University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

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

(USC Thesis Other)

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

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content 1
Preservice Teacher Perspectives: Impact of Culturally Responsive Pedagogy and
Implications of Eurocentric, Whitewashed Roots on United States Education
by
Kerry Mullen Shanahan
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
2
© Copyright by Kerry Mullen Shanahan 2022
All Rights Reserved
3
The Committee for Kerry Mullen Shanahan certifies the approval of this Dissertation
David Cash, Committee Chair
Cathy Krop, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022
Abstract
Throughout the United States, the makeup of our student population continues to change,
growing more diverse where our teaching populations grow stagnant and consist of White
women. Can teacher preparation programs do more to meet the needs of their evolving student
population? Unfortunately, few studies on teacher preparation programs can refute the need for
teacher programs to evolve and change into more equitable and critically responsive programs.
In this qualitative phenomenological study, I draw on interviews, field notes, course curriculum
components, and preservice teacher voices to explore the Eurocentric elements of current teacher
preparation. This research offers insight into the obstacles that preservice teachers face in
regards to choosing and advocating for culturally responsive curricula and practices within their
classrooms. The findings lead to recommendations for teacher preparation, ongoing teacher
education, and a conceptual reworking of the importance of culture and identity in the classroom.
iv
Dedication
To forgotten and dismissed student voices.
To my own students, students occupying Native Land, students across the world. Thank you for
your spirit, heart, and growth.
To my son, Conor Shanahan Bollweg, you grew with me.
v
6
Acknowledgments
When I envisioned my future I always pictured a life filled with adventure, evolution, and
love. I am fortunate enough to have found a person who encapsulates all the above and more. I
would like to thank my partner and love of my life, Robert Bollweg, and our growing family for
exuding patience, love, support, and kindness through long days and short nights. Throughout
my drafting, research, and writing I had the magical and unique experience of growing a child
while building a body of research and creating a dissertation. I am eternally grateful my son,
Conor Shanahan Bollweg was along on this journey in growth and strength. To borrow a line
from Brandi Carlile, “You’re nothing short of magical and beautiful to me. I would never hit the
big time without you.” Of all my accomplishments, I am most proud of the family we have
created, Robbie.
I am deeply indebted to the expertise of my chair committee members, Dr. Cathy Krop
and Dr. David Cash who were always able to bring a sense of levity, joy, and understanding
throughout a very precarious time in life. Their unwavering dedication to my craft, research, and
writing were often what kept me functioning throughout this process. I would like to thank my
third chair, Dr. May Jadallah for being the spark that started the fire within my educator's heart in
a small classroom in central Illinois. For continuing to push me further than I thought possible.
Forever grateful to have been a Redbird in your class.
One of my educational and life role models, Mr. Jack Young deserves a shout-out. He
encouraged me to take a risk and move my family to Costa Rica which proved to be the breath of
life my education career needed. Jack then inspired me to take another big risk and apply for a
doctorate program I was certain I wouldn’t get into and yet, here I am. Pura vida y gracias Senor
Young!
vi
7
I would be nowhere in this process without my sisters in arms, Dr. Ruby Lin, Dra.
Victoria Rivas Castro, and Dra. Martiza Rodriguez Dortrait. I am eternal, whole body and soul
grateful for the shared wisdom, grace, compassion, and early morning writing sessions. In the
throes of new motherhood muddling my way through postpartum depression and anxiety they
held me up through this process and at times carried me. I struggle to explain the immense
importance of community throughout the dissertation process.
Additionally, I would like to thank the universe for providing me with The Avengers
(School of Rossier Cohort A 2022). Without my cohort, my heart (and my red cup) would not
have been filled with so much joy as well as knowledge. I love you all deeply, Fight On!
To my younger self, school did not always come easy to you yet your parents surrounded
you with love and reminded you constantly that your best is enough. All of the times you were
told you are too loud, too bossy, or too much. I wish you could see the strength in all aspects of
who you are and the power in knowing your identity. Take up space, Kerry, do not minimize
yourself for the comfort of others.
My family is the bedrock of my existence as a student. I was blessed with parents that
always allowed me to use my voice, a privilege so few children and adults are provided. I would
like to thank my father, Dr. Timothy Shanahan, Sr., and my mother, Mrs. Sue Mullen Shanahan
for creating a foundation of hope, safety, understanding, and unconditional love. Additionally, I
would like to thank my siblings, brothers in law, and nephews; Colleen Shanahan Wehrli, Mike
Wehrli, Jack Wehrli, Sean Wehrli, Ryan Wehrli, Owen Wehrli, Timothy Shanahan, Jr., Amy
Shanahan Rylander, & Jeff Rylander for pushing me to be the best version of myself even when I
don’t want to be.
vii
8
My in-laws, Jim and Nicky Bollweg were a constant source of support throughout this
three-year process. They are also the people that gifted this world with my husband. I would not
have been able to complete this program without their help.
My grandparents imparted such a wide breadth of knowledge, conversation, and
experiences growing up that shaped the person I am today. I know they would be proud of what I
have written and created. I see you in the way I speak, write, care for one another, and in my
baby’s eyes. Carpe Diem-All my love, always.
Finally, I would like to thank the foundation of this dissertation, my students. It has been
my immense privilege to learn from and with you. All of this is you.
viii
9
Table of Contents
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………...iv
Dedication…………………………………………………………………………………………v
Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………………….vi
List of Tables…………………………………………………………………………………….xii
List of Figures……………………………………………………………………...……………xiv
Chapter One: Overview of the Study……………………………………………………………...1
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..1
Background of the Problem……………………………………………………………….3
Statement of the Problem……………………………...…………………………………..7
Purpose of the Study……………………………………………………………………... 8
Research Questions………………………………………………………………………..9
Importance of the Study…………………………………………………………………...9
Limitation and Delimitations……………………………………………………………... 9
Definition of Terms………………………………………………………………………11
Organization of the Study……………………………………………………………….. 13
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature…………………………………………………………. 13
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………13
Historical Perspective on Systemic Inequities…………………………………………...14
Brief History of the Eurocentric Roots in America…………………………………. 15
White Eurocentric Foundations in Schooling Throughout the United States………..17
Educational Inequity in the United States………………………………………………..18
Educational Debt…………………………………………………………………… 19
To See or Not to See: Colorblind Education……………………………………… 21
Whiteness as Property………………………………………………………………..23
No Child Left Behind……………………………………………………………….. 24
Role of Teachers as Gatekeepers………………………………………………………... 26
ix
1 0
White Women in Education…………………………………………………………. 26
Teacher Preparation Programs by Race/Ethnicity in 2016………………………….. 29
New Approaches In Teacher Education………………………………………………. 29
Tools and Frameworks to Redesign Teacher Preparation: Culturally Relevant
Teaching and Pedagogy……………………………………………………………... 32
Conceptual Framework…………………………………………………………………..36
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………. 39
Chapter Three: Methodology…………………………………………………………………….40
Statement of the Problem………………………………………………………………...40
Purpose of the Study…………………………………………………………………….. 40
Selection of the Population……………………………………………………………… 41
Design Summary…………………………………………………………………………42
Methodology…………………………………………………………………………43
Qualitative Method………………………………………………………………….. 43
Instrumentation and Protocols…………………………………………………………... 44
Qualitative Instrument………………………………………………………………. 44
Data Collection………………………………………………………………………….. 45
Interviews…………………………………………………………………………….45
Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………………….46
Validity and Reliability………………………………………………………………….. 48
Summary…………………………………………………………………………………49
Chapter Four: Results and Findings……………………………………………………………...50
Background………………………………………………………………………………50
Participants……………………………………………………………………………….52
Research Questions………………………………………………………………………54
Findings…………………………………………………………………………………. 55
Results Research Question One: Perception of Culturally Responsive Pedagogies in
Teacher Preparation Programs…………………………………………………………... 55
ix
1 1
Theme One: Desire to Educate……………………………………………………… 57
Theme Two: Yes, But……………………………………………………………... 59
Theme Three: Envisioning New Curriculum………………………………………...62
Discussion Research Question One……………………………………………………... 65
Results Research Question Two: Preservice Teacher Motivation to Apply CRT and
Decenter Eurocentricity…………………………………………………………………. 65
Theme One: Identity………………………………………………………………… 67
Theme Two: Name, Describe, Question, then Dismantle………………………… 70
Theme Three: Grappling with Whiteness…………………………………………...75
Discussion Research Question Two……………………………………………………...78
Results Research Question Three: Organizational Impact on CRT Application………...79
Theme One: Opportunities to Implement Culturally Relevant Teaching…………… 80
Theme Two: Barriers to Implement Culturally Responsive Teaching……………. 82
Theme Three: Reinvention of Typical Teacher Preparation Programming…………. 85
Discussion Research Question Three…………………………………………………….87
Summary…………………………………………………………………………………88
Chapter Five: Discussion………………………………………………………………………... 89
Discussion of Findings…………………………………………………………………...92
Nice White Teacher: Reframing the Status Quo……………………………………..92
Growth in Risk-Taking……………………………………………………………… 94
Discomfort Avoidance………………………………………………………………. 96
Scratching the Surface………………………………………………………………. 96
Delimitations and Limitations……………………………………………………………97
Implications for Practice…………………………………………………………………99
Intertwined Intersections of Identities……………………………………………... 100
Student V oice………………………………………………………………………. 101
Implementing a CRT Framework…………………………………………………..101
Future Research……………………………………………………...…………………102
ix
1 2
Conclusions……………………………………………………………………………..103
References………………………………………………………………………………………106
Appendix A……………………………………………………………………………………..131
Interview Protocol…………………………………………………………………………..131
ix
1 3
List of Tables
Table 1: Expressed identities of participants…………………………………………………….55
Table 2: Implications for Future Practice………………………………………………………101
xiii
1 4
List of Figures
Figure 1: Teacher Preparation Programs by Race/Ethnicity in 2016………………………….29
Figure 2: Conceptual Framework……………………………………………………………..39
xiv
1
Chapter One: Overview of the Study
Introduction
Education in the United States faces many challenges. One issue, largely unnamed, is
Eurocentric, colorblind, Whitewashed-based teaching practices, propagated through teacher
preparation programs (TPP) and practices. Warren (2013) asserted, “Colorblind perspectives still
shape understandings of race and racism within educational contexts.” (p. 214) The relationship
between teacher preparation and Whitewashed ways of knowing has been long-standing.
Bonilla-Silva (2010) contended that colorblindness refers to “the racism that shields White
privilege and deploys justifications for racial inequality that some White people are free from
blame or responsibility while placing it solely on the shoulders of people of color” (p. 28). The
colorblind school of thought includes other exclusionary practices such as colonialism or settler
colonialism. Colonialism is the practice of domination, which involves the subjugation of one
person to another, a practice utilized by early colonizers in the United States and invariably
replicated through our education system (Spring, 2016). Within the early existence of American
education systems, Eurocentric values are preferred, for example, White, able-bodied,
cis-gendered, and male-dominated (Kahreem, 2006). Eurocentrism, often referred to as
Eurocentricity or Western-centrism, is a worldview centered on Western Civilization and/or a
biased view that favors it over non-Western civilizations. Historically, an apologetic stance
towards European colonialism and other forms of imperialism is often reflected in American
curriculums (Wasserstrom, 2001).
Though the roots of this practice seem invariably distant from current times, their impact
and effect continue in education systems today. Schooling in the United States has existed in the
colonized waters of White supremacy since its founding, creating generations of students that are
2
indoctrinated with the cultural values, patriotic nationalism, political and economic systems,
language, and religion that reflect the Anglo-Protestant American norm and not the diverse fabric
of society that accurately reflects the United States (Kahreem, 2006). Ongoing educational
practices rooted in colorblindness lead TPPs and, in turn, teachers to approach their practices
with a deficit-based understanding of their students and their abilities.
According to the National Center for Educational Statistics (2021), 53% of the United
States’ school population is represented by students of color; however, 79% of the United States
K-12 teaching force identified as White. The overwhelmingly White population of teachers does
not reflect the increasingly diverse background of the United States’ student population. T.C.
Howard (2010) and Milner (2014) report that predominantly White teachers “are not being well
prepared to teach in urban schools across the United States.” (p. 200) T.C. Howard and Milner
contend that teachers must “attend to their own deep-rooted beliefs, ideologies, and values”
while cultivating a “deep understanding of the sociopolitical context of urban communities” (p.
107). Are TPPs providing these opportunities for teachers? Is culturally responsive teaching part
of TPP programming? With the demographic gap between teachers and students widening, what
can TPPs do to better serve both their preservice teachers and the students they aim to serve?
Educational inequities persist in the United States despite federal legislation such as the
Elementary Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 2016 and the No Child Left Behind Act
(NCLB) of 2001 intended to remedy the educational inequity (Mondale & Patton, 2001). Due to
the systemic educational inequities present in the United States, race persists as a predictor of
educational achievement for PK-12 public school students (Solórzano et al., 2005). Throughout
the United States, education is centered in Whiteness and often seen as “normal” or even an
invisible aspect of schooling thus compromising educational opportunities for students of color
3
(McIntosh, 2010). For example, a colorblind approach to teaching coupled with a Eurocentric,
Whitewashed, single-narrative framed text leads to a mono-perspective learning environment,
not reflective of the student population intending to be served (Smith, 2010).
Ladson-Billings (1995) reports that many middle-class White educators have limited
experiences and awareness of people outside of the dominant European American culture,
contending that many educators suffer from multicultural illiteracy. Due to the Whiteness of the
majority of teachers in the United States, Eurocentric curriculum, practices, and norms become a
mainstream aspect of education (Annamma, 2015).
Recognizing the immense position of power education holds, Harmon (2012) affirmed
the importance of understanding racial and cultural knowledge within self and systems and
asserted that continual dismantling of Eurocentric based practices should be ranked as highly in
TPPs as subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content. However, we often do not see
evidence of these practices replicated in our teacher preparation (Knowles & Hawkman, 2019).
This research study will provide insights into how Eurocentric and colorblind teacher preparation
may affect culturally responsive teaching (CRT) practices in classrooms.
Background of the Problem
Despite laws and policies enacted throughout the history of the United States, racial
hierarchy continues to be reinforced (Bonilla-Silva, 2014). The roots of Eurocentric American
educational inequities begin early in the 1500s where English-Protestant culture was deemed
superior to that of other countries, creating hostility towards non-Anglo-Saxons, Indigenous
peoples, and other immigrants (Spring, 2016). This choice to center Whiteness and belittle other
races, religions, and ethnicities reproduced itself throughout the development of the United
States. By the 1800s, southern states in America made the education of Black enslaved peoples
4
illegal, as a means to deny any knowledge that might lead to revolt. This practice was done
intentionally to further the suppression of Black culture and maintain a colonialist society
(Spring, 2016). In an effort to advocate for themselves and gain footing in a White-dominated
society, freed formerly enslaved people became the first group to campaign for universal and
state-sponsored public education. It can be said that former enslaved Black Americans were the
catalyst in creating public education in the United States. Despite Balck Americans’ effort to
advocate for universal education, planters, and former enslavers, believed that by becoming
educated the formerly enslaved people would gain higher footing in society and violate the
“natural evolution of society” (Anderson, 2010, p. 4). By choosing to deny education to formerly
enslaved peoples, the White planters furthered the disenfranchisement of minoritized groups.
Exclusivity of education was reserved for White people, ignoring the diverse human tapestry that
is the United States (Anderson, 2010).
Evidence of the effects of Eurocentric, White-washed practices in modern-day education
continues to reproduce. According to Knowles and Hawkman (2019), “Colorblind perspectives
still shape understanding of race and racism within educational contexts” (p. 238). Coupled with
colorblind assumptions are deeply ingrained understandings of class-based dominant narratives
and the deficit views of minoritized peoples. Richards (2019) defined the class-based dominant
narrative as “the arguments, frames, and rationales used to legitimize and perpetuate the
assumption that racial differences are secondary manifestations of class-based structures” (p. 2).
Teacher candidates are often not presented with or expected to decipher the pitfalls of
Eurocentric education. Ugwuegbula (2020) reported Eurocentric education, curriculum, and
pedagogy were “founded on principles of colonialism and continue to center on Eurocentric, or
Western, knowledge and theories of teaching and learning, leaving out the diverse knowledge of
5
Black, Indigenous, and other marginalized communities” (para. 2). Oftentimes in teacher
preparation programs, discussion of curriculum, pedagogy, and the historical impact is not
discussed (Bertrand & Porcher, 2020). Preservice teachers and teachers alike are often
ill-prepared or even unaware of the implications race has on education, pedagogy, and
curriculum. The notion that race is a nonfactor in society is what Bonilla-Silva (2013) calls
colorblind ideology. Colorblind ideology can be defined by Bonilla-Silva (2013) as a concept
stating racism is no longer a problem because everyone is given equal opportunities regardless of
their culture, ethnicity, linguistic background, or race. Fifty-three percent of the United States’
school population is represented by students of color (NCES, 2021) therefore indicating that
understanding the implications of race is an essential aspect of a teacher’s job expectations.
Solórzano(1997) stated that the intersectionality of race as an oppressive social system
and understanding the nuanced interconnectedness harnessed by systems like education are not
only notions teachers must be aware of but also prepared to teach and dismantle alongside
students. Eurocentric teaching practices continue to manifest themselves today in the form of
mandatory European history classes while Indigenous Studies and Black History are offered as
an elective, if at all (Wineburg, et al., 2012). Non-western narratives are often Whitewashed,
outdated, inaccurate, and devoid of diversity and hardship, not reflective of the lived experiences
of minoritized groups (Tomassi, 2020). Narratives like this continue to marginalize Black,
Brown, and Indigenous students by not providing a sense of community, belonging, and
understanding.
Teacher education continues to lack a theoretical grounding when it comes to the
examination of race (Annamma, 2015). Annamama (2015) asserted “Educators continue to be
informed in ways that ignore systemic racial inequities and their role in perpetuating those
6
inequities” (p. 294) By ignoring systemic inequities in education devoid of examination of race,
Eurocentric teaching practices perpetuate and lead to Whiteness as property. Whiteness as
property can be defined as the ability to exclude others from the benefits of Whiteness and
maintain inequitable distribution of resources (Donor, 2013; Harris, 1993). In public education,
Whiteness as property benefits communities with more valuable property and higher funding,
therefore, delivering higher academic benefits and excluding other communities from benefiting
by maintaining an inequitable footing (Harris, 1993).
Public school enrollment for students of color will surpass the enrollment of White
children by the year 2023 (Hussar & Bailey, 2011). Yet, preservice teaching programs rarely
focus on and support Teachers of Color (TOC) leading to isolation and marginalization in
preparation programs (Brown, 2014; Cheruvu et al., 2015). Teacher preparation programs tend to
be rooted in Western understandings leading to single perspective thinking and viewing alternate
information through a deficit lens (Martin & Pirbhai-Illich, 2016). Often teacher preparation
programs fail to address and identify the intersections that are granted or denied by holding
Eurocentric pedagogy on a pedestal (Rabaka, 2010). Many programs lack the support for
preservice educators to critique curriculum, frameworks, assumed knowledge, and status quo that
is centered on Whiteness (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). This, in turn, affects the implementation of
culturally responsive teaching practices. As teacher candidates enter their classrooms they may
not be prepared to address and understand the nuanced intersections of how Eurocentric and
colorblind teacher preparation affects practices in the classroom.
Culturally Responsive Teaching and Culturally Responsive Pedagogy (CRP) are
considered tools that center the experience, knowledge, and performing styles of students from
diverse groups to enhance learning experiences by making them more relevant and efficient
7
(Chou, et al, 2018; Hammond, 2015). Originally developed by Dr. Gloria Ladson-Billings
(1995), Culturally Relevant Pedagogy centers around three criteria: students must experience
academic success, students must develop or maintain cultural competence, and students must
develop a critical consciousness through which they challenge the status quo of the current social
order. CRP is used as an analytic tool to explain and uncover the ways the teacher develops
cultural knowledge to maximize student learning opportunities (Milner, 2010).
Until TPPs, and teachers, adopt a critical framework for educational equity, the impact of
race in education will be ignored thus emboldening colorblind ideology that replicated
educational inequities and increasing the number of students of color embedded with the myth of
racial superiority (Cutler, 2019). Without a change in teacher preparation, culturally responsive
pedagogies will not be modeled in a way that enables teachers to understand and use them in
their future classrooms.
Statement of the Problem
Teacher preparation in the United States centered on colorblind and Whitewashed
perspectives, knowingly or otherwise, further embedding Eurocentric teaching pedagogy in
teachers’ classrooms leading to a lack of culturally responsive pedagogy. White teachers
continue to, knowingly or otherwise, perpetuate Eurocentric-based disparities by not examining
the impact of their Whiteness in their teaching practices (Reyes et al., 2018). According to
Matias (2013),
White teachers, and teachers of color who have internalized Whiteness ideology for the
purpose of surviving in a White world, need to understand how race impacts us all.
Without examining this issue, these educators cannot successfully bind their racial
8
liberation to that of their urban students of color. Instead, they may problematically
assume the “White savior” role. (p. 35)
This study examined how the presence of Whiteness continues to manifest itself in
teacher preparation programs. Attention was focused on preservice teachers nearing completion
of their Teacher Preparation Program (TPP). The study asked participants to reflect on their
learning experiences, positionality, intersectionality, and biases. Participants were asked to
identify and name Eurocentric parts of their own schooling and if and how they were given tools
to challenge or disrupt the status quo utilizing culturally responsive teaching practices.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to investigate traditionally Eurocentric aspects of curriculum
and teacher preparation programs. This study is motivated by a greater understanding of how
teacher preparation helps or hinders culturally relevant pedagogies and teachers’ strategies
through a critical lens. This study utilized qualitative methods to understand the diverse
perspectives and experiences of preservice teachers. The data collected was nuanced, including
teacher voices, vision, and knowledge (National Research Council, 2002). The study will take
place in an environment focusing on exploring and understanding how the preservice teachers
are informing and supporting their own students (Lockmiller & Lester, 2017).
The vast majority of the teaching force is White middle-class women (Harmon, 2012).
Critical Whiteness unveils profound impacts in the field of education (Applebaum, 2016). Black
scholars like DuBois and Baldwin interrogate the prevalence and pervasiveness of Whiteness in
American society (DuBois, 2018; Baldwin, 1985). This study aims to develop a greater
understanding of how TPPs impact CRT practices and the development of a critical lens through
the perspective of preservice teachers.
9
Research Questions
The following research questions guided the study:
1) What knowledge did preservice teachers perceive to gain around culturally responsive
pedagogies embedded within their TPP, coursework, or curriculum?
2) In what ways were preservice teachers motivated to utilize culturally relevant pedagogy
and curriculum? To what extent were preservice teachers motivated to address, decenter
or challenge Eurocentric, Whitewashed practices?
3) How does the preservice teachers’ organization impact the implementation of culturally
responsive practices?
Importance of the Study
The research gleaned from this study provides a clearer understanding of the implications
of current teaching preparation and teaching practices and identifies gaps in understanding and
cultural literacy in order to develop a framework to embed further culturally responsive
pedagogies in teacher preparation and onwards. This study will help undergraduate and graduate
teacher training programs to name, describe, question, analyze, and dismantle parts of their
program that do not serve and reflect the diverse tapestry of students they serve. Additionally,
teachers and education advocates can use this study as a means to reflect on and analyze the
culturally relevant practices they have adopted at any stage of their careers.
Limitation and Delimitations
The limitations of this study were largely generalizability and respondent validity.
Generalizability is a concern due to the sampling of participants, with all of whom were willing
to participate being middle school level preservice teachers, meaning the data collected were not
reflective of the whole K-12 preservice teacher population. Additionally, the study's small
10
sample size was limited to nine participants suggesting the findings can not be generalized. The
limited number of preservice teachers interviewed may not reflect the beliefs and perspectives of
the majority of preservice teachers. Participants were asked for their own perspectives about their
practice, implementation, and programming in their TPP. Their responses may have been limited
to their amount of experience, knowledge, or bias. Respondent validity remains a concern due to
the reliance on interview data and the inclusion of only one stakeholder group, preservice
teachers, for qualitative collection. These are one small group’s perceptions filtered through their
belief system. The nature of the qualitative study suggests that the findings may be interpreted
differently than my perspective. The findings in this study were also limited to a period of time,
Fall 2021. Efforts to maximize credibility were taken via data interview triangulation with
existing literature and NCES expectations of TPPs.
The delimitations of the study include the selection of the institution of study as well as
the sample size of the participants. This study centered around one mid-western university and,
therefore, the data collected may not be generalizable to other institutions or regions of the
United States. Future studies, based on this one, would need to be reproduced in different regions
across the country. The goal is for this study to be replicated nationally. A COVID-era limitation
could be the change in what teacher preparation looks like for the current preservice teacher. This
limitation might cause the need for more specific research questions about the pre-service
experience so far.
The greatest delimitation of this study could be my own positionality as a member of the
79% of White women, middle-class teachers the study is aimed at understanding and
dismantling. Not only as a White woman but a cis-gendered, able-bodied, heterosexual, US-born
White woman, I bare many of the hallmarks of Eurocentric-based practice and untapped internal
11
biases. Though I work continuously to unlearn White supremacist and racist practices that have
been baked into the White American experience, I am still limited in my scope under the White
gaze. To combat this, I will continue to have my research cross-validated through a diverse group
of scholar-practitioners checking for my bias.
Definition of Terms
Critical Race Theory (CRT): a framework that examines society and culture as they
relate to categorizations of race, law, and power in the United State of America (Yosso, 2005). It
is rooted in critical theory, a social philosophy that argues social problems are influenced and
created more by societal structures and cultural assumptions than by individual and
psychological factors (Crensahw et al, 1995). CRT can be sorted into two common themes. First,
White supremacy exists and exhibits power maintained over time. Second, achieving racial
emancipation and freedom from gender-based subordination are possible (Crenshaw et al, 1996).
Critical Whiteness Studies (CWT): Critical Whiteness Studies (CWS) is a growing
field of scholarship whose aim is to reveal the invisible structures that produce and reproduce
White supremacy and privilege. CWS presumes a certain conception of racism that is connected
to White supremacy. In advancing the importance of vigilance among White people, CWS
examines the meaning of White privilege and White privilege pedagogy, as well as how White
privilege is connected to complicity in racism (Applebaum, 2016).
Eurocentrism: often referred to as Eurocentricity or Western-centrism is a worldview
centered on Western Civilization and or a biased view that favors it over non-Western
civilizations. Historically, it has been used as an apologetic stance towards European colonialism
and other forms of imperialism (Wasserstrom, 2001).
12
Settler Colonialism: a form of colonialism that seeks to replace the original inhabiting
population with that of the colonizer (Veracini 2010). It is rooted in domination and violent
depopulations through sometimes subtle, and legal assimilation. The colonizing authority
typically views the colonizer as racially superior and previous inhabitants as “other” or less than.
Settler colonialism lives past its initial act and into the twenty-first century. In the United States,
Western Australia, and South Africa, governments used land allotment as a legal way to take
possession of indigenous people’s land thus contributing to ongoing colonial superiority
(Morgan, 2017).
Teacher Preparation Program (TPP): The Department of Education (ED) defines a
teacher preparation program as a state-approved course of study, the completion of which
signifies that an enrollee has met all the state’s educational and/or training requirements for an
initial credential to teach in a K-12 school.
Whiteness: According to Carter, et al, "Whiteness is a hegemonic system that perpetuates
certain dominant ideologies about who receives power and privilege. Whiteness maintains itself
in cultures through power dynamics within language, religion, class, race relations, sexual
orientation, etc." (2007).
White Supremacy: According to Moreton-Robinson, White supremacy is the foundation
of structural racism in the United States is a continuously unfolding set of practices of
subordination and domination of racialized, gendered and sexed populations, and central to these
processes is the way Whiteness is always and everywhere in a state of becoming
(Moreton-Robinson, 2015). White supremacy, Whiteness, and White privilege are the waters we
swim in, not the shark (Tran Myrhe, 2016). Social inequalities are influenced by entrenched
13
systematic, structural, socio-cultural, political, and economic realities (Carr, 2011; Leonardo,
2009).
Organization of the Study
Preservice Teacher Perspectives: Impact of Culturally Responsive Pedagogy and
Implications of Eurocentric, Whitewashed Roots on United States Education was organized into
five chapters. Chapter 1 includes an overview of the study, a brief analysis of the historical state
of education, and the present ways Whiteness has been centered in teacher preparation and
student learning. Chapter 2 presents a literature review in the following areas: Brief History of
the Eurocentric roots in America, White Eurocentric Foundations in schooling throughout the
United States, Systems of Power Maintaining Settler Colonialism in Education, Whiteness as
Property in Schooling, Role of Teachers as Gatekeepers, and New Approaches. Chapter 3 details
the methodology of the research study including study participants, data collection, and analysis.
Chapter 4 reports the research findings. Chapter 5 details a summary of findings, assumptions,
and projected implications in practice, conclusions, and recommendations. References and
appendices are included at the conclusion of this research study.
14
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Introduction
Many universities cite the goal of education towards a more inclusive learning
environment as a means to improve outcomes for students by equipping teachers with
appropriate, effective tools (Bertrand & Porcher, 2020). However, are preservice teachers
receiving education in order to teach all students they intend to serve?
