University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

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

(USC Thesis Other)

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

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Addressing the Education Debt: How Community College Educators Utilize Culturally
Relevant Pedagogy to Support Black and Latinx Student Success
by
Yessica M. De La Torre Roman

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

May 2022

© Copyright by Yessica M. De La Torre Roman 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Yessica M. De La Torre Roman certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Briana Hinga
Cynthia Olivo
Tracy Tambascia, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv
Abstract
Despite the growing research on practices that support student success, available data
demonstrate a continued education debt for Black and Latinx students. Culturally relevant
pedagogy (CRP) is a practice that can increase the academic success of students of color. This
study explored how Black and Latinx students experience CRP. The study was conducted at a
community college and collected information from both faculty and students to determine if
students’ experiences align with the practices utilized by faculty. The study was guided by CRP,
critical race theory, and critical pedagogy. This study found that CRP is used and experienced
more frequently through practices that do not center race.

v
Dedication
To my family who taught me the beauty of my cultura, to all the Puentistas and their families, to
all the Black and Brown students who strive to see themselves in their classroom, to all the first-
generation students taking on the unknown, and to all my ancestors and fellow educators that
paved the way for me—mil gracias.

vi
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank my family for supporting my education my entire life. You have
sacrificed so much for me to do well and enjoy my academic journey. Mom and dad, sin ustedes
no estuviera aquí. Jackie and Linda, I am sorry I have been absent and am ever grateful for your
support and encouragement despite that. I am so proud of you. Grama, gracias por siempre
apoyar me y por creer en mi. Rafa, thank you for being so patient, yet challenging me when I
needed it the most. A todos mis tías, tíos, primos, sobrinos, y familiares, gracias por siempre
echarme porras. Gracias Dios, por darme una familia tan buena, que nunca fallo en apoyar me.
Gracias por darme salud y fuerza para poder sacrificar y luchar por este estudio.
I would like to thank my teachers, professors, and mentors throughout the years. To my
third-grade teacher Miss Emi, you taught me that it is okay to be different and showed me that
there was nothing wrong with celebrating my culture in class. To my Puente teacher, Mrs. López
Mares, you inspired me to actually go to college and reminded me of the impact that a degree
could have on my future, my family, and my community. To Mrs. Dominguez, for always
challenging us to succeed, for coordinating such a powerful Puente program all these years, and
for reminding us to give back to our community. To the Forgues family for guiding me and so
many others through the field of education. To all my colleagues for providing me with
opportunities to develop and inspiring me in our work.
Last, but not least, I would like to thank my dissertation committee: Dr. Hinga, Dr. Olivo,
and Dr. Tambascia. You are an inspiration and in so many ways role models for me. I could not
have accomplished this without you. Dr. Hinga, thank you for inspiring and challenging my data
interest, and for reminding me of the importance that societal events have on academia. In your
class and throughout this process, you convinced me to dedicate my work to challenging inequity
vii
and structures that impede justice. Thank you for being such a powerful agent of change in a
most humble and clever way. Dr. Olivo, thank you for showing me that challenging oppressive
structures is our responsibility and possible only if we act on it. Your leadership has inspired me
and my career in so many ways. Thank you for paving the way and empowering me to do the
work that is needed, not wanted. Dr. Tambascia, you have been the most encouraging, patient,
and empowering chair that I could have asked for. I appreciate your time, endless validation, and
belief in me, despite what seemed like a black hole. I would be lost if it wasn’t for your support,
feedback, and understanding. Additionally, your work as a faculty and practitioner has moved
and reminded me of the impact that we can make when we do good work in multiple spaces. At
the same time, you have demonstrated to me that balance is possible. I am so fortunate to have
such inspiring women on my committee. Muchísimas gracias.

viii
Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ........................................................................................................................................ v
Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. xi
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
The Education Debt ............................................................................................................. 1
Intentional Practices for Success ......................................................................................... 3
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 4
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................ 5
Significance of the Study ..................................................................................................... 6
Limitations and Delimitations ............................................................................................. 7
Definition of Terms ............................................................................................................. 8
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 9
Chapter Two: Literature Review ................................................................................................... 10
Transfer and Graduation Rates .......................................................................................... 11
Campus Racial Climate ..................................................................................................... 18
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy ........................................................................................... 23
Community Colleges ......................................................................................................... 29
California Community Colleges ........................................................................................ 30
Theoretical Framework ..................................................................................................... 34
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 39
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 41
Research Design ................................................................................................................ 41
ix
Location of Study .............................................................................................................. 43
Population and Sample ...................................................................................................... 45
Instrumentation .................................................................................................................. 46
Data Collection .................................................................................................................. 47
Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 48
Trustworthiness and Ethics ................................................................................................ 50
Positionality and Role ........................................................................................................ 52
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 53
Chapter Four: Findings .................................................................................................................. 54
Participant Overview ......................................................................................................... 54
Survey: The Student Experience ....................................................................................... 57
Faculty Use of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy .................................................................. 67
Comparing the Intent and Impact ...................................................................................... 92
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 94
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations ......................................................................... 96
Discussion .......................................................................................................................... 97
Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 99
Implications for Research and Practice ........................................................................... 102
Limitations ....................................................................................................................... 104
Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 105
References ................................................................................................................................... 107
Appendix A: Survey Email Invitation ......................................................................................... 117
Appendix B: Interview Invitation Email ..................................................................................... 119
Appendix C: Informed Consent ................................................................................................... 120
Appendix D: Survey .................................................................................................................... 122
x
Appendix E: Student Survey Opportunity Drawing Notification ............................................... 131
Appendix F: Information Sheet ................................................................................................... 132
Appendix G: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 135

xi
List of Tables
Table 1: Survey: Student Participant Racial Background 55
Table 2: Survey: Student Participant Year in School 56
Table 3: Interviews: Faculty Participant Background 56
Table 4: Classroom Practices 61
Table 5: Learning Practices 63

xii
List of Figures
Figure 1: 6–Year Graduation Rate From Public 4–Year Institution for the 2012 Cohort 13
Figure 2: Theoretical Framework 35
Figure 3: Data Collection and Analysis Design 43
Figure 4: Student Sense of Belonging/Connectedness 58
Figure 5: Student Course Experience 59
Figure 6: Student Experience With Classroom Practices 62
Figure 7: Student Experiences With Learning Practices 64
Figure 8: Students Experience With Faculty 67

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
During my undergraduate years, I remember feeling proud and empowered because my
high school Puente cohort was the first in the program’s history to all graduate high school and
almost all enroll in 4-year institutions. As each year in college passed, I remember hearing of
cohort mates dropping out or deciding to take a break from college. Upon reaching my fourth
year, I realized I was one of about 10 Puentistas on track to graduate. Post-graduation, I learned
that many of my peers who stopped attending their 4-year institution enrolled in a community
college, and others who were enrolled in community college stopped attending. Of 28 brilliant
and determined Latinx scholars from my Puente high school class, only about one-third
graduated from a 4-year institution in 4 years, and a few more received a college degree within 6
years. This personal experience reflects the reality of national graduation rates for Black and
Latinx students in the United States.
The Education Debt
Education debt is a concept that incorporates historical, sociopolitical, economic, and
moral factors to help understand the disparities in success rates for students of color (Ladson-
Billings, 2006). The highest reported national 6-year graduation rate for public 4-year institutions
in the United States was for the 2012 cohort and was about 60% (National Center for Education
Statistics [NCES], 2019). Although the graduation rate is more than half, when one considers
how many students did not graduate within the 6 years and who those students are, the statistic
becomes more alarming. One-fourth of the students from the 2012 cohort who did not graduate
within 6 years were Black and Latinx students (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES],
2013). This number represents over half of Black students and about half of Latinx students who
enrolled in college across the nation in 2012 (NCES, 2019). In other words, about half of Black

2

and Latinx students that enrolled in public 4-year institutions in 2012 did not graduate within 6
years. Public 4-year institutions are not the only education system with concerning racial gaps in
student success measures such as graduation.
Public 2-year institutions exhibit a similar education debt for Black and Latinx students.
For the 2012 cohort, 33% of the nation’s postsecondary students enrolled in a public 2-year
institution, and after 6 years, less than 40% completed a degree, and only 8% completed a degree
at a 4-year institution (Shapiro, Dundar, Huie, Wakhungu, Bhimdiwala & Wilson, 2018).
Furthermore, about 50% of the 2012 cohort who started their higher education journey at a
public 2-year institution were no longer enrolled after 6 years (Shapiro, Dundar, Huie,
Wakhungu, Bhimdiwala & Wilson, 2018). These low 2-year institution completion rates are
concerning considering the larger populations of Black and Latinx students enrolled in
community colleges.
Community colleges across the United States enroll roughly 52% of all Latinx
undergraduate students and 44% of Black undergraduate students (American Association of
Community Colleges [AACC], 2020). From the 2012 cohort, 27.6% of Black students completed
a degree within 6 years of starting, about 5% of whom completed their degree at a 4-year
institution (Shapiro, Dundar, Huie, Wakhungu, Bhimdiwala & Wilson, 2018). For Latinx
students from the same 2012 cohort, 35.7% completed a degree within 6 years, about 6% of
whom completed their degree at a 4-year institution (Shapiro, Dundar, Huie, Wakhungu,
Bhimdiwala & Wilson, 2018). Considering degree attainment leads to life enhancements such as
higher pay and better health, addressing the low success rates in higher education is an urgent
need, particularly for historically marginalized and disenfranchised communities such as Black
and Latinx communities (Fletcher, 2015; Ladson-Billings, 2006).

3

Intentional Practices for Success
A multitude of research demonstrates that increasing success rates of students of color is
possible with intentional practices (Howard & Terry, 2011; Hausmann et al., 2007; Ladson-
Billings 1995; Oja, 2011; Steele & Aronson, 1995). The classroom environment is commonly
associated with student learning; however, engagement impacts student success in and out of the
classroom (Kuh, 1993). Although documentation of the impact that engagement has on student
success exists (Kuh, 1993), it is essential to note that engagement can look different for Black
and Latinx students. Campus climate issues can hinder classroom experiences for students of
color, especially when there is a lack of representation in educators and peers, a presence of
stereotypes and stereotype threat, and European-American-centered curriculum and experiences
(Quaye & Harper, 2014). Although engagement can positively impact student success, hostile
campus racial climates may impede student success, especially for students of color (Harper &
Hurtado, 2007; Hausmann et al., 2007; Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Oja, 2011). Despite barriers
students of color experience in their education, educators can foster environments that
intentionally support students of color. Pedagogical practices executed with cultural relevance,
equity in mind, and mindfulness of students’ identities have proven to impact student success,
especially for students of color (Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Ladson-Billings, 1995).
With over 20 years of research, culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) is widely known for
the impact it has on academic achievement and on the educational experience of students, in
particular for students of color (Altschul et al., 2008; Bowman 2010; Byrd, 2016; Cerezo &
McWhriter, 2012; Garcia & Okhidoi, 2015; Howard & Terry, 2011; Ladson-Billings, 1995;
Sealy-Ruiz, 2007; Stone & Stewart, 2016). Although most CRP research revolves around the K–
12 setting, a more petite body of research demonstrates that utilization of CRP in higher

4

education classrooms also impacts student success (Altschul et al., 2008; Garcia & Okhidoi,
2015). CRP provides a framework for educators to create educational experiences that best
support student success by calling educators to nurture an environment that develops students
academically, develops cultural competence, and develops critical consciousness in students
(Ladson Billings, 1995). To accomplish this, an educator must have an anti-deficit mindset and
practice critical consciousness (Johnson, 2019; Ladson Billings, 1995). Practicing critical
consciousness allows an educator to look beyond deficit perspectives and stereotypes associated
with Black and Latinx students, two common factors that contribute to a negative educational
experience for students of color (Quaye & Harper, 2014; Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Hausmann et
al., 2007; Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Oja, 2011). Despite available literature on factors that impact
student success, especially the success of students of color, low Black and Latinx student success
rates such as graduation and transfer continue to be a higher education issue.
Statement of the Problem
Available research and theoretical frameworks found to support student success have not
led to a substantial increase in Black and Latinx student success rates, particularly in the form of
graduation and transfer (NCES, 2019). Continuing to achieve the same graduation and transfer
rates is a higher education racial equity problem that needs a resolution. The problem of low
student success rates for Black and Latinx students is so widely researched, it has come to be
known by many names, including the education debt and education pipeline (Ladson-Billings,
2006; Solorzano, Villalpando, et al., 2005). Research on Black and Latinx student success has
produced tools and frameworks to assist educators in nurturing Black and Latinx student success
through engagement and interactions and the pedagogical practices utilized. Nevertheless, the
low graduation and transfer rates remain. Considering that pedagogical practices that support

5

Black and Latinx student success exist and contribute towards eliminating transfer and
graduation gaps, there is a need to understand how these pedagogical practices transpire and are
implemented for systemic change.
Although CRP utilization supports students' academic success (Byrd, 2016; Howard &
Terry, 2011; Garcia & Okhidoi, 2015; Stone & Stewart, 2016), there is no list of CRP practices
for educators to utilize (Ladson-Billings, 1995). CRP requires educators to exhibit behaviors that
demonstrate an understanding of theoretical concepts related to students of color and their
success (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Not having a physical list or example makes CRP challenging
to copy and mass-produce but is important for eliminating misuse of CRP (Ladson-Billings,
1995). Despite this, CRP does provide educators with necessary characteristics for appropriate
utilization, including conceptions held by the educator regarding knowledge, notions of self and
others, and establishing certain relationships between students and educators (Ladson-Billings,
1995). Examining how these characteristics appear in the higher education setting can help
educators understand how to utilize CRP in their work to best support Black and Latinx student
success in the community college setting.
Purpose of the Study
The study aimed at understanding how CRP is utilized to support Black and Latinx
student success in the community college. The study sought to understand how faculty utilize
CRP, if at all, to support Black and Latinx student success, the extent of its use, and the Black
and Latinx student experience with CRP. The study focused on faculty utilization of CRP in the
classroom in supporting students’ ability to transfer because of the future life implications that
academic success, such as transfer, holds and faculty’s direct role in student success. The study
also collected data from Black and Latinx students on their experience with CRP to understand if

6

students’ experiences align with the CRP practices utilized by faculty. Together, the information
informed the study’s research question: How does culturally relevant pedagogy manifest for
Black and Latinx students in California Community Colleges?
Significance of the Study
Findings from the study contribute to higher education literature around CRP and may
inform educators to support Black and Latinx student success better. Various educators may
benefit from the study’s findings, including individual faculty and staff, human resource and
development teams, and institutional leadership teams. Findings may provide educators with the
opportunity to understand how a well-studied pedagogical framework may be used and
experienced in the community college, an area of research where little is documented.
Community colleges are of crucial importance because of the large population of Black and
Latinx students they serve, on average enrolling half of the nation’s Black and Latinx
undergraduate students (AACC, 2020). With such a large population of Black and Latinx
students, community colleges can achieve a more significant impact on the success of these
populations. This study sought to understand how CRP exists in the community college, the
extent of its use, and students’ experience with CRP to further equip educators with the missing
information needed to increase student success rates.
Individual faculty members may benefit from this study because of the clarity the
findings bring regarding CRP use and students' experience with it. As CRP is more of a
theoretical framework than set practices, it is not limited to a particular setting nor a specific type
of educator (Ladson-Billings, 2014). Although it is not the study's goal to develop a list of CRP
practices for faculty to utilize as a checklist, it is the goal of the study to identify how CRP is
utilized and implemented in curricular settings. In identifying how CRP is utilized by faculty

7

participants in their pedagogical practices, faculty members may gain insights to improve their
current pedagogical practices.
Human resource and development teams and institutional leadership teams will benefit
from this study because findings will inform initiatives geared toward eliminating the education
debt for Black and Latinx students. In identifying practices that utilize CRP, the study unveils a
more in-depth understanding of CRP that was non-existent, including gaps in how CRP is and is
not used. Furthermore, by understanding the scope of CRP use and commonalities in its use
among faculty, institutions may improve development opportunities for faculty to expand their
understanding and use of CRP. Developing faculty to utilize culturally relevant practices
appropriately will enhance the campus climate because of CRPs anti-deficit mentality and
research-proven impact on student success (Bowman 2010; Ladson-Billings, 1995; Ladson-
Billings, 2006). This study informs institutional decisions related to faculty development and
diversity and inclusion-related initiatives that address campus climate and structural issues.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations exist in all research, and this study is no exception. One of the limitations of
the study is in the data collection design. Although a convergent parallel mixed method design
draws from the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative methods, the different sample sizes
and populations from each method is a common limitation (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Differing sample sizes are expected, considering qualitative and quantitative methods call for
different sample sizes (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Another limitation is the researcher’s
historical connection with CRP informed experiences, resulting in researcher bias. Efforts were
made to prevent researcher bias, including reflexivity (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Maxwell,
2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Bias may also exist in the data collected, considering that the

8

study asked participants to share information from their past experiences. Timing and current
societal events due to the COVID-19 pandemic may also impact participant responses. Efforts
were made to help participants focus on prior experiences. Last, another limitation is the study’s
focus on faculty despite the frameworks call for the student experience to be the primary focus of
the study.
Three delimitations were identified: Interviewing faculty only, focusing on transfer as a
success measure, and location of study. The study collected qualitative data through interviews
with faculty participants. Faculty were intentionally chosen because of their direct impact on
student academic success, particularly with the curricular focused environment found in the
community college. Although transferring is not the only form of academic success for
community college students and quality of life is not limited to higher pay and better health,
these values are the norm in the U.S. society and culture of higher education. Despite this, it is
important to acknowledge the power of counternarrative and additional forms of success outside
of transferring. This study did not intend to dismiss additional measures of success. Instead, it
sought to utilize the current standard of success and norms of higher education to answer the
research question to correspond with the social reality. Last, the study did not collect information
from other institutions. Information from other institutions could have provided a more
representative understanding of the true scope of CRP use in higher education. However, the
study’s focus on Black and Latinx students and considering that community colleges enroll the
largest populations of Black and Latinx students justified the decision to focus on community
colleges.
Definition of Terms
• Black students refers to students who identify as Black or African American.

9

• Culturally relevant pedagogy refers to the theoretical framework for practitioners to
develop teaching behaviors that nurture culturally competent, critically conscious, and
academically successful students (Ladson-Billings, 1995).
• Education debt refers to the combination of historical, sociopolitical, economic, and
moral factors that impact the disparities in success rates for students of color (Ladson-
Billings, 2006).
• Latinx students refers to students who identify as Hispanic, Latina/o/e/x, and or
Chicana/o/e/x.
• Practices refers to both curricular and co-curricular activities with students. This includes
classroom pedagogy, interactions with students in and out of class, advisement sessions,
and student service interactions.
Conclusion
Theories and research on developing and supporting students, understanding the impact
of environmental factors, and even research to help educators develop provide a wealth of
knowledge and tools to address the low graduation rates (Kuh 1993; Rendon, 1994; Ladson-
Billings, 1995). Despite well-documented literature demonstrating that student success rates can
be impacted, the success rates of Black and Latinx students essentially remain stagnant (NCES,
2019). The gap between research, practice, and results calls for understanding how educators
utilize theories and frameworks to support student success.

10

Chapter Two: Literature Review
Higher education seeks ways to best serve the growing and diverse population of students
and assist in their retention and graduation, particularly for students of color. Despite efforts to
increase retention and graduation rates, research shows that the graduation rates for Black and
Latinx students have remained substantially lower than their White peers and demonstrate a
prolonged increase throughout the years despite increasing enrollment (National Center for
Education Statistics [NCES], 2018). Transfer rates from community colleges also follow this
trend, with Black and Latinx students transferring to 4-year institutions at less than 40%
(Shapiro, Dundar, Huie, Wakhungu, Bhimdiwali, Nathan, & Hwang, 2018). This persistent
inequity is known by many names, most commonly by the achievement gap or opportunity gap.
Using an anti-deficit and critical race theory lens, the gap in this study will be referred to as the
education debt, which is any form of “historical, economic, sociopolitical, and moral
components” that contribute to the retention and graduation disparities for students of color
(Ladson-Billings, 2006, p. 3). By utilizing education debt to refer to the disparities in student
success, this study recognizes and puts the responsibility on the systemic factors that impact
student success instead of the students.
Despite the growing support for initiatives attempting to increase retention, transfer, and
gradation for students of color, research demonstrates persistent problems related to campus
climate (Barnett, 2011; Chen, 2017; Kishimoto, 2018; Museus, et al., 2017; Museus, et al., 2018;
Oja, 2011). Campus climate refers to how students, faculty, and staff experience race on their
campus, including learning environments such as classrooms. Research also demonstrates that
the use of CRP, both in curricular and co-curricular experiences, increases educational outcomes
for students of color (Byrd, 2016; Cerezo & McWhirter, 2012; Howard, 2001; Ladson-Billings,

11

1995). CRP is a theoretical perspective educators can use to make race salient in their pedagogy,
address systemic barriers impacting students, and adequately serve and develop students of color
(Ladson-Billings, 1995). This study focused on the use of culturally relevant pedagogy and how
Black and Latinx California Community Colleges students experience it.
One research question guides this study: How does culturally relevant pedagogy manifest
for Black and Latinx students in California Community Colleges? Five sections compose the
literature review in this chapter. The first reviews student success measures for public
institutions, such as transfer rates and factors impacting transfer rates. The second section
examines campus climate and its role in the experiences of Black and Latinx students. The third
section reviews CRP and its influence on student success, particularly for Black and Latinx
students. The fourth section overviews the Community College system, emphasizing California
Community Colleges. The fifth and final section in the literature review describes the theoretical
framework for this study.
Transfer and Graduation Rates
Graduation for public 4-year and transfer for public 2-year institutions in the United
States are markers of success that many institutions showcase to attract prospective students.
However, these traditional markers of success fail to reflect the complexity in closing the
education debt and the persistent challenges students of color face in navigating higher education
systems. Available data shows the 2012 cohort to have the highest national graduation rate for
public 4-year institutions in the United States, with 61.2% graduating in 6 years and 38.8%
graduating in 4 years (NCES, 2019). Only 30% of the 2012 cohort enrolled in public 2-year
institutions transferred to 4-year institutions within 6 years, and less than 45% of those students
who transferred to a 4-year institution received a bachelor’s degree (NCES, 2019). Despite an

12

increase in graduation and transfer over time, data demonstrates that less than half of first-time,
first-year students enrolled in 4-year institutions and just over half of transfer students achieve
their goal of graduating with a bachelor’s degree (NCES, 2019).
Graduation and transfer rates for Black and Latinx students are lower than the average
graduation and transfer rates. Of the first-time, first-year students from the 2012 cohort enrolled
in public 4-year institutions, 55.6% of Latinx students and 42.8% of Black students graduated in
6 years, and 28.9% of Latinx students and 20.6% of Black students graduated in 4 years (NCES,
2019). Using public 4-year graduation rates, the education debt for Black and Latinx students
ranges from about 5% to almost 20%, an evident concern for racial equity (NCES, 2019). As
seen in Figure 1, the same concern is found in transfer rates for Black and Latinx students from
the 2012 cohort, with only 6% Hispanic students and 5% of Black students who transferred to a
4-year institution graduating from a 4-year institution within 6 years (Shapiro, Dundar, Huie,
Wakhungu, Bhimdiwali, & Wilson, 2018).

