Advertisement

Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 12, Issue 3, pp 637–660 | Cite as

“It’s worth our time”: a model of culturally and linguistically supportive professional development for K-12 STEM educators

  • Anne H. Charity Hudley
  • Christine Mallinson
Original Paper
First Online:

Abstract

Professional development on issues of language and culture is often separate from professional development on issues related to STEM education, resulting in linguistic and cultural gaps in K-12 STEM pedagogy and practice. To address this issue, we have designed a model of professional development in which we work with educators to build cultural and linguistic competence and to disseminate information about how educators view the relevance of language, communication, and culture to STEM teaching and learning. We describe the design and facilitation of our model of culturally and linguistically responsive professional development, grounded in theories of multicultural education and culturally supportive teaching, through professional development workshops to 60 K-12 STEM educators from schools in Maryland and Virginia that serve African American students. Participants noted that culturally and linguistically responsive approaches had yet to permeate their K-12 STEM settings, which they identified as a critical challenge to effectively teaching and engaging African-American students. Based on pre-surveys, workshops were tailored to participants’ stated needs for information on literacy (e.g., disciplinary literacies and discipline-specific jargon), cultural conflict and mismatch (e.g., student–teacher miscommunication), and linguistic bias in student assessment (e.g., test design). Educators shared feedback via post-workshop surveys, and a subset of 28 participants completed in-depth interviews and a focus group. Results indicate the need for further implementation of professional development such as ours that address linguistic and cultural issues, tailored for K-12 STEM educators. Although participants in this study enumerated several challenges to meeting this need, they also identified opportunities for collaborative solutions that draw upon teacher expertise and are integrated with curricula across content areas.

Keywords

African-American education Sociolinguistics Culturally supportive education Culturally responsive education K-12 education STEM education Multicultural education 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant #1050938/1051056. Anne also recognizes the support of the National Science Foundation Grant #0930522, the US Department of Education Teachers for a Competitive Tomorrow Program at the College of William & Mary, the U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Preparing Inclusive Educators Program Improvement Grant #H325T090009, the State Council of Higher Education in Virginia SURN Visible Teaching, Assessment, Learning, and Leading (VTALL) Grants (2011–2015), and the Community Studies Professorship at the College of William and Mary. Christine further acknowledges the UMBC Dresher Center Summer Faculty Research Fellowship (2013–2014), the UMBC Special Research Assistantship/Initiative Support (2010–2011), and the UMBC Alex Brown Center for Entrepreneurship Course Initiative Grant (2008). We thank all of the educators who participated in our professional development workshops, as well as our current and former students Erin L. Berry, Merci Best, Rachel Boag, Jerome Carter, May F. Chung, Inte’a DeShields, Adryan Flores, Aureanna Hakenson, Heather Hoskins, Mark Jamias, Rita J. Turner, Daniel Villarreal, and Adom Whitaker for their invaluable research assistance.

