Table of Contents 23(1) - journals.library.brocku.ca

Table of Contents 23(1)

Editorial

Enhancing Education: Attending to the Four Commonplaces

Julian Kitchen p. 1

Articles

Teachers’ Perspectives on Educational Research

Karen Drill, Shazia Miller, and Ellen Behrstock-Sherratt p. 3

Shifting Currents: STSE in Northern Ontario Schools

Astrid Steele p.18

Improving Urban Students’ College Readiness as a Driver of High School

Curriculum Enhancement

Marius Boboc, R. D. Nordgren p.43

Pre-service Teachers' Self-Regulated Learning and their Developing Concepts of SRL

Dawn Buzza, Trina Allinotte p.58

Loose Coupling and Inhabited Institutions: Inclusion Policy and Teacher Strategies

Christina DeRoche p.77

Enhancing Conditions for Aboriginal Learners in Higher Education: The Experiences of

Nishnawbe Aski Teacher Candidates in a Teacher Education Program

Julian Kitchen, John Hodson p.97

Book Review

The Slow Fix: Solve Problems, Work Smarter and

Live Better in a World Addicted to Speed Stephanie Tukonic p.115

Cover Design: Peter Vietgen Cover Layout: Herman Yu

Editorial:

Enhancing Education: Attending to the Four Commonplaces

Julian Kitchen Editor

Brock University

At all levels—elementary, secondary and tertiary—there is a need to constantly improve

education. There is no formula, no magic bullet. Instead, educators strive to make a difference

through intervention in one or more areas of the educational experience.

Joseph Schwab identified four commonplace of education—teacher, learner, curriculum,

and milieu (Schwab, 1970)—that exist in all schools and in other learning contexts. The authors

of each article in this issue of Brock Education address one or more commonplaces in their

research and their efforts to improve education. Many also give explicit attention to social

justice.

As teachers are the professionals who guide the educational experience in classrooms,

many efforts to improve schooling focus on improving practice. In “Teachers’ Perspectives on

Educational Research,” Karen Drill, Shazia Miller, and Ellen Behrstock-Sherratt address the

widely acknowledged disconnect between practitioners and the findings of educational research.

They present two related studies conducted with teachers in the Chicago area on how teachers

make use of research. As a result of these findings, they identify ways in which research findings

can be made more accessible and useful to busy practitioners.

Astrid Steele, in “Shifting Currents: STSE in Northern Ontario Schools,” focuses on the

practices of secondary science teachers in rural, resource-extraction-based communities in

northern Ontario. She investigates the extent to which science teachers are implementing

mandated curriculum on the impacts of science on society and environment. While Steele finds

that most teachers are shifting in their attitudes, she notes a range of factors that make it difficult

for teachers to effectively address the curriculum and adapt it to local contexts. Like Drill and

her associates, Steele offers recommendations to help teachers become more effective in their

use of information from experts and policy makers.

Steele’s article is situated on the border between teachers and curriculum, with a focus on

teachers as curriculum makers. Marius Boboc and R. D. Nordgren, in “Improving Urban

Students’ College Readiness as a Driver of High School Curriculum Enhancement,” work on the

border between curriculum and milieu. Recognizing that impovershed urban students often

struggle at college, they researched the effectiveness of an instrument designed and validated to

predict success of impoverished minority students in college. They probe deeply into the

importance of curriculum that is relevant to the lives of students at both secondary and college

levels. The plan of action offers a holistic approach to curriculum improvement that considers

students’s developmental levels and sequences of learning across a range of content and skills

Brock Education, Vol. 23, No. 1 Fall 2013. 2

needed for college success. By doing so, they contribute to the improvement of outcomes for

learners who are not always well served by schools or society.

At the centre of the learning experience is the student. Each student has particular

learning needs. In “Pre-service Teachers' Self-Regulated Learning and their Developing

Concepts of SRL,” Dawn Buzza and Trina Allinotte begin with the recognition that each student

has different abilities and skills. Of particular significance for Buzza and Allinotte, is the fact

that the ability to self-regulate skills, behaviours, and beliefs differs greatly from learner to

learner. As well as learning about pedagogy and curriculum, they argue, new teachers also need

to become aware strategies for enhancing self-regulated learning in students. Their paper, by

investigating teacher candidates’ application of SRL in their field experiences, offers the

possibility that teachers can better support students in becoming effective self-regulated learners.

Christina DeRoche, in “Loose Coupling and Inhabited Institutions: Inclusion Policy and

Teacher Strategies,” is also concerned with improving the student experience by improving their

learning skills. Whereas Buzza and Allinotte’s work applies to all students, DeRoche focuses on

the particular needs of exceptional learners. Through participant observation and interviews with

two teachers and an educational assistant, she studies how the framework of loose coupling and

inhabited institution was used by these educators to actively negotiate curriculum and pedagogy

by drawing on the personal and social resources of each special needs learner. She concludes

with recommendations about employing loose coupling with exceptional learners, and how to

support educators in doing this important work.

The final article, “Enhancing Conditions for Aboriginal Learners in Higher Education:

The Experiences of Nishnawbe Aski Teacher Candidates in a Teacher Education Program” by

Julian Kitchen and John Hodson, focuses on the milieu in which Aboriginal B.Ed. students are

prepared. The authors, based on interviews with Aboriginal teacher candidates, identify ways in

which a community-based program inadvertently complicated the process of becoming a teacher

and making it more difficult. Listening to the voices of minority learners who struggle to succeed

in the unfamiliar territory of educational institutions is an important first step in making these

institutions more effective in serving the needs of all learners and communities.

Each article in this issue helps us understand one or more of the commonplaces of

education. Taken together they offer insights into how to enhance the skills of teachers, adapt

curriculum to the needs of students, address the learning skills of students, and improve the

contexts in which students learn. By addressing these in our practice, we as educators can make a

positive difference for all students, particularly those not well served by contemporary schools or

by the societies in which we live.

References

Schwab, J. J. (1970). The practical: A language for curriculum. School Review, 78, 1-23.

3

Teachers’ Perspectives on Educational Research

Karen Drill American Institutes for Research, Researcher

Shazia Miller American Institutes for Research, Managing Director

Ellen Behrstock-Sherratt American Institutes for Research, Senior Researcher

Abstract

Based on two studies conducted in the Chicago metropolitan area in 2009 and 2010, we found

that teachers do, in fact, use research, although they tend to seek it out under very specific

conditions and circumstances. Namely, teachers tend to look to research in response to an

immediate, pressing concern such as how to best teach fractions to English language learners

(ELLs). Teachers also turn to research to address a specific content need, such as gathering

information for an upcoming lesson. In terms of broader reviews of research, teachers

sometimes review research they have used in the past, such as best practices for a particular

topic or method. Finally, teachers may consult educational research when they participate in

groups that use research findings to more broadly support their instructional practice (e.g.,

study groups, committees or courses on using research in the classroom).

Keywords: education research, teachers, best practices

Karen Drill has led and worked on local and national projects, including South Carolina Extended Learning, Striving

Readers in the Chicago Public Schools, and the Texas Principal Excellence Program. Her primary focus has been

qualitative and quantitative research within education, and has led the evaluation of three mentoring and induction

programs in Illinois districts. Previously, Drill worked as the program coordinator for Northwestern University’s

Center for Talent Development. She is currently pursuing a doctoral degree in educational psychology from the

University of Illinois at Chicago.

Emaill: [email protected]

Shazia Miller has over 20 years of experience in evaluation, with an emphasis on high school transitions and data-

based decision-making in schools. She lead or been a senior advisor to many initiatives to improve educational

outcomes. Miller is currently the co-primary investigator of the IES sponsored randomized control trial of Indiana’s

system of diagnostic assessment.to provide teachers with ongoing feedback on their students.

Ellen Behrstock-Sherratt has authored numerous articles, briefs, and reports on teacher and principal quality and is

co-author of Everyone at the Table: Engaging Teachers in Evaluation Reform and Improving Teacher Quality: A

Guide for Education Leaders. She led the development of the Educator Talent Management Framework. She has

provided technical assistance to state and national educational bodies, and supported teacher effectiveness work at

the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association.

Brock Education Vol. 23(1), 3-17

Karen Drill, Shazia Miller and Ellen Behrstock-Sharret Teachers perspectives on educational research

Brock Education Vol. 23(1), 16-33 4

The sources of educational science are any portions of ascertained knowledge that enter into the

heart, head, and hands of educators, and which, by entering in, render the performance of the

educational function more enlightened, more humane, more truly educational than it was before.

(Dewey, 1929, p. 76).

How can we improve education? The educational research community constantly aims to

produce high-quality research that pushes the boundaries of our knowledge and creates a

stronger education system. The volume of literature housed in the Education Resources

Information Center (ERIC) database now exceeds one million articles. Linking the vast

community of educational researchers is “a deep concern with the condition of children and

schools” (Gardner, 2002, p. 72).

However, in spite of the large volume, educational research has sometimes been

criticized as neither useful nor influential (Burkhardt and Schoenfeld 2003); some have gone so

far as to say the reputation of research is awful (Kaestle, 1993). As described by Bransford, Vye,

Stipek, Gomez, & Lam (2009), in 2003 Grover Whitehurst, the then director of the National

Institute of Education Sciences, drew widespread attention to these concerns about whether the

educational research field was producing useful work for the field. In a presentation at the annual

meeting of the American Education Research Association, Whitehurst criticized some of the

esoteric paper titles that are inaccessible to those outside a particular research niche, citing a

made-up example paper entitled “Episodes of Theory-Building as a Transformative and

Decolonizing Process: A Microethnographic Inquiry into a Deeper Awareness of Embodies

Knowing.” Whitehurst further cited a survey of state and district leaders, 77 percent of whom

believed educational research was overly theoretical and too academic in its orientation

(Whitehurst, 2003).

Some researchers note that educational researchers may not be adequately prepared to

disseminate research in ways that are useful to practitioners (Schoenfeld, 2009). But we do not

know whether there are more fundamental criticisms to how research is being produced and

disseminated. For teachers to make effective use of new knowledge being developed by the field,

they must be able to identify and access high quality research. But what are the circumstances

under which this occurs?

Much of the research on educational research’s usefulness to teachers has emerged from

abroad, including Canada (Cooper, 2010; Lysenko, Abrami, & Bernard, 2003), Great Britain

(Cordingley, 2000, 2009), Turkey (Beycioglu & Ozer, 2008), and the Netherlands (Bronkhorst,

Meijer, Koster, & Vermunt, 2011). Hemsley-Brown and Sharp’s (2003) cross-national review of

research on this topic in multiple English-speaking countries over the period 1988-2001 revealed

that there were indeed barriers to teachers’ use of educational research, including lack of access

to academic journals, the daunting amount of research, jargon and overly theoretical orientations,

and distrust of the findings.

Porter (2007), a leader in the education research field in the USA, believes there remains

a dearth of relevant research on whether teachers look for research-based solutions or even view

research as a useful source of information. A limited amount of research has begun to address

this topic (Laitsch, 2010; Nelson, 2011), which confirms that practitioners are generally not

prone to accessing educational research. Hargreaves and Stone-Johnson (2009) argue that,

because teaching is not only a technical and intellectual practice but also an experiential,

emotional, ethical, cultural, political, and situational practice that requires complex decision-

making in a diversity of contexts, educational research ought to be used by groups of colleagues



engaged in dialogue and collaboration, such as that provided by professional learning

communities.

To address the disconnect between researchers and practitioners, we conducted two

related studies in the Chicago Metropolitan area. For the first study, we held nine focus groups

with 49 public school teachers in 2009. We chose focus groups for the first study because we

wanted to explore teachers reactions to research directly through an in depth conversation. We

asked teachers about the types of research they are most likely to use and about the resources

they consult when looking for research. Based on the findings from the first study, which

suggested that teachers are more likely to use research when it is filtered to them by fellow

educators, we conducted a follow-up case study in 2010. In the second study, we were interested

in whether the information teachers received in a course specifically designed to disseminate

research to teachers translated into classroom practice. Here, we found again that if research is

tied to a current classroom issue, teachers may use research to address the issue. However,

teachers will not spend a lot of time seeking out research. Instead, the information needs to be

presented in a way that is convenient and sensitive to their time. In this article, we present each

of the studies, the findings, and implications for researchers and schools.

Study 1

Our first study focused on the extent to which the large body of educational research is useful to

teachers’ instructional practice and how educational research might be made more appealing to

teachers. In other words, is there a demand by teachers for research, and, if so, what, if anything,

can the producers of research at universities and elsewhere do to ensure that what they are

supplying meets this demand.

To further our understanding of this issue, we conducted nine focus groups with a total of 49

teachers from urban and suburban schools within the Chicago Metropolitan Area. Teachers were

asked about:

• Whether they seek out research and why or why not

• What comes to mind when they hear the word “research” in an education context

• What sources of research they rely on and how they judge its credibility

• What barriers prevent them from using educational research

• What type of research is useful and what would make using research more appealing

• What type of preparation for using research they have received

Methods

For the focus groups, we chose teachers from schools that were not struggling, where 60 percent

or more of the students meet or exceed adequate yearly progress (AYP). More specifically, the

percent of students in the selected districts meeting or exceeding AYP standards ranges from 60

percent to 88 percent. Both urban and suburban schools were sampled, representing a wide

socioeconomic range. The focus group sessions took place at schools and district offices between

October 12, 2008, and January 12, 2009, before or after school and, in one case, at lunchtime.

Participant demographics are presented in Table 1.



Table 1

District and School Sample

School/District

Number

of

Teachers

Range in Years

of Teaching

Experience

Percent

Students

Meeting/

Exceeding AYP

Percent

Students

Low

Income

Date of

Focus

Group

Suburban

Elementary

School District

#1

7 8–27 years of

experience 87.6% 13.2% 10/22/08

Urban

Elementary

School #1

5 0–1 years of

experience 76.8% 93.3% 11/19/08

Urban

Elementary

School #2

6 4–6 years of

experience 62.2% 97.1% 11/20/08

Suburban High

School 3

25–30 years of

experience 87.6% 2.1% 12/11/08

Urban High

School 5

4–7 years of

experience 61.6% 43.4% 12/8/08

Suburban

Elementary

School District

#2

8 3–6 years of

experience 59.5%* 92.8% 1/12/09

Suburban

Elementary

School District

#3

6 3–5 years of

experience 68.0% 70.0% 12/10/08

Suburban

Elementary

School District

#4

5 0–15 years of

experience 82.9% 26.4% 11/13/08

Suburban

Elementary

School District

#5

4 3–7 years of

experience 62.0% 76.1% 1/6/09

Focus groups were recorded and transcribed. Data were analyzed inductively, allowing findings

to emerge from frequent or dominant themes and subthemes in the data. Transcripts were coded

using an iterative process that involved identifying and re-identifying emerging themes until

agreement between two researchers was reached. Responses then were coded and grouped by

theme. All data related to a particular theme or subtheme were read and reread in order to fully



capture the essence of the discussion. The focus group findings should not be interpreted as

representative of all teachers, but rather as a useful starting place for future studies.

Findings

Based on data gathered from the focus groups, several key findings emerged about the ways

teachers use educational research, the types of research teachers find most useful, and some of

the barriers that prevent teachers from accessing and using research.

• Although teachers are not opposed to accessing and using research, research in general evokes a number of strong yet conflicting responses. The tension between

using educational research to support instruction and the perceived gap between what

researchers provide and what practitioners need emerged as a common theme in all nine

focus groups, regardless of teachers’ years of experience, grade level taught, or school

location in the greater Chicago area.

Teachers who held positive reactions to research viewed it as information about “what

works” in the classroom. For example, some teachers indicated that research findings are a

way to validate that educational practices are “tried and true” and have “proven to be

successful.” Research findings, then, can provide an extra level of assurance that teachers

are implementing strategies and practices that work.

However, not all teachers view educational research in a positive light. Many focus group

participants also suggested that research can seem removed from everyday classroom

realities. This sentiment was reinforced when teachers believed that the research

environment is not an accurate representation of actual classrooms or of classrooms with

similar student compositions to theirs.

• While there was a wide degree of skepticism about researchers and research

findings per se, this skepticism can be reduced when research comes from a source that teachers trust and if the findings work their classroom. In general, focus group

participants were more likely to trust research findings that came from a source they

deemed credible, such as a colleague, administrator, professor of theirs, or a researcher

with experience in the classroom. However, if the research is associated with promoting

an educational product, the findings may be disregarded. In the end, teachers have to do

what seems to work in the classroom, regardless of official best practices or other

research guidance. Teachers also are more likely to trust their own experiences and

feedback they receive from their students than suggestions made by a researcher. For

some, a strategy that works with their students provides more evidence of success than

what research might argue is effective. In addition, teachers may be more likely to

accept research that confirms their current instructional pedagogy. Conversely, if

applying findings does not work in their classroom, teachers will abandon the effort.

• Teachers turn to research when there is a pressing concern, but often only after they have consulted other, more efficient resources. Before teachers look at research to

address clearly defined issues, they are more likely to turn to colleagues, trade journals



such as The Reading Teacher, or the Internet, starting with Google. Through these

avenues, research and research-based information may be shared. Teachers report that

they also will use educational research when they are part of a study group, committee,

school initiative, or other work group that uses research findings to support learning

more broadly.

• Teachers indicated nearly unanimously that, given competing demands on their time, both seeking and reading research are low priorities. This explanation was

shared by teachers of all experience levels in urban and suburban elementary and high

schools serving higher and lower-income students. In light of their limited time,

teachers stated that they are less likely to read research when it is presented with

overwhelming information and in a manner that is dry and difficult to decipher.

However, even though teachers stated that they often do not have or make time for

educational research, some mentioned that they would be more likely to read research if

administrators advocated for and provided sanctioned time to discuss research with

colleagues. For example, one elementary school received a grant that supported a

teacher study group focusing on professional development about instructional strategies.

In addition, teachers suggested that they also would be more likely to read research if

the massive volumes of research available were screened and filtered by school leaders

or administrators.

The desire to receive research findings as a bulleted list, brief synopsis, or audio-visual

media also was cited by an overwhelming majority of teacher participants as a way to

access the research findings without taking large amounts of time away from students’

more pressing needs.

• Finally, teachers are less likely to use research if they do not see a connection

between the population studied and its applicability to the students in their classroom. Some teachers suggested that the research setting is so controlled that they

would be unable to replicate the program or practices in their classroom, while others

believed that certain aspects of their own classroom, such as a high concentration of

ELLs, make many research-based teaching strategies inappropriate for their students. If

teachers believe their classroom does not reflect a study’s students, resources, or

context, they will be less likely to try to read or apply the findings.

Summary of Findings

In all, focus group participants were not opposed to using educational research; rather, they

indicated that as long as certain conditions and criteria are met, research is or can be informative

to their instructional practice. However, for research to be most useful to teachers it needs to take

into account teachers’ limited time by presenting findings in a clear, user-friendly manner;

appear relevant to teachers’ own classroom context and experience; and be provided by a person

or organization they trust.



Study 2

A key finding from Study 1 was that teachers are open to using research if it comes from a

trustworthy source, is relevant to their classroom context, and is presented in way that respects

and values their time. The challenge is ensuring that these trusted sources are also good

consumers of research and capable of sifting through documents of varying quality to accurately

communicate the findings to teachers. Looking at these criteria, we asked ourselves if there were

initiatives that provided teachers with research in ways that would be useful. One vehicle stood

out as especially promising -- a professional development program run by the American

Federation of Teachers (AFT).

The AFT, one of the two major teachers unions in the country, includes in its mission goals of:

• Strengthening the institutions in which teachers work;

• Improving the quality of the services teachers provide; and

• Bringing together all members to assist and support one another.

The AFT has addressed its mission in part by creating a number of professional development

courses to help teachers improve their practice. Their line of professional development,

Educational Research and Dissemination (ER&D), provides professional development in ways

that meet the needs of teachers by providing information on research-based practices that have

been field tested, with content delivery by their peers.

The AFT’s ER&D program was created in 1981, and in the past five years at least 7,500

teachers nationwide have taken an ER&D course. The ER&D program deliberately trains

classroom teachers to create and deliver each course. Instructor training involves two distinct

week-long training sessions, with requirements between sessions to practice and reflect on topics

taught. The instructor training also involves a mock delivery of the course. Local course

instructors are chosen for their content mastery and are often classroom teachers, teacher leaders,

or coaches rather than administrators. ER&D offers courses on topics including managing anti-

social behavior; reading instruction; reading comprehension; thinking mathematics; school,

family, and community; and others. In 2010 the American Education Research Association gave

the ER&D program highest honors for bridging the gap between research and practice.

To get a better sense of whether the information provided in an ER&D course translates

into classroom practice, and whether it increased teachers use of research we conducted a case

study of the ER&D course, Managing Anti-Social Behavior, in a Chicago suburb in Fall 2010.

Managing Anti-Social Behavior encourages classroom teachers to improve their practice and

their students’ performance by:

• Becoming users of research;

• Exposing them to timely research-based principles, practices, and strategies; and

• Teaching other teachers to share strong practices.

Participants also are expected to leave with a strong knowledge base that equips them with

specific research about the nature and origins of anti-social behavior and to change their practice

accordingly. The course specifically focuses on the following topics presented in the course

binder:



• Who are these students and what is antisocial behavior?

• Effective classroom management techniques

• Behavior analysis

• Building social competence in the classroom

• Behavior enhancement and reduction

• The acting-out cycle

• School-wide behavior support practices

In keeping with teachers’ interest in meeting with peers to discuss research and practices,

participants meet for three hours, once a week, for seven weeks in the Managing Anti-Social

Behavior course. Each session involves a lecture peppered with numerous opportunities for

participants to ask questions and participate in tabletop and whole group discussions, thereby

learning not only from the research, but also from trusted peers.

Teachers are also provided with a binder, assembled by course designers at the AFT

headquarters, that consolidates high quality, timely, meaningful research. The course designers

included articles with charts and images to help readers connect to the content. The course binder

is updated every three years by national AFT experts who seek feedback from other course

instructors to ensure that the research is useful to teachers. The course is then field tested for

usability. In response to early feedback that the binder felt more like a research journal than a

user-friendly resource, previous adjustments have included removing research articles that were

not relevant, too dense, wordy, or jargon-filled. In line with principles of adult learning, activities

were added to help readers identify with and internalize the content. Each of these efforts aligns

with our previous findings that teachers are more likely to use research if it is provided in a clear,

straightforward way, and filtered through a trusted source.

Methods

Using a case study approach, we followed two sessions of ER &D’s Managing Anti-Social

Behavior course, presented in a Chicago suburb in the fall of 2010. Through pre- and post-event

surveys, interviews, and focus groups with teachers and ER&D instructors and five course

observations, we explored why course participants chose to take the course, the degree to which

they use research to inform their practice, and the extent to which course participation influenced

their research use. The course was facilitated by a school administrator.

Findings

Our findings suggest that when teachers are presented with research-based information, they use

it, particularly when it is related to a specific classroom need. Several themes emerged from our

case study on the Managing Anti-Social Behavior course.

• Participation in this targeted professional development course did increase teacher reflection on and knowledge about student behaviors. Participants reacted positively to

the course, and walked away from the course with more strategies for classroom

management. One participant specifically spoke about how the instructor stated, “What

you permit, you promote,” and that this phrase stayed with her well beyond the course.

This course participant also found herself reflecting on how “letting little things go” in the



classroom can have larger ramifications for student behavior later. Another teacher wrote

in the post-event survey, “I have been reflecting on the way I address students.”

• Course participants left with increased knowledge about the medical, psychological, and cultural underpinnings of typical student behavior issues. Teachers told us that

they left the course equipped with “techniques to deal with anti-social behavior” and a

better understanding of “why students with anti-social behaviors act in certain ways.”

• The course did not influence teachers’ use of research. While participants enjoyed the

course, and felt like they gained new knowledge and strategies for working with

challenging students, most did not indicate that the course influenced how often they turn

toward research or their intentions to seek out research on their own after the course ended.

Summary of Findings

This feedback from participants suggests that a targeted approach to using research can increase

teacher knowledge about the topic at hand, and can have a direct effect on teachers’ use of

research-based practices. At the same time for a course focused exclusively on research

dissemination, we were surprised that participants and instructors did not emphasize using

research regularly to inform practice. For example, little emphasis was placed on seeking out and

assessing the quality of research. Neither the participants nor the course instructors received

training on seeking out research beyond that which was given to them by the national course

designers.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that teachers use a different set of criteria to evaluate high quality research

than researchers. They want research that is worth their time, attention and leads to possible

change in practice. Researchers, on the other hand, are trained to judge quality based on key

criteria such as internal validity, rigor of analysis, strong methodological design, triangulation of

data and appropriate measurement. When forced to use shortcuts, the researcher is taught to rely

on peer-reviewed journals as a first cut check of quality, followed by their own review of study

methods, which are, not coincidentally, extensively presented in such journals.

Teachers, our study suggests, use an entirely different set of criteria to identify high

quality research that they will consider integrating in their classrooms. And, even when

presented with research through content-based professional development, teachers are still

hesitant to seek out and incorporate research regularly in their practice. Given these findings, we

offer several recommendations to educational stakeholders.

Recommendations

For educational research to enlighten and improve teachers’ practice, certain changes must be

made by educational researchers and other stakeholder groups. Based on the findings from both

of our studies, several recommendations are presented for researchers, teacher preparation

programs, and school and district leaders and policymakers.



Recommendations for Researchers

Teachers genuinely want their students to benefit from the findings of good research. However,

there is somewhat of a mismatch between the educational research that currently is supplied and

what is demanded by teachers. This mismatch is not necessarily due to researchers’ carelessness

or lack of concern; quite on the contrary, it may be largely due to researchers’ extreme care to

present their findings as precisely as possible, a process that may lend itself to obscure language

and lengthy discussions. In order to bring supply and demand into equilibrium, researchers

should:

• Get to the point. Teachers are busy and want to see bulleted lists and brief synopses of

the research findings. Not only does this help ensure that teachers will benefit from

findings, but it also demonstrates to teachers that researchers understand and appreciate

that teachers’ time is at a premium.

• Provide examples of the applicability of the research to real classroom situations.

This may include illustrations and hands-on examples of how to put the research findings

into practice. Also, many teachers consider themselves visual learners and have expressed

a desire to access research through audio-visual technology that allows them to see the

recommended instructional practices put into action.

• Write in an accessible manner. This does not mean that research findings should be

watered-down; rather it means that unnecessary jargon should be avoided in favor of

straightforward language and sentence structure. In addition, complex statistical analyses

should be described in laymen’s terms.

• Emphasize how research findings can help teachers solve specific, immediate classroom problems or address students’ particular learning needs. The demands of

teaching tend to prevent teachers from exploring future-oriented or higher order issues than

those immediately at-hand; however, there was near consensus that research is consulted in

response to pressing needs.

• Highlight the attributes positively associated with research. Teachers already

appreciate that good research represents a trustworthy and solid basis for coming to

conclusions about what works in the classroom. Research that reminds readers of these

qualities and how they inspired the study is likely to be better received by teachers.

• Be clear about the context of the study and its applicability to other settings. Teachers are quite skeptical about the relevance of studies conducted in different contexts,

especially when there are clear differences in grade level, ability level, socioeconomic

level, class size, behavior, and culture. It is important to make clear which population was

studied and, if it is believed that the findings are generalizable, to emphasize that point and

explain why.

• Be proactive about engaging with teachers and those who directly disseminate research to teachers and spending time in schools. Although the demands of doing



research may make it difficult, spending time in schools and with teachers, being available

to present findings and answer questions about the research, and working collaboratively

with teachers and teacher educators at each stage of the research process will make

research more relevant and useful.

Recommendations for Teacher Preparation Programs

Teacher preparation programs play an important role in building the foundations for a research-

oriented teaching career. As the gateway to the profession, they shape teachers’ views and

approaches to using research to inform their practice. In some cases, they are also the closest

source of access to research and researchers that teachers will receive during their careers.

• Be proactive about bringing teachers and researchers into contact. Bridging the gap

between teachers and researchers requires that the two groups build trust. This can be

accomplished through interaction from the early stage of their careers: their preparation.

It might take on the form of joint seminars, coffee hours, or project work, for example.

• Prepare teachers to find the research they likely will need. A number of teachers

mentioned difficulty in using search engines effectively, deciding which research is

credible, and making decisions about which sources to trust when studies contradict one

another. Those preparing teachers should ensure that they learn how to search for

research effectively, how to evaluate the quality of research, and how to interpret the

findings.

• Encourage and support teachers in accessing research once on the job. Teacher

preparation programs cannot feasibly address all of the potential classroom experiences

that teachers might encounter. It is important to make it clear that gaps between the

knowledge gained during preparation and that which is needed to address particular

needs they will face in their specific classroom contexts can be filled in part through

access to research on the job. A few teachers attributed their current use of research to

their continued contact with and guidance from former graduate school professors.

Recommendations for School and District Leaders and Policymakers

Leaders and policymakers in schools and government have an important role to play in

facilitating teachers’ use of research by taking action to overcoming barriers to teachers’ access

to research. This primarily involves the provision of time, encouragement, and resources.

Specifically, they can:

• Create a system to filter high-quality research to teachers. Having school

administrators or teacher leaders filter research is attractive because it makes the task of

locating relevant research less overwhelming, it comes to teachers from a trustworthy

source, and it provides a channel for support and communication between teachers and

school or district leaders. Teachers who prefer to search for useful research themselves

will still have that option.



• Ensure that teachers have enough structured time specifically intended for accessing, collaborating on, and reflecting upon research. The primary barrier to

teachers’ use of educational research was simply not having enough time. By providing

adequate planning periods and support staff to guide teachers toward high-quality

research, this type of professional growth and learning can take place. Teachers should

be provided with regular time to work with others in their subject and grade level to

discuss research findings and how to coherently apply them to teaching the school’s

curriculum. Teachers should receive both support from administrators and sufficient

classroom autonomy in their implementation of research-based findings.

• Encourage and provide the time for teachers to access research through district initiatives or in collaboration with unions. Teachers appreciate time to discuss

strategies and best practices that are backed by research and from trusted sources.

Providing regular opportunities for teachers to participate in committees, lead

departmental meetings, or participate in professional development that include

discussions regarding research is likely to enhance teachers’ use of research.

• Provide professional development opportunities that include opportunities to learn about and reflect upon research. Some teachers cited high-quality, ongoing, job-

embedded professional development workshops as among the most useful sources of

research that encouraged them to put research to practice in the classroom.

• Encourage more best practices based professional development, similar to the programs provided under the ER&D model. Based on our findings, teachers enjoyed

participating in the ER&D course, and felt equipped with new research-based strategies

to apply in their classroom.

• Maintain high-functioning technology for accessing research. The Internet was the

most cited source for accessing educational research. Yet in some cases, broken or slow

computers, as well as blocked websites, presented a barrier to teachers who wished to

access research.

• Create a library of educational research. Currently, teachers tend not to rely on

libraries as a source of research-based information. Devoting a section of the school

library or creating a staffroom library that houses articles, books, and digital media that

exhibit the characteristics of research that are useful to teachers is one way to provide

busy teachers with easy access to research.

• Support the dissemination of research to teachers. The cost of journal subscriptions,

books, and workshops is a real barrier to teachers using research. Local and state-level

policymakers should consider ways to reduce or eliminate this financial burden to

encourage teachers’ access to knowledge that is likely to help improve student learning.



Future Research

Our findings provide thought-provoking insights into the teachers’ use of research, insights that

could be well worth exploring through additional studies. Future work might further explore

these ideas in a variety of ways, including obtaining the perspective of educational researchers,

exploring the role of social networks in disseminating research-based practices, and investigating

the use of research by particularly successful teachers.

The Perspective of Educational Researchers

Although our studies examined teachers’ perspectives on educational research, if the desire truly

exists to bridge the gap between researchers and practitioners, one possible next step is to hear

directly from educational researchers: Do researchers view their work as a means to improving

instructional practice? More specifically, do educational researchers have aspirations to

disseminate findings in ways that that are useful to teachers, and, if so, are there barriers that

prevent this from happening?

As one half of the researcher–practitioner divide, educational researchers provide a much

needed perspective on research, its purpose, and the way findings are disseminated. Once the view

of researchers is clarified, the two points of view can be compared for similarities as well as areas of

disagreement. By identifying teachers’ and researchers’ perspectives, the two communities can be

brought together to discuss ways to make research findings relevant and useful for both parties.

Social Networking

Our study participants indicated that they would be more likely to turn to colleagues for

information about how to improve instruction before consulting research findings. Exploring

how teachers use social networks to gather information may lead to a better understanding of

how to more effectively disseminate research findings. A future study, then, could explore

possible connections between group norms, social influence, and use of research. For example,

how do group norms or school culture influence the way teachers use research? Do teachers in

schools with stronger collegial networks influence whether their colleagues use or access

research? Do teachers who are part of an organized cohesive group, such as a professional

learning community, access research more frequently?

Effective Teachers and Use of Research

Another potential avenue for exploration includes looking at whether teachers who have been

identified as particularly effective by district or school performance metrics use research to

inform their practice: Are effective teachers more likely to access research than teachers who are

less effective in the classroom? Do they make more time to access research? Are they part of

programs or communities that support using research?



References

Beycioglu, K., & Ozer, N. (2008). Teachers’ views on education research. Poster presented at

the European Education Research Association Conference, Göteborg, Sweden.

Bransford, J. D., Vye, N. J., Stipek, D. J., Gomez, L. M., & Lam, D. (2009). Equity, excellence,

elephants, and evidence. In J.D. Bransford, N.J., Vye, D.J. Stipek, L.M. Gomez, & D.

Lam. The role of research in educational improvement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

Education Press.

Bronkhorst, L., Meijer, P. C., Koster, B., & Vermunt, J. D. H. M. (2011). Collaboration as

Means to Promote Research Use. Paper presented at the annual conference of the

American Education Research Association. New Orleans, LA.

