University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

MAT@USC and Latino English language learners

(USC Thesis Other)

MAT@USC and Latino English language learners

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content
MAT@USC CANDIDATES AND LATINO ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

by

Cynthia Leticia Lomeli

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 2012

Copyright 2012 Cynthia Leticia Lomeli

ii
DEDICATION

Education is the passport to the future, for tomorrow belongs to those who prepare for it
today.
--Malcolm X
I want to thank my parents, Rosa and Manuel Lomeli, for instilling the
importance of education in me. Just like Malcolm X, my parents emphasized education
since day one because they wanted me to work with my “brain” instead of my “hands”
like they did and continue to do. Due to the financial hardships my parents’ families
faced, they were both forced to work and leave school by age thirteen. Yet, I have
learned a lot from them despite lacking a formal education, things that I plan to pass
down to my own children such as: respect, compassion, resiliency, and the desire to
become better each day. Their work ethic and ganas to achieve the “American Dream”
far away from their beloved Tecolotlán, Jalisco, México inspired me to be the educator
and Chicana that I am today.
I also want to thank all my relatives, friends, and colleagues who supported me
since day one. Thank you for understanding that, at times, I had to be a hermit in order to
finish my dissertation. I am lucky to have such a great support system that made this
terminal degree possible.
To all my current and former students, THANK YOU for shaping me into the
educator that I am today. Schurr High School’s Class of 2013, a big Gracias! Thank you
for feeding me, supporting me, and understanding me throughout this odyssey.
Remember, no one can ever take your education away from you.
As a first-generation Chicana who hails from Inglewood, California, I will utilize
the knowledge and tools I gained at USC’s Rossier Schol of Education to address the
iii
achievement gap among students of color and low socioeconomic status, particularly
those who lack academic English skills to succeed in the classroom.
I want to thank all my professors at USC who made this dissertation possible:
Drs. Eugenia Mora-Flores and Reynaldo Baca and my dissertation committee: Drs.
Sanda Kaplan, Ronni Ephraim, and Robert Keim. Thank you for all your constructive
feedback and support.
Ruca, Dad, Kat, and Ñañito: ¡Si Se Pudo!
iv
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
DEDICATION ii

LIST OF TABLES vi

ABSTRACT viii

CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY 1

Introduction to the Study 1

Statement of the Problem 9

Purpose of the Study 15

Research Questions 17

Theoretical Framework 17

Methodology 20

Setting 22

Participants 22

Conclusion to Chapter One 23

Definitions of Key Terms 23

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 27

Introduction to Literature Review 27

Preservice Teachers 28

Teacher Quality 31

Latino Students 34

Gender 37

Acculturation and Assimilation 39

Linguistic Needs of Latino Students 40

Teacher Education Programs 42

Importance of Educating Latino Students 44

Conclusion to Literature Review 46

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 48

Introduction to Methodology 48

Purpose 48

Research Questions 49

Site 49

Participants 51

Procedure 54

Research Design 55

Instruments 56

Summary 59

v
CHAPTER FOUR: RESEARCH FINDINGS 61

Focus of Study 61

Research Questions 61

Setting 62

Population 62

Findings: Data Analysis 64

Research Question 1 64

Research Question 2 76

Research Question 3 86

Conclusion to Research Findings 94

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION 96

Purpose of Study 96

Research Questions 98

Setting 99

Participants 99

Instruments 100

Key Findings 101

Research Question 1 101

Research Question 2 105

Research Question 3 108

Limitations 111

Recommendations for Practice 112

Conclusion 115

REFERENCES 117

APPENDICES 127
Appendix A: Introductory Letter 127

Appendix B: Live Sessions Course Summaries 128

Appendix C: “English language learners and the mainstream
classroom” Survey 132

Appendix D: Vignettes and Open-ended Questions 134

Appendix E: Course Effectiveness Survey 137

Appendix F: The Background Information Questionnaire (BIQ) 138

vi
LIST
OF
TABLES

Table 1: Instruments 21

Table 2: Data Collection Procedure 55

Table 3: Instruments 59

Table 4: Demographic Description of Participants 64

Table 5: Frequency Analysis: “English language learners and the mainstream
classroom” Survey 70

Table 6: Frequency Percentage Analysis: “English language learners and the
mainstream classroom” Survey 71

Table 7: Themes found on Vignettes 76

Table 8: Linguistic and Cultural Awareness Frequency Analysis 80

Table 9: Linguistic and Cultural Awareness Frequency Percentages 81

Table 10: Linguistic and Cultural Awareness Frequency Analysis for all
Three Courses 81

Table 11: Linguistic and Cultural Awareness Frequency Percentages for all Three
Courses 82

Table 12: Frequency Analysis: If enrolled in EDUC 558, are you taking the
course as an elective? 83

Table 13: Frequency Percentage Analysis: If enrolled in EDUC 558, are you
taking the course as an elective? 83

Table 14: Frequency Analysis: Number of languages other than English (Per Course)84

Table 15: Frequency Percentage Analysis: Number of languages other than
English (Per Course) 84

Table 16: Frequency Analysis: Number of languages other than
English (All Courses) 84

Table 17: Frequency Percentage Analysis: Number of languages other than
English (All Courses) 85

vii
Table 18: Major Themes of Each Course 86

Table 19: Frequency Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How effective
was your course in helping you 87

Table 20: Frequency Percentage Analysis:“Course Effectiveness” Survey: How
effective was your course in helping you 88

Table 21: Frequency Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How effective
was your course in helping you 89

Table 22: Frequency Percentage Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How
effective was your course in helping you 90

Table 23: Frequency Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How effective
was your course in helping you 91

Table 24: Frequency Percentage Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How
effective was your course in helping you 92

Table 25: Frequency Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How effective
was your course in helping you 93

Table 26: Frequency Percentage Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How
effective was your course in helping you 94

Table 27: Instrument Description 100

viii
ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to further understand the perceptions of
MAT@USC teacher candidates and how their perceptions and previous experiences
affect the educational experiences of Latino English language learners. Three questions
were developed to guide this study: (1) What are the perceptions of MAT@USC
candidates in selected courses toward Latino English learners? ; (2) How do the
experiences prior to enrollment in one of the MAT@USC selected courses affect
candidates’ reception to course content?; and (3) How do the candidates perceive the
three selected courses in the MAT@USC program in facilitating their ability to serve the
needs of Latino English learners?
The respondents of this study were all MAT@USC students who reside across the
United States and were enrolled in one of the targeted courses for this study: “Integrating
Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction,” “Framing the Social Context of High
Needs Schools,” and “Culture Learning in Schools: Latino,” during the Fall 2011
semester.
This mixed methods study illustrated what teacher candidates feel affects Latino
English learners and how their coursework in the MAT@USC program prepared them to
work with these students. Based on participants’ responses, MAT@USC is “recasting the
US curriculum to give greater emphasis on multiculturalism, equity, and social justice,”
in their teacher education program as recommended by Lynn & Smith-Maddox (2007, p.
95).

1
CHAPTER
ONE:
OVERVIEW
OF
THE
STUDY

Introduction
to
the
Study

Teacher perceptions play an important role in the education of all students (Ogbu
1995; Polat, 2010). These perceptions not only guide teachers to make curriculum
choices but also influence the way they will treat and view students (Ogbu, 1995). There
is a “remarkable amount of consistency between teachers’ beliefs and their instrumental
practices,” and research also suggests that some content area teachers’ beliefs about
students can have a debilitating effect on their academic achievement (Karabenick and
Noda, 2004 as cited in Polat, 2010).
Culture plays an important role in students’ educational experience and affects
teachers’ perceptions of students. Culture is a people’s way of life and is defined with the
following five components: a) customary ways of behaving—of making a living, eating,
expressing affection, getting married, raising children, responding to illness and to death,
getting ahead in society, and dealing with the supernatural; b) codes of assumptions,
expectations, and emotions underlying those customary behaviors; c) artifacts—things
that members of the population make or have made that have meaning for them; d) the
institutions—economic, political, religious, and social—the imperatives of culture that
form a recognizable pattern requiring know-how, skills, and customary behaviors in a
fairly predictable manner; and e) social structure—the patterned ways that people relate
to one another (Cohen, 1971; Edgarton and Langness, 1968; Jacobm 1993; Levine, 1973;
and Sprindly, 1979 as cited in Ogbu, 1995, p. 192). Ogbu found that “culture influences
its members, even though the latter create, change, and pass on their culture to their
children who, in turn, further change it” (p. 192). A student’s culture plays a role in
2
his/her educational experience, especially for many males of African and Latino descent
who see education as “an assimilation or subtractive process, displacing and replacing the
culture and language they already have with those of their oppressors or enemies”
(Ogbu, 1995, p. 289; Valencia 1997 & 1999).
The number of English learners continues to increase in most areas of the United
States (Hayes-Bautista, 1990). During the mid-1990s, the number of English language
learners in the United States increased by 104%. The National Clearinghouse for English
Language Acquisition in 2011 reported that, from the 1997-98 school year to the 2008-09
school year, the number of English learners enrolled in public schools increased from 3.5
million to 5.3 million, or by nearly 51 percent. Data from the 2010-2011 academic school
year shows that, in California, twenty three percent of all students enrolled in K-12 public
school were English learners, 86 percent were of Latino origin, and 37 percent spoke a
language other than English (California Department of Education, 2012). Therefore, lack
of English proficiency among students has become a prominent issue in education in the
last decade (Callahan, 2005). Moreover, most research based on ELLs has been focused
on elementary and adult English learners, leaving behind a group that is rapidly
increasing—secondary students (Yoon, 2008).
In California, the state with the highest number of ELLs, approximately 29
percent of secondary students, or 418,002, were labeled as English language learners in
the 2010-2011 academic school year (http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/cb/cefelfacts.asp).
Research shows that, when English learners start high school, many are tracked in less
rigorous courses with the most unprepared, unmotivated teachers (Callahan, 2005).
3
Secondary English language learners can be described in two distinct categories.
Forty-three percent are first generation students who were born outside of the United
States (with seventeen percent being recent arrivals who have been in the country for less
than two years). Fifty-seven percent of secondary ELLs are U.S.-born. Most of these are
second or third generation (MetisNet, 2008).
Within students of color, students with limited English deal not only with
linguistic limitations but with racial and cultural differences as well (MetisNet, 2008;
Walker, Shafer, & Iiams, 2004). A study by MetisNet in 2008 concluded that
“expectations for English language learners are very low; it is as if we do not expect them
to graduate” (p. 3). Katz (1999) agreed by adding that “teachers, principals, and
counselors frequently, though perhaps inadvertently, interpret limited English proficiency
as a form of limited intelligence and place students in low-track classes to compensate for
this perceived deficiency” (MetisNet, 2008, p. 3; Katz, 1999, p. 310).
A large number of teacher education programs are not effectively preparing
teachers to work with linguistically, socially, and culturally diverse students (MetisNet,
2008; NCTE, 2008). Kirk (1986) pointed out that “teacher education consistently fails to
produce teachers that have a critical insight into their democratic role and functions as
teachers” (p. 95). In an effort to produce critical teachers, universities and school districts
might consider offering incentives to retain highly qualified and experienced English
Language Development (ELD) teachers, offering relevant and effective (and consistent)
professional development, offering teacher exchange programs that will allow preservice
teachers to learn and appreciate the culture and language of a predominant ethnic group
present in their school, redefining reclassification criteria for ELD students, and
4
providing support for teachers at all times (Gandara, Maxwell-Jolly, & Driscoll, 2005;
MetisNet, 2008).
As of 2009, 21 percent of students entering US public schools spoke a language
other than English at home and/or were products of parents who have limited academic
English language skills (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2012). Teachers need
to be prepared to teach academic English in all content areas and learn to work with
cultural backgrounds other than their own (Orellana, Reynolds, Dorner, & Meza, 2003).
There are public schools that are being successful with English language learners,
specifically with Latino English learners. In Lucas, Henze, & Donato’s (1990) Promoting
the Success of Latino Language-Minority Students: An Exploratory Study of Six High
Schools, the authors outlined features of high schools that ensure academic success by
attending to the diversity (educational, social, academic, cultural, and linguistic) of these
students through special programs and practices and increased sensitivity to students’
needs. After observing six successful high schools, Lucas, Henze, & Donato (1990)
identified eight features that were common in all:
1. Value is placed on students’ language and culture.
2. High expectations of language-minority students are made concrete by
hiring minority staff in leadership positions to act as role models,
providing special programs to prepare language-minority students for
college, offering advanced and honors bilingual/sheltered classes in
content areas, and making it possible for students to exit ESL (English as
a Second Language) program quickly.
5
3. School leaders make the education of language minority students a
priority by having high expectations and being knowledgeable of
instructional and curricular approaches to teaching this student population.
4. Staff development is explicitly designed to help teachers and other staff to
serve language-minority students more effectively.
5. A variety of courses and programs for language-minority students is
offered. The programs include courses in ESL and primary language
instruction (both literacy and advanced placement) and keeping class size
small (20-25 students) in order to maximize interaction.
6. A counseling program gives special attention to language-minority
students through counselors who are informed about post-secondary
educational opportunities and believe, emphasize, and monitor the
academic success of these students.
7. Parents of language-minority students are encouraged to become involved
in their children’s education. Schools provide and encourage on-campus
ESL classes for parents, monthly parent nights, parental involvement with
counselors in planning their children’s course schedules, early morning
meetings with parents, and telephone contacts to check on absent students.
8. School staff members share a strong commitment to empower language-
minority students through education. (pp. 324-325)
These eight key features are the foundation of a working model that not only keeps in
mind the academic needs of Latino English language learners, but also provides services
6
and attitudes that go beyond academic instruction that affect the academic outcomes of
these students (Lucas, Henze, & Donato, 1990).
Calderon, Slavin, & Sanchez (2011) found that successful schools with a high
number of English learners have the following elements in place: constant collection and
use of ongoing formative data on learning, teaching, attendance, behavior, and other
intermediate outcomes; strong focus on professional development for all staff members,
including administrators that is intensive and ongoing; standards of behavior and
effective strategies for classroom and school management; and is able to build a “high-
reliability organization” that shares information widely, monitors the quality of teaching
and learning carefully, and holds all staff responsible for progress toward shared goals.
The authors also explained these schools reform their entire schools by providing
“innovative approaches to the curriculum, instruction, assessment, provisions for
struggling students, and professional development” (p. 108).
Some researchers believe that English learners can be academically successful
without the need of incorporating student’s linguistic and personal backgrounds. In their
book, No Excuses: Closing the Racial Gap in Learning, the authors pointed to KIPP
(Knowledge is Power)- Bronx in New York and North Star Academy in Newark, New
Jersey as two examples of successful junior high schools that believe that:
excellent schools deliver a clear message to their students: No excuses. No
excuses or failing to do your homework, failing to work hard in general, no
excuses for fighting with other students, running in the hallways, dressing
inappropriately and so forth. Americans need to say to their schools as well: No
excuses. Given the challenge urban students face, more money well spent could
7
improve education. But it does not cost more to set high academic and behavioral
standards, and inadequate funding and overcrowded classes do not explain the
racial gap. Neither does racial isolation. Family poverty is no excuse for failing to
teach kids. (Thernstrom & Thernstrom, 2004, p. 272)
These two schools also believed that great teaching is central to the success of all
students regardless of their racial background. Therefore, KIPP-Bronx and North Star
Academy believed that “the best inner-city schools have greatly extended instructional
time and created safe environments. They focus relentlessly on the core academic
subjects, insisting that their students learn the times tables, basic historical facts, spelling,
and the rules of grammar” (p. 272). These two schools start the school day by 7:30am
and end it at 5:00pm. This means students attending one of these schools are spending
approximately two extra hours in school than the average student attending a public
school, and this does not include Saturday tutoring sessions that most students are
mandated to attend. While KIPP-Bronx and North Star Academy have more than 60
percent of their students scoring proficient or advanced on annual English Language Arts
and Mathematics state exams, neighboring schools are unable to have more than 30
percent of their students score in either advanced or proficient (Thernstrom &
Thernstrom, 2004).
While many researchers, such as Lucas, Denze, and Donato (1990), stated that
teachers of Latino English learners and other underrepresented students of color should
ideally be from the same community and share similar racial/cultural backgrounds, Steele
(1991), McWhorter (2000), and Thernstrom & Thernstrom (2004) thought otherwise.
Thernstrom & Thernstrom ( 2004) stated:
8
too many “role model” advocates not only traffic in group stereotypes; they
reinforce a dangerous sense of racial isolation—a conviction that whites are
foreigners with whom blacks [and Latinos] have little in common. With respect to
education, specifically, if black [and Latino] students believe America is “white”
and doors are closed, they will see little point to working hard to acquire skills
and knowledge they need to do well. And such a strong focus on racial identity
may distract from the true priority: teacher quality. (p. 201)
McWhorter (2000) discussed that teachers’ backgrounds do not help explain that:
what one sees in black [and Latino] students is less a refusal to contribute any
effort than a sad tendency for their efforts to stop before the finish line. This
tendency stems not from laziness or inferior mental power, but from a brake
exerted on them by cultural inheritance that schoolwork is more a pit stop than a
place to live. (as stated in Thernstrom & Thernstrom, 2004, p. 120)
Steele (1991) stated, “when a people of a race or nation are insecure about their
inability to thrive in the larger world, they inevitability evolve an identity that allows
them to recompose inner fears into external threats,” (p.71). This helps to explain that,
regardless of a teacher’s racial background, students of color create an identity that tries
to protect their academic fears and, as a result, see it as easier to fail academically.
Thernstrom and Thernstrom (2004) emphasize how “no one believes that white students
need white teachers; the concern about ‘role models’ for [students of color] is obviously a
reaction to history of too many [students of color] seldom seeing adults of [color] in
positions of power and prestige” (p. 201).
9
McWhorter (2000) blamed the notion of separatism, which divides people racially
and ethnically, and the idea that “scholarly achievement [is] what white people do,” for
the low achievement of black and Latino students (p. 162). Steele (1991) added that
people of color are “new to freedom, new to its challenges, new even to the notion that
self-doubt can be the slyest enemy of freedom,” and causes the notion of “victimization”
among blacks and Latinos that causes them to be victimized “as much as by [their] own
buried fears than by racism,” ( p. 24). Thernstrom and Thernstrom (2004) suggest,ed that
“if these students [Black and Latino students] come to think of themselves as unique, free
to choose their identity, to emphasize their racial and ethnic group ties as much or little as
they wish, and if they come to understand that they belong in the country in which they
live, they will have an excellent chance of going far if they acquire solid skills”
regardless of who their teachers are and how diverse their school might be (p. 78).
Thernstrom and Thernstrom ( 2004) then asked, “If a Mexican-American child goes to
school that has mostly Mexican American students, will he or she learn less? Is a school
academically better when black and Hispanic youngsters have lots of white classmates?”
(p. 179).
This study aimed to investigate how teacher perceptions and their preservice
preparation play a role on their ability to address the language, socioeconomic status, and
culture of their students. Therefore, this study analyzed the preparation of MAT@USC
candidates in three selected courses who are or will teach in high needs schools.
Statement
of
the
Problem

As of 2008, less than one sixth of teacher education programs offered their
preservice teachers training on how to work with English learners (Ballantype &
10
Sanderman, 2008). This means “more and more teachers of ‘mainstream’ general
education classes, who normally do not have special training in bilingual education, are
faced with the challenge of educating these children” (p. 7). Only 30 percent of teachers
working with a high number of English learners have the appropriate training to do so
effectively (Ballantype & Sanderman, 2008).
In an effort to address this problem, the U.S. Department of Education gave the
University of California, Santa Cruz a two million dollar grant, over the course of five
years, to address the need to train teacher candidates to work effectively with English
learners (Lasnier, 2011). The University of Santa Cruz launched the ELLISA (English
Language as Literacy Integration in Subject Areas) program designed to help elementary
teacher candidates learn how to best teach English to English learners while also teaching
grade-level content (Lasnier, 2011).
Gonzalez & Darling-Hammond (2000) stated, “teacher education programs have
begun to rethink preservice and inservice professional development to take into account
the need for teachers to work effectively with students learning English” (p. 1).
According to the researchers, two teacher education programs that have successfully
revamped their teacher education programs to better prepare teacher candidates to work
with English learners were the University of Minnesota and San Diego State University.
The University of Minnesota’s program “Second Languages and Cultures” was based on
the philosophical tenets that “teachers and students both act as knowers and learners in an
active, experiential, and integrative process; that teaching is context sensitive; and that
reflection is a cornerstone in a teacher development,” (p.2). San Diego State University’s
program “Cross-cultural Language and Academic Development” focused on cultural
11
awareness, theoretical knowledge, content knowledge, knowledge of pedagogical
methods, and a variety of fieldwork experiences (teaching, classroom observations, and
community ethnographies).
The MAT@USC program was revamped in 2009 in order to address emerging
problems of practice teachers faced, including working effectively with English learners.
Consequently, two courses were added to the program: “Integrating Literacies in
Secondary Content Instruction” and “Framing the Social Context of High Needs
Schools.” “Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction” addresses the need to
teach all students academic English across content areas and the need to better support
struggling readers, including English learners. “Framing the Social Context of High
Needs Schools” aids teacher candidates to reflect based on their beliefs and perceptions
of students, especially students attending high needs schools, and addresses the many
macro and micro issues high needs schools are plagued with. One course, “Culture
Learning in Schools: Latinos,” used to only be offered to candidates who were proficient
in Spanish and were also working towards their BCLAD (Bilingual Crosscultural,
Language, and Academic Development) certification, yet, after the MAT@USC’s
redevelopment in 2009, it was opened as an elective course to any candidate who was
interested in the subject.
After reformatting the MAT@USC program in 2009, the program identified three
core principles for their candidates to will leave the program with. Graduates of the
MAT@USC program will be teachers who:
a) sustain passion about students and their learning and cultivate inclusive,
engaging, and rigorous learning environments.
b) plan and teach systematically in response to students’ needs
12
c) are reflective professionals who are committed to improving their own
practice
(MAT@USC Core Principles, www.mat.usc.edu. Retrieved on
11 April, 2012).
With these new changes in place, MAT@USC faculty hoped their teacher candidates
would have the necessary tools to approach their problems of practice as they encounter
them in their classrooms.
A problem of practice that plagues many schools is the low academic
achievement of Latino students. One of ten Latino students obtains a bachelor’s degree
within six years of enrollment in an institution of higher education (Solorzano, 1998).
Within the Latino student population, there is a specific group that is silenced and has
been affected by failed federal bills and propositions (Gandara & Contreras, 2009).
These students are identified as English language learners. English language learners are
unable to successfully use academic English in the classroom and can benefit from
various types of language support programs (NCTE, 2008). The lack of English
acquisition predestines many English language learners, specifically those with a Latino
background, to fail academically and socially in American public schools (Callahan,
2005).
As English language learners are tracked in low-placement and continue to be
taught by unprepared teachers, the educational gap between them and their mainstream
English-speaking counterparts will continue to grow (Polat, 2010). Callahan (2005)
defined tracking as an “assignment of students to differentiated coursework with varying
levels of academic content. Low performing students must be separated from other
students and taught a simplified curriculum, this allows high-performing students to
move ahead unhampered by their peers” (p. 307).
13
Katz (1999) stated that tracking due to linguistic abilities starts affecting Latino
students in middle school when “[Latino] English language learners are placed in low-
track classes with little expected of them, assigned to a physically isolated site, and
taught by underprepared teachers in classrooms with limited resources” (p. 311).
Callahan (2005) stated how “teachers’ low expectations of English language learners
combined with school administrators’ open preference for high track gifted and talented
students resulted in institutionalized racism against Latinos” (p. 310). Additionally,
“English learning educators often focus on teaching English to the extent that entry into
the content area academics is delayed until ‘enough’ English has been acquired. As a
result, English learners often find themselves on the periphery, physically and
pedagogically outside of the richest academic discourse” (Callahan, 2005, p. 309).
Monzo and Rueda (2009) asked “how can Latino students preserve a sense of
dignity as Spanish speakers in an English-speaking world?” (p. 22). Spanish-speaking
Latino students have a hard time preserving a sense of dignity in the educational setting
due to the policies, beliefs, and perceptions that affect students who are not English
proficient. Monzo and Rueda (2009) added that “Latino immigrant students are
constantly bombarded with multiple and conflicting discourses from the media, school,
home, and community contexts with respect to their race, language, and cultural practices
as well as the role of their education and English in the potential for social mobility”(p.
25). Monzo and Rueda further stated that “activity, like language, is socially and
historically developed and it carries with it particular functions, perspectives, discourses,
and values,” which explains why English is seen as the language of success in schools
and not other languages students bring from home (p. 24). One of the objectives in
14
“Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools” ties in with Monzo and Rueda’s
research since it states that “candidates will become familiar with or deepen their
understanding of the relationship between students’ prior academic knowledge, socio-
historical experiences, and language(s) and curriculum, standards, learning goals,
instruction, and learning,” which also helps candidates further understand the importance
of funds of knowledge in the classroom (EDUC 516, Course Syllabus, 2011). Yoon
(2008) added that many English language learners feel “powerless and invisible” in the
school setting due to their lack of English acquisition and “affiliate with either other
ELLs or students who were perceived by the teacher and students as problematic or
struggling students” (p. 517).
The current educational system refers to English language learners as deficient
students by having labels such as English learner, LEP (Limited English Proficiency),
Special Designated Academic Instruction in English, English Learner Advisory
Committee, and English Language Acquisition Programs (Callahan, 2005). All these
labels define students with language deficiency and most teachers will use the term
“deficient” to define the student as a whole. The perceptions teachers have regarding
English language learners reinforce the importance of belonging to the status quo.
Teacher perceptions of English language learners have a negatively profound effect on
the learning process of these students and “people’s beliefs are instrumental in
influencing their behavior is a truism: people act on the basis of perceptions and their
definition of the situation,” (Lawrence, 2005; Thompson, 2009, p. 537).
15
Purpose
of
the
Study

Most teachers view themselves as instructors of general education students and/or
of a single-subject, leaving behind students from special populations, including English
language learners (Yoon, 2008). Yoon (2008) discussed how “teacher’s views of their
roles varied based on their positioning of themselves as teachers for all students, as
teachers for regular education students, or as teachers for a single subject” (p. 495).
Teacher education programs need to challenge their preservice teachers to view
themselves as teachers for all students and remind these teacher candidates that lack of
English acquisition skills do not translate into lack of intelligence (NCTE, 2008).
Teacher education programs need to prepare teacher candidates to effectively work with
the linguistic differences in their classrooms and also take into consideration the cultural
and social needs their students have (NCTE, 2008).
This study will look into the University of Southern California’s Rossier School
of Education MAT@USC teacher education program. The MAT@USC program was
launched in 2009 with three program options for students:
a) MAT with Credential Program: designed for those candidates who are
pursuing a master's degree and teaching credential. Candidates in this
category may be seeking a multiple subject or single subject credential. The
MAT with Credential Program will prepare students to apply for a teaching
credential in California or their home state, when possible. USC will
endorse teacher candidates who have applied for their teaching credentials
once they have successfully completed the MAT with Credential Program.
USC does not have the authority to grant teaching credentials to an
individual.

b) MAT ONLY program: designed for candidates who are currently teaching
and those candidates who are pursuing a master's degree but not a credential.

