Literature related to Cultural Responsive Pedagogies

Literature related to Cultural Responsive Pedagogies

Mary-Angela Tombs

The purpose of this assignment is to explore a selection of literature regarding culturally responsive pedagogies. The four papers selected for review and comparison, focus on classroom management from a variety of perspectives. Weinstein, Tomlinson-Clarke and Curran (2004) write from an American perspective in their article, Toward a Conception of Culturally Responsive Classroom Management. They suggest crucial factors for ensuring that management of a classroom is culturally responsive. Villegas and Lucas (2002) also write from the point of view of American educationalists. In their article, Preparing Culturally Responsive Teachers: Rethinking the Curriculum, they make a curriculum proposal that emphasises the importance of infusing multicultural lessons into teacher training to ensure cultural responsiveness in schools. Glynn and Berryman (2005) investigate the response to behaviour management in the context of New Zealand schools, and propose a set of principles to guide ways of thinking in their article entitled Understanding and Responding to Students’ Behaviour Difficulties. The fourth perspective reviewed is that of De Jong (2005), who presents the concept of managing student behaviour from a psychological view point in the research report, A Framework of Principles and Best Practice for Managing Student Behaviour in the Australian Education Context. De Jong’s research was broadly qualitative in that it involved the analysis of survey responses about best practice in behaviour management.

Within these articles, several themes regarding student management emerge. This assignment will focus on the following common themes: grounds for build a culturally responsive learning environment; building relationships for management, and for learning, with the final theme focusing on systems transformation.

Why Build a Culturally Responsive Learning Environment?

All of the four articles reviewed indicate that teachers have a professional responsibility to provide a responsive learning environment (De Jong, 2005; Glynn & Berryman, 2005; Villegas & Lucas, 2002; Weinstein et al., 2004).  However, each author communicates a different perspective of living up to this responsibility, and different reasons for creating such an environment.

De Jong’s (2005) rationale is that of a response to growing concerns over the deterioration of behaviour in Australian schools. This response identifies aspects of internationally acclaimed practice in managing student behaviour that are evident in the Australian setting. De Jong argues that responsiveness, in the form of programme flexibility and sensitivity to student needs, increases self-worth by positioning the student as the focus of learning.

Both American articles recommend that culturally responsive learning is the appropriate response to the growing diversity of schools in that country (Villegas & Lucas, 2002; Weinstein et al., 2004). Weinstein et al. (2004) suggest that if cultural diversity is ignored, it leads to denigration of those from the minority cultures and is likely to result in conflict within the class that is a barrier to learning. Villegas and Lucas (2002) argue that while American schools may be multicultural, the norms of the dominant culture (in this case middle class, European Americans) promote inequity in American schools as their systems operate within a Eurocentric paradigm. They argue also that schools have a social responsibility to reverse societal discrimination and suggest that the most effective starting point for this shift in attitude is with teacher trainees and their educators.

Within a New Zealand setting, Glynn and Berryman (2005) respond to a growing number of students who are removed from their learning environment because of behaviour. They advocate a environment where teacher, student and family work together in order to be more culturally responsive to one another. Cultural responsiveness implies cultural diversity within a class. As identified by Glynn and Berryman (2005), when a teacher is from a similar societal/cultural background as their students and are familiar with the students’ home backgrounds and ethnic communities, they are more able to offer responsive and contextually appropriate learning experiences. However Glynn and Berryman assert that exigent student behaviour results from a teacher having little understanding or experience of that student’s family or community values. Weinstein et al. (2004) corroborate this view, and describe discord that is likely to prevail in classrooms where teachers and students are from different cultural backgrounds. From a psychological viewpoint, De Jong (2005) emphasises the importance of the teacher having a broad understanding of language, dialect and cross-cultural communication in order not to treat students as an homogenous group, but as unique individuals.

Building Relationships: for Management … and for Learning

In order to better understand the cultural backgrounds of their students, and before they can develop a meaningful relationship that will enhance learning, teachers must begin by investigating their own sociocultural uniqueness, according to Villegas and Lucas (2002). By considering the various groups they belong to, both social and cultural, and their personal attachments to such groups, they can consider how these connections have shaped who they are as an individual. Weinstein et al. (2004) also suggest that an individual’s social and cultural perspective contours their thinking and how they understand or make sense of unfamiliar situations they are faced with. Self reflection on the part of the teacher allows them to consider how their own personal biases, attitudes and assumptions impact on their approach to their students (Villegas & Lucas, 2002; Weinstein et al., 2004).

A responsive teacher seeks to build relationships by learning as much as possible about their students. They are committed to finding out what their students know, what they are able to do and where they should next go with their learning. A culturally responsive teacher wants to know as much as possible about the backgrounds of their students (Glynn & Berryman, 2005; Villegas & Lucas, 2002; Weinstein et al., 2004). If a teacher is informed by some understanding of the language, values, beliefs and practices of their students they can consider how individual cultural backgrounds may have an impact on learning, other students and the way those students may be impacted by the learning environment.

