Recruiting, Preparing, and Retaining STEM Teachers for a Global Generation [1 ed.] 9789004399990, 9789004399976

Citation preview

Recruiting, Preparing, and Retaining stem Teachers for a Global Generation

Recruiting, Preparing, and Retaining stem Teachers for a Global Generation Edited by

Jacqueline Leonard, Andrea C. Burrows and Richard Kitchen

leiden | boston

All chapters in this book have undergone peer review. The Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available online at http://catalog.loc.gov

Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface. isbn 978-90-04-39998-3 (paperback) isbn 978-90-04-39997-6 (hardback) isbn 978-90-04-39999-0 (e-book) Copyright 2019 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Hes & De Graaf, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Rodopi, Brill Sense, Hotei Publishing, mentis Verlag, Verlag Ferdinand Schöningh and Wilhelm Fink Verlag. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

Contents

Preface vii Acknowledgments xiv List of Figures and Tables xv Notes on Contributors xvii

PART 1 Teacher Recruitment in the stem Content Areas 1 Using stem Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars into Elementary Education 3 Jacqueline Leonard, Scott Chamberlin, Saman A. Aryana, Marina Lazic and Anne Even 2 Stronger Together: The Arizona Mathematics Teaching (MaTh) Noyce Program’s Collaborative Model for Secondary Teacher Preparation 36 Jennifer A. Eli, Rebecca H. McGraw, Cynthia O. Anhalt and Marta Civil 3 Noyce at Vanderbilt: Exploring the Factors That Shape the Recruitment and Retention of Black Teachers 58 Heather J. Johnson, Teresa K. Dunleavy and Nicole M. Joseph 4 Rise, Defy, Teach, and Lead: The enable stem Project 78 Justina Ogodo, Karen E. Irving, Patti Brosnan and Lin Ding

PART 2 Teacher Preparation in stem Education 5 Developing a Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity 103 Belinda P. Edwards, Desha Williams, Karen Kuhel and Adrian Epps 6 Supporting Noyce Scholars’ Teaching of Mathematics in Rural Elementary Schools 133 Dorothy Y. White, Jacqueline Leonard, Michelle T. Chamberlin and Alan Buss

vi

Contents

7 Building Computational Thinking: Design and Making in Teacher Education 163 Laurie O. Campbell and Samantha Heller 8 Teacher Preparation Programs, Teacher Diversity, and stem: Considering a “Race-Centered” Political Economy Perspective 190 Ryan Ziols 9 World Class stem Faculty: An International Dual-Degree Program 217 Karen E. Irving, Anil K. Pradhan and Sultana N. Nahar

PART 3 stem Teacher Mentoring and Retention 10 Negotiating Structures and Agency in Learning to Teach Science for Equity and Social Justice 241 David Segura, Maria Varelas, Daniel Morales-Doyle, Brezhnev Batres, Phillip Cantor, Diana Bonilla, Angela Frausto, Carolina Salinas and Lynette Gayden Thomas 11 Exemplary Mathematics Teachers for High-Need Schools: A Two-Way Mentoring Model 262 Lillie R. Albert 12 Becoming Equity-Minded stem Teachers through Mentoring and Internship Experiences 289 Joy Barnes-Johnson, Saman A. Aryana and Jacqueline Leonard 13 Retention through Community Building: Secondary Science and Math Noyce Scholars’ Use of a Chat Room 322 Andrea C. Burrows 14 Seeking to Stay: Job Search Process and Teacher Retention 346 Lora Bartlett and Alisun Thompson 15 The Teacher Induction Network: Findings from over 10 Years of stem Teacher Induction 368 Joshua A. Ellis Index 389

Preface There is a critical need to prepare teachers with expertise in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) with the skills necessary to work effectively with K–16 students from diverse backgrounds. Kuenzi (2008) reported on more than 200 federal grant programs in STEM education and found that three major goals of these programs were to: (a) attract and prepare students at all educational levels to pursue coursework in the STEM content areas; (b) prepare graduates to pursue careers in STEM fields; and (c) improve teacher education programs in the STEM content areas. Drawing upon these goals as the framework, the 15 chapters contained in Recruiting, Preparing, and Retaining STEM Teachers for a Global Generation highlight challenges and successes in K–16 educational settings. Several scholars received funding from the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Robert Noyce Scholars program, while some received funding from other agencies, to examine the recruitment, preparation, and retention of STEM teachers and educators in rural, urban, or international contexts. This volume is organized into three primary parts: (1) teacher recruitment in the STEM content areas, (2) teacher preparation in STEM education, and (3) STEM teacher mentoring and retention. The descriptions of each chapter are provided by part. We begin by summarizing the first four chapters in the book on teacher recruitment.

Part 1: Teacher Recruitment in the stem Content Areas In the volume’s first chapter by Leonard, Chamberlin, Aryana, Lazic and Even, preservice teachers’ self-efficacy in STEM and mastery experiences after a summer internship experience are discussed. Using journal entries and field notes to complete the Dimensions of Success Tool, participants (predominantly female, European-American undergraduate students in STEM disciplines) reported positive effects of the summer internship program. Specifically, participants generally suggested that the summer experience helped raise cognizance of areas of need in future elementary education preparation. In short, the summer internship was deemed valuable by participants. In the second chapter, Eli, McGraw, Anhalt, and Civil describe the work of the Arizona Mathematics Teaching (MaTh) Noyce Program that focuses on recruiting and preparing undergraduates who have expressed interest in secondary mathematics teaching. The purpose of the program is to help the undergraduates develop mathematically rich experiences for all students

viii

Preface

in grades 6–12, particularly those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. The program is a collaborative model involving a community of mathematics education faculty, undergraduates, teachers, and secondary mathematics students and their communities. In this chapter, the authors describe a collaborative model for providing opportunities for prospective secondary mathematics teachers to learn about and implement equitable teaching practices. They found three overarching themes influencing participants’ inclination to learn about and engage in equitable teaching practices through Noyce Program activities: (a) experiencing teaching opportunities; (b) building relationships; and (c) developing professional identities grounded in equity. The recruitment and retention of Black STEM teachers is a nation-wide challenge for the field of teacher education. In their chapter, Johnson, Dunleavy, and Joseph start to unpack the recruitment and retention challenges of Black teacher candidates into Vanderbilt’s Noyce STEM teacher education program. They share the analysis of lived-experience interviews from two Black teacher candidates who earned their STEM degrees from an HBCU (Fisk University) and then transitioned to a PWI (Vanderbilt University) to earn their Master’s degree in Education (M.Ed.). The analysis of their lived experiences revealed four themes: (a) the need for more visible partnerships between the HBCU and PWI; (b) the identification of mentors for scholar success; (c) the investigation for understanding Black teacher candidates as role models for their students; and (d) the institutionalized racism that still challenges Black teacher candidates at PWIs. These findings have implications for how programs situated within a PWI might consider the recruitment and retention of Black mathematics and science teachers. In the final chapter on STEM teacher recruitment, Ogodo, Irving, Brosnan, and Ding describe how teaching in urban high-need schools can be challenging for teachers, which is one major reason for high teacher turnover. Inadequate teacher enculturation can also contribute to high teacher attrition. The Empowering Noyce Apprenticeships by Leadership Engagement in STEM Teaching (ENABLE STEM) project is a study funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) that is designed to recruit students into the Master of Education program at The Ohio State University (OSU) with the goal of empowering them to become successful learners and productive innovators in STEM fields. OSU preservice teachers are prepared as quality teachers, empowered to rise and defy the challenges that prevent others from remaining in urban high-need schools. They are equipped to teach students effectively through a four pronged-focused and intensive teacher training program: (a) Urban Teaching Seminar; (b) informal teaching experience at the Center of Science and Industry; (c) science methods with scientists and science educators; and (d) leadership focused induction and mentoring.

Preface

ix

Part 2: Teacher Preparation in STEM Education In the first chapter of this part, Edwards, Williams, Kuhel and Epps describe how a professional development project engaged mathematics preservice teachers and teacher educators in an ongoing conversation about teaching culturally and linguistically diverse students enrolled in highneed schools. Qualitative research methods were employed to examine preservice teachers’ perspectives about the process of learning to teach culturally and linguistically diverse students and how their identities and cultural competence evolved as they progressed through five professional development workshops and a semester long clinical field experience in an urban high-need school. In the next chapter, White, Leonard, Chamberlin and Buss write about how high teacher turnover rates and teachers working out-of-field leave many children in rural and urban contexts without a highly-qualified teacher. The Robert Noyce Scholars program was instituted to address this problem in STEM education. The Wyoming Interns to Teacher Scholars (WITS) program was developed to increase the number of STEM teachers in rural K–6 settings. This chapter examines how professional development and other supports influenced self-efficacy in mathematics between two cohorts of Noyce scholars and the student teaching experiences of three Noyce scholars’ in mathematics. Results of the Mathematics Teaching Efficacy Belief Survey (MTEBI) were mixed. Preservice teachers’ self-efficacy and outcome expectancy scores were malleable but vacillated slightly over time. Male preservice teachers’ scores were higher than female preservice teachers’ scores on self-efficacy and outcome expectancy. However, observational data revealed strong evidence across all domains that focal student teachers’ mathematics lessons improved over time. Student teachers who attended professional development and incorporated supervisor’s feedback showed the most improvement. However, additional research that links professional development to advances in preservice teachers’ mathematical content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge is warranted. Campbell and Heller argue in their chapter that while the importance of teaching computational thinking has received national attention over the last decade, many educators continue to lack the understanding and awareness to implement computational thinking as a problem-solving framework in their daily instruction. In their mixed methods study, preservice teachers participated in Pop-Up Makerspace activities designed to introduce and explore computational thinking as a framework for problem solving. After determining the participants’ level of confidence teaching STEM-related content was lowest in problem-solving and engineering, the study examined how affective factors such as disposition and attitude were evident during the Pop-Up learning

x

Preface

experiences. In this study, educators demonstrated the affective traits of resilience, failure, persistence, and frustration. Each factor of computational thinking was observed during the design and making experience. The effects of participation in a Pop-Up Makerspace motivated the preservice teachers to incorporate these experiential learning experiences into their own teaching practices. In the next chapter, Ziols considers some of the complexities and challenges in STEM teacher education with respect to recruitment, preparation, and retention. First, STEM teacher education is considered from a “race-centered” political economy perspective. It is argued that a “race-centered” political economy perspective on STEM teacher education may provide an important lens for examining how both “traditional” and “alternative” teacher education programs approach issues of recruitment and preparation. Next, drawing from Rancièrean political theory, STEM teacher education is considered with a different sense of the political. Dropping retention concerns from teacher preparation program planning is provided as an example of a less familiar framing of the political that may offer alternative ways for approaching perennial and endemic issues in STEM teacher education. In the final chapter of the part, Irving, Pradhan and Nahar describe how the global community is engaged in educational reform to improve opportunities for young people in higher education and scientific research. The responsibility of science teacher educators extends to the preparation of world-class faculty in STEM disciplines at institutions of higher education (IHE). This chapter describes a highly intensive and innovative international dual-degree program designed to prepare world-class professors in STEM fields for colleges and universities. With about 150 million future students, some reports indicate that 50,000+ new colleges and universities are being formed in India. These new institutions of higher education need highly-qualified STEM faculty to train the next generation of leaders in STEM fields. A collaboration funded by the US-India Education Foundation (USIEF) between The Ohio State University (OSU) and the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) was established with the primary goal of exploring pathways to prepare the next generation of world-class STEM faculty for universities in India. Theoretical frameworks and logistical challenges are described.

Part 3: STEM Teacher Mentoring and Retention The final part of the book includes six chapters. The first three chapters focus on mentoring and induction, and the final three on retention. In the first chapter, Segura et al. examine how teaching that is oriented towards equity

Preface

xi

and social justice was co-constructed between two experienced high-school science teachers and their four student teachers. Using the lenses of structureagency dialectic and culturally responsive mentoring, along with case study design, we studied ways in which structures (e.g., curricular, pedagogical, material, symbolic, and programmatic) influenced, and were influenced by, the experienced teachers’ and their student teachers’ agency to conceptualize and enact such practices. The findings unpack the complicated nature of learning to teach science in ways that promote equity and social justice. The cooperating teachers’ mentoring was structured differently based on how each interpreted the structures impeding their students’ agency. Moreover, the student teachers constructed their cooperating teachers’ guidance differently, using their own agency to support student agency. Although the teachers and student teachers foregrounded specific dimensions of culturally responsive mentoring, other dimensions of the framework intermingled to inform and shape the practices of experienced and novice teachers. The major objective of the study described in Albert’s chapter is to document the experience of eight beginning teachers, eight experienced teachers, and six mathematicians participating in a professional learning community. The hallmark of the professional learning community is a two-way mentoring model, designed to incorporate content and pedagogical knowledge for teaching mathematics, whereby the beginning teachers have a mathematician and an experienced practicing teacher as mentors. Applying Vygotsky’s concept of sociocultural historic theory, the mentor-mentee relationship is examined through the lens of intersubjectivity. Findings suggest that the development of intersubjectivity can move the mentoring process ahead, where this relationship is characterized by achieving a common understanding of mathematical activities and ideas. In the next chapter, Barnes-Johnson, Aryana and Leonard report findings from a Noyce study on the internship experiences that supported STEM undergraduate students’ transition to elementary teaching in a rural, highneed context. The central research question addressed in this chapter is how can pre-professional mentoring and Noyce programs be used to support STEM majors to become equity-minded STEM educators? An underlying assumption embedded in this question is that teachers who espouse equity as a guiding principle for teaching will be more committed to teaching in high-need contexts, a requirement for participation in the Noyce scholarship program. This chapter reports on training experiences provided to Noyce scholars at various stages of commitment to the two- to three-year program. The identity development of a mentor and three interns were explicated as a cross-case study of a Noyce scholars’ program. The patterns of support that improved selfefficacy and cultivated equitable STEM teacher identity development may be

xii

Preface

used as a model for STEM teacher preparation programs in other high-need communities. In the first chapter focused on retention, Burrows describes a study that targeted degree holding STEM graduates to support licensure and induction in secondary science or mathematics. The project, entitled Sustaining Wyoming’s Advancing Reach in Mathematics and Science (SWARMS), provided the study’s pool of 24 participants. This chapter highlights the SWARMS chat room to document the study’s successes and challenges as well as the participants’ interactions. Throughout the four-year study (2014–2018), qualitative and quantitative data showed consistent chat room interactions, especially as these data relate to classroom activities. However, some of the participants used the chat room with more frequency and self-reflection than others. Based on responses in the chat room and via email communication, community was built among participants and their self-efficacy was enhanced. In the next chapter, Bartlett and Thompson provide the results of a qualitative longitudinal research study that followed 30 science and mathematics teachers across five cohorts from their preparation program into the early career years to better understand the conditions of professional retention and attrition. Findings indicate that the teachers exhibited little agency or discernment in the job search process and typically accepted the first position offered with little to no information about the school, students, colleagues, or teaching assignment. This decision has profound consequences for teacher turnover. Retention differences exist between teachers who choose their schools with robust information and those with very limited information. Furthermore, how and why teachers choose schools have profound consequences for their professional success and their persistence in high-need schools. This research study contends that professional retention of mathematics and science teachers in high-need schools starts with teacher articulation of workplace priorities and is coupled with a rich information hiring process. In the final chapter of the volume, Ellis shares findings from the Teacher Induction Network (TIN), a Noyce-sponsored online induction program that has operated continuously at the University of Minnesota for over 10 years and has supported over 200 beginning STEM teachers. Through a design-based research approach and a commitment to continual improvement, TIN has leveraged emerging technologies and innovative mentoring practices to provide support to science teachers across the nation who are in their first few years of classroom teaching. This chapter shares quantitative and qualitative research findings that describe participating teachers’ classroom experiences, evaluate the efficacy of mentoring supports provided through TIN for reformed STEM instruction, and highlight opportunities for future improvement and growth of not only the TIN program, but of STEM induction programs across the nation.

Preface

xiii

In summary, this edited volume fills a void in the literature on the recruitment, preparation, and retention of STEM teachers in a global society. In terms of recruitment, it is imperative to build trust and community to attract and support teacher candidates from underrepresented backgrounds (see Chapters 1, 3, 10, & 12). Additionally, it is important to support beginning teachers through chat room networks (see Burrows, this volume) and job searches (see Chapter 14) to reduce attrition. Teachers should be prepared to teach our most vulnerable children, while respecting their cultures and exhibiting an ethic of care that engages students in high-quality science and mathematics instruction (see Chapters 2, 4, 5, 6 & 7). While content is important in mathematics and science education, equitable instruction offers vulnerable students opportunities to learn and engage in STEM activities that have the power to improve the quality and substance of their lives by providing them with access to higher education and meaningful work that can allow them to give back to their communities (see Chapters 3, 8, & 10). Such opportunities begin with reforming teacher education (see Chapters 9 & 11) and transforming teachers to serve a higher sense of purpose for the public good. The chapters and recommendations in this volume add to the extant literature on STEM teacher recruitment, preparation, and retention in a global context by addressing the needs of K–12 students, preservice teachers, and teacher educators through transformative pedagogies.

References Ingersoll, R. M. (2008). A researcher encounters the policy realm: A personal tale. Phi Delta Kappan, 89(5), 369–371. Kuenzi, J. J. (2008). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: Background, federal policy, and legislative action. Retrieved from Congressional Research Service Reports, 35. http://www.digitalcommons.unl.edu/crsdocs/35 Leonard, J., Barnes-Johnson, J., Dantley, S. J., & Kimber, C. T. (2011). Teaching science inquiry in urban contexts: The role of elementary preservice teachers’ beliefs. The Urban Review, 43(1), 124–150. Leonard, J., Russell, N. M., Hobbs, R. M., & Buchanan, H. (2013). Using GIS to teach place-based mathematics in rural classrooms. The Rural Educator, 34(3), 10–17. U.S. Department of Education Office of Post-Secondary Education. (2013). Preparing and credentialing the nation’s teachers: The secretary’s ninth report on teacher quality. Washington, DC.

Acknowledgments We extend special thanks to Michel Lokhorst (formerly of Sense Publishers) for seeing the value in this edited volume and guiding us toward publication. We also thank our colleagues who submitted chapters and served as reviewers to make the manuscripts much stronger: Lillie Albert, Cynthia Anhalt, Saman Aryana, Joy Barnes-Johnson, Lora Bartlett, Brezhnev Batres, Diana Bonilla, Patti Brosnan, Alan Buss, Laurie, Campbell, Phil Cantor, Michelle Chamberlin, Scott Chamberlin, Marta Civil, Lin Ding, Teresa Dunleavy, Belinda Edwards, Jennifer Eli, Joshua Ellis, Adrian Epps, Anne Even, Angela Frausto, Samantha Heller, Karen Irving, Heather Johnson, Nicole Joseph, Karen Kuhel, Marina Lazic, Rebecca McGraw, Daniel Morales-Doyle, Sultana Nahar, Justina Ogodo, Anil Pradhan, Carolina Salinas, David Segura, Lynetta Gayden Thomas, Alisun Thompson, Maria Varelas, Dorothy White, Desha Williams, and Ryan Ziols. Finally, we acknowledge the National Science Foundation for supporting the research studies contained herein, as well as the administrators, teachers, and students who helped to make this work possible.

Figures and Tables Figures 1.1 1.2 1.3 2.1 4.1 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 7.1. 7.2 7.3 9.1 11.1 11.2 11.3 12.1 12.2. 15.1. 15.2.

Wind turbine. 24 Math lesson. 26 Girls and Wedo 2.0. 27 AZ Noyce MaTh program. 39 Triangular model of the urban teaching seminar. 81 smart Board work on fraction concepts. 147 Comparing fractions to whole numbers. 149 Student worksheet. 150 Tangram area model. 152 Partitioning and iterating (from Siebert & Gaskin, 2006). 154 Fractions and set models. 155 Computational Thinking Framework. 170 Participants working on Pop-Up Makerspace activities. 176 Knowledge wheel of computational thinking. 178 Logic model for the stem-ER program. 223 Four quadrants of two-way mentoring (adapted from Wilber, 1995, 1998). 273 Mentoring across the four quadrants. 278 Beginning mathematics teacher (mentee) as expert 279 Goldilocks’ bed: fabricated from cardboard. 310 EqSTrEAM educational responses to high-need contexts. 315 VideoANT screenshot of Edith (biology teacher). 373 Comparison of Year 7 (2012–13, n=333) and Year 8 (2013–14, n=282) Venture/Vexation posts by reflective level (Ellis, Polizzi et al., 2017). 378

Tables 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 4.1

Demographic data for summer interns. 11 Characteristics of interns in cohort 2. 11 Assignments by internship site. 12 Analyses of interns’ self-efficacy and interest in teaching (n=10). 16 Analysis of stem & knowledge practices (n=10). 19 Demographics and dimensions of success ratings of focal interns (n=4). 20 Cross-case analyses of interns by site. 21 Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (caep) Standards. 89

xvi 4.2

Figures and Tables

Sample disciplinary focused projects for the Reformed Science Methods Course and student comments. 91 4.3 stem teacher leadership sample elements. 95 6.1 Noyce scholar cohorts by race and gender. 140 6.2 Sample of noyce scholars by major and cohort. 141 6.3 Descriptive analyses of pre-post mtebi scores. 143 6.4 Descriptive analyses of spring mtebi scores by cohort. 144 6.5 Descriptive analyses of spring mtebi scores by gender. 144 6.6 Student teachers by stem background and grade level taught. 144 6.7 Dimensions of Success (DoS) ratings: Student teachers’ mathematics lessons. 145 7.1 Pop-up makerspaces examined in the study. 174 7.2 Confidence to teach science and engineering by gender. 177 7.3 Behavioral themes from the pop-up makerspace event. 179 7.4 Evidence of computational thinking behaviors in the pop-up makerspace. 180 7.5 Affective themes from the pop-up makerspace event. 181 9.1 Master of education program design. 224 9.2 Cohort 1 description. 226 9.3 Educational research topics for Cohort 1 fellows. 228 9.4 Science research topics for Cohort 1 fellows. 230 9.5 Apprenticeship undergraduate teaching assignments at amu, Autumn 2015. 232 9.6 Cohort 2 fellows. 233 9.7 Obama-Singh fellow progress. 234 9.8 Fellow achievement metrics. 235 11.1 Participants’ characteristics. 271 12.1 Demographic data for summer interns by cohort. 299 12.2 Noyce interns’ stem majors by cohort. 300 12.3 Description of subjects/journals authors. 301 13.1 Academic year 2016–2017 chat room information and response frequency. 336 14.1 Entry-year teacher hiring process information level and pattern of retention and attritiona. 353 14.2 Relationship between accepting first job offer and year 1 retention by information level. 357 15.1 Timeline of events in the venture/vexation activity for presenter and peers. 376

Notes on Contributors Lillie R. Albert (PhD) is an Associate Professor at Boston College Lynch School of Education. She teaches graduate and undergraduate courses in mathematics methods, problem solving, and qualitative research methods. Her research focuses on how sociocultural historic contexts influence mathematics learning across the lifespan, which includes the exploration of the relationships between teaching and learning of mathematics and the use of cultural and communicative tools to develop conceptual understanding of mathematics. Cynthia O. Anhalt (PhD) is an Associate Research Professor, Director of the Secondary Mathematics Education Program in the Department of Mathematics at The University of Arizona, and the Principal Investigator of the NSF AZ Noyce grant project on which this chapter is based. Her research focuses on teacher knowledge in mathematical modeling and preparing K–12 teachers for culturally diverse student populations, particularly with Latinx students. Saman A. Aryana (PhD) is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Chemical Engineering and an adjunct assistant professor in the Department of Mathematics and Statistics at the University of Wyoming. He serves as a co-principal investigator on the Wyoming Interns to Teacher Scholars (WITS)—a Robert Noyce Scholarship program. His research interests include macroscale models of multiphase flow in complex porous media, microfluidics, and mentorship in education. Joy Barnes-Johnson (PhD) has worked in assessment, curriculum design, professional development, adult basic education, and secondary science education over the span of her career. Founder of EMC2 Group, LLC, an educational consulting firm, she currently works as a high school science teacher and consultant for several STEM education and teacher training projects in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Wyoming. Lora Bartlett (PhD) is an Associate Professor of Education at the University of California, Santa Cruz. She studies schools as workplaces for teachers and the teacher labor market, including the transnational migration of teachers to meet labor market needs.

xviii

Notes on Contributors

Brezhnev Batres is pursuing a PhD in Mathematics and Science Education in the Curriculum and Instruction Department at the University of Illinois, Chicago. He is a veteran high school science teacher. His research interests include identity construction and culturally relevant approaches in science education. Diana Bonilla is a biology teacher at a southwest neighborhood high school in Chicago. She conducts teacher inquiry centered on developing culturally relevant and socially just biology lessons as a member of the University of Illinois Chicago’s Project SEEEC. Patti Brosnan (PhD) is an Associate Professor of Mathematics Education in the Department of Teaching and Learning at The Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio. Her research interests revolve around how students can learn mathematics and what we need to do to get that learning to happen, especially for students who struggle to learn in high-need schools. These learnings are shared with both preservice and in-service teachers to reach greater numbers of students. Andrea C. Burrows (EdD) is an Associate Professor in the School of Teacher Education at the University of Wyoming, where she teaches courses in science methods, pedagogy, and research. Her research interests include secondary STEM partnerships and engineering education specifically focused on preservice and in-service teachers, and she often employs action research as her methodology of choice. Alan Buss (PhD) is an Associate Professor in Elementary and Early Childhood Education at the University of Wyoming and teaches graduate and undergraduate courses in science and mathematics education, learning theory, and integrating technology in the classroom. His research focuses on meaningful integration of educational technologies to enhance students’ understanding of STEM, including Geographic Information Systems (GIS), LEGO robotics, computer gaming, and 3D visualization in immersive virtual reality environments. Laurie O. Campbell (EdD) is an Assistant Professor of STEM and Instructional Design and Technology at the University of Central Florida. She pursues with passion research related to STEM curriculum and STEM identity among underserved and underrepresented populations, personalized and active learning, and

Notes on Contributors

xix

exploring factors of computational thinking related to learning. The purpose and foundation of her interdisciplinary research includes the desire to improve education for all through instructional design and technology. Phillip Cantor has taught high school science for 15 years in Chicago and has been a member of the Teachers for Social Justice organization. He is committed to helping students take a critical view of the world in which they live and use scientific thinking to analyze and solve the problems they see around them. Michelle T. Chamberlin (PhD) is an Associate Professor of Mathematics Education in the Department of Mathematics and Statistics at the University of Wyoming. Her research interests include studying the effectiveness of mathematics coursework and professional development for prospective and practicing teachers. She has published in various journals including the Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, School Science and Mathematics, and Mathematics Teacher Education and Development. Scott A. Chamberlin (PhD) is Professor of Mathematics Education in the School of Teacher Education at the University of Wyoming. He has served as co-principal investigator on the Wyoming Interns to Teacher Scholars (WITS), Robert Noyce grant. His research interests include teacher education and gifted education. Marta Civil (PhD) is a Professor of Mathematics Education and the Roy F. Graesser Chair in the Department of Mathematics at The University of Arizona. Her research examines cultural, social, and language aspects in the teaching and learning of mathematics; connections between in-school and out-of- school mathematics; and parental engagement in mathematics. She has led funded projects working with children, parents, and teachers, with a focus on developing culturally responsive learning environments, particularly with Latinx communities. Lin Ding (PhD) is an Associate Professor of STEM Education in the Department of Teaching and Learning at The Ohio State University. Dr. Ding’s scholarly interests lie in discipline-based science education research. His work includes theoretical and empirical investigations of learners’ content learning, problem solving, reasoning skills, and epistemological development. Dr. Ding has been

xx

Notes on Contributors

leading or co-leading several federal and state projects sponsored by the National Science Foundation and the Ohio Department of Education. Teresa K. Dunleavy (PhD) is an Assistant Professor of the Practice of Mathematics Education in the Department of Teaching and Learning at Peabody College at Vanderbilt University. Her research interests are centered on analyzing equitable teaching and learning practices in mathematics classrooms and understanding students’ perspectives of their mathematics learning. She is interested in highlighting transformative practices for historically marginalized students, and in particular for Black girls. Belinda P. Edwards (PhD) is a Professor of Mathematics Education in the Department of Secondary and Middle Grades Education at Kennesaw State University. She teaches mathematics and secondary mathematics methods courses. Her research focuses on issues of equity and access in secondary mathematics education, as well as, preparing culturally and linguistically responsive secondary mathematics teachers. Jennifer A. Eli (PhD) is an Associate Professor of Mathematics Education in the Department of Mathematics at The University of Arizona. Dr. Eli’s research focuses on investigating the types of mathematical connections and teaching decisions teachers make when engaged in tasks of teaching, and examining ways to leverage Complex Instruction to support mathematicians, mathematics teacher educators, and K–12 teachers in their work with future teachers. Joshua A. Ellis (PhD) is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Teaching and Learning and the STEM Transformation Institute at Florida International University. His research interests include facilitating the development of preservice and in-service teachers’ reflective practice in online, blended, and face-to-face learning environments. He is also a former K–12 science teacher and he has continued to work as an instructor and mentor to beginning K–12 science teachers. Adrian Epps (EdD) is an Associate Dean in the College of Science and Mathematics and a Professor of Educational Leadership in the Department of Educational Leadership at Kennesaw State University.

Notes on Contributors

xxi

Anne Even is a workforce trainer at Central Wyoming College. She has served as the WITS/ Noyce program manager at CWC and worked closely with the WITS team at University of Wyoming to help them achieve their grant goals. Her interests include providing students with unique opportunities to explore career paths and connecting agencies to resources to meet staff and client outcomes. Angela Frausto is a teacher at a near northwest neighborhood school in Chicago. She has taught biology, chemistry, and environmental science, and her interests include providing an engaging and hands-on science education to all students. Samantha Heller is a PhD candidate in the Instructional Design and Technology program at the University of Central Florida. Her research focuses on active learning, computational thinking, and design-based research for improving training and education in K–12 learning environments. Karen E. Irving (PhD) is an Associate Professor in the School of Teaching and Learning at The Ohio State University. Dr. Irving is currently principal investigator on the ENABLE STEM project, a National Science Foundation Noyce project, as well as on the Engineering is Elementary Ohio 3: Leadership for 21st Century Learners project. She is also the former Chair of the Columbus Section of the American Chemical Society. Heather J. Johnson (PhD) is an Associate Professor of the Practice of Science Education in the Department of Teaching and Learning at Peabody College at Vanderbilt University. Her research explores supports for teacher learning and how these supports affect teacher practice and ultimately student learning. She is also the principal investigator of an NSF-funded Noyce Scholarship Program, entitled Mobilizing STEM Talent for STEM Teaching. Nicole M. Joseph (PhD) is an Assistant Professor of Mathematics and Science Education in the Department of Teaching and Learning at Peabody College at Vanderbilt University. Her research explores two lines of inquiry: Black women’s and girls’ identity development and experiences in mathematics and Whiteness, White Supremacy and how it operates in shaping Black women’s and girls’ underrepresentation in mathematics. She is the founder of the Tennessee

xxii

Notes on Contributors

March for Black Women in STEM, an event held every fall which seeks to promote community awareness. Richard Kitchen (PhD) is Professor and Wyoming Excellence in Higher Education Endowed Chair in Mathematics Education at the University of Wyoming. He is the author of one book, lead author of another book, the co-editor of two books, and initiated and served as a co-editor of the TODOS: Mathematics for All Research Monograph. His research interests include diversity and equity in mathematics education, school reform at urban schools that serve low-income students, and formative assessment of English language learners. Karen Kuhel (PhD) is an Associate Professor of TESOL in the Inclusive Education Department at Kennesaw State University (KSU). At KSU, she served as TESOL Graduate Program Coordinator and teaches ESOL courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels. She collaborates with colleagues in surrounding school districts and across the College of Education and university in the areas of ESOL, culturally and linguistically responsive teaching, and literacy for all P-12 students. Marina Lazic is a molecular biologist with a specialty in genetic engineering. She has served as a graduate assistant to collect and analyze data on Robert Noyce scholars as part of a National Science Foundation project. Ms. Lazic has also served as a teaching assistant for multiple courses, including Principles of Biochemistry, General Microbiology, and Pathogenic Microbiology at the University of Wyoming. Her research interests include promotion and development of active learning strategies in science classrooms. Jacqueline Leonard (PhD) is Professor of Mathematics Education in the School of Teacher Education at the University of Wyoming. She has served as the principal investigator on multiple National Science Foundation projects that include funding from Robert Noyce and Innovative Technology Experiences for Students and Teachers programs. Her research interests include computational thinking, culturally specific pedagogy, and equitable STEM practices. Rebecca H. McGraw (PhD) began her professional career as a high school mathematics teacher and joined the faculty at The University of Arizona in 2002. Dr. McGraw

Notes on Contributors

xxiii

teaches both mathematics and methods courses for future middle and high school teachers, leads professional development programs for K–12 teachers, and conducts research on secondary student learning and teacher education. She is currently engaged in the study of teacher development of equitable instructional practices. Daniel Morales-Doyle (PhD) is an Assistant Professor of Science Education in the Department of Curriculum & Instruction at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC). His work seeks to confront inequity in science education as a component of systems of oppression and to leverage science teaching and learning towards justice and sustainability. Prior to working at UIC, Daniel was a high school teacher in the Chicago Public Schools for more than a decade. Sultana N. Nahar (PhD) is an atomic astrophysicist in the Astronomy Department of The Ohio State University. Her research interest is in the atomic processes in astrophysical plasmas and developing new methodologies. She is a member of The Iron Project and The Opacity Project, and since 1995, she has been involved in the promotion of STEM education and research in developing countries. Currently, Dr. Nahar is the director of the Women in STEM Roadshow program, which is sponsored by the U.S. State Department Mission to India. Justina Ogodo (PhD) is a Post-Doctoral Researcher in STEM Education in the Department of Teaching and Learning at The Ohio State University. Her research focuses on science curriculum and instruction, STEM teacher PCK, urban education, and culturally responsive teaching. Dr. Ogodo uses her instructional and leadership experience in STEM education to provide preservice teachers with effective tools that prepare them for the profession. Anil K. Pradhan (PhD) has been a member of The Ohio State University faculty since 1989. He works primarily on theoretical multi-wavelength spectroscopy and astrophysics. Dr. Pradhan was the principal investigator on the Indo-US 21st Century Knowledge Initiative STEM Education and Research Faculty Training Program: Global Strategy for Higher Education in the 21st Century. Carolina Salinas is a high school science teacher at an International Baccalaureate school. She teaches on the northwest side of Chicago, which is near where she grew up. She

xxiv

Notes on Contributors

now serves as a teacher in the public school system she attended since during preschool. David Segura (PhD) is an Assistant Professor of Education and Youth Studies at Beloit College and a former high school science teacher. His research interests include how social capital and science identity empower or limit students’ opportunities to succeed in science. Lynette Gayden Thomas is a chemistry teacher at a neighborhood school on Chicago’s south side and a member of the University of Illinois, Chicago’s Project SEEEC. She is passionate about assisting students of color to pursue STEM-related careers, as well as empowering women to fight for equal rights in an unjust system. Alisun Thompson (PhD) is an Assistant Professor of Education in the Department of Teacher Education at Lewis & Clark Graduate School of Education and Counseling. Her research examines the contours of the teacher workforce and the conditions that attract, support, and retain teachers in high-need schools. Maria Varelas (PhD) is a Professor of Science Education in the University of Illinois Chicago’s Department of Curriculum & Instruction. She has taught undergraduate and graduate students for over 25 years, co-led various collaborations and funded projects, and studied science learning and identity construction in urban K–12 and college science education contexts exploring equity-oriented curricular, instructional, and teacher education practices. Dorothy Y. White (PhD) is an associate professor of mathematics education in the College of Education at the University of Georgia. Her research focuses on equity and culture in mathematics education and strength-based professional learning communities. She teaches undergraduate and graduate mathematics education courses and provides professional development in mathematics for classroom teachers and coaches. She has served on several NSF grants and currently serves on the Board of Directors for the Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators. Desha Williams (PhD) is the Department Chair of the Department of Teacher Education and Professor of Mathematics Education at Georgia College and State University.

Notes on Contributors

xxv

She is dedicated to preparing teachers for culturally and linguistically diverse students, as well as, students with various exceptionalities. Dr. Williams is a native Georgian who is committed to improving education in urban, suburban, and rural communities. Ryan Ziols is a Doctoral Candidate in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His research focuses on the cultural politics of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education.

PART 1 Teacher Recruitment in the STEM Content Areas

∵

CHAPTER 1

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars into Elementary Education Jacqueline Leonard, Scott Chamberlin, Saman A. Aryana, Marina Lazic and Anne Even

Abstract In this qualitative study, preservice teachers’ self-efficacy in STEM and mastery experiences are discussed after a summer internship experience. Using journal entries and field notes to complete the Dimensions of Success Tool (Noah, Shah, & Larson, 2014) participants (predominantly female, EuropeanAmerican undergraduate students in STEM disciplines) reported positive effects of the summer internship program. Specifically, participants generally suggested that the summer experience helped raise cognizance of areas of need in future elementary education preparation. In short, the summer internship was deemed valuable by participants.

Keywords elementary education – recruitment – self-efficacy – STEM, internships

Introduction Preservice teachers with disaffection for mathematics or science are less likely to enter the field of education (Darling-Hammond, 2000), and if they do become teachers, they are more likely to avoid teaching these subjects (Leonard, Barnes-Johnson, Dantley, & Kimber, 2011). To address the need for highly qualified teachers1 in elementary classrooms (U.S. Department of Education, 2013), the authors conducted a study to examine the recruitment and retention of undergraduate dual STEM and elementary education majors. Undergraduates from natural science, engineering, mathematics, biology, geology, and zoology completed a degree in STEM along with certification in elementary education. The purpose of the Wyoming Interns to Teacher Scholars (WITS) program © koninklijke brill nv, leideN, 2019 | DOI: 10.1163/9789004399990_001

4

Leonard et al.

was to increase the number of STEM majors interested in teaching. In order to recruit prospective teachers into the program, we offered summer internships to expose potential scholars to informal STEM instruction in a variety of settings, including STEM camps. The data reported on the internships are part of a larger five-year Robert Noyce Scholars project funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) to increase the number and quality of teachers of mathematics and science who are committed to serving high-need students in rural elementary schools. Specific benefits of the five-year project included: (a) full tuition, housing assistance, textbooks, and digital tablets; (b) mentoring by STEM faculty and graduate students; (c) professional development opportunities; and (d) social activities. This chapter focuses on the Year 2 internship and how it influenced summer interns’ self-efficacy, interest in teaching, and student engagement during summer camps focused on STEM.

Theoretical Framework The theoretical framework that undergirds this study is self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1997). Self-efficacy theory is critical to developing the skills needed to be a highly-qualified teacher. Bandura (1977) developed what is now known as self-efficacy theory, which connects the predictive value of an event’s success to the confidence that one has to perform it. Efficacy beliefs have tremendous influence over the course of action individuals may take, the amount of effort they will expend, how long they will persevere when challenged, how much stress they will experience, and the level of success they will reach (Bandura, 1997). Bandura identified two factors that affect teacher efficacy: personal efficacy and outcome expectancy. When applied to teaching, personal selfefficacy is defined as perceived judgment about one’s ability to teach (Newton, Leonard, Evans, & Eastburn, 2012). Outcome expectancy is “a person’s estimate that a given behavior will lead to certain outcomes” (Bandura, 1977, p. 193). In addition to the constructs of personal efficacy and outcome expectancy, Bandura (1997) contended that four factors influence self-efficacy: mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion, and affective states. Mastery experiences are those prospective teachers may obtain from actual practice in formal and informal settings. Vicarious experiences are shaped by observing appropriate teacher behavior. In the field, such experiences might be gained through assisting a teacher in a lesson. Verbal persuasion comes about when someone with significant experience in teaching offers encouragement or praise, which reinforces one’s ability to teach. Finally, affective states, such as positive or negative feelings about teaching experiences, influence personal

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

5

efficacy and outcome expectancy (Flores, 2015). In this study, all four factors were evident during the internship in Year 2: mastery through opportunities to engage students in learning activities; vicarious experiences through observation of master teachers in the field; verbal persuasion in terms of feedback from field supervisors and WITS Noyce project staff; and affective states in terms of intrinsic (i.e., job satisfaction, positive student or teacher relationships, etc.) and extrinsic rewards (i.e., stipends, housing, meals, etc.).

