Teaching Newcomers Inclusively: Social Studies in a New ... · Teaching Newcomers Inclusively:...

Social Studies Research and Practice

www.socstrp.org

Volume 10 Number 1 41 Spring 2015

Teaching Newcomers Inclusively: Social Studies in a New Gateway State

Jeremy Hilburn

University of North Carolina Wilmington

Xue Lan Rong

Hillary Parkhouse

Alison Turner

University of North Carolina Chapel Hill

We explored social studies teachers’ dispositions towards working with immigrant students in an

Atlantic new gateway state. We surveyed 99 middle and high school social studies teachers

using the additive versus subtractive models as a theoretical framework. Although teachers’

professional backgrounds and school contexts were connected to teaching inclusively, their

academic expectations of immigrant students, their beliefs on assimilation (regarding schools’

and teachers’ roles in maintaining heritage cultures and languages), and their opinions on the

effective implementation of school policies concerning immigrant students’ learning were

significant contributors to teaching inclusiveness.

Key words: inclusiveness, social studies education, immigrant students, additive versus

subtractive approaches, teachers’ beliefs and attitudes, culturally relevant

pedagogy, new gateway state

Introduction

In this study, the authors attempted to identify social studies teachers’ dispositions toward

teaching immigrant students in central North Carolina, an area with a rapidly rising immigrant

population. North Carolina has a unique context in terms of immigrant students. Since 1990,

patterns of immigrant settlement in the United States have expanded beyond the six traditional

gateway states—those states that have historically been the preferred settlement locales for

newcomers including New York California, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, and Texas—to include

new gateway states, such as Georgia and North Carolina (Rong & Preissle, 2009). In 1990, the

Latino population in North Carolina was 77,000; it increased to over 855,000 by 2010 (U.S.

Bureau of the Census, 2010). The Asian population also increased dramatically, from 53,000 in

1990 to over 210,000 in 2010 (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2012). Although these states may still

receive fewer immigrants than traditional gateways, the percentage of growth is remarkable. In

2000, for instance, the number of heritage-language speakers above age four in Wake County,

one of North Carolina’s largest school districts, was only 5.7%. By 2010, that number had

increased to over 20% (Wake County School District, 2011).

Teaching Immigrants in New Gateway States

Educators in the new gateway states are facing many obstacles in the education system.

According to Xue Lan Rong (2012), in addition to the scant resources for social and health

programs for newcomers and for their families and communities, the new gateway states’

educational organizations and personnel have had very little preparation for working with immi-

grants. To illustrate, teacher education programs in North Carolina have only recently added

English as a Second Language (ESL) coursework; the only certification requirement for teaching

ESL is successful completion of the PRAXIS II English to Speakers of Other Languages exam


www.socstrp.org


(North Carolina Test Requirements, 2013). Inadequate education policies and limited funding

prevent schools from restructuring the curriculum and implementing programs to address the

realities of immigrant students’ needs (Fix & Passel, 2003; Terrazas & Fix, 2008). During the

past decade, national education reform focusing on standardized testing has failed largely to

address the special needs of immigrant students. These high-stakes testing policies have created

environments that were not designed with immigrant students in mind (Parker, 2008) and have

led newcomers to be overrepresented in special education and underrepresented in gifted and

talented programs (Artiles, Rueda, Salazar, & Higadera, 2005) and Advance Placement courses

(Kanno & Kangas, 2014).

Teachers in schools need to understand not only how their instructional decisions affect

newcomers, but also how school culture and policies influence the students. Teachers of

immigrant students, however, often have limited language resources to draw upon within the

school, through professional development, or from the community. Multiple scholars have

identified that teacher education programs in new gateway states offer limited preparation for

teaching newcomers (Goodwin, 2002; Hilburn, 2014; Rong, 2012). For instance, Amanda Sox

(2009) found that North Carolina did not mention English language learners in its state standards

beyond an “example of diversity” (p. 316). In terms of instructional decisions regarding

linguistic minority students, teachers in North Carolina viewed second-language learning as a

problem for students to overcome rather than as a resource for richer learning (García, 2014;

Murillo, 2002). They may have internalized the widespread notion that English immersion is a

better model than bilingual instruction, although this notion has long been challenged in

established educational research (Cummins, 1986). As a result of this notion, teachers may

engage in subtractive behaviors (Valenzuela, 1999), such as discouraging native-language use or

neglecting the active maintenance of native languages.

Well-intentioned teachers may overemphasize assimilation to American culture at the

expense of the maintenance of heritage cultures, a subtractive practice that has been described as

“benevolent racism” (Villenas, 2002, p. 17). Students in such classrooms are forced to adopt

dual identities: at school, they are Americanized and conform to “whitestream” (Urrieta, 2010, p.

47) expectations or those impositions of White norms and cultural capital, while at home they

maintain their families’ cultures (Wortham, 2002). This may result in either the rejection of their

parents’ values or resistance toward their school’s expectations in order to preserve familial

connections. The latter often involves behaviors associated with academic failure, such as

truancy and withdrawal from school (Meador, 2005). Teachers in new gateway states may not

be aware that whitestream characteristics, such as promoting individualism and competition over

cooperation, can conflict with immigrant students’ home cultures. Teachers may not see the

connection between school performance and patterns of assimilation (Gibson, 1995). As a result,

they may inadvertently force students to adopt dual identities or choose between assimilation and

the maintenance of the home culture (Meador, 2005).

One common school policy in new gateway states is to remove immigrant students from

mainstream classrooms in order to provide them with targeted ESL instruction. This practice

disrupts their content-area learning, restricts their ability to take honors and Advanced Placement

courses, and isolates them from their peers (Olsen, 1996). In one study of a new gateway state

school adapting to a sudden influx of Mexican immigrant students, language teachers were

expected to teach in hallways and supply closets (Hamann, 2002). Newcomers are then viewed


www.socstrp.org


as others and have fewer opportunities to communicate and to form relationships with native-

born students (Valenzuela, 1999). At the same time, learning suffers when students with

minimal English language skills are taught by mainstream content teachers who have limited

training in ESL or bilingual methods, or when they are taught by teachers reluctant to adapt

instruction for this population (Wainer, 2006).

In North Carolina, the only certification requirement for teaching ESL is successful

completion of the PRAXIS II English to Speakers of Other Languages exam (North Carolina

Test Requirements, 2013). Teachers who have not completed ESL coursework or other related

training are less likely to promote the maintenance of home cultures and heritage languages,

since they believe parents, and not the school, are responsible for such maintenance (Lee &

Oxelson, 2006). Likewise, newcomers in North Carolina are marginalized in the social studies

textbooks (Hilburn & Fitchett, 2012) and standards (Journell, 2009). As a result, these structural

factors in North Carolina and other new gateway states, immigrant students are limited in their

development of positive bicultural identities.

Compounding misunderstandings of how assimilation policies and practices negatively

influence immigrant students are differences in teachers’ and newcomers’ often-contrasting

views of parental involvement in education. Teachers, in terms of attendance at conferences and

other school functions, often narrowly define parental involvement, whereas immigrant families

may demonstrate involvement through assistance with homework and instruction on life skills

(López, 2001). Teachers often misinterpret immigrant families’ different methods of school

involvement as a lack of commitment to education (López, 2001). On the other hand, immigrant

families may expect schools to perform certain roles that U.S. schools fail to fulfill, such as

functioning as the primary site of learning as well as teaching formality and discipline (Li, 2003).

