University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Critical hope for culturally responsive education: an improvement study

(USC Thesis Other)

Critical hope for culturally responsive education: an improvement study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Critical Hope for Culturally Responsive Education: An Improvement Study
by
Monica Beatriz Gonzalez

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 Darnell Fine, Monica Gonzalez and Wendy Windust 2022
All Rights Reserved
The Committee for Darnell Fine, Monica Gonzalez and Wendy Windust certifies the approval of
this Dissertation

Dr. Lawrence Picus
Dr. Kenneth Yates
Dr. Darline Robles, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv

Abstract
This improvement study adapted the gap analysis problem-solving framework (Clark & Estes,
2008; Rueda, 2011) as the conceptual framework to identify the performance gaps that keep
Anglia Naxos Community School (ANCS, a pseudonym) from reaching its performance goals
and to analyze the obstacles educators face when trying to implement culturally responsive
practices. The gap analysis examined three factors: school leader and classroom educator
knowledge and skills, motivation, and the organizational factors that act as barriers to
organizational change. The study methodology was a qualitative case study that included
interviews, observations, and document analysis for data collection. Based on the study’s
findings, research-based solutions addressed the organization’s performance challenges. In
addition, an improvement plan and evaluations were suggested using the New World Model
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Keywords: international schools, culturally responsive education, instructional coaching,
professional development, professional learning communities

Dedication
I dedicate my dissertation to my past and present students in Singapore, California, and
Japan, who have all taught me something and helped me evolve into a better human being and
teacher.
Acknowledgments
Words cannot express my gratitude to Dr. Robles, the chair of my committee, for her
invaluable patience and feedback. I could not have undertaken this journey without Dr. Yates,
who generously provided knowledge and expertise. I am also grateful to Darnell Fine and

v
Wendy Windust, co-authors, my classmates, and friends for their research help, late-night and
early morning feedback sessions, and moral support. Thanks should also go to my dear friends,
Jennifer Norman, Shuna Sun, and Ying Chu, for always being there to encourage my learning.
In addition, to my friends and mentors, Dr. Rosario Greenberg and Kevin Smith, for mentoring,
encouraging, and making this journey possible. To my friends and coworkers, Rogelio Bolanos,
Greg Reynen, Mario Cruz, Noelia Torres, Joanna Alvarado, and Omar Rachid, who positively
impacted and inspired me.
This endeavor would not have been possible without my husband, Trenton Sivo Szakall,
for his unconditional love, support, suggestions, technology tips, and many hours of
proofreading. I also express my gratitude to my daughter, Audrey Marisol Szakall-Gonzalez, for
being my biggest cheerleader and never leaving my side throughout this process. Both of you
have emotionally supported me throughout my entire doctoral program. I am also grateful to my
parents, Oscar and Floriza Gonzalez, and my sisters and brothers-in-law, Vilma Gonzalez and
Ricardo Sanchez, Flor Gonzalez and Ivan Rodriquez, Claudia Gonzalez and Moises Sandoval,
and Iraida Gonzalez, for their encouragement and patience while I persevered to finish this
program. I must also thank my second mother, Jarmé Condell, whose words of encouragement
and determination ring in my ears. Furthermore, I am thankful that my nieces and nephews,
Emily Sanchez, Natalie Sanchez, Carlos Rodriquez, Diego Rodriquez, and Camila Sandoval, got
to witness my process and that it may inspire them to appreciate the value of their education. I
would also like to thank the numerous students, parents, student teachers, educators, and
administrators that I have had the privilege of working with over the past 24 years for implicitly
and intuitively teaching me the value of culturally relevant practices before I even had a
definition in my mind of what they were. The belief in me that all the aforementioned have

vi
expressed over the years has kept my spirits and motivation high throughout this process. I love
you all.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ..................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... iv
List of TablesList of Figures
............................................................................................................................... xv .......... Error!
Bookmark not defined.

Preface ..........................................................................................................................................
xvi
Chapter One: Introduction ..............................................................................................................
1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................
3
Importance of Addressing the Problem ..............................................................................
4
Organizational Context and Mission ..................................................................................
4
Organizational Performance Status .....................................................................................
6
Organizational Performance Goal ....................................................................................... 8
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals ....................................................................................... 9
Stakeholder Groups for the Study .....................................................................................
10
Purpose of the Project and Questions ...............................................................................
12
Conceptual and Methodological Framework ....................................................................
13
Definitions .........................................................................................................................
14

viii
Organization of the Study .................................................................................................
16
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................
18
The Historical and Contemporary Role of Racism in American Education .....................
19
Foundations of Culturally Responsive Education .............................................................
26
Conceptual Framework .....................................................................................................
32
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences ..............................
33
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................
56 Conceptual and Methodological Framework .................................................................... 56
Assessment of Performance Influences ............................................................................
58
Participating Stakeholders and Sample Selection .............................................................
66
Data Collection and Instrumentation ................................................................................
68
Data Analysis ....................................................................................................................
70
Trustworthiness of Data ....................................................................................................
70
Role of Investigators .........................................................................................................
70
Chapter Four: Results and Findings .............................................................................................
72
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................
74
Determination of Assets and Needs ..................................................................................
74

ix
Results and Findings for Knowledge Influences ..............................................................
75
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes ....................................................................
84
Results and Findings for Organization Causes .................................................................
88
Summary of Validated Influences ....................................................................................
97
Summary .........................................................................................................................
100
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Evaluation .......................................................................
102
Purpose of the Project and Questions .............................................................................
102
Recommendations to Address Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization
Influences ........................................................................................................................
104
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan .............................................................
141
Limitations and Delimitations .........................................................................................
162
Recommendations for Future Research ..........................................................................
164
Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................
166
References ...................................................................................................................................
168
Appendix A: Interview Protocols ...............................................................................................
193
Appendix B: Observation Protocols ...........................................................................................
197 Appendix C: Document Analysis Protocols
............................................................................... 212

x
Appendix D: Informed Consent/Information Sheet ....................................................................
218
Appendix E: Recruitment Email .................................................................................................
219
Appendix F: Immediate Evaluation Tool ...................................................................................
220
Appendix G: Delayed Evaluation Tool .......................................................................................
222

xi
List of Tables
Table 1: Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Goals 9
Table 2:
Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on Stakeholders’
Ability to Achieve the Performance Goal
40
Table 3:
Summary of Assumed Motivation Influences on Stakeholders’
Ability to Achieve the Performance Goal
47
Table 4:
Summary of Assumed Organization Influences on Stakeholders’
Ability to Achieve the Performance Goal
54
Table 5: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Method of Assessment

59
Table 6: Summary of Motivation Influences and Method of Assessment

62
Table 7: Summary of Organization Influences and Method of Assessment

65
Table 8: Knowledge Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data

97
Table 9: Motivation Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data

98
Table 10: Organizational Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data

99
Table 11: Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations

106
Table 12: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations

118
Table 13: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 130

Table 14: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 142

xii
Table 15: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 144
Table 16: Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 145
Table 17: PLC Questions Explored Through a Culturally Responsive Lens 153
Table 18: Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program 157
Table 19: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 160

xiii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Process Framework 57
Figure 2: Multi-Tiered Approach to CRILI Professional Learning 150

Preface
Except for Chapter Four, all chapters of this dissertation were jointly authored by the
researchers using a team approach. The researchers are listed alphabetically and reflect equal

xiv
contributions. While jointly authored dissertations are not the norm of most doctoral programs, a
collaborative effort reflects real-world practices when addressing disparities that affect
historically marginalized groups and interrogating the systems of power that shape policies and
practices. To meet their mission of engaging innovative thinking to achieve educational equity,
the USC Graduate School and the USC Rossier School of Education have permitted our inquiry
team to carry out this shared venture.
The dissertation is part of a collaborative project of three doctoral candidates: Darnell
Fine, Monica Gonzalez and Wendy Windust. As doctoral students, we met with educators at
Anglia Naxos Community School (a pseudonym; ANCS) to help the school improve its
development and implementation of culturally responsive practices. However, being that ANCS
is a community made up of over 10,000 educators, parents, and students, the process for
examining and addressing the problem was too large for a single dissertation. As a result, the
dissertations produced by our inquiry team collectively address the needs of ANCS (see
Gonzalez, 2022; Windust, 2022).
1

Chapter One: Introduction
Written by Darnell Fine, Monica Gonzalez, and Wendy Windust
The word “institution” may conjure the image of concrete in one’s mind. Perhaps
because institutions are just that: concretized ideas that take up permanent residence in society.
They are mechanisms for cementing laws and practices that govern and shape how one sees the
world. Through the use of institutions, the formalization of hegemonic power structures such as
white supremacy are solidified and difficult to eradicate within society. Watson (2015) explains
how researchers can stay within these hegemonic structures of white supremacy even as they
argue against them. She further suggests that while researchers may study, deconstruct, and talk
about the problem of white supremacy, they must also “uplift solution[s] of practice” (Watson,
2015, p. 12). These solutions of practice are grounded in what Duncan-Andrade (2009) calls
critical hope, which allows those marginalized by hegemonic institutions to “emerge in defiance
of socially toxic environments as the ‘roses that grow from concrete’” (p. 186).
The researchers in this study use the terms critical and hope with purpose. While there
have been calls to ban critical race theory in K–12 schools in the United States (Morgan, 2022)
as well as in American schools abroad (Weale, 2022), Taylor (2021) argues that a critical
analysis of race offers hope for educators wishing to disrupt racism in American schools
domestically and abroad. So, while the researchers in the study do not teach critical race theory
to K–12 students, they borrow from Bell’s (1995) original inquiry when they ask, “Why should
anyone be afraid of critical race theory in the first place?” If being critical is about critiquing
systems of oppression and critical hope is the undying belief that people have the power to
dismantle social systems of oppression that dehumanize them, “What is wrong with being
critical when engaging in culturally responsive practices?”
2

This study is grounded in critical hope, where schools must exhibit the “solidarity to
share in others’ suffering, to sacrifice self so that other roses may bloom, to collectively struggle
to replace the concrete completely with a rose garden” (Duncan-Andrade, 2009, p. 186).
Education is a practice of freedom (hooks, 2014), and schools must maintain hope that white
supremacy is not insurmountable (hooks, 2003). Classroom educators and school leaders cannot
do this work alone and must share the belief that, together, they can solve the problems they
face.
Epistemologies of critical hope are not just a way of knowing but also a way of
democratizing educational communities as sites of shared inquiry that produce knowledge and
inspire action. As such, the researchers in this study–representing a wide variety of stakeholders
from classroom educators to school leaders–have engaged in shared inquiry with the hope of
improving culturally responsive practices in schools. Both classroom educators and school
leaders should not only ask, “How have I helped concretize ideologies and institutions that
inhibit the growth of marginalized people?” but also, “How will I commit myself to creating and
growing learning communities that are culturally responsive?”
As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (1968) once said, “The ultimate tragedy is not the
oppression and cruelty by the bad people, but the silence over that by good people.” To speak up
and take action against oppressive educational policies and practices, culturally responsive
practices will help educational organizations move beyond the claimed goals of diversity, equity,
and inclusion. It will encourage critical hope and consciousness by assessing and reframing
normative practices, curriculum, and assessments as starting points for educational reform (Gay,
2010). Culturally responsive education centers on students as “resources to honor, explore, and
extend” (Paris, 2012, p. 94) through cultural knowledge, experience, and perspectives (Gay,
2010) and is focused on improvement and innovation that is inclusive of academic success,
3

cultural competence, and sociopolitical consciousness (Ladson-Billings, 1995a). Freire (1970)
states, “Any system that deliberately tries to discourage critical consciousness is guilty of
oppressive violence. Any school which does not foster students’ capacity for critical inquiry is
guilty of violent oppression” (p. 74). This study hopes to end the practices of violent oppression,
promote critical consciousness, and ensure a culturally responsive education for all students.
Background of the Problem
The problem is not the absence of culturally responsive education, as the Eurocentric
curriculum was created to be culturally responsive to and through white, middle-class norms
(Gay, 2018). The problem is the absence of a culturally responsive education that supports all
ethnically and racially diverse learners’ needs, cultural knowledge, prior experiences, and
performances of understanding. Culturally responsive education suggests that the addition of
cultural relevance is a pedagogy that empowers students intellectually, socially, emotionally, and
politically by using cultural referents to impart knowledge and skills (Ladson-Billings, 2014).
The lack of a culturally responsive education representing diverse cultural identities not only
manifests racism and Eurocentrism but also has the effect of further promoting and continuing
inequity.
This problem derives from the larger societal problem of institutionalized inequities in
education, such as how Eurocentric curriculum and pedagogy function to maintain and
reproduce systems of hegemony. It is located squarely in Critical Race Theory’s (CRT) tenet that
racism is a normal feature of society, embedded–and often hidden–within systems and
institutions that replicate racial inequality (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). To build on CRT’s
position in education, the Theory of Racial Ignorance (TRI) follows the evolution of racial
ideology to racial ignorance, focusing on how the hidden or invisible results in colorblindness
(Mueller, 2020). Representing an adaptive challenge of education reform, shifting organizational
4

culture, and leveraging social justice through a commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion
means moving beyond cultural competence to dismantling racism through culturally responsive
practices.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The problem of how to bridge the gap between the theory, policy, and practice of
culturally responsive education must be addressed for a variety of reasons. Schools cannot truly
fulfill their mission and commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion if their educational
practices are grounded in ethnocentric and racist ideologies. When curricula are ethnocentric,
monocultural, and steeped in whiteness, this perpetuates curriculum and epistemological
violence. Educators have a moral obligation to safeguard the intellectual and psychological
wellbeing of learners, every one of them. They can do so by drawing upon theoretical
frameworks of culturally responsive practices to acknowledge and confront inequities in
education.
Organizational Context and Mission
ANCS is a PS–12 independent school located in Southeast Asia and founded in the
1950s. It is the world’s largest American-curriculum school outside of the United States. Nearly
a decade before ANCS opened its doors, Japanese colonizers in Southeast Asia mandated a core
curriculum seeking to assimilate the local indigenous students into the colonial Empire (Akashi
& Yoshimura, 2008). Moreover, when ANCS did open its doors in 1956, its students
experienced school closures due to riots and racialized violence just a few miles from campus–a
precursor to the race riots years later in ANCS’s host country (Clutterbuck, 2019). At the end of
their first academic school year in 1957, ANCS students then experienced what was deemed the
worst pandemic in the country's history, leading to further school closures. So as much as ANCS
5

educators today may believe they are now living in extraordinary times–amid COVID-19 and the
Black Lives Matter movement–neither global pandemics nor systemic racism is new or uniquely
American.
While ANCS has a mission to provide each student with an exemplary American
education grounded in the international perspectives of Southeast Asia, students indigenous to
the host country are restricted from attending international schools without government waivers.
This is to preserve and sustain the national identity of students indigenous to the host country,
which suggests their sense of culture may be lost while attending international schools like
ANCS. Still, students from 66 other countries attend ANCS. And while ANCS is a registered
501(c)(3) United States (US) non-profit organization, the school is not required to follow US
federal and state educational regulations.
With more than 10,000 educators, students, and parents from around the world, ANCS
claims to be one of the world’s most diverse international schools. Yet, the school only collects
student data on nationality (according to passports) and not race. The ANCS school leadership
team consists of 28 members, of which 82% are white. Similar demographics can be found in the
ANCS faculty, where most educators are white, including the school’s instructional coaches.
This stands in stark contrast to the ANCS student demographics that represent what appears to
be great racial diversity and multiculturalism. 54% of the students are US citizens, 33% have
citizenship from other Asian countries, including China, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and
Hong Kong SAR, and 13% of the students are dual (American and a second country) passport
holders. The second-largest national group of students are Indian citizens at 12%, and the
remainder of the student population is made up of passport holders from a variety of countries.
Central to ANCS’s mission are the organization’s six “Institutional Commitments.” As
faculty and staff, each employee signed contracts subscribing to these ideals and the expectation
6

that they collaborate, innovate, and make a positive difference within the ANCS community.
Embedded in the organization’s institutional commitments is the expectation that curricula be
culturally responsive. That is, culturally responsive practices should be reflected in the
curriculum’s intended outcomes, plans for assessment, and daily instruction. It should also be
reflected in the concepts and processes of lessons and entire courses of study. Furthermore, in
the school’s six-year strategic plan, the organization identifies the development and
implementation of culturally responsive practices as a prioritized area of growth.
Organizational Performance Status
The organization’s performance problems are the knowledge, motivation, and
organization gaps inhibiting educators from enacting culturally responsive practices at ANCS.
According to ANCS’s 2020 Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) Committee
report, to maintain accreditation, a recommended area of growth and focus for ANCS is a shift
toward explicitly addressing cultural competence in all areas of the school community. This
problem impacts the school’s goals because, in addition to the WASC report, one of the themes
that emerged from a recent self-study of the ANCS community, framed in the school’s “2027
Strategic Improvement Plan,” focused on the need to improve the organizational, educational
practices around the issues of bias, prejudice, and racism.
However, the strongest voices demanding improvement came from a group of alumni
who created and collated a survey to inquire into student experiences with prejudice, inequality,
and racism during their time at ANCS. The alumni received over 240 responses from 23 years of
graduated and graduating classes. They sent a list of curricular and non-curricular demands to
the administration and faculty body, calling for actionable changes to the school’s curriculum
and culture. The implication of their findings demonstrated a lack of cultural responsiveness in
the written and taught curriculum at ANCS. The alumni group highlighted what they termed five
7

curricular failures: (1) lack of curriculum exploring topics of race and privilege; (2) lack of
diverse teaching body; (3) lack of Black/Indigenous history integrated into Social Studies
curriculum; (4) lack of history/education of colonialism and racism in the host country and
region; and (5) lack of open dialogue around economic privilege.
The organization’s office of teaching and learning also surveyed students from the
elementary, middle, and high schools in 2020 about their perceptions of ANCS’s six Desired
Student Learning Outcomes (DSLOs) and how well their classes supported learning in these
areas. One of these DSLOs is cultural competence, a key component of culturally responsive
teaching since its inception and across time (Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 2014). ANCS students in
each school division scored cultural competence the lowest on the survey, indicating that
students perceive this DSLO as the least effectively taught or prioritized in their classes.
During a focus group meeting in January of 2020, school leaders at ANCS also solicited
feedback regarding the DSLOs from parents across the divisions. Parents were asked to give
examples of how they saw each DSLO, including cultural competence, exemplified by ANCS
students. Campus leaders reported that parents expressed that cultural competence was taught
mainly through cultural celebrations and exposure to the school’s diverse student population.
Ladson-Billings (2014) would describe this as “very limited and superficial notions of culture”
and culturally responsive teaching (p. 77). Often well-intentioned classroom educators take what
Banks (1989) would deem a foods-festivals-and-holidays approach to designing multicultural
curricula. The cultural celebrations that the parents described are superficial representations of
cultural competence that fail to dive deeper into multiculturalism beyond tokenistic exposure to
diverse groups of people.
Feedback from alumni, students, and parents is aligned with faculty perceptions of
cultural competence at ANCS. In the school’s most recent 2020 accreditation report, faculty
8

across all divisions identified a need to improve their teaching and assessment of cultural
competence. Through a self-study process, each professional learning community indicated on a
Likert scale of 1 to 4 how each DSLO is taught. Cultural competence received the lowest score
of 2.66 compared to the other DSLOs. The school’s leaders concluded that ANCS needs to
provide professional learning so all educators understand cultural competence and how it can be
taught and assessed. They stated that ANCS would develop a set of tools to more explicitly teach
and assess skills directly related to cultural competence.
Even with this context provided, the researchers do not think this gives justice to what
truly motivates the study on a human level. The researchers have outlined the contractual
obligations of classroom educators, provided numbers from survey results, and shared
perceptions from various stakeholders. Nevertheless, what is truly at stake for ANCS if they fail
to develop educators’ capacity to teach in culturally responsive ways?
Organizational Performance Goal
The organization’s performance goal is that by 2027, all classroom educators will
implement culturally responsive strategies into their classroom instruction 100% of the time, and
school leaders will support their capacity to do so. Research suggests that if every classroom
educator can implement these teaching strategies, the academic achievement gap will be reduced
(Gay, 2010; Howard, 2003; Ladson-Billings, 2009). The achievement of this goal will be
measured by interviewing educators, observing them in practice, and document analyses. The
organization’s performance goal for educators to develop and enact culturally responsive
practices is not just adding something new to educators’ plates; it is the plate.
9

Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
ANCS expects all of its educators to carry out its institutional commitments as well as
support the goals outlined in the school’s strategic plan. In order to meet the organizational goal,
the educators will know what the framework of culturally responsive education encompasses and
feel motivated to enact culturally responsive practices. To ensure its educators are fulfilling its
organizational goals related to culturally responsive education, ANCS has systems supporting
learning, which are driven by its organizational mission and performance goals outlined in Table
1.

Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Goals

Organizational Mission

The mission of Anglia Naxos Community School (ANCS) is to be a world leader in education,
cultivating exceptional thinkers prepared for the future. ANCS is committed to providing each
student an exemplary American educational experience with an international perspective.

Organizational Performance Goal
By June 2027, ANCS will promote diversity, equity, and inclusion
thro and ensure that every student feels valued and included.
ughout our community
School Leaders Classroom Educators Spanish Educators
10

By June 2027, school leaders
will oversee and support the
development of culturally
responsive classroom educators
and curricula.
By June 2027, classroom
educators will develop greater
expertise in using high-quality,
culturally responsive practices to
plan, teach, and assess.
By June 2027, Spanish
educators will develop greater
expertise in using highquality,
culturally responsive practices
to plan, teach, and assess.

Critical Behaviors

Educators design policies and
curricula through a culturally
responsive lens.
Educators evaluate student and
professional learning
experiences using culturally
responsive assessment practices.
Educators facilitate processes
and learning experiences
anchored in culturally
responsive practices.

Stakeholder Groups for the Study
Due to the collaborative nature of this study, the three individual stakeholder groups will
be examined interdependently. The stakeholders are classroom educators (inclusive of Spanish
educators) and school leaders (inclusive of instructional leaders and divisional principals). As
ANCS uses the umbrella term educators to describe school leaders and classroom educators
collectively, the researchers in this study will do the same. The use of the term educators also
suggests a degree of interdependence between stakeholder groups in their functions and primary
responsibilities related to developing and implementing culturally responsive practices in the
organization. Still, separate dissertation team members researched each stakeholder of focus
throughout the study to note nuances in findings and results. And when appropriate, the use of
educators was used to represent common attributes and traits across all stakeholder groups.
11

The primary responsibility of school leaders at ANCS is to support students and
classroom educators in a sustained focus on student learning. ANCS’s school leaders help ensure
classroom educators implement and create effective schoolwide systems supporting students and
learning. While many schools may assign instructional leadership duties solely to their divisional
principals, due to the size and scale of ANCS, their divisional principals rely on instructional
leaders (i.e., coaches, deans, professional learning community leaders) to help support the
development of culturally responsive educators and curricula. Both divisional principals and
instructional leaders at ANCS have considerable influence on the school’s curriculum,
instructional, and assessment practices.
School leaders refer to both divisional principals and instructional leaders who oversee
and support the development of classroom educators and curricula. Divisional principals are
tasked with ensuring the fulfillment of the school’s strategic initiatives in their respective
divisions. Divisional principals lead and directly supervise faculty and staff in developing and
implementing critical strategic initiatives. They also provide instructional leadership in various
areas, including curriculum, assessment, and high-impact instructional practices. Instructional
leaders are not only members of a particular division in the school; they are also responsible for
modeling ANCS’s vision and values as described in the school’s strategic plan. Instructional
leaders work in close partnership with divisional principals and classroom educators to support
student learning in their respective divisions.
The primary responsibility of classroom educators at ANCS is to facilitate deep and
personalized learning experiences for students, whether in Spanish-language, Chinese-language,
or English-medium classrooms. Classroom educators teach students to think critically, use their
creative problem-solving skills, and collaborate with classmates from diverse cultural
12

backgrounds. Classroom educators are also expected to engage in collaborative inquiry and
action with their colleagues, focusing on fostering equity and achievement for all students.
Developing greater expertise in using high-quality, culturally responsive practices is a critical
focus of classroom educators’ engagement with students as well as their colleagues.
Spanish educators have the same primary responsibilities as other classroom educators at
ANCS. In addition to these responsibilities, the ultimate goal of Spanish-language educators at
ANCS is to help students learn Spanish so that they can communicate effectively in diverse,
reallife contexts. Spanish educators are also expected to develop students’ understanding of
Hispanophone cultures through teaching language skills. Spanish educators should advance
students’ language proficiency by designing and implementing a variety of culturally-rich
thematic units. While developing culturally responsive practices is a critical focus for any
classroom educator at ANCS, Spanish educators’ practices are intimately connected to the
cultural foundations of culturally responsive pedagogy.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this improvement study is to conduct a gap analysis examining the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences impacting ANCS’s performance goal of
supporting the development and implementation of culturally responsive pedagogical practices.
Characteristics of culturally responsive leadership practices and the development of culturally
responsive pedagogy were examined in the organization. A review of literature related to
culturally responsive practices was to determine the key features explored in the study. The
current reality of culturally responsive education at ANCS was identified, and then a gap
analysis was conducted to assess the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors required
for the stakeholder goals to be achieved.
13

The analysis began by generating a list of possible or assumed influences that were
examined systematically. It then focused on actual or validated factors influencing the
achievement of the stakeholder goals. While a comprehensive analysis would focus on all
stakeholders, for practical purposes, this study focused on school leaders, classroom educators,
and Spanish educators. As mentioned before, these stakeholder groups are collectively termed
educators by the organization as well as by the researchers of this study. Thus, two research
questions guided this study:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that contribute to
educators’ successful enactment of culturally responsive practices?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions
for supporting culturally responsive educators?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
To gain a richer understanding of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational gaps at
ANCS, a case study approach was used to collect qualitative data. The researchers used a
qualitative case study approach as defined by Yin (2018) and Lochmiller and Lester (2017).
Lochmiller and Lester (2017) state that qualitative research requires emergent research designs
that allow for flexibility with respect to the purposes of a study and for “unexpected pathways to
appear during the collection and analysis” of data (p. 99). As emergent design is a hallmark of
qualitative research, the researchers embraced a multitude of research methods that provided
them with ongoing perspectives regarding their topic of study.
This is a collaborative action research project using Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis
as the conceptual framework to analyze the obstacles school leaders and classroom educators
face when implementing culturally responsive practice at ANCS. In addition, the framework
identified performance gaps that keep the organization from reaching its performance goals.
14

Clark and Estes (2008) maintain that causes and solutions can be identified, leading to
organizational change. The researchers identified three factors to look at within the gap analysis:
educators’ knowledge, motivation, and the organizational factors that serve as barriers to
organizational change. When assessing educators' knowledge, the framework attempts to
identify whether educators know what to do and how to reach the organizational performance
goal.
Motivation means educators want to work toward the organization’s performance goal.
The current performance of ANCS educators in relation to the organizational goal was
assessed using personal interviews, observations, and document analyses. Research-based
solutions were recommended and evaluated comprehensively. Organizational obstacles pertain
to the strategies, cultures, or resources that enable or limit the employees’ progress toward
achieving the performance goal (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Definitions
The following key terms and definitions are used throughout this study: Classroom
Educator: an educator at ANCS who plans curriculum for, delivers instruction to, and
assesses the learning of students in a particular academic discipline.
Coaching: the process in which an educator facilitates a conversation regarding their
professional growth for individual team members. While instructional leaders typically coach
classroom educators at ANCS, educators at all levels of the school (including ANCS’s
superintendent) receive coaching in some capacity.
Critical Self-Reflection: the process of educators identifying, assessing, and thinking about their
cultural beliefs, values, assumptions, and biases, especially as it relates to enacting culturally
responsive practices.
Cultural Competence: one dimension of culturally responsive education at ANCS in
15

which students, as well as educators, gain self-awareness of their personal worldview, as well as
the worldview of others.
Culturally Responsive Education: at ANCS, education is defined according to three primary
components: curriculum, instruction, and assessment. The school thereby defines culturally
responsive education as educators facilitating meaningful connections between what students
learn and their cultures, identities, and life experiences via curriculum, instruction, and
assessment practices.
Culturally Responsive Practices: ANCS defines culturally responsive practices as research-based
approaches that make meaningful connections between what students learn and their cultures,
identities, and life experiences.
Divisional Principals: educators who are tasked with leading and ensuring the fulfillment of
ANC’s strategic initiatives in their respective divisions.
Educators: ANCS uses the umbrella term educators to describe school leaders and classroom
educators collectively.
Instructional Leaders: While many schools may assign instructional leadership duties solely
to their divisional principals, due to the size and scale of ANCS, divisional principals rely on
instructional leaders (i.e., coaches, deans, professional learning community leaders) to help
support the professional learning of classroom educators and curricula. Professional
Learning: ANCS defines professional learning as a comprehensive, differentiated, and
sustained approach to improving classroom educators’ and school leaders’ effectiveness in
optimizing student learning. In addition to whole-school professional development offerings,
professional learning at ANCS includes coaching and professional learning communities.
Professional Learning Communities (PLCs): at ANCS, a Professional Learning Community
(PLC) is defined as a group of educators committed to working collaboratively in ongoing
16

processes of collective inquiry and action research to achieve better results for the students they
serve.
Racism: while ANCS references racism in its strategic plan, the school does not provide a clear
definition of the term. They do state that ANCS has no place for racism or any other type of
discrimination. They also expect classroom educators and school leaders to teach students in
thoughtful and age-appropriate ways about historical and present-day issues of racism and other
forms of discrimination. Drawing on ANCS’s professional learning materials, racism was at one
point defined as one group having the power to carry out systematic discrimination through the
major institutions of society.
School Leaders: school leaders refer to both divisional principals and instructional leaders at
ANCS who oversee and support the development of classroom educators and curricula.
Sociopolitical Consciousness: one dimension of culturally responsive education at ANCS in
which students, as well as educators, gain an awareness between oppression and advantage
(Ladson-Billings, 2014).
Spanish Educators: classroom educators at ANCS who plans curriculum for, delivers
instruction to, and assesses the learning of students in Spanish language classrooms.
White Supremacy: white-dominant culture having the power to carry out systematic
discrimination against communities of color through the major institutions of society.
Organization of the Study
This study is organized using five chapters. This chapter provides key concepts and
terminology commonly found in discussions about culturally responsive teaching and leadership
practices. The organization’s mission, goals, and stakeholders, as well as the initial concepts of
gap analysis, are also introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of the current literature
surrounding the scope of the study. Topics of culturally responsive pedagogy, culturally relevant
17

pedagogy, and culturally responsive school leadership are addressed. Chapter Three details the
assumed interfering knowledge, motivation, and organizational causes for this study, as well as
methodology when it comes to the choice of participants, data collection, and analysis. In
Chapter Four, findings are analyzed for individual stakeholders and published in each team
member’s separate dissertations. Chapter Five provides solutions, based on data and literature,
for closing the perceived gaps and recommendations for an implementation and evaluation plan
for the solutions.

18

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Written by Darnell Fine, Monica Gonzalez, and Wendy Windust
The necessity of developing and implementing culturally responsive education is a global
problem in the sense that all nations will need to address and repair the damage done by socially
dominant groups to underrepresented and minoritized groups throughout history if humanity is
to thrive in a post-colonial era in which all nations have become economically interdependent. If
there is anything that humanity should have learned from the COVID-19 pandemic, it is that no
nation-state can thrive on its own, isolated from all others, if it wishes to move beyond a
subsistence level of living. It is no longer acceptable to ignore the needs and contexts of diverse
groups of learners from minoritized backgrounds if they are to succeed.
The embedded educational practices of the past that form the foundational basis of
today’s educational systems worldwide have not and still do not serve the needs of a diverse
group of learners. For centuries, it has been the historical pattern and practice of socially
dominant groups to impose forms of educational indoctrination that have ignored and
marginalized learners that were not accepted members of the dominant group in each nation.
This chapter will first review the historical role of racism in American education domestically
and abroad as well as the foundations of culturally responsive education. It will then review the
role of ANCS educators, followed by the explanation of the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences’ lens used in this study. Finally, Chapter Two will examine ANCS
educators’ knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences and complete the chapter by
presenting the conceptual framework.
The Historical and Contemporary Role of Racism in American Education
Given the history of “European epistemological supremacy” from the 17th and 18th
centuries, how have institutions originating from the West and anchored in Western ideologies
19

perpetuated a “whitestream curriculum” (Tuck & Gaztambide-Fernández, 2013, p. 82)?
Furthermore, how have “whitestream institutions” within American education failed to sustain
and respond to the diverse cultures of its students (Paris & Alim, 2017, p. 3)? The historical role
of racism in American education has preserved an education system that upholds white-
dominant culture and consequently marginalizes communities of color (Anderson, 1988; Au et
al., 2016;
Spring, 2016).
Curriculum Violence
Curriculum documents, as Wiggins and McTighe (2007) stated, are the architectural
blueprint of a school. And as schools in the United States were historically designed to exclude
communities of color, it should come as no surprise that the voices of Black American, Native
American, Mexican American, and Asian American communities were too often excluded from
the hegemonic history of curriculum studies (Brown & Au, 2014). And if, as Pinar (2012)
argued, “the school curriculum communicates what we choose to remember about our past, what
we believe about the present, what we hope for the future” (p. 20), then a curriculum invariably
tells stories about who society was and still is designed for. In order to challenge the master
narratives of curriculum studies (Brown & Au, 2014), educators must heed Audre Lorde’s
(1984) warning that the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house. That is, the
selective tradition of curriculum excluding communities of color will never dismantle
institutional racism because it was not designed to do so. On the contrary, hegemonic curricular
traditions have the potential to enact harm on communities of color.
Love (2016) warned of the “spirit murdering” inflicted on the souls of Black children by
culturally insensitive school officials. This “intangible violence” is “less visceral and seemingly
20

less tragic than the physical acts of murder at the hands of [w]hite mobs, kidnapping and killing
by White self-appointed vigilantes, or shootings by police officers in their homes and streets
[but] a slow death, a death of the spirit, is a death that is built on racism” (Love, 2016, pp. 1-2).
And such spirit murders can be and are often committed in the design and implementation of a
hegemonic curriculum. Ighodaro and Wiggan (2013) referred to this as curriculum violence, the
“deliberate manipulation of academic programming in a manner that ignores or compromises the
intellectual and psychological well-being of learners” and their heritage (p. 2). They argued that
a “school that is based primarily on the experiences of [the dominant group] best serves that
group, while simultaneously indoctrinating the excluded groups, teaching them of their
subordinate status in the society” (p. 67).
What is often ignored in conversations about spirit murders and curriculum violence are
the individuals who are spirit murderers and agents of violence. In her book Beloved, Morrison
(2004) gave voice to a fictional character who warned, “Watch out. Watch out. Nothing in the
world more dangerous than a white school teacher” (p. 266). Baldwin (1997) echoed similar
sentiments, stating that “a child cannot be taught by anyone whose demand, essentially, is that
the child repudiates his experience, and all that gives him sustenance, [...] Black people have lost
too many children that way” (p. 6). Woodson (1933/2006) referred to this as miseducation,
arguing to teach students that their “Black face is a curse [...] is the worst sort of lynching” (p.
6). Hayes (2016) argued that it is a type of violence–or academic lynching–when educational
institutions force teacher educators to value and maintain white supremacy in their curricula.
From the educational and societal apartheid from the Civil War to the new millennium, there
exists a long history of curriculum for Black Americans that is imbued with the values and ideas
of white supremacy (Watkins, 2001). The hegemonic history of curriculum has not only
invisibilized but also perpetuated violence towards Native American, Mexican American, and
21

