1 min. Welcome participants Introduce selves Let’s dive right in…
10 min. Poem: http://www.huarchivesnet.howard.edu/9908huarnet/randall.htm. Ask folks to discuss at tables/groups of 4-5. Wrap Up: The poem you read highlights the difference between two educational philosophies or perspectives. We hope in this session, we will be able to do the same, differentiating between culturally responsive teaching and critical pedagogy on the one hand, and the perspective our organization has tended to operate within on the other. The difference between the poem and this session, though, is that we don’t want these two perspective to simply disagree and de-commit to each other. Nor do we naively think that WEB and Booker T can just work out their differences. We don’t want to think about this as a false binary of responsive/unresponsive or critical/uncritical, but rather two sides of the same coin that exist in tension. And in a tension, you can’t just take one side out: you need to navigate it. In this session we will share how folks in and out of our organization have navigated it in their work in a way that responds critically to the sociocultural needs of our students and communities.
2 min. VIC LEADS Preview outcomes of the session. On that note, we hope you will leave the session… Ask participants to share with a partner for a moment: What do you hope to get out of our time together, or what excites you about where we are headed? If there is time, ask for 2-3 people to share out.
2 min VIC LEADS Explain how we will spend our time together There are two important things I’ve learned in my own pursuit of understanding culturally responsive teaching and critical pedagogy. The first is that you learn about culturally responsive teaching by doing something with it. So this session is intended for all of us to get our hands dirty today as we look at classrooms and teachers who are aligned with this perspective. The second is that this is a rabbit hole. As you learn more, you dive deeper and deeper into that rabbit hole. So as we look at each classroom today, we’ll take a deeper look at culturally responsive teaching and critical pedagogy. We have three classrooms and teachers that will be the main focus of our session today – each one connects well to one of these three levels of depth. Before we jump into this Rabbit Hole, I want to take a minute to show you the conceptual map we have prepared for this journey.
2 min. VIC LEADS Explain to participants In pulling together all of this work, its been important for us to find a way to connect what people are doing with what the research is telling us. We could have used a lot of different ways to conceptually map this all together, and we chose to use the four questions to do this. This model is focused on perspective; it is values-based; and it is contextual. All of these things are at the heart of CRT and critical pedagogy. In responding to each of these questions, we have developed several statements that reflect this perspective’s answer to these questions. Around the room, you will see these statements on posters. Throughout the session, we’ll take some time to talk in depth about some of them, and you will also have the chance to learn more about the ones that seem most important to you, or the ones that you are most hazy about, or the ones that you simply most disagree with. This is the conceptual map we want to share with you today, and we hope we can use it as a way to build a shared lens and vocabulary that we can use together. The first place we’d like to visit in this map is under the WHO question. CRT pushes us into thinking through this in a particular order. In the traditional TAL conception, the why is at the bottom, and the why predicates a teachers’ mindset and skills. The implication is that the why starts from the place of the CM – problematic given the dominant backgrounds of our CMs (young, White, upper-middle class, not native to communities). CRT repositions us to put the who first. Our communities come first, and it is through working with them that we understand the why. Not the other way around. A fundamental element of culturally responsive teaching and critical pedagogy is found in that third bullet.
6 min. with Grace’s Clip VIC LEADS Ask a participant to read the key idea out loud Explain to CMs The reality is that throughout history, schools have been a place that feels like home for some people, while feeling like a place very far from home from other people. For some people, there is little to no distinction between who they are at home – their cultural identity – and who they are at school – their academic identity. But, for others, these things can feel distant and even contradictory. Yet, alignment between these identities is crucial in building academic achievement. A recent study was just published that shows the impact on “racial pride” on academic achievement. (http://urbanyouthjustice.visibli.com/share/DzhpJY – new study about “racial pride” and its impact on academic achievement) Give a quick example of this Play Grace Chen Clip Vic’s testimonial Explain to CMs On the flip-side, we know that there is great power and potential to aligning these identities, and making school a place that responds to the sociocultural needs of students.
30 min. JENEE LEADS Explain to Participants: That leads us to the first teacher we’d like to feature for you, and analyze with you. Each of the teachers we analyze are recipeients of Teaching Tolerance’s Award for Excellence in Culturally Responsive Teaching, and these videos are found on their website. Frame Video In Anna’s video, you’ll see the importance she places on bridging students’ homes and school lives. You’ll also see the importance she puts on students’ understanding their own lives and cultures as they find their place in the world. Give directions. As we watch the video, we’d like you to notice the concepts from our map that you see in Anna’s reflections and in her practice. We’ve given you a graphic organizer if you find that helpful – we’ve also bolded the concepts we believe are most clearly demonstrated. After watching the video and jotting some notes, we’re going to break into discussion groups based on the concept that you’d most like to talk about and dive more deeply into. We’ll then come back together to share out our reflections on these questions. Timing: (0-2) Frame and Directions (2-8) Video and Notes (8-18) Group Discussions (18-25) Share Out Question #1 Only. Wrap Up with Three Outcomes: Academic Achievement: 90% of Arlee HS 10 th graders passed the Montana CRT in reading. Cultural Competence Critical Consciousness
1 min VIC LEADS Explain to Participants So on our next stop down the rabbit hole, we’ll take some time to think about what’s behind teachers like Anna, and what lies underneath their inspiring practices
2 min. VIC LEADS Ask a participant to read the key idea out loud Explain to CMs: Culturally Responsive Teaching is more than just a series of “what works” or “best practices.” It’s a way of thinking about education, an orientation towards teaching, and a perspective on teaching and learning.
