University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Science as white property: BIPOC elementary teachers’ science experience and its impact on their pedagogy

(USC Thesis Other)

Science as white property: BIPOC elementary teachers’ science experience and its impact on their pedagogy

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Science As White Property: BIPOC Elementary Teachers ’ Science Experience and Its
Impact on Their Pedagogy

by
Victoria Alicia Rivas Castro

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 Victoria Alicia Rivas Castro 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Victoria Alicia Rivas Castro certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Dieuwertje J. Kast
David Cash
Cathy Krop, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv
Abstract
This study aimed to understand the science experiences of Black, Indigenous, and People of
Color (BIPOC) through their foundational K–12 experience, teacher preparation program, and
administrative leaders. Utilizing critical race theory as the general framework, this qualitative
study uses counter-storytelling to center the narratives of nine BIPOC elementary educators.
Reflexivity, member checks, and peer reviews were used to increase the validity and reliability
of the study.
Keywords: [BIPOC, Elementary Educators, Science, Teacher Preparation, K–12 science,
White Property, Critical Race Theory]

v
Dedication
The twisted inversion that many children of immigrants know is that, at some point, your
parents become your children, and your own personal American dream becomes making
sure they age and die with dignity in a country that has never wanted them.
- Karla Cornejo Villavicencio, The Undocumented Americans
To my parents, Mirian Alicia and José Víctor Rivas, who sacrificed their youth, their bodies, and
their own dreams to give me wings so I could fly. I recognize, honor, and stand on your
shoulders and on the shoulders of my ancestors. Your sacrifices made all these dreams possible
and made possible a life I could never have imagined. My triumphs are your triumphs,
congratulations Dr. Mirian Alicia Rivas and Dr. José Víctor Rivas, I love you, your legacy will
change the world.

Para mis padres, Mirian Alicia y José Víctor Rivas, que sacrificaron su juventud, sus cuerpos y
sus propios sueños para darme alas para que pudiera volar. Reconozco, honro y me apoyo en sus
hombros y en los hombros de mis antepasados. Sus sacrificios hicieron posible todos estos
sueños e hicieron posible una vida que nunca podría haber imaginado. Mis triunfos son sus
triunfos, felicidades Dra. Mirian Alicia Rivas y Dr. José Víctor Rivas, los amo, su legado
cambiará el mundo, este libro se los dedico a ustedes.

vi
Acknowledgements
There is wisdom and experience and amazing story in the communities we love ... the
strength of our movement is in the strength of our relationships.
—Adrienne Maree Brown, Emergent Strategy
To my community, none of this could be possible without you. My dearest husband,
when I could no longer go on, you carried me through. Thank you for loving me immensely, and
for being my greatest supporter. This life is infinitely better because of you and in this and every
lifetime, I choose you as my life partner. You are the fuel that lights up my soul and pushes me
to be a better version of myself. To my sweet puppies, Kobe, Vee, Gigi, thank you for staying at
my feet whether it was a very early morning or a very long night, I never felt alone because of
you.
To my sister Karla, thank you for paving the way for me, it is because of the road you
bravely created that I could walk the path I am on today. You broke the barrier that college was
unattainable, you broke the notion that women could not enter male dominated fields, and you
gave us hope for a better tomorrow. Now I pave the way for others, for my baby sister Daniela,
may your compassionate heart lead you to change the oppressive conditions that our community
suffers. For, my baby Isabella, your beautiful soul is going to change the world, dream every
dream. Kaleb may your ingenuity guide you in achieving your life’s passion and take you
beyond our wildest dreams.
To my second family Evie, Eddie, and Davendy, my hope is in you. Evie your sweet
spirit and compassion is admirable. As you continue to break your own barriers through a male
dominated field, know that I am with you every step of the way. Eddie, you are a little fighter,
and in your short life you have brought immense joy to mine. It is too soon to tell what you will

vii
do, but I know that in every way you will be a source of joy and love. Davendy Justice, you are
only days old, and already my heart bursts for you. Just as you carry Justice in your name, I
know you will carry it in your heart, and the world will be a better place because of you.
To Alejandra, Mercedes, Ruby, Maritza, Kerry, J.R. I literally could not have made it
through without you. I choose you to be the star system that positively influences and expands
the power within me. May the love and power you carry within you illuminate the darkness and
the heaviness that comes from disrupting systems of power. May our revolution always be fueled
with radical love.
To my teachers and great friends, Nicolle, Lupe, Starr, Oskatti, Kristina, Casey, Emily,
Christine, Julia, Jessica, Michelle, Mayra, Kristin, Kim, Amber, AG, Jocelyn, Tony, Adrian, I
am deeply honored and privileged to watch you mold little minds. To watch you teach, fight, and
advocate for our students, is to watch the world become a better place. Thank you for supporting
me through this journey, you inspire me to lead with a spirit of liberation.
To my dearest friends Alec and Maria, thank you for the constant words of
encouragement and support. To Alec thank you for helping me with my table designs, you took
my work and elevated it. Forever grateful.
To Dr. Krop, your gentle spirit carried me through this process, creating a safe space to
ask questions, and be vulnerable. This journey is daunting, especially when you are the first to
attempt it, but having you on my team was comforting, and I am forever grateful for you. Dr.
Cash, thank you for all the guidance and for believing in me, before I even believed in myself.
To Dr. Kast, my dear friend, and classmate, the universe placed you in my path because it knew I
needed you. You are transforming science education, and I know in my heart that for years to
come, we will be transforming these spaces together.

viii
To my students you are my hope and you are the seeds of tomorrow, you have changed
my life more than you will ever know.
To my Salvadoran and Latinx community: you can dream in both languages, si se puede!

ix
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication .......................................................................................................................................v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ xii
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. xiii
List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... xiv
Chapter One: Overview of the Study ...............................................................................................1
Background of the Problem .................................................................................................2
Statement of the Problem .....................................................................................................4
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................5
Significance of the Study .....................................................................................................6
Limitation and Delimitations ...............................................................................................6
Definition of Terms..............................................................................................................7
Organization of the Study ....................................................................................................9
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .........................................................................................10
Historical Background of Critical Race Theory ................................................................10
Critiques of CRT ................................................................................................................15
Education as White Property .............................................................................................17
Science as White Property .................................................................................................23
Counter-Storytelling as a Disruptive Force in CRT ..........................................................27
Negotiating White Science ................................................................................................28
Influences on BIPOC Elementary Teachers’ Science Instruction .....................................49
Conclusion .........................................................................................................................67

x
Chapter Three: Methodology .........................................................................................................69
Purpose of Study ................................................................................................................69
Selection of the Population ................................................................................................70
Design Summary ................................................................................................................72
Methodology ......................................................................................................................72
Qualitative Instrument and Protocols.................................................................................73
Data Collection ..................................................................................................................74
Data Analysis .....................................................................................................................75
Validity and Reliability ......................................................................................................75
The Researcher...................................................................................................................76
Summary ............................................................................................................................78
Chapter Four: Results and Findings ...............................................................................................79
Participants .........................................................................................................................80
Results Research Question One .........................................................................................81
Results Research Question Two ........................................................................................91
Results Research Question Three ......................................................................................98
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................100
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................103
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................104
Discussion of Findings .....................................................................................................105
Limitations .......................................................................................................................109
Implications for Practice ..................................................................................................111
Future Research ...............................................................................................................113
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................113
References ....................................................................................................................................115

xi
Appendix: Semi-Structured Interview Question Guide ...............................................................127

xii
List of Tables
Table 1: Participant Demographics 80
Table 2: Desired Administrative Support 97
Table 3: Recommendations for Practice 112

xiii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Critical Race Theory 68
Figure 2: K–12 Foundational Science Experiences 91
Figure 3: Teacher Preparation in Science Instruction 94

xiv
List of Abbreviations
BIPOC Black, Indigenous, People of Color
CRT Critical Race Theory
STEM Science Technology Engineering and Math
CCC Cross-Cutting Concepts
DCI Disciplinary Core Ideas
SEP Science and Engineering Practices
NGSS Next Generation Science Standards

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
“Who is a scientist? What does a scientist look like?” In the beginning of the school year,
elementary students are asked to sketch a picture of a scientist and without fail, they sketch a
picture of a White male with messy hair, dressed in a lab coat. Despite the fact that standing
before them is a Latinx woman in science, students of color often do not see themselves as
scientists. They see what the world has depicted in front of them: a world where science was not
made for people of color, depicts science as exclusive, and where they yearn for scientific
knowledge but are filled with thoughts of inferiority. As the population of students of color
increases, White females make up 80% of the teaching population, and that has a significant
impact on the student population. The White female teacher is set up to represent “goodness and
virtue,” and through her Whiteness upholds patriarchal and racist systems that rely on failing
institutions that produce “expendable labor pools” and “capitalist class benefits” (Leonardo &
Boas, 2013, p.320). The cultural erasure of Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) from
the curriculum and teacher preparation programs upholds the power dynamic of Whiteness as
property (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). The presence of BIPOC teachers in science begins to break
identity barriers and dismantle Whiteness as property in science. Science has long been at the
forefront of educational discussions for the benefit of the global economy. However, until the
voices of the marginalized are centered, communities’ true equity will not be achieved
(Solórzano & Yosso, 2002).
This study sought to tell the counterstories of BIPOC elementary educators. In centering
the voices of marginalized communities, this study sought to understand the experiences of
BIPOC elementary educators in their foundational (K–12) education and teacher preparation
programs as well as with their administrative support as it pertains to science. The narratives of
2

teacher experiences with science can help understand and begin to dismantle Whiteness as
property in science education. It is imperative to use their experiences to learn how to break the
cycle of inequity.
Background of the Problem
“Historically the focus of civil rights as it relates to urban school questions...has been on
shared school space, not a direct call for opportunity to learn” (Tate, 2001, p. 1016). The demand
for rigorous academic content for students of color results from the historical disenfranchisement
of their education through physical segregation and inferior learning opportunities. The fight for
desegregation began a century prior to the Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954 with
the Roberts v. City of Boston decision in 1850. However, those cases and others did little to
desegregate school systems, despite separate but equal being deemed unconstitutional and
replaced with equal opportunity for all (Tate, 2001). This shift brought challenges as schools
segregated African Americans internally through tracking and ability grouping, which “provided
inferior learning opportunities” (Tate, 2001, p. 1016). When it comes to science, students from
diverse ethnic backgrounds confront “societal-induced barriers,” that exclude them from
participating in science (Brand et al., 2006, para. 5). These barriers range from prior science
experience, student-teacher interactions, and positive feelings about their teacher to engagement
in science (Brand et al., 2006).
In 1983, the publication of A Nation at Risk highlighted the many ways that American
schools were failing children and set recommendations to move forward (The United States
National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). The report highlighted the need to
focus on basics like science, computer science, and technology and increase qualifications for
those teaching these subject matters (The United States National Commission on Excellence in
3

Education, 1983). The argument for increased science education for BIPOC students often
includes the ambition for global competition rather than a genuine devotion to equity (Tate,
2001). However, the complexities of achieving equal opportunity for all in science education are
still central among BIPOC communities.
“Science as a subject area and culture is rooted in positivist thinking that restricts ways of
knowing to a Western conception of knowledge” (Mensah & Jackson, 2018, p. 4). The
Eurocentric lens through which students and teachers of color learn science to sets them on a
cycle of alienation (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). The overrepresentation of White students in
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors results directly from inferior
opportunities for students of color. Black and Latinx students often enter college with similar
interest levels in STEM as their White counterparts, but “White privilege [is] both enacted and
preserved [when] minority students exit STEM majors at comparatively higher rates” (Riegle-
Crumb et al., 2019, para. 7). Black students switch majors about 19% more often than their
White counterparts, and Latinx students switch at a rate 13% higher than their White
counterparts. Majors in the STEM disciplines experience the most significant attrition for Black
and Latinx students, and past research demonstrates these fields make for an exclusionary space
that subjects students to presumed inferiority (Riegle-Crumb et al., 2019). In discussions of
persistence in STEM, Chang et al. (2014) find that low retention rates for students of color are
“largely associated with unequal preparation and access to educational opportunities” (p. 568).
“The displacement of Black educators after the Brown v. Board of Education decision
was an extraordinary social injustice” and one that directly impacted the opportunity to learn for
BIPOC students (Tillman, 2004, p. 280). Their displacement led to the erased history,
perspective, and voice of the Black community in science. Consequently, science has a culture of
4

exclusivity due to the whitewashing of its pedagogy, which then becomes inaccessible to BIPOC
teachers as well (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). This whitewashing can be seen in teacher
preparation programs where the curriculum is missing the voices of people of color and ignores
racial inequities in these programs. These conditions are detrimental, as teachers of color serve as
role models and have an “inherent understanding of the backgrounds and experiences of students
from diverse cultural backgrounds” (Mensah, 2019, p. 1415).
The denial of the opportunity to learn science for BIPOC students begins as early as
elementary school when science minutes are reduced to prepare students for annual assessments
in reading and math (Dee et al., 2013; Griffith & Scharmann, 2008; & Milner et al., 2017).
Elementary students are, therefore, cheated of the proper foundational science skills and enter
middle school with little to no knowledge of science. These inferior learning opportunities can
sometimes lead to disengagement in high school science. However, for those students who
continue to be engaged in science, the foundational gap enlarges and can be detrimental when
pursuing post-secondary education. All of this is then compounded “by a limited number of
science teachers of color,” with 80% of teachers being White, and/or teachers’ inaccessibility to
science (Mensah & Jackson, 2018; Moss, 2016). This study focused on counterstorytelling to
give voice to BIPOC elementary educators (Solórzano & Yosso, 2002). This study sought to
understand ground BIPOC elementary educators’ experiences as both students and teachers of
science.
Statement of the Problem
Critical race theory centers race as the normal order of things in U.S. society (Ladson-
Billings, 2004). Racism is deeply embedded in society, from institutions to individuals, and it
thrives due to racial discrimination (Ladson-Billings, 2004). One theme of critical race theory
5

(CRT) is Whiteness as property. This theme “asserts that there are tangible aspects of life that
White people claim as their own; hence, they are positioned to allow and deny access because of
their claims to property” (Mensah & Jackson, 2018, p. 7). The disenfranchisement of science
education for BIPOC communities has thus alienated students from seeing themselves as
scientists and maintained science as exclusive to others. The lack of BIPOC representation in the
STEM field maintains the culture of power. The critical nature of the influence of BIPOC
teachers on students of color makes it imperative to examine the experiences of elementary
teachers in their role as scientists. The absence of culturally relevant pedagogy and
administrative support, combined with an exclusionary K–12 experience, could perpetuate the
status quo. Understanding the BIPOC elementary teachers’ experience will aid in breaking this
cycle that maintains Whiteness as property in science (Mensah & Jackson, 2018).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of the lived experiences
that have impacted the science teaching of BIPOC elementary educators. The participants’
narratives were collected through semi-structured interviews wherein they shared their personal
experiences in their foundational science (K–12) education and teacher courses as well as with
administrative leadership (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). The theoretical framework guiding the
study is CRT, which helps examine how educational theory can subordinate racial and ethnic
groups in science. Three research questions were developed to understand the participants’
varying perspectives:
1. How does the foundational science (K–12) education of BIPOC elementary teachers
impact their science pedagogy?
6

2. How do BIPOC elementary teachers relate to their teacher preparation courses, and
how does that impact their science pedagogy?
3. How do BIPOC elementary teachers feel that their administrative leadership supports
the effectiveness of their science teaching?
Significance of the Study
As the need for 21st century STEM skills increases, the United States trails behind many
countries in developing these skills, and the number of women and minorities in STEM remains
severely underrepresented (Chenoweth, 2020; DeSilver, 2020). A genuine devotion to equity is
necessary to increase science opportunities and accessibility for BIPOC communities. Teachers
of color play a critical role in developing culturally relevant pedagogy and imparting
accessibility for students of color. This study tells the narratives of the life experiences of BIPOC
elementary teachers to develop a deeper understanding of how to break the cycle of inequity in
science.
Limitation and Delimitations
The delimitation of the study lies in the fact that it is not generalizable due to the small
sample size. The nine BIPOC elementary educators’ counterstories were collected through semi-
structured interviews, which served to center marginalized voices. However, the study’s
limitations lie in the participants’ valid interpretation and truthful accounts. I partook in peer
reviews and member checks to increase the credibility and trustworthiness of the study, as
further explained in detail in Chapter Three. Additionally, due to distance learning, it is possible
that participants experienced Zoom fatigue. Thus, I ensured to stay within the 60-minute time
frame, to limit fatigue. Moreover, I used the beginning of the interview to build trust, as the
virtual setting is difficult to read body language. Lastly, my bias may skew the results of the data
7

analysis. Therefore, I took careful precautions through member checks as outlined in Chapter
Three.
Definition of Terms
• Cross-Cutting Concepts (CCC): Per the Next Generation Science Standards (Cross
Cutting Concepts, n.d),
These are concepts that hold true across the natural and engineered world.
Students can use them to make connections across seemingly disparate disciplines
or situations, connect new learning to prior experiences, and more deeply engage
with material across the other dimensions. The NGSS requires that students
explicitly use their understanding of the CCCs to make sense of phenomena or
solve problems (para. 1).
The seven CCC are patterns, cause and effect, scale proportion and quantity, systems and
systems models, energy and matter, structure and function, and stability and change.
• Critical Race Theory (CRT): “utilized as the theoretical framework, where the centrality
of experiential knowledge and the unique voice of color establish a basis for the
research...in science and teacher preparation” (Mensah & Jackson, 2018, p. 5).
• Cycle of Inequity in Science: Per Mensah and Jackson (2018),
Teachers of color live within a perpetual cycle of alienation, exclusion and
inequity. The cycle starts first with not having the opportunity for use and
enjoyment of learning science as PK–12 learners, viewing science as White
property, and then finding themselves in teacher education programs as White
property. Access and right to ownership of science teaching and learning become
virtually impossible. (p. 10).
8

• Disciplinary Core Idea (DCI): According to the NGSS website (Disciplinary Core Idea,
n.d.),
The fundamental ideas that are necessary for understanding a given science
discipline. The core ideas all have broad importance within or across science or
engineering disciplines, provide a key tool for understanding or investigating
complex ideas and solving problems, relate to societal or personal concerns, and
can be taught over multiple grade levels at progressive levels of depth and
complexity. (para. 1)
• Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS): A framework of K–12 science standards,
with three dimensions: CCCs, science and engineering practices (SEPs), and disciplinary
core ideas (Three Dimensional Learning, n.d.).
• Science and Engineering Practices (SEP): According to the NGSS website (Science and
Engineering Practices, n.d.),
The practices are what students DO to make sense of phenomena. They are both a
set of skills and a set of knowledge to be internalized. The SEPs reflect the major
practices that scientists and engineers use to investigate the world and design and
build systems. (para. 1).
The eight SEPs are asking questions (as a scientist and an engineer), developing and
using models, planning and carrying out investigations, analyzing and interpreting data,
using math and computational thinking, constructing explanations (for science and
engineering), engaging in argument from evidence, obtaining, evaluating, and
communicating information.
• STEM: an acronym for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
9

• Whiteness as Property: “tangible aspects of life that White people claim as their own;
hence, they are positioned to allow and deny access because of their claims to property”
(Mensah & Jackson, 2018, p. 7).
Organization of the Study
This study tells the counterstories of the marginalized voices of BIPOC elementary
educators. The study is divided into five chapters. The first chapter provides the context of the
problem of inferior learning opportunities in education for both BIPOC students and teachers and
the significance of centering marginalized voices and introduces the research questions guiding
the study. Chapter Two will consist of a literature review relating to the conceptual framework of
this study in the areas of CRT pertaining to BIPOC elementary science educators. The third
chapter will examine critical race methodologies, data collection, and analysis used for the study.
Chapter Four will explore the findings of the research. The final chapter will discuss the meaning
behind the results, implications, and recommendations for practice and future research.

10

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
The complexities of achieving equal opportunity in science education are still front and
center in BIPOC communities’ lives. The disenfranchisement of science education for BIPOC
students begins as early as elementary school and maintains science as exclusive to others. The
influence of BIPOC teachers on students of color makes it imperative to examine elementary
teachers’ experiences in their role as scientists. This chapter reviews the historical background of
CRT and the theme of Whiteness as property as it pertains to science. Additionally, it addresses
the power of counter-storytelling as a disruptive force in CRT. Then it addresses the need for
culturally relevant pedagogy in elementary science and teacher preparation courses as a tool to
shift the power dynamics that maintain science as White property. Lastly, the chapter focuses on
how science instruction in elementary schools is affected at the macro level by the pressures of
high-stakes testing and at the micro level by the organization’s administrative leadership. The
chapter ends by presenting the conceptual framework guiding this research.
Historical Background of Critical Race Theory
Derrick Bell’s racial realism states that “racism is an integral, permanent and
indestructible part of American society” (Brown & Jackson, 2013, p. 14). The roots of CRT
began in 1989 in Madison, Wisconsin, with a group of 23 legal scholars (Crenshaw, 2011).
Critical race theory arose due to the historical developments of the time, which began with the
Black and Latinx struggle towards equity for their communities, which pushed forward the civil
rights movement (Valencia, 2005). “One of the greatest strengths of CRT lay in the observation
that diverse groups who join together to fight segregation and other forms of oppression often
see that fighting to protect one groups basic rights is inextricably linked to everyone’s rights”
(Valencia, 2005, para. 134). The 1946 case of Mendez v. Westminster played a central role in in
11

the struggle towards desegregation, and essentially paved the way for the groundbreaking case of
Brown v Board of Education (Valencia, 2005). The Mendez v. Westminster case was a class-
action lawsuit that involved more than 5,000 Mexican American students in Orange County,
California seeking access to school spaces (Valencia, 2005). Mexican American schools had
been segregated post 1848 after the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ended the Mexican American
war and continued despite the influx of Mexican immigrants to California in the 1900s
(Valencia, 2005). This case became the “first successful constitutional challenge to segregation”
challenging the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause (Valencia, 2005, para. 2). The
Mendez case argued that exclusion due to race from school spaces was harmful to students due
to the stigmatization and harmful psychological development of those excluded (Valencia,
2005). This case laid the groundwork for the 1954 Brown v. Board decision which used similar
arguments made in the Mendez case, thus both developing “the legal and moral climate” for
Brown (Valencia, 2005, para. 10). In 1954 the Brown v Board case triumphed over Plessy v.
Ferguson and so commenced a 15-year strife for equity and the dismantling of structures of
racism. The Brown v. Board decision, which overturned the belief in separate but equal and
made racial segregation unlawful resulted in a fight for political, economic, and educational
policies, such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968. However, in 1973
these efforts came to a halt with the decision of Keyes v. School District no. 1, followed by
Milliken v. Bradley in 1974 and Washington v. Davis in 1976, which stated that if laws were not
intentionally discriminatory but resulted in a discriminatory effect, they were constitutional
because. This made de facto segregation constitutional in the United States.
12

Additionally, in the 1978 case of Bakke v. Regents of the University of California, the
court decided to inhibit the plan of the medical school to reserve 16 of its 100 admission seats for
BIPOC (Brown & Jackson, 2013). The laws and policies at the time motivated law professors of
color at predominantly White institutions to meet at the original CRT workshop. The law
professors participated in critical legal studies (CLS), which taught that “laws tend to enforce,
reflex, constitute and legitimize the dominant social and power relations through social actors
who generally believe they are neutral and arrive at their decisions through an objective process
of legal reasoning” (Brown & Jackson, 2013, p. 12). While CLS brought to light how the legal
process worked, the legal scholars felt that it failed to address the struggle of people of color, in
particular Black people. The first CRT meeting thus sought to understand how White supremacy
maintains the status quo in America, and the attendees’ mission was to understand “the very
foundational ideas of traditional legal discourse and formulat[e] criticisms of those ideas”
(Brown & Jackson, 2013, p. 14).
There are five tenets of CRT: permanence of racism, interest convergence, counter-
storytelling, Whiteness as property, and intersectionality. The first challenges the law’s
neutrality. The objective or neutral stance of the law is, in fact, not neutral because the law is
written and formulated from the perspective of the perpetrator, White Americans in this case.
Freeman (1978) pointed out that racism and racial oppression are viewed differently, depending
on whether the perspective is of the victim or the perpetrator. The victim’s perspective on racial
discrimination is that it should be eliminated and allow the advancement in their employment,
education, and wealth opportunities. In contrast, the perpetrator's perspective on racial
discrimination is that it is a conscious discriminatory action and not a phenomenon that is
occurring in society. Therefore, those who are intentionally racist are the problem, and others are
13

innocent and absolve themselves of the problems caused by racism. Thus, the legal system’s
view of racism is not objective but represents the courts’ choice in choosing the perpetrator's
perspective (Brown & Jackson, 2013). Another important conceptual element of CRT stems
from Lawrence’s (1987) work, which claims that traditional legal discourse is inherently
discriminatory because America’s history is rooted in racism and has played a dominant role in
society’s attitudes and beliefs about race. Therefore, these cultural beliefs create biases among
society, and failure to recognize them can result in policies that harm (Brown & Jackson, 2013).
The second tenet of CRT is Derrick Bell’s work with interest convergence, becoming an
important contribution to CRT. Bell claimed that any advancement or racial remedies for
marginalized groups comes solely at the interest of Whites, known as interest convergence. For
example, the Brown v. Board of Education decision improved America’s credibility against
communism, shifted the South into an industrialized economy, and relieved the disappointment
of Black soldiers fighting in World War II. Similarly, Lincoln’s emancipation proclamation
disrupted the Southern economy that relied on slave labor, gained financial aid from foreign
governments, and increased the opportunity to enlist Black soldiers. Both the Brown v. Board
decision and the emancipation proclamation had little to do with freeing Black slaves but had
everything to do with serving the interests of White elites (Brown & Jackson, 2013). In 1992,
Bell proposed the tenet of racial realism, in which he believed that “Black people will never gain
full equality in this country” (Brown & Jackson, 2013, p. 18). Instead, Black people receive
“peaks of progress” that disappear when society falls back into racial patterns of White
superiority (Bell, 1992, p. ix). Nevertheless, the struggle towards freedom should continue
(Brown & Jackson, 2013).
14

