University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

How do teacher beliefs shape the approaches used to support low-income, Black, White, and Latino students in Advanced Placement English?

(USC Thesis Other)

How do teacher beliefs shape the approaches used to support low-income, Black, White, and Latino students in Advanced Placement English?

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running Head: HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 1
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE THE APPROACHES USED TO SUPPORT LOW-
INCOME, BLACK, WHITE, AND LATINO STUDENTS IN ADVANCED PLACEMENT
ENGLISH?

by

Andrea Cota

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2017

Copyright 2017 Andrea Cota

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 2
Dedication

This dissertation is dedicated to my husband, Tony. I could not have completed this journey
without your words of encouragement, your delicious meals, and your unwavering belief that I
would persevere. Thank you for giving me the space to grow intellectually and professionally.

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 3

Acknowledgements
For me, teaching was always about living a life of service. Though I never imagined the
path my career would take, I always knew being an educator mattered as much and continuing
my education. This path has been difficult, but also rewarding in many unexpected and deeply
fulfilling ways. Without the support of my family, my friends, my colleagues, and students I
could not have reached this ultimate academic destination. There were many people along the
way who inspired, cajoled and supported. The following is just the short list of companions who
have helped along this journey.
First, it goes without saying I could never have completed this journey without the
amazing support of my chair, Dr. Julie Slayton, J.D., Ph.D. I find it hard to put into words what I
have learned as a result of your guidance and every single conversation we’ve had about
education. From the time I started the Ed.D program I knew I wanted to write from my
experiences as teacher, but you helped me crystalize a vague idea into a tangible topic. Through
unexpected life changes you guide me toward completing the most difficult and inspiring work
of my career. For that, no words of thanks will every be enough.
To the second member of my committee, Dr. Paula Carbone, Ph.D. Thank you so much
for joining me on this journey. Your advice and support have been invaluable.
To the third member of my committee, April Moore, Ed.D., thank you for your
professional mentorship and guidance through this dissertation process. I am so grateful to count
you among my mentors and my friends.
To my master teachers over the years, Dave Hill, Susan Payne, Jeff Elsten, and in loving
memory of Diana Harrelson, you all taught me well and I am eternally grateful for your
guidance. Without you I would not have come this far.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 4
Of course, I cannot thank my husband enough for the 3 years of unconditional love and
support through this program. Through breakdowns and breakthroughs, you always offered the
right words of wisdom and reminded me I had the capacity for this.
To my family, thank you for always encouraging me to “just keep swimming.”
And finally, to Julie and Cleave, the best, the most supportive, the most amazing study
team I could have ever wished for. Your friendship means the world, and I would not have
finished without you. I am forever grateful I got to share this journey with you, through every
paper, every article, and even through intersectionality, you helped me fight on!

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 5
Abstract
Scaffolding and culturally relevant pedagogy are critical components to support learning,
especially for low-income and students of color. To understand how teacher beliefs shape the
use of these tools, this study addressed the following research question: How do teacher beliefs
about students shape the approaches they use to support low-income, White, Black, and Latino
students in Advanced Placement English courses? Through qualitative case studies of two
teachers, both 12
th
grade AP teachers in semi-rural settings, this study examined their beliefs and
how those beliefs reflected in classroom practice. The data included teacher interviews and
observations. The data revealed teachers who were well meaning and cared deeply about their
students, but engaged in unconscious deficit thinking about their students. Their practice
revealed that, despite having quality scaffolds, a full system of assistance performance was not in
practice, nor was culturally relevant pedagogy. As a result, not all students accessed meaningful
and rich learning opportunities. For all students to have access to meaningful learning
opportunities, teachers must engage in a critical examination of beliefs to develop asset ideology,
effective scaffolding practices, and embrace culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy.

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 6
Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgements 3
Abstract 5
List of Figures 8
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 9
Background of the Problem 9
Statement of the Problem 15
Purpose of the Study 16
Significance of the Study 17
Organization of the Study 17
Chapter Two: A Review of the Literature 19
Ideology and Teacher Beliefs 19
Deficit Ideology 21
Deficit Thinking 27
Asset Ideology and Dynamic Thinking 35
Culturally Relevant and Responsive Pedagogy 38
Scaffolding 60
Conceptual Framework 74
Chapter Three: Methods 79
Research Design 79
Sampling and Sampling Strategy 80
Setting(s) 81
Participants 84
Data Collection and Instruments/Protocols 85
Interviews 85
Observations 87
Data Analysis 88
Limitations and Delimitations 91
Limitations 91
Delimitations 91
Credibility and Trustworthiness 92
Ethics 93
Chapter Four: Findings 95
Case Study #1: Mrs. Carol Smith, Twelfth Grade 95
Carol’s Ideology 99
Asset Beliefs about Potential 99
Asset Beliefs about Access 100
Beliefs about Scaffolding 102
Deficit Thinking 103
Ideology in Classroom Practice 107
Absence of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy 108
Case Study #2: Mr. Jason Norton, Twelfth Grade 110
Jason’s Ideology 113
Asset Beliefs about Access 113
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 7
Asset Beliefs about Students and their Culture 114
Deficit Beliefs 116
Ideology in Classroom Practice 120
Absence of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy 126
Cross-Case Analysis 128
Enacting Access 129
Scaffolding Practices 130
Personal Experience as a Guide 131
Critical Consciousness 133
Conclusion 134
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations 136
Summary of Findings 136
Recommendations 139
Practice 140
Policy 141
Research 145
References 147
Appendices 154
Appendix A: Pre-Observation Interview Protocol 154
Appendix B: Post-Observation Interview Protocol 156
Appendix C: Classroom Observation Protocol 157

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 8
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 75

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 9
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study was to understand how teacher beliefs shape the ways teachers
support low-income, White, Black, and Latino students in Advanced Placement (AP) English
courses. In this chapter I will explain the background of the problem to place the study in
context of greater education issues. Then, I will provide a statement of the problem as it focused
on my study, followed by the purpose of the study, and why it is significant.
Background of the Problem
After the end of World War Two, the United States saw a dramatic increase in college
attendance due to the passage of the G.I. Bill, which created as Lacy (2010) suggested, “an
environment conductive to making U.S. higher education more efficient and popular” (p. 23).
Spurred on by concerns about America’s ability to win the Cold War, several private foundations
set about developing what Lacy (2010) described as a “school-to-college transition program” (p.
24). The goal was to help select groups of students at elite prep schools complete college faster
in order to move into graduate programs or the work force (Schneider, 2009).
The AP program grew out of the Kenyon Plan, a gifted and talented program developed
at Kenyon College in the early 1950s with funding from the Ford Foundation (Lacy, 2010).
Then president of the college, Keith Chalmers, sought to develop a curriculum that allowed
gifted students to take college level course work while still in high school, thus accelerating their
path through college and beyond. Lacy (2010) suggested this early program “assumed that
‘gifted students can proficiently do college-level work while still in secondary school,’ that
appropriately trained high school teachers can deliver the subject matter, and that high school is
the best social setting for adolescents” (pp. 24-25). Despite the focus on gifted and talented
students, Lacy (2010) suggested Chalmers hoped the program would “evolve into something that
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 10
served more than just the gifted” (p. 26). The College Board—a non-profit founded in 1900 as an
institution designed to test students’ readiness for college and owner of the Scholastic Aptitude
Test (SAT)—took over administration in 1954 in efforts to expand the original plan. Renamed
Advance Placement, the College Board began administering tests in 1956.
In the 1960s and 1970s, educational reformers concerned with issues of equity in public
school systems began pressure the College Board to increase access to AP (Schneider, 2009).
According to Schneider (2009), these reformers saw AP as a way for “all students…particularly
those in underserved communities long denied educational equity” (p. 819) to gain access to
rigorous curriculum and the chance to go to college. Furthermore, not only had AP shown that it
helped students academically, but Schneider (2009) also suggested it has also become
increasingly important in gaining access to higher education. Schneider (2009) suggested this
meant schools felt they had to offer AP if they were going to provide their students with “access
to ‘better’ colleges and universities” (p. 819).
Though Lacy (2010) observed a slight stagnation in the number of exams administered in
the 1970s, for the most part schools continued to adopt AP and more students took the tests.
Lacy (2010) suggested the expansion did not ever really wane, with hundreds of schools joining
annually. Lacy also noted that there was a particular push beginning in the 1980s to increase
diversity among the students taking AP with the support of the College Board. By the mid-1990s
nearly half the nation’s schools offered at least some AP courses. The 1990s also saw an increase
in state funding for AP courses and test fee subsidies, as well as several foundations financially
supporting the expansion (Lacy, 2010). Schneider (2009) noted that the federal government also
supported AP, providing $2.7m in 1998-1999 alone, suggesting this number would continue to
grow. Though Lacy (2010) noted growth could be slower in rural areas, expansion continued
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 11
rapidly in urban low-income areas, particularly among schools serving African American and
Latino students. Schneider (2009) noted a dramatic increase in the 1990s stating that “by 1994
minorities accounted for 26.3% of AP test-takers, marking an expansion so accelerated that AP
was becoming a standard aspect of US secondary education, whether public or private, elite or
otherwise” (p. 821).
As public high schools embraced the AP expansion, Schneider (2009) suggested this
might have unintentionally created more inequality. Reformers in the 1970s saw AP as a way to
provide disadvantaged students a route to college opportunity, and public schools could claim to
offer the same education as their more elite counterparts (Schneider, 2009). Unfortunately,
Schneider suggested it has become just another sorting tool for higher education. AP courses had
in many cases become an unspoken pre-requisite for college acceptance, thus creating another
barrier low-income and students of color had to overcome. Schneider also suggested that as AP
becomes more commonplace, elite schools—which tend to be dominated by White upper and
middle class students—would look to other programs to give their students a way to distinguish
themselves, thus continuing a cycle of inequity. On the other hand, Schneider (2009) offered
that AP served an important purpose for underserved schools. It offered students a challenging
curriculum and provided teachers with much needed professional development through AP
institutes and annual test scoring. Furthermore, “AP still carries weight with colleges, the label
can give teachers a sense of purpose that they are not providing a second-rate education for their
students, but one that is nationally recognized and respected” (p. 827).
Recent data from the College Board (2014) stated it administered over 3.1 million tests in
2013 alone, a far cry from the 1200 first administered in 1956. This clearly showed AP has
reached its goal of expanding the Kenyon Plan beyond the elite few for which it was originally
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 12
designed (Lacy, 2010). Despite this considerable increase, equity continued to be a primary
concern of the College Board (College Board, 2014). The organization clearly expressed its
desire to continue opening access to what it called “underrepresented students,” or in other
words, low-income, White, Black, and Latino populations. The College Board (2014) advised
schools to continue removing obstacles to enrollment, such as pre-requisites and grade point
requirement.
Yet, researchers have suggested that schools should be cautious about embracing rapid
expansion without consideration of the best ways to serve students (Klopfenstein, 2003;
Schneider, 2009). Klopfenstein (2003) suggested schools should re-examine how they identified
students who should take AP. Though she suggested the program should be open to all
interested students, schools should be wary of enrolling students who were not motivated to
challenge themselves. Klopfenstein recommended schools examine their selection criteria,
removing as many barriers as possible. She suggested that limiting enrollment to students who
met specific criteria or prerequisites excluded students who could be successful in AP.
Rapid expansion also failed to consider if low-income and students of color were taking
the courses offered. Theokas and Saaris (2013) noted that though the majority of students
attending high schools in the United States attended a school that offered at least some AP
courses, low-income students were three times less likely to enroll in AP courses compared to
their middle and high income peers. This suggested that though low-income students technically
had access to AP because it was offered at their school, they were still less likely to take the
course. This suggested rapid expansion was not necessarily helping solve equity issues.
Perhaps more concerning than access or enrollment practices, many students were not
achieving at the same rate as their more affluent White peers (College Board, 2014a; Judson &
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 13
Hobson, 2015; Thoekas & Saaris, 2013). Judson and Hobson (2015) noted in a review of test
scores, that as the numbers of low-income, White, Black, and Latino students taking the AP tests
rose, the scores decreased. For example, they observed that between the years 1992 to 2012 the
over all percentage of students achieving a 3 or better on the exams dropped from 65.5% to
59.2% (Judson & Hobson, 2015). At the same time the number of Black students taking the
examines grew by over 132% from 1997 to 2009 (roughly the same for White students); the
number of Hispanic students taking tests grew by over 230%; and American-Indian students
taking exams increased by over 123%. Asian students also increased by over 85%.
Clearly this data showed that AP reached the goal of expansion, but student success was
another matter. Judson and Hobson noted that between 1992 and 2002 the number of students
earning a 1 on exams—in effect failing the test—had increased to over 20%. Data released by
the College Board (2014) supported these findings, showing 53% of low-income students scored
less than a 3, failing the exams.
As the AP program continued to expand, examining how to support the needs of low-
income and students of color continued to be an issue. As noted above by Theokas and Saaris
(2013) and again by Judson and Hobson (2015) low income, White, Black, and Latino students
were not enrolling in AP courses nor passing the AP exams at the same rate as their more
affluent White peers. In particular Theokas and Saaris (2013) noted that though low-income
White students were more likely to take AP courses than equally low-income students of color,
each group showed significant gaps in achievement on the tests. Theokas and Saaris (2013)
found middle and high-income students were “three times as likely to enroll in an AP course as
are low-income students” (p. 4). They suggested the gaps in enrollment could be at the school
level. They provided the following explanation:
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 14
if, for example, low-income students participated in AP at the same rate as other students,
more than half a million low-income students would benefit from advanced study. These
same patterns hold for Black, Hispanic, and American-Indian students who are not from
low-income families. (emphasis in original, p. 4)
However, solving issues of access and enrollment created another problem: Access did not
necessarily mean success. For non-White students, the average pass rate was significantly lower
than their White peers, by as much as 55% (College Board, 2014). Figuring out how to support
AP students became an important issue facing schools with low-income, White, Black, and
Latino populations (Hallett & Venegas, 2011).
Hallett and Venegas (2011) suggested there were reasons for this underperformance that
must be examined by teachers and administrators. The authors suggested that though
underrepresented populations were gaining access to AP courses, many students expressed worry
about their preparation for the exams. The researchers found three issues repeatedly surfacing in
the data: “(a) teachers were unprepared or unmotivated, (b) course material did not match the
national exam, and (c) school-based structural issues negatively influenced the AP class
experience and later test performance” (Hallett & Venegas, 2011, p. 478). The first and third
reasons echo Hargreaves and Shirley (2009). The authors suggested there was an effort from
teachers and administrators to keep the status quo. The authors suggested the current school
design forced teachers to only plan for short-term improvements, resulting in an inability to plan
into the future. This created a cycle that has yet to be broken (Hargreaves & Shirley, 2009).
Despite Hallett and Venegas’s (2011) findings that teachers were under motivated and/or
underprepared, particularly in schools serving low-income and students of color, Burton,
Whitman, Yepes-Baraya, Cline, and Kim (2002) suggested AP teachers both wanted and needed
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 15
support systems specifically designed to help underrepresented students in AP classes. Burton et
al. (2002) suggested, “good teachers can and do use a wide variety of teaching methods” (p. 26)
and a “good teacher of minority students is no more and no less a good teacher” (P. 27). Burton
et al. (2002) also observed that successful AP teachers also must be passionate, maintain strong
relationships with students, and have a desire to see students succeed. Though their study
focused on minority students, good teaching crossed economic, racial, and ability lines. As
suggested by Theokas and Saaris (2013) low-income White students were just as in need of
support as low-income students of color. Furthermore, just because a student was in AP did not
mean he or she did not need teachers to implement strategies specifically designed to increase
and improve learning (Burton et al., 2002; Hallett & Venegas, 2011).
Statement of the Problem
Rowland and Shircliffe (2016) suggested there was a tendency in some schools to create
AP inclusion programs that had little support in place for both teachers and students, yet they
cautioned that this should not lead educators to think that these students were not capable of
success in AP. This frames the problem this dissertation sought to understand: how beliefs shape
the way teachers support students. Little is known about how much teacher beliefs contribute to
the choices made in how to support students who do not come from affluent parents or attend
elite schools. Support is clearly necessary, but as suggested by Burton et al. (2002), support is
not enough if the teacher does not also believe in his or her students’ ability to be successful in
AP.
Pajares suggested, “there is a strong relationship between teachers’ educational beliefs
and their planning, instructional decisions, and classroom practices” (Pajares, 1992, p. 326).
Furthermore, though scaffolding has been proven to increase success in diverse K-12 classrooms
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 16
(Dixon, Yssel, McConnell, & Hardin, 2014; Logan, 2011), little research existed on how to bring
effective scaffolding strategies into the Advanced Placement classroom. Ambrose, Bridges,
DiPietro, Lovett, and Norman (2010) clearly showed the importance of scaffolding in the college
classroom, linking college rigor to the high school classroom is yet deeply explored. Geddes
(2010) noted regarding high school AP instruction, “very little attention is given to
differentiating instruction for the variety of students enrolled in a collegiate-level course while
attending high school” (p. 32). Clearly low-income, White, Black, and Latino populations were
gaining access to AP courses, but their rates of success were significantly lower than their White,
middle and upper income peers. Additionally, teacher beliefs about students influence planning
and instruction. As suggested by Burton et al. (2002), successful AP teachers who work with
underrepresented populations need to not only be good teachers, but also need to care about their
students’ success. To understand these issues, this study explored the connections between
teacher beliefs, classroom practices, and student-learning opportunities.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to explore the ways in which teacher beliefs about students
affected the strategies they used to support students in AP English, particularly marginalized
populations who were often new to the rigors of college level coursework in high school. To
understand this phenomenon I conducted a case study of two AP English teachers.
The research question that guided this study was: How do teacher beliefs about students
shape the approaches they use to support low-income, White, Black, and Latino students in
Advanced Placement English courses?

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 17
Significance of the Study
This study was important because it provided an opportunity to exam how teachers were
experiencing the expansion of the AP program as it encourages more students to take AP
courses. Increasing access has often been used as an example of increasing equity, but results
only in superficial change. The belief that access created equity failed to address the underlying
issues present in the system; specifically, that there is a disconnection between the teachers and
students.
At a time when there is a pressure to expand, it does not seem as though educators have
taken enough time to think about how teacher approaches and beliefs intersect with the push to
expand AP. There is pressure to enroll more students in AP courses, but there is little support
once they are placed in the courses. Examining how teacher beliefs intersect with practice could
help educators understand the disconnection between the student population’s needs and the
teacher population’s beliefs about underrepresented students taking AP courses.
Additionally, as a current AP English teacher this informed my practice in the classroom.
In the future I hope to work with teachers either through professional development or in a teacher
education program. This study helped inform my practice in these future roles.
Organization of the Study
This document is organized in the following manner. Chapter 2 contains a literature
review focused on the three major concepts that frame this study: Teacher beliefs and ideology,
culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy, and scaffolding. This concludes with the
conceptual framework that guided this study. Chapter three describes the qualitative methods
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 18
used and data collection procedures undertaken. Chapter four reports on the findings and
includes a cross-case analysis of the two teachers. Finally, Chapter five made recommendations
for- practice, policy, and research.

