University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Using critical reflection to counter and disrupt deficit-based assumptions

(USC Thesis Other)

Using critical reflection to counter and disrupt deficit-based assumptions

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Using Critical Reflection to Counter and Disrupt Deficit-Based Assumptions

Elia Reyes-Mahoney

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation proposal submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

December 2023

© Copyright by Elia Reyes-Mahoney 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Elia Reyes-Mahoney certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Amy Hanreddy
Julie Slayton
John Pascarella, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv
Abstract
This action research study explored critical reflection as an adult learning process to build
awareness of deficit-based assumptions to counter and disrupt them. Literature shows many
factors influence the development of personally held assumptions which in time transform into
undisputed truths. Without challenging the validity of these assumptions, adults make decisions
and engage in actions that are propelled by them. To explore this phenomenon further, three
teaching support staff (TSS members, also known as instructional coaches) weekly for 1 hour
with me, the facilitator, for seven sessions (three sessions in the first cycle, and two sessions in
both Cycles 2 and 3). Transformational learning theory, constructive developmental learning
theory and critical reflection as an adult learning process informed the development of the
learning experiences and andragogical moves implemented during the sessions. The emergent
findings suggest that using these three adult learning theories helped all three participants make
progress toward developing their awareness of the deficit-based assumptions they held of the
special day class teachers they supported. These findings build on current literature on the
effectiveness of using andragogy to address the needs of adult learners’ needs and the ongoing
need to engage in critical reflection to best support the students they serve.
Keywords: critical reflection, adult learning, assumptions, instructional coaches

v
Dedication
To the ones that love nopales and Big Macs … who are "ni de aqui, ni de alla" … who are from
the rain, trees, wet soil and hints of mole poblano all rolled into one … who considers their
parents their first temachtiani … who enter unapologetically into spaces with Black hair and
Brown skin … who recognizes the true beauty they possess … who work hard to counter and
disrupt dominant ideologies. … This is for you.

vi
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the following temachtiani, without whom I would not have been
able to complete my doctoral.
Dr. Slayton, thank you for viewing me as an adult learner and providing me with
the opportunity to engage in cognitive stretches. Keep slaying away!
Dr. Pascarella, thank you for creating a space where I could self-author my
doctoral journey.
Dr. Amy Hanreddy, thank you for being my biggest cheerleader! Your
approach to the field of critical disability studies in education and students with extensive
support needs is conducted with such grace and humility. Thank you for modeling the
grace and humility with which you approach the field of critical disability studies.
I would also like to acknowledge the village that helped me through my academic
journey: Mami, Papi, Miguel (brother), Andres (brother), Magaly (sister), Karina (sister),
Rory (husband), Hunter and Ranger (my babies), Jo (in-law), Papa (in-law), Susie (in-
law), Mr. Weiss (Grade 7 ELA), Ms. Thompson (Grade 2 teacher), Ms. Berridge (Grade
3 teacher), Mr. Young (Grade 5 teacher), Meski (master teacher), Donovan (student with
ESNs and my teacher), Rachel (my best friend), Adrienne Johnston (master teacher),
Ogroskin (algebra co-teacher), Chenelle (history co-teacher), Dr. Sally Spencer (master
teacher), Dr. Akila Lyons-Moore (first Black professor at USC for me), the folks from
Sephardic Temple, Sinai Temple, the Compton Library, the bus riders of Bus 51, Bus
720, and the blue and red metro lines, who would help me with my homework and,
finally California State University Northridge for changing my life.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ........................................................................................................................................v
Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. xi
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xii
Context Statement ................................................................................................................1
Regional Center SibShop ........................................................................................ 2
My Disorienting Dilemma ...................................................................................... 3
Historically Entrenched Inequity .........................................................................................4
Organizational Context ........................................................................................................5
Student Population Within My Educational Organization ..................................... 6
Special Day Programs and Teacher Attrition in My Organization ......................... 8
Supporting Special Day Class Teachers in Restrictive Special Day Classes ....... 10
Educational Systemic Challenges and Their Impact on Special Day Class
Teachers ................................................................................................................ 11
Training of Teacher Support Staff ........................................................................ 12
My Role in My Organization .............................................................................................13
My Perpetuation of Inequities in My Organization .............................................. 14
Consequences Over a Lack of Critical Reflection in My Organization ............... 15
Conceptual Framework ......................................................................................................17
Deficit Views and the Genesis of Special Education ............................................ 18
Concepts Within My Conceptual Framework ...................................................... 19
Recalibrating the Conceptual Framework ............................................................ 33
Roles Within My Conceptual Framework ............................................................ 35
Intended Outcomes ............................................................................................................36

viii
Research Methods ..............................................................................................................37
Adult Learners’ Practices and Actions in My Conceptual Framework ................ 37
My Relation to Practices and Actions Outlined in My Conceptual
Framework ............................................................................................................ 38
Using a Qualitative Action Research Methodological Approach ......................... 40
Participants and Setting ......................................................................................................41
Recruiting Participants .......................................................................................... 42
Participants Part of This Study ............................................................................. 43
Setting of Action ................................................................................................... 45
Actions ...............................................................................................................................46
Cycle 1: Exploration of Positionality and Experiences ........................................ 47
Cycle 2: Deeper Exploration of Positionality, Experiences, and
Assumptions .......................................................................................................... 49
Cycle 3: Examining Deficit-Based Assumptions of Special Day Class
Teachers ................................................................................................................ 51
Data Collection and Instruments/Protocols .......................................................................53
Session Recordings/Transcripts ............................................................................ 53
Codes..................................................................................................................... 54
Ways of Knowing Questionnaire .......................................................................... 54
Analytic Memos .................................................................................................... 54
Critical Reflections ............................................................................................... 55
Documents and Artifacts ....................................................................................... 56
Member Checks .................................................................................................... 56
Methodological Memos ........................................................................................ 56
Data Analysis .....................................................................................................................56
Data Collection in the Field .................................................................................. 57

ix
Data Analysis of Data Generated .......................................................................................58
Session Recordings ............................................................................................... 58
Session Transcripts ............................................................................................... 58
Codes..................................................................................................................... 60
Ways of Knowing Questionnaire .......................................................................... 60
Analytic Memos .................................................................................................... 61
Critical Reflections ............................................................................................... 62
My Participants’ Reflections ................................................................................. 63
Limitations and Delimitations ............................................................................................63
Credibility and Trustworthiness .........................................................................................65
Ethical Considerations .......................................................................................................67
Power .................................................................................................................... 67
Data Security and Confidentiality ......................................................................... 68
Findings .............................................................................................................................69
Emergent Finding: Participants Developed Awareness of Deficit-Based
Assumptions .......................................................................................................... 69
Recognizing Deficit Assumptions: An Important Step Towards Noticing
and Disrupting Them ............................................................................................ 93
Afterword/Epilogue ...........................................................................................................94
Data Analysis Takeaways That Informed My Practice ........................................ 95
My Self-Discovery ................................................................................................ 96
My Path Forward .................................................................................................. 97
References ......................................................................................................................................99
Appendix A: Instructional Meeting Agenda ................................................................................108
Appendix B: My Positionality and Epistemology Influence My Teaching Practices .................109
Appendix C: What Lies Beneath the Decisions and Actions I Take? .........................................110

x
Appendix D: Teacher Vacancies and Substandard Credentials ...................................................111
Appendix E: Slow Down, Pause, Self-Talk, and Enact Informed Actions ..................................112
Appendix F: Iterative Cycles in the Action Research Study .......................................................113
Appendix G: Research Concepts Aligned to the Iterative Cycles of the Study ...........................114
Appendix H: The Social Identity Wheel ......................................................................................115
Appendix I: Which Person Is Most Likely? PowerPoint Slides ..................................................116

xi
List of Tables
Table 1: Demographics by Region 7
Table 2: Types of Substandard Credentials 9
Table 3: TSS Member Demographics 44
Table 4: Cycle 1: Exploration of Positionality and Experiences 48
Table 5: Cycle 2: Deeper Exploration of Positionality, Experiences, and Assumptions Developed
50
Table 6: Cycle 3: Examining the Deficit-Based Assumptions of Special Day Class Teachers 52
Table 7: Operationalization of the Sub-themes for my Emergent Finding 68

xii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 21
Figure 2: Updated Conceptual Framework 34
Figure 3: Data Collected and Analyzed While in the Field 59
Appendix A: Instructional Meeting Agenda 117
Appendix B: My Positionality and Epistemology Influence My Teaching Practices 118
Appendix C: What Lies Beneath the Decisions and Actions I Take 119
Appendix D: Teacher Vacancies and Substandard Credentials 120
Appendix E: Slow Down, Pause, Self-Talk, and Enact Informed Actions 121
Appendix F: Iterative Cycles in the Action Research Study 122
Appendix G: Research Concepts Aligned to the Iterative Cycles of the Study 123
Appendix H: The Social Identity Wheel 124
Appendix I: Which Person is Most Likely? PowerPoint Slides 125

1

Using Critical Reflection to Counter and Disrupt Deficit-Based Assumptions
This action research study explored critical reflection as an adult learning process to build
awareness of deficit-based assumptions to counter and disrupt them. Previous research shows
multiple factors influence the development of personally held assumptions, which, in time,
transform into undisputed truths. Without challenging the validity of these assumptions, adults
make decisions and engage in actions that are propelled by them. To explore this phenomenon
further, three teaching support staff (TSS members, also known as instructional coaches) weekly
for one hour with me, the facilitator, for seven sessions (three sessions in the first cycle, and two
sessions in both Cycles 2 and 3). Transformational learning theory, constructive developmental
learning theory and critical reflection as an adult learning process informed the development of
the learning experiences and andragogical moves implemented during the sessions. The findings
from this study suggest that using these three adult learning theories helped all three participants
make some progress toward developing their awareness of the deficit-based assumptions they
held of the special day class teachers they supported. These findings build on previous studies on
the effectiveness of using andragogy to address the needs of adult learners’ needs and the
ongoing need to engage in critical reflection to best support the students they serve. In the
following section, I introduce my context statement, which highlights the factors that drew me to
this work. Following this introduction is a description of the historically entrenched inequity I
have identified and my role in its perpetuation. I finalize this section by delineating my research
question to address the problem of practice I identified.
Context Statement
There were many things I did not understand as a child. One I wrestled with involved my
younger brother, Miguel. I did not understand why he would not play with me. I would try to
2

start a game with him, but my attempts were hardly reciprocated. Years later, I would learn
Miguel had been diagnosed with “autistic-like behaviors and developmental delays,” (M.
Bjorklund, personal communication, December 1, 1997). This neurological disorder negatively
impacted his communication, sensory needs, academic, adaptive, and behavioral skills. By fifth
grade, Miguel had attended four elementary schools, often citing his extensive support needs and
challenging behavior as the reason for this continuous movement. Later, I would learn this to be
the same reason for his placement in some of the most restrictive and segregated educational
settings for his whole academic life.
As the eldest of five, I had to care for Miguel. Public outings were a nightmare, as Miguel
would scream, cry, and hit me and my siblings to communicate his needs. I tried my best to keep
him calm during these outbursts as a wave of humiliation befell me. People in public would
gawk with curiosity, causing my already fragile self-esteem to endure more lacerations. My
disdain for Miguel grew with each passing day.
Regional Center SibShop
In the mid-1990s, the South-Central Los Angeles Regional Center offered a program for
siblings of people with disabilities called SibShop. To this day, I am not sure why my mother
enrolled my other brother and me in this program and boy am I ever grateful she did. At 12 years
old, I was not sure what to expect from these sessions. However, week after week, I began
looking forward to the space the SibShop sessions provided me. These spaces validated the years
of pent-up frustration I accumulated as a sibling of someone with extensive support needs
(ESNs). For the first time in a while, I was reminded to let my guard down and just be a kid, and
to be more than my brother’s caregiver, a role forced upon me due to necessity.
This positive turning point helped me peel away the layers of the autism label placed on
3

him and see Miguel for who he was. Turns out Miguel was not as complicated as I had made him
out to be. Miguel was a teen who loved basketball, Mexican music and television shows. He was
bilingual, had an interesting sense of humor, could be bossy at times and loved to keep his room
clean. For the first time, I appreciated my dear brother as just a sibling who would make me
laugh and cry and everything in between.
My Disorienting Dilemma
During my sophomore year at California State University, Northridge, I pursued my
special education credential. I expected to teach students with disabilities in a segregated
classroom, but this assumption came crashing down with one class assignment. It required me to
visit a school site that implemented the educational philosophy of inclusive education, where all
students, regardless of the extent of their disability, are educated alongside their typically
developing peers (Downing, 2010). Under the Individuals with Disabilities Act, inclusive
education is considered the least restrictive environment and should be considered first for
students with ESNs to attend (Vitelli, 2015).
Looking forward to fulfilling the requirements of my assignment, I entered the school
with a cynicism that soon dissipated. Before me, I saw an educational reality for students with
ESNs to which my brother was not privy. How were they part of the whole school community
instead of hidden away in segregated classrooms? My brother was not allowed to attend schools
in my neighborhood because his needs were considered too severe. Yet, I saw students with
disabilities similar to Miguel’s in this inclusive school. The more I observed, the more I mourned
the experiences and opportunities he could have had.
My first-hand observation of this fully inclusive school was the necessary disorienting
dilemma to consider a reimagination of the current educational approaches for students with
4

ESNs. From that moment forward, my passion and commitment to inclusive education grew.
Amid my personal disorientation, I knew I did not want to continue perpetuating exclusionary
practices. I did not want to continue watching students with typical needs shine while my brother
and others with similar disabilities had their basic educational rights ripped from them.
My parents immigrated to the United States in 1982. Carrying with them were dominant
ideologies that favored light skin over Brown. My parents reproduced the concept of colorism
with my siblings and me. As a young child, the messages telegraphed to me as a young child
were that of worthlessness, ugliness, and inferiority. These feelings fed into the assumptions I
developed of light-skinned and White people in general, that they would always be better than
me. My mother reinforced these beliefs with her unquestioned compliance to the many White
professionals who entered our lives in large part due to Miguel and his autism label. In my
mother’s eyes, they knew better than her and felt they all acted in my brothers’ best interest.
As I look back on these experiences, I understand that many professionals meant to
support my brother and my family did not act in our best interest. This helps me understand why
my brother attended so many schools and was segregated his whole academic life. My mother
did not know what to ask for, and the system implicitly reproduced the status quo, weeding out
and segregating those considered unfit from the rest (Ferri & Connor, 2006). Unfortunately, this
is a common trend in families and communities of color. In the subsequent section, I will discuss
how the historically entrenched inequity my family experienced with my brother’s diagnosis of
autism continues to reproduce itself at my educational organization.
Historically Entrenched Inequity
The eugenics movement dominated the United States at the start of the 20th century
(Ferri & Connor, 2006). During this time, dominant ideologies and science were meshed to
5

justify the superiority of the White race. People were categorized into two groups: those
considered “fit and healthy” and those considered “unfit” (Ferri & Connor, 2006, p. 36). Given
the wave of anti-immigration sentiment propelling the flames of racism during this era, those
considered unfit were usually people of color (Painter, 2010). Other groups fitting this category
included the poor, people involved in prostitution, and people with disabilities. Goddard
reinforced deficit-based notions of intelligence using faulty assessment results. These results
highlighted the superiority of White Americans while attributing a moronic level of intelligence
to “[third-class] immigrants” (Painter, 2010, p. 280).
Deficit-based perspectives propelled the social construction developed between race and
ability. This perspective justified inequity and segregation of people of color. The 1954 Brown v.
Board of Education decision disrupted the continued segregation of Black and White Americans
in public schools (Bell, 1980). Sensing the eventual collapse of segregation, educators used
deficit-based orientations disguised as policies to address this issue (Ferri & Connor, 2006).
These color-blind policies led schools to recommend struggling students for special education
support and services (APA, 2021). However, these supports and services could only be provided
in a separate classroom. It did not take long to fill these classrooms with students of color. The
implicit beliefs and assumptions of students of color as incapable of learning or less intelligent as
White students led educational institutions to develop segregated special classes to help students
who could not keep up academically. However, the nefarious reason for offering this special
support to students of color was for schools to comply with the desegregation laws while
resegregating through special education programs.
Organizational Context
The historical vestiges of deficit-based perspectives are alive and self-reproducing in my
6

educational organization. My organization consists of six regions. Each region is responsible for
the schools in its area, including hiring personnel, administrative oversight, and providing
services to its communities (LAUSD, n.d.).
Student Population Within My Educational Organization

Table 1 illustrates the 2021–2022 demographics for each region (LAUSD, 2022). The
data are disaggregated by total student enrollment per local district, racial and ethnic
demographics, students experiencing economic disadvantage, number of special day programs
(segregated educational placements for students with ESNs), and racial and ethnic demographic
breakdown of students attending more restrictive educational settings.
Deficit-based perspectives and narratives regarding people with intersecting identities
(people of color and with a disability) infiltrate school organizations through color-blind policies.
In this instance, the data in Table 1 highlights what historically has been occurring to students of
color with ESNs and what the literature continues to report as an issue of inequity, biases,
economic and demographic stratification, and assumptions of competency, as students of color
with ESNs are more likely to be placed in restrictive educational settings than their White
American counterparts (Agran et al., 2020; Losen et al., 2021; National Council on Disability
[NCD], 2018).
Table 1 shows that 75% of the students attending Region 1 identified as Latinx, 14% as
Black, 2% as Asian American, and 3% as White American. Eighty-six percent of students in this
region also experienced economic disadvantage. Although students identifying as Black
constituted 14% of the total student population in this region, 49% received special education
services in restrictive settings. Students identifying as Latinx constituted 75% of the total student
population, with 44% receiving their education in restrictive settings. These percentages match
7

the NCD’s (2018) report to the U.S. Congress.

Table 1
Demographics by Region
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Total student body 74,329 74,166 71,837 66,789 71,920 63,695
Latinx 75% 95% 82% 76% 61% 52%
Black 14% 0.7% 4% 2% 3% 19%
Asian American 2% 1% 3% 3% 7% 5%
White American 3% 2% 5% 14% 20% 16%
Economic disadvantage 86% 100% 89% 86% 62% 68%
Number of SDP (RS) 166 146 127 100 113 99
Students with
disabilities
9,990 10,884 9,817 9,737 9,908 8,192
Latinx students in RS 44% 41% 40% 41% 41% 43%
Black students in RS 49% 44% 48% 40% 44% 48%
Asian American in RS 41% 55% 50% 43% 43% 41%
White American in RS 36% 42% 27% 33% 33% 25%

Note. The acronym SDP stands for special day program. The acronym RS refers to a restrictive
setting. The term Black was used instead of African American to include students of African
ancestry worldwide (APA, 2021; LAUSD, 2022).

8

The findings from Region 1 are similar across all of my organization’s regions. Overall,
the data in Table 1 highlight how students’ race, ethnic identity, ability, and socioeconomic
status increase the likelihood they will receive their education in a more restrictive and thus
segregated setting. This is only one effect of this historically entrenched inequity. The following
section will explore the prevalence of underprepared teachers relegated to occupy these
segregated spaces and the effects of this practice on students of color with ESNs.
Special Day Programs and Teacher Attrition in My Organization
Across the nation, there is an extreme shortage of qualified and fully credentialed special
education teachers (Ondrasek et al., 2020). With teacher preparation program enrollment
declining, school districts have few options to staff vacant classrooms. According to Ondrasek et
al. (2020), “Two of three special education teachers enter with minimal qualifications in the state
of California” (p. 4). The mass shortage of fully credentialed special education teachers compels
school districts to hire either long-term substitutes or teachers with substandard credentials.
Research has found that teachers entering the field with substandard credentials are twice as
likely to leave the field of education when “compared to their fully credentialed counterparts,”
thus further contributing to the growing trend of continuing the cycle of classroom vacancies
(Carver- Thomas et al., 2020, p. 10). These systemic issues find their way to perpetuate harm
upon students with ESNs once again.
In April 2022, Miguel Sanchez became the director of the second-largest educational
organization in the United States. Soon, they faced their first of many issues they had to tackle,
figuring out how to staff 2,100 teaching vacancies. In August 2022, with well-coiffed hair, an
expensive suit, and a million-dollar smile, Sanchez boasted before news cameras that the 2022–
2023 school year would begin with every classroom staffed with a certificated teacher. Sanchez
9

was technically correct; the 2022–2023 school year did start with every classroom staffed with a
credentialed teacher. This was accomplished by redeploying certificated, out-of-the-classroom
teachers to cover these vacancies.
It is unknown how many special day classrooms for students with ESNs need of a
credentialed special education teacher at my organization. Attempting to gain this information is
futile. Given this lack of transparency, The United Teachers Los Angeles filed an unfair practice
charge against the organization in October 2022 for “obscuring the actual number of job
vacancies” available (United Teachers Los Angeles, 2022).

