University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Analysis of faculty professional identity upon culturally responsive practices and pursuit of critical thinking

(USC Thesis Other)

Analysis of faculty professional identity upon culturally responsive practices and pursuit of critical thinking

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Analysis of Faculty Professional Identity Upon Culturally Responsive Practices and
Pursuit of Critical Thinking

Barbara Gail Jacala-Whalen

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

August 2023

© Copyright by Barbara Gail Jacala-Whalen 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Barbara Gail Jacala-Whalen certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Alan Green
Anthony B. Maddox
Monique Claire Datta, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv
Abstract
Shifts in the demographic landscape of U.S. higher education institutions misalign with the
initial precepts of curriculum and frame an unstable system within the radical-reform space. As a
result, governmental and institutional policies attempt to enact culturally responsive practices
(CRP) to rectify injustices and improve inclusivity, equity, and achievement gaps. However,
these enactments are met with mixed faculty conceptions and pursuits. This study employs
metaphor analysis and phenomenological inquiry to explore eight non-tenured faculty participant
conceptions of accountability to pursue critical thinking exercise through CRP within the general
education post-secondary classroom. Findings revealed institutional structures as the single top-
down influence upon faculty conceptions of curriculum. Participants equated institutional policy
and its curriculum with English proficiency and social mobility. However, findings also revealed
divergent faculty conceptions between curriculum, CRP, and critical thinking. Faculty reported
greater bottom-up accountability influences that inform CRP and critical thinking exercises.
These influences are situated upon community culture, race, and tacit language.
Recommendations from these findings align with post-modern educational research that focus on
faculty and institutional processes to propel higher education into beyond-reform space.

v
Dedication
To the unknown and unknowable: May we one day meet and shake hands.

vi
Acknowledgments
My study began three generations ago in the shadow of my ancestors who endured
colonization and navigated the diasporic effects of mainstream teacher education. These shadows
initiated an educational mission to understand the contexts of compliance for survival and
upward mobility. So, I first thank those that came before me and raised those before me to not
merely digest academe, but challenge and improve it. To my mom who recalled, recanted, read,
and re-read stories of the past and stories of her own to weave into stories of mine: You are my
footsteps in the sand. To my dad who corrected her: My eye rolling meant that I love you too.
To USC: My OCL cohort, thank you for the discourse … the Saturdays … the ears, the
shoulders, and the emergency phone calls. You did not allow me to quit. To Dr. Patricia Tobey,
Dr. Maria Ott, and Dr. Ravneet Tiwana, thank you for your guidance. To Dr. Anthony Maddox
and Dr. Alan Green, thank you for your time, consideration, and direction. To Dr. Monique
Datta, thank you for the fight that I was so reluctant to pursue, but most of all, thank you for the
aloha that I absolutely despised but definitely needed.
Thank you to the faculty who volunteered their lived experiences and honored me with
their truths. Thank you to my current and former colleagues that refused my pink slip and
championed me to write truth. Thank you to my sisters for the dry runs. And thank you to my
malis who stepped in and stepped up as my strength, laughter, and relief through all the work.
Finally, thank you to my pod: Willie, for putting up with me … Ate Eya, for reminding
them to put up with me. Sousuke, for sitting beside me. And Isa, Matua, and Alina: for giving me
reason. Everything I do, I do for you. Hu aguaiya hao.
There are no conflicts of interests to disclose.
Correspondence concerning this dissertation can be emailed to: whalenb@usc.edu.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi
List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study .......................................................................................... 1
Context and Background of the Problem ............................................................................ 3
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions .................................................................. 6
Importance of the Study ...................................................................................................... 7
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................... 8
Definition of Terms ........................................................................................................... 10
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................. 12
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 14
Influence of Accountability Relationships Upon Faculty Dispositions ............................ 14
Influence of Accountability Upon Pedagogical Mindsets ................................................ 26
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 39
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 42
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 43
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 43
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 44
Research Setting and Participants ..................................................................................... 46

viii
Positionality ...................................................................................................................... 50
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 54
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 55
Data Collection Procedures ............................................................................................... 56
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 57
Trustworthiness and Credibility ........................................................................................ 58
Ethics ................................................................................................................................. 58
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 60
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 61
Data Collection and Analysis ............................................................................................ 66
RQ1: Faculty Perceptions of Higher Education ................................................................ 82
RQ2: Impact of Education Trends and Policies on Faculty Dispositions ......................... 86
RQ3: Impact of Cultural Implications Upon Faculty Dispositions .................................. 90
Summary of Findings ........................................................................................................ 95
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations ......................................................................... 96
Curriculum as “Interface” ................................................................................................. 97
The Impasse: For Whom, By Whom Within the Radical-Reform Space ......................... 98
Changed Market = Changed Mission ............................................................................... 99
Recommendations to Move Into Beyond-Reform Space ............................................... 101
Limitations and Delimitations ......................................................................................... 116
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 117
Connection to the USC Rossier Equity Mission ............................................................. 118
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 118

ix
References ................................................................................................................................... 120
Appendix A: National Career Development Association Diagram of Intersectionality ............. 146
Appendix B: Demographic Sampling Survey and TSSP Alignment .......................................... 147
Appendix C. Interview Protocol and Alignment to Key Research Concepts ............................. 150

x
List of Tables
Table 1 Interview Participants ................................................................................................. 63
Table 2 Participant Examples of Behavioristic Attributes ....................................................... 72
Table 3 Participant Examples of Constructivist Attributes ...................................................... 75
Table 4 Participant Examples of Situative Attributes .............................................................. 77
Table 5 Comparison of Teaching Conceptions and Pronoun Usage ........................................ 78
Table 6 Participant Examples of Self-Referential Attributes ................................................... 79
Table 7 Divergent Faculty Conceptions of Tier 1, CT, and CRP ............................................. 80
Table 8 Comparison of Higher Eduation Experience and CT and CRP Conceptions ............. 84
Table 9 Faculty Conceptions of Educational Policies ............................................................. 88
Table 10 Counts of Participant References to Various Intersectionality Elements .................... 91
Table 11 Participant Phrases Expressing Significance of Positionality and Culture ................. 91
Table 12 Faculty Conceptions of Workplace Constructs ........................................................... 94

Table B1 Demographic Sampling Survey ................................................................................ 148

Table C1 Interview Questions .................................................................................................. 151

xi
List of Figures
Figure 1 Faculty Accountability Conceptual Framework ......................................................... 41
Figure 2 Research Themes and Coding Relationships .............................................................. 67
Figure 3 Faculty Conceptions of Early Education .................................................................... 69
Figure 4 Faculty Conceptions of Higher Educcation ................................................................ 70
Figure 5 Faculty Conceptions of Tier 1 Courses ....................................................................... 71
Figure 6 Constructivist Frequency of Terms ............................................................................. 74
Figure 7 Rhetorical Situation of Bounded Curriculum ............................................................. 97
Figure 8 Rhetorical Situation of Bounded Curriculum Within Radical-Reform Space .......... 102
Figure 9 Rhetorical Situation of Culturally Relevalant Inclusion Theory .............................. 103

xii
List of Abbreviations
CT Critical thinking
CRP Culturally responsive practice
CRT Critical race theory
DEI Diversity, equity, and inclusion
GE General education
P12 Primary through secondary education grade levels
TSSP Teacher preparation as a historically situated social practice framework

1
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
The historical implications of higher education’s monoculture have detrimental effects on
the concept of knowledge. Researchers include only 16% of the world’s demographic make-up,
neglecting potential collective human contribution and affecting the perception of universal
knowledge (Haggis, 2009; MacPherson, 2006; Wang, 2016). Lenoir et al. (2015) argued the
current resulting didactic conceptions of curriculum and teacher pedagogy through a historical
analysis of the foundations of institutionalized education in the United States and Europe. Such
conceptions have cultivated transmissive teaching dispositions that are uneasily changed (Gibbs
& Coffey, 2004; Postareff et al., 2007; Tishman et al., 1993). In fact, a recent study revealed that
faculty resistance to change defends status quo bias (Dana et al., 2021). As a result, current
educational research attempts to enact culturally responsive practices to improve inclusivity,
equity, and achievement gaps that breach dominant discourse and alter teaching practices and
pedagogy (Alim et al., 2020; Cochran-Smith & Villegas, 2015; Gay, 2013; Ladson-Billings,
2021, Paris, 2012). However, little research on culturally responsive practices is conducted in
higher education. In addition, P12 culturally responsive practices (CRP) are inconsistently
implemented and measured, complicating a collection of empirical evidence to prove CRP
effectiveness in changing teaching practice and pedagogy and student improvement (Bottiani et
al., 2018; Castillo, 2018; Cochran-Smith et al., 2015; Han et al., 2014). Ladson-Billings (2021)
argued that national CRP curriculum and prescriptive guidance incorporate little CRP theory and
lacks effective pedagogical design. As a result, it remains unclear how to promote and how to
support teacher adoption and pursuit of CRP.
More importantly, the limitations of a monoculture negatively impact critical thinking
perceptions and ability. In a multiple case study, Kuhn and Modrek (2018) documented the

2
significant damage of single perspectives upon critical reasoning, arguing for the promotion of
multi-cultural perspectives in education and the development of curriculum and teaching
pedagogy. Employers echo similar concerns that college graduates are ill-prepared to enter the
current global workforce (Hart Research Associates, 2016). Because of the expansion of
technology, customer service, and globalization that require innovative solution processing,
initiative decision-making, and transcultural communication, employers increasingly value
critical thinking skills and recognize its absence in current education (Hart Research Associates,
2016). Subsequently, trending policy and accreditation standards require multidisciplinary
general critical thinking (CT) outcomes, assessments, and programs (Spellings et al., 2006). Yet
like CRP, CT measurement and implementation are inconsistent (Arroyo & Gasman, 2014;
Karimi & Eskafi, 2014; Liu et al., 2016; Shaw et al., 2020).
Nonetheless, studies in both CRP and CT reveal the impact of teacher role perceptions
and professional identity construction in teacher pursuit and adoption of CRP and CT (Beijaard
et al., 2004; Chang & Viesca, 2022; Clark & Flores, 2001; Ellis, 2019; Kim, 2018; Kow, 2016;
Moslemi & Habibi, 2019; Smits & Janssenswillen, 2020). A teacher’s professional identity
informs practice and pedagogy and influences the pursuit of research inquiry and more effective
teaching strategies (Richter et al., 2021). Initially, Nixon (1996) argued that the institution and
subject matter field inform professional identity. Consequently, changes in demographics and
cultural conditions within higher education would change faculty professional identity. However,
more recent research reveals that most teacher dispositions remain unaffected by shifts in
diversity or professional development interventions (Cochran-Smith et al., 2015). Furthermore,
investigation of how teacher dispositions inform practice, complex task navigation, and pursuit
of effective teaching strategies is limited (Cochran-Smith et al., 2015). This study examines how

3
social, cultural, and institutional factors impact faculty dispositions that inform faculty choices to
pursue CT and CRP. Findings from this study will not only add to research within higher
education on professional identity, CT, and CRP, but provide increased clarity to support faculty
pursuit of more effective practices that invite diverse knowledge bases and challenge
argumentation.
Context and Background of the Problem
Although the historical premise of institutionalized education and curriculum was to
inculcate civics and socially stipulated values and symbols as explained by Lenoir et al. (2015),
the landscape of the United States and its educational institutions are changing. Poverty and
family homelessness is at their highest rate since the Great Depression (Gorski, 2013; Shrider et
al., 2021). Immigration trends report the United States as one of the most religiously diverse
nations in the world (Pew Research Center, 2014). In 2016, students of color represented
approximately 45% of all higher education student enrollment and represented the largest share
in all income brackets, with women representing the majority across all groups (Espinosa et al.,
2019). The proportion of students who identify as White has decreased to 52% from 70% in
1996 (Espinosa et al., 2019). Yet, higher education’s faculty composition remains comparatively
homogenous; only one in five faculty members are persons of color, leaving three-quarters of
full-time faculty White (Espinosa et al., 2019). As a result, Espinosa et al. (2019) stressed that a
single focus on hiring and retaining diverse faculty may not completely address the complex
systemic issues incurred from such historical homogeneity. More research is needed to
understand the impacts of shifting demographics and the embedded factors that contribute to
faculty resistance to such changes.

4
Most importantly, shifts in demographics influence conceptual knowledge, and resistance
to such changes endangers growth and capacity in learning. Freire (2008) argued that
transmissive dispositions historically inculcated by higher education’s monoculture have
propagated the role of fixed and prescriptive knowledge that risks opportunity for higher critical
thinking skill development. In a critical extended overview of U.K.-based and U.S.-based
educational journals with a range of international authors within 40 years of student learning
research in higher education, Haggis (2009) purported that educational research, excluding Adult
Education, provides a narrow range of perspectives and methodologies that potentially
propagates bias, ignores wider ranges of understanding, and impoverishes thought processes. The
disparity of diverse faculty representation is most significant in research institutions where the
research pool constitutes only 16% of the world’s population, impacting curriculum, practice,
assessment, and knowledge distribution (MacPherson, 2006; Wang, 2016). Adult Education
produces a contrasting trajectory of critical research by including input from diverse perspectives
that incite motivation for increased experimentation (Haggis, 2009). Input from diverse
perspectives is also a main component in critical thinking concepts in both CT research fields of
philosophy and psychology (Atabaki, 2015). In fact, a competition between knowledge contexts
is required to improve critical thinking skills (Navaie et al., 2018). As a result, Atabaki (2015)
recommended for further exploration of effective educational opportunities that decrease
transmissive communication and instead increase transcultural dialogue that invites other
ontological and epistemological perspectives to increase CT exercise.
Consequently, the transmissive dispositions historically inculcated by higher education’s
monoculture have also propagated the fixed identity of the teacher as the expert knowledge
provider. Although research on professional identity within higher education is limited, studies

5
have demonstrated that professional identity strongly influences teaching behavior, practice, and
willingness to shift with educational changes and innovations (Beijaard et al., 2000). Yet,
Cochran-Smith et al. (2015) argued that most teacher dispositions remain unaffected by current
shifts in diversity or professional development intervention. In a recent study using quantitative
analysis through Pearson Correlation and analysis of variance models, a strong positive
relationship was confirmed between a teacher’s professional identity and their self-efficacy and
critical thinking skills (Moslemi & Habibi, 2019). More research is needed to understand how to
support teacher agency and social justice consciousness that invite argument from diverse
perspectives. Contradicting Nixon’s (1996) conception of shared professional identity among
occupational and field groupings, Beijaard et al. (2004) stressed the unique, subjective, and
individualized teacher experiences upon self-evaluation of subject-matter expertise, personal
teaching experience, and biographical factors. Research shows teacher achievement behaviors
such as pedagogical pursuits and use of teaching strategies are attributed to self-efficacy (Schunk
& Usher, 2019). Hence, teacher beliefs about one’s personal ability in a specific teaching context
influence thinking processes, behaviors, and motivation. The continued critical awareness and
examination of such abilities and identity activate “restructuring,” a key creative component in
critical thinking and a key challenger of education’s historical monoculture and transmissive
dispositions (Paul & Elder, 2005, p. 6).
Considering the historical precepts of institutionalized education, higher education
faculty are at the epicenter of managing knowledge formation and distribution to respond to the
needs of a diversifying student body and knowledge base. Faculty are not only the teacher
trainers of pre-service P12 teachers, but the purveyors of conceptual knowledge. A historical
narrative on the foundations of institutionalized education within the United States and Europe

6
paints the context and rationale of higher education as the curator of modern-day curriculum and
teacher pedagogy (Lenoir et al., 2015). Higher education faculty ultimately answer the question:
“What should we teach?” that constitute and prioritize practice and pedagogy within all fields of
study (p. 52). Specifically, higher education faculty within an institution determine the minimum
foundational concepts, skills, and attitudes students need and develop a general education
program (GE) that reflects the institution’s articulated philosophy.
Although GE courses are institution specific, each institution must articulate the
outcomes, mode of practice (grounded, hybrid, integrated, interdisciplinary, etc.), and alignment
of GE courses to the Higher Learning Commission for approved GE programming and for
achieved minimum federal requirement (Higher Learning Commission, 2022). GE courses are
generally divided into tiers with Tier 1 courses supporting the foundational competencies
students need to succeed in Tier 2 and Tier 3 GE courses and upper-level field concentration
courses. As a result, Tier 1 GE faculty primarily teach 1st-year college undergraduates and are
not only responsible for imparting subject matter details, but also for introducing the culture of
the institution and higher education to students. For this reason, this study focuses on Tier 1
general education higher education faculty and their professional identities that are impacted by
their separate fields of expertise yet inform their choices to pursue CRP and CT. Moreover, the
diversity of subject matter expertise and backgrounds among Tier 1 faculty addresses the unique
influence of separate fields and experiences upon the conception of professional identity, as
expressed by Beijaard et al. (2004).
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
This study explores how faculty professional identity informs teaching choices to pursue
critical thinking and culturally responsive practice. Guided by Guided by Cochran-Smith and

7
Villegas’ (2016) teacher framework, this study questions the teaching dispositions created by (a)
the larger historical setting of institutionalized education, (b) the emerging trends that influence
current policy and practice, and (c) the broader institutional constructs (bottom-up or top-down)
that support and maintain cultures of practice and pedagogy. The goal of the study is to
understand how social, cultural, and institutional factors influence teacher identities that inform
behaviors and pedagogical pursuits. Three research questions guided this study:
1. How do faculty perceive the role of higher education?
2. How do educational trends impact current practice?
3. What cultural conditions influence practice?
Importance of the Study
Although educational studies show the significance of CRP in developing student critical
thinking and relationships, in responding to emerging educational trends, and in increasing
inclusivity, there is no articulated framework that specifically defines CRP or disseminates
universal best practices. Moreover, CRP research is limited to P12 education levels and is
separated between educational disciplines, further obscuring the promotion and adoption of CRP
(Castillo, 2018; Han et al., 2014; Ladson-Billings, 2021).
Separately, studies show the positive relationship between a teacher’s professional
identity, self-efficacy, and critical thinking skills (Moslemi & Habibi, 2019). Teacher beliefs
inform pedagogy and practice. Yet, most teacher dispositions remain unaffected by shifts in
diversity or professional development interventions (Cochran-Smith et al., 2015). Higher
education’s historical dominant discourse presents three major issues for educational research
and improvement: biased determinants of “effective” curriculum and practice, transactional
perceptions of the learning process, and the single perception of knowledge (Biesta, 2016).

8
Moreover, teaching dispositions are informed by historical precepts, emerging trends in policy or
practice, or institutional constructs (Cochran-Smith & Villegas, 2016). Yet, little research
examines how teacher dispositions inform practice and pursuit of effective teaching strategies
(Cochran et al., 2015). Furthermore, much less research is conducted specifically on higher
education faculty teaching dispositions.
Considering the higher education setting, faculty are at the epicenter of managing
knowledge formation and distribution to respond to the needs of a diversifying study body and
knowledge base. Research is needed to understand the impact of faculty professional identities
upon teaching choices to pursue effective practices and pedagogies that support educational
reform to includes diverse perspectives and that respond to concerns from consumers, employers,
and educational policy to increase critical thinking standards (Butler, 2012). An examination of
how faculty dispositions inform work among diverse populations will better inform the barriers
professional identities have towards teaching dispositions and pursuits of CRP and CT and
potentially explain the unyielding shifts in pedagogy and practice that maintain the historical
institutionalized education archetype.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
For this study, Cochran-Smith and Villegas’ (2016) framework is referred to as TSSP due
to the discursive and linguistic nature of its terms. As explained in the study’s section on
“Definition of Terms,” separate terms are frequently used within the education system to
describe teaching members within the different levels of education (i.e., P12 versus higher
education, tenured versus non-tenured). These terms are not universal nor are designations
mirrored between U.S.-based or U.K.-based research. Cochran-Smith and Villegas’ (2016)
framework is named: teacher preparation as historically situated social practice (TSSP). In most

9
U.S.-based studies, the use of the term “teacher” or “teacher preparation” may infer study
pertaining to only P12 educators and elementary and secondary education preparation. Whereas
“faculty,” “lecturers,” and “professors” refer to post-secondary educators. However, for the
purpose of this study, the term “teacher” refers to all members of the teaching profession at all
levels; the term “faculty” refers to all teaching members within post-secondary or higher
education. In fact, Merriam-Webster (n.d.) dictionary provides the same ambiguous definitions
of both faculty and teacher.
Furthermore, it should also be acknowledged that faculty do not experience formal
teacher preparation education and training as teachers within P12 are required to complete.
Faculty teacher preparation includes professional development conducted individually or as
required by a teaching position or assignment. Regardless, the adoption of Cochran-Smith and
Villegas’ (2016) framework acknowledges teaching as a situated social practice.
The TSSP framework adapts Herndl and Nahrwold’s (2000) research as a situated social
activity framework into the teaching profession. Both draw on Bourdieu’s (1977/1980) theory of
practice that recognizes the impact of the researcher’s rhetorical situation and the reciprocal
triadic relationship between a researcher, the subject matter, and information inputs. Herndl and
Nahrwold (2000) further contended that the research process includes social activities that a
researcher interprets and contextualizes through a personal lens of interests, social positioning,
time, and place. The framework presents researchers along a social and political continuum to
continually reflect upon how one’s personal identity influences perceptions and potentially
cultivates bias. Continued critique and reflection upon one’s positionality and identity as a
professional promotes efficiency and commitment to social action and change.

10
Cochran-Smith and Villegas (2016) specifically chart teacher preparation and identity
development along a landscape of social, political, and economic contexts that currently and
historically shape education. The framework requires an examination of (a) the larger historical
setting of institutionalized education, (b) the emerging trends that influence current policy and
practice, and (c) the broader institutional constructs (bottom-up or top-down) that support and
maintain cultures of practice and pedagogy. These categories organize the sources of influences
that mold teacher identity and teaching dispositions towards practice and theory.
The goal of the study is to understand how social, cultural, and institutional factors
influence faculty identities that inform behaviors and pedagogical pursuits. Qualitative
phenomenological inquiry that employs metaphorical analysis is used to explore faculty
perceptions of the teaching role in CT and CRP and to understand how social, political, or
economic contexts inform practice and pedagogy.
Definition of Terms
It should be noted that several terms used in this study are ambiguously and
inconsistently used and measured throughout research. As a result, the following definitions
provide increased clarity for their use throughout this research.
Agency is an individually action-oriented focus, practice, or task and a crucial component
in identity formation. Varghese et al. (2005) expressed the significance in defining agency
through the lens of two separate frameworks: identity-in-practice and identity-in-discourse.
Identity-in-practice frames agency in respect to occupationally grouped perspectives whereas
identity-in-discourse presents agency as more fluid and communicated through argument and
personal reflection, and critical reasoning.

11
Critical race theory (CRT) is a 1970s legal studies framework that was extended into
education field in the 1990s to articulate the racialized social practice of research and education’s
control of conceptual knowledge, identifying the historical precepts that culturally and
structurally maintain racial categories of oppression and power within institutionalized policies
and practices (Bell, 2008; Ladson-Billings, 2013).
Critical thinking (CT) is a cognitive exercise separately investigated in the fields of
philosophy and psychology. The goal of critical thinking is to improve presupposed knowledge
through the process of analysis and assessment (Paul & Elder, 2005). Atabaki et al. (2015)
explained that philosophers emphasize the cultivation of CT propensity to naturally seek quality
information whereas psychologists focus on the development of specific skills used to investigate
and problem solve.
Culturally responsive practice (CRP) is a personal and professional practice that involves
valued intentional inclusion of linguistic, ethnic, racial, or cultural discourse to specifically
empower and cultivate cultural integrity, individual ability, and academic success among diverse
student populations (Gay, 2013). CRP is an approach that acknowledges culture as a central
component in cognitive development, leaning on student identities and backgrounds as optimal
sources of knowledge (Ladson-Billings, 2021).
Faculty are teaching members that hold academic rank in a higher education institution
(Merriam-Webster, n.d.).
Self-efficacy is a personal characteristic informed by the personal assessment of
reciprocal interactions between one’s person, environment, and behaviors (Bandura, 1977).

12
Situated learning is learning that occurs in the same context of application as an aspect of
social participation and community commitment, stressing the dynamic significance of time and
place in knowledge perception and application (Lave & Wenger, 1991).
Teacher is a person whose job is to instruct at a primary, secondary, or higher education
institution (Merriam-Webster, n.d.).
Teacher professional identity is defined as a personally interpretive lens of a specific
teaching position that guides actions and meaning within the position’s context (Beijaard et al.,
2000; Kelchtermans, 2009). It is a relational and not fixed, changing between contexts (Beijaard
et al., 2004). Mead (1934) explained that identity is socially constructed upon reflection of
oneself in relationship to one’s community of practice.
Organization of the Study
This dissertation follows a traditional five-chapter model. The Chapter One introduces
the study’s context and background and presents the study’s significance, research questions,
theoretical framework, and working definitions. Chapter Two first presents a thorough literature
review of faculty accountability relationships as outlined by the TSSP framework and proceeds
to review literature on the impacts of education accountability relationships upon CRP and CT
definitions and perceptions. Chapter Three describes the use of qualitative phenomenological
inquiry to explore faculty perceptions of teaching role in critical thinking and culturally
responsive practices. Chapter Three also presents the rational for metaphorical analysis among
the participants in the research setting along with the ethics and limitations of the research design
and methods. Chapter Four provides discussion of the findings and Chapter Five provides a
summarized conclusion of recommendations that have emerged from the research and how
findings address concerns within the conceptual framework and study. Recommendations also

13
address implications for future research and further study on the impact of teacher role
perceptions on critical thinking and culturally responsive practice pursuit considering the study’s
limitations, credibility, and trustworthiness of findings.

