Introduction

All teachers face politics in their work lives. When we say politics, we mean power dynamics that arise in interactions and in response to larger structures and systems in society. That is, regardless of whether they are aware of, perpetuating, or deconstructing interlocking systems of oppression (e.g., white supremacy, cisheteropatriarchy, capitalism, imperialism, ableism, etc.), teachers are always positioned with respect to those systems; they must navigate their understandings of such systems with the concrete ways they enact their work. These navigations include how to respond to authorities, pressures to conform to “professional” standards, or expectations to protect the status quo. Moreover, teachers of mathematics are uniquely challenged by a subject which many believe to be neutral, culture-free, and universal (Burton, 1994; Frankenstein, 1989; Gerdes, 1988), yet always imbues a set of values (Bishop, 2001). Rather than believing they will develop political conocimiento (i.e., understanding ways mathematics is entangled with interlocking systems of oppression, further elaborated below) once they have accumulated years in the profession, teacher candidates (TCs) need opportunities to critically analyze school policies (e.g., placement of students into gifted/remedial courses and tracks, state/district mandates like Common Core State Standards for Mathematics) and administrator/colleague actions (e.g., adopting textbooks that are difficult for multilingual students; enforcing pacing guides) to recognize inequities and advocate for justice (de Freitas, 2008; Picower, 2012). For example, within the USA, mathematics departments that have been successful in supporting historically marginalized students by using innovative pedagogies and detracking policies have been derailed by local politics that have pushed for a “return to basic skills” (e.g., Gutiérrez, 1999, 2002; 2017a; Nasir et al., 2014). Today, US teachers face anti-Critical Race Theory and anti-LGBTQ + legislations, book bans, greater surveillance of their classroom practices by parents, and threatened school closures for students not performing well on standardized tests. Teachers in other countries face additional or different politics. Supporting teachers to understand the systemic roots of injustices aligns with professional standards in the field (AMTE, 2017; TODOS Mathematics for All, 2020), research on politics in mathematics education (Chronaki, 1999; Darragh, 2017; McKinney de Royston & Sengupta-Irving, 2019; Valero & Knijnik, 2015; Valoyes-Chavez & Martin, 2016), and supports desires to create healthier, more sustainable, and liberatory futures (Gutiérrez, 2022).

Our previous and ongoing work on political conocimiento highlights several findings. First, political conocimiento can be learned when TCs are in partnership with teachers who model political clarity of accountability to minoritized students and larger justice issues (Gerardo, 2021; Gutiérrez, 2017; Gutiérrez & Gregson, 2013; Gutiérrez, et al., 2017). Second, when adequately supported, TCs can intervene in harmful situations during student teaching and the first years of teaching (Gutiérrez, 2013, 2015). Third, TCs need support to interrogate the harmful narratives re(told) about mathematics, students, pedagogies, and politics (Gutiérrez, et al., 2021a, 2021b, 2023). That is, they need to understand who are the actors and structures through which such narratives are (re)told in mathematics so they can take actions to create healthier narratives. Fourth, developing political conocimiento with TCs is not a universal activity that can be inserted into a methods course. Mathematics teacher educators (MTEs) need to carefully consider: other work in that program, TCs’ and teacher educators’ intersectional identities (e.g., influence of racial/ethnic, gender, dis/ability, and additional identities), and their K-12 school contexts (Crenshaw, 1989; Myers et al., 2023; Peterson & Williams, 2008). Crenshaw (1989) emphasizes that the intersectional experience is greater and more complex than the sum of the vectors of oppression by which one may be marginalized (e.g., racism, sexism).

While the field is starting to develop a research base documenting the various ways TCs make sense of the politics of mathematics teaching, we know little about how TCs with different intersectional identities (especially lacking a focus on teachers and teacher candidates of ColorFootnote 1) experience the same activities (an exception being Gutiérrez et al., 2021). Therefore, we offer empirical results from TCs who range in intersectional identities, with candidates of Color and teacher candidates but primarily identifying as white women.Footnote 2 Drawing from activities that support their political conocimiento, we highlight ways in which TCs’ intersectional identities (focusing on race, ethnicity, and gender) influenced the meanings they made of one activity and the ethical identities (later defined) they enacted with each other when discussing actions to intervene in situations harmful to students.

Given the salience of race (e.g., Bonilla Silva, 2001), gender (e.g., Vaid-Menon, 2020), and dis/ability (Annamma et al., 2013; Tan & Kastberg, 2017; Tan & Thorius, 2019) in the USA, the field needs investigation of teachers and teacher candidates of marginalized backgrounds. Of the few studies in the US focusing on TCs learning to teach mathematics with a justice lens, the emphasis has been on white TCs (Downey & Cobbs, 2007; Felton-Koestler, 2017; Simic-Muller et al., 2015). Racially/ethnically minoritized TCs often feel unsafe in hostile climates among their mostly white peers (Amos, 2016), feel conflicted between their desires to honor cultural ties while working within dominant systems (Gist, 2017), and may feel their white professors “miss the mark” when attempting to discuss issues related to race/racism, culturally relevant pedagogy, and so forth (e.g., Navarro et al., 2022). The field needs investigation of teachers and teacher candidates of Color with various additional intersectional identities learning justice-oriented teaching in mathematics. This article addresses this need by studying TCs of Color and white TCs, investigating how their racial, ethnic, and gender identities influence their development of political conocimiento, especially with respect to the Mirror Test, which we describe below. We investigate the following research question: How do mathematics TCs’ race, ethnicity, and/or gender influence the ethical identities they enact with each other when discussing what is happening in an educational scenario and what actions they might take to intervene in situations harmful to students?

