RTL2 Assignment 2

Part A - Literature Review

Has cultural diversity affected teachers pedagogical beliefs and practices

in the 21st century?

Cross-cultural education has been part of the educational agenda since the

second half of the twentieth century, to ‘manage’ ethnic and cultural diversity

(Leeman & Reid, 2006). It has been a topic of debate within Australia since the

1970s in which theory, policy and practice has been ongoing (Leeman & Reid,

2006). More recently, inclusive practices have been made a priority within the

education department to establish a sense of ‘global citizenship’ (Ho, 2011. pg.

605). A push for intercultural education has created momentum for a change to

the dominant western discourse, in which teachers pedagogical beliefs and

practices are at the forefront.

Flemming (2007) describes Australian school populations as increasingly

reflective of the diverse social, cultural and linguistic backgrounds of

communities within Australian, with 40% of inhabitants being first and second

generation migrants (Leeman & Reid, 2006). Ho (2011) further acknowledges

the notion of ‘everyday multiculturalism’, within contemporary Australia,

arguing that cross-cultural ‘micropublics’, where unavoidable engagement

across cultures exist in many social settings of everyday life, most notably

within schools (Ho, 2011).

In 2006, Leeman & Reid compared the differences and commonalities of

multi/intercultural Education programs between Australia and Netherlands. The

aim of their comparative study was to provide impetus for reflection on the

interwoven dimension of culturalism and individualism by teachers, students

and the wider community and how it creates limitations and dilemmas for

teaching pedagogies (Leeman & Reid, 2006). An example of this was their

discussion of a study involving four focus groups of Aboriginal students across

multiple levels of a Sydney secondary school. Aboriginal youth have been

pathologised as having low self-esteem due to a ‘lost’ culture, thus policy and

curriculum has been developed to enhance self‐esteem through supportive

school‐based activities (Leeman & Reid, 2006). That said, the focus group

discussion revealed that much of the curriculum aimed at supporting the

culture of Aboriginal students was objectionable, whereby students believed

the traditional ‘textbook’ material of bush-tucker and political Aboriginal

colours of resistance (yellow, red and black), did not connect with the

Aboriginal youth of today, as students were more interested in African

American rap culture and clothes, whilst coming to understand their own family

culture and history (Leeman & Reid, 2006).

This notion transcends into Upping and Bukers (2014) discussion on

intercultural developments in the German education context. They discuss the

social influences on pedagogy from the 1970‘s ‘foreigner policy’, to antiracism

pedagogy of the 1990‘s after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and current diversity

pedagogy, in which homogeneity aims to be replaced by heterogeneity as the

norm in schools (Upping & Buker, 2014). Their study acknowledges that

children fit poorly into one-dimensional, pre-determined patterns of action and

interpretation, for example German or non-German students (Upping & Buker

2014). Upping and Buker raise concerns over a discourse on the development

of hybrid identities and transculturality which they believe can create a loss of

cultural heterogeneity, as diversity pedagogy in Germany expands to

incorporate social inclusion.

On the other hand, Ali & Murphy (2013) discuss the importance of effective

culturally inclusive and relatable content for all students. They discuss how

American Schools began to incorporate a Culturally-Value-Driven (CVD)

framework into their classrooms in the 2000’s to combat the increasing drop-

out rate of African American students, who were often reported as believing

that achieving success in school was associated with acting ‘white’. The CVD is

a deconstructed model which encourages students to identify education as

valuable, develop their identity, and for teachers instruction to be impactful.

The framework allows students to find meaning and relevancy in their

schoolwork, to which students may find their ‘voice’ within the classroom,

however it also challenges Upping & Bukers ideals of replacing of

‘homogeneity’ with ‘heterogeneity’ (Upping & Buker, 2014).

The CVD framework is similar to Catarci’s (2014) findings in his comparative

analysis of intercultural practices and theories developed in the ‘old’ and ‘new’

immigration countries of contemporary Europe. His research demonstrates

various strategies in place throughout European schools aimed to encourage

intercultural education for example: orientation measures, including

interpreters, special resource persons/councils; strategies to enhance parental

involvement and communication between school and immigrant families;

‘mother tongue’ instruction, including extracurricular activities and resources

(Catarci, 2014).
However, unlike Ali & Murphys research, Catarci highlights social equity as a

major challenge for intercultural education. He discusses the structural

segregation of students from immigrant backgrounds, where the tradition of

language and cultural homogeneity in European education systems has led to

many cases of isolation amongst immigrant students, coinciding with lower

social and economic opportunities. Catarci gives an example of the statistically

widening gap between the higher performing native-born students of

immigrants compared to their lower performing immigrant counterparts.