Asian American communities as well (Brown & Au, 2014).
Cultural Deficit Models of Education
Cultural assimilation was the main solution to address students of color’s academic
failures and was rooted in their perceived cultural deficits. As Solórzano and Yosso (2002)
noted, students of color were expected to assimilate to white middle-class culture in order to
meet academic expectations. Cultural deficit models of education began with the assumption that
students of color are intellectually, morally, and emotionally deficient and ended with the
foregone conclusion that their evitable failure within the educational system will be due to these
deficiencies. Cultural deficit theories suggested that students of color were “victims of
pathological lifestyles that [hinder] their ability to benefit from school” (Ladson-Billings, 2006,
p. 4).
Never mind the legacy of white-dominant culture forcing Native Americans to attend
“Indian schools” that erased their indigenous culture (Khalifa, 2020) and then predominantly
white universities admitting few Native Americans upon their graduation (Ladson-Billings,
2006). Cultural deficient models posit that to be successful, Latinx American students must learn
English at the expense of losing Spanish (Solórzano & Yosso, 2002), never mind the history of
segregating and denying Latinx American students access to equitable educational opportunities
since 1848 (Ladson-Billings, 2006). White-dominant culture propagated the idea that Asian
immigrants were morally, racially, and culturally inferior, justifying educational policies
designed to deny Asian immigrants equitable educational opportunities as early as 1872 (Spring,
2016). And prior to the abolition of slavery in the United States, enslaved Black people were not
only banned from reading and writing but also brutalized, punished, tortured, and even killed for
doing so (Harmon, 2012). Following the Emancipation Proclamation in 1961, Harmon (2012)
stated that former enslavers viewed the idea of literate Black Americans with fear, believing the
22

notion of educated Black people went against beliefs of their racial inferiority. White-dominant
culture was hostile to the idea of educating formerly enslaved Black people and even purported
that they could not be educated in the same way as white children (Anderson, 1988), an ideology
that persisted well into the 1960s and beyond. The legacies of oppressive policies and practices
inhibited Black students, as well as indigenous students and other students of color, from gaining
equitable access to educational opportunities throughout US history.
Racist History of Standardized Testing
Historically, US standardized testing has been used as an instrument to uphold and
reinforce the oppression of minoritized students and preserve white-dominant culture in
education. Au (2015) stated that standardized tests served a malicious function in schooling by
systematically erasing epistemologies that were different from white-dominant culture and ways
of knowing. Cunningham (2018) argued that standardized tests throughout history and today
have been designed in a way that positioned whiteness as the norm and thereby the only
acceptable source of knowledge. This, in turn, led to a lack of critically examining testing
methods and instead focused on fixing students of color who may not demonstrate an
understanding of normative knowledge defined by white-dominant culture.
Standardized tests were not only found to be racially and culturally biased in the
knowledge they chose to measure and assess but also in how they were used as a tool to track
and re-segregate white students and students of color (Knoester & Au, 2015). This was a
callback to the IQ tests and eugenics movements that sought to determine intelligence and
“mental fitness” to justify racially discriminatory practices (Knoester & Au, 2015). Ladson-
Billings (1998) also argued that assessments in school today are reminiscent of the intelligence
testing falsely legitimizing students of color’s cultural deficiencies under the guise of scientific
rationalism.
23

Racism in the Context of American International Schools
Murakami-Ramalho (2008) stated that an influx of American international schools were
first established in the 1960s to meet the needs of United States expatriate families. Specifically,
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 provided aid and assistance to nonmilitary overseas schools
and was often connected to American embassies, American military settlements, American
corporations, and American missionary groups. Although these schools received aid and
assistance from the US government, policy control typically was in the hands of U.S. expatriate
parents elected to the school board, who thereby supervised the head of school or superintendent.
Today, there are 256 American-sponsored schools overseas (U.S. Department of State, 2021).
The United States Department of State (2021) estimated that nearly a quarter-million
school-age children of overseas Americans attend these schools. These children attended a wide
variety of American schools abroad, ranging from schools operated by the United States
Department of Defense to non-government, co-educational, and independent schools. The U. S.
government aided and supported many of these schools with the purpose of “help[ing] the
schools provide quality education for children of United States citizens and to demonstrate to
foreign nationals the philosophy and methods of American education” (U.S. Department of
State,
2021, para. 1). While the schools were open to all nationalities and were deemed critical to the
US government’s “foreign policy objective of strengthening mutual understanding between
Americans and the people of other countries” (U.S. Department of State, 2021, para. 1), the core
curriculum and instructional program were American-centric.
According to the United States Department of State (2021), the intent of American
international schools was to prepare students to enter schools, colleges, and universities in the
24

United States. In other words, “American schools overseas often are named ‘American school of
[name of country]’; in some cases, they are called international schools, even though they have
adopted an American philosophy of education” (Murakami-Ramalho, 2008, p. 79). Given the
historical and contemporary role of racism in U.S. education, Taylor (2021) argued that,
[American international schools] abroad who offer an ‘American’ education often include the
additive of American schoolings’ racist ideology as they work to imitate American schools. As
there is racism infiltrating United States schools, there is also racism infiltrating [American
international schools]. (p. 32)
Allen (2001) argued that the globalization of white supremacy was interconnected to
multicultural education and that the colonized peoples of “Africa, Asia, Australia, and the
Americas [...] have always had to deal with the ‘globalization’ practiced by Europeans and their
colonial representatives” (p. 4). Taylor (2021) stated that children of overseas Americans may
recognize a racialized curriculum, but non-American students may develop misconceptions
about racial hierarchy and thereby perpetuate racial stereotypes when attempting to “assimilate
into American culture by studying colonized American content” (p. 33).
Gardner-McTaggart (2018) described international schools as sites of cultural
laundering: a post-colonial process where non-Western students are taught Western and English
ways of being and knowing. Gardner-McTaggart (2018) referenced international schools
institutionalizing an imperial gaze, which “reflects the assumption that the white western subject
is central” (Kaplan, 2012, p. 78). Kaplan (2012) defined the imperial gaze as a “structure that
which fails to understand that [...] non-American peoples have integral cultures and lives that
work according to own, albeit different, logic” (p. 78). Gardner-McTaggart (2021) extended this
definition to an international gaze in which not only American international schools but
international schools, in general, are steeped in neo-colonial overtones and the cultural power of
25

whiteness. He described implicit racism in international schools’ hiring and recruitment
practices, a ‘tick box’ culture that fails to deeply explore diversity issues, and “a process of
social alchemy [...] turning the ordinary metal of the non-white, non-English (student) to gold.”
International school students are situated in a habitus where the accepted ways of talking,
thinking, and even being are defined by dominant white, English hegemony.
While Bonilla-Silva (2006) defined white habitus as a means of ensuring white children
experience tremendous levels of racial segregation and isolation from communities of color,
Gardner-McTaggart (2021) described the function of white habitus in international school
settings not as a means of physically excluding students of color but erasing their cultural
identities to assimilate into white-dominant culture. Similar to the previously mentioned
concepts of spirit murdering (Love, 2016), academic lynching (Hayes, 2016), and curriculum
violence (Ighodaro & Wiggan, 2013), Gardner-McTaggart (2018, 2021) argued that the
processes and policies of international schools enact symbolic violence. While not physical, this
symbolic violence still perpetuates the harms of upholding white cultural superiority while
devaluing students of color’s home cultures. Beyond academia, the problem of racism in
international schools has entered public discourse and is being explored at American
international schools around the world (Pearson, 2022).
Foundations of Culturally Responsive Education
Several existing frameworks served as the pedagogical foundations of culturally
responsive education. This review of the literature is by no means exhaustive of all the history
and scholarship related to culturally responsive education. What it does offer is a review of
seven frameworks intimately related to the foundation and application of culturally responsive
practices to and throughout history (e.g., critical race theory, cultural asset-based instruction,
multicultural education, culturally relevant pedagogy, culturally responsive pedagogy, culturally
26

sustaining pedagogy, and culturally responsive school leadership). Collectively, these
frameworks offered counter pedagogies to culturally unresponsive policies and practices found
throughout the history of American schools domestically and abroad. While each of these
frameworks offered its own unique perspectives related to culturally responsive practices, each
sought to counter the oppressive and exclusionary nature of schools towards students of color.
Critical Race Theory in Education
Critical race theory in the context of education examined the curriculum, assessment, and
instruction through the lens of race, white supremacy, and People of Color. It deemed white
supremacy as endemic and deeply ingrained in American education while challenging myths of
neutrality, objectivity, colorblindness, and meritocracy (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 2016).
LadsonBillings and Tate (2016) discussed how critical race theory in education posits that anti-
racist practices must converge with white interests, ensuring that white communities are happy
and do not leave the system altogether. Nonetheless, critical race theory in education
necessitated educators de-center white, middle-class culture by affirming and drawing upon
students of color’s funds of knowledge, cultural wealth, and cultural capital (Yosso, 2014). As
official school curricula may have represented a culturally-specific artifact designed to maintain
white supremacy, critical race theory in education questioned the use of instructional tools that
presumed students of color as deficient, recognizing that the master’s tools can never dismantle
the master’s house (Ladson-Billings, 1998). Critical race theory argues that racism and white
supremacy remain inseparable from American curriculum, instruction and assessment.
Cultural Asset-Based Instruction
Cultural asset-based instruction disrupted deficit-oriented philosophies about students of
color and culturally diverse students. Boykin et al. (2005) stated that mass public education in
America was conceived, in large part, to bring the values and behaviors of minoritized groups in
27

conformity with white mainstream culture. As schools historically and today were not culturally
neutral terrains, cultural asset-based instruction strived to appreciate, understand, and more fully
embrace multiple cultural perspectives to more efficiently meet the needs of students of color
(Boykin, 2000; Boykin et al., 2005). Instead of viewing students and their cultures through a
deficit-oriented lens, students of color’s cultural values and behaviors were seen as assets that
could help educators teach in ways that are congruent to learners’ diverse cultures and needs
(Boykin, 2000). Ford and Trotman (2001) discussed the lack of multicultural preparation in
teacher education, reinforcing deficient-oriented philosophies that inhibited educators from
incorporating multicultural perspectives and materials into curriculum and instruction. Cultural
asset-based instruction involved not only classroom educators disrupting their deficitorientations
of culturally and racially diverse learners but called for teacher education programs to also center
multiculturalism in their professional development of educators.
Multicultural Education
Multicultural education refers to the incorporation of racially and ethnically diverse
perspectives in the curriculum and instructional materials. Banks (1997) stated that a
mainstream-centric curriculum had negative consequences for white students and students of
color, promoting a false sense of superiority that robbed white students from becoming culturally
competent in students of color’s cultures while also marginalizing students of color’s culture and
lived experiences. Multicultural education extended beyond studying cultural foods, festivals,
and holidays in the curriculum to taking a transformative and social action approach that
integrated multiculturalism into the curriculum and encourages leaders to address systems of
oppression (Banks, 1997). This aligned with the history of social movements in multicultural
education, spanning from Black activism in the 1840s to the advocacy of communities of color
in the 1970s (Nieto, 2009). Multicultural education became disassociated in many schools from
28

its sociopolitical and transformative roots with the increased involvement of white educators in
the 1990s (Sleeter, 1996). Nonetheless, multicultural education was not simply the incorporation
of multicultural perspectives in the curriculum but social activism, attempting to subvert and
disrupt white supremacist curricula and systems.
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Ladson-Billings (1995b, 2009) coined the term culturally relevant pedagogy to represent
educators’ ability to uphold students’ cultural identities while developing their cultural
competence in at least one other culture. She also introduced several other tenets of culturally
relevant pedagogy, centering on developing learners academically as well as the development of
their sociopolitical consciousness (Ladson-Billings, 1995b, 2009). Culturally relevant pedagogy
focuses on not only the academic and intellectual development of students but also their ability
to think critically about society, solve real-world problems, and confront social inequities
(Ladson-Billings, 1995b, 2009).
The responsibility for learning did not fall solely on classroom educators and their
students but also on teacher educators who should have had a more expansive understanding of
culture (their own and others) and the ways it functioned in education (Ladson-Billings, 1995b).
Ladson-Billings (2008) stated that teacher education was culpable for the lack of culturally
relevant pedagogy in school and should have encouraged educators to not just do culturally
responsive pedagogy but be culturally relevant educators beyond the confines of the classroom
and their time with students. Culturally relevant pedagogy was not simply using culture as a
vehicle for supporting learning and academic achievement in schools but was also a means of
promoting cultural competence and a sociopolitical consciousness related to systems of
oppression.
29

Culturally Responsive Pedagogy
Culturally responsive pedagogy draws upon and uses the cultural knowledge, prior
experiences, frames of reference, and performance styles that learners bring to the classrooms to
make learning more relevant to and effective for them. Gay (2018) offered a set of culturally
responsive teaching strategies that were multidimensional and drew upon students’ cultures and
experiences to drive instruction, assessment, and curriculum design. Gay (2002) called on
educators to not only develop knowledge of the subject matter they teach but also the cultural
background of their learners so that they could employ cultural scaffolding to expand their
learners’ intellectual and academic development. Culturally responsive pedagogy also
challenged educators to design curriculum and instructional plans that confronted issues of
racism, historical atrocities, powerlessness, and hegemony beyond the myths of white
mainstream America and its marginalization of minoritized cultures (Gay, 2002).
Furthermore, Gay (2002) argued that teacher educators must teach educators how to
develop cultural congruence with the cultures that learners bring to the classroom and the
instructional plans they employ in the classroom to effectively teach and reach diverse learners.
That is, teacher education programs should have been just as culturally responsive to cultural
diversity as K–12 classrooms. Sleeter (2012) argued that schools should also educate all
stakeholders (parents, educators, and education leaders) about what culturally responsive
pedagogy means and looks like in the classroom. Culturally responsive pedagogy calls upon
educators to recognize the cultural capital and cultural tools that diverse learners bring to the
classroom and to leverage them as assets throughout instruction. An added dimension of
culturally responsive pedagogy was to confront hegemony and exclusion within and beyond the
confines of the classroom.
30

Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy
Culturally sustaining pedagogy built on culturally relevant/responsive pedagogy not only
affirming and connecting schooling to learners’ cultural backgrounds but also sustaining
learners’ cultural backgrounds through schooling. Paris (2012) questioned the use of
“responsive” and “relevant” as terms that may not inspire or even connote a critical stance
toward and critical action against unequal power. He argued that culturally sustaining as a term
required pedagogies to be more than responsive or relevant to the cultural experiences and
practices of learners; it required that educators encourage learners to sustain the cultural and
linguistic competence of their communities while simultaneously offering access to dominant
cultural competence. Paris and Alim (2014) argued that educators must develop pedagogies
beyond white, middle-class norms permeating educational research and classroom practices;
linguistic, literate, and cultural hegemony must be disrupted in a pluralistic society. Culturally
sustaining pedagogy reimagined schools as sites where culturally diverse practices are not only
valued but sustained, encouraging learners to explore, honor, extend, and at times problematize
their own culture (Paris & Alim, 2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogy challenged educators to
not only leverage learners’ culture as a tool to meet whitestream standards but to see their
cultures as worth sustaining and exploring in their own right, independent of the white,
hegemonic gaze.
Culturally Responsive School Leadership
Culturally responsive school leadership became an important component of culturally
responsive education, expanding beyond classroom teaching to looking inward at one’s self as a
critical school leader to looking outward at professional development, the entire school
environment, and the community at large (Khalifa, 2020; Khalifa et al., 2016). Marshall and
Khalifa (2018) stated that school leaders could also engage in coaching cycles promoting
31

culturally responsive instructional practices in the classroom. Teacher educators and school
leaders too often grounded their leadership practices in white supremacy, hindering the
preparation of educators to be culturally responsive teachers to all students (Hayes & Juárez,
2012). Hayes and Juárez (2012) argued that school leaders and teacher educators must recognize
the racial power of whiteness and how culturally responsive teaching cannot be realized in the
classroom until whiteness is explicitly addressed. Johnson (2014) stated that culturally
responsive school leaders must advocate for culturally responsive curricula, racial equity, and
the inclusion of diverse racial and ethnic communities in the schools. This involved culturally
responsive school leaders challenging all forms of oppression, influencing the contexts in which
they worked so that ultimately the lives of students within and beyond the confines of school
were positively impacted (Lopez, 2016).
Conceptual Framework
This study used Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis model to determine the difference
between preferred and actual performance, the gaps that prevented stakeholders from meeting
the performance goals of the organization, and the solutions to closing the gaps between goals
and current progress. This process model first identified the organizational and individual goals
of the stakeholders and then uncovered and analyzed the reasons for the performance gaps that
act as barriers between the current and desired performance levels. Once the causes have been
determined, the next step was to identify and implement knowledge (K), motivation (M), and
organizational (O) performance solutions to close the gaps. Continuously evaluating the results
and revising goals as needed ensured steady performance improvement (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Adaptation of Gap Analysis Framework as an Improvement Model
Through the conceptual framework of an improvement gap analysis, an adaptation of
Clark and Estes’ (2008) KMO framework, this study examined the factors that prevented ANCS
32

educators from bridging the gap between the policy and practice of culturally responsive
education. Although stakeholder knowledge and the motivation to achieve the performance goals
were key influences, they were not enough to attain and sustain improvement without
organizational change. Clark and Estes (2008) stated that closing performance gaps would only
happen when all three factors were addressed in symphony. According to Clark and Estes
(2008), recognizing how educators’ knowledge and motivation worked together and acted as
drivers to facilitate or hinder performance within the organizational culture–inclusive of efficient
and effective processes and resources–was paramount to enacting organization-wide change.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
Through the literature review of the scholarship around culturally responsive practices, it
was evident that educators–including school leaders, Spanish educators, and classroom
educators–must have sustained knowledge, motivation, and organizational support to embrace
culturally responsive practices as an antidote to the hegemonic Eurocentric ideologies that
oppress students of color (Sleeter, 2018; Solomon et al., 2005; Vaught & Castagno, 2008). This
understanding of how educator knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences work as a
cooperative system was an important aspect of the larger investigation in considering ways to
best support educators to meet the school’s performance goal. This section discussed and
explored the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of ANCS educators
and the possible implications for enacting culturally responsive practices.
Knowledge
Mayer (2011) defined learning as “a change in knowledge attributable to experience” (p.
14). He added three parts to this definition: (a) learning involves a change in the learner, (b) what
is changed is the learner’s knowledge, and (c) the cause of the change is the learner’s experience.
Mayer (2011) presented a cognitive view of learning in that what happens in the learner’s
33

environment is represented as knowledge and is observable as behavior. Building upon the
cognitive domains of Bloom’s taxonomy, Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) recategorized the
components of knowledge necessary for learning into four types: factual, conceptual, procedural,
and metacognitive. According to Clark and Estes (2008), to close stakeholder performance gaps,
it was necessary to understand the categories of knowledge necessary to ensure organizational
performance. Educators’ knowledge and skills, in comparison with other factors, made the
biggest difference in students’ acquisition of knowledge (Darling-Hammond & Lieberman,
2012). This section reviewed the literature relevant to the knowledge influences that may explain
the gaps in educators’ understanding of how to enact culturally responsive practices.
The knowledge section of the conceptual framework also drew inspiration from Smith’s
(2012) “Research Through Imperial Eyes.” Hegemonic epistemologies served as a knowledge
gap when it came to supporting culturally responsive teaching and learning. To perpetuate a
monocultural, white, Western way of knowing the world ran counter to culturally responsive
practices. It silenced and erased Black and indigenous ways of knowing the world that were
essential in creating culturally responsive schools. Also explored in the conceptual framework is
what Leonardo (2009) deemed the myth of white ignorance in education. Leonardo argued that
white educators are not oblivious to race but are “race knowers” who are “full participants in
racialization” (2009, p. 108). As such, the conceptual framework thereby made room for the idea
that it was not only white educators’ lack of knowledge about race that served as a knowledge
gap but also the incidents when they feigned ignorance about race that impeded culturally
responsive education.
Factual Knowledge Influences
Factual knowledge centers on developing an understanding of foundational facts that are
specific to disciplines and domains. It encompassed the basic knowledge that one must know in
34

order to function effectively or problem solve in a given area (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001;
Rueda, 2011). Educators must know the components of culturally responsive education,
including curricular, instructional, and assessment practices. As suggested by Gay’s (2018)
research, theory, and practice, the components of effective culturally responsive practices
include caring, culture and communication in the classroom, ethnic and cultural diversity in
curriculum content, and cultural congruity in teaching and learning. Cultural responsiveness
require educators to learn and develop an understanding of cultural and ethnic diversity and be
able to apply and incorporate this body of knowledge into the educational environment (Gay,
2002;
Ladson-Billings, 1995b).
Beyond Superficial Knowledge of Culture
However, one factor that may have contributed to the misuse of culturally responsive
practices was when educators demonstrated “limited and superficial notions of culture”
(LadsonBillings, 2014, p. 77). Sleeter (2012) cautioned, “Oversimplified and distorted
conceptions of culturally responsive pedagogy, which do not necessarily improve student
learning, lend themselves to dismissal of the entire concept” (p. 572). Specifically, she identified
cultural celebration, trivialization, essentializing, and substituting cultural for political analysis
as four ways educators demonstrated a limited and simplistic understanding of culturally
responsive practices (Sleeter, 2012). Further cultural simplifications included surface-level
positioning of food, festivals, folklore, and fashions in the curriculum leading some educators to
have “a shortsighted view that multicultural education [was] not an issue in their predominantly
European-American school” (Meyer & Rhoades, 2006, p. 83). When educators were unaware of
their knowledge deficits, it was necessary to build more than declarative knowledge so that they
may analyze problems and accomplish performance goals (Clark & Estes, 2008).
35

Conceptual Knowledge Influences
Although factual and conceptual knowledge are both declarative, the difference between
the two types of knowledge are the way information is interpreted. Conceptual knowledge
explores the interrelationships among concepts within a larger system, exploring the
classifications, principles, generalizations, theories, models, or structures related to a particular
area (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). As it related to culturally responsive teaching and learning,
conceptual knowledge encompassed an understanding of key concepts related to oppression and
advantage within school systems and in society at large. Once educators used factual knowledge
to learn about the components of culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment
practices, the next step was to understand the interrelationship between these concepts. To build
a conceptual understanding of the sociopolitical context between oppression and advantage,
educators should be given experiences to deepen their understanding and make sense of the
material rather than just focus on memorization (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006).
Sociopolitical Consciousness
Culturally responsive teaching and learning also called for educators to understand such
concepts at what Picower (2009) deemed four overlapping levels between oppression and
advantage–ideological, institutional, interpersonal, and internalized. Love (2016) called for
culturally responsive educators to not only know the assets that minoritized students brought
with them to the classroom but also to know how systems of oppression work to spirit murder
students of color. Ladson-Billings (2014) stated that even when educators demonstrated a more
expansive knowledge of culture, the lack of a deeper understanding of sociopolitical dimensions
of the world led to the misuse and misapplication of culturally responsive practices. By having a
conceptual understanding of the sociopolitical context of oppression and advantage within and
36

beyond the confines of school, educators were equipped to dismantle oppression in themselves
and their environment while enacting culturally responsive practices with fidelity.
Procedural Knowledge Influences
Procedural knowledge was required for an individual to know how to do something. It
pertained to the skills, techniques, steps, sequences, methods of inquiry, and methodologies of
varying difficulty and sophistication that individuals are required to know to accomplish a
particular task (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001; Rueda, 2011). To successfully implement
culturally responsive practices, educators needed knowledge of how to execute the tasks of
creating and using culturally responsive curricula, instruction, and assessments. In addition,
educators need to know how to build culturally responsive learning communities.
Culturally Responsive Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment
However, research has shown that some teachers who perceived themselves as
knowledgeable in implementing culturally responsive education had reduced this framework to a
series of discrete steps to follow (Hammond, 2015; Paris, 2012; Paris & Alim, 2014; Sleeter,
2011, 2012; Young, 2010). The danger of oversimplifying culturally responsive practices
through trivialization reduced it to a lockstep process instead of an educator knowledge-
dependent paradigm for teaching and learning (Sleeter, 2012). As a method of inquiry and a
pathway to support learning, educators needed to use procedural knowledge to support the
progression of culturally responsive practices through the curriculum, instruction, assessment,
and learning community (Delpit, 2006; Gay, 1995, 2010; Moll et al., 2006; Paris, 2012; Villegas
& Lucas, 2002).
From a curriculum standpoint, culturally responsive educators understood how racism is
manifested through Eurocentric curricula and how this limited learner growth (Au, 2009). To
facilitate culturally responsive learning, such educators knew that the hegemonic epistemologies
37

needed to be critically interrogated, guiding inquiry into the inaccuracies, omissions, and
distortions in curricula (Villegas & Lucas, 2002). In addition to curricula, educators knew the
culturally responsive instructional strategies needed to provide culturally-congruent scaffolds
and structures to ensure that all students learn (Au, 2009; Farinde-Wu et al., 2017; Gay, 2018;
Muhammad, 2020). And finally, culturally responsive educators knew the components of
assessment practices that ensured access and equity through learners’ cultural frames of
reference and alignment with learner growth (Gay, 2018; Montenegro & Jankowski, 2017;
Nortvedt et al., 2020). When educators ensured that assessments, even those designed for the
majority population, were closely aligned with curricula, teaching, and learning practices, and an
understanding and valuing of students’ cultures and languages, the focus shifted from a rigid and
reductive deficit model to a pluralistic approach of understanding proficiency. Educators with
knowledge of the interrelationship between culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and
assessment were better equipped to facilitate students’ understanding of their identity, their
community, and the world.
Metacognitive Knowledge
Strategically understanding when to and why one should take action was a key aspect of
metacognitive knowledge. It pertained to “knowledge about cognition in general as well as
awareness of and knowledge about one’s own cognition” (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001, p. 27).
This type of knowledge was centered on self-awareness, including the knowledge of and
approaches to one’s own thought processes. To effectively leverage culturally responsive
practices, educators need to be able to critically self-reflect on how their knowledge, beliefs,
values, assumptions, biases, and experiences contributed to strengths and areas for growth.
Critical Self-Reflection
38

Critical self-reflection was foundational to the development of sociopolitical
consciousness (Howard, 2003; Khalifa, 2020; Ladson-Billings, 2008; Sealey-Ruiz, 2021), and
sociopolitical consciousness was an antecedent to understanding and addressing the issues–such
as beliefs, values, assumptions, and biases–that contributed to perspectives of identity,
community members, and the world. Through metacognitive learning, critical self-reflection for
educators presented the potential to reveal practices around normative knowledge (Kincheloe,
2004) while challenging and uncovering biases and hegemonic assumptions (Brookfield, 2009)
extant in pedagogical practices. As Ginsberg (2015) argued, “Unless we as educators understand
our own culturally mediated values and biases, we may be misguided in believing that we are
encouraging divergent points of view and providing meaningful opportunities for learning to
occur” (p. 17).
Educators were unable to effectively incorporate all aspects of culturally responsive
education into practice if they did not first investigate and excavate their own values, beliefs, and
attitudes about other cultures and their own culture (Grant & Asimeng–Boahene, 2006;
HowardHamilton, 2000; Moreno & Wong-Lo, 2011; Nieto, 2004; Wong-Lo & Bai, 2013).
Critically reflective educators questioned “the omissions and tensions that exist between the
master narratives [...] that make up the official curriculum and the self-representations of
subordinated groups as they might appear in ‘forgotten’ or erased histories, histories, texts,
memories, experiences, and community narratives” (Giroux, 2005, p. 25). Critical self-reflection
also created transformational learning experiences by identifying and assessing assumptions and
seeking perspectives through other lenses that led to informed decision-making in the best
interests of the learning community (Brookfield & Holst, 2010). Table 2 shows the stakeholders’
influences and the related literature.

39

Table 2
Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on Stakeholders’ Ability to Achieve the Performance
Goal
Assumed knowledge influences Research literature
Factual Anderson & Krathwohl (2001); Clark & Estes (2008);
Educators know the components of Gay (2002, 2018); Ladson-Billings (1995b, 2014);
culturally responsive curriculum, Meyer & Rhoades (2006); Rueda (2011); Sleeter
instruction, and assessment (2012) practices.
Conceptual
Educators need to know the
sociopolitical relationship between
oppression and advantage
underpinning culturally responsive
practices.
Anderson & Krathwohl (2001); Ladson-Billings
(2014); Love (2016); Picower (2009); Schraw &
McCrudden (2006)
Procedural
Educators need knowledge of how
to create and use culturally
responsive curriculum, instruction,
and assessment practices.
Anderson & Krathwohl (2001); Au, (2009, 2012);
Delpit, (2006); Farinde-Wu et al., (2017); Gay, (1995,
1998, 2010); Hammond (2015); Moll et al., (2006);
Montenegro & Jankowski, (2017); Muhammad (2020);
Nortvedt et al. (2020); Paris (2012); Paris & Alim
Metacognitive Educators need
to know how to critically self-
reflect on their knowledge,
beliefs, values, assumptions,
biases, and experiences related
to improving culturally
responsive practices.
(2014) Rueda (2011); Sleeter
(2011, 2012); Villegas &
Lucas, (2002); Young, (2010)
Anderson & Krathwohl (2001); Brookfield (2009);
Ginsberg (2015); Giroux (2005); Grant & Asimeng–
Boahene (2006); Howard (2003); Howard-Hamilton
(2000); Khalifa (2020); Kincheloe (2004);
LadsonBillings (2008); Moreno & Wong-Lo (2011);
Nieto
(2004); Sealey-Ruiz (2021); Wong-Lo & Bai (2013)

40

Motivation
Cooperating with, yet distinct from knowledge, motivation was influenced by both
internal (beliefs, perceptions) and external (sociocultural, environmental) factors–a
contextspecific drive that inspires the activation and continuation of goal-directed behavior
(Pintrich, 1994; Rueda, 2011; Schunk, 2020). In a recursive process and reciprocal relationship,
motivation led to learning as learning also led to motivation (Bandura, 1997). However, in
contrast to learning, motivation could not be observed directly; there were behaviors, or
indicators, that helped pinpoint when motivation was extant or absent (Schunk, 2020), such as
active choice, persistence, and mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008; Schunk et al., 2008).
Increased motivation paired with effective knowledge, skills, and work processes,
resulted in performance gains (Clark & Estes, 2008). The factors that had the most influence on
choice, persistence, and mental effort were personal and team confidence, beliefs about
organizational and environmental barriers to achieving goals, the emotional climate people
experience in their work environment, and the personal and team values for their performance
goals (Clark, 1998; Clark & Estes, 2008). On the other hand, an immunity or aversion to change
(Kegan & Lahey, 2009) may have stemmed from a fear of the unknown or a sense of comfort
that caused educators to shy away from emotional or cognitive labor.
Motivation was a vital component in enhancing the effectiveness of educators in teaching
and learning environments (Carson & Chase, 2009). Research studying the link between quality
instruction and learning outcomes has found that in terms of effectiveness, educational methods,
techniques, practices, and instructional behaviors were all closely related to educator motivation
(Butler & Shibaz, 2014; Han et al., 2015; Retelsdorf & Günther, 2011; Retelsdorf et al., 2010;
41

Thoonen et al., 2011). Although there are many dimensions to motivation, this study will focus
on the assumed motivation influences of interest, emotion, and self-efficacy.
Interest
The achievement behaviors of educators resulted from value components in response to
the perceived importance of tasks. According to Schunk (2020), the overall value of any task
depends on four essential constituents:
1. Attainment value–importance attached to the task as it relates to educators’
conception of their self-worth and competence in a certain area.
2. Intrinsic or interest value–refers to the satisfaction one obtains from the task.
3. Utility value–the importance of the task in relation to a specific short- or longterm
goal orientation.
4. Cost belief–the belief that working on one task may take the time and effort away
from a more meaningful task.
This study examined how interest value influenced the enactment of culturally responsive
practices as Kaplan (2012) stated that the research literature was quite unanimous in intrinsic
motivation enhancing long-term learning engagement. On the contrary, Kaplan (2012) stated
that learning engagement ceased once extrinsic motivators were removed.
In the context of learning motivation theory, interest was “an interactive relation between
an individual and certain aspects of his or her environment (e.g., objects, events, ideas), and is
therefore content-specific” (Hidi & Harackiewicz, 2000, p. 152). Schraw and Lehman (2009)
theorized that activating personal interests increased participants’ motivation. Hidi and
Harackiewicz (2000) also explained that a learner can find a topic interesting without liking it. A
learner’s interactive relation with their environment could also elicit negative responses, not just
42

positive ones. In another sense, interest was how one’s interaction with their environment served
their needs or desires.
Interest Convergence
In “Race, Culture, and Researcher Positionality,” Milner (2007) not only argued the need
for alternative epistemologies and ways of knowing but discussed at length the idea of interest
convergence as a motivating factor for confronting racism. Milner’s ideas about interest
convergence could thereby serve as a motivating factor for supporting culturally responsive
teaching and learning. Ladson-Billings (2013) added that “white people will seek racial justice
only to the extent that there is something in it for them” (p. 38). On the other hand, white
selfinterest may also have served as a motivating factor for maintaining curriculum violence in
schools. Dominant culture, in particular white-dominant culture, often engaged in self-interest
that institutionalized power, privilege, and social dominance (Milner, 2007).
Negotiation Interests of Racially Oppressed Groups
When considering motivational factors, Gillborn (2010) argued that the idea of interest
convergence must equitably negotiate the interests of white people and racially oppressed
groups. That is, the interests of racially oppressed groups should not have been made subordinate
to the interests of white people. Gorski (2019) offered similar insights, stating that “in
inequitable contexts, equality—attending equally to everybody’s interests—reproduces inequity”
(p. 60). Schraw and Lehman (2009) offered interest-activating strategies to increase motivation,
but such strategies should have also been employed through a culturally responsive lens that
avoided potentially subordinating the interests of racially oppressed groups.
Whiteness as Property Interest
43

Harris (1993) and Hayes (2016) both explored the concept of whiteness as a property
interest in society and in education, respectively. Whiteness was afforded valuable benefits and
was thereby a valued possession in racialized society (Harris, 1993). Because of its high sense of
value and the entitlements it afforded, culturally responsive and multicultural education could
not serve as a threat to the value of whiteness in a racialized society. When it did, it led to what
Hayes (2016) called “academic lynching,” a term referenced earlier in this literature review. On
a much lesser scale, maintaining the valued possessions and privilege of whiteness potentially
led to superficial notions of multicultural education that failed to incorporate the sociopolitical
dimensions of the work (DeCuir & Dixson, 2004). Ideas of value and interest convergences
reinforced the oppressive systems Ladson-Billings (1998) sought to disrupt in her work in
reforming education.
Emotion
Scholars of motivation theory indicated that emotion influenced learners’ desire to
engage and attend to their learning (Pekrun, 2011; Schraw & Lehman, 2009). Schraw and
Lehman (2009) proposed that creating emotional disequilibrium could also activate interest and
serve as a motivating factor for learning. Pekrun (2011) discussed how educators can increase
motivation by activating positive emotions like enjoyment, hope, and pride, as well as negative
emotions like anger, anxiety, and shame. Whether eliciting a positive or negative emotion, Hidi
and
Harackiewicz (2000) stated that affective reactions could serve as motivating factors for
learning.
Emotion as a Challenge to White Culture
44

Gulati-Partee and Potapchuk (2014) stated that embracing conflict and emotion
challenged white culture and white ways of operating. Often in professional settings, white
cultural norms defined certain emotions as acceptable while discounting others, further
upholding the status quo (Gulati-Partee & Potapchuk, 2014). But Matias (2016) argued that
when confronting racism and white supremacy, white people must be willing to deconstruct their
own emotionalities as a way to re-humanize themselves. By extension, when enacting culturally
responsive practices, white educators and educators of color alike must be willing to explore
what Pekrun (2011) categorized as the multidimensional taxonomy of emotions.
Emotion as Culturally Relative
Recognizing that emotion and motivation were both inseparable from culture,
Wlodkowski and Ginsberg (1995) stated, “What may elicit that frustration, joy, or determination
may differ across cultures because cultures differ in their definitions of novelty, hazard,
opportunity, and gratification, and in their definitions of appropriate responses” (p. 17). That is,
the emotional response an educator has while engaging in a learning activity is a reflection of
their culture. There are situations in which emotions such as rage and anger, routinely deemed
negative affective reactions in learning activities, should be embraced by educators. When
theorizing about culturally responsive teaching and teacher education, Hayes and Juárez (2012)
deemed emotions such as anger to be a “healthy response to white supremacy” (p. 7). The idea
that rage is both an appropriate affective reaction to racial injustice and a way of knowing has
been echoed by many scholars and Black thinkers throughout history (Baldwin et al., 1961;
Dumas, 2018; hooks, 1995; Lorde, 1984). A variety of emotions, not limited to rage and anger,
could drive educators to learn about and implement culturally responsive practices. The
45

embracing of educators’ emotions while engaging in such activities is in itself an exercise in
culturally responsive practices.
Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy was defined as one’s beliefs about their ability to organize and complete a
specific task (Bandura, 1997). When there were positive expectations for success, motivation
was also enhanced (Pajares, 2006). Motivational theories related to self-efficacy posited that
effective functioning requires more than the acquisition of knowledge and skills (Bandura,
1997). Simply acquiring knowledge and skills was not a predictor of action; self-efficacy was
needed to apply acquired knowledge and put acquired skills to use (Bandura, 1986; Bandura &
Evans, 2006; Pajares, 2006).
Culturally Responsive Teaching Self-Efficacy
In the context of culturally responsive teaching and learning, it was not enough for
educators to simply acquire knowledge. That is, educators need to develop culturally responsive
self-efficacy, the belief in their ability to organize and execute the practices associated with
culturally responsive teaching (Siwatu, 2007). Siwatu (2011) recognized that in order to become
an effective culturally responsive educator, one needs to not only acquire knowledge related to
culturally responsive teaching, but they need to also have the self-efficacy beliefs to put their
knowledge to use. In particular, Siwatu (2011) argued that teacher educators needed to undertake
the necessary steps to ensure that educators have culturally responsive self-efficacy beliefs to
enact culturally responsive teaching practices.
Culturally Responsive Learning Self-Efficacy
In their Motivational Framework for Culturally Responsive Teaching, Wlodkowski and
Ginsberg (2017) stated that adult learners’ self-efficacy influenced how they engage in culturally
46

responsive learning environments. They saw competence and self-confidence as mutually
enhancing. In the context of adult learning environments, in order to engender competence in
culturally responsive practices, educators themselves needed to experience a culturally
responsive learning environment that built their own sense of self-efficacy (Wlodkowski &
Ginsberg, 2017). Likewise, Wlodkowski and Ginsberg (1995) advocated for culturally
responsive practices that engendered students with the competence and ability to take ownership
of their own learning. Educators needed to ensure that both students and adult learners had the
self-efficacy beliefs to engage successfully in culturally responsive learning activities. Table 3
shows the stakeholders’ influences and the related literature.