Background of the Study While literature on teacher recruitment is often focused on “financial and human capital incentives to recruit and retain high quality teachers,” some studies stress “teacher recruitment and retention by focusing on relationships and the interchange of social capital” (Baker-Doyle, 2010, p. 2). Thus, a social network perspective that seeks to understand the role of working conditions such as the flow of information, sharing resources, and general support may be more salient in recruitment and retention efforts (Baker-Doyle, 2010; Bischoff, French, & Schaumloffel, 2014; Djonko-Moore, 2016). We focused on three areas in the literature that highlight the importance of using social networks to recruit, prepare, and retain STEM teachers: (a) successful STEM preparation programs; (b) self-efficacy in STEM teaching; and (c) varied field-based experiences (i.e., summer school programs, summer camps, and informal learning environments, such as museums and tours etc.). Successful stem Preparation Programs Preparing teachers from diverse backgrounds (i.e., racial, gender, ethnic, and geographic) with caring dispositions (Cochran-Smith, 2004) and STEM expertise is necessary to equalize educational opportunities for Title 1 students (Leonard et al., 2011; Shah et al., 2013). Several programs have been implemented to facilitate the recruitment, preparation, and retention of diverse teachers, which is a major goal of this Noyce project. Beginning in 2005, the Urban Teacher Education Program (UTEP) was implemented at a university in the Midwest to foster “a professional learning community that recruit[ed] mostly teacher candidates of color…with urban life experiences” (Waddell & Ukpokodu, 2012, p. 16). Students were provided with financial support that included tuition, housing, and books. The UTEP program had an 88% retention rate from 2005 to 2011 for graduates teaching in urban school communities. Another program that has had some success is the Sherman STEM Teacher Scholars program. Instituted at the University of Maryland Baltimore County

6

Leonard et al.

(UMBC) in 2007, the goals of the Sherman Scholars program were to increase the number of “STEM students in the Pre-K-12 teacher education pipeline” and to fill the critical teacher shortage in Maryland (Hrabowski & Sanders, 2015, p. 111). Key components of the Sherman Scholars program were: (a) developing a community of teachers; (b) hosting a summer bridge program to prepare candidates; (c) academic, professional, and personal advising, coaching, and mentoring; and (d) summer internships in different academic settings under the guidance of teacher-mentors. This program has been successful in recruiting, preparing, and retaining preservice teachers in STEM education. At the State University of New York (SUNY) College at Oneonta, 22 undergraduate students from rural and suburban backgrounds were recruited into a Noyce scholars program in 2009 to obtain certification in science education with the goal of teaching in New York City (NYC) (Bischoff, French, & Schaumloffel, 2014). Noyce scholars participated in content courses, field trips to NYC to explore the subway and cultural venues, and school placements at host schools for week long internships. After the internship, 16 (73%) Noyce scholars showed a commitment to becoming an urban teacher in NYC. However, none of these studies focused on training STEM majors to teach K-6 students in rural contexts, like the study presented in this chapter. Building Self-Efficacy in stem Teaching Self-efficacy is important in the teaching profession and has been studied at length in teacher education (Bandura, 1997; Flores, 2015; Leonard et al., 2011; Morrell & Carroll, 2003; Newton et al., 2012; Parajes, 1992). Researchers contend that teachers with high self-efficacy are more enthusiastic, have greater commitment to the field, and are willing to work longer with students who struggle than peers with low self-efficacy (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2007). Self-efficacy is more than self-confidence. It is a construct to explain “how a person cognitively processes and interprets environmental influences and how certain patterns of behavior are acquired and sustained” (Flores, 2015, p. 3). According to Bandura (1997), it is a two-fold belief that one can successfully perform an activity (personal efficacy) and as a result, others will learn (outcome expectancy). These two constructs are often discussed separately in the literature since some efficacy scales such as the Science Teacher Efficacy Belief Instrument (STEBI) (Enochs & Riggs, 1990) and the Mathematics Teacher Efficacy Belief Instrument (MTEBI) (Enochs, Smith, & Huinker, 2000) measure these two constructs separately, and outcome expectancy is often lower than personal efficacy (Leonard et al., 2011; Newton et al., 2012). Self-efficacy in science and mathematics is critical at the elementary level as young students develop cognitive skills in these subjects and misconceptions

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

7

can easily be formed. The ability to move beyond the textbook and engage students in hands-on, inquiry-based learning has the potential to improve teacher efficacy (Czerniak & Schriver, 1994; Newton et al., 2012). “An inquiry-based learning environment is one in which learning science is viewed in terms of processes through which students act as scientists, creating, designing, and conducting their own scientific investigations and communicating their findings to their peers” (Avery & Meyer, 2012, p. 396). In one study, Avery and Meyer (2012) engaged 34 preservice elementary teachers in an inquiry-based science course to improve their self-efficacy in science teaching. Results show 70% of the preservice teachers’ efficacy increased while 30% decreased on a survey known as the Inquiry Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument (ISTEBI) (MaKinster, 2000). For those preservice teachers’ whose scores dropped, the authors realized the importance of nurturing prospective teachers who may not have had authentic science experiences themselves. For these prospective teachers, teaching inquiry-based science was more difficult and thus worsened rather than enhanced their self-efficacy. In a second study on inquiry-based science teaching, elementary preservice teachers’ self-efficacy scores on the STEBI improved or remained unchanged (Leonard et al., 2011). However, prospective teachers’ beliefs about student learning as a result of their teaching declined. This finding reveals the need to inform prospective teachers that teaching for understanding through inquiry-based practices requires patience and persistence as positive student outcomes are not always immediate. Similarly, a study of elementary preservice teachers in a mathematics methods course found a positive moderate relationship between content knowledge and personal teaching efficacy but no relationship between content knowledge and teacher outcome expectancy (Newton et al., 2012). The study revealed that knowing the content does not mean preservice teachers believe students can learn the content as a result of their efforts. Given preservice teachers’ limited contact with students, mastery experiences such as internships and field experiences become critical to improving teacher efficacy. A key component of the study reported here was providing opportunities for Noyce interns to work with students in less threatening, informal learning environments where they could engage in authentic practices and experience the wonder of students’ inquisitive nature. The Influence of Field-Based Experiences Field experiences have long been associated with bridging the gap between theory and practice (Capraro, Capraro, & Helfeldt, 2010). Field experience is particularly critical for elementary teachers who are not convinced of their own science teaching capabilities (Avery & Meyer, 2012; Leonard et al., 2011).

8

Leonard et al.

Historically, educators and researchers have touted the importance of field experiences on prospective teachers’ development of content knowledge, pedagogy, and self-efficacy (Charalambous, Philippou, & Kyriakides, 2008; Dewey, 1965; Flores, 2015; Newton et al., 2012). However, Capraro et al. (2010) suggested that not all field experiences are equal and conducted a study to examine the influence of three different types of field experiences on preservice teachers’ perceived competence. They contended “teacher preparation programs must recognize that more systematically structured, intensive field experiences involving reflection and inquiry that link theories and personal learning experiences are necessary” (Capraro et al., 2010, p. 134). The study participants included 134 elementary education majors. They were placed in three different types of field settings: control, Professional Development School (PDS), and inquiry. All students had similar training and completed the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) Survey that was aligned with ten INTASC standards (Foster, Schverak, & Jacobs, 2001). The results of a t-test revealed the inquiry group had higher mean scores with smaller variance compared to the control and PDS groups. Furthermore, the inquiry group believed they were better prepared than the control (on two of four INTASC standards) and the PDS (on three of four INTASC standards) groups. However, as previously stated, inquiry-based field experiences do not necessary improve preservice teachers’ self-efficacy (Avery & Meyer, 2012). Flores (2015) conducted a study on self-efficacy and field-based science teaching practices at the elementary level. The purpose of the study was to address “the need for field-based preservice teacher preparation coupled with authentic practice to build confidence for teaching” and the need for children to engage in inquiry-based activities to learn science (Flores, 2015, p. 2). Thirty undergraduate preservice teachers participated in field placements as part of a science methods course that consisted of topics on physical, life, and earth sciences. The course focused on both science content and pedagogical practices. The preservice teachers completed the STEBI-B prior to and after taking the course. Results of a t-test revealed a significant difference when pre-post STEBI-B scores were compared. While personal science teaching efficacy (PSTE) scores increased significantly from pretest to posttest, there was no significant difference when science teaching outcome expectancy scores (STOE) were compared, although scores increased slightly from pretest to posttest. These results are similar to previous findings (Leonard et al., 2011; Newton et al., 2012). Nevertheless, the Flores (2015) study suggests that after completing a science methods course with site-based field experience, preservice teachers’ personal efficacy is malleable.

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

9

Similarly, summer camps and internships provide novice teachers with excellent settings to learn science. Internships in summer camps provide undergraduates with valuable opportunities to grow through shadowing mentors, attending meetings, and performing teacher-related duties (Borgerding, 2015). Learning to teach science in informal summer camps allows preservice teachers to develop pedagogy in a context where inquiry is a natural part of the learning environment. For undergraduate students who are exploring college majors and career choices, an internship can help them to become aware of their potential and realize their strengths. Borgerding (2015) conducted a study using science education summer internships to provide authentic practice settings for STEM majors (i.e., Noyce scholars) considering teaching as a profession. However, case studies of five participants revealed mixed results as two Noyce scholars exhibited an increased interest after the summer internship, while two expressed marginal interest, and one indicated reduced interest. As a concluding remark, it could be postulated that becoming more acquainted with the rigors of the classroom, in some instances, decreased preservice teachers’ self-efficacy as the field experience unfolded. This may not suggest that their confidence to teach has lessened per se. Instead, the change in self-efficacy may be a result of more familiarity with the challenges associated with teaching. All of the aforementioned field-based studies informed the current Noyce study, which used different types of summer internships to recruit Noyce scholars into teaching. Research Questions This study focused on the Year 2 cohort of 10 Noyce summer interns. The internship offered an opportunity to work for two weeks in one or two different settings. The following questions guided this research study on STEM internships: 1. How did the field-based experiences influence the Noyce interns’ efficacy beliefs and interest in teaching STEM? 2. How did Noyce interns engage student participants in STEM, and how did student engagement compare and contrast across internship sites? Method We used qualitative methods to conduct this research study by employing thick descriptions of informal learning environments to understand the learning context (Creswell, 1998). Specifically, the case study methodology was used to examine changes in the intern’s self-efficacy and to rate their STEM practices. Case studies are used primarily for deep examinations of processes that emerge from phenomena, providing critical data that are often overlooked in quantitative analyses (Bogdan & Biklen, 2006). In this study, we examined cases from

10

Leonard et al.

two perspectives. First, aggregate data on all of the interns were analyzed to find themes and patterns. Second, four individual cases were examined to determine how these interns engaged students in STEM during their internships. Role of the Researchers The researchers in this study were STEM educators and STEM content experts at the University of Wyoming and staff at one of the state’s seven community colleges. They had expertise in the following areas: chemical engineering, mathematics, microbiology, and workforce education. The research team was also diverse with faculty from the following backgrounds: African American (n=1), East Asian (n=2), and European American (n=2); females (n=3) and males (n=2). The research team reviewed 20 applications for the Year 2 summer internship. While, the majority of the applicants for summer internship were White females, this was not representative of the diversity of Noyce scholars at the end of Year 2: African American (15.4%), Two or more races (15.4%), White (69.2%); females (54%); males (46%). Sample We targeted biology, chemistry, geology, pre-engineering, mathematics, education, and undeclared majors at nearby community colleges and a four-year land-grant university who had completed their freshman or sophomore year. We used a rubric to evaluate the applicants, who were judged on the basis of their essay, GPA, references, and intended major. We accepted 15 scholars, but five withdrew prior to beginning the internship due to conflicts and other commitments. Table 1.1 shows demographic data to further describe these interns, and Table 1.2 provides more details on their educational background. The demographic data revealed 80% of the interns identified as White and 90% were female. In general, males are underrepresented in elementary education, but were well represented in the WITS project as a whole. There was one male from Wyoming who participated in the summer internship. Three students (30%) identified as racial or ethnic minorities. Student characteristics reveal three of the interns were elementary education majors, one majored in psychology, another majored in biology, one majored in forensics/anthropology, and three interns majored in geology/ earth science or environmental science (see Table 1.2). One intern had not declared a major. Thus, five of the interns were science majors and four were social science majors. If they were to become Noyce scholars, the elementary majors would have to choose a STEM major, and the STEM majors would have to add elementary education to become dual majors. The minimum GPA requirement to become a Noyce scholar in the WITS program was 2.50. The GPAs for this cohort of interns ranged from 2.77 to 4.00.

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

11

table 1.1  Demographic data for summer interns

Demographics

Cohort 2

Race/Ethnicity  Asian American  Black  Hispanic/Latinoa  Native American  White  Two or more races Gender  Female  Male Total Interns

0 0 1 1 8 1 9 1 10

a Hispanic/Latino is an ethnicity; individuals are also listed by their racial identifijication. Thus, the subtotal does not equal the total number of students. table 1.2  Characteristics of interns in cohort 2

Intern ID

Major

GPA

S1.16 S2.16 S3.16 S4.16 S5.16 S6.16 S7.16 S8.16 S9.16 S10.16

Undeclared Biology Elementary Education Forensics/Anthropology Geology/Earth Science Psychology Elementary Education Environmental Science Geology/Earth Science Elementary Education

3.86 3.76 4.00 3.20 2.89 3.17 3.00 3.16 2.77 3.24

Setting The Noyce interns selected one or two sites for a two-week internship in 2016. The summer settings consisted of working at (a) a natural science camp, (b) an energy camp, (c) a summer school enrichment, (d) a robotics/game design camp, or (e) a state park (See Table 1.3). The assignments ranged from tutoring

Assist students with environmental science lessons Assist with lesson plans on energy; present a lesson related to energy

Assist students with reading, math, and science tasks Assist students with LEGO EV3 robotics and Scalable Game Design Conduct guided tours through an underground cave

Natural science camp Energy camp

Summer school enrichment

a Two interns had two placements each.

State park

Robotics/Game Design camp

Job description

Internship site

table 1.3  Assignments by internship site

Wyoming

Pennsylvania

August 8–13, 2016

June 20–July 2, 2016

June 6–July 29, 2016

July 5–11, 2016

Wyoming

Wyoming

June 12–17, 2016

Dates

Wyoming

Location

5–65

8–11

6–12

14–16

12–15

Age of participants

2

1

6

1

2

Number of internsa

12 Leonard et al.

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

13

elementary students in the core subjects of reading, mathematics, and/or science to conducting tours and spelunking at a state park. The settings where the interns worked provided a range of opportunities to engage rural students in STEM. The majority of these settings were in rural Wyoming. However, one of the interns desired an urban setting and was able to work with an affiliate institution in Pennsylvania. Demographics2 show 73,088 students were enrolled in Wyoming schools in fall 2016. The student population was predominantly White (72.4%). Hispanic/Latinx students (17.9%) were the largest ethnic minority group and Native American students were the largest racial minority group (3.3%) in Wyoming. In the 2015–16 academic year, demographics3 for 5,094 students in a suburban Pennsylvania school district revealed a population that was predominantly African American (91%) with White (3.8%) and Hispanic/Latinx (2.1%) students as the next two largest groups. Data Sources Qualitative data sources were used to answer the research questions posed in this study. These data sources consisted mainly of the interns’ journals, some of which included photographs of the interns and the students. The journals were open-ended and consisted of the primary record of the STEM activities performed during the summer internships. The other main source of data included field notes of site visits and observations of the interns’ engagement with students at each of the sites. We observed and recorded field notes for the entire STEM lesson, which lasted on average 30–40 minutes. Transcripts of lessons and photos of student engagement often accompanied the field notes, which were used to complete the Dimensions of Success (DoS) observation tool (Noam, Shah, & Larson, 2014). The DoS consisted of 12 dimensions to rate the interns’ instructional practices and engagement with students. The DoS dimensions may be grouped into two categories: learning environment and student learning outcomes (Noam, Shah, & Larson, 2014). Student learning outcomes may be further divided into three domains: (a) Activity Engagement, (b) STEM and Knowledge Practices, and (c) Youth Development. Data Collection and Procedures Because the interns did not share the same kinds of experiences, we chose not to use survey data to measure self-efficacy. Rather we examined the interns’ journals for statements that indicated one or more factors related to teacher efficacy: (a) mastery and (b) vicarious experiences, (c) persuasion, and/or (d) affective state (Bandura, 1997). Every intern was required to maintain a journal, which was collected and analyzed for themes and patterns related to

14

Leonard et al.

self-efficacy. No prompts were given to allow each intern to reflect and record details that were of interest and relative to his/her internship. The journals were read by the Principal Investigator, a Co-Principal Investigator, and a graduate research assistant. Standard open-coding procedures (Glaser, 1978) and the constant comparison method (Strauss & Corbin, 1990) determined themes and patterns that exhibited one or more factors related to self-efficacy. In addition to self-efficacy, the DoS tool was used to rate the interns’ instruction at their respective sites. Each intern was observed at least twice during his/her two-week internship. The Principal Investigator, who was DoS certified, rated each intern on 12 dimensions using a 4-point rubric, “where 1 indicates little evidence and 4 indicates strong evidence of quality in that dimension” (Papazian, Noam, Shah, & Rufo-McCormick, 2013, p. 20). Given our research questions, only the second domain, which is related to STEM practices, will be reported in this chapter.

Results The results of this study are presented in two parts to address the research questions. The first section deals with the development of the summer interns’ self-efficacy and interest in teaching. The second section reports on the Noyce interns’ STEM teaching practices as well as their ability to engage children in purposeful STEM activities. Influence of Summer Internships on Self-Efficacy and Interest We used open coding to analyze the interns’ journals to find themes and patterns related to low- and high-efficacy. The analysis revealed five distinct themes that were represented by dichotomous codes: affective states; enhanced or diminished self-efficacy; interactions with students, instructors, or staff; interest or lack of interest in teaching elementary school; and engagement in the planning process. Expressions such as awesome experience, excited, and amazing gave rise to the theme of affective states. Statements such as “I started to realize with each day that the key to leading a good [session], was to be relaxed, and to have confidence in myself”; and “…I was awesome and was a great teacher” were captured in the improved or diminished selfefficacy theme. Statements such as “I was able to make great connections with many of the students”; “…the teacher wouldn’t really let me help”; “Working with [the instructor] was a lot of fun”; and “some of the staff should be a little nicer to the kids and staff… .” gave rise to the categories related to interactions with students, instructors, and staff. Expressions such as “I cannot wait

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

15

to get my degree and start teaching” and “I really want to be a teacher, maybe not in math” were indicative of the interest in teaching theme. Finally, a common theme that emerged from the journals was engagement in planning and implementation of STEM lessons. Example statements for this theme include: “…it didn’t seem like I am necessarily needed there”; and “I would like to be included in what is taught ahead of time.” After finding the themes, we categorized some of the entries interns made in their journals as low-efficacy (LE) or high-efficacy (HE) statements. We also assessed their level of interest in teaching grades K-6. Examples of LE and HE statements are shown in Table 1.4 along with interns’ interest in teaching at the elementary level. As shown in Table 1.4, analyses of the journal entries reveal that six (60%) of the interns made low-efficacy (LE) statements near the beginning of their internship experience. Four of these interns used words such as “nervous” or “unsettling” to describe their apprehension. Three voiced concerns about challenges related to the content, students, or the context using words such as “difficult” and “labor-intensive.” Two interns expressed a desire for more information and two wanted to be more involved in teaching. In terms of highefficacy (HE) statements made near the end of the internship, all 10 interns made HE statements about their overall experience. Eight interns made HE statements directly related to teaching such as “I want to be a teacher”; and “Those kids made me want to teach much more.” Other statements related to affective states: “I am so excited; I loved working with the third graders”; and “I enjoyed each day… .” Analyses by type of efficacy statements reveal the interns had more HE (i.e., “After camp, I felt a lot of more comfortable in holding students accountable to the rules and standards”) than LE statements (i.e., “I was super nervous about starting my first day”). However, most statements fell into the categories of mastery experiences and affective states. Interestingly, verbal persuasion came from the students of one intern: “Kids were telling me that I am an awesome and great teacher.” The data also revealed that supervising teachers could do more to encourage novice teachers by allowing them to have more responsibility: “The teacher really wouldn’t let me help until her other helper was gone.” All of the interns made affirmative affective statements at the conclusion of the internships: “Having this experience made me so excited to be a teacher.” Thus, the summer internships had a positive impact on all of the interns. In analyzing the interns’ journals for interest in teaching elementary school, we found that two interns had little to no interest, two had moderate interest, and six had high interest in teaching elementary students after completing the internship. However, the two who had little to no interest in elementary

Evidence of low efffijicacy (LE)

Working with children with disabilities was very difffijicult; I defijinitely don’t want to work with elementary school children.

I would like to be a little more included in what is taught ahead of time so I wasn’t completely in dark with some things. I learned a lot of the same things as the kids learned as I had no idea what the SCAR community was coming from the east coast.

I was very nervous in the beginning. Maybe not (teaching) in math because I don’t have my times table down, and they do in fourth grade and up.

Intern ID

S1.16

S2.16

S3.16

table 1.4  Analyses of interns’ self-efffijicacy and interest in teaching (n=10)

I enjoyed each day and I was able to make great connections with many of the students. I had a great time because I had a chance to be with students out of classroom. When the activities were more interactive, the kids seemed to get more out it, compared to straight classroom learning. The leadership and community from the stafff was great, and they were excellent people to shadow. I loved the experience and would do it again, but I would defijinitely prefer teaching older kids. Work like this really cemented that I want to be a teacher. I found that if children don’t want to do something, if you ask them nicely and tell them it would be a big favor, they tend to do as you ask.

Evidence of high efffijicacy (HE)

High interest (K-3)

(cont.)

No interest

No interest

Interest in teaching K-6

16 Leonard et al.

Evidence of low efffijicacy (LE)

This was a very labor–intensive internship.

This was my fijirst experience teaching, so I was learning just as much as the students I was teaching.

Leading a tour through this cave by myself with just one other intern was a thought that was very unsettling to me at the start of the week.

I was super nervous about starting my fijirst day and meeting teachers and kiddos.

Intern ID

S4.16

S5.16

S6.16

S7.16

Work that was done here was fun and fulfijilling. I would highly recommend this internship for people who want to be STEM or education. This internship allowed us…to see amazing work that you can do when you combine science and education. I loved working with the third grade. After camp, I felt a lot of more comfortable in holding students accountable to the rules and standards that school and society holds for them. Working with these kids was certainly my favorite part of this entire experience. I really enjoyed being able to help these kids to work out their diffferences and encourage them to work together. This experience made me realize how much I do enjoy working with elementary-aged students. I made so many connections with students, it was hard for me to leave. Kids were telling me that I am awesome and great teacher. Those kids made me want to teach much more. I cannot wait to get my degree and start teaching. I am so excited.

Evidence of high efffijicacy (HE)

table 1.4  Analyses of interns’ self-efffijicacy and interest in teaching (n=10) (cont.)

High interest

High interest

High interest

High interest

(cont.)

Interest in teaching K-6

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

17

Going into the week I was a little nervous because it didn’t seem like I am necessarily needed. There were many times when I didn’t know what exactly was happening, where I need to be and to whom to talk to solve problems. I believe I would have had a better experience if I had…more contact with graduate students before so I can assist in creating lesson plans. I would have felt more useful and involved. The teacher really wouldn’t let me help until her other helper was gone.

S8.16

S10.16

S9.16

Evidence of low efffijicacy (LE)

Intern ID

Working in equation station was really fun, and I learned new games. During the internship, we went on the fijield trip which was awesome. I really liked being a part of this group and got along with the teachers and loved their stories.

I was paired with the science teacher and everything seemed to be going great. Overall, I want to do this again. It was awesome and the other teachers helped me. Having this experience made me so excited to be a teacher. I just loved this experience. It was great to watch students engineer the project that would be successful in the wind. I believe this internship was a great experience overall.

Evidence of high efffijicacy (HE)

table 1.4  Analyses of interns’ self-efffijicacy and interest in teaching (n=10) (cont.)

Moderate interest

High interest

Moderate interest

Interest in teaching K-6

18 Leonard et al.

19

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

teaching were interested in teaching high school. Three of the ten interns in the summer cohort applied and were accepted as Noyce scholars, and one was already a scholar, but completed the internship to gain teaching experience. Interns’ stem Knowledge and Practices We used the Dimensions of Success (DoS) observation tool to rate the interns’ STEM practices. Recall that a four-point rubric was used to rate each DoS dimension from weak (1) to strong (4). Although at least two lessons were observed and rated, we report on a single lesson taught near the end of the WITS participants’ internship to capture their training and best efforts. The results of interns’ ratings on the DoS as it relates to the STEM and Knowledge Practices domain are presented in Table 1.5. In addition to the DoS rating, we also analyzed the data by the subject matter taught. table 1.5  Analysis of STEM & knowledge practices (n=10)

Intern ID

Subject taught

S1.16 S2.16 S3.16 S4.16 S5.16 S6.16 S7.16 S8.16 S9.16 S10.16 Average Category Score

Engineering Science Math Science Engineering Science Science Science Science Math

STEM engagement

STEM content

Inquiry

Average intern score

4 4 2 4 4 3 4 4 3 4

4 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 4

4 4 1 3 2 4 2 4 2 4

4 4 2 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 4 3 4

3.6

3.7

3.0

3.4

The majority of the lessons taught by this cohort of interns was science (n=6), followed by mathematics (n=2) and engineering (n=2). While the sample size is small, it appears this cohort was stronger in teaching science and engineering content than mathematics content. The results of the DoS revealed that intern one (S3.16) exhibited the weakest STEM practices while four interns (S1.16, S2.16, S8.16, & S10.16) exhibited the strongest STEM practices among the group. Interestingly, the data did not

20

Leonard et al.

exhibit a pattern in terms of major or interest. The interns who performed highest on the DoS were two science majors (S2.16 & S8.16), one elementary education major (S10.16), and one undeclared major (S.1). Further analysis of these four interns, revealed two had no interest in teaching elementary school (S1.16 & S2.16) and two (S8.16 & S10.16) showed moderate interest. Ironically, the intern (S3.16) with a 4.0 GPA and high interest in teaching elementary school had the lowest ratings on the STEM and Knowledge Practices domain, indicating a need for stronger content knowledge, pedagogy, and pedagogical content knowledge (Shulman, 1986), if she were to enter a teacher preparation program. Interns’ Ability to Engage Children in stem We also used the DoS and anecdotal records to examine Noyce interns’ ability to engage children in STEM. Furthermore, we conducted cross-case analyses to further understand the interns’ STEM practices, self-efficacy, and interest in teaching. Pseudonyms are used to identify and describe four focal interns who had a range of teaching ability. They were rated toward the lower end (n=1), middle (n=1), and upper end (n=2) of the continuum on the STEM & Knowledge Practices domain and selected as a convenience sample for the cross-case analyses. Table 1.6 further describes each of these interns. table 1.6  Demographics and dimensions of success ratings of focal interns (n=4)

Pseudonyms Gender Internship site

Major

Interest in elementary

STEM DoS rating

Felicia (S2.16) Sandra (S3.16) Wesley (S5.16) Kathy (S8.16)

Biology

No interest

4

Elementary Education Geology/Earth Science Environmental Science

High interest

2

High interest

3.3

Moderate interest

4

Female Natural Science camp Female Summer school enrichment Male Robotics/Game Design camp Female Energy Camp

In order to compare and contrast the focal interns’ experiences across sites, we examined their journals and observers’ field notes obtained during site visits. Excerpts from the journals and field notes are presented in Table 1.7 to further understand the growth and development of these interns.

Internship site Excerpts from journal reflections

Natural science I was an intern at the natural science camp. The camp kids that went to this short summer camp were middle school age. The kids mostly learned about sustainable energy and SCAR communities, an emphasis on how these topics work in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and the overall Wyoming environment. I learned a lot of the same things as what the kids learned

Summer school I interned at summer school enrichment. I got the enrichment privilege to help teach children from kindergarten to sixth grade math also known as the equation station, and iron on beading. We played math based games like go fijish, war, dice games and the card game positive and negative. We also did diffferent types of math such as multiply divide adding and subtracting. I found that if you have a child that does not want to do something such as

Intern

Felicia

Sandra

table 1.7  Cross-case analyses of interns by site

(cont.)

Intern said that she was very nervous in beginning, but later she overcame the fear since everyone was willing to help. She also emphasized the importance of the way that the teacher approached the children (if you have a child that does not want to do something such as sit still or play whatever particular game the rest are if you ask them nicely and tell them it would be a big favor for you they tend to do as you ask in all age ranges). Students practiced writing numbers and doing math problems. They were

Intern said that experience in camp taught her that a lot goes into teaching and indeed teachers take just as much out of experience as children. Students were working on SCAR communities (Sagebrush, Conifer, Aspen and Riparian). The topic was very related to STEM and children in the camp already expressed interest in science topics. Together with their interest in STEM, this camp provided an opportunity to interact with stafff that share the same interest. All students were fully engaged in projects and made a lot of connections to the project activities.

Field notes from site visits

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

21

Wesley

Intern

Robotics/Game I was an intern at the robotics/game design camp Design Camp at an urban university. I found myself [working] in the group with third and fourth graders, and loved working with third graders. Every child in the camp learned and was exposed to basic game design and robotics. Since I was working with the younger children, I was able to help teach them about the game Frogger and how to make basic robots and program them to do simple tasks such as move forward and turn. This was my fijirst experience teaching so I was learning just as much as the students… .

sit still or play whatever particular game the rest are if you ask them nicely and tell them it would be a big favor for you they tend to do as you ask in all age ranges.

Internship site Excerpts from journal reflections

table 1.7  Cross-case analyses of interns by site (cont.)

(cont.)

learning about patterns, colors and shapes and how shapes work together. They were learning by watching stafff and by trying it through a hands–on approach. Even though the topic was relevant to the STEM fijield, the stafff did not tie this to real life. Intern said that he was able to help children in camp with a basic game design and robot. Even though he said there were difffijiculties in understanding programming language, he loved working with elementary school children. Students were making basic robots and they learned about the game Frogger. The topic was very relevant to STEM. The children’s voice was prominent in their work since they asked questions about design and made corrections where needed. Girls and boys were highly engaged and enthusiastic about the lessons. There was no great deal of reflection noted in general. Intern built a strong rapport with the students. They all wrote thank you notes and praised him for his work at the end of the program.

Field notes from site visits

22 Leonard et al.

Energy camp

Kathy

Each hour was exciting and it was easy to see how much the kids dove into each area of study. Everything worked well this week and I thought it was great there was a day spent completely outside rock climbing and learning about GIS and GPS. Being able to connect with each individual on some level helped exponentially here, I wouldn’t have changed a thing. Overall, my personal take away would revolve around my teaching method. This being that the deeper the connection that is built with children, the more it seems as though they absorb whatever material is being taught.

Internship site Excerpts from journal reflections

Intern

table 1.7  Cross-case analyses of interns by site (cont.)

Intern stated that she would focus her teaching method on building deeper connections with the children, Middle school students worked with graduate students to make liquid iron and played with liquid nitrogen. However, Kathy led a lesson on black carbon and glacial melting. While there were a few questions, students did not get a chance to engage in inquiry for themselves. Nevertheless, students responded well to the intern, implying there was a relationship of mutual respect. Kathy should work on drawing information from the students rather than teaching by telling in order to increase participation.

Field notes from site visits

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

23

24

Leonard et al.

The constant comparison method was used to analyze the data obtained from the journals and field notes. These data were used to develop case studies on each of the focal interns. Descriptions of each intern and the setting, as well as vignettes of the lesson or topic taught to students during the summer internship, are presented below. Felicia at Teton Science Schools Felicia identified herself as a White female, biology major. She reported a GPA of 3.76. Yet, she was candid about her lack of interest in elementary education but was open to exploring the internship. Coming from the east coast, she was apprehensive about working in the natural science camp with youth in a remote area of Wyoming. In particular, she was unfamiliar with topics related to sustainable energy and SCAR (Sagebrush, Conifer, Aspen and Riparian) communities. Data also revealed Felicia felt underprepared because she did not know what was being taught ahead of time. Yet, Felicia was observed supervising students (ages 9–14) as they collected data on wind turbines in Teton National Park (see Figure 1.1). Vignette 1 captures the lesson via field notes collected by a member of the research team.

figure 1.1 Wind turbine

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

25

Vignette 1 While Felicia’s interactions with the students were limited, the data revealed she was supportive of student activities and cared about their needs as they climbed the rugged terrain to collect real-time data on wind turbines. We headed up a very, very steep hillside to get to an area with a great view of the Tetons. One group gathered data on their blades made of different materials. Students were highly engaged in the activity. One person took notes, another used the various meters to collect data, and the lead instructor used a timer to measure the testing window. Felicia supported students, as needed. However, the students were very familiar with the equipment by now and were pretty independent in their data collection. There was a lot of other learning that was taking place along the hike in addition to data collection. Felicia had the group take a break as she was observant that one student was having a difficult time hiking in the high elevation. As we reached the top of the hill, the students stopped to gather more data on their wind turbines. The wind here was much stronger, and it broke one of the turbines. That group wasn’t able to collect any more data, but the other group continued to collect information. Evidence of self-efficacy Factors that influenced Felicia’s self-efficacy included mastery and vicarious experiences as well as the affective aspect of working in a breathtaking natural environment like Teton National Park. Examples of Felicia’s HE statements revealed she believed the more interactive the activities were, the more engaged students became. She also appreciated the sense of leadership and community exhibited by the staff at the internship site. While Felicia exhibited high evidence of STEM Knowledge and Practices (M=4.0) near the end of the internship, she did not feel she was a good fit for working with elementary students and preferred to work with high school students instead. Sandra at Summer School Day Camp Sandra described herself as a White female, elementary education major. She had an impressive 4.0 GPA. She was very nervous and lacked confidence in her abilities to work with children in the summer school enrichment program at the beginning of her internship. Moreover, Sandra stated she was unfamiliar with all of the content before working directly with the students. In general, mathematics was a topic in which Sandra expressed weakness. However, she was confident that she could work effectively with early childhood students in all content areas including mathematics (see Figure 1.2).

26

Leonard et al.

figure 1.2 Math lesson

Vignette 2 Sandra was observed working with a small group of students as they used manipulatives such as counting blocks, dominoes, and pattern blocks to learn mathematics concepts. At Sandra’s table, the students used pattern blocks of various shapes and sizes to learn about geometric shapes. The lead instructor grabbed a block and showed it to the students. One student looked at the chart on the wall to identify the name of the shape. Then the instructor had a discussion about the difference between a rectangle and a square, and placed them side by side to show the difference. Some students were making patterns with the hexagons to form a honeycomb pattern. Other students were building flowers with various pieces. Staff also showed how you can combine shapes to make different shapes. Students were also sorting and looking for particular pieces in the large assortment of blocks. The instructor also used the word ‘predict’ to help them guess what would happen if they used certain shapes. Sandra had some students look for small circles. Finally, Sandra made a design and wrecked it to see if students could rebuild the same design. Evidence of self-efficacy Sandra’s experiences in the summer internship included both mastery and vicarious experiences. Examples of HE statements reflected vicarious

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

27

experiences of staff modeling hands-on approaches to actively engage students and how the internship solidified her desire teach. She also found that the strategy of asking students to participate as a favor to her helped to motivate them. While Sandra had a high interest in working with K-3 students, her weakness in mathematics and her low rating on the STEM and Knowledge Practices domain (M=2.0) implied she could benefit from coursework to strengthen her mathematics content knowledge. Wesley at Robots and Game Design Camp Wesley identified himself as a White/East Indian male. His majors were geology and earth science and he had a 2.89 GPA. Wesley had prior experience in computer programming, which was one of the foci of the internship. He expressed high interest in working with elementary students during the robotics and game design camp. During the internship, Wesley noted his desire to be involved in the curriculum planning process to develop appropriate teaching strategies for the younger students during digital game design. The curriculum was initially designed for students in grades four and up. While LEGO Wedo 2.0® robotics curriculum was very appropriate for his students (see Figure 1.3), there was a need to modify the game design curriculum for the third-grade students he was working with. Vignette 3 A transcript of the dialogue that took place during a robotics lesson was recorded in the field notes during the DoS observation. The data show some of Wesley’s interactions with students after they made a rover that moved forward and backward on a track. Teacher: Wesley: Boy 1: Teacher: Girl 1: Boy 1: Boy 2: Wesley:

When you get to the end go backwards. Make sure you stop. Backward? Ok. Backwards. Wait! We got to space them out. Oooh! Go backward! Your car is getting ahead. Oh, nice! [One car crosses the finish line.]

Evidence of self-efficacy Factors that influenced Wesley’s self-efficacy were mastery experiences and affect, which were expressed in his journal: “I found myself [working] in the group with third and fourth graders, and loved working with third graders. Every child in the camp learned and was exposed to basic game design and robotics.” As the above vignette reveals, Wesley was directly engaged in the

28

Leonard et al.

figure 1.3 Girls and Wedo 2.0

robotics activity. Moreover, he praised and encouraged the children’s efforts, which are important in the teaching-learning process. Examples of HE statements recorded in his journal related to his ability to help students design digital games and program the robots. Near the end of his internship, Wesley exhibited good evidence of STEM Knowledge and Practices (M=3.3), and he expressed that he wanted to further pursue a teaching career. Kathy at Environmental Camp Kathy described herself as a White female, environmental science major. She had a 3.16 GPA. She had moderate interest in elementary education prior to the internship. Kathy felt very comfortable working with youth at the environmental energy camp. Vignette 4 describes her interactions with rising high school freshman during a lesson on black carbon.

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

29

Vignette 4 Kathy introduced the lesson and the materials for the lesson on black carbon by informing the students they were going to make miniature glaciers. The materials included salt water, heat lamps, paper plates, and ice. Kathy:

Which is going to melt the fastest? (1) Heat lamp, (2) salt, or (3) water. Students put Black carbon on the paper plate. Kathy: What do you see? Student 1: Melting Kathy: Which one is melting faster? Student 2: Salt water Handout distributed on Black Carbon aerial process. Kathy: What else do you think? Student query: What would happen if…(inaudible)? Kathy: Black carbon is made through the incomplete combustion cycle of fossil fuels. Instructor: What happened with your experiment? Student 3: Black carbon increased melting and absorbs heat from the sun (acts like a conduction oven). Salinity impacted the rate of melting. Evidence of self-efficacy Kathy was one of the few interns who had the opportunity to actually teach a science lesson. Thus, both mastery and vicarious experiences influenced her self-efficacy. Kathy engaged student participants in cognitively demanding tasks such as observing the impact of black carbon, salt, and heat on ice to learn about glacial melt. Moreover, she stated the internship made her excited to be a teacher, and she loved the experience. Examples of HE statements included wanting to do the internship again and appreciating the help that other teachers offered her. She had strong ratings on the STEM Knowledge and Practices domain (M=4.0) and expressed a moderate interest in teaching elementary school at the end of the summer internship. Summary of Cases In summary, the four interns could be described as undergraduate students seeking to further explore their various interests in education. All of these focal interns appeared to initially lack confidence in either their teaching abilities or the subject matter at the beginning of their internships. However, all of the interns expressed a desire to be more involved in the planning process and the activities leading up to the first day of placement in the

30

Leonard et al.

internship. HE statements were made in all of the cases, and by the end of the internships, there appeared to be more positive experiences than negative experiences overall. All of the focal interns saw benefits, regardless of the site location. The cases show the internship experience helped them decide if they wanted to continue in the teaching field, and in some cases, which age group was the most appealing. These cases suggest that positive impacts were made and the internship experiences seemed to reaffirm the interns desire to teach.

Discussion The results of this study yield three important findings: (a) the summer internships were perceived as valuable; (b) concrete field experiences had a positive impact on the interns’ mastery experiences and affective states; and (c) the internship had positive influences on the interns’ initial states of low-efficacy. Each of these findings are described in more detail below. Value of Internships in stem Settings Many of the interns exhibited ample content knowledge in their respective STEM placements, but some expressed insufficient depth of experience(s) to render a decision regarding becoming a Noyce scholar. As noted earlier, field experiences can help preservice teachers to formulate an informed decision about whether to persist in a teaching career (Flores, 2015). In some cases, field experiences can demotivate individuals (see S1.16), but at least such decisions are informed ones. In other instances, positive field experiences can serve to substantially motivate preservice teachers to enter the teaching field (see S3.16, S5.16, S6.16, & S7.16) (Borgerding, 2015). Thus, it is important to have robust field experiences to recruit and retain novice teachers. Influence of Realistic Field Experiences on Affective States Affective ratings (i.e., feelings, emotions, and disposition), such as those outlined by McLeod and Adams (1989) are imperative to high-quality outcomes in performance. As Anderson and Bourke (2000) state, initial experiences often result in tentative, temporary, or situational affect, and extended experiences help to solidify or create more permanent (stable) affective states. Hence, field experiences prior to student teaching may help preservice teachers to secure a realistic perspective of the demands of teaching, thereby affirming their decision to teach. Some teacher preparation programs may suffer from a paucity of field experiences early in the program, thus forcing undergradu-

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

31

ates to rely almost exclusively on content and pedagogy classes as their level of motivation. Field experiences, therefore, may serve to motivate college students to persist in securing their teaching credentials so that they can ultimately have their own classroom (Capraro et al., 2010; Leonard et al., 2011). On the contrary, field experiences in which interns engage in predominantly busy work, such as cleaning facilities, recording data, and calling parents, can serve to demotivate prospective teachers and lower their self-efficacy (MaKinster, 2000). Influence of the Internship on Initial Low Self-Efficacy Mastery and vicarious experiences during the summer internships had a positive impact on the interns’ self-efficacy (Avery & Meyer, 2012; Bandura, 1997; Flores, 2015). In this study, we noted improved self-efficacy among the interns as they progressed through the internship experience. Many interns exited the internship with a perceived improvement in self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997). For example, Sandra learned that she could motivate students to do a task if she asked them to do her a favor. The ability to motivate children empowered her as an intern and may have positively influenced her outcome expectancy beliefs (Bandura, 1997). Furthermore, Kathy commented on her level of anxiety as the field experience commenced. However, actually teaching science lessons was influential in her growth and development. When the internship ended, it was apparent that Kathy had developed comfort with students and exhibited strong evidence of HE as related to STEM teaching in her specific educational setting. Similar to other findings, the interns’ personal efficacy was malleable in this study (Flores, 2015; Newton et al., 2012).