Moreover, Ho (2011) analyses government data from the ‘My School’ website,

on school populations to show that culturally diverse classrooms are unevenly

distributed amongst schools, most notably between public and private sectors.

Ho outlines public schools have the highest levels of cultural diversity, and

most closely reflective of their wider community, where as independent schools

had the lowest level of cultural diversity, reflecting a smaller proportion of their

surrounding community (Ho, 2011).

Flemming (2007) highlights another issue teachers face when attempting to

create culturally responsive and relevant pedagogy, is the rigourous

assessment demands placed upon them by the national education system. The

intensity of reporting student achievement against the benchmark can be

directly affected by social and economical influences (Flemming, 2007).

Research based off Munter et al. (2012) underline a new modal for twenty-first

century educators that redefine the identity of the teacher/student relationship,

with focus on the teachers agency in students’ lives. The project is based off

the impact war has on students identity and why educators must advocate

human rights by promoting principles of peace education in their curricula.

Munter et al. (2012) conduct an interview with a teacher from El Paso, located

on the USA and Mexican boarder. The interview provides a window of

observation into how teachers bridge the gap between theory and action on

how to create a safe place for immigrant youth who have possibly experienced

violence. Techniques enacted in the El Paso classroom promote positive

interactions that engage students, by integrating thoughtful and well-designed

pedagogies such as active listening, creating caring relationships between

teacher and students, experiential learning that enhances connectedness and

reflection.

These beliefs and practices are reflected in Flemming’s (2007) discussion on

the 20 item scale study by Lingard, Ludwig, Bahr, Mills, Hayes, Christie, Gore

and Luke, (2001) of Productive Pedagogies to examine classroom practice.

Their findings were used to develop a model of Productive Pedagogies,

becoming the basis for curriculum reform (Flemming, 2007). Flemming noted

that key aspects required for improved student outcomes, were Intellectual

Quality, a Supportive Classroom, Connectedness, Environment and Recognition

of Difference, and described teachers as the most important variable in a

students learning (Flemming, 2007).

This view is also supported by Voinea & Bota, who in 2015 conducted a study

on the pedagogical beliefs of teachers, focusing on the theories behind the

relationship between society values/beliefs and teacher professional

development. Voinea & Bota used an ALACT model, (which consisted of five

phases: Action, Looking back on action, Awareness, Creating alternative

methods, Trial), to develop a questionnaire-based survey named, The Teacher’s

Beliefs Inventory. It consisted of 104 questions grouped into several categories

which were ranked on a Lickert-type scale, and conducted across 120 teachers

and pre-service teachers. The second part of the study asked subjects to fill out

statements regarding the future of education. The study found that participants

believe “the teacher is the most important agent in educating young

generations” (pg. 1004), with responsibility and empathy ranking highest

among teaching values. A general comment frequently made was: “Students

today are different today” (pg. 1005), which can be interpreted in various ways,

according to the subjects teaching beliefs (Voinea & Bota, 2015).

There is more research to be done on culturally responsive pedagogies in

contemporary classrooms. The action research project on this topic partly

addresses this subject for new research.

References

Ali, S. & Murphy, R. (2013) Merging and Creating Culturally Relevant Pedagogy in

Public Schools, Journal of Research Initiatives, 1: 1(6).

http://digitalcommons.uncfsu.edu/jri/vol1/iss1/6
Catarci, M. (2014). Intercultural education in the European context: key remarks from a

comparative study, Intercultural Education, 25:2, pp. 95-104. DOI:

10.1080/14675986.2014.886820

Flemming, M.A. (2007) The Impact of Diversity in Queensland Classrooms on Literacy

Teaching in Changing Times. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning,

3(3), pp. 77-91. https:// eprints.usq.edu.au/19737/1/Fleming_IJPL_v3n3_PV.pdf

Hüpping, B & Büker, P. (2014). The development of intercultural pedagogy and its

influences on primary schools: conclusions and perspectives. Intercultural

Education, 24: 1, pp. 1-13.

