Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The importance of teacher motivation in professional development: implementing culturally relevant pedagogy
(USC Thesis Other)
The importance of teacher motivation in professional development: implementing culturally relevant pedagogy
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
The Importance of Teacher Motivation in Professional Development: Implementing
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Matthew J. Sekijima
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
May 2023
© Copyright by Matthew J. Sekijima 2023
All Rights Reserved
The Committee for Matthew J. Sekijima certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Courtney Malloy
Eugenia Mora-Flores
Kathy Stowe, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023
iv
Abstract
Professional development (PD) and culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) are both widely
acknowledged to positively impact student outcomes. Despite these benefits, teacher motivation
for PD is unequal and teacher resistance to CRP is high. This dissertation investigates the factors
that influence teacher motivation to implement instructional strategies learned from culturally
relevant pedagogy professional development. Interviews were conducted with seven high school
teachers in Southern California who completed a series of CRP PD. Additionally, document
analysis of PD slide presentations contextualized and corroborated the accompanying interview
data. Study findings revealed that teacher motivation was influenced by self-efficacy, levels of
value for PD strategies (i.e., utility, attainment, intrinsic), and the costs of learning and
implementation. Furthermore, environmental factors were found to shape teacher motivation,
including the impact of administrators, colleagues, PD facilitators, and the school’s culture and
learning environment. The findings expand current understanding of teacher PD motivation
specifically for culturally relevant pedagogy. This study posits how administrators and PD
facilitators can more effectively maximize teacher motivation to create more culturally relevant
instruction, ultimately benefiting student success.
Keywords: professional development, culturally relevant pedagogy, student outcomes,
teacher motivation, culturally relevant pedagogy professional development, self-efficacy, value,
cost
v
Dedication
To my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, may this dissertation bring you honor and glory.
To my family—my wife Erica, my daughter Toki, and our yet-to-be-born daughter—I also
dedicate this dissertation. You are truly the greatest treasure entrusted to me on this earth.
vi
Acknowledgments
First, I would like to express my utmost gratitude to my dissertation chair, Dr. Kathy
Stowe. Your instruction has been the capstone of all my previous learning, stretching my
thinking, writing, and student worldview through your invaluable wisdom and experience. I
could not have asked for a better chair to guide me through my greatest academic challenge.
I would also like to deeply thank my committee members, Dr. Courtney Malloy and Dr.
Eugenia Mora-Flores. Dr. Malloy, your specialization in educational psychology and research
has truly made this a study I can be proud of. Dr. Mora-Flores, from your instruction during my
master’s program, to your expertise in culture and PD, my study is all the richer because of you.
To my doctoral cohort, it was an honor to learn beside you. Thank you for inspiring me.
To my teacher interview participants, thank you for carving out time from your busy
schedules to provide such crucial and insightful data. This study could not exist without you.
To my loving and supportive wife, Erica, you were the one who encouraged me to
become an educator and embark on this doctoral journey. Thank you for holding our family
together these three years. Without you, none of this would have ever been possible.
To my incredible daughter, Toki, thank you for loving me and giving me hugs when I
needed them most. Thank you for being patient with your daddy, who was so often busy with
school. You amaze me daily. I am so proud to be your father, and hope to make you proud.
To my parents, Dr. and Mrs. John and Celia Sekijima, there are no two people on this
earth I have more respect and admiration for than you. Thank you for loving me unconditionally
and teaching me the value of education. My biggest dream has always been to make you proud.
To my three older sisters, Ms. Carrie Sekijima Lam, Dr. Jayna Sekijima, and Ms. Lori
Sekijima, thank you for modeling the academic dedication I always hoped to achieve.
vii
To my wonderful grandparents, whom I dearly miss, Dr. and Mrs. Haruto and Toki
Sekijima, and Mr. and Mrs. Hiro and Dorothy Nishimura, it is only because of your sacrifice for
our family, paying the price, and paving the way for us through World War II incarceration
camps that I am who I am today. You taught me how to work hard and what it means to be an
American. I am so proud to be your one and only grandson. お陰様で。
To my mother-in-law, Mrs. Theresa Ko, thank you for supporting our family through this
program, especially by being such a loving and generous halmoni to Toki.
To my host mother and host father in Japan, Dr. and Dr. Kohichi and Shirley Tamura,
thank you for inspiring me to pursue doctoral studies and encouraging me in my struggles.
To my high school English teachers, Ms. Amy McGinnis and Ms. Marianne Null, thank
you for the investments you have made in my writing. Your contributions have shaped not only
the content of this dissertation, but also how I teach my own students.
To my undergraduate political science honors thesis advisor, Professor Michael McCann,
thank you for holding me to the highest standards and supporting all my graduate studies.
To my master’s professor, Dr. Akilah Lyons-Moore, thank you for modeling excellence,
believing in me, and recommending me to this incredible doctoral program.
To my guiding teacher, Ms. Holly Anderson, I would not be the educator I am today
apart from your continued mentorship. To Mr. Mike Tarango, thank you for opening the door to
my classroom training. To my boss, Ms. Marva Woods, thank you for your unwavering support.
To my past and current students, thank you for journeying through my final days of being
a formal student. Thank you for sharing in my struggles and inspiring me to actualize this dream.
To Pastor Gary Shiohama and Pastor Caleb Kim, thank you for your friendship,
encouragement, and prayers as you walked through these past three years with me.
viii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi
List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Context and Background of the Problem ............................................................................ 3
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 5
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 5
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 6
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................... 7
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................. 8
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................. 10
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 11
The Role of Culture in Education: Culturally Relevant Pedagogy ................................... 11
Professional Development Overview and Impact............................................................. 19
Teacher Impact and Motivation ........................................................................................ 24
Theoretical and Conceptual Framework ........................................................................... 35
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 40
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 40
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 41
Research Setting................................................................................................................ 42
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 43
ix
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 44
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 47
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 47
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 49
Overview of Participants................................................................................................... 49
Findings for Research Question 1: Teacher Motivational Factors ................................... 51
Findings for Research Question 2: Environmental Motivational Factors ........................ 73
Summary of Findings ........................................................................................................ 90
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations......................................................................... 91
Discussion of Findings ...................................................................................................... 92
Recommendations for Practice ......................................................................................... 99
Limitations and Delimitations......................................................................................... 106
Recommendations for Future Studies ............................................................................. 108
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 110
References ................................................................................................................................... 111
Appendix A: Participant Recruitment Letter .............................................................................. 129
Appendix B: Teacher Interview Protocol ................................................................................... 131
x
List of Tables
Table 1: Research Questions and Data Collection Methods ......................................................... 42
Table 2: Participant Overview....................................................................................................... 50
xi
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................. 39
Figure 2: Creswell’s (2014) Model for Qualitative Data Analysis ............................................... 46
xii
List of Abbreviations
CRE Culturally relevant education
CRP Culturally relevant pedagogy
CRP PD Culturally relevant pedagogy professional development
PD Professional development
1
Chapter One: Overview of the Study
Although professionals throughout K–12 education widely acknowledge professional
development’s (PD) capacity for improving teaching (Desimone, 2011; Kennedy, 2016; Osman
& Warner, 2020; Pop et al., 2010; Sancar et al., 2021; Steinert, 2010), leveraging PD as a tool to
improve instruction is also a well-established systemic challenge for all levels of the education
apparatus (Daly et al., 2020; Desimone, 2009; Fullan, 1995; Thoonen, et al., 2011). Professional
development is defined as any type of teacher training targeting the improvement of teacher
practice to increase student learning and success (Desimone, 2011; Osman & Warner, 2020).
While PD offers a wide range of subjects within K–12 education (Kennedy, 2016), culturally
relevant pedagogy (CRP) is a teaching philosophy that has been primarily delivered through
school site culturally relevant pedagogy professional development (CRP PD).
Ladson-Billings (1995a, 1995b) proposed culturally relevant pedagogy as “a theoretical
model that not only addresses student achievement but also helps students to accept and affirm
their cultural identity while developing critical perspectives that challenge inequities that schools
(and other institutions) perpetuate” (p. 469). In other words, CRP aims to empower teachers with
instructional strategies and curriculum that enhance student achievement, cultural competence,
and sociopolitical consciousness (Byrd, 2016; Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b; Neri et al., 2019).
While culturally relevant pedagogy is uniquely equipped to support historically marginalized
students (Byrd, 2016; Ladson-Billings, 1995b; Mitton & Murray-Orr, 2021), its core tenets and
practices also have the potential to benefit all students. In everyday classroom settings, CRP has
been found to measurably promote academic outcomes and cultural identity formation (Byrd,
2016; Christianakis, 2011; Ensign, 2003; Mitton & Murray-Orr, 2021; Rodriguez et al., 2004;
Sleeter, 2011; Tate, 1995). Despite CRP’s value in advancing student engagement, critical
2
reflection, and cultural competence through constructivist methods, resistance from both pre-
service and in-service teachers remains strong (Brown et al., 2019; Ladson-Billings, 2011; Mette
et al., 2016; Neri et al., 2019; Picower, 2009; Rose & Potts, 2011).
Furthermore, multiple studies corroborate the need for further empirically valid research
to understand teacher motivation for learning and implementing strategies from professional
development (Osman & Warner, 2020). In the same way that teachers mold their instructional
practice to maximize student learning through leveraging motivational theories (Schunk, 2020),
professional developers can equivalently benefit when teachers adopt the student role in the PD
context. Formally, motivation is “the process whereby goal-directed activity is instigated and
sustained” (Schunk et al., 2009, p. 4). Various theories postulate their own nuanced conceptions
of motivation; however, they universally assert that while learning can occur apart from
motivation, a majority of learning experiences stem directly from one’s motivation (Schunk,
2020). Therefore, as a learner’s motivation increases, learning and success also improve.
Thus, a salient issue facing administrators and professional developers is teacher
motivation in PD learning and implementation (Kennedy, 2016; Maurer et al., 2003; Opfer &
Pedder, 2011; Osman & Warner, 2020; Thoonen et al., 2011). Teachers differ not only in their
motivation level (Kyndt et al., 2016; Osman & Warner, 2020; Thoonen et al., 2011), but also in
the extent to which they will implement professional development material (Kennedy, 2016;
Kyndt et al., 2016; Opfer & Pedder, 2011; Osman & Warner, 2020; Yoon et al., 2007). For
example, teacher motivation in professional development differs depending on individual interest
and professional experience (Avidov-Ungar, 2016; Wayne et al., 2008). Therefore, it follows that
professional development goals—including CRP PD—are not implemented equally.
3
Context and Background of the Problem
Professional development is the primary vessel for delivering culturally relevant
pedagogy to practicing teachers (Young, 2010). While PD’s potential to advance student
achievement through instruction is widely acknowledged by education professionals (Desimone,
2011; Kennedy, 2016; Osman & Warner, 2020; Pop et al., 2010; Sancar et al., 2021; Steinert,
2010), culturally relevant pedagogy has been particularly vulnerable to teacher resistance since
its inception (Ladson-Billings, 2011; Neri et al., 2019; Picower, 2009; Rose & Potts, 2011). Neri
et al. (2019) theorize that teacher opposition to culturally responsive education is a “multilevel
problem that stems from (a) limited understanding, and belief in the efficacy, of CRE and (b) a
lack of know-how needed to execute it” (p. 202). Additionally, professional development, more
broadly, has grappled with the issue of teacher motivation. Although teacher motivation to
implement PD strategies is generally high across the United States (Karabenick & Conley,
2011), levels of motivation and implementation are not equal (Kennedy, 2016; Kyndt et al.,
2016; Opfer & Pedder, 2011; Osman & Warner, 2020; Thoonen et al., 2011; Yoon et al., 2007).
Teacher resistance to CRP has endured (Brown et al., 2019; Mette et al., 2016; Neri et al., 2019;
Picower, 2009; Rose & Potts, 2011) despite data that supports how both PD and CRP can
improve outcomes for all students—especially students of color (Byrd, 2016; Ladson-Billings,
1995b; Mitton & Murray-Orr, 2021).
Teacher resistance to culturally relevant pedagogy ranges from pre-service teacher
training to practicing teachers (Brown et al., 2019; Ladson-Billings, 2011; Mette et al., 2016;
Neri et al., 2019; Picower, 2009; Rose & Potts, 2011). Teacher candidates have displayed
resistance to CRP while enrolled in multicultural education classes, which explicitly train
teachers to practice culturally responsive practices (Picower, 2009). Moreover, teacher
4
perspectives on CRP are shaped prior to becoming teacher candidates based on their prior
experiences and positionality, defined as a person’s identity as it is “situated through the
intersection of power and the politics of gender, race, class, sexuality, ethnicity, culture,
language, and other social factors” (Villaverde, 2008, p. 10). For example, some pre-service
teachers convey their resistance to CRP based on their own beliefs about the irrelevance of race
or minimizing histories of racial oppression for students of color (Picower, 2009; Rose & Potts,
2011).
Resistance to CRP also extends to practicing teachers, including those who undergo
professional development on culturally relevant pedagogy. In-service teacher resistance to CRP
begins with implicit race bias (Blake et al., 2011; Devine et al., 2012). Empirical evidence has
established a direct causal relationship between teacher implicit bias and unequal treatment based
on skin color (Devine et al., 2012), such as inequitable disciplinary practices (Blake et al., 2011).
Additionally, these implicit race biases have been documented as barriers to CRP for both pre-
service and in-service teachers.
However, even teachers who recognize the potential of CRP to expand student and
teacher knowledge of social issues may not acknowledge its effectiveness in addressing student
achievement (Mette et al., 2016). Moreover, teachers who affirm CRP’s positive impact on
students may not be fully effective in implementing CRP strategies. Therefore, teacher
perspectives on CRP have varied, in addition to the extent they have successfully applied CRP
instructional strategies in their classrooms (Brown et al., 2019; Ebersole et al., 2016; Mette et al.,
2016; Picower, 2009; Rose & Potts, 2011). Ultimately, teacher experiences, positionality, and
perspectives on CRP influence their level of motivation to implement culturally relevant
practices learned at CRP PD (Young, 2010).
5
Statement of the Problem
Despite the potential benefits of professional development and culturally relevant
pedagogy individually and collectively (CRP PD), teacher motivation for general PD is unequal
(Kyndt et al., 2016; Osman & Warner, 2020; Thoonen et al., 2011) and teacher resistance to CRP
is high (Ladson-Billings, 2011; Mette et al., 2016; Neri et al., 2019; Picower, 2009; Rose &
Potts, 2011). Both elements of the problem of practice represent missed opportunities for
advancing the student outcomes of learning and success. Because teachers receive training on
culturally relevant pedagogy primarily through professional development (Young, 2010),
investigating the factors that motivate teachers to implement strategies from CRP PD can
ultimately improve student outcomes through improved instructional practice.
Moreover, while there is substantial literature pertaining to teacher motivation in
professional development and teacher perceptions of culturally relevant pedagogy individually,
research on teacher motivation to enact culturally relevant professional development content is
scarce. Specifically, further research is needed to understand how the unique qualities of
culturally relevant pedagogy shape teachers’ self-efficacy, expectancy, and value relating to
professional development.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to explore teacher motivation in the context of
implementing strategies from CRP PD. This study aimed to build on the literature surrounding
teacher motivation in professional development and their perceptions of culturally relevant
pedagogy by investigating the factors that influence teacher motivation to implement strategies
from CRP PD. Because professional development is imperative for improving teacher learning,
instruction, and eventually student learning, it is crucial to identify the factors that yield effective
6
PD (Desimone, 2011). Teacher motivation helps determine the extent to which teachers
implement professional development material (Osman & Warner, 2020), and ultimately student
learning. This understanding can also help reproduce the successes of effective PD and learn
from the areas of improvement. The study sought to address the following research questions:
1. What factors influence teacher motivation to implement instructional strategies
learned from culturally relevant pedagogy professional development?
2. How do environmental factors affect teacher motivation to implement instructional
strategies learned from culturally relevant pedagogy professional development?
Significance of the Study
Kennedy (2016) described the professional development model as a “three-step process:
PD alters teachers’ knowledge, which in turn alters their practices, which in turn alters student
learning. If there is slippage in any one of these steps, we might expect effects to be diminished”
(p. 960). Thus, professional development researchers and policymakers have historically
assumed the causal relationship between three variables: effective professional development,
strengthened instructional practice, and improved student learning (Opfer & Pedder, 2011).
Culturally relevant pedagogy also seeks to strengthen teacher instruction to improve student
outcomes of learning and success, while also encompassing cultural competence and
sociopolitical consciousness.
However, because the universal goal of professional development (Desimone, 2011;
Guskey, 2002; Osman & Warner, 2020; Pop et al., 2010; Steinert, 2010) and culturally relevant
pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b) is the student outcomes of learning and success, it is
vital to decipher all the preceding factors that could make it possible, beginning with teacher
motivation (Osman & Warner, 2020). First, by developing a thorough understanding of what
7
motivates teachers to implement culturally relevant teaching strategies from professional
development, scholars and instructional leaders can then employ those techniques to stimulate
teacher desire to both learn and apply PD knowledge. As a result of this implementation, the
ultimate goal of professional development and culturally relevant pedagogy becomes
achievable—an improvement in student outcomes inside and outside the classroom (Mitton &
Murray-Orr, 2021; Opfer & Pedder, 2011).
Student outcomes are anchored in student learning (Byrd, 2016; Ladson-Billings, 1995a;
Mitton & Murray-Orr, 2021). For example, the specific outcomes of achievement, cultural
competence, and sociopolitical consciousness are all facets of CRP, but only made possible
through student learning. Thus, understanding the factors that influence teacher motivation to
apply CRP strategies increases the potential for student outcomes to achieve academically, as
well as expand their cultural competence and critical consciousness by building positive student
identities; empowering students to challenge systemic issues of discrimination; and creating
broader societal change (Byrd, 2016; Ensign, 2003; Mitton & Murray-Orr, 2021; Sleeter, 2011;
Tate, 1995).
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
This study aimed to understand the level of teacher motivation to implement culturally
relevant pedagogy from professional development. Social cognitive theory and expectancy-value
functioned as lenses to understand learning and motivation respectively. Because the level of
teacher motivation to implement any PD strategies presupposes teacher learning from
professional development, social cognitive theory framed how teachers first acquire knowledge
relating to CRP, as well as their level of learning motivation. Expectancy-value theory is a
motivation theory that postulates how a learner’s different values for and perceived ability in
8
completing a task influence their motivation. Together, these distinct theories functioned as the
conceptual framework for the study.
This study gathered data through qualitative interviews with teachers who participated in
professional development related to culturally relevant pedagogy. Participants were offered the
highest levels of transparency, privacy, and confidentiality to maximize the study’s reliability
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Document analysis of professional development materials followed
to contextualize and corroborate interview data. A qualitative methodology allowed for framing
the study around people and their interactions with events and processes, rather than offering a
relationship between variables (Maxwell, 2013b).
Definition of Terms
This study employed several terms to frame its literature and methodology. The
following terms have been defined within the context of this study:
• achievement gap: the observed and measured academic disparity between students of
color and their White counterparts, usually measured through grades and standardized
test scores (Ladson-Billings, 2006a).
• cost: “the negative aspects of engaging in [a] task” (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002, p. 120).
• cultural competence: helps students see and “honor their own cultural beliefs and
practices while acquiring access to the wider culture, where they are likely to have a
chance of improving their socioeconomic status and making informed decisions about
the lives they wish to lead” (Ladson-Billings, 2008, p. 36).
• culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP): teacher instruction committed to the individual
and collective cultural empowerment of student learning, cultural competence, and
sociopolitical consciousness (Ladson-Billings, 1995a).
9
• culturally relevant pedagogy professional development (CRP PD): teacher training
aiming to promote student learning, cultural competence, and sociopolitical
consciousness by improving teachers’ culturally relevant pedagogy (Ladson-Billings,
1995a, 1995b; Osman & Warner, 2020).
• expectancy: “beliefs about how one will do on different tasks or activities” (Eccles &
Wigfield, 2002, p. 110).
• motivation: “the process whereby goal-directed activity is instigated and sustained”
(Schunk, et al., 2009, p. 4).
• positionality: “how one is situated through the intersection of power and the politics
of gender, race, class, sexuality, ethnicity, culture, language, and other social factors”
(Villaverde, 2008, p. 10).
• professional development (PD): any form of teacher training seeking to promote
student learning through improving instructional practice (Osman & Warner, 2020).
• self-efficacy: one’s perception of their own abilities to learn or complete a task at
specific levels of difficulty (Bandura, 1986).
• sociopolitical consciousness: “the ability to take learning beyond the confines of the
classroom using school knowledge and skills to identify, analyze, and solve real-
world problems” (Ladson-Billings, 2014, p. 75).
• student achievement: “‘student learning’—what it is that students actually know and
are able to do as a result of pedagogical interactions with skilled teachers” (Ladson-
Billings, 2006, p. 34).
• student outcomes: the desired academic and non-academic impacts of education,
encompassing student learning, academic achievement, individual growth, and
10
societal change (Day et al., 2016; Ladson-Billings, 2006; Robinson et al., 2008;
Wiggins & McTigh, 2005).
• value: “incentives or reasons for” completing a task (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002, p.
110).
Organization of the Study
This study sought to understand the factors that influence teacher motivation to
implement instructional strategies learned from culturally relevant pedagogy professional
development. Chapter One provided an overview of the problem of practice, stemming from the
unequal implementation of PD strategies and teacher resistance to culturally relevant pedagogy,
and the importance of understanding teacher motivation in CRP PD to ultimately bolster student
outcomes through improved instructional practice. Chapter Two will contextualize the extant
literature beginning with the role of culture in education and culturally relevant pedagogy. It will
then provide an overview of professional development and its impact, as well as teacher impact
and motivation in PD. The chapter concludes with an overview of the study’s conceptual
framework. Chapter Three will describe the conceptual framework as a frame for the study’s
methodology. Chapter Four will reveal the findings from the study in response to the stated
research questions. Chapter Five will offer an analysis of the study’s findings and
recommendations for future practice and research.
11
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
The following chapter reviews research on the role of culture in education, professional
development, and teacher motivation to implement culturally relevant pedagogy. Scholars have
examined the overlapping benefits of culturally relevant pedagogy and professional development
individually, but focused research into CRP PD is limited regarding the level of teacher
motivation related to CRP PD. Likewise, teacher perceptions of their organization’s resources
affect their motivation to implement new CRP strategies from professional development.
Understanding teacher motivation for implementing CRP PD can maximize student outcomes in
not only student achievement, but in cultural competence and sociopolitical consciousness.
This literature review begins with the role of culture in education. This section also
reviews teacher perceptions of CRP’s relevance and efficacy. The next section provides an
overview of professional development and its impact on teacher instruction and student
outcomes. The following section investigates teacher impact and the various internal and
external motivational factors that influence teacher motivation for professional development.
Finally, the chapter concludes with an overview of social cognitive theory and expectancy-value
theory, serving as the study’s synthesized conceptual framework.
The Role of Culture in Education: Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
This section reviews the role of culture in education through an analysis of culturally
relevant pedagogy (CRP) as an instructional strategy, beginning with its origins and relationship
to similar pedagogical approaches involving culture. Additionally, the section assesses CRP’s
impact on student outcomes in quantitative and qualitative studies. Finally, this section examines
teachers’ relationships with culturally relevant pedagogy, such as their perceptions of CRP and
the variance of CRP enactment.
12
Ladson-Billings (1995a, 1995b) proposed culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) as an
approach that would improve the academic success, cultural competence, and critical
consciousness of all students. Scholars have employed other overlapping concepts that also
center the role of culture in education. Culturally relevant education (CRE), for example, aims to
improve teacher effectiveness in diverse classrooms, and thus incorporates culturally responsive
teaching and culturally relevant pedagogy (Aronson et al., 2016; Neri et al., 2019). Culturally
responsive teaching specifically describes teacher competency and practical strategies for
teachers to employ in their instruction “to make learning encounters more relevant” for students
(Gay, 2018, p. 31). Culturally relevant pedagogy embodies the pragmatics of culturally
responsive teaching, in addition to its antecedents, such as a teacher’s personal ideologies and
instructional planning (Byrd, 2016; Ladson-Billings, 1995a; Neri, et al., 2019). Ladson-Billings
(2014) later amended CRP to incorporate the role of popular culture, rather than limiting its
definition to racial and ethnic culture. In addition, many studies conflate culturally responsive
teaching and culturally relevant pedagogy because of their striking similarities (Byrd, 2016).