Burkhardt, H., & Schoenfeld, A. H. (2003). Improving educational research: Toward a more

useful, more influential, and better funded enterprise. Educational Researcher, 32(9),

3–14. Retrieved March 30, 2009, from

http://gse.berkeley.edu/faculty/ahschoenfeld/Schoenfeld_BurkhardtEdResearch.pdf

Cooper, A. (2010). Knowledge Brokers: A Promising Knowledge Mobilization Strategy to

Increase Research Use in Education. Paper presented at the annual conference of the

American Education Research Association. Denver, CO.

Cordingley, P. (2009). Using research and evidence as a lever for change at classroom level.

Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Education Research

Association, San Diego, CA.

Cordingley, P. (2000). Teacher perspectives on the accessibility and usability of research

outputs. Presented at the British Education Research Association Annual Conference.

Cardiff, UK. Retrieved March 30, 2009, from

http://www.tda.gov.uk/upload/resources/doc/b/bera.doc

Dewey, J. (1929). The sources of a science of education. New York: Liveright Publishing.

Gardner, H. (2002). The quality and qualities of educational research. Education Week, 22(1),

49, 72. Retrieved March 30, 2009, from

http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2002/09/04/01gardner.h22.html

Hargreaves, A. & Stone-Johnson, C. (2009). Evidence-informed change and the practice of

teaching. In J.D. Bransford, N.J., Vye, D.J. Stipek, L.M. Gomez, & D. Lam. The role of

research in educational improvement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.



Hemsley-Brown, J., & Sharp, C. (2003). The use of research to improve professional practice: a

systematic review of the literature Oxford Review of Education, 29(4), 449–470.

Retrieved March 30, 2009, from

http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/research/themes/cpd/researchfindingspractice/teachers

useresearchfindings.doc

Kaestle, C. F. (1993). The awful reputation of education research. Educational Researcher,

22(1), 23, 26–31.

Laitsch, D. A. (2010). Surveying practitioner use of research. Paper presented at the annual

conference of the American Education Research Association. Denver, CO.

Lysenko, L., Abrami, P. C., & Bernard, R. M. (2003). Researching research Use: An online

study of school practitioners in Canada: Quantitative results. Paper presented at the

annual conference of the American Education Research Association. New Orleans, LA.

Miller, S. R., Drill, K., & Behrstock-Sherratt, E. (2011). The bridge between researchers and

teachers: Exploring the pathway to innovation in the classroom. Paper presented at the

annual conference of the American Education Research Association. New Orleans, LA.

Nelson, S. R. (2011). An image of the truth: Exploring the role of research evidence in

educational policy and practice. Paper presented at the annual conference of the

American Education Research Association. New Orleans, LA.

Porter, A. (2007). Making connections between research and practice. Journal of Personnel

Evaluation in Education, 20(3–4), 281–283.

Schoenfeld, A. H. (2009). Instructional research and the improvement of practice. In J.

Bransford, N., Vye, D. Stypek, L. Gomez, & D. Lam (Eds.), The Role of Research in

Educational Improvement (pp. 161–188). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

Whitehurst, G. (2003). The Institute of Education Sciences: New wine, new bottles. Paper

presented at the annual conference of the American Education Research Association. San

Francisco, CA.

18

Shifting Currents: Science Technology Society and Environment in

Northern Ontario Schools

Astrid Steele

Nipissing University

Abstract

The focus is on the practices of secondary science teachers in rural, resource-extraction-based

communities in the boreal region of northern Ontario, Canada. In 2008 the Ontario Ministry of

Education mandated that science teaching and learning should bring to the forefront

consideration of the impacts of science on society and environment, and include environmental

education; topics that are particularly pertinent given the location(s) of the study in logging and

mining towns. Three years after the introduction of that curriculum the researcher investigates

the extent to which the mandated changes have entered teacher practice. The study consists of a

survey, (n= 26), interviews (n=7) and a closer exploration of the collaboration between two

teachers who work towards including social and environmental issues in their lessons. Findings

provide evidence that secondary science teachers are shifting toward a stronger emphasis issues

of society and environment in their practice, however teachers identified a number of concerns

including an information gap, developing new lessons, program planning, assessment, and

teaching in the North. A theoretical framework developed by Pedretti and Nazir was used in the

analysis of the teacher collaboration. Recommendations are for professional development to

specifically address the concerns raised by the teachers; as well, changes are suggested to the

theoretical framework to include a stronger emphasis on environmental education.

Keywords: environmental education, rural science education, secondary science, STSE, teacher

collaboration

Astrid Steele is an Assistant Professor in Education (Science Methods) at Nipissing University. Her

research interests focus on the intersection of science and environmental education, especially in

secondary education. In her work with teachers she endeavours to empower them to develop rich and

meaningful praxes.

E-mail: [email protected]

Brock Education Volume 23, No. 1, Fall 2013, pp. 18-42

Astrid Steele Shifting Currents

19

Brock Education, 23(1), 18-42

Introduction

As I drive north the boreal forest slips by, an endless ocean of black spruce, wetlands bordering

on muskeg, and groves of trembling aspen. The boreal region covers 58% of northern Canada, it

is economically worth $4 billion a year, and it is home to about 14% of Canadians (Canadian

Boreal Initiative). I have lived and worked in towns in Canada’s boreal region for several

decades and it has left its mark. This landscape elicits environmental sensibilities borne of the

harshness of its topography and its seasons, and the result of a northern economy that is

predicated on the brutally invasive extraction of timber and minerals. The sense of surviving and

thriving in a harsh frontier lingers, and is manifest, in recreational activities that include hunting,

trapping, fishing, four-wheeling, and snowmobiling. It seems that for many residents the illusion

persists that the boreal is endless, and endlessly capable of absorbing human impacts. Living

within close range of nature does not guarantee an environmental ethic of conservation and care.

Indeed, living so close to the trees can engender a sort of myopia toward the forest; the big

picture of environmental degradation goes unattended.

I believe that environmental education (EE) is a critical factor in ensuring the sustainable

use of the boreal region by its inhabitants, and I further believe that formal schooling continues

to be one of the powerful platforms for such learning. This research follows, and is informed by,

previous action research (Steele, 2011) wherein secondary science teachers in the northern boreal

region of Ontario embedded EE in their science lessons, through expectations that are formally

titled Science, Technology, Society and Environment (STSE). This study is set apart from other

investigations into the nature and implementation of EE/STSE in science curricula by virtue of

its location; it gives voice to educators living and working in settings very different from their

southern, urban counterparts. While we may have a mutual understanding of the term ‘urban’ as

including high-density city living, the term ‘rural’ is not so easily defined. In its simplest terms a

rural population is defined as those who live outside commuting distance of a center with more

than 10,000 inhabitants (Statistics Canada). However, human interactions are usually more

complex than simple numbers; rural populations are also identified through social

representations that link people through shared language, symbols, and sensibilities (Halfacree,

1993). For the purpose of this investigation, the term rural will be understood to refer to the

people who live and work in Ontario’s boreal north, and who share certain environmental and

other subcultural sensibilities.

Understanding EE in the north, particularly as secondary science teachers enact it in formal

classrooms, led me to ask the questions: How do secondary science teachers in northern Ontario

understand and teach to the STSE expectations? What do the reported lessons in STSE actually

look like? and How do teachers understand and implement EE through STSE?

Certainly, there has been considerable research that explores how teachers include

environmental education in their practice (Hart, 2003), and how science teachers accommodate

STSE expectations (Pedretti & Nazir, 2011). However, there is a gap in the literature pertaining

to EE and STSE in secondary science (Steele, 2011) particularly in rural areas, corroborated by

Karrow, Fazio, and Dusto (2012). Two studies in particular point to the need for additional

research in rural areas: in a cross-Ontario survey for teachers about STSE and EE practices by

Tan and Pedretti (2010), only 18.5% of their respondents identified themselves as rural, and in

another Ontario survey by Fazio and Karrow (2011) addressing EE practices, less than 10% of

the respondents were from rural populations. Clearly, the voices and perspectives of educators in

rural areas are underrepresented in STSE/EE research.


20


Taking STSE and EE theoretical frameworks as underpinnings, this article examines the

practices of secondary science teachers in rural northern Ontario from three vantage points: a

multi-participant survey, several interviews, and actual classroom activities of two collaborating

teachers.

STSE and Environmental Education Theoretical Frameworks

In Ontario, Canada, the document Acting Today, Shaping Tomorrow (Ontario Curriculum

Council, 2009), informed by Shaping Our Schools, Shaping Our Future, (Ontario Ministry of

Education, 2007), and supported by the Pan-Canadian Framework of Science Learning

Outcomes (CMEC, 1997) directed that EE be incorporated in all school topics and in all grades.

In the science curricula, for both the elementary and secondary panels, this was achieved by

placing curriculum expectations that contextually examine the impacts of science and technology

on issues of society and environment (STSE) at the forefront of all topics in the science

curriculum. This represents a significant and profound change to Ontario science curricula, to

bring into balance required content knowledge and skills with the scientific literacy of students,

to make informed and wise decisions as citizens (Hodson, 2003, 2010; Ontario Ministry of

Education, 2008a, 2008b; Pedretti & Little, 2008).

The intentions of the STSE expectations are diverse: to increase student interest; to

practice critical thinking and decision-making in the context of social responsibility (Pedretti,

2003); to search for data driven knowledge and act on it (Hodson, 2010); and to introduce

elements of morality (Fowler, Zeidler, & Sadler, 2009; Lee et al., 2012; Zeidler, Sadler,

Simmons, & Howes, 2004). As Pedretti, (2003) points out:

It would be a mistake to assume that STSE is a single, coherent, well articulated approach

to science education, nor should it be. If the spirit of STSE education is to explore the

relationships among science, technology, society and environment, then we cannot hope to

capture this complexity in a neat unencumbered package. (p. 221)

The Pedretti and Nazir STSE model

More recently the multiple interpretations of STSE have been refined by Pedretti and

Nazir (2011) into a coherent and comprehensive framework that allows for the analysis and

discussion of different versions of STSE, as they are practiced by educators. Based on an

exhaustive review of literature, and particularly Sauvé’s (2005) description of currents in EE,

Pedretti and Nazir describe iterations of STSE and propose that these at times overlap or run

together in six STSE currents. The currents are identified using four criteria: the focus of the

current, the aims of science education, the dominant approaches providing educational emphasis,

and examples of strategies that speak to pedagogy and practice of the current. The six currents

within STSE identified by Pedretti and Nazir (2011) are summarized below.

The Application/Design current. The focus of the Application/Design current is on problem

solving based on the creative design or modification of technologies. Its educational aims are

utilitarian and practical in nature and require the transmission of disciplinary knowledge and

technical skills. The dominant approaches are cognitive, experiential, pragmatic, and creative.

This current is most often associated with designing and building artifacts.


21


The Historical current. The Historical current focuses on the connection between the human

enterprises called science, and its historical, social, and cultural dimensions. Its educational aims

include valuing the achievements of science and scientists. The dominant approaches are

cognitive, reflexive, and affective, and it is most often associated with activities such as case

studies and forms of drama.

The Logical Reasoning current. The focus of the Logical Reasoning current is to develop the

ability to make decisions regarding socioscientific issues through examination of empirical

evidence. The education aims are to develop citizenship, civic responsibility, decision-making,

and the transaction of ideas. The Logical Reasoning current is enacted through consideration of

socioscientific issues using risk/benefit and stakeholder analyses, and various argumentation and

decision-making activities.

The Value Centered current. The Value Centered current focuses on the understanding of

socioscientific issues through ethical and moral reasoning. Like the Logical Reasoning current,

its aims are to develop citizenship and civic responsibility, however its dominant approaches are

affective, moral, logical, and critical. Value Centered current strategies include considering case

studies and socioscientific issues through an ethical lens.

The Socio-Cultural current. The focus of the Socio-Cultural current is the understanding that

society and culture provide the context for science and technology, therefore, the educational

aims of this current focus on cultural and intellectual achievements. The dominant approaches

are holistic, reflexive, experiential, and affective. As well as case studies and socio-scientific

issues, strategies within this current acknowledge alternate knowledge systems and the

integration of curricula.

The Socio-Ecojustice current. The Socio-Ecojustice current focuses on critiquing problems of a

social and/or environmental nature and then solving them by taking action. Along with civic

responsibility and citizenship, this current’s aims are transformative and emancipatory; its

dominant approaches include creative, critical, experiential, and place-based. Strategies used in

the Socio-Ecojustice current include community projects and actions plans within both local and

global contexts.

Environmental Education within STSE

In the Ontario Science curriculum EE is defined as follows:

Environmental education is education about the environment, for the environment, and in

the environment that promotes an understanding of, rich and active experience in, and an

appreciation for the dynamic interactions of:

The Earth’s physical and biological systems

The dependency of our social and economic systems on these natural systems

The scientific and human dimensions of environmental issues

The positive and negative consequences, both intended and unintended, of the

interactions between human-created and natural systems.

(Ontario Curriculum Council, 2007, p. 6)


22


Environmental education in Ontario science curriculum is tasked with teaching about the

environment through avenues such as environmental science; in the environment, requiring that

students have out-of-classroom and place-based experiences (Greenwood, 2009; Louv, 2005;

Smith, 2007) through which they develop affiliation for nature (Tan & Pedretti, 2010); and for

the environment, by learning to make wise consumer and citizenship choices (Hodson, 2003,

2010), engaging in actions of stewardship (Tan & Pedretti, 2010), and socio-political actions on

behalf of environment (Hodson, 2003, 2010). This comprehensive definition of EE is consistent

with the call for a broader focus for EE (Gough, 2002; Hart, 2002) beyond traditional forms such

as nature and conservation studies or environmental science. Environmental education should

include considerations of the impacts of science on society and environment (Hart, 2002;

Hodson, 2003;). Thus, environmental education finds its strongest expression within the STSE

expectations:

(STSE) within this (science) curriculum document provides numerous opportunities for

teachers to integrate environmental education effectively into the curriculum. The STSE

expectations provide meaningful contexts for applying what has been learned about the

environment, for thinking critically about issues related to the environment, and for

considering personal action that can be taken to protect the environment. (Ontario Ministry

of Education, 2008a, p. 36)

As such, EE is consistent with, and may actually be embedded within, a number of the

STSE currents described by Pedretti and Nazir (2011), however, it is not identified in their

framework as a separate current. The STSE expectations in the Ontario science curriculum

appear to provide multiple opportunities, within a broad range of topic areas, to embed EE

concepts and pedagogies in secondary science curriculum. This is best illustrated by a number of

STSE expectation examples taken from different grade levels and courses (Table 1); they

provide a selection of possible contextual issues and questions associated with each unit of study.

Given a science curriculum that is arguably poised as a platform for a robust form of EE

within STSE, and that allows for a variety of pedagogies and perspectives, the question becomes

one of enactment. What pressures come to bear on teaching EE, through the STSE expectations,

in a secondary science classroom, particularly one in rural northern Ontario?


23


Table 1. Sample STSE expectations for Ontario Secondary Science curricula (Ontario

Ministry of Education, 2008a, 2008b)

Grade and Topic STSE Expectation Sample Issues/Questions Provided in the Curriculum

Grade 9

Chemistry

Assess social,

environmental, and

economic impacts of the

use of common elements

or compounds.

Sample questions: How has the presence of mercury

in water bodies in Northern Ontario affected the

environment and the lives of Aboriginal people?

How does the widespread use of agricultural

chemicals in Canada or elsewhere affect the

economy, society, and the environment? What are

the economic benefits and environmental costs of

diamond mining for Northern Canadian

communities? (OME, 2008a, p. 52)

Grade 11

Physics:

Kinematics

Assess the impact on

society and the

environment of a

technology that applies

concepts related to

kinematics (e.g., photo

radar helps prevent

vehicular accidents and

reduces fuel consumption

associated with excessive

speeding).

Sample issue: The use of the global positioning

system (GPS) increases accuracy in mapping,

surveying, navigation, monitoring earthquakes, and

tracking the movement of oil spills and forest fires,

among other benefits. However, its extensive use

raises concerns about privacy and human rights.

Sample questions: How are satellites used to track

animal species in remote areas? How can scientists

and environmentalists use this information to help

protect vulnerable species? What is the impact of the

use of speed limiters and tracking devices in the

trucking industry? What effect do lower truck speeds

have on highway safety and vehicle emissions?

(OME, 2008b, p.184)

Grade 12 Earth

and Space

Science:

Earth Materials

Assess the direct and

indirect impact on local,

provincial/regional, or

national economies of the

exploration for and

extraction and

refinement/processing of

Earth materials (e.g.,

gold, uranium, sand,

gravel, dimension stone,

fossil fuels).

Sample issue: Diamonds are prized for industrial

and personal uses. The demand contributes to the

existence of illegal trade in “blood diamonds”, in

which stones mined in war zones are sold and the

revenue is used to fund military action by insurgent

groups. The protracted wars devastate local and

national economies.

Sample questions: What are the effects on local

economies of oil extraction in Alberta, transportation

by pipeline through the Prairies, and refinement in

Ontario? How does the economic benefit of

manufacturing items using a mineral resource

compare to the economic benefits for the

communities that mine the resource? What is the

impact on the economy of local Aboriginal

communities of diamond mining on their lands?

(OME, 2008b, p. 144)


24


Educator Agency

Although science studies have traditionally housed education about environment, most

specifically through environmental science, the partnership between secondary science education

and STSE/EE has been criticized as theoretically and pragmatically incompatible (Gruenewald,

2004; Gruenewald & Manteaw, 2007; Hart, 2002; Pedretti, 2003; Steele, 2011; Stevenson,

2007). Whereas elementary classrooms in Ontario generally support opportunities for integration

and cross-disciplinary learning, secondary/high school programs persist in a model that keeps

disciplines separate (Gough, 2002; Hodson & Bencze, 1998). Further, traditional science

pedagogy has been described as teacher-directed, content-based, and proud of an objective and

value-free scientific process (Hodson, 2003). Consequently, the secondary science opportunities

for pedagogies often associated with STSE/EE, described with phrases like learner-centered,

interdisciplinary, systemic, issue-based, or place-based learning (Smyth, 2006) are difficult to

enact. Moreover, there is a documented reluctance by secondary science educators to fully

engage in critical studies of how society and environment are impacted by science and

technology (Gayford, 2002; Tan & Pedretti, 2010; Wals & Alblas, 1997). Teaching and learning

that delves into the realms of cultural and sociopolitical values often elicit between personal

beliefs, sociocultural expectations, and peer culture within the science-teaching milieu (Kim,

2005; Pedretti, 2003).

Yet, arguably, the key to enacting any form of EE lies with the determination, knowledge,

and agency of the educator tasked with its delivery, placing the onus of meaningful studies in EE

directly on their shoulders. The personal conviction of the educator sustains and informs the

environmental lessons that they teach (Hart, 2003; Karrow & Fazio, 2010). Therefore, “it is

important for each educator to attempt to clarify how he or she views the juncture between

education and the environment and coherently translate that into practice” (Sauvé, 2009, p. 325).

Taking into account the peculiar and distinct EE/STSE landscape of rural northern Ontario,

the study described assists in identifying how STSE is being taught in northern Ontario

secondary science classrooms, and locates EE within the enactment of STSE education.

Method for Research

The research study had more than one distinct data collection phase and format, typifying a

mixed methods approach (Creswell, 2009). Via an online survey Phase One provided general

quantitative information that informed the subsequent qualitative interviews. Phase Two

followed the work of two teachers as they collaborated to design and implement STSE lessons

with a focus on EE. The study design progressed from multiple-participant survey responses that

provided an overview of STSE/EE teaching, through a series of interviews that provided

additional and specific concepts and perspectives, to an in-depth case study of two collaborating

teachers.

Phase One

The voluntary online survey addressed the question: How do secondary science teachers in

Northern Ontario understand and teach to the STSE expectations? The survey consisted of 34

single response items answerable on a graduated scale of: 1- strongly agree, 2-agree, 3-not

sure,4- disagree, 5-strongly disagree. Survey questions covered teachers’ understandings of


25


STSE curriculum expectations and their focus on those expectations during course delivery. The

survey url was sent to secondary science teachers in the northeastern Ontario public school board

and the secondary school in Moosonee, Ontario. The response rate was approximately 45 %

(n=26); this is an estimate based on the number of secondary schools in the catchment (10) and

the estimated number of educators teaching science in each school.

Seven respondents agreed to be interviewed to further discuss their responses on STSE and

EE in their classroom practice. The semi-structured interviews each lasted about 30 minutes and

were conducted both face to face and through Skype; the anonymity of the interviewees has been

preserved through the use of pseudonyms.

Phase Two

The second phase of the study asked the questions: What do the reported lessons in STSE

actually look like? and How do teachers understand and implement EE through STSE? In this

second phase of the study, research was focused on the collaboration between two secondary

science teachers. Data collection took place over the course of a semester and is comprised of

several semi-formal meetings and interview transcripts, and observations during classroom and

field trip visits. It was anticipated that many of the teachers who had been interviewed in the first

phase would agree to participate in the second phase of the study. In addition a number of

teachers who had not been interviewed, but were aware of the study expressed interest in

participating further, so the small number of participants who eventually remained with the study

was surprising. Of the 12 who had expressed interest, two were assigned non-science courses,

two were affected by maternity leaves and six cited insufficient time in their schedules. Thus, the

focus of the study was narrowed to the work of two secondary science teachers as they chose to

collaborate to deliver meaningful lessons in EE, through the STSE expectations.

Both teachers, Ned and Tess (pseudonyms), worked in the same secondary school in a

town in northern Ontario and from the start of the project they were excited to collaborate. Tess

was a teacher with five years of classroom experience who was teaching grade nine science

courses and Ned had two years of classroom experience and was teaching grade nine science and

grade 11 biology courses. Data collection took the form of interviews with Ned and Tess, and

observations that I made as I visited the classes and accompanied them on their field trips. Tess

and Ned’s committed collaboration provided not only a gateway into understanding the work of

northern educators, but from it there emerged an unexpected synergism. Both Ness and Ted offer

compelling narratives as two northern Ontario born-and-raised educators, describing their

trajectories towards becoming science teachers with a passion for EE.

Analysis

Phase One

Phase One survey data offered an overview of teacher perspectives on STSE in science

curriculum, and indicated that STSE was being generally addressed in science lessons. The

qualitative data was subjected to a grounded theory approach (Creswell, 2009) whereby, during

numerous readings of the transcripts and notes, recurring ideas regarding teachers’ comments on

STSE were identified. The recurring ideas were then refined into themes such as the information

gap and positioning STSE in a science unit, that are analyzed in detail below.


26


Survey. Of the total number of secondary science teachers who responded to the survey, two-

thirds were male; two-thirds had teaching assignments that included courses other than science;

the undergraduate science degrees held by the respondents were diverse, but most of the women

held biology degrees; and one-third of the respondents had been teaching less than six years.

Based on the survey results (Table 2) it appears that respondents feel that: (a) the STSE

expectations are important in their science teaching and (b) provide a context for student

learning. Further, (c) respondents viewed science teaching as more than the transmission of

content; (d) science teaching should include opportunities for decision-making, (e) for

consideration of social and environmental issues, (f) for consideration of values, and (g) for

taking action to solve problems. This is a general acknowledgement, on the part of the

respondents, of the role importance of STSE in science education and a possible (though likely

slow) shift in direction away from the traditional science pedagogy described earlier.

Table 2. Survey results showing trends as reported by secondary science teachers

Survey Statements Mean (M) Variance

I am familiar with STSE expectations 2.0 0.7

The STSE expectations are an important part of the science

curriculum that I teach.

2.0 0.4

STSE expectations provide a context for students to learn

science

2.2 0.4

Content knowledge should be the primary focus of science

education

3.4 0.8

Decision making skills should be an important part of a

science curriculum.

2.0 0.2

Science teaching and learning should address social and

environmental issues

1.6 0.3

Science and values education should not be coupled 3.7 0.5

STSE expectations require an interdisciplinary approach 2.7 0.8

Promoting ‘action’ (personal, local) should not be the

business of public school science education

3.4 0.8

Note: Each survey statement was rated using a likert scale of 1 (Strongly Agree), 2 (Agree), 3 (Not Sure),

4 (Disagree), 5 (Strongly Disagree).


27


More experienced teachers (5+ years of teaching experience) seemed to have a higher

comfort level with non-traditional approaches to teaching science, with fully two-thirds of them

indicating that development of skills, rather than acquisition of content knowledge, was more

important. Those with less than five years of experience reported being less confident and more

uncertain about undertaking lessons that were of a non-traditional nature.

The data is weakened by the small number of respondents overall; the total number of

respondents represent only a fraction of the secondary science teachers working in northeastern

Ontario, when all school boards are considered; and the voluntary nature of the survey and the

interviews which may have been answered by a preponderance of respondents who already hold

positive attitudes towards STSE and EE.

Interviews. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven of the survey respondents

(Tess, Jeri, Sal, Radley, Ben, Hannah, and Fanny). All interviewees were teaching at least one

secondary science course and all were from English public secondary schools in Northeastern

Ontario, including two from Moosonee, situated on the James Bay.

Interview data was analyzed taking a constructivist grounded theory approach (Charmaz,

2006; Creswell, 2009). Charmaz (2006) described the process of constructing codes from

qualitative data as a reflection of the views and values of the researcher; I recognize that despite

my best efforts at objectivity, the data was processed through the lens of my personal experience.

Upon numerous readings of the interview transcripts and notes, the recurring themes that I

identified include the information gap, developing new lessons, positioning STSE in a science

unit and in a program, and the importance for STSE/EE learning for northern students and

assessment.

I have further organized the themes into three groupings: (a) the difficulties associated with

preparing STSE lessons; (b) the importance of STSE and EE for their students; and, 3) living and

teaching in northern Ontario.

Difficulties associated with preparing STSE lessons the information gap

Some science topics lend themselves easily to embedding EE, whereas others require extra

preparation on the part of the teacher, particularly when providing for local contexts that might

tap into students’ prior knowledge and interests. Many of the interviewees expressed the concern

that they were not experts, and often lacked background information pertaining to specific

environmental issues. This requires of them extra time to research and prepare lessons; time that

is at a premium for teachers who also coach school teams and work on committees. In addition,

it takes time and effort to gather knowledge of, and make connections to, local resources,

including suitable locales for out-of-classroom learning and experts in the community.

Information technologies and media can be both friend and foe here. For example, although

issues of mining waste are front and center in a number of northern communities, media and

internet will often focus student and teacher attention on the concerns of other regions or

countries. As one teacher put it: “It’s a lot easier to talk about polar bears because we have all

heard about those in the media!” (Hannah)

Developing new lessons. Another concern amongst interviewees was how to turn STSE

expectations into lessons, particularly with a view to teaching about, in, and for the environment.


28


A look back at the STSE expectations listed in Table 1 reveals that neither the expectations, the

issues, nor the questions, indicate what the lessons should look like. This was disconcerting to

several of the interviewees, who were unsure how to develop learning experiences for their

students. As one interviewee pointed out, STSE can be uncomfortable for science teachers

because they have been trained to “teach science consisting of facts and skills, not run debates in

class or tackle issues and problems that have no answers.” (Hannah). Other interviewees held

similar views: “...you end up having to do this massive amount of background research for it,

which I am not opposed to, but what do I do with it? How do I use that in the classroom to teach

this unit?” (Radley), and “...you got an issue which is basically just a statement and what are you

supposed to do with it?...its not exactly clear.” (Ben)

Positioning STSE within a unit. Neither is there an indication of how the STSE expectations

should be positioned as part of the overall teaching and learning within the unit. Should an

issues-based approach set the stage for learning content and skills, or should it be a culminating

activity that builds on knowledge and skills already learned?

...he [a colleague] actually introduces the units with the [STSE] topics and the students

struggle their way through...as they go through they are finding out they need to know this

- so knowledge- and they need to know what this is - so knowledge again. So they are kind

of working backwards, but I don’t think backwards is the word for it, but starting with the

big picture and then working backwards towards the concepts that you need to understand

the big picture...he is getting to all the other aspects of the curriculum by using that.

(Radley)

Positioning STSE within a science program. Hannah asked, “Do you teach the content and

then work it into the environmental issues or do you talk about the issues first?” Her question

speaks to the importance and re-positioning of the STSE expectations within the curriculum

documents towards the beginning of the unit rather than at the end, as they had been in the

previous edition. STSE expectations at the end of a unit sent the tacit message that they would be

addressed in the classroom only if there was time. Placing the STSE expectations at the

beginning of the unit (and the content knowledge expectations at the back) redefines their

relative importance and encourages science educators to embrace them as part of their regular

science curriculum. “I went to the ministry training and they said, ‘That’s why we put the all up

front, because nobody ever really pays attention to them.’” (Ben) The clarity of the message is,

however, blurred by years of traditional practice:

A lot of teachers told me that...when you look at the curriculum, if you are planning your

course its annoying that they moved the STSE’s to the front because now you have to go to

find what you have to teach near the end...they just flip to the back anyways because they

have to find out what the kids need to know for the test that they’re going to give them...I

think the mindset is still there, because when I started teaching I remember my program

leader saying do that (STSE) if you have time. (Fanny)

Content is the third set. Does it always happen that way? No. I personally am still trying to

make that flip. (Hannah)

Assessment of STSE student learning. Finally, all interviewees expressed concern over the

assessment of STSE and EE expectations, stemming in part from its problematic nature already


29


discussed, whereby the language of the expectations gives little pedagogical guidance.

Assessment of STSE expectations requires strategies other than traditional science assessments

that indicate the retention of content knowledge and the acquisition of investigative lab

techniques; there are no definitive correct answers to the issues and questions presented by the

STSE expectations.

The opportunity to “test for correctable answers” must be supplanted by assessment

strategies, such as rubrics, that allow teachers to assess student engagement and application of

their knowledge and skills. After collaborating on a rubric, first with her students, and then with

a colleague, one interviewee explained:

...this particular rubric I think I could use for quite a few STSE assignments because I’ve

written it in a way that I feel is not specific for a certain product or topic. Rubric experts

might say that is flawed or there is something wrong with that. But I think the students

know what is expected, ... it is general enough that it allows me to differentiate my

instruction or my assessments. (Tess)

A number of the interviewees expressed their discomfort with rubrics as being too

subjective and open to interpretation, which is a predictable response from educators who have

been trained in the acquisition of content knowledge and skills. “I can’t say I’m a huge fan (of

rubrics)...there is a lot of wiggle room. They enable you to focus more on the the experience and

the doing...a test is right or wrong, there is no grey...” (Hannah)

I’m mainly a checklist type of guy. At the start of the year, for the science labs and

everything, I say “okay, we’re going to do formal lab reports and here’s the things for

assessment.” And I go through with them and I say, “okay, here’s what you need” and I list

all the things, and “here’s how you do this, and there’s what I’m looking for” and they

have this checklist so when they go through with their partner and write up their labs they

can exchange and say “do we have this, yes, yes, yes”. (Ben)

What students need. Overwhelmingly, interviewees spoke to the importance of the contexts that

STSE provides for student engagement and the development of critical thinking and problem

solving skills.

...they [the students] don’t necessarily need to know the information because they have

access to it. They need to know how to use the information, they need to know how to

solve problems, they need to know how to work with people. (Hannah)

Ben spoke of his concern for students who were learning to transfer their knowledge to

real-life situations; Hannah talked about the need for some of her students to realize that their

choices have impacts and that there is a “reality beyond themselves”; Fanny discussed how most

of her students would never be scientists, but they should have the skills to be critical of

information from media; Sal and Hannah both expressed their intentions to provide local hands-

on experiences that students could relate to; Radley found that STSE expectations make the

curriculum practical and tangible for students, particularly those who are bored and question the

usefulness of the information that is presented to them; Jeri felt it was important that students see

various perspectives of scientific issues; and finally, Tess describes how she tapped into student

engagement through an STSE assignment:

...in my college level physics I have a lot of boys, they come to school on snowmobiles,

that’s how they come to school every day. So in the motion unit they wanted to do

something related to snowmobiles or vehicles...(Tess)


30


Teaching in northern Ontario. Many of the interviewees confirmed that they enjoyed living

and teaching in the northern part of the province, since they were able to take advantage both

personally and professionally of having a “wilderness at your doorstep to play in” (Sal).

Opportunities for out-of-classroom learning in natural environments are often more accessible

and many of the interviewees took advantage of this:

I can simply walk out the end of the school just in the backyard with my kids and we’ve

got wilderness right there. We’ve got bush [forest], we’ve got a little stream ecosystem...so

we can go there to collect organisms. (Sal)

But teaching with a wilderness in the backyard comes with a downside. Although the

internet and other media is useful for gathering information about the world beyond the forests,

students living in isolated northern communities do not necessarily develop a strong sensibility

or understanding of issues beyond their communities. Admittedly, a local focus, such as place-

based learning (Gruenewald, 2009) for STSE and EE is important, but a broader understanding

of societal and environmental issues is equally important, particularly for secondary students as

they begin to define themselves as global citizens. Indeed a number of the interviewees

commented on the lack of environmental knowledge and sensibility of their students who had

grown up in northern locales:

To be honest, I was kind of hoping that my students would be a little more familiar with

the local environment [Hudson Bay Lowlands]. For instance I did a review question to just

name five trees... and [they said] ‘palm tree’ or ‘Christmas tree’... Most of the species

would be ones from the media than ones actually native to where they live. (Jeri)

Hannah worried that her students did not really appreciate their surroundings and so were

oblivious to crises in environment:

...they are not exposed to the shortages and the inconveniences. Down south they are hyper

aware of recycling programs and impacts...we have the resource-based industries [mining

and logging] that we can relate to...but as far as making good environmental choices it

doesn’t seem to touch us up here...there just doesn’t seem to be that awareness and that

drive.

Hannah also speaks to the general mindset of her colleagues in this regard:

They have heard [the three R’s] a bazillion times but how many times a day do I pick

through the garbage...they know...its just easier. It’s not just students, its a pervasive

mindset. It’s a lack of awareness, its a culture...we are a very wasteful, resource-abusing

people...we are quite oblivious of the reality of the crisis.

The comments of the interviewees confirm the importance of EE embedded in STSE

expectations as one of the critical elements in the education of northern youth, and perhaps also

peers.

