University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Using culturally relevant pedagogy to increase access and engagement in STEM for historically underrepresented and marginalized populations

(USC Thesis Other)

Using culturally relevant pedagogy to increase access and engagement in STEM for historically underrepresented and marginalized populations

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Using Culturally Relevant Pedagogy to Increase Access and Engagement in STEM for
Historically Underrepresented and Marginalized Populations
by
Celia Eugenia Castellanos

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

August 2022

© Copyright by Celia Eugenia Castellanos 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Celia Eugenia Castellanos certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Monique Claire Datta
David Cash
Cathy Sloane Krop, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv

Abstract
As global dependence on innovation and technological advances rises, support and urgency for
quality science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education increases (Byko,
2007; Xie et al., 2015). However, systemic racism and the education debt have created access
and engagement obstacles for students of color in STEM, which has given rise to the STEM
racial gap seen through racial discrepancies in STEM achievement and engagement in STEM
careers (Corneille et al., 2020; Duncan, 2015; Ladson-Billings, 2006). This qualitative study
seeks to address the STEM gap by understanding how culturally relevant pedagogy can be used
to help secondary students of color gain access and engage in STEM education. It is guided by
three research questions. STEM educators in Baldwin Park Unified School District were
surveyed to gather data about how educators use culturally relevant pedagogy in the STEM
classroom. Surveys were used to select six STEM educators that use culturally relevant
pedagogy, of which three participated in virtual interviews via Zoom, to gather more in-depth
data regarding the research questions. Interviews were transcribed and coded for themes. All data
collected was triangulated to thematically answer the three guiding research questions.
Keywords: secondary STEM education, STEM gap, culturally relevant pedagogy

v

Dedication
To my parents, whose support and lessons have been the foundation of my passion for equity and
continued pursuit of excellence.

vi

Acknowledgements
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my dissertation committee chair, Dr.
Cathy Krop, and dissertation committee members, Dr. David Cash and Dr. Monique Datta, as
well as my colleagues at the University of Southern California. Their support and feedback were
invaluable to the development of this study. Also, I would like to thank my family and friends,
whose moral support give me the strength to pursue my dreams. Lastly, thank you to all my
students, past, present, and future. They are my inspiration and fuel my passion for the pursuit of
equity in education.
As my students know, I became an educator in South Los Angeles, the same community
in which I grew up, to disrupt the inequities in education that I witnessed as a student. I attended
a predominantly Black public elementary school in South Los Angeles. However, for secondary,
I attended magnet programs out of my community, which gave me a glimpse of the different
resources and experiences students within different communities are given. As a child, I did not
fully understand the roots of these inequities, but I knew I wanted to be part of the change.
During my undergraduate studies at the University of Pennsylvania two things occurred. First,
my understanding of racial inequities and their systemic roots increased. Second, my work-study
at a Philadelphia middle school tapped into my passion for education and allowed me to see the
similarities between South Los Angeles and West Philadelphia. After UPenn, I did not
immediately become a teacher, but found opportunities to mentor and tutor South Los Angeles
students. These opportunities quickly made me realize that little had changed since I was a child
and led me to become an educator pursuing equity for students of color. Thus, my experiences
have caused me to develop a lens that aligns with critical race theory and develop a desire to
disrupt systemic racism in education.

vii

Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. x
List of Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................... xi
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 1
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 3
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 4
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 5
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................. 6
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................... 8
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .......................................................................................... 9
Systemic Racism in Education............................................................................................ 9
STEM Education ............................................................................................................... 12
STEM Gap ........................................................................................................................ 16
Addressing the STEM Gap With Culturally Relevant Pedagogy ..................................... 19
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 24
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 25
Sample and Population ..................................................................................................... 25
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 26

viii

Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 27
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 28
Positionality ...................................................................................................................... 29
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 30
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 31
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 31
Research Question 1 Results ............................................................................................. 33
Research Question 2 Results ............................................................................................. 41
Research Question 3 Results ............................................................................................. 47
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 52
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................. 54
Findings............................................................................................................................. 55
Implications for Practice ................................................................................................... 59
Limitation and Delimitations ............................................................................................ 63
Future Research ................................................................................................................ 64
Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 66
References ..................................................................................................................................... 67
Appendix A: Survey for Baldwin Park Unified School District................................................... 73
Appendix B: Interview Protocol for Baldwin Park Unified School District ................................ 74

ix

List of Tables
Table 1: Survey Questions 1 to 4 Frequency Table 32
Table 2: Interview Participants 33
Table 3: Survey Responses Suggesting Project Based Learning 35
Table 4: Survey Responses Suggesting Growth Mindset 38
Table 5: Survey Responses Suggesting Building Community 44

x

List of Figures
Figure 1: Culturally Relevant Pedagogy in STEM Education 53
Figure B1: Interview Protocol Page 1 75
Figure B2: Interview Protocol Page 2 76
Figure B3: Interview Protocol Page 3 77

xi

List of Abbreviations
BPUSD Baldwin Park Unified School District

CRP Culturally Relevant Pedagogy

NSF National Science Foundation

STEM Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics

URM Underrepresented Racial/Ethnic Minorities
1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
During the last century, training and preparation in fields involving science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) gained popularity and importance as society became
more dependent on technology and innovation. STEM fields are seen as the jobs of the future
and require diverse individuals to develop diverse solutions for the world’s problems (Byko,
2007). In the United States, the desire to recruit diversity of thought and talent has led to
initiatives to recruit individuals from diverse racial backgrounds to work in STEM (Canning et
al., 2019; Duncan, 2015). Despite these initiatives, there continues to be racial discrepancy in
STEM fields and education, which is seen in statistically significant gaps in the participation of
White individuals in STEM courses and careers versus individuals that are Black, Latino, and
Indigenous, or people of color (Duncan, 2015; Goins, 2021). Although many initiatives have
focused on increasing the number of people of color in STEM, these initiatives have not
addressed issues of systemic racism, such as White superiority, deculturalization, and exclusion,
which contribute to the education debt (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Culturally relevant pedagogy
(CRP) can provide a solution to addressing systemic racism in STEM education; thus, this study
seeks to understand how the use of culturally relevant pedagogy can increase access and
engagement in STEM education for students of color.
Background of the Problem
Administrators from the National Science Foundation introduced the acronym STEM in
2001, however, the history and advocacy for STEM education began decades before 2001
(Hallinen, 2019). During the race to the moon, programs were created to educate and recruit
future STEM professionals, such as Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) programs that
focused on what is now known as STEM fields. Early STEM programs sought to recruit talented
2

individuals regardless of background, while systemic practices, such as segregation, limited
STEM career opportunities for people of color. Thus, systemic and social barriers to STEM
education and career opportunities have excluded and/or alienated people of color from programs
created to recruit STEM professionals (Corneille et al., 2020). The underrepresentation of
people of color in STEM fields has motivated the creation of programs and initiatives to
advocate for the increase in people of color in STEM. For example, per the National Science
Foundation’s (n.d.) website, programs targeting girls and students of color began as early as
1980, and the first planning grant to increase the number of scientists and engineers of color was
announced in 1990. However, almost half a century later, although people of color represented
approximately 34% of the population in 2017, they held 13% of the science and engineering jobs
in 2017 (National Science Board & National Science Foundation, 2020), suggesting that people
of color are still underrepresented in STEM fields (Duncan, 2015; Xie et al., 2015). Former U.S.
Secretary of Education, Duncan (2015) stated that “while 71% of White high school students
have access to the complete range of [math and science] courses—often required for college
admittance—only two-thirds of Latino students and a little more than half of Black students do”
(p. 1). The reasons for the inequities in STEM education are rooted in the historical, economic,
sociopolitical, and moral factors that create the education debt, the accumulation of resources
that should have been invested in low-income communities that has led to the racial disparities
that are seen today in the U.S. school system (Ladson-Billing, 2006; Xie et al., 2015).
Recently, with the adoption of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and Next
Generation State Standards (NGSS), urgency and support for STEM education has increased,
specifically in the areas of technology and engineering (Belland et al., 2017; Shernoff et al.,
2017). However, standards are not enough to ensure the successful outcomes of students in
3

STEM education, especially among students of color. Researchers have found that teachers’
perceptions of both their own ability and their students’ intellect have an impact on an educators’
ability to engage students in and teach STEM (Bell, 2015; Canning et al., 2019; Shernoff et al.,
2017). Since teachers’ perceptions play such an important role in STEM education, teachers’
biases and preconceived notions of students’ abilities due to their ethnic or racial backgrounds
can greatly influence a student’s access and engagement in STEM education (Canning et al.,
2019; Shernoff et al., 2017). Teachers with deficit mindsets will unintentionally communicate
their beliefs to students, affecting students negatively (Canning et al., 2019; Milner & Lomotney,
2014). Role models, such as STEM educators of color, can help students see themselves as
STEM professionals and offset the negative effects of deficit mindsets. However, in 2011, only
16% of public-school teachers were teachers of color while 41% of elementary school students
and 31% of secondary school students were students of color (Milner & Lomotney, 2014). In
addition, there is a shortage of qualified STEM teachers, which impacts schools serving
predominantly low-income students of color disproportionately due to systemic practices that
marginalize STEM educators of color, such as tokenism or the expectation to be the expert and
voice for communities of color (Duncan, 2015; Sears et al., 2021). The current teaching
environment points to how systemic racism is affecting the equitable access to STEM education.
Statement of the Problem
Much of the research on STEM education focuses on understanding the effectiveness of
STEM education and/or how teachers’ perceptions influence STEM education in the general
student population, but there is a lack of research and understanding of the experiences different
ethnic groups have within STEM education. Also, there has been a push for increasing the
number of people of color in STEM fields for over thirty years (National Science Foundation,
4

n.d.). However, to improve STEM access and engagement for students of color, it is necessary to
tackle the education debt and systemic racism within classrooms. Researchers have found that
teachers’ perceptions can influence their ability to teach STEM (Bell, 2015; Canning et al., 2019;
Shernoff et al., 2017), which makes teachers’ biases and perceptions of their students even more
important. Culturally relevant pedagogy has been successful in engaging students of color and
calls for cultural competence in the general classroom (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Yet, a better
understanding of culturally relevant pedagogy in the STEM classroom is needed to help
empower STEM educators.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the study is to understand how educators can use culturally relevant
pedagogy to help secondary students of color gain access to and engage in STEM education.
Black, Latino, and Indigenous students in the United States have historically been
underrepresented in STEM competitions, programs, and fields (Canning et al., 2019; Duncan,
2015; NSF, n.d.). Some of the obstacles or barriers to STEM education for students of color are
caused by the effects of systemic racism, for example, hegemonic curriculums and urban schools
with large populations of low-income students of color that lack economic and social capital.
Educators can help counterbalance these effects with CRP, since research shows that CRP has
successfully engaged students of color in academic success in order to decrease the achievement
gap and counterbalance the effects of deculturalization and systemic racism.
With this in mind, it is necessary to identify the teaching practices and strategies that can
help increase access and engagement in STEM for students of color in order to better understand
what CRP looks like in STEM. A better understanding of what CRP looks like in the STEM
classroom can help STEM educators disrupt systemic practices that maintain the status quo and
5

racial inequities. Since systemic practices need to be disrupted, it is assumed that racism is a
social construct and normal. In addition, this study also assumes that the experiences of students
of color in STEM education are different from the general population. These assumptions are in
line with critical race theory, which has the following five tenets: racism is normal, interest
convergence, race is a social construct, intersectionality and anti-essentialism, and counter-
narratives (Ladson-Billings, 2013). Thus, critical race theory will be used as the theoretical
framework of this study.
To guide the study, the following research questions are used:
1. What teaching strategies help historically marginalized secondary (6–12) students in
the United States gain access to STEM education and fully engage in the scientific
method and/or engineering design process?
2. How do secondary STEM educators in the United States implement culturally
relevant pedagogy to develop problem solving and critical thinking skills in
historically underrepresented, marginalized student populations?
3. How do secondary STEM educators in the United States facilitate students'
understanding and critique of inequities within educational and social institutions
(culturally relevant pedagogy's third tenet) in order to increase access and/or
engagement in STEM among historically underrepresented, marginalized
populations?
Significance of the Study
This study provides understanding of how culturally relevant pedagogy and culturally
responsive teaching strategies can be used and/or implemented to increase access and
engagement in STEM education for students of color by learning from STEM educators that are
6

currently providing access to STEM education and engaging students of color in STEM. Among
the STEM education research gaps identified by Brown (2012) are descriptive classroom
applications and the effectiveness of STEM education initiatives in classroom settings including
teacher reflections of STEM teaching and learning. This study addresses these gaps by providing
qualitative insights on effective teaching strategies and classroom applications that engage
students of color in STEM education.
Definition of Terms
• Common Core Standards are a set of learning standards for English and Mathematics
launched in 2009 in an effort to standardize K–12 instruction in the United States
(Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2021).
• Critical race theory is a theoretical lens that developed in the 1970s, which sees
racism as ordinary and that the White over color system serves important purposes for
the dominant group. It has five basic tenets: racism is normal, interest convergence,
race is a social construct, intersectionality and anti-essentialism, and counter-
narratives. (Delgado, & Stefancic, 2017; Ladson-Billings, 2013).
• Culturally relevant pedagogy is a pedagogy of opposition committed to the
empowerment of the collective, not just the individual. Three tenets serve as the
pillars of culturally relevant pedagogy: (a) academic success for all students; (b)
students’ cultural competence; and (c) development of students’ critical/sociopolitical
consciousness through which they can critique the status quo and institutional
inequities (Ladson-Billings, 1995).
• Culturally responsive teaching strategies are teaching strategies that make content
and learning experiences culturally relevant to learners (Corneille et al., 2020).
7

