putting pact in context and context in pactto place pact and our collaboration around it in context,...

Stillman, Anderson, Arellano, Wong, Berta-Avila, Alfaro, & Struthers

135

Teacher Education Quarterly, Fall 2013

Putting PACT in Contextand Context in PACT:

Teacher Educators Collaboratingaround Program-Specific

and Shared Learning Goals

By Jamy Stillman, Lauren Anderson, Adele Arellano, Pia Lindquist Wong,

Margarita Berta-Avila,Cristina Alfaro, & Kathryn Struthers

Jamy Stillman is an assistant professor in the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. Lauren Anderson is an assistant professor in the Department of Education at Connecticut College, New London, Connecticut. Adele Arellano is a professor, Pia Lindquist Wong is a professor and chair, and Margarita Berta-Avila is an associate professor, all with the Department of Teaching Credentials of the College of Education at California, State University, Sacramento. Cristina Alfaro is an associate professor and chair of the Department of Policy Studies in Language and Cross-Cultural Education at San Diego State University, San Diego, California. Kathryn Struthers is a doctoral candidate in the Urban Education Policy Ph.D. Program in the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern Californa, Los Angeles, California.

One of the more noteworthy developments inuniversity-basedteachereducationtodayisthepro-liferation of preservice teacher assessment, and inparticular, teacher performance assessment (TPA).Indeed,more than160 teacher educationprogramsinmorethan25statesrecentlyadoptedtheedTPA,aStanfordUniversitydevelopedteacherperformanceassessment tool (formerly theTeacherPerformanceAssessment Consortium or TPAC), to determineteachercandidates’eligibilityforateachingcredential(AACTE,2012a). Thescalingupofteacherperformanceassessmentistakingplaceinthefaceofanincreasinglynegativediscourseaboutandgrowingscrutinyofuniversity-

Putting PACT in Context and Context in PACT

136

based teacher education and has therefore generated strong reactions from theteachereducationcommunity.SomeleadersinthefieldhaveendorsedtheedTPA,arguing,forexample,thatitwillofferteachereducatorsevidenceofcandidates’abilitiestofacilitateK-12studentlearningandbringcredibilitytotheprofession(AACTE,2012b;Darling-Hammond&Hyler,2013;Hollins,2012).Othershavevoicedconcernabout,forexample,potentialthreatstoprogramqualityandfacultyprofessionalismposedbyedTPA’sstatusasahigh-stakesassessment,aswellasitspartnershipwithPearson—afor-profiteducationcorporation(Au,2013;Sawchuk,2013;Winerip,2012). Inmanyrespects,developmentsinCaliforniahaveservedasharbingersforthesedebatesnation-wide.In2008,theCaliforniaCommissiononTeacherCredentialingmandatedthateveryteachercandidateenrolledinanapprovedteachereducationprogrammustpassoneofthreeapprovedpreserviceteacherassessmentsinordertoearnacredential;more than30programsstate-widechose thePerformanceAssessmentforCaliforniaTeachers(PACT)—essentiallyanearlyversionoftheedTPA.Likecurrent reactions to theedTPA,responses toPACThave includedbothpraisefromthosewhobelieveithasthecapacitytoholdprogramsmoreac-countableforcandidates’learningandperformanceandconcernsfromthosewhoworryaboutitspotential—asatop-down,high-stakesassessment—tocontributetothestandardizationofteachereducation. Thisarticledescribestheeffortsofacollectiveofseventeachereducators,rep-resentingthreeofCalifornia’smanyuniversity-basedteachereducationprograms,torespondwithagencytosomeoftheopportunitiesandconcernsdescribedabove.ToplacePACTandourcollaborationarounditincontext,thearticleopenswithabriefoverviewoftheresearchontheimplementationoftop-downreformandhigh-stakesassessmentinteachereducation,focusingonthepotentialopportunitiesandobstaclesitpresents.Wethenofferabriefdescriptionofourcollaboration,whichwasanchoredinoursharedcommitmenttoimprovingeducationforhistoricallymarginal-izedyouth.Specificallywearticulatethekindofteachingpractice—contextualizedpractice—thatwehopetopreparefutureteacherstoengagein,andweshareatoolthatwedevelopedtohelpourselvesdeterminewhetherandhowPACTmightassistusinassessingthedevelopmentofthisparticularkindofpracticeamongourrespectiveteachercandidates.Weconcludebydiscussingpatternsseenacrossprogramsregard-ingcandidates’demonstrationofcontextualizedpracticeandbyraisingquestionsaboutthekindsofconditionsandresourcesthatwouldsupportteachereducatorstouseperformanceassessmenttoolsinadaptiveandinquiry-orientedways.

The Performance Assessment

for California Teachers (PACT) Like the edTPA, PACT takes a portfolio approach to assessment, with itscenterpiecebeingthe“teachingevent”:videosofcandidatesdeliveringalesson


137

intheirfieldplacementclassrooms,accompaniedbystudentworksamplesandmultiple,candidate-authoredwrittentasks,includinglessonplansandreflections.ThewrittentasksareassociatedwitheachofPACT’sfivedomains:ContextforLearning;PlanningforInstructionandAssessment;InstructingStudentsandSup-portingLearning;AssessingStudentLearning;andReflectingonTeachingandLearning.WiththeexceptionoftheContextCommentary—PACT’sonlyun-scoreddomain—candidatesmusteachearnapassingscore,requiringatleasta2ona4-pointscaleineachdomain. Researchsuggeststhattop-downreformsinteachereducation,includinghigh-stakes assessments like PACT, can lead programs to privilege compliance withexternalmandatesovermore authenticpursuits (Rennert-Ariev,2008), and/or tostandardizetheircurriculum(Berlak,2003;Kornfeld,Grady,Marker,&Ruddell,2007).Theseareparticularlytroublingtrendsgiventhatstandardsoftenfailtoen-courage,andmayevenundermine,effortstoprepareculturallyresponsiveteachers(Sleeter,2003;Zeichner,2003). Indeed,scholarshave raisedconcernsabout, forexample,thecultural-biasofteacherperformanceassessments,andhavequestionedteacherperformanceassessments’capacitytoaccuratelyevaluateteachersofcolorinparticular(e.g.,Ladson-Billings,1998). Keepingtheseconcernsinmind,andacknowledgingcurrentdebatessurround-ingthetop-downimplementationofedTPA,itisnotablethatmostexistingresearcharticlesonPACT,specifically,tendtoreportonPACT’spotentialtopositivelyimpactprogrampractice,especiallywhenfacultytakeanactiveroleinitsimplementation.Twostudies,inparticular,suggestthatPACTcanstimulateproductivedialogueamongteachereducatorsandleadtoprogramimprovement(Pecheone&Chung,2006;Peck,Gallucci,&Sloan,2010).Similarly,intheirstudyofhowteachercan-didatesframeandtreatEnglishLearnersinPACTmaterials,Bunch,Aguirre,andTéllez(2009)foundthatPACTimplementationcan“serveasaforumfor[teachereducators]…tocometogethertodiscusssharedordivergentunderstandingsofthegoalsoftheir…endeavors”ifandwhenteachereducatorsengagewithoneanotheraroundPACTimplementationandanalysesofPACTdata(pp.123-124).Inanotherexample,vanEsandConroy(2009)foundthatteachereducatorswerebetterabletoscaffoldcandidatelearninginrelationtoprogramgoalsafterconductingcasestudyanalysesofcandidateswithhighandlowPACTscores. Nonetheless,severalstudiesalsorevealthepotentialshortcomingsofPACT,aswellaspotentialproblems raisedby its implementation.Forexample, someresearch suggests that strict implementationofPACT, combinedwith its high-stakesnature,canleadcandidatestofocusonPACTcompletionandpassageattheexpenseofauthenticendeavors—includingthosethatengagethemwithK-12students directly—such as coursework and student teaching (Okhremtchouk etal.,2009).This isperhapsparticularlyproblematic,givenonerecentstudythathighlightsdiscrepanciesbetweenuniversityfieldsupervisors’informalevaluationsofcandidates(basedonreal-timeobservationsoftheirpracticewithchildrenin


138

classrooms)andcandidates’formalPACTscores(basedonretroactiveanalysesofsingle—andperhapsstrategicallyselected—video-tapedsegments)(Sandholtz&Shea,2012).SandholtzandSheaunderscorethelimitsofanyassessmenttool,includingPACT,tocaptureandassesswithaccuracyteaching’svariousdimen-sions,particularlyitsharder-to-capturecompetencies,suchasthosethatcompriseculturallyresponsiveteaching.Asaresult,authorsarguetheimportanceofusingmultiplemethodsand“multiplesourcesofevidencefrommultipleevaluators”inordertoensure“amorethoroughassessmentofeffectiveness”(p.48). Whilemanyofthesestudiesyieldinsightsthatholdpromiseforinformingimprovementstoteachereducatorpractice,othersraiseconcernsaboutthepotentialunintendedconsequencesofPACTimplementation.WiththeexceptionofBunch,Aguirre, andTéllez (2009), who illustrate how PACT can bring program-wideattentiontotheneedsofdiverselearners,theresearchbaseoffersgoodreasontoattendvigilantlytotherolePACTplaysinthepreparationofteachersgenerallyandinthepreparationofteacherstoservediversestudents,specifically.