Phase Two - Collaborating Science Educators

By the end of Phase One data collection I was becoming increasing intrigued by what STSE

lessons might look like, particularly if EE was an embedded element. Certainly secondary

science teachers in Northeastern Ontario were reporting that such lessons were being taught, and

it became incumbent to observe a number of these. Consequently the study was narrowed to

follow the work of two secondary science teachers who chose to collaborate to explicitly embed

EE in their science lessons.


31


The lessons were situated in the grade nine unit titled Biology: Sustainable Ecosystems.

The teachers, Tess and Ned, decided to focus student learning on soils and food production, with

particular emphasis on organic foods. This was a deliberate and important choice since their

students live in an area of Ontario that has a short growing season and produces very little of the

food sold in local grocery stores. Most students are not able to speak knowledgeably about food

production. The students participated in three activities: they planted bean and corn seeds in class

and documented plant growth over time; a local organic farmer was invited to their classes to

speak about maintaining healthy soils through organic farming practices, and also about benefits

of organically produced foods; and the students toured the local organic farm where they

observed a variety of soils, watched fieldworkers transplant seedlings, and interacted with a

variety of farm animals being raised through organic and humane methods. As a participant in

the field trip I was able to observe and speak with students. Although they listened attentively to

the explanation of organic crop production, a number of them shared that studying or working

with plants held little appeal for them. However, their interest in the heritage chickens, the

African goats, and the endangered species of turkeys was genuine and prompted many questions

and comments.

As I met and worked with Tess and Ned it became apparent that through their lessons

about food they had a genuine desire to provide a rich, transformatory experiences for their

students. That is, they wanted the lessons to have personal meaning for the students, beyond

content acquisition; they hoped to shift the students’ attitudes and behaviours towards living in

more environmentally sustainable ways.

Like anything, change takes time and I think especially now that the environment is at the

forefront we can take time to do it and kids will get exposed to it at school and they’ll

bring it home and hopefully it’ll become a part of their adult life. (Ned)

I asked Tess and Ned how their attitudes towards environment and EE had developed,

realizing from earlier interviews in Phase One that many teachers as well as students in the north

are not committed to environmental concerns to the point of overtly incorporating elements of

EE in their practice. Although they were both ‘born and raised in the north’, their two answers

were quite different.

Ted described camping trips with his parents as a child; learning in nature, about nature

and the responsibility to protect nature, at an early age. He attributed his attitudes also to his

studies in science and biology and eventually as a young man to his peer group, from whom he

learned to attend more closely to his food choices. Being a teacher was a second career for Ned,

as he had already trained for and worked in the health care field. Thus, while he was a relatively

new teacher, he was not a young teacher, and had already developed a strong sense of purpose

and confidence.

Tess did not recall childhood experiences in nature similar to those of Ned. Her interest

developed when, as a very new teacher, she became part of an action research project that

addressed EE curriculum issues in science. Her further influences came from two other teachers

who served as mentors over the years and encouraged her involvement in school and

professional development activities focusing on EE. Her work with the student council also

provided her with opportunities to tackle environmental concerns at her school.

A study conducted in Australia, Canada, and the UK, (Palmer, Suggate, Robottom, & Hart,

1999) identified influential people (family, other adults and teachers), childhood experiences of

nature and work as the most significant factors that led educators toward EE. Remarkably, these


32


are exactly the main reasons given by Tess and Ned for their enthusiasm for EE. And these three

factors should be taken as further reasons for providing opportunities for students (and teachers)

to learn outside the classroom.

[the] results presented...suggest the importance of providing young people - indeed people

of all ages - with opportunities for positive experiences of nature and the countryside. It is

those ‘in’ and ‘with’ the environment experiences that appear to be fundamental to the

development of long-term environmental awareness and concern. (Palmer et. al., 1999, p.

199)

Given that Phase One survey data suggested that teachers with more years of experience

are more inclined to contemplate and/or embark on a shift in their practice, the enthusiastic

collaboration between Ned and Tess is somewhat unique. However, they had both independently

developed a strong environmental ethic and perhaps the opportunity to collaborate in a research

project acted as a form of permission for Tess and Ned to break away from traditional or

normative practices much earlier in their careers than might have been expected.

Discussion and Implications

The boreal region of northern Ontario is a special place and worthy of consideration from an

education perspective, since it is through education, I believe, that we can address social and

environmental well-being and sustainability. My research and teaching find focus at the

intersection of secondary science, STSE, and EE, especially as they are enacted in formal

schooling and particularly in this case as they are enacted in northern Ontario. While

encouraging progress has been made embedding STSE and EE in formal science curriculum

documents in Ontario, the real issue is one of practice. The Ontario science curriculum tasks

environmental education with learning about, in, and for the environment; learning that would

include not only nature studies (about and in the environment) but also studies that connect

environment to social and justice issues, and that advocate for positive action and activism.

Recognizing that it is not the curriculum but the personal beliefs of the individual educator that

determine how and what is taught, I was led to wonder whether secondary science educators

were presenting STSE and EE learning opportunities that provided students with opportunities to

think critically about environmental and social issues related to science, and to take action where

appropriate. This is a pertinent query at the secondary level, where science studies have tended to

follow a traditional route of science content and skill acquisition, with a leaning towards value-

free inquiry, and disciplinary isolation.

The questions informing this study were: How do secondary science teachers in northern

Ontario understand and teach to the STSE expectations? What do the reported lessons in STSE

actually look like? and How do teachers understand and implement EE through STSE? The

study was conducted in two phases: surveys and interviews, and a case study of two

collaborating teachers. Arising from the data analysis of both research phases, and coupled with

current understanding of STSE and EE teaching and learning in formal education settings in

Ontario, I present below six Implications for consideration. Based on Charmaz's (2006)

description of grounded theory as a means for data analysis, the implications that I propose

should not be taken as absolute and conclusive, instead they should be seen as a basis for

discussion and further investigation.

Implication #1: Secondary Science Teachers are Shifting their Practice towards STSE/EE


33


Generally, secondary science teachers in northern Ontario are reporting that STSE expectations

are gaining importance insofar as they agree that social and environmental issues, along with

ethics and values, have a place in science curricula. Further, they recognize the importance of

problem solving and decision-making in science studies inasmuch as these support the

development of students’ citizenship. This overall stance is in keeping with the intentions of

STSE to “place science squarely within social, technological, cultural, ethical, and political

contexts” (Pedretti & Nazir, 2011, p. 602). Moreover, this result hints at a change in attitude

from that reported (e.g. Gayford, 2002) in which science teachers are reluctant to move away

from traditional science pedagogies. A decade ago, Gough (2002) pointed out the dwindling

student interest in secondary science studies and made a strong case for providing context to

boost student engagement. Ten years later, teachers are reporting their belief in the importance of

providing opportunities for decision-making, and for examining the social and environmental

issues impacted by science and technology in their science programs. Teachers increasingly

recognize the shortcomings of a science curriculum that does not acknowledge the impact that

science and technology have on people and their environments, both locally and globally. Their

responses to the survey and interview questions indicate a change, a shift in beliefs held about

the nature of teaching science, and a concurrent shift in practice.

Nonetheless, the survey results are purely self-reported and may represent either the actual

state of practice and/or the state of practice that the respondents believe is preferable.

Implication #2: STSE Continues to be Problematic for Science Teachers

While the shift of science teachers towards deliberate inclusion of STSE and EE is encouraging,

there is considerable evidence that such a shift is fraught with difficulties. Indeed, discussions

regarding the challenges of implementing STSE are not new, yet it remains important to consider

the evolving practicalities of enacting a form of curriculum that is problematic. An unanswered

dilemma for teachers is the positioning of STSE within a science program and within a unit. The

re-placement of the STSE expectations to the front and center of each science unit challenges the

traditionally accepted view that science learning is a primarily content and lab-skill driven

discipline. Furthermore, there is confusion whether the STSE issues should define the content

and skills that need to be learned or whether the STSE issues should be presented only after the

content and skills have been attained. Are issues related to science and technology the very

reason why we should be teaching and learning science? Or are those issues an add-on to the

curriculum content if there is time? This remains a conundrum for many science teachers.

The information gap requires that teachers become knowledgeable and remain current on

topics that are far-ranging throughout the sciences; then teachers must develop new lessons on

those topics, such that students will be challenged to think critically, to problem solve, and to

engage in inquiry. Teachers are taking increasingly non-traditional approaches to teaching

secondary science curriculum in Ontario, despite the difficulties such a shift might entail. The

STSE expectations for teaching science require additional teacher content and pedagogical

knowledge; teachers who have considered themselves experts in their fields find themselves

having to research and prepare material that is new for them, and in many cases to hand over that

research to their students. This speaks to issues of confidence, and the shift of the role of the

teacher from gatekeeper of knowledge to facilitator of knowledge acquisition and interpretation.

It also speaks to many additional hours of lesson preparation time for teachers who already have


34


full schedules.

One of the most difficult practicalities that STSE presents to teachers is in student

assessment and evaluation. Shifting from long-established assessments for specific content and

skill acquisition using straightforward testing methods, to identifying student skill development

critical thinking, logical reasoning, or creativity, is quite another matter that, for many secondary

science teachers, presents a departure from their customary practice. Both teaching STSE and

assessing student learning become more complex than the administration of a series of well-

established lessons and then a test of acquired content knowledge.

Implication #3: Teaching in Rural Northern Ontario Presents Unique Conditions and

Challenges

Teaching in the north is an additional dimension within the already complex task of teaching

STSE. Northern sensibilities around environmental sustainability are reportedly not as pervasive

as those in the southern part of the province, neither amongst students nor teachers. And perhaps

because wilderness is at the doorstep, a sense of environmental crisis is not prevalent, nor is the

overarching belief of the need for personal acts of stewardship and sustainability. The teachers

confirmed that northern Ontario is a setting different from its southern urban counterpart, and

that its people, students, and teachers need to pay more attention to environmental issues.

Moreover, the isolated nature of some of the students/schools creates a disconnect relating

to environmental, social, and cultural perspectives between north and south, between rural and

urban, between resource-extraction and industrially based communities. A strong EE emphasis in

secondary science STSE should be seen as imperative for students and educators alike, which

would require focused professional and personal development opportunities.

Implication #4: Science Teachers in Northern Ontario Recognize their Need for PD

As stated above, the challenges of teaching EE within STSE, particularly in the north, speak to

the immediate and ongoing need for professional development opportunities that focus

specifically on the challenges that secondary science teachers have identified. The value of on-

going collaboration is confirmed (see also Wallace & Louden, 1994), as are multiple

opportunities for sharing practice with like-minded educators. Carefully designed and well

supported professional development experiences have far-reaching and amplifying effects for the

teachers involved.

It seems that teachers with more years of experience are more inclined to contemplate

and/or embark on a shift in their practice. This makes the enthusiastic collaboration between Ned

and Tess somewhat unique, as they are both less-experienced educators, however, they had

developed a strong environmental ethic. An opportunity to collaborate in a research project can

be viewed as a form of permission to break away from traditional or normal practice. Certainly

Ned and Tess took advantage of that opportunity. Professional development, whether in the form

of workshops, seminars, or longer-term action research projects and collaborations are key to

improved education. And equally important is the opportunity for educators to identify their

professional development needs for the purpose of designing and/or subscribing to appropriate

activities.


35


Implication #5: The STSE Framework Provides a Useful Lens for Data Analysis

A component of relevant professional development should include an examination of the Pedretti

and Nazir (2011) STSE framework as a means of analysis of science curriculum and lessons.

Recall that the STSE framework consists of six currents: Application/Design, Historical, Logical

Reasoning, Value Centered, Sociocultural and Socio-Ecojustice.

The classroom lessons that were observed during the study were deconstructed through the

lenses of the six currents as a way to examine the utility of the framework for the purpose of

providing pedagogical clarity to educators. For example, the lessons that required students to

consider evidence for the personal, social, and environmental health benefits of growing and

consuming organic foods fell within the Logical Reasoning current. Students were challenged to

think critically about the sources of the foods that they consumed and the benefits associated

with them. Further, as students found themselves thinking about the choices they make around

eating meat from animals that are inhumanely raised and slaughtered, they were working within

the Value Centered current. Many of them realized that the welfare of animals raised for food

had ethical ramifications for them. The Sociocultural current was powerfully represented by the

voice of the organic gardener who, during another lesson, introduced an alternative knowledge

system (organic food production). Students were challenged to recognize a broader cultural

context for learning the science of soils, and to consider that localities other than those sustained

by mining and forestry have equally valid and useful knowledge systems.

While strong links were not found for the other three currents, this does not negate their

usefulness for purposes of analysis. It is hardly likely that three lessons will fully encompass all

six currents. However, using the STSE framework as a foundation for analyzing multiple lessons

within a unit, or an entire course, will provide educators with a unique perspective of their

practice. The STSE framework is richly detailed with descriptions, pedagogical approaches and

teaching strategies that can inform and support a shift in practice towards a contemporary science

teaching practice. Indeed, an analysis exercise using the framework would likely prove

elucidating for both individual and collaborating educators.

However, as useful as the STSE framework is in its current form, the data analysis does

suggest that there is an important set of activities and experiences missing.

Implication #6: An EE Current is Needed in the STSE Framework

Earlier, the theoretical link was made between EE and STSE, so it is interesting to note that there

is not a strong focus on EE in the six STSE currents of Pedretti and Nazir (2011). Certainly

elements of EE can be found in the background, for example: in the Application/Design current

there is potential for examination of environmental impacts of new or modified technologies;

within the Logical Reasoning current can be nested the environmental sciences; the Value

Centered current entertains possibilities for studying various philosophies such as deep ecology,

ecofeminism or an ethic of care; the Sociocultural current has strong links to place-based EE and

indigenous environmental paradigms; and, the Socio-Justice current is an obvious place for the

examination of environmental justice issues. Yet, considering my conversations with the teachers

and my observations of the students particularly during the field trip to the organic farm, a

stronger voice for EE is missing from the framework.

The teachers talked about wanting their students to feel comfortable in natural

environments, and to learn to care deeply about them. I watched the students connect to the


36


natural environment sensuously, that is, they enjoyed the sun and wind on their faces, theyand

they keenly observed and interacted with the animals. I was reminded that EE must be about

more than thinking logically/critically about environmental issues, more than taking action in the

interests of eco-justice. Environmental education must be felt as much as reasoned. To that end I

suggest that Nazir and Pedretti (2011) have provided too weak a focus on environment/nature in

their STSE currents. There is a solid literature base underscoring the importance of a

sensuous/affective/intuitive connection to nature (for a comprehensive bibliography see Council

of Outdoor Educators of Ontario, 2007), and an equally strong foundation in the literature

connecting EE to science and to STSE (e.g. Gough, 2002; Hart, 2002, 2007; Hodson, 2003,

2010; Smith 2007; Tan & Pedretti, 2010). Moreover, the work of the teachers in this study

demonstrates their intention to provide transformatory EE experiences for their students through

the STSE expectations.

Rather than have EE hover in the background of the six STSE currents proposed by

Pedtretti and Nazir (2011), I would suggest that it be added as a seventh current. Its Focus would

be to understand that humans exist within/as part of, and not separate from, the natural

environment, and further that human actions have significant impact on environment. The

Educational Aims of an EE current would be Environmental Citizenship, and

Transformation/Agency, and its Dominant Approaches would include Affective, Intuitive,

Sensory, Experiential, Place-based, Creative, and Immersive. Examples of Strategies used in an

EE current would include integrated activities taking place out-of-classroom, out-of-doors,

within natural environments.

I sensed a genuine commitment on the part of Ted and Ness, to teach science in a way that

goes far beyond the transmission of content. They wanted their students to understand their role

within society as consumers and within the environment as caretakers. And they wanted their

students to spend time out-of-classroom, out-of-doors. Ted and Ness's commitments to EE are a

result of their trajectories towards embracing EE in their teaching practice and their personal

lives. At first glance their stories seem quite different - Ted recalled childhood experiences while

Ness attributed her commitment to EE to influential people in her adult life and work. But

according to Palmer et al. (1999) childhood experiences, influential people and work are three of

the most significant factors leading to interest and commitment to EE. Ted and Ness' stories

should have resonance for the STSE framework, and for secondary science teaching practice. For

the STSE framework to be complete and for EE to fully embedded in science teaching and

learning, both students and teachers need to spend time in nature and interact with environment.

They need to meet and interact with others who have a passion for environmental issues, and

they need to be prepared to find mentors and/or act as mentors for others. They need to gain

knowledge about environmental issues, and confidence in their ability to make good decisions

and act on them. Initiatives such as environmental clubs, activism for social and environmental

issues and further personal and professional development in EE should be encouraged and

supported. That falls well within the purview of the Ontario Ministry of Education definition of

EE, which is to teach in, about, and for the environment. And it should certainly be considered as

an important seventh addition to the six currents of the STSE framework.


37


Recommendations

The six implications discussed at length in the preceding paragraphs inform the following

recommendations:

First, given evidence that secondary science teachers are making a shift in practice to

include issues-based STSE science teaching and learning, new research directions should be

taken. For example: Is the shift in science teaching perspective peculiar to northern Ontario, or is

the shift occurring in other parts of Ontario? in other provinces? Moreover, the disparity between

perspectives and practice should be further explored, leading to questions such as: Which factors

impact the degree to which science teachers' EE perspectives or beliefs are reflected in their

practice? The personal and professional EE trajectories of teachers appear to play a significant

role in determining how they will address STSE/EE lessons inside (and outside) of their

classrooms. The EE trajectories of science teachers should be further explored as a means to

inform directions for professional development and professional support.

Important also is the question of how much STSE teaching and learning is enough in a

science program. How much time should be given over to STSE in order to meet curriculum

obligations? to hold student interest? and to adequately connect pure science learning to local

and global contexts? Examination and discussion of those issues will help teachers who struggle

with the thorny problem of how to position STSE in their teaching.

In addition, research focusing on rural northern science education is highly recommended,

as there is a distinct gap in the academic literature, as well as a pragmatic lack of understanding,

of what is entailed in teaching science in the boreal north.

Second, a current for EE should be created within the STSE Framework. It is important

that curriculum be designed and implemented within theoretical frameworks that inform and

unify it. While the STSE framework has six currents that provide meaningful and complex

understanding of the STSE intentions and expectations in secondary science, I believe that the

‘E’ in STSE would be strengthened by the addition of an EE current. An EE current in the STSE

framework would fill a gap that has been identified both through the literature and through an

analysis of teaching practice in this study, by bringing attention to the intuitive, affective,

sensory, experiential, and creative elements of EE within science curriculum.

Third, create a curriculum analysis tool based on the STSE Framework. Once the STSE

framework is enriched by a seventh current, the framework has the potential to inform and

augment the STSE practice of science teachers. However, currently the framework resides in a

scholarly paper, a version so detailed and comprehensive that it is too wieldy for use by

practicing teachers. A functional curriculum analysis tool is needed, based on the STSE

framework, concise in its terminology and easy to administer. Such a tool would provide

teachers with a detailed review of their STSE teaching, including suggestions to improve and

supplement their lessons.

Fourth, assist secondary science teachers to access meaningful professional development.

Professional development efforts should focus particularly on the areas of STSE that the teachers

have identified as needing clarification. In addition, there is a need for professional development

to address issues related to the shift in the role of the science teacher from traditional knowledge

keeper and transmitter to facilitator/interpreter/mentor of science studies. For the teachers in the

study, their changing role was the basis of many of their concerns and difficulties with

implementing STSE and EE. While workshops and seminars can be useful, teachers need time

and multiple opportunities to enact changes in their practice. Thus, it is highly recommended that


38


professional development occur over a longer term. Long-term projects and collaborations, such

as the one described in this study seem to be worthwhile for developing and honing teacher

practice and should be particularly encouraged and supported.

Finally, inform and inspire pre-service science teachers. It is during their extended study

time that pre-service teachers have the opportunity to engage in science curriculum as a unified

enterprise that continues to shift its focus. Pre-service teachers will benefit from being introduced

to the STSE and EE expectations embedded in science curriculum as a way to develop non-

traditional attitudes towards understanding and teaching science. The STSE/EE combination

encourages examination and development of pedagogies unfamiliar to traditional science

education. Pre-service teachers will not need to engage in the hard work of shifting their practice,

if they enter their science teaching careers already prepared to addresses STSE/EE in their

classrooms.

This study, based in the northern boreal region of Ontario, Canada has potential to inform

efforts at STSE/EE teaching in other rural, isolate regions, as well as in densely populated, urban

areas. The shift in focus amongst many science educators towards inclusion of significant,

contextual STSE/EE lessons is heartening, as is their willingness to examine and improve their

practices. I applaud the commitment of individual teachers who continue to be a driving force in

the shift towards developing authentic and relevant EE/STSE lessons for their students. I believe

their work will contribute to a robust EE/STSE component in science teaching and learning that

will, in turn, expand and strengthen the understandings that northerners have of their

extraordinary boreal surroundings. Through patient and passionate education the boreal region

will remain treasured by its human inhabitants.


39


References

Canadian Boreal Initiative. (n.d.) About Canada's Boreal. Retrieved April 2, 2013, from

http://www.borealcanada.ca/boreal-did-you-know-e.php

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. London, UK: Sage.

Council of Ministers of Education, Canada, CMEC. (1997). Common Framework of Science

Learning Outcomes: Pan-Canadian Protocol for Collaboration on School Curriculum

Toronto: Council of Ministers of Education, Canada.

Council of Outdoor Educators of Ontario. (2007). Reconnecting children through outdoor

education: A research summary. Toronto, Canada: COEO.

Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches.

Thousand Oaks, CA; SAGE publications.

Fazio, X., & Karrow, D. D. (2011, April). Exploring school-based environmental education

practices. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association for Research in

Science Teaching, Orlando, Florida.

Fowler, S., Zeidler, D., & Sadler, T. (2009). Moral sensitivity in the context of socioscientific

issues in high school science students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(2),

279-296. doi:10.1080/09500690701787909

Gayford, C. (2002). Controversial environmental issues: A case study for the professional

development of science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11),

1191-1200. doi:10.1080/0950069021013486

Gough, A. (2002). Mutualism: A different agenda for environmental and science education.

International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1201-1215. doi:10.1080/09500690210136611

Greenwood, D. (2009). Place: The nexus of geography and culture. In M. McKenzie, P. Hart, H.

Bai, & B. Jickling (Eds.), Field of green: Restorying culture, environment and education.

Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Gruenewald, D. (2004). A Foucauldian Analysis of Environmental Education: Toward the

Socioecological Challenge of the Earth Charter. The Ontario Institute for Studies in

Education of the University of Toronto Curriculum Inquiry 34(1), 71-107.

Gruenewald, D., & Manteaw, B. (2007). Oil and water still: How No Child Left Behind limits

and distorts environmental education in US schools. Environmental Education Research,

13(2), 171-188. doi:10.1080/13504620701284944

../../../../../../../../AppData/Local/Temp/%22http:/www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/21-006-x/2007007/6000446-eng.htm

../../../../../../../../../../AppData/Local/Temp/%22


40


Halfacree, K. H. (1993). Locality and social representation: Space, discourse and alternative

definitions of the rural. Journal of Rural Studies, 9(1), 23-37.

Hart, P. (2007). Environmental education. In S.K. Abell & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of

research in science education (pp. 689-728). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.

Hart, P. (2003). Teachers' thinking in environmental education: Consciousness and

responsibility. New York: Peter Lang.

Hart, P. (2002). Environment in the science curriculum: The politics of change in the Pan-

Canadian science curriculum development process. International Journal of Science

Education, 24(11), 1239-1254. doi:10.1080/09500690210137728

Hodson, D. (2010). Science education as a call to action. Canadian Journal of Science,

Mathematics and Technology Education, 10(3), 197-206.

Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International

Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645-670. doi:10.1080/14926156.2010.504478

Hodson, D., & Bencze, L. (1998). Becoming critical about practical work: Changing views and

changing practice through action research. International Journal of Science Education,

20(6), 683-694.

Karrow, D. D., Fazio, X., & Dusto, C. (2012, October). Exploring environmental education from

a rural education perspective. Paper presented at the meeting of the North American

Association of Environmental Education, Oakland, California.

Karrow, D. D., & Fazio, X. (2010). NatureWatch, schools and environmental education practice.

Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 10(2), 160-172. doi:10.1080/14926156.2010.504478

Kim, M. (2005). Ethics of pedagogy in world-becoming: Contemplations on scientific literacy

for citizenship. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 71(3), 52-58.

Lee, H., Chang, H., Choi, K., Kim, S., & Zeidler, D. (2012). Developing character and values for

global citizens: Analysis of pre-service science teachers’ moral reasoning on

socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34(6), 925-953. doi:10.1080/14926156.2010.504478

Louv, R. (2005). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder.

Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books.

Ontario Curriculum Council. (2007). Shaping our schools, shaping our future: Environmental

education in Ontario schools. Toronto, Ontario: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.


41


Ontario Ministry of Education, (2009). Acting today, shaping tomorrow: A policy framework for

environmental education in Ontario schools. Toronto, Ontario: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2008a). Science: Grade 9 and 10, revised. Toronto, Ontario:

Queen’s Printer for Ontario.

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2008b). Science: Grade 11 and 12, revised. Toronto, Ontario:

Queen’s Printer for Ontario.

Palmer, J., Suggate, J., Robottom, I., & Hart, P. (1999). Significant life experiences and

formative influences on the development of adults' environmental awareness in the UK,

Australia and Canada. Environmental Education Research, 5(2), 181-200. doi:10.1080/1350462990050205

Pedretti, E. (2003). Teaching science, technology, society and environment (STSE) education:

Preservice teachers’ philosophical and pedagogical landscapes. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The

role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education.

Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.

Pedretti, E., & Little, C. (2008). From engagement to empowerment: Reflections on science

education for Ontario. Toronto, Canada: Pearson.

Pedretti, E., & Nazir, J. (2011). Currents in STSE education: Mapping a complex field, 40 years

on. Science Education, 95(4), 601-626. doi:10.1002/sce.20435

Sauvé, L. (2009). Being here together. In M. McKenzie, P. Hart, H. Bai, & B. Jickling (Eds.),

Field of green: Restorying culture, environment and education. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton

Press.

Sauvé, L. (2005). Currents in environmental education: Mapping a complex and evolving

pedagogical field. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 10, 11-37.

Smith, G. A. (2007). Place-based education: Breaking through the constraining regularities of

public school. Environmental Education Research, 13(2), 189-207. doi:10.1080/13504620701285180

Smyth, J. C. (2006). Environment and education: A view of a changing scene. Environmental

Education Research, 12(3), 247-264. doi:10.1080/1350462950010101

Statistics Canada. (n.d.) Rural and Small Town Canada Analysis Bulletin, 7(7). retrieved April

12, 2013 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/21-006-x/2007007/6000446-eng.htm

../../../../../../../../../../AppData/Local/Temp/%22http:/www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/21-006-x/2007007/6000446-eng.htm


42


Steele, A. (2011). Beyond contradiction: Exploring the work of secondary science teachers as

they embed environmental education in curricula. International Journal of Environmental

and Science Education, 6(1), 1-22.

Stevenson, R. (2007). Schooling and environmental education: Contradictions in purpose and

practice. Environmental Education Research, 13(2), 139-153.

doi:10.1080/13504620701295726

Tan, M., & Pedretti, E. (2010). Negotiating the complexities of environmental education: A

study of Ontario teachers. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology

Education, 10(1), 61-78. doi:10.1080/14926150903574320

Wallace, J., & Louden, W. (1994). Collaboration and the growth of teacher knowledge.

Qualitative Studies in Education, 7(4), 323-334. doi:10.1080/0951839940070403

Wals, A., & Alblas, A. (1997). School-based research and development of environmental

education: A case study. Environmental Education Research, 3(3), 253-26.

doi:10.1080/1350462970030301

Zeidler, D., Sadler, T., Simmons, M., & Howes, E. (2004). Beyond STS: A Research-Based

framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377.

doi:10.1002/sce.20048

43

Improving Urban Students’

College Readiness as a Driver of

High School Curriculum Enhancement

Marius Boboc Cleveland State University

R. D. Nordgren National University

Abstract

Many factors inhibit college completion by African-American high school graduates who come

from low socio-economic backgrounds. Some factors are “cognitive,” while others can be

classified as “non-cognitive.” Variables in the latter classification are examined in this study

conducted at an urban high school in the Midwest with an African-American student population

five times the national average, and in a city with a median income well below that of the nation.

An instrument designed and validated to predict success of impoverished minority students in

college was administered to over 200 students at this school. This paper outlines the connection

between findings and specific curricular plans put forth by high school and district staff, assisted

by two researchers from an area public university, as a way to prioritize the school resources

aligned with non-cognitive variables leading to curriculum enhancement and successful student

transition to college.

Keywords: non-cognitive variable, curricular change, urban high school students, higher

education

Marius Boboc, Ed.D., is an Associate Professor of Education and Chair of the Department of Curriculum and

Foundations in the College of Education and Human Services at Cleveland State University. His research interests

include postmodern education, college and career preparedness and success, assessment and accreditation in higher

education, as well as online pedagogy and assessment practices.

Email: [email protected]

R.D. Nordgren, Ph.D., is a Professor in the School of Education and chairs the Educational Administration and

School Counseling/Psychology Department at National University. His research interests include national school

reforms, and the transition from secondary school to college or work. Email: [email protected] Marius Boboc, Cleveland State University


Brock Education, Volume 23, No. 1, Fall 2013, pp. 43-57

M. Boboc and R. D. Nordgren Improving Urban Students’ College Readiness

44

Brock Education, 23(1), Fall 2013, pp. 43-57

Introduction

Recent conversations on the future of the American society and economy in the 21st century have

been increasingly focused on identifying the attributes of teaching and learning in a globalized

world. According to the P21 Framework definitions developed by the Partnership for 21st

Century Skills, the core of these attributes should support students’ “blend of content knowledge,

specific skills, expertise and literacies” (2009, p. 1). Connecting these 21st century skills to a set

of expectations expressed by employers surveyed by Hart Research Associates on behalf of the

Association of American Colleges and Universities in Fall 2009, individuals graduating from

high school and then college should demonstrate the necessary skills and “higher levels of

learning and knowledge” (2010, p. 1). There needs to be a flexible balance between broad

knowledge and discipline-specific, more focused knowledge. Both types of knowledge should

lead to the development of “intellectual and practical skills,” “personal and social responsibility,”

as well as “integrative learning” (2010, p. 2). Along the same lines, the 21st century skills

movement has emphasized the connection among global awareness, financial literacy,

information, media, innovation, life and career skills (Johnson, 2009). Recent data show that

most high school graduates in the U.S. are not sufficiently prepared to meet the rigor of college

education or workplace requirements (Barnes & Slate, 2010; Santos, 2011). Consequently, the

sense of urgency in dealing with the current “aspirations-attainment gap” (Roderick, Nagaoka, &

Coca, 2009, p. 185) is reiterated by a call for action to prevent the possibility for today’s

generation to lag behind its predecessors in terms of educational achievement (Complete

College, 2011).

Completion of a four-year college degree by Americans over the age of 25 was 28% in

2006, an increase from 21% in 1990 (National Center for Education Statistics, 2007). As

encouraging as this trend appears, it does not allow us to see the higher education “achievement

gap” that certainly exists. For Whites, the college completion rate was 32% and over 49% for

Asian-Americans. On the other hand, African-Americans completed college at a 19% rate, and

Latinos fared even worse at a 13% level (National Center for Education Statistics, 2007). If equal

opportunities are to exist for all Americans, minority populations must be better prepared for

success in higher education. For this to happen, stakeholders in education should realize the wide

range of obstacles that prevent underserved populations from accessing postsecondary education

opportunities, followed by appropriate corrective measures (Martinez, 2006; Reid & Moore III,

2008). More recently, the Obama administration reinforced the American Graduation initiative

by releasing the College Completion Tool Kit in March 2011 (Russell, 2011), coupled with

proposed K-12 education reforms related to higher standards and improved assessment systems,

better teaching and school leadership workforce, with a particular focus on turning around our

lowest-achieving schools (The White House, 2013). Under these circumstances, any future

agenda aimed at improving high school graduation and successful transition to college, leading

to retention and completion, should factor in cognitive and metacognitive skills, content and

contextual knowledge, as well as academic self-management (Conley, 2008).

Traditionally speaking, college admission decisions have relied heavily on standardized

tests, such as the Graduate Record Examinations (GRE), even though it has been argued that

such assessment tools do not provide an accurate representation of test takers’ “relevant abilities”

(Kuncel, Hezlett, & Ones, 2001, p. 163), attrition risk, or non-traditional students’ readiness for

college (Adebayo, 2008; Sommerfeld, 2011). Therefore, in an attempt to increase the selection


45


process accuracy, college readiness includes factors that help high school graduates to manage

the various demands of college work and life. Identified either as “non-cognitive” or “soft”

skills, they focus on the complementarity to the academic side of schooling of personal

independence and responsibility, time and goal/task management, self-awareness and advocacy,

community service, and leadership initiatives developed in a variety of non-academic aspects of

the educational enterprise (Adebayo, 2008; Adams, 2012; Byrd & MacDonald, 2005; Skelly &

Laurence, 2011).

Sedlacek’s (2004) study that is the premise for this paper identifies “non-cognitive”

variables that have been tested to affect the success of minorities in college. Based on the study’s

findings, it was determined that different actions could be undertaken by school personnel in an

attempt to improve college readiness by addressing student performance from the non-cognitive

perspective.

The site of the current study is the only public high school that serves two so-called

“inner-ring” suburbs of a highly impoverished midwestern city. The median household income

for people living in the suburb where the high school is located is only at a range of 85% of the

national median. Of the 25,000 combined residents from the two suburbs served by the high

school, 35.65% are White and 62% are African-American (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). The high

school’s demographics mirror that of the two communities: of its nearly 1300 students, 74% are

Black while only 21% are White. Free-and-reduced lunch rate is at 30% compared to 24%

nationally. The school’s graduation rate is at 71% while the state average is 93%, and 18% of the

city’s residents have a 4-year degree or higher compared to a national average of over 25% (U.S.