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 19
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This dissertation examined teacher ideology and how it shaped pedagogy by asking the
following question: How are teacher beliefs about students revealed through the approaches used
to support low-income White, Latino, and African American students in Advanced Placement
English courses? To answer this question, I drew on three bodies of empirical and theoretical
literature: teacher beliefs, in particular those of deficit verse dynamic thinking, culturally relevant
and responsive pedagogy, and scaffolding. The latter drew upon literature exploring assisted
performance and teacher behaviors, or “moves” in the classroom.
Ideology and Teacher Beliefs
The literature on teacher ideology and beliefs is extensive. Due to the setting of this
study, which took place in a semi-rural area in the Western United States, where the research
site(s) were a part of a smaller metropolitan area, this literature review was written to be
inclusive of this perspective. Much of the research on ideology and beliefs has been conducted
in urban environments. There was limited research dealing specifically with teacher ideology in
non-urban environments and has been included in the following review.
To understand how ideology influenced the strategies teachers use, I needed to have a
clear definition of difference between the terms “teacher beliefs” and “ideology.” Though these
terms were often used in similar contexts, it was important to understand that in this study, I
asserted that the terms were different yet relational, with ideology serving as a macro context,
while beliefs manifest at the micro level, or rather, beliefs were expressed as result of the
ideology. They defined teacher ideology as “the framework of thought that is used by members
of a society to justify or rationalize an existing social (dis)order” (p. 279), suggesting that
teachers develop their understandings of their students based on personal experiences. Bartolomé
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 20
(2008) added that often educators “unconsciously accept the current way of doing things as
“natural” and “normal” (p. XIII). Essentially, society reproduces a framework that allows its
members to unconsciously justify inequality and inequity with the excuse that it is the normal
behavior of the society.
As articulated above, teacher beliefs are the expression of ideology. Pajares (1992)
suggested teacher beliefs often remained unchanged regardless of the situation. He further
suggested that beliefs were difficult to study with multiple terms used to describe it. According
to Pajares (1992), beliefs could be viewed as a type of knowledge, thus creating more confusion;
however, he warned that knowledge did not equal belief, only that they were intertwined. Pajares
(1992) concluded with the suggestion that researchers should be careful in defining beliefs
simply as “teacher attitudes about education” (p. 316). He suggested educational researchers
take a more complex view of beliefs, defining them as “an individual’s judgment of the truth or
falsity of a proposition, and judgment that can only be inferred from a collective understanding
of what human beings say, intend, and do” (Pajares, 1992, p. 316). In other words, a teacher’s
beliefs about a student are inferred by the teacher based on the totality of the student, not simply
what the student says, intends, or does in the classroom.
Bartolomé (2008) suggested that teachers needed to examine their beliefs against the
dominant culture if they were to begin to see how social constructs enforce and nurture
inequality in the classroom. For the purposes of this dissertation I used Bartolomé’s definition of
ideology, which she articulated as a framework through which teachers form beliefs about
students. I used the definition of beliefs suggested by Pajares (1992), which he defined as those
judgments expressed through words and actions. When adopting beliefs people combine the
words and actions of a person and use them to make inferences about that individual.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 21
In this section I will explore literature on teacher ideology and by extension beliefs, and
their effect on student expectations. In some of these studies, the researchers examined ideology,
while others examined teacher beliefs. Still others, such as Milner (2010) examine beliefs
through the lens of what he termed “mind-sets.” What all these concepts have in common is the
desire to understand how teachers express an internalized set of understandings about students.
In order to understand the literature on beliefs and ideology, I designed this section to
examine two facets of ideology and beliefs, the ways in which these concepts impede student
learning (of which there is significant research) and the ways in which positive ideology and
beliefs can foster success for students. The latter consists of two studies, one conducted by
Bartolomé (2007) and the other by Johnson and Bolshakova (2015). Each study focused on
exemplar teachers and explored ways in which teachers could develop ideologies that help
support marginalized populations increase learning opportunities and translate into
improvements in achievement.
Deficit Ideology
In this section I addressed literature on ideology and beliefs and the way that they
translate into classroom contexts within which children are not afforded meaningful learning
opportunities. I present Rist (originally published in 1970 and republished in 2000), now
considered seminal research. Rist (2000) explored how teacher beliefs informed student
expectations in an urban kindergarten classroom. The purpose of the study was to “describe the
manner in which such inequalities imposed on children become manifest within an urban ghetto
school and the resultant differential educational experience for children from dissimilar social
class backgrounds” (Rist, 2000, p. 270). The district superintendent selected the school site for
the researcher, providing five sites for the research team. Rist visited all five schools and
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 22
observed four; however, Rist did not clarify why he chose this particular school from the four
observed.
Over the course of 2.5 years Rist (2000) followed 33 Black kindergartens through
second grade at a school of 900 students in a “blighted urban area” (p 271). All the students,
staff and faculty at the school were Black, educated, and middle class, though 55% of the
students came from families receiving federal aid, and the neighborhood was 98% African-
American. Rist (2000) collected data by visiting the class twice a week for 1 to 1.5 hour
observations during the whole of the students’ kindergarten year and the first half of their
second-grade school. In their first-grade year, Rist (2000) conducted informal observations four
times over the course of the school year. Informal observations were different from the formal
observations in that Rist (2000) engaged in “a continuous handwritten account of classroom
interactions and activity as it occurred” (p. 271). Interviews were conducted with the
kindergarten and second grade teachers.
By attempting to follow the same group of students for several years Rist (2000) hoped to
gain a “longitudinal perspective” (p. 271), one that he believed other studies of the time lacked,
stating ‘the complexities of the interactional processes which evolve over time within classrooms
cannot be discerned with a single two-or three-hour observational period” (p. 271). By first
grade, the original group of 33 kindergartners dropped to 18, and by second grade only 10 of the
original kindergarten group remained at the school.
Each year the students had a new teacher, yet each teacher following similar patterns of
differentiating students established by the kindergarten teacher. The kindergarten teacher used
social data rather than academic data when she divided the students into three tables after
observing them for the first 8 days of school. Rist (2000) suggested the grouping could not be
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 23
based on academic ability because the placement was determined so early in the school year, far
too soon to judge a student’s academic abilities. Furthermore, Rist (2000) noted that the teacher
made decisions about which students were quick learners even though “there had been no formal
testing of the children as to their academic potential or capacity for cognitive development” (p.
275). In the absence of testing data to determine student placement, the teacher used social data
collected from four sources: 1) a pre-registration form with demographic and personal student
data, 2) information on which children received federal or state aid, provided by the school social
worker, 3) beginning of the school interviews with mother and child mostly composed of
medical information and “parent concerns,” and 4) “her own experiences with older siblings, and
those of other teachers in the building related to behavior and academic performance” (p 272).
Table 1 was composed of children from backgrounds similar to those of the teacher. Rist (2000)
suggested, “her resultant preferential treatment of a select group of children appeared to be
derived from her belief that certain behavioral and cultural characteristics are more crucial to
learning in school that are others” (p. 277). Tables 2 and 3 were composed of students who did
not meet these criteria and it was reflected in her treatment of the students. Rist (2000) noted
that by the end of the year in the month of May, the teacher did not communicate once with the
children at Tables 2 and 3 during any of his observations.
This trend continued into first grade when Rist (2000) conducted four informal
observations, noting that the same table arrangements continued despite a change in teachers.
The labels created in kindergarten followed the children to first grade, where gaps in learning
became clearer. Rist (2000) suggested this was likely due to the teacher’s lack of attention
resulting in the children being less prepared for first grade than those children at Table 1,
creating a situation where there “was no mobility upward” (p. 284).
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 24
Rist (2000) found that the decisions the kindergarten teacher made about each student in
the first 8 days of class framed the first-grade teacher’s expectations and defined how she would
treat each child for the rest of the year. The first-grade teacher organized the table in the same
way as they kindergarten teacher, though she chose to identify the tables using the alphabet, or
tables A, B, and C. Students placed at Table A were considered more intelligent and worthy of
her attention, while children at Table B and C were considered less capable of learning. During
his four informal observations, Rist (2000) noted that the first grade teacher had access to more
information to place students, having received “readiness” material from the kindergarten
teacher; however, Rist (2000) suggested this information was inaccurate because Table 1
received significantly more attention during the year than Tables 2 and 3. The students at Table 1
covered more material and “as a result, the Table 1 group from kindergarten remained intact in
the first grade, as they were the only students prepared for the first-reading material” (p. 284).
Finally, in their second-grade year, 10 students of the 18 from first grade moved to
second grade. Of the eight who did not advance, three repeated first grade and five had moved
away from the school. The second-grade teacher also divided the students into three tables,
though she did not use numbers (as the kindergarten teacher had) or letters (as the first-grade
teacher had), rather she named the groups with animals, with the “tigers” taking the place of
group 1 and A from the previous years, followed by the “cardinals” and the “clowns.” Again,
Rist (2000) noted none of the children from the lower tables were moved up to the “tiger” table.
The teacher used the reading data from first grade to determine where students were placed. Rist
(2000) suggested a “self-fulfilling prophecy” (p. 287), when the teacher determined who should
be in the three reading groups, she did so using the information gained from the child’s
performance as a result of the previous teacher’s decisions. Rist (2000) further suggested the
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 25
process created a caste-like system “in that there was no observed movement into the highest
reading groups once it had been initially established at the beginning of the kindergarten school
year” (p. 294).
Despite being of the same ethnic group Rist (2000) found the teacher judged the students
through the lens of her own middle class, Black experience. This is particularly important when
examining how socio-economics play into the beliefs teachers infer about students. As noted in
Pajares (1992) teacher beliefs are inferred based on personal experience rather than concrete
knowledge of students. Rist (2000) suggested the teachers at this school based their judgment
about their students’ ability to learn on social norms, rather than documented ability. This
judgment then placed these children on an academic path that had very little to do with ability
and far more to do with socio-economics and class distinctions.
In a similar vein, yet 30 years later, Hatt (2012) explored the ways in which teachers used
smartness as a way to control students, often resulting in division of students based on class and
race. Like Rist (2000), Hatt (2012) conducted an ethnographic study of a single kindergarten
class. Three questions guided Hatt’s (2012) work: “Who has power? How is it enacted? What
actions in the classroom constitute “privilege” and how is privilege negotiated?” (p. 444). Hatt
(2012) conducted her research over the course of 1 year, in one kindergarten classroom. The
author collected data including observations, interviews, and documents. The interviews were
structured and unstructured, conducted with one teacher and one teacher aide, 10 parents, and all
the students.
Hatt (2012) chose a semi-rural community in the southwestern United States for its cross-
section of academic families—the neighboring town had a university—and working class Black,
White, and Latino families. The study was inside an evaluation; one classroom of four that were
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 26
studied as a part of a larger four-classroom program evaluation with Hatt’s (2012) ethnography
nested inside the larger research project to “examine constructions of readiness” (p. 445). Within
her study, Hatt followed 25 students, 10 of whom were Black and 15 White. The teacher, in her
fourth year of teaching, had help from a teacher’s aide. The aide had been working with the
teacher for 3 years. Keeping a similar schedule as the teachers for 3 days a week, Hatt (2012)
spent over 865 hours in the classroom.
Hatt (2012) defined smartness as “the ways we come to understand ourselves within and
in relation to the institution of schooling and how this identity shapes our own perceptions of
efficacy, ability, and success in relation to academic potential, performance, and achievement”
(p. 439). Using this definition, she explored the ways in which the teacher enacted control over
the students by associating smartness with good behavior. Hatt (2012) discovered a particularly
powerful artifact of this behavior in the stoplight/car display the front of the room. At the front
of the room a large stoplight displayed cars with each student’s name on a different car. As
students worked through the day the car would either stay at green, signifying good behavior,
move to yellow as a reminder to watch their behavior, or move to red, indicating a behavior that
was considered problematic. When a child’s car needed to be moved, the child would be
directed by the teacher to go to the front of the room, in full sight of his or her peers, and move
the car, often resulting in an emotional response clearly indicating a child’s sense of efficacy
(Hatt, 2012). This activity came to define smartness for the children because the teacher and
teaching assistant used language such as “keep being smart and you can move [the car] back [to
green]” (p. 448). Comments like this quickly resulted in the children equating smartness with
good behavior, learning it was better to be quiet, docile, and subservient to authority. In
addition, many of these decisions about who could and could not move a car had more to do with
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 27
teacher attitude than whether or not a child was breaking more classroom rules that his/her peers.
Hatt (2012) came to this conclusion this when she noticed “certain students were asked to move
their cars faster than others while some students were better at breaking rules without getting
caught” (p. 449). These divisions crossed into social and racial lines, with low income and
students of color often determined to be inferior to White, upper class students. The teacher was
often found to exhibit negative feelings toward some students over others. Hatt (2012) observed,
“She made a face of disgust aimed at adults while hugging low income White and African
American students who initiated a hug (p. 449). Additionally, Hatt (2012) observed the teacher
regularly making “negative comments about low-income parents of White and African American
students (p. 450).
Hatt (2012) noted that these behaviors extended to the discourses in the classroom with
students who showed more prior knowledge being described verbally as smart, resulting in
students associating smartness with praise. Being identified as smart led to gains in power for
students and positioned them above their peers by giving them opportunities and privileges not
available to others. Hatt (2012) concluded, “smartness operated as a tool of social positioning,
authoritatively used to denote which students had social power” (p. 455).
Deficit Thinking
Another common theme that appeared often in the literature is that of deficit thinking.
The following literature focused on these ideas. In his conceptual framework, Milner (2010)
suggested that teachers bring specific “mind-sets” to the classroom, or ways of thinking about
the world that affect how they teach. Harris (2012) also saw these ideas play out in her empirical
research about deficit thinking.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 28
Milner (2010) suggested a conceptual framework designed to help educators address
“opportunity gaps” Milner identified through four case studies. Milner discussed the concept of
“mind-sets,” or ways of thinking. The theory consisted of five areas: 1) the rejection of
colorblindness, 2) ability and skill to understand, work through, and transcend cultural conflicts,
3) ability to understand how meritocracy operates,4) ability to recognize and shift low
expectations and deficit mind-sets, and 5) rejection of context-neutral mind-sets and practices (p.
14).
Milner’s (2010) first area, “color blindness,” suggested teachers often failed to see how
race and racial backgrounds affected learning opportunities. He described this mind-set as their
inability to “recognize how their own race and racial experiences shape what they teach, how
they teach it, and how they assess what has been taught” (p. 17). He further suggested that
teachers who used phrases such as “I don’t see color” were playing into racial injustice by
refusing to see how important racial identity was to people, creating an environment that
expected assimilation without taking into consideration how that expectation could marginalize
students of color. Milner (2010) provided several examples including the lack of racial diverse
curriculum and suggested “students very often learn from a curriculum dominated by White
contributions and White norms to the exclusion of contributions from other racial and ethnic
groups” (p. 18). Milner (2010) further suggested that the colorblind mind-set could make it hard
for educators (who were predominately White and middle class) to see the gaps. He suggested
this blindness was clear in the data around students of color being overrepresented in special
education and underrepresented in gifted programs, suspension rates, the lack of students of
color involvement in school activities, and the failure to recruit and retain teachers of color.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 29
The second part of the conceptual framework concerns culture. Milner (2010) suggested
there was a disconnection between teachers’ understanding of culture and those of their students,
often creating conflicts in the classroom. Milner (2010) advised that teachers learn to build
relationships with students and their families to balance the power dynamics often at play in the
classroom. Milner (2010) suggested that teachers needed to help students learn how to move
through the mainstream culture to change the status quo, but this could not be done unless
teachers were willing to acknowledge the privileged they enjoyed as members of the dominate
culture.
The third part of the conceptual framework addressed the “myth of meritocracy” or in
other words the belief that working hard would lead to success. Milner argued that the education
system often perpetuated this myth by failing to “take into consideration the resources,
advantages, and privileges that wealthier students often inherit” (p 31). Beyond wealth Milner
suggested this extended to “students’ social, economic, political, and educational opportunities”
(p 30) yet teachers often engaged in a belief structure that failed to consider that opportunity was
determined by more than just a person’s willingness to work. He also suggested “a pervasive
theme of a meritocratic mind-set centers around a we/they binary that some adopt as they
position themselves and their ‘earned’ success in opposition or in relation to others” (p 31).
Milner’s (2010) fourth area used to explain opportunity gaps dealt with deficit thinking,
suggesting this mind-set often allowed teachers to blame the students for their failure to learn.
The author suggested these beliefs often came from “(1) conversations they have had among
themselves about students in the teacher’s lounge or hallway; (2) their interpretations of student
results on standardized tests, or (3) parents’ views about particular groups of students” (p. 35).
Though Milner (2010) believed it did not matter where the beliefs originated, he was concerned
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 30
that teachers passed these beliefs onto students through four types of mind-sets within the
broader deficit thinking mindset he identified. The first concerned teachers’ belief that home
environments were the problem and that they “need to distance students from the “horrors” of
their home conditions” (p. 35). The second mind-set suggested teachers believed “I am being
sensitive…when I feel sorry for them” and set expectations low for fear of “setting the students
up for failure” (p. 35). The third belief suggested that teachers thought their students did not
come to school with the skills necessary to succeed, so they spent their time “[making] up for
what students lack” (p. 35). Finally, the fourth mind-set viewed students as “other,” with
teachers believing the students could not meet high expectations because “they [did] not have the
resources to do so” (p. 36). These beliefs often led teachers to refer to students as “those
students,” effectively segregating students into groups based on the teachers’ expectations.
Milner further suggested that teachers believed they were doing the right thing by limiting the
opportunities without really examining “the role that teachers and school structures play” on
student expectations and performance (p. 36).
Milner’s (2010) fifth area, context neutral mind-sets, or the belief that place (such as
rural, urban or suburban) did not affect student achievement, “[did] not allow educators to
recognize the realities embedded in a particular place, such as a school in a particular
community” (p. 37). Milner (2010) suggested this had to be taken into consideration when
trying to close opportunity gaps because where a student learns had a strong impact on the
quality of the learning. Milner (2010) provided several examples related to urban environments,
including rates of teacher absenteeism in urban low-income schools, the likelihood that students
in urban schools would have more new teachers than experienced educators, and the disparities
of funding evident in urban low-income districts. Milner (2010) also found new teachers entered
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 31
the profession with neutral mind-sets already in place. He identified three minds-sets: including
the beliefs that “kids are just kids” and location did not matter, a failure on the educator’s part to
see the importance of knowing the community, and a belief that no matter where one went in the
United States, schools were the same. These teachers often failed to take into consideration the
“realities of the school community where I teach” (p. 40). Milner (2010) suggested that teachers
needed to have more than content knowledge to effectively teach diverse populations they
needed “to understand that they are working in service with the community” (emphasis in
original, p. 40) if the gaps were to close.
In her research examining America’s Choice middle schools, Harris (2012) suggested
deficit thinking had to be addressed if standards based reforms were to be successful. The
purpose of her study was to examine the following:
How the deficit beliefs among middle school teachers involved with the comprehensive
school reform America's Choice, influenced the application of content standards by
describing (a) the academic challenges teachers report about their students; (b) how
teachers’ beliefs about students influence their views about whether all students were
capable of meeting academic standards; and (c) how teachers’ beliefs about students
influenced the application of standards. (p. 132)
Using mixed methods that included survey data, interviews, and case studies Harris
(2012) relied on data collected from a 5-year evaluation of the America’s Choice Middle School
Program. Harris (2012) believed this program was a setting worthy of study because it provided
an opportunity to “examine the tensions confronted when implementing a standards-based
reform to address the gaps in students’ skills and learning experiences” (p. 133). To evaluate the
middle school program, from fall of 2001 to winter 2004, two researchers visited five different
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 32
middle schools, at least five times for 2-3 day visits, twice a year. The researchers interviewed
teachers, administrators, school-level coaches, and counselors using semi-structured interviews
and conducted surveys with 244 teachers.
The schools were in the northern and southern parts of the United States and all located in
urban areas. All the schools were under pressure to improve their standards bases assessment
results, and the schools chose to adopt America’s Choice in an effort to improve student
outcomes. The schools varied in enrollment from just under 1000 students to schools serving
more than 1600 students, with anywhere from 49% to 100% qualifying for free and reduced
lunch. All sites were predominately students of color, though Harris (2012) did not give exact
percentage breakdowns.
Harris (2012) identified three main findings, though only two were applicable to this
study. The first concerned deficit beliefs, which Harris (2012) found were common regarding
students and their families. “Some teachers tended to attribute the challenges the confronted to
student IQ, home life, and culture” (p. 137), which allowed teachers to limit their responsibility.
Fifty-seven percent of teachers felt student achievement was out of their control with so many
other issues present. Her second finding suggested teachers felt student did not take
responsibility for their learning and that students’ personal motivation presented a challenge
many teachers could not overcome. Only 46% of teachers reported they “strongly or somewhat
agreed that their students assumed responsibility for their work” (p. 138). Harris (2012) then
suggested this influenced “teacher responses regarding how standards were applied including
whether standards were modified where different criteria were used to judge the attainment of
them” (p. 141). She found 32% of teachers disagreed with a statement asking them if they
applied different standards depending on the student. This contradicted the purpose of America’s
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 33
Choice program. Harris (2012) further suggested that, “efforts to improve student access and
learning, teachers’ deficit beliefs can derail efforts to promote equal educational opportunity for
students. Adjusting criteria to judge mastery of standards contradicts the goals of standards
based educational reform” (p. 143). Though this study only focused on America’s Choice
schools, Harris (2012) did not identify any other limitations, suggesting instead that educators in
all educational settings must examine deficit beliefs and the connection to teacher expectations.
Tenenbaum and Ruck (2007) conducted a quantitative meta-analysis of 39 studied to
examine whether a teachers’ expectations were different for students of color as compared to
White European American students. Tenenbaum and Ruck (2007) “hypothesized basis of
available research that teachers would hold more negative expectations and demonstrate
correspondingly more negative behaviors toward African American and Latino/a than toward
Asian American students” (p. 254). Though several other meta-analyses existed, Tenenbaum
and Ruck (2007) believed it was time to conduct another, as it had been nearly 20 years since the
last, allowing them to include more recent work in the topic. The researchers essentially
conducted four meta-analyses. One meta-analysis incorporated more literature to previous meta-
analysis look to see if teachers held lower expectations for racial minority students compared to
their European American peers. Three addition meta-analyses were conducted to “examine
teacher referrals and their positive and negative speech” (p. 253). The authors thought it
necessary to include the addition analyses because of the number of studies that looked at
African American students (30 out of 39) suggesting “teacher may hold different expectations
for African American children than for other ethnic minority children” (p. 254).
The studies were found using PsycINFO, ERIC, and Dissertations Abstracts International
The authors looked at the type of measure that was used as well the units of analysis (teachers or
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 34
students), geographic location, the year of publication, and the publication source as criteria for
selecting studies to be included in the meta-analysis. Tenenbaum and Ruck (2007) paid specific
attention to the design of the studies, which lead the researchers to add to their hypothesis “that
visual or vocal information would be associated with stronger effect sizes than written materials”
(p. 255). To determine bias Tenenbaum and Ruck (2007) used the concept of “unconditional
race neutrality, teachers expect the same of children from different ethnic backgrounds
regardless of past performance” (emphasis in original, p. 253) and “race neutrality based on
potential in which neutrality is based on the potential of a student” (emphasis in original, p. 254),
though the authors suggest this is hard to determine as student potential is not measurable.
In the meta-analysis on teacher expectations, Tenenbaum and Ruck (2007) found “small
but meaningful correlations” (p. 261) between teacher expectations. The meta-analysis on
referrals found that “teachers made more negative and fewer positive referrals for ethnic
minority children than for European American children” (p. 265). On positive and neutral
speech, the researchers found a statistically significant difference in positive and neutral speech
with the teachers directing “more positive and neutral speech toward European American
children than toward ethnic minority children” (p. 266). After examining studies on negative
speech, Tenenbaum and Ruck (2007) did not find statistically significant data showing that
teachers directed more negative speech toward children of color than White students. It should
be noted, that despite finding some “statistically significant” data, Tenenbaum and Ruck (2007)
suggested the results should be viewed with some care as “students are not passive within
classrooms and may engender particular expectations and behaviors from teachers…caution is
thus warranted in interpreting teacher expectations as always leading to negative treatment” (p.
271).
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 35
Asset Ideology and Dynamic Thinking
Bartolomé (2007) argued that teacher preparation programs must address ideology if
education is the serve all students. Sharing the results from a study conducted in 2001,
Bartolomé (2007) sought to understand “how some teachers figure out that teaching is not an
apolitical undertaking, develop a critical understanding of how asymmetrical power relations
play out in schools, and devise strategies on their students’ behalf for short-circuiting potential
inequalities they may experience” (p. 266). The study was conducted at a well-established high
school in a coastal southern California community fewer than 20 miles from the Mexican border.
The school was diverse with 70% of students identifying as Latino and 8% identifying as
Filipino American. The rest of the population consisted of small numbers of White students,
African American, and Pacific Islanders, though Bartolomé (2007) did not provide exact
percentages; however, she also noted that 62% of students reported speaking another language
other than English at home. Though the author did not expressly state why she chose the school,
her purpose statement suggested the school was chosen for the quality of its teachers in regards
to the criteria expressed in the purpose statement (Bartolomé, 2007). Additionally, she reported
that the four teachers who were chosen for study were “identified as exemplary by administrators
and colleagues” (p. 267).
Using interviews with open-ended questions, Bartolomé (2007) “intended to elicit teacher
explanations and views about their own experiences with and beliefs about low-SES, non-White,
and linguistic-minority students and factors related to educating them” (p. 268). After analyzing
the interview data, Bartolomé (2007) found that successful teachers viewed themselves as
“cultural brokers or advocates for their students” (p. 268), they questioned the “validity of
meritocracy” (p. 268), “rejected deficit views of their students” (p. 271) and “refuse[d] to blindly
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 36
accept dominant White culture as superior or highly desirable to emulate” (p. 272). She also
found teachers were empathic with students who were “other” and able to see these “other”
cultures as equally valuable to their own. Yet, Bartolomé (2007) did suggest this could be
connected in some way to their own experiences with injustice as the teachers describe their own
experiences having influence over how they treated their students. Finally, Bartolomé (2007)
found that these successful teachers worked to help their students navigate both their school
cultures and the mainstream culture of the United States. Though they did not identify
themselves as “cultural brokers” in effect that acted as guides for their students, helping to build
strong relationships. Bartolomé (2007) also found that the teachers “reported striving to provide
their students with practices and knowledge bases that are typically unavailable to working-class
youth—the very cultural capital they many middle-class and more privileged parents regularly
provide their own children” (p. 279).
Johnson and Bolshakova (2015) explored teacher beliefs in a middle school science
classroom. The goal of the study was to “address and transform teacher beliefs regarding the
role of culture within their science pedagogy” (p. 179). The authors used Cultural Relevant
Pedagogy (CRP, which will be explored later in the literature review) to help implement
“Transformative Professional Development Framework” (TPD) designed to “address the
growing need for supporting teachers more effectively teaching science to an increasingly
diverse student population” (p. 180). The study focused how teacher beliefs could be changed
using the framework.
Their study was conducted in a low achieving, large urban middle school in the
southwest where 79% of students receive free or reduced lunch and 49% identified as Hispanic.
Five teachers participated, though the number was later reduced to three when two teachers
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 37
opted out of implementing CRP in their classrooms. Johnson and Bolshakova (2015) did not
state why this school site was chosen, nor did they share the limitations of the study.
The authors described their study as a qualitative case study that was a “subset of an
overall longitudinal study of the impact and implementation of the TPD model” (Johnson &
Bolshakova, p. 181). Their study had one research question: How do teachers’ beliefs regarding
the inclusion of culturally relevant pedagogy change while participating in the TPD program?
To answer the question Johnson and Bolshakova (2015) examined interview and focus groups
transcripts and field notes from classroom observations collected during the larger study. The
researchers also engaged in member checking by having teachers review the transcripts. The
framework consisted of two stages over 3 years. Teachers were released often from their
classrooms, and engaged in intensive sessions designed to develop their skills in CRP as well as
help them examine their own beliefs. The first year focused on developing Professional
Learning Communities (PLCs) and teachers engaged in home visits; the second year focused on
developing curriculum that incorporated CRP; the third year focused on developing assessments
and continuing to develop curriculum.
Overall Johnson and Bolshakova’s (2015) findings suggested teachers were able to
change their beliefs about the need to include CRP in their teaching. The authors stated,
“teachers focused their instruction on modeling questioning for students, including questioning
societal inequities as well as solving problems in science” (Johnson & Bolshakova, 2015, p.
183). The authors also reported teachers understood the need to develop relationships with their
students, the importance of helping students from all backgrounds feel welcome, and made
efforts to connect content to students lives in meaningful ways.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 38
As suggested by the findings in the above research, ideology has clear links to teacher
expectations and behaviors in the classroom; but ideology, though it strongly impacts teacher
moves, does not illustrate how beliefs translate into action in the classroom. One of the big ideas
coming out of this literature is that a teacher’s own positionality in the world informs his/her
practice in the classroom. For example, as suggested by Rist (2000) and Hatt (2012) a teacher’s
personal socio-economic background is expressed in how they value their students. This is
particularly important when exploring how social class reveals itself in a classroom where the
students and teachers share the same ethnic background.
The literature on ideology and teacher beliefs clearly shows the need for teachers to
engage in asset pedagogies if they are to support students, but for this dissertation I needed to
examine what these beliefs look like in the classroom. This allowed me insight into how
teachers’ beliefs are revealed through their interactions with students to see how beliefs are
embedded within classroom practice. As suggested by Pajares (1992) teachers infer their beliefs
through words, actions, and intentions, examining teacher actions through this lens helped me
answer my research question. It is one thing to believe students are capable, but quite another to
know and use strategies designed to help marginalized students be successful. This is the reason
why I needed to look to another body of literature to inform my approach to answering the
question. Once teachers develop asset pedagogies they need to understand how culture and
cognition influence student learning.
Culturally Relevant and Responsive Pedagogy
Just as beliefs inform how teachers treat students, beliefs also inform the choices teachers
make in how to deliver instruction. Statistically, White, middle class women, dominate the
teaching profession, with the most recent national statistics showing the profession is more that
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 39
80% White and over 75% female (U.S. Dept. of Ed., 2016). This does not reflect the greater
society and suggests teachers need to develop skills and practices that serve a diverse population
(Ladson-Billings, 1995a). In this section I explore the theory of culturally relevant pedagogy
developed by Ladson-Billings in the early 1990s. Her theory is foundational the understanding
how to incorporate culture into classroom practice. Though Ladson-Billings’s (1995a) term
culturally relevant pedagogy is first term coined to describe teaching with cultural understanding,
over time researchers have extended the term to including culturally responsive teaching (Gay,
2007), culturally sustaining pedagogy (Paris, 2012) and critical culturally revitalizing pedagogy
(McCarty & Lee, 2014) research on these topics falls under the terms first developed by Ladson-
Billings.
To fully understand these concepts this section I begin with Ladson-Billing (1995a,
1995b) then explore the work of other researchers who explored the theory further, both
empirically and theoretically. The section ends with a return to Ladson-Billings (2014) and her
most recent iteration of the theory in response to Paris’s (2012) critique.
Culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP), a widely researched area, suggested teachers needed
to develop practices that honor and support students of varying ethnic and racial backgrounds. In
her seminal theoretical and empirical work, Ladson-Billings (1995a) sought to reform teacher
education by proposing a “theory of culturally focused pedagogy” (p. 466). The author stated
her interest in exploring this issue stemmed from a “desire to challenge deficit paradigms that
prevailed in the literature in African-American learners” (p. 472). Ladson-Billings began to
formulate her theory through work with eight teachers “in a small (less than 3,000 students)
predominately African-American, low-income elementary school district in Northern California”
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 40
(p. 471). The teachers were selected by the community and identified as exemplar practitioners
by the parents. Nominations were verified by principals and teaching colleagues.
The study consisted of four parts. In part one Ladson-Billings (1995a) interviewed each
teacher to gain information on background, philosophy and teaching styles. The second part
included observations of the teacher, unscheduled, with regular visits occurring over a 2-year
period about 3 times a week. While observing the author took field notes, audiotape, and talked
with the teacher after the visit. The third part consisted of a recording of the teacher to be used
in the fourth part. In the fourth part of the study the eight teachers viewed the videos over 10
visits that were about 2-3 hours each. They engaged in critical assessment and through this
analysis, with the researcher, “formulations about culturally relevant pedagogy that had emerged
in the initial interviews were confirmed by teaching practice” (p. 472). Understanding this the
author believed it was necessary to make a “paradigmatic shift toward looking in the classrooms
of excellent teachers, through the reality of those teachers” (p. 472). In other words, to
understand why they were excellent she needed to understand how they saw the world. In order
to do this, she established two “criterion of meaning” (p. 472). The first was established by
talking to parents about what they thought made an excellent teacher, suggesting the parents
could be relied on as “experts” to assess the teachers. Ladson-Billings (1995a) found that the
parents made their decisions using a comparative structure. They had experience with many
teachers and most had more than one child, thus they were able to compare across the staff,
making determinations based on how their children performed in comparison to others. Next,
Ladson-Billings (1995a) looked to the teachers. They all had “from 12 to 40 years of teaching
experience, mostly with African-American students” (p. 473) and they engaged in dialogue about
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 41
their practice. Ladson-Billings suggested, “dialogue was critical in assessing knowledge claims”
(p. 473).
Ladson-Billings (1995a) found that these exemplar teachers exhibited similar traits. She
identified these as “the ethics of caring” and “the ethics of personal accountability” (pp. 473-
474). In these two traits Ladson-Billings (1995a) found the teachers communicated the caring
through their concern for their students and how their work affected those students. In their
personal responsibility through the “pedagogical stands they took. Several of the teachers spoke
of defying administrative mandates in order to do what they believed was right for students” (p.
474). Teachers were proactive and felt the significance of their actions in relation to student
success; moreover, student success was viewed as a personal responsibility with teachers making
decisions based on the good of their students.
Using this study Ladson-Billings (1995a) formulated a theory focused on three concepts
beginning with teachers’ views of themselves in relation to the communities they served. The
author suggested these teachers were successful because they saw themselves a members of the
community and placed student achievement as the highest priority. Secondly, these teachers
understood the significance of social relationships, taking time to know their students, parents,
and the community. They encouraged collaboration and responsibility among students and
teachers. Finally, she found successful teachers held specific beliefs about knowledge,
particularly that, “knowledge is not static [and it] must be viewed critically” (p. 481).
Furthermore, teachers were passionate, willing to scaffold student learning, and incorporate
multiple forms of assessment to give students opportunities to show their learning in multiple
ways. She suggested, “for the teachers in this study, knowledge was about doing” (p. 481).
These three ideas would eventually inform Ladson-Billing’s (1995b) theory of Culturally
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 42
Relevant Pedagogy (CRP) in which she suggested CRP “requires that teachers attend to students’
academic needs, not merely make them “feel good.” The trick of culturally relevant teaching is
to get students to “choose” academic excellence” (p. 160). To do this, Ladson-Billings (1995b)
suggested teachers needed to do three things: develop students academically, support cultural
competence, and develop critical consciousness in order to support the success of students of
color. She suggested academic success could be achieved if students felt connected to the
content. The author indicated students needed to find the material personally meaningful,
advising teachers to incorporate materials relevant to the lives of their students.
The second aspect of the theory suggested teachers needed to become “culturally
competent;” in other words, teachers need to honor the culture of their students while teaching
them how to navigate the wider mainstream culture. Ladson-Billings (1995b) cited her previous
work where teachers incorporated rap music, invited community members to share their
experiences and taught students about their crafts, allowed students to use their home language,
and effectively taught students to code-switch.
Ladson-Billings (1995b) third aspect she described as “critical consciousness” or the
ability of students to critically exam “the cultural norms, values, mores, and institutions that
produce and maintain social inequities” (p. 162) so students could better enter those systems to
create change. Ladson-Billings (1995b) provided several examples of this practice, including
several teachers (from her study describe previously) who helped students to critique “the
knowledge represented in the textbooks, and the system of inequitable funding that allowed
middle-class students to have newer texts. They wrote letters to the editor of the local newspaper
to inform the community of the situation” (p. 162). The author suggested teachers needed to
create and implement “social action curriculum” (p. 162), giving students a chance to challenge
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 43
and solve problems relevant to their lives. With these three concepts Ladson-Billings (1995a,
1995b) theory would go on to inform other research into teacher practice and its connection to
culture and ideology.
Inspired by Ladson-Billings, McCarthey (1997) “wanted to examine how teachers and
students connected home and school literacy practices” (p 147). McCarthey’s conducted her
yearlong ethnographic at an urban elementary school in the southwest. The school demographic
included 56% Hispanic—which included students who were designated by the school as
Mexican, Mexican-American, or from Central American Countries) and 30% White. About 62%
of students qualified for free and reduced price lunch. The community was chosen because of its
mix of working class and middle class families.
The study followed five White middle class teachers of varying experience levels. All
were involved in co-teaching model. The researcher and her research assistant interviewed all
five teachers three times in the first 3 months of the school year. Then, they overserved each
teacher for 1 to 3 hours three times a week. In addition to this data collection, after several weeks
in the classroom, the researchers identified 15 students who were representative of the school
cultural population. Each student was interviewed four times throughout the school year and
from this data the research decided to focus on nine students with whom she then conducted
home visits. The researcher further focused her efforts by providing detail descriptions of the
experiences of five children for the purposes of the published article.
As a researcher, McCarthey planned to take on the role of a participant observer, but over
time found that difficult because their teaching suggestions were “implemented much differently
from what we intended” (p. 152). She also described her positionality as being “closely aligned
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 44
with social constructivism” (p. 151). McCarthey did not include other limitations to her study
beyond her stance and role.
McCarthey (1997) found that teachers, though well intentioned, still appeared to make
assumptions about students’ ability to make connections between home and school, thinking, if
they provided the opportunities, connections would be automatic. Furthermore, McCarthey
concluded that the teachers’ background knowledge of students’ home lives resulted in “stronger
connections between home and school for some students than for others” (p. 154). In addition,
she suggested these connections were often stronger for White, middle-class students because the
teachers tended to know more about those students—who were similar to the teachers’ own
backgrounds—than students of color. However, McCarthey (1997) clarified that just because
that was her conclusion, it did not mean that “no working-class students made connections
between home and school” but rather the curriculum tended to favor one group of students more
than others.
Because of these findings, McCarthey (1997) recommended that teachers and teacher
education programs encourage teachers to make home visits, as these experiences could have a
profound effect on a teacher’s knowledge of students’ home lives. Though she acknowledged
that “coming to know students’ lives outside of school poses psychological, ethical, and practical
challenges” (p 177) there are other ways teachers can better support home to school literacy for
all children. She recommended teaching strategies, such as small group and asking open-ended
questions to help children create their own narratives. Furthermore, McCarthey (1997) suggested
teachers needed to “engage in critical reflections about readings linked to larger issues of culture
and class” (p. 179) and also consider their own positionality with that of their students.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 45
Young (2010) explored Ladson-Billings’s (1995a) theory in her collaborative, qualitative
study in an effort to help an elementary school “define, implement, and assess culturally relevant
pedagogy as a viable pedagogical tool” (p. 251). Young’s (2010) study was the second phase of
a larger research project, with the second phase designed as action research within the school.
The research was conducted with teachers and administrators to “immerse [the participants] in a
process of collaborative inquiry” (p. 253). Young (2010) asked three questions: 1) How do
teachers and administrators understand and utilize culturally relevant pedagogy? 2) What process
is involved in the co-participatory effort to conceptualize and actualize culturally relevant
pedagogy in classroom practice? And, 3) what challenges arise in the definition, implementation,
and evaluation of culturally responsive pedagogy? (p. 249).
The site, an urban elementary school in the northeastern United States, was chosen
because the principal was interested in being a part of the research currently underway at his
graduate school, where he was enrolled in a leadership program. Young (2010) further
elaborated on the reason for choosing the school in that “the principal found it necessary to
openly address the issues of race and racism at the school” (p. 250). The school was small, with
approximately 220 students, with 40% of the population identifying as African-American, 40%
Latino and/or Hispanic, 12% White, 5% Asian, and 3% Other.
Young (2010) collected data over a period of 3 months, consisting of interviews,
meetings, classroom observations, and document collection; she was not more specific in
providing details regarding her data collection efforts. Young (2010) found “confusion over
culturally relevant pedagogy was palpable in all facets of data collection” (p. 251). Using
Ladson-Billings’s (1995a) framework of academic success, cultural competence, and political
consciousness. Young (2010) found that teachers, though they could articulate the ideas behind
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 46
culturally relevant pedagogy, in practice their efforts were superficial. In terms of academic
success and cultural competence, Young (2010) found, “the participants regarded the students’
cultural capital as the means to build learning on their personal experiences and the make the
curriculum meaningful to them but not necessarily as a way to promote rigorous academic
learning” (p. 252). Furthermore, though teachers thought relationships were very important
Young (2010) suggested “although well intentioned, [teachers] built relationships with students
in only a superficial manner” (p. 252). In fact, Young (2010) suggested this only reinforced the
concerns Ladson-Billings (1995a) expressed in that often teachers, though well intentioned, end
up practicing what amounts to a “feel-good curricula” (Young, 2010, p. 252).
These concerns carried through in Young’s (2010) research as she looked at the Ladson-
Billings’s concept of political consciousness. She found that the district had very little
understanding of the political element of culturally relevant pedagogy, and no way of addressing
issues of inequity. As the project was action research, Young (2010) helped the teachers develop
their own definition of culturally relevant pedagogy and design lessons that could address issues
of social and racial inequalities. Young (2010) noticed while creating their definition, the White
teachers “primarily focused on minority students’ home culture when conceptualizing culturally
relevant pedagogy rather than a wider culture that embraces high expectations and collegial
support from the school, the community, and society at large” (p. 253). Young (2010) did warn
that this particular study had limitations, primarily its size, the length of time it took, and the lack
of generalizability. Young (2010) suggested interesting links between deficit thinking and
privilege, though she was quick to clarify this could not be verified without further research.
Continuing the exploration of CRP Milner (2011) used the theory as a conceptual
framework in his study of a successful middle school science teacher. Looking at the cultural
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 47
competence component of Ladson-Billings (1995a) theory, Milner (2011) focused his research
using two questions: 1) How was this teacher, Mr. Hall, able to build cultural competence in
ways that allowed him to (more) effectively teach his students? 2) In what ways does Mr. Hall
develop relationships with his students inside and outside the classroom to build cultural
competence? (p. 67). Though Ladson-Billings (1995a) focused her theory on students, Milner
(2011) applied the theory to teachers, suggesting it was important for teachers to develop cultural
competence to increase student success and create as many learning opportunities as possible in
the classroom.
Milner (2011) spent 19 months at the school observing Mr. Hall, visiting once a week for
half a day each time; though, Milner (2011) also noted he contacted the teacher daily for updates
on lesson planning and materials. The author chose Mr. Hall, a White male in his third year of
teaching, based on the principal’s recommendations. Through semi-structured and informal
interviews with the teacher, observations in and out of the classroom, document and artifact
review, Milner (2011) focused on understanding the context of the school “to provide rich and
deep details about the nature of the school, its culture, and the teacher” (p. 73). Milner (2011)
was also careful to fully describe his own positioning within the study as an African-American
male researcher and former teacher studying a White male teacher. Milner (2011) suggested,
because I am studying a White teacher’s practices and capacities to build his cultural
competence in this study, I attempt to explain some of the tensions embedded in the
practices of studying a participant outside my own racial and ethnic background. (p. 72)
Milner’s (2011) data yielded three findings regarding how Mr. Hall exhibited cultural
competence, which Milner described as a “mind-set” a term Milner used before in research on
ideology (Milner, 2010). This mind-set included building “meaningful and authentic
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 48
relationships with his students…[recognizing] the multiple layers of identify among his students
and confronted matters of race with them…[and] perceived teaching as a communal affair” (p.
76). Milner suggested Mr. Hall’s view of the classroom molded his cultural competence. As
Milner dug into Mr. Hall’s beliefs about students, he found Mr. Hall engaged in certain
behaviors in regards to building relationships with the students. He verbally encouraged
students, gave many opportunities to change behaviors and increase success. In other words, he
was not quick to send students to the office for discipline. Though Milner (2011) suggested this
could be perceived as a weakness, Milner (2011) noted the students did not interpret Mr. Hall’s
flexibility that way, rather “the students realized that Mr. Hall was not going to allow student to
turn in work that did not demonstrate their best efforts conceptually and intellectually” (p. 78).
The second aspect concerning student identity showed Mr. Hall’s understanding that students
needed to feel that he understood they had “multiple and varied identities” (p. 81) and that they
also knew him as an individual, which mean he allowed students to know him as a person,
through personal stories, sharing his personal identity, and allowing students to share their
experiences. Milner (2011) suggested this “was an important pedagogical tool to build
relationships and to assist Mr. Hall in deepening his cultural knowledge about himself and also
about his students” (p. 81). This was further exhibited in Mr. Hall’s understanding that “matters
of race” (p. 82) were always present in the classroom; however, Milner (2011) noted that Mr.
Hall knew he had not always been aware and that it took being called racist by students for him
to understand how issues of race affect learning environments. Milner suggested,
Mr. Hall used these experiences when students called him racist as personal and
professional opportunities to learn and build cultural competence. Although it seemed
clear that Mr. Hall did not see himself as a racist and that he did not intend for his actions
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 49
to be interpreted or portrayed as racist, what really mattered was the students’
perceptions: in short, the students’ perceptions actually became their reality. (emphasis
in original, p. 83)
Furthermore, Milner found Hall developed and ability to reflect on his own position in
relationship to that of his students. This increased his ability to help his students be successful.
The final aspect of the “mind-set” described by Milner (2011) involved Hall’s ability to
see teaching as a collaborative practice. Milner (2011) noted that Mr. Hall also exhibited this
behavior with his colleagues, by helping mentor and support new teachers. Hall also showed this
through his beliefs that “teachers have to model ‘appropriate’ behavior at all times” (p. 85). He
understood the importance of acting as a role model for his students, modeling the behaviors that
he hoped to see in them, while at the same time providing the forgiveness, caring, and guidance
of a family environment. Milner (2011) suggested Mr. Hall was very serious about his teaching
commitment. For Milner (2011), this was most clearly expressed when Mr. Hall stated, “he was
“fighting” for the lives of his students in the entire Bridge Middle School community” (p. 86).
For Hall, the school was a family, with each person a member. As a teacher he felt it was
extremely important to develop a sense of family both in his classroom and the greater school
community. Milner (2011) suggested this “mind-set” allowed Mr. Hall to be so successful,
suggesting that teachers need to develop their cultural competence as much as they need to help
their students develop it.
Continuing to explore CRP, Morrison, Robbins, and Rose (2008) examined 45
classroom-based studies conducted between 1995 and 2008 looking for the ways in which CRP
was used in the classroom. Though Ladson-Billings (1995a) clearly described the elements of
CRP, she did not provide the specific strategies teachers could use in the classroom. Morrison et
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 50
al. (2008) sought to understand the approaches teachers used to implement CRP, suggesting, “we
consistently find that our teacher candidates lack the ability to translate theory into pedagogy in
their field of experience” (p. 433). Morrison et al. (2008) conducted their synthesis with the goal
to help teachers develop a stronger understanding of how to implement CRP; however, the
authors warned it was not an attempt to create a “prescribed set of instructional moves,” (p. 434)
but rather to show how teachers used CRP in the classroom.
Using six online databases, Morrison et al. (2008) searched for studies using the terms
“culturally relevant” and “culturally responsive” terms created by Ladson-Billings (1995a) and
Gay (2013) respectively. The authors chose those specific terms because other terms they
considered were either too broad or too specific. These terms allowed them to search
specifically for studies focused on Ladson-Billings’s (1995a) theory, which the authors used as a
framework to organize their findings. Using the three criterion established by Ladson-Billings
(1995a) Morrison et al. (2008) created subcategories of behaviors they saw repeatedly in the
studies. These sub-categories were then fitted under the criterion. Yet, the author acknowledged
that after reviewing the studies, they found it was difficult to identify “a teacher action as solely
an example of one criterion or subcategory” (p. 435). Morrison et al. (2008) also acknowledged
the limitation of their synthesis in that there was a degree of subjectivity in how they chose to
organize the criterion and subcategories; however, they suggested “our interpretations satisfy our
goal to organize and provide educators with concrete examples of what culturally relevant
pedagogy ‘looks like’ in actual classrooms” (p. 435).
Morrison et al. (2008) began with Ladson-Billings’s (1995a) first criterion “high
academic expectations” and organized the studies in five subcategories. The first suggested the
importance of teachers “offering intensive modeling, scaffolding, and clarification of the
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 51
challenging curriculum” (p. 435). The authors provided some examples such as “encouraging
students to collaborate” and “closely monitoring student learning” (p. 435). Their second finding
suggested teachers designed lessons that would create opportunities for “students to have
positive first encounters with subject matter before moving on to areas of greater challenge” (p.
436). Third, the authors found several studies suggested teachers took personal responsibility for
their students’ success. Fourth, teachers needed to create positive learning environments,
through encouraging students to support each other and teachers monitoring and intervening
when “classroom inequalities occurred” (p. 436). Finally, the last subcategory suggested
teachers needed to maintain high behavioral expectations for students. Much as Mr. Hall
behaved in Milner’s (2011) study, Morrison et al. (2008) found teachers needed to make
expectations explicit and created routines that helped foster positive behavior; suggesting
teachers should react “verbally with disappointment or anger in a manner similar to how family
members might react” (p. 437). Morrison et al. (2008) also noted specific strategies such as
enforcing behavior expectations by ignoring students’ attempts to start arguments and dealing
with unacceptable behaviors immediately.
Under “cultural competence” Morrison et al. (2008) organized their findings into three
subcategories. The first suggested successful teachers of CRP often made adjustment to the
curriculum to reflect their students lived experiences. Secondly, teachers built learning
opportunities based on the experiences of their students, making efforts to connect the
curriculum to their student lives. Third, teachers understood the importance of building links
between themselves, the students, the school, and the community. Morrison et al. (2008) noted
strategies such as inviting the community to assemblies, bringing in mentors from the
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 52
community to share experiences, and making a “conscious efforts to involve families and
communities in the day-to-day decisions of the school” (p. 440) increased cultural competence.
Finally, in Ladson-Billings’s (1995a) theory the need to establish “critical consciousness”
or in other words helping students to understand how race played out in society so they could
begin to change the system, Morrison et al. (2008) organized their findings into four
subcategories. The first addressed the need to develop critical literacy skills. In several studies
the authors found “teachers employed a critical stance toward the content of their literacy
instruction and sought to help students develop a similar critical stance” (p. 441). Morrison et al.
(2008) found studies that suggested teachers could do this through “providing critical thinking
prompts before reading a text, allowing students to discuss controversial topics, and asking the
student to take a critical/political view of a text” (p. 441). Next, Morrison et al. (2008) created a
second category dealing with “engaging students in social justice work” (p. 441). The authors
found many studies that suggested teachers helped students develop social justice skills that
would prepare “students to act upon social justice issues in their future” (p. 442). Strategies
included helping students learn to provide services to their community, examining how their
academic learning could serve them in dealing with community issues, in particular, using
research project to exam community issues. Morrison et al. (2008) also found studies suggested
the importance of community service work in developing students’ capacity to care for their
community and contribute to its betterment. This category lead to a third focused on empowering
students to examine the power structures present in society. Morrison et al. found studies that
suggested “culturally relevant teachers make explicit the dynamics of mainstream society to
those students from cultures outside the mainstream, while simultaneously validating the unique
cultures and heritages of their students” (p. 442). Morrison et al. (2008) found studies that
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 53
provided ways in which teachers could implement begin practicing culturally relevant pedagogy
in their classrooms through the choice of literature, and the context of language use. Finally, the
fourth category continued to explore issues of power, this time in the classroom itself. Morrison
et al. (2008) suggested that successful practitioners of culturally relevant teaching understood the
importance of sharing power in the classroom. The authors found studies that suggested teachers
could do this through allowing students to help design assessments, syllabi, and help select the
content (Morrison et al., 2008). These studies suggested that giving students choice in the
curriculum helped balance the power in the classroom. Morrison et al. (2008) suggested that this
third criteria of “critical consciousness” was the most important aspect of CRP, because “it is
through critical consciousness that students are empowered with the tools to transform their lives
and ultimately the conduct of our society” (p. 443)
Another important voice examining how culture impacts learning is Gay (2013). Gay
(2013) suggested teachers needed to not only believe in the importance of culture in the
classroom, but also have tools in which to support the inclusion of culture. In that vein, Gay
(2013) suggested teachers implement what she called culturally responsive teaching and defined
it as “using the cultural knowledge, prior experiences, frames of reference, and performance
styles of ethnically diverse students to make learning encounters more relevant to and effective
for them” (pp. 49-50). Gay (2013) suggested teachers needed to engage in four “actions” to
develop culturally responsive teaching. The first dealt with shifting away from deficit beliefs
such as blaming the students’ living conditions and examining other possible causes of
underachievement. Gay (2013) proposed such alternate beliefs as “incompatibilities between
schools and home…stress and anxiety associated with continually crossing cultural borders
between home and school; the existential gap between students and teachers due to such factors
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 54
as race, class, gender, age, education, ethnicity, and residence” (p. 55). Gay (2013) further
suggested teachers should ask themselves a series of questions designed to help them examine
personal beliefs about diverse students and how they shaped their instructional practices. This
shows the intersection of culture responsive teaching and beliefs, in that teachers enter a
conversation about how beliefs shape practice (Gay, 2013; Pajares, 1992).
In the second action, Gay (2013) warned teachers that they would face opposition when
they tried to include culturally responsive teaching in their classroom practice and they had to be
prepared to face it. The author suggested “part of the challenge to culturally responsive teaching
is confronting resistance without simultaneously diverting attention and effort away from
promoting cultural diversity” (p. 56). Resistance could come in several forms including
concerns about the validity, teachers using the excuse of incompetence without attempting to
learn, and those who perceived culturally responsive teaching to be “racist and discriminatory by
highlighting differences” (p. 56). In addition to these “resistances” Gay suggested fear of
change, the lack of textbooks that promote diversity, and “the demands and challenges prompted
by the current standards movement with its emphases on the same measures and indicators of
academic achievement for all students” (p. 59) all create resistance. Gay (2013) suggested that
pushing back against these issues became necessary to ensure diverse student populations had
access to learning opportunities.
The third action suggested, educators needed “to understand how and why culture and
difference are essential ideologies and foundations of culturally responsive teaching” (p. 60). On
the sensitive subject of race, Gay (2013) suggested teachers needed to accept that race existed as
a social construct and as such played a significant role in opportunity or lack thereof. Turning a
blind eye to racial issues under the guise of saying it does not exist created problems. Even
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 55
though Gay (2013) acknowledged that race did not exist biologically, she suggested it was very
present in education. Gay (2013) suggested:
Race, like culture and other human differences, does not carry any inherent stamp of
privilege or problem; these are socially and politically constructed. Problems arise when
perceptions of and value judgments about race, culture, and ethnicity help by some
individuals and groups are imposed on others. (p. 61)
From here, Gay framed her fourth action around teacher practice, which provided specific ways
teachers could begin to use her framework in the classroom to make connections between
culturally responsive teaching and pedagogy. According to Gay (2013), connecting subject areas
to culturally responsive teaching practices would be “crucial to determining teachers’ levels of
ownership and of investment in it” (p. 64). Gay (2013) did acknowledge it would be difficult to
address culturally responsive teaching in every imaginable content area, rather teachers needed
to make connections between instructional content and technique. The author further suggested
that teachers should adapt “teaching strategies to the learning styles of different ethnic groups”
(Gay, 2013, p. 64). Gay described many specific strategies, providing teachers with concrete
examples for how to “do” culturally responsive teaching. In particular, she discussed the need to
promote literacy through culture in two ways: 1) providing examples from students’ cultures to
teach content, and 2) “acquiring knowledge about different ethnic groups’ cultural heritages,
experiences, contributions, institutions, and artifacts” (p. 65). Gay stressed the importance of
using examples to encourage student learning. She suggested the examples should come from
students’ cultures; however, Gay (2013) did acknowledge the difficulty, suggesting teachers
needed to develop a “repertoire of culturally diverse examples” (p. 67) and use them often.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 56
Another more recent voice in the conversation about culturally relevant pedagogy
includes work by Paris (2012) and Paris and Alim (2014) who examined the tenets of Ladson-
Billings’s (1995a, 1995b) theory and suggested an additional lens from which to view culture in
the classroom. Paris (2012) suggested that culture was not static, nor did it belong only to one
group, rather young people constantly borrowed, adapted and reformed culture. Paris (2012)
began his theory with a discussion of the pitfalls of deficit thinking so common in education,
forcing students to risk losing their heritage in order to fit into the mold created by the majority
White society. Yet, Paris (2012) proposed that CRP did not go far enough. His concerns took on
three questions he posed to researchers and practitioners.
We must ask ourselves if the research and practice being produced under the umbrella of
cultural relevance and responsiveness is, indeed, ensuring maintenance of the languages
and cultures of African American, Latina/o, Indigenous American, Asian American,
Pacific Islander American, and other longstanding and newcomer communities in our
classrooms. Furthermore, we must ask if a critical stance toward and critical action
against unequal power relations is resulting from such research and practice. Finally, we
must ask ourselves if the very terms “relevant” and “responsive” are descriptive of what
we are after in teaching and learning in a pluralistic society. (pp. 94-95)
To address these questions, Paris (2012) suggested a new term “culturally sustaining pedagogy,”
adding that this term would more accurately describe current scholarship and practice.
Additionally, Paris stressed the importance of helping students to honor their cultures while
teaching them how to navigate the mainstream culture. This notion was important to Paris
(2012), suggesting that “a pluralistic society needs both the many and the one to remain vibrant”
(p. 95). The author further suggested that culture was constantly evolving and educators must
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 57
look for ways to honor the traditions but also see the ways in which culture continues to change
and shift especially in young people. Paris (2012) advised that schools had to work to maintain
and build “the richness of our pluralistic society…both those marginalized and dominant” (p.
96).
Having provided this call to action Paris and Alim (2014) produced a critique of
culturally relevant and responsive theories, suggesting ways in which the approaches did not
address the changing landscape of culture in schools. Their critique had three areas: historical
context of previous pedagogies, a discussion of how those pedagogies failed to take into
consideration the “contemporary/evolving community practices” (p. 85), and an examination of
how these pedagogies “do not critically contend with problematic elements of expressed in some
youth cultures” (p. 86). The authors suggested these pedagogies were still too concerned with
assimilation, or bringing students of color to the dominant White culture at the expense of their
own heritage. Paris and Alim suggested,
…deficit approaches to teaching and learning have echoed across decades of education in
the United States. Such approaches view the languages, literacies, and cultural ways of
being of many students and communities of color as deficiencies to be overcome if they
are to learn the dominant language, literacy, and cultural ways of being demanded in
schools. (p. 87)
This continued hegemony with the White culture held up as an ideal, rather than as just one of
many ways of being. Paris and Alim’s (2014) primary concerned was that as a pluralistic
society; society needed to ensure that pluralism was expressed and protected within the
education system. The authors argued that current ways of understanding culture in the
classroom did not do this (Paris & Alim, 2014).
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 58
To address this disconnect, Paris and Alim (2014) suggested the alternative of culturally
sustaining pedagogy (CSP) as a way to continue to process of developing education systems that
honor cultural plurality. CSP had the goal of “supporting multilingualism and multiculturalism
in practice and perspective for students and teachers” (p. 88). Going further, Paris and Alim
(2014) brought forward a criticism suggesting just because a culture has been oppressed does not
mean teachers and students should accept that same culture’s oppression of others. The authors
cited hip-hop music, often used in the classroom as a culturally responsive literacy tool,
suggesting, “hip hop pedagogies have tended to be largely celebratory and nave ignored the
contradictory forces found within all popular cultural forms” (Paris & Alim, 2014, p. 93). This
reflected a key component of CSP, in that students must be taught to critically analyze all
culture, celebrate the good, but not allow the oppressive qualities to continue.
As Paris and Alim (2014) suggested a “loving critique” of Ladson-Billings (1995a)
theory, shortly after Ladson-Billings (2014) responded with an update of culturally relevant
pedagogy. She addressed criticisms of her theory suggesting a “remix” was necessary. One
criticism she addressed was her sole focus on African American students, acknowledging that
she concentrated her research on African American students because “the students who had been
least successful [were] likely to reveal important pedagogical principles for achieving success for
all students” (p. 76). She also made clear, that at the time, there was no research focusing on
these students. Ladson-Billings (2014) wished to bring those issues to light, hoping the
educational community could
learn from and not merely about African American students…By focusing on student
learning and academic achievement versus classroom and behavior management, cultural
competence versus cultural assimilation or eradication, and sociopolitical consciousness
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 59
rather than school-based tasks have no beyond-school application, I was able to see
students take responsibility for the deep interest in their education. (pp. 76-77)
Ladson-Billings (2014) suggested her theory continued to evolve through her work with a
spoken-word and hip-hops arts group at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where students in
this group were also enrolled in new teacher programs. Through this experience Ladson-Billings
(2014) explored new ways “of understanding how popular culture can be deployed to engage in
conversations about critical theoretical concepts such as hegemony, audit cultures, and
neoliberalism as well as to develop new pedagogical strategies” (p. 79). This experience
highlighted the need to continue developing CRP to changing ideas of culture, suggesting
Culturally sustaining pedagogy could be considered a new iteration of CRP. Ladson-Billings
(2014) praised Paris and Alim’s (2014) attempt to bring together CRP with the many identities
youth culture expresses today; however, she warned that researchers and educators must
thoroughly ground their pedagogical methods in theory. She urged teachers to examine their
privilege and that “pedagogies take on the dual responsibility of external performance
assessments as well as community—and student driven learning” (Ladson-Billings, 2014, p. 83).
Ladson-Billings’s (1995a) concept of critical consciousness merges with teacher beliefs
in that critical consciousness is an understanding of the impacts one’s beliefs have on actions. As
a teacher helps students toward critical consciousness, the teacher engages in his/her own
evaluation of critical consciousness by examining the beliefs he or she holds about students. This
examination then leads to a shift in teaching, allowing the teacher the space to engage in CRP.
Gay (2013) elaborated on this idea when she asked teachers to examine their beliefs about
diversity and how it molded their actions in the classroom. Therefore, it was important to
examine the components of the CRP for this dissertation so I knew what to look for, such as the
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 60
inclusion of culture in curriculum, and ways in which teachers supported student identity in the
classroom.
Research has shown significant value in incorporating culture into educational practice:
however, there are limitations in the research. A significant limitation in research on CRP is that
the research does not provide specific classroom strategies or “moves” that teachers use to
support student learning. CRP is more about adopting a mind-set as described by Milner (2010).
The research suggests teachers need to value students’ cultures while simultaneously helping
students navigate the dominant culture, but with the exception of Gay (2013), the research does
not provide tools and strategies, or in other words, the moves teachers make to support students.
To fill this gap in knowledge, another body of literature was needed to help marry CRT to
practice. Furthermore, as this study was not only concerned with beliefs, but how teachers
supported students in rigorous coursework, so another body of research exploring scaffolding
was needed.
Scaffolding
What teachers believe about their students may directly impact the tools they employ in
the classroom, including scaffolding strategies, a common practice proven to increase success in
diverse K-12 classrooms (Dixon, Yssel, McConnell, & Hardin, 2014; Logan, 2011). Yet, little
research exists on how to bring effective scaffolding strategies into the Advanced Placement
classroom. In an effort to understand this particular concern, this study explored teacher beliefs
about utilizing differentiation and scaffolding strategies in the Advanced Placement classroom,
or teacher moves, essentially what teachers actually do in the classroom to support all students.
This section begins with an exploration of the foundational works by Vygotsky (1962) and the
concept of “the zone of proximal development” (ZDP), then explores assisted performance as
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 61
described by Tharp and Gallimore (1991), followed by empirical studies exploring
differentiation and scaffolding.
The zone of proximal development originated in Vygotsky’s (1962) work with young
children where he asserted “with assistance every child can do more than he can by himself” (p.
103). Vygotsky termed this as working within the zone of proximal development where a child
constructed meaning with the help of a more experienced other. In his research working with
children to examine higher cognitive functions, Vygotsky found that young children could be as
successful solving harder problems with help, as children 3 years older solving the problems on
their own. He described this as an example of the zone of proximal development or “the
discrepancy between a child’s actual mental age and the level he reaches in solving problems
with assistance” (p. 103). More commonly this support is often described as “scaffolding” a
term coined by Wood, Bruner, and Ross (1976), based on the idea that scaffolding is a “process
that enables a child or novice to solve a problem, carry out a task or achieve a goal which would
be beyond his unassisted” (p. 90).
Other important voices in the exploration of ZDP include Tharp and Gallimore (1991)
who sought to understand how assisted performance influenced student learning. Tharp and
Gallimore (1991) summarized Vygotsky’s four stages around the type of assistance a learner
needed. For example, in the first phase a learner was assisted by a more experience other; in the
second the learner assisted him/herself; in the third stage, the behavior was internalized; and, in
the fourth the learner returned to stages 1-3, suggesting the ZDP is recursive. This whole process
was affected by the scaffolding provided by the more experienced other or the child during stage
2; however, Tharp and Gallimore (1991) suggested the term “assisted performance” was more
appropriate to describe the support than the “scaffolding” as suggested by Wood et al. (1976).
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 62
Tharp and Gallimore suggested this metaphor did not express the complexity of assisted
performance. They said, “Scaffolding suggests that the principal variations in adult actions are
matters of quantity…but many of the acts of the adult in assisting the child are qualitatively
different from one another” (p. 34). The authors proposed a theory of assisted performance as a
way to explain the support learners need to master a skill.
Tharp and Gallimore (1991) examined Vygotsky’s (1962) four phases and incorporated
their theory of assisted performance and responsive assistance. The authors suggested there were
several stages of assistance within the ZDP cycle, particularly between phrase 1 and 2 where a
learner moved from assistance from the other and self-assistance. Here, Tharp and Gallimore
(1991) suggested there was a third type of assistance: responsive assistance, where the more
experienced other had to observe the learner carefully to determine when it was time to step back
verses when it was time to intervene and provide specific guidance. Furthermore, they advised
the goal of the activity had to always be at the forefront of the adult’s mind as he or she made
suggestions to help the child achieve his/her current goal. The authors suggested this was a key
component in pedagogy. Knowing when to offer assistance was key, or it would threaten to
become interference, “for this reason, our definition of teaching emphasizes that teaching can be
said to occur when assistance is offered at points in the ZDP at which performance requires
assistance” (p. 41). Effective teachers needed to engage in constant assessment of the child’s
progress to determine when to intervene and when to step back. For the authors, this was the key
to providing appropriate assistance.
Tharp and Gallimore (1991) continued their work by providing specific strategies, or a
“theory of teaching” (p. 44) designed to assist performance. Six mechanisms were explored
including: modeling, contingency management, feeding-back, instructing, questioning, and
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 63
cognitive structuring. Using a sample classroom, the authors provided examples of each
strategy.
Tharp and Gallimore (1991) suggested modeling was a powerful tool, yet often found
“teachers demand that students perform skills without having observed an expert performance of
those skills within a relevant task context” (p. 49). An example provided in the text, illustrated
ways in which a teacher modeled a cognitive strategy to aid student comprehension.
Tharp and Gallimore described contingency management as a way to manage students
using rewards and punishment to assist students in developing desired behaviors. They clarified
that this was not operant conditioning because it was not designed to create new behaviors, but to
assist students in developing the skills needed to learn and progress through the ZDP. Returning
the sample classroom, the authors showed a teacher using the strategy to guide the children
toward reading comprehension, gently redirecting, correcting incorrect responses, and leading
the children through a discussion of their reading material.
Tharp and Gallimore (1991) provided several ways in which teachers could provide
feedback to students, through test data, verbal responses, and grades. They suggested there were
other ways this could be achieved, but noted that feedback was only assisted performance when
“the information provided is compared to some standard” (p. 55). Furthermore, they suggested
that responsive teaching—where a teacher solicits and accepts information from students—was a
type of feedback.
Tharp and Gallimore (1991) suggested though it was often believed teachers were
instructing when giving directions for assignments, real instruction that assisted students through
the ZDP was rare. For instruction to be assisted performance, “teachers [must] assume
responsibility for assisting performance, rather than expecting students to learn on their own” (p.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 64
57). This suggested that instructing was intentional, not just a passing of information from
teacher to student.
Tharp and Gallimore (1991) described questioning as a second linguistic strategy with
instructing and cognitive structuring. Questioning needs little explanation here, except that the
authors suggested questioning to qualify as assisted performance it needed to provoke “active
linguistic and cognitive response” (p. 59). The authors suggested there were two types of
questions, those that assist the learner and those that assess. They cautioned that understanding
the difference was important in assisting performance, because an assessment question expects
the learner to perform without help; but, teachers often used these questions more than those
questions that assisted.
Tharp and Gallimore (1991) suggested teachers needed to actively engage in cognitive
structuring; in other words, building of “structures for thinking and acting” (p. 63). The authors
suggested this was one of the most common practices in assisting performance (Tharp &
Gallimore, 1991). The authors also referred to this as “metacognition” or the idea of thinking
about one’s thinking. This included ways of helping students connect information provided in a
learning environment to their own life experiences. They indicate this could be most
successfully achieved through and was achieved through questioning and contingency
management (Tharp & Gallimore, 1991).
Through these six strategies Tharp and Gallimore (1991) offered practical, applicable
examples of assisted performance. They cautioned that these strategies were not to be view as
prescriptive and that teachers needed to considered the varying needs of their students and the
“complexity of the activities” (p. 70).
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 65
Vygotsky (1962) has long been considered foundational to understanding how children
learn, yet as Smagorinsky (2013) observed, “understanding what Vygotsky has to offer modern-
day teachers can be a challenge” (p. 192) partly because of dubious translations of his original
work (all written in Russian). Smagorinsky (2013) also suggested understanding Vygotsky in
modern education systems was challenging because of the nature of Vygotsky’s place in history
as a citizen of the Soviet Union in the first half of the 20
th
century. Smagorinsky (2013)
suggested this difference should not be ignored because “the values, goals and practices of the
context in which he [Vygotsky] developed his ideas thus stand in dramatic contrast to the
individualistic, free-market principles of the modern-day US and other parts of the English-
speaking world” (p. 192). In his assessment of this issue, Smagorinsky (2013) suggested ways in
which Vygotsky’s ideas remained important to K-8 English-speaking classrooms. Smagorinsky
(2013) identified five areas: “the use of speech as a tool for thinking, the role of emotion in
thinking, the social nature of thinking, an emphasis on meaningful activity, and ultimately what
the notion of the zone of proximal development means in the setting of the language arts
classroom” (p. 193).
The first area “speech as a tool,” Smagorinsky (2013) offered that teachers needed to
provide students with opportunities to develop language skills without the added stress of grades.
The author suggested students were often expected to produce final draft quality work both
orally and written, which did not give them the chance to explore language as a way to make
meaning. He suggested, “the notion of exploratory speech is central to the “writing to learn”
approach in which writers are granted the opportunity to think through writing, no matter what
the writing looks like at first glance (p. 194). The second area involved the links between
thinking and emotion. Vygotsky (1962) emotion could not be disconnected from cognition, and
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 66
Smagorinsky suggested teachers must continue to address this concept if students were to be
successful. Smagorinsky (2013) argued that students needed to feel confident about their
abilities as learners in order to be successful. This reflected Vygotsky’s concerns about “affect”
or feelings of inferiority in children. Smagorinsky (2013) continued his recommendations with
the suggestion that teachers develop classroom environments designed to promote empathy in
students as a way to combat feeling if inferiority in their learning. The author provided examples
of how to do this through specific group activities designed to promote healthy social
experiences. This further supported Vygotsky’s (1962) belief that learning was social and led to
Smagorinsky’s (2013) third area “mind in society” where he examined Vygotsky argument that
“thinking is social in origin: we learn not only words but ways of thinking, through our
engagement with the people who surround us” (Smagorinsky, 2013, p. 197). Smagorinsky
suggested that cognition was affected by culture and the American education system did not fully
take into account the cultural differences between students; as a result, students generated
negative feelings toward school including alienation and inferiority. He suggested for some
students it was easier to fit in because the school was designed with them in mind (particularly
for White middle class students) but for others who did not fit that mold, schools became places
they would rather avoid. The author suggested schools had to address these issues if they were
to provide productive learning environments for all students (Smagorinsky, 2013).
In the fourth area, which concerned the need to provide students with meaningful
activities. Smagorinsky (2013) suggested students needed to participate in learning that was
personally meaningful. The author advised,
schoolwork thus needs to be grounded in what students know from their experiences in
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 67
everyday activity. That knowledge becomes refined as students learn in school how to
take what they know and create abstractions that they can then apply to new situations.
(pp. 198-199)
To do this, Smagorinsky suggested teachers needed to revise their understanding of Vygotsky’s
theory of the zone of proximal development, taking into consideration how language, emotion,
experience, and meaning affect cognition. Smagorinsky (2013) suggested “that without attention
to the whole context of learning and the cultural history that has helped to produce it, one cannot
consider the facets of human development in social context that are central to a Vygotskian
outlook” (p. 200). Smagorinsky (2013) suggested teachers spend more time scaffolding with
students, created learning environments that helped build community, and provided students
opportunities to explore language without performance always being tied to grades.
Continuing the exploration of ZDP and assisted performance, Thompson’s (2013)
qualitative case study explored writing in a secondary classroom. Thompson’s work was a part
of a larger action research “designed to change the pedagogical practices of English teachers” (p.
252). The research question that guided this case study that applies to this dissertation was:
What meditational role do teachers or more capable others have in the development of pupils’
writing abilities? Though Thompson had two other questions, they both explore the student’s
experience rather than the teacher’s and were not applicable to the topic of this dissertation.
Thompson (2013) collected the data at the school where he taught students aged 12-13, at
a public secondary school in the United Kingdom. The study focused on one student, John, who
was a reluctant writer with lower than average writing level as determined by national tests,
though his reading level, at times, could be as high at a level six. Thompson did not offer an
explanation for the meaning of the levels, though inference suggested six was a high score.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 68
The class was composed of students who had tested at least one level below the national
average. The author chose this school, as the study was also action research into his practice as a
teacher, focusing on John because he was “a particularly complex case” (p. 253). Despite some
power imbalance, Thompson (2013) felt John would be willing to work with him and trust
Thompson to protect John’s feelings in front of the group. Thompson (2013) also felt since John
had accepted, though not used, his teacher’s constructive comments in the past, that John would
be receptive to working on a writing piece they would develop together. Thompson (2013)
described John as “easily distracted in classes…[having] a large oral vocabulary that was rarely
replicated in his writing [and] his handwriting was at time illegible” (p. 253). The student was
also described as exhibiting behavioral challenges, such as the inability to work in groups due to
his penchant for name-calling and lack of anger management.
To document John’s progress, Thompson (2013) placed John at a computer with two
cameras to capture spoken and computer interaction, which would allow Thompson a window
into John’s thinking processes. Thompson (2013) was looking for opportunities to observe and
participate in “critical incidents where the collaborative element of learning established
conditions of negotiation between student and teachers or significant other” (p. 254). Using a
four-part model, Thompson (2013) examined John’s behavior at the computer to identify
important moments in John’s writing development. He found John exhibited all four phases.
After repeated viewing, Thompson (2013) found John not only responded well to working on the
computer but also progressed through the stages of the ZDP. In the first stage, John worked with
Thompson to develop their dual narrative writing piece. Thompson (2013) was aware of his role
as the significant other. As the teacher, Thompson (2013) was very aware of his role, and
suggested “decisions of when to intervene and when to leave John alone to develop the text” (p.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 69
260) were important. Together they made a plan using bullet points to put the story in order. As
they worked Thompson (2013) asked John questions about the writing, suggesting possible
alternatives (which John rejected), and helping John to develop the roles of each character.
Often Thompson asked John clarifying questions and they discussed the next steps John would
take in his writing. Through this process Thompson (2013) developed his understanding of the
role of the significant other suggesting,
the concept of assisted performance, then is central to development within the ZDP.
Progression through a ZDP is dependent on both social interaction between a student and
their teachers and peers as well as the learner’s own history or context of how they feel or
perceive themselves as learners. (p. 271)
As a result of their work together John’s writing improved and he completed the task.
Thompson (2013) suggested this completion showed that John had successfully moved through
the ZDP.
In her qualitative study of urban, suburban, and rural middle school teachers, Roe (2010)
sought to understand how differentiation worked in the classroom. She approached her study
with three purposes: 1) to identify teachers’ understanding of differentiation, 2) to understand
their implementation of differentiated instruction for their students, especially those who
underachieve or those for whom English is their second language, across an academic year, and
3) to understand students’ and teachers’ views of challenges and successes of differentiation
attempts (p. 139). For the purposes of this dissertation I focused on her first two questions and
incorporated the teachers’ views from the third question. Roe (2010) defined differentiation as
everything teachers did in the classroom while also examining how this shifted across school
contexts from rural to urban schools.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 70
Roe (2010) identified her study as ethnographic in nature but also suggested it was cross-
case analysis because the author examined several classrooms in different locations with the goal
of understanding both the experiences of teachers and students. To do this, Roe (2010) collected
data from nine teachers from four different middle schools. The schools were located in the
Northwest with one school located in an urban area with a low socio-economic population with
many second-language learners. Roe did not provide details on size or grade level for this
school. Two schools were located in a suburban context in the same district. Roe (2010)
described these schools as having a range of socio-economic backgrounds with a large portion
receiving free and reduced lunch. Again, Roe (2010) did not provide specific numbers. Finally,
one school was located in a rural setting serving grades 6-8, many of whom were Native
American students from the nearby reservation.
Using purposeful sampling, the author chose teachers of both genders (three male; six
female) and varying degrees of experience. Data was collected during individual interviews,
observations and informal conversations. The author conducted 135 classroom observations,
semi-structured interviews with all participating teachers, and also interviewed 30 students. The
study also included document analysis.
Roe (2010) divided her findings into three sections, each exploring a different aspect of
differentiation. The discussed classroom climate, with Roe (2010) suggesting “instead of
immediately and exclusively attending to differentiation to help students read, write and attend to
social studies, one many occasions these teachers settled for behavior compliance devoid of
students’ intellectual engagement” (p. 146). Her second finding suggested teachers focused on
an “affective dimension” in that teacher made and effort to know their students, however Roe
(2010) noted this did not appear to be linked to academic learning. For example, teachers had
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 71
students write a narrative at the beginning of the year as a way to get to know their students, but
the process ended there. Roe (2010) also suggested teachers “invoked students’ backgrounds to
further explain achievement concerns” (p. 147) suggesting teachers engaged in deficit thinking.
Roe (2010) further noted that teachers seemed more concerned with distractions in the
classroom, which in turn limited their ability to respond “to the personal needs and educational
gaps of their students” (p. 147).
In her third finding Roe (2010) suggested teachers’ differentiation practices were driven
by the use of activities as a means to complete tasks rather than ensure student learning with the
teachers’ primary concern being the completion of an assignment rather than the develop of
literacy skills. Roe (2010) further suggested, “when they did explain or model one [a literacy
process], it was primarily reactive rather than proactive, offered to the whole class, and not
prompted by previously obtained formative assessment results” (p. 148). Continuing this trend
Roe (2010) also suggested that teachers were not making adjustments to the lessons to address
student needs. She summarized her findings as follows:
1) Teachers’ attention to differentiation goes beyond primary cognitive aspects so
prevalent in existing research, 2) the wider school context plays a role in a teacher’s
differentiation options, 3) a selected activity provides a focal point for differentiation, 4)
teachers tend to differentiate for product completion rather than planning for the use of
literacy processes, and 5) these teachers seldom link assessment findings, affective
concerns, and instructional choices. (p. 148)
Roe (2010) did express limitations to the study in that her understanding was limited to what she
learned from teachers and students; it would be difficult to generalize the findings to other
contexts because differentiation is often context specific.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 72
In an effort to identify differentiation strategies (DI), once thought only to apply to
special education, coupled with culturally relevant teaching (CRT) Santamaria (2009) explored
the ways in which DI and CRT could be used to support all students. The author selected two
elementary schools in Southern California specifically for their success at exceeding annual
progress targets, achieved high levels of proficiency on state tests, and continued to show growth
over time. Both schools served diverse low socio-economic populations. Santamaria (2009)
stated the main reason for choosing both schools was to dispel “the myth that high levels of
poverty/and/or CLD [culturally and linguistically diverse] student populations lead to lower
student achievement” (p. 231).
At the first school, nearly 20% of the population were ELLs, and more than a third
qualified for free or reduced price lunch, the common metric used to determine a child’s socio-
economic level. Santamaria (2009) spent one day a week at the school for 1 school year where
she observed, interviewed, and collected documents to discover how teachers supported students.
The author also stated that she was at the school for another purpose in addition to the study: to
support the school as it implemented DI practices.
The second school, while similar to the first, was both larger, and move diverse, with
about half the students eligible for free and reduced lunch, 43.3% ELL, and 70.1% Latino.
Santamaria (2009) spent 2 academic years at the school, observing 4 hours every week, while
also helping “to transform the neighborhood school with declining enrollment into a district
magnet school to attract families outside the neighborhood” (p. 232).
Santamaria (2009) used qualitative methods to collect her data, which included
interviews with teachers, administration, parents, and students. She also conducted observations
and collected documents. In her findings she identified five processes that supported students
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 73
using both DI and culturally responsive teaching, “1) Clarifying key concepts; 2) emphasizing
critical and creative thinking; 3) engaging all learners; 4) balance between student and teacher-
selected tasks; and 5) using assessment as a teaching tool” (pp. 233-234). Santamaria (2009)
found that teachers used a variety of DI strategies to support students including using models,
accessing prior knowledge, making connections between the content and students’ lives, writing
frames, flexible grouping, and presenting information in multiple forms. The author also noted
many CRT strategies which included accessing classroom helpers from culturally and
linguistically diverse backgrounds, encouraging students to see their bilingualism as an asset and
by designing assignments that allowed students to “grasp learning through their own cultural
filter” (p. 235). Setting high expectations was common with teachers posting standards and
goals.
Throughout the literature on ideology, CRP, and scaffolding several themes emerged.
First, the importance of positive classroom interactions that help create opportunities for student
learning; and second, the importance of teachers engaging in asset pedagogies and dynamic
thinking (Johnson & Bolshakova, 2015; Milner, 2010, 2011). In addition to these themes the
connections between concepts of CPR and ideology suggest to be successful, critical
consciousness is a part of developing asset thinking (Gay, 2013; Milner 2010).
Whether in engaging in culturally relevant pedagogy or focusing on scaffolding
strategies, Gay (2013) and Milner (2013) suggest that belief in students’ abilities must be
nurtured and reflected upon by the teacher. Though Vygotsky (1967) it is understood that the
interactions between the learner and the more experienced other also required a degree of
positivity, with the significant other helped to build knowledge. Milner’s (2011) study of Mr.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 74
Hall reinforces this concept as Mr. Hall focused on positive interactions with his students, which
reflected asset ideologies and dynamic thinking about students and their academic capabilities.
Conceptual Framework
In this section I present my conceptual framework that guided this study. As suggested
by Merriam (2009) the conceptual framework is developed from the stance taken by the
researcher. Maxwell elaborates on this idea further when he described the conceptual framework
as a “visual or written product” (p. 39) that describes what a researcher will study and includes
the key components that frame the study.
My conceptual framework draws together three interconnected concepts: ideology,
scaffolding, and culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP). Throughout the literature on these
concepts one theme repeatedly surfaced, that of the importance of the quality of interactions
between students and teachers in creating opportunities for student learning. This conceptual
framework uses this theme to explain how ideology is revealed through the supports teachers use
in AP English classrooms. I argue that teachers cannot fully support students unless they have
engaged in asset thinking as suggested by Milner (2010). The beliefs teachers hold about their
students shape the supports they choose to use to create meaningful learning opportunities
(Milner, 2010).
Figure 1 illustrates the intersections of ideology, scaffolding, and CRP, in a Venn
diagram. CPR is not actually meant to be used with White students, though I argue it simply
good teaching, and as suggested by Burton et al. (2002) good teachers use many different
strategies to support students in AP. Scaffolding on the other hand, are strategies that work for
all learners. I argue that students will be most successful when all three areas overlap.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 75