Our Collaboration Ourcollaborationbeganatthe2008PACTImplementationConference,whentwoteachereducatorspresentedseveralquestionsthathademergedfromtheirin-volvementintheredesignoftheirteachereducationprogram.Thesequestionspressedparticipantstoconsider(a)howandtowhatdegreedifferentlearningexperienceswithinprogramsenabledteachercandidatestodevelopthecapacitiesnecessaryforfacilitatinglearningamongdiversestudents;(b)whatevidenceprogramswerecol-lectingtodemonstratethattheircandidatesweredevelopingthesecapacities;and(c)whatinterventionsprogramsemployedwhenevidenceindicatedthatcandidateswerenotdeveloping,orwerestrugglingundulytodevelop,suchcompetencies.Followingthepresentation,facultyfromseveralprogramsexpressedinterestinmeetingaftertheconferencetobeginthinkingtogetherabouttheissuesathand—particularlyhowtheyweremanifestingacrossdifferentteachereducationprogramsandwhatrolePACTmighthavetoplayinaddressingthem.Members’interestininter-institutionalcollaborationalsoreflectedtheirdesire tobeginrespondingintentionallytowhatwereatthetimerelativelynewcriticismsoftheknowledgebaseonteachereduca-tion—namelyitsrelianceonresearchandotheraccountsfocusedprimarilyonsinglecoursesand/orprograms(Cochran-Smith&Zeichner,2005). Whenthegroupnextconvened,theconversationturnedmoreconcertedlytoPACTasanopportunityforgeneratingvaluableassessmentdata,generally,andconcerningcandidates’abilitiestofacilitatelearningamongdiversepopulations,specifically.SomeparticipantssharedstoriesaboutcandidateswhohadscoredpoorlyonallorpartsofthePACT,butwereconsideredstrongwhenassessedotherwiseduringcourseworkandfieldexperiences.Otherssharedstoriesofcandidateswhowereperceivedasweakbyprogramfaculty,butwhohadreceivedhighscoreson


139

PACT.TheseanecdotesledseveralparticipantstoraisequestionsregardingPACT’scapacitytocapturecandidates’understandingsofandactualabilitiestoenactcultur-allyresponsiveinstruction.Morespecifically,questionsbegantocoalescearoundPACT’sdomainsofpracticeandcorrespondingrubrics.Theseincluded:HowdotherubricspressPACTscorerstoemphasizeparticularaspectsofpractice?Whichaspectsofpractice, ifany,seemtobeunderemphasizedand/orunderspecified?Whichrubriccomponentsseemmostandleastequippedtocaptureexamplesofcandidates’knowledgeandenactmentofculturallyresponsiveinstruction?Otherquestionsfocused,forexample,onissuesrelatedtoscorercalibration. Atthecloseofthismeeting,facultyfromonelargepublicuniversity’sBilin-gual,Crosscultural,Language,andAcademicDevelopment(BCLAD)program,anotherpublicuniversity’sBilingualandMulticulturalEducationprogram,andoneprivateuniversity’surban-focusedMATprogram—eachindifferentpartsofthestate—devisedaplantoexploretogetherPACT’scapacitiestoevaluatecandidates’understandingsandenactmentsofculturallyresponsiveinstruction.Tothatend,thegroupagreedtoexplorearandomsampleofPACTscompletedbygraduatesofourrespectiveprograms.Weanchoredthisexplorationwiththefollowingquestion:WhatisPACT’sroleincapturingteachercandidates’knowledgeaboutandabilitiestoenactculturallyresponsiveinstruction? Whenwereconvenedmonthslater,wedrewonthePACTswehadanalyzedtoengageinamoredetaileddiscussionofPACT’sroleincapturingcandidates’understandings of and abilities to practice culturally responsive teaching. Notsurprisingly,welearnedthatcandidatesacrossourthreeprogramsdemonstratedconsiderablevariationintheirunderstandingsabouthowtoteachdiversestudentsinculturallyresponsiveways;however,wefounditdifficulttoassessthenatureofthisvariationusingPACTrubrics,particularlybecausetheContextCommentary—thePACTcomponentdesignedtocapturecandidates’knowledgeaboutlearnersandplansforleveragingthatknowledgeininstruction—hasnocorollaryPACTrubricandthusgoesun-scored.Atthismeeting,wealsorealizedthat,despitepossessingwhatweperceivedtobesimilargoals,wedidnotalwaysusethesamelanguagetodescribequalityteaching.Weagreedthatweneededtocometogreaterclarityaboutourcommonground—whatwe,asacollective,hopedourteachercandidateswoulddemonstrateasaresultofmatriculatingthroughourprograms,andthuswhatwehopedPACTmighthelpusassess. Tobeginthisprocess,weestablishedagreementaboutthebasicpremise—as-serted by numerous scholars—that excellent teaching necessarily requires thatteachersdrawuponknowledgeoftheirstudentsinordertoadaptthe‘given’cur-riculumtosuitthespecificcontextandlearners(Hollins,2008).Keepingthisas-sertionandPACT’sfeaturesinmind,wedecidedtoreviewliteraturerelatedtothedevelopmentof“ambitious”pedagogygenerally(e.g.,Ball,2000;Ball&Forzani,2009;Lampert&Graziani,2009;Windschitl,Thompson,&Braaten,2011)andculturallyresponsivepedagogyspecifically(e.g.,Au,2001;Gay,2002;Hollins,


140

2008;Ladson-Billings,1995,2005;Nieto,1992),andthentofocusonandexpli-cateafoundationalelementofresponsiveteaching,whichwecall“contextualizing practice.”Thisconstruct—elaboratedbelowandoperationalized in the toolwepresentinsubsequentsections—articulatescommongroundamongourcollectiveandservesasanexplicitbridgeconnectingeducationaltheoryandpracticetothecontextualrealitiesofstudents’lives.

Coming to Clarity:

Contextualizing as Common Ground Ournotionofcontextualizingpracticedrawsonadeepbodyofworkthatboththeorizesandpositspracticalapproachesforfacilitatinglearningandimprovingout-comesfordiversestudents,particularlythoserepresentinghistoricallymarginalizedgroups.Asageneralrule,theseworksproblematizetraditionalassumptionsabouttherelationshipbetweenculture,teaching,andlearningasreflectingdeficitandas-similationistideologies;andtheyconceptualizenewrelationshipsthatunderscoremarginalizedstudents’culturalbackgroundsandexperiencesasassetsforlearning. Beginningintheearly1980s,scholarsbegantoofferaccountsofteachersandteaching that researchsuggestedmight facilitate learningamongstudents fromhistoricallymarginalizedcommunitiesmoreeffectively thantraditional instruc-tionalpractices(e.g.,Au&Jordan,1981;Lipka&McCarty,1994;Michaels,1981;Noordhoff&Kleninfeld,1993).Manyoftheseaccountsforegroundand/orhavebeeninterpretedasforegroundingchallengesposedbycultural“mismatch”andpossiblesolutionsrootedinculturalcompatibilityandcorrespondence.Michaels(1981),forexample,documentshowaWhiteteacher’sfailuretounderstandandseeasaresourceoneAfrican-Americanstudent’sdiscourseimpededthechild’sopportunitytolearn.Althoughthestudent’sdiscoursewasjustasdevelopedasthediscourseconsidered‘normal’or‘standard’bytheteacher,theteacherwasunabletorecognizeitsvalue—aninabilitythatresulted,evenifunintentionally,inmarginal-izingthestudentwithinthediscursivecommunityoftheclassroom.AuandJordan(1981),meanwhile,illustratehowteacherswhoprivilegeda“talk-story”interactionstructureduringlanguageartsinstruction—ratherthantraditionalturn-takingandteacher-leddiscussion—yieldedincreasedengagementandparticipationamongNativeHawaiianstudents. Scholarshiponmulticulturaleducation—emergingasanidentifiablefieldofstudyinthe1990s—likewiseadvancesthenotionthateducatorsmust“movebe-yondtolerance”ofstudentsfromnon-dominantbackgrounds(e.g.,Nieto,1994),andinsteadembracediversityasanassetforlearning.Liketheresearchalreadydescribed,multiculturalistsasserttheimportanceofteachersmodifyingcurriculumcontenttomoreaccuratelyreflectdiverseperspectivesandexperienceswhilealsoengaginginequity-minded,student-centered,andresponsivepedagogicalpractices(e.g.,Gay,2000,2002;Grant&Sleeter,1996;Sleeter,1996).Somescholarsamong