Conceptual framework

Ethical identity

When we say ethical identity, we do not mean a universal or evaluative version, as if there is an agreed upon “correct” or “moral” thing to do in a given situation. Consistent with Indigenous perspectives, ethics are always local and relational practices—connected to interdependence, reciprocity, and humility—that spiral across time and space (Deloria, 1994, 1999). Thus, an important part of an ethical identity is identifying to whom/what teachers hold themselves accountable. That is, what one knows, even about oneself, is dependent on others to confirm, thus highlighting relational knowing. For example, even if a teacher does not feel they will successfully convince an administrator at a faculty meeting that a particular school policy is discriminatory, they might still speak up in a public meeting in order to indicate “the kind of person [they are]” (Gutiérrez, 2015; Gutiérrez & Gregson, 2013). By speaking up in a public space, teachers can communicate that they want to work with others to fight against injustices. Different teachers may have different ethical identities they are trying to uphold. Some teachers might seek to implement school mandates with “fidelity” to be seen as “professionals,” to be seen as a “team player” by colleagues, whereas others might take extra time to serve their most marginalized students to enact an “ethical” identity. Moreover, TCs’ intersectional identities may influence their ethical identities.

Political Conocimiento in Teaching Mathematics

The typical capital imparted to TCs through teacher education programs centers pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) or mathematical knowledge for teaching (MKT). Among other things, such knowledge includes: mathematics needed to solve a task; flexibility with solution strategies; and sharing feedback for student learning (Ball et al., 2008; Ma, 1999; Shulman, 1987). Promisingly, more teacher education programs are embracing culturally relevant and/or sustaining pedagogies and social justice-oriented mathematics approaches (e.g., White et al., 2016). We seek to bring the margins to the center (Hooks, 1984), to prepare teachers to understand how politics (i.e., interlocking systems of oppression) are entangled with mathematics, students, and pedagogies.

Our larger longitudinal project centers Political Conocimiento in Teaching Mathematics (PCTM), a theoretical framework that highlights the political conocimiento (knowings) mathematics teachers needs to navigate their practice (Gutiérrez, 2012, 2017) if they want to advocate for liberatory experiences for historically marginalized students and support dominant students to challenge systems of oppression. PCTM is different from MKT in several ways. More than simply highlighting the political nature of teaching mathematics (i.e., understanding how systems of oppression are uniquely related to mathematics, pedagogy, and students), PCTM defines knowledge as relational, thus the term conocimiento.

In Spanish, there are two ways to know: saber (objective knowing, like knowing the phone number of a friend) and conocer (relational knowing, like knowing your grandmother). One would never use the verb saber to talk about knowing a person because a person cannot be known in an objective or universal way. Consistent with an Indigenous worldview that the mind and body cannot be separated, Anzaldúa (2000) privileges a particular use of conocimiento to reflect the perspective of the subaltern, to indicate that all knowing is filtered through our bodies and carries dimensions of authority and power. While Anzaldúa seeks to center a subaltern view with her definition of knowledge (relational knowing), we acknowledge the tension some may experience with using a term that reflects the colonizer's language (Spanish) operating in several countries that Spain colonized. That is, we could have chosen an Indigenous term. By using the word “conocimiento,” we aim not to uplift Spanish but to break with the traditional binary that suggests some knowledge is universal/objective and other knowledge is subjective. In using conocimiento, we argue that all knowings are relational, even those (e.g., mathematical) presented as disconnected from identities, experiences, or power. For example, in school mathematics, knowledge is often viewed as objective: There is one correct answer; you know the answer or you do not. This objective framing of knowledge often contributes to harmful narratives like “Some people are good at mathematics and others are not.” Thus, centering knowledge as relational within the context of mathematics is another way PCTM works against Western ways of knowing and brings the margins to the center.

Figure 1 is an updated version of PCTM (Gutiérrez, 2012). It highlights relational knowledge in all four dimensions here with the term “with” as opposed to “of,” and we further underscore the ongoing nature of relational knowledge with the term “knowings” instead of “knowledge.” PCTM highlights that the conocimiento (knowings) one needs to develop are always dependent on experience(s) with others; “key features of conocimiento are subjectivity, solidarity, and interdependence” (Gutiérrez, 2017, p. 20). Thus, PCTM attends to contexts and intersectional identities, which influence one’s experiential knowings. See also Gutiérrez (2012), Gutiérrez et al. (2023), and Myers et al. (2023) for further explanation of how all four knowledge bases are intertwined and how el Mundo ZurdoFootnote 3 means being in the left-handed world with other activists.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Political Conocimiento in Teaching Mathematics (updated)

Full size image

Unlike MKT, where a teacher may hold themself accountable to all students irrespective of their cultural backgrounds, PCTM holds teachers accountable to their most marginalized students and larger justice issues and asks, “What in my actions demonstrates this? Would students, families, and communities agree?” Thus, PCTM reflects one’s political understanding and inclination to intervene in harmful situations. Moreover, PCTM recognizes that the process of coming to know is a “becoming.” That is, TCs, teachers, and MTEs are always in an active, dynamic process of “becoming” a particular kind of teacher (Gutiérrez, 2016).

PCTM, which centers knowledge as relational as opposed to objective, is marginalized in our field. In this article, we bring the margins to the center, by focusing on: (a) the politics of school mathematics, (b) knowledge as relational, and (c) teacher education as becoming a kind of person. More specifically, we report on teacher candidates’ ongoing manifestations of PCTM through the identities they enact with others.

The Mirror Test

The Mirror Test (Gutiérrez, 2016) is a conceptual tool within PCTM. It is,

“a way of thinking about the profession that uses one’s internal compass, as opposed to an external one…at the heart of the Mirror Test is one’s core values and willingness to act upon those values in order to advocate for students [and larger justice].” (Gutiérrez, 2017, pp. 26–28).