Conclusions Recruiting and retaining highly-qualified STEM teachers to work with highneed students in hard-to-staff schools in rural and urban settings are critical to broadening the participation of underrepresented children and youth in STEM. We recruited three new Noyce scholars from a cohort of 10 interns and retained one who was considering transfer to another institution. The new recruits joined a cadre of 10 other Noyce scholars from diverse racial and gender backgrounds. While six interns did not become Noyce scholars, we planted seeds to encourage interns to become teachers. In fact, one additional intern decided to pursue education without the constraints of the Noyce program (i.e., teach in high-need school two years for every year funds were received). Preparing elementary teachers from underrepresented backgrounds (e.g.,

32

Leonard et al.

male; ethnic/racial minorities) with strong content knowledge, pedagogy, and caring dispositions (Cochran-Smith, 2004) is necessary to promote equitable mathematics and science education (Shah et al., 2013). However, providing high-quality summer internships that allow interns the autonomy to actually teach and work with students cannot be understated.

Future Recommendations To address concerns raised by the interns, a series of workshops were implemented in Year 3 (2016–2017) to introduce the program to a new cohort of interns, familiarize them with expectations, and allow them to develop appropriate lesson plans for their internship setting (see White, Leonard, Chamberlin, & Buss, this volume). It was recommended that the interns be put in touch with their respective instructor in advance of the internship to encourage active engagement in planning activities and an elevated level of responsibility. It was also recommended that an orientation session be held with the staff at each summer program to ensure that they are aware of the interns’ arrival, understand the internship program, and make the interns feel welcome. A more structured intern feedback process would benefit future interns and enable researchers to collect additional data (see BarnesJohnson, Aryana, & Leonard, this volume). Finally, interviews with focal interns would help to triangulate the data collected from journals and DoS observations. The results of these initiatives are reported in other chapters in this volume (see Barnes-Johnson & White et al.). In summary, the Year 2 internships provided a model of recruitment and retention for the WITS project to build upon.

Limitations The results of this study are limited to the participants and settings where the study took place and should not be generalized to Noyce interns in other contexts. One limitation of the study is the short duration of the summer program. Given a one- or two-week internship, there may not have been enough instruction to have a long-term impact on self-efficacy. A second limitation is the small sample size. However, it is important to ensure there are enough resources and supervision to support and sustain quality summer internships. Finally, this study relies on self-report in the form of journaling. Some interns may have been reluctant to share negative experiences. However, given the

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

33

frank comments of many interns in the current study, we do not believe this cohort of interns was less than candid in reflecting on their experiences and interest in teaching elementary school.

Acknowledgments We acknowledge the interns and collaborating teachers who participated in this project. The material presented is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under grant no. DUE 1439546. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Granting Agency.

Notes 1 Highly qualified teachers are defined as those who possess a bachelor’s degree, full state certification or licensure, and can demonstrate content knowledge in the subject area (U.S. Department of Education, 2004). 2 See https://portals.edu.wyoming.gov/Reports/Public/wde-reports-2012/publicreports/stat-2/stateanddistrictfallenrollmentbyethnicityandgenderannual 3 See http://www.education.pa.gov

References Anderson, L. W., & Bourke, S. F. (2000). Assessing affective characteristics in the schools. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Avery, L. M., & Meyer, D. Z. (2012). Teaching science as science is practiced: Opportunities and limits for enhancing preservice elementary teachers’ self-efficacy for science and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 112(7), 393–452. Baker-Doyle, K. (2010). Beyond the labor market paradigm: A social network perspective on teacher recruitment and retention. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 18(26), 1–17. Retrieved from http://www.epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/836 Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy–toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman. Bischoff, P. J., French, P., & Schaumloffel, J. (2014). Reflective pathways: Analysis of an urban science teaching field experience on Noyce scholar-science education

34

Leonard et al.

awardees’ decisions to teach science in a high-need New York City school. School Science and Mathematics, 114(1), 40–49. Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2006). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education. Borgerding, L. (2015). Recruitment of early STEM majors into possible secondary science teaching careers: The role of science education summer internships. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 10(2), 247–270. Capraro, M. M., Capraro, R. M., & Helfeldt, J. (2010). Do differing types of field experiences make a difference in teacher candidates’ perceived level of competence? Teacher Education Quarterly, 31(1), 131–154. Charalambous, C. Y., Philippou, G. N., & Kyriakides, L. (2008). Tracing the development of pre-service teachers’ efficacy beliefs in teaching mathematics during fieldwork. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67(2), 125–142. Cochran-Smith, M. (2004). Walking the road: Race, diversity, and social justice in teacher education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Czerniak, C., & Schriver, M. (1994). An examination of preservice science teachers’ beliefs and behaviors as related to self-efficacy. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 5(3), 77–86. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1–44. Dewey, J. (1965). The relation of theory to practice in education. In M. Borrowman (Ed.), Teacher education in America: A documentary history (pp. 140–171). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Djonko-Moore, C. M. (2016). An exploration of teacher attrition and mobility in high poverty racially segregated school. Race Ethnicity and Education, 19(5), 1063–1087. Enochs, L. G., & Riggs, I. M. (1990). Toward the development of an elementary teacher’s science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science Education, 74, 625–637. Enochs, L. G., Smith, P. L., & Huinker, D. (2000). Establishing factorial validity of the mathematics teaching efficacy beliefs instrument. School Science and Mathematics, 100, 194–202. Flores, I. M. (2015). Developing preservice teachers’ self-efficacy through field-based science teaching practice with elementary students. Research in Higher Education Journal, 27(1), 1–19. Foster, E., Schverak, A., & Jacobs, K. (2001). Yearlong inquiry: From methods to graduation. Denver, CO: Annual National Network for Educational Renewal Conference. Glaser, B. G. (Ed.). (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory (Vol. 2). Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Using STEM Internships to Recruit Noyce Scholars

35

Hrabowski, F. A., III, & Sanders, M. G. (2015). Increasing racial diversity in the teacher workforce: One university’s approach. Thought & Action, 31(2), 101–116. Leonard, J., Barnes-Johnson, J., Dantley, S. J., & Kimber, C. T. (2011). Teaching science inquiry in urban contexts: The role of elementary preservice teachers’ beliefs. The Urban Review, 43(1), 124–150. MaKinster, J. (2000). Evaluation of integrated science experience for elementary education. Unpublished report. McLeod, D. B., & Adams, V. M. (1989). Affect and mathematical problem solving: A new perspective. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. Morrell, P. D., & Carroll, J. B. (2003). An extended examination of preservice elementary teachers’ science teaching self-efficacy. School Science and Mathematics, 103(5), 246–251. Newton, K. J., Leonard, J., Evans, B. R., & Eastburn, J. A. (2012, Summer). Preservice elementary teachers’ mathematics content knowledge and teacher efficacy. School Science and Mathematics, 112(5), 289–299. Noam, G., Shah, A. M., & Larson, J. D. (2014). Dimensions of success observation tool. Program in Education, Afterschool, and Resiliency. Papazian, A. E., Noam, G. G., Shah, A. M., & Rufo-McCormick, C. (2013). The quest for quality in afterschool science: The development and application of a new tool. Afterschool Matters, 18, 17–24. Parajes, M. F. (1992). Teacher beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332. Shah, N., Lewis, C. M., Caires, R., Khan, N., Qureshi, A., Ehsanipour, D., & Gupta, N. (2013). Building equitable computer science classrooms: Elements of a teaching approach. In Proceedings of the 44th ACM technical symposium on computer science education, March 6–9, Denver, C, USA (pp. 263–268). New York, NY: ACM. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage Publications. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2007). The differential antecedents of selfefficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 944–956. U.S. Department of Education Office of Postsecondary Education. (2013). Preparing and credentialing the nation’s teachers: The secretary’s ninth report on teacher quality. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education Office of Postsecondary Education. Waddell, J., & Ukpokodu, O. N. (2012). Recruiting & preparing diverse urban teachers: One Urban-focused teacher education program breaks new ground. Multicultural Education, 20(1), 15–22.

CHAPTER 2

Stronger Together: The Arizona Mathematics Teaching (MaTh) Noyce Program’s Collaborative Model for Secondary Teacher Preparation Jennifer A. Eli, Rebecca H. McGraw, Cynthia O. Anhalt and Marta Civil

Abstract The Arizona Mathematics Teaching (MaTh) Noyce Program focuses on recruiting and preparing undergraduates who have expressed interest in secondary mathematics teaching. The purpose of our program is to help these undergraduates develop mathematically rich experiences for all students in grades 6–12, particularly those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. The program is a collaborative model involving a community of mathematics education faculty, undergraduates, teachers, and secondary mathematics students and their communities. In this chapter, we describe this collaborative model for providing opportunities for prospective secondary mathematics teachers to learn about and implement equitable teaching practices. Collectively our analysis resulted in three overarching themes influencing participants’ inclination to learn about and engage in equitable teaching practices through Noyce Program activities: (a) experiencing teaching opportunities; (b) building relationships; and (c) developing professional identities grounded in equity.

Keywords equity – secondary mathematics teaching – collaborative model

Introduction National calls for preparing a strong STEM workforce for the 21st century, and by extension highly qualified STEM teachers, are on the rise (American Physical Society Panel on Public Affairs, 2017; National Science Board, 2015; U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education, 2013). Also, on the rise are teacher shortages in secondary mathematics (American © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2019 | DOI: 10.1163/9789004399990_002

Stronger Together

37

Association for Employment in Education, 2017; U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2014). These shortages pose a challenge to many high-need school districts to recruit and hire qualified secondary mathematics teachers and retain them long enough to make a substantial impact…. In mathematics education, these challenges are further exacerbated by historical tensions that have played out in the “spirited debates” (Schoen, Fey, Hirsch, & Coxford, 1999, p. 445) between mathematicians and mathematics educators about how to effectively address questions of mathematics teaching and learning, known as the “math wars” (Schoenfeld, 2004). At one end of the “math war” spectrum you have proponents in favor of more “traditional” methods of teaching and learning while at the other end, there are those in favor of a “reform” oriented approach to teaching and learning. Historically, a more traditional approach to mathematics teaching and learning, where students are passive receivers of knowledge and where knowledge is accessible to only an elite few, has permeated and dominated mathematics learning in the U.S. Louie (2017) terms this the culture of exclusion, which “limits all students’ access to rich and meaningful mathematics learning experiences and further limits many students’ opportunities to develop identities as mathematical capable learners and thinkers” (p. 489). Louie (2017) describes two interconnected dimensions within a culture of exclusion, one dimension focused on an exclusion from worthwhile engagement of mathematics due to narrow definitions of what it means to do mathematics, and the other dimension focused on an exclusion of forming positive mathematical identities grounded in strength-based perspectives of who is capable of doing and learning mathematics. Within the last two decades, there has been a national push advocating mathematical equity towards developing a culture of inclusion where ALL students have access to high-quality equitable mathematics instruction that empowers students to see themselves as capable knowers and doers of mathematics (Aguirre, Mayfield-Ingram, & Martin, 2013; Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators [AMTE], 2017; Boaler, 2016; Boaler & Staples, 2008; Nasir, Cabana, Shreve, Woodbury, & Louie, 2014; National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics & TODOS: Mathematics for All, 2016; Strutchens et al., 2012) who view mathematics as a humanistic enterprise (Gutiérrez, 2002, 2007, 2009). Generally speaking, prospective secondary mathematics teachers have been part of an inequitable American educational system that (a) frames mathematics success as something that depends on having a fixed, innate ability that cannot be taught, that is, students either have or do not have an aptitude for learning challenging mathematics (Boaler, 2016); (b) separates students by

38

Eli et al.

perceived mathematical abilities that are reflective of the norms of dominant groups (e.g., tracking) (Loveless, 2013); (c) adopts teachings practices that deny students from non-dominant groups access and opportunity to learn mathematics (Bartell et al., 2017); and (d) ignores the linguistic and cultural resources of students from non-dominant groups often taking up deficit views of these resources (Civil, 2007). Thus, teacher education programs are challenged to better prepare prospective secondary mathematics teachers to develop inclusive equitable teaching practices and pedagogical content knowledge that meet the needs of culturally, linguistically, and socioeconomically diverse student populations. Expectations for initial teacher education about equity are quite high, given what is known about prospective secondary mathematics teachers entering preparation programs. According to the Standards for Preparing Teachers of Mathematics (AMTE, 2017), beginning teachers should (a) work to provide access and advancement for every student and recognize schoolwide and classroom-based threats to access and advancement; (b) plan and implement instruction so as to encourage the development of positive mathematical identities for all students; (c) notice, value, and draw upon students’ funds of knowledge (González, Moll, & Amanti, 2005) and language resources; and (d) challenge deficit views in their schools and in their own emerging practices. To engage in equitable teaching practices “requires acknowledging the particular context, needs, and capabilities of each and every learner rather than providing identical opportunities to students” (AMTE, 2017, p. 1). In their work developing a framework for research in linking equitable teaching with the standards for mathematical practice, Bartell et al. (2017), provide a list of equitable teaching practices that include, but are not limited to: (a) drawing on students’ funds of knowledge; (b) establishing classroom norms for participation; (c) positioning students as capable; (d) monitoring how students position each other; (e) attending explicitly to race and culture; (f) recognizing multiple forms of discourse and language as a resource; (g) pressing for academic success; (h) attending to students’ mathematical thinking; and (i) supporting development of a sociopolitical disposition (pp. 11–12). Clearly, there is much work to be done if teacher education programs are to be successful in preparing teachers to engage in the grand challenges of equitable mathematics instruction, and to work as advocates and agents-of-change in their schools. In response to this need, our secondary mathematics teacher preparation faculty developed the Arizona Mathematics Teaching (MaTh) Noyce Program, supported by the National Science Foundation.

39

Stronger Together

figure 2.1 AZ Noyce MaTh program

Arizona MaTh Noyce Program The Arizona (AZ) MaTh Noyce Program at the University of Arizona focuses on recruiting and preparing undergraduates who have expressed interest in secondary mathematics teaching. The purpose of our program is to help these undergraduates develop mathematically rich experiences for all students in grades 6–12, particularly those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. The program is a collaborative model involving a community of mathematics education faculty, undergraduates, in-service teachers, and secondary mathematics students and their communities with the goal of better preparing undergraduates in the program for engaging in equitable teaching practices as they work with high-need culturally and linguistically diverse student populations. To meet this goal, the design of the AZ MaTh Noyce Program (see Figure 2.1) strives to provide quality learning experiences for future teachers via work with students and communities in local-area secondary schools with a focus on equity and equitable teaching practices. The Noyce program experiences include: (a) tutoring in local secondary schools; (b) teaching in an algebra academy summer internship with partner schools; (c) teaching in an afterschool mathematics program at a partner bilingual middle school that involves students and the community around the school; (d) serving as undergraduate teaching assistants (UTA) for two mathematics courses offered to prospective elementary teachers; (e) participating in regional and national STEM teaching conferences; and (f) participating in monthly Noyce Seminars focused on equity.

40

Eli et al.

Central to the development and implementation of the AZ MaTh Noyce program components is a focus on equity and equitable teaching practices. Our local context with diverse student populations of predominantly Latinx and working-class families demands program coursework and activities where undergraduates learn how to implement high-leverage equitable teaching practices that are meaningful and culturally relevant. Teaching practices are deemed “high leverage” when they focus on the critical skills needed for promoting student thinking and learning, for creating equitable classroom environments, and for developing the skills needed to advance one’s instructional practices (Teaching Works, 2018). A main goal of the AZ MaTh Noyce activities is to foster discussions on equity and equitable teaching practices with the Noyce scholars and interns and observe how these practices manifest in the design of instructional activities within the program. Our goal is to prepare future secondary mathematics teachers for excellence in equitable teaching practices while working with ethnically and linguistically diverse students— in Arizona and nationwide. We aim to help undergraduates develop knowledge, dispositions, and practices that build on student mathematical thinking as well as their cultural, linguistic, and community-based knowledge (Anhalt, Staats, Cortez, & Civil, 2018; Civil, 2007, 2014a, 2014b).

Methods Participants The participants in the Noyce Program include both Noyce interns and Noyce scholars. Noyce interns are typically lower division (freshman and sophomore) undergraduate STEM majors. Noyce scholars are upper division (junior or senior) undergraduate prospective mathematics teachers who have declared a mathematics major with emphasis in mathematics education. Between summer 2016 and fall 2017, we had a total of 23 participants in the Noyce Program; with 14 identifying as female and 9 identifying as male. Of the 23 participants, nearly half (n=11) identified as belonging to a minority ethnic group (predominantly Latinx). Noyce interns participate in teaching-related enrichment activities to engage and inspire them to consider mathematics education as an attractive long-term career choice. These activities include: (a) tutoring in schools program, (b) the afterschool program, and (c) algebra academy (described below). Noyce scholars also participate in the monthly Noyce seminars, and scholars have opportunities to (a) take a lead role in the afterschool program, (b) participate as a teacher leader in the Algebra Academy, (c) serve as an undergraduate

Stronger Together

41

teaching assistant (UTA) in one of two elementary content courses for prospective K–8 teachers, and (d) participate in regional and national conferences, including both Noyce and National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) regional and national conferences. In what follows, we provide a brief description of three of the major teaching related enrichment activities of our Noyce program. Teaching Related Enrichment Activities The Algebra Academy The Algebra Academy is a pre-existing summer program through the University’s Early Academic Outreach Center. Our project team has a long history of collaborative involvement with this program. It is a five-week, 120 hours summer program for rising 9th graders with a focus on (a) increasing students’ understanding of fundamental algebra concepts, (b) increasing students’ perceptions of the relevance of mathematics, and (c) increasing student preparation for high school, planning for college, and exploration of future career options. The Algebra Academy attempts to bridge a gap that exists between rising 9th graders’ preparation in mathematics and their cultural and social identity as they transition to high school. The Algebra Academy takes up the perspective that mathematics learning is a culturally and socially constructed endeavor. Through small-group and project-based learning, the rising 9th grade students develop an understanding of variables, and other algebraic concepts, that illustrate how mathematics and science can be applied to the real world and how to solve real-world problems. The Afterschool Program The afterschool program takes place at a bilingual (English/Spanish) middle school. The program leadership team is comprised of Noyce scholars and interns, university faculty mentors, a graduate student, and a middle school mathematics teacher. The team and approximately 20 grade seven students meet twice a week for 1.5 hours during the fall and spring semesters. Middle school students work on rich mathematical tasks within a hands-on and linguistically-rich environment focused on reasoning and making sense of mathematics within relevant and meaningful contexts (e.g., a unit around the living wage; a unit around nutrition). Undergraduate Teaching Assistantship (UTA) The undergraduate teaching assistant (UTA) program is a long-standing program within our department, providing teaching-related experience to mathematics majors who have successfully completed the calculus sequence.

42

Eli et al.

Although UTAs can be placed within a variety of mathematics courses, we deliberately place Noyce interns and scholars in sections of our two elementary mathematics content courses for future K–8 teachers. Course instructors are mathematics education faculty, post-doctoral students, or advanced graduate students with specific knowledge and experience related to mathematics education. UTAs engage collaboratively with course instructors to plan and conduct lessons, create assessments, and grade student work. They also work with small groups of students and hold office hours. Data Collection and Analysis The data collected for this project include survey results, focus group interviews, participant reflections on internship experiences, and reflections on conference (e.g., Noyce regional conference), as well as field notes on activities that occurred between summer 2016 and fall 2017 among a total of 25 undergraduate Noyce Program participants. The surveys administered included elements of equitable mathematics teaching practices (Bartell et al., 2017), culturally relevant mathematics teaching (Aguirre & Zavala, 2013), and identity (Aguirre, Mayfield-Ingram, & Martin, 2013). Noyce interns and scholars were asked to consider ways of incorporating equitable mathematics teaching practices by developing mathematics activities that were relevant to students’ background cultural knowledge that allowed students to experience academic success, and simultaneously develop a socio-critical awareness, that is an awareness of the social dimensions of teaching and learning and the propensity to engage critically with these dimensions in order to address educational inequities in local schools. The open response data from surveys, focus group interviews, and participant reflections on internship and conference experiences were analyzed qualitatively using inductive thematic analysis (Braun & Clark, 2006) within each of the Noyce program activities (i.e., Algebra Academy, afterschool program, undergraduate teaching assistant (UTA) program, Noyce conference, and Noyce seminars). Inductive analysis is a process of coding used to build theory, themes, or conclusions based solely on the given data, “searching across a data set—be that a number of interviews or focus groups, or a range of texts—to find repeated patterns of meaning” (p. 86). We began our analysis by reviewing transcripts of focus groups responses, reading written responses to open-ended survey questions and participant reflections on internship and scholar experiences. The participant responses were then “chunked” so that each meaningful phrase or sentence could be categorized with an initial descriptive code. Each new chunk of data was compared with previously generated descriptive codes, so that similar chunks could be labeled with the same descriptive codes

Stronger Together

43

(Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2007). After all data had been coded, the codes were grouped by similarity which represented a unique emergent theme.

Findings Collectively our analysis resulted in four overarching themes influencing participants’ inclination to learn about and engage in equitable teaching practices through Noyce Program activities: (a) experiencing teaching opportunities where they develop and carry out mathematics lessons from start to finish with grades 6–12 students and undergraduate elementary prospective teachers (distinct from teacher preparation practicum experiences); (b) building caring and trusting relationships with their peers, faculty, teaching mentors, and 6–12 students; (c) learning to listen generously to students’ ideas and adopt practices that help to uncover and build on students’ ways of knowing; and (d) actively participating in regional and national conferences leading to feelings of empowerment to take on mathematics education leadership roles in their school and community. We draw upon these themes as we describe Noyce scholars’ and interns’ opportunities to learn about equitable teaching practices and the successes and challenges we have identified thus far. For each section, we begin with a brief description of the Noyce program activity along with the opportunities Noyce scholars and interns have to learn about mathematics teaching and learning with an emphasis on equity and equitable teaching practices followed by a description on the successes and challenges towards developing, implementing, and reflecting on equity and equitable teaching practices. The Algebra Academy The Algebra Academy is structured around instructional partnerships between at least one Noyce intern or scholar and a middle or high school mathematics teacher. Each team typically worked with approximately 15–20 rising 9th graders at a local middle or high school. Collectively the teaching partnerships come together to form a larger collaborative team where they design, reflect upon, and contribute to improve existing curriculum and lesson plans. Over the course of summer 2016 and summer 2017, we had a total of seven Noyce interns and/ or scholars participate in the Algebra Academy, one of which participated in both summers. At the end of each summer, we collected written feedback from the students in which they were asked to describe what they had learned from teaching in the Algebra Academy as well as how the experience supported their development as a teacher of mathematics. Analysis of the written feedback

44

Eli et al.

revealed three overarching themes: (a) experiencing the complexities of teaching that are not often revealed during practicum experiences; (b) working in a collaborative community for designing and enacting mathematics lessons; and (c) learning to establish classroom norms for participation that help to build trusting relationships between teacher and student and between students. The majority of the Noyce participants (six of the seven) were either juniors or seniors who were declared mathematics majors in the secondary mathematics education program. As part of the secondary mathematics education program, these six students had already experienced approximately 18+ hours of field practicum experiences in local area middle and high schools. In their written reflections, many of these interns expressed a clear distinction between their field placement experiences and those in the Algebra Academy. For all of the interns, the Algebra Academy was their first real experience with the “full responsibility” of teaching as expressed by these responses: – I was involved in the process of creating, planning, and teaching lessons and activities. I was able to immerse myself in the joys of teaching as well as the trials and tribulations. I was capable of taking what I have learned thus from my program courses and implement them and see how they work day to day…It showed me a lot of things that I had yet to see or infer from my practicum experiences. – Being able to be with the students from day one to set up the classroom and social norms was something that I had never experienced before, and it was really important. The students viewed me as their teacher, which isn’t completely true in the field placements. – I feel that this experience has given me a more accurate picture as to what teaching is actually like versus the field practicum that we have done in the past. I considered it a “mini student teaching” and think that every student would benefit from this experience. – I feel that the Algebra Academy was in a way an intro to student teaching. I was a teacher, with support, for five weeks and was able to get a grasp at what the day-to-day life of a teacher is like. I was also able to take what I have learned thus far in my courses and how they take shape in the classroom setting. I feel this is very important because having had a taste of the classroom[,] my attention is much more focused on what I need to learn and work on to be prepared to teach. – This was my first experience in any sort of classroom as a teacher figure and consistent time in front of the classroom full of kids allowed me to develop immensely as I got to try and improve each day. – …how to deal with disruptions both from students and outside sources, how to deal with negativity from students towards each other and themselves…

Stronger Together

45

As illustrated, the majority of the participants felt that the Algebra Academy gave them more practical experience and insight into what it is like to take on the full responsibility of teaching, leading to feelings of empowerment towards continued growth in their emerging teaching practices. Many of the interns described the powerful experience of working in a collaborative team. For the majority of the interns, this was their first experience with collective inquiry related to mathematics teaching and student learning as part of a collaborative teaching team. As illustrated in these responses, participants described what they learned through their experiences of being part of a teaching team. – I learned how to effectively plan a lesson and how to adjust the lesson if things change through the day. – I learned not only the difficulty of being a teacher, but also the amount of time spent every day for a teacher to see the success for their students. – I think the main things that I learned from the Algebra Academy are exactly how much goes into planning a lesson, how it is like to have a real classroom of your own, and how it is to work in a teaching team. It was extremely beneficial to be in teaching teams and I think it was[a] great lesson for me as teaching teams are becoming more apparent in schools. Finally, many of the participants described getting to know their students and learning to build caring relationships with them. – I learned a lot about how I should speak to students in a professional manner as well as to further my relationships with them through showing interest in their interests. – I learned the ways in which to address students who are being disruptive in the classroom as well as treating all students equally and fairly. There are so many things going on in the life of a student and it is important to understand that prior to making judgement into their lives. – I was able to put into perspective the age group, what’s appropriate, what’s not appropriate, what motivates them, what doesn’t motivate them, the developmental stages for this age group, and just how to talk with them in a way that allowed to listen and not be confused. With regard to equitable teaching practices, we find both successes and challenges reflected in the Noyce participants’ written feedback. One of the major successes of the Algebra Academy is that it provided interns with a more authentic experience of the complexities of what it means to engage in equitable teaching practices when taking on “full responsibility” in stark contrast to the “assistantship” roles that dominate their field placement experiences as part of their teacher preparation courses. Our goal is for all interns/scholars to have the opportunity to be active participants in collaborative teaching teams

46

Eli et al.

that focus on attending to students’ mathematical thinking where they could respond to and meet the developmental needs of their students (Jackson, 2009), establish classroom norms for participation, and orchestrate discussions so that linguistically, ethnically, and culturally diverse students develop strong mathematical identities (Hodge, 2006). Opportunities to learn about equitable mathematics instruction through the Algebra Academy collaborative teams could include: (a) establishing classroom norms for participation; (b) positioning students to use one another as mathematical resources; (c) having high academic expectations while maintaining student’s well-being rather than accept deficit view about student’s intellectual capability; and (d) building caring and trusting relationships not only with students but with peers and mentors through collaborative professional learning communities. Based on the interns’ reflective responses, more work is needed to expose interns to some aspects of equitable instruction (e.g., providing interns with opportunities to work in collaborative teams that model how we would want middle school students to collaborate around mathematics and responding to the developmental needs of students). In response to this need, our Noyce project team is working with Algebra Academy teachers, Noyce interns, and Noyce scholars to incorporate Complex Instruction (Cohen & Lotan, 2014; Eli & Wood, 2016; Featherstone, Crespo, Jilk, Oslund, Parks, & Wood, 2011; Horn, 2012) through the development of a pre-Academy Complex Instruction workshop and observational follow-ups throughout the five-week implementation. Furthermore, we are working with the Algebra Academy leadership to incorporate equitable teaching practices protocols (for lesson development and classroom observation) and equity-focused readings for teachers and scholars/interns. Afterschool Program The Afterschool Program is intended to create a space for middle school students to participate and contribute their ideas, bring students’ everyday experiences into mathematics learning, support students to appreciate mathematics and its role in understanding their world, and bridge the gap between home and school. Our goal is for scholars and interns to gain valuable experience creating and facilitating mathematics activities where they notice, value, and leverage middle school students’ funds of knowledge (González, Moll, & Amanti, 2005) and language resources to engage in culturally relevant challenging mathematics. The afterschool program provided an opportunity for scholars and interns to (a) interact with students in an informal casual environment, (b) gain new insights into students’ learning of mathematics, (c) collaborate with peers and others to design mathematics activities, and (d) try out their

Stronger Together

47

own teaching ideas and get educative and constructive feedback from teammates and mentors. The activities developed by our team of interns and scholars have included hands-on projects grounded in themes of social relevance (e.g., a unit on nutrition, living wage) and students’ interest as well as community walks and field trips. During focus group sessions, the participants highlighted strengths of the afterschool program which included (a) opportunities to take on a leadership role to design, implement, and reflect on a mathematics lesson within a collaborative community; (b) opportunities to observe other teaching strategies; (c) getting immediate real-time feedback from other interns in the room; and (d) debriefing as an integral part of group facilitation. Through these opportunities, the following responses represented some of the lasting effects in their views toward adopting equitable teaching practices. – Building relationships is important. Knowing what excites them [the middle school students] and applying math whenever we can. – Asking questions instead of giving the answer. Making sure the students have a chance to answer the questions, instead of letting others answer for [them]. – [I learned about] exploring their [middle school students’] passion – This program helped me to see which kinds of activities grab students’ attention more than others. I learned about bringing some of their interests forward in the activities we do. – [The] afterschool program taught me that [learning mathematics] is more about the process than the final answer. As we can see from the following responses, the interns learned about the importance of building relationships with students and drawing upon their knowledge for engaging students in mathematical exploration. However, at the same time, and perhaps not surprisingly, the Noyce interns’ reflective responses included grappling with how to uncover what students know and are capable of doing mathematically. As one intern put it, “There is so much I still do not know with respect to how students learn and interact with mathematics. Students learning is diverse. They know much more than they themselves recognize.” Although we viewed the afterschool program as one experience to promote the development of equitable teaching practices, two challenges that persist are helping interns to grapple with the nuances and salient features of equitable mathematics instruction. The first is engaging interns in pedagogical practices where they leverage students’ mathematical ideas, culture, and linguistic resources (funds of knowledge) as strengths to move the mathematical thinking forward. The second is creating mathematical activities that are both

48

Eli et al.

collaborative in nature and are grounded in knowledge of the school, community, and local context. Moving forward, our Noyce program leadership is planning to integrate more readings and case studies on equity and social justice that can be directly applied to the planning and implementation of afterschool activities during weekly preparation meetings. Undergraduate Teaching Assistantship Program Opportunities to learn about equitable mathematics instruction via the undergraduate teaching assistantship (UTA) program are numerous, including (a) using cognitively demanding tasks with multiple entry points, and multiple representations and solution strategies; (b) distributing mathematical expertise, particularly through assigning competence, across a wide range of learners; (c) centering and building upon students’ experiences; (d) promoting the value of mistakes as a source of learning; and (e) disrupting deficit views of learners and learning. Course instructors varied in the ways that they themselves promoted equity in these courses; thus, Noyce scholars’ opportunities to learn also varied. For example, one instructor used tasks, such as measuring Barbie™ in order to highlight narrow and unrealistic images of beauty that are sold to young girls. Furthermore, multiple instructors worked to assign competence (Cohen & Lotan, 2014; Featherstone, et al., 2011; Horn, 2012) and distributed opportunities to participate in whole-class discussions. It was not our goal to give each scholar the same UTA experience, but rather to capitalize on the powerful practices of our instructors and provide scholars with opportunities to experience and engage with these practices. During fall 2017, four Noyce scholars participated in the UTA program, each with a different instructor. Twice during the semester, we collected written feedback from the students in which they were asked to describe particular experiences they had had as UTAs (e.g., teaching, grading, tutoring, facilitating discussions, posing questions) and what they had learned. Analysis of the written feedback of these four scholars revealed four themes including (a) learning how to ask good questions; (b) bringing forth and utilizing students’ ways of thinking during instruction; (c) having the opportunity to teach and receive immediate feedback on teaching; and (d) learning how (and what) to grade. In addition, one scholar in particular mentioned learning how to connect mathematics to the real world, and how to focus on mathematical concepts as opposed to using shortcuts to find answers. Each of the four Noyce scholars had multiple opportunities to experience core aspects of teaching via the UTA program such as lesson planning, wholeclass and small-group instruction, working with students individually, planning and implementing assessments (jointly with the course instructors),

Stronger Together

49

and grading. Not surprisingly, the scholars found these experiences extremely valuable. As one scholar put it, “The instant feedback and the experience from doing these things in front of a class is worth so much.” With respect to questioning techniques, the scholars described learning how to ask questions such as, “Does your solution make sense?” “How did you get that answer?” and “Can you explain your thinking?” One scholar specifically mentioned not lowering cognitive demand, and another scholar mentioned learning to ask the same questions to students regardless of whether their answers were correct. Thinking about questioning techniques seemed to support the scholars in their efforts to uncover and utilize students’ thinking. As one scholar put it, “A student’s mind may work in a completely different way from [one’s] own and it is necessary to follow their thought process and not just try to change it. As teachers we must learn to loosen control and let the students thought process flow.” With regard to equity, we find both successes and challenges reflected in the Noyce scholars’ written feedback. All four of the scholars engaged with their instructors in planning and implementing mathematics lessons in which students’ ideas and ways of thinking were central. As one scholar wrote, “I feel that a lot of mathematics teaching can come from the students themselves.” Further, the scholars experienced a rich enacted curriculum, in which multiple representations and connections to concepts and meanings were frequent, and this curriculum was provided to all students. We conjecture that the experience of listening to, and valuing, students’ mathematical ideas combined with a conceptually-based curriculum, may disrupt deficit views of students, and we find some evidence that this is so in the scholars’ feedback. In addition, at least one of the four scholars had significant experiences connecting mathematics to the outside world, and she wrote, “I have learned that math content is very much interconnected with life. You can create every lesson with at least one real-life application. It is essential to connect with students at a deeper level because it adheres to them and makes them want to be interested.” At the same time, and perhaps not surprisingly, the Noyce scholars’ feedback included statements reflective of deficit views of mathematics learners, especially around assessment and grading. For example, when reflecting on his experience grading an exam, one Noyce scholar wrote, “Something that I have learned is that all students are different. Some don’t read instructions, some are not familiar with words such as algorithm even though it was explained in class, some don’t pay attention all the time in class, and some who need help do not get help more than likely by choice….” Another scholar wrote, “One of the students in my class seems to not care about his homework because he consistently gets low scores for things like not following directions and giving illogical solutions.” Seemingly, these scholars’ UTA

50

Eli et al.

experiences did not include drawing out what is reasonable and thoughtful in students’ homework and exams (although they did seem to get experience drawing out student thinking during class), or if the scholars did have such experiences, then they were not enough to cause a fundamental shift in how the scholar thought about students. We should also note that, for these four scholars, there was much that was absent from their written reflections related to equity such as methods for utilizing mathematics for social justice or identifying one’s own biases. This may be partially due to the fact that questions about bias, advocacy, systemic inequities, and social justice were not explicitly included in the feedback prompts, but it is also the case that these were not central themes in the courses themselves (with the exception of the Barbie™ activity in one course section). Based on the feedback from these four students, we can conclude that the UTA program is currently providing students with experience with some aspects of equitable instruction (e.g., distributing expertise, building instruction based partially in students’ mathematics) but not others (implementing social justice lessons, deconstructing deficit views of homework/assessments). Although we view the UTA program as one experience among many that taken together promote the development of equitable practice, we see an opportunity here to encourage ourselves and our colleagues to provide participating scholars opportunities to reflect upon and deconstruct their ways of framing student success and failure. In addition, we need to seek additional feedback from students engaged in other UTA-type experiences (e.g., serving as a teaching assistant in a college algebra course), in order to ascertain what opportunities for learning about equitable instruction may or may not exist in courses that are not specifically intended for future teachers. stem Teaching Conferences As part of the Noyce program, our Noyce Scholars have the opportunity to be supported to attend national and regional STEM-focused teacher conferences. In spring 2017, four of our Noyce Scholars attended the Western Regional Noyce Conference. Two of the scholars were in their junior year and two were in their final semester of student teaching. The conference was a gathering of Noyce scholars, fellows, teachers, Noyce PIs/personnel from across the Western Region of the United States (e.g., Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming). The conference focused on the implementation of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (National Governors Association [NGA] Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers [CCSSO], 2010) and Next Generation of Science Standards (NGSS Lead States, 2013) along with resources,

Stronger Together

51

technologies, and strategies designed to support teaching and learning in high-need schools. Through this conference experience, the four AZ Noyce scholars had opportunities to learn about equity and equitable teaching practices by attending sessions that focused on implementing student-centered instruction, sessions on the impact of teachers’ social-emotional competence on student learning, sessions on building caring and trusting relationships with students, and sessions on the importance of taking leadership roles within your school, district, and community. The scholars also got to network with other scholars from across the region exposing them to different ways other institutions and programs are preparing secondary mathematics teachers to work in high-need cultural and linguistically diverse schools. In analyzing the scholars’ reflective open-ended survey responses and focus group interviews during and after the conference, one major theme that emerged was the impact the conference had on their personal and professional identities as mathematics teachers, and in some cases as scholars of color. The change in their personal and professional identities that resulted from their experiences is evident in the following reflective responses: – Seeing all these people who are leaders, everybody who has spoken and came, that is where all the future of education, at least in the western part of the US, And I think, after seeing all this, I want to be more involved and take more initiative with students and peers when I am teaching. – Like being a student teacher as well right now, how can I serve students better? For some students I have, how can I bring those into the fold, those who feel marginalized; really not part of the classroom environment. – I feel out of place but also fitting in. My perspective is that of being Latino and a teacher. On the one hand I feel that the [Noyce] program brings many people who share a passion for teaching and that is great for me because I feel that I was missing that sense of community. I also feel out of place because I get the feeling of being a minority and coming from a different cultural background that I feel it is hard to connect with those around me. So, in that sense I feel the odd man out. My perspective however, that I am having is that I have a particular voice that is unique, and I feel emboldened to use that voice to be (in the future) a leader as a mathematics educator. In summary at first, I felt out of place but now I see myself as a unique piece of the larger picture. – I feel I’m fitting in perfectly, since I feel I embody the marginalized minority type of student interested in STEM. I also feel that after this I do want to be a leader in education. – I see myself as a learner, at this moment, and I also see myself sharing experiences in the future as a teacher.

52

Eli et al.

– [I learned that I should…] allow students to make revisions on any graded assignments. This will help with a growth mindset. [I should ask myself…] how does this lesson foster students’ thinking that they are a competent math learner. The impact that the conference had on these scholars was one of professional growth and empowerment towards engaging in more equitable teaching practices and serving as role models and leaders in their school and community. Noyce Seminars The Noyce seminars are 1.5-hour monthly seminars that bring together interns, scholars, mentors, teachers, faculty, and others committed to or interested in secondary mathematics teaching and learning. The Noyce seminar provided a space to discuss mathematics teaching and learning experiences as an intern and scholar. The Noyce seminar included discussions of readings that linked research and practice with a particular focus on equity and diversity. We have also had invited guest speakers to make interactive presentations, from mathematics education scholars and educators who have focused on such topics as: funds of knowledge, complex instruction, sheltered instruction strategies for supporting multilingual learners, implicit bias, cultivating positive mathematical identity, students’ mathematical agency, and culturally relevant mathematics teaching. Through the seminars the interns have highlighted the impact on their developing views of equity and equitable teaching practices. – The seminars focus a lot on equity and diversity and teach us a lot about them, and to be conscious of our subconscious inequities. – Increase diversity by involving students in classrooms as well as having a diverse community of diverse abilities coming together as resources for each other. – Promotes sense of community; rely on each other. – I mean this whole entire Noyce thing is just to get us out into somewhere, where, you know, we’re teaching in low economic status areas, and seeing, um, these stereotypes, and the accusations that are made against students, and you know, how that affects them when they’re learning and talking about it. Talking about equity and what that actually means is super important to me as a future teacher, and just opening your eyes and opening your perspective of what people are thinking and how, not only the diverse people, but the people outside of it. – I think the first seminar was on grouping students, and how students work in groups, complex instruction, and that was one of those roles, yeah, so that was a really good way to see, like, all of these different things that happen in student groups, and how to deal with them.

Stronger Together

53

The strengths of the Noyce seminars are that they bring together the entire community involved in the Noyce program. As highlighted by the students, their experiences in Noyce program and in the Noyce seminars make them feel part of the mathematics education community in ways they have not felt in their secondary teacher preparation programs. Furthermore, the Noyce seminars provided a space for them to reflect on their own identities, bias, and what it meant to engage in equitable teaching practices. Moving forward, our Noyce project team is looking to extend the Noyce seminars to include more critical conversations around race, identity, equity, culture, and social justice. In particular, we are looking to develop ways for scholars to take on leadership roles within the seminar through pairings with project team members (PI/Co-PIs, other mathematics education faculty, and mentors). Through these pairings we hope to mentor scholars into leading critical conversations around inequities in mathematics education.