In this chapter, I will discuss the deep historical roots of Eurocentric ideals that continue
to permeate current teacher preparation programs and thus replicate themselves through the
generations of students being taught (Sleeter & Stillman, 2013; Yosso, 2002). Foundations of
knowing rooted in Eurocentric understandings lead to decades of perpetual educational inequities
centered on colorblind theories of learning and maintaining Whiteness as property, knowingly or
otherwise. Teachers play a strong role in this notion as the education force is dominated by
White women (Ingersoll et al. 2018; Morrell, 2010). As diversity in linguistics, culture, and other
demographic factors shift, so do the teacher preparation programs and the teachers they produce.
New approaches in teacher education are being developed with new tools and ways of knowing
rooted in Culturally Responsive Teaching and Pedagogy.
As American author, poet, activist, and disruptor James Baldwin (1962) said, “not all that
is faced can be changed but nothing can be changed that is not faced” (p. 2). The purpose of this
literature review is to name, describe, question, and dismantle what challenges teacher
preparation programs and beginning teachers face in implementing culturally relevant pedagogy.
It is necessary to study the issue of the roots of American education, society's input on schooling,
and historical events that have shaped the way teachers are trained and the way students have
been taught.
15
Historical Perspective on Systemic Inequities
The roots of Eurocentric Settler Colonialism have been long-standing throughout the
history of the United States. Since its foundation, American society has prioritized European
standards both legally and off the books, ignoring the voices of marginalized people (DaCunha &
Cidalia, 2016). United States citizenship was restricted to free White persons, therefore,
perpetuating racial and economic inequalities that continue to impact educational opportunities
for minority groups (Noguera, 2017). In order to reckon with the current state of education, it is
vital we reflect on the history of American education, whose voices were included or excluded,
and who controlled the narrative. As Nigerian novelist, poet, and critic Chinua Achebe shared in
an interview with journalist Broooks (1994) his translation of an African proverb, “Until the
lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter” (para. 11).
Brief History of the Eurocentric Roots in America
The first form of traditional schooling in the United States was established early upon the
arrival of colonizers (Gutierrez, 2004; Spring, 2016). According to Spring (2016), English
Protestant culture was established as superior to the culture of other countries such as Ireland,
Spain, and Italy as early as the 1500s. The assumed elitism and individualistic thinking resulted
in the policy. Doctrine policy created a level of hostility towards other immigrants and
non-Anglo Saxons resulting in the English believing their cultural racial superiority over Native
Americans, and later enslaved Africans, Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, and Asians
(Gutierrez, 2004; Hobson, 2013; Spring, 2016). The effort is classified as deculturization which
is a conscious attempt to replace one culture or language with another that is considered superior.
The practice of deculturization was commonly used throughout the globalization process of
linking worlds together through shared culture by any means (Hobson, 2013).
16
The Naturalization Act of 1790 brought concerns about cultural and linguistic differences
after the American Revolution and the creation of the United States government. This act
excluded all nonwhites, including Native Americans, from citizenship and considered them
domestic foreigners- thus ineligible for education (Spring, 2016). The Founding Fathers rejected
any form of a multicultural society and encouraged a unified American culture (Paul, 2014).
Noah Webster lead an effort to bolster nationalistic attitudes by creating American English, a
unified national culture, and a common school movement devoid of anyone other than White
males (Tawil, 2006).
Though the Declaration of Independence stated “All men are created equal,” European
colonists subscribed to the notion that their culture and language were superior to the indigenous
peoples of Africa and the Americas (Goodman, 2008). The Founding Fathers utilized European
scientist Carl Linnaeus’ framework of scientific racism. This framework named Europeans the
biologically superior race (Kailin, 2002; Pollack, 2008). Modern scientists have dismissed any
evidence that race is a biological category. Humans are genetically 99.9% similar, making racial
categories benign from a biological perspective and instead are a social construct (Goodman,
2008; Mukhopadhyay & Henze, 2003).
Although history showcases examples of dismantling Eurocentric practices, evidence of
intentional exclusionary practices by the dominant party persists. In the early 1960s peaceful
civil rights efforts were made. In January 1964 the United States Congress ratified the
Twenty-Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, outlawing arbitrary poll taxes that historically
had kept Black people from voting in the south and continuing the narrative of White supremacy
(Gutierrez, 2004). Later that year the Civil Rights Act was passed dismantling Jim Crow-era
laws thus guaranteeing citizens’ protection against discrimination in voting, education, and the
17
use of public facilities (Bonilla-Silva, 2014; Franklin & Moss, 2000). Regardless of the
dismantling of Jim Crow laws and proof of biological equality between all people, racism
remains a deeply-rooted historical legacy of colonialism (Gutierrez, 2004). These attitudes are
deeply embedded into the educational fabric of the United States and perpetuate in both
prominent and invisible ways known as systemic racism. Derman-Sparks and Ramsey (2011,
p.310) define systemic racism as “attitudes, actions, or practices by an individual or institution,
backed up by societal power, that undermines human and legal rights, economic opportunities,
and cultural expressions of people because of their racial or ethnic identity.”
White Eurocentric Foundations in Schooling Throughout the United States
Educational access was not created for all. The United States was founded upon the
principle of privatizing citizenship for only free White men (Noguera, 2017). Though it is
commonly asserted, that race is a social construct, race has also been used as a weapon to
structure education and perpetuate inequalities through intentional marginalization
(Jones-Wilson, 1990).
Educational methods of colonization include cultural genocide, assimilation, and denial
of education. Cultural genocide is manipulating the power of education in an attempt to destroy
the culture of a group such as Indigenous Peoples, Puerto Ricans, and Mexican Americans
(Spring, 2016). For example, education for Native American children traditionally existed in
tandem with the daily community life of a tribe. Education was passed down by storytelling from
adults, working with elders, participating in tribal ceremonies, and learning the customs of the
clan (Edwards, 1932). In contrast, Anglo-Saxon style education emphasized discipline, authority,
and memorization. Assimilation is defined as educational practices designed to absorb and
integrate cultures into the dominant one (Pettitt, 1936). American schools have traditionally used
18
assimilation programs to integrate groups of immigrants into mainstream American Culture
(Spring, 2016). Denial of education by the ruling group is intended to control another culture by
limiting or depriving education (Spring, 2016). The assumption here is that education will
empower a group to rebel. Although freed formerly enslaved people were the first to campaign
for universal state-supported public education their cries were squelched by planters, White men,
and former enslavers, who believed that by becoming educated former slaves would gain social
hierarchy through public education and violate the natural evolution of society (Fuke, 1989).
Denial of education was used in the United States on enslaved Africans, Native Hawaiians, and
many other cultural parties (Asato, 2003).
Eurocentric, Whitewashed, and colorblind understanding of pedagogy, curriculum, and
student background has been the ongoing focal point for schooling in the United States (Cutler,
2019). What is taught in school is often Western-centered, positivist, and rooted in a single
narrative leading to a mono-perspective learning environment (Smith, 2010). Sleeter and
Stillman (2013) found in their study of standards used in California public schools that history
was predominantly based on European and European American contexts. Utilizing data from ten
grade levels Sleeter and Stillman (2013) reported “the dominant storyline revolves around
European and European Americans, particularly men. For example, we counted the
representation of people. Of the 96 Americans named for the study, 82% were male and 18%
were female. They were 77% White, 18% African American, 4% Native American, 1% Latino,
and 0% Asian American” (p. 37). Sleeter and Stillman (2013) show that students of color face an
educational experience that is not reflective of their lived experience (Delpit & Dowdy, 2002).
More culturally and linguistically diverse students are making up classrooms across the nation,
yet Eurocentric teachings continue to permeate the school atmosphere thus limiting perspectives
19
and cultural knowledge with White middle-class and monolingual women at the helm of the
teacher population in the United States (Gay, 2006; Townsend, 2000; U.S. Department of
Education, 2016).
Educational Inequity in the United States
Educational inequity persists throughout the United States. Inequity is made evident by
laws, policy, historical events in the United States, and societal expectations (Spring, 2006). The
summation of this history leaves large groups of people perpetually disenfranchised
(Bonilla-Silva, 2014; Pollack, 2008). Dr. Bettina Love (2019) stated that current policy
discussions fail to represent the students and teachers that they are intended to serve. Scholars
like Love argue that although this is the way things have been, it is not how education needs to
remain. Love (2019) declared the importance of racial and disability analysis for schools citing
dialogue around questions that lead to a better understanding of students’ full selves, students’
challenges, and how schools can perpetuate injustice. Love’s call to action and research by
Howard (2010) highlighted that an increasing number of the nation’s citizens will not receive an
adequate education. How will these systems change to reflect the changing world?
Educational Debt
The continual denial and exclusionary practices in American education have not passed
without consequence. Systemic inequities created under the guise of Eurocentric learning
standards have left people of color disenfranchised through achievement gaps or as
Ladson-Billings (2006) reframes it, educational debt. Ladson-Billings defines the achievement
gap as the disparities in standardized test scores between Black and White, Latina/o and White,
and recent immigrants and White students (Ladson-Billings, 2006). The achievement gap is often
measured by The National Assessment of Educational Progress and SAT results (Lee, 2002).
20
Research on the achievement gap purports differences in socioeconomic status, family cultural
resources, school quality, racial composition, and bias and prejudice in schools are all aspects
that link race to academic achievement (Merolla & Jackson, 2019).
Merolla and Jackson (2019) stated that achievement differences can be difficult to
contextualize due to the variety of subject areas, groups tested, and assessments utilized.
However, Merolla and Jackson claim there has not been a substantial change in racial parity in
academic achievement. According to the National Center for Educational Statistics (2019):
In 2003, 41% of White eighth ‐grade students scored at or above proficient in reading,
compared to 14% of Black and 15% of Hispanic students. In 2015, disparities stayed
essentially stable, with the respective numbers of 44% of White, 16% of Black, and 21%
of Hispanic students scoring at or above basic skill levels. Moreover, in 2012, 41.4% of
White 13 ‐year ‐old students were able to adequately perform reasoning and problem
solving involving fractions, decimals, percentages, elementary geometry, simple algebra,
and mathematics, compared to only 33.8% of Black and 43.4% of Hispanic 17 ‐ year ‐old
students (p. 18).
Ladson-Billings (2006) states there is not an achievement gap but an educational debt.
She emphasizes that the term education debt is utilized to better understand the historical,
economic, sociopolitical, and moral decisions and educational policies that birthed the education
debt (Ladson-Billings, 2006). Patel (2015) contends “a debt is something that is owed; a gap can
simply exist. A debt raises questions of who owes whom and who stands to benefit, and surfaces
questions of equity” (p. 6). Ladson-Billings (2006) reports that this debt is echoed in other
aspects of schooling including dropout rates, students who take advanced places and gifted
classes, and admittance into college, graduate, and professional programs. Therefore, academic
21
outcomes in the United States are strongly structured by race despite research and policy work
on the achievement gap (Merolla and Jackson, 2019).
Scholars such as Lisa Delpit (1995) argue that cultural mismatch contributes to the gap.
Various other experts have focused on the nature of the curriculum and the school as sources of
the gap while others have focused on the pedagogical practices of teachers contributing to or
narrowing the gap (Ladson-Billings, 2006). According to researchers Vasquez Heilig et al.,
(2011) educational policy reforms centered around high stakes assessment measures for students,
sanctions for teachers and schools that do not reach AYP, labeling teachers “highly qualified”
and schools “underperforming” based on test scores have little to do with learning and more to
do with control and power. They go on to assert that accountability measures in education have
not resulted in achievement gains for students in urban schools.
The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) predicts come 2025 White students
will make up 46% of the public school population in the United States. If the education debt
persists as it has, Howard (2010) suggests that an increasing number of students will be
undereducated. In Gay’s (2015) view, society suffers when the human capital and intellectual
potential of groups of color are neglected. Ultimately, Gay (2015) argues for radical
improvement in the quality of educational experience as a moral imperative.
To See or Not to See: Colorblind Education
A school of thought called colorblind ideology centers on the notion that an individual
can be completely free of prejudice or implicit bias, leading to a lack of awareness of
assumptions and behaviors towards specific racial groups (Tatum, 2004). According to scholar
Eduardo Bonilla-Silva (2015), colorblind racism refers to “the racial ideology based on the
superficial extension of the principles of liberalism to racial matters that results in “raceless”
22
explanations for all sort of race-related affairs” (p. 1364). Bonilla-Silva (2018) added colorblind
racism is how most White people and some People of Color consider race as in irrelevant factor
in shaping peoples lives and claim not to see color or notice skin color. According to Annamma
et al. (2017), efforts not to see race imply that recognizing race is problematic. King (1991)
refers to colorblindness as dysconscious racism since colorblind ideology sustains and justifies
the culture of power. Evidence of the culture of power, especially within the parameters of
education, has been deeply rooted in American society. Lucas (2008) stated “the claim that race
is irrelevant to education is patently false. Nowhere is race more visible with respect to education
than in observation of racial inequality in achievement and attainment.” (p. 62). Colorblind
education continues today through pedagogical color blindness that relies on a traditional
curriculum, sanitized instruction, and a status quo approach (Ferlazzo, 2021).
In educational policy, Milner (2007) reported that educators have embraced colorblind
ideology as evident by the surplus of colorblind approaches to educational research, policy
analysis, and teacher preparation discourse. Education policy in the United States and reform
continues to advance color-blindness. Wells (2014) stated,
The two central educational reforms of the last few decades – the
standards/accountability movement and free-market school choice policies – have both
been framed as outcome-based solutions to the racial achievement gap without directly
addressing any societal or educational issues related to race… No Child Left Behind
(NCLB)…is, quite simply, a reflection of the most popular “colorblind” approach to
addressing racial disparities in education: Ignore stark racial inequality when
implementing policies and then bemoan vivid racial inequalities in educational outcomes
(p. 39-40).
23
This nuanced understanding of education policy and reform acknowledges that United States
education commits to colorblind racial ideology. Education outcomes within the United States
continue to highlight that race does matter, especially with bias and racism impacting
achievement, discipline, and special education status (Annamma, et al., 2014; Berlak, 2001;
Fabelo et al., 2011). Ignoring race does nothing to help students of color or White students.
Though some empirical research has been done on colorblind higher education, very little
research in the K-12 setting is available. The understanding of colorblind education included in
this discussion was limited to what was presented which mainly revolved around colorblind
policy and ignoring race. This gap in understanding creates a void of knowledge that needs
filling.
Whiteness as Property
Professor Cheryl I. Harris (1993) terms Whiteness as Property as a framework for
understanding how racial identity and property are interwoven concepts in the United States,
how Whiteness was initially constructed as a form of racial identity, evolving into a form of
property, historically and currently acknowledged and protected in American law. Historically,
Whiteness was further emboldened when Whiteness defined a person as free while blackness
was defined as slavery (Harris, 1993).
Annamama (2015) stated that in public education Whiteness as property benefits
communities with more valuable property and higher funding, therefore, delivering higher
academic benefits. Communities with more valuable well funded schools provide access to
intellectual property in the form of high-quality curriculum, teachers, and programming,
therefore, providing access to power over public education that impacts both law and policy
24
(Buras, 2011). Whiteness as property excludes other communities from benefiting by
maintaining an inequitable footing (Annamma, 2015; Donnor, 2013).
Ladson-Billings and Tate (2016) surmise Whiteness’ inaugural function in education was
the exclusion of Black children through various means starting with denial of education, towards
“creating and maintenance of separate but equal schools, to “White flight, vouchers, public
funding of private schools and schools of choice” (p. 59). Ladson-Billings and Tate (2016) assert
these are methods to maintain exclusiveness to education. Another educational example of
Whiteness includes the method of tracking in schools as a form of resegregation, within the
tracked schools specific students are able to access high-quality teaching, rich curriculum, and
well-qualified teachers while other students are offered a lesser education with no access to
high-quality education or teachers with deep knowledge of pedagogy (Mensah & Jackson, 2018).
Annamma (2015) reports “Whiteness as property has historically and continues to
function as a tool to confer social benefits, from the intangible to the material, on those who
possess it and to punish those who do not” (p. 298). Therefore, the myriad of educational policies
and practices that restrict or deny students of color, teachers of color, or students with special
needs can be viewed under the lens of Whiteness as property (Mensah & Jackson, 2018).
No Child Left Behind
As stated previously in Chapter Two, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 was
marketed as an outcome-based solution to the racial achievement gap. However, what the act
failed to do was directly address any societal or educational issues related to race further
embedding Whiteness as property throughout American education (Wells, 2014). The No Child
Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) was a President Bush Administration educational initiative
greatly expanding federal influence over United States public education (Dee & Jacob, 2011).
25
The main goals of the NCLB Act were aimed at raising test scores, leveraging more qualified
teachers, and allowing families to have educational choices (Darling-Hammond et al., 2003).
NCLB required schools to complete academic performance targets in order to meet Annually
Yearly Progress (AYP). AYP is a measurement that allows the United States Department of
Education to determine how public school districts perform academically according to the results
of standardized tests (Simpson et al., 2004). Represented by the annual achievement growth
expected by students in a given school, district, or state, AYP was a form of accountability
ushered in by No Child Left Behind. Moreover, schools needed to make AYP targets for the
entire student population as well as each student demographic-based subgroup such as race,
ethnic background, limited English proficiency, economically disadvantaged (ED), and disability
status (Whitney & Candelaria, 2017). The subgroup accountability feature set NCLB apart from
previous reform efforts.
Schools that failed to make progress each year were required to adhere to a set of
consequences that became increasingly more intense if progress was not made including and not
limited to school closure (Simpson et al, 2004). Before NCLB districts did not seek out student
performance as a measure to indicate school closure, districts used low enrollment and budget
(Gardiner & Anderson, 2008). According to a California study, public school districts containing
diverse student populations are far more likely to be labeled failing than students in homogenous
populations (Dillon, 2003). In this study, it was reported that 3,000 schools were deemed
“needing improvement” due to one of their demographic subgroups, such as disabled learners or
Asian students, falling short of the target goal. The implications lead to the chances of the school
heading toward “failing” being increased in tandem with the number of demographic subgroups
served by the school (Dillion, 2003). Fuller and Novak (2003) claim that NCLB penalizes
26
schools that serve more diverse students because these schools are required to hit more targets -
not making them less effective.
Duncan-Andrade and Morreell (2008) stated that NCLB focuses on student achievement
but fails to address the structural inequities that are responsible for the differential outcomes
between urban schools and suburban schools, between White students and students of color.
Policies created on the basis of high-stakes accountability often reproduce racial and economic
inequities by placing blame on students and families as the problem (Irizarry, 2011; Pollock,
2004, Valencia et al., 2001).
In the post-NCLB world achievement, gaps remain between students of color and White
students (Reardon, et al, 2012). Data suggests that NCLB’s high-stakes testing policies have had
a negative effect on students of color’s educational outcomes citing low-quality pedagogy, poor
teacher quality, and inequitable funding (McNeil, 2000; Vasquez Heilig et al., 2010; Vasquez
Heilig, et al., 2011). Moreover, the assumption that policies are neutral remains a roadblock as
the policy does not take into account the student’s prior educational experience (Vasquez Heilig
& Darling-Hammond, 2008). Though equity and social justice were often a prominent aspect of
discussion around accountability, especially for Black and Latinx students, NCLB’s punitive
approach to educational reform ignored structural issues in the educational system and further
disenfranchised minoritized students.
Role of Teachers as Gatekeepers
Disparities in the race and ethnicity of teachers and students will continue to widen as the
United States grows more racially, ethnically, linguistically, and economically diverse (Mensah
& Jackson, 2019). National Center for Educational Statistics (2019) found that 79% of the
United States K-12 teaching force identified as White; about 50% of schools in the United States
27
do not have a single teacher of color meaning most students will leave school having only been
taught by a White teacher (Picowar, 2009). With the vast disparity in race and ethnicity between
student and teacher, it is imperative we deeply analyze Whiteness and its relationship to
education, particularly within the walls of the classroom (Harris, 1993).
White Women in Education
United States public school teachers look different from students when it comes to not
only race but also gender with three-quarters of all elementary and secondary teachers
identifying as women (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2019). As of 2008, Nearly 76%
of American teachers are White, monolingual, middle class, cis-gender, and women (Ed-Data,
2008; Ingersoll et al. 2018; Morrell, 2010). Picowar (2009) found that White teachers play a key
role in creating patterns of racial opportunity. One of the many ways Whiteness operationalizes
itself in education is through racial identity. Frequently, White teachers are unaware that they
have a racial identity allowing them, knowingly or otherwise, to reject their place in the racial
hierarchy through the use of erasure (Kincheloe & Steinber, 1997). Power of erasure can be
defined as “ways in which Whiteness remains masked from consciousness, allowing White
people to be blind not only to their own privilege but also their group membership” (Picowar,
2009, p. 198).
Muhammad (2020) asserted the importance of identity, especially for people and students
of color, and states, “Even teachers with the best of intentions and practices are not the best
people to speak for any student- the students must speak for themselves” (p. 74). Annamamma
(2015) reports, “Teachers often avoided talking about race and subscribed to the myth of
meritocracy to explain why there are racial inequities” (p. 308). Gaps in teacher understanding
present a problem for all learners but specifically students of color. Teacher education needs to
28
be explicit in teaching rejection of approaches to education that ignore systemic injustices and
rather employ explicit connections between racial inequities such as disciplinary exclusion,
achievement gap/education debt, with educational laws and policies that appear to be
race-neutral (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995, Milner, 2008). Annamamma (2015) asserted that
teachers must be equipped at understanding their own connection to race and the evolving
inequalities throughout time, in addition to pedagogy and content knowledge. Meaning, that
how teachers are prepared now is lacking a vital aspect of understanding rooted in racial
inequity.
Will (2020) argued that many white teachers, with little experience in communities of
color, need to become comfortable discussing culture and race openly. According to recent
research, teachers, a majority of whom are White, are just as likely to have racial biases as
non-teachers (Will, 2020; Picowar, 2009). Warikoo et al. (2016) confirm that educational
research shows teachers treat students differently depending on a student’s race. The
inconsistencies in teacher behavior add to racial disparities in achievement and other forms of
racial stratification in schools. Will (2020) asserted these biases accumulate in varying ways
including discipline choices, curriculum section, and who gets to speak in class. Sleeter (2001)
found that in teacher preparation for the chronically underserved, White preservice teachers
brought little cross-cultural background knowledge and experience to the classroom.
Additionally, White preservice teachers held negative stereotypical beliefs about urban children,
lacked awareness or understanding of racism and discrimination, and “used colorblindness as a
way of coping with fear and ignorance” (p. 95).
Bertrand and Porcher (2020) suggested we often see words like diversity, inclusion and
social justice appearing in university mission statements and teacher preparation programs but
29
question if these words ensure preservice teachers develop a deep understanding of their role in
regard to race. In Figure 1, the US Department of Education (2016) reports the number of
teachers in Traditional Institutes of Higher Education (IHE); a state-approved course of study
leading to initial accreditation to teach in the state’s elementary, middle, or secondary schools,
Alternate IHE; primarily serve candidates who states permit to be teachers of record in the
classroom while participating in the program, and Alternative non-IHE which can be decided
based on the state, for example, Teach For America. According to the United States Department
of Education (2016), as of 2013 teacher preparation programs were 63 percent White, 13 percent
black, 14 percent Hispanic, 6 percent Asian, and 1 percent American Indian or Alaska Native.
Figure 1
Teacher Preparation Programs by Race/Ethnicity in 2016
Note. Percentage distribution for types of teacher preparation programs by race/ethnicity (US
Department of Education, 2016)
30
Considering the current demographics of preservice teachers, it is likely the teaching
force will remain overwhelmingly White. Therefore, analyzing and disrupting the Whiteness of
teaching remains an essential aspect for preservice teachers and programs that aim to improve
the educational experiences of students of color (Picowar, 2009).
New Approaches To Teacher Education
Teacher education appears to be at a crossroads. In response to the growing change in the
demographic makeup of the United States and more culturally and linguistically diverse students
making up our classrooms, teacher education must shift to reflect these changes (U.S.
Department of Education, 2016). Scholars throughout the United States are researching and
enacting new ways to explicitly prepare preservice teachers to teach students of color and
interrupt patterns of bias in the classroom (Bertrand & Porcher, 2020).
Bertrand and Porcher (2020), two Black women teaching at predominantly White
institutions (PWIs), have developed a lens of identification and disruption in White-normed
preservice education. In response to recognizing preservice teachers lacked the ability to teach a
diverse group of students because the standard in preservice teaching was rooted in Whiteness,
they set on redesigning coursework.
By reflecting on their institutions’ mission statements, Bertrand and Porcher (2020)
carefully selected elements of the course design keeping in mind the lives of the children
preservice teachers were being prepared to teach. Bertrand and Porcher (2020) noted that the
course she was teaching, intended to be an introduction to education for preservice teachers,
failed to address diversity, social justice, equity, or inclusion. The course materials did not reflect
people of color and in fact, were only written by White scholars or authors. Based on readings,
discussions, and anecdotal notes from community partners Bertrand and Porcher (2020) were
31
able to construct a new course overview reflective of an equity mindset, replacing old deficit
rooted pedagogy and assignments with culturally responsive approaches to teacher preparation
programming.
The elements of Bertrand and Porcher’s (2020) course redesign followed the scholarly
work of others, including unpacking self through an archeological dig (Sealey-Ruiz, 2018);
exploring the assets and conditions (Love, 2019) of communities and students of color through
community-university engagement (Clark et al., 2015); and design using culturally relevant
pedagogy and teaching (Ladson-Billings, 1995). According to Bertrand and Procher (2020),
through work in the courses student would,
Critically reflect on their identities, ways in which they show up in classrooms and
communities, the ways in which their actions and mindsets impact their students and
communities, and explore strategies for dismantling racist ideologies and systems that
prevent students of color from being and learning in their future urban classrooms (p. 80).
In the course redesign highlighting and lifting up narratives and experiences of people of color
was an intentional step utilized to disrupt Whiteness in education. The overhaul and reworking of
course materials to support preservice teachers’ preparation to teach students that often do not
share their racial, ethnic, or cultural background is one of many practices education disruptors
are harvesting as a means to change the current status quo in education.
Reyes, Radina, and Aronson (2018) argue that radical love can incite transformation
within teacher education. The scholars define radical love as a way of being that enables the
reimagination of urban education through the everyday practice of teaching for liberation.
Radical love includes leaning inward toward vulnerability, struggle, solidarity, liberation,
organization, and action. In this practice, Reyes, Radina, and Aronson (2018) call to arms teacher
32
educators to take up space for radical social change and transformation, using love as an act of
resistance. The authors use three central concepts outlining what love as an act of resistance or
teaching against the grain entails: vulnerability, collective support and healing, and critique. For
example, Reyes, Radina, and Aronson (2018) claim that students in an urban teacher preparation
program have not been encouraged to question their past and present educational experiences.
This reflection is not a means of devaluing preservice teachers’ previous learning experience, but
instead is a further means to utilize a critical lens. An aspect of radical love includes the act of
calling in as opposed to calling out. Palmer (1998) claims, “People who start movements do not
do so because they hate an institution but because they love it too much to let it descend to its
lowest form” (p. 170).
Utilizing this radical love framework created in order to practice radical love in teaching
and in solidarity with other transforming oppressive systems in urban education provides a
pedagogical model for both students and colleagues. These practices are an accumulation of
individual and collective experiences coupled with a framework that is continuously expanding
to encompass more voices including more educators and preservice teachers. As Baszile (2017),
an advocate for embracing educational disruption and radical love, shares, “Education is the
primary process through which revolutionary change is made possible…such change calls for
more than discrete solutions. It calls for a movement” (p. 209).
Tools and Frameworks to Redesign Teacher Preparation: Culturally Relevant Teaching
and Pedagogy
Recently, university-level teacher preparation programs have faced increasing pressure to
ensure their graduates are capable of teaching all students effectively (Anagnostopoulos, et al.,
2018). Redesigning teacher education programs brings forth reimagined organizational learning,
33
conceptual tools, and social practices to guide, enact, and sustain university-based teacher
education. As Chou and Wang (2018) assert, “Schools are micro societies where teachers from
the dominant culture often teach students that do not share the same cultural background”
(p.120). Thus highlighting educators’ need to recognize the diverse background of their students
can come through utilizing tools and frameworks like CRT.