14
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Outlined by Cochran-Smith and Villegas’ (2016) TSSP framework, the following
reviews literature on the impacts of higher education’s historical setting, of the emerging trends
in educational policy and practice, and of the institutional constructs upon faculty dispositions
and teaching choices to pursue culturally responsive practice and critical thinking. Literature on
the faculty accountability relationships is first presented to illustrate the significance of the TSSP
framework in examining faculty dispositions. Impacts of education accountability relationships
are further examined through the lens of CRP and CT.
Influence of Accountability Relationships Upon Faculty Dispositions
Accountability outlines the scope of responsibilities upon which performance is measured
and therefore, behavior is managed. Dubnick (2014) stressed the importance of analyzing and
understanding cultural contexts and societal changes to effectively define “accountableness” in a
specific setting (para. 12). Hall et al. (2017) reviewed numerous theories and research within
organizational management that exhibit the impact of the perceptual domain among leaders and
organizational members. Accountability presents itself through relationships and transactions in
two separate domains: ontological and epistemological. Structural relationships and transactions
within higher education frame faculty functions, roles, and responsibilities upon which a faculty
member is assessed and held accountable. Consequently, ontological and epistemological
accountability relationships impact faculty judgment and choice.
Ontological Accountability in Education
Foremost, overhead structural values are embedded in ontological accountability
relationships that consequently influence faculty behaviors and agency. Social constructivist
theory explains how philosophical ontological realities are uniquely developed within time and

15
place social circles that mold individual human thinking, behaviors, and actions (Lindgren &
Packendorff, 2009). Modern Bronfenbrenner (2005) bioecological theory offers a systematic
description of these situational concentric circles in a process-person-context-time (PPCT) model
that influence an individual’s development and perceptions. Bourdieu’s (1977/1980) theory of
practice recognizes the impact of the researcher’s rhetorical situation and the reciprocal triadic
relationship between a researcher, the subject matter, and information inputs, providing a lens to
analyze the relationship between agency and structure. As a result, Herndl and Nahrwold (2000)
drew upon Bourdieu to contend that such dispositions form the basis of personal action and
theory, further feeding and regenerating societal structures. Cochran-Smith and Villegas’ (2016)
TSSP framework adapts Herndl and Nahrwold’s research as a situated social activity framework
into the teaching profession.
Examination of ontological relationships reveal the values and forces that are used to
maintain compliance or promote change. As a result, it is first important to review the historical
contexts upon which ontological accountability birthed itself within education to understand the
values sustained within its system. In addition, societal shifts influence ontological values and
perceptions throughout time. Lastly, ontological accountability examination requires a reflection
upon an organization’s hierarchy, values, mission, and perception of jobs that exist to succeed
the mission and values. These accountability relationships are mirrored in the TSSP framework
organized into the three categories: historical setting, emerging trends, and institutional
constructs, that mold teacher identity and teaching dispositions towards practice and theory.
Historical Contexts of Higher Educational Accountability
The historical implications of higher education’s monoculture have detrimental effects on
the concept of knowledge and knowledge management. Historically, the academic institution has

16
been perceived as a resource to grow national infrastructure and external recognition and power,
captivating government involvement (Jensen & Sydney Freeman, 2019). The Age of Imperialism
demonstrated education as an institutionalized tool to control and indoctrinate. The Doctrine of
Discovery and campaign of Manifest Destiny prioritized “discovery” and colonization of Euro
Christians over the sovereignty of Indigenous peoples and lands (Stein, 2017). War won new
territories for dominant nations to erect schools on foreign soil where initially military officials
enlisted to control the colonized and legitimize dominant power (Bacchus, 2006). Curriculum’s
primary purpose was to indoctrinate the colonizer’s language and values and eventually breed
select few to continue as “comprador elites” (Bacchus, pp. 260–261). Goonatilake (1975) notes
that the breeding of the comprador intelligentsia completes the cyclical goal of the current
mainstream educational institution by “getting the colonized to colonize themselves” (p. 6). On
the home front, Land-Grant institutions were raised on indigenous lands mostly acquired through
unratified treaties that exalted the pioneering of statehoods and social and political mobility
while “othering” and widening the wealth and education gap (Stein, 2017).
As a result, the structural nature of education sets a backdrop of a political regime and
reflects the significance of compliance upheld by colonial education soldiers. Compliance and
conformity are further solidified during the Age of Industry as societies sought more rational
frameworks to increase efficiency and produce measurable results (Snyder, 2018). The
intellectual and industrial competition between power nations spurred a drive for educational
production backed by outcomes and assessments that maintain the impact of educational
constructs in dictating defined achievement (Schwarz, 2016). These constructs influence
educational policy and institutional infrastructures that maintain certain faculty dispositions.
Although faculty are employed as independent contractors, outcome achievement dictates faculty

17
participation. Higher education’s structural network defines and coordinates key working
divisions through functional roles and responsibilities (Bolman & Deal, 2017). Ultimately, the
purpose of this frame is to create a rational system where a director or provider focus on the
larger system to implement change, increase efficiency, and produce measurable results that
affect and inform ontological accountability (Snyder, 2018).
Educational Trends That Impact Higher Educational Accountability Within Radical Reform
However, over time, time-related values and relationships interrupt historically cultivated
processes and inform higher education’s ontological accountability. Without disregard to the
endemic influence of colonialism upon education, de Oliveira Andreotti et al. (2015) illustrated
the phenomenal impact of trends and provided a cartography that explains the life cycle of social
structuring upon higher education accountability. Currently, higher education sits within the
“radical reform space” where separate parties of antagonistic views challenge dominant
discourse to decolonialize from historical values (de Oliveira Andreotti et al., p. 25). Mirroring
Flinders’ (2014) language of supply and demand on the concepts of accountability, the
reformists’ demand for an effective democracy develops an “accountability gap” that requires
new methods of accountability to be implemented (p. 3). Reformists question the previous
historically dominantly discoursed reputation upheld through political power and regime and are
skeptical of the social mobility and wealth positioning education once provided to its graduates.
Significantly, a recent study identified status quo bias as root of faculty resistance to change
(Dana et al., 2021). However, time-related events have demonstrated impacts to higher
education’s initial trajectory, slowly altering ontological accountability parameters.
Specifically, globalization introduces increased population mobility and resource
exchange that triggered current educational trends. Major trends include diversity, equity, and

18
inclusivity initiatives (DEI); conceptions of knowledge; and entrepreneurship in higher
education. Each trend challenges the status quo but influences separate ontological accountability
results.
21st Century Educational Shifts in Values of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI).
Global migration and exchange prompt ethical interrogations of dominant discourse that alter
higher education ontological accountability priorities. Stecher and Kirby (2004) explained that
four key perspectives frame a shift in educational values: market demands, performance,
bureaucracy, and professional practices. As trends inform all key entities, the value for
accountability changes.
First, increased mobility alters population demographics and therefore, alters market
demands. In 2016, students of color represented approximately 45% of all higher education
student enrollment and represented the largest share in all income brackets, with women
representing the majority across all groups (Espinosa et al., 2019). Moreover, demographic
changes infused with current U.S. civil rights movements and prompted an examination of DEI
efforts within all facets of society.
Separately, improved performance results increase bureaucratic support of DEI-related
professional practices. Studies show that curriculum engaged in social activism and multicultural
perspectives effectively improve student engagement, student outcome achievement, institutional
climate, and institutional authenticity (Barnett, 2020). In addition, diversity among college-
educated persons has an overall positive impact upon U.S. economic growth and has generated
innovations especially within the science, technology, engineering, and mathematic (STEM)
fields (Bound et al., 2021; Docquier et al., 2020; Ford & Cate, 2020). The Institute of
International Education (IIE) reveals the rapid growth of international students in U.S.

19
institutions, influencing policy changes within America’s higher education systems to respond to
the evolving global environment. The National Center for Education Statistics (2018) reported
the tripled enrollment of foreign students in American universities from 1980 to 2017, donning
higher education as a $44 billion export enterprise comparable to total U.S. export of combined
agricultural and textiles in 2019.
As a result, the historical nature of institutionalized education is disrupted. The compiled
socioeconomic impact upon the U.S. labor market alters dispositions towards DEI-activities,
generating public interest and institutional and governmental support. Amidst the current budget
cuts and staff shortages incurred throughout higher education and the 2020 pandemic, campus
diversity budgets survive (Wilson & Stroble, 2021). In addition, the U.S. Department of
Education (2022) increased funding for diversity and equity-related actions to grow extrinsic
reward and motivation. Consequently, DEI initiatives currently flood higher education
institutions to change professional practices. The 2019 American Council on Education reported
increases in recruitment and hiring of diverse faculty, in partnerships with diverse community
stakeholders, and in professional development training on diversity, equity, inclusion, and
implicit bias (Espinosa et al., 2019). The final addition of DEI outcomes for accreditation and
educational assessment are the ultimate proof of the increased DEI weighted values that have
adjusted priorities in higher education.
New Concepts of Knowledge. Furthermore, globalization feeds a second educational
trend that challenges historical conceptions of knowledge. Social constructivist theory explains
how realities are uniquely developed within social circles that mold individual human thinking,
behaviors, and actions (Lindgren & Packendorff, 2009). As a result, it is imperative to note the
impact of institutional education’s historic influence in molding society’s perceptions upon

20
diverse concepts of knowledge. Paris (2012) asserted that the initial goal of 20th century broad-
based institutionalized education was to eradicate deficit linguistic and cultural practices and
instead supplant colonized values. These values determined the parameters of ontological
accountability benchmarks, upholding dominant conceptions of knowledge as achievement
measures. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) explained that minority academic
underachievement was then attributed to asynchronous values between home and school
cultures. In addition, as American and European models dominate psychological and social
discourse, the study of cultural implications on perceptual processes is obstructed (Wang, 2016).
The social realities constructed by dominant discourse affected conceptual knowledge
and created blinders that make other realities with potential solutions, opportunities, and
translations inaccessible. Lindgren and Packendorff (2009) explained that the perpetual barrier of
established Western research models only legitimizes new knowledge in respect to previously
established definitions, methods, and theories of leadership and entrepreneurship. The historical
implications of initial academia’s private reservation for the male, elite, and wealthy initiated and
maintains a stigma towards the power of knowledge and the institutional sites of ideological
production (Meyer, 2001). Moreover, Wang (2016) argued that the systemic impact of
historically dominant Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic societies have affected
the research pool and information sources, stating that “a participant pool that represents 16% of
the world’s population and yet constitutes 96% of the samples in psychological research can
hardly yield data and theories about human behavior” (para. 33). Coincidentally, globalization
shepherds new information exchange that initiates interrogation of knowledge provisions and
credibility.

21
However, the challenge upon historical conceptions of knowledge does more than alter
ontological accountability priorities; it weakens the absolute and expertise of the institution as
the sole knowledge director. The core of accountability is the contractual relationship between a
delegating director and provider (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). Hall et al. (2017) stressed the
maintenance of accountability relationships for social order and improved cognitive processing.
Studies reveal the devalue of higher education for the increased migration towards social media
and online entrepreneurship instead (Aldana, 2021; Busteed, 2020; Mitchell & Belkin, 2017;
Nadworny, 2022). The poor exchange rate of higher education and higher education’s overall
budgetary decline has propelled research to explore alternative educational provisions such as
online global universities or decentralized educational provisions to community partners or start-
ups, warning status quo frailty. Such trends in higher education offer alternative perceptions of
educational pathways, hierarchies, and knowledge acquisition that also impact faculty
dispositions towards pedagogical and practice choices.
Evolving Scope of Education Into an Entrepreneurial Model. Whereas trends in DEI-
actions alter ontological accountability priorities and trends in knowledge perception reframe
accountability relationships, globalization also initiates an education trend that diverts higher
education’s political and civic mission into a business mission. Global mobility, competition, and
exchange monetizes knowledge and innovation and capitalizes on new diverse labor markets and
information industry (Bidyuk, 2016; Taylor & Cantwell, 2015). Studies indicate a heightened
interest among individual countries and higher education institutions to better position
themselves and gain market advantage. As a result, Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) and Times
Higher Education (THE) partnered to develop the annual World University Rankings in 2004
where universities are scored in five categories: teaching, research, citations, industry income,

22
and international outlook (Hanafi & Boucherie, 2018; THE, 2022). In 2014, the Council for
Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) International Quality Group initiated dialogue on
developing a formal single set of international quality higher education standards guided by
principles set forth by pre-established 2005 international quality assurance guidelines provided
by United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and European
Standards Guidelines for Quality Assurance (ENQA), and the 2008 Chiba principles (Wells,
2014). However, varied political structures and interests between countries make it difficult to
form a single set of international higher education standards. Specifically, within the United
States, the education sector is not controlled by a central government and instead accountable to
the shared governance of the state and the individual institution. Still, American institutions
consistently rank highest globally setting a precedence of standards that most international
standards model (Resuli, 2019).
Consequently, higher education’s new entrepreneurial reputation has manifested a
complex faculty identity. The evolution of higher education into an economic enterprise has
highlighted the value of knowledge, ideas, and innovation, shifting the focus of institutions into
faculty research production to increase prestige and impact world rankings (O’Meara &
Bloomgarden, 2011). Education’s historical focus on pedagogy to inculcate values maintained
and measured by standards, assessments, and achievements stunted individual faculty practice,
training, or dialogue to navigate personal agency. However, faculty must now navigate the
complex identity of the multifaceted role of the educator in higher education who must balance a
persona as a practitioner, researcher, and community leader and balance it in such that it
“maintains the identity in relation to the ‘collective regard’ that others have for their role” (van
Lankveld et al., 2017, p. 326). In addition, a collective lens poses additional pressures from the

23
separate communities that shape this hybrid identity causing professionals to waiver in
developing personal agency. Yet, individual agency is a significant component in developing the
entrepreneur and change agent to remain relevant in global enterprise (Döringer, 2020; Mole &
Mole, 2010). Moreover, competing priorities increase information asymmetry, reduce faculty
autonomy and creativity, and trivialize teaching practices and social justice activities (Lisovsky,
2017; van Lankveld et al., 2017). As a result, quantitative analysis reveals that educators within
the modern-day post-colonial era experience a sort of stressful psychological trauma as they
attempt to come to terms with the dichotomy of the modern-day “educated” professional
researcher and the historic symbolic power of education’s expert teacher (Dugas et al., 2020).
Ironically, faculty that identify primarily as researchers endure the most stress. Moreover,
findings echoed a domino “cohort effect” among younger faculty influenced by graduate studies
in the evolved modern neo-liberal system who are more likely to also identify as researchers (p.
322). As a result, Dugas et al. (2020) suggested that the faculty distress incurred by the
entrepreneurial institution will likely increase over time since entrepreneurial missions have
altered higher education investments that redefine faculty priorities. Studies also reveal the
increased reliance upon part-time lecturers or adjunct faculty to teach so that full-time faculty
can research (Benjamin, 1998; Lisovsky, 2017).
Institutional Relationships and Constructs That Impact Educational Accountability
Lastly, higher education ontological accountability is informed by unique institutional
constructs that validate productivity. Key accountability relationships in education are
bureaucratic, legal, professional, and public/market accountability (Stecher & Kirby, 2004).
Individual institutions are held accountable to the bureaucracy of local, federal, or accreditation
standards or risk sanction and funding. Flinders' (2014) supply and demand accountability

24
framework explains the significance of institutional marketability regardless of funding source.
Employment contracts bind employees to working rules and legalities. Faculty are bound to
professional certification or organizational membership requirements. These relationships are
explicit in nature to account for time and effort expenditures and communicated up the hierarchy
of director-provider relationships throughout the bureaucracy of education where faculty are on
the bottom (Stecher & Kirby, 2004).
Epistemological Accountability in Higher Education
In addition to ontological contexts, unique individual faculty transactions also inform
faculty agency. Epistemological accountability recognizes the relationship between a specific
knower and their available ontological realities (Samarji & Hooley, 2015). Specifically, faculty
epistemological accountability is examined through the various director-provider transactions
faculty endure throughout professional practice. Examination of these transactions help to
employ and analyze faculty behavior management and agency. The review of ontological
accountability properties within higher education provides an overview of contexts that frame
faculty epistemological accountability that can be categorized into top-down transactions or
bottom-up transactions.
Top-Down Accountability
Top-down relationships and transactions are mandated and initiated from an external
source. Currently, studies show that education’s outcome focus has affected teacher preference
for a structural framework that clearly defines functions, roles, and responsibilities within the
mechanical bureaucracy of education (Bolman & Deal, 2017). Boards of education, hierarchical
administration, job descriptions, and salaries mirror centralized structures and establish clear and
formal chains of command. Although higher education exercises independent contracting and

25
faculty academic freedom, every faculty transaction is calculated, compensated, and regulated by
an institution and its directors. Notably, transactions within large organizational structures
require a focus on group capacity and systemic initiatives, not individual agency (Snyder, 2018).
Self-governance exercised and celebrated within higher education is monitored by accreditation
and state standards, producing an “audit culture” (Schwarz, 2016, p. 139). Stecher and Kirby
(2004) argued that ultimately, the bureaucracy manages educational professional accountability.
In an 8-month qualitative study, Dana et al. (2021) revealed that faculty resistance to change is
extrinsically motivated by status quo bias recognized and awarded through top-down
transactions. In addition, veteran faculty have a higher resistance to change (Dana et al.).
Bottom-Up Accountability
Data usage within the educational hierarchy further affects bottom-up accountability.
Data-driven initiatives frame public concern and teacher perceptions about modern institutional
education. Flinders (2014) reframed the radical reform space as a paradoxical outcome that
celebrates self-governance and faculty input to reverse the top-down director-provider
relationship within education’s bureaucracy. Nonprofit organizations provide a substantial
portion of U.S. higher education (Independent Sector, 2022). Yet, studies examine the similar
paralysis of bottom-up approaches that inhibit teacher ability to explore and critique theory.
Mohanan (1997) posited education’s lost ability to separate, articulate, and exercise academic
context (foundational knowledge and skills) and the cognitive context (creativity and critical
thinking skills). A S-STEP study revealed that examinations of institutionalized education
failures and student achievement mainly focus on institutional and structural improvements or
classroom interventions to affect educational and societal injustice (Mellado et al., 2018). Even
formative and summative assessments of pre-service teacher perceptions of teacher-learner

26
relationship reveal that most teachers illustrate teacher-centered conceptions about their
profession and perceive their work as behaviorist/transmissive (Mellado et al.).
Influence of Accountability Upon Pedagogical Mindsets
Examination of the relationship between education’s ontological and epistemological
accountability details reveal that ontological situations affect epistemological knowledge and
perceived opportunity. In other words, “truth” is dynamic and subjective to a knower’s specific
contexts. Yet, little training or education is provided for teachers to explore tenets of
bioecological theory that examine the historical influence of power, significance of contextual
time and place, or the ontological-epistemological continuum that limit knowledge availability.
In fact, the educational setting maintains teachers, learners, and curriculum as separate and fixed
(Prawat, 1992; Samarji & Hooley, 2015). As a result, Cochran-Smith and Villegas’ (2016)
applied Herndl and Nahrwold’s (2000) situated social activity framework into the teaching
profession as a lens to examine the implications of historical context, trends, and institutional
constructs.
The review of history, trends, and infrastructure upon educational provisions reveals the
sacrificed opportunity for faculty to navigate personal agency for the collective interest. Lenoir et
al. (2015) revealed the issues inherent to ontological accountability within education that aim to
answer the question: “What should we [emphasis added] teach?” (p. 52). While no holistic study
captures the development of faculty identity within higher education, Beijaard et al. (2000)
conducted a qualitative study among secondary teachers that demonstrates the significant
influence of perceptual expertise in subject matter, pedagogy, and didacts towards professional
identity development. Similarly, within higher education, faculty identity research has been
separated between fields of study and between specific institutions and cultures. Overall studies

27
have revealed that the “collective regard” upon the expert faculty role negatively constrains
faculty agency and identity (van Lankveld et al., 2017, p. 326).
Specifically, Biesta (2016) examined the limitations upon mindsets produced by
education’s assessment of effectiveness. As a value based upon situational processing, a
dominant board of experts subjectively defines the desired outcomes of effectiveness. Medina et
al. (2017) expressed that such limited information selection narrows individual agency and
increases bias as explained by Bourdieu’s (1977/1980) idea of habitus, a cyclical condition
formed and regenerated through coercive societal structures that shape a member’s actions,
beliefs, and practices. Furthermore, Bourdieu emphasized the significance of an institution in
further perpetuating participant dispositions through participant recognition and shared group
experience. Such a narrow mindset and scope of effective knowledge disavows diverse
possibilities of truth. Ultimately, educational accountability attributes provide a controversial
foundation for pursuits in CRP or CT.
Culturally Responsive Practice (CRP)
Contrary to dominant discourse, culturally responsive practice involves intentional
inclusion of multiple perspectives. Gay (2013) defined CRP as a personal and professional
practice that specifically empowers and cultivates cultural integrity, individual ability, and
academic success among diverse student populations. CRP is an approach that acknowledges
culture as a central component in cognitive development, leaning on student identities and
backgrounds as optimal sources of knowledge (Ladson-Billings, 2021). In lieu of the following
backdrop painted by educational accountability, the constraints in developing cohesive CRP
curriculum are clarified.
Historical Impacts Upon Cultural Responsivity

28
The historical imprints of dominant discourse upon faculty as knowledge providers
constrain faculty mindsets. Educational anthropologists lean on social construction of reality
theory to explain the significant impact of education as an institutional tool to mold a society’s
worldview and behavior (Kang et al., 2017; McDermott & Varenne, 1995). As a result, it should
be noted the dominance of Western models in philosophical, psychological, and social discourse
that affect teacher epistemological accountability, that obstruct the study of cultural implications
on perceptual processes, and that create blinders that make other realities with potential
solutions, opportunities, and translations inaccessible (MacPherson, 2006). The foundations of
social construction of reality allude to the significance of multiple key dimensions in molding an
individual’s knowledge and motivation and ultimately bias. Through this lens, knowledge can be
examined as also a potential barrier to learning and motivation due to the historical political and
structural accountability nature of institutionalized education and the systemic unconscious bias
it may preserve.
Specifically, human agency within sociocultural cognitive theory highlights the
significance of individual teacher’s beliefs and personal factors. Bandura (2001) specifically
identifies three facilitating or constraining agencies in cognitive development: personal agency,
proxy agency, and collective agency. Yet, most work within pre-service teacher education grant
individual teachers with little agentic capabilities, focusing instead on behavioristic and
social/environmental factors. Bolman and Deal (2017) explain that a common error in addressing
organizational failure is a focused blame on the bureaucracy. In this case, the influence upon
education’s ontological accountability’s characteristics and history has manifested
bureaucratically handicapped faculty positioned as providers directly responsive to public/market
accountability.

29
Evolving Trends Influence Cultural Responsiveness
However, shifts in international migration have evolved personal reactions towards
cultural differences that influence educational responses. In the 1970s, critical race theory (CRT)
emerged from a legal studies examination of the civil rights movement to reconstruct societal
and individual concepts of systemic racism (Bell, 2008). The framework was later extended into
the field of education in the 1990s to articulate the racialized social practice of research and
education’s control of conceptual knowledge, identifying the historical precepts that culturally
and structurally maintain racial categories of oppression and power within institutionalized
policies and practices (Ladson-Billings, 2013). Other Crit discourses have since manifested as an
extension to the initial civil rights movement. Recently, an explosion of branches of CRT such as
LatCrit, BlackCrit, AsianCrit, TribalCrit, Kanaka ‘ŌiwiCrit, LangCrit, and QuantCrit have
erupted to address the specific influences of dominant discourse and colonization upon
individual historically marginalized populations and to empower the separate cultural definitions
of knowledge and power.
Although this specific research project does not focus on CRT and stresses the difference
between CRP and the politically driven CRT platform, the implications of CRT reveal
education’s shifting dispositions towards diverse perspectives. Ladson-Billings (2000) explained
the significance of racialized discourses that center the individual in the knowledge-making
process as compared to Eurocentric dominance. Each Crit framework provides a transformative
evaluation paradigm for educators to reflect and link theory to practice, revealing the
significance of time and place context in teaching and learning. However, little research on
culturally responsive practices is conducted in higher education. In addition, CRP and the use of
CRT curriculum in P12 are inconsistently implemented and measured, complicating a collection

30
of empirical evidence to prove CRP effectiveness in changing teaching practice and pedagogy
and student improvement (Bottiani et al., 2018; Castillo, 2018; Cochran-Smith et al., 2015; Han
et al., 2014). In fact, Ladson-Billings (2021) reported that national CRP curriculum and
prescriptive guidance to solve social inequities in education has led to pedagogical designs
grounded in little CRP theory. As a result, it remains unclear how to promote and how to support
teacher adoption and pursuit of CRP.
Institutional Support of CRP
Mirroring trends inducted by globalization and externally motivated funding, higher
education institutions have increased response to supporting DEI. Specifically, institutions have
focused on increased recruitment and hiring of diverse faculty, on partnership with community
stakeholders, and on professional development for faculty and staff. However, studies reveal that
the overall neglect of implicit bias poses potential misalignment of efforts to increase cultural
responsivity within education. A quantitative study at two large public universities in the United
States revealed that desire to hire a more diverse faculty base is insufficient to resolve the
accumulated systemic biases and consequences to retain diverse faculty (Carey et al., 2020). In
addition to targeted diversity hiring, institutions must embed faculty behavior modification
activities to promote inclusion. Stanley (2006) revealed that faculty of color experience
challenges related to authority, credibility, and validity that require supports through collegial
mentorship. Still, supports do not eliminate institutional and individual biases that disadvantage
faculty of color. Since institutions have yet to calculate and define the merits of diversity, other
faculty evaluation measures narrow the scope of diverse interests. For example, faculty are
evaluated on the amount of published works within renowned journals. However, renowned
journals mirror specific prejudice align with dominant discourse (Wang, 2016). Published works

31
by faculty of color who write to impact smaller communities and populations are viewed as less
rigorous (Stanley, 2006).
Tendencies have shown that institutions lean towards professional development options
that are more cost effective and accessible to the variable schedules for individual divisions and
employees. Especially in the context of today’s technology and impacted culture from the most
recent 2020 pandemic, massive open online courses (MOOC) gain the most participant interest
while remaining practical and most cost effective (Rosendale & Wilkie, 2021; Stanberry, 2022).
Current organizational issues struggle with staff shortages, time, and competition for talent while
modularized and self-paced trainings provide a low risk- high yield engagement opportunity that
increases employee morale, skill, awareness, and knowledge (Rosendale & Wilkie, 2021). In
fact, Microsoft’s Unconscious Bias Training has been identified as one of the most effective
approaches to improve diversity, equity, and inclusion within the workplace (Gino & Coffman,
2021). However, Dobbin and Kaley (2016) argued that these strategies instead activate increased
bias, distrust, and rebellion, leading to increased grievance, legal fees, and lessened performance
ratings. Trainings may also lead to further backlash and increased forms of discrimination
(Iverson, 2012; Rawski & Conroy, 2020). Moreover, most teaching dispositions remain
unaffected by shifts in diversity or professional development interventions (Cochran-Smith et al.,
2015). Possibly the inconsistent implementation of professional development trainings
complicate alignments of learning outcomes and collection of effectiveness (Cochran-Smith et
al., 2015; Dunbar et al., 2014; Rawski & Conroy, 2020). Nonetheless, professional development
opportunities are cheapest and least time-consuming option to respond to the diversifying
educational landscape.

32
Although multicultural inventions acknowledge the significance of pre-service teacher
knowledge and motivation, limited studies conduct examination of pre-service teacher
motivation and bias (Gorski & Parekh, 2020). Exploration of potential misalignment is most
urgent as recent inventions for bias reduction in education call for pre-service teacher
multicultural educational training backed by critical race theory (CRT). Gorski and Parekh
(2020) revealed that 71% of multicultural inventions in pre-service teacher education still fail to
impact critical perspectives. Essentially, information asymmetry problems caused the current
retaliation and banning of CRT efforts in schools. Still, the bureaucracy responds by demanding
more accountability measures from teachers, maintaining a burdensome assessment cycle, and
legitimizing its ontological space. Specifically, within higher education, the evolution of higher
education into an economic enterprise requires faculty to direct more focus on research within
their prospective fields to impact world rankings versus practicum theory.
In addition, the comparison of faculty entering teaching practice from professional work
versus those entering directly from university also reveal the lack of ontological exercise in
professional development (van Lankveld et al., 2017). The real world of work permits faculty
with prior professional work experience to gain a greater confidence in themselves and their role
as agents. Although some faculty with prior professional work experience struggle when they
realize insufficient transference from professional experience, student and staff development
programs assist to remedy this disjoint and continue to strengthen identity. However,
comparative studies of various faculty education and training backgrounds have revealed a
constraint on developing professional identity and consciousness of time and place (van
Lankveld et al., 2017). A review of institutionalized education’s history and timeline outlines the
roots of these pedagogical constraints (de Oliveira Andreotti et al., 2015).