Conclusion Collectively our analysis suggests that the Noyce program supports students in beginning to develop a teacher community, and in developing and examining their identities within the community. The program provides students with a variety of experiences (e.g., carrying out lessons with grades 6–12 and undergraduate students, presenting a poster at a national Noyce conference, reflecting on power and privilege through a Noyce seminar activity), and this variety may be useful as it allows students to engage with multiple aspects of teacher practice and connect in different ways with different members of the Noyce community. Although we have found indicators in our data of Noyce prospective teachers’ thinking about and beginning to develop equitable instruction, we also, not surprisingly, have found evidence of the messiness and complexity of teacher education as it pertains to equity. We have seen that prospective teachers can become of aware of, and sincerely reject, deficit thinking, but then easily regress into such thinking when students fail to perform as expected. In some cases, prospective teachers have described how an ability mindset has negatively affected them personally as well as students, and yet, they use language that reinforces this same mindset. Our prospective teachers have shown sensitivity to students’ needs and experiences, and yet, sometimes they show indifference and fall short of fully embracing students’ learning needs that may be based on their cultural, linguistic, or social needs. This may be evidence that their developing ideologies in asset-based instruction may conflict with personal beliefs associated with deficit perspectives about learning. While

54

Eli et al.

we are not surprised at this, we strongly feel the need to understand our prospective teachers better, and to identify and support them to build upon their strengths as they become increasingly aware of their own preconceptions and biases. While our Noyce program has made great strides in two years, we have much work to do. We see opportunities across program components to challenge ourselves and our colleagues to provide participating Noyce interns and scholars more concrete and applicable ways to adopt a strength-based stance towards implementing equitable teaching practices.

Acknowledgments This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1557255. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. The AZ Noyce Program is grateful to Rudy McCormick, the director of the Algebra Academy, University of Arizona Office of Early Academic Outreach, for supporting the Noyce Interns and Scholars in their mathematics teaching.

References Aguirre, J., Mayfield-Ingram, K., & Martin, D. B. (2013). The impact of identity in K-8 mathematics: Rethinking equity-based practices. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Aguirre, J. M., & Zavala, M. R. (2013). Making culturally responsive mathematics teaching explicit: A lesson analysis tool. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 8(2), 163– 190. doi:10.1080/1554480X.2013.768518.nh American Association for Employment in Education (2017). Educator supply and demand report 2016–2017: Executive summary. Retrieved from http://www.aaee.org/ resources/Documents/AAEE%20Supply%20_%20Demand%20Report%20 2017%20Ex%20Summary_fnl.pdf American Physical Society Panel on Public Affairs. (2017). Recruiting teachers in high-needs STEM fields: A survey of current majors and recent STEM graduates. Retrieved from http://www.aps.org/policy/reports/popareports/upload/POPASTEMReport.pdf Anhalt, C., Staats, S., Cortez, R., & Civil, M. (2018). Mathematical modeling and culturally relevant pedagogy. In Y. J. Dori, Z. Mevarech, & D. Baker (Eds.), Cognition, metacognition, and culture in STEM education (pp. 307–330). New York, NY: Springer.

Stronger Together

55

Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators. (2017). Standards for preparing teachers of mathematics. Retrieved from http://www.amte.net/standards Bartell, T., Wager, A., Edwards, A., Battey, D., Foote, M., & Spencer, J. (2017). Towards a framework for research linking teaching with the standards for mathematical practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48(1), 7–21. Boaler, J. (2016). Mathematical mindsets: Unleashing students’ potential through creative math, inspiring messages and innovative teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Boaler, J., & Staples, M. (2008). Creating mathematical futures through an equitable teaching approach: The case of Railside School. Teachers College Record, 110(3), 608–645. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. Civil, M. (2007). Building on community knowledge: An avenue to equity in mathematics education. In N. Nasir & P. Cobb (Eds.), Improving access to mathematics: Diversity and equity in the classroom (pp. 105–117). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Civil, M. (2014a). STEM learning research through a funds of knowledge lens. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(1), 41–59. doi:10.1007/s11422-014-9648-2 Civil, M. (2014b). Why should mathematics educators learn from and about Latina/o students’ in-school and out-of-school experience? (Invited Commentary). Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 7(2), 9–20. Cohen, E. G., & Lotan, R. A. (2014). Designing groupwork: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University. Eli, J. A., & Wood, M. B. (2016). Learning to facilitate groupwork through complex instruction. In M. B. Wood, E. Turner, M. Civil, & J. A. Eli (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Annual North American chapter of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (p. 933). Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona. Featherstone, H., Crespo, S., Jilk, L. M., Oslund, J. A., Parks, A. N., & Wood, M. B. (2011). Smarter together! Collaboration and equity in the elementary math classroom. Reston, VA: National Council of Mathematics Teachers. González, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. New York, NY: Routledge. Gutiérrez, R. (2002). Enabling the practice of mathematics teachers in context: Towards a new equity research agenda. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4(2–3), 145–187. Gutiérrez, R. (2007). (Re)defining equity: The importance of a critical perspective. In N. Nasir & P. Cobb (Eds.), Diversity, equity, and access to mathematical ideas (pp. 37–50). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Gutiérrez, R. (2009). Framing equity: Helping students “play the game” and “change the game.” Teaching for Excellence and Equity in Mathematics, 1(1), 4–7.

56

Eli et al.

Hodge, L. L. (2006). An orientation on the mathematics classroom that emphasizes power and identity: Reflecting on equity. The Urban Review, 38(5), 373–385. doi:10.1007/s11256-006-0041-7 Horn, I. (2012). Strength in numbers: Collaborative learning in secondary mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Jackson, K. (2009). The social construction of youth and mathematics: The case of a fifth-grade classroom. In D. B. Martin (Ed.), Mathematics teaching, learning, and liberation in the lives of black children (pp. 175–199). New York, NY: Routledge. Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2007). An array of qualitative data analysis tools: A call for data triangulation. School Psychology Quarterly, 22(4), 557–584. Louie, N. L. (2017). The culture of exclusion in mathematics education and its persistence in equity-oriented teaching. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48(5), 488–519. Loveless, T. (2013). The resurgence of ability grouping and persistence in tracking. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. Retrieved from http://www.brookings.edu/ research/the-resurgence-of-ability-grouping-and-persistence-of-tracking NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Nasir, N. S., Cabana, C., Shreve, B., Woodbury, E., & Louie, N. (Eds.). (2014). Mathematics for equity. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers Mathematics. National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics and TODOS: Mathematics for All. (2016). Mathematics education through the lens of social justice: Acknowledgement, actions, and accountability. Retrieved from https://www.todos-math.org/assets/ docs2016/2016Enews/3.pospaper16_wtodos_pp.pdf National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_Math%20 Standards.pdf National Science Board. (2015). Revisiting the STEM workforce: A companion to science and engineering indicators 2014. Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/ nsb/publications/2015/nsb201510.pdf Schoen, H. L., Fey, J. T., Hirsch, C. R., & Coxford, A. F. (1999). Issues and options in the math wars. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(6), 444–453. Schoenfeld, A. (2004). The math wars. Educational Policy, 18(1), 253–286. Strutchens, M., Bay-Williams, J., Civil, M., Chval, K., Malloy, C. E., White, D. Y., D’Ambrosio, B., & Berry, R. Q. (2012). Foregrounding equity in mathematics teacher education. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 15(1), 1–7. Teaching Works. (2018). High leverage practices. Retrieved from http://www.teachingworks.org/work-of-teaching/high-leverage-practices

Stronger Together

57

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). Teacher attrition and mobility: Results from the 2012–13 teacher follow-up survey (NCES 2014077). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education. (2013, April). Preparing and credentialing the Nation’s teachers: The secretary’s ninth report on teacher quality. Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://title2. ed.gov/titleiireport13.pdf

CHAPTER 3

Noyce at Vanderbilt: Exploring the Factors That Shape the Recruitment and Retention of Black Teachers Heather J. Johnson, Teresa K. Dunleavy and Nicole M. Joseph

Abstract The recruitment and retention of Black STEM teachers is a nation-wide challenge for the field of teacher education. In this chapter, we start to unpack the recruitment and retention challenges faced by Vanderbilt’s Noyce STEM teacher education program. We share the analysis of lived-experience interviews from two Black teacher candidates who earned their STEM degrees from an HBCU (Fisk University) and then transitioned to a PWI (Vanderbilt University) to earn their master’s in education (M.Ed.) degree. The analysis of their lived experiences revealed four themes: (a) the need for more visible partnerships between the HBCU and PWI; (b) the identification of mentors for scholar success; (c) the investigation for understanding Black teacher candidates as role models for their students; and (d) the institutionalized racism that still challenges Black teacher candidates at PWIs. These findings have implications for how programs situated within a PWI might consider the recruitment and retention of Black mathematics and science teachers.

Keywords Noyce scholarship program – teacher education – African-American teachers – black teachers – recruitment – retention – HBCU – PWI

Introduction “Do you have any Black male candidates graduating this year?” Not one—not two—but three principals asked us this question in April 2016. Why? They were urban secondary school principals without a single Black male represented on their STEM faculty. While the principals were hoping there were © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2019 | DOI: 10.1163/9789004399990_003

Noyce at Vanderbilt

59

Black candidates in the pipeline, the reality is that there were and still are few Black male candidates with STEM licensure graduating from the universities in the Nashville area. We (the faculty in the Secondary Education Program at Vanderbilt University) work with an urban public-school district where 70% of the students identify as students of color. In contrast, the same percentage of licensed teachers identify as white. The few Black scholars who have recently been in our program have experienced challenges associated with being a racial minority at a predominantly-white institution (PWI). When responding to the question, “What advice would you give to Vandy and to the Noyce program to make life better for the students here?” Ramona,1 one of our Black graduate students, shared, Be more accepting of my culture…If you want to talk so much about race and racism and how it’s impacting the Black community—go to the source. You’re not at the source yet. None of your papers are at the source. None of your faculty are at the source. Go out into the communities. Go to North Nashville; go to Antioch; go set up shop on Jefferson for a full day and see what happens; see what you see and the things you encounter. Go to African street festivals. Go to Napier. Go to those housing developments. If you want to know how to get more Blacks to come to your school or to recruit them or even get them to stay—go to the source. Quit acting like it’s not a problem. It’s a problem. In this chapter, we start to examine the ‘problem’ that Ramona referred to. That is—the recruitment and retention of Black students into Vanderbilt’s STEM teacher education program. In so doing, we share the analysis of interviews from two of our Black teacher candidates.

Context and Background The recruitment and retention of Black STEM teachers is a nation-wide challenge for the field of teacher education. “The teacher workforce has become less ethnically and racially diverse and more female [white female] over time, a development that has adversely affected students, particularly males of color” (The Albert Shanker Institute, 2016, p. 18). Research has pointed to the positive benefits of more racially diverse teachers: students of color need positive role models that look more like them; teachers of color hold higher expectations for their minority students; and greater teacher racial diversity can positively enrich students of all races and cultures

60

Johnson et al.

from different backgrounds (Chazan, Brantlinger, Clark, & Edwards, 2013; Clark, Badertscher, & Napp, 2013). Despite the positive influence that teachers of color can have on students, “teachers of color remain significantly underrepresented relative to the students they serve” (The Albert Shanker Institute, 2016, p. 18). The same story is being told in city after city across the United States. Despite a lack of scholars of color, many teacher preparation programs have set goals to ‘increase diversity.’ In particular, Noyce programs across the country have a goal to recruit and retain more racially and culturally diverse STEM majors into teaching. Based on conversations with faculty from other Noyce programs at Noyce summits (summer 2016 and summer 2017), it became clear that recruitment of candidates of color for initial licensure programs has been a pervasive challenge. Even programs located in urban spaces, densely populated with people of color, like ours, report difficulty with recruiting students of color. During the year of this study, about 85% of students in the secondary education program reported their racial identity as white, about 10% reported their identity as Asian, and about 5% reported their identity as Black. In this cohort, none of the students reported their identity as Hispanic or Native American.2 As the authors of this chapter (STEM education faculty in the Department of Teaching and Learning at Vanderbilt) experienced the challenge of recruiting candidates of color into teaching, we sought to learn more. Therefore, we investigated the following research question: What factors affect the Noyce recruitment of candidates of color into Vanderbilt’s Master’s in Secondary Education program? In order to understand this question from our scholars’ perspectives, we narrowed our focus to Black undergraduate STEM majors from Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). As a result, we explored the following questions: 1. How do Black Noyce scholars at Vanderbilt report their lived experiences? 2. How do these experiences inform recruitment and retention efforts? 3. How do issues of race and privilege influence Black Noyce scholars’ lived experiences? 4. What can we learn from the lived experiences of Black Noyce scholars to inform future Noyce recruitment and retention efforts? This chapter reports on what we learned by interviewing two Black STEM scholars who attended Fisk University as undergraduates, sought a master’s degree and teaching license through Vanderbilt’s secondary education program, and were recruited to become Noyce scholars who would make a commitment to teach in their STEM area in an urban secondary school. Ultimately, by seeking to understand our Black scholars’ experiences, we hope that innovative ideas

Noyce at Vanderbilt

61

related to recruitment and retention efforts for Black undergraduate STEM majors who pursue careers in teaching will emerge.

Methods The setting for this study is the Noyce program at Vanderbilt University, a PWI, where about 30–50 secondary education teachers graduate every year. Between 20–25% of these teachers specialize in the areas of science and mathematics. The scholars for this study came from the first cohort of Noyce scholars at Vanderbilt that started in fall 2015. Two scholars completed their undergraduate STEM degrees at Fisk University, an HBCU located two miles from Vanderbilt. These scholars were recruited into the Vanderbilt Noyce program. We conducted in-depth interviews with each scholar in order to understand their lived experiences (van Manen, 2016). Because research participants from communities of color do not always trust white researchers, we hired a Black undergraduate student whom we had worked with in previous projects to conduct the interviews. Additionally, we aimed to create a comfortable atmosphere where the participants could share their lived experiences in an uninhibited way. The interviewer used a semi-structured interview format with broad, open-ended questions, following up with probing questions to understand our scholars’ perspectives on a deeper level (Moustakas, 1994). The interview questions revolved around four main themes: (a) the journey to and through Fisk, including the decision to major in science; (b) the decision to pursue graduate studies at Vanderbilt; (c) social and academic experiences at Vanderbilt and in the Noyce program; and (d) program recruitment and retention. We analyzed the participant interviews on multiple levels. We hired a research assistant to transcribe the interviews. After an initial transcription was completed, we noticed that some of the authenticity in terms of the scholars’ speech, as Black Americans, was lost in the transcription. Therefore, we engaged in another phase of transcribing the interviews, listening for and transcribing the scholars’ authentic use of words, phrases, and references. For example, there were several places in the first transcription of Ramona’s interview noted as “inaudible,” which led us review the transcript. In one case, when responding to the question, “What about Fisk made it such good times?” part of Ramona’s original transcript read: Professors would literally stop you from eating to say (inaudible) class. But you literally stopped, and you had respect for everything they said. I want to learn some of that.

62

Johnson et al.

The second-level transcription revealed, Professors would literally stop you from eating to say “hey, we’re fixin’ to have class.” And I’m like, “What? You lyin’.” (Snaps.) But you literally stopped, and you had respect for everything they said, and you was like, “dang, I learned something today.” While the student who transcribed these interviews may have thought that they transcribed them in full or as they were requested, this process illuminated some of the tensions researchers have to contend with when researching issues related to equity and diversity. Specifically, the terms that were removed from the transcripts consisted of Black vernacular, which suggested that the transcriptionists were correcting their grammar, an act that could be interpreted as racist. There were also places where content was clearly omitted, which further limited the story that could be told. We engaged in iterative analysis of the interviews, in order to identify emerging themes and insightful vignettes (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011). Each transcript was separately analyzed by the researchers in order to triangulate findings (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011). We then determined themes within and across the interviews, in order to map out the descriptions, compare responses, and identify relationships between the themes (Denzin & Lincoln, 2008; Spradley, 1980).

Results In reporting the results, we first provide a short narrative of the individual interview participants to provide context for their socially constructed identities. We then discuss the four themes that emerged from the analysis. We discuss these themes in the context of future recruitment and retention efforts of Black STEM teachers. Ramona’s Narrative Ramona grew up in a small town with her sister and grandmother in Mississippi. She said that one day, during her senior year, a Fisk recruiter showed up at her high school, offering her a scholarship. “You’re a provost scholar, and we want to give you full tuition paid.” She always believed that she would attend a four-year institution. When talking about the decision to enroll at Fisk, Ramona specifically stated, “I knew for a fact it was an HBCU; that was not even a question. Because, our family always went to them.” The scholarship

Noyce at Vanderbilt

63

offer helped solidify that decision. In reflecting on her years at Fisk, she is very proud of what she achieved: “Put me up against any university, HBCU or PWI. Put me up against them. Fisk stands tall….We stand firm in the scholars we produce, second to none, we produce them.” Ramona was initially sure about becoming a biologist. She started pursuing a master’s degree in biology after graduating, but found herself returning to her “Fisk family” to work with a Fisk-sponsored after-school science program for middle school girls. The director, whom we will call Mr. Abraham, was a former science teacher, a Black man, and had worked with Fisk outreach programs for nearly 15 years. Furthermore Mr. Abraham was a very important mentor in both scholars’ trajectories. Mr. Abraham identified Ramona’s teaching talents in the after-school program, and he introduced her to the Noyce program. Because of his mentorship, Ramona realized the need to shift her professional trajectory from research in the biology lab to teaching in the science classroom. After shifting her graduate studies from biology to the master’s in education program at Vanderbilt, Ramona talked about how her identity as a Black female who always loved science helped her to establish rapport and relationships with her middle school students. She said, “I realized every single time I needed a pick-me-up, I needed a boost where I was genuinely happy; eight times out of ten I was with my kids. No matter what.” Alvin’s Narrative When Alvin reached high school, he stated some Black kids at his school, including him, were “either too Black for the white kids or not Black enough for the Black kids.” About his upbringing, he said, I’d been to predominantly white schools all my life. And, you know…it was kinda crazy. Because I guess we [my family] didn’t do typical—like, ‘normal’ Black people stuff. You know, I guess—we spoke correctly, we were vegetarians….And when you grow up in a small bubble, a lot of times the only influences that people see of Black people, successfully, are athletes or entertainers. And we were like, we were involved in both those things, but a lot of times, they don’t see a lot of Black academics. Alvin shared this narrative because he felt like he did not understand Black culture the way he thought he should. He enrolled at Fisk and connected with the family-like feel of the campus. He enjoyed science, but he leaned on mentors to keep him in science. Like Ramona, he discovered the after-school program run by Mr. Abraham and found that he felt comfortable working with the kids there. Alvin told us that Mr. Abraham played a significant role in encouraging

64

Johnson et al.

him to consider education as a profession. The attraction to Vanderbilt’s Noyce program may have been a relatively easy sell because, in part, his father used to work for Vanderbilt and his brother was already enrolled in a graduate program at Vanderbilt. Specifically, he also told us: I always thought of the process of going to an HBCU for undergrad, and I always wanted to go to a PWI for grad school. Just because it’s often funny to see, you know, what you were taught—and then go and apply that. You know, go and test it out in the real world. In his classes at Vanderbilt, Alvin talked about the lack of racial diversity in the student body. Over time though, he said he thought he needed to engage his Vanderbilt peers in difficult conversations and debates, “because it’s a conversation that needs to be had. And, if not me, then who?” There were few Black students in Alvin’s classes. Yet, when reflecting on whether he thought there were any good things about being a Noyce scholar, he highlighted the benefit of discovering other [white students] who were equity-minded. Alvin stated: In our country today, even with the election of President Trump, there’s a lot racially going on and the fact that you get to meet with other people who are like-minded and wanting to help, you know, push your culture along and want to help you empower your culture. I think that’s beautiful. On the one hand, when asked what advice he would give a Black student who was planning to attend Vanderbilt, he quickly said, “hold on tight,” and he cautioned prospective students to be prepared for “things you’ve never seen before here.” On the other hand, our analysis revealed that Alvin also regularly talked about asking people to understand different viewpoints. The combination of all of his contributions pointed toward supporting the community to grow, understand, and respect Black culture. Learning from Ramona’s and Alvin’s Lived Experiences as Noyce Scholars The participant narratives paint a picture for how Ramona and Alvin earned their STEM major at an HBCU and then transitioned to a PWI for graduate studies in education. While these are two of many stories in the extant literature, analyses of Ramona and Alvin’s lived experiences revealed four themes that have implications for the recruitment and retention of Black scholars situated at PWIs. These four themes include: (a) the need for more visible partnerships

Noyce at Vanderbilt

65

between the HBCU and PWI for recruitment purposes; (b) the identification of mentors for scholar success; (c) the investigation for understanding how Black scholars become role models for their students; and (d) the institutionalized racism that still challenges Black scholars at a PWI. Visible Relationships between PWIs and HBCUs may Support Recruitment Efforts Both Ramona and Alvin said they learned about Noyce when Mr. Abraham introduced them to it. Alvin described his undergraduate experience at Fisk as “a big bubble. We barely knew much about Vandy.” Thus, we found that if Vanderbilt wants to recruit students from Fisk, they need to do some work to (a) make the program visible to Fisk students and (b) help Fisk students see how they will have opportunities to participate in the effort to act as agents of change. To meet the first goal, Ramona suggested a good first start would be to, “Get over there and just bombard Fisk…Hit them hard. Emails, flyers, brochures, packages, tables, just hit them. That’s what it will take.” More than that though, both Ramona and Alvin thought face-to-face time with Vanderbilt professors was important. Ramona explained that Fisk students, “know about Vanderbilt, they just don’t know about this side of Vanderbilt. They know about the research; they just don’t know about the education part.” Alvin agreed that it was going to take “investment and time” from the PWI to establish relationships with the STEM departments at Fisk, perhaps even having “a person in each of those departments” to help with recruitment. He also suggested that Vanderbilt faculty sponsor lectures and host a Noyce booth at Fisk’s homecoming. Alvin emphasized the importance of the Noyce program explicitly acknowledging and valuing what Black scholars learn at Fisk about their community and culture. He said he felt it was important, in recruitment efforts, to talk explicitly about how Vanderbilt needed to acknowledge the following: We’re not working against what you guys learned at Fisk. We’re not working against how you guys were brought up and taught at Fisk. We’re going to show you a different perspective that also might help you become a better teacher, become that better person and to reach those children that you’re actually going to reach. We’re not here to take away what you learned, we’re not here to discount or discontinue what you learned. We interpreted this part of Alvin’s reflection to be about how Vanderbilt should explicitly acknowledge Fisk’s contribution to an HBCU graduate’s knowledge

66

Johnson et al.

base and how that knowledge is legitimated and used to produce knowledge about teaching. Ramona stated that in addition to acknowledging the value of Black culture and community, Noyce program directors or recruiters need to remind Fisk students that they have the agency to promote change: This is the way you can be that change. This is one of the many ways you can be that change, by going to those schools and impacting those students. But you are going to do it by getting the proper training and knowledge you need by going through Noyce by going through Vanderbilt. Because the terminology, the pedagogy, everything I’ve gotten here, I feel so equipped, that’s why I’m not afraid to go to (my school) every day and do what I do, because I know I’m prepared for it. Not only because of my personal [experiences], but because of what I’ve gained professionally. And if you exhibit that to students at HBCUs, not just Fisk, but at any HBCU, and get them recruited to that Noyce program, they will come like that (indicating quickly). Ramona and Alvin both valued the knowledge and experiences Fisk provided for them as undergraduate STEM students and what Vanderbilt provided for them as graduate students in education. Together, their lived experiences at both institutions had a cumulative effect on building their confidence and preparing them to be secondary STEM teachers. What Ramona and Alvin shared, is the perception that despite efforts to have “partnerships,” Fisk students have to physically go to Vanderbilt to engage in those partnerships. However, they wanted to see more students and faculty from Vanderbilt participate in Fisk activities. Ramona and Alvin emphasized the importance of deeply investing in the Fisk culture. Paramount to successful recruitment of students from an HBCU, there needs to be some effort by the PWI to understand the culture of HBCU students to gain their trust and to ensure that the program will help to sustain and empower that culture. Effective Mentors Can Be Game Changers for Recruiting Noyce Black Scholars We found that mentors can become family proxies at the undergraduate level all the way through the transition to and duration of graduate school. As undergraduate students at Fisk, both Ramona and Alvin talked about the professorial support they received. Ramona emphasized that this support went beyond academics for her to include emotional and financial support. She thought the work at Fisk was stressful at times, stating, “But I wouldn’t

Noyce at Vanderbilt

67

trade it for anything, because my professors…I literally have numbers in my phone I can call right now, and say I need X, Y, and Z, and they would do it.” For Alvin, science professors played a large role in learning about who he was as a person and keeping him in school and on track to finish his biology major. He identified “Four professors—who made my –science—choice— necessary (pausing to emphasize each word individually) and really worth it, you know?” Both Ramona and Alvin connected with Mr. Abraham’s after-school program when they were undergraduates at Fisk. We found that he became the game changer for both of them to apply to the Noyce program at Vanderbilt. Alvin credited Mr. Abraham with giving him the opportunity to work with students but also acknowledged the flexibility that allowed him to explore other options at Fisk. Alvin said, “Anyone who knows Mr. Abraham, knows he’s famous for ‘I don’t need you to come every day. I just need you to pick a day you can be consistent about and come.’” There was just enough support to guide Alvin in a purposeful direction, with enough slack in his rope for him to explore his interests, but it was always under the watchful eye of his mentors. Alvin started attending one day a week, and it eventually evolved into an everyday commitment. He found “the kids became my family. All the people who worked there during the school year and summer—family. So, I just loved the atmosphere and couldn’t stay away.” When Mr. Abraham asked him what Alvin was going to do after undergraduate school, and he did not have a response, Mr. Abraham responded, “I have this program for you. Take a look at it; research.” Ramona described her process in discovering the Noyce program was also heavily influenced by Mr. Abraham. As described above, Ramona first started a graduate degree in biology research. In spite of this, she found that she could not break away from the after-school program or the summer camps that she worked with through Fisk. She recalled the following events: One day [Mr. Abraham] popped up, because he knew I wasn’t happy doing research, because I had been doing research for like three or four years and I was miserable. And he was like, ‘maybe you should look into Vandy’s program,’ and I was like, ‘No. I’m not teaching. Are you crazy?’ He was like, ‘that’s really what you do all day.’ I said, ‘No, I don’t, I just work with kids. That’s what I do.’ He was like, ‘No, you teach.’ I was like, ‘No, I work with kids.’ He was like, ‘Whatever, fill this out.’ And I did. Ramona’s reenactment of her conversation with Mr. Abraham demonstrates his critical role in both identifying her talent to pursue teaching as a viable

68

Johnson et al.

career, and his role in counseling her to make the switch from science research to teaching science. After the decision was made to join Noyce, both Ramona and Alvin expressed some concerns about transitioning from Fisk to Vanderbilt. Mr. Abraham helped them consider opening the door. After face-to-face meetings with Vanderbilt faculty, they talked about feeling comfortable enough to sit down at a meeting to engage in conversations about teaching and learning. When responding to a question about what encouraged her most as a Noyce scholar, Ramona talked about how the Vanderbilt faculty were: So in your face, so on your side, they are so rooting for you; they are so doing anything they can to make sure you’re successful. Even with all the stuff I had going on, they never gave up on me; they took a chance on me. They didn’t have to, at all, and I’m appreciative of that, so…that’s the thing that encouraged me, knowing they genuinely cared and was in it. I was like, ‘Oh, I can do this.’ Similarly, Alvin shared that, “The same people that got me into this program have never left me. They have never decided that ‘he’s behind,’ or ‘we can’t work with him.’ The same people who have helped me have been there with me. That continuity is huge.” When Alvin spoke of continuity, he named specific faculty from the Noyce program, and again, it was Mr. Abraham. We recognize that Mr. Abraham played an enormous role in both Ramona’s and Alvin’s trajectories before and during the Noyce program. Some of this support became more visible after these interviews were conducted. We discovered that Mr. Abraham drove Alvin to his first classroom visit, helping to make sure he knew where to go and that he could arrive on time. We also found that Mr. Abraham checked in on Ramona and Alvin weekly, asking about whether they were happy and whether they were completing their assignments. While the continuity of support that started during Ramona’s and Alvin’s undergraduate experiences at Fisk and continued all the way through graduate school might be unique to this program, we found that it influenced their success and retention in the program. As further testimony to this relationship, Ramona won a graduation award for Outstanding Professional Promise in Service to Diverse Populations, and Mr. Abraham was the person who was there to congratulate her when she received it. Black STEM Teachers Are Role Models for Their Students Both Alvin and Ramona stated that the profession they were pursuing was going to place them in a position where they, as Black STEM teachers, were

Noyce at Vanderbilt

69

underrepresented. Ramona explained, “Education is one of those areas where Black people do not get it. We are underrepresented in that area, so bad.” Alvin talked about the role he took on as a Black man studying to be a science teacher at a PWI: To be Black in the Noyce program [here], you’re going to be watched….So, namely, you’re going to be looked at to see—can you lead? Because this program was designed ‘specially for you. You’re going to be watched by your fellow teachers, your support staff, by your students. In this respect, being a Black teacher put Ramona and Alvin into positions where they were role models for their future students and also for peers who did not see teaching as a viable career trajectory for a Black STEM major. Not everyone wants to take on a role with that much weight, but Ramona and Alvin described an opportunity to build a pipeline of Black talent that transitioned into teaching. Ramona declared: I think it’s only fair that these Black and Brown kids see Black and Brown faces. And stop seeing the same Teach for America faces. And stop seeing the same Nashville Teaching Fellow faces. See the faces. They need to see us. A little girl questions me every day if I’m completely Black. It’s almost been a year [since] I’ve been here. They question me still, because they are not used to seeing someone who [looks] like them. Alvin and Ramona each said that their lived experiences as Black students would help them to connect with the students they planned to teach. Ramona said, “I felt like I would be an asset, because I had already lived in the shoes these kids live in. I have walked that journey.” And, while Alvin recognized he was signing up for a career that is “you know, statistically and historically underpaid and underappreciated,” he also saw his opportunity to lead stating: I think Black teachers are Black superheroes. To be real. Because you get to be everything, you know? For a child and their development. I can’t control anything that happens outside the classroom, but I can give you tools to help you deal with that; help you go back and change that. Ramona and Alvin do not have an answer right now for the children that have asked them, “Why are our teachers white? Why are none of them Black like you?” But, they described being hopeful that they could be part of the change that might bring more Black teachers to urban schools.

70

Johnson et al.

Black Scholars May Experience Institutionalized Racism Studying at a PWI brought new challenges to Alvin and Ramona; some they expected but did not always know how to navigate. Ramona talked about difficult interactions she had with white students at Vanderbilt, both within and outside the classroom walls. Because Ramona started the program slightly before Alvin, she was often the only Black student in her classes. She recalled: I was literally the only Black person in the room. It’s life! But what else can I do? I’m at Vanderbilt. There is nothing else I can do about that; I knew that coming in. If I didn’t want to be that person, I didn’t have to be here. So, when I walked into the room, I was okay with it. However, walking in, I could feel that everybody else was not okay with the fact that I was okay. It made them uncomfortable because they felt they had to tiptoe around what they say, tip-toe around what they did. And I’m like, ‘What are you doing?’ Like, this is not going to rub off…(rubs skin on arm). This excerpt illuminates the micro- and macro-aggressions and other negative experiences Black students (as well as Black faculty) often experience at PWIs like Vanderbilt. When describing his academic and social adjustments to Vanderbilt, Alvin said: I had a hard time with relatability—to a lot of people at Vandy who [weren’t] Black, so that took some time getting used to. Just by Vanderbilt’s label as a PWI, in contrast to Fisk’s HBCU status, both Ramona and Alvin knew there would be differences when they stepped into their classes at Vanderbilt. Yet, their lived experiences were sometimes more challenging than they expected and difficult to work through on their own. When talking about her social adjustment to Vanderbilt, Ramona reflected on various encounters with students: I had to understand I wasn’t going to have the same community that I had at Fisk. So, some days you might get looked at crazy or different. Or some days, you might be walking on a sidewalk, and a Vanderbilt student bumps you and doesn’t say ‘excuse me.’ Or, when you are walking, and you have a couple of girls all in a group laughing and ki-ki’ing, and they stop and ’spect you to get off the sidewalk to walk. Or you get in class, and someone says something like, ‘if all Black boys weren’t thugs wearing hoodies maybe I wouldn’t have to fear for my life.’ You know? Things like that, you have to say, ‘Hmmm, I can approach this one of two ways.

Noyce at Vanderbilt

71

I can either just come out of the bag and just let you have it; and give you the show that you want.’ Or, ‘I could give you the hard, cold facts.’ ‘And really give you the facts about who really benefits from all these quoteunquote things that you say all Black people take up,’ like, ‘Who really are the benefactors, you or me?’ So, when I first got here, I really had to learn how to just curve it. I didn’t know how to…[I would] just leave from class frustrated and just be crying, and just mad at the world, you know? Again, this excerpt illustrates how micro-aggressions and institutional racism continue to surface in white institutional space. Additionally, it becomes a lesson for Vanderbilt faculty to acknowledge the microaggressions and racist behaviors of some students and to do a better job of creating a more inclusive classroom, where all students feel valued and where moments of racism are not ignored and/or not known to exist. The fact that Ramona cried and felt like she had to “curve it” suggests that the instructor did not provide an identityaffirming learning environment. Alvin shared Ramona’s sentiments about his initial classroom experiences at Vanderbilt. When topics broached race or inequities in education, Alvin reported, “I could tell in some of my classes I wanted to get into an argument, because I knew it was coming but I would stop myself. Because I would think, ‘That’s false; that’s false; but I’m gonna let it ride….’” Like Ramona, he remained quiet at first, choosing not to bring in an alternate viewpoint when he was the only one who could share his perspective. It was these instances of institutionalized racism that Ramona and Alvin reported to Mr. Abraham. Through conversations with each of them, we learned that Mr. Abraham helped them to reflect on what happened and to work through next steps. Ramona and Alvin reported that their work with Mr. Abraham was helpful, but because Mr. Abraham had built connections with Ramona and Alvin at Fisk, we note that his work with them left Vanderbilt off the hook, giving rise to another example of institutionalized racism. While attending a predominantly white graduate program in secondary education, Ramona and Alvin found a Black mentor in Mr. Abraham; he was someone who cared for them and remained involved throughout their graduate studies. But he was not in class sessions with them, and he was not at their field placements with them. So when Ramona and Alvin entered these white-dominant spaces, they did not have an affinity group to support their success. Ramona said that initially, when there were Noyce seminars, she “wouldn’t even talk or speak,” particularly when racial injustices seemed to be mirrored in her interactions at Vanderbilt. Despite receiving some support from their non-Black peers and faculty at Vanderbilt, Alvin explicitly talked about the potential benefits of having

72

Johnson et al.

more Black students enroll in Noyce and in secondary education at Vanderbilt: “You [would] have a lot of Black students who can [empathize] because…you all have that shared experience. Of what it’s like to be here.” Alvin’s comment is important, because, in the context of talking about how much he appreciated the Noyce program and all that it had offered, he also acknowledged that he would benefit from having more Black peers to share his experience. Near the end of the interview, when responding to a question about his sense of community as a Noyce scholar, Alvin stated the following: At first it was hard because I didn’t know anybody, and I was out of my comfort zone. I would definitely like to see…I need to see…more African Americans and other minorities in this program. Because—this program is teaching OUR children, so of course students need to see a teacher who looks like them. Ramona and Alvin were not close friends. Furthermore, they were at different points in life when they went through the program. Yet, their common Fisk history, their involvement with Mr. Abraham’s programs, and their move to a PWI for graduate school brought them together. Paramount to understanding their lived experiences as a Noyce scholar at Vanderbilt was a deeper understanding about how their identity as Black scholars mattered, not only in their stories but also in the PWI. Both Ramona and Alvin emphasized the value of having additional Black voices in the Noyce cohorts. And they both described how Mr. Abraham helped them to navigate some of the difficult spaces they encountered at Vanderbilt.

Discussion and Implications Both Ramona and Alvin reflected on the role that their Black identities played in their lived experience as Vanderbilt Noyce scholars. In both interviews, they talked about the privilege of being a student at Vanderbilt as well as their fieldwork in the schools, which we identified as white privilege and dominantculture privilege and how they worked through that on their own and with the Noyce program coordinators. In this section, we point to evidence that describes the need for Vanderbilt to intentionally seek out opportunities to make change. We identify Vanderbilt as a PWI, both currently with predominantly white students and predominantly white faculty. We acknowledge that Vanderbilt has been seeking to grow the number of Black scholars who participate in their Noyce program to become secondary STEM teachers.

Noyce at Vanderbilt

73

Alvin’s interview revealed some perspectives about privilege. He said, To be totally honest, you’re going to meet a lot of kids from privilege. You yourself might be from privilege or not, but you’re going to meet a lot of kids….And they’re gonna have a lot of views. Some are gonna be like yours. Some might not be quite so like yours. How are you going to respond to that? Granted, you ARE going to have people here who can help you and to take care of you. But, if you’re going to help move…as a Black man (pointing to self), if you’re going to help move our culture forward, you’re going to need to see and hear what they have to say so that you can look to protect your culture and you know, help your culture. They need you here. Alvin identified the presence of privilege in the graduate school classroom. As faculty, we learned from Alvin that it is not enough to acknowledge the systemic inequities in public school classrooms. If we want to move this work forward, if we want to grow our programs, we need to simultaneously acknowledge the systemic inequities in our secondary school classrooms alongside the inequities in our graduate school, PWI classrooms. Ramona recalled that it took a little time to feel comfortable, but it was her experiences at Fisk that built her confidence to pursue graduate work at Vanderbilt: You don’t feel like you’re above anybody else, but you feel the difference. Like, I felt like I could go in any classroom [at Fisk], that why I felt so comfortable comin’ over to Vanderbilt. I was like, ‘Oh,’ (shrugs), ‘come to Vandy, nothing’s nothin’. And my sister was like, ‘are you sure?’ And I’m like, ‘Yeah. I’ve been to Fisk.’ (shrugs). It’s nothin’. I feel like it made me so ready to come here. And I didn’t feel like timid or shy. I can stand my ground here at Vanderbilt in the classrooms, because I had gained that confidence. Despite the confidence she developed coming into the Noyce program at Vanderbilt, Ramona was still surprised by some of the encounters she had with other Vanderbilt students, like the sidewalk experience described above, as well as some of the intellectual conversations that were introduced in her classes. She reflected: I’ve gotten into some very interesting debates with classmates here, and I’ve had a lot of interesting things said to me. I will say interesting, that I never thought would be said to me in the year of our Lord 2016–17, but you’d be surprised….But I mean hey, it’s life, I can’t negate that.

74

Johnson et al.

As white faculty (Johnson and Dunleavy), we have worked to affect change in our Noyce program. First, we acknowledged the opportunity to learn from Ramona and Alvin’s experiences. Next, we needed to invest in that change from the bottom up. Our Noyce program identifies a clear mission for justice in education, citing “valuing diversity,” “commitment to urban settings,” and attracting “candidates who want to take on the challenges and rewards of teaching historically marginalized learners.” And yet, we still have work to do in identifying the places where dominant-culture narratives make our classrooms unsafe spaces for our Black students. As previously discussed, the mentoring work Mr. Abraham took on helped Ramona to navigate these experiences. But because there were no other Black scholars in her classes, and Mr. Abraham was not present on Vanderbilt’s campus when these experiences took place, faculty began to acknowledge her challenges and responded in ways to help her to shape her role and identity as a Black graduate student at a PWI and prepare for a career that has been traditionally dominated by white females. Ramona’s peers and faculty at Vanderbilt started to provide space to encourage her to be who she wanted and needed to be. We learned that, over time, Ramona was given the space to be herself: The space I’m allowed to be, the space that I’m given to have that speech, to say what I want; it is what it is, like, ‘I’m sorry, take it or leave it.’ But this is literally what you are going to walk into when you go to an urban school. This is what, fixin’ to hit you right over the head. And they gonna look at you crazy. And just take it, and go with it. You make it work for you or against you. For me, given that space, I am so appreciative that I have it. Because I couldn’t come in here any other way, but they have accepted me for who I am for the most part. They don’t question who I am. And they let me be me. Ramona said that she felt the faculty and students in the Noyce program and at Peabody let her “have a voice,” and got to know her for who she was. “I could be orange, just…know me for being me. For me! (with emphasis) Not for me being this Black girl, or this Black woman, or….They just know Ramona for Ramona. I’m appreciative of that.” Ramona said that she believed her opinion was valued, and she was respected as a scholar who could make contributions that advanced her peers’ learning. Because she found this space to share her voice, she learned that she felt more fulfilled personally at being able to productively contribute to the conversation. Ramona made it clear in the interview that Vanderbilt, and PWIs in general, need to acknowledge the institutional and structuralized racisms that exist on campus. She declared if Vanderbilt wants more Black students to enroll in their graduate programs, the university first

Noyce at Vanderbilt

75

needs to be, “honest about the stigma the university has anyway. Just be totally honest and blunt about it.” Thus, the university needed to make it clear that it was doing something to address these inequities. In other words, the PWI needed to follow through on their promise to: Allow the Black students on this campus to have a voice. If they want to be angry, let them be angry. If they want to be upset, let them be upset. If they want to scream and lash out, let them have the room to do that, without you having to call the police and label them as a threat. We’re not all angry; we’re not all belligerent; we’re not all upset. What we learn from these interviews is that intentionally seeking opportunities to make systemic change happen can allow students the space to find their voice. We have learned that PWIs cannot continue to recruit scholars of color just to “check off” their diversity boxes. Most importantly, if Noyce programs at PWIs are really interested in recruiting scholars of color into the teaching profession, then our practices, perceptions, and conversations need to change within our higher education classrooms, as well as the larger university community.