5 min. VIC LEADS Explain to Participants This book has had a strong influence on the ways in which we’ve approached and conceptualized this work. In it, the authors describe six dispositions of culturally responsive teachers Several of our colleagues have already used these dispositions in their work with their CMs. In fact, at the innovation fair, I will share the work at the PHX Institute to develop these first two dispositions. We would definitely recommend that one of the first things you think about doing after this session, if you haven’t already, is picking this book up and reading more about these dispositions. Give a few moments to look at Page 4 and discuss with partner: Which of these dispositions do you see most evidence of with CMs? Which do you see least? Of these dispositions, which one do you most personally feel true to? Which do you most struggle with? Transition One of the places we have most seen these dispositions at play is in analyzing the work and reflections of some of our past Sue Lehmann winners.
2 min. – PUSH TO IMPLICATIONS?? JENEE LEADS Share hypothesis
30 min. Explain to Participants: That leads us to the second teacher we’d like to feature for you, and analyze with you. Frame Video In Darnell’s video, you’ll see these dispositions on display as he talks about his classroom and his practice. Of course, he may not specifically name these dispositions, but you will still see the ways that these root his thinking about his classroom. Give directions. As we watch the video, we’d like you to notice these dispositions in his work and reflections Again, we’ve given you a graphic organizer if you find that helpful After watching the video and jotting some notes, we’re going to break into discussion groups based on the disposition that you’d most like to talk about and dive more deeply into – we’ll focus on the first three. We’ll then come back together to share out our reflections on these questions. Timing: (0-2) Frame and Directions (2-8) Video and Notes (8-18) Group Discussions (18-25) Share Out Question #1 Only. Wrap Up with Three Outcomes” Academic Achievement: 100% of 5 th graders are at or above the standard on the Florida CRCT. Cultural Competence Critical Consciousness
1 min VIC LEADS Explain to participants On our next stop down the rabbit hole, we’ll take a closer look at the idea of culturally responsive teaching and critical pedagogy being a “Pedagogy of Opposition.” This quote comes from Gloria Ladsen-Billings and this idea is rooted in understanding power and hegemony, and offering kids an education that analyzes power relationships so that they can influence them and change them to reflect a bend towards social justice.
3 min. VIC LEADS Ask participant to read key point out loud Explain to participants For analytic convenience, let’s take a moment to zoom in on the idea of power, hegemony, and a pedagogy of opposition as it applies to Native American education. Throughout their history, schools that serve Native American students have struggled between offering students an assimilation-based education, and one that is culturally responsive. At the heart of this struggle is, as Lomawaima says, a struggle for power. When Native students are pushed to assimilate to White and non-native norms, there is a loss of power that includes a loss of language and a loss of culture. On the other hand, when Native students are offered a culturally responsive education that affirms their cultural background, their power grows as they take control of their education, their language, and their culture. Native students are not the only students impacted by this distinction. For English Language Learners, the same tension exists between an assimilation-based education, where students develop only their English skills, and a culturally-responsive education where their culture is affirmed, and thus they develop both their English and native language skills. In the English-Only, assimilation-based education model, we can see who retains power, whereas in a multilungual, culturally responsive education, those students, their families and their community take power away from those who seek to destroy their culture, language, and heritage. Aside from Native Students and ELL students, can anyone else think of an example where schools engage in assimilation-based practices that come from struggles for power, and impact a students’ ability to reconcile who they are at home, with who they are at school? Elicit 2-3 responses from participants. Examples may include: Heteronormativity that exists in representations of families in elementary school. The use of Ebonics in urban schools. School uniform policies The selection of literature in Language Arts classrooms The exclusion of non-Eurocentric contributions to math, art and science. In all these situations, students feel that they can not be both a good student and from their culture at the same time. This is at the heart of what we seek to do in our culturally responsive and critical pedagogy perspective on teaching and schooling. Also at the heart of culturally responsive teaching and critical pedagogy is the need to oppose these assimilative processes, as they render marginalized cultures as inferior and less-human. Some critical question to ask then are: Whose culture is being maintained and whose culture is being marginalized? Whose power is being reinforced, and whose power is being repressed?