Table 3
Summary of Assumed Motivation Influences on Stakeholders’ Ability to Achieve the Performance
Goal
Assumed Motivation Influences Research Literature
Interest DeCuir & Dixson (2004); Gillborn (2010); Gorski (2019);
Educators need to have intrinsic Harris (1995); Hayes (2016); Hidi & Harackiewicz
(2000); interests and personal relevance Kaplan (2012); Ladson-Billings (1998, 2013);
Milner in implementing culturally (2007); Schraw & Lehman (2009); Schunk (2020);
responsive practices. Wlodkowski & Ginsberg (2017)
Emotion
Educators need to be
emotionally driven to learn
about and implement culturally
responsive practices.
Baldwin et al. (1961); Dumas (2018); Gulati-Partee &
Potapchuk (2014); Hayes & Juárez (2012); Hidi &
Harackiewicz (2000); hooks (1995); Lorde (1984); Matias
(2016); Pekrun (1992, 2011, 2016); Schraw and Lehman
(2009); Wlodkowski & Ginsberg (2017)
Self-Efficacy Bandura, (1986, 1997); Bandura & Evans (2006); Pajares,
Educators are confident in their (2006); Rueda, (2011); Schunk, (2020); Siwatu,
(2007, ability to enact culturally 2011); Wlodkowski & Ginsberg (2017) responsive
curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices.

47

Organization
Even with the highest level of knowledge and motivation, stakeholders were not able to
successfully meet performance goals without the alignment of effective organizational work
processes and resources (Clark & Estes, 2008). According to Schein (2004), there were three
deeper levels of culture that include (1) artifacts, (2) espoused beliefs and values, and (3) basic
underlying assumptions. Artifacts refer to structures and processes that can be seen and felt and
also include observable behaviors. Espoused beliefs were the shared ideals, goals, values, and
aspirations within an organization. Oftentimes, there may have been a disconnect between
educators’ espoused values that were communicated but not reflected in observed behavior
(Argyris & Schön, 1974; Schein, 2004). Basic underlying assumptions were the unconscious
beliefs and values that determine behaviors, perceptions, thoughts, and feelings (Schein, 2004).
In this study, the gaps or barriers to implementing culturally responsive practices within the
organization of ANCS focused on resources, policies, processes, procedures, cultural models,
and cultural settings.
Resources
Achieving cultural responsiveness and equity in education necessitated not only an
equitable allocation of resources between schools but also within schools (Brayboy et al., 2007;
Galloway & Ishimaru, 2020). Recognizing that the distribution of resources was intimately
linked to the quality of education students received (Ishimaru & Galloway, 2014; Lynch &
Baker, 2005), allocating resources to culturally responsive education is a means of ensuring
culturally and racially diverse students received a quality education.
Cultural and Social Resources
48

Lynch and Baker (2005) argued that resource equity should not only be conceived in
“economic forms of capital such as income and wealth, but also in forms of social capital like
family social networks and affiliations and in forms of cultural capital such as educational
credentials” (p. 2). To elaborate upon this idea, culturally responsive educators and organizations
needed to also ask themselves, “Whose culture has capital?” (Yosso, 2005). Moll et al. (2006)
argued that culturally and racially diverse learners brought funds of knowledge to the classroom.
That is, culturally responsive educators and organizations needed to also assume a perspective
that people of color were not entirely under-resourced nor at a cultural deficit, but as Yosso
(2005) argued, their cultural and social resources were historically devalued.
Policies, Processes, and Procedures
According to Clark and Estes (2008), effective organizations ensure that organizational
messages, rewards, policies, and procedures that govern the organization’s work were aligned
with or are supportive of organizational goals and values. Galloway and Ishimaru (2020) stated
that such organizational procedures, policies, and processes were often invisible and hidden in
aspects of curricula, pedagogy, and assessment. This potentially ensured that educators would
work together to review, revise, and update current policies, processes, and procedures to
maintain alignment with the organization’s strategic goals.
Procedures, Policies, and Processes in a Racialized Society
To ensure a high-quality education for all students, policies, processes, and procedures
need to counter the root causes of oppression while addressing racial inequities normalized in
organizational and instructional practices (Ishimaru & Galloway, 2014). Lynch and Baker
(2005) called for the adoption of difference-respectful procedures, policies, and processes that
challenged cultural non-recognition and misrepresentation. However, according to Gillborn
49

(2013), there was a marked difference between how traditional mainstream approaches to
education saw policy as a series of incremental steps toward equity, while critical perspectives
viewed it as a process shaped and limited by the dominant white population.
When attempting to bridge the gap between policy and practice in a racialized society,
one might encounter what Delgado and Stefancic (2017) called contradiction-closing cases.
While policy shifts may have appeared to address a gap or fix a barrier to equity, there remained
a shift in name only, as these cases maintained “just the right amount of racism” to protect the
status quo:
Contradiction-closing cases provide the solution when the gap grows too large between,
on one hand, the liberal rhetoric of equal opportunities and, on the other hand, the reality
of racism.
[Contradiction-closing cases] are a little like the thermostat in your home or office.
They assure you that there is just the right amount of racism. Too much would be
destabilizing–the victims would rebel. Too little would forfeit important pecuniary and psychic
advantages for those in power (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017, p. 80). In cases such as these,
Gillborn (2005) argued that “policy assumes and defends White supremacy through the
priorities it sets, the beneficiaries it privileges, and the outcomes that it produces” (p. 498).
Culturally Responsive Multi-Tiered Systems of Support
Educators can use multi-tiered systems of support to fully embed cultural responsiveness
throughout the processes of an organization and to inform continuous culturally responsive
improvement for the school as a whole (Bornstein, 2021; Goodman-Scott & Betters-Bubon,
2019). Implementing culturally responsive policies and practices needed to be systematically
monitored by its educators to ensure it was embedded in all aspects of the organization,
50

including classrooms (Minkos et al., 2017). Project LEE et al. (2019) offered a framework that
organizations could use to provide multi-tiered systems of support for culturally responsive
learning. Such organizations should have developed policies, processes, and procedures to guide
the systematic implementation of culturally responsive practices.
Cultural Models
Culture is a way to describe the core values, goals, beliefs, emotions, and processes
learned in work environments (Clark & Estes, 2008). And cultural models define for individuals
how the world worked or ought to work, normalizing a particular community’s ideologies,
values, and taken-for-granted assumptions as common-sense reality (Gallimore & Goldenberg,
2001). According to Schein (2004), there were three deeper culture levels: artifacts, espoused
beliefs and values, and basic underlying assumptions. Artifacts referred to structures and
processes that could be seen and felt and included observable behaviors. Espoused beliefs were
the shared ideals, goals, values, and aspirations within an organization. Frequently, there may be
a disconnect between educators’ espoused values that were communicated but not reflected in
observed behavior (Argyris & Schön, 1974; Schein, 2004). Basic underlying assumptions were
the unconscious beliefs and values that determine behaviors, perceptions, thoughts, and feelings
(Schein, 2004).
Since cultural rules and models were defined by those with power (Delpit, 2006),
organizational change can be difficult to manage. In addition, Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001)
explained that cultural models become so normalized that they often become invisible and go
unnoticed by those who subscribe to them. When cultural models are normalized and invisible to
stakeholders in the organization, according to Kegan and Lahey (2009), this could lead to
immunity to change, resulting in the inability to unearth and change deep-rooted and often
51

entrenched assumptions and conflicting commitments. Schein (2004) defined organizational
culture as the accumulated shared learning of that group as it solved its problems of external
adaptation and internal integration, which has worked well enough to be considered valid and,
therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, feel, and behave in
relation to those problems. This accumulated learning was a pattern or system of beliefs, values,
and behavioral norms that came to be taken for granted as basic assumptions and eventually
dropped out of awareness (Schein, 2004).
Achieving cultural responsiveness required organizations to transform both visible and
invisible norms that were aligned with oppressive and exclusionary practices (Galloway &
Ishimaru, 2020). In the same vein, educators needed to be part of an organization whose cultural
models were aligned with cultural responsiveness and the equity-focused theories of change.
Such cultural responsiveness and theories of change focused not only on individuals’ thoughts
and beliefs but also in shifting organizational policies, processes, and procedures (Ishimaru &
Galloway, 2019).
Cultural Settings
Cultural settings were where culture existed and was created when two or more members
of a particular community came together to accomplish an activity they valued (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001). In other words, it was when what was valued in a cultural model was
brought to life and put into practice. In the context of educational settings, this would have
involved members of a school community not only stating a commitment to eliminating
exclusionary and marginalizing systems but enacting practices that redressed bias and promoted
cultural responsiveness (Galloway & Ishimaru, 2020). Such settings would have entailed
52

educators implementing practices that promoted values of cultural responsiveness, critical
reflection, inclusivity, and community (Khalifa, 2020; Khalifa et al., 2016).
In expressing the need for culturally responsive teaching, Obiakor and Green (2014)
stated that “schools are not culturally neutral terrains,” and their environments were shaped by
the policies, processes, and values of the dominant culture (p. 6). One way that schools have
been shaped by these policies, practices, and values was through what Bonilla-Silva (2006)
referred to as white habitus, “a racialized, uninterrupted socialization process that conditions and
creates whites’ racial taste, perceptions, feelings, and emotions, and their views on racial
matters” (p. 104). The white habitus helped to explain and unpack how a racial hierarchy could
function as a cultural setting without the awareness that the dominant white racial group was
enacting racism. Disrupting and dismantling culturally unresponsive and oppressive practices
moved beyond stating that these practices existed to “uncover[ing] the places, instances, and
incidents where they happen” (Sondel et al., 2019, p. 6). Still, it was not enough to simply
identify where oppression occurred in schools; culturally responsive leaders needed to transform
school settings into inclusive environments (Khalifa, 2020). Classroom educators needed to also
heed Freire and Macedo’s (2005) call to “become conscious individuals who live part of their
dreams within their educational space” (p. 88). Specifically, “classrooms can be places of hope,
where students and teachers gain glimpses of the kind of society we could live in, and where
students learn the academic and critical skills needed to make it a reality” (Au et al., 2007, p.
217). As bell hooks (1994) stated, education is a practice of freedom; then, educational spaces
needed to also be lab sites of liberation. Table 4 shows the stakeholders’ influences and the
related literature.

53

Table 4
Summary of Assumed Organization Influences on Stakeholders’ Ability to Achieve the
Performance Goal
Assumed Organization Influences Research Literature
Resources Brayboy et al. (2007); Galloway & Ishimaru
Educators need to be a part of an (2020); Ishimaru & Galloway (2014); Lynch &
organization that purposefully develops Baker (2005); Moll et al. (2006); Yosso
(2005) and utilizes resources (time, finances, staff) to enhance culturally responsive
learning.
Policies, Processes, & Procedures
Educators need to be a part of an
organization that provides multi-tiered
systems of support for culturally responsive
learning.
Goodman-Scott & Betters-Bubon, 2019;
Bornstein (2021); Clark & Estes (2008); Delgado
& Stefancic (2017); Galloway & Ishimaru (2020);
Gillborn (2005, 2013); Ishimaru & Galloway
(2014); Lynch & Baker (2005); Minkos et al.
(2017); Project LEE et al. (2019)
Culture Model
Educators need to be part of an
organization whose ideologies, values,
and assumptions are aligned with cultural
responsiveness and equity-focused
theories of change.
Argyris & Schön (1974); Clark & Estes (2008);
Delpit (2006); Gallimore & Goldenberg (2001);
Galloway & Ishimaru (2020); Ishimaru &
Galloway (2014); Kegan & Lahey (2009); Schein
(2004).
Culture Setting Educators need to be
part of an organization that implements
policies, processes, and procedures
promoting values of cultural
responsiveness, critical reflection,
inclusivity, and community.

Au et al. (2007); Bonilla-Silva (2006); Freire &
Macedo (2005); Gallimore & Goldenberg (2001);
Galloway & Ishimaru (2020); Khalifa (2020);
Khalifa et al. (2016); Obiakor & Green (2014);
Sondel et al., 2019
This improvement study utilized the knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO)
influences (Clark & Estes, 2008) to examine the implementation of culturally responsive
54

practices in school settings. These influences served as the foundation for data collection
described in Chapter Three. The researchers of this study described how they gathered data
related to these factors with critical hope that ANCS educators would continue to improve the
development and implementation of culturally responsive practices in the organization.

55

Chapter Three: Methodology
Written by Darnell Fine, Monica Gonzalez and Wendy Windust

Through the conceptual framework of an improvement gap analysis, an adaptation of
Clark and Estes’ (2008) framework, the purpose of this study was to examine the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational factors that prevented ANCS educators from bridging the gap
between the policy and practice of culturally responsive pedagogy. The analysis began by
generating a list of possible or assumed influences that were examined systematically and then
focused on validated factors influencing the achievement of the stakeholder goals. After the
current reality of culturally responsive education at ANCS was identified, the analysis found the
factors that created a disconnect between the current reality and the school’s performance goal.
This chapter further outlined the research design and methodology, data collection and
instrumentation, and outlines the data analysis. The questions that guided this gap analysis are
the following:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that contribute to
educators' successful enactment of culturally responsive practices?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions for
supporting culturally responsive educators?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
This study used Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis model to determine the difference
between preferred and actual performance and the gaps that prevent stakeholders from meeting
the organization’s goals. This process model first identified the organizational and individual
goals of the stakeholders and then uncovered and analyzed the reasons for the performance gaps
that act as barriers between the current and desired performance levels. Once the causes were
56

determined, the next step was to identify and implement knowledge (K), motivation (M), and
organizational (O) performance solutions to close the gaps. As shown in Figure 1, continuously
evaluating the results and revising goals as needed ensures steady performance improvement
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Adaptation of Gap Analysis Framework as an Improvement Model
Through the conceptual framework of an improvement gap analysis, an adaptation of
Clark and Estes’ (2008) KMO framework, this study identified and investigated the factors that
act as gaps between the goals and current progress of ANCS educators’ practice of culturally
responsive pedagogy. Educators’ knowledge and the motivation to achieve the performance goal
were key influences and would ensure systematic change when aligned with the organizational
culture and setting.
Figure 1
Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Process Framework

57

Assessment of Performance Influences
The literature review in Chapter Two identified the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational (KMO) influences (Clark & Estes, 2008) that may create gaps in ANCS
educators’ implementation of culturally responsive pedagogical practices. Understanding how
educator knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences work together was an important
facet of the larger examination in considering the support educators needed to meet the school’s
performance goal for educators and to implement culturally responsive strategies into the
curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices 100% of the time. This section discussed and
explored the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of ANCS educators
and the possible implications for solutions to enact culturally responsive pedagogical practices.
Knowledge Assessment
The literature review in Chapter Two examined the assumed knowledge influences on
educators’ abilities to utilize culturally responsive pedagogical practices and ensure access and
equity for all learners. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) recategorized Bloom’s taxonomy of
knowledge necessary for learning into four types: factual, conceptual, procedural, and
metacognitive. According to Clark and Estes (2008), to close stakeholder performance gaps, it
was necessary to understand and assess the categories of knowledge necessary to ensure
organizational performance.
The research was clear that educators’ knowledge and skills, in comparison with other
factors, made the biggest difference in learners’ acquisition of knowledge (Darling-Hammond &
Lieberman, 2012). If educators did not have the knowledge and skills necessary and required
abilities to audit and write curriculum, instruct, and assess learners in a culturally responsive
manner, and if educators did not understand how the sociopolitical relationship between oppression
and advantage underpins this practice, they would not be able to successfully implement this asset-
58

based framework. In addition, educators who did not know how to critically self-reflect on their
knowledge, beliefs, values, assumptions, biases, and experiences related to improving culturally
responsive practices lacked this component for learning and transferring the knowledge of cultural
responsiveness into practice.
The methods of assessment for knowledge were through the use of interviews, observations,
and document analyses. All three methods of assessment addressed the aspects of factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge. The interviews with educators assessed the
level of knowledge of each stakeholder group. The observations looked for the behavioural
evidence of educators’ knowledge, facts, information, and terminology related to culturally
responsive practices. Document analyses examined curricular documents and artifacts for evidence
of knowledge, facts, information, and terminology related to culturally responsive curriculum
practices. Table 5 presents the assumed influences and the method of assessments for factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge influences related to this study on educators’
ability to implement and enact culturally responsive practices at ANCS.

Table 5
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Method of Assessment

Assumed Knowledge
Influences
Interview Items Observation Items Document Items
Factual What might it mean Observe educators’ Review curricular Educators need to to
be a “culturally behaviors in documents and
know the components responsive” educator? professional learning artifacts for
evidence of culturally What do culturally community settings of knowledge, facts,
responsive responsive educators for evidence of information, and curriculum, teach?
How do knowledge, facts, terminology related to

59

instruction, and
assessment practices.
culturally responsive
educators teach? How
do culturally
responsive educators
assess students?
information, and
terminology related to
culturally responsive
practices.
culturally responsive
curriculum practices.
Conceptual Educators
need to know the
sociopolitical
relationship between
oppression and
advantage
underpinning
culturally responsive
practices.
How might racism
influence how
educators at our
school teach, if at all?
How might white
privilege influence
how educators at our
school teach, if at all?

Observe educators’
behaviors in
professional learning
community settings
for evidence of
knowledge related to
the interrelationship
of oppression/
advantage and
educational practices.
Review curriculum
documents and
artifacts for evidence
of knowledge related
to the
interrelationship of
oppression/advantage
and educational
practices.
Procedural
Educators need
knowledge of how to
create and use
culturally responsive
curriculum,
instruction, and
assessment practices.
Could you describe
step-by-step how would
you:
• design a
culturally
responsive lesson
for students?
• teach a culturally
responsive lesson?
• assess students’
learning in
culturally
responsive ways?
Looking for evidence of
the steps needed to
enact culturally
responsive practices,
observe educators:
• designing
curriculum in
professional
learning
communities
• facilitating intended
learning in
classroom settings
• assessing student
learning
Look for evidence of
the steps needed to
enact culturally
responsive practices,
and review
curriculum,
instruction, and
assessment plans.
60

Metacognitive
Educators need to
know how to
critically self - reflect
on their knowledge,
beliefs, values,
Emergent data Observe educators’ Review curriculum behaviors in
documents and
professional learning artifacts for evidence community settings
and examples of and in the classroom educators selffor
evidence and reflecting on their assumptions, biases, examples of
them knowledge, beliefs, and experiences self-reflecting on values,
assumptions, related to improving their knowledge, biases, and
culturally responsive beliefs, values, experiences. practices. assumptions, biases,
and experiences.

Motivation Assessment
The literature review in Chapter Two examined the assumed motivational influences on
educators’ ability to utilize culturally responsive practices and ensure access and equity for all
learners. Research has found that motivation was influenced by both internal (beliefs,
perceptions) and external (sociocultural, environmental) factors and was a context-specific drive
that inspired the activation and continuation of goal-directed behavior (Pintrich, 1994; Rueda,
2011; Schunk, 2020).
Although motivation could not be directly observed or measured, and it remained
difficult to assess (Ginsberg, 2015), this lens of understanding remained firmly fixed in place as
the researchers used the methods of interviews, observations, and document analyses to ask and
look for the behavioral measures of motivation. All three methods of assessment addressed the
assumed influences of interest, emotion, and self-efficacy. The interviews with educators
assessed the stakeholders’ motivation to implement culturally responsive practices. The
observations looked for the behavioral evidence of educators’ motivation related to culturally
responsive practices. Document analyses examined curricular documents and artifacts for
evidence of interest, emotional drive, prioritization, and confidence related to culturally
responsive curriculum practices. Table 6 displays the assumed motivational influences of
61

interest, emotion, and self-efficacy related to this study on educators’ ability to implement and
enact culturally responsive pedagogy at ANCS.
Table 6
Summary of Motivation Influences and Method of Assessment

Assumed Motivation Interview Items Observation Items Document Items
62

Emotion What is your emotional Examining Faculty
Educators need to be reaction when learning Senate Minutes, an emotionally driven
to about and implementing archive of learn about and culturally responsive
questions/feedback/ implement culturally practices? concerns that are all-
Influences
Interest
Educators need to
have intrinsic
interests and personal
relevance in
implementing
culturally responsive
practices .
How do you feel about
the implementation of
culturally responsive
practices?

Observing behaviors
in classroom and in
professional learning
community settings:
•

Do educators
choose to enact
culturally
responsive
curriculum,
instruction, and
assessment
pract ices?
•

Do they persist
in enacting
them?
•

Do they invest
mental effort in
enacting them?

As several factors
cause choice,
persistence, and
mental effort,
interviews conducted
pre - and post -
observations will
triangulate data.
Examining the
following curricul ar
documents and
artifacts to analyze
the extent to which
culturally responsive
practices are
prioritized.
responsive practices .
Observation of what
individuals say, as
well as facial and
postural expression in
professional learning
community settings school in nature that
63

Self - Efficacy
Educators need to be
confident in their
ability to enact
culturally resp onsive
curriculum,
instruction, and
assessment practices .
How do you feel about
your ability to support
the implementation of
culturally responsive
curriculum practices?
How do you feel about
your ability to support
the implementation
of culturally respons ive
teaching practices? How
do you feel about your
ability to support the
implementation
of culturally responsive
assessment practices?
Observing behaviors
triangulate data.
when culturally
responsive practices
are introduced and
discussed.
relate to culturally
responsive practices.
Examining internal
in the classroom and climate
assessment in professional data that asks
learning community educators and teacher
settings: educators about their
• Do educators
confidence in their
choose to enact
ability to enact
culturally
culturally
responsive
responsive
practices.
curriculum,
instruction, and
assessment
practices?
• Do they persist in
enacting them?
• Do they invest
mental effort in
enacting them?

As several factors
cause choice,
persistence, and
mental effort,
interviews conducted
pre- and
postobservations will
Organization
Assessment
The literature review in Chapter Two examined the assumed organizational influences on
educators’ ability to utilize culturally responsive practices and ensure access and equity for all
64

learners. Stakeholders with the highest level of knowledge, skills, and motivation would not
successfully meet performance goals without the alignment of effective organizational work
processes and resources (Clark & Estes, 2008). While it was easy to focus on the organization as
an entity, it was important to remember that organizations are composed of people whose
knowledge, skills, and motivation are at the heart of performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). This
means that organizationally, ANCS needed to focus on providing maximum support for
educators’ needs. Gallimore and Goldenberg’s (2001) framework, including cultural models and
cultural settings, explained how achieving cultural responsiveness required organizations to
transform both visible and invisible norms that were aligned with oppressive and exclusionary
practices and create settings to show the value of practices that redressed bias and promoted
cultural responsiveness (Galloway & Ishimaru, 2020).
The methods of assessment for organization influences were employed through the use of
interviews, observations, and document analyses. All three methods of assessment addressed the
organizational components of resources, policies, processes, procedures, cultural models, and
cultural settings. The interviews with educators and observations of meetings and classrooms
inquired into and looked for the stakeholder’s understanding of the organizational components.
In addition, educators had an opportunity to further elaborate on how they understand and see the
alignment of resources, policies, processes, and procedures with the ANCS culture. Document
analyses included ANCS’s mission statement, strategic plan, handbooks, websites, curricular
documents, and artifacts showing the time and staff allocated to enhancing culturally responsive
education. Table 7 shows the assumed organization influences of resources, policies, processes,
procedures, cultural models, and cultural settings related to this study on educators’ ability to
implement and enact culturally responsive practices at ANCS.

65

Table 7
Summary of Organization Influences and Method of Assessment

Assumed
Organization
Influences
Interview Items Observation Items Document Items
Resources What resources might Observe meetings to Review documents Educators
need to be an educator need to determine how much and artifacts showing a part of an
enact culturally time is spent on, how the time, finances, organization that
responsive practices much money is and staff allocated to purposefully develops
at ANCS? How well- allocated towards, enhancing culturally and utilizes resources
resourced do you and how many staff responsive education.
(time, finances, staff) think ANCS currently members
are tasked to enhance culturally is in supporting the with
enhancing responsive learning. implementation of culturally
responsive culturally responsive learning. practices?
Policies, Processes, &
Procedures
Educators need to be
a part of an
organization that
provides multi-tiered
systems of support for
culturally responsive
learning.
What systems might
need to be put into
place to enact culturally
responsive practices at
ANCS? How effective
are the systems
currently in place at
ANCS in supporting
the implementation of
Observe meetings to
determine what
policies, processes,
and/or procedures are
currently operating
that enhance
culturally responsive
learning.
Review documents
and artifacts showing
the systems that
support culturally
responsive learning.
culturally responsive
practices? What
policies might
educators need to
implement for ANCS
to live out these
values?

66

Cultural Model
Educators need to be
part of an
organization whose
ideologies, values,
and assumptions are
aligned with cultural
responsiveness and
equity-focused
theories of change.
What values might a
school need to have
in order to enact
culturally responsive
practices at ANCS?
How aligned are
ANCS’s values to the
ones you just
mentioned?
Observe meetings and
classes to determine
what ideologies,
values, and
assumptions are
aligned with
culturally responsive
learning.
Review ANCS’s
mission, strategic
plan, handbooks,
websites, etc., to
determine what
ideologies, values,
and assumptions are
aligned with
culturally responsive
learning.
Cultural Setting Is the school setting Observe decision- Review ANCS’s
Educators need to be at ANCS conducive making meetings that policy documents to
situated in an to culturally reveal how ANCS determine how ANCS
environment that responsive practices? implements processes implements processes
promotes the practice and procedures to and procedures to of cultural promote
cultural promote cultural responsiveness, responsiveness. responsiveness.
critical reflection, inclusivity, and community.

Participating Stakeholders and Sample Selection
The stakeholder group of focus for this study was 29 ANCS educators consisting of 19
classroom educators (inclusive of Spanish classroom educators) and 10 school leaders (inclusive
of instructional leaders and divisional principals). This group participated in semi-structured
interviews, follow-up interviews as needed, and observations when possible.
Sampling
All of the educators who participated in this study were purposefully selected for
interviews. Drawing on Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) overview of purposive sampling
67

techniques, the researchers selected a sample they felt the most could be discovered, understood,
and learned about their topic of study. Lochmiller and Lester (2017) also identify purposeful
sampling as an appropriate technique specifically for case study approaches as “they offer useful
manifestations of the phenomenon of interest; sampling, then is aimed at insight about the
phenomenon, not empirical generalization from a sample to a population” (p. 94). As such,
purposeful sampling was most appropriate to the study as the researchers solicited participants
with non-random characteristics who served as classroom educators (inclusive of Spanish
classroom educators) and school leaders (inclusive of instructional leaders and divisional
principals) at the site of the study.
The purposeful sampling of participants was criterion-based (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016)
and included educators chosen for interviews because of their roles as classroom educators and
school leaders. Thus, when selecting individuals for semi-structured interviews, the following
criteria were used:
Criterion 1. Participants must include a diverse representation of ANCS educators,
ranging from classroom educators, Spanish educators, instructional leaders, and
divisional principals.
Criterion 2. Participants must include a diverse representation of ANCS school divisions,
representing the elementary, middle, and high schools.
Selection intended to capture perspectives from educators from all divisions, PS-12, and from a
variety of experiences and backgrounds. This approach is supported by Saldaña and Omasta
(2018) who note that “most qualitative research employs purposive sampling, in which
participants are deliberately selected because they are most likely to provide insight into the
phenomenon being investigated due to their position, experience, and/or identity markers” (p.
147). Although the researchers hoped all participants would have worked at ANCS for at least
68

one year, thereby ensuring they understood the organizational culture (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016),
due to the limitations of the study, the participants represented those who responded to the
recruitment email and were available for interviews.
Recruitment
A stratified recruitment strategy was utilized to achieve representativeness of (a) all
educational roles and (b) all divisions of the school. For the purpose of this study, all educators
were asked, via email, to participate in an interview on a voluntary basis. As noted in Appendix
E, all participants were provided with the information in the IRB approval process.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Following University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval,
prospective participants were solicited by email, with follow-up emails. The instrumentation
used for this study were interviews, observations, and document analysis. An interview protocol
was conducted during the months of October, November, and December 2021, as well as
January 2022, to assess the knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences impacting the
implementation and enactment of culturally responsive education at ANCS (see Appendix A).
An observation protocol was also used, requiring detailed field notes of the interviewees’
meetings and classroom instruction (see Appendix B). Finally, a document collection protocol
was used to gather data and information to triangulate and corroborate findings from interviews
and observations (see Appendix C).
Interviews
Twenty-nine educators were purposefully selected for virtual and in-person interviews
from ANCS. Among the 29 interviewees, 19 were classroom educators (inclusive of Spanish
classroom educators), and 10 included school leaders (inclusive of instructional leaders and
divisional principals). The interviewees represented a diverse cross-section of divisions, subject
69

areas, and leadership roles in the school. Each interview was audio-recorded, and each interview
lasted for approximately 30-minutes to 1 hour. All interviews were semi-structured and
transcribed for qualitative analysis. Interview information was stored on three passwordprotected
laptops.
Observations
Following each interview, observational data were collected to gather more evidence of
the KMO influences impacting the culturally responsive educational practices at ANCS. Beyond
what interviewees may say in an interview, Maxwell (2013) stated that observation provides a
lens for learning about the actions and behaviors of individuals in the cultural settings they occur
in. Observations of classroom instruction, classroom walkthroughs, professional learning
community meetings, and school leader meetings provided more evidence of KMO influences
impacting culturally responsive education at ANCS. The observation data gathered was analyzed
in concert with the semi-structured interviews and documents.
Document Analysis
Documents were analyzed to provide evidence of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors influencing culturally responsive education at ANCS. Bowen (2009) stated
that document analyses allow researchers to seek convergence and corroboration of interview
and observation sources, providing a confluence of evidence that reduces potential research
biases. Access to documents was made available by educators, the Office of Teaching and
Learning, and other sources within the organization. The documents analyzed were curriculum
maps, instructional plans, formative & summative assessment data, the school mission, strategic
plan, handbooks, the school website, feedback forms, and internal survey results. The documents
were triangulated with interviews and observation data to corroborate the findings. Pertinent
documents and artifacts were gathered and analyzed during the months of December 2021 and
70

January and February 2022.
Data Analysis
Different strategies were used to analyze the interviews, observations, and documents.
Interviews were transcribed and coded according to knowledge, motivation, and organizational
categories. The interview and observation analysis helped to validate and inform possible
improvements and solutions for the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences.
Trustworthiness of Data
In order to maintain the credibility and trustworthiness of this study, it was essential to ensure
that the data collected was credible and accurate. The researchers ensured that the data was
credible and accurate by (1) using triangulation of data between the interviews and observations,
(2) assurance of anonymity and confidentiality, and (3) member checks to ensure internal validity
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Role of Investigators
The investigators’ role in this study was to research how to improve the ANCS educators’
implementation and continued use of culturally responsive practices. This role also included
ensuring that no participant felt coerced or pressured to participate in the study. The researchers
ensured that several steps were taken before and after the study to preserve the anonymity of all
the participants. In addition, the researchers ensured that the voluntary nature of participation and
the right to not participate in the study was clearly understood. The researchers ensured
confidentiality of all information from the interviews and observations and obtained permission
to use documentation or data that was produced at ANCS for other institutional purposes.