Table 2
Types of Substandard Credentials
Provisional intern permit
(PIPs)/short-term staff permit
(STSPs)/waiver
Limited assignment permit Intern credential
One-year, emergency-style
permits issued to
individuals who have not
completed teacher
preparation programs nor
demonstrated subject-
matter competency
Permits issued to fully
credentialed teachers to
teach outside of their
subject area to fill a staffing
vacancy or need.

Credentials issued to teachers
in training …[demonstrate]
subject-matter competence
but have not completed
teacher preparation or met
the performance assessment
requirements for a license

Note. Teachers can teach with one of the substandard credentials listed in this table. Adapted from
California’s Special Education Teacher Shortage by N. Ondrasek, D. Carver-Thomas, C. Scott,
and L. Darling-Hammond, 2020. Policy Analysis for California Education.
(https://bit.ly/3Ea6R2u). In the public domain.

10

According to Tat (2022), schools with high concentrations of “low-income students,
English learners, students with disabilities, or those facing homelessness” experience the greatest
vacancies. Once again, students who have been historically marginalized due to their intersecting
identities (racial and ethnic identity and abilities) are being harmed as they are more likely to be
taught by a substitute teacher, an inexperienced teacher, or one who holds substandard
credentials. Alvarez (2007) further highlighted this institutional racism, stating that teachers with
substandard credentials often lack the necessary pedagogical training and knowledge to teach
and often employ more punitive behavior management techniques. Other studies have also
demonstrated that new teachers are often less effective than experienced teachers in all aspects of
teaching (Carver-Thomas, et al., 2020). The systems that reinforce these actions continue to
harm the large population of students of color with ESNs in these classrooms. The oppressive
system I operate causes a snowball effect that lowers the quality of instruction and rigor,
classroom management, and standards-based curricular implementation for students with high
needs.
Supporting Special Day Class Teachers in Restrictive Special Day Classes
The setting where teachers begin their first teaching assignment contributes to high
turnover rates. According to Teacher Shortages in California: Status, Sources, and Potential
Solutions research brief, the turnover rate of special education teachers with substandard
credentials and are assigned to work in a segregated classroom are twice that of teachers working
in other education environments (Darling-Hammond et al., 2018). Therefore, the odds of
teachers staying if they have a substandard credential and teach in a special day class for students
with ESNs is low unless they receive quality mentoring and professional development.
Currently, there are three ways new teachers receive support from my organization. The
11

first is to receive a visit from their region’s teaching support staff (TSS). This usually takes place
during the first or second week of school. The second way to receive support is direct contact via
email. The last way is to attend one of the all-day training sessions the district offers throughout
the school year. However, this last option has the most issues. My organization is experiencing a
shortage of credentialed special education teachers and substitute teachers available to cover
special day classes for students with ESNs. These spots are the hardest to fill with substitutes.
This shortage has serious implications for novice teachers. Unless a new teacher can secure a
substitute, they will not be able to attend the all-day training. Sometimes, even if the teacher has
secured a substitute, a lack of school funds to pay for the substitute will jeopardize their
attendance.
Educational Systemic Challenges and Their Impact on Special Day Class Teachers
Every school in my organization has a handful of special day programs available to
educate students with ESNs. New teachers hired to teach in these classrooms often realize they
are one of the few serving students with ESNs on their campus. With this professional loneliness,
newly hired special day class teachers will seek instructional strategies int places. Given how
adult learners make meaning of their situations, they may gravitate toward instructional
strategies that resonate with their positionalities, epistemologies, prior experiences, and
assumptions regarding the education of students with ESNs. Defaulting to unexamined
assumptions for teaching students with ESNs further perpetuates deficit-based orientation of
student abilities. Because the foundation of special education originates from a medical model
that insists on remediating student deficits, these new teachers will likely employ unexamined
assumptions that reinforce this perspective will likely be employed by these new teachers in my
organization (Siuty, 2019). They are more likely to focus on what their students cannot do,
12

limiting their opportunities and learning expectations.
Training of Teacher Support Staff
During my team’s monthly meetings, we dedicate little time to meaningful training
regarding the coaching and support of adult learners who are teachers. The meeting agendas for
these monthly meetings exemplify hierarchal, one-way communication (see Appendix A). For
example, the agenda in appendix A lists a total of five topics. With the exception of one, all the
agenda topics revolve around hierarchical one-way communication, telegraphing Freire’s (1970)
banking model of education. The assumption being that TSS members are viewed as empty
vessels where knowledge is deposited by the administrators of my organization. This oppressive
approach helps to keep the status quo undisturbed. In other words, by silencing the TSS members
and me through this approach, we are not provided the space to voice disagreement or question
organizational decisions.
According to Darling-Hammond (1999), team meetings should avoid this type of one-
way communication where leaders deliver information to the team members without expecting a
respectable output. Instead, these meetings should be a platform to collaboratively tackle
adaptive problems (Davey, 2016). Safir (2017) reiterated the importance of including “data-
based inquiry,” where team members engage in “data-driven dialogue” (p. 230). Using data to
drive team meetings can be the anchor to help organization members stay on track and attentive
to issues troubling the organization. This collaborative problem-solving acknowledges the team
as valued members expected to contribute meaningfully.
Just as novice teachers make sense of the world using their experiences, the TSS will also
default to prior experiences, beliefs, and assumptions of ways to support new teachers and high-
leverage classroom practices to support students with ESNs. Therefore, it is imperative that the
13

monthly team meetings the TSS members and I attend provide us with opportunities to engage in
critical reflection based on our coaching experiences. Unpacking our personal assumptions
regarding the special day class teachers is paramount to countering deficit-oriented coaching
practices.
My Role in My Organization
I started my career in special education as a paraprofessional for students with ESNs.
Working with these students motivated me to get my special education credential. After a decade
of working as an inclusion facilitator, I left for a new opportunity. I was beginning to feel burned
out and no longer felt the joy that attracted me to teaching in the first place. I reached out to my
mentor, who connected me to the job I have today. Initially, my role focused on supporting
schools in developing inclusive settings while guiding staff to these goals. As the years went on,
my role transformed from developing inclusive settings to becoming a teacher support staff
member and later the lead teacher support staff (LTSS), the role I currently hold. Neither of these
positions required me to possess an administrator’s credential. My role is classified as a teacher
on special assignment.
My role as LTSS entails assigning a TSS member to support all special day class (SDC)
teachers with a specific emphasis on supporting new teachers. In addition, I also coordinate
district-wide training, developing training based on region-specific and school needs, completing
special projects, and working closely with the TSS members regarding their coaching practices.
Although I am not an administrator, I am very knowledgeable of the organization’s policies and
procedures. The TSS members know this and have come to rely on me when they face
challenging situations.
14

My Perpetuation of Inequities in My Organization
I painfully acknowledge how I single-handedly perpetuate deficit-based perspectives and
narratives regarding the SDC teachers I am expected to support. I had convinced myself that
having a sibling with an ESN, my experiences with inclusive education, and serving on the board
of an organization focused on advocating for people with ESNs absolved me from any
wrongdoing. Developmentally, I was not in a place where I could critically reflect upon myself
and the implicit biases that infiltrated my decisions and actions (Drago-Severson & Blum-
DeStefano, 2017). According to Orange et al. (2019), regardless of “how much expertise a coach
may have, [they] may be unconsciously guiding mentees through suggestions … that marginalize
students of color and low-income students” (p. 46). If my positionality and epistemology
implicitly infiltrate my decisions and actions, then I am reproducing deficit-based perspectives of
the adult learners I am to support.
The hypocritical reality I built for myself imploded in the Spring semester of 2022. I was
in the 2nd year of my doctoral program at the University of Southern California. I recall feelings
of frustration during this time. I struggled to envision how I would complete my action research
dissertation, which left me questioning my intelligence. During one of my meetings with Dr.
Slayton and Dr. Pascarella (program concentration chair and dissertation chair, respectively),
feelings of embarrassment and confusion consumed me. I recall clasping my hands tightly in an
attempt to decrease the amount of space I was taking as I grappled with my thoughts aloud:
I’m going, to be honest. I’m still grappling with … I don’t know. … My graph shows that
where there’s a higher population of Latinx and Black or African American students,
there’s a higher [percentage] of special day classes, which are segregated. … That’s one
area I was heading into. … I had an aha moment along the way. … I had an aha moment.
15

… I don’t know if you both have been trying to tell me this in your own way … that I
have a deficit mindset against any teacher who works in a special day class.
The words stung as they left my lips. At that moment, I realized how complicit I was in
reproducing the historically entrenched inequity of deficit-based perspectives. I perpetuated this
inequity by accusing SDC teachers of having low expectations of their students with ESNs
without realizing I was doing the same thing to them. This golden moment helped me realize that
I somehow had taken all my childhood experiences of living with a brother with ESNs and
attached them to anything or anyone associated with special day programs. Here I was, working
for an educational organization meant to support and coach SDC teachers working in restrictive
SDCs. This critical self-reflection helped me realize that, from the onset, I was viewing SDC
teachers from a deficit perspective, thus contributing to the ongoing shortage of special
educators.
Overall, I am a prime example of why the critical reflection of long-held beliefs and
assumptions is needed. Internally, I developed a self-righteous narrative that justified my beliefs
of others and myself. The segregation my brother encountered justified my disdain for educators
teaching in restrictive settings. Unbeknownst to me, I fully reproduced the deficit-based
perspectives I had dedicated my career to advocating against. Externally, the deficit-based
assumptions and beliefs I held of SDC teachers were detrimental, as manifested in the low
expectations I perceived of improving their teaching practices and the low-level adult learning
experiences I crafted for them during the development of district-wide training.
Consequences Over a Lack of Critical Reflection in My Organization
Steeped in White supremacy culture (Jones & Okun, 2001), deficit-based thinking
involves blaming an individual for perceived failures. The orientation to blame the victim places
16

the onus of their predicament solely on the individual without acknowledging how educational
systems reproduce conditions that push teachers out (Patton Davis & Museus, 2019). Using a
deficit-based orientation, TSS members enter classrooms and highlight everything that needs
fixing. School or district administrators often request their presence, not because a teacher is
doing great but because of a problem. As these support visits unfold, the blame for student
misbehavior, lack of classroom management, and lack of robust instruction is directly on the
teachers without acknowledging the systems that contributed to these problems in the first place.
Approaching the mentoring of novice teachers through a deficit-based orientation can
cause the TSS members to have low expectations of their teaching abilities. Furthermore, it helps
to shift the lack of progress squarely on the novice teacher, which causes the TSS members to
disengage and avoid taking responsibility for the teacher’s lack of progress. Even before the TSS
member meets the SDC teacher and observes their classroom practices, they walk in expecting to
find something wrong. Unfortunately, the reproduction of this deficit-based orientation in special
day classrooms occurs where students with ESNs are blamed for their lack of progress (Ferri &
Connor, 2006). This approach does not consider the systemic issues that are failing these
students in the first place. The systemic issues that fail new SDC teachers are the same.
If the panacea of special education teacher attrition is to provide SDC teachers with high-
quality mentoring and professional development, then my organization (including myself) is
complicit and contributes to the teacher shortage. Without professional learning to support the
examination of assumptions the TSS members and I hold of how each of our positionalities and
epistemologies influences the decisions and actions we take; we all will continue reproducing
deficit-based orientations toward SDC teachers. Therefore, I aimed to use critical reflection as an
adult learning process to support the TSS members and me to counter and disrupt our deficit-
17

based assumptions and take more informed actions. Aligned with this study’s aims, I addressed
the following research question: How can I use critical reflection as an adult learning process to
help teacher support staff members and I build awareness of, counter, and disrupt deficit-based
assumptions within my organization?
Conceptual Framework
In its most basic form, a conceptual framework is an image a practitioner-scholar creates
to highlight concepts essential to a study. In this image, arrows illustrate connections between
concepts and their perceived relation. According to Maxwell (2013), the concepts researchers
choose to depict come from either “existing theory, our own experiences,” or both (p. 62).
Therefore, this conceptual framework can be interpreted as an extension of my positionality and
epistemology, the ways they shaped my perception of phenomena, and their interconnectedness.
This conceptual framework also highlighted how I was situated in my organization and my
relationship to the concepts I explored for this action research study.
As a practitioner-scholar, I needed to communicate how I interpreted the concepts from
the literature. With these actions in mind, I acknowledged the subjectivity with which I
approached my conceptual understanding of these concepts. As Slayton (personal
correspondence, 03-01-22) stated, “We do not pretend to be objective. … We name our biases as
the instruments through which the research takes place.” Overall, operationalizing each concept
helped me communicate my personal understanding of the concepts and their perceived
relationships (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This operationalization justified the working theory of
the phenomena I developed, thus increasing its credence and trustworthiness (Maxwell, 2013).
Theories can confirm or disconfirm one’s beliefs and assumptions (Brookfield, 2017).
18

Using theories as the metric by which I measured the accuracy of my long-held assumptions
helped me achieve the outcomes of this action research study. The conceptual framework helped
anchor my “ideas and beliefs’' and supported my ability to “assess [my objectives], refine [my]
goals … [and] select appropriate methods” (Maxwell, 2013, p. 39), which informed my
decisions. Above all, the conceptual framework was designed to be a living diagram of my study,
changing as I unpacked the data generated and analyzed it (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017).
Therefore, multiple revisions occurred before I considered my conceptual framework complete.
Since the inception of the United States, deficit narratives have positioned people of
color as inferior (Spring, 2016). Historical documents such as the Bill of Rights excluded people
who were not White Americans (Valencia, 2012). Thomas Jefferson justified the enslavement of
African Americans because he considered their cognitive skills defective or faulty and that they
were, therefore, at a higher risk of dying if not protected and kept as enslaved people
(Menchaca, 2012). The amalgamation of White supremacy ideology and science served as
justification to forcibly sterilize women of color to slow down the birth of people deemed
defective (Ferri & Connor, 2006). Samuel George Morton finagled cranial data that
scientifically proved how defective people of color were, basing this assumption on their small
cranial size compared to White Americans (Gould, 1978). Terms such as feebleminded were
often used as code words to refer to people of color (Ferri & Connor, 2006; Milner & Jumbe,
2020). Although the eugenics movement waned in popularity, remnants of deficit views of
people of color remain entrenched in society.
Deficit Views and the Genesis of Special Education
In the United States, special education services support students with disabilities to
19

access their educational environment and curriculum at their schools regardless of their race,
ethnic identity, gender identification, disability category, language spoken, or socioeconomic
status. In reality, these policies and procedures are not color-blind as they uphold dominant
ideologies stemming from the deficit-based perspectives of the 20th century. Students of color
with disabilities continue to be harmed by the historically entrenched inequity of deficit
perspectives. Their intersecting identities impact the disability label they are assigned, the level
of segregation they experience, the access (or lack thereof) to educational resources, the level of
experience their teacher will have, and the educational rigor and expectations they experience
(Kurth et al., 2016).
This study aimed to counter and disrupt harmful deficit-based perspectives and
assumptions ubiquitous in special education. I aimed to use critical reflection as an adult
learning process with the adult learners so that collectively, we could continually examine
deficit-based assumptions we have of SDC teachers we support as part of our job role.
Concepts Within My Conceptual Framework
As detailed by the conceptual framework in Figure 1, I used the fundamental tenets of
transformational learning theory (TLT), constructivist developmental theory (CDT), and critical
reflection as an adult learning process (CRALP) to achieve these aims. This conceptual
framework comprises three overarching ovals, a variety of arrow types, and a small rectangle.
The double-headed arrows convey the interdependence existing between all the concepts. The
oval on the left-hand side of the rectangle illustrates a Venn diagram, which highlights the
critical intersecting tenets of transformational learning theory and constructive developmental
theory. Above the Venn diagram is a smaller oval circle labeled four lenses of critical reflection
20

(Brookfield, 2017). I used these four lenses to engage in an iterative reflexive cycle which
helped me critically reflect upon my andragogical moves while facilitating transformative
learning experiences for adult learners. These four lenses included seeing events through
students’ eyes, checking in with critical friends and getting their - perceptions using my personal
experiences to interpret the events that took place in the sessions, and lastly, using the literature
to name the phenomena I observed. The second overarching oval on the top right includes
pictures of myself and the teacher support staff members (TSS). The double-headed arrow
between me and these two adult learning theories signified the ongoing interactions I submerged
myself into. Lastly, the double-headed arrow between me and the TSS members signifies our
equal participation in adult learning experiences that incorporated key characteristics of TLT,
CDT, and CRALP.
With this in mind, the adult learning experiences I facilitated were in the presence of
others, centered my participants’ experiences and their TSS member roles, critical reflection that
supported their changes in “what they knew and how” they made sense of it (Kokkos, 2019, p.
162), and considered a multi-modal approach to help my participants to better express
themselves (Brookfield, 2017), all while using Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2017)
typology. The double-headed arrow pointing from me to the three adult learning theories and the
arrowheads revolving around them signified the reflexive process I enacted throughout this
action research study. In the following sections, I describe each theory’s significance and
illustrate how the theories presented in my framework were utilized within my study.
Transformational Learning Theory
Transformational learning theory (TLT) posits that learning (or transformation) occurs
when adults have the opportunity to examine long-held assumptions, reflect upon them, and
21

enact more “informed actions” (Brookfield, 2017, p. 80). Only after this analysis has occurred
will adult learners have a higher likelihood to consider alternate perspectives and thus enact
more informed actions. Critical reflection and discourse with and in the presence of others are
the hallmark characteristics of TLT. Mezirow (2018) described critical self-reflection as a
critical evaluation of one’s thinking and the thought process of others.

Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

Note. Conceptual framework designed by Elia Reyes-Mahoney, the researcher of this action
research study. The image inside the circle depicting a tanned woman with long black hair is of
Elia Reyes-Mahoney, the author of this study. The image next to it does not require attribution.
22

Through critical self-reflection, I took a closer look and problematized “assumptions
[both adult learners and I make] about the world” to check their accuracy (Teaching Excellence
in Adult Literacy [TEAL], 2011, p. 2). However, to problematize long-held assumptions, adult
learners must first experience a disorienting dilemma (Mezirow, 2000). Here, adults experience a
phenomenon that triggers an emotional response in them. During this time, the adult learner may
struggle to process their feelings of uneasiness.
As an instructor of adult learners, my role was to capitalize on this moment of
disequilibrium, using it as an entry point to facilitate their examination of assumptions that may
have been propelled by their biases (Brookfield, 2019). Fostering these learning conditions
allowed me to support my participants’ ability to and work towards challenging their deficit-
based assumptions, thus moving them closer to transformational learning through critical
reflection (Wergin, 2020).
Dewey (1938/1997) considered critical reflection a meaning-making process that
supports an adult’s ability to reframe their way of knowing (Wergin, 2020). The presence of
others who hold alternate perspectives is critical if adults are to disrupt existing beliefs,
assumptions and bias (personal correspondence). These are the learning conditions I developed
that supported my adult learners to “challenge each other’s assumptions,” including their own
(TEAL, 2011, p. 2). Through this process, my adult learners and I unearthed the genesis of
deficit-based beliefs and assumptions, dissecting the dominant ideologies that held them together
so they could enact more informed actions in the future. The conceptual framework (Figure 1)
illustrated TLT inside the Venn diagram, denoting it as one of the adult learning theories I used
in this action research study.
23

Transformational Learning Theory Limitations
Mezirow’s (2000) transformational learning theory is the cornerstone of adult learning
theories. Many instructors of adult learners use its tenets to help them impart field and subject-
specific knowledge. However, one limitation of Mezirow’s TLT is its deficit-based approach
toward adult learners who have experienced significant life challenges. This orientation
considers adults who have or are experiencing homelessness, trauma, or illness as unable to
engage in discourse centered around the unpacking of their epistemology. This deficit-based
approach toward adult learners can lower expectations of their abilities and inhibit the
opportunity to engage in transformational learning experiences. Furthermore, viewing adult
learners through this lens places the blame directly on them for their inability to engage in
transformative learning experiences. Parallels can be drawn between TLT’s deficit-based
perspectives of adults experiencing hardship and the eugenic movement’s view of people of
color’s intellectual abilities, where they were often blaming them for their “own inequality”
(Ferri & Connor, 2006, p. 27).
In light of this critique, transformational learning theory served very useful to support
my adult learners’ examination of their deficit-based assumptions. By facilitating adult learning
experiences common in transformational learning, I supported my adult learners in transforming
their previous ways of knowing and their consideration of alternative perspectives, which
increases their chances of enacting more informed actions. Because aspects of Mezirow’s (2000)
transformational learning theory view adults from a deficit-based lens, I used concepts from
Kegan’s (2001) constructive developmental theory (CDT). I used CDT to help me counter the
deficit-based perspectives that I would inevitably default to as I work with my adult learners.
Since my action research focused on countering and disrupting deficit-based perspectives, it was
24

necessary to incorporate CDT to counter and disrupt my deficit-based biases.
Constructive Developmental Theory
Kegan et al.’s (2001) CDT layers a developmental approach to TLT (Wergin, 2020).
Unlike TLT, CDT views adults from diverse life and cultural backgrounds as able to construct
complex meaning-making systems (changes in what we know and how we know; Kegan et al.,
2001). This can be accomplished as long as the instructors of adults facilitate learning conditions
optimal for this type of learning and extend these opportunities to all adults, not just those
assumed to have the capability to engage in discourse and stretches for growth (Drago-Severson
& Blum-DeStefano, 2017; Kegan et al., 2001). Also, CDT makes it clear that instructors of adult
learners should not conflate an adult learner’s prior disciplinary knowledge and skills regarding a
concept (what we know) with how they make meaning (Kegan, 2018; Kegan et al., 2001).
Combining both is not only erroneous, takes on a deficit-based orientation, and unintentionally
dismisses adult learners’ wealth of knowledge, background information, and prior experiences.
Ignoring adult learners as carriers of knowledge deemed canonical perpetuates ideological
oppression (Freire, 1970). Therefore, adopting CDT was a safeguard to help circumvent
defaulting to my deficit-based perspectives, as it can influence my thoughts, decisions, and
actions regarding the adult learners. The conceptual framework I designed (Figure 1) I includes a
Venn diagram to illustrate the overlap between TLT and CDT as they both focused on the
change of “what [adults] know” (Kokkos, 2019).
From a developmental standpoint, CDT is interested in how instructors of adult learners
can create optimal learning environments that will increase the adult learners’ knowledge and
abstract thinking skills (Kegan & Lahey 2009). Thus, CDT supported my consideration of the
adult learners’ ways they created meaning using Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano’s (2017)
25

developmental meaning-making typography. Understanding the participants’ adult learning
profiles helped me generate adequate learning experiences and the “stretches for growth” they
need to support their upward mobility toward transformational learning (Drago-Severson &
Blum-DeStefano, 2017, p. 469). Through my awareness of the four ways adults construct
meaning of phenomena (instrumental, socializer, self-authoring, and self-transforming ways of
knowing), I was positioned to “better differentiate the supports and challenges” they needed
within the learning experiences I facilitated with them (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano,
2017, p. 463). This careful consideration helped me meet the participants where they were
developmentally and increased the chances that they would unpack unchallenged beliefs and
assumptions that cause the SDC teachers and students with ESNs harm.
TLT and CDT to Unearth Hegemonic Assumptions
The consequences of relying on unchecked assumptions to guide coaching practices TSS
members implement can vary from innocuous to pernicious. As adults, we assume professional
decisions are made from an objective standpoint. In reality, the instructional decisions and
actions we take are an extension of oneself. Our positionality and epistemology are influenced by
the people in our environment, various experiences, educational institutions and cultural and
linguistic backgrounds to mention a few. The illustration in appendix B showcases how my
gender identity, upbringing, education and familial experiences shaped my positionality and
epistemology, thus influencing my teaching practices toward my students. The importance of this
level of introspection and reflection upon one’s identity and positionality and epistemology by
extension is paramount if we are looking to counter and disrupt the reproduction of deficit-based
perspectives and assumptions.
26

Critical Reflection as an Adult Learning Process
Although both learning theories provide insightful information regarding andragogy, I
needed an additional adult learning theory to help me address the dominant ideologies that
influence society’s views of acceptable norms and infiltrate individuals’ long-held beliefs and
assumptions through this indoctrination. Because my action research focused on countering and
disrupting deficit-based assumptions, I used critical reflection as an adult learning process
(CRALP) to help me accomplish my objectives (Brookfield, 2010). Brookfield’s (2010) CRALP
is a theory that supports this study’s objectives. I used this theory to practice critically reflective
teaching with adult learners. This theory centers on developing critical habits that will help adult
learners examine the assumptions that influence their beliefs and assumptions as educators,
which can lead to more educated actions (Mezirow, 2000).
Critical reflection as an adult learning theory comprises four intersecting actions, which I
facilitated to investigate the beliefs that constructed the participants’ views of their practices and
professional experiences. The visual in appendix C, illustrates how dominant ideologies, social
construct of race, abilities, scholastic experiences, gender identification, socioeconomic status,
cultural background, and biases all push the assumptions adults come to develop. Therefore, the
unpacking of a decision an adult has made (akin to lifting a handkerchief) is necessary (see
Appendix C). Through this exploration, the participants and I worked toward uncovering the
dominant and hegemonic ideologies that propel our long-held assumptions. The process of
critical reflection as an adult learning theory entails the following:
● A discussion of an experience where the adult learner notices an inconsistency
between their beliefs and what took place.
● Critical reflection should occur in the presence of others, where individuals check the
27

validity of their assumption through a series of questions meant to challenge it.
● The community makes meaning of the presumption under analysis using alternate
perspectives to view the assumptions under analysis (Brookfield, 2010).
● Finally, the group must consider alternate perspectives to increase the chances they
will take more informed actions.
Helping the participants engage in critical reflection helped them examine the assumptions that
tangentially influence their support of my organization’s SDC teachers.
Engaging in CRALP required the participants to engage in pure description (Rodgers,
2002), the ability to describe coaching practices that are devoid of interpretation. Doing so
helped the adult learners and I to consider alternative ways to think about coaching experiences
described in our sessions. Using CRALP was necessary to facilitate a space where adult learners
could engage in experiences that helped them break down long-held beliefs and assumptions
shaped by historical, experiential, and cultural contexts. Deficit-based perspectives flourished in
the early 20th century, and messages telegraphed the physical and cognitive inferiority of people
of color. Today, the vestiges of these deficit-based perspectives are covertly embedded in our
society and continue to disperse the fallacy that people of color are not as intelligent or hold
beauty comparable to those of White Americans. This message is reproduced through the words,
decisions, and actions that fuel assumptions. These implicit assumptions taint the participants’
and my views with deficit-based lenses of the teachers we are meant to support. Without critical
reflection aiding my work with the participants, they would have continued to reproduce
dominant ideologies, further harming teachers and students who have historically been
marginalized.
28

My Critical Reflexivity
As the adult instructor facilitating learning experiences, I used the four lenses of critical
reflection to help me critically reflect on my practice (Brookfield, 2017). Using these four lenses
helped me engage in reflexivity regarding the andragogical moves I employed in the sessions. I
first used the lens of my student eyes to develop an awareness of how the participants perceived
the learning experiences I facilitated (Brookfield, 2017). This introspection helped me consider
andragogical moves and learning experiences to implement for the subsequent sessions of my
study. Secondly, I employed the lenses of colleagues’ perceptions as it encouraged me to use
critical friends to challenge my assumptions. Thirdly, I utilized the lens of personal experience,
keeping in mind to engage in pure description as I reflected on the events in each session
(Brookfield, 2017). Finally, to complete this iterative process of reflexivity, I went back to the
adult learning theories of TLT, CDT, and CRALP to continue informing my efforts of
facilitating appropriate adult experiences.
Critical Reflection
Howard (2003) defined critical reflection as a theory that supports teachers’ ability to
discern their explicit and implicit biases and uncover deficit-based perspectives that might propel
their assumptions. Brookfield (2010) further described critical reflection as necessary for adults
to engage in a transformational learning process. Drawing from both definitions, I defined
critical reflection as a process for adults to slow down the impetuousness of thoughts that race
through their minds. By engaging in these actions, these adult learners and I took a step back and
examined the basis of our long-held beliefs and assumptions. This critical introspection provided
us with the ability to notice how implicit assumptions influence personal thoughts and actions.
29

Research shows that teachers entering education with substandard credentials are twice as
likely to leave the field when “compared to their fully credentialed counterparts,” thus
contributing to the cycle of classroom vacancies (Carver-Thomas et al., 2020, p. 10).
Additionally, the turnover rate of special education teachers working in segregated classrooms is
twice as likely compared to teachers working in other educational environments (Carver-Thomas
et al., 2020). In response to these vacancies, school districts desperately seek credentialed
teachers to fill these positions. Given the current teacher shortages in California, local
educational agencies are left to hire teachers with substandard credentials or long-term
substitutes to fill these vacancies.
The relationship between deficit-based assumptions and new teacher turnover rates is
precarious and profoundly based on the quality of mentoring and professional development they
receive. Numerous studies highlight the impact of quality mentoring and professional
development on new teachers entering the field (Darling-Hammond et al., 2018). As long as new
teachers do not receive the appropriate coaching and support, a revolving door of substitutes,
teachers with substandard credentials, or brand-new teachers will continue to teach students with
the most needs (see Appendix D).
Therefore, to counter and disrupt these inequities, the TSS members and I had to
critically reflect on the coaching practices we used with the SDC teachers and the assumptions
guiding them. Through this process, the adult learners and I worked to uncover conscious and
unconscious biases and deficit thinking regarding individuals’ abilities and racial, ethnic,
linguistic, and cultural backgrounds. By critically reflecting, we unpacked our assumptions and
moved toward enacting informed action: actions carried out based on the validity of these beliefs
and assumptions. In this case, the participants and I critically reflected on the origins of our
30

personal assumptions regarding SDC teachers in our organization. Without engaging in this
process, the quality of our instructional coaching practices would have continued to be
contingent on personal assumptions and individual perceptions of SDC teachers, continuing to
perpetuate educational inequities for the students with intersecting identities that we serve.
Multiple Means of Critically Deliberate Expression
According to Meyer et al. (2014), universal design for learning (UDL) assists educators
in anticipating learner neurodiversity to develop learning conditions that will support their
learning. Three tenets undergird UDL. They are (a) multiple means of representation, (b)
multiple means of action and expression, and (c) multiple means of engagement. Drawing from
this definition and its tenets, I conceptualize an extension of “rational discourse” (Mezirow,
2000) to encompass multiple modes of expression. According to Freire (1970/2000), “dialogue
…with the oppressed” as the only means of communicative expression limits the participation of
all adult learners as it automatically ostracizes adult learners who cannot engage in such
dialectical actions in the presence of others (p. 67). Limiting critical reflection to only one
modality of expression (discourse) further perpetuates the historically entrenched inequity of
deficit-based perspectives of the participants, which I will work to counter.
Using multiple means of critically deliberate expression is another way to disrupt the
deficit approach to adult learners. By providing opportunities for the participants to engage in
critical reflection using varied ways of expression, they communicated their thoughts in a way
that made them feel comfortable. Critical reflection can be abstract, and many adults require the
opportunity and space to strengthen this skill. Brookfield (2017) highlighted this importance,
citing how unfair it is to situate adult learners in a space where they expect to engage in
discourse over an unfamiliar topic or concept. Learning conditions such as this are neither
31

productive nor contribute to transformational learning.
The Intersection of the Adult Learning Theories Within My Conceptual Framework
I used a Venn diagram in Figure 1 to illustrate the intersection between TLT (Mezirow,
2000) and CDT (Kegan, 2001). The Four Lenses of Critical Reflection are part of CRALP
(Brookfield, 2010) and were placed above the Venn diagram to demonstrate their relationship.
Cumulatively, TLT, CDT, and CRALP will lead to (a) changes in what we know; (b) cognitive
stretches (from concrete to abstract thinking); (c) changes in how we know, and through this; (d)
a higher likelihood that adult learners engage in informed action. This informed or intelligent
action can occur in adult learners when they engage in learning experiences that support their
exploration of their assumptions and beliefs.
Adult Learning Experiences
Using aspects of all three adult learning theories helped guide the adult learning
experiences I facilitated with the participants. Exploring the nexus of adult learners’ deeply held
beliefs and assumptions is challenging and, at times, painful work. Brookfield (2010) states that
assumptions adult learners accept without challenging their validity may work against them,
further contributing to their marginalization. With a clear understanding of this, I approached the
work with the adult learners in a way that ensured I facilitated adult learning experiences that
fostered optimal tensions to help them engage in varying levels of transformational growth
(Wergin, 2020).
Ultimately, my objective was to help my adult learners unpack their assumptions,
challenge them to determine their accuracy. To accomplish this, I facilitated learning experiences
that created the necessary conditions to develop and strengthen their critical reflection muscles.
The learning experiences I designed needed to provide the participants with autonomy in the
32

presence of others and with pathways that allowed them to use their experiences as coaches and
adult learners to essentially help transform their ways of knowing. Most importantly, these
learning experiences needed to create an optimal tension where adults experience an event that
“challenges their existing beliefs just enough” to “create new meaning,” thus transforming their
ways of knowing (Wergin, 2020, p. 35). Therefore, I facilitated learning experiences that were
not too paralyzing or would cause the participants to shut down. This process required me to
understand my adult learners’ developmental meaning-making systems so I could help them
make the progress they made toward developing their awareness of deficit-based assumptions
(Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2019).
Coaching experiences and problems of practice were at the center of the adult learning
experiences I facilitated with my adult learners during my sessions. Through my doctoral
program, I learned that my educational organization approaches the instruction of adult learners
with a deficit-oriented mindset. This approach asks teachers to attend all-day professional
development, treated as empty vessels, expecting to receive knowledge, not produce it as it is not
deemed legitimate (Freire, 1970). Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999) further reinforce this notion,
highlighting that teachers’ knowledge is often considered to be “low status knowledge,” (p. 130).
For example, I sat in on one of my organization’s training sessions geared towards SDC teachers.
Two TSS members were facilitators; they asked everyone to introduce themselves and share
teacher-specific experiences and information. I noticed this information was not used to make
andragogical changes to the training. Instead, the facilitators stuck to the script, where the
training space became one-sided. Cramming information into the participants’ brains took
precedence over facilitating substantive adult learning experiences. During this training,
33

participants were asked to engage in matching activities, concept sorts, and engage in discussions
that rewarded rote memorization. This is not meant to be a critique of the facilitators. Instead, I
am highlighted how the lack of training focused on coaching and supporting adult learners is
seriously lacking, further reinforcing deficit-oriented training sessions.
The literature focused on andragogy states time and time again that this approach ignores
necessary learning conditions to shift what adult learners know and how they know (Kegan et al.,
2001). Freire (1970) stated that to ignore students (my adult learners who are teachers) as carriers
of legitimate knowledge is in itself a “characteristic of [ideologic] oppression” (p. 72). Therefore,
to counter and disrupt the perpetuation of this oppression, I intentionally centered the coaching
experiences of the TSS members in the sessions I facilitated (Rodgers, 2002). This action helped
counter the “banking model of education,” ubiquitous in adult professional development (Freire,
1970, p. 72).
Recalibrating the Conceptual Framework
Something that I did not account for in the initial iteration of the conceptual framework in
Figure 1 was the importance both trust, and vulnerability played within the holding environment
of the sessions. Drawing from Wilkins (2018), I define the concept of trust as the “willingness to
be vulnerable to the actions of another party, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control the
other party” (p. S6). Vulnerability, on the other hand, is defined as the ability to engage in
“uncertainty, risk, and emotional exposure” (Brown, 2021, p. 13). Trust is one of the key
ingredients in a quality holding environment if people are to engage in racial discourse the way
the participants and I did (Heifetz et al., 2009; Spikes, 2018). Furthermore, it is through the
availability of trust that “participants are willing to be vulnerable,” (Spikes, 2018). The
34

availability of trust and vulnerability to us supported our ability to pursue the work and make
progress toward developing an awareness of deficit-based perspectives and assumptions. In light
of this revelation, I revised the conceptual framework in Figure 1 to include the critical concepts
that emerged during data analysis. Figure 2 illustrates the updated conceptual framework. The
emergent concepts that emerged will be addressed in the subsequent section.

Figure 2
Updated Conceptual Framework

Note: This conceptual framework has been updated to include trust and vulnerability in the
holding space and andragogical moves. These critical concepts supported the aims of this study.

35

Roles Within My Conceptual Framework
I currently work for an educational organization divided into six regions. Each region
focuses on a specific area of Los Angeles. These regions operate semi-autonomously in some
capacity but still report to the organization’s director. My role as a lead teacher on special
assignment (LTOSA) allows me to work across all regions on many projects. One primary
function of this role is to collaborate with other instructional departments that represent the
unified interests of the whole organization. This collaboration leads to the development and
facilitation of district-wide training centered around curricular instruction, behavior support, and
overall best practices for educating students with ESNs. I also work alongside 12 TSS members
(two for each region of my organization). My direct supervisor outlines professional
development projects. The TSS members are expected to sign-up for the professional
development project of their choosing. My responsibility is to ensure they complete these
projects on time. In addition, the TSS members provide direct support to SDC teachers in
curriculum and instruction for students with ESNs.
At the core of the roles the TSS members and I hold is the reality that we are instructing
adult learners who are educators. While I work with adult learners at the district level, the TSS
members work with them at a school site. Therefore, training and supporting adult learners in
different settings and capacities must be examined. Limited training and guidance are provided
to the TSS members to coach the SDC teachers. With little guidance, the TSS members often
have to choose, defaulting to their prior experiences, beliefs, and assumptions of how to support
teachers in the classroom effectively and what constitutes high-leverage instructional practices
for adults. According to Orange et al. (2019), regardless of “how much expertise a coach may
36

have, [they] may be unconsciously guiding mentees through suggestions … that marginalize
students of color and low-income students” (p. 46). Without explicit training addressing the
importance of unpacking assumptions through the use of alternate perspectives, people default
to their immediate assumptions and are more likely to reproduce implicit biases and deficit-
based perspectives.
Both the TSS members and I were in charge of supporting special educators working in
self-contained classrooms at our organization. The TSS members were meant to be these
teachers as their first line of support as teachers enter the field. Therefore, it was imperative that
the TSS members and I co-develop a space to unpack our long-held beliefs and assumptions
regarding the SDC teachers.
Intended Outcomes
The outcomes of this action research study were to guide the participants to investigate
the beliefs that constructed their views of their practices and their coaching experiences
(Brookfield, 2010). Through this exploration, the participants and I made some progress in
uncovering deficit views that propel personally held assumptions, which in turn, impacted our
coaching practices in ways that harmed the SDC teachers and their students with ESNs.
To reach this objective, I used key tenets of TLT (Mezirow, 2000), CDT (Kegan, 2001),
and CRALP (Brookfield, 2010) to support both my reflexivity and facilitation of adult learning
experiences to aid the adult learners in examining their experiences to trace the genesis of their
assumptions. The circle surrounding these three adult learning models with arrowheads suggests
the iterative process I engaged in during this action research study.
The concepts in Figure 2 aided my ability to answer the following research question:
How can I use CRALP to help teacher support staff members and I build awareness of, counter,
37

and disrupt deficit-based assumptions?
Research Methods
The deficit narratives regarding people of color crystallized the status quo for many
White Americans. To secure it, students of color and with a disability were segregated for their
benefit to receive specialized educational interventions that would help them catch up with the
rest of the students (Crenshaw, 2017). Educators argued that these students needed a separate
classroom to learn at their own pace. With such rationales, special education policies normalized
the segregation of students deemed unable to catch up. Masquerading under the guise of good
intentions, schools offered academic support to students falling behind. Coincidentally, many
students of color were found eligible to receive these special education supports and thus placed
in segregated classrooms. With the historical deficit narratives woven into the fabric of the
American education system, students of color were exposed to less rigor, fewer resources, and
low expectations (Kurth et al., 2019; Morgan, 2020). What was expected to help students of
color make academic gains was in fact, widening the achievement gap (Ladson-Billings, 2006).
I acknowledged how my role as LTOSA situated me in relation to the deficit-based
perspectives in which my organization is steeped. To counter and disrupt my involvement and
perpetuation of deficit-based perspectives, this study aimed to answer the following question:
How can I use CRALP to support my adult learners and me to examine deficit-based
assumptions to counter and disrupt them?
Adult Learners’ Practices and Actions in My Conceptual Framework
The remnants of deficit-based perspectives and narratives are alive and come to life in the
participants’ conversations. Comments such as the following are mired in deficit-based
narratives of the SDC teachers we are expected to support.
38