Conclusion Our interviews with Ramona and Alvin have provided some important perspectives on the experiences of being recruited from an HBCU to complete teacher licensure, earn a master’s degree in education, and participate as a Noyce scholar at a PWI. In thinking about the experiences of Ramona and Alvin and the decisions they made to commit to the Noyce program, we have to recognize the number of people who supported them, the resources they leveraged to help them maintain and strengthen their identities as Black students, and the goal-driven mindset that kept them on track. In Alvin’s words: If we’re really trying to build a pipeline, then we’re going to need to work on building the pipeline. How would you build a railroad? You have to first see what type of soil is there, you know? What, like, what can it sustain? What type of engine I can run over the railroad to make sure the goods can get from one area to another? Over the last three academic years, Vanderbilt has made steps that may positively affect change for students of color broadly and Black students specifically. Since 2015, nine professors have been hired into our department. The majority

76

Johnson et al.

of these faculty members identify as faculty of color. Furthermore, Vanderbilt has established an office for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion, hired a vice provost for inclusive excellence, and an associate provost for strategic initiatives and partnerships. One author (Dunleavy) received a seed grant to start developing relationships with additional HBCUs. All of these efforts work toward similar goals, and yet, we contend that if we seek to recruit more Black scholars into the teaching profession, the most important goal of all is to listen and learn from our Black graduates. Reports show that our demographic data across the secondary education program has moved from about 2% of students reporting Black as their race in 2016 to a projected 11% in 2019. Similarly, students reporting Asian as their race has increased from about 5% to 11% and students reporting white has declined from 93% to 68% over the same time period. In 2019, while 5% of students did not report a race, 2.5% of students reported more than one race, and another 2.5% reported Hispanic as their race. Neither of these categories were selected by students in 2016. To successfully recruit STEM majors from an HBCU to pursue a teaching career, Noyce programs, especially those located at PWIs, need to do a lot more work to get involved in the communities and cultures of the populations we wish to join our cohorts. Alvin and Ramona have offered suggestions for how to make one Noyce program and the teaching profession, more generally, an appealing trajectory for Black STEM majors. For urban schools to have highquality Black STEM talent in the pool of candidates, Noyce programs have to take these recommendations seriously in order to have more success with Black recruitment and retention in the teaching profession.

Acknowledgments We would also like to thank the students who participated in these interviews and the student who interviewed our Noyce scholars. The project described was supported by the National Science Foundation, Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program, Grant #1439866. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NSF.

Notes 1 All participant names are pseudonyms. 2 The admissions survey from Vanderbilt included the following categories for students to select to report their racial identity: 2 (two or more races), Asian, Black, Non-resident alien, Hispanic, Native American, Pacific Islander, White, Unspecified.

Noyce at Vanderbilt

77

References Chazan, D., Brantlinger, A., Clark, L., & Edwards, A. (2013). Creating a long-term archive of data on urban mathematics teaching: An initial corpus. Teachers College Record, 115(2). Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 16828. Clark, H. D. (2010). We are the same but different: Navigating African American and deaf cultural identities (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Accession Order No. 3421743). Clark, L. M., Badertscher, E. M., & Napp, C. (2013). African American teachers as agents in their African American students’ mathematics identity formation. Teachers College Record, 115(2), 1–15. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2008). The landscape of qualitative research (Vol. 1). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools. (2016). 2015–2016 Annual diversity report. Retrieved February 12, 2018, from https://static1.squarespace.com/static/ 57752cbed1758e541bdeef6b/t/57927bc1579fb3fb9d306e2f/1469217732838/2015_16_ Annual%2BDiversity%2BReport.pdf Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2003). Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. The Albert Shanker Institute. (2016). A look at teacher diversity. American Educator, 40(3), 18–19. Van Manen, M. (2005). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy (2nd ed.). Ontario: Althouse Press. Van Manen, M. (2016). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. New York, NY: Routledge.

CHAPTER 4

Rise, Defy, Teach, and Lead: The ENABLE STEM Project Justina Ogodo, Karen E. Irving, Patti Brosnan and Lin Ding

Abstract Teaching in urban high-need schools can be challenging for teachers, which is one major reason for high teacher turn-over. Inadequate teacher enculturation can also contribute to high teacher attrition. The Empowering Noyce Apprenticeships by Leadership Engagement in STEM Teaching (ENABLE STEM) project is a study funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) that is designed to recruit students into the Master of Education program at The Ohio State University (OSU) with the goal of empowering them to become successful learners and productive innovators in STEM fields. OSU preservice teachers are prepared as quality teachers, empowered to rise and defy the challenges that prevent others from remaining in urban high-need schools. They are equipped to teach students effectively through a four pronged-focused and intensive teacher training program: (a) Urban Teaching Seminar; (b) informal teaching experience at the Center of Science and Industry; (c) science methods with scientists and science educators; and (d) leadership focused induction and mentoring.

Keywords culturally responsive teaching – STEM education – informal science education – teacher leader

Introduction Over the last two decades, concerns about the state of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education in the United States have grown (Rodgers-Chapman, 2012). Increasingly troubling is the low percentage of students enrolling in STEM fields or pursuing STEM careers (Rogers-Chapman, © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2019 | DOI: 10.1163/9789004399990_004

Rise, Defy, Teach, and Lead: The ENABLE STEM Project

79

2012). A National Research Center (2011) report indicated that while students with high socioeconomic status (SES) may perform at the 50th percentile in STEM education, on average low-SES students tend to perform in the 20th percentile. This gap in STEM teaching and learning continues to grow significantly while underrepresented groups have limited access to needed resources for STEM education. To increase the number of students with STEM majors, improved STEM preparation is needed for teachers and learners regardless of their socioeconomic status. Narrowing the gap for underrepresented populations, especially those enrolled in low-SES schools could increase the STEM workforce. Addressing this gap requires a concerted effort by all stakeholders, including policymakers, to formulate policies that encourage transformed STEM teaching and learning, implementation of effective teacher preparation programs at colleges and universities, and equal access to highly qualified and effective STEM teachers for all learners. To re-energize our teacher preparation program, which is geared to produce highly qualified STEM teacher leaders for the important goals set before them, we developed a new project, currently funded by the National Science Foundation, called Empowering Noyce Apprenticeship by Leadership Engagement (ENABLE STEM). The program intends to infuse four major components including the following: (a) the Urban Teaching Seminar; (b) informal teaching experience at a local STEM-oriented museum called the Center of Science and Industry (COSI); (c) a reformed science methods course with scientists and science educators; and (d) a leadership focused induction and mentoring program. – Because of the changing landscapes of America’s classroom, our first choice in this work was to include the Urban Teaching Seminar. This unique seminar introduces the fellows to culturally responsive teaching (CRT) and community involvement in high-need localities. This enables them to interact, connect and understand the cultures and nuances of the communities in which they will teach. Fellows volunteer in community-based organizations within the areas of clinical placements. – Fellows are provided the opportunity to experience first-hand, informal STEM teaching and learning at the Center of Science and Industry (COSI) using discovery carts that cut across all of the STEM disciplines. Fellows volunteer for summer field experiences, where they facilitate inquiry-based learning through hands-on activities. These activities allow COSI visitors to examine and learn how the STEM activities on the carts function. Fellows then design prototypes for their own carts assisted by COSI personnel who then build, test, and refine them for use in the following year. As such the

80

Ogodo et al.

materials used for COSI field experiences are continuously improved and fellows are introduced to a valuable local STEM resource. – An integral aspect of the fellows training involves a unique approach to learning in a reformed methods course. Scientists from chemistry, physics, earth science, life science, and engineering team-teach with a science educator to present inquiry-based lessons to the fellows. This five-credit course transforms the methods course into authentic experiences grounded in state-of-art science research and development. – Fellows receive leadership focused training and implementation through the ENABLE Leadership and Mentoring community (ELM). The ELM experience prepares the fellows to develop leadership qualities in the classroom, school, community, and professional circles and serves as a support system for four years.

The Urban Teaching Seminar The Urban Teaching Seminar (UTS) was designed to prepare the ENABLE STEM fellows as culturally competent teachers in STEM education. This component of the program is critical because it addresses the added responsibilities for urban teachers to meet the needs and issues that affect their students’ learning. As America’s classrooms continue to change culturally and ethnically, urban teachers especially are expected to be culturally competent in teaching and responsive to the needs of their diverse student population (Ladson-Billings, 1994, 1995a, 1995b). However, important and numerous aspects of urban communities are not often experienced by our predominantly white preservice teacher population. Brown (2003) notes that culturally responsive pedagogy (CRP) is needed to meet the culturally and ethnically diverse needs of learners in urban classrooms. Brown and other researchers indicate that there are three main areas that address the cultural competency of teachers: (a) implementing specific student-oriented instructional processes, (b) choosing and delivering ethnically and culturally relevant curricula, and (c) using communication processes that reflect the values and beliefs held by students about learning. The ENABLE STEM program uses the Urban Teaching Seminar to equip fellows with tools that position them to adapt their teaching to the present classroom structure. They are trained to be “purposely responsive to the needs of the many culturally and ethnically diverse learners” (Brown, 2004, p. 268). In addition, the course fosters sociocultural consciousness to facilitate teachers’ understanding of their self-identities; how their cultural background shapes their beliefs and values; and how they can use the knowledge

Rise, Defy, Teach, and Lead: The ENABLE STEM Project

81

to navigate through the changing dynamics associated with their culturally and ethnically diverse students. As culturally competent teachers, the fellows are prepared with the “ability to understand, communicate, and effectively interact with students from different cultures, and successfully engage them in science learning” (Santiago, 2014, p. 3). Understanding cultural, ethnic, and racial differences is crucial to students’ learning and achievement in STEM classrooms. Using three modules, the UTS presents a holistic and unique modular intersection between culturally relevant pedagogy, community mapping and observation, and classroom organization and relationship building. This essentially makes the UTS a unique experience that is not often available in other teacher training programs. The triangular model of the course is shown in Figure 4.1.

figure 4.1 Triangular model of the urban teaching seminar

Module 1: Culturally Responsive Pedagogy Culture is power and is central to teaching and learning. It influences and affects students’ perceptions, behavior, and learning processes (Santiago, 2014). Understanding the place of culture enables the teacher to make informed decisions and better instructional choices. The culturally responsive pedagogy module is aimed at preparing the ENABLE STEM fellows with culturally mediated instruction. Martin (2007) notes that there are three types of knowledge/ skills needed to teach diverse students effectively: (a) deep content knowledge; (b) strong pedagogical content knowledge; and (c) strong culturally relevant pedagogy. The UTS is a two-consecutive semester course. Throughout the course, the fellows develop an in-depth understanding of how their worldviews influence

82

Ogodo et al.

and impact their teaching methods. They recognize how diversity issues affect or have affected their school experiences, lives, and philosophies. By using multiple lenses, they interpret and analyze the different viewpoints on multiculturalism, equity, justice, and power. This module provides the fellows with understanding of how students utilize their culturally diverse background in constructing their knowledge and in representing their understanding. Ladson-Billings (1994) notes that culturally relevant pedagogy “empowers students intellectually, socially, emotionally, and politically by using cultural referents to impart knowledge, skills, and attitudes” (p. 18). CRP enables teachers to bridge the gap between students’ home knowledge and school knowledge. Studies indicate that teachers who practice culturally relevant teaching make students’ learning encounters more relevant and effective because they construct their teaching around the learner’s cultural knowledge, prior experiences, and frames of reference (Bonner, 2009). Conversely, teachers who lack culturally relevant pedagogy, use instructional practices that contribute to failure and practices that lower students’ interest due to their unfamiliarity of the materials and lack of relevance to the learner. At the end of the course the fellows are able to reflect on multicultural issues that affect STEM curriculum and instruction based on major concepts, principles, theories, and research related to diversity. Module 2: Community Mapping and Observation The Community Mapping and Observation (CMO) module is an activity-based instructional tool used to provide opportunity for the ENABLE STEM fellows to interact and engage with their students through community involvement. The CMO invites fellows to tell a neighborhood’s story. The activity is conducted during the fellow’s clinical placements in local schools. They connect with their students by identifying local assets, networks, and opportunities in the community that provide resources for students and families around their placement schools, and by serving and supporting community-based organizations. Duncan-Andrade (2011) stated that teachers need to understand the conditions in which students live to be effective. This process of immersion allows the fellows come to know the cultural and ethnic framework of their students and the critical role that the community and environment play in molding the lives and experiences of the learner. Ladson-Billings (2002) noted that students’ excellence is located within the context of their community and cultural identities. Because the process gives the fellows the opportunity to experience firsthand the lived-experiences of their students, the fellows acquire pedagogical language that is culturally congruent with students’

Rise, Defy, Teach, and Lead: The ENABLE STEM Project

83

background. They utilize the out-of-school experience to situate students’ cultural and personal identities in designing instruction that is tailored toward students’ needs. The experience also enriches and adds value to the weekly discourse on socioeconomic, equity, and justice issues that is prevalent in urban high-need schools. Lastly, the fellows synthesize and present their community mapping and observation project publically. This experience highlights the immense informational benefit of the exercise. Module 3: Classroom Organization and Relationship This module is vital to the urban teaching seminar because new teachers often struggle with classroom organization and establishing relationships. The importance of classroom organization could not be overemphasized because of its role in engendering effective classroom management. Milner and Tenore (2010) agree that one of the major concerns among urban teachers is effective classroom management, especially for difficult behaviors. The fellows are exposed to classroom management techniques that are culturally responsive and useful for urban school contexts. The module uses research-based strategies that have been shown to be effective for conflict resolutions to prepare them to organically cultivate culturally appropriate relationships with their students. They are exposed to the power structures that exist among students and between students and teachers and are encouraged to implement some of these strategies during their clinical experience. Feedback episodes from their classrooms experiences are used as vignettes and case studies for further discussions. The UTS component of ENABLE STEM is quintessential to the program because fellows are well-grounded and pedagogically ready to teach in culturally and ethnically diverse classrooms. They are empowered to effectively enable urban students to attain academic excellence in STEM education. Weaving these three modules together adds value and uniqueness to the ENABLE STEM curriculum. The fellows become more aware and respectful of the cultural and ethnic variations that exist among students, families, and their communities. They become more conversant of the wide range of diversity issues and of how they relate the issues to STEM education. The fellows also develop proficiency in culturally responsive pedagogy in STEM teaching and learning, and as future teacher-leaders, they are able to challenge equity issues and to use informed judgment in addressing societal structures that mitigate students’ learning and achievement. More importantly, as the fellows integrate students’ border crossings in teaching, it adds to their instructional strength and growth as educators. As the new Cohort 2 fellows venture into the teaching world, they will continue to build on the framework provided by the Urban Teaching Seminar

84

Ogodo et al.

and add to the encouraging feedback from the Cohort 2 fellows who are completing their first year of teaching. Feedback from questions such as, “what was your experience teaching STEM content in a urban high-need school as firstyear teacher?” two fellows responded: Being aware of the lives my students have outside of the classroom and strategies for learning about them as well as making the most of what we have access to do improve learning…more awareness of how to respect diversity in my classroom and try to empower it within the context of mathematics. (Cohort 1, fellow 1) I think the course helped to promote us looking at students’ family backgrounds and cultures. One of my student’s mother was deported toward the end of the school year. This clearly impacted his focus and keeping that in mind was crucial in maintaining a positive relationship with him. He was such a polite young man despite his family’s hardships. (Cohort 1, fellow 3) When asked specifically how the urban teaching seminar prepared them as culturally responsive teachers, two fellows responded: I would say field placement and Urban Seminar have had the biggest impact. You never can really know what to expect until you are immersed in that environment. We use Urban Seminar as a time to reflect on and dissect our experiences. We haven’t otherwise gotten much training in classroom management in our program, so having this training in the Urban Teaching Seminar and having it tied to cultural responsiveness is very useful. (Cohort 2, fellow 2) Since the community mapping project, I think more about what my students are doing outside school hours and think a lot about the examples I provide and the simple phrases I frequently use. It was a lot of fun and really opened my eyes to so many aspects that affect my students’ lives. (Cohort 2, fellow 5) This feedback provided insight on the future of our fellows in being culturally responsive to the needs of their students. Because as Santiago (2014) puts it, “Becoming culturally competent is an ongoing process that happens over time; it is a sensibility that is cultivated throughout our lifetime” (p. 4). They

Rise, Defy, Teach, and Lead: The ENABLE STEM Project

85

will rise as competent teachers who defy cultural and ethnic barriers, teaching STEM subjects effectively with language that is congruent to the learners. They will also empower students through mentorship and modeling their leadership qualities.

Field Experience at Columbus Center for Science and Industry One unique feature that the ENABLE STEM program boasts, which also separates the program from others, is the informal field experience for the fellows at the Columbus Center for Science and Industry (COSI). Located in a 320,000-square-foot home in downtown Columbus, Ohio, COSI is one of the largest modern science centers in the United States and represents a significant investment in economic development and community revitalization. COSI functions as an integral part of the local learning ecosystem and provides a flexible, responsive, and proactive framework to create relevance and inspiration for diverse audiences around STEM content and topics. COSI offers visitors a suite of activities through exhibits, demonstrations, and physical and recreational experiences, thereby engaging a demographically diverse audience in learning science, mathematics, industry, health, and history topics. Goal of Field Experience at Columbus Center for Science and Industry The partnership established between The Ohio State University (OSU) and COSI provides a great opportunity for preservice STEM teachers to participate in informal teaching and learning activities. As stated above, the goal of the ENABLE program is to empower preservice fellows to grow into successful teacher leaders who can nurture underrepresented students in highneed urban areas to become effective learners and productive innovators. The settings, resources, and activities of COSI create a unique, excellent learning venue for our ENABLE fellows. By placing the ENABLE fellows in the COSI environment in which they engage in informal teaching of STEM-related subjects to visitors at the facility, we can extend preservice teachers’ experiences beyond the ordinary formal activities of the classroom. Thus, the knowledge and skills gained from classroom experiences can bear more relevance to their everyday lives. At the same time, they can also enjoy greater opportunities to interact with different groups of visitors who are demographically diverse and range in age from toddlers to senior citizens. This indeed is what the COSI component of the program is designed for.

86

Ogodo et al.

Implementation of the COSI Field Experience The implementation of the COSI field experience includes three major features, each targeting different purposes. First is the six-week summer field placement at COSI. This component is aimed at exposing the fellows to an informal teaching and learning environment, where they practice communicating with a diverse audience. The field placement starts with an orientation session, in which the fellows receive training on informal science and inquiry learning opportunities and are introduced to hands-on, discovery carts that they will use to interact with COSI visitors. These inquiry-based carts consist of carefully designed activities, such as a collection of skulls from various animals that COSI visitors are invited to examine and different devices containing Ferro fluids that visitors can observe by placing them under magnetic fields. Each fellow plays an ‘expert’ role when engaging in conversations with COSI guests, conducting demonstrations, providing explanations, and answering or asking questions about the carts and content related to the carts. A minimum of five, three-hour sessions at COSI are required of each fellow during the six-week summer session. In addition, a debrief session takes place at the end of the summer program, which gives the fellows an opportunity to recap their experiences and to reflect on their initial teaching and learning in informal science settings. To capture how the fellows participated in the COSI activities and to allow them better reflection on their experiences, we videotaped a short segment of each fellow’s engagement with visitors. Where possible, the videos are shared with instructors who teach the methods classes and the learning and cognition course in the summer to strengthen the connections between the COSI placement and formal coursework. A second feature of the COSI experience is the requirement for ENABLE fellows to work with COSI staff in developing new mathematics, science and engineering-themed discovery carts. While understanding existing carts and being able to educate others about relevant STEM topics is desirable, it is more beneficial for the fellows to participate in initiating original ideas and inventing new carts for illustrations, demos, and activities around STEM content. By doing so, the fellows can deepen their classroom knowledge and acquire firsthand experience about real applications of learned STEM topics. In a sense, the fellows are no longer mere users of previously created products. Instead, they now are producers themselves. This provides our fellows with a strong sense of ownership of their own knowledge, skills, and intellectual products of which they can be proud. Since the development of new carts from the initial brainstorming stage to actual production may require a relatively long time, we divide the entire process into three manageable steps. The first step is developing ideas and building conceptual models about new carts. This occurs in the first summer while the fellows are concurrently

Rise, Defy, Teach, and Lead: The ENABLE STEM Project

87

working in COSI placement. The ideas are then actualized in the second step during the autumn semester, where the fellows, with the help of COSI staff, begin to build the new carts. Fellows have the opportunity to see their product prototype in the spring semester before the carts are presented to the public in the summer. During the following summer, these new carts are piloted with a new cohort of fellows in volunteer sessions at COSI, thereby becoming an intellectual legacy that can inspire future COSI volunteers. A third unique feature of the COSI experience is the opportunity we have designed for ENABLE fellows to participate in a local grant funding search. As fiscal challenges for all sectors of public education continue to grow, the burden on educators and researchers to secure financial resources for classroom materials also increases exponentially. To sustain and improve public education, especially in high-need school settings, teachers must be familiar with the current funding trend and be equipped with basic winning strategies to obtain needed educational grants. In this part of the program, fellows are guided to conduct research on local grant funding opportunities and work with COSI staff and OSU advisors to design, search, and if possible apply for local government, academic, and industry grants. The aim here is to achieve (or attempt to achieve) funding to support the development of summer workshops for students from the fellow’s high-need schools. The purpose of the envisioned summer workshops is to introduce the students to STEM learning in an informal environment when regular schools are not in session and students are less pressed for time and less stressed. In addition, this component of the COSI experience can further prepare ENABLE fellows to think and act like teacherleaders in both academic and financial areas so that they know how to attract resources and at the same time learn to optimally manage and utilize those resources. These three features together form a unique component of our ENABLE program that goes beyond traditional training for preservice teachers. The benefits the fellows receive from participating in the COSI activities have enriched their STEM content knowledge, broadened their views about teaching and learning in informal settings, and better prepared them to interact with a diverse audience.

The Reformed Methods Course Critics of science teacher preparation often note the low involvement of science and engineering faculty in the pedagogical preparation of teachers. One unique element of the ENABLE STEM program is the innovative collaboration

88

Ogodo et al.

between faculty members in education, arts and sciences, and engineering departments to provide a science methods course for preservice teachers of students in middle and secondary school. The ENABLE STEM project supports a graduate-level science methods course that is co-designed and co-taught by science content experts (n=5) and a science pedagogy expert (n=1) at a research-intensive university. The current methods instruction builds on previous work supported by the Woodrow Wilson Ohio Teaching Fellows program at OSU. Faculty members with disciplinary expertise in geology, chemistry, physics, life science, and engineering partnered with faculty members with expertise in science and mathematics education to design a new course. The syllabus for a five-hour course (second in a two-course sequence) was designed to increase preservice science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge associated with topics identified by A Framework for K–12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas (NRC, 2012), and the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS Leads States, 2013). Instruction was shared by science educators and science and engineering faculty who collaborated on a series of lessons related to their specific expertise. The Framework for K–12 Science Education (NRC, 2012) identifies core ideas, science and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts as organizing principles. The syllabus designed and implemented for the new methods course was closely aligned with these principles. In particular, crosscutting concepts such as energy and matter flow, patterns, models, structure and function, and stability and change were interwoven into each of the disciplinary focused lessons. Core ideas and science and engineering practices were identified for each of the sequences of lessons. The Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation [CAEP] (2013) standards met through implementation of the course included: Standard 1. Content and Pedagogical Knowledge, Sections 1.1 to 1.5 (see Table 4.1). Syllabus Design One science education faculty member, who served as the primary instructor, led the work to create a common syllabus, organize the lessons around core ideas, crosscutting concepts, and science practices, and coordinated the logistics. This instructor attended every lesson, completed much of the evaluation and assessment work for the course, and awarded grades at the end of the semester. The five core disciplines of physics, chemistry, life science, earth/ space science, and engineering provided a focus for a series of four to six lessons for each discipline. Additional lessons focused on pedagogy, science unit construction, backward design, feedback, and academic language. Arts and

Rise, Defy, Teach, and Lead: The ENABLE STEM Project

89

table 4.1  Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) Standards

CAEP Standard 1. content and pedagogical knowledge Candidate 1.1 Candidates demonstrate an understanding of the 10 InTASC knowledge, Skills, standards at the appropriate progression level(s) in the and Professional following categories: the learner and learning; content; Dispositions instructional practice; and professional responsibility. Provider 1.2 Providers ensure that candidates use research and evidence Responsibilities to develop an understanding of the teaching profession and use both to measure their P-12 students’ progress and their own professional practice. 1.3 Providers ensure that candidates apply content and pedagogical knowledge as reflected in outcome assessments in response to standards of Specialized Professional Associations (SPA), the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS), states, or other accrediting bodies (e.g., National Association of Schools of Music – NASM). 1.4 Providers ensure that candidates demonstrate skills and commitment that affford all P-12 students access to rigorous college- and career-ready standards (e.g., Next Generation Science Standards, National Career Readiness Certifijicate, Common Core State Standards). 1.5 Providers ensure that candidates model and apply technology standards as they design, implement and assess learning experiences to engage students and improve learning; and enrich professional practice. Source: http://caepnet.org/~/media/Files/caep/standards/caepstandards-one-pager-061716.pdf?la=en

science and engineering faculty co-designed and participated in the lesson sequences related to their particular expertise and evaluated projects completed during their lesson sequences. Each set of disciplinary experts developed lesson plans for the series of lessons for which they were responsible. They selected appropriate readings and took the lead in instruction during the assigned class meetings. Activities included hands-on, lab-based, experiment-based, and inquiry-based tasks to engage the fellows as students so that they could internalize the act of being science apprentices. Common themes

90

Ogodo et al.

of academic language, unit design, safety, real-world connections, nature of science, and assessment were included. Specific attention was paid to readings related to academic language, as well as students’ naïve understandings in each discipline. The goals of the course were to produce preservice science teachers who are able to: – Describe and participate in various methods of scientific inquiry; – Understand and explain common naïve understandings in physics, chemistry, life science, earth/space science, and engineering; – Describe and demonstrate various teaching actions, strategies, and methods to promote the development of multiple student skills and understandings; – Design unit plans and assessment strategies with both formative and summative assessments that address inquiry, nature of science, connections to student’s lives, and are differentiated for a diverse student body; – Align plans and resources to state and national standards; – Use educational technology resources for inquiry-based learning and engineering design; – Address issues of safety; – Describe explicit plans to address the needs of diverse learners, and – Describe and give examples of academic language in science instruction. Each set of lessons included a project—five-minute micro-teaching in physics; classroom demonstrations in chemistry; citizen science projects in life science; technology integration in inquiry-based lessons in earth/space science; and a design challenge (Pringle drop) in engineering. Over the semester, students created two unit plans intended for middle school or high school students with accompanying formative and summative assessments, one unit for a physical science topic and one unit for a life or earth/space science topic. These unit plans served as CAEP assessments for the program and aligned with the elements of the edTPA (Education Teacher Performance Assessment). A sample of the disciplinary focused projects is shown in Table 4.2. In summary, this innovative program to provide disciplinary and pedagogically sound instruction for future science teachers was a key element in the ENABLE STEM project. Finding a path to involve faculty from arts and sciences and engineering department in the work of preparing teachers for middle and high school resulted in benefits for all stakeholders. The preservice teachers received instruction from both science educators and scientists, the faculty forged new collaborative relationships that spilled over into other jointly sponsored grant opportunities, and the visiting faculty learned about the work involved in preparing world-class STEM teachers for our community.

Project

5-minute microteaching on energy related topic

15-minute microteaching with chemistry demonstration materials

Lesson plan construction using online data sets such as climate data or complex diagrams

Discipline

Physics

Chemistry

Earth Science

Use of multiple representations to represent geologic time & earth systems Use of online data to engage in inquiry lessons Lesson plan construction Assessment aligned with objectives

(cont.)

I appreciated [the physics professor’s] desire in his section of this course to expose us to a wide variety of physics concepts. Since he is a physics education researcher, I found his perspective incredibly valuable because he does this type of research as his career and has developed strategies built to elicit certain responses. Specifijically, what I really enjoyed about the chemistry lessons were the amount of examples and experiments we worked with. The experiments were the highlight because they showcased the huge amount of ways that we as educators can explain and work with diffferent concepts in the classroom. I thought the best thing about this section was the use of data sets to stress the concepts, and highlighting how these data sets can come in such a wide variety of forms. I for one, never considered a diagram to be a data set, but after our discussions in class it because quite clear how that is exactly what they are!

Identify learning objectives Selection of academic language related to energy and matter

Identify learning objectives Engage students in demonstration Academic language choices Assessment of learning Safety

Student comments

Pedagogical goal

table 4.2  Sample disciplinary focused projects for the Reformed Science Methods Course and student comments

Rise, Defy, Teach, and Lead: The ENABLE STEM Project

91

Project

Lesson plan construction using Citizen Science sites for life science topics

Engineering design cycle building project

Discipline

Life Science

Engineering

I found this fijinal section of the course, engineering, to be some of the most valuable work we did from a future educators’ perspective. What I found most valuable was the critical thinking and creative problem-solving strategies that were discussed and implemented in great detail. Creative Problem Solving and Critical Thinking are truly some of the cornerstones that I want to build my future classroom on and I loved to see the wide variety of examples we discussed in class.

One thing I did enjoy was the citizen science project research. Citizen science provides students with the opportunity to engage in the everyday applications of scientifijic research. Learning about the wide range of citizen science projects allowed me to see applications across the 7–12 spectrum and the diffferent ways I would apply projectbased learning into my classroom.

Use of online science inquiry sites Lesson plan construction from online inquiry opportunity Academic language Assessment aligned with objectives Feedback

Compare and contrast scientifijic methods and engineering design cycle Focus on constraints, planning, implementation, evaluation and improvement of prototypes Feedback implementation

Student comments

Pedagogical goal

table 4.2  Sample disciplinary focused projects for the Reformed Science Methods Course and student comments (cont.)

92 Ogodo et al.

Rise, Defy, Teach, and Lead: The ENABLE STEM Project

93

Induction Support and Leadership After graduating from the ENABLE STEM preservice program, fellows felt accomplished and ready to begin their new first-year teaching position. Graduates of the program asserted that they experienced gains, especially from the Urban Teaching Seminar, and reported the following: – “…I think that [Urban Teaching Seminar] has been the biggest thing for me…I feel like for me, it has erased stereotypes and certain assumptions I had.” – “Everyone is different; everyone is going through a different thing. That has been the biggest thing that has impacted me-get to know kids in your setting.” – “And a lot of managing the classroom in an urban setting has to do with creating and developing relationships with students. And that is something I did not think a whole lot about before.” However, the need for support surfaced quickly. The first years of teaching are a critical period for new teachers. Like other new teachers, our fellows face the transition from teacher preparation to professional practice with various levels of difficulty that often significantly influence their career trajectory (Gold, 1996; Sikes, Measor, & Woods, 1985; Watzke, 2007). The traditional range of support for our fellows at the classroom level are well-documented by our placement school district through the Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) program and the state-required Resident Educator (RE) program. All teachers in the district, where our fellows are placed, and who are in their induction years, are required to participate in the Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) program. This district-wide program hires teachers on special assignment to serve as PAR consultants to observe each assigned new teacher at least 20 times a year, provide instructional assistance with detailed feedback, and evaluate each teacher annually. After the first two years with PAR, each new teacher is assigned a mentor who facilitates large groups of new teachers in making progress towards earning a professional license in the state-required Resident Educator (RE) Program. The PAR and Resident Educator programs’ goals and provisions align well with what is suggested by research on comprehensive induction programs. Researchers, such as Bartell (2005) and Bickmore and Bickmore (2010), have affirmed that promising induction programs include components such as carefully selected and trained mentors, a curriculum of intensive and structured support, professional development opportunities, regular meetings with mentors, and provisions of resources and strategies. Knowing that the ENABLE STEM fellows were in good hands with districtand state-supported induction initiatives, we wanted to go one step beyond

94

Ogodo et al.

what is traditionally provided. According to Richard Ingersoll (2012), upgrading teacher quality requires schools to do more than simple hold teachers more accountable. They need to give teachers more control.” To this end, one of the ENABLE STEM project goals is to produce high-quality STEM teachers who emerge as leaders in all aspects of the teaching profession. To meet this goal, we carefully designed a leadership development program, named ENABLE-STEM Leadership and Mentoring (ELM). This program provides leadership training to prepare fellows to serve as mentors to members of subsequent cohorts and leaders in their classrooms, schools, and communities. Four teachers, who recently completed funded projects with induction programs and emerged as natural leaders, volunteered to serve as ELM program leaders. These experienced teacher-leaders were from districts that met the high-need designation. The work of the ELM program leaders was to facilitate Saturday sessions during the academic year that focused on leadership at the classroom level, mentoring in the community, and professional service. Each of the four Saturday meetings during an academic year focused on leadership, as well as other topics as suggested by participants. These meetings will continue for a period of four years after the fellows have graduated from the program. The leaders were provided a modest stipend to do this work. The four leaders met regularly to co-plan sessions that they co-facilitated. In fact, their leadership qualities were so strong that they actually took charge of the professional development. Each ENABLE fellow is expected to develop an e-Portfolio that includes evidence of their competencies in leadership elements each year. Over time, new topics/ideas will be introduced into the Saturday professional learning community plans. Our hope is that our program leaders with their unique experiences in high-need schools will inspire our new ENABLE STEM fellows to rise, defy, and lead. The leaders will share how they rose up to the challenge to help students from high-need schools to successfully learn science and mathematics; how they defied the status quo and the negative statistics and dispositions towards mathematics and science; and how they became leaders in helping students and teachers become ENABLED in STEM education. Members of the Arts and Sciences and STEM Education advisory committee for the project actively participate in the ELM Teacher Leadership Mentoring Plan. Their contribution to the leadership experiences include adopting one or more of the ENABLE fellows as their disciplinary expert and sharing in the mentoring activities. During the program, the faculty have the opportunity to work with the ENABLE fellows to establish relationships that will be enriched and sustained throughout the ELM years. The STEM Teacher Leadership Sample Elements are shown in Table 4.3.

Rise, Defy, Teach, and Lead: The ENABLE STEM Project

95

table 4.3  stem teacher leadership sample elements

Leadership Example 1 element

Example 2

Classroom teaching

Participate in school committees Present at school meetings

Mentoring

Professional behaviors Innovation Student centered classrooms Student achievement Learn about mentoring models Practice co-planning Practice co-teaching

Community Learn about the & Service community around your school Involve parents in school events Professional Investigate & Community participate in professional communities related to your teaching interests

Example 3

Attend conferences Present at conferences Participate in Professional Development Participate as club/ Present workshops on organization leader at mentoring school Serve as mentor for Participate as part of student teacher mentoring team Participate in Organize and implement community events community events at held at your school your school Volunteer to lead/ participate in a leadership position in a professional community

Organize and implement professional development opportunities

After the first semester of the ELM program, the leaders surveyed the participants’ reactions to the first Saturday session. In response to the question, “What did you learn today that you’ll use this year?” comments included: “Ways to bring in reluctant students;” “How to build and keep relationships with students;” and “Strategies for co-teaching and parent communication techniques.” When asked, “What topics would you like to discuss at future meetings?” participant suggestions included, “Building school communities;” “Involving people in the community in the classroom;” and “How do I start changing the way I teach.” These anecdotal responses show that the seed has been planted and the ENABLE STEM fellows are already thinking in a forward direction.

96

Ogodo et al.

Conclusion According to the No Child Left Behind Act (2001), high-need schools are characterized by their location in areas where families live with incomes below the poverty line, have high teacher turn-over, and low student test scores. Because of high teacher turnover, these schools struggle to retain quality teachers which result in a high percentage of underqualified teachers and teachers who are teaching out-of-field. A major reason for the high turnover rate may be inadequate teacher enculturation in the challenges of teaching in that context. Teaching in high-need schools can be intimidating if the teachers are not adequately prepared. Children in most high-need schools come from multicultural backgrounds and face multiple difficulties and challenges. Therefore, they need teachers who are well-equipped to meet the challenges in those schools and who can impact the lives of the students in meaningful ways. The ENABLE STEM project leaders recognized these challenges and designed the program with a robust curriculum that prepares preservice teachers to be effective STEM teachers and leaders in urban high-needs schools. Each of the four components: (a) the Urban Teaching Seminar; (b) informal STEM teaching and learning at the Center of Science and Industry (COSI); (c) the reformed methods course; and (d) the ENABLE Leadership and Mentoring (ELM) program is structured and geared to address specific aspects of teaching in urban high-need schools. At the end of the program, the fellows are armed with content knowledge and pedagogical tools that differentiate them in the ways they that can respond and meet their learner’s needs. These tools also enhance their ability to nurture their students’ critical thinking processes in STEM education. As a result of the ongoing intensive training provided by the ENABLE STEM program, the fellows not only developed a deep knowledge of their STEM content areas but also advanced their vested interest in the students and the communities in which they were placed. These fellows chose to rise to the occasion presented to them by the ENABLE STEM program and to defy expectations and anticipated odds existing in high-need school settings to teach STEM courses. They are poised to take the experiences and knowledge gained to make a difference in STEM teaching and learning. The fellows believe they possess what it takes to inspire and lead their students. Additionally, upon completion of the training, fellows received a Ohio teaching license for grades 7–12, a master’s degree in education, and multiple years of continued support in their journey to become effective highly-qualified STEM teacher-leaders in low-income schools. The COSI field experiences fostered interest in informal science venues and introduced the fellows to

Rise, Defy, Teach, and Lead: The ENABLE STEM Project

97

innovative ways to present and understand STEM content. Lastly, they developed team-experience working with the COSI staff to build new carts. New skill-sets were added to their knowledge base because of the collaborative teamwork that they can take to their different worksites. The ENABLE STEM project produces STEM fellows with a repertoire of knowledge to be effective STEM teachers that close the lacuna between high-SES student and the lowSES high-need students to improve STEM education. Besides a great curriculum, the ENABLE STEM program ensures that the fellows possess the affective characteristics needed to teach in urban high-need schools. Their interest and passion about teaching was part of the recruitment process and this important aspect of teaching in urban high-need schools was further enhanced by the opportunities afforded them through the ENABLE STEM project. As a result of this program, the fellows have shown increased levels of dedication to the profession and this key ingredient may translate into perseverance to stay in the field.

Acknowledgments This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1557250. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

References Bartell, C. (2005). Cultivating high-quality teaching through induction and mentoring. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Bickmore, D. L., & Bickmore, S. T. (2010). A multifaceted approach to teacher induction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 1006–1014. doi:10.1016/J.TATE.2009.10.043 Bonner, E. (2009). Achieving success with African American learners: A framework for culturally responsive mathematics teaching. Childhood Education, 86(1), 2–6. Brown, D. F. (2003). Urban teachers’ use of culturally responsive management strategies. Theory into Practice, 42(4), 277–282. Brown, D. F. (2004). Urban teachers’ professed classroom management strategies reflections of culturally responsive teaching. Urban Education, 39(3), 266–289 Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation. (2013). CAEP accreditation standards. Retrieved from http://www.caepnet.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/final_ board_approved1.pdf

98

Ogodo et al.

Duncan-Andrade, J. (2011). The principal facts: New directions for teacher education. In A. Ball & C. Tyson (Eds.), Studying diversity in teacher education (pp. 309–326). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Gold, Y. (1996). Beginning teacher support. Attrition, mentoring, and induction. In J. Sikula, T. J. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 548–594). New York, NY: Macmillan Library. Ingersoll, R. (2012). Beginning teacher induction: What the data tell us. Phi Delta Kappan, 93(8), 47–51. Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995a). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159–165. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995b). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491. Ladson-Billings, G. (2002). I ain’t writin’ nuttin’: Permissions to fail and demands to succeed in urban classrooms. In L. Delpit & J. K. Dowdy (Eds.), The skin that we speak: Thoughts on language and culture in the classroom (pp. 107–120). New York, NY: The New Press. Martin, D. B. (2007). Beyond missionaries or cannibals: Who should teach mathematics to African American children? High School Journal, 91(1), 6–28. Milner, H. R., & Tenore, F. B. (2010). Classroom management in diverse classrooms. Urban Education, 45(5), 560–603. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/18290 National Research Council. (2011). Committee on highly successful schools or programs for K-12 STEM education. Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from https://www.doi.org/10.17226/13165 No Child Left Behind Act. (2002). P.L. 107-110, 20 U.S.C. § 6319. Rogers-Chapman, M. F. (2012). Accessing STEM-focused education: Factors that contribute to the opportunity to attend STEM high schools across the United States. Education and Urban Society, 46(6), 716–737. Santiago, A. (2017). Focusing on cultural competency in STEM education. Informal Science, 1–16. Retrieved from http://www.informalscience.org/focusing-culturalcompetency-stem-education

Rise, Defy, Teach, and Lead: The ENABLE STEM Project

99

Sikes, P., Measor, L., & Woods, P. (2001). Critical phases and incidents. In J. Soler, A. Craft, & H. Burgess (Eds.), Teacher development: Exploring our own practice. London: Paul Chapman. Watzke, J. L. (2007). Longitudinal research on beginning teaching development: Complexity as a challenge to concerns-based stage theory. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 1, 106–122.