71

Chapter Four: Results and Findings
Written by Monica Gonzalez
The purpose of this chapter is to report the findings from the conceptual framework of
an improvement gap analysis (Clark and Estes, (2008) of the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors that prevent Anglia Naxos Community School (a pseudonym; ANCS)
Spanish educators from bridging the gap between the policy and the practice of culturally
responsive pedagogy (CRP). These eleven influences were described in Chapter 2 and are
briefly summarized to present the study's findings. Qualitative data were collected through
interviews and documentary analysis. The interviews with the Spanish educators from this
organization who volunteered for this study assessed levels of knowledge, motivation, and
organization. Document analyses of the curriculum documents provided evidence of
knowledge, facts, information, and terminology related to culturally responsive curriculum
practices for the participants. The interviews were set up following the IRB guidelines and
conducted in the time frame allotted by the school and the dissertation chair. The document
analysis reviewed ANCS’s K-12 Spanish Curriculum Roadmap, a unit plan, and a lesson
plan. The Spanish Curriculum Roadmap, unit plans, and lessons are accessible on the ANCS
Spanish Department’s Google Drive for use and review by all current educators of ANCS. For
those areas of continuing need, evidence-based recommendations for practice are
provided in Chapter 5. The questions that guided this gap analysis are the following:
1. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors contribute to educators'
successful enactment of culturally responsive behaviors?
72

2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions for
supporting culturally responsive educators?
This chapter will address the first question that guided this study and is organized as follows.
The sections demonstrate the results and findings for knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational influences on culturally responsive educators. The eleven assumed effects
included:
• the factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge and skills needed
to enact culturally responsive practices;
• the interest, emotion, and self-efficacy motivational influences needed to implement
culturally responsive practices; and
• the resources, culture model, cultural setting, policies, processes, procedures, and
organizational influences necessary for educators to enact culturally responsive practices
across divisions and within an international school setting.
This study used the assessment methods of analyzing interview responses and ANCS’s
documents to collect data and validate the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences related to culturally responsive teaching practices. The interviews with the Spanish
educators assessed the level of knowledge related to culturally responsive practices of each
stakeholder. Document analyses of the curriculum documents provided evidence of knowledge,
facts, information, and terminology related to culturally responsive curriculum practices for the
participants, along with semi-structured, virtual interviews. An 18-question interview protocol
was followed for each interview that was conducted during January and February of 2022 to
assess the influence of culturally responsive teaching practices in the Spanish classes at ANCS.
An analysis of the curriculum was completed by examining the K-12 Spanish Curriculum
73

Roadmap, one unit plan that had the same theme of study centered on personal identity and a
lesson plan based on the theme of personal identity from each of the Spanish teaching divisions
of elementary, middle, and high school, as taught by each of the participants. This curriculum
analysis was conducted during March of 2022.
Each study participant who volunteered was also actively recruited because they all
teach Spanish at the ANCS. They were also recruited to participate in this study to get a
complete perspective of all cognitive, developmental, and academic levels taught at ANCS
from Kindergarten through twelfth-grade Spanish classes. Therefore, this non-random sample
group was selected to ensure that multiple perspectives were gathered through various data
points and triangulated to ensure that the research questions were answered
(Maxwell, 2013).
Participating Stakeholders

For this research project, eight Spanish-language educators from the elementary, middle,
and high school divisions of ANCS participated in the study. The specific demographic
identifiers of ethnicity and gender will not be addressed, and a randomized identification number
from one to eight was created for each of them to ensure the participants’ anonymity. The
participants have a range of teaching experience from four to 25 years. The teachers were
between the ages of 30 to 53 years of age. All eight educators volunteered to participate in the
thirty-minute interview, and each provided a Spanish lesson that was analyzed for its CRP
content as related to this this research.
Determination of Assets and Needs
Since this is a qualitative gap analysis research study, the analysis tested for validity by
looking for the convergence of information from different sources. To understand the knowledge,
74

motivation, and organizational influences, interviews and curriculum analysis through a specific
examination of curriculum plans, unit plans, and lesson plans were used to triangulate the data
sources (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To determine whether an influence was an asset or a need,
the investigator used the threshold of 80% correct response rate and agreement among the
participants. In addition, ANCS uses universal screening tools to assess the effectiveness of new
school-wide implementations. For instance, when approximately 80% of the student learners
demonstrate comprehension, it indicates the effectiveness of the implementation. If the student
learners demonstrate less than 80% proficiency, it reveals a need, which is addressed
accordingly. The researchers used this framework to apply it to the improvement gap analysis.
For an influence to be identified as an asset, 80% of the participants would have to demonstrate
proficiency in culturally responsive practices. However, if less than
80% of the participants demonstrated proficiency, the influence was identified as a need.
Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes
The knowledge includes factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge
(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). These four knowledge categories were individually analyzed by
assumed influences and reported in each separate category to close knowledge-based
performance gaps and provide students with culturally responsive education. In order to have a
better understanding of the educators, assumed knowledge was analyzed through interviews and
a lesson plan from elementary, middle, and high school Spanish departments to determine the
stated influence as an asset or need.
Factual Knowledge Influence
Educators need to know the components of the culturally responsive curriculum,
instruction, and assessment practices.
75

Interview Findings: Two different questions were asked during the interview to determine the
factual knowledge of CRP. The first interview question asked What it might mean to be a culturally
responsive educator? For example, What do culturally responsive educators teach?
The elementary school participants were able to identify the components of a culturally
responsive educator with 100% accuracy. Their answers met the threshold of 80%, and this
assumed influence was determined to be an asset. Participant 8 said that a culturally responsive
educator “…is expected to help students develop a sense of or a skill that allows students to be
aware of their cultural values, other people's cultural values, and how to navigate in this reality.”
All middle school participants were able to identify the components of a culturally
responsive educator with 100% accuracy. Their answers met the threshold of 80%, and this
assumed influence was determined to be an asset. Participant 4 said, “By paying attention, we
decenter ourselves (the educator) and think about who is furthest away from equity and justice.” As
such, it shows how these Spanish educators from elementary school and middle school divisions
know some of the components of culturally responsive practices.
In the high school division, participants gave responses that only demonstrated 50% as an
asset and did not meet the threshold of 80%; thus, this assumed influence was determined to be a
need. An example from one of Participant 2’s stated answers illustrate this need as follows:
“That is a good question, and it is one I am not super clear about what a culturally responsive
classroom is.”
The second question in the interview required the participants to identify how to perform
culturally responsive assessments. In the elementary school, none of the participants could
respond to how they would conduct culturally responsive assessments; therefore, this assumed
influence was determined to be a need. Participant 1 exclaimed, “I do not know, honestly, I do
not know!”
76

In the middle school, 67% of the participants were able to answer the question, but their
responses did not meet the threshold of 80%, which indicates this influence was determined to be a
need in that division also. For example, Participant 3 stated, “It is still something (culturally
responsive assessment) that seems unclear.”
In the high school, none of the participants could respond as to how they should conduct
culturally responsive assessments; therefore, this assumed influence was determined yet again to
be a need in that division. As another example of this need, Participant 2 stated, “I do not know.
It depends on what you want to assess, I suppose.” This data suggests that ANCS’s
Spanishlanguage educators from the three divisions of elementary, middle, and high school need
guidance and support regarding developing and performing culturally responsive assessments.
Document Analysis
The Spanish Curriculum Roadmap, K-12 was analyzed to determine how well it supports
and influences educators in implementing culturally responsive teaching practices and
assessments. The road map does reveal that the framework includes an intercultural objective for
all units. The units from each division that deal with the theme of personal identity were
examined. The intercultural objective of this unit is stated as follows: “In my own and other
cultures, I can compare and contrast how people label themselves and others and why.” Based
on this document, the assumed influence was determined to be an asset for all three ANCS
school divisions.
Through an examination of the assessment practices for unit 2 on personal identitythemed
plans, it is evident that all the divisions had some sort of assessment related to culturally
responsive teaching practices. However, most of them were traditional assessments. Educators
need to create culturally relevant Spanish language assessments that are similar in all grade
levels.
77

Summary
The assumed factual knowledge influence that educators know what culturally
responsive teaching is and how to assess students in a culturally responsive way was determined
as a need based on the participant interview responses. It was evident that most Spanishlanguage
educators in the three divisions understand culturally responsive teaching, but they need
assistance in assessing it. In the document analysis, the researcher observed that the intercultural
objective was incorporated for all units; therefore, it was evident that the participants creating
this document knew about culturally responsive teaching practices. The assessments are not
culturally responsive since the educators are still using traditional assessments to measure
language acquisition. During the interviews, most educators acknowledged that they need
support in understanding culturally responsive assessments and how to create and implement
them in a Spanish-language classroom. The combined data from the interviews and document
analysis show discrepancies in this influence for all three divisions. Some educators know the
components of the culturally responsive curriculum and instruction but do not know how to
perform the assessment practices. This influence is determined to be a need.
Conceptual Knowledge Influence
Educators need to know the socio-political relationship between oppression and
advantage underpinning culturally responsive practices.
Interview Findings
Two questions were asked during the interview to determine conceptual knowledge. The
first interview question asked participants: How racism might influence how educators at our
school teach? In the elementary school, 100% of the participants demonstrated conceptual
knowledge, which met the 80% threshold, and was assumed as an asset. Participant 7 said, “The
78

whole idea of a culturally responsive curriculum is to dismantle the racism that is embedded in the
curriculum.”
In the middle school, 100% of the participants demonstrated conceptual knowledge,
which met the 80% threshold and was assumed as an asset. Participant 4 said, “Much harmful
language has been used to weaponize and terrorize students and faculty members to continue
perpetuating White supremacist values and structures.” Some Spanish educators from elementary
and middle schools know the sociopolitical relationship between oppression and advantage
underpinning culturally responsive practices.
In high school, 50% of the participants responded that racism influenced how educators
at ANCS teach. These responses did not meet the threshold of 80%; therefore, this assumed
influence was demonstrated as being a need in the high school. As for participant 6, “ I do not
know. I am not too aware of what is happening in other classes.”
The second question asked: How might White privilege influence how educators at our
school teach? All the elementary school participants were able to identify this influence with
100% accuracy. Their answers met the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was
determined to be an asset. Participant 7 stated, “You know you have it, it is something that you
do not want to let go of, so it influences the way you teach because you do not want to change
the status quo.”
All middle school participants were able to identify this influence with 100% accuracy.
Their answers met the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was determined to be an
asset. Participant 5 from the middle school explicitly referred to White privilege and stated, “I
guess that (White privilege) might influence how you teach.”
In high school, 50 % of the participants said White privilege does not influence how
educators at our school teach. Participants in the high school did not meet the threshold of 80%,
79

and this assumed influence was supported as a need. Participant 2 stated, “I do not know much
about the notion of White privilege, so it is difficult for me to give you a proper answer.” This
participant could not demonstrate conceptual knowledge of the sociopolitical relationship
between oppression and advantage, a component of culturally responsive practices.

Summary
The assumed conceptual knowledge that educators need to know and understand the
sociopolitical relationship of oppression and advantage underpinning culturally responsive
practices was supported as an asset with the combined interview data for elementary and middle
school Spanish educators. Educators from these two divisions know how racism and White
privilege influence teaching practices. The combined data from the two interview questions show
that this influence was determined to be a need for the high school. In this division, there may be
some need to provide educators with more resources and information about the sociopolitical
relationship between oppression and advantage underpinning culturally responsive practices.
Procedural Knowledge Influence
Educators need knowledge of how to create and use culturally responsive curricula,
instruction, and assessment practices.

Interview Findings
Three questions were asked during the interview to determine the procedural knowledge.
The first interview question asked participants to describe, step-by-step how to design a
culturally responsive lesson for students. 67% of the participants demonstrated that they could
design a culturally responsive lesson in the elementary school. Participants from this division did
80

not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was shown to be a need. Participant 1
said, “I would need support. I could not do it off the top of my head.”
67% of participants could design a culturally responsive lesson in middle school.
Participants from this division did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence
was demonstrated to be a need. Participant 3 said, “I feel I still need much learning; I do not
know how it would look, an effective culturally responsive lesson.”
In high school, 50% of the participants were able to answer the question. Participants in
the high school did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was demonstrated
as a need. Participant 6 said, “The Spanish program we developed with k-12 teachers; I did not
decide; it was not my own decision, it was a group decision.”
For the second question, participants were asked to describe how they would teach a
culturally responsive lesson step-by-step. In the elementary school, 67% of the participants
demonstrated the procedural knowledge for this influence. Still, it did not meet the threshold of
80%, and this assumed influence was determined to be a need. Participant 1 stated that they
would do this by, “…making sure that your (their) examples are culturally inclusive and do not
have bias.”
In the middle school, 67% of the participants demonstrated the procedural knowledge for
this influence. However, it did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was
determined to be a need. Participant 5 said, “We would talk about the aspects of a celebration,
and what those are, and then students will talk to their classmates about something they celebrate
with their families.” This demonstrates that Participant 5’s lesson and teaching had minimal
influences from culturally relevant pedagogy.
81

In high school, none of the participants answered the question. Participants in the high
school did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was determined to be a
need. Participant 2 said, “I would teach by doing three different activities as I normally do.”
For the third question, participants were asked to describe how they would assess
students’ learning in culturally responsive ways. In the elementary school, 33% of participants
described how they would assess students' learning in a culturally responsive way, yet this did
not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was determined to be a need.
Participant 1 said, “How far do we go to ensure that everyone feels okay with this type of
assessment?”
In middle school, 33% of the participants were able to describe how they would assess
students’ learning in culturally responsive ways. This did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this
assumed influence was determined to be a need. Participant 5 stated, “This is an area that I am
not sure 100%.”
In high school, 50% were able to describe how to assess students' learning in culturally
responsive ways. Their answers did not meet the 80% threshold, and this influence was
determined to be a need. Participant 2 said, “I would assess students' learning purely based on
our rubrics at school.”

Document Analysis
A lesson plan from each participant was analyzed to determine all of the participants'
procedural knowledge of the content and assessment. The lesson was from Unit Two- Personal
Identity. The lesson was accessed by the shared Google Drive from the Spanish department. The
elementary school, middle school, high school, and participants' lesson plans had detailed
information about the unit and incorporated several culturally responsive components. For
82

example, unit lesson plans incorporated various media, short movies, and games that positively
depict a range of cultures and that were relevant to the students. The lessons on identity for each
division were analyzed for content and assessment in relation to culturally relevant practices and
did have some components. The lesson on personal identity was culturally responsive. It had some
components of CRP, but it was difficult to understand the lesson’s organizational coherence. Not
all divisions had a lesson plan with the same CRP components and were, therefore, inconsistent
across the range of developmental levels. Based on the analysis of the documents, it was
determined that there is a need for coherence and consistency throughout the divisional Spanish
departments.
Summary
For this influence, educators from the three divisions demonstrated a need for knowledge
of how to create and use a culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment
practices. There is a need to support these educators in preparing, instructing, and teaching
culturally responsive lessons, but there is a greater demand to develop assessment for students in
a culturally responsive way. The collected data and its analysis show that there is a great need for
educators to prepare, instruct and teach culturally responsive lessons. There is a greater demand
for assisting these educators in developing assessments for students in a culturally responsive
way. Overall, this assumed influence was determined to be a need.
Metacognitive knowledge
Educators need to know how to critically self-reflect on their knowledge, beliefs, values,
assumptions, biases, and experiences to improve culturally responsive practices.
Interview Findings
A question was not asked during the interview regarding the need for critical reflection,
but it was noted that the concept of critical reflection and the ability of the educators to reflect on
83

their culturally responsive practices was orally-reflected upon without prompting. During the
interview, all the educators from all three divisions reflected on their culturally responsive
teaching knowledge, experiences, values, and assumptions.
For instance, participant 1, from the elementary school stated, “I am trying to learn about
that. What does that mean? Where do my biases come from? Just my upbringing or the privilege
that I have had in life?” Participant 4 from the middle school reflected, “It starts with yourself,
learning about where you are in a position of privilege or a position of oppression and
recognizing both.” Participant 6 from high school said, “We try to avoid biases we all have.”
Summary
One-hundred percent of all participants from elementary school, middle school, and high
school were able to critically reflect during the interview on their beliefs, biases, or experiences
related to improving their culturally responsive practices. The data confirmed this assumed
influence to be an asset.
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes

The Spanish educators assumed motivational influences were assessed through four
interview questions and observing their unguarded expressions, immediate reactions, or strong
emotions during the interview. The three assumed influences of interest were (Schraw &
Lehman, 2009) emotion (Pekrun, 2011), and self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997; Pajares, 2006).
Motivational Influence Interest

Educators need to have intrinsic interests and there must be a personal relevance to them for
implementing culturally responsive practices.
84

Interview Findings
To determine the interest as a motivational influence, one question was asked to
determine this influence. Participants were asked: How do you feel about the implementation of
culturally responsive practices? Responses from the elementary educators showed that 100%
knew the components of the interest influence. This group of educators did meet the threshold of
80%; this assumed influence was determined to be an asset. Participant 1 said, “I think it is an
excellent idea, and I am for it.”
In middle school, all their responses showed that 100% knew the components of the
interest influence. This group of educators did meet the threshold of 80%; this assumed influence
was determined to be an asset. Participant 3 said, “I am excited about it. I am excited that the
school has made it (CRP) one of the objectives for the next few years.” This participant was
referring to cultural competency as it is one of the learning aspirations that the school is focusing
on this year.
In high school, 50% of the participants did not meet the threshold of 80%. The assumed
influence was determined to be a need. Participant 2 said, “ I think I need to know a lot more to
adapt or be able to implement it.” This participant is showing no interest in culturally responsive
practices, but there might be potential interest in the future if he/she receives explicit instruction
on these practices.
Document Analysis
For the document analysis on motivation, the attendance of the Organic World Language
workshop was reviewed. All world language educators were invited to attend this workshop.
Three Spanish elementary educators participated in the workshop, three middle school teachers
attended the workshop, but none of the high school Spanish educators attended.
85

Summary

For elementary and middle school, the assumed influence that educators need to have
intrinsic interests and personal relevance in implementing culturally responsive practices was
supported to be an asset by the interview data. The data show that this influence was supported
as a need for the high school. There is a gap in motivation within the high school division. It is
important to note that three of the four Spanish teachers are moving to different schools next
year. The movement of high school teachers might have contributed to the lack of participation
in the workshop.
Self-Efficacy Influence
Educators are confident in enacting culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and
assessment practices.
Interview findings
To determine self-efficacy, three different questions were asked during the interview. The
first interview question asked participants how they felt about their ability to enact culturally
responsive curriculum practices? All participants felt that they were not able to enact culturally
responsive curriculum practices in the elementary school. Participants from this division did not
meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was shown to be a need. Participant 1
responded, “Not knowing how to define them, well, I feel like I probably need to be able to do
that before I can enact them very well.”
Sixty-seven percent of the participants were able to enact culturally responsive
curriculum practices in middle school. Participants from this division did not meet the threshold
of 80%, and this assumed influence was determined to be a need. Participant 1 said, “I am
86

unsure. I am intimidated. I feel intimidated, but at the same time, I am also excited to get to work
and get started.”
In high school, 50% of the participants were able to answer the question. Participants in the
high school did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was determined to be a
need. Participant 2 said, “I do not think I am there right now.”
For the second question, participants were asked to share their feelings about their ability
to enact culturally responsive teaching practices. In elementary school, 67% of the participants
demonstrated self-efficacy for this influence, but this did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this
assumed influence was determined to be a need. Participant 1 answered, “Identifying those
culturally responsive teaching practices, you know if I read them off a sheet, I probably do one,
but I am not sure what they are right now.”
In middle school, 33% of the participants demonstrated the self-efficacy influence, but
this did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was determined to be a need.
Participant 5 said, “I will need some support with doing that, but I do not always know.”
In high school, all participants shared that they felt they could enact culturally responsive
teaching practices. Participants in the high school did meet the threshold of 80%, and this
assumed influence was supported as an asset. Participant 2 said, “I think, overall, language
teachers in my department are probably well placed to do this work for this kind of practice, just
because of the nature of the subject.”
For the third question, participants were asked to share their feelings about their ability to
enact culturally responsive assessment practices. In the elementary school, 33% of participants
felt they could enact culturally responsive assessment practices. This data does not meet the
threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was determined to be a need. Participant 1 said,
87

“They are not at the forefront, and I do not have enough knowledge to get it or use them regularly
or daily.”
In middle school, 33% of the participants demonstrated self-efficacy in their responses,
and the threshold of 80% was not met. The assumed influence was determined to be a need.
Participant 5 stated, "I do not feel I can do that.”
In high school, none of the participants demonstrated self-efficacy in their responses.
Their responses did not meet the 80% threshold, and this influence was determined to be a need.
Participant 2 said, “ I do not feel like I can do that.”
Document analysis No document analysis was conducted.
Summary:
The interview data consisted of a three-part interview question that showed that the
Spanish educators from the three divisions do not feel confident in enacting culturally responsive
curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices. Even Though they are emotionally invested
and excited to teach CRP, there is a gap in their knowledge of doing this work. Spanish
educators who participated in this research have expressed their need to have a coach with whom
they can do lesson planning and culturally responsive assessments that are adequate in a world
language classroom.
Results and Findings for Organization Cause
The Spanish educators’ assumed organizational influences were investigated through
seven interview questions and document analyses to assess ANCS’s position in the institution’s
equity journey. The assumed organizational influences include resources (Brayboy et al., 2007;
Galloway & Ishimaru, 2020), policies, processes, and procedures (Ishimaru & Galloway, 2014),
cultural models (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001), and cultural settings (Gallimore & Goldenberg,
88

2001). Interviews and document analyses assessed each assumed organizational influence as being
an asset or need.
Resources Influence
Educators need to be a part of an organization that purposefully develops and utilizes
resources (time, finances, staff) to enhance culturally responsive learning.
Interview Findings

To determine the organization's influence, two different questions were asked during the
interview. The first interview question was to activate factual knowledge on the resources needed
to enact culturally responsive practices. The second question connected participants' schema to
understanding how the ANCS uses and provides resources to enhance culturally responsive
practices.
The first interview question asked participants: What resources might an educator need
to enact culturally responsive practices at ANCS? In elementary school. Participant 1 stated,
“We need training on culturally responsive practices focusing on teaching a world language. We
also need time for planning lessons, assessments, and curriculum on implementing these
practices in the classroom.” In middle school, Participant 5 said, “I need to observe people who
are experts in doing this job.” In high school, participant 2 stated, “Teachers need examples. We
need teachers modeling culturally responsive practices and a clear understanding of what the
teacher and students produce and professional development.”
The second question asked how well resourced do you think ANCS currently is in
supporting the implementation of culturally responsive practices? All the elementary school
participants identify that the school is not well resourced in supporting the implementation of
culturally responsive practices. Their responses did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this
89

assumed influence was determined to be a need. Participant 1 stated, “ We have some resources,
but we need to be trained on how to use those resources in our classroom.”
When asked the second question, in middle school, 33% of the participants were able to
identify this influence. Their response did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed
influence was determined to be a need. Participant 3 said, “I need someone that can work with
me to plan lessons, bounce ideas, and help me implement the lesson. There is hypothetical
support, but there is no concrete support, and that is what we need.”
In high school, all the participants said they felt that the school is not well resourced to
support the implementation of culturally responsive practices. Participants in the high school did
not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was demonstrated as a need.
Participant 6 replied, “I do not think the school gives us any specific resources; we have received
DEI resources but not related to the courses I teach (Spanish).”

Summary

The interview data had a two-part question in which the first part was meant to activate
the participants' thinking background knowledge on the resources an educator needs to enact
culturally responsive practices. This question is a factual knowledge question; however, it was
necessary to address it so that the participants could compare the resources to enact culturally
responsive practices. All the participants from all three divisions expressed that the school has
resources, but not all teachers have access, have been trained, or know how to utilize them
best. A common theme from the responses shows the need for professional development in
enacting culturally responsive practices in a Spanish classroom, planning curriculum, assessing
CRP, coaching in CRP, and time for implementation. Policies, Process, and Procedures
Influence
90

Educators need to be a part of an organization that provides multi-tiered support systems for
culturally responsive learning.
Interview Findings
To determine the policies, process, and procedural influence at ANCS, participants were
asked two questions. The first interview question was designed to activate long-term memory
and access the participant's background factual knowledge. The question asked about the systems
that need to be implemented to enact culturally responsive practices at ANCS. In the elementary
school, Participant 7 stated, "We have an office of learning. This person and his/her office staff
are in charge of providing teachers with the tools, resources, and training for implementing
culturally responsive practices, but this is not happening. CRP should not be a teacher's initiative
because, otherwise, it will not happen. (Initiative) needs to come from the top-down, needs to be
initiated from the superintendent, board, administration to the teachers and staff.” In the middle
school, Participant 4 said, “When harm occurs between colleagues or students, there is not a
system or structure, you have the option to report to the human resources, but not much is done.
The harm might continue.” The high school participant shared that “About four years ago,
before COVID, the school started the Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) committee. This
committee presented workshops on several DEI topics. The workshop was a great way to inform
and educate teachers about DEI.” Several educators were able to name systems that the school
already has established.
The second question asked participants: How effective are the systems currently in place
at ANCS in supporting the implementation of culturally responsive practices? Thirty-seven
percent of the elementary school participants said that ANCS has a system that supports the
implementation of culturally responsive practices. The data did not meet the 80% threshold. The
assumed influence was a need. Participant 1 said, “I do not think they are very effective. We need
91

specific guidance. For example, at the beginning of the school year, explain the expectations and
the process we will follow. This is what we are doing and this work needs to be done, and you
need to be here by the end of the school year.”
In middle school, 67% of the participants demonstrated this organization's influence,
which did not meet the 80% threshold, and was determined to be a need. Participant 5 said, “I am
not sure if this is a priority. The system for implementing CRP is not at the center of the priority
list, and I do not think there is a system to support this initiative because we are understaffed,
under-resourced, and underfunded. We are competing with other overstaffed, resourced, and
funded programs.We are not there yet.”
Fifty percent of the high school participants agreed that the school had some type of
system, but that the system is not conducive or focused on culturally responsive practices. Their
responses did not meet the threshold of 80%; therefore, this assumed influence was also
identified as a need. Participant said, “We need examples, we need teacher modeling, what they
want the students to produce, and professional development. We need explicit instruction and
expectations.”
Document analysis No document analysis was conducted.

Summary

The data from the three different divisions of the Spanish educators showed some
systems implemented in the school. Most of the systems are not conducive to or focused on
culturally responsive practices. There is not a clear or multi-tiered support system for culturally
responsive learning at ANCS. There are other systems successfully implemented at the school;
for example, the coaching model has been well developed, implemented, and explained to all the
stakeholders at ANCS. This data also shows a need to create and implement a multi-tiered
92

support system that can be aligned with all divisions. It needs to be specific and focus on
culturally responsive practices and presented to all stakeholders at school.
Cultural Models Influence
Educators need to be part of an organization whose ideologies, values, and assumptions
are aligned with cultural responsiveness and equity-focused theories of change.
Interview Findings
To determine the educator’s need to be part of an organization whose ideologies, values,
and assumptions align with culturally responsive and equity-focused theories of change, two
different questions were asked during the interview. The first interview question was to activate
the participants' long-term memory and access background factual knowledge to explore their
values. The question asked participants to describe what they think the values are that a school
needs to enact culturally responsive practices at ANCS. One hundred percent of the participants
from all the three divisions described the values needed to enact culturally responsive practices.
For example, Participant 1 stated that these values included, “...the value of richness in diversity
in all its forms, not just the way people look but the diversity of critical thinking and diversity of
backgrounds.” In middle school, participant 3 said the school should value, “...a diverse level of
experiences and backgrounds both for teaching and staff.” A participant from high school
declared that, “...these are our values and we promote them.” The prior quote refers to the values
that are listed and promoted at the school.
For the second question, participants were asked to describe: How aligned are ANCS’s
values to those they mentioned in the first question. In the elementary school, 67% of the
participants said that ANCS’s values align with the values they mentioned in the first question, but
it did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was determined to be a need.
93

Participant 8 said, “The school acknowledges the values’ importance, but I am afraid it is
superficial and they are not put into practice as much as they could.”
In middle school, all participants said ANC’S values are not aligned to enact culturally
responsive practices. Participant 4 said, “We are not there yet. There is much work that needs to
be done.”
In high school, 50% of the participants were able to answer the question. Participants in
the high school did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was determined as
a need. Participant 6 said, “The school is very aligned on paper. The values look good on paper,
but not in real life.”
Document Analysis
Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.

Summary According to the interview data, the Spanish educators from the three divisions
demonstrated that the school is on the right path and wants the organization to have a positive
cultural model where the ideologies, values, and assumptions are aligned with cultural
responsive practice. At this point, ANCS needs to improve cultural responsiveness, critical
reflection, inclusivity, and community. Even though there is a need to apply a CRP model in
all divisions, the educators feel that there is no consistent alignment in all divisions. Having no
alignment between divisions has created and perpetuated confusion and disorganization when
problems related to the lack of diversity, equity, and inclusion surface at the school. This
assumed influence was determined to be a need.

94

Cultural Settings Influence
Educators need to be situated in an organizational setting that promotes values of
cultural responsiveness, critical reflection, inclusivity, and community.
Interview Findings
To determine the educators' cultural model settings, they must be part of an organization
that implements policies, processes, and procedures promoting values of cultural responsiveness,
critical reflection, inclusivity, and community. One question was asked during the interview to
determine this influence. The interview question asked participants to describe the policies
educators might need to implement for ANCS to effectively promote cultural responsiveness and
the value of inclusivity. In the elementary school, 33% of the participants could describe the
policies, processes, and procedures promoting values of cultural responsiveness. Participants
from this division did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was shown to
be a need. Participant 7 described his frustration with how she or he felt the school did not have
or did not know where to find these policies or the answer given to her or him of “I do not know”
when they had asked other staff members.
In middle school, 67% of the participants felt the school did not have established policies,
which has had the effect of creating a misalignment, since educators do not know what
expectations the school has of them or what they should do with regard to CRP. Participant 3
expressed her feelings about this question as follows, “I do not know. I cannot say that I know
the policies we need or where we have these policies. I do not know where to find them.” The
division did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was supported as a need.
Fifty percent of the division's participants in high school did not feel that the school
provided them with policies. Participant 2 stated, “The school needs to be explicit in their policy.
There must be an expectation that teachers need to perform, what we must do, and how to do it.”
95

The influence did not meet the threshold of 80%, and this assumed influence was determined to be
a need.
Observation
The observation took place at an elementary school professional learning community
(PLC) meeting. All the research participants were notified by email as to when they would be
observed. It was noted that an item about culturally responsive practice (CRP) was added to the
agenda after the observation was scheduled. During the first 10 minutes of the PLC, the item
about culturally responsive practice was discussed. The discussion on culturally responsive
practices (CRP) has been rarely discussed in the PLC meetings. The researcher felt that this
discussion was only included on the PLC meeting’s agenda because several of the participants
for this research were present at this PLC meeting. Upon review of PLC agendas for the past
year, the topic of culturally relevant items, diversity, inclusion, or community was only discussed
four times during the past school year (2021-2022). The observation data indicated that CRP was
not supported as an asset and was determined to be a need at PLC meetings within the
elementary school Spanish department.

Document Analysis

In June of 2020, a group of ANCS alumni collected survey data about their experiences
in this institution. From this survey, they also analyzed ANCS’s cultural setting. The alumni
shared a high-level summary of an independent survey they collected from current and former
students’ experiences with racial discrimination at ANCS. The 240 responses from 2000 to 2023
of former and current students revealed what they experienced at the school in an environment of
prejudice, inequality, and anti-Black racism. Their findings revealed the lack of a culturally
responsive curriculum, and they also highlighted the lack of an equitable and inclusive school
96

culture at ANCS. The analysis of ANCS’s alumni survey responses from current students
revealed that Spanish educators at ANCS may not be situated in an environment that promotes
practices of cultural responsiveness, inclusivity, and community. As such, this assumed influence
was determined to be a need.
Summary
The interview findings for elementary, middle, and high school showed that the school
needs to establish policies that promote a supportive cultural setting. The ANCS alumni report's
analysis showed that educators are not part of an organization that implements policies,
processes, and procedures promoting values of cultural responsiveness, critical reflection,
inclusivity, and community. The assumed influence was determined to be a need.
Summary of Validated Influences

Table 8
Knowledge Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed Knowledge
Influences
Category
Elementary
Division
Middle

High School
Classroom educators need
to know the components of
Declarative
Factual
Need

Need

Need

culturally responsive
curriculum, instruction, and
assessment practices.
Classroom educators need Conceptual Asset Asset Need to know the sociopolitical
relationship between oppression and advantage
underpinning culturally responsive practices.
97

Motivation
Table 9
Motivation Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed Motivation
Influences
Category
Elementary
Division
Middle

High School
Educators need to have
intrinsic interests and
personal relevance in
implementing culturally
responsive practices.
Interest Asset

Asset

Asset

Educators need to be
emotionally driven to learn
about and implement
culturally responsive
practices.

Emotion
Asset

Asset

Asset

Classroom educators need
knowledge of how to
create and use a culturally
responsive curriculum,
instruction, and assessment
practices.
Procedural Need Need Need
Classroom educators need
to know how to critically
self - reflect on their
knowledge, beliefs, values,
assumptions, biases, and
experiences related to
improving culturally
responsive practices.
Metacognitive Asset

Asset

Asset

98

Educators need to be
confident in their ability to
enact culturally responsive
curriculum, instruction, and
Self-Efficacy Need Need Need

Organization
Table 10
Organizational Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed Organizational
Influences
Category
Elementary
Division
Middle

High School
Educators need to be a part
of an organization that
purposefully develops and
utilizes resources (time,
finances, staff) to enhance
culturally responsive
learning.
Resources Need Need Need
Educators need to be a part
of an organization that
provides multi-tiered
systems of support for
culturally responsive
learning.
Policies,
Processes, &
Procedures
Need Need Need
assessment practices.
99

Educators need to be part of
an organization whose
ideologies, values, and
assumptions are aligned
with cultural responsiveness
and equity-focused theories
of change.
Cultural
Model
Need Need Need
Educators need to be
situated in an organizational
setting that promotes values
of cultural responsiveness,
critical reflection,
inclusivity, and community.
Cultural
Setting
Need Need Need

Summary

This chapter addressed the first research question that guided this study (What are the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that contribute to educators’ successful
enactment of culturally responsive behaviors?) and was organized into three sections, which
delineated the findings by assumed knowledge and skills, motivation, and the organizational
influences on culturally responsive practices. By examining 11 assumed influences, this study
examined and analyzed the factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge and
skills, interest, emotion, and self-efficacy motivation, and the resources, policies, processes, and
procedures, cultural model, and cultural setting organizational influences needed for educators to
enact culturally responsive practices across divisions and within an international school.
One of the organization’s performance goals is that by 2027, all educators will implement
culturally responsive strategies into the curriculum, classroom instruction, and assessment practices
100% of the time. Research suggests that if every classroom educator can implement these
strategies, the academic achievement gap will be reduced (Gay, 2010; Howard, 2003;
100

Ladson-Billings, 2009).
Assessed through the research question, the findings presented in this chapter suggest that
most participants generally saw the knowledge and skills and assumed motivation influences as
assets. In contrast, the assumed organizational interests were consistently seen as needs across all
categories. As classroom educators across all school divisions continue to build their capacity to
enact culturally responsive practices and organizational needs, the data suggest specific needs in
procedural knowledge and self-efficacy.
Chapter 5 presents recommendations and solutions for these needs based on the validated results
and findings. The proposed recommendations seek to maintain and improve continuity,
consistency, and commitment so that classroom educators can develop and enact culturally
responsive practices. In addition to classroom educators, the proposed recommendations include
school leaders and Spanish-classroom educators, the other stakeholder groups examined in this
study.

101

Chapter 5: Recommendations and Evaluation
Written by Darnell Fine, Monica Gonzalez, and Wendy Windust
As a school, ANCS believes diversity is one of the greatest strengths of its community.
The organization not only expresses that diversity helps build cross-cultural relationships and
intercultural understanding, but diversity also offers extraordinary learning opportunities for its
community members. Diversity allows community members to learn from multiple perspectives
and draw upon one another’s strengths to address needs within a learning organization (Lämsä &
Sintonen, 2006). With this hope in heart and mind, this chapter will provide recommendations
addressing the needs of one particular stakeholder group and might also draw upon the assets of
other diverse stakeholder groups revealed in the concurrent studies. As such, the KMO assets of
one stakeholder group might help inform recommendations addressing the KMO needs of
another stakeholder group in the study. This rationale for offering a combined set of
recommendations and evaluations serves all stakeholder groups. Furthermore, a combined set of
recommendations and evaluations offered in this chapter will use the inclusive term “educators”
to address the needs of the Spanish educators, classroom educators, instructional leaders, and
102

divisional principals to maintain continuity, consistency, and collective commitment across all
divisions and positions of the school.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this improvement study was to conduct a gap analysis examining the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that impact ANCS’s performance goal of
educators developing and implementing culturally responsive practices. The research questions that
guided this performance study for all the ANCS stakeholders are:
1. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors contribute to educators’
successful enactment of culturally responsive practices?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions for
supporting culturally responsive educators?
This chapter addresses the second research question that guided this study for both assets
and needs described in Chapter 4 of the concurrent studies. In addition to addressing the needs,
the recommendations and evaluation outlined in this chapter emphasize the consistency,
continuity, and commitment required to support developing and implementing culturally
responsive practices at ANCS. In a community consisting of over 10,000 educators, students,
and parents worldwide, the size and scale of ANCS alone requires the organization to maintain
consistency across the school while developing and implementing culturally responsive
practices. Furthermore, due to the transient nature of international schools (Bailey & Gibson,
2020) and recent trends of high educator turnover at ANCS, sustaining continuity of culturally
responsive practices becomes increasingly important when onboarding new employees into the
organization. Finally, current ANCS educators must demonstrate a collective commitment to the
school’s vision of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) through the implementation of culturally
responsive practices. As expressed in the school’s DEI commitment statement, each student at
103

ANCS should feel valued, cared for, and included. With critical hope, ANCS will engage in
continuous improvement so that these commitments become a reality. As such, ANCS might
offer promising practices to other international schools wishing to become more culturally
responsive to their respective communities.
Recommendations to Address Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Influences
The KMO influences in the following tables were determined to be assets or needs based
on interview findings, observations, and document analyses presented in the researchers’
individually written Chapter Four. Each KMO is reported separately and contains an overview
identifying the evidence-based principle supporting the recommendations. Recommendations in
this study have been reordered and do not follow the traditional KMO structure, as the
researchers determined that the organizational influences were the highest priority.
Besides determining that organizational influences were the highest prioritized, they were
also the most pervasive need across all stakeholder groups. Drawing on the inspiration from
Galloway and Ishimaru (2020), the researchers of this study reject the notion that equitable
change in a school first requires shifts in individuals’ “hearts and minds.” Recognizing that the
hearts-and-minds-first theory of change can hinder changes in organizational policies, structures,
and practices (Galloway & Ishimaru, 2020), the researchers in the study started by addressing the
validated organizational influences to achieve the stakeholders’ performance goals. Following
recommendations addressing organizational influences, the researchers addressed the validated
knowledge and motivational influences.
Organization Influences
While it is easy to focus on the organization as an entity, it is important to remember that
organizations are composed of people whose knowledge, skills, and motivation are at the heart of
performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). This means that, organizationally, ANCS must focus on
104

providing maximum support for educators’ needs. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) describe
how organizations can be examined through the two dimensions of cultural models and cultural
settings. Cultural models are the often invisible and underlying shared ideas and behavioral
patterns that distinguish one culture from another, whereas cultural settings are the social contexts
and routines which shape everyday life (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). This framework
suggests that achieving cultural responsiveness requires organizations to transform both visible
and invisible norms that are aligned with oppressive and exclusionary practices and create
settings to show the value of practices that redress bias and promote cultural responsiveness
(Galloway & Ishimaru, 2020).
Achieving cultural responsiveness and equity in education necessitates not only an
equitable allocation of resources between schools but also within schools (Brayboy et al., 2007;
Galloway & Ishimaru, 2020). Recognizing that the distribution of resources is intimately linked
to the quality of education students receive (Ishimaru & Galloway, 2014; Lynch & Baker, 2005),
allocating resources to culturally responsive education is a means of making sure that culturally
and racially diverse students receive a quality education. To ensure a high-quality education for
all students, policies, processes, and procedures must counter oppression and address racial
inequities normalized in organizational and instructional practices (Ishimaru & Galloway, 2014).
In this study, within the organization of ANCS, the gaps or barriers to implementing culturally
responsive pedagogy focused on resources, policies, processes, procedures, and cultural models
and settings.
Organization Recommendations
The organizational domain consists of four subdomains, including resources, policies,
processes, procedures, and cultural model and setting. Findings in this study validated
organizational needs for all of the four influences across all stakeholder groups as each validated
105

influence was identified and supported by the data gathered from interviews, observations, and data
analysis. Poorly allocated resources, inconsistent policies, processes, and procedures, and
misaligned cultural models and settings may prevent the organization’s stakeholders from
achieving performance goals even with ample knowledge and motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Clark and Estes’ (2008) framework suggests using evidence-based, context-specific
recommendations for each validated influence. Therefore, Table 23 lists the organizational
influences, assets or needs according to stakeholders (Spanish educators, classroom educators, and
school leaders in the elementary, middle, and high school), the principles from organizational
science research, and context-specific recommendations. Following the table, a detailed discussion
for each cause and recommendation and the literature supporting the recommendation is provided.
Specific activities for the recommendations will be described later in the chapter in the integrated
implementation and evaluation sections.
Table 11
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Organization Influence Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Resources
Educators need to be a part of
an organization that
purposefully develops and
utilizes resources (time,
finances, staff) to enhance
culturally responsive learning.
Effective change efforts
ensure that everyone has the
resources (equipment,
personnel, time, etc.) needed
to do their job and that if there
are resource shortages, then
resources are aligned with
organizational priorities
(Clark & Estes, 2008).

Provide educators with the
resources they need (i.e.,
coaching, professional
development, time, and space)
to share evidence that
culturally responsive goals are
being prioritized and met.