To expose the structural racism embedded within society, CRT authors used strategies
such as counter-storytelling, the third tenet of CRT (Brown & Jackson, 2013). Because racial and
ethnic occurrences are interpreted differently based on positionality, counter-narratives can aid in
weakening the claims of racial neutrality in legal discourse (Brown & Jackson, 2013).
Additionally, counter-narratives shed light on racism in the everyday lives of people of color,
validating their experiences. Because marginalized communities have often been disqualified
and excluded from discourse, it is important for them to occupy space and transform theoretical
spaces (Yosso, 2005). Moreover, challenging racism entails revealing cultural wealth, which is
the accumulated assets and resources of communities of color, such as knowledge, skills,
abilities, and contacts that resist macro and micro level forms of oppression (Yosso, 2005).
Harris (1993) contended that White racial identity provides societal benefits to Whites,
while serving as a barrier for people of color. This is the fourth tenet of CRT, as Harris provides
the evolution of Whiteness from color to race to property rooted in White supremacy. Harris
claimed that the privileges of Whiteness are so deeply embedded in society that they are often
not apparent. Due to these societal privileges, Whiteness and its power are greatly protected and
sought after by those who are White passing. Ultimately, the protection of Whiteness in the legal
system makes Whiteness a property value. “In particular, Whiteness and property share a
common premise- a conceptual nucleus- of a right to exclude” (Harris, 1993, p. 1714).
Therefore, BIPOC communities’ subordination is not due to their race but to the profitability of
their dehumanization because Whiteness as property flourishes out of their subjugation.
Whiteness serves as a barrier to systemic change.
Crenshaw (1991) introduced the last tenet of CRT through a closer look at race and
gender bias in a framework coined intersectionality. Intersectionality helps to understand how
15

multiple forms of inequality intersect and compound one another, creating greater obstacles for
the individual. For example, better understanding Black women’s economic struggle in the
workplace requires examining the roles of both gender and race in their pay. It is vital to look at
the intersection of such inequalities to dismantle structural racism and inequalities and build a
new world that takes into account the multiple identities that shape an individual (Brown &
Jackson, 2013).
Critiques of CRT
Critical race theory challenges the racist structures of American society and aims to shift
the current paradigm; as a result, it has met resistance (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). Critics have
argued that CRT relies too heavily on narrative over evidence and further critiqued its “merit,
truth and objectivity” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017, p. 102). Critics like Randall Kennedy
believed that CRT was accusing the prominent scholars of the time of ignoring voices of color,
victimizing them, while failing to determine whether the works provided were of high quality
(Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). Similarly, Daniel Farber and Suzanna Sherry believed that CRT
hid behind personal narratives to push an agenda (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). They further
argued that CRT ignored the success of two minority groups: Jewish and Asian people. Thus,
CRT’s argument that there is bias against minorities is simply untrue and is “implicitly anti-
Semitic and anti-Asian” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017, p. 128). This criticism feeds into the model
minority myth, which states that Asians are smart and successful citizens who overcame racism
and discrimination to live out the American dream (Chow, 2017). As with all stereotypes, this is
problematic because it creates a rigid narrative that erases and ignores the experiences of the
Asian diaspora (Chow, 2017). Additionally, it ignores the historical racism Asian Americans
experienced and the selective recruitment and rewards for educated Asians that put them towards
16

a path of citizenship (Chow, 2017). Most harmful of all, this pits minority groups against one
another, faulting African Americans for not being more like Asians, perpetuating anti-Blackness,
and maintaining the racial hierarchy in America (Chow, 2017).
Since 2009, right-wing conservatives have used Obama’s presidency to claim that the
nation has overcome its racist past (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). Obama’s election has been used
as an argument against the social uprisings for Black lives in 2020. The Black Lives Matter
movement gained traction in 2020, with people yearning to learn more about the true history of
America and bring forward CRT as the basis for social justice movements (Ray & Gibbons,
2021). Educational leaders and schools incorporated equitable learning opportunities and ethnic
resources to build a more just world (Ray & Gibbons, 2021). These additions caused fear among
many right-wing politicians who sought to pass legislation to ban CRT from being taught in
schools (Ray & Gibbons, 2021). As of February 2022, nine states banned CRT in schools (Ray
& Gibbons, 2021). The legislation bans “the discussion, training, and/or orientation that the U.S.
is inherently racist as well as any discussions about conscious and unconscious bias, privilege,
discrimination, and oppression. These parameters also extend beyond race to include gender
lectures and discussions” (Ray & Gibbons, 2021, para. 8). Additionally, 19 states are considering
a ban or have bills ready for the next session (Ray & Gibbons, 2021).
Also, CRT has been subjected to internal criticism. The first criticism lies in the fact that
CRT is theoretical but not practical. For example, CRT cannot help alleviate issues with police
brutality. Activists need different theories to help them fight for social change (Delgado &
Stefancic, 2017). Additionally, some critics believe that CRT has become distracted with identity
issues, as opposed to its original design of social analysis (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). Issues of
identity include multiracial identity, White passing identity, intersectionality, or the social
17

construction of race, which differ in each individual depending on their personal experience
rather than focusing on the systemic issues at large (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). Lastly, there
are critiques on whether some parts of CRT can be applied in different countries and cautions
against doing so (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017).
Education as White Property
Critical race theory illuminates the long history of deliberate educational deprivation of
people of color. A tenet of CRT names Whiteness as property, contending that White racial
identity has provided societal benefits to Whites while serving as a barrier for people of color,
particularly within the educational system. Historically, people of color have been denied access
and excluded from receiving an education. However, in the years following the Brown v. Board
decision, there were serious repercussions for students of color when thousands of Black
educators were displaced. In more recent days, the fight for equitable education lies in denying
the opportunity to learn science (Tate, 2001). The continual access White communities have to
science education makes science education White property and a civil rights issue.
Harris (1993) investigated the relationship between race and property and the “tension
between property and humanity” (p. 1719). White identity and racial hierarchy paved the way for
chattel slavery as a lawful way of life in America and justified the massacre of Indigenous
people. The racial otherness of Indigenous people, and the unmarked land as property,
legitimized the conquest and bloody massacre to acquire new land (Harris, 1993). Therefore,
property is defined as something that “consists of right in ‘things’ that are intangible, or whose
existence is a matter of legal definition…[it is] a right, not a thing.” (Harris, 1993, p. 1725).
Further, “Whiteness has functioned as self-identity in the domain of the intrinsic, personal and
psychological; as reputation in the interstices between internal and external identity; and, as
18

property in the extrinsic, public and legal realms” (Harris, 1993, p. 1725). Therefore, Whiteness
is a value and a right, giving it property value, and legal rights, while enslaving others. In
modern times, property values are socially constructed by jobs, entitlements, occupational
licenses, contracts, and subsidies. White Americans most often enjoy these privileges at the cost
of excluding others, synonymous with the functions of property, which increases in value
through exclusion (Harris, 1993).
To understand the hierarchy of race in America, it is critical to understand its history
through education. Schooling has been a considerable contributor to race relations because it has
been accessible to some and not others. In 1787, Thomas Jefferson proposed that White children
be offered three years of public schooling that would send the most intelligent males to grammar
school at the expense of the public Anderson, 2010). However, the other 40% of the population,
consisting of enslaved children, were disenfranchised from public education (Anderson, 2010).
Once emancipated in 1863, ex-slaves demanded universal schooling. “They rushed not to the
grog-shop but to the schoolroom-they cried for the spelling-book as bread, and pleaded for
teachers as a necessity of life” (Stowe, as cited by Anderson, 2010, p. 5). Yearning for learning,
freed people established their own educational system of at least 500 schools, which included
Black educators and administrators. “Rooted deeply within their own communal values,” their
educational system was funded solely by their own money and labor because African Americans
viewed literacy as a necessary tool of liberation (Anderson, 2010, p. 9).
The model used by African Americans to fund their own schooling was contributed
significant to the development of universal schooling in the United States (Anderson, 2010). To
increase the Southern economy, there was a reestablishment of a plantation system. However,
ex-slaves requested schooling as part of their contract for the year (Anderson, 2010). The
19

plantations agreed to allow them to continue learning with only Black teachers, believing this to
be an inferior learning experience (Anderson, 2010). However, the dominant class was now
threatened by the emergence of a literate Black working class in direct contrast with the illiterate
poor White class (Anderson, 2010). In 1880 and 1890, there was a demand for free schooling,
largely due to ex-slave efforts and their educational revolution (Anderson, 2010).
Black educators operated, funded, and gathered resources for Black schools. The ethos of
Black educators aligned with that of the Black community. Similarly, Black leaders were both
educators and activists and believed that education was the way to advance the life of future
generations. Thus, the epistemology of teaching was the same as the cultural norms, preparing
students to live in a desegregated world, although it did not exist at the time. Black Principals
were liaisons between school and community and servant leaders. Although there is not enough
research on Black superintendents, Tillman (2004) posited they must have been expected to have
a great influence in their community and surrounding cities.
The path to school desegregation, however, marked the loss of employment of many
Black educators due to the 1954 Brown v. Board decision and the idea that schools with Black
educators were inferior. The courts were reluctant to interfere with segregation policies and local
school boards. The courts had no prior experience with resistance to desegregation, which
resulted in a lack of monitoring and data collection after the court-ordered desegregation. Prior to
Brown v. Board, there were approximately 82,000 Black teachers who taught two million
children. Between 1954 and 1964, 38,000 teachers were dismissed from their teaching positions.
In the years following, 1975 to 1985, there was a decline in Black students choosing teaching
careers. Discouragement followed when new teacher requirements displaced 21,500 Black
teachers between 1984 to 1989. Finally, in 2001, African American teachers represented only 6%
20

of public school teachers, while African American students represented 17.1% of the public
school population (Tillman, 2004). Brown was a civil rights decision that benefited Whites rather
than an educational decision that benefited students. This decision displaced Black educators,
administrators, and principals, and it ultimately resulted in a threat to the social, emotional, and
academic well-being of children of color.
The Brown decision failed to deal with teachers' integration, and the teachers who were
not be displaced confronted additional barriers. In 1955, Georgia barred teachers from joining
the NAACP; consequently, anyone affiliated with this organization risked their employment. In
1966, Chicago threatened to withhold state funds from school districts that did not integrate, and
schools bargained to drop Black teachers. In the 1960s, several lawsuits ensued. The first against
the Phoenix school district claimed it was discriminatory because it was not hiring Black
educators. Similarly, in 1961 L. L. Owens sued their district for firing Black teachers based on
racial discrimination because all the Black teachers were fired after integration. In 1962, after
Mississippi’s NAACP president was fired from their teaching position after 11 years of service, a
lawsuit ensued. Willa Johnson filed a lawsuit in 1964 after she was fired for civil rights activity.
Her firing was meant to intimidate other African Americans from registering to vote. Finally, in
1965 after eight Black teachers filed an appeal to be reinstated, the court declared school officials
did not have to guarantee a position for Black teachers, and more Black educators were displaced
(Tillman, 2004).
The displacement of Black educators affected African American communities at cultural,
social, economic, and academic levels. The decline of Black educators is still prominent today,
with a shortage of Black teachers in urban schools. Black students still pursue educational
careers at lower numbers than the rest of the population. Today, approximately 80% of teachers
21

are White, and 65% of principals in predominantly Black schools are White. The loss of Black
educators put African American children in racist school environments with teachers who did not
necessarily care for their social, emotional, and academic success. The African American
epistemology of teaching was interrupted. Post-1954, problems like low self-esteem, decreasing
aspirations, ability grouping, and tracking rose among Black students and still resonate today
(Tillman, 2004).
Crenshaw (2010) stated that “legal ideology has helped create, support and legitimize
America’s present class structure,” and policies within the education system have been no
exception (p. 10). Laws and policies generated by state legislation heavily impacted education
minutes, curriculum, standards, assessments, and funding. Therefore, CRT reveals how the
education system upholds systems of White supremacy, beginning with the curriculum. The
educational curriculum silences marginalized voices and perspectives while legitimizing the
dominant White perspective. Historical distortions and omissions, combined with a lack of rigor
in the curriculum, directly impact BIPOC communities, guilting them of their own failure
(Ladson-Billings, 1998). Additionally, teachers with a deficit mindset or who do not clearly
understand race in education and society taint instructional strategies and do not properly serve
their students of color (Ladson-Billings, 1998). Moreover, standardized assessments serve to
legitimize the deficiencies of marginalized communities. In essence, Black students’ low
achievement fits the racial stereotype that Black students are inferior to White students (Ladson-
Billings, 1998). Holding students of color to the same standards as their White counterparts when
their education is more deficient places blame on the students rather than the systems and
upholds racial stereotypes.
22

Further inequities and racism lie in how schools are funded, based on property tax values
(Ladson-Billings, 1998). Therefore properties with more wealth have better-funded schools
(Ladson-Billings, 1998). This is a direct result of institutionalized racism that prevents African
Americans from educational advancements, jobs, and home loans and keeps them in a perpetual
cycle of low achievement (Ladson-Billings, 1998). Inequities within the curriculum, instructional
strategies, assessments, and school funding have led to a continuous fight for equal opportunity
in schools, which correlates to CRT’s fight for equity and justice in society (Ladson-Billings,
1998).
White people have played a central role in Black people’s access to education. There has
been a continual denial of “Black people’s collective access to quality learning environments”
(Donnor, 2013, p. 295). The decision in the 2007 case of PICS v. Seattle School District no. 1
determined that diversity cannot be decided by the government. Therefore, schools cannot use
racial classification to achieve diversity. Through this case, the United States Supreme Court
abolished race as a relevant aspect of public education. This decision does not take into account
society’s historical and systemic racial inequities (Donnor, 2013). Donnor (2013) explained,
Unwillingness of Whites, irrespective of socioeconomic status and political affiliation to
recognize that true equality for blacks will require the surrender of racism-granted
privileges for Whites, means legal remedies for racism and policy efforts to foster racial
equality are not intended to systematically combat the practices, policies and structures
that adversely affect the life chances and experiences of people of color in the United
States (p. 201).
23

Science as White Property
Science education is a civil rights issue. Today, the struggle must shift from an argument
of shared school space (desegregation) to demands for high-quality academic preparation (Tate,
2001). The denial of the opportunity to learn provides the theoretical perspective to discuss
science as a social justice issue. Remedying the inequities facing students of color requires
interventions related to science learning and teaching (Tate, 2001). Tate (2001) argued that
students of color are denied the opportunity to learn. Tate’s claim that science education is a civil
rights issue is based on the work of Carroll’s (1963) and Husen’s (1967) model of school
learning. According to Carroll (1963), an important aspect in opportunity to learn is how much
time a student has to learn a specific concept. Therefore, taking time away from science to
prioritize other subjects reduces students’ opportunity to learn. According to Husen (1967), the
greatest concern is the quality of instruction relative to concepts. Therefore, if the quality of the
education is poor, it also reduces the opportunity for students to learn adequately. Time and
quality can and should be altered with appropriate interventions in schools to provide students of
color with opportunities to learn (Tate, 2001).
Policies are pivotal in determining time, quality, and technology for students learning
science. According to Tate (2001), high-stakes testing is a disincentive to dedicate time to
science instruction. Moreover, it has created low-level curriculum opportunities for students in
urban schools due to the pressures of increasing test scores in reading and math, which shifted
schools to a test-oriented pedagogy and school mission (Tate, 2001). In regards to quality
instruction, tracking students by curriculum or ability level limits the quality of science
instruction because math placement typically drives science placement. Therefore, students who
struggle with math might be placed in lower-level science courses. Darling-Hammond (2001)
24

named it a rationed opportunity in which students of color are denied access to high-quality
curriculum, which directly relates to achievement. Schools with a large population of students of
color are less likely to offer advanced college preparatory courses in math and science than
schools serving affluent communities (Oakes, 1990). Moreover, when schools with a high
minority population offer advanced courses, they are only offered to a small fraction of students.
As a result, BIPOC students are largely underrepresented in math and science programs
(Darling-Hammond, 2001).
Tracking begins early on in the U.S. school system, as early as elementary school
(Darling-Hammond, 2001). In elementary schools, students are designated into certain groups
based on test scores, and the designation becomes formalized by middle school (Darling-
Hammond, 2001). Schools can increase access to rigorous and high-quality science instruction
through teacher quality. Teacher quality has a significant impact on students’ opportunity to
learn science (Tate, 2001). Teacher quality is associated with content knowledge, pedagogy,
years of experience, behaviors, practices, knowledge of learning, and certification. Teachers with
STEM certifications are retiring and relocating at greater rates than the production of teachers
qualified to teach STEM. Thus, it is imperative to increase teachers with a STEM certification, as
these certifications would require that teachers have strong content knowledge in science.
Additionally, financial incentives for teaching STEM, such as opting out of federal
income tax, could incentivize teachers to pursue certification in STEM. Moreover, sustained
professional development and resources to support STEM instruction is essential in supporting
teachers to feel confident in their science instruction (Tate, 2001). To support teachers, science
budgets need to be evaluated to ensure that professional development, resource allocation, and
funds are all aligned. Financial resources and budgeting should also include technology.
25

Technology is typically exclusive to gifted children, robotics clubs, and coding groups.
Furthermore, engineering and technology are seen as too advanced for elementary and secondary
schools (Tate, 2001). However, a global pandemic proved otherwise and highlighted the need for
age-appropriate technology curriculum.
Bullock (2017) examined how middle-class Whites in urban areas secure STEM
education as White property by opening STEM schools. Urban STEM schools are built under the
pretense of raising math and science achievement, improving the economy, increasing job
prospects, and providing better opportunities for minority students of low socioeconomic status.
The plans to diversify STEM education are to create more opportunities for Black students, but
they do not address other systemic barriers such as poverty, food quality, unemployment, and
homelessness (Dumas, 2013). Schooling has played an active role in Black suffering because,
after forced integration, schools have failed to provide a quality education (Dumas, 2013). When
education fails to acknowledge the historical disenfranchisement of Black youth and the systemic
barriers they face, harm will continue to exist (Bullock, 2017). Therefore opening STEM schools
in urban neighborhoods will provide a limited opportunity for non-White students.
Further harm occurs through gentrification, which is key to securing STEM schools and
remaking the city while displacing the community (Bullock, 2017). New STEM schools attract
newcomers (White families) and displace the residents of color, therefore serving as a “race and
class conquest of the city” (Morales-Doyle & Gutstein, 2019, p. 528). These schools are used as
pawns and community anchors in urban economic development (Bullock, 2017). Additionally, as
White families invest in property to access STEM public schools, they act like owners of public
education. In contrast, working families’ interactions with schools are that of recipients of
26

services. At the end, when failing schools are repurposed as STEM schools, students pay the
price (Bullock, 2017).
In addition, urban STEM schools often have admission criteria centered around
standardized test scores, grades, attendance, and behavior that make it impossible for parents and
students to meet (Bullock, 2017). Working parents may find it difficult to pick up their child at
odd times due to extended school days or meet the number of volunteer hours required (Bullock,
2017). Additionally, some urban STEM schools do not provide transportation, and public
transportation is limited in these areas, making it difficult for students of low socioeconomic
status to attend (Bullock, 2017). Ultimately, if parents or students do not meet the criteria or do
not have transportation, they forfeit their option to select the STEM school and must return to
their home school (Bullock, 2017). Working-class parents are thus disempowered due to the lack
of accessibility, responsiveness, and agency for the community (Bullock, 2017). These choices
displace students from the opportunity to learn, and White middle-class parents continue to
exclude students from science.
Historically, exclusion began with denying Black people access to schooling and then
creating and maintaining separate schools. The modern equivalent is White flight, vouchers,
public funding of private schools, and school choice (Bullock, 2017; Morales-Doyle & Gutstein,
2019). White middle-class parents have quality schools available to them, while Black working-
class families have school closures. Therefore, school closures repurposed for STEM schools
inconvenience and displace Black families in their own communities and secure more
educational property for White children (Bullock, 2017; Morales-Doyle & Gutstein, 2019).
Morales-Doyle and Gutstein (2019) stated, “there are essentially two roads – assimilate
27

populations of color who are perceived as potentially ‘unruly’ into specific job categories for
economic productivity, or push them out entirely” (p. 541).
The appeal of STEM schools is that the curriculum provides students opportunities for
project-based learning, cooperative learning, and lab activities that are not common in public
schools. The curriculum in public schools often focuses solely on test preparation. In contrast,
STEM schools are less restricted in their accountability systems and therefore can provide more
opportunities for learning for students. Selective STEM schools admit academically proficient
students and eliminate extra staff who may support differentiation for students, allowing them to
focus on staff members who can provide rigorous instruction, such as Advanced Placement
courses. Additionally, selective STEM schools have an advantage because they have more
technological resources than under-resourced schools (Bullock, 2017).
The disenfranchisement of science education for BIPOC communities began long ago
with the denial of education, deprivation of educators of color, and the opportunity to learn. As a
result, this disenfranchisement prevents students from seeing themselves as scientists and
maintains science as exclusive to others. As the need for 21st century STEM skills increases, the
United States is falling behind. A genuine devotion to equity is necessary to increase science
opportunities and accessibility for BIPOC communities.
Counter-Storytelling as a Disruptive Force in CRT
The marginalization of communities of color has often disqualified and excluded them
from discourse. Rather than see marginalized communities from a deficit perspective, Yosso
(2005) recommended examining the strengths such communities possess. These strengths are
described as cultural wealth and include accumulated assets and resources such as knowledge,
skills, abilities, and contacts marginalized communities use to fight against oppressive systems
28

(Yosso, 2005). The cultural capital BIPOC communities have come in six forms: aspirational,
navigational, social, linguistic, familial, and resistant (Yosso, 2005).
Aspirational wealth is the ability to passionately dream despite the systemic barriers that
need to be overcome (Yosso, 2005). Navigational wealth is the potential to traverse social
institutions with resilience (i.e., code switching). The third cultural capital is social, or the
propensity to create and form networks and community resources of resistance. Additionally, the
capacity of speaking more than one language or one style of language allows for a multitude of
communication skills, storytelling, and narrative skills in the form of linguistic capital.
Moreover, marginalized communities build familial wealth through kinship and a sense of
community that keeps them interconnected. Most powerful is the resistance to challenge
inequalities and passing down their cultural capital as a form of continued resistance.
The omission of voices of color disempowers them, and challenging racism requires
empowering them to occupy and transform theoretical spaces (Yosso, 2005). The reigning
master narrative distorts and silences the experiences of people of color (Solórzano & Yosso,
2002). Currently, teacher education programs rely on dominant stories centered on a cultural
deficit model to delineate educational inequities and pass on harmful beliefs of students of color
(Solórzano & Yosso, 2002). In contrast, CRT focuses away from dominant and hegemonic views
of culture; therefore, to disrupt the dominant narrative, research should center perspectives and
voices that have been missing.
Negotiating White Science
The growing divide between White teachers and students of color speaks to the
importance of culturally relevant pedagogy to dismantle deficit thinking and racial stereotyping.
Elementary science teacher programs maintain the status quo, as they are often spaces of
29

exclusivity that alienate BIPOC educators. Therefore, culturally responsive pedagogy must also
be centered in teacher preparation programs.
A Case for Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Culturally relevant pedagogy is committed to the empowerment of students as individuals
and collectives, in which students experience academic success, cultural competence, and critical
consciousness (Ladson-Billings, 1995). To achieve academic success, teachers must demand that
their students produce academic excellence through academic ownership that values their skills
and abilities (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Culturally relevant teachers use students’ culture,
backgrounds, and abilities to produce higher engagement, academic ownership, and success
(Ladson-Billings, 1995). Finally, Ladson-Billings (1995) stated that “beyond those individual
characteristics of academic achievement and cultural competence, students must develop a
broader sociopolitical consciousness that allows them to critique the cultural norms, values,
mores, and institutions that produce and maintain social inequities” (p. 162). A critical
consciousness prepares students for active citizenship (Ladson-Billings, 1995). This pedagogy
respects and uses students’ lived experiences, history, and perceptions to humanize learning
(Bartolomé, 1994). As the U.S demographics shift towards a larger minority population, teachers
must receive appropriate training to best serve students of color (Howard, 2003). Culturally
relevant teaching is an effective approach to meet students’ academic, social and cultural needs
by making it more relevant (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Thus, preparing teachers for diverse
learners in an unwelcoming education system requires rejecting deficit thinking (Ladson-
Billings, 1994). However, what happens when the teachers themselves are also of color and the
teaching programs continue to cater to the majority, White teachers?
30