Effective teachers of immigrant students understand not only the complex interactions

between school and classroom policies, positive identity formation, and academic success, but

also how societal conditions, such as xenophobia, present unique challenges to immigrant

families. New Latino Diaspora states e.g. North Carolina are affected by particular forms of

discrimination (Murillo, 2002). The “addition of a ‘third race’ to a historically biracial southern

community” (p. 219) has led to a “pro-immigration script” (Suárez-Orozco, 1998, as cited in

Murillo, 2002, p. 225) that “uses immigrants’ very arrival as ‘proof’ of the fairness and

attractiveness of current conditions, thus becoming an argument for the socioeconomically

stratified status quo and against substantive newcomer accommodation” (p. 225).

Immigrant families in North Carolina may be relegated to low prestige and hazardous

jobs and perceived by low-income White families as economic threats. They are “expected to

either fully and successfully assimilate into White middle-class culture, or they are blamed for

failing or resisting these efforts” (Murillo, 2002, p. 221). Poverty rates, among immigrant

families, are higher than among native-born families (Gaytan, Carhill, & Suarez-Orozco, 2007),

as are rates of enrollment in racially and linguistically isolated and low-resourced schools

(Kozol, 1991). Undocumented immigrants have higher rates of stress (Suárez-Orozco, Suárez-

Orozco, & Todorova, 2008), depression (Gaytan et al., 2007), poverty (Edelman & Jones, 2004;

Rong & Preissle, 2009), and homelessness (Huerta-Macios, Gonzales, & Holman, 2000).

Teachers in new gateway states must maintain an awareness of these inequitable conditions and

use critical, inclusive pedagogy in their classrooms to counteract them.


www.socstrp.org


Factors Contributing to Effective Teaching of Social Studies to Immigrant Students

As the central goal of teaching social studies is to promote civic competence (NCSS,

2011) there is an additional layer of complexity for social studies teachers in new gateway states.

Scholars asserted there is a civic education opportunity gap between immigrant students and

native-born students (Levison, 2010; Marri, 2009; Torney-Purta, Barber, & Wilkenfeld, 2006).

Social studies literature conflates the needs of immigrant students with the needs of ELL students

(Goodwin, 2002), which is problematic for these reasons: some immigrant students do not

require ELL services, many ELLs are not newcomers, and the majority of ELL learners’ needs in

social studies classroom are beyond ESL services. In Educating Democratic Citizens in

Troubled Times (Bixby & Pace, 2008), the editors cite the civic disenfranchisement of

marginalized groups, and of immigrants in particular, as one of the four most troubling

characteristics of contemporary civic education.

In addition to knowledge of immigrant families’ assets and struggles, as well as skills for

teaching English language learners (ELLs), the dispositions of teachers are integral to the

effective teaching of immigrant students (Davies, 2008; Garmon, 2005). In emphasizing

culturally relevant teaching as more of a mindset than a collection of skills or strategies, Gloria

Ladson-Billings (1995, 2006) underscored the importance of dispositions for the successful

teaching of diverse learners. She defined culturally relevant pedagogy as an ethical position, a

long-term commitment to “democracy as a central principle of their pedagogy” (2006, p. 40).

Social studies teachers, in particular, should prioritize teaching, not just about democracy but

also through democratic practices. In an extension of Ladson-Billings’ model, Django Paris

(2012), included the explicit and active fostering of cultural pluralism in the classroom and in

society, which aligns with the National Council for the Social Studies (2011) curriculum

standards. The dispositions of effective teachers of immigrant and culturally diverse students

were also highlighted by Valenzuela (1999). These teachers embody additive schooling by

showing authentic caring, building on students’ bicultural experiences, and presenting dominant

knowledge not as something to master, but as something to challenge.

In terms of teaching the content of social studies to immigrant students, Bárbara Cruz and

Stephen Thornton (2009) outlined successful strategies and considerations for ELLs and for

immigrant students who are not ELLs. Cruz & Thornton’s recommendations for supporting

students through the stages of cultural adjustment, creating a positive classroom environment,

and achieving access and follow-through with parents are useful for teachers of all immigrant

students. For teaching ELLs specifically, the authors expounded upon research in second-

language acquisition to suggest strategies for making social studies content comprehensible for

ELLs, as well as for developing their English language skills through the teaching of social

studies. Toward the first aim, the authors recommended using visual aids, cooperative and

kinesthetic learning, modified texts, role-plays, and other strategies. They also recommended

modifying the assessment of ELLs through the provision of multiple opportunities to practice

and to correct errors in their English productively. Employing such strategies requires

substantial effort and regular critical reflection on practice; thus, a strong commitment to caring,

democratic, and culturally sustaining pedagogy is essential to the effective teaching of immigrant

students.


www.socstrp.org


Theoretical Framework

The researchers who conducted this study were interested in ways to help social studies

teachers develop inclusiveness in their teaching. Although the term inclusive teaching may often

be used in relation to special education, we apply this concept here with a broader definition:

social and cultural inclusion for marginalized groups, such as immigrant students. Scholars have

noted the importance of culturally responsive teaching (Gay, 2002) and culturally relevant

teaching (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Culturally relevant teachers, as argued in Ladson-Billings,

know how to base teaching experiences on the cultural realities of the child (e.g., home life,

community experiences, cultural and language backgrounds, belief systems, etc.). Teachers need

to rethink and restructure their curricula, practices, and classroom learning environments to

maximize the full participation of all learners. Culturally responsive pedagogy comprises three

dimensions: institutional, personal, and instructional (Richards, Brown & Forde, 2007). The

personal dimension refers to the cognitive and emotional processes needed for teachers to

become culturally responsive, and the instructional dimension includes materials, strategies, and

activities that form the basis of instruction. The institutional dimension reflects the

administration and its policies and values. To assess the institution’s cultural responsiveness,

and building on Judith Little’s (1999) model, Richards, Brown, and Forde summarized three

specific areas of observation:

1. Organization of the school: Do the administrative structure and the use of physical

space (including planning schools and arranging classrooms) reflect a fair

consideration of diversity?

2. How do the school's policies, procedures, and practices influence the delivery of

services to students from diverse backgrounds?

3. Community involvement: What is the extent of, and approaches to, involvement with

families and communities?

As described above, Ladson-Billings’ scholarly works (1994, 1995, 1999) provide our

study with a broad framework for working with diverse students. Since our argument focuses on

inclusive teaching specifically for immigrant students, we incorporated perspectives from the

additive versus subtractive models of schooling. The additive model (Gibson, 1995) suggests

schools and teachers provide equal opportunities to immigrants and acculturate students through

a bicultural or multicultural process that values their heritage cultures and languages. This

model promotes home-school relations and encourages students to maintain their ethnic

communities while also learning and adopting aspects of American life.

