Grimbeg Gummer Cultural Points of Intersection

7/27/2019 Grimbeg Gummer Cultural Points of Intersection

1/21

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING VOL. 50, NO. 1, PP. 1232 (2013)

Research Article

Teaching Science From Cultural Points of IntersectionBruna Irene Grimberg1 and Edith Gummer2

1Math Resource Center, Montana State University, Bozeman, 401 Linfield Hall, Science,

Bozeman, Montana 597172WestEd, 1350 Connecticut Ave. NW Suite 1050 Washington, District of Columbia 20036

Received 24 April 2012; Accepted 24 October 2012

Abstract: This study focuses on a professional development program for science teachers near or

on American Indian reservations in Montana. This program was framed by culturally relevant pedagogy

premises and was characterized by instructional strategies and content foci resulting from the intersec-

tion between three cultures: tribal, science teaching, and science. The study employs a quasi-experimen-

tal design and quantitative methods to examine the impact of the program on teachers practice and

beliefs, and to determine the relationship between student-centered equity-focused instruction and stu-

dents science test score gains. Results of the analyses indicate that after 2 years in the program teachers

changed their teaching practices and beliefs about their ability to teach science and to implement equita-

ble instruction in a way that positively impacted students performance. Using a multiple regression

analysis it was found that gains in teacher beliefs about their ability to implement equitable strategies

and the increase of teaching strategies that prompt students to make connections between science and

their real-life issues significantly explained the 36.7% of the variance of student science test scores gains

in treatment classrooms. No significant changes in beliefs or teaching strategies were found for compari-

son teachers. The results obtained from this study contribute to the identification of characteristics of a

professional development program that positively impacted the science teaching of American Indian

students. 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 50: 1232, 2013

Keywords: professional development; equitable instruction; student science achievement

The development of an educational system that is supportive of diverse cultures is imper-

ative in light of rapid and sustained globalization. Globalizationdefined as the worldwide

redistribution of ideas, culture, organisms, goods, capital, and communication (Bencze &

Carter, 2011)links communities of different cultural backgrounds. In the U.S., globalization

accounts for three phenomena: the increase of first and second generation immigrant students,

estimated to be 30% in 2015 (Fix, Passel, & Ruiz De Velasco, 2004); the inclusion of non-

mainstream American students in mainstream public schools; and the national standardization

of education permeating all public schools. Globalization not only entails systemic changes

required of educational institutions to address the needs of students with multiple cultural

backgrounds; globalization also requires community-level reflections about the meaning and

role of education as a globalizing force.

Contract grant sponsor: NSF-MSP; Contract grant number: DUE-0634587.

Correspondence to: Bruna Irene Grimberg; E-mail: [email protected]

DOI 10.1002/tea.21066

Published online 30 November 2012 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com).

2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.


2/21

Culture and education confront each other when education becomes the vector of

one hegemonic culture, or a tool of colonialism. Consequently students and teachers of

non-mainstream groups may be forced into a dichotomy that sometimes necessitates strategies

to make the duality bearable, while at other times this dichotomy increases their marginaliza-tion. For example, Brayboy (2004) found experiences of American Indian college students in

Ivy League institutions to be reactive to mainstream perceptions of American Indians such

that students used strategies [of (in)visibility] that helped them maintain a connection with

their cultural and tribal backgrounds, and thus preserved their individual and group identities

within an uncomfortable and often oppressive context (p. 127). In ways similar to American

Indian students enrolled at Ivy League institutions, American Indian communities have

contested the detrimental effects of standardization on educational, cultural, and linguistic

self-determination and sovereignty with initiatives that have included the identification and

implementation of culturally responsive standards for teaching (AANE, 1998), Native

American charter schools (Lomawaima & McCarty, 2006), and full-immersion programs in

which instruction is delivered almost exclusively in the Native language and centered on the

tribal culture (Warner, 2001).

Globalization also imposes a least common denominator in terms of workforce qualifica-

tions, including communication skills, and scientific and technological knowledge, in order to

be part of the global community. Poor technological and scientific literacy presumably pose a

barrier for economic development (Chiu & Duit, 2011; DeBoer, 2011) and hinder integration.

In a globalized world, education in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics

(STEM) becomes a gatekeeper for participation in global productivity and wealth systems.

That is, globalization simultaneously leads to an increase of cultural encounters and diversi-

ty and, in the case of universally valid science, to an increase of homogeneity (van Eijck &

Roth, 2011, p. 825). The tension between unifying and decentralizing tendencies is at the

core of science education in a globalized society. This study examines the impact of a profes-

sional development program on science teaching practice and teachers beliefs, and subse-

quently on the science achievement of non-mainstream students in American Indian

reservations. The program was designed based on the ideas of culturally relevant pedagogy,

and culturally responsive and congruent instruction.

Theoretical Perspectives

Culture, Culturally Relevant Pedagogy, and Culturally Responsive and Congruent Instruction

Culture can be conceptualized as the combination of norms, values, beliefs, expecta-tions, and conventional actions of a group (Phalen, Davidson, & Cao, 1991). The outcome

of cultures is knowledge, which in turn impacts cultures. The cyclic nature of culture-

knowledge makes culture a dynamic construct. How knowledge is produced, and what

knowledge is produced are the most defining differences among cultures. The realization of

the discontinuity between the cultures of school and community, and its negative impact

on the schooling experience of non-mainstream students led to instructional approaches that

focused on the positive interaction between culture and learning. Ladson-Billings (1995)

proposed a culturally relevant pedagogy framework for the collective empowerment of

non-mainstream students and educational systemic change. This pedagogy is based on

three main ideas: (a) students academic success; (b) students cultural competence; and(c) students critical social consciousness (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Thus, instruction that

approaches content knowledge in such a way that it affirms students values and competences

related to a particular cultural group (students cultural competence) and enhances their

CULTURAL POINTS OF INTERSECTION 13

Journal of Research in Science Teaching


3/21

communities (students critical social consciousness) would result in students achievement

gains (students academic success).

Culturally responsive instructional models are framed by the conceptual premises of cul-

turally relevant pedagogy and are implemented through culturally congruent instruction.Culturally responsive models can be explained as instruction that makes sense to students

who are not members of, or assimilated into, the dominant social group (Klug & Whitfield,

2003, p. 151). These models require the integration of multicultural content, and the use of

instructional approaches that are aligned with students cultural learning styles (Pewewardy,

1998). Responsiveness also implies awareness of students cultural differences and how these

differences might impact students learning. Indeed, research findings provide evidence of the

benefits of making explicit connections between students cultural experiences in and outside

the school on students learning (Apthorp, DAmato, & Richardson, 2002; Lee & Luykx,

2006; Lipka, 2002) and on increasing parental involvement and support (Simpson & Parsons,

2009). Culturally congruent instruction intends to bridge the cultural differences between

school, and homes and communities of non-mainstream students (Parsons, Foster, Travis, &

Simpson, 2005). Such instruction requires teachers to: (a) understand and value students

language and cultural backgrounds; (b) have knowledge of the nature of science; and (c) be

able to connect science to students experiences (Lee, 2004; Lee & Fradd, 1998). Cultural

congruence emphasizes that shared ways of communication and interaction between teachers

and students facilitate non-mainstream students learning. In contrast, cultural incongruence

hinders access to quality science education for non-mainstream students (Parsons, Foster,

Gomillion, & Simpson, 2008). Concurrently, research on classroom uses of students funds

of knowledgedefined as historically accumulated cultural knowledge, skills, and resources

students bring from their households (Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez, 1992)shows an

increase in the learning experience of all students (Barton & Tan, 2009; Rios-Aguilar, 2010).