13

Figure 1
6–Year Graduation Rate From Public 4–Year Institutions for the 2012 Cohort

Note. This line graph demonstrates Black and Latinx student graduation rates from a public 4-
year institution for transfer and non-transfer students in the 2012 cohort.

A Historical Perspective of Exclusion
Although examination of college graduation rates in the United States is a relatively new
concept that took flight in the 1990s as a result of the Student Right to Know Act (Cook &
Pullaro, 2010), the education debt between student racial identities is visible in all available data
and across every level of education (Barnes, 2018). The education debt owed to students of color
at all levels of education is no surprise based on the history of exclusion on which the education
system in the United States was founded. Understanding the history of education provides
context to the various forms of education debt for Black and Latinx students.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Non-Transfer Students Transfer Students
Black students Latinx Students National

14

The first schools and universities in the United States were created exclusively for White
students, and when Black students were allowed to attend schools, they were schools developed
primarily to maintain a servant class (Ladson-Billings, 2006; Mutakabbir, 2011). Schools for
Black students were not funded nor supported the way schools for White students were, typically
receiving old, handed-down books. In rural areas, schools were only open a few months of the
year because society prioritized keeping Black people working for most of the year (Ladson-
Billings, 2006). Even the earliest universities for people of color only offered practical training
for skilled labor instead of the traditional curriculum catered to upper class, White society
(Mutakabbir, 2011). In 1890, the second Morrill Act required states to allow people of color
access to higher education in order to receive funding for land grant institutions, which resulted
in separate but theoretically equal institutions that utilized segregation boundaries to enroll
students into particular institutions (Mutakabbir, 2011). Utilizing segregation boundaries to fund
schools resulted in low funding for schools with high populations of students of color and
continued high funding for schools with White students (Ladson-Billings, 2006). The intent to
exclude students of color from quality education is more evident in the Mendez v. Westminster
(1946) case, where the Mendez children were denied enrollment into their local school while
their lighter-skinned cousins were not denied (Ladson-Billings, 2006). It was not until 1954, with
the passing of Brown v. Board of Education, that the concept of equal education challenged
school segregation.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954) allowed students of color to attend the same schools
and classes as White students and intended to spark racial equity in education. Yet, the exclusion
of representation, lack of culturally relevant pedagogies, and lack of commitment to the success
of students of color remained and was reinforced with European-American-centered curriculum

15

and education structure (Bell, 2004; Ladson-Billings, 2006). Two primary issues in education
today are the lack of representation of educators of color and low funding for schools segregated
by zips codes that predominately serve students of color, remnants of discriminatory laws meant
to exclude students of color from quality education. Although the passing of laws such as Brown
v. Board of Education (1954) indeed served as a symbolic step for equity in education and in
many ways paved the way for change in education, it was not enough to shift the legacy of the
history of exclusion in the U.S. education system (Bell, 2004).
Apart from Brown v. Board of Education (1954), various laws also attempted to address
the racial inequities and history of exclusion in education, such as the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act in 1968 and the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001 (Horsford & D’Amico, 2015).
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act provided federal financial support to schools in
high need. It was reauthorized in 2001 as the No Child Left Behind Act, where student
identifying factors were added as a criterion to track success and provide funding (Horsford &
D’Amico, 2015). These laws attempted to solve gaps in education for Black and Latinx students.
However, they failed to acknowledge the impact that the United States' history of exclusion and
racism has on student success. Instead, these laws focused on incentivizing success as if the
education debt was non-existent. Educational leaders today continue to try and solve the
education debt, which results in an array of literature intended to understand why the debt exists.
Factors Impacting Graduation and Transfer
Researchers have attempted to explain the education debt for Black and Latinx students
without considering the historical context. Some even argue that the debt is due to genetics or
racial superiority. However, science has demonstrated that these claims are no more than racist
beliefs that unfortunately still infiltrate our laws and policies (Barnes, 2018). Valid research has

16

identified barriers that impact the education debt, such as stereotype threat and lack of cultural
relevance (Ladson-Billings, 1995; Steele & Aronson, 1995), and has acknowledged that these
barriers are not just contemporary but are rooted in a history of racism and exclusion. Many
factors that contribute to the education debt result from the combination of discriminatory
historical systems of education, politics, and society (Ladson-Billings, 2006). Acknowledging
and understanding the education debt may aid policymakers in appropriately addressing success
rates for Black and Latinx students (Horsford & D’Amico, 2015; Ladson-Billings, 2006).
Cultural Relevance
The system of education in the United States was first developed to educate White
students, and at no point in time has the system adjusted to serve Black and Latinx students
(Horsford & D’Amico, 2015). Although demographics have changed, the system primarily
supports the same style of classroom, the same pedagogy, and even the same traditions such as
going away to college, developed decades ago. These educational structures may not align with
the community-oriented cultures of Black and Latinx students and their families. Studies show
that utilizing CRP in and out of the classroom leads to higher engagement and a direct impact on
academic achievement (Altschul et al., 2008; Brozo et al., 1996; Byrd, 2016; Howard, 2001;
Howard & Terry, 2011; Ladson-Billings, 1995; Sleeter, 2011). The lack of cultural alignment in
the system of higher education despite the substantial research demonstrating the impact of
cultural relevance on student success measures is troubling. Despite the harm to Black and
Latinx students as evidenced by the education debt, education and government leaders
demonstrate an apparent inability to address the education debt through the continued existence
of an unchanged system of education.

17

Policies and Structures
In addition to the unchanged education system and its practices, approaches often used by
educators to address the education debt seem to have little impact and, in some cases, even
worsen the education debt (Bell, 2004). For example, Brown v. Board of Education (1954) made
segregation illegal, and although the intention may have been purely positive, it also caused
unintended outcomes, including the firing of Black educators, the loss of resilient and thriving
Black community public schools, and the disenrollment of many Black children from school
(Bell, 2004; Horsford & D’Amico, 2015). Furthermore, inequity and segregation still exist today
in the form of funding disparities between urban and suburban public-school systems, with urban
schools that predominantly enroll Black and Latinx students receiving less funding compared to
suburban school systems that predominantly serve White students (Bell, 2004; Ladson-Billings,
2006).
Stereotype Threat
Stereotype threat occurs when a person believes the negative stereotypes about an
identity they hold are accurate (Steele & Aronson, 1995). Black and Latinx students experience a
lifetime of discriminatory structures in their educational journey, particularly negative
stereotypes (Steele, 1997; Steele & Aronson, 1995). Negative stereotypes disrupt the truth of
someone’s identity and push Black and Latinx students into labels perceived by society and
educators as less than, violent, or incapable of success (Steele & Aronson, 1995). Stereotype
threat manifests in classroom settings, particularly in testing, and impacts students’ academic
performance (Walton & Spencer, 2009). Experiencing stereotype threat systematically, as many
Black and Latinx students have in their educational experience, has a significant impact on a

18

student’s education as reflected in the education debt for Black and Latinx students (Steele &
Aronson, 1995).
Campus Racial Climate
Various institutional elements contribute to campus racial climate, including the
institution’s history of exclusion, present diversity policies, representation of race and inclusion
of diversity, race relations, and faculty, staff, and student perceptions of race relations (Hurtado,
Milem, et al., 1998). Although colleges and universities are spaces that provide an opportunity
for growth and development for all students, racial conflict and violence on college campuses
impact the campus racial climate. Racial conflict and violence are found through
microaggressions and bias in hiring practices that result in low representation of tenured faculty
and administrators of color, in racist themed student events such as “cinco de drinko” or the use
of Blackface, in confederate statues located on university campuses across the nation, and even
virtually as seen in the recent racist Zoom-bombing that occurred at various institutions during
the COVID-19 pandemic. Varied responses or lack of response from institutions concerning
campus racial climate often result in student protests and dissatisfaction, as seen across the
nation with Black Lives Matter in 2013 and 2020. The vast number of racially charged instances
occurring even within the last 10 years is more than enough to demonstrate that racial violence is
embedded in the culture of U.S. higher education institutions and is not limited to a specific
method or form.
Campus racial climate is a national problem that impacts student success, particularly for
students of color (Hausmann et al., 2007; Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Oja, 2011). Research
demonstrates that student satisfaction on various variables, one of which was campus climate,
was associated with higher grades (Oja, 2011). Another study found that Black and Chicanx

19

students believed institutional initiatives could improve racial campus climate and that all
students perceived student-centered initiatives as predictors for a more positive racial climate
(Hurtado, 1992). Sense of belonging, faculty and staff interactions, and culturally relevant
experiences are some of the many impactful factors that contribute to a campus racial climate for
students of color, with positive and healthy factors leading to higher student success (Barnett,
2011; Goldrick-Rab 2010; Hausmann et al., 2007; Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Museus, 2014;
Museus, et al., 2017; Museus, et al., 2018; Rendon, 2002).
Sense of Belonging
A sense of belonging is widely known as a human need that impacts motivation, an
essential factor for student success in higher education. Defining a sense of belonging for a
college student includes feeling connected, supported, valued, accepted, and a part of the campus
community (Strayhorn, 2019). Students with a sense of belonging are likely to be associated with
positive student success outcomes, from higher grades to graduation (Hausmann et al., 2007).
One study found that a sense of belonging was a positive predictor for Black and White students'
intent to remain in college (Hausmann et al., 2007), supporting the idea that a sense of belonging
is a human need and essential for student success. Another study on Latinx students identified
hostile campus climates to negatively impact Latinx students’ sense of belonging (Hurtado &
Carter, 1997). Studies on sense of belonging have also found that campus environment has a
strong relationship with sense of belonging (Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Museus, et al., 2017;
Museus, et al., 2018), a finding that various campus ecology theorists have supported for
decades. Banning and Kaiser’s ecological model (1974) noted that people are impacted by their
environment, and they, in turn, impact their environment, even with transactional experiences.
Strayhorn (2019) provided the example of how a sorority that values its members and provides a

20

space for them to feel important is more inviting to others. In this example, the Banning and
Kaiser ecological model (1974) describes a cycle of recruitment and existence for an
organization because its environment provides a sense of belonging to members, which impacts
its members to recruit and results in the continuous existence of the organization.
Engagement in environments that provide a sense of belonging, both in and out of the
classroom, positively impact student success (Kuh, 1993). Expanding on Strayhorn’s (2019)
example of the sorority, members engaged in an environment that made them feel valued, which
resulted in new members, an increase of members taking leadership roles, and increased
participation in community service. These experiences expose members to diverse perspectives
and are documented to impact student success (Kuh, 1993; Pak, 2019). Furthermore, Kuh’s
seminal study in 1993 found students’ race or ethnicity to have no impact on learning and
development when engaged in positive experiences, including positive campus racial climates.
On the other hand, hostile campus racial climates are well documented to deter student success,
particularly for students of color (Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Hausmann et al., 2007; Hurtado &
Carter, 1997; Oja, 2011)
A more recent, race-conscious model, the culturally engaging campus environment
(CECE) model by Museus (2014), reported that students who experience a culturally engaging
environment are more likely to have a sense of belonging and graduate. The CECE model
(Museus, 2014) provides a framework composed of nine indicators of culturally engaging
environments, including cultural familiarity, meaningful cross-cultural engagement, culturally
relevant knowledge, proactive philosophies, cultural community service, culturally validating
environments, humanized educational environments, collectivist cultural orientations, and
holistic support. These nine indicators interact with what Museus (2014) refers to as individual

21

influences, including a sense of belonging and contributing to a student’s academic success. A
study on the CECE model found that five elements were positive indicators of a sense of
belonging for both students of color and White students (Museus, et al., 2017). Further research
on campus climates found the CECE model to be a valuable tool for examining the impact
campus environments have on sense of belonging for all students, and that culturally engaging
environments are predictors for sense of belonging for both White students and students of color
(Museus, et al., 2018). Overall, having a sense of belonging is an integral part of a positive
campus climate and impacts all students.
Faculty and Staff Interactions
Another factor frequently found to impact campus climate is faculty and staff's
relationship and interactions with students. A key scholar in the research around faculty and staff
relationship with students, Rendon (1994), found that validation from faculty and staff directly
impacts student success. Rendon (1994) also argued that real validation requires faculty and staff
to rethink the current, outdated, and exclusive models of student learning and development based
on European-American ideas of higher education. Validation can occur in and out of the
classroom and is guided by actions such as expressing genuine care and concern for students or
providing experiences that allow students to manifest their abilities (Rendon, 1994). This
contrasts European-American strategies in higher education where students’ multiple identities
are not a priority compared to their student identity, and where students are primarily seen as
learners meant to consume content. Another study on community college students found that
faculty acknowledgment was a predictor of students’ academic integration and intent to persist,
with caring instruction as the strongest predictor (Barnett, 2011). This finding on community
college students is significant, as most of the community college experience is classroom-based,

22

and most of the available research around persistence focuses on out-of-the-classroom
experiences and 4-year institutions (Barnett, 2011).
Culturally Relevant Experiences
Providing culturally relevant experiences in the curricular and co-curricular experience
supports the academic success of students from various racial backgrounds, and for Black and
Latinx students in particular (Byrd, 2016; Howard & Terry, 2011; Garcia & Okhidoi, 2015;
Ladson-Billings, 1995; Stone and Stewart, 2016). Culturally relevant experiences are those
students can relate to or see themselves in, and can be provided through any campus experience,
from admissions, financial aid, student life, and even classroom settings. Some of the most
promising practices for supporting community college student success include reforms to
curriculum and pedagogical practice towards more community and student-specific experiences
(Goldrick-Rab, 2010). As Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie (2009) shared, there is power in
representation and danger in a single story. Providing culturally relevant experiences in and out
of the classroom can be a form of validation that improves campus climate and results in
increased transfer rates.
Incorporating culturally relevant content into educational experiences demonstrates a
commitment to diversity and equity that may positively impact campus racial climate. The
previously mentioned CECE model provides nine elements for educators to include in
developing a culturally engaging campus environment, two of which are cultural relevance and
cultural responsiveness (Museus, 2014). Chen (2017) stated that incorporating diversity in every
course is an institutional practice that must be present if an institution is truly committed to
diversity and equity. Chen (2012) analyzed four different studies and developed
recommendations to improve professional practice to support and move towards the commitment

23

to diversity in the campus culture. The first recommendation is to increase the diversity of
campus affiliates and the second to integrate diversity into the curriculum. Although increasing
cultural relevance and diversity in experiences and representation is important, the key to
providing culturally relevant experiences lies not just in the content but initiates in the mindset
and behaviors of educators (Ladson-Billings, 1995).
Bensimon and Kezar (2005) proposed that campuses adopt an organizational learning
lens so educators can adequately address the systemic inequities that prevent institutions from
providing equitable experiences and outcomes for students. An organizational learning
perspective allows for faculty and staff to reflect on their own biases and places the institution in
a state of constant learning (Bensimon & Kezar, 2005). Reflection is a practice that appears in
many pedagogical frameworks, including anti-racist pedagogy and CRP. Anti-racist pedagogy
calls for faculty to go beyond embedding diverse content into the curriculum and teaching by
utilizing one's position of power to support and advocate for anti-racist organizational structures
(Kishimoto, 2018). Kishimoto (2018) provides a framework for incorporating anti-racist
pedagogy beyond classroom experiences to create institutional change. Ladson-Billings (1995)
calls for educators to develop a culturally relevant mindset as a form of pedagogy that can be
implemented into any curriculum and practice. Beyond the impact that faculty and staff can have
on campus climate through their pedagogical and professional practices, an institution can also
impact campus racial climate by committing to developing culturally conscious and equity-
oriented educators.
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Ladson-Billings introduced culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) in 1995 as a theoretical
perspective that prepares educators to adequately serve and develop students of color (Ladson-

24

Billings, 1995). Specifically, CRP provides an alternative perspective that places race and culture
at the forefront of teaching and learning to address systemic barriers impacting the success of
students of color. During a time where education programs were undergoing reform towards
more social justice and equity-minded practices, Ladson-Billings (1995) proposed CRP as a
pedagogical practice that would “produce students who can achieve academically, produce
students who demonstrate cultural competence, and develop students who can both understand
and critique the existing social order” (Ladson-Billings, 1995, p. 469). Emerging educational
literature in the 1990’s considered restructuring pedagogy in its various forms. However, unlike
CRP, it did not address students’ cultural backgrounds and culture's role in teaching and learning
(Ladson-Billings, 1995). By making race salient even in educational practices, CRP aimed to
address the historical inequities in the system of education and create a learning environment that
supports the success of students of color.
Ladson-Billings drew from literature in educational anthropology and early work with
Native Hawaiian, Native American, and Black or African American communities around
pedagogical practices that connect to a student’s home and community (Ladson-Billings, 1995).
Various terms were used by anthropologists studying these phenomena, such as culturally
responsive, culturally appropriate, and culturally congruent, to describe the incorporation of
culture, specifically speech and language, into the classroom (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Despite
the various terminology, research has shown that connecting culture to a students' educational
experience, in particular for students of color, results in higher academic performance (Bowman,
2010; Byrd, 2016; Cerezo & McWhriter, 2012; Howard & Terry, 2011; Ladson-Billings, 1995;
Sealy-Ruiz, 2007).
Another influential factor in the development of CRP was the need to shift from using

25

culture to socialize students to succeed in the current education system towards a practice of
building student-teacher relationships, or cultural synchronization, to nurture student success
(Irvine, 1990). CRP highlights alternative pedagogical practices from the standard teacher-
student hierarchy and promotes practices that nurture interpersonal relationships between
students and educators. CRP does not provide examples of conducted practices but instead calls
on educators to challenge perceptions of themselves and others, reconsider social relations
between students, and challenge preconceived notions of knowledge and how to capture it
(Ladson-Billings, 1995). Instead of providing a checklist of practices that educators can meet in
the form of requirements for pedagogy to be culturally relevant, CRP provides a framework for
educators to develop behaviors in themselves that then influences their pedagogy at any point in
time and promotes a mindset of constant growth. With an understanding that racial barriers exist
in the system of education and that shifting behaviors could assist in addressing those barriers,
CRP aims to accomplish three outcomes: To develop students academically, to nurture cultural
competence, and to develop critical consciousness (Ladson-Billings, 1995).
Criticism of CRP
CRP is critiqued for its lack of structure regarding what it should look like in practice.
This is primarily due to the framework’s lack of fixed examples that educators must incorporate
in order for pedagogy and experiences to be culturally relevant, something Ladson-Billings
acknowledged and intentionally avoided. As mentioned in the previous section, CRP calls on
educators to develop behaviors that can be applied to pedagogical practices instead of providing
concrete examples that can be mirrored for the sake of being culturally relevant. Another
limitation is the CRP’s original focus on Black students; however, CRP’s wide adoption and
effectiveness in supporting the academic success of students from different racial backgrounds

26

and age groups through academic improvement and empowerment is found in various studies
(Altschul et al., 2008; Bowman 2010; Byrd, 2016; Howard & Terry, 2011; Ladson-Billings,
1995; Sealy-Ruiz, 2007; Stone & Stewart, 2016).
Recent critiques include the debate over terminology, specifically around the word
“relevant” and if terms such as “responsive” or “sustaining” are more appropriate (Paris, 2012;
Paris & Alim, 2015). Paris (2012) argued that terminology used by Ladson-Billings lacks the
intention to maintain the growing multiethnic and multilingual society. Although this critique
gained scholarly attention, the idea of adjusting pedagogical practice to support the growing
diverse population of students is the root goal of CRP (Ladson-Billings, 2014). CRP
intentionally avoids providing a structured framework for practices. Instead, it provides a
mindset for educators to be culturally relevant in all of their practices, despite the changing
student demographics and needs.
CRP’s Application Beyond K–12
Although most research related to CRP is on the K–12 setting, CRP impacts the success
of students of various ages, racial backgrounds, and gender (Byrd, 2016; Howard & Terry, 2011;
Sealy-Ruiz, 2007). A study on adult Black women found that utilizing a culturally relevant
curriculum, such as incorporating personal experiences in the curriculum, enhanced the learning
experience (Sealy-Ruiz, 2007). Another study found that Black and Latinx middle school and
high school students with both high racial-ethnic identity connectedness and embedded
achievement (the belief that one can succeed academically) received better grades and
maintained higher grades than their peers with low racial-ethnic identity connectedness and
embedded achievement (Altschul et al., 2008). CRP has also impacted the academic outcomes of
White students, as seen in a study that utilized constructivist pedagogical methods (Byrd, 2016).