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy (CRP) is an instrument originally developed by Dr. Gloria
Ladson-Billings in 1995. CRP centers around three criteria: students must experience academic
success, students must develop or maintain cultural competence, and students must develop a
critical consciousness through which they challenge the status quo of the current social order
(Ladson-Billings, 1995). According to Milner (2010), CRP is an analytic tool to explain and
uncover the ways the teacher develops cultural knowledge to maximize student learning
opportunities. In 2014, Ladson-Billings reimagined her original theory on CRP alongside Paris’s
(2012) theory of culturally sustaining pedagogy to generate a more adaptive approach to mirror
the current culture,
Culturally responsive teaching: simultaneously develops, along with academic
achievement, social consciousness, and critique; cultural affirmation, competence, and
exchange; . . . individual self-worth and abilities; and an ethic of caring. It uses [different]
ways of knowing, understanding, and representing various ethnic and cultural groups in
teaching academic subjects, processes, and skills. It cultivates cooperation, collaboration,
reciprocity, and mutual responsibility for learning among students, and between students
and teachers. It incorporates high-status, cultural knowledge about different ethnic groups
in all subjects and skills taught. . . .Thus, [it] validates, facilitates, liberates, and
34
empowers ethnically diverse students by . . . cultivating their cultural integrity, individual
abilities, and academic success. (p. 45–46)
This reimagining of CRP breathes life into the pedagogy itself, as it is critiquing, validating, and
evolving through cooperation and collaboration.
Culturally Responsive Teaching (CRT) can be defined as utilizing cultural characteristics,
experiences, and perspectives of ethnically diverse students in order to teach them more
effectively (Gay, 2002). CRT operates under the assumption that the acquisition of academic
knowledge and skills within the lived experiences of students creates more personally
meaningful, higher levels of interest, and more easily consumed content. Said plainly, diverse
student achievement would improve when offered education through their own cultural and
experiential filters (Gay, 2002; Ladson-Billings, 1995).
According to Hammond (2015), there are four core areas of CRT conned through
principles of brain-based learning. The first area is awareness; teaching students from culturally
and linguistically diverse backgrounds through a sociopolitical lens. Culturally responsive
teachers must develop a sociopolitical consciousness acknowledging we live in a racialized
society that gives unearned privileges to some whole others experiencing unearned
disadvantages because of race, gender, class, or language (p.18). The second practice area
focuses on building trust with students across differences creating a social-emotional partnership
in order to develop deeper learning. CR (culturally responsive) teachers build capacity by
helping students rise to high expectations, create space for mutual trust, and give feedback in
emotionally intelligent ways (p.19). Practice area three focuses on information processing,
knowing how to strengthen and expand students’ intellectual capacity so they can actively
participate in complex learning. In the fourth practice area, the focus is on community building
35
and creating an environment that simulates a socially and intellectually safe space for learnings
to take risks by integrating universal cultural elements and themes in the classroom, setting up
rituals and routines that reinforce self-directed learning and academic identity (p. 19).
Research on CRP and CRT has been conducted to define, implement, and assess
culturally relevant pedagogy as a viable tool (Young, 2010). Many gaps remain, including how
teacher preparation fits into CRP. Though the conceptual application of CRP itself is a viable and
effective tool toward equitable education, the available research highlighted deep structural gaps
in educator cultural bias, the persistence of racism in schools, and the shortcomings of teacher
preparation programs and/or professional developments to prepare educators to apply CRP to
their practice that creates challenges for students and teachers alike (Byrd, 2016; Young, 2010).
These studies help to highlight weak areas of teacher preparation programs that need further
naming, describing, questioning, and dismantling of harmful practices that CRT aims to eradicate
(Bertrand & Porcher, 2020; Piocwar, 2009; Young, 2010).
Teacher education programs offer some opportunities to discuss CRT but teacher
candidates cannot often translate those opportunities into pedagogy or field experiences
(Villavicencio, 2009). Byrd (2016) found that CRT is a powerful tool for increasing student
achievement and engagement as well as reducing achievement gaps. CRT centers on student
culture through three approaches: high expectations, promoting cultural competence, and
promoting critical consciousness (Byrd, 2016; Villavicencio, 2009).
CR teachers create high expectations in the classroom by building on student successes,
offering a challenging curriculum that is scaffolded to the student’s needs. They create classroom
climates that are respectful and inclusive to help students deepen their understanding of the
36
cultures of their peers. Culturally relevant teachers utilize cooperative and experiential learning
for instruction and take personal responsibility for student learning (Byrd, 2016).
When promoting cultural competence in the classroom, a teacher must look inward and
develop their own cultural competence by first understanding themselves and then their students’
communities and homelives. Culturally responsive teachers must encourage students to develop
an understanding of their own culture and identity by reflecting on it in the materials in the
classroom. Using students’ previous experiences and funds of knowledge gained through family
and community assets will allow teachers to bridge and affirm students’ ways of knowing by
bringing the outside world into the classroom (Byrd, 2016).
Raising critical consciousness in the classroom means addressing issues of social justice
and racial inequity. Culturally relevant teachers must work to help students identify problems in
their communities, name them, and generate ideas to address them while acknowledging societal
structures that are evident in daily life. Culturally relevant teachers empower their students and
offer opportunities for choice and decision-making (Byrd, 2016).
Culturally responsive teaching is a tool to develop higher-level thinking utilizing brain
principles from neuroscience to mediate learning effectively (Hammond, 2025, p. 20). However,
CRT is only effective when teachers have a deep understanding of students’ cultural backgrounds
and a nuanced understanding of the impact race has on their daily life (Byrd, 2016; Gay, 2006).
Teachers must root themselves in a deep knowledge of self-identity, and deepen their
understanding of their students in regard to cultural diversity, even if the classroom is
homogeneous (Aronson & Laughter, 2016; Byrd, 2016).
37
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework was created by aligning the theoretical framework, the
literature review, and the research questions of this study. The conceptual framework of this
study served to identify factors that help or hinder TPP students from developing a critical lens
through utilizing CRT. The gap analysis process is an essential problem-solving aspect of this
study created to enhance performance by identifying gaps in current practices and performance.
Clark and Estes (2008) provide an evidenced-based framework meant to identify causes of
organizational performance gaps and develop solutions for identified deficiencies. Through the
gap analysis, various influences are taken into account and problem-solved based on evidence
through research. Under Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis there are three primary influences
considered to affect achievement and stakeholder goals; knowledge, motivation, and
organization. The first influence identified by Krathwohl (2002) is a lack of knowledge through
his nuanced understanding of Bloom’s taxonomy. The second influence is lack of motivation,
identified by Rueda (2011). This influence includes attribution, self-efficacy factors, and how
much the individual values the desired outcome. The third influence is deficiencies in
organizational policies, processes, resources, or structures (Clark & Estes, 2008).
In this study, the gap analysis process was used as a framework to gain an understanding
of each participant’s perceptions about the implications of culturally relevant pedagogy on their
practice. This process presented a viable means to investigate preservice teachers’ perceptions of
factors that impede or limit the effectiveness of CRT through their lens. In this study, systematic
gap analysis involved (a) measuring current influences, (b) assessing whether current TPP
structures are optimized for attaining preservice teacher performance goals, (c ) identifying
factors that can create performance gaps and impeded educational attainment, (d) identifying the
38
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences impacting performance gaps and (e)
evaluating, recommending, and implementing solutions or suggestions for further research
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Utilizing this gap analysis framework to investigate how teacher preparation programs
prepare teacher candidates to teach all students using culturally relevant pedagogies identified
gaps in current practices and performance in areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences. The gap analysis process helped to develop solutions and identify weaknesses and
help stakeholders develop and study recommendations for change and improvement. The
purpose of the framework is to center equity in the classroom, elevate teacher practice, and
develop just and critical thinkers who excel in a variety of contexts.
Figure 2 presents the conceptual framework that guided this study. The three boxes
outline in red aim to root the context of the framework, highlighting knowledge influences,
motivation influences, and organizational influences. The gray boxes surrounding the red
outlined boxes contain possible reasons for gaps. The red boxes at the bottom of the figure
indicate conditions, processes, and consequences in connection to the influences and potential
gaps highlighted above.
39
Figure 2
Conceptual Framework
Note. This figure demonstrates the elements of the conceptual framework employed
throughout this study illustrated using Clark and Estes’s (2008) Gap Analysis.
Conclusion
The United States’ history of educational inequity rooted in the Eurocentric foundations
of this country has led to perpetuated harm in our public education. With the makeup of our
students becoming more diverse and our teachers remaining mostly White women, it is vital that
teacher preparation evolves to support the students it is intended to serve. Culturally responsive,
anti-racist practices need to be embedded in teacher preparation to disrupt the current educational
disconnect. Utilizing the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework, I identified gaps in
40
current practices and performance in areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences and developed solutions, and identified weaknesses to help stakeholders develop and
study recommendations for change and improvement. The research presented in this study is
intending to fill a gap in TPP education by contributing new evidence from the perspectives of
preservice teachers. The evidence presented contains preliminary findings meant to deepen
understanding of the implications Eurocentric practices have on Culturally Responsive Teaching
throughout TPPs.
In Chapter 2, research was presented on the Eurocentric roots of the United States
followed by the Eurocentric foundations of schooling in the United States, Educational inequities
in the United States, teachers’ role as gatekeepers, and tools and frameworks to redesign teacher
preparation. Finally, the conceptual framework is discussed to conceptualize and synthesize the
content and research about culturally responsive curriculum and reimagining teacher preparation.
Chapter 3 will detail the methodology of the research study.
41
Chapter Three: Methodology
Statement of the Problem
Most aspiring teachers from dominant groups, White, middle-class, and native speakers
of Standard English in the United States, hold deficit views on students who differed from the
mainstream (Cochran-Smith et al, 2015). Teachers who enter Teacher Preparation Programs
(TTP) enter with beliefs about internalized White ideologies, Eurocentric, Whitewashed, and
colorblind understandings leading to a lack of culturally responsive practices reflective of the
culturally, linguistically, racially, and ethnically diverse student body in the United States
(Cochran-Smith, Davis, & Fries, 2003; Sleeter, 2001; Wideen, Mayer-Smith, & Moon, 1998).
Matias (2013) noted that White teachers, and teachers of color, need to understand how race
impacts all aspects of learning.
This study examined how the presence of Whiteness continues to manifest itself in
teacher preparation programs focusing on preservice teachers nearing competition for their
degrees. Participants were asked to reflect on their learning experiences, positionality, and biases.
Additionally, participants were asked to identify and name Eurocentric aspects of their TPP and
if or how they were given tools to change the status quo using culturally responsive teaching
practices.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to investigate how teacher preparation programs prepare
teacher candidates to teach all students using culturally relevant pedagogies. This study was
motivated by a greater understanding of how teacher preparation helps or hinders culturally
relevant pedagogies and teachers’ strategies through a critical lens. This study is guided by the
conceptual framework rooted in Clark and Estes's (2008) gap analysis in order to identify
42
influences and factors that help or hinder TPP students from developing a critical lens through
utilizing CRT. The gap analysis framework is an evidence-based approach that asserted gaps in
performance are caused by three distinct factors: lack of knowledge and/or skills, lack of
motivation, and organizational or cultural barriers (Clark & Estes, 2008).
The following research questions guided the study:
1) What knowledge did preservice teachers perceive to gain around culturally responsive
pedagogies embedded within their TPP, coursework, or curriculum?
2) In what ways were preservice teachers motivated to utilize culturally relevant pedagogy
and curriculum? To what extent were preservice teachers motivated to address, decenter
or challenge Eurocentric, Whitewashed practices?
3) How does the preservice teachers’ organization impact the implementation of culturally
responsive practices?
This study utilized qualitative methods to understand the diverse perspectives and
experiences of preservice teachers. The data collected contained nuanced participant
perspectives, including teacher voices, vision, and knowledge (National Research Council,
2002). The study took place in an environment focusing on exploring and understanding how
teachers inform and support their students (Lockmiller & Lester, 2017).
Selection of the Population
To conduct this study, I used qualitative purposeful sampling based on the assumption
that the investigator wanted to uncover, understand, and gain insight, therefore, I selected a
sample from which the most can be learned (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The type of purposeful
sampling utilized is known as typical sampling, meaning the participants were selected because
they reflect the “average” person within the teacher preparation program. Since the study is
43
focused on gaining insight into teacher preparation programs’ inclusion of Eurocentric practices
and culturally relevant teaching, the sample population included nine preservice educators from a
large midwestern accredited teacher preparation program. The chosen sample size of nine is a
common phenomenological study size as evidenced by Creswell and Creswell (2018). All nine
participants were current students in a teacher preparation program in the state of Illinois. To
qualify for the study, participants were required to be over the age of 18 and have completed or
nearing the completion of 200 clinical hours in a K-12 setting. It was important to this study that
the participant selection included participants with a desire to pursue a job as an educator after
degree completion and certification.
The site of the study was chosen due to its rich history of teacher education. It is one of
the largest teacher preparation sites in the Midwest and a top ten producer of teachers in the
nation from 2014 to 2019. This university is ranked in the top ten colleges offering degrees in
education in the United States. The enrolled student population at this university is 71% White,
11% Hispanic or Latino, 9% Black or African American, 3% Two or More Races, 2% Asian, 1%
American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders. This
includes both full-time and part-time students as well as graduates and undergraduates
(DataWheel, 2021). There is great value in knowing more about the preparation of teachers in
culturally responsive pedagogies due to the large net the university casts as a national leader in
teacher education.
Design Summary
A phenomenological research design was selected for this study to assess the lived
experiences of the participants about a phenomenon as described by the participants (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). Qualitative design was chosen for this type of study due to my motivation to
44
understand the phenomenon with my goal of extending knowledge on the topic. The primary
purpose of the research is to know more about the Eurocentric roots of teacher preparation and
the implications of culturally responsive teaching (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Additionally,
qualitative research is interested in how people interpret their experiences, construct words, and
what meaning they attribute to their experiences making it a natural fit for this study.
This study was broken down based on the steps for conducting qualitative research
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Chapter One focused on the research
problem and the purpose of the study. Chapter Two centered on the review of the literature.
Chapter Three describes the methodology for data collection. Finally, Chapters Four and Five
deconstruct the analysis, interpretation, findings, and reporting of data.
Methodology
The methodology of the qualitative study included semi-structured interviews with
preservice teachers from a large midwest university in Illinois. Due to the complex and nuanced
nature of the study topic, semi-structured interviews were determined to be the most appropriate
form of data collection because they allowed me to respond to the lived experiences of the
participants, emergent world views, and ideas of each participant (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
interview protocol was designed with Eurocentric themes in mind and sought to understand how
a critical and culturally responsive lens is implemented in this TPP. Each interview question was
devised to address one or more of the research questions. All three research questions were
accessed within the interviews.
Qualitative Method
To increase internal validity and reliability, the perspectives shared by the participants
were reexamined through member checks in order to rule out misinterpretation of what the
45
participants said or observed (Maxwell, 2013). Systematic feedback was solicited from the
participants in checks for understanding, reflection, and allowing participants an opportunity to
consider whether any of their experiences or perceptions had changed. Responses based on
member checks were recorded using Google Forms. The purpose of the member checks was to
identify any biases and misunderstandings on my part as well as continue to build a culture of
rapport between interviewees and researcher by soliciting feedback (Maxwell, 2013).
Instrumentation and Protocols
Qualitative Instrument
Qualitative data gathered was collected through semi-structured interviews that asked all
nine participants open-ended questions focused on their teacher preparation, Culturally
Responsive Pedagogy, and practical implications in the classroom (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017).
Participants were probed with follow-up questions based on their responses. The probes centered
on the personal definition of Eurocentric learning, how it is perpetuated in teacher preparation,
and how it shows up in classrooms (Patton, 2002).
In the design of the instrumentation, an interview protocol was created. The interview
protocol was guided by the conceptual framework and the three research questions. The
interview protocol consisted of nine questions (see Appendix A), one opening question, and one
follow-up question. The interview questions served as a framework for discussion; however, the
lived experiences of the participants shaped the interview outcomes. In addition to understanding
how current teacher preparation helps or hinders culturally relevant pedagogies and teachers’
strategies, it is essential to better understand how their preparation sets them up for success or
lack thereof. Through the interviews, all three research questions are addressed.
46
In response to the updated IRB guidelines in order to minimize the risk of COVID-19, the
semi-structured interviews were conducted virtually via Zoom. As a means of collecting accurate
data representative of the participants’ experiences, interviews were recorded using Zoom
software and then transcribed utilizing Otter.ai software to analyze keywords and themes.
Data Collection
In this study, data were collected following Creswell and Creswell’s (2016) methodology
for data collection and alignment with the design of the study. The qualitative data were collected
by (a) purposefully identifying individuals and sites of the study to best help me understand the
problem and the research questions, (b) recruiting participants, (c) selecting samples, (d)
collecting and recording data, (e) resolving any data collection discrepancies, and (f) storing data
for the prescribed amount of time.
Interviews
Participant interviews were conducted after the certification of criteria was confirmed. An
explanation for the criteria is listed in the Selection of Population section above. I sent an email,
and video, and participated in short presentations at the beginning of six collegiate courses
explaining the purpose, requirements, and impact of the study to prospective participants via
professors at the university. Prospective participants indicated their interest in participating via
Google Form. Once the participants were verified, selected arrangements were made to meet
with each participant for a one-on-one interview via the Calendly Software. Following the
University of Southern California’s Research Ethics and Responsibility Policies, participant
consent was requested before the interview, as well as at the beginning of the interview protocol.
During the interview, participants were asked nine questions I developed surrounding teacher
preparation and the implications of culturally responsive teaching and pedagogies. I utilized
47
follow-up probes or clarifying questions that were asked based on my judgment and flexibility
and/or individual participant responses. Examples of the probes can be found in Appendix A. The
questions asked were carefully triangulated alongside an evaluation team I created. The
evaluation team consisted of colleagues and peers in the field of education. In order to triangulate
the questions, I had each evaluator study the interview protocol and reflective prompt. The
findings from each evaluator’s analysis of the interview protocol and reflective prompt were
compared and adjusted to reflect questions framed without bias, devoid of leading assumptions,
and without any double-barrelled questions. The interviews lasted approximately 30 to 45
minutes and took place over two weeks in Fall 2021. Upon the conclusion of the interviews,
participants were asked to complete an optional reflective prompt via Google Forms in an effort
to provide me with any lingering thoughts or questions. The reflective prompt allowed further
clarity on participant experiences and responses (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The identities of the
participants, their responses, their employer, and preservice teaching placement all remained
confidential and anonymous throughout the research process and upon the conclusion of the
study. All interviews were recorded using Zoom Communications Software and transcribed
using Otter.ai transcription software. Immediately after the interview, I cross-checked the
recording for accuracy, and transcripts were read to ensure the accuracy of the software-based
transcription.
Data Analysis
This study employed a qualitative approach through the collection of interview data. All
research questions formulated using Clark and Estes’s (2008) gal analysis were addressed using
the interview protocol and additional probing based on my judgment and flexibility. The research
questions served as a guide for the data analysis of this study alongside the conceptual
48
framework. The gap analysis framework helped to determine existing performance gaps in
knowledge/skills, motivation, and organizational/cultural barriers that impacted preservice
teachers’ understanding of CRT and Eurocentric-based curriculum. Clark and Estes (2008)
contend that the gaps in performance can only be closed and goals achieved when these three
causes are properly addressed.
Using Zoom Communication Software, I recorded an audio file of each participant's
interview. The audio file was uploaded to the data storage and coding software Otter.ai for
transcription. Once the interviews were coded and transcribed, the data gleaned from the
interviews were analyzed for commonalities, themes, inconsistencies, and possible gaps in
understanding. Utilizing Lockmiller and Lester (2017), I triangulated the interview data with
existing research (see Chapter 2). Additional steps were followed to promote validity and
reliability through the study such as member checking, appropriate time spent collecting data,
researcher self-reflection on assumptions and biases, and peer review (Lockmiller & Lester,
2017). Field notes were utilized as evidence to validate the interview’s outcomes and stimulate
early insights relevant to the emergent nature of the qualitative inquiry. The field notes contain
post-interview notes on the setting, conditions, and reactions of the participants. To ensure the
data is reliable, useful, and authentic, I reflected on interactions and data collected to ensure all
questions address the intended research questions (Patton, 2002).
I organized the data into categories based on lack of knowledge, lack of motivation, and
organizational/cultural barriers that impacted preservice teachers’ understanding (Clark & Estes,
2008). Then, Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) framework for analytical coding was used to finalize
the categories and themes in response to the varied research questions. Data in this research
project were organized using Otter.ai software and Google Sheets.
49
Data analysis procedures included listening to audio recordings of individual interviews
alongside the interview transcripts and anecdotal notes were taken. This method is part of
Maxwell’s (2013, p. 105) qualitative data analysis strategy. Maxwell’s data analysis focuses on
three main groups of analytics: memos, categorizing strategies like coding and thematic analysis,
and connecting strategies, such as narrative analysis. Once all interview data were collected,
reviewed, and coded, the responses were sorted into categories, compared with the gap analysis,
connected to the literature review, and identified significant themes and experiences shared by
the interviewees.
Validity and Reliability
Throughout this study, I enacted every effort to ensure the highest level of validity and
reliability were achieved. I adhered to Merriam and Tisdells’s (2016) best practices including
adequate sample size, adequate time collecting data, actively looking for variation in the data,
researcher reflecting on any biases and implications of worldviews, efficient and reliable data
recording, storage, and analysis tools, member checking, and peer review. Member checks were
utilized as a form of respondent validation. I solicited feedback on responses and findings from
the interview via Google Forms. The purpose of this process was to identify any biases and
misunderstandings on my part and continue to build a culture of rapport between interviewees
and researcher (Maxwell, 2013). Despite my best efforts to build researcher participant rapport, it
is difficult to say if participants were able to be fully candid in their reflections. Due to the
immense pressure the participants are under during a COVID era, it is hard to gauge how
invested they were in the research process. Granted I built a rapport with the participants,
competing factors such as school closures, short staffing, and frequently shuffling between
e-Learning and in-person learning led to a bit of a researcher-participant disconnect. As
50
previously mentioned, I reflected on my own positionality in order to eliminate or acknowledge
potential biases and assumptions throughout the research process (Maxwell, 2013). Finally, to
protect participants and maximize result validity, research protocols were followed closely.
Summary
This study used qualitative methods to collect data through semi-structured interviews
and reflective prompting to address the study’s three research questions aligned with the
conceptual framework. The data collected with preservice teachers were analyzed to target three
research questions: what knowledge did prospective teachers perceive to gain around culturally
responsive pedagogies embedded within their TPP, coursework, or curriculum; what motivation
did preservice teachers have to utilize culturally relevant pedagogy and curriculum and were
preservice teachers motivated to address decenter or challenge Eurocentric, Whitewashed
practices; and how the preservice teachers’ organization impacts the implementation of culturally
responsive practices.
The methodology presents preliminary research on the topic. Upon researcher reflection,
the sample size of participants was small and fairly homogenous creating not very robust data.
Relying on qualitative data from interviews and a reflective prompt provided one level of data,
further research could involve more stakeholders to create a more circular understanding of the
phenomenon. A major delimitation in this study is not only my affiliation with the university the
study was conducted but also my Whiteness. Though efforts were made to eliminate
opportunities for bias and assumption, I continue to benefit from Whiteness, colorblind ideology,
and Eurocentric pedagogy as a White woman herself.
Findings from the data collection will be presented in Chapter Four, with a discussion of
the recommendations related to the findings in Chapter Five.
51
Chapter Four: Results and Findings
Background
The purpose of this chapter is to explain the results of the data collected from this study
aimed at identifying factors that help or hinder the implementation of Culturally Responsive
Teaching (CRT) from the perspective of TPP students. In a mixed-methods study on CRT,
Phuntsog (2001) reports that over 96% of teachers analyzed believed culturally responsive
teaching to be an important part of working with culturally diverse students. Aligned with
Phuntsog’s findings, this study echoed similar perspectives on the importance of CRT. However,
similar to Chu and Garcia’s (2021) study on teacher efficacy in CRT practices, participants
shared they were not completely certain whether their school or organization would be on board
with creating a meaningful CRT-based learning environment and providing appropriate materials
to correspond to students’ backgrounds. Muñiz (2019) argues that TPPs and ongoing
professional development failed to prepare educators to bring culturally responsive teaching to
life. Adding to the discussion, Warren (2017) reports that while some teacher education programs
attempt to teach culturally responsive pedagogy, a valley of disconnect exists between preservice
teachers’ understanding of CRT and what it means to apply the CRT lens within the classroom.
This gap in the implementation of CRT in schools presents a problem as CRT practices are
central to improved educational outcomes for nondominant, culturally and linguistically diverse
students (Gay, 2002, 2010). The cultural disconnect made evident by Warren (2017) and Young
(2010) illuminates the clear gap in teacher preparation programs' ability to prepare their teachers
for diverse schools in order to serve all students.
In this qualitative study, I sought to investigate how TPPs prepare preservice teachers to
educate all students using CRT. The motivation of this study was to develop a greater
52
understanding of how TPPs impact CRT practices and the development of a critical lens through
the eyes of preservice teachers. As part of the conceptual framework, analysis of lack of
knowledge, lack of motivation, and cultural/organizational barriers were utilized to identify gaps
in understanding (Clark & Estes, 2008). The following research questions grounded the study:
1) What knowledge did preservice teachers perceive to gain around culturally responsive
pedagogies embedded within their TPP, coursework, or curriculum?
2) In what ways were preservice teachers motivated to utilize culturally relevant pedagogy
and curriculum? To what extent were preservice teachers motivated to address, decenter
or challenge Eurocentric, Whitewashed practices?
3) How does the preservice teachers’ organization impact the implementation of culturally
responsive practices?
Utilizing phenomenological research design, I sought to describe the lived experiences of
students in a TPP navigating their coursework and pedagogy in relation to CRT and developing a
critical lens to combat Eurocentric and mono-perspective practices (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The findings in this study are preliminary and hope to identify specific experiences that impacted
the implementation of CRT by a select group of preservice teachers. Preliminary findings from
this study may help to guide future research and to redesign TPPs in order to serve a wider range
of students. Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis provided an evidence-based framework to
identify root causes of organizational performance gaps and develop strategies and solutions for
identified gaps.
Qualitative data were gathered via semi-structured one-on-one interviews and a reflective
writing prompt with nine preservice middle-level teachers. The nine preservice teachers
interviewed are referred to as Participants 1-9. The semi-structured interviews were utilized to
53
ask all nine participants open-ended questions about the impact of their TPP on the implication
of CRT practices in their experience or perceived experience. Participants were probed with
follow-up questions based on their responses and my judgment as a researcher (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2015). The semi-structured interview protocol (see Appendix A) was designed with nine
questions based on the conceptual framework; aligned with Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap
analysis, three research questions, and the literature review. The questions were designed to
reflect the preservice teachers’ perceptions of CRT practices, tools, frameworks, and coursework;
identify implications of eurocentric, Whitewashed, colorblind curriculum; and the impact their