In summary, science learning opportunities for all students occur when values and experiences

students bring from their homes and communities are included in the classroom through the

integration between disciplinary, and cultural and linguistic knowledge; and when support

systems and resources for science learning are in place (Lee & Buxton, 2011). As First

Nations community members expressed, the education system should be able to espouse

traditional values and at the same time meet the changes taking place in society (Agbo,

2004, p. 14).

Science, School Science, and Science Teaching Cultures

Practices reflect their associated culture because they involve patterns of norms, values,and beliefs; in this regard, the practice of science entails a process of gradually engaging in

sciences culture (Aikenhead, 2001; Krogh & Thomsen, 2005; Lyons, 2006; Taconis & Kessels,

2009). Scientific knowledge is constantly monitored against validated theories and constrained

by dominant paradigms. In the context of this study, science culture is defined as the combina-

tion of norms, values, beliefs, expectations, and conventional actions of a group with the pur-

pose to produce and warrant knowledge following scientific epistemic ways. In turn, the

produced knowledge changes the norms, values, and beliefs of science practice; it is in this

regard that science culture is viewed as a practiceknowledge cycle. As in any community of

cultural practice, science practices, policies, and foci are related to their historical time and

place (they have a chronotopic nature). Chronotopic backdrops that shape scientific activityreflect power tensions between the groups engaged in the practice of science. The culture of

science is defined by the attributes and paradigms of the scientific activity itself, but its practice

echoes the social dynamic, place, and historical circumstances of the practitioners.

14 GRIMBERG AND GUMMER



4/21

Although school science is expected to transfer science attributes into the classrooms

(AAAS, 1993; NRC, 1996, 2007, 2012), the culture of schools radically changes some

aspects of science. For example, the organization of the school day using limited time

periods, and the authoritarian structure of schools, constrain the open-ended activity of sci-ence. Similarly, the dynamic nature of scientific knowledge characterized by the practice

knowledge cycle is at odds with teacher-centered instruction. In this study, school science and

science will be considered as different cultures. School science entails a socio-cultural process

highly dependent on the culture of the school and the classroom, and is shaped by the social

dynamics among students, the curriculum, teacher and administrator expectations, and teach-

ing approaches (Carlone, Haun-Frank, & Webb, 2011). Curriculum, instruction, and teacher

and administrator expectations reproduce social and political tensions (Mickelson & Velasco,

2006), such that science education can be perceived as chronotopic (Lemke, 2005; van Eijck

& Roth, 2011) because its practice and outcomes are time and place bound. The culture of

science teaching is characterized by shared practices, expectations, discourse (Bartholomew,

Osborne, & Ratcliffe, 2004), knowledge derived from the practice of teaching science, and

beliefs about science teaching (Luft, 2001). These characteristics of science teaching depend

on the socio-cultural and historical circumstances in which teaching is embedded.

Cultural Border-Crossing, Cultural Flexibility, and Hybridization

In this section three theories related to students scientific knowledge construction are

discussed: cultural border-crossing, cultural flexibility, and hybridization. These theories view

science learning from a cultural perspective implying learners integration or incorporation of

science knowledge in students cultural schemata. In his seminal work on science learning

and cultural border-crossing, Aikenhead (1996) argues about the need to recognize the

inherent border crossings between students life-world subcultures and the subculture of sci-

ence, and that we need to develop curriculum and instruction with these border crossings

explicitly in mind, before the science curriculum can be accessible to most students (p. 2).

In this framework, science learning is viewed as culture acquisition; it requires developing

proficiency in the discourse and semiotics of science (Gee, 2004; Lemke, 1990). Border-

crossings are mediated by one of two processes: (i) enculturation when the culture of

science agrees with students worldview, or (ii) assimilation when the culture of science is

at odds with students worldview (Aikenhead, 1996, 2001; Aikenhead & Jegede, 1999). How

conflictive a cultural border crossing is depends on the process that mediates it. Although

science learning requires all students to cross a cultural border, school science has connota-

tions of social status and power putting non-mainstream students at a disadvantage either dueto linguistic differences (Zuniga, Olson, & Winter, 2005), dissonances with their home culture

(Gilbert & Yerrick, 2001), or intrapersonal conflicts (Brown, 2004).

Cultural flexibility theory claims that students over the course of their social develop-

ment, effectively navigate diverse social environs such as the workplace, communities, and

neighborhoods (Carter, 2010, p. 1529). Cultural flexibility promotes participation in many

different cultures, as opposed to acceptance of one rigid or homogenous worldview. Sussman

(2000) introduced the notion of intercultural identity in which students are able to interact

effectively in many different cultural settings. Cultural flexibility can be seen as the develop-

ment of students individual identity through a process of multiple assimilations into multiple

cultural settings. School science provides a ground for students and teachers to develop anintercultural identity and cultural flexibility.

Unlike previous views of pre-existing constructs of culture with well-defined boundaries,

the concept of hybridity implies students actively constructing meanings and understandings




5/21

through the creolization of communication around school science (Elmesky & Seiler, 2007).

Hybridity theory attempts to describe how non-mainstream learners generate science knowl-

edge (Barton & Tan, 2009; Barton, Tan, & Rivet, 2008; Elmesky, 2011; Seiler, 2011). It

claims that teachers and students establish new forms of participation that merge the firstspace of school science with the second space of the home (Barton et al., 2008, p. 73). In a

study focused on the incorporation of students home knowledge into a teaching unit on nutri-

tion, Barton and Tan (2009) elicited the generation of hybrid spaces and noted their positive

impact on students engagement and learning. In a later study, Seiler (2011) focused on the

hybridization of teachers identity and science teaching as a vehicle for students identifica-

tion with school science. In both examples hybridity results from the synergy of students and

teachers, differing from the notion of a determined socio-cultural space achieved through

teacher-controlled instruction (Richardson Bruna, 2009). Instead, hybridity depicts students

and teachers co-constructing the school science culture.

In summary, the ideas and theoretical frameworks that are relevant to this study are the

following:

Equitable science instruction, or instruction that attempts to provide learning opportu-

nities for all, is imperative in a globalized, and presumably democratic, world.

Science culture is characterized by a practice-knowledge cycle producing a dynamic,

chronotopic body of knowledge.

School science is strongly shaped by the school culture and teaching and learning.

Learning and teaching science requires engagement in cultural processes.

Science learning can be described as: (i) cultural border-crossing, either through

assimilation or enculturation; (ii) cultural flexibility; or (iii) hybridization.

Instructional approaches conducive to science learning of non-mainstream studentsare supported by a culturally relevant pedagogical framework, and facilitated by the

implementation of culturally responsive and culturally congruent instruction.

This study focuses on the impact on school science teaching, teachers beliefs, and stu-

dents science achievement of a professional development program for teachers of predomi-

nantly American Indian students that was framed by the premises of culturally relevant

pedagogy.

Overview of the Study

After the implementation of Not Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB, 2002), the timeallocated to teaching science at elementary schools decreased considerably, and in schools

that have not attained the adequately yearly progress (most often focused on language arts

and mathematics) teachers seldom teach science throughout the year (NSTA, 2009). This

situation reflects the status of science teaching in many of the schools included in this project.