DOI:org.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/10.1080/14675986.2014.878072

Ho, C. (2011) Respecting the Presence of Others: School Micropublics and Everyday

Multiculturalism. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 32 (6), 603-619.

http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/ 10.1080/07256868.2011.618106

Leeman, Y. & Reid, C. (2006) Multi/intercultural education in Australia and the

Netherlands. pp. 57-72

https://doi-org.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/10.1080/03057920500382325

Munter, J., McKinley, L. & Sarabia, K. (2012) Classroom of hope: The voice of one

courageous teacher on the US–Mexico border. Journal of Peace Education. 9:1. pp.

49-64.

https://doi-org.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/10.1080/17400201.2012.657616

Voinea, M. & Bota, A.O. (2015) (When) teachers’ pedagogical beliefs are changing?

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 180, pp. 1001 – 1006.

DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.191
Dear Potential Participant:

I am working on a project titled ‘What are the effects of changing pedagogical practices
in 21st century classrooms?’ for the class, ‘Researching Teaching and Learning 2,’ at
Western Sydney University. As part of the project, I am collecting information to help
inform the design of a teacher research proposal.

Our topic has outlined a number of factors that reflect the effects of changing pedagogical
practices in contemporary classrooms. We will be assessing how cultural diversity impacts
on teachers pedagogical beliefs and practices. In order to do this, we are seeking consent
from teachers and students to take part in an interview. Participants contribution will be
de-identified.

By signing this form, I acknowledge that:

· I have read the project information, or have had the project information read to me
and have been given the opportunity to discuss the information and my
involvement in the project with the researcher/s.

· The procedures required for the project and the time involved have been explained
to me, and any questions I have about the project have been answered to my
satisfaction.

· I consent to taking part in an interview.

· I understand that my involvement is confidential and that the information gained

during this data collection experience will only be reported within the confines of
the ‘Researching Teaching and Learning 2’ unit, and that all personal details will be
de-identified from the data.

· I understand that I can withdraw from the project at any time, without affecting my
relationship with the researcher/s, now or in the future.

By signing below, I acknowledge that I am 18 years of age or older, or I am a full-time

university student who is 17 years old.

Signed: __________________________________

Name: __________________________________

Date: __________________________________

By signing below, I acknowledge that I am the legal guardian of a person who is 16 or 17

years old, and provide my consent for the person’s participation.

Signed: __________________________________
Name: __________________________________

Date: __________________________________

Part B: Data Collection Protocol

The following data collection uses the method of interview protocol constructed

by the researcher to collect relevant data as follows:

Interview protocol: Establish background and demographic knowledge including

participants name, year level, race, migration background and language levels,

as well as context and any possible concerns at the beginning of the interview.

Provide the WSU protocol document for full understanding of the research

project and ethical purpose of the practice. Interviews will run between

approximately 5 - 15 minutes in a semi-structured style.

The interview question table below was inspired by the work of Sickel &

Friedrichsen, 2015, pages 75-87.

Research Conceptual Interview Questions Interview Questions

question themes from for Teachers for Students
the Literature
What practical Teachers * What do you N/A
and theoretical knowledge know about
knowledge do What is their Culturally responsive
practicing understanding pedagogy?
teachers have about cultural * Can you
about culturally responsive describe when it
responsive pedagogy? would be
pedagogy? appropriate to use
culturally responsive
pedagogy?
* What do you
know about the
effects this has on
student learning?
How do Teachers practice *If I followed you *How do you feel your
teachers Do they exhibit through a regular school lessons relate
implement culturally diverse school day, how to you on a cultural
culturally teaching ? would I see you level?
diverse approach culturally *How do you feel the
pedagogical responsive teacher responds to
strategies pedagogical your language and
within the strategies in the cultural needs?
classroom? classroom?