16
c) MAT TESOL program: designed for candidates who are pursuing a
master's degree and plan to teach speakers of other languages in the United
States and abroad. The MAT TESOL program is not a credential program.

(MAT@USC January 2012 Orientation, www.2sc.usc.edu.
Retrieved on 1 April, 2012).

All the three MAT@USC programs are focused on four primary areas: theories of
learning, pedagogy, human difference, and social context. The goal of these four primary
areas is to enable MAT@USC candidates to contextualize their practice so they ensure
that each child or adult learner achieves at high levels.
Three courses were selected from the MAT@USC program in order to further
analyze teacher candidates’ perceptions regarding English learners. “Integrating
Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction” focuses on the connection between
“language and literacy as a vehicle for developing content and articulating one’s thinking
and learning” (Course Descriptions, 2011. www.mat.usc.edu.). This course also examines
student diversity (racial, special needs, language, and economic) from a literacy
perspective and how to use students’ heritage language to provide access to academic
language of the discipline (EDUC 505, Course Syllabus, September 2011). “Framing the
Social Context of High Needs Schools” is designed to help candidates “understand the
relationship between the actions of the teacher and the extent in which students are able
to learn in the classroom and school context” (Course Descriptions, 2011.
www.mat.usc.edu.). The last course, “Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos” explores the
“hegemony of the Latino culture. Especially among Latino students attending public
schools in California” and discusses the “failure to understand the diversity within and
across the Latino community,” (Course Descriptions 2011. www.mat.usc.edu; EDUC
558, Course Syllabus, September 2011).
17
Research
Questions

This study aimed to inform teacher education programs and teacher candidates
about the perceptions of candidates in one teacher education program who enrolled in
courses designed to increase teacher candidate knowledge of “students’ cultural and
experiential backgrounds, what they know and need to know, and their differences, [that]
will enable candidates to contextualize their practice for the particular students they will
teach and ensure that every child or adult learner achieves at high levels,” (MAT@USC
January 2012 Orientation, www.2sc.usc.edu. Retrieved on 1 April, 2012.). More
specifically, this study seeks to answer the following questions:
Research Question 1— What are the perceptions of MAT@USC candidates in
selected courses toward Latino English learners?

Research Question 2— How do the experiences prior to enrollment in one of the
MAT@USC selected courses affect candidates’ reception to course content?

Research Question 3— How do the candidates perceive the three selected courses
in the MAT@USC program in facilitating their ability to serve the needs of
Latino English learners?
Theoretical
Framework

Howard (2006) discussed how social dominance theory explained why certain
student populations need to be labeled as “inferior” and “deficient.” According to social
dominance theory, “human social systems are predisposed to form social hierarchies,
with hegemonic groups at the top and negative groups at the bottom” (Howard, 2006, p.
35). Consequently, “most forms of social oppression, such as racism, sexism, and
classism, can be viewed as manifestations of group-based social hierarchy” and “social
hierarchy is a survival strategy that has been selected by many species of primates,
including Homo Sapiens” (Howard, 2006, p. 35). Social dominance theory explains why
18
students who do not have characteristics of the hegemonic group (e.g. language, social
status, phenotype) will be marginalized in school and will not succeed academically,
since someone needs to be at the bottom of academic achievement (Howard, 2006). This
theoretical approach explains why some “develop belief structures that support and
rationalize their social position and their collective reality,” which justifies why some
individuals feel inferior to others (Howard, 2006, p. 36).
Yoon (2008) stated “Positioning Theory” also explains the marginalization of
English language learners [and students of color] in our schools. Positioning theory is
defined as “the study of local moral orders as ever shifting patterns of mutual and
contestable rights and obligations of speaking and acting” (p. 499). In other words,
positioning theory describes how “persons position themselves and how they are
positioned by others within a specific context” (Yoon, 2008, p. 499). The positioning of
the self and of others creates two perspectives on this theory: reflective positioning and
interactive positioning. Reflective positioning refers to how “individuals view the world
from a certain position: that is, individuals’ self-positioning guides the way in which they
act and think about their roles, assignments, and duties in a given context” (Yoon, 2008,
p. 500). Meanwhile, interactive positioning describes how “individuals are positioned as
incompetent in a certain field of endeavor they will not be accorded the right to
contribute to discussions in that field” (Yoon, 2008, p. 500). Consequently, many
teachers practice reflective positioning theory to justify their superiority in the classroom
and the pedagogy they use in the classroom with English language learners.
Paulo Freire`s (2005) Pedagogy of the Oppressed discussed the importance of
acknowledging that students, like teachers, are objects in the classroom. Freire asserted
19
that, for the most part, most students are seen as “Objects” in the classroom, which means
they are being portrayed as individuals who are passive, have “empty vessels,” cannot
reproduce valid knowledge, and are subordinates (Freire, 2005). This view has affected
the educational experience of a vast number of minority students, especially those of
Latino and African-American background. These students are not able to connect their
cultural experiences with those that are being taught as a consequence of the banking
system. Banking education (banking system) is a system of teaching and learning that
kills the capacity to understand that world and its reality since it objectifies individuals,
which can result in dehumanization of a certain group of people (Freire, 1998; 2005).
Freire stated in Pedagogy of Freedom (1998) that the educational system needs to learn
how to respect what students know (i.e. their personal experiences and their relationship
to the world), but the school system has been set as a medium that needs to teach and
transfer “packages” of knowledge to the students, which, once learned, will operate
automatically (Freire, 1998).
In contrast with the definition of an Object, a Subject can be defined as an
individual who is critical, analytical, is an active thinker and participator, questions, and
they provide valid knowledge in the classroom (Freire, 1998). Thus, students offer
legitimate knowledge in the classroom just like teachers do (Freire, 1998). Educators
should recognize that students and teachers can play an equal role in the classroom and
the act of “teaching” is not to perpetuate the banking system since:
to teach is not to transfer the comprehension of the object to a student but to
instigate the student, who is a knowing subject, to become capable of
comprehending and of communicating what has been comprehended…To listen
20
to the student’s doubts, fears, and incompetencies that are part of the learning
process. It is in listening to the student that I learn to speak with him or her.
(Freire, 1998; p. 106)

Freire challenged the traditional educational system, which relies on the banking system,
with a more problem-posing approach. This problem-posing approach allows students to
become Subjects rather than Objects, use their personal experiences in the classroom as a
means of learning, balance the student-teacher roles in the classroom since the teacher is
aware that they are also learning in the process, and be respected by the teacher since
they are being listened to (Freire, 1998). Steven Krashen confirmed that this approach
benefits English language learners by enabling them to use their primary language skills
and knowledge in the classroom to make connections with the targeted language of
English, use what they already know about language acquisition without feeling ashamed
of their primary language, and increase their affective filter (Krashen, 1996).
Methodology

This mixed method study included data collection from open-ended answers, and
survey questions reflect the participants’ responses about their MAT@USC experiences,
feelings, and knowledge teaching Latino students, and classroom observations in order to
identify the main themes discussed (Table 1). The participants were MAT@USC
candidates who were enrolled in “Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content
Instruction”, “Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools”, or “Culture Learning
in Schools: Latino” through the MAT@USC program. Participants read and responded to
questions based on five vignettes that relate to attitudes and beliefs of participants. These
21
vignettes were “useful in addressing difficult-to-explore and sensitive topics” (Jeffries &
Maeden, 2005, pp. 19-20).
Surveys and vignettes were used in this study. Vignettes are short stories that help
contextualize problems in different contexts, including education. Jefferies & Maeder
(2005) discuss how “vignettes are relatively easy to construct. They provide a useful
focus and stimulus for discussion. They are valuable in addressing difficult-to-explore
and sensitive topics, can be used with individuals and groups, and reflect real-life
contexts and problems,” (p. 17). Jefferies & Maeder (2005) stated that “the use of stories
in various formats have long been a powerful and successful method for modeling,
teaching, and researching behavior and understanding in general education, health
sciences, social sciences, and behavioral sciences” (p. 17). The vignettes engaged teacher
candidates in stories that deal with secondary Latino students and the different types of
barriers they face in education. The vignettes expressed cultural, social, and linguistic
issues Latino students confront in urban secondary school settings.
Table 1
Instruments
Instrument Instrument Purpose
Background Information
Questionnaire

This questionnaire illustrates who are the respondents
in the study. Gender, area of study, respondent’s
interaction with specific group demographics and
course enrollment were identified through the
questionnaire.
“English language learners
and the mainstream
classroom” Survey

This survey depicts the views the respondents have
towards English language learners once they are placed
in the mainstream classroom; and the instructional and
pedagogical decisions a teacher needs to make that will
meet the linguistical needs of the English language
learner.

22
Table 1, continued
Vignettes

The vignettes narrate the experiences of five Latino
English language learners who are navigating the
public school system. Respondents mentioned what
they thought were barriers and facilitators for each of
the five students’ academic success.
“Course Effectiveness”
Survey
This survey asks participants to evaluate how prepared
and comfortable they feel teaching Latino English
language learners after a taking a course that
emphasized in either literacy pedagogy, social context
of high needs schools, or Latino cultural awareness.
Course Observations All three courses used for this study were observed (by
attending live sessions and watching recordings of the
sessions) in order to identify major themes discussed in
each of the three courses.

Setting

This study was conducted with the Rossier School of Education at the University
of Southern California, located in Los Angeles, California, and the online MAT@USC
program. 2tor Inc. is a Rossier School of Education partner helping to bring Rossier’s
teacher education program online. 2tor partners with “preeminent institutions of higher
education to deliver rigorous, selective degree programs online to students nationally and
globally” (2tor, 2012).
Participants

The participants were teacher candidates enrolled in MAT@USC’s online teacher
education program and enrolled in one of the following three courses during Fall of 2011:
“Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction,” “Framing the Social Context
of High Needs Schools,” or “Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos.” These three courses
were selected because they discuss many issues that affect urban, inner-city students,
many who are of Latino background. Due to the nature of the online program, the
23
participants resided in various places in the country and had diverse teaching
experiences, from none to five years of experience.
Conclusion
to
Chapter
One

Chapter One highlights the overview of this study and purpose to identify how
MAT@USC candidates feel towards Latino English learners. Chapter Two discusses
what the research and theories say about Latino students, English learners, teacher
education programs, and preservice teachers. Chapter Three explains the methodology
used in this study. Chapter Four describes the data collected through data analysis.
Lastly, Chapter Five concludes this study by providing findings, recommendations, and
limitations.
Definitions
of
Key
Terms

Below are terms that help define the problem:
1. Perception: Personal knowledge generally defined as preservice or
inservice teachers’ implicit assumptions about students, learning, classroom
and the subject matter to be taught. Beliefs shape perceptions and they tend to
be relatively stable and resistant to change (Kagan, 1992).
2. Preservice teachers: Preservice teaching is a period of guided, supervised
teaching. The college student is gradually introduced into the teaching role for
a particular class by a mentor or cooperating teacher. The cooperating teacher
works with and encourages the preservice teacher to assume greater
responsibility in classroom management and instruction as the experience
progresses. The preservice teacher begins as an observer and finishes the
24
preservice teaching experience as a competent professional (Virginia
Wesleyan College, School of Education, 2011).
3. Selection: Relationship of teachers’ beliefs, perceptions, and practices that
contribute to a more complete description of the cognitive activities teachers
engage during instruction (Johnson, 1992).
4. Curricular experiences: John Dewey (1902) defined curricular
experiences as “selecting appropriate stimuli for instincts and impulses which
desire to employ in the gaining of new experience. What new experiences are
desirable, and thus stimuli are needed, it is impossible to tell except as there is
some comprehension of the development which is aimed at, except, in a word,
as the adult knowledge is drawn upon as revealing the possible career open to
the child” (pp. 40-41).
5. Instructional experiences: Concepts, skills, and activities that are aligned
with state and/or district standards and help teachers decide what to teach and
review (Guskey, 2003).
6. Latino: A segment of the United States population that traces in descent to
the Spanish-speaking, Caribbean, and Latin American worlds. The term
“Latino” is a new and ambiguous invention. It is a cultural category that has
no precise racial signification since Latinos are white, black, indigenous, and
every possible combination of these. The term also lacks the specificity
regarding national origin that terms such as Italian American convey. Latinos
are among the “oldest” Americans—the ancestors of some settled in the
Southwest and spoke Spanish, making it their home well before there was a
25
United States. The term “Latino” refers to the US experience of this
population and explains why Latinos/as are made in the USA (Suarez-Orozco
& Paez, 2002). The term “Latino” is used here to refer to both genders of this
population and the term “Latina” is used when only referring to female
members of this community.
7. Chicano: Many researchers interchangeably use the term “Chicano” (and
“Chicana to refer to female members of this group) to refer to Latinos. The
term “Chicano” is most commonly used to refer to individuals of Mexican-
American descent, yet many Latinos with heritage to other Latin American
countries, besides Mexico, have also embraced the term. Chicanos tend to be
first or second generation American-born individuals who show cultural pride
for their biculturalism, their community, are aware of the struggles their
ancestors had to make to come to America, and are proud of their indigenous
roots (School of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts at UC Merced, 2012,
www.ucmerced.edu, Retrieved on 1 April, 2012).
8. Teacher Education Programs: Teacher Education refers to a series of
educational experiences aimed at preparing entrants to the profession for
successful teaching careers and at providing continuing education for those
already engaged in teaching. Those experiences include preservice programs
and in-service training (Hallian & Khmelkov, 2001).
9. English language learners (ELLs): A highly heterogeneous and complex
group of students with diverse gifts, educational needs, backgrounds,
languages, and goals. They are typically students who are between the ages of
26
3-21 and are enrolled in elementary or secondary education, often born
outside of the United States or who speak a language other than English in
their homes, and who do not have sufficient mastery of English to meet state
standards and excel in an English-language classroom (MetisNet, 2008;
NCTE, 2008).
10. MAT@USC: On June 2009, MAT@USC was launched under USC’s
Rossier School of Education and 2tor. MAT@USC “is a rigorous as the
traditional on-campus MAT program, conceived and built around an honest
discussion about how to integrate theory effectively with classroom practice”
in order to create “ a selective high quality, large scale distance-learning
program for teachers” (MAT@USC January 2012 Orientation,
www.2sc.usc.edu. Retrieved on 1 April, 2012).
11. Deficit thinking: Is the practice of assuming “that students from particular
groups such as low income, ESL, racial/ethnic backgrounds, are destined to
fail in school because they have internal conflicts” (The Freire Project,
www.freireproject.org. Retrieved on 1 September, 2012).
12. Social justice: The idea that all students need to be taught fairly and
equally. In order for social justice to exist in our schools it means that “each
student is entitled to the same opportunities for academic achievement,
regardless of background or acquired privilege” (NCTE, www.ncte.org,
Retrieved on 1 September, 2012).
27
CHAPTER
TWO:
LITERATURE
REVIEW

Introduction
to
Literature
Review

Students who come from a home where a language other than English is spoken
and who speak languages other than English are a growing presence in U.S.
Schools. Many classroom teachers have had little or no preparation for providing
the types of assistance that such learners need to successfully learn academic
content and skills through English while developing proficiency in English.
Linguistically and culturally responsive practices informed by principles from
high quality research have not often been employed in mainstream teacher
education (usually reserved for the preparation of specialists). There is a need for
Teacher Education to incorporate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that will
prepare all preservice teachers to be linguistically and culturally responsive to
this student population’s needs.

(excerpt from EDUC 501’s Course Syllabus, April 2012).

The above excerpt highlights the need for teacher education programs to address
the problems practice teacher candidates and classroom teachers face in the classroom
due to the lack of effective preparation to work with English learners. The purpose of this
literature review was to better understand Latino English learners, the largest ethnic
group within English learners, to see what teacher education programs do, or not, to
address the preparation of their teacher candidates to respond to the problems plaguing
English learners, and to understand who our teachers in our classrooms are and how their
perceptions and beliefs affect the learning of diverse students, including English learners.
Teacher education programs need to realize that “educational outcomes for
students of color are much more than a function of their unequal access to key
educational resources, including skilled teachers and quality curriculum, than they are a
function of race,” (Darling-Hammond, 2007, p. 320). Gonzalez and Darling-Hammond
(2000) added “because students must use language to acquire academic content in
28
mainstream classes, second language teaching must be integrated with the social,
cultural, and political contexts of language use,” (p. 1). Gonzalez and Darling-Hammond
listed the problems that generally plague teacher education programs as they try to
incorporate second language acquisition into their programs: failure to see the
interconnectedness between first and second languages and cultures, fragmentation and
isolation of language teaching and learning, view of language, paralyzing focus on
methodology, and disjuncture between language and culture. Even with all the problems
many teacher education programs face as they try to address second language acquisition
with their teacher candidates, only about one-sixth of U.S. colleges offer second language
acquisition training to their candidates (Ballantyne, Sanderman, & Levy, 2008, p. 7).
Preservice
Teachers

Preservice teachers go into teacher education programs with beliefs and
ideologies that affect how they perceive their students (Freeman & Johnson. 1998;
Sleeter, 2001). Most teacher education programs fail to recognize that these preservice
students are not empty vessels waiting to be filled with theoretical and pedagogical skills;
they are individuals who enter the programs with prior experiences, personal values, and
beliefs that inform their knowledge about teaching and shape what they do in their
classrooms (Freeman & Johnson, 1998). Teacher education programs generally operate
under the assumption that teachers need discrete amounts of knowledge, usually in the
form of general theories and methods, in order to be successful in the classroom and meet
the needs of all their students (Freeman & Johnson, 1998). Tellez and Waxman (2005)
added that an effective teacher education programs will focus on the developing four
domains among preservice teachers:
29
a) Language: Teachers must understand language as a system, knowing
components of language such as phonology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics,
and writing conventions. They should also understand native-and second-
language acquisition.
b) Culture: Teachers must understand the role that culture has in language
development and academic achievement. They must also understand the
nature of cultural groups and how students’ cultural identifications affect
language learning.
c) Planning, Implementing, Managing Instruction: Teachers must understand
how to teach to standards in ELD, as well as use resources effectively in ELD,
SDAIE, Academic English, and content instruction.
d) Assessment: Teachers must understand how systematic biases in assessment
may affect students who are not Standard English learners. They must also
know the proper methods and techniques for assessing student-language
growth. (p. 11)
Teacher education programs need to keep in mind previous experiences and personal
backgrounds of preservice teachers affect how they perceive and internalize the
informationpresented in their credentialing program (Freeman & Johnson. 1998; Sleeter,
2001; Waxman, 2005).
The majority of preservice teachers share similar personal backgrounds and
experiences. The demographics of preservice teachers continue to stay stable even as the
United States continues to get more linguistically and culturally diverse. Preservice and
in-service teachers continue to be predominantly White, female, monolingual, and middle
class (Darling-Hammond, 1997; Goodwin, 2002). The National Center for Education
Statistics (2008) reported that, in the 2007-2008 academic school, 83.5 percent of all
public school teachers were White, even as our public schools become more racially
diverse.
Preservice teachers display parochial attitudes and articulate a preference for
teaching children like themselves and in familiar environments (Goodwin, 2002).
30
Valencia (1997 & 1999) added that instead of cultivating the cultural and linguistic assets
Latino/a students bring to the school, teachers often engage in processes of “subtracting
schooling,” assuming students have multiple cultural deficits rather than cultural
advantages. Due to the growing numbers of students of color, preservice teachers will
most likely not teach students who look and speak like they do or have similar
institutionalized capital as they do (Darling-Hammond, 1997; Goodwin, 2002; Suarez-
Orozco & Paez, 2002— Appendix A). As Ladson-Billings (1999) argued," the
demographic imperative is not just about numbers of culturally diverse students, the
social and economic conditions of these students are also a major concern" (p. 92).
Surveys held in various geographic regions consistently reported that although a
large proportion of White preservice teachers anticipate working with children of another
cultural background, as a whole, they bring little cross-cultural background, knowledge,
and experience (Barry & Lechner, 1995; Gilbert, 1995; Larke, 1990; Schultz, Neyhart, &
Reck, 1996; Sleeter, 2001; Su, 1996, 1997). For example, Barry and Lechner (1995)
found that even though students felt their coursework made them aware of cultural
diversity, most felt unprepared to teach in multicultural classrooms and communicate
with students from diverse backgrounds. Schultz et al. (1996) explained White
preservice candidates in their study were naïve and held stereotypic beliefs about urban
children. For example, they believed that culture does not affect education and that urban
children bring attitudes that interfere with education. Several White preservice teacher
candidates also stated in a survey that they embrace the myth of individualism, insisting
that anyone can achieve the "American dream," regardless of color (Sleeter, 2001; Valli,
1995). Changing these teacher candidates’ attitudes is a challenge since “as institutions,
31
predominately White universities generally reflect the same attitudes and experiences of
predominately White preservice students, and it is as hard to change these universities as
it is to change the people in them” (Corwin, 1973; Sleeter, 2001, p. 239).
Teacher
Quality