The lack of continuity in science teaching and the cultural distance between school science,

students culture, and teachers culture also hinder science teaching. So, one main goal of

the program was to facilitate professional development meaningful and feasible for the

teachers near or on American Indian reservations in Montana. Building on the theoretical

frameworks discussed above, the professional development was designed under the following

assumptions:

(1) Learners constantly cross cultural borders among the many cultures to which they

belong. Yet, there are points of intersection blurring these borders.




6/21

(2) Effective teaching occurs when intersection points are made explicit to the learners.

(3) Teachers need to be able to identify intersection points between school science and

students real-world cultures.

The intersection points between school science (science content knowledge), science

teaching (how to teach science), and contemporary American Indian culture of the schools

communities (cultural knowledge), guided the design of the professional development science

curriculum, modes of delivery, and assessment tools. American Indian contemporary culture

results from the merging of traditional tribal culture with mainstream cultural elements, and

is characterized by the preservation and revitalization of the tribal cultural heritage (van

Hamme, 1995; Henze & Vanett, 1993). Traditional values, beliefs and conventional activities

of American Indians are closely related to the tribal land and natural environment, hence the

cultural diversity among American Indian people. Relevant cultural elements of the tribal

communities involved in this study include: spiritual, ritual, linguistic, and family relations

aspects. This research examines the effects of a professional development program framed by

the premises of culturally relevant pedagogy on teachers science teaching practice and

beliefs, and on American Indian students science test score gains. The research questions

that guide this study are: (1) To what extent does a teacher professional development program

built upon cultural intersection points between school science, science inquiry teaching, and

American Indian cultures facilitate a shift in science teaching? (2) How do shifts in teaching

practices and teachers beliefs contribute to science test score gains of American Indian

students?

Methodology

Implementation of the Professional Development Program

This study focuses on a teacher professional development program that links the theoreti-

cal frames of culturally relevant pedagogy, program implementation, and impact on teaching

practices and students test score gains. Culturally relevant pedagogy provided the conceptual

premises from which the assumptions of the intervention were draw; culturally responsive

models assisted in the identification of topics relevant to the tribal communities; and cultural-

ly congruent instruction guided the design of the activities by determining which tribal cultur-

al elements and practices would be matched up with science content. It involved the joined

effort of tribal advisory teams, faculty of institutions of higher education, and participant

teachers.Program Characteristics. This research was conducted in the frame of a professional

development (PD) program for teachers near or on American Indian reservations in Montana.

The overall project was 5 years long such that two cohorts of teachers received 3 years of PD

with an overlap of cohorts in year 3. Each cohort comprised treatment and comparison teach-

er groups. The PD took place simultaneously in two regions in the state, each with a high

concentration of tribal communities. The northwest region included the Flathead Reservation,

contemporary home of the Salish-Kootenai and Pend d Oreille tribes; and the southeast

region, on the Crow and Northern Cheyenne Reservations. These communities share many

characteristics of rural communities but they also have differences in relation to their cultures

that can be characterized as differences in cultural repertoires of practices due to variationsin the way people participate in common practices (Gutierrez & Rogof, 2003). Although the

PD model and science content was common to both sites, each site had an advisory team

composed of tribal members and teacher leaders to provide guidance on cultural knowledge,




7/21

protocol, and culturally relevant pedagogy suitable to the tribal cultures. The professional

development was delivered in a blended way combining face-to-face and online interactions.

All face-to-face interactions were onsite, including: day-long monthly academies, a 2-week

Summer Institute, and 3-day summer cultural camps. The ongoing year-long online

component supported teachers discussion about the science content and culturally relevant

pedagogy presented during the face-to-face events.

The aim of the professional development was to: (1) develop teachers knowledge of the

tribal cultures; (2) model teaching methods and science content applications congruent with

the cultural practices of the tribal communities; (3) enhance teachers science knowledge; and

(4) enhance teachers knowledge of how to teach science. Because all professional develop-

ment activities wove three cultural strandstribal community, science teaching, and school

sciencescience and education faculty involved in the program worked closely with

tribal advisory teams to identify intersection points between American Indian culture, school

science, and science teaching. The advisory teams included experienced teachers and tribal

elders that have the recognition of their communities, and were actively involved in the com-

munity life. Advisory teams were consulted during the planning and implementation of

the professional development, in order to identify common and unique cultural elements

of the tribes involved in the project. Tribal advisory teams mainly provided suggestions about

the relevance of the science topics and meaningful contexts for science teaching. The science

content foci of the program included Earth Science, Astronomy and Weather and Climate,

and Physics and the topics addressed by the program aligned with the Montana State Science

Standards (OPI, 2011). Cultural intersection points were identified by matching science con-

cepts to cultural practices. Teaching approaches that allowed to incorporate tribal values and

students learning styles were modeled in the face-to-face meetings. Then, teachers imple-

mented these approaches in their classrooms, and the impact of the teaching was discussedonline or in the face-to-face meetings.

An example of a unit on accelerated motion that incorporates cultural points of intersec-

tion is presented in Table 1. In this unit the major science concept woven throughout is:

Table 1

Cultural points of intersection for a unit on accelerated motion

Science Content

American Indian

Cultural Element

Science Teaching

Cultural Element

Cultural Points of

Intersection

Accelerated motion Arrow making andthrowing

Formative assessment Result from thecommon concepts of

arrow making and thegame of Basketball

with the science contentUnbalanced forces Basketball game Collaborative activities Result from the

common practicesbetween science

teaching and AmericanIndian ways of knowing

Vectors Community festivals Naturalisticobservations

Story-telling by com-munity elders

Modeling exploratoryactivities

Learning by observingNative language




8/21

Accelerated motions result from the application of an unbalanced force. The pedagogy

component addressed the use of formative assessment, the implementation of collaborative

activities, the use of naturalistic observations, and modeling exploratory activities. The forma-

tive assessment emphasized the use of multiple representational modes (text-based, diagrams,picture-based, kinesthetic, etc.) and being authentic in the context of students everyday life.

The cultural component was present through two contemporary cultural practicesarrow

making and throwing, and basketball gamesand by the fact that members of the community

presented such topics. A tribal elder gave a presentation about the art of making and throwing

arrows and also explained who and when it is appropriate to engage in this practice according

to the Northern Cheyenne tradition. He introduced words in the Native language and related

the practice of arrow throwing to festivals and community events familiar to the teachers of

the community. The game of basketball is a very important community event for Montana

tribes as it incorporates family related cultural values. Moreover, basketball games are also

part of contemporary Powwows-competitions of traditional dances and drumming that

involves multigenerational members of the community. High school Crow students demon-

strated different ways to throw the ball providing opportunities to discuss applied forces and

parabolic motion. The curriculum and instruction of this unit reflected a culturally responsive

approach because the culture of the tribes was integrated in an authentic way: on-site, relevant

to the students and teachers life experiences, and presented by community members who

held mastery of the cultural practices. Content knowledge resulted from finding intersection

points between tribal, science teaching, and school science cultures.

In the example provided above, the science concept of accelerated motion was identified

in the cultural practice of arrow making and throwing. The shape of the bow, the elasticity of

the materials of the arrow and bow, the tension in the string, the body position in the throw,

and many more intricacies of this practice were matched to the concept of force and acceler-

ated motion. In this example the empirical epistemology of the tribal practice was matched to

the abstract, model-based epistemology of school science as both knowledge bases have the

same purpose: the prediction of the motion of an object subject to an unbalanced force.