The growing divide between students of color and White teachers creates a great
challenge for culturally relevant pedagogy because White teachers uphold patriarchal and racist
views of society (Leonardo & Boas, 2013). The teaching population is composed of
overwhelmingly White women, 80% to be exact (Leonardo & Boas, 2013). White women have
historically comprised the largest teaching population, and federal data from 2019 showed that
the teaching population remains 79% non-Hispanic White women (Taie & Goldring, 2019). It is
important to critically analyze the dimensions of Whiteness that White women bring into U.S.
classrooms to understand their relationship with students of color. White women have done the
work of White supremacy from their own place in the hierarchy (Leonardo & Boas, 2013).
According to Leonardo and Boas (2013),
Just as every army is composed of different tactical positions to secure or conquer a
territory, so does Whiteness consist of its own foot soldiers…who perform different
functions but whose allegiance to Whiteness is not the question…although [White
women] may not call the shots, they often pull the trigger. (p. 315)
As part of an oppressed gender, White women have been relegated to reproductive roles:
social and biological in society. Their role of domesticity extended into the school system, and
their role as teachers would be of benevolent protector (Leonardo & Boas, 2013). However, the
U.S. education system produces more failure than success, and the White female teacher is set up
to fail “within a greater system that relies on the systematic failure of the majority to reproduce
an expendable labor pool and a capitalist class that benefits from it” (Leonardo & Boas, 2013, p.
320). This situation is by design as the model of power is upheld by coloniality of power
(Quijano, 2000). Solomona et al. (2005) called it the “institutionalization of Whiteness,” which
seeps into the education system as “neutral and invisible” but reproduces and maintains “racial
31

order” (p. 147). Therefore, White privilege is lived, unseen, and essential to domination;
dismantling requires deep reflection (Perry, 1995). As Lorde (1984) wrote,
In a patriarchal power system where whiteskin privilege is a major prop, the entrapments
used to neutralize Black women and White women are not the same…White women face
the pitfall of being seduced into joining the oppressor under the pretense of sharing
power. (p. 118)
This is a gentler Whiteness reproduces systems of oppression (Leonardo & Boas). Perceived
benevolence gives teachers the power to speak on behalf of the other and continue to uphold
systems of White supremacy without ever acknowledging White capital and White privilege
(Leonardo & Boas, 2013; Solomona et al., 2005). White female teachers, therefore, play a
critical role in reproducing racism, posing a serious threat to students of color because, by 2050,
they will be the majority in trend-setting states like California and Texas (Leonardo & Boas,
2013). The principles of CRT can influence teacher candidate beliefs when they are critically
reflective of racial and gender histories and of how one can be implicated in them, embed race
and race history in curriculum, teach systemic racism, and work to understand that race is part of
a larger socio-historical construct (Leonardo & Boas, 2013). Critical race theory helps shed light
on White women’s role in teaching practices and the importance of culturally relevant pedagogy
to begin to dismantle White racial domination.
Classrooms are not the only ones perpetuating White supremacy and upholding the status
quo. Teacher education programs also continue to reproduce suffering in pre-service teachers
(Carter Andrews et al., 2019). Teacher education programs often have “damage centered
teaching” because they use the life experiences, pain, and exploitation of BIPOC communities to
shift the hearts of teachers (Carter Andrews et al., 2019, p. 5). This use is deficit-framing and
32

subtractive, emphasizing what communities lack rather than their assets. Due to a “White-
supremacist-cis-hetero-ableist society,” unlearning is required by any person seeking access to
the classroom (Carter Andrews et al., 2019, p. 6). A pedagogy that centers critical consciousness,
empathy, cultural humility, and love for all humans should be at the forefront of teacher
education programs because it “interrupts, reverses and refuses negative impacts” (Carter
Andrews et al., 2019, p. 5). Humanizing pedagogy is a lifelong process of becoming, as one can
never fully achieve cultural competence. Thus, this endeavor has to be both “an individual and
collective effort toward consciousness” that leads to actions that challenge inequitable systems of
power (Carter Andrews et al., 2019, p. 6). Teacher education programs cannot fully prepare
social justice educators without critically examining inequities in school systems and their own
positionality as teachers (Carter Andrews et al., 2019). The core tenets of a humanizing
pedagogy are engaging in critical self-reflection (for both the preservice teacher and the
educator), resisting binaries, and ontological and epistemological plurality (Carter Andrews et
al., 2019)
Engaging in self-reflection is important to assess one’s beliefs and challenging cultural
norms perpetuated in classrooms that continue to oppress students of color. Self-reflection allows
for the unlearning of biases and assumptions and the disruption of harmful anti-Black,
xenophobic, homophobic, sexist, colonialist systems of power in schools. Additionally, teacher
education programs have a moral obligation to teach preservice teachers to examine their ways
of thinking beyond the good and bad binary and confront the complex intersections of race,
class, and gender. Complex conversations around White supremacy and its many manifestations
allow teachers to confront how they reproduce systems of power in their classrooms (Carter
33

Andrews et al., 2019). “Formal schooling has always been a site of policing particular
knowledge [the written word], social and cultural practices” (Carter Andrews et al., 2019, p. 21).
The White-supremacist-cis-hetero-ableist society worships the written word and regards
it as legitimate (Carter Andrews et al., 2019). Teacher preparation programs should create space
for diverse ways of being and knowing through multiple modalities, such as literacy, artifacts,
music, and narratives, so the written word does not bind teachers. Given the sociopolitical
climate that calls for justice for Black lives, reevaluates immigration reforms, resists oppressive
systems for marginalized communities, a humanizing pedagogy is necessary.
Teacher Education Programs as Spaces of Exclusivity, Standing in the Gaps with Latinx
Teacher Pedagogy
“Latinx students face unique challenges at various points along their educational
trajectory, which ultimately contribute to the underrepresentation of Latinx teachers in the
classroom” (Garza, 2019, p. 10). Research shows the significance that preschool programming
can have on school readiness however, Latinx students have the lowest enrollment rates at 37%,
in comparison to 50% of their White counterparts (Garza, 2019). They begin their elementary
career less academically prepared, and their preparation is further exacerbated by the quality of
the schools they will attend. Latinx students are more likely to attend high poverty schools with
less qualified teachers and offering less Advanced Placement courses (Garza, 2019). Garza
(2019) astonishingly states that “by the end of fourth grade, low income Latinx students can be
up to two years behind their wealthier White peers in reading and math” (p.10). Even though
Latinx students are graduating at higher rates, they are “trailing [behind] other groups of
students, even before they get to college” (Garza, 2019, p. 10).
34

The academic challenges Latinx students face is just one barrier into higher education,
another significant barrier is the lack of financial resources. Latinx students make up a large
proportion of students living in poverty 27% even though they only make up 18% of the
population (Garza, 2019). Latinx students may also carry financial responsibility in their homes,
and this is an additional challenge to paying for a costly education, despite the dreams and
ambitions many Latinx parents carry for their children to attend college (Garza, 2019).
According to the Pew Research Center (2020) 74% of students from ages 16-25 named helping
their families financially as one of the reasons for not continuing to higher education.
Additionally, there has been political opposition in allowing undocumented students which are
majority Latinx, to pay in-state tuition although many have lived here all their lives (Irizarry,
2011). Furthermore, at times the support comes in the shape of caregiving, supporting their
families with younger children or grandparents (Garza, 2019). Financial and caregiving support
can add an additional emotional burden of guilt and neglect should Latinx students seek to leave
the proximity of their home to attend college elsewhere (Garza, 2019). Finally, the financial
barriers can influence Latinx students to pursue a more “lucrative career” besides teaching due to
the pressures of upholding their families financially (Garza, 2019, p.11).
Despite the academic, financial, and emotional barriers, Latinx students are enrolling in
college at an increasing rate (Garza, 2019). However, they are so “ill-prepared” that many must
enroll in remedial courses to increase their math and reading skills, Latinx students enroll in
these courses 30% more than their White peers (Garza, 2019, p. 13). Because these courses do
not count toward a degree, Latinx students waste time and financial resources they already lack
getting through them. Moreover, it is less likely they will “persist” through their degree (Garza,
2019, p. 13).
35

An additional barrier Latinx students face when entering teacher education programs is
the testing certifications required to enter the field. In particular, the basic skills test used as a
prerequisite to enter teacher education programs. The results of this test show that Latinx
teaching candidates of color have lower passing rates that their White counterparts, 20% less
(Garza, 2019). This is not hard to believe given the academic setbacks taking place as early as
preschool. The intent of the test is to identify academic gaps however it is important to
interrogate whether this basic skills test is a predictor of effective teaching (Garza, 2019).
Moreover, research further shows that teachers of color serve as role models and have an
inherent understanding of their students’ needs (Mensah, 2019). Latinx teachers can recognize
and affirm their students’ language, identity and culture, and serve as cultural liaisons between
families. Thus, Latinx teachers are critical players in fostering academic success (Irizarry, 2011).
Thus, a basic skills test that excludes teachers of color who have historically been academically
disenfranchised serves as a systemic barrier in acquiring a teaching credential. Therefore, how do
we continue to “recruit and prepare” teachers of color for a more diverse and equitable teaching
workforce (Garza, 2019, p.12)? Bell & Busey (2021) state,
teacher education programs fail to deconstruct he intersectional racial grammar of teacher
education to provide meaningful learning experiences for preservice teachers of color,
who often endeavor to teach in the very underserved communities of color that educator
preparation programs fetishize (para 1).
Moreover, teacher education programs continue to “normalize Whiteness while fetishizing
communities of color” (Bell & Busey, 2021, para. 2). Given that Black and Latinx teachers are
vital to the diversity of the teaching force, they often become the sole voice for their
communities in predominantly White institutions (Bell & Busey, 2021). Rogers-Ard et al. (2013)
36

further states that teacher education programs are only interested in diversifying their teacher
pool without removing systemic barriers.
In Irizarry’s (2011) article titled “En la lucha: The struggles and triumphs of Latino/a
Preservice Teachers” he outlines the three ways in which teacher preparation programs have
failed to attract and retain Latinx students. Particularly by ignoring the racism experienced in the
daily lives of their students. Latinx students in teacher preparation programs are systemically
silenced in three ways through curriculum and instruction, in social spaces and in school policies
(Irizarry, 2011). Five Puerto Rican college students that were part of Project TEACH
participated in this research study, volunteering to be followed during their collegiate years and
agreeing to be interviewed over many years. Project TEACH was aimed at recruiting Latinx
teachers for local employment (Irizarry, 2011). The five participants mentioned that although this
program aimed at diversifying the teaching staff, professors within the program were culturally
insensitive and the curriculum failed to address the needs of Latinx students in k-12 as well as
adequately prepare teachers for culturally responsive teaching (Irizarry, 2011). The participants
felt “marginalized rather than treated as valued members of [their] communities” (Irizarry, 2011,
p. 2818). These experiences were not isolated events, most participants had experienced vast
discrimination and marginalization throughout their college experience, even prior to entering
their teacher preparation program. Interactions in social spaces with faculty, staff and students,
was often problematic due to the stereotypes incited by the media. Thus, students were often
confused for custodial staff and one participant was yelled at by the White cafeteria manager that
she was late and out of uniform when she was trying to grab lunch (Irizarry, 2011). Such racial
microaggressions in social spaces serve to suppress, isolate, silence and exclude students of color
(Irizarry, 2011). Finally, school policies also serve as exclusionary barriers for Latinx students.
37

One school policy that limited the mobility and suppressed student voice was their forced
assignment to teach in suburban communities that were far away from the communities in which
they resided. Four of the participants were the heads of household and low-income students that
had difficulty acquiring the proper transportation to get to the suburbs (Irizarry, 2011).
Additionally, they experienced feelings of isolation in the suburban schools where they
overheard on site teachers speaking ill of Latinx students (Irizarry, 2011). The psychological
trauma that Latinx preservice teachers experience in predominantly white institutions is a
significant barrier in diversifying the teaching force. In order for teacher education programs to
remove some of these barriers it requires “critical allies” that will stand “en la lucha” with Latinx
preservice teachers as they navigate hostile climates (Irizarry, 2011, p. 2830).
This experience extends into STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) teacher
preparation programs where Latinx teachers remain largely underrepresented at all grade levels
(Monarrez et al., 2021). Therefore, it is critical to provide “effective pathways for Latinx youth
to pursue STEM teaching careers” (Monarrez et al., 2021, p. 165). Monarrez et al. (2021) article
examines STEM teaching motivation among Latinx population that participated in the Robert
Noyce scholarship using Yosso’s lens of cultural wealth. The core assumptions in this article are
that teacher preparation programs should recognize the cultural capital in STEM teaching and
learning, develop social capital among preservice teachers and use an inclusive STEM teaching
model (Monarrez et al., 2021). The Robert Noyce scholarship believes that teachers of color
have assets that are invaluable as future STEM teachers and so they recruited STEM students
from a university at the US-Mexico border to become secondary level STEM teachers granting
them a $5,000 scholarship each semester (Monarrez et al., 2021). The scholarship recipients
were mentored throughout the program. Data was collected using a focus group of 15 scholars
38

and individual interviews, and the conceptual framework focused on the assets Latinx students
possessed as described by Yosso (2005): aspirational, navigational, social, linguistic, familial
and resistant. These assets serve to “empower preservice teachers who are historically not fully
participating in STEM teaching communities” (Monarrez et al., 2021, p. 165). Several themes
arose from this study, scholars possess multiple forms of capital that helped them navigate
through their journey as STEM scholars:
1. Familial capital was accessed for scholars through the adoption of teachers as family who
inspired and motivated students to become teachers. These teachers became part of their
extended family that positively impacted their lives, in turn influencing their motivation
to become teachers.
2. The scholars possessed aspirational capital. They had passion and motivation to help
other students understand science, become a role model and have a positive impact on
their community because of their awareness to the societal issues their communities face.
3. The scholarship provided opportunities for students to build their social and navigational
Capital by providing important connections, resources, and a support network for the
scholars.
4. Viewing students from a lens of cultural wealth rather than deficit thinking builds
resistant capital, drawing from their hardships and understanding that their cultural
capital can push them forward despite the barriers they have encountered (Monarrez et
al., 2021).
Latinx preservice teachers already possess aspirational and familial capital that is foundational to
their desire to become STEM teachers and an invaluable resource to open access for students of
color. Monarrez et al. (2021) state,
39

this study demonstrates that STEM teacher preparation for people of color is supported
and enhanced by adopting a cultural wealth lens for viewing teacher formation…[and]
can support other emerging types of capital needed for effective teaching, such as
resistant capital (p. 175).
Resistant capital in teachers of color is vital to challenge inequities and resistance is “the legacy
of the minoritized…the effort to be seen and heard and whole in the wake of oppression that
overwhelms” (Mitchell, 2016, para. 3).
Science Teacher Education Programs as Spaces of Exclusivity
As Annamma (2014) stated, “educators continue to be educated and educate others in
ways that ignore systemic racial inequities and their own role in perpetuating those inequities”
(p.294). As the gap between White teachers and students of color widens, and student
populations become more linguistically and economically diverse, it is critical to examine the
systemic racial inequities and the “unspoken norms of Whiteness” that create barriers for
students and teachers of color (Mensah & Jackson, 2018, p. 5). Teacher preparation programs
often neglect the experiences of teachers of color and the impact systemic racism has had on
their own lives, which becomes even more problematic when the focus is on a subject rooted in
Eurocentricity: science. The overrepresentation of White-cis-hetero-males in science and the
Western curriculum excludes BIPOC students and teachers. Mensah and Jackson (2018) coined
the phenomena “science as White property” because “the fundamental precept of Whiteness—
the core of its value—is exclusivity” (p. 8).
This study analyzed the experiences of preservice elementary teachers of color as they
attempt to gain access to science. Teachers of color were once students of color, and as teachers,
they must grapple with their own foundational science knowledge and how they felt excluded or
40

marginalized from it. The exclusion begins early students’ education and continues through their
teacher education programs. They enter a constant cycle of exclusion where access to science
teaching and learning becomes almost unattainable (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). Teachers of color
create significant relationships with their students and can enhance their learning experience.
They see science as vital to their students’ learning because they, too, lacked a high-quality
science experience. However, school placements that do not prioritize science prevent the
advancement of science instruction, producing a new generation of students who are
“underprepared science learners” (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). These learners then go to high
school and college, either avoiding or failing science. Eventually, some of these learners become
teachers and “enter a teacher education program carrying with them a legacy of science learning
neglect” (Mensah & Jackson, 2018, p. 11). Science teacher preparation programs should be
examined to reveal the thriving structural racism and power within a program’s curriculum,
structure, and pedagogy that exclude teachers of color from science (Mensah & Jackson, 2018).
In Mensah and Jackson’s (2018) study, teachers received an elementary methods course
by a professor of color and a curriculum that focused on hands-on engagement for pre-service
teachers of color. Additionally, the content in the elementary course was delivered through
culturally relevant and interdisciplinary connections. The purpose of the study was to analyze the
experiences of teachers of color in an elementary science methods course as they attempt to gain
access to science (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). It was a field-based elementary science methods
course at a graduate school in New York City in 2018 where teachers were asked to take
observational notes, interact with students and develop and teach micro-lessons that integrated
science and literacy. At the end of the methods courses, seven preservice teachers of color aged
22 to 28 and of Black/Nigerian American, Latinx, and Caribbean Chinese backgrounds agreed to
41

participate (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). Data were collected via pre- and post-surveys, semester
journals, a final course paper, and post-course questionnaires to analyze their experiences
through the science methods course.
The journals were coded, and the theme of science as White property was seen in all the
narrative accounts (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). The elementary science methods course shifted
attitudes toward science. Participants had initially felt that science was not inclusive throughout
their high school and college courses, but having a professor of color helped them gain access to
science learning (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). The methods course disrupted the narrative that
science was only for White-cis-hetero males, making science both accessible and meaningful to
the participants. Thus, BIPOC elementary educators set the foundational interest in science
education among early learners that set them on a course to break the cycle of alienation.
Teacher preparation programs should empower teachers to relieve the inequities of science
education and recognize how “generational and educational inequities impact teaching practices”
to transform teacher preparation programs into spaces of social justice reform (Mensah &
Jackson, 2018, p. 31).
To further examine how science teacher education programs are spaces of exclusivity,
Mensah (2019) conducted a second longitudinal study using CRT to study how an African
American female science teacher named Michele (pseudonym) navigates a predominantly White
teacher education program. The study examined Michele’s educational history as a young child,
her experience through a predominantly White teacher program, her growth as a science teacher,
and her first teaching position. The research questions addressed in the study were as follows:
1. In what ways did Michele understand race and racism in her educational narratives,
and how did these experiences affect her preparation as a teacher of color?
42

2. What were Michele’s experiences as a teacher of color in a White teacher education
program?
3. What experiences shaped her development as a teacher of color desiring to teach
science? (Mensah, 2019, p. 1414)
Digitally recorded interviews and oral and written narratives were used to understand Michele’s
experience with race and racism.
The study found four racial narratives: race, racism, power, and inequities both at the
individual and systemic level. In Narrative 1, race, Michele’s early childhood experiences were a
recollection of a keen awareness of her skin tone and the association of beauty with lightness.
Moreover, during her elementary and middle school experience, she felt that she did not belong
because she was “the only [Black] one” in her class (Mensah, 2019, p. 1426). She remembers her
teacher comparing her to her White classmates and letting her know that she did not learn as
effectively as they did.
In Narrative 2, racism, this pattern continued through her teacher education program
where Michelle struggled to find her voice and feelings of isolation persisted when she was one
of four Black preservice teachers. Furthermore, she did not resonate with the readings and felt
that her teacher program reflected “White sensibilities” and disregarded the needs of teachers of
color (Mensah, 2019, p. 1429). In Narrative 3, power, however, this all changed. Michele found
her voice in Mensah’s science methods course. Although Michele did not like science due to her
lack of experience, she was invigorated by the fact that her science teacher was a Black woman
that challenged her personal views and offered critical reflection. This reflection is a testament to
the role teachers of color play for their students (Mensah, 2019).
43

Finally, after finishing her methods course, Michele felt empowered to teach science. She
pushed to teach science at her science placement and even integrated science and social studies
into her lesson plans. She felt confident in her science background to create, plan, advocate and
defend science at her school site, even as a resident teacher. Michele’s confidence stemmed from
her learning science in Mensah’s science methods course:
By having Dr. Mensah as my professor, I was able to find my voice and place in science
education because of her personal pedagogy in the field. If a White professor [taught the
course], I would not have been able to find my voice. Science methods reminded me of
Langston Hughes poem, I too sing America. Anyone can be a scientist regardless of your
ethnicity and gender. (Mensah, 2019, p. 1437).
Today, Michele continues to use multicultural strategies from her science methods course in the
classroom, gets to know her students, and builds a classroom community.
In Narrative 4, inequities, Michele struggles to find a school placement that accepts her
but finally finds a school to call home (Mensah, 2019). While this narrative is that of only one
teacher of color, CRT addresses the nature of racism in education and the shared experience
among people of color (Mensah, 2019). Additionally, Mensah (2019) notes the need for
elementary teachers of color and the influence they can have on their students. Science education
is already a subject that sits at the margins in elementary school programs, and the limited
number of science teachers of color augments this issue (Mensah, 2019). Michele’s story
highlights the need for teacher education programs to center the needs of teachers of color in an
intersectional way, especially in science learning. “Without sharing the authentic voices of
teachers of color, we are blind to the educational inequities in teacher education programs and
44

unaware how we might improve programs that will benefit more of them” (Mensah, 2019, p.
1443).
“Negotiating White Science ” With Culturally Responsive Education
Mensah’s longitudinal studies and science methods courses challenge the Eurocentric
lens in which science is taught. It challenges how teacher education programs have neglected and
disregarded how teachers of color have been impacted by systemic racism, oftentimes assuming
that elementary educators have strong foundational science knowledge. Mensah’s research sheds
new light on the impact of culturally relevant teaching in science education for both teachers and
students. Mensah’s (2011a) study discusses three pre-service teachers’ experiences with planning
culturally responsive science lessons around a pollution unit for a fourth to fifth-grade span. The
data for the study came from microteaching papers, lesson plans, classroom observation,
interviews, and informal conversations. Mensah concludes that teaching and learning culturally
relevant teaching principles in science teacher education is essential in preparing teachers for
diverse learners. Mensah took from Ladson-Billings’ (1995) teachings that explain the three
criteria for culturally responsive teaching: students experience academic success, develop
cultural competence, and develop critical consciousness to challenge the status quo.
Similarly, just as students should be taught in these ways, so should teachers. Teachers
cannot teach culturally relevant pedagogy when they have not been taught in that manner. These
criteria are important for teaching, but fail to address science specifically, which continues to be
a non-priority subject (Mensah, 2011a). Mensah’s (2019) longitudinal study demonstrates how
impactful culturally relevant pedagogy can be for elementary science teachers and its effect on
future generations of students. Mensah addressed the following research questions:
45