A culturally responsive learning environment builds relationships by offering fair opportunities to learn to all students, so that they are affirmed as individuals according to Weinstein et al. (2004). Villegas and Lucas (2002) concur in that they believe fairness involves affirming the views of students from diverse backgrounds in an effort to providing a caring learning environment. They suggest that teachers should trust that all students, not just those from the dominant culture bring worthwhile and relevant knowledge and know-how to any learning context. Being fair and affirming is not sufficient however. In order to maintain a safe learning environment students need to be guided, as with their academic learning, to manage their own behaviour (De Jong, 2005; Glynn & Berryman, 2005; Weinstein et al.,2004). This involves being conscious of behaviour and learning strategies to cope as with learning to learn. De Jong (2005) and Glynn & Berryman  (2005) also recommend that teachers should be aware and monitor of the antecedents of behaviours so that problems can be diffused before they arise.

Transforming the System

Weinstein et al. (2004) urge a commitment to transformation of current systems and acknowledge the earlier stance taken by Villegas and Lucas (2002) regarding the need for the ‘infusion’ of a multicultural emphasis to the pre-service curriculum of aspiring teachers. Weinstein suggests that prospective teachers must act as the ‘change agents’ to turning around practice in schools. Villegas and Lucas sees that it as necessary that teacher trainees need to believe in the need for a culturally responsive learning environment and that this view cannot be imposed on them by their educators, but rather that dialogue begin between teacher educators and aspiring teachers.

When teacher trainees become classroom practitioners they need to consider how best to manage systems within the classroom in order to be culturally responsive. De Jong (2005) advocates flexibility of systems and approaches within the classroom so that learning is responsive to need and experience. Villegas and Lucas (2002) are in accord with this view and flexibility allows for a multitude of ways to perceive reality in the learning environment.

System transformation must also change at a school-management level in order to achieve widespread success in creating culturally responsive centres of learning. Weinstein et al. (2004) recommend that educators reflect on their current practices and Villegas and Lucas (2002) propose that schools should consider the role that they take in perpetuating social and societal injustice and discrimination, whether in policy or practice.

Evaluation

While Villegas and Lucas (2002) proposal is aimed at those whose role it is to instruct teachers during their initial teacher training, this proposal could also be applied to a school leadership context. Villegas and Lucas’ suggestion that dialogue is necessary between leaders and learners to afford any shift in practice, the same applies in a school setting. In this setting, teacher experiences may serve to aid or hinder progress. Many teachers find changing their attitudes and approaches to teaching to be a challenging prospect, but others may be motivated to make such changes because of their own experiences in increasingly diverse classroom settings.

Weinstein et al. (2004) claim that there is little reference made to the impact of culture on classroom management. They assert that much literature on classroom management is presented as if management is culturally impartial. At a first glance, it would seem that this claim is illustrated in De Jong’s (2005) research report on managing student behaviour in an Australian context. However, while in this case the term ‘culture’ is used within the context of ethnic difference, if an understanding of this term is broadened to include environment, values, relationships, and community, it becomes evident that a good deal of consideration has been given to the culture of students within this report. Nevertheless, there is a danger in omitting exclusive reference to ethnic belonging when considering environment, values, relationships and community as readers from the dominant culture may overlook the significant differences in such aspects in a minority culture.

De Jong’s investigation examined whether ‘best practice’ in managing student behaviour, as identified within international research, was also evident in selected Australian settings that had been identified as being successful in addressing student behaviour issues by different education jurisdictions. However the literature regarding cultural responsiveness has tended to focus more on curriculum content, than behaviour management (Weinstein et al., 2004). Therefore the questions regarding whether those practices identified as being ‘best practice’ within international research were culturally responsive must be asked. Whose ‘best practice’ is it? Is it culturally responsive best practice?

The aim of the Student Behaviour Management Project of which De Jong was principal researcher, was to create a scaffold for steering principles and practices that could be used to support the creation of successful student behaviour management programmes for use in a variety of Australian education settings (De Jong, 2005). This is in contrast to the approach taken by Villegas and Lucas (2002), whose intention was to initiate meaningful dialogue. The danger with the approach reported by De Jong is that any framework that is created is seen as a ‘one size fits all’ approach to behaviour management, which seems to contradict De Jong’s recommendation not to treat students as an homogenous group, but as individuals. However, De Jong’s indicates that educationalists are using the guidelines as a ‘checklist’ for reflection purposes, rather than a recipe for success. De Jong also proposes that further discourse and deliberation about this important topic from an international perspective is necessary.

Conclusion

In conclusion, these four pieces of academic literature written by De Jong (2005); Glynn & Berryman (2005); Villegas and Lucas (2002); and Weinstein et al. (2004) exploring classroom management take different perspectives on the specifics within the notion of responsiveness, but they each emphaise the importance of relationships to enhance learning and behaviour. They also advocate the need for change at all levels – from teaching training to school management in order to ensure that learning environments are responsive to learners’ needs and backgrounds.

References

De Jong, T. (2005). A framework of principles and best practice for managing        student behaviour in the Australian educational context. School Psychology

            International. 26, (3)353-370.

Glynn, T., & Berryman, M. (2005). Understanding and responding to students’    behaviour difficulties.  In Fraser, D., Moltzen, R. & Ryba, R. (Eds.), Learners         with special needs in Aotearoa New Zealand (3^rd ed.), (pp.294-315).           Melbourne: Thomson Dunmore Press.

Villegas, A., & Lucas, T. (2002). Preparing culturally responsive teachers: Rethinking        the curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education. 53, (1)20-32.

Weinstein, C., Tomlinson-Clarke, S., & Curran, M. (2004). Toward a conception of          culturally responsive classroom management. Journal of Teacher Education.       55, (1)25-38.