3 min. VIC LEADS Vic Explain to CMs One example of this “struggle for power” and “pedagogy of opposition” we’d like to share comes from a student I had when I taught in San Jose. Patricia was a senior in my CAHSEE prep class – a class for students who had failed the reading and/or writing portions of the CAHSEE and were in risk of not graduating. The first week of school, I always pulled my seniors in all my classes and sat down to talk with them about their post-graduation plans, their career plans, and about what they felt I could do to help them get there. On the day when I pulled Patricia’s group, I was in for a big surprise from this very quiet and shy young woman. As I jumped into my spiel about college and careers, she interrupted me to say, “Why do you teachers always do this?” I said, “do what?” She said, “Tell us about all the great stuff about college and stuff. I’m worried about graduating high school, plus I don’t have money for college. And I don’t have my papers so I can’t go to college. You tell us all the great stuff but you never help us – you just talk to us.” I was stunned, and later that night wrote her a letter to thank her for calling me out on my bullshit because she was right. At that point of my career, I wasn’t sure that I had really helped all that much, other than giving information and encouragement. Patricia wanted something tangible – so did her classmates. At that point, the CAHSEE prep class was no longer the CAHSEE prep class. It was Ethnic Studies. We spent the year learning about social and local issues important to our community, including about the stuggle for immigrant student rights and the DREAM Act. In fact, the first unit we did that year was about the history of high stakes graduation tests like the CAHSEE, and in the unit students wrote three essays: the first explaining why we have these tests, the second explaining whether they agreed with these tests, the third proposing a different assessment for high school graduation. A light just went off in Patricia, and the other students, and that light has only grown brighter over the years. As you see here, she now has an AA and a BA, and is a community organizer. When I asked her about her experiences in high school and college as an undocumented Latina, this is what she wrote me. Going back to those questions about power and culture, you can see in Patricia’s story the potential of using the classroom and the curriculum as spaces for developing students’ power and collective strength as they fight for a better deal in society. In this perspective kids are learning to change the world, and growing the skills and knowledge to do so. Let’s turn our attention away from an individual classroom or an individual student, and think about this on an even larger, systemic level.
2 min. VIC LEADS Explain to CMs The Mexican American Studies department in Tucson is perhaps the greatest example of the power and potential of this perspective. Many of you have seen the documentary, “Precious Knowledge” or read about this program in other places. The purpose of this program is to develop a generation of critical, compassionate, intellectual people in Tucson, focusing particularly on Mexican American students who have not done well in school or who have previously dropped out. Their program is based on this model – a model that says that academic proficiency has to come with an academic identity that is inclusive of students’ racial and cultural identities. To do this, they teach within a responsive curriculum using a responsive pedagogy and by interacting with students and families in respectful, responsive ways. Their results are incredible. I think what stands out most about their program is that they have seen growth in math….and they don’t teach math! But its not just about achievement, and feeling good about being Chicano – their program is about preparing the next generation of Chicanos in Tucson to take on the challenges of the day, and lead a movement in their community towards equity and social justice. Its not just about being smart, or being a smart Chicano. Its about what you do as an intellectual Chicano, and how that elevates an entire community that is and has been under attack in this country. If you want to learn more about this amazing program (and I hope you do), tomorrow Curtis Acosta will be hosting two workshops about his work in Tucson and will break this down and blow this up for you even more.
30 min. Explain to Participants: That leads us to the third and final teacher we’d like to feature for you, and analyze with you. Frame Video Lawrence exemplifies this perspective incredibly well, as he helps students develop their identities as well as their motivations to work for social justice. Lawrence’s classroom has a attitude and a directionality to it – his kids are learning to read and write and do math to change the world towards social justice. As a bit of context, Lawrence has been an FA at the summer institute in LA before, and has worked very closely with Jeff Duncan-Andrade: another powerful voice in this field. Give directions. As we watch the video, you’ll see a lot of these concepts on the map come together. Again, we’ve given you a graphic organizer if you find that helpful After watching the video and jotting some notes, we’re going to break into discussion groups based on the concept that you’d most like to talk about and dive more deeply into. We’ll then come back together to share out our reflections on these questions. Timing: (0-2) Frame and Directions (2-8) Video and Notes (8-18) Group Discussions (18-25) Share Out Question #1 Only. Wrap Up with Three Outcomes: Academic Achievement: 122 nd St. School has an API of 6, and a similar school API of 10. Cultural Competence Critical Consciousness
1 min VIC LEADS Explain to participants With the last bit of time we have, we’d like to talk about the implications of Culturally Responsive Teaching and Critical Pedagogy on our organization, as well as our work in communities across the nation.