141

theseadditionallyunderscoretheimportanceofhelpingstudentstoviewknowledgeassociallyconstructedandtoparticipateinknowledgeconstructionthemselves(e.g.,Banks,1995,1996). TheworkofLadson-Billings(1994,1995)andothersbuildsonthislineofschol-arshipandemphasizesanexplicitstructuralcritique.Culturally relevant pedagogy,whichLadson-BillingsconceptualizedbasedonastudyofeighthighlyeffectiveteachersofAfricanAmericanstudents,advocatesinstructionalapproachesthatsup-portstudentstomakesenseofnewknowledgethroughtheirownculturalframes.AsLadson-Billingsexplains,thisperspectiveontherelationshipbetweencultureandteachingchallengesthetendency—evenamongsomemulticulturalists—tocon-ceptualizeeffectiveinstructionfordiverselearnersasinvolvingeffortstopromote“compatibility”or“congruence”betweenstudents’culturalandlinguisticpracticesandtheculturalandlinguisticpracticesdeemedmostvaluablebyschools.Inparticular,Ladson-Billingsclaimsthatworkingtoincreasehome-schoolcompatibilityand/orcongruenceoftendoeslittletochallengemainstreamnotionsofschoolingandsuc-cessandcanresultinovertortacitgoalsthatpositiondiversestudentsashavingto‘fit’intomainstreamsocietyasitis,andtosucceedonitsterms(problematicastheymaybe).Thus,Ladson-Billings(1995)theorizesarelationshipbetweenschoolandhomeculturethat“notonlyaddressesstudentachievementbutalsohelpsstudentstoaccept andaffirm their cultural identitywhiledevelopingcriticalperspectivesthatchallengeinequitiesthatschools(andotherinstitutions)perpetuate”(p.469).Underlyingthisperspectiveisadefinitionofculturethatrecognizesitsdynamismandcomplexity,andprivilegesstudents’everydaypracticesratherthantheir“fixed”culturaltraits(Gutiérrez&Rogoff,2003). Morerecently,researchersandeducatorshavebuiltonthisscholarshipand,indoingso,drawnontheoreticalperspectivesthatexplicitlyacknowledgethesocial,cultural,andhistoricaldimensionsoflearning(e.g.,Cole&Engestrom,1990;Tharpe&Gallimore,1988;Vygotsky,1978).“Fundsofknowledge,”theorizedbyLuisMollandcolleagues(1992)tocapturethe“historicallyaccumulatedandculturallydevelopedbodiesofknowledgeandskillsessentialforhouseholdorindividualfunctioningandwellbeing”(p.133)representsoneofthemostcom-monlycited—andoftenreductivelyinterpretedandmisused—conceptsinthislineage(e.g.,González,Wyman,&O’Conner,2011).Amongrespectedcontem-poraryscholarship,muchoftheworkthatisdrawingonandbuildingoutfromthesesocialandculturalperspectivesandkeyconceptsexploreshowteachers’practicescanscaffolddiversestudents’learningwithinspecificcontentareas.Multiple scholars, for example,haveapplied thiswork to literacy instruction(e.g.,Au,2001;Duncan-Andrade&Morrell,2005;Lee,2001,2007;Orellana,Reynolds,Dorner,&Meza,2003).Lee(2001),forexample,hasdocumentedtheeffectivenessofhavingAfricanAmericanhigh-schoolstudentsanalyzetheirownlanguagepractices,andleveragethatknowledgetoanalyzethelanguagefeaturedincanonicalliterature.Meanwhile,Duncan-AndradeandMorrell(2005)have


142

describedhowpopularculturetexts,suchaship-hoplyrics,canserveasabridgeforstudentstodeveloptheknowledgeandskillsarticulatedinthestatestandardsforEnglish/LanguageArts. Increasingly,researchersarealsoapplyingtheseframeworkstoothercontentareasaswell(e.g.,Brown&Ryoo,2008;Emdin,2010;Mojeetal.,2004).BrownandRyoo(2008),forexample,illustratehowa“content-first”approachtoscienceinstruction—whichintroducesscientificconceptsinstudents’everydaylanguage,followedlaterbyinstructionusingacademiclanguage—supportedagroupofmostlyAfrican-Americanstudentstobetteracquiresciencecontentknowledgeandtheacademiclanguagenecessaryforexpressingunderstanding.Particularlynotableamongthesemorerecentstudiesareeducators’effortstotapintostudents’salienteverydayexperiences,andtoconsidertheseassetsjustasessentialforlearningasstudents’culturalandlinguisticbackgrounds. Stretching across these works is recognition that preservice teachers mustdevelop ideological clarity about teaching historically marginalized youth and developpedagogicalclaritygroundedinthatideologicalclarity.Inotherwords,teachersneedtounderstandwithclaritytheirpurposeandtheircontext,includingtheschool,community,andbroadersocio-politicallandscape;theymustbelieveinstudents’capacitiesforsuccess,andtheymustworktoensurestudents’needsaremet,even—indeed,especially—withinoppressiveschoolandsocietalstructures.Thisrequiresthatteacherscontinuallyaskthemselves“if,when,andhowtheirbeliefsystemsuncriticallyreflectthoseofthedominantsocietyandsupportunfairandinequitableconditions”(Bartolomé,2002,p.168).SuchclarityisessentialinordertoavoidwhatBartoloméandTrueba(2000)describeas“blindlyfollowinglockstepmethodologiesandpromulgatingunexaminedbeliefsandattitudesthatoftencompoundthedifficultiesfacedbyimmigrantandU.S.-bornlow-statusminoritystudentsinschool”(p.279). Aftermuchdiscussionabouttheaforementionedworks,weestablishedcom-mongroundaroundtheessentialcomponentofqualityteachingthatwecall“con-textualizing.”Wefeltstronglythatourdefinitionofcontextualizingshouldreflectdynamicnotionsofcultureandattendtostudents’everydayexperiences,aswellastheirculturalandlinguisticbackgrounds;thesearevalueswehopethatweandourrespectiveprogramsimbueinteachercandidates.Wealsofeltstronglythatourdefinitionshouldemphasizetheactionswehopetoseecandidatestakeandtheacademiccontentcandidatesaimtoteach.Ultimately,wesoughtadefinitionthatwouldanchoroureffortstodeterminethedegreetowhichandhowourteachercandidatesweretailoringinstructiontothecontextswheretheywereteachingandtothelearnerswhotheywereteaching.Thus,wedefinedcontextualizing practiceas:“makinglearningmeaningfulandaccessiblethroughunearthing,recognizingandleveraginglearners’priorknowledge,values,andsalientexperiences,employ-ingfamiliarculturalandlinguistictools,andengagingstrategiessuchasexplicitteaching,coaching,andscaffoldingtosupportlearning.”


143

Withthisdefinition,weattemptedtomovebeyondanexpectationthatcandi-dateswouldmaketheirinstructionmoreculturally“compatible”or“congruent”;indeed,ouruseoftheterm“leveraging”representsourefforttoarticulateanap-proachthroughwhichthecontentisnotonlymadeaccessibletostudents,butisalsotransformedbytheknowledgeandresourcesthatstudentsbringtothetable.Thisparticulardistinction is important, becausewhile cultural recognitionandrelevanceremaincrucialpreconditionsforacademiclearning,theyalonewillnotensureintendedlearningunlesscoupledwithinspired,ambitiouspedagogies.Suchpedagogiesaim“toteachallkindsofstudentstonotonlyto‘know’academicsub-jects,butalsotobeabletousewhattheyknowinworkingonauthenticproblemsinacademicdomains”(Lampert,Boerst,&Graziani,2011).