With respect to who they are trying to become, candidates need to look themselves in the Mirror and assess whether their actions reflect their ethical identity. Although researchers have employed a variety of working definitions (Darragh, 2016), when we refer to teachers’ identities, we align our work with identity as something that is enacted in lives and bodies (Butler, 1999). That is, how mathematics teachers conceptualize and present themselves to others and how others perceive or receive them and project back their identities is a negotiated act. Thus, in studying teachers’ identities, it is important to capture both how TCs present themselves (e.g., words/actions in context) as well as how they believe they are perceived and received by others.

Studies of mathematics teacher identity have found teachers often work to please others to be seen as a professional (Brown & McNamara, 2005, 2011), indicating their teacher identities may be performative, where they are attempting to measure up to external (institutional) standards to be viewed as professional. Teacher education programs also offer “new” identities to perform in schools (Neumayer-Depiper, 2013; Povey et al., 2017), such as identifying as an “equity or justice-oriented teacher” who “goes against the grain,” to enact an ethical identity, which as previously discussed, we define as teachers identifying to whom/what they hold themselves accountable. Thus, it is important to understand the role of teachers’ ethical identities, or passing their Mirror Test, when engaging in teacher education that centers the margins by focusing on PCTM. Within PCTM, knowledge is relational, so teachers, alone, do not get to decide if they pass their Mirror Test. They must rely upon others (e.g., Indigenous, Black, and other students of Color) to determine if they are the kind of ethical person they purport to be, which requires intentions or concrete acts of intervening in harmful situations.

Ethical identities are fluid and influenced by the ongoing moments of teaching. We represent this using a movie reel to indicate continual action that is built scene-by-scene. In Fig. 2, the Mirror Test, denoted by the smaller image of someone looking at themselves, arises more than once because it reflects moments in time constantly revisited in different contexts with different people (Gutiérrez, 2017). Figure 2 also offers underlying tenets that indirectly guide TC reflection about their ethical identity, though we did not offer this image or list of questions to them directly. While we did not give candidates this image or questions, we invited them to pause and reflect to grapple deeply with accountability as it relates to their political conocimiento. In the future, we envision sharing these questions with TCs.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Mirror Test as a Manifestation of PCTM in Reflection Before Action

Full size image

The Mirror Test distinguishes between: (1) identity as accountability, wherein one is upholding a sense of self through actions that address justice and hopefully also passing that test (which is determined by communities one claims to serve) versus (2) identity as performativity, where one simply wants to be seen in a particular way (perhaps to look good/righteous/morally upstanding). In this article, we interchangeably use the terms: “passing one’s Mirror Test,” “identity as accountability,” “enacting an ethical identity,” and “being the teacher they are trying to become.” Similarly, we interchangeably use the terms: “identity as performativity,” “performing for others,” and “wanting to look good.”

In our work, we utilize tools with teaching scenarios where marginalized students are being harmed. See Fig. 3 for a sample scenario presented to teacher candidates.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Sample Scenario: “Asian (American) Girls”

Full size image

Thus, if TCs’ Mirror Tests are grounded in PCTM, their considerations and plans for action are more likely to reflect their accountability to marginalized students and communities who are being harmed in the scenarios (e.g., What are my values? Why are these my values?) above and beyond their own feelings of fear or not knowing exactly what to do. In this sense, one’s Mirror Test depends on weighing the potential consequences for students and communities if a TC fails to take action, not just the consequences for themselves (e.g., What systems, narratives, actors, communities, individuals, and power dynamics am I considering and why?). We presume TCs plan to take action because when they look in the Mirror to consider if their actions represent their professed values, those students and communities are in the Mirror with them, looking back. And because marginalized students/communities are in focus in those moments for TCs, they are more likely to consider systems and power (e.g., intersecting systems of oppression and the ways people are positioned in those systems), not just interpersonal relations.

As we engage TCs in examining scenarios, we create opportunities for them to pause, analyze the situation, look in the Mirror, and consider how their actions and decisions reflect the kind of teacher they are constantly becoming, to hopefully uphold their ethical identity. We support this work with TCs by inviting them to consider the underlying reasons for why they might intervene, or not. For example, in the “Asian (American) Girls” scenario (see Fig. 3), TCs who see those girls staring back at them in the Mirror might recognize that it is not simply one teacher who holds stereotypical views of Asian American students in her class; that teacher is perpetuating a common and harmful narrative that all Asian Americans (positioned as proximate to whites by white supremacy, Chen & Buell, 2018) do well in mathematics, thereby implying other groups should strive to be more like them. Moreover, TCs focusing on systemic issues could also potentially recognize that singling out “Asian (American) girls” as “nice” perpetuates another harmful stereotype that such students do not speak up or make waves, implying that is their “proper” role in society.

For TCs whose Mirror Tests lack this explicit accountability, they might be looking into the Mirror and seeing themselves, how they appear primarily from their own view, and may simply want to look good. Such moments can accentuate interpersonal considerations (e.g., assuming that the person in the scenario who made a racist comment was just a “bad person”) rather than analyses of systems and potential harm to marginalized students/communities (e.g., recognizing that the scenario reflected a repeated pattern in society). Or, when potential harm is considered, it might be done in a way that centers the TC’s needs (e.g., fear of being seen as a racist, not wanting to be “rude”).

Methods

Context/data

This study draws from a larger cross-case longitudinal analysis (Yin, 1994) of three teacher education sites in the USA (East, Southeast, and Midwest). In the larger project, we seek to understand how TCs make sense of activities that support their political conocimiento, to further theorize PCTM and offer the field a set of tools/activities for teacher educators to use with their TCs. In this study, we focus on just one of those tools/activities.

