In my work, I examine how speakers frame arguments about inequality in education. How do listeners react, and what are the consequences for children?

Here’s a tough question with implications for both K-12 and university classrooms: when talking about racial inequality in the nation (and in education), should we frame racial inequality as a set of disadvantages faced by people of color, or as a set of advantages enjoyed by white people?

Some new work by Brian Lowery and Daryl Wout, social psychologists, suggests that it depends on the listener. They found that when university lectures framed racial inequality as disadvantage to people of color, listeners of color could disengage from the lecture and even from academic achievement in the institution. At the same time, if racial inequality was framed as white advantage, white listeners could disengage in the same ways.

Lowery and Wout point out that framing inequality as disadvantage to people of color is the default, more common frame. While this framing allows some white listeners to stay engaged, it also may allow them to ignore white advantage altogether.

Such work on framing inequality has deep implications for how we discuss racial inequality in our K-12 faculty meetings and in our university classes, particularly with a predominantly white educator force. It also raises important questions about how various K-12 students are “best” taught about inequality. How can we talk about inequalities in ways that motivate listeners to combat and overcome those inequalities? That’s a key research question.

In my professional development work with educators, I attempt to talk about racial inequality as both disadvantage to people of color, and white advantage. See my post “Emphasizing educators’ everyday actions,” below.