Teacher quality is essential for student academic success (Darling-Hammond,
1997; Gandara & Contreras, 2009). Gandara and Contreras (2009) found there is a “clear
relationship between the quality of teachers and the achievement of their students, and
the quality of instruction has also been shown to have the greatest impact on the
academic achievement of students of color” (p. 103). Robert Ream (2004) explained
teachers of students of color lower their standards or implement a less rigorous
curriculum out of desire to not make students feel “bad.” Gary Orfield (1978) agreed,
stating low-income and minority students are concentrated in schools within metropolitan
areas that tend to offer different and inferior courses and levels of competition, creating a
situation where the most disadvantaged students receive the least preparation for college.
Orfield (1978) adds that a fundamental reason low-income, minority youth are not
academically successful is that schools do not provide a fixed high school curriculum
taught at a common depth and pace. The actual working curriculum of a high school is
the result of the ability of teachers, the quality of counseling, and enrollment patterns of
students (Orfield, 1978).
In 2009, the USC Rossier School of Education’s MAT@USC teacher education
program curriculum was redesigned in order to address the issues that plague high needs
schools, where the vast majority of minority, low-income, and English learners attend. As
Carey (2004) stated, “effective teachers are not teaching low-income and minority
32
students, the students who have traditionally been short-changed by the education
system, the students who are most dependent on our public schools” (p.8). Carey (2004)
also added:
no matter which study you examine, no matter which measure of teacher qualities
you use, the pattern is always the same—poor students, low-performing students,
and students of color are far more likely than other students to have teachers who
are inexperienced, uncertified, poorly educated, and under-performing. Many of
those teachers demonstrate most or all these unfortunate qualities all at the same
time. (p. 8)
To better prepare teacher candidates and address the problems of practice associated with
teaching minority, low-income students, two courses were added to the MAT@USC
program: “Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools” and “Integrating
Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction.
The purpose of “Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools” is to prepare
“candidates to understand the relationship between the actions of the teacher and the
extent to which students are enabled to learn in the classroom and school context,”
(Course Descriptions, 2011. www.mat.usc.edu.). The course aims to have candidates
“understand the relationship between the actions of the teacher and the extent in which
students are able to learn in the classroom and school context,” (Course Descriptions,
2011. www.mat.usc.edu.). This course prepares candidates to become “familiar with or
deepen their understanding of the relationship between students’ prior academic
knowledge, socio-historical experiences, and language(s) and curriculum, standards,
learning goals, instruction, and learning” (EDUC 516 ,Course Syllabus, September 2011).
33
“Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction” focuses on the
connection between “language and literacy as a vehicle for developing content and
articulating one’s thinking and learning” (Course Descriptions, 2011.
www.mat.usc.edu.). This course examines student diversity (racial, special needs,
language, and economic) from a literacy perspective and is designed to prepare
candidates to know how to use students’ heritage language to provide access to academic
language of the discipline (EDUC 505, Course Syllabus, September 2011). The course
also aims to prepare candidates to value “students’ heritage languages and language
varieties while providing access to academic language of the discipline,” (EDUC 505
Course Syllabus, September 2011).
In addition to “Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools” and
“Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction,” there were two courses already
in place as part of the MAT program that also address practices associated with teaching
minority, low-income students: “Instruction for English as a New Language” and
“Culture Learning in Schools: Latino.” “Instruction for English as a New Language” is
intended “to engage graduate students in exploring a variety of theories, issues,
procedures, methods and approaches for use in bilingual, English as a second language,
and other learning environments” (EDUC 501, Course Syllabus, April 2012). Prior to the
2009 restructuring, “Culture Learning in Schools: Latino” was only offered to students
pursuing a BCLAD (Bilingual Crosscultural, Language, and Academic Development)
certification, yet, beginning in 2009, the course was also offered as an elective. The
purpose of the “Culture Learning in Schools” course is for candidates to “learn about
themselves and their own culture…[and explore their] our own beliefs, attitudes,
34
perceptions and experiences as members of diverse ethnic backgrounds” in order to better
understand Latino students (EDUC 558, Course Syllabus, September 2012).
Latino
Students

There is a fifty percent dropout rate among Latino and Black students in
American public schools (Gandara & Contreras, 2009). It is well documented that the
schools most Latinos attend have fewer resources, are more crowded, and have teachers
who are themselves less skilled. Such schools are also more likely “to have high teacher
turnover and teachers with less experience” (Gandara & Contreras, 2001, p.31). Many
teachers who decide to teach in high concentration minority schools tend to be the least
qualified. In schools regarded as having a high minority student population, “88 percent
of teachers scored in the bottom quartile for quality. By contrast, the schools with the
lowest percentage of minority students had only 11 percent of teachers who scored in the
bottom quartile of the teacher-quality index. “Numerous studies have shown a clear
relationship between the quality of teachers and the achievement of their students, and
the quality of instruction has also been shown to have the greatest impact on the
academic achievement of students of color” (Gandera & Contreras, 2009, p.103).
The sole fact of having “highly qualified” teachers in a high minority school site
does not guarantee a high performing school since, “recent research on teachers’ beliefs
about their ethnic minority students has found that cultural differences between students
and teachers also contribute to teachers’ unfairly low opinion of these students’ academic
abilities” (Gandara & Contreras, 2009, p. 104). Gandara & Contreras (2009) stated, “One
important way in which even ‘highly qualified’ teachers can inadvertently affect their
students’ achievement is through the expectations they hold for them and teachers’
35
beliefs about children’s abilities can either enhance or reduce their school performance,
and teachers’ assessments of student potential begin at a very early age” (pp.103-104).
Angela Valenzuela (1999) agreed with Gandara and Contreras (2009) by adding:
Predominantly non-Latino teaching staff see students as not sufficiently caring
about school, while students see teachers as not sufficiently caring for them.
Teachers expect students to demonstrate caring about school with an abstract, or
aesthetic commitment to ideas and practices that purportedly leads to
achievement. Immigrant and U.S. born [Latino] youth on the other hand are
committed to an authentic form of caring that emphasizes relations of reciprocity
between teachers and students. (p. 77)
This contradiction of beliefs shapes how teachers and students view each other,
which consequently guides teachers on how to treat and view their students, even if they
are considered to be “highly qualified” instructors (Gandara & Contreras, 2009;
Valenzuela, 1999).
This does not mean that non-Latino teachers are not capable of teaching Latino
students. The research suggests that teachers and administrators need to take the time to
learn more about who their students are, which includes their cultures and the community
they reside in. Gandara and Contreras (2009) pointed out:
While the research remains unclear about whether teachers and administrators
from the same ethnic background as their students are more educationally
effective with these students, there is considerable consensus that teachers and
administrators who know and are engaged with their students and communities
are more effective than those who are detached from them (p. 109).
36
Yet, Zelher et al (2003) stated that hiring teachers from students’ own communities can
be beneficial as well:
Such teachers not only better understand the challenges that students face and the
resources that exist in those communities; they are also more likely to speak the
language of the students and be able to communicate with them and their parents.
Moreover, teachers who come from the same community in which they work are
more likely to stay in the job over time, developing valuable experience and
expertise that has been shown to enhance the achievement of their students.
Unfortunately, only about 5 percent of the teachers of English learners across the
nation are certified bilingual teachers, and only about 6 percent of teachers
nationally are Latino (compared to 20 percent of students).
(p. 148)
Even though there is no consensus as to who is better qualified to teach Latino
students, knowing about and respecting the Latino culture helps in forming more positive
relationships between teachers and students.
There are also social factors that have an impact on the educational experience of
Latino children. Gandara and Contreras (2009) discuss how “Latino children are much
more likely than White or Asian children to have five risk factors for social failure at the
point of school entry: poverty, a single-parent household, a mother with less than a high
school education, a primary language other than English, and a mother unmarried at the
time of the child’s birth” (p. 67). The education of parents is also critical due to the fact
that “parent education is essential because it is tied to class, and class privilege is tied to
social and cultural capital—access to power and authority, to networks of influential and
37
informed friends and colleagues, to the understandings of the workings of ‘the system’
that allows those with privilege in society to maintain it” (Gandara & Contreras, 2009, p.
51). Gandara & Contreras (2009) added that “low-income and minority parents often lack
the cultural capital (knowledge of how the system works and what it values) and social
capital (access to important social networks) that are such an essential part of how
middle-class White and Asian parents support their children’s academic achievement” (p.
68).
Gender

Ginorio and Huston (2002) discussed that, aside from race, gender plays a pivotal
role in the educational experience of Latina and Latino students. Family dynamics help
explain some of the discrepancies between Latina and Latino students (Barajas & Pierce,
2001; Cammarota, 2004; Ginorio & Huston, 2002). Unlike most White families, Latino
families have a higher percentage of single parent households, often leaving older
siblings with a responsibility to encourage and be positive role models to the younger
siblings, yet sacrificing their own academic achievement by doing so. Many start
working at a young age and babysit for long hours (Ginorio & Huston, 2002). This is not
to state that Latino families do not value education but value family above all. Therefore,
“when it comes to choosing between going to school and helping the family, the family
will win” (Ginorio & Huston, 2002, p. 546). Due to the many roles most Latino families
impose on their children based on their gender, Latinas are most likely to stay at home
instead of going to school in order to take care of younger siblings (Cammarota, 2004;
Ginorio & Huston, 2002).
38
Latino male students are “vanishing” from the American educational pipeline as
Saenz & Ponjuan (2008) state, “ as the number of Latina/os attending college has actually
increased steadily over the past few decades, the proportional representation of Latino
males continues to slide relative to their Latina female counterparts” (p. 54). This finding
correlates with Arizona State University’s Center for Community Development and Civil
Rights (2007) statistic that “Latino males are more likely to drop out of high school than
any other male. In 2004, 29% of Latino males dropped out, compared to 7% of White
males and 14% of African American males” (p. 5). Saenz and Ponjuan (2008) added that
“20.9% of inmates in federal, state, and local prisons are Latino” and “63% of these
Latino [inmates] are between 18-34 years old” (p. 56). Since 63% of Latino inmates are
between 18-34 years old, this statistic helps to explain why a large number of young
Latino males are most likely to “require government assistance, go to prison, experience
chronic poverty, and pass these struggles on to their children” (p. 2). The lack of positive
educational experiences and community role models push many Latino males to engage
in illegal activities (Saenz & Pojuan, 2008).
Latino male youth do not have a positive image of their cultural identity, which
makes it difficult for them to find and be positive role models within their families and
communities (Barajas & Pierce, 2001). This lack of a positive identify is a consequence
of the racial discrimination many students of color, particularly Latino and African-
American male students, face in the classroom (Wakefield & Fajardo, 2004). Wakefield
& Fajardo (2004) defined racial discrimination as “denying members of certain racial
groups equal access to scarce and valued resources” (p. 3). The authors stated that racial
discrimination is manifested in the classroom by teachers who perceive Latino and
39
African-American male youth as having “low intelligence, low motivation towards
achievement, and engage in antisocial behavior” and how the school (and society in
general) criminalizes them due to their appearance and racial background (p. 9).
The negative image Latino male students receive from others has caused many of
them to associate academic success with being White (Saenz & Ponjuan, 2008). Latino
male students see it as “selling out” and “acting white” if they succeed academically
(Saenz & Ponjuan, 2008). Yet, this attitude explains how “the stigma of acting white
among minority males is ultimately a reflection of their lack of identification with
traditional norms of academic success, which ultimately results in their devaluing of
academics and education in the traditional sense” (Saenz & Ponjuan, 2008, p. 61).
Acculturation
and
Assimilation

How a Latino family decides to integrate into American culture also affects the
educational outcomes of Latinos (Barajas & Pierce, 2001; Cammarota, 2004; Gandara &
Contreras, 2009; Ginorio & Huston, 2002). Latino families are most likely to acculturate
than to assimilate. Acculturation refers to “changes wherein one group acquires some of
the characteristic values or behaviors of the other without giving up its own values or
behaviors” (Ginorio & Huston, 2002, p. 552). Assimilation is the “acquisition of new
values or behaviors that replace original values or behaviors with the intent of becoming
like the group they copied” (Ginorio & Huston, 2002, p. 552). Gandara and Contreras
(2009) stated that the more assimilated a Latino family becomes, the worse its students
will do academically, especially Latino male students. Barajas and Pierce (2001)
reinforced Gandara& Contreras’ (2009) finding by stating that “success is predicated on
assimilation, however, Latino students construct paths through the terrain of
40
discrimination and prejudice they encounter in school that is much more complex” (p.
873). One of the course objectives of MAT@USC’s course “Framing the Social Context
of High Needs Schools” is that “candidates will become familiar with or deepen their
understanding of the diversity of backgrounds, experiences, socio-historical, and
languages of the students they will be teaching,” which should help teacher candidates
better understand who their students are and minimize indirect discrimination they might
unintentionally introduce in their classroom due to their lack of knowledge regarding
students’ diverse backgrounds.
Linguistic
Needs
of
Latino
Students

Besides acknowledging how the hegemony within the Latino community may
affect a student’s academic success, teachers also need to take into consideration the
linguistic needs of many of these students (Gandara & Contreras, 2009). Classroom
teachers are confronted on a daily basis with a reality; many of their students are not
English proficient (Goodwin, 2002). Funding shortfalls and teacher shortages have
resulted in a shortage of bilingual education and English as a Second Language (ESL)
programs and instructors (Goodwin, 2002). Gonzalez and Darling-Hammond (1997)
discussed that they do not expect all teachers to be bilingual or ESL teachers, but it will
be necessary to expect all teachers “to have basic understandings of the tools, materials,
and techniques appropriate for second language learning” (p. 168; Goodwin, 2002).
Goodwin (2002) added, “all teachers will need to be familiar with language acquisition
theories—especially the interdependence of first and second language proficiency and
instructional strategies to provide appropriate support for the English language learners
they will find in their classrooms (p. 168). Gandara and Contreras (2009) mentioned “an
41
English-only outlook also fails to capitalize on the human resources and cognitive
advantages that are conveyed by having full literacy in another language—not just for
students who speak another primary language, but also for those who would choose to
become multiliterate” (pp. 321-322).
Language is an important factor in the ways teachers view their students (Walker,
Shafer, & Iiams, 2004). How a teacher perceives students affects how they teach and
what they expect of students (LeMoine & Hollie, 2007). In public schools, “speaking a
language other than English is generally considered an impediment to learning; a defect
to be corrected, and a characteristic with little relevance to other students,” (Gandara and
Contreras, 2009, p. 321). Smitherman (2000) stated, “language is the foundation stone of
education and the medium of instruction in all subjects and disciplines throughout
schooling. It is critical that teachers have an understanding of and appreciation for the
language students bring to school” (p. 119). Cummins (1989) added how the educational
experience of minority students is a direct consequence of how teachers define
themselves in relation to minority communities. LeMoine and Hollie (2007) concluded,
“teachers who devalue the language, culture, and experiences of minority students
convey the messages that hurt the students’ classroom performance” (p. 48).
Additionally, “studies find that attitudes toward language learning, do, indeed, affect
acquisition and that teachers are influenced by the primary language (or dialect) that
students speak, holding higher expectations for some language groups than others,”
(Gandara & Contreras, 2009, p. 136).
Likewise, Fairchild and Edwards-Evans (1990) discussed how “teachers who
expect failure, typically demand less, provide less information and feedback, and
42
generally engage in conscious and unconscious behaviors that produce failure” (p. 78).
Teacher education programs must therefore engage new teachers in a process of self-
reflection and analysis to ensure that they:
a) do not use children’s bilingualism as a scapegoat for poor academic
achievement and blame children for their own failures
b) recognize that schools generally do not value skills in any language but
standard American English
c) actively resist deficit perceptions of English language learners whereby the
inability to speak standard English is often times equated with low levels of
cognitive functioning. (Goodwin, 2002)
Teachers also need to keep in mind that not all Latino students are the same when
it comes to English proficiency. They need to be aware that immigrant language-minority
students hold more positive attitudes towards schooling than subsequent generations and,
as a result, often outperform native-born members of their own ethnic group
scholastically – even when the native-born group is more proficient in English (Rumbaut,
1995; Suarez-Orozco and Suarez-Orozco, 1996). Callahan (2005) discussed that all
students have different linguistic needs, since some students are newcomers with strong
academic backgrounds, some come with interrupted formal education, and the vast
majority (57%) are long term English learners who have been classified as an ELL for at
least seven years. Hence, there is no single curriculum and/or program that can meet all
the needs of ELL students.
Teacher
Education
Programs

In Genres of research in multicultural education, Bennett (2001) discussed the
need for curriculum reform that “requires active inquiry to discover and include
knowledge and perspectives that have previously been ignored or suppressed” (p. 176).
43
This curriculum would take into account the various experiences and funds of knowledge
of all students, including English learners. Bennett (2001) stated the current curriculum
assumes “that knowledge is contested and constructed” and the Eurocentric curriculum is
a tool for cultural hegemony since it portrays a multicultural society (p. 176). Bennett
(2001) urged educational settings to adopt curriculum reform, equity pedagogy,
multicultural competence, and societal equity genres into their practices to ensure the
success of all students. Goodwin (2002) added that curriculum reform should include
instructional strategies that help develop Academic English, such as:
a) Providing students with written communication models consistently;
b) Providing opportunities for students to share their writing with peers in small
and whole groups;
c) Providing opportunities for students to write daily;
d) Using language experience to write down student talk;
e) Using some aspects of the writing process on a daily basis;
f) Using technology to develop written language and instructional practices that:
i) activate and using student background knowledge;
ii) emphasize naturalistic language experiences;
iii) acknowledge and respect cultural and linguistic diversity;
iv) use visuals, realia, manipulatives, graphic organizers, multimedia, and
other sources to explain concepts, accommodating the student’s
culture and language;
v) infuse student’s history and culture into daily instruction;
vi) encourage other students to recognize, respect, and appreciate their
language and culture. (p. 53)
44
Teacher education programs need to consider re-evaluating their programs to ensure they
are preparing the next generation of teachers to deal with the linguistic, cultural, and
social needs of the students they will encounter in the classroom.
Importance
of
Educating
Latino
Students

By 2025, the U.S. Census Bureau predicts that one of every four students will be
Latino and that the population will continue to become more Hispanic (Gandara &
Contreras, 2009). Latino youth are inextricably linked to the nation’s future (Gandara &
Contreras, 2009; Hayes-Bautista, 1992). Darling-Hammond (2007) mentioned that
“about 70% of U.S. jobs [will] require specialized skill and training beyond high school,
up from only 5% at the turn of the 20th century” (p. 318). Consequently, “with a more
educationally demanding economy, the effects of dropping out are more negative than
they have ever before been and are much worse for young people of color than for
Whites” (Darling-Hammond, 2007, p. 322). Yosso and Solorzano (2006) emphasize the
serious need to reform the current educational experience of Latino students by
highlighting:
Of the 100 Chicano [Latino] students who start at the elementary level 54 of
them drop out (or are pushed out) of high school and 46 continue on to graduate.
Of the 46 who graduate from high school, about 26 continue on toward some
form of postsecondary education. Of these 26, approximately 17 enroll in
community colleges and nine enroll at four-year institutions. Of those 17 in
community college, only one will transfer to a four-year institution. Of the 9
Chicana/os [Latinos] attending a four-year college and the 1 community college
transfer, 8 will graduate with a baccalaureate degree. Finally, 2 Chicana/o
45
students will continue on to earn a graduate or professional degree and less than 1
will receive a doctorate. In contrast, of every 100 White elementary students, 84
graduate high school, 26 graduate with a baccalaureate, and 10 earn a professional
or graduate degree (p.1 of Latino Policy & Issues Brief, No. 13 – Appendix B).
Gandara and Contreras (2009) continued by stating how “excellent, well-prepared, caring
teachers are the most important social resource for Latino students, but they are in
terribly short supply” (p. 331-332). Until then, the Latino educational pipeline will see
little or no improvement.
Hayes-Bautista (1990) stated, in Burden of Support, the consequences the nation
faces, particularly states with a heavy influx of Latino, Spanish-speaking immigrants,
such as California, if Latino students continue to be ill-prepared in elementary and
secondary schools. Hayes-Bautista (1990) reiterated how education continues to be the
traditional route to improve economic mobility. The educational attainment of Latinos is
critical for the economic growth of the nation, since Latinos will become the new
working majority by the year 2030 (Hayes-Bautista, 1990). Yet, “only about 17% of
African American young people between the ages of 25-29—and only 11% of Hispanic
youth—had earned a college degree in 2005, as compared with 34% of White youth in
the same age bracket” (Darling-Hammond, 2007, p. 318).
Improving the educational status of undereducated Latinos will have positive
implications for the economic future of the nation (Hayes-Bautista, 1990; Valencia,
2002). Hayes-Bautista (1990) restated, “the ‘burden of support’ for the elderly [which
will be majority Anglo] (i.e. regarding the cost of health care; income support through
social security payments), will fall primarily on the shoulders of the income of working-
46
age earning, taxpaying Latino workers” (p. 66). Depriving Latinos of an effective,
socially just education, will not only affect their academic attainment, but also the ability
for the United States to compete in the global market in the near future.
Conclusion
to
Literature
Review

As the number of English learners increases in our public schools, teacher
education programs will need to be ready to effectively prepare their teacher candidates
to work with this student population. About 79% of English learners are of Latino origin,
the lack of teacher preparation and deficit-thinking ideologies has negatively affected the
academic success of this student population (Kindler, 2002). Madrid (2001) stated:
[that this] problem is complex and its solution will not be found in a specific
program, intervention, or curriculum because the academic achievement of
Latinos is affected by many factors, including the conditions of the schools in
which Latino students are enrolled, the quality of the coursework, the manner in
which teacher teach, how teachers and school leaders perceive Latino students,
the allocation of resources, parents’ expectations, parent empowerment, and
teacher preparation. (p.7)
Yet, regardless of all the problems that affect minority students and English learners,
Rakosi and Rosenbloom (2004) cited that teacher quality and teacher involvement (i.e.
quality of the interpersonal relationship between teacher and student) are the primary
factors that indicate success of each student, regardless of his/her previous academic
history and personal backgrounds. The USC Rossier School’s MAT@USC’s program
response to better prepare teacher candidates to develop positive teacher-student
relationships, without sacrificing content knowledge, was to integrate two new courses
47
in 2009: “Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools” and “Integrating Literacies
in Secondary Content Instruction,” along with opening “Culture Learning in Schools:
Latino” to all students.
This Literature Review highlighted who Latino English language learners are and
how teacher education programs prepare teacher candidates to work with this student
population. This chapter also explained the importance of teacher quality and teacher
perceptions and how they affect the education of students.
48
CHAPTER
THREE:
METHODOLOGY

Introduction
to
Methodology

Garcia and Wiese (2002) emphasized that the 1974 Lau vs. Nichols Supreme
Court decision “does not stand for the proposition that children must receive a particular
educational service (such as bilingual/bicultural instruction or ESL), but instead that
some form of effective educational programming must be available to ‘open the
instruction’ to English language learners” (p. 161). Therefore, educators need to make
sure that all students, regardless of their English language proficiency, are able to have
equal access to the curriculum (Gandara, 2002; Garcia & Wise, 2002). Currently, one out
of five American household speaks a language other than English as the primary
language, which explains the growing number of students whose native tongue is not
English (Gandara, 2002).
Purpose

Teacher perceptions play a pivotal role in the education of all students (Ogbu
1995; Polat, 2010). These perceptions not only guide teachers’ curriculum choices but
also the way they treat and view students (Ogbu, 1995). Thus, it is not surprising that
there is a “remarkable amount of consistency between teachers’ beliefs and their
instrumental practices,” and how “content area teacher beliefs about students can be
debilitating, affecting their academic achievement” (Karabenick & Noda, 2004 as cited in
Polat, 2012, p. 232). It is important to study the perceptions preservice teachers have
regarding students’ culture, social status, and linguistic abilities before they complete a
credentialing program, since only one sixth of U.S. colleges offer second language
49
acquisition training to their candidates even as the number of English language learners
increases each year (Ballantyne, Sanderman, & Levy, 2008).
MAT@USC courses “Culture Learning in Schools: Latino Culture,” “Framing
the Social Context of High Needs Schools,” and “Integrating Literacies in Secondary
Context Instruction” address and challenge teacher perceptions. Challenging teachers’
perceptions is important for both teachers and students because it helps teachers to
critically think about their teaching and learning views and how these affect [linguistic]
minority students (Lynn & Smith-Maddox, 2007.) When teachers have high expectations
for students, then students are more willing to be active participants in their education
and try to meet those teacher expectations (Lynn & Smith-Maddox, 2007).
Research
Questions

This study sought to answer the following research questions to depict the
perceptions and experiences of students enrolled in three selected courses in the Rossier
School of Eduction MAT@ USC program:
Research Question 1— What What are the perceptions of MAT@USC candidates
in selected courses toward Latino English learners?

Research Question 2 How do the experiences prior to enrollment in one of the
MAT@USC selected courses affect candidates’ reception to course content?