33
Critical Thinking (CT)
The critical thinking concept is most scrutinized for its lack of universal definition and
framework. Dewey (1993) considered deduction and induction as primary components.
However, Smith (1993) revealed that teaching logic does not equate with CT. McPeck (1990)
added considerations of domain-specific skills versus domain-general skills. Halpern (1998)
suggested CT skill exercise to advance outcomes while Paul and Elder (2002) stressed the
significance of constant metacognition. Ultimately, two separate disciplines offer input. Whereas
psychology focuses on cognitive processes and skill, philosophy emphasizes on dispositions or
voluntary capacities to respond in certain ways. As a result, CT variables are currently assessed
in two dimensions: skills and dispositions. Tishman et al. (1993) noted that skills do not equate
with dispositions towards using skills. In fact, individuals with CT dispositions are more apt to
develop CT tendencies and pathways towards CT. Therefore, CT disposition is critical to CT
development and exercise. However, literature reveals overall insufficient teacher dispositions
towards CT (Ozdemir, 2005).
Historical Impairment of Critical Thinking
Scrutiny of CT resonates in the defining parameters of its assessment. If assessment of
intelligence is ability-centric, then the constitution of ability reflects a dominant cultural mindset
of those qualifications (Ritchhart, 2001). Considering the historical precepts of institutionalized
education, dominant discourse and dominant accountability processes outweigh inputs on the
values that define desired CT outcomes. Biesta (2016) warned the limitations upon mindsets
produced by dominant values. Studies that assess the effectiveness of current CT measurements
reveal the lack of universal accuracy. For example, Native Chinese speakers who took the
Chinese Watson Glaser CT Appraisal version prior to the English version performed

34
significantly better than native Chinese speakers who did the reverse (Floyd, 2011). The lack of
common CT language, for one, limits CT assessment and currently constrains CT study,
development, and research to English. Insofar, English fluency is “the key to teaching thinking”
(Roberts & Billings, 2008). As a result, it should be noted that aside from the fields of
psychology and philosophy, CT is examined separately in the interdisciplinary field of cognitive
linguistics. Cognitive linguistics was birthed from the combined rejection of traditional concepts
of psychology and linguistics in the 1970s, providing another example of historical constraints
upon conceptual knowledge (International Cognitive Linguistics Association, 2022).
Evolving Parameters of Critical Thought
Global mobility and information exchange has certainly unfolded views upon critical
thinking and knowledge possibilities. Impermanence is the greatest theme the radical reform
space introduces which is contrary to the historical structures and standardization of
institutionalized education. In a review of 40 years of higher education provisions, Haggis (2009)
reported that little research attempts to document dynamic interaction across various disciplines,
populations, or contexts; education and research has remained stagnant. In fact, employers
echoed concerns that college graduates are ill-prepared to enter the current global workforce
dynamic demands and contexts (Hart Research employer surveys, 2016). As a result, higher
educational trends exhibit an increase in multidisciplinary general critical thinking (CT)
outcomes, assessments, and programs driven by new policy and accreditation standards
(Spellings et al., 2006). Moreover, there is a recent movement for institutions to engage
community partnerships to leverage shared knowledge, networks, and resources to transform
homogenous curriculum, to adapt to shifts in diversity, and to serve as a catalyst for social
responsivity (Flicker, 2008; Green et al., 2020; Jongbloed et al., 2008).

35
The time-related accountability values towards cultural diversity serve as catalysts that
prompt critical examination of faculty practice and pedagogy. Criticism is evident through the
explosion of critical race theories in the 21st century. Two CRT theories specifically examine
critical thinking perspectives: LangCrit and QuantCrit.
LangCrit further examines the cognitive blinders historically initiated by institutionalized
education’s fixed and stable establishment of lingua franca. Harvard University’s establishment
of “English A” in 1874 exemplifies administrative control of the hegemonic goals of
institutionalized education (Fontaine & Smith, 2008). The course objective was to standardize,
formalize, and distribute en masse the writing, communication, and values already employed by
the White, masculine, imperial in response to the change of demographics during the Industrial
Age (Meyer, 2001). Universities around the world quickly followed suit to align with the
structure of standardized education and lingua franca to ensure orthodox communication,
economic viability, and yield to America’s socio-political and economic strength (Crystal, 2017).
Globally, nations have aspired to adopt dominant discourse such as English versus Putonghua in
Hong Kong or French and German in Bengal as a means for social mobility but in sacrifice of
congruence and familiarity to home languages (Jamatia & Gundimeda, 2019; Kumar, 2001). As
a single example, English A highlights institutionalized education’s historical impact as an
instrument to meet the needs for social mobility and economic advancement while protecting and
standardizing the unified values and beliefs of the dominant and denying individual agency and
more importantly, separate avenues of critical thought (Fontaine & Smith, 2008; Meyer, 2001).
LangCrit calls to recognize the social construction of language and therefore the tension
that arises upon the negotiation of a single construct of communication and identity development
(Crump, 2014). Psycholinguistic experiments similarly posit the correlation between

36
epistemology and language processing. Although it is still unclear the complex effects of
monolinguistic societal demands, studies have shown that such items as verb-number agreement
and subject-verb order align with unique socially constructed perceptions of space and time
(Bamyaci, 2016; Levinson, 1997). As a result, Floyd (2011) stressed the added complexity of the
fixed discipline-specific terminology within higher education that assumes language
homogeneity potentially which exacerbates meaning construction for English language learners.
From a socio-linguistic perspective, Kandiah (1998) posited the limitation of language on
possibilities. Oliver Sacks painted this reality in his book, The Island of the Colorblind, where a
foreigner is surprised by the blind islanders’ ability to determine ripe, yellow bananas. Similarly,
Kumar (2001) illustrated the identity struggle among citizens in India and Pakistan as nations
sacrifice home language for foreign Roman script in hopes of promoting more global citizens. In
a research review, Ellis (2019) outlined cognitive science and cognitive psychology theories and
research that reveal language as the greatest source of not only self-identity but bias and
ethnocentrism, recommending a shift of focus from lingua franca to multilingualism to provide
increased critical thinking opportunities.
Parallel to LangCrit, QuantCrit highlights space and time significance in quantitative
reasoning. However, unlike the social and cultural construction of language and art, math is a
product of universal cognitive activity. As a result, Menary (2015) points out the capacity of the
human mind to evolve by scaffolding and transforming learning-driven practices to cortical
function, resulting in new mathematical thinking that can be misconstrued as enculturation. Yet,
the impact of cultural differences in mathematical processing is still unclear and warrants further
study. Nonetheless, mathematical thinking involves observational processes that require
references to cultural and linguistic contexts that cause variations in brain processes recruited in

37
math tasking (Tcheang, 2014). Math tasks such as explanation, measurement, design, location,
problem solving, and quantification demand ethnomathematical teacher identities to make
connections between community activity and the content of school mathematics in such that
teachers and students alike examine etic and emic conceptions of numeracy further empowered
by his/her individual knowledge base (Owens, 2014).
The timely interjection of QuantCrit aligns with globalization’s quick advancements
within STEM fields and higher education’s adopted entrepreneurial model. Like the survival and
increase of diversity budgets, STEM continues to receive the greatest support and funding within
higher education. The U.S. Department of Education (2022) continues to announce new funding
initiatives to grow innovation and investments triggered by globalization. Since 1999,
contributions towards higher education specifically for science and engineering has grown by
approximately $5billion (Dorsey et al., 2009). However, CT studies in communication and
technology reveal that as technology increases, individual user decoding skills decrease even
when CT assessments demonstrate high user CT scores (Akgül & Şahin İzmirli, 2021; Ellis,
2019). Findings posit the effects of low schema inputs within technology’s highly automated
climate. Growth in STEM innovations have triggered critical examination of the impact of
automation intelligence on critical thinking ability, reinstituting the significance of the human
and culture in all capacities. As recanted by Hutchins (1995), culture is a “human cognitive
process that takes place both inside and outside the minds of people” (p. 354). To develop higher
propensities towards CT, both psychology and philosophy fields agree that individuals must
endure active mental processes in various contexts to increase schema inputs and exercise
diverse analysis and problem solving. Diverse schema inputs promote restructured knowledge
resulting from effective contextualized and situational analysis (Ellis, 2019; Paul & Elder, 2005).

38
Infrastructural Support of Critical Thinking
Varied political structures and interests between countries make it difficult to form a
single set of international higher education standards. Higher education standards in the United
States remain accountable only to the individual institution and the requirements of its local
government due to the absence of central governance. In 2000, the Council for Aid to Education
(CAE) and RAND Corporation launched the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) for higher
education institutions to assess CT achievement, but the lack of universal definitions of CT
draws criticism (Hardison & Vilamovska, 2009; Williams, 2022). In lieu of ontological
accountability, funding incentives demonstrate federal value and support of initiatives. However,
unlike the external motivators raised for CRP, CT initiatives have received little monetary
incentive, requiring more bottom-up initiative. The U.S. Department of Education attempts to
persuade new policies through edited accreditation standards, but CT professional development
opportunities and curriculum are mostly supplied by the U.S. nonprofit sector (Independent
Sector, 2022; Spellings et al., 2006). All the while, a 1997 institutional study done among faculty
from various institutions affirmed that faculty lack extensive exposure and understanding of CT
although most identify CT as a key outcome yet are not involved in teaching it (Paul et al.,
1997). Although no follow up studies have occurred, the Reboot Foundation (2020) initiated
public surveys to teachers in 2018 and 2019 that express a similar lack of exposure and
understanding of CT information, exercise, and resources while remaining supportive of CT and
its objectives.
Ultimately, the lack of CT support is rooted in its lack of consistent measurement and
universal framework. Historically mass-produced standards, assessments, and achievements have
stunted practice, training, or dialogue to navigate faculty agency. Bandura (2000) stressed the

39
context-specific nature of self-efficacy that is orchestrated by one’s perceptions skill in a specific
circumstance. Without disregard to the influence of education’s historical precepts of dominant
discourse, Ritchhart (2001) provided a dispositional view of intelligence that integrates the
impacts of history and infrastructure, summarizing characterological tendencies that contribute to
productive thinking. A study examined the effect of academic disciplines on motivation, self-
efficacy, and approaches to teaching, revealing low overall self-efficacy among faculty (Nevgi et
al., 2004). To compare, Nevgi et al. (2004) provided a list of various findings on teacher self-
efficacy from studies from different education levels that reveal that higher teacher efficacy is
linked to more effective teaching practices, better student learning outcomes, and increased
motivation for research. In addition, Nevgi et al. argued that efficacy training does improve
ability and that self-efficacy demonstrates differently between disciplines in different institutions
and countries, revealing the significant impact of infrastructure upon faculty. However, findings
show that quantitative disciplines affect higher self-efficacy and higher teacher-centricity.
Moreover, a positive correlation exists between discipline regulation and faculty self-efficacy.
These results also reveal the potential universal cultures among faculty in certain disciplines,
echoing Bandura (1997), Beijaard et al. (2000), Kelchtermans (2009), and Schunk and Usher
(2019).
Conceptual Framework
Current faculty discourse and practice is primarily driven by predetermined course
outcomes, prewritten curriculum, and best practices that provide a type of manual for course
instruction and facilitation. Meyer (2011) argued that faculty solely reflect upon and pursue
micro-level changes within the classroom. Faculty receive little support to explore tenets of
identity construction that examine the historical influence of power that limit knowledge

40
availability. Course outcomes are predetermined by its department. Department full-time faculty
members vote on outcomes that express skills and values shared with the department and its
represented fields of study. Departments then submit course outcomes for acceptance by an
institution’s Curriculum Committee upon course establishment. Committee acceptances are
determined by the alignment of outcomes with the institutional mission and objectives published
and accepted through accreditation. Accreditation is an evaluation process an institution
undergoes through an external commission authorized by the U.S. Department of Education to
publicly affirm the quality of educational provisions. Department faculty then agree upon
textbooks and curriculum to facilitate the course learning outcomes. Kincheloe (2011) argued
that these processes do not promote the critical examination of personal zones of proximal
development, and examination of implicit bias needed to develop cultural responsivity.
Ontology is a philosophical construct based upon social constructivist theory that
explains how realities are uniquely developed within social circles that mold individual human
thinking, behaviors, and actions (Lindgren & Packendorff, 2009). However, these social realities
also affect epistemological knowledge and create blinders that make other realities with potential
solutions, opportunities, and translations inaccessible. Although critical ontology does not permit
one’s access to these inaccessible realities, critical ontology requires philosophical self-reflection
and premeditated inquiry on the socio-historical relevance of power upon embedded personal
identity and knowledge perceptions, permitting access to personal evaluation of the ontological-
epistemological learning continuum (Meyer, 2011). Similarly, Lev Vygotsky, Marurana, and
Varela’s studies on the zone of proximal development reveal that learning takes place when
external information is reflected upon and internalized (Kincheloe, 2011).

41
Figure 1 expresses a conceptual framework that reveals the endemic impact of
historically cultural context upon higher education’s hierarchy of accountability. Yet, this impact
can evolve through the contexts of time that encounter various trends that influence values within
the hierarchy. Ultimately, this is the framework that defines faculty responsibilities, manages
faculty behaviors, and supports faculty dispositions to pursue culturally responsive practice and
critical thinking.

Figure 1
Faculty Accountability Conceptual Framework

42
Conclusion
Ontological and epistemological accountability relationships frame the culture within an
environment and outline the opportunities for behaviors and choices with the same context. The
TSSP framework provides a foundation to conceptualize the impacts of higher education’s
engineers of accountability. This literature review illustrates the endemic impact of higher
education’s history, the transformative influence of emerging trends, and the limitations of
institutional constructs upon faculty dispositions. Such dispositions frame faculty identity and
propensity to pursue CRP and CT.

43
Chapter Three: Methodology
Faculty self-perceptions inform professional identity and choices in practice and
pedagogy. Embedded tacit beliefs are the strongest predictor of practice and pedagogy (Lortie,
1975). Yet, faculty do not easily change deeply rooted self-perceptions even when conceptions
are inappropriate or compete with new information (Farrell, 2006; Mellado et al., 2016). This
qualitative phenomenology attempts to understand higher education faculty perceptions of their
teaching roles and impact on professional identity, culturally responsive practices (CRP), and
critical thinking (CT). These perceptions may provide insight into the opportunities to support
faculty dispositions towards CRP and CT. The following chapter presents the research questions,
design, and data collection procedures for qualitative phenomenological inquiry that examine the
spectrum of personal metaphors faculty ascribe to separate teaching contexts. Specifically, the
overview of the research design presents the rationale for metaphor inquiry among faculty in
higher education. Thereafter, collection procedures present data instrumentation, analysis, ethics,
and study limitations.
Research Questions
This study explores how faculty professional identity informs teaching choices to pursue
CT and CRP. Guided by Cochran-Smith and Villegas’ (2016) teacher framework, this study
questions the impacts of three contexts upon teaching dispositions: (a) the larger historical
setting of institutionalized education, (b) the emerging trends that influence current policy and
practice, and (c) the broader institutional constructs that support and maintain cultures of practice
and pedagogy. The goal of the study is to understand how social, cultural, and institutional
factors influence teacher identities that inform behaviors and pedagogical pursuits. The research
questions include:

44
1. How do faculty perceive the role of higher education?
2. How do educational trends impact current practice?
3. What cultural conditions influence practice?
Overview of Design
This study utilizes qualitative phenomenological inquiry and metaphorical analysis to
examine the spectrum of personal metaphors faculty ascribe to separate teaching contexts.
Conceptions are complex and implicit (Wegner & Nückes, 2015). However, Lackoff and
Johnson’s (1980) cognitive theory on metaphors provides a linguistic means to simplify and
uncover individual and collective thought patterns that are not easily articulated. Metaphors are a
cognitive tool to structure and communicate abstract concepts that are grounded in socio-cultural
conventions (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996; Landau et al., 2010; Nikitina & Furuoka, 2008; Schmitt,
2005). Within educational research and learning theory, metaphor usage and analysis permit
teachers to verbalize implicit beliefs on professional identity, pedagogy, and practice (Farrell,
2006). Metaphors not only capture individual mental perceptions, but guide personal actions
(Carter, 1990; Senge, 1990). As a result, metaphor usage can stimulate reflection, provide a
holistic view and deeper vision of the classroom, bridge prior lived experiences, and reduce
potential implicit bias expressed when exploring personal reflection (Mellado et al., 2016).
While critical research design examines the power relationships and structures
influencing participant epistemological views, arts-based research design examines the meaning
making process. This study combines the two approaches to allow participants to reflect deeper
upon the conditions of their teaching practices and pedagogy that inform decisions. “The job of
phenomenology in education is not to make teaching methods more efficient, more innovative …
but to question what [it] is for, and how we do it” (Grant, 2020, p. 17). The purpose of this study

45
is to understand how situational contexts influence faculty professional identities that inform
pursuit of CT and CRP. Faculty ascribed metaphors to different teaching contexts can increase
understanding of how faculty perceive teaching as a historically situated social practice as
explained by the TSSP framework. Moreover, examination of these metaphors can reveal how
derived professional identities impact pursuits of CT and CRP.
For this study, faculty interviews are individualized and semi-structured. The semi-
structured individual interview format highlights specific data required from all the respondents
but permits further story-telling and personal reflection in a safe space setting (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2015). This study asks respondents to draw upon their own metaphors as teachers in
separate contexts: field specific, critical thinking, and culturally responsive practice, and provide
a rationale for their metaphor identification. Questions are adapted from a similar process
conducted with pre-service secondary school science teachers (Mellado et al., 2018). Thereafter,
metaphor analysis and coding follow phenomenological data analysis procedures and utilizes
Leavy et al.’s (2007) categories of teacher perceptions in transcendental phenomenological
reduction.
The adaptation of earlier studies stipulates reflection upon personal positionality and
supports personal critical ontology, a significant step in phenomenological inquiry. As a critical
thinking instructor and prior critical thinking faculty trainer, I carry personal bias towards
culturally responsive practices and critical thinking exercises. However, phenomenological
inquiry requires the researcher removal of prior beliefs (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The
employment of Leavy et al.’s (2007) categories of teacher perceptions help to reduce my
personal interpretation of responses while increasing research trustworthiness and fluidity of
verbiage used within the educational field.

46
Research Setting and Participants
This field-based study was conducted during the Spring 2023 semester among faculty
who teach critical thinking outcomes in a non-field specific Tier 1 general education (GE) course
at Discovery University (a pseudonym). Academic field-specific GE courses are omitted from
the selection to decrease field-specific bias upon teaching pedagogies.
Specifically, higher education faculty within an institution determine the minimum
foundational concepts, skills, and attitudes students need and develop GE that reflect the
institution’s articulated philosophy. Although GE courses are institution specific, each institution
must articulate the outcomes, mode of practice (grounded, hybrid, integrated, interdisciplinary,
etc.), and alignment of GE courses to the Higher Learning Commission for approved GE
programming and for achieved minimum federal requirement (Higher Learning Commission,
2022).
GE courses are generally divided into tiers with Tier 1 courses supporting the
foundational competencies (such as CT) students need to succeed in Tier 2 and Tier 3 GE
courses, upper-level field concentration courses, and institutional outcomes. Tier 1 faculty are
elicited from a variety of academic fields and divisions to primarily teach 1st-year college
undergraduates. These faculty are not only responsible for imparting subject matter details but
also for introducing the culture of the institution and higher education to students. As a result, the
diversity of subject matter preparation within Tier 1 GE presents a unique setting to examine the
influence of separate fields and experiences upon the conception of professional identity as
expressed by Beijaard et al. (2004).
Moreover, Tier 1 GE courses are more likely to be taught by non-tenured faculty. The
evolution of higher education into an economic enterprise has highlighted the value of

47
knowledge, ideas, and innovation, shifting the focus of institutions into faculty research
production to increase prestige and impact world rankings (O’Meara & Bloomgarden, 2011).
Studies reveal the increased reliance upon part-time lecturers or adjunct faculty to teach so that
full-time faculty can research (Benjamin, 1998; Lisovsky, 2017). In addition, new budget
constraints cause institutions to decrease tenured positions and instead, leverage that funding
source to rely more on contracted part-time faculty and Ph.D. students for GE instruction (Carey
et al., 2020). As a result, Postareff et al. (2007) posited the effect of institutional research focus
upon faculty investments in developing or reflecting upon teaching practices and pedagogy.
For these stated reasons, this study focuses on Discovery University’s non-tenured Tier 1
GE higher education faculty and their professional identities that are impacted by institutional
culture and their separate fields of expertise that inform their choices to pursue CRP and CT. The
participants within this phenomenological field-based study are faculty who currently teach
critical thinking outcomes in a non-field specific Tier 1 GE courses. Postareff et al. (2007) noted
the effects of pedagogical and professional development training upon faculty perceptions and
identity: Timeframes any less than a year from training exposure may decrease self-efficacy and
student-centered focus. As a result, participants have taught the same course for at least one year.
Discovery University is the pseudonym used for this study’s higher education setting.
Discovery University is a Land-Grant institution. Land-Grant institutions were raised on
indigenous lands mostly acquired through unratified treaties that exalted the pioneering of
statehoods and social and political mobility while “othering” and widening the wealth and
education gap (Stein, 2017). As guided by the first Morrill Act in 1862, the original Land-Grant
institutional mission is to provide practical education to new members of the working class and
teach: agriculture, military tactics, technical and mechanical vocational studies, and classical

48
studies (Association of Public & Land-Grant Universities, 2021). In response to the Industrial
Revolution, the Land-Grant institution was a “Plan for a State University for the Industrial
Class” (Congressional Research Service, 2022, p. 2). Within U.S. soil, each state was extended
federal funding and land to erect at least one Land-Grant institution. As an extended campaign
tool of Manifest Destiny, Land-Grant institutions were also erected on foreign soil where initially
military officials enlisted to control the colonized and legitimize dominant power (Bacchus,
2006). Curriculum’s primary purpose was to indoctrinate the colonizer’s language and values
and eventually breed select few to continue as “comprador elites” (pp. 260–261). Goonatilake
(1975) notes that the breeding of the comprador intelligentsia completes the cyclical goal of the
current mainstream educational institution by “getting the colonized to colonize themselves” (p.
6). Specifically, Discovery University was established as a product of colonial expansion and
assimilation education. According to Bourdieu (1997/1980), such educational archetypes mold
citizen perceptions and actions to gain economic, social, cultural, and symbolic capital within a
new colonized world. Furthermore, colonial education influences hiring and teaching practices
that cyclically impact future student perceptions. As a result, Discovery University is an ideal
setting to examine teaching as a historically situated social practice.
Educational anthropology postulates the unique educational experience produced in the
form of colonial education (Kang et al., 2017; McDermott & Varenne, 1995). Current TribalCrit
further explains the systematic result of this institutional tool within its initial tenant:
“Colonization is endemic to society” (Brayboy, 2006, p. 429). Various research demonstrates
such effects in the loss of indigenous language and culture. In one example, researchers
examined the phenomenon of “subtractive bilingualists” and English dialectical speakers that
continue to show issues with pronunciation, intonation, and word order on the Language

49
Assessment Scales I and II because of the dichotomous culture and language identity produced
by colonization (Sablan, 1997). A subversion of cultural interests occurs because of Western
discourse domination and control. As a result, Jamatia and Gundimeda (2019) explained that:
the only option left for the linguistic minority is to assimilate the dominant languages …
to appropriate them within the linguistic situations. As a result, the dominant street
language pervades the home among the linguistic minorities, while the minority
languages are at threat to extinction. (p. 312)
Recent findings from educational anthropology and cognitive linguistics propel increased
examination of best practices in teacher classroom strategies and curriculum to increase reading,
writing, and math gains for multi-lingual students while educational shifts attempt to mandate
curricular introduction of multi-cultural perspectives in reparation of historical
disenfranchisement and social injustices. Yet, initiatives have only appeared to improve student
persistence and graduation rates among Discovery University’s demographic populations. 61%
of the tested pre-college student population are at “need of support” level of proficiency on the
2017 ACT Aspire Assessment (Lujan, 2020). Moreover, U.S. federal guidelines and frameworks
such as the U.S. Census do not capture the specific demographic characteristics hosted among
Discovery’s service population. Per U.S. Census definitions, Discovery only serves two large
populations: Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (48%) and Asian (44%). The remainder is White
(2%), Other and Unknown. However, upon further review, the institution serves Asia (48
countries), Australia, Polynesia (14 countries and seven nations), and 12 adjacent countries that
reflect four major cultural and distinct linguistic groups.