• Deculturalization is the process through which the cultural traditions and identity of a
group of individuals is stripped away from them through social and systemic practices
that see that cultural as a deficit (Spring, 2016; Hollins, 2015)
• Education debt is the compounded, long-term effects of lost schooling resources or
investment due to inequitable practices (i.e. segregation, racism, and classism) which
have led to social problems (i.e. crime, low productivity, low wages, etc.) that require
on-going public investment (Ladson-Billings, 2006).
• Historically underrepresented minority students are students from racial groups that
historically have had a representation in STEM fields that is statistically lower than
their general population representation, such as Black, Latino, and Native American
students (Canning et al., 2019).
• Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) are a set of K–12 science standards
launched in 2013 that combine three dimensions to learning science: disciplinary core
ideas, science and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts (NGSS Lead
States, 2013).
• Project based learning is a teaching approach where students learn by responding to
an actively engaging, real-world, personally meaningful complex question, problem,
or challenge (Buck Institure for Education, n.d).
• STEM education are curricular and teaching practices that integrate science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics to emphasize logical and conceptual
connections between different fields of STEM (Xie et al., 2015).
8

Organization of the Study
The first chapter of this study provided an introduction to the problem, the racial gaps
within STEM education, and discussed the purpose of the study and the research questions
guiding the study. In Chapter Two, literature around the problem is reviewed in order to give a
broader understanding of critical race theory, culturally relevant pedagogy, and STEM education.
Chapter Three explains the methods followed to conduct this study and collect data. Data
findings and results for each research question are explained and described in Chapter Four.
Lastly, Chapter Five concludes this study with a discussion of how this study’s findings connect
to prior literature, implications of this research for practice, and areas of future research.
9

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
The United States’ education system is complex and has been influenced by historical
and political practices that have created a system with the racial inequities and gaps that are seen
in present day school systems (Hollins, 2015; Ladson-Billings, 2006; Milner & Lomotey, 2014;
Spring, 2016; Xie et al., 2015). Concurrently, during the last 50 years, the rise of technological
advances and a political desire to remain competitive in a global market have fueled support for
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education. When systemic racism
meshes with an urgency for STEM education, students of color, specifically Black, Latino, and
Native American students, are left behind, which is seen year after year with a STEM racial gap
that does not narrow (Canning et al., 2019; Ducan, 2015; Goins, 2021; Olszewski-Kubilius et al.,
2017). In order to address the STEM gap, a lens that addresses systemic racism in schools and a
pedagogy that focuses on students as assets while recognizing students’ counternarratives in
schools is needed. To explore the factors and structures impacting the access and engagement of
students of color in STEM, this chapter will present literature on systemic racism in education,
STEM education, the STEM racial gap, and how culturally relevant pedagogy could be a
solution.
Systemic Racism in Education
In education, systemic racism is seen through the practices, structures, and norms of
school systems that disadvantage and/or oppress students of color. In the United States, White
superiority and deficit beliefs fueled deculturalization creating systemic practices that
disenfranchise students of color. The aggregate effects of years of such practices have led to the
education debt.
Deculturalization
10

The United States’ education system has a long history of deculturalization practices,
which continue to affect school systems today. Deculturalization practices are a “conscious
attempt to replace one culture and language with another that is considered ‘superior’” (Spring,
2016, p. 1). In the United States, White superiority and deficit beliefs have led to systemic
practices that attempt to replace the culture and language of students of color with the culture of
White protestants. For example, boarding schools created by White protestants removed Native
American children from their families and tribes to civilize Native Americans or have Native
American children undergo a process of deculturalization (Spring, 2016). Similarly, prior to the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, students of color were punished for speaking their home language at
school, which sent the message that English is superior (Spring, 2016). These practices led to
curriculums and teaching practices that value Eurocentric culture and portray cultures of color
from a deficit mindset.
Furthermore, red-lining and school segregation caused an inequitable distribution of
resources along racial lines causing schools that serve predominantly students of color to have
less resources than schools serving predominantly White students (Spring, 2016). Since schools
have different resources, schools are unable to offer students the same quality of education,
which means that students of color are denied access to high quality education (Spring, 2016).
Today, the inequities in education allow individuals in positions of power who can offer
resources to dictate whose culture is valued, just like what occurred with Native American
boarding schools, thus, continuing deculturalization practices (Spring, 2016; Yosso, 2005).
Deficit mindsets do not only affect students and the quality of education offered to
students, but also parent involvement (Milner & Lomotey, 2014). Milner and Lomotey (2014)
state that “studies and parent involvement programs which assume deficit stances unintentionally
11

position schools as experts and do not acknowledge the strengths that parents have” (p. 178). A
stance resulting in one-size fits all approaches do not support the needs of culturally and
linguistically diverse communities, instead systematically creates a deficit narrative for
communities of color written from a White, middle-class perspective. Such narratives are not
written out of intentional malice, but they support assimilation ideals where communities of
color abandon their home cultures to adopt the dominant U.S. culture —White protestant values
and practices (Milner & Lomotey, 2014; Hollins, 2015).
In the early twentieth century, a modified version of cultural assimilation was introduced
as the melting pot, which is the idea that immigrants no longer have to abandon their native
culture, but instead that a common culture would be formed from the best attributes from all
cultures in society (Hollins, 2015). In practice the idea of the melting pot became a myth, since
the common culture continued to value and follow European cultural norms, practices, and
beliefs (Hollins, 2015). Schools reflect the cultural norms of its society, thus, schools in the
United States reflect “that the interconnected beliefs and values associated with Protestantism,
capitalism, and republicanism are present in the focus on individualism, competition, and
equality,” resulting in a cultural disconnect for students of color who “more frequently
experience feelings of alienation in school” (Hollins, 2015, p. 37).
Education Debt
Deculturalization has led to systemic practices and racial inequities that in the short term
are observed through racial achievement gaps, but in the long-term accumulate into the education
debt (Ladson-Billings, 2006; Milner & Lomotey, 2014). Initiatives, such as integration, were
expected to resolve low achievement of Black students, instead integration encouraged
assimilation and caused urban schools to become “more racially concentrated and more
12

oppressive” (Milner & Lomotey, 2014, p. 25). Integration efforts were founded on the idea that
White schools offered superior education, however, during implementation, integration efforts
did not address the historical and systemic causes for the differences in education quality, such as
the differences in economic resources (Milner & Lomotey, 2014). The lack of focus on historical
and systemic causes of the achievement gap created a deficit narrative that focuses on short-term
solutions and metrics that compare students of color to European American students instead of
comparing performance to an expected level of excellence without addressing the needs of
schools within communities of color (Ladson-Billings, 2006; Milner & Lomotey, 2014). Thus,
year after year, there is an accumulation of forgone schooling resources that could have been
invested in schools with high concentrations of low-income, students of color, leading to a
variety of social problems that require on-going public investment and reduce the resources that
could be used to address the achievement gap (Ladson-Billings, 2006). Ladson-Billings (2006)
calls the accumulation of the forgone schooling resources the education debt and points out that
to address the long-term problems creating the education debt, the focus needs to shift from
short-term solutions addressing the achievement gap to long-term solutions addressing the
historical, economic, sociopolitical, and moral factors influencing the education debt.
STEM Education
Defining STEM Education
Although science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education has existed and
grown in popularity with the growing importance of technological advances and innovation, it
was not until 2001 that the acronym STEM was first introduced (Hallinen, 2019; National
Science Foundation, n.d). The acronym only defines STEM as science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics, which leaves room for interpretation and different definitions of what STEM
13

education is. For example, in practice, what is referred to as STEM differs at the elementary,
secondary, and higher education level. The elementary grades (K–6) often use STEM as a
synonym of the general math and science curriculum and research at this level focuses on
participation and performance in math and science in general (Xie et al., 2015). The secondary
level (7–12) offers multiple tracks in math and science and elective courses in social science,
computer science, and applied topics in engineering and technology (Xie et al., 2015). Higher
education has sequences of courses in specific fields that are defined as STEM or non-STEM.
Per Xie et al. (2015), the different approaches to defining STEM education can be generalized
into two. The first approach lumps together different science, technology, engineering, and math
disciplines with the assumption that their shared importance will promote technological
innovation, competitiveness, and long-term national prosperity and security (Xie et al., 2015).
The second approach emphasizes logical and conceptual connections across different STEM
fields to treat STEM education as a whole that requires curriculum and pedagogical coherence
(Xie et al., 2015). For this study, STEM education is defined using the second approach, as a
whole that makes logical and conceptual connections across different STEM fields to expose and
prepare secondary students for the available STEM specific sequences in higher education.
Renewed Urgency and Support
In 2005, a report published by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, Rising above the
gathering storm, renewed political and private sector interest and support for STEM education
prompting several public and private sector initiatives. The 690-page report quantified the impact
a decline in STEM literacy would have and warned of dire consequences for the economy if
nothing changed (Byko, 2007). Due to the report, a convocation was hosted in September 2006,
which received more interest than expected (Byko, 2007). Also, during his 2006 State of the
14

Union, former President George W. Bush introduced the American Competitiveness Initiative,
which proposed doubling funding for basic research over 10 years and new incentives to attract
and retain qualified math and science teachers (Byko, 2007). However, in 2010, a second report
found that little changed between 2005 and 2010 and called for funding to increase skills of
current teachers, to increase the number of students enrolled in Advanced Placement courses,
and the number of teachers qualified to teach Advanced Placement courses (Erik, 2010).
More recent studies continue to find a need to improve and/or expand STEM education.
In 2019, Emerson conducted a survey where it found that six out of 10 Americans are interested
in STEM careers, but only four in 10 felt encouraged to pursue a STEM career (Emerson, 2019).
Kathy Button Bell, senior vice president and chief marketing officer for Emerson, used the
survey results to emphasize that “empowering individuals of all ages and backgrounds with the
tools necessary to thrive in STEM is a crucial step in solving the growing talent gap across
several key industries” (Emerson Global, 2019, p. 1). Although reports and studies urge for a
focus on STEM education to maintain the competitiveness of the U.S. economy and increase the
STEM labor market, few provide research on how to improve STEM education. A study of
STEM education literature intended to explore the STEM education research base found that
more research is needed in descriptive classroom applications for practicing teachers and in
rigorous qualitative/ quantitative research projects (Brown, 2012).
Teaching Challenges in STEM Education
A teacher’s ability to teach STEM is impacted by their perceptions of their own ability
and understanding of STEM education. Research studies on the perceptions of STEM educators
have found that teachers’ confidence and knowledge in STEM influences their ability to teach
and embrace STEM education (Bell, 2015; Shernoff et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2011). In a
15

qualitative case study of three middle school STEM teachers in the same high-needs urban
school, Wang et al. (2011) found that teachers’ beliefs about the value and purpose of STEM
influences how teachers integrate STEM into their practice. Additionally, they found that
professional development is needed to make STEM integration sustainable (Wang et al., 2011).
Similarly, Bell (2015) found four distinct ways in which secondary design and technology
teachers in England and Wales perceive and understand STEM, which impacted how efficiently
teachers teach STEM. For example, teachers with a limited understanding of STEM have limited
success (Bell, 2015). In a qualitative study of 22 teachers and 4 administrators in an East Coast
U.S. state, Shernoff et al. (2017) found that one of the biggest challenges to the implementation
of integrated STEM is understanding and/or knowledge of integrated STEM. Among other
challenges identified by Shernoff et al. (2017) are also a need to shift students’ and teachers’
mindsets regarding the role of the teacher from a vessel of knowledge to that of a facilitator and
teacher training that focuses on student-centered pedagogy and cross curricular approaches.
Similarly, by studying the perspectives of preservice teachers of color enrolled in an elementary
science methods course, Mensah and Jackson (2018) found that preservice teachers of color that
had experienced exclusion from the science curriculum as students needed to shift their
perspectives to take ownership of science and become empowered to call out hegemonic science
curriculum. The experiences of preservice teachers of color in the elementary science methods
course helped participants shift their perspective and see themselves as scientist and future
science educators (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). Thus, it is important that STEM educators receive
professional development that allows them to deepen their understanding and knowledge of
STEM and provides teachers with a clear picture of what is STEM education.
16

