Culturally Responsive Teaching

Culturally Responsive Teaching of Mathematics: Three Models from Linked Studies

Authors: Robin Averill, Dayle Anderson, Herewini Easton, Pania Te Maro, Derek Smith & Anne Hynds

Source: Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Vol. 40, No. 2 (Mar., 2009), pp.157-186

Be it ever so small, it is as precious as the greenstone.

As though it were a spider web.

This article is guided by the two Maori proverbs above (as translated into English).  The goal of Averill et al. was to model the ways that cultural perspectives of indigenous New Zealand Maori can be “woven” into pre-service teachers’ pedagogy and practice. This study is based on culturally responsive teaching (Gay, 2002); this is the idea that students bring cultural capital into the classroom and that by integrating cultural values and perspectives in the classroom, children’s motivation, mathematical understandings and achievement can improve. In order to reach these ends, raising social consciousness and developing cultural competence of teachers is key.  Averill et al. examined three studies to find out how teachers integrate cultural values and perspectives. Three models are offered as starting points for culturally responsive teaching and research. These are the component model, the holistic model and the principles model.

The component model was developed during a study of 124 pre-service elementary teachers. The key question in this study was to compare lecturer and student perceptions about the bi-cultural content in a mathematics education course.  Researchers used surveys and systemically analyzed course structure and course components .The most notable finding is that while lecturers tried to incorporate Maori content into a seamless and normal way through the use of artifacts and metaphors, pre-service teachers did not identify these specific strategies. The benefit of the component model is that it provides a more planned, coherent and explicit way to identify culturally responsive teaching practices and thus can be used to review and improve existing courses. 

In New Zealand, the Treaty of Waitangi informs education policy which states that indigenous content should be incorporated in public schools (K-12). The holistic model was developed as lecturers created a fourth year university course for pre-service teachers. Lecturers developed the course so that it was based on an indigenous metaphor and linked cultural components to the central metaphor. The metaphor was used as a tool for organizing and representing ideas. Researchers examined the artifacts that pre-service teachers made in order to determine how confident teachers were in their ability to address the implications of The Treaty of Waitangi; to examine how effective the use of the central theme in advancing students confidence and ability to incorporate indigenous components in a course; what specific mathematical links students find in practical activity; and to determine if there was a shift into students’ intentions and attitudes concerning the use of cultural activities. The holistic model can be used to develop courses. In order to do this successfully, course leaders have a confident understanding of cultural aspects in order to show and describe how they are linked to mathematical principles. Also, linking to an expert from the cultural group from which activities are drawn so that their approach aligns with that of the culture (and is thus holistic).

The third study recognized that first year teachers practice can vary considerably from their university learning. In this study researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with three first year teachers in order to examine how the principles of partnership, protection and participation linked to their mathematics teaching. The questions asked centered around teacher expectations, how they demonstrated their understanding of the Treaty of Waitangi and what supports, dilemmas and challenges these teachers faced. All three teachers reported that they felt pressure to conform to the existing values and beliefs in their school communities. School personnel did not talk about the incorporating indigenous teaching and so one idea that teachers struggled with was bi-cultural perspective (indigenous and non-indigenous) versus a multicultural perspective. The results of this study show that teacher education programs should include strategies to address challenges that first year teachers face.

I found this article quite helpful. In my last post, I said how I feel I have haphazardly have used culturally responsive teaching methods; I think what I mean is that I have used cultural components in my teaching but I feel I am on a journey towards having a more holistic approach that incorporates indigenous ways of knowing into units of study.

What I found interesting was that in the introduction, the authors glossed over Demmert and Towner’s finding that stated student achievement is not linked to culturally responsive teaching (p.160). Instead Averill et al. assert that cultural competence and social consciousness are also worthy goals for teachers. To me this seems completely illogical. Firstly, if students are not achieving as a result of culturally responsive teaching we need to look at our assessment measures. Secondly, if students are not achieving we need to critically examine our so-called culturally responsive teaching methods. The point of having cultural competence is to meet the need of the learner.

One aspect I think this article does not address is the implicit way ‘western’ ways of knowing are considered normal and legitimate compared with indigenous (and other cultural) ways of knowing in school. (I think this could be a part of the hidden curriculum) My first teaching job was in a remote Metis community.  One example of how Metis ways of knowing were delegitimized is the way that students did not get any credit for what they knew. As the school as ‘at-risk’ the province mandated that students had to complete ‘culture-free’ math unit tests and submit them to the province’s ministry of education. For instance, in learning shape and polygons, students who could build cabins with their kokums (grandmas) on the weekend but had difficulty spelling a polygon name would technically be incorrect. Although one could argue that we could use cultural capital to teach such concepts, the assessment measures and the types of knowing (valuing writing as opposed to building) need be addressed. The result of these measures is that students feel inferior, like they have failed and that they themselves are de-legitimized. Compounded over years, this has a detrimental effect on student identity and is likely one of the factors that leads most students in this community to drop out in the ninth grade. 

There are aspects of culturally responsive teaching that make me feel uneasy. If 'pure mathematics' is supposedly culture-free will culturally responsive teaching ever be fully accepted?