Contextualizing Practice and PACT Followingthedevelopmentoftheabovedefinition,wecreatedamatrix-stylediagnostictool(seeFigure1),bothtooperationalizeourunderstandingofcontex-tualizedpractice, and also to assist ourselves indeterminingwhere examplesofcandidatepracticeembeddedincompletedPACTsmightfallalongacontinuumofcontextualization.Withthistool,weaimedtoassesscandidates’demonstratedca-pacitiestorecognize,makesenseof,makeconnectionsto,respondauthenticallytoand/orintentionallyleveragestudents’priorknowledgeandlivedexperienceswhenplanning,enacting,andreflectingonteachingpractice.Wantingtoalsoacknowledgetheinteractionbetweencandidates’degreeofideologicalclarityandthedegreeofpedagogicalclarity—andwantingtoacknowledgethepossibilitythatcandidateswouldpotentiallydemonstratedifferingdegreesofeach—weassignedroughcategoriespertainingtoideologicalclaritytothecolumnsinthematrix,andweassignedroughcategoriespertainingtopedagogicalpracticetotherowsinthematrix. ConstructingthesecategoriesoccurredthroughourengagementwithPACTswesharedacrossprograms.WethenassessedsharedPACTs,utilizingthistooltodeter-minetowhatdegreecandidatesappearedtoengageinthekindofpracticeoutlinedabove.Hereweoffersomeexamplestodemonstratesomekeydistinctions. Consider,forexample,Jason,whosePACTfeaturedhimintroducingthroughroleplayalessonontheconceptofadditionnumberstoriesinakindergartenclass-room.(Jason,andallothernames,arepseudonyms.)Duringthisroleplay,Jasonhadseveralstudentscometothefrontoftheclassroom,pretendingtogotothepark,andtheninvitedtwomorefriendstomeetthemthere.Insteadofusinganabstractproblem,thestudentswerethe“items”beingadded,sotheycouldimmediately(andinadevelopmentallyappropriatemanner)connectwithwhatwashappening.Laterinthelessonandlessonsequence,theteacheremployedmanipulatives(smallplasticbears)totell—andhavestudentsretell—numberstoriesaboutgoingtothemarketandgoingswimming,activitieswithwhichJasonassumed(butdidnotseemsure)hisstudentswerefamiliar.Intheplanningcommentary,onwhichJason


144

Figure 1: Contextualizing Practice Matrix

a TeacherasTechnician aTeacherasAgenta

Denial/ Passivity Engagement Ownership Rationalizationrecognizies recognizes recognizes Ideologya denies importanceof importanceof importanceof importanceof culturally culturally culturallyresponsive contextualizing responsive responsive instruction, practice instructionbut instructionanddemonstrates ORrationalizesdoesnotsee demonstrates senseofresponsibility decisiontonot oneselfas somesenseof forcontextualizing contextualize individually responsibility practice Practice practice/explainsresponsiblefor for andholdsoneself whycouldnot contextualizing contextualing accountablefor contextualize practice... practice... students'learning practice... outcomes...

Namingasimportant,butNotEvidencingunderstandingofstudents’ Jasonpriorknowledge,values,high-salienceexperiencesandfamiliarculturalandlinguistictools…

Identifying/Recognizingstudents’priorknowledge,values,high-salience Roxanaexperiencesandfamiliarculturalandlinguistictools…

Connectingtostudents’priorknowledge,values,high-salienceexperiences Saraandfamiliarculturalandlinguistictools…

Respondingtostudents’priorknowledge,values,high-salienceexperiences Aliciaandfamiliarculturalandlinguistictools…

Leveragingstudents’priorknowledge,values,high-salienceexperiences Marisaandfamiliarculturalandlinguistictoolstofacilitatelearningofacademicknowledgeandlanguage…

a


145

scoredall3s(i.e.,exceedingthepassingscoreof2onthePACT4-pointrubrics),heexplained,“whenIwasplanning,ItooktimetomakesurethatIwasmakingculturallysignificantreferencesforthem…Iknowhowmuchfuntheyhaveusingstickersand[bears].” What thisand the restof Jason’sPACTdocumentation indicates isa levelof engagement, in the sense that he demonstrates a sense of responsibility forcontextualizing(here,forexample,inhisstatedinterestinproviding“culturallysignificantreferences”).However,italsorevealsafairlyshallowunderstandingofhowtotapintostudents’priorknowledge,values,high-salienceexperiencesandfamiliarculturalandlinguistictools;indeed,itwasstudents’“fun”withstickersandplasticbears,forexample,thatJasonframedas“culturallysignificant.”Interest-ingly,Jasonhadwritteninhiscontextcommentaryabout,forexample,hisstudentslivingwithinclose,walkingdistanceoftheschool.One,hewrote,alsolivedinanearbyhomelessshelter,aboutwhichhenoted,“thishomeenvironmentbringsawholenewsetofinterestingthingstothinkaboutwhenteachingandmakingrelationstohome.”Yet,Jasonnevermentionedwhatthese“things”mightbeandhowthey—orotheraspectsofhisstudents’livesbeyondschool—mightactuallyinfluencehisinstruction.Hisinstructiondidnotmanifestsubstantiveaspectsofcontextualizing;heseemedmostlytomakegeneralassumptionsaboutstudents’salientexperiences,anddidlittletodrawoutandbuilduponstudents’knowledgeandfamiliarculturalandlinguistictools. Now consider Roxana, who completed her PACT in an English Only 6thgrademathclassthatwaspartofalargerdualimmersionlanguageprogram.InherPACT—whichcenteredaroundaseriesoflessonsaimedatteachingstudentsaboutpercentages—Roxanaconveyedsomedeficitthinking,particularlyconcern-ingEnglishLearners’academiccapacitiesandneeds,acrossvariousPACTcom-ponents.Forexample,intheplanningcomponent,wherecandidatesarepromptedtoexplaininstructionalaccommodationstheywillmakeforparticulargroupsofstudents,includingthoseconsideredEnglishLearners(ELs)orashavingspecialneeds,Roxana’sresponseillustrated(thoughshedidnotseemtorecognizethis)thatshewouldinfactlowerexpectationsforthesestudents,asopposedtomakingaccommodationsthatwouldsupportthemtoperformathighlevels.Specifically,shecommented,“Toaccountforthese[EL]students’needs,Ihavebeensurenottoaskforwrittenexplanations[oftheirunderstandings]...”)Amongotherthings,shealsopresentedGATEstudents(thosedesignatedas“gifted”)andELsasneces-sarilymutuallyexclusivegroups(e.g.,“Whilewholegrouplearningmaymoveataslowerpacethanisnecessaryfor[GATEstudents]inordertoaccommodateELstudents,onceinsmallgroups,they[GATEstudents]shouldbesufficientlyandadequatelypushed...”). SuchcommentssuggestthatRoxanamayunderstandtheimportanceofplan-ninginstructionthatrespondstospecificstudents’needs;however,wecannotbesure,sinceshewasrespondingtoapromptthataskedhertodescribetheaccom-


146

modationsshewillmake,ratherthantoexplainwhetherornot,andwhy,shewould makeaccommodations.Eitherway,Roxanaclearlystruggledtounderstandhowaccommodationscouldbemadeinawaythatwouldtreatallstudentsaspossessingimportantresourcesforlearning. Inaddition,throughoutherPACT,Roxanamostlytreatedstudents’priorknowl-edgerelatedtopercentagesasnecessarilybeingrootedonlyintheirinvolvementinpriorlessons(i.e.,inthiscase,priorlessonsfocusedonconvertingfractionstodecimals),andshemostlyoverlookedhowstudents’out-of-schoolknowledgeandexperiencesmightserveasabridgetoacademiccontent.And,evenininstanceswhereRoxanaseemedtorecognizestudents’out-of-schoolknowledgeandprac-tices,shedidsoinrelativelysuperficialterms.Tomakelearningexperiencesmore“relevant”forstudents,forexample,Roxana—similartoJason—reportedusing“familiar”languageandcontentinwordproblemsshecreated(e.g.,sneakers,bikeshop,grocerystore,Target,[Schoolname]sweatshirt). Roxanadidalsodescribeincorporatingactualcoupons/advertisementsfrom“local”publications“toconnectwhatwewillbedoingintheclassroomtotherealworld.”Thatsaid,herchoiceofrealia(coupons/advertisements)raisedquestionsabouttheirrelevance—mostwereclippedfroman‘eco-circular,’somefororganicchocolate,someforagourmet-ishfoodshop,someforcommuter-railtickets,andnoneselectedbykidsthemselves.Inaddition,evidenceofthecandidateactuallyuncoveringandcontextualizinginstudents’knowledgeandexperiencesremainedlimited(e.g.,“whenwehadfinishedoneexample,Iaskedstudentstothinkaboutsomethingtheyhadpurchasedrecently…bypullinginexamplesthatwererelevantto the students, the concept became more applicable to their daily lives”) andtentative(e.g.,“studentsmaymaketheconnectionbetweenthelessonthatwillbepresentedandfindingthebestdiscountatthegrocerystorewiththeirparent”). Roxana’sreflectionsrevealsomeevidenceofpotentialdevelopmentaroundthisissue—forexample,Day2reflectionsincludedcommentsaboutherdecisiontoaddahomeworkcomponentaskingstudentsto“findanadvertisement,cutitout,andcalculatehowmuchtheywillpayiftheyusethecoupon…toconnectstudents’learninginclasswiththeirlivesoutsideofschool.”Still,student-centeredartifactsremainedattheperiphery;corematerials,examples,andproblemsorbitedaroundRoxana,whoseemedtoassumetheirrelevancetoallstudentsbasedontheirpotentialrelevancetosome(e.g.,assumingaflyerisrelevantbecauseitcirculatesfrequentlyontheblockwheresheandtwostudentslive)and/orbasedonbasictopicalinterest(e.g.,assumingbiking-relatedcoupons’relevancebecausesomestudentslikebiking). Thoughevidenceofcontextualizedinstructionwaslimited,Roxanadidac-knowledgeexplicitlyinhercontextcommentarythat“allstudents…bringresourcesfromtheirhomeandcommunitylives”andthattheseresourcesare“notallequallyvaluedbyschools.”Andinherreflectivecommentarysheofferedanexampleofhowonestudent’s“fundsofknowledge”emergedinthecourseofalesson.Based


