• unlimited access with print and download
    $ 37 00
  • read full document, no print or download, expires after 72 hours
    $ 4 99
More info
Unlimited access including download and printing, plus availability for reading and annotating in your in your Udini library.
  • Access to this article in your Udini library for 72 hours from purchase.
  • The article will not be available for download or print.
  • Upgrade to the full version of this document at a reduced price.
  • Your trial access payment is credited when purchasing the full version.
Buy
Continue searching

Pre-service teachers: Does cultural responsiveness affect anticipated self-determination to teach in specific settings?

Dissertation
Author: Michelle L. Cox
Abstract:
Motivation to teach is essential to educating all children in the public schools. This study examined the anticipated self-determination of pre-service teachers to teach in classroom settings that varied in the ethnic and racial composition of the students in the classes. Additionally the cultural responsiveness of participants was measured to examine whether high/low cultural responsiveness interacted with the specific contexts given. Ninety-seven participants from seven university teacher preparation programs, provided answers to a multi-faceted online survey assessing their cultural responsiveness and self-determination to teach in classrooms containing majority White, majority Hispanic, or majority African American students. The participants were assigned a scenario after answering the cultural responsiveness measurement followed by a scale that was designed to measure their anticipated self-determination to teach in that specific setting. The research findings revealed that both cultural responsiveness and the scenarios related to prospective teacher anticipated motivation for working with specific groups of students, but these two constructs were linearly independent of one another (no interaction). Additionally, data indicated that pre-service teachers were not significantly and positively developing their cultural responsiveness understanding. Results generally supported cultural beliefs and limitations of pre-service teacher's feelings of anticipated competence, relatedness, and autonomy with students different from themselves. Further investigation provided interesting stereotypical belief comments that were aligned with the differing scenarios assigned to the participants.

TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... VII LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................... VIII ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... IX CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1 Statement of the Problem ................................................................................................. 2 Review of the Related Literature..................................................................................... 5 Race, Ethnicity and Culture: Issues in Education ........................................................... 6 Culturally Responsiveness and Pedagogy ..................................................................... 16 Cultural Competence as a basis for Learning................................................................ 20 Encouraging Parental Involvement ............................................................................... 26 Teacher Beliefs ................................................................................................................ 30 Self-Efficacy as a Belief ................................................................................................ 34 Pre-service Teacher Beliefs ........................................................................................... 38 Self-Determination .......................................................................................................... 41 Competency ................................................................................................................... 42 Autonomy ...................................................................................................................... 42 Relatedness .................................................................................................................... 44 Teacher Preparation and Student Diversity................................................................. 46 Summary of Literature Review ..................................................................................... 52 Research Variables ........................................................................................................ 55 CHAPTER II: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.............................................................. 59 Sample and Context ........................................................................................................ 61 Study Procedures ............................................................................................................ 63 Measurement Instruments ............................................................................................. 65 Demographic questionnaire........................................................................................... 66 Cultural Responsiveness Scale ...................................................................................... 66 Anticipated Self-Determination Scale ........................................................................... 67 Treatment Scenarios ...................................................................................................... 68

vi

Study Design and Procedures ........................................................................................ 70 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................... 72 CHAPTER III: RESULTS ................................................................................................ 74 Initial Item Level Inspection .......................................................................................... 74 Factor Analysis .............................................................................................................. 75 Measures of Central Tendency and Normality ............................................................. 76 Instrument Reliabilities ................................................................................................. 76 Analyses of Research Questions .................................................................................... 78 Research Question 1 ...................................................................................................... 78 Research Question 2 ...................................................................................................... 83 Additional Results ........................................................................................................... 92 Open-ended Comments ................................................................................................. 96 CHAPTER IV: DISCUSSIONS ..................................................................................... 105 Study Constructs ........................................................................................................... 106 Discussion of the Findings ............................................................................................ 107 Research Question 1 .................................................................................................... 107 Research Question 2 .................................................................................................... 108 Limitations of Study ..................................................................................................... 112 Implications for Research and Teacher Preparation Programs .............................. 113 Cultural Responsiveness and Minority Focused Research ......................................... 115 Teacher Preparation Program Considerations ............................................................. 117 Discussions Summary ................................................................................................... 118 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 121 APPENDIX A: ANTICIPATED SELF-DETERMINATION SCALE .......................... 149 APPENDIX B: TEACHER‘S PERCEPTIONS OF CULTURAL RESPONSIVENESS ......................................................................................................................................... 154 APPENDIX C: CULTURAL AWARENESS AND BELIEFS INVENTORY ............. 156 APPENDIX D: BASIC NEEDS AND SATISFACTION – GENERAL ....................... 159