Policies, Processes, & Procedures Educators need
to be a part of an
organization that provides
multi-tiered systems of
106

support for culturally
responsive practices.
Effective organizations
ensure that organizational
messages, rewards, policies,
and procedures that govern
the work of the organization
are aligned with or are
supportive of organizational
Provide educators with a
multi-tiered progress
monitoring system to
examine patterns and trends
related to culturally
responsive behaviors,
providing support as needed.
goals and values (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

Cultural Model
Educators need to be part of
an organization whose
ideologies, values, and
assumptions are aligned with
cultural responsiveness and
equity-focused theories of
change.
Effective change efforts
ensure that all key
stakeholders’ perspectives
inform the design and
decision-making process
leading to the change (Clark
& Estes, 2008).
Provide educators with
ongoing audits of their teams’
messages, policies, and
processes, to check for
alignment or interference
with the organization’s
espoused values/goals related
to culturally responsive
practices.

Cultural Setting Effective change efforts use Provide evidence-based and Educators need
to be situated evidence-based solutions and adaptive solutions responsive in an organizational
setting adapt them, where necessary, to educators’ specific needs to that promotes values
of to the organization’s cultural ensure the cultural setting is
cultural responsiveness, setting (Clark & Estes, 2008). conducive to
culturally critical reflection, inclusivity, responsive practices. and community.

Implications for Practice: Resources
Clark and Estes (2008) state that effective change efforts ensure everyone has the
resources needed to do their job and that if there are resource shortages, then resources are
aligned with organizational priorities. Educators need to be a part of an organization that
purposefully develops and utilizes resources such as time, finances, and staff to enhance
culturally responsive learning. However, data from interviews and document analyses identified
gaps in the organization’s resources. Culturally responsive leaders must also advocate for the
equitable use of resources throughout systems within and beyond their own sphere of control
107

(Galloway & Ishimaru, 2020). When working with one’s team, it is important to establish, from
the beginning, what the priorities of the team are so that when hard choices have to be made, the
guidance is already in place (Clark & Estes, 2008). This principle suggests that for educators to
enact culturally responsive practices, the organization must provide them with the resources they
need.
Schoolwide Professional Development
Data across all stakeholders showed a gap in educators’ access to the resources they need
to enact culturally responsive practices. Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that knowledge and skills
enhancement is required when individuals do not know how to accomplish performance goals
and when solving novel problems. At a schoolwide level, a professional learning plan will
prioritize, align, and integrate professional development with the school’s strategic goal of
enacting culturally responsive practices. According to Knight (2007), only 10% of traditional
professional development learning is fully integrated into the classroom. However, when
educators are engaged in learning, there is motivation to apply learning to their own pedagogy
(Klein & Riordan, 2009). To increase knowledge and motivation simultaneously, educators
should have input into what and how they learn (Clark, 2018). Studies have found that when
educators take part in intellectually engaging, culturally responsive professional development,
the results are twofold: they deepen their sociopolitical consciousness and apply teaching and
learning beyond the confines of school to identify, analyze, and solve real-world problems
(Hynds et al., 2011; Kennedy, 2019; Ladson-Billings, 1995b). Therefore, a recommendation is to
implement a schoolwide professional learning plan to prioritize, align, and integrate professional
development with the school’s strategic goal of enacting culturally responsive practices.
Time and Space in PLCs
108

At a PLC level, congruent data across all stakeholder groups revealed the need for the
time and space to prioritize the enactment of culturally responsive practices. This includes the
support to ensure consistent implementation and a focus on sharing evidence that culturally
responsive goals are being prioritized and met. Educators who participate in PLCs focused on
culturally responsive practices develop culturally responsive competencies (Alhanachi et al.,
2021). Therefore, the recommendation is for ANCS to restructure the existing PLCs so that
educators have access to resources, according to need, through their participation in learning
communities prioritized with the school’s strategic goal of focusing on and developing culturally
responsive competencies. Since school leaders develop teacher capacity for creating culturally
responsive curricula and assessments (Villegas & Lucas, 2002), to remove barriers to this
influence, the school leadership must allocate culturally responsive resources to support this
work.
Coaching
Data across all stakeholders showed a gap in the resources allocated for educators’
support to receive and apply personalized and embedded professional development. Clark and
Estes (2008) state that individual team members will benefit from the resources of just-in-time
training and support through expert coaching. ANCS needs to provide educators with one-on-
one coaching to build and share evidence that culturally responsive goals are being prioritized
and met. A more effective method of professional development, instructional coaching may,
increase educators’ self-efficacy in implementing instructional strategies (Joyce & Showers,
2002). According to Sprick and Sprick (2010), without coaching, the professional development
educators receive may be less applicable to their own practice. However, working alongside a
coach can support educators as they increase student achievement and progress, develop the
ability to analyze their lessons, and refine their teaching practices. Thus, the recommendation is
109

to allocate the resources of instructional coaching paired with the time and space to build trust in
the relationship between educator and coach since coaching for cultural responsiveness requires
trust (Aguilar, 2013; Averill et al., 2015; Bradshaw et al., 2018; Khalifa, 2020; Knight et al.,
2016).
Implications for Practice: Policies, Procedures, and Processes
Educators need to be a part of an organization that provides multi-tiered systems of
support for culturally responsive practices. According to Clark and Estes (2008), effective
organizations ensure that organizational messages, rewards, policies, and procedures that govern
the organization’s work are aligned with or are supportive of organizational goals and values.
This principle suggests that educators must work collectively to review, revise, and update
current policies, processes, and procedures to maintain alignment with the organization’s
strategic goals.
Schoolwide Progress Monitoring System
At a schoolwide level, the data across all stakeholders showed a gap in the systems for
monitoring educators’ progress toward enacting culturally responsive practices. To support the
culturally responsive instructional needs of classroom educators, findings revealed a need to
create coherent and sustainable systems schoolwide. Marshall and Khalifa (2018) recommend
that leaders at all levels of the school commit to and enact culturally responsive leadership
practices that support the culturally responsive instructional needs of classroom educators. When
addressing matters of equity and cultural responsiveness at the classroom level, Orange et al.
(2019) state that school leaders must develop processes and systems to coach educators to
dialogue, critically reflect, and take action to challenge bias in their teaching. Implementing
culturally responsive policies and practices must be systematically monitored by its leaders to
110

ensure it is embedded in all aspects of the organization, including classrooms (Minkos et al.,
2017). Thus, the recommendation for ANCS is to provide school leaders with a progress
monitoring system where leaders at all levels of the school can examine patterns and trends
related to culturally responsive pedagogy, providing support as needed.
Systematically Monitoring Culturally Responsive Practices in PLCs
At a PLC level, findings revealed a need for data-based problem solving and decision
making, as well as evidence-based instruction and assessment. Minkos et al. (2017) argue that
“statements alone will not engender cultural responsiveness. Education regarding cultural
competence in an organization must be systematically monitored along with the implementation
of new policies and practices” (p. 1264). This should also hold true for PLCs. Khalifa (2020)
states that conversations about racial and cultural bias need to inform system-level changes
where cultural responsiveness becomes embedded in all aspects of the organization. He states
that an essential step in this process involves educators and school leaders using data and equity
audits to center culturally responsive practices in PLCs (Khalifa, 2020). It is recommended that
ANCS provide educators with a multi-tiered progress monitoring system, such as data and equity
audits, to systemically monitor each PLC’s implementation of culturally responsive practices,
providing support as needed.
System of Progress Monitoring Individual Educators
The findings across the data from the interview responses and document analyses showed
that, while there are systems in place at ANCS to support educators’ culturally responsive
practices, there were gaps in implementing the policies, processes, and procedures. Clark and
Estes (2008) state that all organizational goals are achieved through a system of interacting
processes that specifies how stakeholders and resources must work together to produce and
sustain the desired result. Failure may ensure when these processes do not align with the
111

organizational goals. For example, while the organization’s strategic plan provides a goal to
increase diversity, equity, and inclusion and gives broad actions that should cause promising
outcomes, there is a gap between the goal, the actions, and the outcomes, revealing a need for the
organization to link actionable steps to culturally responsive critical behaviors. Therefore, the
recommendation for ANCS is to provide educators with a multi-tiered progress monitoring
system where educators examine patterns and trends related to culturally responsive behaviors,
reflect on their own educational practice and take action to amend patterns of bias and disrupt the
status quo.
Implications for Practice: Cultural Models
Educators need to be part of an organization whose ideologies, values, and assumptions
are aligned with cultural responsiveness and equity-focused theories of change (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001; Galloway & Ishimaru, 2020; Ishimaru & Galloway, 2014). Effective change
efforts ensure that all key stakeholders’ perspectives inform the design and decision-making
process leading to the change (Clark & Estes, 2008). When organizations such as ANCS have
divisional subcultures, each is more difficult to change (Bolman & Deal, 1991). At the classroom
level, cultural models at ANCS are enacted through a hidden curriculum that teaches who
community members should be through unspoken norms and taken-for-granted values. The
culture of power and dominant values must be made visible so that ANCS can disrupt them
when they inhibit culturally responsive practices. Achieving cultural responsiveness requires
organizations to transform both visible and invisible norms aligned with oppressive and
exclusionary practices (Galloway & Ishimaru, 2020).
Schoolwide Culturally Responsive Audits
This study revealed emergent dichotomies through the investigation of the organizational
cultural models within ANCS. Therefore, the recommendation is for ANCS to use second-order
112

change (Marzano, 2005) to apply the theory of action of double-loop learning (Argyris & Schön,
1974), which occurs when an organization no longer falls back on strategies that have worked
before. Instead, ANCS needs to conceptualize the problem of closing the gap between the
intention and outcomes of culturally responsive practices and add new strategies to their
repertoire. One type of double-loop learning is through an audit. By completing an
actionoriented culture analysis to develop a mental model, this will bring culture to a conscious
level for analysis and collect and infer deeper meaning from artifacts and espoused values to find
the misalignments between the elements of ANCS’s culture, including artifacts, espoused values,
and underlying assumptions (Buch & Wetzel, 2001) to ensure culturally responsive coherence
throughout the organization. Therefore, the recommendation is to provide educators with
ongoing audits of their teams’ messages, policies, and processes, to check for alignment or
interference with the organization’s espoused values and goals related to culturally responsive
practices.
PLC Level Culturally Responsive Audits
At the PLC level, the data across all stakeholders showed a gap between the ANCS’s
espoused theories and theories in action revealed through organizational values and goals.
According to the data, professional learning communities (PLCs) are not conducive to culturally
responsive practices and can be façades of collaboration with little to no responsibility for
collaborating in a culturally responsive way. One educator said that these learning communities
are hegemonic with “wide swaths and amounts of power being held, but not distributing that
power. And the goals of my PLC are going to be only decided on by my PLC leader.” Brookfield
(2017) defines critical reflection as the process of illuminating power and uncovering hegemony.
113

Therefore, a recommendation is to restructure the PLC framework in order to reform systems of
power so that they align with the organization’s strategic goal of becoming a culturally
responsive school with critical self-reflective practices.
Individual Culturally Responsive Audits
Findings revealed a gap between the espoused and enacted cultural model of the
organization, showing that educators do not feel that the organizational setting at ANCS is
conducive to culturally responsive practices. According to Brookfield (2009), critical reflection
starts with self as one closely examines, uncovers, and challenges these power dynamics and
hegemonic assumptions and seeks to uncover and liberate the internal biases that frame
epistemology and practice. Grounded in a set of values (Brookfield, 2017), educators need to use
critical reflection to realize and challenge the status quo in their own practice and to recognize
and research the assumptions that are just beneath the surface of their thoughts and actions
(Brookfield, 2009). Therefore, a recommendation is to provide educators with data related to
how they are enacting culturally responsive practices, prompting educators to self-reflect and
generate evidence-based solutions when they are not showing and modeling such behaviors.
Implications for Practice: Cultural Settings
Educators need to be situated in an organizational setting conducive to culturally
responsive practices. Disrupting and dismantling culturally unresponsive and oppressive
practices moves beyond stating that such practices exist to “uncover[ing] the places, instances,
and incidents where they happen” (Sondel et al., 2019, p. 6). Effective change efforts must use
evidence-based solutions and adapt them, where necessary, to an organization’s cultural setting
(Clark & Estes, 2008). This principle suggests that ANCS’s cultural setting influences how
culturally responsive change is enacted in order to disrupt oppressive practices. As cultural
settings are where educators come together to accomplish organizational goals Gallimore and
114

Goldenberg (2001), ANCS must provide evidence-based and adaptive solutions responsive to
educators’ specific needs to ensure the cultural setting is conducive to culturally responsive
practices. Such evidence-based and adaptive solutions derive from a process of ongoing critical
self-reflection across ANCS’s cultural setting.
Culturally Responsive School Culture
Findings at the schoolwide level revealed educators feel that the organizational setting is
not conducive to implementing culturally responsive practices. Specifically, they note the
presence of whiteness, Westernized practices, and the superficial celebration of culture
throughout ANCS’s organizational setting. School settings are not just physical locations but
also social and historical contexts that have traditionally been designed for middle-class white
communities (Khalifa, 2020). Khalifa et al. (2016) state that white, Western hegemony–as well
as minimizing deeper explorations of race and culture–inhibits educators from fostering
culturally responsive school settings. School leaders can have a significant impact in facilitating
the professional development of culturally responsive classroom educators and, by extension,
promoting culturally responsive school climates (Marshall & Khalifa, 2018). As such, the
recommendation for ANCS is to provide educators with schoolwide professional learning to
explore their cultural biases and how they must foster a culturally responsive school
environment.
Culturally Responsive Learning Communities
At the PLC level, findings revealed that educators do not feel that the learning
communities at ANCS are conducive to culturally responsive practices. According to one
classroom educator, these learning communities are hegemonic with “wide swaths and amounts
of power being held, but not distributing that power. And the goals of my PLC are going to be
only decided on by my PLC leader.” Cooper et al. (2009) state that PLCs can be transformed into
115

sites of culturally responsive learning, where educators should not only share leadership but also
engage in self-reflective activities examining their cultural biases. To leverage change, school
leaders can ensure that the core components of PLCs are more culturally responsive, guiding
educators to critically self-reflect not only their cultural biases but also their curriculum,
instructional, and assessment practices (Khalifa, 2020). Thus, it is recommended that ANCS
restructure PLCs as culturally responsive learning communities where educators work together
to promote values of critical reflection, inclusivity, and community.
Culturally Responsive Classrooms
Findings revealed that the classroom environment is not always a setting that ensures a
high-quality, culturally responsive education for all students. To draw upon and use the cultural
knowledge, prior experiences, frames of reference, and performance styles that learners bring to
the classrooms, educators need to use culturally responsive practices to make learning more
relevant to and effective for students (Gay, 2002). To ensure change, school leaders can use
equity audits to examine data not only related to the school culture and climate but also
classroom settings to determine these culturally responsive practices (Khalifa, 2020). In order to
foster what Steketee et al. (2021) describe as a culturally responsive school ecology, educators
must “must develop the capacity to be culturally sensitive, provide culturally responsive
pedagogy, and regularly self-assess for biases implicated in positive academic outcomes for
students in kindergarten through Grade 12” (p. 1075). Therefore, it is recommended that
ANCS’s school leaders provide educators with data related to how they are enacting culturally
responsive practices in their classroom settings, prompting them to critically reflect while also
supporting them in generating evidence-based solutions when they are not showing and
modeling such behaviors.
116

Knowledge Influences
According to Clark and Estes (2008), to close stakeholder performance gaps, it is
necessary to understand and assess the categories of knowledge. While investigating the barriers
impeding culturally responsive practices, this study closely focused on the gaps in factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge. Educators’ knowledge and skills, in
comparison with other factors, make the biggest difference in learners’ acquisition of knowledge
(Darling-Hammond & Lieberman, 2012). According to Villegas and Lucas (2002), culturally
responsive teachers are socioculturally conscious, have affirming views of students from
diverse backgrounds, see themselves as responsible for and capable of bringing about
change to make schools more equitable, understand how learners construct knowledge
and are capable of promoting knowledge construction, know about the lives of their
students, and design instruction that builds on what their students already know while
stretching them beyond the familiar. (p. 20)
If educators do not have the knowledge, skills necessary, and required abilities to audit and write
curriculum, instruct, and assess learners in a culturally responsive manner, and if educators do
not understand how the sociopolitical relationship between oppression and advantage underpins
this practice, they will not be able to successfully implement this asset-based framework. In
addition, educators who do not know how to critically self-reflect on their lack the ability for
learning and applying the knowledge of cultural responsiveness into practice.
Knowledge Recommendations
The knowledge domain consists of four subdomains: factual, conceptual, procedural, and
metacognitive knowledge (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Findings in this study validated
organizational needs across all stakeholder groups as each validated influence was identified and
supported by the data gathered from interviews, observations, and data analysis. Therefore,
117

Table 12 lists the knowledge influences, assets or needs according to stakeholders (Spanish
educators, classroom educators, and school leaders in the elementary, middle, and high school),
the principles from organizational science research, and context-specific recommendations.
Following the table, a detailed discussion for each cause and recommendation and the literature
supporting the recommendation is provided. Specific activities for the recommendations will be
described later in the chapter in the integrated implementation and evaluation sections.
Table 12
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Knowledge Influence Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Factual
Educators need to know the
components of culturally
responsive curriculum,
instruction, and assessment
practices.
To develop mastery,
individuals must
acquire component
skills, practice
integrating them, and
know when to apply
what they have learned
(Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide learning experiences
(i.e., professional
development, PLC cycles of
inquiry, one-on-one coaching
cycles) that connect verbal
and pictorial representations
of culturally responsive
practices with educators’
prior knowledge of
curriculum, assessment, and
instruction.

Conceptual Provide experiences Provide professional learning
Educators need to know the that help people make sense experiences (i.e., professional
sociopolitical relationship of the material rather than development, PLC cycles of
between oppression and
advantage underpinning
culturally responsive practices.
just focus on memorization
(Schraw & McCrudden, 2006).
inquiry, one-on-one coaching
cycles) that build educators’
conceptual understanding of
racism rather than just
focusing on memorization.

118

Procedural
Educators need knowledge of
how to create and use culturally
responsive curriculum,
instruction, and assessment
practices.
Modeling to-be- learned
strategies or behaviors
improve self-efficacy,
learning, and performance
(Denler et al., 2009).
Provide professional learning
experiences (i.e., professional
development, PLC cycles of
inquiry, one-on-one coaching
cycles) modeling to-belearned
culturally responsive
strategies and practices.

Metacognitive The use of metacognitive Provide professional learning
Educators need to know how strategies facilitate learning experiences (i.e., professional
to critically self-reflect on (Baker, 2006). development, PLC cycles of
their knowledge, beliefs, inquiry, one-on-one coaching values, assumptions, biases, cycles)
on how to critically and experiences related to reflect on culturally improving culturally
responsive practices. responsive practices.

Implications for Practice: Factual
Educators need to know the components of the culturally responsive curriculum,
instruction, and assessment practices to meet the needs of their students (Gay, 2010;
LadsonBillings, 2014). To develop mastery, individuals must acquire component skills, practice
integrating them, and know when to apply what they have learned (Schraw & McCrudden,
2006). Research has shown that many pre-service educators are inadequately prepared with the
relevant knowledge, experience, and training needed to build culturally responsive teaching
practices (Au, 2009; Cummins, 2007). In addition, insufficient preparation may cause a cultural
divide between educators and students (Gay, 2010; Ladson-Billings, 2009). In response, schools
must be sites of learning to ensure that all educators (regardless of the amount of knowledge held
when initially hired) understand and can communicate the components of culturally responsive
pedagogy, including curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices. The findings validated
the need for the factual knowledge influences in Table 24, indicating that some of the
119

stakeholders in the elementary, middle, and high school require ongoing support through
collaboration with the educators who know and can share their understanding of culturally
responsive practices. Thus, ANCS must provide professional learning experiences for all
educators to learn from and with each other schoolwide, as well as within the PLCs’ cycles of
inquiry and individually, during one-on-one coaching cycles to apply and increase their factual
knowledge of culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices.
Schoolwide Professional Development Experiences
The data across all stakeholder groups revealed incongruent data in educators’ factual
knowledge about the components of culturally responsive practices, and while some educators
can communicate factual knowledge, there are gaps in others’ knowledge of culturally
responsive terminology, details, and elements (Rueda, 2011). Research has shown that active
learning possibilities in professional development led to enhanced knowledge and abilities, as
well as changes in classroom practice (Lieberman & Grolnick, 1996; Stiles & Loucks-Horsley,
1998). As part of their professional development, active learning encourages educators to engage
in meaningful conversation, planning, and practice as they deepen their understanding of the
components of the culturally responsive practices of curriculum development, instruction, and
assessment. Therefore, it is recommended that ANCS provide schoolwide professional
development experiences to connect verbal and pictorial representations of culturally responsive
practices with educators’ prior knowledge of curriculum, assessment, and instruction.
PLC Experiences
At the PLC level, the findings highlighted the need for all educators to acquire factual
knowledge about the components of culturally responsive practices. The PLC cycle of inquiry
offers the opportunity for growth in factual knowledge as the learning community collaborates
through professional learning to meet both the organizational performance goals as well as the
120

PLCs’ goals to enact the culturally responsive practices of curriculum development, instruction,
and assessment. Developing learning communities that incorporate critical intercultural
orientations will support educators in cultural transformation (Mullen, 2009). Therefore, it is
recommended that ANCS provide PLC experiences that connect verbal and pictorial
representations of culturally responsive practices with educators’ prior knowledge of curriculum,
assessment, and instruction.
Coaching Experiences
Incongruent findings revealed the need for individual educators to acquire factual
knowledge of culturally responsive pedagogy. Through one-on-one coaching cycles, educators
receive differentiation to meet their individual needs related to the components of culturally
responsive practices. Active learning with a culturally responsive coach includes opportunities to
observe and be observed in the classroom, plan classroom lessons, and analyze student work or
co-teaching and coaching that incorporates cooperation with colleagues and teacher reflection on
methods improve teaching practice and student results (Curby et al., 2009; Pianta et al., 2008;
Reinke et al., 2008). Thus, it is recommended that ANCS provides one-on-one coaching
experiences that connect verbal and pictorial representations of culturally responsive practices
with educators’ prior knowledge of curriculum, assessment, and instruction.
Implications for Practice: Conceptual
Educators need to know the sociopolitical relationship between oppression and advantage
underpinning culturally responsive practices, including an understanding of the concepts Picower
(2009) illustrates as four overlapping levels between oppression and advantage: ideological,
institutional, interpersonal/individual, and internalized. To build a conceptual understanding of
the sociopolitical context between oppression and advantage, educators must be given
experiences to deepen their understanding and make sense of the material rather than just focus
121

on memorization (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). The findings validated the need for the
conceptual knowledge influences in Table 24, indicating that some of the stakeholders in the
elementary, middle, and high school require ongoing support through collaboration with the
educators who know and can share their understanding of culturally responsive practices. To
align the school’s strategic goal with specific and measurable outcomes, ANCS must provide
professional learning experiences through schoolwide professional development, within the PLC
cycles of inquiry, and in one-on-one coaching cycles to build educators’ conceptual
understanding of racism rather than just focusing on memorization.
Schoolwide Professional Development Experiences
At the schoolwide level, the findings highlighted the need for professional learning
experiences to increase educators’ conceptual knowledge of culturally responsive practices
through what Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) defined as the categories, classifications,
principles, models, and structures that are relevant to a specific area. Once educators learn about
the components of culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices, a next
step is to understand the interrelationship between these concepts. Increasing educators’
conceptual knowledge will also increase awareness of the relationships inherent in their
educational organization, shown through the structures of status quo norms and practices that
uphold racial inequities (Larson & Ovando, 2001). Thus, it is recommended that ANCS provide
professional development experiences with a range of learning opportunities that build
educators’ conceptual understanding of racism rather than just focusing on memorization.
PLC Experiences
At a PLC level, congruent data across all stakeholder groups revealed the need for what
Banks et al. (2001) recommend as professional learning to increase educators’ competence in
addressing the educational needs of students. According to Chouari (2016), it is not uncommon
122

for educators to struggle when teaching in a culturally diverse classroom as they frequently as
lack in-depth understanding of the learners’ cultural backgrounds. Data revealed that PLCs at
ANCS were a consistent barrier to enacting culturally responsive practices for educators in all
divisions. Effective PLCs can act as levers for individual and institutional change, providing
educators the resources of time, space, and support needed for conceptual learning through what
Leonard and Woodland (2022) describe as “critical dialogue about identity, implicit biases, and
systemic oppression, so they can recognize and transform racist beliefs and practices” (p. 220).
Therefore, a recommendation is to restructure PLCs to instigate action through the cycle of
inquiry, focused on providing culturally responsive professional learning experiences to build
educators’ conceptual understanding of racism, rather than just focusing on memorization. In
addition, a PLC reconstructed as a space for public critical reflection can act to consistently
challenge and uncover biases and inherent hegemonic assumptions (Brookfield, 2009).
Coaching Experiences
Findings revealed educators need support with conceptual knowledge to understand the
interrelationship between these concepts of culturally responsive practices. Roche and Passmore
(2021) found that there was a need for a greater understanding of systemic racism among
instructional leaders responsible for facilitating coaching conversations with educators.
However, the same could not be said about ANCS’s instructional leaders, as the findings
revealed that instructional leaders at ANCS understand the framework of culturally responsive
pedagogy. Bocala et al. (2021) state that instructional leaders engaging classroom educators in
coaching cycles must be “acutely aware of historical oppression, and understand how racial
inequities manifest in schools” (p. 69). ANCS’s instructional leaders involved in the study
understand how race and racism impact educational practices, so they must be empowered to
apply and center such knowledge in their coaching conversations with educators. Orange et al.
123

(2019) urge both instructional leaders to engage in coaching conversations with educators about
combating racism so that they can promote equitable, culturally responsive practices.
Instructional leaders can use coaching to push themselves and educators beyond superficial
understandings of racism to shifting practices to address the culturally responsive needs of
students (Marshall & Khalifa, 2018). Thus, it is recommended that ANCS provide coaching
experiences that build educators’ conceptual understanding of racism rather than just focusing on
memorization.
Implications for Practice: Procedural
Educators must possess procedural knowledge, shown through skills, techniques, steps,
sequences, methods of inquiry, and methodologies of varying difficulty and sophistication, to
know how to execute particular tasks (Rueda, 2011). It is important to note that culturally
responsive practices are not essentialized into checklists or guidelines; rather, they are a concept
that provides a multidisciplinary framework with implications for practice (Stembridge, 2019).
According to Mayer (2011), “Learning is a change in knowledge attributable to experience” (p.
14). To successfully implement culturally responsive pedagogy, educators need to have the
experience and know how to apply the progression of knowledge of culturally responsive
practices, including how to create and utilize curriculum, instruction, assessment practices, and
learning communities (Delpit, 2006; Gay, 1995; Gay, 2010; Moll et al., 2006; Paris, 2012;
Villegas & Lucas, 2002). The findings validated needs for the procedural knowledge influences
indicating that some of the stakeholders in the elementary, middle, and high school require
ongoing support through collaboration with the educators who know and can share their
understanding of culturally responsive practices. Bandura’s (1977) Social Learning Theory
posits that people learn through the observation, imitation, and modeling of others and the more
knowledgeable other (MKO) within Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of Proximal Development refers to
124

the efficiency of learning with someone with a better understanding of the concept. To align the
school’s strategic goal with specific and measurable outcomes, ANCS must provide professional
learning experiences for all educators on how to enact culturally responsive strategies and
practices through schoolwide professional development, PLCs, and coaching to model to-
belearned culturally responsive strategies and practices.
Schoolwide Professional Development Experiences
Data across all stakeholders showed a gap between educators’ declarative (factual,
conceptual) and procedural knowledge of culturally responsive practices, revealing a
misalignment between the espoused theories and theories in action. In addition, participants’
interview responses revealed that, while educators know the components of culturally responsive
practices and the interrelationship between these concepts, they were not able to clearly
communicate how to create assessments that are in alignment with this framework. The
observations validated the congruent findings that educators were not able to systematically
enact culturally responsive practices within classroom, meeting, and PLC settings, conveying the
need to increase educators’ expertise in the areas of curriculum development, instruction, and
assessment. Clark and Estes (2008) state that training must show trainees exactly how to decide
and act to achieve performance goals. This principle suggests that ANCS must systematically
plan schoolwide professional development experiences, modeling to-be-learned culturally
responsive strategies and practices to encourage educators to use the knowledge from
professional development to deepen their understanding of relevant content knowledge and
experience (Au, 2009; Cummins, 2007). It is recommended that all educators receive
professional development about how to enact culturally responsive practices, providing the
strategies needed to conduct curriculum reviews and audits and to create and revise instruction
and assessment plans.
125

PLC Experiences
At a PLC level, congruent data across all stakeholder groups revealed the need for
professional learning in procedural learning centered on the specific needs of each professional
learning community. Since learning is a social process and educators learn through their
interactions with others and the environment (Vygotsky, 1978), professional development is
most effective when it is collaborative, job-embedded, instructionally-focused, data-driven, and
ongoing (Darling-Hammond et al., 2009). Scott and Palincsar (2013) suggest that targeting
training and instruction between the individual’s independent performance level and their level
of assisted performance promotes optimal learning. Therefore, it is recommended that ANCS
provide educators with the opportunity to collaborate with peers who have slightly higher levels
of proficiency and skills to practice and apply new knowledge about culturally responsive
practices while designing curriculum, planning instructional activities, and assessing student
learning within professional learning communities.
Coaching Experiences
Findings revealed educators need support with the procedural knowledge of how to
structure and enact culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices to
facilitate learners’ understanding of their identity, their community, and the world. One
participant stated,
It’s (planning, instruction, and assessment) just a little bit haphazard there. But when you
talk about procedure, there wasn’t a lot of procedure there, so I guess that’s kind of the
heart of it. When it comes to culturally responsive practices, I do it with my feelings, not
with my procedural brain.
Modeling to-be-learned strategies or behaviors improve educators’ self-efficacy,
learning, and performance (Denler et al., 2009), especially when coaches facilitate intended
126

learning in classroom settings. Supplying procedural strategies and purposeful recommendations,
paired with the guidance to communicate when the strategies would be most appropriate
(Kennedy, 2019), constitutes personalized professional development specific to educators’
needs. In addition, according to Hammerness and Matsko (2013), coaches can provide a lens for
educators to focus their critical self-reflection as they question and dismantle the status quo,
reflecting on their own experiences (which may have been formed by hegemonic practices) to
evaluate what style of instruction would best benefit learners.
Implications for Practice: Metacognitive
Educators need to know how to critically self-reflect on their knowledge, beliefs, values,
assumptions, biases, and experiences related to improving culturally responsive practices. Using
metacognitive strategies facilitates learning (Baker, 2006). Specifically, as it relates to critical
self-reflection, Ford and Trotman (2001) posit, “culturally competent educators seek greater
selfawareness and understanding regarding their biases, assumptions, and stereotypes. Teachers
must be self-aware in the classroom, as their beliefs influence the way they teach” (p. 236).
Khalifa et al. (2016) state that school leaders must also engage in critical self-reflection if they
are to create culturally responsive school communities. The findings validated needs for the
metacognitive knowledge influences in Table 24, indicating that some of the stakeholders in the
elementary, middle, and high school require ongoing support through collaboration with the
educators who know and can share their understanding of culturally responsive practices. ANCS
must provide professional learning experiences through schoolwide professional development,
within PLC cycles of inquiry, and in one-on-one coaching cycles focused on how to critically
reflect on culturally responsive practices.
Critically Reflective Professional Development
127

Findings revealed that professional development related to critical self-reflection serves
as a catalyst for improving culturally responsive practices. To improve culturally responsive
practices at the schoolwide level, organizations must provide professional development on how
to critically self-reflect on biases in the workplace (Hopf et al., 2021). Professional development
experiences need to engage educators in ongoing critical reflection so that the entire school
community is grounded in culturally responsive practices (Genao, 2021; Morales et al., 2020).
As such, it is recommended that ANCS offer professional development opportunities that
support educators in critically self-reflecting to improve their culturally responsive practices.
Critically Reflective PLCs
The findings revealed that ANCS PLCs are not yet sites where educators consistently
engage in critical reflection on culturally responsive practices. When PLCs are leveraged as
culturally responsive learning communities, educators recognize and name their biases in
selfreflective activities (Cooper et al., 2009). Khalifa (2020) notes that self-reflection, language,
literature, equity audits, community-based focus, and perspectives that center on cultural
responsiveness should all be included in the processes of PLCs. School leaders can leverage and
structure PLCs as sites for critical self-reflection to make spaces for educators to understand
when and why minoritized students are not responding to instruction or curricular content
(Khalifa, 2020). In turn, this challenges educators to adjust and make their curriculum and
instruction more culturally responsive. It is thereby recommended that ANCS integrate ongoing
critical self-reflection activities into PLC meetings so that educators can improve their culturally
responsive practices.
Critically Reflective Coaching
The findings revealed that some educators at ANCS know how to engage in critical
selfreflection related to culturally responsive practices. Such knowledge can be shared with
128

individual educators to continue supporting ongoing growth related to culturally responsive
practices. Marshall and Khalifa (2018) state that instructional coaches who engage educators in
critical reflection help ensure instructional practices are culturally responsive. Instructional
leaders who facilitate ongoing coaching cycles grounded in critical reflection activities help
educators examine and realize biases that inhibit culturally responsive practices (Orange et al.,
2019). It is recommended that school leaders at ANCS facilitate repeated coaching cycles with
educators, guiding them to critically reflect on culturally responsive practices.
Motivation Influences
Increased motivation paired with effective knowledge, skills, and work processes, results
in performance gains (Clark & Estes, 2008). Research has shown that the factors that have the
most influence on choice, persistence, and mental effort are personal and team confidence,
beliefs about organizational and environmental barriers to achieving goals, the emotional climate
people experience in their work environment, and the personal and team values for their
performance goals (Clark, 1998; Clark & Estes, 2008). There is a link between quality
instruction and learning outcomes and research has found that, in terms of effectiveness,
educational methods, techniques, practices, and instructional behaviors are all closely related to
educator motivation (Butler & Shibaz, 2014; Han et al., 2015; Retelsdorf & Günther, 2011;
Retelsdorf et al., 2010; Thoonen et al., 2011).
Motivation Recommendations
This study examined influences within three subdomains: interest, emotion, and
selfefficacy. Findings validated organizational needs for all of the three influences across all
stakeholder groups as each validated influence was identified and supported by the data gathered
from interviews, observations, and data analysis. Therefore, Table 25 lists the motivational
influences, assets or needs according to stakeholders (Spanish educators, classroom educators,
129

and school leaders in the elementary, middle, and high school), the principles from
organizational science research, and context-specific recommendations. Following the table, a
detailed discussion for each cause and recommendation and the literature supporting the
recommendation is provided. Specific activities for the recommendations will be described later
in the chapter in the integrated implementation and evaluation sections.
Table 13
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Motivation Influence Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Interest
Educators need to have
intrinsic interests and
Activating and building upon
personal interest can increase
Provide educators with
professional learning
experiences (i.e., professional
personal relevance in learning and motivation development, PLC cycles of
implementing culturally ( Schraw & Lehman, 2009). inquiry, and coaching) that
responsive practices. build upon their intrinsic
interests and personal relevance
in implementing culturally
responsive practices.

Emotion
Educators need to be
emotionally driven to learn
about and implement
culturally responsive practices.
Activating positive and
negative emotions can serve
as motivating factors for
learning (Hidi &
Harackiewicz, 2000; Pekrun,
2011)
Provide professional learning
experiences (i.e., professional
development, PLC cycles of
inquiry, and coaching)
activating positive and
negative emotions for
educators, motivating them to
enact culturally responsive
practices.

Self-Efficacy Feedback and modeling Provide educators with Educators need to be
increase self-efficacy professional learning confident in their ability to ( Pajares,
2006). experiences (i.e., professional
enact culturally responsive development, PLC cycles of curriculum, instruction, and
inquiry, and coaching) that assessment practices. increase self-efficacy beliefs
130

towards enacting culturally
responsive practices.