50
Positionality
Some argue that researcher personal self-reflection is a requirement of the
phenomenological qualitative inquiry process. A declaration of positionality, or epoch process,
prompts the researcher to isolate biases that may impact data analysis (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
Positionality is the social and political positioning of a researcher in relation to the context of a
study that impacts the research or presentation of such (Coghlan & Brydon-Miller, 2014). The
following is a presentation of my intersectionality and my positionality on higher education,
critical thinking, and culturally responsive practices. Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989) coined the term
“intersectionality” that has since been approved by the National Career Development
Association (NCDA) as an operational framework to express the multiple identities of privilege
and oppression (Appendix A; Cooper, 2017).
I am a first generationally born American, yet a third-generation daughter “comprador
intelligentsia” who navigates the diasporic effects of mainstream teacher education and dominant
discourse. One grandmother was whipped into conformity to teach Spanish, then Japanese, and
then finally English as colonists demanded upon each acquisition of her homeland. My mother
was an adult learner educator who held a degree in English but gravitated towards the holistic
andragogical approach. Through them, I have been taught to tiptoe through the diaspora of the
indigenous educator who secretly trains students to celebrate the multiple moral personalities of
Kohlberg (1958/1984) to comply to standards for social, economic, and political mobility while
at school/work and comply to family and community at home. My personal success is a result of
my self-regulated reflective exercise that is continually deflated by my observations of my peer
majority. We are not the same, yet we display the same credentials. And within the same breath,
I exhale my privilege as an able heterosexual, multi-generationally financially stable, and

51
credentialed educator and resume the resistance of my gender defiant female, working, multi-
ethnicity, dark skin, and less English tongue.
The comprador elites, or comprador intelligentsia, were a select breed produced during
the Age of Imperialism to indoctrinate the colonizer’s language and values (Bacchus, 2006, pp.
260–261). Goonatilake (1975) notes that the breeding of the comprador intelligentsia completes
the cyclical goal of the current mainstream educational institution by “getting the colonized to
colonize themselves” (p. 6). As a result, the structural nature of education as a product of
political regime and systematic racism and control roots itself in the intelligentsia. In one hand,
the intelligentsia grew the stigma towards the power of knowledge and the institutional sites of
ideological production (Meyer, 2001). In another hand, the intelligentsia gained social mobility
and solidified the future class positions and stratifications of society if not through increased
earnings, then through increased networking (Brown, 2013; Mok, 2016). I have personally been
privileged by this educational advancement and the running-start of at least three known
generations of financial stability due to this educational meritocracy.
However, my lineage of educator intelligentsia left much of the colonizer’s curriculum
outside the home. Although I have yet to find studies completed on the psycho-social difference
of the female intelligentsia within indigenous matriarchal societies, I suspect that this may be the
failure of the patriarchal colonists’ researched intentions and the assumption of universal
dominant and oppressed axes labels. In fact, studies have shown the international emergence of
feminism through the female intelligentsia induction and the commissioning of disenfranchised
White women to teach in colonized territories to claim and challenge gender and race roles
(Coloma, 2012; Steinbock-Pratt, 2019). I posit: What more female empowerment occurs within
matriarchal societies that internally denied the White male dominant curricula? I recall the

52
whispers of my mothers before me: “Do as I say not as I do.” Several historical accounts on
colonialism share stories of persecution for language infringement (Sablan, 1997). I assume my
one grandmother elected to teach each foreign language to save her kin. This did not stop her
from speaking native tongue at home. We were taught the power of rhetoric at early ages to
disguise our intended freedoms and choices. Other matriarchs that surrounded me empowered
themselves with iron weapons and led the fights among men. All were working for undercover
survival of a people versus passive indoctrination.
Yet, migration causes initial intentions and values to be short-lived or changed.
McDermott and Varenne (1995) exclaim that “the downside to culture as a container of
coherence: The container leaks” (p. 325). Education is an instrumental tool in “leaking” these
individual containers and perspectives, posing a threat to indigenous inventory and the support of
faculty agency and consciousness. The oppression of the matriarch has come with the adoption
of Western ideals through education and globalization. This purpose is expressed in U.S.
President William McKinley’s 1899 memorandum that proclaimed U.S. policy mission in
Philippine colonial education, introducing the concept of “benevolent assimilation” to the world.
Similarly, “the entire history of [colonialized territory] school systems can be characterized by
the emulation of American trends, imitation of American curricular structures and utilization of
American cultural experience as the central focus of the system” (Underwood, 1987, p. 6). As a
result, subtractive bilingualism occurs as proof of indigenous cultural rejection in exchange for
upward mobility (Sablan, 1997). I assume that this was the intentions of my other grandmother
who obtained her degree in accounting although never worked. Through this grandmother, I also
learned the significance of my skin tone and was always warned to marry lighter to increase my

53
lineage. She, versus my English teaching mothers, always corrected my grammar because she,
too, hoped for our survival but by embracing the demands of patriarchal colonization.
It is through the lens of intersectionality, that I perceive my complex self and history to
pursue complex work to empower the intrinsic motivation in others to deconstruct the
disenfranchisements of institutionalized education. On numerous occasions, I have seen faculty
struggle with personal motivations to reconstruct curricula and move away from didactic lecture
and shift with the demands of global education and awareness of historical oppressions.
Although there is a desire for change agent leadership, direction is lacking. Current teacher
education’s primary focus on micro-level changes on reflective practices within the classroom
provides little training for teachers to explore tenets of identity construction that examine the
historical influence of power that limit knowledge availability (Meyer, 2011). To maintain
leadership in this global economy and to ease the step of my daughters in a post-colonial society,
mainstream teacher education must change. I align with post-modern research philosophy and
strive to understand how to enact these changes.
The post-modern research philosophy provides the ontology, epistemology, and axiology
needed to move “beyond-reform space” (de Oliveira Andreotti et al., 2015). Through this lens,
researchers first recognize the dynamic impact of power and privilege in socially constructed
realities and the irrecoverable damages and benefits it has awarded. However, post-modern
research focus is on process versus single entities or injustices (Creswell & Creswell, 2018;
Saunders, 2019). Although Wilson (2008) argued for indigenous researchers to rectify injustices
and remain accountable to indigenous values of respect, reciprocity, and responsibility, I diverge
from Wilson’s intentions, interpretivism, anticolonialism, and transformative forms of inquiry. In
the epoche process of phenomenological qualitative inquiry, the researcher must acknowledge

54
personal perceptions that frame bias and preconceived ideas to “set aside predilections,
prejudices … [to not be] hampered by voices of the past” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 3).
As a post-modern philosopher, I acknowledge that there is no person or group or entity to
“blame.” Power and privilege merely exist in a world full of diverse entities, intentions, and
“shadows of truths” (Saunders, 2019). Moreover, the purpose of this phenomenological research
is to examine relationship phenomena. The post-modernist merely works for academe,
counterbalancing influences that regulate or manipulate critical thinking and educational
practice. Post-modernism acknowledges language, communication, context, and rhetoric
(Saunders, 2019). As a result, I choose phenomenological inquiry through a post-modernism lens
in reflection of my third-generation intelligentsia English and philosophy faculty-self.
Data Sources
The primary data sources for this study are semi-structured interviews and metaphor
analysis conducted during April to May 2023. I received approval from Discovery University to
utilize University email addresses to contact and recruit faculty for research participation. An
initial online email survey confidentially collects faculty demographics and screens eligibility
among 23 Discovery University faculty that teach non-field specific Tier 1 GE courses with CT
course outcomes. Only eight non-tenured faculty members at Discovery University were
interviewed. Selected faculty were purposefully selected among survey participants to represent
a greater variety in academic field expertise and demographic. Criteria for participation includes
non-tenured, non-field specific Tier 1 GE course instruction for more than one year, and field
specific course instruction for more than one year.
The interview questions capture metaphors faculty ascribe to separate teaching
experiences. Participants are also prompted to provide rationale for the metaphors ascribed.

55
Explicit participant permission provides audio recordings and automated transcriptions of those
recordings to review during data analysis. Specifically, phenomenology explores the
transcription of conscious experience (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Thereafter, Leavy et al.’s
(2007) categories of teacher perceptions are used to code and analyze the “essence” of the
experiences captured in the interviews (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015, p. 26).
Instrumentation
As an instrument of network sampling, an online email survey was sent to a faculty
network at Discovery University to gather demographic details, disclose interview protocol, and
elicit further network referrals. Survey items serve to screen participant eligibility and collect
individual demographics that inform influential time and place contexts reflected in the TSSP
framework: (a) historical and cultural setting, (b) alignments with current policies and practice,
and (c) institutional setting. The National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional
Assistance provides a five-step guidance to selecting a sample when a full target population is
not accessible (Pazzaglia et al., 2016). Especially since the study examines the impact of social
constructs upon personal identity development, it is important to include demographic survey
items to delineate bias interjected by details of intersectionality. Intersectionality details
influence responses towards CRP and considerations of power and privilege (Ladson-Billings,
1995). The study survey, included in Appendix B, is developed to elicit responses reflective of
NCDA axes of intersectionality in Appendix A.
To explore how faculty professional identity informs teaching choices to pursue CT and
CRP, a semi-structured interview protocol consisting of 13 questions prompts participants to
ascribe metaphors to separate teaching contexts and provide rationale for their metaphor
identification. Questions are adapted from a similar process conducted with pre-service

56
secondary school science teachers (Mellado et al., 2018). Guided by TSSP, this study extends
Mellado et al.’s (2018) study to further explore faculty perceptions on the impacts of (a) the
larger historical setting of institutionalized education, (b) the emerging trends that influence
current policy and practice, and (c) the broader institutional constructs (bottom-up or top-down)
that support and maintain cultures of practice and pedagogy. These categories organize the
sources of influences that mold teacher identity and teaching dispositions towards practice and
theory. Furthermore, the reframing of Mellado et al.’s questions into TSSP permits imaginative
variation and phenomenological reduction. Imaginative variation is a phenomenological strategy
that collects various perspectives of an experience; phenomenological reduction requires
participants to revisit experiences to extract more data and detail (Creely et al., 2020; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2015). Note that the open-ended interview questions are followed by probing questions
to capture greater essence of participant experiences. The interview protocol is included in
Appendix C.
Data Collection Procedures
Data collection began in April and ended in May of the Spring 2023 semester at
Discovery University. There is a greater propensity to find faculty who are actively teaching
during the Fall, Winter, and Spring sessions. A confidential survey was sent to faculty who teach
non-field specific Tier 1 GE courses with CT outcomes. Only faculty who are non-tenured and
have taught the same GE course for more than year were selected as potential interview
candidates. Furthermore, I used the demographic data from the survey to select a purposeful
sample that offers a greater range of ages, races, ethnicities, field expertise and backgrounds for
interview participation. “Data collection and analysis are simultaneous activities in qualitative
research” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015, p. 191). For this study, the screening survey provided

57
descriptive data to determine purposeful sampling for increased imaginative variation and assist
in data organization.
Eight faculty participated in one-hour semi-structured interviews individually via Zoom.
All interviews follow the interview protocol in Appendix C. Due to the Discovery University’s
unique situation, participation is confidential. Data from this study was transcribed and compiled
into a report where pseudonyms and a two-level de-identification strategy were used to maintain
confidentiality. Data is kept in a password protected computer and will be destroyed after four
years.
Data Analysis
Merriam and Tisdell (2015) stressed the significance of early analysis from the inception
of data procedures. The initial screening survey for this study serves as a benchmark to establish
available categories among Discovery University’s Tier 1 GE faculty pool. Survey questions
elicit responses reflective of NCDA axes of intersectionality in Appendix A. Analysis of the
mode of various demographic responses determine the final interviewees to increase range of
intersectionality variables in purposeful sampling. Survey question alignment to TSSP, research
questions, and key concepts are shown in Appendix B.
Phenomenological data analysis proceeds through horizontalization, reduction, structural
description, and integration to capture the essence a phenomenon (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015, p.
27). After the transcribing each of the individual interview recordings, interview statements
directly referring to the research questions were taken from the transcript and separately listed
without prioritization or organization for closer examination. This approach is called
horizontalization (Moustakas, 1994). The reduction process includes identifying key phrases and
patterns to cluster interpreted meanings. Creswell (1998) recommended continual epoch

58
processing to clearly identify subjective and objective perceptions and interpretations throughout
the reduction process in such that personal bias is transparent in the structural description
process. As advised by Merriam and Tisdell (2015), rationale for coding is provided throughout
the research design for transparency and to reveal connections between key concepts. Moreover,
interpretations of responses and metaphors lean on Leavy et al.’s (2007) categories of teacher
perceptions (behaviorist, constructivist, situative, and self-referential) to also assist with verbiage
fluidity in the field and integration of analysis within this study. Leavy et al.’s categories also
mirror faculty ontological and epistemological relationships outlined in this study’s literature
review.
Trustworthiness and Credibility
Adaptation Mellado et al.’s (2018) interview process and utilization of Leavy et al.’s
(2007) defined categories of teacher perceptions maintains the accuracy among studies on the
impact of teacher perceptions of teaching roles. Such practices of transferability increase fluidity
within the field (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Duplicated verbiage in examining teaching practice
and pedagogy also aids in the promotion and adoption of CRP. Although studies show the
significance of CRP in developing student critical thinking and relationships, responding to
emerging educational trends, and increasing inclusivity, there is no articulated framework that
specifically defines CRP or disseminates universal best practices (Han et al., 2014; Ladson-
Billings, 2021).
Ethics
Phenomenological inquiry addresses ethics through the epoch, or researcher reflection
upon personal positionality, so as not to influence data with personal bias. Ultimately researcher
bias impacts the trustworthiness and credibility of a study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). In addition

59
to the bracketing of my own personal beliefs, interview questions and coding processes are
adapted from previous studies. Moreover, Merriam and Tisdell (2015) stressed the significance
of early analysis from the inception of data procedures. Early and continual data analysis and
epoch processing throughout phenomenological inquiry ensure transparency of research bias,
structured descriptions, and data integration and interpretation (Creswell, 1998). Throughout all
instrumentation, data transcription and data coding in this research, alignment to key concepts,
research questions, and TSSP are made clear within the appendices.
Adapted interview questions were pilot-tested and reviewed for researcher bias and
ethical line of questioning. Interview protocol (Appendix C) includes an opening that invites and
supports participants to engage or stop the interview should there be any discomfort. Question
sequencing also allows participants to revisit statements for clarification. After each interview,
the epoch process continues through recorded reflexive journals. Reflections are included in the
study’s final data analysis.

60
Chapter Four: Findings
Current educational research calls focus on culturally responsive practices (CRP) to
improve inclusivity, equity, and achievement gaps as student demographic compositions in
educational institutions diversify and separately shift away from their comparatively
homogenous faculty. CRP is an approach that acknowledges culture as a central component in
cognitive development, recognizing that student identities and backgrounds are sources of
knowledge (Ladson-Billings, 2021). Yet, little research on CRP is conducted in higher education.
In addition, P12 inconsistently implements and measures CRP, complicating a collection of
empirical evidence to prove CRP effectiveness in changing teaching practice and pedagogy and
student improvement (Bottiani et al., 2018; Castillo, 2018; Cochran-Smith et al., 2015; Han et
al., 2014). Ladson-Billings (2021) argued that national CRP curriculum and prescriptive
guidance incorporate little CRP theory and lacks effective pedagogical design. As a result, it
remains unclear how to promote and how to support teacher adoption and pursuit of CRP.
Nonetheless, effective implementation of any initiative requires organizational
assessment of potential communication gaps that influence dissemination and implementation of
strategies that influence change. This qualitative phenomenological inquiry examined the
spectrum of personal metaphors faculty ascribed to separate teaching and learning contexts
during semi-structured personal interviews to understand how historical, social, cultural, and
institutional factors influence faculty identities that inform practice and pursuit of critical
thinking outcomes within multi-cultural classrooms. Personal metaphors provide a cognitive and
linguistic means to articulate complex thought patterns grounded in socio-cultural conventions
(Coffey & Atkinson, 1996; Johnson, 1980; Landau et al., 2010; Nikitina & Furuoka, 2008;
Schmitt, 2005). Chapter Four first unfolds and investigates metaphors faculty shared to illustrate

61
CRP in teaching critical thinking outcomes. Thereafter, the following research questions guided
by Cochran-Smith and Villegas’ (2016) TSSP framework frame the study’s findings:
1. How do faculty perceive the role of higher education?
2. How do educational trends impact current practice?
3. What cultural conditions influence practice?
Participants
This study elicited responses from non-tenured faculty that teach non-field specific Tier 1
GE critical thinking outcomes at Discovery University. GE course outcomes are aligned with
Higher Learning Commission approved GE programming and federal requirements. Tier 1
courses support the foundational competencies students need to succeed in higher level courses
and outcomes. Tier 1 faculty are elicited from a variety of academic fields and divisions to
primarily teach 1st-year college undergraduates. Discovery University hosts four non-field
specific Tier 1 GE courses with critical thinking outcomes.
Specifically, Discovery University is a Land-Grant institution that was established as a
product of colonial expansion and assimilation education. According to Bourdieu (1997/1980),
such educational archetypes mold citizen perceptions and actions to gain economic, social,
cultural, and symbolic capital within a new colonized world. Furthermore, colonial education
influences hiring and teaching practices that cyclically impact future student perceptions. U.S.
federal guidelines and frameworks such as the U.S. Census do not fully capture the specific
demographic characteristics hosted among Discovery’s service population. Discovery serves
Asia (48 countries), Australia, Polynesia (14 countries and seven nations), and 12 adjacent
countries that reflect four major cultural and distinct linguistic groups. All feeder schools into the
University serve 100% free and reduced populations with 61% of the pre-college student

62
populations testing at “need of support” level of proficiency on the 2017 ACT Aspire
Assessment (Lujan, 2020).
The single-stage survey was available for 2 months in the Spring 2023 semester, yielding
a 43.5% response rate with 10 responses from a combined pool of 23 faculty at the time of
distribution. Department heads of the respective courses provided University emails of non-
tenured faculty within their pools. Response rates from the four Tier 1 courses were: Course A
(20%), Course B (28.6%), Course C (50%), and Course D (66.7%). However, survey responses
revealed that some faculty currently teach or have taught more than one Tier 1 course.
Ultimately, eight participants were selected to interview. All interview participants are non-
tenured faculty that have taught at least one of the same Tier 1 GE courses for at least one year.
The initial survey also prompted participants to share potential operating identities that
impact perceptions of power and privilege aligned with the NCDA framework of
intersectionality. The overall demographic composition of interview participants included two
male faculty, three faculty who identified as multi-racial, four Catholic, one Buddhist, one
Protestant, and two multi-religious; two faculty have physical or mental conditions that limit
daily activity; and while all participants communicate fluently in English, three speak more than
three languages. It should be noted that during the interview process, an additional interviewee
admitted to speaking more than three languages which is later discussed in the findings.
However, to maintain the confidentiality of interviewees, a summary of the individual participant
demographic responses is omitted from this report. Instead, Table 1 summarizes Tier 1 course
affiliation, field certifications, teaching experience, professional associations, professional
experiences, and collective educational experience by interviewee pseudonym.

Table 1
Interview Participants
Pseudonym Tier 1
course
Field
certifications
Teaching
experience
Professional
experience
Educational
experience
Generations of
college graduates
Bailey A & B Art history;
Linguistics
Part-time (PT)
at more
than one
institution;
23 years
Various Tier 1;
Multiple higher
ed program and
institution
associations;
ESL Director (Asia);
Education
assessment
coordinator (Asia
& Central
America);
management;
graphic arts; real
estate
Primary-secondary:
various
American/British
international
schools (Asia &
Central America);
BA/MA/MS: public
state
3+
Cyrus A & B Legal;
Public policy
PT at more
than one
institution;
5 years
Multiple institutional
associations in
secondary & post-
secondary
instruction;
Private primary &
secondary ed tutor;
Journalist
Primary: public;
Secondary: private
religious
affiliated;
BA: public state
2 MA: ivy league
2

63

Didi A Communication
culture;
Holistic therapy
PT at more
than one
institution;
1.5 years
Various courses at
various levels;
Multiple higher ed
program &
institution
associations;
Health coordinator;
Spiritual therapies;
Service
entrepreneur;
Public relations &
marketing;
Journalist
Primary-PhD: public
(Europe);
MS: public Land-
Grant

2
Lita D International
development;
Global
cooperation
PT; 1 year TESOL;
Research assistant in
intercultural
communications;
Translator;
Nonprofit program
officer (East Asia)
Primary-secondary:
public;
BA: private religious;
MA: private religious
2
Mac D Logic FT; 5 years Various Tier 1
courses
Primary-MA: public
(Asia)
2
Pillar A & B Communication;
Education
FT;
Institutional
coordinator;
PT at another
institution;
23 years
Various courses at
various levels;
Multiple program &
institution
associations in
secondary & post-
secondary
instruction
Primary: public;
Secondary: private
religious;
BA: private religious;
MA: public Land-
Grant
2

64

Reggie C Math;
Education
PT at more
than one
institution;
6 years
Various Tier 1
courses;
Multiple program &
institution
associations in
primary,
secondary, &
post-secondary
instruction
Primary-secondary:
religious;
BA/MA: public
Land-Grant
3
Stitch D Political science;
Public
administration;
Education
FT;
Student
advisor;
1 year
Government program
coordinator;
Community
organization
president
Primary: private
religious;
Secondary: public;
BA/MA: public
Land-Grant
2

65

66
Data Collection and Analysis
This study used qualitative data collected through semi-structured personal interviews
with Tier 1 general education course faculty at Discovery University. An initial online survey
was emailed to 23 Discovery University faculty to screen a greater variety of academic field
expertise that inform influential time and place categorical contexts reflected in the TSSP
framework: (a) historical and cultural setting, (b) alignments with current policies and practice,
and (c) institutional setting. In addition, the demographic survey items attempted to highlight
potential bias interjected by details of intersectionality. Intersectionality details influence
responses towards CRP and considerations of power and privilege (Ladson-Billings, 1995). The
study survey included in Appendix B reflects NCDA axes of intersectionality in Appendix A.
After screening, eight non-tenured Discovery University Tier 1 GE faculty were selected for
interview.
The semi-structured interviews reflected the eight participants’ understanding of CRP and
CT exercise in the classroom. Their stories reflected upon the influence of educational
experiences, educational trends and policies, and workplace structures upon participant practices.
Interpretation of responses and metaphors leaned on Leavy et al.’s (2007) categories of teacher
perceptions: behaviorist, constructivist, situative, and self-referential. These categories
established the four key a priori codes and coding foundations for this study that were overlayed
into the TSSP categorical contexts to address each research question. In addition, findings are
categorized into top-down or bottom-up accountability transactions to further examine
transactions that influence faculty behavior management and agency. Figure 2 provides an
illustration of the alignment between the a priori codes, TSSP, epistemological accountability,
and the research questions.

67
Figure 2
Research Themes and Coding Relationships

Use of Pseudonyms and Second-Level De-identifiers to Protect Participant Identity
It should be noted that some tables in this report present findings labeled with the same
pseudonyms as initially presented in Table 1. However, a second level de-identification strategy
in this report attempts to further disassociate interview responses from research participants or
their pseudonyms and pseudonym attributes in Table 1 that may be used to identify the research
participants. The second-level random alphabetic assignment presents examples of individual
interviewee metaphor responses that are examined through the lens of Leavy et al.’s (2007)
categories of teacher perceptions that are linked to specific teaching and learning stigmas. The
second-level de-identification precaution attempts to prevent any risk or harm to participants.
Furthermore, any quotes used in this report do not name participants or pseudonyms. Instead,

68
interview quotes are unnamed or linked to the random alphabetic assignment due the sensitivity
and connection to metaphor stigmas and responses.
Analysis of Divergent Faculty Metaphors
To understand the influence between various faculty epistemological accountability
relationships and faculty identity development, this study did not discount or revisit divergent
metaphors within single interviews. Phenomenological inquiry examines each participant’s
“conscious experience” to identify phenomena relationships (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 26).
Furthermore, phenomenological reduction requires researcher (a) separation of prior knowledge
and theory to pay full attention to phenomenon manifestations and (b) withholding of
conceptions of observations/data (Giorgi, 2008).
In addition, participants were chronologically prompted to provide teaching metaphors in
various contexts throughout their work experiences, early educational memory, and current
teaching position. The repetitive investigative series exercised imaginative variation, a secondary
component of phenomenological inquiry in addition to reduction. For each contextualized
metaphor, participants provided articulation of how these metaphors exercised CT and CRP.
Finally, participants were prompted to provide separate metaphors for CT, CRP, educational
policy, and workplace structures. Disjointed metaphors within single interviews informed how
faculty perceive higher education and what cultural influences inform faculty dispositions,
providing insight on how dynamic identities serve faculty in their various workplace situations.
In fact, all faculty participants in this study shared different dispositions when reflecting upon
different contexts of teaching and learning. For example, participants referred to behaviorist and
self-referential classifications in conceptions of teaching in learning in participant early
education experiences (Fig. 3). However, only two participants maintained their interpretations

69
for teaching and learning in higher education. Participant conceptions of teaching and learning
during participant higher education experiences varied between behaviorist, constructivist, and
self-referential (Fig. 4).

Figure 3
Faculty Conceptions of Early Education

0
1
2
Behaviorist Constructivist Situative Self-Referential

70
Figure 4
Faculty Conceptions of Higher Education

These initial metaphors served to later clarify participant conceptions of critical thinking
exercise, culturally responsive practices, and the impact of educational trends and policy and
workplace infrastructures.
Divergent Faculty Conceptions of Tier 1 Ed
Most participants interpreted teaching and learning within Tier 1 courses mostly from the
behaviorist’s perspective (Fig. 5). Behaviorists perceive the teaching role as a transmitter and
knowledge as prescribed. Learning and individual growth is acquired through the provision of
new associations. Participant examples of behavioristic attributes are provided in Table 2.

0
1
2
3
Behaviorist Constructivist Situative Self-Referential

71
Figure 5
Faculty Conceptions of Tier 1 Courses

0
1
2
3
4
5
Behaviorist Constructivist Situative Self-Referential

72
Table 2
Participant Examples of Behavioristic Attributes
Participant examples of behavioristic attributes
Curriculum Formula, basics, foundational knowledge … immovable structure.
Pre-installed game with leveled objectives and stages and pre-
programmed game functions with pre-programmed character
and tool options for game play, but play is bound by rules. …
The game also incorporates relevant topics that engage students.
Exclamation point: important need-to-know information.
Not cultural knowledge, but institutional and historical significance.
Learning A meat processor refines information.
A one-way street that imparts knowledge; At intersections, [teachers]
pause to accommodate [student understanding and engagement],
but then send [students] back onto that one-way street …
imparting knowledge.
WD40 greasing cogs to ensure proper assessment of leveled skills.
Improvement of skills. … No one is getting a degree, but confidence
in what you know.
Teacher-student
relationship
A [parent/mother/father] that conveys lecture style.
Supervisor criticizes, “tweeks,” and [students] make changes.
[Teachers] make observations from a balcony, use magnifiers …
monitoring and adjusting … identifying needs to be addressed
[to improve organization and program].
Sun to photosynthesis: Plants (students) need to grow, needing the
sun (teachers). The sun pushes away the clouds for learning to
happen, creating a space, feeding that space, infusing curiosity.
Robot military soldier ringmaster policeman … keeping an eye on
things to make sure all is going as planned. … I’m watching
you. … to keep [students] on task.
[Teacher] is the program developer informed by course learning
outcomes and shared feedback from colleagues to design the
program.

For more than three participants, behavioristic curriculum most often aligned with
“structure,” “foundation,” and “formula” within student skill levels. Participants explained that
curriculum in this context upholds institutional and historical significance and value, requiring
clear authoritative metaphors ascribed to behaviorist teaching figures. One participant referred to

73
behavioristic curriculum as “propaganda.” More than three participants classified behaviorists as
“directive” and “overseeing.” When elaborating upon a behavioristic context, one participant
explained that “no one was getting a degree from [what was taught], but [students gained]
confidence in what [they] know.” Extraction of behavioristic attributes from varying participant
experiences clarified participant conceptions of Tier 1 courses. Summarizing the behavioristic
perspective on Tier 1 courses, one participant explained:
This is Tier 1. If you give [students] more options, the effect won’t be the desired result.
… We have some rules … [but] if you are a good player, you can take advantage of
higher levels [in higher level courses]. … It’s not like … a dissertation where there’s no
limit. … That’s too advanced for them right now.
Yet critical thinking outcomes within Tier 1 courses mirror the constructivist approach.
Course outcomes generally require students to be able to consider diverse cultural contexts and
ethics; to organize language for effective communication; and to apply abstract thinking to
identify, to evaluate, and to use diverse processes to solve problems. Constructivists embrace the
student as a constructor of knowledge and faculty as facilitators in this process. Participants
referred to constructivists as “guides” or “advisors” more than six times.
Figure 6 presents high frequency attributions provided by participants that express the
significance of “learner-centered” instruction and organic curriculum within the constructivist
context. One participant explained that within the constructivist space: Teachers are mindful of
the “weird power structure of being the white person in the room … that being aware that there
was this weird power structure there telling [students]: ‘This is how you should think.’ … [So the
constructivist teacher adjusts] to be less prescriptive.” Another explained that this space requires
a “shared responsibility between teacher and student,” requiring other shared attributes such as

74
“humility,” “compassion,” and “forgiveness.” Participant examples of constructivist attributes
are provided in Table 3.

Figure 6
Constructivist Frequency of Terms

75
Table 3
Participant Examples of Constructivist Attributes
Participant examples of constructivist attributes
Curriculum Student-centered. Context-centered.
Storytelling … living and complicated … shared perspectives.
Less prescriptive … forgivable
Learning Place of thought to encounter new associations … connections …
network.
Learning is a conversation … where the focus is on process
Teacher-
student
relationship
Students are flowers. Teachers are bees that pollinate. Teachers are also
suns with eyes that can see when and where to provide light.
Mutual symbiotic relationship … shared responsibility … reciprocal
growth.
We’re all on a road lit up with signs: “this way.” The teacher/cheerleader
checks on progress to provide feedback and support to get back on the
road to the finish line.
The teacher is a light switch that toggles between directive and reflective
light … based on so many variables … to support the direction for that
context … what the student needs.
The teacher is a canoe captain with a vision, but no paddle. The teacher
provides expectations … but how you get to it, the steps leading up to
it- that’s up to you.
Teacher is a two-way mirror that allows students to reflect upon
themselves while the teacher observes unobtrusively while shielding
students from negative interference.