Census Bureau, 2010).

Study Focus

The focus of the current study is placed on generating and interpreting individual profiles for

participating high school students based on their respective NCQ scores, with a particular

emphasis on school-specific factors impacting changes in these profiles that could be tied to

expected success in college. In this light, the following research questions are intended to meet

specific needs of teachers, counselors, and administrators from the participating high school,

while providing the two researchers with data based on which to initiate conversations about

curricular change with school stakeholders:

• What is the non-cognitive profile of each student in a college-bound freshmen cohort?

• How will these non-cognitive profiles change over two consecutive administrations of

the instrument?

• What factors (curricular or otherwise) contribute to the changes in non-cognitive

strengths and weaknesses?

• What trends can be found in the 180+ student cohort based on the results of the NCQ?

• How do the eight non-cognitive variables predict success in college for the cohort of

students?

Theoretical Framework

School success depends on the degree to which students have opportunities to engage in learning

activities that gradually lead to knowledge acquisition as well as skills and dispositions


46


development (Li & Lerner, 2013). To that effect, school curricula should be structured in a way

that strikes a balance between academic and non-academic foci designed to meet the needs of all

students by taking into account their “varying needs and abilities” (Sedlacek, 2004, p. 22). In

today’s increasingly diverse student population, there needs to be a conscious and concerted

effort toward creating and sustaining multicultural learning environments where students can

engage in challenging tasks preparing for college and/or the workforce. Under these

circumstances, well-informed career decision-making relies on a clear “sense of vocational

goals, strengths, and interests,” as shown for samples of Black and Latino/Latina high school

students (Flores, Navarro, & DeWitz, 2008, p. 491).

Traditional means of assessing student learning are associated with standardized tests and

grades, and they have become the guiding principle in the current age of accountability, leading

to a reactive perspective on determining student progress (Kellow & Jones, 2008). Non-cognitive

variables focused on “adjustment, motivation, and perceptions” provide a fuller picture of

student potential (Sedlacek, 2004).

Given the ability of non-cognitive variables to help measure student non-traditionality, a

Midwestern school district asked two urban education faculty members at a nearby state

university to help identify their students’ readiness to be successful in college. The district had

recently instituted a College Exploratory course that is mandatory for its nearly 400 freshmen

students. While much research has been conducted determining what students should know

academically to be successful in schools (Conley, 2005), only a small strand of research

examines “non-cognitive” assets. William Sedlacek has spent over three decades determining the

non-cognitive variables that enable students to be successful in four-year institutions, developing

a questionnaire used by some colleges and universities for placement of freshmen and actual

admittance into the university (Sedlacek, 2004). The eight variables identified by Sedlacek and

his colleagues are briefly described below, as they apply to successful non-traditional students:

• Positive self-concept: Demonstrate confidence, strength of character,

determination, and independence, as this non-cognitive variable is expected to be

predictive of “success in higher education for students of color and other non-

traditional students” (Sedlacek, 2004, p. 39). Scores range from 7 to 27.

• Realistic self-appraisal: Recognize and accept any strengths and deficiencies,

especially academic, and work hard at self-development; recognize need to

broaden their individuality, as it leads to self-monitoring and development. Scores

range from 4 to 14.

• Successfully handling the system (racism1): Exhibit a realistic view of the

system on the basis of personal experience of racism; committed to improving the

existing system; take an assertive approach to dealing with existing wrongs by not

assuming a hostile perspective on society, while being able to handle a

discriminatory system. Scores range from 5 to 25.

• Preference for long-term goals: Respond positively to deferred gratification;

plan ahead by setting goals; demonstrate ability to understand “the relationship

1 “For traditional students, this non-cognitive variable takes the form of handling they system without the addition of racism and

might better be labeled ‘negotiating the system’” (Sedlacek, 2004, p. 43).


47


between current efforts and future outcomes” (Sedlacek, 2004, p. 44) by using

role models as a reinforcement system. Scores range from 3 to 15.

• Availability of strong support person: Seek and take advantage of a strong

support network or have someone to turn to in a crisis or for encouragement.

Scores range from 3 to 15.

• Leadership experience: Demonstrate strong leadership in any area of their

background, some of which could be quite atypical (church, sports, non-

educational groups, gang leader and so on). Scores range from 3 to 15.

• Community involvement: Participate in their respective community from which they receive support. Scores range from 2 to 8.

• Knowledge acquired in a field: Acquires knowledge in a sustained or culturally

related way in any field (Sedlacek, 2004). Scores range from 2 to 8.

As the questionnaire was administered to junior students in high school, the researchers

made a few minor changes to the original survey that do not affect the instrument’s validity or

reliability, as follows: a) directions made it clear that the focus of the survey is on attending and

completing college, while requesting that students do not place their name on the paper; b) the

item dealing with the percentage of students dropping out of college was modified by adding the

phrase “before I am 25” as it applied to all participating high school students; c) the item stating

that universities should play a role in shaping social conditions in the world was modified by

adding the phrase “high schools;” d) finally, the item dealing with tutoring services availability

“on campus” was qualified to apply to “my school,” based on the age composition of the

participants. The first 6 items are focused on demographic information, followed by 4 items

dealing with how much education the participants expect to get during their lifetime, potential

reasons for which they might have to leave college before receiving a degree (to which the

researchers added “before I am 25,” as mentioned earlier), and a list of three things the students

are proud of having done. The next 19 items are based on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1

being “strongly agree” to 5 being “strongly disagree,” all of which rely on students’ current

feelings or future expectations, thus connecting to all 8 non-cognitive variables.

Methodology

School district officials granted permission to the two researchers to administer Sedlacek’s Non-

cognitive Questionnaire (NCQ) to 47 junior students in the College Exploratory class in October

2009. Sedlacek provides a scoring rubric for the NCQ that was used by the two researchers and a

graduate assistant involved in the project. The scores were shared with the school district, and a

profile developed for each student based on the scores for all instrument parameters described

above.

Over the past six decades, non-cognitive variables have been used to determine a variety

of attributes supporting student success, ranging from personal involvement, social integration,

study skills, to socio-economic background as well as environmental variables (Sedlacek, 2004).

Personality traits identified by Goldberg (as cited in Sedlacek, 2004) and non-cognitive variables

used by Sternberg (as cited in Sedlacek, 2004) to analyze experiential and contextual domains

are reflected in Sedlacek’s (2004) NCQ.

As there were no means available for high school students, the researchers and school

administration representatives agreed to use the community college benchmarks established by

Sedlacek (2004). Following an analysis of the findings of the initial administration, it appeared


48


that the area in which most students scored below the national average dealt with the availability

of a strong support person. Consequently, district officials asked the authors to provide

university personnel to speak to the College Exploratory classes about freshmen year experience,

thus emphasizing the effective transitioning to college life, both in social and academic terms.

Nine university students formed a panel to discuss their experiences and make suggestions on

how the district students can learn from their successes and failures. The panel (including the

Dean of Student Life, Admissions personnel, and the two co-authors) responded to questions

from the high school students about how best to navigate preparation for college and what they

could be doing as 11th graders to deal successfully with this challenge. A second administration

of the NCQ took place in October 2010 (N=172).

According to the original design of the research project, the teachers at the site high

school would utilize their students’ non-cognitive profiles as impetus for curriculum

enhancement. The questionnaire would be administered to the same students each year until

graduation and, it is hoped, to those matriculating to college each and every year they attend

college. Every consecutive year, the researchers would analyze the data for the October 2010

freshman cohort, discuss their findings with the district’s teachers and administrators, and act as

consultants to make curricular changes. Additionally, the district would like to administer the

NCQ to subsequent freshman classes in their College Exploratory course, and continue the

practice of administering the questionnaire each year in high school; the researchers may be

employed as consultants but will not be collecting these data, as they would only collect and

analyze data for the 2009-10 freshman class.

Findings

A comparison of the findings from the data collected in March 2010 and October 2010 shows

variation. In the March administration of the instrument (N=47), the only variables that were out

of the national norms range for high school seniors entering a community college (this norm

range was selected collaboratively by the school district and the researchers) were Positive Self

Concept, which was slightly above the range, and Availability of a Strong Support Person, which

was below range (see Table 1 and Table 2 below).

Table 1. Comparative data showing variation in terms of the first particular non-cognitive

variable based on the two consecutive NCQ administrations

Positive Self Concept Male Female Total

African American 19.43 21.90** 20.88**

Multi-racial 16* 21** 18.5

TOTAL 19 21.82** 20.63**

National Median 18, 19

Note: * denotes national median, ** denotes above national median


49


Table 2. Comparative data showing variation in terms of the second particular non-

cognitive variable based on the two consecutive NCQ administrations

Support Person Male Female Total

African American 13 11.8** 12.29**

Multi-racial 13 13 13

TOTAL 13 11.91** 12.37**

National Median 13, 14

Note: * denotes below national median, ** denotes above national median

These did not raise a great concern for the researchers, as the degree to which both were

out of range was small. However, the district did see the holistic value of the findings and

decided to have all 11th graders take the NCQ. As a result, 172 students were administered the

questionnaire in October 2010; this was approximately one-half of the 11th grade population at

the school, as the other half would take the course in the spring semester.

The findings for the second administration (Table 3 below) were interesting and a bit

unsettling. As can be seen, six of the eight variables were out of the national median range: Self-

Appraisal, Racism, Preference for Long-Term Goals, Availability of a Support Person,

Leadership Experience, and Knowledge Acquired in a Field. The following sections represent

the analysis of findings based on Sedlacek’s assumptions supporting his theoretical framework

and the instrument used for this research project. It should be noted that 165 of the 172 students

taking the questionnaire self-identified as Black or Multi-Racial. Therefore, it was determined by

the district and the two researchers that there was no need to aggregate the data by race, as the

number of White, Latinos, and others would be too low.

Table 3. Averages of October 2010 NCQ Administration

Self-

Concept

Self-

Appraisal Racism Goals

Support

Person Leadership Community Knowledge

Male 20.00** 8.50* 14.50* 6.50* 7.00* 7.50* 7.50** 5.00**

Female 17.87* 7.62* 14.87* 7.12* 7.75* 6.25* 5.62** 2.87*

Total 18.30 7.80* 14.80* 7.00* 7.60* 6.50* 6.00 3.30

National

Median

18, 19 9, 10 17, 18 9, 10 13, 14 8, 9 5, 6 3, 4

Note: * denotes scores that were below national average, ** denotes scores that were within national range


50


Self-Appraisal Scores for both male and female students were slightly below the norm range. According to

Sedlacek’s work, this could be from a lack of understanding about what is involved to attain

one’s goals or, in general to be successful in career, school, and life. The respondents may not be

aware of their own abilities, how evaluations are done in school, how others rate their

performance, or the consequences of grades, actions, and skills.

Racism/Navigating a System Scores for both male and female participants were quite a bit below the national norm range,

indicating that the students may not understand how the system of schooling works, could blame

others for their own problems, or their strategies for handling the system and/or racism could be

interfering with their academic development.

Preference for Long-Term Goals Again, scores for both male and female respondents were below the national norm range. This

could mean that the students lack evidence of setting and accomplishing goals and may proceed

without clear direction, they are not future-oriented spending too much energy in the present, or

their goals are vague or unrealistic.

Availability of a Support Person These scores were drastically low for both males and females, which could leave the researchers

and district to consider that the students either avoid turning to a mentor or have no one to whom

they can turn.

Leadership Experience Both genders were slightly out of range, although the scores for female students were

surprisingly lower. This could indicate that the girls (and to a lesser extent, the boys) lack

confidence in their leadership skills, are passive or lack initiative, or avoid controversy.

Knowledge Acquired in a Field Here, the scores for male students were slightly above the range, while those of female students

were slightly below. According to Sedlacek’s (2004) research, the male students could be

working independently in a field of their choice, therefore, gaining skills perhaps unrelated to

schoolwork. Girls could be more traditional in their approach to learning, not know their interests

or the possibilities that exist for them.

Translating NCQ Data Into High School Curriculum Enhancement

After several discussions at the school district level involving teachers and counselors from the

high school representing the site of the research project, one particular non-cognitive area was

selected for emphasis over the course of the following academic year - availability of strong

support person. According to Sedlacek (2004), this is where students seek and take advantage of

a strong support network or have someone to turn to in a crisis or for encouragement, and it has

proven to be crucial to success in college by minorities. Any follow-up actions in this respect


51


could involve the district in increasing its mentoring programs and outreach to the home

community. After the dissemination of the March 2010 results, school district officials contacted

the two researchers about having university students engage in formal mentoring relationships

with select students participating in a college-bound cohort at the high school. This was possible

by a small grant being awarded to the district by a local foundation that supported the initiative.

A call for participation was sent out to students from a nearby state university where one

of the researchers works as a faculty member. In his attempt to disseminate the information about

this mentorship opportunity, he contacted several department chairs, the director of the Honors

program, as well as the Dean of Students. As a result, over 40 students expressed interest in

participating in the project designed to start before the end of the Spring semester and extend into

the following academic year. High school staff and the school district curriculum director

decided to use an interest survey that they normally use for the college-bound cohort to

determine the compatibility of university students with the prospective high school student

participants in the project. Additionally, correlations were made between the background (major

areas) of the university students and their high school mentees, so that common academic

interests could support the mentoring relationship. Consequently, 20 university students were

paired up with 31 high school students, which meant that most of the university students were

assigned to 2 high school students. Eight of the 20 university students were in the Honors

program, 8 were in the Social Work program (5 at the undergraduate level and 3 at the graduate

level), while the remaining 4 students were majoring in other areas included in a College of

Liberal Arts and Social Sciences.

In preparation for the initiation of the year-long mentorship program, one researcher

worked closely with the school district curriculum director and several counselors at the high

school to generate a set of preliminary meetings designed to prepare the participating university

students for a successful mentorship relationship with their corresponding high school students.

The first meeting took place on the state university campus, and it was intended to introduce

university students to some background information on the mentoring project, college-bound

cohort at the high school, and requirements as well as expectations related to their involvement

in a range of activities aimed at improving the overall college readiness of the participating high

school students.

The following event also took place on the state university campus a week later. This

time, the “meet-and-greet” was the official start of the mentoring partnership. Due to the fact that

not all mentors were able to attend (some of them were either in class or had some internship

obligation that day), the participating high school students were assigned to work with the

available university students present at the event (only for this occurrence). The follow-up plan

took all mentors to the high school campus where they met their mentees for a March Madness

event that provided the informal framework for a better acquaintance of each other. As the spring

semester was coming to a close, future meetings were arranged between the mentors and their

mentees, as part of the initial parameters of the project expectations for participation. The bulk of

the preparation work for the selection of a college and its required paperwork for admission and

registration would occur during the following academic year. As the mentoring project was

underway, one of the researchers, the school district curriculum director, and a small group of

high school teachers and counselors met to discuss how to capitalize on the NCQ data gathered

the previous academic year. Once again, the area of “availability of strong support person” was

selected to become the support for curriculum development initiatives designed to improve

college preparedness. Prior to the beginning of a new academic year, the meeting focused on an


52


overview of the non-cognitive areas highlighted by Sedlacek’s work, the fall 2010 NCQ data,

and their corresponding findings, which led to an outline of potential actionable items of interest

to high school staff, as follows: a) characteristics of the population that would be targeted by any

resulting curricular initiatives, b) existing programs/courses, c) staff availability (in terms of

teaching and student support), d) instructional strategies and resources availability, e) student

performance data, and f) facilities. All these items were intended to prompt ensuing planning

conversations that would formalize curriculum changes informed by the NCQ data and the

mentoring program. See Appendix A of an example of a working document used during the

planning meeting. Zooming in on curriculum unit design, the group tackled issues such as the

creation of a coherent and consistent template that could be used by the high school teaching

staff and counselors, specifics related to the duration and initial composition of the units/lessons

included in the curriculum development initiative, as well as appropriate ways to disseminate

findings and progress with school staff, while documenting the impact on student learning (both

in cognitive and non-cognitive ways).

The plan of action generated during that planning meeting centers on enhancing the

current high school curriculum by establishing new as well as strengthening current programs

that have proven to serve the needs of students well. This implies a holistic approach to

curriculum improvement by sequencing content and associated skills in a developmental manner.

Concurrently, the entire curriculum could be revisited in terms of how it supports the application

of the entire range of knowledge bases and skills students possess to be able to meet the exit

standards and progress seamlessly to college (Conley, 2005). New initiatives revolve around

using the eight non-cognitive dimensions identified by Sedlacek (2004) as the basis for a lecture

series that would deal with various ways in which students could develop self-appraisal skills

that would be expected to improve their college readiness as demonstrated by an increase in

NCQ scores in a subsequent administration in a pre-/post-test manner. The informal and

formative data collected during these lecture series events intended to occur on the first Friday of

each month during the following academic year would feed into discussion topics for a new

support person/counseling group that would meet on a monthly basis.

In terms of the programs in place at the participating high school that would benefit from

the integration of the non-cognitive dimensions into the curriculum, two additional cohort-based

programs would be added to the college-bound group of students who would be involved in

academic and career planning as early as grade 9. This initiative expands the scope of the NCQ

research project initially focused on a select group of 11th graders. The rationale behind this

decision stems from the high school staff’s interest in tracking student performance (both

cognitive and non-cognitive) from the very first high school grade, which would allow the

school-wide decision making process to mature and generate feasible curricular initiatives that

would enhance college readiness. Part of the structure of this curricular enhancement informed

by the non-cognitive framework is provided by a statewide career planning Web site

(www.ocis.org) designed to guide high school students through the various stages of developing

career interest and relevant choices.

Future Research

As the demographics of our school age populations change fast, stakeholders in the field of

education should analyze how factors such as student differences account for education

attainment and completion. Just as the demographics of first-year students relate to a wide range


53


of diversity characteristics – age, race/ethnicity, gender, enrollment status, institutional type,

disabilities, sexual orientation, international, and/or first-generation students (Upcraft, Gardner,

& Barefoot, 2005) – it would be useful to inform curricular changes by connecting these

characteristics to the development of “significant learning experiences” (Fink, 2003, p. 7).

Student engagement, high-energy instructional activities, long-lasting retention of information,

and applicability of learning to real-life contexts and situations represent indicators of

significance of learning opportunities. While the weight of these indicators seems to rely heavily

on the academic side of schooling, their utility can have a great impact on students’ ability to

lead meaningful lives by contributing to their communities while preparing for the next

professional stage, be it college or the workplace. Consequently, the non-cognitive

characteristics of students’ growth and development should be taken into account as we plan the

future of all levels of formal instruction.

Under these circumstances, school district representatives and the two researchers are

examining a wide range of possibilities designed to ensure that graduates of the participating

high school have the necessary knowledge and skills to make an effective transition to college.

Both parties have concluded that follow-up interviews with students are necessary to gain a full

picture of areas of curricular improvement based on their respective NCQ-based profiles. In

addition, advising and mentoring efforts should become an integral part of the program so that

high school students have opportunities to develop their contextual knowledge based on which to

make informed choices about college financial aid, campus student support services, and

freshman curricula (Wilson, 2006), particularly connected to the two non-cognitive variable

areas – Positive self-concept and Availability of strong support person – highlighted in the

comparative study. It is the intent of the researchers to continue the partnership with the

participating school in order to refine the set of strategies used to connect the various aspects of

school life – academic and non-academic – at both high school and college levels (Martinez,

2006), especially as expectations of students can vary greatly between the two levels (Burns,

2006).

Future research will investigate the same non-cognitive variables in additional high

school settings serving high Latino populations. Finally, further investigation needs to take place

in order to determine the factors (curricular as well as extra-curricular) contributing to changes in

the profile of non-cognitive variables for participating students from the high school representing

the site of the research project. Once trends are identified in these cohort-based profiles and their

evolution over time, it would be quite beneficial to focus on the degree to which the eight non-

cognitive variables in this research project’s theoretical framework predict success in college.

The latter requires a longitudinal approach necessitating a continual relationship with the district

and the researchers as well as the study’s population throughout the next five to ten years.


54


References

Adams, C. J. (2012). ‘Soft skills’ pushed as part of college readiness. Education Week, 32(12), 1,

14.

Adebayo, B. (2008). Cognitive and non-cognitive factors affecting the academic performance

and retention of conditionally admitted freshmen. Journal of College Admission, 200, 15-

21.

Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2010, January). Raising the bar:

Employers’ view on college learning in the wake of the economic downturn. Retrieved

from http://www.aacu.org/leap/public_opinion_research.cfm

Barnes, W., & Slate, J. R. (2010). College readiness: The current state of affairs. Academic

Leadership (15337812), 8(4).

Burns, P. F. (2006). Success in college: From C’s in high school to A’s in college. Lanham, MD:

Rowman & Littlefield Education.

Byrd, K. L., & MacDonald, G. (2005). Defining college readiness from the inside out: First-

generation college student perspectives. Community College Review, 33(1), 22-37.

doi:10.1177/009155210503300102

Complete College America. (2011, Fall). Time is the enemy of graduation. Retrieved from

http://www.completecollege.org/docs/Time_Is_the_Enemy_Summary.pdf

Conley, D. T. (2005). College knowledge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Conley, D. T. (2008). Rethinking college readiness. New Directions for Higher Education, 144,

3-13. doi:10.1002/he.321

Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to

designing college courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Flores, L. Y., Navarro, R. L., & DeWitz, S. J. (2008). Mexican American high school students’

postsecondary educational goals: Applying social cognitive career theory. Journal of

Career Assessment, 16(4), 489-501. doi:10.1177/1069072708318905

Haberman, M. (2004). Star teachers of children in poverty. Houston: Haberman Foundation.

Johnson, P. (2009). The 21st century skills movement. Educational Leadership, 67(1), 1 – 15.

Retrieved from

http://ipkt.org:8080/modul/DPLI/index_htm_files/21ST%20CENTURY%20SKILLS.pdf.

Kellow, J. T. & Jones, B. D. (2008). The effects of stereotypes on the achievement gap:

Reexamining the academic performance of African American high school students.

Journal of Black Psychology, 34(1), 94-120. doi:10.1177/0095798407310537


55


Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., & Ones, D. S. (2001). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the

predictive validity of the Graduate Record Examinations: Implications for graduate

student selection and performance. Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 162-181.

Lee, J. M., Jr., Edwards, K., Menson, R., & Rawls, A. (2011). The college completion agenda

2011 progress report. Retrieved from

http://completionagenda.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/reports_pdf/Progress_Report

_2011.pdf

Li, Y. & Lerner, R. M. (2013). Interrelations of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive school

engagement in high school students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(1), 20-32.

Martinez, M. R. (2006, May). The link between high school reform and college readiness.

Nation’s Cities Weekly, 29(19), 4.

National Center for Education Statistics (2007). Status and trends in the education of ethnic

minorities. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/minoritytrends/

Olson, L. (2006). Skills for work, college readiness are found comparable. Education Week,

25(36), 1-19.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009, December). P21 framework definitions. Retrieved

from http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/P21_Framework_Definitions.pdf

Public School Review (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.publicschoolreview.com/school_ov/school_id/65095

Reid, M. J., & Moore, J. L., III (2008). College readiness and academic preparation for

postsecondary education: Oral histories of first-generation urban college students. Urban

Education, 43(2), 240-261 doi:10.1177/0042085907312346.

Roderick, M., Nagaoka, J., & Coca, V. (2009). College readiness for all: The challenge for urban

high schools. Future of Children, 19(1), 185-210.

Russell, A. (2011). A guide to major U.S. college completion initiatives (A Higher Education

Policy Brief). Washington, DC: AASC&U.

Santos, F. (2011, October 25). College readiness lacking, reports show. The New York Times, p.

A25.

Sedlacek, W.T. (2004). Beyond the big test: Noncognitive assessment in higher education. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Skelly, K.A., & Laurence, S.T. (2011). Tracking college readiness. School Administrator, 68(6),

33-36.


56


Sommerfeld, A. (2011). Recasting non-cognitive factors in college readiness as what they truly

are: Non-academic factors. Journal of College Admission, 213, 18-22.

The White House. (2013). K-12 education. Retrieved from

http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/education/k-12

Upcraft, M. L., Gardner, J. N., Barefoot, B. O. (2005). Challenging and supporting the first-year

student: A handbook for improving the first year of college. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

U.S. Census Bureau (2010). American fact finder. Retrieved from

http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtml?ref=geo&refresh=t

Wilson, B. J. (2006). Preparing urban scholars for college: A best practice in college readiness.

Connection: The Journal of the New England Board of Higher Education, 21(1), 15-16.


57


Appendix A

Sample Course/Class-Specific Planning Document for Non-Cognitive Items

Grade level: 10th Subject: ELA

Grading period(s): 1st Teacher: Mr. Thompson

Non-cognitive

area

Lesson

sequence

(lesson 1 – X)

Knowledge

acquisition

(Introduced,

Developed,

Mastered)

Skills developed

(Introduced,

Developed,

Mastered)

Follow-up

Actions

Notes

Self-appraisal Lesson 1

Lesson 2

Lesson 3

Introduced

Developed

Mastered

Introduced

Developed

Developed

(cont.)

Connect self-

appraisal to

Social Studies

curriculum

Talk to Ms.

Sanford about

team teaching a

unit on ___ that

would require

self-assessment,

as practiced in

our class.

58

Pre-service Teachers' Self-Regulated Learning

and their Developing Concepts of SRL

Dawn Buzza Wilfrid Laurier University

Trina Allinotte Waterloo Region District School Board

Abstract

Self-regulated learners manage their thoughts, emotions, and behaviours, and their social and

contextual environments to reach their learning goals. Research shows that student teachers can

learn to teach in ways that promote students’ development of SRL. It has also been shown that

there is a relationship between teachers’ own SRL and their ability to develop self-regulation in

students. This study examined student teachers’ developing concepts of SRL as they learned

about this complex set of skills, behaviours, and beliefs through both coursework and field

observations. This paper investigates the relationship between self-reported SRL of these

teachers and their understanding of SRL behaviours and SRL-supportive teaching practices.

Participants’ self-reported learning strategy scores predicted their performance on an SRL

classroom observation assignment while motivation scores were unrelated. These results

contribute to our growing knowledge of how to support student teachers in their learning of

teaching strategies that support the development of SRL.

Keywords: self-regulated learning; teacher education; teaching strategies; learning strategies;

intrinsic motivation

Dawn Buzza, PhD. is an Associate Professor of Education at Wilfrid Laurier University. Her research interests

include child and adolescent development and self-regulated learning (SRL). She is currently working with

secondary school teachers to examine the effectiveness of teacher-developed SRL support strategies across

instructional contexts and over time. One goal of this research is to examine academic and motivational outcomes of

SRL support aimed at helping students during the transition to high school.


Trina Allinotte teaches secondary science and special education in the Waterloo Region District School Board. She

holds a Master's degree in Education from the University of Victoria, BC.


D. Buzza Teacher Education and SRL

59

Brock Education, 23(1), pp. 58-76

Introduction

The importance of self-regulated learning (SRL) in academic learning and in contexts outside of

school has been demonstrated in the literature (McCaslin & Good, 1996; Perry, 1998, Boekaerts,

Pintrich & Zeidner, 2000; Schunk & Zimmerman, 2008). Self-regulated learners are

metacognitively, motivationally, and behaviourally engaged in the learning process (Zimmerman

& Schunk, 2001). In addition, self-regulated learners are aware of their strengths and limitations

in academic situations and they have a range of strategies to use to meet the demands of

challenging learning tasks. They believe that they are capable (i.e., have high self-efficacy

beliefs), hold an incremental theory of ability, and typically focus on learning goals and personal

progress more than performance goals or competing with classmates (Schunk & Zimmerman,

2008). They also attribute successes and failures to factors they can control (e.g., effort and

strategy use). Finally, they are flexible and adaptable in monitoring their own learning and

applying strategies to learning challenges they face.

Research has shown that teaching behaviours, task design, and classroom interactions

influence students’ development of self-regulated learning skills. For instance, Perry and her

colleagues (Perry, Phillips, & Dowler, 2004; Perry & VandeKamp, 2000) describe classrooms

that support children’s development of SRL as those where they work on extended, complex

learning tasks; make decisions about how they go about learning and about the end products and

criteria for evaluating them; can collaborate with peers; and where there are opportunities for

peer and self-evaluation. Perry, Phillips, and Hutchinson (2006) also demonstrated that student

teachers can, with adequate support, learn to teach in ways that promote SRL, despite earlier

assumptions that pre-service teachers were not ready for such complex planning, interactions,

and decision making in their classroom practice. Student teachers in Perry et al.’s (2006) study

participated in a yearlong program that involved intensive mentoring, coursework, supervised

practice, and school-based professional development, all with a particular focus on promoting

SRL. However, not all teacher education programs or even all cohorts within the program

studied by Perry and colleagues are likely to place this much emphasis on developing teaching

practices that support SRL. These authors thus raise the question of how much and what kinds of

scaffolding student teachers need in order to learn SRL-supportive teaching practices (Perry et

al., 2006; Perry, Hutchinson, & Thauberger, 2008).

Recent literature has also made the connection between teachers’ own self-regulated

learning and their ability to develop self-regulation in students (Gordon, Dembo, & Hocevar,

2007; Randi, 2004). The purpose of this study was to examine the statistical relationships that

may be shown between student teachers’ self-reported SRL and their demonstrated

understandings about how SRL can be supported in classroom teaching. Specifically, the

research question we examined was, Do teacher education candidates’ self-reported Self-

Regulated Learning (SRL) scores predict how well they understand SRL as it appears and is

supported in classrooms? This study may provide evidence that will help us to better understand

how to scaffold teacher candidates as they learn to teach in SRL-supportive ways.


60


Theoretical Context and Literature Review

Over the past two decades, research in education has shown that achievement, both in and

outside of school, is positively influenced by students’ use of self-regulated learning (SRL) skills

and behavior to manage learning situations effectively. While there are varying models of self-

regulated learning in the education literature, most theoretical formulations hold that when

learners self-regulate they manage their abilities and capacities (e.g., thoughts, emotions, and

behaviours) and their social and contextual surroundings to reach their goals for learning and

achievement (Reeve, Ryan, Deci, & Jang, 2008). In this research, self-regulated learning is

conceptualized from a social-cognitive perspective, in which metacognitive knowledge and

control, intrinsic motivation, and strategic knowledge and skills are applied to learning situations

(Winne & Perry, 2000). The first of these components, metacognitive knowledge and control, is

seen as students’ awareness of their strengths and weaknesses as learners and the ability to adapt

strategies and tactics effectively as they manage challenging tasks. Intrinsic motivation for

learning, the second component, involves strong self-efficacy beliefs, a focus on personal

progress and deep understanding, and a tendency to attribute outcomes to factors the learner can

control. The third component of SRL involves learners being strategic in their approach; these

learners can choose from a repertoire of strategies to accomplish challenging tasks, apply them

appropriately, monitor their progress against task goals, and adapt and adjust their strategy use as

needed.

Although the positive effects of self-regulated learning are well documented (Perry, 1998;

Perry et al., 2004; Boekaerts, et al, 2000), we also know that many learners across a wide range

of ages and learning contexts are not self-regulating effectively (Perry, 1998; Zimmerman &

Schunk, 2008). Indeed, many students are not taught strategies that could help them to manage

their learning, or how to choose and apply them effectively in the right situations. In many

classrooms students are given little or no opportunity to evaluate their own learning processes

and products, which can provide them with feedback on how they are managing their learning

and contribute to their development of metacognitive knowledge. Also, and not surprisingly

given the competitive goal structures within many classrooms (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece,

2007), most students are extrinsically motivated by grades, praise, and social comparisons. For

some students, and under certain classroom conditions, external rewards such as grades and

teacher praise act as incentives, while for other students in other situations they can lead to

failure avoidance and lowered self-esteem, resulting in their choosing easy tasks, procrastinating,

or avoiding work altogether (Schunk, 2008). Research has shown, for instance, that specific

external events such as opportunities for choice, self-direction, and an optimal level of challenge

will enhance students’ intrinsic motivation by supporting their sense of autonomy and perceived

competence (Perry et al., 2000; 2004; Reeve et al., 2008). Reeve and his colleagues also note that

differences in teachers’ intentions (i.e., supporting student autonomy vs. controlling their

behaviour) can strongly affect students’ intrinsic motivation and engagement, even when the

teaching behaviours themselves are the same (e.g., setting limits, providing rewards, or offering

feedback).


61


When Perry and VandeKamp (2000) asked teachers about their goals for students, most

indicated that they wanted to help students become more independent and effective learners, but

were not sure how much support their students needed, or what kinds of support would be most

helpful. These authors worked with pre-service teachers and experienced associate teachers who

mentored them in efforts to promote teaching practices that would support SRL in elementary

school learners. Through intensive coursework, classroom practice, mentorship, and professional

development activities throughout a one-year teacher education program, the researchers found

that even novice teachers could learn to teach in ways that foster SRL in their students. Perry and

VandeKamp’s (2000) findings challenged previous conceptions of novice teachers as being

unable to focus on complex pedagogical activities while they were learning the basics of

behaviour management and content delivery (Alexander, Murphy, & Woods, 1996; Clark &

Riecken, 2000; Duffy, 1997; Whitaker, 2000; 2003).

Research by Perry and her colleagues (e.g., Perry et al., 2006; 2008) demonstrated that

student teachers can learn to implement some of the sophisticated teaching strategies and skills

required for promoting SRL in their classrooms, through the use of extensive, targeted

mentorship focused on this goal, along with a high level of continuity between practice and

coursework. However, the authors note that further research is needed to determine how much

scaffolding, focused reflection, and discussion beginning teachers need in order to learn how to

design tasks and interact with young students in ways that promote SRL (Perry et al., 2008).

Randi (2004) emphasized the importance of teachers’ own SRL in their ability to

effectively perform in their practice, noting that teachers’ roles have changed through

contemporary professional development, such that they need to be effective learners, not just

effective workers. Also, Hwang and Vrongistinos (2002) reported that elementary student

teachers’ use of SRL strategies was strongly related to their academic achievement. However,

contrary to these findings and to most current research on SRL and achievement, a recent study

by Shawer (2010) indicated no differences between student teachers in low, average, and high

SRL groups on a test of curricular content knowledge and course design skills.