STEM Gap
Racial Gap in STEM Access and Engagement
Currently, a racial gap exists in STEM that can be observed by looking at different types
of data points. For example, there are discrepancies in the access students of color have to high
school STEM courses and activities (Ducan, 2015). Data from standardized test scores and
course grades related to STEM show a racial achievement gap (Canning et al., 2019; Olszewski-
Kubilius et al., 2017). In addition to discrepancies within K–12 education, there is also a
discrepancy in the number of people of color pursing STEM careers in higher education (Goins,
2021).
In a 2015 Los Angeles Times article, Arne Duncan, former U.S. Secretary of Education,
noted that 71% of White high school students had access to gateway math and science courses
while only 66% of Latino and 50% of Black students had access to gateway math and science
courses. According to Duncan (2015), the discrepancy has worsened with teacher shortages in
math, science, and computer education, which disproportionately affect high need schools with
large populations of low-income students of color. Discrepancies in access to STEM courses in
K–12 create barriers for students of color to participate in STEM careers and fields in higher
education, which causes underrepresentation of people of color in STEM fields. For example,
Goins (2021) points out that while the percent of Blacks receiving doctorates in the mathematical
sciences has increased, it is a minimal increase compared to the increase of Whites receiving
doctorates.
Although Olszewski-Kubilius et al. (2017) also point out that students of color are less
likely than their White counterparts to have access to more advanced STEM courses, they also
identify that achievement gaps, especially in math, widen as students go from kindergarten to
17

12th grade along racial and income levels. Olszewski-Kubilius et al. (2017) conducted a
longitudinal study of Project Excite, a program that seeks to prepare third to eighth grade
students for advance math and science courses by engaging students in supplemental math and
science instruction and enrichment activities. Their study found that Project Excite reduced the
math and science achievement gap along racial and income lines, suggesting that engaging
students of color in STEM can reduce the achievement gap in STEM.
Furthermore, Canning et al. (2019) found that the STEM racial achievement gap is also
influenced by the mindsets of instructors. They studied the role of faculty members’ beliefs and
mindsets in the motivation and academic achievement of students of color and found that the
racial achievement gap was nearly twice as large in courses taught by professors with a fixed
mindset than professors with a growth mindset. Their findings are consistent with the cues
hypothesis, which suggests that threatening situational cues can cause students of color to
become concerned about being judged in terms of ability stereotypes resulting in loss of
motivation and intellectual underperformance causing larger racial achievement gaps (Canning et
al., 2019). In addition, Canning et al. (2019) also looked at student evaluations of fixed versus
growth mindset faculty and found that fixed mindset professors used less motivating pedagogical
practices.
Thus, the STEM racial gap is influenced by structural factors that influence students
access to STEM, but also more complex systemic factors that affect students’ engagement in
STEM, such as the beliefs and mindsets of educators. The combination of both structural and
systemic factors creates barriers to education access and opportunity for students of color
throughout the education system, especially in STEM fields (Corneille et al., 2020). Due to the
complexity of the factors affecting the STEM gap, Corneille et al. (2020) recommend a holistic
18

approach to STEM learning that includes structurally and culturally responsive STEM education
strategies that address the barriers to STEM education for students of color. They outline the
following four structural and systemic changes to address barriers to STEM education: racial
equity and anti-racism training in teacher preparation programs, opportunities for students to
explore STEM applications to solve community problems, equitable distribution of STEM
education funding, and increasing the role of educators of color in developing pedagogies and
providing leadership in STEM that reflects students’ backgrounds (Corneille et al., 2020).
Theoretical Framework of Critical Race Theory for Understanding Gap in STEM Access
Racism towards Black, Latino, and Native American people and stereotypes about the
ability of students belonging to these racial groups can explain the racial STEM Gap. In the
1970s, many activists and scholars noticed that many of the advances from the civil rights era
had stalled or were being rolled back with subtler forms of racism that required new theories or
strategies to combat (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). A collection of activists and scholars studied
the relationship between race, racism, and power and how to transform this relationship, giving
rise to critical race theory (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017; Ladson-Billings, 2013). Critical race
theorist believe that racism is “the common, everyday experience of most people of color” in the
United States and “that our system of White-over-color ascendancy serves important purposes,
both psychic and material, for the dominant group” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017, p. 8). The idea
that racism is normal is one of the five tenets of critical race theory; the other four tenets are:
interest convergence, race is a social construct, intersectionality and anti-essentialism, and
counter-narrative (Ladson-Billings, 2013). In education, a critical race theory lens has been used
to discuss racism in educational theory and practice, which includes questioning Anglocentric
19

curriculum and stating that many educators apply a deficit theory approach to teaching students
of color (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017).
Using a critical race theory lens, the racial STEM gap can be attributed to Anglocentric
STEM curriculums and teaching practices that apply a deficit approach with students of color,
which limit the access and engagement students of color have in STEM education. The critical
race theory tenets help deepen the understanding of how racism causes the racial STEM gap. For
example, students counternarrative experiences with mainstream curriculum help pinpoint
hegemonic curriculums that limit access to STEM content. Similarly, intersectionality and anti-
essentialism points to how underrepresented marginalized students often have multiple identities
that can compound the effects of oppressive, deficit practices (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017).
However, as Tenets 2 and 3 suggest, society needs to be interested in challenging the status quo
and changing the current social constructs of racism (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). At the
moment, the social interest in challenging the status quo can be the economic desire to stay
competitive (Byko, 2007; Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). Thus, the five tenets of critical race
theory offer a broader perspective of the complex issues causing the racial STEM gap and
avenues for possible solutions.
Addressing the STEM Gap With Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
What Is Culturally Relevant Pedagogy?
In the 1990s, Gloria Ladson-Billings’ research led her to develop the term culturally
relevant pedagogy (CRP). Ladson-Billings (1995) conducted a 3-year study of eight successful
teachers of Black students and found that the participating teachers shared philosophical and
ideological beliefs of the teaching practice. The shared pedagogy was a pedagogy of opposition
committed to collective, not individual, empowerment and shared three components (Ladson-
20

Billings, 1995). The three components of CRP are that students experience academic success,
teachers and students maintain and develop cultural competence, and developing the critical
consciousness of students to challenge the status quo of the current social order (Ladson-Billings,
1995). However, in practice, CRP has been distorted and simplified to the idea of superficially
adding images of people of color to the classroom without addressing the sociopolitical
dimension of the work. When reflecting about CRP in practice, Ladson-Billings (2014) points
out that “many practitioners … seem stuck in very limited and superficial notions of culture” and
“few have taken up the sociopolitical dimensions of the work, instead dulling its critical edge or
omitting it altogether” (p. 77). Ladson-Billings (2014), then, expands that practitioners have
focused on concepts of celebrating culture and/or adding cultural images to learning spaces
without making changes to the curriculum to make it more accessible to students of different
cultural backgrounds, which is a distortion of Tenet 2. Furthermore, practitioners are not creating
spaces or learning opportunities where students can critically address social issues that impact
students, ignoring Tenet 3.
Additionally, further research is pushing the boundaries and broadening the definition of
culture (Ladson-Billing, 2014). For example, Paris and Alim (2014) expanded the definition of
culture to include multiplicities of identities, acknowledging that individuals have multiple
identities from which they interact with the greater society. With their work, they commit to
move away from a duality that measures others against White middle-class norms and focuses on
achievement gaps, which perpetuate deficit thinking (Paris & Alim, 2014). Instead, they push for
a deeper understanding of cultural diversity that acknowledges the assets of different cultural
identities, including youth culture. Similarly, the work of McCarty and Lee (2014) focused on
indigenous people reclaiming and restoring cultures in different spaces. McCarty and Lee (2014)
21

acknowledge the effects of colonization and deculturalization among indigenous populations and
focus on the revitalization of language as an important component to reclaiming indigenous
cultures. Their work highlights the importance of the sociopolitical aspect of CRP, since their
work gives a voice to indigenous experiences during colonization, a counternarrative to the
White protestant narrative (McCarty & Lee, 2014).
Thus, although additional research has caused the original pedagogical idea introduced by
Ladson-Billings (1995) to evolve to incorporate more fluid identities and broaden into culturally
sustaining pedagogies, CRP focuses on racial and ethnic cultures (Ladson-Billings, 2014).
Educators using CRP in their teaching practice need to have the ability to link learning with a
deep understanding of and appreciation for culture, see their students as sources and resources of
knowledge and skills, and be willing to focus on community- and student-driven learning on top
of the demands of the education system, such as external assessments, which reaffirms the need
for practices that address all three components of CRP (Ladson-Billings, 2014).
Successful Examples of CRP
Culturally relevant pedagogy can successfully address racial achievement gaps and create
nurturing, supportive learning environments for students of color (Dee & Penner, 2017; Jett et
al., 2015). Dee and Penner (2017) estimated the casual effects of an ethnic studies course
developed from a culturally relevant pedagogical stance. The course’s program of study offered
students an interdisciplinary multicultural education that emphasized the historical struggles and
social movements of racial and ethnic minorities (Dee & Penner, 2017). Dee and Penner (2017)
found that the ethnic studies curriculum increased student attendance, increased students’ GPA
by 1.4 grade points, and increased the number of credits students earned. The research of Jett et
al. (2015) explicitly recommends implementing CRP to create supportive environments for
22

students of color. Based on their research, Jett et al. (2015) recommend four strategies to create a
supportive learning environment for Black male students: develop caring relationships and set
high expectations, build on out of school experiences and community funds of knowledge,
implement CRP throughout instructions, and disrupt prejudice of mathematics as a White
institutional space. Although one of their recommendations explicitly state CRP, the other three
recommendations also align with the three components of CRP (Jett et al., 2015; Ladson-
Billings, 1995). Royal and Gibson (2017) use historical narratives of Black educators to research
CRP in hyper-standardized, hyper-accountable neoliberal school environments. Although hyper-
standardized, hyper-accountable neoliberal environments disenfranchise and alienate students,
Royal and Gibson (2017) argue that highly skilled, strategic educators can and should implement
CRP to implement more holistic, inclusive teaching approaches otherwise “students from
historically marginalized communities will continue to appear as standardized failures” (Royal &
Gibson, 2017, p. 19).
Glimpses of CRP in STEM
Some STEM practitioners are using culturally responsive teaching strategies, which
means they are using at least one component of CRP, cultural competence, in STEM. A Santa
Ana College Professor of Mathematics uses culturally responsive teaching strategies to engage or
re-engage students of color with math content (Romero, 2021). For example, Professor Romero
(2021) uses a strategy called first impressions to give his students a list of facts about himself.
The list purposefully includes some details with which students can connect to validate students’
culture within the classroom and build community. Another strategy he uses is windows, mirrors,
and doors, where he gives students snippets of an article or data, so that students can use their
funds of knowledge to make sense of the data presented and ask questions, which provides
23

students with low-stake opportunities to experience success with math content (Romero, 2021).
Both of these strategies allow the professor to address and implement the second tenet of CRP,
cultural competence, since the strategies give students’ different cultural perspectives a place in
the math classroom. Although educators understand some principles of CRP and its benefit for
students, Brown et al. (2019) found that teachers do not always know how to match theory to
practice, but the disconnect between theory and practice can be minimized with professional
development on CRP. Brown et al. (2019) used interview and video data in a yearlong
qualitative study to explore how professional development on CRP affected the instruction of
nine elementary STEM teachers. All teachers that participated in the qualitative study had
received previous training on CRP, but at the start of the study were unclear on how to apply the
theoretical knowledge in their practice (Brown et al., 2019). Findings from video analysis found
that after receiving professional development on the application of CRP, teachers made
improvements in incorporating CRP into their teaching practice (Brown et al., 2019).
Furthermore, Van et al. (2018) collaborated with elementary teachers at urban, Title 1 schools to
develop integrated STEM lessons. Through their work, they found that integrated STEM
instruction in elementary classrooms is intertwined with culturally responsive teaching, since
engagement in culturally responsive teaching can enhance the design of STEM lessons by
making lessons meaningful to the specific learners in the classroom. Van et al. (2018) also
highlight that it is not enough to expose students to STEM, but students need to become
interested and engaged in STEM learning opportunities, which can occur when students are
given an authentic problem in their local community that can be address within a STEM lesson.
Thus, there are elementary and higher education STEM educators that are successfully using
CRP to increase access and engagement of students of color in STEM.
24

Conclusion
This Chapter examined literature on systemic racism in education, STEM education, the
racial STEM gap, and how a critical race theory lens can help explain the complex systemic
racism within the United States school system. Deculturalization practices and the education debt
have created systemic racism that oppresses students of color, specifically Black, Latino, and
Native American, and can be observed through the STEM gap. However, the use of culturally
relevant pedagogy can disrupt systemic racism in schools and increase access and engagement in
STEM for underrepresented marginalized students, since it allows teachers to intentionally
address inequities with students to develop a sociopolitical consciousness. STEM educators and
programs currently using CRP in their practice are experiencing success with engaging students
of color, which further supports that CRP can be a solution to disrupting the racial STEM gap.
The following chapter, Chapter Three, discusses the methodology used to answer the research
questions guiding this study.
25

