University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

An examination of a social justice teacher cohort and its capacity to support transformational professional learning

(USC Thesis Other)

An examination of a social justice teacher cohort and its capacity to support transformational professional learning

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

1

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT AND ITS CAPACITY
TO SUPPORT TRANSFORMATIONAL PROFESSIONAL LEARNING

by

Eric Moe

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

August 2019

Copyright 2019 Eric Moe
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, I would like to thank my wife and eternal love Rose Moe, for not only
supporting me in my doctoral pursuit through the past three years but also being the one who
initiated and encouraged me to apply to SC Rossier in the first place. We are now officially a
Trojan family!
I want to acknowledge my three daughters—Daisy, Meadow, and Violet—who had to
deal with their dad being gone once a week and me going into hibernation at my desk each
weekend during their early childhood years. I will make it up to you!
I would like to thank my dissertation committee for the support they provided me. Dr.
Sandra Kaplan, I appreciate your honesty, wisdom, and gentle pushes forward. Dr. Kenneth
Yates, you provided me with strategic organization at a point in the process that was very critical
in my being able to complete the work. I also appreciated your ongoing feedback and input. Dr.
Cash, I extend my gratitude towards you for thinking about me when this study was initially
presented—it was not a path of research I would have chosen for myself, but over the past year I
became passionately invested in it. Thank you for believing in me.
The learning I received these past three years from all of the USC Rossier professors is
invaluable and appreciated. To my original cohort (and some of those met along the way), you
helped me quickly get acclimated to the life of a working doctoral student, and even made the
long Thursday nights enjoyable and memorable—cheers! Finally, I would like to thank Paul
Karaiakoubian for the friendship and brotherly support, especially on those weekly train rides
from Santa Monica to campus and back again. Looking forward to working with you in the
future.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

3
ABSTRACT

This study focuses on a social justice professional development cohort and its participants’
attempts at integrating social justice lessons within their classrooms. The research combined a
theoretical framework that intersects critical pedagogy, adult learning, social justice and
professional development theories with the organizational Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis
approach. The purpose of this study was to conduct a gap analysis on teacher learning and
performance expectations from a pilot group of educators as they participated in the social justice
professional development cohort. Knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) needs of
the teacher participants were determined in respect to the participants’ ability to learn, design,
and implement social justice-integrated lessons into their classroom curriculum. This was a
qualitative research study that utilized interviews, observations, and artifact analysis, and
included five middle and high school public school teachers as the participants. Based on the
evidence, many KMO needs were found that affected the teacher participants’ ability to develop
and implement social justice-integrated lessons within their respective content areas and grade
levels. Much of the evidence was related to the cohort setting’s professional learning/teaching
structure. By utilizing the New World Kirkpatrick Model framework (2013) to address the
specific needs, recommendations backed by both research and learning theories have been
provided to address future cohort professional learning structure and facilitation. Utilizing
professional development cohorts structured for this transformational learning and application is
an attainable approach, but commitment and support to the fidelity, integrity, and flexibility of
these cohorts will be necessary from all parties involved.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements.....................................................................................................................2

Abstract.......................................................................................................................................3

List of Tables..............................................................................................................................8

CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY...................................................................10

Statement of the Problem..............................................................................................10

Background and Setting................................................................................................13

Teacher Learning of Social Justice Standards..............................................................14

Background of Social Justice Standards for Education and Culturally Responsive
Teaching.......................................................................................................................16

Purpose of the Study....................................................................................................18

Significance of the Study.............................................................................................19

Organization of the Study and Research Questions.....................................................20

Methodology................................................................................................................20

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE...........................................................22

Social Justice in Education..........................................................................................23

Social Justice Theories................................................................................................24

Social Justice Empirical Studies..................................................................................27

Culturally Responsive Teaching..................................................................................30

Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy.....................................................................32

Studies Conducted on Culturally Responsive Teaching..............................................37

Critical Theory in Relation to Culturally Responsive Teaching..................................38

Professional Development...........................................................................................39
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

5

Conceptual Frameworks of PD Evaluation..................................................................40

Challenges in Professional Development Research.....................................................42

Professional Learning Communities as Models of Professional Development...........44

Adult Learning.............................................................................................................46

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY................................................................................50

Purpose and Research Questions.................................................................................50

Methodology................................................................................................................51

Subjects........................................................................................................................53

Instruments...................................................................................................................54

Data Analysis...............................................................................................................56

Validity and Reliability................................................................................................57

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS...................................................................60

Introduction..................................................................................................................60

Methodology & Conceptual Framework......................................................................62

Participating Stakeholders............................................................................................63

Research Question One................................................................................................65

Participants’ Reactions—Knowledge for RQ One.......................................................65

Participants’ Use and Application of Knowledge & Skills—Knowledge (RQ one) ...68
.
Participants’ Reactions—Motivation for RQ One........................................................70

Participants’ Reactions—Organization for RQ One.....................................................72

Research Question Two................................................................................................74

Participants’ Reactions—Motivation for RQ Two.......................................................74

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

6
Participants’ Use and Application of Knowledge & Skills—Knowledge (RQ two) ....76

Document Analysis........................................................................................................79

Summary of Results and Causes Affecting Knowledge................................................81

Summary of Results and Causes Affecting Motivation.................................................83

Summary of Results and Causes Affecting Organization..............................................83

Summary........................................................................................................................84

CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS AND EVALUATION........................................85

Purpose of the Project and Questions............................................................................85

Recommendations to Address Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Influences 86

Knowledge Recommendations......................................................................................86

Motivation Recommendations.......................................................................................94

Organization Recommendations....................................................................................99

Summary of Knowledge, Motivation and Organization Recommendations...............104

Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan..........................................................106

Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectation...........................................................106

Implementation and Evaluation Framework................................................................108

Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators......................................................................109

Level 3: Behavior.........................................................................................................111

Level 2: Learning.........................................................................................................116

Level 1: Reactions........................................................................................................120

Evaluation Tools...........................................................................................................121

Data Analysis and Reporting........................................................................................122

Summary of the Implementation and Evaluation.........................................................122

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

7
Limitations and Delimitations.......................................................................................123

Recommendations for Future Research.........................................................................124

Conclusion.....................................................................................................................125

References..................................................................................................................................127

Appendix A: Interview Protocol................................................................................................136

Appendix B: Observation Protocol............................................................................................139

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

8
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Five Critical Levels of PD Evaluation 41
Table 2: Seven Common Design Components for Effective 42
PD Approaches

Table 3: Fullan & DuFour Framework of PD Strategies 43
Table 4: Six Characteristics of High-Performing PLCs 44
Table 5: Interview Questions 58
Table 6: Guskey & KMO Professional Development
Framework 63

Table 7: Participating Stakeholders Race/Ethnicity Demographics 63
Table 8: Participating Stakeholders Gender & Experience 64
Table 9: Participants’ Reactions Learning/Knowledge 65
Table 10: Participants’ Use & Application of
Knowledge & Skills 68
Table 11: Participants’ Reactions—Motivation 70
Table 12: Participants’ Reactions—Organization 72
Table 13: Participants’ Reactions—Motivation RQ #2 74
Table 14: Participants’ Learning, Use, and Application 76

Table 15: Document Analysis 79
Table 16: Summary of Knowledge Influences
and Recommendations 86

Table 17: Summary of Motivation Influences and
Recommendations 95

Table 18: Summary of Organization Influences and
Recommendations 99

Table 19: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External
and Internal Outcomes 110
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

9

Table 20: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and
Timing for Evaluation 111

Table 21: Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 113
Table 22: Evaluation of the Components of Learning
for the Program 119

Table 23: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 121
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Social Justice Anchor Standards and Domains 61
Figure 2: Critical Practices for Social Justice PD 61
Figure 3: Visible Evidence of Student Learning 80

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

10
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY

Statement of Problem

A learning gap persists in the United States, affecting a growing number of students from
diverse cultural, economic, and racial backgrounds. Since the greatest stakeholders in improving
student learning and academic growth are the teachers, the burden of closing this learning gap
becomes their ultimate responsibility (Borko, 2004; Robinson & Timperley, 2007). The task
teachers face places them at a complex intersection of meeting the standards-based, neoliberal-
driven accountability expectations for student achievement (Cochran-Smith et al. 2013; Sleeter,
2012) and the simultaneous need to meet the social, emotional, and academic needs of an ever-
expanding diverse population of learners (Gay, 2010; Cochran-Smith et al., 2009; Francis et al.,
2017; Ladson-Billings, 1995). The tension lies in the processes and prioritization—systemic
initiatives have been influenced greatly by focuses on performance-based accountability
measures and the outcomes, but there has been a lack of coherence and fidelity in supporting
teacher learning in respect to their classroom practice and supporting them in creating responsive
pedagogy to counter the inequitable learning outcomes of their diverse student populations
(Sleeter, 2012; Gay, 2010). In the past decade, much of the focus on strengthening teachers’
practice has been on teacher evaluations and assessment (Murphy et al., 2013). The contradicting
demands create mixed messages for the teachers as to what to prioritize within their practice,
causing them to feel overwhelmed and under-supported in their balance to maintain equitable
learning experiences for all students while meeting the multitude of accountability expectations
(Kennedy, 2016). If teachers are expected to transform their teaching practice, what factors does
professional development entail that can support their agency for learning and applying new
pedagogies and practices to meet the needs for all students?
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

11
This study looks at the effects of an ambitious, district-initiated goal to embed social
justice standards and culturally responsive pedagogy within teachers’ practice in K-12 schools,
with a specific focus on a social justice professional development cohort model and its effect on
teacher learning and outcomes. The decision to implement these standards and changes in
pedagogy was impacted by an outside study that found layers of inequities affecting the school
district’s students, particularly those from diverse racial and cultural backgrounds and second-
language learners. Although the social justice standards themselves are geared towards the
students, teachers need to develop a strong foundation of understanding culturally responsive
pedagogy and critical practices in order to truly integrate the standards within their practice. It
will be necessary for teachers to move beyond “just teachers of content” to becoming advocates
for each and every one of their students, to create classroom cultures that promote equity and
understanding and to shape their practice in ways that meet the academic, social and emotional
needs of the all the students (Cochran-Smith et al., 2009).
Elmore (2002) states that accountability needs to be a reciprocal process—if teachers are
expected to change their practice in order to ensure more equitable learning environments for all
students, then the schools that they work in need to provide the capacity to allow them to make
these changes. Fullan (2014; 2016) makes an argument for the significance of organizational
capacity in supporting the improvement of teacher practice as well, believing that in order for
whole system change to occur, the organizations need to develop a culture that fosters teacher
pedagogy that focuses on building positive relationships with their learners and is selective in
using strategies that address equity. In the case of systemic reform that will influence large
numbers of educators, professional development needs to support and provide explicit guidance
and feedback for the teachers’ learning. In addition, the overall effectiveness is influenced by the
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

12
situational contexts within which the professional development will be received (Borko, 2004;
Guskey, 2003). Overall, the research demonstrates that in order for professional learning to
make teachers’ practice more equitable, two major characteristics of the organizations’ structural
and professional development capacities must be met: (1.) The need for awareness and changes
in teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, values, and assumptions about the relationship of student
learning in respect to their own practice, including their pedagogical and epistemological
approaches; and (2.) the fostering of a culture of collective collaboration, support and active
learning guided by an explicit strategic plan of action (Florian, 2012; Gay, 2010; Ladson-
Billings, 1995; Elmore, 2002; Fullan, 2014; Garet et al., 2001; Hochberg & Desimone, 2010).
Since teachers’ beliefs have significant influence over their instruction (Gay, 2010),
teachers need opportunities to change their beliefs and assumptions about student learning
(Elmore, 2002). According to Gay and Kirkland (2003), teachers need to participate in critical
reflection in order to transform concepts about their own beliefs, their connection of equity to
excellence for all students, and deep knowledge and consciousness about the relationship of their
individual practice to each and every student. Research has illustrated that there is significant
value to teacher critical reflection and the use of culturally responsive pedagogy, but the process
for which it is developed within educators requires significant changes to the current structural
organization and professional development models found currently in education (Jay & Johnson,
1999; Meijer et al., 2017; Brown, 2014; Zeichner and Liu, 2010; Loughran, 2010; Rodgers,
2002; Papa and Papa, 2016; Sleeter, 2012; Brookfield, 2010).
Even if these organizational capacities are met, what does evidence of teacher learning
look like? What exactly constitutes teacher learning resulting in transformation of their practices
to create outcomes to improve student learning for all students—particularly those who have
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

13
historically suffered from inequitable educations? This study examined the capacity of the
professional development provided by the district to promote teacher learning about culturally
responsive and critical pedagogies as a means of integrating social justice standards within
teachers’ daily practices and the teachers’ perspectives of their learning experience and
outcomes.
Background and Setting
In the spring of 2016, the Ocean Park School District (OPSD)* received equity report
findings from an external consulting group hired by the school board illuminating multiple issues
in the district’s attempt at successfully meeting the educational, social, and emotional needs of
all of its students, particularly the Hispanic, Black, socio-economic disadvantaged, special
education, and ESL students. The data was compiled from a year-long evaluation that included
classroom observations within all 16 schools in the district, analysis of the schools’ sub-group
student data (including test scores, failure rates, and suspensions), and interviews and surveys
with various stakeholders including students, parents, and school board members. Although the
district was recognized for its award-winning schools, overall high academic achievement, and
excellent performing arts programs, this report served notice that nearly 40% of the school
district’s students weren’t receiving an equitable learning experience. Rather than just pointing
out that an achievement gap still persisted, the report also detailed reasons behind the failure to
meet the needs for all students, holding multiple stakeholders accountable. According to the
report, the prior efforts failed due to:1.) Lack of consistent implementation of systems,
structures, processes and practices; 2.) Failure to build capacity in support of equity; 3.) Isolation
and fragmentation of school sites throughout the district; 4.) Lack of coherent and cohesive focus
related to teaching and learning; and 5.) A culture of opposition among some staff.
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

14

A change of district leadership occurred, including the superintendent and the assistant
superintendent. Using the equity report as a stimulus for change, the new administration
presented an agenda they named a “Three-Pronged Approach to Excellence through Equity”.
This plan shares the equity report findings, reasons why the prior systemic efforts had failed, and
provides the three tenets of the new approach. The goals are as follows:
1.) Create a culture of shared accountability through a systems approach
2.) Teach cross-cultural and socio-emotional skills
3.) Engage in constant self-reflection around issues of equity

Within this framework, leadership adopted a strategy to meet the needs of all three goals
in a single initiative—adopting and integrating social justice anchor standards into multiple
subject areas and age groups. The adopted standards come from a Southern Poverty Law Center
(SPLC) project called Teaching Tolerance, and are separated into four domains: Identity,
Diversity, Justice, and Action. Beginning with a 20-member cohort consisting of mostly high
school teachers across various content areas, the plan is to bring in a new cohort each year for the
first three years, focusing predominantly on the high schools for the first two years. The idea is
to create a structure of classrooms throughout the schools where teachers are embedding the
social justice standards within their curriculum and practice. The district also intends to use the
School Leadership Teams (SLTs) and PLCs to provide professional development to the other
teachers in the district to support implementation across all schools.
Teacher Learning of Social Justice Standards
District-wide integration of SJAS will require a transformation within the district
regarding teacher practice and teacher learning and will be challenging to sustain without
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

15
strategic support and guidance (Borko, 2004). There are two issues at stake in this situation.
First, in order to accomplish such large-scale improvement, the professional development must
create the capacity for teachers and administrators to collaboratively engage in the improvement
of practice and performance (Elmore, 2002). As designed by the district’s goals, this plan will
include the use of cohorts, school leadership teams (SLTs) and PLCs, beginning with two social
justice cohorts consisting of mostly secondary teachers. As opposed to completely restructuring
the high school class offerings, it has been proposed to instead educate teachers to create
classrooms that are culturally responsive, utilize critical practices, and offer curriculum that is
integrated with social justice learning standards. According to Elmore (2002), if the professional
development is going to be effective, the professional learning needs to be connected to the
questions and needs of the teachers themselves in how they can improve their practice. Second,
for all of the research on pre-service social justice education, there is little published data related
to the large-scale implementation of social justice standards. If social justice standards are going
to be effectively implemented within the school district, the definitions, expectations, and
examples need to be made clear and explicit to all stakeholders. Social justice has been a divisive
concept for generations based on ideology and understanding of context. The inclusion of social
justice standards has been met with criticism and frustration by both teachers and parents
(Cochran-Smith et al., 2009; Zeichner, 2006) due to vague terminology associated with the
standards, and some political and economic ideologies claim the term social justice as
antithetical of democratic values (Rueda, 2012), even though in essence the idea behind social
justice promotes democracy.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

16
Background of Social Justice Standards for Education and Culturally Responsive Teaching
The Teaching Tolerance social justice anchor standards and the respective teacher lessons
included with the curriculum have been influenced by critical and culturally responsive
pedagogies. Over a century ago, educational theorist John Dewey became a key reformer and
advocate of progressive public education and espoused that education and democracy should
coexist in a manner that improved the lives of all and create thoughtful, forward-thinking citizens
(Dewey, 1938). Aligning with Dewey’s ideas, Cochran-Smith et al. (2009) believe that teaching
for social justice refers to “good and just teaching”, where the teachers’ core purpose is to
advocate and develop students whose future work will create social change that can contribute to
the advancement of our democratic society. Social justice in education is essentially about
preparing students to become productive adults by challenging the inequities of school and
society (Cochran-Smith et al., 2009). Dewey’s philosophy about the role of education in society
was also influential for the use of critical theory within the teaching and learning experience
(Nouri and Sajjadi, 2014). The premise of critical theory is not only to teach the students content,
but also make them aware of their positionality in the power structures of their environments.
Half a century later, Paulo Freire began working with adults living in poverty in South America.
Viewed as a critical educator and a philosopher, Freire took the ideas of critical theory and
developed what would be known as a critical pedagogy—he felt that the role of education should
be transformational and empowering to those who have been subjugated into roles of being
oppressed by others (Nagda et al., 2003). Freire believed that the role of the educator was to
partner with the learner in the learner’s act of emancipation through literacy and praxis,
connecting the lived experiences of learners to critical reflection and action (Friere, 1970).
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

17
Freire and his foundation for critical pedagogy and transformative learning was very
influential in what became known as culturally relevant (and later, culturally responsive)
pedagogy. Culturally responsive teaching provides more meaningful and rewarding learning
experiences for students from diverse backgrounds, including those from various ethnic and
cultural backgrounds, English-learners, and from impoverished home situations (Au, 2001).
Ladson-Billings (1995) defined cultural relevant pedagogy as a theoretical model that looks at
learning as more than just achieving academically, but also affirming one’s own identity and
developing critical thoughts and actions that challenge societal inequities. The Teaching
Tolerance social justice anchor standards are structured around both Freire’s concepts of critical
pedagogy and culturally relevant/responsive pedagogies. The standards are designed for students
to use what the curriculum labels as critical practices for an anti-bias education, broken up into
the domains of: Identity, Diversity, Justice and Action (Teaching Tolerance, 2018). The
curriculum also provides very comprehensive professional development plans that utilize critical
practices geared towards developing the teachers’ perspectives and strategies of how to make
their practice more culturally responsive. Although well developed and detailed, the professional
development and the teacher lessons only serve as frameworks for actually integrating the
standards within teachers’ daily contextual instruction. The anchor standards serve as
benchmarks and learning targets, but do not provide fully formed objectives that can easily be
integrated into content curriculum. There are lesson examples and ideas for collaborative
professional development opportunities for teachers but considering the scope and breadth of the
district’s plans of seeing evidence of these standards within teachers’ instruction, there seems to
be a greater need for creating a sustainable and effective collaborative framework for teachers to
design, analyze, and share lessons embedded with the SJAS.
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

18
Purpose of Study

This study intends to inform how professional development can best provide support to
teachers to effectively integrate and implement SJAS within their classroom practice as a means
of providing their students a more equitable learning experience. The study will focus on the
professional development and organizational capacity for teacher learning that supports the
agency of individual teachers to collectively improve their quality of instruction, contributing to
a culture of improved practice within each school (Elmore, 2012). Focusing on one of the two
SJAS cohorts, interviews and observations were used in this study to determine both the
perspectives of individual teachers regarding the district professional development supporting
their application of integrating the standards and how the teacher learning through collaboration
and use of critical practices during the SJAS cohort meetings transfers to the teachers’ respective
school sites. For this study, teacher learning will be defined as the ability to demonstrate an
understanding of culturally responsive and critical pedagogies and to able to apply them within
their practice in order to integrate the social justice standards within their curriculums and
classroom culture. The collaboration opportunities and learning of critical practices are major
components of the Teaching Tolerance SJAS professional development guide and are crucial for
the process of integrating the SJAS within teachers’ practices. In order to try and counter the fact
that research on professional development shows that an implementation done uniformly on a
large-scale doesn’t often meet the established expectations, program fidelity and an awareness of
contextual and situational variables related to the teachers within their respective schools needs
to be analyzed and accounted for (Guskey, 2002). The study was also shaped by determining the
perspectives of teacher learning and professional development from the teachers, including their
thoughts on their own practice, how they learn best, their self-efficacy in integrating the SJAS
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

19
within their respective curriculums, and their own interpretations of the relationship between
knowledge and practice (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999). The study will provide opportunities for
teachers to reflect on their own beliefs and values in relation to both student learning and the
significance of teaching social justice standards. Research data was to determine the knowledge,
motivation and organizational needs of teacher participants in relation to their ability to design
and implement social justice-integrated lesson plans. Guskey’s Five Critical Levels of
Professional Development Evaluation (2009) and Clark and Estes’ Turning Research into
Results (2008) were used as frameworks in Chapter Four to organize the participants’ needs for
designing and implementing SJAS lessons, and Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s New World
Kirkpatrick Model (2016) was used in Chapter Five as an implementation and evaluation
framework.
Significance of Study
There is very limited research on districtwide initiatives incorporating social justice
standards within the content and grade level curriculums of K-12 teachers, and only one (non-
empirical) article has been found that details the incorporation of Teaching Tolerance’s SJAS,
and that was conducted with pre-school students. A significant amount of research has been
conducted and literature has been written related to social justice in education (Garii & Approva,
2012; Cochran-Smith et al., 2009; Warren, 2014; Pantic, 2017; Papa & Papa, 2016; Brown,
2004; Esposito & Swain, 2009; Bender-Slack, 2010), but studies analyzing teacher professional
development in relation to the implementation of social justice standards is lacking. This study is
meant to examine OPSD’s early attempts at incorporating the SJAS throughout classrooms in the
district by use of professional development cohorts and the Teaching Tolerance professional
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