15 min. VIC LEADS Explain to Participants We’d like to do this by breaking into two groups. One group will focus more on our organization, in particular where we’ve been with TAL and where we’re headed with TAL 2.0. Thinking about TAL, TFA, etc. The other group will focus on using this conceptual map to develop culturally responsive corps members. Thinking about classrooms, CM, MTLD.
1 Min. JENEE LEADS Explain to CMs We want to start by comparing some statements to each other. In the green box, you will see language from Teaching As Leadership. Bonus points for anyone who can tell us what row this is In the orange box, you’ll see a statement from a member of the Native Achievement Initiative.
1 Min. JENEE LEADS Explain to CMs Now check out this statement from TAL, and this quote we got from a teacher we’ve been partnering with.
5 Min. JENEE LEADS Explain to CMs Finally, check out this statement from TAL compared to this quote from a former Sue Lehmann winner. Take a few minutes to discuss with your table/group, what stands out to you about these statements? What resonates most with you, or what causes the most dissonance for you as we think about these two perspectives on education. Ask 2-3 participants to share their reflections or the reflections of person they spoke with. The distinction between the TAL statements and these statements from the teachers and colleagues we’ve been working with leads us to a very central idea in this work.
3 min. VIC LEADS Vic Explains to CMs For the past four or five years, I’ve worked with CMs in Phoenix on a concept I call “Teaching Through the Test.” If you’d like to read more about it, I wrote a chapter for a book that talks about this work that I can share with you. At the crux of this work is bridging together standards-algined teaching and academic achievement and developing curricular units that develop students’ critical capacity: their critical understanding of the world around them, and their capacity to do something about it. One of the teachers I have worked with is Regina Mills, who designed a unit for her students that focused on Arizona SB 1070. They read the law in its entirety, along with a handfull of articles in local and national newspapers, practicing expository and persuasive reading standards as they read through these texts. At the end of the unit, students were asked to write a letter to anyone they would like about this law. Some wrote to the governor, some wrote to local leaders, some wrote to family members, but most students wrote a letter to the Sheriff of Maricopa County, Joe Arpaio. The Sheriff responded to several of these students, and you can take a look at their reflections on the letters they received and the unit in general. You can also see the academic growth her students experienced in this unit in terms of class average mastery. The data is from a previous assessment on these standards, and the unit test that came at the end of the unit – I believe she taught this unit in the Winter. The assessment she used was standards aligned and made up of out of context passages like the ones you see on the state test. We believe that the unit reinforced students’ cultural identities by discussing and debating an issue that was important to them, and developed their academic achievement as measured on standardized tests, thus building their critical capacity. We believe there is a strong power in students who achieve at this level, and believe these things – in fact we believe that is how social change happens.
5 min. VIC LEADS Explain to participants One of the most important parts of definition culturally responsive teaching and critical pedagogy, is understanding what it is NOT. These are just some of the terms we see floating around the organization right now, and usually being attached to this work. Sometimes they are attached in an appropriate way, as there is CLEARLY a connection between this work and diversity and inclusiveness. Unfortunately, though, often they are not, so we’d love to take some time to make it clear how culturally responsive teaching and critical pedagogy are different than these concepts, and how they also connect. Explain each concept
5 min . JENEE LEADS Explain to CMs As we’ve created that definition, and cultivated the examples, read the books, and had hundreds of discussions, there are some important questions that are at the front of our mind about culturally responsive teaching and critical pedagogy. In these questions, you will see that there are differnet “entry points” into this work that we have seen people use – some people come to this work from their reflections on race, class and privelege, others in their pursuit of student outcomes, and others in their reflections on the best teachers they’ve seen. Take a moment, then, to think about which of these questions most speaks to you and offers you entry into this work. And if you have a question that doesn’t really fit here, we’d love for you to share that in the question bags at your table.