Chapter Three: Methodology
Although there is research on how educators’ (teachers and professors) perceptions can
impact ethnic minorities, there is a lack of research to help educators understand what teaching
strategies they can use to increase access and engagement in Science, Technology, Engineering,
and Mathematics (STEM) (Brown, 2012; Canning et al., 2019; Shernoff et al., 2017). With this
in mind, this study has been developed as a qualitative study to help gain understanding on how
culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) can be used to increase access and engagement in STEM in
order to address the STEM racial gap at the secondary education level.
Sample and Population
For this study, secondary STEM educators at Baldwin Park Unified School District were
surveyed. Secondary is being defined as grades seven through twelve, thus participants were
selected from the five middle schools and three high schools at Baldwin Park Unified School
District. The student populations of the eight schools were 84% to 97% Latino, 0% to 2% Black,
and 80% to 100% low-income in the 2019–2020 school year. Secondary STEM educators were
surveyed to gather preliminary data. Survey respondents were asked to indicate their interest in
participating in an approximately 45-to-60-minute interview. Of the 29 STEM educators who
responded to the survey, six provided contact information and three agreed to participate in a
virtual interview. Originally, the study aimed to select approximately eight STEM educators
currently using a teaching philosophy that aligns with CRP to participate in virtual interviews.
Although multiple attempts were made to engage additional educators in an interview, due to the
COVID-19 pandemic and other constraints on their time, additional educators were not able to
participate. The three educators who did participate taught high school STEM courses and
indicated that they are educators who are reflecting on or using culture to inform their teaching
26

practice. Also, all interviewees had over three years of experience in engaging students of color
in STEM, which means that the interviewees’ experience can offer insights about strategies that
can be used to provide access to and engage students in STEM education.
Instrumentation
Survey
All Baldwin Park Unified School District secondary STEM educators were emailed a
survey (appendix A) through their work email addresses. The purpose of the survey was to
collect preliminary data on STEM teaching strategies and educators’ teaching philosophy. The
first two questions asked non-sensitive demographic data and questions three to six asked about
educator teaching practices. The Culturally Responsive Teaching Survey (Rhode, 2017), which
has a Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient of 0.752, was used to inform and create questions three to
six. Questions 7 to 10 were open-ended questions regarding teaching strategies aligned to
Research Question 1. Due to the open-ended nature of these questions, respondents provided
data that helped inform Research Question 2. Lastly, Question 11 asked respondents if they
would be willing to participate in an interview to gather contact information from individuals
willing to participate. Survey respondents that were not willing to participate in an interview
submitted survey responses anonymously without providing contact information.
Interviews
The research questions of this study focused on understanding how culturally relevant
pedagogy and culturally responsive teaching strategies are used to provide access and engage
students of color in STEM education. In order to learn about and understand the teaching
strategies that educators use, educators currently engaging students of color in STEM at Baldwin
Park Unified School District participated in one 45-to-60-minute semi-structured virtual
27

interview. Interviews were virtual in order to follow social distancing guidelines established by
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) due to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic.
The interview protocol (appendix B) consists of three sets of questions aligned to each research
question. The first question in each set was used to open that set of questions. Participants’
responses were used to determine probing questions to be asked and in what order. All
participants’ identities are kept confidential by using numeric labels and findings are reported
with gender neutral pronouns.
Data Collection
The survey was administered with a Google Form to make it easy for individuals to
access and participate in the survey. A Google Form allowed participants to respond on a variety
of devices. In order to ensure participants confidentially, the Google Form was set to not collect
emails, unless participants were willing to participate in an interview.
To begin the recruitment phase of the study, the survey was emailed to Baldwin Park
Unified School District secondary STEM educators. Data was collected for a period of three
weeks to give individuals an opportunity to respond to the survey. After 3 weeks, participants
who indicated they were willing to participate in an interview were contacted, provided with
more details about the study, asked about interview availability, and if they were still willing to
participate. Data from survey respondents not willing to participate in an interview were used to
give initial insights on teaching strategies and as a source of discrepant data, or data that does not
fit developing conclusions (Maxwell, 2013).
In order to collect rich data from interviews, upon permission granted by the interviewee,
virtual interviews were recorded using the Zoom recording tool. Recordings were used to
transcribe interviews to produce rich, descriptive notes (Maxwell, 2013). Transcriptions and
28

recordings were saved with numeric labels to help keep interview participants’ identity
confidential. Numeric labels were used instead of pseudonyms to discourage the use of names
and encourage the use of gender-neutral pronouns throughout the study, thus helping maintain
the confidentially of participants.
Data Analysis
After collecting data, data was transcribed and coded to find themes. Themes regarding
teaching strategies were used to respond to Research Question 1, what teaching strategies help
historically marginalized secondary (6–12) students gain access to STEM education and fully
engage in the scientific method and/or engineering design process? The data was triangulated
with survey data collected to find common themes, discrepancies, alternative explanations, and
to help identify strategies that are used specifically with students of color and not with the
general population.
Themes regarding culture, problem solving skills, and critical thinking skills were used to
respond to Research Question 2, how do STEM educators implement culturally relevant
pedagogy to develop problem solving and critical thinking skills in historically underrepresented,
marginalized student populations? Themes regarding social inequities and student empowerment
were used to answer Research Question 3, how do STEM educators facilitate students'
understanding and critique of inequities within educational and social institutions (culturally
relevant pedagogy's third tenet) in order to increase access and/or engagement in STEM among
historically underrepresented, marginalized populations? Data that seems not to fit one of the
first three research questions was not ignored. Instead, it was further analyzed as discrepant
evidence and/or negative cases (Maxwell, 2013).
29

To address the reliability and validity of the data analysis, respondent validation was used
(Maxwell, 2013). Data findings and conclusions were shared with Baldwin Park Unified School
District interviewees to obtain feedback from them and ensure that their experiences and ideas
have been correctly interpreted. Furthermore, as the researcher, I engaged in constant reflection
in order to minimize the effects of my positionality on my research and ensure that I produce
reliable and valid findings.
Positionality
I am a STEM educator. Most of my classroom experience has been serving 7th and 8th
graders that are predominantly Latino and Black within Title 1 schools. Approximately, 85% of
my students were Latino, and the other fifteen percent were Black. As a teacher, I began seeing
the effects of the STEM gap when I noticed that most of my students had not engaged in a
science project, few had engaged in learning activities that challenged them to think critically,
and the majority expected teacher-focused instruction involving rote-learning activities.
However, I knew that my students were capable of rigorous inquiry-based learning, I just had to
find the right scaffolds and learning activities. My belief in their ability is rooted in the fact that I
am from the same community and grew up seeing inequities in learning opportunities that limit
the potential of students of color, especially within schools with large percentages of Black and
Latino students. Furthermore, I grew up observing how relatives in Central America were able to
grasp math and science concepts while my Latino counterparts in the United States struggled
with these same concepts. Due to this background and my experiences with my students, I have
come to see that the underlying difference is culture and the different manners in which racism
has affected the systems of the United States and Latin American countries. With this in mind, I
30

am heavily interested in how culturally relevant pedagogy can help us, educators, address issues
of systemic racism and educational inequities.
Summary
This study was designed as a qualitative research study to align with the research
questions, which seek to understand STEM education for students of color. A survey was used to
collect data from Baldwin Park Unified School District educators teaching STEM to a
predominantly Latino population. The survey was also used to purposefully recruit and select
interview participants that were currently using a teaching philosophy that aligns with culturally
relevant pedagogy. The identity of educators participating in interviews were kept confidential
by labeling data with numeric labels and using gender neutral pronouns. Data from surveys and
interviews were coded for themes and triangulated. The validity and reliability of this study was
addressed by seeking feedback from respondents on conclusions and through constant reflection
to reduce potential researcher bias due to my positionality.

31

Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this qualitative study is to understand how culturally relevant pedagogy
(CRP) can increase access and engagement of students of color in secondary science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education. Themes around teaching strategies
and implementation of all three tenets of culturally relevant pedagogy were found by coding and
triangulating survey and interview data, guided by the following research questions:
1. What teaching strategies help historically marginalized secondary (6–12) students in
the United States gain access to STEM education and fully engage in the scientific
method and/or engineering design process?
2. How do secondary STEM educators in the United States implement culturally
relevant pedagogy to develop problem solving and critical thinking skills in
historically underrepresented, marginalized student populations?
3. How do secondary STEM educators in the United States facilitate students'
understanding and critique of inequities within educational and social institutions
(culturally relevant pedagogy's third tenet) in order to increase access and/or
engagement in STEM among historically underrepresented, marginalized
populations?
The themes that emerged are interconnected and place the student at the center of learning and
teaching activities and experiences.
Participants
Twenty-nine Baldwin Park Unified School District STEM educators responded to the
survey administered to collect preliminary data on STEM teaching strategies and educators’
teaching philosophy and to help select interview participants. Sixteen of the survey respondents
32

teach high school, 12 teach middle school, and one teaches at the elementary school level. Since
the research questions focus on STEM education at the secondary level, the survey responses of
the elementary teacher were excluded from findings. The teaching experience of the secondary
participants ranged from their first-year teaching STEM to 27 years of experience with the
median years of experience being eight and a half. Participants responses to Questions 3 through
6, as displayed in Table 1, show that the majority are using CRP to some degree. Questions 4 and
5 were selected from the Culturally Responsive Teaching Survey items under the domain of
engendering competence, which aligns with Tenet 1 of CRP (Rhodes, 2017). Similarly,
Questions 3 and 6 are from the domain establishing inclusion and address Tenet 2 (Rhodes,
2017). Table 1 shows that over 75% of participants agreed or strongly agreed with the statements
in Questions 3 to 6, thus, survey participants suggest that they are currently using Tenet 1 and/or
2 of CRP in their teaching practice.

Table 1
Survey Questions 1 to 4 Frequency Table
Response
3. I spend time
outside of class
learning about
the cultures and
languages of
my students.
4. I ask for
student input
when planning
lessons and
activities.
5. I provide
rubrics and
progress
reports to
students.
6. I reflect on
how my culture
impacts my
classroom and/or
teaching
practices.
Strongly agree 6 3 4 8
Agree 17 18 20 16
Disagree 5 7 3 4
Strongly disagree 0 0 1 0

Note. This table shows the response frequency the 28 secondary STEM educators had with the
four statements selected from the Culturally Responsive Teacher Survey (Rhodes, 2017).
33

Six educators provided contact information and were invited to participate in an
interview. Their responses to Questions 3 to 6 indicated that they are among the educators using
CRP in their teaching practice. Of the six educators invited to interview, three educators
participated in a virtual interview. The interview participants all teach high school STEM
courses. Their teaching experience varies from 3 to 20 years of experience and all three come
from different ethnic backgrounds, as shown in Table 2.
Research Question 1 Results
Research Question 1 sought to address the need and desire for more research about how
STEM content is understood and taught to help educators deepen their understanding of STEM
education (Brown, 2012; Shernoff et al., 2017). While coding and analyzing survey and
interview data, three themes emerged around teaching strategies that participants implement to
help historically marginalized secondary students gain access to STEM education and fully
engage in the scientific method and/or engineering design process: a project based learning
teaching lens, differentiation, and growth mindset.

Table 2
Interview Participants
Interview
STEM teaching
experience (in years)
Grade levels taught Ethnic background
01 20 9th, 10th, 11th, and
12th
Latino
02 3 11th and 12th Asian
03 14 9th, 10th, 11th, and
12th
White

Note. This table shows the demographics of the interview participants.
34

Project Based Learning Teaching Lens
“The hands-on is crucial … I can sit in front of you and talk for hours about whatever the
topic of the science is, but if you aren’t actually getting to put it in practice, it means nothing”
(Interview Participant, 2021). The sentiment was echoed by all interviewees, who stressed the
use of real-world, hands-on learning opportunities that are relevant to students. Although the
specifics varied based on the course the educator taught, they connected the academic content
from the classroom to topics of interest to students through a variety of learning experiences that
allow students to question and explore by doing. For example, one educator shared,
Students had to design a food court using shipping containers, which is kind of the avant
garde architectural thing to do right now … but they also had to pick six local restaurants
and only two chain restaurants … I told them that the idea was to celebrate their ethnic
food and design a courtyard that would include a little bit of everything. So, they had to
research the different ethnicities that exist in Baldwin Park, so they knew there wasn’t
just people from Mexico that there were people from El Salvador, Guatemala, and other
parts of the world. And they came up with these restaurants and they had to explore the
food and what they were selling. And so, it kind of goes beyond just the architectural, I
tap into their history, I tap into their language.
According to the educator, this learning experience is relevant to students as a possible future
career, but also as an opportunity for students to explore their cultural wealth and assets.
Students learn about the cultural diversity that exists within their community, while learning
about architecture and the engineering design. Thus, the project allows students to learn by
“actively engaging in a real-world and personally meaningful” challenge, which is how the Buck
Institute for Education (n.d) defines project based learning. The other interviewees described
35

similar learning experiences which posed a problem for students to solve. For example, in a
forensics course, students followed a real-world crime case, as it unfolded in the news, to learn
about forensics and the scientific process while hypothesizing solutions for the case. In a physics
course, sports and popular music are used to meaningfully engage students in labs. In the open-
ended survey questions, questions seven to 10, 15 survey respondents referenced success with or
needing more hands-on, real-world application, or interdisciplinary activities that align with the
ideas and use of project based learning expressed by interviewees, as displayed in Table 3.

Table 3
Survey Responses Suggesting Project Based learning
Response Number of survey respondents
Stated the phrase “hands-on” 8
Referenced use of real-world applications 7
Described interdisciplinary lesson/unit planning 5
Total unique number of survey respondents 15

Note. This table shows the frequency with which survey respondents stated using or
recommended using hands-on, real-world, and/or interdisciplinary learning opportunities to
engage students of color in STEM.