The subtractive model, contrarily, is based on a deficit perspective (Valenzuela, 1999),

which associates immigrant children with multiple presumed handicaps in schooling, such as

language barriers, lack of parent involvement, lowered motivation and potential to do well

academically, lack of understanding with respect to the social, political, and educational

institutions in the United States, and apathy towards school. Subtractive practices in education

emphasize English-only instruction, rapid Americanization, and a monocultural approach to

assimilation. It recommends a corrective curriculum that devalues belief structures and cultural

traditions outside the Euro-American mainstream. This imposition of White norms and cultural

capital, or whitestreaming, through both curricula and pedagogy has been likened to cultural

genocide (Urrieta, 2010).


www.socstrp.org


Research indicates teachers who have adopted the additive model tend to teach

inclusively (Gibson & Hidalgo, 2009; Valenzuela, 2002). Based on the definitions of additive

and inclusive teaching outlined, we constructed six items to measure the extent to which teachers

appear to be additive and inclusive in their teaching. These six items were as follows: believing

immigrant students should be taught in mainstream classrooms (not in separated classrooms or

groups), including multicultural perspectives in class, enjoying teaching immigrant students,

valuing immigrant students’ life experiences, incorporating immigrant students’ life experiences

and culture into class discussions and activities, and believing social studies teachers should be

resources for immigrant students.

Based on the perspectives of culturally responsive pedagogy and additive versus

subtractive models, we established a multidimensional and multilevel model including a variety

of factors important to developing an integrative understanding of what upholds social studies

teachers’ inclusive teaching with culturally diverse students, particularly immigrant students.

Based on the model, this study aims to reveal the causal relationship between social studies

teachers’ dispositional variables (see variables in Domains 2-4 in Figure 1) and their

inclusiveness in teaching immigrant students through answering the following three research

questions:

1. What are the profiles of the teachers who participated in the study? What are their

personal and professional characteristics? What characteristics of their schools are

related to immigrant students?

2. Will teachers’ inclusiveness be affected by their personal, professional, and school

characteristics, their academic expectations of immigrant students, their beliefs on

assimilation, and/or their opinions on the effectiveness of policies related to immigrant

students?

3. What are the more influential variables on teachers’ inclusive teaching when all other

variables are held constantly?

Method

Participants and Data Collection

The pool of targeted participants included 255 middle and high school social studies

teachers in central North Carolina, an area with a large number of immigrant students (Migration

Policy Institute, 2008; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2009). Teachers in three rural counties, one

suburban county, and one urban county were contacted in order to reach a representative sample

across the population, ranging from the children of high-skilled immigrants in the Research

Triangle Park area to children of agricultural laborers in rural counties. We emailed all 255

teachers and received affirmative responses from 101 teachers. We sent a survey to each of the

respondents and used online survey software to collect their responses. Among the 101 teachers

who participated in the survey, two were excluded in the data analysis due to a large number of

incomplete responses. As a result, 99 teachers who completed the survey in its entirety were

included in our data analysis. The return rate of this study (44%) is considered within the an

acceptable range (e.g., Kalton, 1983).

Survey Instrument We collected the data through a 55-question survey with open and closed-ended

questions. Survey items were drafted based upon the reviewed research literature. Primarily

Gibson’s model of additive acculturation (1995) and Valenzuela’s critiques of subtractive


www.socstrp.org


assimilation (1999, 2002) influenced the survey items. The survey, further, was grounded in

Richards, Brown, and Forde’s (2007) three-dimension framework of culturally responsive

pedagogy. Part of this literature suggested although teachers may espouse a belief that

immigrants should maintain heritage cultures, “the manner in which many teachers assume this

process implies the replacement of the old language and culture” (Gibson, p. 96). One of the

Likert-scale items on the survey thus asked respondents to agree or disagree with the statement,

“Recent immigrants should be Americanized as rapidly as possible.” Items related to heritage

culture maintenance are grounded in research indicating the maintenance of heritage language is

a significant factor in academic progress (Lee & Suárez, 2009). We asked teachers to evaluate

the effectiveness of policies that place ELLs in mainstream classrooms based on research

demonstrating that language is learned best through content and isolation contributes to gaps in

achievement between ELLs and native-English speakers (Cummins, 1986).

The survey questions were conceptualized into five factors. Figure 1 shows a design

construct of the dependent (output) factor in relationship to the independent factors, which

comprise four major domains of explanatory factors: Domain 1: Socio-demographic

characteristics of teachers and schools; Domain 2: Teachers’ expectations of immigrant students’

academic potentials; Domain 3: Teachers’ beliefs in immigrant students’ acculturation, including

their affinity for maintaining pride in the heritage country and their positions on using heritage

languages. Domain 4 uses seven 5-point Likert-scale survey questions to indicate teachers’

opinions regarding the implementation of classroom integration, school language, and testing

policies relevant to immigrant students. It also incorporates teachers’ opinions regarding how

supportive the school policies for immigrant students are and whether the school involves

parents of immigrant students in its policy implementation.


www.socstrp.org


Figure 1. Inquiry Model

Domain 1

Socio-

demographic

Characteristics

Teacher

1. Years of

Experience

2. Gender

3. Significant time

spent overseas

(more than 6

months)

4. Race/ethnicity

School

1. % immigrants in

student population

2. Variety of

heritage countries

represented in

student population

Inclusive Social Studies Instructional Strategies

and Classroom Environment

Teach immigrants in mainstream classes

Include multicultural perspectives

Enjoy teaching immigrant students

Value immigrant students’ life experience

Believe social studies teachers should be a resource

for immigrant students

Share immigrant experiences in class discussions

(DependentVariables)

Domain 2

Academic

Expectation of

Immigrant

Students

1. Higher potential

to go to college

2. Greater

motivation to learn

Social Studies

3. Higher grades

Domain 3

Beliefs and

Attitudes

Regarding

Assimilation

1. Immigrant

students feel

patriotism

toward the U.S.

2. Assimilation

does not

necessarily need

to be rapid

3. Immigrants

have pride in

heritage

countries

4. Schools

should support

heritage

language

maintenance

5. Teachers

should support

heritage

language

maintenance

Domain 4

Opinions on

Effectiveness of

Policies for

Immigrants

1. ESL programs

2. Mainstream

classroom

3. Textbook in

heritage languages

4. Documentation

sent home in

heritage languages

5. End-of-Course

Exam waiver

6. Belief that the

school policy is

supportive toward

immigrant students

7. Belief that

school policies

involve parents of

immigrant students


www.socstrp.org


Figure 1: Inquiry model

In order to construct a valid survey instrument, we did an initial review of research

literature on teaching social studies and educating immigrant students, and wrote eight open-

ended questions for a semi-structured interview. The first author conducted a think aloud

(Ericsson & Simon, 1993) pilot test on the first draft of the survey with five former social studies

teachers and made revisions based on their feedback. The first author then conducted one-on-

one semi-structured interviews with six local high school social studies teachers, focusing on

their personal and professional experience in working with immigrant students in social studies

classrooms. After coding and thematic development, we identified the more relevant variables

that were later classified into factors. The survey was distributed and collected using online

survey software. The reliability indexes for the total instrument and for each of the five factors

were in the acceptable range: 0.7 for the whole instrument, and a range of 0.5–0.7 for the factors.

We acknowledge two limitations of this study. First, the participants were self-selected;

therefore, caution is advised in attempting to generalize the findings to a larger population.