• What supports are needed in the preparation of preservice teachers who focus on
planning, teaching and assessing science lessons and teaching in culturally relevant
ways?
• What lessons are learned in preparing pre-service teachers to incorporate culturally
relevant teaching in urban elementary science classrooms and their learning to
become culturally relevant science teachers? (Mensah, 2011a, p. 297)
Three assertions were made in the study as important practices for preservice teachers:
• Elementary educators are in need of support, and should collaborate with diverse
teachers to teach culturally relevant pedagogy, for themselves and their students.
• Elementary educators should be empowered to teach and maintain cultural
competence in their science classrooms.
• Elementary educators should find personal relevance in their science content, thus
challenging the status quo and empowering their own students to do the same
(Mensah, 2011a).
Teaching elementary educators these practices in their teacher preparation programs will
increase teacher efficacy to teach science. When teachers feel successful in teaching science,
students also experience this success (Mensah, 2011a, 2013), which is important for
marginalized students who cannot see themselves in science when it is dominated by White-cis-
hetero-males and taught through a Eurocentric lens. Science is not prioritized in classrooms with
predominantly marginalized populations (Mensah, 2013).
Three takeaways from Mensah’s (2011a) study are a need for strong collaboration
between universities and urban schools, ample time to embed culturally relevant practices in
science, and a need for schools to prioritize science instruction with more time and resources so
46

that both teachers and students can be successful. Culturally relevant pedagogy in teacher
preparation programs can transform science classrooms into places of inclusion rather than
exclusion from access to science (Mensah, 2011a, 2013). Educational settings with rigorous
learning environments seek to challenge hegemonic culture and support culturally relevant
teaching to meet the needs of a diverse set of students. Teachers must first transform the mind
and challenge their own thinking about what it means to teach underserved students effectively
(Mensah, 2013). Mensah’s studies (2011a, 2013, 2018, 2019) serve to eliminate notions of who
can have access to science for both students and teachers by preparing teachers with culturally
responsive teachings specific to their science classroom.
Mensah (2012b) asserted that “social justice is the missing element in much of the work
in science education” (p. 18). Social justice can be achieved through critical dialogue in how
current teacher education programs teach science to future educators. Mensah (2012b)
recommended six theoretical approaches to prepare teachers for social justice science teaching:
• Critical race theory empowers marginalized communities and reveals the social,
political and ideological processes of American society;
• Urban education pays close attention to issues of power dynamics within school
systems;
• Multicultural education promotes and celebrates learning cultural differences,
• Culturally responsive teaching uses cultural knowledge to empower students socially,
intellectually, emotionally and politically;
• Sociocultural theory acknowledges differing perspectives and voices to produce a
shared understanding; and
• Postcultural feminist teaching challenges sexism in science education
47

Mensah (2012b) expressed a responsibility to help teachers of color, phrased as a moral
obligation to dismantle the Eurocentricity of science education that starts with the presence of
women of color. This responsibility continues with the collaborative fight towards culturally
relevant science education programs that center diversity, equity, and social justice (Mensah,
2012b).
Hernandez et al. (2013) conducted a theoretical study due to the need for an inclusive
model to prepare pre-service teacher candidates in culturally responsive teaching pertaining to
science and mathematics teaching. This study sought answers to the following research
questions: “what does culturally responsive teaching among candidates look like? What are the
characteristics and behaviors that culturally responsive teachers (pre- and in-service) demonstrate
in practice” (Hernandez et al., 2013, p. 806)? An effective model for culturally responsive
teaching needs to consider teachers’ thoughts and actions (Hernandez et al., 2013). This study
had three steps, a comprehensive literature review, synthesis of the literature into themes, and
piloting of the thematic categories to build a model of culturally responsive science education
(Hernandez et al., 2013). After an extensive literature review, three approaches were important in
effective teaching: “multicultural education, culturally responsive teaching and culturally
relevant pedagogy” (Hernandez et al., 2013, p. 807). According to Banks (1981), multicultural
education should include critical analysis of issues such as racism, sexism, and issues of equality;
development of values; examining diverse cultures and teaching strategies; and an examination
language variations and development
Hernandez et al. (2013) also borrow from Ladson-Billings’ (1995) work on culturally
relevant teaching, naming the three criteria of success as academic, social, and critical
consciousness. Furthermore, Gay (2003) stated that a culturally responsive teacher must create
48

positive learning environments and hold their students to high expectations. Then, Villegas and
Lucas (2002) developed a plan for curriculum development that included six strands for teacher
development: gaining sociocultural consciousness, affirming attitudes towards students,
commitment to being agents of change, understanding foundations of culturally responsive
teaching, learning about students and their communities, and developing culturally responsive
practices. Hernandez et al. (2013) developed the following thematic categories from the
extensive literature review:
• content integration: including that of many cultures;
• facilitating knowledge construction: using student ideas and building on their ways of
knowing in order to develop critical thinking skills;
• prejudice reduction: building safe, positive classroom environments;
• social justice: teachers’ willingness to be agents of change and empowering students
to challenge inequities (Villegas & Lucas, 2002; Ladson-Billings, 1995); and
• academic development: the opportunity to learn and gain academic success.
Lastly, these thematic categories served as tools to assess the practices of 12 Latinx
teacher candidates in a teacher education program. The 12 teachers were followed from their
science and math methods courses to their field experience in which they planned and taught
lessons and were observed (Hernandez et al., 2013). Evidence was collected through
(1) artifacts of teaching such as philosophy of teaching statements, candidate summaries
of classroom and school contextual factors, lesson plans, post teaching self-reflections,
and logs of professional responsibilities; (2) observations of teaching; (3) final
evaluations of field experiences and student teaching; (4) as well as audio taped
interviews. (Hernandez et al., 2013, p. 810).
49

The evidence was then coded under each thematic category. The study has many
implications that advocate for culturally responsive training in teacher education programs.
Hernandez et al. (2013) further stated that “teacher education programs must develop strategies
to educate all teachers to meet more effectively the needs of diverse learners and to integrate
themselves more effectively into the communities where they will teach” (p. 817). This model
can guide curriculum and assessments for teacher preparation programs to develop culturally
responsive candidates (Hernandez et al., 2013).
Influences on BIPOC Elementary Teachers ’ Science Instruction
Macro- and micro-level influences affect BIPOC elementary teachers’ science
instruction. At the macro level, policies like high-stakes testing pressure elementary teachers to
deprioritize science instruction. At the micro level, the school climate, professional development
opportunities, and administrative leadership influence educators’ dedication to teaching science.
Lastly, BIPOC elementary teachers’ personal beliefs and scientific content knowledge shape the
science instruction they provide.
Macro-Level Influences on Science Instruction
In a speech at a Georgia rally, President Bush stated that “for decades, the public school
system failed too many children, so we passed the No Child Left Behind Act and demanded
schools show results in return for money” (The New York Times, 2006). President Bush signed
the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2002, and it was a controversial policy that held
schools accountable for ensuring all students were proficient in reading and math. The goal of
this policy was to center equity and eliminate the achievement gap for minority and low-income
students. Thus, funding was withheld if schools were not making adequate yearly progress
50

(AYP). School’s proficiency goals were measured through high-stakes testing in reading and
math.
While NCLB was founded in equity, the output had unintended consequences (Wirt &
Kirst, 2009). The pressure of high-stakes testing tied to provisions leads to district cheating,
selective testing, increased spending, and negative impact on non-tested subjects (Dee et al.,
2013). The following literature will examine the impact of NCLB on early science education.
After NCLB, instructional time for science in elementary and middle schools decreased to meet
the demands of preparing students for their annual assessments in reading and math (Dee et al.,
2013; Griffith & Scharmann, 2008; & Milner et al., 2017). In 2007, NCLB was reformed to
include a testing requirement for science, but this assessment was not tied to schools’ AYP.
Therefore, this reform did little to improve science education in elementary schools. “Until there
are consequences for school performance in science, the teaching of elementary science will
continue to be minimized further eroding the nation’s goals for improved STEM education,
advanced innovation, and improved economic prosperity” (Milner et al., 2017, p.129).
Dee et al. (2013) examined how schools changed after NCLB in a quantitative study. The
authors conducted a longitudinal study on NCLB’s financial impacts and the shift in the use of
time and overall climate in schools. They used a comparative interrupted time series (CITS) to
compare changes in schools. CITS requires a comparison group, and since it was federally
required for all schools to partake in NCLB, it was difficult to offer a true comparison. Despite
the limitations, Dee et al. examined schools with pre-existing accountability systems closely
related to NCLB prior to implementation. They believed these schools would show little change
because they were so closely related to the policy, while schools with no pre-existing
accountability systems would experience larger effects.
51

Dee et al. (2013) found that all schools, whether they had pre-existing accountability
systems or not, had increased spending per pupil and in teacher compensation. Also, instructional
time increased for reading and math and decreased for science. Lastly, the schools’ climate
shifted to be more test-focused (Dee et al., 2013). The evidence demonstrated that after NCLB,
teachers shifted their instructional focus. There was more time allotted to math and English and
less time devoted to science. This effect was even greater in schools with free or reduced-price
lunch programs; the effect was a percentage point higher. Typically, schools increased
instructional time in math and literacy by 3.6 percentage points, or 5%, but Title I schools
increased it by 4.2 percentage points. The increase in time meant Title I schools were offering an
additional 50 minutes to math or literacy instruction on top of the 20 hours they were already
spending on these subjects every week. Unfortunately, this additional time spent on literacy at
the cost of science had no significant impact on student achievement in their English test.
In another study, Griffith and Scharmann (2008) examined the impact of NCLB directly
on science instruction in Midwestern states, specifically at schools with strong national education
measures. They used quantitative data to answer four research questions. The first question
pertained to instructional changes in the minutes that science education was taught. The second
question sought to examine the influence of administration on the time spent teaching science.
The third question asked whether teachers believed they needed to change their instructional
science time. The last question examined how budgeting affected teachers’ prioritization of
science. Participants were K–6 teachers employed in these Midwestern states and were
interviewed through a web-based survey with closed and open-ended questions.
Their findings showed that out of 164 teachers surveyed, 59.1% cut science instruction
time since the implementation of NCLB and replaced it with additional math and reading
52

minutes. Most teachers who cut science instructional minutes 71.8%, cut down 31 to 90 minutes
per week, and as a result, 53.6% of teachers spent 90 minutes or less per week on science
instruction. The decrease in instructional science time was due to four reasons: district and
administrative leader instructions, teacher pressure, less professional development, and
budgeting. Over 30% of the teachers who cut down science minutes reported that it was due to
administrative direction and a focus on the topics that affected the school’s AYP. About 9% of
teachers reported that science was not required by their administration. Overall, one in four
teachers were asked to cut down science instruction, and 68% of teachers believed they needed
to cut down instructional minutes from science to adequately meet AYP. Also, 72% of teachers
cut instructional time due to the lack of professional development, and almost 60% cut it because
there were not enough resources. Of the teachers who provided additional comments, 36.9%
stated that the limited curriculum in science made them focus on reading and math. Overall,
teachers felt there were no accountability systems for science, leading to fewer instructional
minutes. This study brought to light the negative effects of NCLB on a subject that provides
students with the opportunity to think critically about the world around them. The authors
recognized that the limitations of their study were due to the focus being in Midwestern states
and wondered if they would also find these results on a national scale. One truth remains,
“NCLB is leaving science behind” (Griffith & Scharmann, 2008, p. 44).
Seven years after the introduction of NCLB, a new reform was implemented to include
science testing. Milner et al. (2017) sought to compare data from years prior to science testing
with data from the years after regarding science instruction. They used a mixed-methods
approach to assess elementary teachers’ science teaching beliefs before and after science
assessments. The participants were randomly selected from a national sample of elementary
53

teachers obtained from the National Science Teaching Association’s website. The majority of
their participants were female public school teachers who taught grades K–3. Because the
researchers used a mailed survey, they had a very limited response and had limited demographic
information from the participants. Moreover, they received contradictory data, which they
believed was because teachers did not fully understand NCLB, which threatened the study’s
validity.
Their results indicated that teachers believed there were advantages to teaching science
because it was interesting and relevant for children. However, they had many concerns about the
time it takes to prepare hands-on lessons and inadequate access to materials. Teachers felt
encouraged to teach science when there was adequate funding, curriculum, professional
development, and support, such as a teacher’s assistant for set-up. Discouragement to teach
science occurred over the pressures to teach math and reading. Most teachers (73%), stated that
their greatest obstacle was a lack of time to teach a quality science lesson. Also, 36% of teachers
chose to link science to other tested subjects such as reading, writing, literacy, and spelling. In
terms of hands-on learning, only two-thirds of teachers implemented it. Most importantly,
teachers were heavily influenced by administrators and their support when deciding whether to
teach science. Although state testing is now required for science, NCLB continues to use only
reading and math scores to determine a school’s proficiency level. High-stakes testing and the
increased amount of pressure for schools to meet their goals decreased science instruction in
elementary schools, and little has changed since the reform.
Overall, NCLB was intended to level the playing field for students across the nation by
keeping schools accountable through high-stakes testing (Dee et al., 2013). However, it
unintentionally added pressure to administrators and teachers to meet AYP at the cost of science
54

education (Dee et al., 2013; Griffith & Scharmann, 2008; Milner et al., 2017). Teachers cut
instructional minutes due to a lack of administrative support and resources and to prepare
students for reading and math (Dee et al., 2013; Griffith & Scharmann, 2008; Milner et al.,
2017). Administrators have a significant influence on science education, and until there are true
accountability systems for science, little will be done to increase science teaching (Griffith &
Scharmann, 2008). Elementary science offers the foundational support for students to become
doctors, engineers, physicists, researchers, and innovators. During a global pandemic, as students
and educators navigate distance learning through technology, it is important to note that none of
it is possible without science. It is a moral obligation to prepare students for a world dominated
by science, and currently, the education system is failing to do that.
Micro-Level Influences: Personal Beliefs and Content Knowledge
“Primary teachers typically lack science content knowledge and therefore the science
pedagogical content knowledge that enables them to teach science” (Appleton, 2003, p. 1).
Despite the need to increase quality science education, the time spent teaching science is
decreasing due to high-stakes testing policies that increased pressures to teach math and English.
However, another contributor to the decrease of quality science is teacher preparedness and
beliefs regarding themselves as science educators (Appleton, 2003; Mensah, 2009, 2011b,
2012a; Nadelson et al., 2013). The literature demonstrates that educators are underprepared to
teach science due to their constrained foundational backgrounds, which limits student
preparedness (Nadelson et al., 2013). These backgrounds set a dangerous precedent because
teaching science at the elementary level is critical. A student’s foundational science knowledge is
formed early in their elementary education when they are the most enthusiastic and curious about
the world (Nadelson et al., 2013). Therefore, not preparing teachers to teach science effectively
55

does a disservice to their students. Teachers cannot prepare their students if they are not prepared
themselves.
Appleton (2003) found that emerging elementary educators avoid teaching science
because they lack content knowledge and the confidence to teach it. Appleton examined the
question regarding how beginning elementary teachers cope with trying to teach science when
they have limited pedagogical content knowledge. This study was a continuation of prior work
on the practices of early education graduates in teaching elementary science. In this
investigation, nine participants were interviewed on the scientific strategies they used.
Among participants, only one had a good science background and felt comfortable
teaching science (Appleton, 2003). All others coped with their limited science content
knowledge by avoiding teaching science or using activities that worked. Avoidance occurs in
several ways: not teaching science at all, postponing science, using fortuitous events, and
thematic teaching. When teachers do not teach science at all, there is little to no opportunity for
students to develop science knowledge. One participant in Appleton’s (2003) study expressed
that she “pushed [science] to the side a little bit” due to her own difficulties with the science
content (p. 10). Others used the deprioritization of science in their schools to postpone science
teaching.
Some participants used fortuitous events to teach science (i.e., someone brings a frog to
show and tell) as teachable moments (Appleton, 2003). These events occur spontaneously and
periodically, which also constitutes a form of avoidance. Lastly, teachers avoided science by
using thematic teaching and building science where they could, such as non-fiction reading
books. A recurring discussion among the participants was activities that work, which led to
Appleton’s (2003) second study.
56

The second study examined teachers’ understanding of the activities that work and the
meaning behind that expression (Appleton, 2003). Field notes from the first study were
considered for the second study to identify patterns in science teaching practices, specifically
around participants’ learning experiences and teaching strategies (Appleton, 2003). Although the
participants lacked pedagogical content knowledge, they attempted to teach science using
activities that work. The two research questions for the second study were as follows: If
beginning primary teachers have limited science pedagogical content knowledge, how do they
cope when trying to teach science and to what extent do the constructs of science PCK and
activities that work provide a basis for understanding such coping behavior (Appleton, 2003,
p.5)? Data from the first study were reexamined, so it was a post-hoc analysis of data. The five
characteristics of activities that work that surfaced from the study are as follows:
1. it teaches the required science content i.e the water cycle
2. the background content of the activity is already known to the teacher, teachers prefer
to work with activities that deal with content that is familiar to them
3. typically a hands-on activity that is fun and interesting for students and familiar to
teachers
4. it is manageable
5. contains a predictable and familiar outcome (Appleton, 2003).
These activities supplemented teachers’ lack of content knowledge and were coping
mechanisms for teaching science. Although these coping mechanisms are better than avoiding
teaching science, they are not preparing students for science. “The teaching profession seems to
attract people into primary teaching who fear science, rather than those who love it” (Appleton,
57

2003, p. 21). Teachers are not deficient; they are ill-prepared and working within constraints
with little or no support from their schools, school systems, or teacher preparation programs.
Mensah’s (2011b) study focused on science preservice elementary teachers’ personal
views and perceptions using the DESTIN procedure. The DESTIN procedure is a simple drawing
procedure accompanied by a discussion to gain a deeper understanding of preservice teachers’
notions of science and science teaching. Ninety drawings were analyzed during Mensah’s
science methods course at the beginning and the end of the semester. When teacher candidates
enter educational programs, they carry identities of their role as a teacher and role of scientists.
This can severely impact their and their students’ access to science learning.
Mensah’s (2011b) study used 54 preservice teachers of an elementary science methods
course aged between 22 and 37. Their pre-drawing focused on negative images of science
teaching, and their post-drawing focused on new images of science teaching. The pre-drawing
was titled “ideal science teacher-not,” meaning the teacher they did not want to become and their
post-drawing was titled “ideal science teacher,” meaning the teacher they would want to be
(Mensah, 2011b, p. 381). The drawings were open-ended and analyzed using science teacher
characteristics as a symbolic representation. Common descriptors were compiled to create a
narrative profile and then coded to analyze all 90 drawings, of which only three were simple or
ambiguous. Finally, the DESTIN criteria were used to analyze all the drawings systematically.
The criteria are explained below:
1. Stereotypical/traditional images, including non-collaborative learning environments,
and stereotypical teacher appearance.
58

2. Alternative images or non-traditional to teaching science such as, outside learning
environments, collaborative learning, student-centered learning, student exploration
and discovery and inquiry-based learning
3. Diversity and Identity with images showing diversity among students and teachers or
mentions of their own selves, written as “I,” “me,” or in an oral response (Mensah,
2011b).
In the pre-drawing, 80% of the images were females, which coincides with the majority
of participants being female. The descriptors used in this pre-drawing were that the female
middle-aged teacher was “boring,” “mean,” “standing and lecturing,” “not student centered,” and
“authoritative” (Mensah, 2011b, p. 383). On the other hand, the “ideal science teacher” had
descriptive words such as “fun,” “enthusiastic,” “warm,” “connect to students,” “students trust
her,” and she had a “student-centered” classroom that was not limited to the walls of her class,
but was connected to the outside world (Mensah, 2011b, p. 384).
When examining these drawings through the DESTIN criteria, it was noted that all pre-
drawings depicted non-collaborative learning environments, and some drawings did not include
students at all (Mensah, 2011b). Discussions with participants revealed that this had been their
experiences, and they recalled their own teachers used many memorization strategies. For
Criterion 2, the post-drawings demonstrated more student collaboration and inquiry-focused
science. Additionally, the drawings included learning in outside settings, and the science teacher
was not lecturing but walking around the classroom. Furthermore, 47% of the drawings included
students exploring and using science tools and teachers asking inquiry questions, and 54% of
post-drawings included identifiable diversity and identity markers for students, in comparison to
0.6% of the predrawings.
59

Also, 51% of the drawings of the ideal science teacher were self-portraits that included
darker skin tone, braided hair, almond-shaped eyes, and words such as “I” or “me.” The pre-
drawings revealed the negative, traditional images of science and science teaching of preservice
teachers. These images also correspond with the images of a scientist and reveal teachers’ past
experiences. However, the post-drawings illustrate that centering the needs of diverse learners
opens doors for more inclusion and access to science for both teachers and students. Mensah
(2011) affirms that “diversity and identity in the drawings show that preservice teachers
acknowledge race/ethnicity, gender, class, age or disability of students” (p.386). Thus, teachers
can now be social change agents in their classrooms.
This procedure can be helpful for teacher education programs or professional
development to reveal teachers’ past experiences and views of science teaching and learning.
Revealing these views is imperative because teachers’ negative images of science teaching can
manifest in their practice and influence their students (Finson, 2002, Rosenthal; 1993, as cited in
Mensah, 2011b). Rather than overcoming these views and past experiences, the goal should be to
undo this previous understanding of science (Mensah, 2011b).
Johnson-Bailey (2002) wrote, “to be Asian, African American, Hispanic, Native
American or White in the [science classroom or in an]...education classroom carries a different
meaning with each classification. Yet…we frequently ignore these arbitrary distinctions” (as
cited by Mensah, 2012a, p. 119). Positional identity can help educators find purpose for their
science practice and think critically about how their identity can be advantageous or
disadvantageous in science teaching and learning, particularly as racially, ethnically, and
economically diverse students enter classrooms while the number of Black teachers is declining.
The alienation experienced by Black teachers due to desegregation, racist institutional practices,
60

underfunding of urban schools, full classrooms, deep poverty, collapsing neighborhoods, and
lack of parent involvement has led them to seek career opportunities in other professions
(Mensah, 2009).
Mensah’s (2009) research uses narrative research to report on the experiences of three
Black science teachers with their science learning and teaching. Mensah (2012a) also conducted
research on the positional identity of three service teachers from ethnically diverse backgrounds.
While most researchers focus on identity with little attention to race, class, gender, and social
markers, Mensah’s work is foundational to understanding how such markers intersect with
participants’ identities as teachers. Moreover, this work can help select and retain high-quality
teachers who are asked to teach under adverse conditions.
Black teachers’ backgrounds shape their views of schooling. Foster (1997) revealed five
factors that contribute to Black teachers’ effectiveness: cultural solidarity with students, linkage
of classroom content to students’ experiences, incorporation of culturally compatible
communication patterns, use of familiar cultural patterns, and focus on the whole child. Mensah
(2009) used Foster’s background as a foundation to narrative research on three Black secondary
science teachers that focused on how they are experts in their content-specific domain and how
the content knowledge and experiences they bring to teaching science are reconciled in their
classroom.
The conversations with teachers were audiotaped, transcribed, and coded. Mensah’s
(2009) familiarity with the literature on Black teachers and positional identity shaped the data
analysis and interpretation. Three themes are presented in the study: self connections to science
and teaching, supporting students and their learning of science, and community and science
(Mensah, 2009). All three participants had understandings of science they used to make
61

decisions and interact with their students. They had a desire to improve science teaching
practices and were eager to share their life experiences with their students to make connections
to science (Mensah, 2009). To support their students’ learning and make science accessible, they
played games, questioned the world around them, and exposed students to science through
different forms such as field trips and science fairs (Mensah, 2009). Additionally, they promoted
inquiry skills, mentored students, and encouraged Black students to enter science-related careers
(Mensah, 2009). Finally, the teachers in the study used their community resources to teach
science and formulate connections with their communities (Mensah, 2009). They kept parents
involved by informing them of the learning expectations. They also made science education a
priority and involved students in their community. The three Black teachers in the study tried to
create meaningful relationships with their students in and out of the science classroom, centering
their love for science and their students (Mensah, 2009). This passion is a characteristic of
culturally relevant teachers. These teachers’ content-specific expertise allowed them to open
doors for their students to science and create inclusive spaces (Mensah, 2009).
The value of Black teachers for Black students in science highlights the importance of
understanding teachers’ positional identity (Mensah, 2009). Mensah’s (2012a) study using
positional identity as a lens further highlighted this importance. This qualitative case study used
interviews and a card activity for positionality as sources of data. The three participants were
asked to discuss their positionality and teaching based on the cards of positionality: class, gender,
political affiliation, race, ethnicity, upbring, disability, age, education, and language (Mensah,
2012a). The findings further affirmed that personal experiences influence what is taught and how
it is taught. The participants had fixed notions of identity that influenced their purpose for
teaching (Mensah, 2012a). Additionally, their identities formed stronger connections to science.
62