organization has or had on their practice to ensure their pedagogy is accessible for all students.
Data collection for this study followed Merriam and Tisdell’s (2015) data collection and
analysis processes for qualitative research. In this study, interview questions were directly linked
to the three research questions, and, in turn, the research questions guided data analysis. I
recorded audio files for each interview using Zoom software and uploaded each audio file to a
data storage and coding software called Otter.ai.
Participants
The participants in this study were a volunteer group of middle school preservice
teachers. With the help of an Assistant Professor specializing in middle school education, I was
sent out a recruitment letter to possible participants. After a recruitment letter was sent, I gave
potential participants a brief presentation at the beginning of their classes via Zoom. In response
to the recruitment efforts, ten individuals were interested in the study, but not all hopeful
participants were able to join the study. One potential participant could not be included due to
scheduling conflicts. However, nine potential participants did respond to follow-up emails and
54
met all requirements for the study. To be eligible for this study potential participants were
required to:
● Be over the age of 18
● Completed or neared completion of 200 clinical hours in a K-12 setting
● Plan to pursue a job as an educator after degree completion and certification
All nine participants were referred to as Participant 1-9. The study was intended to
represent a wide range of grade-level teachers serving kindergarten through high school.
However, all nine participants happened to be part of the middle school education
program, several of whom were getting additional endorsements in special education or
English Language learning (ELL). Moreover, eight out of nine of the participants identified
as White meaning the perspectives shared by the participants are under the White gaze.
The findings shared through the participants’ perspectives overwhelmingly represent
perceptions from the point of view of a White educator. Additionally, eight out of nine
participants identified as women meaning the data gleaned from this study can be skewed
toward the female perspective. Below is a table detailing the identities the participants
expressed throughout the research process.
55
Table 1
Expressed Identities of Participants
Participant Gender Race (if shared) Identities expressed
1 Female Multi-racial Multilingual
2 Female White Middle class
3 Female White
4 Female White From a small southern town
5 Female White
6 Female White Middle class
7 Male White
8 Female White
9 Female White Middle class
In response to the updated IRB guidelines, in order to minimize the risk of COVID-19,
the semi-structured interviews were conducted virtually via Zoom. The semi-structured
interviews were scheduled utilizing the Calendly software and lasted between 20 to 45 minutes.
To maintain confidentiality, pseudonyms were assigned to each interviewee and no video
evidence was saved. A week following the respective interviews a reflective prompt was sent to
the participants asking them to clarify, add, or retract any information they shared during the
interviews. Throughout the interview process, each participant offered a unique view of their
respective educational background, beliefs, identity, and educational expectations. The
participants in this study represent a small portion of the TPP students as a whole. Their
contribution to the study brought forth rich findings and implications for further research.
56
Research Questions
The findings in this research study were guided by the following research questions:
1) What knowledge did preservice teachers perceive to gain around culturally responsive
pedagogies embedded within their TPP, coursework, or curriculum?
2) In what ways were preservice teachers motivated to utilize culturally relevant pedagogy
and curriculum? To what extent were preservice teachers motivated to address, decenter
or challenge Eurocentric, Whitewashed practices?
3) How does the preservice teachers’ organization impact the implementation of culturally
responsive practices?
Findings
The findings from this study have been presented in categories, themes, and theories
derived from data analysis in reference to the research questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The
data analysis from this study aimed to identify how preservice teachers perceive gaps in their
ability to implement CRT through their coursework within their TPP. The findings presented here
are preliminary and reflective of the lived experiences of the participants and their perceptions.
Results Research Question One: Perception of Culturally Responsive Pedagogies in
Teacher Preparation Programs
What knowledge did preservice teachers perceive to gain around culturally responsive
pedagogies embedded within their TPP, coursework, or curriculum?
Brazilian educator, philosopher, and leading advocate for critical pedagogy Paulo Freire
(2000) asserted, “Teacher preparation should go beyond technical preparation of teachers and be
rooted in the ethical formation both of selves and of history” (p. 23). At this moment, teacher
preparation is at a crossroads. The ever-changing demographic makeup of the United States
57
continues to become more culturally and linguistically diverse. Knowledge of self-identity,
student identity, and racial identity all presented gaps in participant perception. Scholars
throughout the United States believe teacher education must shift to reflect deeper knowledge of
the ever-changing background of students and enact new ways to explicitly prepare preservice
teachers to educate students of color while interrupting patterns of bias in the classroom (Chu &
Garcia, 2021).
Research question one led to three themes including Desire to Educate; Yes, But…; and
Envisioning New Curriculum. Theme one of Desire to Education centers on the participants’
innate known desire to educate students. Universally, participants felt a calling to share their
knowledge with their future students. Theme two, Yes, But…, shared the participant's
perspective understanding of CRT practices. Aligned with Phuntsog’s (2001) research study,
participants largely endorse the need for CRT practices and the value CRT holds in the
classroom. However, their perspective was limited to the tools they had the knowledge of from
their life experiences and time in their TPP, simply scratching the surface with plenty of room to
further their understanding and application of CRT in their own classrooms. Theme three
Envisioning New Curriculum teases out participants’ acknowledgment of lack of knowledge of
certain texts and curricula due to their lived experiences. Additionally, participants explore ideas
of how envisioning a new curriculum can lead to wider and deeper knowledge where gaps in
understanding may have previously existed.
Interview questions asked to gain evidence for this research question included:
1) Do you think that your teacher preparation program, coursework, and curriculum
prepared you to teach all kids? Please provide examples
a) Which specific frameworks or authors were highlighted and how were they used?
58
2) Has your teacher preparation program, coursework or curriculum included culturally
relevant pedagogy and practices at all? If yes, how?
Theme One: Desire to Educate
Sharing and passing knowledge is the basis of education at its core. Theme one delves
into the participants’ innate desire to share knowledge with their future students. Many educators
describe their draw to teaching as something they were born with. All participants in this study
share similar notions- a deep desire to educate. In response to being asked what brought them to
education, the resounding answer from participants was, I always knew I wanted to be a teacher.
Participant 2 envisioned a world of grading papers with cool pens while the class worked
peacefully. Participant 2 explained “I have known truthfully since I was four. My whole life I
loved teaching, and I loved teachers.”
The participants all came from the midwestern United States but from varied
backgrounds and locations. Participant 5 could tell that education was the right career choice for
them based on their desire to experience more than what the small town they grew up in had to
offer. Participant 5 asserted, “I decided that education was for me. I've always loved learning. To
me, the role of a teacher was to be the carrier of knowledge to students. I had teachers that made
learning fun, I thought that that was something.” Participant 5 added, that bringing knowledge to
others is what kept the ongoing connection to education strong for them.
Some desires to embark on an educational career were sparked through challenging
situations. Participant 7 learned a little later on that they wanted to teach after a difficult
experience in school. Participant 7 stated,
My freshman year of high school I had a really good math teacher. Just the best, shout me
out, showed me more than just math. They could tell I clearly did not want to be there.
59
They made it like more about me than it was the math. Then the math just came so easily
after that.
Though Participant 7’s journey toward an educational career blossomed from a rough patch in
their schooling experience, it highlights an important aspect of culturally responsive teaching by
making learning relevant to students (Hammond, 2015). Participant 7’s teacher enacted CRT
practices by knowing their student deeply and realizing there was a lack of connection between
the student and the classroom. Additionally, the participant felt validated by the way their teacher
embraced their identity. According to Byrd (2016), culturally responsive (CR) teachers
encourage students to develop an understanding of their own culture and identity by reflecting it
in the materials in the classroom. The impact of this CR teacher’s relationship with Participant 7
left a lasting impression and helped to guide them toward a path of lifelong learning.
Other participants cited a social-emotional draw that brought them to education.
Participant 6 knew that they wanted to be an educator their whole life. They envisioned helping
kids move through their academic careers during a very vulnerable time. Participant 6 described
how middle school students often experience strong and complex emotions during this time in
adolescence and often do not have the knowledge to express their needs organically. They add:
Middle School is a time when a lot of kids go through changes. They get bullied, and
they don’t really understand the social aspects of many things. To be there to guide them
and be a friendly face, someone to lean on at times is kind of why I wanted to be a middle
school teacher. That’s kind of my vision.
Making a difference in students’ lives was a recurring theme among all nine participants. Marsh
(2015) declares that 75% of teachers join the education force because they wanted to make a
difference. It is evident that a wide range of students had strong feelings about becoming a
60
teacher and joining a teacher preparation program in order to spread knowledge both
academically and social-emotionally. Pop and Turner (2009) report several indicators for
preservice teacher motivation include willingness to help children, love of the subject, and
personal experiences. Responses from all nine of the participants around motivation to join a
TPP are in line with Pop and Turner’s (2009) findings.
An interesting caveat is that none of the participants offered any aspects of their
positionality or intersectionality when it came to education and what brought or drove them to
teach. Though probed about their identity later in the interview, none of the nine participants
offered information about their race or ethnic background prior to that probing. This raises
questions of awareness and whether the preservice teachers are aware of the position of power
they are in. A core tenet of CRT is knowledge of self. The data suggests that though students
shared aspects of their identity, none of the participants organically shared their positionality or
intersectionality. This raises the question of the amount of knowledge about aspects of identity
and positions of power students perceive to comprehend through both their lived experiences as
well as their curriculum and course work throughout the time in their TPP. This topic was
explored further throughout the interview process and offers implications for further research.
Theme Two: Yes, But…
Theme two called to mind participant knowledge of how CRT practices operate in the
world they live in as well as their experience within the TPP. When asked if the participants
perceived the presence of CRT embedded within their teacher preparation program, coursework,
and curriculum, the participants shared mixed responses. Five participants confirmed that CRT as
part of their practice in teacher preparation while two participants claimed they had no idea and
two participants shared vague responses. In fact, three participants conflated CRT with other
61
topics such as special education programming or English as a Second Language (ESL). For
example, when asked if culturally relevant pedagogy was part of their current TPP, Participant 9
explained they are endorsed in ESL (English as a Second Language) so they have exposure to a
more diverse set of curricula. Participant 9 was also able to be on an Individual Education Plan
(IEP) team through their clinical placement. Without these circumstances, Participant 9 felt as
though they would be underprepared to teach all students. They stated the balance between
preparedness and unpreparedness to teach all students, “I got exposure to [ESL]. I learned how to
accommodate and modify for students [with diverse needs]. I wouldn’t feel as well prepared to
teach the special education group. But because of my placement, I feel better prepared for that.”
Though Participant 9 was able to acknowledge two distinct and intersecting populations
in education, ESL and Special Education, they did not highlight additional student demographics
they will serve and how they are prepared to serve all students. This perspective brings to light
the existence of colorblind ideologies in education. Colorblind ideology is rooted in the
understanding that individuals can be completely free of prejudice or implicit bias, leading to a
lack of awareness of assumptions and behaviors towards specific racial groups (Tatum, 2004).
The data suggest that there is a gap in knowledge of theories of race, racism, and systemic
inequities from the perspective of this group of preservice teachers. Furthermore, a gap is present
in the group of participants’ knowledge of how to discuss and communicate these inequities.
Additional research would need to be done to suggest this gap of knowledge exists throughout
education in the United States. Though not mentioning race may seem innocuous, Annamma et
al. (2017) assert efforts not to see race imply that recognizing race is problematic. As referenced
in Chapter Two, teachers need training in understanding theories of race, racism, and inequities
that recognize the historical legacy of Whiteness as property (Annamama et al, 2017). Implicit
62
biases and teacher dispositions typically center on deficit mindset myths about students
perpetuating harm. In order to create change and disrupt harmful cycles, high-quality TPPs must
ensure examination of Whiteness and all intersections are part of the core curriculum
(Darling-Hammond, 2006).
Participant 6 highlighted positives within their TPP experience but agreed with
Participant 9 that aspects of the TPP could be strengthened and diversified, including special
education. When asked if their TPP embedded a culturally relevant curriculum into their
learning, they very honestly and vulnerably admitted that they do not feel prepared to teach all
students. Participant 6 reported, “I definitely think that there are certain types of kids that I’m not
prepared to teach. I think it’s because of a pandemic. Honestly, I haven’t gotten the chance to
observe many classrooms or experience different kinds of students.”
Three participants in the study recognized their lack of knowledge when it came to the
application of CRT practices. Participant 8 acknowledged the pitfalls of their current perception
of embedding CRT structures into preservice teacher learning. When asked if their TPP,
coursework, and curriculum had prepared them to teach all students, they confirmed that CRT
has been discussed in one or two classes, one of them being a Special Education class. However,
Participant 8 shared that more could be done in their opinion to ensure their TPP garnered
enough knowledge about CRT practices for preservice teachers to successfully apply them. They
commented,
I feel like we probably need more on [CRT], not just one class. There’s a lot to cover in
that area. Also [classes on] students that are from different backgrounds as us. We had
one class talking about how there’s gonna be differences in gender and race and stuff we
kind of already knew. I feel like maybe more preparation to help those certain kids.
63
Nurturing a culturally responsive classroom can prove to be challenging for teachers
(Watts, 2021). Regrettably, many teachers lack the knowledge of the concepts they teach are tied
to cultural existence, reflective of lived, familiar experiences of students (Hammond, 2015). If
this concept of connection to lived experience is not mined and understood in TPPs, the direct
result is a perpetuated cycle of unknowing, further disenfranchising students of color. Theme two
suggests that participants' perceptions of CRT and practical application are developing but not
yet distinguished.
Theme Three: Envisioning New Curriculum
Theme three suggests that knowledge of a new form of curriculum, pedagogy, and
schooling was forming in the minds of the participants. As Courtland (2021) stated, “Imagining
possibilities of a curriculum creates space to explore without a prescribed need for answers or
overt attentiveness to potential barriers or dominant narratives.” Throughout participant
interviews, questions about the curriculum that emphasized positivist narratives in the classroom
were vocalized. Green (2017) contends positivism in education is the historically dominant
epistemology from which knowledge is produced. This notion aligns with findings from Chapter
Two on the perpetuation of ignorance and or lack of knowledge in regards to Whiteness of
Whiteness as property. One participant discussed having very little exposure to any sort of texts
in her schooling other than the classics which they acknowledged were operating under the
White gaze. At the same time, the majority of students in this TPP expressed their knowledge of
CRT practices embedded in the texts utilized. Participant 5 shared,
A lot of my English language arts classes more specifically than math teach it [CRT
Texts]. We’ve talked a lot about how to explore nontraditional texts and how to
64
explore non-White texts, and how to teach kids that are not what we have seen written
about for hundreds of years.
Participant 5 highlighted the evident disconnect with current trends in curriculum and planning,
students failing to see themselves reflected in their learning. Aligned with the findings in Chapter
Two, Participant 5 cited specific examples of restructuring learning, pedagogy, and curriculum to
support a diverse group of students from abolitionist educator Gholdy Muhammad. Participant 5
explained that three of their classes have used Cultivating Genius (2020) and the framework
Muhammed recommends to critically analyze the strengths and weaknesses of texts that have
been traditionally used in middle school literacy classes. They explained further:
We evaluated different texts that we grew up with, using her framework, and like looking
at the strengths and the many weaknesses that fall within, like the more traditional books
that we read. Currently, I’m in a literacy class that talks about literacy in all subjects,
rather than just English Language Arts using her framework also.
Participant 3 added that part of her preservice journey included an English Language
Learner (ELL) endorsement that included a more diverse text list within her TPP. They shared a
resource they enjoyed utilizing was Tiffany Jewell’s (2020) This Book is Anti-Racist. Participant
3 explained,
I love this book just because it came with a lot of images, and art and great
quotes and questions. [The book] even had some activities to do, like this one says to pull
out your notebook and a piece of paper and write down without any interruption, take a
deep breath and reflect on your own race and ethnicity. I thought that was really
important because not only does this book show how to be more inclusive to others, but it
helps all the students kind of find their own identities.
65
Participant 3 mentioned this was an integral piece in envisioning new ways of schooling, and
identity. This finding aligns with research in Chapter Two from Muhammad (2020) citing that
the vital aspect of learning for students of color is rooted in unpacking identity.
Participant 7 further shared that Your Students, My Students, Our Students by Jung et al.
(2019) helped sustain their learning as preservice teachers because the text was easy to read and
understand. They highlighted the accessibility of one of their course texts, something that is often
dismissed when it comes to the TPP curriculum. They expressed:
I like this one for the sole purpose of I can read it. It’s an easy read. That’s so important.
Like I said, I’m in math and science. I am not the best reader. I think you could give this
book to my roommate who’s not even a teaching major, anything like that. He’d be able
to think back on his schooling and be like, oh, yeah, like this would have helped a lot.
Participant 7 highlighted several important tenets of CRT by utilizing students’ prior knowledge
structures and performance styles of various groups. By including an easily accessible and
consumable text in the curriculum, this TPP was able to enhance the learning experience by
making it more relevant and efficient (Ladson-Billings, 2012).
The majority of participants shared moments within their TPP that they believed were
leading towards greater equity for students by reimagining the curriculum with a CRT lens in
mind. Though there appear to be beginning stages of awareness of CRT practices, the application
needs to be strengthened. Making the effort to redesign for diversity, equity, and inclusion in
education is not an easy task but remains an essential building block in order for TPPs to prepare
educators to teach all students.
66
Discussion Research Question One
Research Question One provided bountiful insights into the perspectives of participants.
Theme One offered introspective insights on the innate desire to share knowledge with students,
Theme Two purported that although steps toward CRT practices have been made, work is yet to
be done, and Theme Three brought to attention the gaps participants perceived in their own
learning or understanding of teaching all students coupled with ideas on how to remedy those
gaps. The findings based on Research Question One are significant as they tap into knowledge
participants have gained from both their lived experiences and knowledge gleaned through time
and coursework throughout their TPP. Additionally, the findings also point to some significant
gaps where additional knowledge and understanding could serve to strengthen these preservice
teachers’ practice and critical lens. The findings presented from Research Question One are
preliminary and offer suggestions for further research and greater unpacking.
Results Research Question Two: Preservice Teacher Motivation to Apply CRT and
Decenter Eurocentricity
In what ways were preservice teachers motivated to utilize culturally relevant pedagogy and
curriculum? To what extent were preservice teachers motivated to address decenter or challenge
Eurocentric, Whitewashed practices?
Bell hooks, American author, professor, feminist, and social activist shares, “Many
teachers who do not have difficulty releasing old ideas may still be resolutely attached to the old
ways of teaching…even those of us who are experimenting with progressive pedagogical
practice still are afraid to change.” The findings from Research Question Two suggest that most
participants are motivated toward positive progress to a more equitable education. Responses
from the participants suggested various ways preservice teachers were motivated to utilize CRT
67
and address Eurocentric teaching practices. The data analyzed in connection to Research
Question Two led to three themes: Identity; Name, Describe, Question, then Dismantle; and
Grappling with Whiteness. Theme One offers insight on participant motivation to center student
identity in their classrooms. Theme Two showcased participants’ expression of an important
aspect of CRT practice, naming, describing, questioning, and dismantling aspects of learning and
knowledge that no longer serve the community of diverse students. Finally, Theme Three
covered the topic of grappling with an often ignored part of teacher identity, Whiteness. The
findings from Research Question Two focus on preservice teacher motivation to utilize CRT
pedagogy and curriculum as well as motivation to address and decenter Eurocentric practices.
The interview questions asked to gain evidence for this research question included:
1) Do you think that your teacher preparation program, coursework, and curriculum
prepared you to teach all kids? Provide examples
a) Were you asked to reflect on the implications of your race, gender, or ethnicity? If
yes, how?
b) If something is rooted in Whiteness, what do you think this means?
2) Have you heard about Culturally Relevant Pedagogy before? If yes, what does it mean to
you?
3) Have you heard the term eurocentrism before? How would you describe eurocentrism?
a) Tell me your understanding of eurocentric practices?
b) What eurocentric practices are being utilized in teacher preparation and how are
they addressed or challenged, if at all?
68
Theme One: Identity
The first theme of Research Question Two led to centers around the idea of identity, not
only for preservice teachers but their students, school, community, and district at large. As noted
in Chapter Two, teachers must root themselves in a deep knowledge of self-identity, and deepen
their understanding of their students in regard to cultural diversity, even if the classroom is
homogeneous (Aronson & Laughter, 2016; Byrd, 2016). The majority of participants expressed
motivation to understand their identity in the classroom and outside of the classroom. All
participants were able to cite the work their TPP established to ensure preservice teachers were
able to recognize their various identities and how they present themselves in the classroom-a key
tenet of culturally relevant practices (Hammond, 2015). Participant 3 shared a poignant idea
when it came to their motivation to unpack identity,
I definitely think that identity has an effect on everyone, no matter how we think. I think
everyone kind of has a little bit of bias. But that’s why, as teachers, I think it’s really
important, especially with something like This Book is Anti-Racist to recognize your
own bias and reflect on your own experiences in order to better your classroom as a
whole.
Participant 3 further addressed bias when it comes to identity. When asked to share specific ways
culturally relevant pedagogy was used in their TPP, they dug deeper into this topic and brought
up notions of White privilege and the intersections of different shared experiences. Participant 3
was motivated to share how the interconnected identities they hold could impact their teaching,
adding:
I think some of the things that I’ve had to recognize are my experiences, my privileges,
stuff like that. My clinicals have really shown me that a lot of people live very different
69
childhoods than I do. I was very fortunate. I’m now experiencing some of those other
things like family lives and stuff like that. So learning how to deal with that
acknowledging this was my experience, but it’s not everyone else’s experience.
These findings align with research from Chapter Two. Teachers must be motivated and equipped
to understand their own connection to race and the evolving inequities that have been replicated
throughout time, in addition to pedagogical and content knowledge (Annamamma, 2015).
Participant 3 shared, “It is not everyone else’s experience” which served as a powerful reminder
of the importance of unpacking teacher identity and doing so continuously.
Similarly, Participant 5 was able to reflect on their own experiences and identity as a
teacher leading them to a nuanced understanding of the weight identity can carry. They vocalized
their motivation to change in response to their new responsibilities as an educator,
I think I have changed a lot in college. The biggest thing that I would say is that I have
found what I am willing to compromise on and what I’m not willing to compromise on.
In my personal beliefs and in my pedagogical approach. In high school, identity didn’t
matter to me. But I also think that as a White female who grew up middle class I
represent the majority of teachers, right? We talk about a lot in our classes that people
like me become teachers to students who probably do not look like me, right?
Participant 5 contended a core component of this research study-disconnect between the teaching
population and the students they are intended to serve. This finding aligns with research from
Chapter Two, as 53% of the United State’s school population is represented by students of color,
and 79% of the United States K-12 teaching force identified as White (National Center for
Educational Statistics, 2019). Participant 5 accessed an essential part of CRT: acknowledging,
adjusting, and reimagining ways of teaching and learning, while creating positive safe learning
70
environments all center on knowing your identity and teaching students to know theirs
(Muhammed, 2020).
Participant 2 grappled with their White middle-class upbringing and how that identity is
tied to their future classroom that will likely not be all White middle-class students. They
reported that their motivation to unpack their identity is in part due to their coursework.
Participant 2 shared,
I think that being a White middle-class female has many things already geared towards
me. We were able to dive deeper into concepts of identity, regardless if they were our
own or not. In the fact that it doesn’t matter what identities are in your classroom, you
should be addressing all of them because they’re going to be present in the world.
Students need to be aware of those. You have the ability to create that safe space in your
classroom for your students to ask questions about different identities. I feel like that has
been a really cool topic that’s been really talked about, throughout my teacher education,
in different classes, it hasn't just been one course, it’s been kind of an ongoing theme of
how identities fit into our classroom and what we’re doing. So that’s been really great, I
think.
Participant 2’s perception aligned with Gay’s (2002) findings. Gay (2002) argues that
teachers cannot alter their instructional strategies to become more culturally responsive until they
work to decenter their Whiteness and take a social justice approach to promote more equitable
teaching for all students. Adding to the evidence, Watts (2021) points out the process of
unpacking identity is motivated by and begins with acknowledging the power and privilege
White culture holds and how it promotes or constrains student learning and growth. If teachers
have a goal of transforming classrooms to teach all students by valuing student identity, the
71
teacher must start with self-reflection and confrontation of bias (Watts, 2021). In Theme One of
Research Question Two, participants shared their motivation to explore identity as an aspect of
CRT and the impact their identity can hold in the classroom.
Theme Two: Name, Describe, Question, then Dismantle
The second theme that emerged from Research Question Two revolved around participant
motivation to name, describe, question, and then dismantle practices in education in order to
create change. Participants described ways in which Eurocentric curriculum, pedagogy, and
thinking impacted their learning experiences and perceptions. The majority of participants
alluded to or explored the idea that students of color face an educational experience that is not
reflective of their lived experience (Delpit & Dowdy, 2002). The participants in this study were
motivated to change the traditional status quo in schools but still presented some gaps in
understanding when it came to the application and pervasive nature of the Eurocentric
curriculum.
Participants 1, 3, 4, and 8 all showed vulnerability by sharing that they did not know or
understand Eurocentric thinking and practices or how that would be reflected in their curriculum.
Though lack of understanding can often be dismissed as ignorance, failing to invest in
understanding Eurocentric pedagogy can be considered a method of upholding Whiteness,
patriarchal, and racist systems (Leonardo & Boas, 2013). As previously stated in Chapter Two,
the cultural erasure of Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) from curriculum and
teacher preparation programs has served to uphold the power dynamic of Whiteness as
property(Mensah & Jackson, 2018).
Participant 7 grappled with mixed feelings about the legitimacy of Eurocentric ways of
thinking. When asked about the meaning of “rooted in Whiteness”, this participant shared “I
72
don’t want to say fake but like…well forcing a culture or rooted in Whiteness just sounds like
racism to me.” When asked to clarify their response they went on to report, “The world is
centered around Europe, there are good people in Europe. I’m not very familiar with Europe in
general, I guess all I really know is Chicago, Illinois culture.” Participant 7 continued to unpack
their understanding of Eurocentric Whiteness. They shared a deeply jarring experience of
Whiteness in action.
One of the teachers that [my classmate] works with has a student who is from an Asian
country and the teacher knows the student is from an Asian country. But he [classroom
teacher] keeps trying to do things in Spanish to help the student from the Asian country.
So it’s like the assumption that what is the Eurocentric aspect of that is the assumption
that if someone is foreign, they’re speaking Spanish? Right?
Put more plainly, the teacher exhibited a Eurocentric worldview that conflates all non-European
cultures as one. This example of ignorance highlights the evolution of Whiteness according to
Harris’ (1993) study. Harris claims that privileges of Whiteness are so deeply embedded in our
society that its privileges are often not apparent, as per the example cited above, the teacher was
so entrenched in Whiteness they didn’t even realize they were conflating Asian and Spanish
speaking cultures. In this instance, Participant 7 was motivated by this teacher’s gap in
understanding. Participant 7 highlighted a clear example of Whiteness as property in the school
system.
When asked how they would describe Eurocentrism and Eurocentric practices,
Participant 2 was able to share a nuanced understanding of Eurocentric thinking. They were able
to connect individualistic thinking with Eurocentric roots (Gutierrez, 2004). Participant 2
expressed that,
73
I think that I would describe it as ideas that are coming from Europe. Ideas, ideologies,
and theologies that were created or most talked about in Europe and then brought into
other areas. In a sense, the individualistic approach of education can be partially
attributed to a Eurocentric idea. Every man for themselves, kind of like the competitive
nature of education.
They continued to unearth more intersections of Eurocentric thinking within behavior
management in schools. When asked what Eurocentric practices are being utilized in teacher
preparation programs, Participant 2 was able to mention other methods of exclusion, a harmful
practices for students. Exclusionary practices are a hallmark of Eurocentric practices (Gutierrez,
