Liberatory Pedagogical Practices: Measuring Observable Teacher Change

• In Event: Education for Liberation: Centering Marginalized Students in a Theory-to-Practice Model of School Change

Abstract

Objective
Despite decades calling for student-centered educational reform, teacher pedagogy has not radically shifted to developing students as thinkers (Cuban, 2013; Gorski, & Zenkov, 2014). Using the Education for Liberation’s (E4L) school change leadership model (described in Paper #1), this study quantitatively investigates teacher growth using pedagogical practices that are intentionally student-centered, dialogic, collaborative, cognitively challenging, democratic, and liberatory.

Theoretical framework
E4L’s pedagogical approach rests on critical sociocultural theoretical perspectives (Freire, 1994; Tharp et al., 2000; Tharp, 2006) that accentuate two necessary shifts: Thinking relationally and repositioning oneself politically, culturally, and pedagogically in relationship to students (Gottesman, 2016). Vygotsky (1997) argued that such learning spaces between teachers and students must be dialogic, collaborative, and rich with assistance (Wells, 1999). The Enduring Principles of Learning (EPL) require both shifts (Tharp et al., 2000; Tharp, 2006; Author 2 et al., 2014; Author 2023). Eight practices represent this pedagogy: Joint Productive Activity (collaboration), Language and Literacy Development (language use), Contextualization (meaning making), Challenging Activities (complex thinking), Instructional Conversation (dialogic learning), Critical Stance (democratic engagement), Modeling (observation), and Self-Directed Learning (autonomy and choice). The instructional model relies on differentiated small-group activities. This pedagogy has effectively increased English Learners’ content and language learning with medium and large effects (e.g., Portes et al., 2018; Saunders & Goldenberg, 2017; Author 1 et al., 2022).

Method of Inquiry
Do teachers grow in using the Enduring Principles of Learning because of participation in the E4L model of pedagogical school change? We used descriptive, paired T-test, and effect size statistics to answer this quantitative research question. Teachers participated in a 30-hour summer institute on pedagogy and were supported across the school year through staff and grade-level professional learning community events led by the school’s leadership team.

Data Sources
Twelve teachers in a high-need urban elementary school were observed for 45 minutes using the Standards Performance Continuum Plus (Author 1 et al., 2014) pre-and post-intervention. Results for each principle, total score, and level of cognitive complexity using Bloom’s Taxonomy are reported.

Results and/or substantiated conclusions
The paired t-test results showed a significant difference in the mean scores of teachers between pre and post-test scores for Joint Productive Activity (very large effects), and large effects for Language and Literacy Development, Contextualization, and Challenging Activities, and Total Score. These effect sizes reach above Hattie’s (2012) d = 0.40 “hinge point” where effects make “achievable, ‘real-world’ differences” (p. 16). There was no statistical change in the level of higher-order thinking, averaging at application rather than analysis, evaluation, or synthesis.

Scholarly Significance
These findings provide statistically significant and positive outcomes for teachers’ pedagogical change due to participation in the E4L program. These significant differences also coincide with the focus of the SCL Team’s monthly PLC meetings during the 2022-2023 school year. The results contribute to understanding to what degree E4L’s school change leadership model supports teachers in radically improving teaching for historically marginalized students.

Authors

• Annela Teemant, Indiana University - Indianapolis

• Valerie Clark, Indianapolis Public Schools