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework.
As suggested by Milner (2010), teachers need to engage in positive mind-sets, or
dynamic thinking. I argue that the power of ideology and beliefs has a profound impact on
learning opportunities and that beliefs about students directly impact the strategies teachers use
to support students in Advanced Placement. If a teacher utilizes CPR and scaffolding strategies
also reflects ideology, and the value teachers place on creating quality learning opportunities for
their students. Drawing on Ladson-Billings (1995a) theory or CRP, in particular the concept of
critical consciousness, I argue that part of good teaching involves teachers engaging in critical
consciousness as both instructors in individuals. In other words, teachers engage in teaching
students about critical consciousness so students will develop the skill, but the teacher must also
engage in the developing their own internal understanding. As suggested by Gay (2013) asking
teaching to examine their beliefs on diversity issues, begins the process of developing critical
consciousness.
Teacher beliefs are founded on personal experiences and values (Bartolomé, 2008) held
both consciously and unconsciously. Teachers also often unknowingly set student expectations
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 76
based on their personal experiences (Hatt 2012; Rist, 2000). In turn these expectations form the
basis for the types of strategies teachers implement because teachers make decisions based on
what they think their students can achieve. This creates the overlap as illustrated in Figure 1. It is
in this space that learning opportunities are created for students in AP, in particular low-income,
White, Black, and Latino students who struggle in AP despite increase in access to the courses.
To create successful AP classes that support all students, I expect teachers to exhibit four
specific beliefs. The beliefs are: 1) the teacher believes in the importance of opening AP to all
students (often referred to as open access), 2) the teacher believes in the importance of students
feeling like they belong in AP, 3) the teacher engages in asset ideology, and 4) the teacher
believes in the value of incorporating scaffolding and CRP strategies, the latter particularly
focused on Latino and Black students.
Opening access to more students is a major goal of the College Board (2014) and the
organization has consistently advised schools to remove barriers to students’ access to AP
courses, such as teacher recommendations, test scores, and other placement data to create an
equitable program (College Board, 2014; Klopfenstein, 2003). However, this also requires
teachers to believe in the importance of opening access to all students, regardless of students’
previous academic performance, family background, or socio-economic level, or ethnicity. To
support low-income White, Black, and Latino populations teachers need to believe in the value
of the program, as it applies to all students, not just a select few designated as high achieving.
This connects directly to the second belief in that teachers need to believe in the importance of
helping students feel and believe that they belong in academically challenging courses. As
suggested by Milner (2010) one aspect of creating asset mind-sets is students need to feel and
believe in sense of familial and academic belonging in their classes if they are to have a chance
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 77
at success. This is also echoed in CRP through in the need to value students’ cultures and create
a sense of community within the classroom (Ladson-Billings, 1995a).
Finally, to help low-income White, Black, and Latino students achieve in AP courses
teachers, AP teachers must believe in the importance of supporting not just White, middle class
students, who make up the majority (58%) of students taking courses (College Board, 2014), but
also the increasing number of low-income White, Black, and Latino students who are new to the
rigors of college level coursework taught at the high school level.
These beliefs not only need to be expressed by teachers but also evident in teacher
moves, or the strategies they employ in their daily teaching. As CRP is a type of support
(Ladson-Billings, 1995a), one of the challenges at play in CRP is that few researchers provide
specific CRP teaching strategies, but rather suggest it is a way of being in the classroom
(Ladson-Billings, 1995a; Paris, 2012). I expect to see teachers engage in strategies designed to
help students connect to culture, by incorporating literature from multiple view-points,
examining how culture plays a role in understanding literature, while also allowing students to
express their identities (Gay, 2013).
In terms of scaffolding, I expect to see teachers enact support strategies, for example, co-
construction of writing tasks, graphic organizers, and discussions aimed at building the social
nature of learning. These are strategies that encourage students to enter in the ZDP with support.
I also expect to see teachers engaging in scaffolding strategies described by Tharp and Gallimore
(1991). These include the following: questioning, modeling, contingency management, and
feedback (Tharp & Gallimore, 1991). Furthermore, as suggested by Smagorinsky (2013),
strategies using language as a tool should be in use. Smagorinsky (2013) also suggested
scaffolding was present when teachers gave students opportunities to meaningfully connect on a
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 78
personal level to the material. Interestingly he also made links between cultures and learning,
suggesting Vygotsky believed children needed opportunities to gain self-esteem, find ways to
connect meaningfully to material on a personal level, and increase their affect (Smargorinsky,
2013).
In order for teachers to support low-income, White, Black, and Latino populations in
Advanced Placement English classrooms, teachers must engage in asset thinking. This requires a
specific set of ideological principals, particular those of asset mind-sets (Milner, 2010) and
strategies build on theories of scaffolding and culturally relevant pedagogy (Ladson-Billings,
1995a).