As three women of Color scholar activists, we are well aware of our intersectional identities, as we make sense of the work we carry out, the microaggressions we encounter, and the implications for our continued refinement of the tools/activities. Author 1 identifies as a Xicana,Footnote 4 cisgender, nonqueer, and bilingual woman with Rarámuri roots; she taught in California. Author 2 is a Japanese American cis nonqueer woman and former New York City high school math teacher. Author 3 is a Black woman who was born, raised, HBCUFootnote 5-educated and taught in the South. The combination of our intersectional identities and contexts influenced how we designed/planned for our activities, how we carried them out, and how we reflected on the activities afterward (Myers et al., 2023; Kokka et al., in press).

During the 2020–2021 academic year, after obtaining signed consent from participants, each of us carried out several activities with our teacher candidates in mathematics methods courses we taught via Zoom. In the USA, “mathematics methods” courses are courses that teacher candidates are required to take in order to receive licensure; these courses focus on methods of teaching mathematics (e.g., pedagogical practices). In those courses, we used four interconnected Political Conocimiento Development Tools (PCDTs) developed and piloted by the PCDT team at the University of Illinois to support TCs to cultivate political conocimiento and the ability to advocate for justice.Footnote 6 All sessions using these tools were video-recorded then transcribed by research team members who utilized Otter.ai transcription software. TCs’ intersectional identities reflect the ways they described themselves in interviews.

We focus here on the second activity in our suite of tools/activities, the Difficulty Sort, which attends to TCs’ feelings of ease or difficulty with taking risks to advocate for students in the scenarios. Because intervening in the scenarios generally involves challenging authority, or taking risks, this activity tends to surface to whom the TC is accountable/responsible (e.g., their Mirror Test and ethical identity). Moreover, this activity has specific prompts for them to reflect upon their intersectional identities. These prompts included such things as reflecting on who they are and how their identities might influence how others might respond to their actions when intervening in the scenarios. The prompts, used in all three sites, allowed us to focus on how TCs of different backgrounds made sense of their ethical identities while considering why, how, or whether to take action. TCs were asked to individually sort into three categories (from easiest to hardest) how difficult various politically charged teaching scenariosFootnote 7 would be for them to respond. To give the reader a broader understanding of the range of scenarios and their connections to mathematics and the need to intervene, we also share Table 1. This table was not presented to TCs. They received a set of teaching scenarios via Miro board that included these scenarios plus others.

Table 1 Sample scenarios and their relations to mathematics and need for intervention
Full size table

After sorting scenarios into piles of easiest to hardest, TCs joined Zoom breakout rooms to discuss their sorts. Then, TCs reflected on what they learned and what questions they had. Finally, using a shared protocol across the three sites, TCs were interviewed individually (1–1.5 h each) about such things as their backgrounds (e.g., identities, lived experiences), teaching contexts (e.g., kinds of schools, types of mathematics, school practices), and experiences during the activity (e.g., ways they sorted the scenarios, things they discussed in their breakout groups) and after each activity. We focus on interview and/or coursework data of 55 TCs across our three settings.

Although all participants were offered the same activities and reflection prompts, each site offered opportunities to learn from TCs with different backgrounds and under different learning conditions (see Table 2 for some demographics). For example, the Midwest site had more TCs of Color than in the Southeast or East coast sites. The East and Southeast sites engaged TCs preparing to teach elementary school (preK-4; K-5), whereas the Midwest and East sites engaged teachers preparing to teach in secondary schools (middle and high school). The majority of TCs identified as white. However, we also center the experiences of TCs of Color to counter the idea that teacher education should continue to cater to white teachers’ needs and/or comfort and to move beyond essentialist notions of TCs of Color.

Table 2 Participant and context data
Full size table

Analysis

Following Boyatzis (1998) and Saldaña (2012), we each inductively coded data from our own site and wrote analytic memos about our data collection sessions. In our initial review of the data, we reflected on the variety of TCs’ responses (e.g., which scenarios were the most difficult, why they were difficult, and strategies for action). While the initial round of review helped us categorize when TCs felt compelled to act and notice trends across sites, we determined that we also needed to focus on their justifications for action (or inaction). This shift from centering TCs' actions to centering how their ethical identities were presented as they considered how to act (or abstain from action) was aligned with our theoretical construct of the Mirror Test. In our second round of data analysis, we used inductive coding to capture these justifications.

Table 3 shows an abbreviated list of initial codes from each site. The words in parentheses under the code in the table represent sub-codes that we each used to label the data. In our next meeting, we compared and aligned what appeared to be similar codes (e.g., external perceptions, moral perception, and good place/intentions) and unpacked the nuances to determine if the similar language was capturing similar concepts in the data. We also took note of codes that appeared at only one site (e.g., rule-following at the Southeast site) and made conjectures about how unique codes were related to our individual contexts. In our discussions, we noticed that the external perceptions, moral perceptions, and good place/good intentions codes all related to the theme of “TCs centering their needs and comfort over that of their students or those harmed in the scenarios.” We also collapsed the rule-following code with the external perceptions code, as the theme of “TCs wanting a ‘manual’ or ‘protocol’ to follow to avoid ‘doing the wrong thing’ or ‘looking bad to others.’” In contrast, the moral compass and accountability codes were collapsed under the theme of “TCs centering the needs of students in the scenarios.” We then returned to our TC data to further investigate the aforementioned themes to determine if and how there was variability with each theme by TCs’ racial/ethnic background (TCs of Color and white TCs) and gender identity (men and women TCs; we did not have TCs who identified as nonbinary). In this next round of analysis, we noticed that TCs of Color were more likely to center their students or those harmed as a reason to act, whereas the white TCs were more likely to note external perceptions as a reason to not act. We unpack this further and offer quotes from our TCs in the next section.