2004). Exclusion of students, especially students of color, perpetuates inequality in schools by
denying education (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 2016). This is an example of Whiteness as property.
When asked to identify examples of Eurocentric practices or ideas from their perspective,
Participant 2 reported:
I feel like there are also Eurocentric ideas in a hierarchy and power structures [in
schools], right? I think that within classroom management, there sometimes is this idea
that the teacher is the one in power, right? The student has none. The teacher dismisses
the students. They’ll say “Oh, I’m not even going to deal with you. Go to the office! You
are not even welcome in this classroom anymore.” Because they have that power and
they think like “Oh well, I need to get them out of my classroom” and that they have the
power to do that. I personally strongly disagree with that [behavior management
strategy]. Especially when it comes to the fact that you’re sending a student out but they
need to be in your classroom learning. It’s the butting heads of I don’t want them in my
74
classroom because they’re being disruptive, and they never do their work. Maybe they
would if they were spending more time in your classroom?
Participant 2 was able to reflect on the impact of Eurocentricity in their lived experience and
their motivation to change course for their students. Participant 9 agreed that Eurocentricity is a
major intersection of power in school. At the same time, they are hopeful about the future of
education as they feel their TPP prepared them to combat Eurocentric curriculum. When asked
how Eurocentric practices are being addressed or challenged from their perspective, they
reinforced,
We’re in a country that was established by White people. We just kind of continued
with those past traditions or ideas of what we think things should be or how they should
be [with] White people are in power. A lot of our classes really focus on talking about
diversity and ways to include that in your classroom and make sure because there is [not]
such a disconnect between the race and culture and [between] the teachers and the
diversity of the students, just making sure that you’re being respectful and teaching
yourself.
Participant 9 highlighted a key component of CRT by first acknowledging Whiteness and
positions of power and privilege Whiteness holds as well as the importance of continuing to
“teach” yourself. Participant 9 had a multi-tiered understanding of the shared web CRT and
Eurocentricity share.
When asked if there are any Eurocentric practices they are aware of within their TPP,
Participant 5 responded in context to curriculums that some would consider classics. They
discuss the variety of their course work, citing that different teachers use vastly different
approaches to combating mono-narrative thinking. Participant 5 commented:
75
I think that typically textbooks are written with Eurocentric points of view. I think that a
lot of the classic books that we teach are from a Eurocentric point of view. One that
comes to mind is To Kill a Mockingbird. We talk all the time about how we use it as “Oh,
look, it’s progressive and anti-racist”, but it’s not. It’s harmful. In my math courses,
we’ve had four math professors, three of them are men, and they’re very much White
men. While in my ELA (English Language Arts) classes, we have specifically taken
approaches of what books to read, here’s what books not to read, here’s how you can
approach them, where lines lie, and, the research about why these things are important.
Which I think is super important to have that research because that’s something that I can
use as a teacher later on is why I am doing what I am doing because these [are] facts.
Here’s how you can approach issues in your own classroom.
Participant 5’s experience in their TPP points to gaps in common knowledge and spoken
understanding of colorblindness within the teaching community. Colorblind approaches in
education go hand in hand with Eurocentric practices as colorblind understandings of race
conceptualize race to be an irrelevant factor in shaping a person’s life (Bonilla-Silva, 2018).
Efforts to not “see” race implies that recognizing race is problematic (Annamma et al., 2017). A
colorblind approach to teaching coupled with a Eurocentric, Whitewashed, single-narrative
framed text like To Kill A Mockingbird leads to a mono-perspective learning environment, not
reflective of the student population intending to be served (Smith, 2010). Participant 5 was
motivated to highlight Eurocentric practices they noticed within their TPP and highlighted the
essentialness of a critical lens when it comes to being an educator, especially surrounding
colorblind text-based decisions.
76
In response to Research Question Two, the participants shared varied experiences with
culturally relevant curricula. Their experiences addressing and challenging Eurocentric practices
spanned from little to vague understandings of Eurocentric practices and curriculum to nuanced
discussions of colorblind curriculum and practices, to ways they are motivated to combat
Eurocentric practices they have witnessed. This large mix of understandings from this group of
nine preservice teachers points to the need for a universal language, acknowledgement and tools
to dissect Eurocentric thinking. As mentioned in Chapter Two, the colorblind approach to race
perpetuates disparities in education (Wells, 2014). Similarly, the colorblind approach to ignoring
or upholding Eurocentric, mono-perspective narratives perpetuates disparities. Colorblind
education continues today through pedagogical color blindness that relies on a traditional
curriculum, sanitized instruction, and a status quo approach (Ferlazzo, 2021). Though some
participants are beginning to understand the weight of Whiteness in education and are motivated
to create change, there is a gap in understanding and developing a universal language to
dismantle systems of oppression within education.
Theme Three: Grappling with Whiteness
The third theme to emerge from Research Question Two stemmed from a critical
exploration of identity. Engaging in conversations about Whiteness with a nearly all White group
of participants presented findings from a single perspective-White. Meaning the data analyzed
from this study is under the White gaze. As noted in Chapter Two, Eurocentric, Whitewashed,
and colorblind understanding of pedagogy, curriculum, and student background have been an
ongoing theme in the United States since its inauguration (Cutler, 2019). A growing number of
culturally and linguistically diverse students are making up classrooms across the nation, yet
Eurocentric, Whitewashed understandings continue to permeate the school atmosphere thus
77
limiting perspectives and cultural knowledge with White middle-class and monolingual women
at the helm of the teacher population in the United States (Gay, 2006; Townsend, 2000; U.S.
Department of Education, 2016). Muhammad (2020) urges “before getting to literacy skill
development such as decoding, fluency, comprehension, writing, or any other content-learning
standards, students must authentically see themselves in the learning” (p. 79). Keeping in mind
the cultural gap between teachers and students that continues to widen, how can preservice
teachers grapple with the label of Whiteness in education (NCES, 2020)?
Participant 8 shared their understanding of Whiteness as an underlying foundation of
society and thus education. They explained:
The White culture hundreds of years ago is all about if you’re White, you’re the
dominant culture. So that’s what we’re going to follow. If it’s rooted in Whiteness, I
would say it kind of follows White dominant culture.
As Love (2020) explains, White Americans cannot see America from the same lens as people of
color. Though Participant 8 shared the belief that Whiteness remains part of the dominant
culture, the need for a diversity of voices is not mentioned.
Participant 6 was able to connect the presence of a dominant White culture to harm. They
shared, “Historically there have been problems that have been caused by people that are White.
And because the White population, I guess, has power. It kind of causes harm.” As Milner and
Lomotey (2014) contend, our society is built around a complex system of organizations,
institutions, individuals, processes, and policies with many factors that interact to create and
perpetuate social, economic, and political structures that are harmful to people of color and our
society as a whole.
78
Participant 2 shared their understanding of Whiteness as a form of exclusion. As
Annamma (2015) and Donnor (2013) contend, a tenet of Whiteness as property excludes other
communities from benefiting by maintaining an inequitable footing. Participant 2 explained,
If something is rooted in Whiteness, that tells me that the people who created said thing,
whatever it was, were White, and many times it also means that the people who created
it, we’re not thinking of anybody but themselves, whether they meant to or not. It was
created by White people, for white people without the thought of others who are not
White.
This conclusion pairs with Ladson-Billings and Tate’s (2016) findings, citing that the function of
Whiteness in education is exclusion. According to Mensah and Jackson (2018), “the fundamental
precept of Whiteness-the core of its value- is exclusivity” (p.8). Participant 5 shared a similar
insight noting there is a systematic and intentional aspect of Whiteness. They stated:
Written by White people, for White people for the progression of White people. That
does not necessarily take into consideration anybody else outside of European descent. I
think that something is rooted in Whiteness, typically it’s very systematic. It’s very
cyclical. It’s very, like, deep into our society.
The foundation of Eurocentric practices are embedded in the exclusivity of Whiteness
(Spring, 2016). Research Question Two asked participants if their TPP utilized Eurocentric
practices in their programming and if they were addressed or challenged. Though six of the
participants can confirm the existence of Whiteness, three were able to construct meaning around
how to deconstruct it in their classrooms and within themselves, a key component in culturally
responsive teaching. Moreover, Research Question Two asks what preservice teachers were
motivated to utilize culturally relevant programming. Participants’ ability to name Whiteness in
79
their lived experience proves the beginning motivational stage of a CRT lens, awareness
(Hammond, 2015). Education is heavily impacted by systems of Whiteness, especially within
curriculum, standards, assessment, and funding (Crenshaw, 2010, p. 10). White-based,
Eurocentric programming perpetuates a cycle of alienation, exclusion, and inequity. By using a
critical CRT lens participants would be able to transition toward access, opportunity, and
enjoyment while focusing on increased representation reflective of the diverse student population
(Mensah & Jackson, 2018).
Discussion Research Question Two
Research Question Two provided insight on preservice teachers’ motivation or lack of
motivation to utilize CRT and their perception of the implications of Eurocentric thinking and
curriculum. Culturally relevant pedagogy has the power to transform learning into an inclusive
space filled with rigorous learning, ways to challenge preconceived notions and support
culturally relevant teaching as a means to meet the needs of a diverse group of students (Mensah,
2011). The main findings from Research Question Two led to three themes: Identity; Name,
Describe, Question, then Dismantle; and Grappling with Whiteness. Research Question Two
asked what culturally relevant pedagogy or curriculum was present in the participant’s TPP.
Culturally Relevant Teaching starts with the awareness of identity of self, students, and the
community at large. The findings point to a beginning understanding of identity embedded
within the TPP. For change to happen, preservice teachers must anchor themselves in
understanding their own identities, and their student’s identities, and challenge their thinking
about what teaching students effectively looks like (Mensah, 2013; Muhammad, 2020).
Research Question Two asked participants to name Eurocentric practices in their TPP and
if they were challenged and addressed at all. The findings imply that students were motivated to
80
name moments of Eurocentric or colorblind practices in their TPP but questioning and
dismantling Eurocentric practices remains an area of growth. Participants had made steps to
acknowledge Whiteness but were still grappling with the duality of awareness and action.
Naming Culturally Relevant Teaching and Pedagogy taking place in their learning strengthens
the understanding of the students preservice teachers are aiming to serve, therefore creating a
more equitable educational foundation for all students being served. Conversely, being able to
name, describe, question, and dismantle pillars of educational existence, such as Whiteness as
property, presented a gap in understanding and application thus remaining an essential battle
toward a more equitable future.
Results Research Question Three: Organizational Impact on CRT Application
How does the preservice teachers’ organization impact the implementation of culturally
responsive practices?
The findings from Research Question Three led to three themes: Opportunities to
Implement Culturally Relevant Teaching; Barriers to Implement Culturally Relevant Teaching;
Reinvention of Typical Teacher Preparation Programming. Theme One offers participant
perspectives on opportunities participants had to implement CRT in their own practice. Theme
Two provided instances where barriers or misconceptions arose when planning or implementing
CRT. Theme Three presents unique ideas expressed by participants around the reinvention of
teacher preparation programming. As Gay (2002) and Ladson-Billings (2016) describe;
culturally responsive pedagogies encompass the social-emotional, relational, and cognitive
aspects of teaching culturally and linguistically diverse students. The nature of CRT application
does not exist without challenge, organizational limitations, or misconceptions. This finding was
echoed throughout the research gleaned from participant interviews. As stated in Chapter Two,
81
Hammond (2015) acknowledges there is much confusion over what culturally responsive
teaching is and how it works. The confusion generated from the lack of knowledge and
understanding leads to a dismembered and inconsistent approach to CRP in the classroom. In this
study, participants were able to offer their unique perspectives by sharing opportunities they have
had to enact CRP or imagine they will have in the future, as well as limitations and barriers they
have or foresee they will experience. Interview questions asked to gain evidence for this research
question included:
1) Do you think there are any strengths or weaknesses to implementing Culturally
Responsive practices in the classroom?
2) Do you think that CRP has the potential to strengthen student knowledge? To strengthen
the students’ connection to their community? How?
3) Name challenging parts of implementing CRP
a) What barriers do you face? Do others assist you?
Theme One: Opportunities to Implement Culturally Relevant Teaching
Theme One centered on participant perspectives on CRT application in their own
classrooms. Many participants expressed that cultural relevance was becoming more mainstream
in their internal practice. For example, several participants shared that cultural relevance became
part of their lesson planning expectations within their TPP. Similar to accommodations and
modifications components of lesson planning for students with Individual Education Plans
(IEPs). Culturally responsive teaching was often brought up as aspects of learning in their TPP,
but opportunities to unpack and disseminate how to make CRT actionable appeared to be an area
of needed growth. Participant 2 shared a powerful reflection about the strengths she sees in
implementing CRT as well as a poignant reflection on the intersection of Whiteness,
82
There are a couple of strengths to doing [CRT]. First is if you do have students who
come from different cultures in your classroom, they can see themselves represented in
the content that you’re delivering. I think that’s super important. I feel like a lot of people
say, “Oh, it’s not that important.” The people saying that have seen themselves in their
own spaces without them knowing it. They don’t know what it’s like to not be seen in a
classroom. I think another strength is that the students in your classroom will be learning
those concepts they can take into the outside world because that’s essentially what we’re
doing- preparing [students] for the outside world. If we want to prepare them, well, we
need to prepare them for the realities of what they’re going to see in the world.
Participant 3 added that large cultural movements such as Black Lives Matter have helped to put
a focus on CRT. They report that CRT is something that has been addressed often within the
senior block of the teacher preparation program. They asserted:
As a society, we are getting better. The fact that we are trying to celebrate other
people’s differences. Teaching is all about relevancy and trying to get better, I think that
is why it’s been a big part of my classroom. I took this middle-level literacy class. What
we had to do is read. Basically, read a bunch of culturally relevant and diverse books.
That was a really interesting class. I really want to bring some of those books that I read
into my own class because I want my children to feel like societies are becoming more
and more diverse, that they can see themselves in the curriculum and in the books that
they read.
Participant 3 went on to report that collaborating with peers as well as professors has helped to
strengthen their understanding of how to enact CRT in the classroom. Most importantly,
Participant 3 shared the importance of listening to their students.
83
Participant 9 offered further opportunities to implement CRT including early exposure to
diverse narratives. They reported that creating relevant learning for students allows them to
create a greater sense of community as well as exposes them to a world they will see as more
reflective of their existence. Participant 5 shared that the strength of CRT is that even if your
classroom is homogenous, that does not mean you can not talk about a variety of issues. They
added, “I think the whole idea of tolerance is a strength. If you, if you teach students how to talk
about something safely, beyond the classroom, especially with the climate that we live in now.”
Participant 8 highlighted the unique nature each year of teaching offers an educator, as
each class is different. They framed their understanding of CRT with the knowledge that it would
not necessarily be the easiest road but it remains what is best for students. They theorized,
I would say, being responsive to the culture, that’s present in your classroom. Each class
is going to be different, have a different culture, and different students come from
different backgrounds. [CRT] is not just incorporating your own culture, but the culture
around you, even the community around you could be different.
Theme One focused on the many strengths of implementing CRT from the perspective of
the participants. Culturally responsive teaching cannot center around just culture. As stated in
Chapter Two, implicit bias and structural racialization underpin opportunities for students, and
teachers, of color-especially in the classroom (Hammond, 2015, p. 34). Though three participants
cited specific examples of putting CRT into action, a gap in the application was present.
Theme Two: Barriers to Implement Culturally Responsive Teaching
Theme Two brought forth participant perspectives when it came to experienced or
predicted barriers to application. As Freire and Valdez (2017) describe, four barriers that
interfere with the ability to implement CRT are lack of time, lack of culturally relevant materials,
84
lack of knowledge about CRP, and the belief that social justice is inappropriate for children.
Participant 1 explained, “Teachers need to be invested in CRT when looking out for students’
interests and cultures, it takes time to invest in a student.” Confirming notions of potential
barriers to CRT implementation, Ebersole et al. (2016) study asserted,
Without a firm foundation or having a perspective that supports culturally responsive
teaching, teachers saw culturally responsive teaching as limited “doing activities.”
Without a lens that valued culturally responsive teaching, teachers saw many barriers and
were limited by external factors such as lack of time, lack of resources, and competing
initiatives (p. 102).
Participant 3 concedes CRT might be difficult for certain groups to understand, namely White
people. They explained that resistance to change and letting go of positions of power could be
largely part of a fear of losing control:
I think a lot of people just don’t really understand why you’re trying to be culturally
relevant, because most of our textbooks are written primarily by White race. They don’t
really understand why we would have to change that. I think it’s kind of a resistance to
change is something why people wouldn’t necessarily understand why we’re doing
[CRT]. Some people just think it’s kind of overplayed in society, especially right now. I
have noticed that people don’t really agree with everything that’s going on. It’s usually
because they don’t understand the change and like they might be scared of change.
Participant 5 elaborated on fear of community pushback. They echoed Freire and Valdez’s
(2017) analysis of barriers to CRT implementation in the classroom. Freire and Valdez name
three factors that contribute to the deficit mindset surrounding CRT practices: the belief that
children do not have the cognitive understanding to grasp social justice concepts, that children
85
could be emotionally hurt by discussion of these topics, and that developmentally appropriate
approaches were not possible in CRP. Participant 5 voiced,
I think that community pushback is one of the biggest things because if [White] parents
don’t see their child directly reflected in what you’re doing, they feel that that’s a
disservice to their child, even though that might not be the case. That would be one of my
fears. In the future, how to justify what I am doing to parents who don’t agree.
Participant 8 asserted that time and lack of cultural knowledge could be potential barriers to
implementing CRT in their classroom. However, they acknowledge that the benefits perhaps
outweigh any barriers. They narrated:
I think maybe some barriers are not knowing how to incorporate it if the culture is
different from yours. If the culture is the same I’m just gonna do the same. But once it’s
different. You may not want to take the time to learn because it does take time, and you
have a million other things to do. But I think [CRT] strengthens how students would feel
more involved and included in the classroom, not like, “Oh, I’m not the same culture, or
have the same culture as a teacher, like I matter in this class. So incorporating that culture
in my classroom can help.
Research Question Three asks how culturally responsive pedagogies are embedded into
learning in the participants’ classrooms. The findings imply that participants assert the value of
CRT practices yet still need the confidence and tools to strengthen the critical lens CRT practices
require. Additionally, participants assert barriers to implementation of CRT that include,
curriculum access, community pushback, lack of time, and lack of awareness of other cultures.
The gap between White teachers and students of color continues to grow. The findings
from Research Question Two help to gain a preliminary, vital understanding of the direction
86
TPPs need to reroute in order to properly embed CRT practices into preservice teachers'
classrooms. With student populations becoming more economically, linguistically, and ethnically
diverse, it is critical that we analyze the “unspoken norms of Whiteness” that continue to create
barriers for students of color embedded in classrooms (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). As Hammond
(2015) iterates, “Culturally responsive teachers must develop a sociopolitical consciousness
acknowledging we live in a racialized society that gives unearned privileges to some whole
others experiencing unearned disadvantages because of race, gender, class or language” (p.18).
Until that is achieved, the cycle of inequity will continue for schooling in the United States.
Theme Three: Reinvention of Typical Teacher Preparation Programming
Disrupting and redesigning teacher preparation programs is no easy feat. Bertrand and
Porcher (2020) assert that redesigning TPPs is a necessary task in order to ensure that preservice
teachers are prepared to teach students who do not look like or share similar racial, ethnic, and or
cultural backgrounds. In order for progress to be made and truly prepare preservice teachers for
racially and socioeconomically diverse schools, analysis and disruption of norms in TPPs are
essential to better center diverse student needs.
Participant 2 stated that they felt their TPP did a great job talking about adolescent
development but missed the mark when it came to the intersections of development and student
identity. Participant 1 shared similar ideas of redesign with Participant 2 when it came to student
input. Participant 1 asserted that preservice teachers should have a voice when it came to course
redesign. They reported that connection was lacking between programs and cohorts, with
learning taking place in silos. For example, Participant 3 shared that the Urban Education
program, Special Education Program, and English as a Second Language program mostly took
classes within their respective programs providing little opportunity for connection and
87
communication between programs. Participant 1 stated, “getting more connection between
[classes] because we work so much when we’re in the building. So during preparation, figure out
how to communicate more.” According to Hammond (2015) creating an environment and
community that centers on care, support, belonging, and communication is integral to
implementing CRT (p. 19).
When considering implementing CRT into their classroom, Participant 3 wondered if
redesigning aspects of their TPP would lead to a greater opportunity to embed CRT into learning.
Participant 3 lamented that access to quality culturally responsive texts in their classrooms would
be an area to rethink and redesign. Though Participant 3 named a lack of abundant curriculum as
a limitation, they also shared a growth mindset and initiative by locating culturally responsive
texts and sharing them with friends and colleagues. Participant 3 believes updated texts should
be an aspect of TPP redesign. They add,
I do think that [TPP] should make us read more culturally relevant textbooks. I do read
other culturally relevant books that I’m going to share with my students, but I think that
having more updated textbooks on how to be culturally relevant and diverse is important
because we have talked about it. But I feel like not really the textbooks have reflected
that. I don’t think you should read the same textbooks forever. Defeats the purpose, right?
Things are supposed to evolve and change.
Participant 3 highlighted a key aspect of CRT including responding to the world around you and
most importantly the students occupying that world. The participant was able to show a method
of how they are actively embedding CRT into their classroom through their practice.
Participant 5 reflected on their experience so far and indicated they wished their
reflective lens could have been developed earlier in their college career. They shared that now as
88
a senior, they feel as though they could have benefited from a more responsive lens earlier on.
They reported, “I see that there are gaps of knowledge that in my content that I have that I think I
would approach differently had I had some of the diversity classes earlier on.”
Research Question Three asked participants to reflect on opportunities and or limitations
to implementing culturally responsive practices in their classrooms. Through this lens, the
participants were able to analyze and reflect on their learning experiences in their TPP and how
reimaging their coursework could better serve themselves and their students. Thinking about
limitations as a means of reimagining coursework led many of the participants to include ideas
about TPP redesign. Rethinking the TPP led five participants to conclude additional experience
with special education and English as a Second Language would benefit most preservice
teachers. TPP redesign is a necessary task to ensure preservice teachers are prepared to teach
students who do not look like or share similar racial, ethnic, or cultural backgrounds (Bertrand &
Porcherl 2020). Opportunities to rethink and reimagine their own learning experiences
demonstrate how these preservice teachers aim to live CRT practices by providing authentic
moments to pause, reflect, and reimagine.
Discussion Research Question Three
In response to Research Question Three, participants shared the opportunities or lack
thereof to embed culturally relevant pedagogies into their teaching experience. The limitations of
implementation appeared to outweigh the opportunities. This problem can be remedied by
reimagining how TPPs operate and what is considered effective teaching of students from
diverse backgrounds. Research Question Three led to findings surrounding the opportunities for
implementing CRT practices, barriers or limitations to implementing CRT practices, and the
redesigning of typical TPPs from the perspective of current TPP students. Through their shared
89
understanding, participants were able to voice their ideas about what the future of TPPs could
look like, depending on who is doing the redesigning. According to the participants, a greater
variety of voices, structures, and systems need to be implemented to help TPPs reach preservice
teachers and the students they intend to serve.
Summary
Chapter Four presented the findings from one-on-one semi-structured interviews and a
reflective prompt conducted with nine preservice teachers. The purpose of this qualitative study
was to investigate how teacher preparation programs prepare teacher candidates to teach all
students using culturally relevant pedagogies. This chapter deciphered how preservice teachers
perceive culturally responsive pedagogies within their own TPP, the existence of Eurocentric,
Whitewashed curriculum, coursework, or programming, and the opportunities and limitations to
implementing CRT-based strategies in the preservice teacher sown practice.
All participants acknowledged the potential benefits of CRT practices, however, the
effectiveness of and means of delivery greatly varied. Motivational factors that led to
implementation varied from participant to participant. Influences on implementation from each
participant reflected not only their experience throughout the TPP so far but their lived
experiences, cultural backgrounds, and location of their upbringing. Results from this research
study indicate that students are interested and beginning to understand CRT practices but a gap in
common language, accountability, and practical application strategies exist.
The majority of participants were able to name more limitations to implement CRT than
opportunities which point to a possible larger gap in preservice teacher knowledge of CRT. The
results from this study indicated the presence of Whiteness and Eurocentric curriculum was a
highly contested factor of influence for this study’s participants. Four out of nine participants
90
were able to explain how Whiteness exists within curriculum and education. However, five
participants were not sure what Whiteness in education meant or did not believe it was a
phenomenon that existed. These preliminary findings align with current research and suggest the
acknowledgment of Whiteness, Eurocentric, and colorblind ideology leading to a gap in
knowledge and motivation in regards to decentering this type of curriculum.
Reimaging teacher preparation brought forth unique understandings from participants but
did not quite overlap extensively with components of CRT. Interestingly, no participant
mentioned student voice or student-led instruction. The preliminary findings here showcase there
can be steps toward the emergence of CRT from the perspective of TPP students but in no way is
it all-encompassing. Results suggest that there is still work to do to center student voice, diverse
lived experiences, and joy in education. Participants honestly shared their perspectives and
painted a positive picture of the future of education. As Muhammad (2022) says, “What would
happen if making the world a better place and developing student joy were the ultimate goals of
education? And policymakers spent their time in these two areas. How beautiful time would be
spent.”
91
Chapter Five: Discussion
White teachers in the United States continue to, consciously or otherwise, perpetuate
Eurocentric-based disparities by not examining the impact of their Whiteness in their teaching
practices (Reyes et al., 2018). In most curriculums and teacher preparation programs, the
experiences and oppression of Black people, Latinx people, Indigenous People, Asian and
Pacific Islander people, and other minority groups in the United States are largely ignored
(Mensah & Jackson, 2018). As seen in Chapter One, teacher preparation in the United States
presents gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organization when it comes to preparing teachers to
educate students from linguistically, culturally, ethnically, and racially different backgrounds.
Throughout the Literature Review in Chapter Two, the roots, history, and perpetuated inequities
throughout the United States’ education system were examined. This study utilized a conceptual
frame created by aligning the theoretical framework of Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis,
content knowledge from the Literature Review in Chapter Two, and the Research Questions that
guided the study. Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis is an evidence-based framework meant to
identify the causes of performance gaps and develop solutions based on deficiencies. Under the
gap analysis, three primary influences are considered to affect success toward goals: lack of
knowledge, lack of motivation, and organization and or cultural barriers. The purpose of this
study is to investigate traditionally Eurocentric aspects of curriculum and teacher preparation
programs and the implications of Culturally Responsive Pedagogy (CRP) from the perspective of
preservice teachers. Chapter Five summarizes findings related to the implications of current
teaching preparation and teaching practices, identifies gaps in understanding and cultural
literacy, and develops a framework to embed further culturally responsive pedagogies in teacher
preparation and onwards.
92
This qualitative study utilized nine unique perspectives from middle school preservice
teachers at a large midwestern university. Participants were recruited with the help of an assistant
professor in the education department. An email containing a recruitment letter detailing the
study was sent out to all possible participants. To qualify for the study, participants needed to be
over the age of 18, have completed or nearing completion of 200 clinical hours in a K-12 setting
at a specific midwestern university, enrolled as a student at the university, and planning to pursue
a job as an educator after degree completion and certification. Out of the eligible educators, ten
preservice teachers responded to the study request, and nine were eligible to participate. The
following research questions guided the study:
1) What knowledge did preservice teachers perceive to gain around culturally responsive
pedagogies embedded within their TPP, coursework, or curriculum?
2) In what ways were preservice teachers motivated to utilize culturally relevant pedagogy