27

This study found that focusing directly on race and culture was linked to even higher success in
meeting academic outcomes across all racial backgrounds in the study (Byrd, 2016).
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy in Higher Education
Despite the small advancements higher education has made towards adopting CRP into
the college experience, existing research already demonstrates CRP has a positive impact on
student success, particularly for students of color (Garcia & Okhidoi, 2015; Stone & Stewart,
2016). Faculty in ethnic studies departments and programs that have utilized CRP found it
impacted student success, as seen in a study conducted on introductory courses in a Chicanx
Studies department (Garcia & Okhidoi, 2015). The study found that incorporating CRP in
introductory courses impacts students' critical consciousness, even if they are not a part of the
major (Garcia & Okhidoi, 2015). Another study on general education courses that utilized CRP
in the form of Critical Hip Hop Rhetoric Pedagogy in a first-year writing course resulted in
higher success in completing assignments for students who engaged in the curriculum compared
to those who did not (Stone & Stewart, 2016). Research on a college prep program found that
after incorporating CRP into various aspects of the co-curricular experience, multiple student
success measures had increased, such as graduation and college acceptance, particularly for
Black students (Howard & Terry, 2011). In summary, there is evidence that incorporating CRP
in higher education experiences leads to higher academic success, particularly among Black and
Latinx students.
Supporting Minoritized Student Communities
While academic success is predominantly attributed to the classroom setting,
incorporating CRP in educational experiences directly impacts the academic achievement of
Black and Latinx students from K–12 to higher education (Bowman 2010; Cerezo & McWhriter,

28

2012; Ladson-Billings, 1995; Sealy-Ruiz, 2007). A meta-analysis of 17 studies in higher
education with a population of almost 80,000 undergraduate students analyzed the relationship
between diversity experiences in college and students’ cognitive development and found that
interpersonal experiences with racial diversity were strongly related to higher cognitive
development (Bowman, 2010). Even simple personal activities, such as reading racially diverse
content, were positive for racial bias and academic skills (Bowman, 2010). A study of a co-
curricular program aimed at developing social awareness and understanding of how to navigate
higher education showed that building a connection to students’ cultural, racial, or ethnic identity
in programming increased the success of Latinx students (Cerezo & McWhriter, 2012).
Embedding CRP in the educational experience both in and out of the classroom increases Black
and Latinx student success, as well as the success of their peers.
CRP provides an anti-deficit framework for educators to utilize in their pedagogical
practices to support the success of students of color and address the educational debt owed to
students of color (Ladson-Billings, 1995; Ladson-Billings, 2006). Although many studies
demonstrate that CRP increases the academic success of all students (Byrd, 2016; Garcia &
Okhidoi, 2015; Howard & Terry, 2011; Sealy-Ruiz, 2007), in particular, students of color, the
use of CRP remains predominately in K–12 education. Despite the limited research, it is clear
that even a simple interaction with diversity positively affects students' development (Bowman,
2010). Considering that CRP is much more than a simple interaction with diversity and that
positive academic success is associated with practices utilizing CRP, there is a need to examine
how CRPs manifests in Community Colleges.

29

Community Colleges
Community colleges, formerly known as junior colleges, were established in the early
1900’s to further educational opportunities for recent high school graduates, meet workforce
needs, and serve the community (Knoell, 1997). The community college mission and purpose are
different from other higher education systems due to a focus on serving the community's needs
instead of the prevalent focus on research or 4-year degree completion. Serving the community's
needs can be seen not just in the various services offered, but also in the diverse population it
serves and its mission to remain affordable and accessible. Community colleges offer
transferrable courses to 4-year universities, vocational education and certificates, community
programs, skill development, and recently, even bachelor degrees, all at a low or no cost. The
community college continues to evolve to meet the community's changing needs, remaining as
the primary pathway to the middle class (Heelan & Mellow, 2017).
With over 1,000 community colleges in the nation, almost 12 million students were
enrolled in the fall 2018 semester, 57% of which were women, and 29% were first-generation
college students (AACC, 2020). This enrollment accounted for almost half of the nation’s (41%)
undergraduate student population, 39% of all first-time students, and high populations of
students of color (AACC, 2020). Community colleges enrolled 57% of Native American, 52% of
Hispanic, 44% of Black or African American, and 39% of Asian and or Pacific Islander students
in the United States for fall 2018 (AACC, 2020). The average cost to attend community college
in fall 2018 was about three times less than the average in-state cost of a public 4-year
institution. Almost 60% of community college students from 2015–2016 received some kind of
financial aid (AACC, 2020). The diverse breakdown of student identities and need enforces the
community college mission of serving all students.

30

More than half of the fall 2018 cohort of students enrolled in for-credit courses and 43%
enrolled in non-credit courses (AACC, 2020), which include community-centered education such
as skill development, GED courses, and ESL classes. Although community colleges are often
viewed as institutions for students to transfer out of, a large percentage of students enroll in non-
credit courses, often for only a few terms. A report on transfer mobility found that many students
transfer from their 4-year institution to the community college during the first few years of their
undergraduate career (Shapiro, Dundar, Huie, Wakhungu, Bhimdiwali, Nathan, & Hwang,
2018). The act of transferring from 4-year institutions to 2-year institutions has become so
common that it is known as “swirling” and made up almost 60% of transfers in fall 2011
(Shapiro, Dundar, Huie, Wakhungu, Bhimdiwali, Nathan, & Hwang, 2018). Another common
form of transfer is “double-dipping,” which is when students enroll at two different institutions
(McCormick, 2003). The “acts of swirling” and “double-dipping” in community colleges occur
to accelerate time to degree, scheduling flexibility, and to reduce expenses (McCormick, 2003).
The multiple educational paths offered at a community college further support the community
college mission of serving the community.
California Community Colleges
The California Community College (CCC) system is the nation's most extensive higher
education system, with 115 colleges throughout the state (California Community Colleges
Chancellors Office, 2020). The CCC serves over two million students each academic year,
accounting for more than half of the college students enrolled in the state of California
(California Community Colleges Chancellors Office, 2020; Public Policy Institute of California
[PPIC], 2019). Fresno City College, established in 1910, was the first community college in
California and second in the nation, with a mission to transfer and serve the surrounding

31

community (Community College League of California [CCLC], 2020). By the 1930s, one in
every six students in California enrolled in a vocational program (CCLC, 2020). In the 1960s, the
California Master Plan reinforced the community college focus on serving the local population
and outlined the mission of the three higher education systems in California, designating the
CCC as the primary system for providing affordable and accessible education for the first 2 years
of college, remedial instruction, community and non-credit courses, and vocational education
(University of California [UC], 2020). In addition to providing guidelines on each higher
education system in California, the California Master Plan outlined the populations to be served
by each type of institution. The California Master Plan designated the University of California
system to serve the top 12.5% of high school graduates, the California State University system to
serve the top one-third of high school graduates, and the CCC to serve everyone else, aligning
with its founding purpose of open admission, affordable, and accessible education (CCLC,
2020). The plan further supported the community college mission of serving the community by
maintaining an accessible and affordable education system.
Demographics
Despite the education debt’s impact on transfer rates, the CCC enrolls students from
diverse backgrounds, one of the system’s many benefits compared to 4-year institutions (AACC,
2020; Perez & Ceja, 2010). Over two million students enrolled in the CCC system during the
2018–2019 academic year, almost 30% of which were first-generation students (California
Community Colleges [CCC], 2020). The CCC’s highest enrolled racial groups in 2018–2019
were Hispanic students at 45.1%, White students at 25.1%, Asian students at 10.5%, and African
American students at 5.8% (CCC, 2020). The majority of CCC students in 2018–2019 were
women, and 51.1% were between 19 and 24 years of age (CCC, 2020). Regarding financial

32

eligibility, 55.4% of students in 2018–2019 were eligible for the College Promise Grant, 35.7%
received the Pell Grant, and 62.9% were considered Perkins Economically Disadvantaged (CCC,
2020).
Transfer Student Preparation
Although the CCC system serves a large and diverse population of students, the CCC
system results in relatively low transfer and graduation rates. For the 2012 cohort, 39.2% of
students had completed a degree after 6 years, 8% of whom completed their degree at a 4-year
institution (Shapiro, Dundar, Huie, Wakhungu, Bhimdiwala, & Wilson, 2018). These education
success rates are especially concerning for Black and Latinx students, given the population sizes
of Black and Latinx students enrolled in the CCC. Only 5.3% of Black students and 6% of
Latinx students who began at a 2-year institution in 2012 completed a degree at a 4-year
institution in 6 years (Shapiro, Dundar, Huie, Wakhungu, Bhimdiwala, & Wilson, 2018). Other
measures of academic success in the community college reveal the same trend in the education
debt for Black and Latinx students.
Completion of transfer-level courses and course success rates are also essential to
examine. In 2018–2019, 4% of Black students and 7% of Latinx students completed both
transfer-level Math and English during their first year (CCC, 2020). Black students received the
lowest rate for completing both transfer-level Math and English, while Latinx students were the
fifth lowest among the 10 ethnicities reported (CCC, 2020). Black and Latinx student course
completion rates were also among the lowest compared to other tracked ethnicities, with
Hispanic students having the third-lowest rate of 69% and Black or African American students
having the lowest course completion rate of 62% (CCC, 2020). The same trend exists in prior
years, revealing a pipeline problem for Black and Latinx students.

33

Community College Pedagogy
Understanding the purpose of the CCC and the gaps in academic success measures calls
for an examination of the pedagogical practices and structural factors impacting Black and
Latinx academic success. Perez and Ceja (2010) studied successful practices for developing a
transfer culture for Latinx students and identified seven recommendations for institutions to
increase transfer rates. The seven recommendations are to have, (a) a faculty and staff population
that represents the student population; (b) educational partnership programs where Latinx
students can receive information to prepare for college; (c) streamlined articulation agreements;
(d) culturally responsive outreach programs; (e) funded and prioritized outreach programs; (f))
accessible financial support for Latinx students; and (g) support for transfer incentives (Perez &
Ceja, 2010). Another study on the Chicanx pipeline called for an examination of current models
that build policy and educational experiences and for the inclusion of theoretical models that
consider obstacles created by the institution (Solorzano & Solorzano, 1995). Other models that
reflect deficit perspectives, a known academic success barrier for Latinx and Black students,
include school and societal determinist, which explain the structural issues that impact the
success of students of color (Solorzano & Solorzano, 1995). However, Solorzano and Solorzano
(1995) counter this with the use of the Effective Schools and the Accelerated Schools model,
which focuses on anti-deficit approaches to address the low academic success rates of Latinx
students while identifying successful schools and practices that can assist with closing the gap in
academic success measures such as transfer rates (Solorzano & Solorzano, 1995).
Addressing the Gap in Transfer
Research and data show the education debt is consistently present for Black and Latinx
community college students throughout the history of higher education (CCC, 2020; California

34

Community Colleges Chancellors Office, 2013; California Community Colleges Chancellors
Office, 2018; Perez & Ceja, 2010; Shapiro, Dundar, Huie, Wakhungu, Bhimdiwali, Nathan, &
Hwang, 2018). Addressing the education debt at an institutional level in the form of transfer is
especially important considering the vast and diverse population of students served in the CCC
and the lifelong impact educational success can have (Fletcher, 2015; Ladson-Billings, 2006;
Perez & Ceja, 2010; Solorzano & Solorzano, 1995). Perez and Ceja (2010) noted that continuous
low numbers of student transfers and other student success markers signify the continued
widening of the education debt and wage gap. Other scholars have expressed similar concerns,
stating that the low transfer and other student success markers for Black and Latinx students
impact more than the individual but impact the generational success (Solorzano & Solorzano,
1995). These concerns align with national data demonstrating that higher levels of educational
attainment lead to higher pay (NCES, 2019). By addressing the education debt, the CCC further
serves Black and Latinx students more equitably and advances equity in society.
Theoretical Framework
Considering my own experience with the system of education as a Latina and the study’s
focus on Black and Latinx students, utilizing a race-conscious lens was fundamental for the
study. The study called for an understanding of pedagogies that develop and support Black and
Latinx community college students in transferring to 4-year institutions. This study was guided
by critical race theory (CRT), critical pedagogy, and culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP)
concepts. Although these theories and frameworks apply to various settings, aspects most
relevant to the study, such as pedagogical concepts and practices, predominantly guided the
study. Figure 2 demonstrates how each theory guided the study.

35

Figure 2
Theoretical Framework

Note. This figure describes how the theoretical framework informed the study.

Critical Race Theory
Critical race theory (CRT) is widely used throughout education. However, CRT’s origins
are in legal studies and draws from a vast range of literature, including sociology, history, ethnic
studies, and women studies (Solorzano & Yosso, 2002). Developed in the late 1980s as a tool for
examining the racial injustices in the U.S. legal system, CRT has been widely adopted and
expanded into other critical theories, such as FemCrit and Latina/o critical theory. The root of
CRT is to reveal how race and racism impact systems and processes and eliminate racism and
other forms of oppression. CRT is composed of five tenets to guide analysis in search of racism
and racial equity in any given field (Howard & Navarro, 2016). Various scholars have
contributed to developing the five tenets, which have been aligned to fit specific fields. The core
five tenets are as follows: (a) centralize race and racism and other forms of subordination; (b)

36

challenge dominant perspectives and highlight marginalized perspectives; (c) commit to social
justice; (d) value experiential knowledge; (e) be interdisciplinary (Solórzano & Delgado Bernal,
2001).
Utilizing these tenets in higher education research requires researchers to (a) center their
work around race; (b) include intersectionality; (c) challenge dominant narratives and deficit
perspectives while re-centering marginalized ones; (d) practice a social justice-oriented
perspective and agenda that promotes social justice and equity in education; (e) focus on and
utilize knowledge from marginalized communities including indigenous communities and
students of color; and (f) reflect multiple perspectives and fields of study to understand the
diverse experiences of students of color (Solorzano & Yosso, 2002). Utilizing CRT in higher
education may guide scholars and practitioners in examining the impact that race has on
practices and policies that influence student experiences and outcomes.
CRT has guided research for more than 30 years, resulting in valuable information for
decreasing the education debt in higher education. Despite decades of CRT-informed research,
the disparity in student success indicators, such as low transfer rates for Black and Latinx
students, continues to exist (Howard & Navarro, 2016). Although there are many explanations
for why the education debt persists, Howard and Navarro (2016) argued that many scholars and
practitioners are not truly CRT-informed, and translating CRT into research and practice is a
difficult skill. There is a need for the “research, practitioner, and policy community to play an
active role in identifying, analyzing, and seeking replication of racially inclusive and sensitive
learning environments” (Howard & Navarro, 2016, p. 268). This study utilized CRT primarily as
a guide to understanding the role that race has on pedagogy that supports or hinders Black and
Latinx student success.

37

Critical Pedagogy
Critical pedagogy in education calls for a space of examination and growth that develops
students who can identify, critique, and act on oppressive structures (Freire, 2005). Critical
pedagogy encourages the understanding of how power influences the production and
consumption of knowledge and seeks to develop informed citizens capable of making socially
just decisions (Giroux, 2010). The concept of critical pedagogy was first introduced in 1970 by
Paulo Freire. Freire called for education to be a space where students would develop a
consciousness, or conscientação, that allowed them to identify social, political, and economic
inequities within structures and act against them (Freire, 2005). Although the term critical
pedagogy did not emerge from Freire, his work around critical education is frequently associated
with critical pedagogy.
In his book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire (2005) described the banking model of
education and provided an alternative, problem-posing education. In the banking model,
instructors are the authority that dictate the structure and content of the class while students
obediently intake the content and are socialized to the concepts presented (Freire, 2005). The
problem-posing education that Freire (2005) proposed as an alternative would center the
instructor and student as active participants in the learning environment, with the instructor
serving as the facilitator, ensuring that the student can critically reflect. Traditional banking
education contradicts the very nature of higher education, where critical thinking is valued and
aims to develop citizens who engage in a democratic society. The alternative, problem-posing
education, provides students the opportunity to critique society and make conscious decisions
that could improve their way of life (Freire, 2005).

38

Critical pedagogy positions education as a tool for addressing social injustice and
oppression in various forms while building capacity for democratic activity (Giroux, 2010). In
other words, students who learn to identify and challenge systems of oppression can do so as
alumni as well, contributing towards a more socially just society after graduation. Students who
have accomplished a conscientação can utilize this critical consciousness in their places of work
and with their families (Giroux, 2010), contributing to the dismantling of various forms of
oppression throughout society. As a practice, critical pedagogy not only empowers educators and
students to have a conscientação in the classroom setting but in the long term develops leaders
who can challenge the very systems that continue to maintain oppressive procedures and
processes, such as those contributing to the education debt owed to Black and Latinx students.
This study utilized critical pedagogy as a guide for identifying structures in pedagogy that impact
the development of conscientação and therefore sustain or increase education debt for Black and
Latinx students.
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) is a framework of beliefs or behaviors that educators
can adopt in their pedagogical practices to produce a culturally relevant education experience for
students. Introduced in 1995 by renowned scholar Gloria Ladson-Billings, CRP comprises three
domains educators should strive for: Cultural competence, sociopolitical consciousness, and
academic success (Ladson-Billings, 2014). The CRP domains align with three student
development outcomes: Nurturing cultural competence, developing critical consciousness, and
increasing students' academic success (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Cultural competence includes
validating and celebrating students' cultures while becoming competent in them, sociopolitical
consciousness is utilizing knowledge from outside the classroom to address societal issues, and

39

academic success is the intellectual growth of students (Ladson-Billings, 2014). These domains
were commonalities found in a study across teachers whose students of color were succeeding
academically when the academic success of students of color was being questioned (Ladson-
Billings, 1995).
Many higher education initiatives attempt to improve traditional educational experiences,
including pedagogy, by adding a diversity focus to support racially diverse students. Although
many initiatives provide culturally diverse content, learning strategies, and express commitment
to supporting diverse students, CRP involves more than changing the content and methods of
educational experiences (Ladson-Billings, 2014). CRP calls for educators to incorporate
knowledge from outside the classroom and utilize it to address societal issues, requiring
educators to have this socio-cultural knowledge (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Ladson-Billings
(2014) stressed the importance of pushing students and educators to think critically about and
challenge policies and structures that impact students’ daily lives. Understanding the CRP
framework guided the researcher and study in identifying CRP in pedagogical practices.
Conclusion
A history of exclusion continues to fuel factors impacting the education debt, graduation,
and transfer rates for Black and Latinx students, including the lack of cultural relevance in
learning environments, barriers to equity from policies and structures, stereotype threat, and
hostile campus racial climates (Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Ladson-Billings, 1995; Ladson-Billings,
2006; Steele & Aronson, 1995). Despite the wealth of understanding of factors that impact the
education debt, graduation and transfer rates for Black and Latinx students essentially remain
stagnant. Research has found that factors such as culturally relevant pedagogy increase student
success (Bowman, 2010; Byrd, 2016; Cerezo & McWhriter, 2012; Howard & Terry, 2011;

40

Ladson-Billings, 1995), and there is a need to understand how tools that increase student success,
such as CRP, are being utilized.

41

Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this study is to understand how CRP is utilized in pedagogical practices to
foster Black and Latinx student academic success in California Community Colleges, if at all.
Although CRP is primarily based in K–12 settings, there is evidence of its use and influence on
student academic success in the higher education setting (Bowman, 2010; Cerezo & McWhriter,
2012; Garcia & Okhidoi, 2015; Stone and Stewart, 2016). This study aims to expand the
literature on CRP in higher education by exploring how higher education educators utilize CRP
to address the education debt for Black and Latinx students. The study focuses on answering the
following research question: How does CRP manifest for Black and Latinx students in California
Community Colleges?
Research Design
The study utilized a mixed-methods approach to better understand how CRP exists in the
community college to support Black and Latinx student success. A mixed-methods approach is
used in various fields, including education, because it draws from the strengths of both
qualitative and quantitative measures, allowing for a better understanding of the research
question compared to information collected from only one method (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Considering the study seeks to understand how CRP appears in California Community Colleges,
a qualitative method was appropriate to answer the research question because qualitative designs
seek to understand a process or experience (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Quantitative data can also help explain a process and complement qualitative data (McEwan &
McEwan, 2003). In the case of this study, quantitative data provided insight on the impact or
frequency of CRP that supports Black and Latinx students’ academic success. A mixed-methods
approach allowed for different perspectives around the use of CRP to support Black and Latinx

42

student success (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Although qualitative data may have been sufficient
for answering the research question, collecting quantitative data provided a more comprehensive
understanding of CRP in community colleges.
A convergent parallel mixed method design was utilized to guide the study's
methodology because it allowed for qualitative and quantitative data to be collected and analyzed
at the same time and with minimal influence on each method (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). In a
convergent parallel mixed method design, qualitative and quantitative data is collected around
the same time, analyzed independently, then compared and interpreted together to identify
findings (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). However, the key is ensuring that both the qualitative and
quantitative methods collect data on the same concepts or variables (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Figure 3 provides a visual model of the convergent parallel research process used in this study.
Ensuring minimal to no influence between qualitative and quantitative findings is essential
because of the triangulation in the research design, where quantitative and qualitative data are
compared. Triangulation of data in this manner will allow for a deeper understanding and an
opportunity to validate the qualitative data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

43

Figure 3
Data Collection and Analysis Design

Note. This chart illustrates the process used for data collection and analysis in alignment with the
convergent parallel mixed method design.