● “Unfortunately, they are still there.”
● “My teachers will not/cannot do that.”
● “Ugh, they are such a disservice to our students.”
● “They would do much better if they spent their time on lesson planning rather than
doing their nails.”
Based on my observations, TSS members on my team view SDC teachers in one of three
ways: as a great teacher, as having potential, or as a waste of time. These beliefs implicitly
determine the quality of support they will receive from the TSS members, including myself.
Figure 2 illustrates the conceptual framework I developed, which highlights the concepts I used
in this action research study. Using these concepts, the participants reflected on their
positionality and the experiences tethered to their positionality, including examining their TSS
role and the deficit-based assumptions they developed.
Without problematizing their assumptions, the TSS members risked defaulting to their
unexamined biases, rooted in deficit-based assumptions. The consequence here is the varied
quality of support these teachers receive. The literature cites that a lack of quality support and
mentorship for beginning teachers is one reason for the high turnover rate of new teachers
(Ondrasek et al., 2020). With teacher shortages at an all-time high across the United States, my
organization cannot afford to lose brand-new teachers. Therefore, the consequences of deficit-
based assumptions cause a revolving door of long-term substitutes or teachers with substandard
credentials to teach students who have already been historically positioned to receive an inferior
education (Morgan, 2020).
My Relation to Practices and Actions Outlined in My Conceptual Framework
I would have considered myself an instrumental type of knower prior to my doctoral
39

program (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). As an adult with an instrumental way of
knowing, I could not see or accept alternate perspectives or explanations. Any person’s belief
that contradicted mine was wrong, and I was right. I often struggled to clearly articulate the
values that propelled my actions and decisions. My painful experiences as my brother’s caregiver
shaped my beliefs, values, and assumptions about the world. My instrumental way of knowing
between the Fall of 2020 and the Fall of 2021 was very far from the actions and practices I
delineate in the conceptual framework in Figure 2.
Prior to my doctoral training, I would not have been able to slow down my thoughts and
be more present when engaging with adults as I can now. I have developed a growing ability of
slowing down my thoughts, suspending my emotions, and distancing myself from my feelings
(see Appendix E). This is followed by mental self-talk, where I ask myself critical questions,
forcing myself to consider alternate perspectives. After this self-talk, I decide which action will
carry a low a margin of harm toward the individual. The transformational learning, I engaged in
through my doctoral program facilitated the exploration of my assumptions and helped me
uncover the deficit perspectives I had internalized and reproduced. Drago-Severson and Blum-
DeStefano (2019) describe this type of growth as “increases in an individual’s capacities
(cognitive, affective, interpersonal, and intrapersonal)” (p. 2).
The increases in my cognitive, affective, interpersonal and intrapersonal capacities are
captured in a drawing I drew that illustrates how I experienced the process of slowing down my
thoughts while supporting an SDC teacher (see Appendix E). During my visit with the SDC
teacher, I looked over the data concerning their curricular implementation. This is when I noticed
they had not administered any unit assessments. My mind quickly defaulted toward deficit-based
assumptions. I could feel getting upset at the teacher and their lack of care or follow-through. In
40

my mind, this was evidence that they did not care about their students. Something in me made
me pause at that moment and acknowledge the emotional trigger I was experiencing. This was
when I distanced myself to try and consider alternative perspectives for this teacher’s lack of
curricular follow-through. Rodgers (2002) considered slowing down one’s thoughts as necessary
to attend to the moment and the way it is unfolding. Pausing the moment and acknowledging my
reactions provides me with the opportunity to explore the triggers of my emotions.
As I reflected on this moment, I realized my assumptions of the teacher were culpable for
my feelings towards them. This teacher had not implemented the curriculum which
communicated a lack of care for their students, most of whom were students of color. At that
moment, I witnessed how intersecting identities of race and ability manifested in this context,
thus reproducing the historically entrenched inequity that continued marginalizing them. At that
moment, I forced myself to consider alternate perspectives that contributed to this teacher’s lack
of curricular implementation, helping me to avoiding disregarding him.
I cannot say this process was easy. Unpacking my assumptions and critically reflecting
upon them is hard work. However, the experience of supporting this SDC teacher helped me
reflect and learn from the cycle I detailed in Figure 2. It also helped concretize the reflective
process I envisioned the participants embarking in by supporting the learning experiences I
planned for the sessions I facilitated.
Using a Qualitative Action Research Methodological Approach
I used an action research methodology, given the iterative cycles I engaged in, as I
examined my progress toward the learning objectives of my sessions (see Appendix F). This
reflexivity was also necessary to gauge how the participants made sense of the information
covered in the sessions which supported my reflection-on-action. This type of reflection
41

informed the andragogical moves I implemented, supporting my move toward a learning-in-
action approach (Koners & Goffin, 2007, as cited in Coughlan, 2019).
I used Lewin’s (1948) iterative cycles as speed bumps in this study. These speed bumps
helped to slow down my thought process and reflect upon my observations (as cited in Herr &
Anderson, 2015). The visual in appendix F illustrates how I entered the initial cycle with my
doctoral training and background knowledge of the participants’ organizational context and job
roles. The bottom right section of the image depicts how I exited the three cycles and the actions
in which I engaged. These actions included analysis of the action research data, generating
findings based on the data analyzed, and reporting my findings to the participants for member
checks.
Participants and Setting
Qualitative action researchers use purposeful sampling to recruit participants based on
specific criteria aligned with the study’s focus and the problem of practice identified (Lochmiller
& Lester, 2017). It reflects an “intentional selection of research participants to optimize data
sources” (Johnson et al., 2020, p. 141). For this study, I looked for participants who met the
following criteria: an extensive support needs teaching credential, experience teaching in a
special day program, and working as a TSS where they directly support SDC teachers of students
with ESNs. These criteria helped isolate participants who helped me to answer the research
question. Additionally, there was a timeframe I needed to adhere to when executing this action
research study. Therefore, using purposeful sampling saved me time by supporting the
desegregation of ideal participants who met the criteria delineated from the onset.
Finally, using purposeful sampling in this case was appropriate since my long-term focus
was to reduce the harm caused to SDC teachers and students with ESNs by the historically
42

entrenched inequity of deficit-based mindsets at my organization. The TSS members work
directly with these teachers using coaching, modeling, and classroom instructional support to
build their teaching efficacy and capacity. Therefore, to meet this long-term focus, it was
reasonable to invite the TSS members. Doing so allowed me to facilitate adult learning
experiences that would help the participants and me examine the deficit perspectives behind the
assumptions we hold of the teachers we support to engage in more informed actions.
Recruiting Participants
The research question aimed to determine how CRALP can help the TSS members and
me challenge deficit-based narratives that propel our assumptions. Through this work, we opened
ourselves to considering multiple perspectives to check the validity of these assumptions.
According to Brookfield (2010), many assumptions and beliefs adult learners have acquired
throughout life often originate from the omnipresent dominant ideologies and hegemony
entrenched in society. What adult learners assume to be common-sense beliefs can stem from
hegemonic structures that do not act in the best interest of historically marginalized communities
(Brookfield, 2010). Therefore, adult learners need pause and analyze their assumptions to engage
in more educated actions based on this introspection (Rodgers, 2002).
Given this context, the participants I sought out were the 12 TSS members because they
engaged daily with the SDC teachers across my organization. There are currently 12 TSS
members working in my organization. Their role is to provide ongoing support to new and
experienced SDC teachers. They focus on instructional practices, curricular implementation, and
positive behavior support in their classrooms. Some TSS members also teach in my
organization’s teaching credentialing program. My organization’s regions are assigned two TSS
members to support SDC teachers.
43

During an informal meeting, I made an announcement to the TSS members regarding the
action research study I would conduct. I also encouraged them to email me if they were
interested in further details. Six TSS members emailed me, requesting more information. For
anonymity, I used the acronym TSS to refer to the teacher support staff followed by a number.
The numbers were assigned randomly and did not delineate any meaning besides serving as an
identity marker.
According to Coghlan (2019), a participant’s readiness is the “motivation and willingness
to change” (p. 127). All the TSS members who emailed me, inquiring about the study were
intrinsically motivated to continue improving their practices. Based on personal conversations,
all the TSS members had earned master’s degrees in education and received further accolades,
post-graduate degrees, and certifications. In the end, three of the six TSS members who initially
emailed committed and were part of this study: TSS Member 1 (Ofelia; pseudonym), TSS
Member 4 (Yareli; pseudonym), and TSS Member 5 (Maria; pseudonym).
Participants Part of This Study
As stated, three TSS members volunteered to be part of this study. For context purposes, I
provide a description of each participants’ identity in the subsequent section. Table 3 shows the
participants’ demographic information which was organically collected through conversations
with the TSS members.
Ofelia
Ofelia is in her mid-40s. She has been in the field of special education for 17 years, with
six of those as a TSS member. Ofelia has a master’s degree, National Board for Professional
Teaching Standards certification, and an administrative credential. She was born in Mexico and
immigrated to the United States at the age of three years old. Ofelia grew up in Pacoima,
44

California and is one of nine siblings. She is bilingual (Spanish/English) and identifies as
Mexican.

Table 3
TSS Member Demographics
TSS Member 1: Ofelia TSS Member 4: Yareli TSS Member 5:
Maria
Years in the
classroom
17 years 10 years 14 years

Years as a TSS 6 years 5 years > 1 year
Degrees and
certifications
Master’s degree
National board
certification
Administrator credential
Master’s degree
Administrator
credential
Master’s degree
Augmentative and
alternative
communication
certification (San
Francisco State
University, n.d.).
Country of birth Mexico Mexico United States
Arrival in the
United States
Arrived at age of 3 Arrived at age of 5 –
Childhood
upbringing
Pacoima, Ca Gardena, Ca Wilmington, CA
Languages Bilingual; native
Spanish speaker
Bilingual; native
Spanish speaker
Bilingual; native
Spanish speaker
Self-
identification
Mexican Mexican Angelina Mexican American

Note. This table includes demographic information of the three participants that were part of this
action research study.

45

Yareli
Yareli is in mid-30s. She has been in the field of special education for 10 years, with five
of those as a TSS member. She earned a master’s degree, and an administrative credential. She
was also born in Mexico and immigrated to the United States at the age of five years old. Yareli
grew up in Gardena, California and is one of four siblings. She considers herself to be bilingual
(Spanish/English) and identifies as Mexican Angelina.
Maria
Maria is also in her mid-30s. She has been in the field of special education for 14 years
and just completed her first year as a TSS member. Through this time, she earned a master’s
degree, and an Augmentative and alternative communication certification. She was born in the
United States and grew up in Wilmington, California. She is one of two siblings. She also
considers herself to be bilingual (Spanish / English) and identifies as Mexican American.
Setting of Action
Initially, I planned to conduct the sessions in person, in a school centrally located to all
the participants. However, I pivoted away from facilitating in-person sessions and used Zoom, an
online video conferencing tool to have the sessions (Zoom, 2022). This occurred because the
participants indicated that Mondays after 5:30 p.m. would work for them and because schools
require special permissions if teachers decide to stay past their contractually obligated hours.
Teachers must leave at 4:00 p.m. unless they are participating in a school function.
Given this setting change, I revisited the components of optimal learning conditions for
adult learners that I previously delineated: use critical reflection to support adult learners’
changes in “what they know and how they know” (Kokkos, 2019, p. 162); be in the presence of
others (Kegan et al., 2001); based on adults’ coaching practices and experiences (Yu, 2018);
46

consider a multi-modal approach for adults to express themselves (Brookfield, 2017); meet adult
learners where they are using Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano’s (2017) typology.
These components do not stipulate that they can only be effective during a face-to-face
session, only that they should be included in a shared space with the participants. This
consideration made me comfortable in pivoting my sessions to be held in a virtual space.
Holding a virtual space still allowed me to engage the participants in adult learning experiences
to facilitate their development of critical reflection skills. These adult learning experiences
centered the TSS members’ coaching experiences, and the availability of technology allowed me
to use a multi-modal approach to support them, thus meeting them where they are using the
Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2017) typology. Most importantly, video conferencing
platforms allowed the participants to be in the presence of each other, which is often cited as one
of the prerequisites to engaging in this type of work (Kegan et al., 2001; Rodgers, 2002).
My organization has an institutional review board (IRB) approval process that
researchers must complete if the intention is to conduct research associated with the
organization. Given that I did not conduct this study during my contractually obligated hours, I
was not required to complete this process. However, my university’s IRB approved the study
before beginning research activities.
Actions
My action research study aimed to help the participants engage in a continuous
examination of their assumptions to counter and disrupt deficit-based mindsets. This ideal state
requires the participants to take a pause during a moment that triggers them, attempt to consider
alternate perspectives and engage in self-talk that will result in enacting more informed actions.
To accomplish this ideal state, I facilitated learning experiences that supported the participants’
47

use of CRALP. I conducted three cycles of sessions with the participants. Cycle 1 consisted of
three sessions, while Cycles 2 and 3 consisted of two sessions each for an hour. I will discuss the
content of each cycle in greater detail in the subsequent sections.
Cycle 1: Exploration of Positionality and Experiences
The learning objective of Cycle 1 was to support the participants' exploration of their
positionality and the experiences tethered to them to begin critically reflecting on their
assumptions and the potential influence on their coaching practices. The learning experiences, I
facilitated focused on supporting their examination of their positionality which touched upon
their experiences growing up and the assumptions they developed. Their reflections on their
positionality also involved an examination of their beliefs behind their role as a TSS member.
However, to get to this place of introspection and vulnerability, I had to facilitate a co-
construction of community agreements with them. In the presentation of Cycle 2, I will discuss
how the focus on community agreements shifted attention to the learning objectives for each
session. Table 4 delineates the learning experiences implemented as part of Cycle 1.

48

Table 4
Cycle 1: Exploration of Positionality and Experiences
Cycle 1: Exploration of positionality and experiences
Cycle 1 objective: Participants will explore their positionality and experiences to examine
their assumptions and coaching practices.
Session 1 Session 2 Session 3
LO: Participants will enact the
norms for discussion during
the sessions for this action
research study.
LO: Participants will evaluate
the identities we each
possess and analyze the way
they may influence our
perception of a phenomenon.
LO: Participants will use
their coaching
experiences to begin
examining the concept
of assumptions.
Cycle 1: Exploration of positionality and experiences
Electronic notebook: (Bethea-
Hampton & Holder, 2018):
Used an electronic notebook
for the sessions
Welcomed participants and
went over session materials
and objectives.
Welcomed participants
and went over session
materials and
objectives.
Setting the stage: (Spike,
2018): Co-generated norms
w/ the group and work
toward a brave space (Arao
& Clemens, 2013)
Revisited the co-developed
community agreements with
the participants.
Show and tell:
Participants were asked
to share an artifact that
they felt symbolized
their TSS role.
Identity: Who are you: Asked
participants to consider their
positionality and how they
thought others viewed them
(Auerbach & Wallerstein,
2004)

Examine positionality:
Participants will continue
unpacking their identities of
marginalization and
privilege.
Where do we get our
knowledge from:
Participants considered
where their knowledge
comes from and how it
connects to
assumptions they hold.
Critical incident questionnaire:
Participants answered four
questions about their session
experiences and takeaways.
Reflection on process:
Participants reflected on the
learning experience and its
connection to their role.
Participants watched a
short video of the
dangers of leaving
assumptions
unchallenged.

49

Cycle 2: Deeper Exploration of Positionality, Experiences, and Assumptions
The learning objective for Cycle 2 centered on continuing to co-develop a space where
the participants could explore and challenge their assumptions or those of others. In this cycle, I
facilitated learning experiences that helped the participants confront their assumptions and
examine the factors that influenced their formation, including dominant ideologies prevalent in
our immediate surroundings. Table 5 outlines the learning experiences implemented during
Cycle 2.

50

Table 5
Cycle 2: Deeper Exploration of Positionality, Experiences, and Assumptions Developed
Cycle 2: Deeper exploration of positionality, experiences, and assumptions developed
Cycle 2: Learning objective: Collaboratively work toward an equitable space to share our
thoughts, ideas, and assumptions and also challenge them as needed (including each
other’s).
Session 4 Session 5
Grounding/Checking-in: I asked the participants
if they wanted to share something about their
week.
Grounding/Checking-in: I asked the
participants if they wanted to share
something about their week.
Introduce session materials and session LO. Introduce session materials and session LO.
Yes, and: Participants worked toward
incorporating the phrase, “Yes, and.” And
reflected on their reframing when coaching
the SDC teachers
Engaging in discourse: I went over the
difference b/w discussion and discourse
to clarify why I was engaging in some
andragogical moves the way I was.
“I’m so ugly.” - I started a discussion around
assumptions by showing a video in which a
4-year-old Black girl tells the hairdresser that
she is very ugly.
Which person is most likely? Participants
were shown two pictures featuring
people of different ethnicities. They were
then asked a series of questions that
helped clarify the assumptions they held.

Examining the assumptions, we hold:
Assumptions discussed during previous
sessions were displayed on a PPT slide.
Participants read them and listed people,
institutions, experiences, etc., that helped
shape the assumptions they developed (listed
on the PPT slide).
What is dominant ideology: Participants
watched the doll test video and were
asked to consider what assumptions did
the kids hold based on their responses to
questions posed to them.
What do we value: After reading assumptions
listed on the slide, participants were asked to
list what the assumptions said of what we
seem to value the most.

Wrap-up: Did we meet our objective? Wrap-up: Did we meet our objective?

51

Cycle 3: Examining Deficit-Based Assumptions of Special Day Class Teachers
The learning objective for Cycle 3 was for the participants and me to trace the genesis of
our assumptions, beliefs, and values. In tracing their origin, participants gained a greater insight
into the people, institutions, cultural backgrounds, and experiences that influenced their deficit-
based assumptions of SDC teachers. Table 6 outlines the learning experiences implemented
during Cycle 3.
Table 4, 5 and 6 delineates the learning experiences I facilitated with my participants. I
relied on Transformational Learning Theory, Constructive Developmental Theory and Critical
Reflection as an Adult Learning Process to develop these learning experiences. Facilitating these
learning theories with my participants supported my participants to make some progress towards
developing their awareness of deficit-based assumptions of the SDC teachers they supported.

52

Table 6
Cycle 3: Examining the Deficit-Based Assumptions of Special Day Class Teachers
Cycle 3: Examining the deficit-based assumptions of special day class teachers
Cycle 3 Objective: To explore where our assumptions, beliefs, and values come from. What
contributes to our beliefs and assumptions?
Session 6 Session 7
LO: Explore where assumptions, and values
come from. What contributes to their
development?
LO: Turn into your practice and determine
your role in the perpetuation of deficit
perspectives.
Grounding: I asked the participants if they
wanted to share something about their
day/week.
Grounding: I asked the participants if they
wanted to share something about their
day/week.
Introduce session materials and session LO. Introduce session materials and session LO.

Cycle 3: Examining the deficit-based assumptions of special day class teachers
Exploring epistemology: Begin the session by
recapping what our established assumptions
are. This conversation will help us begin our
discussion regarding where our assumptions
come from.
Reflecting upon experiences and assumptions:
Participants examined the connections b/w
experiences, assumptions, and ways they
influence their role as TSS members.

What is dominant ideology: Discussed
dominant ideology and ways it manifests in
our work and TSS roles.
Turning into our practice: Participants looked
for evidence of ways they reproduce
inequity and deficit perspectives of SDC
teachers they support.
Mapping out the influence of dominant
ideology: Collectively, participants mapped
out the influence of dominant ideology
upon their TSS role.
Wrap-up: Did we meet our objective?
Moving forward: Participants considered what
they would like to get out of the last
session.