Implications for Practice: Interest
Educators need to have intrinsic interests and personal relevance in implementing
culturally responsive practices. The findings validated needs for motivational interest influences
in Table 25, indicating that some of the stakeholders in the elementary, middle, and high school
require ongoing support through collaboration with the educators who know and can share their
understanding of culturally responsive practices. While the findings in the concurrent studies
revealed that classroom educators showed intrinsic interest and personal commitment to
implementing culturally responsive practices, ANCS’s school leaders need additional support in
developing their capacity to engage in this work. A participant stated, “I am excited to work on
this, and I want to get started as soon as possible. I know it will be a long process where I need to
unlearn and relearn.” Activating and building upon personal interest can increase learning and
motivation (Schraw & Lehman, 2009). However, school leaders did not express interest in
actively pursuing and persisting the implementation of culturally responsive practices. According
to Griner and Stewart (2013), long-term commitment to social justice issues in education to
discover practical and meaningful strategies to overcome inequitable structures and belief cycles
that contribute to issues such as the achievement gap and disproportionality. It is recommended
that there is a need to create opportunities for educational leaders to be accountable for their
commitment to supporting culturally responsive practices. In addition, to align the school’s
strategic goal with specific and measurable outcomes, ANCS must provide educators with
professional learning experiences through schoolwide professional development, within the PLC
131

cycles of inquiry, and in coaching to increase intrinsic interests to enact and continue culturally
responsive practices.
Schoolwide Professional Development Experiences
While the study results showed that most educators have an intrinsic interest in culturally
responsive practices, ANCS's school leaders require more support to develop an interest in the
practice. Khalifa (2020) states that if cultural responsiveness is to be present and sustainable in
school, it must foremost and consistently be promoted by school leaders. Since higher levels of
interest and intrinsic motivation activate learning, educators must see school leaders’ interest and
involvement in learning to enact culturally responsive practices (Rueda, 2011). According to
Khalifa (2020), training and modeling focused on culturally responsive practices can foster the
educators’ intrinsic interests. Educators need to be interested in implementing culturally
responsive methods because they want to improve their practices, are strongly driven to fulfill
their students' needs, and believe it is empowering work. Therefore, it is recommended that
ANCS provide schoolwide professional development experiences that build upon educators’
intrinsic interests and personal relevance in implementing culturally responsive practices.
PLC Experiences
At a PLC level, educators showed intrinsic interest in implementing culturally responsive
practices. However, some stakeholders require further support in developing this practice, and
some study participants expressed that they had no time to discuss or plan culturally responsive
practices in their PLC meetings. A participant stated,
In our PLC, we rarely speak about cultural responsiveness or issues related to these
practices. Culturally responsive pedagogy (CRP) is not part of our PLC discussion. Who
decides on what and when to include CRP? Is this our PLC leader's decision, or are they
only following orders?
132

School leadership must be motivated and interested in aligning with culturally responsive
practices. Khalifa (2020) supplied three basic premises: 1. cultural responsiveness is a necessary
component of effective school leadership; 2. if cultural responsiveness is to be present and
sustainable in schools, it must first and foremost be promoted by school leaders; and 3. culturally
responsive school leadership is characterized by a core set of unique leadership behaviors,
namely, self-reflection, developing and sustaining culturally responsive teachers and curricula,
promoting inclusive, anti-oppressive school context and engaging students community context
(Khalifa, 2020). To combine and support the educators’ interest and the school leaders, join them
to restructure the PLCs by creating an environment conducive to collaboration and discussion on
culturally responsive practices. Therefore, it is recommended that ANCS provides a PLC
experience that builds upon their intrinsic interests and personal relevance in implementing
culturally responsive practices.
Coaching Experiences
While the data in the concurrent studies revealed that classroom educators were already
interested in implementing culturally responsive practices, ANCS’s school leaders need
additional support in developing an interest in engaging in this work. Social learning theory
(Vygotsky, 1978) indicates that social interactions facilitate learning like those between a coach
and teacher. For example, one participant stated, “I want to talk to someone (coach) who will
give me ideas or guide me to find resources and discuss these findings with them.” A coach can
support educators by developing lessons, observing and giving feedback, and continuing their
interest in culturally responsive practices. Similarly, the teacher and coach relationship can
create a commitment within the teacher to learn and grow (Joyce & Showers, 1981). Educational
leaders have social interaction with a one-on-one coach to create meaningful opportunities to
continue their learning and interest and their commitment to culturally responsive practices.
133

Therefore, it is recommended that ANCS provides educators with coaching that builds upon their
intrinsic interests and personal relevance in implementing culturally responsive practices.
Implications for Practice: Emotion
Educators need to be emotionally driven to learn about and implement culturally
responsive practices. The findings validated needs for the motivational emotion influences in
Table 25, indicating that some of the stakeholders in the elementary, middle, and high school
require ongoing support through collaboration with the educators who know and can share their
understanding of culturally responsive practices. While the findings in the concurrent studies
revealed that classroom educators were already emotionally driven to learn about and implement
culturally responsive practices, ANCS’s school leaders need additional support in developing
their emotional capacity to engage in this work. Clark and Estes (2008) stated that positive
emotional environments support motivation. In addition to positive emotional environments,
emotions perceived as negative can also serve as motivating factors for adult learning (Hidi &
Harackiewicz, 2000; Pekrun, 2011). Whether supporting the continued growth of classroom
educators or developing emotional commitment from school leaders, ANCS must provide
professional learning experiences (i.e., professional development, PLC cycles of inquiry, and
coaching) activating positive and negative emotions for educators, motivating them to enact
culturally responsive practices.
Exploring Emotions in Professional Development
Findings revealed that educators were emotionally driven to learn about and implement
culturally responsive practices. Professional development programs can model culturally
responsive teaching for educators; they can also serve as an arena where educators’ emotional
reactions to instruction continue to heighten their desire to learn (Wlodkowski, 2003).
134

Professional development seeking to cultivate culturally responsive practices must also continue
to develop educators’ social-emotional stamina to engage in such work (Donahue-Keegan,
2018). Recognizing that some classroom educators may exhibit emotional pushback when the
organization promotes culturally responsive practices, Khalifa (2020) stated that school leaders
can develop and discuss in advance responses to “guilt, anger, denial, diversion, race-neutral
talk, diversion to gender or socioeconomic status, and other ways that some staff may disengage
from equity work.” As findings in the study revealed that school leaders need to further develop
their own emotional investment in learning about and implementing culturally responsive
practices, the same strategies can be applied to professional leadership development programs. It
is thereby recommended that ANCS provide professional development activating emotions
needed to cultivate culturally responsive practices while employing strategies to address
emotions that inhibit them.
Exploring Emotions in PLCs
Findings revealed that educators were emotionally driven to learn about and implement
culturally responsive practices. PLCs that provide emotional support and safety to address
common dilemmas build a sense of continuity in learning (Hairon, 2020). Not only is learning
often an outcome of addressing disorienting dilemmas but critically reflecting and dialoguing
about emotions is vital in this process (Mezirow, 2000). Motivating educators in such a way can
help them be more culturally responsive (Jenkins & Alfred, 2018). Specifically, in PLCs, Cooper
et al. (2009) stated that educators should participate in “multicultural activities that help them
feel more comfortable discussing controversial topics and reflecting on identity issues and
matters of privilege and oppression” (p. 108). Such activities can become culturally responsive
instructional tools that educators use in their own practice (Cooper et al., 2009). Still, it is
important that educators are emotionally committed to being culturally responsive, anti-racist
135

teachers, and this commitment transcends any feelings of discomfort caused in their learning
journey (Matias, 2013). As Matias and Zembylas (2014) argued, educators should not prioritize
“socially inappropriate emotions into ones that are more acceptable” (p. 321) but rather
demonstrate an “emotional willingness to engage in the difficult work of empathizing with views
that one may find unacceptable or offensive” (p. 333) in the name of culturally responsive,
antiracist pedagogy. As such, it is recommended that ANCS provide PLC experiences that
activate positive and negative emotions for educators, motivating them to enact culturally
responsive practices.
Exploring Emotions in Coaching Conversations
Findings revealed that while some educators were emotionally driven to learn about and
implement culturally responsive practices, other stakeholders, such as school leaders, said that
they were not. Marshall and Khalifa (2018) stated that when coaching for equity, coaches must
establish trust with educators to have uncomfortable conversations about culturally responsive
practices. Aguilar (2020) advised coaches to use data to help educators recognize inequitable
practices while exploring their emotional selves before, during, and after a coaching
conversation. Majors et al. (2020) developed an emotional literacy reflection tool that can further
help educators understand their emotions and thereby enhance culturally responsive practices.
When the results revealed emotional areas of growth, Majors et al. (2020) advised the use of
coaching interventions to support their emotional growth through a culturally responsive
framework. In the process of exploring emotions in coaching conversations and through
coaching interventions, Aguilar (2020) stated that coaches must also recognize that dominant
culture often deems certain emotional expressions as acceptable while inhibiting authentic
coaching experiences for minoritized groups that do not subscribe to these norms. In addition to
engaging in uncomfortable coaching conversations about culturally responsive practices, coaches
136

must be willing to embrace authentic emotional expressions from minoritized coaches to
facilitate their growth as culturally responsive educators. As such, it is recommended that ANCS
provide coaching cycles activating positive and negative emotions for educators, motivating
them to enact culturally responsive practices.
Implications for Practice: Self-Efficacy
In order to meet the organizational goal, educators must not only know what the
framework of culturally responsive pedagogy encompasses, but they must also value and feel
confident in their ability to enact culturally responsive practices, attributing their successes and
failures to their own actions. In a study that developed and implemented a series of quantitative
scales to assess racial fragility and anti-racist educator self-efficacy, Knowles and Hawkman
(2020) found that educators’ levels of racial fragility may create barriers that limit their
motivation to engage in anti-racist or culturally relevant teaching. According to researchers,
educators’ self-efficacy may influence the instructional behaviors, practices, and methods used to
support learners’ growth (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). The findings validated needs for
selfefficacy influences in Table 25 across all stakeholder groups within the larger group known
as educators. To align the school’s strategic goal with specific and measurable outcomes and to
ensure continuity, consistency, and commitment within the organization, ANCS must provide
educators with professional learning experiences such as schoolwide professional development,
PLC cycles of inquiry, and coaching that increase self-efficacy beliefs and confidence in their
ability to enact culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices. This is
not a quick-fix solution as ANCS educators must be given the time to learn, apply learning
within their PLCs, and get feedback through coaching cycles. This is what Dewey (1986) called
reflective practice, and in order for professional development to impact students’ learning, it
must first affect educators’ learning (Desimone, 2009).
137

Schoolwide Professional Development Experiences
Findings across all stakeholders revealed a gap across the school between the knowledge
and motivation of educators, shown in the self-efficacy beliefs about their own abilities to
effectively enact culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices at
ANCS. In comparison with educators with lower self-efficacy, those with higher self-efficacy
beliefs are more likely to try new strategies, utilize challenging teaching techniques, and use
better organized, student-centered, and humanistic classroom instruction (Tschannen-Moran &
Hoy, 2001). Villegas and Lucas (2002) stated that culturally responsive educators believe they
are both accountable for and capable of bringing about educational reform that makes schools
more responsive to all students. Therefore, a recommendation is to provide educators with
schoolwide professional development to increase self-efficacy beliefs towards enacting culturally
responsive practices.
PLC Experiences
The findings revealed patterns of needs in the data, including gaps in the self-efficacy
beliefs of professional learning communities towards enacting culturally responsive practices.
Research has shown that collaboration with others leads to greater critical reflection that results
in higher self-efficacy (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009). And according to Drago-Severson and
Blum-DeStefano (2017), teachers and educational leaders must create “safe, brave, and
collaborative spaces” to create optimal and continuous learning-focused environments (p. 476).
However, one participant communicated that while their PLC colleagues know what to change
and how to change, the stimulus to change, rooted squarely in the collectivist PLC structure,
demotivates movement to culturally responsive, anti-bias, and anti-racist pedagogy. While it is
important to understand the norms, behaviors, and attitudes of the group (Merriam & Bierema,
2013), school leaders must leverage the equitable leadership practice of “fostering an equitable
138

school culture” (Ishimaru & Galloway, 2014) to ensure the movement in every PLC member
toward the school’s strategic goal of enacting culturally responsive practices. Collective agency
refers to people’s shared perceived capabilities of accomplishing tasks as a group (Ryan et al.,
2019), providing PLCs with the power and responsibility to take actions that lead to individual
growth and societal change (Kumar et al., 2018). Thus, a recommendation is to provide
educators with PLC experiences (such as problems to collaboratively solve) that increase
selfefficacy beliefs towards enacting culturally responsive practices.
Coaching Experiences
Findings revealed that educators at ANCS have low self-efficacy beliefs about their own
abilities to enact culturally responsive practices. According to Bandura (1986, 1997), there are
sources of information that educators may use to judge efficacy. The first source might include
the outcomes of previous performances. For example, one participant said, “I have an idea about
what good assessment practices look like, but I'm not, I'm not super confident in my ability to
say ‘is that culturally relevant, responsive--or not?’” A next step may be to connect this
educator’s prior knowledge about assessments while coaching through and to the understanding
of culturally responsive assessment practices. Another participant stated, “I think, although I
think I have a general knowledge of what I could do and how I could do it, and I think that it
would be helpful to have more professional development.” Vicarious observations are a second
source of information and could be connected to the next coaching move of collaboratively
observing classrooms to see, first-hand, how educators use culturally responsive practices. A
third source of information to judge efficacy is encouragement and feedback from others
(Bandura, 1986, 1997). Supporting this idea, Pajares (2006) also found an increase in the
selfefficacy of educators that receive relevant feedback and modeling. Therefore, a
139

recommendation is to provide educators with coaching that increases their self-efficacy beliefs
towards enacting culturally responsive practices.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
The organization’s performance goal is that by 2027, educators will implement culturally
responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices 100% of the time. Research
suggests that if every classroom educator can implement these teaching strategies, the academic
achievement gap will be reduced (Gay, 2010; Howard, 2003; Ladson-Billings, 2009). The
achievement of this goal was measured by interviewing educators, observing them in practice,
and through document analyses.
ANCS expects all of its educators to carry out the institutional commitments as well as
support the goals outlined in the school’s strategic plan. In order to meet the organizational goal,
the educators will not only know what the framework of culturally responsive education
encompasses but also feel motivated to enact culturally responsive practices. To ensure educators
are fulfilling the organizational goals related to culturally responsive education, ANCS will have
systems supporting learning, which are driven by its organizational mission and performance
goals. The concurrent case studies corroborate the findings that the interconnected stakeholders
must work in concert to execute the organizational performance goal with fidelity.
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
To design an implementation and evaluation plan for the program recommended to the
stakeholders, this study utilized the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). The model includes four levels of training and evaluation: Level 1 Reaction, Level 2
Learning, Level 3 Behavior, and Level 4 Results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This model
140

recommends working backwards from Level 4 to Level 1 to more easily identify the problems
and align the solutions with the organizational performance goals.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) state, “Level 4 is the degree to which targeted
outcomes occur as a result of the training and the support and accountability package” (p. 31).
This means that Level 4 Results measures the degree by which targeted outcomes and changes in
performance are a result of the application of knowledge and skills gained as a result of the
impact of training and provides proof that the investment in training is justified. In other words,
this level measures whether the results and outcomes show achievement and are in alignment
with the ANCS’s performance goal of increasing the culturally responsive practices in the
school. According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016), leading indicators are the “short-term
observations and measurements that suggest that critical behaviors are on track to create a
positive impact on the desired results” (p. 33). Table 14 shows the proposed Level 4 Results and
leading indicators in the form of outcomes, metrics, and methods for external and internal
outcomes for ANCS.
Table 14
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
External Outcomes Metric(s) Method(s)
Increased ANCS profile and
global presence as the
preeminent training ground
for culturally responsive
education in international
schools
Number of conferences in
partnership with prominent
US and international
educational organizations
Conference announcements
and materials posted
publicly on ASCD website
and the social media
outlets of the top
international education
organizations around the
world

141

Increased hosting and Number of culturally Recorded meetings and facilitation of
culturally responsive learning materials shared with the responsive learning
communities in ISS Diversity
communities with educators
in and outside of ANCS
collaboration with
International School
Service’s (ISS) Diversity
Collaborative

Collaborative’s 1000+
members
Increased culturally
responsive coaching and
school leadership offerings to
educators in and outside of
ANCS
Number of culturally
responsive coaching
modules offered in
partnership with the
Culturally Responsive
School Leadership
Institute (CRSLI)
Public exhibition of learning
in collaboration with the
CRSLI

Internal Outcomes Metric(s) Method(s)
Increased schoolwide
professional development
inservice offerings to learn
about and implement
culturally responsive
practices
Number of professional
development in-service
offerings related to
culturally responsive
education
Culturally Responsive
Professional Development
Scorecard
Increased collaborative
inquiries into culturally
responsive practices
Number of PLC activities
examining culturally
responsive practices
PLC Observation Tool
Increased facilitated coaching Number of coaching Coaching Observation Tool
conversations about how to conversations about improve culturally responsive culturally
responsive
practices practices

Level 3: Critical Behaviors
According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016), “Level 3 is the degree to which
participants apply what they have learned during training when they are back on the job [...] and
consists of critical behaviors, required drivers, and on-the-job learning” (p. 33). Critical
142

behaviors are the key behaviors and specific actions, which, if performed in a consistent manner,
will have the greatest impact on the desired results in achieving the organizational performance
goal (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Out of the hundreds and perhaps thousands of behaviors
educators might perform on the job, the critical behaviors are the few that have been identified as
most important to achieving organizational success. Aligning the learning outcomes from
training with the critical behaviors and leading indicators ensures the continuation of training
programs that are meaningful and value-added. Table 15 lists the specific metrics, methods, and
timing for each of the critical behaviors.
Table 15
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior(s) Metric(s) Method(s) Timing
Educators design
policies and curricula
through a culturally
responsive lens.
Alignment of policies
and curricula to
characteristics of
culturally responsive
education.
Stakeholder meeting to
evaluate policies and
curricula using a
rubric for Culturally
Responsive Planning
Design

Monthly
Educators evaluate
student and
professional learning
experiences using
culturally responsive
assessment practices.
Alignment of student and
adult learning
assessments to
characteristics of
culturally responsive
education.
Stakeholder meeting to
evaluate student and
adult learning
assessments using a
rubric for Culturally
Responsive
Assessment Design

Bimonthly
Educators facilitate Alignment of meeting Stakeholder meeting to Weekly
processes and learning facilitation and evaluate educators’ experiences anchored
in classroom instruction facilitation and/or cultural responsiveness. to characteristics of
instruction using
culturally responsive Culturally Responsive
education. Walkthrough Forms

143

Required Drivers
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) describe required drivers as the “processes and
systems that reinforce, monitor, encourage, and reward performance of critical behaviors on the
job [...] and are key to accomplishing the desired on-the-job application of what is learned during
training” (p. 35). They are built-in accountability systems for the stakeholders who choose not to
perform the required behaviors and are support systems for those who need it (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). At this level, it is important to encourage educator accountability through the
responsibility to apply the knowledge and skills from professional learning experiences, as this
will result in increased performance and personal empowerment (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). Table 16 shows the recommended drivers to support the critical behaviors of educators as
they implement and enact culturally responsive practices at ANCS.
Table 16
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
Reinforcing
Provide educators with on-site and off-site professional Monthly 1
development opportunities to generate increasing levels of
understanding about culturally responsive practices

Provide educators with PLC processes in which they work Bimonthly 2
collaboratively in recurring cycles of collective inquiry and
action research to implement culturally responsive practices

Provide educators with professional coaching to access timely, Weekly 3
relevant, job-embedded feedback related to their understanding and implementation of
culturally responsive practices
144

Encouraging
Provide educators with on-site and off-site professional
development opportunities to generate self-efficacy towards
implementing culturally responsive practices

Monthly 1
Provide educators with PLC processes in which they develop
collective efficacy towards implementing culturally responsive
practices

Bimonthly 2
Provide educators with professional coaching to generate
selfefficacy towards implementing culturally responsive practices

Rewarding
Weekly 3
Provide educators with on-site and off-site professional
development opportunities that generate personal interest in
implementing culturally responsive practices

Monthly 1
Provide educators with PLC processes in which they develop
collective interest in implementing culturally responsive
practices

Bimonthly 2
Provide educators with professional coaching that generates
personal interest in implementing culturally responsive
practices

Monitoring
Weekly 3
Evaluate educators’ policies and/or curricula using a rubric for
Culturally Responsive Planning Design

Monthly 1
Evaluate educators’ student and/or adult learning assessments
using a rubric for Culturally Responsive Assessment Design

Bimonthly 2
Evaluate educators’ facilitation and/or instruction using Weekly 3
Culturally Responsive Walkthrough Forms

145

Organizational Support
ANCS will provide organizational support through the identified drivers to reinforce,
encourage, reward, and monitor the critical behaviors necessary for educators to implement and
enact culturally responsive practices. Critical behaviors must be reinforced by providing
educators with on-site and off-site professional development opportunities through the PLC
processes of collective inquiry and action research, and within professional coaching to access
timely, relevant, job-embedded feedback related to their understanding and implementation of
culturally responsive practices. In addition, the organization will provide additional training, as
needed, if educators ask for or show the need for additional support. To encourage critical
behaviors, ANCS will provide support with on-site and off-site professional development
opportunities through the PLC processes to develop collective interest and within professional
coaching to generate self-efficacy towards implementing culturally responsive practices. One
way to reward educators is by offering professional development opportunities to generate
personal and collective interest in implementing culturally responsive practices, including
options within the PLC processes and job-embedded in professional coaching. The last driver to
support educators’ critical behaviors is monitoring to evaluate educators’ policies and/or
curricula and the student and/or adult learning assessments by utilizing a rubric for culturally
responsive planning design and using culturally responsive walkthrough forms to evaluate
educators’ facilitation and/or instruction.
Level 2: Learning
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) define learning as “the degree to which participants
acquire the intended knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment based on their
146

participation in the learning event” (p. 35). The New World Kirkpatrick model includes
confidence and commitment with the aims of closing the gap between learning and behavior and
educators who possess but do not use the required knowledge and skills shown in job
performance. To maintain and improve continuity, consistency, and commitment, ANCS must
provide educators with the learning experiences to acquire the required knowledge and skills and
the motivation shown in educators’ attitude, confidence, and commitment to implement and
enact culturally responsive practices.
Learning Goals
The following learning goals are the results of an improvement study. Specifically, the goals
are based on the identified KMO recommendations identified in the knowledge and motivation
tables. After completing the recommended solutions, educators will be able to:
• Describe the components of culturally responsive education. (Factual)
• Explain the sociopolitical relationship between oppression and advantage underpinning
culturally responsive education. (Conceptual)
• Apply strategies for developing and implementing culturally responsive practices.
(Procedural)
• Critically self-reflect on how to improve culturally responsive practices. (Metacognitive)
• Identify personal relevance of culturally responsive education. (Interest)
• Feel emotionally invested in culturally responsive education. (Emotion)
• Develop confidence in enacting culturally responsive practices. (Self-Efficacy)
Learning Program
The researchers of the study created the Culturally Responsive International Learning
Institute (CRILI). The CRILI program design is based on empirically-validated practices that
support the gap analysis framework (Clark & Estes, 2008). The overarching goal of CRILI is to
147

establish commitment toward implementing culturally responsive practices at ANCS and other
international schools. CRILI offers a comprehensive approach to continuously improving
educators’ knowledge and motivation toward education responsive education. To ensure
consistency, CRILI has developed professional learning design principles based on the work of
Easton (2008). As such, CRILI will offer professional learning that:
1. Arises from and returns benefits to culturally responsive teaching and learning
2. Models culturally responsive practices in the facilitation of adult learning
3. Includes content that is culturally responsive to the participants
4. Requires the collection, analysis, and presentation of data related to culturally
responsive practices
5. Employs the use of culturally responsive learning communities engaged in
collaborative inquiry
6. Seeks to improve culturally responsive practices for minoritized students in
international schools
7. Develops educators’ high quality, culturally responsive practices
8. Sustains culturally responsive learning beyond one-off workshops 9. Leads
directly to the application of culturally responsive education in professional
practice
10. Alters time and space to critically self-reflect on cultural values, biases,
assumptions, and perspectives to improve culturally responsive practices
11. Makes professional learning more than just a meeting/planning structure but
constructivist activities for improving culturally responsive practices
148

12. Differentiates professional learning for those new-to-culturally-
responsiveeducation as well as enrichment to educators experienced in implementing
culturally responsive practices
CRILI’s focus differentiation will not inhibit consistency; rather, CRILI provides a multi-tiered
approach to professional learning to provide multiple pathways for educators to achieve the
organizational goals of culturally responsive education. As shown in Figure 2, this approach
provides schoolwide professional development sessions for all educators, restructures PLCs as
culturally responsive learning communities for small groups, and finally provides individual
educators with a culturally responsive coach who facilitates educators’ critical reflection.

Figure 2
Multi-Tiered Approach to CRILI Professional Learning

149

Culturally Responsive Professional Development. CRILI will transform ANCS into
the preeminent training ground serving the professional learning needs of international educators
within and outside of ANCS. CRILI will use ANCS as a lab site school providing practical,
research-based professional development that is (1) about culturally responsive practices in
international schools, (2) facilitated by international educators grounded in culturally responsive
practices, (3) for international educators to further develop culturally responsive practices, and
finally (4) situated at ANCS, the largest international school in the world.
ANCS will offer on-site conferences, workshops, institutes, and courses related to
culturally responsive education. PD sessions may involve using culturally responsive books or
journals as third-point resources, attending interactive workshops, participating in text studies,
and observing high-quality culturally responsive practices in action. The frequency of PD
sessions may range from three to six times a year, monthly, weekly, or even daily. The duration
of any one session could be three or more hours, one to two hours, or less than thirty minutes.
A hybrid of on-site and virtual sessions will be offered for international educators who are not
able to attend on-site.
For needs that cannot be met on-site and through internal PD offerings, CRILI offers
ANCS educators a network of external support from experts in the field of culturally
responsive education. Through generous contributions from parent donors as well as partners
with peer institutions within the international school community, ANCS (and by extension,
CRILI) will also hold a speaker series where culturally responsive scholars and worldrenowned
thinkers will provide keynotes and workshops related to culturally responsive teaching and
leadership practices. Current proposals for speakers include Drs. Gloria Ladson-
Billings and Muhammad Khalifa, among others.
150

Collaborations and partnerships will also be established with various regional
education associations dedicated to advancing culturally responsive practices in international
schools. These organizations will include but are not limited to:
• American International Schools in the Americas (AMISA)
• Association for the Advancement of International Education (AAIE)
• Association of International Schools in Africa (AISA)
• Central and Eastern European Schools (CEESA)
• Council of International Schools (CIS)
• East Asia Regional Council of Overseas Schools (EARCOS)
• European Council of International Schools (ECIS)
• International School Services (ISS)
• Near East South Asia Council of International Schools (NESA)
• Office of Overseas Schools (A/OIS)
• The Association of American Schools of Central America, Colombia–
Caribbean and Mexico (Tri-Association)
These are organizations that the researchers have already established previous relationships
with and presented on the impact of culturally responsive education in international school
settings. Partnerships with these organizations, as well as other peer international schools,
will establish a global network of educators engaging in culturally responsive PD where
knowledge can be shared with ANCS educators, and their hearts can be inspired.
Transforming PLCs into Culturally Responsive Learning Communities. As PLCs are
sites where meaningful professional learning occurs (Dana & Yendol-Hoppey, 2008), CRILI
advocates for the restructuring of PLCs into culturally responsive learning communities
(Cooper et al., 2009). ANCS already leverages PLCs as collaborative groups engaged in
151

cycles of collective inquiry and action. Employing Khalifa’s (2020) strategies for making
PLCs more culturally responsive, CRILI applies culturally responsive expectations and
outcomes for how collaborative time is used during PLCs. Specific uses of time include:
• Establishing shared agreements on culturally responsive practices
• Reflecting on student and adult work through a culturally responsive lens
• Analyzing data to improve culturally responsive practices
• Developing culturally responsive interventions for students who are struggling
• Developing culturally responsive enrichments for students who are meeting
standards
• Evaluating the quality of assessment tasks through a culturally responsive lens
Additionally, Khalifa (2020) offers suggestions for embedding a culturally responsive
focus into the traditional PLC questions. Table 17 shows an adaptation of Khalifa’s
(2020) PLC questions and is already being used in isolated pockets at ANCS; CRILI
advocates its use in all PLCs as a cycle of collective inquiry.
Table 17
PLC Questions Explored Through a Culturally Responsive Lens

Lens PLC Questions Culturally Responsive Focus Questions
Curriculum

Question 1: What
do we want all
students to learn?
How are we ensuring the core curriculum is matched to
culturally responsive learning goals and standards?
— Curriculum includes minoritized communities’
knowledge

— Minoritized students and communities are asked what
they should learn

— Curriculum connects to the communities and
152

experiences of minoritized students

— What students learn (i.e., knowledge) is beneficial to
minoritized communities
Assessment Question 2: How
will we know if and
when they have
learned it?
How are we designing and implementing culturally
responsive assessments?
—The scales and rubrics used are culturally responsive
and seek to minimize cultural bias

— Nontraditional ways of measuring the knowledge of
minoritized students are offered

— Community perspectives are included in how learning
is measured

— Students offered input into the best ways for them to
show what they know
Instruction Question 3: How
will we teach it?
How are we implementing culturally responsive
instructional practices?
— Instructional methods are culturally responsive and
inclusive

— Parents and community members are used to help
connect instruction to student communities/lives
Intervention Question 4: How
will we respond if
How will we use critical self-reflection techniques to
understand when (and why) some minoritized students are
not responding to our instruction and content?
153

some students do
not learn?
— Schoolwide collaborative process to coordinate
resources within our context to accomplish tiered
prevention and intervention efforts that are culturally
responsive

— Structure for coaching to ensure that
instruction/intervention at all levels is high
quality/culturally responsive, delivered with fidelity, and

evaluated to be consistent with evidence- and/or
empirically validated processes and programs
Extension Question 5: How
will we respond if
the students have
already learned?
How will we take responsibility (individually and
collectively) if minoritized students are not learning?
— Tier 1 interventions are differentiated with
evidencebased practices to extend learning for students
who need it, offering greater depth, complexity,
abstraction, and/or cultural responsiveness

— Supplement core curricular materials with more
complex and culturally responsive content where
appropriate

Culturally Responsive Coaching Cycles. Peer coaching is essential in transferring the
knowledge and skills gained in professional development sessions to practice (Joyce &
Showers, 2002). CRILI will use a culturally responsive coaching model to help ANCS
educators apply their learning. Adapting Zwozdiak-Myers’s (2012) dimensions of reflective
practice, CRILI provides a framework for culturally responsive coaches engaging educators
in critical self-reflection. Below are the dimensions of critical self-reflective practice that
educators will engage in with a culturally responsive coach during ongoing coaching cycles:
154

• Dimension One: culturally responsive coach works with the coachee to decide on
methods to study and record reflections about their culturally responsive practices
(i.e., journals, blogs, audio diaries, videos, etc.)
• Dimension Two: culturally responsive coach facilitates coachee’s thinking about
the gaps and issues they would like to address that inhibit their implementation of
culturally responsive practices
• Dimension Three: culturally responsive coach and coachee find models showing
what culturally responsive education looks like in practice
• Dimension Four: culturally responsive coach facilitates coachee’s critical
selfreflection on personal values, emotions, and self-efficacy beliefs inhibiting their
implementation of culturally responsive practices
• Dimension Five: culturally responsive coach facilitates learning conversations
with the coachee helping him explore alternative perspectives and possibilities related
to culturally responsive practices
• Dimension Six: culturally responsive coach encourages coachee to try out
culturally responsive strategies and ideas, innovating their practice
• Dimension Seven: culturally responsive coach works with the coachee to
develop a culturally responsive and inclusive school environment beyond their
workspace
• Dimension Eight: culturally responsive coaches facilitate the coachee’s
development of high-quality, culturally responsive practices to plan, teach/facilitate,
and assess
• Dimension Nine: culturally responsive coach works with the coachee to develop
a plan for engaging in continual professional learning and development.
155

Coaching thereby cycles back to PD and PLCs tiers
This is an ongoing, iterative process that is not linear. It is meant to build the knowledge of
individual educators and positively impact their interest, emotion, and self-efficacy beliefs
toward implementing culturally responsive practices.

Evaluation of the Components of Learning
In order to meet performance goals, ANCS educators must possess the appropriate
knowledge and motivation to transfer new knowledge into practice. Specifically, it is important
to evaluate knowledge and motivation during and after the program implementation. Table 18
lists the evaluation methods and timing for each learning method or activity.

Table 18
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Factual Knowledge “I know it.”
Entry and Exit Tickets for pre- and post-assessment of knowledge of the
components and terminology of culturally responsive practices
Before and after
the training

Knowledge checks (i.e., surveys, games like Kahoot, physical response,
etc.)
During and after
the training

Collaborative discussions (i.e., jigsaw, think-pair-share) to share
understanding
During the
training

Coaching discussion to check for knowledge of the components and
terminology of culturally responsive practice

Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
After the training
156

Collaborative discussions with other culturally responsive learning
communities to share how to implement culturally responsive curriculum,
instruction, and assessment practice

During and after
the training

Collaborative discussions within own culturally responsive learning
community to share how to implement culturally responsive curriculum,
instruction, and assessment practice
During and after
the training

Observations using PLC Observation Tool and Coaching Observation
Tool
During the
training

Coaching feedback from observation

Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”

After the training
Collaborative discussions with other culturally responsive learning
communities about the value of implementing culturally responsive
practices

During the
training
Collaborative discussions with other culturally responsive learning
communities about the value of implementing culturally responsive
practices

During the
training
Coaching discussion to check in about the value of implementing
culturally responsive practices

After the training
Opportunities for critical self-reflection
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Before, during,
and after the
training
Collaborative discussions with other culturally responsive learning
communities about concerns, fears, and potential barriers to the work
During and after
the training

Collaborative discussions within own culturally responsive learning
community about concerns, fears, and potential barriers to the work
During and after
the training

Coaching discussion to check in about concerns, fears, and potential
barriers to the work of implementing culturally responsive practice

After the training
157

After the training
Before, during ,
and after the
training
Opportunities for critical self-reflection
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Before, during,
and after the
training
Self -evaluating using a rubric for culturally responsive planning design After the training
Making an action plan for next steps in implementing learning from
workshops
During and after
the training

Collaborative discussions within own culturally responsive learning After the training
community to share action plan

Coaching discussions to share action plan
Opportunities for critical self-reflection

Level 1: Reaction
According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016), Level 1 is “the degree to which
participants find the training favorable, engaging, and relevant to their jobs” (p. 38). It includes
the three dimensions of the satisfaction and engagement of the participants and how relevant the
participants deem the training. Satisfaction has a positive correlation to learning and can be used
to identify and eliminate barriers to participant learning during the program (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) state that engagement refers to the degree
of active participation, involvement, and contribution to the learning experience and directly
relates to participant learning. Relevance is the degree to which participants will be able to apply
learning to their own context and content. The alignment of the application timeline to the
learning experience will increase relevance. The goal of Level 1 is to measure the quality of the
training and the instructor and the degree to which it resulted in knowledge and skills that can be
158

applied on the job (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 19 lists the methods or tools used to
determine the participant reactions to the program and the timing for the methods or tools.