Location of Study
The study took place in a large, public 2-year community college located in a suburban
city of Southern California. The pseudonym of Rosa Community College (RCC) is used to
reference the institution. Established in the early 1920s, RCC was one of the first junior colleges
in the Southwestern United States, enrolling less than 300 students. RCC now enrolls over
30,000 students and is designated a Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI). More than half of
enrolled students in fall 2019 attended part-time, and almost three-fourths of the student
population was under 24. With a focus on education, diversity, and community, RCC’s mission
is to provide equity-minded learning experiences that enrich students’ lives. RCC provides
degree and certificate programs, pathways for transfer, campus engagement opportunities, and
Collect
quantitative
data
(Survey)
Collect
qualitative
data
(Interviews)
Analyze
quantitative
data
(Survey)
Analyze
qualitative
data
(Interviews)
Combine
qualitative and
quantitative data to
develop findings

44

individualized student support. RCC has received numerous awards recognizing its success,
including a national award recognizing top community colleges for overall stellar institutional
performance, including work on student equity in retention and successful outcomes. However, it
was not until 2012 that RCC shifted its focus to achieving student equity by introducing a Master
Plan that included race-conscious language and publicly positioned equity as a top priority.
With diversity as one of RCCs core pillars and race being a core focus of the study, it is
crucial to analyze the racial and ethnic demographics of the students enrolling at RCC and the
faculty, staff, and local community the institution serves. In the 2018–2019 academic year, RCC
enrolled over 35,000 students, over 50% were Latinx, 25% Asian, 15% White, 4% Black, 3%
two or more races, and 3% unknown. Out of almost 2,000 employees, approximately 75% were
faculty, and half were temporary academics or part-time faculty. Over 50% of all faculty were
White, and when combined with an additional 30% of White staff and administrators, RCC’s
employee demographics overwhelmingly do not represent the student demographics. However,
demographics for classified employees or staff were more representative of the student
population, with 36% Latinx, 30% White, 15% Black or African American, 10% Asian, 5%
unknown, and 3% multiethnic. The city in which RCC is situated also has similar demographics
as the student and staff populations, with 35% Latinx, 35% White, 17% Asian, 10% Black, and
5% two or more races, in a population of almost 150,000. However, the county where RCC is
located best reflected the enrolling student population, with almost 50% Latinx, 26% White, 16%
Asian, 9% Black, and 3% two or more races in the over 10 million residents.
RCC is an ideal environment for the study because of its public commitment to equity
and its diverse student population. Although the faculty demographics are not representative of
the student population, this is the case in most higher education institutions. In fact, 76% of full-

45

time faculty in degree-granting postsecondary institutions in 2017 were White (NCES, 2019).
Despite the lack of representation, the mission and progress around student success measures
indicate that the education debt owed to students of color needs further review.
Population and Sample
The population of study includes RCC students and faculty affiliated with the institution
during the fall 2020 semester who are connected to a transfer pathway. The RCC student
population consisted of full-time and part-time students intending to transfer, which was
indicated by haven taken at least one transferrable course. Similarly, the faculty population
consisted of faculty who had taught at least one transferrable course. Limiting the population to
students and faculty associated with transfer pathways is due to the study’s focus on student
success in the form of transfer. Staff also impact student success in the form of transfer;
however, considering the community college commuter culture, there is a higher potential that a
student would experience CRP from their courses than from an interaction with a staff member.
From the identified RCC population associated with transfer pathways, a purposive,
representative, random sample of students and faculty were invited to participate in the study. A
purposive sample is composed of strategically selected individuals because of their ability to
provide information related to the study (Maxwell, 2013). The researcher received the sample
from the RCC’s institutional research department. Faculty must have taught at least one
transferable course to be included in the sample. Student participants must have identified as
Black and or Latinx and have taken at least one transferable course. Additionally, the study used
screening questions to ensure students and faculty meet the criteria of being affiliated with
transfer pathways. Students were asked is they identified as Black and or Latinx, and faculty

46

were asked to self-identify as using CRP in their classroom. The study aimed for a 15% response
rate to the survey and 10–15 interviews.
Instrumentation
Interviews were utilized to collect qualitative information from faculty on their use of
CRP to support Black and Latinx student success in transfer. Interviews are an appropriate
qualitative method because they collect participants’ beliefs and experiences (Patton, 2002). The
interviews followed a semi-structured protocol to allow the opportunity for further analysis
through probing questions with the participant if the opportunity arose. As Maxwell (2013)
stated, a less structured approach allows one to understand the phenomenon better and leads to
more valid results. Interview questions were field-tested with faculty from different fields and
racial backgrounds to ensure the quality, clarity, and usefulness of questions. Careful wording of
questions was vital to collecting the data needed to answer the research question appropriately
(Patton, 2002). Interview questions focused on understanding forms in which CRP practices are
utilized and incorporated into pedagogy to support Black and Latinx student success. Examples
of questions in the protocol are “What does equity mindedness look like in the courses you
teach?” and “How do you incorporate societal issues related to Black and or Latinx identities in
your curriculum?”
A survey was utilized to understand students’ experience with CRP. As Creswell (2014)
stated, survey research provides information on a population’s trends, attitudes, or opinions.
Survey data from the students complimented the interview data by providing a more extensive
understanding of how CRP transpires in the community college, including the kinds of CRP
characteristics and practices students experienced and the frequency of those experiences. Survey
data helped connect theory and practice by providing the opportunity to confirm if how faculty

47

think they utilize CRP to support Black and Latinx student success aligns with how students
experience CRP. Field testing of the survey was conducted with students from a different
institution to ensure quality, intentionality, and clarity of questions (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Field testing and ensuring quality, intentional questions in this manner were vital (Patton, 2002)
given the attempt of the study to capture a critical view of campus culture through quantitative
means.
Data Collection
Direct solicitation via email was utilized for both faculty and students. Email was chosen
as the primary method of communication because of campus closures due to the COVID-19
pandemic. Based on campus guidelines for survey research, a 15% representative random sample
of Black and Latinx students who had taken at least one transferrable course were selected to
participate. The survey and interview email invitation were sent from campus leadership,
resulting in a 5.09% (n = 85) survey response rate and six interview participants. An additional
six interview participants were recruited using snowball sampling.
Due to a low response rate, the survey was open for approximately 10 weeks. Qualtrics
was utilized for the survey and to house the data. No personal identifying information was
collected in the survey, but demographic data was collected to verify eligibility and determine if
respondents represented the campus demographics. No survey questions were required, and the
survey took between 10–15 minutes to complete. An Information Sheet was at the beginning of
the survey for participants to review prior to starting. The Information Sheet discussed the study,
risks associated with participation, confidentiality, compensation information in the form of an
opportunity drawing, and researcher contact information. Upon completion of the survey,
participants had the opportunity to enter a drawing for one of 10 digital gift cards from a location

48

of their choice with the condition that the gift card can be directly emailed to them from the
online store. Gift cards varied in amounts from $100 to $10, with one $100 gift card, four $25
gift cards, and five $10 gift cards. Opportunity drawing information was not linked to participant
survey responses as the opportunity drawing information was collected in a different survey.
Interviews took place online using a web-based video conferencing program, Zoom. A
total of 12 interviews were held for about 1 hour each. Each interview utilized an interview
protocol and provided participants with an Information Sheet. The Information Sheet was sent to
participants prior to the interviews via email and was shared with them at the start of the
interview. The information sheet contained an overview of the interview, including information
on participant consent, how the interview would be conducted, the anonymity of participants,
and participants’ rights such as not answering questions and being able to opt-out of the study at
any time. Interviews were recorded with the participants’ consent to produce digital transcripts.
Notes were taken during the interview and after each interview to help with the validity of the
data (Bogdam & Biklen, 2007; Patton, 2002). A $10 gift card was provided to each participant
after the interview. Participants were able to choose their gift card from a list of online stores.
Both data sets were collected in the same semester due to the convergent parallel
mixed method design. Although the quantitative data collection was completed before the
qualitative data, the difference in the collection is not an issue considering that the data collection
for both sets of data occurred in the same semester and needed to occur separately given the
convergent parallel mixed method design.
Data Analysis
Aligning with the study’s convergent parallel mixed method design, the qualitative and
quantitative data were analyzed separately then compared to generate findings. Analyzing the

49

findings separately then bringing them together to find commonalities in the data allows for little
to no influence from each method, a form of triangulation that strengthens the credibility of
findings (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). According to Creswell and
Creswell (2018), there are three data analysis stages in a convergent parallel model: Analyzing
the qualitative data, then the quantitative data, and finally, integrating the two data sets to
identify findings. This study followed the three-stage process and began with analyzing the
qualitative data.
The first step to analyzing the qualitative data began with assigning a pseudonym to each
interview participant. As each interview was completed, the audio file was uploaded to a
transcription agency for transcribing, and completed transcriptions were then compared to the
audio and interview notes for accuracy. As Maxwell (2013) shared, it is important to analyze the
data as soon as the first collection is completed. Interviews were ongoing during the transcription
process, and checking for accuracy was repeated for each interview. Coding of the transcriptions
began as soon as the transcription accuracy was confirmed for each interview. Emerging similar
codes were put into themes that were added to a codebook. Themes and codes were
recategorized throughout the data analysis process. Quantitative data was analyzed using the
Qualtrics reports tool to produce descriptive statistics. The study conducted a descriptive
statistical analysis to explain how Black and Latinx students reported experiencing CRP.
After qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed separately, findings from each were
merged to identify results. Merging the data types and identifying similarities is a complex
process considering the different qualitative and quantitative data sets (Creswell & Creswell,
2018). Side-by-side comparison and data transformation were utilized to report alignment
between how faculty believe they are using CRP and students' experience. A side-by-side

50

analysis is when the researcher compares the data sets by presenting one set of findings followed
by the other and is best for this study due to the different populations and different types of data,
one qualitative and one quantitative (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). For this reason, the
quantitative findings will be discussed first, followed by the qualitative findings. Data
transformation was also used for some data points in the qualitative data. Data transformation is
when the codes are counted to produce quantitative measures to identify the frequency of themes
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Overlap in findings from both data sets will be shared in a
discussion.
Trustworthiness and Ethics
To increase the trustworthiness of the data and findings, triangulation, member checking,
and reflection of researcher biases were utilized. Triangulation refers to the utilization of
multiple methods to see if different data sets reach the same conclusion (Maxwell, 2013).
Triangulation is essentially embedded in a mixed-methods design by using multiple data
collection methods, in this case, a survey and interviews. Utilizing multiple data collection
methods allowed for the qualitative data from faculty to be verified by the students' experience
collected in a quantitative form. It also allowed for the qualitative data from faculty interviews to
be compared to quantitative data from a larger population of students regarding the use of CRP
to support Black and Latinx student success. Given that the survey and interviews had different
strengths and limitations, similarities in the findings indicate higher credibility. Differing sample
sizes are sometimes considered a limitation; however, given that both methods utilized the same
concepts, the difference in sample sizes does not appear to be a problem. After all, the distinct
purposes of quantitative and qualitative methods result in a natural distinction between sample
sizes (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).

51

To ensure the accuracy of qualitative data analysis, member checks were offered to each
interview participant to prevent misinterpretations or clarify observations (Maxwell, 2013).
Member checking of the data was accomplished by providing a list of findings to each interview
participant and requesting that they check for misinterpretations in the conclusions. Despite
intentionality, the qualitative data may have also been influenced by researcher bias (Maxwell,
2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Steps to prevent researcher bias in the study included utilization
of reflexivity, a powerful method to help address researcher bias, and an integral tool in
qualitative studies (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Reflexivity allows the researcher to reflect on
how their role and personal background may impact findings (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Field
testing of data collection tools and member checking of qualitative results also reduce potential
researcher bias in the findings.
In addition to conducting validity checks and triangulation to increase the trustworthiness
of the data, potential ethical limitations are important to note. One ethical concern is the focus on
faculty perspectives instead of student perspectives, who are the primary constituents of CPR in
educational experiences. Although the survey collected students' experience, the study’s
framework is influenced by a transformative worldview, qualitative methodology, and a critical
race theory lens, which all default to students’ experience being the primary focus of the study.
The idea behind interviewing faculty was not to ignore the frameworks call for highlighting the
student voice, but to understand what faculty are doing, their intentionality, and clarify if what
educators believe works, actually does. For this reason, quantitative data from students was
collected to verify how CRP is supporting Black and Latinx student success.
Measures were taken to keep the data secure, including limiting data locations and
utilizing secure data storage methods. Qualitative data was saved on one external hard drive and

52

was accessed through the researcher’s desktop only. Quantitative data was housed in Qualtrics
through the researcher’s student account, which is protected by the company and university
contracts. Quantitative data was also saved on the aforementioned external hard drive for backup
and safety. The researcher’s desktop was used to access the data and remained secured in the
researcher’s residence where data analysis occurred. To maintain the confidentiality of
participants, very minimal contact information was collected and stored in the external hard
drive. Contact information from the opportunity drawing was appropriately discarded after
completing the study, and all compensations were awarded. Contact information for the
opportunity drawing was not connected to the survey responses as a different survey was used to
collect opportunity drawing information.
Positionality and Role
My experience with the system of education as a Latina higher education professional
and student influences the study in various ways. I have held multiple roles in both academic
affairs and student affairs, from advising to administration, and have worked with faculty and
students in varying capacities in those roles. The diverse experiences from my professional
positions provide me with insight into the relationship between faculty and students, the impact
that the educational experience can have on students, and the different powers that constituents
have on impacting the educational experience. My experience as a student in different levels of
education provides me with firsthand experience on the impact that faculty and courses can have
on student success. In particular, my experience as a Latina student and my experience with
courses that utilize CRP primarily drive the study. Although my experience provides me with a
level of knowledge that prepares me for the study, it may also result in bias towards the use of
CRP in classrooms.

53

With an underlying focus on how inequities in academic success measures for Black and
Latinx students continue to increase, the study assumes the form of a transformative worldview.
A transformative world view considers how external factors such as history and politics impact
marginalized populations and takes an action-oriented approach to research (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). The study embodies a transformative worldview by focusing on how CRP
exists and supports Black and Latinx student academic success in the community college despite
the political and historical influences placed in higher education and educational pedagogy.
Furthermore, the study’s action agenda is comprised of identifying how CRP supports Black and
Latinx academic success in the community college, if at all. This positionality influenced the
purpose and methodology of the study.
Conclusion
The methodological approach to the study included a mixed-method design in the form of
convergent parallel mixed methods. The study collected data from two populations and utilized
two data collection methods, a quantitative survey for students and qualitative interviews for
faculty. The study and researcher practiced various methods to increase the trustworthiness of the
data, including triangulation, member checking, and reflexivity. The next chapter discusses the
study’s findings.

54

Chapter Four: Findings
The goal of this study was to understand how faculty use CRP and how students
experience it. Understanding the intent and impact of CRP may lead to further understanding this
framework and its impact on students’ success. Data was collected from both faculty and
students to understand how culturally relevant pedagogy’s (CRP) engages Black and Latinx
students. Faculty and student participant experiences were analyzed using CRP, critical race
theory, and a transformative worldview. This chapter will provide an overview of the data
collected, including an overview of the participants, a quantitative overview of the student
experience, a review of the three themes found in the qualitative data from faculty, and an
overview of quantitative and qualitative data overlap.
Participant Overview
A quantitative survey collected information from students. Eligibility for student
participants included being a current student, identifying as Black/African American and or
Latinx, and having an intent to transfer. A representative, random 15% sample of current
Black/African American students (n = 101) and Latinx students (n = 1,568) that had taken at
least one transferable course was used to recruit student participants. Although the sample was
filtered to the specific population, the survey included three screener questions to increase
eligibility accuracy. A total of three emails were sent to the 1,669 students resulting in 98
responses. Out of the 98 responses, only 85 met the criteria to participate in the survey. The
student survey yielded a response rate of 5.09% (n = 85). More details on the breakdown of
student respondents are in Table 1 and Table 2.
Semi-structured interviews were used to collect information from faculty. A total of 12
faculty were interviewed. Faculty participants were recruited at first using a representative

55

random 15% (n = 309) sample of current faculty who have taught at least one transferable
course. The 309 randomly selected faculty were emailed six times throughout the semester,
resulting in six interviews. After experiencing difficulty in recruitment, the sampling method was
changed to a snowball sample. An additional six faculty were recruited through the snowball
sample. More information on faculty participants is in Table 3.

Table 1
Survey: Student Participant Racial Background
Race/ethnicity (select all that apply) Percent Count
African American/Black
• One participant also identified as American Indian/Native
American/Indigenous American, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander,
Latinx/Hispanic, Multiracial/Multiethnic, and
White/European American.
2.88% 3
American Indian/Native American/Indigenous American 2.88% 3
Asian American/Asian 1.92% 2
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 1.92% 2
Latinx/Hispanic
• 12 participants also identified as African American/Black,
American Indian/Native American/Indigenous American,
Asian American/Asian, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander,
Multiracial/Multiethnic, and or White/European American.
76.92% 80
Middle Eastern/Arab American 0.00% 0
Multiracial/Multiethnic 5.77% 6
White/European American 7.69% 8
Total 100% 104

Note: Participants who identified with more than one race/ethnicity are counted in all
races/ethnicities they reported identifying with.

56

Table 2
Survey: Student Participant Year in School
Semesters on campus Percent Count Semesters on campus Percent Count
This is my first semester. 4.71% 4 5–6 semesters 15.29% 13
2 semesters 20.00% 17 7–8 semesters 12.94% 11
3–4 semesters 25.88% 22 9–10 semesters 8.24% 7
11+ semesters 12.94% 11
Total 100% 85

Table 3
Interviews: Faculty Participant Background
Name Race/ethnicity Gender
identity
Semesters
on campus
Academic department
Una Culturally Mixed Female 16 Communication
Ava White Female 14 Health/natural sciences
Eva Latina Female 12 Languages
Rocio Chicana Female 4 Social sciences
Chatli Salvadorean American Female 1 Arts
Victoria Mexican American Female 10 Social sciences
Marcelo Chicana Female 32 Languages
Tom White Female 20 Languages
Julian Chicano Male 50 Social sciences
Deathgrip Xicanx Male 42 Social sciences
JP Chicano Male 34 Social sciences
Wade White Male 11 Kinesiology

57

Most student respondents were Latinx identified, with 76.92% (n = 80) identifying as
Latinx and 1.92% (n = 2) identifying as Multiracial/Multiethnic and Latinx, as seen in Table 1. A
total of 2.88% (n = 3) of student respondents were Black/African American identified. One
student respondent identified as both Black and Latinx and with other races/ethnicities. Most
student respondents, 75.29% (n = 64), had attended the college for over a year, with 25.88% (n =
22) having been enrolled for 3–4 semesters, 15.29% (n = 13) for 5–6 semesters, 12.94% (n = 11)
for 7–8 semesters, 8.24% (n = 7) for 9–10 semesters, and 12.94% (n = 11) for 11 or more
semesters.
Most faculty participants, or 66.6% (n = 8), were Latinx, Chicana/o, Xicanx, Mexican
American, or Salvadorean American, as seen in Table 3. The next highest racial/ethnic
demographic in faculty participants was White, with 25% (n = 3) identifying as White, followed
by 8.3% (n = 1) identifying as Culturally Mixed. Most faculty participants, or 66.6% (n = 8),
identified as female and 33.33% (n = 4) identified as male. The number of semesters faculty
participants had worked at the college varied from 1 semester to 50 semesters. The academic
colleges represented in the faculty participants included Social Sciences (41.6%, n = 5),
Languages (25%, n = 3), Arts (8.3%, n = 1), Communication (8.3%, n = 1), Health/Natural
Sciences (8.3%, n = 1), and Kinesiology (8.3%, n = 1).
Survey: The Student Experience
Understanding the student experience with CRP is essential, considering that students are
the primary constituents of higher education pedagogy. A survey was used to collect Black and
Latinx students’ experience with CRP in the classroom setting. Quantitative data provides us
with information to understand if trends are occurring (Creswell, 2014), an important aspect in
understanding CRP's frequency and impact on Black and Latinx students. The survey questions

58

asked students about their sense of belonging or connectedness and their experience with CRP in
the classroom. The questions were developed using the goals of CRP and critical race theory as a
framework. Students were asked if specific experiences increased their intellectual/academic
skills, increased their understanding and or appreciation of cultures, developed how they view
societal issues, and provided them the opportunity to challenge and or solve societal issues.
Student survey participants were also asked how often specific experiences included context or
experiences that developed their intellectual/academic skills, content that represented their
racial/ethnic identities, incorporated student knowledge and or experience, and content relevant
to societal issues related to their racial/ethnic identities. Findings from the survey regarding
students feeling of connectedness, representation, and experience with culturally relevant
materials, are found in Figure 4–5.

Figure 4
Student Sense of Belonging/Connectedness

Note: One participant identified as both Black and Latinx and is therefore counted in both the
Black and Latinx data.

0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
Often/always felt
welcomed on campus
Often/always felt they
belonged on campus
Often/always see their
cultural identities
represented on campus
All respondents Black/African American respondents Latinx respondents

59

Figure 5
Student Course Experience

Note: One participant identified as both Black and Latinx and are therefore counted in both the
Black and Latinx data.

Most student participants felt a sense of belonging and felt represented on campus,
including in courses. As Figure 4 demonstrates, 86.82% (n = 70) of student respondents stated
that they often or always felt welcomed on campus, with 100% (n = 3) of Black students and
86.08% (n = 68) of Latinx students stating they often or always felt welcomed on campus. It is
important to note that 13.92% (n = 11) of Latinx student respondents said they sometimes or
never felt welcomed on campus. Slightly fewer student participants, or 79.01% (n = 64), stated
they often or always felt they belonged on campus. All (100%; n = 3) Black student respondents
and 78.48% (n = 62) of Latinx student respondents reported they often or always felt they
belonged on campus. A slightly higher percent, or 21.52% (n = 17) of Latinx students, reported
that they sometimes or never felt they belonged on campus.
Regarding representation on campus, 75.31% (n = 61) said they often or always see their
cultural identities represented. Also found in Figure 4, 66.67% (n = 2) of Black students said
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
The courses often or always included
readings, case studies, or materials that
are representative or inclusive of their
racial/ethnic identities.
The courses often or always included
materials related to societal events or
issues that impact their racial/ethnic
communities.
All respondents Black/African American respondents Latinx respondents

60

they always see their cultural identities represented on campus, while 33.33% (n = 1) said they
sometimes see their cultural identities represented on campus. Black student respondents'
experience with feeling represented differs from the other two sense of belonging/connectedness
findings, where all Black student respondents said they felt welcomed and felt they belonged.
For Latinx student respondents, 74.68% (n = 59), reported that they always see their cultural
identities represented on campus, and 25.32% (n = 20) reported they sometimes or never see
their cultural identities represented on campus.
Additional data on students’ experience with representative materials in courses
demonstrates that representation is an area that students experience the least when it comes to
sense of belonging. When asked how often courses included readings, case studies, or materials
representative or inclusive of their racial/ethnic identities, 58.44% (n = 45) of student survey
participants said courses often or always included these representative materials. In
disaggregating the data, 66.67% (n = 2) of Black student respondents and 57.34% (n = 43) of
Latinx student respondents said that courses always included readings, case studies, or
representative or inclusive materials of their racial/ethnic identities. It is important to note that
33.33% (n = 1) of Black students and 42.67% (n = 32) of Latinx students said their courses
sometimes or never included readings, case studies, or materials representative or inclusive of
their racial/ethnic identities. Similarly, 57.14% (n = 44) of student participants reported that
courses often or always included materials related to societal events or issues that impacted their
racial/ethnic communities. All (100%; n = 3) Black and 56% (n = 42) of Latinx survey
participants reported that courses often or always included materials related to societal events or
issues that impact their racial/ethnic communities, while 44% (n = 33) of Latinx students
reported courses sometimes or never include materials related to societal events or issues that

61

impact their racial/ethnic communities. The survey also asked student participants about the
forms of teaching they experienced. An overview of the findings is in Table 4–5 and in Figure 6–
7.