147

onhisexperiencesgroceryshoppingwithfamilymembers,“onestudentsharedthatjustbecausesomethinghasadiscountdoesn’tmeanthatitischeaper.Heexplainedthatfoodonthebottomshelfisusuallycheaperthanfoodonthehighershelves.Hisadvicewastofigureouthowmuchthefoodonthehighershelfcostswiththediscountandthenchecktoseeifitwascheaperthanthefoodonthebottomshelf.”ThisexampleisnotablebothinthattheinstructionallowedforthisknowledgesharingandthatRoxanarecognizedthevalueofthisstudent’scontribution;thesearenecessarypreconditionsforcontextualizedinstruction. YetitisalsotellingthatRoxanaemployedthisexamplemostlytodemonstrateherbeliefthatstudents’limited“academiclanguage”—inthiscase,notknowingtheworddiscountattheoutsetofthelessonsequence—tendedtounder-representstudents’conceptualunderstanding.Inherfinalreflectioncommentary,sheadmittedbeing,“surprisedatthelevelofconceptualunderstandingthatstudentsbrought…giventheirlackofbasiccomputationskills”;forexample,shenotedsurprisethatherstudents“alreadyunderstoodthatthenewpricewouldhavetobelowerthantheoriginalprice.”Whileitwasnodoubtimportantforthecandidatetosurfaceandreflectonpre-PACTassumptions,herrevelationsneverthelessraisequestionsaboutthenature/content/sourceofherassumptions(i.e.,assuminglimitedpriorknowledge),hercorollaryandfairlylowexpectationsfor(most)students,andhertendencytoviewcomputationalfluency(i.e.,calculatingpercentagesandconvert-ingfractionstodecimals)asthegatewaytoconceptualunderstanding. Ideologicallyspeaking,Roxana—similartoJason—attimesrecognizedtheimportanceofmakingherinstructionsomehow“relevant”tostudents.Atthesametime,shefailedinmanyinstancestoviewstudents’priorknowledgeassomethingbeyondwhatstudentshavelearnedinschoolandoftentendedtocharacterizestu-dentsashavingdeficitsinabilityandpriorout-of-schoolknowledge.Thissuggestsamorepassiveorientationtowardscontextualizedteaching.Ratherthanactuallycontextualizingherinstruction,RoxanaspentconsiderabletimeintheReflectiveCommentaryexplainingwhatappearedtobeanewfoundunderstandingofstu-dents’priorknowledgeandhigh-salienceexperiencesaswellasanewawarenessthatthesecouldbeconnected,respondedtoorleveragedforinstructionalpurposesinsubsequentlessons.Inotherwords,whileRoxanabegantodemonstratesomeunderstandingofhowstudents’out-of-schoolknowledgeandexperiencesmightrelatetoacademiclearning,shedidnotreallyworktoestablishconnections(ex-ceptsuperficially),torespondtostudents’priorknowledgeandexperiences,ortoleveragetheirpriorknowledgeandexperiencesforlearning. Sara’sandAlicia’seffortstocontextualizewentbeyondthoseofJasonandRoxanainimportantways.BothSara’sandAlicia’slessonswereconductedinde-mographicallydiverseupperelementaryclassrooms,whereLatinostudents(manyELs)comprisedthelargeststudentsubgroup.Saramadeconnectionsbetweenthesolidfiguresthatwereattheheartofhermathlessonsandherstudents’lives.Despitereceivingall2sacrossrubrics(withtheexceptionofone3inplanning),herPACT


148

demonstratedfairlyhigh-leveleffortsaimedatmakingmathematicalconceptsmoreaccessibletostudents.Sheexplainedhergoalwas,“tomakesolidconnectionstotheoutsideworldintermsoftheapplicationofthecontentknowledge[students]acquire…especiallyinthereal-worldapplicationofvolume.” Saraused“realiaandreal-worldexamples”tointroducesolidfigurestothestudentsinthefirstlesson.Shebroughtinherownexampleswhichconsistedofitemsthestudentsmightfindfamiliar:acerealbox,canofcorn,Harry PotterbookinSpanish,Ice AgeDVD,andtwotypesofcandy.Saradisplayedtheobjectsandsaidtostudents,“Theseareexamplesofsolidfiguresfrommyhome.Whataresomeexamplesfromyourhomes?”Thisquestion,whilesubtle,demonstratedthatSararealizedtheitemsinherownhomemightdifferfromthoseinherstudents’homes.Shetheninvitedstudentstobringinitemsfromhomeandcreatedatableforthewholeclasstousewithacolumnwheretheycouldlist“examplesfrom[the]realworld.”Asthelessonscontinued,Saraintroducednewmathematicalconcepts(e.g.,faces,edges,andvertices),usingthesoliditemsbroughttoclass;throughout,however,sheengagedstudentsprimarilyaroundheritemsandexamples,includingacerealbox,whichstudentswereinvitedtowrapandunwrapastheyexploredtherelationshipbetweenvolumeandsurfacearea. TheselessonsreflectedSara’sengagementineffortstocontextualize;theyofferedopportunitiesforstudentstomakemeaningfulconnectionsbetweenmathematicalcontentandtheirownlives.HadSaramovedherstudents’examplestothecenteroftheinstruction(e.g.,tryingtoengagethemindiscussionaboutwhenandwhyintheirownlivesitmightbeimportanttoknowthesurfaceareaofasolid,whenandwhytheymightneedtowrapsoliditems,etc.),shewouldhavebeenpoisedtoactuallyrespondtoandleverageintheinterestoflearningtheknowledgestudents’broughtwiththemintotheclassroom. Aliciatakesanaddedstep.HerContextCommentary,too,revealedherdesiretomakeclassroomlearningrelevanttoherstudents.ShealsomentionedthatbecausehercooperatingteacherdidnotallowanySpanishtobespokenintheclassroom,shesoughttomakeherinstructionmoreporoustostudents’knowledgeandexperiences:

Therefore,manyofmystudentscomefromarichHispanicheritageandsharemanyculturaltraditionswithothersintheclass;however,theyarerarelyaskedtobringthatheritageorthosetraditionstobearduringclassroomlessonstaughtbyMs.Hanson.Duringmylearningsegment,therefore,Iwillworktoincorpo-ratenotonlymystudents’priorknowledge,butalsotheirculturalandfamilialexperiencesoutsideof[the]classroominordertoconnecttheir“worlds”withthecontentathand.

Alicia’slearningsegmentlessons,whichfocusedondifferentformsofmeasure-ment,incorporatedeffortstodrawoutandonstudents’knowledgeandexperiences.Forexample,whendiscussingthemetricsystem,Aliciaaskedstudentstoshareiftheyhadvisitedothercountriesorcommunitieswhereadifferentmeasurementsystemwasusedandexplainedthat,“It’s important,asmathematicians,andas


149

worldtravelers,tounderstandhowtousebothsystemsofmeasurement.”Attheendofthislesson,Aliciaaskedstudentswhatunitsofmeasurementtheywouldwanttousetomeasuretheplayground,thedistancebetweenschoolandtheirownhomes,andthelengthofavideogame.Shealsoaskedthestudentstogiveexamplesoftimeswhentheyusedmeasurementineverydaylifeandofcareersthatwouldinvolveusingmeasurement. Withthisfoundationinplace,lessonstwoandthreerespondedmoreauthenti-callytostudents’livesoutsidemathclass,whilealsomakingcross-curricularcon-nectionstophysicaleducation.Knowingstudentsweretrainingforanupcomingtimedrunandroadrace,sheinvitedthemtoestimateandthenmeasurethedistancearoundthelotwheretheypracticed,to“seehowfarwe’vereallybeenrunningallthistime.”Thissecondlessonthencontinuedoutside,wherestudentsmeasuredtheasphalt,generateddatathatwasusedinthesubsequentlesson,anddraftedtheirownformulasforperimeterandsurfacearea.Inherreflection,Aliciaexplained,

Thestudentsseemedtobe…excitedtohaveanactualapplicationofthetopictotheireverydaylives(howfartheyruneachday).Infact,oneofmystudents,Ashley,whotendstostruggle…cameuptomeafterclass,andshehadcalculatedthedistancethestudentsruneachweek,allbyherself.WhenIsharedthatfactwiththeclass,manymorestudentsdecidedtotrytocalculatethedistancetheyruneachmonth.