The participants were an Asian American female, a White female, and an Asian male.
The Asian American teacher had an immigrant background and felt strongly about teaching
science to immigrant youth and making it accessible to them (Mensah, 2012a). The White female
and Asian male understood the importance of making science accessible to females (Mensah,
2012a). Their different positionalities were important in how they related to science and their
students (Mensah, 2012a). Preservice teachers must recognize and reflect on their relationship
with power. Leveraging these identities is critical to increasing science accessibility for
marginalized students (Mensah, 2012a).
Micro-Level Influence: Professional Development and Administrative Leadership
The pressure teachers experience to teach literacy and mathematics, combined with their
personal beliefs and science content knowledge, leaves science at the margins of elementary
education. One way to support teachers teaching science is to provide them with professional
development. Nadelson et al. (2013) found that many elementary educators need only minimal
STEM instruction to be certified, taking one or two classes to meet requirements. Moreover,
teachers’ limited exposure to science in their K–12 educational experiences and science inquiry
instruction contributes to their confidence in teaching STEM. Thus, providing professional
development that addresses teacher confidence, attitudes, knowledge, and efficacy for teaching
inquiry-based science can upliftstudent learning in science. Students need a strong elementary
science foundation to be successful in the upper grades; without this foundation, they will
struggle (Mensah, 2010). When science learning is disrupted due to time constraints, access, and
quality, students are negatively impacted by not receiving high-quality instruction, and teachers
are impacted through the hindering of their professional, pedagogical and content knowledge
63

growth (Mensah, 2010). Mensah (2010) urged policies that empower science educators through
professional development.
Nadelson et al. (2013) conducted a 2-year study with 33 participants, providing year-long
professional development and a 3-day summer program focused on teaching inquiry-based
STEM. The first research question focused on answering how efficacy in teaching STEM
correlated to years of teaching, education, and knowledge. The second question focused on how
the participants’ level of efficacy changed after the 3-day institute and how they compare with
the 2-year professional development program. Lastly, the study explored which parts of the
professional development participants found helpful. The majority of the participants were
Caucasian women with moderate comfort and knowledge levels for STEM. The findings showed
a positive correlation between teachers’ knowledge and comfort with STEM and their efficacy in
teaching it. Therefore, lack of content knowledge could reduce the effectiveness with which
science is taught (Nadelson et al., 2013). Nevertheless, teacher professional development that
focuses on enhancing content knowledge can improve teacher practice (Nadelson et al., 2013).
Schools should make an effort to move beyond professional development that addresses
curriculum use or positive attitudes toward STEM and instead identify the content knowledge
their teachers bring into the classroom and begin to build on their foundational knowledge
(Nadelson et al., 2013).
Banilower et al. (2007) also examined the impact of professional development that is
strongly focused on content knowledge, classroom practices, and teachers' perceptions of
preparedness. Banilower et al.’s longitudinal study utilized data from 42 projects from National
Science Foundation’s Local Systemic Change through teacher enhancement initiative (LSC).
The LSC’s primary goal is to improve instruction in STEM through professional development
64

focused on content and pedagogical knowledge with ongoing support from administrators. The
LSC used a teacher questionnaire measuring their beliefs, teachings, and practices. The findings
showed that teachers who participated in LSC’s professional development had positive attitudes
toward science and greater awareness of pedagogical knowledge and science preparation.
Moreover, teachers were more likely to try instructional materials, especially after receiving
training, and increased the time they spent on instruction. Teachers were also more likely to use
teaching practices aligned with science standards. Their perceptions of principal support were a
significant predictor of positive outcomes in their attitudes, pedagogical preparedness, content
knowledge, use of instructional materials, time spent on instruction, and standards-aligned
instruction. These positive outcomes were small and could have a greater impact if applied
consistently and effectively.
Another study by Sandholtz and Ringstaff (2014) focused on increasing teacher self-
efficacy through professional development that promotes changes in science instruction in early
elementary. The research continues to show that in addition to the deprioritization of science
instruction in elementary schools, teachers do not feel qualified to teach science (Sandholtz &
Ringstaff, 2014). The lack of qualifications stems from their preparation programs, college
experiences, and certifications, leading to avoidance and negative sentiments towards science
teaching and learning. Thus, there is a substantial need for professional development to build
content knowledge in science, yet 85% of elementary teachers described having no professional
development in 3 years (Dorph et al., 2011).
Sandholtz and Ringstaff’s (2014) study had participants from 16 districts that participated
in professional development for over 3 years that focused on increasing teachers’ content
knowledge and fostered the use of research-based instructional strategies. The program included
65

adult science content instruction, pedagogical training specifically for science instruction and
integrating it across curricula, and support in teacher collaboration. Data were collected through
a self-efficacy assessment, teacher survey, interviews, and class observations. The self-efficacy
assessment was developed in 1990 by Riggs and Enoch, called the Science Teaching Efficacy
Beliefs Instrument, and designed to measure self-efficacy in science teaching (Sandholtz &
Ringstaff, 2014). The survey asked questions about teachers’ opinions about science, teaching,
preparedness, and practices. Classroom observations were conducted in the spring of each year
for 20 participants who represented a sample of the larger research project. Finally, strategic
random sampling was used to select participants to conduct a semi-structured interview at the
end of the year. These questions sought teachers’ opinions on instructional time, content
knowledge, curriculum, instructional strategies, confidence, and support. A mixed-methods
design was used to analyze the data (Sandholtz & Ringstaff, 2014).
Sandholtz and Ringstaff’s (2014) results showed that self-efficacy in teaching science
increases with professional development. At the study’s start, 46% of teachers questioned
whether they had the skills to teach science, which decreased to 10% a year later. By the end of
the study, the rate had decreased to 7% (Sandholtz & Ringstaff, 2014). At the beginning of the
study, 43% of teachers believed they understood science concepts well enough to teach
elementary science; by the end of the program, that increased to 94%. Additionally, pre-program,
62% of teachers believed that students’ science background could be overcome with good
teaching, as compared to 93% by the end of the program (Sandholtz & Ringstaff, 2014).
Teachers also recognized that good teaching can increase their students’ interest in science after
participating in the program (71% to 97%; Sandholtz & Ringstaff, 2014).
66

Overall, teachers increased their confidence in teaching science after participating in the
program. When it comes to teachers’ perceptions about preparedness to teach science, 67% felt
they were “somewhat prepared,” or “not adequately prepared,” compared to 100% that felt “very
well prepared” or “fairly well prepared” after three years of the program” (Sandholtz &
Ringstaff, 2014). “Teachers related how their lack of background knowledge in science had
contributed to a lack of confidence, and how building their content knowledge in science was
influencing their confidence to teach it” (Sandholtz & Ringstaff, 2014, p. 742). Additionally,
modeling lessons helped teachers feel more prepared to teach science.
Banilower et al. (2007) mentioned that administrators continue to play a large role in the
teachers’ development. Therefore, their influence cannot be ignored. Casey et al. (2012)
conducted a study that explored the roles elementary school principals play in science education.
Sixteen participating principals of successful Texas science programs were surveyed to explore
how they influence science education at their schools. Four main themes resulted from this data:
“encouraging collaboration, aligning the curriculum, implementing modes of teaching science
that complement teacher strengths through staff organization and providing professional
development” (Casey et al., 2012, p. 58). Strong instructional leaders support and collaborate
with teachers in science content. They also strategically assigned staff based on their teachers’
science skills and strengths. Moreover, principals stated the importance of making classroom
observations to assess areas of growth for teachers and help coach them.
Principals also gave teachers time to write a science curriculum and improve instruction
and had a district science coordinator assisting teachers with instruction (Casey et al., 2012).
Principals also ensured alignment by having all grade levels teach and prioritize science.
Furthermore, principals used school and scholarly data to make science program decisions
67

(Casey et al., 2012). Lastly, 10 of the 16 principals found that professional development was
beneficial to their staff’s science instruction and recognized the need for teachers to have a
strong content background in science. Research indicates that effective professional development
is not enough to support teachers because they are less likely to utilize this knowledge if the
principal does not support science (Casey et al., 2012).
Empirical studies continuously support the idea that professional development programs
should focus on content and pedagogical knowledge. The lack of resources and priority placed
on science leaves it on the back burner, with the average science lesson being 30 minutes long.
Professional development is a major lever for instructing science teachers; however, given the
limited resources in education, it is important to understand what approaches are most effective.
The results of previous research highlight the need to increase elementary teachers’ preparation
to teach science and use professional development as an effective tool to do so. Increasing
teacher self-efficacy changes their instructional practice, in turn increasing student achievement.
School administrators also play a role in supporting the development of their teachers and should
consistently collaborate with teachers to make the greatest impact on science instruction.
Conclusion
The cultural erasure of BIPOC communities from curricula and teacher preparation
programs upholds the status quo. The presence of BIPOC teachers in science begins to break
identity barriers and dismantle Whiteness as property in science. This study sought to tell the
counterstories of BIPOC elementary educators. By centering the voices of marginalized
communities, this study sought to understand their experiences in their foundational (K–12)
education, teacher preparation programs, and the macro and micro level influences that impact
their science instruction. The narratives of teacher experiences with science can help understand
68

and begin to dismantle Whiteness as property in science education. It is imperative to use their
experiences to break the cycle of inequity. Critical race theory is used as the foundational theory
for this dissertation, focusing on the historical background and the theme of Whiteness as
property in science, then examining culturally relevant pedagogy and macro- and micro-level
influences on elementary science teacher instruction. The study concludes with possible
recommendations and solutions to increase the effectiveness of science instruction for BIPOC
elementary educators. Figure 1 outlines the conceptual framework used for this study.

Figure 1
Critical Race Theory

69

Chapter Three: Methodology
In 2016, 0.5% of American Indians or Alaskan Natives, 9% of African Americans, 9% of
Asian Americans, and 13.5% of Hispanic or Latinx American students earned a bachelor’s in
science in comparison to 56% of White Americans (National Center for Science and Engineering
Statistics, 2019). The lack of representation for BIPOC is a testament to Whiteness as property in
science. Whiteness continues to claim science as its own, allowing and denying access to others
(Mensah & Jackson, 2018). To challenge Whiteness as property, science must become a space of
inclusivity for the BIPOC community, which begins with BIPOC educators. The cultural
knowledge, diversity, and humanity that teachers of color bring to the classroom is a disruptive
force against Whiteness as property in science (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). These educators,
however, face similar exclusionary challenges in science due to the absence of culturally relevant
pedagogy in their teacher preparation programs (Mensah & Jackson, 2018), administrative
support (Casey et al., 2012), and foundational K–12 experience (Mensah & Jackson, 2018).
These challenges continue to uphold the dominant culture of science as an exclusionary space for
BIPOC communities. Therefore, it is imperative to examine the experiences of BIPOC
elementary teachers in their role as scientists to continue to disrupt the exclusivity in science and
begin to build inclusive spaces.
Purpose of Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the barriers that BIPOC elementary educators
have encountered when seeking access to science. Understanding these barriers positions
educators to be better equipped to provide access to science for BIPOC students. The following
research questions were used to guide the study:
70

1. How does the foundational science (K–12) education of BIPOC elementary teachers
impact their science pedagogy?
2. How do BIPOC elementary teachers relate to their teacher preparation courses, and
how does that impact their science pedagogy?
3. How do BIPOC elementary teachers feel that their administrative leadership supports
the effectiveness of their science teaching?
Selection of the Population
I interviewed BIPOC elementary educators to better understand how their foundational
K–12 science educational experiences, teacher preparation courses, and administrative leadership
impeded or supported their access to science. This study focused on counter-storytelling, and the
knowledge gained from the narratives builds an understanding of how to support BIPOC
educators in creating access to science for their students. The study was conducted at a midsize
charter network located in the Western United States. Pseudonyms were used to protect the
participants’ and network’s anonymity. The participants were selected from the Rosemont
Charter Network (a pseudonym), which has approximately 40 schools in three different regions
of the Western United States. The researcher focused the study on the elementary schools in the
Southern region, specifically schools that do not have science specialists.
The science specialists are responsible for the instruction and curriculum of the school’s
science program, removing the responsibility of science instruction from the general classroom
teacher. Thus, elementary schools with K–5 science specialists were excluded from the study.
The remaining schools employ a majority of teachers who identify as BIPOC. I selected schools
at random and contacted their principals for their participation. Once I selected the schools, I
71

randomly selected volunteer participants from each school who met the study’s criteria. I aimed
for a total of eight participants. The following criteria were used to select the participants:
● identified as BIPOC,
● elementary educator with 2 or more years of experience,
● serving within a charter school district,
● teaches all subjects, including science in the classroom, and
● graduated from a teacher preparation program less than 5 years ago,
I used convenience sampling to conduct this study due to the specific selection criteria for
respondents (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This study was rooted in the use of
counter-narratives as a disruptive force in dismantling Whiteness as property; therefore, it was
necessary to utilize purposeful sampling to uplift voices that have often been silenced (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016; Solórzano & Yosso, 2002). Since this study focused on telling the narratives of
BIPOC educators, the focal point in the selection process was whether elementary educators
identified as BIPOC.
The original intent was to include the insights and perspectives of BIPOC educators who
were 2 years removed from a teacher preparation program, teaching all subjects and serving in
the charter network. I solicited the support of school principals to source participants; however,
as a result of the principal workload and priorities during a global pandemic, I pivoted and
sourced the participants with the help of my school administrators by going through an email
address list of elementary schools without science specialists. Out of the qualifying schools, one
was eliminated due to the principal’s desire not to participate in the study. Additionally, the
criteria that required participants to have graduated from a teacher preparation program within
the last 5 years and have at least 2 years of experience were eliminated due to the difficulties of
72

gathering participants during a global pandemic. Ten individuals expressed interest in the study,
but one was half White and had received her foundational education in Europe. She was not
selected as a participant.
Design Summary
Solórzano and Yosso (2002), state that deficit-informed research “silence[s] and distort[s]
epistemologies of people of color” (p.23). Challenging deficit-informed research requires
culturally sensitive qualitative research that places the BIPOC community at the center.
Culturally sensitive qualitative methods aim to resist theoretical dominance to understand
unequal power relations that continue exclusionary practices in science (Tillman, 2002).
Therefore, culturally sensitive qualitative research uses culturally informed knowledge to drive
educational change (Tillman, 2002). This research study thus centered the voices of marginalized
communities to bring forth educational change for future generations.
This study’s design was based on Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) steps to conducting
research. Chapter One focused on the research problem and purpose of the study. Chapter two is
an extensive review of the supporting literature. Chapter Three details the data collection, and
Chapters Four and Five will discuss the data analysis and interpretation of the results.
Methodology
This study’s methodology included semi-structured interviews with BIPOC elementary
educators in a charter network in the Southern region of the Western United States. The
researcher, who also identifies as BIPOC, used her cultural knowledge to develop an interview
protocol to accurately validate the community’s experiences (Milner, 2007). The interview
protocol used questions as a general framework, leaving room for the respondents’ experiences
to shape the interview’s outcome (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
73

The interview protocol was designed by taking into account the themes of CRT and
sought to examine how “education theory and practice are used to subordinate certain racial and
ethnic groups” (Solórzano & Yosso, 2001, p. 2). Critical race theory allowed me to connect the
experiences of BIPOC elementary educators to the larger perspective. The perspectives shared
were then reexamined through member checks, or respondent validation, to increase the validity
of the findings and center the participants' voices (Maxwell, 2013). Understanding the challenges
BIPOC elementary educators face in science spaces can begin to open doors of accessibility for
students everywhere because of their humanity that deserves equitable education practices. All
three research questions were addressed qualitatively through the interview process.
Qualitative Instrument and Protocols
Qualitative data were collected through interviews with nine BIPOC elementary
educators. The three research questions were used to draft the interview protocol that framed the
interviews. The interview protocol consisted of 13 questions (Appendix A), two opening
questions, and one additional follow-up question after the interview. As mentioned, the interview
questions served as a framework, but the participants' experiences shaped the outcome of the
interview. The researcher used probing questions to gain a deeper understanding of the
participants’ experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The semi-structured interviews were
conducted virtually on Zoom, per the updated institutional review board guidelines to minimize
the risk of COVID-19. To accurately represent the participants’ experiences, the interviews were
recorded with their approval through Zoom and transcribed through Otter.ai to analyze keywords
and themes.
74

Data Collection
Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) methodologies were used for data collection and alignment.
I conducted the following steps to gather qualitative data: (a) located the human resource director
on site and gained permission to conduct the study through the superintendent, (b) emailed the
principals from the four eligible schools to request their voluntary participation, (c) obtained a
list of names and emails of potential participants, (d) emailed potential respondents with the
purpose of the study and a request for their voluntary participation, (e) cross-examined
participants with the list of criteria to acquire a purposeful sample, (f) collected and recorded the
qualitative data, (e) contacted participants for a follow-up member check, and (f) stored data
safely.
I used purposeful sampling to select a sample of participants that accurately represented
the purpose of the study and selected nine educators. I collected the qualitative data through in-
depth interviews with nine BIPOC elementary educators who agreed to participate in the study.
Voluntary participation was imperative for the research study to follow IRB guidelines and
ensure confidentiality among participants.
Once I selected the participants, I used Calendly to schedule a convenient appointment
time for participants a month in advance. The timeliness of this step was important to allow the
participants enough time to schedule their appointments comfortably. I further ensured
participants’ comfort through a digital consent form that delineated the purpose of the study, role
of the researcher, and their rights as participants. This step was equally important to inform
participants of their right to opt out of the interview at any time (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). The
participants received the form via an email that included the Calendly appointment notice.
Finally, prior to the interview, I informed the participants of their rights again and asked for
75

permission to record and take notes during the interview. The interviews were scheduled for 60
minutes, and follow-up phone calls, emails, and texts were made later for further clarification
during data analysis. I used Otter.ai to transcribe and review all the interviews.
Data Analysis
This study utilized a qualitative approach to collect interview data. All questions in the
interview protocol were directly linked to the research questions and guided the data analysis.
Following the interviews, I created an excel sheet of key findings, and made notes on any
clarifications required to fully depict the narratives of the participants. Once a clear narrative was
formed through member checks, a thorough analysis was developed in alignment with CRT that
compared the findings to the larger perspective. The process of comparing findings and literature
increased the trustworthiness of the study, in addition to member checks, and the researcher’s
self-reflection.
Validity and Reliability
Internal validity in the research study was secured through member checks, or
respondent validation (Maxwell, 2013). Culturally sensitive research approaches co-construct
multiple realities and experiences that can lead to more equitable outcomes (Tillman, 2002).
Therefore, I solicited feedback from the participants to determine my biases and
misunderstanding and center the participants' experience. Additionally, I examined my position
or reflexivity to eliminate biases and assumptions throughout the research (Maxwell, 2013).
Lastly, I followed the research protocols to protect every participant and promote the study’s
validity.
76

The Researcher
Soy profesora, soy hija, soy pionera. Como profesora; soy madre, soy consejera, soy
enfermera, soy alegría, soy amor. Como hija, soy fuerte, soy sueño, soy realidad, soy felicidad,
soy orgullo. Como pionera, soy ejemplo, soy luchadora, soy determinada, soy inteligente, soy
fuerza, soy soñadora. Estas partes de mi identidad me han transformado en la persona que soy.
Una mujer que a través de su profesión ha aprendido la compasión, a través de su familia ha
aprendido el amor, y a través de su viaje pionero ha aprendido a luchar. Compasión, amor, y la
lucha, serán para siempre el lema de mi vida. Y por el resto de mi vida será mi lucha transformar
los sistemas opresivos de nuestra comunidad.
Soy la hija de inmigrantes, and this has shaped everything about my schooling
experience. I grew up in the Salvadoran niche of Los Angeles, in a pre-gentrified echo park. My
schools faced the challenges typical of urban schools such as “inadequate teaching practices,
inadequate funding, poor administrative decisions, underdeveloped counseling and psychological
services as well as curricular opportunities that are unchallenging for and unresponsive to
students” (Milner & Lomotey, 2014, p.15). However, my mother did not know of the challenges
that schools faced, as she had gone to school up to the third grade, and my father had only
received a high school education in El Salvador. They migrated to America longing for the
American dream that delivered hope to war-torn poverty-stricken immigrants. My father wanted
us to be model citizens, and he thought education would allow our acceptance into a dominant
White culture. To keep up with the dreams my father had for me, I went through my K–12
schooling receiving only the highest marks. I never questioned the education I was receiving. I
trusted that I was receiving a fair education and being challenged and prepared for the next level:
college. During my senior year, I received the prestigious Gates Millennium Scholarship, and I
77

felt I was reaching the American dream my parents yearned for. Then, suddenly, the mediocrity
of my K–12 education hit me when I failed my first quarter at UCLA.
The time spent at UCLA was transformative and challenging on both an academic and
interpersonal level. I battled with my ethnic identity, poverty level, urban schooling, and all my
identities that were invisible to me prior to college. The many parts of my identity, daughter of
Salvadoran immigrants, science teacher, and pioneer, intersect, creating “multiple levels of social
injustice” I had to battle through (Crenshaw, 2016). Through this reflective journey, I developed
a passion for bringing justice and equity to my community in the realm of K–12 education. The
social justice I long for in education is due to my firsthand experiences with injustice.
The American dream promises that if one works hard enough, one can achieve one’s
goals but fails to acknowledge the barriers along the way. Believing that my community
deserved a fighting chance, I pursued a career as a science educator. I believed I could bring a
culturally relevant experience into my classroom and serve as a role model for my students. As a
science educator, I experienced even more barriers in the pursuit of science justice. As a current
science specialist in an elementary school, I constantly have to defend my discipline to
administrators and teachers. I recognize that the challenges I faced with science shaped both my
deep interest in this study and increased my bias.
However, in many ways, I consider that my voice in education is the voice of our
community. While my positionality and embodied knowledge as a BIPOC science educator can
foster deep connections with participants, it must also be thoroughly examined to eliminate
biases and assumptions throughout the research (Maxwell, 2013). My personal struggles with
science at the college level shaped my deep passion for science education in BIPOC
communities. However, it was my experience as an elementary school science specialist that led
78

me to pursue a doctorate to have a larger impact on what I perceive to be a flawed science
education system. Recognizing these biases is imperative in creating research questions and
interview protocols that do not skew the study or interfere with the data interpretation
(Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). Furthermore, the qualitative research should be fully transparent
about these biases and include a reflexivity statement to allow the readers to evaluate the
adequacy of the objectivity (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017).
Summary
This research study gathered qualitative data through the use of interviews with an
emphasis on culturally sensitive research approaches. The data collected from BIPOC
elementary educators from Rosemont Charter was thoroughly analyzed to focus on the three
research questions: the foundational (K–12) experience, the teacher preparation courses and the
administrative support teachers received as it all pertained to science. These findings will be
presented in chapter four and a discussion of those findings and recommendations for practice
can be found in Chapter Five.

79

Chapter Four: Results and Findings
I didn’t have the best experience with science and I never really pinned it down to like,
you didn’t have a good experience with science growing up. So, I think now, this is an
issue because I’m seeing the same trend that was happening when I was a kid continue.
It’s making me feel like we need to prioritize science more because we don’t. And it’s
one of those things [that’s] been on the backburner, so I haven’t really reflected on it, but
just being asked these questions. Oh, man, I need to prioritize this more, at least in my
class. Control what I can control.
—Daniel, study participant
The purpose of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of the barriers that BIPOC
elementary educators have experienced as they sought access to science. Empirical research
demonstrates that teachers of color are invaluable for students of color because they bring with
them an intrinsic understanding of their students’ backgrounds. Yet, teacher preparation
programs often ignore the ways that systemic racism has impacted the lives of their pre-service
teachers, leaving them in a perpetual cycle of alienation from science learning and teaching. It
begins early in their foundational education with the lack of access to science learning, and
continues through their teacher preparation programs (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). Ultimately this
becomes a barrier in their ability to learn and teach science in their classrooms. This study uses
CRT to center the narratives of teachers whose experiences have often been ignored. The three
research questions used in this study were as follows:
1. How does the foundational science (K–12) education of BIPOC elementary teachers
impact their science pedagogy?
80

2. How do BIPOC elementary teachers relate to their teacher preparation courses, and
how does that impact their science pedagogy?
3. How do BIPOC elementary teachers feel that their administrative leadership supports
the effectiveness of their science teaching?
This study sought to disrupt cycles of inequities by understanding BIPOC teachers’ science
experiences.
Participants
A total of nine participants were interviewed in this study, three participants from each of
three qualifying schools. Eight females and one male were interviewed. I assigned all
participants and their schools pseudonyms to protect their anonymity. Table 1 shows the their
pseudonyms and demographic information.