20
development framework, using the participating teachers as the lens to guide the analysis, with
hopes of informing future professional development and studies.
Organization of the Study
Research Questions
The questions the study will answer are:
1. In what ways has the SJ cohort as a PD model provided the capacity to support the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs of teacher participants in their effort
to integrate SJAS within their classroom practice?
2. In what ways are the SJ Cohort participants' teacher learning experiences and their
integration of the SJAS within their classroom practice aligned with the district goals
of the SJ cohort?
Methodology
Utilizing critical and culturally responsive pedagogies, adult learning and professional
development theories, and social justice literature, this was a qualitative case study examining
the relationship between teacher learning and professional development that contributes to the
district’s goals of implementing social justice anchor standards within classrooms throughout the
district as a way to provide for more equitable student learning opportunities. From the adult
learning perspective, the literature focuses on two categories: 1.) Transformative learning and
critical practice theories constructed by scholars including Jack Mezirow, Carol Rodgers,
Maxine Greene, and Paulo Freire, and 2.) culturally responsive pedagogy as established by
scholars such as Geneva Gay and Marilyn Cochran-Smith. Much of this work centers the
teacher learning upon ideas of dialogue, critical reflection, and developing multiple perspectives.
The professional development literature focuses on organizational change and action theories
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

21
described by Richard Elmore, Michael Fullan, and Robert DuFour. The study looks at three
facets of the professional training and implementation: (1) The cohort implementation of the
professional development activities and collaboration opportunities in relation to the design
provided by the Teaching Tolerance framework; (2) the challenges related to the application of
implementing and integrating the SJAS by teachers within their respective classrooms and school
sites; and (3) evidence of teacher efficacy, knowledge, and willingness in change of practice
relating to the implementation and integration of the SJAS within their respective content area
(Trivette et al., 2009). The study also examined the available research that provides
implications, models, and prior evidence of the integration of social justice standards within
academic content curriculum.
The research was conducted through a combination of interviews and observations. Five
teacher participants from the original social justice cohort were interviewed and observed. The
focus was on individual teacher perspectives that provide insight to their learning and support
provided through their cohort in integrating the SJAS, and the transfer of collaborative and
critical practices experienced within the cohort to their respective school sites in their effort to
collectively integrate the SJAS within multiple classrooms. Once the data was collected,
Guskey’s Five Critical Levels of Professional Development Evaluation (2009), Clark and Estes’
Turning Research into Results (2008), and Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s New World Kirkpatrick
Model (2016) were used as frameworks to first categorize and prioritize teacher needs, and then
to create suggestions for future implementation and evaluation.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

22
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

According to Kraft and Papay (2014), professional development should be designed to
improve the capacity of educators to work collectively on common problems of practice within
their own situational contexts, should connect pedagogy and content to the teachers’ needs, and
should serve from the foundation of an explicit model of adult learning. The professional
development cohort that was studied for this research is expected to provide adult learning in the
areas of critical and culturally responsive pedagogies and social justice standards. The teachers
were expected to move their learning of these practices, pedagogies and standards to their own
classroom environments. The literature review section was structured to examine research and
theories related to these areas of critical and culturally responsive pedagogies, social justice and
professional development. This study is driven by teacher learning in relation to the intersection
of these three components, therefore the literature reviewed for this study was divided into three
sections: 1) social justice; 2) critical and culturally responsive pedagogies; 3) and professional
development. Adult learning theories will be examined in context of professional development.
The social justice section reviews literature from scholars who defined and influenced
social justice in its relation to equity and education and examine empirical studies that
demonstrate the significance of social justice embedded in educational practice. The social
justice theories of John Rawls (1972), Nancy Fraser (1996, 2001) and Iris Young (1990, 2006)
were examined in relation to the development of social justice as we see it used to counter
inequities today. The second section is focused on culturally responsive pedagogy and the use of
critical practice, and examined the influence of Paolo Freire, Gloria Ladson Billings, Maxine
Greene, Geneva Gay and Marilyn Cochran-Smith, focusing on critical theory and culturally
responsive teaching theories. Empirical studies conducted within schools that implemented
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

23
critical and culturally responsive practices are detailed to connect these pedagogical practices to
the social justice standards. The professional development section focused on the organizational
change and action theories related to promoting the teacher learning and improvements in equity,
and included literature from Richard Elmore, Michael Fullan, Hilda Borko, Thomas Guskey and
Laura Desimone. As a subsection of professional development, a teacher learning section looks
at the theories and practices related to the actual learning needs of the teachers, reviewing the
literature and theories of scholars that include Jack Mezirow (2000), Stephen Brookfield (2010),
Ilana Seidal Horn and Judith Warren Little (2010), Joelle K. Jay and Kerri L. Johnson (2002),
Ken Zeichner (2010), and Carol Rodgers (2002). Empirical studies in relation to both teacher
learning and professional development were also examined.
Social Justice in Education

According to the theorist and philosopher John Dewey, education was not just about
acquiring information about subject matter, but also to serve as a social platform that would
promote students—as individuals—to acquire their own identities and abilities for not only
wanting to learn about the world but to also be active members in an ever-dynamic democratic
society (Dewey, 1916). Nearly 100 years later, Cochran-Smith (2009) supports those early
thoughts of the purpose of education by Dewey but in a more specific context, arguing that in
order for educators to serve as student advocates and promote the need for those students to be
active members of a democratic society, teaching about social justice is necessary. Although
Dewey’s later work still has significant impact on the use of the reflective cycle that is an
important element of adult learning (Jay & Johnson, 2002), what Dewey had not been able to
predict was the sheer force of continued societal segregation and discrimination due to deeply
embedded racism. In fact, in spite of multiple reforms since 1916 to close opportunity and
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

24
achievement gaps, little has changed since the court rulings of Brown v. Board of Education
(Oakes, 2016). The role of social justice in education, according to Cochran-Smith et al. (2009)
is to guide students to challenge the inequities that they face and will face in their futures.
The term social justice has been divisive and ambiguous since its early inception
(Gewirtz, 1998; North, 2006). For the purpose of this study, the literature and research on social
justice is focused specifically on the impact of its relation to education and to countering the
inequities faced by students marginalized due to their cultural, ethnic, racial, gender, sexual
orientation, language or socioeconomic backgrounds (Agarwal et al., 2010; Brown, 2004;
Cochran-Smith et al., 2009; Francis et al., 2017; Fraser, 2001; Lingard et al., 2014; Pantic, 2017;
Papa & Papa, 2016). The research and literature used for this topic of the study support the
specific social justice standards being integrated with in the OPSD classrooms—the Teaching
Tolerance Perspectives for a Diverse America Social Justice Anchor Standards (SJAS). The four
domains that these standards are guided by are: Identity, Diversity, Justice and Action. From the
perspective of social justice education, students and teachers are expected to recognize and
accept the different identities of others, critically analyze their own identities in relation to
others, critically analyze systemic and structural inequities, and act to counter these inequities.
Social Justice Theories
The ideas of “fair” and “equal” helped shape an early American theory of social justice
by John Rawls (1972) who believed that a just society should have a distributive obligation that
provides to the social and economic disadvantages of the those with less, and that inequalities
that were not benefit to all created injustice. Although a lightning rod for political discourse and
criticism, particularly from the political right, the emphasis on ‘distributive justice’ fell far short
in its description of what others felt that social justice needed to encompass (Fraser, 2001;
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

25
Gewirtz, 1998; North, 2006). As a response to the work of Rawls (1972), Nancy Fraser (1996;
2001) developed her own theory of social justice, focusing on the terms of redistribution,
recognition, and representation and what she has termed as ‘parity of participation’. Her
argument was that the focus of distributive justice lacked an emphasis on recognizing the rights
of those with different identities and cultural differences, creating a shallow and ineffective focus
on the roots of inequities (Fraser, 2001). Fraser’s (2001) belief is that the redistribution of what is
equitable must be connected to the idea of recognition, and—later—representation. Her idea of
recognition refers to the idea that parties shouldn’t be subordinated due to their identities and that
the denial due to group status is unjust (Fraser, 2001). She coined the term ‘parity of
participation’ to refer to the connection between redistribution and recognition as a means of
saying that justice requires that everyone—all groups—should be on par with each other (Fraser,
2001). Fraser (1996) also believed that the focus on recognition should be to change the
institutional cultural norms. In order to create a framework that was more comprehensive, Fraser
did not want to get too caught up in the vast arrays of ethical identity differences found in
society, so even though she developed a dimension that provides an acknowledgement of identity
on a large scale, her work drew both substantial criticism and praise.
One argument critiquing Fraser’s theory in relation to recognition is that she emphasized
that group acceptance was necessary for justice but de-emphasized (for the purpose of her
framework) the need to acknowledge and understand the complex differences within these
groups (North, 2006). North (2006) worried that this lack of specificity could perpetuate
inequities through a normalizing process that even though diverse groups were acknowledged,
the status quo wouldn’t change. At the same time, North believes that Fraser’s theories were very
beneficial in stimulating critical discourse surrounding the ideas connected to social justice. In
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

26
support of Fraser’s work is Keddie (2012), who sees the significance of the framework in
relation to educational equity. The work of Fraser (amongst other theorists) has provided an
impetus for prioritizing cultural and economic recognition in relation to academic
underperformance by school systems around the world (Keddie, 2012), countering dominant
views that privilege white, middle-class students. One example of the implementation of the
recognition dimension within school districts is the inclusion of explicit equity policies that are
geared at supporting students from all backgrounds (Keddie 2012).
Gewirtz (1998) looks at the work by Rawls and Fraser as focused on two dimensions—
distributional and relational and sees both as valuable in the discourse for social justice theory,
but highlights the significance of Iris Young’s (1990, 2006) work as casting a wider net to the
purposes of social justice. Young’s (1990, 2006) work was also critical of social justice defined
through a distributive paradigm, and focused her ideas on the intersection of inclusion, diversity,
and the oppressive structural injustices that affected collective decision-making, the workforce
and culture. Young’s work is congruent to the anti-bias component of the Teaching Tolerance
SJAS.
As highlighted by North (2006), the significance of the dynamic theories surrounding
social justice is that the dialogical conversations and critical reflection generated from differing
points of view and perspectives are valuable to future transformation of social justice and how it
is applied. Lingard et al. (2014) are concerned that discourse concerning social justice is
negatively affected by neoliberal and what they describe as neo-social ideologies using empirical
data and statistical measurement to re-articulate the focus of equity. They fear that social justice
and equity are being transformed into frames of measurement and comparison that places too
much emphasis on the data accumulated through the use of high-stakes testing, and that the
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

27
recognitive and representative dimensions as framed by Fraser (1997, 2009) and the inclusive
and critical dimensions framed by theorists such as Young (1990, 2006) will give way to a big-
data, free-market rationalization that devalues the contextual and personal inequities of
marginalized student (Lingard et al., 2014).
Social Justice Empirical Studies
There are limited studies that explore the implementation of social justice practices
within schools without referring to specific culturally responsive and critical pedagogical
approaches (which will be presented later in this chapter) and very few empirical studies that
connect social justice education with student outcomes. A number of studies conducted with pre-
service teachers and their experience with social justice are available, but for this study the
purpose is to focus on the use of social justice practices within the schools. For the overarching
purpose of this paper, the examination of restorative justice studies will not be completed, even
though it can be looked as an offshoot of social justice. This section of the literature review will
illuminate some of the studies completed that make efforts in producing evidence in improved
student achievement due directly to social justice and will also examine studies that demonstrate
the challenges faced by social justice educators and those conducting research on the topic.
Teaching for Social Justice Observation Scale (TSJOS)
Mitescu et al. (2011) conducted a study that analyzed student learning outcomes in
relation to social justice practices that was guided by a theory of social justice education. The
sample size was twenty-two new elementary teachers who were observed teaching math lessons
twice during a four to six-week period. Pre-tests and post-tests were used to gather student data,
and two observation protocols—RTOP (Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol) and a newly
developed TSJOS (Teaching for Social Justice)—were used for the measurement of teaching
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

28
practices. The results of the teacher observations demonstrated a high, positive correlation to the
teaching practices to the students’ test score outcomes. The results of this study indicate that the
use of the TSJOS in relation to the RTOP can serve as valuable tools for other studies in efforts
to measure the effectiveness of teacher social justice practice in relation to student outcomes.
Although small in scale, this offers pathways for future empirical research seeking to connect
social justice practices with measurable student outcomes.
Teaching and Learning Mathematics for Social Justice in an Urban, Latino School
Eric Gutstein’s (2003) conducted a qualitative two-year study about teaching and
learning math for social justice in an urban, Latino classroom using practitioner-research
methodology. The purposes of this study were to determine concrete components of learning
math for social justice and to analyze the relationship of using a standards-based curriculum.
Gutstein (2003) took an approach shared by Freire (Freire & Macedo, 1987) that asked his
students to write the world to develop the agency that would allow them to become agents of
change. The study was conducted at a predominantly Latino urban elementary school consisting
of 800 students for a two-year period using his own class. The methodology utilized semi-
ethnographic research methods that included observation, open-ended surveys, and document
analysis. The data was collected from sixth, seventh, and eighth grade students over the two-year
period and included journals as artifacts. From the results, Gutstein determined that he helped
students develop sociopolitical consciousness, a sense of agency, and positive social and cultural
identities. He determined that the standards-based curriculum that he used could support social
justice pedagogy under certain conditions. He concludes that his study provided a framework
that demonstrates that teachers can promote more equitable classrooms by helping students
explicitly use math to understand and analyze the inequities in society. Though lacking in
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

29
empirical results, this study was significant enough in relation to connecting mathematics to
social justice that Gutstein is often cited in mathematical journals and has been published in
National Council of Mathematics Teachers (NCTM) books.
English Language Arts Teachers Negotiate SJ Teaching
Bender-Slack’s (2010) research involved 22 secondary teachers in 15 public schools
located throughout a midwestern city and utilized a three-interview series of phenomenological
interviews. Guided by the social justice framework as detailed by Oakes and Lipton (2003), the
study explored the ways that the secondary ELA educators defined social justice, their feelings
about the purpose of social justice, and the texts used. Using the coded data, the researchers
utilized the social justice framework (Oakes & Lipton, 2003) as a lens to determine the patterns
of issues that can provide focus for future research concerning improving social justice in
education. The results demonstrated the complexity of social justice in its relation to education.
The teachers had very different thoughts about social justice, most had difficulty in the critical
components of the framework, most were concerned about making students uncomfortable with
discourse, and most did not demonstrate agency in implementing social justice within the
classrooms. This study demonstrates the need for those hoping to promote social justice
implementation in the classrooms in creating an explicit framework and common language that
frames collaborative discourse and critical reflection about the purposes behind making social
justice a core component of teaching practice (Cochran-Smith et al., 2009; Zeichner, 2006).
Beginning Teachers Teaching for Social Justice
The study done by Agarwal et al. (2010) was a multi-case study that focused on
beginning elementary teachers and their success and challenges in enacting social justice within
their curricula. There were 12 participants who were all recent graduates from the same
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

30
preservice program. The study was guided by the authors’ description of what encompasses the
expectations of teachers of social justice: a) enact curricula that integrates multiple perspectives,
are critical of dominant Western narratives, and are inclusive of the racial, ethnic, and linguistic
diversity; b) support students to develop a critical consciousness of the injustices; and c) scaffold
opportunities for students to be active participants in democracy. The study was completed in
the span of one semester, distributed amongst the five authors and 12 doctoral students, with
each doctoral student responsible for collecting the data from a beginning teacher—this meant
that multiple cases were involved. Interviews and observations were used as data collecting
tools. The results showed that the teachers were on a ‘journey toward teaching for social justice’
and had varied but mostly positive attitudes. They all felt somewhat obstructed by the schools’
curriculum and schedules and had some struggles with the necessary pedagogies. This study was
ultimately done as a means to better prepare future preservice teachers for the task of
implementing social justice within their practice. The authors put forth the following
recommendations (2010): a) elucidate the inevitable struggles around teaching for social justice;
b) scaffold opportunities for student teachers to practice reflective-thinking skills; and c) explore
resources in teacher education classrooms to plan social reconstructionist curriculum enactments.
Although this study focused on aspects needed to be provided to preservice teachers, its
situational context of actual school classrooms provides valuable input for further work on
providing support for new and experienced teachers willing to integrate social justice within their
practice.
Culturally Responsive Teaching
Teaching Tolerance’s Social Justice Standards are anchored in an anti-bias framework
(www.tolerance.org), and the professional development modules that accompany the framework
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

31
are designed to support the teachers in teaching the standards within their classroom contexts that
emphasize four core focuses: identity, diversity, justice, and action. Embedded within the
professional development modules are critical practices designed for teachers to promote anti-
bias education within their classrooms utilizing core components of culturally responsive
pedagogy (www.tolerance .org/professional-development/critical practices). According to the
Teaching Tolerance curriculum and the research and literature focused on culturally responsive
teaching, educators need to have opportunities to reflect on their own biases and assumptions,
need to have a clear understanding of their own identity, and need to recognize the structural
racism that affects the learning of their students before they expect to implement the culturally
responsive pedagogy and social justice anchor standards within their classroom practice
(Hammond, 2015; www.tolerance.org; Ladson-Billings, 1995).
For the purpose of this section of the chapter, it should be clarified that culturally
responsive and culturally relevant teaching both define a very similar pedagogical approach to
teaching diverse student populations and are congruent to one another (Villagas & Lucas, 2002).
The idea of culturally responsive teaching (CRT) is not new, but there is a lack of clarity
amongst many educators in how utilizing this pedagogical approach can actually close learning
gaps (Hammond, 2015). This section of the literature review will provide a brief historical
context to the implementation of culturally responsive teaching, the varying approaches and
beliefs that encompass culturally responsive teaching and will also provide empirical case studies
of the implementation of CRT within classroom contexts.
An increase in the number of diverse students found in the student populations of schools
across the country has led to a dynamic shift in approaches to curriculum and pedagogy.
Promising research on a realignment of teacher learning to place more emphasis in the
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

32
understanding of culture, context, race and empowerment demonstrated that culturally
responsive practices could have an impact (Sleeter, 2012). Villegas and Lucas (2002) categorized
the concept of culturally responsive teaching into six main components. These categories are: a.)
teachers need to be socio-culturally conscious; b.) teachers need to hold affirming views of
students from diverse backgrounds; c.) teachers see themselves as capable and responsible
change agents; d.) teachers have an understanding of how students construct knowledge; e.)
teachers know their students (their backgrounds, their families, their learning styles, their social-
emotional needs; f.) teachers know how to design instruction based on the background
knowledge of their students (Villegas & Lucas, 2002). Hammond (2015) re-organized the
categories into four, which include: a.) awareness; b.) learning partnerships; c.) information
processing; and d.) community of learners and learning environment. Both the work of
Hammond and Villegas & Lucas represented the foundation of culturally responsive teaching
first made explicit by Gloria Ladson-Billings.
Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Ladson-Billings (1995) developed the theory of culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP)
anchored in the belief that teachers must provide a way for students to both achieve academically
and simultaneously maintain cultural integrity. Within the CRP framework, teachers are
expected to guide students to an awareness of the social inequities they face and will face in the
future, but many teachers (and pre-service teachers) either don’t recognize or refuse to
acknowledge the social inequities faced by their students (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Ideologies and
beliefs are cornerstone to teacher practice, and it is a challenge for many teachers to move
beyond static notions of their own beliefs about teaching and learning and to recognize the need
to differentiate for students of diverse backgrounds (Ladson-Billings, 1995). According to
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

33
Hammond (2015), the understanding of sociopolitical context in relation to teaching and to the
individual schools is affected by two main components—implicit bias and structural
racialization. Ladson-Billings saw this as the first characteristic of culturally relevant pedagogy
that she used to support her theory--teachers conception of self and others. According to Hawley
& Nieto (2010), race and ethnicity impact teaching and learning by how students respond to
instruction and how race and ethnicity influence teachers’ assumptions about students’ capacity
to learn. Research demonstrates that most people contain some biases towards different races
and/or ethnicities, and that many people see biases and discrimination differently (Hawley &
Nieto, 2010). These biases formed through racial, ethnic, and cultural attitudes play a significant
role in teachers’ practice (Gay, 2010). In order to meet the needs of the diversity of all students,
explicit cultural diversity knowledge is necessary (Gay, 2001). Hawley and Nieto (2010) list
three steps that teachers need to complete in order to initiate an effective culturally responsive
approach: 1. Understand how race affects teaching and learning; 2. Use culturally responsive
teaching practices; and 3. Promote supportive school conditions, which begins with teachers
creating classroom cultures that contribute to the learning of every one of their students.
Sonia Nieto (2010) states that in order to successfully teach a diverse population, one
must know oneself. Differences of culture, race, and ethnicity can distort teachers’ perceptions,
beliefs, and attitudes toward their diverse students, so learning to critically recognize one’s own
perceptions, beliefs and assumptions can be a first step towards becoming a more effective
teacher (Gay, 2010). Hammond (2015) argues that striving to understand and accept the various
cultures of the students being taught and recognizing the significance of sociopolitical contexts
in relation to these students, including one’s own implicit biases, provides a platform for
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

34
supporting the social-emotional needs of the students, which in return provides a base for
establishing a learning environment that builds the intelligence capacity of every learner.
Ladson-Billings second focal point was teachers’ construction of social interaction and
collaborative learning opportunities within their classroom setting, emphasizing the idea of a
“community of learners” (1995). Teachers need to demonstrate to all students that the process of
learning and achieving is reciprocal between students and the teacher, where both the students
and the teacher serve as partners in the learning process and that the sustainability of a
community of learners requires a flexible, action-oriented approach by the teacher (Gay, 2002).
Awareness in the significance of communication styles in influencing learning behaviors is also
a trait demonstrated by culturally responsive teachers. Gay (2002) states that an important
strategic tool for culturally responsive teachers to acknowledge and utilize within their practice is
the use of the protocols of participation in discourse. Recognizing that the traditional “passive-
receptive” approach used by many teachers can counter the learning opportunities of culturally
diverse students, culturally responsive teachers learn to use active-participatory methods when
applicable (Gay, 2002). Freire (1970) labeled the passive-receptive approach as a “banking
method” of instruction, where the teacher—the one who holds of the knowledge—deposits the
information to the students as they passively receive the knowledge. Rather than simply telling
students the information, Freire (1970) recommended a problem-posing, dialogical approach that
motivates critical consciousness and connection. This emphasis of moving from didactic
instruction to a discursive and relationship-based approach is a foundational cornerstone in
culturally responsive teaching.
The third main point of focus within Ladson-Billing’s theory is the idea of teachers’
conception of knowledge, which requires dialogue to take place between educators to ascertain
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

35
the end goals of their practice in relation to their students’ needs. It becomes a matter of critically
reflecting on one’s own practice, their learners’ needs, and collaborating with other educators to
make the teachers’ roles and strategies more explicit. This critical practice can lead to what
Cochran-Smith and Lytle call inquiry as stance, where teacher learning and instructional purpose
is linked to questioning the systemic structures of the status quo, acknowledging the perspectives
of others, and to the dynamic cultures and communities of their students and classrooms (1999).
Ladson-Billing’s culturally relevant pedagogy theory initiated numerous research studies
and further iterations of her initial work into varying frameworks with multiple interpretations,
resulting in her re-emphasizing and re-articulating the meaning behind the core components of
her theory (Young, 2010). According to Evelyn Young (2010), while many researchers and
educators remained to true to Ladson-Billings work, others developed off-shoots of CRP that
aligned to specific minority populations or content areas. What has resulted from the variance in
interpretations of the theory has led to an inconsistent and watered-down application of the
pedagogy within the classrooms—teachers tend to focus on only one or two components of the
theory, and many educators hold a superficial understanding of the significance of the word
culture (Young, 2010; Ladson-Billings, 2014). Ultimately, Ladson-Billings recommends that
teachers implementing culturally relevant pedagogy place equal amounts of emphasis on
establishing a culture of high expectations, creating a community of learners, and developing
students’ abilities to critique knowledge as a socially constructed event (Young, 2010; Ladson-
Billings, 2014).