53

Data Collection and Instruments/Protocols
For this action research study, I recorded the sessions using Zoom. The recordings
produced transcripts, which I coded using a priori codes. I also developed seven analytic memos,
one for each session, and three critical reflections, one per cycle. Finally, I developed a nine-
question questionnaire that helped me determine the type of knower each participant was. All
changes to the data-generating tools were documented in three methodological memos, one per
cycle. All these tools supported my engagement in reflection-on-action (Rodgers, 2002) calls to
help me reflect on my actions and those of the participants. This reflexivity aided my ability to
move toward enacting learning-in-action and execute more informed actions in my sessions
(Koners & Goffin, 2007, as cited in Coghlan, 2019). I will cover the data collection tools used in
the subsequent sections.
Session Recordings/Transcripts
As stated previously, I used Zoom to hold the sessions. This tool helped me generate
three forms of data points: session transcripts, a priori codes applied to the session transcripts
generated, and observational data. These data helped me gauge the progress the participants
made toward the ideal state I outlined in the conceptual framework in Figure 2. In particular, the
session recordings provided me with the opportunity to revisit them, looking for nonverbal body
language, important events, or evidence regarding each participants’ way of knowing.
It was also of utmost importance to have a transcript for each session since I anticipated
coding them to inform the findings. I used the transcription feature provided by Zoom for the
first three sessions. Given how time-intensive it was to clean up the transcripts manually, I
purchased a monthly subscription to Otter.ai, a speech-to-text transcription tool that makes
54

cleaning up transcripts less time-intensive. Otter.ai was used to generate transcripts for sessions
four through seven.
Codes
Once everything was transcribed, I used Atlas.ti, a tool that helped me organize the a
priori codes I assigned to the session transcripts generated. My conceptual framework informed
the inductive codes I developed. Once I generated the a priori codes, I used Atlas.ti’s feature to
engage in intercoder reliability. In other words, I had Atlas.ti use its artificial intelligence (AI)
feature to code the same transcripts I had coded beforehand. By comparing the codes, the AI
feature from Atlas.ti applied to the session transcripts allowed me to engage in further
reflexivity, prompting me to closely examine how I interpreted session events by comparing my
codes to those generated by the Atlas.ti software. Finally, using intercoder reliability allowed me
to consider an additional data point and use it to triangulate my findings.
Ways of Knowing Questionnaire
I completed the Knower Observational Tool Questionnaire (Mahoney, 2022), to inform
how the participants made meaning of the phenomena occurring in their environments (Drago-
Severson & Bloom-DeStefano, 2017). I drew from work by Mezirow (2000), Kegan et al.,
(2001), Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2017), Brookfield (2018), and classroom
discussions led by my doctoral professors to develop this nine-question questionnaire.
Analytic Memos
According to Maxwell (2013), practitioner-scholars are the primary instruments for data
collection. As such, it was paramount to document the intended learning experiences and
andragogical moves I implemented during each of my sessions, circling back and documenting
what was enacted. This reflection on intended versus enacted learning experiences and
55

andragogical moves helped me reflect on three points, with the exception of the first session:
plan my intended learning experiences based on my recollection of events and their confirmation
by using the session recordings, use additional literature to justify the learning experiences and
andragogical moves I intended to implement, and reflect upon the learning experiences and
andragogical moves I actually enacted, thus helping me to reflect- on- action.
Critical Reflections
In addition to writing an analytic memo after each session, I also wrote a critical
reflection after each cycle, three critical reflections in total using Brookfield’s (2017) four lenses
to support my reflexivity. According to Brookfield (2010), it is important to consider four
alternative perspectives, or lenses, to have a clearer understanding of events, experiences, and
situations as they unfold. These four lenses are students’ eyes, colleagues’ perceptions, personal
experience, and theory. Both Mezirow (2000) and Brookfield discussed the importance of
creating optimal learning conditions to facilitate this type of exploration within us and those
around. Using these four lenses increased my likelihood of considering multiple perspectives,
avoiding the trap of the single story to provide a more holistic interpretation of the phenomena I
observed.
To get the participants to the ideal state I delineated in the conceptual framework (Figure
2), I facilitated learning experiences that supported their engagement in critical reflection.
According to Mezirow (2000), these opportunities become the entry point by which teachers of
adult learners “set the stage” for them to unpack their assumptions and beliefs regarding the SDC
teachers they support (Spikes, 2018). Creating these opportunities for the participants helped
orient them toward considering alternate perspectives, thus bringing them closer to the ideal state
delineated in the conceptual framework.
56

Documents and Artifacts
I created a PowerPoint presentation for each session. I also created an electronic
notebook tabbed by sessions. Each session tab included an agenda, the community agreements
and/or learning objectives, and the PowerPoint slides. Additionally, I included sections where the
participants could add notes. I solely developed all these documents. Since I did not conduct this
study during my contractually obligated hours, I did not incorporate documents or artifacts
authored by my educational organization.
Member Checks
According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), as a qualitative researcher, conducting member
checks with the participants helps to lessen the possibility of misinterpreting information. For
this reason, I conducted separate member checks with each participant, showing them the
conclusions, I drew and asking them to point out any inconsistencies that needed to be addressed.
Methodological Memos
Finally, I developed three methodological memos to document changes to the data
collection tools. I created a three-column chart to document the data-generating changes I made
throughout the cycles. The data-generating tool was listed under the first column. The rationale
for using the data-generating tool was listed under the second column and my findings and
considerations regarding the data tool went in the third column. This allowed me to engage in
reflexivity, stepping back and determining whether the data tools were effective in helping me
answer my research question.
Data Analysis
This action research study aimed to help the participants make progress toward
developing their awareness of deficit-based assumptions regarding the SDC teachers they
57

support. I analyzed the data while in the field to gauge this progress and ensure I met the study’s
aims. Heeding Herr and Anderson’s (2015) recommendations and consistent with my conceptual
framework (Figure 2), I used the plan-act-observe-reflect iterative cycle across all the sessions in
this study, applying it across the three cycles (p. 105; see Appendix G). I used TLT, CDT and
CRALP to plan the learning experiences I facilitated with the participants for Cycle 1 (Plan 1a;
Sessions 2 and 3 only), Cycle 2 (Plan 2a; Sessions 4 and 5), and Cycle 3 (Plan 3a; Sessions 6 and
7).
With the exception of Session 1 in Cycle 1, the learning experiences I facilitated across
the cycles were additionally informed by the session recordings and transcripts and the analytic
memos I developed at the end of each session. The green arrow pointing to learning experiences
in illustrated in the visual symbolize this process (see Appendix G). Act 1b, 2b, and 3b
symbolizes the actual actions or andragogical moves I facilitated in each session across the three
cycles. Observe 1c, 2c, and 3c signify how I used my session observations, recordings,
transcripts, and analytic memos to support my reflexivity and symbolized by Reflect 1d, 2d, and
3d across the three cycles.
Data Collection in the Field
Figure 3 illustrates the data I collected and analyzed while in the field. I wrote an analytic
memo right after facilitating Sessions 2 and 3 to increase the accuracy of the events on which I
reflected. This reflexivity helped inform the learning experiences and andragogical moves I
planned to implement in subsequent sessions. I collected session recordings and transcripts
during the observation phase of Rodgers’ (2002) iterative reflective cycles. I used these to map a
priori codes consistent with the conceptual framework (Figure 2). Finally, I wrote critical
58

reflections as part of the reflecting portion of this process. This is symbolized by the squircle
outlining Rodgers’ iterative reflective cycle that I used for this study’s aims.
Data Analysis of Data Generated
In the following section, I detail how each piece of data generated was analyzed.

Session Recordings
As stated previously, I used Zoom to hold my sessions with the participants. This tool
helped save the recordings of each session online where it was kept secured with a secure
password. Recording the sessions reduced the pressure to quickly analyze the content, allowing
me to focus on other components of data collection (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). Therefore, I
reviewed the session recordings after the three cycles were complete. I watched each session
recording, looking for two pieces of data that highlighted the typicality of verbal and/or
nonverbal language that indicated discomfort (frown, nervous giggling, etc.) by the participants,
the number of times they apologized (sorry), and the number of times the participants initiated a
discussion or were the first to respond to a question or prompt. I analyzed this type of data for
only two of the three participants, Yareli and Maria because I needed a way to track how many
times, they initiated their participation in the discussions. I did not need to establish this for
Ofelia because I had more than sufficient data that showed she was always the first to initiate her
participation.
Session Transcripts
In preparation for data analysis, I used a verbatim transcript approach (Lochmiller &
Lester, 2017). As a novice qualitative researcher, I was uncomfortable using a transcription
approach that heavily relied on my interpretation of large chunks of a session recording.
Therefore, using a verbatim transcript approach allowed me to capture everything from
59

beginning to end and deferred the act of choosing parts of the transcript that were most relevant
to answering my research question at a later time. As stated earlier, I switched the method by
which I transcribed the session audio after completing Cycle 1.

Figure 3
Data Collected and Analyzed While in the Field

60

Even though switching and using Otter.ti to transcribe the audio sessions was more
efficient, I still had to fix several typographical errors made by the transcribing tool. This is
where I relied on the session recordings to help me interpret what participants stated.
Codes
I used Atlas.ti, a coding software to help me organize all the codes I developed into a
codebook. The a priori codes developed aligned with the conceptual framework and were
continuously refined. In the end, I developed five a priori code groups related to the conceptual
framework, dominant ideological concepts, the participants’ positionality, and the participants’
ideal state as outlined in the conceptual framework (Figure 2).
As mentioned earlier, I used Atlas.ti’s AI Beta software feature to engage in intercoder
reliability. For this section, I created seven two-column charts, one for each session per
participant (21 two-column charts in total), to help me organize the a priori codes I assigned to
each transcript and those developed by Atlas.ti’s AI Beta software. This process allowed me to
evaluate the validity of the a priori codes I had initially assigned to aspects of each transcript and
develop an adult learner profile for each TSS member.
Ways of Knowing Questionnaire
I completed the Ways of Knowing Questionnaire for each participant after I completed
the three cycles. I intended to complete this questionnaire for each participant after the first
cycle. However, as a novice researcher and instructor of adult learners, I did not feel adequately
prepared to determine the type of knower the participants were without having multiple data
points to inform my conclusions (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). Using evidence
from the video transcripts, session recordings, and analytic memos, I answered the following
questions for each participant:
61

● Does it matter to the participant what others think of them?
● Is the participant susceptible to others’ opinions and ideas?
● What values are anchoring the participants’ enactment of their values?
● Is the participant able to concretize the values driving their actions?
● Has the participant built an identity by internalizing social norms and finding a place
within the existing social structure?
● Does the participant have a fear of failure?
● Is the participant concerned with agreements, norms, and beliefs of the people or
system around them?
● Does the participant look for external validation and desire for acceptance from their
colleagues?
● Is the participant’s identity made up of their relationship with other people?
Answering these questions for each participant supported my ability to determine each
participants’ way of knowing.
Analytic Memos
Initially, the analytic memos were intended to help me organize different aspects of each
session, such as the learning experiences I planned to implement, the literature justifying each
learning experience, the andragogical moves to consider, and the session materials I would be
using. However, after listening to a lecture in my data analysis course, I adjusted the analytic
memos’ components. This lecture encouraged me to focus more on documenting my intended
versus the enacted andragogical moves in which I engaged. Therefore, I created a four-column
table that listed the name of the learning experience I intended to facilitate in the session titled
“Learning Experience”; a description of the learning experience and the andragogical moves I
62

intended to facilitate, titled “Description of Intended Learning Experience and Andragogical
Moves”; the rationale for intending to implement the learning experience titled “Reasoning
Behind Intended Learning Experience and Andragogical Moves”; and the actual learning
experiences and andragogical moves I actually enacted, entitled “Enacted Learning Experience
and Andragogical Moves.”
The third column, titled “Reasoning Behind Intended Learning Experience and
Andragogical Moves,” became instrumental in helping me to systematically reflect on the
learning experiences and andragogical moves that occurred in the previous session to the new
learning experiences and andragogical moves I intended to implement for the next session.
Organizing the information in this format aided my reflexivity, helping me to keep track of the
concepts I covered in each session. It also supported my reflection on the learning conditions I
fostered and whether these moved the participants to the ideal state I delineated in the conceptual
framework: to self-examine their assumptions to counter and disrupt them as they pertained to
the SDC teachers they supported.
To ensure I was generating data to help me answer the research question, I embedded the
image of my conceptual framework and the research question above each analytic memo. This
scaffold helped me be more efficient, supporting my development of robust analytic memos that
informed the learning experiences and andragogical moves I would implement in the subsequent
sessions. In other words, I was slowing down my thought process and considering alternate
perspectives to carry out more informed actions (Brookfield, 2017).
Critical Reflections
Merriam and Tisdell (2016), stated that data analysis in a qualitative action research study
is “focused not only on what happens but how it unfolds” (p. 235). For these reasons, using
63

critical reflection journal entries as a data collection point helped me see how my actions as an
instructor of adult learners changed over the three cycles. Therefore, to stay true to the aims of an
action research study, I wrote three critical reflections, one after each cycle to ensure I explored
the power dynamics in the sessions and to reflect on the andragogical moves I was implementing
and determine whether they were helping to counter power imbalances.
Initially, my intention was to use Brookfield’s four lenses to write my critical reflections.
However, I realized after the first critical reflection I wrote that I did not use Brookfield’s four
lenses. To ensure I avoided this mistake, I created a critical reflection template that outlined the
four lenses, prompting me to consider those perspectives as I critically reflected. Furthermore,
this scaffold helped me to stay true to the actions delineated in the conceptual framework.
My Participants’ Reflections
The participants critically reflected in multiple ways across the three cycles. For the most
part, they had processing time to consider a question or prompt before responding if they wished
to. This is where access to the session recordings and transcripts became invaluable as I revisited
them to access their critical reflection responses. The data generated from those critical
reflections aided my ability to determine how much progress they had made toward developing
their awareness of deficit assumptions regarding the SDC teachers they support.
Limitations and Delimitations
A few limitations need noting concerning this study. First, as noted in the rationale for an
action research methodology, as the researcher, I am the data-collecting instrument. For those
reasons, I needed to ensure I engaged in critical self-reflexivity to validate the findings and meet
the criteria of credibility and trustworthiness. I did this through analytic memos, critical
reflections, and methodological memos. Additionally, I relied on a critical friend who challenged
my assumptions, helping me to consider perspectives I may not have previously considered (Mat
64

Noor and Shafee, 2021). The critical friend was a classmate who began this doctoral program
with me and chose the same doctoral concentration. I chose them because I trusted them and
valued their perspectives and how they critically examined the events I was experiencing in my
sessions. One last strategy employed to circumvent the limitation of being the data-collecting
instrument was to engage in member checks. This strategy is discussed in more detail in the
credibility and trustworthiness section of this dissertation.
A second limitation I encountered was the length of time I had to meet the aims of my
action research study. Realistically, 3 months is not enough time to facilitate transformative
learning sessions with the participants. Although we met once a week for an hour during those 3
months, I facilitated only seven 1-hour sessions. The concepts central to this action research
study, such as positionality and dominant ideologies, are abstract. Additionally, it takes dedicated
time to help adult learners explore their positionality and assumptions and develop connections
to their experiences.
My action research contained delimitations that restricted the scope of my study. Firstly,
my action research study is delimited to my organization. It specifically used CRALP to counter
and disrupt deficit-based assumptions of the SDC teachers we support. Using purposeful
sampling ensured I collected specific data unique to my educational organization to help answer
my research question.
Secondly, my action research was delimited to the TSS members with whom I work.
Therefore, this action research study excludes the voices of SDC teachers and other
organizational staff that support these teachers, such as school and district administrators. This
delimitation was set because the data generated from the additional sources would be
insurmountable, making it difficult to analyze appropriately, given my timeline of 3 months. A
65

final delimitation is the number of critical reflections I wrote. I completed a critical reflection
after each cycle instead of after each session. Writing a critical reflection after every session
would have diminished returns given the amount of time passing between each session Personal
correspondence, Slayton, 2021). Writing a critical reflection after each session can be
exhausting, in addition to the in-field data analysis I conducted. Therefore, delimiting the critical
reflections to one after each cycle provided me the time and space to focus on other of this
study’s pertinent aspects.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
In qualitative research, the researcher is the instrument by which data is analyzed and
interpreted. As the researcher, I ultimately decided what data to highlight, informed by my
positionality and epistemology (Ratcliffe, 1983, as cited in Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Therefore,
I paid meticulous attention to ensuring I engaged in data collection and analysis that was valid
and reliable to further establish the research findings’ credibility.
The first step I took toward establishing the credibility and trustworthiness of my study’s
findings were to be honest by unpacking my deficit-based assumptions regarding the special
education system, the actors operating in this system and my perpetuation of the continued
inequities students of color with ESNs experiences. This was disclosed in detail in the researcher
positionality section of this dissertation. By engaging in this level of critical self- reflexivity, I
critiqued my professional actions and expanded upon what I know and how I make meaning of
the phenomena I experience. Through this process, I engaged in professional transformation.
The second way I ensured this study’s credibility and trustworthiness was to engage in
member checks. According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), member checks allow a researcher to
receive participants’ feedback regarding the preliminary conclusions drawn. This approach helps
66

to safeguard against “misinterpreting the meaning of what participants [said or did]” (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016, p. 246). Understanding the potential unintended consequences of this limitation
led me to conduct member checks with the participants. Each participant was emailed a copy of
my emerging findings prior to the meeting. Next, I scheduled individual 30-minute meetings via
Zoom with the participants based on their availability.
During the individual member checks, I asked them three questions:
● After reading through the findings, what are your general thoughts?
● What could be added to the findings to capture your experiences better?
● If there is anything you would like removed, what would that be and why?
The opportunity to conduct member checks with each participant individually and check in with
them regarding the emergent findings provided me with an additional layer of internal validity,
thus helping me feel more confident with my findings overall.
The third strategy I employed to ensure my data collection and analysis phases were
credible and trustworthy was to use the iterative cycles of the plan-act-observe-analyze approach
across this study’s three cycles (Lewin, 1948 as cited in Herr & Anderson, 2015). According to
Argyris et al. (1985) the process of reflection should focus on problematizing practices
individuals experience. Therefore, I centered participants’ coaching experiences to support their
examination of assumptions that guided their professional practices (as cited in Herr &
Anderson, 2015). All the data points I analyzed were scrutinized through these iterative
reflective cycles. To further increase this study’s validity and trustworthiness, I developed a
methodological memo documenting all the data-generating tools I used, the rationale for using
them, and my thoughts and/or findings regarding the usefulness of the data to answer my
research question. Additionally, changes to the data collection tool or protocols were carefully
67

documented to ensure transparency.
Lastly, I engaged in data triangulation to uphold the findings’ validity and
trustworthiness. In this case, I engaged in intercoder reliability using Atlas.ti AI Beta software to
code the transcripts I had coded previously. I did this to evaluate the validity of the a priori codes
I had assigned to aspects of each transcript. I also used my session recordings and transcripts to
answer the Ways of Knowing Questionnaire for each participant. To triangulate this data point, I
used member checks to check the accuracy of my findings.
Ethical Considerations
Lochmiller and Lester (2017) highlighted keeping in mind the ethical implications when
conducting a study. The concept of power was the main ethical consideration I was vigilant over
throughout this study.
Power
As stated, I needed to be focused on my role and perceived power by the participants in
the sessions I facilitated. At the time of this action research study, I was in a quasi-administrative
role where I carried out duties akin to an administrator without any real decision-making power.
As the LTOSA of my organization, I was tasked with supporting the TSS, ensuring they met
project timelines and fulfilled their TSS roles. Danielson (2006) pointed out that being in a quasi-
administrative role tends to elevate the staff member and is often seen as “breaking ranks with
the solidarity… [and] no longer being [considered] true colleagues” (p. 19). In other words, the
quasi-administrative role I held may have given the TSS participants the illusion that I possessed
greater knowledge and administrative power. Operating under these assumptions may have made
the participants feel obligated to participate in this research study.
Considering this ethical dilemma, I took intentional steps to curtail the influence of my
perceived power on the participants. First and foremost, I thoroughly explained and reiterated
68