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 79
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS
The purpose of Chapter Three is to explain the qualitative research design used in this
study, including the sample, data collection, and methods. I examined how teacher beliefs were
revealed through the strategies teacher used to support students in AP English courses. The
following research question guided this study: How are teacher beliefs about students revealed
through the approaches used to support low-income, White, Black, and Latino students in
Advanced Placement English courses?
Research Design
As suggested by Merriam (2009), qualitative research seeks to understand how an
individual’s experiences shape his or her understanding of the world through the meaning he or
she attached to his or her experiences. Since beliefs are deeply influenced by experience,
qualitative methods were particularly appropriate to understanding teacher beliefs and their
influence on practice.
To answer the research question, I used qualitative methods in case studies of two AP
English teachers. In this bounded system I examined how two teachers’ beliefs about students
influence the approaches they used. The case study was also suited to exploring educational
issues because case studies allowed for a level of examination that, as suggested by Merriam
(2009), could “perhaps even improve practice…[and] inform policy” (p. 51). Furthermore, as
suggested by Pajares, because beliefs were deeply connected to teacher practice, a case study
allowed the researcher to focus on a teacher’s professional practice.
How a teacher experiences the world could directly connected to the approaches he or she
used in the classroom. Since this research question was not concerned with testing a theory,
qualitative research was the most appropriate means to collect data focused on the experiences of
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 80
the participants. As articulated by Creswell (2014) qualitative research is “inductive style, a
focus on individual meaning, and the importance of rendering the complexity of a situation”
(p. 4). Considering this inquiry was founded in belief structures, interviews, observations, and
document/artifact collection were appropriate tools to gather first and second hand experience of
teacher beliefs. Rich, thick description was necessary to understand ideology, as it was so
personal to each teacher.
Sample and Sampling Strategy
This section of Chapter Three will describe the sampling strategy used in this study,
including the criteria used to select the site. I will explain why these particular criteria were
important to understanding the phenomenon under study.
For this study I used purposeful sampling and the study took place at the high school
level. I studied two teachers at two different schools. I used purposeful sampling because, as
suggested by Merriam (2009), purposeful sampling gave me the opportunity to select a site and
sample where I assumed that I could learn the most about the topic under study. In addition to
general purposeful sampling, I used network sampling to gain access to sites that fit the needed
criteria. Network sampling allowed me to easily contact potential participants who could then put
me into contact with other potential participants (Merriam, 2009). I started by contacting the
district department chair because she was extremely well placed. Through email, she reached out
to multiple area teachers and department chairs both in and outside my district. Though I had
initially hoped to study teachers outside my district, due to the limited number of schools in the
area that met the criteria, and working for the largest high school district, I had to include
teachersa who also taught in the same district where I worked. As a result, I found one teacher in
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 81
a neighboring district, and one teacher in my district, though we did not teach at the same school
site.
Interested teachers responded back to her. Several of who were district chairs who said
they would pass the world on to their AP teachers, but I did not hear back from those sources
beyond the promise to share the information; however, two teachers responded. I sent out
personal emails to each teacher requesting an initial meeting to discuss the possibility of
participating in the study. At first only one teacher replied, and I set up an initial meeting.
Shortly after we conducted our first interview. I still had not heard from a second teacher, but
shortly after my first observation of the first teacher, a second teacher responded to my second
request.
I met with both teachers, separately, in their classrooms to discuss the purpose of the
study. Both immediately agreed and we scheduled interviews shortly thereafter.
Settings
The northern section of California where this study was conducted was rural, with a
majority White population. The area is geographically large, but sparsely populated with about
47 people per square mile, with nearly 30% living in rural areas (Jefferson County, 2016
1
). With
only three incorporated cities in the county and a population just under 180,000 in the county,
though there is a medium sized city in the county that houses most of the population (70%) the
area is rural and surrounded by national forests (Jefferson County, 2016).
Many communities struggled with high levels of poverty, illegal drug use and
homelessness—though exact numbers are hard to quantify, organizations in the community have
suggested that just under 1000 people are identified as homeless; approximately 10% were