Of particular relevance to the present investigation, Gordon et al. (2007) found that

teachers’ own self-reported SRL influenced the extent to which they conveyed a mastery goal

orientation in their classrooms, and that those with a mastery goal orientation also reported more

humanistic control ideologies. The authors note that teachers who hold a humanistic control

ideology try to help students learn to manage their behaviour and academic progress by creating

a classroom environment that supports student responsibility, strategy use, and appropriate help-

seeking (2007) – in these ways, they support students in developing SRL. This research indicates

that how teachers learn may be an important mediating factor in the way they teach. The authors

also called for more research on how student teachers learn during their teacher education

programs and, more specifically, how they can become more self-regulated learners.

As a first step in discovering how much support is enough to help student teachers apply

concepts of SRL in their own teaching practice, it may be useful to identify factors that influence

their understanding of what SRL is and how teachers and classroom tasks can help students to

develop it. The present study was designed to examine the relationship between student teachers’

own self-reported SRL skills and their performance on a measure of SRL knowledge. Teacher


62


education candidates completed the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ,

Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, & McKeachie, 1993) as an assessment of their own SRL. They then

learned about SRL through readings, lecture, and class discussions. They applied their

developing concepts of SRL by observing teacher and student behaviours known to be

representative of SRL in classroom settings and summarizing their observations in a written

report. The rubric developed to assess teacher candidates’ observation reports was used as a

measure of their SRL knowledge. Gaining a better understanding of the relationship between

student teachers’ intrinsic motivation, metacognitive learning strategies (as measured in the

MSLQ), and their effectiveness in conceptualizing SRL in elementary classroom contexts (as

measured through the observation report rubric) may help to identify ways to better prepare them

for fostering SRL in their own classrooms. This study also provides evidence that may help to

clarify the contradictory findings related to SRL and achievement in student teacher populations.

Methods

Study Context and Participants

The study took place in the context of a nine-month, post-degree Bachelor of Education program

where the concepts related to SRL were addressed through a single unit of instruction in a

Learning and Child Development course. The teacher education program is based on a

professional development school (PDS) model, in which teacher education candidates are placed

in the same schools for the entire academic year. The course takes place in two five-week blocks,

separated by a two-week block practicum. Throughout the blocks of time when university classes

are held, teacher candidates also spend 1.5 days per week (referred to as field experience days) in

their professional development school (PDS) sites.

The sample for the study consisted of 108 teacher education candidates at a Canadian

university. There were 27 males and 81 females in total, with 7 males and 45 females in a

primary/junior (P/J) program and 20 males and 36 females in a junior/intermediate (J/I) program.

Participants were students in four sections of the Learning and Child Development course, two

of which were taught by Buzza. Students were informed that their participation was voluntary

and that refusal would have no bearing on their evaluation in the course. Names and other

identifying information were removed from course materials collected from participants before

they were added to the data set.

Measures

Demographic survey. Participants completed a demographic survey, which provided data

on their gender, level of academic preparation, and years of teaching-related work experience.

One survey question also asked them how many courses in psychology they had taken

previously. The purpose of this question was to explore potential relationships between prior


63


knowledge in psychology, self-reported SRL, and understanding of SRL as applied in classroom

settings.

Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). The MSLQ is an 81-item

paper-and-pencil self-report measure comprised of six Motivation subscales and nine Learning

Strategies subscales. It was selected as a measure of SRL in part because it contains subscales

that allow examination of specific motivational and strategic components and their potential

relationships to outcomes on an assignment that reflects an understanding of SRL. The MSLQ

has been extensively validated and used in previous research literature (Pintrich et al., 1993). It

was demonstrated to be internally consistent in our sample, with an alpha coefficient of .90 for

the total score, .80 for the Motivation Scales, and .89 for the Learning Strategies scales.

Reliability coefficients for the subscale scores ranged from .50 to .88.

SRL observation rubric. Teacher candidates’ understanding of SRL was assessed using

a rubric for a major course assignment. The assignment provided practice in conceptualizing

how teaching can promote SRL by asking teacher candidates to observe three classroom

learning activities in the schools where they were assigned for field experience. For each

observation they were required to take running notes and then summarize their notes to identify

situations where SRL components of student choice, control over challenge, opportunities for

self-evaluation, making use of peer support, and making use of teacher support were observed.

Perry and colleagues identified these specific features of classrooms and tasks as important in

supporting students’ development of SRL (Perry, 1998; Perry et al., 2004; Perry &

VandeKamp, 2000). Along with their observation summaries, teacher candidates submitted a

report of their observations addressing the following requirements: (a) a summary of the

instructional tasks, activities, and interactions they observed and the classroom context in which

they took place; (b) a description of teaching behaviours they believed would promote SRL in

students; (c) a description of learner behaviours they observed that appeared to reflect SRL; and (d) a description of how they could envision using what they had learned about SRL in their

own teaching, such as how they might design and support learners’ management of complex

learning tasks, or how they could enhance students’ intrinsic motivation. The rubric for assessing the SRL assignment contained five criteria: Observation Summary,

Teacher Behaviours that Promote SRL, Learner Behaviours that demonstrate SRL, Application

to Teaching Practice, and Professional Writing Standards. The Professional Writing Standards

criterion was not included in the analysis for this study as it was not directly relevant to the

research question or to teacher candidates’ understanding of SRL. While there were four

performance levels on the rubric, Levels 1 and 2 were collapsed for the purposes of our analyses

because Level 1 was either rarely or never assigned to any of the criteria.

Research Design, Data Collection Activities, and SRL Instruction

We examined hypothesized relationships between teacher candidates’ self-reported SRL and

their understanding of how SRL appears and is supported in classroom practice, using

correlational and analysis of variance statistical tests. Teacher candidates in four sections of

approximately 35 students each were introduced to the study during their first Learning and


64


Child Development class, and signed consent forms if they agreed to participate. Participants in

the study then completed the demographic survey and the MSLQ.

Teacher candidates were informed about the SRL Observation assignment during the first

class session, when the course syllabus was reviewed. They were then assigned to read an article

by Perry and VandeKamp (2000) as part of the coursework associated with the topic of complex

cognitive processes in learning, which occurred in Week 7 of the 10-week course. They were

expected to read the chapter on this topic in their course textbook (Woolfolk, Winne, Perry, &

Shapka, 2010), which included a section discussing SRL. Finally, teacher candidates participated

in lecture, discussion, and application activities during a three-hour class session. They had

covered a unit on motivation earlier in the course.

Following their readings, class discussions and activities related to SRL, teacher

candidates were asked to complete their structured observations at convenient and appropriate

times during their field experience days. To ensure that they had a reasonable understanding of

what they were looking for in their observations, teacher candidates were required to bring to

class at least one of their three sets of observation notes, including categorized summary notes

two weeks before the final report was due. The instructor checked over the observation notes on

the same day and returned them with verbal feedback related to any questions about possible

misunderstanding of the task. The SRL Observation report was submitted during the final week

of the course.

Scoring of SRL Observation Rubrics

The SRL Observation rubric total scores were converted to a percentage score for purposes of

these analyses. The rubrics for the Junior/Intermediate classes were scored such that percentage

scores were obtained for each rubric criterion. The assignments for the Primary/Junior classes

were scored categorically, so that level 1, 2, 3, or 4 were selected on each rubric criterion. As

noted earlier, Levels 1 and 2 were collapsed for the present analyses because Level 1 was either

rarely or never assigned to any of the criteria. Criteria scores were averaged to obtain a total SRL

Observation score and, in the Primary/Junior classes, converted to a mark out of 35, which was

the weight of the assignment in the course grade.

ResultsResultsResultsResults

Table 1 shows the means and related descriptive statistics for the MSLQ total and subscale

scores and the SRL Observation rubric total cores.


65


Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for MSLQ Total and Subscale Scores (on a 7-point scale) (N

= 124) and for SRL Observation rubric Total Scores (N = 117)

Scale Min. Max. M SD

MSLQ Total 3.22 5.95 4.94 .49

Motivation Scales 3.33 6.22 5.03 .53

Intrinsic Goal Orientation 1.00 6.75 5.07 .96

Extrinsic Goal Orientation 1.50 7.00 4.75 1.19

Task Value 1.50 7.00 5.49 .83

Control of Learning Beliefs 3.50 7.00 5.37 .77

Self-Efficacy for Learning

& Performance

3.25 7.00 5.39 .78

Test Anxiety 1.00 7.00 4.10 1.40

Learning Strategies Scales 2.98 6.14 4.84 .62

Rehearsal 2.00 7.00 5.17 .96

Elaboration 2.83 7.00 5.37 .93

Organization 1.75 7.00 5.24 1.11

Critical Thinking 1.75 7.00 4.48 1.24

Metacognitive Self-regulation 2.75 6.17 4.48 77

Time & Study Environment 2.38 7.00 5.26 .90

Effort Regulation 2.25 7.00 5.45 .99

Peer Learning 1.00 7.00 3.88 1.21

Help Seeking 1.50 7.00 4.26 1.23

SRL Rubric (Total) .43 1.00 .79 .13

Evaluation of the SRL Observation rubric

The main interest in this study was to examine the relationships between pre-service teachers’

self-reported SRL and their ability to understand and observe SRL in practice. The SRL

Observation assignment was designed to provide them with an opportunity to demonstrate their

learning of these aspects of SRL by describing teaching behaviours known to promote SRL,

observing learners’ SRL behaviours, and suggesting how they might apply SRL concepts in their

own teaching practice.

The rubric used to assess the SRL Observation assignment was developed and refined

over several iterations of the course, but was not previously analysed to determine its statistical

properties. To evaluate this measure, a two-way Chi Square test was conducted on the

frequencies of teacher candidates’ assessments falling in the various levels (1, 2, or 3) on each

criterion within the rubric. This provided estimates of how well the frequencies of scores in each

cell matched predicted outcomes and the strength of associations among them. The contingency

table used for the Chi Square test was therefore 4 X 3, with levels reflected in three columns (see


66


Table 2). A Chi Square statistic of 13.55 (p = .04, df = 6) was obtained. This result shows that

the actual frequencies for scoring at the various levels on the rubric criteria were fairly well

predicted by expected frequencies. The strength of the associations among the frequencies for the

criteria and performance level variables was weak, however, as shown by a Cramer’s V of 0.12.

Table 2. Frequency Contingency Table for SRL Observation Rubric Criteria

Criteria Level 1/2 Level 3 Level 4

Observation Summary 17 57 44

Teacher Behaviour

20

52

46

Learner Behaviour 22 66 30

Application 30 61 27

Note. Chi Square =13.55 Cramer’s V = 0.12, df = 6, p = .04

Relationships between Demographic Variables, SRL scores, and SRL Observation scores

As a first step in examining relationships among variables within our sample, Pearson

correlations were calculated between several demographic variables, MSLQ scales, and SRL

total scores. These results appear in Table 3. The demographic variables were as follows: Gender

(male/female); Grad Year (high school graduation year, within five-year ranges); Program

(primary/junior vs. junior/intermediate teacher education program); Psych Courses (number of

psychology courses taken previously); Academic Level (Bachelor’s/Master’s/Doctorate); Work

h/year (weekly hours working for pay during teacher education program).


67


Table 3. Pearson Correlations between Demographic Variables, MSLQ Scales, and SRL

Assignment Scores (N = 115)

Note. MSLQ M = motivation subscale total score; MSLQ LS = learning strategies subscale total

score; Program = 1 (Primary/Junior) or 2 (Junior/Intermediate); Psych. Courses = number of

psychology courses taken previously; Work h/year = hours worked for pay during current

academic year.

* p ≤ .05, **p ≤ .01.

All of the MSLQ scales (MSLQ Total, Motivation and Learning Strategies) appeared to

be related positively to gender (where 1 = males and 2 = females) and negatively with grad year

(where higher numbers were assigned to more recent graduates entering the program). Overall

performance on the SRL Observation assignment (labelled SRL Rubric) was not predicted by

any of the demographic variables.

Relationships between Self-Reported SRL and Observing SRL in Classrooms

Next, we examined correlations between the MSLQ scales and the total SRL Observation rubric

score. The results of this analysis show relationships among the MSLQ scales in the context of

our sample and also predictions of teacher candidates’ performance on the SRL Observation

assignment from MSLQ scores. The total MSLQ scores and SRL Observation rubric (total)

scores did not show a statistically significant correlation (r = .15, p = .12). However, while not a

strong relationship, the MSLQ Learning Strategies subscale was correlated with the total SRL

Observation scores (r = .19, p < .02). As shown in Table 4, this relationship appeared to be

attributed mostly to two individual Learning Strategy scales that showed statistically significant

correlations with the SRL Observation rubric scores: Organization (r = .26, p < .01) and Time

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. SRL Rubric ---

2. MSLQ M .06 ---

3. MSLQ LS .19* .41** ---

4. MSLQ Total .16 .70** .91** ---

5. Gender .19* .18* .19* .21** ---

6. Grad Year -.10 -.17 -.23** -.26** -.02 ---

7. Program .00 .02 .00 .02 -.30** -.05 ---

8. Psych. Courses -.10 -.08 -.13 -.11 .16 .21* -25** ---

9. Academic

Level .02 .12 .22** .26** -.10 -.19* .11 -.08 ---

10. Work hr/year -.18 -.03 -.05 -.07 -.03 .06 -.10 .07 -.03 ---


68


and Study Environment (r = .27, p < .01). Scores on the MSLQ Motivation scales did not predict

the SRL Observation rubric scores.

It was anticipated that teacher candidates’ scores on some of the MSLQ subscales would

be related differentially to more specific outcomes on the SRL assignment. For example, the two

rubric criteria that are related to identifying and describing teacher behaviours that promote SRL

and learner behaviours that demonstrate SRL were seen as the most direct test of understanding

SRL concepts, because for these parts of the assignment, theoretical or abstract explanations

would not suffice. These more specific relationships were examined next.

Different scoring of the SRL Observation assignment by the two instructors teaching the

Learning and Child Development course prevented us from using all of the data in analyses

involving the criteria scores. As described above, for the Junior/Intermediate classes, percentage

scores were assigned to each criterion in the SRL Observation rubric. The assignments for the

Primary/Junior classes were scored categorically and then averaged to obtain a total score for the

assignment and converted to a mark out of 35 (which was the weight of the assignment in the

course grade). Because percentage scores for the individual criteria were available only for the

Junior/Intermediate classes, the remaining analyses were conducted with this portion of the

sample only (N = 63).

Table 5 shows correlations between the MSLQ Total scale, Motivation subscale,

Learning Strategies subscale, and the criteria and total scores for the SRL Observation rubric.

These results indicate positive relationships between the Learning Strategies scales on the MSLQ

and the SRL assignment, as indicated from the larger sample correlations (Table 4). Also, the

Learning Strategies scales were related to the SRL rubric criteria of Teacher Behaviours and

Learner Behaviours. Lower correlations between both of the other SRL rubric criteria and

Learning Strategies scales did not reach statistical significance, but were in the expected

direction.

To further explore the relationships between Learning Strategy (LS) scales and SRL

Observation scores we conducted a one-way ANOVA using High Learning Strategy (High-LS)

and Low Learning Strategy (Low-LS) groups as predictors and SRL Observation rubric total

scores as the dependent variable. High- and Low-LS groups were obtained using upper and

lower quartiles as cut-offs from the total sample (N = 124). This analysis did not produce a

statistically significant F-statistic but a positive trend was shown (F = 2.95, p = .09). This trend

could indicate that particularly high and particularly low scores on the Learning Strategies

components of SRL differentiate between teacher candidates who demonstrate strong SRL

understanding and those who do not. Additional analyses involving specific SRL assignment

criteria were ruled out given the small sample size that would be required.

D.

Bu

zza

Tea

ch

er

Ed

ucati

on

and S

RL

1

Tab

le 4

. C

orr

ela

tio

n M

atr

ix f

or

MS

LQ

Su

bsc

ale

s a

nd

SR

L O

bse

rvati

on

Ru

bri

c

Var

iable

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

1

3

14

15

1

6

17

18

19

1. M

ST

--

-

2. M

OT

.7

0**

---

3. M

VI

.59

**

.54

**

---

4. M

VE

.2

6**

.61

**

-.0

7

---

5. M

VT

.6

9**

.72

**

.59

**

.24

**

---

6. M

EC

.10

.33

**

.02

.07

.09

---

7. M

ES

.4

1**

.36

**

.30

**

.03

.31

**

.25

**

---

8. M

AT

.2

8**

.57

**

.01

.38

**

.20

*

-.0

7

-.2

9**

---

9. L

ST

.92

**

.41

**

.42

**

.10

.48

**

-.0

6

.24

**

.17

*

---

10

. L

CR

.3

5**

.21

**

-.0

6

.26

**

.16

*

.02

-.0

3

.20

*

.43

**

---

11

. L

CE

.6

9**

.33

**

.37

**

-.0

6

.40

*

.09

.46

**

-.0

0

.65

**

.14

---

12

. L

CO

.6

5**

.31

**

.34

**

.04

.34

**

-.0

5

.08

.21

**

.73

**

.32

**

.53

**

---

13

. L

CC

.5

7**

.25

**

.52

**

-.0

3

.29

**

-.0

6

.39

**

-.1

2

.57

**

.04

.44

**

.26

**

---

14

. L

CM

.6

9**

.20

*

.46

**

-.1

3

.36

**

-.0

7

.11

-.0

0

.70

**

.24

**

.54

**

.48

**

.47

**

---

15

. L

RT

.5

7**

.26

**

.25

**

.06

.35

**

.10

.16

*

.02

.57

**

.20

*

.28

**

.38

**

.16

*

.34

**

---

16

. L

RE

.5

0**

.21

*

.22

**

-.0

2

.37

**

.10

.15

-.0

3

.50

**

.07

.28

**

.25

**

.16

*

.39

**

.57

**

---

17

. L

RP

.4

9**

.23

**

.14

.12

.18

*

-.1

3

.06

.26

**

.65

**

.30

**

.24

**

.44

**

.24

**

.25

**

.18

*

.06

---

1

8. L

RH

.4

3**

.22

**

.06

.23

**

.22

*

-.2

4**

-.0

4

.31

**

.57

**

.16

*

.15

*

.28

**

.22

**

.21

**

.11

.07

.62

**

---

19

. S

RL

.1

6*

.06

.08

-.0

1

.13

-.0

2

-.1

2

.09

.19

*

.05

.11

.26

**

-.0

0

.09

.27

**

.09

.10

.09

---

Note

. M

ST

= M

SL

Q t

ota

l sc

ore

, M

OT

= M

oti

vat

ion

tota

l, L

ST

= L

earn

ing S

trat

egie

s to

tal,

SR

L =

SR

L O

bse

rvat

ion

Ru

bri

c %

sco

re.

All

oth

er a

cro

nym

s ar

e p

rese

nte

d i

n A

pp

end

ix A

. *

p ≤

.0

5, *

*p≤

.05


70

Table 5. Pearson Correlations between MSLQ scales and SRL Assignment Criteria for

Junior/Intermediate Sample (N = 63)

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

MSLQ TOT --

MSLQ MOT .70* --

MSLQ LS .92* .44* --

Observation Summary .19 .07 .18 --

Teacher Behaviour .19 -.04 .26* .64* --

Learner Behaviour .20* .11 .23* .67* .82* --

Application .13 .03 .18 .37* .57* .64* --

SRL Rubric (total) .15 .00 .22* .73* .85* .90* .70* --

Note. 1-tailed * p ≤ .05.

Discussion

The present study took place in a context where teacher education candidates were provided with

somewhat limited instruction and practice related to SRL and then their conceptual and applied

knowledge of these constructs and behaviours was assessed. Instead of 10 months of SRL-

focused practice teaching and professional mentorship as occurred in the Perry et al. (2006)

study, these teacher candidates studied SRL as one topic within a Learning and Child

Development course and then conducted and reported on a series of classroom observations. In

this context we examined the relationship between student teachers’ own reported SRL and their

ability to effectively observe and describe SRL in classroom settings, both in terms of teacher

behaviours that support SRL and students’ SRL behaviours.

The question of whether teacher education candidates’ self-reported SRL is related to

their achievement was not addressed here. However, in exploring possible relationships among

SRL component variables as measured through the MSLQ and teacher candidates’ demonstrated

SRL knowledge, our results showed evidence of some predictive relationships. The Learning

Strategies MSLQ scores predicted understanding of SRL concepts as indicated by the

Observation rubric. Also, the statistically reliable correlations between self-reported SRL and

more specific performance criteria on the SRL assignment that were found in the

Junior/Intermediate sample provided evidence of a predictive relationship between learning

strategies and understanding of SRL. On the other hand, the lack of apparent relationship

between the Motivation scales on the MSLQ and performance on the SRL Observation

assignment was interesting. The mean for Motivation scales appeared slightly higher and the

standard deviations lower than for the Learning Strategy scales (see Table 1). It could be that,

because our sample consists of post-degree professional students who have met stringent and

competitive admission standards of the teacher education program, their motivation levels are


71


consistently quite high. This factor may attenuate observed relationships between motivation and

other variables.

The ultimate goal in teaching pre-service teachers about SRL is to promote their

development of teaching practices that support SRL in their students. One question of interest

that is suggested by the present study is whether these results indicate potential benefits from

added support for student teachers in developing their own SRL over the course of their

professional program. It is not known whether such support will increase the likelihood that they

will teach in ways that support SRL; however, helping them to better understand and recognize

SRL in classroom practice is a first step toward this goal.

Given the motivational strengths and orientations that incoming teacher candidates

demonstrate, providing scaffolding for their development and use of effective learning strategies

may be more important than addressing motivational aspects of their approach to learning. This

conclusion is also supported by the relationship found here between teacher candidates’ scores

on the MSLQ learning strategy scales and their performance on the SRL Observation

assignment. As an example, teacher candidates in this sample learned about and discussed

various kinds of learning strategies that can help young students to increase school achievement

within their Learning and Child Development course. It would be quite possible to provide them

with targeted practice in using these strategies for their own learning, which might offer the dual

benefits of increasing their academic performance and their SRL. By experiencing enhanced

academic success themselves through the use of specific learning strategies (e.g., rehearsal,

organization, time management, and metacognitive strategies such as self-questioning and self-

evaluation), teacher candidates will be better prepared to promote the development of strategic

learning and SRL in their students.

Another consideration for teacher preparation is that, even though self-reported

motivation components of SRL were not related to teacher candidates’ performance on the SRL

Observation assignment, they nonetheless need to learn how to support intrinsic motivation in

their students. The fact that they succeeded in a competitive admissions process and are thus

highly motivated learners does not mean they are aware of classroom strategies for supporting

motivational beliefs that support SRL. Learning to support young learners’ sense of autonomy

and perceived competence by providing opportunities for choice, self-direction, and appropriate

levels of challenge (Reeve et al., 2008) cannot be expected to come naturally just because

teacher candidates are, themselves, motivated learners. It may be especially important for teacher

candidates to understand that intentionally supporting student autonomy is important for

enhancing their intrinsic motivation and engagement (Reeve et al., 2008). Also, it may not be

easy for them to develop this kind of approach, given that managing student behaviour is a

primary issue for most pre-service teachers (Whitaker, 2003). However, as Perry et al. (2006)

found, teacher candidates’ understanding and development of more complex learning tasks may

be one way they can learn to promote student engagement in meaningful decision-making and

self-reflection (p. 253). Through developing these kinds of skills, beginning teachers may learn

to support students’ autonomy as learners and, thus, their intrinsic motivation. When their

students are actively engaged in challenging learning tasks, their off-task behaviour may be


72


reduced, therefore also allowing these novice teachers to shift some of their attention from

behaviour management to student learning.

As demonstrated by Perry et al. (2006), helping beginning teachers to develop skills and

approaches that will support SRL in their classrooms may be provided through extensive

mentorship on the part of experienced teachers and SRL-focused coursework that is integrated

with field experiences. At the same time, not all teacher preparation programs offer these

intensive opportunities to learn about and implement SRL practices. Our findings point to some

potential areas for further research involving pre-service teacher preparation. For instance,

learning and practice opportunities that are focused on aspects of instruction such as designing

complex learning tasks, opportunities for self-evaluation and other forms of student autonomy

can be included in any teacher education program, regardless of its format. However, teacher

candidates must also come to understand how these practices contribute to their students’

development of SRL over time, including recognition of their value in developing strategic,

confident and intrinsically-motivated learners. Given that many teacher candidates are highly

motivated academically themselves, reflecting in depth on how their own learning and success

has been influenced by the teaching practices they have experienced may help them to

understand these aspects of SRL support. Examining links between novice teachers’ own

motivational beliefs and strategic learning behaviours and how they view these characteristics in

their students may suggest the kinds of pre-service learning experiences that will be most

beneficial for them. Research involving building SRL-supportive components into existing

teacher education programs is needed to help determine, as suggested by Perry and her

colleagues (2008), how much and what kinds of scaffolding novice teachers need in order to

reach these goals.


73


References

Alexander, P. A., Murphy, P. K., & Woods, B. S. (1996). Of squalls and fathoms: Navigating the

seas of educational innovation. Educational Researcher, 25(3), 31–36.

Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P., & Zeidner, M. (Eds.) (2000). Handbook of self-regulation. Orlando,

FL: Academic Press.

Clarke, A., & Riecken, T. (2000). A school advisor association: Seeking ways to change

substantively the role played by classroom teachers in preservice teacher education. Alberta

Journal of Educational Research, 46, 346–355.

Duffy, G. G. (1997). Powerful models or powerful teachers? An argument for teacher-as

entrepreneur. In S. A. Stahl & D. H. Hayes (Eds.), Instructional models in reading (pp. 351–

365). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Gordon, S. C., Dembo, M. H., & Hocevar, D. (2007). Do teachers’ own learning behaviors

influence their classroom goal orientation and control ideology? Teaching and Teacher

Education, 23, 36-46. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2004.08.002

Hwang, Y., & Vrongistinos, K. (2002). Elementary in-service teachers’ self-regulated learning

strategies related to their academic achievements. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 29(3),

147–154.

McCaslin, M., & Good, T. L. (1996). The informal curriculum. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee

(Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 622-670). New York: Simon & Schuster

Macmillan.

Perry, N. E. (1998). Young children’s self-regulated learning and contexts that support it. Journal

of Educational Psychology, 90, 715–729.

Perry, N.E., Hutchinson, L., & Thauberger, C. (2008). Talking about teaching self-regulated

learning: scaffolding student teachers’ development and use of practices that promote self-

regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 47, 97-108. doi:

10.1016/j.ijer.2007.11.010

Perry, N. E., Phillips, L. & Hutchinson, L. (2006). Mentoring student teachers to support self-

regulated learning. The Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 237-254.

Perry, N., Phillips, L., & Dowler, J. (2004). Examining features of tasks and their potential to

promote self-regulated learning. Teachers College Record, 106,1854–1878. doi:

10.1111/j.1467-9620.2004.00408.x


74


Perry, N. E., & VandeKamp, K. O. (2000). Creating classroom contexts that support young

children’s development of self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational

Research, 33, 821–843.

Randi, J. & Corno, L. (2000). Teacher innovations in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P.

Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation, (pp. 651–685). Orlando, FL:

Academic Press.

Pintrich, P.R., Smith, D.A., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive

validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MLSQ). Educational and

Psychological Measurement, 53, 801–813.

Randi, J. (2004). Teachers as Self-Regulated Learners. Teachers College Record, 106, 1825-

1853.

Reeve, J., Ryan, R., Deci, E. L., & Jang, H. (2008). Understanding and promoting autonomous

self-regulation: A self-determination theory perspective. In D. H. Schunk & B. J.

Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and

applications (pp. 223-244). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Schunk, D. H. (2008). Metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning: Research

recommendations. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 463-467. doi:10.1007/s10648-008-

9086-3

Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. (2007). Motivation in education: Theory, research,

and applications (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill-Prentice Hall.

Schunk, D., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2007). Influencing children's self-efficacy and self-regulation

of reading and writing through modeling. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23(1), 7-25. doi:

10.1080/10573560600837578

Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (2008). Motivation and self-regulated learning:

Theory, research, and applications. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Shawer, S. (2010). The influence of student teacher self-regulation of learning on their curricular

content-knowledge and course-design skills. The Curriculum Journal, 21(2), 201-232. doi:

10.1080/09585176.2010.480872

Whitaker, S. D. (2000). Mentoring beginning special education teachers and the relationship to

attrition. Exceptional Children, 66, 546–566.


75


Whitaker, S. D. (2003). Needs of beginning special education teachers: Implications for teacher

education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 26(2), 106-117. doi:

10.1177/088840640302600204

Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P.

Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531–566). Orlando, FL:

Academic Press.

Woolfolk, A.E., Winne, P.H., Perry, N.E., & Shapka, J. (2010). Educational psychology, 4th

Canadian edition (4th ed.). Toronto: Pearson.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.). (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic

achievement: Theoretical perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2008). Motivation: an essential dimension of self-regulated

learning. In Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 1-

30). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

T

each

er E

duca

tion a

nd S

RL

Ap

pen

dix

A

Tab

le A

1.

MSL

Q I

tem

Va

ria

ble

Co

des

Co

de

Sca

le T

yp

e C

om

ponen

t S

ub

scal

e It

em C

oh

ort

MV

I M

oti

vat

ion (

M)

Val

ue

(V)

Intr

insi

c G

oal

Ori

enta

tio

n (

I)

1,

16,

22,

24

MV

E

Mo

tivat

ion (

M)

Val

ue

(V)

Extr

insi

c G

oal

Ori

enta

tion (

E)

7,

11,

13,

30

MV

T

Mo

tivat

ion (

M)

Val

ue

(V)

Tas

k V

alu

e (T

) 4

, 1

0,

17,

23,

26,

27

ME

C

Mo

tivat

ion (

M)

Expec

tancy

(E

) C

ontr

ol

Bel

iefs

(C

) 2

, 9,

18,

25

ME

S

Mo

tivat

ion (

M)

Expec

tancy

(E

) S

elf-

Eff

icac

y f

or

Lea

rnin

g &

Per

form

ance

(S

) 5

, 6,

12,

15, 2

0,

21,

29,

31

MA

T

Mo

tivat

ion (

M)

Aff

ecti

ve

(A)

Tes

t A

nxie

ty (

T)

3, 8,

14,

19,

28

LC

R

Lea

rnin

g (

L)

Co

gn

itiv

e &

Met

aco

gn

itiv

e

(C)

Reh

ears

al (

R)

39,

46,

59,

72

LC

E

Lea

rnin

g (

L)

Co

gn

itiv

e &

Met

aco

gn

itiv

e (C

) E

labora

tio

n (

E)

53,

62,

64,

67,

69,

81

LC

O

Lea

rnin

g (

L)

Co

gn

itiv

e &

Met

aco

gn

itiv

e

(C)

Org

aniz

atio

n (

O)

32,

42,

49,

63

LC

C

Lea

rnin

g (

L)

Co

gn

itiv

e &

Met

aco

gn

itiv

e

(C)

Cri

tica

l T

hin

kin

g (

C)

38,

47,

51,

66,

71

LC

M

Lea

rnin

g (

L)

Co

gn

itiv

e &

Met

aco

gn

itiv

e

(C)

Met

aco

gnit

ive

Sel

f-re

gu

lati

on

(M

) 3

3,

36,

41,

44,

54,

55,

56,

57,6

1,

76,

78 ,

79

LR

T

Lea

rnin

g (

L)

Res

ourc

e M

anag

emen

t

Str

ateg

ies

(R)

Tim

e &

Stu

dy E

nvir

onm

ent

(T)

35,

43,

52,

65,

70,

73,

77,

80

LR

E

Lea

rnin

g (

L)

Res

ourc

e M

anag

emen

t

Str

ateg

ies

(R)

Eff

ort

Reg

ula

tio

n (

E)

37,

48,

60,

74

LR

P

Lea

rnin

g (

L)

Res

ourc

e M

anag

emen

t S

trat

egie

s (R

) P

eer

Lea

rnin

g (

P)

34,

45,

50

LR

H

Lea

rnin

g (

L)

Res

ourc

e M

anag

emen

t S

trat

egie

s (R

) H

elp S

eekin

g (

H)

40,

58,

68,

75

Loose Coupling and

Inhabited Institutions: Inclusion Policy

and Teacher Strategies

Christina DeRoche McMaster University

Abstract

This case study uses interviews and participant observation to study how teachers negotiate

inclusion policy in their everyday classroom interactions and strategies. Interviews consisted of

two teachers and an educational assistant from one Northern Ontario classroom while

participant observation was conducted for a period of seven weeks. Drawing from the framework

of loose coupling and inhabited institution, this study finds that teachers actively negotiate policy

in the face of classroom reality by drawing upon personal and social resources. Drawing from

their previous experiences and some of their educational training they create, and implement

strategies in dealing with learning diversity. Teachers felt enthusiastic about inclusion but their

ideas ranged as to what it looked like; on top of their creativity in strategy making they also

expressed the need for more resources and support to ensure the success of inclusion within their

classrooms.

Keywords: inclusion, inhabited institutions, loose coupling, learning disabilities

Christina DeRoche is currently a PhD Candidate at McMaster University studying how children with developmental

coordination disorder experience both classroom and outside activities and their peer relationships. She currently

works part-time at the North Bay Regional Health Centre as a research assistant focusing on health informatics,

mental health of both adults and children, and practitioner experiences. Her current research interests include special

education and mental health initiatives within the education. She received her teaching degree from Nipissing

University in 2004 and is an active member of the Ontario College of Teachers.


Brock Education Volume 23, No. 1, Fall 2013, pp. 77

C. DeRoche Inclusion and Inhabited Institutions

78


Loose Coupling and Inhabited Institutions: Inclusion Policy and Teacher Strategies

In education, there are often major differences between the perspectives of educational leaders,

those who develop policy, and the teachers who implement them in classrooms and schools

(Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005). This is evident in the ways in which policy-makers and

teachers have understood the goals of inclusive education and how to apply them in Canadian

and American contexts (for examples see Porter & Richler, 1991; Stainback & Stainback, 1996).