that they had the right to withdraw at any point without any consequences that would affect our
working relationship. Secondly, I engaged in critical self-reflexivity, writing critical reflections
across the three cycles to counter and disrupt the uneven power imbalances with which the
participants and I entered the sessions. The critical reflection written after the first cycle helped
me realize I was not doing a good job of disrupting the power imbalances. Through this process,
I realized I was implicitly reinforcing them. Armed with this knowledge, I approached the
second cycle with andragogical moves that helped decenter myself as the instructor/researcher
and ground me more so as a participant.
The andragogical moves I implemented with the participants to counter and disrupt these
power imbalances included the co-generation of knowledge, being cognizant of the space I was
taking and making space for others to share, responding to the same prompts I would pose to the
participants, avoiding being the first person to share, and sharing experiences and narratives that
left me vulnerable. Although I had an agenda of tasks I wanted to complete in each session, I
started leaving it behind, letting the discourse lead the progression of the sessions. Through it all,
I continued to critically reflect, continuously scrutinizing the andragogical moves and learning
experiences facilitated to ensure they supported the participants’ ability to develop their
awareness of their deficit-based assumptions of SDC teachers and countered power imbalances.
Additionally, I also needed to ensure I did not cause the participants harm during the sessions.
This required a focus on the participants’ nonverbal behaviors, pauses, discussion points, or
moments of silence. Careful attention to these nuances was imperative to provide the participants
with a psychologically safe space to help them be vulnerable (Wergin, 2020).
Data Security and Confidentiality
The final ethical dilemma I tackled was the issue of confidentiality. It was important to
69

ensure participant confidentiality. All the data I generated through this study such as recorded
sessions, transcripts and other identifying information were kept in an online cloud storage,
accessible only by me through two-factor identification (GCF Global, n.d.). All Zoom meeting
sessions were using a Zoom passcode that varied for each session (Zoom, 2022). Finally, I also
used pseudonyms throughout the data-generating process, continuing upholding the participants
confidentiality.
Findings
In this section, I present this study’s overarching findings which are consistent with the
conceptual framework (Figure 2) which helps to answer the following research question: How
can I use CRALP to support my adult learners and me to examine our deficit-based assumptions
to counter and disrupt them? One primary finding emerged from the data: the participants made
progress in developing an awareness of deficit-based assumptions they held about the SDC
teachers. Supporting this central theme/finding, three sub-themes or sub-findings were evident.
Table 7 showcases how each sub-theme was operationalized. As I present this central theme and
supporting sub-themes, I will describe the growth participants made, my efforts to support their
growth, the growth I made as a facilitator of adult learning, and efforts to strengthen my
facilitation skills.
Emergent Finding: Participants Developed Awareness of Deficit-Based Assumptions
The emergent finding is that the participants made progress in developing their awareness
of deficit-based assumptions. To achieve this, the participants utilized their positionality and
experiences to explore the deficit-based views propelling their assumptions of SDC teachers.
This is aligned to TLT and CRALP which is part of the conceptual framework I designed in
70

Figure 2. This emergent finding is made up of three sub-themes: co-construction of community
agreements and reflection of group experiences, exploration of positionality and identity-based
experiences, and an examination of personally held assumptions. As evidenced by the data
generated, the sub-themes build on each other, supporting the participants to make progress in
developing their awareness of deficit-based assumptions of the SDC teachers.

Table 7
Operationalization of the Sub-themes for My Emergent Finding
Emergent finding: By exploring their self-identities and experiences, participants made some
progress in developing an awareness of their deficit-based assumptions of special day class
teachers.
Sub-themes Operationalization of each sub-theme
Sub-theme 1: Co-
construction and
revisitation of
community agreements
and reflection on group
experiences increased
trust and vulnerability
Participants co-generated community agreements to follow during
the sessions and reflected on their experiences in groups. Their
reflection on these experiences helped them be more committed
to following the community agreements. This help increase their
trust and vulnerability. This sub-theme finding aligns with adult
learning theory of centering adult experiences into shared spaces.

Sub-theme 2: Exploration
of positionality and
identity-based
experiences revealed
race-based trauma and
social privilege
Participants reflected upon their positionalities and the experiences
tethered to these identities. This introspective process revealed
dualities of race-based trauma and social privilege and this
introspection was necessary to prepare them to explore the
assumptions and deficit-based views they had of the SDC
teachers.
Sub-theme 3:
Examination of
assumptions revealed
insecurities about their
TSS roles, deficit
views, and low
expectations of SDC
teachers
Participants used their TSS roles and experiences to examine their
personally held assumptions. This introspection revealed how
their assumptions were connected to their previous role as an
SDC teacher. It also revealed the insecurities they had regarding
their TSS roles, thus developing their awareness of the deficit
assumptions they held (low expectations) of SDC teachers.
71

Sub-theme 1: Community Agreements and Reflection Supported Vulnerability and Trust
The co-construction of community agreements and the reflective discussions regarding
feelings and experiences in group settings supported the participants’ ability to be vulnerable and
thus develop trust. During the first session, participants looked over six community agreements
by the California Conference for Equality and Justice. The six community agreements included
the following:
● speak for myself
● one mic (at a time)
● make space, take space
● be honest [with yourself and others]
● [be mindful of your] intent and impact
● [ensure] confidentiality [of topics discussed during the sessions]
These community agreements set the stage and provided the participants with a guide to help
navigate uncomfortable conversations regarding biases, assumptions, race, and our role in
perpetuating inequity in our organization (Spikes, 2018).
Participants looked over the community agreements individually before discussing them
as a whole. They determined whether these community agreements needed to be edited, sufficed
as they were or if additional agreements needed to be added. Each participant decided the
community agreements were fine as they were, choosing a different reason for appreciating
them. For example, Ofelia liked the community agreements because she felt they provided the
opportunity for everyone to be sincere and respectful of each other’s beliefs and values. Yareli
echoed similar opinions, stating she liked the agreements because it would help her keep other
members in mind during the sessions while holding herself accountable for her opinions. Lastly,
72

Maria appreciated the community agreements, citing that they made her feel safe; a need that
would become more evident with each passing cycle.
We revisited the community agreements established during the first session at the
beginning and end of the second session. According to Marquart and Counselman Carpenter
(2020), revisiting community agreements serves as a signpost, signaling to participants that
taking risks is welcomed and participation in learning experiences considered out of their
comfort zone is encouraged. As time went on, the explicit review of these community
agreements faded out and these were either verbally referenced or embedded in the PowerPoint
or the electronic notebook. Instead, the focus shifted to session learning objectives, discussed in
more detail in the subsequent section.
Consistent with the conceptual framework in Figure 2, the session holding space needed
participants to develop a level of trust first in order to support their willingness to be vulnerable.
The co-construction of the community agreements served as the catalyst that built the trust to
proceed to the next part of the session: reflecting on experiences related to participating in group
settings. Ofelia started first, reflecting aloud on her experiences,
I’ve been on the team 5 years, and I feel a bit more comfortable [but] … I remember the
1st year I would hold back, I … have to feel comfortable, and … feel the room. Now it’s
been 5 years I’ve been in the team. I feel more comfortable, … but there have been times
among certain colleagues. I feel uncomfortable asking certain questions, because … [I’m]
afraid of people judging me, interpreting, like, … why is she asking these questions? Is it
for attention, she really doesn’t know, or trying to prove something? But my intentions
are [that] I truly want to know the information.
Ofelia’s reflection expressed the need to feel comfortable speaking up during meetings.
73

She also discussed her fear of judgment from others when she does ask questions and reaffirmed
that she does so “because I truly want to know the information.” According to Fritscher (2023),
an example of being vulnerable includes sharing emotions such as “shame, grief, or fear” and
this is exactly what Ofelia did. She admitted to the participants and me the fear she feels in times
when she is in a group situation further illustrating how the co-construction of community
agreements developed her trust which led her to be vulnerable.
The co-construction of community agreements also supported Yareli’s ability to build
trust within the holding space of the sessions as evidenced by a vulnerable moment she shared
with us,
so elaborately or you might tell me something, … I might not be able to communicate
and I might not understand what you're actually telling me. I think that's my fear, not
knowing how to respond to maybe more serious questions, or even have a conversation.
I've walked away from a group of teachers who were doing a play with words … like
different ways to describe an avocado … and I was so nervous when that was coming to
me that I pretended to be distracted and [walked away].
Just like Ofelia, Yareli disclosed a moment that brought her shame and through that
shame, acknowledged the fear she experiences when engaged in a conversation with others. As I
discuss in more detail later on, Yareli’s fear stemmed from her perceived lack of academic
language and her ability to hold intellectual conversations. She took a risk by sharing a situation
in which she felt extreme anxiety as the deficit views she held of herself made her remove
herself altogether from her colleagues. She admitted she would rather not participate than be
perceived as unintelligent, given her perceived lack of vocabulary. This is evidence that the co-
construction of community agreements helped to develop Yareli’s trust which in turn fostered
74

her ability to be vulnerable.
Maria shared last and said,
And like what she just said, this is my first time, so I’m just quiet and observing and
hearing everyone. I still don’t have the experience and knowledge as a support teacher
yet to be able to ask those questions.
This excerpt illustrates Maria’s general discomfort regarding the idea of speaking up or
engaging in group discussions. When asked to consider factors that would make her comfortable
to speak up in groups, she reverted to highlighting factors that inhibit her from engaging in
groups, citing, “I still don’t have the experience and knowledge as a support teacher, yet to be
able to ask those questions.” The vulnerability Maria displayed is evidence of the trust she
developed by the co-construction of community agreements.
By “setting the stage,” through the use of co-constructed community agreements, and
reflective discussions around group experiences, the participants were able to have a trustful
learning environment where they felt psychologically safe to be vulnerable (Spikes, 2018). This
foundation was necessary to support their engagement in race-based discourse. All three
participants demonstrated significant growth in their ability to trust the holding environment in
order to be vulnerable across the three cycles. By the last session, Maria had developed enough
trust to be vulnerable, sharing her role in reproducing an assimilationist ideology, stating,
I feel that our people, … we make fun of each other … and I think that’s where it starts.
Like, I’m at fault. Sometimes I’m like [mimicking an accent], … and we kind of laugh
about it … It starts within us, where we are not putting a stop to it or preventing it. We
help it grow. … I feel this society, … if you’re Hispanic, if you have an accent, you …
may live in a low socioeconomic area, … it’s just stereotyping.
75

Maria’s thoughts illustrate how she took a risk by acknowledging the stereotypes and
assumptions she developed regarding Hispanics in low socioeconomic-status neighborhoods
having a higher chance of speaking with an accent.
Ofelia also demonstrated growth in the trust she developed of the holding environment
which supported her willingness to be vulnerable. This is evidenced by the thoughts she shared
during the last session regarding White people and their intellectual superiority, stating,
When I do approach someone that … comes across more knowledgeable … it could be a
bit intimidating, … that part. I have never been able to really understand why? And that’s
the reason with the Caucasian, because, in my mind, I connect [them] with being
intellectual, [having] better vocabulary.
It takes a great level of vulnerability to disclose the beliefs Ofelia did regarding White people
and their perceived intellectual superiority. This disclosure would not have been possible if the
holding space did not foster the trust she needed to be as open and vulnerable as she was.
Yareli also demonstrated how the trust she developed in the sessions supported her ability
to be vulnerable. This is evidenced by the reflection she shared regarding the assumptions she
held of the SDC teachers and her use of the phrase “common sense.” Yareli said,
Since I began [this] journey … I think deeper of my assumptions and forcing them onto
Others. … I believe that my experiences and therefore my assumptions are going to differ
from those of the teachers I support, I need to do my best to remember that others have
different yet valuable experiences that shaped their assumptions and has propelled them
to become the most individual they are now. … And often times, I have used the phrase
common sense in a judgmental way. So, there's a lot of work to be done.
Yareli’s words wonderful exemplify the level of vulnerability she developed across the
76

three cycles of this study. Here, she acknowledges the need to consider alternate perspectives in
light of the different experiences the SDC teachers she supports bring with them. She also
addresses her use of the term, common sense and admits using it in a judgmental way.
Each participant took increasing risks with each session, sharing deficit-based
assumptions, unsure of the consequences of their disclosure. Without the ongoing adherence to
the community agreements, learning objectives and introspection of their dynamic group
experiences, the participants may not have developed the necessary vulnerability to explore the
deficit-based assumptions they held of the SDC teachers. This sub-theme is consistent with the
conceptual framework in Figure 2 as it illustrates the need to develop trust in order to be open to
vulnerability. These two concepts were critical in supporting the answer to my research question.
Learning Objectives That Encompassed Learning Agreements
As discussed earlier, a shift of focus from community agreements to session learning
objectives occurred after the second session, lasting until the last one. The learning objectives
were discussed at the beginning and revisited at the end of each session, where I asked
participants whether they felt the learning objectives were met and, if so, to share evidence that
showcased the objective as being met. Working collaboratively toward developing an equitable
space to share our thoughts, ideas, and assumptions and challenging them (ours and each other’s)
was the learning objective for Sessions 4 and 5. The following excerpt outlines the evidence each
participant presented for having met this specific session’s learning objective. I asked,
Before we go … did we meet the objectives of today, which is working towards an
equitable space to share our thoughts, ideas, assumptions, [and] challenge them as
needed. If … so, what is evidence … that speaks to … having met the [session]
objective?
77

Ofelia answered, “For me, … I felt comfortable speaking my mind, … and I feel
again, that I’m practicing … taking that pause … to give others an opportunity to [speak]. Yareli
said, “I think we met this. I think looking at different pictures, and then sharing what we each
saw … helped us really unpack those assumptions that we chat [about]. So, I think that, in itself,
met the objective.” Maria added, “To piggyback on [Yareli], we all respected each other’s
perspectives. We didn’t have any negative comments or disagreements on what we all saw [even
though we all saw] things very [differently].”
Here, Ofelia stated that she felt “comfortable speaking [her] mind” and “[practiced] …
taking [a] pause … to give others an opportunity to [speak].” Yareli chimed in next, stating that
the learning exercise they all engaged in during the session allowed them to consider alternative
perspectives and overall “[help] us really unpack those assumptions that we chat about” as
evidence for meeting the learning objective. Maria followed suit, agreeing with the evidence
Yareli presented. She felt that they all had met the session’s learning objective because “we all
respected each other’s perspectives … [even though we saw different] things.”
Promoting the Learning of Participants to Increase Trust and Vulnerability. I used
my analytic memos to inform the instructional moves related to the community agreements.
These analytic memos helped me reflect upon my intended andragogical moves, the participants’
reception, action, and engagement during the sessions and the enacted andragogical moves I
actually implemented. Two andragogical moves I employed reciprocally during this portion of
the session were the use of facilitation and questioning. Facilitation refers to act of thinking
along with through the use of questioning with adult learners as a form of assistance. These
andragogical moves helped the participants develop their own thoughts regarding the community
agreements, which helped safeguard against opinions from the other participants, including
78

myself. It was of utmost importance that each participant had time to process the information on
their own so they could come up with their own thoughts regarding the community reasons.
People are more likely to go along with what others in a group, thus censoring their opinions.
This becomes more likely if there is one person dominating the conversation or there are power
imbalances present (MacDougall & Baum, 1997). It is for these reasons that I provided the
participants a copy of the community agreements to view on their own along with processing
time to formulate their thoughts:
If you go to your digital notebook, you’ll notice six community agreements I picked to
get us started. … Let’s take [some] time looking over them individually. Consider what
else you feel you would need from each of the participants here for you to feel
comfortable to share your thoughts, no matter how controversial they may be. … what
will you need from us.
Providing the participants with processing time and a copy of the community agreements to view
Individually helped to counter single opinions dominating the conversations.
After the participants and I finalized our co-constructed community agreements, I
switched gears and centered the participants’ experiences as an andragogical move. According to
Rodgers (2002), the “primary text for reflection must be a teacher’s experience,” (p. 232). In
other words, transformative growth learning to occur, I needed to have the participants reflect on
their experiences as a TSS member and that is what I did. The andragogical move of centering
the participants’ experiences was invaluable in promoting their growth towards developing their
awareness of the deficit-based assumptions they held of SDDC teachers.
My Growth in Relation to the Use of Community Agreements. My analytic memos
demonstrate how much growth I made using community agreements in shared spaces. Previous
79

to these sessions, my use of the community agreements was performative, co-constructing them
with my adult learners on the first day of class, never to be revisited. Furthermore, my intended
actions during the sessions were to decenter myself, thus developing a learner-centered
environment. This proved more difficult than intended. The analytic memos and critical
reflection I wrote in Cycle 1, helped me realize how my actions steered them toward a teacher-
centered approach. Although I spent one and a half sessions co-constructing the community
agreements, I let them falter. I was unsure of how to reintroduce the community agreements we
co-constructed, especially as we were heading towards our fourth session. To get back to a place
where I could review the community agreements with the participants intentionally, I anchored
the community agreements to each session’s learning objectives. I asked, “Do you feel that we
met our lesson objective [of creating] … a more equitable space where we all could share out,
and … unpack our assumptions … if you feel we met it, what evidence is there of it?” Maria
started off by saying, “Well, definitely, that wheel, cause I usually don’t go first & that wheel
made me go first. So that’s working towards an equitable space to make sure … everyone is
heard.” Ofelia went next and stated, “For me, I was taking a pause because I get excited and
want to share because, but other than that because I feel comfortable. Again, I’ve been practicing
… pausing myself, I will let others take a turn.”
By highlighting the learning objectives to address the community agreements, I was more
intentional and provided the space to observe why they are needed and important to follow.
Tangentially, each TSS member incorporated aspects of the community agreements within the
evidence they used to justify their reasons for having met the sessions’ learning objective. For
example, Maria stated that she had met the learning objective because a name wheel was used to
ensure different participants got the opportunity to share their ideas and thoughts first. This
80

evidence aligns with the third community agreement from the California Conference for Equality
and Justice of “taking space and making space” (n.d). Ofelia’s evidence also incorporated the
need to make space for others in the session to share as she recognizes she can be quite
loquacious, and often tunes others out.
As I move forward, I plan to continue strengthening my skill of using community
agreements with more intentionality. I like how I reviewed the community agreements by way of
the session learning objectives, as it helped me create the learning conditions necessary to foster
trust and vulnerability in the participants and myself.
Sub-theme 2: Participants’ Exploration of Identity and Experiences Revealed Intersecting
Identity Dualities
Because the participants had developed the trust necessary to be vulnerable (sub-theme
1), they were able to reflect on their positionalities and the experiences tethered to them. By
unpacking their positionalities, participants revealed dualities of race-based trauma and social
privilege. This process began with a discussion that centered around the word “sorry” and its
typicality in situations that did not call for an apology. Ofelia stated she used apologies as a form
of respect, particularly if she felt she was causing an inconvenience to someone, actively looking
for a replacement word to take its place.
Maria felt she could not help avoiding using the word, “sorry,” stating it almost seems
automatic. She noticed she apologizes the most during presentations because she gets nervous,
causing her “ESL [to start] kicking in.” Here, Maria reveals her biases against her
multilingualism, viewing it as a deficit. Overall, Maria made progress in connecting her feelings
of nervousness and embarrassment to her identity as a bilingual speaker.
Yareli expressed similar sentiments, stating she often finds herself apologizing during
81

presentations when she struggles to articulate her thoughts and according to her, “gibberish”
comes out. For example, she recounted several instances during presentations when anxiety and
nervousness would grip her, given her perceived mispronunciation of words. These situations
would cause her to apologize or make fun of herself, stating, “This is what I default to mask my
insecurities.” Through storytelling, Yareli demonstrated how she learned to deal with her
feelings of discomfort and language-based inferiority, the lasting effects of race-based trauma,
and the assimilationist ideology prevalent in society.
After engaging in this discussion, participants used a social identity wheel (see Appendix
H) to map out their positionality. After listing their identities, participants proceeded to pick the
identity they felt stood out the most. The following excerpts show what each participant chose
the identity they felt stood out the most. Ofelia said,
Okay, well, for me … as I am looking at my wheel, and where it says the “power,” right?
One of the words that’s really bold is the word “White,” and when I look at this, I don’t
associate… with that word … [because] I am Hispanic … Mexican … So, one of the
things is that … I see myself as having less power as Caucasian people, so when I speak
to others, I just learned to say, “Oh, I’m sorry”, “Oh, I apologize,” and again, [it’s] a
source of respect because I was always brought up that way. We apologize for … our
actions, especially if you’re around people who are … more superior than you.
Yareli stated,
When I look at my wheel … to me, it’s the erased [identity] … the Learned English one. I
came here when I was about to turn 5 … my childhood was watching telenovelas … so I
don’t feel like … I have this extensive vocabulary. I … learned enough to get myself to
college … being in this position, when people look at you and want to have these
82