PART 2 Teacher Preparation in Stem Education

∵

CHAPTER 5

Developing a Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity Belinda P. Edwards, Desha Williams, Karen Kuhel and Adrian Epps

Abstract This chapter describes how a professional development project engaged mathematics preservice teachers and teacher educators in an ongoing conversation about teaching culturally and linguistically diverse students enrolled in highneed schools. Qualitative research methods were employed to examine preservice teachers’ perspectives about the process of learning to teach culturally and linguistically diverse students and how their identities and cultural competence evolved as they progressed through five professional development workshops and a semester long clinical field experience in an urban high-need school.

Keywords culturally responsive pedagogy – equity – English language learners – social justice

Introduction This qualitative study focuses on the evolving culturally and linguistically responsive (CLR) teacher identities of a group of preservice teachers. The novice teachers were seeking initial secondary mathematics teacher certification through a Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) degree program. They were also participants in workshops provided by the authors and outside experts in mathematics and differentiated instruction. The workshops were a component of the Increasing Mathematics Teachers for All Students (IMTAS) program, developed through National Science Foundation (NSF) Noyce funding. The study examined how secondary mathematics preservice teachers’ CLR teacher identities evolved as they progressed through workshops that were © koninklijke brill nv, leideN, 2019 | DOI: 10.1163/9789004399990_005

104

Edwards et al.

designed to build the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to recognize and address mathematics teaching and learning inequities for marginalized learners (defined here as African-American, Latinx, English learners, Indigenous, or economically disadvantaged). CLR teaching is one method to address classroom inequities. Marginalized learners are often those who experience persistent educational disadvantages that are rooted in social injustices (Ladson-Billings, 2006; Oakes, 2005; Rothstein, 2004). We define CLR pedagogy as a merging of the tenets of culturally relevant pedagogy and linguistically responsive pedagogy. Culturally relevant pedagogy is a student-centered approach to teaching that attends to “political underpinnings of the students’ community and social world” (Ladson-Billings, 1995a, p. 477) by using students’ prior experiences and frames of reference to make mathematics learning encounters more relevant to and effective in improving their lives (Gay, 2010; Ladson-Billings, 1995a; Villegas & Lucas, 2008). Linguistically responsive pedagogy expands upon culturally relevant pedagogy by taking into account the cultural background knowledge, interests, and abilities of students to include development of academic English language skills for English learners to maximize academic achievement (Villegas & Lucas, 2008). In this study, CLR teachers consider and enact culturally and linguistically responsive/relevant pedagogy during their planning and the act of teaching (Gay, 2010; Ladson-Billings, 1995a; Villegas & Lucas, 2008). The IMTAS workshops focused on developing future mathematics teachers who could approach teaching with a belief that mathematics is a result of human activity (Wager, Stinson, & Kilpatrick, 2012). For example, without humans there would be no need for mathematics, which implies that mathematics is intimately related to and needs human beings (Gutiérrez, 2007) in order to exist as a meaningful concept. For many, mathematics is sterile, developed, owned, and accessible only to those who belong to a high-status community of which they are not members. Our goal was to prepare preservice teachers who would challenge or disrupt this notion and facilitate the teaching of mathematics in ways that enable students to bridge mathematics to activities within their own culture and community (Barta, Cuch, & Barkley, 2014; Delpit, 2012). The workshops also engaged participants in critical inquiry about issues of inequity primarily affecting marginalized students in high-need schools. We openly acknowledge the difficulty of developing CLR teachers through participation in workshops and recognize that becoming a CLR responsive teacher who engages in critical issues around equity in education is a process that requires a breadth and depth of knowledge and understanding of self, students, and continuous effort over

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

105

time. Through the workshops, we sought to create a foundation for preservice mathematics teachers that would (a) enable an awareness of equity issues affecting marginalized students in the mathematics classroom and (b) develop teacher knowledge, skills, and dispositions to teach mathematics in ways that can begin to change the conditions of African-American, English learner, Indigenous, and marginalized students in mathematics education (Martin, 2015). This study examined five secondary mathematics preservice teachers’ experiences during their participation in workshops situated throughout their program of study. The study sought to examine the changes in their understandings of equity issues affecting marginalized learners, as well as the concept of CLR teaching. Additionally, the participants were encouraged to identify experiences and factors that influenced their understandings and how they viewed themselves as CLR teachers. The question that guided the study was: In what ways do preservice mathematics teacher candidates’ CLR identities evolve during their participation in workshops and a clinical field experience in a school with predominately African-American and English learner student populations? Through discourse analysis of audio recorded semi-structured interviews, seminar and book discussions, written reflections, and an observation during their internship, we explored the challenges and complexities of preservice teachers evolving into CLR responsive teachers and the conflicts they experienced in that development. Awareness of preservice teachers’ understanding of equity and CLR teaching, how they view themselves as CLR teachers, and how they perceive their preparedness to teach marginalized students, particularly African-American and English learners, can help teacher educators create impactful opportunities for preservice teachers to explore their own beliefs about the role of equity, access, language and culture in the teaching and learning mathematics. Knowledge gained from the study can also assist teacher educators in creating opportunities that promote and support the development of preservice teachers’ equity related CLR teacher identities. In this chapter, we provide a discussion of some important contextual issues concerning the preparation of CLR teachers who can build connections between mathematics and students’ personal lives and cultures. We give an overview of the potential impact that CLR teaching has on student learning of mathematics, equity issues in mathematics education, as well as preservice teachers’ CLR identity formation. We then provide a brief look into the design and contents of the workshops along with an exploration of preservice teachers’ efforts and experiences, from their point of view, as they progressed through the workshops. Finally, we end with a presentation of findings

106

Edwards et al.

associated with shifts and changes in the preservice teachers’ CLR identity, a discussion of both successes and challenges associated with preparing CLR preservice teachers, and recommendations for others interested in preparing CLR preservice teachers. Culturally and Linguistically Responsive (CLR) Teaching Many teaching practices in diverse classrooms fail to incorporate the rich cultural and linguistic capital that students bring to the classroom in order to make mathematics learning meaningful and successful (Gay, 2010; Gutiérrez, 2000; National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM], 2000). Too often, the dominant teaching practice in mathematics follows a traditional teaching approach that views teaching and learning mathematics as primarily dehumanized and culture-free. This practice of teaching mathematics does not engage or meet the learning needs of students from marginalized or underrepresented groups and, as a result, contributes to their low motivation and lack of mathematics interest and achievement (Gay, 2000; Tate, 2005). Acknowledgement of attention to marginalized students in mathematics practices and research that identifies best practices for teaching students for marginalized groups is slowly emerging (NCTM, 2000; Orosco & O’Connor, 2011). While NCTM’s Professional Standards for School Mathematics (PSSM) equity standard does not address how to more effectively teach diverse learners, it suggests that mathematics pedagogical strategies should be studentcentered and inquiry-based and allow students to engage in cooperative learning, which are important aspects of CLR teaching practices (Berry, 2008; Ladson-Billings, 1994; NCTM, 2000) that have been shown to increase students’ participation in mathematics and to improve their mathematical understanding (Gutiérrez, 2000). Studies of specific CLR practices in the mathematics classroom indicate three important aspects for teaching and learning. First, a structured learning environment should be established that includes substantial time in purposeful groupings, where they talk about what they are learning, utilizing mathematical terms and discourse patterns (Echevarria & Short, 2010; Saunders & Goldenberg, 2010; Walqui, 2006). Secondly, students’ prior knowledge of both mathematics and the world should be used to make connections (Echevarria & Short, 2010; NCTM, 2014). Lastly, students should be encouraged to use the language or dialect they feel most comfortable using while initially developing knowledge of concepts (Secada, 1998). Teachers, who utilize CLR teaching practices, value the cultural and linguistic resources students bring to the classroom and view this knowledge as capital to

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

107

build upon rather than as a barrier to learning (Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez, 1992). CLR teaching practices provides opportunities for teachers to form deep connections with their students, advocate for their students. Such practices also influence teacher development in ways that make a difference in the academic and home lives of their students (Gutierrez, 2003; 2009; Martin, 2015). In this study, what the participants learned and how they interacted with others served as important sources of discourse regarding the development CLR practices for the teaching mathematics. The CLR pedagogy framework served as a component of our conceptual framework in our investigation by giving meaning to the ways the participants talked about and described their experiences, as well as the challenges and complexities they faced in their effort to develop and enact CLR teaching practices and develop CLR teacher identities. Students in a CLR classroom have a developed sense of their mathematics identity, which includes students’ beliefs about themselves as a mathematics learner, the nature of mathematics, their perceptions of how others perceive them as a mathematics learner, and their perception of their ability to participate or engage in mathematics (Aguirre et al., 2013; Solomon, 2009). When students identify themselves as being good at mathematics, they adopt behaviors and actions associated with doing mathematics—problem solving, asking questions, confirming problem solutions, and sharing their solutions (Berry, 2008). Because teachers play an important role in affirming and supporting students’ development of a positive mathematics identity, the development of the teacher’s identity is vital. However, how do new mathematics teachers— who are yet to develop their own identities as teachers and who often view themselves as unprepared to support the learning of students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds (Banks et al., 2005; McDonald & Zeichner, 2009)—learn and enact culturally and linguistically responsiveness in ways that will support their students’ development of positive mathematics identities? One way is to re-conceptualizing teacher preparation in order to help preservice teachers attend to their multiple identities in ways that will enable them to learn about and implement equity-oriented teaching practices that will lead to the development of culturally and linguistically responsive teachers (Gay, 2010c; Gee, 2001; Matthews, Jones, & Parker, 2008; Nieto, 2004).

Teacher Identity In the literature, there are several definitions of teacher identity. Some researchers define it as the conceptualization teachers have of themselves in

108

Edwards et al.

the context of teaching, while others see it as the conceptions and expectations of other people about what a teacher should know and be able to do in the classroom (Buzzelli & Johnston, 2002; Singh & Richards, 2006). Gee (2001; 2005) defines identity as a process of interpreting oneself as a certain kind of person in a given context. Gutiérrez (2013) explains identity, from a sociopolitical perspective, as “something you do, not something you are” (p. 9). A person’s identity is a result of who or what the individual person thinks, says, or how they interact with others, but others can interpret or define the individual’s words and actions in ways that make sense to them in a particular context (Gutierrez, 2013). The sociopolitical perspective seems to support the concept that identity has to do with meaning that individuals make about themselves and with the meaning that others give them (Beijard, Verloop, & Vermunt, 2000) as a certain type of person in a specific context (Gee, 2001, 2005). In the context of being a teacher, this view served as the second component of our conceptual framework. Through a sociopolitical lens, we viewed teacher identity as how pre-service teachers view themselves in regards to being prepared to teach students from varying cultural backgrounds unlike their own and the meaning they give to their efforts in becoming a CLR teacher. By participating in teacher preparation programs and/or workshops, they had an opportunity to develop a new identity or reshape the old one. In this sense, identity is fluid, dynamic, and transformative (Gutiérrez, 2003; Martin, 2015; Varghese et al., 2005) and can change periodically over time. Preservice teachers’ perceptions of who they are as teachers have been shown to influence their development, teaching practices, and ability to deal with situations that occur both inside the classroom and within school environment in general (Olsen, 2008). Collectively, their experiences within a teacher preparation program and/or workshops can become the foundation upon which they build their teacher identity— an identity that “informs teaching views, dispositions, and practices to help children learn mathematics” (Aguirre, Mayfield-Ingram, & Martin, 2013, p. 27). Identity develops over time and involves a process of continued reflection on one’s experiences and interactions within the context of those experiences, all while asking questions such as “Who am I?” and “Who do I want to become?” (Beijaard et al., 2000; Fuller & Brown, 1975). As we explored CLR teacher identity formation in this study, we took into account that the process of becoming a CLR teacher is complex, contextual, develops over time, and passes through several stages. Identity is multidimensional and develops from our varied experiences. Each individual forms his/her identity based on self-image, beliefs, actions, and through the stories we tell about ourselves

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

109

(Aguirre, Mayfield-Ingram, & Martin, 2013). As such, identity is not static but grows based on experiences and interactions both familiar and unfamiliar to individuals or groups. It can also depend on the views of others. Preservice teachers often form or develop their identity based not only on their prior experiences but also on their experiences during teacher preparation coursework and clinical field experiences. In some cases, these experiences are at the surface level and are limited within the context of communicating with others from different cultures and languages, attending or working within a racially diverse school, or living in a culturally diverse neighborhood. As is often the case, preservice teachers are limited in self-confidence, often do not confront or reconcile their beliefs about teaching marginalized students, and do not envision establishing meaningful relationships with students and their parents as an important aspect of mathematics teaching (Fuller & Brown, 1975; Luehmann, 2007).

The Workshops and Clinical Field Experience When designing the workshops, we considered the characteristics that Villegas and Lucas (2002; 2008) described as aspects necessary in becoming a CLR teacher: (a) a socio-cultural awareness, that is, an awareness that your worldview is not universal and is influenced by race, gender, social class, and ethnicity); (b) an affirming, not deficit, attitude toward students; (c) a change agent or advocacy for equity perspective; (d) a constructivist view of learning and teaching; (e) knowledgeable of students’ experiences outside of school; and (f) using knowledge of students to design instruction that builds on their prior knowledge. The participants attended five 4-hour workshops, each with a unique focus: (a) conversations with veteran teachers of ethnically and economically diverse students; (b) a simulation in which some experienced being in a position of power and privilege while others experienced being in a marginalized position; (c) a glimpse into the lives of students who live in homeless situations, homelessness and schooling, and legislation that is in place to protect students who are homeless; (d) a seminar demonstrating pedagogical strategies related to the effective use of manipulatives; and (e) CLR planning and teaching in mathematics. The workshops were conducted on selected weekends, while they pursued a Master’s of Arts in Teaching (MAT) degree supported by the Increasing Mathematics Teachers for ALL Students (IMTAS) project.

110

Edwards et al.

Conversations with Veteran Teachers The teacher workforce is majority White, middle-class, monolingual, heterosexual, Christian women (Cochran-Smith, 2004; Loewus, 2017; Snyder, de Brey, & Dillow, 2016). This was also true for our participants. However, the student population they will teach are diverse and continuing to grow in its diversity. Therefore, in order to gain a greater perspective of teaching diverse students, participants engaged in conversations with veteran teachers, who taught primarily students of color in Title-I schools. Participants were divided into small groups of four so that conversation topics could be individualized. Participants had a chance to ask questions and hear stories of the rewards and challenges of teaching in schools that serve traditionally marginalized students. Positions of Power and Privilege Helping our participants understand power and the implications for their classroom environment, as well as, the potential impact on student learning was the goal of this workshop. Participants “played” the game StarPower (https://www.simulationtrainingsystems.com/schools-and-charities/products/ starpower/). At the beginning of the game, participants seemingly begin with an equal chance of winning. As the game progressed, the winning team had an opportunity to establish new game rules. Inevitably, that team created rules that were beneficial to them. After some time, the losing team typically lost aspirations of winning. At the conclusion of the game, the participants debriefed about their experiences and made connections between the phenomena of learned helplessness and competition versus collaboration. Teaching Students Who Are Homeless According to the National Center on Family Homelessness (NCFH), there are 2.5 million children who are homeless. For these children, survival concerns often outweigh learning efforts (http://www.air.org/center/national-centerfamily-homelessness). This workshop was designed to increase participants’ awareness of the impact of homelessness on schooling and the laws that protect these learners, as well as to equip participants with instructional strategies to assist students in navigating the educational system during this time and beyond. The Use of Mathematic Resources There is substantial evidence that students learn at various rates and in various ways (CAST, n.d.; Courey, Tappe, Siker, & LePage, 2012). Concrete models, such as manipulatives, provide a bridge from a concrete understanding of mathematics to an abstract understanding (Grouws, 2004). This workshop was

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

111

conducted in collaboration with a vendor that markets teaching resources. We sought to focus the participants’ thinking on student learning, with particular focus on building students’ procedural fluency on the foundation of conceptual understanding with the use of manipulatives (Hiebert, 1999; NCTM, 2000; 2014). Participants learned to use various mathematics resources (e.g., algebra-tiles, patty-paper, GeoGebra & TinkerPlots software, and balance scales) to model secondary mathematics concepts. Culturally Responsive Planning and Teaching of Mathematics Freire (1996, 2005) noted that in order for teachers to enact change in the world, they must engage in praxis, which consists of reflection followed by action directed at changing social structures and norms. It is through praxis that teachers develop what Freire termed “critical consciousness,” an in-depth understanding of the world that allows someone to perceive, expose, and take action against social and political norms and policies that lead to oppression (2000). In addition to the workshops and in order to develop the participants’ critical consciousness, critical and sociopolitical awareness, and other understandings around equity and social justice, they read the following books at various points during the project: (1) Rethinking mathematics: teaching social justice by the numbers (Gutstein & Peterson, 2006); (2) Teaching mathematics to English learners (Kersaint, Thompson, & Petkova, 2009); and (3) Culturally responsive teaching (Gay, 2000). At various times during the workshops, participants discussed and shared interpretations and perspectives via reflective discourse and classroom practice (Freire, 2000). To further investigate the enactment of CLR practices, the final workshop aimed to expose the participants to an examination of the research related to CLR pedagogy and helped them to develop high cognitively demanding lessons that enabled students to draw on their everyday knowledge to solve mathematical problems that are important or relative to their community. During the workshop, participants designed mathematics tasks relating mathematical content to students’ culture and real-life experiences. The tasks engaged students in mathematics activities that deepened their understanding of mathematics by enhancing their ability to make meaningful connections among the mathematical concepts and their daily lives. In some cases, these tasks were facilitated during the clinical field experience. The Clinical Field Experience The clinical field experience occurred after the third workshop. The clinical field experience occurred in high-need schools, where over 50% of the students received free and reduced lunch. Participants were placed in

112

Edwards et al.

mathematics classrooms that included Algebra I, Algebra II, and geometry support. The student population consisted of mostly African-American and English learners who had failed one of the classes in a previous semester. During the clinical field experience, each participant was expected to design (create and facilitate a lesson plan) that engaged students in mathematics tasks that embodied tenets of CLR. Tasks were expected to relate to realworld situations, be culturally and linguistically relevant or reflect a social justice phenomenon. Each participant was observed facilitating their lesson and interacting with students at least once. Field notes were recorded based on the nature of preservice teachers’ lesson plans, their students’ participation/motivation during the lesson, and their interaction with students.

Participants Five secondary mathematics preservice teachers participated in this qualitative case study. They were enrolled in an MAT mathematics program and participated in the professional development workshops for approximately two years. The cases of Belle, Ally, Sandi, Lana, and Ethan represent a study that is bounded by the workshops, a clinical field experience in an urban school, and the participants (Merriam, 2001; Yin, 1984). The participants ranged in age from 24 to 40 years old. One participant was of Asian-Indian descent and did not attend P-16 school in the United States; the remaining four participants were White. Ally, Belle, and Sandi were career changers from the fields of biology, engineering, and accounting, respectively, while Ethan and Lana entered the program upon earning undergraduate degrees in civil engineering and psychology. Ally and Sandi completed their clinical field experience in a geometry classroom. Belle, Ethan, and Lana completed their clinical field experience in Algebra I classrooms. The researchers served as mentors for the participants with one researcher serving as the instructor for a secondary methods course and another serving as the ESOL instructor. All researchers participated in leading several of the quarterly workshops.

Methods and Analysis Through sociopolitical and post-structuralism and CLR pedagogy frameworks (Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2012; Gay, 2010; Gutierrez, 2013; Ladson-Billings, 1994, Villegas & Lucas, 2008), we examined how and in what ways preservice mathematics teachers constructed their CLR teacher identity and their

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

113

understanding of equity. Specifically, we examined the relationship between what they were saying in our discussions during the workshops and how they perceive their identity while engaged in the workshops and a clinical field experience. This was accomplished through the recursive analysis of the discourse in conversational interviews, book discussions and reflections, lesson plan artifacts, and a teaching observation. The researchers repeatedly read the reflections and interviews and compared them to lesson tasks and field notes from the teaching observation to find emerging patterns and links between what the participants were saying and doing in the classroom. Data collected before seminar participation consisted of an entry interview. A goal of the research was to gain a deeper understanding of the meanings that the preservice teachers attached to CLR teaching and equity, and how they referenced these meanings when communicating with other preservice teachers and facilitators during the workshops. We also observed their interactions with students in mathematics classrooms during their clinical field experience. We labeled the participants’ talk/conversations and identified ways in which they made meaning about CLR teaching and specifically the teaching of mathematics with a focus on equity. To access these meaning-making processes, we collected observational data during the workshops and the clinical field experience. Furthermore, we collected data related to lesson debriefing and examined the lesson plans preservice teachers perceived to be culturally and linguistically responsive. Observing the participants during the workshops and the clinical field experience and enabled access to their meaning-making processes. We envisioned the participants as a cultural group (predominantly White and female of similar backgrounds) and sought to describe their shared meanings from a sociopolitical or post-structuralist perspective (Gutierrez, 2013; Valero, 2004). After each workshop, the participants completed a reflection. They were later interviewed in order to probe deeper into statements made during their reflections. These semi-structured conversational interviews occurred up to two weeks after each workshop, lasted 75 minutes, and were informed by written workshop reflections that were completed immediately after each workshop. Each interview was audio-recorded and transcribed. The content of each interview was designed to gain an understanding of the participants’ perceptions of CLR teaching in terms of their own subjective understandings and understandings resulting from what they learned during the associated workshop. We anticipated that early on the participants’ understandings would be reflective of prior experiences. We also anticipated that their understandings would, over the course of the workshops, extend beyond prior experiences and be reflective of learning from the various workshops. This method

114

Edwards et al.

of discourse analysis enabled meaning to evolve from what the participants were saying as opposed to applying any existing meaning. We focused on how the participants saw or characterized themselves as CLR and equity perspective teachers over time. These sources of data enabled our understanding of the participants’ experiences during their participation in the workshops and their clinical field experience. During the process of analyzing the first cycle of written reflections data and transcribed interviews, we read through the data and highlighted interesting phrases or ideas as they related to equity, culturally or linguistically responsive mathematics teaching or connecting with or advocating for students, and deficit discourse related to students, parents, and socio-economic status. During our second reading, we noted patterns, combined similar or connected ideas, and coded/labeled them as themes. We then revised data procedures based upon what was learned about our instructions and questions. Finally, we compared these themes after each collection of seminar reflections and interview data, identifying conflicts and adding additional codes which led to the creation of what we considered CLR teacher identity discourse, discourse related to taking an equity stance to teaching mathematics, and deficit discourse related to students’ and parents’ educational concerns and socio-economic status, all while paying close attention to what may have been the source of their discourse. The final list of themes/codes was applied throughout the analysis process to any remaining observation data collection. The coding system enabled us to examine how the participants viewed themselves, over a period of 18 months to two years, as CLR teachers. We also examined how they viewed their ability to teach mathematics from an equity perspective, and how it shaped their perceptions and construction of their identity as culturally and linguistically responsive teachers who were able to connect with and advocate for diverse groups of students.

Findings The opportunity for secondary mathematics preservice teachers to participate in specialized workshops beyond their program of study is uncommon for many teacher education programs. These workshops provided a supportive structure for the participants to develop deeper understandings about culturally and linguistically responsive teaching, as well as equity teaching. We highlight five common themes that emerged across our analyses of the five participants’ workshop reflections, book discussions, interviews, and classroom observation. Common themes were: (a) An awareness of Inequities,

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

115

(b) Making Connections with and Advocacy for Students, (c) Shift in Teaching Practices, (d) Deficit Views on Student Learning, and (e) Need for Improvement. We now examine each finding in some depth. An Awareness of Inequities Analysis of the entry interview data revealed that the participants had perspicacity towards equity before participating in the workshops. After the Conversation with Veteran Teachers’ seminar, participants posted reflections indicating their awareness of inequities present in local school systems and classrooms. They expressed beliefs that all schools, regardless of location, should focus on providing the resources that support student learning—the most valuable resource being good mathematics teachers. With respect to education, the participants consistently associated “good” with caring teachers, high expectations for learning, and a supportive home and school environment. Each participant expressed the belief that marginalized students are often treated differently, attend resource deficient schools, and are taught by teachers who do not have the required mathematics knowledge or caring and nurturing attitudes when reflecting on the impact educational inequities and other factors have on student success. Other data reflecting equity awareness were associated with the participants’ reflections after the Teaching Students Who are Homelessness and Conversations with Veteran Teachers workshops. Ally stated, “Good schooling depends on where you live with the best teachers teaching at schools with well to do students. Any student will do well if they have a good, caring teacher who wants to help students learn.” Belle made a similar statement, “Students who have good teachers who truly care about them are able to learn more and achieve”; as did Ethan, “Based on where I grew up, I always attended good schools and had good teachers who contributed to me getting my good grades and getting into a top-notch college.” With respect to equity awareness, Sandi who grew up outside of the United States stated the following: A good education is what’s going to get you somewhere. It’s what your parents say. I know I wouldn’t be in my career if I didn’t have good teachers and parents to push me, who cared about me and wanted to see me do a good job in school. It begins with caring though. Differing from the other participants, Sandi included parents as part of the equation that is needed to acquire a good education. Based on the statements from the participants, an emerging theme appears to be an understanding of the impact caring relationships, high

116

Edwards et al.

expectations, and a positive home and school environment have on student self-concept and success. These preservice teachers saw caring about students’ well-being and communicating genuine concern as a key ingredient to student success and motivation. Good teachers possess the capacity to connect and care about the students they teach. Effective and consistent communication of high expectations is characteristic of culturally responsive teaching (Ladson-Billings, 1994) and it helps students develop a healthy self-concept, builds intrinsic motivation, and fosters a learning environment that supports student success (Sleeter, 2008). While most of the participants expressed a belief in a culture of care in support of students, one participant seemed to hold a deficit view about marginalized students. Lana focused primarily on what was different about students as compared to her background: Students’ backgrounds determine achievement. If you are poor maybe your parents are not involved, they don’t have time or maybe they can’t really support their kid, then you [the student] are probably not going to do well in school. My parents were always involved in my education and failure just wasn’t a choice in my home…kids become self-fulfilling prophecy. When asked to elaborate, Lana indicated that, “If parents aren’t there to provide support, kids end up not caring, and then fail. Parents who care are important. Teachers, too, but parents mostly are the key to student achievement.” The participants’ entry statements reflected their beliefs that the students they were preparing to teach would have very different backgrounds from their own. Their expressed beliefs and comparisons made that were primarily based on their own educational experiences. These beliefs stemmed from noticing the differences associated with socio-economic status and school location. They associated good schools with caring teachers and expressed beliefs that student success and achievement are related to teachers and parents caring about their students. Two participants associated their noticing of inequities with the concept of privilege. In Belle’s post-reflection on the Positions of Power and Privilege workshop, she stated “…race defines where you live and go to school and is beyond the control of a kid…as a White woman there are privileges I’m afforded that my students do not have and because of that, I will not judge.” Developing a practice of CLR teaching begins with care for students (Gay, 2002). With respect to equity, the participants expressed beliefs that good schools consist of a space where students have access to teachers who have

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

117

strong mathematics knowledge, caring attitudes, and respect for students. Their discourse in the entry interview and their post-reflections after attending the Teaching Students Who are Homelessness, Conversations with Veteran Teachers, and Positions of Power and Privilege workshops align with caring, nurturing, consciousness, and communication as referenced in Harriott and Martin’s (2004) description of culturally responsive teaching. Connecting with and Advocating for Students Data collected from the reflections, workshops, and follow-up interviews generated themes around connecting with students and advocating for students. Each participant expressed a desire to make a difference in the lives of students from culturally and linguistically diverse and marginalized backgrounds by advocating for language supports for English learners and academic resources that help to deepen mathematics understanding and build mathematical proficiency. Each participant addressed their responsibility as a teacher in a way that went beyond simply teaching mathematics and included building relationships with and nurturing students during the process of teaching and learning mathematics. Lana expressed the importance of making connections with students to improve her ability to create lessons that met the needs of her students. She indicated that she made a special effort to do the following: …get to know my students, their personalities, their interests, their backgrounds, and their ability level both mathematically and with language. I use that information to modify and differentiate my lessons in ways that will not only allow me to increase their learning potential, but keep theirs. In her reflection after the Culturally Responsive Planning and Teaching and Teaching Children Who are Homeless workshops, Ally indicated the following: I have to become more aware of my students’ home life. I need to ask questions to learn more about my students so that I can become more aware of their conditions at home. I never thought about students being homeless. I have to reach out to parents and other teachers so that I can begin to advocate for my students. I have to do more. Ally also expressed concerns about helping homeless students without embarrassment: “How do I advocate for a student who is homeless without embarrassing them?” Similarly, in a post-reflection and lesson debrief, Ethan talked

118

Edwards et al.

about how he connected with his students and how he reached out to his students without embarrassing them: …get to know what interests all of my students and then use that information to develop activities to keep them motivated. I plan to use the three-act tasks to start with because these activities seem to cut across all economic status and then create my own based on how they respond. I’m not just teaching math. I’m teaching the students the mathematics and the way I teach students [discovery methods, questioning, listening, personal interests] privileges the interactions and relationships I have with them. After the Teaching Children Who are Homeless workshop, Ethan purchased a small refrigerator for his classroom. In it he kept bread, peanut butter, and jelly. Ethan began morning tutorial sessions and provided food for students who missed breakfast to attend his early morning tutorial sessions. This was his way to advocate for his students who were homeless, not embarrass them, and assist them in their academic growth. Sandi expressed the importance of communicating with parents on a regular basis, especially when students were doing well: Communication is key. I want to make it a point to communicate with parents when their child is doing a good job in my class, not just when there is something wrong. This to me is so important if you want a good relationship with parents. Belle expressed her advocacy for students in terms of schools and school administrators: Everything begins with the support of school administrators and counselors because it appears they know when students are homeless but yet they withhold that information. I know this now and will definitely reach out to them when I suspect there is an issue. The administrators have to support teachers in their efforts to make math learning meaningful. Belle also reported advocating for an English learner when an administrator asked to hold a conference about the student’s attendance and academic achievement in the hallway. She was disturbed that the administrator did not want to hold the conference in a private conference room, but instead discussed the student’s performance with the family member present in the

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

119

hallway. Her concern was that the family member did not speak English and there needed to be someone present to translate other than the student. Out of concern, she rescheduled the conference and refused to conference in the hallway. Fostering relationships with students and building connections between academic learning and a student’s culture and language are at the core of creating a culturally responsive classroom (Gay, 2010; Goldenberg, 2008). Each participant reported actions that supported family communication and establishing student-teacher relationships as a means for encouraging academic achievement and a sense of belonging in their classrooms. After a lesson observation and debriefing, Ethan proudly recounted a transformation in his relationship with two “difficult students” who had misbehaved in his class. After school, he saw these two students “loitering” near the school’s career fair activities. He took the two students to employers he thought could be of interest to the students and introduced them by name as his students. Ethan insisted that his capacity to address and move on from moments of tension “makes for a positive relationship” with his students. Connecting with and advocating for students are key characteristics of a CLR teacher (Aguirre et al., 2013; Gay, 2010; Ladson-Billings, 1994; Villegas & Lucas, 2008). While the participants seemed to understand the role they played in advocating for their students and understanding the whole student, some of the participants’ statements above indicate that advocacy for students also needs the support of school administrators—for example, Belle’s comment “everything begins with the support of administrators and counselors” expressed her frustration with administrators who failed to inform a teacher that one of the students was homeless. Her statement is similar to Maxwell’s (2010, p. 8) who said, “Everything rises and falls on leadership.” Collectively, the participants’ statements above focus on the importance of caring, communicating, and establishing meaningful relationships with students in the overall advocacy for students—all characteristics of a CLR teacher (Villegas & Lucas, 2008). Shift in Teaching Practices An extension of advocating for students includes sharing effective teaching practices with colleagues in an effort to improve student learning through supportive collaborations and professional learning (Montgomery, 2001; 2006). Discussions during the workshops around the books and reflections related to The Use of the Mathematics Resources and the Culturally Responsive Planning and Teaching of Mathematics workshops highlighted an increase in participants’ confidence and a shift in their beliefs about effective teaching practices

120

Edwards et al.

from a procedural focus to a conceptual focus. The workshops also provided academic language supports to deepen and advance English learners’ mathematics understanding. Sandi commented, “Having high expectations means that I provide supports to help students read, write, and do mathematics when they need it. Not everyone needs the same [assistance/support].” Belle stated, “I have been asked to share my lessons with other teachers in the math department, where teachers have seen how engaged their students can be with lessons that reflect their interest.” Lana stated, “I am greatly respected as an educator and a resource to other educators regarding the education of culturally and linguistically diverse students that is the majority population in my school.” She continued, “Part of what I do differently is involve my students in learning math using nontraditional methods, like with the living wage project.” Belle stated, “I was asked by an assistant principal to help run the algebra remediation for failing math students, I believe because my students seem to be motivated to learn.” CLR teaching is student-centered and throughout their participation in the workshops, participants came to have high expectations for students and envisioned themselves as engaging students in high-level thinking, which contributed greatly to their growth as CLR teachers. Each participant reported an appreciation for learning about and acting on pedagogical strategies, incorporating CLR teaching practices, and focusing on equity in mathematics teaching and learning, communicating, and interacting with students in the classroom in ways that enabled them to contribute to improving students’ academic learning. Examples of a realization of the importance of CLR teaching include, Sandi’s comment noting that, “I came into the program with a background in ‘traditional’ lecture-style teaching, and the professional development we received really helped me learn a new and dynamic way of teaching that is effective for diverse learners.” Lana realized that, “It’s not enough to simply explain the rules, they simply will not remember what to do with them. I design lessons that they can relate to outside of class, so that it [the task] has meaning/makes sense.” Belle discovered, “It’s important for me to get everybody on a common group to build them up, and to have them excel, beyond what is required of them to help them meet expectations.” CLR teachers build on the varying cultural and linguistic norms of students to modify instruction to meet the learning needs of these students. In getting to know her students’ personalities and interests, Lana indicated that she “used that information to modify and differentiate…lessons in ways that will not only allow me to increase their learning potential” as a means of understanding what they are capable of achieving.

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

121

Deficit Views of Student Learning The most impactful experience in bringing about a socio-conscious awareness should have been the clinical field experience, but this is when some of the most deficit views about students and student learning were manifested. The clinical field experience impacted teacher identity development in ways we were not expecting. Upon completion of each clinical field experience observation, the observer and participant met for lesson debriefing. Below are participant statements that were made during lesson debriefings, in addition to post-reflection comments after the Culturally Responsive Planning and Teaching of Mathematics workshop. These statements are indicative of deficit views that were heard from multiple participants within multiple contexts. Some statements expressed concerns about teaching something other than what they considered to be basic content. For example, Lana stated, “How can you teach math for social justice lessons when students are unable to do basic mathematics?” Ethan made a very similar comment, “You cannot teach using problem-based learning when your students don’t know basic math.” He also lamented, “I never knew how difficult it would be to get students interested in learning.” He showed no indication, at least at that moment, that the very activity he was experiencing could make the learning more interesting for his students. Belle fell into the unfortunate trap of stereotyping her students by blaming their backgrounds when she stated, “Student backgrounds is the reason for shortcomings in achievement testing for minority students.” Sandi fell into another trap, that there is only one route to teach a standard, she stated, “I can’t teach culturally relevant or social justice lessons when we all have to teach the same curriculum and my team members are not interested.” She seemed to miss the point of the workshop, which was to discover multiple ways of teaching a standard. Some of the participants still viewed CLR teaching, at some level, as an addition to standard teaching practices rather than as a replacement. Need for Improvement Critical components to preparing CLR teachers are authentic clinical experiences that support preservice teachers’ understanding of and empathy with diverse cultures beyond using a theoretical approach that includes simply completing readings or having discussions around culture and its relationship to teaching and learning mathematics. During the program exit interview and reflections on learning in workshops and in-class experiences, there was an overall recognition that the participants were just beginning their journey as teachers of culturally and linguistically diverse learners, and areas of growth were evident. Many were initially overwhelmed with being placed in schools

122

Edwards et al.

serving traditionally marginalized students, an environment very different than they had ever experienced. Several reported the need for additional preparation that included increasing exposure to learners who are economically disadvantaged and from diverse communities. Lana stated, “I feel that I could use more exposure and knowledge about different cultures. I feel more comfortable with certain ethnic students—Black, Hispanic—than maybe others.” Sandi stated, “I feel like I could use more exposure in this [economically disadvantaged] area…if I was placed in an inner-city, low-income majority student school earlier, I would probably feel less overwhelmed.” These statements support the importance of providing diverse cultural experiences for preservice teachers very early in a preparation program as a means for developing a greater appreciation for and understanding of their students’ backgrounds and educational needs (Kitchen, 2005; Ladson-Billings, 1998). Such exposures or immersion experiences can improve preservice teachers’ ability to understand their students’ experiences and advocate for every student, regardless of cultural, linguistic, or socio-economic background. Some participants described challenges that highlighted a need for knowledge of strategies that could support their ability to confront and challenge issues of equity within schools and classrooms. Belle expressed “frustration with testing and how it limited [her] ability to facilitate discovery lessons.” Her comment was not lost among the others who had expressed similar frustrations. Ethan indicated that, “improving my instruction in ways that will meet students where they are in their basic math knowledge and move them to the next level is a major area [that] needs improvement.” Participants began to understand that development as a CLR teacher with a focus and commitment to equity in mathematics teaching and learning is an ongoing process. Belle stated, “It’s going to take time to really get to know my students, the environment, before I will feel completely comfortable in my situation…things will improve.” These responses suggest the participants recognize that an equity perspective of mathematics teaching and learning is challenging and a process that improves over time.