Separately, one participant emphasized that any single member “is a part of this bigger
picture [which is] a greater responsibility.” As the single situative ally within Tier 1 courses, this
interviewee highlighted the significance for Tier 1 courses to support community identity.
Leaning on social constructivism theory, situative conceptions simulate a classroom of
community practice.
You are a member of [this] community … [this] area … [this] culture … these values …
regardless of reasons why you are here. … Embrace your identity [to] check your
assumption, but then understand that your cultural identity and background actually play

76
a bigger part in problem solving. … It takes a village. … Problems are not singular. …
It’s not just [my or your] problem, it’s everybody’s problem. … And even at the 100
level, you can make this anchor to students and community.
Within this classroom, students are legislators sitting at desks exercising discourse. This
interviewee admitted that current government “solutions are far-fetched and disconnected.”
Within the situative conception, students are community members and “future decision makers.”
Situative learning “brings legislators back into the classroom” so decisions and solutions “are of
us.”
Although collective participant references to situative conceptions of learning were
minimal, three participants also shared situative metaphors in other contexts. In fact, another
participant provided a specific example of situative learning exercise in a past Tier 1 course
where students determined a new grading scale. After realizing the static cultural definitions of
some course outcomes, this participant invited shared discourse for students to alter course
rubrics that considered student individual cultures and values as well as future intentions. This
participant also shared teaching whole course examples of situative learning above the Tier 1
level. The collection of situative metaphors from four of the participants are provided in Table 4.

77
Table 4
Participant Examples of Situative Attributes
Participant examples of situative attributes
Curriculum Community-based research.
Collective practice.
Discourse.
Learning Cognizant of learning and perceptions as part of a moving and living
whole model.
Teacher-student
relationship
Teachers and students collectively act as bridges to community
solutions. … As bridges, constant practice of restructuring and
review of implicit bias is an integral part of the joint practice.

Significance of I, (S)He and We: A Comparison of Participant Pronoun Usage
Furthermore, the eruption of participant pronoun usage when exercising specific teacher
dispositions revealed the conceived classroom dynamics in different contexts. Cognitive
linguistics and psychologists reveal the correlation between pronoun usage and individual
perceptions of social relationships. For example, single third person pronouns ([s]he, her/him, or
hers/his) manifested during participant sharing of constructivist contexts. Some recantations of
constructive metaphor exercises included single transactions between the teacher and one
student. Whereas an increased use of plural personal pronouns suggests a higher focus on
collaborative efforts or communal dynamics (Fridland, 2021). Collective culture is mirrored in
the increased use of plural personal pronouns (we, us, and our) when participants were prompted
to explain the ways instruction and learning occurred within situative metaphors. At the same
time, personal pronouns such as “I,” “me,” or “my” dominated self-referential metaphors. Table
5 presents the singular and plural pronoun counts and specific pronoun ratios that participants
employed during different teacher conceptions.

78
Table 5
Comparison of Teaching Conceptions and Pronoun Usage
Perception
category
Singular pronoun
counts
Plural pronoun
counts
Pronoun ratio
approximations
I/me/my (S)he/it/
herhim/
hershis
We/us/our They/
them/
their
I:we I:they
Behaviorist 44 0 4 44 11:1 1:1
Constructivist 98 10 9 87 11:1 1:1
Situative 28 0 30 14 1:1 2:1
Self-referential 65 0 0 30 65:1 2:1
Total counts 235 10 43 175
Total per type 245 218

Divergent Faculty Conceptions of Tier 1, CT, and CRP Practices
Although Leavy et al.’s (2007) fourth category of teacher perceptions did not manifest
itself within faculty perceptions of Tier 1 education, all participants shared self-referential
conceptions in other contexts. Self-referential metaphors do not refer to students, the learning
environment, or measurements of accountability. Instead, self-referential metaphors focus on
egocentric subjective representations. At least seven times, various participants referred a
familial metaphor (mother, father, parent, or guardian) in which no participant was able to
articulate the learning process. One participant explained that the [mother/father] metaphor had
“nothing to do with the actual learning ... not even good at teaching, but … caring … just like
family.” Such responses mirror the cognitive psychological mechanism of analogical transfer.
Analogical transferred knowledge retrieves a prior model, creates a map that parallels past and
current experience, and uses the map to draw inferences that inform application of similar
current choices and behaviors (Nokes, 2009).

79
In fact, 11 of the 17 self-referential metaphors provided inferences to safety. One
participant justified these self-referential conceptions to the idea that:
Rapport and feeling of safety are precursors to any kind of learning. … A person (child or
adult) can learn only once they feel safe, appreciated, and accepted for who they are. …
[Safety] also awakens additional motivation in students. … People can only learn and
possibly change if they want to only once they feel safe.
Coincidentally, four participants attributed self-referential metaphors towards CRP. Examples of
faculty self-referential conceptions for a Tier 1 teacher and for CRP are provided in Table 6.

Table 6
Participant Examples of Self-Referential Attributes
Types of
perceptions
Participant examples of self-referential attributes
Perceptions of a
Tier 1 teacher
The teacher is a butterfly that floats between the needs of students.
The teacher is a clown entertainer.
The teacher is a monster dragon.
Perceptions of CRP The teacher is a tree: free, open, and outreaching … flexible.
Sometimes, I stand my ground … sometimes adaptable … culturally
responsive to good or bad weather … a good job today … other
times, I struggle. … The leaves reach. … I care for students as
people. … I take initiative and reach. … Some cultures are more
familiar. … Sometimes I have storms, but I’m learning.
Parachute opens when you are culturally sensitive.
A guide that observes diversity.
A chameleon that emulates the environment.
A rushing river of information … I gather what I can as it comes
through me … sifting, but knowing full well that there’s so much
that I can’t take it all in. … It is the foundation to stand in … that I
know what I don’t know.

80
Although all participants admitted to the significance of CT and CRP in the Tier 1
classroom, the divergence of teaching conceptions of Tier 1 is clear. In addition, individual
faculty ascribed divergent metaphors to Tier 1, CT, and CRP. Comparisons of ascribed
metaphors revealed the dynamic and situational considerations faculty endure when imagining
the classroom. Table 7 introduces the second level de-identification of participants and presents
the various teaching perceptions in different contexts. Due to the stigmatic relationship with
teaching perceptions, the randomly assigned alphabetic identifiers introduced in Table 7 are used
in the remainder of this report as a second level de-identification strategy.

Table 7
Divergent Faculty Conceptions of Tier 1, CT, and CRP
Interviewee Tier 1 conception CT conceptions CRP conceptions
A Behaviorist Behaviorist Self-referential
B Behaviorist Behaviorist Self-referential
C Constructivist Constructivist Constructivist
D Behaviorist Constructivist Self-referential
E Behaviorist Constructivist Behaviorist
F Situative Situative Situative
G Behaviorist Behaviorist Behaviorist
H Constructivist Situative Situative (self-referential)

Note. Table 7 presents interviewees in their randomly alphabetic reassignment as part of a
second de-identifying measure due to the positive and negative perceptions attached to Leavy et
al.’s (2007) categories of teacher perceptions.

81
When explaining CRP exercise, Participant H attributed “eyes” that gain awareness of
discord for culturally appropriate understanding. H was the only participant who was able to
articulate how this initial self-referential metaphor exercises CRP through a concrete example. H
illustrated how personal observations in a new location provided a lived experience to learn
culturally appropriate eye contact; however, course rubrics did not coincide with this lived
experience. As a result, H invited students to alter the Tier 1 course grading system to reflect
student cultures and future intentions. After collective discourse, H, with the students, changed
the course rubrics. For this reason, H’s initial self-referential metaphor was changed to a situative
conception of CRP. Other participants explained their self-referential CRP conceptions as
“flexible,” “outreach,” “responsive,” “open-minded,” “observant,” “culturally relevant,”
“understanding,” and “accommodating” without further detailed clarification that distinguished
their metaphor separately from self-referential conceptions.
Participants E and G, who are listed as having behaviorist conceptions of CRP, could not
articulate separate CRP metaphors as constrained by their fields of practice. Confirming Nevgi et
al.’s (2004) argument on the effect of academic disciplines on teachers’ motivation, self-efficacy,
and approaches to teaching, E explained: “It’s kind of outlined … what specific things we’re
supposed to be teaching the students. … It’s still [field specific]. It’s not like their cultural
knowledge. What’s the metaphor for nothing?” G referred to a previous behaviorist conception
of Tier 1 as a pre-programmed game that still provides opportunities to learn difference among
the pre-installed diverse game characters and tools. CRP is mirrored in the provision of different
scenarios the game provides. “Our job [as teachers] is to provide these opportunities to let
[students] identify different ways to interpret the same thing.”

82
Similarly, field requirements constrained participants D and E in maintaining a singular
identity between their Tier 1 metaphor and their CT metaphor. Eventually D relinquished to
envisioning a “switch” to illustrate CT and all facets of teaching, toggling between variables and
objectives: “a ringmaster … when they need to be on task; … a mirror … when there are
concepts that I want them to absorb … and understand.” Post-interview, two participants
reflected upon the “different caps” faculty wear that influence practice and pedagogy.
Nonetheless, all participants echoed the same sentiments with Participant H in that CRP
exercise begins prior to instruction. B stated: “The first step is not [my Tier 1 teaching
metaphor]. Your first approach is to get to know your students … to engage the student. …Then
I shift into [Tier 1].” Similarly, G expressed: “At the beginning of a course, the teacher needs
carefully observe and identify the diversity needs.” CRP statements echoed images of Maslow’s
Hierarchy upon learner basic needs.
Overall, the metaphors faculty ascribed to CRP reflected more knowledge compilation
transference from experiences from field of expertise. Cognitive psychology posits that a
knowledge compilation transfer mechanism unconsciously recalls prior instructive knowledge as
a procedural framework to navigate new situations. Nokes (2009) also noted that unconscious
dispositions have little rational basis, explaining the separation of CRP exercise from core
teaching and learning metaphors in addition to the divergent conceptions between Tier 1 and
CRP.
RQ1: Faculty Perceptions of Higher Education
The goal of this study is to understand how historical, social, and cultural factors, and
educational trends and policies influence faculty identities that inform teaching choices and
behaviors. Particularly, this study’s interest is to identify constructs that inform how faculty

83
teach and approach CT and CRP. Research Question 1 (RQ1) sought to examine the rooted
perceptions of faculty in higher education. Although historically and deeply rooted conceptions
are more difficult to change, the rationale for these conceptions provide insight upon social and
cultural constructs that influence faculty choices and behaviors.
All research participants were at least second-generation college graduates who
referenced impactful college student experiences in their metaphorical reflections. However,
participant perceptions of higher education were mixed. Yet, most participant conceptions of
higher education paralleled their CT conceptions. Table 8 compares participant perceptions of
higher education, interest of pursuit of teaching in higher education, CT, and CRP.

84
Table 8
Comparison of Higher Education Experience and CT and CRP Conceptions
Interviewee Positive or
negative
student
experience
Interest in
teaching
higher ed
Conceptions
of higher
education
CT
conceptions
CRP
conceptions
A – Fell into
opportunity

Behaviorist Behaviorist Self-referential
B – Fell into
opportunity

Behaviorist Behaviorist Self-referential
C + Return to
academia

Constructivist Constructivist Constructivist
D + Return to
academia

Constructivist Constructivist Self-referential
E + Teaching
life goal

Self-
referential
Constructivist Behaviorist
F + Teaching
life goal

Constructivist Situative Situative
G + Field

Behaviorist Behaviorist Behaviorist
H + Return to
academia
Situative
(self-
referential)
Situative Situative
(self-
referential)

Whether participant student experiences within higher education were positive or
negative, participant student experiences carried over into participant conceptions of higher
education and CT. Shared positive higher education student experiences occurred among
participants who had interest to return to the academic environment or who had an initial career
goal to teach in higher education. One participant admitted to strategically pursue a faculty
position, a culminative employment option within the field. For this participant, Table 8

85
expresses the duplication of field conceptions upon CT and CRP. Participants who returned to
academia equated their return with “hunger for more knowledge.” Academia was identified by
all these three interviewees as “knowledge sharing” “research spaces” where ideas and people
are valued. One added the appreciation for the “international community where there is no room
for racism.” These participants replicated their conceptions of higher education into their
conceptions of CT.
Similarly, the one participant whose field of study and interest to teach in higher
education has been steady, mirrored the steady in metaphor conceptions across all contexts. Two
participants whose goals have been to teach within higher education had more divergent
conceptions of higher education, CT, and CRP. These two participants also have had a wavering
history of field interest and work experience. Consequently, these two participants shared lived
experiences of learning and developing their higher education practice and pedagogy.
Participant E shared a positive story of a self-referential college instructor, a “father …
not even very good at teaching, but … caring … like family … accommodating.” Separately, E’s
field of study lacks accommodations (behaviorist): “You just do it the way that it is.” As a result,
E admitted: “So I’ve become this cheerleader” specifically for students that “don’t like [the field]
or haven’t even been good at [it].” These lived learning experiences have resolved E’s
conception of CT as constructive.
Participant F shared a positive experience with a constructivist college instructor, a
visionary canoe-captain with no paddle. Non-academic work experiences added realization
(situative) that “problems are not singular … and the member is part of this bigger picture.” As a
resolve, F utilizes the collective practice of the situative classroom for students to exercise
themselves as members that “hold the system accountable.”

86
Otherwise, the two participants that have “fallen into” faculty positions within higher
education without initial goal or interest, replicate the models they have experienced. Oddly,
both participants also shared negative college experiences that expressed “dismissive”
behaviorist faculty. Potentially, these two participants employ self-referential pre-cursor
exercises to ensure safety and trust within their classrooms so as not to repeat the offenses they
experienced from their higher education predecessors. One participant exclaimed: “The first step
is not [my Tier 1 teaching metaphor]. Your first approach is to get to know your students … to
engage the student … then I shift into [Tier 1].” In the end, all participants perceive higher
education as a place for student growth in learning and critical thinking exercise. However, past
lived experiences as a student within higher education influence future faculty identity
development, again reflective of the cognitive psychological mechanism of analogical and
knowledge compilation transfer that insert prior experience as the substratum of choices and
behaviors.
RQ2: Impact of Education Trends and Policies on Faculty Dispositions
The organizational framework of U.S. higher education’s system has evolved over time.
Yet, successful higher education change and leadership first requires understanding of the
organization’s particular leadership framework. Katz (1968) explained U.S. higher education’s
rise from a political regime founded on the hegemonic capitalistic ideals that drove the
development of colonial education during territory acquisitions through war and into the current
mechanical bureaucracy as an effect of the Industrial Revolution. When overlayed with Bolman
and Deal (2017) organizational leadership frameworks, politics is clearly endemic in
institutionalized higher education. The political “jungle” framework is an ideal paradigm to
organize power around negotiation and compromise. However, the Industrial Revolution evolved

87
American culture to seek a more rational framework to increase efficiency and produce
measurable results.
The 20th century saw an increase in student benchmark assessments and teacher
accountability, culminating in initiatives such as “No Child Left Behind” and College and Career
Readiness Standards (Snyder, 2018). The intellectual and industrial competition between power
nations spurred a drive for educational constructs backed by outcomes and assessments that
dictate and define achievement and system accountability (Schwarz, 2016). As a result, the 20th
century experiences an educational reform that aligns more with Bolman and Deal’s (2017)
structural frame. Of the four frameworks outlined by Bolman and Deal, the structural framework
is most reflective of a typical organizational chart that divides, defines, and coordinates key
working divisions by functional roles and responsibilities. Like other universities and colleges,
Discovery University reflects this structure through a centralized control and supervision in the
Board of Education and hierarchy of administrative and teaching positions and salaries. The
purpose of this frame is to create a rational system where a leader focuses on the larger system to
implement change, increase efficiency, and produce measurable results; as a result, barriers to
success generally relate to a loss of clarity fogged by individual perceptions of personal actions
and roles (Snyder, 2018).
These historical higher education constructs intend to influence educational policy and
institutional infrastructures that maintain certain faculty dispositions. However, the paradox of a
structural framework within a jungle environment creates disoriented navigation through the
priorities of each competing reality. Research Question 2 (RQ2) sought to understand how
educational trends and policies currently influence faculty dispositions. The following results and
findings can inform the success or failures in organizational leadership communication. Table 9

88
organizes participant conceptions of educational policies and trends upon top-down and bottom-
up accountability transactions.

Table 9
Faculty Conceptions of Educational Policies
Conception
category
Top-down Bottom-up
Behaviorist
Constructivist A TV [in a room outside of the classroom]
visible through a two-way mirror glass
(teacher) [that also serves as] a shield
… protecting the students.
Self-
referential
Policies and mandates are
lattices that I just have to go
through.
A posted sign: an exclamation
point.
A gas station.
Computer upgrades.

Situative An airplane, but successful landing depends
on the [flight intentions for change] …
for example, the demand for flights.
A purely symbolic big man in a suit …
disconnected [from this reality].
I only see flowers: As the sun, flowers are
students … Any significant information
comes through flowers.

89
Although the intentions of educational trends and policies within the political and
structural frameworks are behavioristic in nature, no metaphors ascribed by participants were
attributed to the behaviorist domain. In fact, participants who identified top-down accountability
relationships with educational trends and policies provided esoteric self-referential conceptions.
The significance of these structural and political procedures and mandates is echoed; however,
participants were not able to articulate the rationale for educational policies or articulate how
these measures inform faculty practice and pedagogy. In fact, one participant declared, “I can’t
even think of any [education policies or trends]. … My workplace will notify me.”
A constructivist aligned a constructivist conception upon educational policies and
procedures. Echoing the constructivist mission to restructure experiences to achieve optimal
individual student learning and exercise, educational policies and procedures are background
noise. This participant explained: “I’m very conscious of what propriety is in every situation, and
they’re not always the same.”
Three situative metaphors were ascribed to the relationship of educational policies and
trends upon faculty practice and pedagogy. Each detailed the heralding of the bottom-up
approach upon which the situative domain focuses. A participant admitted that because of the
perceived disconnection between governmental actions and community interests, faculty are
indifferent to trends.
[Government policies] are rule enforcers, but [I] don’t care. … [I] ultimately care about
[my local community]. … A lot of the time the reason why these [trends and policies] are
so far-fetched is because they are definitely disconnected to some of the problems that
they think they’re solving, but really, they’re putting a hindrance on the community.

90
RQ3: Impact of Cultural Implications Upon Faculty Dispositions
Research Questions 2 and 3 sought to examine external organizational influences upon
faculty dispositions. Whereas RQ2 sought the influence of national and global initiatives, RQ3
focused on local cultural structures that might impact faculty epistemological accountability
conceptions. Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989) coined the term “intersectionality” that has since been
approved by the National Career Development Association (NCDA) as an operational
framework to express the multiple identities of privilege and oppression (Appendix A; Cooper,
2017;). RQ3 is examined through the lens of intersectionality. Especially since this study focused
on the impact of social constructs upon personal identity development, this study’s initial
demographic screening survey delineated potential bias and cultural constructs interjected by
details of intersectionality. Moreover, intersectionality details influence responses towards CRP
and considerations of power and privilege (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Smits and Janssenswillen
(2020) explained that intersectionality details provide comprehensive insight upon single cultural
constructs that impact specific groups and individuals. The following results and findings present
the cultural implications that inform faculty dispositions towards CT and CRP. Table 10
expresses the counts participants expressed on specific intersectionality axes. Since no
participant story inferred connections to ageism and politics of appearance, these axis categories
have been removed from the report. Considering the literature review, “diverse work contexts,”
“field of practice,” and “teaching experience” categories were added. In addition, a “political
stance” category was added due to the historical and current impact of politics within the
educational jungle environment. A “technological competency” category was added in lieu of the
increased significance of technology in education.

Table 10
Counts of Participant References to Various Intersectionality Elements
Intersectionality elements Counts of participant references
Bailey Cyrus Didi Lita Mac Pillar Reggie Stitch Total
Ableism 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Classism 0 5 0 1 0 0 1 1 8
Credentialed 2 3 6 1 3 2 2 0 19
*(a) Diverse work contexts 0 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 9
*(b) Field 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3
Language bias 1 2 0 3 3 2 0 2 13
*(c) Politic stance 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 8 11
Racism/Eurocentrism 4 4 7 6 3 4 2 3 33
Religion/antisemitism 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2
Sexism/genderism 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2
*(d) Tech competency 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
*(e) Teaching experience 3 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 7

Note. NCDA intersectionality elements: ageism and politics of appearance have been removed.
*Items not reflected in NCDA operational framework of intersectionality.
(a), (b) & (e) Added due to significance of field of practice and seniority and tenure among faculty. (c) Added due to current
significance in political stance. (d) Added due to significance of technological ability within education.

89

90
Racial/Cultural Implications Upon Faculty Dispositions Towards CT and CRP
Due to the focus of the study on CRP, participants may have had a higher propensity to
reference race, culture, ethnicity, or nationality during their interviews. As a result, all
participants shared lived experiences that referenced the racism/Eurocentrism axis of
intersectionality. Even when describing contexts separate from CRP, participants shared racial
attributes of characters within their stories without prompt, highlighting race as a significant
detail of not only self-identity, but identification of others. In describing higher education, one
participant voluntarily emphasized that “academia has no room for racism.” More significantly,
when participants were prompted to share their most impactful memory as students, five
participants identified scenarios impacted by race. The four memories that transpired within
higher education shared a range of racial inferences from cultural awakening to more indifferent
sidenotes such as “he was [from another country].” One impactful memory from a participant’s
primary education experience shared a traumatic story of a “monster dragon” that tried to force
eye-contact, “something that I was culturally trained not to do.”
However, the single thread that resonated between all participant recantations of
experiences was the significance of positionality and the awareness of one’s own. Table 11
shares phrases that participants used that stressed positionality and ultimately reflects the
significance of “situated” in the TSSP, teacher preparation as a historically situated social
practice framework. Considering these tenants of positionality, it can be understood how
competitive values and conceptions of CT and CRP through separate versions of positionality
add to the difficulty in establishing concrete parameters and assessments of effectiveness.

91

Table 11
Participant Phrases Expressing Significance of Positionality and Culture
Participant Significant interview quotes expressing positionality
A Cognizant that some cultures are more familiar … and others … I am learning.
B It does [emphasis added] matter where I am.
C That being aware that there was this weird power structure of being the White
person in the room …
D There are cultural rules … social rules in that setting [emphasis added].
E Home culture.
F Embrace cultural identity to: One, check your assumptions and then, understand
that … what works for one culture might not work for another … which can
actually play a bigger part in problem solving.
G Different cultures treat same topics with different perspectives … different values
in each society and you are not always right.
H I was raised … but not the same

Literacy, Language, and Credential Implications upon Faculty Dispositions
Being that higher education is the home of lingua franca and the credentialing thereof, it
is no surprise that the axes of literacy/credentials and language bias house the next two highest
references from faculty participants. Slootman (2018) argued that teaching credentials add to the
historical implications of symbolic power and institutionalized definitions of appropriate
knowledge. Participant responses echoed the sentiment. On the screening survey, one participant
disclosed to only communicate in English. However, the interview uncovered the participant’s
actual regular use of three languages. “I communicate with my family in [these languages], but at
work, of course, English.” Another participant specifically equated English with colonization.
The allusion of appropriate language usage was shared in five separate interviews. Language bias
92

was correlated with “low” or “high” levels of English usage that determine if students were
“going to survive in higher level courses.” One participant explained that “a language barrier
[exists only] if English is not a first language.” In fact, the four participants who attended schools
either in primary, secondary, or post-secondary outside of the United States, admitted to
exercising English within schools. One participant explained that students in [home country] are
required to select and learn two foreign languages throughout primary and secondary education
levels; “95% of kids choose English as one [of their language concentrations].”
However, four participants were adamant about the necessity in exercising diverse
languages aside from English for critical thinking exercise. Shared vessels of communication
beyond English provide broader windows of understanding and educational support to pursue CT
and CRP. One participant stressed: “I understand their culture and literally their words …
[allowing me] to accommodate [their needs].” While another participant explained:
It comes back to the ability of having deep insights that people are perceiving worlds
very differently, especially based on what was their first language. Different languages
have different genders. ... Verb forms and times differ in how the gender changes based
on whether to adjust it towards the [speaker] or [receiver]. … Some don’t recognize left
and right, or above and below … so that helped me understand that even when we use the
same world, we’re [only looking out of our own] window. [Other windows] might have
different emotional and contextual meaning.
In addition, one participant expressed the importance of critical thinking in one’s home language.
This interviewee reminded that “students are not slates. … They have skills and knowledge and
their own critical thinking patterns.” As a result, it may be just as significant or more so to
empower learners with their own patterns of thought, challenging status quo perceptions of
93

knowledge exercise. “English is a great thing, but I’d rather … you have confidence in what you
know.” This participant pleaded:
Move beyond the sort of Western and European: This is how we do logic. … This the
correct way to think. … This is how we do morally. … I have my textbook. I had to use it
but trying to find ways to move beyond … because these folks are not from Greece or the
U.K. … they have their own cultures.
Yet the fact that this study focused on non-tenured faculty revealed the significance of
credentials to also enact change within higher education. One participant explained “I’m an
adjunct … so I’m not in that full time thing where you are going to all the meetings and you’re a
lot more entrenched in that stuff.” Although most institutions rely on non-tenured and adjunct
faculty to teach Tier 1 courses, these faculty share no large voice of change. Perhaps this
explains the unprompted and volunteered sharing of teaching experience and classism within the
interviews. Seven exclamations of years of experience were shared to justify expertise. One
stressed the importance of social mobility by one day obtaining a PhD.
Simultaneously, five participants in this study shared such indifference to institutional
policies and constructs because of a developed trust in the credentials of the institution and its
higher credentialed and published tenured faculty. “Everything I need to know- I’ll get that
information somehow.” Table 12 presents faculty metaphors ascribed to workplace constructs
that inform practice. All metaphors expressed the workplace in positions of authority and as
definite directors of accountability and more clearly top-down than educational trends and
policies upon faculty dispositions. Although some metaphors provide negative connotations
towards the authoritarian institution, participants agreed upon the need for any directives.
94

Of course, as a professor, you have a certain liberty of adjusting those rules … [but as a
member of this institution], I should try to use the framework. Not every nitty, gritty
detail, but the general framework. … If my cultural responsiveness would apply all the
time, [all students] get your full points, but … I must be balanced by my need to fit
somehow in the general framework of [my institution].