Ethnic studies curriculum is related to the aforementioned pedagogical approaches, and is
therefore understood to be one manifestation of CRP, serving as the culturally relevant content
for students to evaluate (Dee & Penner, 2017). Ethnic studies, however, is also distinct from
critical race theory (CRT), which analyzes ethnic studies curriculum through a theoretical lens of
racism and political power (Brown-Jeffy & Cooper, 2011; Delgado & Stefancic, 2012).
Impact of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Three crucial tenets of CRP are its potential to improve student achievement, cultural
competence, and sociopolitical consciousness (Bonilla et al., 2021; Ladson-Billings, 1995a;
Picower, 2009; Young, 2010). Thus, Ladson-Billings (1995a) presented the benefits of culturally
13
relevant pedagogy to not only address the achievement gap on the national level (Griner &
Stewart, 2013), but empower students’ cultural awareness and identity formation on the
individual level (Bonilla et al., 2021). The proceeding sections will detail the impact of these
three tenets of culturally relevant pedagogy.
Student Achievement
Culturally relevant pedagogy first targets student achievement, which scholars have
widely interpreted as student performance in standardized testing and grades. While Ladson-
Billings (2006b) later clarified that her intended emphasis for “student achievement” was
“student learning,” numerous studies have nevertheless demonstrated the positive effects of CRP
on student achievement and engagement (Byrd, 2016; Christianakis, 2011; Ensign, 2003; Mitton
& Murray-Orr, 2021; Rodriguez et al., 2004; Sleeter, 2011; Tate, 1995).
Studies have also assessed the impact of ethnic studies on the student outcome of
academic success, as it is the foundational curriculum for culturally relevant pedagogy (Bonilla
et al., 2021; Dee & Penner, 2017; Sleeter, 2011). Dee and Penner (2017) conducted a
quantitative study on the effectiveness of culturally relevant pedagogy on student achievement,
operationalizing their study to specifically measure the causal effects of a ninth-grade ethnic
studies course in San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD). The study analyzed the effect
of ethnic studies courses on three dependent variables: student attendance, grade point average,
and credits earned. San Francisco, the site of the first formal ethnic studies course in the United
States, SFUSD provided the ideal environment to survey 1,405 ninth-grade students at risk-
students who were given the opportunity to take ethnic studies.
The data mostly come from three of the five high schools that enacted the new ethnic
studies program. Two of the schools offered the course to all ninth-grade students. Students with
14
grades below a 2.0 GPA were encouraged to enroll, but were not required by the schools. The
study employed a regression discontinuity design to offer “causal inferences” to mimic random
assignment in a true experimental design (2016, p. 139). The primary results showed that
attendance, GPA, and credits earned increased by 5.6%, 0.39 points, and 6.3 credits respectively.
Overall, the study results support the hypothesis that ethnic studies classes, or culturally relevant
pedagogy more broadly, quantitatively promote student achievement and learning motivation.
Another key finding was that the benefits of ethnic studies were measurably greater for higher-
performing students than for the “nevertakers,” suggesting that intrinsic motivation is another
crucial interacting factor.
Bonilla et al. (2021) further analyzed Dee and Penner’s (2016) data sampling through a
regression-discontinuity (RD) design to examine the longer-term effects of ethnic studies. The
statistical analysis presented evidence that ethnic studies courses benefit student achievement
and outcomes. First, ethnic studies courses increase the chances of high school graduation for
lower-performing students (Bonilla et al., 2021). Ethnic studies also impacts student behavior
and engagement, such as enrollment, attendance, and credits earned, which ultimately increased
college attendance (Bonilla, et al., 2021).
Sleeter’s (2011) research review juxtaposed the positive and negative effects of ethnic
studies and Euro-American-centric curricula respectively. Ethnic studies curricula yield a
proportional relationship between the racial and ethnic identities of students of color, and
academic achievement (Sleeter, 2011). Specifically, when class literature’s authors align with
students’ cultural backgrounds, multiple studies document high student engagement as a result.
Ethnic studies’ positive impact has also been recorded in math and science curricula, in which
both student achievement and attitudes toward learning improved (Sleeter, 2011). Contrary to
15
popular criticisms, ethnic studies has also been found to benefit White students in fostering
positive racial attitudes (Sleeter, 2011) While ethnic studies cannot be conflated with culturally
relevant pedagogy, the successful delivery of ethnic studies does depend on aspects of culturally
relevant pedagogy. Furthermore, culturally relevant pedagogy does necessitate elements of
ethnic studies curriculum. Therefore, research that positively demonstrates the impacts of ethnic
studies curriculum also supports the effectiveness of culturally relevant pedagogy.
Mitton and Murray-Orr (2021) conducted a qualitative study to identify the impact of
culturally relevant pedagogy on historically marginalized students in Nova Scotia, Canada, such
as African Nova Scotian and Mi’kmaq students, as well as students experiencing poverty. The
study detailed numerous benefits of diverse classrooms. In observations of the selected middle
school teachers with consistent records of creating student success, Mitton and Murray-Orr
(2021) found evidence of CRP effectiveness that corroborated the existing literature’s claims.
However, the study also offered novel insights into how teachers can create conditions for a safe
and positive learning environment for students to feel comfortable enough to take risks in their
academics and engage in cultural discussions (Mitton & Murray-Orr, 2021). In this study, CRP
effectively improved the academic outcomes for historically marginalized students. This study,
along with many others, has established the effectiveness of culturally relevant pedagogy in
improving achievement for students in general, but also uniquely for students of color who have
been historically marginalized by achievement and opportunity gaps (Byrd, 2016; Griner &
Stewart, 2013; Ladson-Billings, 1995; Milner, 2012; Mitton & Murray-Orr, 2021).
Cultural Competence and Sociopolitical Consciousness
In addition to its positive impact on student achievement, culturally relevant pedagogy is
uniquely equipped to improve students’ cultural competence and sociopolitical consciousness.
16
Cultural competence refers to students’ ability to see and “honor their own cultural beliefs and
practices while acquiring access to the wider culture, where they are likely to have a chance of
improving their socioeconomic status and making informed decisions about the lives they wish
to lead” (Ladson-Billings, 2006, p. 36). Sociopolitical consciousness builds on the foundation of
student cultural competence by incorporating criticality, helping “students use the various skills
they learn to better understand and critique their social position and context” (Ladson-Billings,
2006, p. 37).
Numerous studies have substantiated CRP’s positive impact on student cultural
competence, such as student cultural identity formation (Aldana et al., 2012; Brown-Jeffy &
Cooper, 2011; Brozo et al., 1996; Dessel et al., 2006; Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b; Mitton &
Murray-Orr, 2021; Spencer et al., 2008; Thomas et al., 2008; Young, 2010). Byrd (2016)
conceptualized culturally relevant pedagogy and culturally responsive teaching interchangeably
in a study of CRP’s impact on student achievement and engagement. Three hundred and fifteen
students from grades 6–12 were sampled throughout the U.S. The students were equally 25%
White, Latino, African American, and Asian. Byrd (2016) found positive student perceptions of
CRP, as well as a positive relationship between CRP’s tenets of cultural competence and
sociopolitical consciousness and students’ “identity exploration and commitment” (Byrd, 2016,
p. 6). Young (2010) affirmed how teacher practice of culturally relevant pedagogy can support
student cultural identities to positively shape students and their learning environment. For
example, affirming students’ cultures provided them with an assurance of their uniqueness as
individuals, and the safety of being themselves. This affirmation also fostered a greater
understanding of other students to create a learning environment founded on mutual respect.
Bonilla et al. (2021) corroborated the benefits of culturally relevant pedagogy and ethnic studies
17
for students’ cultural competence and sociopolitical consciousness, as evidenced by their “sense
of identity” and “school belongingness” through student explorations of “how social
constructions of race, ethnicity, and culture shaped their individual identity, their family and
community histories” (p. 2).
The positive impacts of culturally relevant pedagogy encompass and eclipse student
learning. CRP bolsters students’ cultural competence and sociopolitical consciousness,
empowering them to engage with their own ethnic identities, other racial backgrounds, and the
larger majoritarian culture. Students are consequently equipped to understand societal disparities
linked to culture and combat systemic injustices. CRP’s multifaceted tenets, therefore, offer a
holistic benefit to student outcomes of learning and future success.
Teacher Perceptions of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Teacher Resistance
Despite the benefits of culturally relevant pedagogy on student outcomes, teacher
resistance to CRP remains strong (Brown et al., 2019; Mette et al., 2016; Neri et al., 2019;
Picower, 2009; Rose & Potts, 2011). This section assesses the evolution of teacher resistance to
culturally relevant pedagogy chronologically from candidacy into professional practice (Brown
et al., 2019; Mette et al., 2016; Picower, 2009; Rose & Potts, 2011). First, Picower (2009) offers
insight into the influences of teacher perceptions of CRP before not only professional practice,
but also teacher candidacy through their examination of eight teacher candidates enrolled in a
multicultural education course designed to explore the teachers’ racial identities, underlying
cultural assumptions, and their roles as educators in urban education. Teacher candidate
perceptions of CRP were formatively influenced by life experiences and positionality, such as
their ethnic identities, and religious backgrounds. For example, students modeled a pattern of
18
comparing instances of struggle from their own life to minimize the experiences of non-White
students, such as family histories of immigration or religious persecution. Picower (2009) also
observed a theme of minimizing current racial inequities by presuming that all races are now
equal under the law, corroborating Rose and Potts’ (2011) study of student teachers in a
multiethnic school that demonstrated a similar resistance to CRP through claims of
colorblindness, the irrelevance of race, and minimizing cultural differences. These themes
demonstrate how teacher resistance can begin professionally with teacher candidacy, but are
formulated from life experiences and student positionality before teacher education (Rose &
Potts, 2011).
Teacher Variance of CRP Enactment
Current research illustrates a wide range of CRP enactment among teachers in addition to
the preceding teacher resistance to CRP. Ebersole et al. (2016) examined teacher perceptions of
culturally responsive teaching as their 18 participants completed an ethnicity and education
course in a Master of Education program. Fourteen of the participants were teachers of color.
The results of the qualitative study presented a progression of culturally responsive teaching
practices: conducting culturally relevant classroom activities, progressing toward a more
culturally relevant perspective, and functioning as a culturally relevant teacher. The first level of
culturally responsive teaching witnessed was culturally responsive activities, which featured
student cultures in classroom learning, but were not seamlessly integrated into the teachers’ units
or wider pedagogy. Some teachers described CRP as difficult to implement and even
unnecessary if the teacher perceived students as belonging to the same culture (Ebersole et al.,
2016). Teachers designated as progressing toward adopting a culturally responsive perspective
acknowledged their attempts to relate their pedagogy to student cultures in an inclusive and
19
constructivist learning environment, but did not fully shift their pedagogy, such as allowing
student cultural beliefs to mold the teacher’s classroom policies or recognizing conflicting
student perspectives on cultural identities as a teachable moment (Ebersole et al., 2016).
Teachers in these first two categories are analogous to the teachers studied by Brown et
al., (2019), who were conceptually familiar with culturally relevant education, yet few could
differentiate culturally relevant pedagogy from other teaching strategies, nor apply its theory to
instructional practice. These studies exhibit the challenge of translating CRP from theory into
practice, even when teachers are willing and making attempts at CRP application (Brown et al.,
2019; Ebersole et al., 2016). Finally, the participants classified by Ebersole et al. (2016) as
culturally relevant teachers were reflected in a teacher’s deliberate choice to evaluate personal
and professional circumstances through a cultural lens and infuse “culture in every aspect of
teaching throughout the day” (p. 101). This study underscores that teachers range in their
perspectives on CRP, and how a teacher’s cultural background may influence these perceptions.
Therefore, these teacher perspectives impact their level of motivation to implement CRP PD,
which is the primary method of delivering culturally relevant pedagogy training to teachers
(Young, 2010).
Professional Development Overview and Impact
The general goal of professional development can be distilled to acquiring new
knowledge and skills to improve teacher performance—particularly in promoting student
learning and achievement through refined instruction (Desimone, 2011; Kennedy, 2016; Osman
& Warner, 2020; Pop et al., 2010; Sancar et al., 2021; Steinert, 2010). This section provides an
overview of professional development’s various learning contexts, such as informal and formal
learning, and collaborative and individual learning; and discusses the impact of professional
20
development on student achievement. These professional development topics illuminate its
relevance as the primary vessel for delivering culturally relevant pedagogy to practicing teachers.
PD Overview
The contexts of teacher learning have been traditionally divided into two mutually
influential categories: informal and formal workplace learning (Hoekstra et al., 2009; Kyndt et
al., 2016). Informal learning can involve collaborative discourse between colleagues (Desimone,
2011), as well as individual initiative and self-reflection (Hoekstra & Korthagen, 2011).
Professional development has traditionally been considered an inherently formal means of
teacher learning. For example, formal PD learning can offer practical assistance for teachers in
understanding unfamiliar tools and technology (Jones et al., 2019). However, Cochran-Smith and
Lytle (1999) contend many scholars now consider PD to encompass both formal and informal
teacher learning (as cited by Desimone, 2011).
Multiple studies of teacher informal learning have identified various learning activities
and outcomes that facilitated learning individually and collaboratively (Jones et al., 2019; Kyndt
et al., 2016). Individual teacher learning activities typically occur through everyday teaching
experiences, such as trial and error, consulting outside resources, self-reflection, and personal
growth from facing daily teaching challenges (Hoekstra & Korthagen, 2011, Kyndt et al., 2016).
Learning activities that involve other people include faculty collaboration, observations, explicit
sharing of strategies, and extracurricular activities (Kyndt et al., 2016). These informal learning
communities of teachers can also be considered an example of professional development
(Desimone, 2011). Whether individual or collaborative, Kyndt et al. (2016) found that the
thematic antecedents of information learning involved school organizational support, teacher
motivation, self-efficacy, and autonomy. While formal and informal learning are distinct
21
concerning professional development, it is critical to recognize not only that informal learning
occurs within PD, but also that it is the most influential factor in determining how PD strategies
are implemented (Osman & Warner, 2020).
PD Impact
The potential of professional development to improve instruction is widely accepted
among scholars (Desimone, 2011; Kennedy, 2016; Thoonen, 2011). The assumed causal
relationship between instruction quality and student outcomes explains the emphasis on
professional development as a critical tool for enhancing teacher practice in the classroom
(Thoonen, 2011) by first fostering teacher learning (Desimone, 2011; Hoekstra & Korthagen,
2011). Desimone (2009, 2011) detailed five thematic elements of effective professional
development: content focus, active learning, coherence, duration, and collective participation, all
of which aim to improve teacher instruction.
PD Impact on Instruction and Student Outcomes
First, effective professional development impacts instruction through its focus on content,
which is potentially the most influential factor in teacher PD learning (Desimone, 2009; Lumpe
et al., 2012). Existing literature has established a relationship between PD activities highlighting
disciplinary content and teacher instructional knowledge and skills (Desimone 2009). Also,
professional development impacts teacher instruction by maximizing collaborative teacher
participation to create a constructivist learning environment (Desimone, 2011). Thus, effective
PD should build on the foundation of teachers’ prior professional knowledge and organizational
values.
Effective PD should also span across a semester and integrate the existing school’s
learning communities, such as grade level or subject groups (Desimone, 2011; Kyndt et al.,
22
2016; Widodo & Allamnakhrah, 2020). This integration is also considered a vertical and a
horizontal alignment of the organization, interpreting the school site as the broader learning
environment, built on multilayered and interacting relationships (Fullan, 1995). Professional
development’s ability to leverage both individual and collective learning formally and informally
is a testament to its impact on student success. Student outcomes are the ultimate goal of
professional development, and become attainable by targeting teachers’ instructional practice. In
other words, effective professional development shapes instructional practice to improve the
student outcome of learning (Desimone, 2009; Kennedy, 2016).
The effectiveness of PD on student outcomes has been documented by multiple empirical
studies (Carpenter et al., 1989; Cohen & Hill, 2000; Cole, 1992; Duffy et al., 1986; Fishman et
al., 2003; Lai & McNaughton, 2016; Marek & Methven, 1991; McCutchen et al., 2002; McGill-
Franzen et al., 1999; Meissel et al., 2016; Penuel et al., 2011; Roth et al., 2011; Saxe et al., 2001;
Sloan, 1993; Tienken, 2003; Yoon et al., 2007). In their review of over 1,300 studies that sought
to assess the impact of PD on student achievement, Yoon et al. (2007) determined that only nine
studies met the necessary rigorous standards to establish a causal relationship between the two
variables. Those nine studies report that teachers who receive substantial professional
development training, averaging 49 hours across the nine studies, “can boost their students’
achievements by about 21 percentile points,” according to their study’s metrics (Yoon et al.,
2007). Numerous studies have corroborated Yoon et al.’s (2007) findings of PD efficacy,
substantiating how professional development benefits student achievement (Carpenter et al.,
1989; Cohen & Hill, 2000; Cole, 1992; Fishman et al., 2003; Lai & McNaughton, 2016; Marek
& Methven, 1991; McCutchen et al., 2002; McGill-Franzen et al., 1999; Meissel, Parr, &
Timperley, 2016; Penuel et al., 2011; Roth et al., 2011; Saxe et al., 2001; Sloan, 1993; Tienken,
23
2003). While studies have thoroughly corroborated PD’s positive impact on student
achievement, research is still limited on CRP PD, specifically (Mette et al., 2016).
CRP PD Impact
CRP PD research has corroborated the previously documented pattern of teacher
resistance to CRP. Mette et al. (2016) explored practicing teachers’ perceptions of professional
development focusing on culturally relevant pedagogy and the training’s impact on their
instruction. The authors selected a particular high school that was purposefully implementing
CRP to address the achievement gap by empowering students of color through classroom
instruction (Mette et al., 2016). In a survey of 120 teachers, the 73 participants revealed a
varying spectrum of agreement on various issues. The least agreed-upon category was that CRP
PD would help narrow the achievement gap (Mette et al., 2016). This finding aligns with Brown
et al.’s (2019) study of teachers who participated in a PD on CRP at a science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) elementary charter school of all African American male
students. Brown et al. (2019) found that while teachers may desire to improve their teaching
practices, teachers who lack CRP training are less likely to acknowledge the positive impact of
CRP on STEM academic outcomes. Contrary to the teacher perceptions of CRP PD, Mette et al.
(2016) argued that the improvement of math and English test scores demonstrates a causal
relationship between CRP and student achievement for students of color. The authors also
hypothesize that teacher beliefs regarding the relative extent of CRP PD inefficacy stem from
when the achievement data was released, which was after teacher perceptions were recorded.
Nevertheless, teacher perceptions that CRP is limited in its academic benefits reveal the
challenges of closing the achievement gap, and culturally relevant pedagogy more broadly
(Brown et al., 2019; Mette et al., 2016).
24
Despite teacher resistance to CRP PD, studies have presented evidence of CRP PD’s
impact on cultural competence and sociopolitical consciousness, such as broadening cultural
inclusivity in teacher pedagogy. Culturally relevant pedagogy professional development has
helped teachers translate CRP from theory to practice (Brown et al., 2019). In Mette et al.’s
(2016) study, CRP PD advanced teacher cultural competence and sociopolitical consciousness,
evidenced by shifts in teacher perspectives. For example, the most highly agreed-upon idea was
that CRP PD helped teachers examine perspectives on poverty, which disproportionately affects
students of color. Additionally, the CRP professional development also helped teachers to realize
differences between cultures (Mette et al., 2016), fostering greater cultural competence. While
teachers may vary in their attitude toward CRP PD, it has the potential to expand their cultural
competence and sociopolitical consciousness, leading to CRP enactment in the classroom
environment (Brown et al., 2019; Mette et al., 2016).
Teacher Impact and Motivation
This section establishes the impact of teachers on student achievement, on which
culturally relevant pedagogy and professional development depend. The studies in this section
assess how teacher quality and instruction impact student learning from student test score data.
Additionally, this section explores teacher motivation because of its influence on teacher impact.
The literature examines teacher motivation for professional development and culturally relevant
pedagogy individually and collectively.
Teacher Impact
The empirically supported assumption that professional development can support student
learning depends on the assumption that teacher quality impacts student achievement. Teacher
quality has a measurable impact on student learning and success (Beteille & Evans, 2019; Crato,
25
2020; Lee, 2018). Although studies vary on the extent of teacher impact, they universally agree
that improvements in student achievement must involve careful analysis of how to bolster
teacher quality (Chetty et al., 2014; Hattie, 2003; Kane & Staiger, 2008; Rivkin et al., 2005;
Rockoff, 2004). Highly effective teachers increase student likelihood of college attendance (Lee,
2018) and lifetime income (Chetty et al., 2014). This also reinforces the reality that teacher
quality is not equal (Chetty et al., 2014; Hattie, 2003; Lee, 2018; Rivkin et al., 2005), which is a
contributing factor to protracting the opportunity gap for students of color. While quality does
improve student outcomes, expert teachers are not equivalent to experienced teachers, despite the
existence of an overlap between the two categories (Hattie, 2003; Podolsky et al., 2019).
Test scores data also reveal the prevalence of teacher impact (Kane, 2008; Rockoff,
2004). Rockoff (2004) analyzed panel data of student test scores and observations of the same
teacher across multiple classes from elementary students and teachers from two districts in a
New Jersey county. Although test score data alone cannot holistically represent all elements of
student learning, they do provide standardized metrics for achievement. Rockoff’s (2004) study
captured consistent evidence of teacher impact on student outcomes on both reading and math
test scores, even accounting for adjusted measures. Kane (2008) also studied the impact of
teachers on student achievement in a randomized controlled trial in Los Angeles Unified School
District (LAUSD) over two school years (2003 −2005). The study produced evidence of a causal
relationship between teacher quality and short-term student achievement on test scores. The
study did not yield evidence of long-term teacher impact, and even found a substantial decline in
teacher effects as the years progressed (Kane, 2008). However, whether long-term or short-term,
teacher impact on student achievement is measurable and observable (Chetty et al., 2014; Hattie,
2003; Kane, 2008; Rockoff, 2004).
26
Teacher Motivation
Teachers’ enactment of culturally relevant pedagogy is only possible after first learning
its strategies, which is highly dependent on their motivation. High teacher motivation increases
the likelihood of furthering teacher learning from professional development and applying its
strategies in the classroom (Osman & Warner, 2020). Teacher motivation reliably predicts PD
learning and implementation (Kennedy, 2016; Opfer & Pedder, 2011), yet remains an
underrecognized area of study in professional development research (Karabenick & Conley,
2011). Based on current literature, teacher motivation can be categorized as internal and external
factors. The most relevant factors in teacher motivation for PD are self-efficacy, expectancy,
value, and environmental influences. The factors that influence teacher motivation can be
divided into internal and external categories.
Internal Motivational Factors
Internal motivational factors are a function of individual teachers, such as their beliefs
and attitudes toward learning, general self-efficacy, and the value they assign to completing a
professional development (Osman & Warner, 2020; Schunk, 2020; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000).
Researchers have also studied internal motivation factors for general professional development,
as PD is not exclusive to public education. In fact, broader research on professional development
reveals an overlap in the variables that enhance professional development for employees. Maurer
et al. (2003) was the first study of its kind to employ a “longitudinal structural model of
involvement” for the professional development of the U.S. workforce (p. 721). The study was
able to generalize that American workers and their organizations benefit from professional
learning and development. Studies on public education and the general U.S. workforce
corroborate the variables that enhance employee development: prior experience in PD, belief in
27
the practical need for PD, belief in their self-efficacy to develop skills, and support from
relationships inside and outside the organization (Attema-Noordewier et al., 2011; Geijsel et al.,
2009; Maurer, et al., 2003; Thoonen et al., 2011).
Teacher Self-Efficacy. Self-efficacy is a particular concept that emerged from Bandura’s
(1986) social cognitive theory, referring to one’s perception of their ability to learn or complete a
task at specific levels of difficulty. Specifically, self-efficacy functions as an attribute of the
person within the triadic reciprocality model of causality. Therefore, a person’s motivation to
complete a task is partially affected by their self-efficacy. In other words, if an individual feels
their skills are effective, it may produce confidence that yields motivated behavior to achieve a
particular goal (Schunk, 2020).
Self-efficacy is a strong internal motivational factor that indicates teacher willingness to
engage with and implement professional development practices (Attema-Noordewier et al.,
2011; Geijsel et al, 2009; Goddard et al., 2000; Schunk, 2020; Smylie, 1988; Thoonen et al.,
2011; Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001; Wheatley, 2002). Self-efficacy also introduces
the more specific concept of expectancy to complete an individual task in expectancy-value
theory. In other words, self-efficacy is a generalized conception of one’s abilities and
competencies in a given situation, whereas one’s expectancy beliefs are specific to a task
(Osman & Warner, 2020).