Discussion and Recommendations The purpose of this study was to examine the ways five preservice secondary mathematics teachers’ identities evolved during their participation in workshops and a clinical field experience in a school serving predominantly African-American, Latinx, English learners, Indigenous, economically disadvantaged, or other marginalized student populations. The workshops were

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

123

designed to build knowledge, skills, and dispositions to recognize and address mathematics teaching and learning inequities for marginalized students in the classroom. Our purpose was to build a foundation that would enable the preservice teachers to develop an equity awareness within the context of teaching and learning mathematics in high-need schools and to consider ways in which educational inequities can be addressed in the mathematics classroom. Findings indicate that the participants embraced the workshops, readings, discussions, and clinical field experience, which helped them to understand the academic and linguistic challenges culturally and linguistically diverse and economically disadvantaged students face and to work more effectively with these students to grow their academic success. Initially, the participants articulated experiences that aligned with a natural identity, defined as a form of identity that individuals cannot control, such as their own educational experiences, economic status, or gender (Gee, 2005). Initially, it was through this lens that they described their views on equity. As they began to participate in various workshops and interact with culturally and linguistically diverse students and teachers in high-need schools, they were influenced by the relationships they formed. They began to notice differences and how these differences either negatively or positively impacted the teaching and learning of mathematics. During this time, their discourse identity (Gee, 2005) emerged as they began to articulate an awareness and vision for equitable mathematics teaching and learning within the classroom. The participants began to talk about the actions they had taken or were planning to take to improve student learning and advocate for students in ways that would support students in developing mathematics understanding and proficiency in both mathematics and academic language. Upon designing and facilitating high-level mathematical tasks, the participants began to consider the changes they needed to make to meet the needs of their diverse population of students. On their journey to becoming CLR teachers with an equity perspective on teaching mathematics, the participants appeared to begin holding more affirming views of their students and the teachers they interacted with in a high-need school. However, tensions emerged between their notion of engaging students in cognitively demanding mathematics tasks and students’ learning abilities and motivation. This tension sometimes resulted in their use of deficit language when describing their students. Other challenges were associated with tensions between the demands of school testing and meeting the needs of students in developing their mathematics proficiency, as well as challenges transitioning from student-teacher to teaching students in their own classrooms. Nonetheless, over time the participants’ efficacy in teaching diverse learners increased as a result

124

Edwards et al.

of the workshops and clinical experiences. They began to develop an equity perspective for teaching and learning mathematics. Tensions and Adaptation to School Culture A critical component of preparing teachers for the ever-changing dynamics of teaching is to focus on innovative pedagogical techniques that combine best teaching practices with social justice and CLR pedagogy (Keiser, 2005; McDonald & Zeichner, 2009). The participants embraced what they were learning during their participation in the workshops. However, it appeared that adapting to the school culture in which they completed their clinical field experience was most challenging and played an especially important role in shaping their teacher identity. The problems they encountered were largely due to their particular schools’ culture around testing and meeting the needs of their students. Ally lamented about the “administrative/bureaucratic responsibilities that have little to do with supporting English learners or others in their mathematics learning.” While the workshops provided opportunities for veteran teachers to share the reality of teaching in a high-need school before the clinical field experience began, the participants’ vision of equitable mathematics teaching differed as they had not considered the planning and teaching norms within many mathematics departments. In some cases, they struggled using the skills developed during the program because as Lauren lamented, “I can’t even write my own lesson plans because I have to deliver content in the exact same way as the other teachers who teach my subject” (i.e., same slides, same explanation, etc.). Recommendations for Future Pre-Service Professional Development We suggest a professional development framework that pairs preservice teachers with mentors who are experienced CLR teachers at the beginning of their teacher education program. We believe an early pairing of preservice teachers with experienced CLR teachers could be helpful in transforming potentially dysfunctional cultures into more collaborative ones, as well as serve to alleviate much of the tensions the preservice teachers encountered during the clinical field experience. Induction Plan It is important for effective teacher preparation programs to include follow-up sessions or an induction plan that supports beginning teachers. We were able to follow-up with participants after graduation in support of their employment as teachers. However, the Increasing Mathematics Teachers for All program did not receive additional Noyce funding to extensively support preservice teachers’ successful transition from the program/PD sessions into the

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

125

classroom. To provide support for the participants, as they assumed the role as teacher, we invited them to participate in additional workshops. This effort did not prove useful for many of the participants. For example Ethan commented, “My first year of teaching has been extremely difficult. I find it hard to attend the meetings with everything else I have going on.” Belle had a similar comment when she said, “additional training opportunities for older graduates that have participated in all the earlier training will provide support for all of us who spend so much of time supporting our students through the learning process, which is not easy for them.” In our evaluation report, we learned that participants could have benefited from induction support in the form of a professional learning community. Lauren suggested, “If we could have some sort of online community for support from fellow novice teachers…that would be beneficial, but the distance and exhaustion is too great for me to attend sessions [face to face] anymore.” All of the participants in this study remained in their positions at highneed schools for at least three years, with two leaving the profession (Belle and Lauren) after six years. Three are currently working in high-need schools with culturally and linguistically diverse students. Those who have remained in the profession have echoed Sandi’s comment, “I don’t have any intention of leaving, even if offered a job closer.” She goes on to say, “I am committed to teaching and supporting marginalized students or any student who struggles to find success learning mathematics.” Gay (2000) and other researchers (e.g., Conkin & Hughes, 2016; LadsonBillings, 1995b; McDonald & Zeichner, 2009) have argued the importance of preparing preservice teachers who are competent in creating a learning environment that builds on students’ cultural knowledge. Developing a cultural and linguistic responsiveness requires one to acknowledge and understand their own cultural values and the impact of those values on their mathematics teaching. The workshops provided opportunities for the participants to build their CLR teacher identity by developing the attitudes, knowledge, and skills needed to teach a racially, ethnically, economically, and linguistically diverse student population.

Conclusions Findings suggest a workshop framework provides a foundation on which preservice teachers are able to build a CLR teacher identity and an equity perspective of teaching and learning mathematics. Teaching mathematics for equity is complex and the participants consistently searched for a balance between

126

Edwards et al.

meeting the cultural and linguistic needs of their students, developing their students’ mathematical knowledge and understanding, and the demands of the school system with the need for a more robust induction plan. The participants embraced what they learned during their participation in the workshops and overtime their efficacy in working with diverse students increased and impacted their perspectives on equity. The researchers openly acknowledge the difficulty of developing preservice teachers’ CLR teacher identities through their limited participation in the workshops and realize that CLR teacher growth and development is a process that requires continuous effort over time (Martin, 2015; Villegas & Lucas, 2007).

Acknowledgments This research was supported in part by a grant from the National Science Foundation (DUE #09347910. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

References Aguirre, J., Mayfield-Ingram, K., & Martin, D. (2013). The impact of identity in K–8 mathematics learning and teaching: Rethinking equity-based practices. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Banks, J., Cochran-Smith, M., Moll, L., Richert, A., Zeichner, K., LePage, P.,…McDonald, M. (2005). Teaching diverse learners. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 232–274). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Barta, J., Cuch, M., & Barkly, C. (2014). Math is a verb: Activities and lessons from cultures around the world. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Beijaard, D., Verloop, N., & Vermunt, J. D. (2000). Teachers’ perceptions of professional identity: An exploratory study from a personal knowledge perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 749–764. Berry, R. (2008). Access to upper-level mathematics: The stories of successful African American middle school boys. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(5), 464–488. Buzzelli, G., & Johnson, B. (2002). The moral dimensions of teaching: Learning, power, and culture in classroom interaction. New York, NY: Routledge.

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

127

Cochran-Smith, M. (2004). Walking the road: Race, diversity and social justice in teacher education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Conklin, H. G., & Hughes, H. E. (2016). Practices of compassionate, critical, justiceoriented teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 67(1), 47–60. Courey, S., Tappe, P., Siker, J., & Lepage, P. (2012). Improved lesson planning with universal design for learning. Teacher Education and Special Education, 36, 7–27. doi:10.1177/0888406412446178 Cummins, J., & Swain, M. (1986). Bilingualism in education. New York, NY: Routledge. Delpit, L. (2012). Multiplication is for white people: Raising expectations for other people’s children. New York, NY: The New Press. Echevarria, J., & Short, D. (2010). Programs and practices for effective sheltered content instruction. In Improving education for English learners: Research based approaches. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Education. Echevarria, J. J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. (2012). Making content comprehensible for English learners. New York, NY: Pearson Education. Ernest, P. (2004). Images of mathematics, values and gender: A philosophical perspective. In B. Allen & S. Johnston-Wilder (Eds.), Mathematics education: Exploring the culture of learning (pp. 11–25). London: RoutledgeFalmer. Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Bloomsburg Academic. Freire, P. (2005). Teachers as cultural workers: Letters to those who dare teach. New York, NY: Routledge. Fuller, F., & Brown, O. (1975). Becoming a teacher. In K. Ryan (Ed.), Teacher education: Seventy-fourth yearbook of the national society for the study of education. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, practice, and research (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 106–116. Gay, G. (2010). Acting on beliefs in teacher education for cultural diversity. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–2), 143–152. Gee, J. P. (2001). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. In W. G. Secada (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 25, pp. 99–125). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. Gee, J. P. (2005). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. Goldenberg, C., & Coleman, R. (2010). Promoting academic achievement among English learners. Thousand Oak, CA: Corwin Press. Grouws, D. (2004). Chapter 7: mathematics. In Cawelti, G. (Ed.), Handbook of research on improving student achievement. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.

128

Edwards et al.

Gutierrez, R. (2000). Advancing African-American urban youth in mathematics: Unpacking the success of one math department. American Journal of Education, 109, 64–111. Gutiérrez, R. (2009). Embracing the inherent tensions in teaching mathematics from an equity stance. Democracy & Education, 18(3), 9–16. Gutierrez, R. (2013). The sociopolitical turn in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44(1), 37–68. Gutstein, R., & Peterson, B. (Eds.). (2005). Rethinking mathematics: Teaching social justice by the numbers. Milwaukee, WI: Rethinking Schools. Hiebert, J. (1999). Relationships between research and the NCTM standards. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(1), 3–19. Hoffert, S. B. (2009). Mathematics: The universal language? Mathematics Teacher, 103(2), 130–139. Janzen, J. (2008). Teaching English language learners in the content areas. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1010–1038. Keiser, D. (2005). Learners not widgets: Teacher education for social justice during transformational times. In M. Nicholas & D. Keiser (Eds.), Teacher education for democracy and social justice (pp. 31–56). New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer. Kersaint, G., Thompson, D., & Petkova, M. (2009). Teaching mathematics to English language learners. New York, NY: Routledge. Kitchen, R. (2005). Making equity and multiculturalism explicit to transform mathematics education. In A. Rodriguez & R. Kitchen (Eds.), Preparing mathematics and science teachers for diverse classrooms: Promising strategies for transformative pedagogy (pp. 33–65). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995a). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995b). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159–165. Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding achievement in U.S. schools, Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12. Loewus, L. (2017). The nation’s teaching force is still mostly white and female. Education Week, 37(01), 11–12. Luehmann, A. (2007). Identity development as a lens to science teacher preparation. Science Education, 91, 822–839. doi:10.1002/sce.20209. Martin, D. B. (2015). The collective Black and principles to action. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 8(1), 17–23. Matthews, L., Jones, S., & Parker, Y. A. (2012). Advancing a framework for culturally relevant, cognitively demanding mathematics tasks. In J. Leonard & D. Martin (Eds.),

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

129

The brilliance of Black children in mathematics: Beyond the numbers and toward a new discourse (pp. 123–150). Charlotte, NC: Information Age. Maxwell, J. (2010). The 21 indispensable qualities of a leader: Becoming the person others will want to follow. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson. McDonald, M., & Zeichner, K. (2009). Social justice teacher education. In W. Ayers, T. Quinn, & D. Stovall (Eds.), The handbook of social justice in education (pp. 595– 610). Philadelphia, PA: Taylor and Francis. Merriam, S. B. (2001). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132–141. Montgomery, D. (2006). Implementing district-wide school reform: Professional learning communities (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Lewis & Clark College, Portland, OR. Montgomery, W. (2001). Creating culturally responsive, inclusive classrooms. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(4), 4–9. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston, VA: Author. Nieto, S. (2004). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. Oakes, J. (2005). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Olsen, B. (2008). Introducing teacher identity and this volume. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(3), 3–6. Orosco, M. J., & O’Connor, R. (2011). Cultural aspects of teaching reading with Latino English language learners. In R. O’Connor & P. Vadasy (Eds.), Handbook of reading interventions (pp. 356–379). New York, NY: Guilford. Rothstein, R. (2004). Class and schools: Using social, economic, and educational reform to close the Black-White achievement gap. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Rowlands, S., & Carson, R. (2002). Where would formal, academic mathematics stand in a curriculum informed by ethnomathematics? A critical review of ethnomathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 50(1), 79–102. Saunders, W., Goldenberg, C., & Marcelletti, D. (2013). English language development. American Educator, 37, 13–39. Secada, W. G. (1998). School mathematics for language enriched pupils. In S. H. Fradd & O. Lee (Eds.), Creating Florida’s multilingual global workforce: Educational policies and practices for students learning English as a new language. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Department of Education.

130

Edwards et al.

Singh, G., & Richards, J. C. (2006). Teaching and learning in the language teacher education course room: A critical sociocultural perspective. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 37, 149–175. Sleeter, C. E. (2008). Preparing white teachers for diverse students. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, & J. McIntyre (Eds.), Handbook of research in teacher education: Enduring issues in changing contexts (pp. 559–582). New York, NY: Routledge. Smith, T. M., & Ingersoll, R. M. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring on beginning teacher turnover? American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681–714. Snyder, T. D., de Brey, C., & Dillow, S. A. (2016). Digest of education statistics 2015 (NCES 2016-014). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Solomon, Y. (2009). Mathematical literacy. New York, NY: Routledge. UDL Guidelines Research Evidence. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.udlguidelines.cast.org/more/research-evidence Valero, P. (2004). Socio-political perspectives on mathematics education. In P. Valero & R. Zevenbergen (Eds.), Researching the socio-political dimensions of mathematics education (pp. 5–23). Boston, MA: Springer. Varghese, M., Morgan, B., Johnston, B., & Johnson, K. (2005). Theorizing language teacher identity: Three perspectives and beyond. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 4(1), 21–44. Retrieved from http://www.dx.doi.org/10.1207/ s15327701jlie0401_2 Villegas, A. M., & Lucas, T. (2002). Preparing the culturally responsive teaches: Rethinking the curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 20–32. Villegas, A. M., & Lucas, T. (2008). Linguistically responsive teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(4), 361–373. Wager, A. A., Stinson, D. W., & Kilpatrick, J. (2012). Teaching mathematics for social justice: Conversations with educators. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Walqui, A. (2006). Scaffolding instruction for English language learners: A conceptual framework. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(2), 159– 180. doi:10.1080/13670050608668639 Wang, J., Odell, S., & Schwille, S. (2008). Effects of teacher induction on beginning teachers’ teaching: A critical review. Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 132–152. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research design and methods: Applied social research and methods series (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Zwiers, J., & Crawford, M. (2009). How to start academic conversations: An innovative technique draws young English language learners into academic discussions. Educational Leadership, 66(7), 70–73.

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teacher Identity

131

Appendix A Semi-Structured Conversational Interview Questions Workshop 1: Culturally Responsive Planning and Teaching of Mathematics – Now that you have had some time to think about culturally responsive mathematics planning and teaching, what is your perception of what it is? Each person, please respond and others chime in. – Most of you have expressed concerns about students possibly not meeting the mathematical challenges associated cognitive demanding CR mathematics tasks. Can you explain what you mean? Why do you think students won’t be able to meet the challenge? – What are some things you can do to support students in meeting these challenges? – What are some of the challenges (you as teacher) associate with locating or designing culturally responsive lessons/tasks? Workshop 2: Conversations with Veteran teachers – What did you learn most from the teachers? – How will you use what you’ve learned to impact your own students? – What, if anything, will you do differently from these mentor teachers? – How will/has the conversation changed the way you think about teaching in a high need school? Explain. Workshop 3: Positions of Power and Privilege – Why do you think there are positions of power and privilege in our schools? – Who has the power and who is privileged in our schools? – How are students impacted by who is privileged? – Some of you expressed some discomfort with the workshop? What were you most uncomfortable with during the workshop? Why? – How might this impact your students? – What changes have you/do you plan to make? Workshop 4: Teaching Students Who are Homeless – In your reflection, all of you expressed (what appeared to be) some form of anger when learning that there are homeless students in our school? Can you explain? – Do you think it’s important to know which students in your classroom are homeless? – Who should be responsible for letting you know your student is homeless? Parents? Counselor? Administrator?

132

Edwards et al.

– Explain why you think the person you named should be responsible? – As a result of this workshop, what changes will you make to support homeless students in your school? Workshop 5: The Use of Mathematical Resources – In what specific ways to you think the manipulatives we encountered in the workshop can be used to connect mathematics to real-life/students’ culture? – Are some manipulatives more useful than others in deepening students’ mathematics understanding? Explain. – How might you use these manipulatives to support struggling students? Be specific.

CHAPTER 6

Supporting Noyce Scholars’ Teaching of Mathematics in Rural Elementary Schools Dorothy Y. White, Jacqueline Leonard, Michelle T. Chamberlin and Alan Buss

Abstract High teacher turnover rates and teachers working out-of-field leave many children in rural and urban contexts without a highly-qualified teacher. The Robert Noyce Scholars program was instituted to address this problem in STEM education. The Wyoming Interns to Teacher Scholars (WITS) program was developed to increase the number of STEM teachers in rural K–6 settings. This chapter examines how professional development and other supports influenced self-efficacy in mathematics among two cohorts of Noyce scholars and the student teaching experiences of three Noyce scholars’ in mathematics. Results of the Mathematics Teaching Efficacy Belief Survey (MTEBI) were mixed. Preservice teachers’ self-efficacy and outcome expectancy scores were malleable but vacillated slightly over time. Male preservice teachers’ scores were higher than female preservice teachers’ scores on self-efficacy and outcome expectancy. However, observational data revealed strong evidence across all domains that focal student teachers’ mathematics lessons improved over time. Student teachers who attended professional development and incorporated supervisor’s feedback showed the most improvement. However, additional research that links professional development to advances in preservice teachers’ content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, and critical pedagogies is needed in order to engage in equitable mathematics instruction.

Keywords self-efficacy – outcome expectancy – mathematical content knowledge – fractions – pedagogical content knowledge

© koninklijke brill nv, leideN, 2019 | DOI: 10.1163/9789004399990_006

134

White et al.

Introduction Recruiting and retaining highly-qualified teachers with expertise in science and mathematics to work in hard-to-staff geographic areas is necessary to equalize educational opportunities for rural, Title 1 students (Leonard, Russell, Hobbs, & Buchanan, 2013; U.S. Department of Education, 2013). High teacher turnover rates and teachers working out-of-field leave many children without a highly-qualified teacher (Ingersoll, 2008). At the elementary level, teachers who are weak in science and mathematics content knowledge struggle to correct students’ misconceptions or avoid teaching the subjects altogether (Leonard, Barnes-Johnson, Dantley, & Kimber, 2011). To change these trends, the researchers applied for and received funding from the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Noyce Scholars Program for a five-year study known as Wyoming Interns to Teacher Scholars (WITS) to examine the recruitment, retention, and pedagogical practices of dual majors in elementary education and STEM (e.g., biology, engineering, geology, mathematics, natural science, zoology, etc.) at a rural, land-grant university. While research on Noyce scholars is sparse, most of the existing studies focus on recruitment (Bischoff, French, & Schaumloffel, 2014; Ganchorre & Tomanek, 2012; Liou & Lawrenz, 2010). Noyce scholars who exhibited an awareness of educational challenges, a sense of belonging to diverse communities, and a belief in themselves as a role model or resource were motivated to teach (Ganchorre & Tomanek, 2012). Other significant variables related to recruiting Noyce scholars to teach in high-need schools were race, pathway into teaching (i.e., traditional versus alternative preparation), and the amount of scholarship funding (Liou & Lawrenz, 2010). There is a gap in the literature, however, on Noyce scholars’ content and pedagogical preparation to teach science and mathematics, particularly in high-need elementary schools. The purpose of this chapter is to share strategies used to improve Noyce scholars’ mathematical content and pedagogical knowledge and the related influence on their self-efficacy in an effort to increase retention at the elementary school level. To examine Noyce scholars’ self-efficacy and preparation to teach mathematics, data were collected and analyzed from three cohorts, consisting of 18 scholars. Surveys were administered on a pre-post basis, and observations took place in the classrooms where Noyce scholars taught to assess their mathematics content knowledge (MCK) and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). The findings were used to develop professional development interventions for subsequent student teachers related to specific mathematics topics like fractions. The results of the Year 3 study, along with changes in Noyce scholars’

Supporting Noyce Scholars’ Teaching of Mathematics

135

mathematics teaching efficacy and instruction during student teaching, are reported in this chapter.

Background of the Study Three constructs were used to situate this Noyce study in the literature on teacher preparation: (a) mathematics teaching efficacy; (b) elementary teachers’ development of MCK and PCK; and (c) K-6 professional development on fractions. Mathematics Teaching Efficacy There is a plethora of research that has shown teacher efficacy is related to positive student outcomes (Bandura, 1997; Giles, Byrd, & Bendolph, 2016; Schunk, 1983). Moreover, teacher conceptions related to mathematics teaching have been well documented in the literature (Moody & DuCloux, 2015). “Teacher self-efficacy, which is defined as a teacher’s sense of personal ability to organize and execute teaching” is linked to higher student achievement (Nurlu, 2015, p. 490). Additionally, Bandura (1977) associated self-efficacy with four factors: mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion, and affective states. Mastery experiences are those that are acquired through actual practice while vicarious experiences are shaped through observing the behavior of others in an apprentice-like setting, such as student teaching. This difference is important to note because personal experience rather than peripheral experience has a stronger impact on teaching ability. In other words, novice teachers learn by teaching rather than observing. In terms of mathematics instruction, teachers with high efficacy are more effective in the classroom than those with low efficacy (Swars, 2005). They not only have the ability to influence student learning and outcomes but also student motivation to learn (Nurlu, 2015). Teachers with a greater sense of self-efficacy are willing to try new methods, persist with struggling students, engage in ongoing professional development, and are willing to build strong relationships with students (Giles et al., 2016; Haney, Lumpe, Czerniak, & Egan, 2002; Nurlu, 2015). Studies on mathematics teacher efficacy found that elementary preservice teachers enrolled in reform-based mathematics education courses exhibited high personal efficacy (Giles et al., 2015; Newton, Leonard Evans, & Eastburn, 2012; Nurlu, 2015). In Moody and DuCloux (2015) study, 51 elementary preservice teachers from traditional (i.e., 19–24 year olds) and non-traditional (i.e., delayed collegiate study of at least five years) backgrounds participated in a three-course, three-semester mathematics sequence. The Mathematics

136

White et al.

Teaching Efficacy Beliefs Instrument (MTEBI), which consists of two subscales (i.e., Personal Mathematics Teaching Efficacy [PMTE] and Mathematics Teaching Outcomes Expectancy [MTOE] (Enochs et al., 2000), was given to determine if differences existed in the self-efficacy of traditional (n=27) and nontraditional (n=24) elementary preservice teachers. Results of a paired t-test revealed all teachers had higher efficacy scores (PMTE & MTOE) after taking the mathematics sequence. When data were disaggregated by student background, findings revealed significant differences from pre- to posttest on the PMTE (t=−2.606, p < 0.01) but not the MTOE for traditional students. However, there were significant differences from pre- to posttest on both the PMTE (t=−5.488, p Year 1

Non-reelected

Quit

10 16 4 30

8 13 4 25

8 6 1 15

0 3 2 5

0 4 1 5

at the same school where they taught as a student teacher is still teaching at the school. It is important to note that while rich job preview primarily happened as a positive consequence of student teaching, the teachers with rich preview from student teaching did not actively pursue information about their schools but came upon it incidentally. Preview was a fortunate happenstance of having student taught at a school where a position become available. While this is in no way problematic, it does indicate that the preview gained through student teaching was incidental rather than intentional. Only two teachers in the entire sample, both in the information-rich category, actually engaged in an information-rich search process. One high school math teacher experienced a robust interview process initiated by the school. From that experience, she determined the school to be a good fit for her and accepted the post. Another math teacher set his sights on finding a high school that was committed to a particular pedagogical practice and undertook a detailed search for a school that aligned with him in this regard. These were the only two teachers for whom finding a good professional fit was a clear part of the search process. One actively sought out specific workplace characteristics while the other was fortunate to interview at a district that was committed to information-rich hiring. The others saw themselves as needing to take what they could get. School Selection Criteria The data that emerged in this study revealed that most took of the study participants accepted their teaching positions simply because they were offered to them (see excerpt below). Teachers, even most of those in the information-rich category, selected their places of employment with minimal criteria. And what criteria they did have was primarily about logistics such as time to commute. For 29 of the 30 teachers in this study, school level working conditions were not

358

Bartlett and Thompson

considered as part of their job search process. Only one teacher actively sought a school based on preferences for a particular working environment. I: What drew you to Valley Oaks High School? Why did you choose to teach there? R: Well, I mean you say “choose to teach there, ” but I didn’t really choose to teach there. I was offered a job there. Twenty of the teachers in the study expressed only logistical preferences in their search. The one criteria that emerged as a driver of the school selection process was geography. Five teachers looked for and accepted schools based on their proximity to where they lived (because they did not want to commute) or declined offers (two teachers) because the school was in a community too far from their current home. The nine remaining teachers expressed absolutely no preferences or criteria when selecting their schools. When asked what went into their decision to accept the position at their schools, their primary concern was “just getting a job.” The rush to secure employment was fueled by two issues: (a) fear that they would not be able to find employment and (b) the desire to secure employment so they could focus on completing their teacher preparation programs without the ongoing distraction and stress of a job search. By and large, school selection criteria were minimal and unimportant for teachers in this study. The tendency not to see schools as offering distinct differences in terms of workplace conditions sheds light on the trend to accept the first job offer. These teachers were passive in their job search process and non-discerning when it came to selecting a school workplace. The importance of working conditions for choosing or not choosing a school is crucial because it was the leading factor that teachers gave for leaving their schools. In all six cases of teacher initiated mobility, the teacher’s rationale for leaving the school was dissatisfaction with the school’s working conditions. Poor working conditions were also a contributing factor for the teachers not being rehired by their school principals. In interviews leading up to their dismissal, teachers complained about challenging working conditions. For example, two teachers described untenable assignments, teaching multiple classes with few resources, and minimal support. Three of the six did not have effective induction programs at their schools and were mentored by people outside of their content area. Thus, while the new teachers showed little to no regard for working conditions as they searched for and selected a school, the differences in working conditions had significant ramifications for their professional trajectories. Anna Hughes is on the extreme end of the poor information and attrition spectrum,

Seeking to Stay

359

but the other math and science teaching fellows were more like her than not. Most took their first job offer, a minority made their decision based on rich information, and only one of them had any clearly articulated school and professional criteria for his preferred place of employment. That one exception is Nick Vega. The case study describing his experiences is presented below. Nick Vega: Rich-Information Professional Selection Criteria Nick Vega knew what he wanted in a school and a teaching job, and he looked for it purposively until he found it. He had a clear set of workplace criteria that drove his job search and decision making, including pedagogical practices, professional development, and student learning orientations. He considered and rejected several schools before accepting an offer at the school he felt best met his criteria. Five years in, he is still at his first school. He is very satisfied with his work and career choice, and, as the recipient of a selective national teacher fellowship, just completed a comprehensive professional development induction support program for new teachers. Like Anna Hughes, Nick had a bachelor’s degree in mathematics, an undergraduate minor in STEM teaching, and a NSF Noyce fellowship funded master’s degree in education. But unlike Anna, Nick had a much stronger sense of his bargaining power in the teacher workforce as a new teacher with outstanding credentials in a highly sought after subject area. And unlike any of the other 29 teaching fellows, Nick had very clear expectations of and for the school where he would accept a teaching position. It was important to Nick that the colleagues he worked with shared his commitment to student learning and his rejection of deficit theories regarding student capacity. He wanted a math department that had fully embraced the pedagogical practice of the College Preparatory Mathematics curriculum4 and a school that supported teacher professional development and collaboration. To find the right teaching job, Nick rejected a job offer from the school where he student taught, describing that school as not being progressive enough in their pedagogical practice and lacking the professional climate he wanted to support his learning. As part of his employment search he attended job fairs to screen districts and departments for fit with his criteria. Once he had narrowed the field, he then visited the schools that interested him and targeted his ideal school for employment. He even had to work around the district practice of poor-information centralized hiring and school placement by lobbying to be hired directly into his school of choice. His search netted him a working environment that met his criteria, and he extolled the school culture and shared pedagogical commitments that he realized there:

360

Bartlett and Thompson

Before the first day even started – kind of midsummer, they had a orientation that [new teachers] have to come to. The whole orientation is about the Carol Dweck book Mindset. That’s the entire philosophy of this district. We believe all students are capable of learning. That’s not what I felt at [my student teaching placement]. When I had that orientation meeting, it really was like, “Yes! This is where I need to be.” I believe all students can learn. Nick celebrated his employer’s commitment to teacher growth and learning, “they care about teachers and professional development of teachers.” He credited the school and district level of support for his success as a new teacher. The school and district supported him in applying for a very prestigious new teaching fellowship that he received after employment. It provided him professional guidance and support for five full years, but it also took him away from the school for days at a time. Supporting this type of external professional development is consistent with the school’s ethos of professional teacher development. Furthermore, his department was very collaborative, and the school had ongoing vibrant teacher professional learning communities inside the school. They served a high-need student population, but teachers did so with ongoing support of their collaborations as well as structural resources to aid student learning: Even though it’s a high-needs school, and I was doing some really challenging stuff, the support that’s available is phenomenal. Like with the EL class, I had two paraeducators. The class isn’t bigger than 24 students. Yeah, I’ve never taught EL. Yeah, I was in over my head, but I had a lot of support. The Credit Recovery class I had one paraeducator. There was a lot of support there. Nick Vega is positioned at the opposite end of the information job search spectrum from Anna Hughes. He distinguished himself from every other new teacher in this sample given his clearly articulated criteria for working condition priorities. Yet, his case demonstrates what is possible. New teachers can be discerning in their job search. They can identify the criteria they want in a work environment, and they can engage actively in a job search for a school that will be a good fit for them. They can insist on an information-rich decision-making process, and they can even pressure districts to go counter to centralized hiring practices to get placed at their chosen school sites. When more teachers, like Nick, engage in an information-rich job search process based on discerning criteria, more teachers will find themselves in schools where they are able to be successful as satisfied teachers who stay.

Seeking to Stay

361

Discussion Teachers’ job search processes, as a unit of analysis, is an important component of teacher success and persistence at the school level and in the profession. Time and again, the response from teacher educators and others in the field was to affirm that new teachers need to accept the first job they are offered and that it does not serve new teachers well to be too particular in their selection criteria. As a consequence, many have come to accept the belief that any teaching post is better than no teaching post for a new teacher. These data indicate the very opposite is true. New teachers are best served by being particular in their job search criteria and thorough in their search for full rich information about prospective places of employment. They need sufficient information to discern the relative fit between their own criteria and the working conditions of prospective schools. When new teachers do not make job acceptance decisions based on informed criteria, they dramatically increase the risk that they will not stay in their schools, and in some cases, face the stigma of an involuntary job termination.5 Viewed through the experiences of these teachers, a successful first school job match is essential to teacher success, and taking no post, while searching for the right teaching post, is a far better employment pathway. This chapter is both informed by and extends the work of Liu and Johnson (2006) on the degree and relevance of information exchange in the hiring process. Their work on the hiring process details specific approaches to hiring that employers can use to increase teacher retention. Liu and Johnson suggested the hiring process was driven by the employer and consider how school districts can alter hiring practices to improve teacher retention. The job search, however, is driven by the employee. The research reported in this chapter expands understanding of how teachers can alter their job search practices to improve their own chances of professional retention. Teachers can structure their job seeking practices to influence the opportunities they have to gather rich information on prospective school employers, to conduct criteria-based job searches, and to fundamentally seek work in a manner that increases the possibility that they will stay in a particular teaching position as well as in the profession overall. Teachers need not play a passive role in ensuring a criteria-based job search. First and foremost, they must identify and articulate a clear set of priorities in their search. Twenty-nine of the 30 Noyce teacher fellows expressed no criteria, beyond some geographic preferences, for their future workplace. Without criteria to guide a search, the collection of information on prospective employers is rendered obsolete. Schools, as potential workplaces, are not uniform and

362

Bartlett and Thompson

treating them as if they are—treating the job search process as if teaching at one school will be the same as teaching at another—ignores the importance of finding a place where a teacher will feel a sense of alignment with colleagues and workplace priorities. Clearly articulated workplace criteria then form the foundation of an information-rich job search. Nick Vega’s clearly articulated set of criteria enabled him to drive his own job search and not to be driven by employer’s practices. For example, the district in which he accepted a teaching post practiced highly centralized hiring with many teachers learning about their final school placement and assignment after accepting employment. But Nick circumvented this information-poor hiring practice with his criteria-based and information-rich job search. He researched and identified a school where he sought employment and only accepted a position with the district once his placement in his preferred school was guaranteed. Of course, sometimes teachers stumble into a good fit at a workplace without clearly articulated criteria. In this study, this happened most frequently through the student teaching experience. Six of the ten teachers who experienced a rich-information job search process gained knowledge of their prospective employer and workplace environment by teaching there as student teachers. However, these six teachers were no more able to articulate their workplace criteria than other teaching fellows who accepted positions based on limited or poor information. Rather, they would say, they had accepted the position because it “felt right” without being able to articulate specifics. This study highlights the power of first-hand experience in job selection, and the effectiveness of student teaching as a job search and recruitment tool. The findings in this study show that accepting a first job offer appears to be a proxy for a lack of discernment among job seekers. Accepting a first job offer is not inherently problematic, but rather the sheer number of teachers who did accept their first job offer indicates a lack of discernment among the teachers as job seekers. Twenty-five of the 30 new teachers accepted their first teaching job offer, and 17 of those 25 first did so with limited to poor information about the workplaces and teaching assignments they were accepting. Ten of the 17 did not make it beyond the first year at their school with five of them being fired by their employer and the other five quitting because they were dissatisfied with workplace conditions. Anna Hughes is the poster child for what not to do in a job search. Her experience clearly highlights the negative career effects of blindly accepting a teaching post. An easy commute is an inadequate measure of the relative merits of a school as a supportive workplace consistent with a teacher’s priorities and needs. Ending up in a school, as she did, where one is misaligned with professional

Seeking to Stay

363

practices and norms and lack of the support needed to succeed led to a poor result. Choosing to leave a first school is a challenging situation, but being fired can have a profoundly negative effect on new teacher persistence. Anna Hughes was fired from her first school and resigned from her second school. She left teaching for a while and nearly left the field of education permanently. Many in Anna’s situation, however, do not get the support to persevere, and they exit both schools and the teaching profession based on a poorly informed job search. Addressing the shortage of qualified math and science teachers in U.S. public schools will take more than recruiting more math and science teachers into high quality teaching programs. New math and science teachers need to better understand their place in the labor market and should be taught how to best navigate the job search process from a position of agency. It is not enough to search merely for the first job. Teachers need to be encouraged to identify and search for what they seek in a school and teaching post where they can be successful. Teacher educators can help preservice teachers to clarify their priorities and preferences in pedagogical practice, subject matter orientation, professional community, and workplace culture and encourage them to foreground these priorities in their job search. Employment discernment criteria and the information needed to find it are essential to perseverance of highquality math and science teachers in public schools.

Conclusion There are many strong takeaways from this research study. First and foremost, this research study offers important considerations for teacher preparation. The teachers in this study, while highly qualified and well prepared for classroom teaching, were woefully unprepared for navigating the demands of the job search process—arguably, the first stage of entering the teaching profession. As evidenced by most of the teachers in this study taking their first job offer, they did not understand the demands of the labor market or their positioning within that market. Furthermore, the teachers lacked an understanding of their own demands and preferences about the kind of school where they might find professional satisfaction. This lack of understanding had significant consequences for their professional trajectories and consequences for the profession. It is our position that teacher preparation should include preparing teachers not only to be successful in the classroom but to also be knowledgeable about the contours of the teaching profession and how to forge a long and satisfying career. Induction into the profession begins with a thoughtful and strategic job search and school selection process.

364

Bartlett and Thompson

This research also has implications for future research and scholarship. We contend from this work that the agential role of the teacher has been undertheorized in the literature on teacher hiring. While Liu and Johnson’s work (2006) made a significant contribution to the literature and brought much needed attention to the role that district and school hiring practices contributed to teacher retention, teachers were only included as secondary actors. In this chapter, we have highlighted the ways teachers’ preferences and decision-making shapes their navigation of the district and school hiring practices and deepened understandings of teachers as actors in the job search process. We believe a research agenda that examines the interplay of teacher decision-making and district hiring practices is the next step in significantly moving this work forward.

Limitations The findings of this study are limited both by the restricted geographic region of the participants as well as by the particularly high demand for the teaching subjects. All of the new teachers studied were prepared as teachers and accepted their first teaching positions in California. Not all states share California’s hiring and employment policies. Thus, the experiences of teachers may vary across states. Further, math and science are currently subjects in particularly high demand in U.S. public schools, and it may be that the job search experience of teachers in subjects that are not in short supply may be quite different. Finally, while the sample size is deep in context and duration, it is a relatively small sample, which presents further limitation.

Acknowledgments The work presented here was funded, in part, by the National Science Foundation Noyce Award 1340034. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Notes 1 Note that one information rich teacher was transferred at the start of the second teaching year to another school in the district because of declining enrollment at the initial school.

Seeking to Stay

365

2 Probationary employees may be non-reelected for the next school year up to March 15 of their second year. This is essentially being fired from your position and can only occur before a teacher has secured tenure (which, in California, begins on the first day of their third year of teaching. Teachers are typically given the opportunity to resign so as to avoid having non-reelect on their resumes. 3 Or resigned because they were informed that they would not be reelected. 4 College Preparatory Mathematics (CPM) is a curricular program that focuses on building math competencies and engaging students through group work and academic discourse. More details can be found at: https://www.cpm.org/ 5 Teachers who are non-reelected (aka fired) in a California public school district must reveal that information to prospective employers. Many HR directors interviewed for this research indicated that non-reelected teachers are never or rarely considered for employment in their districts.

References Allensworth, E., Ponisciak, S., & Mazzeo, C. (2009). The schools teachers leave: teacher mobility in Chicago public schools. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research. Bartlett, L., Ogawa, R., & Belanger, D. (2013). Retaining the math & science teachers we need: high quality STEM teachers in high need schools. Santa Cruz, CA: University of California Santa Cruz. Borman, G. D., & Dowling, N. M. (2008). Teacher attrition and retention: a metaanalytic and narrative review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 367–409. Boyatzis, R. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2005). The draw of home: How teachers’ preferences for proximity disadvantage urban schools. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24(1), 113–132. Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2009, March). Who leaves? Teacher attrition and student achievement. CALDER Working Paper 23. Bryk, A., Camburn, E., & Louis, K. S. (1999). Professional community in Chicago elementary schools: Facilitating factors and organizational consequences. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(5), 751–781. California Council on Science and Technology (CCST). (2007). Critical path analysis of California’s science and mathematics teacher preparation system. Sacramento, CA: Author. Carver-Thomas, D., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Addressing California’s growing teacher shortage. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.

366

Bartlett and Thompson

Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. (2011). The long-term impacts of teachers: Teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper #17699. Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., Vigdor, J., & Wheeler, J. (2007). High-poverty schools and the distribution of teachers and principals. North Carolina Law Review, 1345–1379. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1). Retrieved from http://www.epaa. asu.edu/epaa/v8n1 Darling-Hammond, L., Furger, R., Shields, P., & Sutcher, L. (2016). Addressing California’s emerging teacher shortage: An analysis of sources and solutions. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute. Dolton, P., & Newson, D. (2003). The relationship between teacher turnover and school performance. London Review of Education, 1(2), 131–140. Eppley, K. (2009). Rural schools and the highly qualified teacher provision of No Child Left Behind: A critical policy analysis. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 24(4), 1–11. Guarino, C., Santibanez, L., & Daley, G. (2006). Teacher recruitment and retention: A review of the recent empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 76(2), 173. Hanushek, E. A. (2011). The economic value of higher teacher quality. Economics of Education Review, 30(3), 466–479. Horng, E. L. (2009). Teacher tradeoffs: Disentangling teachers’ preferences for working conditions and student demographics. American Educational Research Journal, 46(3), 690–717. Ingersoll, R. M., & Perda, D. (2010). Is the supply of mathematics and science teachers sufficient? American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 563–594. Jacob, B. (2007). The challenges of staffing urban schools with effective teachers. The Future of Children, 17(1), 129–153. Johnson, S. M., Kraft, M. A., & Papay, J. P. (2012). How context matters in high-need schools: The effects of teachers’ working conditions on their professional satisfaction and their students’ achievement. Teachers College Record, 114(10), 1–39. Kersaint, G. (2005). Teacher attrition: A costly loss to the nation and to the states. Retrieved from Alliance for Excellent Education: https://all4ed.org/reports-factsheets/pathto-equity/ Little, J. W., & McLaughlin, M. W. (Eds.). (1993). Teachers’ work: Individuals, colleagues, and contexts (pp. 137–163). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Liu, E., & Johnson, S. M. (2006). New teachers’ experiences of hiring: Late, rushed, and information-poor. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(3), 324. Milanowski, A., & Odden, A. (2007). A new approach to the cost of teacher turnover. Seattle, WA: School Finance Redesign Project, Center on Reinventing Public Education.

Seeking to Stay

367

Miles, M., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. National Science Foundation. (2017) Program solicitation. Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2017/nsf17541/nsf17541.htm Rosenholtz, S. (1991). Teacher’s workplace: The social organization of schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Rivkin, S., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. E. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458. Scafidi, B. P., Sjoquist, D. L., & Stinebrickner, T. R. (2007). Race, poverty, and teacher mobility. Economics of Education Review, 26(2), 145–159. University of California (UCSC) Department of Teacher Education. (2018). Cooperating teacher handbook. Retrieved from https://www.education.ucsc.edu/ academics/mac-info/cooperating-teachers/ct-handbook-2018-2019/ cthandbook-2018-19-final-8-9-18.pdf

CHAPTER 15

The Teacher Induction Network: Findings from over 10 Years of STEM Teacher Induction Joshua A. Ellis

Abstract This chapter will share findings from the Teacher Induction Network (TIN), a Noyce-sponsored online induction program that has operated continuously at the University of Minnesota for over 10 years and has supported over 200 beginning STEM teachers. Through a design-based research approach and a commitment to continual improvement, TIN has leveraged emerging technologies and innovative mentoring practices to provide support to science teachers across the nation who are in their first few years of classroom teaching. This chapter shares quantitative and qualitative research findings that describe participating teachers’ classroom experiences, evaluate the efficacy of our mentoring supports for reformed STEM instruction, and highlight opportunities for future improvement and growth of not only our own program, but of STEM induction programs across the nation.