School and Classroom Characteristics. The schools involved in the project included 25

K-8 schools on the Flathead, Northern Cheyenne and Crow Reservations and surrounding

areas. These schools are small, isolated, and resource-limited. Poverty rates vary from 31% to

75% of the students participating in the Free and Reduced Lunch program. Students transfer

rate between schools is high; and the lack of curriculum continuity and alignment leads to

disjointed educational experiences for these students. The quality of the science programs inthe schools varied: 43% of the teachers rated their school science program high quality (4 or

5 on a 5-point scale), 30% gave it a middle rating, and 28% gave it a low rating (1 or 2 on a

5-point scale). In 75% of cohort 1 schools, classes were organized as self-contained, likewise

in 79% of schools of cohort 2. The number of students per class varied: about 45% of cohort

1 and 2 treatment classrooms had 2125 students, and 10% of the classrooms had 2630

students; while for comparison groups, about 33% of the classrooms had 2125 students, and

21% of the classrooms had 2630 students. The grade bands considered in this study were:

G34, G56, G78; their distribution in both cohorts for treatment and control groups peaked

at the G34 grade band.

Teachers and Students Characteristics. Teachers volunteered to participate in the pro-gram; the assignment into treatment or comparison roles was the choice of the teacher. Both

treatment and comparison teachers received a stipend for their participation. Forty percent of

the teachers enrolled in the program were American Indians while 60% were Caucasians. The




9/21

teachers gender distribution varied between cohorts. In cohort 1 the percentage of females

teachers was 89% in the treatment group and 79% in the comparison group; in cohort 2 the

percentage of females teachers was 80% for both treatment and comparison groups. The high-

est education degree of 80% of the treatment teachers of both cohorts was B.S. or B.A. in

Elementary Education. Comparison teacher groups held a higher degree of education: 58% of

cohort 1 comparison teachers had a B.S. or B.A., while 37% a M.S. or higher; 47% of cohort

2 comparison teachers had a B.S. or B.A, while 50% held a higher degree. More than 90% of

all teachers involved in the program (both cohorts and treatments) have a certification

for teaching elementary grades and about 30% have multiple certifications (elementary and

middle grades). Teachers expertise, indicated by the number of years in the profession, was

consistent across cohorts and treatment groups. Teachers with more than 15 years of expertise

constituted the largest category.

The fidelity of the treatment varied per cohort group. Forty-eight cohort 1 treatment

teachers were enrolled in the program, but 36 teachers completed the 3 years of professional

development. Forty treatment teachers enrolled in cohort 2, but only 29 completed the pro-

gram. Comparison teachers had a lower attrition rate. Twenty-nine comparison teachers

started in cohort 1 and 24 completed the period of the professional development; and 36

comparison teachers for cohort 2 started and ended in the program. The number of teachers

included in each analysis corresponds to the teachers that had a complete set of data required

by the analysis.

The teachers that participated in this project (treatment and comparison groups) taught

classrooms with about 10030% students enrolled as American Indians, depending on the

school district. The American Indian students live either on or near a reservation, and in most

cases with American Indian family members. Students gender distribution varied per cohort

and treatment group, such that between 53% and 80% of the classrooms had between 50%and 60% male students. The percentage of Limited English Proficient (LEP) students was

consistent across cohorts and treatment groups, about 72% or more of the classrooms includ-

ed in the project had less that 10% LEP students.

Characteristics of the Study

The tapestry of characteristics of schools, classrooms, teachers, and students reflects the

nature of rural school settings with low-density populations, very small school districts, and a

small number of teachers. Thus, the treatment and comparison groups were matched based on

their teaching grade-band as they have comparable teaching demands (in terms of curriculum

and instruction). All comparison and treatment teachers belong to the same pool of school

districts housed on the Flathead, Northern Cheyenne and Crow Reservations, and surrounding areas.

Methods and Tools for Data Collection. Various methods of data collection were used to

document the impact of the professional development on teachers science instruction, on teach-

ers science content knowledge, on teachers beliefs about their ability to implement equitable

instruction and confidence about their science knowledge, and on students science learning.

These methods included: classroom observations, portfolios with lesson plans and students

work, teacher surveys on culturally congruent instruction and on science teaching practices and

beliefs, and teachers and students science content tests. This study used a teacher survey

called Surveys of Enacted Curriculum (SEC; CCSSO, 2005), and students pre/post-sciencetests for Earth Science, and Astronomy, Weather and Climate. The content areas addressed in

this study relate to topics that were taught by cohort 1 and 2 teachers. This study uses data

corresponding to the first and second year of teachers being in the program.




10/21

Teachers completed the SEC individually and online, in early fall (baseline) and sub-

sequently once a year at the end of the school year. SEC is comprised of 17 dimensions

and captures the way teachers allocate classroom time to different instructional tasks, and

documents teachers beliefs about their readiness to teach science content and to implementequitable instruction. Qualitative data, including classroom observation field notes and teach-

ers portfolios, were used to provide fidelity of the professional development intervention and

to identify instructional strategies that were most frequently observed in the classrooms and

documented in teachers portfolios. These strategies included approaches that prompted stu-

dents to: (1) communicate understandings and findings using multiple modalities, (2) analyze

information, (3) perform exploratory activities such as hands-on investigations and simula-

tions, and (4) make connections between science and topics relevant to students life and their

community, and between science content and hands-on activities that involves predicting and

designing new experiments. A description of these dimensions is included in Table 2.

Table 2

List of items in the dimensions of teachers survey

Communicate

Understanding Analyze Information Performing Procedures Make Connections

Teaching practicesWrite about sciencein science papers

Analyze and interpretscience data

Do a laboratory activity,investigation, orexperiment

Make educated guesses,or predictions usingprior knowledge

Complete writtenassignments from the

textbook or workbook

Make a predictionbased on the data

Follow step-by-stepdirections

Change a variable inan experiment to test

a hypothesisWrite up results orprepare a presentationfrom an investigation,or experiment

Analyze and interpretthe informationorally or in writing

Use science equipmentor measuring tools

Design their owninvestigation toanswer a scientificquestion related totheir community

Work on a writing projectseeking peer comments

Display and analyzedata

Collect data

Have class discussionsabout the data

Organize and displayinformation in tablesor graphs

Organize and display the

information in tables orgraphs

Make observations

Practice proceduresUse sensors or probes

Content Readiness Equity Readiness

Teachers believes about their ability to . . .Teach science at your assigned level Teach students with disabilitiesIntegrate science with other subjects Teach classes with students with diverse

abilitiesProvide science instruction that meetsscience standards

Teach science to students from a variety ofcultural backgrounds

Use a variety of assessment strategies Teach science to ELL studentsManage using hands-on activitiesTake into account students prior conceptionswhen planning




11/21

In this study we focused on six dimensions, four of which are the aforementioned practi-

ces, in addition to teachers beliefs about their readiness to teach science content at their

grade level, and to implement equitable instruction. Each dimension consisted of a different

number of items; the number of items per dimension (n) and its reliability coefficient estimat-ed by the Cronbach alpha correlation are: content ready (n 6), 0.90; equity ready (n 4),

0.78; performing procedures (n 8), 0.79; communicate understanding (n 7), 0.79; ana-

lyze information (n 4), 0.84; and make connections (n 3), 0.82. The internal consistency

of each of the SEC dimension was estimated using the full sample size, both treatment and

comparison teachers. Changes in teaching practices and teachers beliefs after 1 and 2 years

in the program for teachers of both cohorts, were obtained from a repeated-measures

ANOVA. Equity readiness and content readiness were rated over a four-point Likert scale;

while the other dimensions were rated over a five-point Likert scale. The results of signifi-

cance and effect size correspond to the multivariate results of the Greenhouse-Geisser correc-

tion because the sphericity condition for the ANOVA was not achieved (Leach, Barret, &

Morgan, 2008).