Table 12
Faculty Conceptions of Workplace Constructs
Conception
category
Participant examples of workplace constructs
Behaviorist A nagging thorn on our side.
I am the program developer of the pre-installed computer game. My
colleagues are program designers. The institution is the cable or outlet
that provides the power to the computer.
I am the sun. The workplace are the clouds, snowflakes, and wind that
interfere with the intensity.
Seats in the balcony.
Constructivist A coach.
A sister … she understands that [teachers] are weird.
Self-referential Teachers are butterflies in a garden with flowers, thorns, butterflies, and
bees.
An email message.
A classroom door. Someone might come through with a polishing cloth to
wash and [clean].
Situative

95

Following the significance of positionality uncovered in the analysis of the
racism/Eurocentrism axis, the analysis of the language and credential axes revealed the
significance of community in informing faculty dispositions. The cultural conditions that inform
faculty practice are those that mirror the member’s positionality and allow the member to
declare: “I’ve been here forever. ... This is my [emphasis added] place.” Table 8 most informs
this social constructivist phenomena by echoing the thread of conceptions from personal interest
to perceptions of higher ed, CT, and CRP. Ultimately, these findings confer the potential for
bottom-up accountability relationships and transactions within the higher educational system.
Summary of Findings
Chapter Four unraveled divergent metaphors faculty participants ascribed to various
teaching and learning contexts to understand the influence between various faculty
epistemological accountability relationships and faculty identity development. Phenomenological
inquiry examines each participant’s “conscious experience” to identify phenomena relationships
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 26). Relationships identified in this study enforced the significance
of “situated” in the TSSP framework that stresses contextualized motivations, key components to
shaping faculty identities that inform faculty choices and behaviors. The critical findings on how
positionality, social constructivism, and bottom-up accountability support faculty dispositions
catalyze the recommendations presented in Chapter Five.

96

Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations
In October 2013, a mysterious billboard sign was erected on a major highway in Flint,
Michigan. The unanticipated announcement read: “I’m concerned about the blueberries.” The
anonymity and unassuming nature of the message spurred debate on its possible meanings,
intentions, and authors. News and social media buzzed with prospective guesses that stimulated
argument and discourse on topics such as climate control, education, economics, politics, and
agriculture. Ultimately, the originator, Phil Shaltz unmasked himself and his intention to reveal
how desensitized humans have become to the limitless subjective possibilities of “blueberry”
stories and truths. His idea for the billboard came from a personal encounter he experienced with
his own ignorance and bias. Herbert Simon (1969/1996) attributed such human desensitization to
bounded rationality.
Simon argued that language, the root of all cognition, is but an artificial organization of
symbols specifically defined by the needs of an individual group. Align with social cognitive
theory, group membership governs consequences of language and thought. Bounded by
significant economic group frameworks, knowledge awareness is limited. The unknown can only
be achieved through additional input from external group resources; the unknowable can never
be achieved without inner membership. As a result, one’s perception of blueberries and concern
is alien from another’s. Consequently, frameworks that govern perceptions and values also
constitute solutions that only satisfy the time, place, and “known” available. Simon (1969/1996)
coined the term “satisficing” (p. 40). Simon argued that individual group solutions suffice the
inner contextual group needs since external outer needs are unknown and unknowable. Simon’s
tenants and sequence of information processing have become the foundation of understanding
higher-order cognition as expressed in cognitive psychology, economics, and artificial
97

intelligence. This study overlays the satisficing constructs upon institutionalized higher
education to reveal the obstruction for faculty dispositions towards culturally responsive
practices and critical thinking. Chapter Five first discusses the constructs that obstruct
dispositions and then presents recommendations.
Curriculum as “Interface”
Align with Simon (1969/1996), curriculum can be thought of as an interface- a bridge
between the inner values of an organization and the outer contexts of its environment. Simon
stressed “If the inner … is appropriate to the outer, … or vice versa, it will serve its intended
purpose” (p. 6). Although Simon (1969/1996) focused his analysis upon language processing and
economic analysis, he provides a rhetorical analysis upon which we can analyze the effectiveness
of curriculum (Fig. 7).

Figure 7
Rhetorical Situation of Bounded Curriculum

98

However, shifting demographics and trends within education reveal the current
disharmony between education’s inner and outer constructs. Diverse outer constructs begin to
overwhelm the system. As a result, major educational trends attempt to stabilize the system
through mandates such as the Department of Education’s mandates to increase diversity, equity,
and inclusion. However, society forgets the original limitations of computer programming.
Increased diverse external input (outer) does not alter the initial foundational (inner) decision
making process that is always limited by the bounded properties of the inner system. As each
outer demographic realizes the lack of reflective (outer) values, inequitable concerns are raised.
As an example, Biesta (2016) examined educational assessments of effectiveness. As a value
based upon situational processing, effectiveness is subject to the initially defined desired
outcomes by the inner dominant group. In addition, the basic architectural processes constituted
by the original substratum affects all other cognitive processing. Consequently, the current
disjointed conceptions of curriculum as expressed by participants within this study reveal the
disharmony between current curriculum and the changing world.
The Impasse: For Whom, By Whom Within the Radical-Reform Space
The historical implications of colonialism upon higher education perceptions and current
faculty perceptions of higher education create an impasse. Simon (1969/1996) explained the
initial purpose of the optimizing interface determines its function. Moreover, “the evolution and
future of such systems can only be understood from a knowledge of their histories” (p. 47).
Curriculum’s initial historical purpose was to disseminate and bring order. The success of the
top-down optimizing system is celebrated within the advancements made within the natural
sciences. In addition, the authoritative nature is mirrored in this study’s faculty alliances to their
99

field and to the collective frameworks set by the institution and its departments, echoing
Varghese et al.’s (2005) explanation of identity-in-practice in limiting a separate teacher agency.
However, the directives that initially encouraged standardization and coherence and
framed social mobility conflict with modern day shifts in population demographics and
technology. As a result, no faculty in this study acknowledged the influence of educational
policy trends or mandates. The top-down communication system has weakened. In addition,
divergent faculty conceptions within literacy/credential and language intersectionality axes
expressed the dichotomous position faculty endure to maintain accountable to both the institution
and the increasing diverse student populations. Although faculty recognized the significance of
individual tacit knowledge through home language and culture, faculty also mentioned the
importance of English proficiency. These findings confirm that higher education currently sits
within the radical-reform space described by de Oliveira Andreotti et al. (2015). Participants
expressed information asymmetry, mindfulness of power structures, and attempts to fix or
transform the educational space echoing the psychological trauma explained by Dugas et al.
(2020) and the relative teacher identity proposed by Beijaard et al. (2004). As a result, Flinders’
(2014) stressed that new methods of accountability must be implemented to address the
“accountability gap” prior to complete system failure (p. 3). The historical curriculum no longer
satisfies future envisions of knowledge, leaving faculty conflicted in their rhetorical analysis of
curriculum’s purpose and provisions.
Changed Market = Changed Mission
According to this research findings, faculty perceptions of higher education do not align
with their perceptions of current curriculum. Although critical thinking outcomes within Tier 1
courses mirror the constructivist approach, most participants interpreted teaching and learning
100

within Tier 1 courses mostly from the behaviorist perspective (Fig. 5). Even when academic
field-specific GE courses and tenured faculty were omitted from this research specifically to
decrease field-specific bias upon teaching pedagogies, participants explained that curriculum in
the GE context upholds institutional and historical significance and value, manifesting clear
authoritative metaphors ascribed to behaviorist teaching figures. These participant explanations
of GE and Tier 1 clearly mirror Nokes (2009) explanation of the analogy transfer cognitive
processing system. Analogy transfer is the most fast and efficient cognitive mechanism, bounded
to available individual prior exemplar knowledge. Faculty follow the footsteps of their
predecessors.
However, this study’s faculty also perceived higher education as a foundation of critical
thought that values student additive knowledge. Faculty ascribed CT conceptions that were more
divergent and difficult to articulate, expressing more self-referential metaphors to learning and
culturally responsive practices. Nokes (2009) explained the greater difficulty in navigating and
operationalizing knowledge compilation transfers. When prior exemplars do not match the
situational context, knowledge compilation transfer mechanisms are triggered to adapt and
optimize prior exemplars. As a result, a clear divergence of metaphors ascribed within this study
express faculty diasporic identities and shifting considerations to a new market and mission. In
addition, all faculty participants expressed indifference towards bureaucratic mandates,
transferring power to the interests of students. The potential of bottom-up accountability
ultimately fragments the hierarchical structure of institutionalized education. Globalization has
erupted a new demand directed by the students. 2021 Strada Education Network Survey
expressed that students expect a new direction for higher education to elicit discovery of new
knowledge.
101

Recommendations to Move Into Beyond-Reform Space
A rhetorical analysis upon curriculum within the bounds of the radical reform space
exposes the central issues to currently provide culturally responsive practices and to exercise
critical thinking. Should the purpose of CRP be to cultivate CT propensity through recognition of
separate individual identities and backgrounds as optimal sources of knowledge, faculty cannot
successfully pursue CRP within the current curriculum interface. Figure 8 overlays the current
curriculum as an interface where a reciprocating relationship serves historical dominant
discourse (inner) and its citizens. This triadic relationship fails since the external multicultural
input (outer) does not achieve the same reciprocity, only informing and optimizing the
substratum system. RAND Corporation’s (2023) findings echoed the inequity of this rhetorical
situation, reporting the lack of guidance from current curriculum to inclusively serve diverse
minority populations (Schwartz, 2023). Moreover, the focus of “othering” diverts attention from
the premise of CRP and CT to investigate new opportunities of knowledge. As a result, the
following presents recommendations to move into beyond-reform space through a recombination
of higher education elements and processes.

102

Figure 8
Rhetorical Situation of Bounded Curriculum Within Radical-Reform Space

Although de Oliveira Andreotti et al. (2015) explained that attempts to move into
beyond-reform space call for the disavowal or destruction of the current curriculum and
educational system, the following recommendations enlist a separate agenda that exploits the
fundamental rhetorical framework and cognitive process of bounded rationality. Soparnot (2011)
emphasized that change be analyzed in its context, process, and content. Recommendation 1 and
2 review the needed content for faculty and for institutions to exercise Recommendation 3
following the implications of the current context of curriculum as an interface within the radical-
reform space. A central tenant of Bandura’s (1977) social cognitive theory is the triangulated
reciprocal interactions among three influences: personal, behavioral, and social environment to
increase interest and motivation. Figure 9 adapts Bandura’s triangle to frame recommendations
and to propose a new leader framework and culturally relevant inclusion theory (CRIT).
103

Figure 9
Rhetorical Situation of Culturally Relevant Inclusion Theory

Recommendation 1: Understand Positionality and Its Significance
Considering the respective position of a specific speaker to a specific audience within a
rhetorical situation, the following recommendation is separated by audience: for faculty and for
institution.
For Faculty
In this study, participants ascribed personal metaphors to different teaching and learning
contexts to understand how historical, social, and cultural factors, and educational trends
influence faculty identities that inform teaching choices and behaviors. Personal metaphors
provide a cognitive and linguistic means to articulate complex thought patterns grounded in
socio-cultural conventions (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996; Johnson, 1980; Landau et al., 2010;
Nikitina & Furuoka, 2008; Schmitt, 2005). Relationships identified in this study enforced the
104

significance of “situated” in the TSSP framework that stresses contextualized motivations are
key components to shaping faculty identities that inform faculty choices and behaviors.
The single thread that resonated between all participant recantations of experiences was
the significance of positionality and the awareness of one’s own. Cognitive psychological
mechanisms of analogical and knowledge compilation transfer insert prior experience as the
substratum of choices and behaviors. Yet, Kincheloe (2003) argued that current education
discourse fails to guide faculty through self-study to explore critical ontology, personal zones of
proximal development, and individual identity. Similarly, Chang and Viesca (2022) revealed that
limited studies engage in teacher reflexivity. Gorski and Parekh (2020) revealed that 71% of
multicultural inventions in education fail to focus on individual teacher knowledge and
motivation. Similarly, six of the eight participants in this study admitted to having never
reflected upon personal conceptions or considered the impact of such conceptions upon their
practice. One participant with several years of teaching experience expressed gratitude for
participation: “You had me come up with a metaphor for when I am teaching that is really
helpful to me right now. … I learned something new about myself.”
Understanding positionality provides an understanding of personal purpose and bias in
choices and behaviors that are bounded by personal rationality. Awareness of bounded
rationality can therefore allow faculty (a) to objectively examine personal limitations and
curriculum as in interface, (b) to realize the impasse occurring within the radical reform space,
and (c) to gain awareness of the market changes misaligned with the current curriculum mission.
Dana et al. (2021) identified status quo bias as the root of faculty resistance to change. Yet
personal awareness is the foundation for faculty to enact behaviors that extend beyond the status
quo and exercise critical thought. Findings from this study reveal the current impact of collective
105

agency upon faculty through fields of study or credentials that further feed the substratum system
as shown in Figure 8, overshadowing interests in other blueberries or ways of knowing. Snyder
(2018) argued that education’s structural organizational frame focuses on group capacity and not
individual agency. This collective agency promotes dualism among faculty and hampers critical
thinking ability.
Perry (1970) chronicled the movement of critical thought from dualism to relativism that
requires self-realization and a rational plan to move forward. Without such self-realization, a
person may not be able to identify personal habitual defense mechanisms of resistance that act as
barriers to critical thinking. As a result, faculty must individually exercise positionality that
gathers such content: Who am I? And why? What of my uniqueness benefits my work? What are
my limitations? What are some of the reactive barriers I employ? What do these forms of
resistance achieve? How can I progress beyond my resistance? These questions assist faculty in
identifying positionality and initiate higher cognitive understanding of personal cultural
references of intersectionality that are not only relevant to practice but can be relevant to
transparently include in curriculum to evoke critical thinking and discourse among students.
Studies have revealed correlations between teacher positionality awareness, critical thinking
skills, and student achievement (Khatami, 2015; Moslemi, & Habibi, 2019). Faculty that
continually confront personal limitations and sources of personal resistance are better equipped
to assist students through the same navigation.
For Institutions
Although this study did not focus on the efficacy of institutional provisions upon faculty
support and training, findings from this study revealed the significant institutional influence upon
faculty identities and dispositions. As a result, the disavowal or destruction of the university
106

context, for which current beyond-reform theorists advocate, is not only unnecessary but may
also disadvantage the influence of the institution-faculty director-provider accountability
relationship to move higher education into beyond-reform space.
Faculty participants in this study identified the institution as the only top-down
accountability informant. Moreover, further analysis of faculty references to intersectionality
revealed that institutional top-down authority is bestowed through faculty conceptions of the
credential intersectionality axis. Nokes (2009) explained that cognitive psychological
mechanisms of analogical and knowledge compilation transfer insert prior experience as the
substratum of choices and behaviors. Faculty past experiences within higher education
unconsciously mold faculty dispositions and duty towards the institution, their field, and their
colleagues. Tetlock (1992) identified the effects of credentials upon cognitive processes as
predecisional accountability based on social contingency. One participant summarized
predecisions framed by the institution:
Of course, as a professor, you have a certain liberty of adjusting those rules … [but as a
member of this institution], I should try to use the framework. Not every nitty, gritty
detail, but the general framework. … If my cultural responsiveness would apply all the
time, [all students] get your full points, but … I must be balanced by my need to fit
somehow in the general framework of [my institution].
In addition, combined faculty alignment with institutional missions towards literacy and
knowledge sharing along with faculty respect towards credentialed colleagues strengthens the
institution’s director-provider relationship and organizer of faculty collective agency. Although
some metaphors provided negative connotations towards the authoritarian institution,
participants agreed upon the need for institutional directives. As a result, the institutional-faculty
107

ontological accountability gap cannot be destroyed due to the historical nature of the institution
and its substratum interface. Hentschke and Wohlstetter (2004) reminded that the core of
accountability definitions are articulated in the contractual relationship between a delegating
director and a provider. To reframe any social order, a recombination of the director-provider
relationship can establish alternative cognitive processes, perceptions, and interpretations of
educational provisions and knowledge acquisitions.
Consequently, this study aligns with Flinders (2014) invitation to empower institutions
through understanding the propriety institutions enact through historical positions of power and
privilege. Institutions should note that various studies have revealed that professional
development has little impact on teaching practice and pedagogy (Cochran-Smith et al., 2015).
Instead, institutions should redirect focus on (a) the development and analysis of institutional
positionality (mission and values) and (b) the support of simultaneous articulation of faculty
positionality separate from the institution to uniquely clarify the institution as an enterprise for
academic networking, discourse, and knowledge exchange.
Institutions should remind teachers of institutional missions and faculty rhetorical ability
to partake in the narrative. Dubnik (2014) stressed that ontological accountability is a social
factor, requiring the specific examination of individual characteristics to establish solutions for
change. Lerner and Tetlock (2003) revealed the impact of perceived rhetorical situations upon
personal motivations that define and affect judgments on accountability. Possibly better than
encouraging antagonistic reform is understanding and empowering the teacher’s constitutiveness
and rhetorical situation at the epicenter of the educational accountability space. To navigate
through the paradox of institutionalized education, the problem may also serve as a possible
solution to provide a space for discourse. Current accountability affairs inhibit the development
108

of learning agility among faculty and therefore, a learning organization. In reference to de
Oliveira Andreotti et al.’s (2015) decolonization of higher education, institutions should develop
goals to understand those inhibitions of current colonized accountability systems for themselves
and for their faculty to be able to restructure itself instead as an enterprise for network exchange.
Recommendation 2: Conduct and Understand Market Analysis to Avail Economics
Findings from this study revealed that positionality awareness is only as effective as its
application towards a contextualized social environmental. The benefit of the triangulated
bounded curriculum system (Fig. 7) is that it enables successful prediction and application of
choices and behaviors. Emphasizing the parallel of curriculum utility to economics, Simon
(1969/1996) explained how the obedience of symbolic translations within a single (inner) system
optimizes output, defending his support of the satisficing principle. However, the revolution
occurring within the current radical-reform space reveals the misalignment between curriculum
content and its market audience. In his research on faculty identities, Kearney (2003) posited that
“if we are to have a curriculum which is truly relevant and inclusive, then we need to ensure that
content is not given precedence over process” (p. 166). As a result, Recommendation 2 presents
a process that should be executed in conjunction with exercises in Recommendation 1 that
explore positionality. Like Recommendation 1, Recommendation 2 is also separated for two
separate audiences to reflect the rhetorical relationship between an individual and a specific
audience.
For Faculty
Examination of participant responses revealed faculty use of knowledge compilation
transference cognitive processing to negotiate conceptions of teaching and learning. However,
“since knowledge compilation operates on declarative knowledge representations, it can be
109

brought to bear in a wide variety of application contexts … [trading-off] between applicability
and efficiency” (Nokes, 2009, para. 8). As a result, this study revealed two types of situated
market awareness: market accommodating and market adapting, among faculty that expressed
two separate CRP outcomes and provided insight upon the foundations of divergent conceptions
of CRP practices.
The first type of awareness, market accommodating, leaned on the language and
literacy/credential intersectionality axes and recognized the need to accommodate diverse
populations. Although this awareness aligns with the radical-reform’s purpose to rectify
injustices, it does not alter curriculum content. Market accommodations instead echo images of
Maslow’s Hierarchy upon learner basic needs, purporting to provide safe learning spaces. For
example, one participant explained rectifying a past similar experience by stressing rhetorical
awareness to currently support students successfully:
I don’t want to say that I’m culturally sensitive, but I think I have more understanding of
where [these] students are coming from because I am one of them. … [Compared to my]
experience [as an outsider] going off to another institution … I did feel as though
[instructors] just stuck with following protocol.
Market awareness through knowledge compilation transference allowed this participant to realize
the need to introduce practices beyond protocol to accommodate student learning needs.
However, market accommodating faculty maintained two separate rhetorical situations between
Tier 1 and CRP teaching and learning. Market accommodating participants referred to Tier 1
curriculum as protocol content determined by field experts and CRP as a language or
social/cultural accommodation. Although all participants mentioned awareness of the limitations
of “protocol” made by either their field of practice or the institution, market accommodating
110

participants also explained the importance of integrating student interest, language, and culture to
increase engagement in learning the content. However, these culturally responsive
accommodations more aligned with Maslow’s Hierarchy to provide a safe and inclusive learning
space.
The second type of awareness, market adapting, leaned on in-depth economic analysis of
director and provider limitations to serve the market. Market adaptive participants weighed the
viability of personal and institutional positionality within the environmental context. Those
participants that considered market adaptation articulated clear in-depth changes to prescribed
curriculum and its rubrics. Market adapting participants admitted to abandoning the textbook or
rubrics because of the inapplicability of content to the market. These participants invited student
discourse to inform curriculum application towards community betterment, leaning on social
constructivism theory. Market adapting faculty could provide rationale for the culturally relevant
use of specific inclusive curricular choices to not only influence student engagement and
persistence, but critical ontology.
Market understanding and usage provides increased clarity unto the process Kearney
(2003) suggested that frames faculty curriculum choices and behaviors. Both market awareness
types serve the capacities of diversity, equity, and inclusion; however, only economically
relevant market adaptation mirrored the essence of CRP that acknowledges culture as a central
component in cognitive development. CRP’s absent critical framing of relevance generates
variable outcomes.
As a result, faculty must not only understand the uniqueness of self, but decide upon
which market analysis outcome they align. Faculty must reflect upon: To whom or what am I
culturally responsive and why? The clarity of this alignment will not only inform personal
111

definition of diversity, equity, and inclusive practices, but help articulate relevancy in one’s
personal missions in higher education, CRP, and CT.
For Institutions
Although this research did not focus on institutional capacity, institutions should also
understand the influence of market awareness upon its faculty. Reflecting upon Bronfenbrenner's
ecological model (1979), a community's cultural conception of accountability is produced by the
values sustained within its system. As a result, to improve accountability processing and
outcomes, institutions must conduct external and internal market analysis to better inform
accountability measurements.
Specifically, this study’s findings conferred the potential for bottom-up accountability
relationships and transactions within the higher educational system. As a result, an external
market analysis benefits institutions by revealing sources of competition or collaboration to
institutional mission and goals. In addition, this study exposed the significant impact of situated
practice. Misalignment with community stakeholder values risks institutional economic
sustainability. Results from external market analysis assist institutional branding and clarification
of culturally relevant topics that support unique situated positioning, mission, and policies.
Internally, institutions should also conduct a market analysis among its employees. Page
(2016) reminded that the creation of inclusive spaces is subjective and should reflect the abilities
within an environment’s time/space continuum to engage diverse thought in a shared mission to
advance knowledge. Without an assessment of employee prior knowledge and awareness of
market, it is unclear if any institutional training or process content is appropriate. A prior
knowledge assessment is a necessary component of the cyclical model of self-regulation that is
required for bias change mindset (Zimmerman et al, 2018). Especially due to the diverse
112

perspectives and conception of DEI terminology, prior knowledge assessments are important to
effectively process DEI efforts (Bogler, n.d.). Page (2016) stressed that the benefits of diversity
efforts vary dependent on its social definition. Ambrose et al. (2010) explained the dangers of
assumptions in prior knowledge between the trainer and learner, identifying learners “in a state
of unconscious incompetence” until prior knowledge is aligned with key components (p. 96).
Any mismatch or misalignment between these knowledge bases impedes the appropriate
translation and absorption of a training. As a result, uniform market understanding of DEI
definitions is critical for DEI outcome alignment and pursuit of CRP. Market understanding
provides the framework for pedagogical design currently lacking within CRP guidance that
outlines the unique parameters of culturally relevant inclusive practices required to support
institutional situative practice.
Like faculty, institutions should reflect upon its market awareness and usage type: How
does the institution include diverse perspectives? Why are those diverse perspectives included?
What do institutional inclusive efforts look like? What is the relevance of these inclusive efforts?
Do these activities work to accommodate new markets or adapt the system processes to align
with the values of the market? Answers to such questions will help institutions determine if
current processes are market accommodations that are inclusive, but do not change the initial
substratum, or if current processes are market adaptations that purposefully enact organizational
learning and change to align with the needs of the community. Answers will also justify the
situated purpose and economic need for the accommodations or adaptations while prompt a
culture of heuristic research.
Recommendation 3: Focus on Ethics, Not Inclusion
113

Recommendation 3 advocates for a change of higher education focus from outcome
accountability to process accountability. Findings from this study revealed the significant
influence of higher education’s quality control through assessments and policies disseminated to
faculty by the institution and expert fields. Darling-Hammond (2020) argued that continued
regulation of teacher training standards, data-management, and assessment promote teacher and
curriculum efficacy. De Langhe et al. (2011) explained that although process accountability may
increase higher critical thinking among participants, outcome accountability increases speed and
accuracy. As a result, outcome accountability has attached quantifiable measures of inclusivity:
percentages of racial, social, or economic groups included within a demographic. The
quantification of such inclusions aligns with the dominant interface to justify efforts to optimize
the system. However, quantifications maintain “other audiences as exotic” (Tapia, 2016, 9:30).
This research recognizes that such focused outcome accountability maintains bounded rationality
and sacrifices innovative results from diverse-minded opportunities.
Instead, a focus on ethics reminds both faculty and institutions that one size does not fit
all. A focus on ethics recalls the subjective differences and the process required to reflect upon
implicit bias prior to invitation or engagement with others. Unanimously, decisions are made
within the confines of one’s bounded rationality. These decisions reflect the ethics of a singular
group, non-reflective of the values of others. Consequently, to a stranger’s eye, some decisions
may alienate but are relevantly required to support the persistence of an institution’s unique
community culture. Moreover, some inner group ethics may be non-negotiable regardless of the
desire to include others. Foci on inclusion forget implicit barriers that ground resistance to
change. Foci on ethics begin with the barriers and resistance towards inclusion in mind.
114

In addition, findings from this study revealed the high use of analogy and knowledge
compilation transfer cognitive mechanisms faculty use to manage and digest information to form
dispositions and predictive behaviors. Nokes (2009) explained that the transfer type and
application is bounded by the situated knowledge available. Recommendation 3 provides a space
to continuously enact the third cognitive transfer type: constraint violation. Constraint violation
cognitive processing mechanisms are only stimulated when no prior exemplars or tacit
knowledge is available and potential outcomes are perceived useful (Nokes, 2009). As a result,
the recognition of personal ethics bounded by individual rationality acknowledges the lack of
prior exemplars and increases the propensity of constraint violation activation. Moreover, Nokes
argued that clear activation of multiple transfer mechanisms through structured activities and
assessments that reflect and explain transfer processes enables increased critical awareness
within individuals and systems. Effective contextualized and situational analysis operationalizes
diverse schema inputs to promote recombinant knowledge (Ellis, 2019; Paul & Elder, 2005).
The additive Recommendations of 1, 2, and 3 provides a process accountability
framework that exercises multi-assessment and systematic information reflections upon
situational ethics to move into beyond-reform space and increase epistemic motivation to
exercise culturally relevant inclusive practices that can be easily articulated. As a result, the goal
of the ethical leader is not to create an inclusive space, but a space that recognizes that:
• Ethics are neither inclusive nor universal.
• Ethics bind and limit individual rationality, knowledge, and ability.
• Conversely, problems are complex and multi-dimensional.
• Multi-dimensional problems require diverse input.
• Baseless are those that perceive themselves beyond economics.
115