Research Question 3— How do the candidates perceive the three selected courses
in the MAT@USC program in facilitating their ability to serve the needs of
Latino English learners?
Site

The Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California’s
MAT@USC program is delivered online and offers several degrees and certificates for
students who are aspiring teachers or current teachers looking to earn a Masters of Arts in
50
Teaching. 2tor, Inc., provides the necessary online tools which makes it possible for this
program to be offered online. Students enrolled in the MAT@USC program work
towards a multiple-subject or single-subject California teaching credential with the option
of obtaining a Master of Arts in Teaching as well.
By offering the MAT@USC online, USC has recognized “the rise of the internet
as a viable learning platform. The wide availability of broadband technologies, in recent
years, has led to the advancement of the concept of internet-based teaching and learning.
Unlike the generic off-site teaching model in which “the focus is placed on broadcasting
educational contents to learners with limited degree of feedback, distance education and
internet-based teaching and instruction place focus on maximal possible interaction”
(Guilbard, 2007, p. 2). Owen and Aworuwa (2003) add that “online learning stacks up
fairly well against the traditional classroom since remote delivery offers value and quality
in education and instruction is designed to be interactive by providing instant feedback to
students, through technology-based-instruction, just like traditional classroom education,
with respect to student outcomes” (p. 22-3). The MAT@USC program also takes into
consideration how adult learners learn. Therefore it assists “adults to learn in a way that
enhances their capability to function as self-directed learners” as they strive to become
the best effective, highly qualified teachers (Meziow, 1981, p. 21)
Preservice teachers from the MAT@USC program were the subjects in this study,
specifically those enrolled in “Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction,”
“Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools,” and “Culture Learning in Schools:
Latino.” “Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction” highlights facilitation,
mediation, and intervention in the development of literacies and language integration
51
(Course Description, 2011,www.mat.usc.edu). The course also emphasizes the
connection between language and literacy as a vehicle for developing content and
articulating one’s thinking and learning (Course Description, 2011, www.mat.usc.edu).
“Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools” prepares candidates to
understand the relationship between the actions of the teacher and the extent to which
students are able to learn in the classroom and school context (Course Description, 2011,
www.mat.usc.edu). The course also focuses on the “how” of facilitating learning at the
classroom level and asks teacher candidates to participate in the process of critical
reflection and inquiry in order to adjust their teaching based on student outcomes (Course
Description, 2011, www.mat.usc.edu).
The last course, “Culture Learning in Schools: Latino,” explores the hegemony
of the Latino culture, especially among Latino students attending public schools in
California (EDUC 558 Course Syllabus, March 2011). Teacher candidates learn about
themselves and their own culture, so they can explore their own beliefs, attitudes,
perceptions and experiences as members of diverse ethnic backgrounds (EDUC 558
Course Syllabus, 2011). This aids teacher candidates to better understand the similarities
and differences within and across ethnic cultures, including theirs, in order to gain a
better understanding of diversity (EDUC 558 Course Syllabus, March 2011).
Participants

Students enrolled in a section of “Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content
Instruction,” “Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools,” and “Culture
Learning in Schools: Latino,” were asked to participate in this study. Participants were
selected based on their willingness to participate in the study. Participation was voluntary
52
and did not affect their grade in their perspective course. Participants were contacted via
email (Appendix A: “Introductory Letter”) and through each course’s wall on the
Learning Management System (LMS), the system MAT@USC, via 2tor, Inc., uses for its
online program. The Learning Management System’s course wall is similar to those
course walls found in many social networks, such as Facebook, where members can post
comments and links for the rest of the participants to see and respond and/or add to the
comment.
The participants are teacher candidates enrolled in MAT @USC’s online teacher
education program and enrolled in one of the following three courses during Fall of 2011:
“Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction,” “Framing the Social Context
of High Needs Schools,” or “Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos.” These three courses
were selected because they discuss many issues that affect urban, inner-city students,
many of who are of Latino background.
“Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction,” provides students with
the pedagogy needed to teach students using effective literacy strategies. One of the
course purposes is to challenge students’ perspectives “that literacy is simply a collection
of discrete skills, socio-cultural perspectives of literacy suggest that literacy is the means
by which individuals make meaning and construct their understandings of the world”
(EDUC 505 Course Syllabus, September 2011). This idea supports two objectives of the
course: a) “examine student diversity (racial, special needs, language, and economic)
from a literacy perspective of equity and access for powerful literacy” and b) “facilitate
valuing students’ heritage languages and language varieties while providing access to
academic language of the discipline” (EDUC 505 Course Syllabus, September 2011).
53
Incorporating socio-cultural perspectives and analyzing students’ diversity, both
culturally and linguistically, can guide students to better understand who Latino English
language learners are and what their literacy needs are.
“Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools,” exposes students to the
social context that affects, personally and academically, many urban, inner-city students.
Since this study examined teacher perspectives and how these affect their views of
students, it was helpful that one of the purposes of this course is to have students:
understand the relationship between actions of the teacher and the extent to which
students are able to learn in the classroom and school context [through] the
teacher’s role in constructing a social context that facilitates learning in [their]
classroom and how [a] teacher’s efforts interact with and are impacted by the
various communities in which a classroom is embedded: teachers, the school,
parents, the neighborhood, and district, state and/or federal policy. (EDUC 516
Course Syllabus, September 2011)
Students enrolled in this course should be able to “become familiar with or deepen their
understanding of the diversity of backgrounds, experiences, socio-historical contexts, and
languages of the students they will be teaching” (EDUC 516 Course Syllabus, September
2011). By the end of this course, MAT@USC students should feel more comfortable and
capable to work with students who are culturally and linguistically different from them.
The last course selected for this study, “Culture Learning in Schools: Latino,”
offers Latino cultural awareness. This course discusses the “failure to understand the
diversity within and across the Latino community” and the “lack of understanding of the
Latino child and the diverse cultures of students from various Latin American countries”
54
(EDUC 558 Course Syllabus, September 2011). It also promotes the exploration of “own
beliefs, attitudes, perceptions, and experiences as members of diverse ethnic
backgrounds” and the value of “understand[ing] the importance of culture in teaching and
learning” (EDUC 558 Course Syllabus, September 2011). “Culture Learning in Schools:
Latino” invites MAT @USC students to reflect on perceptions they have of others,
particularly of those of Latino background, and analyze such perceptions.
Procedure

Once teacher candidates were identified, they were contacted by email and via the
Learning Management System’s (LMS) course wall, so they could respond to the surveys
and vignettes at the beginning of the Fall semester, September 2011 (Table 2). The
“Background Information Questionnaire” survey aided in the quest to find out more
about who the participants were and their experiences with various groups. The “English
language learners and the Mainstream Classroom” survey assisted with the understanding
of how these teacher candidates felt about English language learners and their presence
in the mainstream classroom. After the first two surveys, the teacher candidates answered
open-ended “Vignettes” that portrayed their perceptions of five Latino secondary
students with diverse academic and personal backgrounds. At the end of the course,
students responded to the “Course Effectiveness” survey, where they stated their overall
thoughts of the course, particularly if they felt the course had better prepared them to
teach with Latino English language learners.
55
Table 2
Data Collection Procedure
May 2011 Creation of study’s instruments
July 2011 Study’s instruments were modified based
on expert recommendation
September 2011 Data Collection began; instruments were
distributed via SurveyMonkey
December 2011 Data was gathered via SurveyMonkey
February-April 2012 Data was organized and analyzed
April-July 2012 Conclusions, recommendations, and
limitations were drawn based on data
gathered

Research
Design

This study was conducted using mixed methods to include data collection that
yields in-depth, open-ended answers and direct quotations from the teacher candidates
about their experiences, opinions, feelings, and knowledge. The use of multiple
instruments helped to “strengthen a study by combining methods” of both, quantitative
and qualitative nature, which consequently causes triangulation (Patton, 2002, p. 247).
Participants responded to questions based on five vignettes, since vignettes yield open-
ended answers that help “identify and study attitudes and beliefs” and because they are
“useful in addressing difficult-to-explore and sensitive topics” (Jeffries & Maeden, 2005,
pp. 19-20). The vignettes provided qualitative data, which was needed in order to further
understand perceptions among teacher candidates because topics, like racism and
prejudice, are difficult to quantify (Walker, Shafer, & Iams, 2004).
A mixed methods research design allowed for predetermined and emerging
methods such as open and closed-ended questions, multiple forms of data drawing on all
56
possibilities, and the inclusion of both statistical and text analysis (Creswell, 2003). It
also allowed for strategies of inquiry that involved collecting data either simultaneously
or sequentially to best understand research problems and for the assumption that
collecting diverse types of data provide a better understanding of the research study
(Creswell, 2003). Creswell (2003) explained a mixed studies approach “begins with a
broad survey in order to generalize results to a population and then focuses, in a second
phase, on detailed qualitative, open-ended interviews to collect detailed views from
participants” (p. 21). This mixed studies approach allowed for both, general and detail,
findings of the study (Creswell, 2003).
Instruments

Surveys, vignettes, and classroom observations were used in this study (Table 3).
Vignettes are short stories that help contextualize problems in different contexts,
including education. Jefferies and Maeder (2005) discussed that “vignettes are relatively
easy to construct, they provide a useful focus and stimulus for discussion, they are
valuable in addressing difficult-to-explore and sensitive topics, they can be used with
individuals and groups, and they reflect real-life contexts and problems” (p. 17). Jefferies
and Maeder (2005) stated that “the use of stories in various formats have long been a
powerful and successful method for modeling, teaching, and researching behavior and
understanding in general education, health sciences, social sciences, and behavioral
sciences” (p. 17). The vignettes engaged teacher candidates in stories that deal with
secondary Latino students and the different type of barriers they face in education. The
vignettes expressed cultural, social, and linguistical issues Latino students confront in
many urban secondary schools.
57
The survey questions were developed based on the literature review, readings,
discussions with the researcher’s dissertation chairs, and experiences co-teaching
“Culture Learning in Schools: Latino,” during Spring, 2011, as part as an apprenticeship
at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, California. The apprenticeship is
a requisite for students in the “Teacher Education in Multicultural Societies”
concentration in the Doctor of Education Program at the University of Southern
California. The 8-week apprenticeship allows doctoral students to work with faculty from
the MAT@USC program in various aspects: co-teaching a course, co-authoring an
article, and helping refine course syllabi. Through the internship, the researcher had the
opportunity to work, collaborate, and co-teach with Dr. Eugenia Mora-Flores and work
with her “Culture Learning in Schools: Latino” students. The researcher helped Dr.
Mora-Flores refine several units of the course and teach the unit, “Education of Latinos,”
as well as pilot the vignettes with the students enrolled in the course. Piloting the
vignettes with these students helped with the revision of the vignettes by changing the
format from Likert scale to short-answer as well as by identifying deficit-thinking
language.
Course observations were also used in this study, to allow the researcher to
identify the recurring themes of each course (Appendix B). The researcher attended all
the live sessions of both “Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction” and
“Culture Learning in Schols: Latino.” For “Framing the Social Context of High Needs
Schools,” the researcher attended the first two live sessions and then watched recordings
for the remaining sessions. The researcher took notes for each course and then employed
content analysis in order to “develop some manageable classification or coding scheme”
58
of the qualitative data (Patton, 2002, p. 463). An inductive content analysis approach
was utilized, which helped “discover patterns, themes, and categories in one’s data,” as
the researcher tried to reduce the qualitative data and make sense of it (Patton, 2002, p.
453). The themes from each of the three courses helped determine if each course met its
objectives and how these themes can or cannot help teacher candidates be better prepared
to teach Latino English learners.
The “Background Information Questionnaire” survey was given in order to find
out more about the participants based on short answer, multiple-choice responses, and a
3-point Likert scale. The “English language learners and the Mainstream Classroom”
survey asked participants to voice their opinions on English language learners and their
presence in the mainstream classroom. Data was measured using a 5-point Likert scale
for this survey. The “Course Effectiveness” survey asked participants their thoughts on
the course and whether they felt the course prepared them to better serve Latino English
language learners. The data was measured using a 5-point Likert scale for the “Course
Effectiveness” survey. These surveys were reviewed and revised by fellow doctoral
student colleagues, advisors, and University of Southern California professors for content
validity and reliability.
59
Table 3
Instruments
Research Question Instrument(s) Course(s)
What are the perceptions of
MAT@USC candidates in
selected courses toward Latino
English learners?
a) “English language learners and
the mainstream classroom” Survey
(Appendix C)

b) Vignettes (Appendix D)

EDUC 505
EDUC 516
EDUC 558
How do the experiences prior to
enrollment in one of the
MAT@USC selected courses
affect candidates’ reception to
course content?
a) “Background Information
Questionnaire” (Appendix E)

b) Course Observations (Appendix
B)
EDUC 505
EDUC 516
EDUC 558
How do the candidates perceive
the three selected courses in the
MAT@USC program in
facilitating their ability to serve
the needs of Latino English
learners?

a) “Course Effectiveness” Survey
(Appendix F)
EDUC 505
EDUC 516
EDUC 558

Summary

Data from the surveys and vignette scenarios highlighted patterns and trends
among participants’ answers, such as pedagogical needs of teacher candidates and
perceptions of teacher candidates. The surveys provided quantitative data about teacher
candidate perceptions and how effective the participants thought their course was in
addressing the needs of Latino English language learners.
This study employed a mixed-methods research design in order to look in-depth
at the perceptions of MAT@USC students towards Latino English language learners. A
mixed-methods approach provides statistical results as well as facts through words
(Creswell, 2003). This study used a concurrent mixed-methods approach since
60
qualitative and quantitative data was collected at the same time from the respondents
(Creswell, 2003). Data was gathered in a ten-week period and portrayed the most
common perceptions of MAT@USC candidates of Latino English language learners.

61
CHAPTER
FOUR:
RESEARCH
FINDINGS

Focus
of
Study

The purpose of this study was to further understand the perceptions of
MAT@USC teacher candidates and how their perceptions and previous experiences
affect the educational experiences of Latino English language learners. Hollingsworth
and Gallego (1996) discussed that the education of Latino English language learners is
affected by teacher perceptions by citing:
it [is] neither text nor instructional processes that led to the mastery of Standard
English communication, but the nature of teachers’ beliefs regarding their
[referring to Latino English language learners] prior educational experience and
the nature of their current relationships with children.” (p. 271)
Since “researchers have found that teachers’ beliefs about race, culture, and oppression
perpetuate white mainstream supremacist thinking and become obstacles to their
development of cultural competencies along with perpetuating the underachievement of
disenfranchised students, “it is important for teacher candidates to challenge and analyze
their personal backgrounds and upbringing (Barron, 2008, p. 189). Barron (2008) stated,
“in teacher education courses, prospective teachers need to expose their own race and
culture, along with existing preconceptions, affect their teaching practices as well as their
interactions with, attitudes toward, beliefs about, and expectations for students” (p. 188).
Research
Questions

The focus of this study was to understand the perceptions of teacher candidates,
specifically those in the MAT@USC program, and understand how three courses in the
62
program affect these perceptions in conjunction with their previous experiences prior to
enrolling in one of the three courses. Three research questions guided this study:
Research Question 1--What are the perceptions of MAT@USC candidates in
selected courses toward Latino English learners?

Research Question 2-- How do the experiences prior to enrollment in one of the
MAT@USC selected courses affect candidates’ reception to course content?

Research Question 3—How do the candidates perceive the three selected courses
in the MAT@USC program in facilitating their ability to serve the needs of
Latino English learners?
Setting

This study took place at the University of Southern California and the
MAT@USC program. The Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern
California’s MAT@USC program is delivered online and offers several degrees and
certificates for students who are aspiring teachers or current teachers who are looking to
earn a Masters of Arts in Teaching. 2tor, Inc., provides the necessary online tools which
makes it possible for this program to be offered online. Teacher candidates enrolled in
the MAT@USC program work towards a multiple-subject or single-subject California
teaching credential, with the option of also earning a Master of Arts in Teaching.
Population

The respondents in this study were all MAT@USC students who resided across
the United States and were enrolled in one of the targeted courses for this study:
“Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction,” “Framing the Social Context
of High Needs Schools,” and “Culture Learning in Schools: Latino,” during the Fall 2011
semester. Their participation in this study was voluntary and did not affect their grade in
their perspective course.
63
Table 4 describes the participants. Out of the forty-three possible participants, ten
decided to participate in the study. Three were enrolled in “Integrating Literacies in
Secondary Content Instruction,” two were enrolled in “Framing the Social Context of
High Needs Schools,” and five were enrolled in “Culture Learning in Schools: Latino.”
Respondents were asked to provide their zip code to help identify where they
resided at the time of the study. Asking this question was important in the study because,
based on where a respondent lives, s/he may or may not feel that issues relating to
Latinos and/or English language learners are relevant due to the demographics of his/her
community. Seven of the ten participants, 70%, lived in California (Southern California),
one, 10%, in Colorado, one, 10%, in the District of Columbia, and one, 10%, in South
Carolina.
The field of education has historically been female dominated, and the
respondents reaffirm this statistic because six of the ten respondents, 60%, were female
and four, 40%, were male. The most recent data showed that 76% of public school
teachers are female (National Center for Education Statistics, 2012).
This study focused on Latino secondary English language learners, so it was
important to identify how many of the respondents planned to teach or were, at the time
of this study, teaching at the secondary level. Of the ten respondents, four were teaching
in the classroom at the time of the study.
Participants were asked to identify their classroom experiences. Six of the
respondents were preservice teachers, meaning they had no classroom experience, since
they were currently student-teaching or were about to start student-teaching. Ten percent
had one year of experience, another 10% had two years of classroom experience, one,
64
10%, had four years of experience, and one respondent, 10%, had more than five years of
classroom experience.
Table 4
Demographic Description of Participants
EDUC 505

EDUC 516 EDUC 558
Number of
Participants
3 2 5
Gender Female—2
Male—1
Female—1
Male—1
Female—3
Male—2
Type of
Credential
Single Subject—3
Multiple Subject—0
Single Subject—1
Multiple Subject—1
Single Subject—4
Multiple Subject—1
State of
Residence
California—3
Colorado—0
District of
Columbia—0

South Carolina—0
California—1
Colorado—0
District of
Columbia—1

South Carolina—0
California—3
Colorado—1
District of
Columbia—0

South Carolina—1
Years of
Classroon
Experience
No experience—1
1 year—0
2 years—1
3 years—0
4 years—0
5 years—0

No experience—1
1 year—1
2 years—0
3 years—0
4 years—0
5 years—1

No experience—4
1 year—0
2 years—0
3 years—0
4 years—1
5 years—0

Findings:
Data
Analysis

Research
Question
1

Research Question 1— What are the perceptions of MAT@USC candidates in selected
courses toward Latino English learners?

This question sought to identify the perceptions MAT@USC candidates bring to
their perspective course, which affects not only how they view Latino English learners,
65
but also how they might respond to the content of the course. Qualitative and quantitative
data was used to answer this question.
For the quantitative data portion of Research Question 1, a survey instrument was
employed. The survey instrument, titled “English language learners and the mainstream
classroom,” contained seven statements based on English learners and their presence in a
general, mainstream classroom. A Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree to
strongly agree, was used to allow respondents to rate the statements. Frequency analysis
assisted in the description and organization of respondents’ responses.
Table 5 and Table 6 illustrate how participants perceived English learners in the
mainstream classroom. The following were the findings based on the survey:
Statement #1: Racially biased teachers tend to believe that low-status linguistic minority
students bring too many deficits to the classroom for the teacher, even with the best
practices, to make a difference in their academic success.

Seventy percent of participants agreed that racially biased teachers tend to believe
that low-status, linguistic minority students bring so many deficits to the classroom for
the teacher, even with best practices, to make a difference in their academic success.
Valencia (1997 & 1999) supported this statement by stating how, instead of cultivating
the cultural and linguistic assets Latino/a students bring to the school, these teachers
often engage in processes of “subtractive schooling” assuming students have multiple
cultural deficits rather than cultural advantage. Even with best practices, many teachers
believe that they cannot help minority linguistic students succeed academically. These
beliefs often translate into a simplified curriculum for these students, just to get them
through (Callahan, 2005). This attitude will further increase the academic achievement
gap between English-only students and English language learners.
66
Statement #2: There is a pervasive belief among regular classroom teachers that the
real teaching/learning for English language learners is in the ELL (ELD/ESL)
classroom. This belief serves to justify teachers in their resistance to make curricular and
instructional adaptations in their mainstream classroom.
Seventy percent of participants agreed or strongly agreed that there is a pervasive
belief among regular classroom teachers that the real teaching/learning for English
language learners is in the ELL (ELD/ESL) classroom. These participants, of whom only
40% were currently teaching at the time of the study, agreed that this belief serves to
justify teachers in their resistance to make curricular and instructional adaptations in their
mainstream classrooms. Goodwin (2002) states the importance for all teachers to provide
English language learners with written communication models on a daily basis, offer
opportunities for students to write daily, and use technology to develop English language
acquisition regardless of the content area. Many classroom teachers continue to believe
that English learners are to learn English only in their English class, “it should be a top
priority for teacher preparation programs to develop beginning teachers who are prepared
and grounded on how to effectively instruct ELs (English learners) in their classrooms,”
(Solomon, Lalas & Franklin, 2006, p. 42).
Statement #3: It is the responsibility of English language learners to adapt to American
culture and school as soon as possible.
Sixty percent of participants agreed that it is the responsibility of English
language learners to adapt to American culture and school life as soon as possible. Only
40 percent of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement. Gandara
and Contreras (2009) discussed that, in American schools, “speaking a language other
than English is generally considered an impediment to learning; a defect to be corrected,
and a characteristic with little relevance to other students” (p. 321). This attitude among
teachers who “devalue the language, culture, and experiences of minority students
67
convey the message [in the classroom] [and] hurt [s] students’ classroom performance”
(p. 48).
Statement #4: The regular classroom teacher has enough on his/her plate already.
Adding English language learners to their classrooms will be an extra burden since they
already have to deal with the inclusion of special needs students, adapting the curriculum
to state standards, and the pressure to prepare students for high stake assessments.
Fifty percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the regular classroom
teacher has enough on his/her plate already. These respondents agreed that adding
English language learners to their classroom would be an extra burden since they already
have to deal with the inclusion of special needs students, adapting the curriculum to state
standards, and the pressure to prepare students for high stake assessments. Solomon,
Lalas and Franklin (2006) remind educators, particularly those teaching in California,
that:
more than one-fourth of all students in California classrooms have limited English
skills, and about 85 percent of teachers have non-native speakers in their
classrooms. Although most credentialed teachers now receive some training
focused on culturally diverse students, most need specific training to address the
needs of English learners. (p. 42)
As the number of English learners increases across the nation, all teachers, regardless of
experience, need to have the needs of English learners as a priority in order to ensure the
academic success of this student group.
Statement #5: English language learners should not be placed in the mainstream
classroom until they are ready to learn content area material at their grade level.
The majority of respondents perceive English learners should be taught separately
from their English-only counterparts. Seventy percent of respondents agreed English
language learners should not be placed in the mainstream classroom until they are ready
68
to learn content area material at their grade level. Donato (1990) disagreed and stated
schools need a variety of courses and programs for language-minority students; the
programs include courses in ESL and primary language instruction (in both literacy and
advanced placement). Donato (1990) noted that keeping class size small (20-25 students)
maximizes interaction among teachers and students, which also benefits English learners
along with the aforementioned programs. If English learners do not have access to the
content area of their specific grade level, their disengagement in the classroom will
increase and cause them to fall further behind and less likely to be college ready than
their English-only counterparts.
Statement #6: Teacher don’t need specialized English Language Development training
to teach ELL’s; common sense and good intentions work fine. There is no need for
second language acquisition, linguistic, ELL pedagogy, and multicultural courses and/or
training.
Many participants agreed teachers do not need specialized English language
development training to teach English language learners; common sense and good
intentions work fine. The responses of 40 percent of the participants indicate there is no
need for second language acquisition, linguistic, English language learner pedagogy, and
multicultural courses or training. Tellez and Waxman (2005) disagreed with these
participants. They stated, “teachers must understand language as a system, knowing
components of language such as phonology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and writing
conventions. They should also understand native—and second language acquisition”
(p.11). If many teachers believe they do not need any training to teach English learners,
they can indirectly make the curriculum incomprehensible for these students.
69
Statement #7: It is a teacher’s responsibility to make adaptations to their curriculum for
ELL students, even if there is only one ELL student in a classroom full of thirty students.

