employment of Liberatory Black Science, the usual misreadings or misinterpretations of Black youth and their “behaviors” could be embraced rather than demonized.

Additionally, through considering the political yet savvy ways in which Black youth in science utilize science knowledge speaks to a continued mission of resistance to the dominant narrative. As we continue to consider the importance of Black joy within science education, it is also important to do the same within in science education research. As such, it is necessary for scholars deeply invested in radical existences for Black people and youth to take up this work and critique their own standpoints and paradigms. We imagine Black Liberatory science takes to task the socio-political history of science education and research as well as science practices with hopes of creating something that acknowledges the full humanity of Black youth and learners, throughout the diaspora.