Ethical leaders will be able to provide rationale for relevantly diverse-minded
engagement beyond quantifiable measures of inclusion, promoting adaptive organizational
culture. Costanza et al. (2016) stressed that organizations with adaptive cultures are more likely
to survive by requiring members to pursue inquiry beyond personal limitations and share diverse
perspectives and resources. Adaptive organizations exercise shared responsibility to accomplish
organizational missions through advanced knowledge. Reflecting on Recommendations 1 and 2,
adaptive organizational cultures know self and limitations in accordance with the context and
market.
Once an individual’s perception of self transitions from a separate entity into a
component of a collective environment, certain environmental characteristics impact work
functionality. Lencioni (2002) outlined five characteristics in a pyramid model that envelop a
cohesive team: trust, conflict, commitment, accountability, and results. Specifically, trust is the
base of the pyramid and the key foundation to building relationships that enable team production.
Moreover, performance improvement is developed through trust and not through accountability
measures. Sinek (2014) specifically stressed that trust and cooperation provide the conditions to
develop specific workplace climate and capacity, regardless of an individual’s role in the
workplace. Ultimately although the acknowledgment of personal and organizational limitations
through this study’s recommendation process presents individual vulnerabilities, self-
declarations also provide a foundation for trust in that there is no single person or way to
accomplish a task. As a result, the ethical leader leans on the community for answers, developing
allies with a shared mission for a greater responsibility of community practice and recombination
of higher education. In the end, a colleague, Rodney Mace (personal communication, June 29,
116

2023), offered a platinum rule upon which ethical leaders unbound the conception of the golden
rule: Do unto others as they wish to be done unto them.
Considering the tenants of positionality, market rhetorical situations, and ethical
leadership, it can be understood how current definitions and parameters of CRP are muddled.
Responsivity to various cultures of intersectionality are undefined and unframed, leaving
institutional and faculty conceptions divergent and even conflicted. Concepts of personal
“familiarity” and “values” conflict between different individual “settings.” As a result, the
assessment of competency in CRP may compete with another’s, prompting question: Upon
whose value is competency measured? To further support the pursuit of CRP and CT among
faculty, institutions and faculty must consider moving into beyond-reform space through
positionality, market analysis, and focus on ethics. Considerations of this study’s
recommendations highlights the significance of contextualized and situated relevance towards
unique institutional positioning and engagement of faculty and students.
Limitations and Delimitations
Although skeptics argue the generalizability of phenomenological data, the reduction and
imaginative variation conducted within this study’s data collection and analysis justifies the
generalizability of this study’s findings. As a result, the main limitation of this qualitative
phenomenological study was the sample size. There are more than 4000 higher education
institutions within the United States with numerous faculty from various departments. The
variations of educational backgrounds, demographics, and experiences are countless.
Accessibility influences response reliability and self-reporting data contains bias. Ultimately
however, this was the impetus for phenomenological qualitative inquiry.
117

The study’s delimitations are in its verification of findings. Although participants were
provided transcripts for review prior to data analysis, the validity and reliability of interpretations
were not externally confirmed or reevaluated by participants. Leavy et al.’s (2007) categories of
teacher perceptions are linked to specific teaching and learning stigmas. As a result, participant
reevaluations may have included bias in editing. For the same reason, primary and secondary de-
identification methods were employed to maintain faculty confidentiality and protection from
external judgements outside of this research. Ultimately, the main delimitation is my own
positionality that carries personal bias and bounds my rationality in data analysis. I have
attempted to balance this bias by sharing exact examples of participant transcriptions within the
findings in Chapter Four.
Recommendations for Future Research
The purpose of this research was to understand how historical, social, and cultural
factors, and educational trends influence higher education faculty identities that inform teaching
choices and behaviors to pursue CRP. Still little research exists on higher education faculty
identity development and teacher conceptions of CRP and CT within higher education.
Moreover, Simon (1969/1996) illustrated the myopia of the evolving curriculum interface. As a
result, recommendations for future research include continued investigation of faculty identities
and conceptions of CRP. Moreover, findings from this study reveal the impact of the institution
in facilitating faculty conceptions and CT exercise. Future research should also explore how
institutions construct research spaces to support faculty development and discourse that is
culturally relevant to the spaces in which they serve. Further examination of cultural relevant
inclusions upon faculty dispositions and student persistence will help inform institutions as
enterprises within beyond-reform spaces to facilitate knowledge exchange and networking.
118

Connection to the USC Rossier Equity Mission
The University of Southern California Rossier School of Education mission aims to
“prepare leaders to achieve educational equity through practice, research, and policy.” As the
demographic landscape within U.S. higher educational systems shifts, governmental and
institutional policies attempt to rectify injustices activated by the initial bounds of
institutionalized education. However, studies have revealed faculty resistance to such changes.
This study explored faculty conceptions that inform choices and behaviors towards resistance or
pursuit of CRP as aligned with USC Rossier mission. Moreover, the findings frame a different
perspective towards moving beyond-reform space, reflecting the innovative thinking prompted
by USC Rossier.
Conclusion
The historical precepts of higher education established a top-down optimizing system that
successfully generated predictions and innovations in manufacturing, business, and scientific
theory. However, these systems have also maintained a bounded rationality that no longer
satisfies the shifting student demographics. As a result, higher educational trends and policies
attempt to mandate DEI initiatives to rectify past injustices and respond to current demographic
shifts. Yet within the bounds of this outcome-focused system, DEI is attached to quantitative
measures that do not align with the intent to acknowledge and empower diverse input. de
Oliveira Andreotti et al. (2015) explained the current resulting revolution within the volatile
radical reform space that fosters competition between individual group priorities.
Higher education is at a critical juncture that seeks solutions before collapse. Faculty are
at the epicenter of managing knowledge formation and distribution to redirect outcome
accountability foci to process accountability that interrogates the power, privilege, and
119

limitations of bounded rationality. However, results from this study revealed lack of faculty
preparation and reflection upon knowledge formation, evoking divergent conceptions of higher
education, CRP, and CT. As a result, this study frames a recommendation process for faculty and
institutions to cooperatively work towards educational recombination.
Contrary to frameworks that call for the disavowal or destruction of the higher education
system to move into beyond reform spaces, this study leans on its findings of the institution as
the single top-down informant of faculty conceptions. Institutions should work with faculty to
investigate the rhetorical situation of current curriculum and market demand to define situational
relevance and identify opportunities for institutions to reestablish themselves as enterprises of
knowledge exchange. If not to improve or save the higher education industry, a redesign of
current mainstream institutional processes is needed to welcome what remains of the global
wisdom inventory before minority and indigenous views become extinct. MacPherson (2006)
argued that the continued oppression of individual tacit knowledge in exchange for hegemonic
compulsory extinguishes unconsidered possibilities. We may not be able to unbound our
individual rationalities, but the denial of unknown or unknowable populations is unethical.

120

References
Akgül, H. & Şahin İzmirli, Ö. (2021). Pre-service teachers’ decoding skills in information and
communication technologies and critical thinking dispositions. Journal of Educational
Technology & Online Learning, 4(3), 516–530.
Aldana, R. (2021, August 3). Generation hustle: Young entrepreneurs got creative during the
pandemic. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/03/generation-hustle-young-
entrepreneurs-got-creative-during-the-pandemic.html
Alim, H. S., Paris, D., & Wong, C. P. (2020). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A critical
framework for centering communities. In N. S. Nasir et al. (Eds.), Handbook of the
cultural foundations of learning (pp. 261–276). Routledge.
Ambrose, S. A., et. al. (2010). How learning works. Jossey-Bass.
Arroyo, A. T., & Gasman, M. (2014). An HBCU-based educational approach for black college
student success: Toward a framework with implications for all Institutions. American
Journal of Education, 121(1), 57–85.
Association of Public & Land-Grant Universities. (2021). History of APLU.
https://www.aplu.org/about-us/history-of-aplu/what-is-a-land-grant-
university/#:~:text=The%20original%20mission%20of%20these,obtain%20a%20liberal
%2C%20practical%20education.
Atabaki, A., Keshtiaray, N., & Yarmohammadian, M. (2015). Scrutiny of critical thinking
concept. International Education Studies, 8(3).
Bacchus, M. (2006). The impact of globalization on curriculum development in postcolonial
societies. In Y. Kanu. (Ed.), Curriculum as Cultural Practice: Postcolonial
Imaginations (pp. 260–280). University of Toronto Press.
121

Bailey, J. G. (1999). Academics’ motivation and self-efficacy for teaching and research. Higher
Education Research & Development, 18(3), 343–359.
Bamyaci, E. (2016). Competing structures in the bilingual mind: A psycholinguistic investigation
of optional verb number agreement. Springer International Publishing.
Bandura. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological
Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9, 75–78.
Bandura, A. (2000). Self-efficacy. The exercise of control. Freeman and Company.
Barnett. (2020). Leading with meaning: Why diversity, equity and inclusion matters in U.S.
higher education. Perspectives in Education, 38(2), 20–35.
https://doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v38.i2.02
Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’
professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 107–128.
Beijaard, D., Verloop, N., & Vermunt, J. D. (2000). Teachers’ perception of professional
identity: an exploratory study from a personal knowledge perspective. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 16(7), 749–764.
Bell. (2008). And we are not saved: The elusive quest for racial justice. Basic Books.
Bell. (1992). Faces at the bottom of the well: The permanence of racism. Basic Books.
Bell. (2008). Race, racism, and American law (6
th
ed.). Aspen Publishers.
Benjamin. (1998). On the excessive reliance on part-time faculty appointments. Academe
(Washington. 1979), 84(1), 26–26.
122

Bidyuk. (2016). Higher education globalization in the context of American guidelines.
Comparative Professional Pedagogy, 6(4), 7–14. https://doi.org/10.1515/rpp-2016-0041
Biesta, G. (2016). Improving education through research? From effectiveness, causality and
technology to purpose, complexity and culture. Policy Futures in Education, 14(2), 194–
210.
Bogler, M. (n.d.) What’s the difference between diversity, inclusion, and equity? General
Assembly Blog. https://mopress.com/whats-the-difference-between-diversity-inclusion-
and-equity/
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership (6
th

ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Bottiani, J. H., et al. (2018). Promoting educators’ use of culturally responsive practices: A
systematic review of inservice interventions. Journal of Teacher Education, 69(4), 367–
385.
Bound, J., Braga, B., Khanna, G., & Turner, S. (2021). The globalization of postsecondary
education: The role of international students in the US higher education system. The
Journal of Economic Perspectives, 35(1), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.1257/JEP.35.1.163
Bourdieu, P. (1980). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge University Press. (Original work
published 1977).
Brayboy, B. (2006). Toward a Tribal Critical Race Theory in education. The Urban Review,
37(5), 425–446.
Bronfenbrenner. (2005). Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human
development. Sage Publications.
123

Brown, P. (2013). Education, opportunity and the prospects for social mobility. British Journal
of Sociology of Education, 34(5–6), 678–700.
Busteed, B. (2020, September 25). Wake up higher education. The degree is on the decline.
Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/brandonbusteed/2020/09/25/wake-up-higher-
education-the-degree-is-on-the-decline/?sh=773ea2737ecb
Butler. (2012). Halpern critical thinking assessment predicts real-world outcomes of critical
thinking. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(5), 721–729.
https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2851
Carey, J. M., Carman, K., Clayton, K., Horiuchi, Y., Htun, M., & Ortiz, B. (2020). Who wants to
hire a more diverse faculty? A conjoint analysis of faculty and student preferences for
gender and racial/ethnic diversity. Politics, Groups & Identities, 8(3), 535–553.
Carter. (1990). Meaning and metaphor: Case knowledge in teaching. Theory into Practice, 29(2),
109–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849009543440
Castillo. (2018). Changing lanes or a new direction?: A mini-ethnographic case study exploring
perceptions of district-wide culturally responsive initiatives. ProQuest Dissertations
Publishing.
Chang, & Viesca, K. M. (2022). Preparing teachers for culturally responsive/relevant pedagogy
(CRP): A critical review of research. Teachers College Record (1970), 124(2), 197–224.
Chua, R., Morris, M., & Mor, S. (2012). Collaborating across cultures: Cultural metacognition
and affect-based trust in creative collaboration. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 118(2), 116–131.
Clark, E. R., & Flores, B. B. (2001). Who am I? The social construction of ethnic identity and
self-perceptions of bilingual preservice teachers. The Urban Review, 33(2), 69–86.
124

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research in the next
generation. Teachers College Press.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Villegas, A. M. (2015). Framing teacher preparation research: An
overview of the field, Part 1. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(1), 7–20.
Cochran-Smith, M., Villegas, A. M., Abrams, L., Chavez-Moreno, L., Mills, T., & Stern,
R. (2015). Critiquing teacher preparation research: An overview of the field, Part
II. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(2), 109–121.
Cochran-Smith, M., Villegas, A. M., Abrams, L. W., Chavez-Moreno, L. C., Mills, T., Stern, R.,
Bell, C. A., & Gitomer, D. H. (2016). Research on teacher preparation: Charting the
landscape of a sprawling field. In Handbook of Research on Teaching (5
th
Edition), (pp.
439–548). American Educational Research Association.
Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data: Complementary research
strategies. Sage.
Coghlan, & Brydon-Miller, M. (2014). The SAGE encyclopedia of action research (Coghlan &
M. Brydon-Miller, Eds.). SAGE.
Coloma, R. (2012). White gazes, brown breasts: Imperial feminism and disciplining desires and
bodies in colonial encounters. Paedagogica Historica, 48(2), 243–261.
Congressional Research Service. (2022). The U.S. Land-Grant University System: Overview and
role in agricultural research. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45897.pdf
Cooper, Y. (2017). Intersectionality.
https://www.ncda.org/aws/NCDA/pt/sd/news_article/139052/_PAR
ENT/CC_layout_details/false
125

Costanza, D.P., et al. (2016). The effect of adaptive organizational culture on long-term survival.
Journal of Business Psychology, 31, 361–381.
Creely, S., Southcott, J., Carabott, K., & Lyons, D. (2020). Phenomenological inquiry in
education: Theories, practices, provocations and directions. Taylor and Francis.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429285646
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
traditions. Sage.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage publications.
Cross, F., Bharaj, P. K., Liu, J., Phillips, A., Park Rogers, M., Zhong, Q., Cesljarev, C., & Lloyd,
K. (2022). Questioning our credibility: An exploration of the professional identity
development of mathematics teacher educators. Mathematics (Basel), 10(1), 66–.
Crump, A. (2014). Introducing LangCrit: Critical language and race theory. Critical Inquiry in
Language Studies, 11(3), 207–224.
Crystal, D. (2017). English as a global language. Cambridge University Press.
Dana, S., Soffe, B., Shipley, J., Licari, F., Larsen, R., Plummer, K., Bybee, S., & Jensen, J.
(2021). Why do faculty resist change? MedEdPublish, 10(1).
https://doi.org/10.15694/mep.2021.000089.1
Darling-Hammond, L. (2020). Accountability in teacher education. Action in Teacher
Education, 42(1), 60–71.
De Langhe, B., van Osselaer, S., & Wierenga, B. (2011). The effects of process and outcome
accountability on judgment process and performance. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 115(2), 238–252.
126

de Oliveira Andreotti, V., Stein, S., Ahenakew, C., & Hunt, D. (2015). Mapping interpretations
of decolonization in the context of higher education. Decolonisation: Indegeneity,
Education & Society, 4(1), 21–40.
Dewey, J. (1993). How we think. Buffalo.
Dobbin, F., & Kaley, A. (2016). Why diversity programs fail. Harvard Business Review, 94(7),
14.
Docquier, F., Turati, R., Valette, J., & Vasilakis, C. (2019). Birthplace diversity and economic
growth: evidence from the US states in the Post-World War II period. IDEAS Working
Paper Series from RePEc, 20(2), 321–354. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbz016
Döringer, S. (2020). Individual agency and socio‐spatial change in regional development:
Conceptualizing governance entrepreneurship. Geography Compass, 14(5), e12486.
Dorsey, E. R., Wuyckhuyse, B. C., Beck, C. A, Passalacqua, W. P., & Guzick, D. S. (2009). The
economics of new faculty hires in basic science. Academic Medicine, 84(1), 26–31.
Dubnick, M. (2014). Accountability as a cultural keyword. In M. Bovens et al. (Eds.), Oxford
handbook of public accountability (pp. 23–28). Oxford University Press.
Dugas, D., Stich, A., E., Harris, L., N., & Summers, K. H. (2020). ‘I’m being pulled in too many
different directions’: Academic identity tensions at regional public universities in
challenging economic times, Studies in Higher Education, 45(2), 312–326.
Dunbar, D., Nielsen, C., Watterson, N., Xu, J., Terlecki, M., Cardone, J., Ratmansky, L.,
Medved, C., Gill, S., & Owens, O. (2014). A cost benefit analysis from instructor,
community partner, and student perspectives: Cabrini College CBR courses merge
service, education, and research. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship,
7(1), 25+.
127

Ellis, N. (2019). Essentials of a theory of language cognition. The Modern Language Journal
(Boulder, Colo.), 103(S1), 39–60.
Espinosa, L., Turk, J. M., Taylor, M., & Chessman, H. M. (2019). Race and ethnicity in higher
education: A status report. American Council on Education.
https://1xfsu31b52d33idlp13twtos-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-
content/uploads/2019/02/Race-and-Ethnicity-in-Higher-Education.pdf
Fam, D., Clarke, E., Freeth, R., Derwort, P., Klaniecki, K., Kater-Wettstädt, L., Juarez-Bourke,
S., Hilser, S., Peukert, D., Meyer, E., & Horcea-Milcu, A. (2020). Interdisciplinary and
transdisciplinary research and practice: Balancing expectations of the “old” academy with
the future model of universities as “problem solvers.” Higher Education Quarterly, 74(1),
19–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12225
Farrell. (2006). The teacher is an octopus: Uncovering preservice English language teachers’
prior beliefs through metaphor analysis. RELC Journal, 37(2), 236–248.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688206067430
Flicker. (2008). Who benefits from community-based participatory research? A case study of the
Positive Youth Project. Health Education & Behavior, 35(1), 70–86.
Flinders, M. (2014). The future and relevance of accountability studies. In The Oxford handbook
of accountability.
Floyd, C. (2011). Critical thinking in a second language. HigherEducation Research &
Development, 30(3), 289–302.
Fontaine, S. I., & Smith, C. (2008). Writing your way through college: A student's guide.
Heinemann.
128

Ford, & Cate, L. (2020). The discursive construction of international students in the USA:
Prestige, diversity, and economic gain. Higher Education, 80(6), 1195–1211.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00537-y
Frambach, J. M., Talaat, W., Wasenitz, S., & Martimianakis, M. (2019). The case for plural
PBL: An analysis of dominant and marginalized perspectives in the globalization of
problem-based learning. Advances in Health Sciences Education: Theory and
Practice, 24(5), 931–942.
Freire P. (2008). Pedagogía del oprimido (58a ed.). Siglo Veintiuno.
Freire, P. (2014). Pedagogy of the oppressed. In Pedagogy of the oppressed. Bloomsbury.
Fridland, V. (2021). The psychology of pronouns. Psychology Today. Retrieved from:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/language-in-the-wild/202109/the-psychology-
pronouns#:~:text=Research%20suggests%20that%20pronoun%20use,a%20greater%20f
ocus%20on%20community
Gallimore, R. & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
31(1), 45–56.
Gay, G. (2013). Teaching to and through cultural diversity. Curriculum Inquiry, 43, 48–70.
Gibbs, G., & Coffey, M. (2004). The impact of training of university teachers on their teaching
skills, their approach to teaching and the approach to learning of their students. Active
Learning in Higher Education, 5, 87–100.
Gillborn, D., Warminton, P., & Demack, S. (2018). QuantCrit: education, policy, ‘big data’ and
principles for a critical race theory of statistics. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21(2),
158–179.
129

Gino, F., & Coffman, K. (2021). Unconscious bias training that works. Harvard Business
Review. https://hbr.org/2021/09/unconscious-bias-training-that-works
Giorgi, A. (2008). Difficulties encountered in the application of phenomenological method in the
social sciences. Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology, 8(1), 1–9.
Goble, E. (2020). The challenges of researching lived experience in education. In Creely et al.,
Phenomenological inquiry in education: Theories, practices, provocations and
directions. Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429285646
Goonatilake, S. (1975). Development thinking as cultural neo? colonialism- The case of Sri
Lanka. Institute of Development Studies Bulletin, 7(1), 4–10.
Gorski, P. C. (2013). Reaching and teaching students in poverty: Strategies for erasing the
opportunity gap. Teachers College Press.
Gorski, P., & Parekh, G. (2020). Supporting critical multicultural teacher educators:
Transformative teaching, social justice education, and perceptions of institutional
support. Intercultural Education, 31(3), 265–285.
Grant, S. (2020). Some possible ways into the question of how a phenomenology of education
might be. In Creely et al. Phenomenological inquiry in education: Theories, practices,
provocations and directions. Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429285646
Green, C. A., Tindall-Ford, S. K., & Eady, M. J. (2020). School-university partnerships in
Australia: A systematic literature review. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education,
48(4), 403–435.
Güven, I. (2004). A qualitative study of perceptions of prospective social studies teachers
towards school practices. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 4(2), 291–300.
130

Haggis, T. (2009). Student learning research: A broader view. In The Routledge International
Handbook of Higher Education (pp. 23–36). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203882221-3
Haggis, T. (2009). What have we been thinking of? A critical overview of 40 years of student
learning research in higher education. Studies in Higher Education (Dorchester-on-
Thames), 34(4), 377–390.
Hall, A. T., Frink, D. D., & Buckley, M. R. (2017). An accountability account: A review and
synthesis of the theoretical and empirical research on felt accountability. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 38(2), 204–224.
Halpren, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains. American
Psychologist, 53.
Han, H. S., Vomvoridi-Ivanovic, E., Jacobs, J., Karanxha, Z., Lypka, A., Topdimir, C., &
Feldman, A. (2014). Culturally responsive pedagogy in higher education: A collaborative
self-study. Studying Teacher Education, 10(3), 290–312.
Hanafi, S., & Boucherie, S. (2018, January 18). Discover the data behind the Times Higher
Education World University Rankings. https://www.elsevier.com/connect/discover-the-
data-behind-the-times-higher-education-world-university-rankings
Hardison, C. M., & Vilamovska, A. (2009). Developing institutional standards for critical
thinking using the Collegiate Learning Assessment. RAND Corporation.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9460.html.
Hart Research Associates. (2016, January 19). Recent trends in general education design,
learning outcomes, and teaching approaches: Key Findings from a survey among
administrators at AAC&U member institutions (Rep. No. 3).
131

Hentschke, G. C., & Wohlstetter, P. (2004). Cracking the code of accountability.
Herndl, & Nahrwold, C.A. (2000). Research as social practice: A case study of research on
technical and professional communication. Written Communication, 17(2), 258–296.
Higher Learning Commission. (June 2022). HLC policy book.
https://download.hlcommission.org/policy/HLCPolicyBook_POL.pdf
Hutchins, E. (1995a). Cognition in the wild. The MIT Press.
Independent Sector. (September 30, 2022). Health of the U.S. Nonprofit Sector Quarterly
Review. https://independentsector.org/resource/health-of-the-u-s-nonprofit-sector/
International Cognitive Linguistics Association. (2022). About cognitive linguistics.
https://www.cognitivelinguistics.org/en/about-cognitive-linguistics
Iverson. (2012). Constructing outsiders: The discursive framing of access in university diversity
policies. Review of Higher Education, 35(2), 149–177.
Jamatia, F. & Gundimeda, N. (2019). Ethnic identity and curriculum construction: Critical
reflection on school curriculum in Tripura. Asian Ethnicity, 20, 312–329.
Jensen, D., & Sydney Freeman, J. (2019). Stepping to center stage: The rise of higher education
as a field of study. Educational Foundations (Ann Arbor, Mich.), 32(1–4), 24–48.
Jongbloed, B., Enders., J., & Salerno, C. (2008). Higher education and its communities:
Interconnections, interdependencies and a research agenda. Higher Education, 56(3),
303–324.
Kandiah, T. (1998). Epiphanies of the deathless native user's manifold avatars: A postcolonial
perspective on the native speaker. In R. Singh (Ed.), The native speaker: Multilingual
perspectives (pp. 79–110). Sage.
132

Kang, M., Lessard, D., & Heston, L. (2017). “5. Social constructionism”. In Introduction to
Women, Gender, Sexuality Studies.
Karimi, A., & Eskafi, M. (2014). Towards assessing critical thinking cognitive ability in varied
university majors: Evidence for EFL students' dominance. English Language Teaching
(ELT), 1(2), 67–89.
Katz, M. (1968). The emergence of bureaucracy in urban education: The Boston case, 1850–
1884: Part I. History of Education Quarterly, 8(2), (155–188).
Kearney, C. (2003). The monkey’s mask: identity, memory, narrative and voice. Trentham
Books.
Kelchtermans. (2009). Who I am in how I teach is the message: self-understanding, vulnerability
and reflection. Teachers and Teaching, Theory and Practice, 15(2), 257–272.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600902875332
Khatami, M. (2015). Critical thinking, mindfulness, and academic achievement among Iranian
EFL Learners. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
Khoo, S., Haapakoski, J., Hellstén, M., Malone, J., Wihlborg, M., & Robson, S. (2019). Moving
from interdisciplinary research to transdisciplinary educational ethics: Bridging
epistemological differences in researching higher education internationalization(s).
European Educational Research Journal EERJ, 18(2), 181–199.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904118781223
Kim. (2018). Exploring teacher inquiry through a teacher research community: Inquiry as stance
and multicultural education as inquiry. KEDI Journal of Educational Policy, 15(2), 87–
104.
133

Kincheloe, J. L. (2011). Critical ontology and indigenous ways of being. In K. Hayes et al.
(Eds.), Key works in critical pedagogy (pp. 333–349). Brill Sense. Retrieved Mar 20,
2021, from https://brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9789460913976/BP000026.xml
Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: The nature and validity of moral
stages (Essays on Moral Development, Volume 2). Harper & Row.
Kow, H. (2016). Infusion of critical thinking across the English language curriculum: A multiple
case study of primary school in-service expert teachers in Singapore. [Doctoral thesis,
The University of Western Australia].
Kuhn, D., & Modrek, A. (2018). Do reasoning limitations undermine discourse? Thinking &
Reasoning, 24(1), 97–116.
Kumar, K. (2001). Prejudice and pride: School histories of the freedom struggle in India and
Pakistan. Penguin Books.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that's just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant
pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34, 159–165.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2013). Critical race theory—What it is not!. In M. Lynn & Dixson, A. D.
(Eds.), Handbook of critical race theory in education (pp. 37–57). Routledge.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2021). Three decades of culturally relevant, responsive, & sustaining
pedagogy: What lies ahead? The Educational Forum (West Lafayette, Ind.), 85(4), 351–
354.
Lackoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
Landau, M. J., Meier, B. P., & Keefer, L. A. (2010). A metaphor-enriched social cognition.
Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 1045–1067. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020970
134