Strategies proposed for the implementation of this policy initiative are varied and include

differentiated and direct instruction, universal design for learning, and altering expectations.

Although research on educator practices and strategies within the inclusive elementary classroom

has been extensive, research fails to fully capture how teachers grasp the policies handed down

to them from administration (Labaree, 2010) and the process by which teachers make meaning

from such policies(Laurin-Bowie, 2009).

Inclusion can have many meanings, conceptions, and is practiced in varying ways by

teachers (Laurin-Bowie, 2009; Lloyd, 2002). For example, the Ontario Ministry level means “not

only the practice of placing students with special needs in the regular classroom but ensuring that

teachers assist every student to prepare for the highest degree of independence possible” (Ontario

Ministry of Education, 2005, p. 2). However, interviews with teachers in this project yielded two

different responses including “making it possible for kids who have exceptionalities to function

within the classroom” (Mrs. M) versus having “people in a classroom, some of which learn

differently from others…it means that everybody’s needs are met within the classroom” (Mrs. C)

Inclusion can also mean various things at various levels of implementation; for example,

administration at both provincial and board level can feel it encompasses political ideologies and

public sentiment, but this definition changes at the classroom level. Autonomy, past experiences,

and resources all play a variable role in the definition and implementation of inclusion

(Avrimidis & Kalyva, 2007; Jung, 2007) and can be captured in the idea of loosely coupled

systems (Ingersoll, 1990; Meyer & Rowan, 2006; Weick, 1976), and inhabited institutions

(Hallett & Ventresca, 2006a). Loose coupling refers to the implementation of policy without

adequate consideration of the realistic conditions of the classroom while inhabited institutions

refer to the active negotiation of meaning and relationships, which occupy an institutions

livelihood.

This study addresses four key research questions: How do various participants in the

classroom and school view inclusion? How are teachers practicing inclusion? What are the

frustrations and consequences of such implementation in the classroom as a whole? And how do

concepts of loose coupling and inhabited institutions help understand the logic of classroom

practice? In doing so this study draws upon these two concepts: loose coupling and inhabited

institutions, in understanding how one Ontario classroom implemented Ministry directed

inclusion policy and in answering some of these questions.

Loose Coupling to Inhabited Institutions

Schools often implement policies of equality and rights to education and have stakes in these

claims, but fail to account for how to adequately implement such claims within the reality of the

classroom (Davies & Guppy, 2010). Stating these grand claims, or what is termed “myths” such

as rules and regulations which are implemented on a grand scale, legitimmize the institution’s


79


authority (Aurini, 2006; Meyer & Rowan, 1977), are part of the institutional order and the

development of education on a global scale (Meyer & Rowan, 2006). But as Hallett (2007)

states, institutional policies and claims usually flow downward to more intimate and negotiated

levels at which they are interpreted and implemented by individual actors. The isomorphic

character of education, however, fails to acknowledge how individual actors make meaning from

these policy claims, enact and negotiate such meaning within various relationships, and it does

not account for the creativity that actors have in implementing these policy suggestions (Binder,

2007). Thus, education is characterized by a top-down method, the efficiency of which depends

on the individuals and not the rules guiding it (Coburn, 2004; Dean & Celotti, 1980; Ingersoll,

1993; Murphy & Hallinger, 1984; Weick, 1976). As a result of the disparate relationship

between claims and practices, education has been viewed as a loosely coupled system (Dean &

Celotti, 1980; Ingersoll, 1990; Meyer & Rowan, 2006; Murphy & Hallinger, 1984; Weick,

1976). Loose coupling, then, has been defined as individual components interrelated, in some

way, but at the same time retaining independence from one another (Hallett, 2010; Orton &

Weick, 1990; Weick, 1976). Despite the policy changes, which take place at the structural level,

individual practice remains the same and separate from rhetoric (Scott 2008). This concept of

loose coupling has been pervasive in research because it allows researchers to explain both the

rationality and irrationality of various institutional aspects of education (Orton & Weick, 1990).

These irrational aspects include the effectiveness of such policy implementations where the

implementation was out of some contentious global need (Hogan, 1990); but this implementation

was left to teachers’ devices (Leiter, 1986). Thus, it is difficult for administrators to control the

work that is being implemented in the classroom since a key feature of loose couplings is the

autonomy that individual workers have within the institution (Gamoran & Dreeban, 1986) and

the lack of feedback from one component to another (Ingersoll, 1990).

As a result, researchers have called for conceptions of agency to be included in ideas of

loose coupling (Binder, 2007; Hallett & Ventresca, 2006a). Teachers practice autonomy in a

variety of ways once a policy is implemented but these can be constrained by resources and

various other factors (Gamoran & Dreeban, 1986). Loose coupling, although credible for

challenging the notions that institutions operate with clear goals, rationales, and objectives in

mind (Hallett & Ventresca, 2006a), fails to capture the autonomous nature of individual actors

and how claims are negotiated by them (Hallett & Ventresca, 2006b). Coburn (2004) points out

that teachers respond to the pressures from administrators by five different manners: rejection,

decoupling/symbolic response, parallel structures, assimilation, and accommodation; whereas

Bascia and Rottamn (2011) state that teachers also incorporate their own perceptions of success

and definitions of good teaching in negotiating these policies. Teachers often employ creative

strategies for these policies while administrators seek to break these individual practices and

other routines (Dean & Celotti, 1980) and in turn, try to implement more routine and

standardized and proven methods; thus, there is an inherent conflict and this requires a

reconceptualization of teachers work within the confines of broad sweeping institutional goals.

In response, Hallett and Ventresca (2006b) discuss policies and practices existing

together in inhabited institutions. They argue that institutions provide a rich setting of negotiated

meaning between and amongst individuals. Inhabited institutions, first discussed by Scully and

Segel (as cited in Hallet & Ventresca, 2006b), can be defined as resolving the debate between

agency and structure; rather, inhabited institutions encompass how agents create couplings

between practice and policy together (Hallett & Ventresca, 2006b). Inhabited institutions can be


80


literally defined as institutions occupied and produced by individual negotiations and decisions.

Understanding how teachers exist within inhabited institutions requires that we understand how

meaning is made and used both implicitly within social interactions and within the classroom

(Hallett & Ventresca, 2006b). Hallett (2007) also adds that it is also necessary to draw on

concepts such as symbolic power to fully understand teachers’ actions. In his study, Hallett

(2007) found that the symbolic power exerted by educational authorities is less overt but still

exerts immense institutional pressure on teachers, forcing them to comply with policies in their

own way. Working conditions within the classroom can also affect teachers’ self-perceptions of

effectiveness of strategies (Bascia & Rottman, 2011); but understanding how these meanings are

made requires a more in-depth approach to studying teachers’ strategies.

Belatedly, this new institutional framework has used more qualitative approaches to

understand how claims or myths are constructed and implemented within the educational setting.

Aurini (2006) draws on qualitative interview data, participant observation, and content analysis

to examine how private tutoring businesses and learning centers developed as legitimation

projects, highlighting the three mechanisms which were essential to this process: myth-making,

coupling, and the logic of confidence (Aurini, 2006). Her data yielded myth-making practices in

a few ways: setting up curriculum and guidelines that addressed outside demands but also

environmental concerns, especially anxiety-filled parents; hiring of uncertified individuals to

disseminate these strategies with little room to modify the given program (Aurini, 2006, p. 98);

and retaining essential characteristics of schools. She also finds that these private tutoring

businesses coupled their programs to student outcomes by relying on past assignments and

grades of students and monitoring progress in short-term increments (Aurini, 2006).

Adding to these ideas, Binder (2007) qualitatively examines the concept of inhabited

institutions. She asks how actors couple their strategies with the pressures being exerted upon

them and what tools they draw on in making these decisions. She argues that by acknowledging

the role of inhabited institutions researchers can account for how individuals makes sense and

interpret institutional claims and myths. Inhabited institutions are places in which individuals

gather and interpret information on their clients and make decisions, which sometimes depart

from official policy but may embrace institutional objectives and logic (Binder, 2007, p. 551).

Binder addresses these issues by studying three different subunits from a case study of Parents

Community where she conducted interviews over a period of two years. She finds that inhabited

institutions was useful in not only accounting for how various departments may be linked and

relate differently to claims but also how individuals are creative and engage with multiple logics

in this process (Binder, 2007).

This study aims to add to the growing qualitative research surrounding the coupling of

practice with policy rhetoric (Labaree, 2010). In acknowledging that policy, such as the recent

Education for All policy released by the Ministry of Education in Ontario, has idealistic hopes, it

neglects to penetrate to the core of educational practices (Labaree, 2010), that is teacher and

student dynamics and circumstances. These educational practices are negotiated and formed by a

variety of factors and in a variety of relationships within a variety of settings and as previous

literature has shown these variables are in abundance.


81


Research on Inclusion Practices and Strategies

Teachers are increasingly pressured within the classroom to meet a diverse array of

exceptionalities and needs within the classroom but also have to adhere to curriculum and board

expectations (Florian, 2009; McGhie, Underwood, & Jordan, 2007). Their inclusion practices

and strategies rely on several factors including their own attitudes and past experiences

(Avrimidis & Kalyva, 2007) but also their creativity and ability to relate to children with special

needs (Florian, 2009). Teachers’ strategies and assessments must be innovative and creative,

ensuring that students with special needs are receiving a quality education. They must also

involve parents as a means of assessing the child’s interests, strengths, and weaknesses (Lapp,

Flood, Fisher, Sax, & Pumpian, 1996). Renzaglia et al. (2003) say that it also encompasses the

responsibility of all learners in the classroom in accommodating diversity within the classroom,

emphasizing a more holistic approach to inclusion. McGhie, Underwood, and Jordan (2007)

found that effective inclusion practices include an array of management strategies, modeling, and

scaffolding. Inclusion involves various practices and requirements in order to be successful;

these include teacher perspectives, knowledge, collaboration, administrative support,

instructional repertoire, appropriate assessments, scheduling, and time management (Dymon,

Renzaglia, & Chun, 2007; Worrell, 2008).

Implementation of these ideals is another matter as research has indicated. Lapp et al.

(1996) found that lack of commitment and resources leads to unfortunate results in the inclusion

of students with special needs. With the implementation of inclusive regulations there is certainly

a heightened awareness on the part of teachers as to how they will manage all the children in the

general education classroom. Hastings and Oakford’s (2003) study showed that the attitudes

towards special needs students varied depending on the nature of the special needs and teachers’

own experiences largely shape attitudes towards inclusion (also see Avrimidis, Bayliss, &

Burden, 2000; Burke & Sutherland, 2004). As a result, Goble (1999) highlights that attitudes and

reactions leave students often feeling disempowered or unattached to their teachers. Burke and

Sutherland (2004) also suggest that the more open teachers are to adapting their teaching styles

and strategies, the more accepting they will be of including the child with special needs in the

general education classroom. This argument would suggest that the teachers’ inability to

strategize effectively may be a result of lack of training or experience, something confirmed by

Avrimidis et al. (2000) who find that with more experience teachers become more confident in

their ability to teach special needs within the inclusive classroom.

Similarly, Mamlin (1999) and Smith and Smith (2000) found that teachers felt uneasy

towards inclusion if they lacked adequate training, time, and resources in the implementation of

inclusion. Bunch, Lupart, and Brown (1997) echo this finding that teachers’ concerns for

inclusion fell into two dominant themes: (a) the increased workload that comes with inclusion

and the feeling of unpreparedness and lack of professional development in this areaand (b)

teachers felt positively about being able to accommodate such needs but also collaboratively

with all educational actors involved. However, McGhie, Underwood, and Jordan (2007) found

that teaching experience and length of time in career had no effect on creation of effective

strategies which leadsto the question of how inclusion becomes negotiated with the reality of the

classroom demands and the various relationships that exist within the classroom.

This study intends to contribute in much the same way as Aurini (2006) and Binder

(2007) have; it highlights how teachers engage with policies and claims handed down to them in


82


a variety of manners, drawing on their own expertise, engaging in negotiations and expertise

with and of other teachers, and utilizing various resources and management in tandem. But it

also contributes to how teachers create strategies “on the fly” rather than draw on established

practices handed down to them.

Methodology

This case study took place in one school located in Northern Ontario and surveys a number of

perspectives using interviews and observations. The classroom was a split grade 2/3 with 25

children all between the ages of 7 to 9; there were 13 girls and 12 boys and only one was a non-

Caucasian child. Of these 25 children, 9 of them had a learning disability (LD); these children’s

names have been concealed and replaced with pseudonyms. It is important to note that of these 9

children, only 3 had been formally identified and diagnosed with a LD, the other 6 had been

given the informal diagnosis of LD and treated accordingly by the special education resource

teacher (known as the SERT), as they exhibited various characteristics of a LD, but were

awaiting official testing. Of the 3 students that had been formally diagnosed, 2 students had

severe reading and writing disabilities while the other child had dyslexia.

According to Ritchie and Lewis (2003), a case study consists of “multiple perspectives

and is rooted in a specific context which is seen as critical to understanding the researched

phenomena” (p.76). Case study analysis is also essential to understanding and exploring the

black box of interactions and processes (Binder, 2007). Perspectives in this study include the

classroom teacher, a SERT, and an educational assistant (EA). The teacher and the SERT shared

teaching responsibilities in the classroom by co-teaching. In total, they had an accumulated thirty

years of teaching experience and an assortment of professional development courses between

them. Mrs. C (the SERT) had her special education certification (which entails taking 3

additional courses through an accredited teaching institution and fulfilling a number of in-service

hours). She was also the school assigned SERT while Mrs. M (the second classroom teacher) had

a number of specialist additional qualification courses. Special Education qualification course

part one, within the confines of Ontario licensing, include taking 3 additional qualification

courses in Special Education and meeting a specific level of teaching experience and in-service

opportunities. In Ontario each specialist additional qualification comprises a three-part system.

There was one EA for the entire school. Interviews were semi-structured as this allowed for

focusing on the interview without restricting the exploration of new and unexpected information

and themes.

Participant observation was used as a means of capturing the interactions of children and

teachers but also to experience the classroom environment first hand (Darlington & Scott, 2002).

Children were only observed during the classroom times as outside observation was outside of

ethical parameters. This occurred for seven weeks, the first two weeks used for familiarity with

the classroom and students. This method entailed working with students and teachers regularly

while observing the students and teachers when not teaching. Working periods, lesson times,

recesses, lunch breaks, and after school were used to record and reflect on observations.

Observations included students’ behaviours, interactions with peers, and personal reflections for

the day. Lesson implementation, direct instruction, and classroom management were also all part

of this repertoire.


83


The analysis of both observation and interview transcripts was done with Microsoft Word

as an organizational tool. The data was sorted out in various themes dictated both by previous

literature, and emergent and recurring patterns, but also organized according to the concepts of

loose coupling and inhabited institutions. Observations and interview transcripts were sorted for

these various themes and concepts but also for recurring words and ideas (Berg, 2001; Yin,

1994). These themes were not only drawn from previous literature and the theoretical framework

(Yin, 1994) but were recurring in the data collection and analysis process.

Results and Discussion

The following themes discussed are organized according to recurrent patterns discovered in

discussion with teachers and observation of classroom practices: ideas of inclusion, strategies

and support, and resources.

Ideas of Inclusion

Teachers spoke favourably about inclusion, and pursued additional training and strategies in the

area. Support for this was demonstrated clearly in interviews; however, their ideas of inclusion

differed. For Mrs. M, inclusion means:

Well I think for starters these children are going to be part of real life when they are

finished school so they might as well do their learning in that setting. I mean, you know

to pull them out constantly and have them always working with one on one help maybe

would not be a good lesson in independence for them and so as much as they need extra

support and more support than the other children, I think they do need to learn how to

function within society (Mrs. M).

For her, because the real world was ‘integrated,’ schooling should be as well. The

challenge was to provide the students with the additional assistance they needed, while fostering

independence that would help them function in society as adults. While the EA felt that inclusion

meantthat “it is about integrating the students with all the other students, like not separating

them; they need to be altogether physically and academically. Students need to be learning

together.” Mrs. M felt, however, that “inclusion to me means making it possible for kids who

have exceptionalities to function within the classroom” while Mrs. C stated that “inclusion

means to me that you have people in a classroom, some of which learn differently from

others…it means that everybody’s needs are met within the classroom” (Mrs. C). Teachers,

while being interviewed, mentioned on several occasions what they felt an inclusive classroom

should look like and feel like. Mrs. C remarked that:

Inclusion means to me that you have people in a classroom, some all the same age, some

of them learn differently from others. It means that everybody’s needs are met within the

classroom. Now there can be withdrawal from time to time, there can be small group

learning, one to one.


84


Mrs. C’s response reveals what Paterson (2007) depicted in his study; rather, that the

class was heterogeneous and had differing needs and that both teachers were more concerned

with fostering “the whole person” (Paterson, 2007, p. 430). Later on in the interview, Mrs. C

stated that she was not sure if it fit with the expectations of inclusion policy but “what you are

hoping for is that they take themselves from a point and move forward during the school year.”

In another interview, Mrs. M. remarked that inclusion meant “making it possible for kids who

have exceptionalities to function within the classroom.” Yet, she did not mention what the term

functioning meant: did this equal success? When asked to explain what an inclusive classroom

might look like she stated that “it would be really nice for them to have an EA so that the child

can get the one on one help that they need.”

When asked if they felt others in their school had the same ideas of inclusion, Mrs. C

replied “I know my principal does...I am not sure about the rest of my colleagues, we all have

some version of what inclusion is really.” Additionally, Mrs. M replied:

I think they do, but I think they have the same challenges I have as well and the same

limitations. I think everybody feels the same way. We are really good as working as a

team but we are just so understaffed.

To compensate for this lack of assistance and knowledge, teachers were left to their own

devices in adapting to the needs of the child. It seems that teachers and the EA essentially bought

into the rhetoric of inclusion policy but, like Labaree (2010) states, this rhetoric does not

penetrate to the core levels of education: the classroom. Although both teachers mentioned the

idea of functioning within the general education classroom, neither mentioned their strategies for

ensuring such. The EA, however, elaborated on this stating, “I think it’s important for them to be

in the class and to learn what the other students are learning, just to modify a little bit for them.”

Definitions of inclusion, then, differed and as a result so too did strategies utilized in its

implementation.

Educational Strategies

Strategies for teachers began from the planning process and both stated this in the interview.

Mrs. C remarked

...you are careful about planning your lessons with the needs of the students in mind

, this way things go a lot more smoothly. You can do things in pairs, and you can say you

need a partner to do this, well kids with special needs will never pick another kid with

special needs.

This classroom teacher felt that her positive attitude and her careful planning and

strategizing helped in successfully implementing inclusion in the classroom. In doing this, she

felt that she was really providing the optimal learning environment for all her students. However,

as she notes, “some days are better than others.” This planning process did not always outline the

detailed strategies these two teachers would use, but the idea of planning is reminiscent of

McGhie, Underwood, and Jordan’s (2007) study, as part of inclusion includes general

organizational strategies and planning.


85


Many of their strategies centred on classroom management. For instance, teachers

carefully organized seating arrangements to minimize talking and disruption, but as Mrs. C

stated, “the reality of the learning environment is that there are times when you need quiet but

your whole day is not like that.” Teachers, then, had to go with the current of the classroom at

the time, and at others times they used very common practices such as grouping students.

Children were placed in groups of five to six and these groups were arranged in this manner

solely based of the personality and characteristics of the children and to maximize learning. This

strategy of classroom management was employed often and seating often changed throughout the

time observed, based on new developments of friendships and frustrations of teachers, a

negotiation of sorts. The seating arrangements in the classroom had nothing to do with

disabilities but rather attempt to prevent students who were more likely to talk from disturbing

others around them and to increase learning while decreasing problems and disruptions for both

teachers and them.

Another strategy used by one classroom teacher to deal with a child’s behaviour was to

encourage him to be responsible for his own behaviour. The system to help Andrew calm down

and be self-accountable was set up on a number basis; these numbers range from 1 to 5 and

Andrew could go from a 1 to 4 very easily. If he seemed to be frustrated, the teacher would ask

what number he was and if he indicated a 4, he was sent to the office to write in his journal, read

a calming poem or do something, which he thought would calm him down. If he reached a 5 then

his mother was called and he was sent home, as this indicated that he could be harmful to himself

or others. Where this strategy for the teacher was learned remained in her previous experiences

of children with the same attributes as Andrew, and by workshop material. And although this

system was in place, the teachers did not always use this method, and there were times when the

child was disciplined without knowing what he had done wrong. He was not asked to rate

himself all of the time and the teacher’s attention was geared towards the management of him

and the other children in the classroom rather than following her created protocol and proven

strategies.

Teachers also used strategies commonly used in all kinds of classrooms like grouping,

direct and differentiated instruction, and others. For instance, upon first the day, the teacher gave

one set of students their math lesson while the other students were encouraged to complete their

work independently. Independent students were highly motivated and often did not have a

disability. Students in the classroom were used to this arrangement but it meant that not all

received the help they needed. This overlooking, or inability to reach each student with a

disability, can only enhance the disempowerment the students with special needs feel (Goble,

1999). More than anything, this situation in the classroom reflects the lack of support that

rhetoric often ignores in implementation. The inclusion policy does not gage for the variability of

student needs and inadequately addresses how to implement classroom learning with these

needs. Although the classroom had two Early Childhood Education (ECE) students from the

local college, who would periodically come in to help with the math period and anything else the

teacher needed, this did not help much since they did not have the required training or

knowledge set. The classroom teacher repeatedly mentioned that she valued another pair of

hands in the classroom reflecting what teachers commonly voice, that that they require more help

in the classroom such as additional resources, in incorporating inclusion (Sharma, Forlin, &

Loreman, 2007).


86


On another day, sitting with Kylie, Mary, Christine, John, and Kris during the math

period and working mainly with Christine and Mary, another event unfolded. Debra joined us but

she did not need the help as much as the other two while the rest of the class worked at their own

desks while this occurred. The other grade was pulled out of the classroom to work with the ECE

student for their math period. This was a teamwork exercise and it assured for the teacher that the

students’ learning needs were being met in some substantial manner. It “freed some time” for her

to work with some of the other students with higher learning needs (as quoted by Mrs. C). Thus,

for effective learning to occur, the students were first grouped and then placed in various

locations around the classroom and school. Essentially they were segregated from one another,

which does not coincide with the idealistic goals of inclusion rhetoric but fits with the

practicality and reality of inclusion in the classroom.

This grouping the children was a relatively common practice, as stated earlier, for

teachers in dealing with inclusion commonly use this strategy (Zigmond & Baker, 1996) to deal

with the variability in learning needs. One observation demonstrates one of the various ways the

teachers grouped students:

The students were separated out by grade into two groups; one being instructed by the

classroom teacher and the other by an ECE student. A few times, the teacher had to stop

what she was teaching to tell one child to calm down and to keep the noise level to a

minimum. On another occasion the children were given a spelling test. The spelling test

was divided into three groups: each grade and then a combination of the two into a

separate group. This separate group consisted of students who had a weakness in spelling

and the test consisted of learning five words as opposed to ten words like the other two

groups of children. (Observation)

Again, both teachers drew on this grouping strategy in various ways, something that they learned

both through experience and basics of teaching pedagogy (mentioned in interviews).

The second most frequent strategy was the altering of assignments and tests as echoed by

the work of Zigmond and Baker (1996) where it was common practice in the inclusive

classroom. Both teachers during the interviews discussed altering assignments and tests, as Mrs.

M points out: “I do simplify the assignments. So for a child, for instance, who has a learning

disability, particularly, if it’s in the area of math, what I might do is assign two questions as

opposed to eight questions.” She then said

the other thing I will do is mark them only on the questions they have completed. So if

out of the entire test, they have only managed to answer two questions, then I mark them

out of those two questions as opposed to out of the whole test.

She even remarked on sending tests home so that particular students could complete it

with the help of a parent. Her strategies were mediated by individual student preferences and

abilities.

These examples indicate that at times, teachers drew on established teaching practices to

cope with the integrated classroom, in their attempts to meet the needs of students at varying

levels. Teachers also report devising a number of strategies on their own but at the same time

teachers also voiced frustration that they spend too much time “putting out fires” (as Mrs. M


87


stated in her interview). Another strategy to cope with this was to focus on one child at a time,

and leave the others until later:

First it was really difficult because their hands were going up constantly, say for instance

in a math assignment or in a writing assignment, the hands were going up constantly

cause these kids are not able to work independently at all, and so I was running from one

kid to the other around the classroom, trying to sort of meet all of their needs and solve

all of their problems and I couldn’t do it. I was leaving so frustrated at the end of the day.

So what I have done is I have changed my tactic a little bit where I’ll sit down and focus

with one child and help them work through an entire assignment and that will often mean

that seven other children will not get my help when they need but at least for me and the

one child that I do work with there is some sense of satisfaction at the end. We’ve

accomplished something. From there, the following period or the following day I’ll try to

move onto someone else, so that everyone gets some of my attention at some point in the

week. (Mrs. M)

Although her experience in neglecting some students while meeting another student’s needs

seemed to help in managing her frustrations, it only exacerbated the academic frustrations of the

ignored students. Note that this was a strategy that she developed on her own, after experiencing

considerable frustration and involved a personal negotiation and resolution. The EA mirrored

these types of one-on-one strategies when she mentioned in her interview that “if a student is

struggling I’ll go help them out. I can work with one student in the morning and another in the

afternoon.” In a sense it was about negotiated time with the teacher’s own personal satisfaction

and frustration level.

Throughout the seven-week observation period, teachers relied on trial and error

strategies, rather than teaching methods they encountered in workshops on inclusion. This does

not follow what the Education for All campaign, set out by the Ministry of Education, advocates

in that teachers should engage with professional development, profiling each student, and

assessing them for these needs while drawing upon various strategies outlined in the Universal

Design for Learning (UDL) and differentiated instruction. It seems as though the trial and error

methods of each teacher began as something derived from professional development but was

tailored or changed according to what worked and what did not. And most of these strategies did

not work because of the “lack of available hands” (as stated by Mrs. M in an interview),

something characteristic of loose coupling. More importantly, it seems as though teachers

unconsciously negotiated what rhetoric dictated and the realities of the classroom. Trial and error

was really a strategy negotiated between what was dictated to them with what was presented.

Interestingly, the classroom teachers would consistently discuss how each child was progressing

and pass on any relevant information of prior day events to each other.

There were also more than enough observations made where teachers, or researcher,

would work one-on-one with students. For example,

Kylie received some help from the teacher and I and finished her work successfully.

Kris then was called over by me and forced to focus on the work at hand. He completed

it but I had to write all the answers down.


88


In this instance, children required that we worked with them one-on-one to ensure their

work was completed. More than anything, the researcher relied on trial and error, even with her

teacher training and the number of workshops she had engaged in both previous to and during

this study, none of the strategies were ideal with the reality of the classroom. She was left to

navigate what was realistic in terms of strategies and how to alter them to the dynamics of not

only the students but the classroom also.

And while teachers did their best to accommodate students within the classroom, there

were occasional times that the researcher, EA, or the ECE students would pull students out,

either individually or in groups. After reading of the book, I took a group of 2 students, which

eventually grew to a group of 5 or 6. I had Andrea and Christine initially and then Kylie, Debra

and John all joined; we all read in a group outside the classroom for guided reading.” This

pulling out was not in line with what the EA had decided inclusion meant: “it means integrating

the students with all the other students, like not separating them (Observation and Reflection).

Resources

Resources were another predominant theme within the observational and interview data. These

resources could be defined in any number of ways by teachers; including resources from which

the teachers drew upon for their strategies, such as education and experiences; and also included

physical resources like educational assistants, technology and textbook materials. These teachers,

in addition to having basic teacher’s education, had other qualifications and worked well as a

team rather than as individuals. Scruggs, Mastropieri, and McDuffie (2007) state those teachers

who work collaboratively together, such as in this case with the SERT and a regular classroom

teacher, proves to be beneficial in implementing inclusion successfully. However, these

researchers also expressed that knowledge of inclusion strategies are required by both types of

teachers, and more importantly, the SERT (Scruggs, Mastropieri, & McDuffie, 2007). This was

seen in this study as both of the teachers participated in workshops and other professional

development training, their knowledge was disseminated to other classroom teachers when called

upon. There were many times in which classroom teachers and the SERT worked together on

devising strategies for students. But this again was not only based on what was learned but on

personalizing it to the student and classroom situation. But devising these strategies involved

negotiations of other sorts.

One available resource that both teachers stressed on using in the classroom was assistive

technology, including programs such as Kurzweil or having available AlphaSmarts was both

welcomed but a source of frustration for teachers. Mrs. C remarked on their training for such

initiatives: “We’ve had some in-services around this inclusion and the assistive technology for

the project we are working on.” However, during this study, the researcher became the

technology expert, as both teachers still did not have a grasp on what the technology could do,

nor have the ability to trouble shoot technical problems. The researcher was utilized a number of

times as there was no technical help available from the board. Mrs M. also remarked that “we

have the AlphaSmart computers which help with students who have more of a motor problem,

where writing, physical writing is difficult. They’re helpful. They also help kids to focus. But for

resources that is all we have.” One of the common initiatives in having an inclusive classroom is

the implementation of technology but these sorts of strategies require technical and knowledge-


89


based resources that teachers sometimes did not have, and with that teachers relied on the

researcher for more help, negotiating this relationship to provide for the demands they had.

This does not deny the fact that teachers had training or professional development.

Teachers had gone to some lengths to obtain extra training in strategizing for students using this

technology in some cases. When they were questioned during the interview, the teachers stressed

their credentials in having Special Education and Reading Development as extra professional

development and qualification courses, on top of their basic teacher education training.

Interestingly, they stressed the works of prominent language specialists and both had their

respective basic training course in special education. One teacher mentioned that she sought out

workshops and asked to attend these workshops:

When I started back into full-time teaching as a supply teacher, I went to every workshop

I heard about and I would go to the coordinators: the French coordinator, the English

coordinator, I didn’t care who it was, and I said can I come to that workshop even though

I am not a classroom teacher for you. So I was very adamant about finding courses to

update my learning and my ability to teach, like to find new strategies. (Mrs. C)

In her determination to become more educated, this teacher gained valuable strategies in teaching

students of varying needs; however, she felt she had to seek out these workshops and courses out

and not all were made available to her; thus, she negotiated this based on the relationships she

had with her administrator and other teachers. Numerous times in the data, there was a lack of

educational development available to both the teachers and educational assistants about inclusion

strategies and it seem to be the responsibility of the teachers to seek these out. It was not always

clear in these interviews, however, that their training and workshops had provided the teachers

with many concrete strategies they could use in managing the integrated classroom.

As a result, management and resources were a chronic problem, and both classroom

teachers in their interviews reiterated that lack of hands in the classroom was a problem. One

teacher stated:

When there are not enough hands in the classroom, when you don’t have an EA… for

example, this class is 40 percent identified kids and because of that if you don’t have an

EA present, it means that we cannot hit every kid all the time the way, you know that we

would want to do. Like you know what you want to do, but you are only one person.

(Mrs. M)

Ideally for a child who has a severe challenge it would be really nice for them to have an

EA so that they can get the one on one help that they need on a regular basis.

Unfortunately, within our school that’s not an option. We have, there is no EA for

instance in my classroom, and I have 9 students who are identified with learning

disabilities, so in my case, it’s a matter of getting whatever volunteers you can. (Mrs.C)

One of the main resources that teachers drew from was the human resources at their

disposal. Numerous times, the researcher was asked by Mrs. C. and others to help manage the

class while another lesson was taking place or to take groups of children out for direct

instruction. If the researcher was not called on, either of the teachers would utilize the ECE


90


students or parents who would volunteer. In some cases, parents would also volunteer at lunch

and recess periods to provide a break for teachers from the classroom. Parents would often also

come in and read with various groups of children or help out with assignments, science, and art

projects or take children to the library for book exchanges; these relationships became crucial for

the teachers because they provided aid in the classroom. Lastly, the teachers and the principal

would provide direct reading lessons and review for EQAO (Education Quality Accountability

Office) testing, the standardized testing which occurred at this grade level. This further supports

the idea that teachers need more training on inclusion and further help in the classroom. It also

exemplifies how various educational actors and community members are involved in

implementing inclusion by establishing relationships with one another and the students, and by

communicating and negotiating those relationships to ensure that students’ needs are met

regularly. Lastly, it shows that providing policy or rhetoric is not enough to teachers but

acknowledging that there are a variety of means by which inclusion is to be implemented not just

by teaching alone.

Practising inclusion for these teachers requires one-on-one interaction with the students,

and in a class of 25, this appears to be virtually impossible. The situation was eased in this class,

as the teachers had the full support of parents from the community who would volunteer to come

in and help in the editing of assignments and major projects. It was these volunteer relationships

and established parental communication that seem to benefit them the most. Overall, though,

teachers had only a limited number of strategies for dealing with children with disabilities, and

they were not able to implement many of the strategies they did have (e.g., giving students extra

attention) as well as they would like, because they did not have the resources available to them.

The situation placed a great deal of stress on the teachers as well as the students. On

numerous occasions the researcher remarked feeling frustrated in dealing with all the demands

that students placed on her:

The classroom teacher during the whole day kept on saying how she valued another pair

of hands and help in the classroom. The children constantly kept her on her toes and I

could not provide the one on one attention the kids with special needs required. The

teacher constantly kept her eyes on the whole group and selectively ignored those

students who prayed for her attention in order to meet the needs of some learners.

(Observation)

This stress should come as no surprise as it has been shown that the working conditions of

teachers is often mitigated by the various policy pressures and demands of their own classrooms

combined (Bascia & Rottman, 2011). How teachers perform under certain pressures as this

“depends on how teachers perceive and respond to their working conditions” (Bascia & Rottman,

2011, p. 792) and that factors such as believing that teachers can respond to the social, academic,

and emotional needs of their students is of great importance (Bascia & Rottman, 2011).

