Literature Review

Introduction

The previous section defined Culturally Responsive Teaching and Instruction and highlighted the importance of utilizing CRT in schools. This section examines and reviews existing literature. The literature examined in this section has informed this pilot study, including specific strategies for implementing CRT, preparing pre-service teachers for cultural responsiveness, teacher expectations, and the importance of strong student-teacher relationships. The intention of this pilot study, methodology, and theoretical frameworks are examined and explained.

Culturally Responsive Teaching: Definition and Importance

As defined in Section One, Culturally Responsive Teaching is “a teacher’s use of strategies that support a constructivist view of knowledge, teaching, and learning, assists students in constructing knowledge, building on their personal and cultural strengths, and examining the curriculum from multiple perspectives, thus creating an inclusive classroom environment” (Krasnoff, 2016, p. 2). Students in the United States are culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse; the teacher population does not necessarily reflect this diversity (U.S. Department of Education Equity and Excellence Commission, 2013; NCES, 2020). In order for teachers to use best practices, they need to be made aware of the impact culture has on learning. If teachers are not prepared to teach students who are culturally different from themselves, a cultural gap will be created (Gay, 2010; Ladson-Billings, 2009). If teachers ignore and exclude culturally diverse materials in curriculum, culturally diverse students are not receiving the same learning experiences as their White peers. By embracing differences rather than turning a blind eye toward them, teachers can change classroom experiences for diverse learners.

CRT is “neither simple nor static” (Borrero & de la Cruz, 2016, p. 30). It’s constantly evolving and changing as new information is learned and presented. Essentially, CRT is a process, not a final destination (Borrero & de la Cruz, 2016). Students must be exposed to different cultures and practices early in life so they will experience an accurate representation of what it means to live in a multicultural society (Ladson-Billings, 2005). Additionally, culturally diverse learners deserve to see themselves represented in professional contexts in order to “boost the self-worth of students of color and motivate this population of students to strive for social success” (Villegas & Irvine, 2010, p. 177). In other words, if diverse learners see themselves represented in the classroom in a positive manner, such as being in leadership positions, this will inspire and motivate them to set expectations for themselves that White students already have due to curriculum materials and many academic leadership positions being representative of their culture.

Teachers come into the classroom with intrinsic bias. Brown (2012) defines the concept as a “pedagogical kind”, which is “a type of educator whose subjectivities, pedagogies, and expectations have been set in place prior to entering the classroom” (p. 298). Culture influences the attitudes, expectations, and values teachers bring into the classroom. Because there is a disparity of students of color and teachers of color in the United States, White teachers outnumber teachers of color by quite a large number: almost 80% of the teaching population is White (NCES, 2020). Therefore, cultural matching between students and teachers is unlikely in many cases. Because of this, teachers must be made aware how to integrate culturally diverse materials and differentiate instruction to accommodate diverse learning styles (Gay, 2002). Building community in the classroom will allow students who are culturally diverse to feel welcomed and represented (Borrero & de la Cruz, 2016).

CRT in Pre-service Education Programs

Teacher preparation is a crucial aspect of CRT. America’s student population is growing more diverse year by year, alternatively the teaching force is remaining largely the same: populated primarily by White women. Because of this, students of color often do not see their culture represented in their teachers. There are multiple reasons the teacher workforce continues to stay homogenous: fewer people of color are opting to teach when they have accessibility to other, more lucrative professions; licensing and certification requirements may not attract people of color into the profession of teaching; many people of color don’t perform as well as their White counterparts in K-12 education, thus decreasing post-secondary schooling opportunities (Ladson-Billings, 2005). With this information in mind, it is clear that the teacher workforce remains populated by White women due to systematic and systemic causes.

We see that “students of color generally are more committed to multicultural teaching, social justice, and providing children of color with an academically challenging curriculum” (Sleeter, 2001, p. 95). In order to prepare White educators to teach students with different cultural backgrounds, pre-service teaching programs must have clear guidelines and curricula in place. Gorski (2008) discussed five “defining principles of multicultural education” that may serve as a guide for pre-service programs when designing syllabi for coursework requirements. These five principles are:

Multicultural education is a political movement
Social justice is an institutional matter, and as such can be secured only through comprehensive school reform
Comprehensive school reform can be achieved only through a critical analysis of systems of power and privilege.
Multicultural education’s underlining goal…is the elimination of educational inequities.
Multicultural education is good education for all students” (p. 310).

These guiding principles suggest that CRT begins at an institutional level; that is, it must be taught in teacher preparation programs in order to be widely accepted in schools and thus practiced in classrooms.