vii

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Sample Items – Cultural Responsiveness questionnaire .................................... 68 Table 2: Sample Items Anticipated Self-Determination Scale .......................................... 69 Table 3: Anticipated Self-Determination Items with Corresponding Factors .................. 69 Table 4: Anticipated Self-Determination Scale Scenarios ................................................ 71 Table 5: Pattern Coefficients for Cultural Responsiveness Scale Items ........................... 77 Table 6: Summary of Means, Standard Deviations, and Cronbach Alpha Reliabilities for Scale Constructs................................................................................................................ 79 Table 7: Cultural Responsiveness Scale: Item Frequency Summary............................... 81 Table 8: Cultural Responsiveness Scale: Correlation Matrix .......................................... 82 Table 9: Five Model Summary - Competence ................................................................... 86 Table 10: Table of Regression Coefficients – Competence .............................................. 87 Table 11: Five Model Summary - Relatedness ................................................................. 88 Table 12: Table of Regression Coefficients- Relatedness ................................................. 89 Table 13: Five Model Summary - Autonomy .................................................................... 90 Table 14: Table of Regression Coefficients- Autonomy .................................................... 91 Table 15: Mean Comparisons of Competency, Relatedness, and Autonomy .................... 94 Table 16: Pearson Product-Moment Correlations among the Variables ......................... 95 Table 17: Pearson Product-Moment Correlations - Scenarios as separate variables ..... 96 Table 18: Summary of participant comments based on scenario ................................... 104

viii

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Affect of Cultural Responsiveness on potential self-determination .................. 55 Figure 2. Predictions about the research analyses results. ................................................ 58 Figure 3. Predicted Interactions ........................................................................................ 73 Figure 4: Means for the Cultural Responsiveness Scale as a whole measurement and its corresponding subscales.................................................................................................... 80 Figure 5: Mean differences by Year in Program .............................................................. 83 Figure 6: Independent linear relationship of Cultural Responsiveness and the scenarios found in the analyses ......................................................................................................... 90 Figure 7: Mean Plots for Anticipated Self-Determination components based on scenarios. ........................................................................................................................................... 94

ix

ABSTRACT Motivation to teach is essential to educating all children in the public schools. This study examined the anticipated self-determination of pre-service teachers to teach in classroom settings that varied in the ethnic and racial composition of the students in the classes. Additionally the cultural responsiveness of participants was measured to examine whether high/low cultural responsiveness interacted with the specific contexts given. Ninety-seven participants from seven university teacher preparation programs, provided answers to a multi-faceted online survey assessing their cultural responsiveness and self-determination to teach in classrooms containing majority White, majority Hispanic, or majority African American students. The participants were assigned a scenario after answering the cultural responsiveness measurement followed by a scale that was designed to measure their anticipated self-determination to teach in that specific setting. The research findings revealed that both cultural responsiveness and the scenarios related to prospective teacher anticipated motivation for working with specific groups of students, but these two constructs were linearly independent of one another (no interaction). Additionally, data indicated that pre-service teachers were not significantly and positively developing their cultural responsiveness understanding. Results generally supported cultural beliefs and limitations of pre-service teacher‘s feelings of anticipated competence, relatedness, and autonomy with students different from themselves. Further investigation provided interesting stereotypical belief comments that were aligned with the differing scenarios assigned to the participants.