Table 1
Participant Demographics
Name Gender
Years since
TPP
Years
teaching
Race /
Ethnicity
School
Luisa Female 18 10 Latinx O
Isabel Female 7 7 Latinx O
Daniel Male 9 7 Latinx V
Alicia Female 7 7 Latinx B
Eva Female 3 3 Latinx O
Jessica Female 3 3 Latinx B
Rebecca Female 10 10 Latinx V
Elizabeth Female 1 1 Latinx V
Michelle Female 15 15 Asian B

81

Results Research Question One
The first research question asked, “How does the foundational science (K–12) education
of BIPOC elementary teachers impact their science pedagogy?” Research Question 1 addresses
participants’ access to science education in their foundational K–12 experience and the impact
on their pedagogy. Mensah and Jackson’s (2018) study analyzing the experiences of preservice
elementary teachers of color highlights the cycle of inequity teachers of color experience. They
determined that teachers of color are denied the opportunity to learn science early in their
education (Mensah & Jackson, 2018; Tate, 2001). The exclusion of people of color from science
maintains science as White property. Seven participants had little to no recollection of their
elementary science experiences, some memorable projects or book work in middle school, and a
mixture of book work and labs in high school. Upon reflection of her K–12 science experience,
Elizabeth stated,
It makes me feel sad that [science] is something that scares me because it’s like the
stereotype, right? [As] Brown and Black kids, you don’t succeed in STEM. Maybe you
can try doing art, maybe you can try doing social science, and, you know, that’s the
avenue I took, and it’s not knocking down those subjects or those careers, those
academics because they are really important in life. But it sucks that it’s not like, oh, I
prefer this, but I’m still good at science. It’s like, no, I prefer this because I’m not good at
science.
No Recollection: P ar ti c i p an ts ’ Lack Rigorous Science Preparation at the Elementary Level
A source of concern was participants’ inability to recall their elementary science
education experience, as it is critical in children’s development and in fostering a love for
82

science early on (Nadelson et al., 2013). As Daniel reflected on his elementary science
experience, he stated,
I think, out of all the years from K to fifth, I remember learning about the butterfly stages,
the caterpillar stages, and the planets, but that’s as far as we got with science in
elementary. We didn’t have science. I don’t remember doing experiments. I don’t
remember reading science textbooks in most grades. I don’t even remember science
being mentioned all that often in elementary.
Similarly, six other participants mentioned not having any “experiments” or science being “non-
existent,” with not recognizing what science was until middle school.
In contrast, two participants expressed having a positive elementary experience. Jessica
did not explicitly recall any science projects in elementary school but remembered having fun
and asking questions. Rebecca is a third-generation Latinx from a family of educators. Her
mother was a principal at a private school in an affluent community where Rebecca attended and
returned to teach. A phrase Rebecca continuously used to describe her science experience was
having “designated science time,” which she emphasized as a key difference between her
experience and that of her Latinx coworkers and students. She recalled going to science camp
every year and having a different theme in each grade level. She went to Catalina Island and
astro camp. She remembered “having science. I remember things about it from those years,
specifically because they were designated, and it was explicitly taught.”
Nadelson et al. (2013) underscored the importance of foundational science knowledge in
students’ early years because young children are the most curious about the world. It is a small
window of opportunity to develop students’ curiosity and love for science. This opportunity was
83

missed with seven participants, ultimately impacting how they engaged with science throughout
their schooling experience.
Worksheets, Packets, and Textbooks: Participants Grapple With Low-Quality Middle
School Science
In middle school, students shift from having one classroom teacher to having multiple
teachers specializing in core subjects, therefore offering students more opportunities to learn
science due to designating time for it. However, the pattern of inaccessibility and lack of
opportunity to learn rigorous science content continues to uphold science as White property
(Mensah & Jackson, 2018; Tate, 2001). Participants expressed that their schools were
underfunded and they often had packets, or book work, and an overall low-quality science
experience. Isabel stated,
I don’t feel like I recall, and I feel like I don’t recall because it was a lot of, probably,
worksheets and packets. My middle school wasn’t very well equipped for things. We
didn’t have computers. We didn’t have laptops.
Others echoed this sentiment. Daniel stated, “It was just textbook, textbook, taking notes,
watching videos. It wasn’t very interactive, wasn’t hands-on. It wasn’t like leading students
asking questions. It was more like the teacher just regurgitating.” Elizabeth “vividly recall[ed]”
that her middle school had a difficult time providing science because of the “lack of access [to]
resources.” She recalled having animals for dissections but taking notes and watching as a few
students got to dissect: “I was just watching people do something fun.” Additionally, she
mentioned that funding was focused on “math and reading because that’s what they tested in our
state test. So, that’s what I felt the schools cared about.” Tate (2001) corroborated this sentiment,
84

naming high-stakes testing in reading and math as a disincentive to teaching science and
reducing the quality of instruction, most especially for students of color.
Six of the seven participants who had not received elementary science now encountered
science for the first time but in a way that lacked quality instruction. They described it as “busy
work.” In contrast, Alicia mentioned that her middle school experience was different because she
“was always in a gifted program” and recalled having “different classes because [she] was gifted,
[and was] not aware what the standard [science education] was for everyone.” Rebecca and
Jessica both continued having positive experiences with middle school science, but Rebecca
noticed a decrease in her hands-on learning and a shift towards note-taking.
Hit or Miss: Variance in High School Science Experience
The participants’ high school experiences were split, as three had positive experiences,
three had mixed experiences, and three continued to have negative experiences. For Luisa,
Alicia, and Michelle, their high school science experiences were positive. Alicia changed
districts and recalled having much fun. Luisa had only had negative experiences with science up
to that point, but that changed in high school. She remembered being “into science.” Her
chemistry teacher encouraged her to pursue a STEM major in college, and she pursued a
chemistry and biology major because she wanted to help others. Similarly, Michelle had a
positive science experience in high school, mentioning that she had a significant number of
hands-on activities, and she went on to major in engineering. Although Luisa had been a
“straight A student” in high school, she felt she was “not fully prepared for the experience of a
college-level course.” She remembered feeling like she “was in over [her] head:”
85

I felt like so many people were failing those courses that they really were just weeding
out to see who was going to make it. And that was heartbreaking because it was
something I really enjoyed, and it became something that I felt disappointed in.
Isabel and Elizabeth shared this experience of struggling with STEM in college. Isabel
majored in chemistry, and despite having mediocre science experiences through eighth grade,
she mentioned having some “hands-on” science and projects in high school. However, she did
not “think that my high school prepared me for college.” She also mentioned being a “straight A
student” throughout high school. She earned Bs and Cs in her college coursework and asked the
counselor for advice on bringing her grades up. The counselor told her that if she was already
getting those grades, she should consider quitting the major. Isabel processed her counselor’s
advice: “I don’t know if it was because our races were different or because I’m a woman in
chemistry [or both] a Hispanic woman in chemistry. So, I felt at the time that also played a part.”
Similarly, Elizabeth was a STEM major in college despite having little preparation in her
K–12 years. She remained curious about the world around her. In high school, she took several
honors classes that she felt did not provide much support. She mentioned having to understand
science concepts on her own through “book work.” As she recalled her college experience, she
stated,
I also started at UCLA as a STEM major. I started off in math, and it was hard, and only
the White kids or the really rich Asian and White kids that had good tutors when they
were in high school knew what they were doing because it was all mainly independent.
You were all on your own. I know because I tried it out for a year, and I was, like, I am
gonna die if I do this. No, I can’t do it.
86

Although this study did not focus on the participants’ college experiences, these stories
arose naturally as they processed the impact their K–12 experience had on them into adulthood.
Riegle-Crumb et al. (2019) discussed that STEM has the most significant attrition for Black and
Latinx students. Even at the college level, this field continues to be an exclusionary space and
BIPOC students assume themselves to be inferior when they have been ill-prepared and lacked
access to science educational opportunities in their foundational learning (Chang et al., 2014).
Embracing the “Fail Forward: ” Using Foundational Science Experience to Fuel Teaching
and Advocacy
Reflecting on the impact of their K–12 experience, several participants had sentiments of
sadness and recognized that they had not been properly prepared. At the same time, all
participants stated they used these experiences to fuel their teaching or their advocacy for
science. Daniel reflected,
I guess it has impacted me in both a positive way and a negative way. In a negative way
because I feel like I’m not as prepared as I can be to teach science. And then, in a positive
way [because] I’m feeling like the kids are having the same experience that I had when I
was a kid. That’s not good. So, I try to change that. So, it requires a lot of reflection, and
it requires you to have a lot of background knowledge around it. So, I think I didn’t have
that, I don’t have as strong a background in science as I would like to.
Eva attributes her K–12 experience as the reason why she was so nervous about teaching science,
stating,
I think in the beginning, my first year, I think that might have been a reason why I was so
nervous about teaching [science] because I didn’t get that full K–12 experience. It was
more like high school and college. Also, it was like my first year of teaching. It was a lot
87

of things that I needed to cover, and it just felt like here you go. Now, science is another
one. So, I just didn’t feel confident.
Once participants moved on to higher education, they realized the gaps in their
foundational education lowered their confidence in their careers. They were not prepared to teach
students what they had not been taught. Elizabeth shared similar sentiments:
I didn’t really get taught science the way people with more access to resources get taught
science, and then I work in a similar school to the one that I grew up in where there’s a
lack of science or resources for certain subjects because reading, writing and math,
especially in K–2, that’s what people care about. That’s where you’re going to get help.
Science, you have to go out and do that yourself. So, I think when it comes to impacting
my teaching, I think what I observed was science is not that important. I think I just got
taught to do what I do, which is you can implement science in other subjects when you
have multiple subjects to get through within a day.
Daniel, Eva, and Elizabeth had difficulty accessing science from kindergarten through
12th grade and thus felt more nervous, less confident, and less prepared to teach science in their
elementary classroom. Despite the difficulties, Daniel wanted his students to have an experience
different from his. Eva tried to learn from her partner teacher as much as she could, even if she
did not feel confident. Elizabeth tried to implement science where she could by embedding it into
other subjects. Similarly, Luisa, Isabel, Alicia, and Jessica focused on engagement, expressing
the desire for their students to have more opportunities to learn through projects and experiments
because of their own experiences. Jessica discusses her disengagement in science as a student as
a motivation to push forward with science in her classroom,
88

Something that always comes to mind the first year that I taught science [was that] it was
so dry, so it kind of reminded me of my experience when I was disengaged, and I could
see it in my students. So, I definitely had to figure out ways to keep them engaged and
just make it fun for them, so they wouldn’t lose that or have that same experience I had
when I was in high school.
Isabel expressed similar sentiments but elaborated on the difficulties of doing so:
I feel like I want to make it more engaging. I want to make it fun. I want to make it
project-based and have them do hands-on things. But that’s what I want. But it’s very
difficult to make that into reality for a lot of [reasons]. One, the materials that we need to
purchase. Two, the time that we need to prepare, and, three, the programs given to us.
Due to their own experience that lacked high-quality science instruction, the participants
believe science is vital to their students’ learning (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). Alicia had a
positive middle and high school experience, so she wanted her students to have the same.
However, she also expressed how challenging it can be:
One of the things I’m contemplating right now is the lack of time. I think it’s impacting
because I get to see my kids be curious. I know how fun and engaging it can be. So, it kind
of just reminds me [of] what I liked about it, being curious and doing like a lot of hands-on
[learning], because those are the things that I enjoyed, as opposed to just the teaching.
Rebecca had a mostly positive science learning experience from K–12 and recognized her
privilege of attending school in an affluent community. She discussed the challenges that come
with teaching science in a different community:
I think something that is important [is] to stop and reflect on how we learned. Obviously, I
went to [a] private school, which is nowhere near where [our charter] is. So, I think just
89

recognizing the privilege in the schooling I received and how I can bring some of those
strategies to the kids is always something in the back of my mind, but time and, obviously,
reading and math always get priority.
Michelle lacked a positive elementary experience but was able to have a somewhat
positive experience in middle school, and her high school experience was very positive. Michelle
was the only participant who addressed the challenges she has had advocating for science:
I think kids need to be hands-on. It’s unfortunate that I don’t think the kids get the hands-
on science experience that I have [received]. I [have] even argued that this is not science.
We should be teaching science. Kids need to learn how to read texts as scientists, need to
understand what hypotheses are, and need to get their hands dirty. And we don’t do that.
So, I would say it hasn’t influenced it because we just haven’t [done science]. Maybe I
haven’t advocated well enough, but I just don’t think the organization has prioritized it.
So, it has been very difficult to just implement any kind of science. I would say it hasn’t
influenced me enough because we just don’t [do science]. Science is kind of on the back
burner.
Michelle had the most teaching experience of all participants, and she was visibly frustrated with
the lack of science preparation provided for both teachers and students in the organization,
especially being a STEM major herself.
Utilizing CRT as the framework, this study centered the science experiences of BIPOC
educators that have often been ignored or dismissed. These narratives tell the stories of educators
who experienced science learning neglect (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). All participants were
doing the best they could despite the fact that science was inaccessible for most of them through
their K–12 experience. Whether positive or negative, all nine took their K–12 experience to
90

propel the engagement, determination, and advocacy with which they teach. However, despite
their best efforts, Elizabeth notes that it is easy to fall into a mentality of hoping the next teacher
will get the job done:
I know when it comes to science, I don’t think I’m doing the best service for my kids.
And then because they’re young. They’re only six. Sometimes, in my head, [I think,]
well, they’re going to learn stuff later. They’re going to learn stuff when they get to third
grade. They’re going to learn stuff when they get to middle school, when they get to high
school, but then I don’t know those teachers. I don’t know if they’re going to give them
the proper resources they need to succeed in science.
Participants’ K–12 science experience, or lack thereof, was the first barrier they had to
overcome while attempting to gain access to science. As presented in the section on Research
Question 2, additional barriers continued in their teacher preparation programs. Figure 2
summarizes the participants’ experiences through color-coding their elementary, middle and high
school experience as red, yellow, or green. Red signifies that the participants spoke negatively
about their experience or had no recollection of it. Yellow signifies that the participants had a
mediocre experience in that they were exposed to science but it was often delivered through
bookwork or busy work. Lastly, green signifies that participants had a positive experience with
science and remembered camps or special programs and spoke highly of their teachers.

91

Figure 2
K–12 Foundational Science Experiences

Note. Green indicates positive experience, red indicates negative experience, and yellow
indicates mediocre experience

Results Research Question Two
The second research question asked, “How do BIPOC elementary teachers relate to their
teacher preparation courses, and how does that impact their science pedagogy?” Teacher
preparation programs often assume that their students have the foundational skills to teach all
subjects. The Eurocentricity with which science is taught sets a precedent that overlooks the
systemic racism teachers of color experience (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). When asked about how
her teacher program prepared her in science, Isabel responded,
To be honest, I don’t think I remember. I really don’t think I remember. I’m trying to
think what I did to prepare for science because, honestly, I can’t. I think because I was
teaching all subjects, I don’t think that there was a specific science class that I remember.
If there was, I’m wondering if it was short, but I think a lot of it was spent on reading,
math and behavior and expectations.
Mensah and Jackson (2018) called attention to teacher preparation programs’ exclusionary
practices when they fail to examine the structural racism and power in their science curriculum
92

and the experiences teachers of color bring to the classroom. The continual exclusion of BIPOC
teachers from science learning in their preparation courses maintains science as White property,
a recurring theme in this study.
No Deep Dive: Surface-Level Teacher Preparation Programs
Eight participants had fragments of memories or no memories of taking science in their
teacher preparation programs. Rebecca did have a strong recollection of how her program helped
prepare her. Four participants had no recollection of taking any science preparation course, and
one participant explicitly named experiencing trauma during that time in her life as a reason she
may have no recollections. The other four participants remembered taking one class, or having
one week, possibly even three days, focused on elementary science. They had recollections of
completing a science lesson plan that they never got to implement, learning how to implement
science during reading and writing time, and learning science facts. In contrast, Rebecca
remembered her science classes being specifically targeted for teaching science in the elementary
classroom. Rebecca received a teaching credential concurrently with a bachelor’s degree from a
predominantly White college. She also mentioned she did her student teaching in an affluent
White community and saw this as the reason for her strong preparation. She remembered
learning science content like the moon phases, doing hands-on activities, and having
knowledgeable professors.
For the most part, participants’ preparation programs did not take their students’
foundational background knowledge into account. The participants’ experiences help them build
an intrinsic understanding of their students’ backgrounds. Additionally, they serve as role models
to their students (Mensah, 2019). It is imperative that students see their teachers as well-equipped
scientists of color to believe they can also be scientists. Without lifting teachers of color, students
93

of color will continue to feed into the stereotype of scientists as White males, making science
inaccessible and closing doors for their future. Elizabeth emphasized the importance of seeing
“people like you succeed:”
I have students that love dinosaurs. I have students that love space, and maybe they might
want to go into fields that revolve around that. But if they don’t learn how to analyze and
understand science texts, or know the process for experiments or labs, [then] when they
get to college it’s going to be super hard, and that’s why you see people drop…because
you don’t see people like you succeed, because people tell you get tutors, or make sure
you spend all night studying. But when you have a job to do, when you have to help your
parents with kids, or you need to support yourself in other ways, and you have x amount
of other classes that take your time. It’s kind of hard to get through that.
When preparation programs dismiss BIPOC teachers’ experiences, they rob students of
color of the opportunity to have role models who understand them and share the barriers they
have had to overcome. Teachers of color can benefit from knowing that they are not alone in
their experience and the role systemic racism has played in their role as teachers and learners.
Teacher preparation programs can uplift their stories from a mindset of cultural wealth (Yosso,
2005). This mindset is a critical part of the CRT framework because it helps teachers understand
race's role in the larger socio-historical construct (Leonardo & Boas, 2013). As Carter Andrews
et al. (2019) stated, in a White-supremacist-cis-hetero-ableist society, unlearning should be
required by all educators to interrupt its impact. Figure 3 summarizes eight participants’ science
preparation experiences in their preparation programs. Luisa did not share any feelings, positive
or negative, towards her program due to previous trauma. The color red signifies a negative
experience or no recollection of science preparation. Green signifies a positive experience.
94

Figure 3
Teacher Preparation in Science Instruction

Teacher Preparation Programs Do Not Prepare BIPOC Elementary Teachers to Teach
Science
When I asked participants whether they felt that preparation programs contributed to their
preparedness to teach science, seven answered with a strong “no.” They stated their programs did
not “properly train” them for science. Jessica said she would have benefited from more exposure
to science. Luisa felt she could not speak on her program’s preparation due to a lapse in memory.
Rebecca was the only participant who felt her classes were “helpful.” However, she noted that
she practiced at a school that had “designated science” time during her student teaching. Further
reflecting on that experience, she mentioned the contrast between where she practiced and where
she teaches now, mentioning that it was a “completely different demographic because it was up
95

north. It was all White kids, and Hmong was a big minority population. They could all read on
grade level, [it was] very different from [my current school].”
Rebecca has lived and taught in two distinct worlds and has reflected on the privileges
she has seen and experienced. Rebecca recognized that she did not have these positive
experiences by chance. They were by design because she was learning and teaching in mostly
White communities, and she is “White passing.” She explained,
I’ve dug into my family history a little bit more since starting at [my current school]
because everyone is a person of color. I feel like I always considered myself a person of
color, but then going [here], I [realized,] oh, smokes, these are actual, first-generation
[Latinx people]. In my family, I’m third-generation or fourth, so as the generations have
come, obviously being a person of color in California, they definitely forced themselves
to assimilate. My mom doesn’t speak Spanish. I’m learning how to speak Spanish. I was
able to be White passing, I guess. Now that I’ve been at [my school] and have embraced
my privilege. I think it’s opened my eyes to just how different life is. Pretty much
everyone I went to school with was White, and now I have a cousin who teaches in a
super bougie area, and it’s just night and day.
Rebecca is grateful for her privilege and articulated it took her many years to see her privilege as
a positive attribute rather than a source of shame. Rebecca felt fortunate to have gained access to
science. She is third- or fourth-generation Latinx, and her access to science is due to her
proximity to Whiteness. However, for first-generation BIPOC educators, this is not the case.
They attend schools in the inner city where they do not receive the same opportunity to learn
(Tate, 2001).
96

“Trial and Error, ” BIPOC Elementary Science Teachers have been Forced to Figure
Science Out on Their Own
Only six teachers commented on the impact of their teacher preparation program on their
science classroom now, two felt it did not prepare them at all and had nothing else to add, and
Luisa refrained from giving her opinion. Five participants mentioned the skills they acquired
were not related to science but were general teaching skills. Isabel commented that her
preparation program helped with strategies for differentiation and vocabulary attainment. Jessica
mentioned learning how to read a general curriculum. Both Daniel and Michelle felt like their
programs did not prepare them, and teaching science has been “trial and error” or figuring things
out on their own. Due to the positive experience Rebecca had in her program, she felt that it
helped her
keep the memory alive of what science teaching could be. And then again, it’s just
[about] finding those moments to have that designated science. I think the key to all this
is having designated science time, that’s more than 15 minutes. So, it’s still fresh, even
though it’s been 10 years. It’s still fresh that [science] could happen and what it could
look like. But it’s just that time. I feel like the program was helpful, just seeing how
simple it could be, [and that] it doesn’t have to be like Bunsen burners and gas. It can
literally be putting dye in a cup with a plant, and that would blow minds. I’m thankful
that I had those classes because that’s kind of the only taste [of science] we have now.
However, even though Rebecca felt prepared to teach science, she does not teach it at her school.
She remembers the “taste” of it from her program but mentione that beyond just being prepared,
her school does not prioritize science, which hinders its teaching because there is no “designated
97

science time.” Elizabeth, who also teaches at Rebecca’s school, reflected on this additional
barrier:
One thing that I did learn in my credential program is that if kids in K–2 don’t grow a
love for science, it’s going to be harder for them to want to like science when they’re
older, and that’s what happened to me. It sucks feeling like I’m doing the same disservice
to my students. But now, being on the other side, the teacher side, I can really empathize
and understand why I wasn’t taught science the way I wanted to when I was younger.
Because there’s no time; there’s no resources. When would I ever go to sleep? When
would I ever be a human outside of being a teacher if I tried to tackle another subject and
try to make it perfect when it’s hard enough trying to get through the core subjects that
you want to make sure your K–2 students master before they get to third grade.
Failure to adequately prepare elementary teachers to teach science courses is the cycle of
science inequity BIPOC students and teachers face (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). The inability to
access science at the foundational level and then at the preparation level leaves educators
alienated from accessing science and seeing themselves as scientists. When participants were
asked to describe a scientist, they used terms like someone who is “curious,” who “researches,”
who is “explorative.” Michelle added that she does not assign a gender or physical look to a
scientist, even though “most are White males. [She hopes] to see scientists that look like females,
especially students of color.” Teachers are curious and explorative problem solvers who gather
data to inform their teaching every day, so by these definitions, all teachers should consider
themselves a scientist, yet seven participants responded that they did not.
Elizabeth was one of two educators who said they saw themselves as scientists because
they gather data and do research in their own classroom. However, “In a perfect world, if [she]
98

had time, [she] would want to be like a Bill Nye science guy, just doing a bunch of cool
experiments or having the kids go out and explore the world.” So while she does consider herself
a scientist, the image of a scientist in a “perfect world,” in a “teaching world,” remains a White
male. Rebecca and Elizabeth had contrasting experiences in their teacher preparation programs.
Rebecca reflected on her program positively, while Elizabeth felt she was underprepared.
However, better preparation alone does not mean that teachers will teach science. Ultimately,
both participants took jobs at a school that does not prioritize science, and now both have
difficulty teaching it because of that The next section highlights these additional barriers
elementary teachers face when attempting to teach science.
Results Research Question Three
The third research question asked, “How do BIPOC elementary teachers feel that their
administrative leadership supports the effectiveness of their science teaching?” Phrases that
participants repeated were “designated science time,” “reading and math prioritized,” “science
in the backburner,” “lack of time,” and “lack of resources.” Despite the challenges surrounding
their own educational science experience, all participants believed science to be valuable to their
students and used their experience to drive their students’ learning. Even when they were not
“confident,” or even if they were “scared,” they persisted because they understood the impact
their science experiences had on their lives. However, the third and most difficult barrier teachers
face consists of the macro- and micro-level influences that impact their everyday science
instruction.
At the macro level, high-stakes testing is a barrier to science instruction, removing
valuable teaching time to make room for reading and math (Tate, 2001). At the micro level,
administrative support and professional development play a critical role in prioritizing science
99