Principles such as Gorski’s must be in place in teacher preparation programs because teaching students of diverse backgrounds can be a challenge for many of those who are unfamiliar with “their students’ lived experiences and their communities” (Saffold & Longwell-Grice, 2007, p. 187). Placing a teacher in an urban school for fieldwork will not necessarily prepare them to work in a culturally diverse school. In fact, it may bring harm to their students and negatively affect the teacher’s view of teaching in an urban setting (Saffold & Longwell-Grice, 2007). Learning methodology and course content is an important step in the process of becoming culturally responsive. However, having rich experiences with members of different cultures, overcoming implicit biases and stereotypes associated with certain cultures, and diminishing the use of colorblindness is perhaps more effective in increasing cultural responsiveness (Saffold & Longwell-Grice, 2007).

Implementation of CRT is not intuitive for many. In fact, cultural matching between students and teachers does not necessarily lead to strong relationships. It is likely that common experiences and cultural commonalities will foster a bond between student and teacher. However, it is damaging to posit an expectation on teachers of color simply based on the fact that they share a culture with students of color. Brown (2012) states that “there is an assumption that the connection between a positive adult Black male and a troubled Black male youth could profoundly impact the boy’s life…[however] for decades they were positioned as the source of the problem” (p. 302). Teachers of all cultures must be well-versed in curricula that maintains the principles of multicultural education and culturally responsive instruction. This includes pre-service teachers of color.

Implementation of Culturally Responsive Teaching

Strategies for implementing CRT vary depending on the time period in which research was conducted. Older research (conducted prior to 2000) suggests that students of color and White students should not be taught in the same manner (Ladson-Billings, 2000). Allowing students of color to represent themselves by telling their stories from their own perspective and giving students the opportunity to have an immersive community experience may guide students into cultural responsiveness (Ladson-Billings, 2000). However, differentiating instruction based on race without taking other educational or cultural factors into consideration is not the most equitable approach to CRT.

Representation of different cultures in the classroom- especially teachers of color- is one component in ensuring that students of color feel comfortable and thus ready for rigor. Diversifying the teaching force is an important step in the call to action of giving students who have “historically been marginalized” high quality, rigorous education that White students have been receiving for years (Villegas, Strom, & Lucas, 2012, p. 299). Existing research shows that White pre-service educators tend to manage racism and discrimination by employing colorblindness. This strategy is ineffective; in fact, it is harmful to students who feel that their culture and identity is erased when people claim not to see color- if one does not see color, they are not seeing the student (Tochluck, 2009). Additionally, “as long as racism exists, colorblindness merely masks this reality, blocking us from seeing and addressing its roots and trivializing the experiences of people of color” (Gorski & Pothini, 2018, p. 134). Since White teachers bring little understanding of racism and discrimination into the classroom, relatability with students can be more difficult (Sleeter, 2001).

Cultural responsiveness is essential to be an effective educator. There are five qualities that distinguish effective teachers:

Hold high expectations for all students
Contribute to positive academic, attitudinal, and social outcomes for students
Use diverse resources
Contribute to the development of classrooms and schools that value diversity
Collaborate with colleagues, administrators, parents, and education professionals to ensure student success (Krasnoff, 2016, p. 3).

These qualities provide a baseline from which pre-service educators may begin to form relationships with students, co-workers, and students’ families, and thus become culturally responsive.

As previously stated, these qualities are effective for all learners. All students find success when they are able to gain access to basic skills, think critically, recognize their own strengths, and feel a sense of community (Delpit, 2006). When teachers truly believe that all students are capable of success- whether that be academic, social, or emotional- a sense of community is built (Ladson-Billings, 1995). One of the most important factors in fostering student success is having high expectations for learners, regardless of the learner’s current performance (Sleeter, 2008).

High Expectations

Implicit bias from teachers can influence the way teachers interact with students, particularly students of color. Academic and behavior outcomes can be negatively impacted by poor student-teacher relationships and implicit bias (Liang, Rocchino, Gutekunst, Paulvin, Li, Elam-Snowden, 2019). A direct result of implicit bias is low expectations. Students of certain cultures are subject to low expectations because of stereotypes of biases associated with their culture and/or race (Krasnoff, 2016). Low expectations cause low motivation in students and can negatively affect students’ attitudes about school. Educators must distribute consistent goals and expectation for each student in the classroom, regardless of students’ academic success. One way to create high expectations for students is to use SMART goals: specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and timely (Krasnoff, 2016). Additionally, educators must communicate high expectations to all students, regardless of culture. The Teacher Expectations Student Achievement (TESA) Interaction Model researched and identified 27 behaviors that may communicate high expectations to students (Montgomery County Public Schools, 2010). Some of these expectations include: calling students by name as they enter the room (Ladson-Billings, 2009); learning and using words from each student’s native tongue (Schwarzer, Haywood & Lorenzen, 2003); affirming and correcting all comments during class discussions (Shade, Oberg, & Kelly, 2004); modeling positive self-talk (Aronson, 2004); and giving specific feedback to improve performance (Cole, 1995). When educators provide behaviors that communicate high expectations for learners, deep relationships are fostered.