1
Report author is a pseudonym
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 82
children (Jefferson, 2016). Furthermore though the exact number of illegal drug users is difficult
to collect, rising rates of people admitted to drug treatment facilities, drug related deaths and
injuries suggest the area is suffering from high rates of drug abuse. In some cases double the
state average (Jefferson County, 2016) The county’s most recent demographic estimates from
2015 showed 18% of the population lived in poverty and for children that number was over 23%,
both higher than the state average (U.S Census, 2015). These issues affected student-learning
opportunities, especially if the students experience any of the above life-conditions personally or
in their families (Murphy & Tobin, 2011). As suggested by much of research presented in
Chapter Two, teachers often viewed low-income students through a deficit lens; Milner (2010)
described how deficit mind-sets affected both low-income, White, Black, and Latino students.
Furthermore, as suggested by Hatt (2012) socio-economic status played a role in learning
opportunities, even when the teacher and student were of the same ethnic background.
The settings for these two case studies were two high schools each situated in the same
county though located in different communities. The site for the first case study, Jefferson High
School
2
was located in a small community of approximately 10,000 residents just north of a
medium sized city with a population just under 90,000 people (U.S. Census, 2016). The second
site, Washington High School was located in the town of approximately 90,000 (U.S. Census,
2016).
In order to understand how teacher beliefs are revealed in the approaches used to support
low-income, White, Black, and Latino students, the schools met the following criteria. At least
50% of the student population qualified for free or reduced lunch. Due to limited teacher
response, I broadened the criterion; about 60% of students at Jefferson High School received free

2
All names are pseudonyms.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 83
or reduced price lunches, and about 42% received them at Washington High School; however,
the school the previous year reported 50% (Ed-Data, 2017). As suggested by the Kaiser Family
Foundation (2016), Black and Hispanic students were significantly more likely to live in poverty
than their White peers, thus the free and reduced price lunch was a strong indicator of not only
low-income students, but also increased the likelihood that there would be White, Black, and
Latino students in AP courses.
Furthermore, each school serviced White, Black and Latino students. The 2015-2016
school year was the most recent year to obtain demographic data. At Jefferson High School there
were 644 student enrolled. The student population was 70% White, 14% Hispanic, 7.5% Native
American, 4% Asian-Pacific Islander, 2% Black, and 2.5% identifying as being of two or more
races. Washington High School’s demographics were as follows. Washington High School
serviced approximately 1200 students, and received targeted Title 1 funding. The school had
2.9% English language learners. The school’s ethnic breakdown included 59% White, 20%
Hispanic/Latino, almost 4% Black, 2.9% identifying as two or more races, 7.3% Asian Pacific
Islander, and 3.6% Native American (Ed-Data, 2017).
The composition of the classroom was important to this study and each class observed
included three to four low-income, White, Black, and/or Latino students in order to effectively
answer the research question. The settings may have included other unduplicated populations
such as English Language learners and foster youth, though it was not a requirement of the study.
The size of the school did not matter nor did the developed environment (urban, rural, suburban).
The school sites had established AP English programs and included AP expansion as a
part of the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP), however the specific percentage is not
important. This criterion was needed because it would also increase the likelihood that low-
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 84
income, White, Black, and Latino students participate in the AP English program. Schools that
were focused AP expansion would be more likely to be in the process of trying to create access
for historically underrepresented populations which include low-income White, Black, and
Latino students. This criterion also helped ensure the necessary classroom composition was
available to study. Both sites met all of the listed criteria.
Participants
Specific criteria for participant selection were limited. Obviously, the most important
criterion was the teacher’s course assignment. Both participants taught at least one section of AP
Literature and Composition at the 12
th
grade level. Years of experience were not important,
though as suggested by Simon and Johnson (2015) less experienced teachers tended to be less
effective. Both teachers were veterans of the classroom with their experience at or above 20
years. Anecdotal evidence suggests that in many schools, only the more experienced and well-
regarded teachers are given AP courses; however, this study did not require the teacher to be
either experienced or perceived as a “good teacher” by administration or colleagues. In addition,
though the College Board (2016) encouraged administrators to provide teachers with AP
training, because it was not a requirement for a school to be able to offer or for teachers to be
able to teach AP courses, I did not require it of the participating teachers. The two teachers I
studied both participated at least once in AP training. The first teacher attended 2 one-day
trainings, while the second teacher participated in an AP Summer Institute and took a refresher
course a year later. Both teachers had only been teaching AP for 8 and 4 years respectively,
though they both were 20-year veterans of the classroom.

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 85
Data Collection and Protocols
The purpose of this study was to explore how teacher beliefs shaped the approaches used
to support low-income White, Black, and Latino populations in Advanced Placement English
courses. To understand this research question, I collected data from teacher interviews,
classroom observations, and documentation. Merriam (2009) suggested researchers collect data
first hand through observations and secondhand through interviews with those involved. Miles,
Huberman, and Saldaña (2014) seconded this notion, suggesting triangulation of data was a tool
to confirm findings. Miles et al. (2014) further asserted that if conflicts arose between the
interview data and the observation data, triangulation of the data helped the researcher find the
mistakes in the inquiry. The following section explores how this study captured interview,
observation, and document/artifact data.
Interviews
Bogdan and Biklen (2007) suggested interviews should be “used to gather descriptive
data in the subjects’ own words so that the researcher can develop insights on how subjects
interpret some piece of the world” (p. 103). This directly matched the purpose of this inquiry; to
uncover ideology participant interviews were vital. For this inquiry the interviews acted as tool
to gather information about teacher ideology by asking questions centered around what teachers
believed an AP student should be able to do and what role the teacher played in facilitating
learning. Questions also focused on teacher backgrounds, what teachers felt students should
know upon entrance into an AP class, and how teachers supported low-income, White, Black,
and Latino students, especially those new to the rigors of AP, though scaffolding practices, and
the role of culture in the classroom. Some questions also directly referenced Culturally Relevant
Pedagogy.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 86
Over the course of the study I conducted two formal, semi-structured, hour-long
interviews. One interview occurred before observations and the other after observations
concluded. Both pre-observation meeting took place in the teachers’ respective classrooms. The
final interview for teacher 1, Carol Smith
3
took place in a local coffee shop and for teacher 2,
Jason Norton, in the classroom. Both interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. For
teacher 1 the first interview lasted approximately 30 minutes and the second approximately 60
minutes. For teacher 2, the first interview lasted approximately 60 minutes and the second
approximately 100 minutes.
Informal interviews were conducted periodically, before and/or after observation
sessions, though audio recordings were not collected during these interviews. Taking the advice
of Patton (2002), I used note taking during both formal and informal interviews as a way to
maintain a steady pace, monitor my speed, and ensure I did not interrupt the participant. Notes
also provided a way to record other non-verbal behaviors. Patton (2002) also suggested the
researcher used the note taking as way to “facilitate later analysis, including locating important
quotations from the tape itself” (p. 383) of which I included as evidence of rich, and thick
description.
In an effort to avoid confusion I framed the question sections in advance of the interview.
Before the interview began I outlined for the participant the line of questions, using transitions to
move from one section to the next. The interviews began with a few questions about teaching
background and training, before moving into the more complex questions about practices and
beliefs.

3
Teacher names are pseudonyms
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 87
I used four categories to frame questions, beginning with easier less confrontational
questions as suggested by other researchers (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Merriam, 2009; Weiss,
1994). Questions were designed to give the participants latitude to describe their experiences in
rich detail, with several hypothetical situations as a means to explore their beliefs. Several
questions also focused on allowing for “I believe” statements from the participants.
The interview protocol was semi-structured; however, the order of questions was
determined in advance of the interviews (Merriam, 2009). I relied on the types of questioned
outlined by Merriam (2009) particularly those of “idea position” (p. 97). These questions in
particular allowed me to uncover more about what each teacher believed about student learning
and the need to differentiate in their classes. Additionally, “what if?” questions were included to
give participants an opportunity to hypothesize about specific situations that revealed
information about beliefs and practices. Both of these types of questions provided a non-
confrontational way to explore their beliefs. Additionally, asking for specific examples of
strategies revealed which teachers engaged in critical examination of culturally relevant
pedagogy and scaffolding strategies. As I articulated in my conceptual framework, I looked to
understand the links between ideology, scaffolding, and culturally relevant pedagogy, through
the lens of student and teacher interactions. As the literature in Chapter Two suggested, strong,
positive student teacher relationships were integral in developing asset pedagogies and
incorporating pedagogy designed to support low-income, White, Black, and Latino students.
Observations
The old adage “actions speak louder than words” rang true in the case of exploring
ideology. Though interviews allowed for a conversation of beliefs, actions could also reflect
ideology. As stated by Merriam (2009) “observational data represent a firsthand encounter with
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 88
the phenomenon of interest rather than a secondhand account of the work obtained in an
interview” (p. 117). As is human nature, participants may have withheld or altered information,
looking to provide the researcher with what they thought the researcher wanted to hear. As a
means to triangulate the data, observations complimented interviews to confirm or disprove the
second-hand account shared in interviews. Observations were conducted during eight sessions
with each teacher. Class periods varied depending on the teacher’s schedule and the number of
AP sections taught; however, all periods were AP Literature and Composition (12
th
grade). Each
observation period lasted approximately 56 minutes, though in some cases, depending on the bell
schedule periods averaged around 45 to 50 minutes.
In an effort to focus solely on the teachers’ behaviors I positioned myself near the back or
side of the room where I could easily observe the teachers’ actions, record details of their
classroom setting, observe student engagement, and teacher-student interactions. During
observations I took notes on a computer and also hand-drew the classroom layout, noting the
position of desks, teacher workspace, doors and windows. On the computer, I noted more details
about the setting, teacher descriptions, student teacher interactions, teaching strategies, and as
much as possible, recorded dialogue, questions, and teacher movements around the room.
Observations were particularly helpful in understanding how teachers construct and maintain
positive or negative relationships with their students.
Data Analysis
The data manifested in interview transcripts, and field notes from observations. As
suggested by Creswell (2014) data analysis often unfolded through the process of research as I
began to narrow my focus while examining data. Creswell also suggested analysis was recursive
with the researcher engaging in a cyclical process of inquiry. With this in mind, I focused on
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 89
creating a system of organization for the data before reading through the material. Interviews
were transcribed using an online transcription service. During observations, notes were
compiled digitally using the commenting tool in the word processing program. Margin
comments focused on distilling themes, which were coded later using open coding.
As suggested by Merriam (2009) the analysis process began inductively with opening
coding of interview transcripts and observation notes. Corbin and Strauss (2008) suggested
analytical tools could help the researcher manage large amounts of data. Codes developed from
the literature presented in Chapter Two provided the first layer of axial coding; for example,
deficit thinking, mindsets, teaching strategies, scaffolding, and cultural relevant pedagogy.
These preliminary codes included concepts connected to the conceptual framework described in
Chapter Two, in particular codes that dealt with the ways in which teachers engaged in asset
thinking versus deficit thinking such as beliefs about working hard and notions of smartness.
These open codes developed as I analyzed and questioned the data using four strategies
suggested by Corbin and Strauss (2008). The first, constant comparisons occurred during
observations where I compared what I saw in the last session to what took place during the next.
This also helped in analysis when I compared what teachers said in interviews to what they did
in the classroom. The second technique was to examine words, specifically questioning what
they meant and if what I thought they meant was the same as what the participant intended. This
was particularly powerful in education where teachers often have their language of teaching
(Corbin and Strauss, 2008). Using Corbin and Strauss’s strategy of scanning the transcripts for
repeated phrases and words, helped lead me a deeper level of analysis. The third strategy
involves what Corbin and Strauss called “waving the red flag” (p. 80), suggesting the research be
mindful of words such as “always” or “never” and question it when these words appear in the
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 90
data, so I knew to look deeper. Finally, I carefully examined emotions. Beliefs and
relationships—two key concepts in this study—were highly sensitive and provoked strong
reactions in the data. Corbin and Strauss suggested “emotions and feeling cue the analysts as to
the meaning of events to persons” (p. 83) which reflected the purpose of qualitative research and
its goal to understand how participants experience the world.
These strategies provided the codes needed to begin the process of looking for patterns.
Merriam suggested these patterns result in themes or in other words, findings that answer the
research question. This formed the axial codes used to group the open codes into thematic groups
of ideology, scaffolding, and culturally relevant pedagogy. Some axial codes included using
Milner’s (2010) mindsets and Ladson-Billings’s (1995a) concept of critical consciousness. I also
used Hatt’s (2012) concept of smartness, and Bartolomé’s (2008) suggestion that beliefs arise out
of one’s experience of world, also created axial codes.
Then, returning to the data, I used these categories to sort the data moving from coding,
which Merriam (2009) suggests in more inductive, to deductive, where I began to incorporate the
categories into subsequent observations and interviews. I reached for saturation when Merriam
suggested the researcher has entered a “deductive mode” at which point an understanding of the
results developed. This move toward deductive understanding began to take shape through the
analytic memos when I began to match up what both teachers said versus what they did in the
classroom. Once I could establish their ideology, which moved between asset and deficit, I then
returned to the observation data and examined their actions against their words. I also looked for
the ways in which their words from interviews were also reflected in their words and actions in
the classroom.

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 91
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations
This study had two important limitations that affected the results of the study. The first, a
suggested by Creswell (2014) and Merriam (2009) is inherent in qualitative research, that of
generalizability. As a qualitative study, generalizability of the research findings was limited to
the study participants. Second, I relied on teachers to be truthful in their interviews, however,
that could not be guaranteed.
Delimitations
I was the primary instrument for data collection and I constructed the interview and
observation protocols. There are five primary delimitations I identified as having a possible
effect on this study.
1. As a qualitative researcher and an AP teacher, my personal biases may have influence
the way I collected and analyzed data.
2. I may have added or left out questions in the protocols to obtain more detailed
responses.
3. There was time limitation, including the availability of teachers for observations and
interviews. Furthermore, with limited time in the field it is possible I missed the
opportunity to collect data that would support or refute my argument.
4. As the only researcher in this study I was not able to capture all the data available
during observations and interviews. In interviews, the study would have benefited
from additional questions when markers were present. This was especially possible
during observations when there were multiple interactions I was not able to carefully
detail.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 92
5. As a new researcher my lack of experience affected where I focused my attention in
the study, thus influencing what I did, or did not learn. In particular this occurred with
observations when collecting verbatim interactions, which took practice, resulting in
some observations having less verbatim transcription.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
As suggested by Merriam (2009) credibility and trustworthiness are synonymous with
validity, which in qualitative research is ambiguous, “because human nature is not static”
(p. 221); therefore, this study focused on using observations, interviews and artifacts to
triangulate the data. Additionally, engaging in an examination of the researcher’s relationship to
the study has been taken into consideration as a possible source of bias. According to Merriam
(2009) “investigators need to explain their biases, dispositions, and assumptions regarding the
research to be undertaken” (p. 219). This was particularly salient as I am also an AP teacher,
with experience working at a school site with colleagues who had very polarized ideologies on
equal access and differentiation, where gate-keeping practices were often implied. These
experiences lead to the research question and must be clarified to ensure credibility.
Creswell (2014) suggests qualitative researchers must exam their positionality moving
beyond just looking at biases, but also examine their own position within the study. As a fellow
AP teacher, I bring with me a certain degree of bias and my background could influence how I
not only interpret the data, but also, as suggested by Creswell (2014) my position with in the
study could directly affect how the study unfolds. As I began the study I created a process of
reflective writing. This allowed for frequent reflection aimed at helping me to not only
recognize my biases, but how my biases could influence my data collection and analysis. After
every observation I wrote memos to myself, careful to check biases and ask questions of my
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 93
interpretations of their behaviors. As I coded data I often took breaks to write my thoughts and
kept an journal. This journal writing continued into the writing of the dissertation. Questions like
the following guided my reflections.
• Am I being un-empathetic?
• Am I being hard on the teachers because I disagree with their practice?
• Am I being too positive in my comments and codes because I like what the teachers
are doing, because they are doing what I do as a classroom teacher?
• Does this person remind me of myself? How is this affecting my data collection?
As suggested by Creswell (2014) researchers must work to avoid engaging in
confirmation bias, or looking for what we already expect to see. One of the ways I worked to
avoid doing this came in the sampling choice. Rather than look for exemplar teachers, I choose
the teachers based on the school site, with the only requirement being that the teacher taught an
AP course. This allowed the study to unfold without the natural biases that come from entering
the field already knowing what others—particularly those of administrators and colleagues—
thought of the teachers and their level of competence.
Ethics
To ensure this study was conducted ethically each teacher was informed of the goals of
the study, how the information would be used, and assured that no identifying details would be
shared. Additionally, each participant was apprised of the risks involved—of which there could
be discomfort regarding questions about personal beliefs and professional practices. Participants
were assured that their identities would not be reveal by the researcher, though they could choose
to share their involvement. Because this study was concerned with teacher beliefs and practice,
which could (if viewed as unflattering to the participant) be professionally detrimental, the
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 94
identity of participants was kept confidential and results private until the study was complete.
This study followed the “Ethical Issue Checklist” suggested by Merriam (2009) with particular
attention paid to explaining the purpose of the project, obtaining informed consent, and
maintaining confidentiality.
A major ethical consideration was the location of my study. As a teacher in one of the
major districts in the area, this impacted where I complete my fieldwork; therefore, I decided not
to conduct the study at the same site where I work, though I did study a teacher at a site within
the same district. The other teacher was located in a neighboring district. The study took place at
two schools in different districts with similar demographics. Should the participants request to
see the study I will provide a copy of the completed study: however, the raw observation data
will be kept confidential.
As I am was studying the very sensitive subject of beliefs, how I entered and left the field
carried special weight. It was extremely important to me to enter the field not as a fellow AP
teacher in the same geographic area, but as a researcher exploring a specific phenomenon. I
worked to set personal boundaries between my professional life and my academic
responsibilities of this study. This was primarily achieved by limiting conversations and
comments about my own experience as an AP teacher or employee of an area district during the
study; however some teacher talk did occur before and after observations.
In the protocols, I was clear with the participants that I was not in their classrooms in any
evaluative capacity or with any connections to the school district. I did not share raw data with
any district personnel, site administrators, or other educators beyond those involved with the
completion of this study. I also collected and analyze data with as much impartiality as is
possible, working to recognize and confront my biases as they arose.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 95
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
The purpose of this dissertation was to gain understanding about how teacher beliefs
shape how teachers support low-income, White, Black and Latino students in AP English
classes. According to the conceptual framework of this dissertation, I suggested that at the
intersection of ideology, culturally relevant pedagogy, and scaffolding, student learning
opportunities occur. In this chapter I present the findings of this study.
This dissertation is a qualitative study of two high school Advanced Placement English
teachers, both of whom teach AP Literature and Composition to 12
th
grade students. They taught
in two high schools in different districts within the same county. Geographically and
demographically the schools were similar, though one was smaller than the other. For both cases
I began with pre-observation interviews, followed by 8 hour long observations conducted over
the course of one month. The study concluded with post interviews with each teacher after
completing 8 class period observations in each classroom. During the classroom observations, I
collected artifacts related to lessons, handouts, and photographs of notes and graphic organizers
on the board.
I will address each case separately with a brief description of the community. Then I will
present the findings and analysis of each case study. This will be followed by a cross analysis of
each case study. The data in this chapter addresses the following research question: How do
teacher beliefs about students shape the approaches they use to support low-income, White,
Black, and Latino students in Advanced Placement English courses?
Case Study #1: Mrs. Carol Smith, Twelfth Grade AP Literature and Composition
Mrs. Carol Smith was a teacher at Jefferson High School, a rural high school, servicing
grades 9-12. The students attended 6 periods a day for 59 minutes each period. The Monday
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 96
schedule was shorter to provide time for teacher professional development in the afternoon,
while the Friday schedule was shorter to provide a 36-minute advisory period.
The 2015-2016 school year was the most recent year to obtain demographic data. During
the 2015-2016 school year, there were 644 student enrolled of which approximately 62%
qualified for free or reduced lunch. The student population was 70% White, 14% Hispanic,
7.5% Native American, 4% Asian-Pacific Islander, 2% Black, and 2.5% identifying as being of
two or more races. As of the 2015-2016 school year, 2% of students were designated as English
Learner and 4.3% Fluent English Proficient.
The following paragraph describes how they ways in which Jefferson High School
opened access to all students and this policy reflected in Carol’s asset beliefs. This is important
to understand when examining Carol’s ideology because it directly affected which students
enrolled in her courses. It also helps explain how the school’s policies reflect her ideology on
access.
In 2016, Jefferson High School was recognized by the College Board as an AP Honor
Roll school, an award the College Board created to honor schools that embraced a “universal
access” approach to teaching AP. The award has been in place for 6 years and honors school
that have “simultaneously achieved increases in access to Advanced Placement course for a
broader number of students and also maintained or improved the rate at which AP students earn
scores of 3 or higher on an AP Exam” (College Board, 2016). In 2016, Jefferson’s parent district
received the award. As the only traditional high school in the district, the honor reflected the
practices of the school, rather than a collection of schools. The school had embraced “universal
access” which promoted the practice of allowing any student who wanted to take AP to enroll in
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 97
the courses, regardless of grades or prior coursework. This decision reflects what Klopfenstein
(2003) suggested school needed to do to increase access for low-income and students of color.
Carol was a junior and senior English teacher with over 20 years of teaching experience.
After graduating from Jefferson High School, Carol pursued her bachelor’s degree with the
intention to be a teacher at her alma mater. She said, “My early years were spent trying to get
back to JHS. I always wanted to teacher where I graduated and my husband and I chose to live in
this community so it was always a goal to teach here.” Having spent her teenage years in
community Carol also expressed a connection with the students who attended Jefferson, many of
whom were low income. She described her background as “low SE [socio-economic] …to a
certain extent” and school was a “safe place to be smart and love books.” She also described her
path to teaching having been influenced by her time at Jefferson. She said, “It was actually
legitimately probably my first advanced placement teacher whose job I really wanted and who I
really wanted to grow up to be.” Carol had been on the faculty at Jefferson High School for 19
years and had been teaching AP Literature for the last 7 years. She had a bachelor’s degree in
English and a state credential.
Mrs. Smith’s classroom was on the far side of the main campus, the second in a line of
three rectangular portables, with windows on each of the short ends. Mrs. Smith’s front door
faced the parking lot and the far window overlooked the track and football field behind the row
of portables. With white boards on both long walls, Mrs. Smith positioned her desk in the front
left corner near one of the windows. For the first six observations, the desks were in a “cat-
walk,” in other words the desks were divided in half, in rows, facing the center of the room. In
the center, a wide isle spanned the width of the room. For the seventh and eight observations,
the desks were positioned in traditional rows facing the white board, though one chair on the far
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 98
wall, remained turned toward the center. Along the back whiteboard, Mrs. Smith wrote a two-
week agenda that often changed or updated as the class progressed.
The rest of this section of Chapter Four, I will provide the answer to my research
question: How do teacher beliefs shape the approaches used to support low-income, White,
Black, and Latino students in AP English?
This study used Pajares’s (1992) definition for beliefs as judgments expressed through
words and actions. The conceptual framework for this study drew together three interconnected
concepts of ideology, scaffolding, and culturally relevant pedagogy. Having conducted
interviews and observations during a case study of one teacher, Carol, her words and actions
revealed a teacher whose ideology was complex, containing both asset and deficit thinking.
Bartolomé (2008) suggested that teachers hold conscious and unconscious beliefs about their
students that then informed teacher practice in the classroom. Through her words, Carol
articulated asset beliefs about her students’ potential and her desire to support student learning.
Yet, these conscious asset beliefs were complicated by her unconscious deficit thinking about
their capabilities, which appeared to reflect the extent to which her personal background aligned
with her students. The combination of these factors was reflected in her over-scaffolding and as
suggested by McCarthey (1997) a missed opportunity to utilize the lived experiences of her
students as a way to deepen and enrich their understanding of the AP curriculum.
Because the construction of Carol’s beliefs was complex, I organize the findings by first
exploring her asset beliefs about student potential and access to AP, followed by her beliefs
about scaffolding to support students. Next, I will describe how these beliefs were expressed in
her teaching practice. Then I will present the ways in which Carol articulated deficit thinking
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 99
and how those beliefs reflected in over-scaffolding and an absence of culturally relevant
teaching.
Carol’s Ideology
Asset beliefs about potential. Carol articulated asset beliefs about her students’ potential
to grow. When describing her planning practices, she said,
I have two philosophies that guide my planning. One is, I’m putting the black market out
of business. Nobody ever could possibly sell an essay from my class to the next year’s
kids. There’s no way it’s the same exact task. And, the movement toward personal
improvement should be so intense that I can actually look at an essay and say, “Okay, the
essay they handed me yesterday, I had them tell me which piece to focus most on while
I’m looking through their essays and annotating and thinking. As a writer, what did you
just improve upon?”
Her words “the movement toward personal improvement should be so intense” suggested she
wanted her students to own their progress, to see writing development as more than just a grade,
but as a personal quest for growth. This belief is reflected in her words “I’m putting the black
market out of business,” suggesting she had a desire to create a unique writing experience from
year to year where students would be so invested in their own growth that they would not feel the
need to copy or plagiarize papers. She put the onus on the students and wanted them to believe
they had a stake in their learning.
Another example of her asset beliefs reflected in her description of how she worked to
create “flexibility” in the curriculum. To her “flexibility” meant she gave students time to
complete work, or in her words, she often set a “rolling deadline” particularly where technology
was concerned. When describing her use of technology she stated,
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 100
if there’s ever a place, I’ll do a rolling deadline it would be something like that. Within
two or three days make sure you stop by and do this practice here or send me a screen
shot of your results or post your scores.
Her flexibility with technology gave her students an opportunity to be autonomous, and
expressed her trust through accountability. In this case, by giving the students control over when
the complete the work, Carol provided an opportunity for her students to engage in autonomy,
which reflected both an asset ideology and a belief in the scaffolding. As suggested by Vygotsky
(1962) the end goal of scaffolding was to help the learner become autonomous. The rolling
deadline gave students a few days to complete the action when they were ready and then to
communicate, through technological means such as a screen shot or posting scores, their results.
This allowed students time to work at their own pace and still show proof of accountability.
Another example of this flexibility occurred when Carol gave the students an AP practice
test section that consisted of a long passage from Pride and Prejudice followed by nine multiple
choice questions and two short answer responses. She instructed them to read and annotated the
passage while she annotated the questions on the smart board then uploaded the annotations to
Schoology (a learning management system). She then advised them to look at the annotated
questions on their own time, trusting them to take the opportunity to review her model. This
created an opportunity for autonomy through accountability, because they would be required to
annotate the text in preparation for a future class.
Asset beliefs about access. As suggested by Milner (2010), in order for students to be
successful they must have a sense of belonging. Carol echoed this sentiment in her belief that
her classroom should welcome any student interested in taking AP, regardless of past academic
performance or coursework. It should be noted that this was not just the belief of one teacher,
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 101
but a practice the whole school embraced as described in the introduction to this section. As an
AP teacher, Carol expressed a strong belief that this was the right decision. Her words,
Universal access should mean universal access. Sometimes it takes a bit of conversation
with counselors. For example, I have a student right now who is very much prone to
failing all his classes, but he still belongs in AP. He has the intellectual capacity, and the
interest in literature.
Carol strongly believed that any student who wanted to take her class should, reflecting an asset
belief that all students have the potential to be successful. She further articulated this belief
when she said,
I’m rarely likely to find somebody who I truly believe doesn’t’ belong in AP. I might
find somebody who I believe is absolutely unmotivated to do the work and likely to fail
there as well as anywhere else. But, universal access says that if they are willing to try
the class, they are welcome to try the class. There is never a gate in my mind of “You
don’t level up to AP behavior so you have to leave.”
These beliefs also reflect in how she described recruiting students who did not necessarily see
themselves as AP students. As Milner (2010) suggested, students need to feel like they belong
and Carol tried to create a space where students could discover untapped potential, but telling
them she believed in them and encouraging them to take a class they might not have self-selected
without encouragement. She said,
It’s always been my personal belief that a student who is capable is capable of more than
they realize, and may not even see themselves as an AP student. I recruit broadly. In