instruction. Griffith and Scharmann (2008) examined the impact of high-stakes testing in
schools, determining that teachers decreased instructional science minutes due to administrative
instruction, teacher pressure, less professional development, and budget cuts. A recurring theme
in the present study was that high-stakes testing deprioritizes science and maintains science as
White property through a lack of time, resources, and development.
Reading and Math Are Priorities, Science Is Just Something We Talk About
Priority is defined as that which is regarded as important. When asked how their school
prioritizes science, eight participants answered with a variation of “they don’t.” Jessica provided
a more detailed explanation:
It’s brought up, but I don’t think it’s one of the major priorities. I think our major content
areas are definitely math, reading, and writing. That’s always a priority, especially math.
If we’re crunching for time, usually math always stays. Everything else goes out the
window. In true honesty, if it was prioritized, we would have been teaching it now.
Alicia elaborated, “There’s no mandate we have to teach it. I don’t even know how much I’m
supposed to teach it. There’s no clarity.” Michelle further detailed that her school has never had
professional development in science and that the organization sometimes sends a content
specialist to campus to provide help. However, because they are not teaching science, no one
receives help. She admitted that she thinks her administrators were embarrassed that no one
showed up for help and began “pushing” teachers to attend. She claimed, “It was more for optics
than anything else. What do you want me to sit here and talk to her about if we’re not teaching
science? What am I going to say to her? I’ll just look stupid.”
Luisa is the only participant who believes science is prioritized at her school because they
are asked to submit lesson plans. Her school also has a science dean available to them, however,
100

they have been pulled from their current responsibilities to fulfill other non-science-related
responsibilities. Isabel, who is currently at the same school, elaborated on this issue, saying that
she knows they have an administrator who took charge of science but “reading and math always
come first. Science then gets rolled out.” Eva, who is also at the same school, noted that “the
intent is there, but what is administration doing about it so that teachers are prepared and that we
have the guidance?” Furthermore, Luisa contradicted her previous statement regarding the
priority of science at her school when she stated that math and reading take precedence over
science, mentioning that “100%” of the time, it does. She continued,
The reason I say 100% is because if we think about how our schools are measured by
effectiveness, it goes back to the SBAC, and that’s always reading, writing, and math. So,
that’s why that’s what’s being pushed because that’s how we stay open and show growth.
The evidence suggests that high-stakes testing in reading and math disincentivizes
science teaching (Tate, 2001). Additionally, it decreased students’ opportunity to learn due to the
high focus on test-oriented pedagogy (Tate, 2001). The pattern continues in Rosemont Charter
Network, as the participants commented that science is deprioritized over math and reading.
Additionally, at one school, the science dean now fulfills other responsibilities, demonstrating
that science is not a priority. Ultimately, the deprioritization of science teaching lowers access to
science for students of color (Tate, 2001).
Institutional Obstacles in the Advancement of Science Teaching and Learning for BIPOC
Communities
The materials, resources, and support that the administrative team provides at each school
also tell of the non-prioritization of science. Luisa, Isabel, and Eva received a link and password
to Mystery Science or STEMscopes, an online science curriculum. However, there is “no
101

alignment” across grades or grade levels they should use, and administrators began asking for
science plans “at week 14” of the school year. There are 36 weeks of school, so administrators
asked teachers to begin turning in science plans over one-third of the way into the school year.
Isabel added that STEMscopes is “not user friendly,” and she has to add much to it to make it
engaging. Luisa mentioned Mystery Science is “manageable and user friendly for someone who
may not be into science,” but her concern was that there are not too many hands-on activities for
some grade levels. Michelle, Alicia, and Jessica, who are all at the same school, also received
STEMscopes as a curriculum to use. Michelle did not find it helpful because the school did not
want to purchase a program for each grade level. They made grade levels share, and it was not
“developmentally appropriate.” She felt they had her teaching “a watered-down version” of
science.
Daniel, Rebecca, and Elizabeth’s school did not provide a curriculum and offered
nonfiction books as a resource. Elizabeth admittd that her administration told her, “You don’t
have to worry about full-fledged science blocks, just make sure you have a few units of reading,
writing or ELD [English language development] where you implement nonfiction science
books.” Her frustration built as she recalled her administration providing books as a science
resource. She summarized their statements: “Make sure you’re teaching science somehow. You
guys want a curriculum or fun resources? No. Here’s some books.”
Based on the participants’ foundational science knowledge and teacher preparation
experience, they could benefit from professional development. Professional development would
support their confidence in their science instruction (Mensah, 2010; Nadelson et al., 2013; Tate,
2001). All participants felt they needed guidance breaking down and understanding the NGSS,
with one participant stating they had never heard of the CCCs or the SEPs, which are an essential
102

part of the standards. Nevertheless, most participants had zero to one professional development
session in science through their years at the organization. None have been observed during a
science lesson. Luisa recalled having one professional development session 3 years ago for
STEMscopes. Isabel also remembered this session and recalled doing a science activity, learning
how to log in, and then mapping the units. Eva also added that they have had a few
“conversations” this year about implementing science and one email asking whether they needed
resources. She appreciated the conversations and access to materials but did not see these as
professional development.
Alicia and Jessica, at another school, also remembered having a STEMscope professional
development session a few years back, but it pertained only to logging in and using the
curriculum. Jessica, in particular, mentioned that it was “overwhelming.” Michelle, Elizabeth,
and Daniel mentioned “zero” as the amount of professional development they received. Rebecca
had only had one science professional development session that she sought out of her own
volition. She recalled,
And that was one that I went to on my own [professional development] with my cousin
because she teaches science at that bougie school. She’s always going to the science ones.
I went with her one year, but I was literally like, I will never have time to implement any
of this. But it was very interesting to have that college vibe back of how to teach science
again. But there’s still no time. After, she asked if I wanted to go to another one. I [said]
there’s no point because I don’t teach science. But, being a bougie school, she has a
designated science block.
The transparency with which Rebbeca spoke highlights how school priorities shift teachers’ good
intentions. Rebecca went on her own time because she believes science to be valuable,
103

recognizes the privilege she had in her own experiences, and wants more for her students.
However, when schools make it impossible to teach and understand science, it is easy to give up.
Elizabeth’s words resonate again: when would teachers have time to be humans, to sleep, to rest,
if they have to take this on themselves?
When participants were asked what kind of support they needed, one said “all of it” and
requested a variety of support. Teachers asked for guidance reading the standards, designing
units, increased planning and science time, access to materials and resources, a “good”
curriculum, feedback, and, in an ideal world, a coach available on site. Table 2 shows the variety
of support teachers requested and tallies how many times these strategies were requested.
Overall, Table 2 demonstrates that teachers consistently named having a curriculum as a
necessary tool to support their science effectiveness, six participants desired “good curriculum.”

Table 2
Desired Administrative Support
Luisa Isabel Daniel Alicia Eva Jessica Rebecca Elizabeth Michelle
5E lesson/Unit planning x x x
Increased planning time x x x x x
Curriculum x x x x x x
Materials and resources x x x x
Monitoring student growth/rigor/
differentiation
x x x
Observation/feedback x x x
NGSS and background
knowledge
x x x
Increased designated science time x x x
Science coach/expert x x

97
98

Alicia expressed her frustration with how many times the organization piloted and
changed curriculum: “Right now, I don’t even know if I would want support if they’re going to
change it.” Isabel expressed concern with the current curriculum and mentioned having
something that is “good.” Eva just asked for “consistency and alignment” for a curriculum
program in K–6. Elizabeth agreed that they need curriculum but added,
If I don’t know how to teach it, I’m just going to be like those teachers that I talked about
earlier. I have all these cool resources [but have to] go figure it out [my]self. I’m going to
read off this book that tells me what to say. But if [kids] have any questions that don’t go
with this curriculum, I don’t know how to help [them].
As Daniel mentioned, it is the “regurgitation” that he experienced as a child with his own
teachers. Support for teachers is vital, as Appleton’s (2003) identified how elementary teachers
cope with teaching science. Appleton claimed that the two strategies teachers use are avoidance
and using activities that work. Avoidance can look like not teaching science, postponing science,
using fortuitous events, and thematic teaching. The expressed similar sentiments. Alicia stated,
I guess I may be sounding more pessimistic, but, right now, our allotted time for science
is literally 15 minutes. So, I just feel like I’m just rushing through it. Well, that’s the
schedule that I created because, for me, science isn’t a top priority. Maybe because of all
this, we have to implement the phonics on some days, and then our core content, and then
we have to have language class, which is like a legal requirement. So, then after you plug
in all the minutes, there was no way. Literally, it’s 15 minutes
Elizabeth also noted that she is unaware of how many science minutes are required because she
has not “touched science.” Further affirming that her avoidance is due to her lack of confidence:
99

I’ve been taught techniques for how to teach literacy, and it would be perfect to have that
for science as well. The only reason I feel strongly in teaching literacy is because I’ve
been taught how to do it because I’ve had professional development meetings [and]
because I’ve had resources.
Thematic teaching is also occurring, as Michelle stated, “I think most people at our
school, if they are teaching science its content literacy. They’re not really teaching NGSS. If
NGSS says Earth, they’ll just start reading books on Earth.” These actions are a natural outcome
of teachers being underprepared to teach science.
Additionally, most participants did not feel their administration was knowledgeable
enough to provide support and feedback in science. Most participants expressed disillusionment,
mentioning that “they could but would they,” or saying that they would “prefer someone who
knows science [but], they can support the alignment between task and standard.” One participant
said their administrator could guide them to a person who could help them. Finally, one
participant mentioned that her administrators can hardly provide support in the core subjects, so
she did not believe they could provide science support unless they were truly prioritizing it
through “actions.” In addition to all the required support, Rebbecca mentioned she wanted
administrators to give teachers grace:
For admin, I think giving grace, being okay with flexibility as far as, okay, I’m going to
cut or maybe I’m not going to teach writing today. This would never happen with writing
because it’s a priority because I’m going to emphasize or get the ball rolling with science.
Being flexible with that. It’s going to be a give and take because we can’t make more
time. So, how are we going to make the most of this time?
100

For that to happen, science would have to be prioritized. As Michelle said, “There’s time if you
want to make time for it, there’s time, it’s just not a priority.” Overall, the participants wanted to
provide their students with a better, more engaging science experience. However, the reality is
that they are unable to due to the increased prioritization of math and reading. Thus,
deprioritizing the time spent on science in the classroom, in budgets, and on professional
development ultimately influences both teachers and students.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to center the narratives of BIPOC elementary teachers in
their attempt to gain access to science. The key findings from this study are that science is
maintained as White property by educational institutions that fail to prepare students as early as
the elementary level. Seven participants had no recollection of elementary school science, and of
those, only one went on to have a positive middle school experience because she was in a gifted
program. The others continued having negative to mediocre experiences filled with bookwork
activities. The participants’ high school experience varied, however. For three of the participants
who majored in STEM in college, their foundational gaps were too large, and they changed their
major. This cycle continued, as seven participants felt underprepared to teach science from their
teacher education programs. These past experiences served to fuel their desire to have higher
engagement in their classrooms; however, the deprioritization of science prevented them from
doing so.
The focus is often on the trauma or harm that these questions may bring to participants.
However, the trauma it can bring up for the researcher is not mentioned. This is my narrative. I
am Participant Zero, and I always thought I was struggling alone. I blamed myself. I believed
myself to be inferior. These are the stories that go unheard. These are the stories that fueled the
101

passion and drive to be educators, and they are suppressed. These stories are valuable and reveal
the racist structures deeply embedded in our society. There were moments when I was overcome
with emotions because I understood the pain that it has been to overcome so many barriers. It
was heartbreaking to hear participants believe that they are not as inquisitive and exploratory as
the White male scientists that have repeatedly been presented to them. Yet, they persisted until
their own job told them to stop, told them what to prioritize. And the cycle continues. The cycle
cannot be broken if there is no awareness of it. These isolated narratives tell the story that
educators are not alone. After the interview, Rebbecca spoke about feeling empowered:
It’s empowering to know that people still care. And that, hopefully, there will be a
movement, but it goes back to that systematic oppression. Even if you don’t see it in one
big foom, you see it over time. Kids who don’t have access to sports, kids who don’t have
access to art, kids who don’t have access to theatre, or engineering or whatever. Those
are all opportunities for them to go off and do something, or bring it back to the
community or whatever they feel like doing. It’s a cyclical thing. What is it gonna take to
break the wheel?
Rebecca’s privilege highlights that for now, this wheel can only be broken through proximity to
Whiteness, which occurs over several generations. For Rebecca, this took over three generations.
How many generations must attempt to hurl above, below, across, and through multiple barriers
for their children’s children’s children to receive the opportunity to learn? Daniel summarized,
This is the conspiracy theorist in me; science does a really great job of teaching kids how
to critically think, and when we have critical thinkers, big changes happen, and there
might be people who might not benefit from these changes who might be in control right
now. So, it might be that’s why we see the same trend with [not teaching] science in
102

schools because it might teach critical thinkers. I don’t know. That’s just the conspiracy
theorist in me, but it is a powerful, powerful way of teaching and we’re not taking
advantage of it.
This study concludes with the discussion of findings and recommendations in Chapter Five.

103

Chapter Five: Discussion
Children of color face “societal-induced barriers” that exclude them from partaking in
high-quality science learning (Brand et al., 2006). Tate (2001) asserted that the fight must shift
from desegregated schools to equal opportunities to learn for children of color, most especially
when it comes to science. The historical disenfranchisement of their education through mediocre
learning opportunities makes science a civil rights issue (Tate, 2001). Inferior foundational
science learning opportunities, negative student-teacher interactions, and low science
engagement are barriers to access science for students of color (Brand et al., 2006). Further
inaccessibility lies in how science is taught from a Eurocentric lens and is consistently
represented by White-cis-hetero men (Mensah & Jackson, 2018).
Science is maintained as White property through a cycle of alienation that begins with
inferior science learning opportunities for students of color in their K–12 years. Science minutes
are significantly reduced at the elementary school level to prioritize funding through high-stakes
testing in reading and math (Dee et al., 2013; Griffith & Scharmann, 2008; & Milner et al.,
2017). As a result, students of color enter middle school absent of foundational science
knowledge and skills, leading to disengagement in high school or a widening foundational gap
and further continues as BIPOC students exit STEM majors in college at larger attrition levels
due to the gaps in their foundational knowledge (Riegle-Crumb et al., 2019). Thus, BIPOC
students who eventually pursue a teaching career in elementary education may have significant
gaps in their foundational learning and expect their teacher preparation program to prepare them
to teach science. However, as these programs dismiss or neglect the experiences of their students
of color, inaccessibility to science becomes greater (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). Because teachers
104

of color are role models for their students, they are thus deprived students of color from further
accessing science (Mensah, 2019). The whitewashing of science pedagogy excludes BIPOC
teachers and students of color, maintaining science as White property (Mensah & Jackson,
2018). Centering the narratives of BIPOC elementary educators reveals the challenges they faced
in science spaces, so grounding this research in their stories can allow other students and teachers
of color to access science and equip them with tools of liberation.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to center the voices of BIPOC elementary educators to
transform theoretical spaces and disrupt the dominant narrative (Yosso, 2005). The nine BIPOC
participants’ narratives were collected through semi-structured interviews to build a better
understanding of their lived experiences and the impact these had on their science teaching. The
semi-structured interviews allowed for the participants' experiences to shape the outcome of the
interviews. The protocol was guided by my cultural knowledge, CRT framework, and the
following research questions:
1. How does the foundational science (K–12) education of BIPOC elementary teachers
impact their science pedagogy?
2. How do BIPOC elementary teachers relate to their teacher preparation courses, and how
does that impact their science pedagogy?
3. How do BIPOC elementary teachers feel that their administrative leadership supports the
effectiveness of their science teaching
105

The participants were recruited with the help of the school administration, and the email
addresses of potential participants were collected through Rosemont Charter’s (a pseudonym)
email address book. Participants were required to meet the following criteria:
● identified as BIPOC
● Serving within a charter school district
● Teaches all subjects, including science in the classroom
Discussion of Findings
Yosso (2005) noted that BIPOC communities should be seen from a place of cultural
wealth. The aspirational, navigational, and resistant wealth the participants carry are courageous
forms of defiance towards a system designed to be exclusionary (Yosso, 2005). Despite the
systemic barriers they overcame, such as access to high-quality science instruction, teacher
preparation programs, and professional development, the participants have resiliently persisted.
Yosso (2005) calls on researchers to uplift voices that have been omitted and disempowered to
challenge systems of oppression.
The Denial of the Opportunity to Learn Maintains Science as White Property
Seven participants had negative elementary science experiences, five had negative middle
school experiences, and one had a mediocre experience. Therefore, the chances of receiving a
slightly better middle school science experience improved by only 10%. In high school, three
participants had varied experiences of positive, mediocre, or negative science education. Mensah
and Jackson (2018) delineated the importance of setting a foundational interest in science early
on for learners to break cycles of exclusion. Additionally, teachers of color play an important
role for students of color. Teachers of color serve as role models for students and bring their
cultural knowledge into the classroom (Mensah & Jackson, 2018).
106

In this study, seven of the nine teachers of color had significant gaps in science
knowledge that they then carried into a mediocre or negative middle school experience. Even
though the high school experiences varied, five participants still continued to have negative to
mediocre science experiences, widening their foundational gaps. When students of color are
denied access to science through the denial of the opportunity to learn, science as White property
is maintained (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). This affirms past empirical research that found that
teachers of color are in a continuous cycle of alienation from both teaching and learning science
(Mensah & Jackson, 2018).
Yosso (2005) described aspirational wealth, the ability to dream despite systemic
barriers, as an asset of communities of color. Despite this very significant barrier of lack of
access to high-quality science, the participants pursued STEM fields. Four participants entered
STEM degree college programs. However, only one of them completed this degree, with three
failing out or being encouraged to pursue a non-STEM major. Beyond their college and K–12
experience, all participants believed that science was valuable and aspired to make a greater
science impact in their classroom or in their advocacy. The mere presence of a teacher of color as
a scientist begins to dismantle the image of the White-cis-hetero-male scientist and opens access
to science learning (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). Furthermore, the cultural relevance BIPOC
educators bring into the classroom helps empower students on all levels, academically and
emotionally, while developing their critical consciousness to challenge systemic barriers
(Mensah, 2011a, 2012a).
107

Teacher Preparation Programs Uphold Science as White Property Through Pedagogical
Practices Rooted in Eurocentricity
Teacher preparation programs’ pedagogical practices rooted in Eurocentricity and
Western knowledge maintain the status quo and science as White property (Mensah & Jackson,
2018). Teacher education programs do not acknowledge how systemic racism impacted their
teachers of color and assume elementary educators have strong foundational science knowledge
(Mensah, 2019). Additionally, teacher education programs rely on dominant narratives that focus
on cultural deficit models and transmit damaging beliefs of students of color (Solórzano &
Yosso, 2002). This reliance was further affirmed through the participants’ experiences.
However, the participants presented navigational wealth and resilience in moving through
social institutions that are exclusionary, such as their teacher preparation programs, as suggested
by research (Yosso, 2005). Seven participants had a negative experience in their programs and
had difficulties accessing science because of it. This becomes significant when considering the
participants’ history and their gaps in foundational science knowledge. The gaps in their
foundational knowledge are sufficient to discourage them from teaching science, which is
exacerbated by their ill preparation (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). As a result, all seven expressed
feelings of being underprepared to teach science and did not consider themselves scientists.
Though their voices, histories, identities, and positionalities were ignored by their social
institutions, the participants took the information they needed and moved with hope for the
future (Yosso, 2005).
Navigational wealth was especially important for Rebecca, who navigated through
predominantly White spaces for the entirety of her schooling. She was the only participant who
had a fully positive K–12 experience, which she attributed to her access to White spaces. During
108

the interview, she grappled with her experience, mentioning that she always thought she was a
person of color until she met “actual, first-generation” people of color. She attributed much of
her success navigating White spaces to the fact that she is “White passing.” Though she does not
feel that she was as impacted as a first-generation Latinx student of color would be due to her
ability to be White passing, she is now grappling with the pieces of her identity that she lost.
Rebecca is currently learning Spanish. She recognizes her privilege and is thankful for her
schooling, but it came with the cost of now navigating her way through her own identity in
relation to other people of color. Rebecca’s experience further highlights the disparities of
science education in communities of color. She used the words “designated science time” to
depict the contrast of her experience. “Designated science time” meant a prioritization of science
and students’ opportunity to learn, recognizing that in predominantly BIPOC communities,
science is at the margins due to institutional obstacles.
Institutional Obstacles in the Advancement of Science Teaching and Learning for BIPOC
Communities
As participants ended their interviews, I asked them to reflect on their feelings about their
science experience. Six participants felt sadness and explicitly called out the cyclical inequities
they observed in their schooling and that of their BIPOC students. However, in the end, they did
not ascribe these cyclical issues to their lack of foundational knowledge or preparation programs,
but they continuously called out “time” and “prioritization” as the reasons for their recurrence.
Despite the gaps in their foundational knowledge and science preparation, what seemed to
deflate their efforts towards teaching science was its deprioritization in schools and lack of
administrative support and professional development. All participants expressed doing the best
they could with the little preparation they had, naming it as “trial and error” and “figuring it out.”
109

Three participants added snippets of science wherever they could in their nonfiction texts and for
a minimum of 15 minutes at a time. The other six used the curriculum provided to attempt to
teach science.
The most significant asset these participants carry is their resistance to challenge
inequities and pass down their cultural capital as a form of continual resistance (Yosso, 2005).
Despite lacking foundational preparation, administrative support, professional development, and
time, they are still attempting to “figure it out.” The participants have not given up on science
yet. They embed science in nonfiction texts, figuring out the curriculum as a team, and going to
professional development sessions they personally sought out. The participants expressed
making science as engaging as they could for their students, even if they themselves were not
invested in the material, simply because they knew the value of science and wanted to provide
something different from their own experiences. In contrast, those with limited positive
experiences recalled them fondly and hoped to provide the same engagement for their own
students. This is resistance and refusal of the systemic barriers that prevent students of color
from accessing science.
Limitations
Critical race theory provides the framework for this study, illuminating the educational
disenfranchisement of people of color. The omission of their voices disempowered participants
in White spaces, but partaking in this interview was also a form of resistance. Resisting racism
and inequalities and sharing their stories reveal systemic oppression in educational spaces. Every
participant occupies and transforms theoretical spaces for future generations (Yosso, 2005). The
reigning master narrative ends when others take up space (Solórzano & Yosso, 2002).
110

Although the small sample does not allow for generalizability, CRT contends that due to
White-supremacist-cis-hetero-ableist-society, there is often a shared experience among people of
color (Carter Andrews et al., 2019). Additionally, the small sample did not include perspectives
from Black participants. When it comes to racial justice in education, it is imperative to focus on
the “Black condition and on Black suffering” (Dumas, 2018, p. 32). Dumas (2018) stated that
“Blackness is not analogous to any other racially marked position…while all people of color
experience racism, blackness is the fulcrum of White supremacy” (p. 32). At the time of the
study, Rosemont Charter had three Black teachers; therefore, the study was unable to capture
their voices. However, their narratives are critical to increasing accessibility in science for Black
students, thereby presenting a limitation in this study. Moreover, academia’s exclusivity prevents
this research from being easily accessible to classroom teachers and administrators not enrolled
at a university, limiting the study’s reach. The inquiry process and accessibility must be
demystified to empower educators to take the lead in inquiry, increase their commitment to data-
driven decisions, and foster change in institutions (Malloy, 2011).
Further limitations lie in the valid interpretation of participants’ narrative accounts and
my own bias. I used peer review and member checks to increase the study's credibility. I
contacted participants in a follow-up email or text during data analysis to ensure the
interpretation of their narratives was not skewed. Lastly, due to the pandemic and distance
learning, participants experienced Zoom fatigue and fatigue in general from this school year.
Therefore, I kept all interviews within a 60-minute time frame, and the average interview lasted
40 minutes.
111

Implications for Practice
The study on the impact of BIPOC elementary educators’ science experiences in their
foundational learning has implications for teacher preparation programs, school administration,
and for BIPOC elementary teachers themselves. Firstly, teacher preparation programs would
benefit from understanding the lived experiences of their preservice teachers to more adequately
prepare them for culturally responsive pedagogy rooted in radical love and empowerment for
students of color. Interrupting the current negative impacts of teacher preparation programs
requires adapting a pedagogy that centers critical consciousness (Carter Andrews et al., 2019).
Humanizing pedagogy that engages in self-reflection breaks from the status quo (Carter Andrews
et al., 2019). The value teachers of color bring into their classrooms through cultural competence
is a reason to honor their experiences and break the cycle of inequities in the opportunity to learn
science (Mensah & Jackson, 2018; Tate, 2001). Their value as humans, deserving of the
opportunity to learn and access science, calls for beginning to dismantle systemic racism rooted
in the education system.
School administrators play a substantial role in teachers’ development , as they determine
the allocation of funds and the professional development provided (Banilower, 2007; Casey et
al., 2012). Casey et al. (2012) explored the roles 16 principals played in their school’s successful
science programs. Additionally, they named the decrease in professional development’s
effectiveness when principals did not support science (Casey et al., 2012). Thus, school
administrators would benefit from a deeper understanding of their teachers’ lived experiences to
better inform their practice and cater to their needs. Professional development can increase
teachers’ self-efficacy significantly (Sandholtz & Ringstaff, 2014). Therefore, careful
112

consideration of the experiences of BIPOC teachers combined with intentional professional
development can have a significant impact on students of color.
The most significant implication in this research is for BIPOC elementary teachers
themselves. Participants seemed shaken by the realization that they were in a continuous cycle of
inequity, and that realization brought out sentiments of empowerment and longing to change
things in their classrooms. Teachers’ high impact and influence on school children make them a
strong lever of change. It is imperative that they understand that their experiences have not been
in solitude. The shared experiences can build greater social capital and networks of support
(Yosso, 2005). The greater the social capital, the greater the resistance capital, thus empowering
BIPOC educators to jointly enfranchise students of color to resist and challenge systemic
inequities. Table 3 summarizes the recommendations made at the institutional and personal
levels.