Thatstudentsthemselvesgeneratedtheirownextensionactivities,andthatAliciarespondedtotheirauthenticinterests,speakstothepowerofcontextualizedinstruc-tion;assheputit,“whentheywere…givenacontextformeasurement’suse(suchashowrulerscanbeusedoutsideoftheclassroom),studentssuddenly‘camealive’andwereabletousethatunderstandingtocontinuetocreatenewknowledge.” Asanexampleofparticularlyhigh-levelcontextualizing,wedrawfromthePACTofMarisa,whocompletedherPACTinahighschoolartclass.WerecognizethatmanymightconsiderthisPACTanoutlier,giventhatitwasnotcompletedinatraditionalacademicdiscipline.Still,eventhoughwefoundotherexamplesofhigh-levelcontextualizing,weofferthisoneasanexamplehere,becauseit,inparticular,makesevidenttheimportantlinkbetweenideologicalandpedagogicalclarity,whilealsosituating‘clarity’inrobustnotionsofculture.Specifically,Marisa’sPACTinvolvedhavingstudentscreate“Social Conscience Posters”—artisticrep-resentationsinwhichtheyhadtotakeapositiononasocialissuethatconcernedorinterestedthem.Marisastatedthathermaingoalwasto,“makestudentsawareoftheeducational,informative,transformative,andpersuasiveabilitiesofart,andintheprocess,refinetheirartisticperception.” ThroughoutthePACT,Marisaarticulatedclearlyherunderstandingoftheim-portanceofmakinginstructionresponsiveandrelevanttostudents.Inheraccountofhowsheguidedstudentstoselecttopicsfortheirpostersintheplanningcom-ponent,forexample,Marisaexplained,“Igreatlyemphasizedmywishforstudents


150

tochooseissuesthatarerelevanttotheirlives,mainlybecausetheywillbemorelikelytoproducemoremeaningfulworkifitistiedtotheirpersonalexperiencesinsomeway.”DistinguishinghernotionsofculturalresponsivenessfromthoseespousedbyJasonandRoxana,Marisadidnotpresumetoknowaheadoftimewhatwouldberelevanttoherstudentsortoassumethatthesametopics/issueswouldholdthesamerelevanceforallstudents.Rather,Marisaseemedtoviewcultureasdynamicandherstudents’diversitiesasintersecting.Inherrationaleforsharingwithstudentsawiderangeofexistingsocialconscienceposters,forexample,sheexplained,

Idecidednottonarrowdownthelistofartistsorartworktoaselectfewcultures,butchosetobroadenittoincludeasmanyculturesaspossible…[J]ustbecauseapersonisfromaspecificethnicbackgrounddoesnotmeanthatheorsheactuallyidentifieswiththatethnicity,soItriedtoshowcasedifferenttypesofartworktoavoidstereotypingstudentsandassumingtheywouldidentifywithit.

Inadditiontopossessingamorerobustunderstandingofculture,Marisaalsoconveyedherbeliefthattheresponsibilityforcontextualizinginstructionwasindeedhers.InherReflectionCommentarysheexpressedthat,

Asinstructors,wemustmakeourcontentaccessible,interestingandmostofallrelevanttoourstudentssotheyfeelthereisaneedtolearnthesenewconcepts.Ifstudentsdon’tfeelaconnectionwiththesubject,iftheydon’tseearealworldapplicationtoit,thereisnorealdesiretolearnandinternalizethecontent.

Importantly,thiscommentdemonstratesMarisa’ssenseofresponsibilityforstudentlearninginthatherinterestinmakingthecontentrelevantistiedtohergoaltofacilitatelearning,notjusttoincreasestudents’interestorengagement. AlsoworthmentioningareMarisa’sstatedunderstandingsofstudents’priorknowledgeandtheroleofpriorknowledgeinfacilitatinglearning.AcrossmultiplePACTcomponents,shediscussedpriorknowledgebothintermsofstudents’lifeexperiencesandalsoinrelationtostudents’previousexperienceswithandunder-standingsofthesubjectmatter,includingtheirpastexperienceswithartmateri-alsandtheirfeelingstowardart-making,ingeneral.Recognizingthatthesepastexperiencescouldinfluencestudents’willingnessandabilitytocreateartworks,Marisaofferedstudentstheopportunitytocompleteawrittenreflectionontheseexperiencesandtheirpotentialimpactonthecurrentassignment. Afterintroducingstudentstoavarietyofsocialconsciencepostersfromdiffer-entpartsoftheworldandfromdifferenttimeperiods,Marisasupportedstudentstochooseasocialissuethatresonatedwiththemand/ortheircommunity;shethensupportedstudentstodrawonexperientialknowledgeandspecifictechnicalskillstomakeartworksthatwouldpersuadetheiraudiencestotakesomeformofrelatedaction. Thelessonsincorporatedacademiclanguage,suchas“innovation,”“conserva-tion,”“conscience,”“humanitarian,”andsoon.Thelessonsalsoinvolvedteaching


151

academiccontentandcritiquingartworkintandem—apairingthathelpedscaffoldstudents’understandinganduseofcontent-specificvocabulary(e.g.,complementary,monochromatic,line,color,shape,shade,shadow,texture,contrast,etc.).Studentsalsolearnedaboutthetechnicalaspectsofart-making,includinghowtouseanewmedium,colorpastels;thefinalrequirementsfortheposterswererigorouscon-cerningartisticqualities,reasoning,andpersuasiveness.Students’worksamplesdemonstratethattheychosearangeofissuesandwereabletousetheskillsthatweretaughttocreateeffectiveandtechnicallysophisticatedartwork. Thus,Marisademonstratedownershipinthatshetookfullresponsibilityforcontextualizingherpracticevis-à-visstudents’lives.HerPACT,thus,captureshersenseofideologicalclarity—claritythatguidedheringuidingstudentstowardthecreationofartworksthatvoicedtheirconcernsandofferedupasocialcritique.HerPACTalsoillustratespedagogicalclarity,inthatheractualpracticeinvolvesleveraging students’ knowledge and interests to facilitate students’ learning ofrigorousacademiccontent.

Discussion Astheliteraturecitedearlierinthismanuscriptsuggests,supportingteacherstocontextualizetheirpracticeisbothanessentialanddauntingtaskforteachereducators. For student teachers, too, contextualizing poses specific challenges;studentteachersarenewtotheprofessionandoftenalsonewtotheschoolsandcommunitieswheretheyteach.Andyettheexamplesabovesuggestthatsomeare,nevertheless,successfullyenactingaspectsofcontextualizedpractice.Wefindthisencouragingonmultiplelevels. Mostpertinenthere,weareencouragedbytheinformationthatPACTprovidesaboutourteachercandidates’efforts(orlackthereof)tocontextualizepractice.Webelievethattheperformanceassessmentsweuseforgeneralcredentialing(andforotherpurposes)shouldalsohelpustoencourageandaccuratelygaugecandidates’progresstowardthespecifickindsoflearningthatweconsidermostessential.TheexamplesabovesuggestthatPACTholdsthepotential—intheoryandundertherightconditions—todoso,bothwithinandacrossteachereducationprograms,andthatthematrix-stylediagnostictoolmightproveusefulinsurfacingsomeofthespecificaspectsofpracticethatwesupportandlookforinourcandidates’teaching.Tothatend,someamongushavebegunapplyingthematrixtoolmorebroadlyinourrespectiveprograms. That said, through our shared use of the matrix tool to analyze the afore-mentioned randomsampleofPACTs,wealso identified several cross-programpatterns.Oneofthetrendswasthatcandidatestendedtomentionstudents’priorknowledgeregardingschool-basedcontent,butneglectedtodiscussstudents’livedexperience—asmembersoffamiliesandcommunities—asprovidingrichfundsofknowledgeforschool-basedlearning.Althoughcandidatesserveasstudentteach-