educational conversations, I don’t feel like I have the words to say what I’m thinking or
feeling … so that is intimidating.
Maria said,
I feel like I agree with Ofelia because the first thing that came to my head was … not the
power but the marginalized [identity] … the skin color one … and that was my only one
that I actually chose from that side of the wheel which is my skin color, or my ethnicity
Although all three participants identified an equal amount or more of privileged
identities, each one felt that identities in the marginalized or erased section of the identity wheel
stood out the most. For example, although Ofelia identified themselves as able-bodied, of
Christian faith, possessing advanced degrees, with a salaried job, a homeowner, and in a
heterosexual relationship (all identities of privilege), she felt her marginalized identity as a
Brown, Mexican woman overshadowed them. Furthermore, Ofelia felt this marginalized identity
was the reason she developed feelings of inferiority next to White people, stating she felt she had
“less power than Caucasian people.”
Yareli reported similar thoughts as Ofelia regarding her positionality. Using the social
identity wheel, Yareli listed an equal number of privileged and erased or marginalized identities.
However, the identity she felt stood out above all to others was her identity as a person who
spoke with an accent (learned English according to the social identity wheel). Yareli made clear
connections between her marginalized identity and the feelings of inferiority she developed,
stating, “Being in this position, when people look at you and want to have these educational
conversations, ...sometimes I don’t … have the words to say what I’m thinking or feeling … so
that is intimidating.” The feelings Yareli disclosed about her accent showcase the stress and
83

pressure this identity places on her, implicitly viewing her bilingual abilities as a deficit.
Lastly, using the social identity wheel, Maria listed more identities of privilege than
identities of erasure and/or marginalization. And just like Ofelia and Yareli, Maria chose her
identity as a Brown, Hispanic woman as the one that primarily stood out. When probed further,
Maria felt this identity stood out because she felt as she lacked academic language which in turn
disclosed this identity of hers, giving her away:
When I first joined [the] team I was extremely nervous with facilitating trainings because
my biggest concerns were speaking in public because, like I said my ESL kicks in, and I
felt like if I am representing the … division, I need to know how to discuss topics I’ll be
presenting … because … I don’t have an extensive vocabulary, you know, … academic
vocabulary, or if I do, it doesn’t come out how I want it to come out. Therefore, … if I
say a word incorrectly, I apologize.
Here we see how Maria’s identity as a Brown woman intertwined with her linguistic
abilities. Like Yareli, Maria seemed to have also internalized feelings of inferiority, seeing her
bilingualism as a deficit. Consistent with the conceptual framework, the process of critical
reflection begins by first analyzing the outcomes for each participant regarding Sub-theme 2. In
this instance, the TSS members reflected on their reasons for apologizing and communicated a
deficit view of themselves directly tied to the identities they felt primarily stood out to everyone.
One thing became clear: no matter their upward mobility, they viewed themselves and/or their
linguistic abilities as less than. All three participants defaulted to choosing an erased or
marginalized identity, an identity that also caused all of them to apologize during situations that
did not call for it.
84

Promoting the Participants’ Exploration of Identity and Experiences. Knowing that I
had only an hour once a week with the participants to try and accomplish what my instructors
achieved over 16 weeks (one semester) led me to explore supports I could implement to speed up
the process of helping them unpack their positionalities. For these reasons, I used the Social
Identity Wheel visual (Appendix H). Brookfield (2017) stated that it is unfair to situate adult
learners in a space where they are expected to engage in discourse over unfamiliar concepts.
These types of learning conditions are less likely to move adult learners toward transformational
learning. Therefore, using this visual, the participants had an anchor to support their
understanding of their positionality and intersecting identities. Using this visual aligns with
multiple means of critically deliberate expression and consistent with the conceptual framework I
designed in Figure 2.
I also used the andragogical moves of activating and connecting in addition to the Social
Identity Wheel visual to the promote the participants exploration of their positionality and
experiences. I first began by activating their prior knowledge regarding the concept of
positionality by asking them,
• What is identity?
• What does it mean to have an identity?
These two prompts helped me see how the participants defined the concept of identity and
determine what I could add to this co-constructed definition. After activating their prior
knowledge, I had the participants connect the concept of identity to their own positionality. This
process helped lay the groundwork the participants needed to ultimately develop their awareness
of deficit-based assumptions they held of the SDC teachers.
My Growth in Relation to the Exploration of Positionality. As I reflect on my growth
85

regarding the exploration of one’s positionality, I am reminded of my journey through this
process. I recall experiencing constructive disorientations as the more I examined my
positionality, the more I traced the genesis of many of the assumptions I held. The journey I
embarked on as I unpacked my positionality and epistemology was invigorating, giving me the
language to name phenomena I had experienced. It gave me the power to self-author my life
instead of defaulting to the narratives of marginalization I enveloped my life with. My
understanding of how powerful the exploration of one’s positionality helped me approach its
planning and implementation with utmost care. Additionally, I also grew in my ability to know
what learning conditions need to be present when facilitating this level of identity exploration. I
must say that is my biggest growth indeed.
Sub-theme 3: Participant Exploration of Assumptions Revealed Their Insecurities
The final sub-theme that emerged was how the exploration of the participants’ personally
held assumptions helped them make progress toward developing their awareness of the deficit-
based assumptions they held of the SDC teachers they supported. Participants began this process
by engaging in a discussion regarding their TSS roles. As usual, Ofelia started the conversation,
stating that one of her biggest responsibilities was to motivate the teachers she was responsible
for coaching, ensuring they knew she was always available to lend them a helping hand. Yareli,
on the other hand, highlighted the need to establish trust with the SDC teachers as the
cornerstone of her TSS role. She also was the only TSS member who noted the reciprocity of
her relationships with the teachers she was in charge of supporting.
Lastly, as the newest member of my organizational team, Maria exhibited an overall self-
doubt about her abilities to fulfill her role as a TSS member. She shared the performance
pressure she experienced in her short time in this role. The SDC teachers she visited let her know
86

it would be hard for her to do as great of a job as the TSS member she replaced. In other words,
Maria was already uneasy about starting a role very different from her previous classroom role.
Secondly, she acknowledged the intimidation she felt about presenting pedagogical content as
she viewed her linguistic skills as sub-par. She was receiving messages from the SDC teachers
that indicated their lack of confidence in her coaching abilities. Upon closer reflection, it seems
Maria was experiencing a disorienting dilemma. This could be why she often avoided engaging
in vulnerable conversations during our sessions.
After engaging in this discussion, participants reflected on their assumptions when they
first started this TSS role and how these assumptions influenced their coaching practices and/or
expectations of the SDC teachers they supported. Ofelia said,
When I first started on this team, [I thought], “I’m gonna see amazing things out there.”
like, I had really high expectations for all of our teachers, so, as I started supporting the
teachers, that is when I realized, “Wait a minute, not … I’m not. … My expectations
lowered, I guess, because I didn’t see things that met my expectations from what I would
envision, like what the classroom should look like, based on my standards.
Yareli added,
I thought back to, like, when I was in the classroom, and people would walk into my
classroom, and I didn’t know who they were. I don’t recall them having badges like we
do, so to me, they were just these important people from the district … and it would give
me stress and then anxiety. And so [now] … I always show them my badge, and I always
like to show them my title. … Right there, I’m a support teacher, and I think that helps
me to lower some of their anxiety. Like, you don’t have to worry about me right now.
Maria stated,
87

When I accepted this position, I had the assumption that all teachers … were following
the mandated curriculum and they would put effort and dedication to their classroom, and
… that assumption got squashed right away when I had a conversation with … our
supervisors and they were like “Oh, it’s good that you have those assumptions, but,
reality is, you’re gonna go into programs that we’ll need more extensive support [than
others].” I assume everybody was doing … the best for the students.
Ofelia recounted how her assumptions of what she would see did not match the reality
she experienced as she walked into the SDC classrooms. In fact, she admitted she felt she had to
lower her expectations of the SDC teachers. Later on, though, as she reflected further, she
realized that her assumptions and, therefore, expectations were based on her previous
experiences as an SDC teacher:
I’m thinking about my experiences and my biases even though they were positive biases,
they were still biases. I was already making assumptions like, “I should be seeing this …
this person should be doing this, and this is how it’s supposed to be done in the
classroom.”
Ofelia also recognized the harm that can be done, even when the biases one holds are positive. In
this case, her positive bias was that she was going to see “fabulous” instruction and classroom
management. Ofelia’s reflection was pivotal for them as it helped her comprehend how her
experiences played a large role in developing her assumptions toward SDC teachers. This growth
helped her make some progress toward developing her awareness of the deficit-based
assumptions she was viewing the SDC teachers she was supporting.
Yareli looked deeper into why she holds the establishment of trust with the SDC teachers
she supports as the cornerstone of her TSS role. She spoke about the need to reduce the stress
88

and anxiety of the SDC teacher that her presence in their classrooms may cause. When probed
further, Yareli looked to her experiences as a classroom teacher, citing the stress and anxiety she
experienced when instructional coaches or other district personnel visited her classroom.
Through this reflection, Yareli realized how her previous experiences as an SDC teacher shaped
her assumptions of the type of support the SDC teachers needed from her. In other words, how
her assumptions influenced her coaching practices.
Maria was the last to share her assumptions about the SDC teachers she supported. She
stated that she was under the assumption that the SDC teachers she was coaching would be
demonstrating the same level of dedication and effort she had while in the classroom. However,
she was quickly brought down to reality by her supervisors. With a deficit lens of the SDC
teachers, administrators advised Maria that it was nice for her to have that assumption, but she
would more than likely see teachers who would need substantial support from her. Similar to
Ofelia, Maria was walking in with positive assumptions about the teachers she would be
supporting. The difference here was that Ofelia learned on her own that her assumption was far
from the realities she was experiencing in her TSS role, while Maria was told by someone with
more power what she should expect to see. These interactions, therefore, shaped what she
expected to see and how she would approach her coaching. Yareli on the other hand, let her
previous teaching experiences influence the types of support she was to provide the teachers she
was coaching.
Promoting the Learning of My Participants to Support Their Interpersonal
Examination. There were many learning experiences I facilitated that helped promote the
learning of my participants and supported their exploration of deficit-based assumptions
regarding the SDC teachers they coached. The show and tell learning experience was one
89

exercise that yielded high returns. Here, my participants were asked to bring with them an object
they felt symbolized their TSS role. The underlying objective I was trying to accomplish with
this task was for my participants to take a step back and explore their TSS role, hoping their
artifact would reveal some of the underlying deficit-based assumptions propelling their coaching
practices and influencing the ways in which they support the SDC teachers. Another objective I
was trying to accomplish with this show and tell learning experience was to support my
participants’ ability to move past their stories and experiences of marginalization and inequity.
Based on my session observations, I was noticing that my participants were getting comfortable,
painting themselves as victims of oppressed systems. Without helping to move past this, I would
have not been as successful in supporting their ability to turn-into-their practice and reflect how
they themselves were also perpetuating varied levels of inequity and oppression in their TSS
roles.
The second learning experience promoted actually was only able to promote Maria’s
ability to explore the ways in which they perpetuate deficit-based assumptions. This is because
Yareli was not able to attend this session. In terms of Maria, I assume this learning experience
was not strong enough to promote her learning the way it did for Maria. This learning experience
involved placing a series of assumptions that both my participants and I had shared within the
sessions we had attended thus far (see Appendix I). I asked my participants to read over the
assumptions on the slide and list all the people, institutions, experiences, their cultural
background, etc., that they felt helped shape the assumptions they held and stated the following,
I feel like … the Hispanic people get more shamed with their accent compared to others.
It’s like, even in social media, the memes of accents, and … what people say, and how
they say it. You … see it more derive to the Hispanic population versus any other
90

ethnicity or … language.
I asked Maria to elaborate further on her response. She did so and said,
I feel that our people … make fun of each other … and I think that’s where it starts
because, like, I’m at fault. Sometimes I’m like [mimicking an accent] … and we … laugh
about it. So … it starts with us, too, where we are not putting a stop or preventing it. We
kinda help it grow, you know.
Here Maria illustrated such an introspective self-awareness of how she perpetuates the
assimilationist ideology of any language other than English is considered inferior. Her reflection
on how she helps this inequity grow as she stated shows how the facilitation of this learning
experience promoted Maria’s growing awareness of the deficit-based assumptions she held.
Although this second learning experience did not promote the learning for both Ofelia
and Yareli, the third learning experience was able to achieve this. For this task, the participants
were shown three slides, each containing two pictures, side by side: one of a White person and
one of a person of color. Participants were asked three questions regarding the slides presented to
them:
• Which person is more likely to be viewed as having earned a doctoral degree?
• Which student would be more likely to be considered wealthy?
• Which student is more likely to be included?
All the participants took turns answering the questions and their rationale for the
assumptions that led them to reach their conclusions. It seems this part of the learning experience
helped promote Ofelia’s progress as she grappled with her assumptions and the assumptions of
the other participants, stating,
You know, what’s interesting, as you’re going through these pictures for me, like I
91

wasn’t even focusing in on their ethnicity and their skin color … which I’m very proud of
myself … because I am really addressing my implicit biases … in the sense when it
comes to race and ethnicity, right … So that’s what I thought. But yes, interesting. When
I heard you, guys say the one in the left, because he’s White, I was like, “Oh.”
Here we can see that Ofelia initially was proud of herself for not seeing color. However,
it seemed that being in the presence of others over the course of this session helped her
experience a constructive disorientation. We were getting ready to move on to a different topic
when Ofelia raised her hand and said,
Yes, thank you. So, here’s another [example] … that we talked about. So, they
[instructor] asked us what do you see? And this is what my peers saw, but I didn’t see it.
And I don’t know if something’s wrong with me. But in this picture, the Asian boy here,
he’s the aggressor. In this picture, the Hispanic boy, Alberto is the one with no comida
[no food] and torn clothes … and then here, what is it, Jane? Otra vez [again] Asian,
she’s the aggressor … Maybe, I am colorblind and maybe it’s not a good thing because I
don’t see those things, you know.
All the previous learning experiences Ofelia participated in helped get her to this point
where she proudly admitted her colorblind ideology, only to begin questioning this assumption
and in the process transforming how she was making sense of the experiences she witnessed in
her administrator course.
Yareli’s growth came after we watched The Doll Test video, where Italian kids of varied
skin tones are facing two dolls: a White doll and a Brown doll. The children were asked a series
of questions regarding which doll they considered bad, nice, ugly or pretty. The video concludes,
showcasing that regardless of the children’s skin tones, they overwhelmingly chose the White
92

doll as the embodiment of beauty and good behavior. It seems that the combination of the
learning experience involving the three slides and watching this video helped Yareli reflect upon
the assumptions her dad had of Black people and the role his experiences played in the
assumptions he developed, stating,
My children are biracial … when I was dating my ex-husband, my dad would always
refer to Black people as “those people” … you know how “those people” are? [He loves
his grandkids] … but maybe his experiences [maybe] … he didn’t want my kids to have
it … rougher because [we are] … already [a] minority… but to have half Black kids…
that might make life harder for them. So, I think he meant well … but this thought that [if
you are] White, you don’t have such a rough life, you have better opportunities, …
people treat you better … I think that’s where it stemmed from … I thought [he was]
“racist” but now I’m thinking he was just trying to look out for them before they were
born.
Here we have evidence of Yareli making connections between the role personal
experiences have on the development of assumptions. She enhances her understanding of these
concepts by reflecting upon her dad’s attitudes towards Black people. It is through this process
that Yareli considers alternate perspectives, entertains underlying assumptions that may have
fueled her dad’s attitudes toward his ex-son-in-law and thus naming the phenomena she
witnessed growing up. This introspection of hers showcases how I was able to promote Yareli’s
progress towards developing an awareness of deficit-based assumptions. More specifically, she
strengthened her understanding regarding the interconnection in existence between lived
experiences and the development of assumptions.
My Growth in Relation to the Exploration of Assumptions. Overall, facilitating my
93

participants’ ability to explore their personally held assumptions was the skill I need to continue
honing in. I can see a trail of doubt as I read my analytic memos and critical reflections regarding
my ability to push my participants’ deeper examination of their assumptions. This brought me to
recall an anecdote Dr. Slayton shared with us in one of our classes where a student in the
previous cohort who had just finalized their data analysis found that they had unintentionally led
color-blind sessions, thus impacting how much they were able to promote the learning of their
students. They realized that they tip-toed around the topic instead of bringing this issue head-on.
Needless to say, that story stayed with me. I knew I was working extremely hard to facilitate
learning conditions and experiences in my sessions to promote the growth of my participants. I
knew I would need to help them engage in a constructive disorientation that would not be too
disorienting that would cause them to shut down, thus halting their progress. Having this added
pressure may have sabotaged the intentions I set out to accomplish initially. There were so many
instances in the sessions where I thought I had challenged the assumptions of the participants
only to rewatch the recording and realize I could have done a better job of creating the conditions
necessary to facilitate constructive disorientations and challenge my participant assumptions. As
I move forward, I will continue to work towards problematizing deficit-based assumptions. Just
with anything else, this is another muscle that I need to strengthen and through this, I can
continue developing these skill sets to improve myself as an instructor of adult learners.
Recognizing Deficit Assumptions: An Important Step Towards Noticing and Disrupting
Them
The purpose of this study was to support my Teaching Support Staff members (TSS) to
counter and disrupt harmful deficit-based perspectives and assumptions ubiquitous in special
education. To experience this level of transformational growth, adult learners must unpack their
94

assumptions by finding their genesis (Mezirow, 1991). Retracing these steps will lead back to
one’s positionality, revealing all the identities that comprise our individual self. This
introspection occurs when adults are in the company of others, where trust has been established,
and thus, making way for vulnerability to take place.
Three sub-themes emerged, underscoring the overarching finding of this study, helping
to answer the research question: How can I use CRALP to support my adult learners and me to
examine our deficit-based assumptions to counter and disrupt them? One can use CRALP to
support adult learners by facilitating a holding environment that builds their trust and
vulnerability. It is this vulnerability that supports their openness to explore their positionality
and the experiences tethered to them. Through this process, the participants in this study were
able to trace the origins of their deficit-based assumptions of the SDC teachers they supported.
Additionally, this is how CRALP furthered the participants’ understanding of the historically
entrenched inequities students with ESNs experience. That is their increased likelihood to be
educated by teachers with substandard credentials or long-term substitutes and in a segregated
classroom setting.
Given the time limitations I was against, I was not able to get them to the optimal state as
delineated within my conceptual framework (Figure 2). Nonetheless, the participants made
progress toward developing their awareness of the deficit-based perspectives and assumptions
they held of the SDC teachers.
Afterword/Epilogue
Completing my action research study felt wonderful. I was most excited to continue
analyzing the data I had generated from multiple data points. The wonderful thing is that the
critical conversations my participants and I engaged in during the sessions were still occurring
95

during the times we worked together. This outcome is something I did not anticipate. On the
contrary, I assumed all the momentum fostered in the sessions would have halted once the cycles
of my sessions were over. These experiences provided me insight to what could occur if I
continued embedding similar learning experiences and conditions within the scope of my work.
Data Analysis Takeaways That Informed My Practice
The generation of my analytic memos, developing clean transcripts for each session,
coding these transcripts, developing methodological memos and writing critical reflections were
invaluable data-generating tools that I used while in-the-field, analyzing them routinely to help
inform my andragogical practices. Coding my transcripts while in the field helped me save so
much time. It helped keep me motivated as emergent findings came through. Developing the
methodological memos were conducive in helping me organize the minutiae of changes made to
the data generation and protocol implementation. I focused more on thematic analysis and
triangulation of the data once I was out of the field. Overall, this process helped me to feel
stronger about my qualitative research skills. More specifically, through this action research
study, I was able to develop practical data analyzing tools and the knowledge to develop
implement them with credibility and trustworthiness and readily apply them within my
professional context. Finally, I feel that I was able to also enhance my skills as an instructor of
adult learners. I understand the learning is not complete and know there is still a lot of work that
needs to be done. With this understanding, I cannot help but feel excited at the prospect of
continuing to advance my knowledge regarding the conditions necessary for transformative adult
learning to occur. I have readily applied everything I have learned in this concentration to the
roles I serve in.
96

