The CAR (confront, address, replace) Strategy is an antiracist pedagogy aiming to drive out exclusionary terminology in engineering education. “Master-slave” terminology is still commonplace in engineering education and industry. However, questions have been raised about the negative impacts of such language. Usage of exclusionary terminology such as “master-slave” in academia can make students—especially those who identify as women and/or Black/African-American—feel uncomfortable, potentially evoking Stereotype Threat (Danowitz, 2020) and/or Curriculum Trauma (Buul, 2020). Indeed, prior research shows that students from a number of backgrounds find non-inclusive terminologies such as “master-slave” to be a major problem (Danowitz, 2020). Currently, women-identifying and gender nonbinary students are underrepresented in the engineering industry (ASEE, 2020) while Black/African-American students are underrepresented in the entire higher education system, including engineering fields (NSF, 2019). The CAR Strategy, introduced here, stands for: 1) confront; 2) address; 3) replace and aims to provide a framework for driving out iniquitous terminologies in engineering education such as “master-slave.” The first step is to confront the historical significance of the terminology in question. The second step is to address the technical inaccuracies of the legacy terminology. Lastly, replace the problematic terminology with an optional but recommended replacement. This thesis reports on student perceptions and the effectiveness of The CAR Strategy piloted as a teaching framework in the computer engineering department of Cal Poly. Of 64 students surveyed: 70% either agree or strongly agree that The CAR Strategy is an effective framework for driving out exclusionary terminologies. Amman Asfaw first presented certain portions of this thesis at the virtual 2021 American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Conference and Exposition. The original publication’s copyright is held by ASEE (Asfaw, 2021); secondary authors included Storm Randolph, Victoria Siaumau, Yumi Aguilar, Emily Flores, Dr. Jane Lehr, and Dr. Andrew Danowitz.

Thesis advisor: Jon M. Wargo / Thesis advisor: Patrick Proctor / Book banning has exploded in recent years. Conflicts over what texts belong in schools have caused rifts in communities around the nation. Within English language arts (ELA) classrooms specifically, many teachers have been under scrutiny with local groups and national organizations demanding that some teachers be monitored, fired, or even arrested. Backdropped by this socio-historical moment wherein calls for book censorship and attacks against school teachers are commonplace, this three-article dissertation joins the growing scholarship that explores the challenges that arise when teachers and students dare to address topics of race, racism, gender, and sexuality in the ELA classroom. Designed as an ethnographic case study, this dissertation explores how one White ELA teacher and her sixth-grade students engaged with two regularly banned novels in a racially, culturally, and linguistically diverse classroom. The first paper employs critical Whiteness theory to examine the challenges, opportunities, and contextual factors that one White novice teacher encountered as she employed an antiracist approach to literature instruction. It offers a structural understanding of why so many White teachers attempt but fall short of delivering antiracist pedagogy effectively. The second paper traces how three students of Color in the class negotiated their emotions during conversations about race as it emerged within a literature unit. Using critical discourse analysis, I examine how language was mobilized to invite some emotions (e.g., surprise) and inhibit others (e.g., anger), manifesting as “emotional rules” that regulated students' responses to texts. The third paper examines how two LGBTQ+ youths engaged in literacy not only as a medium for identity work, but as a way to speak back to the social, political, and institutional contexts of their schooling. Placing the theatrical performances that queer youth wrote and directed at the center of my analysis, I submit that these literacy activities are a means of understanding how youth see themselves in the world. Taken together, these articles extend the scholarship on how teachers engage their students on issues of difference through literature, raising important questions about how sociopolitical tensions take shape through moments of silence and cheer in the ELA classroom. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2024. / Submitted to: Boston College. Lynch School of Education. / Discipline: Teaching, Curriculum, and Society.