Seventy percent of participants agreed or strongly agreed that it is a teacher’s
responsibility to make adaptations to the curriculum for English language learners, even
if there is only one English language learner in a classroom of thirty students. Tellez and
Waxman (2005) support this claim in that “teachers must understand how to teach to
standards in English Language Development (ELD), SDAIE, Academic English, and
content instruction” (p. 11). Solomon, Lalas and Franklin (2006) found that a new
popular approach in teacher education programs is “to train teachers to make
instructional adaptations for ELs (English learners) to facilitate access to subject matter
content as a way of decreasing the achievement gap between English speakers and
second language learners. Teaching ELs by making adaptations in the mainstream
classroom is one of the teacher performance expectations set by the California
Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CCTC)” (p. 42). Teachers can make adaptations
for the English learners by “amplifying and enriching the language of the classroom,
using new words in a context and paraphrasing it, instructional scaffolding and schema
building, and using assessments that inform student progress. Such accommodations
would provide rich learning opportunities that allow ELs to weave new information
presented in the class into structures of meaning or schema that exists in their learning
system” (Soloman, Lalas & Franklin, 2006, p. 44-45). If all teachers made the necessary
adaptations for English language learners, it will help decrease the amount of English
learners who do not finish their studies since most “do not expect them to graduate”
(MetisNet, 2008, p.3).
70
Table 5
Frequency Analysis: “English language learners and the mainstream classroom” Survey
Statement Frequency

Strongly
Disagree
Disagree N/A or
Acceptable
Agree Strongly
Agree
Statement #1: Students come
with too many deficits to the
classroom
0 0 2 7 1
Statement #2: The ELD
classroom is where English
learners must learn English
0 0 3 6 1
Statement #3: English
learners need to adapt to
American culture
1 3 3 2 1
Statement #4: General
education teachers have too
much on their plate
0 3 2 4 1
Statement #5: English
learners should not be in the
mainstream classroom until
they are English proficient
0 3 5 1 1
Statement #6: Common
sense, not training, is what is
needed to teach English
learners
3 3 2 2 0
Statement #7: General
education teachers need to
make adaptations for English
learners
0 1 2 5 2

71
Table 6
Frequency Percentage Analysis: “English language learners and the mainstream
classroom” Survey
Statement Frequency Percentage

Strongly
Disagree
Disagree N/A or
Acceptable
Agree Strongly
Agree
Statement #1: Students
come with too many deficits
to the classroom
0% 0% 20% 70%

10%
Statement #2: The ELD
classroom is where English
learners must learn English
0% 0% 30% 60% 10%
Statement #3: English
learners need to adapt to
American culture
10% 30% 30% 20% 10%
Statement #4: General
education teachers have too
much on their plate
0% 30% 20% 40% 10%
Statement #5: English
learners should not be in the
mainstream classroom until
they are English proficient
0% 30% 50% 10% 10%
Statement #6: Common
sense, not training, is what
is needed to teach English
learners
30% 30% 20% 20% 0%
Statement #7: General
education teachers need to
make adaptations for
English learners
0% 10% 20% 50% 20%

A vignette-styled scenario instrument was employed to measure the qualitative
data pertaining to Research Question 1. Respondents were presented with five scenarios
based on Latino English learner secondary students and were asked to name, in short
answer form, facilitators and barriers for each student’s academic success. After
respondents’ answers were collected, responses were sorted, analyzed and coded in order
72
to identify similarities within the responses and to yield themes for each vignette (Patton,
2002). The following section presents the findings from the Vignettes (Table 7):
Vignette #1: Carlos: Carlos’ parents are worried. Immigrants to the United States, they
have worked hard as a day laborer and a housekeeper to earn enough to buy a modest
home in a not-so-good neighborhood that harbors several street gangs. The house wasn’t
much, but it was a lot more than they could have hoped for in their native Mexico, and
they were proud to call themselves homeowners—dueños de su propria casa. In many
aspects the Rodriguez family is an American success story—they had come to this
country with nothing more than what they could carry in a knapsack, and now they were
genuine title-holders of the American Dream. But they worry about their son, and not
without reason. Unlike his parents, Carlos has a shot at an education that could bring
better options than they had, but he is vulnerable to the distractions of the street and
often finds himself cutting class and getting into little problems at school—problems that
seem to grow as he develops a reputation as a “troublemaker.”
Participants identified Carlos’ parents’ work ethic and involvement as a facilitator
to his academic success. Themes that emerged as Carlos’ academic barriers were the low
socioeconomic status of the neighborhood, lack of self-regulation and motivation and
cultural differences between school and Carlos’ culture. Rosoki and Rosenbloom (2004)
stated, “low educational expectations among racial/ethnic minorities, lack of resources
and information, and/or lack of identity with school environment” affect a student’s
academic success, which can explain Carlos’ disconnect with his studies.
Vignette #2: Cindy: A first generation Latina high school student, Cindy, (both parents
arrived to the United States in their late teens) wants to attend a top tier, research
university with the goal to become an educator and role model for her community, which
is predominately Latino and Black. She is ranked 3rd in her graduating class, has a 4.4
grade point average and has excelled in all standardized tests. She was identified as a
gifted student in the second grade. She has been involved in her school’s marching band
as a member of the Color Guard team and has been captain of the squad since her
sophomore year. Cindy was also one of the co-founders of the mathematics club and
member of the Spanish and English clubs. Even though her high school is only 20 percent
Asian, about 90 percent of the students enrolled in Honors/AP courses are of Asian
descent. As her senior year approaches, she is planning her senior year courses with her
counselor. Her counselor points out that the student has satisfied the mathematics,
science, and foreign language requirements for both, graduation and A-G requirements,
so it is not necessary for her to take courses in those subjects her senior year and as a
matter of fact the student can be done with school at noon. The student tells her
counselor that she is aware of this but nonetheless wants to enroll in AP Calculus, AP
73
Spanish Literature, and AP Physics (along with AP English Literature) because she
wants to be a competitive applicant when the time comes to apply to universities. The
counselor looks puzzled at this request and responds by stating, “ But dear, your type
don’t take AP courses, especially AP Calculus and AP Physics. You will probably come
at the end of the first week of school in the Fall pleading to drop those courses, trust me,
I’ve seen way too many times with your type. If you don’t want early dismissal, then take
Child Development and Home Economics so you can learn how to be a great mother and
wife—isn’t that what people in your culture want? I bet your parents will be more than
happy if you graduate from high school and find yourself a job with benefits. And if you
do want to go to college, try the local community college first because you might find out
that it might be a bit too overwhelming.
Respondents identified Cindy’s academic facilitators as her desire, self-
motivation, aspirations, and work ethic to succeed academically. Cindy’s barriers are
institutional racism, an ethnocentric counselor, and assumptions/stereotypes based on
race, culture, and gender. Institutionalized racism is a term coined in the late 60’s by the
late Black Panther member Stokely Carmichael (Kwane Tuke). Institutional racism
affects the educational experiences of students of color because it causes “differential
access to the goods, services, and opportunities of society by race. Institutionalized
racism is normative, sometimes legalized, and often manifests as inherited
disadvantaged” (Jones, 2000, p. 1212).
Vignette #3: Lilia: Lilia came to the United States when she was ten years old. Like
many Latino immigrants, her parents immigrated in search for a better quality of life and
education for their children. Within two years of attending school in the States, Lilia was
able to acquire English and was not only reclassified to mainstream English courses, but
recommended for English honors at the end of her middle school career. Both of Lilia’s
parents are strong advocates of higher education and hope that Lilia can do what they
were not able to: graduate from a university and have a career. As Lilia enters her senior
year in high school she is becoming more aware about her undocumented status, which
can inhibit her aspirations (and her parents’) to attend the university. She is ranked 15th
in her class with a 3.7 G.P.A. and has excelled on various AP exams as well as state
exams and even interned for a Californian senator for two consecutive summers. Lilia is
not sure what will happen after she graduates from high school.
Respondents reported that Lilia’s facilitators are her English proficiency, strong
academic record, parental support, and work experience. Yet, her academic success
74
might be jeopardized due to her undocumented status, the possible veto of the DREAM
Act, and her low socioeconomic status. Perez (2009) stated undocumented students have
difficulties financing their higher education because they are not able to apply for
government based aid (i.e., FAFSA) or be recipients of scholarships that require students
to be U.S. citizens or legal residents.
Vignette #4: Alma: Alma is a seventeen year old who arrived from Mexico seven months
ago. After two months in the school system, she decided to leave her studies due to the
language barriers she confronted in the classroom. After she decided to leave school, she
met Alex, who also migrated from Mexico like her but a few years earlier. Unlike Alma,
Alex had attained legal status, finished high school, and had a steady income. They fell in
“love” instantly even though Alma’s parents were against the relationship due to their
four-year age difference. Alex convinced Alma to return to school but as she was
determined to go back she found out she was three months pregnant. Now she does not
know where to go back at all or wait until her child is born. She does hope to speak
English proficiently in the near future and help Alex economically with the family
expenses.
Respondents stated that Alma’s supporting family and her self-motivation are
facilitators for her academic success. Participants stated that Alma’s lack of social
capital, structural racism, being a teen mother, lack of English proficiency, along with her
first academic failure as barriers to her success. Structural racism, used interchangeably
with institutional racism, has:
academic origins [that] lie in critical race theory and studies of whiteness, power,
and privilege. Notion of race as a social and political construct that works to
maintain the advantages associated with whiteness and the burdens associated
with color, even as laws, policies, and practices change. (Kubish, 2006, p. 1)
Vignette #5: Pablo: Pablo arrived to the United States at the age of 11 from El
Salvador. The eldest of four children, Pablo wants to be a positive role model for his
siblings and “become somebody” to make his parents proud, since both left school after
the sixth grade in order to help their families financially. Pablo attended a junior high
school in inner-city Chicago that has a reputable bilingual education program, hence he
was able to learn English fairly quickly. Consequently, Pablo was mainstreamed into
regular English classes at the beginning of his freshman year at his local high school.
75
With the support of his teachers and counselor, Pablo has been able to maintain a “B”
average thus far in high school and is active in several extracurricular activities. After
high school, Pablo hopes to attend a local university and aspires to major in Psychology.
But like most low-income, first-generation students, Pablo is not sure whether he will be
academically ready for univeristy course work and will be able to financially afford it.
Participants identified Pablo’s supportive staff at his school, self-determination,
effective bilingual education, and active participation at school as his academic
facilitators. His barriers are his lack of social and economic capital, self-doubt (fears lack
of college readiness), and his legal status. Juschik (2005) found “first-generation
students are at a disadvantage throughout their time at colleges and universities. They
enter without as much preparation, they get lower grades, and they are more likely to
drop” (p. 1). A 1992 study conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics also
found that “more first generation students left college without any degree by 2000 (43
percent) than earned a bachelor’s degree (24 percent). Of those whose parents were
college graduates, 68 percent had completed a bachelor’s degree and 20 percent had left
without a degree” (Juschik, 2005, p. 1).
The themes that arose in the vignettes were that parental support, supportive
school staff, and students’ motivation and self-efficacy are facilitators for academic
success. Institutional racism, lack of social capital, and lack of student motivation
negatively affect students’ academic success.
76
Table 7
Themes found on Vignettes
Vignette Findings: Facilitator Themes Findings: Barrier
Themes
Vignette #1: Carlos Carlos’ parents’ work ethic
and involvement
Low socioeconomic
neighborhood, lack of self-
regulation and motivation from
Carlos, and cultural differences
between the school and Carlos’
culture.
Vignette #2: Cindy Cindy’s desire, self-
motivation, aspirations, and
work ethic.
Institutional racism,
ethnocentric counselor, and
assumptions/stereotypes based
on race, culture, and gender.
Vignette #3: Lilia Lilia’s English language
proficiency, academic record,
parental support, and work
experience.
Undocumented status, the
possible veto of the DREAM
Act, and low socioeconomic
status.
Vignette #4: Alma Alma’s supporting family
(especially from her husband)
and self-motivation.
Lack of social capital,
structural racism, being a teen
mother, lack of English
proficiency, and the fact that
Alma “failed” at her first
attempt in school.
Vignette #5: Pablo Pablo’s supportive staff at his
school, self-determination, an
effective bilingual education,
and his active participation in
school.
Lack of social and economic
capital, self-doubt regarding
his college readiness, and his
legal status.

Research
Question
2

Research Question 2—How do the experiences prior to enrollment in one of the
MAT@USC selected courses affect candidates’ reception to course content?
Research Question Two explored how the candidates’ past experiences might
affect how they perceive course content. This is important because these candidates go to
each course with preconceptions and beliefs that affect how they respond to content
presented in class due to their personal backgrounds. As Raths (2002) stated, “teachers
and teacher candidates beliefs about the role that education can play, about explanations
77
for individual variation in academic performance, about right and wrong in a classroom,
and many other areas” (p. 1).
The linguistic and cultural awareness of participants, along with the languages
they speak other than English, and, if enrolled in “Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos,”
whether they were taking the course to fulfill the BCLAD requirement, were measured
for Research Question 2. Respondents answered questions based on their experiences
with individuals with different backgrounds than theirs through the “Linguistic and
Cultural Awareness” portion of the “Background Information” questionnaire. A Likert
scale, ranging from low to high, was employed to rate respondents’ experiences. Data
collected was sorted and analyzed via descriptive statistics, using frequency analysis, to
report the findings. For respondents enrolled in “Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos,”
the “Background Information” questionnaire also asked them to respond either with a
“Yes” or a “No” to whether they were taking the class as an elective. If they answered
“Yes,” it meant that they were not pursing a BCLAD certification. Lastly, another
section of the “Background Information” questionnaire asked all respondents to select the
number of languages other than English that they were proficient in as well.
Table 8 and Table 9 describe the linguistic and cultural awareness of candidates
per course, while Table 10 and Table 11 combined the data of all three courses.
Candidates in “Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction” enrolled in the
course with a variety of experiences regarding their interactions with individuals of
Latino background. Fifty percent stated they have “high” interaction with Latinos while
an equal number, fifty percent, stated that they had a little or no interaction with this
ethnic group. “Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools” candidates reported
78
similar experience with the amount of interaction they have with Latinos, as fifty percent
had “high” interaction with this ethnic group and the other fifty percent had some
interaction. Eighty percent of candidates enrolled in “Culture Learning in Schools:
Latinos” stated a “high” interaction with Latinos compared to twenty percent who had
only some interaction.
All candidates, one hundred percent, enrolled in “Integrating Literacies in
Secondary Content Instruction” declared having some interaction with individuals whose
primary language is Spanish. Of the candidates enrolled in “Framing the Social Context
of High Needs Schools,” fifty percent had “high” interaction with individuals whose first
language is Spanish, while the other fifty percent stated to have some interaction. Sixty
percent of candidates in “Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos” reported “high”
interaction with Spanish-speaking individuals and forty percent had some interaction.
Sixty-eight percent of candidates enrolled in “Integrating Literacies in Secondary
Content Instruction” reported having some interaction with individuals who belong to a
different socioeconomic status than theirs, while thirty two percent had “high”
interaction. All candidates (one hundred percent) enrolled in “Framing the Social Context
of High Needs Schools” stated they had “high” interaction with individuals who belong
to a different socioeconomic status group than their own. Sixty percent of candidates in
“Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos” stated they had “high’ interaction with
individuals who belong to a different socioeconomic status group than their own and the
remaining forty percent had some interaction.
Since this study focused on Latino students, knowing how much interaction
respondents have with this ethnic group is important because it affects how they perceive
79
this group and, consequently, their interaction with Latino students, as research indicates
“that teachers who do not share children’s cultures can provide culturally compatible
instruction if they understand the children’s ‘cultural funds of knowledge,’ which can be
thought of as a different ways of knowing, communicating, and doing that exist within
diverse homes.” (Columbo, 2005, p. 2). One of the ten participants did not answer the
question, while six stated that they have “A lot” of interaction with this group, two
replied that they have “Some” interaction, and one had “Little” interaction with Latinos
at the time.
The primary language of the vast majority of Latino English language learners is
Spanish. The interactions the respondents have with Spanish speaking individuals can
affect their perceptions of Spanish speaking students since those teachers that have been
immersed in a language they didn’t understand create empathy toward their English
learners and their families at higher rates than those who do not (Columbo, 2005). Four
of the ten respondents have “A lot” of interaction with Spanish speakers while six have
“Some” interaction.
Historically, most Latino English language learners come from a low
socioeconomic status background and most teachers have a middle class background.
Thus, respondents were asked to state their interaction with individuals who belong to a
different socioeconomic status than theirs. Six of the ten respondents have “A lot” of
interaction with members of different socioeconomic status than theirs and four have
“Some” interaction. Table 8 and Table 9 represented the diversity of the candidates
across the three courses.
80
Table 8
Linguistic and Cultural Awareness Frequency Analysis
Courses: EDUC 505:
Integrating
Literacies in
Secondary Content
Instruction
EDUC 516:
Framing the Social
Context of High
Needs Schools
EDUC 558: Culture
Learning in Schools:
Latinos
Levels of
Interaction:
Low Some High Low Some High Low Some High
How much
interaction do
you have with
individuals of
Latino
background?
1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 4
How much
interaction do
you have with
individuals
whose primary
language is
Spanish?
0 3 0 0 1 1 0 2 3
How much
interaction do
you have with
individuals who
belong to a
different
socioeconomic
status than
yours?
0 2 1 0 0 2 0 2 3

81
Table 9
Linguistic and Cultural Awareness Frequency Percentages
Courses: EDUC 505:
Integrating Literacies
in Secondary Content
Instruction
EDUC 516:
Framing the Social
Context of High Needs
Schools
EDUC 558: Culture
Learning in Schools:
Latinos
Levels of
Interaction:
Low Some High Low Some High Low Some High
How much
interaction do
you have with
individuals of
Latino
background?
50% 0% 50% 0% 50% 50% 0% 20% 80%
How much
interaction do
you have with
individuals
whose primary
language is
Spanish?
0% 100% 0% 0% 50% 50% 0% 40% 60%
How much
interaction do
you have with
individuals
who belong to
a different
socioeconomic
status than
yours?
0% 68% 32% 0% 0% 100% 0% 40% 60%

Table 10
Linguistic and Cultural Awareness Frequency Analysis for all Three Courses
All Three Courses
Levels of Interaction: Low Some High
How much interaction do you have with individuals of
Latino background?
1 2 3
How much interaction do you have with individuals
whose primary language is Spanish?
0 4 6
How much interaction do you have with individuals who
belong to a different socioeconomic status than yours?
0 6 4
82
Table 11
Linguistic and Cultural Awareness Frequency Percentages for all Three Courses
All Three Courses
Levels of Interaction: Low Some High
How much interaction do you have with individuals of
Latino background?
0% 33% 67%
How much interaction do you have with individuals whose
primary language is Spanish?
0% 40% 60%
How much interaction do you have with individuals who
belong to a different socioeconomic status than yours?
0% 60% 40%

Participants enrolled in “Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos” were asked
whether they were taking the course as an elective since the course was originally created
for students pursuing a BCLAD (Bilingual, Crosscultural, Language and Academic
Development) certificate, which certifies teachers to teach English learners with primary
language support. The BCLAD is considered to be the most rigorous certification
because “it requires that a teacher knows a second language and learn a method to teach
in this language, as well as gain knowledge of language development and culture” (Jesper
& de Alth, 2005, p. 32). At the time of this study, in the state of California, for every 100
English learners there were only 1.9 teachers with a BCLAD certification. Therefore,
about 5% of California public teachers held a BCLAD (Jesper & de Alth, 2005). Only
one respondent was not taking the course as an elective. Hence, the one student was
pursuing a BCLAD (Table 12 and Table 13).
83
Table 12
Frequency Analysis: If enrolled in EDUC 558, are you taking the course as an elective?
Yes No
If enrolled in EDUC 558, are you taking the course as an elective? 4 1

Table 13
Frequency Percentage Analysis: If enrolled in EDUC 558, are you taking the course as
an elective?
Yes No
If enrolled in EDUC 558,
are you taking the course
as an elective?
80% 20%

Participants were asked to state whether they speak another language besides
English and if so, how many languages. This question was important to ask because those
who had to learn another language feel more empathy towards those who are currently in
the process of learning one (Columbo, 2005; Jesper & de Alth, 2005). Six of the ten
respondents spoke only English, three spoke English and another language, and one
spoke English and two other languages (Table 14, Table 15, Table 16, and Table 17).
84
Table 14
Frequency Analysis: Number of languages other than English (Per Course)
EDUC 505:
Integrating
Literacies in
Secondary Content
Instruction
EDUC 516:
Framing the Social
Context of High
Needs Schools
EDUC 558:
Culture Learning
in Schools:
Latinos
Number of
languages
0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2
2 0 1 1 1 0 3 2 0

Table 15
Frequency Percentage Analysis: Number of languages other than English (Per Course)
EDUC 505:
Integrating
Literacies in
Secondary Content
Instruction
EDUC 516:
Framing the Social
Context of High
Needs Schools
EDUC 558: Culture
Learning in
Schools: Latinos
Number of
languages
0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2
67% 0% 34% 50% 50% 0% 60% 40% 0%

Table 16
Frequency Analysis: Number of languages other than English (All Courses)
All Three Courses
Number of languages 0 1 2
6 3 1

85
Table 17
Frequency Percentage Analysis: Number of languages other than English (All Courses)
All Three Courses
Number of languages 0 1 2
60% 30% 10%

Along with the linguistic and cultural awareness of participants, the themes of
each course were identified (Table 18). The researcher took notes during each course
session throughout the semester and later sorted and organized them to highlight the
themes for each course (Appendix B). Themes are “categories” and “topical forms” that
help make sense of qualitative data (Patton, 2002). Course observation notes were
analyzed via content analysis, which is used to “refer to any qualitative data reduction
and sense-making effort that takes a volume of qualitative material and attempts to
identify core consistencies and meanings” (Patton, 2002, p. 453). Since the researcher
had to identify the themes, the researcher had to use inductive analysis to help “discover
themes” in their data (Patton, 2002).
86
Table 18
Major Themes of Each Course
EDUC 505: Integrating
Literacies in Secondary
Content Instruction
EDUC 516: Framing the
Social Context of High
Needs Schools
EDUC 558: Culture
Learning in Schools:
Latinos
• Sociocultural
perspectives in
literacy
• BICS and CALPS
and English
learners
• Reading
Comprehension
Strategies
(emphasis on QAR,
Question-Answer-
Relationship)
• Macro context of
urban/rural schools
• Reflective Cycle
(Carol Rodgers)
• Classroom
environment (race,
ethnicity,
socioeconomic
status, and
language)
• High needs schools
• Cultural relevant
teaching
• Immigration
(voluntary vs.
involuntary)
• Gender
• Social Capital
• Meritocracy

Research
Question
3

Research Question 3—How do the candidates perceive the three selected courses in the
MAT@USC program in facilitating their ability to serve the needs of Latino English
learners?
A “Course Effectiveness” survey was provided to participants to allow them to
voice their opinion on how well their course prepared them to be effective instructors of
Latino English learners based on culture awareness, linguistic awareness, and second
language acquisition awareness. A Likert scale, ranging from very poor to very good,
was employed for respondents to rate the five statements. Frequency analysis aided in the
description and organization of respondents’ answers.
Table 19 and Table 20 highlight how participants for each course responded.
Participants enrolled in “Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction” were
split evenly on their ratings for the course. For all five statements, the participants in this
course chose either “acceptable” or “good” as their answers (Table 19 and Table 20).
87
Table 19
Frequency Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How effective was your course in
helping you
EDUC 505: Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content
Instruction
Ratings: Very Poor Poor Acceptable Good Very Good
1. Understand the
importance of culture
in teaching and
learning?
0 0 1 0 1
2. Understand the
importance of language
in teaching and
learning?
0 0 1 0 1
3. Have a better
understanding of
biliteracy and
biculturalism and their
role in the classroom?
0 0 1 0 1
4. Feel more
comfortable with
second language
acquisition theory and
how to implement it in
the classroom?
0 0 1 0 1
5. Appreciate the
diversity of the Latino
culture?
0 0 1 1 0

88
Table 20
Frequency Percentage Analysis:“Course Effectiveness” Survey: How effective was your
course in helping you

EDUC 505: Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content
Instruction
Ratings: Very Poor Poor Acceptable Good Very Good
1. Understand the
importance of culture in
teaching and learning?
0% 0% 50% 0% 50%
2. Understand the
importance of language in
teaching and learning?
0% 0% 50% 0% 50%
3. Have a better
understanding of
biliteracy and
biculturalism and their
role in the classroom?
0% 0% 50% 0% 50%
4. Feel more comfortable
with second language
acquisition theory and
how to implement it in the
classroom?
0% 0% 50% 0% 50%
5. Appreciate the diversity
of the Latino culture?
0% 0% 50% 50% 0%