Geijsel et al. (2009) analyzed data from the Dutch School Improvement Questionnaire
received from 18 elementary schools encompassing 328 teachers. The results indicated that the
most influential variables on teacher participation in professional development were teacher self-
efficacy and “internalization of school goals into personal goals” (p. 406). The results also
confirmed the relationship between teacher self-efficacy and their learning and students’
28
achievement (Bandura, 1993), as well as previous research documenting causality (Attema-
Noordewier et al., 2011; Beijaard et al., 2004).
Thoonen et al. (2011) surveyed 502 elementary teachers from 32 schools in the
Netherlands to understand the role of teacher motivation, organizational variables, and leadership
in improving instructional practice. Thoonen et al. (2001) confirmed that experimentation and
self-reflection boosted teacher PD engagement (Hoekstra & Korthagen, 2011, Kyndt et al.,
2016), but found that the most salient motivational factor was teacher self-efficacy. A higher
teacher self-efficacy tends to yield increased planning and organization, increased willingness to
learn new ideas and experiment with new techniques, spending more time with struggling
students, elevating their drive if their goals are not met, and more stamina overall (Thoonen et
al., 2011).
Teacher Expectancy-Value. Expectancy-value (derived from expectancy-value theory)
is the fusing of two variables that predict an individual’s motivation (Atkinson,1957; Atkinson,
1964; Schunk, 2020; Wigfield & Eccles (2000). The first variable is expectancy, defined as one’s
beliefs about their ability to complete a task; thus, expectancy is a task-specific conception of
self-efficacy. The second variable is value, the degree to which an individual finds importance in
completing a task. Expectancy-value theory has been applied as a theoretical framework in
multiple studies of teacher motivation related to professional development (Karabenick &
Conley, 2011; Parsons et al., 2019; Pop et al., 2010). Existing literature has also noted
observable interactions among the expectancy-value categories (Husman et al., 2004; Li et al.,
2007; Perez et al., 2019; Weidinger et al., 2020).
Parsons et al. (2019) evaluated teacher motivations for participating in online
professional development. Here, the expectancy-value lens helped uncover teachers’ value for
29
online PD based on its convenience and applicability to their instructional practice (Parsons et
al., 2019). Pop et al. (2010) conducted a study of teacher motivation, expectations, and changes
to teaching practices from a 6-week summer PD program. Sixty-seven participants participated
in survey collections and interviews. Expectancy-value theory functioned as the study’s
theoretical framework, and found that PD boosted the self-efficacy of teachers and self-
confidence in teaching science after attending the PD, which the authors argued produced more
effective teachers.
Intrinsic Value. Intrinsic value is one of the three value categories in expectancy-value
theory, which assesses the level of “enjoyment individuals experience when performing a task”
(p. 3). Intrinsic value can maintain teacher motivation even when experiencing distracting
challenges (Avidov-Ungar, 2016; Gniewosz et al., 2014; Watt & Richardson, 2008). Moreover, a
teacher’s intrinsic value for professional development can predict their intrinsic motivation to
implement strategies from PD (Visser et al., 2014). Avidov-Ungar (2016) evaluated teacher
perceptions of their professional development process through semi-structured interviews with
43 teachers in Israeli schools. Sixty-five percent of the teachers interviewed focused on their
intrinsic rather than extrinsic motivations for PD. Specifically, the participants highlighted
intrinsic factors, such as their satisfaction with their role as educators and enjoying its
corresponding challenges.
Attainment Value. Attainment value is another category of expectancy-value theory
measuring the level of importance “an individual assigns to a task because the task aligns with
his or her identity” (Osman & Warner, 2020, p. 3). For the purposes of this study, attainment
value includes teacher identity, commitment, well-being, and feelings of uncertainty, as they are
components of a teacher’s identity that impact their value of a task (Osman & Warner, 2020;
30
Thoonen et al, 2011). For example, teachers are more motivated when they perceive that
professional development values their identity and unique traits as individuals (Donnell &
Gettinger, 2015); this increase in motivation results from a high attainment value, stemming
from teachers’ identities. Furthermore, when conceptualizing motivation in their study, Thoonen
et al. (2011) included the teachers’ relationship to school goals and values, and the extent to
which they internalized them as personal goals and personal values. Therefore, attainment value
in EVT is the level of importance placed on a task as a product of one’s identity and personal
ideals, in practice.
Thoonen et al.’s (2011) conception of goals and values is best situated as a function of
one’s attainment value. For example, a teacher may have a higher attainment value for a
particular professional development if it is congruent with their pedagogy, and therefore are
more likely to implement its strategies (Abrami et al., 2004; Donnell & Gettinger, 2015).
However, Thoonen et al. (2011) found that teacher well-being hurt PD engagement, possibly
because more satisfied teachers are less willing to reflect. Also, teachers who felt aligned with
the PD demonstrated less urgency to implement new strategies, conflicting with research
suggesting pedagogical alignment produces a higher likelihood of implementation. Further
research is needed to better understand the nuances of this conflict surrounding attainment value
and PD motivation. Thoonen et al. (2011) also discovered that the “internalization of
organizational goals as personal goals” (p. 506) boosts self-efficacy and motivation, which was
previously discussed, and will be discussed further as an external motivational factor. Finally,
experienced teachers were found to be more certain of their practice as teachers, and therefore
more flexible in their openness to new instructional practices.
31
Contrary to Thoonen et al. (2011), Kyndt et al.’s (2016) research found that as teacher
experience increases, motivation to learn and apply new teaching practices decreases. This
particularly applies to teachers who are nearing retirement and are more selective about which
professional opportunities they accept. Attitudes toward learning, learning outcomes, and
contextual factors revealed the main differences between new and experienced teachers in
teacher engagement in learning. Nevertheless, the idea of teacher experience is central to one’s
identity as a teacher, which influences their attainment value in completing a task.
Utility Value. Utility value is the final value category in EVT. One’s utility value
references “the usefulness of a particular task. Tasks with high utility value usually align with
goals and plans for the future. In this way, utility value is closely related to extrinsic motivation”
(Osman & Warner, 2020, p. 3). When applied to teacher motivation in professional development,
teacher utility value can be an exceptional motivating factor in PD (Cameron et al., 2013; Gaines
et al., 2019; Palermo & Thomson, 2019). Therefore, perceived practical benefit can increase
engagement and implementation motivation (Kyndt et al., 2016; Osman & Warner, 2020). For
example, teachers may find utility if the PD can strengthen their pedagogy, such as improving
classroom management (Osman & Warner, 2020) and furthering their understanding of
curriculum and standards (Palermo & Thomson, 2019). Teachers might also assign higher utility
value to PD that can impact their students’ learning (Gaines et al., 2019) or provide benefits for
colleagues (Palermo & Thomson, 2019). Thus, utility value is a valuable tool for motivating
teachers toward greater implementation of PD strategies.
Cost. In addition to various kinds of value, EVT also evaluates an individual’s perceived
costs of completing a task, which can be subdivided into effort cost, opportunity cost, and
emotional cost (Eccles & Wigfield, 2020). These costs associated with professional development
32
learning and implementation affect teacher motivation to engage with and implement PD
strategies in general (Dam & Janssen, 2021; Osman & Warner, 2020). Because of the
multifaceted expectations within the teaching profession, teacher engagement has limitations
dependent on their perceived bandwidth (Kennedy, 2016; Mette et al., 2016). For example, PD
can include the difficulty level of planning and implementing, which also requires significant
time consumption (Cameron et al., 2013; Christesen & Turner, 2014; Geijsel et al., 2009;
Karabenick & Conley, 2011; Kwakman, 2003; Parsons et al., 2019; Saka, 2013). Teachers’
perceived costs of PD have the potential to outweigh teachers’ expectancies for success and task
values, which lessens their motivation (Osman & Warner, 2020).
Dam and Janssen (2021) conducted an explorative study using a PD program at the
school-site level. Results illustrated the strategies of participants to build on their current
practice, integrating new practices as “building blocks.” The study acknowledged the restraining
costs that teachers face (resources, time, etc.). Therefore, the authors recommended that the costs
of learning and implementing new instructional strategies from PD should be reduced for
teachers by creating content that teachers can understand and implement, congruent with their
current pedagogy, and “have low cost in terms of time and energy that teachers need to invest”
(p. 5). PD implementation that requires a low cost to teachers can boost teacher expectancies for
success and increase their motivation to practice new strategies (Dam & Janssen, 2021; Gaines et
al., 2019). These internal motivational factors, ranging from self-efficacy, various kinds of value,
and cost, help explain how teachers consider their desire for professional development on the
individual level.
33
External Motivational Factors
Professional development research offers insights into external motivational factors, in
addition to factors internal to teachers. These variables include organizational factors, such as
professional requirements, school leadership, support, and collaboration with colleagues. Many
PD opportunities are compulsory in education, which may hinder teacher motivation to learn
(Kennedy, 2016). Generally, professional development motivation is lower when the PD fulfills
a district or school requirement (Karabenick & Conley, 2011), which is a facet of external
motivation for professional development.
Daly et al. (2020) conceived school sites as “ecological sites for learning” and
professional development. This interpretation added nuance to the idea that a school site is one
individual environment, but rather is constantly shifting and interacting with broader
organizational systems. School sites, therefore, function within the overlapping purview of local
and national policies and governing organizations (Daly et al., 2020). These organizational
complexities must be acknowledged before discussing the specific motivational factors
experienced within school sites.
Based on their semi-structured interviews with Israeli teachers, Avidov-Ungar (2016)
found that 35% of the teachers interviewed highlighted their extrinsic motivational factors
(others’ expectations, the goal of professional recognition by those around them). External
motivation in this study encompassed multiple professional expectations from their school
environments, such as completing a high-level training popular among colleagues, advancing
one’s educational career, and professional recognition from others in the workplace environment.
In addition, 23% of respondents cited vertical career advancement as an external motivating
factor to participate in PD.
34
Teacher involvement and collaboration during professional development is another key
component of teacher motivation for PD (Opfer et al., 2011; Prenger et al., 2017; Thoonen et al.,
2011). Professional development has a greater effect on teacher learning and instruction when
teachers share a common community, such as their school site or department (Borko, 2004;
Birman et al., 2000; Desimone et al., 2002; Garet et al., 2001; Putnam & Borko, 2000; Wayne et
al., 2008). Furthermore, increased collaboration has helped teachers to internalize the school’s
goals, which has been found to boost teacher self-efficacy and PD motivation (Geijsel et al.,
2009; Thoonen et al., 2011). Teacher collaboration similarly equips teachers with a greater
tolerance for uncertainty, yielding a higher level of engagement in PD learning activities. In
parallel with teacher collaboration, teacher involvement in PD decision-making positively
impacted both self-efficacy and internalization of goals as personal goals (Geijsel et al., 2009;
Thoonen et al., 2011). Again, this boost in self-efficacy raises the level of teacher PD motivation.
However, even when teachers do not fully internalize that professional development has a strong
impact on their teaching beliefs, teachers still acknowledge that PD significantly impacts their
practical instruction and consequently student learning (Opfer et al., 2011). Therefore, these
examples illustrate how external factors, such as teacher implementation of PD and student
learning, impact teacher motivation.
Thoonen et al. (2011) further elaborated on external motivational factors by classifying
the following as organizational factors: collaborative experiences, joint decision-making,
cooperative relationships and communication, and promoting teacher learning in PD.
Organizational leadership and resources are other themes within external motivational factors.
PLC leadership impacts teacher satisfaction with professional development, which involves
school administration, PD coaches, and teacher colleagues (Thoonen et al., 2011; Prenger et al.,
35
2017). For example, the extent to which the PLC leadership maintains contact between PLC
participants and school administrators and colleagues impacts teacher PD satisfaction (Prenger et
al., 2017). An external PD coach that is actively involved and provides teachers with practical
knowledge and strategies boosts teacher satisfaction. Additionally, external PD coaches have
reported not only that low school site support from the administration has a negative influence on
teacher PD motivation, but also that motivation plays a key role at all levels of teachers’
professional development (Prenger et al., 2017), underscoring the relevance of both internal and
external motivational factors.
Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
Social Cognitive Theory
This study employed Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory to examine the factors that
influence teacher motivation for implementing instructional strategies learned from culturally
relevant pedagogy professional development. Bandura (1986) developed social cognitive theory
as a revision of his previously established social learning theory. Social cognitive theory
fundamentally assumes that a person’s environment and behavior influence their learning.
Therefore, Bandura challenged behaviorism’s traditional claims that people need to perform the
actions themselves to learn (Schunk, 2020), but rather that people attain knowledge, skills, and
beliefs through observing others and their modeled behaviors (Schunk, 2020). Bandura
eventually integrated self-regulation as a concept to explain how people attempt to control
important events, including goal setting, evaluating the outcomes of actions, and “self-regulating
thoughts, emotions, and actions” (Schunk, 2020, p. 119).
Social cognitive theory also assumes that people, their behaviors, and their environments
are mutually influential. Bandura (1986) labeled this phenomenon triadic reciprocality, or triadic
36
reciprocity, meaning that the relationship of these three components can be visualized as a
triangle. The person is the individual or individuals whose learning and motivation are of
interest, and who accordingly defines the behavior and environment category relative to the
individual. The behavior of the individual or individuals is considered related to, yet independent
of the person. For example, the extent to which a person’s behavior reflects a successful
implementation of the individual’s goal impacts their self-efficacy, which is a facet of the person.
Finally, the environment is where the individual principally learns and interacts with other
actors. These three components of triadic reciprocity frame the factors that influence teacher
motivation for CRP PD.
Opfer and Pedder’s (2011) literature review on teacher professional development
similarly illustrated a triadic relationship between their three identified subsystems: the teacher,
school, and learning activity. This framework mirrors social cognitive theory’s triadic
reciprocality of person, environment, and behavior. In the current study, the social cognitive lens
places teachers in the person category, although each teacher can still be analyzed as an
individual learner. The environment is defined as the school site and individuals related to
planning and implementing CRP PD. Finally, the behavior category represents teachers’
potential enactment of CRP PD instructional strategies.
Expectancy-Value Theory
Atkinson (1957, 1964) originally developed the expectancy-value theory of achievement
motivation to explain how one’s expectancy of achieving a particular outcome and the value of
that outcome motivates either action or avoidance. Wigfield and Eccles (2000, 2002) further
broadened Atkinson’s model to incorporate additional societal influences, students’ achievement
beliefs, and self-concepts of their abilities in their contemporary model of achievement
37
motivation. Eccles (1984) expanded on Atkinson’s (1957) discussion of incentive value by
dividing task value into four distinct categories: intrinsic value, attainment value, utility value,
and cost (Eccles & Wigfield, 2020).
Social Cognitive Theory and Expectancy-Value Theory as a Conceptual Framework
Social cognitive theory claims that people “act in accordance with beliefs about their
capabilities and the expected outcomes of their actions” (Schunk, 2020, p. 118), coinciding with
the principle of expectancy-value theory suggesting people’s motivation stems from their
expectations and value. Although expectancy-value theory is a motivational theory distinct from
social cognitive theory, this study applied expectancy-value theory as a lens to analyze all three
elements within social cognitive theory’s triadic relationship. For example, a person’s conception
of opportunity cost can directly impact their behavior if they are unwilling to forgo the time and
energy spent on another task. Additionally, if an individual perceives their superiors in the
environment to possess a low intrinsic value of a task, this could correspondingly lessen the
individual’s value also. Thus, social cognitive theory and expectancy-value theory construct a
conceptual framework of intersecting concepts and contexts (Maxwell, 2013a; Ravitch & Carl,
2016)—individuals, environments, behavior, expectancy, and value.
Within the context of this study, social cognitive theory and expectancy-value theory
provided a holistic view of the broader organizational context, as well as a detailed analysis of
the individual's self-efficacy, expectancy, and value. Social cognitive theory established a triadic
structure to organize different interactions between teachers, the work environment, and their
behavior. The arrows, therefore, remain bidirectional between the variables, as they are mutually
influenced by one another. Kennedy (2016) and Opfer and Pedder (2011) corroborate that “the
extent to which teachers implement the objectives of a professional development program in
38
their classroom is influenced by both internal factors (e.g., teacher beliefs, attitudes) and external
factors (e.g., school/district policies, curricular constraints, other professional development
programs” (as cited by Osman & Warner, 2020, p. 2). Therefore, social cognitive theory offered
a sound theoretical base to organize internal and external factors that influence teacher
motivation to learn and implement CRP PD material within all three components of the triadic
reciprocality.
However, expectancy-value theory diversified the traditional conception of the person,
environment, and behavior by enveloping their task expectancies and task values. This
conceptual framework incorporated expectancy-value theory within the person, behavior, and
environment (composed of administrators and CRP PD instructors) categories. Therefore, the
intrinsic value, attainment value, utility value, and cost of the person and environment have the
potential to reciprocally impact not only both person and environment, but also teacher behavior.
Expectancy-value theory was applied to understand teacher motivation in other areas of
professional practice (Osman & Warner, 2020), and similarly offered insight into teachers’
learning and implementation motivation of professional development content.
For example, leveraging both social cognitive theory and expectancy-value theory, this
study assumed that a teacher generally associated a low utility value with professional
development would be less likely to implement new strategies through their behavior.
Conversely, if teachers were to perceive their administrators within the teachers’ environment
possessed high cost and low utility value, or were generally unenthusiastic toward a professional
development event, then teachers’ expectancy, value, and behavior could be negatively
impacted.
39
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework
40
Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this study was to examine the factors that impact teacher motivation to
implement culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) learned from professional development (PD).
Research on culturally relevant pedagogy professional development (CRP PD) is limited;
therefore, this study sought to bolster current literature with nuanced teacher perspectives on
their motivation level for implementing CRP PD strategies through qualitative semi-structured
interviews and document analysis. PD is a well-established means of improving student
achievement (Carpenter et al., 1989; Cohen & Hill, 2000; Cole, 1992; Duffy et al., 1986;
Fishman et al., 2003; Lai & McNaughton, 2016; Marek & Methven, 1991; McCutchen et al.,
2002; McGill-Franzen et al., 1999; Meissel et al., 2016; Penuel et al., 2011; Roth et al., 2011;
Saxe et al., 2001; Sloan, 1993; Tienken, 2003; Yoon et al., 2007). CRP has also demonstrated a
positive impact on student achievement (Byrd, 2016; Christianakis, 2011; Ensign, 2003; Mitton
& Murray-Orr, 2021; Rodriguez et al., 2004; Sleeter, 2011; Tate, 1995). Consequently, it is vital
to study teacher motivation, as it is a strong predictor of teacher learning and implementation of
PD (Kennedy, 2016; Opfer & Pedder, 2011). Understanding teacher motivation allows
researchers, professional developers, and administrators to maximize teacher learning and
implementation of CRP PD.
This chapter begins by reviewing the study’s research methodology and the research
questions that guide the study. A discussion of my positionality, data collection processes, and
the research participants follows. Finally, the chapter concludes with a presentation of ethics,
credibility and trustworthiness, and data analysis procedures.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided the study:
41
1. What factors influence teacher motivation to implement instructional strategies
learned from culturally relevant pedagogy professional development?
2. How do environmental factors affect teacher motivation to implement instructional
strategies learned from culturally relevant pedagogy professional development?
Overview of Design
This study employed a qualitative approach to explore the factors that impact teacher
motivation to implement CRP PD. The study’s descriptive qualitative research methodology
conducted interviews to highlight nuanced teacher perspectives of their motivation level and
contributing factors in their own words. Semi-structured interviews were the most appropriate
approach to collect data on the level of teacher motivation, as they maximized flexibility for both
the respondents and me as the principal investigator during the interview (Lochmiller & Lester,
2017; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Specifically, semi-structured interviews provided a generally
standardized framework of questions that all teachers will be asked, yet allowed the conversation
flexibility to determine the syntax depending on the responses given (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016;
Patton, 2015). Thus, these semi-structured interviews allowed teachers to describe their
perspectives and experiences in depth, producing rich data (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017) about
their motivation level to implement CRP PD strategies. Interview data was also accompanied by
a document analysis of slide presentations from the professional development to help
contextualize the teachers’ learning environment (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). Therefore, these
data sources allowed for the triangulation of data to maximize the study’s reliability (Creswell,
2014; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Table 1 describes the study’s research questions and corresponding instrumentation that
collected data for the study.
42
Table 1
Research Questions and Data Collection Methods
Research Question
Document Analysis
Interviews
1. What factors influence
teacher motivation to
implement instructional
strategies learned from
culturally relevant
pedagogy professional
development?
X
2. How do environmental
factors affect teacher
motivation to implement
instructional strategies
learned from culturally
relevant pedagogy
professional development?
X X
Research Setting
Emmitt High School (pseudonym), located within a Southern California school district,
served as the organization of focus for this study. Roughly one third of students are
socioeconomically disadvantaged, and over 95% of the student population are students of color.
Emmitt is also a high-achieving school in which almost all students graduate. The school
secretary disseminated email invitations to participate in the study to the entire faculty at Emmitt
High School (pseudonym), who teach students Grades 7 −12. Of the 39 teachers on the faculty,
seven teachers indicated interest in participating in the study’s interviews and met the criteria of
43
having completed professional development on culturally relevant pedagogy. Participants were
interviewed using a semi-structured interview protocol.
The Researcher
A key factor that may have affected the study’s reliability is my positionality, which is
defined as the intersection of multiple variables of one’s identity as it relates to power and
politics (Villaverde, 2008). As the primary researcher, I held a position of power in the study’s
design (Glesne, 2011). Thus, my social responsibility required that I protect participants’
anonymity, maximize participant voice in qualitative analysis, and ultimately pursue research for
empowerment (Atkins & Duckworth, 2019). In framing the study, it was crucial that the
questions in teacher interviews were formulated as a derivative of the research questions
(Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). My positionality is also composed of my ethnic identity as a
fourth-generation Japanese American, middle school history teacher who participates in CRP PD
and implements its strategies regularly. Therefore, I reflected on my positionality and biases as a
person of color and as a teacher who enacts culturally relevant instructional practices in the
drafting of interview questions, sampling of teachers, and consequent analysis of data.
While I could not fully eliminate my own opinions about professional development,
culturally relevant pedagogy, and CRP PD, the semi-structured interview protocol served to
standardize the general prompts about teacher experiences and perceptions to mitigate my own
assumptions. Furthermore, it was pivotal to both explicitly state and reflect on my own opinions
when analyzing the study’s findings and synthesizing themes from teacher responses. Finally, I
maximized participant voices and minimized my biases through an effort to present teacher
perspectives through accurate contextualization and direct quoting. This emphasis on researcher
44
reflexivity helped to maximize the study’s openness, transparency, and validity (Atkins &
Duckworth, 2019).
Data Sources
The data sources for this qualitative study triangulated data from semi-structured
interviews and document analysis. Document analysis was conducted after teacher interviews, as
they were not available until after the interviews concluded. Document analysis offered a greater
contextualization of the CRP PD program being delivered at the school site during data analysis.
Interviews
Participants were interviewed using a semi-structured interview protocol, which created a
standardized set of questions and topics for each teacher to address (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), while providing flexibility for the conversation’s progression (Patton,
2015). Interview questions addressed concepts related to motivation, such as self-efficacy,
expectancy, value, and cost. Questions also invited participants to share their own experiences
with professional development and evaluate how those constructs related to their
conceptualization of their motivation level.
Participants
Teachers who attended professional development on culturally relevant pedagogy were
interviewed for this study. This study did not conduct a census due to the time restrictions of the
study. Interview participants were selected through non-random probability sampling of
teachers; the sample included seven teacher participants. Because interviews were paramount to
a nuanced understanding of the teacher experience with CRP PD, this study purposefully
selected teachers from a variety of grade levels, subjects, and levels of teaching experience to
provide a more comprehensive representation of teacher perspectives on their motivation levels
45
for CRP PD implementation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), as well as allow for possible themes to
emerge from this unique school ecosystem (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017).
Document Analysis
This study employed document analysis in conjunction with semi-structured teacher
interviews to enable the triangulation of data to strengthen the study’s reliability (Creswell,
2014). Documents relating to the school’s culturally relevant pedagogy professional
development included the CRP PD presentation slides delivered during sessions. An analysis of
these documents helped alleviate researcher reactivity, which could mitigate the study’s
reliability (Maxwell, 2013b).
