Methodologies that foster long-term partnerships are critical for this project. My research questions were co-constructed as my relationships built over time with community partners. I did not want the project to echo the extractive tropes of “about us, without us.” For this reason, I chose to utilize participatory-action research and community-based research as my methodological approach. Through collaboration, I sought to address the organization's needs Facing History and Ourselves and their community partners. This approach supports and enhances strategic action in the hopes of leading to educational transformation. These methodological choices are inherently political because they challenge the norms of research in academia that ultimately elicit a hierarchy and separation between the student (researcher) and partner (participant of “study”). I intentionally chose not to use words like “study” “participant” “researcher.” Those words create a sense of detachment and of superficial relationship with the subject matter and the people involved who are directly affected by the topic. While there are limitations to community-based and participatory action research, the approaches try to dismantle hierarchies in research and create an equalized partnership where everyone who is a part of the research project feels like their voices and wishes are met. It is also important to note that these methodological approaches are not linear. The results are subject to one’s interpretation of the interviews. While I created four categories based on common themes found in all of my interviews, another researcher might see different commonalities. For this reason, my analysis should be taken as an invitation to understanding rather than as the definitive or sole interpretation of the project’s outcomes. Read more about each methodological approach below.