Table 19
Attendance during the entire training During the training
Active participation in the training During the training
Asking meaningful questions During the training
Individual coaching check-ins to monitor level of engagement After the training
Relevance

Avenues to give feedback on training relevance During the training

Individual coaching check-ins with questions that are relevant to
participant
During and after the
training

Post-training anonymous survey
Customer Satisfaction
After the training

Formative questions for feedback

During the training
Individual coaching check-ins to monitor level of satisfaction During and after the
training

159

Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s)
Timing

Engagement

Immediate Evaluation Tool
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) recommend the use of a blended evaluation approach
to gather data that holistically evaluates the effectiveness of a program. After the training, the
evaluation will consist of an immediate evaluation tool to assess the effectiveness of the
workshops and the participant experiences for Level 1 (engagement, relevance, confidence, and
commitment) and Level 2 (factual knowledge, procedural knowledge, attitude, confidence, and
commitment). This evaluation tool will ask participants to rate the relevance of the training
session, their engagement with the content, and their overall satisfaction with the learning
experience within the CRILI program (see Appendix F).
Delayed Evaluation Tool
If professional learning experiences at any level are impactful, educators throughout the
organization will continue to engage in the development and implementation of culturally
responsive practices in the future. It is thereby critical to check for implementation of practices
well after the facilitation of professional learning experiences. If educators are not transferring
and applying new knowledge and skills in practice, it may indicate that professional learning
needs to be altered and adjusted to be more responsive to the needs of ANCS educators. As such,
the use of delayed evaluation tools will provide the organization with the information they need
Post-training anonymous survey After the training
160

to reassess whether professional learning experiences are leading to the successful development
and implementation of culturally responsive practices. One of the delayed evaluation tools is a
survey that mirrors the immediate evaluation tool and will be given approximately two weeks
after the training. It can be found in Appendix G.
Data Analysis and Reporting
ANCS’s organizational performance goal is for educators to implement culturally
responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices with fidelity to meet student needs.
To meet this goal, ANCS will use the Culturally Responsive International Learning Institute to
offer on-site conferences, workshops, institutes, and courses related to culturally responsive
education. To evaluate progress and areas of growth, ANCS will communicate success to the
stakeholders within the organization by providing access to data and visual representation of
progress paired with the analysis and discussion of the data within the learning organization.
This will be done in collaboration with ANCS’s data analytics specialist and data visualization
specialist. Every 90 days, online tools will be used to convert data into digestible reports and
dashboards updating the ANCS community's commitment towards its culturally responsive
education goals, continued challenges, and opportunities for further growth.
Summary of the Implementation and Evaluation
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) for not only
implementing KMO solutions but also evaluating and progressing monitoring the learning
outcomes of the program. The development and implementation of culturally responsive
practices must be systematically monitored and evaluated (Minkos et al., 2017) so that ANCS
can meet its improvement goals. Ultimately, by starting with the Level 4 desired outcomes, the
New World Kirkpatrick Model can help organizations “uplift solution[s] of practice” (Watson,
161

2015, p. 12) rather than first remaining debilitated by its existing problems. The model in itself is
one grounded in critical hope for a better future.
Limitations and Delimitations
The study’s limitations include the low potential for generalizability. ANCS is a private
international school that caters to high socioeconomic stakeholders, and with motivated and
high-performing students, it can be difficult to show a need for change. This is why this study
focused on not only the knowledge, motivation, and organizational barriers but also on
educators’ racial identities as a way to move past the audit culture and performance metrics that
prove that since the students are academically successful that there is no real need for change.
Although the scope and focus of the study will eventually benefit the organization (Dei, 2005),
this is the very thing that created a limitation of this study’s findings. Still, while case studies
focusing on a single situation produce issues of generalizability, Merriam (2009) states that it is
the reader and not the researcher who must take what they learn from a particular case and
determine how to apply it to their own context. That is, this case study should serve not as a
blueprint but a guide for making one’s own pathways for culturally responsive education in US
and international schools.
Other limitations included the sheer volume of data and the amount of time and labor it
took to conduct and transcribe interviews, schedule and complete observations, and analyze
documents and code for themes and patterns. In addition, since most educators have already
received professional development focused on cultural competence, much like the
DunningKruger effect in which people overestimate their knowledge or skills (Kruger &
Dunning, 1999), there were possible cognitive biases and assumptions about the level of
knowledge obtained from previous professional learning experiences that may have impacted
participants’ equity consciousness.
162

This study focuses on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs and assets
that contribute to ANCS educators’ ability to implement and enact culturally responsive
practices and to provide an equitable education for all students. This context involves the
dominant stakeholders of the school administration, instructional leaders, teachers, students,
parents, and the community. However, to maintain the feasibility of this study, the study was
delimited by examining the perspectives of three stakeholder groups within the school. In
addition, as only a small percentage of educators (classroom educators inclusive of the subgroup
of Spanish educators, instructional leaders, and divisional principals) within ANCS participated
in this study, this could inhibit the purpose of maximum variation sampling, as Maxwell (2013)
argued, “to ensure that the conclusions adequately capture the entire range of variation, rather
than only the typical members or some ‘average’ subset of this range” (p. 98). Therefore, the
findings may not be generalizable or transferable.
One ethical concern is that keeping the study sample size small, bounded within ANCS,
even a promise of anonymity–by removing identifying information and using pseudonyms–may
not fully protect colleagues. This study also considered the confidentiality of the data collected to
ensure a reporting on patterns and trends from the interviews, observations, and document
analyses, not specifics. A final challenge included ensuring that probing interview questions seek
to further elaborate on responses and not harm participants (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017).
Another limitation of this study was self-selection bias since participation was voluntary.
The study was also limited by the design of the interview and observation instruments, as the
validity and reliability of the instruments were not tested across multiple studies. Last but not
least, the biggest limitations to this study are our positionalities as educators who are seeking to
disrupt the very systems that the organization–and educators–consciously or subconsciously
uphold for their own benefits. Racial equity is not a problem to be fixed as much as a call to
163

liberation that must be heeded. Therefore, during the study, unforeseen biases and assumptions
could have impacted multiple levels, from the design of the methodology to the analysis of the
data to the organization of the findings.
Recommendations for Future Research
There is already little empirical research on the organizational change that emerges from
the work of equity teams, including those working towards culturally responsive improvement in
their respective schools (Ishimaru & Galloway, 2019). There is even a larger gap in the research
when reviewing the literature in international school contexts. As only 7% of ANCS educators
participated in our study, we hope to engage ourselves and others in future research adding to the
body of literature. We draw inspiration from Sukumar and Metoyer’s (2019) framework for
replicating qualitative studies to gain a richer and deeper understanding of culturally responsive
practices at ANCS and other international schools.
At ANCS, we hope that a team of independent researchers would be willing to replicate
one or more aspects of our study, whether using the study design, research questions, methods,
or even re-engaging our participants years later to reassess their knowledge, motivation, and
perceptions of organizational influences. Engaging new ANCS participants in a replicated study
would also allow for an “interpretive comparison with a view to corroborate, elaborate, contrast,
or even clarify elements corresponding to the replicated aspects with those [from our] study”
(Sukumar & Metoyer, 2019, p. 2).
We, the researchers in this study, have collectively facilitated culturally responsive
education workshops with over 50 international schools in the past two years. Having access and
relationships with these international schools would hopefully allow us to replicate elements of
our study at other international schools, assessing how peer institutions enact culturally
164

responsive practices in their respective organizations. We intend for future studies to trace across
individuals, groups, and international contexts, seeking to engage in what Bartlett and Vavrus
(2017) termed a multi-sited ethnography. It will not “contrast places assumed to be unrelated
[but] looks at linkages across place, space, and time” (Bartlett & Vavrus, 2017, p. 7).
We plan on using a comparative case study approach when researching several
international schools in Asia, Africa, Europe, Latin America, and the Middle East over the
course of several years. As Lochmiller and Lester (2017) advised, we will use a number of
qualitative data collection methods to carry out our research study, tracing the evolution of
culturally responsive education across space and time. We plan to conduct interviews and
observe monthly team meetings at a variety of study sites via Zoom and perform document
analyses asynchronously. We may further re-invent specific methods using resources on
Lupton’s (2021) “Doing Fieldwork in a Pandemic,” even as COVID-19 measures and travel
restrictions are relaxed.
Conclusion
Off of a street adjacent to ANCS, there is a desire path leading to the side entrance of the
institution. Such desire paths are created on grassy areas originally not intended for humans to
walk on but are created out of human desire to form a new route or path. Even when there is a
structural system people are supposed to use (i.e., sidewalks or roads), these paths emerge
because formal structures do not meet individual or group needs. Urban planners take note of
these desire paths over time and eventually create infrastructure responsive to social and cultural
activity. In other words, what once started as a dirt path by a few individuals eventually becomes
formalized into a concrete sidewalk or road.
Drawing inspiration from Spanish poet Antonio Machado (1912), whose words also
inspired many social movements from around the world: “There is no path, we make the path
165

by walking.” We, the researchers of this study, are reminded of another quotation related to
pathmaking. In the early 1900s, after arriving on Ellis Island, one Italian immigrant remarked, I
came to America because I heard the streets were paved with gold. When I got here, [I] found
out three things: First, the streets weren’t paved with gold; second, they weren’t paved at all:
and third, I was expected to pave them. (Hoxhaj, 2015, para. 1)
Even when the paths marginalized groups desire become institutionalized, we will still be called
upon to perform the labor and pave the way. We are not content with simply building an
implementation and evaluation plan in this study (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) focused on
the KMO resources found in Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis framework; we, ourselves, are
ready to ready to pave the way in implementing this plan beyond the academic exercise of a
dissertation.
This study, examining the KMO influences that were revealed from interviews,
observations, and document analyses show that ANCS still needs to create pathways towards
culturally responsive education. And even if only one stakeholder group demonstrated a need for
a particular influence, in the spirit of collaboration that this dissertation was written in, it is each
of our responsibility to help ourselves and each other build the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational pathways towards becoming a more culturally responsive school. It is not enough
for educators on the margins to “emerge in defiance of socially toxic environments” as a rose
who grew from the concrete; we must “collectively struggle to replace the concrete completely
with a rose garden” (Duncan-Andrade, 2009, p. 186) where all of us are seeds who can
eventually bloom. With critical hope, so be it! See to it!

References
Aguilar, E. (2013). The art of coaching: Effective strategies for school transformation. John
166

Wiley &. Sons.
Aguilar, E. (2020). Coaching for equity: Conversations that change practice. John Wiley &
Sons.
Akashi, Y., & Yoshimura, M. (Eds.). (2008). New Perspectives on the Japanese Occupation in
Malaya and Singapore, 1941-1945. Nus Press.
Alhanachi, S., de Meijer, L. A., & Severiens, S. E. (2021). Improving culturally responsive
teaching through professional learning communities: A qualitative study in Dutch
prevocational schools. International Journal of Educational Research, 105, 101698.
Allen, R. L. (2001). The globalization of white supremacy: Toward a critical discourse on the
racialization of the world. Educational Theory, 51(4), 467.
Anderson, J. D. (1988). The education of Blacks in the South, 1860-1935. Univ of North
Carolina Press.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing:
A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1974). Theory in practice: increasing professional effectiveness
(1st ed.). Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Au, K. (2009). Isn’t culturally responsive instruction just good teaching? Social Education,
73(4), 179-183.
Au, W. (2015). Meritocracy 2.0. Educational Policy, 30(1), 39-62.
doi:10.1177/0895904815614916
Au, W., Bigelow, B., & Karp, S. (Eds.). (2007). Rethinking our classrooms: Teaching for equity
and justice (Vol. 1). Rethinking Schools.
Au, W., Brown, A. L., & Calderón, D. (2016). Reclaiming the multicultural roots of US
curriculum: Communities of color and official knowledge in education. Teachers College
167

Press.
Averill, R., Anderson, D., & Drake, M. (2015). Developing Culturally Responsive Teaching
through Professional Noticing within Teacher Educator Modelling. Mathematics Teacher
Education and Development, 17(2), 64-83.
Baker, L. (2006). Developmental differences in metacognition: Implications for metacognitively
oriented reading instruction. In Metacognition in literacy learning (pp. 83-102).
Routledge.
Bailey, L., & Gibson, M. T. (2020). International school principals: Routes to headship and key
challenges of their role. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48(6),
1007-1025.
Baldwin, J., Capouya, E., Hansberry, L., Hentoff, N., Hughes, L., & Kazin, A. (1961). The negro
in American culture. CrossCurrents, 11(3), 205-224.
Baldwin, J. (1997). If Black English isn’t a language, then tell me, what is?. The Black Scholar,
27(1), 5-6.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological
review, 84(2), 191.
Bandura, A. (1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of
social and clinical psychology, 4(3), 359-373.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
Bandura, A., & Evans, R. I. (2006). Albert Bandura. Insight Media.
Banks, J. A. (1989). Approaches to multicultural curriculum reform. Trotter review, 3(3), 5.
Banks, J. A. (1997). Educating citizens in a multicultural society. Teachers College Press.
168

Banks, J. A., Cookson, P., Gay, G., Hawley, W. D., Irvine, J. J., Nieto, S., & Stephan, W. G.
(2001). Diversity within unity: Essential principles for teaching and learning in a
multicultural society. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(3), 196-203.
Bartlett, L., & Vavrus, F. (2017). Comparative case studies: An innovative approach. Nordic
Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE), 1(1).
Bell, D. A. (1995). Who’s afraid of critical race theory. U. Ill. L. Rev., 893.
Bocala, C., Holman, R., & Malcolm, X. (2021). Coaching for Equity Demands Deeper Dialogue.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 78(6), 66-71.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1991). Leadership and management effectiveness: A multi-frame,
multi-sector analysis. Human resource management, 30(4), 509-534.
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2006). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of
racial inequality in the United States. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative research
journal.
Boykin, A. W. (2000). The talent development model of schooling: Placing students at promise
for academic success. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 5(1-
2), 3-25.
Boykin, A. W., Tyler, K. M., & Miller, O. (2005). In search of cultural themes and their
expressions in the dynamics of classroom life. Urban Education, 40(5), 521-549.
Bradley-Levine, J. (2018). Advocacy as a Practice of Critical Teacher Leadership. International
Journal of Teacher Leadership, 9(1), 47-62.
Bradshaw, C. P., Pas, E. T., Bottiani, J. H., Debnam, K. J., Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., &
Rosenberg, M. S. (2018). Promoting cultural responsivity and student engagement
through double check coaching of classroom teachers: An efficacy study. School
169

Psychology Review, 47(2), 118-134.
Brayboy, B. M. J., Castagno, A. E., & Maughan, E. (2007). Chapter 6 equality and justice for
all? Examining race in education scholarship. Review of research in education, 31(1),
159-194.
Brookfield, S. (2009). The concept of critical reflection: Promises and contradictions. European
Journal of Social Work, 12(3), 293-304.
Brookfield, S. D., & Holst, J. D. (2010). Radicalizing learning: Adult education for a just world.
John Wiley & Sons.
Brookfield, S. D. (2017). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. John Wiley & Sons.
Brown, A. L., & Au, W. (2014). Race, memory, and master narratives: A critical essay on US
curriculum history. Curriculum Inquiry, 44(3), 358-389.
Buch, K., & Wetzel, D. K. (2001). Analyzing and realigning organizational culture. Leadership
& Organization Development Journal.
Bush, M. E. (2011). Everyday forms of whiteness: Understanding race in a 'Post-Racial' World.
Rowman & Littlefield.
Butler, R., & Shibaz, L. (2014). Striving to connect and striving to learn: Influences of relational
and mastery goals for teaching on teacher behaviors and student interest and help
seeking. International Journal of Educational Research, 65, 41–
53.10.1016/j.ijer.2013.09.006
Carson, R. L., & Chase, M. A. (2009). An examination of physical education teacher motivation
from a self-determination theoretical framework. Physical Education and Sport
Pedagogy, 14, 335–353.10.1080/17408980802301866
Chouari, A. (2016). Cultural diversity and the challenges of teaching multicultural classes in the
twenty-first century. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 7(3), 3-17.
170

Clark, R. E. (1998). Motivating performance. Performance Improvement, 37(8), 39-47.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Clark, K. R. (2018). Learning theories: Cognitivism. Radiologic Technology, 90(2), 176-179.
Clutterbuck, R. (2019). Conflict and violence in Singapore and Malaysia 1945-1983. Routledge.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Teacher research as stance. The Sage Handbook of
Educational Action Research. London: Sage, 39-49.
Cooper, C. W., Allen, R. M., & Bettez, S. C. (2009). Forming culturally responsive learning
communities in demographically changing schools. In The handbook of leadership and
professional learning communities (pp. 103-114). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Cummins, J. (2007). Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual classrooms.
Canadian journal of applied linguistics, 10(2), 221-240.
Cunningham, J. (2018). Missing the mark: Standardized testing as epistemological erasure in US
schooling. Power and Education, 175774381881209.
Curby, T. W., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Ponitz, C. C. (2009). Teacher–child interactions and
children’s achievement trajectories across kindergarten and first grade. Journal of
educational psychology, 101(4), 912.
Dana, N. F., & Yendol-Hoppey, D. (2008). The reflective educator’s guide to professional
development: Coaching inquiry-oriented learning communities. Corwin Press.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009).
Professional learning in the learning profession. Washington, DC: National Staff
Development Council, 12.
Darling-Hammond, L. & Lieberman, A. (Eds.). (2012). Teacher education around the world:
Changing policies and practices. Routledge.
171

DeCuir, J. T., & Dixson, A. D. (2004). “So when it comes out, they aren’t that surprised that it is
there”: Using critical race theory as a tool of analysis of race and racism in education.
Educational researcher, 33(5), 26-31.
Dei, G. J. S. (2005). Chapter one: Critical issues in anti-racist research methodologies: An
introduction. Counterpoints, 252, 1-27.
Delgado, R. & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical Race Theory (Third Edition): An Introduction. NYU
Press.
Delpit, L. (2006). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. The New Press.
DeMatthews, D. E., Mungal, A. S., & Carrola, P. A. (2015). Despite best intentions: A critical
analysis of social justice leadership and decision making. Administrative Issues Journal,
5(2), 3.
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2009). Social cognitive theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development:
Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational researcher, 38(3), 181-199.
Dewey, J. (1986, September). Experience and education. In The educational forum (Vol. 50, No.
3, pp. 241-252). Taylor & Francis Group.
Donahue-Keegan, D. (2018). Cultivating culturally responsive teaching in teacher preparation.
The teaching self: Contemplative practices, pedagogy, and research in education.
Drago-Severson, E., & Blum-DeStefano, J. (2017). The Self in Social Justice: A Developmental
Lens on Race, Identity, and Transformation. Harvard Educational Review, 87(4), 457–
481. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-87.4.457
Dumas, M. J. (2018). Beginning and ending with Black suffering: A meditation on and against
racial justice in education. In Toward What Justice? (pp. 29-45). Routledge.
172

Duncan-Andrade, J. (2009). Note to educators: Hope required when growing roses in concrete.
Harvard educational review, 79(2), 181-194.
Easton, L. B. (2008). Powerful designs for professional learning. National Staff Development
Council.
Farinde-Wu, A., Glover, C. P., & Williams, N. N. (2017). It’s not hard work; it’s heart work:
Strategies of effective, award-winning culturally responsive teachers. The Urban Review,
49(2), 279-299.
Ford, D. Y., & Trotman, M. F. (2001). Teachers of gifted students: Suggested multicultural
characteristics and competencies. Roeper Review, 23(4), 235-239.
Freire, P. (1970). Cultural action for freedom (pp. 476-521). Harvard educational review.
Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (2005). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. Routledge.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist, 36(1), 45-
56.
Galloway, M. K., & Ishimaru, A. M. (2020). Leading equity teams: The role of formal leaders in
building organizational capacity for equity. Journal of Education for Students Placed at
Risk (JESPAR), 25(2), 107-125.
Gardner-McTaggart, A. (2018). International schools: Leadership reviewed. Journal of Research
in International Education, 17(2), 148-163.
Gardner-McTaggart, A. C. (2021). Washing the world in whiteness; international schools’
policy. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 53(1), 1-20.
Gay, G. (1995). Bridging Multicultural Theory and Practice. Multicultural Education, 3(1), 4-9.
Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of teacher education,
53(2), 106-116.
173

Gay, G. (2010). Acting on beliefs in teacher education for cultural diversity. Journal of teacher
education, 61(1-2), 143-152.
Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers
College Press.
Genao, S. (2021). Doing it for Culturally Responsive School Leadership: Utilizing Reflexivity
from Preparation to Practice. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 16(2),
158170.
Gillborn, D. (2005). Education policy as an act of white supremacy: Whiteness, critical race
theory and education reform. Journal of education policy, 20(4), 485-505.
Gillborn, D. (2010). The white working class, racism and respectability: Victims, degenerates
and interest-convergence. British Journal of Educational Studies, 58(1), 3-25.
Gillborn, D. (2013). Interest-divergence and the colour of cutbacks: Race, recession and the
undeclared war on Black children. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of
Education, 34(4), 477-491.
Ginsberg, M. (2015). Excited to learn: Motivation and culturally responsive teaching. San
Francisco, CA: Corwin.
Giroux, H.A. (2005). Border crossings: cultural workers and the politics of education (Second
edition.). Routledge.
Gonzalez, M. (2022). Critical Hope for Culturally Responsive Education: An Improvement
Study. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Southern California.
Goodman-Scott, E., Betters-Bubon, J., & Donohue, P. (Eds.). (2019). The school counselor’s
guide to multi-tiered systems of support. Routledge.
Gorski, P. (2019). Avoiding racial equity detours. Educational Leadership, 76(7), 56-61.
174

Grant, R. A. and Asimeng–Boahene, L. (2006). Culturally responsive pedagogy in citizenship
education: Using African proverbs as tools for teaching in urban schools. Multicultural
Perspectives, 8: 17–24.
Griner, A. C., & Stewart, M. L. (2013). Addressing the achievement gap and disproportionality
through the use of culturally responsive teaching practices. Urban Education, 48(4),
585621.
Gulati-Partee, G., & Potapchuk, M. (2014). Paying attention to white culture and privilege: A
missing link to advancing racial equity. The Foundation Review, 6(1), 4.
Hairon, S. (2020). Back to the future: Professional learning communities in Singapore. Asia
Pacific Journal of Education, 40(4), 501-515.
Hammer, M. R., & Bennett, M. J. (1998). The intercultural development inventory (IDI) manual.
Intercultural Communication Institute.
Hammerness, K., & Matsko, K. K. (2013). When context has content: A case study of new
teacher induction in the University of Chicago’s Urban Teacher Education Program.
Urban Education, 48(4), 557-584.
Hammond, Z. (2015). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain: promoting authentic
engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Corwin, a
SAGE Company.
Han, J., Yin, H., & Wang, W. (2015). Exploring the relationship between goal orientations for
teaching of tertiary teachers and their teaching approaches in China. Asia Pacific
Education Review, 16, 1–11.
Harris, C. I. (1993). Whiteness as property. Harvard law review, 1707-1791.
Harmon, D. A. (2012). Culturally Responsive Teaching through a Historical Lens: Will History
Repeat Itself? Interdisciplinary Journal of Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 12-22.
175

Hayes, C., & Juárez, B. (2012). There is no culturally responsive teaching spoken here: A critical
race perspective. Democracy and Education, 20(1), 1.
Hayes, C. (2016). Unhooking from Whiteness and the Assault that Follows. In Unhooking from
Whiteness (pp. 13-25). SensePublishers, Rotterdam.
Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical
issue for the 21st century. Review of educational research, 70(2), 151-179.
hooks, b. (1995). An aesthetic of blackness: strange and oppositional. Lenox Avenue: A Journal
of Interarts Inquiry, 1, 65-72.
hooks, b. (2003). Teaching community: A pedagogy of hope (Vol. 36). Psychology Press.
hooks, b. (2014). Teaching to transgress. Routledge.
Hopf, S. C., Crowe, K., Verdon, S., Blake, H. L., & McLeod, S. (2021). Advancing workplace
diversity through the culturally responsive teamwork framework. American Journal of
Speech-Language Pathology, 30(5), 1949-1961.
Hoxhaj, R. (2015). Wage expectations of illegal immigrants: The role of networks and previous
migration experience. International Economics, 142, 136-151.
Howard, T. C. (2003). Culturally relevant pedagogy: Ingredients for critical teacher reflection.
Theory into practice, 42(3), 195-202.
Howard-Hamilton, M. F. (2000). Creating a Culturally Responsive Learning Environment for
African American Students. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2000(82), 45–
53. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.8205
Hynds, A., Sleeter, C., Hindle, R., Savage, C., Penetito, W., & Meyer, L. H. (2011). Te
Kotahitanga: A case study of a repositioning approach to teacher professional
development for culturally responsive pedagogies. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher
Education, 39(4), 339-351.
176

Ighodaro, E., & Wiggan, G. (2013). Curriculum Violence: America’s New Civil Rights Issue.
Nova Science Publishers, Incorporated.
Irby, D. J. (2021). Stuck Improving: Racial Equity and School Leadership. Race and Education
Series. Harvard Education Press.
Ishimaru, A. M., & Galloway, M. K. (2014). Beyond individual effectiveness: Conceptualizing
organizational leadership for equity. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 13(1), 93-146.
Ishimaru, A. M., & Galloway, M. K. (2019). Hearts and minds first: Institutional logics in
pursuit of educational equity. Educational Administration Quarterly,
0013161X20947459.
Jenkins, C., & Alfred, M. (2018). Understanding the motivation and transformation of White
culturally responsive professors. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 24(1), 81-
99.
Johnson, L. (2014). Culturally responsive leadership for community empowerment.
Multicultural Education Review, 6(2), 145-170.
Joyce, B. R., & Showers, B. (1981). Transfer of training: The contribution of “coaching.” The
Journal of Education, 163(2), 163–172.
Joyce, B. R., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (Vol. 3).
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Kaplan, A. (2012). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Education.com
Kayser, A. A., Nash, A. M., & Kayser, B. (2020). Change-makers: A grassroots approach to
culturally responsive leadership and teaching. Journal of Education Human Resources,
38(1), 35-56.
Kegan, R., & Lahey, L. L. (2009). Immunity to change: How to overcome it and unlock the
potential in yourself and your organization. Harvard Business Review Press.
177

Kennedy, K. (2019). Centering equity and caring in leadership for social-emotional learning:
Toward a conceptual framework for diverse learners. Journal of School Leadership,
29(6), 473-492.
Khalifa, M. A., Gooden, M. A., & Davis, J. E. (2016). Culturally responsive school leadership:
A synthesis of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1272-1311.
Khalifa, M. (2020). Culturally responsive school leadership. Harvard Education Press.
Kincheloe, J. L. (2004). The knowledges of teacher education: Developing a critical complex
epistemology. Teacher Education Quarterly, 31(1), 49–66.
King, M. L. (1968). Letter from a Birmingham jail. Martin Luther King Jr. Center for
Nonviolent
Social Change.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.
Klein, E. J., & Riordan, M. (2009). Putting professional development into practice: A framework
for how teachers in expeditionary learning schools implement professional development.
Teacher Education Quarterly, 36(4), 61-80.
Knight, J. (2007). Coaching: Approaches and perspectives. Corwin Press.
Knight, D. S., Hock, M., & Knight, J. (2016). Designing instructional coaching. In Instructional-
Design Theories and Models, Volume IV (pp. 285-302). Routledge.
Knoester, M., & Au, W. (2015). Standardized testing and school segregation: Like tinder for
fire? Race Ethnicity and Education, 20(1), 1-14.
Knowles, R. T., & Hawkman, A. M. (2020). Anti-racist quantitative research: Developing,
validating, and implementing racialized teaching efficacy and racial fragility scales. The
Urban Review, 52(2), 238-262.
178

Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing
one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of personality and
social psychology, 77 6, 1121-34.
Kumar, R., Zusho, A., & Bondie, R. (2018). Weaving cultural relevance and achievement
motivation into inclusive classroom cultures. Educational Psychologist, 53(2), 78-96.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995a). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant
pedagogy. Theory into practice, 34(3), 159-165.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995b). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American
educational research journal, 32(3), 465-491.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and what's it doing in a nice field
like education?. International journal of qualitative studies in education, 11(1), 7-24.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding
achievement in US schools. Educational researcher, 35(7), 3-12.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2008). Yes, but how do we do it?”: Practicing culturally relevant pedagogy.
City kids, city schools: More reports from the front row, 162-177.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2009). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American
children. John Wiley & Sons.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2013). Critical race theory—What it is not! In Handbook of critical race
theory in education (pp. 54-67). Routledge.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: aka the remix. Harvard
Educational Review, 84(1), 74-84.
Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (Eds.). (2016). “Covenant Keeper”: Derrick Bell’s Enduring
Education Legacy. Peter Lang.
179

Lämsä, A. M., & Sintonen, T. (2006). A narrative approach for organizational learning in a
diverse organisation. Journal of Workplace Learning.
Larson, C. L., & Ovando, C. J. (2001). The color of bureaucracy: The politics of equity in
multicultural school communities. Taylor and Francis Group, 7625 Empire Dr., Florence,
KY 41042.
Leonard, A. M., & Woodland, R. H. (2022). Anti-racism is not an initiative: How professional
learning communities may advance equity and social-emotional learning in schools.
Theory Into Practice, 61(2), 212-223.
Leonardo, Z. (2009). Race, whiteness, and education. Routledge.
Lieberman, A., & Grolnick, M. (1996). Networks and reform in American education. Teachers
college record, 98(1), 7-46.
Lochmiller, C.R. & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. Sage Publications.
Lopez, A. E. (2016). Culturally responsive and socially just leadership in diverse contexts: From
theory to action. Springer.
Lorde, A. (1984). The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house (Comments at the
“The personal and the political panel,” Second Sex Conference, New York, September
29, 1979). In Sister outsider (pp. 110–113). Sister Visions Press. (Original work
published 1979).
Love, B. L. (2016). Anti-Black state violence, classroom edition: The spirit murdering of Black
children. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy, 13(1), 22-25.
Lupton, D. (editor) (2021). Doing fieldwork in a pandemic (crowd-sourced document), revised
version. Available at:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1clGjGABB2h2qbduTgfqribHmog9B6P0NvMgVui
180

NvMg8/edit?usp=sharing
Lynch, K., & Baker, J. (2005). Equality in education: An equality of condition perspective.
Theory and research in education, 3(2), 131-164.
Machado, A. (1912). ‘Proverbios y cantares’, in Campos de Castilla. Retrieved 15 May 2022
from https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/34610.Antonio_Machado
Majors, R., Simmons, L. E., & Ani, C. (2020). Social and Emotional Education and Emotional
Wellness: A Cultural Competence Model for Black Boys and Teachers. In The
International Handbook of Black Community Mental Health. Emerald Publishing
Limited.
Marshall, S. L., & Khalifa, M. A. (2018). Humanizing school communities: Culturally
responsive leadership in the shaping of curriculum and instruction. Journal of
Educational Administration.
Marx, H. (2016). Preparing culturally responsive teachers. Internationalizing Teaching and
Teacher Education for Equity: Engaging Alternative Knowledges Across Ideological
Borders, 21.
Marzano, R. J. (2005). A handbook for classroom management that works. ASCD.
Matias, C. E. (2013). Check Yo’self before You Wreck Yo’self and Our Kids: Counterstories
from Culturally Responsive White Teachers?... To Culturally Responsive White
Teachers!. Interdisciplinary Journal of Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 68-81.
Matias, C. E. (2016). Feeling white: Whiteness, emotionality, and education. In Feeling White.
Brill.
Matias, C. & Zembylas, M. (2014). ‘When saying you care is not really caring’: emotions of
disgust, whiteness ideology, and teacher education. Critical Studies in Education. 55.
319-337. 10.1080/17508487.2014.922489.
181

Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3
rd
ed.). SAGE.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.

Merriam, S. B., & Bierema, L. L. (2013). Adult learning: Linking theory and practice. John
Wiley & Sons.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
Meyer, C. F., & Rhoades, E. K. (2006). Multiculturalism: Beyond Food, Festival, Folklore, and
Fashion. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 42(2), 82–87.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00228958.2006.10516439
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as Transformation: Critical Perspectives on a Theory in Progress.
The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Milner IV, H. R. (2007). Race, culture, and researcher positionality: Working through dangers
seen, unseen, and unforeseen. Educational researcher, 36(7), 388-400.
Minkos, M. L., Sassu, K. A., Gregory, J. L., Patwa, S. S., Theodore, L. A., & Femc‐Bagwell, M.
(2017). Culturally responsive practice and the role of school administrators. Psychology
in the Schools, 54(10), 1260-1266.
Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & González, N. (2006). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using
a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. In Funds of knowledge (pp.
83100). Routledge.
Montenegro, E., & Jankowski, N. A. (2017). Equity and assessment: Moving towards culturally
responsive assessment. Occasional Paper, 29.
182

Morales, D. M., Ruggiano, C., Carter, C., Pfeifer, K. J., & Green, K. L. (2020). Disrupting to
sustain: Teacher preparation through innovative teaching and learning practices. Journal
of Culture and Values in Education, 3(1), 1-20.
Moreno, G., & Wong-Lo, M. (2011). Practical Considerations for Working with Latino and
Asian American Students and Families. Multicultural Learning and Teaching, 6(1).
https://doi.org/10.2202/2161-2412.1074
Morgan, H. (2022). Resisting the movement to ban critical race theory from schools. The
Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 95(1), 35-41.
Morrison, T. (2004). Beloved. 1987. New York: Vintage.
Mueller, J. (2020). Racial Ideology or Racial Ignorance? An Alternative Theory of Racial
Cognition. Sociological Theory, 38(2), 142–169.
Muhammad, G.E. (2020). Cultivating genius: An equity model for culturally and historically
responsive literacy. Scholastic.
Mullen, C. (2009). The handbook of leadership and professional learning communities. Springer.
Murakami-Ramalho, E. (2008). Domestic practices in foreign lands: Lessons on leadership for
diversity in American international schools. Journal of Studies in International
Education, 12(1), 76-95.
Nieto, S. (2004). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education,
Boston, MA: Pearson Allyn & Bacon.
Nieto, S. (2009). Multicultural education in the United States: Historical realities, ongoing
challenges, and transformative possibilities. In The Routledge international companion to
multicultural education (pp. 99-115). Routledge.
183

Nortvedt, G. A., Wiese, E., Brown, M., Burns, D., McNamara, G., O’Hara, J., Altrichter, H.,
Fellner, M., Herzog-Punzenberger, B., Nayir, F., & Taneri, P. O. (2020). Aiding
culturally responsive assessment in schools in a globalising world. Educational
Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 32(1), 5-27.
Obiakor, F. E., & Green, S. L. (2014). Educating culturally and linguistically diverse learners
with special needs. Multicultural education for learners with special needs in the
twentyfirst century, 1-14.
Orange, T., Isken, J. A., Green, A., Parachini, N., & Francois, A. (2019). Coaching for equity.
The Learning Professional, 40(6), 45-49.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy during childhood and adolescence. Self-efficacy beliefs of
adolescents, 5, 339-367.
Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and
practice. Educational researcher, 41(3), 93-97.
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.
Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (Eds.). (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning
for justice in a changing world. Teachers College Press.
Pearson, N.O. (2022, March 4). Elite international schools have a racism problem: around the
world, finishing schools for the Davos class teach excellence—as long as the excellence
is White, Western, and English-speaking. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/asia
Pekrun, R. (2011). Emotions as drivers of learning and cognitive development. In New
perspectives on affect and learning technologies (pp. 23-39). Springer, New York, NY.
184

Pianta, R. C., Belsky, J., Vandergrift, N., Houts, R., & Morrison, F. J. (2008). Classroom effects
on children’s achievement trajectories in elementary school. American educational
research journal, 45(2), 365-397.
Picower, B. (2009). The unexamined whiteness of teaching: How white teachers maintain and
enact dominant racial ideologies. Race ethnicity and education, 12(2), 197-215.
Pinar, W. F. (2012). What is curriculum theory?. Routledge.
Pintrich, P. R. (1994). Continuities and discontinuities: Future directions for research in
educational psychology. Educational Psychologist, 29(3), 137-148.
Project LEE, Project ELLIPSES, & Project ELITE (2019). Culturally and linguistically
responsive response to intervention within multitiered system of supports: Fidelity of
implementation rubric. US Office of Special Education Programs.
Retelsdorf, J., Butler, R., Streblow, L., & Schiefele, U. (2010). Teachers' goal orientations for
teaching: Associations with instructional practices, interest in teaching, and burnout.
Learning and instruction, 20(1), 30-46.
Retelsdorf, J., & Günther, C. (2011). Achievement goals for teaching and teachers’ reference
norms: Relations with instructional practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27,
1111–1119.10.1016/j.tate.2011.05.007
Reinke, W. M., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Merrell, K. (2008). The classroom check-up: A classwide
teacher consultation model for increasing praise and decreasing disruptive behavior.
School psychology review, 37(3), 315-332.
Roche, C., & Passmore, J. (2021). Racial Justice, Equity and Belonging in Coaching.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: finding the right
solutions to the right problems. Teachers College Press.
Ryan, R., Schunk, D., & Usher, E. (2019). Social Cognitive Theory and Motivation.
185

Saldaña, J., & Omasta, M. (2016). Qualitative research: Analyzing life. Sage Publications.
Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2009). Interest. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/interest/ Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M.
(2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from http://
www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/
Schunk, D. H., Meece, J. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (2008). Motivation in education: theory, research,
and applications (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.
Schunk, D. (2020). Learning theories: An educational perspective (8th ed.). Boston,
MA: Pearson Education.
Scott, S., & Palincsar, A. (2013). Sociocultural theory.
Sealey-Ruiz, Y. (2021). The critical literacy of race: Toward racial literacy in urban teacher
education. The handbook of urban education, 281-295.
Siwatu, K. O. (2007). Preservice teachers’ culturally responsive teaching self-efficacy and
outcome expectancy beliefs. Teaching and teacher education, 23(7), 1086-1101.
Siwatu, K. O. (2011). Preservice teachers’ culturally responsive teaching self-efficacy-forming
experiences: A mixed methods study. The Journal of Educational Research, 104(5), 360-
369.
Sleeter, C. E. (1996). Multicultural education as social activism. SUNY Press.
Sleeter, C. E. (2011). An agenda to strengthen culturally responsive pedagogy. English
Teaching: Practice and Critique, 10(2), 7–23.
Sleeter, C. E. (2012). Confronting the Marginalization of Culturally Responsive Pedagogy.
Urban Education, 47(3), 562–584. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085911431472
186

Sleeter, C. E. (2018). Multicultural education past, present, and future: Struggles for dialog and
power-sharing. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 20(1), 5-20.
Smith, L. T. (2012). Chapter 2: Research through imperial eyes. In Decolonizing methodologies:
Research and indigenous peoples. (pp. 42-57). Zed Books, Ltd.
Solomon, R. P., Portelli, J. P., Daniel, B., Campbell, A. (2005). The discourse of denial: How
white teacher candidates construct race, racism and ‘white privilege’. Race Ethnicity and
Education 8(2): 147–169.
Solórzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. J. (2002). Critical race methodology: Counter-storytelling as an
analytical framework for education research. Qualitative inquiry, 8(1), 23-44.
Sondel, B., Kretchmar, K., & Hadley Dunn, A. (2019). “Who do these people want teaching
their children?” White saviorism, colorblind racism, and anti-blackness in “no excuses”
charter schools. Urban Education, 0042085919842618.
Sprick, R. S., & Sprick, R. S. (2010). Coaching classroom management: Strategies & tools for
administrators & coaches. Pacific Northwest Publishing.
Spring, J. (2016). Deculturalization and the struggle for equality: A brief history of the education
of dominated cultures in the United States. Routledge.
Steketee, A., Williams, M. T., Valencia, B. T., Printz, D., & Hooper, L. M. (2021). Racial and
language microaggressions in the school ecology. Perspectives on Psychological Science,
16(5), 1075-1098.
Stembridge, A. (2019). Culturally responsive education in the classroom: An equity framework
for pedagogy. Routledge.
Stiles, K. E., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (1998). Professional development strategies. The Science
Teacher, 65(6), 46.
187