1

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Every year, prospective teachers begin their journey to becoming educators in teacher preparation programs across the country. Belief systems that have been developed through family and life experiences influence strongly persuade and often constrain what prospective teachers are willing and able to learn about teaching and learning in schools (Ball, 1988; Mertz & McNeely, 1992). Internalized beliefs about teaching have also been suggested to facilitate pre-service teachers‘ resistance to change (Anderson & Piazza, 1996; Mertz & McNeely, 1992), making the training of teachers even more complicated. Thus it is important to consider that ―ethnic and socioeconomic background, gender, geographic location, religious upbringing, and life decisions may all affect an individual‘s beliefs that, in turn, affect learning to teach and teaching‖ (Richardson, 1996, p. 105). Research has also suggested that a teacher‘s beliefs may be one of the most important constructs in the educational development of a teacher (Mertz & McNeely, 1992; Pintrich, 1990; Tiezzi, L. & Cross, B., 1997). Research on teacher learning suggests that prospective teachers bring firmly held beliefs about teaching and learning to their teacher preparation programs (Mertz & McNeely, 1992; Zeichner & Gore, 1990): beliefs developed primarily through an "apprenticeship of observation" (Lortie, 1975) or ―teacher watching‖ (Barnes, 1992) during elementary and secondary school years. Thus, these beliefs are suggested as being developed both through personal educational and social experiences that are unique for each person (Calderhead & Robson, 1991; Mertz &

2

McNeely, 1991, 1992; Rust, 1994). This reliance on one‘s beliefs may, in part, be a facet of the ever growing frustration that teachers are experiencing in the classroom when working with diverse populations. The effect of these overall attitudes and beliefs and their influence on the future educator‘s potential teaching motivation that develops during academic preparation is the focus of this study: specifically, I examined the relationship between cultural responsiveness/sensitivity and anticipated self-determination based on contextual teaching situations. Research based on cultural responsiveness, teachers' beliefs about teaching students from a culture and context that differs from their own and self- determination theory are all important to the encompassing considerations related to prospective teachers‘ belief systems. This research asserts that these beliefs develop while growing up within their own families, communities, and schools (Fry & McKinney, 1997; Mertz & McNeely, 1992; Paine, 1989) and affects their ability to be culturally sensitive, to groups unlike themselves, within the context of ―school‖ (Ladson- Billings, 1994). Statement of the Problem Teachers with pre-existing beliefs are entering the teaching field with varying levels of cultural awareness. This awareness may be required to be sufficiently motivated to teach diverse populations (Mertz & McNeely, 1991, 1992; Ogbu & Simons, 1998). Additionally, many teachers do not think that they can do the job that our government has required; they are overwhelmed and not psychologically confident enough to provide diverse students with the ―best‖ that they have to offer (Chance, 2005). Considering that

3

teacher preparation programs are designed to prepare teachers to be successful, programs must consider the effects that cultural beliefs have on self-motivation to teach students of different backgrounds and ethnicities. Additionally, demographic changes now demand our consideration as schools grow more diverse and our teaching population does not (American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education, 1987; Haberman, 1987; Hodgkinson, 1985). To explore these issues I have chosen to consider the facets of self-determination (autonomy, relatedness, and competence) that have been documented to affect the motivation of people in various settings (Deci & Ryan, 2000). The Self-Determination framework addresses motivation that not only affects the way prospective teachers prepare for the classroom, but also the subsequent learning of prospective teachers‘ potential students. Additionally although self-determination is widely researched, a gap in the research includes the examination of how future teachers‘ cultural beliefs affect self- determination. To address this gap research must address the culturally-based, and possibly stereotypical, belief systems of pre-service teachers that may affect their motivation to teach in specific contextual settings. I developed an instrument based on two pilot studies that addressed cultural responsiveness and studied its relationship to a pre-service (or prospective) teacher‘s anticipated self-determination to teach specific populations of students. The goal of this research was to gain a better understanding of issues related to cultural responsiveness of pre-service teachers and their possible affects on self- determination motivation to teach in specific contextual settings.

