Summary: Teaching Race Now Panel Discussion

The "Teaching Race Now" panel discussion was held on Wednesday, May 7th, 2025, at the Center for Comparative Studies of Race and Ethnicity (CCSRE). In my opening remarks, I began by acknowledging Stanford's presence on traditional Ohlone land. I emphasized the need for a more critical acknowledgment of Stanford's history of racism and eugenics. I specifically highlighted the roles of Lewis Terman and David Starr Jordan, arguing that the renaming of buildings should not obscure the fact that Stanford's first president promoted racist views such as "the blood of a nation determines its history" and opposed migration as "an overflow of hereditary unfitness." Stanford must reckon with this troubling past and develop meaningful reparations for the harms inflicted on marginalized communities throughout its institutional history.

Professor Paula Moya, Faculty Director of CCSRE, framed teaching race as fundamentally an issue of academic freedom, emphasizing the need for a more accurate portrayal of U.S. history that acknowledges the decimation of Indigenous populations, the forced migration of 12 million enslaved people, discrimination against Asian immigrants, and exploitation of Mexican labor. She critiqued white Christian nationalist frameworks that promote meritocracy based on patriarchal masculinity and systems of unearned advantages. Moya argued for the importance of studying race across different groups and disciplines, emphasizing that focusing on only one racial group does not enhance understanding of racism as a systemic issue.

Ramón Antonio Martínez, Associate Professor in the Graduate School of Education, focused on the linguistic and educational dimensions of race, arguing for the importance of maintaining "race" as a term because without specific terminology, research and antiracist work becomes impossible. He referenced Anibal Quijano's theory that racism functions as an exceptionally "efficient" form of domination and emphasized understanding the social processes of how we talk about race. Martínez advocated for using race discussions to destabilize societal assumptions, moving toward post-racial questioning, and developing multilingual and multiracial language practices that enable contestation of dominant narratives. He critiqued the bias in linguistic education research, noting that most researchers focused on English acquisition while showing little interest in how Latinx children learned or maintained Spanish as their mother tongue.

Elliott White Jr., Assistant Professor in Earth System Science, brought an environmental science perspective, describing his work in coastal ecosystems research, saltwater intrusion, and sea level rise while emphasizing the importance of integrating racial awareness into environmental science. He highlighted how urban segregation originates from racist policies and practices, with these patterns visible even in GIS satellite imagery and remote sensing data, demonstrating how environmental impacts disproportionately affect communities of color. White shared his educational background attending a school named after Harriet Tubman and learning about the Civil War and its connections to civil rights, explaining how these experiences shaped his understanding of race in America and his scientific work. He advocated for greater awareness of environmental racism among scientists, integration of social justice perspectives into environmental research, and using scientific tools to document and address racial disparities.

The panel engaged with several discussion topics throughout the session: the various frames and time scales used when teaching race, exploring both individual traits and cultural-historical formations; the balance between analytical frameworks and interventional approaches when teaching about racialization and racism; the challenges of disciplinary diversity and how race terminology varies across academic fields; the benefits and challenges of CCSRE's comparative approach to studying race across different groups; and the particular complexities of teaching race in the current political climate, with attention to academic freedom and pedagogical strategies for navigating contested terrain.

In closing, panelists were asked about what brings them joy in teaching race. The responses revealed profound personal and intellectual satisfaction in their work. Panelists expressed that teaching race is "terribly interesting" because it challenges fundamental assumptions about how our societies function while offering pathways for transformation. They spoke of the delight in observing students in the classroom developing critical insights and, in turn, teaching the professors new perspectives. The panelists shared a collective appreciation for how teaching race opens up new visions of society and inspires young scientists to build more just communities. This concluding discussion highlighted that despite the challenges and tensions inherent in teaching race, the work remains deeply rewarding through its capacity to foster growth, understanding, and social change.