3 min. VIC LEADS Explain to Participants Like I said earlier, there are some trailblazers in this room who have been at the front of this work for a number of years in some cases. As we’ve looked at what these teams are doing, we see that people’s attention has been focused on three levels: the classroom, the CM, and the staff. Take a look at some of the things we’ve seen these regions do. The bad news is we don’t have time right now to go through all these innovations. The good news is we don’t have to because these folks are presenting these innovations and efforts, either at the innovation fair or in a session tomorrow. I’d love to take a moment to let those people share a quick preview of what they’ll be presenting/discussing in the hopes that we can all check out the amazing work they are doing: Tara, Tara, Kim, and Layne: Session Angela: Booth Josh: Booth Bea: Booth Anna and Nick: Session Jenny: Booth Angela: Booth
7 min. VIC LEADS Explain to participants Although we didn’t spend much time on the “HOW” question, its still important to see some common themes. We see three places where the HOW happens at the classroom level, which you see here, and some common themes in these teachers’ practice. Take a moment to skim those themes. Ask participants to share takeaways, insights, and questions. Transition… In the conceptual map we shared, you’ll see that the HOW question is answered not just at a classroom level, but a CM and Staff level as well. Before we move on, let’s take a few minutes to look at the CM level more deeply
5 min. VIC LEADS Explain to participants Clearly, this work has not come without its share of challenges, and we’d like to take a moment to share the most significant challenges we’ve seen with you. Some of these are a little more obvious than others, and we don’t really have time to look at them all, but I’d be more than happy to help
Cul t ural l y R pons i ve es Teac hi ng & Cri t i c al Pedagogy Jenee Henry & Vi c D az i 2013 TLD Sum i t m M phi s , TN em <I nser t Dat e Her e> 1
Openi ng D s c us s i on iRead t he poem “B ooker T. and W E. B ” and . .our def i ni t i on of Cul t ural l y R pons i ve esTeac hi ng. Spend a f ew m ent s di s c us s i ng: om • H does t hi s poem hel p i l l us t rat e t hi s ow def i ni t i on? • W hat s t ands out t o you about t he poem and t he def i ni t i on? • W hat pers onal c onnec t i ons c an you make t o t he def i ni t i on and/or t he poem? • W hat prof es s i onal c onnec t i ons c an you make t o t he def i ni t i on and/or t he poem ? 2
Out c omesPart i c i pant s w l l l eave t hi s s es s i on… io W t h a c oherent c onc ept ual m of cul t ur al l y i ap r esponsi ve t eachi ng and cr i t i cal pedagogy t hat t hey can use t o anal yze and devel op cl assr oom s, cor ps m ber s, and st af f t r ai ni ngs. emo Feel i ng c onnec t ed t o a c om uni t y of st af f m ber s m em com i t t ed t o devel opi ng cul t ur al l y r esponsi ve m t eacher s and cl assr oom s.o Feel i ng m i vat ed t o t ake on prac t i c es al i gned wi t h ot cul t ur al l y r esponsi ve t eachi ng and cr i t i cal pedagogy. 3
Agenda1 Ope ni ng Di s c us s i on ( 15 mi n. )2 I d e nt i t y Bo r de r l a nds ( 4 0 mi n. )3 Di s pos i t i ons of Cul t ur a l l y Re s pons i ve Te a c he r s ( 40 mi n. )4 “ A Pe da gogy of Oppos i t i on” ( 40 mi n. )5 I mpl i c a t i ons of Cul t ur a l l y Re s pons i ve Te a c hi ng ( 15 mi n. ) 4
Conc ept ual Map W Y? H • The achi evem ent gap i s a soci al const r uct • Educat i on i s a “ st r uggl e f or power ’ and l i ber at i on W O? H • Fr eedom and Li ber t y cannot be gi f t ed f r om one • St udent s and H ? OW f am l i es m i ust be at gr oup t o anot her• Cl assr oom Level : t he cent er of t heCur r i cul um , Theor y of ChangePedagogy, and Short Term & Long Term • St udent s as f or cesRel at i onshi ps Outcomes of change i n t hei r• CM Lev el : own com uni t i es mDi sposi t i ons f or • St udent s mustcul t ur al l y navi gat e t he W AT? H bor der l and bet weenr esponsi ve t eachi ng • Academ c Achi evem i ent t he wor l ds of • Cul t ur al Com pet ence school and hom e • Cr i t i cal Consci ousness 5