4

Currently, much of the research on cultural and ethnic diversity in education focuses on the learner in many ways: cultural adaptation/assimilation issues (Cummins, 1986, 1992; Reyhner, 2001), cognitive ability (Bowler, Smith, Schwarzer, Perez-Arce, & Kreutzer, 2002), language considerations (Curiel, 1990; Curiel, Rosenthal, J & Richek, 1986; Gopaul-McNicol & Thomas-Presswood, 1998; Reyhner, 2001), dropout rates (Darling- Hammond, 2006, 2007; Carpenter, Ramirez, & Severn, 2006), and a learner‘s parental involvement (Carpenter & Ramirez, 2007; Carpenter et al., 2006; Niemeyer, A., Wong, M., Westerhaus K., 2009; Reynolds, 1992). These constructs have also been suggested to be affected by presentation of new knowledge, creation of positive relationships, and appropriate and positive communications with culturally diverse parents. Also supporting this area of study are educational researchers who have continued to document the low academic performance of Hispanic students in contrast to their White counterparts (Carpenter & Ramirez, 2007; Darden, 2003; Hill & Duncan, 1987; Stevens, Olivárez, & Hamman, 2006). However, much of this research does not suggest practical changes to our educational system which typically reflects White values (Ogbu, 1990, 1992; Ogbu & Simons, 1998). Much of the current research addresses student- focused ―answers‖ rather than the possibility of a teacher‘s pre-dispositional beliefs as an undermining variable. Lastly, pre-existing teacher beliefs among in-service teachers have been only moderately explored in the context of teaching Hispanic students specifically; although research suggests that teacher self-efficacy in specific contexts has been linked to student

5

achievement (Bandura, 1997; Goddard, 2001; Goddard, Hoy, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2000; Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy, & Hoy, 1998). Additionally this research has neglected to address an important culturally relevant subject: teachers‘ self-determination based on their cultural responsiveness/sensitivity beliefs about working with populations from cultures that differ from their own. The problem is clear within the current research: beliefs affect the motivations of pre-service teachers entering the field of education. This research hopes to contribute to bodies of research that endeavor to positively affect, support, and question the current research about minority/diverse student achievement. Review of the Related Literature Substantial literature suggests the need to consider teacher cultural beliefs and anticipated self-determination in specific contextual teaching environments. Understanding how beliefs can undermine teacher preparation programs which subsequently can affect teaching practices and student achievement is also crucial to understanding the problem that drives this dissertation. I will review literature that addresses race and stereotyping, cultural responsiveness and pedagogy, teacher beliefs, Self-Determination Theory, and teacher preparation programs and student diversity. Research reviewed in this chapter includes articles in professional journals, using both quantitative and qualitative frameworks, as well as government data bases, news articles, books, and research reports.

6

Race, Ethnicity and Culture: Issues in Education Although the discussion of race, and its effect on beliefs, as an issue in education may be uncomfortable, current research suggests that this sensitive subject is influential in the overall understanding of the problems that are occurring in the education of Hispanic students. Although laws exist to prohibit discrimination based on race, color, gender, age, and creed, the society of the United States continues to be plagued by attitudes and behaviors that are negative to some ethnic, cultural, and social groups, and preferential to others (Gay, 2000). Additionally, educational leaders avoid addressing any academic gaps by minorities as a possible ―race issue‖ for the sake of ―political correctness‖ (Darden, 2003; Ogbu, 1992). Even with this country‘s many social advances, many schools are organized in ways that reflect the similarities, rather than differences, of students (Guild, 2001). Instructional pace, content, materials, and curriculum are all generally based on the ―whole‖ (Guild, 2001). Teachers‘ instructional deliveries, as well as their activities and assessments, are more similar than different. This idea that conformity is the norm suggests that this nation‘s minority students are still at a disadvantage (Stevens et al., 2006) within the contextual setting of school. This disadvantage can be substantiated in several ways. Stevens et al. (2006) suggested that in the school‘s setting, Hispanic students experience lower academic performance, diminished feelings of self-efficacy (i.e. belief in self), lower amounts of praise from their teachers, lower levels of mastery in knowledge obtainment, as well as higher levels of anxiety. Bryant-Davis & Ocampo (2005), suggested that the combined