Table 4
Classroom Practices
Teaching format Percentage of students experienced Count
Lectures 94.36% 67
Group discussions 87.32% 62
Student presentations 67.6% 48
Guest speakers 40.84% 29
Student-led discussions 36.61% 26
Field trips 19.71% 14
Not listed 2.81% 2

62

Figure 6
Student Experience With Classroom Practices

Various types of teaching practices were experienced by student participants, with the
most common being lectures (94.36%, n = 67), group discussions (87.32%, n = 62), and student
presentations (67.6%, n = 48), as seen in Table 4. Teaching practices are referred to as the
activities used to engage students in the class content. The number of student participants that
have experienced each specific teaching practice and their experience with that teaching practice
is in Figure 6. Across the different teaching practices experienced, the development of
intellectual skills was the most experienced CRP practice, with an average of 75.69% of students
reporting that classroom practices often or always developed their intellectual skills. An average
of 69.59% of students reported classroom practices to often or always incorporate student
knowledge and or experience. Regarding representation, an average of 55.73% of students
reported classroom practices to often or always have content relevant to societal issues related to
their racial/ethnic identities. Similarly, an average of 53.29% of students reported often or always
experiencing content that represented their racial/ethnic identities in their classroom experiences.
0.00%
100.00%
Lectures
(n=62)
Group
discussions
(n=58)
Student
presentations
(n=45)
Guest
speakers
(n=26)
Student-led
discussions
(n=22)
Field trips
(n=12)
Often or always had content or experiences that developed your intellectual/academic skills.
Often or always content that represented your racial/ethnic identities.
Often or always incorporated student knowledge and or experience.
Lectures
(n = 62)
Group
discussions
(n = 58)
Student
presentations
(n = 45)
Guest
speakers
(n = 26)
Student-led
discussions
(n = 22)
Field trips
(n = 12)

63

Of students who selected each type of teaching practice, field trips received the highest percent
(91.67%, n = 11) of students reporting they often or always had content or experiences that
developed their intellectual/academic skills. Group discussions received the highest percent
(63.79%, n = 37) of students reporting they often or always had content representing their
racial/ethnic identities and the highest percent (65.52%, n = 38) of students sharing that they
often or always had content relevant to societal issues related to their racial/ethnic identities.
Student-led discussions received the highest percent (77.27%, n = 17) of student respondents
stating they often or always incorporated student knowledge and experience.

Table 5
Learning Practices
Learning measure Percentage of students experienced Count
Test 90.32% 56
Essays/reports 90.32% 56
Group work 77.41% 48
Presentations 70.96% 44
Reflections 56.45% 35
Not listed 4.83% 3

64

Figure 7
Student Experiences With Learning Practices

In addition to the classroom practices, the survey also asked students about the types of
learning practices experienced by students, as seen in Table 5. Learning practices refer to the
activities used to gather information on students’ understanding of class content. The most
common learning practices were tests (90.32%, n = 56), essays/reports (90.32%, n = 56), and
group work (77.41%, n = 48). The number of students who have experienced a specific learning
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
Tests (n=55) Essays/Reports
(n=55)
Reflections
(n=34)
Presentations
(n=44)
Group work
(n=47)
Often or always challenged your intellectual/academic skills.
Often or always increased your intellectual/academic skills.
Often or always incorporated student knowledge and or experience.
Often or always utilized content that represented your racial/ethnic identities.
Often or always increased your understanding and or appreciation of cultures.
Often or always utilized content relevant to societal issues related to your racial/ethnic
identities.
Tests (n = 55) Essays/Reports
(n = 55)
Reflections
(n = 34)
Presentations
(n = 44)
Group work
(n = 47)

65

practice and their experience with it is in Figure 7. Across the different learning practices, an
average of 76.60% of students reported that teaching practices often or always challenged their
intellectual/academic skills and 73.83% often or always increased their intellectual/academic
skills. An average of 69.50% said learning practices often or always incorporated student
knowledge and or experience. An average of 59.92% said learning practices often or always
increased their understanding and or appreciation of cultures, while 56.13% often or always
developed how they view societal issues. An average of 53.91% of students reported that
learning practices often or always provided the opportunity to challenge and or solve societal
issues. Regarding representation, 52.33% of students reported learning practices often or always
utilized content that represented their racial/ethnic identities, and 51.01% often or always utilized
content relevant to societal issues related to their racial/ethnic identities. Of students who
selected each type of learning practice, essays/reports received the highest percent (83.64%, n =
46) of students that said their intellectual/academic skills were often or always challenged.
Essays/reports also received the highest percentage of students who said essays/reports often or
always increased their intellectual/academic skills (83.65%, n = 46), incorporated student
knowledge and or experience (80%, n = 44), and developed how they view societal issues
(65.45%, n = 36). Reflections had the highest percent (64.70%, n = 18) of students reporting they
often or always utilized content representing their racial/ethnic identities, and the highest percent
(67.64%, n = 23) of students reporting they often or always increased their understanding and or
appreciation of cultures. Group work received the highest percent (55.31%, n = 26) of students
reporting they often or always utilized content relevant to societal issues related to their
racial/ethnic identities. Presentations received the highest percentage of students (63.64%, n =
28), reporting they often or always provided the opportunity to challenge or solve societal issues.

66

The survey also asked students about their experience with faculty, as seen in Figure 8.
Students said that faculty most frequently express beliefs in their abilities to succeed (77.05%, n
= 47), beliefs in their intelligence and academic skills (75%, n = 45), and appreciation/value for
their contributions (73.77%, n = 45). The least frequent experiences students had with faculty
included addressing social issues related to their racial/ethnic identities (47.54%, n = 29),
challenging systemic issues that impact communities of color (55%, n = 33), and challenging
negative stereotypes related to race or ethnicity (57.37%, n = 35).

67

Figure 8
Students Experience With Faculty

Faculty Use of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
The following section will provide an overview of the qualitative findings from the
interviews with faculty. Three themes emerged: intentional engagement, reconstructing academic
norms, and faculty mindsets.
Theme 1: Intentional Engagement
Intentional engagement refers to the practices used by faculty to incorporate Black and
Latinx students in the classroom. Faculty participants expressed care, used validation, and
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
All respondents (n=61) Black/African American
respondents (n=2)
Latinx respondents (n=60)
Often or always express belief in my abilities to succeed.
Often or always express belief in my intelligence and academic skills.
Often or always express genuine care for my success.
Often or always express appreciation/value for my contributions.
Often or always demonstrate appreciation for my or others culture.
Often or always utilized cultural experiences for in class examples or assignments.
Often or always challenge negative stereotypes related to race or ethnicity.
Often or always addressed societal issues that impact communities of color.
Often or always challenge systemic issues that impact communities of color.
All respondents (n = 61) Black/African American
respondents (n = 2)
Latinx respondents (n = 60)

68

demonstrated belief in students’ success. By expressing care or using validation, faculty engaged
with students on a deeper level with their academics, skills, and cultural wealth. By engaging
students with more than just the course content, faculty demonstrated deliberate support for
students, particularly Black and Latinx students. Faculty participants also intentionally engaged
with students by ensuring representation of diverse society, history, or culture in course materials
and acknowledging racism and systemic issues related to course topics and content. All faculty
participants discussed using intentional engagement. This section will review how faculty
participants utilized intentional engagement.
Expressing Care
All faculty participants intentionally engaged students through their expression of care.
Expressing care was demonstrated through faculty’s interest in supporting student academic
success, demonstrating empathy and allyship, and through informal mentoring of students or
serving as institutional agents. Many interview participants shared an interest in supporting
students academically and a desire to see students succeed. Una said,
I want my students to be able to compete with students who’ve attended Ivy League
universities, everybody has the ability to do that. So, I want to get them prepared for that
because in the real world, they are going to be competing with students who went to
quote-unquote, more prestigious, reputable universities.”
Una demonstrated care through her interest in her student's success and ability to compete with
students from other institutions. Similarly, Eva expressed a desire to help prepare her students for
life after college. Eva stated, “I see how committed my students are to transfer and to be
successful. And I want to just help them prepare as much as possible for the expectations of
higher ed.” Una and Eva intentionally engaged with students when they expressed care for

69

students’ academic preparation and demonstrated interest in students’ success. Compared to
simply sharing needed skills with students, the conversations faculty like Una and Eva had with
students about their academic success were part of a plan to bolster students’ sense of confidence
and draw on student assets and abilities to impact their success.
Another form in which faculty participants demonstrated care was through checking in
with students regarding societal events impacting the country, especially those that
disproportionately impact Black and Latinx students. The 2020–2021 academic year was filled
with events that undoubtedly impacted students’ well-being, from the often graphic public
murders of Black lives, inhumane treatment of immigrants and refugees, to the 2020 election and
the COVID-19 pandemic. Victoria shared how checking in with students, particularly around the
societal events that disproportionately impact Black and Latinx students, is a practice she feels is
vital in supporting students holistically. She said,
I think checking in with students asking them how they’re doing, being
comfortable to address social issues that are occurring. I think that sometimes it’s
like an elephant in the room, or we choose not to bring it up, because it’s
something that we’re uncomfortable with. … But the reality is that our students
are dealing with these issues. Therefore, you know, it’s important to address
them. … And being able to embrace the entire student holistically means, you
know, embracing societal issues as well.
By addressing societal issues in her classroom, Victoria demonstrated that she cared for
students and the impact external events may have on them. Instead of allowing racist and
unjust events to loom over the class, Victoria provided a space for students to
decompress. Victoria intentionally engaged with students when she demonstrated care for

70

students’ wellbeing by providing a space in class to discuss and reflect on the societal
issues impacting students.
Mentorship and Advocacy. Another form in which faculty interview participants
expressed care was through their mentorship and advocacy for Black and Latinx students.
Although no participants held a formal mentor role, many shared examples of how they support
students in a way that a mentor would. For example, JP reflected on the importance of listening
to students and connecting them to resources or a network. JP stated,
Listening to them, seeing what their goals are, what their aspirations are, connecting
them. So like if they’re really interested in let’s say, law, can I connect them to a mentor
who is an attorney, right? Um, who is Latino, right? Just so that they can see like what
they have been through.
Instead of just referring students to the career center, JP demonstrated care by intentionally
engaging with students to understand their experiences and goals to help them build networks
with professionals that may share similar cultural and identity-specific experiences.
Institutional Agents. Similarly, faculty participants also expressed care by serving as
institutional agents. Institutional agents are non-kin, high-level professionals or faculty who hold
enough power to provide critical support to underrepresented students and aid in their success
(Stanton-Salazar, 2011). Marcelo noted,
I am here as their institutional agent, right, I’m sure to hold the door open. Like, I
had to open the friggin doors like everywhere, you know, and it’s unfair for me to
have to close them again … that would be going against, you know, who I am as
an educator. And so I feel like because I had to unlock so many of them, or like,

71

freakin tear down the door, like, they’re gone now, you know. And I want our
students to be able to navigate that higher ed space.
Marcelo understood that higher education could be a difficult journey for students of color and
expressed care by supporting students in navigating education without having to experience the
difficulties and barriers she experienced. Marcelo intentionally engaged students by conversing
with them about the systemic barriers she had to break through and by sharing her experience to
support their academic journeys.
Validation and Belief in Student Success
Another form in which intentional engagement manifested in the data was through
faculty validation of students or believing in their success. Faculty interview participants
validated students or demonstrated that they believe in their success through conscious
engagement with students in conversation, collective learning, and empowerment sessions.
Although 11 faculty interviewed expressed using validation or believing in students’ success,
there was a clear range in how faculty used validation to engage students.
For example, participants expressed validation through statements such as “you got this!”
or “great job!” Faculty participants used validation statements to students individually in class
and when providing feedback in students’ assignments. Although some would argue that making
a statement is not proper validation, there may still be power in this simple form of expression.
As Wade commented, “I’ve learned that just saying it goes a long way. … I kind of assumed that
other people also don’t need a lot of validation, and I’m learning that that’s wrong.”
In addition, eight participants expressed validation and belief in a students’ success by
intentionally engaging students in conversations that recognized their skills and empowered them
to overcome obstacles. Chatli validated students by debunking the idea that access to expensive

72

technology makes someone successful in their field. Chatli shared, “Photoshop doesn’t make you
an amazing designer, you know, having a Mac computer doesn’t make you a brilliant designer.
It’s really what’s in here and how you use it.” Chatli intentionally engaged with students by
validating their skills and strengths through conversations that demonstrated her belief in their
ability to succeed. Similarly, Eva stated,
In responding to their ideas, I let them know that they’re capable. I engage authentically
with them, as peers, as in a learning community. … I show them how much I learned
from them, based off what they’re sharing with me.
Eva validated students by confirming that their contributions are vital to the learning
environment. She further validated students’ knowledge by debunking the idea that only faculty
are holders of knowledge and enforcing a learning community where everyone learns from each
other. Eva and Chatli demonstrated a deeper engagement with students through their validating
conversations that demonstrate to students that they too have skills, knowledge, and can succeed.
Connections to Society, History, and Culture
Making a connection to society, history, and culture relevant to students through the
course content selected, the assignments created, and acknowledgments made in class appeared
to be a strategy to intentionally engage students in the course content, particularly Black and
Latinx students. In making connections to society, history, and culture, faculty participants
acknowledged racism and systemic issues that disproportionately impact Black and Latinx
students. Acknowledging racism and systemic issues allows Black, Latinx, and other
underrepresented student identities to feel heard, cared for, and supported. This was
accomplished through making statements and announcements or through discussions with
students or in class. All faculty interviewed made connections to society, history, and culture,

73

and 11 faculty participants intentionally engaged students by acknowledging racism and
systemic issues in their course. Rocio stated,
We look at statistics around the students in Los Angeles County and in California,
and then the statistics around the teachers. And so the first thing that they see,
because I just asked them, like, what do you observe, what do you see is majority
of teachers are White women. And so we just talk about like cultural mismatch,
and what can happen as a result.
Rocio demonstrated how she incorporates current data into a class presentation and
discussion. This data is connected to society because it presents information on the local
community, in this case, the student and teacher demographics of Los Angeles. The data also
connects to a racial disparity occurring in the community, that of cultural mismatch in the Los
Angeles education system. It was clear that Rocio planned to engage students by connecting
course content to societal data relevant to the community that students may be familiar with.
Similarly, Tom made connections to society and history through the course assignments,
such as a research paper. The purpose of the research paper is to examine an element of
White supremacy as a system of oppression. Although other participants did express
making connections through assignments, Tom’s example extends to all assignments in
the course. Tom explained show she purposefully structured all assignments to be
connected to society and history.
Throughout the entire semester, like the way that the writing assignments are, the
first writing assignment is an awakening, where they have to reflect. I mean, I talk
about George Floyd, right. … I say the entire country has experienced an
awakening. What’s an awakening that you have experienced? And so everything

74

is tied, like their first essay is about their own experience. And then the second
essay is more formal. They have to look at a marginalized community, and then
that can flow very naturally into their research paper, which is about the system of
White supremacy, and their essay about hope. … It’s not, you know, writing for
the sake of writing, it’s writing for the sake of better understanding our world,
how to communicate in that world, to others who may not agree with us, right.
Despite the course objectives not being centered around society or history, Tom
demonstrated how an entire course could be relevant by using the assignments. Tom also
explained how these connections impact the course outcomes and skills by allowing students to
practice critical writing and communication. Tom intentionally engaged students through the
course assignments by connecting the assignments to the historical and societal issues that
disproportionately impact many Black and Latinx students.
Chatli also shared how she connects society, history, and culture through the skills
students practice in the course. Chatli said,
One of the things that I promote and kind of walk the students through right away
before we kick off a project for designing, is the contextual analysis and research
and observation piece. And that looks like, you know, what does gentrification
look like? How do we define that, you know? What is socio-economic
differences, what is community? You know, what was here before this? You
know, can you do like a mapping of migrations of a population?
The outcomes or skills students practice in Chatli’s example are contextual analysis and
observation. These skills could have been accomplished without incorporating the
importance of revealing historical, systemic issues such as gentrification, socio-economic

75

differences, and the stealing of Native lands. Chatli intentionally engaged students by
connecting society and history to the course and by encouraging students to use a critical
lens when applying the skills associated with the course.
Eva demonstrated how she uses class announcements to acknowledge racism and
systemic issues impacting communities of color outside the classroom. Eva stated,
I always make it a point to send out announcements that acknowledge right the
rise in Asian hate crimes. We had a very hard summer last summer, right. And I
acknowledged it in all of my classes, even the pandemic as a crisis that has
disproportionately affected Black and Brown students, you know, Black and
Latinx students. Talking about that, and creating the space to talk about that, I’ve
never shied away from.
Eva shared how acknowledging recent events that impact Black and Latinx students, such as hate
crimes, police brutality, and even the COVID-19 pandemic, is a practice she uses in her courses.
Similarly, Ava reported speaking to the different political issues that impact Black and Latinx
students in her courses. Ava said,
Politics has direct effects on your lives and the things that we see that affect our personal
lives are because of the racism built into the political systems in the United States.
Sometimes these are directly because of racism against Black and Latinx people.
Ava acknowledged how politics impact the lives of Black and Latinx communities and made a
direct connection to the racism that is built into the system of the United States. By
acknowledging how systemic issues impact our daily lives in the classroom, Eva and Ava
demonstrate a level of understanding and allyship for Black and Latinx students.

76

Deathgrip also acknowledged systemic issues that impact Black and Latinx communities
in his class. Deathgrip noted,
This is what’s happening in the prison industrial complex, right. We’re seeing like the
murdering and annihilation of multiple Black and Brown trans bodies. … How does this
also reflect White supremacy within the prison industrial complex … how do we bring
what’s happening around us into our classrooms to be able to understand these larger
phenomena?
Deathgrip acknowledged societal events, connected them to larger systemic issues, and
embedded this concept into the class discussion and in his intentional engagement of students.
Victoria also acknowledged racism and systemic issues by incorporating modules into the course
that address racism. Victoria stated,
In our last module, we talked about microaggressions, and how, what that might look like
… and really how they can see them in the classroom, unfortunately, and then how they
can connect with someone on campus, should they experience any of these forms of
microaggressions.
Both Deathgrip and Victoria shared acknowledging racism and systemic issues that impact Black
and Latinx students in their class by incorporating them as topics to be discussed.
Another way faculty participants expressed making connections to society, history, and
culture was by acknowledging students’ cultural wealth. Participants used frameworks such as
Yosso’s Community Cultural Wealth to bring attention to Black and Latinx students' wealth. As
Julian indicated, “They’re already coming in right, not only with their cultural wealth, but also
with a wealth of experience. So I help them, I specifically have them explore that, in the
autobiographical paper that I do.” Faculty participants connected to students’ cultural wealth

77

through reflections, class discussions, essays, and other course assignments. Julian intentionally
engaged students by connecting course assignments with topics that are relevant to students.
Representation
Eleven faculty participants shared that they intentionally use representation to engage
Black and Latinx students with the course material. Representation includes incorporating
cultural, racial, or ethnically representative materials and content to ensure multiple identities are
present, particularly identities that reflect the campus population and underrepresented identities.
Although this is similar to the prior subtheme of making connections to society, history, and
culture, there was a clear distinction between connections and representation. Representation
included efforts to showcase Black and Latinx scholars and public figures because of the need to
diversify the White-centered curriculum and content. Representation also included an
understanding of the importance of representation in the course to engage Black and Latinx
students. Wade shared,
If I say this is a healthy diet, and I’m talking about foods that are very familiar to
me, right, but are not familiar to the students in my classroom, then the implicit
message there is, you know, you’re unhealthy because the foods that you eat,
right, the foods that you grew up with, the foods that you know, are unhealthy or
bad foods.
Wade demonstrated his understanding of the importance of representation by sharing
how single-story examples can send negative implicit messages about stories not
represented. In Wade’s example, not including meals that may represent Black and
Latinx students when referencing healthy meals assumes they are not healthy. By
incorporating various foods to ensure representation, Wade attempted to engage Black

78

and Latinx students in the course intentionally.
Ava stated,
I took as many as I could pictures of White people out of my exams and my lectures and
replaced them with other people, Black, Latinx, Asian, Indigenous people. … My
students see people who look like them instead of all of the examples being White
people.
Ava shared her intent for students of color to see themselves represented in the learning
environment by including images of other races or ethnicities. Ava shared that she purposefully
included other races and ethnicities into the visual references used, which were primarily White
people prior to this. Ava intentionally engaged students of color in her course by using
representation in visual references of people of color in the course materials.
Inclusion of course content such as books and readings by Black and Latinx authors or
public figures is another way faculty expressed using representation in their teaching practice.
Marcelo shared how she consciously selected a book for her course. Marcelo commented,
I thought about our status as a Hispanic serving institution. … You know, we are 51%
Latino, yet a lot of what we do does not celebrate that … and I wanted to do something
that would actually represent our Central American students, so I selected a Salvadoran
American poet.
Marcelo recognized the need to represent the large Latinx campus population in the course
readings and disaggregate the Latinx population to represent Central Americans, a population
within the Latinx population that is typically not represented.
Marcelo provided another example of how she uses representation and its impact on a
student. She said,

79

Another thing that our students really liked, and that was learning about
microaggressions. Specifically, it was ethnic, racial, LGBTQ microaggressions.
And they’ve learned something called the raven framework, and that comes from
the work of Dr. James Wood and Dr. Frank Harris. … I included the original
document, the PDF, and you can see their little pictures at the bottom and our
male Black students were like, holy shit, these are like two Black scholars. And
it’s just like, yeah, they are, and they’re amazing. I had one student in particular,
who was like, I wanted to read other stuff that they published, and so like, he
went, he took it upon himself to go into our library databases to look up Dr. J
Luke Wood.
Although most faculty interviewed utilized articles or books written by Black and Latinx
scholars, Marcelo also included the topic of microaggressions, with scholarly articles written by
Black scholars, which piqued the interest of at least one Black student. Marcelo intentionally
engaged students by ensuring representation through readings and scholars or public figures
representing the students' racial demographics in her class and underrepresented communities.
Theme 2: Reconstructing Academic Norms
Reconstructing academic norms refers to faculty challenging well-known academic
practices to support students’ academic success and learning. Faculty participants demonstrated
an understanding that some academic practices were obstructing the success of Black, Latinx,
and underrepresented students, resulting in a need to restructure the practice. This included being
flexible with assignments and providing equitable support. Eleven faculty participants expressed
reconstructing academic norms to support students academically. Eleven participants expressed