Table 3 Abbreviated List of Initial Round of Inductive Coding Across Three Sites
Full size table

We use the lens of the Mirror Test where “identity as accountability” (or passing one’s Mirror Test) versus “identity as performativity” became more salient throughout our analysis of TCs’ PCTM. We recognize that all identities are performed. However, performativity highlights the aspect that is done to look good (“to perform for others”), whereas accountability is identity carried out to show answerability (“to be accountable to others”). Although we use the term “development” to refer to a nonstatic state of knowing, we do not mean to imply linearity or finality. That is, we do not expect to identify TCs’ “learning trajectories,” to identify some TCs as having more sophisticated PCTM, nor do we believe that when TCs’ PCTM expands/deepens, that it permanently stays that way. Because PCTM is relational knowing, it is always fluid and context dependent. Thus, when speaking about TCs’ PCTM, we consider them “moments” of deepening/expansion or superficiality, as reflected in the repeated images from the movie reel.

Teacher candidates’ perspectives

When analyzing data, we were interested in who and what the TCs considered when making sense of the scenarios and/or what they might do to respond. As aforementioned, the Mirror Test is a manifestation of PCTM and, among other things, asks: What are my values? Why are these my values? What systems, narratives, actors, communities, individuals, and power dynamics am I considering and why? Who is in my Mirror when I’m considering these things? An important aspect of living in the USA is the way people are racialized (e.g., Bonilla Silva, 2001), and several of the scenarios were crafted to include either explicit references to, or coded language about, students of Color. This section highlights how TCs’ intersectional identities came into play in the Mirror Test, with particular attention to who is in the Mirror with them and how that reflects their values and forms of accountability.

Teacher candidates of color

Many TCs saw themselves as student-centered (e.g., empathizing with students in the scenarios, responding to students’ needs). In these cases, TCs felt compelled to intervene in harmful situations. Some of the TCs of Color related to the students in the scenarios, as they had experienced similar situations. In speaking about the collection of scenarios, one TC explained,

I just know what that feels like to have stereotypes put on you. And that's why when it came to like the “Asian” stereotype or just like all the other ones or the scenarios where it was like, “Oh, this student isn't gonna make it; they're not good enough.” I can empathize with that because it has happened to me before [as a math major]. And it's like these are the same stereotypes that minorities experience so I can relate to it. As a kid, I didn't know what to say, and I didn't know what I was feeling. I'm now in a position where I can make more sense of it. So, I need to speak up for the kids who can't speak up for themselves…I want to make sure that the same isn't happening to my students. [Audra, Black woman, secondary]

Because Audra “know[s] what it feels like to have stereotypes put on you,” she can relate to the students in the scenarios who have been harmed. In fact, when looking in the Mirror, she sees herself “as a kid” along with other students of Color, including students who are Latinx/e and Asian American. While Audra could have empathized only with students who are Black, she expressed solidarity with “minority” students in general. When speaking about the need to take action, she is compelled to “speak up” based upon her values to “make sure the same isn’t happening to [her] students,” which seems to reflect accountability and the kind of teacher she is trying to become.

Another scenario depicts a teacher who presumably shows preference for a non-Black student and is called out by a Black student (“Black Student Overlooked”). See Table 1. Expressing dismay at hearing how Black students might be experiencing her actions, one TC commented,

I feel like it would just be really heartbreaking to hear a student say that…to think that I'm not presenting myself [how I want] or the way that I'm teaching is coming off in a way that I have a prejudice, prejudice against certain students would be really difficult to hear, because then I think I would just have to do a lot of reflection, like personally…it’s definitely necessary to address that. [Rebeca, Latina/Puerto Rican female TC, secondary]

As Rebeca ponders how it would feel “heartbreaking,”“really difficult to hear” to have a student call her out as “hav[ing] a prejudice,” she links the feelings to the kind of teacher she is trying to become, to enact her ethical identity and pass her Mirror Test. When she says, “to think that I’m not presenting myself [how I want],” Rebeca is thinking about how she is being received by the students who are Black. Rather than simply being worried about how she appears (e.g., potentially being seen as racist), which would signal performativity, she responds that she would “have to do a lot of reflection.” Rebeca’s focus on reflection (perhaps recognizing that Black students experiencing teachers who ignore them or have lowered expectations in mathematics is systemic rather than personal) suggests a deepened PCTM. Moreover, by ending the statement with “it’s definitely necessary to address that,” she is focusing on her need to take action (accountability). It is noteworthy that Rebeca feels solidarity with Black students in the scenario who may not share racial/ethnic ties with her.

One might assume that TCs would find scenarios where the teacher was called out directly by the students being harmed as scenarios requiring immediate action versus scenarios when harmed students were not present in the room (e.g., comments in the teachers’ lounge) as less urgent. However, in scenarios involving people making derogatory comments about students who were not present, we observed TCs of Color feeling a strong sense of accountability to the students of Color being harmed. In a scenario about a teacher consoling another teacher who has a large contingency of multilingual Spanish-speaking students and referred to them as “the Spanish Coalition,” one TC expressed alarm at the situation and solidarity with the students. He said,

[I would say] “You can’t say that.” I think they mean it doesn’t help that there is a language barrier. But, the way they said it is putting the blame on the students instead of the situation that makes it harder for these students to succeed. It also doesn’t sit right with me because the teacher might have taught it in a way that didn’t make any sense to the students. The first thought shouldn’t be trying to ease the pain for that teacher by saying “it doesn’t help that you have the minority group in your class” in terms of why the lesson didn’t go well. It’s kind of appalling that a teacher is saying this to you. The other teacher doesn’t know the whole situation and is implying it’s the students’ fault. I was just thinking they are stereotyping Hispanic students; it’s not even about language. [Eric, Asian American man, secondary]

Eric seems to value empathizing with Latinx/e students when they are not performing well in class, and suggests instruction, not students, needs to change. When he says, “it’s kind of appalling that a teacher is saying this to you,” Eric seems to be looking in the Mirror and seeing the students staring back at him, also appalled, and expecting him to rebut the statement. Eric might be recognizing that if a teacher is saying this to him, that teacher thinks he would share the sentiment and stereotype, which would go against his ethical identity and the kind of teacher he is trying to become. When considering how to respond and to whom he should be accountable, rather than show empathy for the teacher in the scenario (“trying to ease the pain for that teacher”), or worry that the colleague might no longer like him, Eric focuses on “Hispanic” students who are being “stereotyped” (e.g., bad at mathematics) and cast as at “fault.” Like Rebeca, he shows solidarity with students who do not share his racial/ethnic background.