7

effects of racism, discrimination, stereotyping, and the struggle to assimilate (belonging), while trying to keep one‘s ethnic identity, result in stress, depression, anxiety, family conflicts, sleep deprivation, and low self-esteem in many of our Hispanic youth. The actuality of raising the awareness of ―racial issues‖ as a contributing factor to the achievement gap is difficult not only in schools, but in our country, and although our country has historically taken successful steps in eliminating bias and prejudice, such issues are still creating a great amount of strife in the area of learning (Katz, 1999), including the ability to talk openly about the racial barriers that are contributing to the problem. As recently as November 2009, a report from Manchester University suggested that minority teachers are still experiencing institutional racism inside their schools. However, the conversations about this subject and its implications to our educational learning environments are difficult to address. Race must be talked about. Darden (2003) offers an interesting outlook on the reasoning for dialogue avoidance in the area of the minority achievement gap: The biggest impact to weighing the impact of race or ethnicity…is the deafening silence on the subject….what board member or professional educator wants to admit that a decision about students, personnel, or policy was wayed [weighed] by skin tone, language, or culture? (p. 34)

8

Weissglass (2004) suggested the following: It is easier to have one-day workshops celebrating diversity, to develop new curricula, buy "test prep" programs, write reports, and pressure teachers, than to talk about personal experiences with racism. (p. 72) Race Concerns Although being ―politically correct‖ has become a staple of our country, this ideology can also have disadvantages. When addressing the academic crisis facing schools and their Hispanic learners, school representatives find it difficult to openly admit that decisions that are made about educating children may be based on race/ethnicity (Darden, 2003). For instance, Darden (2003) suggests that research may concentrate more on poverty as the key to an educational problem than race since it becomes difficult, especially in political terms, to address race directly. Additionally the word equality has become synonymous with sameness (Ladson-Billings, 1994). This inaccuracy lends itself to what has become known as ―color-blind teaching‖ which ignores the differences between students and teaches to the norm (Ladson-Billings, 1994). ―Color-blind teaching‖ has its own set of theoretically based assumptions. However, first, the importance of understanding the historical nature of education is relevant to the understanding of the need to approach racially inaccurate belief systems, head-on. Historically, schools were designed to encourage white initiatives (Ogbu, & Simons, 1998); minority needs were not discussed or included. This ―Anglocentric‖/middle-class cultural value system has predominated education (Gay,

9

1994) in the past, and in the present. Ogbu and Simons (1998), in their study about the cultural ecological explanation of school failure, suggested that the U.S. educational system projects a state of ―Whiteness‖. According to Ogbu and Simons (1998), students from involuntary minority groups (those viewing school as a creation of the dominant society), are skeptical about the system, and may not be willing to conform These students performed worse in school than those from voluntary minority groups (those who had conformed). Thus it is a safe assumption that in the context of school, Ogbu‘s theory becomes applicable in that students from a minority group who feel they are unjustly being subjected to ―White‖ norms will not fare as well as those who do not see the cultural dominance as a threat to their own culture. Delgado and Stefancic, (2001) also suggested that racism and racial discrimination were and continue to be staples of American education. This research illustrated that past and current state and federal practices place limitations on minority communities. For example, in Deculturalization and the Struggle for Equality (2003), Spring explained that in the 1800s, legislation in Texas and California declared English the language of instruction in segregated public schools, severely limiting educational opportunities for Hispanic children who were not fluent in English. They were subjected to an English-based curriculum that devalued their own culture in favor of the White majority. Spring (2003) claimed that minorities still battle this deculturization process. This assertion is supported through instances across our country. In 2005, The Washington Post (Reid) reported that a boy had been suspended in Kansas for saying ―no problema‖ in the hallway. Another report (Rothschild, 2008) cited a story about one

10

superintendent who was physically threatened after allowing the Spanish class to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in Spanish. One comment to reporters about the allowance stated: …and I don‘t appreciate Mexicans saying the Pledge in Spanish... If you think Mexicans can waltz right in this school and have an influence on these American students, then you‘re wrong. This is America, home of the free and not the illegal. (The Progressive, 2008) In 2008, I listened to a local newscast report that an elementary student‘s Mexican flag had been thrown in the trash at school on Cinco de Mayo. Upon further investigation, the student reportedly said he was changing into gym clothes in the locker room when the teacher told him, "Give me the flag." The student asked, ‖What's the problem?'" and the teacher reportedly answered ‖The problem is that we are in the United States and not in Mexico.‖ He grabbed it from the student and threw the flag in the garbage can (Breitbart, 2008). In 2009, several children‘s parents were reportedly refunded their money for a swimming camp after the first day of attendance. The president of a Pennsylvania country club had voiced concern that so many children would "change the complexion" or atmosphere of the club, which he acknowledged was "a terrible choice of words." Parents of the children, who were asked not to return, reported that on the first day "… parents [were] pulling their children out and standing there with their arms crossed…" However, club staff reported that the event occurred due to ―over-crowding‖ (CBS News, 2009). These types of racism, stereotyping, and forced assimilation (the destroying of a people‘s

