Culturally Responsive Practices From Teachers’ Perspectives in Two Countries

• In Event: Thursday Roundtable Session 2:30 pm
  In Roundtable Session: Pedagogies for Equitable Access: Reimagining Multilingual Education for an Uncertain World (Table 12)

Abstract

The purpose of this presentation is to share a framework that can inform and guide teacher education, reflective practice, and professional development across cultures. It is based on research conducted during and after the pandemic and identifies and examines teachers’ knowledge of culturally relevant teaching (CRT) practices in two elementary classrooms from two countries, to strengthen understanding of features and relationships of CRT and adaptive expertise (AE).

CRT has a symbiotic relationship with multicultural education (ME). ME is about acknowledging racial, socioeconomic, and ethnic differences instead of ignoring them. Such teaching practices are often referred to as culturally responsive or culturally relevant techniques. CRT uses cultural knowledge, reference to prior experiences, and adaptation to the performance styles of diverse students to make learning more appropriate and effective for them. Acknowledging differences in learning and frames of reference supports adaptive expertise and encourages students to leverage a variety of approaches in problem solving. A characteristic of adaptive expertise is the ability to apply knowledge effectively to new situations or unusual problems (Carbonell et al., 2014; Holyoak, 1991).

In this study, qualitative design was chosen leveraging video-cued multivocal ethnography to address research questions to examine and compare CRT practices in China and the U.S. through two classrooms (Tobin et al.,1989, 2009; Tobin, 2019). By examining teachers’ collective discourse and reflective responses about the videotaped teacher’s thinking and instructional behaviors, this approach provides a way to capture and better understand each participant’s personal and interpretive meanings and perspectives (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003; Stake, 1994). Data collection and analysis included interviews, focus groups, observations, and culture circles (Freire, 1970). Interviews with teachers, video-cued sessions were conducted with the two teachers whose classes were videotaped. These sessions allowed the teacher to view their own classroom engagement (edited version) and provided insight into the typicality of the situation and the thought process behind the engagement. Field notes were taken during the process too.

The following findings were revealed from the study: (a) differences in frequency and application of practices; (b) communication of high expectations across cultures; (c) lack of family and community partnership; (d) emphasis on culturally mediated instruction in the U.S.; and (e) ample time for collaboration and reflection in China.

This study demonstrated how teachers leverage and perceive culturally relevant teaching practices in their schools. More research is needed in post-pandemic scenarios about comparative studies between the US and China about training teachers in using CRT and reflective practice.

Authors

• Alicia R. Thompson, Virginia Commonwealth University

• Yaoying Xu, Virginia Commonwealth University