80

providing equitable support and nine expressed having flexibility with assignments. This section
will discuss how faculty participants reconstruct academic norms in their classrooms.
Equitable Support
Most interview participants expressed having equitable support policies in their courses.
Equitable support includes structuring the course to acknowledge and provide opportunities for
students with different learning styles. Ava shared,
Equity-mindedness in my class is making sure that everybody has the resources that they
need to succeed. And if that means that somebody gets to use a laptop to take notes,
instead of writing by hand then they use a laptop. If somebody records the lecture, so that
they can listen to it again, because they process things more slowly, they can do that.
Ava demonstrated how her classroom becomes an equitable space for learning by allowing
students to use the resources they need for their learning experience. Ava reconstructed academic
norms by allowing students to use technology to take notes and record, a practice typically not
allowed in classes. Similarly, Victoria stated,
Understanding that for some students, you know, the discussion boards might be
something where they flourish. But we wanted to make sure that there were
various methods of learning opportunities. So, whether that was a discussion
board or more of a one-on-one assignment or a group assignment, [I] want to
make sure that there’s a variety of learning opportunities.
Instead of just providing one form of activity for students to accomplish the course outcomes,
Victoria demonstrated how she purposefully incorporates multiple types of course activities to
meet the needs of different learning styles. Typically, students are expected to adapt to the course
and use resources such as those found in student affairs to assist their learning. By incorporating

81

different learning activities, Victoria reconstructed her course to provide equitable support to
students without having students self-identify their needs.
Another form of providing equitable support was having policies and classroom
environments that support students financially, a role faculty are typically not responsible for.
Interview participants offered accessible articles instead of books or required more affordable
books for their courses. Similarly, interview participants provided alternatives to expensive tools
or software required to complete assignments as another way to support students financially. For
example, Chatli shared how she works with students who do not have access to expensive
equipment to ensure they complete the assignment and gain the needed skills.
I will actually go out and ask the students, okay you know, don’t do the most
expensive equipment. Just try to do the bare minimum, and then we’ll work from
it. And then once I see what we get back, if somebody is just going out there to
sketch or doing something, I try to offset them. … I can go out there and do that
documentation so you can just focus on the design part or something like that. It
happened to me, where like students can’t afford supplies … a lot of supplies
require a lot of money. … And so it’s when a student comes to me and says, hey,
I have kind of economic insecurity, it’s not really working out. I’m like, don’t
worry. I’ll make tutorials that are just with some basic materials, or even pens and
stuff, so you have it.
By providing more accessible options, faculty challenge academic structures that traditionally
place the burden of financing education solely on students.
Eight faculty participants also expressed the importance of self-reflection in order to
provide an equitable classroom environment. Tom commented, “We got to focus on equity and

82

what that looks like in the educational environment. And it means constant reflection on the
teachers and on the institutions part, I think, to make sure that we are serving our students.”
Wade reflected on equity in his classroom environment by rethinking how learning is assessed
and what grades represent. He said,
So, equity mindedness is me letting go of … that somehow my assessment
strategies in the course that I’ve put together are so perfect … that somehow I
could assess learning by holding it to this kind of rigid framework that I’ve set up.
And that way the course that I teach has some sort of deep meaning, right. And
that is of course a student getting a B in my course, and that means exactly this
and well, it, it doesn’t. Let’s just be honest, it doesn’t, right. So, what does equity
mean, mindedness means that a student came to me, and I took them wherever
they are, and I increased their knowledge.
Similarly, Marcelo shared that she believes equity comes with practicing CRP because it
causes faculty to think about how to equitability support students. Marcelo said,
I believe that to achieve equity-mindedness, we need to recognize injustice and students
who have been historically underserved. And we need to think about ways to serve those
students. And that’s where cultural relevance informs that. So I would say that it’s not
necessarily the equity-minded lens, but it’s the cultural relevant lens that really pushes for
relevant instruction for our Black and Brown students.
Tom, Wade, and Marcelo demonstrated that reflecting and rethinking how courses are structured
can cause one to identify needed changes to transform the course into a more equitable
experience. Whether that is accomplished by restructuring how learning is measured and

83

redefining the meaning of grades or utilizing CRP, faculty reflection of their practice is key to
creating a more equitable course.
Assignment Freedom
Nine faculty participants reconstructed academic norms by providing flexibility with
assignment topics and deadlines. Typically, faculty set assignment topics and deadlines, but the
nine participants in the study that demonstrated assignment freedom provided students the
opportunity to set topics and deadlines. Furthermore, faculty participants who expressed having
assignment freedom demonstrated an understanding that students have additional
responsibilities. As Ava shared, “So many of them are working, they have families, they’re
helping to take care of younger siblings, or nieces and nephews, and by having those flexible
policies, they were able to manage their time better, and do the work.” Ava recognized that
academic norms such as deadlines are constructed around historically traditional students with
little family responsibilities and do not consider all student populations. Interviewed faculty also
expressed understanding that learning should not be restricted by subjective things such as time
or topic. This section will provide examples to demonstrate how faculty incorporate assignment
freedom in their course structure.
Nine faculty were flexible with deadlines and provided extensions. Rocio stated,
Any time students have asked for an extension, or I see that they’re falling behind,
and I’ll reach out to them, I’ve always just extended deadlines, I think, this year in
particular. … as long as they’re doing the work, and if they need extra time to do
it, that’s fine with me. … I feel like my flexibility as much as I can [is a]
humanizing kind of approach.

84

As Rocio demonstrated, faculty understood that students have additional responsibilities that
impact their student identity, such as work, supporting family, and mental health. This is
important because it reveals to faculty how academic norms such as deadlines can limit students
with multiple roles and responsibilities, supporting faculty in their decision to challenge
academic norms such as deadlines. Wade also shared he was flexible with deadlines to provide
students with multiple roles and responsibilities with flexibility. Wade commented, “I don’t have
closing dates for any assignments. … I want to give them some time to kind of, you know, get in
anything that they can that for whatever reason they weren’t able to.” By allowing students to
submit assignments until the end of the course, Wade demonstrates he is empathetic towards the
many responsibilities students may have and gives students autonomy to organize their priorities.
Another way faculty participants provided assignment freedom was by allowing for re-
submission of assignments. One of the primary reasons faculty participants expressed allowing
re-submissions was because they believed it positively impacted the learning process. Tom
stated,
Who writes a perfect draft, first draft? Nobody. … even expert writers don’t write
beautifully the first time, right? It’s a process … and so I kind of want to make
sure that they’re, you know, they have to be able to revise and improve their
grade. … They’ve got a draft. So what did I do wrong, and how do I fix it?
Similarly, Ava shared how she also allows students to re-submit assignments to assist with
learning. Ava said,
So rather than having everybody turn something in, and then me grading it, and
then ignoring the things that they missed, because they got a bad score on it, now
they turn something in, I grade it, I give it back to them, and then they can fix

85

those things and turn it back in. So now that becomes another learning experience,
a better learning process, and they’re learning from those mistakes, instead of
getting punished for those mistakes.
Both Ava and Tom demonstrate that they prioritize student learning in their course by
allowing students to re-submit assignments.
Assignment freedom also includes allowing students to select topics they are interested in
engaging with. Nine faculty interviewed, such as JP, shared that they allow students to select
their topic because it encourages students to further engage with their interests. JP shared,
There’s an array of topics that they can choose from, whether it’s immigration, whether it
may be … Chavez regime, right. And so they got to learn about that history, and then
they were able to do their own research on what they want to focus on.
Similarly, Wade changed an assignment's topic to incorporate students' needs. Wade stated,
I actually dropped the whole project. I said, you can do the project if you want to,
but if you’d rather talk about, you know, your external experiences right now …
what’s going on in the world, and how that’s affecting you right now, you can
write about that instead. And most students chose to write about George Floyd
and … shifting over to being online, and, you know, all the kind of struggles and
trauma they were having.
Theme 3: Faculty Mindsets
Faculty mindset includes principles or a mentality that prioritizes support for Black and
Latinx student success. These include understanding racism and the societal issues that impact
Black and Latinx students, the belief that everyone has wealth/knowledge, and understanding the
importance of de-centering Whiteness. All faculty participants demonstrated having at least one

86

mindset: Twelve participants demonstrated they understood racism and the societal issues that
impact Black and Latinx students, 11 expressed the belief that everyone has wealth/knowledge,
and nine talked about the importance of de-centering Whiteness.
Understanding Societal Issues and Racism
All faculty participants understood the societal issues and racism that impact Black and
Latinx students. It is clear this is a mindset faculty hold when practicing CRP because it can be
found within all the themes presented in this study. Having this mindset means that faculty can
identify structures or constructs that disproportionately impact Black and Latinx students. Nine
faculty interviewed were able to identify racist structures or systems within education. For
example, Deathgrip shared his understanding of the education system and its exclusion and
manipulation of Black and Latinx histories. Deathgrip reported,
We’re given a very specific historical and contemporary viewpoint that does not reflect, I
think, cultural relevance and erases cultural relevance. … I like to call it, these schools
practice educational genocide, where we don’t learn anything about who we are, our
place in history, or if we do, we learn about ourselves as being less than human or
dehumanized.
Another example is when Eva commented on how the education system does not serve
Black and Latinx students. Eva said,
Yeah, that structure does not work, it causes a lot of harm. … And we have to
understand that the institution is already privileging some forms of cultural
knowledge. So to deny those cultural experiences for Black and Latinx students,
that’s a problem. … the institution doesn’t really know how to engage first-gen
students, and it doesn’t really know how to engage [students] that are non-White.

87

… they don’t know how to engage first-gen students who are Black and Latinx.
We have to recognize that the institution was not made for us. And so we really
need to carve out that space.
Both Deathgrip and Eva shared an understanding that omitting cultural relevance from education
is a systemic issue, one that I would argue is a form of racism. Deathgrip and Eva demonstrated
that they hold a mindset that understands societal issues and racism by identifying how education
excludes Black and Latinx students and histories.
Marcelo shared her understanding of how racism and societal issues impact the
educational experience of Black and Latinx students. Marcelo stated,
They’re so entrenched in policy, they’re so entrenched in curriculum, especially
curriculum instruction, that oftentimes educators teach, or they plan curriculum,
based on the way they were taught, or based on what they think is, quote-unquote,
academic or rigorous. And I’ve found that oftentimes that academic rigor is
oftentimes code for White. And so, if people say we need to maintain that, what
they’re saying is that we need to maintain White supremacy.
In this example, Marcelo spoke to the belief that some educators hold a belief that questions
rigor and pedagogy when it includes frameworks such as CRP and critical race theory. Marcelo
seemed to challenge this idea and argued that maintaining a structure established for White
students is equivalent to supporting White supremacy. By identifying how ideas and beliefs can
maintain racist structures in education, Marcelo demonstrated her understanding of how racism
impacts the educational experience of Black and Latinx students.

88

The faculty interviewed also used self-reflection to understand how racism and societal
issues impact their pedagogy. For example, Wade indicated how he reflects on his biases and
teaching practices to ensure Whiteness is not excluding students. Wade shared,
As a White instructor, I recognize that the material I present has very often been
White-centered or euro-centered. Go figure. And, so part of my role is simply in
examining my own kind of biases, and White centered teaching, and stretching
beyond that, right, and recognizing that there are other cultural displays of wealth
beyond what I have known and what my personal experiences are.
Similar to Marcelo, Wade demonstrated an understanding that racism exists in our beliefs and
values. For this reason, Wade recognized the need to reflect and ensure his ideas and practices do
not uphold racist structures.
Everyone Has Wealth and Knowledge
Another mindset interview participants held was that everyone, including students, comes
with wealth and knowledge. This mindset questions the White European-centered definition of
knowledge and who holds it. Faculty with this mindset also utilized frameworks such as Yosso’s
Community Cultural Wealth (2005), which is widely applied to show that students of color come
with cultural capital. Ava said, “A lot of people are very ignorant of the contributions to society,
and especially science, made by people who are not White Europeans.” Eleven faculty
participants had a mindset that acknowledges that everyone has wealth and knowledge.
Rocio noted how intelligence comes in many forms. She said, “Even when we have
conversations around quote-unquote, intelligence of our students. I talk about the different types
of intelligence that go beyond just the, you know, kind of logical, mathematical kind.” Rocio
acknowledged that intelligence is commonly used to refer to specific kinds of knowledge and

89

shared that she clarifies with students that intelligence has many forms. By acknowledging the
different kinds of intelligence, Rocio reconstructed the academic norm of intelligence being
associated with specific fields, student identities, or cultures, demonstrating her belief that
everyone has knowledge.
Similarly, Marcelo connected standard course learning outcomes and skills with students’
cultural wealth. She stated,
Before our curriculum was really focused on discrete skills, like time
management, and metacognition, and test-taking. And we totally just said, this is
so like, deficit. … I mean, our students know time management. Like if they’re
babysitting a sibling or a child and then having to work and then, you know,
having to cook dinner, like that’s all-time management, you know. And so, to not
acknowledge that, that’s frickin racist.
Marcelo demonstrated that she understands students come with skills, such as time management,
acquired from their experiences or culture. Tom also demonstrated this understanding. Tom said,
It’s very much about, you know, listening to the lived experiences of our students
and recognizing the capital that they have, in their language, right, in their
cultures, in their traditions. And historically, how education has not seen that …
we have this deficit mindset, right about those forms of capital, when in reality
that’s not correct. It’s the opposite, right. Those are incredibly valuable and
useful.
Both Marcelo and Tom understood that students come with skills and knowledge they acquired
from their experiences and understand that these skills and knowledge are often not recognized
in education. This mindset is the opposite of what academia typically promotes, which is that

90

knowledge and experience are gained from education. In understanding that everyone has
knowledge and wealth, faculty deconstruct the academic norm that only a few hold wealth and
knowledge.
Importance of De-centering Whiteness
Faculty participants who expressed the importance of de-centering Whiteness
demonstrated this mindset by acknowledging the systemic issue of White European-centric
experiences and practices dominating education. This mindset differs from understanding
societal issues and racism and from representation because it explicitly calls for an interruption
of Whiteness. Furthermore, participants who expressed this mindset understand that centering
Whiteness is a problem because it excludes Black and Latinx identities. As Marcelo noted,
Once we de-center Whiteness, all other cultures are able to advance and emerge.
… I think that really represents that Eurocentric dominant power that we truly
need to interrupt in order for our Black and Brown students to succeed. And we
need to recognize the historical issues, you know, the various issues of
segregation, and redlining, right, and all of these different ways that Black and
Brown students were left behind. And recognize that scholars like Ladson-
Billings are really just trying to remediate some of those wrongs.
Although all faculty interviewed expressed an understanding of racism and the societal issues
that impact Black and Latinx students, only nine spoke about the importance of de-centering
Whiteness.
Seven faculty participants utilized readings from Black and Latinx scholars to eliminate
the single-story narrative. Deathgrip states, “Yeah, I try to use as much as I can, that kind of
brings that in, to tell multiple stories instead of one.” Deathgrip acknowledged that the course

91

would focus on one story without incorporating content from other cultures and experiences. He
shared a desire to eliminate the single-story, demonstrating the mindset of de-centering
Whiteness. Similarly, Tom shared how because she is White, she intentionally chooses the text
to center the course around instead of centering the course around her knowledge. Tom reported,
“I’m White, I can’t be the voice of it. So that’s why choice of texts is important, right, centering
other voices, not my voice.” Although the academic norm is for faculty to be the leader and
holder of knowledge in the classroom, Tom recognized a need to step back from the course to
allow Black and Latinx voices to be a part of the educational experience.
Another way the importance of de-centering Whiteness was expressed was through
faculty participants’ reflection of how they structure their curriculum. Rocio shared how
Whiteness is centered even when developing a course that includes CRP and critical race theory.
Rocio said,
We often think about what parents are going to get upset when we have these
conversations, you know. … we often fear the conservative parent, but she was
saying you should be afraid of me like, you should be afraid that I’m going to call
in and say like, why aren’t you covering this? Why aren’t you covering that?. …
we often have Whiteness at the center of our worries. And, you know, are people
going to feel comfortable or uncomfortable, not comfortable? And we don’t think
about everyone else.
Rocio expressed how many fear de-centering Whiteness but do not fear the consequences of
centering it. This is relevant to the recent legislation to exclude critical race theory in the K–12
curriculum, where almost half of the United States has introduced legislation to ban critical race
theory. These legislative bans demonstrate how the country fears Whiteness and constantly

92

centers and accommodates it. Rocio acknowledged that Whiteness should not be our concern,
demonstrating an understating of the importance of de-centering Whiteness and reconstructing
academic norms.
Comparing the Intent and Impact
The following section will provide an overview of areas where quantitative and
qualitative findings overlap. Despite the differing populations, the quantitative data overlapped
with two out of three themes. There was no quantitative data collected from students regarding
their experience with the theme of reconstructing academic norms, which included two
subthemes: Equitable support and assignment freedom. No data was collected for the subtheme
Importance of De-centering Whiteness, a faculty mindset. Comparing the two datasets to identify
if any convergence between faculty’s intended use of CRP and students’ experience with CRP is
an important step to understanding CRP in community colleges.
Impact of Intentional Engagement
Intentional engagement has four sub-themes: (a) expressing care; (b) validation and belief
in student success; (c) connections to society, history, and culture, and; (d) representation.
Although all faculty expressed making connections to society, history, and culture, only 57.14%
(n = 44) of students shared courses often or always included materials related to societal events
or issues that impact their racial or ethnic communities. Similarly, 11 faculty expressed
acknowledging racism and systemic issues. However, data from the student survey reveals that
students seldom experience faculty who acknowledge racism and systemic issues. Only 47.54%
(n = 29) of students shared faculty often or always address societal issues related to their
racial/ethnic identities, 55% (n = 33) shared faculty often or always challenge systemic issues

93

that impact communities of color, and 57.37% (n = 35) shared faculty often or always challenge
negative stereotypes related to race or ethnicity.
Regarding representation, only 58.44% (n = 45) of students shared courses often or
always included materials representing their race/ethnic identities, despite almost all faculty
sharing they use representation as a teaching practice. However, 86.82% (n = 70) of students
shared they often or always felt welcomed on campus, 75.31% (n = 61) shared they often or
always see their cultural identities represented on campus, and 79.01% (n = 64) shared they often
or always felt they belonged on campus.
All faculty participants intentionally expressed care to support students in their classes.
An average of 70% (n = 42) of students shared faculty often or always expressed genuine care
for their success. Eleven faculty utilized validation and believed in students’ success. Data from
the student survey revealed that 77.05% (n = 47) of students’ shared faculty often or always
expressed beliefs in their abilities to succeed. Similarly, 75% (n = 45) of students’ shared faculty
often or always expressed beliefs in their intelligence and academic skills.
Impact of Faculty Mindsets
Faculty mindsets had three subthemes, two of which overlapped with data collected
regarding the students’ experience. All faculty participants demonstrated understanding of
societal issues and racism, however similar to the theme found in intentional engagement,
students shared they rarely experience faculty who acknowledge racism and systemic issues.
Almost half (41.67%, n = 25) of student respondents shared that they rarely or never experience
faculty who acknowledge the inequities and discriminatory events occurring off-campus, such as
in the community, the nation, or in politics. Additionally, 52.46% (n = 32) of students reported
they rarely or never have faculty who address societal issues related to their racial/ethnic

94

identities, and 45% (n = 27) rarely or never have faculty who challenge systemic issues that
impact communities of color. Although the data collected from the survey regarding students'
experience with faculty who acknowledge racism and systemic issues do not directly provide
insight on if faculty have that understanding, it is essential to note the high percentage of
students who report having faculty who rarely or never acknowledge, address, or challenge
systemic issues and racism.
Eleven faculty participants demonstrated having a mindset that understands that everyone
has wealth and knowledge. Data from the survey reveals that most students experienced
incorporating student knowledge into the course and experienced faculty who appreciate or value
their contributions. Specifically, for students who shared they experienced at least one type of
practice shared in Table 4, between 62.91%–79.31% shared student knowledge and or
experience was often or always incorporated in the classroom practice they experienced. For
students who shared they experienced at least one type of practice shared in Figure 7, between
34.19%–80% shared student knowledge and or experience was often or always incorporated in
the classroom practice they experienced. The 34.19% is in reference to tests, and when that data
point is omitted, the range changes to 76.6%–80%. Last, 73.77% (n = 45) of students shared
faculty often or always expressed appreciation/value for their contributions.
Conclusion
In summary, the findings suggest that culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) is present in
the community college, and students are experiencing practices that support their intent to
transfer. Data collected from the interviews revealed three themes about how faculty use CRP:
intentional engagement, faculty mindsets, and reconstructing academic norms. These themes
represent the most common ways CRP presents itself in the community college classroom. Data

95

collected from the student survey reveals that students experience CRP through faculty’s
intentional engagement and faculty mindsets. Although the frequency that students experience
CRP varies, many students shared experiencing CRP often or always for most themes. The
following chapter will discuss the findings in relation to existing studies and the conceptual
framework and provide an overview of the limitations and recommendations.

96

Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations
Extant research has shown that culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) supports students'
academic success (Byrd, 2016; Garcia & Okhidoi, 2015; Howard & Terry, 2011; Stone and
Stewart, 2016). CRP calls on educators to challenge perceptions of themselves and others,
reconsider social relations between students, and challenge preconceived notions of knowledge
and how to capture it (Ladson-Billings, 1995). CRP requires faculty to understand that racial
barriers exist and constantly reflect on how to shift classroom practices to address those barriers
and the education debt. Given the available research demonstrating the positive impact of CRP
on student success and considering the education debt between student racial identities (Barnes,
2018) as well as many institutions’ commitment to student success in the form of transfer and
graduation, one would assume CRP to be widely used across higher education. Yet, there is little
understanding of how CRP is practiced in community college classrooms.
Using a mixed-methods approach, this study sought to understand how CRP presents
itself to Black and Latinx community college students seeking to transfer to a 4-year university.
Interviews were conducted with faculty who taught transferable courses and believed they
practiced CRP to understand how CRP was used. A survey was administered to Black and Latinx
students who intended to transfer, primarily to understand the method and frequency of CRP
practices in their educational experience. Gathering information from both students and faculty
provided the opportunity to understand the intent and impact of CRP. Findings from the study
may aid educators in their reflections of their roles and how their pedagogical practice can
improve to best support Black and Latinx students to transfer and eliminate the education debt
owed to Black and Latinx students. Findings may also inspire institutional leadership to further

97

understand how CRP is utilized at their institution and adequately support faculty to include CRP
in their pedagogy and further contribute to closing the education debt.
Discussion
The study used CRP, critical pedagogy, and CRT as frameworks to answer the following
research question: How does culturally relevant pedagogy manifest for Black and Latinx students
in California Community Colleges? This chapter will respond to the research question by
discussing the quantitative and qualitative findings, comparing the findings to prior research, and
examining the findings in relation to the study’s conceptual framework. The study’s limitations
and implications for practice and research will also be discussed.
The Role of CRP
Based on the findings of this study, CRP supports Black and Latinx student success in
community college classrooms through developing a connection between the students and the
class, supporting students holistically, and challenging barriers that limit their success. This is
accomplished through intentional engagement, faculty mindsets, and reconstructing academic
norms. Data from student respondents' experience overlaps with faculty’s intended use of CRP in
their pedagogy in many areas. Overall, the findings answer the research question by identifying
how faculty intend to use CRP and how it is experienced by students, which revolve around
intentional engagement, faculty mindsets, and reconstructing academic norms. More specifically,
faculty use of CRP and students' experience with CRP aligned in the themes of intentional
engagement and faculty mindsets. Additionally, the study’s findings suggest that some practices
are more frequently used and experienced than others.