11

culture and replacing it with a new culture) brings with it even more complications for the educational system. Forced Cultural Assimilation Research has suggested that forced cultural assimilation has actually undermined achievement for Hispanic students (Oyserman, Brickman, Bybee, & Celious, 2006). By forcing assimilation on Hispanic students and families, students risk losing their culture and identity (Ogbu, 1992, Reyhner, 2001), which research suggests affects self-concept, and in turn, achievement. Oyserman et al. (2006) found that boys who felt they looked ―Latino‖ (rather than being forced to assimilate to white physical attributes) were more likely than other boys to choose school focused peers, and by having school-focused peers the boys achieved better grades, displayed better in-class behavior, and a had greater sense of engagement with school. Additionally, in-group belongingness helped the Hispanic males‘ academic achievement by providing a sense of connection that encouraged participation in school endeavors. The results further suggested that boys lacking these physical, culturally based traits, although accepted more-so by their teachers, were at a higher risk of disengaging from school. Language acquisition has also been identified as a controversial component of assimilation research. Cummins (1992) summarized The Ramírez Report, a document that addressed the debate about the use of bi-literacy programs in education. Although the actual comparison of programs will not be addressed in this review, it is important to address the findings that Cummins reported. The report is the only research report that

12

bilingual education advocates and opponents accept as methodologically valid, since both were involved in the design of the study. Cummins (1992) implied that although The Ramírez Report did document the educational validity of promoting bi-literacy as an effective means to overall educational achievement, it also uncovered an important area that undermines successful identity attainment: that of the learning environment. Cummins asserts that current learning environments were shown to have a negative impact on the identity development of minority students. The typical classroom environment restricts the development and use of both cognitive and linguistic abilities, as well as denies students the opportunity for self-expression and a ―voice.‖ Cummins (1992) suggested that current educational structures are designed to force learners to assimilate to the societal norm. Cummins also asserted that curriculum has been designed to (as previously sited) be politically correct and often suggests the alleviation of references to individual identities and socially perceived injustices (Friere, 1970; Ladson-Billings, 1994). Cummins calls for educators to emphasize ways to encourage positive identity structuring that welcomes (rather than negates) historical and society power issues. Race Matters Ladson-Billings (1994, 1995) and Ladson-Billings & Tate (1995) also confirm the idea that race does matter in the context of education. In Ladson-Billings‘s book, The Dreamkeepers: Successful Teachers for African-American Children (1994) she discusses the notion of culturally relevant teaching and internal teacher beliefs. Ladson-Billings writes from the perspective of an African American scholar, a teacher, a parent, and

13

community activist. She addresses culturally relevant content instruction, classroom social interactions, and acquisition of knowledge. Additionally, Ladson-Billings (1994) suggests a ―disconnect‖ with racial issues and practical strategies that our educational community has experienced. Although addressing specifically African-American education, she includes aspects of teaching that affect ―the minority‖ in general. One of these aspects worth considering is bias and stereotyping of minorities. Stereotyping Research also supports the claims that bias and stereotyping are still occurring within the educational system, although this nation has experienced great strides in creating equality for all groups since the 1950‘s/1960‘s Civil Rights Movement. This bias is suggested to be both conscious and unconscious as well as based on either past or current experiences of the teacher. Research suggests that this stereotyping is most common among ―the typical‖ U.S. teachers comprising 75.2% of the teacher population (U.S. Department of Education, 2003-2004), who are white, and are from the middle through upper class socioeconomic groups. Several investigations indicate that many typical teachers have lower expectations of and predispositions about achievement towards low Socio-economic status (SES), poverty, and minority students (Alexander, Entwisle, & Horsey 1997; Alexander, Entwisle, & Thompson, 1987; Katz, 1999; Olmedo, 1997; Rist, 1970). Many in this teacher group also believe that minority students are simply not capable or able to perform at the same levels that ―middle-class Caucasians‖ perform. These predispositions appear to be regulated by personal experiences that affect the way they look at students‘ conformity and backgrounds. Even the dress and the speech of students have been