Keywords teacher induction – online induction – design-based research – mentoring – STEM teachers

Introduction The National Research Council (2010) noted that “there is very little systematic research about current practice in the preparation of…science teachers” (p. 177). Teacher induction programs have been shown to alleviate job dissatisfaction by mentoring and supporting beginning teachers (Smith & Ingersoll, 2004). Indeed, the number of teacher induction programs has proliferated, with over 90% of beginning teachers reporting some form of support (Ingersoll, 2012). However, teacher induction programs vary significantly in © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2019 | DOI: 10.1163/9789004399990_015

The Teacher Induction Network

369

quality (Ingersoll, 2001), which dramatically changes the intended impact on teacher retention (Smith & Ingersoll, 2004). The research is clear that significant support beyond the provision of a mentor is necessary to positively impact the retention of beginning teachers. A sole focus on retention, however, misses a critical opportunity to provide a bridge from teacher preparation to practice (Feiman-Nemser, 2001). In the absence of high quality, science-specific induction support, science teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices are often consolidated into teacher-centered, didactic practices as they are socialized into the classroom (Luft, Roehrig, & Patterson, 2003; Simmons et al., 1999). Therefore, the induction experience is a critical juncture for the development of teachers, as it “is a time when science teachers’ practices and cognitive modes are conceptualized, constructed, and crystallized” (Luft, 2007, p. 533). This chapter shares findings from the Teacher Induction Network (TIN), an online induction program that has operated continuously at the University of Minnesota for over 10 years and has supported over 200 beginning STEM teachers. TIN has been sponsored by the National Science Foundation’s Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program, which was created “to encourage talented science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors and professionals to become K–12 mathematics and science (including engineering and computer science) teachers” (National Science Foundation, 2018). Through a commitment to continual improvement, the designers of TIN have leveraged emerging technologies and innovative mentoring practices to provide support to STEM teachers across the nation who are in their first few years of classroom teaching. In particular, this chapter shares quantitative and qualitative research findings that describe participating teachers’ classroom experiences, evaluate the efficacy of our mentoring supports for reformed STEM instruction, and highlight opportunities for future improvement and growth of not only our own program but of STEM induction programs across the nation.

The Teacher Induction Network (TIN): A Brief History This chapter focuses on the Teacher Induction Network (TIN), an online induction program for beginning secondary STEM teachers. TIN was originally funded in 2006 by the Minnesota Department of Education in order to support untenured secondary mathematics, science, career and technical education teachers through an online platform (Roehrig, Donna, Billington, & Hoelscher, 2015). Since that time, TIN has evolved into an online community of practice that is designed to help beginning STEM teachers not only survive their first two years in the classroom but also advance their professional growth towards

370

Ellis

implementing the reform-based science and mathematics classroom practices advocated for in the Framework for K–12 Science Education (NRC, 2012) and Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM], 2000), respectively. In particular, TIN was designed to provide support for teachers who have completed a high-quality teacher preparation program, serving as a bridge to professional practice and building upon knowledge and practices from their preservice program. The ongoing development of TIN is framed through design-based research strategies (Barab & Squire, 2004; Design-Based Research Collective, 2003) that examine the interactions between participants and the educational, social, and technical affordances of the online environment. Design-based research (DBR) is not a single approach but rather a series of approaches intended to advance design, research, and practice concurrently (Barab & Squire, 2004; Wang & Hannafin, 2005). DBR contains pragmatist philosophical underpinnings, which hold that the value of a theory lies in its ability to produce change (e.g., Dewey, 1933). Therefore, a primary goal of DBR implementation is to produce demonstrable changes at the local level that have broader significance (Barab & Squire, 2004). DBR is a particularly effective approach in what Wang and Hannafin (2005) identify as a technologically enhanced learning environment (TELE), such as TIN. This is due to the fact that, unlike a purely faceto-face classroom, the TELE designer is responsible for every aspect of the environment that the students participate in online. This places a great emphasis on the design, redesign, and improvement of TELEs when considering factors that affect student interactions in an online environment. Although TELE designers do not exercise complete control over the learning environment, everything from the selection of the content management system to the online activities that teachers participate in provides an opportunity for the designer/ instructor to make purposeful decisions regarding the nature and impact of their technologically afforded instruction. TIN has been continually modified in this way in order to best support teachers’ professional growth and develop their reflective, reform-based practices. The following sections will describe some key areas where the designers of TIN have engaged in this process.

Reflective Practice and the Professional Development Inquiry (PDI) National guidelines for teacher preparation and induction advocate the development of teachers as reflective practitioners (Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation [CAEP], 2013). Reflective practice is well established

The Teacher Induction Network

371

as central to the teaching and learning process of student teachers (Harford & MacRuairc, 2008; Zeichner & Liston, 1987), acting as a bridge between theory and practice through the integration of experience and reflection. Dewey (1933) identifies two ways that reflective practitioners can participate in this engagement: reflection-on-action and reflection-in-action. He states that the primary objective of reflection-on-action is to promote the more difficult reflectionin-action, which refers to the instantaneous response or action given in a situation as it unfolds in real-time (Schön, 1984). Rodgers (2002) further defined reflection-on-action as a conscious and disciplined process that occurs after an experience and ends with analysis of that experience and experimentation with possible courses of action. This view is rooted in Dewey’s (1933) three stages of reflection-on-action: description, analysis, and action. Within the context of classroom instruction, a teacher can engage in description and analysis of his or her teaching practice after the fact. The following action occurs when the teacher returns to the classroom and implements the new or modified teaching practice that will then be reflected on moving forward. This form of reflective practice is the hallmark of a master teacher and takes many years to develop. In addition to reflection-on-action and reflection-in-action, Killion and Todnem (1991) include a third type of reflection called reflection-for-action, which adds reflection for future action in addition to reflection on past and present action. Reflection-for-action is the ultimate goal of reflection-onaction and reflection-in-action, as it goes beyond visiting past practice or growing in-the-moment awareness in order to guide future action (Killion & Todnem, 1991). This knowledge-generation for future actions is not only practical but also necessary for beginning teachers who strive to improve their future instruction. Taken together, all three forms of reflection provide the beginning teacher with a framework for making sense of their teaching practice and framing discussions for their continued professional development. A cornerstone of TIN is the engagement of our participating teachers in meaningful activities that focus their reflections on their past, present, and future teaching practices. The Professional Development Inquiry, or PDI (Danielson, 2007) is one such activity in which our teachers engage. The PDI provides beginning teachers with an opportunity to investigate an area of concern or an area of their teaching that they would like to improve. While the PDI has some similarities to teacher research and action research (Check & Schutt, 2012), the outcomes of the PDI are not shared with a broader audience and instead intended for the teacher alone. Prior to starting each PDI, teachers complete a self-assessment using Danielson’s Framework for Teaching (2007). Specifically, teachers are asked to evaluate themselves and identify areas for

372

Ellis

growth related to one of the five components of Domain 3 (Instruction): communicating clearly and accurately, using questioning and discussion techniques, engaging students in learning, providing feedback to students, or demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness. In each PDI, teachers critically examine their own STEM teaching in relation to their beliefs and commitments and develop the skills of data collection, analysis, and reflection. In this way, each PDI follows a reflective learning cycle in which the participants plan for action, implement their plan, and reflect on their actions, mirroring the three stages of reflection described by Killion and Todnem (1991).

Video-based Analysis of Teaching in the PDI When considering the practice of teachers within the classroom, the use of video presents opportunities for promoting reflective practices not afforded prior to its inception and use in teacher education. The advantage of capturing video is simple: while teaching, one cannot stop to reflect on their practice, but video enables the teacher to remove himself/herself from the demands of the classroom and to step back and examine classroom events (van Es & Sherin, 2008). Given that teachers’ knowledge is practical, personal, (Clandinin & Connelly, 1987) and contextualized (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989), video can support teachers’ reflection-on-action and allow them to activate previously constructed knowledge (Eilam & Poyas, 2009). Video then becomes a valuable means of supporting learning for teachers, as it facilitates the development of reflective practices, the examination of teaching from different perspectives, and the discussion of critical incidents and dilemmas (Borowczak & Burrows, 2016; LeFevre, 2004). Roehrig et al. (2015) identified video annotation as a key tool for promoting beginning STEM teachers’ reflective practices within TIN’s PDI activity. Therefore, a key task for our teachers during the PDI is the video capture of classroom events related to the teacher’s chosen goals for improving their teaching practice. After years of exploring various methods of accessing and viewing video from a distance (including mailing video cassette tapes), VideoANT was chosen as a web-based tool to more efficiently facilitate video reflection. VideoANT is an internet-based, browser-embedded video annotation software application that allows a user to add time-marked text annotations to a video of choice (Hosack, 2010). Figure 15.1 contains a screenshot of the software application in use. In VideoANT, a timeline is laid out across the bottom of the screen below the video clip that contains place markers where previous viewers have placed annotations. Annotations created by multiple users are

The Teacher Induction Network

373

displayed vertically down the right-hand column of the screen in alignment with the video being played for reading and response.

figure 15.1. VideoANT screenshot of Edith (biology teacher)

As part of their PDI, our teachers were directed to upload 20–30 minutes of classroom video and use VideoANT to provide evidence of their professional growth based on their specific goal. Following the initial annotation by the beginning teacher, a peer was directed to respond to either the initial comments or events not noted in the beginning teacher’s initial annotations. Beyond these directions, peers were not directed to comment on specific elements of practice or respond in a certain way. This somewhat “hands-off” approach was intended to support the beginning teachers’ development of self-efficacy while ensuring that crucial instructional elements were not overlooked. McFadden, Ellis, Anwar, and Roehrig (2014) analyzed teachers’ PDI video annotations from 2009–2012 and observed that, in the absence of specific directives for reflecting on video, participating teachers’ reflections were dominated by simple description of events. Indeed, annotations that simply described the events in the video accounted for 43% of all annotations (McFadden et al., 2014). Further, annotations that focused on the teacher occurred more than twice as often as annotations that focused on the students in the video. As a result of these findings, McFadden et al. (2014) created a system for identifying participating teachers as beginning, developing, or developed in their ability to

374

Ellis

reflect on their teaching practices and engage in self-regulated growth towards their personal goals for teaching. These three levels correspond to teachers whose annotations are almost exclusively descriptive in nature (beginning), teachers who make a few annotations that are evaluative in nature (developing), and teachers whose annotations feature a balance of description, evaluation, and interpretation of classroom events (developed). This technique allows the facilitators of the induction program to quickly assess participating teachers and provide supports that are appropriate for their current state of development as beginning practitioners. In the PDI, teachers in TIN not only annotate their own videos but also comment on their peers’ videos using the same tool. Ellis, McFadden, Anwar, and Roehrig (2015) examined these peer response annotations and inductively coded them into five broad categories: offering praise and/or agreement, providing a suggestion, posing a question, relating an event to their own experience(s), and summarizing the teacher’s progress toward their goal(s). We found that the relative majority of peer response annotations offered praise and/or agreement, with over 40% of the annotations being coded as such (Ellis et al., 2015). This finding was cause for concern, as praise and agreement with the teacher’s self-observations often missed key opportunities to challenge the teacher’s thinking and reflect more critically on classroom events. This result also seemed to parallel the findings of McFadden et al. (2014) in that teachers chose to make annotations that were more “surface level” in nature and did not often exhibit critical commentary that would serve to challenge the thinking of a peer.

Conclusions Regarding Video-Based Analysis of Teaching in TIN The intent of the VideoANT activity in TIN is to provide teachers with an affordance for reflecting on past teaching practice by sharing and commenting on a video of their instruction. The purpose of doing so is to allow teachers to explore their successes and struggles, identify elements of their teaching that contribute to those successes and struggles, and elicit feedback from peers that may guide the teacher towards improving their practice. However, these results suggest that the mere presence of an online video club or annotation tool is not enough to encourage beginning teachers to reflect on their practice critically. This issue is particularly problematic in the context of an induction program; Luft et al. (2003) demonstrated that induction programs can promote inquiry-based and student-centered teaching strategies, but the vast majority of the teacher peers’ praise and agreement was made in response to classroom

The Teacher Induction Network

375

management and behavioral issues instead. Within TIN, we desire for beginning teachers to develop their “analytic mind set” (Sherin, 2003), but this is not possible when teachers merely describe classroom events or praise their peers’ non-reformed teaching practices. On the contrary, this kind of commentary may actually confirm and entrench their current practices and inhibit their pursuit of new ways of teaching. As the purpose of TIN is to promote the development of teacher practice, this effect can in fact be detrimental to beginning teachers. Additionally, a preponderance of praise may potentially lead to frustration as a new teacher is being told their practice is fine while they continue to struggle. However, the fact that many teachers do engage in critical commentary demonstrates that VideoANT is capable of promoting reflective and thoughtful discussions regarding beginning teachers’ practices. Therefore, we conclude that specific, explicit supports for teacher discourse in TIN activities are needed in order to encourage the reflective practice that we desire for our participating teachers. As a result, the VideoANT activity was modified in order to provide more scaffolding for critical commentary that went beyond description into analysis and interpretation. Specifically, TIN instructors in later years encouraged teachers to make annotations in VideoANT that were directly related to their chosen PDI goal (McFadden et al., 2014). These modifications serve to increase teachers’ awareness of the purpose of the VideoANT activity within the PDI and support their ability to both reflect on their own teaching and provide substantive feedback to their peers (Ellis et al., 2015). Further, we believed that such explicit supports for reflective commentary might prove valuable in other TIN activities where reflective practice is developed through other means. The following section will describe one such activity where we explored this hypothesis.

The Role of Teacher Leadership in Promoting Reflective Practice Another approach to promoting reflective practice among teachers is through teacher leadership. New views on leadership within STEM education have been taking shape over the course of nearly two decades. Shanker (1987) identified the need for teachers to become leaders within their schools and communities of practice without abandoning their classrooms. Katzenmeyer and Moller (1996) defined a view on teacher leadership where teachers “lead within and beyond the classroom” (p. 6) with fellow teacher leaders. In a review of the literature, Howe and Stubbs (2003) synthesize a perspective on teacher leadership that arises from and is created by a community of practitioners. “This is a

376

Ellis

view of leadership that is not managerial or administrative but is one of leadership exercised within the community of practice to which the leader belongs” (p. 284). This view of leadership is fitting for a community like TIN that is composed of novice practitioners who help to lead each other as they collectively develop their teaching practice.

The Venture/Vexation Activity The Venture/Vexation activity was originally created by Johnston and Settlage (2008) and adapted by Roehrig et al. (2015) as a way for TIN participants to provide critical feedback to one another in a small-group setting. A single presenter in the group shares an online forum post that includes either a desire to try something new related to his/her instruction (Venture) or a situation that is challenging him/her (Vexation). The peer group members then ask clarifying questions in order to elicit more information from the presenter, and the presenter answers these questions if possible. Peers then provide feedback or suggestions to the presenter regarding his/her venture or vexation, and the activity concludes with final commentary from the presenter. The entire Venture/Vexation activity takes place asynchronously over the span of one month, and a different group member begins the activity as the presenter in each successive month. The timeline for these events is represented in Table 15.1. While the Venture/Vexation activity was originally created by Johnston and Settlage (2008) as a face-to-face discussion, the transformation of this activity into an online, forum-based environment within TIN provided some unique advantages. For example, the online environment is “quiet” in comparison table 15.1  Timeline of events in the venture/vexation activity for presenter and peers

Day of month

Presenter duties

Peer duties

Between 1st and 7th

Defijine the venture or vexation Read peer questions and respond State a plan for action based on peer feedback None

None

Between 7th and 18th Between 18th and 21st Before end of month

Ask clarifying questions of the presenter None Comment on plan for action

The Teacher Induction Network

377

to a face-to-face setting (Palloff & Pratt, 2002), giving participants time to craft thoughtful responses and provide higher-quality feedback. Additionally, each Venture/Vexation activity spans an entire month, giving the presenter time to present his/her issue and allowing his/her peers time to open up and explore the venture or vexation (Ellis, Polizzi, Roehrig, & Rushton, 2017). For these reasons, the designers of TIN felt that the Venture/Vexation activity had the potential to promote beginning teachers’ capacities for thoughtful, highquality reflection on their teaching practices. However, as noted earlier, our exploration of the PDI activity in TIN revealed that additional scaffolding may be required to help teachers reach this goal (Ellis et al., 2015; McFadden et al., 2014), and such supports may be necessary in other TIN activities besides the PDI. As a result, we reviewed the literature on teacher leadership in search of a framework that would support the development of targeted teacher leadership supports for the Venture/Vexation activity. In our review, we discovered the work of Dempsey (1992), who defined four “images” for teacher leadership that can be used with those new to teaching, teacher leadership, or both: teacher as scholar, teacher as reflective practitioner, teacher as partner in learning, and teacher as fully functioning person. Each of these four images represents a different reflective stance that serves to develop teachers as peer leaders: (a) the scholar explores knowledge from academic research; (b) the reflective practitioner considers past practice before suggesting future action; (c) the partner in learning strives to fully understand a colleague’s challenge before offering a solution; (d) and the fully functioning person helps their colleague look beyond a specific situation to the greater context of the classroom. We believed that these images could be used with teachers in TIN as a way to frame their discussions in the Venture/Vexation activity. During the 2013–2014 academic year, we called upon our beginning teachers to adopt these images when participating in the Venture/Vexation activity in TIN. While the task of the presenter was left unchanged, teacher peers were asked to respond “in character” to the venture or vexation of the presenter as either the scholar, reflective practitioner, partner in learning, or fully functioning person (Dempsey, 1992). These roles rotated month-to-month in order to allow each participant to adopt each of the images throughout the academic year. We conjectured that these teacher leadership supports would support a higher level of reflective commentary in the Venture/Vexation activity. To assess this, we leveraged the work of Larrivee (2008), who identified four distinct levels of teacher reflection: (a) non-reflective commentary is characterized by “knee-jerk” responses that are not reflective in nature; (b) surface reflective commentary focuses on resources and strategies to reach predetermined goals

378

Ellis

and discover “what works” in the classroom; (c) pedagogical reflective commentary makes connections between teaching theory and teaching practice; and (d) critical reflective commentary considers the moral, ethical, social, and/or political implications of teacher practice. After reviewing the Venture/ Vexation activity from earlier years, Polizzi, Dean, Barrett, and Rushton (2014) modified the Larrivee rubric for teacher reflection by adding a fifth level of reflection called technical. Placed between the surface and pedagogical levels of reflection, this type of reflective commentary features reflection on teaching techniques without considering underlying theory or causes. Technical commentary may suggest changes and solutions that focus on short-term results without consideration of long-term effects. In total, the rubric allows raters to score reflective commentary on a five-point scale. Quantitative analysis revealed a statistically significant difference between the distributions of reflective codes in Venture/Vexation posts prior to and following the teacher leadership intervention (Ellis, Polizzi et al., 2017). A visual depiction of these distributions (see Figure 15.2) illustrates an increase in reflective commentary on pedagogical and critical events and a decrease in non-reflective commentary. This suggests that the use of Dempsey’s (1992) images for teacher leadership in the Venture/Vexation activity encouraged our teachers to respond to their peers at a higher reflective level, with an increased focus on pedagogical and critical thinking and a decrease in comments that were not reflective in nature.

figure 15.2. Comparison of Year 7 (2012–13, n=333) and Year 8 (2013–14, n=282) Venture/ Vexation posts by reflective level (Ellis, Polizzi et al., 2017)

The Teacher Induction Network

379

Conclusions Regarding Teacher Leadership Supports in TIN The results from this work suggest that “increased scaffolding from instructors regarding aspects of teacher leadership can be beneficial for beginning teachers to frame their discussions about challenges and explorations within their classrooms” (Ellis, Polizzi et al., 2017, p. 265). The outcomes of the Venture/Vexation activities after the Teachers as Leaders intervention are in line with the goals of Dewey (1933) and Rodgers (2002) for using reflection on past experiences to inform experimentation with new solutions. This result also confirms the recommendation of McFadden et al. (2014) to include targeted supports for beginning teachers’ reflective practice, as less reflective commentary occurs in the absence of such supports. Although we did not assess any outcomes directly related to teacher leadership itself, we did confirm our hypothesis that teacher leadership supports in the Venture/Vexation activity could provide the scaffolding necessary to push teacher commentary to a higher level of reflection. While such supports could work in a face-to-face environment as well, these findings are of particular relevance to designers of online induction courses who wish to promote the critical thinking and reflective commentary of their beginning teacher participants. Online induction programs are capable of promoting more than just teacher retention, and these findings illustrate the positive impact of a teacher leadership intervention in an online induction environment. We find that the use of Dempsey’s (1992) images of teacher leadership in the Venture/Vexation activity positively impacts the ability of early-career teachers to reflect more deeply on their teaching practices. Our teachers not only used these images to craft specific, substantive responses to their peers, but also practiced supporting their peers from a variety of perspectives due to their adoption of a new image each month. This intervention has elevated the quality of teacher commentary within TIN and demonstrated the value of continually refining TIN activities in the service of developing participating teachers’ reflective practices.

Relating Teacher Beliefs and Teacher Practices Recently, we have looked beyond our teachers’ reflections on their teaching practices and begun to consider their classroom teaching practices directly. One very important factor when exploring the enactment of teaching practices, particularly within the context of an induction program like TIN, is an understanding of teacher beliefs related to their teaching practice. The beliefs

380

Ellis

that teachers hold influence their perceptions and judgments, and these in turn impact what takes place in the classroom (Pajares, 1992; Richardson, 1996). We have known for some time that even novice teachers are capable of reformed beliefs (Simmons et al., 1999; Windschitl, 2003), and it is, therefore, important to explore the beliefs of teachers who are participating in an induction program like TIN; such teachers are at a critical juncture on their path towards becoming master teachers and require unique and specialized support (Luft et al., 2003). While studies of teachers’ beliefs are becoming more common, there are far fewer studies that compare teacher beliefs to classroom practices (Luft et al., 2003). Simmons et al. (1999) investigated the relationship between secondary science and mathematics teachers’ beliefs and their classroom performances over the span of three years, characterizing both beliefs and performances as teacher-centered, conceptual, student-centered, or wobbling between teachercentered and student-centered. They found that beginning teachers described their practice as being far more student-centered than their observed practices were in reality; however, by the third year of teaching, many teachers’ beliefs and practices begin to converge (Simmons et al., 1999). Crawford (2007) conducted a similar study with five science teacher candidates over the span of one year, paying particular attention to these candidates’ understandings of teaching science as inquiry and their ability to do so in the classroom. Her work revealed that candidates are capable of everything from traditional, teacher-centered instruction to student-centered “full inquiry” projects that are a hallmark of reformed science instruction. Perhaps more importantly, she found that “a prospective teacher’s set of beliefs about pedagogy, schools, student learning, and the nature of scientific inquiry may have been the overriding factor influencing choice and eventual success in teaching science as inquiry” (Crawford, 2007, p. 635).

Teacher Beliefs and Practices in TIN Since 2015, we have been exploring the relationship between reform-based beliefs and practices of our participating STEM teachers through a comparison of their responses to the Beliefs About Reformed Science Teaching and Learning (BARSTL) questionnaire (Sampson, Enderle, & Grooms, 2013) and our observations of their classroom practice using the Reformed Teacher Observation Protocol (RTOP; Sawada et al., 2002). During this time, we also conducted semi-structured interviews with our teachers using the Teacher Beliefs Interview (TBI) protocol, an instrument designed to elicit teacher beliefs about

The Teacher Induction Network

381

traditional and reform-based teaching (Luft & Roehrig, 2007). These interviews provided our teachers an opportunity to reflect on their teaching, and it also provided us with insights regarding the nature of the relationship between teacher beliefs and practices. Quantitative analysis of the BARSTL questionnaire revealed that, over the span of one year, beginning teacher beliefs became more traditional and less reformed (Ellis, Ring, Brown, & Roehrig, 2017). In particular, teacher beliefs regarding lesson design and implementation experienced the largest and most statistically significant change. Perhaps surprisingly, quantitative analysis of the RTOP observational data revealed that the teaching practices of those same teachers did not become less reformed overall, with no statistically significant change in either direction from the beginning of the academic year to the end (Ellis, Ring, et al., 2017). Based on these findings, we qualitatively analyzed the TBI transcripts and identified two themes that were related to lesson design and implementation: the role of the teacher and agency in planning for learning. These themes are summarized below. The Role of the Teacher At the beginning of the academic year, nearly every teacher used the word “facilitator” to describe their role as the teacher. This is most likely the result of their teacher preparation courses, where constructivist approaches were modeled often and the word “facilitator” was used explicitly by the instructors. However, when asked to elaborate, many used more traditional descriptions of a teacher, such as “an expert in the room” or “an authoritative source in the classroom” (Ellis, Ring, et al., 2017). By the end of the academic year, some teachers became aware of this contradiction. One teacher replied, “Before I would say a facilitator, but now it’s more of a manager. This isn’t what I want it to be, but it is. It’s managing to keep the kids on task…” Other teachers echoed this shift to “managerial” duties over the year but framed it as a way to meet students’ needs. It appears that these teachers solidified their traditional beliefs about their role as the teacher during the year; this may reflect their trajectory through the first two stages of Ryan’s (1986) Four Stages of Teaching (fantasy and survival). Alternatively, these teachers may have simply realized that they were not the “facilitators” that they once thought they were. Agency in Planning for Learning We learned through these interviews that many of our teachers did not have a high degree of control over the curriculum that they were teaching in their classrooms. This revelation primary surfaced in teacher responses to the question, “In the school setting, how do you decide what to teach and what not to

382

Ellis

teach?” One teacher “pretty much let the higher-ups figure out what I’m going to do.” Even those teachers who did have more autonomy sometimes chose to defer to the higher-ups: “I am working with the other physics teacher at the school, and he’s been there for a long time…so I’ve been going off what he’s been teaching.” For these beginning teachers, it simply made sense to adopt the approach of a veteran teacher at their school and mimic his/her curriculum and instruction. These responses suggest that when it comes to planning for learning, many of our teachers defer to veteran teachers or administrators, either by choice or by mandate. This means that they exercise little to no authority over the creation of their classroom curriculum; in some cases, they do not even have control over the order and pacing of their classroom instruction.

Conclusions Regarding Teacher Beliefs and Practices in TIN The results from the 2015–16 academic year indicate that even when earlycareer teachers’ beliefs about their ability to enact reformed instruction decreased, their classroom practices did not follow suit and instead remain reformed. At a minimum, this suggests that a teacher’s practice may not necessarily mirror their beliefs (and vice versa). Our interviews revealed that these beginning teachers’ reversion to less-reformed beliefs about lesson design and implementation was the result of two key factors. The first was the teachers’ own realization over the span of the academic year that their beliefs about teaching were less reformed than those advanced in their teacher preparation courses. Additionally, a number of teachers adopted more traditional beliefs about their role as the teacher in response to the challenges they experienced in the classroom and their perception of student needs. The second factor influencing our teachers’ less-reformed beliefs was the presence of “topdown” directives from the school or district regarding the classroom curriculum, which denied teachers the authority to design and teach their lessons in a reformed way. Even in schools where teachers did have the authority to create reformed lessons, many of our teachers chose to adopt the lessons and strategies of their veteran colleagues. Although beginning STEM teachers are capable of reformed beliefs (Windschitl, 2003), it is clear that first- and secondyear teachers in an induction program like TIN face continual challenges that may result in a shift to more traditional beliefs about teaching. Perhaps more importantly, we have learned that beginning teacher beliefs and practices do not necessarily move in tandem, as these same teachers did not begin teaching less reformed lessons as a result of their change in beliefs. Therefore, we as

The Teacher Induction Network

383

induction designers have a new challenge to respond to these curious findings and continue to craft and refine supports that will promote increases in both reformed beliefs and practices for our beginning STEM teachers during their first years of classroom teaching.

Implications for STEM Teacher Induction The purpose of this chapter is to share research findings from an online STEM induction program that has been in continuous operation for over 10 years. During this span of time, we have learned much about our participating teachers’ classroom experiences through what they share in this online environment of their peers. As educators, researchers, and designers, it is imperative that we constantly evaluate the efficacy of the mentoring supports that we provide our beginning teachers. By sharing our successes and failures, we hope to highlight opportunities for the future improvement and growth of both our own program and STEM induction programs everywhere. From the beginning, we have viewed reflective practice as critical to the development of successful teachers, especially those who are just beginning their careers as educators. As a result, many of the activities in TIN were designed to engage our beginning STEM teachers in meaningful reflection on past teaching events and future courses of action. It, therefore, became imperative for us to ensure that these activities were indeed promoting the kind of reflection and critical consideration of teaching practice that we anticipated— and if they were not, we resolved to modify these activities so that they would support our teachers in the way that we intended. The modifications that we made to TIN activities in order to better support teacher reflection shared a common theme: an increase in scaffolding resulted in an increase in the quality of teacher reflection. For example, after realizing that open dialogue in the Venture/Vexation activity resulted in commentary that was less reflective than we had hoped for, we modified the activity by eliciting commentary that aligned to teacher leadership roles. This modification allowed our beginning teachers to provide commentary that was not only more targeted to the venture or vexation, but more reflective as well. Many instructors recognize the delicate balance that good scaffolding strikes: too much, and student creativity is stifled; too little, and students may not reach their learning goals. As we design and redesign the activities that comprise TIN, we have learned that beginning teachers benefit from increased scaffolding in an online induction program and may require more scaffolding in general compared to teachers in a face-to-face program.

384

Ellis

This process of creation, evaluation, and redesign is a cornerstone of a design-based research (DBR) approach, and we suggest that this approach may be adopted in whole or in part by any teacher induction program that is committed to supporting their beginning STEM teachers in the most formative years of their careers. We believe that no two induction programs are alike, and simply copying activities from one program into another is not guaranteed to succeed. However, we are confident in our belief that the DBR approach that has defined TIN is highly generalizable and can be used by any induction program to support the unique goals and needs of their participating STEM teachers. Further, we echo Wang and Hannafin (2005) in suggesting that the value of DBR is even more pronounced in a technologically-enhanced learning environment such as an online induction program. As online learning becomes increasingly common in induction programs and tools for online learning and collaboration continue to evolve, we believe that DBR can play a key role in helping institutions of higher education continually design and refine their induction programs for maximum positive impact.

Limitations Although this chapter presents findings from a range of studies, there are some important limitations to the studies shared here. First and foremost, each of these studies explores a single online induction program. While we view the iterative design and analysis of TIN as a strength and a hallmark of a DBR approach, one cannot assume that the strategies presented here will necessarily work without modification in another learning environment. Indeed, we caution against merely imitating specific activities or strategies in a different environment with a different population of beginning teachers; we instead encourage researchers, educators, and designers to engage in the same iterative, design-based process to discover what activities and strategies will best support their beginning teachers. The work presented here contributes to the small but increasing body of research that explores the capacity for induction programs to not only retain beginning STEM teachers, but also improve their teaching practice during their first years as educators. While many researchers and educators recognize the importance of mentoring and communities in supporting the retention of beginning teachers, it is our belief that the true purpose of such mentoring and community-based learning is the development of teacher skills and practices, and teachers with these skills and practices are poised to survive and

The Teacher Induction Network

385

thrive in their teaching careers. We encourage those who research, design, and facilitate STEM teacher induction programs to continue to explore the efficacy and impact of teacher supports, particularly in partially- or fullyonline environments.

Acknowledgments The work presented here was made possible by National Science Foundation grants DUE-1238140 and DUE-1540789. The findings, conclusions, and opinions herein represent the views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the view of personnel affiliated with the National Science Foundation.

References Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1–14. Borowczak, M., & Burrows, A. (2016). Enabling collaboration and video assessment: Exposing trends in science preservice teachers’ assessments. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 16(2), 127–150. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. Check, J., & Schutt, R. K. (2012). Teacher research and action research. In J. Check & R. K. Schutt (Eds.), Research methods in education (pp. 255–271). Washington, DC: Sage Publications. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1987). Teachers’ personal knowledge: What counts as ‘personal’ in studies of the personal. Journal of Curriculum studies, 19(6), 487–500. Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation. (2013). CAEP Accreditation Standards. Retrieved October 20, 2014 from http://www.caepnet.files.wordpress.com/ 2013/09/final_board_approved1.pdf Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Dempsey, R. (1992). Teachers as leaders: Towards a conceptual framework. Teaching Education, 5(1), 113–122. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educational process. Lexington, MA: Heath. Eilam, B., & Poyas, Y. (2009). Learning to teach: Enhancing pre-service teachers’ awareness of complexity of teaching-learning processes. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(1), 87–107.

386

Ellis

Ellis, J., McFadden, J., Anwar, T., & Roehrig, G. (2015). Investigating the social interactions of beginning teachers using a video annotation tool. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 15(3), 404–421. Ellis, J., Polizzi, S., Roehrig, G., & Rushton, G. (2017). Teachers as leaders: The impact of teacher leadership supports for beginning teachers in an online induction program. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 25(3), 245–272. Ellis, J., Ring, E., Brown, J., & Roehrig, G. (2017). Induction and its impact on beginning science teachers’ reform-based beliefs and practices. Paper presented at the Annual International Conference of the Association for Science Teacher Education, Des Moines, IA. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103, 1013–1055. Hosack, B. (2010). VideoANT: Extending online video annotation beyond content delivery, TechTrends, 54, 45–49. Ingersoll, R. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: an organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499–534. Ingersoll, R. (2012). Beginning teacher induction: What the data tell us. Phi Delta Kappan, 93(8), 47–51. Johnston, A., & Settlage, J. (2008). Framing the professional development of members of the science teacher education community. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19(6), 513–521. Killion, J., & Todnem, G. (1991). A process for personal theory building. Educational Leadership, 48(6), 14–16. LeFevre, D. M. (2004). Designing for teacher learning: Video-based curriculum design. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching: Vol. 10. Using video in teacher education (pp. 235–258). Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Luft, J. A. (2007). Minding the gap: Needed research on beginning/newly qualified science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 532–537. Luft, J. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2007). Capturing science teachers’ epistemological beliefs: The development of the teacher beliefs interview. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 11(2), 38–63. Luft, J. A., Roehrig, G. H., & Patterson, N. C. (2003). Contrasting landscapes: a comparison of the impact of different induction programs on beginning secondary science teachers’ practices and beliefs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 77–97. McFadden, J., Ellis, J., Anwar, T., & Roehrig, G. (2014). Beginning science teachers’ use of a digital video annotation tool to promote reflective practices. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(3), 458–470. National Research Council. (2010). Preparing teachers: Building evidence for sound policy. Committee on the Study of Teacher Preparation Programs in the United States,

The Teacher Induction Network

387

Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Science Foundation. (2018). Robert Noyce teacher scholarship program. Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5733 Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teacher beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332. Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2002). Lessons from the cyberspace classroom: The realities of online teaching. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Polizzi, S. J., Dean, M., Barrett, D., & Rushton, G. (2014). Developing teacher leaders using adopted personas in an online induction support system. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Pittsburgh, PA. Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.), The handbook of research in teacher education (2nd ed.) (pp. 102–119). New York, NY: Macmillan. Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking. The Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842–866. Roehrig, G. H., Donna, J. D., Billington, B. L., & Hoelscher, M. (2015). Design of online induction programs to promote reform-based science and mathematics teaching. Teacher Education & Practice, 28(1–2), 286–303. Ryan, K. (1986). The induction of new teachers. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa. Sampson, V., Enderle, P., & Grooms, J. (2013). Development and validation of the Beliefs about Reformed Science Teaching and Learning (BARSTL) questionnaire. School Science and Mathematics, 113(1), 3–15. Sawada, D., Piburn, M. D., Judson, E., Turley, J., Falconer, K., Benford, R., & Bloom, I. (2002). Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: The reformed teaching observation protocol. School Science and Mathematics, 102, 245– 253. Schön, D. (1984). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books. Sherin, M. (2003). New perspectives on the role of video in teacher education. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Using video in teacher education (pp. 1–27). New York, NY: Elsevier Science. Simmons, P. E., Emory, A., Carter, T., Coker, T., Finnegan, B., Crockett, D., …Labuda, K. (1999). Beginning teachers: Beliefs and classroom actions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 930–954. Smith, T.M., & Ingersoll, R.M. (2004) What are the effects of induction and mentoring on beginning teacher turnover? American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681–714.

388

Ellis

The Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8. van Es, E. A., & Sherin, M. G. (2008). Mathematics teachers’ “learning to notice” in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(2), 244–276. Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5–23. Windschitl, M. (2003). Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Science Education, 87(1), 112–143.

Index African-American teachers 104, 105, 112, 139, 190 Black teachers viii, 58, 59, 69, 194 chat room xii, xiii, 322–328, 331, 333–343 collaboration x, 87, 110, 111, 119, 165, 166, 179, 217, 218, 220, 222, 229, 234–236, 292, 308, 324, 354, 359, 360, 384 collaborative model viii, 36–54 community building 168, 322–343 computational thinking ix, x, 163–184 culturally responsive pedagogy 80, 81, 83, 104, 293, 294, 296, 307, 309 culturally responsive teacher xi , 84, 243, 244, 245, 249, 252, 256 culturally responsive teaching 79, 111, 116, 117, 292–293, 304, 307, 312, 313 design-based research xii, 370, 384 equity viii, x, xi, 37–40, 43, 46, 48–53, 62, 64, 76, 82, 83, 104–109, 111, 113–116, 120, 122–126, 151, 154, 155, 157, 166, 194, 195, 227, 228, 241–249, 253, 254, 256, 257, 289–318 grow your own faculty 200–203 Historically Black College or University (HBCU) viii , 60–66, 70, 75, 76 informal science education 86, 96 interactions xii, 14, 25, 27, 28, 70, 71, 108, 109, 112, 113, 118, 142, 145, 146, 156, 157, 169, 170, 175, 182, 227, 251, 263, 265–267, 270, 272–277, 279, 280, 282, 283, 303, 314, 317, 325, 326, 330, 337, 340–342, 370 international dual-degree program x, 217–237 international university collaboration 218, 220, 235 internships vii, xi, 3–33, 39, 42, 105, 173, 200, 218, 289–318, 349 intersubjectivity xi, 263, 265–268, 270, 272–274, 276–284

job search and hiring 350–352 makerspace ix, x, 165, 167–169, 172–176, 178–183 mathematician mentors 269, 271, 272, 276, 277, 280, 282 mentoring vii, viii, x, xi, xii, 4, 6, 74, 79, 94, 95, 140, 243–250, 252, 254–257, 262–284, 289–318, 323, 335, 338, 340, 350, 368, 369, 383, 384 Noyce scholarship program vii, viii, ix, xi, 6, 31, 40–43, 48, 50, 290, 349 online induction xii, 369, 379, 383, 384 political economy x, 190–208 predominantly white institution (PWI) viii, 59, 61, 63–66, 69, 70, 72–76 preservice teachers vii, viii, ix, x, xiii, 6–9, 30, 80, 85, 87, 88, 90, 96, 103–109, 112–114, 116, 121–126, 135–137, 146, 155, 156, 164, 165, 167, 172, 173, 175, 181–183, 242, 267, 272, 291, 294–297, 311, 312, 314, 316, 317, 363 professional learning community xi, 5, 94, 125, 270, 271, 281, 282 race x, 10, 11, 38, 53, 59, 60, 71, 76, 109, 116, 134, 140, 144, 190–208, 244, 248–255, 271, 299, 347 recruitment vii, viii, x, xiii, 3, 5, 32, 58–76, 97, 134, 193, 194, 196, 202, 206, 225, 226, 290 291, 298, 316, 323, 347, 349, 362, retention vii, viii, x, xii, xiii, 3, 5, 32, 58–76, 134 ,194, 196, 202, 204–206, 264, 270, 316, 322–342, 346–364, 369, 379, 384 science education xiii, 6, 9, 32, 88, 140, 222, 242, 243, 253, 290 secondary mathematics teaching vii, 36–54, 326 secondary science education 322–342 self-efficacy vii, ix, xi, xii, 4–9, 13, 14, 20, 25, 26, 27, 29, 31, 32, 134–136, 141–143, 155, 156, 158, 164, 167, 171, 172, 174, 183, 291–294, 296–298, 300–302, 304, 307, 307, 308, 311, 312, 314, 316, 317, 355, 373

390 social justice xi, 48, 50, 53, 111, 112, 121, 124, 201–203, 242, 244, 245, 248, 249, 252, 253–256, 292, 296, 297, 308, 316, 317 stem vii, viii, x, xi, 3–33, 40, 78–97, 134, 139, 142, 144–146, 149, 156, 163, 164, 166, 168, 169, 171, 172, 175, 190–208, 217–237, 289–318, 323–325, 383 stem education vii, ix, 6, 78, 79, 80, 83, 94, 96, 97, 172, 193, 198, 207, 222, 225, 231, 233, 236, 291, 293, 297, 298, 302, 325, 375 stem faculty preparation 217–237 stem teachers vii, viii, ix, x, xi, xii, xiii, 5, 31, 36, 50, 59, 62, 66, 68, 72, 79, 85, 90, 94–97, 193–196, 199, 202–207, 289–317, 323, 325, 335, 341, 347–349, 368–385 structure and agency xi, 241–257 subjective learning 265, 275–279

index teacher education, vii, viii, x, xiii 5, 6 ,38, 53, 59, 61, 90, 114, 124 ,138, 163–184, 193–200, 202–207, 237, 242, 291, 296, 311, 316, 317, 347, 369, 372 teacher identity xi, 103–126, 292, 295, 297, 302 teacher induction 265, 283, 354, 368–385 teacher leader 40, 79, 83, 85, 87, 94–96, 375, 377–379, teacher preparation vii, ix, x, xii, , 20, 30, 36–54, 60, 79, 87, 93, 107–109, 124 ,135, 156, 190–207, 245, 246, 257, 269, 270, 296, 297, 302, 324, 349, 358, 363, 369, 370, 381, 382 teacher retention 205, 264, 270, 323–326, 341, 342, 346–364, 369, 379 teacher shortage 6, 36, 205, 346, 347, 354, 363