Af f i rm ng s t udent s ’ c ul t ural ii dent i t i es i s key i n devel opi ngt hei r ac adem c i dent i t y. iH s t ori c al l y, t hi s has been a it roubl es om rel at i ons hi p f or em any s t udent s f rom m argi nal i zedbac kgrounds , w ho s t ruggl e t orec onc i l e w ho t hey are at hom ew th w i ho t hey are at s c hool . 6 6
Anna E. B dw n al i• HS Engl i sh, Com D s c us s i on i posi t i on and Li t er at ur e Ques t i ons :• Fl at head I ndi an Reser vat i on i n • H ow do you s ee M ont ana t he c onc ept s• “ Cul t ur e em anat es f r om m eor i l l us t rat ed i n t han et hni c i t y . Ther e i s t een t hi s vi deo? cul t ur e, hom cul t ur e, as wel l e • W hat does t hi s as t r adi t i onal cul t ur e. So, I m ake you t hi nk us e [ t ex t s] t hat appeal t o st udent s ’ i nt er es t s, about your ow n backgr ounds and abi l i t i es. ” w ork?• Thr ough “ ear nest di s cus si on • W hat ques t i ons about t hi ngs t hat m t er , at or c onc erns pr ovocat i ve as si gnm ent s and does t hi s t ext s , and suppor t i v e and rai s e f or you? hones t r el at i onshi ps , s t udent s wi l l l eave [ t he] cl assr oom wi t h a bet t er sense of 7
Agenda1 Ope ni ng Di s c us s i on ( 15 mi n. )2 I d e nt i t y Bo r de r l a nds ( 4 0 mi n. )3 Di s po s i t i on s o f Cul t ur a l l y Re s po ns i ve Te a c h e r s ( 4 0 mi n. )4 A “ Pe da gogy of Oppos i t i on” ( 40 mi n. )5 I mpl i c a t i ons of Cul t ur a l l y Re s pons i ve Te a c hi ng ( 15 mi n. ) 8
Cul t ural l y R pons i ve Teac hi ng esi s a pers pec t i ve as m h as i t ’ s uca t ool , t heref ore i t i s asim port ant t o f oc us on t eac hers ’di s pos i t i ons as i t i s t o f oc uson t hei r ac t i ons . 9 9
D s pos i t i ons of Cul t ural l y R pons i ve i esTeac hersVi l l egas ’ and Luc as ’ D s pos i t i ons of iCul t ural l y R pons i ve Educ at ors : es• Soc i oc ul t ural Cons c i ous nes s• Af f i rm ng At t i t ude Tow i ards Cul t uralD f f erenc e i• Cons t ruc t i vi s t Approac h t o Teac hi ng &Learni ng• Unders t and s t udent pri orknow edge/experi enc e l• B l d i ns t ruc t i on of f of s t udent uipri or know edge l• Feel c apac i t y and res pons i bi l i t y t obe res pons i ve 10
Darnel l Fi ne D s c us s i on i• M Hum S ani t i es Ques t i ons :• At l ant a Nei ghbor hood Char t er • W hat evi denc e M ddl e School i do you s ee of• “ Bui l d on t he knowl edge t he st udent s br i ng f r om hom … e di s pos i t i ons ? [ and] em phasi z e m eani ngf ul connect i ons t o r eal - l i f e • W here do t hes e cont ext s . ” di s pos i t i ons• “ I n m cl assr oom i ncl usi on y , c om f rom and e i s n’ t l i m t ed t o cel ebr at i ng i how are t hey cul t ur al di f f er ences … [ I devel oped? pr ovi de] spaces f or [ st udent s ] • W hat ques t i ons t o ex pr ess t hei r m t i pl e ul per spect i ves. ” or c onc erns does t hi s rai s e f or you? 12
Agenda1 Ope ni ng Di s c us s i on ( 15 mi n. )2 I d e nt i t y Bo r de r l a nds ( 4 0 mi n. )3 Di s po s i t i on s o f Cul t ur a l l y Re s po ns i ve Te a c h e r s ( 4 0 mi n. )4 A “ Pe da gogy of Oppos i t i on” ( 40 mi n. )5 I mpl i c a t i ons of Cul t ur a l l y Re s pons i ve Te a c hi ng ( 15 mi n. ) 13
“The hi s t ory of Am c an Indi an erieduc at i on c an be s um ari zed i n mt hree s i m e w pl ords : St ruggl e f orpow er. ”( Lom ai m 2000, p. 2) aw a,Assimilation- Culturally Based Responsive Education Education 1414
P ri c i a Cej udo atSt udent i n Vi c ’ s CAHSEE Prep Cl as s , 2005- 2006.• Fi r st i n f am l y t o gr aduat e f r om hi gh school and i col l ege.• B. A. , Soci al W k; M nor i n Spani sh – San Jose or i St at e Uni ver si t y• M obi l i zes DREAM s i n San Jose and t he Bay Ar ea er• " The shor t age of st af f , counsel or s, and pr ogr am s m ade i t har d f or m t o r ecei ve i nf or m i on about e at t he r equi r em ent s f or col l ege. Al so, I di dn t under st and t hat pl ent y of t he st af f at t hese i nst i t ut i ons wer e not f ul l y pr epar ed t o under st and or gui de m nor i t i es, l ow i ncom i e, and undocum ent ed st udent s. [ M . Di az] educat ed us r about our r i ght s as i m i gr ant st udent s, and m or gani zed us t o bet t er r epr esent our needs and 15