Instrumentation
The semi-structured interviews provided flexibility the participants and me (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016) and were conducted using an interview protocol (Appendix B) to standardize the
topics and questions, while protecting the organic nature of human conversations that provide
data (Patton, 2015). Semi-structured interviews allowed open-ended questions, coupled with the
use of probing questions, to help ensure that all relevant topics were explored with a flexible
interview syntax, while maintaining a standardized set of questions (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Interviews were digitally recorded to ensure the accuracy of
reporting. Finally, document analysis of the CRP PD agenda completed the triangulation of
qualitative data.
Data Collection Procedures
Study participants were provided with a letter of introduction (see Appendix A) that
described the purpose of the study and the rationale for their selection as teachers who attend
professional development on culturally relevant pedagogy. Semi-structured interviews were
46
conducted with these teachers to not only understand the factors influencing their motivation, but
also allowed their perceptions to be contextualized in detail based on their unique positionalities
and perspectives. The interview protocol was piloted before the study’s enactment to maximize
clarity and flow for the researcher and participants (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013b).
Data Analysis
The diversity of qualitative sources from this study allowed for data triangulation
(Lochmiller & Lester, 2017) and was studied through Creswell’s (2014) model for qualitative
data analysis. Figure 2 visually represents the data-analysis process.
Figure 2
Creswell’s (2014) Model for Qualitative Data Analysis
47
The qualitative analysis began with data preparation. The first step organized data from
interview transcripts and CRP PD documents, which then helped create a generalized sense of
the data. The third and fourth steps began the coding process through the categorization of data
into descriptive themes. The final two steps situated the themes within the qualitative narrative,
and ultimately allowed meaning to be uncovered from the study’s findings.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
The credibility of this study was established strategically through multiple approaches.
First, three sources of data (semi-structured interviews and document analysis) allowed for
triangulation. While triangulation could not guarantee the study’s validity, it did improve the
overall trustworthiness of the study by corroborating themes in the data sets (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Another facet of the study’s credibility was the standardization of topics and questions in
the semi-structured interview protocol, which ensured that all participants will be presented with
the same opportunities to share their perspectives (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2015). The
interview guide also eliminated any leading questions, and instead created questions that share
common meanings to respondents (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Finally, in the analysis of data, my
positionality as a person of color and educator who implements CRP PD strategies regularly was
explicitly stated to reduce the impact of any biases (Atkins-Duckworth, 2019; Milner, 2007).
Ethics
This study was conducted following approval from the University of Southern
California’s Institutional Review Board. Any potential risks associated with this study were
minimized to the fullest extent, and were ultimately outweighed by the value of understanding
teacher motivation to implement CRP PD for the benefit of students. Social responsibility
required the employment of strategies that would reduce harm. An ethical consideration of the
48
interview protocol included ensuring that questions in the semi-structured interview were
formulated as a derivative of the research questions (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). Additionally,
the study protected the participants’ anonymity and maximized both privacy and confidentiality
through the secure storage of recorded interview data, transcripts, observations, and documents
with data anonymization, password protection, and encryption (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017).
Furthermore, the qualitative analysis maximized participant voices through purposeful direct and
indirect quoting that accurately reflected teacher perspectives in context. Finally, naming the
reality of my positionality (Douglass & Nganga, 2015; Milner, 2007) and reflexivity (Atkins-
Duckworth, 2019) as a teacher who regularly engages in CRP PD sought to address any biased
data analysis that could have undermined the study’s credibility (Maxwell, 2013b; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016).
49
Chapter Four: Findings
This qualitative study collected data through semi-structured interviews with teachers and
document analysis of professional development materials to explore the factors that influence
teacher motivation to implement instructional strategies learned from culturally relevant
pedagogy professional development (CRP PD). This chapter details the study’s interview
participants and findings related to the following research questions:
1. What factors influence teacher motivation to implement instructional strategies
learned from culturally relevant pedagogy professional development?
2. How do environmental factors affect teacher motivation to implement instructional
strategies learned from culturally relevant pedagogy professional development?
Materials for document analysis included slide presentations from five CRP PD sessions
and the PD organization’s website. A review of the documents established that while the PD
facilitators never formally entitled the series as “culturally relevant pedagogy,” functionally its
content embodied all three core values of CRP (Ladson-Billings, 1995a), as evidenced by its
explicitly stated mission, vision, PD objective, and activities designed for teachers. Findings
from document analysis will be synthesized with the interview data and paraphrased to protect
the PD organization’s anonymity.
Overview of Participants
All seven participants, referred to by pseudonyms, were teachers at Emmitt High School
who attended a complete series of culturally relevant pedagogy professional development (CRP
PD). Table 2 presents descriptive characteristics of the teachers, including their years of K–12
teaching experience, subject, grade level, and a representative quote of a factor impacting their
CRP PD motivation.
50
Table 2
Participant Overview
Name
Years
teaching
K–12
Subject(s)
Grade
level(s)
Representative quote
Sam
16
AP Statistics
10−12
So, in that way, my motivation to
learn in the PD is more self-
directed, just because that’s the
type of person I am.
Jen
12
Science,
Study skills
7, 8
I liked it. I mean, I participated…I
think we all enjoyed it. But after a
certain point it was like … we’re
teachers, we need some practical
stuff.
Nyla
30
Science
7
If I’m going to take time out of the
class, time out of teaching science
to present something different … I
don’t feel that I’m trained to teach
them about racial injustice in
science.
Eric
8
Computer
science,
Physics
10−12
Something that makes that topic
tricky is it just seems like good
teaching to me by default. You
need to make lessons relevant to
your students … It should be
something … that’s kind of baked
into the practice.
Cameron
28
Math,
Calculus
8, 10 −12
This year, I think with our new
principal, I’ve been really sort of
interested in trying different things,
and I have … more of a motivation
and not having a fear of trying
things.
Ariana
25
English
7, 9
I believe in it. I think it’s necessary,
but it is one more thing on our
already overflowing plate … give
us hands on very practical stuff that
51
Name
Years
teaching
K–12
Subject(s)
Grade
level(s)
Representative quote
we can incorporate … an example
of something that worked in this
English teacher’s classroom or this
math teacher’s classroom.
Katie
21
Japanese
7–12
I think this is my Japanese roots
coming to life … It’s not about
individual … it’s that group
orientation group mentality … if
really every teacher on campus
bought into it and if they did do it,
there’s going to be huge change…
And I think that group mentality
and the importance of working as a
whole really … motivated me.
Findings for Research Question 1: Teacher Motivational Factors
Three themes emerged from the first research question, which aimed to discover the
various factors that impact teacher motivation to implement instructional strategies learned from
culturally relevant pedagogy professional development. The first theme discusses how teacher
self-efficacy impacts CRP learning and implementation motivation. The second theme highlights
how teachers’ values regarding CRP PD impact learning and implementation. Finally, the third
theme covers the costs to teachers in learning and implementing CRP PD instructional strategies.
Theme 1: Teacher Self-Efficacy Impact
One theme that emerged from the data collection was how teacher self-efficacy impacts
teacher motivation for implementing CRP PD strategies. Teacher self-efficacy relates to their
perceived ability level to understand and enact culturally relevant pedagogy in their classrooms.
52
Overall, teachers reported very low CRP self-efficacy, despite evidence of improvement
resulting from the CRP PD.
Teacher Understanding of CRP
Teacher self-efficacy to implement culturally relevant instructional strategies relies on
their understanding of culturally relevant pedagogy. None of the seven participants were able to
define CRP holistically as a philosophy of teaching that encompassed not only cultural
competence, but also critical consciousness. Document analysis of the CRP slide presentations
confirms that CRP was never defined.
However, all participants understood that ethnic culture was a core component of CRP,
providing evidence that the teachers shared some fundamental understandings of the topic. For
example, Sam admitted, “prior to experiencing our [CRP] training, I don’t know that I would
have defined it,” but after completing the professional development was able to define CRP as
“learning how to include students of all backgrounds.” Document analysis of the CRP PD slide
presentations confirmed explicit discussions of diversity and the value of education for students
of all backgrounds. Jen discussed the need for CRP to target diversity in curriculum due to the
biases of textbooks and curriculum that do not “necessarily align with non-dominant populations
or people that have a different set of worldview or different culture, whether that be ethnicity or
economic backgrounds.” Jen’s ability to further explain historic systemic inequities in education
demonstrates a deeper understanding of the theory behind CRP. Similarly, Cameron highlighted
the need “to be sensitive to all the different kids and their backgrounds and their cultures,”
indicating her understanding that CRP values the diversity of student backgrounds, rather than
regarding the students as a monolithic group.
53
In addition to the participants’ collective understanding that ethnic culture is central to
CRP, all participants voiced agreement with the potential of culturally relevant pedagogy to build
sociopolitical consciousness. Document analysis produced several examples of different
theoretical topics presented, such as systems of oppression, implicit bias, White supremacy and
anti-blackness, and intersectionality.
Teacher Variation in Self-Efficacy
While participants reported a variation in CRP self-efficacy and its impact on motivation,
five of the seven described themselves as unconfident overall in their abilities to implement CRP
PD strategies.
Nyla described her CRP self-efficacy as very low: “I’m not confident about that at all…
But I don’t know what strategies there are…putting up pictures of African American scientists?
Is that what we’re asked to do? I don’t know how that changes anything.” Nyla’s uncertainty
about implementation as a science teacher underscores how low CRP self-efficacy negatively
impacts teacher implementation motivation. Sam, who also reported low CRP self-efficacy,
explained a similar experience:
If I see it and can go, ‘Oh yeah, I could easily do that,’ that has the highest chance of
being implemented…if I go to a PD and it’s like, ‘Oh, this is cool, there’s no way I could
do it,’ It’s not going to get implemented.
It is noteworthy, however, that four of the seven teachers mentioned an increase in self-efficacy
due to the CRP PD. Eric reported that the CRP PD increased his comfortability with
implementing CRP in his classroom “knowing that the students are more comfortable sharing
more personal stories going forward.” Eric stated that he was able to take advantage of the
momentum of teachers and students alike being trained in cultural relevance, which changed the
54
school’s culture and raised his CRP self-efficacy. Despite these improvements in self-efficacy
resulting from the CRP PD, most participants still reported low self-efficacy for implementing
culturally relevant instructional strategies.
Of the seven participants, only two described themselves as efficacious in implementing
strategies from CRP:
There was no strategy that I learned that I could implement. I mean, again, there was
some stuff that I’m like, ‘Oh, yeah, I already do that,’ but there was nothing new I
learned from them. … They didn’t even really provide us with any teaching strategies or
lesson strategies … nothing was anything that I don’t already do (Ariana).
Eric provided the most comprehensive and accurate definition of CRP as “good teaching … You
need to make lessons relevant to your students … It should be something … that’s kind of baked
into the practice.” Furthermore, Eric described high self-efficacy for implementing CRP in his
classroom: “In the context of … these are strategies I’ve learned and I’m using them in my class,
yes, I feel very confident, very strongly about my ability to do that.” Therefore, Eric’s testimony
demonstrates how teacher self-efficacy can positively impact motivation, as teachers who are
more confident in their abilities can then be more motivated to implement CRP strategies.
Theme 2: Teacher Value of CRP PD Learning and Implementation
The second theme that emerged from research question one was the various conceptions
of value that teachers placed on their CRP PD learning and implementation, and will be
discussed in the proceeding sections as subthemes. Teachers’ perceived utility value of CRP PD
strategies was the most salient value category, which relates to how useful teachers find their
professional development. Second, attainment value captures the extent to which teachers
believe the CRP PD aligns with their personally conceived identities as teachers. Finally,
55
intrinsic value evaluates the level of individual interest and enjoyment a teacher possesses
toward the CRP content delivered in the professional development.
Utility Value
Teachers focused on the utility value of the CRP PD more than any other value type. All
participants elevated the relevance of CRP in the classroom as the most important utility factor in
their motivation. Eric affirmed, “It’s going to be the relevance to my classroom, especially just
how much I can actually take from it and implement it in my classroom.” Sam agreed with the
importance of classroom relevance: “if I can’t implement this in my classroom, then it’s no
longer useful for me after a certain point, how it helps me personally and makes me a better
teacher in that regard.” Finally, Ariana corroborated, “I would have loved for them to give me
something I could implement in my classroom.” Participants unanimously argued that
instructional strategies presented at both PD and CRP PD must be applicable and implementable
to boost teacher motivation to implement instructional strategies. However, as noted in the first
theme, strong teacher self-efficacy and strong utility value are crucial to practicing the CRP
strategies they regard as applicable in their classrooms.
Useful CRP PD Elements. Study participants also identified useful CRP PD elements
with four out of seven teachers able to apply CRP PD strategies One common area of utility was
how the CRP PD reshaped teacher thinking that resulted in CRP enactment. For example,
Cameron reported how the PD prompted self-reflection on her teaching practice throughout her
career: “...that’s where it got me thinking…about incorporating or changing…some of the
problems that already existed in my tests or my quizzes…like rewording things so that it was
relevant to the world we live in now versus 20 years ago.” Similarly, Sam was inspired to not
only implement CRP in the classroom by integrating more diverse cultural names in her content,
56
but also outside of the classroom with her softball players. Sam described an incident in which
one player commented on another player without realizing her observation was linked to a
medical condition. Sam credited the CRP PD as a factor impacting her implementation:
probably at least 50%. Because many times I would say before … ‘You stop that,’ or,
‘You need to be nice,’ and not really taking the time to educate or to let each other be
heard. And so, I think that’s where that helped in giving students the power … the
opportunity to discuss their feelings, educating them, giving them a chance to apologize,
versus the, ‘Hey, you know, that’s rude … you need to apologize.’
Cameron and Sam both experienced how the CRP PD reshaped their thinking toward greater
cultural competence and sociopolitical consciousness. Sam’s decision to implement a CRP PD
strategy with her players was impacted by her CRP PD learning, and motivated her employment
of this specific strategy because she could identify the strategy’s utility in empowering students
in their interpersonal relationships as a form of cultural education, rather than merely a
disciplinary issue requiring an apology.
Additionally, Cameron’s self-reflection allowed her to realize CRP’s relevance to the
collective student culture, which changes over time. Thus, the utility value teachers realized in
the CRP PD series was not limited to strategies alone, but a reshaping of how teachers think
culturally and sociopolitically about their own pedagogy to impact their students more
effectively. The CRP PD slide presentations confirm self-reflection journal activities in all five
presentations, including teacher self-reflections on race and implicit biases, brainstorming anti-
racism practices and commitments for equity, and exploring different types of identities to better
support students. Document analysis also supported the PD’s emphasis on addressing conflict,
57
such as restorative justice values targeting how individuals can collaboratively repair the harm
caused in relationships, rather than the traditional punitive model of rules and punishments.
Another area of usefulness was how the CRP PD addressed the issue of teacher comfort
in enacting CRP. Eric recounted how the CRP PD increased his comfort in conducting culturally
relevant discourse with his computer science students about America’s digital divide:
… access to technology is not equitable … Never has been, but we’re hoping that it will
be one day. And so, the way we do that in my class is we actually look back during the
virtual year of learning … the different struggles students would face with that.
Eric felt more confident in this lesson’s enactment as a result of the CRP PD, which reflects the
utility of professional development to boost self-efficacy when teachers can realize the practical
value of PD in their pedagogy. Eric’s bolstered confidence is further evidenced by his cultural
awareness and critical consciousness during the CRP enactment, as he aimed to be “very mindful
of levels of privacy and confidentiality about these discussions.” For example, Eric ensured that
the assignment was private only to each student and himself, but also incorporated small group
and whole class discussion questions to provide scaffolding and allow “students sharing their
story, sharing their cultures.”
Relatedly, Katie found that despite her discomfort in enacting culturally relevant
discussions, the CRP PD helped her shape a more equitable learning environment by establishing
a culture of openness in conversation: “One thing I did learn from training was how important it
is to open up a dialogue … that it’s important to actually start the conversation … I can’t and I
shouldn’t shy away from it because I feel uncomfortable.” The CRP PD altered Katie’s
perspective on the utility of creating culturally relevant dialogues that foster greater
sociopolitical consciousness for students, which were less common prior to her CRP PD
58
experiences, and even motivated her to implement this strategy despite discomfort and lower
self-efficacy. A review of the CRP PD slide presentations confirms several activities during the
PD for communicating feelings around race and racism and sharing race stories. These accounts
of teacher utility value and CRP implementation illustrate how culturally relevant practices and
its broader ability to prompt meaningful self-reflection can boost teacher motivation to create a
more equitable learning context for students.
Finally, all seven teachers identified utility value for colleagues whom they perceived as
in need of the CRP PD. Participants discussed the usefulness of CRP PD in bringing awareness
of the staff’s implicit biases on the individual level, and a transformation of the school’s culture
toward equity on a collective level. Findings regarding teacher colleagues and the school culture
will be discussed further in later sections.
Teacher Recommendations to Maximize CRP PD Usefulness. From a theoretical
perspective, when asked what would help to motivate teachers toward CRP implementation, all
participants agreed that teacher motivation would increase if the professional development could
provide clear and practical examples of how to apply CRP strategies in their classrooms. Nyla
reported that her CRP implementation motivation would increase “If there’s something that I
think is going to fit into the way I teach … to make me be a better teacher … for all students …
to help me to do my job better, I’m all for it. I’m all in.” However, while Nyla described the
teachers at Emmitt High as motivated to learn at CRP PD, she noted they are not as equally
motivated to implement due to the disconnect between the theory of CRP and practical
instructional examples: “There are so many of us trying to get it, and the PD is so generalized for
the generalized learner that I find it not useful.”
59
More specifically, Eric emphasized the importance of applying CRP to individual content
areas:
I think the best way is if they could at least just be given one lesson or one very specific
activity that is already relevant to their content area to at least try it on for a bit. So, if
they’re in a science class, if they could get a map of their community, maybe some
zoning boundaries or something with pollution data … with your environmental science
class ... a chart of the income and where how that ties into zoning for an econ or math
class.
Here, Eric demonstrates his advanced understanding of CRP through his theoretical discipline-
specific examples. Eric’s potential solution targets the utility of building students’ sociopolitical
consciousness, which would increase teacher motivation to enact CRP. Sam called for subject-
specific strategies, and proposed structural changes to the CRP PD series to maximize teacher
learning and motivation:
the first half would let you see the importance of it, the benefit of it, and work through
problems or issues you might have. And then I think the second half would then let you
see how it can be implemented into the classroom more specifically, then what you
learned when you did it like yourself.
According to Sam, teachers need to be shown the benefit and application of CRP in an ideal
professional development setting to increase implementation motivation—both of which are
aspects of her utility value for CRP PD.
Finally, five of the seven teachers mentioned that the ideal CRP PD would provide
teachers with data substantiating the need for and benefits of culturally relevant pedagogy. Of the
five teachers, three teachers sought data substantiating the need for CRP PD to address current
60
inequities: What motivates me is looking at data. So, what data do we have that shows that we
need this? … So, if you tell me how this is going to help me help my students and you have data
to show that, that would motivate me, and I assume it would motivate a lot of my colleagues
(Jen).
Nyla and Sam confirmed Jen’s assumption that data would increase teacher motivation,
specifically regarding evidence of racial inequity among students:
What do the test scores show? We’re not serving these students effectively. That can’t be
OK … if you’re learning that your instruction is not effective to your students, that’s
motivating. How can I make my instruction more effective? … That’s the only way to get
them motivated is to find a weakness. Know something that’s not effective in their
teaching. Point out evidence that it’s not effective (Nyla).
Sam offered a hypothetical example of the school site administration presenting “results of data
… saying that … the brown kids feel discriminated against.” If presented with clear data
establishing the need for CRP, “That would then motivate me to try and learn more because it’s
results that are happening right now … Let’s get some specific PD for that.”
These perspectives underscore how teachers are eager for data that justifies the need for
CRP, even if it illuminates weaknesses in cultural competence and sociopolitical consciousness.
As Nyla contended, if teachers could see how CRP PD would help them “do their job better, I
think teachers are interested in that. I think everybody wants to do their job better. There’s not a
teacher that I talked to that doesn’t want to do their job right.” Here, Nyla reveals the limitations
of CRP PD that may align with teachers in theory, but fails to offer adequate utility based on an
integration of data and practical instructional strategies. Document analysis of the CRP PD
agenda slides found that the benefits of culturally relevant pedagogy were included throughout
61
the PD presentations, but empirical data was not present. Moreover, the slides did facilitate
dialogues around creating a more inclusive school culture, they did not contain explicit mentions
of instructional strategies to be used in teacher classrooms. Quantitative data was provided in
real-world examples of implicit bias, but was neither provided for nor connected to the
classroom setting.
Finally, all five participants who cited a desire for CRP PD data expressed value for data
that could demonstrate CRP PD’s benefits for students. Cameron illustrated what would
specifically be useful to her in an ideal CRP PD, such as strategies that she “would be able to
take back and use in my classroom to make the students feel more comfortable, or for me to be
able to create an environment that is more inviting or more comfortable, safer.” Cameron’s
musings exemplify how teachers are more motivated to implement CRP that they perceive to be
useful in their teaching practice that impacts students, their learning, and overall well-being.
From Eric’s perspective, providing teachers with data, a tangible vision for CRP, and “what it
can bring out of the students, I feel like that could really start building momentum” for teacher
motivation, and ultimately reshape the school’s culture to become more culturally relevant for
the benefit of students.
Less Useful CRP PD Elements. The participants also highlighted the need for teachers
to realize the utility of CRP PD by recounting the less useful components of their PD
experiences. As previously noted, four of the seven participants were able to apply concepts and
strategies learned from the CRP PD series; however, all participants reported that the PD did not
offer explicit strategies related to their respective content areas, and therefore hindered their
implementation motivation. Document analysis of the slide presentations did not produce any
strategies related to content instruction, but did substantiate that teachers were encouraged to
62
apply theory in their classrooms. For example, one slide prompted teachers to reflect on
practicing racial justice principles at Emmitt High School, such as normalizing discussions
around racism, but did not offer discipline-specific examples. Eric exemplified this struggle as a
physics and science teacher: “It’s very math heavy, very problem solving heavy. A lot of the
things they brought to us, in the way they would model discussions isn’t something I could just
bring one-to-one into my practice day to day.” Therefore, the extent to which teachers recognize
the classroom relevance of CRP strategies impacts their motivation.
As a science teacher, Jen claimed that the CRP PD was unable to connect its theory to
instructional practice: “Everything was great, but at some point, it got to be like, ‘Okay, you just
keep asking us to implement stuff, but you haven’t given us any ideas or any resources or any
support.” Jen identified how the lack of practical examples diminished her motivation: “I’m not
quite as motivated because you keep doing the same thing, keep saying the same thing, but we
haven’t really moved on to anything practical.” Sam also “found it difficult to implement in a
math classroom. Thus, even when teachers agree with the theoretical values presented in CRP
PD, teachers require practical support to be motivated enough for implementation. Although the
CRP PD prompted a desire to learn CRP integration with science, Jen admitted she was “not
motivated enough to do it on my own.” This shows how a lack of perceived utility in a CRP PD
is a missed opportunity for inspiring teachers who may not be motivated enough to seek practical
examples on their own.
As Nyla shared, “Try implementing it in math and science. It’s just not easy to do.” She
stated that she “would be very motivated for” CRP PD if its strategies were “possible, something
actionable … something that you want me to do in class. Give me something that I can actually
implement. I just didn’t get it from” the CRP PD. While teachers struggled to apply CRP
63
strategies in STEM content courses, Jen discussed an additional factor influencing her
motivation: “It’s really easy to fit in English, really easy to fit in social studies. So, I don’t
necessarily … think I should be implementing it.” This shows teacher motivation is impacted by
the utility value of professional development. Jen expressed how she “would like to see how it
fits in without distracting or taking away too much from what I do in science,” but could not see
the utility value for science, and was, therefore, less motivated to implement strategies that she
felt were already present in English and social science classrooms.
As Jen anticipated, members of the English department like Ariana felt confident about
practicing these strategies, but recognized that the CRP PD did not provide practical examples
for STEM teachers: “It was just all theory and all talk … great mission, great idea, but it just was
nothing practical … I didn’t even get one thing that I could incorporate into the classroom.”
Teachers like Ariana, for whom CRP implementation “comes naturally or would be common
sense,” recognize that teachers with low CRP self-efficacy experience negative impacts on
motivation when the PD is devoid of practical strategies.
Attainment Value
Another value category that surfaced in the data collection was teachers’ attainment value
for CRP PD, or the degree of alignment between their identities and the culturally relevant
professional development.