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 102
fact, I was extremely excited to get the last three students in my class, some of them came
in January, because I will intentionally grab a kid and say “I believe we can do this…”
It is important to note that Carol used the pronoun “we” when talking about the learning journey.
She saw herself as a guide for her students, a partner in learning. Though she did not articulate it
as such, Carol’s beliefs aligned strongly with Vygotskian theory, in that the teacher is the more
experienced other helping to guide the learner to understanding. This also reflected in her beliefs
about the importance of scaffolding.
Beliefs about scaffolding. During interviews Carol often spoke of scaffolding as an
important aspect of supporting her students in AP. Her approach reflected Vygotsky’s (1962)
assertion that with help “every child can do more than he can by himself” (p. 103). This
reflected in Carol’s belief that students were more capable than they may have believed
themselves to be. She said, “A student who is not able to be successful yet is not necessarily a
student who’s not able to be successful. They just need more scaffolding.” This reflected Carol’s
belief that if she provided the correct scaffolds any student could be successful in her class. She
saw it as her job to figure out what scaffolds would work to help her student reach the level of
critical thinking she believed her class required. She said, “It’s more a question of you’re
capable of this critical thinking…how can I lead you to it?” This suggests she saw her class as
requiring critical thinking as a skill, but believed that she could help guide students to it.
Furthermore, it suggested she believed her students had the capability to do the work, but lacked
the proper scaffolds in which to reach the level required to be successful in AP. This
Vygostskian approach was common throughout the school, with Carol describing how
scaffolding shaped their professional development time, stating, “two thirds of what we’ve
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 103
always done with the program since I’ve been here.” With their “curriculum work’s more
focused on the idea of scaffolding for all students.”
Deficit thinking. As suggested by Milner (2010) teachers engaged in deficit thinking
when they “operate primarily from their own cultural ways of knowing” (p. 23). Furthermore,
Carol engaged in what Milner (2010) described as a cultural conflict, in that Carol, when she said
she must help them understand “what the world really is” suggested that the students lacked a
valid understanding of world, which did not take into consideration the value of their lived
experiences. This also suggested that there was only one right way of seeing the world, and she
as the teacher knew the right one.
Through her words and actions, Carol demonstrated an asset and deficit set of beliefs
about her students. Her deficit ideology also reflected in the classroom through her treatment of
different students. As suggested by Rist (2000), teachers, even when they were of the same race
as their students, made judgments about their students through the lens of their own life
experience. Carol operated primarily from her cultural ways of understanding the world and her
beliefs about these students were shaped by her own lived experiences, though her words and
actions suggested she did not recognize the deficit element of her thinking.
Her deficit ideology was shaped by her affinity for students who were more like her and
it reflected in the way she described their academic motivation. The following paragraphs
describe three students and Carol’s interactions: Haley, a White-European middle class female
student; Naomi, a White, low-income, female student; and Kara, a Black, low-income female
student
Haley was identified by Carol as Serbian exchange student. According to Carol, Haley
was enrolled in two other AP classes in addition to AP Literature. It was Carol’s understanding
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 104
that Haley was only taking one AP exam because “AP credit means nothing to her when she
goes back to Serbia.” Through the course of observations, Haley was never absent and appeared
to be prepared. Carol reflected an affinity for Haley; her rapport with Carol was positive and
warm, demonstrated by Carol often smiling at Haley and allowing use of the water kettle to
make her morning oatmeal. Carol described Haley as a strong student, she called her an “outlier
because of her training in other school systems outside of the country.” In addition, she called
out the fact that Haley was enrolled in three AP classes, although the tests would not count for
her when she returned to Serbia. This suggested Carol felt Haley was exceptional in that she was
taking more challenging classes, even though it would give her no credit advantage. This also
suggested Carol felt an affinity toward Haley because Haley was academically successful and
appeared to value school, reflecting Carol’s belief that school was a “safe place to be smart and
love books.”
By labeling Haley as an “outlier” Carol suggested that she felt Haley was exceptional, not
because she was more capable, but because her experiences in other school systems meant she
was well positioned for success. This also suggested Carol felt other school systems, “the other”
in this case being Europe, prepared students well. She had a daughter working on a degree at
Cambridge and often referenced her daughter during discussions in class. The reflected Carol’s
affinity for White, European, upper-middle class experience. Carol felt education was valued
and seen as a key to success as illustrated through her pride in her daughter’s academic successes
abroad.
On the other hand, Carol often described Naomi, a White, low-income, student, as
lacking motivation because of her experiences at school. Carol recruited Naomi into the class.
Carol said of Naomi, “she’s an interesting challenge because she doesn’t see herself as an AP
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 105
student. We dragged her kicking and screaming, but she reads non-stop.” Carol suggested that
because Naomi read often, she was a good fit for AP, even though she did not “see” herself as an
AP student. Carol, however, did see Naomi as an AP student. They shared a similar background
in that Carol said she could relate to many of her students' low-income backgrounds, of which
Naomi was low-income and White. Carol’s affinity for Naomi reflected in her desire to recruit
Naomi, who like Carol loved books, which is reflected in words “she reads non-stop.” However,
it should be noted that this was not Naomi’s first AP class. She had also taken AP English the
previous year, though it was unclear if Naomi was currently enrolled in additional AP courses.
The reluctance to be in AP, according to Carol, was reflected in Naomi’s classroom
behaviors. Carol said,
Naomi’s battle, her rebellion, is literally to be not a thinker and not a student. And she’s
developed some behaviors over the course of 10 years, 12 years, in the public school
system, that are very distinct. “Oh, I wasn’t thinking about that. Oh, I don’t care about
that. Why would I read that?” …How do I train the student who has capability and the
intellectual capacity at age 17, when they’ve never pushed or tested before?
For Carol, Naomi’s motivational issues stemmed from the school system failing to push
Naomi enough. Carol strongly believed Naomi was capable and therefore wanted her to be in
the class. Having been a lower income student herself, Carol connected to Naomi through their
mutual love of reading, yet Naomi appeared to frustrate Carol, often leading her to lightly
disparage Naomi. This was reflected in her comments during class about Naomi’s lack of
materials. When Naomi asked for a pen Carol said, “the bring a pen to class portion of school is
something I would like you to work on” before giving Naomi the needed item. The reflected
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 106
Carol’s frustration with Naomi, whom she saw as capable yet lacking the motivation Carol saw
in Haley.
For Haley and Naomi, Carol pointed to their experiences at school as shaping their
behaviors, but for Kara, Carol had a different explanation. Carol described Kara, a Black, low-
income student,
I think Kara is a fiercely rebellious person who decided to think as rebelling. Knowing
enough about her family background, that’s her distinction is she’s the one who fights for
grades as opposed to other members of her family who fight against grades and fight
against school. Her older brother was in my class. We had a long running battle for four
years.
In this case, rather than seeing school as the barrier, in the case of Naomi, or as the asset, in the
case of Haley, Carol saw Kara’s home life as the reason for her motivation. According to Carol,
for Kara, being intellectual was a type of rebellion, which suggested Carol thought Kara’s family
did not value intellectualism. Carol did not seem to see how the system could have created
conditions for Kara, and her brother, that made it harder for them to be successful in school.
This also suggested that Carol thought Kara was successful not because of where she came from,
but in spite of it; Kara had intelligence against the odds. This was a much different interpretation
than Naomi, despite the only demographic difference being race. This suggested Carol saw Kara
as more deserving of her support. This reflected in her treatment of Kara, when she said, “I want
you to keep thinking about the excerpt you read yesterday. Keep thinking a about Harvey. I’m
putting you on the fast track.” This extra attention, designed to inspire Kara to work harder, also
showed that Carol believed Kara needed more encouragement. By saying “I’m putting you on
the fast track” Carol not only suggested she believed Kara was more capable than others, but that
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 107
she also needed the additional encouragement to persevere. Furthermore, Kara had a history of
being academically successful, yet Carol suggested that Naomi had not been set up for success
by the system, whereas Kara had not been set up for success by her family.
Ideology in Classroom Practice
As illustrated above, Carol had a strong desire to help her students be successful. She
strongly believed that with the right combination of student “capability” and teacher
“scaffolding” students could be successful in her AP class. She hinged their success on her
ability to insert the right scaffold. Yet, as suggested by Tharp and Gallimore (1991) for her
students to truly pass through the zone of proximal development (ZPD) they needed more than
just the tools; they also needed the careful attention of the more experienced other to help
determine when to remove the scaffolds or intervene further. In Carol’s classroom, she provided
the scaffolds, but did not always ensure they used them. For example, while in small groups
discussing a poem she overheard her students using phrases like “I feel,” “I didn’t know” and
“This didn’t.” She wrote the phrases on the board, and then referred them to the rubric she
designed for discussions, because she noticed they were stuck on decoding words rather than
talking about meaning. But she did not discuss what or how that should look in conversations.
Then, she referred them to a SOAPStone graphic organizer and using the “three readings”
strategy. After a few more minutes, she drew their attention to the board to continue explaining
why she wrote down the phrases. She said, “you can no longer use ‘I feel’ because you are using
it was a way to avoid analysis. She wanted them to “get out of that loop”. Though she
referenced the scaffolds, it did not necessarily lead them to using the scaffolds. As suggested by
Smargorinsky (2013), their schoolwork needed to be personally meaningful. Using words like “I
feel” suggested the students were beginning to use language to move through their ZDP, but
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 108
without additional scaffolding of language to continue the process, the scaffold was incomplete.
Carol modeled how to use the graphic organizer as a sentence starter when she said, “The tone of
this piece is,” yet there was no process in place, other than her eavesdropping, to ensure they
used the scaffolds in their conversation.
Another example occurred in the same class period when Carol presented an “analytical
question”: what metaphor(s) is the author using to achieve meaning in that poem? She told them
they “have to go beyond decoding, pas the identification, and move into analytics,” yet how to
go about doing this was not clear. Furthermore, though it appeared these were not new concepts
or scaffolds, if the students had the tools in place a head of time, they did not appear to use them
with some groups going completely quiet shortly after the instructions were given. This
suggested Carol provided the scaffolds, then expected her students to use them with little
guidance. When she observed her students struggling, she referred them to more scaffolds,
without confirmation they used the supports. This reflected a misunderstanding of the role of
scaffolds in that her students needed more guided practice on how to use the scaffolds before
having the supports removed or modified as suggested by Tharp and Gallimore (1991).
Absence of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
In Carol’s classroom, there was an absence of culturally relevant pedagogy or responsive
teaching. An example of this in Carol’s ideology reflected in how she defined CRP. She said,
“probably the idea of trying to bridge the gap between what our curriculum really covers and
what the world really is.” The word “probably” suggested that Carol had not given a lot of
thought about CRP and or she had limited knowledge about the concept. Though she recognized
that there was a “gap” between the curriculum and the students’ lives, rather than use the lives of
her students as a way into the curriculum, she saw the “gap” as something she had to leap. In
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 109
other words, she saw her role the sense-maker in the classroom. By showing the students how the
curriculum made sense in the world, rather than using their world understanding to make sense
of the curriculum, they did not have the opportunity to engage in shaping their own
understanding. Essentially by taking on the role of the knowledge-keeper, Carol diminished the
role her students could play in constructing meaning.
Carol wanted to show them how they could see themselves in the literature, but she did
not show that she saw her students as whole individuals with access to lived experiences that
could help them reach her expectations. Rather than use their experiences as a scaffold she saw
them as something that had to be overcome. She seemed ignorant to the idea that just by
presenting a universal idea would not be enough to help them connect. When she said,
They come from places where they don’t understand each other’s households, much less
other countries and other time periods. It’s always teaching background and its always
teaching history, and it’s always trying to build as many different references as possible
in their heads, to give them more ground to stand on when they’re confronting a piece of
literature.
This suggests that she thought, if she just gives them the background information and facts, they
would understand. It did not leave room for her to consider that they might have had experiences
in their life that would help them reflect the same kinds of conditions. For example, while
reading an AP practice passage prompt, several students noticed vocabulary that they connected
to Harry Potter. Rather than use this conversation as way to connect to the literature Carol used
the opportunity to discourage their connections because they were not of “literary merit” and
referencing Harry Potter was a really bad idea on the exam. Though this was true of the exam,
rather than use this as a door into the curriculum, she shut down their conversation and belittled
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 110
the connection to the books they valued. Though she intended this to be a teachable moment by
noting that “dumbledores” appeared in the passage before “humble bees” and “hag-rid” meant
night-mares, suggesting they needed to avoid “going down rabbit holes with vocabulary and
make guesses about what things meant rather than using the evidence in the text.” When she
heard the students talking about their connections to the words, she assumed they meant to write
about it, despite their protests that they were just connecting to their prior knowledge.
When asked about culture in the classroom Carol said, “It’s hard for them to think
through who they might be talking to without some idea of trying to model sensitivity in
conversation and reminding them to consider different viewpoints.” This suggested that she saw
culture as something she needed to teach them, not as something they could bring into the
classroom to connect to literature and to each other. This also suggested that she saw her
culture—white, educated middle class—as the culture to which they should aspire. Furthermore,
her words “trying to model sensitivity” suggested students needed to learn to be sensitive to the
cultures of others, rather than using culture to access and enrich the curriculum. This further
suggested a misunderstanding of culturally relevant pedagogy. Though she tried to impart a
sense of cultural sensitivity, teaching cultural sensitivity is not the same thing as CRP.
Case Study #2: Mr. Jason Norton, 12th Grade AP Literature and Composition
Mr. Norton was a teacher at a high school in a union high school district in a medium
sized town, of approximately 90,000 residents. Washington High School serviced approximately
1200 students, and received targeted Title 1 funding. The most recent demographic data from
2015-2016 showed 42% of Washington’s students qualified for free and reduced priced meals, a
decrease of 8% from 2013-2014. The school had 2.9% English language learners. The school’s
ethnic breakdown included 59% White, 20% Hispanic/Latino, almost 4% Black, 2.9%
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 111
identifying as two or more races, 7.3% Asian Pacific Islander, and 3.6% Native American (Ed-
Data, 2017). Washington High School was the most diverse in the district and located in a
lower-income neighborhood.
Mr. Jason Norton was and English teacher with 20 years of experience. Though he
described himself as an “under performer” in high school his skills as an athlete lead him to play
sports at the junior college level before earning scholarship to an area private university. After a
year at the university he quit. He said,
I played one year and I was done. It was not a good experience. At that point, I didn’t
know what I was going to do. I thought I was going to [be an athlete] with my life, like
many dumb jocks I guess. I got a job, and for about six months I was working at a
grocery store... I realized quickly that that wasn’t what I wanted to do. It was horrible,
and so I went back to my JC and took a couple classes to get my AA degree, with the
idea that an AA degree, it would be easier to transfer somewhere.
Having married, Jason moved north and attended a private university, where he said he
discovered he knew he wanted to teach and finished his bachelor’s degree in English. Though he
wanted to attend the same school for his credential he said, “I got myself into an insane amount
of debt going there” and spending more to get his credential was out of the question. He and wife
again moved back south after she lost a job. He got his first job teaching with an emergency
credential within 6 months of graduating from college. He said “I started a master’s program
and it wasn’t interesting enough for me to finish” though he continued teaching and finished a
credential program at a local CSU.
Jason taught for eight years in an urban high school servicing mostly Latino students.
After what he described as a “couple of episode [that] really bothered me” he and his wife
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 112
decided to move back to the northern part of the state. He applied for and was accepted at
Washington high school where he taught English for 12 years. He had been teaching AP
Literature for the last four years. During his four years teaching the class, enrollment grew from
five students to forty and he anticipated further growth for the following year.
Jason’s classroom was at the back of the campus near the stadium in a row of portables
behind the wood-shop. Jason’s front door faced the wood shop and the back wall looked out
over an empty, dirt field. He kept the blinds pulled on both windows and the walls were painted
yellow, creating a warmth in the room. Jason’s desk was on the same wall as the front door,
tucked into the corner near the window. The long wall at the front of the room contained his
white board and LCD project, which he controlled from his desk. The individual desks were in a
“cat-walk” formation with a walkway from the front to the back of the room. On the far wall
facing the dirt field, Jason had low shelves housing classroom book sets. Wall decorations
included a few posters and Jason’s personal items on the wall by his desk. On the back wall in
the corner two large student-made posters displayed the names of every AP student and his or
her birthdate. Of these posters, Jason said, “look at my room, I don’t decorate anything, they did
it.” He also posted some student work, and hung a large American flag on the same wall as the
white board. Bookcases, tables, and shelves were covered in stacks of papers, books, and
binders of teaching materials.
As noted in the previous case study, this study was focused on understanding how a
teacher’s words and actions express his or her beliefs in relation to the approaches used to
support low-income Black, White, and Latino students. Working from the conceptual
framework, which wove together ideology, scaffolding, and culturally relevant pedagogy, this
second case study of one teacher, like the previous case study, revealed a teacher with a complex
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 113
ideology that contained both asset and deficit thinking. Although there was clear evidence of
deficit thinking, there was also evidence of asset thinking. Jason articulated asset beliefs about
access and he also recognized that his students brought different background knowledge to bear
on the curriculum. Though Jason did not actively use culturally relevant pedagogy, he
understood that it was important for him to recognize that their cultural experiences would have
an effect on their experiences in school. Yet, as suggested by Milner (2010) Jason also engaged
in mind-sets that could create opportunity gaps for his students, including those of meritocracy
and colorblindness. These unconsciously held belief reflected in Jason setting low expectations
and abdicating responsibility for learning to his students. The following section explores Jason’s
ideology first by describing his asset beliefs, then how he reflected deficit thinking. Next, I will
turn to his classroom practice, followed by the ways in which he leveraged culture as a way
create opportunities for his students.
Jason’s Ideology
Asset beliefs about access. As suggested by Klopfenstein (2003) removing barriers to
access was important to developing strong AP programs. Jason reflected this need in his beliefs
about access. When describing his beliefs about who should take AP classes, Jason said, “anyone
who wants the challenge of an AP class” should take AP. This universal access approach meant
Jason said, “I hate telling a kid, ‘don’t. ” Rather than see himself as a gatekeeper trying to limit
the number of kids accessing AP, he said “I’m an open-the-gate guy.” He acknowledged this
was not always a well-liked idea, but felt very strongly it was the right course. He said,
That’s not a popular belief. You have to be careful where you let it out…I do know that
there is AP snobbery… But, I think an AP class is for a kid who wants to take a class
that’s going to make them think. I think that’s what the class is for.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 114
This belief also reflected in Jason’s words about whom the typical AP student was, stating “I
don’t think there is a typical AP student.” He strongly believed that a student, even those who
were traditionally low performers needed nothing more than the desire to take the class;
however, Jason did suggest that students who wanted to take AP should be counseled on the
rigor of the class, understand that class would require significant reading.
Asset beliefs about students and their cultures. Although not fully asset ideology, there
was some evidence that Jason understood the importance of students’ cultural contexts and the
culture they brought to school in relation to their ability to learn in his classroom. He understood
that what other students experienced mattered as is evidenced when he said,
Because it is still predominately white, lower middle class, or even close to poverty, it’s
much harder. Because when you have Damien, Michael, even Adam, and then you have
Cassidy, the blondes, they, that just, that is such a wide range of backgrounds. You know,
Cassidy, you gotta be more careful. She wouldn't tell you but she told me, she’s told me
in the past, like “I can't believe you talked about that today or that came up.” And it’s
like, “Well, I understand and I by no means want you to feel uncomfortable, or offended,
but there are kids in this classroom where that's, their whole world revolves in that
realm.”
Jason’s acknowledgement of the different experiences of Damien, Michael, Adam and Cassidy
suggested that he understood their experiences would affect their learning and how they
connected to the curriculum. Furthermore, his words “I understand and I by no means want you
to feel uncomfortable…” suggested sensitivity to the lived experiences of students when they
came into conflict with other students’ perceptions of the world.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 115
Jason also understood that his lived experience was very different from many of his
students, so connecting to his students was important to him. He said,
So when I am, I am very different from my kids. I have beliefs, we've talked, I have very
different beliefs than you. But I still respect what you think and how you look at the
world. And we can get along.
Jason’s words “we can get along” suggested he wanted to connect with his students, and he
wanted them to feel comfortable in his room, despite their real and perceived differences.
Jason made other attempts to connect with his students and he perceived himself to be
good at bringing in cultural relevance. He said, “cultural relevancy I would say is probably one
of my stronger points in the classroom.” Yet, what reflected in the evidence was that Jason was
aware of student’s cultures and he believed he was making connections, though his perception of
his ability to be culturally relevant was not the same as incorporating culturally relevant
pedagogy.
Having grown up and taught in urban schools in Los Angeles, Jason believed he knew
their reality of his students. He said, “having the background, being able to connect and have
discussions and being aware of the different history of different genres of music and culture
itself” helped him connect with his students and bring relevancy to the curriculum.
Jason demonstrated awareness of their music, when he said, “I have Straight Outta
Compton on my phone. That’s something like one of my favorite CDs of all time. It is.” These
words suggested that Jason had an appreciation for rap music, which was a part of his youth
growing up in Los Angeles. He said, “I’m just young enough to remember listening to Eazy-E.
Seeing Easy-E at the swap meet selling his tapes when I was a freshman in high school.” Jason
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 116
suggested these experiences helped him connect with students because his lived experience in an
urban area exposed him to cultures beyond his White middle class background.
Another example of his acknowledgement of culture reflected in a conversation with
Damien about satire and rap. While discussing the comedic ladder, Damien referenced pop
culture, specifically how Chris Brown was “clowned all the time.” Jason understood that when
Damien said, “clowned” he meant Chris Brown was shamed, similar to the biting sarcasm often
found in satire. Jason then asked Damien about rap music and Damien suggested rap music used
word play. Jason then suggested the rap music likely had wit, but he wasn’t sure if it really
included satire. He then prompted Damien to think through the kinds of comedy, focusing on
whether or not he thought rap progressed through the levels. Jason demonstrated an awareness
of Damien’s music and pop culture by both knowing Straight Outta Compton, his conversation
around Chris Brown, and more generally rap music. By saying he wasn’t sure that rap had satire,
he demonstrated some level of familiarity and in his mind he was connecting to David. In this
instance Jason thought he was using culture in ways that connected with his students, which
reflected a kind of asset belief. When Damien brought up rap and Chris Brown, Jason embraced
the topic and pursued the conversation. Furthermore, he prompted Damien to keep thinking
about the idea. In this respect Jason showed asset thinking; however, it as constrained by some
limitations Jason placed on the conversation, which will be explored more fully in the following
sections.
Deficit beliefs. Pajares (1992) suggested that “it is important to think in terms of
connections among beliefs instead of in terms of beliefs as independent subsystems” (327) or in
other words, beliefs were a reflection of the whole self, not just one section of a belief structure.
For educators this meant, personal beliefs influenced educational beliefs. This suggested that
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 117
teachers used their own understanding of the world to understand their students, without
considering how outside forces could shape student behaviors, levels of success, and outcomes.
Jason described himself as an “under-performer” but capable of working hard enough and
possessing a level of talent that allowed his to achieve a level of success. He saw himself as
capable, but often expressed concern that he was not working hard enough. His words, “third
period, I’ve failed and I say that tongue in cheek, but I really have not given them what they
need” suggest a teacher who understood his role as a guide, yet struggled to support his students
in the ways they needed. This reflected in the expectations he set for behavior and learning.
With his words “There is an average for a reason, you know? There’s the average, but I would
like them [period three] to be dedicated more, and I think that dedication starts with me” Jason
suggested he wanted his students to work harder, but also understood that getting them to work
hard began with the expectations that he set for them. These beliefs reflected his personal
experiences of under-performance result in deficit thinking about his students, though his words
and actions also suggested he was unaware of his deficit thinking. The following section
describes how Jason unconsciously engaged in a meritocracy mindset through his relationship
with Damien, a Black low-income student in his AP Literature Class. Though this mind-set
reflected in his interactions with all his students, they featured most prominently with Damien.
As suggested by Milner (2010) gaps in opportunities for students were reinforced through
teacher beliefs about meritocracy. Milner suggested a meritocracy mindset meant that
“Educators sometimes embrace the notion that their own, their parents’, and their students’
success and status have been earned. Conversely they may believe that failure is earned as well”
(p. 28). Jason reflected this mind-set when describing his relationship with Damien, a low-
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 118
income Black student Jason had known from the time Damien started attending Washington and
Tyler, a White student.
Even though Jason thought Damien was “intellectually sharp, sharp, sharp” and
encouraged Damien to take honor’s classes from the time he was a freshman, he also felt Damien
was also “extremely lazy.” This suggested Jason believed Damien was capable of learning, but
that Damien held himself back by not working at the level necessary to do well in his classes.
He words suggested he held Damien responsible for creating learning opportunities and by
“being lazy” he was denying himself the rewards of doing the work that was necessary to move
him into the position Jason wanted for him. Furthermore, Jason suggested one of the main
reasons Damien struggled was due to his emotional state. Jason said, “Damien’s anger is his
greatest barrier to him being successful” suggesting he believed that if Damien could break
through this “barrier,” he could change his behaviors on his own and have better opportunities.
Jason also suggested Damien had more opportunities than other students. Having taught
in more urban areas where conditions could be especially difficult for students of color, Jason
suggested he felt Damien was exaggerating or pretending to be something he was not. Jason
said,
I call bullshit on Damien. I’ve told him that so many times. I call bullshit Damien. You
live in [this] county. Relax. Just be a kid. And I’ve told him this when he was younger.
I said, "Wow, you should be so happy for aspects of your life. That you’re here and
you’re not in Oakland. Or you‘re not in Rialto. Because you have so many more
opportunities to be successful. Because there‘s not all this crap in your neighborhood
that‘s gonna destroy your world and take it down, take you down with them." And he
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 119
don’t want to hear that. And I get it. I get it, I get it, I understand. I t‘s a posture. I still
posture.
Though conditions at Washington and in the surrounding community for Damien were
superficially better, Jason ignored the other conditions that could make Damien and outsider,
such as those resulting from the experience of living in a predominantly White community, his
socio-economic status, and differences in privilege. This also suggested that Jason believed
Damien needed to create the conditions for learning, rather than it being the responsibility of the
teacher to create conditions for students to access learning opportunities.
On the other hand, Jason’s beliefs about Tyler were shaped by the way Tyler engaged in
the class. Jason described Tyler as “an introvert” but extremely bright. In class Jason often
called on Tyler to answer questions, to read aloud from the text, and used Tyler’s writing as
examples during writing workshops. Jason often compared Tyler and Damien, suggesting Tyler
worked harder in class, though he considered both boys to be capable students. He said,
Tyler is an introvert. Damien’s an extrovert. Tyler does not ... He adds to the classroom
discussion. He stays on topic, while Damien does not. Not always though, Damien does
... Damien is quite capable of adding to the conversation”
Jason words suggested he valued Tyler’s ability to stay focused in class, on topic, and interested
in the content. This also reflected in how Jason treated Tyler in class. While he often suggested
felt tension with Damien, Jason turned to Tyler to keep the class moving through material. He
suggested there was a dependability in Tyler when he said, “But the thing with Tyler is that I
know, I know, he’s gonna say something and it's like, “Whoa, wow.” Yeah, you get it. You are
always gonna get it.” These words suggested Jason felt he did not have work hard to create
learning opportunities for Tyler, whereas with Damien, keeping him on task took work. With
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 120
Tyler, Jason suggested he felt he did not have to create high expectations because Tyler was
already motivated to create learning opportunities for himself. Jason said, “But because Tyler is
focused and does a very good job, not just in this class, but all his classes. He comes to class and
he is, “I can't wait to see what we're reading.” This reflected a meritocracy mindset because it
placed the responsibility on Tyler and Damien to create learning opportunities by working hard
and earning the rewards of a job well done.
Ideology in Classroom Practice
In the conceptual framework for this study I argued that for students to having
meaningful learning opportunities teachers needed to use effective scaffolds to support student
learning in addition to engaging in asset ideology and CRP. As suggested by Tharp and
Gallimore (1991) teachers needed not only help guide a student through the ZDP but also keep a
close watch on if and or when the student needed support. This created a responsibility for the
teacher to understand the student’s motivational needs as well his or her strengths and areas that
needed improvement. It also placed the responsibility to create learning opportunities on the
more experience other. In Jason’s classroom, though he used good scaffolding strategies, he
abdicated the responsibility for guidance to his students. Instructions at times were ambiguous
and or contradictory, and expectations were often low or unclear. Jason supported those students
who would be successful due to their intrinsic motivation—such as Tyler—and undermined the
opportunities for those students—such as Damien—because they did not choose to step up and
complete the work. Yet, Jason also suggested he was aware that he had not provided the
opportunities. His words,
Third period, there is no routine. It is a class which has five or six AP students and then
10 they many have the intellectual ability to be in that class, but the don’t have the where
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 121
with all to do the work and that is having a negative impact on the five or six kids,
because we’re not getting the depth of anything, which is a shame. Fourth period class is
a much larger class by eight or nine students and it's far different. It's an intellectual
class, and they keep me on task. They keep me on track, which is great, which I enjoy.
His words, “they keep me on task” suggested Jason abdicated responsibility to his fourth period
students to set the expectations in the classroom. His words, “third period, there is no routine,”
suggested he also abdicated responsibility to his students in third period, but rather than help
them be focused it undermined their learning opportunities. Moreover, his words “it’s a shame”
suggest he knew there was a problem with motivation and that he may have had something to do
with it, but in the end, he rationalized it by saying “they don’t have the wear with all to do the
work.” Jason suggested the responsibility of doing the work fell on the students themselves,
rather than being a joint effort lead by the teacher to help move learners through their ZDP.
As with CRP Jason said he had little formal training in scaffolding practices having
learned most of in AVID trainings. Though his training was limited, he often used scaffolding
strategies, but coupled with his low, unclear expectations and Jason did not create learning
opportunities for every student.
For example, after reading Candide one the last assignments required students to answer
the following prompt: What did you take away from Candide? Jason also added that the paper
should express your understanding of Voltaire. The lesson was taught over the course of three
days and involved drafting the paper, reviewing and discussing drafts in class, and ending with
peer grading. The first day, the assignment was given when the students had a substitute teacher.
They were given time in class to write and several students worked on the assignment at home.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 122
On day two, Jason, removing the names, posted two papers on the LCD projector, and
discussed the papers with the class. Upon completion of that discussion Jason decided the
students would grade the papers the following day, before moving on to the rest of the items on
his agenda for day two. The following discussion occurred on day two. Jason posted a paper on
the LCD screen titled, “Voltaire’s Ideas.” Below is an excerpt of the conversation that followed:
Student 1: Is this yours?
Jason: No.
Student 2: It’s Cassidy’s.
Jason: What do you think of her introduction?
A brief discussion of the strength of her paper ensued.
Jason: I’m going to be honest, I think it is too good. I hope I’m wrong and I’ve been
wrong in the past before, but I stand firm on my first statement. It sounds like a website I
could find on Voltaire. I hope I’m wrong, I really do. I don’t have a document to prove
it. I think it’s too polished for an in-class write.
Nora: It was mine. I will admit I used your power point that you shared with us. I did
take stuff from there, but I put it in quotes. I used my own words and twisted them
around a bit. I didn’t do it in class.
Student 3: We did work on these at home.
The students then complained that the sub did not let them work for very long and spent much of
the period instructing them, so they worked on the assignment at home.
Jason: That isn’t you, would you agree?
Nora: Sure. I don’t know.
Jason: Is that you?
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 123
Nora: No, this is more formal.
Jason: I wanted your response not so much the weaving of all the sources I gave you.
Sometimes we get into the habit of reading too much into the assignment and I really just
wanted a response from you. I’m speaking the truth of what I see, but you are behind the
veil.
Carson: The prompt was really hard to respond to.
Jason said he though Carson’s complaint was a “cop-out.”
On day three, Jason began class by telling the students he only had ten responses of the
17 that should have been turned in. He printed their papers if they shared it with him. In groups
of threes and fours he hands out packets of papers to each group with the instructions “read it,
grade it, pass it.” They were instructed to grade it on a 1-4 scale, because fourth period the
previous day said they could grade without a rubric and use just a simple 1-4 scale. The students
broke into groups and were very talkative. Jason repeated, “Read it, score it, pass it.” He
reminded them again to read. A group on the left side of the room expressed confusion about
whether or not they could write on the papers and Jason clarified yes, they could. He again
repeated, “Score it and pass it on.” As soon as the finished reading, conversation started again,
some of it was on task, and others were side conversations. After about 14 minutes Jason had the
groups switch packets. While they scored Jason moved to the back of the room and sat down.
The room by this point had quieted and most students were reading the papers. Another student
on the left side again asked for clarification on the directions. Jason said, “For a senior class you
guys aren’t very good at following directions.” Then he again explained what to do “Read the
paper, score it, and pass it around.” Approximately 6 minutes later Jason collected the papers
and returned to his desk to post a paper on the board. The students were restless, asking when
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 124
the could go to the career fair which was taking place that period in the lunch room. Jason told
them they would go toward the end of class. He posted a paper and commanded “read,” then
asked “do you want to read it out loud? We can.” Jason read the paper out loud noticing the
student used the term “bad ass” and he emphasized the word as he read. The students laughed
and he continued reading it. After a few more sentence he “popcorn-ed” to another student to
read. This process continued every paragraph until the paper had been read completely. When
they finished the following occurred.
Jason: So badass is the key word. How many of you give this a 4? How many of you
give this a 3? Three and a half? Okay start over no halves. AP graders aren’t allowed to
give halves so you have to settle on a score… How many give it a 4?
A few hands went up…
Jason: How many of you give it a 3?
Several more hands go up.
Jason continued telling them of the ten papers he read none scored more than a three. He
suggested there was a difference between reading in one’s head and reading out loud, suggesting
the words came to life when read out loud. He also advised them to avoid words like badass
saying, “Do not use any language that can be construed as vulgar or inappropriate.” He then
asked the write to reveal him or herself and told her she earned an A, even though it only earned
a three due to a weak first paragraph and a lack of development in certain areas. He gave her an
A because the paper “had some teeth” and she alluded to a current political landscape, though
most of her peers did not catch the allusion. Within a few minutes of this conversation Jason
released the class to the career fair.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 125
The following section describes how the above evidence reflected Jason’s pattern of
abdication of responsibility of being the more experienced other and the setting of low or
ambiguous expectations and engaging in meritocracy mind-set.
Jason reflected the pattern of abdicating responsibility when he said fourth period said
they could grade the papers without a rubric and use only a 1-4 scale. This suggested the
students were in control the expectations. Furthermore, a 1-4 scale suggested ambiguity in
grading. There no clarification for period 3 on what 1-4 score meant, nor what qualities a paper
would possess at each level. Though at the end, Jason discussed with them why he gave a paper
a particular grade, without this understanding before hand it was questionable whether or not
students fully engaged in meaningful grading.
In addition, the process of peer grading, though it can be very useful, was not fully
explained, nor were specific expectation communicated other than to “read it, score it, and pass
it.” When students expressed frustration understanding the expectations, Jason interpreted their
confusion as a failure to pay attention. His words, “For a senior class you guys aren’t very good
at following directions.” This suggested he did not consider the possibility their confusion was a
sign they needed more scaffolding. This also shows that he expected them to figure out what to
do, rather than create opportunities for them to grow in the process of assessing peers.
Furthermore as suggested by Tharp and Gallimore, though teachers often believed they were
guiding their students, assisted learning required the teacher to “assume responsibility for
assisting performance” (p. 57). Jason also reflected the research in that Tharp and Gallimore
(1991) also argued that instructions that really assisted students through the ZDP were rare.
Though the process or writing, reviewing, and grading the personal responses on its face,
contained scaffolding, the prompt was unclear and ambiguous. Asking students to write a
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 126
personal response suggested he wanted them to respond to the book on a personal level, which
did not necessarily require a writer to know about or explain how the novel reflected the author’s
beliefs. Yet, while reviewing the papers on day 2, Jason suggested Nora had not written a
personal reflection but rather used the materials presented in class to explain Voltaire’s beliefs.
This reflected ambiguity in what he wanted in their responses. Though Jason understood what
he wanted them to do, they clearly did not. Furthermore, on day 2, after reviewing Nora’s paper,
when a student suggested that the prompt was problematic, rather than explore the issue, Jason
said that was an excuse for not doing well. This statement was consistent with the meritocracy
mindset and showed a seeming apparent pattern in Jason’s habit of creating vague general
outlines of what he wanted them to do, then releasing them to do the work. He did not hold them
accountable to clear expectations and then blamed them they could not reach the expectation.
Jason also communicated low expectations on day 2 as evidenced by how few students
turned in the assignment despite having had several days to complete the work. Rather than
address the issue, Jason moved on which suggested he would work with the students who
stepped up and did the work, and dismiss those who did not, which was consistent with his
meritocracy mind-set.
Absence of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Ladson-Billings (1995a) suggested that for teachers help students choose academic
excellence they need to engage in three acts: 1) nurturing their students academicall, 2) become
culturally competent, and 3) help students learn to become critically conscious. Though Jason
did not dismiss his students’ cultures out of hand, he did not use CRP. As illustrated earlier in
this analysis, through low and or ambiguous expectation Jason did not academically develop all
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 127
his students—he created opportunities for student who expressed a desire, and dismissed those
who he perceived did not work hard.
Though Jason reflected some asset ideology in his desire to form connects with his
students, especially Damien, with whom he had a tense relationship. Jason did not Though Jason
illustrated some asset beliefs about the power of music, he did not see Damien’s knowledge and
interest in music as something he could leverage, suggesting Jason was not culturally competent,
though he perceived himself to be. When Damien suggested rap music used satire, Jason asked
Damien to think through the comedic ladder, and said, “music is typically on the low end, it is
hard to develop irony in a song.” He added that rap music is usually about life issues. His words
suggested satire could not be present in the music because the music was too low on the ladder,
with also suggested he placed more value on Candide than he did on the music. Jason’s words
suggested that Candide, which was written by a White European male, was more valued than rap
music, which he broadly generalized. Though Damien agreed and said “well, yeah” he hesitated.
Jason acknowledged the connection to rap music, and valued the connection, he stopped
short of being culturally competent by simultaneously diminishing the experience Damien had
with rap music, thus diminishing Damien’s culture. This could have had a chilling effect on
Damien’s interest in learning, which often reflected in their tense relationship. Furthermore,
Jason placed boundaries around what he felt was valuable about rap music. His words, “it gets
way over the top and then the artistic value isn’t there because it doesn’t even leave there.”
Jason made a broad generalization about rap music, constraining his ability to use Damien’s
culture as an asset in the classroom.
Jason acknowledged what students brought with them to the classroom; however, he did
not engage in the practice of developing critical consciousness, and important aspect of culturally
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 128
relevant pedagogy. For example, rather than help Damien see how he could challenge and
change systems of oppression, Jason suggested Damien needed to learn to assimilate into
society. Jason’s words when speaking of Damien, “Oh, that makes sense. Maybe I’ll start
playing the game that way so I can get more out of my life than what I think is cool.” With these
words, Jason suggested Damien needed to assimilate into the dominant culture in order to earn
the benefits of being in the culture. This is counter to critical consciousness because it suggested
that Damien needed to “start playing the game” rather than figure out way to change “the game”
from within.
Cross-Case Analysis
My conceptual framework brought together three interconnected concepts: ideology,
scaffolding, and culturally relevant pedagogy. I argued that in order for students to have
meaningful learning opportunities teachers needed to hold asset beliefs about their students
(ideology), incorporate meaningful and effective scaffolding practices, and incorporate culturally
relevant pedagogy.
In my cross-case analysis I will explore four patterns that emerged from an examination
of Carol and Jason’s ideology, scaffolding practices and the lack of culturally relevant pedagogy.
This section will explore what the teachers have in common but were not necessarily direct
findings. Furthermore, these commonalities were not separate from one another, reflecting
complex relationship between ideology and classroom practice. This section will explore three
interwoven patterns that emerged in the data. First, both teachers shared a strong belief in the
importance of universal access. Second, both relied on their own personal experiences to shape
how they perceived and treated their students. Third, though both teachers believed they were
helping to guide their students through a scaffolding process, neither completed the process.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 129
Finally, neither teacher engaged in culturally relevant or responsive teaching practices, in
particular the need for teachers to engage in reflection on issues of diversity and their beliefs
about culture in the classroom. The latter suggested by Ladson-Billings (1995a) was key to
developing critical consciousness both in the self and in students.
Enacting Access
The data from the interviews and observations of both Carol and Jason showed their strong
belief in the importance of allowing any student who expressed a desire to take AP to enroll in
their courses. Regardless of the academic, cultural, socio-economic, or ethnic background of
their students, both Carol and Jason believed in universal access; however, how they enacted
access varied.
Carol enacted access through her active recruitment of students into AP. Carol’s cohort was
small, with only 13 students, 4 or 5 of whom she personally recruited, with one entering the class
as late as January. Though she may have pull one or two in “kicking and screaming” she was
very clear in articulating that she felt her student’s belonged in her classroom, regardless of their
past academic performance. Though Carol felt some students were likely to be more successful
because of certain life conditions and privilege, she broadly supported every student in her class,
believing they not only belonged in AP, but also had the capabilities to be successful. She
strongly believed that if she could find the right scaffolds any student could succeed in her class.
She believed it was just a matter of finding the right support and that it was her responsibility to
figure out the supports.
This asset mind-set meant Carol believed it was important to create a space where her
students felt they belonged academically and it was also her partly her responsibility to make
sure her students had access to the tools to help create learning opportunities. Milner (2010) and
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 130
Bartolomé (2008) suggested teachers needed to help students have a sense of belonging to foster
learning opportunities and Vygotsky (1962) suggested it was the role of the more experienced
other to find and implement the appropriate tools to support student learning.
Jason also believed any student who wanted to take AP should have access. He also
encouraged his students to take honors and AP classes. For example, he encouraged Damien to
take honor’s course from time he was a freshman. Having taught honor’s freshman for many
years, Jason felt it was his job to keep students in the honor’s classes as well as welcome new
students who enrolled. The majority of his freshman the previous year stayed in honor’s English
in their sophomore year; however, Jason was not as proactive in new recruitment to his senior
class as Carol.
Jason’s beliefs reflected an asset mindset about access, though he believed students also
needed to be motivated to take the course. As Klopfenstein’s (2003) suggested, increasing
access also meant school and by extension teachers needed ensure students who enrolled in AP
were interested and motivated to take the courses. Jason reflected this concept when he
suggested students needed to be aware of the workload and the school needed to exercise
flexibility for students’ choices to both enter and leave the class at the semester.
Scaffolding Practices
Through interview data, both teachers expressed their understanding that scaffolding was
extremely important. They both had a tool kit of strategies and gave them to students as tools,
however, full development of assisted learning was not always present in the classroom. As
suggested by Tharp and Gallimore (1991) scaffolding was not enough to help move students
though the ZDP. It required a fourth step, between modeling, guided practice, and release, in
that the teacher needed to see him/herself as the scaffold. In other words, the teacher must
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 131
“assume responsibility for assisting performance.” Though both teachers expressed beliefs that
aligned with this research—the both believes themselves be integral in guiding their students—in
practice it was inconsistent. Though Carol and Jason both used modeling strategies, graphic
organizers, provided feedback on writing, and engaged in questioning, they did not fully
engaging in assisted learning because they expected their students to use scaffolds on their own,
without always making sure the scaffolds were really being used effectively. Additionally
metacognition—connecting information provided in a learning environment to students own life
experiences—though it was present, especially in Jason’s classroom, it was not utilized its
greatest advantage.
Personal Experience as a Guide
Though interview and observation data, but teachers reflected a reliance on their personal
experiences to guide their practice and shape their ideology. As suggested by Bartolomé (2008)
teachers used their cultural ways of knowing to inform their beliefs and practice. Both Carol and
Jason beliefs and practices reflected the research.
For Carol, though she strongly believed all her students were capable and wanted to
connect with them, the examples she used from her own life were often disconnected from her
many of her students experiences. As a member of the White, middle class, though she
connected with low-income students through her experiences as a child, Carol’s words reflected
an affinity and aspiration for a White Eurocentric lifestyle. This often led her to use experiences
that reflected her reality, not the reality of most of her students. Though these examples were
used in an effort to connect with them, it created distance between the world in which many of
them lived and her reality. Furthermore, in her need to show her students what she perceived the
world to be, she unconsciously dismissed their value of their lived experiences as a tool to help
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 132
them connect with the literature. Rather than seeing their lived experienced, especially those of
her low-income students of color, as a tool, she perceived it to be a barrier that had to be
overcome. Though Carol was extremely well meaning and wanted all her students to have a safe
place to be smart, the relationship she offered her students was only one way of understanding
the world, and often did not account for the power of their own backgrounds. Yet for Carol, the
more students looked and acted like her, the more freedom she gave them. She presumed
students who were more like her (middle class, valuing education) the less she felt they needed
her support. The less they were like her, the more she presumed they needed support. The
reflected what Rist (2000) and Hatt (2012) suggested teacher often base their perceptions of
students on how similar or distant students are from their own way of understanding the world.
Jason also used his own understanding of the world to inform his beliefs about his
students, though with greater attention paid to how their lived experiences affected the learning
opportunities. Though Jason engaged in deficit thinking about his students through a
meritocracy mind-set, he did see that where they came from had a profound and important effect
on their performance in the classroom. He also understood that where he came from was
different, though he still expected his students to assimilate into the dominant culture. Jason also
understood that their experiences had power and who they were mattered to him; however, he
often perceived it to be a barrier rather than a point of access.
Furthermore, Jason as a self-described “under performer” projected this belief onto his
classroom practice. Jason abdicated the responsibility for creating learning opportunities to his
students by suggesting they were either motivated to work or not. Though Jason provided the
quality tools for learning, he left engagement and accountability in the hands of his students.
Then, when they failed to create the opportunities, he blamed lack of motivation as the cause.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 133
This was in-line with his own personal experiences, where he perceived his life choices to be
about how hard he was willing to work.
Jason was also well meaning and concerned for his students future success. This was
reflected in his statements about needing to give more to his third period class than he was
currently doing. This reflection suggested he was engaging in questioning his approach and
whether or not it fully benefited his students.
Critical Consciousness
Neither Carol nor Jason actively engaged in culturally responsive or relevant pedagogy.
Though both teachers expressed concern for their students’ academic success they did not use
culture as a way help students access the material, nor did they engage in cultural consciousness.
Ladson-Billings (1995, 1995b) suggested that in order to create learning opportunities for
students teachers needed to examine their own positionality concerning culture and diversity.
This would then allow space for teachers and students to examine issues of oppression and
hegemony with the goal of creating change from the inside. The research also suggested that
cultural relevancy was a recursive process involved belief and practice. For teachers to begin to
engage in CRP it was necessary to examine one’s own beliefs about culture. Neither Carol nor
Jason could define CRP at a theoretical level. In interview data they both attempted to define
CRP, though the definition resulted from what they thought the words meant rather than any
theoretical knowledge. This suggested that Jason and Carol had not been exposed to CRP in
trainings or their educational background, therefore any understanding of cultural relevancy
came from their perceptions of the world.
Though Carol expressed a need to help her students be culturally sensitive that was not
the same as helping students to become critically conscious. Because Carol reflected a belief
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 134
structured around the idea that there was a right way to see the world, she felt she needed to help
her students understand the culture of a White, Eurocentric world. This suggested Carol had not
engaged in a critical examination of her own way of understanding the world. Though she felt a
need to help her less affluent students, it was to help them adapt to the mainstream culture rather
than develop their ability to be critical of the status quo, much less create change.
Similar to Carol, Jason did not engage in critical reflection about culture. Though he
understood that the cultural contexts of his students would affect what they brought into the
classroom, he was concerned with helping his students learn how to move within the dominant
culture. For Jason, assimilation was more appropriate, suggesting they needed to learn to “play
the game,” in particular those students who he perceived to be rebelling or unwilling to accept
the world as it was.
Conclusion
I argued in the conceptual framework for this study that for teachers to create learning
opportunities for all students, the intersection of asset ideology, effective scaffolding practices,
and CRP needed to be in place. I argued that certain beliefs needed to in place, namely belief that
students had access, students felt like they belonged, the teacher engaged in asset ideology, and
believed in the importance of incorporating CRP and scaffolding. Through their words and
actions, Carol and Jason reflected asset ideology in some areas—namely access—it was not fully
apparent in the approaches they used to support their students.
Though scaffold tools were in place, because many of those scaffolds did not help student
connect personally to the material, students struggled to internalize the scaffolds and perform
independently. Smagorinsky (2013) suggested that for students to truly pass through the ZDP the
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 135
schoolwork needed to be relevant to students lived experiences, suggesting there was a distinct
relationship between effective scaffolding and CRP.
Finally, as I argued in the conceptual framework, the concept of critical consciousness
was integral in creating learning opportunities. Though Ladson-Billings (1995a) suggested it was
important for students, Gay (2013) and Ladson-Billings (2014) also suggested it was equally, if
not more important, for teachers to examine their beliefs on issues of privilege and diversity.
Though Carol and Jason both expressed a belief in the importance of being culturally sensitive,
critical consciousness was not enacted. Both teachers were extremely well meaning and cared
deeply for their students, but as argued in the conceptual framework, without the intersection of
asset ideology, scaffolding, and CRP, student learning opportunities were not fully supported.