Participants enrolled in “Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools”
gave positive ratings for all statements, except for one. One hundred percent of
participants felt their course was good or very good at explaining “the importance of
culture in teaching and learning,” “the importance of language in teaching and learning,”
“biliteracy and biculturalism and their role in the classroom,” and “appreciate the
diversity of the Latino culture.” Opinions were divided on the statement “feel more
comfortable with second language acquisition theory and how to implement it in the
89
classroom,” since 33% felt the course did a “poor” job, while the rest of the participants
felt the course did a “good” or a “very good” job (Table 21 and Table 22).
Table 21
Frequency Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How effective was your course in
helping you

EDUC 516:
Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools
Ratings: Very Poor Poor Acceptable Good Very Good
1. Understand the
importance of culture in
teaching and learning?
0 0 0 1 2
2. Understand the
importance of language in
teaching and learning?
0 0 0 2 1
3. Have a better
understanding of biliteracy
and biculturalism and their
role in the classroom?
0 0 0 2 1
4. Feel more comfortable
with second language
acquisition theory and how
to implement it in the
classroom?
0 1 0 1 1
5. Appreciate the diversity
of the Latino culture?
0 0 0 2 1

90
Table 22
Frequency Percentage Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How effective was your
course in helping you
EDUC 516:
Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools
Ratings: Very Poor Poor Acceptable Good Very Good
1. Understand the importance
of culture in teaching and
learning?
0% 0% 0% 33% 67%
2. Understand the importance
of language in teaching and
learning?
0% 0% 0% 67% 33%
3. Have a better
understanding of biliteracy
and biculturalism and their
role in the classroom?
0% 0% 0% 67% 33%
4. Feel more comfortable
with second language
acquisition theory and how
to implement it in the
classroom?
0% 33% 0% 33% 33%
5. Appreciate the diversity of
the Latino culture?
0% 0% 0% 67% 33%

One hundred percent of participants enrolled in “Culture Learning in Schools:
Latino” reported that the course did a “good” or “very good” job explaining “the
importance of culture in teaching and learning” and learning how to “appreciate the
diversity of the Latino culture.” Eighty percent stated that the course did a “good” or
“very good” job at illustrating the “importance of language in teaching and learning” and
understanding “biliteracy and biculturalism and their role in the classroom.” Twenty
percent of participants stated that this course did a “poor” job at making them “more
comfortable with second language acquisition theory and how to implement it in the
91
classroom,” compared to 20% who stated the course did an “acceptable” job and 60%
who gave it a “good” rating. (Table 23 and Table 24)
Table 23
Frequency Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How effective was your course in
helping you
EDUC 558: Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos
Ratings: Very Poor Poor Acceptable Good Very Good
1. Understand the
importance of culture in
teaching and learning?
0 0 0 4 1
2. Understand the
importance of language in
teaching and learning?
0 0 1 2 2
3. Have a better
understanding of biliteracy
and biculturalism and their
role in the classroom?
0 0 1 3 1
4. Feel more comfortable
with second language
acquisition theory and how
to implement it in the
classroom?
0 1 1 3 0
5. Appreciate the diversity
of the Latino culture?
0 0 0 2 3

92
Table 24
Frequency Percentage Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How effective was your
course in helping you
EDUC 558: Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos
Ratings: Very Poor Poor Acceptable Good Very Good
1. Understand the importance
of culture in teaching and
learning?
0% 0% 0% 80% 20%
2. Understand the importance
of language in teaching and
learning?
0% 0% 20% 40% 40%
3. Have a better
understanding of biliteracy
and biculturalism and their
role in the classroom?
0% 0% 20% 60% 20%
4. Feel more comfortable
with second language
acquisition theory and how
to implement it in the
classroom?
0% 20% 20% 60% 0%
5. Appreciate the diversity of
the Latino culture?
0% 0% 0% 40% 60%

Table 25 and Table 26 highlight the qualitative data for the “Course
Effectiveness” survey with all three courses combined. Ninety percent of participants
felt good or very good that their course allowed them to better “understand the
importance of culture in teaching and learning.” Only twenty percent of participants felt
their course was “acceptable” compared to 80% who felt their course was good or very
good at helping them “understand the importance of language in teaching and learning.”
Eighty percent of participants felt their course was effective in helping them “have a
better understanding of biliteracy and biculturalism and their role in the classroom.”
Forty percent of participants felt their course was “poor” or “acceptable” in helping them
93
feel “more comfortable with second language acquisition theory and how to implement it
in the classroom.” Ninety percent of participants felt good or very good that their course
allowed them to better “appreciate the diversity of the Latino culture” (Table 25 and
Table 26)
Table 25
Frequency Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How effective was your course in
helping you
Ratings: Very Poor Poor Acceptable Good Very Good
1. Understand the importance
of culture in teaching and
learning?
0 0 1 5 4
2. Understand the importance
of language in teaching and
learning?
0 0 2 4 4
3. Have a better
understanding of biliteracy
and biculturalism and their
role in the classroom?
0 0 2 5 3
4. Feel more comfortable
with second language
acquisition theory and how
to implement it in the
classroom?
0 2 2 4 2
5. Appreciate the diversity of
the Latino culture?
0 0 1 5 4

94
Table 26
Frequency Percentage Analysis: “Course Effectiveness” Survey: How effective was your
course in helping you
Ratings: Very Poor Poor Acceptable Good Very Good
1. Understand the importance
of culture in teaching and
learning?
0% 0% 10% 50% 40%
2. Understand the importance
of language in teaching and
learning?
0% 0% 20% 40% 40%
3. Have a better
understanding of biliteracy
and biculturalism and their
role in the classroom?
0% 0% 20% 50% 30%
4. Feel more comfortable
with second language
acquisition theory and how
to implement it in the
classroom?
0% 20% 20% 40% 20%
5. Appreciate the diversity of
the Latino culture?
0% 0% 10% 50% 40%

Conclusion
to
Research
Findings

The purpose of this study was to gain an understanding of the perceptions
MAT@USC teacher candidates, enrolled in three selected courses of the program, have
of Latino English learners. Survey instruments and a vignette scenario instrument helped
gather data to describe the perceptions and beliefs of the respondents. A Likert scale was
employed for all surveys while short answer responses were used in the vignette
scenarios. Descriptive statistics, or frequency analysis, was utilized in the sorting,
organization, and analysis of the quantitative responses. Content analysis aided in the
identification of themes for the qualitative portion of the study.
95
A mixed methods research design was used for this study. Creswell (2003) stated
that a mixed methods approach research design “begins with a broad survey in order to
generalize results to a population and then focuses on detailed qualitative, open-ended
interviews to collect detailed views from participants” (p. 21). Data collected provides
statistical results as well as facts through words for the study (Creswell, 2003). Themes
from each course were also identified using content analysis to relate participants’
previous experiences with the content of each course.
96
CHAPTER
FIVE:
DISCUSSION

Purpose
of
Study

Cabello & Davis (1995) found “teaching students of diverse backgrounds and
experiences is challenging, particularly for teachers unfamiliar with the students’
backgrounds and communities” (p. 285). The researchers added that “teachers may have
preconceptions about teaching based on their own backgrounds and experiences,” and
that “learning to teach diverse students requires that teachers examine their beliefs about
teaching and explore the effectiveness of their practices in accommodating the various
cultures, lifestyles, and learning styles of their students” (p. 285). Spradly and McCurdy
(1984) explained, “we [individuals] tend to think that the norms we follow represent the
‘natural’ way human beings do things. Those who behave otherwise are judged morally
wrong. This viewpoint is ethnocentric, which means that people think their own culture
represents the best, or at least the most appropriate way for human beings to live” (pp. 2-
3). Bartolome (2008) stated “most educators believe that students from subordinated
groups—both immigrant and domestic minorities—must assimilate into the dominant
culture and be schooled solely in English” (p. xvi).
Tatto (1996) stressed “the importance of personal values and beliefs to teaching
has become increasingly apparent in the last several years. Teachers’ values and beliefs
have been shown to influence grade-retention practices, systems of classroom rules,
options considered when trying to solve a problem actually taught within in a given
subject,” (p. 157). Tatto (1996) explained, “not only do teacher beliefs influence their
teaching practices, these beliefs are relatively stable and resistant to change. If teacher
educators are striving to help teachers learn practices teachers do not value, it is likely
97
that teacher education will not have much effect” (p. 157). Bartolome (2008) added, “key
dominant ideologies include the belief that the existing social order is fair and just—a
meritocracy—and that disadvantaged cultural groups are responsible for their own
disadvantages” (p. xvi). Therefore, “although there is no research that definitely links
teachers’ ideological stances with particular instructional practices, many scholars
suggest that a teacher’s ideological orientation is often reflected in his or her beliefs and
attitudes and in the way he or she interacts with, treats, and teaches students in the
classroom,” (Bartolome, 2004; Cochran-Smith 2004; Nieto, 2003; Sleeter, 1994 as cited
in Barlotolome, 2008, p. xv).
Regardless of student demographics, teacher perceptions affect teaching and
learning. Elliott (2008) stated, “there is substantial evidence that teachers’ beliefs, which
are influenced by race, class, culture, and other social group memberships, directly affect
their practice and are extremely difficult to change” (p. 212; Cochran-Smith, 1997).
Therefore, “holding beliefs that race doesn’t matter and that people are all the same are
typically intended to avoid the possibility of imposing any perceptions of inferiority on
that person or racial group,” (Elliott, 2008, p. 228). Cox Suarez (2008) noted that the
“culture of power in the United States, is the current mainstream (White, middle class)
with strong influences on literacy, personal presentation, and how schools are organized
to confirm and perpetuate this dominant culture” (p. 137). Cox Suarez (2008) added
“educators need to recognize that no language or set of life experiences is inherently
superior (avoiding the stance of exclusionary literacy), yet our social values in the
mainstream reflect our preferences for certain language and life experiences over others”
(p. 139).
98
Abelson (1979) defined beliefs as the manner in which “people [manipulate]
knowledge for a particular purpose or under a necessary circumstance” (as cited in
Pajares, 1992, p. 313). Pajares (1993) added (pre) service teachers’ beliefs are “attitudes
and values about teaching, students, and the education process that students bring to
teacher education” (p. 47). Roths (2000) stated “it is not clear what the source of those
[referring to preservice teacher’s beliefs] beliefs might be—a product of their upbringing,
a reflection of their life experiences, or a result of socialization processes in schools” (p.
385). Sigel (1985) explained beliefs are “mental constructions of experience—often
condensed and integrated into schemata or concepts that are held to be true and that guide
behavior” (as cited in Pajares 1992, p. 313). Dewey’s (1933) seminal work stated beliefs
are a “third meaning of thought, something beyond itself by which its value is tested; it
makes an assertion about some matter of fact or some principle or law,” adding that “the
importance of beliefs is crucial for…all the matters of which we have no sure knowledge
and yet which we are sufficiently confident of to act upon and also the matters that we
now accept as certainly fine, as knowledge, but which nevertheless may be questioned in
the future” (as cited in Pajares, 1992, p. 313).
Research
Questions

The following research questions were explored in this study:
Research Question 1— What are the perceptions of MAT@USC candidates in selected
courses toward Latino English learners?
Research Question 2— How do the experiences prior to enrollment in one of the
MAT@USC selected courses affect candidates’ reception to course content?
Research Question 3— How do the candidates perceive the three selected courses in the
MAT@USC program in facilitating their ability to serve the needs of Latino English
learners?
99
Setting

This study took place at the University of Southern California and the
MAT@USC program. The Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern
California’s MAT@USC program is delivered online and offers several degrees and
certificates for students who are aspiring teachers or current teachers who are looking to
earn a Masters of Arts in Teaching. 2tor, Inc., provides the necessary online tools which
makes it possible for this program to be offered online. Teacher candidates enrolled in
the MAT@USC program work towards a multiple-subject or single-subject California
teaching credential with the option of also obtaining a Masters of Arts in Teaching.
Participants

Ten respondents participated in this study and all were students in the
MAT@USC program during the Fall 2011 Semester (September-December, 2011).
These students were enrolled in one of the following three courses: “Integrating
Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction,” “Framing the Social Context of High Needs
Schools,” and “Culture Learning in Schools: Latino.” Six of the respondents had no
teaching experience at the time, and only one was pursuing a BCLAD (Bilingual,
Crosscultural, Language and Academic Development) certificate. Seven were residing in
California at the time and all were pursing teaching careers at the secondary level (eight
were obtaining Single Subject credentials and two Multiple Subject credentials with
plans to teach in a middle school/junior high school). Six of the respondents identified
themselves as monolinguals. Six respondents said they have a lot of interaction with
Latinos. All ten respondents stated they have some or a lot of interaction with individuals
whose primary language is Spanish.
100
Instruments

This study was conducted through a mixed-methods research design. The use of
multiple instruments helped to “strengthen a study by combining methods” of both,
quantitative and qualitative nature, which will consequently cause triangulation (Patton,
2002, p. 247). It also included statistical evidence, through frequency statistics gathered
from the surveys, to further explain how the participants felt about Latino English
learners and their respective course (Patton, 2002). Table 17 describes the instruments
used in this study.
Table 27
Instrument Description
Instrument Instrument Purpose
Background Information
Questionnaire
This questionnaire illustrates who are the respondents in
the study. Gender, area of study, respondent’s
interaction with specific group demographics and course
enrollment were identified through the questionnaire.
“English language learners
and the mainstream
classroom” Survey
This survey aids depicted the views the respondents
have towards English language learners once they are
placed in the mainstream classroom; and the
instructional and pedagogical decisions a teacher needs
to make that will meet the linguistical needs of the
English language learner.
Vignettes The vignettes narrate the experiences of five Latino
English language learners who are navigating the public
school system. Respondents mentioned what they
thought were barriers and facilitators for each of the five
students’ academic success.
“Course Effectiveness”
Survey
This survey asks participants to evaluate how prepared
and comfortable they feel teaching Latino English
language learners after a taking a course that emphasized
in either literacy pedagogy, social context of high needs
schools, or Latino cultural awareness.

101
Key
Findings

Research
Question
1

What are the perceptions of MAT@USC candidates in selected courses toward Latino
English learners?

Findings

Seventy percent of participants agreed that racially biased teachers tend to believe
that low-status, linguistic minority students bring so many deficits to the classroom for
the teacher, even with best practices, to make a difference in their academic success.
Seventy percent of participants agreed or strongly agreed that there is a pervasive belief
among classroom teachers that the real teaching/learning for English language learners is
in the ELL (ELD/ESL) classroom. Sixty percent of participants agreed that it is the
responsibility of English language learners to adapt to American culture and school life
as soon as possible. Half of the respondents, 50%, agreed or strongly agreed that the
regular classroom teacher has enough on his/her plate already. Therefore, adding English
language learners to their classroom will be an extra burden, since they already have to
deal with the inclusion of special needs students, adapting the curriculum to state
standards, and the pressure to prepare students for high stake assessments. Seventy
percent of participants think English learners should be taught separately from their
English-only counterparts, so these students should not be placed in the mainstream
classroom until they are ready to learn content area material at their grade level. Forty
percent of participants agreed teachers do not need specialized English language
development training to teach English language learners; common sense and good
intentions work fine. So, there is no need for second language acquisition, linguistic,
102
English language learner pedagogy, and multicultural courses and/or training. Seventy
percent of participants agreed that it is a teacher’s responsibility to make adaptations to
the curriculum for English language learners, even if there is only one English language
learner in a classroom of thirty students.
Themes were identified based on the five vignettes. Themes were separated into
two categories, facilitators and barriers, since some themes aid students in their academic
success (facilitators) while others create an obstacle for students to achieve academic
success (barriers). For Vignette #1, Carlos’ story, participants expressed that Carlos’
parents’ work and involvement are his facilitators while his low socioeconomic
neighborhood, lack of self-regulation and motivation, and cultural differences between
the school and Carlos’ culture are the barriers. In Cindy’s story, Vignette #2, participants
identified Cindy’s desire, self-motivation, aspirations, and work ethic as facilitators.
Cindy’s barriers are institutional racism, an ethnocentric counselor, and
assumptions/stereotypes based on race, culture, and gender. In Vignette #3, Lilia’s story,
participants stated Lilia’s facilitators are her English language proficiency, academic
record, parental support, and work experience. Lilia’s barriers are her undocumented
status, the possible veto of the DREAM Act, and her low socioeconomic status. Alma’s
facilitators, Vignette #4, are her supporting family (especially her husband) and her self-
motivation and her barriers are her lack of social capital, structural racism, being a teen
mother, lack of English proficiency, and the fact that Alma “failed” at her first attempt in
school. For vignette #5, Pablo’ story, participants identified Pablo’s supportive staff at
his school, self-determination, an effective bilingual education, and his active
participation in school as his facilitators. Pablo’s barriers were identified as his lack of
103
social and economic capital, self-doubt regarding his college readiness, and his legal
status.
Implications

Participants in this study identified deficit thinking as a concept prevalent
in the classroom. Walker (2011) discussed teachers need to focus on reframing deficit
attitudes and behaviors by “acknowledging deficit explanations and examining them
critically” (p. 578). Race/ethnic group, low socioeconomic status, and the lack of
English proficiency play a pivotal role in the development of a deficit stance among
educators. As supported by Walker (2011), this focus on deficit attitudes and behaviors
guides educators to understand that there is no such thing as “colorblindness” because,
unconsciously, race, language, socioeconomic status and the overall personal
backgrounds of students do affect how teachers view students, which creates
dysconscious racism. Guerra and Valverde (2007) added, “some people look at our kids
[referring to English learners] as disadvantaged because they don’t speak English,
because they come from a culture other than mainstream America, because there is crime
and tremendous obstacles in our community [i.e. low income communities], because they
don’t stand out as individualistic” (p. 40). Consequently, sixty percent of participants felt
English learners need to adapt to American culture as soon as possible, in order to fit
with mainstream America instead of embracing this new culture with theirs. Guerra and
Valverde (2007) added, “principals and teachers in minority schools [high needs schools]
must rethink how they educate students, who often have been categorized as
underachievers on standardized tests,” and “you know, Latino kids like to hang in groups.
And…if you look at the Fortune 500 companies, what are they looking for? Bilingual,
104
bicultural, collaborative, resilient people…[Latino] kids are who they want to hire” (p.
40). This exemplifies how Latino English learners can maintain their cultural and
linguistic identity and are still able to succeed academically.
In the vignette scenarios, participants identified Latino English learners’
neighborhoods and cultural differences as barriers to their academic success. Even
though research shows that low socioeconomic status and cultural differences affect
student academic achievement, they are not the primary causes for student failure.
Unfortunately, many teachers believe that “unless students of color change background
factors such as their culture, values, and family structures they encounter minimal or no
opportunities to have successful outcomes in school” (Walker, 2011, p. 577). Walker
(2011) described these teachers as having deficit thinking ideologies and described them
as “labeling poor minority students and their families as disadvantaged, at risk, and
uninvolved,” therefore blaming “students’ lack of readiness to learn in the classroom, the
parents’ lack of interest in their education, and the families’ overall lifestyle,” (p. 577).
Barron (2008) added, “although many [White] teacher candidates realized that they [will]
work with children from racial, ethnic, linguist, and economic backgrounds different
from their own, they had very limited cross-cultural experiences, knowledge, or
understanding” (p.185). Therefore, “though well-intentioned and caring, these teachers
have not developed their beliefs, attitudes, and perspectives in isolation. Their cultural
identities have been shaped by social, historical, and political factors that perpetuate
social inequities, unequal power relations, and White, European-American supremacist
ideologies” (Barron, 2008, p. 184). Regardless of their legal status, English proficiency,
105
socioeconomic status, and personal background, all students deserve an opportunity to a
socially just education.
Research
Question
2

How do the experiences prior to enrollment in one of the MAT@USC selected courses
affect candidates’ reception to course content?

Findings

Sixty-seven percent of participants reported having a “high” interaction with
individuals of Latino background. Sixty percent of participants expressed a “high”
interaction with individuals whose primary language is Spanish. Most participants, 60%,
declared having “some” interaction with individuals who belong to a different
socioeconomic status that their own.
For the participants enrolled in “Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos” only 20%
were taking the course in order to meet the BCLAD (Bilingual, Crosscultural, Language,
and Academic Development) certification requirements. The other 80% took the course
as an elective.
Sixty percent of participants were monolingual, which means they are only
proficient in English. Thirty percent are bilingual, so they are proficient in English and a
language other than English. Ten percent of participants labeled themselves as trilingual.
Therefore, they were proficient in English and two languages other than English.
The major themes identified for the course “Integrating Literacies in Secondary
Content Instruction” were sociocultural perspectives, BICS and CALPS and English
learners, and reading comprehension strategies. In the course “Framing the Social
Context of High Needs Schools,” the following were the major themes: macro context of
urban/rural schools, reflective cycle, class environment (race, ethnicity, socioeconomic
106
status, and language), high needs schools, and cultural relevant teaching. In the third
course, “Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos,” the following were identified as the
major themes: immigration (voluntary vs. involuntary), gender, social capital, and
meritocracy.
Implications

It is important for preservice teachers to be exposed to different cultures and
personal backgrounds as they prepare to teach diverse classroom settings. As Rao (2005)
explained the “increasing discontinuity between the sociocultural background of teachers
and students have propelled several important reforms in teacher education field” (p.
279). Rao (2005) added that, as a consequence, “multicultural education courses and in-
service programs have proliferated across the country to better prepare teachers to meet
the challenges of diversity in classrooms,” in order to expose teachers to difference
experiences than theirs (p. 280). As a result, the three courses selected for this study
emphasized themes within multicultural education such as sociocultural perspectives in
literacy, cultural relevant teaching, and the idea behind meritocracy. This shows that
MAT@USC is aware that their preservice teachers need to critical think who they are,
including defining who they are racially and ethnically, and how they see others before
going into a classroom, which will most likely have students whose backgrounds are
different from theirs. Therefore, it is important for preservice teachers to keep race in
mind as Curtis (1998) stated, “race matters in the creation of curriculum. It always has. It
has mattered in regard to whose version of history gets taught and in regard to creating
the ‘illusion of inclusion’ while at the same time excluding substantive participation by
people of color” (p. 139). The author continued, “race matters because teachers and
107
students are ‘racial and racialized’ beings. The inclusion of our historical and social
locations as they relate to power, oppression, and privilege has the potential to be a
compelling component in the construction of curriculum” (p. 139).
In this study, sixty percent of participants were monolingual as well as having
“some” interaction with individuals whose socioeconomic status was different than their
own. The courses in the MAT@USC need to reflect this and incorporate activities that
will engage preservice teachers in learning more about diverse students. Verdugo &
Flores (2007) noted, “knowing and understanding a student’s culture and background are
important factors in the teaching and learning process. Teachers are primarily middle-
class adults, and a majority of ELL students are from poor communities. In California,
61% of the student population is from minority backgrounds, whereas only 21% of
teachers are minority” (p. 175). Darling-Hammond (2006) agreed and added:
in the classroom most beginning teachers will enter, at least 25% of students live
in poverty and many of them lack basic food, shelter, and health care; from 10%
to 20% have identified learning differences; 15% speak a language other than
English as their primary language (many more in urban settings); and about 40%
are members of racial/ethnic ‘minority’ groups, many of them recent immigrants
from countries with different educational systems and cultural traditions. (p. 303)
Moreover, these teachers need to “realize that acquiring and developing the ’register of
schooling’ in a second language is a complex process that requires a great deal of
institutional support. Most likely, the process will take several years,” (Rubinstein-Avila,
2006, p. 38).

108

Research
Question
3

How do the candidates perceive the three selected courses in the MAT@USC program in
facilitating their ability to serve the needs of Latino English learners?