CRP PD Alignment with Participants’ Personal Identities. Five out of seven
participants discussed alignment between CRP PD and their personal identities. Sam, for
example, described herself as highly self-regulated in her professional learning:
if I’m at a PD that I have to be at, I’m going to try to gain something from it. I am a more
Type A person. I’m not one who’s going to be not paying attention or talking. That’s just
64
not me … So, in that way, my motivation to learn in the PD is more self-directed,
because that’s the type of person I am.
Here, Sam discussed how her identity as a Type A learner prompts self-regulation during PD
learning, and ultimately strengthens her overall motivation. Sam’s learner identity coincided with
Ariana, who shared, “I always showed up hoping that I was going to learn something … And
maybe that’s just because I’m very nerdy. I like being a student. I was hoping for a new
takeaway.” According to Ariana, her identity as a student prompted her PD learning motivation,
corresponding with Sam’s discussion. Ariana further aligned with Sam when sharing, “I wasn’t
going to not show up because I’m a complete rule follower type,” which served as another
example of how teachers’ identities can affect their motivation in PD. However, Ariana reported
that “the more sessions we had, I was always like, ‘Oh, here we go again…here’s like an hour of
my time wasted where I can be working on something else.’” Thus, teachers’ attainment value
for professional learning did not necessarily lead teachers to find value in the CRP PD, and
negatively impacted teacher motivation.
CRP PD Alignment with Participants’ Identities as Teachers. The most common
manifestation of participants’ attainment value was their identities as teachers, with six of the
seven interview participants citing alignment with CRP. “I think it is something very, very
relevant to the way I want to teach,” Eric stated. “It is something where I do think students have
to be able to connect what I’m learning to something already in their life, and that is how we do
it. It’s through their lived experiences.” Furthermore, Cameron observed a stronger alignment
between CRP and her teaching identity: “Probably more so than it did maybe five, ten years ago.
I’m more conscious of it … more so I think also because as a minority female, I feel like I don’t
want to shy away from that.” Cameron’s testimony reflects a progression toward greater
65
alignment with CRP over time, influenced by the intersection of her race and gender, and
demonstrates how the impact of teachers’ cultural positionality and attainment value can increase
their motivation for implementing culturally relevant pedagogy.
Although the majority of participants expressed their alignment between CRP and their
identities as teachers, they also expressed how their content area is an important factor in who
they are as teachers. Three of the seven participants named inner conflicts in practicing CRP as
discipline-specific teachers. As stated in a previous section, all teachers reported that the CRP
PD did not help them implement culturally relevant practices in their respective disciplines. Nyla
asserted, “There was nothing actionable in the professional development. It was all about that
there is injustice, and we all knew that there’s systemic injustice … I’m a science teacher. How
do I fit racial injustice into my teaching? I don’t feel that I’m trained to teach them about racial
injustice in science.” Document analysis corroborated its discussion of topics related to racial
injustice. For example, at the beginning of each slide presentation, the PD organization stated its
vision for a diverse community in the United States and mission to combat systemic
discrimination and foster respect among all backgrounds. The mission and vision of the PD
organization corroborate with interview findings that all participants agreed with the theoretical
value of CRP. Nyla illustrates that while teachers can agree with the theoretical value of CRP,
the lack of effective training creates avoidable misconceptions that culturally relevant topics are
incompatible with STEM curriculum. Low self-efficacy in implementing CRP resulted, which
further inhibited Nyla’s motivation.
Even teachers, such as Sam, who were able to recall multiple instances of CRP
implementation from professional development, struggled to see alignment between the CRP PD
content and their identity as a discipline-specific teacher:
66
I’m a math teacher … I don’t want to sit here and have a discussion about gender identity
… about Black Lives Matter, and it’s not that I support those things, but I just feel like
I’m not equipped.
The CRP PD slide presentations did not relate CRP to specific academic disciplines. Despite
finding value in culturally relevant topics, both Nyla and Sam demonstrate how CRP self-
efficacy, utility value, and attainment value can negatively impact teacher motivation to
implement CRP PD strategies.
Intrinsic Value
The third value category found to impact teacher motivation was intrinsic value, defined
as the level of interest individuals possess toward a particular topic or task.
Teacher Interest Prior to CRP PD. Five out of seven teachers reported evidence of
intrinsic value in the CRP PD concepts. Of those five, two mentioned that they were interested in
attending the culturally relevant pedagogy professional development series, and three mentioned
that the PD itself was intriguing. For example, Ariana linked her interest to learning enjoyment
and utility:
at first, I was pretty excited because there’s a lot they don’t teach you in your credential
program … I’m like, ‘Yeah, I would love to learn something like these situations that
come up that maybe we’re not prepared for … to get some pro tips from teachers in
schools who are handling that stuff.’ And that’s not what the training was.
Nyla echoed high levels of interest:
I went to every meeting. I was always very interested in going … I wanted to make sure
that I was there participating, doing what was asked of me, listened more than I spoke. I
67
was really motivated to learn, really trying to grasp anything that I could to change the
way I present lessons. I was very motivated to attend.
Both Ariana and Nyla reported strong initial interest, but stated disappointment in the PD’s
inefficacy in classroom application. Therefore, intrinsic value does enhance teacher motivation,
but its positive impacts are curtailed by lower levels of utility value and a deficiency of practical
instructional strategies.
Teacher Interest During CRP PD. Regarding the PD experience, Jen and Sam
mentioned interest in the CRP content and learning experience. “I liked it,” Jen remarked, “I
mean, I participated. All of us, I think we all enjoyed it. But after a certain point it was like …
we’re teachers, we need some practical stuff.” Sam, too, “found it to be interesting. I found it
difficult to implement in my math classroom. I also feel like some of it I wasn’t comfortable
discussing.” Although intrinsic value was a positive motivational factor for these four teachers,
their testimonies also depict how motivation is impacted by other competing factors. All four
teachers described their interest in the CRP PD, yet also emphasized that a combination of low
self-efficacy and lack of practical application to the classroom impeded their CRP
implementation motivation.
Intrinsic value was not a driving factor for all participants. When asked about her level of
interest, Katie shared:
Not at all. And this, I think, has nothing to do with the training. I think it’s the time in
which it came. It was right through our virtual … And I’m not a tech-savvy person, so I
really would have liked to have a different set of training technology rather than seeing
through [the CRP PD].
68
Katie later expressed interest in the CRP topics resulting from separate PD experiences. Katie
identified the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on her teacher bandwidth (will be discussed
further in a proceeding section), which shifted her priorities toward her new utility value for
technology training, and overshadowed her potential intrinsic value for CRP.
Theme 3: Teacher Costs of CRP PD Learning and Implementation
The category of teacher costs in learning and implementing CRP PD strategies was the
final theme of research question one. While a variety of factors can positively motivate teachers,
as discussed in the previous two themes, costs primarily have a negative impact on motivation.
The three subthemes of teacher costs consisted of time constraints and opportunity cost, money,
and energy and bandwidth.
Time Constraints and Opportunity Cost
The most widely discussed cost among participants was the time that teachers spend in
CRP PD learning and implementation.
Loss of Instructional Time. All teachers cited the loss of instructional time as the most
significant cost in CRP PD and implementation. Eric detailed his perspective on time and
opportunity costs:
I think the most important cost to me to be mindful of would just be time, and especially
time in the classroom with students … PD that does take us out of the classroom … is a
lesson in time we could have spent with the kids. And time with the kids I believe is just
as valuable as any PD we could get. Just learning about our students getting an
opportunity to make more connections with them, that’s going to be infinitely more
helpful for my class than potentially some abstract list of vocab I’m supposed to be able
to recite after a training or something like that.
69
While Eric regards PD as potentially valuable in utility, he highly values the time that could be
spent on instruction and building relationships with his students, and therefore considers it an
unavoidable opportunity cost. Moreover, Eric’s experience depicts the consequences of
professional development that take place during the school day, rather than before or after hours,
or during breaks.
Teachers also connected the cost of instructional time loss to the previously mentioned
issue of perceived content misalignment. When asked to describe her current motivation for CRP
PD, Sam replied, “How am I supposed to fit this in my math classroom? This just doesn’t fit.
They’re like, ‘Talk about these projects you can do.’ And I’m like, ‘Well, I’m teaching an AP. I
don’t have time to do these projects.’” Sam’s response first displays how teachers’ low self-
efficacy in implementing CRP in their content areas negatively impact motivation and are
compounded by the time constraints teachers face. While Sam does not address her utility value
for the culturally relevant projects she mentioned, she does stress the high opportunity cost of
CRP implementation in light of the time requirements related to her teaching responsibilities.
Similarly, Nyla identified the opportunity cost of CRP implementation in her science
class:
If I’m going to take…time out of teaching science to present something different, and I
don’t feel that I’m trained to teach them about racial injustice in science…I’m not ready
for those questions…I don’t think that [culturally relevant] pedagogy [PD] got me ready
for that kind of thing.
Nyla corroborated how teachers are less motivated to implement CRP when faced with the cost
of instructional time loss. Because culturally relevant instruction can be integrated with existing
course content, Nyla’s response reveals the negative impacts of misunderstanding CRP on
70
implementation motivation, as well as the need for CRP PD to address the possible
misconceptions to increase teacher motivation.
While the loss of instructional time was a universal cost for all participants, Eric argued
that its repercussions extended beyond the classroom to school culture and teacher morale: “that
morale hit from it, being able to say, ‘Hey, there is something more important than class, and to
do that regularly.” To Eric, because students missed instructional time to also attend CRP
sessions, “when there was time after school, there were other ways I know it could have been
made to work … really just sends a strange message” Document analysis of slide presentations
from the student sessions corroborate student attendance during instructional time. Eric
interpreted the administration’s decision to routinely allocate blocks of instructional time as
costly to both teachers and students in instruction and learning respectively, especially if other
avenues existed to deliver the CRP content without compromising instructional time. Thus,
teacher motivation was negatively impacted by instructional time loss for teachers and students.
Teacher Willingness to Spend Personal Time to Protect Instructional Time. Five out
of seven teachers expressed their willingness to attend CRP PD sessions that did not interfere
with their classroom instruction. Katie expressed her openness to voluntarily spending her
summer vacation time to protect instructional time:
if I’m being taken away from my classroom, yet I have to meet the standards…finish the
curriculum, and I have all these required PD courses, but they’re not going to adjust…and
then taking me out of my classroom … And that’s a lot for me to maintain, so I prefer
that they do it during summertime … And I don’t mind attending because if it’s going to
help me grow as a teacher, I’m all for it.
71
Katie’s attainment value for CRP PD, evident in her commitment to teacher growth, motivates
her CRP engagement, and even creates a willingness to sacrifice vacation time to develop her
understanding. This willingness is also fueled by the desire to forgo the stated costs of losing
instructional time pivotal to meeting standards and curricular goals.
The cost of instructional time also applies to teachers who do want to practice CRP, but
do not have the opportunity to observe colleagues who are successfully implementing these
strategies in their classrooms: “The other seventh grade science teacher, she did do that [CRP]
lesson … I wanted to go in and see her do it … but I teach at the same time, so I couldn’t go in
and see her.” Nyla previously described herself as highly motivated to learn and implement CRP,
but struggled to understand how to apply it to her science curriculum. While teachers cited
missing time in their classroom as a significant cost, in this case, the opportunity cost of
instructional time loss for Nyla would allow her to witness a real-world example of culturally
relevant instruction, and increase her motivation to attempt implementation.
Energy and Bandwidth
Another category of costs mentioned by the interview participants was teacher energy
and bandwidth. Six out of seven teachers felt that their bandwidth negatively impacted their CRP
PD motivation. Ariana outlined the tension between her support for CRP and her own capacity:
“I believe in it. I think it’s necessary, but it is one more thing on our already overflowing plate.
And I’m not saying get rid of it, I’m just saying we need other stuff taken off our plate.”
Therefore, even teachers who affirm the benefits of culturally relevant pedagogy are less
motivated to learn and implement CRP when experiencing the toll of other valuable competing
responsibilities.
72
As Jen concurred, “I’m teaching science, you’ve given me this CAST test that I have to
prepare my students for ... I’m grading papers … you’re giving me social emotional learning
now, which our kids need because there’s a lot of anxiety in the classroom.” Jen explained the
importance of her various teaching responsibilities, but also testified to their contribution toward
fatigue. Sam similarly shared how “as teachers, things just keep getting added to our plate, and at
a certain point it’s like, ‘Okay, that’s enough.’ And, so, that’s kind of where I feel, to be honest,
with the culturally relevant PD.” Sam exemplifies how teachers can affirm the vision of CRP,
implement its strategies, and witness their utility with real students, and simultaneously
experience the negative impacts of strained teacher bandwidth on their motivation level.
Money
The final identified subtheme of teacher costs was the role of money in CRP PD
motivation. Four of seven participants mentioned the necessity of being paid to attend CRP PD.
Ariana noted that the need for compensation is not limited to CRP PD, but all professional
development:
I can’t go to anything that I’m not paid for anymore. The amount of time that I spend
working for which I’m not compensated is incalculable…a teacher gets one student-free
period, but we teach five, so we’re teaching the entire time or facilitating…But when do
we plan the lessons … grade the lessons … enter the scores … answer all the emails … I
already work for free so much.
Ariana’s testimony confirms earlier mentions of CRP implementation costs related to teacher
time and bandwidth, and incorporates money as a positive motivating factor to help offset these
costs. As Sam maintained, “finances help. I want my time to be paid or compensated, but it has
to be mixed with a topic that I actually want to learn about…as long as I’m being compensated,
73
at least my hourly rate.” Because most participants stated the need for compensation, it is clear
that teachers value their time. It is therefore more so significant that teachers would be motivated
enough to spend time during summer vacations or after work hours to learn about culturally
relevant pedagogy.
Findings for Research Question 2: Environmental Motivational Factors
The second research question sought to explore how environmental factors affect teacher
motivation to implement culturally relevant instructional strategies learned from professional
development. The data revealed two themes related to environmental influences. The first theme
discusses PD facilitator impact on teachers’ motivation, while the second highlights the influence
of the school site and community environment.
Theme 1: PD Facilitator Impact
The first environmental theme that emerged was the impact of the PD facilitators on
teacher motivation. All participants regarded the PD facilitators as an influential factor in their
own motivation, both positively and negatively. This theme is subdivided into two categories:
the PD facilitators’ ability to create a hospitable learning environment, and their disconnect from
the classroom environment.
Hospitable Learning Environment
This subtheme details how the PD facilitators’ positively impacted teacher motivation
through their ability to create a hospitable PD learning environment. Cameron commented that
the facilitators positively impacted her motivation: “They were very good. I do remember in the
trainings how they would always tell us it’s supposed to be a safe space. We’re supposed to feel
safe discussing and talking about things.” Cameron attributes the safety of the learning
74
environment to the intentional decisions made by the facilitators, which improved her learning
and desire to implement the CRP PD strategies.
Sam’s experience provided a deeper insight into how the PD facilitator’s created
environment empowered her ability to learn:
And so, when those facilitators make you feel comfortable, make you feel heard, or
again, just not passing judgment … that they are like that is probably the biggest benefit,
is feeling comfortable with them to ask questions and not feel like they’re going to judge
you for your questions or for your responses.
Sam’s openness to learning through posing questions was derived from the facilitators’ ability to
increase teacher comfort by valuing their voices in a judgment-free environment. Document
analysis confirmed the PD facilitators’ commitment to an environment of building understanding
and fostering respect. She continued, “I could tell that they had a passion for what they were
doing and that they really cared about the process.” When asked how these elements impacted
her motivation, she responded, “Yeah, absolutely, because…they care about this. It was
infectious. You know how much they cared about the topics.”
While the PD facilitators’ passion for social justice motivated Sam for culturally relevant
pedagogy, also shared how her role as a math teacher both positively and negatively impacted
her motivation: For example, after the January 6 insurrection, Sam “didn’t understand the
significance of it … And I didn’t really see that it was attack on the democracy.” In spite of her
initial disconnect, Sam remarked, “seeing their reactions to that, they were creating a safe space
for people to share.” Thus, the PD facilitators were able to create a safe environment for teachers
to learn about culturally relevant topics. However, Sam communicated her hesitancy when faced
75
with the opportunity to address the insurrection as a culturally relevant topic in one of her math
classes:
They didn’t ask me directly, but just ignoring what they were saying. Whereas in the
training they talked about shining light to not just the topic, but … giving them voice.
And I was like, ‘I don’t feel comfortable. I don’t know enough about social science …
politics … political parties … I’m not touching this with a ten-foot pole.’
Sam noted that with the exception of extreme circumstances, such as addressing overtly racist
language, “anything that’s kind of in the middle I just ignore. That’s the strategy I use because I
don’t feel equipped to have that discussion, or I don’t feel it’s worth losing the instructional math
time.” Sam’s resistance to politically relevant discussions with students was not a function of
value, but rather stemmed from a combination of low self-efficacy and attainment value as a
math teacher, as well as the cost of instructional time loss. Therefore, safe spaces can boost
teacher motivation during CRP PD, but may be insufficient for implementation.
Nyla described how one facilitator helped create a learning environment that allowed
Nyla the ability to connect with the facilitator’s experience as a student: “There was one
facilitator, she was biracial, and she had evidence from her own life that she shared. And that
was very, very effective to me.” The facilitator shared with Nyla how she was afraid of her
chemistry teacher as a student, and had low math self-efficacy. Although Nyla admitted, “She
didn’t tell me how I could be less intimidating to students,” Nyla was better able to identify with
her own students by connecting with her own student experience: “When if I didn’t get
something, I felt like the teacher didn’t like me because I never got it. I try to not do that. I try to
make sure that I show love to everyone.” This PD facilitator positively motivated Nyla to
76
implement the CRP strategy of empathetically identifying with student experiences through the
sharing of personal testimony.
PD Facilitator Disconnect from Classroom
The most inhibiting factor to teacher motivation related to PD facilitator impact was their
perceived disconnect from the classroom setting, which was cited by four of the seven
participants. From Jen’s perspective, the facilitators “seemed young. They didn’t seem like they
had been teachers … maybe they were trained to implement this curriculum and its theory.” A
document analysis of the provided CRP PD agenda slides and the biographies of the PD
facilitators on the organization’s website did not produce evidence of professional K–12 teaching
experience. To Jen, an ideal CRP PD would combine theory with practical steps that are
informed by school site data collection. However, Jen stated that the CRP PD was not typical in
its content and format compared to her previous experiences with K–12 professional
development, specifically lacking in practical classroom education for STEM teachers. Based on
Jen’s experience, teacher input in CRP PD planning would improve teacher motivation by
maximizing the utility of instructional strategies in a variety of academic disciplines.
Sam agreed, and recommended that CRP PD facilitators consider “trying to include
teacher voice because … so many times PD’s just handed to us, and it’s always tougher to
swallow that way.” In the same way that the perceived lack of teacher voice decreased utility,
relevance, and ultimately teacher implementation motivation, teacher voice also has the potential
to strengthen motivation. Document analysis revealed that the facilitators did ask participants to
reflect on questions they still had regarding the topics, but could not confirm teacher requests for
resources, nor that the facilitators provided any additional resources.
77
Other participants offered comparable critiques regarding the PD’s disconnect from the
K–12 classroom setting:
The intention of the program is great and the facilitators were nice, wonderful people
with hearts in the right place … I’m not trying to say like I can’t learn from anyone
younger to me because I certainly can … but when you’re 50 and you’ve been teaching
for 25 years, you’re like, ‘I want someone who, if they’re not like older and wiser with
more experience, that can give me pro tips who’s young and also in the situation with a
new, edgy way to handle it. But these people that were running it, they’re not teachers.
They’re not in the classroom (Ariana).
For teachers like Ariana, PD facilitators can establish credibility not only through their teaching
experience, but also the amount of time spent in the classroom. These factors influence teacher
motivation, as they both inform the relevance of the PD content and to serve to build teacher
trust.
The absence of practical instructional strategies in the CRP PD led at least two teacher
participants to request examples during future sessions “with the understanding that they don’t
have the same backgrounds we do academically, and that asking for culturally relevant computer
science lessons from someone is a stretch. And they’re here for groups of teachers” (Eric). Jen
also asked the facilitators for examples of CRP enactment, but did not receive the requested
information in future sessions. These experiences demonstrate teacher motivation for applicable
strategies, but a challenge to formulate and apply them independently. They also display missed
opportunities for increasing teacher motivation, as teachers have shared struggles in
implementing the theory of CRP without explicit strategies.
78
Theme 2: School and Community Environmental Impact
The second theme from research question two was the impact of the school and
community environment on teacher CRP learning and implementation motivation. Within this
category, data were evident in subthemes: the impact of the physical and virtual environment, the
administration, teacher colleagues, and the school and community culture.
Impact of the Physical and Virtual PD Environments
The first subtheme describing the school and community’s environmental impact on CRP
motivation was the role of the physical and virtual PD environments. As discussed in a previous
section, Katie felt that challenges in virtual learning during the COVID-19 pandemic inhibited
her motivation to learn and implement the PD content. While she described herself as someone
“that loves to find something to take away from a PD,” the virtual setting, and larger context of
the pandemic, “was just not the right time, we’re also not in the right mind frame because we
were all exhausted and I feel like timing is also very important for our training.” Again, Katie
personally affirmed her value for CRP PD and implementation motivation; however, the
challenges associated with the pandemic presented additional costs that negatively impacted her
motivation. Document analysis confirmed that the first CRP PD session was in October 2020
during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Conversely, Eric identified the benefits of the virtual environment: “I preferred online
because it gave me a little more privacy in some of these discussions.” To Eric, online
professional development produced a more comfortable learning environment that limited stress,
which benefited his learning and motivation. However, for faculty-wide discussions, Eric shared,
“I definitely prefer those to be in person because you can’t read the online room as well as you
can read an in-person room.” He concluded that given the circumstances of the pandemic, and
79
the ample opportunities for small group discussions “I think online was the best way it could
have happened for us.” Thus, the virtual PD environment presented a mixture of opportunities
and obstacles for teacher learning and motivation.
Finally, the physical environment also played a role in teacher motivation. When asked to
describe conversations with administration related to the CRP PD, Jen reported that the school
construction occupied the time and energy of the assistant principal, which affected his ability to
support implementation: “It was always construction … my room was under construction
basically the whole year. Everything was construction related from him. Nothing was
instructional at any point from the assistant principal that I can remember.” The school’s
construction, as a facet of the physical environment, affected the priorities of Jen’s administrator,
and consequently his motivation to support teachers instructionally implement CRP.
After the first year of online professional development, the CRP PD was able to be held
in person. This shift allowed Cameron to realize, “it’s not as easy to connect and feel their
energy and how passionate they are about it, to understand the relevance of it all. It’s just
different on the screen.” She ultimately realized, “I would say it has to be in-person,” and that
she was more motivated by in-person learning to better engage with “and learn from others’
experiences.”
Administrator Impact
Multiple participants reported that the previous administration at Emmitt High School
initiated the CRP PD series in response to numerous controversial incidents involving race at the
school site. Teacher participants also reported the impact of their previous administrators on their
motivation in the form of accountability and power dynamics.
80
Accountability and Power Dynamics. Five out of seven teachers cited the negative
impact of the perceived power dynamics on teacher motivation. According to Katie, “I felt like it
was more of a directive…’You need to go and if you don’t go, then you’ll be punished, or there
will be consequences,’ was more the impression that I had.” Eric correspondingly shared his
perspective:
With the culture we had with that team, it made it a very stressful experience for myself
and a lot of my colleagues because there was a lot of fear of punitive results from the
training. It was, ‘Hey, you have this training now. The expectations are higher.’ And that
was a very uncomfortable place to be in because it does color the material we’re learning
very negatively.
The punitive impression that Katie and Eric described in their previous administration functioned
as an external motivating factor from their work environment, rather than fostering internal
motivation through self-efficacy, utility and attainment values, and cost.
The professional development experience presented other forms of administrator impact.
Jen discussed how administrators were part of small group discussions: “And when we got
certain administrators, people didn’t want to talk if they were part of the group because they
were afraid that what they said would be used against them. That wasn’t helpful.” As a result,
some teachers requested the PD facilitators not group administrators with teachers given their
experience with their former principal: “because that was something that the old principal
did…he wrote people up and he was very nasty, and he was vindictive, and he would use stuff
against you” (Jen).