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 136
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This dissertation examined how teacher beliefs shaped classroom practice. The study
used qualitative methods via a case study of two teachers at two different sites in order to
understand the following research questions:
• How do teacher beliefs about students shape the approaches they use to support low-
income, White, Black, and Latino students in Advanced Placement English courses?
I collected data via two formal interviews with each teacher, and 8 classroom observations that
totaled approximately 12 hours. The data collected for this study shed light on how two teachers
supported low-income, White, Black, and Latino students in two high school AP English classes.
I chose to study two English teachers based only on the criteria that they taught the course.
Years of experience and or perceptions of excellence did not factor into the sampling. In my
conceptual framework I argued that for all students to have access to meaningful learning
opportunities teachers need to incorporate three interconnected concepts: asset ideology about
learning and their students, effective scaffolding practices, and culturally relevant or responsive
pedagogy. Though it is possible to deliver instruction without these three concepts working
together, the absence of one, two, or all result in fewer meaningful learning opportunities for
low-income and students of color, and exacerbate the gaps already present in education for these
students.
Summary of Findings
Carol Smith taught 12
th
Grade AP English. Her cohort of students was small, numbering
13 total in 1 period. It was the only period of AP Literature and Composition she taught. Her
student demographic reflected a range of socio-economic levels and ethnicities. Carol was a
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 137
White, middle class woman who went to the same high school where she taught. It had been a
goal to teach at her alma mater and Carol expressed a strong affinity for the community and the
school.
With 20 years of teaching experience, Carol believed strongly that any student should
have access to AP classes and embraced a universal access ideology. Furthermore, she
consciously believed her students had potential, though her unconscious enactment sometimes
reflected a deficit mindset. Carol also had a conscious desire to connect with her students and
build meaningful relationships, but her unconscious affinity for students who were more like her,
meant the ways in which she connected to students cause unintended distancing with others.
In classroom practice Carol also believed in the importance of scaffolding, but her
enactment of scaffolds did not ensure her students were always using the scaffolds effectively.
Carol embraced Vygotskian theory, though in practice there were gaps in her implementation.
Though she modeled the use of the scaffolds, she often left students to use the tools with little
guidance. In some cases it appeared students had had exposure to the tools in the past and may
have been guided through with scaffolding, but they were not always held accountable for their
use at the time of observations. Carol also wanted her students to be autonomous, yet for many
in the class the inconsistent use of scaffolds resulted in an inability to moved through their ZDP
and complete the work independently with mastery. Furthermore, though Carol believed it was
important to teacher her students to be culturally sensitive, there was an absence of culturally
relevant or responsive pedagogy in her practice. This resulted in a class that was focused on
purely on academics and did not use culture a as a way to understand students lived experiences
to help them connect to the curriculum.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 138
Jason Norton taught 12
th
Grade AP Literature and Composition. He taught two periods
of AP English, both 12
th
grade and was the only 12
th
Grade AP English teacher in his
department. Jason was a White, middle class man who grew up in large metropolitan area.
Before coming to the school Jason taught for 8 years in an urban high school. Jason started his
teaching career on an emergency credential and earned his clear credential while teaching full
time. After deciding he did not want to raise children in in a large urban area, Jason and his
family returned to the northern part of the state 12 years ago when he was offered a job at
Washington high School.
With over 20 years of experience teaching multiple grade levels in English, Jason’s
ideology reflected some asset beliefs complicated by deficit thinking. Jason believed universal
access was important and also felt students needed to be counseled into the rigors of the course.
He believed all his students had the potential to be successful, but due to his meritocracy
mindset, he felt some students were more likely to be successful because they worked hard. This
suggested Jason did not necessarily believe privilege could play a role in creating learning
opportunities for his students, especially because he saw the location of the school as being a
much better place than more urban areas.
Jason understood that his students brought different cultural contexts to the classroom,
but rather than use those as tools, he saw them as barriers that had to be overcome. Though he
often used his knowledge of other cultures beyond his White, middle class experience to try to
connect with his students, the connections suggested Jason believed his students should aspire to
and in some cases assimilate. This resulted in a lack of culturally responsive or relevant
pedagogy, though Jason appreciated that his students had different, yet valid experiences
informing how they approached the world.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 139
In practice Jason had a repertoire of strong, effective scaffolds but the implementation did
not hold students accountable. Because of his meritocracy mind-set Jason did not fully engage in
the role of the more experienced other. He did not see himself as a scaffold, but rather depending
on the tool to be scaffold. As a result he unintentionally set low or ambiguous expectations for
his students and often abdicated responsibility for creating learning opportunities. He left this
responsibility up to his students. Jason also suggested he was aware of this to a degree and had
begun to engage in some reflection of his actions and the needs of his students.
Though both teachers were very well meaning and cared deeply about their students,
neither teacher fully developed the necessary asset ideology, followed through effectively with
scaffolding practices, nor embraced culturally relevant pedagogy. This is not to say asset
ideology was not present. Both teachers believed very strongly in the importance of access,
believed their students were capable and understood that their role as guide was important to
student success. Each teacher also had a repertoire of effective scaffolding practices, but the
implementation was inconsistent. Furthermore, each teacher had some understanding of the role
of culture, though rather than leverage the cultural assets of their students, the importance of
acknowledging and using culture as a way for students access learning opportunities was
marginalized.
In the following section, I will discuss the recommendations for teacher practice and
policy that I have gathered from my study.
Recommendations
This dissertation sought to understand the ways in which ideology, scaffolding, and
culturally relevant pedagogy intersected to create learning opportunities for students. Through
two case studies it examine how ideology shaped the approaches the teachers used to support
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 140
their students. The study found that the relationship between ideology and practice often
resulted in teachers using their life experience to dictate how they approached the creation of
learning opportunities for their students. Furthermore, because both teachers did not engage
fully in asset ideology, implement a complete process of assisted learning, and did not use
culture as a way to help students understand the curriculum, resulting in student-learning
opportunities that were not fully developed. Though both teachers were well-intentioned and
cared deeply about the success of their students, the disconnect between the power of culture and
the students lived experiences resulted in teaching practices that did not leverage the assets their
students already brought to class. This was especially true for those students who the teachers
perceived as capable but hampered by outside circumstances. In the following section I will
discuss the recommendations for teacher practice, educational policy, and future research that
emerged from these findings.
Practice
As suggested by Parjares (1992) beliefs are extremely hard to change, but other
researchers suggest teachers must examine their beliefs if they are to be able to support all
students in creating learning opportunities (Ladson-Billings, 1995a; Bartolomé, 2008; and Gay,
2013). The key recommendation I make as a result of this study is that teachers must engage in
critical reflection on the topic of beliefs about students and personal positionality within the
classroom. As suggested by Pajares (1992) adjusting and or changing beliefs is challenging and
requires teachers to enter a conversation that is often uncomfortable, yet as suggested by multiple
researchers (Ladson-Billings, 1995a; Bartolomé, 2008; and Gay, 2013) it is a conversation that
must happen. Just as students bring their own culture contexts, so do teachers and these
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 141
positions must be examined if teachers are to embrace asset ideology, effective scaffolding, and
culturally relevant and responsive pedagogies.
As suggested by Milner (2010) it is easy to unconsciously engage in deficit mind-sets and
they are extremely damaging for students. Teachers need to engage in a critical examination of
how they both see themselves in the classroom and how they see their students (Ladson-Billings,
1995a; 1995b, 2014). Though this is a process individual teachers must engage in, it is also a
policy issue, which will be more fully explored in the following section.
From pedagogical standpoint, teachers also need to examine what they teach. As
suggested by Lacy (2010) AP was originally designed to serve a very specific population of
upper class White students attending elite prep schools. Furthermore as nearly 85% of teachers
in the United States are White, middle class women (U.S Dept. of Ed., 2016). As suggested by
Bartolomé (2008) and this dissertation, teachers beliefs are strongly influenced by their own
cultural ways of knowing, it is not a stretch to assume that the curriculum in AP English is very
likely White and Eurocentric. Ladson-Billings (1995a, 2014) suggested that the curriculum
needed to include more diverse authors to represent the diverse experiences of students. Though
she cautioned simply adding more diversity in the curriculum was not enough to address issues
of equity and access, I recommend in light of AP’s over reliance on White authors that this is a
necessary step in ensuring teachers begin the process of incorporating CRP into their practice.
Policy
In the following section I make four recommendations for improving teacher practice at
the school, district, and state level. Though much of what was discovered in this study focused
on individual teacher beliefs, how those beliefs developed were influenced by more than just the
teacher’s experience. These influences include trainings and professional development. In order
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 142
to give teachers the opportunity to improve practice, certain policies and ways of educating need
to change. The following four recommendations are designed to address the needs for teachers
to engage in asset ideology, effective scaffolding, and culturally relevant and responsive
pedagogy.
• Design the AP Literature and Composition exam to include more diverse voices
• Implement a training requirement to be able to teach AP
• An examination of professional development at the school and state level
• A reexamination of what access means.
One of the benefits of teaching AP English has always been the perceived flexibility of
the curriculum, with teachers guiding the literary choices in the classroom. With no set
curriculum, teachers are expected to use their expertise and the many resources available to them
to prepare students for the exam. Though Greenblatt (2011) writing for the College Board
suggested a teacher’s AP syllabus should “represent a diversity of literary voices” (p. 32), the
majority of the books that appear on the exam are most often written by White male authors.
This creates a sense of false freedom by creating a dilemma for teachers. If he or she deviates
from the traditional canon he or she puts students at risk of not having read enough texts that will
likely appear on the exam. This is both an issue of practice—the need to incorporate more
diverse texts—and policy, because the exam forces teachers to maintain allegiance to the
traditional literary canon. I suggest, that in order to support the diverse populations that have
gained access to AP, the test also needs to adapt to a more culturally relevant model and be
reframed to include more diverse authors.
As access to AP has continued to grow for low-income White, Black, and Latino
students, the test scores have remained low for these groups (College Board, 2014). Though
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 143
access has increased success has not kept pace with the rate of students taking the test. Judson
and Hobson (2015) suggested there could be several reasons for the decline. They offered three
primary reasons for decline: 1) administrators continue to add more AP classes to boast a
school’s reputation, 2) a philosophical shift that taking AP is a valuable experience for all
students, 3) and the concern that in an effort to offer more AP classes, schools are staffing
courses with underprepared teachers. Hallett and Venegas (2011) also supported the concern that
teachers were underprepared to teach AP. With no formal training requirement, teachers often
enter the classroom unprepared to teach the courses. In low-income communities where access to
high quality teachers is limited, this is even more likely to occur (Hallett & Venegas, 2011).
Furthermore, as AP populations shift to include more diverse student populations, the needs of
those students need to be explicitly address by incorporating culturally relevant and responsive
pedagogy into AP training. I recommend that AP training be more formal, include explicit
training in culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy, and readily available to teachers in more
rural communities where traveling to institutes and or workshops can be a burden.
Furthermore, the state should re-instate a continuing education requirement beyond those
of a beginning teacher induction program to encourage teachers to expand their skills and
improve their practice, particularly in areas of scaffolding and CRP. Without a formal
continuing education requirement, veteran teachers are not required to continue their education
save for the professional development requirements established by a school district. Though
teachers in the last ten years have learned more about CRP, teachers with more years of
experience in the classroom also are less likely to have taken courses or trainings designed to
support and encourage CRP. As illustrated by the results of this study, teachers may not know
about or understand what CRP is, let alone how to use it effectively in an AP classroom.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 144
Yet these recommendations falls short of address the deeper issues present in AP
instruction. It is a common suggestion that more training is needed; however, training is not a
panacea. As suggested by Hargreaves and Shirley (2009) teachers often engage in presentism, in
that the demands place on the teacher make it nearly impossible for the teacher to think long-
term. Furthermore, education systems, by their very structure have created a self-inflicted wound
by creating systems that does not allow teachers to do anything but teach (Hargreaves & Shirley,
2009). To address this, schools and school districts need to reexamine the current conception of
professional development (PD).
First, schools, school districts, and even state education offices need to reconsider how
PD is both delivered and framed. Currently the trend in PD fails to give teachers learning
opportunities that are sustained. As suggested by Burton et al. (2002) teachers both want and
need professional development to better prepare them for teaching AP. The currently model of
short workshops and brief meeting fails to give teachers the needed time for sustained critical
reflection on practice. As suggested by Harris (2012) reflection on beliefs takes time and
teachers need access to long-term professional development opportunities to make the necessary
changes. Furthermore, as suggest by Ladson-Billings (1995a) teacher must also engage in
critical reflection on issues of race and diversity in their classrooms if they are to help their
student engage in critical consciousness. This too takes time and energy, something teachers
often have in short supply.
This study showed two teachers who both believed strongly in the importance of
universal access, but in the absence of really know to do for their students, access was not
ensured. As suggested by Hallett and Venegas (2011) simply placing a student in the room does
not create access. Godley, Monroe, and Castma (2015) suggested teachers needed to engage in
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 145
developing strategies that specifically supported low-income and students of color. It is not
enough to simply open the door, rather teachers need to reframe how the teach AP, incorporating
strategies that serve diverse populations, which often looks different than the traditional AP class
(Godley et al., 2015). This brings me to my third recommendation. Educators and policy makers
need to reexamine what it really means to create access for students. Access is much more
complicated that sampling increasing the number of students taking AP. It also should address
the needs once the gates have been removed. For access to be true, it must also mean there are
measures in place to create access to the curriculum, not just the space in which is housed.
Research
This study sought to understand how teacher beliefs shaped practice. To the extent that
was possible, everything was done to ensure results were as accurate as possible. Some
limitations made it more difficult to present a whole, complete picture of the two teachers under
study. There were time limitations that narrowed the amount of data that could be collected for
each teacher. Additionally, due to time constraints it was not possible to observe teachers for
consecutive days, which would have provided a more comprehensive understanding of their
practice. The study was also limited to teacher interviews, which restricted the involvement of
students, and did not capture their personal experiences and perceptions.
Though there is significant research on ideology, scaffolding, and CRP individually,
research is limited on the intersection of these concepts. Furthermore, research on these topics
was most frequently conducted in urban settings (Ladson-Billings, 1995; Rist, 2000; Milner,
2010, 2011; Johnson & Bolshakova, 2015) and very little research exists concerning low-income
Black, White, and Latino students in rural areas (Hatt, 2012; Roe 2010). Though Roe (2010) and
Hatt (2012) both took place in rural communities they each studied elementary and middle
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 146
school respectively. Milner, Murray, Farinde and Delale-O’Connor (2015) suggested educators
needed to reframe the way they defined “urban” to include schools in rural areas “may be
beginning to experience increases in features that are sometimes associated with urban contexts”
(p. 531). This suggests too, that rural schools need more research attention, particularly low-
income communities, as students in these communities are likely to face the similar and or
unique hurdles as those of their more urban peers.
More research examining the intersection of ideology, scaffolding, and CRP in the high
school context is needed, particularly in AP. As suggested by Sadler (2010b) “only a relatively
small group of academics involved in AP research has conducted studies that carefully control
for student backgrounds and explore relevant alternative hypotheses” (p. 7). This reinforces the
need for more research on AP by researchers not affiliated with the College Board.
Finally, though there is significant research on the need pre-service and new teachers to
examine their beliefs (Bartolomé, 2007; Milner, 2010) research on asset ideology with veteran
teachers, or those with more than 10 years experience, is limited (Johnson & Bolshakova, 2015).
These teachers are less likely to have experiences teacher preparation programs that adequately
included course focused on ideology and CRP, though many still have a long career to look
forward to in the classroom. Further research is needed on this group of teachers to understand
how ideology, scaffolding practices, and CRP can help even the most experienced teacher serve
a changing population of students.