TUSD s M c an Am c an St udi es ’ exi eriNow banned, t he program s res ul t s are rem ’ arkabl e.• W l above di st r i ct el Critically Compassionate Intellectualism and st at e aver ages on st at e t est s of Increased Academic Achievement = r eadi ng, wr i t i ng and Academic + Academic ma t h. Proficiency Identity• Enr ol l i n post - = secondar y i nst i t ut i ons at a Student/ r at e wel l above Teacher/ Curriculum Pedagogy Parent Lat i no nat i onal Interaction aver age• I ncr eased cl ass engagem ent• 95% of st udent s 16
Lawrenc e Tan D s c us s i on i• 5 t h Gr ade Ques t i ons :• 122 nd St . School ; Los Angel es, • W hat evi denc e CA do you s ee of• Fi ve pi l l ar s: Engage, Educ at e, al l of t he Ex per i ence, Em power and Enact . c onc ept s on• Tan s ays hi s s t udent s s ucc eed our m ap? ac adem c al l y— i and he ac com i shes t hi s by us i ng a pl • H ow do you s ee soci al j ust i ce cur r i cul um . t hes e c onc ept s “ The dev el opm ent of yout h i nt o bui l di ng of f soci al l y cr i t i cal and of eac h ot her? r esponsi bl e i ndi v i dual s i s of • W hat ques t i ons t he hi ghest i m por t ance. ” or c onc erns does t hi s rai s e f or you? 17
Agenda1 Ope ni ng Di s c us s i on ( 15 mi n. )2 I d e nt i t y Bo r de r l a nds ( 4 0 mi n. )3 Di s po s i t i on s o f Cul t ur a l l y Re s po ns i ve Te a c h e r s ( 4 0 mi n. )4 A “ Pe da gogy of Oppos i t i on” ( 40 mi n. )5 I mpl i c a t i ons of Cul t ur a l l y Re s pons i ve Te a c hi ng ( 15 mi n. ) 18
Where W ve B e’ een & Where W re Goi ng e’Choos e a Breakout Group f or engagi ng i n c onvers at i on,s hared unders t andi ng and c ont i nual ref l ec t i on: – Teac hi ng As Leaders hi p & TAL 2. 0 – Us i ng t he Conc ept ual M t o D ap evel op Cul t ural l y R pons i ve St af f and Corps M bers es em 19
Compare t he Fol l ow ng… i“D evel op s t udent s ’ “The not i on t hat s i m y plrat i onal unders t andi ng w orki ng hard w l lit hat t hey c an ac hi eve ens ure t hat s t udent sby w orki ng hard ( ‘ I c an ac hi eve i m i es plc an’ ) t hrough evi denc e t hat s t udent s w ho don’ tof s t udent s ’ ow n ac hi eve t hei r dream sprogres s , s t at i s t i c s , f ai l ed bec aus e t heyexpl i c i t di s c us s i ons of di dn’ t w ork hardm l eabl e i nt el l i genc e, al enough. W c h, i f w hi ec reat i ve m arket i ng, ac know edge t he ll everagi ni ng t he bi g s ys t em c s t ruc t ures of igoal s , et c . ” i nequal i t y i n our c ount ry, w know e i s n’ t t rue. ” 21
Compare t he Fol l ow ng… i“D evel op s t udent s ’ “W need t o t al k erat i onal unders t andi ng s pec i f i c al l y aboutt hat t hey w l l benef i t i hel pi ng s t udent sf rom ac hi evem ent ( ‘ I i dent i f y, navi gat e, andw ant ’ ) t hrough overc om t he s t ruc t ural ec onnec t i ons bet w een barri ers t hat s t andc l as s ac hi evem ent and bet w een t hem and t hei rt hei r l i ves and dream . ” sas pi rat i ons ,s t at i s t i c s , c reat i vem arket i ng, l everagi ngt he bi g goal , et c . ” 22
Compare t he Fol l ow ng… i“D evel op s t andards - “Ins t ead of arm ng and ial i gned, m urabl e, eas equi ppi ng our t eac hersam t i ous , and f eas i bl e bi t o hel p f os t ergoal s t hat w l l i s t udent ’ s i dent i t y-dram i c al l y i nc reas e at dri ven l eaders hi p, i ts t udent s ’ opport uni t i es f eel s l i ke w re e’i n l i f e. ” t eac hi ng t hem [ s t udent s ] how t o operat e i n a w t e hi m s w an’ orl d rat her t han c hangi ng i t t o ref l ec t t hei r i dent i t i es . ” 23
M . M l l s : 9t h- 10t h Grade Engl i s h rs iAc adem c Ac hi evem i ent and St udent s part i c i pat ed i n aGrow h t uni t anal yzi ng Ari zona l aw SB 1070.M n Idea: 62% t o 82% ai • “ I t was cool get t i ng a l et t er f r om Sher i f f Joe, t hough m yFac t and Opi ni on: 74% t o85% m om al m ost sm acked m when e she saw m nam and t he y eAut hor’ s Purpos e: 62% t o Sher i f f ’ s addr ess. Now t hat I71% have t hi s m ean- soundi ngText Feat ures : 68% t o 81% l et t er f r om Sher i f f Joe, I can show i t t o ot her peopl e so t hey won’ t vot e f or hi m next t i m ” e. • “ The bi ggest t hi ng I r em ber em about t he SB1070 pr oj ect was t hat m f am l y and I y i di scussed i t a l ot . W spent e a l ot of t i m f ocusi ng on t 24 e he