36

However, interviewees also noted that what is meaningful for one community is not
necessarily meaningful for another. While interviewees described their use of project based
learning, they also commented on how units are modified based on trends, current events, and
students’ funds of knowledge. One interviewee explicitly stated how given their current student
population, soccer is the most relevant sport to students, but if they went to a different school or
district, their units would have to be modified to include the sport that is most relevant in that
community. Thus, it is important to provide students opportunities to engage in culturally
relevant project based learning experiences, or meaningful, real-world, hands-on learning
experiences that actively engage students with academic content. These learning experiences are
not a one-size fits all, but projects and activities designed and developed with the needs and
cultural assets of a specific student population in mind.
Differentiation
Study participants referenced a variety of differentiation strategies to provide students
access to academic content. Survey respondents mentioned the use of manipulatives, visuals,
hooks, and English language development (ELD) strategies. Interviewees expanded on these
differentiation strategies. For example, one interviewee stated,
I make them do vocab notebooks, where they’ll have to put the definition in their own
words. They have to write a sentence with the word … once they can understand the
terms, then you can start applying the terms and then once they can apply some of the
terms a little bit, that’s when you can start throwing the problems, okay so how can we
solve this plastic in the ocean problem.
Here, the participant uses vocabulary notebooks to develop students’ academic vocabulary and
the conceptual understanding needed to tackle more rigorous STEM activities. Similarly, another
37

interviewee spoke about using closed captioning to provide access to ELD students while giving
students an opportunity to develop language skills. Culturally responsive teaching strategies were
referenced to develop meaningful hooks and relevant activities that promote inclusivity and
cultural competence while capturing student interest and fostering student inquiry.
In addition, interviewees also differentiate for differences in student motivation and lived
experiences. Participants described how they use scaffolding to chunk information to align with
student motivation and grasp student interest. Verbal scaffolds are also used to frame activities
differently for students with different career goals. One interviewee shared how they articulated
with local community colleges to provide students with rigorous activities. College-bound
students are motivated by the college credit students can earn due to the articulation agreement.
However, students that are not college-bound are motivated by highlighting that the rigors of the
course can help students develop a work portfolio for future employment while developing the
skills needed to succeed in a skilled career. Another interviewee stated,
[A student] had never left the city of Baldwin Park and so when you are trying to give
real world examples of stuff with somebody like that it’s very limited. So, you are having
to use online things, video sources, movies, stuff like that. Then I had other kids, they’ve
been to 15 other countries already. Then, they’re bringing back more examples.
These educators used their knowledge of students’ life and career goals to differentiate and
provide students with the needed motivation and support to engage in STEM activities. Thus,
interviewees use a wide variety of differentiation tools and strategies to provide access to content
and engage students in STEM.
38

Growth Mindset
Seven survey respondents, as displayed in Table 4, and all interviewees implied the
importance of developing students’ confidence and willingness to revise work. Survey
respondents suggested the importance of a growth mindset in the open-ended questions
(Questions 7 to 10) by referring to student confidence and the importance of engaging students in
revising work. For example, survey respondents stated, “Discovery, exploration and flexibility
for experimentation, without right or wrong distinction,” “I spend a lot [of] time getting students
to believe in themselves and their self-efficacy in STEM at the start of the year,” and “students
have to understand that revising a prototype is one of the major cornerstones of STEM.”
Similarly, three of the other four responses were general and neutral in tone. However, one
respondent stated, “Many students have a set mindset. Many feel they cannot be successful in
math because they have never felt successful and have struggled for a long time. It's hard to help
them develop a growth mindset.” The respondent refers to the difficulty in developing a growth
mindset, yet they imply that students need to experience success in STEM to feel confident that
they can be successful in STEM.

Table 4
Survey Responses Suggesting Growth Mindset
Response Number of survey respondents
References building student confidence 4
Described engaging students in revisions of work 3
Total unique number of survey respondents 7

Note. This table shows the survey response frequency suggesting developing a growth mindset.
39

Although most survey and interview participants did not explicitly state growth mindset,
their descriptions referred to developing a growth mindset in students or having students
demonstrate a willingness to develop skills and knowledge to improve their ability to solve
future problems or challenges (Schunk, 2020). One interviewee described how they help students
experience success and develop a growth mindset by “giving [students] easy kind of gimmie
examples to start building that confidence and then progressing it higher to make it more
difficult.” Additionally, interviewees described how they modeled a growth mindset for students
by modeling perseverance and troubleshooting challenges with students.
There’s a high school in Florida … they solved the case. I’ve used it as examples with my
kids and they’re like, well, how can a high school kid solve something that a cop didn’t.
Well, let’s think about it, we chart it up on the board and they start trying to figure out
why was a high school class able to solve it and what they ultimately realize is that a high
school class has 36 kids, that’s a lot more eyes than the two detectives and the one CSI
that were working on the case.
Here the interviewee explained how they facilitate student inquiry while allowing students to
discover how students are capable of the same type of success as expert investigators. Similarly,
another interviewee uses their career story to model how with hard work students can change
their current circumstances and pursue their life and career goals. With these stories,
interviewees described how they motivate students to persevere and attempt to have students
develop a growth mindset.
Research Question 1 Discussion
As participants spoke about the three themes that emerged as teaching strategies to help
historically marginalized secondary students gain access to STEM education, project based
40

learning, differentiation, and growth mindset, they referenced the STEM gap as a reason for their
teaching choices. Ultimately, study participants want to provide their students with equitable
STEM experiences that offer students the level of rigor and challenge that their affluent
counterparts receive. Interviewees continuously referenced the importance of providing students
with meaningful, relevant learning experiences that capture student motivation, but also provide
the right mix of support to help students develop problem-solving and critical thinking skills so
that students can experience success. They expressed their discontent with deficit theory
approaches (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017) with comments such as,
One of the things that quite frankly infuriated me my first year of teaching was the idea
that hey in order for our kids to do well on the test, we really need to focus on these areas
that are tested well and ignore the others … I got into many heated arguments over this
one with people.
Such comments expressed their use of a pedagogy of opposition or teaching from a lens that
challenges the status quo (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Their focus on having students experience and
willingly engage in academic success aligns their teaching practice with the first tenet of CRP
(Ladson-Billings, 1995). While they described the differentiation strategies that give students
access to project based learning experiences, study participants also noted that success can look
different for different students, since students have different life and career goals. They balance
these differences in their classrooms by cultivating a growth mindset to motivate students. Thus,
study participants have infused the first tenet of CRP into their teaching practice with their use of
project based learning, differentiation, and focus on developing a growth mindset.
41

Research Question 2 Results
Ladson-Billings (2014) commented on how CRP has been distorted since she first
introduced the concept of CRP. However, there are pockets where the original concept of CRP is
implemented. Research Question 2 sought to learn from such spaces to understand how CRP is
being implemented to develop higher-order thinking skills, such as problem-solving and critical
thinking skills in historically underrepresented, marginalized student populations. Guided by this
question, the findings place the focus on student-centered teaching that is supported by having
the teacher take on the role of facilitator and building a community of learning that includes
students and teacher. Although two of the themes (building community and teacher as facilitator
of learning) support the first theme (student-centered teaching), each theme is equally important
in the implementation of CRP.
Student-Centered Teaching
As interviewees spoke about their teaching practice, activities, projects, and students,
there was an underlying thread that connected it all —all interviewees made decisions centered
around their students and their students’ needs. The specific strategies and teaching practices
teachers use depend on the unique set of students they have at a given moment. One interviewee
described differences in students’ needs as “an important piece of a big puzzle, and every year,
every class, it’s a different puzzle.” This type of thinking places the student at the center of all
teaching activities, from planning to implementation of learning experiences. Since students are
the center of participants teaching practice, participants were also aware of the inequities that
their students face. One participant spoke of students’ access to resources,
In our area there are zero parks with tennis courts, so students would have to go to West
Covina to play tennis where only two parks have tennis courts. Not every city has a park
42

with tennis courts for students. So, if I’m going to do a lab lesson, I need to make sure
that students can finish it in that lab and not tell them to finish after school.
The availability (or lack thereof) community resources, such as parks, plays a role in how this
participant plans labs for students and the class time given for the activity. They expressed a
desire to provide such learning opportunities for students, but also described the external factors
they must consider to provide equitable access to their specific student population. The teacher’s
desire to equitably provide access to labs so that all students are successful directly aligns his
pedagogical views with the first tenet of CRP.
Similarly, another interviewee spoke of the challenges they face with hegemonic
curriculums,
One of the big problems I’ve had … is that a lot of the assignments that I have to teach
my students are not designed for kids in my neighborhood … one of the projects is to
interview a professional architect or engineer … but the way the assignment is written it
almost sounds like I have an engineer living across the street or my best friend’s dad is an
engineer … that’s not the case for us in Baldwin Park … we’re going to have to knock on
doors … so that particular project is sort of catered to, I feel like it’s not catered to
students of color.
At first glance, this assignment may not seem out of reach to students, but for students who do
not have engineers in their family or community networks, finding an engineer to interview can
be an obstacle for success. To address this issue, the interviewee described in detail scaffolds and
support they use to guide students through the process of cold calling or sending hundreds of
emails to connect with one engineer willing and able to participate in an interview. The scaffolds
are a piece that they have added to make this particular assignment accessible to their students.
43

Although this participant’s motivation was guided by the first tenet of CRP, they also employ the
other two tenets by acknowledging the social inequity, differences in networks, and highlighting
the cultural assets students have to address the inequity, students’ personalities and passions.
Thus, to provide equitable STEM learning experiences, participants plan and implement lessons
that center around their students’ unique set of cultural assets and academic needs as well as the
challenges and obstacles their students face in accessing mainstream curriculum and resources.
Building Community
The key thing is making [students] feel that they are important, making them feel that
their opinions count and that I truly want to know about their backgrounds, truly want to
know about the way they live, because it's part of, I mean it’s part of who I am, but it’s
part of how I connect with my students. (Interview participant, 2021)
A key component in providing access to STEM for students of color is building community,
which aligns with CRP Tenet 2, cultural competence. Participants build community by making a
conscious effort to develop positive classroom cultures, but also by building teacher-student
relationships, authentically addressing inclusivity in their classrooms, and building trust. In the
open-ended questions, four survey respondents identified building teacher-student relationships
as important to improve STEM education and 16 highlighted the importance of inclusivity by
including activities that allow students to see themselves in STEM, as presented in Table 5. For
example, a response to question ten stated, “Connect with the students first. Students don't care
what you know, unless they know that you care.” Similarly, all interviewees described how they
build their class culture and connect with students. One interviewee stated, “I think once you get
their trust it’s like a piece of cake,” before going into detail about how they share their personal
story with students to build trust and teacher-student relationships.
44

Table 5
Survey Responses Suggesting Building Community
Response Number of
respondents
Described using experts/ figures with similar backgrounds as students 8
Described sharing teacher story to help teacher relate to students 2
Described making learning experiences personal to students 8
Suggested considering funds of knowledge to provide equitable experiences 4
Stated “connect with students” referring to building teacher-student relationship 4
Referenced developing student ownership of learning 2
Parent Involvement 1
Total unique number of survey respondents 20

Note. This table shows the frequency with which survey respondents suggested building
community to increase access and engagement of students of color in STEM.

In addition to organically building relationships with students, they also intentionally
invite successful former students to the classroom, so that students can see themselves in the
visiting alumni, similar to how Professor Romero (2021) uses culturally responsive teaching
strategies to help students see themselves as mathematicians. The power of having successful
alumni as industry experts or guest speakers was expressed by saying,
They see a face that looks like theirs, something familiar, and when I point out that this
professional architect that came to visit us sat in that seat where Juan sits now, it’s like
wow, he was here in my shoes.
45