Students science tests were designed by the external evaluators, and the education and

STEM faculty involved in the project, using released test items from various sources. The

external evaluators as well as the STEM and education faculty had an extended experience

of working with American Indian communities and in-service teachers. Test items were

aligned with the content topics targeted by the professional development program and

the competencies associated with research-based science instruction. Issues of language and

contexts suitable to American Indian students were considered in adapting the items. Three

different tests, corresponding to the G34, G56, and G79 grade bands, were designed and

used in the treatment and comparison classrooms. All questions were multiple choice, and the

number of items varied depending on the grade band test, such that Earth Science tests

included 16, 25, and 29 items for G34, G56, and G79, respectively; and the Astronomy,

Weather, and Climate test included 25, 27, and 28 questions for G34, G56, and G79, res-

pectively. Students pre and posttests were administered in their classrooms during September

and April, respectively. Students score sheets were scanned, and scores recorded in spread-

sheets. The reliability of Earth Science and Astronomy, Weather, and Climate tests were

estimated using the Cronbach alpha correlation coefficient. The reliability estimates for the

Earth Science test were: 0.61 pretest, 0.71 posttest for G34; 0.76 pretest, 0.78 posttest for G

56; and for both pre and posttests of G78 Cronbach alpha 0.80. The reliability estimates

for the Weather, Astronomy and Climate test were: 0.63 pretest, 0.70 posttest for G34; 0.60

pretest, 0.72 posttest for G 56; and 0.74 for the pretest and 0.61 for the posttest of G78.

Methods of Analysis. The analyses included in this study are: (i) a repeated measures

ANOVA of the SEC data for two teacher cohorts including treatment and comparison groups;

(ii) a mixed ANOVA of test score gains of the students in the treatment and comparison

teacher groups; and (iii) a multiple regression analysis to explain students science test score

gains with changes in science instruction and beliefs of treatment and comparison teacher

groups. The unit of analysis in this study is the teacher/classroom. The repeated-measures

ANOVA provided results of the variance of teachers practice and beliefs (SEC data) through-

out the time teachers were enrolled in the program. Cohort 1 treatment teachers data corre-

spond to three-time SEC measurements: baseline, after 1 year in the program, and at end ofthe second year. The analyses for comparison teachers of cohort 1 and 2 teachers included

two-time SEC measurements: baseline and at the end of 1 year in the program. The mixed

ANOVA was conducted to assess whether there were differences in students average scores




12/21

in terms of the time of the year of the test administration (pre/post), and of the treatment

condition of the teachers (treatment or comparison). The multiple linear regression analysis

was conducted with the classrooms that have a full set of data including: teachers SEC data

(baselines and subsequent years), and classroom students tests data (pre and postdata).

Even though this approach to the management of missing data, also called a complete-case

analysis, reduces the sample size it leads to unbiased parameter estimates (Howell, 2007).

Thus, the sample size for the regression analysis was smaller than the number of teachers

initially enrolled in the project from 36 teachers down to 27 teachers; constraining the number

of variables that can be used to meaningfully model classroom average students test score

gains.

Findings

This study examines the effects of a professional development program framed by the

premises of culturally relevant pedagogy on teachers science teaching beliefs and practice,

and on students science test score gains on or near American Indian reservations in Montana.

The questions that guided this study are: (1) To what extent does a teacher professional

development program built upon cultural intersection points between school science, science

inquiry teaching, and American Indian cultures facilitate a shift in science teaching? (2) How

do shifts in teaching practices and teachers beliefs contribute to science test score gains of

American Indian students?

The teaching practices included in this study correspond to strategies that prompted stu-

dents to: (1) communicate understandings and findings using multiple modalities, (2) analyze

information, (3) perform procedures such as exploratory activities, and hands-on investiga-

tions, and (4) make connections between science and topics relevant to students life and their

community, and between science content and hands-on activities that involves predicting anddesigning new experiments. The teachers beliefs that were included in this study referred to

their readiness to teach science content, and to implement equitable instruction. The findings

reported here attempt to answer these questions.

Shift in Teachers Science Instruction and Beliefs

Results of cohort 1 teachers, including treatment and comparison teachers, are included

in Table 3. Treatment teachers results show a change in content and equity readiness,

analysis of information, and the make connection variables. These variables significantly

followed a linear increment from year to year, and their effect sizes (ffiffiffiffiffih2

p) are large (Cohen,

1988). Comparison teachers significantly increased the use of strategies that prompt studentsto analyze data. This variable had a significant increment in 1 year. The observed low power

of the comparison group results can be attributed to the small sample of comparison teachers

that completed both SECs.

Results for cohort 2 treatment and comparison teachers are based on baseline and after

1-year program SEC data. Treatment teachers changed their beliefs in their ability to implement

equitable instruction and to teach science content knowledge, and practices that require stu-

dents to make connections between science topics, students real-world issues, and hands-on

activities; while comparison teachers showed changes only in practices requiring students to

communicate understandings and findings. Results for cohort 2 teachers are shown in Table 4.

A third repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted for cohort 1 treatment teachers after1 year in the program with the purpose of comparing these results to cohort 2 treatment

teachers and to identify the teachers practices and beliefs that are impacted after 1 year in

the program. The results for both cohorts overlap. The variables that changed over a 1-year




13/21

period were: teachers beliefs in their ability to implement equitable science instruction and

teach science content, and teaching strategies that prompt students to make connections.

In summary, after 1 year in the program treatment teachers felt empowered in their abili-

ty to teach science content and to implement equitable instruction, and they increased the

classroom time students spent making connections between science topics and issues related

to their life and communities, and to hands-on experiences. These results were obtained for

both cohorts. Similarly, during the first 2 years in the program, treatment teachers showed a

Table 4

Teachers practices and beliefs (cohort 2)

Teaching Variable Y0 Mean (SD) Y1 Mean (SD) Sig. (p) Effect Size Power

Treatment teachers (N 27)a

Content readiness 1.67 (0.70) 1.95 (0.40) 0.009 0.48 0.77Equity readiness 1.30 (0.55) 1.54 (0.44) 0.008 0.49 0.79Performing procedures 2.18 (0.68) 2.36 (0.49) 0.111 0.31 0.36Communication 1.79 (0.73) 1.94 (0.65) 0.164 0.27 0.28Analysis of information 2.11 (0.77) 2.36 (0.82) 0.064 0.35 0.46Connections 1.71 (.74) 2.09 (0.65) 0.025 0.42 0.63

Comparison teachers (N 35)a

Content readiness 1.75 (0.65) 1.73 (0.60) 0.750 0.05 0.06Equity readiness 1.60 (0.62) 1.48 (0.63) 0.186 0.22 0.26Procedures 2.07 (0.58) 1.90 (0.53) 0.060 0.31 0.47Communication 1.39 (0.45) 1.57 (0.56) 0.020 0.39 0.67Analysis 1.83 (0.86) 1.70 (0.59) 0.160 0.24 0.28

Connections 1.87 (0.89) 1.77 (0.69) 0.430 0.14 0.12

Y0 and Y1 refer to: baseline and after 1 year in the program, respectively.aN denotes the number of cohort 2 teachers with complete SEC data for both baseline and end-of-first year. This

number might differ from the number of teachers enrolled in the program.