152

ersinotherteachers’classroomsforarelativelyshortamountoftime(comparedtoanentire,fulltimeacademicyear)andthereforehaverelativelylimitedopportunitiestolearnaboutstudents,theirfamilies,andcommunities,mostcandidates’lackofacknowledgment—or merely superficial attention—concerning the role that stu-dents’out-of-schoolpriorknowledgeshouldplaywhenplanninglessonswasratherdisheartening.OurrespectiveTEPsespousevaluingstudents’homeandcommunityexperiencesandleveragingstudents’out-of-schoolknowledgeforschool-basedlearn-ing,andyetsomecandidatesseemednottobeacknowledgingorincorporatingtheseemphasesintotheirPACTs.Giventhatthemajorityofcandidatesmentionedstudents’priorknowledge,itseemsclearthatmanyhadinternalized—oratleasttakenupthelanguageof—theideathatnewlearningmustconnectwithandbuilduponwhatstu-dentsalreadyknow.However,theyoftenappearedweddedtoaviewoflearningthatwasprimarilyschool-basedandthusparticularlyproblematiciftheywereworkingwithstudentsfromculturallyandlinguisticallydiversebackgrounds,whosehomeandcommunityexperiencesmightnotreflecttraditionalormainstream/Whitestream“school”normsbutareneverthelesscriticaltotheirhealthyidentitydevelopmentandrepresentpowerfulresourcesforfacilitatinglearningnewacademiccontent. A second cross-program pattern concerned candidates’ assumptions aboutstudents’interestsandexperiencesandwhatwouldberelevanttostudents’lives.Whilesomeof theseassumptionsmayhavebeenaccurate(e.g.,kindergartnersspending timeat thepark), fewcandidatesdedicated time in their planningortooktimeintheirlessonstoactuallyaskthestudentsabouttheirlivesandthengroundtheirinstructioninwhattheirstudentsdeemedinterestingand/orrelevant.Indeed,oneofthecharacteristicsthatdistinguishedMarisa’sPACTfromothersweanalyzedwasthefactthatshedidnotassumerelevance.Instead,shesoughttolearnfromstudentsabouttheirexperiences,concernsandinterests,createdspaceinherlessonsforexchangeofideas,andactively(andexplicitly)strovetoavoidstereotypingstudentsbasedontheirraceorethnicity. Thecombinedtrendsofcandidates(a)eithernotacknowledgingorsuperficiallyacknowledgingout-of-schoolpriorknowledge,and(b)relyingonassumptions,ratherthanauthenticexchanges,aboutstudents’liveswhentheydidtrytorecognizetheknowledgestudentscarriedwiththemintotheclassroomofferdirectionforus,asteachereducatorsthinkingaboutprogramimprovementandthemessagesbeingtakenup,withvaryingdegreesofdepth,byourteachercandidates.Specifically,thesefindingspressustoconsiderhowstudentteachers,asguestsinotherteachers’classrooms,canlearnaboutstudents,families,andcommunitiesinmeaningful,respectfulwaysandhowourprogramscansupportcandidatestousewhattheylearntoinform—indeed,tocontextualize—theirinstruction.

Conclusion Whileweareabletoidentifysomeofthekeydifferencesbetweencandidates’


153

degrees of contextualization, we are left with more questions than answers.Specifically,itisbeyondthescopeofthisinvestigationtopinpointwhycertaincandidateswerebetterablethanotherstocontextualizetheirpractice.Sincethisanalysiswasexploratoryinnature,wedidnot,forexample,collectsupplemen-tarybackgroundinformationonthecandidateswhosePACTsweanalyzed.Nordidwehave theopportunity to interview thembefore,during,orafterPACTcompletionaboutthethinkingthatwentintotheirteachingevents.Weknow,forexample,thatMarisaandJasonattendeddifferentteachereducationprograms;butwedonotknowwhetherandhowthecontentoftheirprogrammaticcourse-workcontributedtothedifferingdegreesofcontextualizationevidencedintheirPACTs.Likewise,wecannotspeaktotheotherfactorsthatmayhaveledtotheirseeminglydifferentcapacitiesand/orinclinationstodemonstratecontextualizedpracticeinthecontextoftheirrespectivePACTs. WhileJason’s,Roxana’s,Sara’s,andAlicia’sPACTswererepresentativeinsomewaysofmanyteachingeventsweanalyzed,Marisa’swasanoutlierofsorts—intherandomsample,andinourownanecdotalaccountsofothercandidates’perfor-mancesonPACT—whenitcametocontextualizingpractice.NoneofthemembersofourcollaborativetaughtMarisainclass,andsowefoundourselveswondering,“Whoisshe?Whatcontributedtoherabilitytocontextualizeherpracticeinmorerobustways?”Givenherteachingevent’soutlierstatus,wetendtothinkthatitwasnotprogramcourseworkalonethatcontributedtohercapacity tocontextualizeherpracticeasshedid.Wealsohavesomeconcernaboutholdinghersupasanexemplar;indeed,fromadevelopmentalperspective,itmaynotbereasonabletoexpectmostpreserviceteachers—novicesattheverybeginningoftheirdevelop-mentaseducators—toconstructlessonsthatlandtheminthe“ownership”columnand“leveraging”rowofourmatrix,althoughcertainlythisisaworthy,if loftygoal.WhilewearecurioustoknowwhatmakesMarisa—andothercandidateslikeher—sospecial,whatsupportshertocontextualizeasshedoes,weareperhapsmoreacutelyconcernedwithcandidateslikeJason,Roxana,Sara,andAlicia,astheylikelyrepresentthemajorityofthestudentsweteach,andhowwecanbestsupportthem.How,forexample,canwemoveJason—whostatesclearlytheimportanceofcontextualizing—frommerelynamingthisasimportanttoidentifying,connecting,respondingand/orleveragingstudents’actualinterestsandexperiences?HowcanwemoveRoxanafurtheralongonthe“ideology”continuum,sosheengageswithandtakesownershipofherresponsibilitytocontextualizepractice? Giventherichnessofourownlearningexperienceasteachereducators,wealsowonderhowotherteachereducatorsmightbesupportedtoengageininquiry-orientedandadaptiveimplementationofcommonteacherperformanceassessmenttools.Forexample,howcanweprotectagainstcandidates—andteachereduca-tors—engagingwithaperformanceassessmentlikePACTinwaysthatprivilegerubric points over principles, technical skills over ideological clarity, policycomplianceoverprogrammaticcoherence?WhatcanbedonetopositionPACT


154

dataordatafromotherperformanceassessmentsasonecomponentofamultiplemeasuresassessmentsystem—thekindofsystemthatweknowisessentialinorderforassessmenttobeaccurate,fair,andreflectiveoflocalvaluesandgoals?Howcanperformanceassessmenthelpusnavigatetensionsthatarisewhenemphasiz-ingthecontextualizationofpracticeacrossmultiple,variedsettings,whilealsoworkingtoconstructcoherenceanddevelopsharedknowledge?Finally,becausewerecognizethetremendousvalueofcross-instructionalcollaboration,wealsowanttoacknowledgethatourcollaborationtookplacemostlyonourowntime,outsideourprogrammaticrolesandresponsibilities,andwithvaryingdegreesofinstitutionalsupport;thisaloneraisesquestionsabouttheconditions,practices,structuresandsystemsthatwouldbestsupportteachereducatorstoengageongoinginthisgenerative,inquiry-orientedwork. OuranalysisofsamplePACTsthusfardoesnotallowustoanswerthese—andother—questionsthataroseforusoverthecourseofthisexploration.Itdoes,how-ever,assistusinposingandrefiningsuchquestions.Italsogivesusspacetothinktogetheraboutandbetterarticulatewhatwehopeourcandidateswillknowandbeabletodoasfutureteachersofculturallyandlinguisticallydiversestudents.Likeothers,webelievethattoday’steachersmustbe“thoughtfullyadaptive”(Duffy,2005);indeed,thatveryideaiscentraltothekindofteachingthatcontextualizedpracticerepresents.Contextualizingisnothingifnotthoughtfuladaptionthattakesintoconsiderationtheneedsoflearners,astheyaresituatedinsocial,culturalandhistoricalcontexts.Whilenotwithoutitsflaws,weappreciatethatPACTprovideduswithcommontoolsforuseincollaboratingacrossprogramsandaroundsharedgoals.Aswetakeourfindingsbackwithustoourrespectiveprograms,wearehopefulthatthematrixtoolwedevelopedwillserveasaresourceforotherteachereducators—bothwithinandacrossTEPs—whoaimtoprepareteacherswhocancontextualizetheirpracticeinordertomeettheneedsofculturallyandlinguisti-callydiversestudents,particularlythosewhohavebeenhistoricallyunderserved.

Note TheauthorswouldliketothankDr.EttaHollinsforherleadershipinorganizingandsupportingthecollaborationthatledtothispublication.

ReferencesAACTE(2012a).edTPA.Available:http://edtpa.aacte.org/AACTE(2012b).Voices from the field.Available:http://edtpa.aacte.org/voices-from-the-

fieldAu,K.H.(2001).Culturallyresponsiveinstructionasadimensionofnewliteracies.Read-

ing Online, 5(1). Available: http://www.readingonline.org/newliteracies/lit_index.asp?HREF=/newliteracies/xu/index.html

Au, K., & Jordan, C. (1981).Teaching reading to Hawaiian children: Finding a cultur-allyappropriatesolution.InH.Trueba,G.Guthrie,&K.Au(Eds.),Culture and the


155

bilingual classroom: Studies in classroom ethnography (pp. 69-86). Rowley, MA:NewburyHouse.

Au,W.(2013,Summer).What’sanicetestlikeyoudoinginaplacelikethis?TheedTPAandcorporateeducation“reform.”Rethinking Schools,22-27.