Conclusion

This study aimed at answering four key research questions: how do various participants in the

classroom and school view inclusion? How are teachers practicing inclusion? What are the

frustrations and consequences of such implementation on the classroom as a whole? And how do


91


concepts of loose coupling and inhabited institutions help understand the logic of classroom

practice? To address the first two research questions a combination of methods was used and

yielded insightful but unsurprising results: mainly that teachers and other educational actors

involved in the classroom viewed inclusion as slightly different from one another; these

responses ranged from including all children in the classroom to ensuring all learning needs are

met. This study was unable to answer how children viewed inclusion, which would be beneficial

in future research, especially within a Canadian, and more specifically, an Ontario context.

The concept of loose coupling provided a useful theoretical framework for understanding

how a policy such as inclusion was implemented but only with the creativity, flexibility, and

often negotiation, a process captured by inhabited institution research. The classroom teachers in

this study often communicated on an informal basis but also relied on established relationships

with volunteers, ECE students, the EA, and parents to truly help each child with various learning

needs. At some points my help was sought as a participant observer, which provided me with

valuable insight into the negotiation process and establishing links of informality with other

teachers and administrators. Gamoran and Dreeban (1986) highlight that teachers’ strategies in

implementation of any policy can be restricted by the number of resources available; this in-

depth case study exemplified this well by illustrating how lack of resources dictated policy

implementation and negotiation. And just as Coburn (2004) found, teachers drew upon their past

experiences and knowledge they had acquired in their training and in their own creativity; and

one of the most common ways teachers responded to the policy was to accommodate, something

which Coburn (2004) states is consistently used by teachers in the face of policy implementation.

Teachers in this study also embraced inclusion but often stated there were numerous frustrations

and could not always find the pedagogical strategies to fit with its mission, which is something

that echoed in Coburn’s (2004) work as well.

So while inclusion presents an ideal policy for present day needs, it seems that it is

characterized by a loose coupling with teacher strategies. This is not uncommon as Deal and

Celotti (1980 find with education stating that “instructional policies and educational priorities

show to the world that there is some consistency within the institution” (p.473) but consistency is

only at face value. What seems to be at the root of the problem is what Labaree (2010)

characterizes as the inability of rhetoric or policy to reach the core of the classroom interactions;

instead, teachers negotiate this policy through a number of different ways and through a number

of different relationships which occupy the classroom and school environment (Hallett &

Ventresca, 2006a). This negotiation often took place “on the fly” by the teachers or myself and

left us to interpret what was meant by policy and how to implement the policy in the face of

classroom reality. This negotiation of policy was dependent on a multitude of factors such as past

experiences, demands of the student behaviour, established strategies set out in training, and

physical and human resources. Meanings of inclusion were in a sense directly tied to not only the

teachers’ abilities to be organized and managed in the classroom but also the perceived

relationships with other resources like the ECE students, the EA, parents, myself, and the

principal.

More research is needed to establish just how pervasive this case study’s findings are in

other schools. Despite its important contributions in providing in-depth understandings of

classroom interactions and negotiations of inclusion policy, it is limited in its applicability and

generalizability because of the small sample size. It would be interesting to see how other

qualitative studies characterize teachers’ strategies, meanings, and negotiations within the


92


inhabited institutions framework. This study was also unable to assess how administrator

attitudes might also affect these negotiations and policy implementation, a crucial aspect that has

already been cited in research (see Praisner, 2003). However, in the face of such weaknesses, this

study does make two contributions to research: it adds to the abundance of literature on loose

coupling but provides a more qualitative understanding of this process, and secondly, it applies

the idea of inhabited institutions in explaining teacher meaning making and negotiation of policy

through institutional and personal relationships.

These two concepts of loose coupling and inhabited institutions can provide for much

more insight in the educational realm and may lend to more practical strategies but also help to

acknowledge both the dilemmas facing administrators and teachers in policy development and

implementation. And while both of these concepts have been well researched within the areas of

sociology of education, and organizational and professional relationships, they are sorely missing

from educational research where policies are pervasive and the consequences of such are even

more profound and concrete. Thus, acknowledging these two concepts, even in such a small case

study, lends to a new line of understanding and research within education.


93


References

Aurini, J. (2006). Crafting legitimation projects: An institutional analysis of private education

businesses. Sociological Forum, 21(1), 83-111. doi: 10.1007/s11206-006-9004-8

Avramidis, E., Bayliss, P., & Burden, R. (2000). A survey into mainstream teachers’ attitudes

towards the inclusion of children with special educational needs in the ordinary school in

local education authority. Educational Psychology, 20, 191-211. doi: 10.1080/713663717

Avrimidis, E., & Kalyva, E. (2007). The influence of teaching experience and professional

development on Greek teachers' attitudes towards inclusion. European Journal of Special

Needs Education, 22(4), 367-389. doi: 10.1080/08856250701649989

Bascia, N., & Rottmann, C. (2011). What’s so important about teachers’ working conditions?

The fatal flaw in North American educational reform. Journal of Education Policy, 26(6),

787-802. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2010.543156

Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative research methods for the Social Sciences. Boston, MA: Allyn and

Bacon.

Binder, A. (2007). For love or money: Organizations’ creative responses to multiple

environmental logics. Theory and Society, 36(6), 547-571.

Bunch, G., Lupart, J., & Brown, M. (1997). Resistance and Acceptance: Educator Attitudes to

Inclusion of Students with Disabilities. Research Report: Social Sciences and Humanities

Research Council.

Burke, K., & Sutherland, C. (2004). Attitudes towards inclusion: Knowledge vs. experience.

Education, 125, 163-172.

Coburn, C. E. (2004). Beyond decoupling: Rethinking the relationship between the institutional

environment and the classroom. Sociology of Education, 77(3), 211-244.

doi: 10.1177/003804070407700302

Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What

teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Darlington, Y., & Scott, D. (2002). Qualitative research in practice: Stories from the field.

Buckingham, England: Open University Press.

Davies, S., & Guppy, N. (2010). The schooled society: An introduction to the sociology of

education. Toronto, ON: Oxford Publishers.

Dean, T. E., & Celotti, L. D. (1980). How much influence do (and can) educational

administrators have on classrooms? The Phi Delta Kappan, 61(7), 471-473.


94


Dymon, S. K., Renzaglia, A., & Chun, E. (2007). Elements of effective high school service

learning programs that include students with and without disabilities. Remedial and

Special Education, 28(4), 227-243. doi: 10.1177/07419325070280040301

Florian, L. (2009). Editorial: Preparing teachers to work in ‘schools for all.’ Teaching and

Teacher Education, 25, 533-534.

Gamoran, A., & Dreeban, R. (1986). Coupling and control in educational organizations.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(4), 612-632.

Goble, C. (1999). Like the secret service isn’t it. People with learning difficulties’, perceptions of

staff and services: Mystification and disempowerment. Disability and Society, 14, 449-

461. doi: 10.1080/09687599926064

Hallett, T. (2007). Between deference and distinction: Interaction ritual through symbolic power

in an educational institution. Social Psychology Quarterly, 70(2), 148-171.

doi: 10.1177/019027250707000205

Hallett, T. (2010). The myth incarnate: Recoupling processes, turmoil, and inhabited institutions

in an urban elementary school. American Sociological Review, 75(1), 52-74.

doi: 10.1177/0003122409357044

Hallett, T., & Ventresca, M. J. (2006a). Inhabited institutions: Social interactions and

organizational forms in Gouldner’s Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. Theory and

Society, 35(2), 213-236.

Hallett, T., & Ventresca, M. J. (2006b). How institutions form: Loose coupling as a mechanism

in Gouldner’s Patterns of Industrial Economy Bureaucracy. American Behavioural

Scientist, 49(7), 908-924.

Hastings, R.P., & Oakford, S. (2003). Student teachers’ attitudes towards the inclusion of

children with special needs. Educational Psychology, 23, 87-94.

Hogan, D. (1990). The organization of schooling and organizational theory: The classroom

system in public education in Philadelphia, 1818-1918. Research in Sociology of

Education and Socialization, 9, 241-294.

Ingersoll, R. M. (1993). Loosely coupled organizations revisited. Research in the Sociology of

Organizations, 11, 81-112.

Jenkins, J. R., & Pious, C. G. (1991). Full inclusion and the R.E.I.: A reply to Thousand and

Villa. Exceptional Children, 57, 17-19.

Jordan, A., Schwartz, E., & McGhie-Richmon, D. (2009). Preparing teachers for inclusive

classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 535-542.


95


Jung, W. S. (2007). Preservice teacher training for successful inclusion. Education, 128,106-113.

Labaree, D. (2010). Someone has to fail: The zero-sum game of public schooling. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press.

Lapp, D., Flood, J., Fisher, D., Sax, C., & Pumpian, I. (1996). From intrusion to inclusion: Myths

and realities in our schools. The Reading Teacher, 49, 580-584.

Laurin-Bowie, C. (2009). Better educational for all: A global report. Instituto Universitario de

Integración en la Comunidad (INICO).Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/

new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-agenda/efareport/

Leiter, J. (1986). The organizational context of teachers' perceived control over decision making.

Sociological Focus, 19(3), 263-288.

Lloyd, C. (2002). Excellence for all children false promises! The failure of current policy for

inclusive education and the implications for schooling in the 21st Century. International

Journal for Inclusive Education, 4(2), 133-151. doi: 10.1080/136031100284858

Mamlin, N. (1999). Despite best intentions: When inclusion fails. The Journal of Special

Education, 33(1), 36-49. doi: 10.1177/002246699903300104

McGhie-Richmond, D., Underwood, K., & Jordan, A. (2007). Developing effective instructional

strategies for teaching in inclusive classrooms. Exceptionality Education Canada, 17(1),

27-52.

Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and

ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.

Meyer, H., & Rowan, B. (2006). Institutional analysis and the study of education. In H. Meyer &

B. Rowan (Eds.), The new institutionalism in education (pp. 1-14). Albany, NY: State

University of New York Press.

Murphy, J. A., & Hallinger, P. (1984). Policy analysis at the local level: A framework for

expanded investigation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 6(1), 5-13.DOI:

Policy analysis at the local level: A framework for expanded investigation

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2005). Education For All: The Report of the Expert Panel on

Literacy and Numeracy Instruction for Students With Special Education Needs,

Kindergarten to Grade 6. (Government Publication ISBN 0-7794-8062-7). Retrieved

from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/reports/speced/panel/speced.pdf.

Orton, J. D., & Weick, K. E. (1990). Loosely coupled systems: A reconceptualization. The

Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 203-223. doi: 10.5465/AMR.1990.4308154


96


Paterson, D. (2007). Teachers’ in-flight thinking in inclusive classrooms. Journal of Learning

Disabilities, 40, 427-435.

Porter, G. L., & Richler, D. (1991). Changing Canadian schools: Perspectives on disability and

inclusion. North York, ON: Roeher Institute.

Praisner, C. L. (2003). Attitudes of elementary school principals toward inclusion of students

with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69(2), 135-145.

Renzaglia, A., Karvonen, M., Drasgow, E., & Stoxen, C. C. (2003). Promoting a lifetime of

inclusion. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 18(3), 140-149.

doi: 10.1177/10883576030180030201

Ritchie, J., & Lewis, J. (2003). Generalising from qualitative research. In J. Ritchie & J. Lewis

(Eds.), Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers

(pp. 263-286). London, England: Sage Publications.

Roach, V., Salisbury, C., & McGregor, G. (2002). Applications of a policy framework to

evaluate and promote large-scale change. Exceptional Children, 68(4), 451-464.

Scruggs, T.E., Mastropieri, M. A., & McDuffie, K. A. (2007). Co-teaching in inclusive

classrooms: A metasynthesis of research. Exceptional Children, 73(4), 392-416.

Sharma, U., Forlin, C., & Loreman, T. (2007). What concerns pre-service teachers about

inclusion education: An international viewpoint? KEDI Journal of Educational Policy, 4,

95-114.

Smith, M. K., & Smith, K. E. (2000). “I believe in inclusion, but…”: Regular education early

childhood teacher’s perceptions of successful inclusion. Journal of Research in

Childhood Education, 14(2), 161-80. doi: 10.1080/02568540009594761

Stainback, S. B., & Stainback, W. C. (1996). Inclusion: A guide for educators. Baltimore, MD:

Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

Stanovich, P. J., & Jordan, A. (2010). Preparing general educators to teach in inclusive

classrooms: Some food for thought. The Teacher Educator, 37(3), 173-185.

doi: 10.1080/08878730209555292

Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative

Science Quarterly, 21, 1-19.

Worrell, J. L. (2008). How secondary schools can avoid the seven deadly school “sins” of

inclusion. American Secondary Education, 36, 43-56.

Zigmond, N., & Baker, J. M. (1996). Full inclusion for students with learning disabilities: Too

much of a good thing? Theory into Practice, 35(1), 26-34.

doi: 10.1080/00405849609543698

Enhancing Conditions for Aboriginal Learners in

Higher Education: The Experiences of Nishnawbe

Aski Teacher Candidates in a Teacher Education Program

Julian Kitchen

Brock University

John Hodson

Maamaawisiiwin Education Research Institute

Abstract

This article studies a community-based Indigenous teacher education program in Northwestern Ontario

in Canada. This program, the result of a partnership between the Northern Nishnawbe Education Council

and Brock University, was designed to prepare Nishnawbe Aski teachers able to teacher through a Two

Worlds Orientation: unique Indigenous understandings combined with Western educational principles.

The program characteristics and structure are outlined. The strengths of the program, as identified by

teacher candidates and teacher educators, are explored. Impediments to success are also considered.

Keywords: Aboriginal teacher education, teacher education, Aboriginal education

Julian Kitchen, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Education at Brock University. His research

interests include Aboriginal education, LGBTQ issues in education and the self-study of teacher education practices.


John Hodson, Ph.D., is the Director of the Maamaawisiiwin Education Research Institute. His research interests

include Aboriginal education, teacher education, and international Indigenous research and development.


Brock Education Volume 23, No. 1, Fall 2013, pp. 97-115

J. Kitchen and J. Hodson Aboriginal Learners in Higher Education

98


“I am so far from my family. We are a really close family and three weeks is a long time away.”

“Every time I left, I did planning for three weeks… I would be planning until 3 o’clock in the morning and

then be up for work early.”

“Our internet in not so good, due to bandwidth… I can’t even log on before I run out of time.”

“It’s like nobody knows what is going on. Nobody knows when our next course is going to be.”

(Comments by Teacher Candidates)

One of the greatest challenges for First Nation, Inuit, and Métis people is adapting education to

suit their needs and interests. As Hampton (1995) writes, Aboriginal education has long been a

site for cultural genocide and assimilation into the mainstream of Canadian society. In order for

schools to better serve Aboriginal teacher candidates, they need to establish a learning

environment that is culturally responsive while preparing them to “confidently deal with all

aspects of modern society” (Hampton, 1995, p. 7). Yet, there is much evidence that schools have

been unsuccessful on both counts. There has been ongoing decline in the percentage of North

American Indian children with an Aboriginal mother tongue from 9% in 1996 to 7% in 2001

(Aboriginal Peoples Survey, 2001) suggests that schools are doing little to protect language.

Tthere has been a steady increase in the number of Aboriginal children in Ontario classrooms,

with an estimated 50,312 Aboriginal teacher candidates enrolled in Ontario’s elementary and

secondary schools (Ontario Ministry of Education [OME], 2007). Low graduation rates,

however, are a major concern. Almost half of all Aboriginal people over the age of 15 have less

than a high school diploma (OME, 2007). Only 9% of the adult Aboriginal population between

ages 25 and 64 have completed a bachelor’s degree, while 36% are college or trades graduates

(Statistics Canada, 2006). Twelve percent of Aboriginal Canadians between the ages of 15 and

29 drop out before Grade 9, while 37.5% of 15 to 24 year olds are neither in formal schooling

nor employed in the workforce (Robertson, 2003).

Rather than continue on the same path, the education system “must decolonize Canada’s

education and understanding the treaty right to education as a manifestation of Aboriginal

choice” (Youngblood Henderson, 1995, p. 257). In response to this need, a five-year elementary

Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) was established in 2004 through a partnership between the

Tecumseh Centre for Aboriginal Research and Education of Brock University and the Northern

Nishnawbe Education Council (NNEC) representing 24 Nishnawbe Aski First Nations in

northwestern Ontario. After extensive community consultation, a program was developed to

prepare Nishnawbe Aski teacher candidates to promote language and culture while providing

teacher candidates with the academic skills needed to succeed in Canadian society (Kitchen,

Hodson, & Raynor, in press). The first cohort of 20 teacher candidates began in 2007, with

followed by a second cohort of 15 candidates began in 2011. There are six graduates from the

first cohort, with others expected to graduate soon.

At the end of the third year of the program, a Talking Circle was conducted with teacher

candidates in the first cohort of the program. As the program was guided by principles of self-

determination (Hampton, 2000) and culturally responsive schooling (Castagano & Brayboy,

2008), we were not surprised that teachers were largely satisfied with their courses. Teacher

candidates were also very pleased with their instructors (see Kitchen & Hodson, 2013). We were


99


surprised, however, to learn that many teacher candidates expressed high levels of frustration

with the program. All experienced considerable stress and a significant number were at risk of

failing to graduate within the allotted five years. Tension and pain emerged as they shared stories

of challenging circumstances and the ways logistical and communication issues further

complicated their education and lives. This was in spite of considerable efforts at the design

stage, at which John had been an active contributor, to incorporate many of the innovative steps

taken by Canadian universities to address the needs of Aboriginal teacher candidates (Holmes,

2006).

What happened? As we puzzled over their stories as recounted in the Talking Circle, we

came to a deeper understanding of the multiple layers of complexity in the Aboriginal teacher

education experience. While grounding in culturally responsive schooling is essential, we

learned of the importance of attending to a myriad of minor logistical and communication issues.

Attending to these issues is critical to establishing conditions for learning so that the focus of

teacher candidates’ remains on teaching and learning. Thinking more broadly, this is important

for all Aboriginal post-secondary teacher candidates, particularly the 46% who do not live in

urban centres (Statistics Canada, 2006). To that end, we identify crucial issues and suggest ways

of enhancing conditions for learning for Aboriginal learners in higher education.

Framing the Issue in Theory and the Historic Context

The experiences of teacher candidates in the Brock/NNEC Aboriginal B.Ed. program need to be

situated in the context of the challenges that have faced Aboriginal people in the context of

colonization, with a focus on higher education and, particularly, teacher education.

Education is critical to the success of Aboriginal Peoples both as emergent self-

determining nations and in terms of the needs of the greater Canadian society. Teacher education

is a historic site in the struggle of Aboriginal people to free themselves from assimilative forces

and assert their right to educational self-determination (Smith, 1999). This understanding is

evident in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007):

States shall, in conjunction with indigenous peoples, take effective measures, in order for

indigenous individuals, particularly children, including those living outside their

communities, to have access, when possible, to an education in their own culture and

provided in their own language. (Article 14.3)

This document reflects an emergent international consensus that education has a critical role to

play in the success of “Indigenous peoples in (re)claiming and (re)creating their lives, languages,

and futures” (Deyhle, Swisher, Stevens, & Galvan, 2007, p. 330).

Tribal Critical Theory (TribalCrit) is a useful framework for both critiquing existing

approaches to university education and reframing issues in ways that are respectful of the lives of

Aboriginal peoples. The first two tenets of TribalCrit are that colonization is endemic to North

American society and that government policies are rooted in “imperialism, White supremacy,

and a desire for material gain” (Brayboy, 2005, p. 429). It is important that one recognize that

from the point of European contact there have been “systematic assaults on [Aboriginal]

languages, religions, and communal ways of being” (Deyhle et. al., p. 330) by colonizers in

Canada and throughout the world. The cultural assumptions endemic to Canadian society with its

engrained in Eurocentric views of education in North America (Ladson-Billings, 1998) also need

to be acknowledged. These normative assumptions and judgments fail to account for “the

multiple, nuanced, and historically- and geographically-located epistemologies and ontologies


100


found in Indigenous communities” (Brayboy, 2005, p. 427) and lead to assimilative approaches

to education that are not responsive to the cultural traditions of Aboriginal teacher candidates.

The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples [RCAP] (1996) highlighted the depth of the

educational challenges for Aboriginal peoples in Canada. Colonization underlies many of the

obstacles to post-secondary education. Historical factors related to “absorbing them into

mainstream society” (Holmes, 2006, p. 9) include abuse in residential schools and a university

system that has had little participation from Aboriginal teacher candidates until recently. In

Canada, Aboriginal leaders acknowledge that there are considerable challenges facing their

communities and worry about the impact of poor educational outcomes for their children will

effect those challenges. They also worry about the declining health of their communities and the

decline in knowledge of language and culture among their young (Statistics Canada, 2003).

These barriers are compounded by the university programs themselves, which “ignore

Aboriginal perspectives, values and issues” and offer “little or no affirmation of Aboriginal

identity” (RCAP, Chapter 5, Section 6). The report also blames negative environments and a lack

of Aboriginal support systems. In addition, the report highlights other impediments to post-

secondary attainment, including socio-economic and geographic factors. These challenges are

illustrated in Morrisette and Gadbois’ (2006) study of Aboriginal counselling teacher candidates.

Counselling teacher candidates faced personal challenges due to financial constraints and family

demands, as well as a range of academic issues related to language, culture, learning styles, and

competitiveness among teacher candidates. NNEC, which had noticed similar problems among

the university teacher candidates it supported and funded, entered into a partnership with Brock

in order to provide teacher candidates with culturally responsive higher education within the

community.

Aboriginal teacher candidates need to see themselves and their culture reflected in

university classroom settings (Holmes, 2006). This requires universities to foster deeper

understandings of Indigenous Knowledges (IK) and integrate it into educational processes to

create “fresh vantage points from which to analyze Eurocentric education and its pedagogies”

(Battiste, 2002, p. 5). Aboriginal leaders also view IK as integral to a curriculum that addresses

culture, language, history, and intellectual traditions. For example, the Chiefs of Ontario (2005)

identify Aboriginal teachers as critical to preserving Indigenous languages and culture:

A foundational element of a high quality First Nations education system is the presence of

teachers and educators who understand First Nations history, culture, intellectual traditions

and language. They must also comprehend First Nations relationships with the land and

creation. (Anderson, Horton, & Orwick, 2004, p. 2)

This manifesto speaks to the importance of preparing Aboriginal teachers so that they both

understand their languages and culture and have the skills to teach through culture and the ability

to teach Aboriginal languages through immersion.

Universities have an important role to play in supporting Aboriginal peoples as they

extract themselves from the legacy of colonization. Meaningful partnerships with Aboriginal

communities can lead to decolonized education (Freire, 1970) that frames, shapes, and supports

curriculum that is meaningful to Aboriginal communities. While problems faced by Aboriginal

university teacher candidates may arise from the legacy of colonization, not all obstacles to

postsecondary education are cultural. As Holmes (2006) observes, geographic,

personal/demographic, and economic factors also play important roles. The difficulties and costs

of travel and accommodation are compounded by the “potential for social isolation for an

Aboriginal student used to the networked support environment of a small community” (Holmes,

2006, p. 11).


101


There are many ways in which universities are now attempting to eliminate barriers and

support Aboriginal teacher candidates in order to enhance their prospects of graduation from

university. Manitoba, for example, has promoted Aboriginal access programs since the 1970’s

(Levin & Alcorn, 2000). The government of Ontario launched the Aboriginal Education and

Training Strategy (AETS) in 1991 with the goal of increasing participation/completion rates,

sensitivity/awareness of post-secondary institutions, and Aboriginal participation in decisions

(Education Policy Institute, 2007, p. 3). Approaches include increasing the number of Aboriginal

faculty and staff, pro-active recruitment, pro-active admissions policies, transitional support

programs, academic outreach (such as distance education), Aboriginal studies programs, and

programs focused on Aboriginal needs (Holmes, 2006). Recognizing that faculty and staff may

lack cross-cultural awareness, many universities have also instituted training in Aboriginal

culture and issues. Other forms of support come in the form of student support services –

counselling, tutoring, and financial support (Holmes, 2006). Finally, a sign of heightened

sensitivity is the involvement of Aboriginal Peoples in university governance, particularly

through Aboriginal advisory committees (Holmes, 2006). While these efforts have to some

progress in terms of educational access and attainment, in Ontario the government acknowledges

that “Aboriginal learners continue to experience social, cultural, financial, and geographic

barriers to success” (Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities, 2011, p. 9).

Teacher education, as was highlighted by RCAP, has often led the way with flexible

partnerships between universities and Aboriginal people. University of British Columbia has

offered a Native Teacher Education Program since 1974, which is now delivered both on the

main campus and at four field centres (UBC, 2012). University of Saskatchewan, in

collaboration with First Nations in northern Saskatchewan and Inuit in the Northwest Territories,

has developed a number of community-based teacher education programs since 1977. Courses in

these programs take place in a larger community, with field experiences in local communities

(RCAP, 2006). Some Ontario universities also offer community-based opportunities, sometimes

combined with distance learning, in their Aboriginal teacher education programs (Queens

University, 2012; University of Ottawa, 2012). The Brock/NNEC model incorporated many of

these elements, including courses held near the hub community of Sioux Lookout and distance

learning. While these programs have generally reported good results, teacher candidates continue

to face many challenges. Freeman (2001) and Duquette (2007) both emphasize the challenges of

balancing learning with the pressures of family and community. Fleet, Kitson, Cassady, and

Hughes (2007) highlight challenges such as the complexity of learning across cultures, the maze

of academic requirements, transitioning between school and home communities, and negotiating

time away from work to attend university classes.

Overall, the literature highlights the myriad of challenges confronting Aboriginal learners

in post-secondary education. While many teacher education programs have addressed the deeper

issues of cultural-responsiveness through partnerships and community-based programming,

many significant challenges and logistical problems remain. In this paper, we situate the

challenges faced by the Brock/NNEC program in the larger context of higher education and

teacher education in Canada.

Context and Methodology

Our research gives explicit attention to the voices of six Nishnawbe-ski teacher candidates in a

B.Ed. in the province of Ontario. These six teacher candidates were part of the first cohort in a


102


community-based program run by Brock University in partnership with the Northern Nishnawbe

Education Council. These six were part of a group of eight attending a summer institute.

A limitation of the study is the number of participants involved, which was a result of a

number of teacher candidates that were unable to attend the summer program due to the

challenges faced by Aboriginal teacher candidates. They are, however, representative of

Aboriginal teacher candidates in such programs: female, over 30, and with considerable life

experience; half were practicing teachers (without degrees). The experiences expressed during

the two hour Talking Circle represent a rich resource for a preliminary study of the learning

challenges experienced by teacher candidates from remote communities in an innovative

program with an Aboriginal focus. While this paper focuses on the issues raised in one Talking

Circle session, it is informed by data from other Talking Circles, questionnaires of staff at the

university, the NNEC, and interviews with course instructors.

Participants attended this Talking Circle towards the end of a three-week summer program

on the main campus of Brock University in July of 2010. The Wildfire Research Method (Kompf

& Hodson, 2000), a semi-structured format that invites participants to share their experiences

and observations in a Talking Circle, provided a communal and sacred research environment

respectful of the traditions and cultural beliefs of Aboriginal people and the importance of a

relationship with the land. An experienced Aboriginal facilitator, who understood the crucial role

of the importance of interconnectedness, respect, and the wisdom of the Indigenous intellectual

tradition, ran the session (Goulet & McLeod, 2002). This is consistent with Cajete’s (2008)

observation that “Indigenous educational research is best performed when an Indigenous view

and purpose are represented in the conceptualization, development, and implementation of

research” (p. 204). This bi-epistemic research team (Hodson, 2009) acknowledged and respected

both Aboriginal and Euro-Canadian knowledge traditions in order to garner more profound

understandings of Aboriginal student experiences (Smith, 1999).

For the qualitative data analysis, the research team applied grounded theory (Strauss &

Corbin, 1990), a methodology that allowed them to gather data “and then systematically develop

theory directly derived from the data” (Walker & Myrick, 2006, p. 548). After the team compiled

the data, the two researchers reviewed the results independently, to identify emerging patterns in

the data, while considering individual responses. Anecdotal responses provided in the comment

boxes were then analyzed through coding and categorizing of key idea units, as described by

Creswell (2009). The idea units were then collapsed into categorical clusters and themes

representing participants’ perceptions. The two researchers independently reviewed the

qualitative data before combining their categories, in order to identify key overall findings and

broad themes. In presenting the findings, the overall pattern of response, together with supportive

quotes that illustrate the themes identified through analysis of participants’ anecdotal responses,

are included.

Tensions Experienced by Aboriginal Teacher Candidates

Teacher candidate highlighted the personal and professional challenges they experienced. There

were many tears as participants spoke of pain and sacrifice. There was also much laughter:

sometimes to mask pain or awkwardness, sometimes out of an awareness of life’s absurdities.

These accounts were then coded and analyzed around major themes related to the administration

of the program. In this section, we look at five themes that emerged from the data: (a) Travel and

Distance from Community, (b) Family, (c) Community, (d) Communication with University and

Community Partners, and (d) On-line Learning.


103


Travel and Distance from Community

It is widely recognized that access to educational opportunities is significantly more difficult for

individuals living far away from major urban centres. Aboriginal peoples are doubly challenged

as they experience geographical distance, differences between small and large communities, and

the cultural distance between their Aboriginal world and the dominant Euro-Canadian culture

(Battiste & Barman, 1995). Teacher candidates from the North, especially from fly-in

communities, must be deeply committed in order to make the necessary sacrifices. The B.Ed.

program was designed as a community-based and culturally responsive program. As the

communities were far apart, and well away from the university, courses were offered in one of

three formats: in retreat setting near Sioux Lookout, on campus Brock University, and on-line.

Two of these entailed withdrawing teacher candidates from their home communities to reside

together for three-weeks at a time. Many teacher candidates identified travel as a major

challenge. One described it as “heart wrenching for us and our families.” She recalled that many

years ago she declined the opportunity to study nursing because “I couldn’t leave my kids or

couldn’t take my kids out… It was just me there for the kids.” With her children no longer living

at home, she enrolled for the B.Ed. program but remained worried about her grandchildren and

others in the community.

The program at the retreat near Sioux Lookout was viewed positively. Participants valued

the opportunity to live together on the land. This setting enabled them to bond as a group and

focus on their studies, but it also limited contact with their families and communities.

Fortunately, telephone and the internet were used regularly to maintain contact with loved ones.

At the same time, as one complained, “It is just so far from town.” She was concerned that this

made it harder to maintain contact with members of their community passing through Sioux

Lookout.

Issues were more pronounced when they attended classes at Brock University for three-

weeks to attend courses. Some appreciated the opportunity: “I really enjoyed coming down here

to Brock...I have never been anywhere further than Thunder Bay.” Others joked about their

adventures, including getting lost, discovering new foods, adapting to a large campus in an urban

community. While some looked forward to returning to campus the next summer, most would

prefer to study closer to family and community.

Family

Participants who were teachers in community schools were deeply committed to teacher

candidates’ learning and enhancing the communities in which they live. They loved teaching and

were proud to be furthering their education. This commitment, however, came at a high personal

price for them and their families. Many told moving stories that conveyed how difficult it is to be

away from their families for several weeks at a time, whether near Sioux Lookout or at Brock

University. These absences diminish family life, including declines in school attendance by their

children, reduced parental support at home, and resulted in greater safety risks within their home

communities.

Their stories highlighted the heavy burden of health and mortality issues in their

communities. Attending classes often meant not being able to help care for ailing relatives or to

mourn the deaths of people in the community properly. Isolation issues meant that access to

health care for participants and their families was difficult. One participant recalled leaving a


104


three-week course early in order to visit her father in hospital after a heart attack. The next year,

she lost her grandmother, her father who passed away due to heart failure, her uncle who died

due to diabetes. “It was really hard to leave my Mom at the gravesite,” she recalled. While she

tried to “keep [her] head up and stand strong” and viewed what she learned as “valuable to [her]

and the kids [she] loved,” she also wondered if it was worth the sacrifice. These family realities

were genuine challenges for these teacher candidates in a rigorous program of study stretched

over five years. There were many moving moments in the Talking Circle as participants spoke of

the personal strain resulting from efforts to meet all the demands of the program. They also

worried that these demands had caused other members of the cohort to miss courses or withdraw

from the program all together.

While there may be little the program administrators can do to alleviate these problems, it

would seem important to reduce other stresses that might add to difficulties in completing the

program.

Community

The challenges in Aboriginal communities are particularly great. As teacher candidates

participating in the study were often pillars of their families and communities, this placed

burdens on them that were much greater than those of other university students. One participant

recalled, “When I came out here, I had to think about how people were going to be…” She then

burst into tears before she could explain her worries for the safety and well-being of family

members. Also, while efforts were made to align the teacher education calendar with local

activities, it sometimes conflicted with communal activities such as the annual goose hunt. As all

participants came from communities facing numerous difficulties, that are direct outcomes of

colonization, it was difficult for them to simply remove themselves from the burden of worry and

responsibility. As many participants were also educators, they carried responsibilities for their

school communities. One participant confided “Every time I left [my school], I did my planning

for three weeks and that required a lot of work and sometimes I would still be planning until 3

o’clock in the morning and still be up and be back to work.” Since many in schools were

unaware of program demands, they often placed additional demands on participants when they

had major teacher education commitments.

Communication with University and Community Partners

Many of the practical concerns of B.Ed. teacher candidates could be characterized as

communication issues. While teacher candidates recognized that sacrifices were necessary and

inevitable, they were irritated by poor communication with and among the university, the NNEC,

and local education authorities.

This new program was innovative in conception, but the fine details were still being

worked out as teacher candidates were recruited. Sometimes, partners in the project conveyed

different understandings as they responded to the particular circumstances of individual teacher

candidates, which they in turn shared with their fellow learners. Participants had varying

understandings of when courses would run and how many advanced standing credits they would

receive for previous higher education experiences. One participant said, “Nobody talked to me

about how long it is going to be: the whole day, one subject, one hour.” The exact dates for

sessions were sometimes not worked out until a few weeks before, which added to uncertainty


105


and stress. Among the challenges was finding qualified instructors prepared to teaching in the

community, and adapting the schedule to accommodate their availability. One participant

recalled, with frustration in her voice, “I didn’t know what was the next course we were taking.”