In response to the same scenario, Fatima shared her perspective,

Even if the student does something wrong or isn't flourishing as much as we'd want them to, we want students to know that we're on their side and that we're here to support them. Even if the student isn't right in front of us, I feel like that should be our mindset. So, I'd want to respond with something that would be in support of our students.” [Fatima, Palestinian female TC, secondary]

Like Eric, who expressed the need to consider whether instruction, not students, need to change, we see Fatima considering how the students would feel if this was said about them. When she clarifies that “even if the student does something wrong or isn’t flourishing” and “even if the student isn’t right in front of us,” we should be on their side, she seems to be indicating consistent accountability. This perspective is noteworthy, as some teacher candidates (and many teachers) feel they should be on the side of students, but then express qualifying statements (e.g., students who put forth good effort). In mathematics, the emphasis on effort and motivation as key to student success has led to US initiatives such as a focus on “growth mindset” (where students are taught to continue to look for opportunities to grow neural pathways) and “grit” (where students are taught to persevere when facing challenges). Such narratives can perpetuate the idea that learning is ultimately the responsibility of students and if students are “not invested” in their own learning, teachers do not need to invest in such students. In the previous quote, Fatima is considering the needs of the students in the scenario; they did not need to call her out directly; they were with her in her Mirror. By ending the statement with “I’d want to respond,” we notice her focus on action and accountability.

TCs were asked to sort the different scenarios into three piles/categories. Fatima generalized about one of her categories and commented on a different scenario that featured a teacher who referenced “Asian (American) girls” as good at helping other students in mathematics. See Table 1 for the specific scenario. The scenario purposefully used language that we believed would be used by teachers who perpetuate stereotypes, using “Asian” instead of either “Asian American” or “Asian Pacific American,” (e.g., suggesting that all Asian Americans are the “forever foreigner,” that girls are nice, or even that all Asian Americans are the same). In our analysis, we put “Asian” in quotes when referring to the specific scenario and use Asian American to remind the reader that the students in the teacher’s class likely identified as Asian American. Fatima discusses how she might respond.

I think a lot of the scenarios, in the “I can do this now” [category], is, I don't know exactly what I would do. But I feel like I wouldn't be able to just listen to that statement and not do anything in the moment. But for this [scenario about “Asian” girls being good at math], I think I would just, I would just politely phrase to the teacher that, “You know, as teachers, we shouldn't be putting our students in boxes or labeling [stereotyping] them.” [Fatima, Palestinian female TC, secondary]

When she said, “I don’t know exactly what I would do,” she was clarifying that the scenarios in her pile/category of “I can do this now” did not mean she knew how to respond now. This notion of being committed to act, even when unsure that the action will lead to desired outcomes (e.g., convincing a colleague that it’s harmful to essentialize Asian American students or that the colleague may lash out) underscores the idea that enacting an ethical identity where she is accountable to historically marginalized students is at the forefront of her mind and perhaps the basis of her Mirror Test. Her words “as teachers, we shouldn't be putting our students in boxes or labeling [stereotyping] them” seem to indicate she is reflecting on: “What are my values? What might be the consequences of my actions?” Like Fatima, several of the TCs of Color felt the scenarios violated their ethical identities (i.e., creating/perpetuating inequities) and although they did not always know what to do, they felt compelled to do something, signaling an emphasis on accountability.

The TCs of Color seemed to enact their ethical identities, influenced by their racialized identities, in ways that aided them to support students of Color, even when the students in the scenarios did not share TCs’ racial or ethnic backgrounds. While this may not be surprising, it is noteworthy to discuss because teachers may experience internalized racism and perpetuate the idea that students of Color simply need to work twice as hard. Moreover, white supremacy operates in insidious ways where teachers of Color may feel pressure to simply follow the rules and “not make waves.” From the data we analyzed, we did not find that to be the case.

White teacher candidates

While the perspectives of TCs of Color are powerful and valid in their own right (e.g., Bell, 1995), we share data from white TCs to further investigate how intersectional identities and contexts may influence one’s ethical identity. Given that the scenarios often featured students of Color being harmed, it is not surprising that we saw concrete ways that whiteness was triggered and played out in the activities. We recognize that whiteness could be performed in many ways: as using privilege to work toward justice, or as a sense of entitlement, a form of distance, etc. (Picower, 2012). Thus, we explored the nuances when whiteness arose and how it related to accountability (“passing one’s Mirror Test,” “upholding one’s ethical identity,” and “being the teacher one is trying to become”) versus performativity (“wanting to look good”).