98

Frequency of Practices
Although this study found alignment between practices faculty reported using, and the
practices students reported experiencing, there was a clear difference in frequency of use and
experience. Intentional engagement, faculty mindsets, and reconstructing academic norms were
all practices utilized by faculty participants. All faculty participants utilized intentional
engagement and held a mindset that demonstrated a concern for the success of Black and Latinx
students, while most faculty participants reconstructed academic norms. Student participants’
experiences overlapped with intentional engagement and faculty mindsets. Most student
respondents experienced some form of intentional engagement, and fewer reported having taken
a class with faculty who demonstrated concern for their success. Unfortunately, no data was
collected from students around their experience with faculty and reconstructing academic norms.
Despite this limitation, the findings suggest practices that intentionally engage students without
race consciousness may be more extensive than those that are race conscious. This finding is
essential considering how CRP, the study’s framework, and recent literature, such as anti-racist
pedagogy research, call for educators to center race and be race conscious in their practices
(Kishimoto, 2018; Ladson-Billings, 1995).
Frequency of practices is also visible within the themes. For example, with faculty
mindsets, all faculty expressed understanding that racism and societal issues impact Black and
Latinx students, while fewer spoke to the importance of de-centering Whiteness. The quantitative
data from student participants’ experience with faculty align with the study’s qualitative findings
that demonstrate validation, belief in students’ success, expression of care, understanding and
acknowledgment of racism and systemic issues that impact Black and Latinx students to be more
common forms in which CRP appears. Additionally, over half of student respondents shared that

99

faculty often or always acknowledged the inequities and discriminatory events occurring off-
campus, such as in the community, the nation, or politics. In comparison, less than half shared
that faculty often or always addressed societal issues related to their racial/ethnic identities. This
finding reflects the different ways and frequency in which critical mindsets and frameworks like
CRP and CRT are expressed, with practices that do not center race to be more common than
those that do, such as addressing or challenging racism. This finding suggests that challenging or
addressing systemic issues and racism is a less common practice than acknowledging systemic
issues and racism. This is an important finding considering the study’s framework and the need
to close the education debt.
Despite certain practices being more prevalent than others, the study found that CRP is
present and utilized to support Black and Latinx student success. Even within the least frequent
theme amongst the qualitative data, reconstructing academic norms, it was clear that faculty
reflected on their use of CRP and other practices to best support Black and Latinx student
success. Reconstructing academic norms was a theme demonstrated through faculty participants'
acknowledgment of well-known practices benefiting some populations of students more than
others, and their decision to use a different practice indicated the theme of reconstructing
academic norms. The reflection and action from faculty participants resemble a response to
researchers’ call for educators to reflect on how their practices and the system of education may
be upholding racism and contributing to the education debt (Bell, 2004; Bensimon & Kezar,
2005; Hurtado, Milem, et al., 1998; Kishimoto, 2018; Ladson-Billings, 1995).
Recommendations
This study identified CRP’s intended use and experience, and found practices that focus
on race to be less prevalent. This is a concerning finding considering the call for educators to go

100

beyond incorporating diverse content and address the education debt (Kishimoto, 2018; Ladson-
Billings, 1995). Although any use of CRP is positive, educators must ensure their CRP practices
do not become a checklist. Ladson-Billings (1995) cautioned educators to refrain from using
CRP as a checklist. It is critical that educators and institutions further understand and reflect on
how CRP is used in their classrooms and that faculty are adequately supported to use and
develop practices such as CRP.
Recommendation 1: Reflection as a Practice
Educators should constantly reflect on their pedagogy to ensure CRP is utilized by more
than just the inclusion of diverse content. Constant reflection is critical to avoid one’s practice
becoming a checklist and also for improving one’s pedagogy. Reflection is a well-known
practice used for bringing awareness and improvement that appears in many pedagogical
frameworks such as anti-racist pedagogy and CRP (Ladson-Billings, 1995; Kishimoto, 2018).
Considering that the findings from the study identify practices that center race to be less
prevalent, educators should reflect and analyze if practices that de-center Whiteness need to be
included. Reflection practices may include semester or quarterly journals, review of authors and
examples utilized for each course, assessment of the student experience in their class or program,
peer observation, climate surveys or data, or a review of student performance disaggregated by
race for each course taught by faculty. Although this study did not collect information from non-
faculty educators, staff who hold non-faculty roles also positively impact student success. For
this reason, educators such as student affairs practitioners should also reflect on their practice to
ensure they go beyond incorporating diverse content in the experiences they provide students.

101

Recommendation 2: Provide Development Opportunities
Institutions committed to increasing graduation rates for Black and Latinx students must
support educators to incorporate CRP in their pedagogical practices. Although reflection is a
powerful tool for identifying gaps in one’s practice, educators may not always have the
experience, knowledge, or resources to take the next step. Development opportunities for
educators to further CRP use in their pedagogical practices are crucial and should be provided in
various forms. Development opportunities may include on and off-campus training, mentorship,
funding for conferences, acknowledgment of CRP practices, monthly conversations around race
and equity in department and institution level meetings, and more. Considering that the
development of faculty who do not use CRP is vital to expanding its use, development at all
levels should be provided to expand and develop the use of CRP in pedagogy.
Recommendation 3: CRP as an Institutional Value
CRP should be recognized as an institutional value that students, faculty, staff, policies,
and processes can align to and uphold. Institutional commitment to the development of CRP is
essential to encourage and support faculty and staff in enhancing their pedagogy to include CRP.
Considering that an institution's values are embedded throughout all its activities and upheld by
its employees and their accomplishments, institutions should identify CRP and similar
frameworks in their mission, strategic plan, and other governing statements. Although many
institutions have developed diversity statements or initiatives around diversity, equity, and
inclusion, few of these documents are a part of the institutions governing fabric. It is essential for
institutions that value CRP and similar frameworks to share that explicitly with their campus
community. Explicit commitment results in policy and practice changes, including recruitment
and hiring, development, campus activities, and assessment. Recruitment and hiring practices,

102

for example, could shift to ensure recruitment of employees that hold CRP mindsets. Similarly,
development opportunities for current employees to incorporate CRP or develop their use of
CRP would be further encouraged.
Recommendation 4: De-center Whiteness
In alignment with the study’s framework, the recent legislations to ban critical race
theory, and considering this study’s finding of race conscious practices to be less prevalent, it is
essential that faculty, staff, institutions, and organizations de-center Whiteness. De-centering
Whiteness is critical to advance equity and close the education debt. As Marcelo noted, “Once
we de-center Whiteness, all other cultures are able to advance and emerge.” De-centering
Whiteness may include incorporating CRP into one’s pedagogy beyond the addition of diverse
content or the use of accountable and more accurate language such as education debt. Institutions
nationwide utilize the term “opportunity gap” or, more progressively, “equity gap.” The issue
with this terminology is that it revolves around the notion that there is an opportunity for students
of color to become like their White peers, or that students of color need more to achieve because
they are different. Furthermore, neither term acknowledges the historical, economic,
sociopolitical, and moral factors that continue to maintain low graduation rates for Black and
Latinx students. De-centering Whiteness is a critical step towards including Black and Latinx
students in the institution’s student success initiatives.
Implications for Research and Practice
The findings from this study may inform faculty, higher education professionals, and
administrators at institutions dedicated to decreasing the education debt and increasing
graduation rates for Black and Latinx students. Findings from this study could also inform
policymakers and K–12 institutions debating whether frameworks such as CRT and CRP are

103

beneficial for their students. This study may provide educators and policymakers with a deeper
understanding of how faculty utilize CRP in their pedagogy and how students experience it.
Further understanding how CRP is used and experienced by Black and Latinx students allows
educators to identify gaps in their pedagogy and refine it to best support Black and Latinx
students. Similarly, policymakers and K–12 institutions could utilize the findings from the study
to understand the impact that CRP has on Black and Latinx students and advocate for
pedagogical practices that support student success. This section will discuss the implications for
research and practice resultant from the findings.
Higher Education Research
The study’s identification of the themes intentional engagement, reconstructing academic
norms, and faculty mindsets supports research on CRP in that all appear in research on CRP,
sense of belonging, and campus climate and demonstrate a positive relationship with student
academic success (Barnett, 2011; Bowman, 2010; Byrd, 2016; Cerezo & McWhriter, 2012;
Goldrick-Rab 2010; Howard & Terry, 2011; Ladson-Billings, 1995; Museus, 2014; Rendon,
1994; Sealy-Ruiz, 2007). Additionally, this study found certain practices more common than
others, such as incorporating diverse content and expression of care. This finding aligns with
research on CRP, CRT, and other critical frameworks that call for educators to go beyond
ensuring representation. Although the study’s findings support research on CRP, additional
questions emerged that require further research considering the study’s limitations. Future
research could explore the extent to which faculty utilize CRP. Additional research should also
include students’ experiences.

104

Education Pedagogy
It is vital to note the surge in policy decisions to exclude CRT in K–12 across the
country. Although this study did not focus on the K–12 education system, CRP is rooted in K–12
education, and the education system is impacted by the decisions made across the various
systems. The study’s findings support the need to practice CRP beyond representation and
incorporate more critical practices such as de-centering Whiteness and challenging systemic
issues that impact communities of color. If K–12 institutions are committed to closing the
education debt, policymakers and K–12 institutions must advocate for the use of pedagogical
practices that support student success, such as CRP and CRT.
Limitations
The study presented several limitations with the data collection and sampling. A
convergent parallel mixed method model was used, which resulted in different sample sizes from
the quantitative and qualitative data. Although this is a usual limitation found in the data
collection design (Creswell & Creswell, 2018), the sample sizes differed significantly, and both
were difficult to attain. The method for acquiring interviews began with a representative random
sample, then changed to a snowball sample due to not receiving enough participants. Although
the change in methods for the recruitment of interviews could inform the universality of CRP as
a practice amongst faculty, additional research is needed.
The survey was also extended in hopes of collecting more student responses. The sample
of student participants resulted in a few students that identified as Black/African American.
Although the sample and final respondent percentages are representative of the campus
population, the final count of Black/African American identified participants is low.
Oversampling the Black/African American student population could have drawn more robust

105

insight into the Black/African American student experiences with CRP. Additionally, it is
important to note the response rate and acknowledge that many student voices were not captured
in this study. Eligible students who did not respond may include students who have not
experienced CRP, may not have felt supported in their educational journey, and or may not be in
a transfer pathway. External factors such as over surveying due to the pandemic or fatigue from
the virtual experience during data collection could have also impacted the response rates and
recruitment results.
The study also presented limitations with the data collected. Although data collected was
sufficient to answer the research question, additional data would have provided a deeper
understanding of CRP in community colleges. For example, data on students' experience with
faculty who reconstruct academic norms was not collected. Additionally, information on the
extent to which CRP is used at the institution was also not collected. Although these data would
most likely result in a different study, additional data from students' experience and on the extent
that CRP is used on campus could enrich results.
Conclusion
Findings from this study contribute to the research on CRP and student success by
identifying how CRP is utilized and experienced to support the academic success of Black and
Latinx community college students intending to transfer. The study identified forms in which
CRP is embedded into classroom pedagogy, which revolved around intentional engagement,
faculty mindsets, and reconstructing academic norms. The study also revealed which
pedagogical practices that incorporated CRP were least frequently experienced by students.
These findings provide educators a better understanding of where to improve their practice to
utilize CRP best to support Black and Latinx student success. Identifying the forms in which

106

CRP could be better utilized also provides institutional leadership and policymakers with
information on best supporting educators and contributing to closing the education debt.

107

References
Adichie, C. N. (2009, July). The danger of a single story [Video]. TED Conferences.
https://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_ngozi_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story?la
nguage=en
Altschul, I., Oyserman, D., & Bybee, D. (2006). Racial‐ethnic identity in mid‐adolescence:
Content and change as predictors of academic achievement. Child Development, 77(5),
1155–1169.
American Association of Community Colleges. (2020). Fact facts 2020 [Fact sheet].
https://www.aacc.nche.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2020/03/AACC_Fast_Facts_2020_Final.pdf
Banning, J. H. & Kaiser, L. (1974). An ecological perspective and model for campus design.
Personnel and Guidance Journal, 52(6), 370–375.
Barnes, G. (2018). The history and strategies of addressing the Black-White
academic achievement gap in the U.S. (Publication number 10793733) [Doctoral
dissertation, Georgetown University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
Barnett, E. A. (2011). Validation experiences and persistence among community college
students. The Review of Higher Education, 34(2), 193–230.
Bell, D. A. (2004). Silent covenants: Brown v. Board of Education and the unfulfilled hopes for
racial reform. Oxford University Press.
Bensimon, E. & Kezar, A. (2005). Closing the achievement gap in higher education: An
organizational learning perspective. New Directions for Higher Education, 2005(131),
99–111.
Bowman, N. A. (2010). College diversity experiences and cognitive development: A

108

meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research 80(1), 4–33.
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories
and methods (5th ed.). Pearson A & B.
Brown v. Board of Education 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
Brozo, W., Valerio, P., & Salazar, M. (1996). A walk through Gracie’s garden: Literacy and
cultural explorations in a Mexican American junior high school. Journal of Adolescent &
Adult Literacy, 40(3), 164–170.
Byrd, C. (2016). Does culturally relevant teaching work? An examination from student
perspectives. SAGE Open, 6(3).
California Community Colleges Chancellors Office. (2013). 2018 student success scorecard.
https://scorecard.cccco.edu/scorecardrates.aspx?CollegeID=000
California Community Colleges. (2020). Student success metrics.
https://www.calpassplus.org/LaunchBoard/Student-Success-Metrics
California Community Colleges Chancellors Office. (2020). Retrieved April 2020, from
https://www.cccco.edu/
Cerezo, A., & McWhirter, B. (2012). A brief intervention designed to improve social awareness
and skills to improve Latino college student retention. College Student Journal, 46(4),
867–879.
Chen, A. (2017). Addressing diversity on college campuses: Changing expectations and practices
in instructional leadership. Higher Education Studies, 7(2), 17–22.
Community College League of California. (2020). The California community college history
project. Retrieved April 2020, from https://ccleague.org/california-community-college-
history-project#event-_1917-2

109

Cook, B., & Pullaro, N. (2010). College graduation rates: Behind the numbers. American
Council on Education. https://www.acenet.edu/Documents/College-Graduation-Rates-
Behind-the-Numbers.pdf
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed). Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and
mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Fletcher, J. M. 2015. New evidence of the effects of education on health in the US: Compulsory
schooling laws revisited. Social Science & Medicine 127, 101–07.
Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum International Publishing Group Inc.
Garcia, G., & Okhidoi, O. (2015). Culturally relevant practices that “serve” students at a
Hispanic Serving Institution. Innovative Higher Education. 40(4), 345–357.
Giroux, H. A. (2010). Bare pedagogy and the scourge of neoliberalism: Rethinking higher
education as a democratic public sphere. The Educational Forum, 74, 184–96
Goldrick-Rab, S. (2010). Challenges and opportunities for improving community college student
success. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 437–469.
Harper, S. R., & Hurtado, H. (2007). Nine themes in campus racial climates and implications for
institutional transformation. New Directions for Student Services, 120, 7–24.
Hausmann, L. R. M., Schofield, J. W., & Woods, R. L. (2007). Sense of belonging as a predictor
of intentions to persist among African American and White first-year college students.
Research in Higher Education, 48, 803–839.
Heelan, C. M. & Mellow, G. O. (2017). Social justice and the community college
mission. New Directions for Community Colleges, 180, 19–25.

110

Horsford, S. D., & D’Amico, D. (2015). The past as more than prologue: a call for historical
research. The International Journal of Educational Management, 29(7), 863–873.
Howard, T. (2001). Powerful pedagogy for African American students: A case of four
teachers. Urban Education, 36(2), 179–202.
Howard, T. C., & Navarro, O. (2016). Critical race theory 20 years later: Where do we go
from here?. Urban Education, 51(3), 253–273.
Howard, T., & Terry, C. (2011). Culturally responsive pedagogy for African American students:
Promising programs and practices for enhanced academic performance. Teaching
Education, 22(4), 345–362.
Hurtado, S. (1992). The campus racial climate: Contexts of conflict. The Journal of Higher
Education, 63(5), 539–569.
Hurtado, S., & Carter, D. F. (1997). Effects of college transition and perceptions of the campus
racial climate on Latino college students’ sense of belonging. Sociology of Education,
70(4), 324–345.
Hurtado, S., Milem, J. F., Clayton-Pedersen, A. R., and Allen, W. R. (1998). Enhancing campus
climates for racial/ethnic diversity. Review of Higher Education, 21(3), 279–302.
Irvine, J. (1990). Black students and school failure. Greenwood.
Johnson, A. (2019). A model of culturally relevant pedagogy in physics. AIP Conference
Proceedings, 2109(130004), 1–4.
Kishimoto, K. (2018). Anti-racist pedagogy: From faculty’s self-reflection to organizing within
and beyond the classroom. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21(4), 540–554.
Knoell, D. (1997). California community colleges. Community College Journal of Research
and Practice: Focus on America: partII, 21(2), 121–136.

111

Kuh, G. D. (1993). In their own words: What students learn outside the classroom. American
Educational Research Journal, 30(2), 277–304.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American
Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding
achievement in U.S. schools. (Report). Educational Researcher.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: A.k.a. the remix. Harvard
Educational Review, 84(1), 74–135.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.).
Sage Publications.
McCormick, A. C. (2003). Swirling and double-dipping: New patterns of student attendance and
their implications for higher education. New Directions for Higher Education, 121, 13–
24.
McEwan, E. K., and McEwan, P. J. (2003). Making sense of research: What’s good, what’s not
good, and how to tell the difference. Sage Publications.
Mendez v. Westminster 64F. Supp. 544 (1946).
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Museus, S. D. (2014). The culturally engaging campus environments (CECE) model: A new
theory of college success among racially diverse student populations. In M. B. Paulsen
(Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 189–227). Springer.
Museus, S., Yi, V., & Saelua, N. (2017). The impact of culturally engaging campus
environments on sense of belonging. Review of Higher Education, 40(2), 187–215.

112

Museus, S., Yi, V., Saelua, N., & Museus, S. (2018). How culturally engaging campus
environments influence sense of belonging in college: An examination of differences
between White students and students of color. Journal of Diversity in Higher
Education, 11(4), 467–483.
Museus, S., Nichols, A., & Lambert, A. (2008). Racial differences in the effects of campus
racial climate on degree completion: A structural equation model. Review of Higher
Education, 32(1), 107–134.
Museus, S., & Quaye, S. (2009). Toward an intercultural perspective of racial and ethnic
minority college student persistence. Review of Higher Education, 33(1), 67–94.
Mutakabbir, Y. T. (2011). Beneficial, yet bittersweet: Historically Black land-grant institutions.
Making Connections, 12(2), 35–41.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). Total fall enrollment in degree-granting
postsecondary institutions, by level and control of institution and race/ethnicity of
student: Selected years, 1976 through 2012.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_306.20.asp
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). Graduation rate from first institution attended
for first-time, full-time bachelor's degree-seeking students at 4-year postsecondary
institutions, by race/ethnicity, time to completion, sex, control of institution, and
percentage of applications accepted: Selected cohort entry years, 1996 through 2012.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_326.10.asp?current=yes
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). Percentage distribution of first-time, full-time
degree/certificate-seeking students at 2-year postsecondary institutions 3 years after

113

entry, by completion and enrollment status at first institution attended, sex,
race/ethnicity, and control of institution: Cohort entry years 2010 and 2015.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_326.25.asp
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). Status and trends in the education of racial and
ethnic groups. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/raceindicators/indicator_RFD.asp#:~:text=
Among%20those
%20with%20an%20associate's,workers%20were%20also%20higher%20than
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). Undergraduate enrollment.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cha.asp
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). The Condition of education 2019 (NCES 2019-
144). U.S. Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2019/2019144.pdf
National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. (2019). Tracking transfer.
https://nscresearchcenter.org/signaturereport13/
Oja, M. (2011). Student satisfaction and student performance. Journal of Applied Research in
the Community College, 19(1), 50–56.
Pak, C. (2018). Linking service-learning with sense of belonging: A culturally relevant pedagogy
for heritage students of Spanish. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 17(1) 76–95.
Paris, D. (2012). Review of culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance,
terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97.
Paris, D., & Alim, H. (2014). What are we seeking to sustain through culturally sustaining
pedagogy? A loving critique forward. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 85–100.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Perez, P. A., & Ceja, M. (2010). Building a Latina/o student transfer culture: Best practices and

114

outcomes in transfer to universities. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 9(1), 6–21.
Public Policy Institute of California. (2019). California’s higher education system.
https://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/higher-education-in-california-californias-
higher-education-system-october-2019.pdf
Quaye, S. J., & Harper, S. R. (Eds.). (2014). Student engagement in higher education:
Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse populations. Taylor &
Francis Group.
Rendon, L. (1994). Validating culturally diverse students: Toward a new model of learning and
student development. Innovative Higher Education, 19(1), 33–51.
Sealy-Ruiz, Y. (2007). Wrapping the curriculum around their lives: Using a culturally relevant
curriculum with African American adult women. Adult Education Quarterly, 58(1), 44–
60.
Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Huie, F., Wakhungu, P. K., Bhimdiwali, A., Nathan, A., & Hwang, Y.
(2018). Transfer and mobility: A National view of student movement in postsecondary
institutions, fall 2011 cohort (Signature Report No. 15). National Student Clearinghouse
Research Center. https://nscresearchcenter.org/signaturereport15/#:~:text=
The%20overall%20six%20year%20transfer,before%20earning%20a%20bachelor's%20d
egree.
Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Huie, F., Wakhungu, P.K., Bhimdiwala, A. & Wilson, S. E. (2018).
Completing college: A national view of student completion rates–Fall 2012 cohort
(Signature Report No. 16). National Student Clearinghouse Research Center.
https://nscresearchcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/SignatureReport16.pdf
Sleeter, C. E. (2011). The academic and social value of ethnic studies: A research review.