Findings

The first question on the “Course Effectiveness” survey was “How effective was
your course in helping you understand the importance of culture in teaching and
learning?” Fifty percent of participants enrolled in “Integrating Literacies in Secondary
Content Instruction” stated the course was “acceptable” while the other 50 percent stated
that the course did a “very good” job. For participants enrolled in “Framing the Social
Context of High Needs Schools,” 67% stated the course did a “very good” job explaning
the importance of culture in teaching and learning. Eighty percent of participants
declared that the course “Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos” did a “good” job
explaining the importance of culture in teaching and learning.
Participants were asked, “How effective was your course in helping you
understand the importance of language in teaching and learning?” Fifty percent of
participants enrolled in “Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction” stated
the course was “acceptable” while the other 50% stated that the course did a “very good”
job. Of the participants enrolled in “Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools,”
67 percent reported the course did a “good” job explaining the importance of language in
teaching and learning. Eighty percent of participants stated that the course “Culture
Learning in Schools: Latinos,” did a “good” or a “very good” job explaining the
importance of language in teaching and learning.
109
The third question on the “Course Effectiveness” survey was “How effective was
your course in helping you have a better understanding of biliteracy and biculturalism
and their role in the classroom?” Fifty percent of participants enrolled in “Integrating
Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction” stated that the course did a “very good” job
in helping them better understand biliteracy and biculturalism and their role in the
classroom. Sixty-seven percent of participants enrolled in “Framing the Social Context of
High Needs Schools” reported that their course was “good” in helping them understand
the role of biliteracy and biculturalism in the classroom. Sixty percent of participants
enrolled in “Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos” stated their course did a “good” job
helping them understand the role of biliteracy and biculturalism in the classroom.
The next question on the “Course Effectiveness” survey was “How effective was
your course in helping you feel more comfortable with second language acquisition
theory and how to implement it in the classroom?” Fifty percent of participants enrolled
in “Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction” stated that the course did a
“very good” job in helping feel more comfortable with second language acquisition
theory and how to implement it in the classroom. Two-thirds, 67 percent, of participants
enrolled in “Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools” reported that their
course did a “good” or a “very good” job in helping them better understand second
language acquisition and its implementation in the classroom. Sixty percent of
participants from the course “Culture Learning in Schools: Latinos” stated this course did
a “good” job explaining second language acquisition and its implementation in the
classroom.
110
The last question on the “Course Effectiveness” survey asked participants “How
effective was your course in helping you appreciate the diversity of the Latino culture?”
Fifty percent of participants enrolled in “Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content
Instruction” reported that their course did an “acceptable” job in helping them appreciate
the diversity of the Latino culture while the other 50% gave it a “good” rating. One
hundred percent of participants enrolled in “Framing the Social Context of High Needs
Schools” rated their course as “good” or “very good” in helping them better appreciate
the diversity of the Latino culture. Likewise, 100% of participants enrolled in “Culture
Learning in Schools: Latinos” also stated that their course did a “good” or a “very good”
job at helping them better appreciate the diversity of the Latino culture.
Implications

Ninety percent of participants felt their course help them better understand and
appreciate other cultures, including the Latino culture. These three courses challenged
preservice teachers to question the status quo through discussions, reflections, and self-
discovery. Therefore, these three selected course were about to “fundamentally reinvent
[existing structures and paradigms] by challenging traditional ideological underpinnings,
placing knowledge about culture and racism front and center, including teaching social
justice as a major outcome, and valuing the cultural knowledge of local communities”
(Cochran, 2003, p. 20). These three courses analyzed culture and language, which
Villegas & Lucas (2007) explained can aid preservice teachers to “successfully teach
students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds—especially students from
historically marginalized groups— [since it] involves more than just applying specialized
teaching techniques. It demands a new way of looking at teaching that is granted in an
111
understanding of the role of culture and language in learning” (p. 29). Even though all
participants stated they feel more comfortable with the Latino culture at the end of their
perspective course, being culturally sensitive does not guarantee effective teachers and
teaching. As Cabello & Davis (1995) noted “being culturally sensitive, however, is not
sufficient to be an effective teacher. The primary goal is to provide appropriate and
effective instruction for all students” (p. 292).
Having confident teachers in the classroom is important, especially in a classroom
full of diverse learners. As supported by Wadlington and Wadlington (2011) “confident
teachers are more likely to differentiate their instruction for diverse learners as well as
teach higher levels of learning. In addition, they are more collaborative and likely to
listen to others. Again, these teachers consider the students to be part of the “class team”
and can diversify their instruction and questioning levels without a fear of losing control”
(p. 324). Most secondary teachers do not feel confident in teaching English learners. As
Rubinstein-Avila (2006) reported “only 2.5 percent of teachers of English language
learners have received special preparation to work with these students” (pp. 39-40).
Rubinstein-Avila (2006) added “given the lack of professional development available to
secondary teachers with regard to second language development issues…teachers
probably have limited awareness of the funds of knowledge that [students] bring to
school” (p. 38).
Limitations

This study was limited since there were only ten candidates who participated in
the study. A larger pool of participants would have allowed generalization of the
findings. Also, the study asked students enrolled in three of the twelve courses offered by
112
the MAT@USC program. Participants in this study were in different points in the
MAT@USC program: some were at the beginning of the program, others were mid-way,
a few were completing the program that semester, and some already had teaching
experience. Since the study did not observe teacher candidates in the classroom, one
cannot assure that the feelings and perceptions that were identified on the surveys
translate to their practice in the classroom.
Recommendations
for
Practice

MAT@USC courses should continue to challenge preservice teachers to critically
analyze their preconceptions and beliefs along with examining how their personal
backgrounds influence their teaching. As supported by Gonsalves (2008), “many
preservice teachers unconsciously rely on commonly held beliefs as explanations for
current social inequality and operate on the assumed truth of these ideas. The basis of
these beliefs is preserved and advanced through prevailing interpretations of history, by
stereotypes found in mass media, or the myth of common knowledge about others,” (p.
10). Cox Suarez (2008) added, “it will be ideal if all teachers embraced their own
cultural and racial identity, question their biases, and look critically at how their attitudes
might affect their students’ learning and their relationships with students” (p.
145).Therefore, Elliott (2008) suggested five questions that all (White) teachers,
preservice and inservice, should reflect and discuss throughout their teacher education
programs and classroom experiences:
1. Why is it that people of the same race (skin color) seem to have an instant
bond when they begin talking to each other, whereas people of different
colors seem to need to bridge a gap before they can feel comfortable?
113
2. I wonder how I incorporate race into my thoughts. Do I ignore it? Do I have
subliminal thoughts?
3. Do my students see how many actions and reactions may be a result of my
White upbringing? Is this a bad thing? Would I have reacted differently to the
scenario if I were Hispanic or a Black woman [man]? Would she [he] feel the
same way as I do? Would she [he] react the same as a White teacher?
4. Are race and culture important considerations in subject matter or are they
limited to how you interact with students on a personal (teacher/student)
level?
5. How is the role of academic teacher viewed across various ethnic and cultural
segments? (p. 281).
Barron (2008) added “they [White teachers] need to confront their assumptions about
low-income, immigrant, English language learners, and students of color as being
culturally disadvantaged people who must adopt to the values, beliefs, norms, and
behaviors of the White (English-speaking, European American, middle-class)
mainstream in order to become successful learners” (p. 187).
Teacher education programs need to challenge all preconceptions teacher
candidates have regarding race, culture, and class. Martin (2008) provided an example of
a typical class in a teacher education program that brings up the concept of [white]
privilege that is rarely questioned. He asked “how many of you walked into this room
and thought, ‘it’s really White in here?” Only the four teachers of color in the room
raised their hands; the remaining 56 White educators had not noticed the disproportionate
number of White educators in the room. The privilege of not noticing, or not having to
114
notice, that the room was primarily White carries over into the classroom” (p. 163).
White educators need to assume “an antiracist stance [that] moves toward becoming a
White ally who works to interrupt situations of racism whenever they occur and works to
actively prevent overt or covert acts from re-occurring” (Martin, 2008, p. 177).
Martin (2008) mentioned:
deeply imbedded in American society, coloring virtually all cross-cultural
interactions, is racism, a system of privilege and power based on race that
typically goes unacknowledged by those who benefit from this system, Whites in
general and White teachers in particular. In education, it is particularly important
that White teachers develop an understanding of this system of privilege
especially when they work with non-White students.” (p. 163)
Teacher education programs need to support teacher candidates in recognizing their
privilege in order to end racial oppression rather than validating it.
Unlike the typical teacher education program that does not require preservice
teachers to think critically about their preconceptions and beliefs; the three selected
courses that were used in this study show how the MAT@USC program is pushing
preservice teachers to critically reflect on their ideologies. As supported by Pajares
(1993), “teacher educators should challenge beliefs not simply to search and destroy but
to encourage self-explorations, clarity, consistency, and commitment” (p. 47).
Bartolome (2008) added “preservice and practicing teachers are often emerge from
teacher education programs having unconsciously absorbed assimilationist, white
supremacist, and deficit views of nonwhite and low-income students” (p. xv). Also,
Roths (2000) discussed how “some programs [teacher education programs] choose not to
115
improve practice, but instead they strive to prepare teachers who fit into the patterns of
current practice” (p. 385).
The debate of what constitutes good teaching for diverse students continues with
no “right” answer. Cabello and Davis (1995) stated that some “argue good teaching
practices are effective for all, ignoring the importance of differences in culture and
learning. Others emphasize that particular ethnic, racial, or linguistic groups require
specific approaches that reflect their cultural background but neglect to consider the
significance of individual differences within cultures” (p. 285). Regardless culture
shapes how individuals perceive, relate to, and interpret their environment. Therefore,
“students from different cultural backgrounds may find that practices fostered and
encouraged at home are often unacceptable and discouraged in school” (Collier &
Hoover, 1986; Cuban, 1989; Payne, Patton, Kaffman, Brown, & Payne, 1983; as cited in
Cabello & Davis, 1995, p. 285).
Conclusion

This study identified MAT @USC teacher candidates’ perceptions of Latino
English learners and how their previous experiences and courses affected how they
perceive English learners and their ability to be effective teachers to this student
population. Due to the small number of participants in the study, generalizations based on
respondents’ answers were not made. Most respondents in the study were monolingual
preservice teachers who reported to have some interaction with individuals from a
different socioeconomic status and whose primary language is not English.
This mixed methods study illustrated what current teacher candidates feel affects
Latino English learners and how their coursework in the MAT@USC program prepared
116
them to work with these students. Based on participants’ responses, MAT@USC is
“recasting the US curriculum to give greater emphasis on multiculturalism, equity, and
social justice” in their teacher education program as recommended by Lynn and Smith-
Maddox (2007, p. 95). Therefore, these MAT@USC teacher candidates “rather than
discouraging students from using their existing linguistic repertoires, [will] encourage
Latino students to rely on their funds of knowledge and build on their bicultural and
bilingual experiences as a bridge to developing academic English proficiency”
(Rubinstein-Avila, 2006, p. 43).
117
REFERENCES

Arizona State University’s Center for Community Development (2007). Preparing for
college: enrolling, educating, and advancing Latinos. Summary report presented
on December 2007: Ford Foundation.
Baca, R. (2011). EDUC 558: Culture Learning in Schools: Latino. (Available from the
University of Southern California: MAT @USC program, Waite Phillips Hall,
3470 Trousdale Parkway, Los Angeles, CA 90069).
Balderrama, M.V. (2008). Shooting the message: The consequences of practicing
anideology of social justice. In L. I. Bartolome (Ed.), Ideologies in Education:
Unmasking the trap of teacher neutrality, 29-45. New York, NYL Peter
LangPublishing.
Ballantyne, K.G., Sanderman, A.R., Levy, J. (2008). Educating English language
learners: Building teacher capacity. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for
English Language Acquisition. Available at
http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/practice/mainstream_teachers.htm.
Barajas, H.C.. & Pierce, J.L. (2001). The significance of race and gender in school
success among Latinas and Latinos in college. Gender & Society, 15(6). Sage
Publications, 859-878.
Barry, N. H. & Lechner, J. V. (1995). Pre-service teachers’ attitudes about and awareness
of multicultural teaching and learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(2),
149-161.
Barron, N. L. (2008). Reflections from Beneath the Veil: Mainstream Preservice
Teachers (Dis) Covering Their Cultural Identities. In L. I. Bartolome (Ed.),
Ideologies in Education: Unmasking the trap of teacher neutrality, 181-205.
New York, NYL Peter Lang Publishing.
Bartolome, L.I. (2008). Introduction: Beyond the fog of ideology. In L. I.Bartolome
(Ed.), Ideologies in Education: Unmasking the trap of teacherneutrality, ix-xxix-
45. New York, NYL Peter Lang Publishing.
Bennett, C. (2001). Genres of research in multicultural education. Review of
EducationalResearch, 71(2), 171-217.
Cadiero-Kaplan, K. (2008). Critically examining beliefs, orientations, ideologies, and
practices toward literacy instruction: A process of praxis. In L. I. Bartolome (Ed.),
Ideologies in Education: Unmasking the trap of teacher neutrality, 117-134. New
York, NYL Peter Lang Publishing.
Calderon, M., Slavin, R., & Sanchez, M. (2011). Effective instruction of English learners.
The Future of Children, 21(1), 103-127.
118
California Department of Education. (2012). Facts about English Learners in
California—CalEdfacts. http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/cb/cefelfacts.asp Retrieved
on 1 April 2012.
Callahan, R.M. (2005). Tracking and high school English Learners: Limiting opportunity
to learn. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 305-328.
Cammarota, J. (2004). The gendered and racialized pathways of Latina and Latino youth:
different struggles, different resistances in the urban context. Anthropology and
Education Quarterly, 35(1), 53-74.
Carey, K. (2004). The real value of teachers: Using new information about teacher
effectiveness to close the achievement gap. Thinking K-16, 8(1), 1-42.
Castagno, A. E. (2008). I don’t want to hear that: Legitimating Whiteness through silence
in schools. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 39(3), 314-333.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2003). The multiple meanings of multicultural teacher education: A
conceptual framework. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(2), 7-26.
Colombo, M.W. (2005). Empathy and cultural competence: Reflections from teachers of
culturally diverse children. Journal of the National Association for the Education
of Young Children, 60(6). 1-8.
Corwin, R.G.(1973). Organizational reform and organizational survival: The teacher
corps as an instrument of educational change. NY, NY: Wiley.
Course Description (2011). www.mat.usc.edu. Retrieved on 30 August 2011.
Cox Suarez, Stephanie (2008). Sharing the wealth: Guiding all students into
theprofessional discourse. In L. I. Bartolome (Ed.), Ideologies in
Education:Unmasking the trap of teacher neutrality, 135-160. New York, NYL
Peter LangPublishing.
Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methodsapproaches. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Curtis, Cheryl. (1998). Creating culturally responsive curriculum: Making race matter.
The Clearing House, 71(3), 35-139.
Darling-Hammond, L. & Gonzalez, J.M. (2000). Programs that prepare teachers to work
effectively with students learning English. Center for Applied Linguistics.
www.nces.ed.gov./fastfacts/display.asp?id=96. Retrieved on 8 April 2012.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). Doing what matters most: Investing in quality teaching.
NY, NY: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future.
119
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that
work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st century teacher education. Journal of
Teacher Education, 57(3), 300-314.
Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago
Press.
Education Data Partnership (Ed-Data). (2011). English learners: State of California,
2010-11.
http://www.eddata.k12.ca.us/App_Resx/EdDataClassic/fsTwoPanel.aspx?#!botto
m=/_layouts/EdDataClassic/profile.asp?Tab=1&level=04&reportNumber=16#en
glishlearners Retrieved on 1 April 2012.
Elliott, P. (2008). Mapping the terrains(s) of ideology in new urban teachers’
professionaldevelopment experiences. In L. I. Bartolome (Ed.), Ideologies in
Education:Unmasking the trap of teacher neutrality, 207-230. New York, NYL
Peter LangPublishing.
English Language Learners (2004). Ed Week. www. edweek.org/ew/issues/english-
language-learners/. Retrieved on March 26, 2012.
Fairchild, H.H. & Edwards-Evans, S. (1990). African American dialects and schooling:
A review. In A.M. Padilla, H.H. Fairchild, & C.M. Valadez (Eds.), Bilingual
education: Issues and strategies, 75-86. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Freeman, D., & Johnson, K. E. (1998). Reconceptualizing the knowledge-base
oflanguage teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 397-417.
Ferrario, K. (2011). EDUC 505: Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content
Instruction.(Available from the University of Southern California: MAT @USC
program, Waite Phillips Hall, 3470 Trousdale Parkway, Los Angeles, CA 90069).
Freire, P. (1998) Pedagogy of Freedom: Ethics, Democracy, and Civic Courage.
Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the Oppressed: 30th Edition. New York, NY: Continuum.
Gandara, P. & Contreras, F. (2009). The Latino education crisis: The consequences of
failed social policies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gandara, P. (2002). In the aftermath of the storm: English learners in the post-227 era.
Bilingual Research Journal. 24(1), 1-15.
Gandara, P., Maxwell-Jolly, J., & Driscoll, A. (2005). Listening to teachers of English
language learners. The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning. Santa
Cruz, CA: The Regents of the University of California.
120
Gandara, P. & Contreras, F. (2009). The Latino education crisis: The consequences of
failed social policies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Garcia, E.E., & Wiese, A.M. Language, public policy, and schooling: a focus on
Chicano English language learners. In R. Valencia, Chicano School Failure and
Success: Past, Present, and Future (Second Edition), (Ed.), (pp 70-113). London:
RouledgeFalmer.
Gilbert, S. L. (1995). Perspectives of rural prospective teachers toward teaching in urban
schools. Urban Education, 30(3), 290-305.
Ginorio, A., & Huston, M. (2002). Characteristics of communities affecting
participation/success. Jossey-Bass Reader on Gender in Education. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 543-583.
González, J.M., & Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). New concepts for new
challenges:Professional development for teachers of immigrant youth. McHenry,
IL, and Washington, DC: Delta Systems and Center for Applied Linguistics.
Gonsalves, R.E. (2008). Hysterical blindness and the ideology of denial: Preservice
teachers’ resistance to multicultural education. In L. I. Bartolome (Ed.),
Ideologies in Education: Unmasking the trap of teacher neutrality, 3-28. New
York, NYL Peter Lang Publishing.
Goodwin, A. L. (2002). Teacher preparation and the education of immigrant children.
Education and Urban Society, 34(2), 156-172.
Guerra, P. & Valverde, L.A. (2007). Latino communities and schools: Tapping assests
for student success. Principal Leadership, 8(2), 40-44.
Guillbard, P. (2007). Andragogy & Online Learning: Towards a Systematic Instruction
Framework. University of Virginia: ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
Guskey, T.R. (2003). Using data to improve student achievement. Educational
Leadership, 60(5), 6-11.
Hallian, M. T. & Khmelkov, V. T. (2001). Recent developments in Teacher Education in
the United States of America. Journal of Education for Teaching, 27(2),175-185.
Hayes-Bautista, D. (1992). No longer a minority: Latinos and social policy in California.
Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Chicano Studies Research Center Publications.
Hayes-Bautista, D., Schink, W.O., & Chapa, J. (1990). The burden of support: Young
Latinos in an aging society. Chicago, IL: Stanford University Press.
Howard, G.R. (2006). We can’t teach what we don’t know: White teachers, multiracial
schools. New York, NY: Teachers City College Press.
121
January 2012 Orientation via LMS. 2sc.usc.edu. Retrieved on 1 April 2012.
Jeffries, C. & Maeder, D. W. (2005). Using vignettes to build and assess teacher
understanding of instructional strategies. The Professional Educator, 27(1 & 2),
17-27.
Jepsen. C & de Alth. S. (2005). English Learners in California Schools. San Francisco,
CA: Public Institute of California.
Johnson, K.E. (1992). The relationship between teachers’ beliefs and practices during
literacy instruction for non-native speakers of English. Journal of Literacy
Research, 24(1), 83-108.
Jones, C. (2000). Levels of racism: A theoretic framework and a gardener’s tale.
American Journal of Public Health, 90(8),1212-1215.
Juschik, S. (2005). First generation challenges. Inside Higher Ed.
www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/08/10/first. Retrieved on 29 January 2012.
Kagan, D. (1992). Implications of research on teacher belief. Educational Psychologist,
27(1), 65-90.
Kane. W. (2010). Latino kids now majority in state’s public schools. SF Gate.
www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/11/12/MNIGBDOC.DTL.
Retrieved on 26 March 2012.
Katz, S.R. (1999). Teaching in tensions: Latino immigrant youth, their teachers and the
structures of schooling. Teachers College Record, 100, 809-840.
Kindler, A. L. (2002). Survey of the states’ limited English proficient students and
available educational programs and services: 2000-2001 summary report.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education; Office of English Language
Acquisition, Language Enhancement and Academic Achievement for Limited
English Proficient Students.
Krashen, S. D. (1996). Under attack: The case against Bilingual education. Culver City,
CA: Language Education Associates.
Kubish, A. C. (2006). Structural racism. Poverty and Race Research Action Council,
15(6), 1-8.
Ladson-Billings, G.J. (1999). Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in anice
field like education. In L. Parker, D. Deyhele, S. Villenas (Eds.) Race is…race
isn’t: Critical race theory and qualitative studies in education,7-30. Boulder, CO:
Westview Press.
Larke, P. J. (1990). Cultural Diversity Awareness Inventory: Assessing the Sensitivity of
Pre-service Teachers. Action in Teacher Education, 12(3), pp. 23-30.
122
Lasnier, G. (2011). Education researchers win $2 million grant to prepare teachers who
help English learners. University of California Santa Cruz.
http://news.ucsc.edu/2011/12/teacher-education-grant.html. Retrieved on 8 April
2012.
Lawrence, S. (2005). Contextual matters: Teachers’ perceptions of the success of
antiracist classroom practices. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(6), 350-
365.
LeMoine, N., & Hollie, S. (2007). Developing Academic English for Standard English
learners. In H.S. Alim & J. Baugh (Eds.). Talkin black talk: Language, education
and social change, 43-55. New York: Teachers College Press.
Orfield, G. (1978). Must we bus? Segregated schools and national policy. Washington,
DC: Brookings Institution.
Lucas, T., Henze, R., & Donato, R. (1990). Promoting the success of Latino Language -
Minority Students: An Exploratory Study of Six High Schools. Harvard
Educational Review, 60(3), 315-340.
Lynn, M. & Maddox, R. S. (2007). Preservice teacher inquiry: Creating a space to
dialogue about becoming a social justice educator. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 23, 94–105.
Madrid, E.M. (2011). The Latino achievement gap. Multicultural Education, 18(3).
http://go.galegroup.com.libproxy.usc.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA274955676&v
=2.1&u=usocal_main&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w. Retrieved on 12 April 2012.
Martin, P.S. (2008). “I’m White, now what?” Setting a context for change in
teachers’pedagogy. In L. I. Bartolome (Ed.), Ideologies in Education:
Unmasking the trap of teacher neutrality, 161-180. New York, NYL Peter Lang
Publishing.
Martinez, S. (2009). Mexican American high school students’ perceived levels of
challenge in schools. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 31(3), 297-316.
McWhorter, J. (2000). Losing the Race. New York, New York: Free Press.
MetisNet (2008). Impoving graduation and college readiness of English language
learners: A briefing of key issues and strategic opportunities for investment.
Center for Applied Linguistics, 1-46.
Mezirow, J, (1981). Critical Theory of Adult Learning and Education. Adult Education
Quarterly, 32, 3-24.
Moll. L.C. (2001). “The diversity of schooling: A cultural-historical approach.” In M. de
la Luz Reyes & J.J. Halcon (eds.) The best for our children: Critical perspectives
on literacy for Latino children, 13-28, NY, NY: Teacher College Press.
123
Monzo, L. & Rueda, R. (2009). Passing for English fluent: Latino immigrant children
masking language proficiency. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 40(1),
20-40.
Mora-Flores, E. (2011). Syllabus for EDUC 558: Culture Learning in Schools: Latino
Culture. (Available from the University of Southern California: MAT @USC
program, Waite Phillips Hall, 3470 Trousdale Parkway, Los Angeles, CA 90069).
National Center for Education. (2012). English language learners.
http://nces.ed.gov./fastfacts/display.asp?id=96. Retrieved on 8 April 2012.
NCTE (2008). English language learners: A policy research brief produced by the
National Council of Teachers of English. NCTE: James R. Squire Office of
Policy, 1-8.
NCTE (2009). Beliefs about social justice in English education. http;//www.ncte.org.
Retrieved on 1 September 2012.
Ogbu, J. (1995). Cultural problems in minority education: Their interpretations and
consequences--Part 1: Theoretical Background. Urban Review, 27(3), 189-205.
Orellana, M.F., Reynolds, J., Dorner, L., & Meza, M. (2003). In other words: Translating
or “para-phrasing” as a family literacy practice in immigrant households. Reading
Research Quarterly, 38(1), 12-34.
Orfield, G. (2004). Brown misunderstood. In J. Anderson & D. Byrne (Eds.) Black
Issues in Higher Education, 151-163. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Orfield, G. (Ed.) (2004). Dropouts in America: Confronting the graduation rate crisis.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Owen, R. & Aworuwa, B.(2003). Return on Investment in Traditional versus Distributed
Learning. Preceedings of the Tenth Annual Distance Education Conference,
22.1-22.10. Rod Ham & Jim Woosley (eds.). Sponsored by Center for Distance
Learning, Research, Texas A&M University.
Patton, M. P. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods: 3rd Edition.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Polat, N. A comparative analysis of pre- and in-service teacher beliefs about readiness
and self-competency: Revisiting teacher education for ELLs. System, 38. 228-
244.
Price, N., J. (2000) Against the odds. Greenwood, CT: Westport.
Rakosi-Rosenbloom, S. & Way, N. (2004). Experiences of discrimination among African
American, Asian American, and Latino adolescents in an urban high school.
Youth & Society, 35(4), 420-451.
124
Raths, J. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs and teaching beliefs. Early Childhood Research and
Practice, 3(1), 1-10.
Ream, R. K. (2003). Counterfeit social capital and Mexican-American
underachievement. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 25(3), 237-262.
Rubinstein-Avila, E. (2006). Connecting with Latino learners. Educational Leadership,
63 (5), 38-43.
Rumbaut, R.G. & Cornelius, W.A. (1995). California’s immigrant children: theory,
research, and implications for educational policy. Boulder, Co: Lynne Rienner
Publishers.
Saenz, V., & Ponjuan, L. (2008). The vanishing Latino male in higher education. Journal
of Hispanic Higher Education, 8(1), 54-89.
Schultz, E. L., Neyhart, K. & Reck, U. M. (1996). Swimming Against the Tide: A
Studyof Prospective Teachers’ Attitudes Regarding Cultural Diversity and Urban
Teaching. Western Journal of Black Studies, 20(1), pp. 1-7.
Slayton. J. (2011). Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools. (Available from
the University of Southern California: MAT @USC program, Waite Phillips Hall,
3470 Trousdale Parkway, Los Angeles, CA 90069).
Sleeter, C. (2001). Preparing teachers for culturally diverse schools: Research and
theoverwhelming presence of whiteness. Journal of Teacher Education, 52 (2) ,
94-.
Smithermanm G. (2000). Talkin that talk: language, culture, and education in
AfricanAmerica. NY, NY: Routledge.
Solomon, M., Lalas, J, & Carol Franklin. (2006). Making instructional adaptations for
English learners in the mainstream classroom: is it good enough? Multicultural
Education, 13(3), 42-45.
Solorzano, D. (1998). Critical race theory, race, and gender microaggressions, and the
experience of Chicana and Chicano scholars. Qualitative Studies in Education,
11(1), 121-136.
Steele, S. (1991). The Content of Our Character. New York, New York: Harper
Perennial.
Su, Z. (1996). Why teach: profiles and entry perspectives of minority students
asbecoming teachers. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 29(3),
117-133.
Su. Z. (1997). Teaching as a profession and as a career: Minority candidates’
perspectives. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(3), 325-340.
125
Suarez-Orozco, C., & Suarez-Orozco, M. (1995). Transformations: Immigration, family
life, and achievement motivate among Latino adolescents. Palo Alto, CA:
Stanford University Press.
Suárez-Orozco, M., & Páez, M. (Eds.) (2002). Latinos: Remaking America. Universityof
California Press and the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies at
Harvard University: Berkeley, CA.
Tellis, W. (1997). Application of a case study methodology. The Qualitative Report [On-
line serial], 3(3). Available:http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-3/tellis2.html.
Retrieved on March 20th, 2011.
The Freire Project (2009). Deficit thinking. http://www.freireproject.org Retrieved on 1
September 2012.
The Growing Numbers of English Learner Students, 1998/99-2008/09 (2011). The
National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition.
http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/files/uploads/9/growingLEP_0809.pdf
Thernstrom, A. & Thernstrom, S.(2004). No Excuses: Closing the Racial Gap in
Learning. New York, New York: Simon & Schuster.
Thompson, G. (2009). Language use in the classroom: Understanding the relationship
between perceptions, beliefs, and verbal communication. Hispania, 92(3), 537-
549.
Téllez, K., & Waxman, H. C. (2005). Effective professional development programs
forteachers of English language learners. Spotlight on student success,
803.Philadelphia, PA: Laboratory for Student Success (LSS), The Mid-
AtlanticRegional Educational Laboratory.
UC Merced School of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts. (2012). www.
ucmerced.edu. Retrieved on 1 April 2012.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2012).
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=28 Retrieved on 23 July 2012.
Valencia, R. R. (Ed.) (2002). Chicano school failure and success: Past, present, and
future (2nd edition). New York, NY : Routledgefalmer.
Valencia, Richard (1999). “Educational Testing and Mexican American Students:
Problems and Prospects.” In J. F. Moreno (ed.) The Elusive Quest for Equality:
150 years of Chicano/a Education, 123-140, Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Educational Review.
Valencia, Richard (Ed.) (1997). The evolution of deficit thinking: educational thought
and practice. London: The Falmer Press.
126
Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive Schooling: U.S.–Mexican Youth and the Politics of
Caring. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Valli, L. (1995). “The dilemma of race: Learning to be colorblind and color conscious.”
Journal of Teacher Education, 46 (2), 120-129.
Verdugo, R. & Flores, B. (2007). English language learners: Key issues. Education and
Urban Society, 391(2), 167-193.
Virginia Wesleyan College. School of Education Handbook. Avaiable at:
www.vwc.edu/academics/programs/educ/field.../handbook.pdf -. Retrieved on
April 19th, 2011.
Wadlington, E. & Wadlington, P. (2011). Teacher dispositions: Implications for teacher
education. Childhood Education, 87(5), 323-326.
Wakefield, W.D., & Fajardo, G. (2004). Discrimination at school: Latino and African
American Male High School students’ experiences. Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (San Diego, CA, Apr
13, 2004).
Walker, A., Shafer, J., & Iiams, M. (2004). “Not in my classroom”: Teacher attitudes
towards English Langauge Learners in the mainstream classroom. NABE Journal
of Research and Practice 2(1), 130-160.
Walter-Haynes, K.L. (2011). Deficit Thinking and the Effective Teacher. Education and
Urban Society, 43(5), 576-597.
Yoon, B. (2008). Uninvited guests: The influence of teachers’ roles and pedagogies on
the positioning of English language learners in regular classrooms. American
Educational Research Journal, 45(2), 495-522.
Yosso,T. &Solorzano,D. (March2006). Leaks in the Chicana and Chicano Educational
Pipeline. Latino Policy & Issues Brief ,13, UCLA Chicano Studies Research
Center.
Zelher, A., et al. (2003). Descriptive study of services to limited English proficient
students. Washington, DC: Development Associates.
127
Appendix
A:
Introductory
Letter