Ot her Conc ept s Definition Common Misconceptions A strategy for making school curriculum A perspective that dramatically alters Culturally relevant to the lives of students and reflective dominant school practices in order to Relevant of students’ experiences. affirm students’ backgrounds and Teaching identities. A perspective on education that embraces A sufficient attempt at disruptingMulticultural cultural diversity and celebrating the cultural relationships of power and domination. Education differences between different groups. An educational process of developing anti- An all-encompassing framework for Anti-Racist racist attitudes in students and teachers. teacher education, nor student Education actions/habits and outcomes. Our approach towards creating diverse and A perspective on curriculum, pedagogy,Diversity and inclusive spaces within our organization. or teaching practices that address theInclusiveness historical, social, cultural and racial context of education. The ability to survive and thrive in one’s own A destination or arrival. A stand-alone Cultural and multiple different cultural contexts by capacity that develops devoid ofCompetence understanding power and privilege. understanding one’s own identity, or a understanding of power. 25
Ques t i ons W re P e’ urs ui ngThes e ques t i ons keep us up at ni ght & w ake us upi n hat ar orni ng… i s es and as s um i ons em• Wt he m t he prem e pt bedded i n cul t ur al l y r esponsi ve t eachi ng?• I n what ways does cul t ur al l y r esponsi ve t eachi ng al i gn or com pet e wi t h t he way our or gani zat i on ar t i cul at es rac e, c l as s , pri vi l ege, and pow ? er• To what ext ent can cul t ur al l y r es ponsi v e t eac hi ng hel p us under st and our m t s uc c es s f ul t eac hers at os a m ndset / dr i ver / di sposi t i on l evel ? i• W hat br oader s t udent out c om and t eac her ac t i ons es ar e r eveal ed t hr ough a cul t ur al l y r esponsi ve t eachi ng per spect i ve?• How does cul t ur al l y r espons i ve t eachi ng dr aw a st r ai ght l i ne bet ween our or gani z at i on’ s consci ous ness and t he wor k of our t eacher s, as wel l 26
How are Educ at ors Al ready Us i ng CRT?Several t eam have al ready brought s P art i al l i s t ofc ul t ural l y res pons i ve t eac hi ng and regi ons w ho havec ri t i c al pedagogy i nt o t hei r w ork… i nnovat ed t hrough c ul t ural l yAt t he Cl as s room Level res pons i ve – Cul t ur al l y Responsi ve Uni t Pl ans t eac hi ng and – Connect i ons t o Com uni t y Gr oups and m c ri t i c al M ber s em pedagogy: – Di scussi ons about Power , Pr i vi l ege • Sout h D akot a and I dent i t y • N ew M c o exiAt t he CM Lev el • Col orado – Ser i es of Sessi ons and W kshops or • P hoeni x – Di scussi on and Cr i t i cal I nqui r y • Los Angel es Gr oups • R o Grande i – Excel l ent School Vi si t s Val l eyAt t he St af f Level • H ous t on – Di scussi on Gr oups & Book St udi es • San Ant oni o – Pr of essi onal Devel opm ent Sessi ons • P l adel phi a hi 27 • Great er N ew
Com on Them i n H m es OW ( Cl as s roomLevel )Curri c ul um - Local , r el at abl e, and per sonal i zed - St udent exper i ences, hom l i f e, and “ f unds e of knowl edge” have i m por t ant space i n t he cur r i cul um - “ Ki ds bef or e cont ent ” - Or i ent at i on t owar d soci al j ust i ce and cr i t i cal under st andi ng of t he wor l dPedagogy - St udent - cent er ed: t eacher i s “ de- cent r al i zed” - Const r uct i vi st - St udent s as knowl edge cr eat or s t hr ough i nvest i gat i on, connect i on, and di al ogue.R at i ons h el - Em ace ki ds’ cul t ur e, com uni t y cul t ur e, br mi ps hom cul t ur e. e - Aut hent i c car i ng dem onst r at ed by car i ng about what t he ki ds car e about . - Car i ng f o r st udent s: i nvest i gat i ng st er eot ype, wor ki ng wi t h st udent s t o i m ove pr 28 l i f e and com uni t y, wor ki ng wi t h st udent s t o m
Si gni f i c ant Chal l enges• R pons i venes s vs . R evanc e es el• R pons i ve m hods as w l as c urri c ul um es et el – “H ki ds . Y i ou’ re oppres s ed. Let m break t hat dow f or you, e n and l et m hel p you w t h t hat . ” e i• Cons t ant devel opment and ref l ec t i on. – “O h, w al ready di d t hi s l as t year. I ’ ve read m t of t hos e e os art i cl es . ”• Teac hers l et t i ng go of power and de- c ent ral i zi ng t hem el ves s – CM l et t i ng go of ow s ners hi p and t rus t i ng t hei r s t udent s .• D s pos i t i ons geared t ow i ards monoc ul t ural i s m and uni c ul t ural i s m. 29