14

suggested by research to provoke racist biases from U.S educators (Alexander et al., 1987, Dietrich, 1998). Dietrich (1998) introduces us to one of her study participants, Rashlesha (pseudonym), an African American student, who stated the following about stereotyping: They [teachers] see you and they stereotype you. The teachers think you‘re in a gang just ‗cause the way you dress. It‘s harder for the black guys and the Mexican guys – especially the Mexican guys. We have this teacher and he has lots of Mexican guys who don‘t speak English. He doesn‘t mean to but I think he gets frustrated and takes it out on them…If they can‘t speak English then they aren‘t American citizens. That‘s how I feel about it. Bias and stereotyping has also undermined additional educational areas that this review must consider. Stereotypical ―grouping‖ of students by ability (Rist, 1970) is but one of these topics. This so-called grouping is also reflected in the words of Rashlesh (Detrich, 1998): ―I think they put all those Mexican guys in electives ‗cause they can‘t do anything else…‖ Rist (1970) supports this young student‘s opinion within his study about how teachers stereotyped children even as young as kindergarteners. Rist found that as early as the eighth day of school, some teachers had ―grouped‖ their students. These teachers had designated fast learners and less able learners with just over a week of school progress in place. Rist, however, questioned whether the grouping was actually ability based as sited by the teachers or bias. Rist concluded that the degree of conformity that

15

children had shown to the teacher‘s own middle-class values was suggested to have been the actual driving force for the teachers‘ designation of students. Additionally, in January 2006, Michelle Dallacroce founded Mothers Against Illegal Aliens (MAIA). This organization‘s Mission statement proudly states ―…our children and our country are at risk of being eliminated!‖ Dallocroce describes immigrants as a ―mass invasion‖ of unintelligent, disrespectful, conspiratorial criminals while targeting her message to women and families. Also, MAIA contends that children of immigrants are destroying the nation‘s school systems. Complicating this stereotyping, MAIA‘s positions have been given voice in various mainstream media outlets, including the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, the Orlando Sentinel, and Fox News (Anti- Defamation League, 2007). Another area of concern is in academic achievement. Alexander et al. (1987) investigated whether or not the academic difficulties among minority and low SES youth could be attributed to their non-conformity to the middle-class school culture. 825 urban 1st graders participated in the study. This research suggested teachers' own social backgrounds were strongly related to how they reacted to their students. Additionally, when compared to their White middle-class student population, students of color, students of low socio-economic status, students who spoke languages other than English, and students with disabilities, consistently experienced significantly lower achievement test scores, teacher expectations, and allocation of resources. Pre-service teacher bias tendencies were also found by Olmedo (1997). These biases existed towards their beliefs about urban students, which according to the U.S.

Full document contains 171 pages
Abstract: Motivation to teach is essential to educating all children in the public schools. This study examined the anticipated self-determination of pre-service teachers to teach in classroom settings that varied in the ethnic and racial composition of the students in the classes. Additionally the cultural responsiveness of participants was measured to examine whether high/low cultural responsiveness interacted with the specific contexts given. Ninety-seven participants from seven university teacher preparation programs, provided answers to a multi-faceted online survey assessing their cultural responsiveness and self-determination to teach in classrooms containing majority White, majority Hispanic, or majority African American students. The participants were assigned a scenario after answering the cultural responsiveness measurement followed by a scale that was designed to measure their anticipated self-determination to teach in that specific setting. The research findings revealed that both cultural responsiveness and the scenarios related to prospective teacher anticipated motivation for working with specific groups of students, but these two constructs were linearly independent of one another (no interaction). Additionally, data indicated that pre-service teachers were not significantly and positively developing their cultural responsiveness understanding. Results generally supported cultural beliefs and limitations of pre-service teacher's feelings of anticipated competence, relatedness, and autonomy with students different from themselves. Further investigation provided interesting stereotypical belief comments that were aligned with the differing scenarios assigned to the participants.