My Self-Discovery
The past 3 years of this doctoral program have been intense. I never thought I would
transform my way of thinking the way this program transformed me. I started out this doctoral
program with the same narrative looming over my head:
I had been married for 14 years up to the Fall 2020. For the 13 of the 14 years, we were
married, I had been the sole provider and his caregiver. I always said we had one
“normal” year as husband and wife where we would go out hiking and do what other
couples enjoyed themselves.
After his accident, I was always juggling one full-time job and two part-time jobs to
make ends meet. All I had known was to be a caregiver, first to my brother and now to my
husband. Chronic pain has a way of changing a person and it definitely changed him. I was
socialized with the idea that once you marry a person, that is it; you are married for life. Your
personal happiness comes second to your duties as a mother and wife. My way of making
meaning was instrumental at best, where everything was clearly delineated, and I eagerly waited
for the script of my life to be written for me.
Come the Fall of 2020, I start my first class as part of my doctoral program at USC.
Embarrassingly, I cried in front of others during my fourth class (one of many instances). I cried
because I was overwhelmed with emotions. Up to that point, I was socialized and emotionally
punished for acting “Indian” or exhibiting “Indian” behaviors. And here I was, in one of the most
prestigious universities in the nation, and the assigned reading was spring (2016), where the
atrocities against Native Americans were brought to light and a robust discussion ensued. For the
first time, I understood why I longed to be light-skinned and why I longed to assimilate as much
as possible into the dominant culture. My ability to name what I had experienced was
97

empowering. This realization brought me to tears. I had never been encouraged to embrace my
Indigenous self. On the contrary, I detested the body I occupied. This self-hatred led me to feel
unbelievably lucky when a light-skinned person took an interest in me.
Something transformative happened as the semesters went on. I would fall and wallow in
my tears while my instructors and classmates would tenderly pick me back up (looking at you
Ifeyinwa, Lucero, Alex, Cheyenne, Maria S., Gaby, Alisia, Dr. Slayton, Dr. Samkian, Dr.
Pascarella, Dr. Torres-Retana, Dr. Hinga, and Dr. Lyons-Moore). In a way, these doctoral
courses became therapeutic, helping me to understand the race-based trauma I experienced and
allowing me to heal from the inside out. For the first time, I saw myself as more than just a
caregiver, a wife, a mother, and a teacher. I saw myself as Elia, an indigenous Mexican woman
from Piaxtla, Puebla who loved nopales and Big Macs. Across my doctoral journey, I learned to
love myself, appreciate my Indigeneity, and self-author my own life narrative. This path of self-
discovery was cultivated and supported by my doctoral program, a journey that I will continue
on.
My Path Forward
I never imagined I would ever leave the field of special education. As I stated previously,
this doctoral program fostered the necessary conditions to help transform me to what I consider
to be a self-authoring learner. Along my journey through this transformation, I decided it was
necessary to self-author my professional satisfaction, and staying in the role I was in during the
time my action research study took place was not it. Therefore, I decided to look for new job
opportunities and like serendipity, stumbled upon a job within my educational organization that
focused on Native American/Indigenous student education programs.
The prospect of applying for this new job opening was both exhilarating and frightening.
98

As an individual that experienced cultural and linguistic erasure of my indigenous roots, I was
always intrigued to continue learning about my identity and continuing to empower students
within my organization that may have experienced similar childhood experiences as my own.
Here stood an opportunity that would allow me to work in a department that focused on my own
growth and interests and not based on my childhood experiences with my brother Miguel. Fear
of having to learn a new set of skills gripped me but I did not let this stop me and submitted my
application.
Today, I am the Title VI Teacher Expert for my organization and working with a
community of families and students that have been marginalized and continue to be harmed by
the educational institutes meant to support them. Today, Native youth continue to experience
harm because their cultural knowledge and identity are denied, the experience of ongoing erasure
through the terminology used in schools (Dobson and Nez, 2023). It may be a different student
population I will be working for, but the same process of engaging in critical reflection remains
the same.

99

References
Agran, M., Jackson, L., Kurth, J. A., Ryndak, D., Burnette, K., Jameson, M., Zagona, A.,
Fitzpatrick, H., & Wehmeyer, M. (2020). Why aren’t students with severe disabilities
being placed in general education classrooms: Examining the relations among classroom
placement, learner outcomes, and other factors. Research and Practice for Persons with
Severe Disabilities, 45(1), 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796919878134
Alvarez, H. K. (2007). The impact of teacher preparation on responses to student aggression in
the classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(7), 1113–1126.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.10.001
American Psychological Association. (2021). Inclusive language guidelines.
https://www.apa.org/about/apa/equity-diversity-inclusion/language-guidelines.pdf
Anderson, K. (2017, May 17). Kimberly Crenshaw at TED + Animation [Video]. YouTube.
https://youtu.be/JRci2V8PxW4
Arao, B., & Clemens, K. (2013). From safe spaces to brave spaces. In L. M. Landreman (Ed.),
The art of effective facilitation: Reflections from social justice educators (pp. 135–150).
Routledge.
Bell, D. A., Jr. (1980). Brown v. Board of Education and the interest convergence dilemma.
Harvard Law Review, 93, 518–533. https://doi.org/10.2307/1340546
Bethea-Hampton, T., & Holder, A. (2018, June 10–14). Digital notebooks and collaboration
[Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the Association Supporting Computer Users in
Education, Myrtle Beach, SC, United States.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED592865.pdf

100

Brookfield, S. (1998). Critically reflective practice. Journal of Continuing Education in the
Health Professions, 18(4), 197–205. https://doi.org/10.1002/chp.1340180402
Brookfield, S. (2010). Critical reflection as an adult learning process. In N. Lyons (Ed.),
Handbook of reflection and reflective inquiry: Mapping a way of knowing for
professional reflective inquiry (pp. 215–236). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-
387-85744-2_11
Brookfield, S. D. (2017). Becoming a critically reflective teacher (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Brookfield, S. D., & Associates. (2019). Teaching race: How to help students unmask and
challenge racism. Jossey-Bass.
Brown, B. (2021). Atlas of the heart: Mapping meaningful connection and the language of
human experience. Random House.
Carver-Thomas, D., Kini, T., & Burns, D. (2020). Sharpening the divide: How California’s
teacher shortages expand inequality. Learning Policy Institute.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher
learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24(1), 249–305.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x024001249
Coghlan, D. (2019). Doing action research in your own organization (5th ed.). Sage.
Crenshaw, K. W. (2017). Race, reform, and retrenchment: Transformation and legitimation in
antidiscrimination law. In Law and social movements (pp. 475–531). Routledge.
Danielson, C. (2006). Teacher leadership that strengthens professional practice. ASCD.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Target time toward teachers. Journal of Staff Development, 20(2),
31–36.

101

Darling-Hammond, L., Sutcher, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2018). Teacher shortages in
California: Status, sources, and potential solutions [Research brief]. Learning Policy
Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/teacher-shortages-ca-solutions-brief
Davey, L. (2016). A step-by-step guide to structuring better meetings. Harvard Business
Review. https://hbr.org/2016/04/a-step-by-step-guide-to-structuring-better-meetings
Dewey, J. (1938). 1997. Experience and education. Touchstone.
Downing, J. E. (2010). Academic instruction for students with moderate to severe intellectual
disabilities in inclusive classrooms. Corwin. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483350400
Drago-Severson, E., & Blum-DeStefano, J. (2017). The self in social justice: A developmental
lens on race, identity, and transformation. Harvard Educational Review, 87(4), 457–481.
https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-87.4.457
Drago-Severson, E., & Blum-DeStefano, J. (2019). A developmental lens on social justice
leadership: Exploring the connection between meaning making and practice. Journal of
Educational Leadership and Policy Studies, 3(1).
Ferri, B. A., & Connor, D. J. (2006). Reading resistance discourses of exclusion in desegregation
and inclusion debates. Peter Lang Publishing.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). Continuum.
Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniv ed.). Continuum. (Original work
published 1970).
GCF Global. (n.d.). What is the cloud? https://bit.ly/3rXd38Q
Gould, S. J. (1978). Morton's ranking of races by cranial capacity. Unconscious manipulation of
data may be a scientific norm. Science, 200(4341), 503–509.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.347573
102

Herr, K., & Anderson, G. L. (2015). The action research dissertation: A guide for students and
faculty. Sage publications.
Howard, T.C. (2003) Culturally relevant pedagogy: Ingredients for critical teacher reflection.
Theory into Practice, 42(3), 195–202. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4203_5
Jackson, L.B., Ryndak, D.L., and Wehmeyer, M.L. (2008). The dynamic relationship between
context, curriculum, and student learning: A case for inclusive education as a
research-based practice. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities. 33(4),
175–195. https://doi-org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.2511/rpsd.33.4.175
Jones, K., & Okun, T. (2001). White supremacy culture. Dismantling racism: A workbook for
social change groups. https://bit.ly/WhiteSupCul
Kegan, R., Broderick, M., Drago-Severson, E., Helsing, D., Popp, N., & Portnow, K. (Eds.).
(2001). Toward a “new pluralism” in the ABE/ESOL classroom: Teaching to multiple
“cultures of mind” (Research Monograph of the National Center for the Study of Adult
Learning and Literacy, No. 19). World Education.
Kegan, R., & Lahey, L. L. (2009). Immunity to change: How to overcome it and unlock potential
in yourself and your organization. Harvard Business Press.
Kegan, R. (2018). What “form” transforms? A constructive-developmental approach to
transformative learning. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary Theories of Learning (2nd ed.,
pp. 29–45). Routledge.
Kokkos, A. (2019). The process of transformation: Kegan’s view through the lens of a film by
Wenders. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults,
10(2), 161–167. https://doi.org/10.3384/rela.2000-7426.RELA9140

103

Kurth, J. A., Mastergeorge, A. M. & Paschall, K. (2016). Economics and Demographic Factors
Impacting Placement of Students with Autism. Education and Training in Autism and
Developmental Disabilities, 51, 3–12.
Kurth, J. A., Ruppar, A. L., Gross Toews, S., McCabe, K. M., McQueston, J. A., & Johnston, R.
(2019). Considerations in placement decisions for students with extensive support needs:
An analysis of LRE statements. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe
Disabilities, 44(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796918825479
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding
achievement in U.S. schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035007003
Lochmiller, C. R., & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. Sage Publications.
Los Angeles Unified School District. (n.d.). About the Los Angeles Unified School District.
Retrieved September 25, 2022, from https://achieve.lausd.net/domain/4#
Los Angeles Unified School District. (2022). Enrollment [Interactive disaggregation of school
district data]. https://my.lausd.net/opendata/dashboard
Losen, D. J., Martinez, P., & Rim Shin, G.H. (2021). Disabling inequity: The urgent need for
race-conscious resource remedies. The Center for Civil Rights Remedies at The Civil
Rights Project | Proyecto Derechos Civiles. www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu
MacDougall, C., & Baum, F. (1997). The Devil’s Advocate: A Strategy to Avoid Groupthink
and Stimulate Discussion in Focus Groups. Qualitative Health Research, 7(4), 532–541.
https://doi.org/10.1177/104973239700700407

104

Marquart, M. S., & Counselman Carpenter, E. A. (2020). Engaging Adult Learners by Creating
inclusive online classroom communities.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE.
McMullin, C. (2021). Transcription and qualitative methods: Implications for third sector
research. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations
volume 34, 140–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-021-00400-3
Menchaca, M. (2012). Early racist discourses: The roots of deficit thinking. In R.R. Valencia
(Ed.), The evolution of deficit thinking: Educational thought and practice. (pp. 13–40).
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203046586
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and
Practice. CAST Professional Publishing.
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning to think like an adult: Core concepts of transformation theory. In J.
Mezirow (Ed.), Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress
(pp. 333–252). Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (2018). Contemporary theories of learning (2nd ed.). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315147277-8
Milner, A., & Jumbe, S. (2020). Using the right words to address racial disparities in COVID-19.
The Lancet. Public Health, 5(8), e419–e420. https://bit.ly/3CANLSL
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30162-6
Morgan, H. (2020). Misunderstood and mistreated: Students of color in special education. Voices
of Reform, 3(2), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.32623/3.10005
105

National Council on Disability. (2018). The segregation of students with disabilities.
www.ncd.gov/sites/default/files/NCD_Segregation-SWD_508.pdf
Noor, M. S. A. M., & Shafee, A. (2021). The role of critical friends in action research: A
framework for design and implementation. Practitioner Research, 3, 1–33.
https://doi.org/10.32890/pr2021.3.1
Ondrasek, N., Carver-Thomas, D., Scott, C., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2020). California’s
special education teacher shortage. Policy Analysis for California Education.
https://bit.ly/3Ea6R2u
Orange, T., Isken, J.A., Green, A., Parachini, N., and Francois, A. (2019, December). Coaching
for equity: Disrupt and transform practices that reveal implicit and explicit biases.
Learning Professional, 40(6), 45–49. https://bit.ly/3yJINCj
Painter, N. I. (2010). The history of White people. WW Norton & Company.
Patton Davis, L., & Museus, D. (2019). Identifying and disrupting deficit thinking. National
Center for Institutional Diversity. https://bit.ly/DisruptDeficitThinking
Rodgers, C. R. (2002). Seeing student learning: Teacher change and the role of reflection.
Harvard Educational Review, 72(2), 230–253.
Safir, S. (2017). The listening leader. Jossey-Bass.
San Francisco State University. (n.d.). Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC).
https://bit.ly/AugandAltComm
Siuty, M. B. (2019). Teacher preparation as interruption or disruption? Understanding identity
(re) constitution for critical inclusion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 81(1), 38–49.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.02.008
106

Spikes, D. D. (2018). Culturally competent and racially conscious professional development for
school leaders: A review of the literature. Teachers College Record, 120(14), 1–17.
https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811812001403
Spring, J. (2016). Deculturalization and the struggle for equality: A brief history of the education
of dominated cultures in the United States (8th ed.). Routledge.
Stahl, N. A., & King, J. R. (2020). Expanding approaches for research: Understanding and using
trustworthiness in qualitative research. Journal of Developmental Education, 44(1), 26–
28. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1320570.pdf
Sylvia Duckworth [@sylviaduckworth]. (2020, August 19). Wheel of Power/Privilege.
Instagram. https://www.instagram.com/p/CEFiUShhpUT/?hl = en
Tat, L. (2022, April 19). LAUSD fills teacher vacancies by redeploying staff. The Los Angeles
Daily News. https://bit.ly/3T4vWCT
Teaching Excellence in Adult Literacy. (2011). Adult learning theories [Fact Sheet].
https://lincs.ed.gov/sites/default/files/11_%20TEAL_Adult_Learning_Theory.pdf
United Teachers Los Angeles. (2022). UTLA files UPC as a lack of transparency by LAUSD
attempts to hide educator shortage crisis. https://utla.net/utlaupclausdvacancies
U.S. Department of Education. (2021). 43rd annual report to congress on the implementation of
the individuals with disabilities education act, 2021. https://bit.ly/3jzZ8BB
Valencia, R. R. (Ed.). (2012). The evolution of deficit thinking: Educational thought and
practice. Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203046586
Vitelli, E. M. (2015). Universal Design for Learning: Are we teaching it to preservice general
education teachers? Journal of Special Education Technology, 30(3), 166–178.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643415618931
107

Wallerstein, N., & Auerbach, E. (2004). Problem-posing at work: Popular educator's guide.
Grass Roots Press.
Wergin, J. F. (2020). Deep learning in a disorienting world. Cambridge University Press.
Wilkins, C. H. (2018). Effective engagement requires trust and being trustworthy. Medical Care,
56(Suppl 10), S6–S8. https://bit.ly/Wilkins-2018
Yu, W. M. (2018). Critical incidents as a reflective tool for professional development: An
experience with in-service teachers. Reflective Practice, 19(6), 763–776.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2018.1539652
Zoom. (2022). One platform to connect. https://zoom.us/

108

Appendix A: Instructional Meeting Agenda

109

Appendix B: My Positionality and Epistemology Influence My Teaching Practices

110

Appendix C: What Lies Beneath the Decisions and Actions I Take?

111

Appendix D: Teacher Vacancies and Substandard Credentials

Appendix E: Slow Down, Pause, Self-Talk, and Enact Informed Actions

112

Appendix F: Iterative Cycles in the Action Research Study

113

Appendix G: Research Concepts Aligned to the Iterative Cycles of the Study

114
115

Appendix H: The Social Identity Wheel

116

Appendix I: Which Person Is Most Likely? PowerPoint Slides

Appendix E: Which Person is Most Likely To? PowerPoint Slides

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This action research study explored critical reflection as an adult learning process to build awareness of deficit-based assumptions to counter and disrupt them. Literature shows many factors influence the development of personally held assumptions which in time transform into undisputed truths. Without challenging the validity of these assumptions, adults make decisions and engage in actions that are propelled by them. To explore this phenomenon further, three teaching support staff (TSS members, also known as instructional coaches) weekly for 1 hour with me, the facilitator, for seven sessions (three sessions in the first cycle, and two sessions in both Cycles 2 and 3). Transformational learning theory, constructive developmental learning theory, and critical reflection as an adult learning process informed the development of the learning experiences and andragogical moves implemented during the sessions. The emergent findings suggest that using these three adult learning theories helped all three participants make progress toward developing their awareness of the deficit-based assumptions they held of the special day class teachers they supported. These findings build on current literature on the effectiveness of using andragogy to address the needs of adult learners’ needs and the ongoing need to engage in critical reflection to best support the students they serve.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Decolonizing the classroom: moving from reflection to critical reflection

PDF

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

PDF

Disrupting cis-heteronormativity: creating safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students through a critical reflection coaching group

PDF

Critically reflective dialogue: an action research study on increasing the critical consciousness of ethnic studies teachers

PDF

Critical discourse: enacting asset orientations that disrupt dominant ideologies

PDF

Cultivating critical reflection: an action research study on teaching and supporting district intern participants through critical reflection

PDF

Cultivating a community of practice: an action research study on cultivating a community of practice that engages in trauma-informed dialogue and critical reflection

PDF

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

PDF

Promoting students' sense of belonging as a practitioner inquiry community

PDF

Turning toward practice: establishing group reflective practice among upper elementary educators

PDF

Critical pedagogy for music education: cultivating teachers’ critical consciousness through critically reflective inquiry

PDF

Critical game literacies and Afrofuturist development

PDF

Reimagining an antiracist and structurally ideological GED program

PDF

Supporting world language teachers to develop a culturally sustaining curriculum and reflect on its enactment

PDF

Mind, motivation, and meaningful learning: A cognitive science approach to learning how to learn

PDF

Critical thinking development in the 21st century college classroom

PDF

Changing the story: an action research study on utilizing culturally relevant pedagogical practice to enact a movement toward liberatory curriculum and instruction

PDF

Transformative social-emotional learning: an action research study on supporting parents in a predominantly White community…

PDF

Transformative learning: action research disrupting the status quo in literature in classrooms

PDF

A cyclical approach to professional development: a case study of the San Bernardino School District

Asset Metadata

Creator Mahoney, Elia Reyes (author)

Core Title Using critical reflection to counter and disrupt deficit-based assumptions

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-12

Publication Date 09/12/2023

Defense Date 09/12/2023

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

Tag adult learning,assumptions,critical reflection,instructional coaches,OAI-PMH Harvest

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Pascarella, John III (committee chair), Hanreddy, Amy (committee member), Slayton, Julie (committee member)

Creator Email elia.mahoney@usc.edu,ermahone@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113340375

Unique identifier UC113340375

Identifier etd-MahoneyEli-12375.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-MahoneyEli-12375.pdf

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Mahoney, Elia Reyes

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230913-usctheses-batch-1097 (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