Cameron detailed how administrator presence in her CRP PD’s virtual breakout groups
negatively impacted her motivation:
81
But I don’t know why, but I almost often had admin in mine … And it was like, ‘Oh
gosh, I’m not saying anything. I can’t, I don’t feel safe to just say anything, to say like, ‘I
don’t think we should have Western Day with this whole cowboys and Indian theme.
Why are we still doing this in 2020?’… you just don’t feel like you’re able to say those
things because, who am I? Oh, I’m just a teacher. And you know that wouldn’t have gone
well.
Cameron, who previously mentioned how the PD facilitators positively impacted her motivation
by emphasizing a safe space for CRP PD learning, also noted how the administrator presence
detracted from this benefit. Groups without administrators “felt safer and felt more willing to say
certain things,” while for groups with administrators, “it was not always safe, even though the
presenters wanted it to be safe. It just couldn’t be all the time.” Cameron continued to describe
how the power dynamics with her previous principal impacted her implementation motivation
after the CRP PD concluded: “I was probably a little bit more afraid because I didn’t want to get
yelled at and I didn’t want to get in trouble, and I didn’t feel like it was safe for me to try new
things.” Thus, the power dynamics in the principal’s teacher relationships obstructed motivation
to implement the CRP strategies taught in the PD he instituted.
Consequently, Sam contemplated the potential need for a separate “admin training and a
teacher training, but if they do come together there should be no power dynamic in that regard
because it just felt like they were watching us, and they weren’t actively participating in the
process.” While accountability and power dynamics are inherent in the relationships between
administrators and teachers, teacher voice can be limited by administrator presence during
professional development, especially if teacher sharing could be received as a criticism of their
supervisors.
82
Teacher Perceptions of Administrator CRP PD Motivation. Teacher perceptions of
their administrators’ motivation for CRP PD served as another motivational factor impacting
teacher motivation. Four of the seven participants perceived low administrator motivation for
culturally relevant pedagogy professional development, describing their perception of
administrator motivation as checking a box to address the school’s history of racial issues: “I felt
like they had to check off a box that they did it,” said Katie, noting, “in order to say they did
train, or they did do something about the issue at hand.” When asked about their perception of
administrator impact, Eric replied, “It very much felt like with them it was a checklist check.”
Eric held a similar opinion to Katie that the PD was brought to Emmitt High as a
formality so the administration could say, “‘Hey, our staff did this. Look, we’re doing our job.’”
Sam also replied, “Check a box. I really believe our principal at the time was catching a lot of
heat for certain things that happened under his watch…the general consensus of the staff was he
found this to save himself.” These teacher perspectives claimed that administrator motivation to
offer the CRP PD was not linked to its pedagogical value, but rather to the school’s recent
controversies, Sam further explained how she perceived low administrator motivation based on
the observed behavior during the PD: “even though they were in the PDs, they weren’t paying
attention. Even in the digital, they wear glasses, and you could see through their lenses that they
weren’t doing what they were saying they were doing.” As a result, “That also made it frustrating
because we’re all in this together. And to me, the CRP is not a hierarchy kind of thing where
sometimes if I’m in a PD.” Therefore, teacher perceptions of low administrator motivation
negatively impacted teacher learning and motivation, as teachers did not believe their
administration valued the PD experience based on their dialogue and behavior.
83
Administrator Support. Finally, participants cited the role of administrator support in
CRP implementation. Five of the seven teachers stated they received no support from the
administration in implementing CRP PD strategies. When asked to describe the extent of
administrator support, Katie shared that other than communicating that mandatory attendance, “I
didn’t receive anything, any instructions or where we need to head with this … There was no
directive on what to do with the stuff that we learned at PD in terms of implementation, in terms
of generating dialogue amongst teachers.” Jen corroborated Katie’s experience: “Zero. None …
Nothing was instructional at any point from the assistant principal that I can remember. The
principal came in and evaluated me, but he didn’t mention it at all; it wasn’t based on that at all.”
Teachers interpreted low administrator value for CRP implementation based on the lack of
support following PD’s conclusion. Because teachers were motivated for practical classroom
examples of CRP, the absence of administrator support for resources to aid implementation
negatively impacted teacher motivation.
However, Ariana did regard the dedicated collaboration time during PD as a form of
administrator support:
we were basically just given time … like, ‘This time is flex time, and then this time is for
meeting with your CRP group.’ And, so, it was not intrusive or invasive, but time was
blocked out … they definitely incorporated that.”
Collaboration with teacher colleagues, therefore, would prove to be a critical resource that
promoted teacher motivation, and will be discussed in the next section.
Colleague Impact
As a facet of school and community, interview participants experienced the impact of
their colleagues on their CRP learning and motivation.
84
Collaboration. Six out of seven teachers mentioned the positive impact of collaboration
with colleagues on learning and motivation. Breakout sessions were integrated into all sessions,
based on document analysis of the five slide presentations. Eric highlighted the benefits of
collaboration in improving the cultural relevance of existing lessons:
Even if we weren’t necessarily coming up with anything new, it was a chance to get
affirmation on things we were already doing. In the science department, for example,
we’ve had lessons on where we get our water from locally, and there were ties already to
topics like equity and zoning.
Eric emphasized that because the science department was striving to enact culturally relevant
lessons prior to the CRP PD series, the department was encouraged by the affirmation received
during the whole group sharing portion of the PD: “That does empower us to be more public
with our lessons. We’ve been doing this for years, but now … it’s actually something that I think
people think are pretty cool.” This affirmation received in both small group and whole group
discussions stemmed from collaboration during the professional development, and increased
Eric’s motivation to implement CRP more effectively.
The provided collaboration time built into the professional development did not yield
positive impacts on teacher motivation for all participants. While Jen agreed with the theoretical
value and potential for collaboration time, she found her CRP PD group work experience
“wasn’t very helpful or productive … just a lot of spinning wheels” because the PD facilitators
did not provide modeling for how to apply CRP in their classrooms. Document analysis
confirmed that teachers were provided time with their departments to identify strategies they
would commit to implementing that would advance racial justice at the school site. However, the
breakout group discussion prompts tasked teachers with brainstorming implementation in their
85
instructional contexts, and did not offer practical examples to participants. Thus, teacher
motivation is enhanced when teachers are provided practical examples of classroom strategies to
maximize the benefits of collaborative time in professional development.
In one breakout room, Katie experienced a teacher’s refusal to collaborate, who
remarked: “‘This was a traumatic experience for me, and it’s just bringing back really bad
memories and I just don’t want to talk about it.’” The teacher then “shut down and started
grading his papers in front of me,” exhibiting the variation in CRP motivation among the faculty,
and its consequent impact on motivation for other teachers.
Teacher Perceptions of Colleagues’ CRP PD Motivation. When asked to assess the
faculty’s level of teacher motivation, Eric conjectured, “Right now, I’d say it’s pretty low
because we’re finally getting a year to go back to normal, not just from the online era, but the
remodel we just had. We’re getting new administrators. And with all of that going on, a lot of
teachers do treat something like that as almost an extra thing, a supplementary thing, not part of
their essential practices.” Eric’s conjecture encompasses the impact of external factors, such as
the COVID-19 pandemic, the school remodel as a physical environment, and the change in
administration, and also parallels previous mentions of teacher bandwidth and its influence on
teacher motivation.
Eric argued that currently unmotivated teachers could be persuaded toward
implementation: “with the right resources provided, I could see people seeing that as something
essential.” Finally, he acknowledged the motivation of some “teachers who are looking into
things to do on their own because it is something they already know is relevant,” and seek
resources “from an organization they trust or just from people they trust, relaying it to them, but
in general is not something most folks are seeking out right now.” While Eric believed that the
86
majority of teachers were not motivated for CRP, he regarded PD as a tool to help build a more
equitable school culture, as he recognized a need to shift away from the current racial inequities
present in the school culture.
School and Community Culture
The final subtheme of the school and community’s environmental impact is their cultural
influence on teacher motivation. This section will discuss the history of race issues at Emmitt
High School, teacher beliefs in CRP PD to change the culture,
School’s History of Race Issues Prior to the CRP PD. As noted in previous sections,
the school had a history of race-related issues, which participants described as a manifestation of
the school’s culture. All seven teacher participants mentioned the school’s history of racial
controversies. According to Nyla, Emmitt High School previously experienced “a big upsurge of
racial injustice.” “We had some serious incidents regarding racism and bullying at our school,”
Eric concurred. Additionally, Ariana detailed how much of the racism was “taking place on
social media and in the halls.”
Cameron provided her perspective of the school culture when she first started teaching at
Emmitt. She witnessed the Filipino club’s Filipino Cultural Night, in which their advisor allowed
the students to make what she perceived to be offensive cultural jokes:
I don’t know if any other Filipino kids that watched it were offended … I had a really
hard time with it. And I wanted to tell somebody, but it was telling the principal, who’s a
white male, that I’m offended by this stuff. It didn’t really go far … just like, ‘Okay,
thanks for that.’ And it just kind of got left and nothing ever happened from it. But it
didn’t sit right with me … So, I just wish that at the time I would have felt more
comfortable being able to stand up for myself and say, ‘Hey, I don’t think that was right.
87
For these instances of racial inequity, Cameron added, “I think it’s important for the staff that are
not minorities to be able to acknowledge and recognize that it is there sometimes, not because
they didn’t care or anything, but they don’t realize, and to be able to listen.”
This pattern of race issues at the school, culminating in a mock slavery classroom
activity, led teachers to hypothesize the administration’s motive for initiating the CRP PD: “But
our former administrators … I know that it was something that had to get done because of things
that happened in the past at Emmitt with racially charged situations…there was a lot of
unfortunate incidents at Emmitt” (Jen).
Teacher Belief in CRP PD’s Potential to Change School Culture. All participants
affirmed the need for CRP PD at Emmitt in response to the school’s culture of racial issues. “I
think they were worth attending,” said Jen. In order to address these incidents, Nyla said, “We
were all very motivated because we didn’t know what we were going to do.” Sam added, “There
were some teachers who thought it was pointless … And those are the same teachers that I’m
like, ‘You’re the one who needs this!’” based on her previous interactions with her colleagues.
Sam recalled how one colleague criticized a field trip to UCLA composed of primarily low-
income Latino students:
And this teacher said, ‘Why are they going to UCLA? Shouldn’t they go to Cal State
LA?’ And they were very serious. They didn’t see an issue … So, I think that those PDs
would help a teacher like that to help them see, ‘Oh, hey, it’s bigger than the world,
bigger than my little environment.
Sam’s experience testifies to the school’s broader systemic issue of racial injustice. As a result,
all participants recognize the potential of CRP PD to expand their sociopolitical consciousness in
shaping a more equitable and inclusive school culture:
88
I see education as being no longer effective for the current population…something has to
change in our schools … We have to give students the reason to learn, the motivation to
learn. And I don’t know how you do that … teachers like you that are effective with these
students, they have to run the PD.” (Nyla)
Despite the participants’ accounts of teacher resistance to CRP PD, Katie maintained hope that
“if really every teacher on campus bought into it and if they did do it, there’s going to be huge
change.”
CRP PD Disconnect from School Culture. Eric acknowledged the need for CRP PD at
Emmitt High School, but expressed doubts about its efficacy due to differences between the PD
content and the school’s culture:
It was the issue of if they weren’t really from our community—we’re a very high level,
academically focused school—so when they bring these situations about like, ‘There’s all
these fights going on,’ or anything like that, we don’t get that ever at our school. And so,
some of the role-play situations, some of the examples they gave were very distant from
what we actually encounter.
Eric regarded some of these tangential topics as important, but less effective in addressing the
needs of Emmitt’s culture:
We had a facilitator who had experience with homelessness … There was something
important to hear about. But at the same time, we only have a couple of students every
year who have those struggles … We want to learn about the cultures of all our students
… but the stories and anecdotes they could bring weren’t as tied to our campus as we
would hope they would be, knowing our resources nearby—those parent groups we have
and things we’ve heard before…
89
Corroborating earlier mentions of utility value impact on teacher motivation, Eric highlighted
how the misalignment between the CRP PD content and Emmitt’s unique culture hurt teacher
motivation, despite its theoretical value. Moreover, while topics such as homelessness are still
important to teachers, Eric recognized that the opportunity cost of forgoing time spent on more
pertinent topics. This echoes previous discussions of how time constraints and cost impact
motivation.
Impact of the New Administration. In contrast with previous discussions of negative
administrator impact, two teachers expressed optimism in the new administration’s potential to
reshape the school culture and teacher motivation for CRP PD implementation. Jen predicted that
the new principal would reintroduce CRP and CRP PD and would positively impact
implementation: “she’s also a former science teacher, so that’s helpful, so I’m assuming she
could be a resource. I assume that we will be discussing this again and helping implement it into
the classroom, into the instruction. I’m hopeful.”
Cameron, who noted her prior fear of implementing new ideas under the previous
principal, shared her hope for change:
I’m super excited because we now have our admin, three females, two Black women, one
Asian. When I first came to Emmitt, it was a White principal, Filipino assistant principal,
white dean, male, all male. So, I’m excited that it’s a team of minorities … They bring a
different view, and I’m excited for that personally.
Cameron reported the positive impact the new administration has already made on her
implementation motivation: “This year, with our new principal, I’ve been really sort of interested
in trying different things, and I have … more of a motivation and not having a fear of trying
things.” Cameron’s shift demonstrates the potential of administrators to redirect school culture
90
toward inspiration despite prior experiences of negative administrator impact, and create positive
influences on teacher implementation motivation for culturally relevant pedagogy.
Summary of Findings
This chapter explored the findings produced from interviews and document analysis in
reference to the study’s two research questions. The data revealed the various factors influencing
teacher motivation to implement strategies presented in culturally relevant pedagogy professional
development. Teacher self-efficacy was one factor found to influence teacher motivation. In
addition, the variety of value types that teachers identified in their CRP PD learning and
implementation was also found to be impactful, such as the degree of perceived PD usefulness,
the extent of CRP PD alignment with participant identities, and teacher interest in PD content.
The third impactful factor found was the costs associated with CRP PD learning and strategy
implementation, such as participants’ time, energy, and finances.
The second research question isolated environmental factors affecting teacher motivation.
The first theme discussed the impact of the PD facilitators. The second theme detailed the impact
of the school and community, including the role of administrators and teacher colleagues who
shaped teacher motivation through power dynamics and collaboration respectively, as well as the
school and community culture that also shaped teacher motivation.
These findings illuminate teachers’ perspectives on culturally relevant pedagogy
professional development and the factors that affect their motivation to implement CRP content.
Therefore, Chapter five will discuss connections between the study’s findings and the current
literature, as well as novel findings from the interviews. The final chapter will also reflect on the
findings’ implications and recommendations for future research and practice related to culturally
relevant pedagogy professional development and teacher motivation.
91
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations
Professional development is highly regarded for its potential to improve instruction by
empowering teachers with knowledge and skills to ultimately advance student outcomes, such as
learning and achievement (Desimone, 2011; Kennedy, 2016; Osman & Warner, 2020).
Culturally relevant pedagogy professional development seeks to specifically target the traditional
outcome of student achievement, as well as cultural competence and sociopolitical consciousness
(Ladson-Billings, 1995a).
Multiple studies acknowledge teacher motivation as a critical factor in successful PD
(Kennedy, 2016; Opfer & Pedder, 2011; Osman & Warner, 2020; Thoonen et al., 2011), as more
motivated teachers are more likely to implement its strategies (Kennedy, 2016; Osman &
Warner, 2020; Yoon et al., 2007). While the benefits of both PD and CRP PD are well-
documented, teachers remain highly resistant to CRP PD (Ladson-Billings, 2011; Mette et al.,
2016; Neri et al., 2019; Picower, 2009; Rose & Potts, 2011) and unequal in their implementation
of PD strategies. (Kyndt et al., 2016; Osman & Warner, 2020; Thoonen et al., 2011). Therefore,
it is critical to understand the factors that motivate teacher implementation to achieve the positive
impacts of culturally relevant pedagogy on student outcomes.
The study sought to investigate the factors that influence teacher motivation to implement
instructional strategies from CRP PD, and addressed the following research questions:
1. What factors influence teacher motivation to implement instructional strategies
learned from culturally relevant pedagogy professional development?
2. How do environmental factors affect teacher motivation to implement instructional
strategies learned from culturally relevant pedagogy professional development?
92
This chapter provides an overview of the study’s findings, which informs a discussion of
recommendations for practice and future research.
Discussion of Findings
Impact of Teachers and Their Behavior on Motivation
Several factors were found to influence teacher motivation in culturally relevant
pedagogy professional development. These initial sections discuss how teachers and their
implementation behavior impacted motivation through the lens of social cognitive theory’s
triadic reciprocity (Bandura, 1986), which demonstrates the mutually influential relationship
between individual teachers, their environment, and their CRP implementation behavior.
Expectancy-value theory (Atkinson, 1957, 1964; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000, 2002) will then detail
the various types of value that individuals in the triadic system assign to CRP learning and
implementation.
First, teacher self-efficacy was found to impact teacher motivation to learn and
implement strategies from professional development, confirming the abundance of literature
acknowledging its influence (Attema-Noordewier et al., 2011; Geijsel et al, 2009; Thoonen et al.,
2011). Based on the interview responses and slide presentations, the findings reveal that while
teachers generally understood that ethnic culture was central to CRP, the CRP PD did not
empower teachers with a holistic understanding of CRP as a philosophical shift in instructional
thinking, planning, and enactment. As a result, teachers possessed inaccurate or incomplete
understandings of CRP that misconstrued it as a collection of practical strategies that must
compete with teachers’ content area, rather than a pedagogical shift toward greater cultural
relevance woven into existing curriculum. The CRP PD created incomplete conceptions of CRP
that diminished teachers’ self-efficacy, utility value, and ultimately undermined its goal of
93
promoting CRP motivation and implementation. Thus, the findings validate existing research of
how low self-efficacy hinders teacher motivation in the context of learning culturally relevant
pedagogy in professional development.
It is also important to note the potential interaction between low self-efficacy and low
utility value, as teachers may not feel efficacious in CRP strategies if they do not regard them as
useful, and vice versa. Two participants described high self-efficacy for implementing CRP;
however, only one participant reported high self-efficacy that accompanied low implementation
motivation. This confounding result may be explainable based on the PD’s lack of available
strategies, as well as participant statements that the presented strategies had already been
practiced in the teacher’s instruction, aligning with research detailing how high self-efficacy can
impede motivation (Saka, 2013). Overall, self-efficacy demonstrated how teachers as individuals
can affect their own motivation level in the triadic relationship within social cognitive theory.
Participants recalled instances of successful CRP implementation, which they regarded as
positive experiences that also increased their motivation for future enactment. Self-efficacy may
also have impacted the teachers’ environment, as those who felt less confident in their
understanding and implementation of CRP could have contributed CRP resistance to the school’s
culture.
Furthermore, teachers as individuals shaped their motivation for CRP implementation
based on the various kinds of value they assigned to CRP PD. Overall, the lack of teacher CRP
implementation revealed a lack of sufficient value for CRP and its implementation. While
teachers did possess attainment value for its theoretical purpose, they lacked sufficient utility
value of its relevance in the classroom, as well as the aforementioned self-efficacy needed to
realize its application. The usefulness of the CRP PD strategies was the most important value
94
factor for participants. While value can be considered an external motivational factor (Osman &
Warner, 2020), this study conceptualized value categories as internal to each individual teacher
possessing a unique value assessment. Individuals who perceived PD strategies to be less
applicable to classroom instruction experienced a negative impact on motivation in confirmation
of existing research (Cameron et al., 2013; Gaines et al., 2019; Palermo & Thomson, 2019).
Thus, a teacher’s behavioral decision to not implement CRP results from low utility value, and
also negatively impacts future implementation motivation. For example, based on social
cognitive theory, teachers’ decisions not to implement CRP in their classrooms then could have
reshaped the school’s environment and culture with a bias against CRP. This environmental shift
reciprocally impedes future motivation for implementation, which could be considered a
manifestation of teacher resistance. The study specifically validated accounts of teacher
resistance to CRP from existing research (Ladson-Billings, 2011; Neri et al., 2019; Picower,
2009; Rose & Potts, 2011), but offered novel insights into how teachers unable to visualize CRP
integration with discipline-specific instruction are consequently less motivated toward
implementation.
Many participants were motivated to attend the PD and learn instructional strategies to
apply in their classrooms, but found themselves less motivated to implement due to an absence
of practical examples. Thus, a PD environment that fails to provide practical tools for teachers
not only hampers motivation, but successively creates a school environment that is less
responsive to CRP, furthering the negative impacts on motivation. Nevertheless, participants
found utility in how the PD reshaped their culturally relevant thinking through self-reflection,
such as reevaluating the wording of math problems and the use of more diverse cultural names.
Additionally, teachers described the PD’s potential for shifting the school’s culture toward CRP
95
alignment. These pedagogical shifts not only embody the goals of culturally relevant pedagogy
to foster greater cultural competence and sociopolitical consciousness in teachers (Aldana et al.,
2012; Ladson-Billings, 1995a), but also depict how teachers assign a high utility value to cultural
competence and sociopolitical consciousness and are consequently more motivated to implement
CRP. The PD also addressed the area of teacher comfort by building greater confidence in
integrating CRP with existing lessons and cultivating a willingness to hold culturally relevant
conversations inside and outside the classroom despite teacher discomfort and low self-efficacy.
These examples of implementation collectively demonstrate how teacher behavior can also shape
a more culturally relevant school environment, furthering motivation to make CRP an
established practice.
Additionally, teacher attainment value was found to impact teacher motivation,
referencing the extent to which the CRP PD aligned with participant identities. The study found
that teachers who considered cultural competence an important facet of their teaching identity
experienced a positive impact on their motivation, corresponding with literature findings that
teachers assign a higher attainment value for PD that is more compatible with their own
pedagogy, and consequently possess a higher motivation to implement its strategies (Abrami et
al., 2004; Donnell & Gettinger, 2015). However, the same participant who possessed high CRP
self-efficacy also expressed alignment between CRP and her identity as a motivated learner and
culturally conscious individual. This participant demonstrated that a high attainment value for
CRP PD is insufficient to produce motivation for implementation.
The last value category references intrinsic value, assessing the degree of teacher interest
and enjoyment in culturally relevant pedagogy professional development. Despite teacher reports
of PD interest prior to and during the sessions, intrinsic value was insufficient in yielding high
96
teacher implementation motivation. This finding contrasted with literature substantiating the
potential of intrinsic value to predict (Visser et al., 2014) and sustain teacher motivation amid
distractions and challenges (Avidov-Ungar, 2016; Gniewosz et al., 2014; Watt & Richardson,
2008). While evidence of intrinsic value for CRP PD indicates an environmental impact that can
positively shape CRP learning motivation, low levels of CRP self-efficacy and PD utility value
are stronger predictors of implementation.
The last factor found to impact teacher motivation related to teachers as individuals was
the costs to participants in learning and implementing CRP (Dam & Janssen, 2021; Gaines et al.,
2019), including the investment of time, energy, and monetary costs. While participants
produced varying assessments of costs, they validated literature noting the prominence of teacher
time as a cost to PD motivation (Cameron et al., 2013; Christesen & Turner, 2014; Geijsel et al.,
2009; Karabenick & Conley, 2011; Kwakman, 2003; Parsons et al., 2019; Saka, 2013). However,
this study contributed a nuanced perspective on teacher time and money to the literature’s
discussion of teacher costs. First, the study uniquely revealed teacher willingness to voluntarily
attend CRP PD outside of the instructional workday (i.e., after school or during summer breaks),
indicating high value assignments and learning motivation. Second, interviewee mentions of
money underscored the high value teachers place on their time. Participants emphasized financial
compensation as a necessity for their PD attendance, whether mandatory or voluntary, to
demonstrate respect and value for teacher time.
Finally, the study exhibited the increasing responsibilities of teachers (Kennedy, 2016;
Mette et al., 2016) particularly evident during the COVID-19 pandemic. Teachers described how
the accumulation of new responsibilities strains teacher bandwidth and restricts teacher
motivation. Therefore, as teachers experience the negative impacts of CRP enactment costs, they
97
collectively create greater CRP resistance in their school environment and reciprocally detract
from teacher CRP motivation and implementation. Ultimately, to maximize teacher desire for
implementation, teachers must ascribe to the usefulness of the instructional strategies while also
believing that the costs are not significant enough to avoid enactment. The findings from
research question one underscore the potential of these various factors pertaining to teachers as
individuals to positively and negatively influence motivation.