115

National Education Association.
Solórzano, D. G., & Bernal, D. (2001). Examining transformational resistance through
a critical race and LatCrit framework: Chicana and Chicano students in an urban
context. Urban Education, 36, 308–342.
Solorzano, D. G., & Solorzano, R. W. (1995). The Chicano educational experience: A
framework for effective schools in Chicano communities. Educational Policy, 9(3), 293–
314.
Solorzano, D. G., Villalpando, O., & Oseguera, L. (2005). Educational inequities and Latina/o
undergraduate students in the United States: A critical race analysis of their educational
progress. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4(3), 272–294.
Solorzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. J. (2002). A critical race counterstory of race, racism, and
affirmative action. Equity & Excellence in Education, 35(2), 155–168.
Stanton-Salazar, R. (2011). A social capital framework for the study of institutional agents and
their role in the empowerment of low-status students and youth. Youth & Society, 43(3),
1066–1109.
Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and
performance. American Psychologist, 52(6), 613–629.
Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of
African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797–811.
Stone, B. J. and Stewart, S. (2016). HBCUs and writing programs: Critical hip hop language
pedagogy and first-year student success. Composition Studies 44(2), 183–186.
Strayhorn, T. L. (2019). College students’ sense of belonging: A key to educational success for
all students. Taylor & Francis.

116

University of California. (2020). California master plan for higher education. Retrieved April
2020, from https://www.ucop.edu/institutional-research-academic-planning/content-
analysis/academic-planning/california-master-plan.html
Walton, G.M., & Spencer, S. J. (2009). Latent ability: Grades and test scores systematically
underestimate the intellectual ability of negatively stereotyped students. Psychological
Science, 20(9), 1132–1139.
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.

117

Appendix A: Survey Email Invitation
To:[Student Email Address]
From Email:yessicad@usc.edu
From Name: Yessica De La Torre Roman
Subject: College Experience Study

Dear [Name]:

You are invited to participate in a research project focused on identifying educational strategies
that support Black and Latinx community college student success in transferring to a 4 year
university. To participate, please complete a 10–15 minute anonymous survey. Please click on
the link below to learn more about the research project and your eligibility.

Please click or copy and paste the link below to view eligibility and participate in the survey:
[link]

Please complete the survey by [Date].
After completion of the survey, you will have the opportunity to enter an optional drawing to win
one $100, one of four $25 gift cards, or one of five $10 gift cards!
Your chances of winning depend on how many complete the survey, which is limited to Rose
City College (a pseudonym has replaced the name of the college for this published dissertation)
students only.

118

If you have any questions about this research project or how the results will be used, please
contact me at yessicad@usc.edu.

Remember, your experience is valuable to inform the study and educational practices that
support Black and Latinx students in transferring to a 4 year university.

Thank you,

119

Appendix B: Interview Invitation Email
To: [Faculty Email Address]
From Email: yessicad@usc.edu
From Name: Yessica De La Torre Roman
Subject: Pedagogical Practices Study: Share your success with us!

Dear [Name]:

You are invited to participate in a research project focused on understanding educational
strategies that support Black and Latinx community college student success in transferring.
The study will be conducted in the form of interviews that will be held via zoom and should last
no more than an hour. After completing the interview, you will receive a $10 gift card from an
online store location of your choice from a list of pre-selected stores.

To participate in the interview, please email the researcher Yessica De La Torre Roman at
yessicad@usc.edu. You can also contact me if you have any questions about this research project
or how the results will be used.

Thank you,

120

Appendix C: Informed Consent
Thank you for your interest in participating in the study. The study is a part of a
dissertation research project by Yessica De La Torre Roman, a graduate student at the University
of Southern California. The study is focused on identifying how certain educational strategies
that support Black and Latinx student success in the form of transfer exist in the community
college. Participation in the study consists of completing a 10–15 min survey that will ask you
questions on you experience at Rose City College (a pseudonym has replaced the name of the
college for this published dissertation). Survey questions will have a focus on experiences you
have had that may have been culturally relevant. Although there are no apparent risks associated
with the study, questions may cause you to reflect or remember past experiences and or feel
some discomfort. All responses are anonymous and will be kept confidential. To participate in
the study and complete the survey, you must by at least 18 years of age and meet one of the
following eligibility requirements: Identify as a Black or Latinx Rose City College (a pseudonym
has replaced the name of the college for this published dissertation) student enrolled in for-credit
courses with the intent to transfer to a 4-year university.
After completing the survey, you will have an opportunity to enter an optional drawing
for a gift card from a store of your choice of up to $100. A total of 10 gift cards will be awarded
to 10 randomly selected survey participants that complete the opportunity drawing form: one
$100 gift card, four $25 gift cards, and five $10 gift cards. Your chances of winning depend on
how many complete the survey. Opportunity drawing information will not be linked to
participants’ survey responses.
By clicking “I agree” below, you agree to participate in the study and agree to have met
the eligibility requirements.

121

___ I agree

122

Appendix D: Survey
Q1. Are you currently enrolled in Rose City College (a pseudonym has replaced the name
of the college for this published dissertation)?
Yes No
*If no is selected, survey will end, and participant will be notified that they did not meet
the eligibility requirement.
Q2. Including this semester, how many semesters have you been enrolled in Rose City
College (a pseudonym has replaced the name of the college for this published dissertation)?
This is my first semester.
2 semesters
3–4 semesters
5–6 semesters
7–8 semesters
9–10 semesters
11+ semesters
Q3. Please select your race/ethnicity:
(select all that apply)
African American/Black
American Indian/Native American/Indigenous American
Asian American/Asian
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
Latinx/Hispanic
Middle Eastern/Arab American

123

Multiracial/Multiethnic
White/European American
*If Multiracial/Multiethnic is selected, participant will be prompted to Q3a.
*If Black or Latinx are not selected, survey will end, and participant will be notified that
they did not meet the eligibility requirement.
Q3a. You selected that you identified as multiracial/multiethnic. If you also identify
as Black and or Latinx, please share below.
I also identify as Black.
I also identify as Latinx.
I also identify as Black and Latinx.
I do not identify as Black and or Latinx.
I identify as multiracial/multiethnic only.
In answering the next set of questions, please keep your racial or ethnic identity in mind.
Q4. How often do you feel welcomed on campus?
Always Often Not Often Never
Q5. How often do you see your cultural identities represented on campus?
Always Often Not Often Never
Q6. How often do you feel you belong on campus?
Always Often Not Often Never
*If always, often, or not often is selected in Q2–Q4:
Q6a. What made you feel welcomed, represented, or that you belonged on campus?
(select all that apply)
There are students who look like me.

124

There are faculty who look like me.
Campus advertisements are representative of my cultural identities.
Campus resources are relevant to my cultural identities.
Campus activities/events are relevant to my cultural identities.
Course materials include readings, authors, researchers, case examples, or other things
that reflect my culture or racial/ethnic identity.
Course instruction incorporates my culture.
Course instruction incorporates societal events or issues relevant to my cultural identities.
Faculty challenge negative stereotypes related to race or ethnicity.
Faculty make an effort to pronounce my name correctly.
Faculty believe I can succeed.
Faculty have expressed care for my success.
Faculty value my contributions in class.
Faculty value my contributions outside of class.
Not listed: __________________________
Q7. Do you feel the campus provides support that considers your ethnic/racial identities?
Yes No Unsure
The next set of questions will be focused on your classroom experience. Please consider
your racial/ethnic identities when answering the next set (Q7–Q11) of questions.
Q9. How many of the courses you have taken that included readings, case studies, or
materials that are representative or inclusive of your cultural identities?
All the courses Many courses Some courses None of the courses

125

Q10. How many of the courses you have taken included materials related to societal events
or issues relevant to your identities?
All the courses Many courses Some courses None of the courses
Q11. What forms of teaching have you experienced? (select all that apply)
Lectures
Guest Speakers
Group discussions
Student led discussions
Student presentations
Field trips
Not listed: _____________
*If first choice is selected:
Q11a. You selected that you experienced lectures as a form of teaching. How often
did the lectures include the following?
Content that represented your identities.
Content relevant to societal issues related to your identities.
Student knowledge and or experience.
Always Often Not often
*If second choice is selected:
Q11b. You selected that you experienced guest speakers as a form of teaching. How
often did the following apply to the guest speakers?
Guest speakers represented your identities.
Guest speakers utilized content that represented your identities.

126

Guest speakers referenced societal issues related to your identities.
Guest speakers allowed for student knowledge and or experience to be
shared.
Always Often Not often
*If third choice is selected:
Q11c. You selected that you experienced group discussions as a form of teaching.
How often did the group discussions include the following?
Content that represented your identities.
Content relevant to societal issues related to your identities.
Student knowledge and or experience.
Always Often Not often
*If fourth choice is selected:
Q11d. You selected that you experienced student led discussions as a form of
teaching. How often did the student led discussions include the following?
Content that represented your identities.
Content relevant to societal issues related to your identities.
Student knowledge and or experience.
Always Often Not often
*If fifth choice is selected:
Q11e. You selected that you experienced student presentations as a form of
teaching. How often did the student presentations include the following?
Content that represented your identities.
Content relevant to societal issues related to your identities.

127

Student knowledge and or experience.
Always Often Not often
*If sixth choice is selected:
Q11f. You selected that you experienced field trips as a form of teaching. How often
did the field trips include the following?
Content that represented your identities.
Content relevant to societal issues related to your identities.
Student knowledge and or experience.
Always Often Not often
Q12. What methods to measure your learning have you experienced in a course? (select all
that apply)
Test
Essays/Reports
Reflections
Presentations
Group work
Not listed:_____________
*If first choice is selected:
Q12a. You selected that you experienced tests as a method to measure your
learning. How often did the tests utilize content that represented your identities?
Always Often Not often

*If second choice is selected:

128

Q12b. You selected that you experienced essays/reports as a method to measure
your learning. How often did the essays/reports utilize the following?
A prompt that represented your identities.
A prompt related to the societal issues relevant to my identities.
Always Often Not often
*If third choice is selected:
Q12c. You selected that you experienced reflections as a method to measure your
learning. How often did the reflections utilize the following?
A prompt that represented your identities.
A prompt related to the societal issues relevant to my identities.
Always Often Not often
*If fourth choice is selected:
Q12d. You selected that you experienced presentations as a method to measure your
learning. How often did the presentations require you to utilize the following?
A prompt or format that represented your identities.
A prompt or format related to the societal issues relevant to my identities.
Always Often Not often
*If fifth choice is selected:
Q12e. You selected that you experienced group work as a method to measure your
learning. How often did the group work require you to utilize the following?
A prompt or format that represented your identities.
A prompt or format related to the societal issues relevant to my identities.
Always Often Not often

129

Q13. Have you experienced any of the following from faculty? (select all that apply)
Belief in my abilities to succeed.
Belief in my intelligence and academic skills.
Genuine care for my success.
Appreciation/value for my contributions.
Challenged negative stereotypes related to race or ethnicity.
Have made an effort to pronounce my name correctly.
None
*If first choice is selected:
Q13a. You selected that faculty have expressed belief in your abilities to succeed.
Please share how often you have experienced that.
Always Often Not often
*If second choice is selected:
Q13b. You selected that faculty have expressed belief in your intelligence and
academic skills. Please share how often you have experienced that.
Always Often Not often
*If third choice is selected:
Q13c. You selected that faculty have expressed a genuine care for your success.
Please share how often you have experienced that.
Always Often Not often
*If fourth choice is selected:
Q13d. You selected that faculty have expressed appreciation/value for your
contributions. Please share how often you have experienced that.

130

Always Often Not often
*If fifth choice is selected:
Q13e. You selected that faculty have challenged negative stereotypes related to race
or ethnicity. Please share how often you have experienced that.
Always Often Not often
*If sixth choice is selected:
Q13f. You selected that faculty have made an effort to pronounce your name
correctly. Please share how often you have experienced that.
Always Often Not often
Q14. How often have your professors acknowledged the inequities and discriminatory
events occurring off campus, such as in the community, the nation, or in politics?
Always Often Not Often Never
Q15. How often have your professors utilized cultural experiences for in class examples or
assignments?
Always Often Not Often Never

131

Appendix E: Student Survey Opportunity Drawing Notification
Thank you for completing the survey! If you would like to participate in the optional
drawing, please complete the form below. Please note that the contact information provided for
the opportunity drawing will not be associated with your survey responses.
A total of 10 gift cards will be awarded to 10 randomly selected survey participants that
complete the opportunity drawing form: One $100 gift card, four $25 gift cards, and five $10 gift
cards. Winners will be able to select the store for the gift card from the list below. Your chances
of winning depend on how many complete the survey.

[List of stores]
First name:
Last Name:
Contact email:
Retype contact email:

132

Appendix F: Information Sheet
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR EXEMPT NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
Addressing the Education Debt: How Community College Educators Utilize Culturally Relevant
Pedagogy to Support Black and Latinx Student Success
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
This research study aims to understand how certain educational strategies that support Black and
Latinx student success in the form of transfer exist in the community college. Specifically, the
study aims to understand the role culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) in supporting Black and
Latinx student academic success in the form on transfer. The hope is to identify ways that
support Black and Latinx students to transfer. Research shows that CRP impacts student success
however, little research around this exists in reference to higher education.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
Faculty who agree to take part in this study will be asked to participate in a 1-hour interview via
zoom. To ensure accuracy of data collection and analysis, the interview will be recorded.
Interviewees do not have to answer questions they do not wish to answer and may opt out of the
study at any time. If interviewees do not want to be recorded, they cannot participate in this
study.

133

Black and Latinx student who agree to take part in this study will be asked to participate in a 10–
15-minute survey via Qualtrics. No survey questions will be required, and students may opt out
of the survey at any time.
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
For the interview, participating faculty will receive a $10 gift card for their time. Gift card will
be from a location of their choice from a list provided to by the researcher. Interview participants
do not have to answer all of the questions in order to receive the card. The card will be emailed
to participants after the interview is completed.
For the survey, participating students will have the opportunity to enter a drawing for one $100
gift card, one of four $25 gift cards, or one of five $10 gift cards. After completing the survey,
participants will have the opportunity to enter their information for the drawing. Their
information will not be associated with their survey responses. Drawing will be held after all data
collection has concluded using a random number generator. Winning participants will be emailed
their gift card.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Information collected will be kept secure by limiting storing locations and utilizing secure
methods for storing such as password protection. The primary location where information will be
stored is the researchers external hard drive which will be secured by the researcher in a private
location. Data will be kept for 5 years then will be appropriately discarded.
All information will be kept confidential and pseudonyms will be assigned at the beginning of
the interview for confidentiality purposes. In addition, to increase confidentiality of participants’,
very minimal contact information will be collected and will only be stored for a year after the
study ends. This will allow the researcher to follow up with participants if needed. Recordings

134

will be shared with an external company for transcription purposes. Please refer to the
transcription company’s security and safety measures for more information: _________
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 in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.
Qualitative data will be saved on two external hard drives and will be accessed through the
researcher’s laptop only. Quantitative data will be housed in Qualtrics through the researcher’s
student account which is protected not only by the company but also by university contracts with
the company. Quantitative data will also be saved on the two aforementioned external hard
drives for back up and safety. The researcher’s laptop will be used to access the data and will
remain secured within the researcher’s residence where data analysis will occur.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
Principal Investigator: Yessica De La Torre Roman via email at yessicad@usc.edu
Faculty Advisor: Dr. Tracy Poon Tambascia via email at tpoon@rossier.usc.edu
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board,
1640 Marengo Street, Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA
90033-9269
Phone (323) 442-0114
Email irb@usc.edu

135

Appendix G: Interview Protocol
Participant name:
Research question: How does culturally relevant pedagogy foster student academic success in
California Community Colleges?
Introduction:
Thank you for being here today and giving me some of your time.
I am conducting a study to understand how culturally relevant pedagogy exists to support Black
and Latinx students in California Community Colleges. For the purpose of this study, student
success is specifically in reference to transfer. You were selected to participate in this study
because of your insight with student success in the classroom. You will be asked a series of
questions, some of which may require you to reflect on your time working on this campus. You
may choose to not answer questions however the interview will be recorded in order to maintain
accuracy of the information shared. The interview should last no more than an hour. Your
identity will remain confidential. With that, do you agree to participate in this study?
- If no, end the interview:
Okay, thank you for that information. I appreciate your time.
- If yes, continue:
Thank you. To assist me with confidentiality, please provide me with a pseudonym of
preference. I will use this name starting now.
- Participant will provide pseudonym.

Thank you. At this time, I would will begin recording. Do you have any questions before we
begin?

136

- If yes, answer questions.
- If no, continue:
Thank you. I will start the recording now and begin the interview.
Questions:
1. Tell me about your current role at this institution.
2. What is your race/ethnicity?
3. Could you please share your gender identity?
4. What department do you teach in?
5. And how many semesters have your worked on this campus?
6. How, if at all, is your role directly related to supporting Black and Latinx students to
transfer?
a. If “it’s not”: Then how, if at all, do you find yourself interacting with or
supporting students to transfer?
7. How do you help students feel welcomed on campus? Do you engage in activities or
participate in certain organizations?
8. How do you express care for students on campus?
9. How do you practice mindfulness of students’ cultural identities in the classroom setting?
10. How do you utilize an equity mindset in the classroom setting?
11. For the purpose of this study, the term culturally relevant is adopted by scholar Ladson-
Billings and refers to bringing students’ backgrounds and experiences outside of school
into their learning experience, fostering a socio-political consciousness, and seeing
students through an asset-oriented lens. Some folks would say that Black and Latinx

137

students do not need or should not receive culturally relevant experiences. What are your
thoughts on this?
Thank you. The next set of questions may require you to reflect on if and how you have
intentionally provided culturally relevant experiences to support Black and Latinx student
success.
1. How do you incorporate materials that are representative of Black and or Latinx cultural
identities in your curriculum?
a. Do you utilize theories and frameworks? If so which ones?
b. Is this a process that you use for every course you teach? Does it depend on the
course?
c. How is this incorporated in your assignments?
d. How is this incorporated in your teaching methods?
e. How is this incorporated in your interactions with students?
2. How do you incorporate societal issues related to Black and or Latinx cultural identities
in your curriculum?
a. Does this depend on recent events or do you consider historical issues?
b. Do you utilize issues that are specific to the surrounding community?
c. Is this a process that you use for every course you teach? Does it depend on the
course?
d. How is this incorporated in your assignments?
e. How is this incorporated in your teaching methods?
f. How is this incorporated in your interactions with students?

138

3. How do you incorporate cultural experiences related to Black and or Latinx identities in
your curriculum?
a. Is this a process that you use for every course you teach? Does it depend on the
course?
b. How is this incorporated in your assignments?
c. How is this incorporated in your teaching methods?
d. How is this incorporated in your interactions with students?
4. What does equity mindedness look like in the courses you teach?
a. How is equity incorporated in your assignments?
b. How is equity incorporated in your teaching methods?
c. How is equity incorporated in your interactions with students?
5. How do you incorporate student knowledge and or experience in the courses you teach?
6. What classroom engagement strategies do you utilize in your courses?
a. Are these intentionally relevant to Black and or Latinx culture? If yes, how?
7. How do you acknowledge inequities and discriminatory events occurring off campus,
such as in the community, the nation, or in politics, to students, etc. in class?
Thank you. The next set of questions may require you to reflect on if and how you have engaged
with Black and Latinx students.
1. How do you express belief in students’ abilities to succeed?
a. Does this depend on the student?
b. Does this differ in your interactions with Black and or Latinx students? If yes
how?
2. How do you express belief in students’ intelligence and academic skills?

139

a. Does this depend on the student?
b. Does this differ in your interactions with Black and or Latinx students? If yes
how?
3. How do you express care for students and their success?
a. Does this depend on the student?
b. Does this differ in your interactions with Black and or Latinx students? If yes
how?
Closing
Thank you for sharing with me. Is there anything you would like to share with me, anything you
would like to expand on, or anything that you were expecting me to ask you that I did not ask
that would help me understand the role of culturally relevant pedagogy at your campus?
Once participant has completed sharing:
Thank you very much for your time. I really appreciate you sharing this with me. If there is a
need for me to contact you in regard to the study, may I do so with the contact information you
provided?
Thank you, if you have any questions moving forward, please feel free to contact me. I will
certainly share the study with you once its completed.
Thank you very much for your time.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

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

PDF

Problems and solutions for school counselors supporting Black and Latinx students in the 21st century

PDF

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

PDF

Pa’delante, la lucha continúa: resiliency among Latinx college students with past experiences of bullying

PDF

Unlocking the potential: improving persistence and graduation of Black female students at select historically Black colleges and universities: a case study

PDF

Changing pedagogy to promote the success of international students

PDF

Culturally relevant pedagogy in Khan Academy’s Algebra 1 course

PDF

Increasing representation of Black male hip-hop educators in the community colleges in California

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

A different world: exploring how Black students facilitate their own success at a public, 4-year institution

PDF

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

PDF

School disciplined reimagined: centering Black students in discipline policies

PDF

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

PDF

A fine balance: enrollment & support of international and historically minoritized students in community colleges

PDF

Closing the achievement gap for marginalized students using the college-going culture: a promising practices study

PDF

Cultivating culturally competent educators

PDF

Persistence of first-generation Latinx engineering students: developing a better understanding of STEM classroom experiences and faculty interactions

PDF

Listening to the bottom of the well: a counternarrative Exploring Black collegial success

Asset Metadata

Creator De La Torre Roman, Yessica M. (author)

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

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Publication Date 03/22/2022

Defense Date 01/18/2022

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

Tag achievement gap,Black student success,community college,critical pedagogy,critical race theory,culturally relevant pedagogy,education debt,equity gap,graduation rates,latinx student success,OAI-PMH Harvest,opportunity gap,pedagogy,student success

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tambascia, Tracy (committee chair), Hinga, Briana (committee member), Olivo, Cynthia (committee member)

Creator Email yessica.m.delatorre@gmail.com,yessicad@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC110816573

Unique identifier UC110816573

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights De La Torre Roman, Yessica M.

Type texts

Source 20220323-usctheses-batch-917 (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