Table 3

Teachers practices and beliefs (cohort 1)

Teaching Variable

Y0 Mean

(SD)

Y1 Mean

(SD)

Y2 Mean

(SD)

Sig.

(p)

Effect

Size PowerTreatment teachers (N 31)

a

Content readiness 1.58 (.54) 1.89 (0.60) 2.00 (0.63) 0.003 0.45 0.89Equity readiness 1.27 (0.65) 1.77 (0.65) 1.74 (0.58)


14/21

significant improvement in teaching practices that prompt students to analyze data and to

make connections. Also, they built on their confidence in their ability to teach science content

and to implement equitable approaches in the classroom. No significant changes were found

in treatment teachers implementation of practices that involve exploratory procedures; orpractices prompting students to use various ways of communication. In turn, comparison

teachers change of practice and beliefs did not display a clear trend between cohorts. First

cohort comparison teachers improved the implementation of teaching strategies that prompt

students to communicate their findings using multiple ways of representations. While the

second cohort of comparison teachers reported a change only in teaching strategies that

prompt students to analyze data. Comparison teachers readiness to implement equitable

instruction decreased in the 1-year interval (1.52 0.72 and 1.49 0.59 for baseline and

year 1, respectively, for cohort 1; and 1.60 0.62 and 1.48 0.63 for baseline and year 1,

respectively, for cohort 2). This trend contrasts with treatment teachers results, in which

mean values of the equity readiness variable increased after 1 year in the program

(1.27 0.65 and 1.77 0.65 for baseline and year 1, respectively, for cohort 1; and

1.30 0.55 and 1.54 0.44 for baseline and year 1, respectively, for cohort 2). Similarly,

the mean values of treatment teachers SEC variables are overall higher than the mean values

for comparison teachers.

Another, unintended, result is the decrease in the number of teachers that completed the

SEC survey throughout the years. About 15% of cohort 1 treatment and comparison teachers,

and 27% of cohort 2 treatment teachers did not complete the SEC survey as the years passed.

This trend, common in both cohorts and more prominent for treatment teachers, speaks to

the difficulties of data collection in rural settings in which long commuting distances and

inconsistent access to online communications pose a real obstacle.

Students Test Score Gains

Classroom average scores of student science tests, for treatment and comparison groups,

are presented in Table 5. A mixed ANOVA was conducted to assess whether there were differ-

ences in the average scores in terms of the time of the year of test administration (pre/post),

and of the treatment condition of the teachers (treatment or comparison). Results for the

Earth Science test indicate a significant effect of the time of the year, F(1, 59) 67.99,

p < 0.001, but not of the treatment condition, F(1, 59) 0.00, p 0.99; nor is there

indication of an interaction between the time of the year and the treatment condition,

Table 5

Classroom average students science test scores

Treatment Condition Earth Science Mean (SD) Astronomy, Weather, and Climate Mean (SD)

PretestTreatment 54.40 (13.30) 41.57 (10.48)

N 29 N 29Comparison 54.40 (14.32) 44.39 (10.06)

N 32 N 28Posttest

Treatment 60.70 (14.17) 48.34 (11.45)

N 29 N 29Comparison 60.64 (14.42) 49.30 (10.21)

N 32 N 28

N represents the number of classrooms that have both pre- and post-student science test data.




15/21

F(1, 59) 0.002, p 0.967. Results for the Astronomy, Weather and Climate test indicate a

significant effect for the time of the year, F(1, 55) 67.76, p < 0.001, but not of the treat-

ment condition, F(1, 55) 0.46, p 0.50, nor of the interaction between the time of the

year and the treatment condition, F(1, 55)

1.75, p

0.197. The results for both sciencetests indicate that even though there is a difference in the classroom average scores between

the beginning and end of year tests, unexpectedly, this difference is not associated to the

treatment condition of the teachers.

In order to explore if the increase of the average posttest scores was related to teachers

changes of practices and beliefs, a multiple linear regression analysis between classroom

average test score gains and changes of practices and beliefs was done. The regression model

used the variables that displayed a significant and sustained change as reported by treatment

teachers, including: make connections, equity readiness, content readiness, and analysis

of information. For comparison classrooms, where a sustained change was not found, test

score gains were modeled using multiple regression linear models of combinations of two,

three, and up to four variables out of the six variables included in this study.

Classroom average student test score gains for Astronomy, Weather, and Climate of treat-

ment teachers were best predicted by a linear regression model that combined the changes in

make connections and equity readiness variables. This model explains 36.7% of the vari-

ance of average test score gains (adjusted R); the correlation coefficient is 0.645, and the

model is significant at p 0.002 level. The parameters of this model are shown in Table 6.

It is important to note that both variables of the modelthe changes in teachers beliefs

about their ability to implement equitable instruction, and students making connectionsare

linearly independent, as shown by the colinearity tolerance (close to 1.00). In contrast, no

combination of variables produced a significant model (p 0.05) when linear regression

models were used to predict comparison classrooms average score gains of the Astronomy,

Weather, and Climate student test. In addition, quadratic and cubic relationships between

dependent and independent variables were explored, but no significant relationships were

found. Similar multiple regression linear models were applied to the Earth Science classroom

average test score gains but no combination of variables produced a significant model for

both treatment and comparison groups. It is important to note that students score gains on

the Astronomy, Weather, and Climate test were modeled with the changes in practices of

teachers that had been 2 years in the program. In contrast, the Earth Science score gains

were modeled with changes in practices of teachers that spent 1 year in the program. Thus,

although teachers significantly improved some of their practices and self-confidence after

1 year in the program, these changes are not enough to explain students test score gains.

Discussion

The findings related to the impact of the professional development on teachers practice

provide evidence that the shifts in science teaching incorporated the ideas of equitable and

reform-based instruction. Teachers also increased their confidence in the ability to teach

Table 6

Regression linear model of treatment average score gains

Linear Model Standardized Coefficient Significance (p) Collinearity Tolerance

Making connection 0.583 0.001 0.963Equity readiness 0.409 0.017




16/21

science content and to implement equitable teaching approaches. ANOVA results of the SEC

data show that after 1 year in the program, treatment teachers increased the use of teaching

strategies that prompt students to make connections between science and topics relevant to

their life and community, and to hands-on experiences that involves predicting and designingnew experiments. According to the results of the ANOVA for a 2-year span, treatment teach-

ers showed a consistent pattern of changes in these beliefs and practices, while comparison

teachers rendered a random-like change in teaching practices.

The findings for the treatment teachers are closely aligned with the foci of the profession-

al development program aiming to integrate American Indian culture of the local communi-

ties, science content, and reform-based pedagogy through identifying cultural points of

intersection. These findings are in agreement with the claim about the effectiveness of science

teaching when it occurs in a hybrid space resulting from the incorporation of everyday

discourses in science teaching and learning (Barton et al., 2008; Seiler, 2011), or when teach-

ers tap into students funds of knowledge (Barton & Tan, 2009). Similarly, in a context of

professional development, Chinn (2007) found that programs focused on eliciting Native

knowledge in relation to science significantly increased participants appreciation of Native

culture and its importance to effectively teach science. Additionally, Johnson (2011) found

that professional development models grounded on the premises of improving the educational

experiences of diverse students, effective science teaching, and culturally congruent instruc-

tion enable participant teachers to shift their practice towards a culturally relevant pedagogy.

