Cultivating Inclusivity: Redesigning Physics and Chemistry Curricula for Diverse Classrooms

• In Event: Science Curriculum and Policy in the Rural South

Abstract

Objectives. Many scholars believe the current approach to physics and chemistry instruction is outdated and significantly fails to enhance student learning (Author, 2024). These courses typically rely on didactic lectures and provide examples that do not resonate with students from diverse backgrounds. As a result, these students struggle to connect with the cultural norms reflected in the materials, leading to poorer performance than their peers familiar with the cultural norms in physics and chemistry textbooks.

To address this issue, we propose a study to shift the cultural norms and materials within the current physics and chemistry curriculum. We plan to introduce a reformed, culturally responsive, project-based approach to curriculum design. Using the Design framework of the Developing Next Generation Science Standards-Aligned project-based learning along with a culturally responsive framework developed from the work of Morrison et al. (2008) and Ladson-Billings (1995), this paper outlines the process of designing curricula that engage students in scientific practices and cross-cutting concepts. Students will actively perform physics and chemistry tasks rather than passively listening to lectures. This approach aims to create a more inclusive learning environment.

Framework. We will use the culturally relevant framework as our theoretical lens. Ladson-Billings (1995) developed this approach to instruction around three tenets:
1. Academic Excellence: This involves having high expectations for all students, establishing cognitively demanding tasks, and developing strategies to motivate students toward academic success while maintaining cultural integrity intrinsically.
2. Cultural Competence: This involves assisting students in forming a positive cultural identity. Students should develop positive ethnic and cultural identities without giving up their cultural identity to achieve academically (Morrison et al., 2008, p.437). This also includes integrating students' cultural resources within the curriculum and assessment design.
3. Critical Consciousness: This involves guiding students in developing a critical consciousness to critique or interrupt current and historical social inequities. Ladson-Billings (1995) asserts that “not only must teachers encourage academic success and cultural competence, but they must also help students recognize, understand, and critique current social inequities” (p. 476).

Methods. Our work involves designing curricula for secondary physics and chemistry teachers. The curriculum design process includes researchers meeting weekly to discuss and create culturally responsive physics and chemistry curricula. We approach our work through a deductive method. To understand the curriculum design process, we attend meetings, write field notes, and conduct unstructured interviews to clarify our understanding. We use a deductive approach to iteratively analyze and refine our knowledge of designing effective curricula.

Findings and Analysis. We share how our research group developed a curriculum development framework, highlighting the challenges and affordances of designing culturally responsive physics and chemistry curricula. We consider political pressures from teacher institutions and how the group enables teachers to develop systemic approaches to curriculum development.

Significance. This work contributes to the much-needed research on how physics and chemistry teachers actively develop curricula that leverage the cultural resources students bring into the classroom. It illustrates how secondary STEM teachers can enact real changes to their practices, positioning, and curricula.

Authors

• Clausell Mathis, Michigan State University

• Joseph S. Krajcik, Michigan State University

• Ozlem Akcil Okan, Michigan State University

• Lucky Chukwudalu Nonyelum, Create for Stem Institute

• William Van Luven, Michigan State University

• Angie Valbuena Rojas, Michigan State University

• Ehud Aviran, Michigan State University

• Andrea Wooley, Michigan State University

• Jennifer Tabb, Michigan State University