Relationships

Teachers who place an emphasis on creating relationships with students and building partnerships with student families create better academic and behavioral outcomes (Liang, et al., 2019). “Prejudice reduction” and interpersonal relationships can improve students’ attitudes and beliefs about school (Gorski, 2009, p. 310). Forming relationships with students is perhaps the most important aspect of CRT; at its very core, CRT is based upon the principles of assisting in student knowledge and creating an inclusive classroom environment. In fact, one teacher “thought that relating to students as relatives allowed her to establish a special and intimate bond that helped decrease disciplinary and classroom management problems” (Villegas & Irvine, 2010, p. 183). In order to walk hand-in-hand with students through their educational journey, teachers must be willing to care deeply and develop strong bonds with students of all cultures. This can be challenging for myriad reasons; many of which are stated in the preceding paragraphs. However, sharing experiences and building partnerships can lead to trusting relationships, which can lead to better outcomes.

Tradition/Stance

The action research approaches represented in this study include participatory research and critical research (Buss & Zambo, n.d.). Participatory research emphasizes the action of the participants in this study. Since all participants work in the field of education, the data gathered is based on the experiences and actions of these participants in the field. Critical research is another important aspect of this study. As a result of this study, teachers are asked to reflect on their daily practices and examine how to best implement CRT in their perspective educational placements. This requires practical action research since CRT aims to solve the issue of inequitable education in schools.

Methodology in the Literature Review

The methodology most frequently employed in the current literature about CRT is giving interviews and surveys. Surveys such as Siwatu’s Culturally Responsive Teaching Self-Efficacy Scale (2007) examine the efficacy of educators utilizing CRT in the classroom. Additionally, confidence of educators can be assessed using a survey such as Woolfolk Hoy’s Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (2000). Interviews are given to determine which areas of CRT are challenging and which areas teachers feel the most successful with their culturally diverse students in the classroom. These interviews are typically open-ended, probing interviews that examine the many different qualities that make a teacher culturally responsive. The study methodology will be detailed in full in Section Three.

Theoretical Frames

Transformative framework (see Table 2) influenced the context of this study; education is not equitable, and Culturally Responsive Teaching provides actionable steps toward creating equitable education opportunities for all learners (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Both the framework of CRT (Table 2) and the implementation strategies are examined in this study. In order to properly implement CRT in the classroom, the framework must be utilized. Critical race theory (Table 2) is also employed. Educating teachers on the basic strategies to empower their students in the classroom regardless of race, class, or gender is a foundational concept of CRT. Critical race theory also encourages the participants of a study to change their thinking and form action-oriented groups (Creswell & Poth, 2018). It is the intention of this pilot study to urge the participants to examine their weaknesses in utilizing CRT and discuss why they need more training in specific areas of cultural responsiveness. By examining this, an additional intention of the study is that these participants will learn more about CRT as a framework and theory and learn more about effectively implementing CRT in their classrooms.

Table 2

Theoretical Framework Definitions (Creswell & Poth, 2018)

Transformative Framework

Participation between researcher and communities is studied; collaborative processes of research, highlighting issues and concerns (Creswell & Poth, 2018)

Culturally Responsive Teaching

Creates student-centered learning environments; affirms cultural identities (Gorski & Pothini, 2018)

Critical Race Theory

Addresses areas of inequities; empowers people; engagement in dialogues (Creswell & Poth, 2018)

Closing Thoughts

A brief synthesis of relevant literature was reviewed in Section Two, along with the researcher’s stance and methodology. Theoretical frameworks were discussed and examined, and the intention of this pilot study was provided. This pilot study is needed because there is a gap in the current literature; research must be conducted which examines the differences between pre-service educators and current educators in confidence and efficacy in regard to Culturally Responsive Teaching and Instruction. Section Three will provide a description of the setting and participants, data sources, data collection, and strategies for data analysis.