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

36
Studies Conducted on Culturally Responsive Teaching
Ladson-Billings conducted a study of eight teachers in a predominantly African-
American, low-income school district in northern California to examine what exemplary teachers
of students of color did to ensure academic success. She conducted a four-phased study that
utilized ethnographic interviews, videotaping of teaching and a collective viewing and analysis
of the videotaped classrooms by the participating teachers (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Her work
concluded with a recognition of four common characteristics shared by the participating teachers
that exemplified their success in working with African-American students: 1. Teachers believed
that all students were capable of academic success; 2. The teachers viewed their pedagogy as an
art that was dynamic and evolving; 3. Teachers saw themselves as members of a community; and
4. Teachers saw their practice as a way to give back to the community.
Perhaps the most influential longitudinal and empirical research and studies conducted on
culturally responsive teaching occurred in the Te Kotahitanga study in New Zealand. The work
began in response to a continuation of educational disparities affecting the indigenous Maori
students within the New Zealand public school systems—over forty years of reforms and policy
changes were making no significant changes to the Maori students’ connection to their education
or achievements (Bishop et al., 2009). An initiative was proposed to approach the situation from
the perspectives and understandings of the Maori culture rather than imposing the traditional
hegemonic devices used in the past. The project began in 2001 by first focusing on the self-
determination of 70 Maori secondary students in five different secondary schools through the use
of in-depth, semi-structured interviews as conversations about their classroom experiences.
Family members, school principals and teachers were also interviewed to begin developing a
series of narratives (Bishop et al., 2009). In the following years the second stage occurred where
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

37
the narratives—which uncovered a substantial pattern of deficit beliefs on the part of the
teachers—were then used to as part of a professional development project aimed at providing
teachers with the student perspectives as a catalyst for them to collectively begin critically
reflecting and having critical dialogue about their beliefs, assumptions and practice (Bishop et al.
2009). Teachers working on developing culturally responsive pedagogies which were measured
by frameworks called Effective Teaching Profiles (ETP) (Bishop et al., 2009). The third stage
took place in 2004 and 2005 and included a total of 12 schools and 422 teachers. The
professional development activities were conducted within the schools in workshop formats with
both teachers and principals, where the students’ narratives were provided, the ETPs were
introduced and explained, and teachers worked collaboratively on designing classroom
environments, lessons and goals. These workshops were followed by classroom observations,
teacher feedback, group co-construction meetings and targeted shadow-coaching sessions
(Bishop et al., 2012). By 2010, Phase 3 schools began their seventh year of participation and
Phase 4 schools were in their fourth year (Bishop et al., 2012). This use of the multiple phases
over the years provides longitudinal data in examining the effects of the professional
development program in relation to the Maori students’ achievement. The outcomes of the study
demonstrated and increased improvement in the relations between teachers and students, a
marked improvement in teacher effectiveness, and increase in the Maori academic success
(Bishop et al., 2012).
The work accomplished in the Te Kotahitanga study was not only influential in the
implementation of culturally responsive teaching, but also in the type of professional
development that was provided. The professional development incorporated the parent and
student voices into the training undergone by the teachers and using this as context established a
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

38
sustainable and collective approach to professional learning that was not only transformational,
but also evolved in yearly iterations.
Critical Theory in Relation to Culturally Responsive Teaching
Geneva Gay (2015) states that teachers’ beliefs about ethnic, racial and cultural diversity
determine their instructional behaviors. This requires a process of critical reflection and
subsequent practice on the part of the teachers. Embedded within the framework of culturally
responsive teaching is the practice of critical reflection and consciousness, both influenced by
critical pedagogy. Critical pedagogy has roots that lead back to Paolo Freire (1970) and Jurgen
Habermas (1971). Freire (1974) describes critical consciousness as a view of the relationship
between things and facts as they exist empirically, analyzing the cause and effect of one’s
situation from various perspectives, developing a theory in approach and reasoning, and then
implementing action towards changing the situation, what he called praxis. Freire’s belief was
that in order for critical consciousness to occur, dialogue between parties was necessary and that
the power dynamics of those involved needed to be in a partner relationship, not one of power
dynamics (Freire, 1970; 1974). In order for teachers to truly practice culturally responsive
teaching, they must provide opportunities for students to examine the power dynamics and
inequities that affect their lives (Sleeter, 2012). Milner (2003) describes critical pedagogy as a
form of instruction that provides the students’ voices in countering oppression and injustice and
promotes student-led action both inside and outside of the classroom. According to Cochran-
Smith and Lytle (2013), the use of inquiry and theorizing practices by teachers in respect to their
own practice and larger systemic (and problematic) influences, including power, political and
social agendas place the teacher as a learner and change agent, and their actions within their
practice can become transformative in nature. This connects to the social justice standards of
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

39
both justice and action. Being able to recognize obstacles—both present and from the past—
provides students with opportunities to counter the effects of the oppressive barriers (Milner,
2003).
Professional Development
This section of the literature review will examine professional development from two
perspectives: a.) a larger-scale, more general view defining the characteristics of what can be
considered effective professional development and the research associated with these
characteristics, and b.) a more micro-view of the specific professional (adult) learning
characteristics associated with transformational change and adult learning in relation to teacher
pedagogical improvement.
Defining effective professional development
As the student population rapidly continues to change in terms of diversity, socio-
emotional needs, and complexity in learning needs, educators are expected to adapt to these
changes in uncertain terms to create equitable learning opportunities and meet district- and state-
mandated accountabilities. In order for teachers to maintain professional accountability, they
need to be provided strategies and knowledge to transform their practice from their respective
school or district organizations through the process of professional development (Elmore, 2002).
The most significant outcomes of effective professional development should be the teachers’
abilities to apply the new knowledge and pedagogy into practice that results in improved student
learning (Guskey, 2000; Darling-Hammond, Hyler, & Gardner, 2017). Elements of effective PD
should include content focus, active learning, coherence, duration, and collective participation
(Desimone, 2011).

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

40
Conceptual Frameworks of PD Evaluation
The investment in professional development has become the impetus for educational
reform in the United States, so determining what makes professional development effective is
crucial to understanding the success (or lack of) educational reform (Desimone, 2009). Desimone
(2009) argues that earlier emphasis of professional development research was more focused on
teacher satisfaction, attitudes, and commitment and less on the actual teacher learning that took
place and the student achievement outcomes related to the newly acquired knowledge. Guskey
(2000) identified three reasons that make evaluating the effectiveness of PD challenging: 1.)
confusion about criteria for effectiveness; 2.) focus only on main effects—not paying attention to
the context of the PD; and 3.) too much focus on the quantifiable data and not the qualitative
components. Frameworks have been developed to evaluate professional development programs
since the mid-20
th
century and have undergone much transformation. Guskey (2000) identified
six influential early models of PD, including: a.) Tyler’s Evaluation Model, b). Metfessel and
Michael’s Evaluation Model, c.) Hammond’s Evaluation Model, d.) Scriven’s Goal-Free
Evaluation Model, e.) Stufflebeam’s CIPP Evaluation Model, and f.) Kirkpatrick’s Evaluation
Model. The models of Metfessel and Micheal and Hammond were both extensions of Ralph W.
Tyler’s earlier (1949) model. The models of Scriven and Stufflebeam diverged from Tyler’s
work, focusing less on the relation of outcomes to set objectives and more on the outcomes
themselves and the decision-making processes that led to these outcomes. Kirkpatrick’s model
was not developed for education but rather for business and industry training (Guskey, 2000), but
has been adapted to fit the needs of education professional development. Guskey (2000)
summarizes that the six models can be split into three main categories of evaluation: planning;
formative; and summative. Using Kirkpatrick’s model, Guskey (2000) developed a framework
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

41
for educators he named the Five Critical Levels of Professional Development Evaluation as
shown here:
Table 1: Five Critical Levels of Professional Development Evaluation
The Five Critical Levels of Professional Development
Evaluation

1. Participants’ reactions
2. Participants’ learning
3. Organization support and change
4. Participants’ use of new knowledge and skills
5. Student learning outcomes

Borko (2004) describes the professional development system as consisting of four core
components: the teachers; the facilitators of the program; the professional development program
itself; and the context of the professional development. By focusing research on each of these
specific components--beginning with the teachers—and how the components are interrelated, the
means of assessing evidence of the effectiveness of the professional development becomes more
evident (Borko, 2004).
Focusing the measurement on the critical features of the PD that makes it effective for
teacher learning rather than the type of activity is a way to make the research more measurable
(Desimone, 2009). Her core conceptual framework is as follows:

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

42
A more recent study conducted by the Learning Policy Institute on effective teacher professional
development reviewed multiple PD studies and research to conclude that there are seven
common design components for effective PD approaches (Darling-Hammond, Hyler, & Gardner,
2017).
Table 2:
Seven Common Design Components for Effective PD Approaches
1. Content focused
2. Incorporates active learning strategies
3. Engages teachers in collaboration
4. Uses models and/or modeling
5. Provides coaching and expert support
6. Includes time for feedback and reflection
7. Are of sustained duration

Challenges in professional development research
Out of hundreds of studies of professional development researched in the past few
decades, only 35 substantive studies provide significant descriptions of PD that results in positive
outcomes in student achievement (Darling-Hammond, Hyler, & Gardner, 2017). To explain the
lack of success of so many district and school professional development initiatives, Elmore
(2002) states that public school organizations are not designed to support ongoing teacher
learning and continuous improvement of their respective practices, and that the current structures
actually inhibit the abilities for teachers to collectively improve. Too many district and school
initiatives create professional development opportunities that fail to provide substantive teacher
learning and change in practice due to lack of coherence and organizational resources (Dufour &
Fullan, 2013). If school organizations want to truly invest in teacher learning that can improve
student achievement, the structure of the organizations themselves need to develop the capacity
for the teacher learning to occur (Elmore, 2002).
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

43
Another barrier to effective PD can be found in the delivery. There are still programs that
utilize a transmission-type delivery, didactic in style and not providing teacher learning
opportunities that are directly applicable to their practice (Webster-Wright, 2009). According to
Guskey (2000), if teacher knowledge is not changed from the delivery of the PD, student
achievement is not going to be positively affected by the PD program. Other factors include too
short duration in the program, unsupportive school leadership, and a disconnect in the PD focus
in relation to teacher needs (Darling-Hammond, Hyler, & Gardner, 2017).
To alleviate issues that lead to a lack of coherence in systemic initiatives, Fullan and
Dufour (2013) developed a framework of strategies that narrows the scope of the process.
Table 3:
Fullan & DuFour Framework of PD Strategies
1. Focusing on a small number of ambitious goals
2. Making instruction and student achievement the daily agenda
3. Organizing continuous capacity building around that agenda
4. Creating a sense of systemness on the part of all

According to Fullan and Dufour (2013), systemness refers to the result of shared mindsets
leading to shared coherence, which leads to shared commitment. Too many initiatives and PD
opportunities can lead to what Dufour & Fullan (2013) refer to as initiative fatigue, leading
teachers to come away with disjointed experiences and an inability to transfer any knowledge
gained in their PD experience to their classroom in a sustainable manner. Shared vision, clear
objectives, and specific evidence-based outcomes provide a foundation for educators to work in a
more effective, collaborative manner. If district or school-implemented initiatives are to find
success, the PD must directly connect to the teachers’ practice and school leadership must
provide the capacity for this transmission to occur and regenerate.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

44
Professional Learning Communities as Models of Professional Development
Fullan and Dufour have been influential in creating applicable frameworks for the use of
professional learning communities (PLC) within school systems. Dufour provides an explicit
definition of PLC:
“...ongoing process in which educators work collaboratively in recurring cycles
of collective inquiry and action research to achieve better results for the students they
serve.”
PLCs are designed to provide a platform for teachers to work on solutions to achieve improved
student learning within their school and content context. This changes the dynamics of past
professional development--rather than being told how to fix their practice from external forces,
PLCs provide opportunities for teachers to receive professional learning while simultaneously
contributing to the learning of students through an action-oriented, systematic process (Dufour et
al., 2010). Effective PLCs have led to productive changes in school cultures around the world.
Dufour et al. (2010) provide a list of six characteristics of high-performing PLCs:
Table 4: Six characteristics of high-performing PLCs:
1. Shared mission (purpose), vision (clear direction), values (collective commitments), and
goals (indicators, timelines, and targets), which are all focused on student learning
2. A collaborative culture with a focus on learning
3. Collective inquiry into best practice and current reality
4. Action orientation or “learning by doing”
5. A commitment to continuous improvement
6. A results orientation

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

45
Research conducted by Timperly & Alton Lee (2008) confirm that the professional
learning by teachers requires a focus on specific problems of practice, exploration of pedagogical
content research that moves theory to practice, and a constant focus on how their teaching
directly affects student learning. The use of professional learning communities within school
settings as processes for professional development, if done properly, are synchronized with the
seven effective PD approaches shared by the Darling-Hammond, Hyler, & Gardner study (2017).
Although there have been many successful examples of PLCs used effectively for school
improvement, it has been made clear that many school districts and schools have done a poor job
in the implementation of PLCs due to various reasons. There are several challenges that affect
the implementation of PLCs (Dufour & Fullan, 2013), including: a.) the need to change school
culture; b) leaders and participants not looking at PLCs as processes for teacher learning and
purposeful collaboration but rather as programs initiated from top-down; and c.) a lack of
priority that results in not sustaining the PLC process by not establishing revisited protocols, set
outcomes, and leadership support.
Research on professional communities in schools has demonstrated that teachers’
collegial relationships and the capacity of their organizations to promote their learning and
collaborative work can be influential in increasing student achievement. Horn and Little (2010)
highlight four core indicators of successful professional communities: 1.) core shared values; 2.)
a focus on student learning; 3.) collaboration; and 4.) practice of reflective dialogue. In order for
these collaborative practices to be effective, the organization supporting these professional
learning communities should provide a platform for teacher learning and collaboration. Research
has shown four important factors have been found in successful organizations that support
professional communities: norms for collaboration; a focus on students and their academic
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

46
performance; access to a wide range of learning resources for individuals and groups; and mutual
accountability for student growth and success (Horn & Little, 2010). Most significantly, the
professional discourse and collaboration should focus on problems of practice, with protocols
that approach these problems with collective problem solving, learning, and developing solutions
in mind (Horn & Little, 2010).
Adult Learning
Adult learning--also known as andragogy--refers to a set of theories, strategies, and
methods associated with the most effective means of acquiring knowledge (Trivette et. al.,
2009). Successful adult learning methods have been established through research, including
accelerated (and active) learning, coaching, guided design, and just-in-time training (Trivette et.
al., 2009). Accelerated and active learning centers upon the goal of creating rather than
consuming, allowing for greater application of acquired knowledge. Coaching is based on
modeling, goal setting, providing reflection opportunities and providing appropriate feedback
(Trivette et al., 2009). Guided design is an inquiry and problem-solving approach that requires
the learners to activate critical thinking and the use of meta-cognitive skills. According to
Trivette et al. (2009), just-in-time training is in response to learner needs that is specific to
problems of their practice. This could include mentoring or individualized plans of action
provided to the learner as they attempt to overcome specific challenges. The roles of the
professional development trainer or facilitator is critical in helping the adult learners analyze
problems of practice, engage their prior knowledge and objectives for new learning, identify
misconceptions, and promote constructive approaches to acquiring and applying new knowledge
(Trivette et al., 2009).
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

47
Important to approaching problems of practice through collaboration and inquiry is the
use of a reflection process (Loughran, 2010), which in education originated from the work of
John Dewey. According to Loughran (2010), Dewey’s belief of the reflection process was one of
truly trying to understand the nature of the problem at hand and how one could reflect on their
reactions to this problem, with the intent of leading to a reconceptualization of their approach if
necessary. Using Dewey’s reflection framework, Carol Rodgers (2002) developed a reflective
cycle process that consists of four elements: 1.) presence in experience--slowing down the
learning process and breaking it down to “understand the understanding of students”; 2.)
description in experience--being able to describe in detail the learner’s experience; 3.) analysis of
experience--looking at problems and situations from different perspectives and determining
different possible explanations; and 4.) experimentation--taking intelligent action based on the
other stages of the reflective process. Rodgers (2002) believes that a structured process of
reflection will allow for learners to become agents of their experiences, allowing them to use
their experience in relation to problems of practice in a proactive manner--one that is
transformational.
According to Zeichner & Liu (2010), the reflection practice should be done in
collaboration with other teachers and that their roles are to determine purposes and objectives
towards improving student achievement. For a reflective process to be successful, teachers must
not just focus on means-end approaches, expecting problems to be solved in short periods of
time--the process is cyclical and dynamic in nature. The reflection process must also take in
consideration the social and institutional context of the problem and the target students (Zeichner
& Liu, 2010). Zeichner & Liu (2010) view reflection as political, transformational, and necessary
in addressing the social justice and equity needs of students. When connecting teacher reflection
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

48
to addressing social justice issues, the process must include: 1.) a knowledge of the academic
subject matter; 2.) pedagogical knowledge of how to promote student understanding that
connects their prior knowledge to new knowledge; 3.) opportunities for teachers to know how to
make decisions that generate positive learning experiences for students rather than those that
affect future learning; 4.) opportunities to learn about their students, including what they know
and do not know and their cultural backgrounds; and 5.) strategies for addressing and facilitating
discourse about complex content within the classroom (Zeichner & Liu, 2010).
Transformation theory, which falls under the adult learning theories, explores how adults
make meanings of their lived experiences, work context, and problems of practice through
looking critically at their own beliefs and behaviors (Mezirow, 2000). Mezirow (2000) views
transformation theory as access to emancipatory education, allowing learners to become aware of
their experiences and reasons of how and why they perceive things, which in turn shapes the
actions they take moving forward. The premise behind transformation theory is the focus of a
problem--a disorienting dilemma (Mezirow, 2000) and the use of reflection and perspective
change to make sense of the problem and determine how to move forward. Transformative
learning is not about recall and memory, but rather a learning that alters one’s future approach to
practice (Meijer et al., 2017) and requires critical reflection. Transformative learning through
professional development is a kind of deep learning that requires a focus on participants’
professional identities and their ability to obtain new knowledge attributed to changes in beliefs
and behavior (Meijer et al., 2017). Through structured routines and critical reflection, teachers
can develop deeper understandings of their own beliefs and intentions, which when connected to
a collaborative professional community, can lead to greater changes in behavior (Meijer et al.,
2017). This process provides teachers with an new found understanding of their roles as
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

49
professionals and learners, and the impact their work can have on their students’ learning and
future opportunities. A collaborative reflection process that includes critical reflection should
then lead to critical praxis--where reflection and ideas transform into action in practice. Based on
the idea of critical theory and action, the praxis of teachers can occur when their connections
between the struggles found within their own teaching practice and the needs of their students
leads them to transform their practice in a more equitable and effective manner, navigating
student learning that extends beyond their immediate classroom (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2013).

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

50
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

Purpose and Research Questions
This research was conducted as a qualitative study analyzing the professional learning
experiences of secondary teachers in a pilot social justice cohort tasked with the goal of
developing and integrating social justice lessons within their classroom curriculum. This study
was guided by Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis and Guskey’s (2002) Five Critical Levels of
Professional Development Evaluation frameworks to determine the needs and assets of the
teacher participants. This social justice cohort--the first of two--was established in the Spring of
2018 with originally twenty invited participants from two district high schools, one alternative
high school, two middle schools, and one elementary. The data from this study was collected
from participants of one high school, the alternative school, and one of the middle schools. The
research was conducted during one school year using interviews and observations as a means of
providing an in-depth understanding of the effects of the professional development provided to
teachers through the cohort, and the capacity of the cohort structure to support the teachers in
their goals of designing and implementing social justice-integrated lessons within their
classrooms. The use of interviews provided the teachers’ perspectives of their lived experiences
in relation to their learning and integration of the SJAS, and the use of observations provided a
researcher’s perspective of the teachers’ ability to apply the cohort learning and planning into
their own classroom practice (Merriam and Tisdale, 2016).
Research Questions:
1. In what ways has the SJ cohort as a PD model provided the capacity to support the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs of teacher participants in their effort to
integrate SJAS within their classroom practice?
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

51
2. In what ways are the SJ Cohort participants' teacher learning experiences and their
integration of the SJAS within their classroom practice aligned with the district goals of
the SJ cohort?
Methodology
Using adult learning, social justice, critical and culturally responsive pedagogies, and
professional development theories to frame the research and data collection, this qualitative case
and innovation study focused on an SJAS cohort participants’ perspectives and their knowledge,
motivation, and organizational needs in relation to their work at designing and implementing
social justice standards into their respective grade levels and content areas. Due to the
complexity of the duel expectations of the district that the teachers simultaneously learn about
social justice and how to teach social justice within their own practice, the use of a qualitative
study using interviews and observations hoped to provide a richer view of the teachers’
experience in relation to the professional development they received (Merriam & Tisdale, 2016).
A gap analysis framework (Clark & Estes, 2008) was integrated to provide an approach that
determined the gaps between the cohort participants’ expectations, their assets, and what they
were able to produce. The research questions focused on the capacity of the SJAS cohort to
support the teacher participants’ knowledge, motivation and organizational needs in learning,
designing, and implementing social justice-integrated lessons within their classrooms. The data
collected from the study hoped to provide a detailed description of the interconnections between
the participants learning and application experiences during their involvement in the SJAS cohort
(Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). The data was triangulated between a) the individual
teachers’ perceptions of their professional development experience and ability to transfer
learning to their classrooms; b) the observations of teachers applying their SJAS lessons within
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

52
their respective school sites; and c) artifacts collected of teacher designed lessons and student
work. The use of a gap analysis approach provides a comprehensive framework of the specific
knowledge, motivation and organizational needs that can serve as a platform improving future
cohort work. The research was an inductive and generative process, using collected data from
each experience to inform and improve the next, and then work deductively to connect the
themes and research to the results (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013).
The initial conceptual framework of this study is an intersection of the relationships
between teacher learning through critical practices, culturally responsive pedagogy, social
justice, and design of the professional development. The four focuses provide a structural
framework to analyze the experiences and outcomes of the secondary teachers’ professional
learning from a transformational level, and their attempts to integrate social justice standards
within their daily practice while participating in cohort-based professional development and
examine research and literature that supports these focuses (Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). As this
framework provides the core components that influence the teacher learning in respect to social
justice, it was then connected to two other frameworks to shape the interview questions and the
observation protocol: Guskey’s Five Critical Levels of Professional Development Evaluation
(2001) and Clark and Estes’ Turning Research into Results (2008). Using the Guskey and the
Clark and Estes gap analysis frameworks, the data collected from the interviews, observations
and artifacts was coded and organized to identify the specific participant needs and then provide
evaluation and implementation suggestions.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

