EDITORIAL xv_tcm18-48070.pdf · 2019. 9. 3. · EDITORIAL Regina Panasuk It has been 15 years since the Colloquium was launched, and with this issue the Journal completes its 15th

i

Annual Colloquium Journal vol. XV, Spring 2010

EDITORIALRegina Panasuk

It has been 15 years since the Colloquium was launched, and with this issue the Journal completes its 15th year of pub-lication. By all accounts, the Colloquium and the Journal have carved out a place for themselves in the Graduate School ofEducation. The major purpose of the Colloquium Journal is to create an opportunity for graduate students to share theirresearch ideas, research in progress, or to present completed studies. Now, everyone at the GSE knows that there exists a safeand accessible space to publish and share ideas with others. Evidently, some of the GSE students make all efforts to write andsubmit their papers more than once during their formal course study before they complete their dissertations and even aftersuccessful defense. Some prefer to submit their most completed and significant research conducted in the course of the dis-sertation. I encourage all of you to test, enhance and expand your writing skills at the earlier stages of your degree program.It will help you in the development of your proposal and dissertation.

Nowadays, a serious attention is paid to the improvement of research in education. “Scientifically-based research” or sci-entific inquiry has been a major debate at the conferences and a favorite topic of the research journals. A committee of theNational Research Council continuously examines the status and quality of research in education and produces reports thatoutline most critical features of scientifically reliable research and design principles to guide the creation of an advanced edu-cational research enterprise. Scientific inquiry in education is one of the forms of viewing and describing reality. It is a way ofknowing and understanding of ever changing educational system, which is a very complex social construct. It is a continualprocess of rigorous reasoning supported by strong association between methods, theories and findings, which influence cur-ricula and policy. Schooling cannot be improved by relaying on just folk wisdom about student learning and how schools canbe organized. For that reason, there will be always a great demand in rigorous, sustained, scientific research to reengineer theschools in effective ways.

We belong to the community of educators who are constantly trying to learn, understand and improve educationalprocesses. We make professional decisions that have both immediate and long-range effects on our students, teachers, parentsand ultimately our communities. When conducting research we discuss theoretical and practical views of the real world, andideology and ethics as they shape and form research in education. We equally value and apply a variety of sources of data, andcarefully select the appropriate methods of inquiry. The better knowledge of making inquiries we have the better producersand consumers of educational research we are.

The major questions we always pose are to what degree our explanations of phenomena match the realities of the world andwhether the research findings are valid and reliable. We make every effort for continuous verification our conjectures and con-clusions, and look for new lines of inquiry that would provide more definitive answers to the questions we will address over time.

In the process of improving education, educational research when adequately supported, has benefited many dimensionsof theory and practice. This is most apparent when discoveries, findings, and conclusions are widely disseminated throughwriting, analyzed and discussed. That is why I continuously encourage you to write and help me carrying on the ColloquiumJournal publication.

In this issue I am pleased to present several articles that demonstrate our graduate students’ research endeavor.

Maria Nemerowicz investigated the reasons why some special education paraprofessionals who work in public school set-tings stay in their positions for years and why some leave after only a short time. Paraprofessionals today are being asked toperform responsibilities that were previously reserved for special education teachers. The steep influx of paraprofessionals andthe high rates of attrition that accompany this trend schools are now facing with the challenge of retaining this rapidly expand-ing form of service delivery.

In her paper, Deborah McMakin focused on the needs for fostering educational equity through instructional practice. Shesuggested that one facet of culturally responsive teaching practice is conceptualizing cultural differences and recognizing howculture pervades education. She developed a case study to investigate how three middle class teachers conceptualized cultur-al differences and their implications for education over the course of a culminating field experience. This study examined howone participant’s understanding of cultural differences changed or maintained throughout a semester long field experienceteaching experience in a school site with a culturally diverse student body.

Leslie Bolinger Horton asserts that the successful construction of mathematical knowledge is likely to depend upon the stu-dents’ ability to discover existing and meaningful relationships among concepts. She investigated the literature which suggest-ed that incorporating a historical dimension into the mathematics classroom might help students to achieve a rich and deepconstruction of mathematical concepts. She found and analyzed the research studies, which indicate that although teachersaccept the idea they are reluctant to put it into practice. In her paper she identifies those factors that affect teachers’ decisionsregarding the inclusion of the history of mathematics in their curricula.

Shanna Rose Thompson examines whether continuation high schools, an alternative education program in California, pro-vide supports and opportunities that build bonding and bridging social capital for at-risk youth. She provides a review of thegrowing body of literature on continuation high schools along with insights gained from an interview with Dr. Richard

ii


GUIDELINES FOR SUBMISSIONThe papers submitted for the Journal must discussissues and trends related to educational research andpractice.

WHEN SUBMITTING A PAPER, PLEASE USE THEFOLLOWING GUIDELINES:

1. Submit an electronic version of the paper, anabstract, approximately 150 words, and a biogra-phical sketch, about 30 words. All pictures anddiagrams must be submitted in a separate docu-ment.

2. Use double spacing with one-inch margins.

3. For references, tables, and figures follow the styledescribed in the Publication Manual of theAmerican Psychological Association (APA), SixthEdition.

4. Paper must be submitted by December 1.

5. Authors will be notified about the status of theirpapers by January 15.

6. The Colloquium is scheduled in April.

A RESEARCH PAPER MUST INCLUDE:

a) a rationale and an identification of the researchquestion(s),

b) a conceptual framework or brief statement of rela-tionship to the literature,

c) an identification of research methodology,

d) a summary of the analytical technique(s),

e) a summary of preliminary findings.

The length of the paper length might be up to 30-40pages, including pictures, tables, figures, and list ofreferences.

A position paper for the Educational Resourcessection can be up to 20 pages. It must present newideas and developments of major importance to practi-tioners working in the fields of mathematics and sci-ence education, language art and literacy, and leader-ship and schooling. It must reflect a variety of researchconcerns within the fields and deal with didactical,methodological and pedagogical issues.

SUBMIT PAPERS AND CORRESPONDENCE TO:

Dr. Regina M. PanasukProfessor of Mathematics EducationGraduate School of Education

University of Massachusetts Lowell61 Wilder Street, O’ Leary 5th FloorLowell, MA 01854

Phone: (978) 934-4616Fax: (978) [email protected]

2010 Annual Colloquium JournalThe Graduate School of Education, University of Massachusetts Lowell

Ashcroft, a professor from California State University San Bernardino and the author’s experiences as a continuation highschool teacher in San Francisco. She found a number of research studies, which indicate that continuation schools that areviewed as “safety nets” do provide institutional supports that foster social capital whereas continuation schools that are viewedas “safety valves” provided few, if any, institutional supports.

Sumudu Lewis has developed an interesting analysis of different points of view in regard to the notion of scientific method.She investigated different positions, points of view and attitudes toward the scientific method and discussed contrary beliefsand perceptions. The paper represents an overview of assertions made by certain scientists about the non-existence of the sci-entific method as well as other claims that there is more than one method.

Richard Howarth has successfully passed qualifying examination, and his full qualifying paper is presented in this volume.The concept of evolution is central to the study of biology and important for the development of scientific literacy. Teaching theconcept of evolution is difficult for biology teachers due to various teachers’ and students’ perceptions that influence instruc-tion and learning. Research has indicated that religious convictions, academic preparation in evolution and general biology aswell as teachers’ understanding of the nature of science all have influenced the perceptions towards evolution held by teachers.Additionally, research on this topic has identified instructional practices for the effective teaching of evolution. This paper high-lights the major factors influencing teachers’ perceptions towards the concept of evolution and effective instructional practices.

I am deeply grateful to all contributors and invite new submissions to the next volume of the journal.

R. Panasuk

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Retention and Turnover of Special Education Paraprofessionals: A Multi-Site Case StudyMaria DeJohn Nemerowicz............................................................................................................1

Understanding Cultural Differences: A Pre-Service Teacher’s ViewDeborah McMakin ......................................................................................................................19

Teacher Perceptions on the Inclusion of History of Mathematics in the ClassroomLeslie Bolinger Horton ................................................................................................................31

Educational ResourcesInvestigating the Scientific MethodSumudu Lewis ............................................................................................................................45

At-Risk Youth and Opportunities for Building Social Capital Shanna Thompson ......................................................................................................................51

Qualifying Paper 2009Biology Teachers’ Perceptions Regarding the Teaching of Evolution as a ConceptRichard Howarth ........................................................................................................................59

CONTRIBUTORSMaria DeJohn Nemerowicz completed her Ed.D. in 2009. She started her career as a paraprofessional. She is a SpecialEducation Teacher for the Hudson Public Schools as well as an Adjunct Professor of Special Education at theAssumption College, MA.

Deborah McMakin teaches child development and research methods at the Framingham State College. She is a doctoral student in the Educational Leadership program and is currently working on her dissertation.

Leslie Bolinger Horton is a Professor of Mathematics at Quinsigamond Community College, and an Ed.D. candidateat the Math and Science Education program at UML. She is currently working on her dissertation proposal. Herareas of research interest include history of mathematics, learning styles, and non-Euclidean geometry.

Shanna Thompson is a student at the Leadership and Schooling Graduate Program. Prior to her doctoral studies, sheserved as a high school mathematics teacher in the cities of San Francisco and New Orleans. Her research interestsinclude issues related to at-risk students.

Sumudu Rupika Lewis is a student at the Math and Science doctoral program. Prior to coming to the USA, she earnedher Ph.D. in Chemistry and she was working as an Assistant Principal and STEM coordinator for schools in westLondon, UK.

Richard Howarth has been teaching Biology, Vertebrate Anatomy and AP Environmental Science at the North HighSchool in Worcester, MA , and he is an adjunct faculty at the at the Becker College. He is currently working on hisdissertation proposal in the Math and Science Education doctoral program.

iv


Attention Educators!Learn to Lead a Professional Learning Community

An Innovative New Offering for Educators and School Systems Committed to Improving the Quality of Learning at their Schools through Reflective Practice

The Summer Institute for Educators program is a blended offering combining a mix of online and on-campus sessions.

UMass Lowell’s Graduate School of Education is offering an innovative new program for educatorswho are leading professional learning communities or contemplating doing so. UMass Lowell’sSummer Institute for Educators will provide strategies, practical training, and the intellectual foun-dation necessary to enable confident, thoughtful leadership through its summer offering entitled,“Leadership & Learning: Professional Learning Communities.” Individuals will be invited to partic-ipate in a research study as part of the program.

The format of the Summer Institute for Educators program is designed to meet the scheduling needsof working professionals by offering a blend of online and on-campus sessions. The program com-mences with a week-long summer session held on campus at UMass Lowell, which will be highlyinteractive with plenty of opportunity for individuals to network with colleagues in neighboringschool districts as well as their own. During the fall, continuing instruction, coaching, and supportis provided online through three learning modules, at intervals of about three weeks. The programconcludes with an on-campus weekend component held at UMass Lowell in early November, whichbrings all participants together for a follow-up workshop and reunion.

ONE WEEK ON-CAMPUS SESSIONJuly, 2010.

Monday through Friday 9:00 am–3:00 pm

concluding Friday at noon.

THREE ONLINE LEARNING MODULESSeptember–November, 2010.

Each module includes a one-hour live chat and feedback on work in progress.

ONE WEEKEND ON-CAMPUS WORKSHOPEarly November.

Friday, 5:00 pm–9:00 pm andSaturday, 9:00 am–Noon.

For registration information and dates, visit us online athttp://continuinged.uml.edu

1


ABSTRACTThe purpose of this study was to investigate anddescribe the reasons why some special educationparaprofessionals who work in public school settingsstay in their positions for years and why some leaveafter only a short time. This study investigated thereasons that lead to paraprofessional job retentionand turnover in six Massachusetts elementaryschools by using qualitative research methodology.Within the spectrum of qualitative research, thisstudy used a multi-site, case study method.

Most paraprofessional stayers in this study were mar-ried, college educated, and over the age of 35 whenthey were first hired for the position. Additionally,more paraprofessionals who left were those whoworked in ABA or one-to-one positions with studentsthat had more intensive cognitive or behavioralneeds. For many paraprofessional leavers, the posi-tion was a temporary job to fit their current lifestyle,but others left to pursue higher salaried positionsbecause their financial needs had changed or theirsecondary household income was reduced or elimi-nated.

INTRODUCTIONFar from their early roles as clerical assistants and

support aides for students in the primary grades, para-professionals today are being asked to perform respon-sibilities that were previously reserved for special edu-cation teachers. Over the past 40 years there has been asharp rise in the numbers of paraprofessionals who sup-port students in both general and special education set-tings (Ghere, 2003). In 1965 there were fewer than10,000 paraprofessionals working in public schools,but today there are more than 500,000 (National Centerfor Educational Statistics, 2000). Despite these increas-es, studies have indicated that a vast number of para-professionals had less than two (Blalock, 1991) to fouryears (Elrod, Insko, & Williams, 1993) of experience.With the steep influx of paraprofessionals and the highrates of attrition that accompany this trend schools arenow faced with the challenge of retaining this rapidlyexpanding form of service delivery.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act(IDEA) of 1997 defines paraprofessionals as persons whodeliver instructional and direct services under the super-vision of licensed professionals. Although their role was

intended to be supportive in nature, the increasingreliance on paraprofessionals in schools has causedmany to question special education service delivery(Giangreco, Smith, & Pinckney, 2006). Numerous stud-ies indicate that paraprofessionals have been increasing-ly utilized as direct service providers and placed in roleswhere they are forced to make primary instructionaldecisions for the students they service (Giangreco &Broer, 2005). As a result of this shift in roles there hasbeen a growing emphasis in the literature on the needfor ongoing paraprofessional training and clearlydefined roles and responsibilities (Downing, Ryndak, &Clark, 2000; French, 1999; Bugaj, 2002; Riggs &Mueller, 2001; Tillery, Werts, Roark, & Harris, 2003).

Since this shift in roles, there have been repeatedcalls for improving and increasing paraprofessional edu-cation, training, and support (French, 2003; French,2001; Pickett, Likins & Wallace, 2003). Further, Blalock(1984) found that training paraprofessionals to meetthese new demands is associated with increased levels ofparaprofessional performance in the classroom.Although training and support lead to improvements inparaprofessional classroom performance, with the highrates of attrition within this group, investments in train-ing alone do not appear to solve the problem. At the endof each school year, and even mid-year, paraprofession-als continue to leave their jobs. Training and knowledgeacquired each year are lost because new employeesrequire hours of initial and ongoing training and sup-port to adequately fill these instructional roles (Ghere &York-Barr, 2007). The reason why these paraprofession-als leave and why a small number of paraprofessionalschoose to stay in their position for years is still unclear.

RATIONALE FOR THE RESEARCHResearch has shown that under the direct supervi-

sion of a qualified teacher, and with ongoing trainingspecific to their positions, paraprofessionals can effec-tively carry out follow-up instruction and other educa-tional tasks (Giangreco & Broer, 2005). Many timeshowever, paraprofessionals are used to provide the bulkof instruction and inclusion support to students withdisabilities. Giangreco and Broer (2005) found that cur-rent special education delivery models are based on anover-reliance on under-trained paraprofessionals. They

Retention and Turnover of Special Education ParaprofessionalsA Multi-Site Case Study

Maria DeJohn Nemerowicz Hudson Public Schools, MA

2


note that these models are commonly used and they arenot grounded in the current theories of research.

Ghere (2003) found that in response to the changein paraprofessional roles and responsibilities, specialeducation teachers have become instructional leaders,managers, and staff developers, and they spend a greatdeal of time providing individualized training to para-professionals. Ghere (2003) also noted that directingthe work of paraprofessionals is not a single event, buta multi-faceted job-embedded process that requires sig-nificant investments in time. Because paraprofessionalshave assumed such vital roles with students and in pro-grams, the cost of paraprofessional turnover is extensivefor students, teachers, and school programs. New para-professionals must undergo this lengthy process oftraining but students with special needs continue to beserviced by these newly hired inexperienced serviceproviders, regardless of where they are in their processof training. The special education teacher must spendmore time with the newly hired paraprofessional thanthey would with more experienced individuals and as aresult they have less time to focus on program-relatedduties (Ghere & York-Barr, 2007). Ghere (2003) sum-marizes her findings with a vivid metaphor: “Similar toa pebble dropped in a pond, the turnover of even oneparaprofessional creates a ripple effect that spreadsthroughout an inclusive program. Repeated paraprofes-sional turnover creates repetitive ripples that simplydrain energy from the organization” (p.211).

Ghere and York-Barr (2007) suggest that with thehigh rates of paraprofessional attrition there is an inher-ent loss of organizational knowledge. Prior training andpreviously acquired understandings about the job andorganizational culture are lost each year. Developing awell-trained paraprofessional workforce becomes morecomplex than simply clarifying responsibilities andadding new professional development programs.

Given the size of the paraprofessional workforceand the vital instructional roles that they play in specialeducation programs, the ramifications of turnover onstudents, programs, and school staff are significant(Ghere & York-Barr, 2007). Reducing this turnoverminimizes the loss of time, energy, and professionaldevelopment required to develop well-trained parapro-fessional staff. Ghere and York-Barr (2007) note thatgiven the high costs of paraprofessional turnover forschool staff, fiscal resources, special education pro-grams, and students, additional research in this area isneeded. They call for further studies that will helpschools better understand why paraprofessionals leavetheir positions and what decisions might lead to para-professional retention (Ghere & York-Barr, 2007).

Additional knowledge about why some paraprofes-sionals stay in their positions may help districts moreeffectively maintain a workforce of previously trainedparaprofessionals. Further, it could help to minimizethe negative impacts that paraprofessional attrition hasbeen found to have on programs, school staff, and stu-dents (Ghere & York-Barr, 2007). Several studies haveinvestigated the effects of paraprofessional attrition onspecial education teachers, students, and programs butthere are few studies that have investigated the reasonsfor the high turnover rates or what conditions exist thatinfluence a smaller number of paraprofessionals to stayin their position for years. Investigating the factors thatencourage paraprofessionals to stay in the same districtfor years may contribute to the literature in both specialeducation and employee turnover and retention.

RESEARCH QUESTIONSThe purpose of this study was to examine and

understand the attributes that contribute to retentionand turnover in special education programs. Thisresearch study had an overarching question that hasguided this inquiry and it was supported by two ques-tions that anchored the examination. These questionswere as follows:

• What conditions exist that contribute to the reten-tion and attrition of paraprofessionals?1. What individual attributes contribute to the

retention and attrition of paraprofessionals?2. What institutional attributes contribute to the

retention and attrition of paraprofessionals?

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKAs a result of new legislation during the past sever-

al decades, an inclusion movement initiated by parentsand advocacy groups, and special education teachershortages, a reorganizing of programs and staffing pat-terns has occurred (Ghere, 2003; Nietupski, 1995). Asparaprofessional numbers have increased, their respon-sibilities have shifted from clerical and supportive innature to spending a great deal of their time making pri-mary and often independent instructional decisions forstudents with special needs (Pickett et al., 2003;Giangrego, Edelman, Broer, and Doyle, 2001; Ghere &York-Barr, 2003; Wallace, 2003). The regulations out-lined in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002 (NCLB)mandated that schools receiving Title I funds must onlyhire paraprofessionals that have two years of post-sec-ondary education, an associate’s degree, or a passingscore on a state or local assessment. As a result of these

3


increased expectations, districts have responded withimproved and increased professional development fortheir paraprofessional staff members.

Despite these efforts, paraprofessional burnout andhigh levels of turnover have still persisted. The twotypes of paraprofessionals found by Tillery et al. (2003)suggest that the majority of paraprofessionals leavewithin the first five years of employment, but that asmaller number of paraprofessionals stay at their jobs,thereby reducing the negative effects of turnover insome settings and districts. Unfortunately, not much isknown about the differences between each group orhow some districts have been able to maintain a largergroup of paraprofessionals who stay in their schools formany years. With the noted changes in paraprofession-al roles and responsibilities and requirements for train-ing and highly qualified status, a closer look at the workexperiences of paraprofessionals at different stages ofthis cycle is needed.

Although legislative changes and teacher shortagesin special education provide an explanation for the shiftin paraprofessional roles and responsibilities, it is notclear if or how this may be related to turnover andretention. Paraprofessional attrition is noted in the liter-ature as an area of concern for schools and programs,but the causes for paraprofessional turnover remainslargely uncharted territory (Ghere, 2003). Since theshift in roles, districts have been caught in a costly cycli-cal process of recruiting, hiring, training, and losingparaprofessional staff. The negative effects of this repet-itive cycle are felt by students, parents, school person-nel, and school programs. Not much is known aboutthe experience of paraprofessionals as they enter andleave this revolving process. Even less is known aboutthe small number of paraprofessionals who veer offfrom this dominant sequence as they settle into a schoolsystem. Perhaps if schools better understand the expe-rience of paraprofessionals and the individual and insti-tutional attributes that lead to retention, schools canbreak the costly cycle of turnover.

When paraprofessionals leave their positions thereare system-wide ramifications. The loss of these para-professional resources have a significant impact on stu-dents, teachers, administrators, and special educationprograms (Ghere, 2003; Ghere & York-Barr, 2007).When a paraprofessional leaves their position a shift inresponsibilities and additional time and resources mustbe spent on training, adjusting roles, and helping stu-dents adjust to the change. These losses were especiallydifficult for students when the paraprofessional lefttheir position mid-year (Tillery et al., 2003; Ghere,2003; Ghere & York-Barr, 2007). When paraprofession-

als leave their position, teachers who relied on that sup-port must now refocus their time and attention to re-train new paraprofessionals.

Changes in educational practices, evolving teacherroles, shifts in legislation and educational policy, and ashortage of qualified teachers all appear to be causes ofthe reversal of paraprofessional and special educationteacher roles (Wallace, 2003; Ghere, 2003). Recentstudies suggest that reorganization of staffing patternshas resulted from changes in how students with disabil-ities are serviced in schools, but it is not yet known ifthis is a contributing factor in the high rates of parapro-fessional attrition. Although some researchers have sug-gested that paraprofessional attrition rates are related tolow salary, a lack of career ladder opportunities, and alack of respect and support (Ghere & York-Barr, 2007;Tillery et al., 2003; Giangreco et al., 2001), the exactreasons for the high levels of paraprofessional turnoverare still not entirely clear. Additionally, it is not yetunderstood why some paraprofessionals choose to stayin their positions when such a high number chooses toleave after only a few years.

ROLE CHANGES, TRAINING AND THE CYCLICAL NATURE OFTURNOVER

Special education service delivery has changed dra-matically over the past few decades and new responsibil-ities have been placed on paraprofessionals. No more areparaprofessionals limited to carrying out clerical dutiesand minor supportive roles in the classroom. Thesenewly formed roles and responsibilities have led toincreased expectations for paraprofessionals in terms ofinstructional tasks and ongoing training. NCLB (2002)mandated that schools receiving Title 1 funds must onlyhire paraprofessionals that have two years of post-sec-ondary education, an associate’s degree, or a passingscore on a state or local assessment. As a result of theseincreased expectations, districts have responded withimproved and increased paraprofessional professionaldevelopment. Despite these efforts, paraprofessionalburnout and high levels of turnover still persist. Withtheir noted changes in paraprofessional roles andresponsibilities, requirements for training and highlyqualified status, and high levels of paraprofessional attri-tion rates, districts are caught in a costly cyclical processof recruiting, hiring, training, and losing paraprofession-al staff. The effects of this repetitive cycle are felt by stu-dents, parents, school personnel, and school programs.

It has been documented in the literature that para-professional turnover is costly for districts, causes dis-ruptions for students and programs, and increases the

4


workload of special educators (Ghere, 2003; Ghere &York-Barr, 2007). Despite the disruptions turnover caus-es, it remains one of the least studied areas within therealm of paraprofessional practices. Ghere (2003) arguesthat there is an immediate need to better understand thecauses, impacts, and possible solutions to paraprofes-sional turnover. Schools may be more successful atretaining a quality paraprofessional workforce if morewere understood about the effects that their changingroles, working conditions, and other unknown factorsmay have on current attrition rates. It is imperative thatschools be aware of the individual and institutionalattributes that contribute to paraprofessional retention.Understanding the individual attributes of paraprofes-sionals who stay for years and of those who work close-ly with them, may lead to more effective recruiting andmore meaningful training and support for these impor-tant support staff members. Additionally, a broaderunderstanding of the institutional factors that lead toparaprofessional retention can help policymakers andeducators make more informed decisions so those fac-tors can be replicated in our schools.

METHODOLOGYThis study investigated the reasons that lead to

paraprofessional job retention by using qualitativeresearch methodology. Within the spectrum of qualita-tive research, this study used a multi-site, case studymethod. Paraprofessional participants included individ-uals who have been employed as paraprofessionals fortwo years or less as well as those who were currentlyemployed and who had been working in their positionfor over five years. Interviews with principals and dis-trict-level special education directors were incorporatedinto this study. The overarching goal of this investiga-tion was to identify individual factors that increase thelikelihood of retention.

RESEARCH SITE AND PARTICIPANTS—SELECTION CRITERIA

The three sites in this study were purposely chosenfor the particular characteristics they share. By using atypical case-sampling model to select the sites and par-ticipants, this study aimed to illustrate and highlightwhat is characteristic in Massachusetts school districtswith “typical” profiles so that findings can be general-ized to similar settings. The research sites were purpose-ly selected with three objectives in mind. The first goalin selecting these particular sites was to find three dis-tricts that shared similar attributes such as program-ming practices and demographics. The research siteswere selected because they had similar special educa-

tion programs and service delivery models in theirschools. All three districts maintained full and partialinclusion programs as well as services that were provid-ed in substantially separate classroom settings.Additionally, more than 50% of students in each districtreceived their special education services in a full inclu-sion setting.

The second objective in selecting these sites was tochoose school districts that each maintained a heteroge-neous paraprofessional population. In September of2007, all three districts employed four or more parapro-fessionals with two or less years experience as well asfour or more paraprofessionals that have been there forover five years. They included paraprofessionals whoworked in full and partial inclusion settings as well asthose who worked in substantially separate classroomsas they supported students with special needs.Additionally, all three districts employed paraprofession-als at different stages in the highly qualified requirementprocess. These different paraprofessional populationshave enabled the researcher to obtain specific data aboutretention and attrition from multiple perspectives.

The third objective was to choose sites that were ofvarying socioeconomic levels, but were still somewhattypical to the majority of remaining suburban districtsin the state. Although the three districts were all locat-ed in the same county and on the urban fringe of a largecity, the median household incomes for the three townsdiffered by $19,000 or more. Two of the three districtshowever shared similar rankings with other towns inthe state. Each of these two towns had a median house-hold income within $3000 of at least ten other towns inMassachusetts. In picking two typical districts the hopeis that results can be generalized to districts that sharesimilar profiles with the ones presented in this study.The third town was ranked in the top 10% of the statefor median household income and was $46,000 higherthan the middle-ranked district in this study. Althoughthis district was primarily selected because it sharedsimilar programs, special education student rates, andspecial education per pupil spending with the other twotowns in the study, it also provided information aboutparaprofessional practices and institutional attributesthat lead to retention and attrition in areas with highersocioeconomic levels.

THE HOLMFIELD PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT

Holmfield is a suburban community that is located28 miles from Boston. The town website notes thatHolmfield is a quiet community of hard-working citi-zens which offers the beauty of a semi-rural New

England town as well as the convenience of a metropol-itan suburb. Holmfield is situated near the crossroads ofseveral major highways. It is also an economically well-developed community with a wide range of matureindustry, including several leading technology-basedcorporations. The Holmfield Public School Districtserves a diverse cultural community and the schoolsoffer a Portuguese bilingual program and a multi-cul-tural curriculum.

Holmfield is comprised of 2,900 students. Of thesestudents, 590 are identified as having special needs. Therate of students in this district with special needs is20%, which is the highest rate of the three districts inthis study. Twenty-three percent of the students enrolledin special needs programs are from low-income house-holds. Sixty-nine percent of the students with specialneeds receive their special education services while fullyincluded in the regular classroom, 17% receive servicesin a partial inclusion setting, and 10% receive specialeducation services in substantially separate settingswithin the public schools. The per-pupil spending forstudents in special education is $11,094 and the medi-an household income in Holmfield is $72,000.

The two elementary schools in Holmfield that werechosen for this investigation are Fresco and Martin.Both schools have paraprofessionals who have two orless years and five or more years of experience workingin the district. Fresco and Martin employ a total of 35special education paraprofessionals to support studentsin full inclusion, partial inclusion, and substantiallyseparate settings. At these two elementary schools 57%of the special education paraprofessionals are consid-ered highly qualified.

THE CRESTFIELD PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT

Crestfield is a suburban industrial town that islocated 24 miles from a large city. In general, the north-ern parts of Crestfield tend to be more urban and dense-ly populated, while the south is quite rural. The districtwebsite notes that educators utilize a learner-centeredcurriculum that stresses high expectations and stan-dards for all learners.

The Crestfield Public School District is comprisedof 5,600 students. Of these students, 790 are identifiedas having special needs. The rate of students in this dis-trict with special needs is 14%, which is the lowest rateof the three districts in this study. Nine percent of thestudents enrolled in special needs programs are fromlow-income households. Fifty-seven percent of the stu-dents with special needs receive their special educationservices while fully included in the regular classroom,

31% receive services in a partial inclusion setting, and4% receive special education services in substantiallyseparate settings within the public schools. The per-pupil spending for students in special education is$13,000 and the median household income is $91,000.

The Crestfield Public School District consists of onehigh school, two middle schools, and five elementaryschools. The two elementary schools in Crestfield thatwere chosen for this investigation are Bart and Hartman.Both schools have paraprofessionals who have two orless years and five or more years of experience workingin the district. Bart and Hartman employ a total of 30special education paraprofessionals to support studentsin full inclusion, partial inclusion, and substantiallyseparate settings. At these two elementary schools 57%of the special education paraprofessionals are consid-ered highly qualified.

THE SMITHFIELD PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT

Smithfield is situated midway between two largecities. It is a residential community with rural aspectsand the median household income is $136,000. TheSmithfield District is comprised of 3,300 students.Four-hundred and eighty of those students are identi-fied as having special needs. The rate of students in thisdistrict with special needs is 15% and only 4% of thestudents enrolled in special needs programs are fromlow-income households. At both elementary schools allthree models of service delivery are present, but vastmajority of students in special education are serviced inthe full inclusion to partial inclusion model. Seventy-two percent of the students with special needs receivetheir special education services while fully included inthe regular classroom, 20% receive services in a partialinclusion setting, and 4% receive special educationservices in substantially separate settings within thepublic schools. The per-pupil spending for students inspecial education is $12,000.

The Smithfield Public School District consists offour elementary schools, one middle school and aregional high school located in the district. The two ele-mentary schools in Smithville have paraprofessionalswho have two or less years and five or more years ofexperience working in the district. Lincoln and Jamesemploy a total of 21 special education paraprofessionalsto support students in full inclusion, partial inclusionand substantially separate settings. At these two elemen-tary schools 90% of the special education paraprofes-sionals are considered highly qualified.

Each of the participating sites in this study has a dis-trict-wide special education parent group. In addition to

5


6


these organizations at the district level, each school hasa general parent group. Table 1 outlines district andschool attributes for each participating site.

The data collection methods that were utilized inthis study were interviews, focus groups, and documentanalysis. Gathering information from diverse sourcesprovided the researcher with greater insight about para-professional turnover and retention. Individual inter-views were conducted with the special education direc-tor in each district and the principal of each of the sixschools. In each of the six schools there were two para-professional focus groups. The stayers group at eachschool consisted of two to three special education para-professionals who had been employed in their districtfor over five years. The newbies group at each schoolconsisted of two to three special education paraprofes-sionals who had been employed in their district for twoyears or less. Paraprofessionals who had left their posi-tions were referred to as the leavers. Although theleavers were not actual participants in this study, discus-sions about the perceived reasons for their leaving werepart of the interview and focus group discussions.

In this study, paraprofessional contracts and initialdata surveys on paraprofessional turnover rates for eachschool were analyzed. In addition to turnover data andcontracts, communiqués sent to paraprofessionals as agroup from the principal, pupil services director, andspecial education teacher were used to provide a morethorough analysis of practices and retention strategiesused in each district. Communications distributed aboutparaprofessionals were also examined. Data aboutschool-specific paraprofessional turnover rates were alsocollected. The initial questions asked for paraprofession-al attrition data from the 2004–2007 school years. Threeconsecutive years of data collected on schools in eachdistrict allowed the researcher to make data-based com-parisons among individual schools and districts.

ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUESNVivo 7 Software is a tool that helped this

researcher plan for and analyze the data collected frominterviews and focus group sessions. NVivo serves as anelectronic repository for qualitative data that is collect-ed. Manipulation and analysis of qualitative data cantake place in steps and can be imported into this elec-tronic storage container as it is collected. Step onebegan with the development of an NVivo shell. The datacollection methods that were utilized in this study wereinterviews, focus groups, and document analysis. Eachinterview and focus group transcription was enteredinto the NVivo shell as a document and named by type,school, and district (i.e. Stayers Bart Holmfield). Eachdocument was then placed into a folder by participanttype (Newbies, Stayers, Principals, or Sped Directors).Then cases were created for each district, school, para-professional group, and individual participant.

Step two began with the coding of interview andfocus group transcriptions. The three common waysthat data is organized in qualitative research is throughdescriptive coding, topic coding, and analytical coding.All three of these were used in this investigation andeach had a unique purpose. Richards (2005) maintainsthat descriptive coding is much like quantitative codingbecause it involves storing information about the casesthat are being studied. This type of coding was done byappropriating values to each variable in each case andstoring the data in NVivo. This method of coding assist-ed the researcher in storing and quickly retrieving rou-tine information about the cases (such as the years ofwork experience).

Topic coding is a type of qualitative coding thatenables a researcher to label text according to its sub-ject. This researcher used topic coding so that the spe-cific topics that were coded could be retrieved andexamined during the analytic process. It also helped toidentify patterns that emerged. Analytical coding isdescribed as being central to qualitative investigations

Number Students with Students Students Students in Special Ed Special of Students Special Needs Fully Partially Substantially Per-Pupil Ed Parent

Included Included Separate Spending GroupHolmfield 2,900 590 69% 17% 10% $11,094 YesDistrict Rate: 20%Crestfield 5,600 790 57% 31% 4% $13,000 YesDistrict Rate: 14%Smithville 3,300 480 72% 20% 4% $12,000 YesDistrict Rate: 15%

Table 1Attributes of Each District

7


because it leads to the emergence and the affirmation oftheories (Richards, 2005). These types of codes areoften stored as attributes within a researcher-createdcategory. Richards (2005) asserts that it requires theresearcher to interpret a passage, reflect on its meaning,and create a category for that idea. Analytical codingenabled this researcher to develop assumptions and cat-egories that emerged from the data. The researchermade attempts to substantiate these emerging theoriesthrough voluntary email correspondences of actual cod-ing reports with the research participants.

VALIDITYMaxwell (2005) asserts that internal generalizabili-

ty (the generalizability of a conclusion within the settingor group studied) is crucial to qualitative research,while external generalizability (refers to its generaliz-ability beyond that setting or group) is not. He notesthat that descriptive, interpretive, and theoretical valid-ity of a case study all depend on their internal general-izability. Although external generalizability may notdirectly result from this investigation, the aim was todemonstrate validity in the descriptions of each casebased on the data that was collected from the multipleinterviews, focus group sessions, and data on parapro-fessional turnover rates, and document analysis.Creswell (2003) contends that there are eight strategiesavailable that can help increase accuracy of the findings.She recommends identifying one or more of thesestrategies in a research proposal. Four of the eight wereapplied in this research study.

First, the validity of this study was sustained by tri-angulating the data sources. In this study the researcherused a combination of interviews, focus groups, para-professional turnover data, and document analysis.Through interviews and focus group sessions in sixschools within three districts, special education direc-tors, principals, and paraprofessionals have providedmultiple perspectives of paraprofessional attrition andretention. Analysis of the paraprofessional contracts,communications, and job descriptions revealed furtherinformation about job expectations, benefits, and work-ing conditions. Attrition data provided definitive infor-mation about the actual turnover rates for each schooland how they have changed over time. This data pro-vided a quantitative measure to more thoroughlydescribe turnover and retention at each school.

Member-checking is another procedure thatCreswell (2003) recommends for increasing the likeli-hood that the research findings will be valid. In thisstudy, each participant was emailed the full transcription

of the interview in addition to an Nvivo coding report.Each report was a rich text file of coding results that wasspecific to each interview and focus group. Participantshad the opportunity to review all researcher-coded textfrom the interview and they were encouraged to identi-fy any errors, omissions, or misinterpretations.

The final methods were intertwined and theyincluded clarifying bias and debriefing with a peer. Thisresearcher engaged in ongoing clarification in the formof memos and peer debriefing with fellow doctoral can-didates in the Leadership in Schooling program atUMASS Lowell. During the coding process areas ofpotential researcher bias were identified in debriefingsessions and later coded by the researcher. These areaswere then highlighted in the transcriptions so that theywere evident to the participants (for member-checking),the researcher’s colleagues (for further peer debriefing),and to the researcher (for memo-writing/reflection andanalysis). Areas that were coded for possible biasinclude areas that were both researcher-indicated andpeer-indicated during debriefing sessions. In correspon-ding emails, study participants were made aware of thehighlighted text and asked to pay particular attention tocoding in these areas due to possible researcher bias.

FINDINGS A cross-case merged findings methodology (Stake,

2006) was used to analyze and describe turnover andretention in the six participating schools. Throughanalysis of the coded responses of the individual cases,themes emerged among the cases. Most of the themeswere common in individual cases and across cases, buta few others were not evident in the individual casesuntil a merged findings analysis of all cases was created.

PARAPROFESSIONAL EMPLOYMENT DATA AND TURNOVERRATES

In the 2007–2008 school year, Smithfield had 51%of paraprofessionals who were employed for over fiveyears and 21% employed for less than two years.Smithfield had a three-year turnover rate of 21.5%. Asthe largest of the three districts in this study, Crestfieldemployed the most paraprofessionals and had retained48% of those employees for over five years. At 7% theyhave the lowest three-year turnover rate in this study.Surprisingly, they had two years with no turnover atHartman Elementary School. Holmfield had the lowestnumber of stayers at 30% and the highest number ofnewbies at 43%. At 27% Holmfield has the highest levelof turnover of all three districts in the study with closeto a 50% turnover in the 2006-2007 school year.

8


Analyses of programs and participant data reveal somenotable trends in relation to turnover and retention.

Tables 2 and 3 illustrate the district comparison of para-professional employment and turnover data.

District-Wide Number Percent Percent Percent PercentParaprofessional Employed Employed Employed for Employed for Who AreTurnover Rates 2007–2008 Over Five Less Than Less Than Highlyand Highly Years Five Years Two Years QualifiedQualified StatusHolmfield District 80 30% 70% 43% 86%Crestfield District 106 48% 52% 27% 84%Smithfield District 47 51% 49% 21% 95%

For James and Lincoln only

Table 2District Comparison of Paraprofessional Employment Data

Paraprofessional Paraprofessional ParaprofessionalTurnover Turnover Turnover

2006-2007 2005-2006 2004-200520% Turnover 20% Turnover 30% Turnover10% - unknown 20% - unknown 30% - unknown

10% - maternity leave

47% Turnover 25% Turnover 21% Turnover41% - unknown 19% - unknown 21% - unknown

6% - teaching job 6% - teaching job33% Turnover 23% Turnover 25%Turnover

13% Turnover 14% Turnover 9% Turnover13% - relocated 14% - relocated 9% - not asked back15% Turnover 0% Turnover 0% Turnover5% - relocated

5% - teaching job5% - took a job out of education – needed to

make more money

14% Turnover 4% Turnover 4% Turnover

11% Turnover 30% Turnover 8.3% Turnover11% - different in-district 30% - unknown 8.3% - teaching job-

non-para job other community25% Turnover 27% Turnover 30% Turnover

8.3% - not asked back 18% - unknown 10% - unknown8.3% - relocated 9% - maternity leave 10% - teaching job–10% - unknown other community

10% - relocated18% Turnover 28.5% Turnover 18% Turnover

Table 3District Comparison of 3-Year Paraprofessional Turnover

Fresco Elementary

Martin Elementary

Holmfield School DistrictBart Elementary

Hartman Elementary

Crestfield School DistrictLincoln Elementary

James Elementary

Smithfield School District

Holmfield District3-YearTurnover Rate:27%

Crestfield District3-YearTurnover Rate:7.3%

Smithfield District3-YearTurnover Rate:21.5%

Paraprofessional Turnover Rates

Note: Annual turnover data calculated for each district: paraprofessional leavers for both schools divided by thetotal number of paraprofessionals that were employed in both schools in September of that year. 3-Year turnoverdata calculated for each district: Average of district percentages for three years.

9


Paraprofessional demographic data were collectedin the form of a written questionnaire.

In addition to completing background informationquestionnaires, participants were asked why they choseto stay throughout the years. They also discussed leaverparaprofessionals that they had known and the reasonswhy they had left the position. In addition to parapro-fessional responses, administrative surveys were collect-ed for each school and district relating to the reasons forturnover in the past three school years for each staffmember who had not returned.

Throughout the sources, four main individualattributes were identified in the stayer paraprofession-als. Of these four attributes the first three were alsoranked among the top three attributes coded in eachindividual case. Of the 20 stayers, 90% of them wereage 35 or older when they were first employed as para-professionals in the district. Additionally, there were nostayer paraprofessionals under the age of 40 throughoutall of the district paraprofessional participants, but 35%of the newbie paraprofessionals were younger than 40.Participants from all six stayer focus groups across thedistricts also made references that indicated some com-mon individual attributes among the stayers. It isimportant to note that the references were not exclu-sively noted among stayers, but only the responses ofthe stayer paraprofessionals were noted in an effort tounderstand why individuals have remained in the posi-tion. It is possible that some newbie participants mayeventually become stayers, but for the purpose ofunderstanding the stayers, only their references wereexamined for this question. Table 4 reveals the data col-lected from paraprofessional questionnaires and focusgroup sessions with the stayer paraprofessionals.

When asked about the reasons that encourage themto stay, paraprofessional participants in all six focusgroups made 12 references about their personal enjoy-ment in working with students. Paraprofessionalsthroughout the stayer groups also made referencesabout their desire to have a work schedule that wasaligned with school hours and their desire to learn new

things. Many of these individual attributes were embed-ded within one response. Here a Martin stayer fromHolmfield explained how the position fits her lifestyle.

I like coming to work, I like working with thekids, I like working with my other peers in thebuilding, I enjoy that, I think that is what keepsme here. I enjoy learning what I am doingbecause I didn’t know this job before that and Iwould like to continue it so I like doing this, thatis why I come here everyday, umm, I just likedoing what I am doing, that is why I like beinghere.

Paraprofessionals noted that their personal enjoy-ment of working with students and witnessing studentprogress as a result of the support that they had provid-ed was something that had encouraged them to stay inthe position for years.

Paraprofessional stayers in five of the six focusgroups also made 11 references about their need to havea work schedule that is aligned with school hours. Fortypercent of these paraprofessionals noted that they hadchildren in the district. Many of these participants statedthat supervisors were understanding and accepting whenparaprofessionals needed to leave to care for sick chil-dren. Paraprofessionals in several groups also noted thatthey remained in these positions because of the opportu-nities to learn new things each day. Paraprofessionalsmaintained that they are encouraged to stay because oftheir desire to increase their knowledge base of curricu-lar content and/or special education pedagogy.

INDIVIDUAL ATTRIBUTES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO ATTRITION

When participants were asked about the reasonswhy paraprofessionals had left the district the mostcommon response was that leavers had chosen employ-ment as a paraprofessional as a temporary job and not along-term career choice. Other reasons discussed in atleast half of the participant sources were the need for ahigher salary and education majors who left to pursue ateaching position. Table 5 [next page] reveals the data

What individual attributes contribute to the retention All Stayers Holmfield Crestfield Smithfieldof paraprofessionals? (20 Para Stayers) Stayer Paras Stayer Paras Stayer ParasPara Focus Groups (Sources) 6 Sources 2 Sources 2 Sources 2 SourcesAge 35 or older when first employed in district 90% 100% 71% 100%Enjoyment of Working with Students 6/12 5 References 3 References 4 ReferencesDesire Work Schedule Aligned with School Hours 5/11 5 References 3 References 3 ReferencesDesire to Learn New Things 5/9 4 References 2 References 3 References

Table 4Individual Attributes that Contribute to Retention

collected from paraprofessional questionnaires, partici-pant focus groups, and administrative surveys relatingto individual attributes that contribute to retention.

Of the 21 paraprofessional and administrativesources, 13 sources made 17 references about parapro-fessionals who chose to leave the position so that theycould pursue another career. Sources throughout allthree districts noted that the choice to becomeemployed as a paraprofessional was often a convenientbut temporary decision for many individuals as theytook steps to pursue their true career. Other partici-pants discussed that paraprofessionals often return toprevious professionals after working as a paraprofes-sional for a period of time. Some paraprofessionals evennoted that they would not likely be returning the fol-lowing school year.

Paraprofessional participants in three of the six new-bie focus groups noted that their employment in thisposition was only temporary as they had plans to furthertheir education or gain employment in another field.

The next most common individual attribute thatcontributed to attrition was the need for a higher salary.Of the 21 sources, 12 sources made 20 references aboutpeople who had left the position because of their needto make a higher salary. Throughout eight sources in allthree districts participants noted that paraprofessionalsthat they had known left or were likely to leave due tochanges in personal financial circumstances. It is impor-tant to note that of the three districts, the attrition dueto the need for a higher salary was only discussed byone source (Lincoln Stayer Focus Group) in the districtof Smithfield. Interestingly, Smithfield participants werethe only individuals to respond that salary was not amajor factor of why paraprofessionals leave. They madefour references to paraprofessionals having stablehousehold incomes and the financial freedom to remainin a lower paying position. The remaining 11 sourcesthat noted attrition due to the need for a higher salarywere more equally distributed between the other twodistricts with six of the sources originating in Crestfieldand five from Holmfield.

Like the first attribute, the third most common rea-son that participants noted for turnover occurred more

uniformly throughout the three districts. Participants in11 sources made 13 references about paraprofessionalswho left because they were pursuing a degree in educa-tion or employment as a teacher. Some participants ref-erenced that paraprofessionals left to pursue a teachingposition, complete their student teaching requirements,or finish working on their degrees or certifications.Throughout these sources participants discussed thatalthough some paraprofessionals left to pursue theirteaching degrees and gain employment outside the dis-trict, a number of them went on to become teachers in-district.

THE IMPACT OF INDIVIDUAL SOCIOECONOMICS ON TURNOVERAND RETENTION

Insufficient salary was referenced as one of the topinstitutional attributes that lead to turnover in the threestudy districts. Although salary is determined by eachdistrict, individual socioeconomic factors influencedwhether paraprofessionals were able to stay in the posi-tion for years. Of the stayer paraprofessionals 95% weremarried and 5% were divorced and in four sourcesparaprofessionals maintained that money was notsomething they had to worry about because of theirspouse’s income. In four of the six stayer group sources,paraprofessionals noted that they had a secure secondhousehold income. Five of the nine administrators alsonoted that stayer paraprofessionals tended to be mar-ried and rely primarily on spousal income. The Lincolnprincipal described the stayers at her school:

I think most of my paraprofessionals are mar-ried, stable, good income coming in from othersources and they want to do something mean-ingful. They want to be in touch with a chal-lenge and some of them are working for thebenefits. I think a couple of them have self-employed husbands who make nice livings butneed the health insurance or whatever. So, yes,I think socioeconomics really plays in here.This is a comfortable population.

Several of the paraprofessionals in the four stayersources explained that their continued employment as

What individual attributes contribute to the attrition Total Paraprofessionals SPED Principalsof paraprofessionals? (21 Sources) (12 Focus-Group Directors (6 Sources)

Sources) (3 Sources)Temporary Job – Not Career 13/17 7/8 2/3 4/6Need Higher Salary 12/20 6/13 2/2 4/5Education Majors – Plan on Becoming Teachers 11/13 5/5 3/4 3/4

Table 5Individual Attributes that Contribute to Attrition (Sources/References)

10

11


paraprofessionals was dependent on their husband’sincome. Even stayer participants whose husbands werestruggling to find jobs or being laid off talked about thepossibly of leaving their position so they could makemore money. A Lincoln stayer from Smithfieldexplained, “If my husband lands on his feet, I am a bigfan of inertia, I don’t want to go anywhere or do any-thing but if he doesn’t, then I need to step up.”Paraprofessionals throughout four groups stated thatthey were not doing this for the money, but they alsomaintained that they could not do the job without hav-ing some level of financial security. If that security wasin jeopardy, even seasoned paraprofessionals were atrisk for leaving the position.

In addition to secure household incomes some pat-terns emerged in the stayer group demographics. Of the20 paraprofessional stayer participants 75% had collegedegrees and 25% had taken some college courses.Additionally, all of the stayers were between the ages of40-59 with 80% between the ages of 50-59. Finally,75% of the stayers lived in the district and 40% hadchildren who attended school there. Although somesimilar patterns emerged with newbie paraprofession-als, some of these newbies could be potential stayersand demographic data was not collected about leaverparaprofessionals.

INSTITUTIONAL ATTRIBUTES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO RETENTION

Paraprofessional participants in the study wereasked about the aspects of the position that had encour-aged them to stay. Table 6 reveals the top four cross-dis-trict institutional attributes that contribute to parapro-fessional retention.

In all six stayer focus groups paraprofessionals made15 references about the high levels of collaboration andthe positive relationships between co-workers at theirschools. Many paraprofessionals discussed that theyenjoy the high level of collaboration between employeesand this has encouraged them to stay throughout theyears. Collaboration was defined by high levels of com-munication about students and learning between staff

members. Paraprofessionals noted that they are encour-aged to stay because even though they deal with difficultbehaviors and challenging situations, they feel that theyalways have somewhere to go for assistance.

Another reason paraprofessionals gave for staying intheir positions was that they had established positiveand close relationships with fellow co-workers. Stayersnoted that each year they are asked for their preferencein where they would like to be placed for the followingyear and that their placement opinions had most oftenbeen honored. Participants noted that they have devel-oped strong friendships with fellow staff members andcontinued employment with these individuals hadencouraged them to stay throughout years. They alsodiscussed that they relied on each other and could com-municate with each other when aspects of the jobbecame frustrating. Lincoln stayer from Smithfieldexplained these relationships:

Well, the assistants get along real well. We goout to dinner and vent every other month, andthe majority of us are older women, you know,we have all had other careers, have come backto this, and you know, are really in it for thelong term and certainly not the money.

In all six stayer focus groups paraprofessionalsmade seven references about the strong sense of com-munity at their schools. Stayer participants noted that aschool attribute that encouraged them to stay each yearwas this sense of community. Community was definedby stayers across the districts as an environment whereparents, teachers, paraprofessionals, and students werecaring and highly involved in both the academic andsocial learning process.

Some paraprofessionals noted the intimacy ofworking in a smaller school where they developed long-term friendships.

Paraprofessional stayers in five of the six sources alsomade nine references about the flexibility of the position.Paraprofessionals noted that they were motivated toremain in the position because of the convenience of the

What institutional attributes contribute to the retention Total Holmfield SPED Principalsof paraprofessionals? Stayer Paras Stayer Paras Stayer Paras

(6 Sources) (2 Sources) (2 Sources) (2 Sources)Environment with High Levels of Collaboration - 6/15 2/5 2/7 2/3Positive co-worker RelationshipsSense of School Community 6/7 2/2 2/2 2/3Convenient Work Schedule 5/9 2/3 1/2 2/4Environment where Employees Feel Respected and Valued 5/7 2/3 1/1 2/3

Table 6Institutional Attributes that Contribute to Retention (Sources/References)

12


work schedule and work year. Many of the paraprofes-sionals noted the convenience of this position and thatthey stayed because the flexibility of this position allowsthem to deal with other things that were important intheir lives.

Throughout five of the six stayer groups, partici-pants made seven references that they were encouragedto stay because of the level of respect and value thatthey received from staff. Paraprofessionals maintainedthat colleagues respected their work and treated them asequals. Paraprofessional participants also noted thatthey were encouraged to stay because their contribu-tions were solicited and valued by fellow co-workers.

Although the first two attributes (collaboration andsense of community) also emerged as the top individualdistrict attributes that had encouraged stayer paraprofes-sionals to remain in their positions, the third and fourthmost-commonly cross-referenced attributes were onlyrated in the same sequence in Holmfield and Smithfield.There was not a third or fourth rated institutional attrib-ute that contributed to retention in Crestfield.

INSTITUTIONAL ATTRIBUTES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO ATTRITION

When participants were asked about the institu-tional attributes that have contributed to paraprofes-sional attrition the most common response was job-related burnout due to the assignment of students in anApplied Behavior Analysis (ABA) or a one-to-one per-sonal aide position. Other reasons discussed were insuf-ficient salary, the inability to advance in their career, andunexpected job responsibilities. The themes were pre-sented in this cross-case section but the first two attrib-utes listed in Table 7 also emerged as the top individualdistrict attributes that had contributed to attrition. Table7 reveals the data collected from paraprofessional ques-tionnaires, participant focus groups, and administrativesurveys relating to institutional attributes that con-tribute to paraprofessional attrition.

Of the 21 paraprofessional and administrativesources, thirteen sources made 16 references aboutparaprofessionals they had known who had left theposition because they experienced job-related burnoutfrom either a one-to-one assignment with a student who

had challenging behaviors or severe special needs. Itwas also reported throughout these sources thatburnout and turnover occurred more frequently inparaprofessionals who worked in the ABA programs.The ABA paraprofessionals in the three participatingdistricts were assigned to work with students diagnosedwith autism spectrum disorders. ABA paraprofessionalsare sometimes referred to as ABA therapists or ABAtutors and they are specially trained to work in thesepositions. The special education director fromHolmfield explained the higher turnover rates for ABAand one-to-one paraprofessionals:

I think you either see them here for a couple ofyears or they stay. We get a lot of turnovers inthe ABA’s. Like I said, I think the turnover ratedepends on the severity of the children they areworking with. I think the children that are themost needy, especially the ones that are themost behaviorally challenged, I think that iswhere you see more of the turnover rates possi-bly from the burnout factor, which a lot ofteachers get as well too. I think the inclusionaides are the ones that I tend to see stay. Wemight shift them from school to school but theyare here long term. Generally when we arelooking for a position to fill, it is going to be aone-to-one or an ABA. That is the trend that Ihave seen over the last two years.

In addition to ABA assistants, some paraprofession-als are assigned as one-to-one personal aides. One-to-one personal aides were defined as those who workedwith the same student all of the time. High turnoverwith this group was noted throughout several sources.Throughout the sources participants noted that manyparaprofessionals leave after having been assigned towork one-to-one with a student with significant needsor behavioral challenges. They asserted that althoughthese individuals might have enjoyed working with stu-dents, the challenges and frustrations of working withthe same student with such intensive needs all daywould often lead to burnout and eventually, cause themto leave. The Martin principal of Holmfield explained

What institutional attributes contribute to the attrition Total Holmfield Crestfield Smithfieldof paraprofessionals? (21 Sources) (7 Sources) (7 Sources) (7 Sources)Burnout due to one-to-one and ABA Assignments 13/16 5/8 5/5 3/3Insufficient Salary 9/10 4/5 3/3 2/2No Career Ladders 7/8 3/4 3/3 1/1Unexpected Job Responsibilities/ Unclear Expectations 5/5 4/4 1/1 —————

Table 7Institutional Attributes that Contribute to Attrition (Sources/References)

13


that the job of a one-to-one paraprofessional was notonly challenging, but the most difficult position to fill.She noted that they had already lost three one-to-oneparaprofessionals during the present school year.

In nine of the 21 sources, ten references were madeabout paraprofessionals leaving the position due to thelow salary. Most participants noted that paraprofession-als left because the salary did not match the level ofwork that was required of them. Even stayer partici-pants were noting that they would have to be leavingthe position if the salary did not increase more signifi-cantly in the next contract. Some paraprofessionalsnoted that they would be leaving at the end of theschool year. A Fresco stayer from Holmfield maintainedthat she was going to have to leave the job that she hadbeen at for years and truly enjoyed because of the insuf-ficient salary.

In seven of the 21 sources eight references weremade about paraprofessionals leaving the positionbecause of the lack of career ladders. They noted thatthis was not the position for someone who was lookingto advance in their career. One Martin newbie fromHolmfield noted that she would be leaving the positionat the end of the year. Participants throughout thesesources noted that the only chance to advance was tobecome a teacher and that had caused many paraprofes-sionals that they knew to leave. Some paraprofessionalsnoted also that this lack of career ladders was likely tobe discouraging to paraprofessionals.

Some paraprofessionals had suggestions in lieu ofcareer ladders. They noted that if paraprofessionals hadopportunities to advance and make some money forbeing leaders or mentors to other paraprofessionals,such opportunities might encourage them to staylonger. A Martin stayer from Holmfield elaborated:

I agree with her, it is frustrating. I wish theywould put together at least a mentor-type pro-gram, you know at least that would give us theopportunity to help new people coming in andthe teachers have a mentor program, they get alittle stipend, it would give us the ability tohelp, maybe work with those kids and keepmore people, get more people to stay.

In five of the 21 sources, participants made five ref-erences about paraprofessionals leaving because ofunclear expectations about the job. It is important tonote that these references were only made in Holmfieldand Crestfield. Participants suggested that paraprofes-sionals often started a job with a simplistic idea abouttheir responsibilities, but would leave early on becausethey were not clear about the more specific responsibil-

ities required of their individual positions. Participantsin these sources noted that job descriptions needed tobe more specific so that paraprofessionals for individualpositions knew what would be expected of them beforethey were offered the position.

OBSERVATIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The study aimed to explore the conditions that existthat contribute to the retention and attrition of parapro-fessionals. As each observation is presented particularattention is given to the implications for future educa-tional reform measures that aim to improve paraprofes-sional retention. Findings from the individual andcross-case analysis have supported a number ofhypotheses about paraprofessional turnover and reten-tion as they exist within and among the three districtsin this study. Each of these observations is discussedwith particular attention given to implications and sug-gestions for educational reform. The observations are:

• Observation #1 - Most paraprofessional stayerswere married, college educated, over 35 whenfirst hired, with a stable second householdincome and a strong desire to learn and be a partof student progress. Although this population hasbeen relatively stable for years, several paraprofes-sional stayers noted that they would have to seekout other positions due to current financial diffi-culties.

• Observation #2 - More leavers were reportedabout paraprofessionals who worked in ABA orone-to-one positions with students that had moreintensive cognitive or behavioral needs, and para-professional participants who were currently inthese roles noted that they did not have enoughcontact with or support from special educationteachers.

• Atypical Observation - For many paraprofession-al leavers, the position was a temporary job to fittheir current lifestyle, but others left to pursuehigher salaried positions because their financialneeds had changed or their secondary householdincome was reduced or eliminated.

THE STABLE STAYER PARAPROFESSIONAL

Most paraprofessional stayers in this study weremarried, college educated, and over the age of 35 whenthey were first hired for the position. The question-naires and responses of the 20 paraprofessional stayerparticipants revealed that 95% were married, 85% hadsome type of college degree, and 90% were age 35 or

14


older when they were first employed as paraprofession-als in the district. The traits that were commonly notedby stayer paraprofessionals were a strong desire to learn,the enjoyment of being a part of student progress, andthe convenience of having a schedule that is alignedwith school hours. Paraprofessionals from all three dis-tricts noted that they had chosen to stay in this positionbecause these factors were most important to them.

Many of the paraprofessional stayers in this studynoted that they took on some of the most challengingpositions and that for years they had carried out lessonplanning, the initial teaching of concepts, and the cre-ation of modifications for the students that they serv-iced. Stayer paraprofessionals throughout the three dis-tricts also noted that they had a strong desire to learnnew things, but they talked at length about their discon-tent with much of the district-run professional develop-ment. Seasoned paraprofessionals noted that profes-sional development was often redundant because theyhad either attended similar training in past years orlearned the information in their years of teaching andsupporting students. They maintained that professionaldevelopment was most helpful when they were allowedto attend the workshops that were relevant to their cur-rent teaching situations. To help feed this desire tolearn, districts should provide paraprofessionals withrelevant professional development opportunities.Differentiating training opportunities on district-spon-sored professional development days can allow noviceparaprofessionals to obtain the skills they need as newservice providers but it would also allow experiencedparaprofessionals to participate in more applicabletrainings. When possible, they should be encouraged toattend the workshops that are most meaningful andpurposeful to their unique situations.

Paraprofessionals also maintained that much oftheir learning occurred on the job, but that they hadlimited time with their supervising teacher. Due to thislimited time for interaction and training they often wereunsure if the services that they were providing were themost appropriate or effective. With this in mind, dis-tricts should be attentive of this need for teachers tohave time to work with and train paraprofessionals. Inaddition to time, teacher education programs should bedesigning courses for special educators and other super-vising teachers to prepare them for the task of support-ing and training paraprofessionals. Educators should betaught how to supervise and work with paraprofession-als and how to provide them with appropriate on-the-job training.

Through creative scheduling, paraprofessional men-toring and training can occur during the school day with

little or no financial outlay. The cross-case findings sug-gest that paraprofessionals are encouraged to stay in theirposition when they have opportunities to develop posi-tive co-worker relationships. They noted that they had adesire to be mentored by fellow paraprofessionals and tocollaborate about students on their caseloads. By encour-aging experienced paraprofessionals to become peercoaches or mentors to newer paraprofessionals, districtscan take steps to provide more relevant support to newstaff, while acknowledging the value and expertise of themore seasoned paraprofessionals. Staff members that arechosen for these leadership roles within their schoolscould be compensated with a small stipend or extra per-sonal days for the support and guidance they providedthroughout the school year. By taking this first step toacknowledge valuable stayer paraprofessionals, districtswould provide paraprofessional staff with meaningfulopportunities for collaboration while developing astronger sense of community within each school.

Another common finding that emerged was thatmany stayers were able to continue in this positionbecause they had a stable secondary household income.Throughout both questionnaires and focus group dis-cussions 14 of the 20 stayer paraprofessionals notedthat if this secondary income were to decrease or beeliminated, they would not be able to remain in thisposition as they would be forced to seek out a higherpaying job. Paraprofessional stayers in all three districtshad discussions about their desire to stay in the positionand their discontent about possibly having to leave iftheir financial circumstances change.

In the United States, the past three decades havebeen a period of relative economic stability and growth.This period of stability has made it much easier forparaprofessionals to stay in positions that may not havebeen as financially rewarding as they were intrinsicallyrewarding. Recently, the United States, along with manyother countries has found itself facing significant eco-nomic downturn. Many economists speculate recessionlooms for the U.S. economy. Paraprofessionals in thisstudy have noted time and again their uneasiness aboutthese economic times and several have noted that eventhey may become leavers and pursue careers in theirdegree areas. The valuable steadfast stayers may in factbecome leavers themselves, as the current economic cri-sis worsens and financial instability grows at home.

School districts are now going to be faced with dif-ficult choices regarding paraprofessional expenditures. Ithas been documented in the literature that paraprofes-sional turnover is costly for districts (Ghere, 2003;Ghere & York-Barr, 2007). Ghere and York-Barr (2007)assert that districts are burdened by the high levels of

15


paraprofessional turnover because they must use localdistrict funds to recruit, interview, and train newemployees. Kaye and Jordan-Evans (2001) note the costof replacing an employee varies between 70% and 200%of their annual salary. With the current financial situa-tion, districts are now going to be forced to make sometough decisions about staffing, compensation, and thefunding of programs. It may seem counterintuitive inraising the salaries of paraprofessionals during a periodof economic instability, but this move might actuallyprovide savings for districts in the long run. By address-ing one of the major reasons that paraprofessionals givefor turnover, districts can take steps to retain their mostvaluable and experienced paraprofessionals.

HIGHER TURNOVER WITH ABA AND ONE-TO-ONE POSITIONS

Throughout the data sources in this study, moreleavers were reported about paraprofessionals whoworked in ABA or one-to-one personal aide positionswith students that had more intensive cognitive orbehavioral needs. Of the 21 paraprofessional andadministrative sources, 13 sources made 16 referencesabout paraprofessionals they had known who had leftthe position because they experienced job-relatedburnout from either a one-to-one assignment with astudent who had challenging behaviors or severe specialneeds. It was also reported throughout these sourcesthat burnout and turnover occurred more frequently inparaprofessionals who worked in the ABA programs.Interestingly, the paraprofessional participants whowere currently in these roles noted that they felt theydid not have enough contact with or support from spe-cial education teachers.

To help support paraprofessionals in these roles andaddress one of the most significant barriers to job satis-faction for these employees, schools might want to con-sider implementing a rotating schedule. Through prop-er scheduling, one-to-one and ABA assistants could berotated with other program assistants throughout theday to prevent task redundancy and burnout fromworking with the same student, especially since thesestudents often have some of the most challenging aca-demic needs and behaviors. Paraprofessionals who werecurrently in these positions also noted discontent withthe limited interactions that they had with their super-vising special educators. This is yet another reason whydistricts should be mindful of the need for teachers tohave time to meet with and provide ongoing trainingand support for paraprofessionals.

The responses from paraprofessionals and adminis-trators in this study reveal that districts are taking someof the necessary steps to retain paraprofessionals.

Although some of the strategies districts frequently usedto retain staff were aligned with the needs and desires ofparaprofessionals, some other strategies that were lessfrequently noted were related to some of the most high-ly coded areas for job dissatisfaction and turnover. Forexample, only two of the nine administrators through-out the districts noted that they provided paraprofes-sionals with choices for in-district professional develop-ment, yet irrelevant professional development was themost highly coded aspect of the job that did not appealto paraprofessionals. Also, only two administrators saidthat they required special educators and paraprofession-als to meet regularly, yet not having enough time withspecial educators was another highly coded aspect ofthe position that did not appeal to paraprofessionals.

By becoming more familiar with the aspects of thejob that appeal and do not appeal to paraprofessionals,administrators can take steps to providing supports thatincrease the likelihood of job satisfaction and retention.Special education administrators and principals shouldcontinue to inquire about the reasons for turnover intheir schools. Intermittent surveys as well as exit inter-views could provide valuable and district-specific dataabout aspects of the position that lead to paraprofes-sional retention and turnover. Additionally, when mak-ing decisions about placements districts should contin-ue to solicit feedback from paraprofessionals. Althoughmany of the administrators asked supervising specialeducators their ideas about future placements forteacher assistants, they also asked the paraprofessionals.

Administrators do not work within the classroomsso they may not always be aware of how teams of teach-ers and paraprofessionals are working together, but byasking both parties they can gain a more holistic pictureof how teams are functioning and servicing students.Soliciting feedback from paraprofessionals would alsoenable them to make more informed decisions aboutfuture placements and perhaps encourage retention bykeeping together strong teams that have developedcooperative and effective working relationships. Evenparaprofessionals who worked with the most challeng-ing student populations noted that they were mostencouraged to stay because they had the opportunity tocontinue working with familiar colleagues. Decisions forplacements should always focus first on what is best forstudents and programs, and changes often must occureven in the best of teams. However, if current teams areworking well together and effectively servicing students,administrators should keep in mind that by honoringparaprofessional requests to work with certain teamsthey could be taking steps to increase retention.

16


ATYPICAL OBSERVATION–REPORTED LEAVERCHARACTERISTICS AND POSSIBLE FUTURE LEAVERS

An atypical observation is one that warrants cau-tion. Some of the results were based on what partici-pants recalled about paraprofessional leavers and notfrom the leavers themselves. Unlike the other observa-tions, the information for this one emerged partly fromsecondary sources, or accounts from current adminis-trative and paraprofessional participants. This observa-tion also tied together several findings that emergedfrom the study in an attempt to understand the natureand future of paraprofessional employment. This obser-vation is not considered beyond dispute, but includes asequence of findings that are evidenced throughout thecross-case analysis.

This observation begins with the finding that mostparaprofessionals tend to be college educated withtraining in many different fields outside of education.As the economy changes and financial needs in thehousehold change paraprofessionals must often leavetheir current positions to pursue higher paying jobs.From the coded participant responses, paraprofessionalturnover and retention also appears to rely heavily onthe economy and personal financial status.

There were some commonly coded characteristicsof leavers that were reported by paraprofessional andadministrative participants in this study. Of the 21 para-professional and administrative sources, 13 sourcesmade 17 references about paraprofessionals who choseto leave the position so that they could pursue anothercareer. They noted that the choice to become employedas a paraprofessional was a convenient but temporarydecision as they took the steps needed to gain employ-ment in their true career. The reasons discussed in atleast half of the participant sources were the need for ahigher salary. Of the 21 sources, 12 sources made 20references about people who had left the positionbecause of their need to make a higher salary.Participants in 11 sources made 13 references aboutparaprofessionals who left because they were pursuinga degree in education or employment as a teacher. Someparaprofessionals noted that with school hours leavers

were able to easily attend night classes and take summercourses. Others maintained that leavers were activelyseeking out other positions from the start, and that thiswas a convenient way to make a little extra money untilthey had found the right job.

The observation that emerged from this studyrevealed that there had been some common characteris-tics of leavers in the past, but that some of these char-acteristics are becoming more common among all para-professionals. The most prevalent of these characteris-tics included the need for paraprofessionals to obtainhigher paying jobs. Stayers have noted that for yearsthey have experienced a period of relative of economicstability, most of whom reported an adequate secondaryhousehold income. Many paraprofessional participantsnow reported that this stability no longer existed andthey needed more money to pay for household expens-es and college for their children. Others talked aboutsignificant losses in their household retirement fundsdue to the economy and the need to start saving moremoney than they were currently able to in this position.In fact, at the time of this study 35% of stayers notedthat they would have to leave because of recent finan-cial losses, increases in financial needs, or because theirspouses had lost their jobs.

Although this observation was partly based oninformation collected about leavers, it also includeswhat current paraprofessionals had to say about thelikelihood of remaining in the position. When partici-pants were asked about the likelihood of future employ-ment in their districts, only 38% noted that they hadplanned on staying. Table 8 outlines the coded respons-es of paraprofessionals concerning employment in thedistrict the next one to five years.

Of the 37 paraprofessional participants 38% notedthat they had planned to leave their district sometime inthe next one to five years to pursue higher paying jobs.This included half of the total participants fromHolmfield, 36% of the participants from Crestfield, and27% of the participants from Smithfield. Although atthe time of this study many of the paraprofessionals hada stable secondary household income, seventy percentof the stayer paraprofessionals also noted that if their

Total Newbies Stayers Holmfield Crestfield Smithfield(37 paras) (17 paras) (20 paras) (12 paras) (14 paras) (11 paras)

Staying 38% 35% 40% 17% 43% 55%Leaving for higher paying job 38% 41% 35% 50% 36% 27%Retired 10% 0% 20% 25% 7% 0%Unknown 14% 24% 5% 8% 14% 18%

Table 8Future Employment Responses of Paraprofessional Participants

17


secondary income were to decrease or be eliminated,they would not be able to remain in this position as theywould be forced to seek out a higher paying job.

Although paraprofessional responsibilities haveshifted from clerical and supportive in nature to spend-ing a great deal of their time making primary and oftenindependent instructional decisions for students withspecial needs, many paraprofessionals feel that they arenot being compensated for this increased level ofresponsibility. Many stayer paraprofessionals noted thatthey had settled for the minimal income, claiming thatthey did not take the position for monetary reasons.Many of these stayers maintained that they could nolonger settle for the minimal pay, especially since theirresponsibilities had increased each year. Because of therecent economic downturn, it is anticipated that para-professionals will continue to leave to pursue higherpaying careers. Policies that focus on employing andappropriately compensating high quality paraprofes-sional employees are necessary. Districts will need torespond to paraprofessional turnover and make effortsto sustain a more experienced and quality workforce.

AREAS FOR FUTURE STUDYAt this time Massachusetts does not collect any type

of paraprofessional turnover data, although attritiondata is collected about teachers in all content fields,including special educators. A larger study might revealother factors at work that relate to paraprofessionalturnover and retention. It would be advisable to con-duct a broad-scale study that focuses on the factors thatlead to turnover and retention and the strategies thatschools use to retain staff. A study like this would iden-tify districts with higher rates of retention so that allschools could have more strategies to try in theirattempts to retain their paraprofessional workforce.

In addition to larger studies, a comprehensive costanalysis of turnover and retention should be conducted.This analysis should not only focus on a breakdowncosts related to paraprofessional turnover, but it shouldalso examine the potential cost savings to be realized byreallocating resources in an attempt to retain staff. If dis-tricts had an idea of the financial impact of turnover,they can make more informed decisions about parapro-fessional resource allocation and expenditures.

It is unclear from the data collected in this investi-gation whether new staff, seasoned paraprofessionals, orthose who had left the school system were more effec-tive in their support of students with special needs. Astudy that investigates paraprofessional efficacy mayhelp identify the effect that these employees have on the

academic performance of students with special needs.Finally, exit interview studies should be conducted withparaprofessionals who are leaving the field. This canhelp to develop a more conclusive picture of turnoverfrom first-hand accounts.

CONCLUSIONThe negative effects of turnover are well document-

ed, but schools can introduce additional conditions thatincrease the likelihood of retention. Findings from thisstudy suggest that additional efforts need to be directedtoward purposeful professional development, collabo-rative interactions, appropriate compensation, andongoing supports for paraprofessionals. These opportu-nities should allow paraprofessionals some of the sameprofessional development choices as teachers. Theseimportant service providers are no longer clerical assis-tants or back-up support. Their jobs are demanding andthey carry out much of the same direct instructional,social, self-care, and behavioral supports that teachersdo each day. Districts should provide paraprofessionalswith ongoing supports and opportunities to enhancetheir teaching skills in content areas and assist them inways that are relevant to their caseload assignments.

ReferencesBlalock, V.E. (1984). Factors influencing the effectiveness of parapro-

fessionals with disabled populations. Unpublished doctoral dis-

sertation. University of Texas, Austin.

Blalock, G. (1991). Paraprofessionals: Critical team members in

our special education programs. Intervention in School and

Clinic, 26, 200-214.

Bugaj, S. J. (2002, Spring). Improving the skills of special educa-

tion paraprofessionals: A rural school district’s model for staff

development. Rural Special Education Quarterly 21(2), 16-24.

Creswell, J. (2003). Research : Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed

methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Downing, J. E., Ryndak, D. L. & Clark, D. (2000). Paraeducators

in inclusive classrooms: their own perceptions. Remedial and

Special Education, 21(3), 171-181.

Elrod, G. F. Insko, L., & Williams, L. (1993). A descriptive study

of instructional assistants in rural and remote Eastern Oregon:

Implications for professional development. Rural Special

Education Quarterly, 12(4), 22-29.

French, N. K. (2003). Paraeducators in special education pro-

grams. Focus on Exceptional Children, 36(2), 1-16.

18


French, N. K. (2001). Supervising paraprofessionals: A survey of

teacher practices. The Journal of special Education 35(1), 41-53.

French, N. K. (1999). Paraeducators and teachers: Shifting roles.

Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(2), 69-73.

Ghere, S. G (2003). Employing, directing, and supporting paraprofes-

sionals in Inclusive education programs for students with disabili-

ties: A multi-site case study. (Doctoral dissertation, University

of Minnesota, 2003). ProQuest Digital Dissertations.

Ghere, S. G. &York-Barr, J. (2003). Employing, directing, and sup-

porting paraprofessionals in inclusive education programs for stu-

dents with disabilities: A multi-site case study. MN: Institute on

Community Integration (UCEDD) & Department of

Educational Policy and Administration, University of

Minnesota.

Ghere, S. G., & York-Barr, J. (2007). Paraprofessional turnover and

retention in Inclusive programs: Hidden costs and promising

practices. Remedial and Special Education, 28(1), 21-32.

Giangreco, M. F., Smith, C. S., & Pinckney (2006). Addressing the

paraprofessional dilemma in an inclusive school: A program

description. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe

Disabilities, 31(3), 215-229.

Giangreco, M. F. & Broer, S. M. (2005). Questionable utilization of

paraprofessionals in inclusive schools: Are we addressing

symptoms or causes? Focus on Autism and Other Developmental

Disabilities, 20(1), 10-26.

Giangreco, M. F., Edelman, S. W., Broer, S. M., & Doyle, M. B.

(2001). Paraprofessional supports of students with disabili-

ties: Literature from the past decade. Exceptional Children,

68(1), 45-63.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997,

105th Congress, 1st session.

Kaye. B., & Jordan-Evans, S. (2001). Retaining key employees.

Public Management, 83, 6-12.

Maxwell, J.A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive

approach (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2000). Education statis-

tics: Elementary and secondary schools and staffing survey.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of

Education Research.

Nietupski, J. A. (1995). The evolution of the LRE concept for stu-

dents with severe disabilities. Preventing School Failure, 39(3),

40-47.

No Child Left Behind Act. (2002). Reauthorization of the

Elementary and Secondary Education Act. PL 107-110

§2102(4).

Pickett, A. L., Likins, M., & Wallace, T. (2003). The employment

and preparation of paraeducators: The state of the art. New

York, NY: NRC for Paraprofessionals in Education and

Related Services, City University of New York. (Eric

Document Reproduction Service No.474 398).

Richards, L. (2005). Handling qualitative data: A practical guide.

London: Sage.

Riggs, C. G. & Mueller, P.H. (2001). Employment and utilization

of paraeducators in inclusive settings. Journal of Special edu-

cation, 35(1), 54-62.

Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. New York: The

Guilford Press.

Tillery, C., Werts, M., Roark, R., & Harris, S. (2003). Perceptions

of paraeducators on job retention. Teacher Education and

Special Education, 26(2), 123-130.

Wallace, T. (2003). Paraprofessionals. (COPSSEE Document No.

IB-3). Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, Center on

Personnel Studies in Special Education.

For information about Graduate Programs please contact the appropriate faculty member:

Vera Ossen, Ed.D. Michaela Colombo, [email protected] [email protected] Director of Educator Licensure Programs Graduate Coordinator

Application packets may be obtained on line or by contacting the Graduate School of Education at (978) 934-4601

19


ABSTRACTCulturally responsive teaching is one effort to achieveeducational equity amidst a demographic shift intoday’s classrooms; students are increasingly diverseand the teaching force remains predominately white,middle-class and monolingual. Essential to culturallyresponsive teaching is conceptualizing cultural differ-ences as complex and appreciating how culture influ-ences teaching and learning. This mixed method casestudy is part of a larger study investigating how threewhite middle-class teachers’ conceptualized culturaldifferences over the course of a culminating field-experience. Informed by a cultural competencedevelopmental model, this study examined how onewhite, middle-class male’s understandings of culturaldifferences changed throughout a semester-long,field-experience experience in a school site with aculturally diverse student body. The participant’sconceptions of cultural differences were assessedbefore and after the student-teaching experience withan inventory and semi-structured interviews. Resultsindicated decreased ethno-centrism and less severestereotyping following student-teaching. Culturalself-awareness and the opportunity to observe andreflect as potential tools for change are discussed.

INTRODUCTION“Even without our being consciously aware of it,

culture determines how we think, believe, and behave,and these, in turn, affect how we teach and learn” (Gay,2000, p. 9).

The influence of culture in teaching and learninghas received increased attention as students in K–12classrooms represent an increasingly culturally diversedemographic, while students in college classroomspreparing for a career in teaching are predominatelywhite, female, and middle class (Ladson-Billings, 1994;Zeichner, 2003). Diller (2007) defines culture as “a lensthrough which life is perceived” (p. 4) or what Bennettand Bennett (2004) refer to as subjective culture. Thus,it is not simply cultural affiliations that present implica-tions for teaching and learning, but the range in com-munication styles, language use, prior knowledge, andframes of reference that are associated with culturaldiversity that influence teaching and learning (Banks etal., 2005). The lack of diversity among pre-serviceteachers, coupled with increasing diversity among stu-dents and families poses potential negative outcomesfor teaching and learning unless teachers become cul-

turally responsive (Villegas & Lucas, 2002). Many mul-ticultural education scholars regard culturally respon-sive teaching practices as a potent lever for dismantlingpersistent educational inequities enacted through class-room practice (Gay, 2001; Ladson-Billings, 1994;Villegas & Lucas, 2002). Finally, the need for culturallyresponsive teachers will grow in the upcoming decadesas demographic trends continue (Banks et al., 2005).

Teachers of high-achieving non-mainstream stu-dents possess a knowledge base and skill set oftenreferred to as culturally responsive teaching (Gay, 2000;Villegas & Lucas, 2002), Culturally Relevant Pedagogy(Ladson-Billings, 1994) or multicultural competence(McGee Banks, 2001). Culturally responsive teachingpractices include identifying cultural differences asresources for instruction rather than unchangeabledeficits (Banks et al., 2005; Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings,1994; McGee Banks, 2001; Zeichner, 2003), tappinginto students’ prior knowledge, considering myriadways students perceive school, including the teacher,(Bransford, Darling-Hammond, & LePage, 2005) andholding high expectations of all students (Ancess, 2003;Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 2001).

RELATED LITERATURE: UNDERSTANDING CULTURE

Understanding culture is necessary for culturallyresponsive teaching. According to Ladson-Billings (2001)one indicator of cultural competence is “understandingculture and its role in education” (p. 98). Understandingculture, including, recognizing its complexity and perva-siveness, allows teachers to recognize schools as micro-cosms of mainstream culture and therefore explicitlycommunicate mainstream cultural school expectations tonon-mainstream students rather than regard schools asculturally neutral contexts (Au, 2006; Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 2001; Villegas & Lucas, 2002). Thus, teachers’acknowledgement of structural inequities and privilegeinform culturally competent teaching.

Cultural self-awareness or recognition of how one’sculture influences one’s outlook or worldview andbehaviors is also part of cultural understanding. Thisknowledge requires recognition of oneself as a multicul-tural being in various contexts (Howard, 2006; Ladson-Billings, 2001; Villegas & Lucas, 2002). Identifying cul-ture bound values and behaviors within oneself andothers serves as a foundation for building teaching skills

Understanding Cultural Differences: A Pre-Service Teacher’s ViewDeborah McMakin

Framingham State College, MA

20


associated with high academic achievement among cul-turally diverse students (Ladson-Billings, 1994).

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: UNDERSTANDING CULTURETHROUGH A DEVELOPMENTAL LENS

How do pre-service teachers change or maintaintheir understanding of culture and its role in education?The potential trajectory of understanding cultural dif-ferences with increasing complexity is outlined inBennett’s (1993) Developmental Model of InterculturalSensitivity (DMIS). Developmental models help teachereducators interpret pre-service teachers’ varyingresponses to multicultural coursework or field experi-ences. Through an explanation of how pre-service andin-service teachers’ understanding of culture is changedor maintained over time, teacher educators can betterassess future teachers, plan coursework, and evaluatelearning activities (McAllister & Irvine, 2000; VanHook, 2000).

Similar to cultural competence, intercultural com-petence is comprised of cultural self-awareness, non-evaluative perception, cross-cultural empathy, and cul-tural adaptation strategies (Bennett, 1998). Changes incultural self-awareness, non-evaluative perception, andcross-cultural empathy depend upon the meaning peo-ple attach to their experiences with cultural differences,or their cultural adaptation strategies. As a person expe-riences cultural differences with increased complexity,cultural self-awareness, non-evaluative perception, andcross-cultural empathy are also likely to increase(Bennett & Bennett, 2004). Cultural adaptation is aprocess whereby “one’s worldview” is augmented toinclude both values and beliefs of one’s own culture aswell as the values and beliefs of another culture(Bennett, 1998, p. 25).

Bennett (1993) initially constructed theDevelopmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity(DMIS) to describe observational and self-report datagathered from students studying or working abroad. Agrounded theory, the DMIS depicts the development ofintercultural competence through six stages. Each stagedescribes a deeper, more complex understanding of cul-tural differences and potential for culturally adaptivebehaviors. As the orientation towards cultural differ-ences, or “worldview configuration” becomes increas-ingly complex and differentiated, cultural adaptation isaugmented through expanded perspective-taking andcommunication skills (Hammer, Bennett, Wiseman,2003). Worldview configuration growth is marked bystages, where one moves from ethnocentric to ethno-relative views of cultural difference (Bennett, 1998).

UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS AND CONCEPTS

Bennett (1998) conceives intercultural competenceas dynamic: growth is always possible and may contin-ue throughout life. A change in attitude or behaviorindicates a developmental change. Attitude and behav-ioral changes reflect changes in “cognitive structure” orworldview configuration (Bennett & Bennett, 2001).Varying levels of understanding, behaviors, and atti-tudes represent particular stages (Hammer et al., 2003).Bennett (1993) ascribed the terms “intercultural mind-set” and “skillset” to denote their connection (p. 7).Mindset encompasses cultural awareness and “attitudessuch as curiosity and tolerance for ambiguity that act asmotivators for seeking out cultural differences” (p. 7).Thus, a changing perception, moving from an ethno-centric mindset to an ethno-relative mindset, indicatesintercultural development (Bennett, 1993).Accompanied by a heightening awareness of culturaldifferences, the “skillset” includes the ability to “analyzeinteraction, predict misunderstanding, and fashionadaptive behavior” (p.7).

STAGES OF INTERCULTURAL SENSITIVITY

According to Bennett (1993) an individual’s world-view configuration is represented through one of sixstages, or orientations towards cultural differences,evenly separated along a continuum separated by thefollowing two endpoints: ethnocentrism and ethno-rel-ativism. Accompanying each stage is one or more char-acteristics and one or more developmental tasks toovercome before transitioning to the next. The firststage, Denial indicates the lowest level of interculturalsensitivity and is not common. A lack of knowledgeabout “other” cultures is the hallmark of the Denialstage. Given the changing demographics of today,Denial is rare, although arguably can be maintainedthrough psychological and physical distancing(Hammer & Bennett, 1998, 2001). Acknowledging cul-tural differences is the developmental task facing thosein this stage.

The second ethnocentric stage is Defense. In thisstage, one acknowledges cultural differences but per-ceives them as threatening, leading to polarizedthoughts, attitudes, and behaviors that may manifest intwo different ways. One manifestation is an “us” against“them” mental stance where a sense of superiority expe-rienced when comparing one’s culture to another. Whilecultural differences are acknowledged in this stage, theyare not highly differentiated. Rather, broad categoriza-tions of “good” and “bad” or “us” versus “them” persistwithout a more complex understanding of culture. The

21


other potential manifestation of the Defense stage isReversal. Also of note with Reversal is the identificationwith another cultural group perceived as superior toone’s own resulting in idealization. Similar to Defense,the understanding of cultural differences is simplistic;there is no recognition that all cultural groups are besetwith problems or difficulties. Thus, the developmentaltask in this stage is to decrease hostility toward anotherculture or one’s own and recognize no one culturalgroup is superior to another (Bennett, 1998). A per-spective that all people are generally the same regardlessof culture moves one to the Minimization stage.

The midpoint of the enthnocentric and ethnorela-tive continuum is Minimization. Although the superiorstatus of one culture over another in Defense isresolved, in Minimization there is a strong emphasis onthe commonalities among all people does not allow forthe consideration of cultural differences beyond what isvisible. Moreover, in an ethnocentric fashion, those inMinimization tend to presume that others see culturaldifferences in the same way and an assumed sharedworldview prevails. This perceived commonality oftenresults in “disavowal of power” making it difficult toacknowledge privileges and social stratification associ-ated with cultural affiliations (Bennett, 2004, p. 21).Another common manifestation of this stage is to claimto be “colorblind,” and regard it as a sign of culturalcompetence. The main developmental task at this stageis to continue to recognize commonalities, while alsorecognizing less visible, more complex aspects of cul-tural differences (Hammer, 2007).

Stage four, Acceptance is marked by a perspectivetaking ability in response to a deepened understandingof culture within contexts (Bennett & Bennett, 2001).The Acceptance “worldview” incorporates more subtleand complex cultural differences, resulting in culturalcuriosity; however, there may be little action taken inresponse to this curiosity. Furthermore, categorizationsof culture are differentiated enough to consider a situa-tion through the perspective of another cultural orien-tation resulting in relativistic thinking, where perspec-tive are apprised in relation to their cultural worldview(Hammer et al., 2003).

The Adaptation stage is characterized by deliberateperspective-taking skills that have become moreingrained to inform behavioral skills. The ability toengage in “behavioral code-shifting,” where one adoptsbehaviors appropriate for a particular cultural contextmarks the Adaptation stage (Bennett, 2004). Growthwill continue in this stage if one continuously seeks toact on his or her cultural empathy and expands contextcongruent behaviors (Bennett, 1993).

Integration is the last ethno-relative stage on thecontinuum highlight how a highly differentiated under-standing of cultural differences influences identity.Individuals in Integration synthesize the multiple cul-tural perspectives with which they are familiar andoften identify themselves as bicultural or multicultural.As they participate in multiple cultural contexts, indi-viduals develop identities drawing from more than oneculture (Hammer & Bennett, 1998, 2001).

Although intercultural competence may continuethrough the Integration stage, can one regress in thedevelopment of intercultural competence? According toHammer et al. (2003) particular conditions, such asthose that are experienced as stressful, may renew a“worldview configuration” or way of understanding cul-tural difference that resembles the stage that precedesthe current stage. For example, one may be in theAdaptation stage, but temporarily exhibit behaviors andattitudes or “trailing issues” associated withMinimization when facing a stressful situation. Thus,situational factors may exert a temporary influence onintercultural development (Hammer, 2007).

UNDERSTANDING CULTURE AND TEACHER EDUCATION

Ladson-Billing’s (2001) cultural competence indica-tor for pre- and in-service teachers and Bennett’sIntercultural Communication perspective provide adescription of cultural competence and its development.Ladson-Billing describes the culturally competentteacher as one who comprehends culture and recognizesits presence in education. Given the role of teacher’sunderstanding cultural differences in teaching andlearning and its implications for instruction and learn-ing, describing myriad ways people interpret or under-stand cultural differences is essential for teacher educa-tion aimed at fostering culturally responsive teaching.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THESTUDY

Demographic trends highlight the need for pre-serv-ice teacher education programs to foster the knowledgeand skills necessary for effective teaching practice withnon-mainstream students (Banks et al., 2005; Villegas &Lucas, 2002). Investigations of pre-service teacherpreparation programs have predominately focused onclassroom activities designed to induce attitude shiftsabout cultural differences (Atkinson & Gabbard, 2003;Brown, 2004; Lenski, Crumpler, Staliworth, &Crawford, 2005), brief field experiences (Barnes, 2006;Cooper, 2003; Dalhouse & Dalhouse, 2006; Sleeter,1992), or personal attributes and experiences pre-serv-

22


ice teachers bring to their educational experiences(Garmon, 2004; Husebosch & Koerner, 1993). There isscant research examining how pre-service teachers viewcultural differences and their role in education over thecourse of a culminating field experience in a school witha diverse student body. If teacher preparation programsaim to promote cultural competence among pre-serviceteachers, pre-service teachers’ views of cultural differ-ences within the contexts of a multicultural field experi-ences must be further understood.

This paper is part of a collective case study examin-ing three pre-service teachers understanding of socioe-conomic and ethnic differences and their role in theeducation. The study contributes to a small but growingbody of research investigating pre-service teachers’ cul-tural competence in conjunction with their field experi-ences. Information about pre-service teachers’ experi-ences can inform teacher education programs as ameans to improving instruction for culturally diverselearners. Finally, in their review of research on teachereducation courses and field experiences, Clift and Brady(2005) called for research that included the perspectivesof pre-service teachers. This study is a small step towardresponding to this call.

METHOD

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. Before and after a culminating field experience,(i.e., student teaching) how do pre-service teach-ers describe their understanding of general cul-tural differences?

2. Before and after a culminating field experience,(i.e., student teaching) how do pre-service teach-ers describe their understanding of socioeco-nomic differences and their role in education?

DESIGN

Researchers utilize case study design to understanda unique case or to learn more about an issue or phe-nomenon by examining one or more cases where theissue or phenomenon is present. A collective instru-mental case study design was utilized to investigate thedevelopment pre-service teachers’ views of cultural dif-ferences in the context of a student teaching experiencein a school with culturally diverse students.Instrumental case studies allow the researcher to exam-ine an issue or phenomena through a particular case orcases (Stake, 1995). The pre-service teacher describedin this paper served as the unit of analysis (Yin, 2003)and therefore constituted a case.

PARTICIPANTS

A criterion sampling strategy was employed for par-ticipant selection. Pre-service teachers who were com-pleting a master’s degree program, seeking state initiallicensure and planning to complete their student teach-ing in middle or secondary school placements where atleast 30% of the student body was identified as non-mainstream in terms of race/ethnicity or social classwere selected for the study. One of three participants,“Dave” is described.

MEASURES

The Intercultural Development Inventory (IDI).The IDI is designed to detect a respondent’s orientationtowards cultural differences or worldview as outlinedby the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity(DMIS) including the developmental tasks to furtherintercultural sensitivity. The IDI is comprised of 50statements about cultural differences. Participants areinstructed to think about cultural affiliations to whichthey feel they belong as “my culture” and those they donot as “other cultures”. Respondents indicate their levelof agreement with each statement using a five pointLikert scale ranging from 1 (disagree) to 5 (agree) beforecompleting a brief demographics section. The IDI is notsubject to social desirability, is reliable, and its scalesprovide a generally accurate measure of the DMISmodel (Hammer et al., 2003; Paige, Jacobs-Cassuto,Yershova, & Dejaeghere, 2003).

Results of the IDI yield an overall DevelopmentalIntercultural Sensitivity (DS) profile providing a scorethat places respondents within, or between, orientationsto cultural differences that are on the DMIS as well asthe specific developmental issues associated with eachorientation. While the IDI provides detailed individualprofiles, it also has limitations. The IDI does not providea measure of orientations toward specific cultural affili-ations such as race/ethnicity, gender or social class. IDIitems contain the broad term “cultural differences” andrespondents are instructed to think of cultural differ-ences according to the cultural groups with which theyidentify, noting that this is often an ethnic or nationalaffiliation (Hammer & Bennett, 1998, 2001). However,the ways in which people tend to construe cultural dif-ferences on the IDI tends to be consistent across typesof differences or cultural affiliations (Hammer et al.,2003). To address this potential limitation, interviewquestions addressing specific cultural differences suchas social class within educational contexts were posedin the semi-structured interviews.

Semi-structured interviews. Two semi-structured

23


interviews were developed to describe participants’understanding of socioeconomic differences and theirrole in education before and after their student teachingexperiences. Semi-structured interviews containedmodified “contextualizing questions” adapted from IDIinterview protocol (Hammer et al., 2003). Interviewquestions regarding socioeconomic differences affordedan opportunity to consider participants’ IDI responsesregarding overall cultural differences in conjunctionwith an aspect of cultural diversity discussed in thispaper, namely social class. The first interview questionsfocused on pre-service teachers’ prior knowledge andexperience with social class differences and their role ineducation while the second interview questions empha-sized pre-service teachers’ student teaching experiencesand views of socioeconomic differences.

PROCEDURES

The pre-service teacher participant completed theIDI and the first semi-structured interview one weekbefore embarking on his student teaching and againimmediately following his semester long student teach-ing experience. The IDI was completed in pencil-paperformat and interviews were audio-taped. All measureswere administered by the same researcher.

DATA ANALYSIS

IDI scores and Worldview Profiles were calculatedwith IDI software. For IDI analysis, IDI Developmentalscore (DS) situates the participant within a DMIS stagewhich also indicates degrees of ethnocentrism or eth-norelativism. The IDI Worldview Profiles outlining par-ticipants’ progress on the developmental issues associat-ed with each DMIS stage were examined. TheDevelopmental score (DS) continuum is situated withinthe DMIS stage continuum and the Worldview Profiledisplays the five IDI subscales and their developmentalissues. Developmental issues associated with each stageare reported numerically and categorized along a con-tinuum: 1-2.33 unresolved, 2.34-3.66 in transition or3.67-5 resolved (See Figure 1). A score within“resolved” suggested that the respondent was address-ing the developmental issue with increasing consistencywhile “unresolved” indicated lack of awareness.

Interview data were analyzed with NVivo 8.0 soft-ware, utilizing predetermined and emerging codingstrategies. Broad codes included DMIS stage character-istics and memos were created to note potential emerg-ing themes.

DESCRIPTION OF CASE AND CONTEXTS

Background information for the participant wasdrawn from interview and IDI demographic data.Background information here includes the circum-stances under which the participant entered the collegeand his or her student teaching school site, as well asprior experiences teaching across cultural differences.

PARTICIPANT, COLLEGE, AND SCHOOL SITE CONTEXTS

Dave is in his twenties and identified his ethnicityas Italian American on the IDI. During his initial inter-view he identified himself as “American” and middleclass. He reported no prior experience living in “anoth-er culture.” He was enrolled in Favorton CollegeGraduate School of Education (GSE) master’s degreeprogram, preparing to teach history in secondary edu-cation. Dave first entered Favorton as an undergraduatestudent, where he learned about the GSE. Upon gradu-ation from the undergraduate program as a historymajor, he was accepted to the GSE’s master’s programleading to initial state teaching licensure.

Dave reported prior experience teaching as a teach-ing assistant in a public urban middle school. Heworked in two classrooms for approximately 20 hoursper week for an academic year. He described the stu-dent body demographic as “varied.” In addition to hishistory coursework Dave completed a required GSEdiversity course aimed at providing students withknowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to addressvarying needs of all public students to prevent academ-ic failure. An emphasis on teachers’ responsibilities torespond to oppressed groups was evident in the coursesyllabus and by Dave in his first interview.

The secondary education public school site whereDave completed his student teaching served approxi-mately 2,000 students pursuing vocational and academ-ic studies. School enrollment data indicate that slightlyover 50% of the students qualified for free or reducedlunch and just less than 50% were identified as Asian,

Figure 1. Dave’s IDI Pre- and Post-Student TeachingScores.

24


Hispanic, African American or Multi-racial during theacademic year Dave completed his student teaching.

RESULTS

IDI DATA: UNDERSTANDING GENERAL CULTURALDIFFERENCES

When Dave first took the IDI before his studentteaching his DS score was 73.94. This score indicatedhe was slightly beyond the midpoint of theDenial/Defense-Reversal (DD-R) DMIS worldview andwas at the cusp of the Minimization (M) stage at the endof student teaching. When Dave took the IDI again hisDS was 83.19. This 10 point increase, close to one stan-dard deviation, indicated a slight decrease in ethnocen-trism and progress from Defense/Reversal towardsMinimization (Figure 1).

IDI and Denial. Findings from the IDI WorldviewProfile pinpoint Dave’s scores on Defense Denial-Reversal (DD-R) clusters which represent developmen-tal issues associated with Defense and Denial. TheWorldview Profile outlines cluster scores to see whichDD-R characteristics were maintained or slightlychanged. The DD scale encompasses two clusters repre-senting Denial related issues: Disinterest in andAvoidance of interactions with cultural differences.Dave’s Worldview profile indicated he entered studentteaching having “resolved” these two issues; however,the subscale scores differed slightly, indicating varyingdegrees of resolution. Close to the highest possiblescore of five, his subscale Avoidance scores were 4.67before student teaching and 4.87 after, firmly placinghim in the “resolved” category for this developmentalissue. In contrast, Dave’s Disinterest subscale score wassomewhat less stable.

Upon entering student teaching his Disinterest incultural differences score was 3.75 placing him slightlybeyond “resolved” while his second score of 4.25 sug-gests progression within the “resolved” range. Themodest increase following his student teaching high-lights decreased withdrawal from cultural differencesvia Disinterest.

IDI Defense and Reversal. IDI Worldview Profiledata indicate Dave was aware of cultural differences;however his scores in Defense and Reversal were asso-ciated with interpreting cultural differences through“us/them” categories. Defense subscale scores of 3.33(Time 1) and 3.17 (Time 2) and Reversal scores of 3.36and 3.56 indicate Dave was “in transition” with regardto categorizing cultural differences through oversimpli-fied “us” and “them” dichotomies. Dave exhibited a pat-tern of partial agreement with items conveying “us” as

better than “them” or “other”. For example, he indicat-ed some agreement with statements reflecting superior-ity of his culture before student teaching, and then indi-cated partial agreement and disagreement with thestatement following his student teaching. Similarly, heindicated full and partial agreement with statementsfrom the Reversal subscale. Following student teachingsimilar scores in Reversal and Defense indicate thatDave was aware of surface cultural differences accompa-nied by a tendency to construe cultural differences into“us” and “them” categories, viewing them either in anegative or positive light. This tendency serves as a bar-rier to recognizing how negative and positive qualitiescoexist within all cultures. (Hammer & Bennett, 1998).IDI data are displayed numerically and in the form ofhorizontal bars along subscale and developmental issuecontinuums (Figure 2).

While the IDI indicated how Dave understood gen-eral cultural differences qualitative data revealed Dave’sorientation towards socioeconomic differences betweenstudents and teachers and their role in teaching andlearning. The following section presents Dave’s under-standings of socioeconomic differences from interviewdata as they relate to DMIS stage characteristics and fre-quencies. Descriptions of how his understandingschanged and remained stable over the course of his stu-dent teaching are also included.

CULTURAL DIFFERENCES AND THEIR ROLE IN EDUCATION:DMIS QUALITATIVE DATA

Before and after student teaching, Dave made state-ments about socioeconomic differences and their role ineducation that reflected characteristics of Defense,Reversal, and Minimization. Taken together, statementsreflecting characteristics of Defense and Reversal weretwice as frequent as statements reflecting Minimization.DMIS stage characteristics identified from interviewdata before and after student teaching as they pertainedto his understanding of socioeconomic differences and

Figure 2. Dave’s IDI Worldview Profile.

25


their role in education are described. Defense and Negative Stereotypes. Several of

Dave’s interview statements regarding students whom heperceived as high or low socioeconomic status reflectednegative stereotypes of “other” cultural groups, onecharacteristic of Defense. In response to interview ques-tions regarding SES differences prior to student teach-ing, Dave made four statements that were peppered withnegative stereotypes about students living in low incomeor wealthy households. For example, in his response tohow socioeconomic differences between teachers andstudents influence teaching and learning before studentteaching Dave noted, “You see generally the poorer pop-ulation has difficulty reading. They are not taught toread; they don’t read at home.” Similarly he described awealthy family that “would either have a nanny who hadsome education or their parents would be home and itwas more important for them to do their homeworkthan hang out with their friends out on the street on thestoop.” Both of these statements contain negative stereo-types and imply deficits in behavior or values.

Reversal and Positive Stereotyping. Dave seemedto counterbalance negative stereotypes associated withthe “wealthy class” with positive stereotypes of middleand low class status, a characteristic of Reversal. Hemade statements reflecting a negative stereotype he heldabout the values and behaviors of high income studentsboth before and after his student teaching while makingstatements reflecting a positive stereotype about middleto low income students. Notably, Dave seemed to associ-ate socioeconomic differences with differences in educa-tional values, specifically regarding the purpose of edu-cation and the role of teachers. Part of Dave’s response tothe interview question about the opportunities for teach-ing and learning when there were socioeconomic differ-ences between teachers and students, included:

Lower socioeconomic students probably, if theyhave nothing else to worry about, do value edu-cation more, I think, because they know thatthat might be their one way out, to improve.You know whereas wealthy kids might some-times just take it for granted. I think sometimesthey’re the type of kids that say when they fail aclass, “the teacher failed me.” Whereas, a lowersocioeconomic student says they failed theclass, ‘Oh well maybe I didn’t do enough.’ But Ithink they are more willing to help whereas theupper socioeconomic student thinks theyshould be helped.

Perhaps as an outgrowth of his perception of howmiddle and low income students value education, Dave

perceived his school site students as a more desirableschool in which to teach compared to a school site witheconomically privileged students. During his secondinterview, Dave concluded,

…. these kids [referring to students in hisschool site] I’d much rather teach kids like thatthan kids that are well off that, who wouldrather not listen to you at all, because these kidsreally embrace, people that respect and listen tothem, I tried my best to respect them and listenwhat their opinions were.

Dave associated an appreciation for the value ofhard work and education with middle and low socioe-conomic status, and identified this as a shared valuewith his students. He expressed hope for his students athis school site to realize upward mobility, but noted thatnot everyone could alter the effects of social class strat-ification. This was reflected in interview data whereDave made statements that were arguably contradictorybefore and after his student teaching. For example,when comparing himself to his students he remarked:

...that’s the life that they [school site students]live sometimes they can’t get out of it but youknow uhm...the neat thing about the highschool I taught is it’s a vocational high school sothey are all learning such a trade skill, youknow. Once they graduate they can go rightinto the work place and make a good amount ofmoney, they’re going to be making more that Iwill.

Dave acknowledged that not everyone realizedupward mobility, but seemed reassured schoolsite stu-dents would given their vocational training.

Diffusing Defense and Reversal. Following hisstudent teaching, Dave made no stereotyped statementswithout questioning them aloud during the secondinterview. His descriptions of students seemed lessstark, and he described how he was questioning hisnotions of socioeconomic status after observing orinteracting with school site students. For instance,when asked about what hindered him from getting toknow his students’ socioeconomic status, he expresseda negative stereotype about low income students andcell phone ownership.

You don’t need a cell phone if you can’t payheat. I think a lot of these kids are in a situationlike that, they live in a two family house, withovercrowded, single-parent families that areworking but they have cell phones. And weknow that, but it’s, I don’t know.

26


Dave viewed cell phones as an “extra” and thereforeassumed cell phone ownership did not indicate limitedincome. However, cell phone ownership was so perva-sive among his school site students he became unsatis-fied with his assumption that cell phones served as anaccurate indicator of income. Dave reflected

…I don’t know, sometimes it’s hard to tellbecause as I said the cell phone thing every kidhas a cell phone, it’s like the weird extras thatkids have that people have that you’d neverreally know unless you really went home withthem or saw where they live and all that.

Dave did not relinquish his understanding of cellphone ownership as an “extra” but referred to them as“weird extras” perhaps beginning to acknowledge thelimitations of his explanation and recognizing his eth-nocentrism. In addition to rethinking cell phone own-ership as an indicator, Dave seemed to arrive at a moredifferentiated notion of “normalcy” when describing hisstudents. As previously discussed, he recognized hiseconomic privilege when he termed many of the thingshe had growing up as “extras”. Through this compari-son, Dave seemed to arrive at an additional definition of“normal” when describing school site students.

At open house one girl had her grandparentscome, one of their grandfather’s in a wheelchair. I mean, it’s like sometimes the schoolobviously is trying to be this girl’s priority butshe has a lot of other stuff going on. Where Iwas growing up, there was school, I was play-ing with my friends after school, I was playingsports, these kids don’t have any time for any ofthat. But it is remarkable too that they still doit. They still function, they are still normal kids.It’s kind of an eye opener, it was good.

While Dave assumed students did not have time forrecreational activities, he seemed to question his under-lying assumption that socioeconomic differences wereequated with difficulty functioning.

Although Denial and Defense-Reversal andMinimization are all considered ethnocentric stages,several characteristics of Minimization appear as directmanifestations of ethnocentrism. One manifestation ofethnocentrism in Minimization is the tendency toemphasize similarities between “other” and oneselfthereby avoiding difference (Bennett & Bennett, 2004).Dave drew several similarities between himself and hisstudents when asked about socioeconomic differences.

Minimization, “Valuing Hard Work” andRecognizing Privilege. Reflecting on his student teach-

ing experiences, Dave emphasized sharing a similarwork ethic with his students. When describing schoolsite students whom he perceived as low income, henoted that “we both know the value of hard work.” Heseemed to construct this perceived similarity with hisschool site students by contrasting himself and hisschool site students with the “wealthy class.” Before andafter his student teaching he noted that the “wealthyclass” did not know the value of hard work to the extentof the middle and lower class students. This statementreflects a Defense stage stereotype that was perhaps con-ducive to likening his experiences to school site stu-dents’ experiences. After his student teaching, Daveidentified similarities; however these were accompaniedby parallel differences and contradictions.

During the second interview Dave simultaneouslyconsidered similarities and differences when discussingschool site students. For example, when asked aboutthe differences between himself and his students follow-ing his student teaching, he noted similarity throughtemporary “struggles with making the rent, paying bills,getting food just trying to stay afloat” as a studentteacher. However, Dave quickly qualified the similaritywith a notable difference, “My students, their familyobviously they live like that year round, that’s their lifethat’s how they’ve been brought up.” Dave recognizedthat his privilege remained in spite of his temporarylimited income and prevented him from overlooking acrucial difference.

DISCUSSIONDave’s understanding of cultural differences

appeared to deepen and become slightly more differen-tiated during his student teaching experience. Dave’s IDIprofile indicated that prior to student teaching he wassituated in the Denial/Defense stage. He was continuingto resolve the issues of Avoidance and Disinterest associ-ated with Denial. Dave’s orientation towards cultural dif-ferences in Defense and Reversal indicated that heattended to surface cultural differences and interpretedthem through rigid dichotomies of “us” and “them,” dis-proportionately ascribing negative or positive appraisalsto one or the other. Therefore, to move intoMinimization, Dave’s developmental task was to increasehis awareness of commonalities amidst perceived cultur-al differences. Following his student teaching, IDI dataindicated he moved toward the cusp of Minimization.

Qualitative data were congruent with IDI data;Dave made more statements reflecting Defense andReversal than Minimization. Qualitative data alsorevealed how Dave reasoned about socioeconomic dif-

27


ferences, yielding examples of how he began to ques-tion and loosen some his negative stereotypes regardinglow socioeconomic status and its role education. Beforehe entered student teaching, Dave indicated predomi-nately negative stereotypes when discussing low or highincome students, a characteristic of Defense. WhenDave compared his experiences to school site studentsthrough a socioeconomic lens following his studentteaching, a notable characteristic of Minimizationemerged. His positive stereotypes of low income schoolsite students reflected his ethnocentrism through anemphasis on similar values. He asserted that his stu-dents, like him, shared “the value of hard work,” wereafforded educational opportunities to realize upwardmobility, and therefore regarded teachers as worthy ofrespect and gratitude. This is in contrast to the “entitle-ment” he associated with the “wealthy class.” As Bennettand Bennett (2004) noted of Minimization: “The attri-bution of similar needs, desires, and values to others infact moves simplification to a higher level of abstrac-tion. Now it is not the people who are simplified butcultural difference itself that is subsumed into the famil-iarity of one’s own worldview” (p. 155).

The DMIS indicates the need for intercultural expe-riences and a deepening understanding of cultural dif-ferences to foster intercultural competence (Hammer &Bennett, 1998). While Defense and Minimization char-acteristics may not sound encouraging for culturallyresponsive practice, the DMIS identifies such character-istics as necessary processes to achieving the differenti-ated and complex understanding associated withAdaptation and Integration. Dave’s perceived similari-ties facilitated a deeper understanding of socioeconom-ic differences and increased intercultural experiences ina cyclical fashion. His perceived similarities with schoolsite students fueled his cultural curiosity and guided hisschool site intercultural observations and interactions.In turn, the intercultural observations and interactionsafforded Dave the opportunity to qualify some of hisstereotypes about socioeconomic status.

Villegas and Lucas (2002) maintained that pre-serv-ice teachers relinquish deficit views when they nolonger provide useful interpretations of differences.Some of Dave’s initial negative stereotypes becameinsufficient explanations for his observations. Forinstance, at an Open House, Dave observed studentswho were not congruent with his stereotypes of socioe-conomic status and therefore had to qualify his stereo-type. Qualifying stereotypes may set the stage for moreelaborate and differentiated understandings of particu-lar aspects of socioeconomic status. Dave also reportedcontradictory statements about upward mobility; how-

ever, he maintained that school site students wouldsecure desirable employment in their respective tradeseven though he had no supporting data to support thisassertion. This may reflect the pervasiveness of upwardmobility and meritocracy of mainstream cultural norms(Hogan, 2007) and be more resistant to change thanother stereotypes.

Overall, Dave exhibited characteristics suggesting atleast some of his understandings of cultural differenceswere amenable to change. Garmon (2005) outlined dis-positional factors associated with changing pre-serviceteachers’ attitudes toward diversity. Factors includedopenness, self-awareness, and “the willingness and abil-ity to think critically about oneself” as influential factors(p. 276). Through self-awareness and self-reflectionDave appeared to progress toward Minimization. Beforeentering student teaching, Dave described experiencingprivileges and constraints when discussing his socialclass status. On the one hand, for Dave, being middleclass meant “I know I can do anything I want; whereassome people cannot afford it.” On the other hand, Davealso described feeling “limited” in his higher educationinstitution choices due to monetary constraints. Feeling“limited” likely enabled Dave to identify similarities withhis students while remembering his privilege preventedhim from over generalizing these perceived similarities.

The small gains in Dave’s understanding of generalcultural differences as measured by the IDI and inter-view data remind teacher educators that understandingculture is a complex, ongoing, and slow, process.Hammer and Bennett’s (1998) assessment forIntercultural Sensitivity can indicate worldviews to planfor multicultural education (McAllister & Irvine, 2000;Van Hook, 2000). Gathering information about stu-dents’ understanding of cultural differences is one wayto set realistic expectations for change. Recognizingpositive and negative stereotypes as part of a largerchange process may enable teacher educators to listenfor qualitative changes in stereotypes that reflectdecreased ethnocentrism, keeping expectations forchange realistic.

What propels changes in understanding? Dave drewon self-awareness, specifically identifying his privilege,recognition of diversity, and comparisons drawnbetween himself and his students. Teacher educatorsmay consider these elements to assess and foster cultur-al competence. Self-reflection fosters the development ofcultural understanding among pre-service teachers(Brown, 2004; Gay, 2001; Garmon, 2004; Johnson,2002; Milner, 2003). Periodically reflecting on privilegeand perceived similarities and differences with fieldplacement students may be an inroad for unearthing and

28


eventually questioning stereotypes. Such an exercise isworthy of consideration for pre-service teachers engagedin a field experience with a diverse student body.

This study has several limitations. The pre-serviceteacher volunteered for the study and his reports andexperiences may not represent similar cases, and thesmall number of participants associated with case studyresearch design does not allow for generalizing resultsto a population. The interviews contain questions aboutcultural differences that seemed to spark reflection andthus could have heightened sensitivity to cultural differ-ences, potentially influencing subsequent interview andIDI responses.

ReferencesAncess, J. (2003). Beating the odds: High schools as communities of

commitment. New York: Teachers College Press.

Atkinson, T., & Gabbard, D. (2003). Memories, misgivings, and

future vision: Fostering multicultural understandings of pre-

service teachers. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 19, 87-113.

Au, K. (2006). Multicultural issues and literacy achievement.

Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Banks, J., Cochran-Smith, M., Moll. L, Ricert, A., Zeinchner, K.,

Lepage, P., et al. (2005). Teaching diverse learners. In L.

Darling-Hammond, and J. Bransford, (Eds.), Preparing teachers

for a changing world (232-274). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-

Bass.

Barnes, C. (2006). Preparing pre-service teachers to teach in a cul-

turally responsive way. The Negro Educational Review, 57, 85-

100.

Bennett, M. J. (1993). Towards ethnorelativism: A developmental

model of intercultural sensitivity. In M. Paige (Ed.), Education

for the intercultural experience (pp. 21-72). Yarmouth, ME:

Intercultural Press.

Bennett, M. J. (1998). Intercultural communication: A current per-

spective. In M. J. Bennett (Ed.), Basic concepts of intercultural

communication: Selected readings pp. 1-34. Yarmouth, ME:

Intercultural Press, Inc.

Bennett, M. J. (2004). Becoming interculturally competent. In J.

Wurzel (Ed.), Toward multiculturalism: A reader in multicultural

education (2nd ed., pp. 62-77). Newton, MA: Intercultural

Resource Corporation.

Bennett, J., & Bennett, M. J. (2001, June 27). Development intercul-

tural sensitivity: an integrative approach to global and domestic

diversity. Paper presented at the 2001 Diversity Symposium.

Paper retrieved October 28, 2006, from http://www.diversity

collegium.org/pdf2001/2001Bennettspaper.pdf.

Bennett, J., & Bennett, M. J. (2004). Developing intercultural sen-

sitivity: An integrative approach to global and domestic diver-

sity. In D. Landis, J. Bennett, & M. J. Bennett (Eds.),

Handbook of intercultural training (3rd ed., pp. 147-65).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Brown, E. L. (2004). What precipitates change in cultural diversity

awareness during a multicultural course: The message or the

method? Journal of Teacher Education, 55, 325-340.

Bransford, J., Darling-Hammond, L., LePage, P. (2005).

Introduction. In L. Darling-Hammond, and J. Bransford,

(Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world (1-39). San

Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Brown, E. L. (2004). What precipitates change in cultural diversity

awareness during a multicultural course: The message or the

method? Journal of Teacher Education, 55, 325-340.

Clift, R. & Brady, P. (2005). Research on methods courses and field

experiences. In M. Cochran-Smith, and K. M. Zeichner,

(Eds.), Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA panel

on research and teacher education (309-425). Washington, DC:

American Educational Research Association.

Cooper, P. M. (2003). Effective White teachers of Black children:

Teaching within a community. Teaching and Teacher Education,

54, 413-428.

Dalhouse, D., & Dalhouse, A. (2006). Investigating White pre-

service teachers’ beliefs about teaching in culturally diverse

classrooms. The Negro Educational Review, 57, 69-84.

Diller, J.V. (2007). Cultural Diversity: A primer for the human

services. (3rd Edition). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole, Cengage

Learning.

Garmon, A. (2004). Changing pre-service teachers’ attitudes/beliefs

about diversity: What are the critical factors? Journal of

Teacher Education, 55, 201-213.

Garmon, A. (2005). Six key factors for changing pre-service teach-

ers’ attitudes/beliefs about diversity. Educational Studies, 38,

275-86.

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

practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Hammer, M. R. (2007). The Intercultural Development Inventory

Manual. Portland, OR: The Intercultural Communication

Institute.

Hammer, M. R., & Bennett, M. J. (1998, 2001). The Intercultural

Development Inventory Manual. Portland, OR: The Intercultural

Communication Institute.

Hammer, M. R., Bennett, M. J., & Wiseman, R. L. (2003). The

Intercultural Development Inventory: A measure of intercul-

tural sensitivity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,

27, 421-443.

29


Hogan, M. (2007). Four skills of cultural diversity competence: A

process for understanding and practice (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA:

Thomson Brooks/Cole.

Howard, T. C. (2003). Culturally relevant pedagogy: Ingredients

for critical teacher reflection. Theory into practice, 42, 195-202.

Howard, G. (2006). We can’t teach what we don’t know: White teach-

ers, multiracial schools (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College

Press.

Husebosch, P., & Koerner, M. (2003, November). What does cul-

tural identity have to do with the preparation of teachers?

Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National

Council of Teachers of English, Pittsburgh, PA (ED 403554).

Johnson, L. (2002). “My eyes have been opened”: White teachers

and racial awareness. Journal of Teacher Education, 53, 153-

167.

Ladson-Billings, G. L. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers

of African American children. San Francisco: Jossey Bass

Publishers.

Ladson-Billings, G. L. (2001). Crossing over to Canaan. San

Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.

Lenski, S., Crumpler, T., Staliworth, C., & Crawford, K. (2005).

Preparing culturally responsive pre-service teachers. Teacher

Education Quarterly, 32, 85-100.

McAllister, G., and Irvine, J. J. (2000). Cross cultural competency

and multicultural teacher education. Review of Educational

Research, 70, 3-24.

McGee Banks, C.A. (2001). Becoming a Cross-Cultural Teacher. In

C. Diaz (Ed.), Multicultural Education for the 21st Century (171-

183). New York: Longman/Addison-Wesley.

Milner, R. H. (2003). Teacher reflection and race in cultural con-

texts: History, meanings, and methods in teaching. Theory into

Practice, 42, 173-180.

Paige, M. R., Jacobs-Cassuto, M., Yershova, Y. A., & Dejaeghere, J.

(2003). Assessing intercultural sensitivity: An empirical analy-

sis of the Hammer and Bennett Intercultural Development

Inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 47-

486.

Stake, R.E. (1995). The art of case study research. (3rd Edition).


Sleeter, C. E. (1992). Keepers of the American dream. Washington,

D.C.: The Falmer Press.

Van Hook, C. (2000, November). Preparing teachers for the diverse

classroom: a developmental model of cultural sensitivity. Paper

presented at the Lilian Katz Symposium: Issues in Early

Childhood Education: Curriculum, Teacher Education, and

Dissemination of Information. Champaign, IL. ED 470878

Villegas, M., & Lucas, T. (2002). Educating culturally responsive

teachers: A coherent approach. Albany, New York: State

University of New York Press.

Yin (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd Edition).


Zeichner, K. (2003). The adequacies and inadequacies of three cur-

rent strategies to recruit, prepare, and retain the best teachers

for all students. Teachers College Record, 105(3), 490-519.

30


31


ABSTRACTThe educational goals espoused by teachers of math-ematics reflect a wide variety of teaching beliefs andpractices. The successful construction of knowledgewill likely depend upon the students’ ability to dis-cover existing and meaningful relationships amongconcepts. It has been suggested that incorporating ahistorical dimension into the mathematics classroommight help students to achieve a rich and deep con-struction of mathematical concepts. Research indi-cates that although teachers accept the idea they arereluctant to put it into practice. The purpose of thispaper is to identify those factors that affect teachers’decisions regarding the inclusion of the history ofmathematics in their curricula and to analyze theirperspectives on the incorporation of history into theteaching of mathematics.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEMThe National Council of Teachers of Mathematics

(NCTM), as part of its recommended vision for schoolmathematics stated, “Mathematics is one of the greatestcultural and intellectual achievements of humankind,and citizens should develop an appreciation and under-standing of that achievement, including its aestheticand even recreational aspects” (NCTM, 2000, p. 4). Inaddition to these aspects, NCTM emphasizes the impor-tance of realizing mathematics as a “cultural bridge.” Itis likely that there are many avenues through which onecould mediate the importance of mathematics as a cul-tural and intellectual achievement. One such avenue isthrough the learning of the history of mathematics.Including the history of mathematics in the classroomallows for the co-construction of knowledge, with theteacher and student acting as architects.

In addition, the NCTM (1989) in the Curriculum &Evaluation Standards provides a set of recommendedgoals for the design of educational curriculum. Onesuch goal is that of Learning to Value Mathematics:

Students should have numerous and variedexperiences related to the cultural, historical,and scientific evolution of mathematics so thatthey can appreciate the role of mathematics inthe development of our contemporary societyand explore relationships among mathematicsand the disciplines it serves: the physical andlife sciences, the social sciences, and the

humanities….It is the intent of this goal—learning to value mathematics—to focus atten-tion on the need for student awareness of theinteraction between mathematics and the his-torical situation from which it has developedand the impact that interaction has on our cul-ture and our lives. (New Goals for Students sec-tion, para.4)

The message of the National Council of Teachers ofMathematics is clear. Mathematics, as a socially con-structed science provides a rich and deep contextualstory. Learning the history of mathematics enables thestudent to place mathematics within the larger culturalcontext. In order to fully understand the achievementinvolved in creating mathematical concepts and therelational value of those concepts to each other, onemust be given an opportunity to explore the history ofmathematics in conjunction with the learning of math-ematics. Acknowledging that teachers are the primaryfacilitators of the introduction of the history of mathe-matics into the classroom, the NCTM announced thecreation of a professional development scholarshipemphasizing the History of Mathematics (NCTM,2009). It is the goal of NCTM to:

provide financial support for completing cred-it-bearing course work in the history of mathe-matics, creating and field-testing appropriateclassroom activities incorporating the history ofmathematics, and preparing and delivering aprofessional development presentation relatedto the history of mathematics to colleagues.(NCTM, 2009)

The NCTM is not alone in recommending that thehistory of mathematics be included as part of instruc-tional practice. The National Research Council (1989)commissioned members of the Mathematical SciencesEducation Board, the Board on Mathematical Sciences,and the Committee on the Mathematical Sciences in2000, to conduct a study of United States mathematicseducation from K through graduate study. The findingsand recommendations were published as a report titledEverybody Counts: A Report to the Nation on the Future ofMathematics Education. In the Understanding Mathematicssection, it was recommended that teachers “…learn thehistory of mathematics and its impact on society, for it is

Teacher Perceptions on the Inclusion of History of Mathematics in the ClassroomLeslie Bolinger Horton

Quinsigamond Community College, MA

32


only through history that teachers will come to knowthat mathematics changes and to see the differencesbetween contemporary and ancient mathematics” (p.64). Implicitly this suggests that in order for students tolearn the history of mathematics, teachers must firstbecome familiar with the history of mathematics.

The importance of teacher exposure to the historyof mathematics is exemplified by the standards estab-lished by the National Council for Accreditation ofTeacher Education (NCATE, 2003). NCATE drafted, inconjunction with the NCTM, a set of standards thatguide teacher education programs in their curriculadevelopment. The Content Standards consist of:

1. Knowledge of Number and Operation 2. Knowledge of Different Perspectives on Algebra3. Knowledge of Geometries4. Knowledge of Calculus5. Knowledge of Discrete Mathematics6. Knowledge of Data Analysis, Statistics, and

Probability7. Knowledge of Measurement

Each of the Content Standards makes specific refer-ence to the demonstration of “…knowledge of the his-torical development…” (pp. 4-7). Professional organi-zations have clearly situated themselves in a positionthat supports and recognizes the integral part thatknowledge of the history of mathematics plays ininstruction and learning.

The recommended inclusion of the history of math-ematics is espoused by professional organizations aswell as by scholars and researchers. Kline (1972) stated,“The roots of the present lie deep in the past and almostnothing in that past is irrelevant to the man who seeksto understand how the present came to be what it is”(p.x). In order to fully appreciate mathematics in the pres-ent, it is worthwhile to become knowledgeable of math-ematics of the past. According to Kline, mathematics asit is currently presented to students may appear dis-jointed and polished. The history of mathematics allowsstudents to develop a broad perspective of the workinvolved in creating mathematical discoveries. Studentsmay come to terms with their difficulties in mathemat-ics if they are aware that mathematicians experiencedthe same frustrations over many years.

Swetz (1994) suggested the use of the history ofmathematics in the classroom humanizes the subject stu-dents are asked to study. According to Swetz, “The histo-ry of mathematics supplies human roots to the subject. Itassociates mathematics with people and their needs. Ithumanizes the subject and, in doing so, removes some ofits mystique” (p. 1). It is possible that some view mathe-

matics as a discipline defined by facts and numbers or asa science of symbols that exists separately from humans.Introducing students to the mathematicians’ personallives and intellectual struggle would allow the studentsto see the human aspect of mathematics.

Swetz, Fauvel, Bekken, Johansson and Katz (1995)suggested that exposure to the history of mathematics atthe high school level can have “…a profound effect! Forit is at the secondary or high school level that studentsfirst experience the power of mathematics and begin torealize the wide scope of its application and possibili-ties” (p. 1). It is unlikely that one can surmise a directcorrelation between the learning of the history of math-ematics and student achievement; nevertheless, teach-ers’ perceptions of the history of mathematics, teachers’content knowledge, and teachers’ conceptions of math-ematics as a discipline might potentially influence stu-dents’ attitudes toward mathematics and their successin the field. Barbin et al. (2000) posited:

The conviction that the use of history improvesthe learning of mathematics rests on twoassumptions about the process of learning. Themore a student is interested in mathematics, themore work will be done; and, the more workthat is done the greater will be the resultinglearning and understanding. (p. 69)

The conviction in the importance of the learning ofthe history of mathematics need not rest on the stu-dents’ shoulders. Ultimately, the achievement of theideal scenario described by Barin et al. would beginwith and depend upon the teacher and his/her perspec-tive on the value of including the history of mathemat-ics in the classroom.

Research into teachers’ perspectives on the inclu-sion of the history in the mathematics classroom isscarce. Empirical studies suggested that while profes-sional development focusing on the history of mathe-matic may raise teachers’ awareness of the value orimportance of the history of mathematics, it does notlead to the implementation of that history in the class-room. (Philippou & Christou, 1998; Siu, 2004;Smestad, 2009a; Stander, 1989). It is likely that if teach-ers express no interest in using the history of mathemat-ics they will not incorporate it into their classroominstruction. There exists a gap between what isespoused in the professional and scholarly arena regard-ing the benefits of learning the history of mathematicsand teachers’ perceptions of the use of the history ofmathematics. Until research explores and uncoversteachers’ perceptions pertaining to the use of the histo-ry of mathematics in the classroom, our information

33


regarding the benefits of teaching the history of mathe-matics will be lacking.

As the first strand, this paper presents the existingempirical research on the teachers’ conceptions ofmathematics as a discipline. Past mathematical learningexperience and the confidence a teacher holds in his/herown mathematical knowledge may play a role in ateacher’s conception of mathematics. This strand inves-tigates those factors which may influence teachers’ con-ceptions of mathematics.

The second strand presents an analysis of the exist-ing research on teachers’ perceptions of the history ofmathematics in the classroom as well as discusses fac-tors and limitations affecting the incorporation of thehistory of mathematics into the classroom. The under-pinnings of this paper focus on teachers’ perspectivesregarding the benefit of the inclusion of the history ofmathematics in the classroom.

TEACHERS’ CONCEPTIONS OF MATHEMATICS AS A DISCIPLINE

TEACHERS’ PAST EXPERIENCE IN LEARNING MATHEMATICS

Individuals entering the teaching profession bring amultitude of experiences into the classroom.Experiences related to the teachers’ learning of mathe-matics can potentially influence their understanding ofmathematics as a discipline as well as their teachingmethodology. Hersh (1998) stated, “One’s conception ofwhat mathematics is affects one’s conception of how itshould be presented. One’s manner of presenting is anindication of what one believes to be most essential init” (p. 13). Existing research (Ball, 1988; Cooney, Shealy& Arvold, 1998; Dutton, 1962; Furinghetti, 2007;Philippou & Christou, 1998) has indicated that teach-ers teach in the manner in which they were taught.Their beliefs toward mathematics are shaped by theirexperiences in learning mathematics.

Ball’s (1988) study was designed to elicit prospectiveelementary teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learningby designing a sequence of activities around the conceptof permutations and placing the prospective elementaryteachers in the position of learner, observer, and teacher.The sequence of activities spanned two weeks with four11/2 hour sessions. In addition to class activities, the unitprovided additional out of class participation as well.Ball’s study included 3 phases in which the prospectiveteachers were asked to participate. First they assumedthe role of learner, followed by the role of observer, andlastly, the role of teacher. In this role, the teachers were

asked to engage with someone with whom they couldinvestigate the concept of permutations.

Utilizing an interview format, Ball described thevarious responses teachers provided for each of thethree phases. A major outcome of the study was teach-ers’ realization of the extent to which their past learningexperiences had shaped their present perceptions ofmathematics. The experience the teachers had in pastlearning experiences were exposed when they assumedthe role of teachers in phase 3. Ball stated:

Consequently, what they have learned in ele-mentary and high school math classes oftencomprises almost all of their subject matterpreparation for teaching. Their feelings andopinions about math may thus affect theirapproach to learning to teach it, and ultimatelythe way they as teachers teach math. (p. 14)

Ball’s research did not indicate the number of par-ticipants and whether or not the trepidation on the partof the prospective elementary teachers may have beendue, in part, to the short duration of the study.Permutations may have been a quite difficult conceptfor the elementary teacher to grasp in such a short peri-od of time. Therefore, teaching based upon past learn-ing experiences may be a function of lack of time andnot solely of subject difficulty. It might be the case thatteachers teach the way they were taught when lack ofpreparation time and subject difficulty overshadowinnovative teaching style.

Researchers (Dutton, 1962; Philippou & Christou,1998) have found that some teachers carry with themexperiences from as far back as elementary school. Aspart of their study, Philippou and Christou investigatedprospective primary teachers’ attitudes toward mathe-matics upon entering the University education programand how past experiences had shaped their attitudes.Participants were given the Dutton’s Attitude Scale, theSelf-rating Scale, and Justification Scale (as cited inPhilippou & Christou, 1998, p. 195) designed to meas-ure general feelings about mathematics and a justifica-tion scale in which the participants were asked to iden-tify potential explanations for their like or dislike ofmathematics. In addition to the three surveys, the par-ticipants engaged in a semi-structured interview.

The study was carried out over a 3 year period andin 3 phases. The first phase was implemented prior tothe students’ exposure to the education program.Participants entered phase two after completion of thefirst course in the program and entered phase three aftercompleting the entire education program. The totalnumber of participants for phase 1 was N = 162, for

34


phase 2, N = 137, and for phase 3, N = 128. The ques-tion at hand formulated by Philippou and Christou was:

1. What are the attitudes toward mathematics ofprospective primary teachers entering UniversityEducation programs?

The results of the Dutton survey in phase 1 revealeda disturbingly high number of teachers entering the pro-gram with negative attitudes. According to Philippouand Christou (1998), “At the entrance level 24% of thesubjects stated plainly that they ‘detest mathematics andavoid using it at all times’, 28% declared ‘[they] hadnever liked mathematics’, and 14% reported that they‘[had] always been afraid of mathematics’’’ (p. 196).Philippou and Christou (1998) indicated that interviewresults provide an in depth analysis into the negativeresults identified in the surveys. “It becomes clear thatmost of the subjects developed negative attitudes out ofexperiences at the high school…” (p. 202).

The above research supports the speculation thatteachers’ past experiences shape their attitudes towardmathematics. Teachers, whose attitudes toward mathe-matics are formulated by negative learning experiences,may unknowingly bring negativity into the classroomand lesson design. If this is the case, the probability ofthose teachers extending themselves into the historicaldomain is slim. A teacher’s conception of mathematics isnot formulated by a single factor of a negative learningexperience but by several factors worth investigating.

TEACHERS’ CONFIDENCE IN CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

For the purposes of this paper, conception isdefined as a process of forming or understanding ideasor abstractions or their symbols. Teachers’ conceptionsof mathematics, as a discipline, are a function of theprocess they use to understand and formulate abstrac-tions from mathematical symbols and concepts.Confidence in the ability to perform this process is like-ly affected by self-confidence in content knowledge.Attitudes, perceptions, and self efficacy may play a sig-nificant role in teachers’ motivations to extend beyondthe realm of a prescribed curriculum and into the his-torical dimension of mathematics. If teachers lack con-fidence in their understanding of mathematics as a dis-cipline, they might be unwilling to explore the histori-cal dimension of mathematics in the classroom.

Having a solid foundation of content knowledgeand confidence in that foundation may be instrumentalin a teacher’s ability to conceptualize and processabstract mathematical ideas as well as to effectivelydesign teaching strategies that promote student under-standing. Shulman (1986) described three categories ofcontent knowledge:

1. Subject Matter Content Knowledge2. Pedagogical content knowledge3. Curricular knowledge (p. 9)

Subject matter content knowledge refers to the mentalorganization and amount of knowledge pertaining tothe subject area. A teacher’s knowledge of mathematicsas a discipline and how he/she has effectively mentallyorganized mathematical concepts is an example of sub-ject matter content knowledge. As described byShulman, examples of mental organization would bethe taxonomy of learning theories of Gagné or Bloom.In addition to the amount and organization of knowl-edge, another characteristic of subject matter contentknowledge is the teacher’s ability to extend beyond theknowledge of facts or concepts. How, and to whatextent, a teacher stretches beyond the prescribed cur-riculum may be a function of the teacher’s subject mat-ter content knowledge.

The Massachusetts Department of Elementary andSecondary Education (2009) highlights the importanceof content knowledge by requiring teachers who arepursuing an Elementary Teacher’s license to take a sep-arate mathematics subject matter test in addition to ageneral curriculum test. Of the 34 teachers who tookthe Elementary Mathematics subject test, 29.4% passed.The percentages for other licensure tests requiringmathematics is listed in Table 1 [See next page].(Caution is provided by the Department of Elementaryand Secondary Education of drawing conclusions basedupon small sample sizes.)

The overall results of the mathematics subject mat-ter tests indicated that, regardless of the small samplesize, prospective teachers of mathematics certainly haveroom for improvement where subject matter contentknowledge is concerned.

The second category of content knowledgedescribed by Shulman (1986) is Pedagogical ContentKnowledge. It is this category of content knowledge thatmay be instrumental in a teacher’s receptivity to theinclusion of the history of mathematics in the class-room. Pedagogical Content Knowledge is posited toconsist of knowledge necessary for teaching. In this cat-egory, Shulman included:

The most useful forms of representation of …ideas, the most powerful analogies, illustra-tions, examples, explanations, and demonstra-tions—in a word, the ways of representing andformulating the subject that make it compre-hensible to others. (p. 9)

Pedagogical content knowledge involves under-standing the abstractions of a concept, presenting the

35


abstractions using a multitude of teaching strategies andknowing that the teaching strategies have effectivelyallowed students to construct new knowledge.Pedagogical content knowledge may also involve knowl-edge of teaching strategies that facilitate learning orimpede the process of learning. Incorporating a histori-cal perspective into a teaching strategy is one method ofexpanding pedagogical content knowledge. Teacherswho are well grounded in their pedagogical contentknowledge may be more open to the idea of incorporat-ing the history of mathematics in the classroom.

The last category of Content Knowledge describedby Shulman (1986) is that of Curricular Knowledge.Understanding how subjects relate to each other withina discipline and the relational awareness of one disci-pline to another discipline is an essential component ofContent Knowledge. If a teacher views mathematics asa series of unrelated concepts with no bearing to theabstractions of nature or to other disciplines, it is possi-ble they will view the history of mathematics as irrele-vant to the learning of mathematics overall.

TEACHERS’ CONCEPTIONS ON THE HISTORY OF MATHEMATICS

TEACHERS’ BELIEFS IN THE VALUE OF THE HISTORY OFMATHEMATICS

The educational goals of the mathematics classroomencompass a wide variety of teaching beliefs and prac-tices. The successful construction of knowledge willlikely depend upon the students’ ability to discoverexisting and meaningful relationships amongst con-cepts. When successful, the student has developed arich knowledge base of mathematical concepts wherethe interconnectedness of concepts plays a significantrole in the construction of future knowledge. Learningthe rich history and evolution of mathematics may help

the student to view mathematics as a dynamic humanendeavor. Like piecing together a jigsaw puzzle, learn-ing the history of mathematics has the potential ofallowing the student to piece concepts together, todevelop an appreciation for the evolution of concepts,and view the big picture of mathematics and its contrib-utors—past, present, and future.

While this is a noble precept in theory, classroompractice is quite a different story. The issues at handconcern teachers’ confidence in their own knowledge ofmathematics and their perceptions of the benefits ofincluding the history of mathematics in the classroom.It is likely that a teacher’s belief and confidence inhis/her own mathematical knowledge combined withhis/her perception of the benefits of including history inthe mathematics classroom will play a significant factorin the incorporation of history as part of the instruction-al practice. A teacher’s view of him/herself as a mediatorof mathematical learning and teaching may informhis/her method of instructional practice. According toFasanelli et al. (2000), “…an attitude towards history ofmathematics in mathematics education very muchdepends on a general viewpoint towards mathematicslearning and mathematics teaching (p. 28). Teacherswho use the history of mathematics in their classroomsand those who do not may have polar views of theirconfidence in mathematics and the role that the historyof mathematics plays. Although there exists an abun-dance of anecdotal opinion (Fauvel, 1992; Siu, 2004)extolling the benefits of the history of mathematics,there is very little empirical research examining teachers’perspectives of the benefits of the history of mathematicsas part of instructional practice.

There is no shortage of empirical research analyzingteachers’ behaviors. As Thompson (1984) indicated,researching behavior is a common practice becausebehavior is overtly observable. But “…any attempt to

Test Name First Time Test Takers Test RetakersN % Passing N % Passing

Subject TestsGeneral Curriculum: Mathematics 364 50.3 222 30.2Mathematics 91 71.4 34 52.9Middle School Mathematics 98 67.3 58 39.7Middle School Mathematics/Science 18 27.8 9 22.2Elementary Mathematics 34 29.4 3 66.7

Table 1Massachusetts Tests for Educator Licensure (MTEL)Number of Examinees and Percent of Examinees Passing Each Test by Examinee CategoryTest Administration: September 26, 2009

(Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education, 2009)

36


improve the quality of mathematics teaching mustbegin with an understanding of the conceptions held bythe teachers and how these are related to their instruc-tional practice” (p. 106).

Ideally, the learning that takes place in the class-room is mediation between the teacher and the student.In order for the history of mathematics to be includedin the curriculum, it would be necessary for teachers tobelieve that it benefits the learning process. A teacher’senthusiasm and expertise will likely dictate whether ornot the history of mathematics, a topic that falls outsidethe mandated curriculum, is included in the classroom.Cooney, Shealy, and Arvold (1998) posited, “… one willvalue ideas and people to the extent to which they arecongruent with the person’s belief system” (p. 317).

Empirical studies have indicated that teacherbeliefs, interests, and value in the history of mathemat-ics increased when introduced to the history of mathe-matics. However, studies also indicated that teachersfound no interest in using the history of mathematicswithin the mandated curriculum (Philippou &Christou, 1998; Schram, Wilcox, Lapan & Lanier;1988; Siu, 2004; Smestad, 2009a; Stander, 1989). Inaddition, it may be the case that mathematics teachersperceive the knowledge of the history of mathematics asinconsequential to the role of teaching mathematics(NCRTL, 1991).

A study published by the National Center forResearch on Teacher Learning (NCRTL, 1991) exam-ined formal teacher education and teacher learning,specifically the impact of formal teacher education onteacher learning in the areas of writing and mathemat-ics. For the purposes of this paper, all references are tothe subject area of mathematics. Researchers of thestudy chose to examine teachers at different stages ofdevelopment. The various stages were: Preservice whichincluded those who intend to teach but are not yet inpractice; Alternate Route - teachers in this group hadexperience in a related field but lacked formal prepara-tion; Induction included graduates of a pre-service pro-gram, and In-service was comprised of teachers withvarious amounts of teaching experience.

Participants and college programs were selectedusing a purposive sampling strategy. Three forms of datacollection methods were utilized. The first method wasa Likert scale questionnaire investigating teachers’knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about teaching, learn-ing, and subject matter. A second data collectionmethod consisted of an observation that provided doc-umentation of actual teaching practices. A pre and postobservation interview was administered in an effort togain insight into observed teaching practices. An obser-

vation guide was designed to provide consistency inobservational documentation. The researchers identi-fied spontaneity of teachers’ instruction as a potentialfor introducing variability to pre and post observation.Lastly, the researchers presented participants with stan-dardized hypothetical teaching situations. For the pur-pose of identifying ways in which teachers’ knowledge,beliefs and attitudes influenced teaching decisions, par-ticipants were asked to respond via interview to ques-tions based upon the hypothetical teaching situation.

Researchers of The National Center for Research onTeacher Learning (NCRTL) theorized that many differ-ent domains are incorporated into the act of teaching.The intent of the NCRTL study was to gain perspectiveinto decisions of teaching that emanated from the theo-rized domains. Similar to Shulman’s (1986) theories ofContent Knowledge categories, the NCRTL (1991)researchers posited that the act of teaching would beinformed by several factors and domains. The followingdomains were conjectured to be influential in the act ofteaching:

• Act of Teaching-Knowledge of subject matter-Knowledge of curriculum-Knowledge of the teacher’s role-Knowledge of pedagogy-Knowledge of learning -Knowledge of learners

Regarding the purposes of such a model, NCRTLresearchers commented:

[T]his model recognizes that teaching situationsare multidimensional and rarely governed by asingle principle. Second, it recognizes thatteachers will make instructional decisions,regardless of what knowledge or beliefs theyhave available to them; that is, if they know lit-tle about the curriculum but a lot about thelearning, they will probably base their decisionon their understanding of learning. (p. 14)

In the case of the history of mathematics, such amodel may provide insight into teachers’ instructionaldecisions on the inclusion of the history of mathematicsas an integral and/or important part of instructionalpractice.

The study was divided into two categories of sam-ples. The first category was described by the researchersof NCRTL (1991) as “extensive samples” (p. 18). Aquestionnaire was constructed and mailed throughoutthe United States. Approximately 700 participantsresponded. The second category of samples was

37


described as “intensive samples” in which interviewsand classroom observations were utilized to collectdata. Approximately 160 teachers participated in theobservation and interview modes of collecting data andthus were categorized under the “intensive sample.” Thestudy was conducted over a period of 1-3 years,depending upon the stage of development of the teach-ers. Some teachers were followed for a period of 3 years,through their entire program, while others wereobserved or interviewed over a period of 1 year if cur-rently teaching.

Table 2 presents the results of a questionnaire inwhich the participants were presented with “…a list ofactivities asking respondents to indicate how helpfuleach would be in learning to teach” (NCRTL, 1991, p.69). For example, teachers were asked how helpful aknowledge of the history of mathematics would be inlearning to teach. As evidenced by the results, very lit-tle value was placed upon the study of the history ofmathematics as an aid in learning to teach. Theresearchers of NCRTL commented:

The history of mathematics attracts little inter-est across the board. Most interested are alter-nate route candidates (60 [sic] percent) whopresumably have the strongest background inmathematics already. Experienced teachersreject such knowledge as relevant to teaching.Only 18 percent agree that it is valuable. (p. 70)

It is likely the respondents of this survey wouldrarely incorporate the history of mathematics into theirlessons if they believed that knowledge of the history ofmathematics was not relevant to the process of learningto teach mathematics. Assuming the act of teaching ismultidimensional and that subject matter, pedagogy,and curriculum are dimensions of teaching, it will benecessary for mathematics teachers to view the history

of mathematics as a relevant component of subject mat-ter, curriculum, and pedagogy in order for it to play arole in the classroom.

Smestad’s (2009a) small case study of 4 teachersinvestigated the question “What are mathematics teach-ers’ conceptions of history of mathematics and what arethe backgrounds for these” (p. 2)? The study took placein Norway “over a period of several years” (p. 4) andparticipants were recruited from secondary (studentsage 13-16) and high schools (students age 16-19).According to Smestad, the history of mathematics hasbeen a required component of the Norwegian mathe-matics curriculum since 1997. The backgrounds of the4 teachers are identified in Table 3:

Questions probed the teachers’ own experienceusing the history of mathematics, perceptions of the his-tory of mathematics in the classroom, as well as thewhere or how the teacher had come to learn the historyof mathematics. According to Smestad, “Of these fourteachers, three claim to be very interested in history ofmathematics…” (p. 7). Evidence of the claim was basedon Smestad’s interviews.

The fact that the history of mathematics is arequired component of the Norwegian curriculum rais-es an interesting question. Would the participantsinclude the history of mathematics as part of instructionif it was not required? Smestad posed the question:“Should history of mathematics be in the curriculum”(p. 9)? Teacher 2, Teacher 3, and Teacher 4 indicated aninterest in and appreciated the value of the history ofmathematics regardless of the mandate. There weremany problems of this study, which limit any inferencesor conclusions. Perhaps a broader cross section of gen-der and a wider range of age, as well as number of par-ticipants would have helped to provide greater insightinto Smestad’s (2009a) study of mathematics teachers’conceptions and value of the history of mathematics.

Stages of Teaching Course on School Review Course Study HistoryTeacher Experience Teaching Curriculum Basic on of Math andDevelopment Math Skills Math MathematicsPreservice 99% 96% 89% 84% 81% 33%

(N = 405)Alternate Route 100% 92% 91% 50% 57% 69%

(N = 35)Induction 96% 87% 85% 79% 62% 40%

(N = 53)Inservice 84% 88% 59% 51% 70% 18%

(N = 57)

Table 2Prospective and Practicing Teachers’ Beliefs about Sources of Knowledge in Learning to Teach Mathematics

(NCRTL, 1991, p. 71)

38


Ultimately, the inclusion of the history of mathematicswill not depend upon a mandate but a teacher’s convic-tion that such an inclusion as part of instruction is animportant component of students’ construction ofmathematical knowledge.

Siu’s (2004) study attempted to investigate thevalue teachers place on the history of mathematics aswell as their utilization of the history of mathematics inthe classroom. The study polled 360 mathematicsteachers from 41 schools. Siu received an 82% responserate with 45% of those responding having less than fiveyears of teaching experience and 55% having five ormore years of teaching experience.

The mathematics teachers were divided into twocategories, those who had taken a course on the historyof mathematics and those who had not (Siu, 2004). Theteachers were given a Likert-scale survey in which theywere asked to provide an index of value of the history ofmathematics. A selection of 1 indicated the teachersplaced little or no value on the history of mathematicsand a selection of 5 indicated teachers placed a highvalue on the history of mathematics. In addition, Siuasked respondents to provide an index rating of the uti-lization of the history of mathematics in their class-rooms. A selection of 1 indicated little or no use and aselection of 5 indicated a high level of use of the histo-ry of mathematics in the classroom. The results are pro-vided in Table 4.

From the data in Table 4, it appears as though

teachers who were familiar with the history of mathe-matics through coursework may have been more likelyto value and use it in the classroom.

Table 5 provides an index comparison of thoseteachers who read about the history of mathematics andthose who did not. Teachers who have read about andare thus familiar with the history of mathematics seemto be much more aware of the importance of utilizing itin the classroom than those who have not.

Lastly, Siu (2004) investigated the value and utiliza-tion of the history of mathematics for those teachers“…who have read about the use of history of mathemat-ics in teaching” (p. 3). Table 6 reveals the results of theindex comparison between those teachers who keptabreast of issues concerning the teaching of the historyof mathematics and those who did not.

According to Siu, “The conclusion to be drawnfrom these data is unmistakable. The value of history ofmathematics is highly regarded by school teachers, butthe degree of initiative on actually using history ofmathematics in the classroom is very low” (p. 3).

A prominent result from Siu’s (2004) study was thatthe ratio of the use to the value of the history of mathe-matics appeared very low. This study prompts the ques-tion: “If teachers are interested in and value history ofmathematics, why is there not more initiative to utilizeit in the classroom”? It is quite possible that many fac-tors impede the utilization of the history of mathemat-ics in the classroom. One such factor might be the

Participant Sex Age (approx.) School ExperienceTeacher 1 Male 40’s Secondary 10 yearsTeacher 2 Male 40’s High School 20 yearsTeacher 3 Male 60’s High School 40 yearsTeacher 4 Male 50’s Secondary 10 years

Table 3Participant Background

(Smestad, 2009a, p. 4)

N≈295 Teachers who have Teachers who havetaken a course on NOT taken a course

history of on history ofmathematics mathematics

(19.2%) (80.8%)[Value of the History 3.99 3.78of Mathematics][Utilization of the 1.64 1.44History ofMathematics]

Table 4Teacher’s Value and Utilization of the History of Mathematics

(Siu, 2004, p. 2) 1=little value or use 5=high value or use

N≈295 Teachers who Teachers whohave read on have NOT read

history of on history ofmathematics mathematics

(56.9%) (43.1%)[Value of the History 3.98 3.61of Mathematics][Utilization of the 1.62 1.29History ofMathematics]

Table 5Teacher’s Value and Utilization of the History of Mathematics


39


teachers’ uncertainty of the benefits to the students andthemselves when the history of mathematics is incorpo-rated into the classroom.

WILL THERE BE BENEFITS TO MY STUDENTS?High school students’ perception of mathematics

and the methods by which they construct their mathe-matical knowledge may be improved by learning thehistory of mathematics. The history of mathematics canprovide those students, who view mathematics as a col-lection of discrete facts and algorithms, with a concep-tual foundation that builds a relationship betweenideas, concepts, and definitions. Students’ perceptionsof mathematics as a discipline may be central to thequestionable benefits of the history of mathematics inthe classroom. Fauvel (1992) stated:

What is fundamentally at issue may be a deepcleavage between different ways of looking atmathematics. A mathematics which consists oftimeless truths and value-free facts may be fun-damentally inconsistent with one which devel-ops through human endeavour [sic] withinsocial contexts. (p. 3)

Students who view mathematics as value-free factswith no knowledge of the humanistic participation inthe historical development of concepts may have a dif-ferent attitude toward mathematics than those studentswho have a humanistic historical attachment to theirconstruction of knowledge. The history of mathematicscan provide clarity and insight into the “who”, “when”,and “whys” of mathematics. There is a distinct differencebetween learning to use the Pythagorean Theorem andlearning why we use the Pythagorean Theorem. Whatwas it, so many years ago, that necessitated the develop-ment of the Pythagorean Theorem? Who wasPythagoras? For the innumerable times a student writesthe number zero, is he/she aware that zero was invented

(Merick, 1998, p. 49)? What necessitated the need for asymbol that represents “nothing”? Is there an apprecia-tion for the mathematical leap the invention of zeroallowed? What was the earliest use of zero? By whomwas zero invented? Providing students with a historicaldevelopment of mathematics humanizes mathematics.Many researchers (Fauvel, 1992; Furinghetti, 1997; Siu,2004; Smestad, 2009b) believe the history of mathemat-ics provides students with the opportunity to constructa personal, visual, and emotional connection to thedevelopment of concepts. The humanizing benefit of thehistory of mathematics strikes a chord with the affectivedomain of learning. Students may find solace in learningof the difficulties or years of trials and tribulationsDescartes faced when dealing with negative numbers.Calculus, which is neatly presented and developed intexts today, created centuries of struggle for mathemati-cians. When students encounter difficulty with the con-cept of the square root of a negative number, are theyaware that difficulty with this concept dates as far backas 850 A.D. (Hellmich, 1998, p. 291)? Jones (1969)asserted, “…these stories offer the consolation that greatmen once had difficulties with what today are fairly-well-clarified concepts” (p. 3).

Empirical research investigating the effects of theintegration of the history of mathematics into the class-room is scant. One such study by Stander (1989)involved secondary students, twenty-two girls from aprivate school and forty-one boys from a comprehen-sive school. Each group was divided into two where thecontrol group was presented with the mathematics ofthe Euler formula (V – E + F = 2), which describes therelationship between faces, vertices, and edges of a con-vex polygon.

The experimental group was presented with the his-tory of Euler, as well as with proofs and discovery of theEuler relationship (V – E + F = 2). Stander (1989)issued a twenty item attitude Likert scale questionnairebefore and after a two week experiment. Stander’sresearch results indicated no change in students’ atti-tudes toward mathematics either in the private or thecomprehensive school even after their exposure to thehistory of mathematics. A limitation, as indicated byStander was the two week short span of time. Accordingto Stander, “This experiment clearly showed that a lim-ited short-term inclusion of some history of mathemat-ics material had no effect on pupil attitudes towardsmathematics” (p. 244).

Weng Kin’s (2008) research measured the effect ofthe history of mathematics on students’ attitudes towardLinear Algebra. Weng Kin’s study focused on potentialchanges in beliefs, interest, confidence and persever-

N≈295 Teachers who have Teachers who haveread about the use NOT read about the

of history of use of history ofmathematics in mathematics in

teaching teaching(25.0%) (75.0%)

[Value of the History 4.07 3.73of Mathematics][Utilization of the 1.78 1.37History ofMathematics]

Table 6Teaching - Teacher’s Value and Utilization of the History ofMathematics


40


ance of students when introduced to Linear Algebrafrom a historical perspective.

Weng Kin (2008) exposed 17 students to “minorinclusions” of history of Linear Algebra for the first sixweeks of class. “Minor inclusions”, according to WengKin, involved the introduction of “historical snippets”(p. 18) rather than full immersion of historical connec-tions to major concepts within the mathematicaldomain of Linear Algebra. The subsequent six weeksinvolved a major inclusion of history. Direct historicalties to Linear Algebra concepts were discussed in con-junction with the learning of new concepts. For exam-ple, Weng Kin (2008) utilized the historical element ofAncient Chinese Rod Numerals when introducing theconcept of Gaussian elimination (p. 19).

The control group of 57 students was not exposedto any history. A Likert scale survey of sixteen questionswas issued to both groups. Questions were categorizedby beliefs, interests, confidence, and perseverance(Weng Kin, 2008).

Weng Kin’s (2008) research results suggested thatthe historical approach to teaching mathematics made asignificant difference in increasing a students’ belief inthe usefulness of mathematics as well as in their desireto persevere in mathematics. It appeared to have no sig-nificant difference in a student’s confidence toward orinterest in mathematics. Weng Kin’s caveat in drawing aconclusion was the small sample size of the treatmentgroup N = 17 and control group N = 57. Perhaps timeallotted for inclusion of the history of mathematicsplayed a role in changing a student’s attitude towardmathematics. Where Stander (1989) saw no change intwo weeks, it appears that Weng Kin’s twelve weekstudy produced some significant changes.

Lit, Siu and Wong’s (as cited in Siu, 2004) study onthe use of the history of mathematics in the classroomexamined two 8th grade classes of approximately 42students in each grade. Based on examination results,the two classes consisted of “low achievers” and “moreable-learners” (p. 3). The Pythagorean Theorem from ahistorical perspective was the focus of materials utilizedin the classroom. Lit, Siu, and Wong’s (as cited in Siu,2004) study investigated the change in students’ atti-tudes over the course of the Pythagorean Theorem les-son. The time length for the study was not specified. Lit,Siu, and Wong found “The ‘more able learners’ in gen-eral dismiss history of mathematics as useless and time-wasting, while ‘lower achievers’ in general are moredrawn to it” (p. 4). Siu provided anecdotal analysis thatHong Kong’s schools focus on calculation techniqueswhich tend to overshadow the promotion of “…long-term, in-depth comprehension” (p. 4). A focus on tech-

niques of calculations by the Hong Kong Ministry ofEducation could implicitly relay to the ‘more able learn-ers’ that foundational and historical building of mathe-matical concepts is not a high priority.

There were limitations for each study. For Stander(1989) it was the short time span of the study, for WengKin (2008) it was the small sample size whereas Siu(2004) did not specify the time span of the study.Therefore, it is difficult to make a conjecture one way orthe other as to the benefits to the students of the histo-ry of mathematics as part of instructional practice.

Teachers’ conceptions of the history of mathematicsmay be flavored not only by the perception of the bene-fit to students but the benefit to the teachers themselves.

HOW WILL I, AS A TEACHER BENEFIT?From a pedagogical standpoint the inclusion of the

history of mathematics may provide an opportunity forteachers to enrich their knowledge base as well as devel-op a varied repertoire of topics tangent to concepts pre-scribed by the curriculum. Barbin et al. (2000) posited:

The two most commonly presented reasons forthe inclusion of a historical dimension are thathistory of mathematics provides an opportuni-ty for developing our view of what mathematicsis; and that it allows us to have a better under-standing of concepts and theories. (p. 63)

Furinghetti (2004) viewed the history of mathemat-ics “…as an artifact, which may be introduced in theclassroom as a mediator in the process ofteaching/learning” (p. 3). There has been the opinion(Fauvel, 1992; Katz, 1997; Swetz, 1982; Weng Kin,2008) that teachers who teach mathematics from a his-torical dimension enrich their own knowledge base,which in turn allows their students to develop mathe-matical knowledge with a deep understanding of thebreadth of concepts.

Mathematics is a dynamic science that has been ina state of flux for centuries. Those responsible for theinvention of mathematical concepts endured rigor andconflict for years in order to refine mathematical con-cepts to their current presentation. If the process ofrigor and conflict is not mentioned in classroom discus-sions, teachers as well as students may come to believethat mathematical concepts were easily conceived asthey appear in texts today. For today’s mathematical stu-dents, it may take years to understand a mathematicalconcept but for the developer, it may have taken cen-turies. Teachers who understand the significance, labo-rious efforts, and time span of the developmental of thehistory of mathematics may take to their classroom

41


empathy for those students who have difficulty under-standing concepts in the day or two allowed by the cal-endar school year. Barbin et al. (2004) speculated,“Historical and epistemological analysis helps theteacher to understand why a certain concept is difficultfor the student and can help also in the teaching strate-gy and development” (p.64).

A teacher’s enthusiasm and confidence in mathe-matics has the potential of supporting the claimed ben-efits of the history of mathematics in the classroom.One of the underpinnings of existing research positedby Schubring et al. (2000) that “…mathematics teach-ers’ professional identity is their own intrinsic relationto their subject, their ‘love of mathematics’ ” (p. 128)clearly implies that a teacher’s appreciation, interest, orconfidence in the knowledge base for his/her subjectwill spark students’ interest and appreciation in the sub-ject as well. Current research has suggested that forthose teachers whose education in mathematicsincludes a history of mathematics course, their interest,attitudes, and perception toward mathematics changesfor the better (Furinghetti, 2007; Ismael, 2000; Lingard,2000; Philippou & Christou, 1998; Siu, 2004; WengKin, 2008). If the studies of Lit, Siu, and Wong (as citedin Siu, 2004) and Weng Kin (2008) have suggested pos-itive changes in the students’ attitude, then the questionwe need to ask is why the history of mathematics doesnot play a more prominent role in the mathematics cur-riculum. As cited by Schubring et al. (2000), “A surveycarried out by Victor Katz (1998) shows that in themajority of the United States certification requirementsfor teachers at secondary schools require the study of acourse in the history of mathematics…” (p. 105). Giventhat the majority of teachers at secondary schools havehad a course in the history of mathematics; one canconclude that there should be no shortage of mathemat-ics teachers with knowledge in the history of math.Perhaps there is another factor that is getting in the wayof delivery of the historical dimension of mathematics.

POTENTIAL LIMITATIONS OF INCLUDING THE HISTORY OFMATHEMATICS IN THE CLASSROOM

It is likely that teachers are frequently encouraged byadministration, education reform or parents to try newpedagogical theories. The scope and extent to which ateacher will incorporate new theories or practicesdepends largely on his/her belief that the change willhave positive results. Time is a precious commodity formany teachers. With State mandated tests looming overteachers’ shoulders, many teachers might have to weighseveral factors when making the decision regarding ped-agogical theories to introduce into their classrooms.

Cooney, Shealy, and Arvold (1998) cited several fac-tors that come into play.

Some teachers may prefer to walk into a classroomwith a prescribed outline of the required curriculum. Aby-product of a mandated curriculum may be comfortand confidence in knowledge of the content. The role ofauthority will play a significant role in the teacher’s will-ingness to expand or change the “scripted” curriculum.

A valid concern and factor is the need for evidencein order to integrate change. There is very little longterm or substantial empirical research that clearly iden-tifies the benefits to students and teachers of incorporat-ing the history of mathematics into the classroom. Sowhile it may make sense intuitively that learning thehistory of mathematics is beneficial, teachers needmuch more empirical evidence to exert the extra effortneeded to make the necessary changes.

Cooney, Shealy, and Arvold (1988) also discussedvon Glasersfeld’s concept of reflection as a key determi-nant for teachers’ willingness to change their beliefs ormode of instruction. Cooney, Shealy, and Arvold stated,“…reflection is directly connected with abstraction andre-presentation, which von Glasersfeld believed guidethe ways we think and act” (p. 308). Incorporating thehistory of mathematics is no small task and calls uponthe teacher to incorporate a standard of abstracting andre-presenting mathematical concepts. For the teacher toconsider the history of mathematics as part of instruc-tional practice there needs to be sufficient time for theteacher to reflect, discuss, and re-present his/her cur-riculum presentations. It is fair to say that this will nothappen overnight.

Lastly, the underpinning of any attempt at pedagog-ical change is the teacher’s belief system (Cooney, Shealy& Arvold, 1988). It is likely that a teacher’s belief sys-tem will supersede empirical evidence as well as thevoice of authority. If a teacher strongly believes that theinclusion of a historical dimension will not change stu-dents’ attitudes or mathematical knowledge base, theteacher will likely not include it in his/her instructionalpractice, regardless of presented evidence. The extent towhich a teacher embraces change will, with good prob-ability, correlate with the teacher’s beliefs regarding thesuggested pedagogical change. At the risk of beingrepetitive, “…one will value ideas and people to theextent to which they are congruent with the person’sbelief system” (Cooney, Shealy & Arvold, 1988, p. 317).One cannot stress this enough.

This author conducted a small pilot study investi-gating teachers’ perspectives on incorporating the histo-ry of mathematics into instructional practice. Sourcesfor the survey questions were based upon the work of

42


Tzanakis et al. (2000, p. 203) as well as Panasuk(2009). Seven teachers comprised the sample and allbut one of the teachers had a mathematical background,either as a major or through a field with a heavy focuson mathematics.

The results implied that teachers who did not takea history of mathematics course satiated their desire tolearn about it by reading material concerning the histo-ry of mathematics. Predominantly, the participantsagreed to the necessity or value of staying current on thehistory of mathematics.

Teachers’ perspectives on incorporating the historyof mathematics seemed to correlate favorably with thosewho took a course in the history of mathematics. Thisis a good sign that there is a willingness to incorporatethe history of mathematics as part of instructional prac-tice for students who have taken a history of mathemat-ics course.

According to this author’s pilot study survey, teach-ers who had not taken a history of mathematics coursefelt much less confident in their abilities to incorporateit into the classroom. Two respondents believed therewas not enough time in a classroom period to incorpo-rate the history of mathematics. Of the two respondents,one had 0 -1 years experience. It should be noted thispilot study makes no attempt to draw conclusions dueto the small sample size. However, future questions forresearch may investigate whether a generalization existsbetween teacher background variables and the utiliza-tion of the history of mathematics in the classroom.

An interesting finding of this author’s survey wasthat none of the teachers pointed to the student as a rea-son for not including the history of mathematics. Therewas no indication of presumption that students wouldnot like the history of mathematics. It appeared asthough the teachers accepted full responsibility for thelack of incorporation. This strengthens the hypothesisthat the keystone of the incorporation of the history ofmathematics in the classroom is the teachers’ perspec-tives on the value of incorporating the history of math-ematics in the classroom. If teachers do not see the ben-efit for themselves and the students, or if they lack timeto incorporate history, it may never happen.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONSIf you would understand anything, observe its beginning

and its developmentAristotle

The above literature review suggests that there aresome benefits of learning mathematics from a historicalperspective. Research has concluded that while there is

not significant change in student cognition, there is achange in the students’ affective domain (Siu, 2004). Inaddition, research shows that teachers enjoy learningabout the history of mathematics. However, the realityis that teachers are choosing to not utilize it outside ofthe mandated curriculum (Philippou & Christou, 1998;Schram, Wilcox, Lapan & Lanier; 1988; Siu, 2004).

This author asserts that the foundational justifica-tion for studying history in general is the same forstudying the history of mathematics. Mathematics hasplayed an integral role in the development of societyand culture. Sarton (1957) stated, “…the history ofmathematics should really be the kernel of the historyof culture” (p. 4). Understanding and appreciating cul-tural achievements requires the inclusion of the historyof mathematics as part of the understanding and appre-ciation of our culture, for it is through the advancementof mathematics that our global society has progressedeconomically, socially and scientifically.

In his article Why Study History? Stearns’s (1998)proposed that knowledge of history provides a perspec-tive on events and factors that affect social change. Thestudy of history is the study of human experience andevolution. Stearns contends the study of history devel-ops the skill of assessment and judgment. It is Stearnscontention that, “Learning history means gaining someskill in sorting through diverse, often conflicting inter-pretations” (p. 3). Being able to assess conflicting infor-mation as well as “past examples of change” are valuableby-products in the study of history.

Understanding the human experience that broughtabout change in the discipline of mathematics as well asacquiring the ability to assess conflicting ideas and con-cepts in mathematics may be, by parallel reasoning, aby-product in the study of the history of mathematics.Knowledge in the history of mathematics provides foran understanding of the humanistic endeavor, past andpresent, necessary to the creation of mathematics. If weare to understand the present and project into thefuture, we must be knowledgeable of the past.Concerning the importance of the study of history inthe classroom, Gagnon (1988) stated, “By ignoring thereality of change from the past, it ignores as well thechange there will surely be after us…” (p. 46). This islikely the case for the study of all types of history. Theimportance of learning the history of mathematics par-allels that of learning history in general.

For there to be credence given to the potential ben-efits of learning mathematics from a historical perspec-tive, there must be greater insight into teachers’ per-spectives of including the history of mathematics as partof instructional practice. Incorporating history into

43


mathematics teaching and learning need not take a largeamount of time and one does not have to be an expertin mathematical history. The history of mathematics canbe introduced to students via historical snippets contex-tualized in the mathematical content to be introduced,or through historical biographies of the mathematicianpredominantly involved in the content discussion of theday. Teachers may be overestimating the time allotmentand required knowledge needed to introduce the histo-ry of mathematics. Gaining insight into what teachersbelieve regarding the history of mathematics allowsconceptions to be clarified and misconceptions to beeradicated through the learning of history of math.Possible questions for future research might include:

• What are High School mathematics teacher’s con-ceptions of Mathematics as a discipline?

• What are High School mathematics teacher’s con-ceptions of the history of mathematics?

• What are High School mathematics teacher’s per-ceptions of the inclusion of the history of mathe-matics in the classroom?

• Is there a relationship between teacher back-ground variables and the choice to include thehistory of mathematics as part of classroominstruction?

ReferencesBall, D. (1988). Unlearning to teach mathematics. For the Learning

of Mathematics, 8(1), 40-48.

Barbin, E., Bagni, G. T., Grugnetti, L., Kronfellner, M., Lakoma, E.,

& Menghini, M. (2000). Integrating history: Research per-

spectives. In J. Fauvel & J. Van Maanen. (Eds.), History in

mathematics education: The ICMI study (Vol. 6, pp. 63-90).

Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Cooney, T.J; Shealy, B.E. & Arvold, B. (1998). Conceptualizing

belief structures of preservice secondary mathematics teachers.

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(3), 306-333.

Dutton, W. H. (1962). Attitude change of prospective elementary

school teachers toward arithmetic. The Arithmetic Teacher, 9,

418-424.

Fasanelli, F., Arcavi, A., Bekken, O., Carvalho e silva, J., Daniel, C.,

& Furinghetti, F. et al. (2000). The political context. In J.

Fauvel & J. Van Maanen (Eds.), History in mathematics educa-

tion: The ICMI study (Vol. 6, pp. 1-38). Dordrecht, The

Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Fauvel, J. (1992). Using history in mathematics education. For the

Learning of Mathematics, 11(2), 3-6.

Furinghetti, F. (1997). History of mathematics, mathematics educa-

tion, school practice: Case studies in linking different

domains. For the Learning of Mathematics, 17(1), 55-61.

Furinghetti, F. (2004). History and mathematics education: A look

around the world with particular reference to Italy.

Mediterranean Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,

3(1-2), 1-19.

Furinghetti, F. (2007). Teacher education through the history of

mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66(2), 131-

143.

Gagnon, P. (1988, November). Why study history? The Atlantic

Monthly, 262(5), 43-66.

Hellmich, E.W. (1998). Complex numbers: (The story of ). In A.

E. Hallerberg, J.K. Baumgart, D.E. Deal & B. R. Vogeli (Eds.),

Historical topics for the mathematics classroom (3rd ed., pp.

290-294). Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of

Mathematics. (Original work published 1969)

Hersh, R. (1998). Some proposals for reviving the philosophy of

mathematics. In T. Tymoczko (Ed.), New directions in the phi-

losophy of mathematics (pp. 9-28). Princeton, NJ: Princeton

University Press.

Ismael, A. (2000). Mozambique: Mathematics in history for sec-

ondary school trainee teachers. In J. Fauvel & J. Van Maanen

(Eds.), History in mathematics education: The ICMI study (Vol. 6,

pp. 122-124). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic

Publishers.

Jones, P. S. (1969). The history of mathematics as a teaching tool.

In Yearbook - National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (pp.

1-17). Reston, VA: NCTM.

Katz, V. J. (1997). Some ideas on the use of history in the teaching

of mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 17(1), 62-63.

Kline, M. (1972). Mathematical thought from ancient to modern times

(Vol. 1). New York, NY: Oxford University Press

Lingard, D. (2000). UK: A new dimension in educating mathemat-

ics teachers. In J. Fauvel & J. Van Maanen (Eds.), History in

mathematics education: The ICMI study (Vol. 6, pp. 117-122).


Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education.

(2009, November 6). Massachusetts Tests for Educator Licensure

(MTEL). Retrieved from

http:/?/?www.doe.mass.edu/?mtel/?results/?09_0926.html

Merick, L. C., Jr. (1998). Origin of zero. In A.E. Hallerberg, J.K.

Baumgart, D.E. Deal & B. R. Vogeli (Eds.), Historical topics for

the mathematics classroom (3rd ed., pp. 49-50).

44


National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. (1991, June).

Findings from the teacher education and learning to teach study.

East Lansing, MI: The National Center for Research on

Teacher Learning

National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (2003).

NCATE/?NCTM Program Standards (2003): Programs for initial

preparation of mathematics teachers. Washington, DC: National

Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. Retrieved

from

http:/?/?www.ncate.org/?institutions/?programStandards.asp?c

h=4#NCTM

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum

and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Retrieved from

http:/?/?www.nctm.org/?fullstandards/?previous/?currevstds/?in

tro.asp?

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles

and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2009, September

9). NCTM announces new professional development scholarship

emphasizing the history of mathematics. Retrieved from

http:/?/?www.nctm.org/?news/?content.aspx?id=23700

National Research Council (1989). Everybody counts: A report to the

nation on the future of mathematics education. Washington, D.C:

National Research Council.

Philippou, G. N., & Christou, C. (1998). The effects of a prepara-

tory mathematics program in changing prospective teachers’

attitudes towards mathematics. Educational Studies in

Mathematics, 35(1), 189-206.

Sarton, G. (1957). The study of the history of mathematics, and the

study of the history of science. New York: Dover Publications.

Schram, P., Wilcox, S. K., Lapan, G., & Lanier, P. (1988). Changing

preservice teachers beliefs about mathematics education. In C.

A. Mahers, G. A. Goldin, & R. B. Davis (Eds.), Proceedings of

PME-NA 11 (Vol. 1, pp. 296-302). New Braunswick, NY:

Rutgers University.

Schubring, G.; Cousquer, E.; Fung, C-I.; El Idrissi, A; Gispert, H.;

Heiede, T., et al. (2000). History of mathematics for trainee

teachers. In J. Fauvel & J. Van Maanen (Eds.), History in math-

ematics education: The ICMI study (Vol. 6, pp. 91-142).


Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth

in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.

Siu, M-K. (2004). No, I do not use history of mathematics in my

class. Why? In S. Kaijser (Ed.), History and pedagogy of mathe-

matics: Proceedings of HPM 2004 (pp. 375-376). Uppsala,

Sweden: HPM.

Smestad, B. (2009a). Teachers’ conceptions of history of mathematics.

Retrieved from

http:/?/?home.hio.no/?~bjorsme/?HPM2008paper.pdf

Smestad, B. (2009b). The introduction of history of mathematics in

Norwegian schools. Retrieved June 4, 2009, from

http://home.hio.no/~bjorsme/taipei.pdf

Stander, D. (1989). The use of the history of mathematics in teach-

ing. In P. Ernest (Ed.), Mathematics teaching: The state of the art

(pp. 241-246). Philadelphia, PA: The Falmer Press.

Stearns, P. N. (1998). Why study history? Retrieved December 19,

2009, from American Historical Association Web site:

http://www.historians.org/pubs/Free/WhyStudyHistory.htm

Swetz, F. J. (November 1982). What ever happened to the history

of mathematics? The American Mathematical Monthly, 89(9),

695-697.

Swetz, F. J. (1994). Learning activities from the history of mathematics.

Portland, ME: J. Weston Walch.

Swetz, F., Fauvel, J., Bekken, O. Johansson., B., & Katz, V. (Eds.).

(1995). Learn from the masters. Washington, DC: The

Mathematical Association of America.

Thompson, A. G. (May, 1984). The relationship of teachers’ con-

ceptions of mathematics and mathematics teaching to instruc-

tional practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15(2), 105-

127.

Tzanakis, C., Arcavi, A., Correia de Sa, C., Isoda, M., Lit, C-K.,

Niss, M. et al. (2000). Integrating history of mathematics in

the classroom: an analytic survey. In J. Fauvel & J. Van

Maanen (Eds.), History in mathematics education: The ICMI

study (Vol. 6, pp. 201-240). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:

Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Weng Kin, H. (2008). Using history of mathematics in the teaching

and learning of mathematics in Singapore. In Proceedings of 1st

RICE (pp. 1-38). Singapore.

45


INTRODUCTIONThe scientific method is associated with a series of

steps that people assume scientists use when doing sci-ence. The number of steps, of course, varies dependingon the source. Karl Pearson (1949), in his book TheGrammar of Science which was first published in 1892,identified what he believed to be the three features of thescientific method (p. 37). Prof. Frank Wolfs (2008), onhis homepage for his physics students, at the Universityof Rochester in New York, outlined four steps. NormanEdmund (2005), in his report to the U. S. Department ofEducation, Institute of Education Sciences, and variousother bodies, outlined eleven steps to this method (p.15). Regardless of the number of steps, the common ideaappears to be that the method involves an observation ofa phenomenon leading to the generation of questionsthat result in the synthesis of a hypothesis enabling theobserver to make predictions and test these predictions.Then through this testing, data or evidence is collectedand analyzed to see if the hypothesis could be support-ed; if it can, then a valid conclusion is reached.

Although this method is embraced by many mem-bers of the scientific and non-scientific community, andtaught to students in schools and colleges around theworld, there are a group of people, including renownedscientists, whose beliefs question the existence of a sci-entific method. This report is an investigation into andan analysis of these contrary beliefs. The analysis is, infact, a simple overview of assertions made by certainscientists about the non-existence of the scientificmethod, with an attempt to uncover the notion thatmay have resulted in these claims. Thus, in this investi-gation, the first step involved making an observation,which, of course, generated questions. An investigationwas then carried out in an attempt to find the answersto these questions, and is presented here as the resultsalong with, what is believed to be, an anomalous find-ing which neither oppose nor support the existence of ascientific method, but suggests that there is more thanone method. Finally, the paper concludes by reflectingon what has manifested from this investigation.

OBSERVATION AND QUESTIONS Sometimes if an observation made continually fol-

lows the same pattern, it seems reasonable to accept itto be a true representation. Until, of course, one makesan observation that is contrary to the accepted norm,and when this occurs, it is possible to assume that a sci-entist would naturally be more curious about the latterobservation. This certainly was the case with this inves-tigation of the scientific method. When one generallyaccepts without question the existence of the scientificmethod, it comes as a surprise to learn of certain indi-viduals adamantly vocalizing that it does not exist(Conant, 1964). Moreover, it is even more astoundingto hear that science should not be practiced under astrict method, but be conducted as if anything goes(Feyerabend, 1976); or that there is no single methodwhich scientist use for they work in a series of para-digms (Kuhn, 1970).

This observation generated many questions, and toseek answers to all these questions would be beyond thescope of this investigation. So one question was select-ed to focus on—what are the notions behind theseopposing beliefs? In searching for an answer to thisquestion, it seemed appropriate to, first investigate theorigin of the scientific method, and describe its benefits.

RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION A scientific investigation is indeed a complex

process, but the main aim is for a scientist to obtainunbiased data or evidence to answer the questionsposed and explain their observations. The origin of thescientific method was traced in an attempt to under-stand whether it was discovered or invented, and itsbenefits were explored to demonstrate that it is a neces-sary requirement in the practice of science.

ORIGIN OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD One cannot say with any certainty as to where the

scientific method actually comes from. Depending onthe source, there are discrepancies as to who first intro-duced the scientific method or used it, the Greeks or the

Educational ResourcesInvestigating the Scientific Method

Sumudu Lewis, University of Massachusetts Lowell

46


Arabs? In majority of the literature, the credit goes toAristotle as the first to introduce the scientific method.He was, according to these sources, the first to intro-duce the dual path of scientific reasoning by implyingthat universal truths can first be known via induction;and then through deductive reasoning (in the form ofsyllogism) causes can be identified and scientific knowl-edge acquired (Wikipedia, 2009). However, the firstexperimental scientific method, apparently, may beassociated with the work of Arabs who used a combina-tion of observations, experiments, rational arguments,as well as repeat experiments. As with the Greeks, theArabic scientists were concerned about the isolation ofthe truth. Even then, there were disputations as to themost rational way of arriving at this truth. Somebelieved that a question should lead to an experimentand others such as al-Biruni, a leading figure in Islamicscience during the 11th century, supposedly have saidthat “universals [should] came out of practical, experi-mental work” and “theories [should be] formulatedafter discoveries” (Sardar, 1998).

Centuries later, inspired by the writings of theseArabic scientists and Aristotle’s idea of induction, RogerBacon, may have described his own “repeating cycle ofobservation, hypothesis, experimentation, and the needfor independent verification” (Wikipedia, 2009).However, it was Galileo that is unanimously acclaimedto have practiced and pioneered the scientific method.His method, according to Kline (1985) consisted of first“seek[ing] quantitative descriptions of physical phe-nomena”, second “isolate[ing] and measure[ing] themost fundamental properties of the phenomena”, the“build[ing] up science deductively on the basis of fun-damental physical principles” and finally “idealiz[ing]”(p. 103). It, therefore, seems only appropriate to giveGalileo the credit for his genius, imagination and wis-dom, and showing selectivity in what he chose to studyin depth; as he certainly “showed the restraint of themaster” (p. 103) thus “enable[ing] humanity to uncov-er the behavior of many natural phenomena that mightotherwise have remained unknown” (p. 106).

Following on from Galileo, two other important fig-ures are associated with the contribution to the idea ofthe existence of the scientific method during the 17th

century. They were Francis Bacon and Rene Descartes.The former, suggested that a scientist should be animpartial viewer of nature collecting observations with-out any preconceptions and after making these observa-tions, any patterns emerging would give rise to thetruths about nature (Goodstein, 2000). Hypothesizing,in Bacon’s method, apparently played a very insignifi-cant role, perhaps expecting it to transpire during the

investigation (Wikipedia, 2009). Descartes, on the otherhand, produced a four part method which can be sum-marized as first “accepting as ‘truth’ only clear, distinctideas that could not be doubted”; second “breaking aproblem down into parts”; third “deducing one conclu-sion from another;” and finally “conducting a systemat-ic synthesis of all things” (Nordgren, 1998). Thus,Descartes approach was a deductive model of reason-ing, whereas the Baconian model was inductive obser-vation. Though both these men differed in theirapproach to scientific reasoning, it is clear that theywere concerned about providing a firm foundation forscientific thought by eradicating bias and avoidingdeceptions of the mind and senses in scientific investi-gations (Nordgren, 1998; Wikipedia, 2009).

It is possible that debates over the detailed nature ofthe method involving inductive to deductive reasoningto have continued throughout the 17th and 18th cen-turies. Nevertheless, despite these debates the scientificmethod, apparently, became an important tool for dis-tinguishing between “scientific” and “non-scientific”approaches to describing the natural world (Schuster &Yeo, 1987, p. ix). By the 19th century, the scientificcommunity appeared to have accepted the existence ofthe scientific method that made “natural science themost secure form of knowledge” (p. ix). Then in theearly part of the 20th century, disciplines in the area ofsocial sciences were also using the method of the natu-ral scientists to justify their claims (pp. ix–x). The scien-tific method was thus believed to be the “epitome ofreason and portrayed as an instrument capable of pro-ducing objective knowledge wherever it is properlyapplied” (p. x).

BENEFITS OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD There are probably many benefits to the scientific

method. Described below are two of the benefits thatindicate the necessity of the scientific method. The firstis that it allows people to make judgments between sci-ence and pseudo science. Gower (1996) commented thatpeople have confidence in claims described scientifical-ly, because they have confidence that scientific claimsare reliable. The basis of this confidence was found tohave its roots in the authority of science; people trustthese claims because they are scientific therefore theyare authoritative (p. 6). Why do people simply acceptthe authoritative nature of science? The answer to thisquestion is not that simple. One reason, perhaps, is thetrust that people have in the scientific method. Simplybecause it has been “identified with the highest stan-dards of intellectual rigor and the most reliable proce-

47


dures for gaining and assessing knowledge”; otherforms of inquiry not based on this method are consid-ered to be unreliable and not trustworthy as they mayhave been manipulated by “passion, subjectivity, preju-dice, political bias, and socio-economic interest”(Schuster & Yeo, 1987, p. x).

Secondly, it is quite possible that a scientist whounderstands and practices the techniques of the scien-tific method would be more productive in his or herfield, as they, it s believed, will show greater adaptabili-ty, greater interest, and more realism to judge the sci-ence’s powers and limits (Gauch, 2003). In addition,they are also better researchers because “they make bet-ter decisions about whether or not to question an earli-er interpretation of their data as a result of new evi-dence” and “whether or not there is a need to repeat anexperiment …, and how certain or accurate their con-clusions are” (p. 9). If this was taken to be a benefit ofthe scientific method to the scientist, then it can be saidthat an inadequate understanding of the principles ofthis method can retard progress to the same extent as“inappropriate laboratory equipment or inadequatetraining” (pp. 7-8).

ANALYSISIn science, analysis involves breaking down results

from a scientific investigation into smaller parts to gaina better understanding of them. This investigation ofthe scientific method discovered that the existence of asingle method came into conflict, only in the latter halfof the 20th century. This analysis aims to present thenotion behind this challenge by considering two of theleading figures in science during that time: JamesConant, and Paul Feyerabend.

“ALLEGED SCIENTIFIC METHOD.”James Conant (1964) in his book Science and

Common Sense referred to the scientific method as the“alleged scientific method”, the reason for this isbecause he repudiates the existence of the this methodby announcing that “there is no such thing as the scien-tific method” (p. 45). In analyzing the notion behindthis claim it was important to first establish a probablereason as to why he believes other people acknowledgethe existence of the scientific method and secondly, touncover his perceptions of science and scientists.

Conant (1964) criticizes the survival of the scientif-ic method through the years because of its associationwith impartial and rational enquiry (p. 7). He arguesthat this attitude towards obtaining exact and impartial

facts did not come through an invention by thoseinvolved in scientific inquiry, as they did not consider itimportant (p. 8). He asserts that scientists graduallyimposed self-discipline upon themselves because his-torically most of these scientists were amateurs andtheir work was easily contradicted rather than support-ed (p. 8) Then as the generations that followed saw howtheir predecessors meticulously proved their work andavoided barriers to their progress, the “standards ofexactness and impartiality was gradually raised” (p. 9).Conant reasons that it really is misleading to say, “allimpartial and accurate analyses of facts are examples ofthe scientific method” as this would only “add confu-sion … to the problems of understanding science” (p.14). He believes that it is possible to obtain an exact andan impartial analysis of facts in science without a scien-tific method, as the scientist’s mind will be conditionedto making such analysis when he or she is exposed tothe discipline (p. 8), i.e. trained as a scientist. Further,he does not think that people should view scientistswith high esteem simply because they are impartialenquirers, as this attitude should be inherent in every-one (pp. 13-14).

With regard to Conant’s (1964) perception of sci-ence and scientists, he appears to be of the mindset thatthe works of scientists are difficult to comprehend by alayperson (p. 4). He disapproves of the way the scientif-ic method simplifies a scientist’s work. As he supposes,that this oversimplification misleads the layperson intobelieving that discoveries in science occurs in a logicalorder (p. 44), and consequently people will not appre-ciate the “stumbling way” in which scientists arrive attheir conclusions (p. 44). He comments that the scien-tific method would result in science viewed merely as amethod, consisting of:

asking a clear, answerable question in order todirect one’s observations which are made in acalm, unprejudiced manner, reported as accu-rately as possible and in such a way as toanswer the questions that were asked to beginwith; any assumptions that were held before theobservations are now revised in the light ofwhat happened (p. 50).

His concern thus appears to be that this step-wisescientific method makes a mockery of what scientistsreally do, for he says that if the scientific method waspresented to a “group of discerning young people theymay come back with the statement that they have beenscientists all their lives!” (p. 50).

Thus, Conant does not appear to be comfortablewith the using of the scientific method as a problem-

48


solving technique is that applicable to any practical situ-ation (p. 42) by anyone, including young people, whoare not scientists (p. 50). He may well have wanted sci-entific work to be a separate entity from everyday situa-tions, as he keeps emphasizing the difficulty of scientificresearch, and he may have had high regard for what sci-entists did. Science for him was a dynamic process that ascientist carried out in a laboratory, and only in laborato-ries: “science would disappear completely if all the labo-ratories were closed” (p. 25). Therefore, to have amethod that anyone could use anywhere and at anytimewas not the vision that Conant had of scientific research,so he rejects the existence of the scientific method.

“ANYTHING GOES.” Paul Feyerabend (1975) is also concerned about the

simplification of science, but his argument appears tobe for complete eradication of any sort of method. Byreferring to human history to make his point about get-ting rid of the scientific method, he quotes from a pub-lication by Herbert Butterfield that infers that historyhas no uniformity and is full of unpredictable eventsand characters (p. 17), and Feyerabend questions, if anymethodology can explain these events. It is quite possi-ble that, at this stage, he is comparing human historicalevents to historical scientific events (which have beenreported in literature to have adhered to a method), andscientists to those unpredictable historical characters.This is evident from his comment, that those who suc-ceeded were “ruthless opportunist[s]” who were nottied to any particular philosophy and who adopt[ed]whatever procedure” that fit the situation (p. 18).Feyerabend’s position is that scientific method is tooconstrained and it inhibits progress and “anything goes”is the only solution (p.23), and anarchism is moreappropriate for the philosophy of science (p. 17).

In his book Against Method, Feyerabend (1975) pro-vides case studies to support his position that oneshould put aside methodology and conduct scientificresearch in a different way to see what happens (p.296). He generalizes that every rule at some point inhistory has been violated and these violations occur notbecause of an accident, or lack of knowledge, butbecause it was necessary for progress (p. 23). In supportof his argument regarding the boundaries exhibited bymethodological rules he used examples from the histo-ry of science that showed progress (e.g. Copernican rev-olution) where thinkers, he says, “either decided not tobe bound” by these rules or because “they unwittinglybroke them” (p. 23).

Although Feyerabend (1975) may have carefully

thought out his arguments for his case against themethod, there are a number of opponents who arguethat these cases are bad examples and Feyerabend’sthinking as absurd. As his case for abolishing the scien-tific method appears bizarre to a rational thinker, it isnot that easy to understand whether his argument isactually against the scientific method or science itself.He appears to resent that results obtained by any othermethod are ruled out (p. 20) and declares that it is “nec-essary to re-examine our attitude towards myth, reli-gion, magic,” and “witchcraft” (p. 298). He disputesthat science “took over by force, not by argument” (p.296), and scientific ideas, laws, and facts are not accept-ed democratically as they are not subjected to a vote (p.301). In addition, he comments that there is no separa-tion between state and science, and that “an Americancan now choose the religion he likes, he is still not per-mitted to demand that his children learn magic ratherthan science at school” (p. 299).

So where do these notions come from? Perhaps hereally believes that this is how it should be. However, inany analysis of experimental results, a scientist may notsimply accept this as a reasonable conclusion. An expla-nation is always sought if not to convince others, but forpersonal satisfaction—to make sense of it all. In thiscase, a possible explanation to Feyerabend’s case againstthe scientific method may be due to personal experi-ence as he may have had his belief system alreadyembedded in the area referred to as pseudoscience.There are reports that he had received treatment forpoor health from a healer, and “used to refer to his owncase as an example of both the failures of orthodoxmedicine and the largely unexplored possibilities of‘alternative’ or traditional remedies” (StanfordEncyclopedia of Philosophy, 2009).

THE ANOMALYDuring the analysis of results in a scientific investi-

gation, a scientist would sometimes stumble on ananomalous result that requires further in-depth investi-gation. This was the case with Thomas Kuhn’s (1970)idea of paradigms and scientific revolutions. Althoughmany people may have understood his idea, there werediverse interpretations of his concept of paradigms andscientific revolutions. It was therefore difficult to analyzeaccurately where his notion came from. As a student ofConant, one could assume that he developed his ideasfrom his teacher, but Kuhn (1970) does not appear toclaim that the scientific method does not exist.

His idea is that scientists work in communities witha set of beliefs (p. 4) which they had received through

49


their rigorous training which had become embedded intheir minds, thus scientific research involves a “strenu-ous and devoted attempt to force nature into the con-ceptual boxes supplied by professional education” (p.5). He uses the phrase ‘normal science’ as an “activity inwhich most scientists inevitably spend almost all theirtime” (p. 5) and therefore there is this assumption thatthe scientists working in this community know what theworld is like and they will passionately defend thisassumption (p. 5), this is what Kuhn refers to as a para-digm. However, there are issues with the practice of nor-mal science. Occasionally scientists will be faced with ananomalous result or a concept that will “suppress funda-mental novelties” (p. 5), threaten the normal belief—theestablished paradigm. As this may not prove easy tosolve by the ablest mind or by the instrumentation atthat time, they are put aside for a long period. Then apoint comes when enough of these anomalies accumu-late and the scientific community can no longer ignorethese events. When this occurs, the paradigm shifts (p.6) to adopt a new set of beliefs, methods, and assump-tions that are radically different to the old beliefs—“thescientist’s world is qualitatively transformed as well asquantitatively enriched” (p. 7)—and this is what Kuhnmay refer to as the scientific revolution (p. 6).

It is quite possible that Kuhn was suggesting thatthat instead of one particular teachable method, or aregimental set of rules that govern a community of sci-entists, it is this paradigm that guides the scientificthinking (Stinner, 2003). A possible interpretation ofthis then would mean that there is no one scientificmethod, but many depending on the paradigm the sci-entists are working in. Additionally if the paradigmshifts, then so would the methods.

DISCUSSIONThis investigation of the scientific method resulted

in the deviation of the accepted belief that the methodis composed of steps which scientists follow when con-ducting experiments. These steps, as outlined in text-books, make it clear that this is the procedure used byscientists to make discoveries. Perhaps this is a simplifi-cation of what scientists really do, and Conant (1964),Feyerabend (1976), and Kuhn (1970) had a point. Thissimplification is probably necessary to ensure basic sci-entific literacy and these textbooks only give the “fin-ished scientific achievements” for “persuasive and ped-agogic reasons” (Kuhn, 1970, p. 1). Nevertheless, it isprobably the orderliness of the single method, whichhad the human appeal thus allowing the method to sur-vive so long. Order, after all, makes more sense and is

easier to perceive than disorder. However, in viewing these steps differently, it is pos-

sible to see that each individual step that makes up thescientific method has its own staircase, and thusbecomes a method in its own right. For example, whenanalyzing the results obtained, a scientist would follow aprocedure to verify this data, a process of steps.Therefore, this would mean it is possible to regardinductive and deductive reasoning that makes up thescientific method as separate methods within theumbrella of the scientific method, as would the methodof generating a hypothesis, obtaining evidence, and eval-uating an experiment.

If this was the case, then it is reasonable to disagreewith Conant’s (1964) belief that the scientific method doesnot exist. If it is the stepwise nature of the scientificmethod that he is disputing and its use for problem-solv-ing in practical situations, then there is further need fornot accepting his point. Many scientists and non-scientistsregard the scientific method as a problem-solving method(Edmund, 2005). In fact, Huxley (1963) lectured that spe-cial training is not necessary to use the scientific method,because everyone uses the induction and deduction meth-ods that scientists use to build hypotheses and theories allthe time throughout life (pp. 2–3).

Scientific method has survived to the present dayprobably because a great majority of people accept it. Sogetting rid of it as Feyerabend suggests, may be thesame as getting rid of a national treasure. As to his argu-ment in favor of accepting results of investigations thathave not adhered to a scientific method (Feyerabend,1976, p. 20), one can only ask if there is any guaranteethat these results would benefit life on this planet asauthentic scientific results have. In considering this, theidea of the scientific method as a means for obtainingunbiased results becomes more prominent, and worksof Descartes and Francis Bacon become more valuable.

Finally, with respect to Kuhn’s paradigms, theredoes not appear to be a case against the existence of thescientific method or abolishing it. His ideas are moreprofound, and he may well be suggesting explanationsto scientific discoveries highlighting that there is morethan one scientific method.

CONCLUSION Whether there is a single scientific method with

many steps that scientists follow or a paradigm, the con-clusion is that scientific research does follow some sortof a process used by the practitioners of science whendoing science. Moreover, this method, or even methods,is what scientists use to explain to both scientific and

50


non-scientific communities the inferences of research.Ultimately, what really matters is that the data is validand reliable, and that the research conducted honestly,rigorously, and without bias.

ReferencesThompson, A. G. (May, 1984). The relationship of teachers’ con-

ceptions of mathematics and mathematics teaching to instruc-

tional practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15(2), 105-

127.

Conant, J. B. (1964). Science and Common Sense. Yale University

Press

Edmund, N. W (2005), Report on the Relationship of the Scientific

Method to Scientifically Valid Research and Education

Research. Retrieved from website http://www.harriscompa-

nyrec.com/files/normanbooklet.pdf

Feyerabend, P. (1976). Against Method. Thetford, Norfolk: Lowe

and Brydone Printers Ltd.

Gauch, H. G. (2003). Scientific Method in Practice. Cambridge

University Press: Cambridge. UK

Goodstein, D. (2000). How Science works. Retrieved from website

http://www.its.caltech.edu/~dg/HowScien.pdf

Gower, B. (1996). Scientific Method: An Historical and

Philosophical Introduction. Retrieved from

http://books.google.com

Huxley, T. H. (1963). The Method of Scientific Investigation. In S.

Rapport & H. Wright (Ed.), Science: Method and Meaning (p.

2- 10). New York University Press

Kline, M. (1985). Mathematics and the Search for Knowledge.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kuhn, T. (1970). The Structure of the Scientific revolution.

Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Nordgren, T. (1998). The Scientific Methods of Rene Descartes and

Francis Bacon. Retrieved from website http://www.thingsre-

vealed.net/dscrtbacn.htm

Pearson, K. (1949). The Grammar of Science. London: J. M Dent

and Sons Ltd.

Sardar, Z., (1998), Science in Islamic philosophy. Routledge

Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://www.mus-

limphilosophy.com/ip/rep/H016.htm

Schuster, J. A. & Yeo, R. R. (1987). The Politics and Rhetoric of

Scientific Method. Retrieved from website

http://books.google.com

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2009). Paul Feyerabend.

Retrieved from website http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fey-

erabend/#2.13

Stinner, A. (2003). Scientific Method, Imagination, and, the

Teaching of Physics: Retrieved from website

http://www.hsse.uwinnipeg.ca/Publications/Scientific%20

Method.pdf

Wikipedia (2009). History of Scientific Method. Retrieved from

website

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_scientific_method

Wolfs, F. L. H. (2008). Appendix E. Introduction to the Scientific

Method Retrieved from

http://teacher.pas.rochester.edu/phy_labs/AppendixE/Appendi

xE.html

51


ABSTRACTResearch suggests that social capital can provideopportunities, pathways, and social mobility as wellas increase students’ self-efficacy, well-being, andresilience. This paper examines whether continua-tion high schools, an alternative education programin California, provide supports and opportunitiesthat build bonding and bridging social capital for at-risk youth. A review of the growing body of literatureon continuation high schools is provided along withinsights gained from an interview with Dr. RichardAshcroft, a professor from California State UniversitySan Bernardino and the author’s experiences as a con-tinuation high school teacher in San Francisco. Theliterature is examined for evidence of social capital inthe forms of bonding and bridging. Research indi-cates that continuation schools that are viewed as“safety nets” do provide institutional supports thatfoster social capital whereas continuation schoolsthat are viewed as “safety valves” provided few, if any,institutional supports. Recommendations and impli-cations for future practice and research in this fieldare also provided.

The following paper will examine the literature oncontinuation high schools for evidence of supports andopportunities that build bonding and bridging socialcapital for at-risk youth. According to the CaliforniaDepartment of Education (CDOE) website, at-riskyouth can include students who have been expelled,suspended, retained, or who are habitually truant. Theymay also be pregnant and/or parenting youth, recovereddropouts, or wards of the state. Various alternative edu-cation programs exist in the state of California. Theyinclude independent study programs, community dayschools, opportunity schools, county-operated courtand community schools, and California YouthAuthority (CYA) schools. In addition to these alterna-tives, California offers another form of alternative edu-cation called continuation high schools.

Continuation high schools offer credit recoveryprograms for students who are over the age of 16 yearsold and at-risk of not graduating. California had morethan 71,000 students enrolled in 523 continuation highschools during the 2007–2008 school year. The2009–2010 school year marks their 90th anniversary asa form of alternative education in California. In additionto academic courses, these alternative schools accordingto the CDOE (n.d.) provide guidance, career orienta-tion, work-study schedules as well as supplemental pro-grams such as independent study, career counseling, job

placement, apprenticeships, and concurrent enrollmentin community colleges.

RESEARCH ON CONTINUATION HIGH SCHOOLSDespite the prevalence of continuation high schools

throughout the state of California, a minimal amount ofresearch exists that examines exclusively students whoattend these schools. Moreover, most of the peerreviewed studies on continuation high school studentsfound through the electronic databases of the Universityof Massachusetts Lowell’s libraries focus mainly ondrug-related issues (Ames et al., 2007; de Moor et al.,1994; Pokhrel, Sussman, Rohrbach, & Sun, 2007;Skara, Sussman, & Dent, 2001; Sussman & Dent, 1999;Sussman & Dent, 2004; Sussman, Dent, & Stacy, 1996;Sussman, Rohrbach, Skara, & Dent, 2004; Sussman etal., 1997; Sussman, Skara, de Calice, Hoffman, & Dent,2005; Sussman & Stacy, 1994; Sussman et al., 1995).

Nevertheless, there are some researchers who havestudied topics other than drug use among this popula-tion. Loutzenheiser (2002) conducted an interview-based study on nine female continuation high schoolstudents in order to gain insight into why these studentsdisconnected from schooling in regular schools butreconnected within a continuation high school. Kratzertand Kratzert (1991) attempted to identify characteris-tics of continuation high school students. Worrell(1996) examined the influence of protective factors ongraduation rates among continuation students whereasWorrell and Hale (2001) studied whether hope in thefuture and school climate can serve as protective factorsfor continuation students. Two comparative studieshave also been conducted. Both studies investigated thedifferences between regular education, special educa-tion, and continuation high school students; however,one focused on predictors of global self-worth and aca-demic performance (Wiest, Wong, & Kreil, 1998) whilethe other looked at factors related to motivation (Wiest,Wong, Cervantes, Craik, & Kriel, 2001). In addition tothe aforementioned studies, a legislative report (Warren,2007), two issue briefs (Perez & Johnson, 2008; Ruiz deVelasco et al., 2008), and three technical reports(McLaughlin, Atukpawu, & Williamson, 2008; Ruiz deVelasco, 2008; Williamson, 2008) specifically focusedon continuation high schools were released within thelast two years.

At-Risk Youth and Opportunities for Building Social CapitalShanna Rose Thompson

University of Massachusetts Lowell

52


CONTINUATION STUDENTSThese studies offer more detailed descriptions of the

challenges faced by continuation high school studentsthan the abovementioned California Department ofEducation’s definition. Most continuation high schoolstudents are usually behind in credits (Perez &Johnson, 2008; Ruiz de Velasco et al., 2008; Warren,2007). They become behind in credits due to a varietyof reasons such as chronic truancy or absenteeism, lowacademic skills, failing grades, or a lack of academicmotivation. Truant students may miss school becausethey have to work to help support their families. Theymay also have to take care of younger siblings, parents,or their own children. These students may also havemissed school because they are not engaged by thecourses being offered or have experienced some form oftrauma or illness that rendered them incapable ofattending school for a period of time.

Continuation students have been called disengaged(Kelly, 1993), disinterested (Loutzenheiser, 2002), vul-nerable (Ruiz de Velasco, 2008) and at-risk (Worrell &Hale, 2001). They view themselves as different fromother students in the comprehensive high schools(Kratzert & Kratzert, 1991; Loutzenheiser, 2002). Theyare more likely to be students of color, English languagelearners, and students with disabilities as well as adoles-cents who live in foster or group homes and youth whosuffer from mental illnesses or engage in substanceabuse (Ruiz de Velasco, 2008). Some are victims of vio-lence, drug abuse, racism, sexism, and incest(Loutzenheiser, 2002). They are also likely to be frompoor neighborhoods and have less educated parents.Continuation high school students can also have verylow reading skills (Perez & Johnson, 2008). This maybe due to a lack of pre-school opportunities, learningdisabilities, or gaps in learning due to absenteeism.These students may also lack appropriate adult rolemodels and depend upon representatives from institu-tions such as foster care, the juvenile justice system, andchild protective services to serve as their primary care-takers (Perez & Johnson, 2008).

CONTINUATION HIGH SCHOOLS: SAFETY NETSOR SAFETY VALVES?

In addition to aforesaid studies, a seminal work forcontinuation high schools entitled Last Chance High:How Girls and Boys Drop In and Out of Alternative Schoolswas published in 1993 by Deidre Kelly. This bookdetails Kelly’s five-year longitudinal study on two con-tinuation high schools in northern California. This

work also provides a detailed history of continuationschools, a typology of the unspoken goals of schoolsand districts in relation to continuation high schools,the stigmatization that accompanies attending an alter-native program, and explanations for student disen-gagement and reengagement.

In some respects, Kelly’s (1993) work is outdatedbecause the study was conducted prior to the passing ofNo Child Left Behind and the California Public SchoolAccountability Act (PSAA). Also, continuation highschools are now held to the same graduation require-ment as the comprehensive high schools: a passingscore on both sections of the California High SchoolExit Exam (CAHSEE). Nevertheless, current continua-tion high schools as well as other forms of alternativeprograms are still struggling with many of the issuespresented within Kelly’s book (Warren, 2007).

Subsequent researchers in the field of alternativeeducation (Loutzenheiser, 2002; Munoz, 2004/2005;Ruiz de Velasco, 2008; Warren, 2008) seem most influ-enced by Kelly’s (1993) typology of the perceptions ofcontinuation high schools as either safety nets or safetyvalves. Continuation high schools that are viewed assafety nets typically focus on accommodating differ-ences in students’ learning styles, abilities, interests,schedules, and future goals. Safety nets are also per-ceived as alternative educational centers that focus onfixing the school to meet “the intellectual and socialneeds of those that mainstream schools cannot or willnot help, a program that meets with some measure ofsuccess in reengaging students” (Kelly, 1993, p. 68).

Conversely, when continuation high schools areviewed as safety valves they are typically seen as provid-ing “a mechanism to rid mainstream schools of failuresand misfits without holding school administrators fullyaccountable for the consequences, a mechanism thatreinforces students’ disengagement from school” (Kelly,1993, p. 68). Kelly further states that when continua-tion schools are perceived as safety valves, they aretreated as dumping grounds for comprehensive schoolswho want to keep their student populations more“pure” by segregating “problem” students. Also thisview tends to regard continuation high schools as treat-ment centers that need to fix or rehabilitate those thatare pushed out of mainstream schooling. School admin-istrators and counselors that view continuation schoolsas safety valves are more likely to use them as threats orscare tactics in order to keep students in line at the com-prehensive high schools. This view stigmatizes, margin-alizes, and subordinates continuation schools and theirstudents.

53


METHODOLOGYIn order to gather studies for this paper, 13 databas-

es were queried through the University of MassachusettsLowell libraries. The key word continuation high schoolyielded 163 articles. These articles were then narroweddown using the scholarly (peer review) journal filter.This filter resulted in 51 non-repeating titles. Theabstracts for these articles were reviewed. Then, a sec-ond filter was applied to these 51 articles in order toobtain a list of only those titles that were available in fulltext; the final result was 12 non-repeating titles. AnInternet search was also conducted using the searchengine google.com which yielded the six current reportsand Kelly’s (1993) book. Additional database and inter-net searches using the key words alternative programs,alternative schools, and alternative education were con-ducted in hopes of finding additional continuation highschool studies possibly listed under the umbrella ofalternative education. The California Department ofEducation, California Continuation EducationAssociation, and John W. Gardner Center’s websites werealso referenced frequently throughout the researchprocess. The analysis also draws upon the author’s expe-riences as a continuation teacher of Ida B. Wells HighSchool in San Francisco and insights gathered from aninterview with Dr. Richard Ashcroft, a professor fromCalifornia State University San Bernardino, who hasworked extensively in the field of alternative education.

SOCIAL CAPITALAccording Stanton-Salazar (2001), “Social capital is

a set of properties existing within socially patternedassociations among people that, when activated, enablethem to accomplish their goals or to empower them-selves in some meaningful way” (p. 265). He furtherstates that these associations can take place at an indi-vidual level, a group level, or a community level. Forexample, an association at the individual level in a con-tinuation high school could occur between an Englishteacher and a student whereas an association at a grouplevel may happen among the parents of a continuationhigh school. Associations that can take place at thecommunity level in reference to continuation studentscould be among groups such as teachers, social work-ers, probation officers, community leaders, and parents.Stanton-Salazar (2001) further states that social capitalinvolves “reciprocal investments in a relationship or setof relations” (p. 265) that can “lead to trust as well as toenforceable expectations and obligations” (p. 266) andthe generation of resources in the forms of “emotional,social, and institutional” support (p. 266).

Considering Kelly’s (1993) view that continuationhigh school students have been historically and dispro-portionately “excluded from the mainstream schools forviolating white, middle-class norms” (p. 32), any formof social capital that can help this stigmatized and mar-ginalized group of students effectively cope and sociallyadvanced would be most beneficial. Research indicatesseveral ways at-risk youth can benefit from social capi-tal. First, social capital reduces the likelihood that stu-dents will drop out of high school which furtherdecreases the likelihood of students experiencing nega-tive outcomes in the future such as unemployment, lowwages, poor health, and engagement in criminal activi-ties (Croninger & Lee, 2001).

Second, increased levels of social capital were foundto be related to decreased engagement in high-riskbehaviors, such as substance abuse (Curran, 2007).Considering that drug use, especially the use of alcohol,methamphetamine, and marijuana, has been found tobe higher for continuation students (Ruiz de Velasco,2008), increased levels of social capital for these stu-dents may help them overcome their substance abuse.This in turn may help them to graduate on time,because continuation students who experienced conse-quences of drug use and illegal behaviors were foundless likely to graduate (Sussman et al., 2004). Therefore,building social capital may decrease substance abuse forcontinuation students who engage in such high-riskbehaviors, which in turn may decrease the conse-quences associated with such use.

Third, this population of students may also benefitfrom institutional supports that foster social capital iftheir parents are “less involved in their lives and lesssupportive” (Wiest et al., 2001, p. 123) or if the rela-tionships students have with their parents and familymembers are not the kind of relationships that promoteschool success. Luckily, social capital can be builtthrough relationships with people who are not familymembers (Conchas, 2006). Therefore, it is importantfor these students to be able to form bonds with othersources of social capital within schools such as peers,teachers, and school administrators as well as outside ofschool with community leaders, local business owners,and professionals from post-secondary institutions.These bonds can provide opportunities, pathways, andsocial mobility as well as increase students’ self-efficacy,well-being, and resiliency.

The following sections will present and examine theextent to which opportunities for bonding and bridgingsocial capital exist for the continuation high schoolsthat have been studied thus far by researchers in thefield. For the purposes of this paper, bonding social

54


capital will pertain to the relationships between peoplewho are within the continuation high school and bridg-ing social capital will pertain to relationships made withpeople who are outside of the continuation high school.

BONDING SOCIAL CAPITAL“For youth with any kind of risk…the most power-

ful protector is relationships… especially school rela-tionships” (Dr. Ashcroft, personal communication,October 22, 2009). Dr. Ashcroft’s emphasis on theimportance of students feeling connected or bonded toothers through relationships was also found in the liter-ature on continuation high schools. Loutzenheiser(2002) found that the students in her study perceivedtheir school as a family. They also viewed the adults,such as teachers and the principal, as their friends. Inaddition to the adults, students also indicated howaccepting their peers at the continuation high schoolwere of each other. Though the students were differentfrom each other, they seemed to share a commonground which was their lack of success in a comprehen-sive school. These students also stated that they recon-nected to schooling in the continuation high schoolbecause of the caring community and the personal con-nections they developed with their peers and the adults.Loutzenheiser asserts that “this connection … was a keyto the students’ successes at the alternative school” (p.449) and also “the foundation for students to reconnectto their schooling experience” (p. 457).

Perez and Johnson (2008) also found that their inter-viewees perceived their continuation high schools as hav-ing family atmospheres. The interviewees also describedthem as places that were more comfortable, caring, andaccepting. These schools also offered extracurricularopportunities for students to connect with their peers. “Inall, continuation high school students seem to benefitfrom small environments that promote a family-like net-work of acceptance and caring” (Perez & Johnson, 2008,p. 20). Perez and Johnson (2008) conclude that whenstudents perceive adults as caring about them they aremore likely to persevere in school.

Contact with caring adults, according to Werner(1992), can increase hopefulness. Hope in the futurewas found to be an important predictor of graduationfor continuation high school students (Sussman et al.,2004). Also, hope for the future may in fact promoteresilience in students who are in danger of dropping outof school (Worrell & Hale, 2001). Resiliency, in turn,helps adolescents cope with personal difficulties andstress as well as promote positive states of mentalhealth. Young people are more likely to be resilient

when social capital is strong (Pinkerton & Dolan,2007). Therefore, bonding between adults and at-riskstudents within alternative education environments likecontinuation high schools is important for mitigatingthe risk in students’ lives (Dr. Ashcroft, personal com-munication, October 22, 2009).

BRIDGING SOCIAL CAPITALIn addition to providing bonding social capital,

teachers and other adults within alternative settings canalso provide bridging social capital when they act as a“human bridge to gate-keepers, to social networks, andto opportunities for exploring various mainstream insti-tutions—e.g., university campuses” (Stanton-Salazar,2001, p. 268). Putman (2000) suggests that this form ofsocial capital may be the most beneficial form for thosewho have been disadvantaged. Several instances ofbridging social capital were found within the literatureon continuation high schools.

For example, one article describes a nurse from acontinuation high school who advocates for her stu-dents and their families in regard to health care matters.She goes to great lengths to seek out local resources inorder to find free services for her school’s families (Perez& Johnson, 2008). Another study found that in addi-tion to advocating for resources for their students, someadults in continuation high schools were actively tryingto foster change in how these students are perceived byothers in the community (McLaughlin et al., 2008).These continuation schools had individuals who devot-ed “hours of personal time to building political andsocial capital for their programs” (p. 21).

The literature also suggests that continuation highschools can provide bridging social capital for their stu-dents by building pathways to post-secondary institu-tions like community colleges (McLaughlin et al., 2008;Perez & Johnson, 2008; Ruiz de Velasco, 2008; Warren,2007). These schools have college representatives cometo the schools to provide information sessions on finan-cial aid opportunities, admission procedures, and sup-port services. They may also take students to visit localcolleges and provide assistance with admission proce-dures such as completing applications and financial aidpaperwork. McLaughlin et al. (2008) found a continua-tion high school that had a designated contact at thelocal community college who their students reported tofor assistance in order to prevent these students fromfeeling overwhelmed by the cumbersome aspects of col-lege. Other schools have continuation alumni currentlyenrolled in community, vocational, or college coursescome back to the former schools to provide informa-

55


tional sessions to current students about their post-sec-ondary experiences. Most importantly, some of the con-tinuation high schools described in the literature alsoprovided opportunities for concurrent enrollment at thecommunity college.

Attending adult education offered by communitycolleges was found by Werner (1992) in her longitudinalstudy on the children of Kauai to be one of the strongestagents of change for the at-risk youth in her study. Thiskind of program opened up opportunities for these high-risk youth to change their status from poverty stricken toworking or middle class. Therefore, it is important thatat-risk youth like continuation high school students areencouraged to attend post-secondary educational institu-tions like community or junior colleges.

Continuation high schools may also provide bridg-ing social capital by focusing on building career path-ways for their students (McLaughlin et al., 2008). Theymay offer programs that have professionals from variousoccupations within the community come to discusswith students potential career options, preparation ortraining needed, and local career opportunities(McLaughlin et al., 2008). They may also create part-nerships with Regional Occupational Centers andPrograms (ROCP) in addition to local employers inorder to build pathways to jobs or internships (Ruiz deVelasco, 2008; Warren, 2007). ROCPs provide studentswith practical, hands-on career preparation and guid-ance. Many of these programs provide communitybased internships that can help students earn schoolcredits while gaining valuable work experience. Theseprograms also offer students support with completingjob applications, creating resumes, and preparing forjob interviews (CDOE, n.d.). Putnam (2000) states thatties at the acquaintance level have a greater chance ofproducing job opportunities than stronger relationalties. Therefore, it is important that continuation highschools provide their students with opportunities todevelop acquaintances with business owners, entrepre-neurs, and professionals.

Bridging social capital may also develop when con-tinuation high schools focus on building partnershipswith community organizations in order to provideopportunities and services to their students. Kelly(1993) found that one of the schools she studied hadpartnerships with the Rotary Club and the EmployersCouncil. The former organization provided academicand vocational scholarships for students while the latterprovided job opportunities to students in the workexperience program. Some continuation schools createpartnerships with local agencies to provide community

service opportunities for their students (McLaughlin etal., 2008; Ruiz de Velasco, 2008). Participation insocially desirable tasks that involve helpfulness such ascommunity service was found by Werner (1992) in herlongitudinal study to be a key factor in whether thehigh-risk adolescents in her study developed intoresilient adults. Therefore, this form of bridging socialcapital may also foster resiliency in the at-risk youth ofcontinuation high schools.

In addition to the abovementioned forms of bridg-ing, some continuation high schools also partner withcommunity agencies to provide mental health, drug, andalcohol treatment services (McLaughlin et al., 2008;Perez & Johnson, 2008; Ruiz de Velasco, 2008). Someschools also partner with outside agencies to provideservice learning opportunities for students. Servicelearning projects can help students build connectionswith members of their community in addition to gainingvaluable and practical knowledge (Ruiz de Velasco,2008). Ida B. Wells High School in San Francisco haspartnered with a nonprofit community organizationcalled Urban Sprouts to create an urban garden on theschool’s grounds (Laurence, 2009). Through this servicelearning project students are learning valuable agricul-tural, biological, botanical, and nutritional skills. Thesetypes of projects can build connections with members ofthe community that can open up opportunities for thesestudents. Werner (1992) also found that “opening up ofopportunities led to major turning points in the lives ofhigh-risk individuals” (p. 4). Therefore, continuationhigh schools should partner with community agenciesthat can provide their students with services and oppor-tunities that aid them in turning their lives around.

THE VARIABILITY OF CONTINUATION HIGHSCHOOLS

Despite the evidence presented, not all of the contin-uation high schools studied by researchers in the fieldprovided institutional forms of bonding and bridgingsocial capital. Also, the amount, type, and quality ofinstitutional supports varied widely across the researchedcontinuation schools (McLaughlin et al., 2008; Ruiz deVelasco, 2008). Research by Ruiz de Velasco (2008) sug-gests that the beliefs or philosophies held by the district,administration, and staff of continuation high schoolscan influence the amount of institutional supports avail-able for building social capital. He also found that thecontinuation high schools in his study whose focus wason fixing or adopting the school to meet students’ needs,described by Kelly (1993) as safety nets, provided moreof the aforesaid forms of social capital. On the other

56


hand, the continuation high schools in Ruiz de Velasco’s(2008) study whose focus was on fixing or changing stu-dents, typified by Kelly (1993) as safety valves or dump-ing grounds, provided few, if any, institutional supportsthat fostered social capital for their students. The path-ways present in safety valve schools were “often limitedto GED, independent study, adult education, military, orentry level work as opposed to post-secondary academicinstruction” (Ruiz de Velasco, 2008, p. 12). The path-ways present in dumping ground schools “often serve asexit ramps to nowhere” (p. 14). The outcomes for thesetypes of continuation schools did not compare favorablyto those schools characterized as safety nets or modelcontinuation high schools. These findings were also sup-ported by the research of Warren (2007) and McLaughlinet al. (2008).

Besides the considerable variation in resources andopportunities for alternative education programs,McLaughlin et al. (2008) also found that those pro-grams which provided students with positive outcomesand futures “had little to do with current policy arrange-ments and everything to do with personal initiative,relationships, networks, and drive to provide the bestprogram possible for alternative education students” (p.22) and that “Schools lacking these partnerships andconnections were, by comparison, at a significant disad-vantage in their efforts to meet students’ needs” (p. 21).These researchers also found that the district’s size,awareness, and commitment to such programs can befactors that affect the quality of alternative programs.

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONSThe literature suggests that teachers in alternative

environments could benefit from specialized trainingthat focuses on how to provide at-risk students oppor-tunities for building social capital in the forms of bond-ing and bridging. Presently, a lack of teaching certifica-tions or training programs for educators who teach inalternative settings exists (Dr. Ashcroft, personal com-munication, October 22, 2009; Ruiz de Velasco, 2008).Therefore, training programs specific to teachers inalternative settings should be created. These programsshould focus on teaching educators and adults workingwith at-risk youth methods and strategies for how toestablish relationships with at-risk students thatincrease social bonding. Dr. Ashcroft spoke to “theimportance of teachers in continuation high schoolsbeing trained to wait for the cognitive dissonance to set-tle within newly arrived students before approachingthem” (personal communication, October 22, 2009).He also said these teachers could benefit from training

that develops their ability to gauge whether bondingwith the new environment has occurred through indica-tors such as changes in grooming or affect.

Besides training focused on bonding, continuationteachers could also benefit from training that focuses onmethods of building social networks and garneringresources that foster bridging social capital for their stu-dents. This type of training is important because contin-uation students’ opportunities for bridging can be lim-ited or bolstered by the public relations skills or socialnetworks of their teachers, administrators, and otheradults of their school community (McLaughlin et al.,2008). Therefore, training that helps educators recog-nize their own “resources of capital” and how to sharethese resources with their students could prove to bebeneficial (Trainor, 2008, p. 159). Above all else, teach-ers should be trained on how to take care of themselvesemotionally, psychologically, and physically so that theywill be able to provide the support their students needwithout experiencing burn-out from working with thisemotionally intense population.

In addition to training and professional developmentthat caters to teachers in alternative settings, specializedtraining for principals of alternative schools is also need-ed. This training should focus on improving continua-tion principals’ knowledge of how the financial systemsthat affect their funding work. They should also learnhow to determine if they are eligible for supplementalfunding as well as how to apply for such funds (Ruiz deVelasco, 2008). Without such knowledge, continuationhigh schools are at a significant disadvantage for provid-ing institutional supports that foster social capital.Principal training, like teacher training, should also focuson developing administrators’ abilities to build socialnetworks that provide resources for their schools.

In addition to developing administrators’ and edu-cators’ abilities to provide opportunities that increasesocial capital for their students, the social capital of con-tinuation parents and guardians should also be devel-oped. One way continuation high schools and commu-nity organizations can do this is by providing opportu-nities for parents to network with one another (Curran,2007). They could also build parents’ social capital byproviding financial seminars, workshops on parentingskills, classes focused on literacy development, or infor-mational sessions on how to garner resources for theirfamilies. It should be noted that the literature on con-tinuation high schools provided little evidence of socialcapital building for the parents and guardians of theyouth who attend these alternative schools. Therefore,future research should examine the relationships thatexist between home and school for continuation high

57


school students and the ways in which these schools areinvolving parents and guardians.

Furthermore, schools and districts that serve highrisk youth, like those who attend continuation highschools, need to critically reflect on how they interpretthe purposes of their alternative programs. If it is deter-mined upon reflection that a continuation high school isnot serving its students as a “safety net,” then stepsshould be taken to reform the alternative program.Moreover, schools and districts need to stop blaming stu-dents and their parents and start considering the ways inwhich they can provide an equitable education for at-riskyouth. At-risk students and the resources they need to besuccessful in school should be a district priority. Aboveall else, stronger accountability systems for alternativeschools need to be put in place in order to ensure theeducation continuation students receive is equitable.

This paper’s examination of the studies conductedon continuation high schools and the literature on socialcapital suggests that social capital may indeed provideopportunities, pathways, and social mobility as well asincrease at-risk students’ self-efficacy, well-being, andresilience. However, future empirical research on socialcapital building specifically within continuation highschools needs to be done to confirm the assertions andinferences made within this paper. The results of suchstudies will inform practitioners and administrators inthe field of the best practices for building social capitalfor continuation high school students.

ReferencesAmes, S. L., Grenard, J. L., Thush, C., Sussman, S., Wiers, R. W.,

& Stacy, A. W. (2007). Comparison of indirect assessments of

association as predictors of marijuana use among at-risk ado-

lescents [Abstract]. Experimental and Clinical

Psychopharmacology, 15(2), 204-218.

California Department of Education (n.d.). Continuation education.

Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/index.asp.

Conchas, G. Q. (2006). The color of success: Race and high-achieving

urban youth. New York: Teachers College Press.

Croninger, R. G., & Lee, V. E. (2001). Social capital and dropping

out of high school: Benefits to at-risk students of teachers’ sup-

port and guidance. Teachers College Record, 103(4), 548-581.

Curran, E. M. (2007). The relationship between social capital and

substance use by high school students. Journal of Alcohol and

Drug Education, 51(2), 59-73.

de Moor, C., Johnston, D. A., Werden, D. L., Elder, J. P., Senn, K.,

& Whitehorse, L. (1994). Patterns and correlates of smoking

and smokeless tobacco use among continuation high school

students [Abstract]. Addictive Behaviors, 19(2), 175-184.

Kelly, D. M. (1993). Last chance high: How girls and boys drop in and

out of alternative schools. New Haven, CT: Yale University

Press.

Kratzert, W. F., & Kratzert, M. Y. (1991). Characteristics of contin-

uation high school students. Adolescence, 26(101), 5-18.

Laurence, E. (2009, February 19). An ecologically correct subject

for students. The San Francisco Examiner. Retrieved from

www.sfexaminer.com.

Loutzenheiser, L. W. (2002). Being seen and heard: Listening to

young women in alternative schools. Anthropology and

Education Quarterly, 33(4), 441-464.

McLaughlin, M., Atukpawu, G., & Williamson, D. (2008).

Alternative education options in California: A view from counties

and districts. Retrieved from

http://gardnercenter.stanford.edu/current_initiatives/alt_ed.ht

ml

Muñoz, J. S. (2004/2005). The social construction of alternative

education: Re-examining the margins of public education for

at-risk Chicano/a students. The High School Journal, 88(2), 3-

22.

Perez, P., & Johnson, J. F. (2008). California continuation high

schools: A descriptive study. Retrieved from http://gardner-

center.stanford.edu/current_initiatives/alt_ed.html

Pinkerton, J., & Dolan, P. (2007). Family support, social capital,

resilience, and adolescent coping. Child and Family Social

Work, 12, 219-228.

Pokhrel, P., Sussman, S., Rohrbach, L. A., & Sun, P. (2007).

Prospective associations of social self-control with drug use

among youth from regular and alternative high schools

[Abstract]. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, 2,

22-22.

Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of

American community. New York: Simon & Schuster

Paperbacks.

Ruiz de Velasco, J. (2008). Alternative education in continuation high

schools: Meeting the needs of over-aged under-credited youth.

Paper presented at the AERA Annual Meeting. Retrieved from


ml

58


Ruiz de Velasco, J., Austin, G., Dixon, D., Johnson, J., McLaughlin,

M., & Perez, L. (2008). Alternative education options: A descrip-

tive study of California continuation high schools. Retrieved from


ml

Skara, S. N., Sussman, S., & Dent, C. W. (2001). Predicting regular

cigarette use among continuation high school students

[Abstract]. American Journal of Health Behavior, 25(2), 147-

156.

Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2001). Manufacturing hope and despair: The

school and kin support networks of U.S.-Mexican youth. New

York: Teachers College Press.

Sussman, S., & Dent, C. W. (1999). One-year prospective predic-

tion of marijuana use cessation among youth at continuation

high schools [Abstract]. Addictive Behaviors, 24(3), 411-417.

Sussman, S., & Dent, C. W. (2004). Five-year prospective predic-

tion of marijuana use cessation of youth at continuation high

schools [Abstract]. Addictive Behaviors, 29(6), 1237-1243.

Sussman, S., Dent, C. W., & Stacy, A. W. (1996). The relations of

pro-drug-use myths with self-reported drug use along youth

at continuation high schools [Abstract]. Journal of Applied

Social Psychology, 26(22), 2014-2037.

Sussman, S., Rohrbach, L. A., Skara, S., & Dent, C. W. (2004).

Prospective prediction of alternative high school graduation

status at emerging adulthood. Journal of Applied Social

Psychology, 34(12), 2452-2468.

Sussman, S., Simon, T. R., Dent, C. W., Stacy, A. W., Galaif, E. R.,

Moss, M. A., … Johnson, C. A. (1997). Immediate impact of

thirty-two drug use prevention activities among students at

continuation high schools [Abstract]. Substance use & Misuse,

32(3), 265-281.

Sussman, S., Skara, S., de Calice, P., Hoffman, B., & Dent, C. W.

(2005). Spirituality as a 1-year prospective predictor of vio-

lence perpetration and drug use among youth at continuation

high schools [Abstract]. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,

35(1), 80-99.

Sussman, S., & Stacy, A. W. (1994). Tobacco use observations

[Abstract]. Evaluation Review, 18, 741-755.

Sussman, S., Stacy, A. W., Dent, C. W., Simon, T. R., Galaif, E. R.,

Moss, M. A., … Johnson, C. A. (1995). Continuation high

schools: Youth at risk for drug abuse [Abstract]. Journal of

Drug Education, 25(3), 191-209.

Trainor, A. A. (2008). Using cultural and social capital to improve

postsecondary outcomes and expand transition models for

youth with disabilities, The Journal of Special Education, 42(3),

148-162.

Warren, P. (2007). Improving alternative education in California.

Retrieved from Legislative Analyst’s Office website:

http://www.lao.ca.gov/LAOApp/PubDetails.aspx?id=1547

Werner, E. E. (1992). The children of Kauai: Resiliency and recov-

ery in adolescence and adulthood. Journal of Adolescent Health,

13, 262-268.

Wiest, D. J., Wong, E. H., & Kreil, D. A. (1998). Predictors of

global self-worth and academic performance among regular

education, learning disabled, and continuation high school

students. Adolescence, 33(131), 601-618.

Wiest, D. J., Wong, E. H., Cervantes, J. M., Craik, L., & Kreil, D.

A. (2001). Intrinsic motivation among regular, special, and

alternative education high school students. Adolescence,

36(141), 111-126.

Williamson, D. (2008). Legislative history of alternative education:

The policy context of continuation high schools. Retrieved from


ml

Worrell, F. C. (1996). The risk resiliency paradigm in research on

dropping out. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the

American Psychological Association.

Worrell, F. C., & Hale, R. L. (2001). The relationship of hope in

the future and perceived school climate to school completion.

School Psychology Quarterly, 16(4), 370-388.

59


ABSTRACTThe concept of evolution is a central topic to thestudy of biology and important for the developmentof scientific literacy. Teaching evolution as a conceptis difficult for biology teachers due to various teach-ers’ and students’ perceptions that influence instruc-tion and learning. Research has indicated that reli-gious convictions, academic preparation in evolutionand general biology as well as teachers’ understand-ing of the nature of science all have influenced theperceptions towards evolution held by teachers.Additionally, research on this topic has identifiedinstructional practices for the effective teaching ofevolution. This paper highlights the major factorsinfluencing teachers’ perceptions towards the con-cept of evolution and effective instructional practices.Research questions are developed from review of theliterature for possible future research.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEMScientific literacy encompasses the ability to under-

stand scientific concepts about the natural world, eval-uate issues that affect the everyday lives of people andcritique emerging science and technologies. TheAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science(AAAS, 1990) assessed the need for scientific literacy inthe United States and claimed “most Americans are notscience-literate” (p. xv) and that U.S. students continueto rank below other nations in science.

The United States is often cited as lagging behindthe rest of the world in science education. The resultson many standardized science tests confirm this trend(Chester, 2009, Grigg & Lauko, 2006, Martin et al,2008). Organizations such as the AAAS and theNational Research Council (NRC) have developed con-tent standards for science education as one way toaddress these testing deficiencies . In addition, the useof science content standards by science teachers isintended to help judge the quality of scientific literacyamong students and promote better science education(NRC, 1996).

In the area of biology, one of the content standardsis evolution. According to the NRC (1996), evolution is

a unifying concept within biology that lends itself tounderlying principles found across the field, thus con-necting the many aspects of biology. The content area ofevolution is so important to the study of biology, theofficial position of the National Science TeacherAssociation (NSTA, 2009) claims that the content stan-dard of evolution is a “major unifying concept in sci-ence” that must be taught as part of K–12 science cur-ricula, and if it is not then “students will not achieve thescience literacy they need” (para. 1).

The study of biology, like other sciences, is an inte-gral component for development of a scientifically liter-ate population. Teachers are expected to develop cur-riculum and instruction based upon national and statestandards in the quest to develop good scientific litera-cy in biology among other science disciplines likephysics and chemistry. The NSTA (2009) suggestslearning evolution is important to “unify science disci-plines and provide students with powerful ideas to helpthem understand the natural world” (p. 104).Likewise, the National Academy of Sciences (1998)asserts, “evolution is the central organizing principlethat biologists use to understand the world. To teachbiology without explaining evolution deprives studentsof a powerful concept that brings great order and coher-ence to our understanding of life” (p. 3). Developingscientific literacy will then depend on how teachers per-ceive and teach the concept of evolution, as it brings acentral focus and understanding to all of biology.

The need to develop good scientific literacy is evi-dent in the performance results of the 2009Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System(MCAS) Science and Technology/Engineering exam,where one third was below mastery. Data on the 2009exams indicated 29% performed at the needs improve-ment level with 9% failing. Forty-five percent of stu-dents performed at the proficient level and 16% at theadvanced level (Chester, 2009). Statewide percentageresults for correctly answered questions specific to evo-lution on the Biology exam produced the following: evi-dence of evolution 73%, species classification 56% and

Qualifying Paper*Biology Teachers’ Perceptions Regarding the Teaching of Evolution as a Concept

Richard HowarthWorcester North High School, MA

*Since the qualifying papers are graded, they are published as submitted; revision is not allowed.

60


natural selection 44% (Massachusetts Department ofElementary and Secondary Education, 2009). There is aneed to address the factors, which may have con-tributed to the performance results on this exam, partic-ularly on the concept of evolution as it is consideredfundamental to understanding biology as a whole.

Improvement in science assessment scores andincreased scientific literacy are imperative goals, so it isimportant to investigate some of the underlying issuesrelated to low achievement, instructional practices andteachers’ perceptions about evolution as these are inter-related.

The concept of evolution has been at the center ofdebate, controversy and court cases in the context ofscience curriculum and instruction. The conflictsbetween religious conviction and misconceptions con-cerning the nature of science have greatly affected theeducation system where teachers face many obstacles inteaching the concept of evolution. According to analysisby Donnelly and Boone (2007), there are obstacles biol-ogy teachers may face when teaching the concept ofevolution. Some teachers may not accept or understandthe concept of evolution or feel they are not adequatelyprepared to teach it. It is probable that a lack of under-standing of the nature of science by some teachers isone of the factors. It is also probable that a number ofteachers may face community-based objections, experi-ence stress or avoid teaching evolution because of theirown personal religious convictions.

The teaching of evolution is of central importanceto the understanding of biology and development of sci-entific literacy among students as advocated by the pro-fessional and scholarly organizations in science educa-tion. Accordingly, it is important that biology teachersunderstand and accept the concept of evolution and uti-lize effective instructional practices grounded uponhigh quality content standards to deliver their biologycurriculum. However, based on review of the literature,the central importance of evolution within science edu-cation at the secondary level has not been fully realized.The existence of a gap between what is advocated andwhat has occurred has been a problem of focus for sev-eral studies. The perceptions that some biology teachershave towards evolution as a concept has shown to be amajor factor of the problem, especially when percep-tions are religiously based (Meadows, Doster &Jackson, 2000; Osif, 1997; Trani, 2004; Weld &McNew, 1999; Zimmerman, 1997). The inadequateacademic preparation of some biology teachers in thenature of science as well in evolution and biology havealso influenced perceptions (Nehm and Schonfeld,2007; Rutledge and Mitchell, 2002) though they are not

documented as much as religious influences.Additionally some research has examined use of effec-tive instructional practices (Chuang, 2003; Duveen &Solomon, 1994; Jensen and Finley, 1995; Lawson &Worsnop, 1992) in teaching evolution, which is impor-tant for conveying the concept correctly. Until researchdiscerns a deeper understanding of the factors thatinfluence the inadequate presence of and teaching ofevolution by some biology teachers, the deficienciesamong students in scientific literacy and understandingof evolution will continue.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATUREThe review of the literature will focus on two

strands: biology teachers’ perceptions regarding evolu-tion as a concept and the instructional practices ofteaching evolution effectively. The first part of thereview will focus on the ways in which teachers under-stand, value, use and relate evolution as a concept totheir biology pedagogy. The second part of the reviewwill identify the types of effective instructional practicesused to foster learning of evolution and understandingof the nature of science.

BIOLOGY TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF EVOLUTION AS ACONCEPT

How one perceives the world is dependent uponthe senses, and ultimately the empirical informationgathered is analyzed by the mind. Perception thusdevelops particular beliefs and attitudes about theworld (Siegel, 2005). An individual teacher’s percep-tions about evolution as a concept may develop certainbeliefs and attitudes within the educator. These percep-tions may reveal how the concept is taught and to whatdepth. Additionally, these perceptions may exist as aresult of religious beliefs, acceptance, preparation, edu-cational background, degree of content difficulty,amount of teaching experience, materials available,stress and self-efficacy of biology teachers.

Since the days of Charles Darwin, religious beliefshave influenced the general public in their perceptionsabout the concept of evolution. Not surprisingly reli-gion has also influenced the way science teachers per-ceive the concept they are responsible for teaching. Anunderstanding of the nature of science and an under-standing of the theory of evolution by teachers has alsoplayed a significant role.

Religion and the concept of evolution. Meadows,Doster, and Jackson (2000) examined unresolved con-flicts between the personal religious and philosophicalbackgrounds of biology teachers and the concept of

61


evolution and determined that these conflicts could beresolved. A total of 17 people were interviewed whoself-identified as orthodox or fundamentalist Christian.This group of participants consisted of two universityscience professors, a professor and two graduate stu-dents in science education, four high school biologyteachers and eight prospective middle and secondaryscience teachers. All eleven female participants and allsix males were white. The interviews focused on threeprimary questions: What do you believe about evolu-tion, or the history of the Earth and of life? How areyour beliefs about evolution related to your religiousbeliefs? Given your career interest in science, do youfeel a conflict between your professional and personalbeliefs and values, and if so, how do you resolve thatconflict? Analysis of the transcripts allowed four majorcategories to emerge concerning the beliefs and con-flicts of the participants.

The researchers indicated the participants used fourapproaches to their beliefs and conflict: i) being unawareof conflict, ii) avoiding conflict, iii) being disturbed bythe conflict, and iv) managing the conflict. Followinganalysis of the results, the researchers concluded man-agement of conflict to be the most effective strategy.Conflict management was effective as it allowed person-al religious beliefs to remain intact while the concept ofevolution was engaged openly and accurately.

Though this study focused on a small number of par-ticipants with various experiences in science education,Meadows, Doster, and Jackson (2000) suggested thatunderstanding how teachers can learn to manage theirown personal conflicts between religious beliefs and theconcept of evolution may develop into further under-standing of how teachers can implement effective strate-gies in dealing with the conflicts held by their students.

Osif (1997) investigated the evolution and religiousbeliefs of Pennsylvania high school teachers. Theresearch study questioned whether science teacherswere different in their views on creationism and evolu-tion as compared to the population they teach; toEnglish teachers as peers; and to the communities inwhich they teach. The focus of the study examined reli-gious beliefs and affiliations, opinions on creationismand evolution and the influence of religious beliefsupon the subject matter they taught.

The methodology consisted of an 84-question sur-vey administered to 132 science and English teachers,chosen from a random sample of school districts. Thefive-point Likert Scale survey consisted of questionsrelated to teacher’s personal opinions concerning reli-gious beliefs and educational issues. Twenty-four ofthese questions stemmed from the Christian Orthodoxy

Scale and fourteen were based on statement of beliefheld by the National Association of Evangelicals.Demographic information was obtained on teachers’religious affiliation, academic degrees earned, years ofteaching experience and amount of participation in reli-gion. Data collected by Osif were compared to similarstudies conducted previously in three other states,Georgia, Ohio and South Dakota.

Osif found teachers in the study not only had high-er religious affiliations compared to the state ofPennsylvania, but also had significantly higher affilia-tion with evangelical denominations. Osif concludedonly six teachers in the study indicated conflict betweenpersonal beliefs and teaching evolution within the biol-ogy curriculum. Other results of the study indicated68% of science teachers as well as 68% of the Englishteachers in the study agreed that the theory of evolutionis central to the study of biology, while the remainingpercentages did not agree. For the opinion that creationscience should be taught in the public school, 48% ofscience teachers disagreed while 40% agreed comparedto English teachers with 38% in agreement and 38% indisagreement. Remaining percentages were of no opin-ion. For the opinion concerning the teaching of creationscience in science class, 33% of English teachers dis-agreed and 38% agreed, while 56% of science teachersdisagreed and 37% agreed in the study. Again, remain-ing percentages were of no opinion.

The study itself was limited in the number of par-ticipants but did offer a picture of the how biologyteachers who participated in the study compare toEnglish teachers in their perceptions of evolution.Research on personal religious conviction and percep-tion was limited by inclusion of Christian only partici-pants. As extension of this study, Osif suggested toexamine the understanding of the nature of science byteachers as it relates to their ability to make judgmentson scientific validity.

A study by Trani (2004) set out to answer two ques-tions. The first asked if there are significant correlationsbetween teachers who claim that they reject evolutionbased upon their religious beliefs and the same teachers’understanding of the nature of science and their under-standing of the theory of evolution. The second set outto determine if teachers with a strong understanding ofthe theory of evolution and the nature of science acceptevolution—even if they hold strong religious beliefs.Trani claimed teachers’ strong religious convictions aredirectly correlated to their lack of understanding of thenature of science and the theory of evolution.

Three versions of a 90-question survey were admin-istered to 80 Oregon high school biology teachers from

62


three different levels of years of experience: most, aver-age and least. The four-section survey used Likert scalingand multiple choice questions for the first three parts toassess biology teachers’ acceptance of evolution, under-standing of evolution, and understanding of the nature ofscience. The fourth part quantified the religious convic-tions of teachers using a Likert scale and 15 questions.

Trani concluded Oregon biology teachers in thestudy have a high level acceptance of and a high level ofunderstanding of the theory of evolution. Results indi-cated a moderate to high-level understanding of thenature of science. Religious convictions were describedas moderate without being religiously dogmatic or dog-matically atheistic. The concept of evolution was alsofound by Trani to be a central part of the biology cours-es taught.

Correlation of religious convictions to the under-standing of the nature of science and the theory of evo-lution by Trani showed that teachers with strong reli-gious convictions accept the theory of evolution lessoften that teachers with less religious convictions.Those who do not accept the theory of evolution werefound not to present the concept in their classes.However, teachers who lacked an understanding of thetheory of evolution and the nature of science, were lesslikely to include the concepts in class. Additionally,those with strong religious convictions compared tothose with less religious convictions were less likely toinclude the theory of evolution in their classes.

Though the study was limited in focus onChristianity based religious convictions, Trani does pro-vide insight in the role these convictions play in pre-senting the theory of evolution and the nature of sciencewithin biology classes. The implications pave the wayfor future study to assess if developing an understand-ing of the nature of science may change the way reli-giously convicted teachers view the theory of evolution.

A study by Zimmerman (1987) compared the opin-ions of Ohio biology teachers concerning the teachingof evolution and creationism with general public opin-ion. The goal was to determine whether biology teach-ers supported teaching evolution, creationism or bothin addition to determining their opinions of the scien-tific foundation of each concept.

Methodology for this study included a 19-itemquestionnaire administered to 404 biology teachersfrom public, private and religious schools. This ques-tionnaire included thirteen yes or no questions andthree multiple-choice questions concerning personalopinions of evolution, creationism, scientific foundationand religion. Remaining questions collected demo-graphic information including grade level and type of

school taught by the participant. Data collected werecompared to data gathered from similar questionnairesdistributed to college students and previously polled innewspapers and popular magazines.

Through analysis of the survey, it was found that87% of biology classes offered have some evolutionarycomponent. Seventy-eight percent of the teachers in thestudy reported satisfaction with the amount of evolutioncoverage in their textbooks. Zimmerman concluded that10% of teachers reported pressure not to teach evolutionand 51% of teachers agreed that inclusion of creationismin the classroom meant an inclusion of religion. About78% of the teachers in the study accepted the moderntheory of evolution yet Zimmerman concluded teachersare not particularly sophisticated in their understandingof evolutionary theory. Roughly 77% of teachers report-ed evolutionary theory has a valid scientific foundation,while 17% concurred for creationism. The study found38% of teachers supported the inclusion of creationismin public schools and 59% of teachers objected to theintroduction of religion into public schools. Zimmermanconcluded that teachers favoring religion and prayer inthe public schools are more likely to teach creationismin their biology courses. Furthermore, Zimmerman indi-cated high school biology teachers are far more likely tosupport the teaching of evolution, and far less likely tosupport the teaching of creationism as compared to thepublic at large.

Though this study was limited by a 29% returnresponse for participation, the results do offer valuableinsight into the opinions of biology teachers concerningevolution and creationism. As an extension of this study,Zimmerman suggested more detailed research coulddevelop from the parameters established by this study.

Academic preparation. Griffith and Brem (2004)conducted research to understand the conflicts or stres-sors teachers face when teaching evolution. Theresearch identified personal, internal, and externalstressors in addition to coping mechanisms for thestressors. By understanding identified stressors theresearchers hoped to develop intervention and supportstrategies to alleviate stress when teaching evolutionand other difficult topics.

To identify the stressors teachers experience whenteaching evolution, fifteen secondary teachers from sixPhoenix, Arizona area schools participated in focusgroups and completed questionnaires. One questionnairecollected data on demographics and teaching back-ground, possible sources of stress in teaching evolution,and included a visualization activity that compared teach-ing a unit on evolution to one on circulation. Participantsalso completed a questionnaire known as the State-Trait

63


Anxiety Inventory, which is designed to determine anxi-ety levels in adults. This was intended to help assess theanxiety levels in the two teaching-units. The focus groupallowed for the participants to share experiences anddescribe supports they believe would help them feel moreat ease teaching evolution. The researchers interviewedthree professors of biology and science education to adda teacher-education perspective. As these participantswere separate from the teachers in the focus groups, theinterviews conducted were used as supplementary datafor the teacher’s perspectives.

Utilizing a qualitative approach, Griffith and Bremcategorized teachers in the study into three groups. Thescientist group was found to have strong convictions andunderstanding of science and taught evolution verycomfortably. Selective teachers were found to avoid con-nections between science and life by restricting contentduring the evolution unit as to avoid conflict from stu-dents or community. These teachers also were found tohave religious identities that created personal conflict inteaching. Lastly, the group identified as conflicted, con-sisted of a set of teachers similar to selective teachers yetthey explored their own personal conflicts about evolu-tion and desired more education on the topic.

With a participant group of only 15 this study waslimited in the amount of data collected. Additionally,the separate interviews used to supplement teacher per-spectives should been expanded and included as part ofthe main study. The researchers suggested further studyinto personal efficacy for teachers who experiencedconflict in teaching evolution. Griffith and Brem alsosuggested to examine other areas of controversial teach-ing topics (sex education, dissection, formation of theuniverse) to determine their controversial roots andteacher reactions to them.

Nehm and Schonfeld (2007) investigated the role ofincreased knowledge of evolution and the nature of sci-ence had on the preference for the teaching of evolu-tion. The study set out to determine if teachers changedtheir preferences for teaching evolution with anincreased knowledge after the completion of a graduatelevel course in evolution.

The methodology included 44 pre-certified practic-ing secondary biology teachers at a New York City col-lege who voluntarily took the evolution interventioncourse. The participants represented a range of ethnici-ties with a mean age of 27 years and an average of lessthan two years teaching experience.

Prior to the start of the intervention course, the par-ticipants completed a questionnaire that obtaineddemographic information, certification goal, the extentof their personal conflicts between religion and evolu-

tion, number of biology courses completed, prior com-pletion of courses in evolution and thoughts on thebelief and inclusion of creationism in science curricu-lum. A Likert-type instrument was used to assessteacher knowledge and attitudes about evolution andthe nature of science in addition to essay questions.Nehm and Schonfeld extracted and coded eleven vari-ables from the analysis instrument: conflict, religiosity,biosemesters (biology course work experience), evo-course (evolution coursework experience), key con-cepts of natural selection, concepts of natural selection,misconceptions about natural selection, evolutionarynature of science, evolution content knowledge, teach-ing preferences for evolution or creationism and finallybelieve which asked what the participants think theirstudents believe in.

Nehm and Schonfeld concluded that misconcep-tions about evolution and natural selection decreasedfollowing the course for twenty-five of the teachers butthese misconceptions remained for nineteen of them.Less than 25% of the teachers included key concepts ofnatural selection in their questionnaire responses beforeand after the course. Changes in teacher knowledge ofevolution increased for 75% of the participants follow-ing the course while 83% increased their knowledge ofthe nature of science. Half of the participants showedno change in preference for teaching creationism.Biology teacher belief preferences indicated 57% of theparticipants preferred that students believe and/oraccept creationism, with 9% indicating a preference forcreationism only. Of the teachers studied, 43% thoughtstudents should believe in evolution exclusively and48% thought students should believe in both.Following the course, ten teachers did change theirposition and indicated more emphasis on belief in evo-lution. For teachers who preferred to teach evolutiononly, it was found that they differed significantly morein prior nature of science and evolution content knowl-edge than those who professed to teach both evolutionand creationism. Nehm and Schonfeld found significantassociation between pre-course misconceptions andreligiosity while the course provided a reduction in evo-lution and religious conflict for the participants. Finallythe researches determined that prior coursework andnumber of courses in biology did not appear to be asso-ciated with the participant’s knowledge of evolution,natural selection, or the nature of science.

Limitations of this study included a small numberof participants and the use of pre-certified teachers wholacked significant experience in teaching biology. Nehmand Schonfeld also noted that the study did not indicateif knowledge of evolution could have a threshold effect

64


on preferences for teaching evolution, meaning that thecourse offered was limited in its ability to offer enoughcontent to influence change in preference for teachingevolution by the participants. Future study as recom-mended by the researchers may examine the effects ofoverall knowledge level on preference position in addi-tion to beliefs of evolution.

Weld and McNew (1999) investigated attitudestoward evolution among high school life-science teach-ers in Oklahoma. The purpose of the study was todetermine how much of an emphasis there is on evolu-tion, creationism or both in biology classes. Methods forthe study consisted of a questionnaire administered to224 randomly selected life science teachers from acrossthe state of Oklahoma. The questionnaire consisted ofstrength of opinion items, which measured teachers’emphasis on evolution or creationism in their course.Additionally, an open-ended question for elaboration ofpersonal philosophies was included. Demographicinformation was obtained on the teachers’ years ofexperience, gender, school size, college of preparationand academic preparation. Weld and McNew alsoobtained information on teachers’ professional associa-tion memberships, sources of perceived resistance toteaching evolution, familiarity with evolution and cre-ationism institutes, preparedness to teach evolution anduse of standards.

Results indicated that 91% of teachers in this studyhave studied the nature or philosophy of science. Two-thirds of teachers in the study placed moderate orstrong emphasis on evolution theory. On the contrary,one-third placed little, no or counter emphasis on evo-lutionary theory in their biology classes and one-fourthof teachers placed moderate or strong emphasis on cre-ationism. Results showed 74% of teachers reported feel-ing well prepared to teach evolution and 66% agreedthat teaching biology requires discussion and lab expe-riences on evolution. Fifty-seven percent of teachersperceive evolution as a unifying theme in biology and58% do not fear raising controversy by teaching evolu-tion. The results by Weld and McNew also indicatedthat 48% of teachers agree or strongly agree that there ismuch evidence for creationism.

The study was limited by in the number of partici-pants but does offer insight into factors that influenceteacher attitudes towards evolution. For further study,Weld and McNew suggested further analysis of theinfluence of peer associations and standards-basedpractice upon personal philosophies towards the theoryof evolution.

A study by Trani (2004) set out to answer two ques-tions. The first asked if there are significant correlations

between teachers who claim that they reject evolutionbased upon their religious beliefs and the same teachers’understanding of the nature of science and their under-standing of the theory of evolution. The second set outto determine if teachers with a strong understanding ofthe theory of evolution and the nature of science acceptevolution- even if they hold strong religious beliefs.Trani claimed teachers’ strong religious convictions aredirectly correlated to their lack of understanding of thenature of science and the theory of evolution.

Three versions of a 90-question survey were admin-istered to 80 Oregon high school biology teachers fromthree different levels of years of experience: most, aver-age and least. The four-section survey used Likert scalingand multiple choice questions for the first three parts toassess biology teachers’ acceptance of evolution, under-standing of evolution, and understanding of the nature ofscience. The fourth part quantified the religious convic-tions of teachers using a Likert scale and 15 questions.

Trani concluded Oregon biology teachers in thestudy have a high level acceptance of and a high level ofunderstanding of the theory of evolution. Results indi-cated a moderate to high-level understanding of thenature of science. Religious convictions were describedas moderate without being religiously dogmatic or dog-matically atheistic. The concept of evolution was alsofound by Trani to be a central part of the biology cours-es taught.

Correlation of religious convictions to the under-standing of the nature of science and the theory of evo-lution by Trani showed that teachers with strong reli-gious convictions accept the theory of evolution lessoften that teachers with less religious convictions.Those who do not accept the theory of evolution werefound not to present the concept in their classes.However, teachers who lacked an understanding of thetheory of evolution and the nature of science, were lesslikely to include the concepts in class. Additionally,those with strong religious convictions compared tothose with less religious convictions were less likely toinclude the theory of evolution in their classes.

Though the study was limited in focus onChristianity based religious convictions, Trani does pro-vide insight in the role these convictions play in pre-senting the theory of evolution and the nature of sciencewithin biology classes. The implications pave the wayfor future study to assess if developing an understand-ing of the nature of science may change the way reli-giously convicted teachers view the theory of evolution.

Griffith and Brem (2004) conducted research tounderstand the conflicts or stressors teachers face whenteaching evolution. The research identified personal,

65


internal, and external stressors in addition to copingmechanisms for the stressors. By understanding identi-fied stressors the researchers hoped to develop interven-tion and support strategies to alleviate stress whenteaching evolution and other difficult topics.

To identify the stressors teachers experience whenteaching evolution, fifteen secondary teachers from sixPhoenix, Arizona area schools participated in focusgroups and completed questionnaires. One question-naire collected data on demographics and teachingbackground, possible sources of stress in teaching evo-lution, and included a visualization activity that com-pared teaching a unit on evolution to one on circula-tion. Participants also completed a questionnaireknown as the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, which isdesigned to determine anxiety levels in adults. This wasintended to help assess the anxiety levels in the twoteaching-units. The focus group allowed for the partici-pants to share experiences and describe supports theybelieve would help them feel more at ease teaching evo-lution. The researchers interviewed three professors ofbiology and science education to add a teacher-educa-tion perspective. As these participants were separatefrom the teachers in the focus groups, the interviewsconducted were used as supplementary data for theteacher’s perspectives.

Utilizing a qualitative approach, Griffith and Bremcategorized teachers in the study into three groups. Thescientist group was found to have strong convictions andunderstanding of science and taught evolution verycomfortably. Selective teachers were found to avoid con-nections between science and life by restricting contentduring the evolution unit as to avoid conflict from stu-dents or community. These teachers also were found tohave religious identities that created personal conflict inteaching. Lastly, the group identified as conflicted, con-sisted of a set of teachers similar to selective teachers yetthey explored their own personal conflicts about evolu-tion and desired more education on the topic.

With a participant group of only 15 this study waslimited in the amount of data collected. Additionally,the separate interviews used to supplement teacher per-spectives should been expanded and included as part ofthe main study. The researchers suggested further studyinto personal efficacy for teachers who experiencedconflict in teaching evolution. Griffith and Brem alsosuggested to examine other areas of controversial teach-ing topics (sex education, dissection, formation of theuniverse) to determine their controversial roots andteacher reactions to them.

Nehm and Schonfeld (2007) investigated the role ofincreased knowledge of evolution and the nature of sci-

ence had on the preference for the teaching of evolu-tion. The study set out to determine if teachers changedtheir preferences for teaching evolution with anincreased knowledge after the completion of a graduatelevel course in evolution.

The methodology included 44 pre-certified practic-ing secondary biology teachers at a New York City col-lege who voluntarily took the evolution interventioncourse. The participants represented a range of ethnici-ties with a mean age of 27 years and an average of lessthan two years teaching experience.

Prior to the start of the intervention course, the par-ticipants completed a questionnaire that obtaineddemographic information, certification goal, the extentof their personal conflicts between religion and evolu-tion, number of biology courses completed, prior com-pletion of courses in evolution and thoughts on thebelief and inclusion of creationism in science curricu-lum. A Likert-type instrument was used to assessteacher knowledge and attitudes about evolution andthe nature of science in addition to essay questions.Nehm and Schonfeld extracted and coded eleven vari-ables from the analysis instrument: conflict, religiosity,biosemesters (biology course work experience), evo-course (evolution coursework experience), key con-cepts of natural selection, concepts of natural selection,misconceptions about natural selection, evolutionarynature of science, evolution content knowledge, teach-ing preferences for evolution or creationism and finallybelieve which asked what the participants think theirstudents believe in.

Nehm and Schonfeld concluded that misconcep-tions about evolution and natural selection decreasedfollowing the course for twenty-five of the teachers butthese misconceptions remained for nineteen of them.Less than 25% of the teachers included key concepts ofnatural selection in their questionnaire responses beforeand after the course. Changes in teacher knowledge ofevolution increased for 75% of the participants follow-ing the course while 83% increased their knowledge ofthe nature of science. Half of the participants showedno change in preference for teaching creationism.Biology teacher belief preferences indicated 57% of theparticipants preferred that students believe and/oraccept creationism, with 9% indicating a preference forcreationism only. Of the teachers studied, 43% thoughtstudents should believe in evolution exclusively and48% thought students should believe in both.Following the course, ten teachers did change theirposition and indicated more emphasis on belief in evo-lution. For teachers who preferred to teach evolutiononly, it was found that they differed significantly more

66


in prior nature of science and evolution content knowl-edge than those who professed to teach both evolutionand creationism. Nehm and Schonfeld found significantassociation between pre-course misconceptions andreligiosity while the course provided a reduction in evo-lution and religious conflict for the participants. Finallythe researches determined that prior coursework andnumber of courses in biology did not appear to be asso-ciated with the participant’s knowledge of evolution,natural selection, or the nature of science.

Limitations of this study included a small numberof participants and the use of pre-certified teachers wholacked significant experience in teaching biology. Nehmand Schonfeld also noted that the study did not indicateif knowledge of evolution could have a threshold effecton preferences for teaching evolution, meaning that thecourse offered was limited in its ability to offer enoughcontent to influence change in preference for teachingevolution by the participants. Future study as recom-mended by the researchers may examine the effects ofoverall knowledge level on preference position in addi-tion to beliefs of evolution.

Rutledge and Mitchell (2002) researched the rela-tionship among teachers’ conceptions, acceptance andteaching of evolutionary theory. The study utilized 552surveys and 235 concept-mapping activities completedby Indiana public high school biology teachers. Datacollected for the surveys included teachers’ academicbackground (credit hours in biology, coursework in evo-lution, coursework in he nature/philosophy of science),teaching of evolution (number of days, role in the cur-riculum) and their acceptance of evolution. The conceptmapping activity utilized concepts generated by theteachers to demonstrate their knowledge of evolution.

Rutledge and Mitchell concluded that there is a sig-nificant association between teacher acceptance of evolu-tionary theory and academic background in science forthe participants in this study. More science based aca-demic preparation increased acceptance of evolutionarytheory. Of the teachers studied, 33% indicated that lessthan three days were spent teaching evolution and 43%characterized this brief teaching as avoidance. Conceptmaps were analyzed for overall trends and grouped intothree categories based on the ideas of acceptance of evo-lutionary theory: non-acceptance, undecided and accept-ance. Concept maps within the acceptance group con-tained the most detail and depth. Overall, the researchersconcluded the topic of evolution does not receiveenough emphasis in biology classes and academic back-ground, especially in the nature of science, is a key indi-cator of acceptance of evolutionary theory.

Limited by just over 500 surveys and half as many

participants in the concept-mapping portion of thestudy, Rutledge and Mitchell highlighted importantbackground factors that affect the acceptance andemphasis of evolution within Indiana’s biology curricu-lum. The researchers suggested an exploration ofinstructional methods for evolution to help improvebiology teachers with their teaching of evolution.

INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES OF TEACHING EVOLUTION

Science teachers across the U.S. are charged withthe helping students develop strong scientific literacyand proper understanding of science concepts. For biol-ogy teachers, the teaching of evolution is particularlyimportant as the concept of evolution is considered tobe the unifying theory in biology (NRC, 1996; NSTA,2009). Quality instruction should be based upon local,state and national content standards (National Academyof Sciences, 1998). To be successful in teaching the con-cept of evolution a teacher must employ practices thatfoster learning and an understanding of evolutionthrough the elicitation of prior knowledge, identifica-tion of misconceptions, and proper response to studentchallenges. This is important to effectively teach evolu-tion and to allow students to make connections to allaspects of biology without fault. Biology teachers ideal-ly should adopt and share the practices and aspects ofinstruction in evolution that have been successful inorder to improve their teaching. Unfortunately, accord-ing to the National Academy of Sciences (1998) “thereremains a paucity of instructional materials for teachingevolution and the nature of science” (p.62), indicating aneed for further contribution to this area of education.

Effective practices. Chuang (2003) researchedstrategies of biology teachers in response to studentquestioning the validity of learning evolution in addi-tion to their understanding of evolutionary biology.

The study surveyed 78 biology professors fromeight universities throughout the state of Utah.Demographic information was collected for the partici-pant’s gender; state where advanced degree was earned;current university placement; years of teaching experi-ence; whether an evolution course was required in theprogram they taught; and their opinion on the impor-tance of understanding evolution by biology students.Participants also provided a statement of how they han-dled student challenges to the concept of evolution.These results were grouped into five categories. Type 1response indicated religion and evolution are not con-flicted. The nature of evolution as a scientific processsupported by evidence made up type 2. Type 3 stressedthat religion and science are distinctly different and type4 advocated students handle personal conflicts by ful-

67


filling minimal requirements for courses. Completeavoidance of conflict and student concerns weregrouped as type 5.

Of the participants, 49 described the strategies forteaching evolution when confronted by challenges fromstudents. Type 2 strategies were most often used with44% reporting, indicating the emphasis of the nature ofscience and evidence in teaching about evolution.Religion and science are advocated to be distinct as 27%focused on the type 3 approach. Remaining type 1 gar-nered 16%, type 4 had 12% and type 5 less than 2%.

Chuang recognized the limits of the grouped cate-gories as constraining the professors from identifyingstrategies in instruction that incorporate scientific andreligious perspectives on a more equal basis. The studywas also limited by the small number of participantsand within the context of the college level where stu-dents of the participants are most likely science majors.Further research might investigate the strategies in moredetailed analysis and examine secondary school instruc-tor responses.

Duveen and Solomon (1994) reported the use ofrole-playing in the classroom to help students under-stand the concepts and historical nature of the theory ofevolution. By fusing scientific content and historicalcontext of the content with role-playing activities, thestudents, as noted by the researchers, will developempathy with characters and come to understand thecontext of the science through different perspectives ofhistorical characters.

The Great Evolution Trial is the name of the role-playing activity the researchers discuss. The activityinvolves students taking on the roles of various peopleat the time of Charles Darwin, including the famous sci-entist as well. After forming seven groups, each groupresearched a character role including their background,rank, typical behavior and attitude toward Darwin’s the-ory. From the group study of the character, one studentis chosen to take on the role as part of the classroompresentation of the trial, with others filling in as jurymembers and court officials.

Duveen and Solomon report that they haveobserved this activity performed many times and thatthe role-playing offers students the opportunity toactively construct their own knowledge concerningDarwin’s theories. An important note however is thatthe role-playing is only effective with prior knowledgegained from study leading up to this activity. Duveenand Solomon suggested students learn about the natureof science in addition to the scientific content of thesubject matter.

Not only do Duveen and Solomon present a schol-

arly description of this area of instruction, their observa-tions and analysis also offer interesting insights into theimportance of including the nature of science and inter-active learning for science. The authors supported theirclaims, by concluding that the best way to learn aboutscience is to learn how scientists function as people.

Jensen and Finley (1995) investigated the use ofhistorical arguments for conceptual change. Theresearches claimed that if instruction reviewed events inthe development of Darwin’s theory of natural selection,then students would more readily replace their miscon-ceptions with accurate ones.

Participants for this study included 42 studentsenrolled in Principles of Biology, a 10-week courseintended for under prepared college students. Studentsin the study participated in pre and post-tests andreceived treatment in the form of an intervention course.The intervention at the eight-week of class consisted oftwo sessions of lecture and small group activities con-centrated on evolution. These sessions were brokendown into five sections including the general nature ofevolution, Lamarckian principles, evidence opposed toLamarck, Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selec-tion and the last focused on student’s solving problemsfrom Darwin’s and Lamarck’s perspectives. The sessionsincluded historical components that were influential inevolutionary thought and provided students the oppor-tunity to argue perspectives. The pre and post-tests con-sisted of seven Likert-responses and five multiple-choicequestions on evolution and Darwin. There were alsothree short answer questions requiring explanatoryresponses on evolutionary concepts.

Jensen and Finley reported that less than 25% ofthe pretest questions were answered from a Darwinianperspective, which indicated knowledge of Darwin wasvery limited among the participants. The post-testanswers were 45% consistent with Darwinian evolutionand showed an increase of just over seven points fromthe pretest. The researchers reported the increase as sig-nificant, yet remained disappointed in the strength ofthe gain. A categorization of the results into perform-ance groups for pre and post test data also showed someincreases. The four groups that emerged from thepretest included best understanding (BU), functionalmisconception (FM), correct/incomplete (CI) and worstunderstanding (WU). Jensen and Finley determined theBU group increased by 98% for the post-test and 33%of the initial worst responses became best responses.Additionally 65% of functional misconceptionsimproved. Finally the researchers concluded their datasupported the success of this group of students as hav-ing successful conceptual change due to instruction that

68


reviewed events in the development of Darwin’s theoryof natural selection.

This study was limited by the small number of par-ticipants that resulted from a high attrition rate amongthe full course roster of 85 students. Jensen and Finleyalso reported students answered fewer than 50% of thequestions in strictly Darwinian terms and that here werestill concepts difficult for students to understand.Future research as suggested by the researchers includeexpanding the instructional approach of this study toincorporate more time and to gage the time for chang-ing specific conceptions held by the students, especial-ly those more difficult to understand.

Lawson and Worsnop (1992) determined to identifythe factors that influence student ability to learn the con-cept of evolution and the factors that influence student’sability to reject prior nonscientific beliefs. This studyfocused on reflective reasoning skills as the basis to chal-lenge misconceptions and barriers to learning evolution.

A total of 107 students (57 male, 50 female)enrolled in three sections of a non-tracked general biol-ogy course within a suburb of Phoenix, AZ. The com-munity and high school consisted of a low percentage ofminority students and a high degree of activity in reli-gious organizations, particularly of the Catholic andMormon faiths. The course participants took a biologycourse taught by one of the researchers. Participantswere pre and post tested on reflective reasoning skills,strength of religious commitment, prior declarativeknowledge of evolution and prior belief in special cre-ation or evolution using multiple choice and Likert-scale questionnaires. Instructional treatment consistedof a three-week evolution unit taught near the end of ageneral biology course. The unit examined variation,fossil evidence for evolution and natural selection, fol-lowed by time to reflect upon alternative hypotheses.Following instruction, declarative knowledge andchange in belief in evolution were measured.

Lawson and Worsnop concluded that the instruc-tion of the course provided as intervention did notchange belief in special creation, and that reflective rea-soning skills were highly dependent upon prior knowl-edge. Additionally, reflective reasoning was significantlyrelated to pretest scientific beliefs and was shown to bethe best predictor of post-test knowledge and knowl-edge gains. Reflective reasoning, according to Lawsonand Worsnop was indirectly related to post-test scientif-ic beliefs. They also concluded that their hypothesis thathypothetic-deductive reasoning facilitates the rejectionof non-scientific beliefs is supported. The researchesalso concluded that strong religious views contributenegatively to initial acceptance of evolution.

A major limitation of this study is that theresearchers were the instructors for the interventioncourse, which may enter bias into the study. In additionthe participant number was small and represented asmall fraction of the school population in which thestudy was carried out. Lawson and Worsnop suggestedthat biology teachers utilize instructional time to allowstudents to explore alternative concepts through rea-soning much like scientists do. Thus rather than con-vincing students of evolution students should use theskill of reasoning to arrive to understanding of evolu-tion on their own.

Instructional resources. To assist teachers inimplementing best instructional practices for teachingevolution, WGBH/NOVA Science Unit (2001) createdthe Evolution Project. This endeavor consists of severalcomponents: a seven-part, eight-hour television broad-cast series, an extensive Web site, a far-reaching educa-tional outreach initiative, and companion book byacclaimed science writer Carl Zimmer. According toWGBH/NOVA Science Unit, the goals of the project areto “heighten understanding of evolution and how itworks, to dispel common misunderstandings, to illumi-nate why it is relevant to our lives, to improve its teach-ing, to encourage a national dialogue, and to promptparticipation in all aspects of theproject”(WGBH/NOVA Science Unit, 2001, about theproject). Grounded in the national science standards,the projects offers case studies of instructional practicesfor teaching evolution concepts.

The case studies, presented in video format, showexperienced biology teachers conducting lessons in evo-lution which not only address content, but the chal-lenges to learning evolution as well. As students cometo the study of science with their own thoughts andalternative frameworks or misconceptions, there mustbe instructional practices implemented that addressthese challenges (Driver, 1983, 1989). Ken Binghamintroduces students to evolution and draws out theirmisconceptions through questioning so he can guidehis instructional focus for teaching the concept of evo-lution. The case study of Bonnie Chen illustrates howshe builds on her students’ prior knowledge of muta-tions so she can lead her class through a simulation ofwading birds feeding. As the most important factorinfluencing learning is prior knowledge (Ausubel,1964), identifying what students already know aboutthe concept of evolution is a vital teaching practice forbiology teachers to implement. Chen much like MarilynHavlik, who teaches her students about the Hardy-Weinberg Principle, used simulations to assist their stu-dents in understanding of evolution concepts. Havlik

69


also shares strategies for dealing with conflict in evolu-tion, including teaching students about the nature ofscience and the importance of evidence for understand-ing science. Bingham advocates for explaining theimportance of evidence as well. Chen suggests opendialogue for students to voice their concerns andthoughts. WGBH/NOVA Science Unit also offers morein depth strategies for dealing with conflict in teachingevolution through Teaching Evolution in 21st CenturyAmerica, a course designed to give teachers the back-ground and skills they need to counter pressures topresent or address religiously based alternatives to thetheory of evolution.

Finally, to assist teachers and education policy mak-ers, the National Academy of Sciences (1998) has pub-lished the book Teaching about Evolution and the Natureof Science, in an effort to “summarizes the overwhelmingobservational evidence for evolution and suggests effec-tive ways of teaching the subject” (viii). The text alsooffers guidance on how to analyze and select teachingmaterials for evolution in addition to promoting thenature of science as a unique human endeavor.

CONCLUSION AND POTENTIAL RESEARCHQUESTIONS

The literature reviewed throughout this paperdescribed some of the perceptions teachers havetowards the concept of evolution and effective instruc-tional practices of teaching evolution. The concept ofevolution is central to understanding all of biology as itis widely considered to be the unifying theory (AAAS,1990; National Academy of Sciences, 1998; NRC, 1996;NSTA, 2009). For Americans to develop a strong scien-tific literacy, it is important that they are taught the con-cept of evolution effectively and scientifically.Unfortunately, the controversial and complex nature ofthe concept of evolution has lent itself to questionableintegrity in the context of secondary biology curricu-lum. Some of this been due to teachers’ perceptions ofthe concept based upon religious convictions or aca-demic preparation

The literature reviewed has shown that a prime fac-tor that has shaped teacher perception of evolution hasbeen religion. Research has shown that when faced withteaching the concept of evolution, some teachers strug-gle due to their own personal religious convictions. Thisstruggle has manifested into a poor explanation of evo-lution by some teachers, minimal coverage of the topic,avoidance of the subject or the addition of creationismas an alternative explanation. In contrast, the literaturehas also shown that some teachers are strict in their sep-

aration of religion from science and present evolutionaccurately and scientifically to their students.

Factors that contribute to teacher perceptions aboutthe concept of evolution outside of religion, focus onteacher understanding of the nature of science and aca-demic preparation for the teaching of evolution. The lit-erature has shown that teachers with more academicbackground in biology, especially with coursework inevolution, tend to be more positive about teaching evolu-tion and concentrate on the scientific nature of evolution.Teachers weak in their initial understanding of evolutionhave shown knowledge growth and perception changefollowing intervention coursework as well. Remediatedteachers are also less likely to include religious influencesand creationism as part of their lessons. Understandingthe nature of science, as shown in the literature was alsoa good indicator of presenting evolution accurately andhaving a positive perception of the concept. Studies thatshed light on the understanding of the nature of scienceas a component to a teacher’s background indicated themore experience or understanding a teacher has with thenature of science the more comfortable he or she is inteaching and presenting the scientific basis of evolution.Additionally, teachers with a strong academic preparationin the nature of science and the concept of evolution,along with longer teaching experience manage conflictwith evolution more effectively.

Considering teachers can manage personal conflictsand develop positive perceptions towards the conceptof evolution, instructional practices need to be effectivefor educating students about evolution. The literaturereviewed showed key areas that need to be addressedwhen teaching evolution. It is suggested that teachersaccess the prior knowledge of students to identify mis-conceptions they may hold. Additionally, a lesson devel-oped around the nature of science, with historical con-texts, included may allow for effective understanding ofthe subject matter. Each of these aspects, interwovenwithin a lesson may assist teachers in dealing with stu-dent conflicts or continued misunderstanding of thetopic.

Research into perceptions held by teachers of evo-lution as a concept and the instructional practices forteaching evolution is warranted, especially with the cur-rent state of scientific literacy in biology. The followingresearch questions are suggested.

1. How does the knowledge of the nature of scienceinfluence understanding of evolution as a con-cept?

2. How do teacher perceptions of evolution affectinstruction in evolution?

70


3. What are the essential features of a biology pro-gram of study that prepares teachers for effectiveteaching of evolution?

4. What are the most effective practices for teachingevolution?

5. Do biology teachers support the concept of evo-lution as the unifying concept in biology?

6. How do biology teachers manage conflictbetween religious conviction and evolution as aconcept?

7. How do biology teachers in Massachusetts differin their perceptions of evolution as compared toteachers in other states?

Research into these questions might provide educa-tors with an understanding of the factors that affect thelearning of evolution, which may affect scientific litera-cy. If teachers understand the basis of their perceptionstowards the concept of evolution and take active stepsto modify the scientific authenticity of their teaching,students will develop literacy in science more effective-ly. Additionally, the need to include the nature of sci-ence within biology courses at the secondary and col-lege level may be beneficial to develop more scientificliteracy among potential biology teachers.

ReferencesAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)

(1990). Science for all

Americans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Ausubel, D. (1964). Some psychological and educational limita-

tions of learning by discovery. In Crosswhite, F., Higgins, J.,

Osborne, A., Shumway, R. (1973). Teaching mathematics: psy-

chological foundations (pp.222-237). Worthington, OH: Charles

A. Jones Publishing Company.

Chester, M. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and

Secondary Education, (2009). Spring 2009 MCAS Tests:

Summary of State Results. Malden, MA: Massachusetts

Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

Chuang, H. (2003). Teaching evolution: attitudes & strategies of

educators in Utah. The American biology Teacher. 65(9), 669

Donnelly, L., & Boone W. (2007). Biology teachers’ attitudes

toward and use of Indiana’s evolution standards. Journal of

Research in Science Teaching, 44(2), 236-257.

Driver, R. (1983). The pupil as scientist? Buckingham, UK: The

Open University Press.

Driver, R. (1989). Students’ conceptions and the learning of sci-

ence. International Journal of Science Education. 11, 481-490.

Duveen, J. & Solomon, J. (1994). The great evolution trial: use of

role-play in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science

Teaching. 31(5) 575-582.

Griffith, J. & Brem, S. (2004). Teaching evolutionary biology: pres-

sures, stress and coping. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,

41(8), 791-809.

Grigg, W., Lauko, M., & Brockway, D. (2006). The nation’s report

card: Science 2005(NCES 2006-466). U.S.Department of

Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Jensen, M. & Finley, F. (1995). Teaching evolution using historical

arguments in a conceptual change strategy. Science Education.

79(2), 147-166.

Lawson, A. & Worsnop, W. (1992) Learning about evolution and

rejecting a belief in special creation: effects of reflective rea-

soning skill, prior knowledge, prior belief and religious com-

mitment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 29(2), 143-

166.

Martin, M., Mullis, I., & Foy, P. (2008). TIMMS 2007 international

science report. Boston, MA: Boston College.

Massachusetts Department of Education (2006). Massachusetts sci-

ence and technology/engineering high school standards. Malden,

MA. Massachusetts Board of Education.

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary

Education (2009) Multi-districts summary report: MCAS high

school biology 2009. [Data file]. Retrieved from http://www.test-

wiz.net

Meadows, L., Doster, E., & Jackson, D. (2000). Managing the con-

flict between evolution and religion. The American Biology

Teacher, 62(2), 102-107.

National Academy of Sciences (1998). Teaching About Evolution and

the Nature of Science. Washington, D.C.: National Academy

Press.

National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National science education

standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

National Science Teachers Association (2009). NSTA position state-

ment: The teaching of evolution. Retrieved from www.nsta.org

Nehm, R. & Schonfeld, I.S. (2007). Does increasing biology

teacher knowledge of evolution and the nature of science lead

to greater preference for the teaching of evolution in schools?

Journal of Science Research Education, 18, 699-723.

Osif, B. (1997). Evolution & religious beliefs: a survey of

Pennsylvania high school teachers. The American Biology

Teacher, 59(9), 552-556.

71


Rutledge, M. & Mitchell, M. (2002). High school biology teachers’

knowledge structure, acceptance & teaching of evolution. The

American Biology Teacher, 64(1), 21-28.

Siegal, S. (2005, March 18). The Contents of perception. Retrieved

from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/perception-con-

tents/#2.3

Trani, R. (2004). I won’t teach evolution; It’s against my religion.

And now for the rest of the story... The American Biology

Teacher, 66(6), 419-427.

Weld, J. & McNew, J. (1999) Attitudes towards evolution. The

Science Teacher. 66(9), 26-31.

WGBH/NOVA Science Unit (2001) The Evolution Project. Retrieved

from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/index.html

Working Group on Teaching Evolution, National Academy of

Sciences. (1998). Teaching evolution and the nature of sci-

ence. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

Zimmerman, M. (1987). The evolution-creation controversy: opin-

ions of Ohio high school biology teachers. Ohio Journal of

Science. 87 (4), 115-125.

72


2011 Annual Colloquium on Educational Research and Practice

Call for PapersEducators, researchers and graduate students are invited to submit papers that will be present-ed at the Sixteenth Annual Colloquium on Educational Research and Practice and published inthe Colloquium Journal, vol. XVI. The papers may discuss issues and trends in differentdomains of Leadership and Schooling, Language Art and Literacy, and Mathematics andScience Education.

WHEN SUBMITTING A PAPER, PLEASE USE THE FOLLOWING GUIDELINES.1. Submit an electronic version of the paper and one hard copy, an abstract, approximately 150

words, and a biographical sketch, about 30 words. All pictures and diagrams must be sub-mitted as separate documents.

2. Use double spacing with one-inch margins.

3. For references, diagrams, etc., follow the style described in the Publication Manual of theAmerican Psychological Association (APA), Sixth Edition.

4. Paper length must not exceed 30 pages, including pictures, tables, figures, and list of refer-ences.

5. Papers must be received by December 1, 2010.

6. Authors will be notified about the status of their papers by January 15, 2011.

7. The Colloquium will be scheduled for April 2011.

SUBMIT PAPERS AND CORRESPONDENCE TO:Dr. Regina M. PanasukProfessor of Mathematics EducationThe Graduate School of EducationUniversity of Massachusetts Lowell61 Wilder Street, O’Leary 5th FloorLowell, MA 01854

Phone: (978) 934-4616Fax: (978) [email protected]

Documents

EDITORIAL xv_tcm18-48070.pdf · 2019. 9. 3. · EDITORIAL Regina Panasuk It has been 15 years since the Colloquium was launched, and with this issue the Journal completes its 15th