and curriculum? To what extent were preservice teachers motivated to address, decenter
or challenge Eurocentric, Whitewashed practices?
3) How does the preservice teachers’ organization impact the implementation of culturally
responsive practices?
In this study, data were collected via one-on-one semi-structured interviews conducted
through Zoom lasting 30 to 45 minutes and a reflective prompt. The interview protocol asked
participants to answer nine questions surrounding teacher preparation and the implications of
culturally responsive teaching and pedagogies. Though there was a prescriptive protocol, I used
my best judgment and flexibility to determine when probes or clarifying questions were needed.
The questions asked were carefully triangulated, to the best of my ability framed without bias,
devoid of leading assumptions, and without any double-barrelled questions. Data collected for
93
the semi-structured interviews followed Lockmiller and Lester’s (2017) method of Collecting
Qualitative Data. The answers to the interview questions were recorded and transcribed via
Otter.ai. After transcription, the data gleaned from the interviews were analyzed for
commonalities, inconsistencies, and possible gaps in understanding. Next, data were organized
into categories and themes, making connections to the literature review and using Clark and
Estes’s (2008) gap analysis.
In particular, the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework was used to investigate
how teacher preparation programs (TTP) prepare teacher candidates to teach all students using
culturally relevant pedagogies to identify gaps in current practices and performance in areas of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. The gap analysis in turn helped to develop
possible solutions to help guide stakeholders as they develop and study recommendations for
change and improvement.
Discussion of Findings
Following the analysis of data from the semi-structured interviews and reflective prompt,
all three research questions were answered. The findings from this study are preliminary in
nature and are limited to the perspectives of a stakeholder group of eight middle-school
preservice teachers at one university. From the data analysis, the findings reveal that all
participants perceive to have been impacted by Whiteness and culturally relevant teaching in
their Teacher Preparation Program. Interview responses from each participant highlighted
specific culturally responsive pedagogies and strategies they saw replicated in their TPP. At the
same time, participants’ degrees of understanding and application of CRT practices varied
greatly. Furthermore, participants’ understanding of Whiteness as property, Whitewashed
curricula, and Eurocentric thinking proved to encompass a wide range of awareness. The
94
participants were purposeful about centering students in their classrooms and creating inclusive
environments. Overall, participants seemed to be in the beginning stages of understanding and
implementing CRT practices to serve a diverse group of students. From the data analysis and
reflection on the nine themes established in Chapter Four, four prominent findings emerged. The
following section presents a summary of the study’s findings in relation to the existing literature
available and current practices.
Nice White Teacher: Reframing the Status Quo
Research Question One asked, What knowledge did preservice teachers perceive to gain
around culturally responsive pedagogies embedded within their TPP, coursework, or
curriculum? The interview data connected to Research Question One led to the first finding that
indicated racial identity remains mostly masked in Teacher Preparation Programs. Awareness of
your own identity and acknowledging the socio-political context around race and culture are key
aspects of the Ready for Rigor Framework (Hammond, 2015). Without an initial understanding
of identity, CRT practices can not be put into practice with fluency or fidelity.
This finding aligns with available literature regarding Whiteness in teacher preparation
and in teaching at large and racialized identity. NCES (2019) found that 79% of the United States
K-12 teaching force identified as White. In this study, two out of nine participants referred to
Whiteness as part of their identity, meaning 78% of participants did not address race at all when
it came to their identity. The lack of awareness and acknowledgment of race proves to be
problematic, especially given the diverse makeup of students in the United States.
Participants were not narrow-minded about identity, but perhaps ignorant of the many
ever-changing intersections of power and privilege that identity can hold. Three participants
asserted their role as a woman and being from a middle-class town as part of their identity. Two
95
participants mentioned being from a “mostly White” town as a facet of their identity, distancing
themselves from the idea of race by not claiming it as their own. Findings from data analysis
align with the literature review and point to a gap in knowledge when it comes to acknowledging
the racialized society education lives in. The marker of “Nice White Ladies” comes to mind, as
Whiteness is maintained through many vehicles within the context of education, particularly the
lack of acknowledgment of race’s existence and impact on students. DePouw (2016) defines
Nice White Ladies as an off-shoot of White Saviorism. They structure the explanation of “Nice
White Ladies” White teachers who “save” youth of color by relying on three interrelated factors:
maintaining and normalizing tenets of White supremacy, cultural deficit framing of students and
communities of color, and an ahistorical, decontextualized understanding of institutional
educational inequity.
Many people have been indoctrinated with the belief of colorblindness as a feature of
“equality” in the classroom (Clements & Stutelberg, 2020). These ideals help to distance White
people further from examining their own racialized identity by continuing the myth that it is
possible to not see racialized bodies. Preservice teachers must actively work to acknowledge and
examine their own identity and alignment with Whiteness as a feature of racialized identity in the
United States (Hammond, 2015). Research Question One helped to uncover the first finding
indicating racial identity remains largely unearthed based on the perspectives and lived
experiences of the nine participants in one midwestern TPP. Additional research would be
needed to expand on this understanding. As racial identity holds a large weight in sociopolitical
consciousness, we must acknowledge that we live in a racialized society that gives unearned
privileges to some. While others experience unearned disadvantages based on race, gender, class,
or language (Hammond, 2015).
96
Growth in Risk-Taking
Research Question Two asked, in what ways were preservice teachers motivated to utilize
culturally relevant pedagogy and curriculum? To what extent were preservice teachers motivated
to address decenter or challenge Eurocentric, Whitewashed practices? The second finding was
that most participants were motivated to dismantle traditional systems in schools, especially
curriculum and texts. Disrupting the normativity of Whiteness, especially in education, has
historically been difficult. According to Arday (2018), challenging Whiteness in educational
spaces is paramount to disrupting the cycle of inequality within our society. Whiteness, in this
case, was proving to manifest itself in the form of outdated curricula or texts that did not reflect
the global majority. By asserting a shift in educational culture, the participants in this study
aligned themselves with a wave of change towards equity within education.
Under Hammond’s (2015) Four Practice Areas of Culturally Responsive Teaching,
culturally responsive teachers take advantage of the fact that our brains are wired for connection.
That connection can be established through providing content co-collaborated with students or
selected in a way that is reflective of their lived or familiar experiences. Participant 5 shared
exploring non-traditional texts and learning how to evaluate texts with a critical lens as one of
their greatest take away from their TPP. Participant 2 added rethinking “the classics” as an
important part of their future classroom. Engaging in culturally responsive dialogue around
traditional texts asserted that the participant is on the spectrum of understanding CRT. Participant
3 shared that having their students reflected in their coursework was a non-negotiable aspect of
their classroom.
A noteworthy finding is that many participants shared discussions of risk-taking in the
classroom happening not only academically but socially, meaning peers were challenging one
97
another not only in the classroom but outside of the context of a learning environment.
Hammond (2015) maintains that a key practice area for CRT is rooted in focusing on community
building and creating an environment that stimulates socially and intellectually safe spaces for
learners to take risks. The findings from Research Question One around growth in risk-taking
align with Hammond’s (2015) assertion of the intersections of curriculum and the impact of
student cultural reflection.
Discomfort Avoidance
The third finding centered on the discomfort participants felt when it came to
implementing CRT in their classrooms or future classrooms. Contrasting finding two, finding
three found participants cited fear of backlash from stakeholders such as parents, other teachers,
and community members. Seven participants shared that they would avoid implementing CRT
because they did not want to upset students by learning about other cultures. Avoiding
implementing CRT highlights another tenet of Whiteness in circumventing directly addressing
and confronting racism.
Literature supports this finding of discomfort avoidance as an organizational/cultural
deficit. DiAngelo (2011) explains this phenomenon as part of White fragility, which is defined as
an emotional response from White people in response to accusations of racism or discrimination.
Avoidance was seen as a primary concern for some participants, however, four participants stated
the only barrier they saw to CRT was a lack of practical experience implementing it, which will
be discussed further in the fourth finding.
Scratching the Surface
Research Question Three asks, how does the preservice teachers’ organization impact the
implementation of culturally responsive practices? The interview data connected to Research
98
Question Three led to the fourth finding; many preservice teachers desire to impart CRT
practices in their classrooms but feel woefully inadequate at doing so. Many participants
expressed that they have not had enough experience clinically with diverse groups of students.
Others reported that though they were able to develop a more critically responsive lens as time
went on, they would have benefited from having this lens throughout their entire undergraduate
experience.
Though the majority of participants expressed the importance of embedding culturally
responsive pedagogies into learning, many harbor fears over improper implementation on their
end. Participant 4 explained that although they are getting more comfortable navigating the
cultural needs of students, practical experience is still lacking. A noteworthy consideration is the
uniqueness of the clinical and practical experiences this group of preservice teachers experienced
as the country was in the third year of the global COVID-19 pandemic.
Robust literature found that TPPs and professionals are not sufficiently preparing
educators to bring culturally responsive teaching to life in the classroom (Muniz, 2019). From
the perspective of the nine participants, this study found that gaps existed in the implementation
and understanding of CRT practices. The participants shared some evidence suggesting their TPP
attempted to teach culturally relevant pedagogy. However, a disconnect is evident between what
preservice teachers learn about CRT and what it means to be a culturally responsive practitioner
upon entering the classroom (Warren, 2017; Young, 2010). Warren (2017) asserts that preservice
teachers are not adequately prepared for teaching in diverse schools and that they are unable to
apply culturally relevant pedagogy to their practice.
99
Delimitations and Limitations
Limitations of the study pertained to generalizability due to the sampling of participants
and respondent validity due to the reliance on interview testimony and prompts for qualitative
data collection. Though I took measures to increase the reliability of the study by using
researcher reflexivity, collaboration, and peer befriending, the practices could have been
strengthened throughout the study. Specifically, after the analysis of data, peer checks were
utilized to review transcripts from the interviews. In retrospect, participants reviewing transcripts
from the interviews as well as observation notes would have increased reliability and
strengthened the interpretations and findings.
Additional limitations of the study include:
● The study’s sample size was limited to nine participants meaning the findings
would not be generalized.
● The qualitative nature of the study could lead to different interpretations of the
research.
● The findings are limited to a short period of time.
● The limited number of preservice teachers’ interviews may not reflect the beliefs
or perspectives of the majority.
● The participants were asked for their own perspectives meaning their responses
may have been limited due to their experience, knowledge, or bias.
● The sample population was based on the willingness and convenience of
participants to join the study. This may have limited the potential participants to
those who would be able to work within my schedule and time constraints.
100
● The sample used consisted of eight out of nine women and eight out of nine
self-identified White people. This presents data largely skewed under the White,
female gaze.
● My own positionality as a member of the 79% of White, middle-class female
teachers. Additionally, I identify as cis-gendered, able-bodied, heterosexual, and
US-born making them part of the dominant cultural narrative.
The delimitations of the study include the selection of the institution of study as well as
the sample size of the participants. This study centered on one TPP at a small mid-western
university with the population of the TPP being majority White, therefore, skewing the data
under the White gaze. Therefore, the data collected may not be generalizable to other institutions
or regions of the United States. Future studies, based on this one, would need to be reproduced in
different regions across the country.
Additional delimitations of the study:
● All participants were from the state of Illinois.
● The specific set of criteria the participants had to meet.
● The data gathered is only from the perspective of preservice teachers, not
additional stakeholders.
● In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, interviews were conducted via Zoom or
Google Suite. This may have created a weaker researcher-participant rapport.
Implications for Practice
This study is an investigation of traditionally Eurocentric aspects of curriculum and
teacher preparation programs and the impact of CRT. The findings from this study surfaced
through Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framework, pointing to key influences on
101
knowledge, motivation, and organizational or cultural deficits from the perspective of preservice
teachers. Implications for practice based on the study’s findings call to action administration,
staff, faculty, and students in higher education institutions. Three implications for practice can be
addressed in this study from the perspective of preservice teachers. The first implication for
practice is for TPPs to root programming in identity, positionality, and intersectionality. The
second implication for practice is to honor students’ voices. The third implication for practical
application is an implementation of a CRT framework. Table 2 summarizes the implications for
future research.
Table 2
Suggested Implications for Future Practice Based on Themes
Recommendations for Future Practice
1. TPPs to root programming in identity, positionality, and intersectionality.
2. honor student voice
3. implementation of a CRT framework
102
Intertwined Intersections of Identities
The findings from the study revealed that a comprehensive understanding of self could
have been further delineated. Though all participants expressed that their TPP brought pieces of
their identity into their learning, many remained confused about the implications of identity in
practice. The first implication for practice is for TPPs to root programming in identity,
positionality, and intersectionality. One participant expressed that more mining of their identity
was done socially with their diverse group of friends from various backgrounds, majors, and life
experiences than what they experienced within their TPP coursework. Three participants from
the study shared that identity was accessed in their TPP but mostly around gender. One
participant shared that if you asked what their identities were, they would not have an answer for
you.
Robust data support that identity plays a key role in creating patterns of racial
opportunity, especially the role White teacher identity plays (Picowar, 2009). The TPP needs to
investigate what ideologies and social conditioning have shaped their collective understanding of
student identities. Clear embedded examples of engaging in identity questioning are vital to
changing the status quo and outcomes of TPPs. For example, Muhammad (2020) endorses
engaging in dialogue or writing about “who are you” frequently as identities shift and change.
Student Voice
Participants were consistent in their cry for a more modern approach to not only their
curriculum in their TPP but the curriculum they were utilizing in the classroom for their students.
The second implication for practice is for TPPs to open space for students’ voices. Preservice
teachers expressed their desire to name, describe, question, and dismantle areas of Eurocentric,
Whitewashed, and colorblind perspectives that live in the TPP, but do not have the correct tools
103
or lens yet. As a tenant of the Ready for Rigor (Hammond, 2015) framework, reimagining the
student and teacher relationship as a partnership looks at the current dynamics present in a
classroom and shifts the power balance to be more inclusive of the student’s voices.
It is evident that the participants believe students from different cultures, ethnic, racial,
and linguistic backgrounds should see themselves in the content being taught. Participant 3
shared that making content relevant to students’ lives strengthens student knowledge and
connection to the community by creating shared experiences and fostering student ownership.
The majority of participants felt underprepared to implement CRT on their own, by including
student voice at the higher education level and replicating that in K-12 classrooms, major
progress can be made towards a more equitable educational future.
Implementing a CRT Framework
Throughout the interview process, participants shared many different aspects of CRT in
their TPP and personal practice but a large disconnect remained. The third implication for
practice is implementing a framework for culturally responsive teaching in order to explicitly
teach practices and sharpen preservice teachers’ critical lens. When asked for ways to reimagine
their TPPs, a majority of participants cited more connections between courses, clinicals, and
peers. When asked to clarify this response, Participant 6 shared that observing CRT practices and
offering more opportunities to dialogue about CRT with classmates and experts would be
beneficial. Another participant asserted that developing a CRT lens earlier in the TPP would
create a greater benefit for the preservice teachers throughout their course work and in turn
benefit their students.
Ready for Rigor (Hammond, 2015) has been referenced throughout this study as a valid
framework for CRT practices. Another recommendation is for universities to take a look at their
104
TPPs and adapt this framework, or something similar, to fit the needs of their students. Upon
adopting a framework, a vital and non-negotiable step is to include multiple community
stakeholders. Stakeholders to be included could be; professors, researchers, preservice teachers,
students, parents, and community members. Including multiple communities, and stakeholders
allow for a greater shared voice and a clearer, triangulated vision of CRT practices in the future.
Future Research
To address the needs of the ever-growing culturally, racially, ethnically, and linguistically
diverse population of students in the United States, TPPs must adapt their practices to be more
culturally responsive. The preliminary findings in this study suggest that TPPs must understand
the power of students’ voices and include the community in aspects of learning. Two areas of
future research are necessary to expand the understanding of implementing CRT practices in a
Whitewashed world.
This study needs to be replicated nationally in larger TPPs and with additional
stakeholder groups within TPPs such as professors, students, researchers, community members,
and alumni. Critical research is needed to understand how TPPs are addressing their impact on
the replication of harm through education. Repeating this study nationally could assist
undergraduate and graduate teacher training programs to name, describe, question, analyze, and
dismantle parts of their program that does not serve and reflect the diverse tapestry of students
they will serve or hope to serve. Replicating this study in Historically Black Colleges and
Universities (HBCUs) is a necessary step toward increasing teacher diversity to reflect the
students being served.
Additionally, this study should be replicated with a larger, more diverse group of
participants. Out of the nine participants, only one participant identified themselves as a race
105
other than White. Though White educators continue to be the majority throughout the United
States, providing a more diverse group of voices would provide a clearer understanding of the
impact TPPs have on students from diverse backgrounds. Moreover, adding in further probes and
questions around student identity could help to tease out an understanding of Whiteness in
education and the awareness of racial identity.
Finally, teachers and education advocates can reference this study as a means to reflect on
and analyze the culturally relevant practices they have adopted at any stage of their careers.
Within schools and local districts, Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) can utilize the
Interview Protocol to reflect on their own practice, analyze their responses, and create a more
equitable school environment for their students.
Conclusions
Culturally responsive teaching is a complex tool that necessitates deep knowledge,
practice, and understanding. Untangling the deep web of Eurocentric, Whitewashed, colorblind
pedagogy throughout United States education continues to be a challenging topic to address. The
findings based on the perspectives of participants in this study suggest CRT must be woven into
a teacher’s practice and not seen as a separate entity practiced in only certain subjects, like
English Language Arts or Social Studies. Creating culturally responsive teachers through TPPs
requires a comprehensive commitment not only by the TPP and the University. In order for CRT
practices to be maximized and replicated, state and federal education must in turn incorporate a
reflective lens upon their own programming, policy, and how they are impacting minoritized
students.
This study found that participating preservice teachers needed to elevate their awareness
of their identity, positionality, and intersections of privilege and power they may hold. In line
106
with the Ready for Rigor framework, teachers must not only know and own their cultural lens
but embrace and discover the cultures of their students and their student’s families. Building
relationships by creating a collaborative environment that is an intellectually and socially safe
place for learning and respecting the diversity of all students is a necessary step towards
addressing equity in the classroom.
This study suggests that the band-aid approach does not work. We cannot slap a TPP with
a CRT sticker and expect any sort of change. Reimagining and redesigning TPPs to support
preservice teachers to understand CRT is not a destination but an ongoing discovery. Culturally
responsive teaching is an act and not a framework that lives in a textbook. Hammond (2015)
stated, “Culturally responsive teaching is the antidote to inequality.” However, culturally
responsive teaching is not a quick fix or something to add to lesson plans. TPPs should consider
redesigning their curriculum scope and sequence to include a scaled approach to uncovering
intersections of existence both students and teachers carry with them, such as; identity, race,
privilege, and power.
Reimagining TPPs to ensure all teachers can teach all students will require a major shift.
CRT must be implemented with fidelity at the school, district, state, and nationwide to have a
profound impact. It should be the utmost important goal as an educator to have a desire to create
safe learning environments for all students. That can only be achieved through a full
commitment to CRT through discomfort, risk-taking, awareness of identity, and reaching beyond
the surface of understanding. A teacher cannot be considered prepared to teach until they are able
to meet the needs of all students at all times.
107
References
Achebe, C. (2006). Things Fall Apart. Penguin Classics.
Allen, R., & Liou, D. (2019). Managing Whiteness: The Call for Educational Leadership to
Breach the Contractual Expectations of White Supremacy. Urban Education (Beverly
Hills, Calif.), 54(5), 677–705. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085918783819
Anagnostopoulos, Levine, T., Roselle, R., & Lombardi, A. (2018). Learning to redesign teacher
education: a conceptual framework to support program change. Teaching Education
(Columbia, S.C.), 29(1), 61–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2017.1349744
Anderson. (2010). The Education of Blacks in the South, 1860-1935. The University of North
Carolina Press. https://doi.org/10.5149/9780807898888_anderson
Annamma, S. (2015). 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
Annamma, S., D. Morrison, and D. Jackson. (2014.) “Disproportionality Fills the Gaps:
Connections between Achievement, Discipline and Special Education in the
School-to-Prison Pipeline.” Berkeley Review of Education. 5 (1): 53–87.
Annamma, Jackson, D. D., & Morrison, D. (2017). Conceptualizing color-evasiveness: using
dis/ability critical race theory to expand a color-blind racial ideology in education and
society. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 20(2), 147–162.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2016.1248837
Applebaum, B. (2016). Critical Whiteness studies. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education.
doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.5
Arday. (2018). Dismantling power and privilege through reflexivity: negotiating normative
108
Whiteness, the Eurocentric curriculum and racial microaggressions within the Academy.
Whiteness and Education (Print), 3(2), 141–161.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23793406.2019.1574211
Aronson, B. & Laughter, J. (2016). The Theory and Practice of Culturally Relevant Education: A
Synthesis of Research Across Content Areas. Review of Educational Research, 86(1),
163–206. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315582066
Asato, N. (2003). Mandating Americanization: Japanese language schools and the federal survey
of education in Hawai'i, 1916-1920. History of Education Quarterly, 43(1), 10-38.
Baldwin, J. (1962). As Much Truth As One Can Bear. New York Times , pp. 1–2.
Baldwin, J. (1963). Talk to teachers. http://richgibson.com/talktoteachers.htm
Baldwin, J. (1985). The Price of the Ticket : Collected Nonfiction, 1948-1985 (First edition.). St.
Martin’s/Marek.
Baszile, D. T. (2017). In Pursuit of the revolutionary-not-yet: Some thoughts on education work,
movement building, and praxis. Educational Studies, 53(3), 206–215.
Battiste, M. (2005). Indigenous knowledge: Foundations for first nations. WINHEC:
International Journal of Indigenous Education Scholarship, (1), 1-17.
Before We Can Have Anti-Racist Classrooms, Teacher Preparation Needs an Overhaul; My
knowledge of African American history did not come from schoolEoACAobut it should
have. (2020). Education Week, 40(6), 16–.
https://go-gale-com.libproxy1.usc.edu/ps/i.do?p=AONE&u=usocal_main&id=GALE|A6
37213435&v=2.1&it=r
Bergmark, U., Lundström, S., Manderstedt,. L., & Palo, A. (2018) Why become a teacher?
109
Student teachers’ perceptions of the teaching profession and motives for career choice,
European Journal of Teacher Education, 41:3, 266-281, DOI:
10.1080/02619768.2018.1448784
Berlak, H. (2001). “Race and the Achievement Gap.” Rethinking Schools 15 (4): 10–11.
Bertrand, & Porcher, K. (2020). Teacher Educators as Disruptors Redesigning Courses in
Teacher Preparation Programs to Prepare white Preservice Teachers. Journal of Culture
and Values in Education, 3(1), 72–88. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcve.03.01.5
Bogin, & Nguyen-Hoang, P. (2014). Property left behind: An unintended consequence of a no
child left behind “failing” school designation. Journal of Regional Science, 54(5),
788–805. https://doi.org/10.1111/jors.12141
Bonilla-Silva, E., & Zuberi, T. (2008). Toward a definition of white logic and white methods. In
T. Zuberi & E. Bonilla-Silva (Eds.), White logic, white methods: Racism and
methodology (pp. 3–27). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefeld.
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2010). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and racial inequality in
contemporary America (3rd ed.). Boulder, CO: Rowman & Littlefield.
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2014). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence
of racial inequality in America. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Bonilla-Silva. (2015). The Structure of Racism in Color-Blind, “Post-Racial” America. The
American Behavioral Scientist (Beverly Hills), 59(11), 1358–1376.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764215586826
Brooks, J. (1994). Chinua Achebe, The Art of Fiction No. 139. The Paris Review, 133.
https://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/1720/the-art-of-fiction-no-139-chinua-achebe
110
Brown, K. D. (2014). Teaching in color: A critical race theory in education analysis of the
literature on preservice teachers of color and teacher education in the US. Race Ethnicity
and Education, 17(3), 326–345.
Bryan-Gooden, J. M. Hester, & L. Q. Peoples (2019). Culturally Responsive Curriculum
Scorecard. New York: Metropolitan Center for Research on Equity and the
Transformation of Schools, New York University.
Buras, K. L. (2011). Race, charter schools, and conscious capitalism: On the spatial politics of
whiteness as property (and the unconscionable assault on black New Orleans). Harvard
Educational Review, 81(2), 296–331.
Byrd, C. (2016). Does Culturally Relevant Teaching Work? An Examination From Student
Perspectives. SAGE Open, 6(3), 215824401666074–.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016660744
Carr, P. R. (2011). Does your vote count? Critical pedagogy and democracy. New York: Peter
Lang Publishing.
Carter, S. P., Honeyford, M., McKaskle, D., Guthrie, F., Mahoney, S., & Carter, G. D. (2007).
What do you mean By whiteness?: A PROFESSOR, FOUR doctoral ... Retrieved
February 13, 2021, from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ899389.pdf
Cash, D. (2019). Unit 4 | Navigating the Social and Political Environment. Person Collection of
(David Cash), University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Castagno. (2012). “They Prepared Me to Be a Teacher, But Not a Culturally Responsive Navajo
Teacher for Navajo Kids”: A Tribal Critical Race Theory Analysis of an Indigenous
Teacher Preparation Program. Journal of American Indian Education, 51(1), 3–21.
111
Cheruvu, R., Souto-Manning, M., Lencl, T., & Chin-Calubaquib, M. (2015). Race, isolation, and
exclusion: What early childhood teacher educators need to know about the experiences of
pre-service teachers of color. Urban Review, 47(2), 237–265.
Choi, J. (2008). Unlearning colorblind ideologies in education class. The Journal of Educational
Foundations, 22(3/4), 53-71.
Chou, P., Su, M., & Wang, Y . (2018). Transforming teacher preparation for culturally responsive
teaching in Taiwan. Teaching and Teacher Education, 75, 116–127.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.06.013
Chu, & Garcia, S. B. (2021). Collective Teacher Efficacy and Culturally Responsive Teaching
Efficacy of Inservice Special Education Teachers in the United States. Urban Education
(Beverly Hills, Calif.), 56(9), 1520–1546. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085918770720
Clements, & Stutelberg, E. (2020). Getting read as rad: Performances of “nice white lady” and
tensions in teaching about white supremacy. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy, 17(2),
135–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/15505170.2020.1771484
Cochran-Smith, M., Villegas, A. M., Abrams, L., Chavez-Moreno, L., Mills, T., & Stern, R.
(2015).
Critiquing teacher preparation research: An overview of the field, part II. Journal of
teacher education, 66(2), 109-121.
Coleman, J., Campbell, E., Hobson, C., McPartland, J., Mood, A., Weinfeld, F. D., et al. (1966).
Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education
and Welfare.
Courtland, D. (2021). Reimagining a curriculum in crisis. PROSPECTS.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-021-09562-w
112
Crenshaw, Kimberlé; Gotanda, Neil; Peller, Gary; Thomas, Kendall, eds. (1995). Critical Race
Theory: The Key Writings that Formed the Movement. New York: The New Press. ISBN
978-1-56584-271-7.
Crenshaw, K. W. (2010). Twenty years of critical race theory: Looking back to move forward.
Conn. L. Rev., 43, 1253.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Clark, P., Zygmunt, E., Clausen, J., Mucherah, W., & Tancock, S. (2015). Transforming teacher
education for social justice. Teachers College Press.
Clark, R.E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results. Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.
Crenshaw, Kimberlé Williams; Gotanda, Neil; Peller, Gary; Thomas, Kendall, eds. (1996).
"Introduction". Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings that Formed the Movement. New
York City: The New Press. p. xiii. ISBN 978-1-56584-271-7
Cutler, K. D. (2019). Making race matter: Interrupting racial color-blindness in education
through the implementation of anti-racist curriculum (dissertation). Portland State
University. Department of Educational Leadership and Policy, Portland, OR.
CWS to Understand the White Imaginations of White Teacher Candidates. Equity & Excellence
in Education, 47(3), 289–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2014.933692
DaCunha, J., Cidalia M. (2016), "Disrupting Eurocentric Education through a Social Justice
Curriculum" (2016). International Development, Community and Environment (IDCE).
25. https://commons.clarku.edu/idce_masters_papers/25
Darling-Hammond. (2007). Race, inequality and educational accountability: the irony of “No
113
Child Left Behind.” Race, Ethnicity and Education, 10(3), 245–260.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13613320701503207
DataWheel. (2021). Data USA: Illinois State University. Data USA.
https://datausa.io/profile/university/illinois-state-university#enrollment.
Davidson. (2016). Were children left behind? Essays on the impact of No Child Left Behind on
state policy and school closure. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Dee, & Jacob, B. (2011). The impact of no Child Left Behind on student achievement. Journal