Stoiber, K. C., & Gettinger, M. (2016). Multi-tiered systems of support and evidence-based
practices. In Handbook of response to intervention (pp. 121-141). Springer, Boston, MA.
Sukumar, P.T. & Metoyer, R. (2019). Replication and transparency of qualitative research from a
constructivist perspective.
Taylor, T. A. (2021). Yes, There is Racism in International Schools: A Discussion about the
Black Experience in American International Schools. Annual Review of Comparative and
International Education 2020.
Thoonen, E. E. J., Sleegers, P. J. C., Oort, F. J., Peetsma, T. T. D., & Geijsel, F. P. (2011). How
to improve teaching practices: The role of teacher motivation, organizational factors, and
leadership practices. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47, 496–
536.10.1177/0013161X11400185.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct.
Teaching and teacher education, 17(7), 783-805.
Tuck, E., & Gaztambide-Fernández, R. A. (2013). Curriculum, replacement, and settler futurity.
Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 29(1).
US Department of State. (2021). 2021-2022 World Wide Fact Sheet Now Available. Office of
Overseas Schools. https://www.state.gov/2021_worldwide_fact_sheet.
Vaught, S. E., Castagno, A. E. (2008). “I don’t think I’m a racist”: Critical race theory, teacher
attitudes, and structural racism. Race Ethnicity and Education 11(2): 95–113.
Villegas, A. M., & Lucas, T. (2002). Preparing culturally responsive teachers: Rethinking the
curriculum. Journal of teacher education, 53(1), 20-32.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
188

Walle, A. (2010). Indigenous People and Human Resource Management. International Journal
of Business Anthropology, 1(1).
Walpole, S. (2021). Curriculum and Coaching: Maximizing our Investments in Teaching. The
Reading Teacher, 75(2), 189-196.
Watkins, W. H. (2001). The White architects of Black education: Ideology and power in
America, 1865-1954. Teachers College Press.
Watson, V. (2015, December 7). “The Black Sonrise” [Video]. Youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yzXd4_C328
Watts, G. D., & Castle, S. (1993). The time dilemma in school restructuring. Phi Delta Kappan,
75(4), 306-310.
Weale, S. (2022, March 7). Ofsted downgrades American School in London over focus on social
justice. The Guardian. Retrieved May 15, 2022, from
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2022/mar/07/ofsted-downgrades-
americanschool-in-london-over-focus-on-social-justice
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2007). Schooling by design: Mission, action, and achievement.
ASCD.
Windust, W. (2022). Critical Hope for Culturally Responsive Education: An Improvement
Study. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Southern California.
Wlodkowski, R. J., & Ginsberg, M. B. (1995). A framework for culturally responsive teaching.
Educational Leadership, 53(1), 17-21.
Wlodkowski, R. J. (2003). Fostering motivation in professional development programs. New
directions for adult and continuing education, 2003(98), 39-48.
Wlodkowski, R. J., & Ginsberg, M. B. (2017). Enhancing adult motivation to learn: A
comprehensive guide for teaching all adults. John Wiley & Sons.
189

Wong-Lo, M., & Bai, H. (2013). Recommended Practices: Cultivating a Culturally Responsive
Learning Environment for Chinese Immigrants and Chinese American Students.
Preventing School Failure, 57(1), 17–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2013.731272
Woodson, C. G. (2006). The mis-education of the Negro. Book Tree. (Original work
published
1933)
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage
publications.
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.
Yosso, T. J. (2014). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. In Critical race theory in education (pp. 181-204). Routledge.
Young, E. (2010). Challenges to Conceptualizing and Actualizing Culturally Relevant
Pedagogy:
How Viable Is the Theory in Classroom Practice? Journal of Teacher Education, 61(3),
248–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248710935977
Zwozdiak-Myers, P. (2012). The Teacher's Reflective Practice Handbook: How to Engage
Effectively in Professional Development and Build a Portfolio of Practice. Routledge

Appendix A: Interview Protocols

Classroom & Spanish Educators
Thank you for taking the time for this interview. By 2027, SAS expects all educators to
use culturally responsive practices in their classrooms. The purpose of this interview is to learn
about where you are in your understanding and what you think will help or hinder your ability to
implement culturally responsive practices in your day-to-day practice and educational
environment.
190

There are no right or wrong answers. I would like you to feel comfortable sharing your
knowledge, perceptions, and opinions and saying what you really think and feel. My goal is to
understand where we are as a community so that I can make recommendations to better support
educators. If it’s okay with you, I will be recording our conversation. I want to be attentive to our
conversation but make sure I capture your perspectives accurately. Your information will be
deidentified. This means that while the answers will be collated from all interviews and shared,
your responses will be confidential, and your identity will remain anonymous.
Questions
1. What might it mean to be a culturally responsive educator? For example, What do
culturally responsive educators teach? How do culturally responsive educators assess
students?
2. How do you feel about implementing culturally responsive practices (CRP)?
3. How do you feel about your ability to enact culturally responsive practices?
a. How do you feel about your ability to enact culturally responsive curriculum
practices?
b. How do you feel about your ability to enact culturally responsive teaching
practices?
c. How do you feel about your ability to enact culturally responsive assessment
practices?
4. Could you describe step-by-step:
a. How would you design a culturally responsive lesson for students?
b. How would you teach a culturally responsive lesson?
c. How would you assess students’ learning in culturally responsive ways?
5. What resources might an educator need to enact culturally responsive practices at SAS?
a. How well-resourced do you think SAS currently is in supporting the
implementation of culturally responsive practices?
6. What systems are in place/might need to be put into place to enact culturally responsive
practices at SAS?
7. How effective are the systems currently in place at SAS in supporting the implementation
of culturally responsive practices?
8. What values might a school need to have in order to enact culturally responsive
practices?
191

a. How aligned are SAS’s values to the ones you just mentioned?
9. What policies might educators need to implement/adopt for SAS to live out these values?
10. How might racism influence how educators at our school teach, if at all?
If we have time:
11. How might white privilege influence how educators at our school teach, if at all?
12. Are there any questions you wish I would have asked?
Closing
I’ll be analyzing the information from this and other interviews to look for common
themes about where we are in our journey to becoming more culturally responsive to the needs
of our learners. I will make sure to share this information with you and may ask for a follow-
up interview if needed. Thank you so much for sharing your perceptions and your time. School
Leaders
Thank you for taking the time for this interview. By 2027, SAS expects all educators to
use the practices of culturally responsive pedagogy in their classrooms. As educational leaders
and coaches, we play a critical role in fostering teaching and learning environments that
encourage culturally responsive teaching. The purpose of this interview is to learn about where
you are in your understanding, and what you think will help or hinder your ability to develop
educators’ capacity to teach in culturally responsive ways.
There are no right or wrong answers. I would like you to feel comfortable sharing your
knowledge, perceptions, and opinions and saying what you really think and feel. My goal is to
understand where we are as a community so that I can make recommendations to better support
educational leaders and coaches. If it’s okay with you, I will be recording our conversation. I
want to be attentive to our conversation, but make sure I capture your perspectives accurately.
Your information will be de-identified. This means that while the answers will be collated from
all interviews and shared, your responses will be confidential and your identity will remain
anonymous.
Questions
1. What might it mean to be a “culturally responsive” educator?
2. Could you describe step-by-step:
a. How a classroom educator might design a culturally responsive lesson for students?
b. How a classroom educator might teach a culturally responsive lesson?
192

c. How a classroom educator might assess students’ learning in culturally responsive
ways?
3. How do you feel about supporting classroom educators’ capacity to implement culturally
responsive practices?
a. How do you feel about your ability to support classroom educators in designing a
culturally responsive curriculum?
b. How do you feel about your ability to support classroom educators teaching in
culturally responsive ways?
c. How do you feel about your ability to support classroom educators in assessing
students in culturally responsive ways?
4. What resources might school leaders need to support educators’ capacity to implement
culturally responsive practices at SAS?
5. How well-resourced do you think SAS currently is in supporting the implementation of
culturally responsive practices?
6. What values might SAS need to have in order to enact culturally responsive practices at our
school?
7. How aligned are SAS’s values to the ones you just mentioned?
8. How might racism influence how school leaders at our school lead, if at all?
9. Is there anything else you would like to share?
Closing
I’ll be analyzing the information from this and other interviews to look for common themes
about where we are in our journey to becoming more culturally responsive to the needs of our
learners. I will make sure to share this information with you and may ask for a follow-up
interview if needed. Thank you so much for sharing your perceptions and your time.

193

Appendix B: Observation Protocols
The purpose of the observation is to provide evidence that during meetings and in classrooms:
• Use knowledge, facts, information, and terminology related to culturally responsive
practices.
• Exhibit behavioral evidence of educators’ motivation related to culturally responsive
practices.
• Demonstrate understanding of the organizational components; understand and see the
alignment of resources, policies, processes, and procedures with the ANCS’ culture.

Culturally Responsive Classroom Educator Observation Protocol Use this
protocol to observe culturally responsive classroom educators in action. The researcher will
look for evidence of educators’ knowledge and motivation to enact culturally responsive
practices and the organizational influences that may impact practice through the following
four critical behaviors:
1. Establishes and supports a culturally responsive environment that is inclusive of
community members, cultural artifacts, languages, and behaviors.
2. Creates and uses culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices
to facilitate educators’ understanding of their identity, their community, and the world.
3. Actively participates in intellectually engaging, culturally responsive professional
development that deepens their sociopolitical consciousness and leads them to identify,
analyze, and solve real-world problems.
4. Engages in frequent critical self-reflection to learn from the knowledge, beliefs, values,
assumptions, biases, and experiences that contribute to perspectives of their identity,
community members, and the world
Observer:
Date of Observation:
Educator Observed (assigned number):
194

Description of People Present (ex: number of students in a classroom)
Location of Observation:
• Classroom
• Meeting
• Professional Development
• Professional Learning Community
• Transitional Space
Start Time of Observation:

End Time of Observation: Total Time of Observation:

Effective educators establish and support a culturally responsive environment that is inclusive
of community members, cultural artifacts, languages, and behaviors.
K,M,O Purpose Possible Observation Items
Observation
Notes
K 1. The classroom educator
communicates high
expectations for all students.
• Creates opportunities for students to
show that they are invested in their
own and others’ learning by
working to achieve goals (e.g.,
individually, collaboratively).
• Establishes systems of access so
that all students receive the same
content and learning experiences as
their classmates.
• Ensures that students are aware of
and use the available supports,
learning scaffolds, and resources
and how to use them when
encountering a complex task.
• Promotes an inclusive, safe, and
anxiety-free learning environment
for students of all identity groups.

195

K 2. The classroom educator
maintains positive
perspectives about and
relationships with the
families of students from all
identity groups.
•
•
Seeks to mitigate assumptions and
biases (e.g., when discussing
students’ families). Encourages
parents and community members
to participate in student learning
experiences (e.g., learning
celebrations, panel discussions,
exhibitions).

• Acknowledges parents’ and
community members’ funds of
knowledge and encourages them to
share their experiences and
expertise with students.

• Reaches out to build parental social
capital networks to ensure
inclusivity and access to resources.

K 3. The classroom educator
knows and values all of the
students in their
classroom(s).
•
•
Welcomes students by name
(correctly pronounced) as they
enter the learning space.
Differentiates patterns of
interaction to ensure cultural
congruence with students’ cultural
norms and possible interpretations
(e.g., eye contact, proximity, direct
interactive style).

• Discretely communicates with
individual students (e.g., giving
praise, offering assistance,
addressing behavior).

K 4. The classroom educator
cultivates a caring learning
community that is
studentcentered and
inclusive of all learners.
•
•
Remains supportive, caring, and
flexible in all interactions with
students, not sarcastic,
authoritarian, and/or rigid.
Engages students in ways that
neither privileges nor excludes
groups, identities, or experiences.

• Creates a classroom community
that is safe and responsive to the

196

needs of all students, never posing a
risk to their dignity and selfworth.

• Leverages power structures to give
students voice and choice in what
and how they learn.

• Partners with students to organize
classroom structure around
communal responsibility rather than
compliance and punishment.

• Incorporates and practices healing
practices (e.g., lessons that support
social and emotional learning,
restorative circles, mindfulness,
yoga, art therapy, and affinity
groups).

K 5. The classroom educator
creates an atmosphere that
engenders culturally
respectful learning
experiences.
•
•
Encourages connection and
collaboration through intentional
classroom design (e.g., seating
options, displays, walkways).
Curates and displays positive and
affirming messages and images
about students’ cultures and
intersecting identities (e.g., books,
posters, quotes).

Educators with knowledge of how to create and use culturally responsive curriculum,
instruction, and assessment practices will facilitate learners’ understanding of their identity,
their community, and the world.
K,M,O Purpose Possible Observation Items
Observation
Notes
K
1. The classroom educator
understands the
sociopolitical relationship
between oppression and
advantage underpinning
• Uses the understanding of the
interrelationship of oppression/
advantage and educational practices
while planning curriculum,
instruction, and assessment.

197

culturally responsive
practices.
• Democratizes learning to ensure a
culture of participation

K
M
2. The classroom educator
utilizes the components of
culturally responsive
practices to ensure student
learning.
•
•
Enacts and continues to use
culturally responsive curriculum,
instruction, and assessment practices.
Develops and uses culturally
responsive pedagogies as a means
for engaging and deepening student
learning by recognizing students’
experiences (funds of knowledge) as
a foundation on which to build
knowledge.

• Encourages students to use their
linguistic abilities through
translanguaging to connect to and
validate their funds of knowledge.

• Seeks to develop students’ language
and cultural knowledge to affirm
their membership in all identity
groups.

• Collaborates with students in the
education-related development
process (e.g., content, instructional
activities, the learning environment,
assessment practices).

• Ensures that the curricular content is
accurate, with no stereotypes or bias
(such as by omission, generalization,
or imbalance).

• Connects students’ interests to a
joyful curriculum, alongside antibias,
anti-racist practices.

• Cultivates diversity as a resource for
culturally responsive practices,
including the regular use of materials
and teaching activities from all

198

identity groups along with high
expectations for all students.

• Integrates learning goals and
outcomes with quality, culturally
sustaining instructional strategies and
materials.

• Promotes the development, growth,
and quality of life for students by
incorporating a humanizing
assessment ecology (e.g.,
competency-based systems of
holistic assessment based in
valueadded rather than deficit
perspectives).

• Provides opportunities for students to
show their learning in nontraditional
ways that honor and affirm student
identity.

For educators who actively participate in intellectually engaging, culturally responsive
professional development, the results are twofold as they deepen sociopolitical consciousness
and seek to apply teaching and learning beyond the confines of school to identify, analyze, and
solve real-world problems.
K,M,O Purpose Possible Observation Items
Observation
Notes
M 1. The classroom
educator seeks
professional development
to learn about and
implement culturally
responsive practices.
• Gives verbal/nonverbal communication
cues that may show interest when
culturally responsive practices are
introduced and discussed.
• Seeks ongoing training in culturally
responsive methodologies and
practices (e.g., student-directed
learning, restorative circles, anti-bias,
anti-racist (ABAR) teaching practices,
building authentic relationships with
students and families,
performancebased assessments).

199

K
2. The classroom
educator uses their
learning from
professional
development to enact and
improve their culturally
responsive practices.
•
•
Uses student data to identify disparities
and plan to redress inequities. Disrupts
and replaces educational practices and
norms that disadvantage certain
identity groups (e.g., identity markers
assigned by race, ethnicity, ability,
socioeconomic status, sexual
orientation, and gender).

O 3. The classroom
educator receives
organizational resources
through professional
development to enhance
culturally responsive
learning.
•
•
•
Time: How much time is spent on
learning about culturally responsive
practices?
Finances: How much money is
allocated towards PD centered on
culturally responsive learning? Staff:
How many staff members are tasked
with enhancing culturally responsive
learning?

• Resources

Educators who engage in frequent critical self-reflection introspectively learn from the
knowledge, beliefs, values, assumptions, biases, and experiences that contribute to
perspectives of their identity, community members, and the world.
K,M,O Purpose Possible Observation Items
Observation
Notes
K
M
The classroom educator
knows how to critically
self-reflect and is
motivated to work on
their cultural
competency to improve
their culturally
responsive practices.
• Uses self-reflection tools to understand
how lived experiences and membership
in various identity groups affects their
beliefs and actions (e.g., learning
journals, diaries, contemplative walks,
reading responses, guided reflections,
portfolios).
• Publicly self-reflects on how their own
knowledge, beliefs, values,
assumptions, biases, and experiences
affect how they see and understand the
world.

200

•

Shows an awarenes s of how the
membership in their identity groups
affects the interactions with people in
different groups (e.g., how identity
shapes interactions with students,
colleagues, parents, and community
members).
Observational Analysis

Critical Behavior 1 : Critical Behavior 2 : Critical Behavior 3 : Critical Behavior 4:

201

Culturally Responsive School Leader (Observation Protocol)
This protocol seeks to observe school leaders developing culturally responsive teachers. The
researcher will observe and look for evidence of school leaders exhibiting the following four
critical behaviors:

1. Establishes and supports a culturally responsive environment that is inclusive of
community members, cultural artifacts, languages, and behaviors
2. Creates and uses culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices
to facilitate educators’ understanding of their identity, their community, and the world
3. Actively participates in intellectually engaging, culturally responsive professional
development that deepens their sociopolitical consciousness and leads them to identify,
analyze, and solve real-world problems
4. Engages in frequent critical self-reflection to learn from the knowledge, beliefs, values,
assumptions, biases, and experiences that contribute to perspectives of their identity,
community members, and the world

As school leaders play a number of roles in schools (Killion & Harrison, 2017), they exhibit
these critical behaviors in a variety of ways in order to develop culturally responsive teachers.
Based on the many and varied roles of school leaders, a list of indicators will be used to look
for evidence of these critical behaviors.

These indicators are inexplicably linked to all four critical behaviors. Using these indicators,
the researcher will observe and take notes on school leaders’ procedural knowledge (they can
do it), interest (they believe this is worthwhile), self-efficacy (they are confident they can do
it), and emotional affect (facial expressions and body language). Following the observation,
observation notes are interpreted through the lens of the four critical behaviors of culturally
responsive school leaders.
Observer (e.g., name and behavior):
Date of Observation:
202

Location of Observation:
• Classroom
• Meeting
• Professional Development
• Professional Learning Community
• Transitional Space

Description of Physical Setting (e.g., visible resources, policies, procedures, processes, values,
beliefs, attitudes, and other concrete manifestations that appear within observed activity
setting):
Description of People Present ( e.g., number of educators present in a meeting):
Start Time of Observation:
End Time of
Observation:
Total Time of
Observation:
Role Purpose Observational Items Observation Notes
203

Culturally
Responsive
Resource
Provider
To expand educators’ use
of resources supporting
culturally responsive
pedagogy.
• Assists educators in
locating culturally
responsive
information,
materials, examples
of promising
practices, and
assessments
• Offers and
recommends
culturally responsive
resource sites
• Updates staff about
current culturally
responsive practices
• Finds alternative
teaching materials
for culturally
responsive
instruction
Knowledge (K):

Interest (I):

Self-efficacy (S):

Emotional Affect (E):

Culturally
Responsive
Data Coach
To disaggregate and
analyze data by student
subgroups (i.e., those
assigned by race, ethnicity,
ability, socioeconomic
status, sexual orientation,
and gender) to uncover
potential disparities at the
classroom and school level.
• Identifies
schoolwide and
grade-level
department trends
by student
subgroups to
uncover potential
disparities
K:

I:

S:

E:

• Supports educators
using data to
implement culturally
responsive
instruction

204

• Facilitates data
conversations that
analyze learning by
student subgroups
and identify
culturally responsive
interventions and
extensions

Culturally
Responsive
Instructional
Specialist
To align culturally
responsive instruction with
curriculum, meeting the
needs of culturally diverse
students.
•
•
•
Assists in the
selection and
implementation of
culturally responsive
instructional
strategies
Assists educators in
the implementation
of culturally
responsive teaching
strategies Works
with individual and
groups of educators
to reflect on the PLC
Cycle of Inquiry
through the lens of
culturally responsive
pedagogy
K:

I:

S:

E:
Culturally
Responsive
Curriculum
Specialist
To ensure implementation
of a culturally responsive
curriculum.
•
•
Deepens educators’
knowledge of
multicultural
content Aligns
written, taught, and
assessed
K:

I:

S:

205

•
curriculum
grounded in
culturally responsive
pedagogy Integrates
multicultural
content across
disciplines to
provide additional
opportunities for
students to practice
and apply their
learning relevant to
their lives
E:
Culturally
Responsive
Classroom
Supporter
To increase the quality and
effectiveness of culturally
responsive teaching in the
classroom.
•
•
•
Models and
demonstrates
culturally responsive
instructional
strategies
Co-plans and/or
coteaches culturally
responsive lessons
Observes and gives
feedback to
educators on
culturally responsive
practices
K:

I:

S:

E:
206

Culturally
Responsive
Learning
Facilitator
To design culturally
responsive professional
learning opportunities for
educators.
•
•
•
Coordinates
culturally responsive
learning
opportunities for
educators
Designs and delivers
culturally responsive
PD
Ensures that the
design PD models
culturally
responsiveness
K:

I:

S:

E:

according to the needs,
interests, and cultures of
participating educators

207

Culturally
Responsive
Mentor
To increase the
culturally responsive
instructional skills of
educators and support
schoolwide induction of
culturally responsive
practices.
•
•
•
•
Mentors educators to be
culturally responsive and
supports the work of
developing culturally
responsive coaches
Demonstrates/coteaches
lessons and/or co-plans
instructional strategies that
are culturally responsive
Assists with “newto-
culturallyresponsiveteaching”
questions, issues, and
dilemmas
Assists with implementing
culturally responsive positive
behavioral interventions and
supports
K:

I:

S:

E:
Culturally
Responsive
School
Leader
To work collaboratively
(with formal and
informal leaders) to
plan, implement, and
assess culturally
responsive school
initiatives to ensure
alignment and focus on
intended results.
•
•
Centers a culturally
responsive lens when
facilitating/serving on
leadership teams within the
school Ensures coaches
and/or resource
K:

I:

S:

E:

208

personnel views the
implementation of
culturally responsive
practices as one of
their core
responsibilities

• Serves as another set
of eyes for school
leaders embarking on
culturally responsive
change initiatives

• Facilitates alignment
among individual
educator goals and
school goals related
to culturally
responsive pedagogy

Culturally
Responsive
Agent Of
Change
To create disequilibrium
with the current state as an
impetus to explore
culturally responsive
alternatives to current
practice.
•
•
•
•
Introduces culturally
responsive
alternatives or
refinements
Makes observations
about where current
practices may not be
aligned with
culturally responsive
pedagogy
Asks hard questions
about current
practices and their
alignment to
culturally responsive
pedagogy
Engages educators
in critical reflection
about practices not
aligned to culturally
K:

I:

S:

E:
209

responsive
pedagogy

Culturally
Responsive
Learner
To model continuous
learning in order to keep
current, be a thought leader
in the school, and model
reflecting on culturally
responsive practices.
• Models attitudes
and behaviors
educators need to
successfully
implement
culturally
responsive practices
• Models applications
of culturally
responsive learning
• Proactively
advocates for their
own culturally
responsive learning
opportunities
• Creates their own
culturally
responsive learning
communities

K:

I:

S:

E:
Observational Analysis

Critical Behavior 1:

Critical Behavior 2:

Critical Behavior 3:

Critical Behavior 4:

210

Appendix C: Document Analysis Protocols
The analysis of documents will not only seek to determine the presence of culturally
responsive practices at ANCS but also the presence of culturally unresponsive practices reflected
in ANCS’s knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences. That is, relevant documents
seek to understand both the KMO influences and barriers pertaining to (1) factual, conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive knowledge of culturally responsive practices, (2) motivational
factors of interest, emotion, and self-efficacy driving the enactment of culturally responsive
practices, and (3) resources, policies, processes, procedures, cultural models, and cultural
settings supporting the enactment of culturally responsive practices. A comprehensive array of
documents will be collected and then analyzed to gain a deeper understanding of KMO factors
influencing the enactment of culturally responsive practices.
Culturally Responsive Material (Document Analysis Protocol)
This protocol seeks to analyze materials for cultural responsiveness. The researcher will look
for documentary and archival evidence of teacher educators exhibiting the following four
critical behaviors:

1. Establishes and supports a culturally responsive environment that is inclusive of
community members, cultural artifacts, languages, and behaviors
2. Creates and uses culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices
to facilitate educators’ understanding of their identity, their community, and the world
3. Actively participates in intellectually engaging, culturally responsive professional
development that deepens their sociopolitical consciousness and leads them to identify,
analyze, and solve real-world problems
4. Engages in frequent critical self-reflection to learn from the knowledge, beliefs, values,
assumptions, biases, and experiences that contribute to perspectives of their identity,
community members, and the world

A list of indicators of critical behaviors will be used to look for documentary evidence of
cultural responsiveness.

These indicators are inexplicably linked to all four critical behaviors. Using these indicators,
the researcher will collect documents and artifacts related to knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences. Following the collection of these documents and artifacts, they

will be interpreted through the lens of the four critical behaviors of culturally responsive
classroom educators.
Documenter:
211

Name of Document:
Source of Document:
Description of Documentary Context (e.g., resource, policy, procedure, process, value
statement, institutional belief, attitudinal survey, and other cultural models it seeks to reflect in
the cultural setting):
Date Requested:
Date Received:
Document Purpose Indicators Documentary
Notes
Culturally
Responsive
Resources
To analyze resources
supporting culturally
responsive pedagogy.
• Provides educators with
culturally responsive
information, materials,
examples of promising
practices, and assessments
• Offers and recommends
culturally responsive
resource sites
• Updates staff about current
culturally responsive
practices
• Finds alternative teaching
materials for culturally
responsive instruction
Knowledge
(K):

Interest (I):

Self-efficacy
(S):

Emotional
Affect (E):

Resource (R):

Policy,
Process,
Procedure (P):

Cultural
Model (CM):

Cultural
Setting (CS):

212

Culturally
Responsive
Data
To disaggregate and
analyze data by student
subgroups (i.e., those
assigned by race,
ethnicity, ability,
socioeconomic status,
sexual orientation, and
gender) to uncover
potential disparities at the
classroom and school
level.
•
•
•
Identifies schoolwide and
grade-level department
trends by student
subgroups to uncover
potential disparities
Supports educators using
data to implement
culturally responsive
instruction Facilitates
data
conversations that analyze
learning by student
subgroups and identify
culturally responsive
interventions and
extensions
K:

I:

S:

E:

R:

P:

CM:

CS:
Culturally
Responsive
Instructional
Strategies
To align culturally
responsive instruction
with curriculum meeting
the needs of culturally
diverse students.
•
•
•
Assists in the selection and
implementation of
culturally responsive
instructional strategies
Assists educators in the
implementation of
culturally responsive
teaching strategies
Reflects on the PLC Cycle
of Inquiry through the lens
of culturally responsive
pedagogy
K:

I:

S:

E:

R:

P:

CM:

CS:
213

Curriculum
Materials
To ensure implementation
of a culturally responsive
curriculum.
•
•
•
Deepens educators’
knowledge of multicultural
content
Aligns written, taught, and
assessed curriculum
grounded in culturally
responsive pedagogy
Integrates multicultural
content across disciplines
to provide additional
opportunities for students
to practice and apply their
K:

I:

S:

E:

R:

P:

CM:

learning relevant to their
lives

CS:
Culturally
Responsive
Classroom
Supports
To increase the quality
and effectiveness of
culturally responsive
teaching in the classroom.
•
•
•
Provides models and
demonstrations of
culturally responsive
instructional strategies
Provides culturally
responsive plans and/or
lessons
Provides observations and
feedback notes to educators
on culturally responsive
practices
K:

I:

S:

E:

R:

P:

CM:

CS:
214

Culturally
Responsive
Learning Plans
To design culturally
responsive professional
learning opportunities for
educators.
•
•
•
Explains how culturally
responsive learning
opportunities are or will be
coordinated for educators
Provides instructional
designs of culturally
responsive PD
Shows how the design PD
models culturally
responsiveness according
to the needs, interests, and
cultures of participating
educators
K:

I:

S:

E:

R:

P:

CM:

CS:
Culturally
Responsive
Mentor Texts
To increase the culturally
responsive instructional
skills of educators and
support schoolwide
induction of culturally
responsive practices.
•
•
Provides mentor texts
showing how educators can
be culturally responsive
and how to develop
culturally responsive
coaches
Provides examples of
lessons and/or instructional
strategies that are culturally
responsive
K:

I:

S:

E:

R:

P:

• Addresses “new-to-
• culturally-
responsiveteaching”
questions, issues,
and dilemmas Provides
a model for
implementing culturally
responsive positive
behavioral interventions
and supports
CM:

CS:
215

Culturally
Responsive
Leadership
To work collaboratively
(with formal and informal
leaders) to plan,
implement, and assess
culturally responsive
school initiatives to ensure
alignment and focus on
intended results.
•
•
•
•
Provides a set of culturally
leadership behaviors for
facilitating/serving on
leadership teams within the
school
Outlines how to ensure
coaches and/or resource
personnel view the
implementation of culturally
responsive practices as one
of their core responsibilities
Discusses how to build
partnerships with
stakeholders when
embarking on culturally
responsive change
initiatives
Aligns individual educator
goals and school goals
related to culturally
responsive pedagogy
K:

I:

S:

E:

R:

P:

CM:

CS:
Culturally
Responsive
Change
To create disequilibrium
with the current state as an
impetus to explore
culturally responsive
alternatives to current
practice.
•
•
•
Introduces culturally
responsive alternatives or
refinements
Makes observations about
where current practices may
not be aligned with
culturally responsive
pedagogy
Asks hard questions about
current practices and their
alignment with culturally
responsive pedagogy
K:

I:

S:

E:

R:

P:

CM:

• Critically reflects on
practices not aligned to
culturally responsive
pedagogy

CS:
216

Culturally
Responsive
Learning
To model continuous
learning in order to keep
current, be a thought leader
in the school, and model
reflecting on culturally
responsive practices.
• Outlines attitudes and
behaviors educators need to
successfully implement
culturally responsive
practices
• Outlines potential
applications of culturally
responsive learning
• Proactively advocates for
culturally responsive
learning opportunities
• Discusses and/or provides a
framework for creating own
culturally responsive
learning communities
K:

I:

S:

E:

R:

P:

CM:

CS:
Document Analysis

Critical Behavior 1: Critical Behavior 2:

Critical Behavior 3:

Critical Behavior 4:

Appendix D: Informed Consent/Information Sheet
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Pkwy, Los Angeles, CA, 90089

Culturally Leadership and Teaching: A Gap Analysis
You are invited to participate in a research study. Research studies include only people who
voluntarily choose to take part. This document explains information about this study. You should
ask questions about anything that is unclear to you.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
217

This study aims to examine the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that prevent
ANCS educators from bridging the gap between the theory and practice of culturally responsive
pedagogy.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to take part in an interview or
observation.

CONFIDENTIALITY
There will be no identifiable information obtained in connection with this study. Your name,
address or other identifiable information will not be collected.

Required language:
The members of the research team, the funding agency, and the University of Southern
California’s Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews
and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed at conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
Darnell Fine - darnellf@usc.edu
Monica Gonzalez - Szakallgonzalez@gmail.com or monicabg@usc.edu
Wendy Windust - wsnell@usc.edu

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los
Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu

Appendix E: Recruitment Email
Dear Colleagues,
Darnell Fine, Monica Gonzalez, and Wendy Windust are doctoral students at the
University of Southern California and would like to conduct a series of interviews with educators
who are interested in sharing how the school can best support educators in the implementation of
culturally responsive practices. The data gathered during each interview will provide data for our
qualitative case study, seeking input to help educators and improve ANCS’s current status with
218

cultural responsiveness. If you are willing to participate in this study, please indicate below by
________________. Participation is completely voluntary. If you are willing to participate, one
of us will reach out to you with more information next week. If you are not interested in
participating, you may delete this email now. Each interview will last between 30 and 60 minutes
and will take place during your planning time.

Appendix F: Immediate Evaluation Tool
Anonymous Surveys to Give at the End of Each Session

Professional Development Date: Topic:
Directions: Thank you for your engagement in today’s professional development. To help
ensure the quality of future professional learning experiences, please respond to the following
items. There is space for additional feedback or topic suggestions for future professional
development at the conclusion of the survey items.

1. How important do you believe this session is to:

1. What you teach learners 1 2 3 4
2. How you teach learners 1 2 3 4
3. How you assess learning 1 2 3 4
4. How your PLC responds when individuals are not learning 1 2 3 4

2. Session Feedback:

219

1. I liked my session. 1 2 3 4
2. My time was well spent. 1 2 3 4
3. The content was useful and made sense. 1 2 3 4
4. I acquired knowledge and skills relevant to my work. 1 2 3 4
5. What I have learned and/or reflected on will positively impact
learning outcomes, whether students’ or adults’.
1 2 3 4
6. What I have learned and/or reflected on will positively impact my
work with colleagues.
1 2 3 4

3. Anything else you want to share?

220

Appendix G: Delayed Evaluation Tool
Anonymous Surveys to Give Two Weeks After Each Session

Date: Topic:
Directions: To gauge the effectiveness of the professional development from (date), please
respond to the following items. There is space for additional feedback or topic suggestions for
future professional development at the conclusion of the survey items.

1. As you reflect on your experience in the professional development session,
how important do you now believe this session was to:

1. What you teach learners 1 2 3 4
2. How you teach learners 1 2 3 4
3. How you assess learning 1 2 3 4
4. How your PLC responds when individuals are not learning 1 2 3 4

2. Professional Development Session Feedback:

1. I liked my session. 1 2 3 4
2. My time was well spent. 1 2 3 4
3. The content was useful and made sense. 1 2 3 4
4. I acquired knowledge and skills relevant to my work. 1 2 3 4
221

5. What I have learned and/or reflected on has and will continue to
positively impact learning outcomes, whether students’ or adults’.
1 2 3 4
6. What I have learned and/or reflected on has and will continue to
positively impact my work with colleagues.
1 2 3 4

3. Anything else you want to share?

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Critical hope for culturally responsive education: an improvement study

PDF

Critical hope for culturally responsive education: an improvement study

PDF

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

PDF

Teachers assumptions on the importance of executive function: a gap analysis evaluation study

PDF

The implementation of response to intervention: an adapted gap analysis

PDF

Implications of a tracked mathematics curriculum in middle school

PDF

Implementing Chinese-English dual language programs in international schools: a study for an international school in southeast Asia

PDF

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

PDF

The enactment of equitable mathematics teaching practices: an adapted gap analysis

PDF

Developing standards-based Chinese curricula in international schools: a gap analysis for Eagle American School

PDF

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

PDF

Employee standardization for interchangeability across states: an improvement study

PDF

The factors supporting or inhibiting Teachers of Color to accept and stay in an international school in Southeast Asia

PDF

Underrepresentation of African American faculty in higher education: an improvement model dissertation

PDF

A capstone gap analysis project of English learners' achievement at a suburban high schol: a focus on teacher collaboration and cultural competence

PDF

Preventing excessive force incidents by improving police training: an evaluation study of a use-of-force training program

PDF

The role of higher education in bridging workforce skills gaps: an evaluation study

PDF

An evaluation of the effective engagement of English-language students’ parents in UTK-8th grade schools

PDF

Supporting contingent faculty at Nina University: an evaluation study

PDF

Collaborative instructional practice for student achievement: an evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Gonzalez, Monica Beatriz (author)

Core Title Critical hope for culturally responsive education: an improvement study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Degree Conferral Date 2022-08

Publication Date 08/06/2022

Defense Date 05/21/2022

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

Tag culturally responsive education,culturally responsive teaching,Education,gap analysis,improvement Study,instructional coaching,international schools,OAI-PMH Harvest,professional development,professional learning communities

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Robles, Darline (committee chair), Picus, Lawrence (committee member), Yates, Kenneth (committee member)

Creator Email mgonzalez@sas.edu.sg,monicabg@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111376272

Unique identifier UC111376272

Legacy Identifier etd-GonzalezMo-11121

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Gonzalez, Monica Beatriz

Type texts

Source 20220808-usctheses-batch-972 (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