What is the Social and *In your opinion, do *In your opinion, how
perceived Economical you believe a do you think your
impact socio- contributors students cultural school grades would
economic How does SES background can change if you had
status has on effect students effect his/her learning more financial
students from from culturally opportunities support?
ethnic or diverse *In your opinion, do *What do you believe
minority backgrounds? you believe a is the difference
backgrounds students SES can between Independent
have an affect on (private) schools and
their learning public schools?
opportunities?
What is the Teachers impact *In your opinion, to *In your opinion, how
perceived Are teachers the what extent do you do you think your
impact most important think your choice of teachers choices of
teaching aspect of student pedagogy effects lessons affects your
pedagogy has learning? student learning?
on student development?
education? *Do you believe
educators are
effectively addressing
culturally diverse
classrooms?
Why should Teachers * What are your *Explain any areas in
teachers reflect reflection students like? your lessons that you
on their What is the Describe their believe you would
pedagogical impact of teacher cultural backgrounds benefit more from if
practices? reflection? and interests. your teacher used
*How does your more culturally
students cultural relatable subject
background influence matter or language
your planning if at
all?
*Explain any teaching
strategies you would
like to improve on
that involve culturally
relevant pedagogy
 References

Interviewing for Action Research (2010).

http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~mid/edr725/class/interviewing/

introduction/reading4-1-1.html)

Sickel, A. J., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2015). Beliefs, practical knowledge, and

context: A longitudinal study of a beginning biology teacher’s 5E unit. School

Science and Mathematics, 115(2), 75-87.

Part C: Data Collection Protocol Explanation

The methodology used in the data collection protocol of this research

assignment aims to gather qualitative data which will be used as the basis for

an in-depth analysis of wider issues discussed in the literature review.

The traditional research methodology of interviews was used in a semi-

structured design to stimulate discussion from participants in a relaxed setting

regarding teacher/student attitudes and beliefs. Open-ended and varying

questions were used to facilitate participants exploration of their own beliefs,

knowledge and opinions regarding culturally responsive pedagogies in an open

and honest environment, whist also critically reflecting on their own individual

ideas and concerns (Baumfield et al. 2013).

Consideration of the potential audience for this research assignment, in this

instance teachers, also influenced the decision to gather qualitative data, as

they often prefer a method that collects information on beliefs and attitudes of

students and explores ‘why’ things occur (Baumfield et al. 2013).

Prior to the interview, researches adhere to the ethical principles of informed

consent by which they discuss the interview protocol with participants before

having them sign the Western Sydney protocol document. The participants

background and demographic information are also established prior to the

interview to ensure clear and concise data is collected for later analysis.

The interview uses a variation of questions from different categories influenced

by Interviewing for Action Research (2010), which are used to ignite in-depth

responses from participants. Types of questions included in the interview were

from categories such as ‘experience/ behavior questions’, which were used to

stimulate a description of actions and routines from participants, such as the

questions aimed at teachers associated with the topic ‘teachers response’.

However, in the same topic, students were asked ‘feeling questions’, aimed at

tapping into their emotional response (Interviewing for Action Research, 2010).

The interview questions were created from the conceptual themes that arose in

the literature review, which were then catagorised via the table above inspired

by Sickel & Friedrichsen (2015). The most commonly occurring themes

throughout the review was teachers knowledge and teachers practice in

regards to culturally responsive pedagogy. To ensure a thorough exploration of

these topics, both teachers and students were interviewed to share insight

from both sides of the classroom.

This subtopic contributes to the understanding of the overall research topic by

supplementing the academic outcomes of culturally responsive pedagogy in

the 21st century explored by peers, and other academics. It is supportive to the

other three subtopics which discuss the possible effects that technology,

teacher education and assessment have on contemporary pedagogy practices

and vice versa. The combination of all four topics should produce an in-depth

evaluation on what the effects of changing pedagogical practices of the 21st

century are.

This subtopic inparticular sheds insight into the attitudes and beliefs of

students and teachers, by examining the internal and external pressures of

social, cultural and to some extend political concerns when understanding how

cultural diversity has affected pedagogical beliefs and practices in the 21st

century.

References

Baumfield, V., Hall, E., & Wall, K. (2013). How to do a practitioner enquiry:

Deciding on an approach and complementary methods. Sage Publications.

Action research in education : learning through practitioner enquiry. pp. 50-

69. ISBN: 9781446272039

Interviewing for Action Research (2010).

http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~mid/edr725/class/interviewing/

introduction/reading4-1-1.html)

Sickel, A. J., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2015). Beliefs, practical knowledge, and

context: A longitudinal study of a beginning biology teacher’s 5E unit. School

Science and Mathematics, 115(2), 75-87.