So, what is the novel contribution of cultural points of intersections? Points of intersection

between science knowledge, community culture, and science teaching suggest that the effec-

tiveness of a hybrid space can be expanded to the practiceknowledge cycle of a communitys

culture. Matching cultural practices with core concepts in science promotes the construction

of hybrid content. In other words, cultural points of intersection suggest that school

science would not only be shaped by the school culture and paradigms of science teaching

and learning, but also by the cultural practices of the communities in which teaching is taking

place.

The impact of the professional development program on students science test score

gains can be explained by the increment of teachers implementation of equitable instruction,

which prompted students to make connections between science topics, issues relevant to

their lives, and hands-on experiments. This result, only corresponding to treatment class-

rooms, fully supports the premises of instructional congruence (Lee, 2002, 2003, 2004; Lee

& Fradd, 1998) about the importance of developing congruence not only between students

cultural expectations and classroom interactional norms but also between academic disci-plines and students linguistic and cultural experiences (Lee, Hart, Cuevas, & Enders, 2004,

p.4). Both variables of the model - the changes in teachers beliefs about their ability to

implement equitable instruction, and students making connectionsare linearly independent

indicating that both aspects of the instruction are necessary to contribute to students test

score gains.

Remarkably, of the six variables included in this study, only the two variables that

directly relate to the notion of cultural intersection points significantly predict the increase of

student science tests scores. One of the variables refers to teachers confidence in implement-

ing strategies that explicitly address cultural points of intersection; while the other variable

refers to what students do in class in order to bridge their worldview and school sciencecultures through cultural intersection points. This relationship is absent in comparison groups,

in which teachers neither increased their belief about their ability to effectively implement

equitable instructional strategies, nor gains were found in relation to strategies that




17/21

prompt students to make connections between science and topics relevant to their life and

community.

The constructs of culturally congruent instruction and cultural points of intersection

emerged from the realization of the critical role of students cultural background and priorknowledge in knowledge construction (Driver, Leach, Millar, & Scott, 1996). Cultural con-

gruence stresses shared ways of communication, through common languages and cultural

backgrounds between teachers and students. However, culturally congruent ways of knowing

and communicating are sometimes incompatible with the nature of science as represented by

science education standards (Lee & Fradd, 1998, p. 18). Cultural points of intersection stress

the common conceptual grounds between cultural practices (e.g., the ones derived from em-

pirical and technological knowledge) and science core ideas (e.g., the ones obtained from

abstract or model-based knowledge), such that incompatibilities between students cultural

background and science are greatly reduced. For example, the analysis of the way a tipi is

built will be conducive to the concepts of force and Newtons First Law of Motion. Cultural

points of intersection do not emphasize the adaptation of scientific habits of mind to students

cultural frame, but digs into both frames to find common constructs. This view of science

instruction emerged from the fundamental view that cultures of practice and school science

contribute to learners knowledge construction. Indeed, by eliciting the science concept in

the light of a cultural practice, the culture of science and the cultural practice contribute to

the school science Discourse. This approach dissipates the dichotomy imposed by an educa-

tion based on a hegemonic culture and contributes to equitable normative scientific practices

of the classroom; such practices expand the notion of science literacy and positively impact

non-mainstream students (Carlone et al., 2011).

Conclusions

This research shows the effectiveness of a professional development program that focuses

on cultural points of intersection for the enhancement of teachers science teaching in non-

mainstream students classrooms. After 2 years in the program teachers steadily and signifi-

cantly increased their confidence in the ability to teach science content and to reach non-

mainstream students; they also increased the classroom instruction time allocated to practices

that require students to make connections between science content and topics relevant to their

life, communities, and real-world hands-on experiences. We also showed that teaching strate-

gies and curriculum that explicitly address cultural points of intersection between school

science and students worldviews substantially contribute to students science test score gains.In this regard, teaching through cultural points of intersection constitutes an instructional

strategy that addresses culturally responsive models paradigm.

Globalization entails the re-distribution of ideas, goods, people, and practices; it urges

people to define their cultural identity in order to partake in the globalized exchange. People

bring to and take from a large pool of cultural elements to re-create their own. The notion of

cultural points of intersection mirrors this cultural exchange through conceptual juxtaposition.

This study, that prompts to connect different cultural zones, contributes meeting the chal-

lenges of globalization.

A next step in considering cultural points of intersection as a viable equitable instruction-

al strategy is to address this construct in classrooms with multiple diverse cultures. The find-ings presented here emerged from science instruction in bi-cultural (mainstream and

American Indian) or mono-cultural (American Indian) classrooms; thus, the door is open to

further explore the implementation of cultural points of intersection.




18/21

We are grateful to Regina Sievert and Tim Olson of Salish Kootenai Community

College; Elisabeth Swanson of Montana State University; Judith Devine, Education

Northwest Lab; Gail Whiteman Runs Him, Crow Tribe; and to all participant teachers,

that certainly have been a source of inspiration. Also, we want to express our gratitude

to the reviewers and editors of the manuscript for their insightful suggestions. This

research has been possible with an NSF-MSP grant # DUE-0634587.

References

Agbo, S. (2004). First Nations perspectives on transforming the status of culture and language in

schooling. Journal of American Indian Education, 43, 131.

Aikenhead, G. S. (1996). Science education: Border crossing into the subculture of science. Studies

in Science Education, 27, 152.

Aikenhead, G. S. (2001). Students ease in crossing cultural borders into school science. Science

Education, 85, 180188.Aikenhead, G. S. & Jegede, O. J. (1999). Cross-cultural science education: A cognitive explanation

of a cultural phenomenon. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 269287.

American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy.

New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Apthorp, H., DAmato, E., & Richardson, A. (2002). Effective standards-based practices for Native

American students: A review of research literature. Aurora, CO: Mid-Continent Research for Education

and Learning.

Assembly of Alaska Native Educators (AANE). (1998). Alaska standards for culturally-responsive

schools. Anchorage: Alaska Native Knowledge Network.

Bartholomew, H., Osborne, J. F., & Ratcliffe, M. (2004). Teaching students Ideas-About-Science:

Five dimensions of effective practice. Science Education, 88, 655682.Barton, A. C. & Tan, E. (2009). Funds of knowledge, discourse and hybrid space. Journal of

Research in Science Teaching, 46, 5073.

Barton, A. C., Tan, E., & Rivet, A. (2008). Creating hybrid spaces for engaging school science

among urban middle school girls. American Education Research Journal, 45, 68103.

Bencze, L. & Carter, L. (2011). Globalizing students acting for the common good. Journal of

Research in Science Teaching, 48, 648669.

Brayboy, B. (2004). Hiding in the ivy: American Indian students and visibility in elite educational

settings. Harvard Educational Review, 74, 125152.

Brown, B. A. (2004). Discursive identity: Assimilation into the culture of science and its implica-

tions for minority students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 810834.

Carlone, H. B., Haun-Frank, J., & Webb, A. (2011). Assessing equity beyond knowledge- andskills-based outcomes: A comparative ethnography of two fourth-grade reform-based science class-

rooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 459485.

Carter, P. L. (2010). Race and cultural flexibility among students in different multiracial schools.

Teachers College Record, 112, 15291574. http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 15688, Date Accessed:

3/22/2012.

Chinn, P. W. U. (2007). Decolonizing methodologies and indigenous knowledge: The role of

culture, place and personal experience in professional development. Journal of Research in Science

Teaching, 44, 12471268.

Chiu, M. & Duit, R. (2011). Globalization: Science education from an international perspective.

Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 555566.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale NJ: LawrenceErlbaum.




19/21

Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). (2005). Surveys of Enacted Curriculum:

Tools and services to assist educators. http://www.ccsso.org/Resources/Programs/Surveys_of_Enacted_

Curriculum_(SEC).html. Date Accessed: 3/24/2012.

DeBoer, G. (2011). Globalization of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,

48, 567591.Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people images of science. Bristol, PA:

Open Univ. Press.

Elmesky, R. (2011). Rap as a roadway: Creating creolized forms of science in an era of cultural

globalization. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6, 4976.

Elmesky, R. & Seiler, G. (2007). Movement expressiveness, solidarity and the (re)shaping of

African American students scientific identities. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 2, 73103.

Fix, M., Passel, J. S., & Ruiz De Velasco, J. (2004). School reform: The demographic imperative

and challenge. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.

Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. New York:

Routledge.

Gilbert, A. & Yerrick, R. (2001). Same school, separate worlds: A sociocultural study of identity,resistance, and negotiation in a rural, lower track science classroom. Journal of Research in Science

Teaching, 38, 574598.

Gutierrez, K. D. & Rogof, B. (2003). Cultural Ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of

educational researcher. Educational Researcher, 32, 1925.

Johnson, C. C. (2011). Road to cultural relevant science: Exploring how teachers navigate change

in pedagogy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 170198.

van Hamme, L. (1995). American Indian cultures and the classroom. Journal of American Indian

Education, http://jaie.asu.edu/v35/V35S2ame.htm Date Accessed: 9/28/2012.

Henze, R. C. & Vanett, L. (1993). To walk in two worlds -or more-: Challenging a common meta-

phor of Native education. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 24, 116134.

Howell, D. C. (2007). The analysis of missing data. In W. Outhwaite & S. Turner (Eds.),Handbook of Social Science Methodology. London: Sage.

Klug, B. & Whitfield, P. (2003). Widening the circle: Culturally relevant pedagogy for American

Indian children. New York: Routledge.

Krogh, L. B. & Thomsen, P. V. (2005). Studying students attitudes towards science from a cultural

perspective but with a quantitative methodology: Border crossing into the physics classroom.

International Journal of Science Education, 27, 281302.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational

Research Journal, 32, 465491.

Leach, N. L., Barret, K. C., & Morgan, G. A. (2008). SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and

interpretation. New York: Lawrence-Erlbaum.

Lee, O. (2002). Science inquiry for elementary students from diverse backgrounds. In W. G.Secada (Ed.) Review of Research in Education. (pp. 2369). Washington, DC: American Educational

Research Association.

Lee, O. (2003). Equity for culturally and linguistically diverse students in science education: A

research agenda. Teachers College Record, 105, 465489.

Lee, O. (2004). Teacher change in beliefs and practices in science and literacy instruction with

English language learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 6593.

Lee, O. & Buxton, C. (2011). Engaging culturally and linguistically diverse students in learning

science. Theory Into Practice, 50, 277284.

Lee, O. & Fradd, S. H. (1998). Science for all, including students from non-English language back-

grounds. Educational Researcher, 27, 1221.

Lee, O., Hart, J., Cuevas, P., & Enders, C. (2004). Professional development in inquiry-basedscience for elementary teachers of diverse students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41,

10211043.




20/21

Lee, O. & Luykx, A. (2006). Science education and student diversity: Synthesis and research agen-

da. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Lemke, J. (2005). Place, pace, and meaning: Multimedia chronotpes. In S. Norris & R.

Jones (Eds.), Discourse in action: Introducing mediated discourse analysis (pp. 110122). London:Routledge.

Lipka, J. (2002). Schooling for self-determination: Research on the effects of including

Native language and culture in the schools. Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural and Small

Schools.

Lomawaima, K. T. & McCarty, T. L. (2006). To remain and Indian: Lessons in democracy from a

century of Native American education. Columbia University New York: Teachers College Press.

Luft, J. A. (2001). Changing inquiry practice and beliefs? The impact of a one-year inquiry-based

professional development program on the beliefs and practices of secondary science teachers.

International Journal of Science Education, 23, 517534.

Lyons, T. (2006). The puzzle of falling enrolments in physics and chemistry courses: Putting some

pieces together. Journal Research in Science Education, 36, 285311.Mickelson, R. A. & Velasco, A. E. (2006). Bring it on: Diverse responses to acting White among

academically able African Americans. In E. McNamara Horvat & C. OConnor (Eds.), Beyond acting

White: Reassessments and new directions in research on Black students and school success. New York:

Teachers College Press.

Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching.

Theory Into Practice, 31, 132141.

National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: The

National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in

Grades K-8. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscut-ting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). (2009). Newsletter. Retrieved from http://

www.nsta.org/publications/news/story.aspx?id559, August 2012.

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115, Stat. 1425 (2002).

Office of Public Instruction (OPI), 2011. OPI source retrieved from http://opi.mt.gov/pdf/

Measurement/EdFacts2011.pdf on December 2011.

Parsons, E. C., Foster, S., Travis, C., & Simpson, J. S. (2005). The Black Cultural Ethos, students

instructional context preferences, and student achievement: An examination of culturally congruent sci-

ence instruction in the eighth grade classes of one African American and one Euro-American teacher.

The Negro Educational Review, 56, 183204.

Parsons, E. C., Foster, S., Gomillion, C. T., & Simpson, J. S. (2008). Diversity knowledge inscience teacher education-Translating concept to instruction: An example specific to African Americans.

Journal of Science Teaching, 19, 6983.

Pewewardy, C. (1998). Our children cant wait: Recapturing the essence of Indigenous schools in

the United States. Cultural Survival Quarterly, 22, 2934.

Phalen, P., Davidson, A., & Cao, H. (1991). Students multiple worlds: Negotiating the boundaries

of family, peer, and school cultures. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 22, 224250.

Richardson Bruna, K. (2009). Jesus and Mara in the jungle: An essay on possibility and constraint

in the third-shift third space. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4, 221237.

Rios-Aguilar, C. (2010). Measuring funds of knowledge: Contributions to Latina/o students aca-

demic and nonacademic outcomes. Teachers College Record, 112(8), 22092257. http://www.tcrecord.

org, ID Number: 15950, Date Accessed: 4/20/2012.Seiler, G. (2011). Becoming a science teacher: Moving toward creolized science and an ethic of

cosmopolitanism. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6, 1332.




21/21

Simpson, J. S. & Parsons, E. C. (2009). African American perspectives and informal science educa-

tional experiences. Science Education, 93, 293321.

Sussman, N. (2000). The dynamic nature of cultural identity throughout cultural transitions: Why is

home not so sweet. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 355373.

Taconis, R. & Kessels, U. (2009). How choosing science depends on students individual fit toscience culture. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 11151132.

van Eijck, M. & Roth, W.-M. (2011) Cultural diversity in science education through novelization:

Against the epicization of science cultural centralization. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,

48(7), 824847.

Warner, S. L. N. (2001). The movement to revitalize Hawaiian language and culture. In L. Hinton

& K. Hale (Eds.), The green book of language revitalization in practice. (pp. 133144). San Diego, CA:

Academic Press.

Zuniga, K., Olson, J. K., & Winter, M. (2005). Science education for rural Latino/a students:

Course placement and success in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 376402.



Grimbeg Gummer Cultural Points of Intersection

Documents

Transcript of Grimbeg Gummer Cultural Points of Intersection