of Policy Analysis and Management, 30(3), 418–446. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20586
Delgado, R. & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical Race Theory (Third Edition): An
Introduction. NYU Press.
Delpit, L. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the class-room. New York: Free
Press.
Delpit, & Dowdy, J. K. (2002). The skin that we speak : thoughts on language and culture in the
classroom . New Press.
DePouw, C. (2016). Teachers as “Nice White Ladies”: Race, Gender and Neoliberalism.
Derman-Sparks, L., & Ramsey, P. G. (2011). What if all the kids are White?: Anti-bias
multicultural education with young children and families. New York, NY: Teachers
College Press.
DiAngelo, R. (2018). White fragility: Why it’s so hard for white people to talk about racism.
Beacon Press
Dillon, S. (2003, December 25). Diverse Schools More Likely to Be Labeled as Failing, Study
Says. New York Times. Retrieved January 7, 2022, from
https://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/25/us/diverse-schools-more-likely-to-be-labeled-as-fai
114
ling-study-says.html.
Donnor, J. (2013). Education as the property of whites: African Americans continued quest for
good schools. In M. Lynn & A. Dixson (Eds.), Handbook of critical race theory in
education. New York, NY: Routledge.
Du Bois, W. E. B. . (2018). The Souls of Black Folk: Essays and Sketches. University of
Massachusetts Press.
Ebersole, M., Kanahele-Mossman, H., & Kawakami, A. (2016). Culturally Responsive Teaching:
Examining Teachers’ Understandings and Perspectives. Journal of Education and
Training Studies, 4(2), 97-104.
Education Commission of the States. (2005). The nation’s report card.
Retrieved January 2, 2006, from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard
Edwards, J. (1932). The Choctaw Indians in the Middle of the Nineteenth Century . Chronicles
of Oklahoma, 10, 410.
Ed-Data, District Profile, Los Angeles Unified School District (2008-2009). Retrieved
December 1, 2009 from http://www.eddata.k12.ca.us/
Fabelo, T., M. D. Thompson, M. Plotkin, D. Carmichael, M. P. Marchbanks III, and E. A. Booth
2011. Breaking Schools’ Rules: A Statewide Study of How School Discipline Relates to
Students’ Success and Juvenile Justice Involvement. New York: Council of State
Governments Justice Center
Farag, A. (2020). Structured Whiteness (Order No. 28023180). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global; ProQuest One Academic. (2485571720).
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/structure
d-whiteness/docview/2485571720/se-2?accountid=14749
115
Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy, and civic courage. Rowman and
Littlefield.
Freire, & Valdez, V . E. (2017). Dual language teachers’ stated barriers to implementation of
culturally relevant pedagogy. Bilingual Research Journal, 40(1), 55–69.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2016.1272504
Ferlazzo, L. (2021). The 'colorblindness' of schools has 'failed children of color' . Education
Week. Retrieved January 9, 2022, from
https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/opinion-the-colorblindness-of-schools-has-fail
ed-children-of-color/2019/09
Franklin, & Moss, A. A. (2000). From slavery to freedom : a history of African Americans (8th
ed.). A.A Knopf.
Fuke, R. (1989). James D. Anderson. The Education of Blacks in the South, 1860-1935. Chapel
Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1988. xiv,366 pp. Historical
Studies in Education, 344–346. https://doi.org/10.32316/hse/rhe.v1i2.1238
Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of teacher education,
53(2), 106-116.
Gay, G. (2006). Connections between classroom management and culturally responsive teaching.
In C.M. Evertson, & C.S. Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management:
Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 343-370). New York, NY: Routledge.
Gay, G. (2015). Teachers’ beliefs about cultural diversity: Problems and possibilities. In
H. Five & M .G. Gill (Eds.), International handbook of teachers’ beliefs (pp. 436-
452). New York, NY: Routledge.
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is right. Becoming qualitative
116
researchers: An introduction, 4, 162-183.
Goodman, A. H. (2008) Exposing race as an obsolete biological concept. In M. Pollock
(Ed.), Everyday antiracism: Getting real about race in school (pp. 4-8). New
Green, T.L. (2017) From positivism to critical theory: school-community relations toward
community equity literacy, International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,
30:4, 370-387, DOI: 10.1080/09518398.2016.1253892
Gutierrez, R. A. (2004). Internal Colonialism: An American Theory of Race. State of the
Art , 281–295.
Hamilton, L. S., Stecher, B. M., Marsh, J. A., McCombs, J. S., Robyn, A., Russell, J. L., Naftel,
S., & Barney, H. (2007). Conclusions and Implications. In Standards-Based
Accountability Under No Child Left Behind: Experiences of Teachers and Administrators
in Three States (1st ed., pp. 129–138). RAND Corporation.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/mg589nsf.16
Hampton, B., Peng, L., & Ann, J. (2008). Preservice teacher’s perceptions of urban schools.
Urban Review, 40(3), 268-295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-008-0081-2
Hammond. (2015). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain : promoting authentic
engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Corwin, a
SAGE Company.
Harmon, D. A. ( 2012). Culturally Responsive Teaching though a Historical Lens: Will
History Repeats Itself? Interdisciplinary Journal of Teaching and Learning, V2 N1
P12-22 Spr 2012, 2(1), 12-22. doi:https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1056428
Harris. (1993). Whiteness as Property. Harvard Law Review, 106(8), 1707–1791.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1341787
117
Havnes, & Mogstad, M. (2011). No child left behind: Subsidized child care and children’s
long-run outcomes. American Economic Journal. Economic Policy, 3(2), 97–129.
https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.3.2.97
Hess, R. D., & Shipman, V . C. (1965). Early experience and socialization of cognitive modes in
children. Child Development, 36, 869–886.
Heilig, J. V ., Cole, H., & Aguilar, A. (2010). From Dewey to No Child Left Behind: The
evolution and devolution of public arts education. Arts Education Policy Review, 111(4),
136-145.
Heilig, J. V ., Cole, H. A., & Springel, M. A. (2011). Alternative certification and the Teach for
America: The search for high quality teachers. Kan. JL & Pub. Pol'y, 20, 388.
Heilig, J. V ., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Accountability Texas-style: The progress and
learning of urban minority students in a high-stakes testing context. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(2), 75-110.
Hobson, J. (2013). Part 1 - Revealing the Eurocentric foundations of IPE: A critical
historiography of the discipline from the classical to the modern era. Review of
International Political Economy : RIPE, 20(5), 1024–1054.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2012.704519
Hostetler, K. (2005). What Is “good” education research? Educational Researcher, 34(6), 16–21.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034006016.
Howley, C. B., Clifton, J., & Howley, A. (2018). Equality, history and an end to whiteness.
Journal of Research in Rural Education (Online), 33(8), 1-3.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.18113/P8JRRE3308
Howard, T. C. (2010). Why race and culture matter in schools: Closing the achievement
118
gap in America’s classrooms. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Hussar, W. J., & Bailey, T. M. (2011, September). Projections of education statistics to 2020
(NCES 2011-026). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved
from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch
Ingersoll, R., Merrill, E., Stuckey, D., & Collins, G. (2018). Seven trends: The
transformation of the teaching force [Research Report 2018–2]. Consortium for Policy
Research inEducation, University of Pennsylvania.
Irizarry, J. (2015). Latinization of US schools: Successful teaching and learning in shifting
cultural contexts. Routledge.
James C. Jupp (2010) What Is Theorizing White Teachers’ Life Histories?, Journal of
Curriculum
and Pedagogy, 7:2, 75-86, DOI: 10.1080/15505170.2010.10471344
Jewell, T. (2020). This book is anti-racist: 20 lessons on how to wake up, take action, and do the
work. Frances Lincoln Children’s Books
Jones-Wilson, F.C. (1990). Race, Realities, and American Education: Two Sides of the
Coin. The Journal of Negro Education, 59(2), 119–128. https://doi.org/10.2307/2295635
Kailin, J. (2002). Antiracist education: From theory to practice. New York, NY:
Rowman & Littlefield.
Kharem, H. (2006). Chapter Two: INTERNAL COLONIALISM: WHITE SUPREMACY
AND EDUCATION. Counterpoints (New York, N.Y .), 208, 23–47.
King, J. (1991). Dysconscious racism: Ideology, identity, and the miseducation of the teachers.
Journal of Negro Education, 60(2), 133-146.
Knowles, R., & Hawkman, A. (2020). Anti-racist Quantitative Research: Developing, Validating,
119
and Implementing Racialized Teaching Efficacy and Racial Fragility Scales. The Urban
Review, 52(2), 238–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-019-00526-1
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into practice,
41(4), 212-218.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But That’s Just Good Teaching! The Case for Culturally Relevant
Pedagogy. The Social Foundations Reader, 34(3), 159-165.
doi:10.3726/978-1-4539-1584-4/43
Ladson ‐Billings, G. (2005). The evolving role of critical race theory in educational scholarship.
Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 115-119.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the Achievement Gap to the Education Debt:
Understanding Achievement in U.S. Schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035007003
Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (1995). Toward critical race theory of education. Teachers
College Record, 97, 47-68.
Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (2016). Toward a critical race theory of education. In Critical
race theory in education (pp. 10-31). Routledge
Lauen, & Gaddis, S. M. (2012). Shining a Light or Fumbling in the Dark? The Effects of
NCLB’s Subgroup-Specific Accountability on Student Achievement. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34(2), 185–208.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373711429989
Leatherwood, & Payne, C. (2016). Putting “No Child Left Behind” behind us: rethinking
education and inequality. Social Service Review, 90(3), 562–570.
https://doi.org/10.1086/688713
120
Lee, J. (2002). Racial and Ethnic Achievement Gap Trends: Reversing the Progress Toward
Equity? Educational Researcher, 31(1), 3–12.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X031001003
Leech, N., & Onwuegbuzie, A. (2007). An Array of Qualitative Data Analysis Tools: A Call for
Data Analysis Triangulation. School Psychology Quarterly, 22(4), 557–584.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1045-3830.22.4.557
Lensmire, T., McManimon, S., Tierney, J., Lee-Nichols, M., Casey, Z., Lensmire, A., & Davis,
B. (2013). McIntosh as Synecdoche: How Teacher Education’s Focus on White Privilege
Undermines Antiracism. Harvard Educational Review, 83(3), 410–431.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.83.3.35054h14l8230574
Leonardo, Z. (2009). Race, whiteness, and education. New York: Routledge.
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. Handbook of
Critical Race Theory in Education, 333–344. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203155721-34
Lewis. (2004). “What Group?” Studying Whites and Whiteness in the Era of
“Color-Blindness.” Sociological Theory, 22(4), 623–646.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0735-2751.2004.00237.x
Lewis, A. E. (2001). There Is No “Race” in the Schoolyard: Color-Blind Ideology in an (Almost)
All-White School. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 781–811.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038004781
Lochmiller, C.R. & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. Sage Publications.
Lopez, A., & Jean-Marie, G. (2021). Challenging Anti-Black Racism in Everyday Teaching,
121
Learning, and Leading: From Theory to Practice. Journal of School Leadership, 31(1-2),
50–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052684621993115
Love, B. L. (2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of
educational freedom. Beacon Press.
Lucas, S. R. (2008). Constructing colorblind classrooms. In M. Pollock (Ed.), Everyday
antiracism: Getting real about race in school (pp. 62-66). New York, NY: The New Press.
Marsh, S. (2015). Five top reasons people become teachers – and why they quit. The Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/2015/jan/27/five-top-reasons-teachers-join
-and-quit
Martin, F., & Pirbhai-Illich, F. (2016). Towards Decolonising Teacher Education: Criticality,
Relationality and Intercultural Understanding. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 37(4),
355–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/07256868.2016.1190697
Matias, C., Matias, C., Mackey, J., & Mackey, J. (2016). Breakin’ Down Whiteness in Antiracist
Teaching: Introducing Critical Whiteness Pedagogy. The Urban Review, 48(1), 32–50.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-015-0344-7
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3
rd
ed.). SAGE.
McIntosh, P. (2010). White privilege and male privilege: A personal account of coming
to see correspondence through work in women’s studies. In E. F. Provenzo, Jr.
(Ed.), The Teacher in American Society: A Critical Anthology (pp. 121-134).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
McNeil, L. (2001). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing.
NASSP Bulletin, 85(621), 81-83.
122
Mensah, F., & Jackson, I. (2018). Whiteness as property in science teacher education. Teachers
College Record, 120(1), 1-38.
Merriam, S., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation
(4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merolla, D. M., & Jackson, O. (2019). Structural racism as the fundamental cause of the
academic achievement gap. Sociology Compass, 13(6), e12696.
Milner, H. R. (2010). Culturally Relevant Pedagogy in a Diverse Urban Classroom. The Urban
Review, 43(1), 66-89. doi:10.1007/s11256-009-0143-0
Mondale, S., Patton, S. B., & Streep, M. (2001). School: The story of American public
education. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Morgan, R (2017). "Indigenous Communities and Settler Colonialism: Land Holding, Loss and
Survival in an Interconnected World". Victorian Studies. 59 (2): 342.
doi:10.2979/victorianstudies.59.2.18
Moreton-Robinson, A (2015) The White Possessive. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press. National Research Council. (2002). Scientific Research in Education. Washington,
DC: The National Academies Press.
Spring, J. (2016). Deculturalization and the struggle for equality: A brief history of the
education of dominated cultures in the United States (8th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
(Chapters 1 - 3)
Morrell. (2010). Teacher preparation and diversity: When american pre-service teachers aren’t
white and middle class. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 12(1), 1–.
https://doi.org/10.18251/ijme.v12i1.302
Morse, J. M. (2000). Determining sample size. Qualitative health research, 10(1), 3-5.
123
Muhammad, G., Love, B. L., & Scholastic Inc.,. (2020). Cultivating genius: An equity
framework for culturally and historically responsive literacy.
Muhammad, G. (2022, January 29). A little food for thought on Saturday morning
#cultivatinggenius Retrieved from
https://www.instagram.com/p/CZUV4Vusv0l/?utm_medium=copy_link
Muñiz, J. (2019, March 29). Culturally Responsive Teaching A 50-State Survey of Teaching
Standards(Rep.). Retrieved January 20, 2022, from
newamerica.org/education-policy/reports/culturally-responsive-teaching/
Mutegi, J. W. (2011). The inadequacies of “Science for All” and the necessity and nature of a
socially transformative curriculum approach for African American science education.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(3), 301–316.
National Research Council. 2002. Scientific Research in Education. Washington, DC: The
National Academies Press.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2019). Achievement gaps: How Hispanic and White
Students in Public Schools Perform in Mathematics and Reading on the National
Assessment of Educational Progress. Institute of Educational Sciences . Retrieved April
4, 2022, from https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/2011459.pdf
NCES. (2019). Digest of Educational Statistics. Digest of education statistics-most current
Digest Tables.https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/current_tables.asp
Neville, H., Awad, G., Brooks, J., Flores, M., & Bluemel, J. (2013). Color-Blind Racial
Ideology: Theory, Training, and Measurement Implications in Psychology. The American
Psychologist, 68(6), 455–466. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033282
124
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Chapter 7: Qualitative Interviewing. In Qualitative research &
evaluation methods (3rd ed.) (pp. 380-384, 391-396, 415). SAGE Publications.
Noguera, P. A. (2017, April). Introduction to “racial inequality and education: Patterns and
prospects for the future”. In The Educational Forum (V ol. 81, No. 2, pp. 129-135).
Routledge.
Novak, J. & Fuller, B. (2003) Penalizing diverse schools? Similar test scores but different
students bring federal sanctions (Berkeley, CA, Policy Analysis for California
Education).
Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology and
practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93-97.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12441244
Patel, L. (2015). Decolonizing educational research: From ownership to answerability.
Routledge.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Chapter 7: Qualitative Interviewing. In Qualitative research &
evaluation methods (3rd ed.) (pp. 380-384, 391-396, 415). SAGE Publications.
Paul. (2014). Chapter 4 The Myths That Made America : An Introduction to American Studies.
(1st ed.). transcript.
Pettitt, G. A. (1946). Discipline. In Primitive Education in North America (pp. 6–7). essay,
Berkley: University of California Press.
Phuntsog. (2001). Culturally Responsive Teaching: What do selected United States elementary
school teachers think? Intercultural Education (London, England), 12(1), 51–64.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14675980120033966
Picower, B. (2009). The unexamined Whiteness of teaching: How White teachers maintain and
125
enact dominant racial ideologies. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 12(2), 197–215.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13613320902995475
Picower, B., & Mayorga, E. (Eds.). (2015). What’s race got to do with it? How current school
reform policy maintains racial and economic inequality. New York: Peter Lang.
Plachowski, T. J. (2019). Reflections of preservice teachers of color: Implications for the teacher
demographic diversity gap. Education Sciences, 9(2), 144.
Pollock. (2001). How the Question We Ask Most about Race in Education Is the Very Question
We Most Suppress. Educational Researcher, 30(9), 2–12.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X030009002
Pollock, M. (2004). Race wrestling: Struggling strategically with race in educational practice and
research. American journal of education, 111(1), 25-67.
Pollock, M. (2008). Everyday antiracism: Getting real about race in school. New
York, NY: The New Press.
Pop, M. M., and J. E. Turner. 2009. “To Be or Not to Be … a Teacher? Exploring Levels of
Commitment Related to Perceptions of Teaching among Students Enrolled in Al Teacher
Education Program.” Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice 15 (6): 683–700.
doi:10.1080/13540600903357017.
Quinn, A. (2013, March 22). Chinua Achebe and the bravery of Lions. NPR. Retrieved January
14, 2022, from
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2013/03/22/175046327/chinua-achebe-and-the-
bravery-of-lions
Rabaka, R. (2010). Against epistemic apartheid: W.E.B. Du Bois and the disciplinary decadence
of sociology. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books/Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
126
Reardon, S., Greenberg, E., Kalogrides, D., Shores, K., & Valentino, R. (2012). Left behind? The
effect of no child left behind on academic achievement gaps (Working paper)
Reyes, G., Radina, R., & Aronson, B. (2018). Teaching Against the Grain as an Act of Love:
Disrupting White Eurocentric Masculinist Frameworks Within Teacher Education. The
Urban Review, 50(5), 818–835. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-018-0474-9
Richards, B. (2020). When class is colorblind: A race ‐conscious model for cultural capital
research in education. Sociology Compass, 14(7). https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.1278
Rice, Dion, S. D., Fowlie, H., & Breen, A. (2020). Identifying and working through settler
ignorance. Critical Studies in Education, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print), 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2020.1830818
Rodriguez, A. J. (1997). The dangerous discourse of invisibility: A critique of the National
Research Council’s National Science Education Standards. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 34(1), 19–37
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 Dimensions of Improving Student Performance: Finding the Right
Solutions to the Right Problems. Teachers College Press. 1234 Amsterdam Avenue, New
York, NY 10027.
Sealey-Ruiz, Y . (2018, January 5). Yolanda Sealey-Ruiz: The archaeology of the self [Video].
Vimeo. https://vimeo.com/299137829
Simpson, Lacava, P. G., & Sampson Graner, P. (2004). The No Child Left Behind Act:
Challenges and Implications for Educators. Intervention in School and Clinic, 40(2),
67–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451204040002010
Siwatu. (2011). Preservice Teachers’ Culturally Responsive Teaching Self-Efficacy-Forming
127
Experiences: A Mixed Methods Study. The Journal of Educational Research
(Washington, D.C.), 104(5), 360–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2010.487081
Sleeter, C. E. (2001). Epistemological diversity in research on preservice teacher preparation for
historically underserved children. Review of Research in Education, 25, 209-250.
Sleeter, C. E. (2011). Becoming white: Reinterpreting a family story by putting race back into
the picture. Race Ethnicity and Education, 14(4), 421–433.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2010.547850.
Sleeter, C., & Stillman, J. (2013). Standardizing knowledge in a multicultural society. In D. J.
Flinders & S. J. Thornton (Eds.), The curriculum studies reader (4th ed., pp. 253-287).
New York, NY: Routledge.
Solórzano, D. G. (1997). Images and words that wound: Critical race theory, racial stereotyping,
and teacher education. Teacher education quarterly, 5-19
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
Solórzano, D. G., Villalpando, O., & Oseguera, L. (2005). Educational inequities and
Latina/o undergraduate students in the United States: A critical race analysis of
their educational progress. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4(3), 272-294.
Spencer, M. B. (2008). Lessons learned and opportunities ignored since Brown v. Board of
Education: Youth development and the myth of a color-blind society. Educational
Researcher, 37(5), 253.
Spring, J. (2016). Deculturalization and the struggle for equality: A brief history of the education
128
of dominated cultures in the United States (8th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. (Chapters
1 - 3)
Smith. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies : research and indigenous peoples (2nd edition.).
Zed Books.
Tatum, B. D. (2004). Defining racism: Can we talk? In P. Rothenberg (Ed.), Race, class,
and gender in the United States: An integrated study (6th ed., pp. 124-131). New
York, NY: Worth Publishers.
Tawil. (2006). “New Forms of Sublimity”: Edgar Huntly and the European Origins of American
Exceptionalism. Novel : a Forum on Fiction, 40(1-2), 104–124.
https://doi.org/10.1215/ddnov.040010104
Tomassi, P. (2020). Catholic homeschool curricula has whitewashed world history. Is it too
late to fix it? America (New York, N.Y . : 1909), 223(4), 1–13.
Townsend, B. L. (2000). The disproportionate discipline of African American learners: Reducing
school suspensions and expulsions. Exceptional Children, 66(3), 381- 391.
Tran Myrhe, K. (2016, March 07). Guante – how to Explain white supremacy to a white
supremacist. Retrieved February 13, 2021, from
https://genius.com/Guante-how-to-explain-white-supremacy-to-a-white-supremacist-lyric
s
Tuck, E., & Yang, K. (2018). Toward What Justice?: Describing Diverse Dreams of Justice in
Education (1st ed., V ol. 1). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351240932
Ugwuegbula, L. (2020). The Role of Education in Perpetuating Racism and White
Supremacy: Rethinking the Eurocentric Curriculum. Samuel Centre For Social
Connectedness.
129
https://www.socialconnectedness.org/the-role-of-education-in-perpetuating-racism-and-w
hite-supremacy-rethinking-the-eurocentric-curriculum/#:~:text=Eurocentric%20curriculu
ms%20teach%20Black%20and,spaces%20of%20knowledge%20and%20power
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education. (2015). Higher Education
Act Title II reporting system.
https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/highered/racial-diversity/state-racial-diversity-workfor
ce.pdf
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Science, National Center for Educational
Statistics (2021). Racial/ethnic enrollment in public schools. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cge.asp
Valencia, R. R. (Ed.). (2012). The evolution of deficit thinking: Educational thought and
practice. Routledge.
Varpio, L., Paradis, E., Uijtdehaage, S., & Young, M. (2020). The distinctions between theory,
theoretical framework, and Conceptual Framework. Academic medicine : journal of the
Association of American Medical Colleges.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31725464/
Vasquez Heilig, J. (2011). Understanding the interaction between high-stakes graduation tests
and English learners. Teachers College Record, 113(12), 2633-2669.
Vasquez, J., Williams, A., & Jez, S. J. (2010). Inputs and student achievement: An analysis of
Latina/o-serving urban elementary schools. Association of Mexican American Educators
Journal, 4(1).
Vaught, S. (2011). Racism, public schooling, and the entrenchment of white supremacy: A
critical race ethnography. SUNY Press.
130
Veracini, L. (2010). Settler Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview. Cambridge Imperial and
Post-Colonial Studies Series (reprint ed.). Basingstoke: Springer. p. 17. ISBN
9780230299191. Retrieved 29 January 2019
Villavicencio, A. (2009). Morrison, K. A. et al. Operationalizing Culturally Relevant Pedagogy:
A Synthesis of Classroom-Based Research. (Author abstract). Ethnicity and Race in a
Changing World, 1(2), 62–.
Waddell, J. (2011). Crossing borders without leaving town: The impact of cultural immersion on
the perceptions of teacher education candidates. Issues in Teacher Education, 20(2),
23-36. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ954569
Warren, D. (2013). Color-Blind Racism in Post-Obama America: An Examination of Attitudes
Toward Hurricane Katrina Evacuees in Houston, Texas. Race and Social Problems, 5(3),
213–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-013-9090-1
Warren, C. A. (2017). Urban Preparation: Young Black Men Moving from Chicago's South Side
to Success in Higher Education. Harvard Education Press. 8 Story Street First Floor,
Cambridge, MA 02138.
Warikoo, N., Sinclair, S., Fei, J., & Jacoby-Senghor, D. (2016). Examining Racial Bias in
Education: A New Approach. Educational Researcher, 45(9), 508–514.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16683408
Wasserstrom, J. N. (2001). Eurocentrism and its Discontents: Perspectives on
HISTORY: AHA. Retrieved February 13, 2021, from
https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/january-2
001/eurocentrism-and-its-discontents
Watts. (2021). Teaching English language learners: a reconsideration of assimilation pedagogy in
131
U.S. schools. Diaspora, Indigenous and Minority Education, 15(1), 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15595692.2019.1684890
Weuffen, S., Cahir, F., & Zeegers, M. (2016). What’s in a Name?: Exploring the Implications of
Eurocentric (Re)naming Practices of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Nomenclature
in Australian Education Practices. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education,
45(2), 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1017/jie.2016.2
Wells, A. S. (2014). Seeing Past the ‘Colorblind’Myth of Education Policy: Why Policymakers
Should Address Racial/Ethnic Inequality and Support Culturally Diverse Schools.
Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center.
Whitehead, Foste, Z., Duran, A., Tevis, T., & Cabrera, N. L. (2021). Disrupting the Big Lie:
Higher Education and Whitelash in a Post/Colorblind Era. Education Sciences, 11(9),
486–. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11090486
Whitney, & Candelaria, C. A. (2017). The Effects of No Child Left Behind on Children’s
Socioemotional Outcomes. AERA Open, 3(3), 233285841772632–.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858417726324
Wideen, M., Mayer-Smith, J., & Moon, B. (1998). A critical analysis of the research on learning
to teach: Making a case for an ecological perspective on inquiry. Review of Educational
Research, 68(2), 130-178. doi:10.3102/00346543068002130
Will, M. (2020, September 23). Teachers Can Take on Anti-Racist Teaching. But Not Alone;
Teachers need help making their classrooms more just. Education Week, 40(06), 16.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A637213426/AONE?u=usocal_main&sid=bookmark-AO
NE&xid=c1bb4a78
Wineburg, S. S., Martin, D., & Monte-Sano, C. (2012). Reading like a historian: Teaching
132
literacy in middle and high school history classrooms. Teachers College Press.
Wolfe, B., & Haveman, R. (2001). Accounting for the social and non-market benefits of
education. In J. Helliwell (Ed.), The contribution of human and social capital to sustained
economic growth and well-being OCTOBER 2006 11 (pp. 1–72). Vancouver, BC:
University of British Columbia Press. Retrieved September 11, 2006, from
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/5/19/1825109.pdf
Yosso, T. J. (2002). Toward a critical race curriculum. Equity & Excellence in Education, 35(2),
93-107.
Yosso, T.J. ( 2005). "Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of
community cultural wealth" (PDF). Race Ethnicity and Education. 8 (1): 69–91.
doi:10.1080/1361332052000341006
Young, E. (2010). Challenges to Conceptualizing and Actualizing Culturally Relevant Pedagogy:
How Viable Is the Theory in Classroom Practice? Journal of Teacher Education, 61(3),
248–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109359775
133
Appendix A
Interview Protocol
Introduction:
The purpose of this study is to investigate how teacher preparation programs prepare
teacher candidates to teach all students using culturally relevant pedagogies. This study is
motivated by a greater understanding of how teacher preparation impacts culturally relevant
pedagogies and teachers’ strategies through a critical lens.
You were asked to be part of this study because you are over the age of 18, have
completed or neared completion of 200 clinical hours in a K-12 setting, and plan to pursue a job
as an educator after degree completion and certification. Around one thousand students are in
their final year of university in the education department. The goal of the sample size is to be
around 5 students that meet the qualifications. Names will be changed to protect the identity of
participants.
As a participant in this study, you have the right to skip questions, stop the interview, or
exit at any time. Your confidentiality will be maintained. With your permission, the interview
will be voice recorded and transcribed. No video evidence will be created. Do I have your
permission to audio record? Any questions?
Interview Questions:
Before asking the questions, ask participants to state their names and date.
1. Think about when you decided to become a teacher. What was your vision for your role or
understanding of your role?
a. When did you initially want to be a teacher?
134
b. How did you know you wanted to be a teacher?
2. Do you think that your teacher preparation program, coursework, and curriculum prepared
you to teach all kids? Please provide an example
a. Which specific frameworks or authors were highlighted and how were they used?
(to prompt the student you can ask for readings (ask who was the author, what the text was
about, who was centered in the text, why was the reading impactful to teach all kids), class
activities, course assignments, etc.)
3. Describe how your identity was brought into your preparation, if at all.
a. Were you asked to reflect on the implications of your race, gender, or ethnicity? If
yes, how?
b. If something is rooted in whiteness, what do you think this means?
4. Have you heard the term eurocentrism before? How would you describe eurocentrism?
a. Tell me your understanding of eurocentric practices?
b. What eurocentric practices are being utilized in teacher preparation and how are they
addressed or challenged, if at all?
5. Have you heard about Culturally Relevant Pedagogy before? If yes, what does it mean to
you?
i. Has your teacher preparation program, coursework or curriculum included culturally
relevant pedagogy and practices at all? If yes, how?
ii. Which specific frameworks or authors were highlighted and how were they used?
6. Do you think there are any strengths or weaknesses to
implementing Culturally Responsive practices in the classroom?
135
i. Do you think that CRP has the potential to strengthen student knowledge? To
strengthen the students’ connection to their community? How?
ii. Name challenging parts of implementing CRP.
iii. What barriers do you face? Do others assist you?
7. Describe how your program prepared you to teach a diverse group of students.
a. In what ways did the program strengthen you? Barriers that held you back?
b. In your “FUTURE” classroom as the teacher, how, if at all, do you “plan” to embed
culturally responsive pedagogies into learning? How?
8. If you could alter or redesign any aspects of your preparation program, what would you
change? How?
a. Who do you feel the program served?
9. Is there anything that we should have talked about but didn’t? Any clarifying questions?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Throughout the United States, the makeup of our student population continues to change, growing more diverse where our teaching populations grow stagnant and consist of White women. Can teacher preparation programs do more to meet the needs of their evolving student population? Unfortunately, few studies on teacher preparation programs can refute the need for teacher programs to evolve and change into more equitable and critically responsive programs.
In this qualitative phenomenological study, I draw on interviews, field notes, course curriculum components, and preservice teacher voices to explore the Eurocentric elements of current teacher preparation. This research offers insight into the obstacles that preservice teachers face in regards to choosing and advocating for culturally responsive curricula and practices within their classrooms. The findings lead to recommendations for teacher preparation, ongoing teacher education, and a conceptual reworking of the importance of culture and identity in the classroom.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Stop, dismantle and reimagine teacher preparation programs: an examination of racial justice practices of beginning preservice teachers…