Fall 2011
Dear MAT@USC Student,

My name is Cynthia Leticia Lomeli, and I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School
of Education at University of Southern California. I am conducting a research study as
part of my dissertation, focusing on preservice teachers and Latino English language
learners under the faculty advisement of Drs. Sandra Kaplan and Ronni Ephraim. You
are invited to participate in the study since you are enrolled in one of the following
courses: EDUC 505 “Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction”, EDUC
516 “Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools”, or EDUC 558 “Culture
Learning in Schools: Latino”. If you agree, you are invited to participate in online
surveys. The surveys will anticipate to take no more than 45 total minutes to complete.

Participation in this study is voluntary. Your identity as a participant will remain
confidential at all times during and after the study. Your course grade will not be
affected whether or not you participate in this study.

If you have questions or would like to participate, please contact me at clomeli@usc.edu.

Thank you for your participation,

Cynthia Leticia Lomeli
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California

128
Appendix
B:
Live
Sessions
Course
Summaries

Course: EDUC 505 Integrating Literacies in Secondary Content Instruction
Ten week course; meet every other week; students met in inquiry groups during the
“off” weeks

Date Class Focus
9/27/2011 Discussion was focused around the
question “what are the different types of
text used in your content area?”
Sociocultural perspectives were discussed
in order to incorporate funds of knowledge
and critical literacy in the classrooms.
10/11/2011 Focus question for this meeting was “what
makes the text in your content area
difficult?” Sociocultural perspectives and
metacognition strategies were mentioned as
ways to make context area text accessible
for students, especially for English
language learners.
10/25/2011 Reading comprehension strategies was the
focus of this session. Engaging strategies
such as QAR (Question-Answer-
Relationship) and predictions were
explained and modeled.
11/8/2011 The difference between BICS and CALPS
was discussed. Three different tiers of
vocabulary selections were explained as
well as strategies to increase academic
language in the classroom.
11/22/2011 Students presented their inquiry projects
where they explained their ideological
stance regarding pedagogical approaches in
their content area, focusing how they will
provide equity and access to the
curriculum.

129
Course: EDUC 516 Framing the Social Context of High Needs Schools
Twelve week course

Date Class Focus
9/13/2011 Class started with the question “who are
our children? What does Oakes and Lipton
help us see about who attends public
schools and their varied opportunities to
learn? How does this connect with your
own K-12 experiences?” This lead to a
discussion of how predispositions and the
macro context of urban/rural schools affect
students’ educational experiences.
9/20/2011 Reflective Cycle was introduced with a
focus on the two first stages: “seeing” and
“describing.” Students were also asked to
think about “what is ‘presence’ and what
does it mean to ‘be present’.”
9/27/2011 Continued with the reflective cycle and
discussed the last two stages “analyzing”
and “experimenting.”
10/4/2011 Reflective cycle was further discussed with
the concepts of personal ideologies and
biases. Furthermore, it was also discussed
how the reflective cycle can help identify
and better understand the concept of
teacher ideology and the role it plays in
their work as a teacher.
10/11/2011 The importance of classroom environment
was the focus of this class meeting. Some
of the macro (“big picture”) issues were
discussed that affect a classroom
environment such as race, ethnicity,
socioeconomic status, and language.
Hence, it is important for teachers to
deepen their knowledge and awareness of
who students (attending high needs
schools) are and the conditions that may
attribute to their academic success or
failure.
10/18/2011 This session continued with macro issues
that affect students in high needs schools
and might create negative stigmas towards
these students. Thus, the reflective cycle
can help teachers get to know their students
better before labeling students.
130
10/25/2011 This session focused on the micro issues
that affect a classroom environment,
focusing on the teacher. Teachers can
intentionally or unintentionally exclude
students’ funds of knowledge, which affect
the instructional and curricula choices a
teacher makes.
11/1/2011 Families and communities were the focus
of this class meeting. The importance of
engaging parents to participate in their
child(ren)’s education and what it means to
be successful in each family were
discussed.
11/8/2011 Student autonomy and teacher control were
the focus of this class meeting. High
behavioral and academic expectations
along with culture and climate of the
classroom affect classroom management.
Reflective cycle can help teachers create a
positive classroom climate.
11/15/2011 The importance of culturally relevant
teaching was the focus of this session and
how teachers struggle with their
assumptions and biases of what they think
students need academically.
11/22/2011 The importance of a multifocal lens and a
nonlinear model in the classroom was the
focus of this session. Hence, teachers need
to learn how to connect prior student
learning, socio-historical experiences of
students, language(s) of students, learning
goals, standards, curricula when making
instructional and learning decisions.
11/29/2011 Federal and State policy and high stakes
tests affect decisions in the classroom.
Thus, teachers need to learn how to balance
high stake tests to what students are
learning in the classroom.

131
Course: EDUC 558 Culture Learning in Schools: Latino

Ten week course; meet every other week (starting with the second meeting); during
“off” weeks students watched films

Date Class Focus
9/22/2011 First meeting was to discussed course’s
syllabus and structure of the class.
9/29/2011 Professor discussed the difference between
involuntary and voluntary immigrants and
their correlation with internalized racism.
The concepts of nationality and identity
were explained as well defining what is
“white.” The idea of privilege was
discussed and its relation with language
and racism at the macro structural level.
10/13/2011 The importance of social capital was
discussed and how it is important for
students to have role models in schools.
The challenges of incorporating additive
schooling in subtractive times were
analyzed as well as questioning the
“middle class achievement rod.”
10/27/2011 Gender and immigration issues were
discussed in this meeting. The importance
of culturally responsive teaching was
argued with examples from the films
“Precious Knowledge” and “Walkout.”
11/10/2011 Focus question of this class meeting was
“how are students (attending high needs
schools) treated by the dominant group?’
and how are these students responding to
the treatment?” The statement “we are not
in a colorblind society” sparked a
discussion around privilege (and the need
to recognize privilege) and meritocracy.
11/22/2011 For the last class meeting, students
presented a piece of art that represented
who they are and what they learned in the
course. Many students used flags,
propaganda, and music in their
presentations.

132

Appendix
C:
“English
language
learners
and
the

mainstream
classroom”
Survey

To what extent to you agree with the following statements:

1. Racially biased teachers tend to believe that low-status, linguistic minority
students bring too many deficits to the classroom for the teacher, even with the
best practices, to make a difference in their academic success.

Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree

2
Neutral/Undecided

3
Agree

4
Strongly
Agree
5

2. There is a pervasive belief among regular classroom teachers that the real
teaching/learning for English language learners is in the ELL (E.L.D./ESL)
classroom. This belief serves to justify teachers in their resistance to make
curricular and instructional adaptations in their mainstream classrooms.

Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree

2
Neutral/Undecided

3
Agree

4
Strongly
Agree
5

3. It is the responsibility of English language learners to adapt to American culture
and school life as soon as possible.

Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree

2
Neutral/Undecided

3
Agree

4
Strongly
Agree
5

4. The regular classroom teacher has enough on his/her plate already. Thus, adding
English language learners to their classrooms will be an extra burden since they
already have to deal with the inclusion of special needs students, adapting
curriculum to state standards, and the pressure to prepare students for high stake
assessments.

Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree

2
Neutral/Undecided

3
Agree

4
Strongly
Agree
5
133

5. English language learners should not be placed in the mainstream classroom until
they are ready to learn content area material at their grade level.

Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree

2
Neutral/Undecided

3
Agree

4
Strongly
Agree
5

6. Teachers don’t need specialized English Language Development training to teach
English language learners ; common sense and good intentions work fine. Hence,
there is no need for second language acquisition, linguistic, ELL pedagogy, and
multicultural courses and/or training.

Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree

2
Neutral/Undecided

3
Agree

4
Strongly
Agree
5

7. It is a teacher’s responsibility to make adaptations to their curriculum for ELL
students, even if there is only one ELL student in a classroom of thirty students.

Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree

2
Neutral/Undecided

3
Agree

4
Strongly
Agree
5

Reference:
Walker, A., Shafer, J., & Iiams, M. (2004). “Not in my classroom”: Teacher attitudes
towards English Langauge Learners in the mainstream classroom. NABE Journal of
Research and Practice 2(1), 130-160.

134
Appendix
D:
Vignettes
and
Open-‐ended
Questions

1. Carlos’ parents are worried. Immigrants to the United States, they have worked hard
as a day laborer and a housekeeper to earn enough to buy a modest home in a not-so-
good neighborhood that harbors several street gangs. The house wasn’t much, but it
was a lot more than they could have hoped for in their native Mexico, and they were
proud to call themselves homeowners—dueños de su propria casa. In many aspects
the Rodriguez family is an American success story—they had come to this country
with nothing more than what they could carry in a knapsack, and now they were
genuine title-holders of the American Dream. But they worry about their son, and not
without reason. Unlike his parents, Carlos has a shot at an education that could bring
better options than they had, but he is vulnerable to the distractions of the street and
often finds himself cutting class and getting into little problems at school—problems
that seem to grow as he develops a reputation as a “troublemaker.”

2) A first generation Latina high school student, Cindy, (both parents arrived to the
United States in their late teens) wants to attend a top tier, research university with
the goal to become an educator and role model for her community, which is
predominately Latino and Black. She is ranked 3
rd
in her graduating class, has a 4.4
grade point average and has excelled in all standardized tests. She was identified as a
gifted student in the second grade. She has been involved in her school’s marching
band as a member of the Color Guard team and has been captain of the squad since
her sophomore year. Cindy was also one of the co-founders of the mathematics club
and member of the Spanish and English clubs. Even though her high school is only
20 percent Asian, about 90 percent of the students enrolled in Honors/AP courses are
of Asian descent. As her senior year approaches, she is planning her senior year
courses with her counselor. Her counselor points out that the student has satisfied the
mathematics, science, and foreign language requirements for both, graduation and A-
G requirements, so it is not necessary for her to take courses in those subjects her
senior year and as a matter of fact the student can be done with school at noon. The
student tEnglish language learners her counselor that she is aware of this but
nonetheless wants to enroll in AP Calculus, AP Spanish Literature, and AP Physics
(along with AP English Literature) because she wants to be a competitive applicant
when the time comes to apply to universities. The counselor looks puzzled at this
request and responds by stating, “ But dear, your type don’t take AP courses,
especially AP Calculus and AP Physics. You will probably come at the end of the
first week of school in the Fall pleading to drop those courses, trust me, I’ve seen way
too many times with your type. If you don’t want early dismissal, then take Child
Development and Home Economics so you can learn how to be a great mother and
wife—isn’t that what people in your culture want? I bet your parents will be more
than happy if you graduate from high school and find yourself a job with benefits.
And if you do want to go to college, try the local community college first because
you might find out that it might be a bit too overwhelming.

135
3) Lilia came to the United States when she was ten years old. Like many Latino
immigrants, her parents immigrated in search for a better quality of life and education
for their children. Within two years of attending school in the States, Lilia was able to
acquire English and was not only reclassified to mainstream English courses, but
recommended for English honors at the end of her middle school career. Both of
Lilia’s parents are strong advocates of higher education and hope that Lilia can do
what they were not able to: graduate from a university and have a career. As Lilia
enters her senior year in high school she is becoming more aware about her
undocumented status, which can inhibit her aspirations (and her parents’) to attend
the university. She is ranked 15
th
in her class with a 3.7 G.P.A. and has excelled on
various AP exams as well as state exams and even interned for a Californian senator
for two consecutive summers. Lilia is not sure what will happen after she graduates
from high school.

4) Alma is a seventeen year old who arrived from Mexico seven months ago. After two
months in the school system, she decided to leave her studies due to the language
barriers she confronted in the classroom. After she decided to leave school, she met
Alex, who also migrated from Mexico like her but a few years earlier. Unlike Alma,
Alex had attained legal status, finished high school, and had a steady income. They
fell in “love” instantly even though Alma’s parents were against the relationship due
to their four-year age difference. Alex convinced Alma to return to school but as she
was determined to go back she found out she was three months pregnant. Now she
does not know where to go back at all or wait until her child is born. She does hope to
speak English proficiently in the near future and help Alex economically with the
family expenses.

5) Pablo arrived to the United States at the age of 11 from El Salvador. The eldest of
four children, Pablo wants to be a positive role model for his siblings and “become
somebody” to make his parents proud, since both left school after the sixth grade in
order to help their families financially. Pablo attended a junior high school in inner-
city Chicago that has a reputable bilingual education program, hence he was able to
learn English fairly quickly. Consequently, Pablo was mainstreamed into regular
English classes at the beginning of his freshman year at his local high school. With
the support of his teachers and counselor, Pablo has been able to maintain a “B”
average thus far in high school and is active in several extracurricular activities. After
high school, Pablo hopes to attend a local university and aspires to major in
Psychology. But like most low-income, first-generation students, Pablo is not sure
whether he will be academically ready for univeristy course work and will be able to
financially afford it.

136
Participants will answer the following questions for each vignette:

1. What are some facilitators and barriers for each student’s academic success?

• Carlos:

• Cindy:

• Lilia:

• Alma:

• Pablo:

2. What recommendations would you give to each students’ teachers in order to
meet their academic needs?

• Carlos:

• Cindy:

• Lilia:

• Alma:

• Pablo:

137
Appendix
E:
Course
Effectiveness
Survey

How effective was EDUC 505, 516, or 558 in helping you:

1. Understand the importance of culture in teaching and learning?

Very Poor

1
Poor

2
Acceptable

3
Good

4
Very Good

5

2. Understand the importance of language in teaching and learning?

Very Poor

1
Poor

2
Acceptable

3
Good

4
Very Good

5

3. Have a better understanding of biliteracy and biculturalism and their role in the
classroom?
Very Poor

1
Poor

2
Acceptable

3
Good

4
Very Good

5

4. Feel more comfortable with second language acqusition theory and how to
implement it in the classroom?

Very Poor

1
Poor

2
Acceptable

3
Good

4
Very Good

5

5. Appreciate the diversity of the Latino culture?

Very Poor

1
Poor

2
Acceptable

3
Good

4
Very Good

5

138
Appendix
F:
The
Background
Information

Questionnaire
(BIQ)

Below are some questions regarding your background and education. Please respond to
all questions briefly.
Name (Pseudonym):
Zipcode Participant resides:_________
Sex: Male Female
Area of Study (Multiple or Single Subject
Credential):
If Single Subject Credential, state subject:
If enrolled in EDUC 558, are you taking the
course as an elective or as part of the
BCLAD
requirements?___________________

How much interaction do you have with
individuals of Latino background? (circle
one)
Low Some High
How much interaction to you have with
individuals whose primary language is
Spanish? (circle one)
Low Some High
How much interaction do you have with
individuals who belong to a different
socioeconomic status than yours? (circle one)
Low Some High

139
Number of languages other than English that
you speak (circle one)
0 1 2 3+
List the languages:
This Background Information Questionnaire was adapted from Nihat Polat (2010).

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study was to further understand the perceptions of MAT@USC teacher candidates and how their perceptions and previous experiences affect the educational experiences of Latino English language learners. Three questions were developed to guide this study: (1) What are the perceptions of MAT@USC candidates in selected courses toward Latino English learners?

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Beliefs and perceptions of DPRK teachers of English towards CLT instruction and factors that influence program implementation

PDF

Factors that influence the ability of preservice teachers to apply English language arts pedagogy in guided practice

PDF

Gifted Spanish speaking English learners' participation in advanced placement programs

PDF

Goal orientation of Latino English language learners: the relationship between students’ engagement, achievement and teachers’ instructional practices in mathematics

PDF

The transfer of online instruction to TESOL candidates' perceived self-efficacy of teaching English language learners

PDF

Student perceptions of the relationship between Web-based instructional tools and perceived attainment of intended learning outcomes

PDF

Examining the relationship between knowledge, perception and principal leadership for standard English learners (SELs): a case study

PDF

Teacher beliefs on bilingual education for English learners post proposition 227

PDF

Building academic vocabulary for English language learners through professional development: a gap analysis

PDF

Immigrated Latino/a students' general education teachers' mind frames and pedagogy

PDF

Teacher perceptions of instructional practices for long-term English learners

PDF

Teach them to read: implementing high leverage pedagogical practices to increase English language learner academic achievement

PDF

Building teacher competency to work with middle school long-term English language learners: an improvement model

PDF

Teacher perceptions of English learners and the instructional strategies they choose to support academic achievement

PDF

Support for English learners: an examination of the impact of teacher education and professional development on teacher efficacy and English language instruction

PDF

Equitable learning opportunities for English Language Learners

PDF

Teachers’ perceptions of strategies and skills affecting learning of gifted 7th graders in English classes

PDF

An investigation on the integration of science and literacy for English language learners

PDF

The role of music in the English language development of Latino prekindergarten English learners

PDF

The effectiveness of the cycle of inquiry on middle school English-learners in English-language arts

Asset Metadata

Creator Lomeli, Cynthia Leticia (author)

Core Title MAT@USC and Latino English language learners

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 10/04/2012

Defense Date 08/28/2012

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

Tag deficit thinking,English language learners,Latino students,MAT@USC program,OAI-PMH Harvest,preservice teachers,teacher beliefs,teacher education programs,teacher perceptions

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Ephraim, Ronnie (committee chair), Kaplan, Sandra (committee chair), Keim, Robert G. (committee member)

Creator Email lomelicyn@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-99897

Unique identifier UC11288291

Identifier usctheses-c3-99897 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-LomeliCynt-1224.pdf

Dmrecord 99897

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Lomeli, Cynthia Leticia

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