References

  1. Adger, C., Wolfram, W., & Christian, D. (2007). Dialects in schools and communities. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  2. Banks, J. A. (2013). An introduction to multicultural education (5th ed.). New York: Pearson.Google Scholar
  3. Banks, J. A., & McGee Banks, C. A. (2007). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. Bianchini, J., & Cavazos, L. (2007). Learning from students, inquiry into practice, and participation in professional communities: Beginning teachers’ uneven progress toward equitable science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 586–612. doi: 10.1002/tea.20177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bianchini, J. A., Hilton-Brown, B. A., & Breton, T. D. (2002). Professional development for university scientists around issues of equity and diversity: Investigating dissent within community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 738–771. doi: 10.1002/tea.10043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (1994). Sociolinguistic perspectives on register. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, B. (2006). “It isn’t no slang that can be said about this stuff”: Language, identity, and appropriating science discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 96–126. doi: 10.1002/tea.20096.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, A. L., Greeno, J. G., Lampert, M., Mehan, H., & Resnick, L. B. (1999). Recommendations regarding research priorities: an advisory report to the National Education Research Policy and Priorities Board. New York: National Academy of Education.Google Scholar
  9. Bryan, L. A. (2003). Nestedness of beliefs: Examining a prospective elementary teacher’s belief system about science teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 835–868. doi: 10.1002/tea.10113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Busch-Vishniac, I. J., & Jarosz, J. P. (2007). Achieving greater diversity through curricular change. In R. J. Burke & M. C. Mattis (Eds.), Women and minorities in science, technology, engineering and mathematics: Upping the numbers (Chapter 11). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  11. Cazden, C. B. (1990). Differential treatment in New Zealand: Reflections on research in minority education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 6, 291–303. doi: 10.1016/0742-051X(90)90022-W.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Charity, A. H. (2007). Regional differences in low SES African-American children’s speech in the school setting. Language Variation and Change, 19, 281–293. doi: 10.1017/S0954394507000129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Charity Hudley, A. H. (2009–2011). Examination of effective methods of communicating about language variation to educators National Science Foundation Minority Postdoctoral Research Starter Grant #0930522.Google Scholar
  14. Charity Hudley, A. H. (2015). Language and culture. Language variation in the classroom. Virginia Department of Education. Retrieved November 2, 2015. http://www.doetest.virginia.gov/instruction/english/literacy/language_culture.shtml
  15. Charity Hudley, A. H., & Mallinson, C. (2011). Understanding English language variation in US schools. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  16. Charity Hudley, A. H., & Mallinson, C. (2014). We do language: English language variation in the secondary English classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  17. Collins, S. N., Deer, C. J., & Gilbert, J. E. (2012). Chemistry and hip hop: Outreach efforts to attract minority students to the chemical sciences. The Chemical Educator, 17, 175–178.Google Scholar
  18. Craig, H., & Washington, J. (2006). Malik goes to school: Examining the language skills of African-Americans from preschool—5th grade. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Delpit, L. (2012). Multiplication is for white people: Raising expectations for other people’s children. New York: New Press.Google Scholar
  20. DeShano da Silva, C., Huguley, J. P., Kakli, Z., & Rao, R. (Eds.). (2007). The opportunity gap: Achievement and inequality in education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review.Google Scholar
  21. Desimone, L. M., Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Does professional development change teachers’ instruction? Results from a three-year study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 81–112. doi: 10.3102/01623737024002081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eglash, R., Gilbert, J. E., Taylor, V., & Geier, S. R. (2013). Culturally responsive computing in urban, after-school contexts: Two approaches. Urban Education, 48, 629–656. doi: 10.1177/0042085913499211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ehrenworth, M., & Vinton, V. (2005). The power of grammar: Unconventional approaches to the conventions of language. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  24. Emdin, C. (2010). Dimensions of communication in urban science education: Interactions and transactions. Science Education, 95, 1–20. doi: 10.1002/sce.20411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Emdin, C., & Lee, O. (2012). Hip-hop, the “Obama effect”, and urban science education. Teachers College Record, 114(2), 1–24.Google Scholar
  26. Feasey, R. (1998). Primary science and literacy. Hatfield: ASE.Google Scholar
  27. Fullan, M. (2007). Change the terms for teacher learning. Journal of Staff Development, 28, 35–36.Google Scholar
  28. Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  29. Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Gipe, J. P., Duffy, C. A., & Richards, J. C. (1989). A comparison of two types of early field experiences. Reading Improvement, 26, 254–265.Google Scholar
  31. Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory: Emergence vs. forcing. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
  32. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded research: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  33. Gupta, A. (2010). African-American English: Teacher beliefs, teacher needs and teacher preparation programs. The Reading Matrix, 10, 152–164.Google Scholar
  34. Guskey, T. R., & Yoon, K. S. (2009). What works in professional development? Phi Delta Kappan, 90, 495–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hakuta, K. (2014). MOOC: Supporting ELLs in reasoning in the content areas. Retrieved October 7, 2014. http://ell.stanford.edu/event/mooc-supporting-ells-reasoning-content-areas