While there were good reasons for many of these complications, B.Ed. teacher candidates paid a

toll.

This stress was compounded by a sense of powerlessness as they dealt with distant

bureaucracies. This was particularly evident in their concerns about credit transfers, which were

handled by the university registrar’s office. One participant, disappointed to receive credit for

only one of two university courses she had previously taken, failed to understand why both

credits were not recognized and felt powerless to appeal: “It’s just a hassle when you have to

explain yourself over and over again.” Feeling insulted, she failed to provide the information

necessary to receive credit recognition. In response to our recommendations, clearer lines of

communication were established with a NNEC staff member working with the registrar to

resolve issues.

A similar lack of awareness of process contributed to several teacher candidates failing

courses. Although they had the program guidelines, these B.Ed. teacher candidates were unaware

that they had the right to request more time to complete work, particularly if they were dealing

with personal issues. One participant who failed a course when she left early due to a family

medical crisis, thought she had passed the course, only to learn months later that her mark was

below the cut-off. In such cases, contract instructors were often not familiar with university

procedures and did not take the initiative to ensure that teacher candidates were given every

chance to succeed. Given the difference between their cultural experiences and the norms of

mainstream society, these B.Ed. teacher candidates needed added supports to succeed in an alien

environment. Interestingly, more experienced teacher educators were more likely to

accommodate candidate needs and push them to complete assignments after the official due

dates. In response to these concerns, the university program coordinator now received ongoing

reports on teacher candidates’ progress and works to ensure that they avail themselves of every

opportunity to succeed.

Concerns were also expressed about sense of support they felt they received from Chiefs,

and Band Councils, education directors, and principals. Most were pleased with the level of

financial support and encouragement they received. At the same time, the level of support they

received varied. One person spoke of a significant increase in support after the election of a new

local education authority, and believed that a new education director was making her continued

enrolment in the program difficult. Others expressed disappointment that the program was not

better understood by local leaders: “I don’t even know if our education director even knows how

far we are…They don’t say anything to me when I tell them I’ll be leaving for three weeks.”

There were also concerns about ongoing funding, particularly as the program is five years in

duration; some indicated that funding on a year-by-year basis added to their stress. While B.Ed.

teacher candidates understood that local leadership often change over the course of five years,

they remained concerned about gaps in information, different levels of support, and varying

degrees of understanding. Understanding at the local level is particularly important in ensuring

that principals and schools put teacher candidates at ease when they indicate that they must take

time off to take courses in the program. In response the NNEC developed a more rigorous

communication strategy at the local level designed to inform, update, and garner support for

those teacher candidates.


106


On-line Learning

On-line learning was seen as a positive dimension of the program. B.Ed. teacher candidates liked

the idea of taking courses while remaining in their schools and communities. One person

commented that she enrolled in the program because she assumed “that we would be doing it on-

line.” Many wished to have more on-line courses in the program, as this was the option that

provided the most continuity in their personal and professional lives. These comments are

consistent with those heard during community-based consultations prior to the development of

the program, which identified program delivery via internet as a way of lowering high

transportation costs while minimizing absences from their families and, for some, the schools in

which they taught (Gordon, Hodson, & Kitchen, 2012).

While an audit of local connectivity identified the level of internet connectivity as good

and the familiarity with distance education in the communities as sufficient to in distance

learning initiatives (Gordon, Hodson & Kitchen, 2012), teacher candidates encountered

considerable problems with on-line course delivery. Much of this was attributed to local

connectivity issues and older hardware. One participant noted, “our internet is not good due to

band width issues.” Another noted the limitations of the laptop computers provided by the

NNEC. These diminished the effectiveness of on-line courses by frustrating efforts by both

teacher candidates and instructors. Over time, some of these issues began to resolve themselves.

Teacher candidates also have specific suggestions for improving connectivity. One participant

noted that nursing stations had the best connectivity in her community, as it is vital to ensuring

health.

Teacher candidate who had taken other distance education courses suggested using radio.

While radio is a lower level technology, participants praised its reliability in their communities.

Generally, these on-line problems contributed to lower completion rates in the first on-line

courses.

On-line learning presented challenges in terms of balancing study with their personal and

professional lives. Completing teacher education readings and assignments presented challenges

for participants who had to manage busy lives in both school and community. At first they were

given release time for the on-line classes, but this proved too little time. Later they were also

granted time to complete the work, which made a difference for many.

Lessons to Be Learned

The degree of teacher candidate tension was surprising given the culturally responsive nature of

the program and the efforts of instructors and Tecumseh Centre staff to avoid the assimilationist

practices that have often impeded university attainment for Aboriginal teacher candidates

(Hampton, 2000). As there seemed to be little to suggest significant issues with faculty and staff

(carers) or teacher candidates (cared-for), the “failure of caring” (Noddings, 2001) seems

primarily situational. Many of the practical issues of concern delineated by teacher candidates

can be broadly characterized as involving logistics and/or communications. While teacher

candidates recognized that sacrifices on their part were necessary and inevitable, they also

believed that life would be easier if many of these irritants were removed. As these teacher

candidates belong to a population that has traditionally been poorly served by the education

system it is particularly important that they be addressed sensitively and effectively. As caring

involves a commitment to improving the experience of teacher candidates, it is up to the program


107


and institution to adapt in order to enhance their learning and prepare them to work in

underserved Nishnawbe-Aski communities.

In schools and universities, there is an increasingly recognition that education is more

that a systematic course instruction. As Dewey (1938) wrote, it is important that educational

systems recognize the “organic connection between education and personal experience” (p. 25)

and proceed from the individual in his/her social context. While subject knowledge remains

important, good instructors “are centrally concerned with the creation of authentic relationships

and a classroom environment in which teacher candidates can make connections between the

curriculum of the classroom and the central concerns of their own lives” (Beattie, 2001, p. 3). A

body of scholarship emphasizes the importance of caring and relationship in student learning

(Noddings, 1992). Since caring is by nature relational, one must be responsive to the cared-for

and attempt to trace failures of caring to the carer, cared-for, or the situation” (Noddings, 2001,

p. 100).

Certainly what dominates the narratives of the teacher candidates are many examples of

“relations” (Bishop, O’Sullivan, & Berryman, 2010) that can be understood to be fundamental to

an ongoing process of decolonizing the relationships that exist within the sphere of the program.

To that extent what we observe as researchers through the teacher candidate experiences of this

particular learning community – teacher candidates, instructors, funders, First Nation, and

university support personal – is a community in the process of decolonizing the totality of their

relationships that are a natural outcome of being immersed in this teacher education program.

That process of decolonization is therefore simultaneously relational, reciprocal, and discursive

with all involved decolonizing by virtue of being part of that shared experience. As each new

challenge to the status quo is confronted a tension results that drives those in relation to that

challenge to engage in a reciprocal discourse of deconstruction that reveals the underlying

assumptions that support the status quo. Each decolonizing discourse results in that status quo

being recognized to be untenable and there is a corresponding realignment of the relationships

involved. Each experience becomes a milestone of personal and yes even institutional

decolonization that once experienced can never be fully ignored and the status quo shifts.

Bishop, O’Sullivan, and Berryman (2010) describe this interaction between reciprocal

discourses and decolonization as a “culturally responsive pedagogy of relations,”

...in which power is shared between self-determining individuals within a nondominating

relations of interdependence; where culture counts; where learning is interactive, dialogic

and spiral; an where participants are connected and committed to one another through the

establishment of a common vision of what constitutes excellence in educational outcomes.

(p. 20)

Successfully enacting this pedagogy within a dominant educational culture depends on

recognizing the needs of Aboriginal learners and being prepared to respond to those needs. This

study creates a backdrop that illuminates the possibilities intrinsic of this definable process of

decolonization as an act of doing, of the engagement of two distinct and often conflicting

epistemic traditions working to the common purpose of social justice.

University programs are particularly effective when they care for the needs of the diverse

individuals and groups they serve. Universities provide programs to help teacher candidates who

experience difficult transitions from high school. Accommodations such as orientation programs,

academic counsellors, and writing clinics have helped reduce the failure rate among these teacher

candidates. Universities have also made accommodations for groups of teacher candidates

identified as underserved or underperforming so that they are better able to succeed in the

university context: reduced discrimination, curriculum more inclusive of cultural diversity, and


108


the development of new programs that serve teacher candidates of particular backgrounds or

aspirations. The range of accommodations for Aboriginal teacher candidates identified by

Holmes (2006) reflected such a commitment to adapting education to serve the needs of teacher

candidates from diverse backgrounds.

The people, who designed, taught, and supported the teacher education program

demonstrated considerable care in their work with Nishnawbe-Aski teacher candidates. The

program was carefully designed to be culturally responsive by progessive Aboriginal educators

in consultation with First Nations educators in the region. Teacher candidates were generally

very positive about both the curriculum and the instructors hired to teach the courses. While

many of the instructors were not of Aboriginal descent, and only one was Nishnawbe-Aski, this

was not identified as a problem by teacher candidates. Staff at both the Tecumseh Centre

responsible for the program and the NNEC were deeply committed to the program and actively

involved in the program administration.

Reviewing these tensions, we identified four areas for improvement: (a) advanced planning

and logistical support, (b) reduced points of contact, (c) instructor continuity, and improved on-

line learning.

Advanced Planning and Logistical Support

Universities and their complex procedures can be daunting for teacher candidates regardless of

circumstances. For teacher candidates thousands of kilometres away and unfamiliar with large

bureaucracies, these are even greater. Add the cultural differences between Aboriginal and Euro-

Canadian cultures and the challenges are daunting.

Teacher candidates wanted to have the program planned and scheduled at least one or two

terms in advance. This was not always possible, however, for a variety of reasons known to

program organizers. As this was the first year of the program, there were challenges in finding

instructors who were available to teach courses, particularly intensive three-week courses in the

Sioux Lookout area. There were also challenges finding dates that were suitable for all teacher

candidates, as they lived in different communities with varying cultural calendars. When

explained by us, teacher candidates understood the challenges, but nonetheless often felt lost at

sea. Partly as a result of our report to the steering committee for the program, the schedule for the

second cohort has been mapped out in advance with dates, courses, and locations specified.

Similarly, teacher candidates sought better ongoing local support during the five years of

the program. Some felt tremendously supported by principals and local education authorities,

which made it easier for them to enter the program and meet the challenges, while others felt

isolated. Some reported reluctance to attend because their principals did not support the

replacement of them in the classroom with qualified and effective teachers. Given this it should

come as no surprise that many B.Ed. teacher candidates in the first cohort were so dedicated to

the needs of their teacher candidates that they knowingly disadvantaged themselves by missing

courses in the program. As Chiefs, local board officials, and principals change during the course

of the five-year program, there are bound to be gaps in information, different levels of support

and varying degrees of understanding. One person, after recalling very encouraging words from

her Chief, said, “But still they don’t seem to be aware of how the program has proceeded. There

doesn’t seem to be any communication from our education authority. I don’t even know if our

education director even knows who we are.” Understanding at the local level is particularly

important in ensuring that principals and schools put teacher candidates at ease when they

indicate that they must take time off to take courses in the program.


109


Points of Contact

B.Ed. teacher candidates wanted fewer points of contact with Brock University and the NNEC.

Some issues were handled by the Registrar’s Office, the program coordinator, or various staff

members at the Tecumseh Centre, while others were the responsibility of the NNEC. This caused

confusion and frustration. While the division of duties made sense institutionally, it led to further

frustration for many B.Ed. teacher candidates. We recommend that teacher candidates work

directly with designated staff who can then work behind the scenes with the complex university

bureaucracy.

Part of the problem was a lack of staff in the university designated to work closely with

this cohort. The program coordinator was a contract employee who lived far away from both the

university and Sioux Lookout, and was unfamiliar with the university culture. Program support

was spread across several staff members rather than being the focus of a single staff member.

These circumstances tend to compromise accurate communication. Reducing the number of

contact people at Brock and NNEC would result in greater clarity and less confusion for teacher

candidates. Close communication across the two institutions would enhance the logistics of this

complex operation, resulting in a more positive student experience.

While it is important to think pragmatically about logistical issues and points of contact, it

is also important to establish the broader structures that support and sustain teacher candidates

and their communities. Archibald (2008), in describing a program run by University of British

Columbia, highlighted the importance of “community-based relationships and regional field

centres that provide localized opportunity of Indigenous learning” (p. 89). While Brock’s

program took place in Sioux Lookout and NNEC helped with the logistics, there was not the

ongoing presence of field-based teacher education personnel offering an ongoing presence. This

meant that the program bureaucracy always seemed distant. Also, the lack of such a presence

reduced awareness among community leaders, such as band council representatives. A stronger

local presence, by increasing the sense of self-governance in the program (Hampton, 2000),

might help address these issues. As local capacity expands with more program graduates

teaching in schools, it may be possible for the program coordinator and support staff to be

located in the area. It may also be possible for more instructors to emerge from those First Nation

communities.

Instructor Continuity

One way of reducing stress is to provide a level of continuity in the team of instructors. While

teacher candidates appreciated most of their instructors, they particularly enjoyed working with a

core group of instructors over time because they were able to build deeper relationships. This

should be an important consideration in staffing and curricular decisions. The first instructor is

particularly critical as s/he establishes the overall tone of the program and has the opportunity to

set forth an approach to teacher education that is respectful of the knowledge and culture of

teacher candidates and the contexts in which they live and work.

Student evaluation exemplifies the tensions caused by poor communication and instructor

continuity. Teacher candidates were unaware of their rights, particularly their right to appeal

grades or request extensions. Similarly, instructors from outside the university tended to adhere

strictly to the due dates in their course outlines and did not take an active role in ensuring that

teacher candidates had every chance to meet course requirements. Even though these instructors


110


were Aboriginal or had worked in First Nations schools, they were not always responsive to

teacher candidate needs. On the other hand, instructors who were long-time university instructors

tended to be more accommodating. Teacher candidates were very appreciative of instructors who

provided alternatives and critical of those who simply submitted marks to the university (Kitchen

& Hodson, 2013). The program coordinator could also review final marks with instructors and

discuss ways in which teacher candidates can make up for missing work. This form of ongoing

communication about policies would have made a considerable difference to teacher candidates.

Implicit in a number of comments from participants was a sense that there was a clash

between the cultural norms of the university and of Nishnawbe-Aski culture. The short duration

courses in the program reinforced a technical rational view of the world that is not consistent

with the holistic nature of Aboriginal knowledge. Therefore, it is important that the

administrators be sensitive to potential culture clashes and advocate for solutions that are

respectful of Aboriginal worldviews. While university policies often cannot be changed, there is

often latitude to adapt administrative and instructional practices to meet local circumstances.

Comparing this program to larger and more established programs, the issue of instructor

continuity can be linked to the importance of local capacity. One of the defining characteristics

of the Saskatchewan Urban Native Teacher Education Program is a dedicated group of faculty

and staff who are regularly available in the community to respond quickly to needs (McCreath,

2008). While Nishnawbe-Aski teacher candidates valued the coordinator and instructors they

had, there seems little doubt that locally based faculty would add both to continuity and to

community relevance.

Online Issues

Teacher candidates like many other Aboriginal people in remote communities, desired on-line

learning as a means of obtaining “postsecondary educational credentials without leaving their

home communities” (Voyageur, 2001, p. 1). While educational programming delivered via the

internet has long been held to be the answer to increasing access to higher education by

Aboriginal peoples in remote communities in Canada (Fiddler, 1992; Voyageur, 2001), there is

little research (Hodson, 2002; Sharpe, 1992) that presents a holistic view of what occurs across

those involved in administrating, creating, supporting, teaching, and learning within such a

technologically mediated environment. While the field of distance education continues to evolve,

Voyageurs (2001) wisely notes that “having an appropriate experienced student support network

in place is essential” (p. 6). Distance education can provide excellent learning opportunities but,

the Brock based computer support team’s efforts to remedy problems were thwarted by

infrastructure issues in communities and a lack of technical support. They discovered that skilled

technicians could achieve little without support at the user’s end (Gordon, Hodson, & Kitchen,

2012).

Partly as a result of our recommendations, later on-line courses were delivered using a

broadcast technology that was more robust though less innovative and nimble. As importantly,

the replacement system was community-based. It relied on existing community technology and

was managed by a community provider. Yet again, local knowledge and local capacity has a

critical role to play in supporting partnerships between universities and Aboriginal communities.


111


Conclusion

Even the most cursory study of the historic and contemporary indices definitively demonstrate

that Aboriginal peoples in Canada have been harmed by acts of colonization and that public

institutions have an important role to play in the process of decolonization and local capacity

building. Many institutions of higher education have committed to better serving Aboriginal

teacher candidates and communities by improving access, enhancing support services programs,

and offering programming targeted at Aboriginal populations (Holmes, 2006) but there is much

more that needs to be done.

Studying the experiences of Aboriginal teacher candidates in specialized programs is

essential to enhancing conditions for all Aboriginal learners in higher education. This study

highlights many of the logistical challenges that face post-secondary institutions as they attempt

to move from sound principles to the practical challenges of enhancing conditions for learning by

Aboriginal teacher candidates from remote communities. While some challenges may be outside

the university’s direct control—such as geography, family, and community—university officials,

and instructors can make culturally responsive adaptations to meet these unique needs.

One lesson to be learned is that caring and relationship with Aboriginal teacher candidates

and communities needs to be culturally responsive. Given the critical shortage of bi-

espistemically educated Aboriginal people employed by universities, long-term retention

requires that the initial transition to university be as smooth as possible. As Aboriginal teacher

candidates from these communities are less familiar with bureaucracy, careful consideration

needs to be given to ensuring that the steps in the process are clear and smooth and that logistical

support is easily accessible. Communication should be with qualified and culturally responsive

staff who maintain ongoing relationships with teacher candidates. Continuity in instruction and

effective on-line learning are also crucial.

Another lesson to be learned is that university-based expertise works best when it is

combined with local community-based practitioners. As the programs such as the Brock/NNEC

partnership develop, they need to develop and sustain local capacity in order to better serve the

Aboriginal teacher candidates they serve and develop in the community the ability to adapt

teacher education to suit their needs.


112


References

Aboriginal Peoples Survey. (2001). Initial findings: Well-being of the non-reserve Aboriginal

population. Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada.

Anderson, D., Horton, L., & Orwick, S. (2004). First Nations teacher education: Issues for First

Nations communities. In Chiefs of Ontario (Eds.), The new agenda: A manifesto for First

Nations education in Ontario. Toronto: Chiefs of Ontario. Retrieved on June 20, 2008

from http://www.chiefs-of-ontario.org/education/manifesto.

Archibald, J. (2008). Self-study and report: Aboriginal ways of knowing: Native Indian teacher

education program (NITEP). In S. Niessen (Ed.), Aboriginal knowledge exchange project:

Self-study compilation and report: Aboriginal ways of knowing in teacher education (pp. 86-

95). Regina: Saskatchewan Instructional Development and Research Unity, Faculty of

Education, University of Regina.

Battiste, M. (2002). Indigenous knowledge and pedagogy in First Nations education: A literature

review with recommendations. Prepared by the National Working Group on Education.

Ottawa, ON. Retrieved July 17, 2013 from

http://www.usask.ca/education/people/battistem/ikp_e.pdf

Battiste, M., & Barman, J. (Eds.). (1995). First Nations education in Canada: The circle unfolds.

Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.

Beattie, M. (2001). The art of learning to teach: preservice teacher narratives. Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Bishop, R., O’Sullivan, D., & Berryman, M. (2010). Scaling up education reform: Addressing

the politics of disparity. NZCER: Wellington, NZ. Retrieved July 17, 2013 from

http://www.nzcer.org.nz/nzcerpress/scaling-education-reform-addressing-politics-

disparity

Brayboy, B. M. J. (2005). Toward a tribal critical race theory in education. The Urban Review,

37(5), 425-446. doi:10.1007/s11256-005-0018-y

Castagano, C. E., & Brayboy, B. M. J. (2008). Culturally responsive schooling for Indigenous

youth: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 941-993.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method

approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.3102/0034654308323036

Deyhle, D., Swisher, K., Stevens, T., & Galvan, R.T. (2007). Indigenous resistance and renewal:

From colonizing practices to self-determination. In. F.M. Connelly, M.F. He, & J.

Phillion (Eds.), The Sage handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 329-348).

Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books.


113


Education Policy Institute. (2007). Evaluation of the Government of Ontario’s Aboriginal

Education and Training Strategy (AETS). Toronto, ON: Author.

Fiddler, M. (1992). Developing and implementing a distance education secondary school

program for isolated First Nation communities in northwestern Ontario. In D. Wall & M.

Owen (Eds.), Distance education and sustainable community development (pp. 105-118).

Athabasca, AB: Canadian Circumpolar Institute with Athabasca University Press.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.

Gordon, M. K., Hodson, J., & Kitchen, J. (2012, April). Lessons learned: Effectiveness of

synchronous full-distance delivery for Aboriginal teacher candidates. American

Educational Research Association, Vancouver, BC.

Goulet, L., & McLeod, Y. (2002). Connections and reconnections: Affirming cultural identity in

Aboriginal teacher education. McGill Journal of Education, 37(3), 355-369.

Hampton, E. (2000). First Nations-controlled university education in Canada. In M.B. Castallano,

L. Davis, & L. Lahace (Eds.), Aboriginl education: Fulfilling the promise (pp. 208-223).

Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.

Hampton, E. (1995). Towards a definition of Indian education. In M. Battiste & J. Barman (Eds.),

First Nations education in Canada: The circle unfolds (pp. 1-46). Vancouver, BC: UBC

Press.

Hodson, J. (2009). Envisioning a healing song in the public education of Aboriginal children in

Ontario. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Hodson, J. (2004). Learning and healing: A wellness pedagogy for Aboriginal teacher education.

Unpublished master’s thesis, Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada.

Hodson, J. (2002). Learning and healing network final report. St. Catharines, ON, Centre for

Adult Studies and Distance Learning.

Holmes, D. (2006). Redressing the balance: Canadian university programs in support of

Aboriginal students. Ottawa: Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada.

Kitchen, J., & Hodson, J. (2013). Living alongside: Teacher educator experiences working in a

community-based Aboriginal teacher education program. Canadian Journal of

Education, 36(2),144-174.

Kitchen, J., Hodson, J. & Raynor, M. (in press). Indigenous Teacher Education as Cultural

Brokerage: A University/First Nations Partnership to Prepare Nishnawbe Aski Teachers.

International Education Journal.


114


Kompf, M., & Hodson, J. (2000). Keeping the seventh fire: Developing an undergraduate degree

program for Aboriginal adult educators. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 24(2),

185-202.

Levin, B., & Alcorn, W. (2000). Post-secondary education for Indigenous populations. Adult

Learning, 11(1), 20-25.

McCreath, M. (2008). Self-study and report: Aboriginal ways of knowing: Saskatchewan Urban

Native Indian teacher education program (SUNTEP). In S. Niessen (Ed.), Aboriginal

knowledge exchange project: Self-study compilation and report: Aboriginal ways of

knowing in teacher education (pp. 70-84). Regina: Saskatchewan Instructional Development

and Research Unity, Faculty of Education, University of Regina.

Morrissette, P.J., & Gadbois, S. (2006). Promoting success among undergraduate Canadian First

Nations and Aboriginal counselling students. Guidance and Counselling, 21(4), 216-223.

Noddings, N. (1992). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education.

New York: Teachers College Press.

Noddings, N. (2001). The caring teacher. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on

teaching (4th ed.) (pp. 99-106). Washington, D. C.: American Educational Research

Association.

Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities (2011). Aboriginal postsecondary

education and training policy framework. Toronto, ON: Author.

Robertson, H. J. (2003). Decolonizing schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 552-553.

Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. (1996). Report of the Royal Commission of

Aboriginal Peoples, 5 vols. Ottawa, ON: Canada Communications Group.

Sharpe, D. B. (1992). Successfully implementing a Native teacher education program through

distance education in Labrador. In D.Wall & M.Owen (Eds.), Distance education and

sustainable community development (pp. 75-85). Athabasca, AB: Canadian Circumpolar

Institute with Athabasca University Press.

Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. Dunedin,

NZ: University of Otago Press.

Statistics Canada. (2003). Aboriginal peoples’ survey – Initial findings: Well-being of the non-

reserve Aboriginal population. Ottawa, Canada: Author.

Statistics Canada. (2006). Aboriginal peoples in Canada in 2006: Inuit, Métis and First Nations,

2006 census. Retrieved July 2, 2013from http://www12.statcan.ca/census-

recvensement/2006/as-sa/97-5558/pl-eng.cfm


115


United Nations (2007). Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. New York: Author.

Adopted by the General Assembly, 13 September 2007

Voyageur, C. A. (2001). Ready, willing and able: Prospects for distance learning in Canada’s

First Nations community. [37 paragraphs]. Journal of Distance Education. [On-line].

Available: http://cade.icaap.org/vol 16.1/voyageur.html

Walker, D., & Myrick, F. (2006). Grounded theory: An exploration of process and procedure.

Qualitative Health Research, 16(4), 547-559. doi:10.1177/1049732305285972

Youngblood Henderson, J. (1995). Treaties and Indian education. In M. Battiste & J. Barman

(Eds.), First Nations education in Canada: The circle unfolds (pp. 245-261). Vancouver,

BC: UBC Press.

S. Tukonic The Slow Fix

116

BOOK REVIEW

Title: The Slow Fix: Solve Problems, Work Smarter and Live Better

in a World Addicted to Speed

Author: Carl Honoré

Publisher: Toronto, ON: Alfred A. Knopf Canada

Year of publication: 2013

Reviewed by: Stephanie Tukonic

We live in a world that is addicted to the quick fix – quick and easy solutions for instant

weight loss, turning your baby into Einstein, and instant abs in 5 days. We rely on money and

medications to help quickly solve our problems. Yet, I find myself falling victim to these tactics

of the quick fix as responsibilities increase and deadlines approach. In English, these solutions

are deemed as “band-aid cures” or “duct tape solutions” (p. 12). The Slow Fix: Solve Problems,

Work Smarter and Live Better in a World Addicted to Speed, written by Canadian Journalist Carl

Honoré, promotes fixing problems at the right speed to yield better and longer-lasting outcomes,

because too many times we depend on quick solutions to mend problems. These include

problems from personal relationships, to other matters such as business and education. The

quintessential example of this book describes an ‘andon rope,’ which translates into a ‘paper

lantern rope’ in Japanese describing the juxtaposition of the rise and fall of Toyota as a

cautionary tale. This rising Japanese car company tackled problems at the source, by pulling the

andon rope when something went wrong on the assembly line. Yet, in a sprint to become number

one car manufacturer in the world – management overreached despite warnings from the factory

floor and lost control of the supply chain – in other words, they stopped pulling the andon rope

and fell for the quick fix. In this book, comprised of 14 chapters, Honoré collectively uses

research, personal experiences, and examples to investigate the multiple ingredients of a slow

fix. It begins with admitting mistakes; thinking hard, long, and holistically; thinking in small

detail; preparing for troubleshoots to collaborating with others and crowdsourcing; an individual

catalyst and including everyday people in the front line; understanding and challenging

emotions; solving problems with games with a problem that is evolving. Honoré motivates

readers of all backgrounds to stop, reflect, learn, and become active agents of their own slow fix.

Honoré is very clear on the fast paced culture in which we live and surround ourselves

with everyday, but uses multiple qualities of a slow fix as an opportunity to reduce the hurry of

our environment. This does not mean living at a snails pace, however, “doing everything at the

right speed – fast, slow or whatever pace delivers the best results” (p. 290). The book introduces

the reader to two speeds of thinking. System 1 is described as rapid intuitive thinking, which is

used in fast paced situations (e.g., deciding on which sandwich to buy, smiling back to a stranger

on the bus), but this system is also responsible for human biases (e.g., Einstellung effect, denial,

legacy problem). System 2 is described as slow deliberate thinking, which requires more time

and effort, but yields more accurate results (e.g., calculating 34 multiplied by 12). These systems

of decision making is an extension of the work of Daniel Kahneman. This book is a reminder

that we must engage in the slow fix in our everyday lives so that it can be the core of our culture,


117

which will not be easy given human biology. There are several things one can do to short-circuit

the quick-fix reflex, as readers, learners, educators, or employees, which to my understanding,

are clear in experiential learning through critical reflection and participatory learning, in

conjunction with maintaining a goal-orientated outlook.

There are several ingredients of the slow fix that Honoré explores – including confessing

mistakes, thinking hard, holistically, and long – that subscribe to experiential learning through

the use of critical reflection. There are several examples that Honoré uses to illustrate the

potential of each ingredient as a part of the slow fix. One purpose of critical reflection is to

inform ones self of our actions, which can lead to interpretation and creation of new knowledge

(Brookfield, 1995). Interpreting our actions begins with recognizing our actions. Yet, these

actions that may be labelled as a mistake are often more difficult to own up to due simply to the

adverse consequences of this action. For example, in a testing scenario, an incorrect answer on a

test results in a deduction of a mark. Honoré also recognizes that “deadlines have a role to play

in finding solutions, but racing the clock can lead to sloppy, superficial thinking” (p. 66), which

is unfortunate, since the world we live in “prizes action over reflection, and when the clock is

ticking, it takes nerve to spend 55 minutes thinking” (p. 58). Locke high school in South Central

Los Angeles, California, is a prime example of how the slow fix that incorporates the qualities of

critical reflection in combination with these slow fix ingredients. Marco Petruzzi is a member of

the non-profitable organization Green Dot and the man behind the engineering turn around of

this “lousy school” (p. 73). Schools like Locke were administered quick fixes (e.g., a fresh

reading program, new attendance policy) of “sweeping policies handed down by District with no

thought for what they would really mean for Locke, so they never made a dent” (p. 75). Petruzzi

argues that it is not the one policy that can change the environment, but “it’s host of factors, and

you have to figure out what they are, how they are interconnected, and then tackle them all

together” (p. 76). In essence, critical reflection is a useful tool in assessing assumptions about

beliefs, and specifically, how to solve problems (Mezirow, 1990). This process of critical

reflection is a way for adult learners, in particular, to interpret and create new knowledge or

actions from ordinary to extraordinary experiences (Brookfield, 1995). Therefore, using critical

reflection as a learning staple, it challenges prevailing social, political, and cultural, or

professional ways of acting.

As a learner, goal orientation is rooted in the ability and willingness of ones self to delay

gratification and the slow fix incorporates this motto that if you “put in the effort now… [you

can] save time and money later” (p. 292). These behaviours are not new, as delaying gratification

in childhood enhances the cognitive and social competence in both adults and adolescents

(Michel, Shoda, & Rodriguez, 1989). Are Hoeidal uses the ingredients of the slow fix to reinvent

the penal system in Norway with the Halden High Security Prison, which are similar to Marco

Petruzzi and the Locke high school slow fix. Most penal systems outside of Norway have

adopted short-term views of prisons and consider incarceration to be costly and an ineffectual

approach that fails to turn criminals into law-abiding citizens. Hoeidal uses a different penal

philosophy that is primarily focused on the goal of paving a way for convicts to fit back into

society at the end of their sentence. But once more, Honoré reminds the reader that setting long

term goals may come easy, but it is important to continue to test everything against it to help one

in the slow fix. Nonetheless, individuals like Hoeidal and Petruzzi act as important catalysts in

this goal-reaching process. The rationale behind this is that “ideas change, circumstances change

and teams change, so people need a single person who has a clear idea of where they are going

and is ultimately going to be responsible for what happens” (p. 194). Therefore, this book helps


118

readers to understand and recognize that the slow fix is not easy, but constant reflection and goal

orientation is essential in a slow fix.

Learners can also use their own expertise to be apart of the slow fix. Participating in

events can help individuals learn to build their expertise and troubleshoot errors. Experiences in

the work place, relationships, and home help us to prepare for trouble shooting along the way in

the slow fix. We build up a personal database of experiences that allow you to spot familiar

patterns, pitfalls, and possibilities in a problem, in a process referred to as “thin slicing”. The

twist is that true thin slicers have “taken the time before the problem arises to build up a database

of experiences that allows you to troubleshoot from the hip when things go wrong” (p. 131) –

which becomes a defining ingredient in the slow fix. Honoré highlights that the best thin slicers

never stop building their expertise. This is especially true in the field of research where it is

suggested that it takes approximately 10,000 hours to master a discipline, and it is something that

resonates close to my position as a graduate student. This situational perspective of participatory

learning evokes communities of practice to involve people to engage in the process of shared

collective learning (Fenwick, 2000). Collective learning in communities also lead to

collaborating with others, in essences, people from different disciplines and fields of work to

come together to give a different perspective on the problem.

Essentially, this book provides insight into how to go about solving all kinds of problems

in the domains of, but is not limited to, business, politics, education, and relationships. The

ingredients for the slow fix can be used to take a moment to understand the available resources

and tools, and the possibilities for fostering solutions to problems in a world addicted to the so-

called quick fix. As an educator, these ingredients can be embedded into problem solving

opportunities that are incorporated into the learning material to promote the slow fix at both

micro and macro communities of learning. However, Honoré reminds us that “a partial solution

is often much better than no solution at all” (p. 276) as complex problems evolve. Yet, the

challenge is to recognize and foster our personal slow fix, that may be unique to us as learners,

educators, partners, or employers in a culture addicted to fast results.

References

Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fenwick, T. J. (2000). Expanding conceptions of experiential learning: A review of the five

contemporary perspectives on cognition. Adult Education Quarterly, 50(4), 243-272.

Mezirow, J. (1990). Fostering critical reflection in adulthood. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Rodriguez, M. L., Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1989). Cognitive person variables in the delay of

gratification of older children at risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

57(2), 358-367.

Documents

Table of Contents 23(1) - journals.library.brocku.ca