Lave, & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge
University Press.
Leavy et al. (2007). An examination of what metaphor construction reveals about the evolution
of preservice teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 23, 1217–1233. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2006.07.016
Lencioni, P. (2002). 5 dysfunctions of a team. Jossey-Bass.
Lenoir, Y., Hasni, A., & Froelich, A. (2015). Curricular and didactic conceptions of
interdisciplinarity in the field of education: A socio-historical perspective.
Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (2003). 13 bridging individual, interpersonal, and institutional
approaches to judgment and decision making: The impact of accountability on cognitive
bias. In S. L. Schneider & J. Shanteau (Eds.). Emerging perspectives on judgment and
decision research (pp. 431–457). Cambridge University Press.
Levinson, S. (1997). Language and cognition: The cognitive consequences of spatial description.
In G. Yimithirr (Ed), Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 7(1), 98–131.
Lindgren, M. & Packendorff, J. (2009). Social constructionism and entrepreneurship: Basic
assumptions and consequences for theory and research. International Journal of
Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 15(1), 25–47.
Lisovsky, K. (2017, Oct 31). Submission: Growing reliance on part-time faculty shortchanges
instructors, students. University Wire http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www-
proquest-com.libproxy2.usc.edu/wire-feeds/submission-growing-reliance-on-part-time-
faculty/docview/1958175956/se-2
135

Liu, O. L., Mao, L., Frankel, L., & Xu, J. (2016). Assessing critical thinking in higher education:
The HEIghten
TM
approach and preliminary validity evidence. Assessment and Evaluation
in Higher Education, 41, 677–94.
Lortie. (1975). Schoolteacher; a sociological study. University of Chicago Press.
Lujan, A. M. A. (2020). Working together: A qualitative case study on the effects of implementing
cooperative learning strategies in 3
rd
grade math class on Guam (Order No. 27739759).
[Doctoral dissertation, Northcentral University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
MacPherson, S. (2006). To steal or to tell: Teaching English in the global era. In Y . Kanu.
(Ed.), Curriculum as cultural practice: Postcolonial imaginations (pp. 71–94).
University of Toronto Press. Retrieved March 3, 2021, from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3138/9781442686267.6
McDermott, R., & Varenne, H. (1995). Culture as a disability. Anthropology & Education
Quarterly, 26(3), 324–348.
McPeck, J. E. (1990). Teaching critical thinking. Routledge.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society. University of Chicago Press.
Medina, M., Castleberry, A. N., & Persky, A. M. (2017). Strategies for improving learner
metacognition in health professional education. American Journal of Pharmaceutical
Education, 81(4), 78A–78N.
Mellado, L., de la Montaña, J. L, Luengo, M. R., & Bermejo, M. L. (2018). Evolution of the
personal teaching models of prospective secondary school science teachers as expressed
through metaphors. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13, 957–982.
Menary, R. (2015). Mathematical cognition: A case of enculturation. In T. Metzinger & J. M.
Windt (Eds). Open MIND: 25(T). MIND Group.
136

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. Wiley.
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Faculty. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved September 7,
2022, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faculty
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Teacher. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved September 7,
2022, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/teacher
Meyer, E. J. (2011). Critical ontology and teacher agency. In K. Hayes et al. (Eds.), Key works in
critical pedagogy (pp. 219–226). Brill Sense.
Mitchell, J., & Belkin, D. (2017, September 7). Americans losing faith in college degrees, poll
finds. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/americans-losing-faith-in-
college-degrees-poll-finds-1504776601
Mohanan, K. (1997). How does education paralyze independent thinking?
Mok, K. (2016). Massification of higher education, graduate employment and social mobility in
the Greater China region. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 37(1), 51–71.
Mole, K., & Mole, M. (2010). Entrepreneurship as the structuration of individual and
opportunity: A response using a critical realist perspective: Comment on Sarason, Dean
and Dillard. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(2), 230–237.
Moslemi, N. & Habibi, P. (2019). The relationship among Iranian EFL teachers’ professional
identity, self-efficacy and critical thinking skills. HOW - A Colombian Journal for
Teachers of English, 26(1), 107–128.
Moustakas. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. In Phenomenological Research
Methods. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412995658
137

Nadworny, E. (2022, January 13). More than 1 million fewer students are in college. Here’s how
that impacts the economy. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2022/01/13/1072529477/more-
than-1-million-fewer-students-are-in-college-the-lowest-enrollment-numbers-
National Center for Education Statistics. (2018). Integrated Postsecondary Education Data
System enrollment. Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System.
https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/.
Navaie, L. A., Saeedi, Z., & Khatami, M. (2018). The compatibility of mindfulness and critical
thinking among EFL learners. Journal of Asia TEFL, 15(3), 811–818.
https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2018.15.17.811
Nevgi, A., Postareff, L., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2004). The effect of discipline on motivational
and self-efficacy beliefs and on approaches to teaching of Finnish and English university
teachers. In Estudio presentado en la EARLI SIG Higher Education Conference (pp. 18–
21).
Nikitina, & Furuoka, F. (2008). “A language teacher is like...”: Examining Malaysian students’
perceptions of language teachers through metaphor analysis. Electronic Journal of
Foreign Language Teaching, 5(2), 192–.
Nixon. (1996). Professional identity and the restructuring of higher education. Studies in Higher
Education (Dorchester-on-Thames), 21(1), 5–16.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079612331381417
Nokes, T. (2009). Mechanisms of knowledge transfer. Thinking & Reasoning, 15(1), 1–36.
Ohlsson, S. & Rees, E. (1991). Adaptive search through constraint violations. Journal of
Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 3(1), 33–42.
138

O'Meara, K., & Bloomgarden, A. (2011). The pursuit of prestige: The experience of institutional
striving from a faculty perspective. Journal of the Professoriate, 4(1).
Owens. (2014). Visuospatial reasoning in other cultures. In Visuospatial Reasoning (pp. 205–
222). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02463-9_6
Ozdemir, S. M. (2005). Assessing university students’ critical thinking skills for some variables.
The Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 3(3), 1–17.
Page, S. (2016, May 24). Why the best people don't mean the best teams [Video]. re:Work with
Google. https://youtu.be/wULRXoYThDc
Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and
practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97.
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2002). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your professional and
personal life. Pearson Education, Inc.
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2005). A guide for educators to critical thinking competency standards:
The foundation for critical thinking. Accessed at www.criticalthinking.org.
Paul, R., Elder, L, & Bartell, T. (1997). Research findings and policy recommendations: Study of
38 public universities and 28 private universities to determine faculty emphasis.
Retrieved from http://criticalthinking.org/pages/study-of-38-public-universities-and-28-
private-universities-/598
Pazzaglia, A. M., Stafford, E., & Rodriguez, S. M. (2016). Survey methods for educators:
Analysis and reporting of survey data (part 3 of 3). National Center for Education
Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
https://libguides.uml.edu/ld.php?content_id=55759731
139

Perry, W. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Pew Research Center. (2014). Table: Religious diversity index scores by country [Data set].
https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2014/04/religious-diversity-
index.xlsx
Pontlin, J. (2006, November). Thinking machines. MIT Technology Review.
https://www.technologyreview.com/2006/11/01/227633/thinking-machines/
Postareff, L., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., & Nevgi, A. (2007). The effect of pedagogical training on
teaching in higher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(5), 557–571.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.013
Prawat, R. S. (1992). Teachers' beliefs about teaching and learning: A constructivist perspective.
American Journal of Education, 100(3), 354–395.
Rawski, & Conroy, S. A. (2020). Beyond demographic identities and motivation to learn: The
effect of organizational identification on diversity training outcomes. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 41(5), 461–478. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2439
Reboot Foundation. (November 2020). State of critical thinking 2020. https://reboot-
foundation.org/the-state-of-critical-thinking-2020/
Resuli, V. (2019). International standards on higher education. International Journal of Scientific
& Engineering Research, 10(7), 450–454.
https://www.ijser.org/researchpaper/International-Standards-on-higher-education.pdf
Richter, E., Lazarides, R., & Richter, D. (2021). Four reasons for becoming a teacher educator: A
large-scale study on teacher educators’ motives and well-being. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 102, 103322–. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103322
140

Ritchhart, R. (2001). From IQ to IC: A dispositional view of intelligence. Roeper
Review, 23(3), 143–150.
Roberts, T., & Billings, L. (2008). Thinking literacy, literacy thinking. Educational Leadership,
65(5), 32–36.
Rosendale & Wilkie, L. (2021). Scaling workforce development: Using MOOCs to reduce costs
and narrow the skills gap. Development and Learning in Organizations, 35(2), 18–21.
Rowe. (2014). Positionality. In The SAGE Encyclopedia of Action Research (Vol. 2, pp. 627–
628).
Sablan, V . A. (1997). Teacher efficacy in the bilingual context of the Pacific Island of
Guam (Order No. 9805069). [Doctoral dissertation, Claremont Graduate University].
ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Sacks, O. (1997). The island of the colorblind. Random House.
Samarji, A., & Hooley, N. (2015). Inquiry into the teaching and learning practice: An
ontological-epistemological discourse. Cogent Education, 2(1).
Saunders, M. N. (2019). Understanding research philosophy and approaches to theory
development. In Research methods for business students 5/e. Pearson Education India.
Schmitt. (2005). Systematic metaphor analysis as a method of qualitative research. Qualitative
Report, 10(2), 358–394.
Schunk, U., & Usher, E. L. (2019). Social Cognitive Theory and Motivation. In The Oxford
Handbook of Human Motivation (2
nd
ed.). Oxford University Press.
Schwarz. (2016). The Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation, Techne, and
Curriculum: The contraction of teacher education. Teacher Education & Practice, 29(1),
138–.
141

Schwartz, S. (2023, June). Teachers are frustrated by schools’ scattershot approach to
instruction. EducationWeek. https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/teachers-are-
frustrated-by-schools-scattershot-approach-to-instruction/2023/06
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline. Bantam Books.
Shaw, A., Liu, O. L., Gu, L., Kardonova, E., Chirikov, I., Li, G., Hu, S., Yu, N., Ma., L., Guo, F.,
Su, Q., Shi, J., Shi, H., & Loyalka, P. (2020). Thinking critically about critical thinking:
Validating the Russian HEIghten® critical thinking assessment. Studies in Higher
Education, 45(9).
Shrider, E., Kollar, M., Chen, F., & Semega, J. (2021, September 14). Income and Poverty in the
United States: 2020. U.S. Census Bureau.
https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2021/demo/p60-273.html
Simon, H. (1996). The sciences of the artificial 3
rd
(ed.). MIT Press.
Sinek, S. (2014). Why good leaders make you feel safe [Video]. YouTube.
https://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_why_good_leaders_make_you_feel_safe/c
Slootman M. (2018). Studying ethnic identification: Tools and theories. In Ethnic identity, social
mobility and the role of soulmates. IMISCOE Research Series. Springer, Cham.
Smith, B. O. (1993). A study of the logic of teaching. A report on the first phase of a five-year
research project- the logical structure of teaching and the development of critical
thinking. Bureau of Educational Research.
Smits, & Janssenswillen, P. (2020). Multicultural teacher education: a cross-case exploration of
pre-service language teachers’ approach to ethnic diversity. International Journal of
Qualitative Studies in Education, 33(4), 421–445.
142

Snyder, R. (2018). Show me the resources: Teachers' perceptions of educational leader
responsibilities. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 13(1),
152–164.
Soparnot, R. (2011). The concept of organizational change capacity. Journal of Organizational
Change Management, 24(5), 640–661. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534811111158903
Spellings, M., United States., & United States. (2006). A test of leadership: Charting the future
of U.S. higher education. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Education.
Stanberry, K. (2022). OER textbooks: A helpful tool for DEI initiatives in higher education.
Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 22(8), 33–36.
Stanley. (2006). Coloring the academic landscape: Faculty of color breaking the silence in
predominantly white colleges and universities. American Educational Research Journal,
43(4), 701–736.
Stecher, B., & Kirby, S. N. (2004). Introduction. In B. Stecher & S.N. Kirby, Organizational
improvement and accountability: Lessons for education from other sectors (pp. 1–7).
Rand Corporation.
Stein, S. (2017). A colonial history of the higher education present: Rethinking Land-Grant
institutions through processes of accumulation and relations of conquest. Critical Studies
in Education, 61(2), 212–228.
Steinbock-Pratt, S. (2019). Educating the empire: American teachers and contested colonization
in the Philippines (Cambridge Studies in U.S. Foreign Relations). Cambridge University
Press.
Stremmel, A. J. (2002). Teacher research: Nurturing professional and personal growth through
inquiry. YC Young Children, 57(5), 62–70.
143

Tapia, A. (2016, August 1). Bold and inclusive leadership [Video]. Diversity Best Practices.
https://www.diversitybestpractices.com/diversity-videos?video=x5rs85r
Taylor, B. J., & Cantwell, B. (2015). Global competition, U.S. research universities, and
international doctoral education: Growth and consolidation of an organizational
field. Research in Higher Education, 56, 411–441.
Tcheang. (2014). Culture and math. Cognitive Neuroscience, 5(1), 54–65.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17588928.2013.838552
Tetlock, P. E. (1992). The impact of accountability on judgment and choice. Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology, 25(3), 331–76.
Times Higher Education. (2022, October 3). THE World University Rankings explained.
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/student/advice/world-university-rankings-
explained
Tishman, S., Jay, E., & Perkins, D. N. (1993). Teaching thinking dispositions: From transmission
to enculturation. Theory into Practice, 32(3), 147–153.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849309543590
U.S. Department of Education. (2022, August 19). Department of Education makes $8 million in
new grants available to help colleges strengthen and diversity the teacher workforce
[Press release]. https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/department-education-makes-8-
million-new-grants-available-help-colleges-strengthen-and-diversify-teacher-workforce
Underwood, R. (1987). American education and the acculturation of the Chamorros of Guam.
[Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California]. University of Southern
California Libraries.
144

van Lankveld, T., Schoonenboom, J., Volman, M., Croiset, G., & Beishuizen, J. (2017).
Developing a teacher identity in the university context: A systematic review of the
literature. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(2), 325–342.
Varghese, M., Morgan, B., Johnston, B., & Johnson, K. A. (2005). Theorizing language teacher
identity: Three perspectives and beyond. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education,
4(1), 21–44. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327701jlie0401_2
Verwaeren, & Nijstad, B. A. (2022). What I do or how I do it - the effect of accountability focus
on individual exploration. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,
31(3), 421–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2021.1967322
Wang, Q. (2016). Why should we all be cultural psychologists? Lessons from the study of social
cognition. Perspectives on psychological science: a journal of the Association for
Psychological Science, 11(5), 583–596.
Wegner & Nückes. (2015). Training the brain or tending a garden? Students´ metaphors of
learning predict self-reported learning patterns. Frontline Learning Research, 4, 95–109.
doi: 10.14786/flr.v3i4.212
Wells, P. (2014). The DNA of a converging diversity: Regional approaches to quality assurance
in higher education. Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA).
Williams, T. (September 6, 2022). Do universities teach students to think critically? Times
Higher Education. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/depth/do-universities-teach-
students-think-critically
Wilson, S. (2008). Research is ceremony: Indigenous research methods.
Wilson, S., G., & Stroble, R. L. (2021). Prioritizing campus diversity budgets: DEI funding has
mostly survived the post-pandemic cuts. Planning for Higher Education, 49(4), 22–28.
145

Zhu, & Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2013). Balancing emic and etic: Situated learning and
ethnography of communication in cross-cultural management education. Academy of
Management Learning & Education, 12(3), 380–395.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2012.0221
Zimmerman, B., Schunk, D., & DiBenedetto, M. (2018). The role of self-efficacy and related
beliefs in self-regulation of learning and performance. In A. J. Elliot et al. (Eds.),
Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 313–333). Guilford Press.

146

Appendix A: National Career Development Association Diagram of Intersectionality

147

Appendix B: Demographic Sampling Survey and TSSP Alignment
The following includes the written invitation for faculty to participate in the initial
sampling survey. Table B1 presents the survey questions and alignment to intersectionality axes,
TSSP components, research questions, and other key concepts introduced in the study’s literature
review.
Thank you for participating in this confidential study. As mentioned in the initial email,
the purpose of the study is to explore how historical, social, cultural, and institutional
factors influence faculty identity that inform teaching behaviors and pedagogical choices.
From the responses to this survey, approximately 10 faculty will be selected to participate
in a 1-hour interview between the researcher and the participant volunteer. To identify
faculty from various ages, races, ethnicities, field expertise and backgrounds, the
following 16 question survey assists the researcher in selecting a diverse group to include
in the study.
As previously stated, your identity will be kept confidential. I will not include any
identifiable information including your name or where you work in my report or
dissertation. Additionally, you may decide not to participate further in the study at any
point in time.

148

Table B1
Demographic Sampling Survey
Questions Variables Intersecting
category
TSSP RQ Key concepts
What is the year of your birth?

Nominal Ageism,
politics of
appearance
A, B 2, 3 Identity
formation
What was your sex assigned at
birth?

Nominal Sexism,
genderism,
politics of
appearance
A, B 2, 3 Identity
formation
What are your gender
identities?
Nominal Sexism,
genderism,
politics of
appearance
A, B 2, 3 Identity
formation
What are your racial/ethnic
identities?

Nominal Racism,
Eurocentrism,
politics of
appearance
A, B 2, 3 Identity
formation
What languages do you speak?

Nominal Language bias A, B 2, 3 Identity
formation
With what religion do you
identify?
Nominal Antisemitism A, B 3 Identity
formation
Do you have any physical or
mental conditions that limit
or restrict your daily
activities?
Ordinal
y/n
Ableism,
politics of
appearance
A, B 3 Identity
formation
In what geographic locations
did you attend primary,
secondary, and post-
secondary school?
Primary school location
Secondary school location
Post-secondary location
Nominal Racism,
Eurocentrism,
politics of
appearance,
Credentialed,
classism
A, B 1,
2, 3
Identity
formation
How many generations in your
family have graduated from
college?
Interval Eurocentrism,
credentialed,
classism
A, B 1,
2, 3
Identity
formation
149

Questions Variables Intersecting
category
TSSP RQ Key concepts
How do you classify your
current teaching practice and
rank at Discovery
University? Check all that
apply.
Tenured
Full-time
Non-tenured
Part-time
Part-time at more than one
educational institution
Part-time while also working in
another field
Full professor
Associate professor
Professor
Instructor
Lecturer
Other
Nominal Credentialed,
classism
C 1, 3 Accountability,
identity
formation
Do you hold any other
divisional or departmental
roles at the University?
If so, please list those roles.
Ordinal
y/n

Nominal
Credentialed,
classism
C 1,
2, 3
Accountability,
identity
formation
How long have you been
working in your current
teaching rank?
Interval Ageism,
credentialed,
classism
C 1,
2, 3
Accountability,
identity
formation
What courses are you currently
teaching at any institution?
Please approximate how long
you have taught each course
listed.
Nominal

Interval
Ageism,
credentialed,
classism
A, B,
C
1,
2, 3
Identity
formation
Please name institutions where
you have taught or currently
teach.
Approximate the length of time
at each institution.
Nominal

Interval
Ageism,
credentialed,
classism
A, B,
C
1,
2, 3
Accountability,
identity
formation
What are your credentials?

Nominal Ageism,
credentialed,
classism
A, B,
C
1,
2, 3
Identity
formation
Where did you receive those
credentials?
Nominal Credentialed,
classism
A, B,
C
1,
2, 3
Identity
formation

150

Appendix C. Interview Protocol and Alignment to Key Research Concepts
The following includes the interview introduction and protocol. Table C1 presents the
interview protocol and alignment to TSSP components, research questions, and key concepts
introduced in the study’s literature review.
Thank you for agreeing to participate in research on higher education instructional
approaches. The goal of this study is to understand how historical, social, cultural, and
institutional factors influence faculty identities that inform teaching choices and
behaviors. Particularly, this study focuses on identities that inform how faculty teach
critical thinking outcomes within multi-cultural classrooms. As a result, only Discovery
University faculty that teach Tier 1 critical thinking outcomes are interviewed to gain
insight for this research. This interview includes approximately 13 questions and should
take about an hour.
Interview questions will prompt you to provide metaphorical descriptions and
imagery that you think represent you in different contexts and relationships in your past
and present educational settings. Please note that the focus of this study is you and your
recollection of your own emotions, behaviors, thoughts, and choices. If necessary, you
may take the time to close your eyes to draw a picture in your mind before sharing the
metaphorical images that you think represent you in each time and place context framed
by each question. For three of the interview questions, you will need a writing tool and
paper to draw and display your metaphor imagery.
Note that your participation is confidential. Data from this study will be compiled
into a report where I will use pseudonyms and other de-identifiers to maintain your
151

confidentiality and the confidentiality of the institution. Data will also be kept in a
password protected computer and destroyed after four years.
May I record our conversation? The recording is solely for my purposes to best
capture your perspectives and allow me to refer to this interview for clarification and
analysis later. Recordings will also be destroyed with other data collected from this study.
Do you have questions?
Do you have your writing tool and paper ready?
Before we get started, please state your name, teaching rank, and department.

Table C1
Interview Questions
Questions Potential probe TSSP RQ Key concepts
What other non-teaching
positions or roles do
you have at Discovery
University or any
other educational
institution?

If none, what other
professional
experiences have you
had?
P1. How has/does that role
inform critical thinking?
P2. How has/does that role
inform culturally
responsive practices?
P3. When you act in this
role, what metaphors do
you identify with? Please
explain why you have
identified those
metaphors.
C 1, 2,
3
Accountability,
self-perception,
identity formation
What interested you in
pursuing a career in
higher education?
A, B,
C
1 Accountability,
self-perception
Recall an early impactful
memory when you
were the student.

When you are that
student in your
memory, what
metaphors do you
attribute to your
P1. What images represent
the relationship between
the teacher in your
memory and the
learning process?
P2. Where did this
experience take place?
P2. When did this
experience take place?
A, B,
C
1, 2,
3
Accountability,
identity formation
152

Questions Potential probe TSSP RQ Key concepts
perception of the
teacher?
P3. How did that teacher
exercise student critical
thinking?
P4. How did that teacher
include diverse
perspectives in the
classroom?
P4. Please explain why you
have identified those
metaphors.
When you teach you
current courses, what
metaphors would you
identify with?
P1. You have described
your students, but how do
you identify yourself?
P2. You have described
metaphors that you
employ to scaffold your
curriculum, but how do
you identify yourself as a
teacher?
P2. Your metaphors reflect
individual interaction.
How do you facilitate this
within the larger
classroom or classroom
as a whole?
P3. Please explain why you
have identified those
metaphors.
A, B,
C

1, 2,
3
Accountability,
self-perception
For this question, please
take out your writing
tool and piece of
paper.

On your paper, draw a
picture that represents
your metaphors as a
teacher and the
learning process in
your classroom.

You may turn off your
camera and turn your
camera back on when
you have completed
your task.
A, B,
C
1, 2,
3
Self-perception
153

Questions Potential probe TSSP RQ Key concepts
What interested you in
teaching (Name of
Tier 1 CT GE) course?
A, B,
C
1, 2,
3
Accountability,
self-perception
When you teach (Name
of Tier 1 CT GE),
what metaphors would
you identify with?
P1. You have described
your students, but how
do you identify yourself?
P2. You have described
metaphors that you
employ to scaffold your
curriculum, but how do
you identify yourself as a
teacher?
P2. Your metaphors reflect
individual interaction.
How do you facilitate
this within the larger
classroom or classroom
as a whole?
P3. Please explain why you
have identified those
metaphors.
A, B,
C
1, 2,
3
Accountability,
self-perception
How is your approach to
critical thinking
different than your
approach to other
courses?
P1. When is this approach
appropriate?
P2. How do you determine
when to utilize this
approach?
A, B,
C
1, 2,
3
Accountability,
identity formation,
self-perception
Cultural responsivity is
an approach that
acknowledges culture
as a central component
in cognitive
development,
recognizing that
student identities and
backgrounds are
sources of knowledge
(Ladson-Billings,
2021).

When you teach
culturally
responsively, what
metaphors would you
identify with?
A, B,
C
1, 2,
3
Accountability,
identity formation,
self-perception
154

Questions Potential probe TSSP RQ Key concepts
How is your approach to
culturally responsive
practices different than
your typical
approaches to
teaching?
P1. When is this approach
appropriate?
P2. How do you determine
when to utilize this
approach?
A, B,
C
1, 2,
3
Accountability,
identity formation,
self-perception
Lastly, please take our
that drawing from
earlier. These final two
prompts will require
you to add images to
your initial drawing.

First, adding to your
image, draw a
metaphor that
identifies the
relationship between
public policy and
trends with your
practice.

You may turn off your
camera and turn your
camera back on when
you have completed
your task.
B 2 Accountability,
identity formation
Second, again adding to
your image, draw a
metaphor that
identifies the
relationship between
various workplace
constructs and your
practice.

You may turn off your
camera and turn your
camera back on when
you have completed
your task.
C 3 Accountability,
identity formation
Please explain your
images.
P1. Do you mind if I take a
screenshot of your
drawing?
Accountability,
identity formation

155

Do you have further input or questions that you want to include about the influences of
faculty perceptions, behaviors, and choices?
Do you have further input or questions about faculty pursuits of critical thinking
exercise or culturally responsive practices?
Thank you for sharing your responses with me today. I appreciate your time and
willingness to share and advance scholarship on faculty identity development and
influences upon critical thinking and culturally responsive practices.
Can I contact you if I have follow up questions?
What is the best contact to do so?

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Critical thinking, global mindedness, and curriculum in a Saudi Arabian secondary school

PDF

Assessing the impact of diversity courses on student-faculty interactions, critical thinking and social engagement

PDF

Understanding cross-cultural knowledge sharing in Ghana’s energy sector: an exploratory study

PDF

Towards critical dialogue: an action research project building an awareness of an administrative team member’s role, identity, and deficit thinking

PDF

Higher education faculty and reflective practice

PDF

Military instructor critical thinking preparation

PDF

Noticing identity: a critically reflective cycle to leverage student mathematical funds of knowledge and identity

PDF

An analysis of influences to faculty retention at a Philippine college

PDF

Knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences within leadership development: a study of a business unit in a prominent technology company

PDF

Leadership in turbulent times: a social cognitive study of responsible leaders

PDF

Critical thinking development in the 21st century college classroom

PDF

The impact of diversity courses on students' critical thinking skills

PDF

Teaching critical thinking in secondary foreign language classrooms

PDF

Decolonizing the classroom: moving from reflection to critical reflection

PDF

Teaching literary criticism: a curriculum with an emphasis on religion

PDF

Factors influencing the success of Black male faculty at a Predominantly White Institution

PDF

An examination of factors that affect online higher education faculty preparedness

PDF

News media literacy among communication majors at Christian University: an evaluation study

PDF

Chameleons and kungas: the perceptions and experiences of military veteran faculty members in their transitions to academic service

PDF

Making them gifted: how elementary makers’ spaces reveal giftedness

Asset Metadata

Creator Jacala-Whalen, Barbara Gail (author)

Core Title Analysis of faculty professional identity upon culturally responsive practices and pursuit of critical thinking

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2023-08

Publication Date 09/11/2023

Defense Date 08/09/2023

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

Tag accountability,adaptive leadership,analog transfer,behaviorist,beyond-reform space,bounded rationality,constraint violation,constructivist,critical race theory,critical thinking,culturally responsive practice,ethical leader,faculty,Higher Education,knowledge compilation transfer,metaphor analysis,OAI-PMH Harvest,satisficng,self-referential,situate,teacher conceptions

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Datta, Monique Claire (committee chair), Green, Alan (committee member), Maddox, Anthony (committee member)

Creator Email whalenb@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113304691

Unique identifier UC113304691

Identifier etd-JacalaWhal-12334.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-JacalaWhal-12334

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Jacala-Whalen, Barbara Gail

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230911-usctheses-batch-1093 (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.

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