Table 3
Recommendations for Practice
Teacher preparation programs School administrators BIPOC elementary educators
Humanizing pedagogy Prioritization of science Networks of social capital
Culturally relevant pedagogy

Greater allocation of
resources and funds

Critically conscious
pedagogy
Professional development:
NGSS breakdown
Scientific background
knowledge
Increased planning time and
unit planning
Observations and feedback

113

Future Research
To support and guide BIPOC teachers in their science pedagogy, future research is
needed in two areas: teacher preparation programs and administrative leadership. Future research
is needed to understand how teacher preparation programs address gaps in preservice teachers’
learning. Mensah completed several studies using her own science course at Columbia
University’s Teachers College, and this research is vital to end the cycle of science inequity.
Additional research should also include more Black voices. If BIPOC teachers are better
prepared, then BIPOC students will be better prepared. This research touches the surface. More
research is needed to build a greater understanding of the shifts teacher preparation programs
need to make towards social justice reform. Continuing to uplift voices of color will begin to
transform spaces to become more inclusive.
Further research to examine BIPOC administrators’ access to science in their
foundational learning and their administrative courses should be pursued. It is essential to
understand if BIPOC administrators are also part of the cycle of inequity that excludes them
from science. It is also essential to understand how their administrative program influences their
school priorities, as these impact BIPOC teachers’ science teaching.
Conclusion
The historical disenfranchisement of BIPOC communities has served to create barriers
that prevent their advancement. However, their cultural wealth and resilience have been a
continual form of resistance. A deep comprehension of the disparities that afflict BIPOC
elementary educators is merely the first step in dismantling systems of oppression. But reform
can only occur by disrupting the status quo, uplifting voices of color, and going into classrooms
114

to raise a new generation of social justice leaders. Perhaps these leaders will transform the world
in the next decades or we might not witness these changes in our lifetime, but I cling to the
words of the Mexican proverb, “[though] they tried to bury us. they didn’t know we were seeds.”
115

References
Annamma. (2014). Whiteness as Property: Innocence and Ability in Teacher Education. The
Urban Review, 47(2), 293–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-014-0293-6
Anderson, J. (2010). The education of Blacks in the South, 1860-1935. The University of North
Carolina Press.
Appleton, K. (2003). How do beginning primary school teachers cope with science? Toward an
understanding of science teaching practice.. Research in Science Education, 33(1), 1–25.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023666618800
Banilower, E., Heck, D., & Weiss, I. (2007). Can professional development make the vision of
the standards a reality? The impact of the national science foundation’s local systemic
change through teacher enhancement initiative. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
44(3), 375–395. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20145
Banks, J. (Ed.). (1981). Education in the 80s: Multiethnic education. Allyn & Bacon.
Bartolomé, L. (1994). Beyond the methods fetish: Ward a humanizing pedagogy. Harvard
Educational Review, 64(2), 173–19.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.64.2.58q5m5744t325730
Bell, D. (1992). Faces at the bottom of the well: The permanence of racism. New York: Basic
Books.
Bell, & Busey, C. L. (2021). The Racial Grammar of Teacher Education: Critical Race Theory
Counterstories of Black and Latina First-Generation Preservice Teachers. Teacher
Education Quarterly (Claremont, Calif.), 48(1), 33–56.
116

Bell, D., & Bell, D. (2016). The reality of STEM education, design and technology teachers’
perceptions: A phenomenographic study. International Journal of Technology and
Design Education, 26(1), 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9300-9
Berg, A., & Moore Mensah, F. (2014). De-marginalizing science in the elementary classroom by
coaching teachers to address perceived dilemmas. Education Policy Analysis Archives,
22, 57. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22n57.2014
Brand, B., Glasson, G., & Green, A. (2006). Sociocultural factors influencing students’ learning
in science and mathematics: An analysis of the perspectives of African American
students. School Science and Mathematics, 106(5), 228–236.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2006.tb18081.x
Brown, K., & Jackson, D. D. (2013). The history and conceptual elements of critical race theory.
In M. Lynn & A. D. Dixson (Eds.), Handbook of critical race theory in education (pp. 9–
22). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203155721.ch1
Bullock, E. (2017). Only STEM can save us? Examining race, place, and STEM education as
property. Educational Studies, 53(6), 628–641.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2017.1369082
Carroll, J. B. (1963). A model of school learning. Teachers College Record, 64(8), 723–733.
https://doi.org/10.1177/016146816306400801
Carter Andrews, D. J., Brown, T., Castillo, B. M., Jackson, D., & Vellanki, V. (2019). Beyond
damage-centered teacher education: Humanizing pedagogy for teacher educators and
preservice teachers. Teachers College Record, 121(6), Article 060305.
117

Casey, P., Dunlap, K., Brown, K., & Davison, M. (2012). Elementary principals’ role in science
instruction. Administrative Issues Journal : Education, Practice, and Research, 2(2), 57–
62. https://doi.org/10.5929/2012.2.2.5
Chang, M., Sharkness, J., Hurtado, S., & Newman, C. (2014). What matters in college for
retaining aspiring scientists and engineers from underrepresented racial groups. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 51(5), 555–580. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21146
Chenoweth, R. (2020, March 17). The rising crisis in American STEM. The Ohio State
University. https://ehe.osu.edu/news/listing/rising-crisis-american-stem/
Chow, K. (2017, April 19). ‘Model minority’ myth again used as a racial wedge between Asians
and Blacks. NPR. https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2017/04/19/524571669/
model-minority-myth-gain-used-as-a-racial-wedge-between-asians-and-blacks
Crenshaw. (2011). Twenty years of critical race theory: looking back to move forward.
Connecticut Law Review, 43(5), 1253–.
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence
against women of Color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.
Crenshaw, K. (2016). The urgency of Intersectionality [Video]. TED.
https://www.ted.com/talks/kimberle_crenshaw_the_urgency_of_intersectionality?languag
e=en
Crosscutting concepts (CCC). Crosscutting Concepts (CCC) | Next Generation Science
Standards. (n.d.). Retrieved April 8, 2022, from
https://www.nextgenscience.org/glossary/crosscutting-concepts-ccc
Darling-Hammond, L. (2001). Inequality in teaching and schooling: How opportunity is rationed
to students of color in America. In B. D. Smedley, A. Y. Stith, L. Colburn, & H. Evans
118

(Eds.), The right thing to do—The smart thing to do (pp. 208–233). The National
Academies Press.

Disciplinary core idea (DCI). Disciplinary Core Idea (DCI) | Next Generation Science
Standards. (n.d.). Retrieved April 8, 2022, from
https://www.nextgenscience.org/glossary/disciplinary-core-idea-
dci#:~:text=The%20fundamental%20ideas%20that%20are%20necessary%20for%20und
erstanding%20a%20given%20science%20discipline.

Dee, T., Jacob, B., & Schwartz, N. (2013). The effects of NCLB on school resources and
practices. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(2), 252–279.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373712467080
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical race theory (3rd ed.). NYU Press.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1ggjjn3.11
DeSilver, D. (2020). U.S. academic achievement lags that of many other countries. Pew
Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/15/u-s-students-
internationally-math-science/
Donnor, J. K. (2013). Education as the property of Whites: African Americans’ continued quest
for good schools. In M.Lynn & A. D. Dixson (Eds.), Handbook of critical race theory in
education (1st ed., pp. 215–223). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203155721-24
Dorph, R., Shields, P., Tiffany-Morales, J., Hartry, A., & McCaffrey, T. (2011). High hopes-few
opportunities: The status of elementary science education in California. The Center for
the Future of Teaching and Learning at WestEd.
119

Dumas, M. J. (2013). ‘Losing an arm’: Schooling as a site of black suffering. Race, Ethnicity and
Education, 17(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2013.850412
Dumas, M. J. (2018). Beginning and ending with Black suffering: A meditation on and against
racial justice in education. In E. Tuck & W. Yang (Eds.), Toward what justice? (1st ed.,
Vol. 1, pp. 29–45). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351240932-3
Foster, M. (1997). Black teachers on teaching. The New Press.
Freeman, A.D. (1978). Legitimizing racial discrimination through antidiscrimination law: A
critical review of Supreme Court doctrine. Minnesota Law Review, 62(6), 1049–1119.
Garza, R. (2019). Paving the way for Latinx teachers: Recruitment and preparation to promote
educator diversity. ERIC.
Gay, G. (2003). Becoming multicultural educators: Personal journey toward professional
agency. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Griffith, G., & Scharmann, L. (2008). Initial impacts of No Child Left Behind on elementary
science education. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 20(3), 35–48.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03174707
Harris, C. I. (1993). Whiteness as property. Harvard Law Review, 106(8), 1707–1791.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1341787
Herro, D., & Quigley, C. (2017). Exploring teachers’ perceptions of STEAM teaching through
professional development: Implications for teacher educators. Professional Development
in Education, 43(3), 416–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2016.1205507
Hernandez, M., Morales, A. R., & Shroyer, M. G. (2013). The development of a model of
culturally responsive science and mathematics teaching. Cultural Studies of Science
Education, 8(4), 803–820. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-013-9544-1
120

Howard. (2003). Culturally relevant pedagogy: Ingredients for critical teacher reflection. Theory
Into Practice, 42(3), 195–202. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4203_5
Husen, T. (Ed.). (1967). International study of achievement in mathematics: A comparison of
twelve countries. Wiley.
Irizarry. (2011). En la Lucha: The struggles and triumphs of latino/a preservice teachers.
Teachers College Record (1970), 113(12), 2804–2835.
https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811111301204
Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers. Jossey-Bass.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant
pedagogy. Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 159-165.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849509543675
Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in a nice field
like education? International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 7–24.
https://doi.org/10.1080/095183998236863
Ladson-Billings, G. (2004). Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in a nice field
like education? In D. Gillborn & G. Ladson-Billings (Eds.), The RoutledgeFalmer reader
in multicultural education (pp. 49–67). RoutledgeFalmer.
Lawrence, C.R., III (1987). The id, the ego, and equal protection clause: Reckoning with
unconscious racism. Stanford Law Review, 39(2), 317–388.
Leonardo, Z., & Boas, E. (2013). Other kids’ teachers: What children of color learn from White
women and what this says about race, Whiteness, and gender. In M.Lynn & A. D. Dixson
(Eds.), Handbook of critical race theory in education (1st ed., pp. 333–344).
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203155721-34
121

Lochmiller, C. R., & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. Sage Publications.
Lorde, A. (1984). Sister outsider: Essays and speeches. Crossing Press.
Malloy, C. (2011). Moving beyond data: Practitioner-led inquiry fosters change. Phi Delta
Kappa International, 6(4), 1–20.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Mensah, F. (2009). A portrait of Black teachers in science classrooms. Negro Educational
Review, 60(1-4), 39–52.
Mensah, F. (2010). Toward the mark of empowering policies in elementary school science
programs and teacher professional development. Cultural Studies of Science Education,
5(4), 977–983. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-010-9279-1
Mensah, F. (2011a). A case for culturally relevant teaching in science education and lessons
learned for teacher education. The Journal of Negro Education, 80(3), 296–309.
Mensah, F. (2011b). The DESTIN: Preservice teachers’ drawings of the ideal elementary science
teacher. School Science and Mathematics, 111(8), 379–388.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00103.x
Mensah. (2012a). Positional identity as a lens for connecting elementary preservice teachers to
teaching in urban classrooms. In M. Varelas (Ed.), Identity construction and science
education research: Learning, teaching, and being in multiple contexts (pp. 105–121).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-043-9
Mensah, F. (2012b). Retrospective accounts in the formation of an agenda for diversity, equity,
and social justice for science education. In Bianchini, J. A., Akerson, V. L., Barton, A.
122

C., Lee, O., & Rodriguez, A. J. (Eds.), Moving the equity agenda forward (pp. 317–335).
Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4467-7_19
Mensah, F. (2013). Theoretically and practically speaking, what is needed in diversity and equity
in science teaching and learning? Theory into Practice, 52(1), 66–72.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2013.743781
Mensah, F., & Jackson, I., (2018). Whiteness as property in science teacher education. Teachers
College Record, 120(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811812000108
Mensah, F. (2019). Finding voice and passion: Critical race theory methodology in science
teacher education. American Educational Research Journal, 56(4), 1412–1456.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218818093
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. Jossey-Bass.
Milner, H. R., & Lomotey, K. (2014). Handbook of urban education. Routledge.
Milner, A., Sondergeld, T., Demir, A., Johnson, C., & Czerniak, C. (2017). Elementary teachers’
beliefs about teaching science and classroom practice: An examination of pre/post NCLB
testing in science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(2), 111–132.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-011-9230-7
Milner, H. R., IV. (2007). Race, culture, and researcher positionality: Working through dangers
seen, unseen, and unforeseen. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 388–400.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07309471
Mitchell, T. D. (2016, October 6). Honoring resistant capital. Campus Climate. Retrieved April
18, 2022, from https://campus-climate.umn.edu/content/honoring-resistant-capital#_ftn1

123

Monarrez, Wagler, A., & Wagler, R. (2021). Latinx STEM Teacher Formation through a
Cultural Wealth Lens. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 20(2), 164–178.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192719835685
Morales-Doyle, D., Gutstein, E. R. (2019). Racial capitalism and STEM education in Chicago
Public Schools. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 22(4), 525–544.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2019.1592840
Moss, J. (2016). Where are all the teachers of color? Harvard Ed. Magazine.
https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/ed/16/05/where-are-all-teachers-color
Nadelson, L., Callahan, J., Pyke, P., Hay, A., Dance, M., & Pfiester, J. (2013). Teacher STEM
perception and preparation: Inquiry-based STEM professional development for
elementary teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 106(2), 157–168.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2012.667014
Oakes, J. (1990). Multiplying inequalities : the effects of race, social class, and tracking on
opportunities to learn mathematics and science. Rand Corp.
Perry, K. (1995). White women, race matters: The social construction of Whiteness. Feminist
Review, 49(1), 115–116. https://doi.org/10.1057/fr.1995.10
Pew Research Center. (2020, September 18). Latinos and education: Explaining the attainment
gap. Pew Research Center's Hispanic Trends Project. Retrieved April 14, 2022, from
https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2009/10/07/latinos-and-education-explaining-the-
attainment-gap/
Quijano, A. (2000). Coloniality of power, Eurocentrism, and Latin America. International
Sociology, 15(1), 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580900015002005
124

Ray, R., & Gibbons, A. (2021, November 21). Why are states banning critical race theory? [Blog
post]. The Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2021/07/02/
why-are-states-banning-critical-race-theory/
Riegle-Crumb, C., King, B., & Irizarry, Y. (2019). Does STEM stand out? Examining
racial/ethnic gaps in persistence across postsecondary fields. Educational Researcher,
48(3), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X19831006
Rogers-Ard, Knaus, C. B., Epstein, K. K., & Mayfield, K. (2013). Racial Diversity Sounds
Nice; Systems Transformation? Not So Much: Developing Urban Teachers of Color.
Urban Education (Beverly Hills, Calif.), 48(3), 451–479.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085912454441
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.).
SAGE Publications.
Sandholtz, J. H., & Ringstaff, C. (2014). Inspiring instructional change in elementary school
science: The relationship between enhanced self-efficacy and teacher practices. Journal
of Science Teacher Education, 25(6), 729–751. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9393-
0
Science and Engineering Practices (SEP). Science and Engineering Practices (SEP) | Next
Generation Science Standards. (n.d.). Retrieved April 8, 2022, from
https://www.nextgenscience.org/glossary/science-and-engineering-practices-sep

Solomona, P., Portelli, J. P., Daniel, B.-J., & Campbell, A. (2005). The discourse of denial: How
white teacher candidates construct race, racism and “white privilege.” Race, Ethnicity
and Education, 8(2), 147–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613320500110519
125

Solórzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. J. (2001). From racial stereotyping and deficit discourse toward a
critical race theory in teacher education. Multicultural Education, 9(1), 2–8.
Solórzano, D., & Yosso, T. (2002). Critical race methodology: Counter-storytelling as an
analytical framework for education research. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 23–44.
https://doi.org/10.1177/107780040200800103
Stanley, W., & Brickhouse, N. (2001). Teaching sciences: The multicultural question revisited.
Science Education, 85(1), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-
237X(200101)85:13.0.CO;2-6
Supovitz, J., & Turner, H. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching
practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 963–
980. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200011)37:9<963::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-0
Taie, S., & Goldring, R. (2019). Characteristics of public and private elementary and secondary
school principals in the United States: Results from the 2017–18 National Teacher and
Principal Survey. National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education
Sciences.
Tate, W. (2001). Science education as a civil right: Urban schools and opportunity‐to‐learn
considerations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(9), 1015–1028.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1045
The New York Times. (2006, October 31). President Bush in Georgia. The New York Times.
Retrieved March 26, 2022, from
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/us/politics/31bush-transcript.html
126

The United States National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk :
the imperative for educational reform: A report to the nation and the secretary of
education. United States Department of Education.
Three dimensional learning. Three Dimensional Learning | Next Generation Science Standards.
(n.d.). Retrieved April 8, 2022, from https://www.nextgenscience.org/three-dimensions
Tillman. (2002). Culturally Sensitive Research Approaches: An African-American Perspective.
Educational Researcher, 31(9), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X031009003
Tillman, L. C. (2004). (Un)intended consequences?: The impact of the Brown v. Board of
Education decision on the employment status of Black educators. Education and Urban
Society, 36(3), 280–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124504264360
Valencia, R. R. (2005, March 1). The Mexican American struggle for equal educational
opportunity in mendez v. westminster: Helping to pave the way for brown v. board of
education. Teachers College Record. Retrieved April 12, 2022, from
https://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentId=11792
Villegas, A. M., & Lucas, T. (2002). Preparing culturally responsive teachers: Rethinking the
curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 20–32.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487102053001003
Wirt, F., & Kirst, M. W. (2009). The political dynamics of American education (4th ed.).
McCutchan Publishing.
Yosso, T. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006

127

Appendix: Semi-Structured Interview Question Guide
Research questions
● How does the foundational science (K–12) education of BIPOC elementary teachers
impact their science pedagogy?
● How do BIPOC teachers relate to, if at all, to their teacher preparation courses, and how
does that impact their science pedagogy?
● How do BIPOC elementary teachers feel that their administrative leadership supports the
effectiveness of their science teaching
Introductory comments:
● Hello. My name is Victoria Rivas Castro, and I am a graduate student at USC.
● Thank you for taking the time to help me conduct my research. I have been an educator
for the past 8 years, and am passionate about this work.
● I am conducting a study on the lived experiences of BIPOC (black indigenous people of
color) elementary teachers pertaining to their science background and preparation. I hope
to gain a better understanding of your experiences, feelings and perspective, in this
regard.
● This interview is completely confidential. No one in the organization will have access to
this information and no identifying information will be shared in any of the written
documents. I encourage you to speak openly and from your heart, this is a non-evaluative
interview, and I hope you can feel safe and comfortable sharing this information with me.
● Your participation is voluntary and at any point during the interview, you may end our
conversation.
128

● Do you have any questions regarding the study? Are there additional norms you would
like me to add so you can have a safe space?
● I am hoping to record this interview for note-taking and analysis. Do I have your
permission to record?
Introduction
1. Tell me a little about yourself
○ Why did you choose to become an elementary teacher?
○ What has your experience teaching science been like?
2. What does a scientist look like to you? Probe: Do you consider yourself a scientist? Why
or why not?
RQ1. Foundational (K –12) Education Experience
3. Take a moment to reflect back on your experience with science in elementary school,
what was that like?
○ If no recollection: do you remember having any science/science experience in
elementary school?
○ If there is no elementary science: tell me about your middle and high school
science experience?
4. How did your feelings towards science evolve/change throughout your K–12 education
experience?
5. How do you think your K–12 science education impacts your own teaching of science?

129

RQ2. Teacher Preparation Program
6. How did you see yourself reflected in your science teacher preparation courses?
7. How did your science teacher preparation courses (curriculum/text) focus on affirming
your identity?
○ Probe: how did you experience culturally responsive pedagogy?
8. How have your science learning experiences, from your teacher preparation programs,
impacted how you teach science in your classroom?
RQ3. Administrative Leadership
9. How is science prioritized at your school site?
○ If not, why not?
10. In what areas of your teaching of science do you feel like you need additional support?
○ Is this something your administrators can provide? Why or why not?
11. How does the administration at your school provide you with support in your teaching of
science?
12. Are there any other ways you’d like your administrative leadership to support the
effectiveness of your science teaching?
○ Probe: How often does your administrative leadership discuss science instruction
(not including for standardized testing)?
Conclusion
13. How did reflecting on your science education make you feel?
○ Is there anything else you would like to add on?
● Thank you for providing your time and answering these questions.
130

● Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. I have emailed you
my contact information prior to our interview.
● If I find myself with a follow-up question, can I contact you, and if so, if email is ok?
And if there are any websites or documents that you feel comfortable sharing with me in
my learning of this content, could you please email them to me? Again, thank you for
participating in my study.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Preservice teacher perspectives: impact of culturally responsive pedagogy and implications of Eurocentric, whitewashed roots on United States education

PDF

School leader impact on equitable grading practices to support middle school English learners

PDF

Interconnectedness of cultural responsiveness, retention, and mentorship: understanding the experiences of BIPOC intern educators with BIPOC mentors

PDF

Reducing the education debt through supporting African American and Latinx teacher longevity

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

An Exploration of the Development and Enactment of Anti-Racist Teaching Practices in the Elementary Classroom

PDF

The impact of campus closures: experiences of first-generation college students at a 4-year private university in southern California

PDF

Impact of elementary grade teachers practicing radical love in Florida classrooms

PDF

Classrooms beyond the binary: elementary teachers gendered beliefs and classroom practices

PDF

Addressing systemic challenges in elementary-school teacher preparation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics

PDF

The lack of National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) hiring of male and female BIPOC athletics coaches

PDF

Finding joy in the fallback: a study of how teachers can stay and find happiness in their now chosen profession through self-efficacy

PDF

In search of the Black superintendent

PDF

Clearing the way: pathways to retention of women in engineering

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K–12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

A full plate: the impact of high expectations and demands on teacher recruitment and retention

PDF

The importance of Black and Latino teachers in BIPOC student achievement and the importance of continuous teacher professional development for BIPOC student achievement

PDF

Who’s teaching whom: a micropolitical examination of teacher placement practices in Milwaukee County high schools

PDF

Black male school administrators perceptions of the recruitment process into leadership at Chicago public schools

Asset Metadata

Creator Rivas Castro, Victoria Alicia (author)

Core Title Science as white property: BIPOC elementary teachers’ science experience and its impact on their pedagogy

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2022-05

Publication Date 04/27/2022

Defense Date 03/10/2022

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

Tag BIPOC science elementary teachers,OAI-PMH Harvest,Science,science elementary teachers,white property

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Cash, David (committee chair), Kast, Dieuwertje (committee chair), Krop, Cathy (committee chair)

Creator Email victorar@usc.edu,victoriarivas5@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111136633

Unique identifier UC111136633

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Rivas Castro, Victoria Alicia

Type texts

Source 20220428-usctheses-batch-934 (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