  36. Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Washington, DC: The Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  37. Holton, J. A. (2007). The coding process and its challenges. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory (pp. 265–289). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Janzen, J. (2008). Teaching English Language learners in the content areas. Review of Educational Research, 78, 1010–1038. doi: 10.3102/0034654308325580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  40. Labov, W. (1995). Can reading failure be reversed? A linguistic approach to the question. In V. L. Gadsden & D. A. Wagner (Eds.), Literacy among African-American youth: Issues in learning, teaching, and schooling (pp. 39–68). Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  41. Labov, W. (2008). Unendangered dialects, endangered people. In K. A. King, N. Schilling-Estes, L. Fogle, J. J. Lou, & B. Soukup (Eds.), Sustaining linguistic diversity: Endangered and minority languages and language varieties (pp. 219–238). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally responsive pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34, 159–165. doi: 10.1080/00405849509543675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Bell, R. L. (2001). If we want to talk the talk, we must also walk the walk: The nature of science, professional development, and educational reform. In J. Rhoton & P. Bowers (Eds.), Professional development: Planning and design (pp. 25–42). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.Google Scholar
  44. Lee, D. N. (2013, January 24). A dream deferred: how access to STEM is denied to many students before they get in the door good. Scientific American, “The urban scientist” blog. Retrieved June 27, 2014. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/urban-scientist/2013/01/24/a-dream-deferred-how-access-to-stem-is-denied-to-many-students-before-they-get-in-the-door-good/
  45. Lee, O., Hart, J., Cuevas, P., & Enders, C. (2004). Professional development in inquiry-based science for elementary teachers of diverse student groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 1021–1043. doi: 10.1002/tea.20037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. New York: Ablex.Google Scholar
  47. Lindholm-Leary, K., & Borsato, G. (2006). Academic achievement. In F. Genesee, K. Lindholm-Leary, W. M. Saunders, & D. Christian (Eds.), Educating English Language learners: A synthesis of research evidence (pp. 176–222). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Lippi-Green, R. (2011). English with an accent: Language, ideology and discrimination in the United States. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  49. Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. W. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  50. Lyman, F. (1981). The responsive classroom discussion: the inclusion of all students. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Mainstreaming digest (pp. 109–113). College Park, MD: University of Maryland Press.Google Scholar
  51. Mallinson, C., & Charity Hudley, A. H. (2011–2015). Collaborative research: Assessing the results of sociolinguistic engagement with K–12 STEM education in Maryland and Virginia public and independent schools. Grants 1050938 and 1051056 to the National Science Foundation, Division of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences, Developmental & Learning Sciences Program.Google Scholar
  52. Mallinson, C., Charity Hudley, A. H., Strickling, L. R., & Figa, M. (2011). A conceptual framework for promoting linguistic and educational change. Language and Linguistics Compass, 5(7), 441–453. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2011.00289.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mensah, F. (2010). Toward the mark of empowering policies in elementary school science programs and teacher professional development. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 5, 977–983. doi: 10.1007/s11422-010-9279-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Morgan, D. (1996). Focus groups. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 129–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Morgan, C. (1998). Writing mathematically: The discourse of investigation. London: Falmer.Google Scholar
  56. Nieto, S. (2002). Language, culture and teaching: Critical perspectives for a new century. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  57. Piestrup, A. M. (1973). Black dialect interference and accommodation of reading instruction in first grade. Berkeley: Monographs of the Language-Behavior Research Laboratory. University of California.Google Scholar
  58. Ramscar, M., Dye, M., Popick, H. M., & O’Donnell-McCarthy, F. (2011). The enigma of number: Why children find the meanings of even small number words hard to learn and how we can help them do better. PLoS ONE,. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0022501.Google Scholar
  59. Reddick, L., Jacobson, W., Linse, A., & Yong, D. (2005). A framework for inclusive teaching in STEM disciplines. In M. Ouellett (Ed.), Teaching inclusively: Diversity and faculty development (Chapter 32). Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.Google Scholar
  60. Rhoton, J., & Bowers, P. (2001). Professional development leadership and the diverse learner. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.Google Scholar
  61. Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  62. Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797–811. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sue, D. W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual orientation. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  64. Sunstein, B. S., Liu, R. Z., Hunsicker, A. W., & Baker, D. F. (2012). Math in the margins: Writing across curricula into community heritage. English Journal, 102, 16–26.Google Scholar
  65. Sweetland, J. (2006). Evaluation of contextualized contrastive analysis in language arts instruction. Ph.D. Dissertation: Stanford University.Google Scholar
  66. Terry, J. M., Hendrick, R., Evangelou, E., & Smith, R. L. (2010). Variable dialect switching among African American children: Inferences about working memory. Lingua, 120, 2463–2475. doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2010.04.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Valla, J. M., & Williams, W. M. (2012). Increasing achievement and higher-education representation of underrepresented groups in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields: a review of current K-12 intervention programs. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering,. doi: 10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.002908.Google Scholar
  68. Villegas, A. M., & Lucas, T. (2002). Educating culturally responsive teachers: A coherent approach. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  69. Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Wojnowski, B. (2001). Foreword. In J. Rhoton (Ed.), Science education leadership: Best practices for the new century. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.Google Scholar
  71. Wolfram, W., & Reaser, J. (2007). Voices of North Carolina dialect awareness curriculum. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Language and Life Project.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.English, Education, Linguistics, and Africana StudiesThe College of William and MaryWilliamsburgUSA
  2. 2.Language, Literacy and Culture ProgramThe University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC)BaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options