The alumni help validate that students of color do belong in STEM regardless of their
background. All participants also referenced conversations with students outside of class time
where they mentored or provided academic support to students. These conversations that often
develop trusting teacher-student relationship with their students.
While participants spoke in detail about their students, demonstrating the time and effort
they put into getting to know their students, they also used language that showed that they had
taken ownership of their students. They often used words such as my students or in our class or
other phrases indicating that an us existed between teacher and students. Two interviewees stated
that they are part of the students’ community, but neither one physically lived in the community.
One indicated living in a nearby neighborhood and the other stated that they live in a different
city. Yet, both participants felt that they were part of their students’ community due to the time
they spend in the community and the relationships they have formed with students and their
families. Thus, building community with students is not just about focusing on the classroom
culture, but also about getting to know students and developing a trusting teacher-student
relationship that creates an inclusive learning environment where teachers take ownership of
their students to personalize learning experiences for students.
Teacher Is a Facilitator of Learning
As interviewees described their teaching practices, they described their role as that of a
facilitator of learning, guiding students through the learning process. When describing the
learning activities and projects they create in their classroom, two interviewees spoke about how
they engage in the inquiry process with students to develop critical thinking skills. These
interviewees do not give students an answer right away, instead they guide students thinking to
allow students to discover the solution or response for themselves. All interviewees expressed
46

the importance of having students learn from the process and how they need to create safe
opportunities for students to revise their thinking. One interviewee spoke about how they
encourage students to engage in the process by comparing practice in their course to sports drills,
concluding, “I think one of the things that I constantly do is coach.” Such self-descriptions by
interviewees highlight that they do not see themselves as the holders of knowledge. All three
interviewees described instances where they learned with students and modeled perseverance
and research skills for students. Although interviewees took on the role of a facilitator of
learning, all interviewees implied that part of that role is helping students experience success
while engaging in rigorous learning opportunities. One interviewee stated,
[Students] know that the challenges ahead are going to be just as rigorous, that they are
kind of getting their feet wet and now they are able to do it just like in an AP class that
they’re taking on campus
Although the interviewee is not teaching an advanced placement (AP) course, they provide
students with learning opportunities that are just as rigorous. The level of rigor is communicated
to students, allowing students to leave the class knowing that the success they have experienced
in that classroom has prepared them for success in future endeavors. Thus, participants facilitate
student success in rigorous learning opportunities.
Research Question 2 Discussion
Study participants use of CRP to develop problem solving and critical thinking skills in
historically underrepresented students can be seen through their use of student-centered teaching,
community building practices, and the teacher role of facilitator of learning. Throughout their
descriptions of their teaching practices, study participants referenced the desire to have students
experience academic success, CRP Tenet 1 (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Although most did not
47

explicitly reference cultural competence, CRP Tenet 2, all interviewees exhibited a high
awareness of their students’ academic needs, cultural assets, and socioeconomic situations
(Ladson-Billings, 1995). Their awareness allows participants to implement student-centered
teaching to develop students’ problem solving and critical thinking skills, since it provides
participants with the needed knowledge to make modifications that give students access to the
curriculum while developing students higher order thinking skills and providing rigorous
instruction. Two essential elements that support participants use of student-centered teaching are
community building and teaching from the role of a facilitator of learning. Participants learn
about their students’ prior experiences, cultural assets, and academic needs by consciously
building teacher-student relationships and becoming a part of a community space with students.
Similarly, by taking on the role of facilitator of learning, participants can accommodate learning
experiences that allow each student to refine problem-solving and critical thinking skills by
providing students with the coaching or supports students need to guide students towards
experiencing success with higher order thinking skills. Thus, student-center teaching supported
by taking on the role of facilitator of learning and building community provides participants the
needed foundation to address Tenet 1 and 2 of CRP to create a learning environment that fosters
students’ problem-solving and critical thinking skills.
Research Question 3 Results
In her reflection of CRP, Ladson-Billings (2014) found that Tenet 3, developing students’
sociopolitical consciousness, was being ignored. Thus, to consciously address Tenet 3 in this
study, Research Question 3 seeks to understand how the third tenet of CRP is being used to
increase access and/or engagement of students of color in STEM. Guided by this question, two
themes emerged from interview data, student empowerment and acknowledging inequities.
48

Student Empowerment
Study participants referenced how they facilitate students’ understanding and critique of
inequities by empowering students. Student empowerment revolved around two main ideas:
helping students understand that they are valuable, and they can make changes with a STEM
education. One interviewee provided a sample conversation they have had with students,
I show them the articles where Musk and Bezos and Gates all funded this kids project
because he made something that made sense and they’re [students] like, people listen to
high school kids? I’m like, yeah.
In this sample, the participant gives value to their students’ voice by communicating that they
can be heard as high school students. They also encourage students to create a project that makes
sense encouraging a growth mindset in students to imply that students are capable of
accomplishing greatness. Similarly, another interviewee shared that they encourage students by
telling students that, “they are going to be able to come back to the community and then give
their grain of salt here and be able to help out.” Through these comments, both interviewees are
attempting to communicate to students that they are valuable and can change the inequities
students experience. The encouragement students received is linked to how participants cultivate
a growth mindset in students, but it also empowers students to know that the knowledge and
skills they are gaining from engaging in STEM will allow students to make changes or be heard.
Acknowledging Inequities
All interviewees acknowledge social inequities with students within their classroom,
especially socioeconomic differences that students are aware of and create barriers for students.
As one interviewee stated,
49

I emphasize that they should not look for shortcuts that those are not always the best
resources to get what they want. That they don’t necessarily have to work hard but work
smart and just realize that they live in a community that is rich in other ways. I don’t
want them to think that just because they don’t have money, they aren’t worth anything.
That they are rich in their culture and rich in their traditions. That all these things are
valuable to other people that haven’t met them yet and that one day they are going to
learn from them.
Here the interviewee expresses how they acknowledge financial differences, but they also
emphasize students’ cultural assets while stressing to students that there are ways to work more
efficiently. Similarly, the other interviewees also expressed that they convey similar messages to
students by acknowledging that our present-day society is inequitable, but students can still
succeed regardless of socioeconomic barriers by focusing on students’ assets instead of
limitations.
Interviewees also gave examples of how they acknowledge social inequities within
learning experiences. One interviewee shared, “We talk about the Tuskegee experiments. We
talk about women in science, how they weren’t credited for a long period of time. Whether that
was fair or not?” This participant uses historical inequities to facilitate student understanding and
critique of social inequities. Similarly, another interviewee shared,
I start every year with a little bit of history. Where [students] create a presentation of the
20 physicists that we will learn [about]. What I want them to see, not memorize them, but
if any of them are Lopez, Martinez, Gomez, Wong. Why are these missing from the
mainstream curriculum? Is there a reason why they are not included in list? Are people
eliminated?
50

The interviewee opens the year with addressing inequities of representation in hegemonic
curriculums. The opening activity is an excellent example of CRP Tenet Three and demonstrates
the use of critical race theory, however, due to the current political discourse of critical race
theory in mainstream media, the participant made an effort to distance their practice from critical
race theory. Thus, participants are acknowledging social inequities in class discussions to help
develop students’ critical thinking skills, however, their willingness to recognize that their
practice uses CRP and/or CRT has been influenced by mainstream discourse.
Influence of Mainstream Perspectives on CRP
Although, from survey and interview data, participants are using CRP within their
teaching practice, two of the three interview participants made comments to distant themselves
from CRP and CRT. For example, one interviewee explicitly stated, “It’s like CRT but not as
this is the science rather than the political part of it,” when describing how they motivate their
students to question who is included in mainstream science curriculums. Their sample activity
aligns with CRP Tenet 3 since they are developing students’ sociopolitical consciousness when
probing students to question the racial representation of scientists in mainstream curriculums.
One of the sample probing questions they gave is “Are people eliminated,” which insinuates that
there is a counternarrative for students to consider, one of the tenets of CRT. Yet, when they
mentioned the term CRT, an effort was made to disassociate their teaching practice from CRT.
The participant stressed that their activity was not an example of CRT, while referencing the
political discourse currently occurring around CRT and attempting to make a distinction between
their teaching practice and the political definition of CRT.
Another participant stated,
51

I hate the term culturally relevant teaching, it is a buzz word that I think really doesn’t
emphasize to a lot of people exactly, when you’re in a classroom, you shouldn’t be
judging the students based on the color of skin.
Before making this statement, the participant shared a negative experience from their first year of
teaching where an administrator misrepresented CRP to direct the participant to post images of
Latino scientists in their classroom. The participant shared how difficult this task had been and
recalled, “I was literally told that I will never understand how a Latino learns.” Due to their
experiences with the administrator during their first year of teaching, the participant has a
negative view of CRP. Yet, the participant defined culture broadly to include students’ multiple
identities, not just students’ racial or ethnic background, made several references to using
knowledge of students’ multiple identities to differentiate learning, and gave examples where
they challenged the prejudice and deficit mindsets of other people with their students’ successes,
which address the participant’s cultural competence, CRP Tenet 2. Thus, the political discourse
on CRT and CRP and distortions of CRP have influenced participants willingness to use and/or
associate with CRP.
Research Question 3 Discussion
Study participants are addressing CRP Tenet 3 in their teaching practice by focusing on
student empowerment and acknowledging social inequities in class discussions with students.
The discussions with students that the interviewees referenced demonstrate that they
acknowledge inequities and develop students’ critical thinking skills by facilitating class
discussions around social inequities. Participants use the themes that emerged for Question 1 and
2 to support their efforts in student empowerment and acknowledgement of social inequities. For
example, the development of a growth mindset helps support student empowerment by
52

highlighting students’ assets and reinforcing the idea that students can make changes as students
improve their skillsets. Similarly, participants acknowledgement of social inequities while giving
students the space to think critically about social inequities helps reinforce a trusting teacher-
student relationship, since educators are not hiding or avoiding what students see as their truth.
However, participants’ facilitation of such discussions requires that they become a facilitator of
learning to help students develop the critical thinking skills needed to analyze complex social
issues.
Yet, although participants are not ignoring CRP Tenet 3, two interviewees did attempt to
distant their practice from CRP, specifically teaching practices that address racial inequities, due
to mainstream discourse around CRP and CRT. One participant had been influenced by the
political discourse around critical race theory in mainstream media and the other was influenced
by the directives administrators had given them under the disguise of CRP. Thus, although study
participants are addressing CRP Tenet 3 by empowering students and facilitating discussions
where they acknowledge social inequities, participants hesitated in describing their teaching
practices as CRP.
Summary
The themes that emerged for all three research questions are interconnected and support
one another. Since all themes continuously place students at the center, student-center teaching is
the focus of participants use of CRP in their STEM class. Participants’ focus on students guides
them to use differentiation, a project based learning philosophy, cultivate a growth mindset,
empower students, build community, be a facilitator of learning, and acknowledge inequities.
However, these themes are also intertwined and support each other. For example, using the
teacher role of facilitator of learning helps participants differentiate learning for students and
53

implement project based learning. Once the themes that support each other are connected, they
form a web that holds student-centered teaching in the middle, as shown in Figure 1. Thus, study
participants’ use of culturally relevant pedagogy in STEM education is seem through a web of
teaching practices that focus on providing students learning experiences where students can use
their cultural assets to experience academic success while addressing social inequities and/or
community problems.

Figure 1
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy in STEM Education

Note. The themes that emerged in the findings are interconnected forming a web that holds
student-centered teaching in the middle when using culturally relevant pedagogy to increase
access and engagement of students of color in STEM education.

54

Chapter Five: Discussion
Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education has gained
momentum and support due to factors that include ensuring that people have the skills and
attributes needed to succeed in the labor market and keeping the United States’ economy
competitive in a global market (Byko, 2007; Canning et al., 2019; Duncan, 2015). At the same
time, a statistically significant STEM gap along racial lines continues to exist, which is observed
by the underrepresentation of students of color in STEM careers and learning opportunities
(Duncan, 2015; Goins, 2021). To help address this problem, this study seeks to understand how
culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) can increase access and engagement of students of color in
STEM education. Baldwin Park Unified School District secondary STEM educators were
initially surveyed and, from the survey, interview participants selected whose teaching practice
aligned with culturally relevant pedagogy.
The following research questions guided this study:
1. What teaching strategies help historically marginalized secondary (6–12) students in
the United States gain access to STEM education and fully engage in the scientific
method and/or engineering design process?
2. How do secondary STEM educators in the United States implement culturally
relevant pedagogy to develop problem solving and critical thinking skills in
historically underrepresented, marginalized student populations?
3. How do secondary STEM educators in the United States facilitate students'
understanding and critique of inequities within educational and social institutions
(culturally relevant pedagogy's third tenet) in order to increase access and/or
55

engagement in STEM among historically underrepresented, marginalized
populations?
Guided by the research questions, eight themes emerged from survey and interview data:
student-centered teaching, project based learning teaching philosophy, differentiation, growth
mindset, teacher role of facilitator of learning, building community, acknowledging inequities,
and student empowerment.
Findings
The eight themes identified in this study are practices used by educators to make STEM
education culturally relevant for historically underrepresented marginalized students. This study
found that all eight teaching practices are interconnected and support each other with student-
centered teaching as the focal practice linking all into one teaching lens suggesting that culturally
relevant STEM teaching is student-centered. The focus on student-centered teaching supports
Shernoff et al. (2017) recommendation for teacher training around student-centered pedagogical
practices and a mindset shift in the role of the teacher to better teach STEM. Since student-
centered teaching is a key component of culturally relevant STEM teaching, it is important that
STEM teachers receive training around student-centered pedagogical practices to address the
STEM gap and increase access to and engagement in STEM education for students of color,
further supporting Shernoff et al. (2017) professional development recommendations.
One of the findings from the survey and interviews that was highlighted and stressed by
participants was the use of a project based learning teaching lens to create relevant hands-on,
real-world learning opportunities. Interview participants described in detail how they used their
hands-on activities and/or projects to help students learn through the process of solving problems
that are important to students. For example, one participant had students design a food court for
56

their community to teach students architecture and design concepts while providing students the
opportunity to expand their cultural competence and critically think about food access in their
community. The learning opportunities the teachers spoke about providing match the type of
opportunities Corneille et al. (2020) suggested, opportunities to explore STEM applications to
solve community problems. Corneille et al. (2020) explained that this approach can create
greater interest in STEM and is consistent with the collectivist worldview.
Although study findings support the suggestions from Corneille et al. (2020), the findings
also suggest that a project based learning teaching lens cannot be applied on its own. To
successfully implement relevant hands-on, real-world learning experiences, participants relied on
their ability to facilitate learning and build community to gain student engagement. When
participants gave examples of how they probe students to facilitate learning and motivate
students, they also referenced details about their students’ backgrounds that students shared with
them due to the trusting teacher-student relationships they formed with students. From
participants accounts, the relationships they formed with students allowed them to build a
community of learners, and they also provided participants with knowledge about students’
assets to help them differentiate learning and motivation strategies for students. Similarly,
Project Excite, a K–8 supplemental and enrichment program for low-income students of color in
Chicago, built trusting connections with participating families that helped the program respond
to students’ needs and increased retention of students in the program (Olszewski-Kubilius et al.,
2017). By building a trusting connection with families, parents sought the help of Project Excite
personnel when needed, voluntarily providing valuable information to Project Excite that
allowed the program to better respond to the needs of students (Olszewski-Kubilius et al., 2017).
Thus, building community allows educators to gain the valuable insights about students’
57