Readers should compare the demographic, social, and professional characteristics of the

participants in this study to those in their own school and school districts when they consider

applying the results of this study. Second, the indicators for inclusiveness in teaching-related

practice were determined by participants’ self-reports, which can yield different data than other

data collection procedures (e.g., classroom observations) or instruments.

Data Analysis

The data analysis was conducted through the following four steps:

1. Pre-data analysis preparation. We took the following steps to prepare the dataset for

statistical analysis:

a. We cleaned the dataset. Since the missing answers were rare and random, we

replaced a few missing values through multiple imputations (replacing the few

missing items with a probable value based on other available information) (Adèr,

2008; Newman, 2003).

b. We totaled the scores of items for the six independent variables and merged them

into one numerical variable: inclusive teaching.

c. The teacher’s race was not included in the regression model due to the following

dilemma: If we had coded the minority teachers into separate groups (2% Native

American, 3% mixed race, 7% African American) with dummy variables, the

small size of each group would not warrant valid regression analyses in the

statistical sense. Conversely, to lump all minority teachers together (12%) may

have caused inaccuracies in the interpretation of findings.

d. We created a scatterplot to make sure that the causal relationship between

teachers’ additive perspective in their disposition and their inclusiveness in

teaching is linear

To answer Question 1, simple descriptive statistics were run.

2. Four ordinary least-square regressions were conducted separately to answer Question 2.

3. A hierarchical regression approach with four theoretically built models was applied to answer

Question


www.socstrp.org


Results

Findings for Question 1

The findings reported in Table 1 answer the following questions: Who are the social

studies teachers? What are their personal and professional characteristics? What characteristics

of their schools are related to immigrant students? Specifically, Table 1 contains information

regarding the teachers’ gender, years of teaching, substantial experience abroad, percentage of

immigrant students of their school’s student population, and variety of countries from which

their immigrant students chiefly emigrated. The vast majority of participants self-identified as

White (n= XX, %), and almost 40% were relatively inexperienced with less than five years of

teaching experience. More than half of the participants estimated that newcomers comprised less

than 10% of the student body at their respective schools.

Teachers’ responses to all items contained in the four domains and inclusive teaching

factors are found in Table 1. These factors include the following: What are teachers’ academic

expectations of immigrant students? What are their beliefs on acculturation regarding the

heritage countries, cultures, and language of immigrant students? How did they see the

effectiveness of their schools’ policies related to working with immigrant students and their

parents? How do they view their own teaching in terms of inclusiveness in working with

immigrant students? Due to space limitations, the text will not repeat numbers and percentages

reported in Table 1, but clearly formatted and straightforward descriptive statistics will be

presented for readers to peruse.

Table 1

Teachers’ Response Frequencies and Percentages, Organized by Domain

DOMAIN 1 – SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

Teacher Characteristics

Years of

experience 0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 >25

38

(38.3%)

17

(17.1%)

15

(15.1%)

12

(12.1%)

5

(5%)

10

(10.1%)

Gender Female Male Missing

48

(48.4%)

50

(50.5%)

1

Lived overseas

<6 months Yes No Missing

16

(16.1%)

81

(81.8%)

2

Race/Ethnicity African-

American

American

Indian

Asian

American

Latina/o White Other

7 2 0 0 87 3

Student Characteristics

Estimated % of

IS in the

School

1-5% 6-10% 11-20% 21-40% 41-60% >61%

18 38 26 10 4 3

Heritage

countries of

ISa

Mexico Honduras El Sal. Guat. China

93 36 35 31 27


www.socstrp.org


DOMAIN 2 – ACADEMIC PERCEPTION OF IS

Potential to go

to collegeb

Much

more

Somewhat

more

About

the same

Somewhat

less

Less I am

not

able to

rate

3

(3%)

5

(5.1%)

43

(43.4%)

37

(37.7%)

5

(5.1%)

6

(6.1%)

Motivation to

learn social

studiesb

3

(3%)

29

(29.3%)

50

(50.5%)

13

(13.1%)

3

(3%)

1

Grades

expected from

IS

Much

higher

Somewhat

higher

About

the same

Somewhat

lower

Much

lower

Missing

3 9 56 28 1 2

(3.1%) (9.3%) (57.8%) (28.9%) (1%)

DOMAIN 3 – BELIEFS AND ATTITUDES REGARDING ASSIMILATION

IS should be

rapidly

assimilated

Strongly

agree

Agree Neither Disagree Strongly

disagree

Unable

to rate

7 11 42 37 2

(7.1%) (11%) (42.4%) (37.4%) (2%)

IS should have

pride in

heritage

countries

17

(17.2%)

52

(50.5%)

22

(22.2%)

6

(6.1%)

1

(1%)

1

(1%)

Role schools

should play in

maintenance of

L1

Teach

English

only;

advocate

English

only

outside of

school

Teach

English

only;

make no

comment

regarding

L1

Teach

English

only;

advocate

value of

L1

Teach

English

and

maintain

L1

5 19 54 21

(5.1%) (19.2%) (54.5%) (21.2%)

Personal

recommenda-

tion to families

regarding L1

maintenance

Make no

comment

about L1

English

only

Learn English and

maintain L1

14 2 83


www.socstrp.org


14.1 2.0 83.8

DOMAIN 4 – OPINIONS ON EFFECTIVENESS OF POLICIES FOR IS

ESL Programs Very

effective

Effective Neither Ineffective Very

ineffective

Missing

27 47 13 8 1 3

(28.1%) (48.9%) (13.6%) (8.3%) (1.0%)

Mainstream

classroom

11 58 18 9 0 3

(11.4%) (60.4%) (18.8%) (9.4%)

Textbook in

L1

5 30 45 10 3 6

(5.4%) (32.3%) (48.4%) (10.7%) (3.2%)

Documentation

sent home in

L1

23

(24%)

57

(59.4%)

12

(12.5%)

3

(3.1%)

1

(1%)

3

End-of-Course

Exam Waiver

22

(23.4%)

35

(37.2%)

28

(29.8%)

4

(4.3%)

5

(5.3%)

5

Belief that

school policies

are supportive

of IS

Supportive Somewhat

Supportive

Unable to

rate

Not very

supportive

Not

supportive

Missing

24 49 13 12 0 1

(24.5%) (50%) (13.2%) (12.2%)

Belief that

school policies

involve parents

of IS

Strongly

agree


disagree

Missing

19 42 24 12 1 1

(19.4%) (42.9%) (24.5%) (12.2%) (1%)

DEPENDENT VARIABLES – SOCIAL STUDIES INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES

AND CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT

IS should be

taught in a

separate class

Yes No

12 87

(12.1%) (87.8%)

I include

multicultural

perspectives

A great

deal

Some Not much None


www.socstrp.org


Findings for Question 2

The results from four ordinal least-square regressions in Tables 2 through5 reveal that all

models fit the data well. Items in each of the four domains explain inclusive Teaching, ranging

from explaining 14% of the variability of the dependent variable (by characteristics of teachers

and schools) to explaining 30% of the variability (by teachers’ beliefs and attitudes regarding

assimilation). Some individual items are singled out by the four separated regression models as

significant contributors: more years of teaching experience and whether or not the school

enrolled immigrant students from multiple countries predicted more inclusive teaching (see

Table 2). Teachers who have higher expectations for immigrant students’ grades are more likely

to report practicing inclusive teaching (see Table 3). The beliefs that immigrant students should

have pride in their heritage country and schools should play roles in heritage language

maintenance are two powerful predictors for inclusive teaching (see Table 4). Finally, teachers

are more likely to report practicing inclusive teaching if they have positive opinions on the

62 34 2 0

(63.3%) (34.7%) (2.0%)

I enjoy

teaching IS Much

more

Somewhat

more

About

the same

Somewhat

less

Much less Missing

6 27 63 1 1 1

(6.1%) (27.6%) (64.3%) (1%) (1%)

I believe life

experiences of

IS provide

learning

opportunities

for their

classmates

Strongly

agree

Agree Neither

agree nor

disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

Missing

61 32 4 1 0 1

(62.2%) (32.7%) (4.1%) (1%)

I believe SS

teachers

should be a

resource for IS

Strongly

agree


disagree

Missing

30 44 22 2 0 1

(30.6%) (44.9%) (22.5%) (2%)

Perception of

how often IS

share their

experiences

Often Sometimes Rarely Never Not given

the

opportunity

to share

10 44 40 5 0

(10.1%) (44.4%) (40.4%) (5.1%)


www.socstrp.org


effectiveness of placing students in mainstream social studies classes and of two-year waivers for

end-of-course standardized tests (see Table 5).

Table 2

Socio-demographic Predictors of Social Studies Teachers’ Inclusiveness (Domain 1)

Note. IV = Independent Variable. β = Standardized Coefficient.

a In the school’s student population, based on the teacher’s estimations

* p ≤ .10. **p ≤ .05. ***p ≤ .001.

Table 3

Teachers’ Academic Expectation of Immigrant Students, as Predictors of Inclusiveness

(Domain 2)

IV β Potential to go to College

a .145

Motivation to Learn Social Studies -.007

Earn Higher Grades .231**

R2 .10 (p ≤ .02)

Note. IV = Independent Variable. β = Standardized Coefficient. a teachers’ perceptions of their immigrant students, as compared to non-immigrant students

* p ≤ .10. **p ≤ .05. ***p ≤ .001.

Table 4

Teachers’ Beliefs and Attitudes Towards Immigrant Students, as Predictors of Inclusiveness

(Domain 3)

IV β Rapid Assimilation not Necessary .049

IS Show Pride in Heritage Country .370***

Teachers Should Maintain L1 -.067

Schools Should Maintain L1 .392***

R2 .293 (p ≤ .000)

IV β

Teacher Characteristics

Years of Experience .213**

Gender .001

Lived Overseas .062

School Characteristics

High Percentage of Immigrantsa

.139

Many Heritage Countries Representeda

.296**

R2 .142 (p ≤ .027)


www.socstrp.org


Note. IV = Independent Variable. β = Standardized Coefficient. IS = Immigrant Students. L1 =

First Language, or Heritage Language.

* p ≤ .10. **p ≤ .05. ***p ≤ .001.

Table 5

Teachers’ Opinions on Effectiveness of Policies for Immigrants, as Predictors of Inclusiveness

(Domain 4)

IV β ESL Programs .009

Mainstream Classroom .266**

Textbook in L1 .027

Documentation Sent Home in L1 .098

End-of-Course Exam Waiver .262**

Belief that School Policies are Supportive .087

Belief that School Policies Involve Parents of IS .154

R2 .227 (p ≤ .003)

Note. IV = Independent Variable. β = Standardized Coefficient. IS = Immigrant Students. L1 =

First Language, or Heritage Language.

* p ≤ .10. **p ≤ .05. ***p ≤ .001.

Findings for Question 3 A hierarchical regression method was employed to identify, among other variables, those

that may significantly contribute to social studies teachers’ inclusiveness in teaching immigrant

students. Hierarchical regressions were performed with a four-stage model, with each stage

adding one domain from the previous stage. The order for the entry of the variables by domains

was theoretically determined.

Stage 1: Domain 1 (Characteristics of Teachers and Schools)

Stage 2: Domains 1 and 2 (add Teachers’ Academic Expectation of Immigrant Students)

Stage 3: Domains 1, 2 and 3 (add Teachers’ Beliefs and Attitudes Regarding

Assimilation)

Stage 4: Domains 1, 2, 3 and 4 (add Teachers’ Opinions on School’s Implementation of

Immigrant Student-Related Policies).

Due to space limitations, we will only report the significant results (see Table 6). All

models fit the data well, and the R square value increased with each factor added to the

regression model. While Model 1 explains 14% of the variability of teachers’ inclusive teaching

by dependent variables, Model 4 explains more than 41% of the variability of the teachers'

inclusive teaching by dependent variables. Findings from Model 4 reveal that, while all 21

variables are held constantly, 4 variables have shown statistical significance: teachers are more

likely to report teaching inclusively if their students are from many countries (rather than from a

few countries) and if they believe schools should play a role in maintaining immigrant students’

heritage languages. Teachers who have more years of teaching experience and who believe that

their schools effectively implement mainstream classroom policies tend to practice inclusive

teaching, based on self-reports.


www.socstrp.org


Table 6

Hierarchical Regression Models Predicting Social Studies Teachers’ Inclusiveness in Teaching

Immigrant Students

CV Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4

R2 .142 .193 .377 .421

p< (.03) (.02) (.00) (.00)

Teacher Characteristics (β)

Years of Experience .198* .213** .174* .181* .175*

Gender .001 -.001 -.044 -.049 -.062

Lived Overseasa

.062 .063 .047 .046 .078

School Characteristics

High Percentage of Immigrantsb .139 .136 .066 .096

Many Heritage Countries

Representedb

.296** .254* .197** .178**

Academic Expectations of IS

Potential to go to Collegec .094 .022 .034

Motivation to Learn Social

Studies

-.025 -.113 -1.05

Earn Higher Grades .188 .145 .149

Beliefs and Attitudes Toward IS

Rapid Assimilation not Necessary .109 .083

IS Show Pride in Heritage

Country

.274** .181

Teachers Should Maintain L1 -.109 .110

Schools Should Maintain L1 .295** .263**

Opinions on Effectiveness of

Policies for IS

ESL Programs -.005

Mainstream Classroom .192*

Textbook in L1 -.043

Documentation Sent Home in L1 .092

End-of-Course Exam Waiver .067

Belief that School Policies are

Supportive

.057

Belief that School Policies

Involve Parents of IS

.013

Note. CV = Control Variable. β = Standardized Coefficient. a for more than 6 months

b In the school’s student population, based on the teacher’s estimations

c teachers’ perceptions of their immigrant students, as compared to non-immigrant students


www.socstrp.org


* p ≤ .10. **p ≤ .05. Models fit at ≤ .05 level.

Discussion

This study is important for several reasons. Returning to the study’s framework from

Ladson-Billing’s culturally responsive pedagogy (1994, 1995, 1999), the study of teachers’

perceptions is important because a teacher’s self-reflection is a crucial part of his or her

professional improvement as a culturally responsive teacher. By carefully examining their

attitudes and beliefs about themselves, students, and their institutions, teachers can achieve self-

realization in terms of who they are, what has shaped their beliefs, and how to recognize and

confront biases that have influenced their value system and practice (Villegas & Lucas, 2002).

Inspired by culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy, Paris (2012) advanced it with culturally

sustaining pedagogy, which questioned if culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy goes far

enough in embodying some of the best research and practice in the cultural resource pedagogy

tradition. Our study substantiates culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy in teaching

immigrant students in social studies education with additive versus subtractive perspectives. In

this sense, contributions to the field are made. Specifically, the following four areas are

identified as contributions to the literature.

First, the existing research literature on inclusive social studies teaching often focuses on

special education (e.g., Lenz & Schumaker, 1999; Lintner & Schweder, 2012). Goodwin (2002)

examined teacher preparation for working with immigrant children, and Cho and Reich (2008)

surveyed social studies teachers specifically; however, their focus was on ELLs rather than on

immigrant students broadly. Hilburn (2014) urged educators to realize the multiple challenges

facing immigrant students in the social studies classroom extend far beyond the linguistic

domain, particularly in new gateway states. This study helps to fill the gap in addressing areas

beyond the linguistic domain in terms of teaching immigrant students in the social studies

classroom. Inclusive social studies teaching can extend beyond linguistic accommodation by

incorporating multicultural perspectives and immigrant students’ life experiences into the

curriculum, a key element of culturally relevant teaching.

For the preparation of pre-service and in-service teachers in new gateway states, this

study not only provides insights into teachers’ dispositions relevant to educating immigrant

students, but also helps to refine an understanding of those factors, which contribute to inclusive

social studies instruction beyond special education and ESL issues. A teacher focused primarily

on immigrant students’ acquisition of English may see the students in terms of their linguistic

abilities only and thus prioritize pull-out English instruction over inclusion in content classes.

Our study found teachers who believed immigrant students should be taught social studies in

mainstream classrooms were more likely to report practicing inclusive teaching. Teachers who

tend to teach inclusively may be those who are likely to recognize ELL needs beyond the

acquisition of English, such as the need to keep up with their peers’ content knowledge, to

socialize with U.S.-born students, and to feel a part of the school community (Cummins, 2001).

Effective social studies teachers of newcomers, likewise, overtly draw on materials relevant to

immigration. An exemplary approach to this type of history teaching was studied by Maria

Franquiz and Cinthia Salinas (2011). Their teacher participant engaged her newcomer students

in a primary document analysis of Latino discrimination during the U.S. Civil Rights era. In

reporting their observations, the authors stated, “This was history they had not learned before—

history that included them and their interests as young citizens” (Franquiz & Salinas, 2011, p.


www.socstrp.org


73). Having students grapple with social studies concepts like acculturation and discrimination

are critical issues to address in any social studies classroom, and can be particularly meaningful

to newcomers (Salinas, 2006). Sociopolitical consciousness development is also one of the

central components of culturally relevant pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 2006).

This study provides complementary evidence to support teaching an additive approach

within teacher education programs and in-service teacher training programs. The findings

indicate the Teachers’ Beliefs and Attitudes domain was the most significant in predicting

inclusive teaching for immigrant students. This finding supports other research literature

(Garmon, 2004; Gollnick & Chinn, 2006; Guskey, 2002; Pohan, 1996; Villegas & Lucas, 2002)

that argued teachers’ beliefs and attitudes in the classroom was important in determining their

treatment of diverse students including immigrant students. Teachers who believe all children

can learn, and who appreciate and value the multiple diversities brought by immigrant students

to the classroom, are more likely to report practicing inclusive instruction by promoting a

culturally responsive classroom environment, varying instruction, adopting instructional

strategies that facilitate accommodation and differentiation, and expressing enjoyment to work

with immigrant students and their communities. Research conducted in traditional gateway

states also supports the finding teacher attitudes towards newcomers and heritage language

maintenance is a key factor in inclusive instruction. In Florida, where all of the social studies

teachers had received professional development on working with newcomers, three-fourths still

indicated newcomers should not be placed in their content area classes until they had maintained

a minimum level of English proficiency (O’Brien, 2009).

Considering our finding beginning teachers are less likely to report practicing inclusive

teaching than more experienced teachers, it stands to reason teacher education programs are not

adequately developing the dispositions needed for inclusive teaching. This implies these

programs need to include more coursework and field experiences to educate candidates on

incorporating an additive approach in their teaching. Teacher education programs can positively

influence candidates’ attitudes and beliefs towards teaching culturally diverse students (Ladson-

Billings, 1999). One example of a successful model is Marilyn Cochran-Smith’s (1995) use of

student teachers’ prior constructions of race, language, and ethnicity as a basis for them to

rewrite their autobiographies and disrupt the dominant discourse. Other studies describe the use

of documentary film to challenge, and possibly reorient, social studies preservice teachers’

dispositions towards diversity (Parkhouse, 2014), educational policies (Journell & Buchanan,

2013), and immigration (Buchanan & Hilburn, 2014). In-service programs should not be

overlooked, however. Jacqueline Jordan Irvine’s CULTURES program at Emory University, for

example, has been successful in changing experienced teachers’ attitudes towards students

through cultural immersion and other experiences supported by research, combined with

opportunities for reflective practice (Irvine, 2003). These and other programs can serve as

exemplars for other teacher education programs to build frameworks for ensuring that their

candidates hold the beliefs and attitudes towards teaching immigrant students that are necessary

for inclusive instruction.

The third finding of this study is confirming that school context matters (Cummins,

2001); teachers are more likely to report practicing inclusive teaching when they believe their

schools effectively implement policies relevant to working with immigrant students, especially

mainstream classroom policies and the End-of-course exam waiver policy. Furthermore,


www.socstrp.org


teachers who work in schools with immigrant students from many countries are also more likely

to report practicing inclusive teaching than teachers in schools with an immigrant population

from one or two countries. Similarly, Banks and McGee Banks (2004) argued that when schools

receive multiple, newer immigrant groups, administrators often respond by directing professional

development towards teaching diverse students, or even adjusting their hiring practices in order

to prioritize hiring teachers skilled in teaching diverse students. Similar findings, specific to

civic and political teaching, in increasingly diverse schools were identified in a study conducted

by Jacobsen and colleagues (2012). They proposed when a school reaches a certain threshold of

diversity—usually three or four racial or ethnic groups of students—students were more likely to

report inclusive opportunities for learning civic and political knowledge and practicing these

skills in and out of the classroom. They argued,

Highly diverse environments with many groups (including historically disadvantaged

groups) push faculties and administrators to prioritize professional development or hiring

of skilled faculty in teaching techniques to engage diverse groups of students. It appears,

however, there is a threshold of diversity (e.g., number of groups) that must be reached

before faculty and administrators seek such out such action (p. 836).

Although there is little a teacher or administrator can do to change the demographic

makeup of a school, it is important for stakeholders in more homogenous schools to be aware

that working with larger numbers of nationalities may positively influence the schools’

inclusiveness climate. This study did not investigate the reasons for this, but it could be that

U.S.-born people in a community with a dense population of immigrants from one country may

feel threatened or may develop xenophobia toward that group (Murillo, 2002). Another

possibility is teachers with more diverse classes are exposed to a greater variety of unique

cultural assets than those with classes of native-born students only, or those with classes of

native-born students and immigrant groups from one predominant country.

Another finding was that teachers may be more likely to practice inclusive teaching if

they believed that schools should play a role in the maintenance of their students’ heritage

languages. It is not surprising inclusive teachers, who themselves believe in heritage language

maintenance, would agree schools should share this commitment. This finding has implications

for school administrators who may not promote heritage language maintenance (Lee & Oxelson,

2006). In failing to do so, they are not only engaging in subtractive schooling (Valenzuela,

1999), but are also potentially creating a dissonant work environment for their more additive

teachers (Powers, 2014). These teachers may lack job satisfaction if they feel that their schools’

educational philosophies and approaches to teaching immigrants are not aligned with their own.

Recent trends in immigration suggest points of entry and dispersion will continue to

impact new gateway states that have little historical and material preparation for educating

immigrant students. Social studies educators in these states will play a key role in the

socialization and education of immigrant students. This study indicates social studies scholars,

teacher educators, school leaders, teachers, and policymakers can each contribute to creating

more inclusive social studies classrooms for immigrant youth in new gateway states.


www.socstrp.org


References

Adèr, H. J. (2008). Chapter 13: Missing data. In H. J. Adèr, & G. J. Mellenbergh (Eds.) (with

contributions by Hand, D. J.), Advising on research methods: A consultant's companion

(pp. 305-332). Huizen, The Netherlands: Johannes van Kessel Publishing.

Artiles, A. J., Rueda, R., Salazar, J., & Higareda, I. (2005). Within-group diversity in minority

disproportionate representation: English Language Learners in urban school districts.

Exceptional Children, 71, 283-300.

Banks, J.A., & McGee Banks, C.A. (2004). Handbook of research on multicultural education

(2nd

ed.) New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.

Bixty, J. S., & Pace, J. I. (Eds.). (2008). Educating democratic citizens in troubled times:

Qualitative studies of current efforts. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Buchanan, L.B., & Hilburn, J. (2014). Which way home: Documentary counter-narratives of

U.S. immigration. Proceedings from the 2014 College and University Faculty Assembly

Annual Meeting: Boston, MA.

Cho, S., & Reich, G. A. (2008). New immigrants, new challenges: High school social studies

teachers and English language learner instruction. The Social Studies, 99(6), 235-242.

Cochran-Smith, M. (1995). Color blindness and basket making are not the answers: Confronting

the dilemmas of race, culture, and language diversity in teacher education. American

Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 493-522.

Cruz, B. C., & Thornton, S. J. (2009). Teaching social studies to English language learners.

New York, NY: Routledge.

Cummins, J. (1986). Empowering minority students: A framework for intervention. Harvard

Educational Review, 56(1), 18-37.

Cummins, J. (2001). Negotiating identities: Education for empowerment in a diverse society

(2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: California Association for Bilingual Education.

Davies, A. Z. (2008). Characteristics of adolescent Sierra Leonean refugees in public schools in

New York City. Education and Urban Society, 40(3), 361-376.

Edelman, M. W., & Jones, J. M. (2004). Separate and unequal: America’s children, race, and

poverty. The Future of Children, 14(2), 134-137.

Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (Revised

edition). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Fix, M., & J. S. Passel. (2003, January). U.S. immigration: Trends and implications for schools.

Presentation at the National Association for Bilingual Education NCLB Implementation

Institute, New Orleans, LA.

García, O. (2014). U.S. Spanish and education: Global and local intersections. Review of

Research in Education, 38, 58-80.

Garmon, M. A. (2004). Changing preservice teachers’ attitudes/ beliefs about diversity: What

are the critical factors? Journal of Teacher Education, 55(3), 201-2013.

Garmon, M. A. (2005). Six key factors for changing pre-service teacher attitudes/ beliefs about

diversity. Educational Studies, 38(3), 275-286.

Gay, G (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education,

53(2), 106-116.

Gaytan, F., Carhill, A., & Suárez-Orozco, S. (2007). Understanding and responding to the needs

of newcomer immigrant youth and families. Prevention Researcher, 14(4), 11-13.


www.socstrp.org


Gibson, M. A. (1995). Additive acculturation as a strategy for school improvement. In R. G.

Rumbaut, & W. A. Cornelius (Eds.), California’s immigrant children: Theory, research,

and implications for educational policy (pp. 77-105). San Diego, CA: Center for US-

Mexican Studies.

Gibson, M. A., & Hidalgo, N. (2009). Bridges to success in high school for migrant youth.

Teachers College Record, 111(3), 683-711.

Gollnick, D. M., & Chinn, P. C. (2006). Multicultural education in a pluralistic society (7th

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Goodwin, A. L. (2002). Teacher preparation and the education of immigrant children.

Education and Urban Society, 34(2), 156-172.

Guskey, T. T. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching:

theory and practice, 8(3), 381-391.

Hamman, E.T. (2002). ¿Un paso adelante? The politics of bilingual education, Latino student

accommodation, and school district management in Southern Appalachia. In S.

Wortham, E. G. Murillo, Jr., & E. T. Hamman (Eds.), Education in the New Latino

Diaspora (pp. 67-97). Westport, CT: Ablex.

Hilburn, J. (2014). Challenges facing immigrant students beyond the linguistic domain in a new

gateway state. The Urban Review, 46(4), 654-680. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11256-

014-0273-x

Hilburn, J., & Fitchett, P.G. (2012). The new gateway, an old paradox: Immigrants and

involuntary Americans in North Carolina history textbooks. Theory and Research in

Social Education, 40(1), 30-60.

Huerta-Macios, A., Gonzales, M. L., & Holman, L. (2000). Children of undocumented

immigrants: An invisible minority among homeless students. In R. Mickelson (Ed.),

Children of the streets of the Americas (pp. 238-246). New York, NY: Routledge.

Irvine, J. J. (2003). Educating teachers for a diverse society: Seeing with the cultural eye. New

York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Jacobsen, R., Frankenberg, E., & Lenhoff, S. W. (2012). Diverse schools in a democratic

society: New ways of understanding how school demographics affect civic and political

learning. American Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 812-843.

Journell, W. (2009). Setting out the (un)welcome mat: A portrayal of immigration in U.S. history

standards. The Social Studies, 100, 160-168.

Journell, W., & Buchanan, L. B. (2013). Confronting educational politics with preservice

teachers: Reactions to Waiting for Superman. Action in Teacher Education, 35, 252-271.

Kalton, G. (1983). Introduction on survey sampling. London, England: Sage.

Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America’s schools. New York, NY: Crown.

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

children. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

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

Education Research Journal, 32(3), 465-491.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1999). Preparing teachers for diverse student populations: A Critical Race

Theory perspective. Review of Research in Education, 24, 211-247.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11256-014-0273-x

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11256-014-0273-x


www.socstrp.org


Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). Yes, but how do we do it? In J. Landsman, & C. W. Lewis (Eds.),

White teachers/ diverse classrooms: A guide to building inclusive schools, promoting

high expectations, and eliminating racism (pp. 29-42). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Lee, S, J., & Oxelson, E. (2006). “It’s not my job”: K-12 teacher attitudes toward students’

heritage language maintenance. Bilingual Research Journal, 30(2), 453-477.

Lee, J.S. & Suárez, D. (2009). A synthesis of the roles of heritage languages in the lives of

immigrant children. In T. Wiley, J.S. Lee, & R. Rumberger (Eds.), The education of

linguistic minority students in the United States (pp.136-181).Bristol, UK: Multilingual

Matters.