First, in contrast to themes that arose among TCs of Color, and similar to other studies (e.g., Picower, 2009, 2012), white TCs were less forthcoming about their racialized and ethnicized identities or how they might trigger responses in others. For instance, although we offered a specific prompt for TCs to discuss how their own intersectional identities (e.g., race) may have influenced their responses, some white TCs responded they had not considered their identities before and/or were not sure how the activity helped them further understand their identities. This was true even when some of the white TCs were in breakout rooms with TCs of Color who were explicitly discussing their racialized and ethnicized identities, commenting on the ways other people ascribe racial/ethnic identities to them, or how they felt compelled to act because of their lived experiences. When whiteness was recognized by white TCs, it usually arose as a form of positioning themselves in contrast to or distanced from students of Color in the scenarios, as if they could not imagine what it would be like to be them. They said such things as:

Who am I to tell them what to think?? I am not a minoritized student. [John, white man, secondary]

…it’s tough to speak with students when you’re completely, completely different backgrounds. And, I always want to let you know, remind them that I’m here for them…I’d love to understand their culture and their, [that’s] my thought process. It can be tough to try to connect with those students. [Megan, white woman, secondary]

On the one hand, it is important that John and Megan recognize they do not have first-person understandings of their students’ experiences and, perhaps, should not give them advice. Yet, in doing so, they might unknowingly perform whiteness as race evasiveness (de Freitas, 2008) and fail to intervene. This complexity and tension interests us because TCs may be showing respect for students’ knowledge, yet they may be simultaneously complicit in perpetuating oppression through inequitable school practices and policies. Further, the comment of “It can be tough to try to connect with those students,” suggests Megan is distancing herself from her students, even referring to them as “those students,” rather than feeling a connection with them and wanting to be held accountable to their needs.

Whiteness was also performed as acknowledged power for responding in the scenarios because TCs believed others would respect white people when they take action. Thus, several of the white teachers were fully aware of their privileged status as it would play out in these scenarios, where it could be a reason to act, to be held accountable to the students being harmed.

I feel that my identity as a cisgender white female will make people listen to me. I am part of a majority and that people hold my identity higher than others. I do not think that it should be that way, but it is. I need to stick up for those that do not have the voice to. [Sara, white female TC, elementary]

In these cases, the TCs recognized they were positioned in society with white privilege, further strengthened by identifying and presenting as cisgender, and saw their responsibility to use that privilege to intervene, which may suggest broadening/deepening PCTM in that moment. However, when Sara says, “I need to stick up for those that do not have the voice to,” it is unclear if she: (a) believed that people of historically marginalized backgrounds are powerless and do not engage in resistance, which would be problematic and more likely a sign of performativity, (b) understood how systemic oppression can disempower or erase historically marginalized communities, and/or (c) will take action, which could be a sign of accountability.

At other times, whiteness arose as uneasiness regarding “doing the right thing.” When contemplating how they might respond when faced with scenarios where students of Color were being harmed (e.g., stereotypes perpetuated), they said things such as,

I’m worried that my good intentions will not be received as such. [John, white man, secondary]

Is there a protocol to follow when we realize these educators may cause more harm to children just by being in their classroom? [Amelia, white woman, elementary]

Recall that the TCs of Color also admitted to not knowing what to do, but still felt compelled to do something. John and Amelia seem to hone in on not knowing what to do as a possible reason to refrain from intervening in the situations, or at least to pause until someone else directs them to the proper action (e.g., “Is there a protocol to follow?”). When John said, “I’m worried that my good intentions will not be received as such,” he might be looking into the Mirror and seeing everyone who could judge them (e.g., colleagues, administrators), rather than the students being harmed. John and Amelia’s sentiments tended to refer less to ensuring justice (accountability) and more to performativity of “not wanting to make a mistake or be seen as racist.”

However, not all white TCs enacted performativity when contemplating how to respond to the scenarios. For example, during small group discussions of which scenario was most difficult, a group of white TCs highlighted the “Black Student Overlooked” scenario. Several white TCs felt this was the most difficult scenario because it implied they were racist and it triggered emotions (Kokka, 2022; Kokka et al., 2023). We follow the conversation of one small group where Veronica offered her perspective to others:

Scenario A is just really, really driving me crazy. And I think that it was probably the most difficult for me. But, with [scenario] B, talking to a colleague [trying to convince them students could handle a more rigorous curriculum], I could handle talking to an adult. But for a child to say something like that, I would just, I'd want to talk about it. I'd want … the [Black] student to tell me how I can do better. It’s much more personal and I'm very sensitive. And I take things to heart. So I just feel like for me, it would be so hard to keep it together. [Veronica, white woman, elementary]

We notice that when Veronica looks into the Mirror, she sees herself and the student in the scenario and seems to alternate between whose feelings should be considered first. When she says, “I’m very sensitive,” “I take things to heart,” and “it would be hard to keep it together,” she may be considering her own feelings and needs, wanting to feel comfortable and secure, or alternatively these emotions may indicate a strong commitment to act. Moreover, her statement, “I’d want the student to tell me how I can do better,” may suggest her accountability to her students, or it may echo earlier comments from other white TCs about wanting a protocol to follow. In the end, it is not clear how or if she may take action, to be accountable to her Black students.

Several of the white TCs talked about how reading and engaging with the scenarios triggered strong feelings. Yet, some of the TCs focused on the need to regulate those feelings or remain “level headed,” to avoid negative reactions as women. In the words of Samantha, a white elementary female TC, her emotions were tied to gender: “Women are considered so emotional and that we might overreact.” Even so, in small group discussion, her peers acknowledged that what could appear to others as “overreacting” could also be a sign of empathy, something to build upon (perhaps to enact an ethical identity). This aspect of gender interests us, as women make up the majority of teachers in the world.Footnote 8

With respect to emotion, Eden responds she would want to be accountable to the students first, regardless of how she feels.