narratives and assets that support their ability to differentiate, motivate, and facilitate learning in
hands-on, real-world activities and/or projects.
Furthermore, the educators interviewed in this study empowered students and
acknowledge existing inequities through the learning experiences offered to students. All
participants spoke about how they acknowledge existing inequities. For example, one participant
described how they invited students to inquire about the racial backgrounds of scientists included
in their curriculum. A critical race theory lens helps understand that participants see racism as
normal and that counternarratives exist (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017; Ladson-Billings, 2013).
Additionally, all participants referenced the deficits that others, such as the media or other
colleagues, see in their students and how they want to help students see their own value.
Participants referenced the desire to help students see themselves as worthy and capable as one
of the reasons why they create relevant hands-on, real-world learning opportunities that empower
students. These opportunities build student confidence and help students discover that they are
capable of making changes in their communities. The connections between the teaching practices
found in this study suggest that STEM educators should use the teaching practices (facilitator of
learning, differentiation, community building, student empowerment, acknowledging inequities,
growth mindset, and project based learning teaching lens) in tandem, as pieces of one giant
puzzle, to create relevant hands-on, real-world learning opportunities for students of color.
The interconnectedness of the eight teaching practices that surfaced in this study in
support of making STEM education culturally relevant for historically underrepresented
marginalized students suggest that any training or professional development should address how
each of these practices support each other in creating accessible and engaging STEM learning
opportunities for students of color. For example, the findings suggest that growth mindset cannot
58

be address on its own in a silo. Instead, a growth mindset needs to be modeled by educators and
used to build student confidence during STEM applications. Participants described how they
often troubleshoot and learn with students, modeling how the educator is still developing their
skills and knowledge, a growth mindset, to motivate students to emulate their example (Schunk,
2020). Once students experienced some success, participants reinforced that success through
positive reinforcement or encouragement that helped students build confidence and empowered
students in their learning process. Similarly, Canning et al. (2019) found that educators with a
growth mindset spark student confidence and have smaller achievement gaps along racial lines,
suggesting that the growth mindset can help disrupt the STEM gap. Teachers use of the role of
facilitator of learning maximizes their ability to differentiate learning for students during project
based learning.
Study participants described a variety of differentiation strategies, such as probing
students during an activity or project to promote higher order thinking and helping students to
revise ideas to consider additional alternatives. While describing their probing techniques,
participants also stated how they differentiate probing questions based on students’ assets,
motivation, and current ability to better meet students’ learning needs. The use of probing
strategies instead of telling students what to do points to the mindset shift that Shernoff et al.
(2017) suggests is needed in STEM education and makes students the primary driver of the
learning process guided by teachers. Thus, the interconnectedness of the eight culturally relevant
STEM teaching practices is an important aspect to address to support educators in maximizing
the use of practices that disrupt the status quo for underrepresented marginalized secondary
students.
59

Implications for Practice
Study findings suggest that there are eight teaching practices that culturally relevant
STEM educators use in tandem to increase access and engagement in STEM education of
underrepresented marginalized secondary students. To disrupt the status quo and create culturally
relevant STEM classrooms, other STEM educators can use the eight teaching practices in their
own practice. To support educators use of the eight culturally relevant STEM teaching practices,
teachers should receive professional development that deepens educators’ ability to use these
practices in unison. In addition, systemic and structural obstacles should also be addressed to
support educators’ efforts and ability to increase access and engagement in STEM. Thus, it is
recommended that educators use the eight culturally relevant STEM teaching practices, are
provided professional development to enhance their ability to use the practices holistically, and
are supported by culturally relevant leaders that address obstacles to STEM education.
Culturally Relevant STEM Teaching Practices
To increase access to and engagement in STEM education of underrepresented
marginalized secondary students, STEM educators can utilize the eight culturally relevant
teaching practices found in this study: student-center teaching, project based learning lens,
differentiation, growth mindset, facilitator of learning, community building, student
empowerment, and acknowledgement of inequities. Per the findings, the combination and use of
the eight teaching practices found can help educators address all three tenets of culturally
relevant pedagogy and create more inclusive learning spaces for students of color (Ladson-
Billings, 1995). Research shows that systemic racism has created school systems and/or spaces
where students of color feel excluded and alienated (Corneille et al., 2020; Ladson-Billings,
2006; Milner & Lomotey, 2014; Spring, 2016). To begin to reverse the effects of systemic
60

racism and create more inclusive STEM educational spaces for students of color, STEM
educators need to implement teaching practices that allow them to create inclusive spaces for
students of color, such as student-centered teaching. Study participants use the eight teaching
practices found to create inclusive spaces for students of color that provide access to content in
relevant and engaging learning experiences. The experience and expertise of study participants
can help other STEM educators gain an understanding of the shifts or changes they need to make
to address the STEM gap and increase access to and engagement in STEM for students of color.
Culturally Relevant STEM Professional Development
To support STEM educators serving students of color, this study can help guide
professional development for STEM educators. The culturally relevant teaching practices found
in this study correspond with the areas of professional development recommended by other
researchers (Canning et al., 2019; Corneille et al., 2020; Shernoff et al., 2017). Furthermore, this
study found that these areas or teaching practices are interconnected, and educators use them
together to create culturally relevant STEM classrooms. Due to this, it is recommended that
professional development for STEM educators address the eight culturally relevant teaching
practices found in this study along with their interconnected nature. For example, the findings
from Canning et al. (2019) and this study highlight that STEM educators should receive
professional development that allows educators to develop a growth mindset as well as training
that builds their capacity to develop students’ growth mindset and confidence while engaging in
relevant hands-on, real-world learning opportunities. It is important that educators understand the
interconnected nature of their teaching practices and how holistically these teaching practices
support culturally relevant student-centered teaching that sees students of color as valuable assets
in their learning.
61

Structurally Responsive STEM Education
The study findings suggest that student-centered teaching is a focal practice of STEM
educators using culturally relevant pedagogy. Additionally, study participants stressed the
importance of providing students of color relevant hands-on, real-world learning opportunities.
Both concepts align with approaches suggested by Corneille et al. (2020) as culturally responsive
education that motivates and improves STEM education for students of color. However,
Corneille et al. (2020) pointed out that along with addressing culturally responsive education
approaches, it is also necessary to address structurally responsive education, or the structural
obstacles students of color have in accessing STEM education. Although the guiding questions
of this study focused on teaching strategies, the findings disclosed some of the structural
obstacles educators faced in providing STEM education to students of color, such as funding and
hegemonic curriculums. For example, one structural obstacle suggested by interview participants
is the lack of adequate funding for needed equipment and materials within high needs schools.
One participant described in detail how some school sites choose to distribute funds equally
among departments instead of equitably, based on department needs. Based on the participants
account, this leads to unspent funds by departments that did not need the funds, while STEM
departments are unable to purchase the needed equipment due to a lack of funding. The school
site funding structure described by the interview participant raises the question about whether
STEM education is adequately funded at school sites or provided the funding necessary to
provide an appropriate level of instruction (Darling-Hammond et al., 2014). To address this
structural obstacle, school site leaders and district leaders should assess their funding structures
to evaluate if the current allocation structure is adequate and equitable for STEM education on
their site and across sites.
62

Similarly, another interview participant referenced curricular obstacles due to activities
and projects in the mainstream curriculum that have not been developed for their students. The
participant described the modifications they have had to make to the hegemonic curriculum to
make it accessible to their students. This structural obstacle can be addressed by providing
educators the time needed to modify hegemonic curriculums and intentionally think about the
teaching strategies educators use in their practice while teaching STEM, such as the culturally
relevant STEM teaching practices found in this study. Funding and hegemonic curriculums were
two structural obstacles that were found in this study. Although this is not a comprehensive list
of structural obstacles to STEM education, since structural obstacles were not the focus of this
study, the structural obstacles disclosed suggest that structurally responsive education needs to
be addressed to truly support culturally relevant STEM education. Thus, it is recommended that
school leaders engage in reflective practices that allow them to identify structural obstacles to
STEM education to make the structural changes needed to support culturally relevant STEM
education.
Culturally Relevant Leadership
The study findings suggest that the current political discourse and distortions of CRT and
CRP are negatively influencing STEM educators’ willingness to associate and/or use CRP. A
number of school districts have banned teaching CRT or using CRT or similar frameworks in the
teaching practice (Gomez, 2022; Jackson, 2022; Marcilla, 2022). Individuals in favor of such
bans argue that schools should not be the ones deciding what to teach children about race, but
parents (Gomez, 2022; Marcilla, 2022). The arguments of people supporting bans of CRT
demonstrate that the political argument against CRT fails to understand that CRT is not a
curriculum, but a theoretical lens that helps make sense of systemic racism in the United States
63

(Delgado & Stefancic, 2017; Gomez, 2022). Additionally, the bans of CRT support the status
quo and are allowing for political rhetoric to guide decisions in the education field instead of
education research and experts. To close the STEM gap, education leaders need to boldly
embrace research-based practices that disrupt the status quo to bring equitable education to
student populations that have been historically marginalized and underrepresented in STEM,
especially when research-based practices are faced with distorted political rhetoric, such as CRT
and CRP. Without education leaders that are willing to embrace research-based practices instead
of the emotions of the majority, educators will shy away from openly using CRP or other similar
pedagogical frameworks to disrupt systemic racism, such as the participants in this study whose
views on CRT and CRP have been negatively impacted by distortions and the political discourse
on CRP and CRT. Thus, it is imperative to have equity-minded leaders as principals, school
board members, and superintendents that prioritize culturally relevant practices that truly address
the systemic and structural obstacles to equitable education for all students.
Limitation and Delimitations
Limitations are factors out of the control of the researcher that affect the generalizability
of the study, and delimitations are the limits or boundaries set by the researcher that need to be
addressed (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). This study was limited by the coronavirus pandemic, a
small sample size, and the truthfulness of the narratives of participants. Due to the pandemic,
interviews were conducted virtually, which could be one of the factors affecting educators’
willingness to participate. Another factor affecting educators’ willingness to participate was that
the COVID-19 pandemic has added stress to the teaching profession causing many educators to
have limited time to participate in other activities, such as this study. In addition, the study is
limited by the narratives of the educators that choose to participate and the truthfulness of their
64

responses. The virtual setting of interviews could have influenced the comfort level of
interviewees and the researcher’s ability to build trusting relationships, which could have
influenced the truthfulness of responses. Thus, the pandemic and its effects on the number of
participants and truthfulness of responses limit the generalizability of this study.
The cultural backgrounds of the participants’ students delimit the study. Participating
educators teach students within Baldwin Park Unified School District, which predominantly
serves Latino and low-income students. Knowledge gained from educators is more significant to
educators teaching at Baldwin Park Unified School District or a school district with similar
demographics. Also, the discipline of interest for this study was STEM. Although educators from
other disciplines might find the findings interesting, the study is delimited to STEM education.
Similarly, the study is also delimited by culturally relevant pedagogy as the pedagogical lens
used in the study. Data were collected to determine if educators’ beliefs aligned to CRP, but data
were not collected to determine if educators views and beliefs aligned to other pedagogies,
delimiting the study to CRP.
Future Research
To deepen the understanding of this study’s findings, three areas of future research can be
further explored. First, due to the pandemic, this qualitative study could not include classroom
observations due to social distancing rules and regulations. However, classroom observations can
help deepen the understanding of the teaching practices educators use. For example, educators
mentioned a variety of differentiation techniques that made differentiation an important theme of
this study, but interview and survey data provided limited information on the differentiation
strategies used by educators. Classroom observations could provide greater depth of
understanding in this area.
65

Secondly, three of the teaching practices that emerged in this study —building
community, acknowledging inequities, and differentiation —require teachers to constantly
deepen their cultural competence and understand that culture is more than posting an image of an
individual that shares the same ethnic background on the wall (Ladson-Billings, 2014). Subtle
cultural differences can cause students to feel excluded or alienated. Plus, students of color in
other places of the world are engaging in STEM education, proving that students of all cultural
backgrounds can be engaged in STEM. STEM engagement outside of the United States raises
the question, what can be learned about STEM education teaching strategies from secondary
educators in other countries to help inform culturally relevant pedagogy in STEM education in
the United States? STEM education teaching strategies and practices in other countries can help
educators in the United States better understand the subtle cultural differences that can help make
education in the United States culturally relevant and move away from the distortion and
corruption of CRP observed by Ladson-Billings (2014).
Thirdly, further research is needed in exploring how the political climate and distortions
of CRP have impacted and/or influenced educators understanding of and willingness to use CRP.
Two of the interview participants in this study, whose teaching beliefs and practices aligned with
CRP, made negative comments about CRP due to how CRP has been distorted in practice or in
public political discourse. These comments point to a need in better understanding how CRP has
been distorted in practice and the effects of that distortion to the concept of CRP. Additionally,
research is also needed in how to undo the negative effects to develop strategies that can be taken
to address the distortion of CRP and shift skewed views of CRP that are currently preventing
educators from embracing culturally relevant pedagogy to disrupt the status quo and/or deepen
their understanding of CRP.
66

Conclusions
To address and disrupt the complex historical, educational, and economic factors that
create the STEM gap, the findings from this research further highlight the need for STEM
educators to use interconnected teaching practices that focus on the student. Student-centered
teaching that takes into account students’ funds of knowledge to use them as assets and taps into
teacher-student relationships can provide students with the rich, rigorous STEM education that
helps students develop higher-order thinking skills, such as problem-solving and critical thinking
skills. Additionally, this research shows that culturally relevant STEM educators do not ignore
Tenet 3 of CRP, developing students’ sociopolitical consciousness, instead they use a project
based learning teaching lens to address and acknowledge inequities while giving students the
opportunity to critically address sociopolitical issues that impact them. Although further research
is needed to better understand how CRP increases access and engagement in STEM, this study
provides some insights that STEM educators can reflect on to better inform their teaching
practice. For some secondary STEM educators of historically underrepresented marginalized
students, the findings will validate their current teaching practice and instructional choices. But,
for others, the interconnected culturally relevant STEM teaching practices should serve as a tool
that helps bring equity to student populations with a history of being left behind by disrupting
deficit theories and the status quo.