Lenz, K., & Schumaker, J. (1999). Adapting language arts, social studies, and science materials

for the inclusive classroom. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.

Levison, M. (2010). The civic empowerment gap: Defining the problem. In L.R. Shrod, J.

Torney-Purta, & C. A. Flanigan (Eds.), Handbook of research and policy on civic

engagement in youth (pp. 331-361). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Li, G. (2003). Literacy, culture, and politics of schooling: Counternarratives of a Chinese

Canadian family. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 34(2), 182-204.

Lintner, T., & Schweder, W. (2012). Practical strategies for teaching K-12 social studies in

inclusive classrooms. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Little, J. W. (1999). Organizing schools for teacher learning. In L. Darling-Hammond, & G.

Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp.

233-262). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

López, G. R. (2001). The value of hard work: Lessons on parent involvement from an

(im)migrant household. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 416-437.

Marri, A. R. (2009, April). Closing the civic opportunity gap: Engaging urban youth in civic

education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research

Association, San Diego, CA.

Meador, E. (2005). The making of marginality: Schooling for Mexican immigrant girls in the

rural Southwest. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 36(2), 149-164.

Murillo, E. (2002). How does it feel to be a problem?: “Disciplining” the transnational subject in

the American South. In S. Wortham, E. G. Murillo, Jr., & E. T. Hamman (Eds.),

Education in the New Latino Diaspora (pp. 215-240). Westport, CT: Ablex.

Newman, D. A. (2003). Longitudinal modeling with randomly and systematically missing data:

A simulation of ad hoc, maximum likelihood, and multiple imputation techniques.

Organizational Research Methods, 6(3), 328-362.

Olsen, L. (1996). From nation to race: The Americanization of immigrants in a high school of

the 1990s. Proceedings from the American Educational Research Associate Annual

Meeting: New York City, NY.

Parkhouse, H. (2013). Teaching culturally relevant pedagogy and transformational resistance

using the film Precious Knowledge. Proceedings from the 2013 College and University

Faculty Assembly Annual Meeting: St. Louis, MO.

Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and

practice. Educational Researcher, 41 (3), 93-97.

Pohan, C. A. (1996). Preservice teachers’ beliefs about diversity: Uncovering factors leading to

multicultural responsiveness. Equity and Excellence in Education, 29(3), 62-69.


www.socstrp.org


Powers, J.M. (2014). From segregation to school finance: The legal context of language rights in

the United States. Review of Research in Education, 38, 81-105.

Richards, H. B., Brown, A. E., & Forde, T. B. (2007). Addressing diversity in schools:

Culturally responsive pedagogy. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(3), 64-68.

Rong, X. L. (2012). Advocacy-orientated teacher education in new gateway states. Teacher

Education and Practice, 25(4), 580-584.

Rong, X. L., & Preissle, J. (2009). Educating immigrants in the 21st century: What educators

need to know (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Salinas, C. (2006). Educating late arrival high school immigrant students: A call for a more

democratic curriculum. Multicultural Perspectives, 8(1), 20-27.

Sox, A. K. (2009). Latino immigrant students in southern schools: What we know and still need

to learn. Theory into Practice, 48 (4), 312-318.

Suárez-Orozco, C., Suárez-Orozco, M. M., & Todorova, I. (2008). Learning in a new land:

Immigrant students in American society. Cambridge, England: Belknap Press.

Terrazas, A., & Fix, M. (2008). Gambling on the future: Managing the educational challenges

of rapid growth in Nevada. Washington, D.C.: Migration Policy Institute.

Torney-Purta, J., Barber, C., & Wilkenfeld, B. (2006). Differences in the civic knowledge and

attitudes of adolescents in the United States by immigrant status and Hispanic

background. Prospects, 36(3), 343-354.

Urrieta, L. (2010). Whitestreaming: Why some Latinas/os fear bilingual education. In L. Diaz

Soto, & H. Karhem (Eds.), Teaching bilingual/ bicultural children: Teachers talk about

language and learning. (pp. 47-55) New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Valdés, G. (2001). Learning and not learning English: Latino students in American schools.

New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Valenzuela, A. (2002). Reflections on the subtractive underpinnings of education research and

policy. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(3), 235-241.

Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: US-Mexican youth and the politics of caring.

Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Villegas, A. M., & Lucas, T. (2002). Preparing culturally responsive teachers: Rethinking the

curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 20-32.

Villenas, S. (2002). Reinventing educación in new Latino communities: Pedagogies of change

and continuity in North Carolina. In S. Wortham, E. G. Murillo, Jr., & E. T. Hamman

(Eds.), Education in the new Latino diaspora (pp. 17-35). Westport, CT: Ablex.

Wainer, A. (2006). The new Latino south and the challenge to American public education.

International Migration, 44, 129-165.

Wortham, S. (2002). Gender and school success in the New Latino Diaspora. In S. Wortham, E.

G. Murillo, Jr., & E. T. Hamman (Eds.), Education in the New Latino Diaspora (pp.117-

141). Westport, CT: Ablex.

Web-based References

Migration Policy Institute. (2008). North Carolina: Social and demographic characteristics.

Retrieved from http://www.migrationinformation.org/datahub/state.cfm?ID=NC


www.socstrp.org


National Council for Social Studies. (2011). National curriculum standards for social studies:

A framework for teaching, learning, and assessment. Retrieved from

http://www.socialstudies.org/standards

North Carolina Test Requirements. (2013). ETS: The PRAXIS series. Retrieved from

http://www.ets.org/praxis/nc/requirements

O’Brien, J. L. (2009). High school social studies teachers’ attitudes toward English language

learners. Social Science Research & Practice, 4 (2), 36-48. Retrieved from

http://www.socstrp.org/issues/PDF/4.2.3.pdf

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2012). North Carolina state and county quick facts. Retrieved

from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/37000.html

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2009). American communities survey 2005-2009. Retrieved from

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/37/37163.html

Wake County Schools District Website. (2011). WCPSS demographics. Retrieved from

http://www.wcpss.net/demographics/

Author Bios

Jeremy Hilburn is an Assistant Professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington, his

alma mater. He addresses three lines of inquiry in his research: social studies curriculum and

pedagogy specific to immigrant students in new gateway states, spatial citizenship education, and

social studies pedagogy in multiple contexts – middle, secondary, and teacher education. Email:

[email protected]

Xue Lan Rong is a Professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Her

research interests include immigration and education, the education of Asian American

children, and education in China. Hillary Parkhouse is a doctoral student in Culture, Curriculum, and Change at the University of

North Carolina at Chapel Hill, with research and teaching interests in secondary social studies,

immigrant students, and global education. She teaches graduate social studies methods classes

and online global education classes for practicing teachers.

Alison M. Turner is a PhD candidate at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Her

research interests include ESL and bilingual education, world language education, and minority

issues in education. Her dissertation focuses on efforts to open Third Spaces by connecting

school to homes in a two-way immersion school.

mailto:[email protected]

Teaching Newcomers Inclusively: Social Studies in a New ... · Teaching Newcomers Inclusively:...

Documents

Transcript of Teaching Newcomers Inclusively: Social Studies in a New ... · Teaching Newcomers Inclusively:...