53
Subjects
The participants of the study were members of the original SJAS cohort, established in
the Spring of 2018. The participants included high school educators and middle school educators
from three OPSD school sites. There were five teachers who took place in the study, all women.
Three of the women identified as white, one Latinx, and one African-American. Because a case
study involves a relatively small focus group of participants experiencing a particular process
during a particular amount of time (Creswell, 2014), focusing on one cohort rather than two
allowed for a more in-depth analysis of the group members’ individual and shared experiences.
The teachers were selected through purposeful selection as a means to gather relevant data from
the participants, and also due to the limited size and make-up of the cohort (both the first and
second cohorts consist mostly of secondary teachers). Interviews were used to gather the
perspectives of the teachers’ experience from both the participation in the cohort and their ability
to integrate the social justice standards within their practices. It was expected that participants in
the cohort will have perspectives shaped by ongoing collaborative work and monthly direct
contact with the district professional development provider. The cohorts were supposed to be
designed as small collaborative inquiry groups that would provide the teachers with opportunities
for adult learning, critical discourse and reflections, and collective planning and sharing of
lessons to use within the classrooms. The professional development leader is a high school
teacher with a background in the implementation of social justice and critical practices within
content curriculum and served as a facilitator and provider of Teaching Tolerance professional
development framework. The questions used to gather the data were guided by the Guskey and
Clark and Estes frameworks, developed to examine the teachers’ assets and needs in relation to
the critical practices, knowledge of social justice standards and related pedagogies, and their
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

54
perceptions of received professional learning necessary to meet the district objectives of being
trailblazers responsible for designing and implementing SJAS lessons. Observations were used
to collect data during the participants’ application of integrating social justice standards within
their classrooms. Artifacts were collected to provide evidence of outcomes.
Instruments
The data was collected using a qualitative, action research-based case study approach that
included interviews and observations. The researcher served as the primary instrument for the
data collection and analysis (Merriam and Tisdell, 2016). The combination of interviews and
observations were meant to connect the research questions to anticipated data that was collected
and organized into a knowledge, motivation and organizational needs framework, in hope of
painting a complete picture of the teachers’ experiences, perspectives and participation in the
SJAS cohort and informing future SJAS work.
Interviews
The interviews were conducted as a means of gathering the perspectives of the
participants’ abilities to integrate the social justice standards within their practice and their
insights to their learning experiences from the cohort. The interviews were semi-structured to
allow for flexibility of emerging thoughts and ideas from the participant in respect to the
questions and their experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The questions were influenced by the
conceptual frameworks of the study and the SJAS curriculum, which was designed to allow for
critical reflection, thoughts about their practice, perceptions of the professional development in
respect to their learning, and the struggles or needs they may have in embedding the social
justice standards within their practice. The interviews took place towards the end of the first
semester (November/December), and were conducted with five teachers.
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

55
Because asking the right questions is critical to obtaining meaningful data, my own role
as a researcher was to provide a level of reflexivity within my questions and process (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Interview questions should be designed to allow for answers to specific questions
that pertain to the study, while simultaneously providing the participants room for elaboration
and deeper reflection (Maxwell, 2013). An audio recorder was used to record—and later
transcribe—each interview. A software application called Otter was used for the transcriptions.
An interview protocol was used for asking the questions and recording the answers (Creswell,
2014). The interviews were conducted in the participants’ respective schools.
Observations
According to Maxwell (2013), triangulation is a process of using different measurement
methods to generate or replicate a similar pattern or support a single conclusion, helping to
eliminate instrument biases. The use of observations to anchor interviews—or vice versa—can
allow for complementary (Maxwell, 2013) data where the observation serves as a first-hand
means of gathering information about the phenomenon being studied while the interviews
provide second-hand perspectives (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The two methods provide two
unique but equally substantive ways of gathering data.
Observations take place in the contextual settings of the experiences being researched,
which can lead to richer descriptions of the participants’ experiences. According to Merriam &
Tisdell (2016), observations need to be systematic in their process by addressing the specific
research questions and selective attentiveness. The researcher needs to become a skilled
observer, knowing what phenomenon they are focusing on that will triangulate their data from
their other tools. The observations can locate aspects of the research that the participants may not
share on their own, either purposely or not (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

56
For this study, the researcher took the role of observer as participant, meaning that
researcher’s role was established as an insider there to observe first, participate second (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). A level of trust can be established through this approach, allowing the
participants to be fully aware of the researcher’s main objectives, but also providing a level of
trust due to an interest in participating in the process at hand. The observation protocol is an
adapted version of Los Angeles Unified school district’s Reading First observation evaluation
form, Teaching Dimensions Observation Protocol (University of Wisconsin), and field notes
space to allow for rich narrative description as viewed by the researcher (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016).
The observations for this study took place in the individual teacher’s classrooms. The
observational focus was a) the teachers’ visible integration of the SJAS within their daily
practice (during days they have indicated they will be doing so; and b) the teachers’ use of
culturally responsive practices developed during the cohort meeting. The intention for this study
was to conduct up to five hours of observations, but only three participants were observed
teaching, another was observed prepping for her lesson but not teaching, and the fifth participant
asked not to be observed. The recording of the data came from detailed, descriptive and
reflective notes. Diagrams and observation charts were used to allow for focus of the field notes,
with attention being paid to time, participant actions and interactions. Coding adapted from the
TDOP was utilized to capture the full dynamics of teacher learning and practice occurring during
the observations.
Data Analysis
Much of the data analysis of a qualitative study occurs during the research itself, since the
collected data can help construct and reconstruct the study and its direction. Interview data can
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

57
affect other interviews, detailed notes leading to a narrative need to be recorded following both
observations and interviews, and data needs to be coded throughout the process to help identify
particular patterns (Creswell, 2014; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). A software application was used
for the transcribing and coding the interview data. By combining the observation narratives, the
coded interview data, the theoretical and conceptual literature, and both Guskey’s evaluation
framework and Clark and Estes’ gap analysis framework, a final conclusion was constructed to
provide the overall findings and interpretations. Recommendations were developed based on the
New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Validity and Reliability
The concept of validity within qualitative research is a crucial component in determining
the study’s authenticity and the design of the study itself plays a substantial role in obtaining this
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Internal validity refers to the credibility of the findings in relation to
the data collected but is also relative to the researcher (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This study
utilized validity strategies such as triangulation, member checking, detailed and specific
description, and peer debriefing to ensure its validity (Creswell, 2014; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
This study used the triangulation of a) the individual teachers’ perceptions of their professional
development experience and ability to transfer learning to their classrooms; b) the observations
of individual teachers implementing the social justice standards within their classroom practice
to provide validation of the data; and c) collected artifacts of lessons used during the observation
process.
Reliability refers to the question of consistency and replication (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Qualitative research serves to provide descriptions, interpretations, and explanations of
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

58
phenomenon based on collected data, and does so to further the understanding of this
phenomenon.
Table 5: Interview Questions

Critical Levels & KMO Interview Questions
Participant’s Reactions/Motivation As a participant, what are your thoughts about
the structure of the SJAS cohort as a platform
for professional development?

In what ways has the SJAS cohort experience
prepared you to embed social justice within
your classroom?

In what ways has the SJAS cohort experience
provided you with the confidence to make
your classroom practice more culturally
responsive?

In what ways has the SJAS cohort provided
you with collaboration and learning
opportunities?

How has the facilitator promoted your
understanding of the SJAS and ensured that
you are able to implement in your
classrooms?

Participant’s Learning/Knowledge At this point, how confident are you in
embedding the four domains of the SJAS
within your classroom practice? Has the
SJAS experience adequately prepared you for
this?

In what ways has the SJAS cohort experience
provided you with the necessary knowledge
to design and implement SJAS-integrated
lessons?

In what ways has the cohort time provided
you the opportunity to examine your own
biases in relation to your teaching, your
students and your students’ learning? What
kind of collaborative opportunities have you
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

59
had in sharing and discussing biases,
assumptions, and questions about identity?

After participating in the SJAS cohort for this
past year, what ideas about social justice and
critical practice stand out most clearly? What
would you like to see addressed more (if
anything)?
Participant’s use and application of
knowledge and skills/Knowledge
Have you had the opportunity to successfully
implement SJAS lessons within your
classroom yet?

Have you created any SJAS lesson plans yet?
How has the cohort experience helped you
gather or design SJAS lessons?

In what ways has the SJAS cohort experience
prepared you to embed social justice within
your classroom?

What strategies and models have been
provided to you through the cohort
experience in order for you to implement
SJAS and CRT within your classroom?

Organization Support & Change/Organization What collaboration opportunities embedded
within the SJAS cohort were most beneficial
for your understanding of how to design and
implement SJAS-integrated lessons within
your classroom?

In what ways has the cohort PD model
provided you the capacity to learn about and
apply SJAS and CRT within your classroom?

What specific activities from the SJAS cohort
experience have you found most effective?

Were you clear on the overall goals of the
district and the expectations for outcomes?

Do you feel adequately supported in your
effort to design and implement SJAS lessons
within your classroom?

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

60
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to examine a school district’s initial attempt to integrate
social justice anchor standards (SJAS) throughout multiple K-12 classrooms facilitated by the
use of a social justice professional development cohort. An extensive district-wide equity study
conducted by an outside consulting firm determined that the district had a history of drop-out,
suspension and failure rates for students of color that were not proportionate to other student
groups, and a problematic and ongoing achievement gap that demonstrated that not all students
were receiving an equitable education. In response, new district administration developed and
initiated a plan of action to respond to these gaps. As part of this process, the district adopted
Teaching Tolerance’s Social Justice Anchor Standards and Domains (Teaching Tolerance, 2016)
as a set of social justice standards to be integrated within teachers’ respective content areas and
classrooms (see Table I). Adjoined to these standards is a list of critical practices (Table II) to be
used within classrooms to provide pedagogical approaches to integration of the SJAS (Teaching
Tolerance, 2016). A cohort of 20 teachers was established by district leadership to pilot the
design and implementation of SJAS within various content curriculums as one part of the larger
effort to increase the equitable learning experiences for all students. Some of the cohort members
were recommended by administrators while others joined because of their own personal interest
in social justice and culturally responsive teaching. The cohort began in March of 2018 and has
met once a month for two-hour sessions. This study was conducted to inform future cohort-
modeled professional development and the continued integration of social justice standards.
Using the Guskey and Clark and Estes frameworks, the professional learning and the social
justice integration outputs were examined and evaluated.
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

61
Figure 1: Anchor Standards & Domains

Figure 2: Critical Practices

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

62
Methodology
Interviews were used to collect qualitative data regarding five teachers’ perceptions of
their own learning experience and ability to integrate SJAS within their classroom practice.
Observations were conducted to help define a more detailed understanding of the challenges the
teachers faced during the transmission of what was expected to be learned developing SJAS
lessons in the cohort setting and its application in the classroom setting. Artifacts of lesson tools
were collected and analyzed to triangulate the results of the interview and observation data.
The results of the study are organized to respond to the two research questions. Each
question is followed by the interview and observation data findings organized into one-of-five
subcategories of Guskey’s Five Critical Levels of Professional Development Evaluation
methodology framework. Each of these five categories have been aligned with the knowledge,
motivation, and organization as defined by Clark and Estes’ Gap Analysis framework.
Conceptual Framework
Two conceptual frameworks have been used in conjunction with each other to categorize
and synthesize the study data. Thomas Guskey’s professional development framework Five
Critical Levels of Professional Development Evaluation (2000) was used to code and organize
the data into five categories of effective professional development expectations to allow for
descriptive analysis of the interview and observation data. This framework is an extension of
Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model (1959) that was originally developed to determine the impact of a
management development program and has been used by various organizations for decades to
evaluate and inform training and professional development services. Guskey’s (2000) framework
serves as an extension of the Kirkpatrick model but was developed to be more aligned with
education and professional development rather than business and management models targeted
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

63
by the former. Guskey’s framework provides evaluative categories that captures the complexity
and perspectives of the participants, providing more focus on the why rather than just the what
(Guskey, 2000).
For the purpose of this study, this framework has been modified to further categorize the
participants’ learning and application outputs into motivation, organization, and knowledge
components. Clark & Estes’ Turning Research into Result (2008) performance gap analysis
framework has been woven into the first framework, providing another iteration for aligning
teacher knowledge, motivation, and organization needs with recommendations for the
professional development program improvement (See Table 6).
Table 6: Guskey & KMO PD Framework
Construct
Guskey Participants’
Reactions
Participants’
Learning

Organization
Support &
Change
Participants’
Use of New
Knowledge &
Skills
Student
Learning
Outcomes
Clark &
Estes
KMO
Motivation Knowledge Organization Knowledge Knowledge

Participating Stakeholders
Table 7: Race/Ethnicity Demographics
Race/Ethnicity of Interview Participants. Total Percentage
African American 1 20%
White/Caucasian 3 60%
Hispanic or Latino 1 20%
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

64
Table 8: Gender & Experience
Gender Years of teaching experience Past experience with social justice and culturally
responsive teaching

Female 8 yes
Female 20 yes
Female 19 no
Female 21 no
Female 22 yes
The participants of the SJAS cohort are all current public-school teachers in Ocean Park
School District. Two participants teach in middle schools and three teach in high school settings.
One participant is in her eighth year of teaching, the other four have all taught twenty or more
years. All five teachers joined the SJ cohort at its inception in the Spring of 2018. Three of the
teachers claim to have had prior experience in working with social justice and culturally
responsive teaching, while the other two teachers felt less familiar with either concept. The
cohort originally had twenty members, but as of November 2019 had less than ten attending on a
regular basis. Ten teachers were asked to participate in the study, but only five replied in the
affirmative. Of the ten asked, three stopped coming to the meetings by October. All five study
participants originally volunteered to join the cohort with an anticipation of learning how to
effectively integrate social justice standards within their respective content curriculum and
classroom practice. Table 7 shows the racial/ethnicity makeup of the teacher participant group
used for the study. Table 8 shows the gender, years of experience, and past experience with
social justice and/or culturally responsive teaching.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

65
Research Questions
RQ1: In what ways has the SJ cohort as a PD model provided the capacity to support the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs of teacher participants in their effort to
integrate SJAS within their classroom practice?
Table 9: Participants’ Reactions—Learning/Knowledge
Participant’s
Learning/Knowledge
In response to learning
about SJAS and
culturally responsive
teaching
In response to learning how to
design SJAS-embedded lessons
Teacher A ...without hearing from
my cohort peers or having
any real dialogue, the
process was rather
disingenuous and
definitely not
transformative...I’m had
many years of experience
with social justice, so I
feel I understand the
standards
...we’ve been given no real models or
examples of SJAS-embedded lessons
that we can deconstruct and talk
about...
Teacher B ...not sure if I’m supposed
to approach this from an
anti-bias approach or
from an action approach
or really even how to tell
one from the other...the
identity and diversity
anchor standards make
sense, but not sure about
the action and justice...
...I am going to use my experience
from other professional development
to design lesson, since we’re getting
no guidance here...not sure how to
embed all four standards within my
subject-area...
Teacher C Nothing definitive...I’m
struggling with the
identity and diversity
standards, and haven’t
even really thought about
the justice and action
standards...
...how are we supposed to know how
to help students unpack their biases
when we haven’t had the opportunity
to unpack our own?...not sure how to
design lessons that aren’t language
arts or history...
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

66
Teacher D Without any real guidance
or support, I feel like I
haven’t learned anything
too tangible...
...wish I could have worked with
other social studies teacher to design
lesson collaboratively
Teacher E ...worked with social
justice and culturally
responsive teaching
projects at past school, so
pretty familiar...most of
our cohort sessions result
in us watching
Powerpoint presentations-
-I would never teach my
own class that way
...no opportunities for collaboration or
dialogue, resulting in teachers having
to design lessons by themselves
outside of cohort...process was not
transformative

In order to enhance participant learning outcomes, the cohort professional development
model needs to provide opportunities for participants to: engage in critical dialogue; be
able to ask questions and receive feedback; be provided with clear objectives, strategies,
learning targets, and expected outcomes.
Interview Findings. Interviews were used to assess the SJAS cohort’s capacity to
support and develop participants’ learning about SJAS, culturally responsive teaching, and how
to create and implement lesson plans that integrate the SJAS. Teacher learning responses are
found in the second column of Table 9. When asked about their learning experiences, all five
teachers demonstrated frustration and had a difficult time demonstrating specific knowledge
acquired. One teacher commented, “...how are we supposed to know how to help students unpack
their biases when we haven’t had the opportunity to unpack our own?”. Descriptions such as
“not definitive”, “nothing tangible”, “no guidance or support”, and “no real examples or models”
were given by the participants in terms of their learning needs. One participant stated that
“...most of our cohort sessions result in us watching Powerpoint presentations--I would never
teach my own class that way”. Another participant stated that she was still unclear about the
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

67
social justice standards themselves. “...not sure if I’m supposed to approach this from an anti-
bias approach or from an action approach or really even how to tell one from the other”. All
five of the participants felt that they had adequate knowledge of the identity and diversity
standards, but less conceptual understanding of the justice and action standards. Three of the five
participants still had questions about how to integrate the SJAS with their particular content area
that they were teaching.
Every participant made comments about the need to collaborate with their peers in
designing the lessons but not receiving the opportunities. Every participant also commented on
the lack of opportunities they had to have dialogue and ask questions about the SJAS, culturally
responsive teaching, and the creation of lessons. Two participants expressed how the learning
was “not transformative”, and one even called the cohort process “disingenuous”. This same
participant stated:
“Many of us were bringing years of experience with social justice and culturally
responsive teaching to the table, but he (the presenter) never inquired or allowed us to
share this experience with the cohort.”
Conclusion: From the interviews, it became clear that more learning targets, clearer
expectations of classroom implementation and desired outcomes, models of lessons, and specific
strategies were desired to aid in the participants’ learning. It also became clear that the
participants felt they received minimal opportunities to ask questions and receive feedback, to
share ideas, and to work collaboratively to begin designing actual lessons to implement in their
classroom settings.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

68
Table 10: Participants’ Use & Application of Knowledge & Skills
Participant’s use and
application of
knowledge & skills
Capacity of SJAS cohort to support participants’
development and application of SJAS-embedded lessons
within classrooms
Teacher A ...need lesson plan templates to ensure goals/objectives are
clear to everyone...need help determining how to “spiral”
SJAS...once again, a common language would help...
Teacher B ...need knowledge about pedagogy, not just the standards
themselves...need more strategies for
implementation...nervous about teaching complex SJ topics
to class
Teacher C ...really struggling to apply SJAS without expectations and
end goals...difficult to apply the SJAS without a map...
Teacher D ...need more strategies to do this with students while
maintaining a safe classroom environment...didn’t have
opportunity to uncover my own biases, so not comfortable
helping students do it...
Teacher E ...using past SJ and CRT PD experiences to help me create
and deliver my lessons

SJAS Cohort participants need clear implementation models, strategies, and lesson plan
examples and templates in order to more confidently implement SJAS within their
classroom context.
Interview Findings: Interviews were used to assess the SJAS cohort’s capacity to
support the participants’ application of developing and teaching SJAS-integrated lesson plans
within the classroom context and teachers’ respective content. All five teachers interviewed
expressed a lack of confidence in implementing SJAS lessons within their respective classrooms.
One teacher stated that “...we need knowledge about pedagogy, not just the SJAS in order to
implement anything in our class”. Another expressed:
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

69
“It’s difficult to apply the SJAS within class without a map of what exactly needs to be
done, how
to get there, and what it’s supposed to look like.”
Two teachers expressed concern in establishing a safe environment for introducing and
discussing complex topics within their classrooms. One teacher suggested that lesson plan
templates would have been very beneficial in ensuring that the goals and objectives were clear to
everyone, and that a common language established within the cohort would have made more
people feel confident in implementing the lessons. Another teacher stated that she was teaching
SJ lessons within her classroom that she had created in her past school setting since she was not
getting the opportunity to work on lessons in the cohort setting.
Conclusion: All five teacher participants stated that they needed much more support
from within the cohort structure in order to confidently develop SJAS lesson plans and
effectively apply these lessons within their classroom context. Some of the teachers shared that
they were very unsure about implementing SJAS within their classroom due to a lack of
pedagogical understanding of how to create supportive classroom environments and to teach the
complex material. Overall the participants wished for actual models and strategies of SJAS
lesson plans to guide their process.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

70
Table 11: Participants’ Reactions (Motivation)

Participant’s
Reactions/Motivation
In response to delivery
of professional
development
In response to feeling supported in
their professional learning
Teacher A Didactic; no facilitation of
dialogue
No clear examples of integrated SJAS
lessons...Our time ended up being
wasted--I think many of us feel
disempowered...
Teacher B Teacher input not valued;
presenter’s priorities did
not seem aligned to
participants’
Ideas are thrown out but no clarity of
how to design or implement lessons
with SJ
Teacher C Talked at; no opportunity
for dialogue between
participants
Need more examples...because I work
with an at-risk student population, I
definitely don’t feel prepared to
integrate a SJAS lesson yet...a little
nervous about what is expected from
me..
Teacher D Standards were presented
but not in context of
exactly how I could
incorporate them
We’ve been meeting every week
since last Spring, and we still haven’t
created anything applicable within
our classrooms...
Teacher E Talked at; no voice from
participants
When and how are we supposed to
construct these lesson? Not clear on
expectations.

Professional development delivery, teacher (participant) input, and clear expectations
directly affect participant motivation.
Interview findings. Interviews were used to assess the SJAS cohort participants’
reactions to how successfully the cohort model supports the participants integrating the SJAS
within their classrooms.
Teachers’ reactions can be found in Table 11. The reactions displayed a similar pattern of
frustration. In relation to interview questions about the professional development delivery, the
term “didactic” was used by one participant, and “talked at” was used by two of the five
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

71
participants. Overall, all five of the participants expressed that the PD followed a traditional
presenter-recipient model with very little opportunity to have dialogue or provide their input.
One participant stated “...input from the participants was not valued--I think the presenter’s
goals and priorities were not aligned with ours”, and another said “...our time ended up being
wasted and I believe many of us felt disempowered”.
All five of the participants also voiced their frustration in the lack of clarity regarding
their expected outcomes, how they were going to achieve these outcomes, and what the evidence
of these outcomes would look like. Each one claimed that agendas were sent the day of or day
before the monthly meetings, and that listed agenda items were never fully completed during any
of the meetings. One participant stated, “...ideas are thrown out but no clarity of how to design
or implement lessons with SJ is ever provided”. Another voiced their frustration by stating,
“...we’ve been meeting almost every month since last Spring and we still haven’t started working
on something”.
Conclusion: Participants expressed an overwhelming frustration with the facilitation of
the SJAS cohort model. According to the interviews, the professional development model’s
capacity to promote teacher learning, collaboration, and opportunities for dialogue, inquiry and
lesson design did not meet the expectations of the teachers, resulting in frustration and anxiety
from the participants.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

72
Table 12: Organization Support & Change—Organization
Organization Support
& Change
Capacity of cohort setting to support teacher
learning and design of SJAS-embedded lessons
Teacher A No time for collaboration during cohort
sessions...need a different type of forum for
presenting and sharing of ideas and
experiences...more dialogue between
participants...a common language would have
been helpful for the process
Teacher B No time for collaboration...hoped for
opportunities of role playing...need more
examples
Teacher C ...would be easier to develop lessons with others
than trying to do it alone...no checks for
understanding within the sessions
Teacher D No opportunities for sharing lessons or receiving
input from others; no opportunity to collaborate
with peers who teach the same subject as me
Teacher E No protocol in sessions that resulted in agenda
items never being completed; no participant input
or critical discussion about the SJAS and relation
to relevance and authenticity of SJ lessons; no
collaboration opportunities for planning,
designing, supporting one another, providing and
receiving feedback, and observing each other’s
lessons

The SJAS PD cohort needs to be designed to ensure that all of the participants have a
forum for exchanging in dialogue and asking questions about the designing and application
of the SJAS lessons, and that there is time provided within the cohort sessions to work
collaboratively towards these objectives and outcomes.
Interview Findings: Interviews were used to assess the SJAS cohort’s capacity and
setting to support the participants’ opportunities to collaborate with cohort peers in critical
dialogue and the construction and sharing of SJAS lesson plans.
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

73
All five participants expressed their frustration with not being provided time within the
monthly two-hour sessions to work collaboratively on SJAS lessons to integrate in their
classroom. One teacher mentioned that “...there was no protocol to the cohort sessions that would
have allowed for agenda items and teacher needs to be met”. The participants also took issue
with the lack of communication between them and the cohort facilitator. They felt that their
input was not being valued and their “...voices weren’t being heard”. Two of the participants
stated that there was no support established to check the participants’ understanding of the
process during any of the sessions. All of the participants voiced a concern about being unclear
about what the district expected from them as evidence of the lessons and integrating the SJAS
within their classes--two even stated that they felt “anxious” about this.
Conclusion: All participants expressed that the monthly cohort sessions were not
structured for productivity. Time was not provided for teachers to collectively design and share
the implementation of SJAS lessons. All five participants shared frustration with the lack of
opportunities within the sessions for critical dialogue, sharing of questions and ideas, and
exploring lesson design models.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

74
RQ2: In what ways are the SJ Cohort participants' teacher learning experiences and their
integration of the SJAS within their classroom practice aligned with the district goals of the SJ
cohort?
Table 13: Participants’ Reactions—Motivation

Participant’s reactions
(motivation)
Reactions to their own teacher learning and ability to
apply SJAS-embedded lessons in relation to district
expectations
Teacher A ...no clear vision provided to us, and no specifics of tasks
and deliverables...lack of communication in timelines for
outputs
Teacher B ...no real action plan was ever communicated (that I
remember)...anxious
Teacher C ...no end goals presented, and no plan laid out to achieve end
goals...not clear on end product...still haven’t developed
lessons...frustrated and a little disillusioned...
Teacher D ...no idea of how our lessons will be assessed by the district,
if at all...unclear of expectations...unsure of my abilities to
implement the lessons, and nervous about district
expectations...
Teacher E ...no clear expectations...

In order to allow for the participants to more effectively and confidently prepare and teach
SJ lessons, district expectations for evidence outcomes and timelines for completion need to
be explicitly communicated during early stages of the cohort.
Interview Findings: Interviews were used to assess the cohort participants’ reactions to
both their own learning and their ability to apply the SJAS within their classroom in relation to
the district’s goals for learning and teacher application. Every one of the participants expressed
that they were unsure of how the district intended to assess their learning and application, and all
participants shared that they were anxious or frustrated with having unknown expectations. One
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

75
member reported that “...there was no clear vision provided to us, and no specifics of tasks or
deliverables.” They were unsure of “how many lessons” and “what type of evidence” and
wondered “is someone coming to evaluate us?”. One cohort member shared that “...no idea of
how participant lessons will be assessed by the district, if at all…”, and there was an overall
feeling that expectations of what constitutes as district-expected evidence should have been
shared in earlier stages of the cohort meetings.
Conclusion: The participants expressed frustration with their lack of clarity regarding the
district’s learning and output expectations. The participants also shared concern that they were
unclear about how and when they were going to be evaluated, and what evidence was expected
of them. Lack of communication was a major issue.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

76
Table 14: Participants’ learning, use, and application of knowledge and skill
*Lesson delivery: teacher lecture while writing (LW); multimedia (MM); small group
work/discussion (SGW); student presentations (SP)
**Student engagement: very high (VH); high (H); medium (MED); low (L)
Observation
Protocol
Standard:
Identity
(ID)
Diversity
(DI)
Justice
(JU)
Action
(AC)
Lesson
Delivery*
Student
collaboration &
student-student
dialogue
(yes/no)
Clear
content
standards
& SJAS
link in
lesson
(yes/no)
Student
Engagement
**

VH H
MED L
Number
of
students
Teacher A ID; DI MM/
SGW
yes yes H 30
Teacher B ID n/a n/a no n/a 4
Teacher C n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Teacher D JU LW no no L 7
Teacher D DV; JU; AC SP/SGW yes yes VH 21

Cohort participants must have time within cohort sessions to share their work with other
participants, both for feedback reasons and as models to guide others to ensure that all
lessons are inclusive, engaging and culturally responsive.
Interview findings: Interviews were not conducted during observations.
Observation findings: Observations were used to assess the SJAS cohort participants’
learning and SJAS application outputs in relation to the district’s goals for learning and teacher
application of implementing the SJAS within the classrooms. Participants of the cohort shared
that they were not fully aware of district expectations for final products of their work.
According to the first district priority for student achievement (SMMUSD 3-Pronged
Equity Plan, 2017), teachers will provide inclusive, engaging and culturally-responsive Tier I
instruction to the diverse PreK-12 student population. There are no clear objectives or
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

77
expectations stated within the district’s equity plan about the integration of the SJAS within
classroom content, although the district has clearly invested in both adopting and promoting the
Teaching Tolerance SJAS through hiring a full-time facilitator from out of state to serve this
specific role. The observation protocol framework found in Table was developed to capture the
specific social justice standards being taught, the inclusiveness of the lesson and its delivery, the
connection found in the integration of the content and the SJAS, and student engagement in
response to the lesson. Based on the protocol, two of the three teachers observed teaching a
lesson demonstrated a significant understanding of SJAS through their ability to both develop
SJAS-embedded lessons and effectively teach the lessons within their classrooms. The SJAS
standards were embedded with the teachers’ respective content, and in both cases the teachers
demonstrated knowledge of how to apply culturally responsive pedagogy. The third teacher
displayed minimal understanding of how to effectively integrate the standard (JU) within her
lesson plan and admitted that the lesson was not truly integrated into the subject matter she had
been previously teaching. This teacher’s lesson consisted of her presenting a reading activity
found in a lesson plan from the Teaching Tolerance curriculum, but the delivery was mostly
teacher lecture and some student reading of text. The students were not engaged and there was
very little discourse. It was unclear if the lesson was part of a specific content unit, and it lacked
learning objectives and targeted outputs. The lesson focused on stereotypes of immigrants, and
even though the group was very diverse, there was very little teacher facilitation of discussion
and inquiry between the students. Following the lesson, the teacher presented a student-created
bulletin board in the hallway that demonstrated the elements of both justice and action social
justice standards. She explained that it was a spontaneous reaction by the students due to a
school issue they felt lacked equity and transparency, but she didn’t know if she would actually
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

78
develop any lessons that connected the bulletin board display to the social studies content. A
fourth teacher had agreed to be observed, but the actual lesson never came to fruition during the
classroom visit. She was planning on teaching a lesson on identity that she found online. She
shared her intent for the lesson but wanted to wait for two missing students who never showed
up during the observation window. Although the lesson was never taught, the teacher did display
friendly compassion towards all of the students in the class, and the environment of the
classroom felt warm and inviting. It is important to note that the latter two participants teach in
an alternative school setting, so their student population is extremely high-risk and always fluid,
with many of the students attending that school for a few weeks or months and then leaving.
Conclusion: Two of the four cohort participants were observed effectively teaching a
SJAS-embedded lesson within their content curriculum. Their lesson plans demonstrated a
knowledge of the SJAS, and both classroom environments were inclusive and attentive to the
diverse learning needs of their students. It should be noted that both of these teachers declared
during pre-lesson briefings that the lessons they developed had been done so on their own accord
and not in the cohort setting. The third observation demonstrated that the teacher had minimal
knowledge of SJAS and how to integrate the standards within a content lesson and did not
demonstrate culturally responsive awareness although she seemed to have a friendly rapport with
students. Based on conversation in the classroom during an observation window, the fourth
teacher who had agreed to be observed seemed unprepared to teach the lesson that she had
chosen and decided not to teach it to the students who were in the classroom.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

79
Table 15: Document Analysis

Document
Analysis
Clear
content
standards
& SJAS
connection
Standard:
Identity
(ID)
Diversity
(DI)
Justice
(JU)
Action
(AC)
Clear
learning
targets
and
outcome
s
Allows for
collaboratio
n & student
to student
dialogue
using
academic
language
Evidence
-based
student
work
outcome
s
Evidence
-based
writing
Teacher A yes ID; DI yes yes yes
Teacher B no ID yes no
Teacher C n/a n/a n/a n/a
Teacher D no JU no no
Teacher E yes DV; JU; AC yes yes

Artifact findings: An artifact analysis was conducted of participants’ lesson templates to assess
the SJAS cohort participants’ learning and SJAS application outputs in relation to the district’s
goals for learning and teacher application of implementing the SJAS within the classrooms.
According to the district’s second of three approaches to increase student achievement
and equitable learning for all students (Three-Pronged Approach to Excellence to Equity Plan,
2017), a framework of visible evidence of student learning (Table 15) provides specific learning
outcomes expected to be found within culturally responsive classrooms. The artifact analysis
table was designed to assess the applicable components from this table in correlation with the
components analyzed during the observation.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

80
Figure 3: Visible Evidence of Student Learning

The artifact evidence correlated with the observation data. The two teachers with
effective classroom lessons had lesson templates that met the criteria from the artifact analysis
table. Teacher A’s lesson plans were connected to the novel her English class was reading that
documents the marginalization faced by contemporary Native Americans, integrating diversity
and identity social justice anchor standards within the lesson. Teacher E’s lesson plans were
connected to the labor movement unit explored in her Ethnic studies textbook. The lesson was
created by Teacher E, providing students an opportunity to explore various cultures’ organized
protests against racism, poor working conditions, inequitable pay and lack of benefits through
role play and evidence-based speeches. The lesson Teacher B was planning on teaching was
acquired from the internet. Although the lesson was not connected to state learning standards or
any particular unit the class was working on at the time, the activity showed much promise as an
identity-based social justice standard lesson. Because the teacher did not teach the lesson during
the observation window, there is not indication of the success. Teacher D taught a lesson using
an article from Teaching Tolerance, but the article itself was not designed as a specific lesson
(although it provided suggestions of how one could develop lessons based on the material).
Although the article was aimed at creating dialogue about the negative assumptions and
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

81
stereotypes facing immigration, there was no structure within the lesson to support active
participation by the students without a teacher-developed protocol (none provided). The students
appeared half-interested, and a number of them were preoccupied with their phones.
Conclusion: The data from the artifact analysis provides evidence that learning and
application of SJAS was effectively demonstrated by two teachers, but the other two teachers’
work showed minimal learning and application of the SJAS. A need for more collaboration
around lesson design and application within the cohort structure seems necessary to ensure that
all participants have lessons that are aligned with district’s expectations, and that teachers
teaching similar content can more closely align their work with one another.
Summary of Results and Causes Affecting Participant Knowledge
The interview and observation findings provide strong indicators to the causes affecting
participant SJAS knowledge acquisition and their ability to apply the knowledge. Although some
of the participants had prior knowledge of social justice and culturally responsive teaching, by
the second year of the cohort none of the participants interviewed expressed that they learned
enough about the domain of SJAS within the cohort setting itself. Those that created and
implemented successful SJAS lessons within their classrooms attributed their ability to do so
from past experiences (including Anti-Bias and Facing History workshops). The participants
who did not have past experience with social justice and culturally responsive teaching expressed
that they had minimal knowledge about the SJAS and not enough to create and implement SJAS
lessons within their classroom context. The observations demonstrated this lack of understanding
and successful creation of SJAS lessons.
The findings presented three causes contributing to cohort participants not being able to
acquire the necessary knowledge about SJAS to design and implement lessons within the
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

82
classroom context. Each cause listed will also include the suggested recommendations that will
be covered in depth in Chapter Five.
Knowledge Gap #1: The facilitation of the professional development and the use of
cohort time did not provide the participants the sufficient learning of the SJAS and how to
develop lessons integrating the SJAS within their classroom curriculum. The participants
expressed that the cohort sessions did not allow for opportunities for critical dialogue, inquiry, or
feedback. They also shared a need for clear objectives, strategies, learning targets and expected
outcomes. The recommendations in Chapter Five will examine the significance of collaborative
professional learning communities, facilitation of critical dialogue, the need for establishing
target goals for learning and outcomes, and the facilitator’s role in providing guidance and
feedback.
Knowledge Gap #2: The participants expressed that without clear models and examples
of lesson plans integrating SJAS within various content curriculum, they were unsure of the
expectations for their outcomes. For the participants who had very minimal previous experience
with social justice and culturally responsive teaching, the lack of clear expectations influenced
their inability to construct and implement SJAS lessons. The recommendations for Chapter Five
will use research literature to examine the significance of providing clear models and examples
of outcome expectations.
Knowledge Gap #3: The participants shared that the cohort sessions provided no time
for them to work collectively in the design process of their lessons or allow those who had
developed lessons to share them with others in the cohort for feedback and input before
implementing them within their classrooms. They also expressed a need for strategies to use for
ensuring culturally responsive classroom settings. Without their peers’ feedback and input,
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

83
participants were unsure if their lessons were satisfying the district equity goals of being
inclusive, engaging and culturally responsive. The recommendations for Chapter Five will
examine the significance of protocols that allow for productive collaborative feedback and will
also provide suggestions for effective culturally responsive teaching strategies supported by
research literature.
Summary of Results and Causes Affecting Motivation
The interviews provided findings that supported a gap in the participants’ motivation in
constructing and implementing SJAS lessons. The participants shared a general frustration in the
delivery of the professional development. They expressed that the professional development did
not allow for collaboration, critical dialogue, or that it was attentive to their specific learning
needs. There was also a collective feeling that their voices were not heard by the facilitator. This
resulted in frustration and anxiety from the participants who remained in the cohort during the
second year. The findings also demonstrated a need for clear expectations of outcome evidence,
and timelines for completion. The recommendations for Chapter Five will focus on effective
research-based professional development models that can best meet the learning needs of the
teacher participants, particularly in the context of social justice and culturally responsive
teaching.
Summary of Results and Causes Affecting Organization
The data findings demonstrated a need for the organizational structure of the cohort to
allow for more time for participant collaboration in unwrapping biases, designing SJAS lessons,
exchanging ideas, asking questions, and sharing work. The fact that the cohort sessions took
place once a month for two-hour sessions and that no time was provided for collaboration and
dialogue runs counter to the research-based literature and the district’s expectations for the use of
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

84
professional learning communities.
Summary
The recommendations for Chapter Five will address effective protocols and structures as
detailed in the literature. The triangulation of the interview, observation and artifact analysis data
findings combined with the conceptual framework provided a set of clear teacher learning needs
that will be addressed in Chapter Five. The findings suggest that much of the knowledge,
motivation and organization needs can be addressed through a training of the facilitator in
providing effective professional development and a reconfiguration of the cohort agenda and
structure to allow for more meaningful and substantive learning experiences for the participants.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

85
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS AND EVALUATION
Purpose of the Project and Questions
This study intends to inform how a PD cohort structure can best support teachers to
effectively integrate and implement social justice anchor standards (SJAS) within their
classroom practice. The study was also designed to determine how to most effectively ensure
evidence of the district initiative’s outcomes and goals. Utilizing a qualitative approach that
integrates Guskey’s Five Critical Levels of Professional Development Evaluation (2009) with
Clark and Estes’ Turning Research into Results (2008) Gap Analysis framework, the study was
focused on the professional development cohort and its capacity to support the knowledge,
motivation and organizational needs for professional learning and the ability to design and
implement SJAS-integrated lessons within K-12 classrooms. Focusing on one of two district-
established SJAS cohorts, interviews and observations were used in this study to determine both
the perspectives of individual teachers regarding the district professional development supporting
their application of integrating the standards and how the teacher learning through collaboration
and use of critical practices during the SJAS cohort meetings transfers to the teachers’ respective
classrooms. This study was guided by the following research questions:
RQ1: In what ways has the SJ cohort as a PD model provided the capacity to support the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs of teacher participants in their effort to
integrate SJAS within their classroom practice?
RQ2: In what ways are the SJ Cohort participants' teacher learning experiences and their
integration of the SJAS within their classroom practice aligned with the district goals of
the SJ cohort?

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

86
Recommendations to Address Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Influences
This section is constructed of three focal points: knowledge, motivation and organization.
Each of these sections include an overview, validated causes and their rationale, and tables that
detail specific needs and prioritization necessary to achieve intended performance results. Each
table will include the established cause, priority, evidence-based principles that support the
provided recommendations, and the recommendations stated for each cause. Following the
tables, detailed discussion of the causes and recommendations are provided and justified with
supporting research literature.
Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. Data collected from the research demonstrates that there are three declarative
factual knowledge needs, two conceptual knowledge needs and five procedural knowledge
needs. All of these needs should be considered high priority based on research literature in
relation to social justice. Table 16 provides a list of the Causes, Priorities, Theory Principles and
Recommendations related to these needs. Detailed descriptions for each priority cause, literature
research related to the cause, and recommendations are provided within the table.
Table 16: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Priority
High
Low
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Declarative Factual

Participants’ need deeper
knowledge about SJAS in
respect to the four
domains

High How individuals
organize knowledge
influences how they
learn and apply what
they know (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).

Information learned
meaningfully and
Provide participants with
opportunities to connect
their prior knowledge of
social justice and how
students learn with the
SJAS and how to
meaningfully organize
their knowledge of the
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

87
connected with prior
knowledge is stored
more quickly and
remembered more
accurately because it
is elaborated with
prior learning (Schraw
& McCrudden, 2006).
SJAS into the respective
domains.

Clear objectives and
learning targets
High Managing intrinsic
load by segmenting
complex material into
simpler parts and pre-
training, among other
strategies, enables
learning to be
enhanced (Kirshner,
Kirshner, & Paas,
2006).

Encourage elaboration
and organization by
creating concept
maps, mnemonics,
advance organizers
and analogies
(Anguinis & Kraiger,
2009).
Provide the participants
with clear learning
targets and objectives for
each cohort session that
are organized into
manageable chunks that
connect to the
participants’ end goals of
developing their own
SJAS-integrated lesson
plans.
More feedback in respect
to design of SJAS lessons
for classroom
implementation
High Provide feedback that
stresses the process of
learning, including the
important of effort,
strategies, and
potential self-control
of learning.
(Anderman &
Anderman, 2009)

Provide the participants
with continuous feedback
in relation to their
learning of the SJAS and
how to implement these
standards into their
content curriculum.
Conceptual

Clear expectations of
outputs and student
evidence in relation to the
connection between SJAS
lesson plans and content
standards
High How individuals
organize knowledge
influences how they
learn and apply what
they know (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).

Provide examples and
models of SJAS lessons
integrated with various
content areas and grade
levels, and create
opportunities for
participants to make
connections of the SJAS
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

88
Encourage elaboration
and organization by
creating concept
maps, mnemonics,
advance organizers
and analogies
(Anguinis & Kraiger,
2009).
to their own content and
grade level.
Deeper understanding of
their own bias,
assumptions and
positionalities in relation
to the expectations of
SJAS integration within
their classrooms and
creating culturally
responsive environments
High How individuals
organize knowledge
influences how they
learn and apply what
they know (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).

Social interaction,
cooperative learning,
and cognitive
apprenticeships (such
as reciprocal teaching)
facilitate construction
of new knowledge
(Scott & Palincsar,
2006).
Provide opportunities for
participants to critically
reflect, discuss, and share
their own biases,
assumptions, and
positionalities in relation
to the SJAS and
implementation within
their classrooms.
Procedural

Models and examples for
SJAS lessons
High Modeling to-be-
learned strategies or
behaviors improves
self-efficacy, learning,
and performance
(Denler, Wolters, &
Benzon, 2009).

Provide participants with
models of SJAS lessons
and demonstrations of
how to implement a
SJAS-integrated lesson
within a classroom
setting using video
examples.

Knowledge of how to
design integrated SJAS
lessons to meet needs of
all students
High To develop mastery,
individuals must
acquire component
skills, practice
integrating them, and
know when to apply
what they have
learned (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).

How individuals
organize knowledge
Provide participants with
demo lessons and model
lesson plans, and create
active learning
opportunities for
participants to practice
designing mini-lessons
that integrate and apply
SJAS with their own
content.
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

89
influences how they
learn and apply what
they know (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Strategies for
implementing SJAS
lessons within their own
content and curriculum
High Learning tasks that are
similar to those that
are common to the
individual’s familiar
cultural settings will
promote learning and
transfer (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001).

To develop mastery,
individuals must
acquire component
skills, practice
integrating them, and
know when to apply
what they have
learned (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006)
Provide participants with
specific strategies that
can be applied both
across content areas and
those that are content-
specific.
Strategies for teaching
complex subject matter
and facilitating dialogue
with students in relation
to SJAS
High Social interaction,
cooperative learning,
and cognitive
apprenticeships (such
as reciprocal teaching)
facilitate construction
of new knowledge
(Scott & Palincsar,
2006).
Provide opportunities for
participants to have
critical discourse,
reflection, and role-
playing exchanges in
collaborative settings to
prepare them for the
implementation of SJAS
lessons.
Pedagogical strategies
and practices related to
culturally responsive
teaching
High Learning tasks that are
similar to those that
are common to the
individual’s familiar
cultural settings will
promote learning and
transfer (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001).

To develop mastery,
individuals must
acquire component
skills, practice
integrating them, and
know when to apply
Provide strategies,
practices and routines
that contribute to
culturally responsive
teaching, and allow
participants opportunities
to reflect on and practice
applying this knowledge
with other cohort peers.
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

90
what they have
learned (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006)
Metacognitive

Recognizing their own
biases, assumptions and
positionality
High The use of
metacognitive
strategies facilitates
learning (Baker,
2006).
Provide participants
critical reflection and
discourse opportunities to
uncover biases,
assumptions and
positionality, and provide
strategies for developing
an awareness of these
behaviors when teaching
students SJAS.

Declarative factual knowledge solutions. The data collected via interviews and
observations from cohort participants demonstrated needs for deeper knowledge about SJAS in
respect to the four domains, knowledge of how to design integrated SJAS lessons to meet needs
of all students, clear objectives and learning targets, and more feedback in respect to the design
of SJAS lessons for classroom implementation. According to Schraw & McCrudden (2006), the
ability to activate prior knowledge to connect to new knowledge promotes learning that is more
accurate and sustainable. The ability to organize new knowledge can promote depth of learning
and the ability to apply this knowledge (Scraw & McCrudden, 2006). In order for the
acquirement of new knowledge to be sustainable and resonant with the learner, the intrinsic load
of complex material should be segmented into manageable parts (Kirshner, Kirshner, & Paas,
2006), and clear feedback should be provided to structure and reinforce the process of learning
(Anderman & Anderman, 2009).
A research synthesis conducted by Trivette et al. (2009) on the effectiveness of adult
learning methods and strategies supports the use of both activating prior knowledge and
providing models as significant to developing new knowledge. The synthesis incorporated 79
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

91
studies and used both randomized controlled trials and comparison group designs in its
methodology. The study focused on six learning method characteristics, catoregizing them into
three features: Planning; application; and deep understanding. Both the use of activating prior
knowledge through learner input and modeling through the use of role playing and real life
applications demonstrated positive results for learning new knowledge (Trivette et al., 2009).
Trivette et al (2009) also found evidence in their research synthesis that determining the next
steps in learning targeted knowledge and feedback within the learning process were also
attributed to more effective learning.
Therefore, it is recommended that future cohort-based professional development provides
participants with opportunities to connect their prior knowledge of social justice and how
students learn with the SJAS and how to meaningfully organize their knowledge of the SJAS
into the respective domains. The participants must be given clear learning targets and objectives
for each cohort session organized into manageable chunks that connect to the participants’ end
goals of developing their own SJAS-integrated lesson plans and receive continuous feedback
during the process.
Conceptual knowledge solutions. The participants of this study demonstrated two
conceptual knowledge needs: clear expectations of outputs and student evidence in relation to the
connection of SJAS and state content standards; and a deeper understanding of the participants’
own biases, assumptions, and positionalities in relation to the district expectations of integrating
the SJAS within their respective classrooms. According to Schraw & McCruddent (2006), the
organization of knowledge is influential in the learning and application of new knowledge. The
creation of concept maps and other advanced organizers can promote the elaboration and
organization of learning (Anguinis & Kraiger, 2009). Also important to this study is the idea that
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

92
social interaction and collective learning are critical in facilitating the construction of new
knowledge (Scott & Palincsar, 2006).
Combining research synthesis of the effectiveness of teachers’ collegial relationships and
professional communities in relation to student achievement and a qualitative case study of two
teacher groups over a full school year, Horn & Little (2010) found that professional learning can
be influenced by collaborative group routines that focus on problems of practice, professional
discourse, and engagement of improvement. Educators also need to have opportunities to reflect
on their own biases and assumptions, need to have a clear understanding of their own identity,
and need to recognize the structural racism that affects the learning of their students before they
expect to implement the culturally responsive pedagogy and social justice anchor standards
within their classroom practice (Hammond, 2015; www.tolerance.org; Ladson-Billings, 1995).
Based on these learning theories, it is suggested that the cohort PD provide examples and
models of SJAS lessons that have been integrated with the participants’ content area and grade
level standards, and that opportunities are provided for the participants to make clear connections
between the SJAS and their respective content and grade level. The cohort PD should also
provide opportunities for the participants to collaboratively reflect, discuss, and unwrap their
own biases, assumptions, and positionalities in relation to their goals of effectively implementing
the SJAS within their curriculum and establishing culturally responsive classroom environments.
Procedural knowledge solutions. Data from the study indicates a number of procedural
knowledge needs, including explicit examples of models of teachers implementing SJAS lessons
within their classrooms, strategies for implementing SJAS lessons in their respective content and
grade level classes, strategies for teaching complex subject matter and facilitating dialogue with
students, and strategies related to the pedagogy of culturally responsive teaching. According to
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

93
Denler, Wolters, and Benzon (2009), strategies and behaviors that are modeled improve self-
efficacy, learning, and performance. Learning tasks that correlate with the individual’s familiar
cultural settings will promote learning and transfer (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). To develop
mastery, individuals must acquire component skills, practice integrating them, and know when to
apply what they have learned (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). Scott & Palincsar (2006) state that
social interaction, cooperative learning, and cognitive apprenticeships facilitate construction of
new knowledge.
Two empirical research studies support these suggestions. The first was a qualitative
four-phased study of eight teachers in a low-income school district that utilized ethnographic
interviews, videotaping of teaching and collective viewing and analysis by the participating
teachers (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Through the process, teachers were able to develop and
recognize shared characteristics that were effective in improving the success of African-
American students. A larger-scale longitudinal study of a professional development project was
conducted in New Zealand, analyzing the PD’s model of providing workshop formats for
teachers and administrators that included teacher reflection, collaborative designing of lessons,
modeled goals and outcomes, and classroom observations and feedback by coaches for the
implementation of a culturally responsive teaching and pedagogies (Bishop et al., 2012).
Based on these studies and learning theories, it is recommended that the cohort PD
should provide participants with video models of SJAS lessons and demonstrations of how to
implement an SJAS-integrated lesson within a classroom. Participants should be provided with
demonstration lessons and model lesson plans through the PD facilitation and given
opportunities to practice designing mini-lessons that integrate and apply SJAS with their own
content. Participants should also be provided with explicit strategies and routines that connect the
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

94
instruction of the SJAS with various content areas and that contribute to culturally responsive
teaching. It is also substantial that participants are provided collaborative opportunities for
critical discourse and role-playing scenarios to better prepare them to implement the SJAS
lessons within their classrooms.
Metacognitive knowledge solutions. Participants in the study demonstrated a need for
strategies that help them recognize their own biases, assumptions, and positionality. According
to Baker (2006), the use of metacognitive strategies facilitates learning.
In a study aimed at exploring the specific characteristics of professional development that
encourages the deep learning of educators, Meijer et al. (2017) utilized an educational design
research method incorporating a qualitative multiple case study to examine the active
components of PD interventions and how they relate to changes in teachers’ beliefs and
behaviors. The study was carried out with 20 teachers in four different settings over a period of
nine months, and utilized videos, surveys, interviews, and written personal theories of practice.
The results of the study demonstrated that participants involved in collaborative active learning
groups that used critical reflection as one component of the process acquired transformative
learning--a learning that results in one’s future approach to practice (Meijer et al., 2017). Based
on these studies, it is recommended that cohort PD provide participants with critical reflection
and discourse opportunities to uncover biases, assumptions, and positionality, and provide
strategies for developing an awareness of these behaviors when teaching students SJAS.
Motivation Recommendations
Introduction. Data collected from the research demonstrates that there is no motivation
value need, one self-efficacy need, one mood need, and one goal orientation need. All of these
needs should be considered high priority based on research literature in relation to social justice.
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

95
Table 19 provides a list of the causes, priorities, theory principles and recommendations related
to these needs. Detailed descriptions for each priority cause, literature research related to the
cause, and recommendations are provided under the table.
Table 17: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence
Priority
High
Low
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Value

None

Self-Efficacy

Confidence in lesson
development and
preparation to teach SJAS
High High self-efficacy can
positively influence
motivation (Pajares,
2006).

Modeling to-be-
learned strategies or
behaviors improves
self-efficacy, learning,
and performance
(Denler, Wolters, &
Benzon, 2009).
Provide models of lesson
plans and the actual
teaching of SJAS-
integrated lessons in
order to make
expectations clearer.
Confidence that SJAS
lessons and student
outcomes will meet
district expectations
High Learning and
motivation are
enhanced when
learners have positive
expectancies for
success (Pajares,
2006).

Provide ongoing
constructive feedback of
participants’ ideas and
lesson plans and ensure
that district expectations
of SJAS lessons are made
clear from the beginning.
Mood

Prevent anxiety and
frustration about SJAS
outcome expectations
High Positive emotional
environments support
motivation (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Provide an ongoing
climate of positivity and
support and include
regular opportunities to
hear participants’
concerns, challenges, and
frustrations.
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

96
Goal Orientation High

Communication of clear
expectations related to
timeline, SJAS
integration evidence,
district evaluation of
work, and student
outcomes

Goals motivate and
direct students
(Pintrich, 2003).

Focusing on mastery,
individual
improvement,
learning, and progress
promotes positive
motivation (Yough &
Anderman, 2006).
Provide early and
ongoing communication
of expectations,
including timelines and
checklists for participants
to be able to self-monitor
their progress. Allow for
opportunities within
cohort time to
accomplish goals in a
collaborative setting.

Value solutions. Following and outline of the teacher needs, no value motivation
influences were determined. There appears to be no gap in this motivation area.
Self-Efficacy solutions. According to the data, two self-efficacy motivation influences
demonstrated need. Participants lacked confidence in their SJAS lesson plan development and
their ability to teach the lessons effectively, and participants expressed a lack of confidence that
their student learning outcomes would satisfy district-level SJAS-integration expectations.
Studies show that high self-efficacy can positively influence motivation (Pajares, 2006).
According to Denler, Wolters, and Benzon (2009), self-efficacy, learning and performance can
be improved by modeling to-be-learned strategies and behaviors. Based on the research and
learning theories, it is recommended that future cohort PD provide participants ongoing support
throughout the entire process, including models of lesson plans and video demonstrations of the
implementation of the lessons for the planning stages, and feedback and coaching during and
after the actual implementation of the lessons.
A quasi-experimental study involving 93 primary teachers from nine schools
demonstrated that a professional development setting that supported mastery experiences with
the use of coaching and feedback had positive effects on self-efficacy for the implementation of
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

97
new strategies and learning (Tschannen-Moran, 2009). The results of the study showed that the
combination of the demonstrations and planning within the PD setting, implementation in work
context, and followed up by coaching had a positive impact on self-efficacy, while no coaching
or follow-up feedback showed a decrease in self-efficacy (Tschannen-Moran, 2009). The
implications of this study relate to the significance of a supportive professional development
setting that provides support in all stages of the SJAS lesson development process, from
constructing the lesson to implementation, and that both coaching and feedback play a critical
role in this process.
By providing ongoing constructive feedback and clear expectations of outcomes, the
participants should demonstrate more confidence in their overall performance of creating and
implementing the SJAS lessons.
Mood solutions. The research data demonstrated that participants had feelings of
anxiety and frustration related to the process of creating and implementing SJAS lessons.
According to Clark and Estes (2008), positive emotional environments support motivation. It is
recommended that the cohort PD create an ongoing climate of positive support, including regular
opportunities for participants to collectively share concerns, challenges, and frustrations.
A longitudinal, multi-site, mixed methods project conducted in England with 300
teachers investigated the factors that contributed to their teaching effectiveness at different stages
of their professional lives, with an approach focused on the holistic influences that affected their
attitudes and motivation (Day & Gu, 2007). The research demonstrated that a positive and
supportive climate that took into context the tensions of teachers’ professional and personal
experiences helped alleviate pressures of professional expectations and provided a more effective
learning climate (Day & Gu, 2007). In the case of the SJAS cohort setting, future meetings
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

98
should provide a climate that acknowledges and supports the challenges participants are
experiencing beyond the SJAS work and channels the positive support towards the work being
done within the cohort.
Goal orientation solutions. The research data suggests that one goal orientation need has
been demonstrated. Participants expressed a need for communication of clear expectations of the
timeline for creating and implementing SJAS lessons, the expectations for SJAS integration
evidence, how the district was going to evaluate their work, and what type of student outcomes
were expected. Learning theories suggest that specific goals motivate and direct students
(Pintrich, 2003). According to Yough & Anderman (2006), a focus on mastery, individual
improvement, learning, and progress promotes positive motivation. It is recommended that
participants are provided early and ongoing explicit communication of expectations, including
timelines and self-monitoring checklists that demonstrates progress. It is also recommended that
the cohort PD sessions allows for opportunities to monitor and accomplish these goals in the
cohort’s collaborative setting.
Richard DuFour, an influential leader in the study and implementation of professional
learning communities, stated that the first out of the six characteristics of high-performing PLCs
in school settings was a shared mission, clear direction, shared values, and established goals that
include indicators, timelines, and targets (DuFour et al., 2013). According to DuFour et al.
(2013), goals (both short- and long-term) are critical for the process of effective collaboration,
and they provide participants with motivation for success through increased self-efficacy and
confidence. In a case study of a school district superintendent’s process of improving the
schools, the significance of results orientation led by clear, well-defined goals was highlighted
(DuFour et al., 2013). Therefore, it is suggested that future SJAS cohort PD establish clear goals-
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

99
-both short- and long-term--and continuously monitor progress related to these goals throughout
the SJAS development and implementation process.
Organization Recommendations
Introduction. Data collected from the research demonstrates that there is one organization
cultural model need, one organization cultural setting need, one organization policies and
procedures need, and two organization resource needs. All of these needs should be considered
high priority based on research literature in relation to social justice. Table 20 provides a list of
the causes, priorities, theory principles and recommendations. Detailed descriptions for each
priority cause, literature research related to the cause, and recommendations are provided within
the following table.
Table 18: Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence
Priority
High
Low
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Cultural Models

Professional development
model initiates change in
teachers’ practice in a
collaborative manner
through shared vision,
common language,
learning protocols and
examining assumptions,
biases, and identities.
High Effective change
efforts use evidence-
based solutions and
adapt them, where
necessary, to the
organization's culture
(Clark & Estes, 2008).

Performances improve
when organizational
goals, policies and
procedures are aligned
with the
organizational culture
(Clark & Estes, 2008)
The cohort should be a
model of PD that
supports the district’s
vision of teaching and
learning, providing
participants with an
opportunity to develop a
shared vision aligned
with the district’s,
challenge one another’s
assumptions, model the
expected teaching and
learning expected,
develop common
language and learning
protocols, and establish a
sense of identity.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

100
Cultural Settings

Culturally responsive
professional learning
settings use critical
discourse and reflection,
protocols that establish
goals and learning
targets, opportunities for
inquiry and to give and
receive feedback, and
opportunities to examine
biases, assumptions, and
positionalities related to
identity.
High Effective change
efforts use evidence-
based solutions and
adapt them, where
necessary, to the
organization's culture
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
A culturally responsive
professional learning
community should be
established that allows
for opportunities of
critical discourse and
reflection, and the use of
collaborative protocols
that focus on specific
goals and learning
targets.

The professional learning
setting should provide
opportunities for inquiry
and feedback, as well as
the examination of
assumptions, biases, and
identity.
Policies and Procedures

District-wide
expectations of changes
to be made within schools
and classrooms are made
explicit and supported by
district and school
policies.
High Effective
organizations ensure
that organizational
messages, rewards,
policies and
procedures that
govern the work of the
organization are
aligned with or are
supportive of
organizational goals
and values (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

The district expectations
of implementing SJAS
and culturally responsive
teaching practices within
all K-12 schools to
increase the equitable
learning experiences of
all students should be
made explicit to all
teachers within the
district, and PD and
PLCs within the school
organizations should be
designed to help the
initiative.
Resources

Effective training for
teachers to uncover and
establish their own
biases, assumptions and
positionality is necessary.

High Effective change
efforts ensure that
everyone has the
resources needed to do
their job (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Cohort time should be
used to provide
participants’
collaborative
professional learning
experiences that includes
modeling, coaching,
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

101
Participants need time
and collaborative
opportunities, as well as
models of lesson plans
and implementation in
order to develop and
implement new SJAS
integrated lessons.
discourse, and feedback
opportunities.

Training of how to
uncover biases,
assumptions, and
positionality in relation
to identity should be
provided.

Cultural model solutions. Based on the data from the study, one cultural model need
has been identified for high priority. The cohort participants shared a need for a PD model that
promotes a culture of change in teachers’ practice, providing them an opportunity to develop
shared vision, common language, learning protocols, and opportunities to examine their own
assumptions, biases, and identities. According to Clark & Estes (2008), effective change efforts
should use evidence-based solutions and adapt them, where necessary, to the organization’s
culture. Furthermore, performances improve when organizational goals, policies, and procedures
are aligned with the organizational culture (Clark & Estes, 2008).
A qualitative study of 37 teachers who participated in PLC teams was conducted using a
combination of surveys, interviews, and observations to determine the effectiveness of the PLCs
and the roadblocks that could affect the intended collaborative cultures (Lujan & Day, 2010).
Their findings show that the use of prioritizing PLC time and keeping it consistent, using norms
and protocols to stay on task, and having established goals and tasks to accomplish during the
meetings made the PLC teams more effective (Lujan & Day, 2010). Dufour & Fullan (2013)
state that if implemented correctly, the PLC process can change the culture of a school and
district by empowering teachers to use their individual knowledge and skills to work collectively
on the common problem of improving student achievement.
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

102
Based on this research and the learning theories, it is recommended that the cohort should
be a model of PD that supports the district’s vision of teaching and learning, perhaps following a
PLC model that provides participants with an opportunity to develop a shared vision aligned with
the district’s, challenge one another’s assumptions, model the expected teaching and learning
expected, and develop common language and learning protocols.
Cultural settings solutions. Based on the research data, participants have expressed a
need for the cohort setting to provide them more opportunities for collaboration, critical
discourse and reflection, protocols that establish goals and learning targets, opportunities for
inquiry and to give and receive feedback, and opportunities to examine biases, assumptions, and
positionalities related to identity. According to Clark & Estes (2008), effective change efforts use
evidence-based solutions and adapt them, where necessary, to the organization's culture.
Meijer et al. (2017) multiple case study found that through structured routines and critical
reflection, teachers can develop deeper understandings of their own beliefs and intentions, which
when connected to a collaborative professional community, can lead to greater changes in
behavior. This will require a front-loading of difficult conversations and reflection about the pre-
held assumptions and biases teachers bring to the table and establishing goals that focus on
changing past practices done autonomously to collaborative work focusing on very specific but
substantial outcomes (DuFour & Fullan, 2013). The reflection process must also take in
consideration the social and institutional context of the problem and the target students (Zeichner
& Liu, 2010). Studies show that in order for educators to practice culturally responsive teaching,
they must provide opportunities for students to examine the power dynamics and inequities that
affect their lives (Sleeter, 2012).
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

103
Based on this research and learning theories, it is suggested that a culturally responsive
professional learning community should be established that allows for opportunities of critical
discourse and reflection and the use of collaborative protocols that focus on specific goals and
learning targets. This professional learning setting should provide opportunities for inquiry and
feedback, as well as the examination of assumptions, biases, and identity.
Policies and procedures solutions. One policy and procedure solution was found as a
priority need. Cohort participants expressed that district-wide expectations of social justice
implementation within schools and classrooms weren’t made clear to everyone within the
schools, and that they had minimal support within their schools for implementing SJAS.
According to Clarke & Estes (2008), effective organizations ensure that organizational messages,
rewards, policies and procedures that govern the work of the organization are aligned with or are
supportive of organizational goals and values.
According to Elmore (2002), professional development and accountability are reciprocal
processes that require commitment in both policy and practice. If school organizations do not
provide the capacity to support the teachers in their professional learning and application, and do
not provide internal and ongoing support, the professional development will not be effective
(Elmore, 2002).
This research supports the recommendation that district expectations of implementing
SJAS and culturally responsive teaching practices within all K-12 schools should be made
explicit to all teachers within the district, and PD and PLCs within the school organizations
should be designed to help the initiative.
Resources solutions. This research has established that there are two organizational
resources needs. The cohort participants have expressed a need for training to uncover and
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

104
establish their own biases, assumptions and positionality. The data also demonstrates a need for
time to be allotted to collaborate and design lessons, models of actual lesson plans, and models
of social justice lessons implemented in actual classroom settings. Clark & Estes (2008) state
that effective change efforts ensure that everyone has the resources needed to do their job.
A multi-case study completed by Agarwal et al. (2010) focused on beginning elementary
school teachers enacting social justice within their curriculum. Interviews and observations were
used to document the struggles and successes of the new teachers as they attempted to integrate
the social justice within their daily lessons (Agarwal et al., 2010). The study’s outcomes
demonstrated a need for teachers integrated social justice within their daily practice to: a.) have
discourse about the inevitable struggles of teaching for social justice; b.) scaffold opportunities
for teachers to practice reflection; and c.) explore the resources available to incorporate social
justice within the various content areas.
This research supports the recommendation that cohort time be allocated to provide
participants’ collaborative professional learning experiences that includes the use of actual lesson
models and video examples of social justice implementation within actual classrooms. Training
of how to uncover biases, assumptions, and positionality in relation to identity should also be
provided.
Summary of Knowledge, Motivation and Organization Recommendations

Knowledge recommendations suggest that future social justice professional development
must provide participants with opportunities to connect their prior knowledge of social justice
and how students learn with the SJAS and must also provide professional learning that
demonstrates how to meaningfully organize SJAS knowledge into the respective domains. The
participants must be given clear learning targets and objectives for each cohort session that is
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

105
organized into manageable chunks connecting the participants’ end goals of developing their
own SJAS-integrated lesson plans and implementing them within the classrooms. Examples and
models of SJAS lessons that have been integrated with a range of content area and grade level
standards should be provided, as well as opportunities for the participants to make clear
connections between the SJAS and their respective content and grade level. Participants should
be provided videos of actual teachers modeling the implementation of SJAS within classrooms.
Opportunities for the participants to collaboratively reflect, discuss, and unwrap their own biases,
assumptions, and positionalities is considered a necessary process for teaching social justice and
culturally responsive pedagogies. Participants should also be provided with explicit strategies
and routines that connect the instruction of the SJAS with various content areas and that
contribute to culturally responsive teaching and be provided opportunities to practice designing
mini-lessons that integrate and apply SJAS with their own content. It is also substantial that
participants are given collaborative opportunities for critical discourse and role-playing scenarios
to better prepare them to implement the SJAS lessons within their classrooms. This work can be
implemented through a professional learning community format that provides protocols, a
collaborative environment, and a goal-setting structure to ensure professional learning for all
participants.
Motivation recommendations include establishing collective and individual learning
targets, providing ongoing constructive feedback, and ensuring that outcome expectations are
made explicit. Future PD should provide a climate that acknowledges and supports the
challenges that participants are experiencing beyond the SJAS work and establish a supportive
environment towards the work being done both within the cohort and in the participants’
classrooms. Continuous monitoring of progress related to established short- and long-term goals
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

106
these goals throughout the SJAS development and implementation process will improve the
participants’ self-efficacy and goal orientation.
Organizational recommendations include the need for the cohort participants to establish
a clear understanding of the district’s vision of teaching and learning. The PD setting should
provide participants with an opportunity to develop a shared vision aligned with the district’s,
challenge one another’s assumptions, model the expected teaching and learning expected,
develop common language and learning protocols, and establish a sense of identity. A culturally
responsive professional learning community should be established that allows for opportunities
of critical discourse and reflection, and the use of collaborative protocols that focus on specific
goals and learning targets. Training of how to uncover biases, assumptions, and positionality in
relation to identity should be provided. Cohort time should be used to provide participants’
collaborative professional learning experiences that includes modeling, coaching, discourse, and
feedback opportunities. The professional development and PLCs within the school organizations
should be designed to promote the district’s SJAS initiative.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
In 2016, concerned parent groups and an outside consulting organization determined that
OPSD was not meeting the academic, emotional and social needs of all OPSD students, and had
not done so for decades. As a response, OPSD developed an agenda they named “Three-pronged
Approach to Excellence through Equity”. The goals of this approach are as follows: 1.) Create a
culture of shared accountability through a systems approach; 2.) Teach cross-cultural and socio-
emotional skills; and 3.) Engage in constant self-reflection around issues of equity. According to
the OPSD mission statement, these goals are guided by three priorities: a.) All graduates are
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

107
prepared for college and careers; b.) English learners will be proficient in English while
engaging in a rigorous, standards-aligned curriculum; and c.) All students will engage in schools
that are safe, well-maintained and family-friendly. A Social Justice Anchor Standards (SJAS)
initiative was adopted as the first strategy in working towards the Excellence through Equity
framework goals. It was determined by district leadership that by August 2020 SJAS-embedded
curriculum would be integrated within K-12 classrooms and subject areas throughout the district.
A SJAS cohort was developed as a pilot PD experience to prepare teachers in learning and
implementing the SJAS. This study has concluded that the professional learning provided by the
cohort experience did not meet the district’s or the teachers’ goals of adequately preparing
teachers for implementing the SJAS, and that specific training and support more aligned to the
particular professional learning is necessary.
The stakeholders for this goal are the OPSD K-12 teachers who are expected to design
and implement SJAS lessons within their respective classrooms. Implementing social justice
standards within content curriculum requires not just the knowledge of the SJAS in relation to
the teachers’ respective grade levels or content area, but also a transformation of pedagogy in
order to teach the SJAS lessons. This makes it necessary to identify the teachers’ knowledge,
motivation, and organization assets and needs relating to the professional learning necessary for
designing and implementing SJAS lessons.
This study examined the knowledge, motivation, and organizational gaps that affected the
professional learning of the teacher participants in relation to designing and integrating SJAS
lessons within their classrooms. It is being proposed that a redesign of the professional
development teachers receive for learning about, designing, and implementing SJAS lessons is
necessary. A professional development program should be modeled from effective professional
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

108
learning communities, and should provide teachers structured collaborative opportunities for
training, reflection, discourse, designing and sharing in relation to the SJAS, their respective
content, student learning, and creating culturally responsive classroom environments. The
professional development must also be supported by a facilitator (or facilitators), school
leadership and other district policies and initiatives.
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
This evaluation and implementation plan utilizes the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016)
New World Kirkpatrick model to structure the findings and recommendations. The New World
Kirkpatrick model is an evolution of the original Kirkpatrick Four Level Evaluation Model
originally designed in the 1950’s. The four levels in both models are: 1.) Reaction, or the degree
to which participants find the training favorable, engaging and relevant to their jobs; 2.)
Learning, or the degree to which participants acquire the intended knowledge; 3.) Behavior, or
the degree to which participants apply what they learned through training at work; and 4.)
Results, or the degree to which targeted outcomes occur as a result of training and support
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Rather than being outcome-focused as was the original model, the New World model
takes a backwards design approach to the evaluation of programs, beginning with Level 4 and
the desired outcomes expected from the training being evaluated and working sequentially to
Level 1, which focuses on the participants’ reactions to the training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). One of the purposes of the New World Kirkpatrick model is to evaluate the training in
relation to the needs of those who are experiencing the learning process while simultaneously
applying the learning to their actual work experience. The significance of working backwards as
opposed to beginning with Level 1 puts an emphasis on the desired outcome, providing a clearer
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

109
path for pre-determining potential obstacles that might affect the end goals. This is particularly
valuable for the applied learning levels evaluated in Level 3 behavior section (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). For each level, the model identifies indicators of critical behaviors that lead
to desired outcomes (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (2016) Level 4 measures evaluate the performance
outputs related to the combination of training and pre-established end-goals. The training and
support is measured reciprocally to final outcomes. The model uses leading indicators to gauge
the progress made during the process, using observations and other measurement tools along the
way to identify critical behaviors that either allow for progression and ultimately success, or
those that hinder the progress and outcomes (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). For example, if
particular short-term learning targets have been established but are not met, a measurement
assessment of the steps taken prior to the expected date of completion can indicate the critical
behaviors that prevented these outcomes. Once established, improvements can be made to ensure
that these critical behaviors are supported to promote the positive overall output expectations of
the organization.
This section focuses on what are considered internal and external indicators. Internal
indicators refer to the critical behaviors and outcomes within the organization, such as the
individuals, teams, and organizations, while external indicators refer to the critical behaviors
from those affected by the organization, such as customers, clients, and those receiving the
service (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). For this study, the internal indicators will apply to the
teacher participants and their abilities to learn and apply the SJAS in relation their professional
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

110
development cohort experience, while the external indicators refer to the overall district
achievement outcomes and parent support in relation to the Excellence through Equity approach.
Table 19 provides an overview of the expected outcomes, metrics, and methods of evaluation.

Table 19: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes

Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Increase in student
academic performance for
state assessment
California Assessment of
Student Performance and
Progress (CAASPP) state test
scores
District data reports of CAASPP
data
Increase in quality of
school perceptions from
parents of students of
color
Positive perceptions of child’s
school experience from all
parents, including parents of
students of color
Data and feedback from district
school climate surveys
Decrease in parent
complaints and concerns
regarding inequitable
learning opportunities for
students of color
Fewer emailed and verbal
complaints and concerns from
parents of students of color
Feedback from Board of
Education meetings,
administrators, and counselors
Increase in positive press
and media
Positive reviews in media and
press
District data collection of press
reviews, articles, and media
presentations
Internal Outcomes
Evidence of SJAS
integration in classrooms
Collection of teacher lessons
developed for classroom
integration
SJAS Lesson Bank of teacher
created lessons for various
content areas
Student evidence of SJAS
integration in classrooms
Collection of student evidence
related to SJAS lessons
SJAS Student Work Bank from
SJAS lessons taught in OPSD
schools
Positive feedback from
teachers developing and
implementing SJAS
lessons
Teachers provide positive
feedback in relation to district
support of their SJAS lesson
development and
implementation
District generated survey sent to
all teachers implementing SJAS
Increase in number of
teachers integrating SJAS
within their classrooms
An increase of teachers
integrating SJAS in all K-12
OPSD schools
Data collected from site
administration and/or SJAS
Coordinator
Increase in positive
student reactions to
classroom climates and
learning
Student feedback indicating
positive reactions to classrooms
integrating SJAS
District generated school
climate surveys for students
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

111
Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. The behaviors measured by Level 3 of the Four Levels of Training
Evaluation (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) are focused on the participants’ performance
application in relation to received training. Level 3 can be thought of as an ongoing performance
monitoring system that focuses on critical behaviors of participants in response to their training
to assess areas for improvement. Before Level 3 can be evaluated, critical behaviors need to be
prioritized and defined (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Critical behaviors are defined as
actions connected to the desired outcomes of the organization, and need to be specific,
observable and measurable (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
The Level 3 focus for this study is on the key stakeholders--the teachers being asked to
design and implement the SJAS lessons. The recommendations are for future SJAS teacher
cohorts. The critical behaviors of focus are related to professional learning needs in relation to
designing and implementing SJAS within classrooms. These critical behaviors have been defined
in Table 20:
Table 20: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation

Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. Collaborative
creation of OPSD
SJAS Curriculum
complete with lesson
plans and units for K-
12 grade levels and
content areas
Number of SJAS
lessons and units
created per grade level
and content area
SJAS Facilitator
monitors and uploads
lessons and units to
Social Justice
Curriculum page of
district website

Teacher participants
upload lesson
plans/units to SJAS
Google Classroom
website
Monthly
expectations of
lesson plans during
school year per
participating teacher

Bi-monthly
expectations of units
per participating
teacher teams
2. Implementation of
SJAS integrated
Number of K-12
teachers implementing
SJAS Facilitator
classroom observations

Monthly during
school year
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

112
lessons within K-12
classrooms
SJAS integrated
lessons
Site administrators’
informal observations
3. Development of
student evidence data
bank connecting SJAS
to content and/or
grade level
Number of artifacts
collected per grade
level and content area
connecting SJAS to
grade level and/or
content area
SJAS Facilitator collects
and organizes student
evidence data from all
SJAS teacher
participants
Monthly during
school year
4. Collection of SJAS
implementation
videos for PD
reflection and
modeling purposes
Number of videos of
SJAS classroom
implementations from
grade levels and
content areas
SJAS Facilitator and/or
teacher participants
upload video to SJAS
Google Classroom
website
Bi-monthly during
school year

Required drivers. In order to ensure that the necessary critical behaviors are
maintained, a system of support and accountability measures--called drivers--must be put in
place to reinforce, monitor, encourage, and reward the prioritized critical behaviors (Kirkpatrick
and Kirkpatrick, 2016). Because teachers are being asked to transform their practice with content
and pedagogy that is complex in nature and also evolving, the supports for teachers to produce
the desired outputs must be consistent, scaffolded, and provide ongoing feedback. The cohort PD
model can be a structure for providing these supports, and the SJAS facilitator, school
administrators and other cohort teachers can help reinforce, encourage, monitor and reward the
progress and actions taken by the teacher participants in both creating and implementing the
SJAS lessons. As stated by Elmore (2002), the accountability of the results must be reciprocal to
the capacity of the organization to support those working to achieve these results. The cohort
setting can provide opportunities for the teacher participants to collectively encourage, reinforce
and monitor one another under the leadership of the facilitator. The cohort facilitator and the site
administrators can encourage, reinforce and monitor the teacher participants’ implementation of
the SJAS within their classrooms. The cohort facilitator can encourage and reinforce the critical
behaviors by coaching and modeling. Site administrators can encourage and reinforce the
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

113
application of the SJAS by promoting a school climate that is supportive and welcoming to SJAS
implementation, and even reward teacher participants by providing them opportunities to share
their work in the form of whole-school PD. Regular classroom visits by the SJAS facilitator
and/or the site administrators can be used to both encourage and monitor the amount and level of
SJAS integration that is occurring, holding the teachers accountable while simultaneously
supporting them. The required drivers to support the critical behaviors of the teacher participants
are found in Table 21.
Table 21: Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Cohort meetings structured to
allow collaboration in
planning, discourse and
creating SJAS lessons that
integrate with respective
content areas.
Monthly 1 & 2
Target checklists that detail
month-to-month expectations
and goals, including
uploading lessons and
collecting student evidence.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3, 4
Cohort meeting opportunities
for specific training in design
and implementation of SJAS
lessons, including model
lessons and video.
Monthly 1 & 2
Cohort and school site PD
opportunities for teacher
participants to share their
SJAS lessons and experiences
with peers and school site
colleagues.
Ongoing 1 & 2
Encouraging
Cohort meetings structured
time for peer feedback and
sharing of ideas.
Monthly 1, 2, 3, 4
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

114
SJAS facilitator coaching and
feedback.
Ongoing 1 & 2
Site administrator informal
feedback.
Ongoing 2
Rewarding
Stipend for SJAS cohort
participants for designing and
implementing SJAS lessons
that can be used throughout
district.
Yearly 1 & 2
Opportunities for cohort
participants to provide staff
SJAS PD in school sites, and
possibly serve as mentors for
other school site teachers.
Ongoing 2 & 4
Monitoring
Cohort meetings structured to
observe monthly goals via
checklists, and to share
challenges, questions, and
strategies related to achieving
the target goals.
Monthly 1 - 4
SJAS facilitator and site
administrators conduct
informal observations of
cohort participants
implementing SJAS lessons.
Ongoing 2
Cohort participants complete
bi-annual surveys detailing
their progress, concerns and
needs. SJAS facilitator
responsible for analyzing data.
Bi-annual 1 - 4
SJAS facilitator maintains the
collection of teacher-created
SJAS lessons and student
evidence via Google
Classroom or similar online
platform.
Ongoing 3 & 4

Organizational support. The OPSD organization must provide the capacity to
implement the proposed drivers and maintain the necessary critical behavior of the teacher
participants. This will require a restructuring of the current cohort model. The SJAS cohort
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

115
sessions must be structured to provide participants with a collaborative and productive setting
guided by a shared vision and target goal checklist. The expected outcomes for the teacher
participants must be made explicit and be continuously supported both within the cohort
structure and the individual school sites. The cohort sessions should follow a professional
development model that promotes transformational professional learning through a collaborative
approach, with ongoing coaching and feedback provided by the cohort facilitator and possibly
those chosen as cohort participant mentors. Because the district currently utilizes professional
learning communities (PLC) as PD models, the cohort model should follow similar protocols and
cycles of inquiry and reflection.
The cohort model must provide SJAS participants with embedded opportunities to
explore and examine their own preconceived biases, assumptions and identities. Constant
reflection, discourse, and inquiry must be encouraged and supported. Training should be
provided within the cohort sessions, utilizing both models of lessons and video models of actual
implementations within classrooms. Teachers should be given ongoing opportunities to self-
analyze their own work and be provided with checklists and rubrics to do so.
Within the school sites, PD time must be provided for cohort participants to share their
knowledge and examples with their colleagues. Site administrators should provide support to
SJAS participants by observing them and establishing opportunities for them to share their work
with others in the school. Site administrators can help promote and develop a school climate that
supports and encourages culturally responsive teaching and social justice. Both the SJAS
facilitator and site administrators can assist SJAS participants in videotaping lessons to upload
for modeling and analysis purposes.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

116
Level 2: Learning
Learning is a change in behavior attributed to knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and
commitment acquired during training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Learning in context to
this study refers to the SJAS teacher participants’ abilities to develop knowledge, skills, attitude,
confidence, and commitment towards transforming their past practice by learning how to
integrate SJAS within their curriculum and developing a culturally responsive pedagogical
approach as a means of doing so. This entails that the learning covers different facets, including
knowledge of the SJAS themselves, determining their own positionality and biases, learning how
to design lessons integrating SJAS with state standard content curriculum, and learning how to
implement their lessons in their respective classroom settings.
Learning goals. Using data collected for the study that determined the needs for
successful implementation of SJAS within the OPSD K-12 schools, learning goals have been
developed. By implementing these learning goals, SJAS teacher participants will be able to:
● demonstrate a deep understanding of all four SJAS domains (declarative)
● know how to design lessons that integrate SJAS with content and grade level state
standards (declarative & conceptual)
● demonstrate a clear understanding of district and cohort expectations for SJAS lesson
development outcomes and SJAS lesson implementation, including timelines and
expectations for collected evidence (declarative & procedural)
● demonstrate a greater awareness of their own positionality, biases and identities in
context of teaching diverse student populations (conceptual)
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

117
● develop pedagogical strategies and routines for both designing and implementing SJAS
lessons, including knowing how to navigate complex discourse within the classroom
(procedural & metacognitive)
● recognize the effectiveness of the SJAS lessons on student learning based on classroom
implementation experience
Program. To meet the needs of the learning goals listed above, a SJAS cohort PD
model should be designed to provide the capacity for teacher participants to acquire the
necessary knowledge to create and implement SJAS and content standards integrated lessons
within their respective schools, and include a substantive support process for the participants to
maintain fidelity in the established targeted goals. The cohort model should be modeled after
effective professional learning communities but amended to the diverse needs of the cohort,
promoting a structured environment that promotes discourse, reflection, inquiry and clear
learning objectives.
The cohort model agenda should be scaffolded to first establish clear expectations and a
shared participant vision. Next, the cohort should provide opportunities for participants to
develop declarative and conceptual knowledge about the actual social justice standards in
relation to their own biases, assumptions, positionalities and identities. Once participants feel
self-efficacious about their understanding of the SJAS and the need to teach it in their
classrooms, lesson design training should be provided. In a collaborative cycle, actual SJAS
lesson plan models should be given for participants to analyze and reference in relation to the
lessons they are designing, supported by ongoing SJAS facilitator and peer feedback.
Following the lesson plan design training, the focus should then be on the actual
implementation of the lessons in the classroom. Explicit models of videos of teachers actually
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

118
implementing the lessons should be provided, and participants should be given strategies for
teaching the lessons in a culturally responsive manner and be given role-playing opportunities to
practice these strategies. The SJAS facilitator and site administrators should observe the actual
implementation of the lessons and provide constructive feedback.
As the school year progresses, the monthly cohort sessions should provide opportunities
for the participants to share their questions, concerns and successes. An ongoing process of
designing lessons, reflecting on what works and what does not work, and providing supportive
feedback to one another should become the norm. Sharing video of their own SJAS teaching and
student artifacts from lessons taught can help provide the cohort participants a means of building
a bank of models that can be used in more classrooms throughout the district. The collection of
these videos and artifacts should be the responsibility of the SJAS facilitator. During the second
half of the year, teachers who feel self-efficacious can provide school site PD to promote the
teaching of SJAS within more classrooms.
At the end of the school year, participants will submit their SJAS goals checklists,
providing feedback of what worked for them and where they need more support. Each
participant should be able to provide a predetermined collection of lesson templates and student
artifacts as evidence.
Evaluation of the components of learning. In order to evaluate the teacher participants’
knowledge needs relative to the cohort experience, both summative and formative measurements
should be made. According to Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick (2016), these summative and formative
assessments can include discussions, knowledge checks, role play, group demonstrations,
surveys, interviews, and action plans. Utilizing both formative and summative measures, cohort
effectiveness in meeting the learning needs of the participants will be ongoing and thorough.
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

119
Table 22 provides a list of the methods and activities that will be used throughout the SJAS
cohort process.
Table 22: Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program.
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Cohort sessions will use PLC model
collaborative inquiry and reflection cycles to
establish participant knowledge of SJAS, and
use SJAS checklists and written reflections as
participant self-checks of knowledge.
Discourse and inquiry will be used as
formative measures.
During first three cohort sessions and use of
ongoing checklist
Cohort sessions will use PLC model
collaborative inquiry and reflection cycles to
establish participant examination and
knowledge of their own identities, biases and
positionalities in relation to their student
population. Discourse and inquiry will be used
as formative measures. SJAS checklists and
written reflections will provide participant self-
checks.
During first three cohort sessions and use of
ongoing checklist
Cohort participants will receive a self-guided
checklist that includes expected outcomes for
each session and each month. During first
cohort, explicit goals and collective vision will
be discussed and determined.
First cohort meeting
Survey will be provided in December
determining participants’ self-efficacy, needs,
and concerns.
December
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Cohort sessions will use PLC model of
collaborative inquiry and reflection cycles to
explore SJAS lesson models and expectations,
and then work in content area or grade level
groups to design SJAS lessons. Completed
lessons will be used as summative measures,
and discourse and inquiry as formative. SJAS
checklist and written reflections will be used
for participant self-check
Monthly
Cohort sessions will use PLC model of
collaborative inquiry and reflection cycles to
explore SJAS lesson implementation. Videos
of teacher SJAS lessons will be used as
Monthly
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

120
summative measures, and discourse, inquiry
and feedback as formative. SJAS checklist and
written reflections will be used for participant
self-check
Observations by SJAS facilitator and/or site
administrator with feedback.
Monthly

Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Survey December
Written reflections Monthly

Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Survey December
Discourse during inquiry and reflection cohort
sessions
Monthly
Written reflections Monthly

Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
SJAS checklist that includes ongoing target
goals
Monthly
Lesson templates, video of SJAS
implementation and student artifacts as
summative measures
Monthly and End of year

Level 1: Reactions
According to Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick (2016), participants’ reactions are defined as
their levels of engagement, relevance, and customer satisfaction relative to the program. In the
case of this study, the reactions measured will be those of the SJAS teacher participants in
relation to their SJAS cohort PD experience. Table 23 below provides formative and summative
measures to determine the participants’ reactions to the SJAS cohort as a professional
development setting.
Table 23: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program.
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Attendance Monthly
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

121
Participation in cohort session inquiry,
discourse, and written reflections
Monthly
Completion of SJAS lessons and
implementation of lessons
Monthly
Relevance
Bi-annual survey December & May
Cohort session use of time for creating lessons
and sharing implementation experiences
Monthly

Customer Satisfaction
Bi-annual survey December & May
Written reflections Monthly
Completion of SJAS self-monitoring checklist Monthly

Evaluation Tools: The SJAS cohort teacher participants will be asked to evaluate the
effectiveness of the cohort PD in relation to their knowledge, motivation, and their ability to
create and implement SJAS lessons for the OPSD organization. Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick
(2016) recommend using immediate and delayed evaluation tools to determine the impact of the
program in relation to the participants’ needs.
Immediately following the program implementation. The evaluations that are given
immediately after (and even during) the PD program should be formative and used to monitor
the environmental conditions that can promote or hinder professional learning (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). The use of formative assessments is valuable to Level 1 and Level 2 critical
behaviors due to the immediate feedback provided, and learner needs can be attended to in a
timely manner (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Attached in the appendix is an example of a
formative checklist that could be provided by the cohort facilitator to the participants during a
cohort session.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. According to Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick (2016), when participants are asked to evaluate their training immediately after can
provide a greater frequency of returned evaluations but could also result in a lack of quality and
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

122
sincerity. By delaying the surveys for a week or two, the participants will have had time to
attempt to implement and apply their learning in their classrooms. Delayed evaluation can
provide the participants more time to determine the relevancy of the PD in respect to their
learning needs. Attached in the appendix is a survey that could be used at the conclusion of the
first semester and then again at the conclusion of the school year, issued a week after the final
cohort sessions for each.
Data Analysis and Reporting
The data acquired from the immediate and delayed instruments will be presented to the
district and site administrators. The data related to the immediate findings will be presented in
monthly administrator meetings as SJAS cohort updates by the SJAS facilitator. The delayed
findings survey data will be presented at the last administrator meetings for both the first and
second semesters. This data will be embedded in a complete report of the SJAS progress and will
include survey data from Levels 1 and 2 as well as evidence of actual teacher designed lessons and
student artifacts from SJAS integration within the classrooms. As more and more teachers
successfully integrate SJAS within their classroom, a promotional video of these lessons combined
with teacher and student narratives about their experience with SJ can be created as a presentation
to the school board.
Summary of the Implementation and Evaluation
The implementation and evaluation recommendations for this organization’s study are
influenced by the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This
approach proposes three guiding questions during the implementation and evaluation process: 1.)
Do the SJAS cohort outcomes meet expectations; 2.) If not, why not; and 3.) If so, why?
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). By prioritizing and analyzing the four levels of critical
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

123
behaviors--beginning with the overall expected outcomes from Level Four, this study hopes to
provide a comprehensive, applicable set of recommendations that can maximize the performance
outputs of participating SJAS teachers and provide a foundation that allows for growth and
sustainability for the future of the social justice and equity initiative. As a sum-of-parts approach,
with the Level Four and Level Three making up the larger parts, the implementation and
evaluation proposal hopes to provide a clear and strategic plan for meeting the knowledge,
motivation and organizational needs of the SJAS cohort necessary for creating a district-wide
school culture where social justice and culturally responsive classrooms increase the equitable
learning opportunities for all students. In return, the district should expect student achievement
to improve for all sub-categories, particularly those historically affected by a significant
achievement gap, as well as district-wide academic culture that reflects the vision and goals of
equitable and culturally responsive schools.
Because this a new initiative, the progress will be incremental yet substantial. If the
overall outcomes and goals are clearly established and provided, the work within the cohort will
only be improved as recommendations are implemented during the process. Through ongoing
evaluation, changes can be implemented that directly correlate to the gaps exposed. As the cohort
participants find more success in their design and implementation of SJAS lessons, they can be
provided roles and modeling opportunities that influence more of their school peers to increase
the amount of SJAS teaching and learning within the district.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study focused on the knowledge, motivation and behavior needs of a small cadre of
teacher stakeholders in their roles of helping a school district provide a more equitable learning
experience for all students, particularly those who been historically underrepresented. The
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

124
sample size of this particular study was very small, and the number of the current district
teachers involved in SJAS cohort is also very small (around 2%). Five teachers of the original 20
in the cohort were interviewed, and only four of these teachers agreed to be observed
implementing an SJAS lesson.
Although there are currently two operational SJAS cohorts, this study focused on the
original SJAS cohort as a pilot PD platform for classroom teachers interested in integrating their
content with social justice. Other stakeholders play a critical role in the implementation of social
justice integration, including district administrators, site administrators, parents, students and the
SJAS facilitator/director. A more expansive study could have included more of these
stakeholders. The study was conducted during the second year of the SJAS cohort’s inception,
with interviews and observations occurring between the months of October to February. Because
of a limited timeframe, no follow-up interviews or analysis of end-of-year outputs could be
conducted.
The researcher’s role in this study was as a researcher-participant. Nearly all cohort
sessions beginning in Spring of 2018 were attended by the researcher also invested as a teacher
participant in the SJAS integration. Other teacher participants were made aware of this dual role
at the very beginning of the cohort implementation.
Recommendations for Future Research
Since the program researched for this study was a pilot PD cohort that did not use the
New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) to guide the implementation
and evaluation of the district’s expected outcomes and program success, future research could
explore the effects of using the recommended success indicators and outcomes to measure both
qualitative and quantifiable growth. Future research could also increase the sample size of cohort
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

125
participants, or even broadening the range to include administrators, parents, students and
teachers who teach social justice but don’t participate in the cohort. A longitudinal study of the
effects of the SJAS cohort PD model or something similar in relation to increased student
achievement over a number of years would result in a more comprehensive, empirical research.
Other data that could be explored include the number of teachers implementing SJAS within
classrooms on a consistent basis, the number of teachers who begin in the cohort but choose to
exit it, and if students and parents feel that the learning experiences in OPSD K-12 schools has
truly become more equitable and accessible for all. The use of this particular professional
development model as a means of providing specialized professional learning requiring new
knowledge and a transformation of one’s practice could also serve as focus for future research.
Because the cohort model suggests a PLC structure, research could also investigate the
applicability of PLCs and their capacity to provide collaborative learning environments for the
transformational learning required in similar initiatives.
Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to examine a school district’s pilot social justice
professional development cohort designed to provide a platform for classroom teachers to
integrate social justice anchor standards (SJAS) in various content areas throughout multiple K-
12 classrooms. The focus of the study was on the teacher participants’ knowledge, motivation
and organizational needs in relation to their ability to both design and implement SJAS-
integrated lessons within their classrooms, and the capacity of the cohort as a professional
development structure that allowed for these needs to be met.
Using the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) to design an
implementation and evaluation plan, this study hopes to inform future use of the SJAS cohort as
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

126
a PD model to ensure success for specific outcomes and goals determined by the district. By
utilizing the study’s recommendations, success indicators and evaluations can be used to
recognize and circumvent potential problems in an ongoing basis to ensure fidelity and success
of the initiative. This framework intends to provide an effective and sustainable professional
learning platform that can provide teachers with the necessary knowledge, motivation and
organizational needs to collaboratively design and implement the intended SJAS lessons, and
eventually evolve to allow these participants to serve as teacher leaders that model social justice
integration for their school-site peers. Due to the increased emphasis of social justice and
culturally responsive teaching on a national level, future success of the SJAS cohort could
provide a model of social justice implementation for other school districts throughout the United
States.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

127
References

Agarwal, R., Epstein, S., Oppenheim, R., Oyler, C. & Sonu, D., 2010. From Ideal to Practice and
Back Again: Beginning Teachers Teaching for Social Justice. Journal of Teacher
Education, 61(3), pp.237—247, DOI:10.1177//0022487109354521
Anderman, E. & Anderman, L. (2006). Attributions. Retrieved from
http://education.com/reference/article/attribution-theory
Baker, L. (2006). Metacognition. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/metacognition/
Bender-Slack, D. (2010). Texts, Talk...and Fear? English Language Arts Teachers Negotiate
Social Justice Teaching. English Education; Urbana, Vol. 42, Issue 2, Jan. 2010,
pp.181—203.
Bishop, R., Berryman, M., Wearmouth, J., Peter, M. & Clapman, S. (2012). Professional
Development, changes in teacher practice and improvements in Indigenous
students’ educational performance: A case study from New Zealand. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 28(2012), pp.694—705.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional Development and Teacher Learning: Mapping the Terrain.
Educational Researcher, Vol. 33, No. 8, pp 3—15.
Brookfield, S. (2010). Critical Reflection as an Adult Learning Process. Handbook of Reflection
and Reflective Inquiry: Mapping a Way of Knowing for Professional Reflective Inquiry,
DOI:10.1007/978-0-387-85744-2_11
Brown, K. (2004). Leadership for Social Justice and Equity: Weaving a Transformative
Framework and Pedagogy. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 40, No. 1
(February 2004) 77—108.
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

128
Clark, R.E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning Research into Results. Information Age Publication
Incorporated, 2008.
Cochran-Smith, M., Shakman, K., Jong, C., Terrell, D.G., Barnatt, J. & McQuillan, P. (2009).
Good and Just Teaching: The Case for Social Justice in Teacher Education. American
Journal of Education, May, 2009, Vol.115(3), pp.347—377.
Cochran-Smith, M., Lytle, S.L. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher
learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 1999, Vol.24, pp.249-305.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods
Approaches. SAGE, 2014.
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E. & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective Teacher Professional
Development. Learning Policy Institute, June 2017.
Day, C. & Gu, Q. (2007). Variations in the conditions for teachers’ professional learning and
development: sustaining commitment and effectiveness over a career. Oxford Review of
Education, Vol.33(4): Learning in and across the professions.
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2006). Social Cognitive theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/
Desimone, L.M. (2011). A Primer of Effective Professional Development. Phi Delta Kappan,
Vol.92(6), pp.68—71, March 1, 2011. DOI: 10.1177/003172171109200616
Desimone, L.M. (2009). Improving Impact Studies of Teachers’ Professional
Development: Toward Better Conceptualizations and Measures. Educational
Researcher, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp.181—199, DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08331140
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience & Education. First Press, 1938, Kappa Delta Pi.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

129
DuFour, R. & Fullan, M. (2013). Cultures Built to Last: Systemic PLCs at Work. Solution Tree
Press: Bloomington, IN.
DuFour, R. & DuFour, R. (2010). Chapter 4: The Role of Professional Learning Communities in
Advancing 21
st
Century Skills. 21
st
Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn.
Edited by: James Bellanca & Ron Brandt, Solution Tree Press: Bloomington, IN
Elmore, R. F. (2002). Bridging the Gap Between Standards and Achievement. Albert Shanker
Institute.
Esposito, J., Swain, A.N. (2009). Pathways to Social Justice: Urban Teachers’ Use of Culturally
Relevant Pedagogy as a Conduit for Teaching for Social Justice. Perspectives on Urban
Education, pp.38—48, Spring 2009.
Florian, L. (2012). Preparing Teachers to Work in Inclusive Classrooms: Key Lessons for the PD
of Teacher Educator from Scotland’s Inclusive Practice Project. Journal of Teacher
Education, 63(4), pp. 275—285. DOI: 10.1177/0022487112447112
Francis, B., Mills, M., Lupton, R. (2017). Towards social justice in education: contradictions and
dilemmas, Journal of Education, 32.4, pp.414-431, DOI:
10.1080/02680939.2016.1276218
Fraser, N. (1996). Social Justice in the Age of Identity Politics: Redistribution, recognition, and
participation. The Tanner Lectures on Human Values. Stanford University.
Fraser, N. (2001). Recognition without Ethics? Theory, Culture & Society, June 1, 2001.
https://doi-org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.1177/02632760122051760
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Bloomsbury Academic: New York, NY.
Fullan, M. (2014). Leading in a Culture of Change. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2014. ProQuest
EBook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/socal/detail.action
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

130
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), pp.45—56.
Garet, M., Porter, A., Desimone, L., Birman, B.F., Yoon, K.S. (2001). What Makes Professional
Development Effective? Results from a National Sample of Teachers. American
Educational Research Journal, Winter 2001, Vol.38, No.4, pp.915-945.
Gay, G. (2010). Acting on Beliefs in Teacher Education for Cultural Diversity. Journal of
Teacher Education, 61(1-2), pp.143—152 DOI:10.1177/0022487109347320
Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for Culturally Responsive Teaching. Journal of Teacher Education,
Vol 53(2), pp.106—116, March 1, 2002. DOI: 10.1177/0022487102053002003
Gay, G., Kirkland, K. (2003). Developing Cultural Critical Consciousness and Self-Reflection in
Preservice Teacher Education. Theory Into Practice, Volume 42, Number 3, Summer
2003.
Gewirtz, S. (1998). Conceptualizing social justice in education: mapping the territory. J.
Education Policy, Vol. 13, No.4, pp.460—484.
Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional Development and Teacher Change, Teachers and Teaching,
8:3, 381—391, DOI: 10.1080/135406002100000512
Guskey, T. R. (2003). What Makes Professional Development Effective? Phi Delta Kappan,
American Educational Research Association, Chicago, 2003.
Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating Professional Development. Corwin Press, Inc. Thousand Oaks,
CA., 2000.
Gutstein, E. (2003). Teaching and Learning Mathematics for Social Justice in an Urban, Latino
School. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Vol.34, No.1 (Jan.,2003),
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

131
pp.37—73. NCTM. DOI: 10.2307/30034699
Hammond, Z. (2015). Culturally Responsive Teaching & the Brain. Corwin: Thousand Oaks,
CA.
Hawley, W.D. & Nieto, S. (2010). Another Inconvenient Truth: Race and Ethnicity Matter.
Educational Leadership, V.68(3), pp.66—71, Nov. 2010.
Hochberg, E.D., Desimone, L.M. (2010). Professional Development in the Accountability
Context: Building Capacity to Achieve Standards, Educational Psychologist, 45:2,
pp.89—106, DOI: 10.1080/00461521003703052
Horn, I.S., Little, J.W. (2010). Attending to Problems of Practice: Routines and Resources for
Professional Learning in Teachers’ Workplace Interactions. American Educational
Research Journal, Vol. 47, No. 1, pp. 181-217. DOE: 10.3102/0002831209345148
Jay, J.K., Johnson, K.L. (2002). Capturing Complexity: A typology of reflective practice for
teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education 18 (2002) pp.73-85
Keddie, A. (2012). Schooling and social justice through the lenses of Nancy Fraser. Critical
Studies in Education, 53:3, pp.263—279, DOI:10.1080/17508487.2012.709185
Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How Does Professional Development Improve Teaching? Review of
Educational Research, December 2016, Vol. 86, No. 4, pp. 945—980 DOI:
10.3102/0034654315626800
Kirkpatrick, J.D. & Kirkpatrick, W.K. (2016). Four Levels of Training Evaluation. ATD Press.
Kirschner, P., Kirschner, F., & Paas, F. (2006). Cognitive load theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/cognitive-load-theory
Kraft, M. A. & Papay, J. P. (2014). Can Professional Environments in Schools Promote Teacher
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

132
Development? Explaining Heterogeneity in Returns to Teaching Experience. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, December 2014, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 476—500.
DOI:10.3102/0162373713519496
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy. American
Educational Research Journal, Fall 1995, Vol.32, No.3, pp.465-491.
Lingard, B., Sellar, S., Savage, G.C. (2014). Re-articulating social justice as equity in schooling
policy: the effects of testing and data infrastructures. British Journal of Sociology of
Education, 35:5, pp.710—730.
Loughran, J. (2010). Reflection Through Collaborative Action Research and Inquiry. Handbook
of Reflection and Reflective Inquiry: Mapping a Way of Knowing for Professional
Reflective Inquiry, DOI:10.1007/978-0-387-85744-2_11
Lujan, N. & Day, B. (2010). Professional Learning Communities: Overcoming the Roadblocks.
Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin. Winter 2010, Vol. 76-2
Maxwell, J.A. (2013). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. SAGE, 2013.
Meijer, M.J., Kuijpers, M., Boei, F., Vrieling, E. & Geijsel, F. (2017). Professional development
of teacher-educators towards transformative learning. Professional Development in
Education, 43:5, 819—840, DOI:101080/19415257.2016.1254107.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass;
1991.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Fostering transformative adult learning. In Transformative dimensions of
adult learning (pp. 196—226). San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S.B. & Tisdell, E.J. (2016). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and
Implementation. John Wiley & Sons, July 6, 2015.
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

133
Milner, H.R. (2003). Reflection, Racial Competence, and Critical Pedagogy: How do we prepare
pre-service teachers to pose touch questions? Race Ethnicity and Education, Vol.6(2),
2003.
Mitescu, E., Pedulla, J.J., Cannady, M., Cochran-Smith, M., Jong, C. (2011). Measuring
Practices of Teaching for Social Justice in Elementary Mathematics Classrooms.
Educational Research Quarterly. Vol.34, Iss.3, March 2011, pp.15—39.
Murphy, J., Hallinger, P., Heck, R.H. (2013). Leading via Teacher Evaluation: The Case of the
Missing Clothes. Educational Researcher, Vol. 42, p. 349-354.
Nagda,B.A., Gurin, P., Lopez, G.E. (2003). Transformative Pedagogy for Democracy and Social
Justice. Race, Ethnicity and Education, Vol. 6, No. 2, July 2003.
DOI:10.1080/19415257.2016.1254107
Nieto, S. (2012). Teaching, Caring, and Transformation. Knowledge Quest, 40(5), pp.28—31.
North, C.E. (2006). More Than Words? Delving Into the Substantive Meaning(s) of “Social
Justice” in Education. Review of Educational Research. Winter 2006, Vol. 76, pp. 507—
535.
Nouri, A., Sajjadi, S. (2014). Emancipatory Pedagogy in Practice: Aims, Principles and
Curriculum Orientation, The International Volume of Critical Pedagogy, Vol.5.
No.2(2014).
Oakes, J., & Lipton, M. (2003). Teaching to change the world. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Pantic, N. (2017). An exploratory study of teacher agency for social justice. Teaching and
Teacher Education. Vol. 66, Augst 2017, pp.219—230.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/article/self-efficacy-theory/
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

134
Papa, J., Papa, R. (2016). Social Justice: Reframing Social Justice for the Adult Learner. Social
Justice Instruction, Springer International Publishing. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-12349-\
3_3
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), pp.667—686
Rawls, J. (1972). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.
Robinson, V., Timperley, H. (2007). The Leadership of the Improvement of Teaching and
Learning Lessons from Initiatives with Positive Outcomes for Students, Australian
Journal of Education, Nov. 2007, Vol.51(3), pp.247-262.
Rodgers, C. (2002). Seeing Student Learning: Teacher Change and the Role of Reflection.
Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 72, No.2, Summer 2002.
Rueda, R., Stillman, J. (2012). The 21
st
Century Teacher: A Cultural Perspective, Journal of
Teacher Education, 2012, Vol.63(4), pp.245—253.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information Processing Theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/
Scott, S. & Palinscar, A. (2006). Sociocultural theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/sociocultural-theory/
Sleeter, C.E. (2012). Confronting the Marginalization of Culturally Responsive Pedagogy. Urban
Educator, 47(3), 562—584.
Timperley, H., Alton-Lee, A. (2008). Reframing Teacher Professional Learning: An Alternative
Policy Approach to Strengthening Valued Outcomes for Diverse Learners. Review of
Research in Education. February 2008, Vol. 32, pp. 328—369. DOI:
10.3102/0091732X07308968
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

135

Trivette, C.M., Dunst, C.J, Hamby, D.W., O’Herin, C.E. (2009). Characteristics and
Consequences of Adult Learning Methods and Strategies. Research Brief Vol. 3, Number
1, 2009
Villegas, A.M. & Lucas, T. (2002). Preparing Culturally Responsive Teachers: Rethinking the
Curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol.52(1), pp.20—32, Jan 2002.
Yost, D.S., Sentner, S.M., Forlenza-Bailey, A. (2000). An Examination of the Construct of
Critical Reflection: Implications for Teacher Education Programming in the 21
st
Century,
Journal
of Teacher Education 2000, 51; 39 DOI: 10.1177/002248710005100105
Yough, M., & Anderman, E. (2006). Goal orientation theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/goal-orientation-theory/
Young, I.M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press.
Young, I.M. (2006). Responsibility and Global Justice: A Social Connection Model. Social
Philosophy and Policy, 23(1), pp.102—130. DOI: 10.1017/S0265052506060043
Zeichner, K., Liu, K.Y. (2010). A Critical Analysis of Reflection as a Goal for Teacher
Education. Handbook of Reflection and Reflective Inquiry: Mapping a Way of Knowing
for Professional Reflective Inquiry, DOI:10.1007/978-0-387-85744-2_11
Zeichner, K. (2006). Reflections of a University-Based Teacher Educator on the Future of
College- and University-Based Teacher Education, Journal of Teacher Education, 2006,
Vol.57(3), pp.326—340.

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

136
APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Social Justice Cohort Interview Protocol Introduction:
I appreciate you agreeing to participate in this interview for my dissertation study. The
purpose of this study is to examine how the social justice cohort can best provide support to
teachers to effectively integrate and implement the SJAS within your classroom. All participants’
names and information including the district and the school will be de-identified and kept
confidential. The interview should take about 45-60 minutes to complete.

Before we begin, I would like to make sure you are aware that we can stop the interview
at any time if you feel uncomfortable with the questions and that you may choose to not answer
specific questions. I would like to confirm that you consent to participating in this study. Do you
consent to participating in this interview? Wait for response. Finally, I would like to record the
audio of our conversation for maintaining accurate records of participation responses. This is not
necessary if you feel uncomfortable with being recorded. I will be the only person listening to
the recording. Do you consent to being recorded for this interview? Wait for response. Thank
you again for agreeing to participate in the interview, and I’m now going to turn on the recording
device and we will begin.

Recording device on.
My name is Eric Moe and I am an Educational Doctorate student in USC’s Rossier
School of Education. This interview is for my dissertation study. I am sitting here with
Participant’s Name on Date. Participant’s Name, do you consent to being audio recorded for tyis
interview? Wait for response. [If no, stop recording/If yes, continue]. Thank you and let us begin
with the first question.

Participant Learning/Knowledge Interview Questions

1. In what ways has the SJAS cohort experience provided you with the necessary
knowledge to design and implement SJAS-integrated lessons?

2. At this point, how confident are you in embedding the four domains of the SJAS
within your classroom practice? Has the SJAS experience adequately prepared you
for this?

3. In what ways has the cohort time provided you the opportunity to examine your own
biases in relation to your teaching, your students and your students’ learning?

4. What kind of collaborative opportunities have you had in sharing and discussing
biases, assumptions, and questions about identity?

5. At this point, how confident are you in embedding the four domains of the SJAS
within your classroom practice? Has the SJAS experience adequately prepared you
for this?
AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

137

6. After participating in the SJAS for the past year, what ideas about social justice and
critical practice stand out most clearly? What would you like to see addressed more
(if anything)?

Participant’s Use and Application of Knowledge & Skills/Knowledge Interview Questions

1. Have you had the opportunity to successfully implement SJAS lessons within your
classroom yet?

2. In what ways has the SJAS cohort experience prepared you to embed social justice
within your classroom?

3. What strategies and models have been provided to you through the cohort experience
in order for you to implement SJAS and CRT within your classroom?

4. Have you created any SJAS lesson plans yet? How has the cohort experience helped
you gather or design SJAS lessons?

Participant’s Reactions/Motivation Interview Questions

1. As a participant, what are your thoughts about the structure of the SJAS cohort as a
platform for professional development?

2. In what ways has the SJAS cohort experience prepared you to embed social justice
within your classroom?

3. In what ways has the SJAS cohort experience provided you with the confidence to
make your classroom practice more culturally responsive?

4. In what ways has the SJAS cohort provided you with collaboration and learning
opportunities?

5. How has the facilitator promoted your understanding of the SJAS and ensured that
you are able to implement in your classrooms?

Organization Support & Change/Organization Interview Questions

1. In what ways has the cohort PD model provided you the capacity to learn about and
apply SJAS and CRT within your classroom?

2. What specific activities from the SJAS cohort experience have you found most
effective?

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

138
3. What collaboration opportunities embedded within the SJAS cohort were most
beneficial for your understanding of how to design and implement SJAS-integrated
lessons within your classroom?

4. Were you clear on the overall goals of the district and the expectations for outcomes?

5. Do you feel adequately supported in your effort to design and implement SJAS
lessons within your classroom?

6. In what ways, if any, would you change the structure of the cohort meetings to better
prepare you for integrating SJAS within your classroom practice?

AN EXAMINATION OF A SOCIAL JUSTICE TEACHER COHORT

139
APPENDIX B: OBSERVATION PROTOCOL

Observation Protocol:

Date:
Grade level:
Number of students:

Lesson:

SJAS: Identity (ID) Diversity (DI) Justice (JU) Action (AC)

Lesson delivery:
Teacher lecture while students write (LW)
Multimedia (MM)
Small group work/discussion (SGW)
Student presentations (SP)

Evidence of student collaboration & student-student dialogue: yes no

Student engagement indicators: very high (VH); high (H); medium (MED); low (L)

Classroom Arrangement and Interaction Map:

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Implementation of the Social Justice Anchor Standards in the West Coast Unified School District: a gap analysis

PDF

Cultivating a growth mindset: an exploration of teacher beliefs and learning environments

PDF

Professional learning communities: the role of school principals, district directors, assistant superintendents, and superintendents in developing collective efficacy in public secondary school...

PDF

Narrowing the English learner achievement gap through teacher professional learning and cultural proficiency: an evaluation study

PDF

Application of professional learning outcomes into the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Effects of individualized professional development on the theoretical understandings and instructional practices of teachers

PDF

Teachers' experiences implementing social and emotional learning in the elementary classroom

PDF

Transformative justice in California’s public schools: decreasing the education debt owed to California’s Latino students through collaboratively-developed professional learning for secondary teachers

PDF

Teachers’ perceptions and implementation of instructional strategies for the gifted from differentiation professional development

PDF

Professional learning communities: the role of secondary site and district leaders in developing collective efficacy in public schools in southern California

PDF

Support for English learners: an examination of the impact of teacher education and professional development on teacher efficacy and English language instruction

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

Transformative technology: teaching and learning at a 21st century elementary school

PDF

Authentic professional learning: a case study

PDF

The impact of professional learning community on teacher learning and student achievement: a qualitative approach

PDF

Incorporating service learning curriculum to enhance college and career readiness: a professional development for teachers

PDF

A curriculum to integrate social justice anchors standards into K–5 curriculum

PDF

Digital learning in K12: putting teacher professional identity on the line

PDF

Teachers’ knowledge of gifted students and their perceptions of gifted services in public elementary schooling

Asset Metadata

Creator Moe, Eric (author)

Core Title An examination of a social justice teacher cohort and its capacity to support transformational professional learning

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 07/30/2019

Defense Date 04/09/2019

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

Tag adult learning,culturally responsive teaching,OAI-PMH Harvest,professional development,professional learning,professional learning communities (PLCs),Social Justice,teacher cohorts,transformational learning

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Kaplan, Sandra (committee chair), Cash, Dave (committee member), Yates, Kenneth (committee member)

Creator Email emoe@usc.edu,moetheteacher@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-199924

Unique identifier UC11663023

Identifier etd-MoeEric-7685.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-199924 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-MoeEric-7685.pdf

Dmrecord 199924

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Moe, Eric

Type texts

Source 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 a...

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