67

References
Bell, D. (2015). The reality of STEM education, design and technology teachers’ perceptions: a
phenomenographic study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education,
26(1), 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9300-9
Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Kim, N. J., & Lefler, M. (2017). Synthesizing Results From
Empirical Research on Computer-Based Scaffolding in STEM Education: A Meta-
Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 87(2), 309–344.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316670999
Brown, B.A., Boda, P., Lemmi, C., & Monroe, X. (2019). Moving Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
From Theory to Practice: Exploring Teachers’ Application of Culturally Relevant
Education in Science and Mathematics
Brown, J. (2012). The Current Status of STEM Education Research. Journal of STEM
Education: Innovations and Research, 13(5), 7–11.
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.libproxy1.usc.edu/scholarly-
journals/current-status-stem-education-research/docview/1266493670/se-
2?accountid=14749
Byko, M. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Answering a call to action. JOM, 59(5), 26–
27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-007-0061-0
Buck Institute for Education. (n.d). What is PBL? PBL Works. Retrieved from
https://www.pblworks.org/what-is-pbl
Canning, E.A., Muenks, K., Green, D.J., & Murphy, M.C. (2019). STEM faculty who believe
ability is fixed have larger racial achievement gaps and inspire less student motivation in
their class. Science Advances, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau4734
68

Common Core State Standards Initiative (2021). Development Process. Retrieved from
http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/development-process/
Corneille, M., Lee, A., Harris, K. N., Jackson, K. T., & Covington, M. (2020). Developing
Culturally and Structurally Responsive Approaches to STEM Education to Advance
Education Equity. Journal of Negro Education, 89(1), 48–57. https://doi-
org.libproxy2.usc.edu/10.7709/jnegroeducation.89.1.0048
Darling-Hammond, L., Wilhoit, G., & Pittenger, L. (2014). Accountability for college and career
readiness: Developing a new paradigm. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity
Policy in Education.
Dee, T.S., & Penner, E.K. (2017). The Causal Effects of Cultural Relevance: Evidence From an
Ethnic Studies Curriculum. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1), 127–166.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216677002
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical Race Theory (Third Edition): An Introduction. New
York University Press. Retrieved from
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/socal/detail.action?docID=4714300
Duncan, A. (2015). The STEM gap. Los Angeles Times. https://www-proquest-
com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/1704441815?accountid=14749
Emerson Global STEM Survey Shows Growing Interest in STEM Careers But Lack of
Encouragement, Especially for Women. (2019, September 4). Education Letter, 79.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A598046008/GIC?u=usocal_main&sid=GIC&xid=cad31e
55
Erik, W. R. (2010). STEM Education: "Rising Above the Gathering Storm, Revisited".
Education Week, 30(6), 5.
69

http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/trade-
journals/stemeducation/docview/758869572/se-2?accountid=14749
Hallinen, J. (2019). STEM | Description, Development, & Facts.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/STEM-education
Hollins, E. R. (2015). Chapter 2: The Deep Meaning of Culture. In Culture in School Learning:
Revealing the Deep Meaning (pp. 19–40). essay, Taylor and Francis.
Goins, E.H. (2021). A Black Man's Journey from South Central to Studying Dessins d'Enfants
[Plenary Session]. Addressing Dual Challenges: Systemic Inequity and COVID-19,
UCLA Curtis Center, Los Angeles, CA
Gomez, M. (2022). Board votes to ban critical race theory in Placentia-Yorba Linda school
district. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-04-06/critical-race-theory-banned-by-an-
orange-county-school-board
Jackson, J. (2022). Professor at the center of Critical Race Theory ban leaving USD. Keloland.
Retrieved from https://www.keloland.com/keloland-com-original/professor-at-the-center-
of-critical-race-theory-ban-leaving-usd/
Ladson‐Billings, G. (1995). But that's just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant
pedagogy. Theory into practice, 34(3), 159–165.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the Achievement Gap to the Education Debt: Understanding
Achievement in U.S. Schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2013). Chapter 3. Critical race theory–What it is not. In M. Lynn and D.D.
Dixon (Eds.) Handbook of critical race theory in education (pp. 34–47). Routledge.
70

Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally Relevant Pedagogy 2.0: a.k.a the Remix. Harvard
Educational Review, 84(1), p. 74–84.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj131485484751
Lochmiller, C.R. & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. Sage Publications.
Marcilla, M. (2022). Madison County School Board discusses ban of Critical Race Theory,
gender and sexuality discussions. NBC 29. Retrieved from
https://www.nbc29.com/2022/05/10/madison-county-school-board-discusses-ban-critical-
race-theory-gender-sexuality-discussions/
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3rd ed.). SAGE.
McCarty, T.L., & Lee, T.S. (2014). Critical Culturally Sustaining/ Revitalizing Pedagogy and
Indigenous Education Sovereignty. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 101–125.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.q83746nl5pj34216
Mensah, & Jackson, I. (2018). Whiteness as property in science teacher education. Teachers
College Record, 120(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811812000108
Milner, H. R., & Lomotey, K. (2014). Handbook of urban education. Routledge.
National Science Board & National Science Foundation. (2020). Science and Engineering
Indicators 2020: The State of U.S. Science and Engineering. NSB-2020-1. Alexandria,
VA. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20201/
National Science Foundation. (n.d). A Timeline of NSF History. National Science Foundation:
Where Discoveries Begin. https://www.nsf.gov/about/history/overview-50.jsp
71

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States.
Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from
https://www.nextgenscience.org/
Olszewski-Kubilius, P., Steenbergen-Hu, S., Thomson, D., & Rosen, R. (2017). Minority
Achievement Gaps in STEM: Findings of a Longitudinal Study of Project Excite. Gifted
Child Quarterly, 61(1), 20–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986216673449
Paris, D., & Alim, H.S. (2014). What Are We Seeking to Sustain Through Culturally Sustaining
Pedagogy? A Loving Critique Forward. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 85–100.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.982l873k2ht16m77
Rhodes, C.M. (2017). A Validation Study of the Culturally Responsive Teaching Survey.
Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(1), 45–53.
https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050106
Romero, M. (2021). Culturally Responsive and Humanizing Mathematics Classrooms [Morning
Breakout Session]. Addressing Dual Challenges: Systemic Inequity and COVID-19,
UCLA Curtis Center, Los Angeles, CA
Royal, C., & Gibson, S. (2017). They Schools: Culturally Relevant Pedagogy Under Siege.
Teachers College Record, 119
Schunk, D. (2020). Learning theories: An educational perspective (8th ed.). Pearson Education.
Sears, R., Jessup, N., Matthews, L. (2021, February 16). Reimagining the STEM Education
Pipeline for Teachers of Color [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://aaas-
arise.org/2021/02/16/reimagining-the-stem-education-pipeline-for-teachers-of-color/
Shernoff, D. J., Sinha, S., Bressler, D. M., & Ginsburg, L. (2017). Assessing teacher education
and professional development needs for the implementation of integrated approaches to
72

STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 13.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0068-1
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.
Van Ingen, S., Davis, J., & Arndt, K. (2018). The Synergy Between Integrated STEM Lessons
and Culturally Responsive Teaching in Elementary Classrooms. Research in the Schools,
25(1), 1–19. http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-
com.libproxy1.usc.edu/scholarly-journals/synergy-between-integrated-stem-
lessons/docview/2351596731/se-2?accountid=14749
Wang, H., Moore, T. J., Roehrig, G. H., & Park, M. S. (2011). STEM Integration: Teacher
Perceptions and Practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-
PEER), 1(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314636
Xie, Y., Fang, M., & Shauman, K. (2015). STEM Education. Annual Review of Sociology. 41,
331–357. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-071312-145659
Yosso, T.J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education. 8:1, 69–91, DOI:
10.1080/1361332052000341006

73

Appendix A: Survey for Baldwin Park Unified School District
Thank you for taking the time to volunteer to take this 11-question survey. Survey responses will
contribute to my dissertation research, which seeks to understand STEM teaching strategies that
can help increase access and engagement in STEM for students of color. Your participation will
be kept confidential and is greatly appreciated!
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to email me at celiacas@usc.edu.
1. What grade(s) do you teach?
 K – 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
 10
 11
 12

2. How long have you taught STEM? ____ years

3. I spend time outside of class learning about
the cultures and languages of my students.
Strongly
disagree
Disagree Agree Strongly
agree
4. I ask for student input when planning
lessons and activities.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Agree Strongly
agree
5. I provide rubrics and progress reports to
students.
Strongly
disagree
Disagree Agree Strongly
agree
6. I reflect on how my culture impacts my
classroom and/or teaching practices.

Strongly
disagree
Disagree Agree Strongly
agree
7. What strategies do you use to engage students of color in STEM?

8. Describe a challenge you have faced in engaging students of color in STEM?

9. From your experience, how does a STEM education empower students of color?

10. If you could go back in time to your first year of teaching STEM, what
recommendation would you give yourself?

11. Would you be willing to participate in a 45 to 60-minute interview regarding how you
engage your students in STEM education?
 No
 Yes. Please provide your contact information:
▪ Name:
▪ Email:
▪ Phone Number:
74

Appendix B: Interview Protocol for Baldwin Park Unified School District
Figures B1, B2, and B3 display the interview protocol that was used during semi-
structured interviews. The script for the introduction and conclusion of the protocol were
followed as written. After the opening question, interviewee responses were used to determine
which question to ask next. For example, if an interviewee response answered a question from
the list that had not been asked that question was skipped.

75

Figure B1
Interview Protocol Page 1

76

Figure B2
Interview Protocol Page 2

77

Figure B3
Interview Protocol Page 3

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Black@: using student voices to dismantle colorblindness and inspire culturally relevant pedagogy in southern independent schools

PDF

Engaging school leaders to conceptualize culturally relevant pedagogy

PDF

Exploring culturally relevant pedagogy in a Chinese immersion program: a gap analysis

PDF

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

PDF

The importance of teacher motivation in professional development: implementing culturally relevant pedagogy

PDF

Incorporation of culturally relevant pedagogy to improve my practice and address the opportunity gap

PDF

Strengths-based pedagogy for culturally marginalized groups

PDF

Reflecting Asian American students in our social studies curriculum through culturally relevant pedagogy: a gap analysis

PDF

Applying culturally relevant pedagogy in the classroom: a course for secondary, public, urban school educators

PDF

Urban elementary school leaders as catalysts for culturally responsive engagement: re-imagining parental and family engagement post-COVID 19

PDF

Cultural wealth exploration of Black female executives and its additive value in STEM corporations: a cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) analysis

PDF

Culturally relevant pedagogy in an elementary school for indigent native peoples

PDF

Development of employee well-being initiatives to improve engagement and performance: an innovative study

PDF

Addressing the education debt: how community college educators utilize culturally relevant pedagogy to support Black and Latinx student success

PDF

The effect of opportunity gaps: the charge for culturally relevant pedagogy in middle school social studies classes

PDF

Graduating with faith: the impact of family, culture, and mentorship on Latino males in a Catholic high school

PDF

The importance of the implementation process to achieve equity in the classroom through culturally relevant pedagogy

PDF

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

PDF

Discipline with dignity for African American students: effective culturally responsive practices for elementary classroom teachers in third through fifth grade in Los Angeles County urban schools

PDF

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

Asset Metadata

Creator Castellanos, Celia Eugenia (author)

Core Title Using culturally relevant pedagogy to increase access and engagement in STEM for historically underrepresented and marginalized populations

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2022-08

Publication Date 06/28/2022

Defense Date 05/03/2022

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

Tag culturally relevant pedagogy,OAI-PMH Harvest,secondary STEM education,STEM gap

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Krop, Cathy Sloane (committee chair), Cash, David (committee member), Datta, Monique Claire (committee member)

Creator Email castellc@alumni.upenn.edu,celiacas@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111352068

Unique identifier UC111352068

Legacy Identifier etd-Castellano-10794

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Castellanos, Celia Eugenia

Type texts

Source 20220706-usctheses-batch-950 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

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

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu