Facilitating Science and Mathematics Teachers’ Talk About Equity: What Are the Strengths and Limitations of Four Strategies for Professional Learning?

Abstract

ABSTRACT:We investigated a 2.5-year professional development effort designed to support practicing science and mathematics teachers in understanding equity and enacting equitable practices. Our purpose was to inform the research base on effective equity professional development, toward the goal of better supporting science and mathematics teachers in transforming their views and practices. Because talk is central to learning, we examined how four strategies for professional learning facilitated or constrained teachers' shared equity talk: (1) engagement in teacher research, (2) reflection on personal experiences, (3) modeling of reform-based instructional practices, and (4) examination of school/state/national data on student course taking and achievement. We asked: How did teachers' shared equity talk vary across these strategies? To answer this question, we qualitatively analyzed recorded seminars, teacher interviews, and written reflections to determine the opportunities each strategy afforded teachers to talk about equity, and the length and substance of teachers' equity talk as a result. We found that, despite teachers' construction of a shared equity discourse and the iterative implementation of professional learning strategies, the type of strategy implemented did indeed matter. Although all four

Income-Based Disparities in Early Elementary School Science Achievement

“…Next, specific policy and practice shifts related to both formal and informal science learning may also mitigate income-based science achievement gaps. For example, attention might be given to the time spent on science (Bassok et al, 2016;Blank, 2013;Marx & Harris, 2006;Phillips, Gormley, & Lowenstein, 2009;Sackes, Trundle, & Bell, 2013;Sackes, Trundle, Bell, & O'Connell, 2011;Tu, 2006), the capacity of teachers and school leaders to teach science (Bianchini, Dwyer, Brenner, & Wearly, 2015), and the ways in which science is taught and integrated with other subjects (Hayes & Trexler, 2016). The recently developed Next Generation Science Standards and the National Research Council's corresponding framework on K-12 science instruction provide some grounding for such shifts in instructional practice around science.…”

The Effects of Curriculum, Gender and Students’ Favorite Science Subject on Indonesian High-School Students’ Conceptions of Learning Science

“…Cheryan et al, 2017;Miller, Eagly & Linn, 2014;Wang & Degol, 2016). Consequently, many have argued that gender stereotyping is one of cognitive biases that hinders the current goals of global science education which is equity in science learning and science for all to be reached (Andre et al, 1999;Bianchini et al, 2015;Phillip & Azevedo, 2017;Renni, 1998;Rodriguez, 2015;Zeyer, 2017). By finding out the way to tackle this issue, it may lead to the decrease of female students on using rote learning in science subjects, because they are likely starting the effort not to please the teachers.…”

Doors labeled as times: Frames of observing and understanding

“…In this regard, having learners construct and test theories is a highly‐prized scientific practice — equally essential to the work of professional scientists as for students learning the culture of science (Macpherson, ). Similarly, science educators have taken great interest in teachers’ theoretical frameworks regarding the subject and the students (Bianchini, Dwyer, Brenner, & Wearly, ; Kind, ). Theoretical framing is essential for a research manuscript to be viable.…”