PDF

Changing nature of preservice teacher concerns in an accelerated, graduate-level teacher education program

PDF

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

PDF

How are teachers being prepared to integrate technology into their lessons?

PDF

Urban teacher residencies and their impact on teacher retention in high-needs school settings

PDF

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

PDF

Teacher identity and culturally Responsive pedagogy

PDF

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

PDF

Perceptions of professional development from the lens of the global teacher in a rapidly evolving, linguistically diverse instructional environment

PDF

America has a problem: helping charter school teachers build a new foundation to combat racism with anti-racist teaching pedagogy

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

An analysis of the impact of Montessori education on Black children

PDF

The relationship between culturally responsive self-efficacy and attitudes of trauma-informed practices among K-12 educators

PDF

Preservice teacher preparation for engineering integration in K-5

PDF

Culturally relevant pedagogy strategies for preservice teachers in urban classrooms

PDF

Examining teacher pre-service/credential programs and school site professional development and implementation of culturally relevant teaching of BIPOC students

PDF

Culturally responsive pedagogy: a curriculum for secondary education teachers

PDF

Culturally responsive teaching in science: an action research study aimed at supporting a resident teacher in developing inquiry-based culturally responsive science lessons

Asset Metadata

Creator Shanahan, Kerry Mullen (author)

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

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2022-05

Publication Date 04/11/2022

Defense Date 03/15/2022

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

Tag colorblind,culturally responsive pedagogy,culturally responsive teaching,educational roots,Eurocentric,identity,OAI-PMH Harvest,preservice teachers,Racism,racist,student voice,teacher preparation,whitewashed

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Krop, Cathy (committee chair), Cash, David (committee member)

Creator Email kmshanah@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC110936908

Unique identifier UC110936908

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Shanahan, Kerry Mullen

Type texts

Source 20220412-usctheses-batch-922 (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