Impact of the Environment on Motivation
Teachers’ professional and learning environments were also found to impact teacher
motivation for CRP implementation. First, the PD facilitators positively impacted teacher
motivation by creating a hospitable learning environment. The study produced new evidence of
how PD facilitators can create safe learning spaces that benefit teachers learning about a topic for
which they possess low efficacy. For example, participants recognized how the passion of
facilitators can spark greater learning motivation, increasing intrinsic value, and eventually
teacher motivation to implement CRP despite a scarcity of practical strategies. Furthermore, as
participants become more engaged in learning, they promoted more openness to CRP in the PD
environment, which may have reciprocally generated teacher motivation.
Contrastingly, participants shared how PD facilitators negatively impacted motivation
when teachers perceived a disconnect between the CRP strategies and their instructional practice
(Osman & Warner, 2020). However, findings presented new insights into how teacher
perceptions of PD facilitators impact learning motivation. Teachers attributed the lack of
instructional examples to facilitators’ disconnection from K–12 teaching experiences. One
participant explicitly linked low learning motivation to her incongruence with the facilitators’
professional backgrounds, whose knowledge was regarded as less relevant and useful to
98
classroom practice. These critiques injected greater CRP teacher resistance in the school
environment, which in turn negatively impacted motivation in the triadic relationship.
The second theme discussed the impact of the school and community environment on
teacher motivation, particularly the role of administrators (Thoonen et al., 2011; Prenger et al.,
2017) who limited teacher motivation when teachers perceived a lack of support and enthusiasm
for CRP PD. The study illustrated new instances of negative administrator impact through
tensions in teacher relationships and teacher perceptions of administrator CRP PD motivation.
Participants described how a prior administrator’s history of vindictive behavior stunted teacher
motivation to implement new instructional strategies, even for PD initiated by that administrator.
In addition, administrator presence during PD activities hindered motivation by making teachers
uncomfortable during small and large group discussions, as well as effusing a lack of interest in
the PD. Systemically, these negative impacts revealed historically-rooted issues in American
education in which teachers have not been adequately prepared to recognize the need for CRP,
grasp its potential value for teachers and students, and possess the efficacy to enact its practices
inside and outside the classroom.
Lastly, the lack of administrator support for CRP implementation negatively affected
teacher motivation, validating findings from existing literature (Prenger et al., 2017). Teachers
defined administrator support as providing collaboration time, CRP resources, modeling of
culturally relevant classroom instruction that is aligned with teachers’ required standards and
curriculum. However, some teachers struggled to define administrator support when asked to
clarify what support would have helped them toward better CRP implementation. This may
reveal areas of improvement for teachers to practice greater self-reflection. Another
environmental factor that failed to produce greater teacher value was the lack of clear
99
implementation expectations from the administration. Teachers were not held accountable for
their enactment of PD strategies, which could have produced higher teacher value for CRP and
consequently greater implementation.
Moreover, study findings corroborated existing research detailing how teacher PD
collaboration builds motivation (Opfer et al., 2011; Prenger et al., 2017; Thoonen et al., 2011).
Teachers’ regard for colleagues as an essential resource for CRP learning and implementation
affirms Daly et al.’s (2020) description of a school site as an ecological site for learning. This
study found that collaboration increased teacher comfort and self-efficacy. However, the study
added to the literature instances of how negative teacher collaboration experiences with
unengaged colleagues detracted from teacher learning and motivation. The influence of the
school and community culture was also evident through the school’s prior controversies with
race and culture, inciting the need for CRP PD. Both positive and negative colleague impacts
illustrate how teachers’ environments are influenced by their colleagues, and how environments
in turn shape motivation and behavior, which feedback into the environment. In contrast,
teachers expressed a renewed desire to attempt new instructional practices under the new
administration. This finding offered a new perspective of how administrators can negatively and
positively shape teacher motivation in their professional environment for the same learned PD
strategies. Together, these factors illustrate how teachers’ professional and learning
environments can shape teacher motivation in both the learning and implementation processes.
Recommendations for Practice
Study findings indicate that administrators and professional development facilitators
impact teacher learning and implementation motivation for culturally relevant pedagogy. The
influence of administrators may be present throughout the entire PD process, while facilitator
100
impact is evident during the training sessions. Both groups influence teachers’ experiences
during the learning process, and therefore can leverage these findings to increase teacher
motivation toward higher CRP implementation.
Recommendations for Administrators
Findings from this study reveal how administrators can impact teacher motivation
through power dynamics in the administrator-teacher relationship, teacher perceptions of
administrator motivation for CRP PD, and the level of administrator support for implementation.
Interview participants highlighted the negative impacts of the teacher-administrator hierarchy,
especially a fear of sharing honestly during PD discussions while administrators were present.
These fears stemmed from prior teacher experiences with administrators that they described as
vindictive. Thus, administrators who are cognizant of the power dynamics of the administrator-
teacher relationship can more effectively amplify teachers’ ability to speak honestly in PD
learning, and may consider removing themselves from activities that could trigger internal or
external conflicts between teachers and administrators. For example, teachers may be more
willing to reflect on areas of school inequity without administrator presence, creating a safer PD
learning environment that could increase teacher motivation. If CRP implementation results, then
this could positively feedback into the school environment and further motivate teachers.
Administrators can increase teacher motivation through an awareness of how the culture
they create influences teachers. A school culture described as punitive or resistant to change can
negatively impact teacher motivation before PD sessions occur. Therefore, administrators can
preemptively target teacher motivation by optimizing their learning environment, which could
increase CRP implementation and further an environment of CRP openness that ultimately
empowers greater enactment.
101
In addition, teacher participants were negatively impacted by their perceptions of the
administration’s motivation for culturally relevant pedagogy professional development.
Administrators can convey their motivation through their behavior and level of engagement
during the PD experience. Multiple teachers described their administrators’ attitudes toward the
CRP PD series as “checking a box” based on their perceptions. It is important for administrators
to be aware of their own motivation for a professional development, and how it can be relayed to
their faculty through subliminal messages that shape not only individual teacher motivation, but
also the school environment of all faculty and their collective motivation. Because both the
environment and individual teachers simultaneously influence teacher motivation to implement
CRP, administrators might consider how their messaging can shape the broader triadic system.
Finally, the findings of this study illuminated the impact of administrator support for
teacher implementation of CRP. Participants noted a widespread lack of administrator support
for implementing strategies they regarded as either absent from the PD or inapplicable to their
teaching practice. Participants did not mention the solicitation of teacher feedback during or after
the PD experience, and noted a lack of clear expectations for implementation. Administrators can
increase teacher motivation by bolstering implementation through goal setting, clear
expectations, and accountability for enactment, which could help create teacher value for CRP
and increase motivation for classroom implementation. Administrators can also solicit teacher
feedback for areas where teachers require support. Given participant accounts of generally low
CRP self-efficacy, teacher feedback could be instrumental in formatively assessing teacher self-
efficacy, and allow administrators to better support teachers with resources or strategies
accordingly. For example, teachers could have benefited from a more comprehensive
understanding of CRP. The CRP PD misled teachers to believe that CRP enactment would take
102
away from their content area instruction. Therefore, administrators might consider framing CRP
as a teaching philosophy that provides a lens of cultural relevance for their existing content
(Ladson-Billings, 2014), rather than a list of instructional strategies that do not influence teacher
pedagogy outside of classroom instruction.
Relatedly, administrators can provide data to support teacher self-efficacy and overall
motivation. Teachers reported an absence of data regarding the needs for and benefits of
culturally relevant pedagogy, and correspondingly how data would strengthen their overall
motivation. Administrators are uniquely positioned to impact teacher motivation, as they can
offer data to teachers prior to PD sessions to build teacher self-efficacy, such as CRP’s impact on
student achievement, cultural competence, and sociopolitical consciousness. Thus, administrators
can begin the CRP learning process and boost teacher motivation in advance of professional
development. However, administrators may consider the current political climate surrounding the
role of culture in education and the limitations of available CRP data in their discussions of CRP
data to maximize stakeholder support. In addition, because student achievement has historically
been operationalized in student test scores (Ladson-Billings, 2006), teachers may benefit from an
understanding that CRP’s impact on achievement extends to improved student attendance and
graduation rates. Qualitative research can also bolster the historically incomplete picture of by
affirming how CRP can increase student comfort in learning and positively influence student
cultural identity development (Byrd, 2016; Christianakis, 2011; Ensign, 2003; Mitton & Murray-
Orr, 2021; Rodriguez et al., 2004; Sleeter, 2011; Tate, 1995). While imperfect, data foster greater
teacher value for CRP and help motivate teachers individually and collectively in the school
environment. As a result, teacher motivation could grow, positively contributing to individual
teachers and their colleagues in the triadic social cognitive relationship.
103
Administrators can support teachers through their awareness of the costs to teachers in
implementing CRP, such as the loss of instructional minutes to attend CRP PD and implement its
strategies. Low CRP self-efficacy was found to compound these costs, especially if teachers
considered strategies to be less useful to their instructional practice. Teacher bandwidth also
contributed to the costs of implementation. Administrators may consider not only reviewing their
directives for teachers, but also soliciting teacher conceptions of their duties given the negative
impact of power dynamics. This would value teacher input and help administrators to better
understand how the limitations of teacher bandwidth impact implementation. Also, given the
willingness of some participants to volunteer their own time to further their CRP knowledge,
administrators can increase teacher motivation by offering compensated PD opportunities outside
of the instructional school day, such as after school or during summer. Finally, administrators
can offer substitute coverage so teachers can observe colleagues who are successfully
implementing CRP. Notably, one teacher reported low self-efficacy and utility value for CRP
and an aversion to losing instructional time. However, she shared a willingness to forgo time
with her students to observe a colleague who had successfully been implementing CRP in their
classroom. This missed opportunity exemplifies the potential of the environment to stimulate
teacher motivation, and the consequent need to consider the triadic reciprocity between teachers,
their environment, and their implementation behavior when targeting teacher motivation.
Overall, the aforementioned recommendations demonstrate how administrators are a
critical component of teachers’ environment that impact their motivation and decision on CRP
implementation. Furthermore, teacher decisions against implementation feedback into the triadic
system, creating an environment that is less inclined toward CRP enactment. Therefore, it may
104
be beneficial for administrators to recognize how their influence shapes not only teacher
motivation, but also the broader social cognitive system.
Recommendations for PD Facilitators
The study revealed that PD facilitators impact teacher motivation related to CRP PD
learning and implementation. The most impactful positive factor on teacher motivation was the
facilitators’ ability to create a hospitable learning environment. Teachers noted how the safe
learning environment allowed teachers to ask questions without fear of judgment. Another option
to optimize the learning environment would be to affirm teachers’ current enactments of CRP, as
two teachers reported higher self-efficacy and how they already enact many CRP strategies. This
recognition of teachers’ current CRP implementation could help motivate teachers who may
display some levels of CRP resistance stemming from high self-efficacy. Participants also
appreciated the facilitators’ passion for CRP and the sharing of personal experiences. Future
facilitators seeking to foster teacher motivation can emulate strategies to create PD environments
that promote comfortable and engaging teacher learning. If these impacts result in CRP
implementation, their effects could then build more culturally relevant teachers and colleagues in
the school environment, compounding advancements in teacher motivation.
The most discussed factor among participants was the relevance of the presented CRP
content to teacher instruction. Participants cited an abundance of CRP theory, but a deficiency of
practical strategies, specifically related to teacher content areas. CRP facilitators can partner with
administrators by motivating teachers with CRP data that demonstrates the prevalence and
negative impacts of cultural inequities, as well as the benefits for student classroom engagement
and cultural understanding. Therefore, facilitators can build on the foundation of data that
administrators create prior to a potential CRP PD.
105
While CRP’s relevance to content instruction was widely discussed, PD facilitators might
seek to first address the broader systemic issue of teacher conceptions of CRP. Because the CRP
PD led teachers to reduce CRP to a list of strategies, PD facilitators can refute misconceptions
that culturally relevant pedagogy and discipline-specific content are mutually exclusive, but
rather can be applied to incorporate various cultural elements to increase student engagement
(Ladson-Billings, 2014), targeting students’ intrinsic and attainment values. Facilitators can then
build on more accurate teacher understandings of CRP as a philosophy by illustrating CRP’s
classroom relevance with concrete, actionable, and illustrated examples of culturally relevant
instructional strategies. Because it is difficult for teachers to feel efficacious about strategies that
they do not believe to be useful, these practical content-specific illustrations can build teacher
self-efficacy and utility value for CRP that stimulates motivation in individual teachers and their
environment of peers as a result, potentially benefiting the triadic relationship. While all teachers
would benefit from a greater visual understanding of applied CRP, STEM teachers who have
shown greater CRP resistance in recent literature (Brown et al., 2019), and elective teachers less
obviously connected to CRP could benefit most. Facilitators can also reinforce CRP relevance
and teacher motivation through careful consideration of each school’s unique culture.
Participants noted that while some topics were interesting, they were less relevant to the school’s
culture. Interviewees preferred greater stress on issues affecting more of their students to
maximize CRP’s impact.
Participants frequently cited how their experiences were affected by the disconnect of PD
facilitators from the K–12 teaching environment. Attendees did not believe the facilitators to be
teachers, and conjectured that this disconnect contributed to the lack of practical strategies
related to general instruction and teacher content areas; this perceived misalignment negatively
106
impacted teacher motivation to learn and implement CRP. Therefore, facilitators can motivate
teachers by showcasing teacher input in the preparation and delivery of the professional
development sessions. If facilitators with teaching backgrounds cannot be present, teacher voice
in PD can still promote the credibility of facilitators and encourage teacher motivation by
leveraging potential implicit trust among teacher colleagues. These steps could create more
openness to CRP in the school environment, generating motivation for enactment, and
correspondingly infusing elevated motivation into the environment.
Relatedly, PD facilitators can evaluate their pedagogy to improve teacher engagement
and motivation. Facilitators can practice various assessments throughout the PD’s delivery.
Formative assessments would help uncover areas of low CRP self-efficacy, and enable
facilitators to adjust their instruction accordingly. Moreover, participants experienced the
negative influence of administrator presence during PD discussions. Thus, PD facilitators can
more intentionally structure the PD to maximize teacher comfort and openness by grouping
administrators separately from teachers if their presence would result in less productive learning.
Limitations and Delimitations
The limitations of this study are defined as potential influences that were beyond the
control of the study that could have impacted its reliability. The broadest limitation of the study
was the 3-month time constraint for data collection determined by the Ed.D. program. Additional
time could have potentially allowed for a wider sample and greater depth of data analysis. The
qualitative research design also created limitations regarding its generalizability. The semi-
structured teacher interviews were contextualized within this school site’s individual culture. The
interviews provided insight into how a select group of teachers perceived their motivation for
CRP PD, but other schools in the district with varying perspectives with culturally relevant
107
pedagogy could have yielded non-equivalent or even contradictory results. Therefore, this study
cannot provide the generalizability of a randomized controlled trial (Locke, 2010).
Other limitations pertained to the study’s reliance on its participants. For example, the
voluntary nature of interviewee participation may have resulted in missing perspectives, such as
those who may have disagreed with the theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. All potential
participants were required to attend the CRP PD, disqualifying an analysis of those who
volunteered to attend a CRP PD. The study was limited by participant self-reporting, such as
memory accuracy, truthfulness, the level of self-awareness, and the degree of prior self-
reflection, which may have also contributed to creating an incomplete or inaccurate
contextualization. Furthermore, the document analysis of the PD slide presentations was limited
in scope, as it cannot be verified that all points were discussed, and in what detail. Finally, my
biases as a researcher stemming from my positionality posed another study limitation. As a
teacher who attends professional development programs on culturally relevant pedagogy, I
possess my own opinions of its efficacy and relevance in public education that I cannot
eliminate.
The delimitations of this study refer to decisions related to the study’s design. The
selection of a qualitative methodology provided data with nuanced descriptions of teacher
interpretations of their experiences and environment (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Consequently,
participants were selected through non-random probability sampling as teachers tasked with
attending CRP PD and implementing learned instructional strategies. Because a census of
teachers was not feasible for a qualitative study, purposeful sampling was designed to select
participants to those with relevant CRP PD experience who also represent a spectrum of
academic grade levels and disciplines. Finally, document analysis was employed to enable the
108
corroboration of data from interviews and document analysis, strengthening the study’s
reliability. These limitations and delimitations helped curtail the generalizability of the study to
other contexts, while still providing nuanced insights into teacher perspectives.
Recommendations for Future Studies
This study provided unique insights into teacher perspectives on their motivation for
culturally relevant pedagogy professional development, which also posed other possible areas of
research related to other motivational factors. The following considerations are offered for future
research: increasing the scale of future studies, isolating the impact of race and culture, and
reassessing teacher resistance to CRP.
Recommendation 1: Increase the Scale of Future Studies
First, while the study’s qualitative methodology allowed the collection of rich and
descriptive data, it cannot produce generalizable results. Therefore, quantitative studies could
illuminate the level of teacher motivation for CRP PD, as well as systematically explore how the
various motivational factors differ across teacher demographics. Relatedly, because the study’s
findings raised the possibility of relationships among the various motivational factors, future
quantitative studies could equip PD creators to teacher motivation more strategically boost. For
example, if a causal link existed between self-efficacy and utility value, then PD facilitators who
successfully build teacher self-efficacy could essentially increase utility value by default, further
maximizing teacher motivation. Finally, increasing the sample size of teachers for both
qualitative and quantitative studies would increase the scale of data collection, capturing
additional perspectives and revealing potential patterns in motivation.
109
Recommendation 2: Isolate the Impact of Race and Culture
Another recommendation for future research is to assess the role of other motivational
factors. While not the focus of this study, two Asian American female teachers discussed the
influence of their ethnic identities on their CRP PD motivation and alignment with the theory
behind CRP. Further study could indicate how cultural identities formed well before a teacher’s
professional life may predict teacher motivation for culturally relevant pedagogy. Specifically,
studies could explore differences in motivation between teachers of color and teachers who are
White, as well possible variations in motivation among the many diverse minority cultures.
Understanding these possible differences would support professional development facilitators to
better motivate teachers to adopt a culturally relevant mindset and ultimately enact CRP
strategies in their classrooms.
Recommendation 3: Reassess Teacher Resistance to CRP
A final recommendation is to reassess teacher resistance to culturally relevant pedagogy.
The study found that teacher resistance resulted from teacher self-efficacy and low utility values
in CRP PD. Thus, researchers could more effectively target teacher motivation by revisiting the
factors contributing to teacher resistance to CRP, which may confirm existing literature and
produce novel findings. For example, participants described difficulty implementing CRP
strategies related to self-efficacy, including the lack of access to practical strategies, uncertainty
in implementation, and the misconception that CRP strategies are incompatible with teachers’
required curriculum. Additionally, only one study participant reported high CRP self-efficacy
coupled with low implementation motivation, which could indicate an unconscious barrier to
CRP PD learning and implementation motivation. While only representative of one participant,
this finding aligned with literature reporting how high self-efficacy could actually obstruct
110
teacher openness to new practices (Saka, 2013). Thus, further studies could explore the
relationship between self-efficacy and teacher motivation, particularly how both low and high
self-efficacy can inhibit motivation.
Conclusion
This qualitative study sought to explore the factors that influence teacher motivation to
implement culturally relevant instructional strategies learned from professional development.
Findings suggest that a variety of factors impact teacher motivation related to the individual and
their environment, encompassing various conceptions of self-efficacy, task values and costs, and
the influences of others. Understanding these factors enables administrators and professional
developers alike to maximize teacher motivation to learn culturally relevant practices that will
reshape teacher pedagogy and result in CRP enactment. As teacher instruction shifts toward
greater alignment with culturally relevant pedagogy, it is students who will ultimately benefit in
their academic achievement, cultural awareness, and critical consciousness.
111
References
Abrami, P. C., Poulsen, C., & Chambers, B. (2004). Teacher motivation to implement an
educational innovation: Factors differentiating users and non-users of cooperative
learning. Educational Psychology: International Journal of Energy Economics and
Policy, 24(2), 201–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341032000160146.
Aldana, Rowley, S. J., Checkoway, B., & Richards-Schuster, K. (2012). Raising ethnic-racial
consciousness: The relationship between intergroup dialogues and adolescents’ ethnic-
racial identity and racism awareness. Equity & Excellence in Education, 45(1), 120–137.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2012.641863
Aronson, & Laughter, J. (2016). The theory and practice of culturally relevant education: A
synthesis of research across content areas. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 163–
206. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315582066
Atkins, L. & Duckworth, V. (2019). Socially just research as ethical endeavor. In Research
methods for social justice and equity in education (pp. 67–90). Bloomsbury.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350015494.ch-003
Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychological
Review, 64(6, Pt.1), 359–372. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043445
Atkinson, J. W. (1964). An introduction to motivation. Van Nostrand.
Attema-Noordewier, S., Korthagen, F., & Zwart, R. (2011). Promoting quality from within: A
new perspective on professional development in schools. In M. Kooy & K. van Veen
(Eds.), Teacher learning that matters: International perspectives (pp. 115–142).
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203805879-16
112
Avidov-Ungar. (2016). A model of professional development: teachers’ perceptions of their
professional development. Teachers and Teaching, Theory and Practice, 22(6), 653–669.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2016.1158955
Bandura. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Prentice-
Hall.
Beijaard, Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional
identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 107–128.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2003.07.001
Birman, Desimone, L., Porter, A. C., & Garet, M. S. (2000). Designing professional
development that works. Educational Leadership, 57(8), 28–33.
Bonilla, Dee, T. S., & Penner, E. K. (2021). Ethnic studies increases longer-run academic
engagement and attainment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS,
118(37), 1–. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2026386118
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain.
Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033008003
Brown, B. A., Boda, P., Lemmi, C., & Monroe, X. (2019). Moving culturally relevant pedagogy
from theory to practice: Exploring teachers’ application of culturally relevant education
in science and mathematics. Urban Education, 54(6), 775–803.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085918794802
Brown-Jeffy, & Cooper, J. E. (2011). Toward a conceptual framework of culturally relevant
pedagogy: An overview of the conceptual and theoretical literature. Teacher Education
Quarterly (Claremont, Calif.), 38(1), 65–84.
113
Brozo, Valerio, P. C., & Salazar, M. M. (1996). A walk through Gracie’s garden: Literacy and
cultural explorations in a Mexican American junior high school. Journal of Adolescent &
Adult Literacy, 40(3), 164–170.
Byrd, C. M. (2016). Does culturally relevant teaching work? An examination from student
perspectives. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016660744
Cameron, S., Mulholland, J., & Branson, C. (2013). Professional learning in the lives of teachers:
Towards a new framework for conceptualizing teacher learning. Asia Pacific Journal of
Teacher Education, 41(4), 377–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2013.838620.
Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., Chiang, C. P., & Loef, M. (1989). Using
knowledge of children’s mathematics thinking in classroom teaching: An experimental
study. American Educational Research Journal, 26(4), 499–531.
Chetty, Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2014). Measuring the impacts of teachers, [part] II:
teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood. The American Economic Review,
104(9), 2633–2679. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.9.2633
Christesen, & Turner, J. (2014). Identifying teachers attending professional development by their
stages of concern: Exploring attitudes and emotions. The Teacher Educator, 49(4), 232–
246. https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730.2014.933641
Christianakis, M. (2011). Hybrid texts: Fifth graders, rap music, and writing. Urban Education,
46, 11311168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085911400326
Crato, N. (2020). Curriculum and educational reforms in Portugal: An analysis on why and how
students’ knowledge and skills improved. In Audacious education purposes: How
governments transform the goals of education systems (pp. 209–231).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41882-3_8
114
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. I. (1999) Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher
learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249–305.
Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. C. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The
mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record, 102(2), 294–343.
Cole, D. C. (1992). The effects of a one-year staff development program on the achievement test
scores of fourth-grade students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 53(06), 1792A.
(UMI No. 9232258)
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research and design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
Daly, C., Milton, E., & Langdon, F. (2020). How do ecological perspectives help understand
schools as sites for teacher learning? Professional Development in Education, 46(4),
652–663. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1787208
Dam, M., & Janssen, F. (2021). Modularity in teacher professional development–building blocks
for bridging everyday teaching practices and reform ideals centered around whole tasks.
Professional Development in Education, 1–18.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2021.1972435
Day, Gu, Q., & Sammons, P. (2016). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: How
successful school leaders use transformational and instructional strategies to make a
difference. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 221–258.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X15616863
Dee, T. S., & Penner, E. K. (2017). The causal effects of cultural relevance: Evidence from an
ethnic studies curriculum. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1), 127–166.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216677002
115
Delgado, J. & Stefancic, J. (2012). Critical race theory: An introduction (2nd ed.). New York
University Press.