Ball,D.L.(2000).Bridgingpractices:Intertwiningcontentandpedagogyinteachingandlearningtoteach. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3),241-247.

Ball,D.L.,&Forzani,F.(2009).Theworkofteachingandthechallengeforteachereduca-tion.Journal of Teacher Education, 60(5),497-511.

Banks,J.A.(1995).Multiculturaleducation:Historicaldevelopment,dimensions,andprac-tice.InJ.A.Banks&C.A.M.Banks(Eds.),Handbook of research on multicultural education(pp.3-24).NewYork:Macmillan.

Banks,J.A.(Ed.)(1996).Multicultural education, transformative knowledge and action.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.

Bartolomé,L.I.(2002)Creatinganequalplayingfield:Teachersasadvocates,bordercross-ersandculturalbrokers.InZ.F.Beykont(Ed.),The Power of culture: Teaching across language difference.Cambridge,MA;HarvardEducationPublishingGroup.

Bartolomé,L.I.,&Trueba,E.H.(2000).Beyondthepoliticsofschoolsandtherhetoricoffashionablepedagogies:Thesignificanceofteacherideology.InE.H.Trueba&L.I.Bartolomé(Eds.),Immigrant voices: In search of educational equity(pp.277-292).NewYork:Rowman&Littlefield.

Berlak,A.(2003).Who’sinchargehere?:Teachereducationand2042.Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(1),31-40.

Brown,B.,&Ryoo,K.(2008).Teachingscienceasalanguage:A“Content-First”approachtoscienceteaching.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(5),529-553.

Bunch,G.C.,Aguirre, J.M.,&Téllez,K. (2009).Beyond the scores:UsingcandidateresponsesonhighstakesperformanceassessmenttoinformteacherpreparationforEnglishlearners. Issues in Teacher Education, 18(1),103-128.

Cochran-Smith,M.,&Zeichner,K.(Eds.).(2005).Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher Education.Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErl-baumAssociates.

Darling-Hammond,L.,&Hyler,M.(2013,Summer).Theroleofperformanceassessmentindevelopingteachingasaprofession.Rethinking Schools,10-15.

Duffy,G.(2005).Developingmetacognitiveteachers:Visioningandtheexpert’schangingrole in teacher education and professional development. In S. Israel, C. Block, K.Bauserman, & K. Kinnucan-Welch (Eds.), Metacognition in literacy learning (pp.299–314).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.

Duncan-Andrade,J.M.R.,&Morrell,E.(2005).Turnupthatradioteacher:Popularculturalpedagogyinnewcentury.Journal of School Leadership, 15,284-304.

Emdin,C.(2010).Dimensionsofcommunicationinurbanscienceeducation:Interactionsandtransactions.Science Education, 95(1),1-20.

Gay,G.(2002).Preparingforculturallyresponsiveteaching.Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2),106-116.

Gay,G.(2000).Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.

Grant,C.A.,&Sleeter,C.E.(1996).After the school bell rings(Secondedition).London,UK:FalmerPress.

Gutiérrez,K.,&Rogoff,B.(2003).Culturalwaysoflearning:Individualtraitsorrepertories


156

ofpractice.Educational Researcher, 32(5),19-25.Hollins,E.(2012).Finally a truly promising new approach to improving teacher preparation.

Available:http://edtpa.aacte.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Hollins-edTPA.pdfHollins,E.(2008).Culture and school learning: Revealing the deep meaning(SecondEdi-

tion).NewYork:Routledge.Kornfeld,J.,Grady,K.,Marker,P.M.,&Ruddell,M.R.(2007).Caughtinthecurrent:A

self-study of state-mandated compliance in a teacher education program.Teachers College Record, 109(2),1902-1930.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2005). New directions in multicultural education: Complexities,boundaries, andcritical race theory. In J.A.Banks&C.A.McGeeBanks (Eds.),Handbook of research on multicultural education (SecondEdition)(p.50-65).SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

Ladson-Billings,G.(1998).Teachingindangeroustimes:Culturallyrelevantapproachestoteacherassessment.The Journal of Negro Education, 67(3),255-267.

Ladson-Billings,G. (1995).Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy.American Educational Research Journal, 32(3),465-491.

Ladson-Billings,G.(1994).The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African-American children.SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

Lampert,M.,Boerst,T.,&Graziani,F.(2011).Usingorganizationalresourcesintheserviceofambitiousteachingpractice.Teachers College Record, 113(7),1361-1400.

Lampert,M.,&Graziani,F.(2009).Instructionalactivitiesasatoolforteachers’andteachereducators’learning.Elementary School Journal, 109,491-509.

Lee,C.D.(2007).The Role of culture in academic literacies: Conducting our blooming in the midst of the whirlwind.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.

Lee,C.D.(2001).IsOctoberBrownChinese?Aculturalmodelingactivitysystemforun-derachievingstudents.American Educational Research Journal 38(1),97-141.

Lipka,J.,&McCarty,T.L.(1994).Changingthecultureofschooling:NavajoandYup’ikcases.Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 25(3),266-284.

Michaels,S.(1981).“Sharingtime”:Children’snarrativestylesanddifferentialaccesstoliteracy.Language in Society, 10(3),423-442.

Moje,E.B.,Ciechanowski,K.M.,Kramer,K.,Ellis,L.,Carrillo,R.,&Collazo,T.(2004).Workingtowardthirdspaceincontentarealiteracy:Anexaminationofeverydayfundsofknowledgeanddiscourse.Reading Research Quarterly, 39(1),38-70.

Nieto,S.(1994).Affirmation,solidarity,andcritique:Movingbeyondtoleranceinmulti-culturaleducation.”Multicultural Education, 1(4),9-12,35-38.

Nieto,S.(1992).Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education.WhitePlains,NY:Longman.

Noordoff,K.,&Kleinfeld,J.(1993).Preparingteachersformulticulturalclassrooms.Teach-ing and Teacher Education 9(1),27-39.

Okhremtchouk,I.,Seiki,S.,Gilliland,B.,Atch,C.,Wallace,M.,&Kato,A.(2009).Voicesofpre-serviceteachers:PerspectivesonthePerformanceAssessmentforCaliforniaTeachers(PACT).Issues in Teacher Education, 18(1),39-62.

Orellana,M.F.,Reynolds,J.,Dorner,L.,&Meza,M.(2003).Inotherwords:Translatingorpara-phrasing”asafamilyliteracypracticeinimmigranthouseholds.Reading Research Quarterly, 38(1),12-34.

Pecheone,R.L.,&Chung,R.R.(2006).Evidenceinteachereducation:ThePerformanceAssessmentforCaliforniaTeachers.Journal of Teacher Education, 57(1),22-36.


157

Peck,C.A.,Gallucci,C.,&Sloan,T.(2010).Negotiatingimplementationofhigh-stakesperformanceassessmentpoliciesinteachereducation:Fromcompliancetoinquiry.Journal of Teacher Education, 61(5),451-463.

Rennert-Ariev,P.(2008).Thehiddencurriculumofperformancebasedteachereducation.Teachers College Record, 110(1),105-138.

Sandholtz,J.H.,&Shea,L.M.(2012).Predictingperformance:Acomparisonofuniversitysupervisors’predictions and teacher candidates’ scoresonaTeachingPerformanceAssessment.Journal of Teacher Education, 63(1),39-50.

Sawchuk, S. (2013). Columbia university profs raise concerns about certification test.Education Week, Teacher Beat,January14.Available:http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/teacherbeat/2013/01/columbia_university_profs_rais.htm

Sleeter,C.E. (2003).Reformandcontrol:AnanalysisofSB2042.Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(1),19-30.

Sleeter,C.E.(1996).Multicultural education as social activism.Buffalo,NY:StateUni-versityofNewYorkPress.

Tharpe,R.G.,&Gallimore,R. (1988).Rousing minds to life: Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context.Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.

vanEs,E.A.,&Conroy,J.(2009).UsingthePerformanceAssessmentforCaliforniaTeacherstoexaminepre-serviceteachers’conceptionsofteachingmathematicsforunderstand-ing.Issues in Teacher Education, 18(1),83-102.

Vygotsky,L.S.(1978).Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.

Windschitl,M.,Thompson,J,&Braaten,M.(2011).Fosteringambitiouspedagogyinnoviceteachers:Thenewroleoftool-supportedanalysesofstudentwork.Teachers College Record, 113(7),1311-1360.

Winerip,M.(2012,May6).Movetooutsourceteacherlicensingprocessdrawsprotest.The New York Times,p.A15.Available:http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/07/education/new-procedure-for-teaching-license-draws-protest.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Zeichner,K.M. (2003).The adequacies and inadequaciesof three current strategies torecruit,prepare,andretainthebestteachersforallstudents.Teachers College Record, 105(3),490-519.

putting pact in context and context in pactto place pact and our collaboration around it in context,...

Documents