Using an Opportunity Gaps Framework and Context-Specific Teacher Preparation to Analyze an Urban Teacher Residency

• In Event: Guiding Justice-Driven Teacher Education: Using Theory to Change Practice in Teacher Education

Abstract

Objectives
This case study examines aspects of a 15-month urban teacher residency program that prepares Earth science secondary teachers in an urban intensive city (Milner, 2012). Using two complementary frameworks, I examine aspects of the program intended to prepare candidates for urban schools, the intended goals, and to what extent the faculty, pedagogies, and programming contribute to how candidates are socialized into teaching specifically for the context of urban schools.

Theoretical/Conceptual Perspectives The conceptual frameworks of [Authors] (2014) and Milner (2010; 2020) together “play[ed] a critical role in … generaliz[ing] the lessons learned” (Yin, 2018, p. 37) when considering ways in which the pedagogies and practices of this program were designed to prepare prospective teachers for the complex context of urban schools. Milner (2020a) argues for “deliberate and consistent” efforts by educators “to address opportunity” and to “becom[e]…more aware of contextual realities that influence their current and future students and their environments” (p. 27). [Authors] (2014) identified six nested, interrelated contextual features helpful for what they term context-specific teacher preparation.

Methods This study was part of a larger, cross-case analysis of teacher preparation at “new graduate schools of education,” defined as newly-founded, state-authorized, philanthropically-funded graduate schools unaffiliated with universities that endorse master’s degrees (Masked, 2016; 2021a; 2021b). Triangulated data (Yin, 2018) included over 400 institutional and programmatic documents, over forty hours of class observations, workshops, monthly meetings, and student-teaching, and twenty-six interviews of program leaders, faculty, current students and program graduates.

Results Examining this program through aspects of context-specific teacher preparation and the opportunity gap framework revealed that while the program offered excellent and innovative programming and arrangements that were designed to prepare urban teachers, this work was limited in two ways. First, there were few opportunities in coursework wherein residents could do the deep, critical work Milner argues is necessary if teacher candidates are to learn how to reject colorblindness, debunk the myth of meritocracy, and understand the utility and value of cultural conflicts. Second, there was a single course designed to prepare residents for what [masked] referred to as the local sociocultural context. Scholars argue that this kind of “add-on approach” has a limited influence on prospective teachers’ attitudes, abilities, and willingness to disrupt racial inequities (Cochran-Smith, Davis, & Fries, 2003; Ladson-Billings, 1995, and; Villegas & Lucas, 2002).

Significance This analysis demonstrates how using these frameworks can help reveal the extent to which teacher preparation programs are intentionally and coherently addressing equity-minded pedagogy and practices within and across their programming. This is particularly important for programs that are designed to prepare candidates for urban school contexts, places that paradoxically intend to cultivate our most vulnerable population of young people while at the same time are also places that struggle to retain powerful teachers. Teacher education researchers should continue to use sociocultural, sociopolitical frameworks such as these to understand and enact programming that prioritizes race and racism, an act that itself will position classrooms as places of intellectual diversity and endless curiosity.

Author

• Marisa Olivo, Boston Public Schools