Critical race theory (CRT) is one of the most widely recognized and used racial frameworks in educational research. Its reach expands the field — from K-12 policy, educational psychology, and teacher education to adult and postsecondary education — as scholars seek to understand and offer strategies for dismantling deeply entrenched racism in education and its intersecting social systems [1]. Over time, CRT has evolved beyond just a theoretical lens to encompass a robust methodological approach known as critical race methodology (CRM) [2].

CRM has been primarily operationalized in qualitative research using methods such as counter-storytelling to center the experiential knowledge of marginalized communities and to challenge dominant ideologies 1, 3. While these approaches offer rich insights into the lived experiences of marginalized communities, they are limited in capturing broader patterns and establishing correlational or causal inferences. Recognizing these limitations, scholars have begun to move beyond sole qualitative CRT approaches to also include quantitative methods 4, 5. This shift has led to the development of Critical Race Mixed Methodology (CRMM) — an approach that integrates CRT with mixed methods research to enable a more comprehensive, multidimensional exploration of racial inequities [6].

In this review, we examine the emergence and application of CRMM in educational research.1 Despite its growing use, there is no comprehensive synthesis of how CRMM is being employed across contexts. Our review addresses this gap by mapping the field: we analyze design types, CRT tenets engaged, and levels of racism examined in existing CRMM studies. Our findings reveal that while CRMM research is gaining traction, it is uneven in its theoretical depth, often relies on a limited set of CRT tenets, and disproportionately focuses on examining interpersonal racism.

We argue that a critical synthesis of CRMM is especially important, given the current sociopolitical climate in the United States. CRT faces legislative bans across K-12 and higher education 7, 8, and race-conscious scholarship is increasingly under attack. However, CRMM remains a vital tool for rigorously documenting systemic racial inequities and challenging disinformation about meritocracy and American exceptionalism. Our review not only surfaces trends and tensions in CRMM literature but also offers recommendations for researchers to maximize its use in educational research.