I feel comfortable, if somebody calls me racist. I feel comfortable addressing that, talking to that kid about what I need to change…I have experience with students who talk to me about how, “Oh, my parents say that I'm not actually supposed to like white people.” And I'm like, “Okay, cool. Let's talk about that. That's probably legitimate.” So yeah, I feel like if someone calls me out for something I'm not worried… I'm just, I'm thinking more of the feelings of the students because like this could be, this could be a symptom of a greater issue in that class. I think that's a shift that I personally would feel comfortable undertaking which is why I don't think it was like the hardest one to respond to. [Eden, white woman, elementary]

Like many of the TCs of Color, Eden focuses on the “feelings of the students” who are being harmed in the scenario, and who are likely in her Mirror when considering if or how to take action. When she says, “I feel comfortable if someone calls me racist” and “I’m not worried,” she is focusing less on performativity and more on holding herself accountable. Moreover, her choice of words “that’s probably legitimate” and “this could be a symptom of a greater issue in that class” may reflect her PCTM, being able to see that things could be systemic, not just personal, which supports her ability to enact her ethical identity.

Eden continues her explanation to others in the breakout group, underscoring the need to take action while still centering students and their feelings and/or experiences.

You know this might not be the first thing that they're noticing. Let's work together as a class, making sure that this student feels like they have a voice in this classroom and that they're being respected and that there's a system where they can call me out, and I can fix, I can change my behavior in the minute [Eden, white woman, elementary]

When reflecting on whether and how to take action, Eden highlights student agency “that this student feels like they have a voice” and dignity “that they’re being respected.” Rather than assuming the student will tell her what to do (i.e., a protocol to follow), she underscores the systemic nature of the problem “that there’s a system where they can call me out,” and “I can change my behavior,” reflecting deep PCTM in the moment. This focus on a system for calling out the teacher recognizes that she is not perfect and will likely “mess up” in the future, placing an emphasis on continued accountability.

As we saw with some of the TCs of Color, Eden had lived experiences that might have contributed to her ability to enact solidarity with the students being harmed in the scenarios, even though they did not share intersectional identities with her. She was an older student (26 years old) who grew up Mennonite and attended protests and rallies with her parents. She also worked as an advocate for survivors of sexual assault (most of whom identify as women), where her identity as a woman and understanding of gender-based violence may have heightened her commitment to women and others who are marginalized. Learning about the experiences of others who have been historically marginalized as well as enacting advocacy in other spaces may have led her to read the scenarios for their underlying narratives, actors, and structures, and to see opportunities for enacting her ethical identity, rather than opportunities to look good (performativity). Her case interests us and highlights the complexity of how intersectional identities and lived experiences influence both how TCs make sense of such activities as well as how they might enact their ethical identities, recognizing that all ethical work is relational.

Discussion

In this article, we focused on racialized, ethnicized, and gendered identities performed in relation to TCs’ ethical identity and developing Political Conocimiento in Teaching Mathematics (PCTM). At times, it was unclear if white TCs were attempting to show respect for students of Color in the scenarios because they did not share their identities or first-person experiences, or if they simply feared doing the wrong thing. We are interested in further investigating this tension. Moreover, some white TCs were articulate about the ways they could show solidarity with, and be accountable to, the students of Color in the scenarios. How might their responses influence others? For example, when using the tool with future TCs, we could share quotes from previous years of white TCs who "wanted to be called out," to see if it helps white TCs who may be resistant to taking action. Further investigation of such examples may help white TCs and teachers better understand that sharing identities with others is not a prerequisite for taking action. Moreover, some TCs of Color were explicit about how they were enacting their ethical identities in ways that signaled solidarity across racial and ethnic lines. Further study with scenarios is needed that can highlight the variety of responses within TCs of Color and where TCs of Color (e.g., those with greater critical consciousness) help other TCs of Color reflect on who is in their Mirror. Consideration of additional intersectional identity characteristics is also needed. Such research is important for countering the narrative that all TCs of Color are the same.

In this article, we focused on who is in the Mirror with TCs when they were considering the scenarios and how that affected embodying an ethical identity based upon accountability versus performativity. We are also studying factors that TCs consider before action (e.g., how they might be perceived/received), in action (e.g., how they are making sense of and responding to others), and on action (e.g., reflections on their actions) and beyond action (e.g., what kind of teacher they are becoming) (Gutiérrez et al., in preparation). These reflection phases (before, in, on, and beyond) of action might indicate differences in the kinds of emotional and cognitive work that TCs with different intersectional identities engage as part of the Mirror Test. If so, these differences can inform professional development that is responsive to TCs’ and teachers’ intersectional identities.

As aforementioned, the US and many other countries are experiencing state-sanctioned violence and protests against cultural groups, racism, among other politics teachers need to navigate. We note that our intersectional identities as women of Color scholar activists and MTEs, especially at a time of heightened surveillance in school spaces, may have influenced the ways TCs made sense of the activities and the kinds of data we received. Further exploration of this phenomenon, especially with respect to developing marginal knowledges like PCTM, is needed.

We endeavored to explore the influence of intersectional identities to TCs’ ethical identities investigated through the Mirror Test. However, our data did not offer consistent patterns beyond differences between racialized/ethnicized and some gendered identities. Future research should also expand a focus on TCs’ intersectional identities to include sexual orientation, religion, linguistic backgrounds, immigrant status, dis/ability, etc. We recognize that TCs outside of the US might not find racialized identities salient, in which case economic status, caste, and additional identities should be explored. As Vithal et al. (2023) suggest, studies in the Global South might require different theories and methodologies than those in the Global North. Teachers’ intersectional identities are also important to chronicle in order to counter the idea of binaries (“these teachers” do “this”; “those teachers” do “that”) or problematic, essentialized beliefs (e.g, all Latinx/e teachers are the same) (Gist & Bristol, 2022). Moreover, further investigation of differences by grade level (P-20) and programmatic features (e.g., teacher education programs with an explicit anti-racist or justice focus) as well state/national policies (e.g., Indigenous Education mandates; anti-Critical Race Theory legislation) will help the field better understand how the political environment may influence TCs’ ethical identity. Finally, TCs should be followed to see how cultivation of PCTM may influence their actions to document any possible lasting effects of such professional development on their beginning and ongoing years of teaching.