Desimone, L. M. (2011). A primer on effective professional development. Phi Delta Kappan,
92(6), 68–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171109200616
Desimone, Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of
professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal
study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 81–112.
https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737024002081
Dessel, A., Rogge, M. E., & Garlington, S. B. (2006). Using intergroup dialogue to promote
social justice and change. Social Work, 51(4), 303–315.
https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/51.4.303
Donnell, L., & Gettinger, M. (2015). Elementary school teachers’ acceptability of school reform:
Contribution of belief congruence, self-efficacy, and professional development. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 51, 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.06.003.
Douglas, T. R., & Nganga, C. (2015). What’s radical love got to do with it: Navigating identity,
pedagogy, and positionality in pre-service education. International Journal of Critical
Pedagogy, 6(1).
Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., Meloth, M. S., Vavrus, L. G., Book, C., Putnam, J., et al. (1986).
The relationship between explicit verbal explanations during reading skill instruction and
student awareness and achievement: A study of reading teacher effects. Reading
Research Quarterly, 21(3), 237–252.
116
Ebersole, M., Kanahele-Mossman, H., & Kawakami, A. (2015). Culturally responsive teaching:
Examining teachers’ understandings and perspectives. Journal of Education and Training
Studies, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i2.1136
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of
Psychology, 53(1), 109–132. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153.
Eccles, W., & Wigfield, A. (2020). From expectancy-value theory to situated expectancy-value
theory: A developmental, social cognitive, and sociocultural perspective on motivation.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101859.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101859
Ensign, J. (2003). Including culturally relevant math in an urban school. Educational Studies:
Journal of the American Educational Studies Association, 34, 414–423.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124521102668
Fischer, C., Fishman, B., Dede, C., Eisenkraft, A., Frumin, K., Foster, B., Lawrenz, F., Levy, A.
J., & McCoy, A. (2018). Investigating relationships between school context, teacher
professional development, teaching practices, and student achievement in response to a
nationwide science reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 72, 107–121.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.02.011
Fishman, B., Marx, R. W., Best, S., & Tal, R. T. (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to
improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education,
19(6), 643–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(03)00059-3.
Fullan. (1995). The school as a learning organization: Distant dreams. Theory into Practice,
34(4), 230–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849509543685
117
Gaines, R. E., Osman, D. J., Maddocks, D. L. S., Warner, J. R., Freeman, J. L., & Schallert, D.
L. (2019). Teachers’ emotional experiences in professional development: Where they
come from and what they can mean. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 53–65.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.09.008.
Garet, M., Porter, A., Desimone, L., Birman, B., & Yoon, K. (2001). What makes professional
development effective? Analysis of a national sample of teachers. American Educational
Research Journal, 38, 915–945. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038004
Gay. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (Third edition.).
Teachers College Press.
Geijsel, Sleegers, P. J., Stoel, R., & Krüger, M. (2009). The effect of teacher psychological and
school organizational and leadership factors on teachers’ professional learning in Dutch
schools. The Elementary School Journal, 109(4), 406–427.
https://doi.org/10.1086/593940
Gniewosz, B., Eccles, J., & Noack, P. (2014). Early adolescents’ development of academic self-
concept and intrinsic task value: The role of contextual feedback. Journal of Research on
Adolescence, 25(3), 459–473. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12140.
Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning,
measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal,
37, 479–507. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312037002479
Griner, A. C., & Stewart, M. L. (2013). Addressing the achievement gap and disproportionality
through the use of culturally responsive teaching practices. Urban Education, 48(4), 585–
621. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085912456847
118
Guskey. (2002). Does it make a difference? Evaluating professional development. Educational
Leadership, 59(6), 45–51.
Guskey, & Yoon, K. S. (2009). What works in professional development? Phi Delta Kappan,
90(7), 495–500. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170909000709
Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers make a difference: What is the research evidence? Paper presented at
the Australian Council for Educational Research Annual Conference on Building Teacher
Quality, Melbourne.
Hill, H. C., Beisiegel, M., & Jacob, R. (2013). Professional development research: Consensus,
crossroads, and challenges. Educational Researcher, 42(9), 476–487.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X13512674
Hoekstra, A., & Korthagen, F. (2011). Teacher learning in a context of educational change:
Informal learning versus systematically supported learning. Journal of Teacher
Education, 62(1), 76–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487110382917
Hoekstra, Korthagen, F., Brekelmans, M., Beijaard, D., & Imants, J. (2009). Experienced
teachers’ informal workplace learning and perceptions of workplace conditions. The
Journal of Workplace Learning, 21(4), 276–298.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13665620910954193
Husman, J., Pitt Derryberry, W., Michael Crowson, H., & Lomax, R. (2004). Instrumentality,
task value, and intrinsic motivation: Making sense of their independent interdependence.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(1), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-
476X(03)00019-5
Jones, W. M., Cohen, J. D., Schad, M., Caratachea, M., & Smith, S. (2019). Maker-centered
teacher professional development: Examining K–12 teachers’ learning experiences in a
119
commercial makerspace. TechTrends, 64(1), 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-
00425-y
Kane, T. J., & Staiger, D. O. (2008). Estimating teacher impacts on student achievement: An
experimental evaluation (No. w14607). National Bureau of Economic Research
Karabenick, S. A., & Conley, A. (2011). Teacher motivation for professional development.
National Science Foundation. https://mspnet-static.s3.amazonaws.com/Teacher_PDM.pdf
Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of
Educational Research, 86(4), 945–980. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626800
Kwakman, K. (2003). Factors affecting teachers’ participation in previous professional learning
activities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(2), 149–170.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00101-4.
Kyndt, E., Gijbels, D., Grosemans, I., & Donche, V. (2016). Teachers’ everyday professional
development: Mapping informal learning activities, antecedents, and learning outcomes.
Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1111–1150.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627864
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995a). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant
pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159–165.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849509543675
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995b). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American
Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491. https://doi.org/10.2307/1163320
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006a). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding
achievement in U.S. schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12.
120
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006b). “Yes, but how do we do it?” Practicing culturally relevant
pedagogy. In J. G. Landsman & C. W. Lewis (Eds.), White teachers diverse classrooms:
Creating inclusive schools, building on students’ diversity, and providing true
educational equity (pp. 33–46). Stylus.
Ladson-Billings, G. J. (2011). Is meeting the diverse needs of all students possible? Kappa Delta
Pi Record, 48(1), 13–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/00228958.2011.10516716
Ladson-Billings. G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: A.k.a. The remix. Harvard
Educational Review, 84(1), 74–84. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj131485484751
Lai, M. K., & McNaughton, S. (2016). The impact of data use professional development on
student achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 434–443.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.005.
Li, W., Lee, A., & Solmon, M. (2007). The role of perceptions of task difficulty in relation to
self-perceptions of ability, intrinsic value, attainment value, and performance. European
Physical Education Review, 13(3), 301–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X07081797
Lee. (2018). Pulling back the curtain: Revealing the cumulative importance of high-performing,
highly qualified teachers on students’ educational outcome. Educational Evaluation and
Policy Analysis, 40(3), 359–381. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373718769379
Lochmiller, C.R. & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. Sage.
Locke, L. F., Silverman, S. J., & Spirduso, W. W. (2010). Reading and understanding research.
(3rd ed.). Sage.
Lumpe, A., Czerniak, C., Haney, J., & Beltyukova, S. (2012). Beliefs about teaching science:
The relationship between elementary teachers’ participation in professional development
121
and student achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 34(2), 153–166.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.551222
Marek, E. A., & Methven, S. B. (1991). Effects of the learning cycle upon student and classroom
teacher performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(1), 41–53.
Maurer, T. J., Weiss, E. M., & Barbeite, F. G. (2003). A model of involvement in work-related
learning and development activity: The effects of individual, situational, motivational,
and age variables. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 707–724.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.707
Maxwell, J. A. (2013a). Conceptual framework: What do you think is going on? In Qualitative
research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed., pp. 39–73). Sage.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013b). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3rd ed.). Sage.
McCutchen, D., Abbott, R. D., Green, L. B., Beretvas, S. N., Cox, S., Potter, N. S. (2002).
Beginning literacy: Links among teacher knowledge, teacher practice, and student
learning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(1), 69–86.
McGill-Franzen, A., Allington, R. L., Yokoi, L., & Brooks, G. (1999). Putting books in the
classroom seems necessary but not sufficient. Journal of Educational Research, 93(2),
67–74.
Meissel, K., Parr, J. M., & Timperley, H. S. (2016). Can professional development of teachers
reduce disparity in student achievement? Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 163–173.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.013.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
122
Mette, I. M., Nieuwenhuizen, L., & Hvidston, D. J. (2016). Teachers’ perceptions of culturally
responsive pedagogy and the impact on leadership preparation: Lessons for future reform
efforts. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1), n1.
Milner, H. R. (2012). Beyond a test Ssore: Explaining opportunity gaps in educational practice.
Journal of Black Studies, 43(6), 693–718. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021934712442539
Milner, H. R. (2007). Race, culture, and researcher positionality: Working through dangers seen,
unseen, and unforeseen. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 388–400.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07309471
Mitton, J., & Murray-Orr, A. (2021). Identifying the impact of culturally relevant pedagogy:
Evidence of academic risk-taking in culturally and economically diverse Nova Scotia
classrooms. Canadian Journal of Education, 44(4), 1084–1115.
https://doi.org/10.53967/CJE-RCE.V44I4.4811
Neri, R. C., Lozano, M., & Gomez, L. M. (2019). (Re)framing resistance to culturally relevant
education as a multilevel learning problem. Review of Research in Education, 43(1),
197–226. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18821120
Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of
Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311413609
Opfer, V. D., Pedder, D. G., & Lavicza, Z. (2011). The role of teachers’ orientation to learning in
professional development and change: A national study of teachers in England. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 27(2), 443–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.09.014
Osman, D. J., & Warner, J. R. (2020). Measuring teacher motivation: The missing link between
professional development and practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 92, 103064–.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103064
123
Palermo, C., & Thomson, M. M. (2019). Large-scale assessment as professional development:
teachers’ motivations, ability beliefs, and values. Teacher Development, 23(2), 192–212.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2018.1536612
Parsons, S. A., Hutchison, A. C., Hall, L. A., Parsons, A. W., Ives, S. T., & Leggett, A. B.
(2019). U.S. teachers’ perceptions of online professional development. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 82, 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.03.006
Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and
practice. Sage.
Pedder, D. and Opfer, V.D., 2013. Professional learning orientations: patterns of dissonance and
alignment between teachers’ values and practices. Research papers in education, 28(5),
539–570. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2012.706632
Penuel, W. R., Gallagher, L. P., & Moorthy, S. (2011). Preparing teachers to design sequences of
instruction in earth systems science: A comparison of three professional development
programs. American Educational Research Journal, 48(4), 996–1025.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831211410864.
Perez, T., Dai, T., Kaplan, A., Cromley, J. G., Brooks, W. D., White, A. C., Mara, K. R., &
Balsai, M. J. (2019). Interrelations among expectancies, task values, and perceived costs
in undergraduate biology achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 72, 26–38.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2019.04.001
Picower, B. (2009) The unexamined Whiteness of teaching: how White teachers maintain and
enact dominant racial ideologies. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 12(2), 197–215,
https://doi.org/10.1080/13613320902995475
124
Podolsky, A., Kini, T., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2019). Does teaching experience increase
teacher effectiveness? A review of U.S. research. Journal of Professional Capital and
Community. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPCC-12-2018-0032
Pop, Dixon, P., & Grove, C. M. (2010). Research experiences for teachers (RET): Motivation,
expectations, and changes to teaching practices due to professional program involvement.
Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(2), 127–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-
009-9167-2
Prenger, R., Poortman, C. L., & Handelzalts, A. (2017). Factors influencing teachers’
professional development in networked professional learning communities. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 68, 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.08.014
Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say
about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.
Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Conceptual frameworks in research. In Qualitative
research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. (2nd ed., pp. 32–61).
Sage.
Rivkin, S., Hanushek, E., & Kain, J. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement.
Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2005.00584.x
Rockoff, J. E. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from
panel data. American Economic Review, 94(2), 247–252
Robinson, V. M., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student
outcomes: an analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X08321509
125
Rodriguez, J. L., Jones, E. B., Pang, V. O., & Park, C. D. (2004). Promoting academic
achievement and identity development among diverse high school students. High School
Journal, 87(3), 44–53. https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.2004.0002
Rose, D. G., & Potts. A. D. (2011). Examining teacher candidate resistance to diversity: What
can teachers educators learn? International Journal of Multicultural Education, 13(2), 1–
20. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i2.1136
Roth, K. J., Garnier, H. E., Chen, C., Lemmens, M., Schwille, K., & Wickler, N. I. Z. (2011).
Videobased lesson analysis: Effective science PD for teacher and student learning.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(2), 117–148.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20408.
Saka, Y. (2013). Who are the science teachers that seek professional development in research
experience for teachers (RET’s)? Implications for teacher professional development.
Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(6), 934–951.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9440-1
Sancar, R., Atal, D., & Deryakulu, D. (2021). A new framework for teachers’ professional
development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 101, 103305.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103305
Saxe, G. B., Gearhart, M., & Nasir, N. S. (2001). Enhancing students’ understanding of
mathematics: A study of three contrasting approaches to professional support. Journal of
Mathematics Teacher Education, 4(1), 55–79.
Schunk, D. (2020). Learning theories: An educational perspective (8th ed.). Pearson Education.
Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2009). Motivation in education: Theory, research,
and application. Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.
126
Sleeter, C. E. (2011). The academic and social value of ethnic studies. National Education
Association.
Sloan, H. A. (1993). Direct instruction in fourth and fifth grade classrooms. Dissertation
Abstracts International, 54(08), 2837A. (UMI No. 9334424)
Smylie, M. A. (1988). The enhancement function of staff development: Organizational and
psychological antecedents to individual teacher change. American Educational Research
Journal, 25, 1–30.
Somekh, B. (2007). Pedagogy and learning with ICT researching the art of innovation (1st ed.).
Routledge.
Spencer, M. S., Brown, M., Griffin, S., & Abdullah, S. (2008). Outcome evaluation of the
intergroup project. Small Group Research, 39(1), 82–103.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496407313416
Steinert, Y. (2010). Making it happen: Faculty development for busy teachers. In P. Cantillo &
D. Wood (Eds), ABC of Learning and Teaching in Medicine (pp. 73–77). Blackwell.
Tate, W. F. (1995). Returning to the root: A culturally relevant approach to mathematics
pedagogy. Theory Into Practice, 34, 166–173.
Thomas, O., Davidson, W., & McAdoo, H. (2008). An evaluation study of the young,
empowered sisters (YES!) program: Promoting cultural assets among African American
adolescent girls through a culturally relevant school-based intervention. Journal of Black
Psychology, 34(3), 281–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798408314136
Thoonen, E. E. J., Sleegers, P. J., Oort, F. J., Peetsma, T. T., & Geijsel, F. P. (2011). How to
improve teaching practices: The role of teacher motivation, organizational factors, and
127
leadership practices. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(3), 496–536.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X11400185
Tienken, C. H. (2003). The effect of staff development in the use of scoring rubrics and
reflective questioning strategies on fourth-grade students’ narrative writing performance.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 64(02), 388A. (UMI No. 3081032)
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive
concept. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783–805.
Villaverde, L. (2008). Feminist primer. Peter Lang.
Visser, R. D., Calvert Evering, L., & Barrett, D. E. (2014). #TwitterForTeachers: The
implications of twitter as a self-directed professional development tool for K–12 teachers.
Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(4), 396–413.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2014.925694.
Watt, H., & Richardson, P. W. (2008). Motivations, perceptions, and aspirations concerning
teaching as a career for different types of beginning teachers. Learning and Instruction,
18(5), 408–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.06.002.
Wayne, A. J., Yoon, K. S., Zhu, P., Cronen, S., & Garet, M. S. (2008). Experimenting with
teacher professional development: Motives and methods. Educational Researcher, 37(8),
469–479. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08327154
Weidinger, A. F., Spinath, B., & Steinmayr, R. (2020). The value of valuing math: Longitudinal
links between students’ intrinsic, attainment, and utility values and grades in math.
Motivation Science, 6(4), 413–422. https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000179
128
Wheatley, K. F. (2002). The potential benefits of teacher efficacy doubts for educational reform.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-
051X(01)00047-6
Widodo, H. P., & Allamnakhrah, A. (2020). The impact of a blended professional learning
community on teacher educators’ professional identity: towards sustainable teacher
professional development. Journal of Education for Teaching: JET, 46(3), 408–410.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1761249
Yoon, K. S., Teresa, D., Lee, S. W.-Y., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. L. (2007). Reviewing the
evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. U.S.
Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education
Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest.
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs.
Young, E. (2010). Challenges to conceptualizing and actualizing culturally relevant pedagogy:
How viable is the theory in classroom practice? Journal of Teacher Education, 61(3),
248–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109359775
129
Appendix A: Participant Recruitment Letter
You have been selected to participate in this study on teacher motivation because you
offer critical insights as a teacher who has attended culturally relevant pedagogy professional
development (CRP PD). The goal of this study is to understand what factors motivate teachers to
implement instructional strategies learned from culturally relevant pedagogy professional
development. Your perspectives will allow district and school site leaders, researchers, and
professional developers to create CRP PD that can motivate teachers to practice their strategies.
Ultimately, this will benefit teachers and students who will be engaging in CRP in the classroom.
This study is being conducted by Matt Sekijima as part of his doctoral dissertation. Your
participation in this study is completely voluntary. Additionally, participant identities will not be
known to the organization and all data obtained in the study will be destroyed after the study is
complete.
The following research questions will be explored to understand teacher motivation:
1. What factors influence teacher motivation to implement instructional strategies
learned from culturally relevant pedagogy professional development?
2. How do environmental factors affect teacher motivation to implement instructional
strategies learned from culturally relevant pedagogy professional development?
Your participation should take approximately 1 hour of your time, consisting of one
interview.
Specifically, I am looking to interview teachers who meet all of the following criteria:
1. You are a teacher who taught at Emmitt High School during the 2021-2022 school
year.
130
2. You completed a year of professional development on culturally relevant pedagogy at
Emmitt High School during the 2021-2022 school year.
If you meet the above criteria and are interested in participating in this study, please
email me at sekijima@usc.edu. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration.
Your insight is truly invaluable to the study’s success.
131
Appendix B: Teacher Interview Protocol
The following document is the approved teaching interview protocol.
Teacher Background
1. First, please tell me about your teaching background.
2. How would you describe yourself as a teacher?
General PD Motivation
3. Some teachers have told us that their PD experiences have really helped their instruction,
while some have said that the time was not beneficial.
a. What have your experiences with PD been throughout your career?
4. How would you describe your current motivation for PD?
5. What factors would you say motivate you to learn in PD?
CRP PD Motivational Factors
6. How would you define CRP?
a. What is your perspective on CRP?
b. How does CRP impact students?
7. How does your perspective on CRP PD compare with general PD?
a. How would you describe your current motivation for CRP PD?
8. How often do you reflect on your own practice as a teacher?
9. Tell me about your experience last year with CRP PD.
a. How interested were you in attending this particular CRP PD?
b. To what extent do you feel confident in your abilities to implement CRP PD
strategies?
c. To what extent is CRP PD useful to you?
132
d. To what extent does CRP PD further your work as a teacher?
e. To what extent does CRP PD align with your identity as a teacher?
10. Whom would you say pays the costs, financial and otherwise, associated with attending
CRP PD?
a. What is your perspective on these costs?
11. To what extent did this CRP PD boost your motivation for CRP?
Environmental Motivational Factors
12. What resources are available to you at your school to support your CRP PD learning?
13. What are your perceptions of how your administrators view CRP PD?
a. Please describe how your administrators have discussed CRP PD.
14. Please describe the level of support that you receive from your administrators to
implement CRP PD strategies.
a. Ideally what would support from your administrators look like?
b. How do your admins impact your learning motivation?
15. How would you describe the current motivation of teachers for CRP PD?
16. To what extent does the PD facilitator impact your motivation to implement CRP PD
strategies?
17. Can you tell me about a time when you implemented a strategy from CRP PD?
a. What factors influenced your decision to implement CRP PD?
b. To what extent did the CRP PD impact this decision to implement?
18. Can you tell me about a time when you did not implement a strategy from CRP PD?
a. What would have helped you implement this strategy?
19. What do you think an ideal CRP PD would look like?
133
a. To what extent did your CRP PD align with this ideal example?
b. What would motivate teachers to become self-motivated for CRP?
c. What would motivate teachers to implement the CRP PD strategies?
20. Are there any final thoughts you would like to share about your perspective on teacher
motivation and CRP PD?
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
Professional development (PD) and culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) are both widely acknowledged to positively impact student outcomes. Despite these benefits, teacher motivation for PD is unequal and teacher resistance to CRP is high. This dissertation investigates the factors that influence teacher motivation to implement instructional strategies learned from culturally relevant pedagogy professional development. Interviews were conducted with seven high school teachers in Southern California who completed a series of CRP PD. Additionally, document analysis of PD slide presentations contextualized and corroborated the accompanying interview data. Study findings revealed that teacher motivation was influenced by self-efficacy, levels of value for PD strategies (i.e., utility, attainment, intrinsic), and the costs of learning and implementation. Furthermore, environmental factors were found to shape teacher motivation, including the impact of administrators, colleagues, PD facilitators, and the school’s culture and learning environment. The findings expand current understanding of teacher PD motivation specifically for culturally relevant pedagogy. This study posits how administrators and PD facilitators can more effectively maximize teacher motivation to create more culturally relevant instruction, ultimately benefiting student success.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Overcoming the cultural teaching gap: an evaluative study of urban teachers’ implementation of culturally relevant instruction
PDF
Narrowing the English learner achievement gap through teacher professional learning and cultural proficiency: an evaluation study
PDF
A culture of care in elementary schools to impact Black student academic achievement: a case study
PDF
Culturally relevant pedagogy in Khan Academy’s Algebra 1 course
PDF
A curriculum for faculty implementation of culturally relevant instruction in a community college classroom
PDF
Teacher as nurturer: perceptions of elementary teachers integrating social and emotional learning practices
PDF
The knowledge, skills, motivation and organizational factors that teachers need to support African American boys in public preschool: an evaluation study
PDF
Faculty’s influence on underrepresented minority (URM) undergraduate retention
PDF
School culture and its impact on PBIS implementation
PDF
Culturally relevant pedagogy in an elementary school for indigent native peoples
PDF
Developing cultural competence in relation to multilingual learners
PDF
Applying culturally relevant pedagogy in the classroom: a course for secondary, public, urban school educators
PDF
Exploring culturally relevant pedagogy in a Chinese immersion program: a gap analysis
PDF
The relationship between culturally responsive self-efficacy and attitudes of trauma-informed practices among K-12 educators
PDF
Culturally responsive pedagogy: a curriculum for secondary education teachers
PDF
Engaging school leaders to conceptualize culturally relevant pedagogy
PDF
Culturally relevant sex education for Black adolescents: a study of Black sexuality educators
PDF
Labor displacement: a gap analysis an evaluation study addressing professional development in a small business environment
PDF
Strengths-based pedagogy for culturally marginalized groups
PDF
Efficacy drivers that aid teacher professional development transfer
Asset Metadata
Creator
Matthew J.
(author),
Sekijima
()
Core Title
The importance of teacher motivation in professional development: implementing culturally relevant pedagogy
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Educational Leadership
Degree Conferral Date
2023-05
Publication Date
04/19/2023
Defense Date
03/06/2023
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
Cost,culturally relevant pedagogy,culturally relevant pedagogy professional development,OAI-PMH Harvest,professional development,self-efficacy,student outcomes,teacher motivation,Value
Format
theses
(aat)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Stowe, Kathy (
committee chair
), Malloy, Courtney (
committee member
), Mora-Flores, Eugenia (
committee member
)
Creator Email
mattsekijima@gmail.com,sekijima@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113056775
Unique identifier
UC113056775
Identifier
etd-SekijimaMa-11662.pdf (filename)
Legacy Identifier
etd-SekijimaMa-11662
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
theses (aat)
Rights
Sekijima, Matthew J.
Internet Media Type
application/pdf
Type
texts
Source
20230420-usctheses-batch-1026
(batch),
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 author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.
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
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
culturally relevant pedagogy
culturally relevant pedagogy professional development
professional development
self-efficacy
student outcomes
teacher motivation