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 147
References
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How
learning works. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bartolomé, L. (2007). CHAPTER 15: Critical Pedagogy and teacher education:
Radicalizing prospective teachers. Counterpoints, 299, 263–286. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.libproxy2.usc.edu/stable/42979411
Bartolomé, L. (Ed.). (2008). Introduction: Beyond the fog of ideology. Ideologies in education:
Unmasking the trap of teacher neutrality (pp. ix-xxix). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Bartolomé, L., & Trueba, E. (2000). Chapter 14: Beyond the politics of schools and the rhetoric
of fashionable pedagogies: The significance of teacher ideology. In L. Bartolomé & E.
Trueba (Eds.). Immigrant voices: In search of equity (pp. 277-292). Lanham, MD:
Rowman & Littlefield.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theories and methods (5
th
ed.) Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Burton, Nancy W.; Whitman, Nancy Burgess; Yepes-Baraya, Mario; Cline, Frederick; Kim, R.
M. (2002). Minority Student Success: The Role of Teachers in Advanced Placement
Program® (AP®) Courses. Research Report No. 2002-8. ETS RR-02-17, 86.
College Board (2014). The 10
th
annual ap report to the nation. Retrieved from
http://apreport.collegeboard.org
College Board (2016) Frequently asked questions. AP Couse Audit. Retrieved from:
http://www.collegeboard.com/html/apcourseaudit/faq.html
Corbin, J. & Strauss (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for
Developing Grounded Theory. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 148
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods
Approaches. Los Angeles: Sage.
Davis, P., Davis, M.P., & Mobley, J.A. (2013) The school counselor’s role in addressing the
advanced placement equity and excellence gap for African American students.
Professional School Counseling 17(1). 32-39.
Dixon, F. A., Yssel, N., McConnell, J. M., & Hardin, T. (2014, Jun 2014). Differentiated
instruction, professional development, and teacher efficacy. Journal for the Education of
the Gifted, 37, 111-127.
Gay, G. (2013). Teaching to and through cultural diversity. Curriculum Inquiry. (43) doi:
110.1111/curi.12002. 48-70.
Geddes, K. A. (2010). Using tiered assignments to engage learners in advanced
placement physics. Gifted Child Today, 33 (1), 32-40.
Godley, A., Monroe, T., & Castma, J. (2015). Increasing access to and success in
advanced placement English in Pittsburgh public schools. English Journal 105(1), 28-33.
Greenblatt, E., (2011). AP English literature and composition teacher’s guide. The College
Board.
Hallett, R. E., & Venegas, K. M. (2011). Is increased access enough? Advanced placement
courses, quality, and success in low-income urban schools. Journal for the Education of
the Gifted, 34(3), 468–487. http://doi.org/10.1177/016235321103400305
Hargreaves, Andy, & Shirley, Dennis. (2009). The Persistence of Presentism. Teachers College
Record, 111(11), 2505-2534.
Harris, D.M. (2012). Varying teacher expectations and standards: curriculum differentiation in
the age of standards-based reform. Education and Urban Society, 44 (2) 128-150. doi:
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 149
10.1177/0013124511431568.
Hatt, B. (2011). Smartness as a cultural practice in schools. American Educational Research
Journal, 49(3), 438–460. doi:10.3102/0002831211415661
Johnson, C. C., & Bolshakova, V. L. J. (2015). Moving beyond “those kids”: Addressing teacher
beliefs regarding the role of culture within effective science pedagogy for diverse learners.
School Science and Mathematics, 115(4), 179–185. http://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12120
Judson, E. & Hobson A., (2015). Growth and achievement trends of Advanced Placement (AP)
exams in American high schools. American Secondary Education, 43(2), 59–77.
Kaiser Family Foundation (2016) Poverty rates by race and ethnicity. Retrieved from:
http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/poverty-rate-by
raceethnicity/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%
22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D
Klopfenstein, K. (2003). Recommendations for maintaining quality of advanced placement
programs. American Secondary Education, (32)1, 39-48.
Khourey‐Bowers, C., Dinko, R., & Hart, R. (2005). Influence of a shared leadership model in
creating a school culture of inquiry and collegiality. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 42(1), 3-24.
Lacy, T. (2010). Examining AP. In P. Sadler, G. Sonnert, R. H. Tai, & K. Klopfenstien (Eds.), A
critical examination of the advanced placement program (pp. 17-50). Cambridge:
Harvard Education Press.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995a). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American
Education Research Journal, 32(3), 465-491.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995b). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 150
pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159-165.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: A.K.A. the remix. Harvard
education review. 84(1), 74-84.
Logan, B. (2011). Examining differentiated instruction: Teachers respond. Research in Higher
Education Journal, 13, 1-14.
McCarthey, S.J. (1997) Connecting home and school literacy practices in classrooms with
diverse populations. Journal of Literacy Research (29) 2. 145-182.
McCarty, T.L & Lee, S.T. (2014) Critical culturally sustaining/ revitalizing pedagogy and
indigenous education sovereignty. Harvard Education Review (4)1. 101-124.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miles, Huberrman, & Saldaña (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A methods sourcebook (3
rd
ed.)
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Milner R. (2010). A diversity and opportunity gaps explanatory framework. Start where you are,
but don’t stay there. (pp. 13-44). Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
Milner, R. (2011). Culturally relevant pedagogy in a diverse urban classroom. Urban review 43,
66-89. Doi: 10.1007/s11256-009-0143-0
Milner, R.,Murray, I., Farinde, A., & Delale-O'Connor, L. (2015). Outside of School Matters:
What We Need to Know in Urban Environments. Equity & Excellence in Education, 48(4),
529-548.
Morrison, K. A., Robbins, H. H., & Gregory, R. D. (2008). Operationalizing culturally relevant
pedagogy: A synthesis of classroom-based research. Equity & Excellence in Education,
41(4), 433-452. Doi: 10.1080/10665680802400006.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 151
Murphy, J., & Tobin, K (2011). Homelessness comes to school. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
National Center for Educational Statistics (2016). Fast facts. Retrieved from:
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=28
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ Beliefs and Educational Research: Cleaning Up a Messy
Construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332.
http://doi.org/10.3102/00346543062003307
Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and
practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93-97.
Paris D., & Alim S. ( 2012). What are we seeking to sustain through culturally sustaining
pedagogy? A loving critique forward. Harvard Education Review, 84(1), 85-100.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Chapter 7: Qualitative Interviewing. In Qualitative research & evaluation
methods (3
rd
ed.) Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Rist, R. (2000). HER Classic : Student social class and teacher expectations: the self-fulfilling
prophecy in ghetto education. Harvard Education Review 70 (3), 226-301.
Roe, Mary, F. (2010). The ways teachers do the things they do: differentiation in middle level
literacy classes. Middle Grades Research Journal, 5(3), 139.
Rowland, M. L., & Shircliffe, B. J. (2016). Confronting the “ Acid Test ” : Educators’
Perspectives on Expanding Access to Advanced Placement at a Diverse Florida High School.
Peabody Journal of Education, 91(October), 404–420.
http://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2016.1184947
Santamaria, L. J. (2009). Culturally responsive differentiated instruction: Narrowing gaps
between best pedagogical practices benefiting all learners. Teacher College Record,
111(1), 214-247.
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 152
Schneider, J. (2009). Privilege, equity, and the Advanced Placement Program: tug of war.
Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41(2008), 813–831.
Simon, N. S., & Johnson, S. M. (2015). Teacher turnover in high-poverty schools: What we
know and can do. Teachers College Record, 117(3), 1.
Smargorinsky, P. (2013). What does Vygotsky provide for the 21
st
century language arts teacher?
Language arts. (90)3. 193-204.
Tenenbaum, H. R., & Ruck, M. D. (2007). Are teachers’ expectations different from racial
minority than for European American students? A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 99(2), 253-273. Doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.253
Tharp R. G., & Gallimore, R. (1991) Rousing minds to life. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Theokas, C. & Saaris. (2013) Finding America’s missing AP and IB students. Shattering
Expectations Series. Washington D.C: The Education Trust.
Thompson, I. (2013). The Mediation of Learning in the Zone of Proximal Development through
a Co-constructed Writing Activity. Research in the Teaching of English, 47(3), 247–276.
U.S. Census Bureau (2015) American Fact Finder. 2011-2015 American community survey 5-
year estimates. Retrieved from:
https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=CF
U.S. Census Bureau (2016). American Fact Finder. Community Facts. Retrieved from:
gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/community_facts.xhtml?src=bkmk
U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (2012) Digest of
Educational Statistics. Table 209.10. Retrieved from:
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_209.10.asp
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 153
Vygotsky, L. (1962) Thought and language (Hanfamann, E. & Vakar, G. Trans.). Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies (pp. 1-14).
New York: The Free Press.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of
Child Psychology and Psychiatry, (17), 89-100.
Young, E. (2010). Challenges to conceptualizing and actualizing culturally relevant pedagogy:
How viable is the theory in classroom practice? Journal of Teacher Education, 61(3), 248-
260. DOI: 10.1177/0022487109359775

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 154
Appendix A
Pre-Observation Interview Protocol
This interview will begin by thanking the participant for his/her time followed by a brief review
of the goals of the interview. The pre-observation interview will focus on the participant’s
background, ideology and classroom practice, with particular attention paid to questions that
seek to elicit beliefs about scaffolding and culturally relevant pedagogy. Questions are designed
to begin with simple background questions followed by more specific situational questions. The
researcher will attempt to avoid flustering by framing questions when appropriate and asking for
clarification.

Background and Training
• Tell me a little about your education background.
• Tell me a little about your teaching background.
• What drew you to the education field?
• How long have you been teaching Advanced Placement?
• What trainings have you attended specifically designed for teaching AP courses?
o What did you think of the trainings?
• Think back on this week’s classes. Can you describe your typical daily routine in an AP
class?
• Think about a typical lesson and walk me through how you would present the
information?
• Do you encourage all students in your AP class to take the test?
o Ask for explanation.

Ideology
• Who/what students should take AP classes?
• Think back on this semester’s students. Choose one that represents a typical AP student
and describe that student.
o Why is he or she typical?
• Suppose a student had consistently low grades in all his/her classes, but she/he expressed
a desire to you take AP, what advice would you give that student?
• One of the College Board’s main goals is to increase the number of students taking AP
courses. What do you think about this expectation?
• In the most recent annual report by the College Board, the College Board are finding that
underrepresented students are slowly gaining access to AP courses, but they’re still
struggling to score above a 3 on the tests. What do you think could be causing the low
scores?
Scaffolding
• What trainings have you attended design for differentiation?
o Scaffolding?
o Culturally Relevant Pedagogy?
HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 155
• Many students are taking AP classes for the first time. Think back on a specific student
who you know is new to AP, what supports do you offer this student that may be
different from a more “experienced” AP student?
• When an AP student enrolls in your class what skills sets do you expect him or her to
have?
• Think back on the most recent writing assignment (non-timed write) you gave. Talk me
through what you said as you introduced the assignment.
• What would an observer see if they walked in on a typical lesson in your classroom?
o Describe what the students would be doing.
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
• When you hear the term “culturally relevant teaching” what comes to mind?
• What role should culture play in the classroom?
• What roles should it play in AP English curriculum?
• In what ways do you incorporate student’s culture into the classroom?
o Describe for me a lesson that does this.
• How do you incorporate students varied cultures into your curriculum?

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 156

Appendix B
Post Observation Interview protocol

Post observation questions will also be developed from the researchers notes on observations,
particularly about specific situations where the researcher will ask for further clarification such
as:
• Can you walk me through that process?
• What were you thinking about as you gave that set of instructions?
• Could you please tell me a little bit more about…
• I want to make sure I understand, could you please tell me what you mean by…
• It would be great if you could walk me though…
Ideology
• Think back over the last week of school, how did you decide what strategies you would
use in class this week?
• Think back on this semester’s students. Tell me about a student you thought, “didn’t
belong in AP.”
o What caused this student not to belong?
Scaffolding
• Describe some of thinking tools you use in your class. Example: graphic organizers,
prompts, etc.
o What thinking tools do you expect students to use during writing?
o What thinking tools do you expect students to use during academic
conversations?
o Where do you believe students acquire those conversation skills?
• When a student doesn’t come into class with those tools, what do you do?
• Think back on a student this year who you know is struggling, even if he or she has not
verbalized this struggle. What if any, supports do you offer that student in class?

Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
• How does your instruction respond to cultural differences between yourself and your
students?
• In what ways do students express their culture in their work product?
• How do writing assignments connect to students lived experiences?

HOW DO TEACHER BELIEFS SHAPE 157
Appendix C
Classroom Observation Protocol

Classroom Observation Protocol
Andrea Cota
USC Dissertation, Spring 2017

Teacher Name:
School:
Grade Level:
Period:
Date
Classroom Observation Day

Literature selection:

In a narrative, describe the activities taking place in the classroom. Focus on teacher to student(s), and
student-to-student interaction as well as activities of individual students. A narrative requires that you
directly quote the teacher as he or she asks questions, models reading strategies, presents material, works
with students in small group, large group, or individually. Additionally, you should document student
engagement in response to the teacher, as well as individual or group work and non-work activities.
Time:
Type of Activity:
Description of Activity:

Notes

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Scaffolding and culturally relevant pedagogy are critical components to support learning, especially for low-income and students of color. To understand how teacher beliefs shape the use of these tools, this study addressed the following research question: How do teacher beliefs about students shape the approaches they use to support low-income, White, Black, and Latino students in Advanced Placement English courses? Through qualitative case studies of two teachers, both 12th grade AP teachers in semi-rural settings, this study examined their beliefs and how those beliefs reflected in classroom practice. The data included teacher interviews and observations. The data revealed teachers who were well meaning and cared deeply about their students, but engaged in unconscious deficit thinking about their students. Their practice revealed that, despite having quality scaffolds, a full system of assistance performance was not in practice, nor was culturally relevant pedagogy. As a result, not all students accessed meaningful and rich learning opportunities. For all students to have access to meaningful learning opportunities, teachers must engage in a critical examination of beliefs to develop asset ideology, effective scaffolding practices, and embrace culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Examining the practices of teachers who teach historically marginalized students through an enactment of ideology, asset pedagogies, and funds of knowledge

PDF

Examining urban high school English language arts teachers’ written feedback to student writing and their perceptions and applications of culturally relevant pedagogy

PDF

The intersections of culturally responsive pedagogy and authentic teacher care in creating meaningful academic learning opportunities for students of color

PDF

Examining elementary school teachers’ beliefs and pedagogy with students from low socioeconomic status and historically marginalized communities

PDF

The opportunity gap: culturally relevant pedagogy in high school English classes

PDF

Discipline with dignity for African American students: effective culturally responsive practices used by teachers in kindergarten through second grade in Los Angeles County urban elementary schools

PDF

Cultural proficiency to provide equity for African American and other students of color: an evaluation study

PDF

Do you see you in me!? No, I do not. I other you.

PDF

Examining the learning environments of urban high school educators who are culturally aware and serve a majority of students from historically marginalized populations

PDF

A case study about the implied and perceived messages sent by one teacher through instruction for academic and behavioral expectations of students

PDF

Overcoming the cultural teaching gap: an evaluative study of urban teachers’ implementation of culturally relevant instruction

PDF

Enacting ideology: an examination of the connections between teacher ideology, classroom climate, and teacher interpretation of student behavior

PDF

The beliefs and related practices of effective teacher leaders who support culturally and linguistically diverse learners

PDF

The relationships between teacher beliefs about diversity and opportunities for culturally and linguistically diverse students, reflectiveness, and teacher self-efficacy

PDF

Positive classroom leadership: how teachers manage meaningfully in high needs contexts

PDF

A multi-case study on teaching practices and how teachers use technology to support scientific inquiry in 1:1 classrooms

PDF

Culturally relevant pedagogy in an elementary school for indigent native peoples

PDF

Changing pedagogy to promote the success of international students

PDF

Developing a critical consciousness toward culturally responsive teaching through critical reflection: A professional development curriculum for elementary teachers

PDF

Examining the intersection of ideology, classroom climate, and pedagogy in creating open-forum discussions in secondary English classrooms

Asset Metadata

Creator Cota, Andrea Leigh (author)

Core Title How do teacher beliefs shape the approaches used to support low-income, Black, White, and Latino students in Advanced Placement English?

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 09/12/2017

Defense Date 08/07/2017

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag advanced placement,beliefs,culturally relevant pedagogy,culturally responsive pedagogy,English,High School,ideology,OAI-PMH Harvest,scaffolding,teaching

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Slayton, Julie (committee chair)

Creator Email acota@usc.edu,andreacota23@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-428395

Unique identifier UC11264179

Identifier etd-CotaAndrea-5716.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-428395 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-CotaAndrea-5716.pdf

Dmrecord 428395

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Cota, Andrea Leigh

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA